are you like this in real life?
****** Game of Thrones - Season 8 ******
2,117,050 Views |
14667 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by Prosperdick
One thing that struck me reading these arguments is that destroying Kings Landing to send a message to the rest of Westeros is something Tywin Lannister would have done. And did, on a much smaller scale with the Reynes and Tarbecks. Not exactly breaking the wheel.
I'm a card carrying member of the Show Defenders Guild but the hard truth is that this show has officially jumped the Dragon.
It was a good run, y'all. But I simply can't continue to make any logic or sense out of the character motivations anymore. It's 100% pure Michael Bay action-thriller now.
The only solace I may be able to find is if Dany truly broke the wheel by destroying to cesspool capital and, in turn, the Three Eyed Raven (you know, that magical all-knowing and non-emotionally manipulated being) takes over and rules. Why the heck was the 3ER hiding north of the wall for the past 1,000 years anyways? What a waste of talent. Maybe to hold the Night King at bay? Well he's dead now so do something productive with your weird magical abilities and be a good ruler for the continent.
But even if that did happen, it wouldn't make any damn sense based on how the writers have written these characters the last two seasons. Oh well, it is what it is.
It was a good run, y'all. But I simply can't continue to make any logic or sense out of the character motivations anymore. It's 100% pure Michael Bay action-thriller now.
The only solace I may be able to find is if Dany truly broke the wheel by destroying to cesspool capital and, in turn, the Three Eyed Raven (you know, that magical all-knowing and non-emotionally manipulated being) takes over and rules. Why the heck was the 3ER hiding north of the wall for the past 1,000 years anyways? What a waste of talent. Maybe to hold the Night King at bay? Well he's dead now so do something productive with your weird magical abilities and be a good ruler for the continent.
But even if that did happen, it wouldn't make any damn sense based on how the writers have written these characters the last two seasons. Oh well, it is what it is.
If Jon keeps his secret, at least for a little while, but still doesn't have an incestuous relationship with Dany does Dany end up going crazy?
Oh yea, and if you haven't been putting certain posters on the ignore list, then now is a good time to try it out. Makes catching up on this thread so much easier.
Lol, he did it on a much smaller scale with a whole army. And it worked for decades. This lady can show up unnannounced by herself and do it in 10 minutes, pretty big ass difference.jenn96 said:
One thing that struck me reading these arguments is that destroying Kings Landing to send a message to the rest of Westeros is something Tywin Lannister would have done. And did, on a much smaller scale with the Reynes and Tarbecks. Not exactly breaking the wheel.
The reality is that the writers decided Dany was going to go crazy so they had to write in some reasons why. To ask the question you asked is to misunderstand how D&D approach "character development".chase128 said:
If Jon keeps his secret, at least for a little while, but still doesn't have an incestuous relationship with Dany does Dany end up going crazy?
Just like there is no way Arya kills Cersei, there is no way they have her kill Dany. It has to be Tyrion or Jon.OldShadeOfBlue said:The white horse signifies death. I don't know if that means the death of Arya or her revenge arc, but I believe it was coupled with her seeing the mother and daughter burned to a crisp and she feels justice needs to be served to Dany and she'll be the one to do it.Social Media Influencer said:So far, that's the least talked about Big Thing in this episode.Quote:
She had a change of heart with the hound and went completely back to her stark roots. Empathy for civilians that have nothing to do with Ned's death.
Arya fled KL in hiding after Ned's death and hadn't been back since. She returns just in time to see it burn and crumble, and again narrowly escapes. I assume they gave her the white horse to let her ride out in contrast to the way she had to sneak out last time.
wasn't the reason the first aegon conquered westeros was because he destroyed an unbreakable keepjenn96 said:
One thing that struck me reading these arguments is that destroying Kings Landing to send a message to the rest of Westeros is something Tywin Lannister would have done. And did, on a much smaller scale with the Reynes and Tarbecks. Not exactly breaking the wheel.
So, do Jon and Tyrion even bother to face Dany now? She has to know that they would never follow her now, so she would just kill them as soon as she sees them. I really don't see where they go from here other than another all out war where all seven kingdoms unite against her. After what she has done, anyone who isn't also a homicidal maniac would turn against her.
D&D had 5 or 6 different ways to approach Dany snapping and picked the absolute worst. Then again Jon Snow makes every bad decision possible and it's considered great character development that he never learns, so what do I know.smokeythebear said:The reality is that the writers decided Dany was going to go crazy so they had to write in some reasons why. To ask the question you asked is to misunderstand how D&D approach "character development".chase128 said:
If Jon keeps his secret, at least for a little while, but still doesn't have an incestuous relationship with Dany does Dany end up going crazy?
Yes, Harrenhall. And it basically ended the resistance to the conquest except in Dorne. I don't remember Aegon wholesale massacring civilians though, just armies on the field. I may be remembering wrong; it's been a long time since I read about it.
aTmAg said:And they were all terrible. Retribution for injustice, treason, etc. are not in the same ballpark as wiping out a city and killing tons of innocent civilians after the battle was over. Groundwork for that was never laid out in past seasons.Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:So the point I am making is this: We didn't know enough about Frey to know if he was capable of wiping out the entire Stark family. When he did it, it was shocking, for sure, but it wasn't outside the limited character of Frey that we were exposed to.Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:What ground work was laid where Frey would kill every last member of that family? I don't remember such groundwork being laid.Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:You don't understand.. she's ALWAYS been crazy. Haven't you been watching all the groundwork they have been laying down in EVERY season to show how crazy she is? If you didn't see that coming, then you weren't paying attention.bobinator said:
Yeah, I mean that's clearly what they've decided they're going for. It just doesn't make any sense to me.
The city has surrendered. If she's that hell bent on instilling fear, accept the surrender, and then kill every single person in the city who fought to defend it.
There are a thousand steps between 'I need to instill fear' and 'I need to kill everyone in this city' and she didn't take any of them.
I just think it's lazy after seven years of all of the tiny steps her character has taken, that in her final act she's reduced to just 'well she's crazy now.'
(Nevermind, nobody else predicted that ending either.)
This is a ridiculous argument. Nobody saw Frey killing Robb, yet they laid the groundwork for it. Just because it surprised you doesn't mean the signs weren't there.
And the signs have been there.
Frey was shown as this arrogant man who was angry at constantly being looked over until he was needed. He invited the Starks and agreed to side against the Lannister's in exchange for Robb marrying his daughter, assuring a Frey in royalty in the north. Robb decided that love was more important than his honor as king, and Frey was pissed about it. He pretended to be ok with just marrying the daughter to Edmure.
Yet we have spent 8 seasons with Dany. She is one of the main characters. We know her well enough to know that he is very unlikely to go on random a civilian killing spree. So if they were going to make her do so, then they needed to show us more on why she would do it. A lot more than "well she's a Targaryen" or "it wasn't enough" (as D&D stated).
And they have, as shown with multiple examples over the past 10 pages.
Well I disagree.
I'm probably cheering for Dany to embrace being Darth Vader now and have Jon/Tyrion relegated to Obi Won and Yoda status. Maybe in 20 years Little Sam can be Azor Ahai.AustinAg2K said:
So, do Jon and Tyrion even bother to face Dany now? She has to know that they would never follow her now, so she would just kill them as soon as she sees them. I really don't see where they go from here other than another all out war where all seven kingdoms unite against her. After what she has done, anyone who isn't also a homicidal maniac would turn against her.
So you disagree that killing a civilian who did nothing more than live in a city is vastly different than killing somebody in retribution for some past injustice?Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:And they were all terrible. Retribution for injustice, treason, etc. are not in the same ballpark as wiping out a city and killing tons of innocent civilians after the battle was over. Groundwork for that was never laid out in past seasons.Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:So the point I am making is this: We didn't know enough about Frey to know if he was capable of wiping out the entire Stark family. When he did it, it was shocking, for sure, but it wasn't outside the limited character of Frey that we were exposed to.Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:What ground work was laid where Frey would kill every last member of that family? I don't remember such groundwork being laid.Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:You don't understand.. she's ALWAYS been crazy. Haven't you been watching all the groundwork they have been laying down in EVERY season to show how crazy she is? If you didn't see that coming, then you weren't paying attention.bobinator said:
Yeah, I mean that's clearly what they've decided they're going for. It just doesn't make any sense to me.
The city has surrendered. If she's that hell bent on instilling fear, accept the surrender, and then kill every single person in the city who fought to defend it.
There are a thousand steps between 'I need to instill fear' and 'I need to kill everyone in this city' and she didn't take any of them.
I just think it's lazy after seven years of all of the tiny steps her character has taken, that in her final act she's reduced to just 'well she's crazy now.'
(Nevermind, nobody else predicted that ending either.)
This is a ridiculous argument. Nobody saw Frey killing Robb, yet they laid the groundwork for it. Just because it surprised you doesn't mean the signs weren't there.
And the signs have been there.
Frey was shown as this arrogant man who was angry at constantly being looked over until he was needed. He invited the Starks and agreed to side against the Lannister's in exchange for Robb marrying his daughter, assuring a Frey in royalty in the north. Robb decided that love was more important than his honor as king, and Frey was pissed about it. He pretended to be ok with just marrying the daughter to Edmure.
Yet we have spent 8 seasons with Dany. She is one of the main characters. We know her well enough to know that he is very unlikely to go on random a civilian killing spree. So if they were going to make her do so, then they needed to show us more on why she would do it. A lot more than "well she's a Targaryen" or "it wasn't enough" (as D&D stated).
And they have, as shown with multiple examples over the past 10 pages.
Well I disagree.
Man, you're relentless with your arguing. It's becoming insufferable.
BowSowy said:
Man, you're relentless with your arguing. It's becoming insufferable.
I prefer Dany burning all of Kings Landing over the game of Red Rover the two armies were about to play in the streets after the surrender. Such a lame faceoff and dropping of the swords by the Lannister army. Just imagine the outrage if all the build up over seven seasons just led to a peaceful turnover of KL
Check out the Chernobyl thread. He simply has the wrong character identified and it takes numerous posts from multiple posters before he budges at all on a very simple, verifiable fact. So good luck on this type of debate. LOLBowSowy said:
Man, you're relentless with your arguing. It's becoming insufferable.
I'm assuming yall are talking about ATM? It's easier if you just ignore him.Old Tom Morris said:Check out the Chernobyl thread. He simply has the wrong character identified and it takes numerous posts from multiple posters before he budges at all on a very simple, verifiable fact. So good luck on this type of debate. LOLBowSowy said:
Man, you're relentless with your arguing. It's becoming insufferable.
Every character in the game killed innocent people, even including ned stark arguably. Thats the whole point of the show.
I'm 100% satisfied that it was burned. The steps she took to get to that point are obviously up for debate. I'm in the camp that the last leap was too big of one and needed more development, but I'd rather that be the case than her not have burned it.tk for tu juan said:
I prefer Dany burning all of Kings Landing over the game of Red Rover the two armies were about to play in the streets after the surrender. Such a lame faceoff and dropping of the swords by the Lannister army. Just imagine the outrage if all the build up over seven seasons just led to a peaceful turnover of KL
aggiejim70 said:
For those of us who came in late and didn't pay attention. Wasn't Lady Mormont in the funeral pyre? Wondering how this could be since she was "transformed" by the Night King prior to his death. Shouldn't she have just "blown up" like we saw so many do?
Probably was already answered, but the white walkers are the ones that blew up.
The wights just collapsed, or fell apart, depending on their individual amount of degradation.
The newest wights, like her, should have just collapsed.
aTmAg said:So you disagree that killing a civilian who did nothing more than live in a city is vastly different than killing somebody in retribution for some past injustice?Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:And they were all terrible. Retribution for injustice, treason, etc. are not in the same ballpark as wiping out a city and killing tons of innocent civilians after the battle was over. Groundwork for that was never laid out in past seasons.Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:So the point I am making is this: We didn't know enough about Frey to know if he was capable of wiping out the entire Stark family. When he did it, it was shocking, for sure, but it wasn't outside the limited character of Frey that we were exposed to.Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:What ground work was laid where Frey would kill every last member of that family? I don't remember such groundwork being laid.Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:You don't understand.. she's ALWAYS been crazy. Haven't you been watching all the groundwork they have been laying down in EVERY season to show how crazy she is? If you didn't see that coming, then you weren't paying attention.bobinator said:
Yeah, I mean that's clearly what they've decided they're going for. It just doesn't make any sense to me.
The city has surrendered. If she's that hell bent on instilling fear, accept the surrender, and then kill every single person in the city who fought to defend it.
There are a thousand steps between 'I need to instill fear' and 'I need to kill everyone in this city' and she didn't take any of them.
I just think it's lazy after seven years of all of the tiny steps her character has taken, that in her final act she's reduced to just 'well she's crazy now.'
(Nevermind, nobody else predicted that ending either.)
This is a ridiculous argument. Nobody saw Frey killing Robb, yet they laid the groundwork for it. Just because it surprised you doesn't mean the signs weren't there.
And the signs have been there.
Frey was shown as this arrogant man who was angry at constantly being looked over until he was needed. He invited the Starks and agreed to side against the Lannister's in exchange for Robb marrying his daughter, assuring a Frey in royalty in the north. Robb decided that love was more important than his honor as king, and Frey was pissed about it. He pretended to be ok with just marrying the daughter to Edmure.
Yet we have spent 8 seasons with Dany. She is one of the main characters. We know her well enough to know that he is very unlikely to go on random a civilian killing spree. So if they were going to make her do so, then they needed to show us more on why she would do it. A lot more than "well she's a Targaryen" or "it wasn't enough" (as D&D stated).
And they have, as shown with multiple examples over the past 10 pages.
Well I disagree.
That's not what I said. No need to make up my arguments, I have been telling you them for the past 10 pages, you can read what I actually did say. You aren't going to change my opinion, and it's obvious from this thread nobody will ever change yours.
Dany destroyed an entire fleet, burned the outer wall of the city and destroyed the Golden Company basically by herself.
So I don't think it would exactly be peaceful.
At that point when she's already taken out all the city's defenses it's pretty clear that she can just kill everyone by herself, so why would they keep fighting.
So I don't think it would exactly be peaceful.
At that point when she's already taken out all the city's defenses it's pretty clear that she can just kill everyone by herself, so why would they keep fighting.
Not my boy Jon. Right proper lad he iscbr said:
Every character in the game killed innocent people, even including ned stark arguably. Thats the whole point of the show.
A suggestion I saw someplace else was the fix to kill off Rhaegal at the beginning of the King's Landing Fight instead of a few episodes earlier over the water. Would have helped her unhinged status.
Bran wargs himself into the dragon. Kills Dany and then kills the dragon thus killing himself.
I loved the episode except for Euron:Jamie duel. Just give him a gory prolonged death from above when dragon first appears and be done with it, or maybe he could eat him alive after burning everything else. You could still have Jamie getting to Cersei without the abdomen wounds. Other than that it's entertainment, I'm not invested enough other than I have enjoyed every Sunday.
Not perfect but still best show on currently
Not perfect but still best show on currently
Agree. I think either Missandei or Rhaegal going down near the start of the fight would have helped a lot of viewers buy it better.
had she just kept going after destroying the scorpions it would have fit as she already told Jon she would rule through fear, but sitting and waiting for the surrender bells then destroying the city was just too far from her normal behavior.Old Tom Morris said:I'm 100% satisfied that it was burned. The steps she took to get to that point are obviously up for debate. I'm in the camp that the last leap was too big of one and needed more development, but I'd rather that be the case than her not have burned it.tk for tu juan said:
I prefer Dany burning all of Kings Landing over the game of Red Rover the two armies were about to play in the streets after the surrender. Such a lame faceoff and dropping of the swords by the Lannister army. Just imagine the outrage if all the build up over seven seasons just led to a peaceful turnover of KL
Correct, my opinion will not change since all of her past kills have fallen into the retribution category until last night. Which is why it was terrible writing and why much of the GoT fandom is up in arms this morning. It's not just me.Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:So you disagree that killing a civilian who did nothing more than live in a city is vastly different than killing somebody in retribution for some past injustice?Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:And they were all terrible. Retribution for injustice, treason, etc. are not in the same ballpark as wiping out a city and killing tons of innocent civilians after the battle was over. Groundwork for that was never laid out in past seasons.Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:So the point I am making is this: We didn't know enough about Frey to know if he was capable of wiping out the entire Stark family. When he did it, it was shocking, for sure, but it wasn't outside the limited character of Frey that we were exposed to.Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:What ground work was laid where Frey would kill every last member of that family? I don't remember such groundwork being laid.Champ Bailey said:aTmAg said:You don't understand.. she's ALWAYS been crazy. Haven't you been watching all the groundwork they have been laying down in EVERY season to show how crazy she is? If you didn't see that coming, then you weren't paying attention.bobinator said:
Yeah, I mean that's clearly what they've decided they're going for. It just doesn't make any sense to me.
The city has surrendered. If she's that hell bent on instilling fear, accept the surrender, and then kill every single person in the city who fought to defend it.
There are a thousand steps between 'I need to instill fear' and 'I need to kill everyone in this city' and she didn't take any of them.
I just think it's lazy after seven years of all of the tiny steps her character has taken, that in her final act she's reduced to just 'well she's crazy now.'
(Nevermind, nobody else predicted that ending either.)
This is a ridiculous argument. Nobody saw Frey killing Robb, yet they laid the groundwork for it. Just because it surprised you doesn't mean the signs weren't there.
And the signs have been there.
Frey was shown as this arrogant man who was angry at constantly being looked over until he was needed. He invited the Starks and agreed to side against the Lannister's in exchange for Robb marrying his daughter, assuring a Frey in royalty in the north. Robb decided that love was more important than his honor as king, and Frey was pissed about it. He pretended to be ok with just marrying the daughter to Edmure.
Yet we have spent 8 seasons with Dany. She is one of the main characters. We know her well enough to know that he is very unlikely to go on random a civilian killing spree. So if they were going to make her do so, then they needed to show us more on why she would do it. A lot more than "well she's a Targaryen" or "it wasn't enough" (as D&D stated).
And they have, as shown with multiple examples over the past 10 pages.
Well I disagree.
That's not what I said. No need to make up my arguments, I have been telling you them for the past 10 pages, you can read what I actually did say. You aren't going to change my opinion, and it's obvious from this thread nobody will ever change yours.
I don't know about y'all, but if I found myself standing in front of Drogon, not only would I have dropped my sword, I'd have been scaling that damn bell tower to ring the thing myself. And probably with a giant **** in my pants.
bobinator said:
At that point when she's already taken out all the city's defenses it's pretty clear that she can just kill everyone by herself, so why would they keep fighting.
Because it is their job.