Game of Thrones - Our Watch has Ended

[Forge]

1 minute ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

unpopular opinion but I enjoyed the end of Littlefinger. There was build up, and then a huge twist and he dies. I loved his death, even though not many people did.

His death was fine - but like so much in the final two seasons, I thought they struggled to earn it. I thought Varys' end was slightly better handled, though also suffered from the lack of screen time. 

[animaltested]

Concepts of the show were fine, execution poor. The Audience was told things were important, and the story focused on massive amounts of development to solidify the importance of those things. Yet the showrunners pulled the rug out to serve subversion. Subversion has a place, but it has to be organic. None of this was. 

Danny spent seven seasons learning how to rule. Her arc was to learn how to avoid the mistakes of the past, and the Targ flaws. Everyone followed her because they saw something inside of her. The audience was told , and shown this for seven seasons. All of that was immediately undone by three character deaths? That's Anime-Comic book level of character development. Side characters merely existing to feed the main characters development, literally through their life. It means Dannys character wasn't her own, it was a blend of the people around her. And the second those people were gone, so were those aspects of her character. That's incredibly shallow and doesn't really fit with the overall tone of the series. Did she have no true agency until the bells? Was she essentially a blank slate the entire time? The path to the Mad Queen is there, but the issue was the showrunners used shallow short cuts to get to the conclusion they wanted. 

 

Jons death and resurrection (you know, the gods placing their fingers on the scales) only served to allow Jon to leave the Nights Watch on a technicality (which he was planning to do anyway). Remove the D&R; the story is exactly the same. It was something the audience was told was super important, and lead to nothing. Jons Parentage was a super cereal reveal dragged along multiple seasons. The way it played out was to help close out two side characters arcs (Varys and Tyrion). Again, people were drawn to Jon as a leader BEFORE it was revealed. Jon was crowned King of the North BEFORE it was revealed. Varys and Tyrion were looking at Jon as a potential leader BEFORE it was revealed. This plot point's whole existence seemed to contrive a wedge between Dany and Jon. Keep Jon as Neds bastard, and does anything change? Everything surrounding Jon was a red herring, meant to set up subversion for the sake of subversion.  

[lancerman]

27 minutes ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

Jon's entire arc was defeating the Night King and basically the whole thing boiled down to using Bran as bait so that Arya can kill him. Yay.

So then Jon gets to become King right beacuse he's a Targ + Stark? Nope, Bran steals that, too.

Okay maybe he's King of the North then? Nope, Sansa steals that.

As that battle shows, it literally didn't matter because Bran was bait for Arya. They could've accomplished the same outcome without any soldiers there at all. Just hide Arya and put Bran in the courtyard. Same outcome.

Yeah such as ruining Jon's entire character arc. I was cool with Arya killing the NK actually because I thought it had some bigger meaning or that it meant Jon would get a bigger meaning, but it was basically just useless filler to allow them to get to King's Landing on time for Episode 5.

 

No Jon’s entire arc was preparing the realm to stop the White Walkers. He did. If Theon or anybody else killed the Night King it was still Jon’s prep that did it. Let’s not forget who knocked the Night King from his dragon in the first place. That was Jon’s war. Jon’s side won. 

In addition, Jon’s character never wanted to rule. He had a clear choice to be Lord if Winterfell and a legitimized Stark when Stannis offered it to him. He said no. He said no because he didn’t want it and it wasn’t his purpose. He became Lord Commander because it helped serve his purpose. He got betrayed and left. He took the crown as King in the North specifically because it united the North. He didn’t ask or want it. He also implied to Sansa that she would be better for the role. Then he bent the knee as soon as he decided Dany would be a worthy Queen..

Crowns and titles weren’t his purpose.

Knowing his parentage was about him knowing he wasn’t just the son of some tavern wench that Ned shacked up with and that he actually had two parents that were in love and that a war was started for the sake of his parents and inevitably his birth. It was about Rheagar and his prophecy that his son would be a savior figure. He was more important than being a king. He was a destined to be a legendary. 

There was no scenario where Jon ended up in a throne for good where he actually wanted it and wasn’t doing it out if anything but some solemn duty. He doesn’t want power. He lived among the wildlings for a reason. He learned the futility of crowns. 

I honestly think people have no clue what a character arc is when they say “his character arc was ruined”. A character arc isn’t getting the outcome you envisioned for him. Jon randomly finding out his parentage gave him a claim to the throne isn’t a character arc. 

Jon’s arc was of a boy who thought he had no place in the world discovering his true character and ability to inspire and unite people through his bravery to do the right thing even when he got nothing for it or it hurt him. It was abandoning Robb Stark’s cause because the Night Watch’s mission was more important. It was embracing the Wildlings and falling in love for the first time, only to be forced to abandon them for his mission and lose his love. It was going against the NW because the right thing was to help the Wildlings. It was taking and losing crowns he didn’t want to unite the North and then unite with Dany’s army. And finally it was finding out that he did have a place in the world and being offered it and denying it for a Queen he loved and later discovered was unjust and then sacrificing everything to put a stop to her. He was more important than a throne. 

If he became King, he’d be sitting with Tyrion and Bronn arguing about how much money to send to sewer systems and brothels and listening to high lords dispute lands and territory. His reward at the end is that he can put king’s and lord’s behind him and live amongst his brothers and the people he loved. He’s free of all that. It’s him, Ghost and his buddies up in the real North forever without the troubles of the rest of Westeros. He gets to move on 

[NYRaider]

20 minutes ago, JonStark said:

 

Bran the Broken is the king! Someone with no loyalty, no army, no money, and no experience! Great writing and ending, amazing. 

[Heimdallr]

2 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

Bran the Broken is the king! Someone with no loyalty, no army, no money, and no experience! Great writing and ending, amazing. 

Also the 3ER, the most powerful/important person in the world.

[BayRaider]

I don’t have a problem with the ending, just the way we achieved it, the way it was written, and how non-organic and rushed it felt was the issue. I had zero response to Jon stabbing Danny. Not mad, not sad, not happy, not even surprised. It was just a rushed mess to the point it didn’t feel real. 

It’ll probably be written correctly and completely fleshed out in the books. I think Jon killing Danny with the proper build up and story telling has a chance to be absolutely epic and one of the most powerful chapters ever written. I look forward to reading it one day if it ever comes out. 

[lancerman]

1 minute ago, NYRaider said:

Bran the Broken is the king! Someone with no loyalty, no army, no money, and no experience! Great writing and ending, amazing. 

You mean Bran whose sister is Queen in the North. Whose Uncle is Lord Paramount of the Riverlands. Whose cousin is Lord Paramount of the Vale, a region fiercely loyal to the Starks. Who the current leader of the Iron Born’s brother died defending out of kinship. Who was just part of a Great War with the new Lord Paramount of Storms End (who also has ties to his family). Who the last Lannister actually suggested should be King, who btw had strong ties to the current Lord of Highgarden. Who all the major Lord’s just agrees should be King? 

You think that guy has no loyalty? 

The King who literally knows absolutely everything and can anticipate everything and knows the actions of every member of his realm? 

Whose lack of experience includes the ability to have seen and lived through literally every ruler in human history’s reign? 

Really? The only thing you can say he lacks is money and he has the two top ranking members of the richest regions on his council 

[Forge]

2 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

Bran the Broken is the king! Someone with no loyalty, no army, no money, and no experience! Great writing and ending, amazing. 

One, he absolutely has loyalty - The North may be independent, but he's still Brandon Stark, and Sansa would not be keen on someone trying something against him. He also has the approval of several high houses - that was kind of the point of that little meeting. A bigger coup plot would take time, and then there's still the consideration of whom would replace Bran - why would Edmure, Bran's uncle, support Yohn Royce in a coup attempt, for example? If nothing else, the realm is tired...there's going to be time for him to improve the realm. Whether you view that as an optimist or pessimist is up to you. The common people don't much care - it's about the high houses in terms of a possible war, and they aren't going to immediately launch into a coup attempt. 

No experience - well, Dany had experience, and you can question whether or not she was actually a "good" at running a city, and she had a temperament that was quickly going downhill. Jon had no experience in running a city - he had experience essentially being a war time commander / General. There was no real satisfactory answer to this problem. Jaehaerys had no experience rebuilding a country when he took over for the cruelty of Maegor, yet he did pretty well. I think that the the lack of experience angle is a little weak. Circumstances are always different - experience for something specific like this would have been impossible to task. 

 

[Forge]

3 minutes ago, lancerman said:

Really? The only thing you can say he lacks is money and he has the two top ranking members of the richest regions on his council 

Yep, and I think that the money would have been an issue for anyone taking the throne. I mean, where was Jon going to get a bunch of money from? It's about restarting a domestic economy - that was going to be a task for anyone. 

[JonStark]

12 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

Bran the Broken is the king! Someone with no loyalty, no army, no money, and no experience! Great writing and ending, amazing. 

...?

He's a Stark. He obviously has loyalty and an army. Since when does money matter? I'd imagine he has some being a Stark, but it's not like you're spending your own money on the throne.

Experience? He's an encyclopedia of history. He has more "experience" than everyone else combined!

I'm indifferent on him becoming king, but you're just reaching at this point. Don't worry, you're not alone. 

[NYRaider]

4 minutes ago, lancerman said:

You mean Bran whose sister is Queen in the North. Whose Uncle is Lord Paramount of the Riverlands. Whose cousin is Lord Paramount of the Vale, a region fiercely loyal to the Starks. Who the current leader of the Iron Born’s brother died defending out of kinship. Who was just part of a Great War with the new Lord Paramount of Storms End (who also has ties to his family). Who the last Lannister actually suggested should be King, who btw had strong ties to the current Lord of Highgarden. Who all the major Lord’s just agrees should be King? 

You think that guy has no loyalty? 

The King who literally knows absolutely everything and can anticipate everything and knows the actions of every member of his realm? 

Whose lack of experience includes the ability to have seen and lived through literally every ruler in human history’s reign? 

Really? The only thing you can say he lacks is money and he has the two top ranking members of the richest regions on his council 

But you think the other lords and people of KL and Westeros would know and/or believe that he's the 3ER and has the powers? Do you think the people of KL would be loyal to Bran? Hell no. He also has no army to defend KL so anyone could realistically just waltz on in, murder him, and take over. 

[Heimdallr]

One thing that I had a problem with from the very start is that they never explain why it is so important to be the leader of the 7 kingdoms. Is it just an ego thing, or are there huge tax levies, etc. that make controlling all the kingdoms very profitable? Why are so many people willing to risk the lives of their entire families just to be in charge? They already have massive castles and holdings, it isn't like the Red Keep was all that special. 

[NYRaider]

2 minutes ago, JonStark said:

...?

He's a Stark. He obviously has loyalty and an army. Since when does money matter? I'd imagine he has some being a Stark, but it's not like you're spending your own money on the throne.

Experience? He's an encyclopedia of history. He has more "experience" than everyone else combined!

I'm indifferent on him becoming king, but you're just reaching at this point. Don't worry, you're not alone. 

He has loyalty in Kings Landing? Since when?  The North has been war-torn and will have to rebuild their own kingdom, not sure they'll have money to give to him to rebuild KL. 

Would anyone else believe that though? And why would the people of KL willingly follow him? After all, he is the brother of Jon Snow, you know, the lover of the tyrant that just destroyed their entire city and killed the majority of the population... 

Edited May 20, 2019 by NYRaider

[pwny]

If you thought the ending disrespected the source material, you just completely missed the entire point of the source material. Full stop. That’s not my opinion, that’s a fact.

Gripes about pacing, nuance and all that are fine. If you want to complain about time travel or the intelligence of dragons, whatever. But if for some reason you believe that Dany shouldn’t have burned down the city, that Jon shouldn’t have killed Dany, that Bran shouldn’t have been king or that Sansa shouldn’t have led an independent North, you just missed the entire point of the series. 

[Forge]

4 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

But you think the other lords and people of KL and Westeros would know and/or believe that he's the 3ER and has the powers? Do you think the people of KL would be loyal to Bran? Hell no. He also has no army to defend KL so anyone could realistically just waltz on in, murder him, and take over. 

Why wouldn't they be? 

“The common people pray for rain, healthy children, and a summer that never ends," Ser Jorah told her. "It is no matter to them if the high lords play their game of thrones, so long as they are left in peace." He gave a shrug. "They never are.”

He will leave them in peace. He didn't burn the city down, Dany did. Would Dany have had problems with revolts? Possibly, yeah. We saw that in Mereen as well. I find it much more likely that Bran will not have a problem with the people of King's landing compared to Dany ascending the throne. 

Also, don't forget...it's his people he's putting in a position of power. Tyrion is house lannister. Samwell is house Tarly. Bronn has Highgarden. His sister reigns in the north while his uncle in Riverrun and his Cousin in the Vale. The city watch will be rebuilt with people he and his people put in positions of power. His Kingsguard are people loyal to him.