3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on May 14, 2019 22:31:43 GMT
how they dealt with Daenerys There are now several very well argued backlash-to-the-backlash pieces online defending the episode - I've just gone back and watched the clip of Dany's vision from series 2 and there it is, the throne room in ruins and full of not snow but ash.
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on May 14, 2019 22:44:24 GMT
Dany had no qualms about seeing her brother killed with molten gold She had no qualms in setting the Warlock on fire or locking the trader in his empty vault to die She had no qualms in setting the owner of the Unsullied alight She had no qualms in ordering the deaths of the Masters in Essos She had no issues with burning the Tarlys
We have seen Dany act badly many, many, many times
Was her behaviour extreme in this week's episode? For sure.
Was it completely out of character? Not in the slightest. She has used fire to get her way in the past. She took it too far - but she was following her instincts
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on May 15, 2019 0:10:09 GMT
Was it completely out of character? Yes, because it was unprovoked, and not in her interests in any way. This is a might is right world, none of the stuff she's done before was notably OTT in this context because she was acting in her interests as a would-be ruler. Go back and look at the stuff Ned or Rob Stark did as supposedly heroic characters. This was completely against Daenerys' interests. Cersei can hardly be popular after nuking the Vatican and she had a very tenuous claim to the throne anyway so Daenerys would broadly have been popular in replacing her. Instead...having won an easy victory and getting exactly what she set out to do, Daenerys...goes crazy and kills innocent people for no reason. Rather than directly targeting Cersei. It was telling that there wasn't a shot of Daenerys on the dragon in the actual moment of the rampage because the writers didn't really know why she was doing it so what is the director supposed to tell the actress? The cast know how terrible the writing is: digg.com/video/game-of-thrones-disappointing
|
|
|
Post by sparky5000 on May 15, 2019 1:04:04 GMT
how they dealt with Daenerys There are now several very well argued backlash-to-the-backlash pieces online defending the episode - I've just gone back and watched the clip of Dany's vision from series 2 and there it is, the throne room in ruins and full of not snow but ash. I don’t have any issue with Daenerys turning out to be the mad queen, if this was the intention. But the execution of it was terrible. The disintegration of her character should have been something that happened over multiple seasons, not in 3 episodes. Her sudden turn into some murderous villain who has no qualms about slaughtering innocent civilians wasn’t in any way believable.
|
|
|
Post by sparky5000 on May 15, 2019 1:06:31 GMT
Was it completely out of character? Yes, because it was unprovoked, and not in her interests in any way. This is a might is right world, none of the stuff she's done before was notably OTT in this context because she was acting in her interests as a would-be ruler. Go back and look at the stuff Ned or Rob Stark did as supposedly heroic characters. This was completely against Daenerys' interests. Cersei can hardly be popular after nuking the Vatican and she had a very tenuous claim to the throne anyway so Daenerys would broadly have been popular in replacing her. Instead...having won an easy victory and getting exactly what she set out to do, Daenerys...goes crazy and kills innocent people for no reason. Rather than directly targeting Cersei. It was telling that there wasn't a shot of Daenerys on the dragon in the actual moment of the rampage because the writers didn't really know why she was doing it so what is the director supposed to tell the actress? The cast know how terrible the writing is: digg.com/video/game-of-thrones-disappointingYes to this!
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on May 15, 2019 7:43:50 GMT
Cersei can hardly be popular after nuking the Vatican and she had a very tenuous claim to the throne anyway so Daenerys would broadly have been popular in replacing her. But her claim - which has always been her overriding obsession - has been fatally undermined by the revelation, now leaked by all of those she trusted, including Snow himself, of Jon Snow's superior claim. She has been treated coldly since crossing the sea and now friends are dead, her lover and surviving advisors have betrayed her. It was hinted in last week's episode that she was prepared to massacre civilians but blame Cersei (reminding me of Western interventions in Middle East, or to GRR Martin's generation Vietnam. Dany loves the smell of napalm in the morning. ) and that was before she knew Snow's claim had been leaked. In her firebombing she nearly killed Jon Snow too - maybe she wanted to.
|
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on May 15, 2019 8:24:44 GMT
And trashing her capital city after she has just won it - destroying a bunch of extremely useful resources that they need to feed her army through the winter - helps her deal with Jon’s claim how?
It actually helps him reach the throne a lot more than her, because we all see the where the show is going with it, right? We’re now meant to root for Jon over Dany. The characters in-show are going to turn on Dany. Except I can’t be bothered to really care because it’s so stupid.
The writers are claiming that she went mad, but people keep trying to come up with rational justifications for her madness. Thing is, there isn’t a rational explanation for madness - that’s why it’s madness.
If she’s not mad, then razing the city at that particular moment makes no sense at all. If she is mad, then she ceases to be interesting as a character because there is no real character-based motivation there - would she even be criminally responsible for her actions, in our terms?
This is the problem when you don’t lay the groundwork for a plot twist properly.
|
|
230 posts
|
Post by hal9000 on May 15, 2019 9:30:08 GMT
Dany was raised to believe in her superiority, in her right to rule -“I am your Queen!”, “You forget yourself!”, “Bend the knee!” - and the brown populations she dealt with in the past bent the knee after they saw what she could do with her weapons.
Now she has no legitimate right to rule her self-interest kicks in and her fallback behaviour of demanding turns to violence.
If this season is about anything it’s about how the characters choices battle their true natures. Dany wants to break chains, but also wants to rule. Tyrion wants to support a political system that may break the wheel, but loves his brother. Jaime wants to try an ordinary, decent life, but he loves Cersei. Jon wants to support his Queen, but he can’t support her ethics.
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on May 15, 2019 9:45:19 GMT
Dany was not born to rule. Her brother was ahead of her in the line of succession.
She could have stopped her brother's murder but didn't.
Her ruthless side has been there from season 1.
|
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on May 15, 2019 11:35:06 GMT
No, she couldn't have stopped her brother's murder. She simply wasn't in that powerful a position at the time. Her brother was doomed to die because his arrogance/entitlement prevented him adapting to the local politics of the situation - even had she managed to persuade Drogo not to kill him then and there he'd have died ten times over since then. And then Drogo died because of his own arrogance and overconfidence.
Adapt or die; simply flying in and declaring yourself ruler is pointless if you don't successfully navigate the local politics; people are fickle; PR is really important; it doesn't matter how powerful your weapons are if they're not the right tools for the job - these have been the lessons of Dany's life.
Her failing to learn those lessons makes for an interesting tragedy. The writers just haven't done enough character work with Dany this season to achieve that. I am not even sure that they tried to - the goal seems to have been to make her an outright villain who we are happy to see die, like Joffrey, rather than a character whose downfall the audience regrets.
Oh, and Dany's belief in her right to rule isn't about her place in the line of succession, it's about the fact that she is the Mother of Dragons! That she resurrected the magical Royal emblem of her whole house, the reason that her ancestors became Kings, hundreds of years after it was believed to be extinct, like her semi-mythical ancestor did. Famously the only people who have managed to control dragons in the hundreds of years prior to their extinction were the royal family. The fact that Jon managed to fly on a dragon should have been absolutely mind-blowing to her, it should have been a major revelation - prompting wonder, terror and soul-searching. Not just for her, but for the other characters too.
The show treated it just like riding a horse. I am honestly not even sure why they bothered spending all that money on the CGI, they've treated it with so little importance.
|
|
528 posts
|
Post by vabbian on May 15, 2019 11:59:37 GMT
They should have done season 8 - Night King plot season 9 - Mad Queen plot
they done f***ed up Game of Thrones
|
|
|
Post by sparky5000 on May 15, 2019 12:06:37 GMT
Dany was not born to rule. Her brother was ahead of her in the line of succession. She could have stopped her brother's murder but didn't. Her ruthless side has been there from season 1. Even Jon Snow has executed people who have betrayed him. All of the characters have been ruthless to varying degrees. This is Game of Thrones! But that doesn’t mean that her sudden switch to crazy mad queen who’s just gonna torch hundreds of thousands of innocents for the heck of it makes any sense. The writers have said that it wasn’t a pre-conceived move and that Daenerys snapped when she saw the Red Keep, but in which case why didn’t she just fly straight there and take out Cersei. And if it really is as simple as “well she’s mad because she’s a Targaryen and that’s why she did it” then what really has been the point!
|
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on May 15, 2019 12:43:24 GMT
Dany was not born to rule. Her brother was ahead of her in the line of succession. She could have stopped her brother's murder but didn't. Her ruthless side has been there from season 1. Even Jon Snow has executed people who have betrayed him. All of the characters have been ruthless to varying degrees. This is Game of Thrones! But that doesn’t mean that her sudden switch to crazy mad queen who’s just gonna torch hundreds of thousands of innocents for the heck of it makes any sense. The writers have said that it wasn’t a pre-conceived move and that Daenerys snapped when she saw the Red Keep, but in which case why didn’t she just fly straight there and take out Cersei. And if it really is as simple as “well she’s mad because she’s a Targaryen and that’s why she did it” then what really has been the point! This is the problem with bumping off the Night King and walkers so quickly, and in the way they did. I would absolutely buy that the point of all the build-up was to handle the existential threat to humanity and the unfortunate side-effect is that Westeros has to deal with the the fall-out of Mad Queen Daenerys afterwards, deal-with-the-devil style. But for that the walkers needed to pose a much bigger threat than they ultimately did and Dany/Jon and the dragons needed to be much more instrumental in defeating them. I'm aware people will tell me that it's all about subverting the expectations of the traditional fantasy genre. But you can only subvert so many expectations before you end up with a thoroughly unsatisfying experience - those expectations are there for a reason.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on May 15, 2019 14:01:01 GMT
Also, it's not that Daenerys devolving into a Mad Queen couldn't have worked as a plot, it's that the execution of it was totally inept.
It would actually be way more believable based on her experiences and previous actions if Arya rather than Daenerys snapped and killed lots of innocent people.
And Daenerys's father, the Mad King, only wanted to burn down the capital when he was under seige and about to lose everything. Now that's crazy but you can see how those extreme circumstances could push a vulnerable mind over the edge. Daenerys burns down the capital HAVING WON. So what she did is several gradations crazier than the exemplar for madness in the story, having previously acted in her rational self-interest.
|
|
230 posts
|
Post by hal9000 on May 15, 2019 15:01:09 GMT
Only executing the men of the Nightswatch wasn't ruthless, it was the punishment for treasonous murder plot in their leader. When Dany watched Viserys burn, she did it with the eyes of a zealot when he showed he wasn't a dragon. Her belief in her ability to withstand fire is not unlike Melisandre's and Stannis' fundamentalist fervour. She implied in 801 to Jon that if Sansa wasn't more respectful, she'd be punished! This is the Sansa who bent the knee and opened Winterfell to Dany's troops - Dany just didn't like her bitchy attitude. Dany wants more than bending the knee, she wants to be worshipped. Unlike the brown populations she conquered who were bamboozled in by her magic to worship her like a goddess, grateful colonials or terrified enough by her dragons to at least pretend to respect her, to the people of Westeros she's potentially another wacko Targaryen who nukes at will. Dany is discovering that she relied on love and admiration more than she expected. Since Season 1 she's had multiple men in love with her doing her bidding and would be happy to die for her and two robot-like armies who do whatever she wants. Even now Jon will still do her bidding, but she's realising he no longer loves her as he did. So much of these past 2 seasons would have been better if the events took place over the standard 10 episodes and if GRRM had contributed to the dialogue. The show has been worse off for the lack of those quite conversations between But I'm not hating it as much as most people because I've not been as interested since half the cast left King's Landing in season 4.
|
|
2,340 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on May 15, 2019 19:59:53 GMT
how they dealt with Daenerys There are now several very well argued backlash-to-the-backlash pieces online defending the episode - I've just gone back and watched the clip of Dany's vision from series 2 and there it is, the throne room in ruins and full of not snow but ash. Be funny if after eight series and all that fire she has melted the iron throne
|
|
2,340 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on May 15, 2019 20:01:18 GMT
They should have done season 8 - Night King plot season 9 - Mad Queen plot they done f***ed up Game of Thrones or episodes 1-5 and 6-10, feel cheated
|
|
2,340 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on May 15, 2019 20:09:28 GMT
They should have done season 8 - Night King plot season 9 - Mad Queen plot they done f***ed up Game of Thrones or episodes 1-5 and 6-10, feel cheated Derek Smalls predicted the ending of GoT all those years ago
|
|
528 posts
|
Post by vabbian on May 15, 2019 20:15:30 GMT
Yes, cheated indeed.
I saw an interview, the writers said they intended to do a shorter series to focus on quality, rather than quantity.
exsqueeze me but where the f*** is the quality
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on May 15, 2019 21:21:37 GMT
Well that was dissatisfying. Now to go back and read what you all think.
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on May 15, 2019 21:40:28 GMT
I got bored of all the burning, you knew after a few flared nostrils that was where we were heading and then pretty much did burning and rubble for rest of episode. I did think the fear thing is also for the rest of the kingdoms, burn Kingslanding and no one really is going to argue with you unless you can take out Drogon. And that losing her two longest standing side kicks had rather a huge impact. Disappointed by endings of characters, no one got eaten feet first by a dragon, sigh. Kept telling Jamie to use that metal hand of his as a weapon, surely it would have worked as a club? So last episode Jon offs her? I did wonder if he could sort of over rule her dragon control but doesn't seem likely.
|
|
2,340 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on May 16, 2019 16:45:47 GMT
I got bored of all the burning, you knew after a few flared nostrils that was where we were heading and then pretty much did burning and rubble for rest of episode. I did think the fear thing is also for the rest of the kingdoms, burn Kingslanding and no one really is going to argue with you unless you can take out Drogon. And that losing her two longest standing side kicks had rather a huge impact. Disappointed by endings of characters, no one got eaten feet first by a dragon, sigh. Kept telling Jamie to use that metal hand of his as a weapon, surely it would have worked as a club? So last episode Jon offs her? I did wonder if he could sort of over rule her dragon control but doesn't seem likely. If Bran can mind f@?# ravens, horses and a dire wolf what is to stop him controlling a dragon
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on May 16, 2019 16:50:20 GMT
Speculation today that Jaime survived the falling masonry...
Who knows what will happen?!
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on May 16, 2019 17:21:47 GMT
tbf, it was a bit more than masonry ... I've seen the 5 of this season in rather quick succession which probably isn't helpful. At times I though the Long Night was a remake of John Wayne's Alamo film from the 1960s but maybe a chaps-together Last Stand trope is just that. This latest one - the 5th; The Bells - felt like a comment piece on everything from Fallujah to Aleppo, or was it the concrete dust winter of Manhattan on 9/11
An awful lot to digest. Not sure how much further it's possible to take this 2D brutalism - at least without a virtual reality headset.
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on May 16, 2019 17:27:35 GMT
Speculation today that Jaime survived the falling masonry... Who knows what will happen?! Was he not also rather full of holes? Don't think you come back from that.
|
|