|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2019 13:55:38 GMT
I find your casual prejudice about disabled people disgusting. Unpack that for me. Is it that the word disabled is no longer a politically correct term? I guess not because you used it. Or you think it's wrong to mention his disability because it's not relevant information? When referring to a scene in which his sister literally mentions it as relevant information? In a world in which it is desired that the King be very good at fighting? In a world in which, if you needed a reminder that our ethics and morality do not apply to their ideals of governance, in that exact scene, representative democracy is proposed as a form of government and everyone laughs their heads off? Or it's that I called him a kid too? I would like to think you could tell I would have been just as condescending if Sansa or Gendry had bizarrely ended up on the throne, either of which would have made roughly as much sense as Bran, rather than that I have some rabid hatred of disabled people in positions of power. But perhaps it would it be okay if I called him a 'disabled guy?' Enlighten me. Disabled people is an acceptable term, the current government guidelines on inclusive language www.gov.uk/government/publications/inclusive-communication/inclusive-language-words-to-use-and-avoid-when-writing-about-disability (not political correctness) might be interesting for you. My issue is that you reduce Bran to ‘disabled kid’ when he is an ancient and immensely powerful greenseer with enormous magical ability. He can perceive the past, present and future through visions and he can time travel. They’re in the burnt out ruins of the former seat of power, they know they no longer need someone who is ‘very good at fighting.’ Did you miss the bit where they kept taking about “breaking the wheel”? A candidate who cannot have children breaks the cycle of inherited power. A candidate who doesn’t want to lead would make a change from someone who believes it’s their right. The old white men laugh at the idea of participatory democracy. Do you not think that Tyrion's proposed solution is the first step on that journey though?
|
|
|
Post by sparky5000 on May 21, 2019 17:09:24 GMT
Yeah, I think I actually kind of loved it. I definitely think the season up until this point was rushed, and I have gripes about other episodes, but I was completely satisfied with this as a finale. All I really wanted was for the Stark children to get some semblance of a happy ending, and they did. I gasped, I cried, I laughed out loud. Other than Grey’s Anatomy constantly making me cry, it’s been a long time since I’ve had such a reaction to a TV show. I read one review that criticised not actually showing Jon stab Dany - for me, how they shot it made complete sense, because even though I was expecting someone to kill her, it took me totally by surprise and I gasped very dramatically. I cackled at Edmure putting himself forward and Sansa firmly putting him down, at Sam inventing democracy and being laughed down, at Tyrion straightening the chairs and getting annoyed when the council promptly moved them. I wept at Brienne writing Jaime’s legacy in the white book, at Greyworm setting sail with the Unsullied to Naath, at the Stark children’s goodbye, at Jon seeing Tormund again. I cheered and cried at Jon’s reunion with Ghost!
When I first watched the finale I thought “wth is this?!” .... but actually I think that’s about as satisfying an ending as they could have given the show given where we were at the beginning of the episode. I’m happy too that the Stark children all got some sort of happy or satisfactory ending. And the music this season has just been epic ❤️
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on May 21, 2019 22:44:00 GMT
Unpack that for me. Is it that the word disabled is no longer a politically correct term? I guess not because you used it. Or you think it's wrong to mention his disability because it's not relevant information? When referring to a scene in which his sister literally mentions it as relevant information? In a world in which it is desired that the King be very good at fighting? In a world in which, if you needed a reminder that our ethics and morality do not apply to their ideals of governance, in that exact scene, representative democracy is proposed as a form of government and everyone laughs their heads off? Or it's that I called him a kid too? I would like to think you could tell I would have been just as condescending if Sansa or Gendry had bizarrely ended up on the throne, either of which would have made roughly as much sense as Bran, rather than that I have some rabid hatred of disabled people in positions of power. But perhaps it would it be okay if I called him a 'disabled guy?' Enlighten me. Disabled people is an acceptable term, the current government guidelines on inclusive language www.gov.uk/government/publications/inclusive-communication/inclusive-language-words-to-use-and-avoid-when-writing-about-disability (not political correctness) might be interesting for you. My issue is that you reduce Bran to ‘disabled kid’ when he is an ancient and immensely powerful greenseer with enormous magical ability. He can perceive the past, present and future through visions and he can time travel. They’re in the burnt out ruins of the former seat of power, they know they no longer need someone who is ‘very good at fighting.’ Did you miss the bit where they kept taking about “breaking the wheel”? A candidate who cannot have children breaks the cycle of inherited power. A candidate who doesn’t want to lead would make a change from someone who believes it’s their right. The old white men laugh at the idea of participatory democracy. Do you not think that Tyrion's proposed solution is the first step on that journey though? The wheel isn't broken because Tyrion, a character who has been wrong about everything for a long time now, hopes so. In the last series the fact Daenerys couldn't have children was a problem according to Tyrion, now it's great that Bran can't? Tyrion's proposed solution is the first step towards civil war every time the King dies because the succession is unclear. See: history. The culture of an entire continent doesn't change because Tyrion makes a stupid speech and a fairly random panel of people, from which the interests of most of that continent aren't voiced, nod their heads. Let's remember for one example from very recent history, what happened the last time a Dornish Prince was perceived to be too weak and pacifist. He got shanked by his sister-in-law who took power to popular acclaim and took up arms against the reigning house. So this new Prince is just going to go home and tell everyone they must accept being ruled from the capital when even the King's sister wouldn't and she got independence for her region? When he has probably the most well-rested army? At the very least he's declaring independence and then the whole thing starts to unravel. I don't see how anyone could have watched all eight series and think that anything has meaningfully, lastingly changed on that ending. The best chance for stable government in the medium term was Daenerys when she had three dragons and could rule through her WMDs like her ancestors. That's irrespective of whether she would be a good ruler, but you can't be a good ruler if you can't maintain your grip on power. The only way Bran is keeping that power structure in place is using his magical powers to implement a totalitarian state in which treason becomes a thought crime because Bran (unverifiably) sees people's treachery in visions of the future. Sounds great, what a happy ending, Team Stark forever. Except he chose not to use those powers to intervene meaningfully in the most important battle of all time in episode three or to prevent an enormous civilian atrocity in the previous episode? I like that you seem to think I don't understand the version of events portrayed by the show, rather than that I don't think it makes a lick of sense.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on May 22, 2019 8:22:21 GMT
It's an Anglo-Saxon Witan: for a televisual illustration of this type of rule in action, see The Last Kingdom on Netflix. Alfred the Great, subject of the series, was a king who was quite frail and ruled with brains not brawn.
|
|
4,038 posts
|
Post by kathryn on May 22, 2019 10:44:14 GMT
It's an Anglo-Saxon Witan: for a televisual illustration of this type of rule in action, see The Last Kingdom on Netflix. Alfred the Great, subject of the series, was a king who was quite frail and ruled with brains not brawn. Alfred was the son of King Æthelwulf of Wessex and succeeded his brothers, who had all had a go at ruling before him and died. He'd never have ruled if he wasn't the last legitimate heir - no-one would have supported him over his older brothers. He persuaded the people with the brawn to support him via canny marriage alliances and he had the support of a very powerful church. It was entirely traditional power politics at play - and he very nearly lost anyway. It was a gradual generational change that brought about his actual aim - thanks largely to the efforts of his daughter Æthelflæd in Mercia, and his son Edward in Wessex - that makes him retrospectively look such a great ruler. It's not the same at all as deciding to install someone as king from an entirely different family who has no other political support and cannot create alliances through marriage and children.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on May 22, 2019 11:07:22 GMT
Alfred was the son of King Æthelwulf of Wessex and succeeded his brothers I know (I had to plough through Anglo-Saxon at uni, which is why seeing Alfred played by David Dawson is such a joy) but Alfred the Great and the Witan is clearly the model for that scene. Also, in a series that has been relatively godless, Bran is the only surviving character with supernatural powers - in an era of exhausted armies minus their dragon WMD, a dragon it's hinted he can contact - he seems the obvious choice (also reminds me of John Major succeeding Thatcher!).
|
|
4,038 posts
|
Post by kathryn on May 22, 2019 11:51:21 GMT
Alfred was the son of King Æthelwulf of Wessex and succeeded his brothers I know (I had to plough through Anglo-Saxon at uni, which is why seeing Alfred played by David Dawson is such a joy) but Alfred the Great and the Witan is clearly the model for that scene. Also, in a series that has been relatively godless, Bran is the only surviving character with supernatural powers - in an era of exhausted armies minus their dragon WMD, a dragon it's hinted he can contact - he seems the obvious choice (also reminds me of John Major succeeding Thatcher!). He may seem the obvious choice to you as a viewer with that knowledge, but he wouldn't to any of the other power-hungry characters who exist in the Westeros the TV show spent years carefully setting up. That's the problem. It doesn't make good sense in-world, because in-world we've seen that the politics of ruling is incredibly complex and dangerous, and requires far more political acumen to gather and keep the necessary support than Bran - distant, disconnected Bran, who isn't even sure that he is really Bran any more - has. His closest natural ally has just declared herself the ruler of an independent kingdom - which will have its own interests that may well oppose his. She takes all of his personally loyal family troops and retainers with her. That means he is going to be entirely reliant on the support of the other leading families of Westeros - which is an incredibly dangerous position to be in, politically. It's not like he has personal charisma on his side, either. If he has to resort to threatening his allies with a dragon attack to keep them in line, then he has become Daenerys!
|
|
4,038 posts
|
Post by kathryn on May 22, 2019 11:53:44 GMT
Alfred was the son of King Æthelwulf of Wessex and succeeded his brothers, who had all had a go at ruling before him and died. He'd never have ruled if he wasn't the last legitimate heir - no-one would have supported him over his older brothers Bagsy kathryn on my team for the next bear-v-monkey Theatreboard pub quiz evening. I did resort to Google for most of the names! Apart from Æthelflæd, who rocks. They should make a film about her.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on May 22, 2019 12:48:04 GMT
They should make a film about her. She's in The Last Kingdom, and I did hear a talk about her recently on Radio 4 (that Matthew Parris programme?) because someone has a children's book out on her in a Kings and Queens series, and they discussed the TV portrayal in that. The Runcorn railway bridge near us is properly titled 'The Queen Ethelfleda Viaduct' because one of its feet is on the site of one of her Mersey forts. he wouldn't to any of the other power-hungry characters who exist in the Westeros the TV show spent years carefully setting up. But it's a TV show, and we like 'tortoise and hare' stories. There have been nods to I Claudius in the series too, and that also ends up with the unlikely, disabled character as the last man standing - for now. Star Wars gave us a hopeful ending in the 80s, the good, surviving characters assembled on a dias, but the new films have it all going horribly wrong again. I doubt Martin will carry on the series at his age, but this might be something someone takes up a few years down the line. Even as it is, the series has never convincingly shown us new characters and powers springing up to fill the power vacuums left as, for example, Dany has moved her armies. Btw, it hasn't really been picked upon in the commentary (a bit on twitter) but I thought a definite Robespierre thing going on with Dany - even her hair and face echoed his (not in any way an exact parallel but defo a strong element there). In a way the anger of elements of the fandom shows the story is working - people are drawn in to an attractive leader and a vision of utopia which by steps turns darker and darker, no liberty to the enemies of liberty - her rhetoric at the end was very 1974. I was reminded of the the way that scene worked in Cabaret - the beautiful blonde boy singing in the lovely beer garden drawing you in, and then you see where it will lead.
|
|
4,038 posts
|
Post by kathryn on May 22, 2019 13:20:56 GMT
The thing is, crowblack , you say 'we like' as if everyone in in agreement here, when the point is that we're not. A great many people found the ending unconvincing, which is why they are complaining about it. This kind of story may have worked in other instances, but for those of us complaining, it didn't work in this specific case. I have seen The Last Kingdom and read the books. I don't think they're a very good representation of Æthelflæd's story, to be honest. I weary of Bernard Cornwell's attitudes towards women - he's a bit too fond of sexual violence. I would like a film or TV series that actually made her the central character in her own story, rather than a supporting character in a male character's story. There was a decent documentary a few years ago - can't remember who presented it off the top of my head.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on May 22, 2019 14:23:19 GMT
you say 'we like' as if everyone in in agreement here, when the point is that we're not I was using 'we' in the sense that humans like particular types of stories (it's very clear that some people hated this series of GoT) - the line that there are a number of plots we as a culture find satisfying and we rework them over and over again. Unlikely character emerging as last one standing is one of those storylines, small / weak /marginalised character succeeding against overwhelming odds, the very optimistic idea that brain can defeat brawn.
|
|
4,038 posts
|
Post by kathryn on May 22, 2019 14:56:18 GMT
But they still have to be well-told to work, and this wasn't.
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on May 22, 2019 17:54:57 GMT
Alfred was the son of King Æthelwulf of Wessex and succeeded his brothers I know (I had to plough through Anglo-Saxon at uni, which is why seeing Alfred played by David Dawson is such a joy) but Alfred the Great and the Witan is clearly the model for that scene. Also, in a series that has been relatively godless, Bran is the only surviving character with supernatural powers - in an era of exhausted armies minus their dragon WMD, a dragon it's hinted he can contact - he seems the obvious choice (also reminds me of John Major succeeding Thatcher!). Yeah but Alfred could write a story without ruining it and leaving lots and lots of plot holes
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on May 22, 2019 17:57:49 GMT
But they still have to be well-told to work, and this wasn't. This. Ruined a brilliant series. I'm never calling the 'greatest programme ever' again until they have finished it. Feel really silly uncrowning The Sopranos now.
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on May 22, 2019 19:39:31 GMT
I'm sure that ink would have smudged.
Bit meh ending for me, so much of it was so clearly signalled that it was no surprise as yes in an attempt I suppose to tie everything up and give everyone a moment it ended in a way that surely yes signalled chaos to come and gave us twee little moments.
Now I may have missed this but was what the point of the night's watch now? Who were some of those randoms at the choose a king session? Poor Jon, fated to be pretty gloomy the whole way through. And Whilst it was nice to see Bron again, I wondered if he'd pop up for his money he was a bit too Bron. And could Pod look any more smug?
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on May 22, 2019 21:45:06 GMT
I'm never calling the 'greatest programme ever' again until they have finished it. Feel really silly uncrowning The Sopranos now. I never had it down as 'greatest programme ever', not even close, but it has been great entertainment, groundbreaking in its ambition and commitment, putting LOTR-level cinematic spectacle on screen in a 70-plus hours series and pulling in a great cast.
|
|
211 posts
|
Post by BoOverall on May 22, 2019 21:52:41 GMT
Poor Jon, fated to be pretty gloomy the whole way through. 😀😀 quite: he was sadly never the buoyant, cheery one with a penchant for light showtunes. Although his delivery of “Go Westeros” in full Cersei drag at Night Watch Pride suggested he had the capacity for some moments of joy in his life. I enjoyed the finale - for me it had some terrific moments (and I loved the scene around the table near the end), but it kind of fizzled out a bit. Of all the characters, I will miss Brienne the most. Loved her, and I liked her moments in the finale.
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on May 23, 2019 17:32:10 GMT
But they still have to be well-told to work, and this wasn't. Think this pretty much sums up series 8
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on May 27, 2019 14:44:55 GMT
Whatever you felt about the last season, it is absolutely worth watching the documentary - The Last Watch
As an insight to what it was like to be part of the production, it is an interesting watch.
But it also made me cry. A lot. Seeing the people react to the end of a project that has been their lives for a decade was almost too much for me. Seeing the genuine love they have for their craft, the colleagues is heart-warming.
The ending was never going to satisfy everyone. But this isn't about the story, it is about people who crafted the most ambitious show in TV history. Their story has been told and their watch has ended.
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on May 27, 2019 15:43:32 GMT
Whatever you felt about the last season, it is absolutely worth watching the documentary - The Last Watch As an insight to what it was like to be part of the production, it is an interesting watch. But it also made me cry. A lot. Seeing the people react to the end of a project that has been their lives for a decade was almost too much for me. Seeing the genuine love they have for their craft, the colleagues is heart-warming. The ending was never going to satisfy everyone. But this isn't about the story, it is about people who crafted the most ambitious show in TV history. Their story has been told and their watch has ended. Could have satisfied a few though Got a friend who worked on production in Belfast team from the start. Said on set there was loads of rumblings it was rushed, unbelievable, too dark, poor dialogue. That said he has worked on James Bond, Harry Potter lots of tv and film blockbusters and he said GoT is by far the most fulfilling production he has worked on. But he did think an opportunity was missed.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on May 27, 2019 16:26:27 GMT
Said on set there was loads of rumblings it was rushed, unbelievable, too dark, poor dialogue. I wonder to what extent it was hampered by the secrecy? Keeping a tight ship presumably meant normal production stuff like fresh pairs of eyes on scripts and test screenings were out of the question.
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on May 27, 2019 19:56:36 GMT
Said on set there was loads of rumblings it was rushed, unbelievable, too dark, poor dialogue. I wonder to what extent it was hampered by the secrecy? Keeping a tight ship presumably meant normal production stuff like fresh pairs of eyes on scripts and test screenings were out of the question. Exactly right. He was there filming for ten years. Never saw anything he didn't capture/work on. Saw it all together same time we all did. But they guessed, it just didn't feel right
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on May 28, 2019 11:14:06 GMT
it just didn't feel right I liked the last series. I watched the documentary last night and it was clear nerves were frazzled by the pressure but this series has been unique in that fans had come to expect every episode to have the production values of a movie. And I think most people, being human, would be tired of doing the same thing over and over for so many years (look how bored the James Bond team seem to be, judging by press reports). The last series had an issue in that all the main surviving characters were now isolated. This is presumably in Martin's plot, but on screen this makes it difficult as they have all lost their verbal sparring partners, sounding boards. People were saying 'it's not like previous series' but how could it be, when all those couples and groups whose conversations and relationships we enjoyed have split up, mistrusting each other or dead?
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on May 28, 2019 20:07:05 GMT
it just didn't feel right I liked the last series. I watched the documentary last night and it was clear nerves were frazzled by the pressure but this series has been unique in that fans had come to expect every episode to have the production values of a movie. And I think most people, being human, would be tired of doing the same thing over and over for so many years (look how bored the James Bond team seem to be, judging by press reports). The last series had an issue in that all the main surviving characters were now isolated. This is presumably in Martin's plot, but on screen this makes it difficult as they have all lost their verbal sparring partners, sounding boards. People were saying 'it's not like previous series' but how could it be, when all those couples and groups whose conversations and relationships we enjoyed have split up, mistrusting each other or dead? Not an excuse for not telling the story. Can't wait to read the books, find out the story behind the hollywoodification.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Oct 29, 2019 20:53:14 GMT
It looks like the proposed prequel isn't happening. A pilot was filmed this summer so it'll be interesting to see the reason why - fall out from the fan backlash to the GoT finale, or the quality of the piece itself? The ex-GoT showrunners have just left the proposed Star Wars series too.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2019 23:21:10 GMT
It looks like the proposed prequel isn't happening. A pilot was filmed this summer so it'll be interesting to see the reason why - fall out from the fan backlash to the GoT finale, or the quality of the piece itself? The ex-GoT showrunners have just left the proposed Star Wars series too. It’s a shame really, considering the cast and the fact the premise was seemingly quite good. HBO have another 4 spin offs in development, so if this one isn’t right, then it’s not right.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2019 23:43:30 GMT
So months after the fact, I still think the final episode should have shown us Dany being revived by a red priestess somewhere. I still think Drogon was MIA for a season or two because they were off laying eggs, and I think the Night King being defeated at Winterfell was an utter shambles, considering we’d spent a decade waiting for him to enter Westeros.
There’s still plenty of scope for a revival series down the line too, which I wouldn’t put past HBO and the cast once the hype around individuals dies down.
Dany could bide her time, raise an army of dragons in isolation. Sansa can make a power grab for the other six kingdoms when someone murders Bran and some of the houses have had time to rebuild and reestablish themselves, and Jon can go further north, explore the mythology of the world and be forced into becoming the next Night King in order to face Dany a second time.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Oct 29, 2019 23:57:32 GMT
HBO have another 4 spin offs in development, so if this one isn’t right, then it’s not right. Yes, sounds like they're going with a different one. Will there still be the appetite by the time they get it made, though? The LOTR prequels start filming soon and with so many other fantasy series in the offing it'll have a lot of competition. Update - yes, they've just announced they're making a prequel series 'House of the Dragons' instead.
|
|
480 posts
|
Post by deej4life on Nov 2, 2019 0:49:23 GMT
Looking back, Game of Thrones Seasons 1-4 really were the peak when it came to television fantasy & drama. If any of these spin-off series can match the quality of those early seasons, it will be a huge success!
I am so glad House of the Dragon has been announced as a replacement for Bloodmoon. I always found the Bran/White Walker storyline to be one of the more dull aspects of the original series. A focus on the Targaryen dynasty/dragon lords of Valyria would certainly peak my interest!
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Nov 2, 2019 7:06:59 GMT
Looking back, Game of Thrones Seasons 1-4 really were the peak when it came to television fantasy & drama. If any of these spin-off series can match the quality of those early seasons, it will be a huge success! I am so glad House of the Dragon has been announced as a replacement for Bloodmoon. I always found the Bran/White Walker storyline to be one of the more dull aspects of the original series. A focus on the Targaryen dynasty/dragon lords of Valyria would certainly peak my interest! Why series 1-4? I'd have gone to series 6. Although I'd like to know what the Bran and WhiteWalker story was, George RR Martin has given them some good material for a Targaryen story
|
|