-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
[OPEN SPOILERS] GAME OF THRONES S8 |*FULL LEAK DISCUSSION*| IT IS KNOWN
- Thread starter Deleted member 2802
- Start date
- Status
Speaking of poetry, I wonder if similar to the prequels well have people in the future making top 10 lists as to why game of Thrones actually ended very well.
Top 10 reasons game of Thrones ending is actually good and doesn't deserve the hate
Number 1
Dragons are cool
Number 2
Incredible cast
Number 3
Jar jar being the night king.
Top 10 reasons game of Thrones ending is actually good and doesn't deserve the hate
Number 1
Dragons are cool
Number 2
Incredible cast
Number 3
Jar jar being the night king.
Martin has said that he (1) hasn't read the season's scripts, and (2) hasn't pre-watched the episodes.
All he's supposing from is meetings he held with D&D years ago. In the Rolling Stone interview, he says "there may also be changes and there'll be a lot added."
When Martin says this or that will be "the same," it's in the same sense as Shireen's death is "the same." She burns either way, but at different times, in different places, in different contexts, with different effects, with different thematics.
The major beats will be "the same." What are the "major beats"? If you asked me, I'd say the Long Night and Others are a pretty major beat, but the show diverged wholesale there, flat-out making up the Night King, his death via Arya, and his death's convenient solving of the problem.
The Night King stole one of Daenerys' dragons. Euron is primed to steal one of Daenerys' dragons via the dragonbinder horn. Are these "the same"? Pretty major beats! They're superficially similar if one squints, but not the same in any meaningful sense.
And as I've harped on about ad nauseam: King's Landing is not burning after the Long Night. It's burning before it. It doesn't make any structural sense otherwise. Aegon and his Golden Company (another superficial similarity) are primed to take the city from Cersei, and be its occupants when Daenerys lands — "the cloth dragon swaying amidst cheering crowds." They are not going to twiddle their thumbs for some books while Daenerys assists the North. (She probably won't even meet Jon Snow until after Aegon is dealt with. Aegon is an important thematic element for Daenerys — she will be immediately cautious of Jon Snow because she's already been the Slayer of Lies of one false male pretender.)
Daenerys is going to accidentally ignite Chekhov's Wildfire in her bid against Aegon's forces, and be positively horrified by the resulting holocaust (which kills Aegon, and tragically his likely wife Arianne as well... another casualty of Doran's ineffectual best laid plans). She'll battle Euron and be tempted by his dark Valyrian guise, but defeat him and go North as the Others descend from Euron's summons atop the Hightower with the Horn of Joramun. Daenerys might die — but it will be as a hero, not as a ~Mad Queen~. She'll look into the abyss before turning away, not dive headlong into it.
Is that a "major beat"? Very. Is that "the same"? Far from it, IMO. Just as stupid whitewashed Tyrion — a main character, right? — is radically different between the two mediums. The show isn't spoiling all that much in a meaningful sense. Bran won't sit the Iron Throne because there will be no Iron Throne, because it burns in the conflagration of King's Landing. He'll be a powerful figure, maybe a king (I'm a little skeptical), but not on the Iron Throne.
All he's supposing from is meetings he held with D&D years ago. In the Rolling Stone interview, he says "there may also be changes and there'll be a lot added."
When Martin says this or that will be "the same," it's in the same sense as Shireen's death is "the same." She burns either way, but at different times, in different places, in different contexts, with different effects, with different thematics.
The major beats will be "the same." What are the "major beats"? If you asked me, I'd say the Long Night and Others are a pretty major beat, but the show diverged wholesale there, flat-out making up the Night King, his death via Arya, and his death's convenient solving of the problem.
The Night King stole one of Daenerys' dragons. Euron is primed to steal one of Daenerys' dragons via the dragonbinder horn. Are these "the same"? Pretty major beats! They're superficially similar if one squints, but not the same in any meaningful sense.
And as I've harped on about ad nauseam: King's Landing is not burning after the Long Night. It's burning before it. It doesn't make any structural sense otherwise. Aegon and his Golden Company (another superficial similarity) are primed to take the city from Cersei, and be its occupants when Daenerys lands — "the cloth dragon swaying amidst cheering crowds." They are not going to twiddle their thumbs for some books while Daenerys assists the North. (She probably won't even meet Jon Snow until after Aegon is dealt with. Aegon is an important thematic element for Daenerys — she will be immediately cautious of Jon Snow because she's already been the Slayer of Lies of one false male pretender.)
Daenerys is going to accidentally ignite Chekhov's Wildfire in her bid against Aegon's forces, and be positively horrified by the resulting holocaust (which kills Aegon, and tragically his likely wife Arianne as well... another casualty of Doran's ineffectual best laid plans). She'll battle Euron and be tempted by his dark Valyrian guise, but defeat him and go North as the Others descend from Euron's summons atop the Hightower with the Horn of Joramun. Daenerys might die — but it will be as a hero, not as a ~Mad Queen~. She'll look into the abyss before turning away, not dive headlong into it.
Is that a "major beat"? Very. Is that "the same"? Far from it, IMO. Just as stupid whitewashed Tyrion — a main character, right? — is radically different between the two mediums. The show isn't spoiling all that much in a meaningful sense. Bran won't sit the Iron Throne because there will be no Iron Throne, because it burns in the conflagration of King's Landing. He'll be a powerful figure, maybe a king (I'm a little skeptical), but not on the Iron Throne.
But Viserys was a crazy prick to begin with with. He sold his sister and told her he'd let every person in and their horse in Khal Drogo's Khalasar fuck her if it resulted in him becoming king. He was known to go into fits of rage that he would call 'waking the dragon' then torment his sister with beatings and sexual abuse. He was unhinged from day one.
We're probably going to see Bran on the Iron Throne in the show.
Remember that leak with a picture
https://www.esquire.com/uk/latest-n...e-us-more-game-of-thrones-season-eight-clues/
They painted the Red Keep a different color. It's white now.
He wasn't always unhinged. He broke.
He was a fool about that, and so much else, Dany thought. If he had been wiser and more patient, it would be him sailing west to take the throne that was his by rights. Viserys had been stupid and vicious, she had come to realize, yet sometimes she missed him all the same. Not the cruel weak man he had become by the end, but the brother who had sometimes let her creep into his bed, the boy who told her tales of the Seven Kingdoms, and talked of how much better their lives would be once he claimed his crown.
.....
Yet even crowned, I am a beggar still, Dany thought. I have become the most splendid beggar in the world, but a beggar all the same. She hated it, as her brother must have. All those years of running from city to city one step ahead of the Usurper's knives, pleading for help from archons and princes and magisters, buying our food with flattery. He must have known how they mocked him. Small wonder he turned so angry and bitter. In the end it had driven him mad. It will do the same to me if I let it. Part of her would have liked nothing more than to lead her people back to Vaes Tolorro, and make the dead city bloom. No, that is defeat. I have something Viserys never had. I have the dragons. The dragons are all the difference.
My sentence wasn't clear. I was talking about the books. (I know you disagree.)
I agree (for the books). King Bran will probably have a weirwood throne in the books.
To be fair, Viserys was robbed, ridiculed, and treated like a vagabond when he was just a child. He was the "beggar king" that had to sell his mothers crown, which broke him. Not really fair to say he was unhinged from day one.
The King in the North, the King of Westeros and the King In the North about to watch an execution and train with arrows.
(TFW you realize that Ned Stark raised 3 different kings)
The King in the North, the King of Westeros and the King In the North about to watch an execution and train with arrows.
(TFW you realize that Ned Stark raised 3 different kings)
Starks OP, pls nerf
But seeing his sister loved by the Dothraki didn't make him go mad. He was already there.
Selling the crown, being a beggar and running for his life on a daily basis would have an impact, but would that turn him into the animal he was in Game of Thrones? A man who would beat and abuse his own sister. A man who wouldn't care if she was raped as long as he got his crown? Danny went through the same, plus had to put up with his abuse and bullying, but she didn't end up like he did. Well not yet in the books anyway.........
This makes me really sad especially after they have introduced the whole time travel aspect of Bran with Hodor. :(
by the way, was viserion a wight dragon or a white walker dragon (white flyer?). it was dead so not sure can you turn something that is already dead into a white walker, but the night king touched it to rez it instead of using telepathy or whatever, and it seemed more intelligent than the average wight, even when the night king wasn't riding it.
I think there's a spectrum of wightness, with crap boney skeletons at the mindless end, and mostly intact corpses at the other, high-functioning end. Like, skeletons wouldn't have been able to play Metal Gear with Arya at Winterfell, because they don't have ears. Those were smartwights. Viserion was just a top-of-the-line wight with all his faculties.
Oh but the skeletons can see even though they don't have eyes, so this is actually bullshit and I have no idea what I'm talking about. Maybe all the wights are connected to nightking.net, and he gives more bandwidth to them when they have complex tasks to perform, like throwing themselves into a fire ditch.
And this is why the writing is so shit.
Executing people who are bad or traitors is VASTLY different then executing civilians after a city has surrendered.
That's a massive jump in logic and show Dany has not come even close to being a character capable of that.
It is absolutely one of the dumbest things that people think Danys prior actions and words somehow justify her innate propensity for civilian genocide in this episode.
Saying the words "Fire and Blood" does not mean you kill innocent civilians en masse. Killing traitors and slavers does not mean that you will kill innocent civilians en masse. Being an aggressive person in war does not mean you kill innocent civilians em masse.
The fact that folks have to ignorance nuance, specificity and characterization to justify awful writing speaks volumes about the state of the final season.
Argue all you want about the differences between the people who occupy Kings Landing and slaves, but it's really fucking unbelievable that she has the audacity to think it important enough to ONLY save slaves after she dies when she just burned an entire city's population of innocents to the ground. That is unbelievably stupid.
She started freeing slaves after she said this and not burning/destorying cities.
But one sentence speaks more than seasons of actions. IT WAS ALL WRITTEN U JUST DIDNT FOLLOW :^)
^that IG post is taken out of context
We knew what she meant
2 days later i still can't get over the fact that the writers thought dany burning innocents for 30 mins straight made any lick of fucking sense lmao
Man they ruined one of the better shows of my time.
What a shame. Not a single arc has ended well except for cleganes and maybe mel.
We knew what she meant
2 days later i still can't get over the fact that the writers thought dany burning innocents for 30 mins straight made any lick of fucking sense lmao
Man they ruined one of the better shows of my time.
What a shame. Not a single arc has ended well except for cleganes and maybe mel.
To build an army to burn and destroy cities of her enemies 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️
Again, what is nuance and context. She had already burnt King's Landing considerably when the bells rung. That's consistent with what she has said. What she did afterwards is a whole another thing.
How, in a show about war and politics, are people taking generalized statements of intent of acts characters intend to carry out in war, and apply those statements to moments that happen after a city and a populace surrenders? Those are two different scenarios and attempting to equate the two is foolish.
And that was the point of my post. The writing is so shit that even the discussion has lost all nuance and context when attempting to justify Danys character assassination.
Let me simplify and reiterate: you can both burn a city to the ground and not the commit mass slaughter of a surrendered civilian population in war. Why people think the two are exclusive is beyond me.
Yeah I'm on the boat that all the idiots saying "how can you not see this coming !@&$!" are just hopping on the wagon trying to seem smart to boost self esteem.
It was not earned this season, and even all their efforts, just felt uncomfortably out of place and awkward for more than half the episode.
Not to mention the worst Pavlov response I've ever seen on screen.
God someone gif it it's JUST SO BAD lmao
It was not earned this season, and even all their efforts, just felt uncomfortably out of place and awkward for more than half the episode.
Not to mention the worst Pavlov response I've ever seen on screen.
God someone gif it it's JUST SO BAD lmao
There is something you miss. Even though the white flag has been raised, the civilians will not accept dany as her queen, what she needs to do is to incite fear by burning them down
That really makes sense if you think about it because if i were dany, i might do the same
Yeah they might not be afraid enough after she burns the scorpions down, have a dragon look down on them, and she burns the red keep (which she could have done)
Dead people don't fear you. They just dead.
And Robert Arryn will be the king on the IT that Arya marries as he will have been king Tyrion's heir and a defeated burn them all Tyrion will be murdered by Sansa giving him poison wine before Jon gets to the city.
But there are survivors. But it doesnt matter at the end, when you are engulfed in fury, you wont think twice about the impact you are about to create
This is one of those things that is so lightly implied that it can't be said to have happened at all.
By the evidence, the people of King's Landing are not being held under the thumb of a tyrant. There are rich, poor, bad, and good. They are free enough to throw shit at their new king when it displeases them, throw shit at the queen, and cheer the arrival of Euron in the streets.
The life they know is so familiar to them that they don't want it suddenly uprooted by an invader. That doesn't mean they hate or love Daenerys, any more than they hate or love Cersei. It's just what they're used to.
The show might have explored this idea, or at least changed the context under which Cersei rules.
No, it absolutely does not.
Cersei has been ruling through fear for the past few seasons. Dany can do the same. She doesn't need to kill everyone to rule through fear.
She has a damn dragon. She can rule through fear better than Cersei ever could without killing everyone.
I reckon Dany's turn could have been done way better with only a small-ish change. Instead of killing Rhaegal in episode 4 with the stupid ambush, have Rhaegal participate in the battle and then have him die after the surrender.
Perhaps Rhaegal gets injured by a Scorpion during the battle but survives the hit for some classic "oh shit, the dragon might die" stuff. Then when the bells ring, Dany is ready to stand down. But suddenly Euron hits Rhaegal with the scorpion and kills him, Dany flies into a rage and just burns the fucking city to the ground.
I'd buy that way more than what we got.
Perhaps Rhaegal gets injured by a Scorpion during the battle but survives the hit for some classic "oh shit, the dragon might die" stuff. Then when the bells ring, Dany is ready to stand down. But suddenly Euron hits Rhaegal with the scorpion and kills him, Dany flies into a rage and just burns the fucking city to the ground.
I'd buy that way more than what we got.
You are right. But you forgot they were once ruled by a targaryen so there is reason for the civilians to hate targaryen
I think you people should stop looking for a way to rebuttal my arguments, you are not going to win. I really understand what dany had been feeling and it was so relatable. Last night was one of the greatest episodes GoT once had, it had some flaws but dany was not one of them
He became really annoying for me and was a bed for the undead for far too long
What makes you think so really?
Because a bunch of northerners bows and laughs with a northerner leader, therefore no one in the seven kingdoms will everlove her? Because she has track record of being ruthless atrocious leader? Yet Cersei somehow managed just fine after blowing up their Vatican so I doubt the smallfolks care all that much.
Maybe it is based on her perspective. She wants love, but she doesnt get any. It is her perspective, whether it is true or not it is another story. Remember what she experienced in essos (myssha), she didnt get any in the north.
About cersei, cersei just doesnt care
- Status