Game of Thrones - Our Watch has Ended

[Dr LBC]

Just an interesting observation (and I'm sure someone is going to respond with 1000's >>>> 1), but it's interesting to me to see people so lamenting Dany mowing down civilians as being going against her character, but they seemed to have no problem with the "innocent" child in Cersei's belly and the characters they were ready to line up to kill her (and thereby the child in her) and whether killing that innocent would have been against their characters.  The only character (outside of Euron - which very few ever mentioned because of how little fan service it would have provided) whose character background would have suggested he was fine with (and possibly had in the past) killing a child was, in this case, the father of said child.

Food for thought.

[THE DUKE]

2 minutes ago, The LBC said:

Just an interesting observation (and I'm sure someone is going to respond with 1000's >>>> 1), but it's interesting to me to see people so lamenting Dany mowing down civilians as being going against her character, but they seemed to have no problem with the "innocent" child in Cersei's belly and the characters they were ready to line up to kill her (and thereby the child in her) and whether killing that innocent would have been against their characters.  The only character (outside of Euron - which very few ever mentioned because of how little fan service it would have provided) whose character background would have suggested he was fine with (and possibly had in the past) killing a child was, in this case, the father of said child.

Food for thought.

And that child was the avenue the Tyrion was using to try to save Cersei, be it escaping with Jamie or begging for mercy from Danaerys.  For all that she did to him, Tyrion still wanted to protect Cersei.

[Broncofan]

15 minutes ago, The LBC said:

Just an interesting observation (and I'm sure someone is going to respond with 1000's >>>> 1), but it's interesting to me to see people so lamenting Dany mowing down civilians as being going against her character, but they seemed to have no problem with the "innocent" child in Cersei's belly and the characters they were ready to line up to kill her (and thereby the child in her) and whether killing that innocent would have been against their characters.  The only character (outside of Euron - which very few ever mentioned because of how little fan service it would have provided) whose character background would have suggested he was fine with (and possibly had in the past) killing a child was, in this case, the father of said child.

Food for thought.

Besides the #’s argument you can’t kill Cersei without killing the child.   You don’t have to kill the 1000’s after surrender was obtained.  

Dany went back and forth on the Tarlys but saw it as necessary.   I see the necessity argument with the unborn child.   

And FTR I like that Dany went Black Hat.   Choosing to do it after surrender was obtained and going after the citizens first is where I don’t see as earned at all, save for shock value.   I totally get that criticism. 

Edited May 14, 2019 by Broncofan

[pwny]

Dany has always had these murderous tendencies. She even said in Season 2 that she was going to burn King’s Landing to the ground. She’s just always been held in check by Jorah and Mes, who always reminded her to not bring things to that point.

Now, all she had left around her was yes man Greyworm, a Hand she no longer trusts, and a lover who she knows doesn’t love her. Her center and moral compass were literally murdered in front of her. 

[sunnygsm]

 

 

 

25 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

Then you're defining crazy to call her crazy. She has an ethical code: free people from tyranny by whatever means necessary. It's obviously skewed, no one here is actually justifying what she did. But it's the same extreme code she's had literally the entire show.

Nah, that's just crazy. Maybe not like her father, but undoubtedly deluded which is not all that different in the end. 

22 minutes ago, Deadpulse said:

She realizes that fear is all she has. She said so to Jon before the attack when he spurned her. She knows that if she lets it come down to who the people love and admire, the throne is Jon's easily as he has the claim. Honestly, this was her best bet to keep the throne. 

I got that and I don't disagree. I'm just curious about which angle the show will take. Will she have a distorted view of what she did or will she be fully aware of it and convey it as such. Will it be "I freed people with justice" or "I slaughtered people so that you would all learn". 

[Dr LBC]

1 minute ago, THE DUKE said:

And that child was the avenue the Tyrion was using to try to save Cersei, be it escaping with Jamie or begging for mercy from Danaerys.  For all that she did to him, Tyrion still wanted to protect Cersei.

I get that.  I'm just saying, people let their hatred for Cersei - which was well-earned - lead them down a path where they had no problem with that child inside her getting killed.  I bring this up for two reasons.

1) People were griping about how Cersei's death should have been bloodier, nastier, on par with the other big baddies of the series.  Similarly, I remember people (my own dad in particular) complaining that Joffrey got off too easily.  In terms of psychological responses, doing Cersei like Talisa Maegyr would have created sympathy (some amount) in the end.  Might it be argued (twisted or not) that she deserved to see her unborn child killed in front of her before having her own light snuffed out?  Sure.  But does carrying out that act also not paint the character carrying out the execution in a similar light to how people are reacting to Dany?  I'd argue it does.

2) Again, whose character does it fit to even carry out such an act?  Even if Jamie could kill Cersei (it could possibly have been played off as a mercy-killing even - saving her from herself), Jamie's not killing his own child.  Arya has killed a lot of people, but the only child she's ever killed, that I can recall, is the stableboy back in Season 2 or 3 and that was almost as much by accident.  The way that Cersei died, was the best way to kill a pregnant woman without doing damage to the arcs of the characters framed as the protagonists (again, I'm not going to use the word "heroes" and I'd even argue that in GOT especially, who is the protagonist and who is the antagonist is fluid from the POV of a neutral and is largely affected by the POV that they're shown from - editing - and by the music played in the background during milestone events).

I'm not sure people really appreciate how much the use of the right music at the right time has manipulated the perspective of the viewer, themes on themes (the later being specific thematic pieces tied to each individual House; the former being variations on that theme).

[Broncofan]

15 minutes ago, THE DUKE said:

And that child was the avenue the Tyrion was using to try to save Cersei, be it escaping with Jamie or begging for mercy from Danaerys.  For all that she did to him, Tyrion still wanted to protect Cersei.

For all the mistakes he’s made as Hand, Tyrion is the one character that’s stayed on point.   Tyrion pleading with Qyburn / Cersei and then Jaime for a bloodless outcome was really strong and completely with who he is. 

The most realistic “happy” ending that I think ppl can hope to see is Sansa ruling with Tyrion either as husband or ally / Hand.   There aren’t likely to be any storybook endings but that would have something resembling a little hope for the realm.   I don’t see any outcome where Jon rules and we know it’s not going to be Dany.  

[Leader]

53 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

What do you find endearing about GoT if not it's character development? Just an honest question. I could never not be hung up on the character arcs because that's the foundation of the show to me. 

I like John LeCarre's work. Terrific stuff IMO and though I've eagerly watched every movie/TV production of his works - I've always found the latter wanting.

It is what it is. The magic of a good novelist is to create the world in which his characters exist and are acting - but its the reader - the reader's imagination - that takes his words and "rebuilds" them in his mind. A novel allows for more exposition of a scene. More detail is expressed - handed to the reader in the form of words - that the reader files away in a perception and the story moves along.

Good writers can take hold of their readers minds and hold them till the last chapter is read. Thats a good book. Tolkien could create a mystical civilization living on the head of a pin - nothing but pure imagination but he'd give it detail, depth and character to a degree that the reader believed he was there Thats magic.

Movies, miniseries and alike taken from a book or novel face a different challenge. By their very medium, they cant allow the viewer to imagine the world being described - they have to present it visually - put voice to its words. They have to abuse the viewers imagination to some extent - down to the very basics (forget character arc) : a character doesnt look or sound like the person perceived when reading the book.

GOT is a HUGE commercial success - and with that comes some drawbacks. They've exceeded the books for two years now - result of slow book production and a need to feed the commercial monster. I personally think that on the overall - they've done a terrific job. GOT exemplifies why I keep HBO: high production values. They do stuff at a scale that nobody else does. I dont watch "TV shows" - I'd rather watch the news (even though thats become more depressing than the NK's army advancing on my home.....).

As stated already - I think the predicates for Dany's actions have been laid out over time - with specific focus provided recently - that "justifies" her characters actions - and the need to compress these story lines into a final (shortened) season is resulting in some dissatisfaction. Oh well.

I'm not a member off the Directors / Screenwriters or Actors guilds - and there's not Holiday Inn's near my home so I can act line one on the Internet. Hence, I'm just enjoying the ride.

 

 

Edited May 14, 2019 by Leader

[Broncofan]

4 minutes ago, The LBC said:

I get that.  I'm just saying, people let their hatred for Cersei - which was well-earned - lead them down a path where they had no problem with that child inside her getting killed.  I bring this up for two reasons.

1) People were griping about how Cersei's death should have been bloodier, nastier, on par with the other big baddies of the series.  Similarly, I remember people (my own dad in particular) complaining that Joffrey got off too easily.  In terms of psychological responses, doing Cersei like Talisa Maegyr would have created sympathy (some amount) in the end.  Might it be argued (twisted or not) that she deserved to see her unborn child killed in front of her before having her own light snuffed out?  Sure.  But does carrying out that act also not paint the character carrying out the execution in a similar light to how people are reacting to Dany?  I'd argue it does.

2) Again, whose character does it fit to even carry out such an act?  Even if Jamie could kill Cersei (it could possibly have been played off as a mercy-killing even - saving her from herself), Jamie's not killing his own child.  Arya has killed a lot of people, but the only child she's ever killed, that I can recall, is the stableboy back in Season 2 or 3 and that was almost as much by accident.  The way that Cersei died, was the best way to kill a pregnant woman without doing damage to the arcs of the characters framed as the protagonists (again, I'm not going to use the word "heroes" and I'd even argue that in GOT especially, who is the protagonist and who is the antagonist is fluid from the POV of a neutral and is largely affected by the POV that they're shown from - editing - and by the music played in the background during milestone events).

I'm not sure people really appreciate how much the use of the right music at the right time has manipulated the perspective of the viewer, themes on themes (the later being specific thematic pieces tied to each individual House; the former being variations on that theme).

I thought Joffrey and Cersei dying were actually quite powerful scenes - in both all power was stripped from them.  They both faced death realizing they were powerless.    

I do get the point on the bloodlust for Cersei though.  

[Dr LBC]

12 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

Besides the #’s argument you can’t kill Cersei without killing the child.   You don’t have to kill the 1000’s after surrender was obtained.  

Dany went back and forth on the Tarlys but saw it as necessary.   I see the necessity argument with the unborn child.   

And FTR I like that Dany went Black Hat.   Choosing to do it after surrender was obtained and going after the citizens first is where I don’t see as earned at all, save for shock value.   I totally get that criticism. 

Using your own logic though (and I too like that Dany went Black Hat), from Dany's perspective going into that battle, instilling fear in the citizenry was necessary.  It was the only avenue she had to establishing the power (claim) to rule.  Jon not only had the more legitimate claim (this assumes she believes his claim, but she's smart enough to know that he doesn't need the claim to be legitimate as long as he's popular/loved by the people - he is also known by the people as he's one of them, she might as well be from Essos for as much as anyone in Westeros has any reason to connect with her), he was increasingly looking to be more and more who the people wanted.  The problem is that that flies in the face of what Dany wanted, what she felt she was owed, was her destiny.

Just having the dragon wasn't enough to invoke fear in the commonfolk.  Knowing/seeing what she was willing to do with that dragon if she was not followed/obeyed/knelt-to was necessary for them to fear her.

[Leader]

8 minutes ago, The LBC said:

Using your own logic though (and I too like that Dany went Black Hat), from Dany's perspective going into that battle, instilling fear in the citizenry was necessary.  It was the only avenue she had to establishing the power (claim) to rule.  Jon not only had the more legitimate claim (this assumes she believes his claim, but she's smart enough to know that he doesn't need the claim to be legitimate as long as he's popular/loved by the people - he is also known by the people as he's one of them, she might as well be from Essos for as much as anyone in Westeros has any reason to connect with her), he was increasingly looking to be more and more who the people wanted.  The problem is that that flies in the face of what Dany wanted, what she felt she was owed, was her destiny.

Just having the dragon wasn't enough to invoke fear in the commonfolk.  Knowing/seeing what she was willing to do with that dragon if she was not followed/obeyed/knelt-to was necessary for them to fear her.

Agree.  So - does Dany give Jon a last shot at life and love in a Queen's bed......or attempt to kill him?

Edited May 14, 2019 by Leader

[pwny]

14 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

The most realistic “happy” ending that I think ppl can hope to see is Sansa ruling with Tyrion either as husband or ally / Hand.  

I don’t even think we’re going to get something like that. GRRM has always said this story is a tale of how ugly war is. Ending with the throne being filled with a competent and justly humane ruler seems really against all that this has led to. 

I think we end up with a ruler who has some sort of major flaw as a ruler that leaves the watcher wondering if they can actually overcome their flaw and be a good ruler. Be it Dany’s anger, Jon’s apprehension to rule, or even Bran’s lack of leadership. 

[Broncofan]

1 minute ago, pwny said:

I don’t even think we’re going to get something like that. GRRM has always said this story is a tale of how ugly war is. Ending with the throne being filled with a competent and justly humane ruler seems really against all that this has led to. 

I think we end up with a ruler who has some sort of major flaw as a ruler that leaves the watcher wondering if they can actually overcome their flaw and be a good ruler. Be it Dany’s anger, Jon’s apprehension to rule, or even Bran’s lack of leadership. 

Given how Joe Public equates Jon / Dany as central to the show I suspect neither sits at the end.  

Now Bran....man.  That would be Jar-Jar levels of fan rebellion lol.  

[Dr LBC]

6 minutes ago, Leader said:

Agree.  So - does Dany give Jon a last shot at life and love in a Queen's bed......or attempt to kill him?

Not sure.  On one hand, he's bent the damn knee and actually has stayed loyal despite having the move legitimate claim and having people willing to hoist him into the power (that he doesn't want; which, again, is a theme George has dug at the entire series: "Those that covet the power/position are less fit/deserving to lead than those who accept the position even though they don't actually want it.").  On the other, Dany when left to her own devices has a massive tendency to tunnel on the threats to her power ("you betrayed me, you have to go") and doesn't come around on forgiveness until said person actually saves her (IMO she's justifying in her mind that "they earned her forgiveness").  So I'm fairly confident she's going to tunnel on Jon having told his family even though she told him not to.  "Family" is ultimately a concept that's pretty foreign to Dany, given that the only blood family she's ever known was Viserys who was manipulative as hell and certainly didn't have the relationship with her that Jon has with Arya, Sansa, and Bran (what's left of him).  I'm failing to see what Jon can actually do at this point to achieve a show of loyalty in Dany's mind that would counterbalance his perceived-betrayal in her eyes.

[Dr LBC]

23 minutes ago, pwny said:

I don’t even think we’re going to get something like that. GRRM has always said this story is a tale of how ugly war is. Ending with the throne being filled with a competent and justly humane ruler seems really against all that this has led to. 

I think we end up with a ruler who has some sort of major flaw as a ruler that leaves the watcher wondering if they can actually overcome their flaw and be a good ruler. Be it Dany’s anger, Jon’s apprehension to rule, or even Bran’s lack of leadership. 

I could see a scenario where Sansa rules in the North and was possibly offered the opportunity to rule the Seven Kingdoms but turns it down, deciding that the realm has ultimately gotten what it deserved, being left to eat itself alive as everyone down south continually scraps for whatever power they can grab.  That the biggest mistake her father made was going south to be part of their world and leaving the North.  And besides, there must always be a Stark in Winterfell.