Game of Thrones

[Kestrel]

@Arkandel said in Game of Thrones:

***=Perhaps, but then again your favorite character***

click to show

destroyed the furniture the moment his mother wasn't around. BAD dragon.

***=Yes, but s/he did that because***

click to show

If mummy can't have the stupid chair nobody can!

They did the feels on that dragon really well tbh, it was good CGI.

I hope Drogon's actor wins an Emmy for that performance.

In all seriousness, I predicted the show would end with the Iron Throne being destroyed.

I just didn't predict they would then elect a new King five minutes later, making the entire act meaningless. I thought Daenerys would do this as a conscious decision to end the feudal system, i.e. "breaking the wheel" ... which would have been a much better story.

When people spoiled the ending weeks in advance, about Bran being crowned king, I thought it was a joke ... ‍️

[ZombieGenesis]

Hmmmm...

***=NSFW content***

click to show

That's now how I saw the Drogon thing(if Dany can't have the iron throne no one can). I saw it as he hated the throne for what it represented, the obsession that led to Dany's death. He killed the thing that killed her. Regardless of how you interpret it, however, it was a really good scene.

[Sparks]

Oh, it was an excellent scene. But are you sure that's the right logic?

***=The spoilers now sit atop the Iron Throne!***

click to show

Was Drogon so smart that he understood that all of this pain and suffering had come from the Iron Throne, and destroyed it?

Or was Drogon so dumb that he was like "There's a pointy thing in mom. And there's a whole bunch of pointy things right over there! DIE, POINTY THINGS!"

(I actually do prefer the first interpretation, and I suspect it's what it's meant to be, but still...)

[bored]

Actually overall I liked it. Also some text goes here?

***=Do I have to put fake text here too? Avert thine eyes.***

click to show

While I fall pretty hard on the "this abbreviated final season was not good" and "the evolution away from Martin shows creative weakness on D&D's part" sides of things... I think the finale was about as good as they could have hoped to manage, with where they brought things. Random thoughts:

• The shots of Dany's army in the plaza, w/ Targ banner, stairs, and the dragon behind was awesome, and great visual storytelling in terms of showing how narrow the divide is between 'honor, glory & justice' and tyranny and even fascism (the visual language was particularly Nazi-esque, & actually reminded me of the First Order shots in Force Awakens, which did the same thing.)

• Jon, with coaching from Tyrion and a dead maester, learns to avoid Ned's mistakes, and is sneaky when the moment demands it. I liked that as a parallel and bookending moment for adoptive father & son.

• Ditto on the throne scenes in general calling back to Dany at the tower. She finally touches it, this time.

• Magical prophet king is probably top tier as kings go. Nice try tho, Edmure.

• Requisite: Yay, Jon pet the dog. Also, I can't help but think he's ultimately happier/better suited where he ends up, getting to be a proper rugged hero sort off on the fringe of the world where his derpiness is less of a handicap.

• Really, everyone gets happy endings. More TV friendly than Martin will be, no doubt, but its hard to hate on getting some payoff at the end of things.

[ZombieGenesis]

IMO...

***=NSFW content***

click to show

I think there was definitely a thought process involved as he pieced together what happened and made a conscious decision not to flame Jon and flame the throne instead. I think the dragons were much more intelligent than people gave them credit for, being much like dolphins in that regard.

[Kestrel]

@ZombieGenesis said in Game of Thrones:

IMO...

***=NSFW content***

click to show

I think there was definitely a thought process involved as he pieced together what happened and made a conscious decision not to flame Jon and flame the throne instead. I think the dragons were much more intelligent than people gave them credit for, being much like dolphins in that regard.

No strong opinion on your/Sparks' interpretations; it's anyone's best guess and I think they're all valid and interesting. But ...

***=Spoiler***

click to show

I think the reason Drogon didn't kill Jon is just sensing his Targaryen blood. If anyone else had killed her, they'd be toast.

It had already been established earlier in the series that Drogon liked Jon when they first met, after sniffing at him, which surprised Dany and was intended as clear foreshadowing.

[Arkandel]

What astounds me is the widespread idea online that just because this season was disappointing to 'many fans' it will somehow harm the producers' career.

For starters the viewership was extremely high. You don't lose your job, or a potential job, because of criticism; you lose them because you didn't make money. Downvotes are unimportant compared to dollars as a metric.

For another everyone whines online. It's non-stop, no matter what's put out there someone will complain, demolish and hate it. It's basically required for all of those people to either not be on social media or to ignore it else they will go crazy. And if people will complain no matter what it's impossible to tell if they are right or wrong.

[Wretched]

I just feel as others have mentioned before me, like i was watching a very pretty and well designed... cliffs notes version of the last 2 seasons. Costuming on point, beautiful imagery, some strong impactful scenes and glorious twists...

...that utterly ignored the established pacing of the series that it had set from the beginning.

[surreality]

@ZombieGenesis The only thing about that is...

here is text, here is text, here is text, here is yet more text

***NSFW content***

click to show

...we don't actually know if Jon would have burned, considering who he ultimately turned out to be.

[Arkandel]

@surreality ***=I think Martin said the special circumstances regarding fire was an one time thing - after all we've read about...***

click to show

... Targaryens burning before. In fact it's been a staple in the books - a lot of them died to fire.

But also if a giant pissed off lizard wants to hurt you it doesn't need to burn you to do so. Those claws are probably not just for show.

[Seraphim73]

@Roz That outfit. So awesome.

[Roz]

@Seraphim73 The writing might have faltered, but damn. All the other departments sure did NOT flag. It's still a fucking beautifully produced show, right to the very end.

[Sparks]

So, one more thing that occurred to me in the aftermath of last night's episode...

***=One More Thing***

click to show

If I say "The kingdom was ruled by an emotionless, omniscient figure now divorced from his own former humanity, one who could foresee all actions in his kingdom before they happened, and who—though his body was broken—could cast his consciousness into any living thing, to watch through their eyes or seize control." — do you think "victorious endgame condition at the conclusion of an epic fantasy cycle" or "setup for the antagonist at the beginning of an epic fantasy cycle"?

Especially if being the Three-Eyed Raven makes Bran age slowly until nigh-immortality (given his predecessor was over a thousand years old), you could arguably get a good sequel series out of people trying to overthrow this coldly rational god-king whose rulings have squeezed the life out of the kingdom. When there's a famine, he foresees it and has enough people executed that the food will be sufficient. When someone plans an uprising, he can see it before it's even done its first meeting, and quash it before it destabilizes the kingdom and threatens the peace he's established. People try to flee north, because for some reason the god-king still respects the sovereign boundaries of the North. Indeed, there are even rumors that he was once a Stark himself, when he was still something close to human...

[Rinel]

@Sparks

Yes, but you also just showcased how absolutely stupid that particular plot point was.

[Kestrel]

@Sparks That's even without diving into the fact that ...

***=Book spoilers that were not explicitly covered in the show***

click to show

THE BLOODRAVEN WAS A FREAKING TARGARYEN

[Sparks]

@Kestrel said in Game of Thrones:

@Sparks That's even without diving into the fact that ...

***=Book spoilers that were not explicitly covered in the show***

click to show

THE BLOODRAVEN WAS A FREAKING TARGARYEN

***=NSFW content***

click to show

In the books, yes; the Three-Eyed Crow is Brynden Rivers—'the Bloodraven', as you noted—who was the bastard son of a Targaryen. But I think he was also only about 125 years old or so when Bran encountered him in the books, as he'd been around—and if I remember right, Hand of the King—during the Blackfyre rebellions. He'd only been exiled to the Wall I think about 60-ish years before the books, had become Lord Commander, and had gone missing while ranging beyond the Wall 30-ish or so years before the books. So presumably he'd been fused with a tree less than 30-ish years.

(I've also always figured being the Three-Eyed Crow despite people having once called him the 'Bloodraven' was something of a hint; when he went missing while ranging, Brynden was the Lord Commander of the Night's Watch. As he had not technically died, arguably his oath to the Brotherhood of the Night's Watch to defend the lands of men still held, and he was thus still theoretically a member of the Watch. The Watch, who are known informally as "crows". Making him, quite literally, the three-eyed crow.)

In the show, though, the Three-Eyed Raven says he's been waiting a thousand years for Bran to be born and come to him, which means he's been around at least a thousand years, quite possibly more. Which means our Three-Eyed Raven can't be Brynden Rivers, or even a Targaryen at all; at that point in time the Targaryens were still across the Narrow Sea in Valyria; the Targaryen conquest was only about 300 years ago by the time of the books/show, and the fall of Valyria only about 100 or so years before that.

ETA: yikes, I spent too long submerged in those books.

[Kestrel]

@Sparks

Decent insights tbh. I appreciate them.

I plan to reread the books now that the show is done and forget it ever happened.

[Arkandel]

@Sparks It might even be fair to say the Doom of Valyria might be a fairly well known event in Westeros whose exact nature we - the readers/viewers - are simply not privy because it was never revealed to us.

But 300 years or so is nothing for such a major event 's cause to already have passed into legend, especially to Maesters and the like. Plus the Targaryen royalty would have certainly had it extensively documented since it's such a vital part of their past.

[Warma Sheen]

I was pretty harsh about the show, but since last week, I think I've changed my opinion a little.

***=Having had some time removed from the episode that really pissed people off...***

click to show

... I think people are being overly harsh because they didn't get the happy ending they wanted. A lot of people wanted a Disney ending. All the heroes die as saviors or live to glorious admiration and respect. Well, GoT isn't Disney. And it never has been.

The thing I hear about most that I disagree with is about Dany's decisions in King's Landing being a big departure from her character in order to jump to the end, but Tyrion spoke on that in the last episode. Wholesale slaughter has been her preferred method to dealing with problems for quite some time now. Its just that the people she did it to were framed in a way that made them unlikable (evil). But it certainly wasn't the first time she wiped out entire groups of people, not all of whom were guilty or evil. It isn't the first time she punished innocent people for the decisions of their leaders. That's who she has been for a while. Its just that when she did it in a place the audience had a connection to and we actually got to see it for ourselves from the inside of the slaughter that people were suddenly revolted by her decision. But to say that wasn't in Dany's character is just wrong. Especially with the way she had to stand by and watch Missandei killed.

Speaking of Missandei, she was one of the people that would have counseled a more temperate reaction. But she was dead. And so was Varys, who also would have advised her to take a chill pill. There was Grey Worm who probably has never advised against killing in his life. Then there's Jon and Tyrion. Tyrion was the person who begged mercy for King's Landing with everything he could muster, then he betrayed her and freed his brother - firmly and effectively placing him, and his advice, in an ash tray. She straight up said Jon betrayed her and blamed all the other betrayals on him for talking about his bloodline when she asked him not to, so he definitely wasn't giving him consideration. And with all her advisors out of the picture, one way or another, she did what she did, which was kill and conquer. That's always been who she was.

No one was up in arms before about her decisions (not en masse like now anyway) until it happened to King's Landing. Then people cared. Because the audience was finally placed on the receiving side of Dany's temper. But that sounds a lot more like what's wrong with the nature of people, than it does with anything wrong with the show or its writing.

Were there some disappointments, sure. It wasn't the greatest final season ever. But it certainly wasn't what some people are making it out to be. They just didn't get what they wanted from it.

[Sparks]

@Arkandel — I mean, we know what happened, we just don't know why. We know everything in roughly a five-hundred-mile square area exploded all at once and the Fourteen Flames started barfing molten rock and dragonglass a thousand feet into the sky, accompanied by lakes turning to acid and earthquakes so severe they literally shattered the Valyrian peninsula into a collection of islands.

As for why no one knows what the heck caused it, I see a couple of possibilities.

Maybe it just was a natural disaster like the Yellowstone supervolcano erupting. No real cause at all to be found, no deeper story. Given the setting we're dealing with—and that Valyria was a place of open magic and long-lost secrets—this actually seems unlikely. Still, possible!

Maybe there were no long-term survivors; I believe all the main surviving Valyrian houses—House Targaryen, House Velaryon, and House Celtigar—fled before the Doom, after prophetic dreams of warning. I know the Targaryens at least got out of dodge about a decade before things literally exploded. We know that the loss of the population was so complete that many Valyrian talents (like the secret of making Valyrian steel) were lost in the Doom. If no one who was left in Valyria at the time of the Doom survived and the survivors had fled enough in advance, there may just not have been anyone left who genuinely knew what happened, and so we only have guesses and supposition to go on.

Possibility three is that if it wasn't natural—maybe one of the theories about the Valyrians doing something Really Ill-Advised and causing the Doom is right—and if the surviving Valyrian houses had an idea of what happened, maybe they concealed that truth because what was being done in Valyria was so bad that if people knew the facts retribution would rain down on the heads of all surviving Valyrians. Maybe the theory the Faith espouses is actually right, and the Valyrians literally were conducting rituals to reach down into the seven hells for power! At any rate, if this is true, then the surviving houses having concealed the truth even from their own descendants, the story is now long lost.

Those are the main possible reasons I see for the general uncertainty about what the heck happened.