Matts4313 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 Quote “When my dragons are grown, we will take back what was stolen from me and destroy those who wronged me! We will lay waste to armies and burn cities to the ground!” It should would be out of character if the person who said that used her full grown dragon to burn a city to the ground. Quote Emilia Clarke has said that: "It's so natural for a person to resort to anger and that’s exactly where she goes. It's there, it has always been there. It’s what has driven her through everything. https://www.joe.ie/movies-tv/22-things-you-may-have-missed-in-the-recent-game-of-thrones-episode-668743 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matts4313 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 35 minutes ago, BayRaider said: I could say I’m gonna burn the cities of my enemies as well and probably would say that over and over because I want my enemies to fear what’s coming, doesn’t mean I actually would. This stance is outlandish. Do you also have a WMD? Have you also killed innocent people? And thousands of people total? Do you inspire 'Fear to your enemies' by telling your private advisor, alone, that you are going to burn a city to the ground? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFlaccoSeagulls Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Matts4313 said: It should would be out of character if the person who said that used her full grown dragon to burn a city to the ground. https://www.joe.ie/movies-tv/22-things-you-may-have-missed-in-the-recent-game-of-thrones-episode-668743 Really though, D&D played both sides of the fence with her character. On one hand she's had those impulses, but on the other hand she's gone out of her way basically the entire story to not kill innocent people. If they wanted to make it more apparent that losing her closest aides kind of allowed her worst instincts to be unchecked, they should've made it more obvious and more gradual, not just a flip-of-a-switch kind of situation. Edited May 14, 2019 by AFlaccoSeagulls 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayRaider Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 5 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: Sentences that have been planted there by writers who wanted shock and awe with her character over development. Any natural transition into madness is not abrupt like that there are actions that build up. If the writers did that though, we'd all have seen it coming, as she's a Targaryen. Instead they wanted to gut punch the audience because that's what they like to do, and make the shows most loved character into it's worst villian with the snap of a finger, all while severely sacrificing character development. It's fine if you're OK with it, others are and how you react to a show is your right. The majority seem to wish a show so rich in character development throughout didn't make that sacrifice at the end. Exactly. People keep referencing these sentences.. but all they are, sentences. There is no substance to them and they feel planted for this moment. I don’t think they realize that’s what we are saying here. I have no issues with Danny being Mad Queen, just make the examples better and more believable. It never felt like part of her character. The fact we are even having this conversation shows how poorly written and executed the whole thing was. No one can sit here and tell me Danny becoming Mad Queen this episode was well written and executed. Not even close No one would have upset with Danny being Mad Queen, but it was done so poorly. Hence the backlash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadpulse Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 8 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: Any natural transition into madness is not abrupt like that there are actions that build up. Well this is just wrong. Have you ever heard of sudden on-set madness and a psychotic break? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayRaider Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 1 minute ago, Matts4313 said: This stance is outlandish. Do you also have a WMD? Have you also killed innocent people? And thousands of people total? Do you inspire 'Fear to your enemies' by telling your private advisor, alone, that you are going to burn a city to the ground? This post is nonsense and extremely over the top to my reply. Words are words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matts4313 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 2 minutes ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said: Really though, D&D played both sides of the fence with her character. On one hand she's had those impulses, but on the other hand she's gone out of her way basically the entire story to not kill innocent people. If they wanted to make it more apparent that losing her closest aides kind of allowed her worst instincts to be unchecked, they should've made it more obvious and more gradual, not just a flip-of-a-switch kind of situation. The dichotomy of character is the entire premise of the novels. The secondary premise is that war is ugly and there are no good guys in battle. It was executed in the most GoT way ever. 1 minute ago, BayRaider said: Exactly. People keep referencing these sentences.. but all they are, sentences. There is no substance to them and they feel planted for this moment. i mean, there are very few people who didnt see the possibility of this coming over the last 10 years of foreshadowing. From the very beginning it was clear that Dany had this mass-murderous side in her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matts4313 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 2 minutes ago, BayRaider said: This post is nonsense and extremely over the top to my reply. Words are words. And murder is murder. Which she has done. A lot of. And she has plotted/wanted to kill much much more than she has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammymvpknight Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 This entire season has been about Dany losing control, losing everyone she loves, and lastly, on the verge of losing her dream/main motivator since season one. Forget the madness...she has very logical reasons for doing what she did. She did what she had to do to win and have a chance to keep the throne. Have people not been paying attention? Or we’re they just too occupied with complaining? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 7 minutes ago, Matts4313 said: This stance is outlandish. Do you also have a WMD? Have you also killed innocent people? And thousands of people total? Do you inspire 'Fear to your enemies' by telling your private advisor, alone, that you are going to burn a city to the ground? We get it, you buy what they're doing. That's fine. You're in the minority, so it's not outlandish for someone to feel the opposite. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayRaider Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 Just now, Matts4313 said: The dichotomy of character is the entire premise of the novels. The secondary premise is that war is ugly and there are no good guys in battle. It was executed in the most GoT way ever. i mean, there are very few people who didnt see the possibility of this coming over the last 10 years of foreshadowing. From the very beginning it was clear that Dany had this mass-murderous side in her. Yes and I knew from EP1 it would probably end with her being the Mad Queen. The actual ending is not the point. The point is the absolute terrible build up and non believable portrayal of her character. If it executed correctly, like 95% of the audience wouldn’t of felt like her snapping wasn’t genuine. It was sloppy, poorly written, terrible execution, with poor solid character concrete examples leading up to it. You know why the examples were bad and vague? Shock value. You can’t tell me last night was executed well by any means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matts4313 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 10 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: We get it, you buy what they're doing. That's fine. You're in the minority, so it's not outlandish for someone to feel the opposite. ummm. I think not. As far as I can tell there are only like 4 of you that didnt see this as plausible/likely. The other 10+ people posting in here saw it as in line with her character and the only complaint is that the season (and this part of it) is rushed. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matts4313 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 9 minutes ago, BayRaider said: Yes and I knew from EP1 it would probably end with her being the Mad Queen. The actual ending is not the point. The point is the absolute terrible build up and non believable portrayal of her character. If it executed correctly, like 95% of the audience wouldn’t of felt like her snapping wasn’t genuine. It was sloppy, poorly written, terrible execution, with poor solid character concrete examples leading up to it. You know why the examples were bad and vague? Shock value. You can’t tell me last night was executed well by any means. IT was a very good episode. The "build up" of this side of her started in season 1. Are you really telling me that ~10 years is not enough build up? Or its not believable that she did what she said she was going to do for the last 10 years? Literally what else would you have needed to see? Her chop off a kids head in season 3? Would that have been enough? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncofan48 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 1 minute ago, Matts4313 said: ummm. I think not. As far as I can tell there are only like 4 of you that didnt see this as plausible/likely. The other 10+ people posting in here saw it as in line with her character and the only complaint is that the season (and this part of it) is rushed. That’s where I’m at. A few more episodes to show the eroding trust and her becoming more and more volatile would’ve helped but it’s not a huge surprise to me. Also I know time has gotten wonky the last few seasons but it had to be at least a month since the battle of Winterfell right? She’s had time to come up with theories about everyone undercutting her etc 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBURGE Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 (edited) I think they did the build up pretty well so it would still be shocking to the viewer when she pulled the trigger, but makes sense after you add it all up. If they had done more, you would have expected it. It had to be shocking for Jon to do what he is likely going to do next episode, otherwise he would have turned on her earlier, and people wouldn't have sympathized with her for this long. Edited May 14, 2019 by JBURGE 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.