Game of Thrones - Our Watch has Ended

[Calvert28]

7 hours ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

Agreed with the first portion. We're to the point in the series where a bunch of stuff straight up has to happen or otherwise the show is just poorly executed from a literary standpoint. No spoiler tags since the last 3 pages.

• Jamie has to die in the arms of the woman he loves
  • He outright says that's how he wants to die, and his entire arc is built around the death of the Kingslayer in the Brienne's arms then the re-birth of Jamie Lannister who seeks redemption. (Likewise, Bronn should survive and get that castle he always wanted.)
  • When combined with the number of times that they talk about coming into this world together and sharing the womb, it fits that they'd go out together, and that Jamie would be the one to do it.

My personal opinion on all of these.

I get the feeling it will be Greyjoy who kills Cersei, and Jamie I think will poetically die defending Dany.

7 hours ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

• Every name on Arya's list needs to bite the dust
  • Her entire arc is offering names up to the god of death. There's a list that was repeated over and over. Illyn Payne is an exception if the writers want to pretend he never existed, but that's just a poorly executed arc otherwise.

Sandor will die taking down a crap ton of Whitewalkers only to be killed by the Night King himself.

7 hours ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

• Varys and Lady Mellisandre need to die in Westeros
  • LM said so.

I think both Varys and LM will die together or at the same episode doing something to save a bunch of villagers.

7 hours ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

• A Targaryan needs to end up on the Iron Throne
  • The whole story is that Robert's rebellion was inherently a lie. If the Targ dynasty, constantly referred to as the greatest dynasty the world has ever known, isn't restored the story isn't finished.

Not to Robert. Rhaegar still broke custom even if he did marry Lyanna and the war was still to bring an end to the Mad King's terror so he technically won by right of conquest. I agree it should be Dany or Jon with a distant 3rd being Bronn for fan service. But for some reason I get the feeling Dany is going to "break the wheel" as she promised.

7 hours ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

• Mountain/Hound need to fight, and probably should kill each other. I mean this one doesn't even need an explanation, they've teased it to death and they're clearly foils.

I get the feeling they are going to intentionally disappoint us with this one. It is Hollywood after all.

7 hours ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

• Theon and Euron need to die, since they're basically re-telling Hamlet on the Iron Islands. Sansa has been Ophelia, not Yara. I'm not sure if Yara has a direct parallel to Hamlet, presumably that was done since Yara would become Queen of the Iron Islands since everybody dies at the end of Hamlet.  

 

Yara will kill Euron. That I am willing to bet.

[ramssuperbowl99]

1 hour ago, PARROTHEAD said:

"Good books" might follow some guideline that suits a particular group. But match that to historic tales that have lasted 1000s of years. Look at Spartacus, look at the battle of Troy, Spartans, Kulls, British history with Vikings/French and the likes. Sure there are certain rules to follow if you want to guarantee success of a book. But to make a work legendary and stand the test of time you dont march lockstep with the rest. You deliver groundbreaking.

There's really no point in continuing this discussion, but just a few notes from that list you made:

"The Battle of Troy", which is really The Iliad and should include The Odyssey, is basically the first major book in Western literature, which is where every theme I laid out comes from. 

Spartan literature was...well, not really notable for much of anything. There were Athenian historians accounting Spartan battles, and there was Athenian literature, but even more notable Spartan conquests like the battle of Themopalyae were originally noted by Herodotus, who didn't use any of the mythologized history that you see in crappy re-tellings like 300. 

British history and dramatization of history is lead, far and away, by William Shakespeare, who is also a huge influence on GRRM not only because the Iron Islands plot is NC-17 Hamlet but there are tons of other references, Julius Caesar being the most obvious one with Tyrion as Brutus. 

The other major influence that you didn't list would be Tolkein, which GRRM has said over and over directly. He doesn't use much of Tolkein's general storylines directly (though you could stretch Arya as Frodo or Jon Snow as Aragorn, but those are stretches), but the influence on the books is clear and obvious.

All of those sources use the same literary framework. If GRRM was a good writer who wanted Jamie to end up on the Iron Throne, he would have started the groundwork for the legitimacy of that in the first book. And he did all of that, but with Jon Snow. Deviating from that isn't groundbreaking, "different", exciting, or long-lasting. Telling a 6 book story about the Targs retaking the Iron Throne only to have Jamie Lannister taking it is the book version of ending a story with "and then I found 5 dollars". It's just bad.

Edited April 12, 2019 by ramssuperbowl99

[ramssuperbowl99]

4 minutes ago, Calvert28 said:

Yara will kill Euron. That I am willing to bet.

Done. If I'm right, I want a 500 word post from you on why comic book movies need more female heros in the lead role, and why Captain Marvel should start that trend.

EDIT: It should go without saying, but no sarcasm, and a few citations (which won't add to the word count) wouldn't hurt.

Edited April 12, 2019 by ramssuperbowl99

[Calvert28]

6 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

Done. If I'm right, I want a 500 word post from you on why comic book movies need more female heros in the lead role, and why Captain Marvel should start that trend.

EDIT: It should go without saying, but no sarcasm, and a few citations (which won't add to the word count) wouldn't hurt.

It was never female heroes I had a problem with, it's the Mary Sue Nazi Feminism that goes with it. GoT has many female leads, heroes and villians. Never once had a problem with any of them because they were actually written well. They went through "Real Adversity", they didn't have all the answers, they didn't just show up in a trailer and say "hey heroes, don't worry we'll succeed this time cause you got me." It's nauseating, I mean when did Batman, Shazam, Superman, Wonder Woman, Leia, Moraine, Arya, Thor, etc come across as that pompous.

[ramssuperbowl99]

18 minutes ago, Calvert28 said:

It was never female heroes I had a problem with, it's the Mary Sue Nazi Feminism that goes with it. GoT has many female leads, heroes and villians. Never once had a problem with any of them because they were actually written well. They went through "Real Adversity", they didn't have all the answers, they didn't just show up in a trailer and say "hey heroes, don't worry we'll succeed this time cause you got me." It's nauseating, I mean when did Batman, Shazam, Superman, Wonder Woman, Leia, Moraine, Arya, Thor, etc come across as that pompous.

So if I'm right, you're going to write 500 words on why those types of female leads are empowering, and why Hollywood should continue to push that message. 

[Calvert28]

30 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

So if I'm right, you're going to write 500 words on why those types of female leads are empowering, and why Hollywood should continue to push that message. 

Which leads? I'll preach Leia, Ripley, Arya, etc all day long but I refuse the likes of CM, Rose, Rey, etc.

Edited April 12, 2019 by Calvert28

[ramssuperbowl99]

5 minutes ago, Calvert28 said:

Which leads? I'll preach Leia, Ripley, Arya, etc all day long but I refuse the likes of CM, Rose, Rey, etc.

Okay. 500 words on why the all woman Ghostbusters remake was better than the original.

[Calvert28]

2 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

Okay. 500 words on why the all woman Ghostbusters remake was better than the original.

WTF? Why not Atomic Blonde or something that doesn't coattail off of a movie previously done by men. That's not empowerment, that's a Hollywood cash grab taking advantage of that movement.

Also if I'm right, I want a 500 word post why those kinds of leads are toxic and promote division, tribalism, and finger pointing for all of their worldly woes.

Edited April 12, 2019 by Calvert28

[ramssuperbowl99]

Just now, Calvert28 said:

WTF? Why not Atomic Blonde or something that doesn't coattail off of a movie previously done by men.

Also if I'm right, I want a 500 word post why those kinds of leads are toxic and promote division, tribalism, and finger pointing for all of their worldly woes.

Because the thought of you writing it amuses me. And deal. Ghostbusters remake > original in exchange for 500 words of trashing bad female leads.

Edited April 12, 2019 by ramssuperbowl99

[PARROTHEAD]

47 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

There's really no point in continuing this discussion, but just a few notes from that list you made:

"The Battle of Troy", which is really The Iliad and should include The Odyssey, is basically the first major book in Western literature, which is where every theme I laid out comes from. 

Spartan literature was...well, not really notable for much of anything. There were Athenian historians accounting Spartan battles, and there was Athenian literature, but even more notable Spartan conquests like the battle of Themopalyae were originally noted by Herodotus, who didn't use any of the mythologized history that you see in crappy re-tellings like 300. 

British history and dramatization of history is lead, far and away, by William Shakespeare, who is also a huge influence on GRRM not only because the Iron Islands plot is NC-17 Hamlet but there are tons of other references, Julius Caesar being the most obvious one with Tyrion as Brutus. 

The other major influence that you didn't list would be Tolkein, which GRRM has said over and over directly. He doesn't use much of Tolkein's general storylines directly (though you could stretch Arya as Frodo or Jon Snow as Aragorn, but those are stretches), but the influence on the books is clear and obvious.

All of those sources use the same literary framework. If GRRM was a good writer who wanted Jamie to end up on the Iron Throne, he would have started the groundwork for the legitimacy of that in the first book. And he did all of that, but with Jon Snow. Deviating from that isn't groundbreaking, "different", exciting, or long-lasting. Telling a 6 book story about the Targs retaking the Iron Throne only to have Jamie Lannister taking it is the book version of ending a story with "and then I found 5 dollars". It's just bad.

Im talking about the actual accounts. And tales spreading by mouth and slow hand wrote accounts for hundreds of years. Not fluff.

You want good storytelling. But you want it to fit a mold of everything else. Where its all sprinkles and rainbows. The books are not about the throne. Clearly says it in the title. Ice and Fire. Dead and Living.  It does not matter who ends up on the throne.

Telling a story when one of these Targs just happy go lucky predictably to the throne and ignoring the major plot is ridiculous. They should stand no better a chance than anyone else or each other.  And Jaime makes as much sense as your Targ Disney crap. Especially with Danys visions, all the prophecies, Jaimes arc, his drive and all else.

 Way you want it I might as well just watch Shrek with the kids again.

[Calvert28]

1 minute ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

Because the thought of you writing it amuses me. And deal. Ghostbusters remake > original in exchange for 500 words of trashing bad female leads.

But this is going off the bet is it not? Yara has to kill Euron. If she does, I get my post. If not then I write your post.

[ramssuperbowl99]

Just now, Calvert28 said:

But this is going off the bet is it not? Yara has to kill Euron. If she does, I get my post. If not then I write your post.

Correct.

[RandyMossIsBoss]

Anyone read the books after the show, and prefer the books? What was your prior history with recreational reading? 

 

I havent read a book recreationally since I was a young lad, but I am so immersed in RR’s world that I plan to pick up the books after the series, which as far as I know tell a pretty different story especially by 4th book. Just skeptical whether or not I’ll actually enjoy it or be able to get through all the reading. 

[Calvert28]

12 minutes ago, RandyMossIsBoss said:

Anyone read the books after the show, and prefer the books? What was your prior history with recreational reading? 

 

I havent read a book recreationally since I was a young lad, but I am so immersed in RR’s world that I plan to pick up the books after the series, which as far as I know tell a pretty different story especially by 4th book. Just skeptical whether or not I’ll actually enjoy it or be able to get through all the reading. 

The books are superior imo. No plot armor appears in there.

[ramssuperbowl99]

47 minutes ago, RandyMossIsBoss said:

Anyone read the books after the show, and prefer the books? What was your prior history with recreational reading? 

 

I havent read a book recreationally since I was a young lad, but I am so immersed in RR’s world that I plan to pick up the books after the series, which as far as I know tell a pretty different story especially by 4th book. Just skeptical whether or not I’ll actually enjoy it or be able to get through all the reading. 

I did. They're different, but the differences are overstated IMO. The show and the books are telling the same basic story, with things that are tied together in different ways so the journey is a little different.

They're both excellent, and completely worth watching/reading. As for one being better than the other, it's a personal taste thing. The show suffers from limited screen time that has to wrap characters together, but the 2 best moments in the show so far were at Hardhome, and you don't get them in the books.