"Non book readers" - Season 8 Episode 5 "The bells" - Spoilers post 2 forward

Mickeroo

Foxtrol wrote: »

But she didn’t go ‘psycho’ in an instant, it has been building for 8 seasons. Just because her previous psycho actions were against people you saw as bad guys, doesn’t make them any less psycho.

Discussing this further is pointless if you have such blinkers on that you put the multiple examples of her burning, crucifying, threats to do exactly what she did to Kings Landing, other horrid acts down as ‘sulking’.

It isn’t even that her actions are that psycho in a completely lost it sense, they are basically the only route she had to win and potentially hold on to the iron throne.

Hows that? She literally waited until after the battle had been won and the city surrendered.

Tazzimus

NuMarvel wrote: »

Heated air expands, so if Drogon's flame is hot enough, it could cause the air in front of it to expand rapidly and generate sufficient force to knock down walls.

I would have preferred if it went like the Harrenhal attack, where the dragons melted the stone rather than exploding it.
Would have made Drogon's power all the more impressive.

MisterAnarchy

Foxtrol wrote: »

It isn’t even that her actions are that psycho in a completely lost it sense, they are basically the only route she had to win and potentially hold on to the iron throne.

The Lannisters had surrendered ,Dany had won the throne ,so there was no need for her rage on innocent people ,it didn't make any sense at all.
How was it the only route she had to win the throne ??

It was like the end of Con Air ,oh look we have loads of money left over lets blow everything up .

turbbo

Tazzimus wrote: »

I would have preferred if it went like the Harrenhal attack, where the dragons melted the stone rather than exploding it.
Would have made Drogon's power all the more impressive.

Yeah I reckon that would have looked better probably a lot more cash needed to do that though.

is_that_so

Foxtrol wrote: »

But she didn’t go ‘psycho’ in an instant, it has been building for 8 seasons. Just because her previous psycho actions were against people you saw as bad guys, doesn’t make them any less psycho.

Discussing this further is pointless if you have such blinkers on that you put the multiple examples of her burning, crucifying, threats to do exactly what she did to Kings Landing, other horrid acts down as ‘sulking’.

It isn’t even that her actions are that psycho in a completely lost it sense, they are basically the only route she had to win and potentially hold on to the iron throne.

Nah, there was no plot development for her to transform from indignant and righteous to out and out psychopath. I don't know where you're getting this good guy bad guy stuff from. Your examples have plenty of supporting plot to show why she chose to do so. Most of its run you can explain events from what has evolved before regardless of your own feelings about it.

I'm really not sure that last bit holds water at all. There were at least half a dozen credible ways to address it that didn't make her burn everything.

Foxtrol

Mickeroo wrote: »

Hows that? She literally waited until after the battle had been won and the city surrendered.

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

The Lannisters had surrendered ,Dany had won the throne ,so there was no need for her rage on innocent people ,it didn't make any sense at all.
How was it the only route she had to win the throne ??

It was like the end of Con Air ,oh look we have loads of money left over lets blow everything up .

The army she brought over the narrow sea is basically gone, her allies from Dorne and Highgarden are dead, the Greyjoys only had enough men to take an undefended Iron Islands, her advisors are all dead or she feels betrayed her, she no longer has the best claim to the throne, the people love Jon and even Cersei more than her, she suspects Jon’s family are plotting against her.

Yes, if she stops at the bells she may sit on the throne, but for how long before someone takes her out? She says it herself in the episode, if she believes she cant rule through love so instead she chooses fear. After seeing what she did to KL, you’d imagine people would think twice before another great house would try to take her on. It is basically what the Lannisters have done over the years with the Rains of Castamere.

Also, it isn’t like ruling through fear is out of character, it is how she ruled in Essos to everyone who didn’t see her as their savior.

Foxtrol

is_that_so wrote: »

Nah, there was no plot development for her to transform from indignant and righteous to out and out psychopath. I don't know where you're getting this good guy bad guy stuff from. Your examples have plenty of supporting plot to show why she chose to do so. Most of its run you can explain events from what has evolved before regardless of your own feelings about it.

I'm really not sure that last bit holds water at all. There were at least half a dozen credible ways to address it that didn't make her burn everything.

The whole point is that the show is written in a way that her actions previously can be justified when you look at it from one angle but if you look at it from another she’s always been, to use your term, ‘a psychopath’.

She justified horribly barbaric acts and you as the viewer went along with her because you saw them as deserving of the fate, despite evidence otherwise, until now where the writers flip it and you don’t agree with who her targets are. Sure, it was fine that she crucified 169 men because they were slavers and some slavers crucified the same number of slaves, but if you look at it another way she indiscriminately crucified 169 men with no trial, simply based on their social standing and the actions of some of their peers.

Alpha_zero

Hey guys would you say Drogon is a unisex name?

Peatys

Alpha_zero wrote: »

Hey guys would you say Drogon is a unisex name?

Absolutely. Go for it.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/problems_in_marriages_and_other_relationships/changing_your_name_by_deed_poll.html

is_that_so

Foxtrol wrote: »

The whole point is that the show is written in a way that her actions previously can be justified when you look at it from one angle but if you look at it from another she’s always been, to use your term, ‘a psychopath’.

She justified horribly barbaric acts and you as the viewer went along with her because you saw them as deserving of the fate, despite evidence otherwise, until now where the writers flip it and you don’t agree with who her targets are. Sure, it was fine that she crucified 169 men because they were slavers and some slavers crucified the same number of slaves, but if you look at it another way she indiscriminately crucified 169 men with no trial, simply based on their social standing and the actions of some of their peers.

She opted, through the plot to help the slaves and they refused to play ball. You could see it was a definite option, not fine under any circumstances, but the plot did lead to that possibility. Other examples were also plot-driven. Here we have a woman suddenly deciding to burn the hell out of a city and its people but with no plot development save possibly one single line about fear. There really was nothing to stop them setting this up properly. I imagine I'd still think it was a poor idea but as least it would have been planned out.

Podge_irl

Foxtrol wrote: »

But she didn’t go ‘psycho’ in an instant, it has been building for 8 seasons. Just because her previous psycho actions were against people you saw as bad guys, doesn’t make them any less psycho.

I think, more importantly, they were people that she saw as bad guys.

So the trick is assuming that she know thinks every living person in KL is a bad guy even after they've surrendered the city. She could have accomplished her goal simply by burning down the Red Keep alone after all. They did touch on this when she referenced the citizens not rising up like the slaves had, but considering they just had - to a degree - done that when she went berserk it just doesn't really track.

storker

Feisar wrote: »

On the Cersei death, she wasn't a warrior or a dragon rider or whatever, hard to see her go out in an epic fashion. Although Olenna Tyrell went out with style. God do you remember those dizzy heights?

Olenna was more worthy of it, a bit of a class act. Cersei just had cunning and cruelty, and regularly proved Tywin right about being not as smart as she thought she was.

Honestly? That was boring.

How did they manage to make such an event lack all feels?
Tyrion is an idiot now.
Where is the Jon who rallied the wild folk and had them cross the wall? Now he just sits back and waits for Danny to level a city.
Jamie... Oh dear seven faces, what have they done to you?
Cersie becomes a nothing (fair enough that it can happen but she becomes a whimpering fool)

And the BIGGEST fight of the series becomes a badly edited and paced stairway fight

naughto

Robbed from reddit
https://m.imgur.com/a/CoyWKMP

kerplun k

I’m wondering if the destruction of Kings Landing will make an appearance in the opening credits next week.

Loafing Oaf

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I didn't pick up on that either.

I thought it was heavily implied myself that it was poison. The little girl said that she was afraid because Dany's guards were watching her and Varys reassures her with something about risk versus reward.

From a recent rewatch of the show, I remember Pycelle saying in the wake of Joffrey's death that poison was "a woman's weapon...women, cravens and eunuchs."

Varys had decided that Dany was not fit to rule and was a danger to the realm. In the previous episode while he and Tyrion were discussing Jon's claim and "treason", Tyrion asked "And what do we do with Dany?". Varys replied to him with a grim look, to which Tyrion squirmed in disbelief. It was then Varys said "I've been as honest as I can" and presumably went off and set himself on a different course to Dany/Tyrion.

Why did Tyrion tell Dany about Varys betrayal if he thought Varys was just going to sit quiet with his musings? Varys is a king/queen-maker, a string-puller, a doer, a very dangerous man to his enemies. Others can read it how they like, but I have no doubt that he was setting about to poison/kill Dany in that scene.

PressRun

Paddy Cow wrote: »

I was one of those and I really wanted him to kill her to complete his redemption. But that was me wanting him to be someone he wasn't. When I think back to everything he's done, it makes sense that he went to die with Cersei because she has always been his true love and purpose. I wanted Jamie to be good but really he wasn't. This was someone willing to kill a child to protect Cersei. He threatened to kill Edmure, his child and everyone in Riverrun to get back to Cersei. He was never going to chose a happy ever after with Brienne and if he had, it would've just been fan service. I don't like Jamie's choice but it's true to who he has been since the beginning.

I actually don't think he was bad, though?
Jamie had sense of justice, I think, and deep down always knew what was right. He was in a toxic relationship with Cersei that drove him to do bad things, but I don't think he was ever an outright bad person.

His line about not caring if innocents burned was particularly jarring to me because of this. This is a character who killed a king to save innocent lives and lived with the burden of the 'kingslayer' label for the rest of his life. We see in that scene with Brienne in the baths how much he is affected by that moment. His entire arc was predicated on people not really understanding why he did what he did and not caring to find out that he actually did it for the greater good. He ends up embracing the 'kingslayer' label to an extent and kind of swaggering along with this bad reputation, but I don't think it was ever who he truly was. It was just an image he went along with because no one was interested in understanding the truth.

Likewise, his treatment of Tyrion showed a compassionate side to him that you couldn't honestly say either Cersei or Tywin had.

Jamie was a good person who did bad things. Just my opinion.

Foxtrol

is_that_so wrote: »

She opted, through the plot to help the slaves and they refused to play ball. You could see it was a definite option, not fine under any circumstances, but the plot did lead to that possibility. Other examples were also plot-driven. Here we have a woman suddenly deciding to burn the hell out of a city and its people but with no plot development save possibly one single line about fear. There really was nothing to stop them setting this up properly. I imagine I'd still think it was a poor idea but as least it would have been planned out.

We’re getting down to it now, just because it wasn’t set up to your liking, for a turn you wouldn’t have agreed with anyway, doesn’t mean it wasn’t set up properly.

I didn’t need Dany to show Joffrey/Cersei in your face psycho for a season to highlight her ability to do barbaric things when required, she has displayed that consistently in bursts over 8 seasons. If anything to me they did too much in the last few episodes flagging that she was making this turn, they should have been more subtle about it.

I’ve no problem with not liking it, what I’ve repeatedly pointed out is that isn’t the same as this being out of the blue or against the arc of her character like some are claiming.

mrkiscool2

Alpha_zero wrote: »

Hey guys would you say Drogon is a unisex name?

I would say so.

Foxtrol wrote: »

We’re getting down to it now, just because it wasn’t set up to your liking, for a turn you wouldn’t have agreed with anyway, doesn’t mean it wasn’t set up properly.

I didn’t need Dany to show Joffrey/Cersei in your face psycho for a season to highlight her ability to do barbaric things when required, she has displayed that consistently in bursts over 8 seasons. If anything to me they did too much in the last few episodes flagging that she was making this turn, they should have been more subtle about it.

I’ve no problem with not liking it, what I’ve repeatedly pointed out is that isn’t the same as this being out of the blue or against the arc of her character like some are claiming.

This. People thinking that it's bad writing because it was never shown have blinkers on because they didn't like Dany turning evil. Like, everyone is the hero of their own story. We've followed her along the way and, even though she had done questionable and bad things, we have been following her so they seem justified. But there have been signs she had this in her and that she will do anything for power.

Tipsy McSwagger

Dragon Fire can’t melt steel beams.

Foxtrol

Podge_irl wrote: »

I think, more importantly, they were people that she saw as bad guys.

So the trick is assuming that she know thinks every living person in KL is a bad guy even after they've surrendered the city. She could have accomplished her goal simply by burning down the Red Keep alone after all. They did touch on this when she referenced the citizens not rising up like the slaves had, but considering they just had - to a degree - done that when she went berserk it just doesn't really track.

There are many instances where she didn’t only barbarically attack those who she saw as ‘bad guys’, she regularly did took similar against people who got in her way, were just associated with her enemies, or some who just didn’t do what she demanded. If she is seeing the latter groups as being bad guys, then it shows where she is mentally and the people of KL could easily fall in with them.

Again, I’m sure she is still grieving, but what she said leading up to attacking KL, regarding ruling with fear and mercy for future generations, doesn’t point to it being a moment that she goes berserk, it was to some level planned. Like all the ‘shocking’ turns characters make in the show, I’m sure there’ll be some further background provided in the following episode.

Sardonicat

Apparently it can't melt Arya Stark, either.

Didn't even singe those monster eyebrows yet everyone around burnt black.

The_Honeybadger

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

I would say so.


This. People thinking that it's bad writing because it was never shown have blinkers on because they didn't like Dany turning evil. Like, everyone is the hero of their own story. We've followed her along the way and, even though she had done questionable and bad things, we have been following her so they seem justified. But there have been signs she had this in her and that she will do anything for power.

I think it would be easier for people to comprehend if burning the city had been critical to victory somehow. It wasn’t, the battle was won and the throne was as good as hers at that stage. Her enemy was decimated. What followed was mindless and unnecessary slaughter, never her modus operandi up to that point despite showing at times a ruthlessness that left nobody in doubt she was capable of doing something like that if it was needed.

It was a surprising turn of events probably written in to set up her demise in the next episode. Can see one of Arya or Jon taking her out before her bum warms the throne.

Foxtrol

The_Honeybadger wrote: »

I think it would be easier for people to comprehend if burning the city had been critical to victory somehow. It wasn’t, the battle was won and the throne was as good as hers at that stage. Her enemy was decimated. What followed was mindless and unnecessary slaughter, never her modus operandi up to that point despite showing at times a ruthlessness that left nobody in doubt she was capable of doing something like that if it was needed.

It was a surprising turn of events probably written in to set up her demise in the next episode. Can see one of Arya or Jon taking her out before her bum warms the throne.

It wasn’t mindless and unnecessary to her, she pretty much sets up earlier in the episode why she was going to do it and I'm sure it'll be expanded upon in the finale.

Many people really haven't listened to what Dany has said over the 8 seasons or didn't believe her.

Loafing Oaf

The_Honeybadger wrote: »

It was a surprising turn of events probably written in to set up her demise in the next episode. Can see one of Arya or Jon taking her out before her bum warms the throne.

I wonder will there be a unanimous "She's got to go" reaction among the remaining 'good guys'. Or will Tyrion or someone be putting a "Such things happen in war" justification, arguing that the dragon rampage was part of the nasty business of defeating Cersei and Daenerys would be grand as a peacetime ruler...

The_Honeybadger

Foxtrol wrote: »

There are many instances where she didn’t only barbarically attack those who she saw as ‘bad guys’, she regularly did took similar against people who got in her way, were just associated with her enemies, or some who just didn’t do what she demanded. If she is seeing the latter groups as being bad guys, then it shows where she is mentally and the people of KL could easily fall in with them.

Again, I’m sure she is still grieving, but what she said leading up to attacking KL, regarding ruling with fear and mercy for future generations, doesn’t point to it being a moment that she goes berserk, it was to some level planned. Like all the ‘shocking’ turns characters make in the show, I’m sure there’ll be some further background provided in the following episode.

What she said in relation to ruling with fear I took to mean that she would use Drogon to take out the KL defences and render her enemy helpless. Of course there were going to be collateral casualties but burning every man, woman and child in the city was over the top even for GOT.

Foxtrol

The_Honeybadger wrote: »

What she said in relation to ruling with fear I took to mean that she would use Drogon to take out the KL defences and render her enemy helpless. Of course there were going to be collateral casualties but burning every man, woman and child in the city was over the top even for GOT.

In the world of GoT, how is taking out defences and rendering her enemy helpless instilling fear? You’re dealing with the likes of the Lannisters and what they did in the Rains of Castamere, what Robert and friends did to her family, or how her own family conquered and ruled.

Even if you take the most passive idea of her quote about fear being what you said, her quote about mercy highlights her thinking.

‘Our mercy is toward future generations who will never again be held hostage by a tyrant’

Again, you can read it as being about collateral casualties, but after what happened she is likely flagging and justifying that she believes whatever she feels she needs to do to become the queen is worth it for the future, whatever about the common folk that may die

TerrorFirmer

Foxtrol wrote: »

Many people really haven't listened to what Dany has said over the 8 seasons or didn't believe her.

The signposting that she has a tendenacy to be cruel, merciless and increasingly willing in the later seasons to accept massive collateral damage?

Yes, everyone listened and watched, it's not like everyone magically forget key elements which are literally the basis for her whole character.

When she talks about returning slaver cities to the dirt - that's tyrannical and cruel, with massive collateral damage - as is pointed out to her by Tyrion.

But it's not necessarily entirely illogical, it has objective and cause, however warped, and it's not the same as madness, and murder/pillage for murder/pillage's sake.

Cersei, for example, is also a ruthless tyrant willing to accept any collateral damage to hold her grip on power....but she's not mad either, there is a purpose and objective to all of her cruelty.

No different to most characters in Game of Thrones - the only true mad characters who revel in utterly senseless violence for the sake of violence are characters like Ramsey and the Mountain.....and Daenery's father, of course.

What Daenerys does in E05 is utter madness, but not the sort that was signposted up until S8.

If she had burned half (or all) of Kings Landing in order 'to win', that would be cruel and obscene collateral damage - as Tyrion and Varys are so fearful of.

But it would still make sense from a total war POV, and it would also tally with that cruel, cold streak Daenerys has been increasingly exhibiting.

Suddenly deciding to raze an entire capital city and it's innocent populace after it's already surrendered does not - especially not in the context presented.

Everyone expected the mad queen at some point, no-one's got 'blinkers' on.

But the show went from developing her as an increasingly ruthless quasi-tyrant, to suddenly making her a full-blown genocidal maniac with almost no development in between stages.

Again, it would've been fine if she'd just indiscriminately razed half of Kings Landing just to win - that in itself would've been both horrifying and abhorrent to Tyrion and Jon, but understandable given her character development the past few episodes.

But the way it was presented - she just went full blown mad and decided to commit mass-scale genocide after the battle was won - was just skeletal and not remotely developed enough to be suddenly entirely credible.

Another victim of this rushed season.

is_that_so

Foxtrol wrote: »

We’re getting down to it now, just because it wasn’t set up to your liking, for a turn you wouldn’t have agreed with anyway, doesn’t mean it wasn’t set up properly.

I didn’t need Dany to show Joffrey/Cersei in your face psycho for a season to highlight her ability to do barbaric things when required, she has displayed that consistently in bursts over 8 seasons. If anything to me they did too much in the last few episodes flagging that she was making this turn, they should have been more subtle about it.

I’ve no problem with not liking it, what I’ve repeatedly pointed out is that isn’t the same as this being out of the blue or against the arc of her character like some are claiming.

Eh no we're really not. I like good plot and I am really not bothered what happens as long as the plot informs it. It didn't happen here no matter how many other examples you list off.

is_that_so

Foxtrol wrote: »

It wasn’t mindless and unnecessary to her, she pretty much sets up earlier in the episode why she was going to do it and I'm sure it'll be expanded upon in the finale.

Many people really haven't listened to what Dany has said over the 8 seasons or didn't believe her.

I rest my case.

The Golden Miller

Dany looked hot as fcuk in that scene before she went mad on the dragon

dsmythy

Don't know if it was mentioned but was the horse at the end meant to be the same one Harry Strickland rode? Looked the same right down to those gorgeous blonde locks.

Tikki Wang Wang

is_that_so wrote: »

I rest my case.

And I rest mine


https://youtu.be/EA7UQOYskas

Foxtrol

is_that_so wrote: »

I rest my case.

When did you expect her to talk about her plans that she needed to instill fear in the population of Westeros because someone has a better claim than her to the throne and nearly all of her loyal army and allies were dead? Should they have started back in season 2, sure nothing has changed since then? :rolleyes:

is_that_so wrote: »

Eh no we're really not. I like good plot and I am really not bothered what happens as long as the plot informs it. It didn't happen here no matter how many other examples you list off.

There’s clearly no point in trying to discuss this further with you, as from the bolded piece above as you have your fingers in your ears to match the blinkers you had over your eyes while watching the show.

NuMarvel

Alpha_zero wrote: »

Hey guys would you say Drogon is a unisex name?

As long as the mother doesn't mind being called Mother of Dragons for the rest of her life, then sure.

kerplun k wrote: »

I’m wondering if the destruction of Kings Landing will make an appearance in the opening credits next week.

Almost definitely. They've been updated every week so far with the key points of the previous week's episodes (path of the White Walkers, battle damage in Winterfell, funeral pyres). There's no way they're not doing something similar for the final episode.

Foxtrol

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

The signposting that she has a tendenacy to be cruel, merciless and increasingly willing in the later seasons to accept massive collateral damage?

Yes, everyone listened and watched, it's not like everyone magically forget key elements which are literally the basis for her whole character.

That’s what I thought until I started discussing with some here.

When she talks about returning slaver cities to the dirt - that's tyrannical and cruel, with massive collateral damage - as is pointed out to her by Tyrion.

But it's not necessarily entirely illogical, it has objective and cause, however warped, and it's not the same as madness, and murder/pillage for murder/pillage's sake.

Cersei, for example, is also a ruthless tyrant willing to accept any collateral damage to hold her grip on power....but she's not mad either, there is a purpose and objective to all of her cruelty.

No different to most characters in Game of Thrones - the only true mad characters who revel in utterly senseless violence for the sake of violence are characters like Ramsey and the Mountain.....and Daenery's father, of course.

What Daenerys does in E05 is utter madness, but not the sort that was signposted up until S8.

If she had burned half (or all) of Kings Landing in order 'to win', that would be cruel and obscene collateral damage - as Tyrion and Varys are so fearful of.

But it would still make sense from a total war POV, and it would also tally with that cruel, cold streak Daenerys has been increasingly exhibiting.

Suddenly deciding to raze an entire capital city and it's innocent populace after it's already surrendered does not - especially not in the context presented.

Everyone expected the mad queen at some point, no-one's got 'blinkers' on.

But the show went from developing her as an increasingly ruthless quasi-tyrant, to suddenly making her a full-blown genocidal maniac with almost no development in between stages.

Again, it would've been fine if she'd just indiscriminately razed half of Kings Landing just to win - that in itself would've been both horrifying and abhorrent to Tyrion and Jon, but understandable given her character development the past few episodes.

But the way it was presented - she just went full blown mad and decided to commit mass-scale genocide after the battle was won - was just skeletal and not remotely developed enough to be suddenly entirely credible.

Another victim of this rushed season.

I’ve stated this already, but I disagree that it is full blown mad though. The finale might go a different direction, but to me she has stated she has decided to rule through fear and this is in line with how she ruled in Essos (if you can even call what she did over there ruling).

I don’t see how it is logical to threaten to burn cities in Essos down and it not be logical here, if she sees fear as the most viable way to maintain power.

You and other posters have claimed that she could have stopped with the bell and she would have won and been fine. I’m interested in you or someone else could tell me how you expect that would have played out for her given her severely weakened position?

osarusan

Alpha_zero wrote: »

Hey guys would you say Drogon is a unisex name?

Are you thinking that Varys wondering if "she" was eating, refers to a dragon he is trying to poison?

OneEyedORourke

My favourite part of the episode was Qyburn having his head splatted against the wall.

I would have preferred if Cersei had a more gruesome death - but I suppose there are only so many ways they could kill a pregnant woman that would be deemed acceptable.

RickBlaine

OneEyedORourke wrote: »

My favourite part of the episode was Qyburn having his head splatted against the wall.

I would have preferred if Cersei had a more gruesome death - but I suppose there are only so many ways they could kill a pregnant woman that would be deemed acceptable.

What about Robb's wife setting stabbed in her pregnant stomach multiple times??

biggebruv

RickBlaine wrote: »

What about Robb's wife setting stabbed in her pregnant stomach multiple times??

In today’s metoo era I don’t think they would get off lightly with it so best not to even go there

The_Honeybadger

Foxtrol wrote: »

In the world of GoT, how is taking out defences and rendering her enemy helpless instilling fear? You’re dealing with the likes of the Lannisters and what they did in the Rains of Castamere, what Robert and friends did to her family, or how her own family conquered and ruled.

Even if you take the most passive idea of her quote about fear being what you said, her quote about mercy highlights her thinking.



Again, you can read it as being about collateral casualties, but after what happened she is likely flagging and justifying that she believes whatever she feels she needs to do to become the queen is worth it for the future, whatever about the common folk that may die

If watching your tyrant queens army and defences get burned alive in front of you does not instill fear nothing will.

I don’t think she was flagging or wavering and I listened and heard everything in the show just fine. I’m not all that bothered how it ends but I really found her going on that rampage when she finally had what she wanted a bit silly. You can pretend you have some higher understanding of the show if you like, it was plain weak writing for me, designed to create a shock factor and set up the ending where she is killed off by someone close to her, probably Jon as we all saw the shock on his face when she started burning the city.

It was entertaining none the less.

Drumpot

The_Honeybadger wrote: »

I’m not all that bothered how it ends

Not really surprising

J. Marston

biggebruv wrote: »

In today’s metoo era I don’t think they would get off lightly with it so best not to even go there

We had a lingering shot of a man brutally slitting a woman's throat in this episode. They're not put off by that stuff.

Rezident

Mokuba wrote: »

Here we go again.

To start - Just like the people crawled out of the woodwork saying "We knew Arya was going to kill the Night King for years - Blue Eyes!!", we have people claiming that Dany's madness was foreshadowed for years and we weren't paying attention. That is absolutely wrong. Dany has never once murdered an innocent before, in fact, she hasn't done much wrong in general. She killed people who were objectively committing atrocities - mainly slavery. She murdered enemies who refused to bend the knee as all other rulers in Westeros have done. Tywin Lannister had Elia's children killed and Elia raped and murdered - not mad! Dany kills a few Dothraki who were trying to enslave her and gang-rape her - CRAZY! LOOK I TOLD YOU SHES CRAZY SEE! The slavers in Mereen betray their agreement to abolish slavery and attack, so she kills them - LOOK! CRAZY! She locked up her dragons (children) for killing one child! People are trying to attribute morality as we know it to her actions in a medieval time. Absolute utter nonsense that she was capable of this, and people acting smug about it too! What Dany did in the last episode was the worst atrocity in the history of Westeros. Let that sink in. The worst atrocity in the entire history of that universe.

Arya fed a man his own children after taking the time to skin and cook them. She smiled as he ate them and slit his throat. She cut off his face and wore it while she poisoned the entire extended Frey family, some of whom surely had nothing to do with the Red Wedding or were just following orders. That is more despicable than anything Dany has ever done, by far. Is Arya not the one whos madness was telegraphed?

• Varys, who for decades has been a master of whisperers, starts folding over paper when people come in like a child who has been caught copying someones homework. Not surprising when last episode he was basically shouting about the treason he is about to commit. Master of Whisperers, for decades people.
• Why did Tyrion telltale on Varys, and then minutes later commit treason himself? I don't understand why he even cares about the people of Kings Landing so much? "I wish I had enough poison for the whole pack of you, I would gladly give my life to watch you all swallow it."
• Why does Tyrion think Jaime can appeal to Cersei? This is the same woman who tortured and bullied him as a child. Blamed him for the death of Joffrey. Rigged the trial to ensure his guilt. Chose the Mountain to ensure his death in the Trial By Combat. Had Bronn bought so he wouldn't fight for Tyrion. Blew up the sept which resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocents. Promised Tyrion she would support the living and lied. Hired Bronn to kill Tyrion. Ignored Tyrion at the walls and killed Missandei. He has tried to appeal to her about 6 times now and it has failed every time!
• Why does Jaime keep taking off his glove? Surefire way to recognise him, lets keep doing it even after acknowledging how dumb it is!
• Sure were a lot of Unsullied and Dothraki outside the gate. Again, they must have been hiding in the library with Arya.
• Euron now has 60 good boats vs 1 dragon. Last episode she lost a dragon and retreated in fear vs 20 boats. 30 seconds later the Iron Fleet is gone. Why didn't she just burn the boats last episode?
• Machine Gun reload time to labouring to reload one bolt. And wow they can't hit anything anymore. Aimbot is broken this episode.
• Golden Company were definitely worth the screentime.
• Jon Snow standing around like an absolute idiot, gawping while innocent people die. The same man who made allies of Wildlings would not stand for this. Ned Starks son would not stand for this. Ned Stark left Kings Landing for 15 years because of a sacking of KL. Jon just watches it happen like a dope.
• Jon Snow hid behind a rock to evade dragonfire in episode 3. Just a reminder. Dragonfire casually levelling an entire city here
• Euron emerging from the water where Jaime happens to be. He must have been swimming around for 30 minutes. "Arthur Curry" Greyjoy, first of his name, King of the seas and the fishes.
• Jaime got stabbed in the same place that The Waif stabbed Arya. Just that sweet spot where stab wounds don't affect a character at all. Then Euron looks into the camera to die. Christ.
• The Hound says to Arya, don't follow the path of killing and revenge. Bit late isn't it? Shes only killed :The stableboy, multiple Frey and Lannister soldiers, Yoren's Prisoner, The sick girl, Meryn Trant, The Waif, Walder Frey's children who she fed to Walder Frey, Walder Frey, The entire Frey extended family and Littlefinger. It's ok Arya you can be a girl again, nothing you do has any consequences! Ignore the 50-60 people you killed and be a girl again!
• They played sad music for Cersei and made it out to be this sad moment when she died. The equivalent of blowing up the Vatican, she has a nun raped and tortured by a zombie, no problem Cersei is tragic! Based on what she has done no competent writer would have given her a sendoff where we were supposed to sympathise. And again supposed to be some sort of emotional moment when she is reunited with Jaime? She rode all around her while she was with Jaime and treated him like a fool.
• Pity Cleganebowl had 0 stakes because they were both doomed, I guess that might be some commentary on the futility of revenge, bit late to be talking that stance though after You-Go-Girl-Arya-Ninja-Stark baked her Frey pies and smiled into the camera after!
• Arya is immune to dragonfire or some sh*t. I liked how she flipped a switch to go from super ninja badass to scared little girl after a little pep talk. And then against all odds she almost died 4 times but lived! Wow! There was so much tension! :rolleyes:

The most unforgivable of all - the character assassination of Jaime Lannister, or how to undo 8 seasons of character development in one episode. The same man who broke down in the bathtub to Brienne when telling her how he had to kill Aerys to save the people, who asked Brienne if she would have stood by when innocents were about to be killed - that same man now doesn't care about the people. Who jumps into the bear pit for Brienne, who abandons Cersei to fight for the living.

People were like, the only reason he is going to Kings Landing is to kill Cersei! Nope, he is "addicted" to her and tosses away all 8 seasons of his development.

Again, in before the usual Nerd! Wierdo! Stop trying to be hipster by not liking it! All my friends like it and so did I!

Oh and the classic - If you didn't like this then you should stop watching television!

You are over-analysing the BEJAYSUS out of it. And to all the people moaning about military tactics and 'arcs' - it's a TV show with dragons. Get over yourselves. I am so glad they did not chicken out of Dany's proper ending - her flying over the city destroying everything was epic. Truly legendary, I loved it.


What would you have done? They all lived happily ever afterwards and they settle down and have kids? The dragon queen!? Yawn. GRRM got you again! Admit it, you didn't see the NK ending either and it was even more brilliant and he's fooled you again with Dany - despite the many signs along the way. Brilliant.

TerrorFirmer

Foxtrol wrote: »

I don’t see how it is logical to threaten to burn cities in Essos down and it not be logical here, if she sees fear as the most viable way to maintain power.

You and other posters have claimed that she could have stopped with the bell and she would have won and been fine. I’m interested in you or someone else could tell me how you expect that would have played out for her given her severely weakened position?

When she made those comments about returning cities to dirt, she was still at war with her enemies.

When she crucified the masters, she was still at war with her enemies.

Both would involve - or did involve - collateral damage, but they weren't killing and destruction for the sake of killing and destruction. Nothing, up to this point, was killing for the sake of it.

When she goes genocidal in E05, the entirely one-sided battle's already won.

She methodically torches the defences, Golden Company, Iron Fleet and a good portion of the Lannister forces effortlessly.

The Lannisters are so terrified they throw down their weapons rather than fight for what they recognise as a hopeless cause, and the entire civilian populace is fleeing in disorganised terror as the city falls into utter chaos.

I think she already had the 'fear' angle nailed down just fine.

Not to mention, the way it's portrayed in the show is clear as day not a calculated, rational thought out course of action.

Only when the bells ring incessently, does she see red and it's etched on her face, with perfect clarity, that she's totally lost the plot.

Grayditch

I'm rewatching the entire thing. By god, seasons 1-4 put this new action movie with bad writing to shame.

Foxtrol

The_Honeybadger wrote: »

If watching your tyrant queens army and defences get burned alive in front of you does not instill fear nothing will.

Do they sing the Rains of Castamere because they just burned their army and defenses? For all her dragons did so far it didn’t make the Lannisters, Greyjoys, the Iron Bank, or all the other enemies she made in Essos fear Dany, even when she was backed by a massive army.

I don’t think she was flagging or wavering and I listened and heard everything in the show just fine. I’m not all that bothered how it ends but I really found her going on that rampage when she finally had what she wanted a bit silly. You can pretend you have some higher understanding of the show if you like, it was plain weak writing for me, designed to create a shock factor and set up the ending where she is killed off by someone close to her, probably Jon as we all saw the shock on his face when she started burning the city.

It was entertaining none the less.

The main weak writing point to me is how much flagging they did that she was going to burn the city and it still wasn’t enough for some.

She had the throne at that point, but she wanted to keep it. Call it silly but, as someone that thinks she should have stopped, I’ll ask again how does her maintaining the crown and ruling look like if she stopped when they rang the bell?

TerrorFirmer

Foxtrol wrote: »

Do they sing the Rains of Castamere because they just burned their army and defenses? For all her dragons did so far it didn’t make the Lannisters, Greyjoys, the Iron Bank, or all the other enemies she made in Essos fear Dany, even when she was backed by a massive army.

The main weak writing point to me is how much flagging they did that she was going to burn the city and it still wasn’t enough for some.

She had the throne at that point, but she wanted to keep it. Call it silly but, as someone that thinks she should have stopped, I’ll ask again how does her maintaining the crown and ruling look like if she stopped when they rang the bell?

She wiped out the Golden Company and Iron Fleet in about 30 seconds.

Decimated Kings Landing's defences in the same time.

I think that would be enough to check the 'fear' boxes.

Iron Bank/Golden Company/etc underestimated the dragons prior to this because they had never seen them in action.

Bronn literally has a conversation with the specific topic with Jaime, and says something along the lines of "As soon as I saw that dragon in action, I knew your sister was ****ed".

Torching Kings Landing was simply a mechanism to alienate Daenerys entirely from her allies in one fell swoop and drive the final episode.

It's a grand plotline in theory, but it desperately needed more than just an episode to make credible sense.

osarusan

RickBlaine wrote: »

What about Robb's wife setting stabbed in her pregnant stomach multiple times??

That was the bad guys killing the good guys...brutal, but you know they will pay for it in the end. They're already the bad guys.

This time it's the good guys, but it makes them a bit less good somehow, as no matter how vicious Cersei is, what's inside her isn't.

I always thought that her being pregnant was going to stop her from getting murdered by somebody, and so wondered how she would die.

kerplun k

I think any criticism should lie squarely on D&D,
It kinda feels like they lost their passion for this towards the end of season 6 and ever since then it feels like they were given a bunch of bullet points from GRRM, and since then they’ve just focused all hitting those points so they can finish up and move into their next project.