806 - The Iron Throne

11213151718

Comments

  • rkcrawf said:

    Why on earth do people (namely, podcasters) keep saying that Jaime had sex with Brienne 1 night (or 1 time)? They were shacking up for at least a couple of weeks. They had sex the night after the battle was over on celebration night, then the next day or two Jon and Dany's crew departed from Winterfell. 

    Sansa gets a raven after an undisclosed amount of time later saying that Rhaegal and Missandei had been killed, but that would have been at least a week or probably a couple of weeks after Dany and her crew had departed from Winterfell. We find Jaime still shacking up with Brienne the night after Sansa tells him about about Cersei killing Rhaegal and executing  Missandei, so you have to imagine they slept together in that room each of those nights during that couple of weeks after they first hooked up.


    Bc it fits into a narrative of what they saw on-screen is the only thing that happened.
    You actually saw 2 separate nights of them sleeping together on screen. So even by that narrative of what was shown, it's still an incorrect description.

    Also, surely we don't need text box that says "15 Days Later" flash onto a screen in order to assume some passage of time. It's just common sense. 
    What does the distinction between a one night stand and a several week tryst change narratively?

  • What does the distinction between a one night stand and a several week tryst change narratively?
    For me it helps frame Brienne's very emotional reaction to seeing Jaime leave in the middle of the night. It would be hard to square with a literal one night stand why she was so emotionally distraught. But after a several week relationship her devastation feels more earned.
    chrisk
  • mtron32mtron32 San Diego
    LordBy said:
    mtron32 said:
    I think it's pretty cool that they made Bran into the God Emperor from Dune.  After Children of Dune, he binds himself to sand trout and becomes an actual sandworm hybrid with immortality and prescience that holds the universe in a stranglehold while adhering to his "Golden Path."  We've now seen Bran spend multiple seasons manipulating events to arrive at the iron throne, I suspect the next series would be about his own golden path and how the people unknowingly enact it.
    Who is his Duncan Idaho?

    [Note that Khal Drogo himself will be playing Duncan Idaho in the upcoming movie]
    There is some encouraging casting for the Dune film.  While I loved the original, hopefully this can do well enough to warrant sequels.
  • zruiz7 said:
    A. Ron really turned into a C U next Tuesday. It particularly happened with the last few episodes. I used to love listening every week. You could tell that Jim was just going along with every complaint, even when he disagreed. I still love you A. Ron, but it was just difficult to listen when 98% of your sentences are complaints. Of course this season was horribly written, but you do not have to displace your displeasure at the expense of the audience. I will continue to follow and listen to your material, but I just hope you change your overall tone. Good luck boys!
    That's why I quit The WD podcast. Why would someone want to listen to someone complain?
    SanguinePenguin
  • mtron32mtron32 San Diego
    zruiz7 said:
    A. Ron really turned into a C U next Tuesday. It particularly happened with the last few episodes. I used to love listening every week. You could tell that Jim was just going along with every complaint, even when he disagreed. I still love you A. Ron, but it was just difficult to listen when 98% of your sentences are complaints. Of course this season was horribly written, but you do not have to displace your displeasure at the expense of the audience. I will continue to follow and listen to your material, but I just hope you change your overall tone. Good luck boys!
    That's why I quit The WD podcast. Why would someone want to listen to someone complain?
    That's actually why I miss TWD because its was a refreshingly realistic take of the series and I love their humor.  GOT used to be on the level of Breaking Bad but in the last few seasons, became like old TWD so it was good to see the podcast reflect that.  The latest season has been iffy but still entertaining; meanwhile all that hope that fans built up over years and years ends in a wet fart so I'm really not surprised at the complaints.
    Giovannialexander.klassen
  • AnominalAnominal San Francisco Bay Area
    edited May 2019
    You guys are probably all talked out, but I haven't talked any! I've had a few days to think about it and have kept away from all reviews, and my initial feels after the episode ended are the same.

    (For reference, I liked the first two episodes of the season, had some major strategy, logistical, and pacing issues with The Long Night, thought the next setup episode was okay, and thought The Bells was almost great but missing something that completely turned it to laughable.)

    Almost Great

    As is, without touching anything, it feels like this was very likely a great finale to 80 episodes of Game of Thrones, and I just forgot to watch seven episodes in these past two seasons.

    The performances in this episode were amazing. The look was beautiful. The final conclusions of where everyone ended up were (mostly) pretty good. 

    Bran being king could make sense, I just missed all the connecting parts. The parts where Bran explained to everyone who he is, what he can do, and prove to them what it means to be the Three-Eyed Raven. And the episodes where he showed true leadership, where after the battle they all realize with certainty that Bran was the target of the Night King, and the parts where he begins to pull himself out from living mostly in the past and making it known he's here to support everyone in the present.

    I missed the episodes where Jon and Dany really fell in love. The parts were Tyrion discovered with solid proof that Varys was betraying Dany, because surely having one of the Queen's top advisers go to greet the leader of half the army as it arrives before the big battle can't be enough to sentence him to death. That must have been an amazing showdown between Tyrion and Varys. I missed the parts that reestablished how close Missandei and Dany were, the parts where Jaime ponders what it means that Cersei sent an assassin to go kill him but realizes he has to go try to save his sister anyway. 

    Leading up to The Bells we had both Cersei and Dany camps talking about how Cersei was going to use the innocents as human shields to test her resolve, and in this episode we had Dany tell Jon about how Cersei did exactly that. But there must have been some miscommunication with the director of The Bells because none of that was on screen, or I must have blinked and missed it. (And of course I also blinked and missed the part that gives Dany that final tip over the edge.)

    I missed the parts where Jaime is smart and trys to avoid riding right through the obvious path of Dany's army, and despite doing his best effort, gets captured. I missed the part where Davos learns of the back entrance to the castle from Tyrion and he makes his decision to not tell anyone about it and just leave a dinky rowboat that is apparently seaworthy enough for a one handed man to row across the sea to Essos. And I missed all the scenes where Dany had to make greyer and greyer decisions.

    In this episode I must have missed the parts where we saw the citizens reacting to Dany's attack, and Dany's reaction to the people. Seeing their despair and seeing only how she liberated them. I missed the part where Jon was questioned about what happened and how he couldn't help but tell them the truth of how he stabbed her, and so that's how they know that little detail. I must have also missed the part where after the vote to make Bran king, Sam decides that he can't handle that responsibility of being one the highest ranking lords and/or Bran asks him to continue on with his training to be a maester. And the scene where Sansa and Brienne have their final talks about how Sansa wants Brienne to protect Bran or that Brienne feels it's time to leave her service because she is a Knight of the Seven (Six now) Kingdoms and Sansa rules The North so she must stay true to her duty as a knight. I also must have missed the parts where Greyworm decided that since Dany's last order as queen was for Tyrion's arrest and not immediate murder, that he must also only arrest Jon, and that indecision with what to do is what led him to allow the remaining armies of the Seven Kingdoms to all march on the Red Keep.

    If I can fill all those things that have been missing. This was probably a great finale.

    The Reality

    In reality, D&D have resorted to sooooo much telling and not showing. And sometimes not even telling and just wants us to fill in the blanks. With Bran being the outrageous victim of this, but not even close to the only character or plot point that fell prey to this "technique." So in the actual reality this was an okay finale. A pretty good standalone episode still, but only an okay finale.

    The Bad

    The first isn't that big of a deal in the overall story. It's more a technique. Jaime and Cersei were covered by an embarrassingly shallow amount of debris after considering their position and what we saw on screen. Not only that, but to rub salt in the wounds the camera kept on going wider or lower, and kept on showing more and more of the perfectly intact ceiling. So where did that fatal one layer of bricks come from?

    Bron. They actually gave him High Garden. I can't roll my eyes hard enough. And that's too bad because they made him Master of Coin but my eye-rolling is already maxed out. 

    The empty Small Council. You have all these kingdoms agreeing to stay as a Six Kingdoms, and no one is forcing a person on the Council? There should be too many people wanting not enough seats. 

    Delusional Dany. I think she had an amazing performance, and did what she could with her lines. As mentioned above, I wish they showed some kind of interaction with the people. Reaction to the people. Or orders to Greyworm about how to handle the people. She only ever talks to her own soldiers and to Jon and Tyrion. She never actually sees the people and I would have liked her reaction to her seeing her affect on them. I think this is going to be amazing in the books if they ever get finished.

    Sansa declaring independence and no one else. With no more Dany, at the very least, Yara would taken Sansa's lead and declared the Iron Islands to also be independent unless there are some more missing scenes where Bran earns her fear and/or her respect of him to keep her in line.

    The Random Good

    Edmure! My brother eye-rolled at his guest appearance and campaign speech. I loved it.

    The Confusing

    I'm not quite sure what was going on with Jon's ending besides being a symbolic equal but opposite scene compared to the opening scene of episode one. I'm confused why the Wildlings who seemed to feel comfortable in Castle Black would have been waiting for Jon to lead them beyond the wall. They're not cowards. If they wanted to go beyond the wall they would have done it on their own. It didn't seem like it was just a foraging mission and they'd be returning to the castle.

    Lol, what is Greyworm going to tell the people of Naath? That they're there to "protect" them, but they have to feed thousands of soldiers and provide shelter?

    What happened to the Dothraki? They didn't go with Greyworm did they?

    Conclusion

    Filmed beautifully, acted wonderfully, in a another universe would be a great finale. I can say that it wasn't as bad as LOST or BSG, and that I'm looking forward to the books if this is where all the characters* are heading.

    *The one ending I doubt the most is Arya's. It seems like maybe that was why some people felt like there was such an abrupt turn for her. They wanted to give her some of her humanity back to prepare her for a possible spin-off.

    (Yay! Now I can listen to all the podcasts.)
    LordBymajjam0770GiovanniSanguinePenguinScottTenorman
  • Bran really ran with the “chaos is a ladder” strategy that he learned from Littlefinger. It worked out much better for him too..
    ken halerkcrawf
  • AnominalAnominal San Francisco Bay Area
    edited May 2019
    Oh! Also! When Jon asks Tyrion if he did the right thing because it doesn't feel like he did, Tyrion should have said, "Yes. But... did you... did you have to kiss her while you stabbed...? That might be it."


    alexander.klassenGiovanni
  • edited May 2019
    Bran ending up as king was the only big thing where I was like... huh.... but the more I think about it, I think the headline is really that Bran is a different kind of king and this council of lords (House of Lords?) will have more power, so moving one more step toward a type of modern government. And I think the more meaningful placement is actually Tyrion as Hand, more meaningful for his character with a better payoff for the audience, and more meaningful to the story (if you were to imagine the extension of this story and its next chapters). The fact that Tyrion basically named the king and no one argued says a lot more about Tyrion's power than Bran's power. And even thought Tyrion makes some bad decisions, I see him as a strong character who has good intentions. So I am kind of OK with it now.

    So, on the topic of the negative criticism- 
    I have a B.A. and an M.A. in English and part of the reason I didn't keep going to the PhD level was that criticism becomes a political game and I didn't want to play in that particular game. (Game of Tomes? LOL IDK) Especially when the prizes are not that spectacular, ha! And the same thing exists in literary criticism where people adopt a certain line of thinking and judge works along that line of thinking, with almost blatant disregard to what was going on in the work, or what the author was doing. I have written book reviews from time to time but I no longer do that professionally ("professionally" haha) because it kind of becomes a drag to pick apart other people's work without having them in front of you to talk about it with and understand it. But I still do like to analyze stuff like TV, books, movies etc on a kind of "fun" level, which is why I participate in this forum.

    So I thought that kind of thinking was what @cdrive was getting at...  if you get mired too deeply in the criticism of a piece, it diminishes the enjoyment of the piece and seems to take the creator out of the equation and put the critic up on a pedestal. I myself have had things sort of ruined by Jim and Aron before. Season 2 of Mr Robot is the biggest one, when they (like many internet people) just kept hacking away at it episode after episode, and I liked it and thought I saw where it was going. After that I decided not to listen to their Mr Robot coverage any more. It becomes difficult to watch with your own point of view when you have someone with as strong a point of view as Aron in your headspace.

    But that's not Aron's fault. Critics do what critics do; part of the job is getting wrapped up in and being confident about their opinions, and regardless of my opinion of their opinions, they have the right to them just as I have the right not to listen.  It's incredibly difficult to avoid a constant onslaught of "content" about Game of Thrones, most of which is garbage, and at least their content is well researched and thoughtfully considered. Personally I did not listen to the Bald move coverage of GoT this season because i wanted to have my own experience, and I don't love Aron's tone all the time on a lot of levels. But I do believe that they both thoughtfully craft their opinions based on a lot of thinking, reading and of course show watching, and that's why I listened to all the other seasons of their podcast for GoT, I actually learned a lot from it (I would always get characters and storylines confused and forget them year after year etc, and I didn't read the books so when the books were more of a factor that was interesting to hear about it too).
    All the Chickensmajjam0770SanguinePenguincdriverkcrawf
  • edited May 2019
    Dee said:
    zruiz7 said:
    A. Ron really turned into a C U next Tuesday. It particularly happened with the last few episodes. I used to love listening every week. You could tell that Jim was just going along with every complaint, even when he disagreed. I still love you A. Ron, but it was just difficult to listen when 98% of your sentences are complaints. Of course this season was horribly written, but you do not have to displace your displeasure at the expense of the audience. I will continue to follow and listen to your material, but I just hope you change your overall tone. Good luck boys!
    As you’ve only just joined the forum, I’d advise you to read the rules before commenting again. Please do not make personal attacks on anyone. - including the hosts. Expressing your disagreement civilly is fine. Calling someone a cunt is definitely not.

    I'm so unhip I didn't even get that. Maybe because they do the GoT podcast on Tuesday I just thought it was "see you next week".

    Someone posted this earlier but I want to repost it so I can see if I can embed YouTube or if I'll have trouble like others. Plus it really made me laugh 



    Edit: I can! Suck it other people with that problem.  B)
    blue_sleeve
  • rkcrawf said:
    The single stupidest moment in the episode was Tyrion telling Greyworm "hey, if we - your enemies-  choose a king on the spot you have to recognize him" and Greyworm, for no reason whatsoever, rolling with it. Why? Why not kill Jon?
    Because the rest of the kingdoms would unite against the remaining Unsullied foreigners and kill them all. They have no money, no food, no external support, etc.
    I can't imagine Greyworm giving a single fuck about any of that in the moment he learns that Jon killed Dany. And isn't the rest of the kingdom already united against them? Unless they're hardcore Dany partisan s like Yara, in which case they'd have no problem.woth Jon getting swift justice.
  • walktheskywalkthesky New York
    God damn, I turned off the main cast 5 min into it.  I’m sorry but what a downer this cast became at the end.   
    SanguinePenguin
  • I was gonna post a topic for people to speculate on who would fill out Bran’s council, so I could argue that Master of Whispers should be Hot Pie, but then I realized this show gave us FOUR unnamed characters in arguably the most climactic scene of the series when they named Bran king. This show. I don’t even know what to say. 
    majjam0770

  • What does the distinction between a one night stand and a several week tryst change narratively?
    For me it helps frame Brienne's very emotional reaction to seeing Jaime leave in the middle of the night. It would be hard to square with a literal one night stand why she was so emotionally distraught. But after a several week relationship her devastation feels more earned.
    It's pretty neat how the show made all this happen in about 30 seconds. 
  • edited May 2019
    Why is it that the people who liked the finale of GoT take any criticism of the show so personally, that they have to turn to name calling when someone says something negative?
    Is this something you're seeing in the forums or just a general statement? 

    Edit: disregard this. The whole "cu next Tuesday" went completely over my head and has been addressed.
  • chrisk said:
    I think the complaints about the North being independent and nobody else are a bit overblown. 

    Theres a a lot of benefit to being part of the Six or Seven Kingdoms. Trade, currency, travel, etc... It’s the same reason countries have joined the EU today.

    You give up some self determination and I suppose you can say they should have debated it more but all these kingdoms have been unified for generations. So being affiliated is the default for everyone already. Sansa’s the only one we know of who’s been making noise about leaving. 

    Also - Master of Whisperers is just the spy chief right? That’s the way I read it. Whatever Bran is capable of, the position needs to exist, no?

    That goes against everything the show has shown us. Robb declaring independence was depicted as a big deal. A big deal that upset not only the Lannisters, but Renly, Stannis and Dany. And then not only do they get independence by just saying so, but the Iron Islands, who have wanted to be independent for just as long, go "you go ahead and do you, we'll stay."
    I 100% understand your argument here as the Iron Islands have pushed for Independence in the show but I want to know how the Iron Islands declares Independence and live on their own without the support of others? Surely in this new Westeros they can't go back to reaving, raping, and pillaging and while it's possible they can survive on fish and food from the sea alone, I highly doubt that's what they want to do. There's tons of benefits being united that I think the Iron Islanders would benefit from.  
    rkcrawf
  • cdrive said:
    Man to be honest I almost turned off the podcast this morning on the way to work (but I didn't!).  I kept stanning in defense of the show while being disappointed by the guys at moments to me sounding like they were reaching way too far to criticize aspects of the episode.  

    Right before I started the podcast I read on twitter about Sophie Turner saying:

    "All of these petitions and things like that — I think it's disrespectful to the crew, and the writers, and the filmmakers who have worked tirelessly over 10 years, and for 11 months shooting the last season," she said. "Like 50-something night shoots. So many people worked so, so hard on it, and for people to just rubbish it because it's not what they want to see is just disrespectful."

    Then I went into the podcast thinking 'oh great watch how me reading that right before jumping in is going to shade my enjoyment of the podcast.'  

    And every time I disagree with criticism this quote sneaks back into my mind:

    “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

    An English professor dropped that quote on me at an impressionable age and it always stuck.  It's like my blow off valve I guess or some coping mechanism when something I like gets trashed.  But criticism is creating something in a way that also has value.  I'm proof as a paid subscriber to 2 TV critics.  So criticism errs too and has shortcomings too.  Criticism is like a lamprey.  Not to be an armchair psychologist but I think many critics are going through a big deal having to process that their host creator is now gone.  And there is a lot of emotions in that and a lot of unobtanium trying to be mined through hindsight and "I would've done this."  It's just tough to hear.  It's like hearing Mommy and Daddy fighting, like one being the show and the other being the guys.  Like there are points I can agree or at least concede on and then are moments where it's like 'aww come on man. so fucking what!'  But I'm just invested as a fan.  So I guess I can be more 'fanatic' in defense of the show's shortcomings.  


    Extremely well put and I had the same feelings listening to the podcast as you did. It really bummed me out listening but I also understand that Jim and A Ron are really bummed out by how everything ended. They've spent years living this show to an extent that few others can say they have. The theory crafting (both tin foil and non), the speculating, the researching for preparation for their next podcast is something special to these guys and A Ron specifically as he was the one leading the spoilore edition alone for so long.

    We all clearly have deep feelings for this show because we not only listen to podcasters talk about it and criticize it but we engage in forums talking with fellow watchers about it. I look forward to checking the forums everyday and seeing what new threads have been started that I can do a deeper dive into the topic. I am thankful for having stumbled into the Bald Move community and it feels like a 2nd family to me. 
    SanguinePenguinblue_sleeve
  • cdrive said:
    I see I'm making a lot of friends this morning.  
    Hahahahahaha, sorry I'm so far behind on getting caught up in the thread. 
  • Two Major Major Frustrations:

    Bran's character doesn't make sense. It was inconsistently written.
    -He used to only be able to see the past and present. Now things imply that he saw the future as well. Does that make him an asshole? For "allowing" things to happen. Was he always meant to take the throne?  
    -He rejected any identity involving Bran, said he could never be Lord of anything.   But suddenly accepts all the titles that come with being King?
    -Can his power be corrupted just like anyone else?   
    -If his omniscience is the point of him being a good ruler, should his successor become the new three-eyed raven?

    And I think the choice to have a time jump between Jon killing Dany, and the council/trial, will forever bother me and one of most frustrating writing choices on a TV show ever. It just didn't make any sense.  

  • All the ChickensAll the Chickens Birmingham, AL
    Two Major Major Frustrations:

    -He used to only be able to see the past and present. Now things imply that he saw the future as well. Does that make him an asshole? For "allowing" things to happen. Was he always meant to take the throne?  


    They've always heavily implied that Bran can see the future. Although people adamantly argued against the evidence, for whatever reason.

    --Season 6 episode 6 Bran has his visions, and in those visions they spliced in a clip that was pulled directly from season 6 episode 10 when the Sept was blown up with wildfire. Despite that, some people still argued that it could be from the past, but that cannot be true because we have access to recorded history of Westeros since Kings Landing was created and that has never happened before in Westeros or KL.

    --In both season 4 and season 6, Bran has the vision of the Dragons shadow flying over Kings Landing, and they used that exact same vision clip in season 8 episode 5. At the time that Bran had those visions, people argued that it could have been from the past with any random Targaryen dragon flying over KL back then, but now we know by them using the same clip that it was a vision of the future.

    --Even in season 2, Bran had a vision about the sea flooding and drowning Winterfell and its people, including Ser Rodrik specifically. This was days before the Iron Born (the sea) took over Winterfell and kill Ser Rodrick.


    However, that doesn't at all imply that he could see exactly how everything was going to shake out. If I get a vision of a dragon flying over Kings Landing and even know it's in the future, does that mean that I know all of the context around that vision and every detail about how that came to happen? Not likely.









    SanguinePenguinawookieemajjam0770Hatorianrkcrawf
  • The more I think about it, the more I do think Bran is a completely diabolical asshole who manipulated everyone involved.  Tyrion is definitely no longer the smartest man in Westeros since he fell for that.  All the times he said someone was exactly where they were supposed to be, it was so he could get there.  I still feel like he could have done or said SOMETHING ANYTHING to save the lives of so many people.  Yes, lives needed to be lost to defeat the Night King but just allowing so many people to be killed is bananas.
  • LordByLordBy Utah
    edited May 2019
    awookiee said:
    chrisk said:
    I think the complaints about the North being independent and nobody else are a bit overblown. 

    Theres a a lot of benefit to being part of the Six or Seven Kingdoms. Trade, currency, travel, etc... It’s the same reason countries have joined the EU today.

    You give up some self determination and I suppose you can say they should have debated it more but all these kingdoms have been unified for generations. So being affiliated is the default for everyone already. Sansa’s the only one we know of who’s been making noise about leaving. 

    Also - Master of Whisperers is just the spy chief right? That’s the way I read it. Whatever Bran is capable of, the position needs to exist, no?

    That goes against everything the show has shown us. Robb declaring independence was depicted as a big deal. A big deal that upset not only the Lannisters, but Renly, Stannis and Dany. And then not only do they get independence by just saying so, but the Iron Islands, who have wanted to be independent for just as long, go "you go ahead and do you, we'll stay."
    I 100% understand your argument here as the Iron Islands have pushed for Independence in the show but I want to know how the Iron Islands declares Independence and live on their own without the support of others? Surely in this new Westeros they can't go back to reaving, raping, and pillaging and while it's possible they can survive on fish and food from the sea alone, I highly doubt that's what they want to do. There's tons of benefits being united that I think the Iron Islanders would benefit from.  
    I hope you understand the frustration involved for those of us not willing to fill in the gaps here with so much off-screen head cannon. The Iron Islanders, as presented, would have wanted independence. The Dornish people would also want independence based on their history and culture.

    You can speculate about an economic system of interdependencies and trade incentives, but that’s in your head. The show used to be about precisely these kinds of politics and interplays, with the spectacle largely happening off-screen. This season is about the spectacle with the power dynamics largely offscreen.

    Still a good show, sure, but when you change Mad Men into Jack Ryan you’re appealing to an entirely different fan base.

    If the books are ultimately written, these character pivots (Jamie, Bran, Danny, etc.) won’t be shocking they will have been well founded and documented by dozens of POV chapters. The choice to sacrifice a cohesive plot for gotcha-moments wouldn’t betrays the source material and probably wouldn’t have happened if they were still able to adapt the novels.

    I know the DDs didn’t sign up to do original material, but the lack of self-awareness that caused them to do it anyway without bringing in some heavyweights to do the writing for them resulted in something like Michael Bay being brough in to finish The Wheel Of Time series after Robert Jordan’s death. It’s jarring.
    awookieemajjam0770Giovanniken haleblacksunrise7
  • All the ChickensAll the Chickens Birmingham, AL
    edited May 2019
    LordBy said:
    awookiee said:
    chrisk said:
    I think the complaints about the North being independent and nobody else are a bit overblown. 

    Theres a a lot of benefit to being part of the Six or Seven Kingdoms. Trade, currency, travel, etc... It’s the same reason countries have joined the EU today.

    You give up some self determination and I suppose you can say they should have debated it more but all these kingdoms have been unified for generations. So being affiliated is the default for everyone already. Sansa’s the only one we know of who’s been making noise about leaving. 

    Also - Master of Whisperers is just the spy chief right? That’s the way I read it. Whatever Bran is capable of, the position needs to exist, no?

    That goes against everything the show has shown us. Robb declaring independence was depicted as a big deal. A big deal that upset not only the Lannisters, but Renly, Stannis and Dany. And then not only do they get independence by just saying so, but the Iron Islands, who have wanted to be independent for just as long, go "you go ahead and do you, we'll stay."
    I 100% understand your argument here as the Iron Islands have pushed for Independence in the show but I want to know how the Iron Islands declares Independence and live on their own without the support of others? Surely in this new Westeros they can't go back to reaving, raping, and pillaging and while it's possible they can survive on fish and food from the sea alone, I highly doubt that's what they want to do. There's tons of benefits being united that I think the Iron Islanders would benefit from.  

    If the books are ultimately written, these character pivots (Jamie, Bran, Danny, etc.) won’t be shocking they will have been well founded and documented by dozens of POV chapters. The choice to sacrifice a cohesive plot for gotcha-moments wouldn’t betrays the source material and probably wouldn’t have happened if they were still able to adapt the novels.

    I largely agree, but I think that's at least somewhat more due to the nature of large books vs visual media, and not a failing specific to GOT the show.

    Just for one example: I do think that they tried the past few seasons to sprinkle seeds of Dany eventually going mad, with early episodes of this season really cranking that theme up as she became more stressed by her losses and other stress triggers, but it's difficult to show that not being jarring on screen without being in her head.
    In the books, we are going to read all the nuances of what is going on in her mind as she slowly and subtly spirals into madness. We're going to be in her mind at the moment she ultimately decides to "burn them all" and while we still won't agree it's justified, we will get her perspective that you simply cannot have in on-screen without it coming off as hamfisted  dialogue written by people who you know are trying to convince you that this turn was not random or unjustified for the character.

    I know some would say that they could have shown her going more mad earlier on in the season or previous seasons, but then her character would be considered by critics as being wildly inconsistent and most of what happens with Dany+Jon and Dany helping Winterfell would have made little sense. Some have proposed softening her actions some to seem more reasonable, but then why would Jon kill her? He almost didn't do it even after all of what she did and said, until he realized that she was 100% going to burn Winterfell to the ground and murder his family.
    I think at some point you either accept that Targaryen madness is something that can be triggered in single moments or events (like her father, who was largely triggered into madness by the events of Duskendale) or you don't accept it and want a much slower descent into grief and madness.

    Perhaps they could have split the difference more by adding more episodes and having Dany sit around in a dark castle grieving, paranoid of treason, and plotting revenge for a couple of slower episodes between the events of episode 4 and 5. But I also think that people are downplaying the idea that that are many fans who simply don't like Dany's turn and still wouldn't like it no matter how much differently they set it up. They would have just started hating the show earlier on instead. Of course, we will never know that for sure.
    awookieeSanguinePenguinrkcrawf
  • AnominalAnominal San Francisco Bay Area
    Yeah, the benefits of being a united kingdom and the practicality of not being able to pillage forever ignores the fact that the Iron Islands were able to do that for decades? Centuries? before the Seven Kingdoms was a thing, and ignores the fact that Iron Islands rebelled for independence twice in recent history.

    And if we then say Yara isn't like her father, and she sees more in regards to the benefits, she should have wanted to be on the small council (or a representative of her) to ensure that her kingdom's voice is heard. Instead she's made out to be completely passive or an idiot or naive or uncharacteristically positive about the new setup and none of those options make sense. Just putting her on the Small Council (and the Dornish prince or other Dorne representative) fixes it all. 
    awookieemajjam0770Giovanniken hale
  • dragons said:
    The more I think about it, the more I do think Bran is a completely diabolical asshole who manipulated everyone involved.  Tyrion is definitely no longer the smartest man in Westeros since he fell for that.  All the times he said someone was exactly where they were supposed to be, it was so he could get there.  I still feel like he could have done or said SOMETHING ANYTHING to save the lives of so many people.  Yes, lives needed to be lost to defeat the Night King but just allowing so many people to be killed is bananas.
    Yes, but assuming Bran planned it all (which I see as a legitimate interpretation of events) it is possible he is not an asshole and this was the best possible outcome with the least amount of casualties. He had white walkers from the north and 2 mad queens and a dragon that needed to be dealt with.  Probably if he spoke up and said “hey you should kill Dany” no one would do that before she clearly went bonkers. And it is possible that he and Tyrion had his kingship sort of planned out when they had their off-camera conversation though that is pure speculation and head-cannon. It would kind of explain why Tyrion did some of the things he did. 

    That being said,  there are legitimate things that Bran could have done to minimize casualties. Like have the women and children head south before the zombie battle, keep people out of the crypt, plan strategy a bit better. Maybe in this scenario he wanted the Dothraki wiped out so he encouraged them leading the charge. Who knows? It is kind of fun to speculate but I wish some of it was more clearly laid out in the show. 
  • That council was a great opportunity for some great politicking and horse trading, and a perfect time for Bran to demonstrate his chops as someone remotely capable of leadership. If all the kingdoms me-to’d into leaving and he was able to pull them back together that would have made him more credible, especially if he were able to bring Sansa back in to hold the Seven Kingdoms together against the wishes of his own family.

    They essentially have small council seats, The Reach (because giving it to Bronn makes no sense), and the Westerlands to bargain with. Even the Knight’s Watch could have been rechartered to be under the Crown’s authority to foster ongoing cooperation and trade with the free folk as some kind of counter to the North’s independence.

    For example: I’m sure Yara could be bought off with a piece of the Westerlands, or even all of them on a temporary basis, and Dorne could get the southern Reach. We don’t even know who gets Casterly Rock as it stands and that’s an unconscionable oversight.
    rkcrawf
  • dragons said:
    The more I think about it, the more I do think Bran is a completely diabolical asshole who manipulated everyone involved.  Tyrion is definitely no longer the smartest man in Westeros since he fell for that.  All the times he said someone was exactly where they were supposed to be, it was so he could get there.  I still feel like he could have done or said SOMETHING ANYTHING to save the lives of so many people.  Yes, lives needed to be lost to defeat the Night King but just allowing so many people to be killed is bananas.
    Yes, but assuming Bran planned it all (which I see as a legitimate interpretation of events) it is possible he is not an asshole and this was the best possible outcome with the least amount of casualties. He had white walkers from the north and 2 mad queens and a dragon that needed to be dealt with.  Probably if he spoke up and said “hey you should kill Dany” no one would do that before she clearly went bonkers. And it is possible that he and Tyrion had his kingship sort of planned out when they had their off-camera conversation though that is pure speculation and head-cannon. It would kind of explain why Tyrion did some of the things he did. 

    That being said,  there are legitimate things that Bran could have done to minimize casualties. Like have the women and children head south before the zombie battle, keep people out of the crypt, plan strategy a bit better. Maybe in this scenario he wanted the Dothraki wiped out so he encouraged them leading the charge. Who knows? It is kind of fun to speculate but I wish some of it was more clearly laid out in the show. 
    Yeah I agree that no one would have listened to him if he said to kill her way sooner, but - and I guess this depends on the extent of his powers - he could have done a few things to mitigate her going mad.  Such as bringing up the Iron Fleet and being careful when coming into Dragonstone since that lead to losing both Rhaegal and Missandi.  Now, if she was arrogant and didn't listen to him and the same thing happened, well, that's on her.  Also he could have maybe chilled with the wanting to get Jon's lineage out in the open so that wouldn't have created the disruption it did.  Instead he just sat around spouting cryptic crap and staring off into space.  Not helpful, Bran...not helpful at all.

    Someone should have applied Littlefinger's "little game" to Bran.  Yikes. 
    majjam0770
  • AnominalAnominal San Francisco Bay Area
    edited May 2019
    LordBy said:
    That council was a great opportunity for some great politicking and horse trading, and a perfect time for Bran to demonstrate his chops as someone remotely capable of leadership. If all the kingdoms me-to’d into leaving and he was able to pull them back together that would have made him more credible, especially if he were able to bring Sansa back in to hold the Seven Kingdoms together against the wishes of his own family.

    They essentially have small council seats, The Reach (because giving it to Bronn makes no sense), and the Westerlands to bargain with. Even the Knight’s Watch could have been rechartered to be under the Crown’s authority to foster ongoing cooperation and trade with the free folk as some kind of counter to the North’s independence.

    For example: I’m sure Yara could be bought off with a piece of the Westerlands, or even all of them on a temporary basis, and Dorne could get the southern Reach. We don’t even know who gets Casterly Rock as it stands and that’s an unconscionable oversight.
    Agreed, and in fact, what they did show shows the exact opposite. Davos as Master of Ships? Combined with what I said above about Yara being on the Small Council, it should have been Yara as Master of Ships. Giving the position to Davos does nothing politically. 

    Bron as lord of High Garden and Master of Coin? That's maybe a brilliant political move in showing loyalty to friends and keeping promises or absolutely ridiculous and insulting to everyone else who wants a position on the a council and wants to be rewarded for all they did to save the North from Ramsey, save the world from the Night King and/or for agreeing to keep the kingdoms united.

    Sam is at least, or now was, one of the High Lords that elected Sam (whose voted mattered, unlike Davos).

    (Not sure if Brienne's vote mattered either. How being Kingsguard to Renly affects her Ladyship or even what her status is within her House.)
  • chriskchrisk Indianapolis
    edited May 2019
    I don't see any reason to think the Iron Islands are in any position to bargain. They had already pretty easily submitted to Dany's demands in changing their whole culture (which is a separate writing problem). If Euron were in charge then ok, but Yara seems pretty well inclined to settle things down based on what we've seen. 

    I'm not sure why people are convinced that Dorne would want independence, or what it would do for them. In the books they're trying to help restore Targaryen rule in the Seven Kingdoms, and in the show Doran is trying to ally with the Lannisters through marriage and the Sand Snakes are all killed by Cersei who is now dead.

    I just don't see any reason the North's independence should inspire anyone else to do the same. It seems like people are just taking that for granted. Why would they want it? I understand why Sansa wants it.


    Anominal said:
    Yeah, the benefits of being a united kingdom and the practicality of not being able to pillage forever ignores the fact that the Iron Islands were able to do that for decades? Centuries? before the Seven Kingdoms was a thing, and ignores the fact that Iron Islands rebelled for independence twice in recent history.
    I think if the show invented the Iron Islands, people would say it makes no sense and they exist because D&D think they're cool. In this case, that's all on GRRM. They're the worst part of the books and don't make any logical sense. Maybe if they were in Essos. 
Sign In or Register to comment.