[TV/Books] Game of Thrones ***SPOILER Discussion***

[molliewoof]

Didnt he said a few years ago, that the series got so complex that it is really hard for him to conclude everything?
I think the main problem is that the story is way too entangled to be easily written

Agree with this, it felt like he enjoyed building the world and just kept doing it.

I didn't particularly enjoy the books past two or three because of that, I didn't need 400 pages of Brienne walking through a field looking at things that give an extra tiny bit of info on something that I don't remember happening 2 books earlier.

Need to get Erikson in to finish it for him

[cubby]

Most viewed because of the build-up from the previous seasons. A lot of people were heavily invested in the story, despite it getting worse with each new season. If GoT started out with the quality of S7-S8, it never would have become this big of a cultural phenomenon.

Lots of people watching something doesn't mean it's objectively good, lmao. What a fucking terrible metric.
A fucking lot of people watched The Room, does that mean it's an objectively good movie?

You only say it's a bad metric because it doesn't help your "case" against the idea that a lot of people enjoyed the last two seasons. Yes, re The Room, it does.

Source on it being the "most enjoyed" season? Because from what I've seen all over the internet, and irl too, the final season was absolute dogshit that killed the franchise.

You mean the GoT of franchise that has two other shows being created right now? Show me a metric that says people liked it more before the last two seasons and we can talk, otherwise you are just proving me more right. Show us "what you've seen all over the internet" and we can talk.

Friday by Rebecka Black was watched by a shitload of people, does that mean it's an objectively good song?

Or hell, let's even go political. A lot of people voted for Trump, does that make him an objectively good president?

Why do you keep using the phrase objectively good? You're using that word wrong. I used the word "objective" for evidence, i.e. metrics, to demonstrate that the show was good and well liked, because of the increased number of people who watched it throughout season 7, and then the even more increased people who watched in Season 8.
We're not talking objectively good, we're talking good, as in people continued to enjoy it. Moreover, we're talking about a series, not a movie, and the metrics show viewership rose throughout both of the last two seasons, meaning as it went on, it became more popular - demonstrably proving you wrong.

Now, if you can point to metrics showing that people watched it even though they hated it, and kept doing so, we can talk.

[Berndorf]

Didnt he said a few years ago, that the series got so complex that it is really hard for him to conclude everything?
I think the main problem is that the story is way too entangled to be easily written

I think that falls under writer's block. As in he just can't get himself to continue writing despite maybe wanting to finish it. So he probably took a year off thinking it would do him some good but still can't get it done.

- - - Updated - - -

You only say it's a bad metric because it doesn't help your "case" against the idea that a lot of people enjoyed the last two seasons. Yes, re The Room, it does.


You mean the GoT of franchise that has two other shows being created right now? Show me a metric that says people liked it more before the last two seasons and we can talk, otherwise you are just proving me more right. Show us "what you've seen all over the internet" and we can talk.


Why do you keep using the phrase objectively good? You're using that word wrong. I used the word "objective" for evidence, i.e. metrics, to demonstrate that the show was good and well liked, because of the increased number of people who watched it throughout season 7, and then the even more increased people who watched in Season 8.
We're not talking objectively good, we're talking good, as in people continued to enjoy it. Moreover, we're talking about a series, not a movie, and the metrics show viewership rose throughout both of the last two seasons, meaning as it went on, it became more popular - demonstrably proving you wrong.

Now, if you can point to metrics showing that people watched it even though they hated it, and kept doing so, we can talk.

I think a large majority of the fans had things that rubbed them the wrong way about the final two seasons but at that point there was so much investment and attachment to the characters and the possible outcomes that had been building up for years that people weren't just going to turn it off at that point. With a lot of the criticism coming on the final two episodes. So I think it's fair to say that the overall quality of the writing went down a lot towards the end(though some episodes were definitely well received such as battle of the bastards) but that people got caught up in the pop culture phenomenon which it had become by then so no one was going to say 'that scene was terribly written, I'm not watching this anymore'. People had to see where it was all leading to.

[Chelly]

You only say it's a bad metric because it doesn't help your "case" against the idea that a lot of people enjoyed the last two seasons. Yes, re The Room, it does.

Nah, I'm saying it's bad because it's a bad metric. Lots of people consuming said product =/= good product.

You mean the GoT of franchise that has two other shows being created right now? Show me a metric that says people liked it more before the last two seasons and we can talk, otherwise you are just proving me more right. Show us "what you've seen all over the internet" and we can talk.

IMDB scores


IMDB + RT


Season 7's score was riding on it leading up to the finish line, a massive cliffhanger towards the finale, and the visuals. That season has just as many issues as season 8 when it comes to the story, character decisions, and time-space (people zooming across Westeros in a few days at most, whereas S1-S4 showed us it took weeks for people to travel).

Why do you keep using the phrase objectively good? You're using that word wrong. I used the word "objective" for evidence, i.e. metrics, to demonstrate that the show was good and well liked, because of the increased number of people who watched it throughout season 7, and then the even more increased people who watched in Season 8.
We're not talking objectively good, we're talking good, as in people continued to enjoy it. Moreover, we're talking about a series, not a movie, and the metrics show viewership rose throughout both of the last two seasons, meaning as it went on, it became more popular - demonstrably proving you wrong.

Now, if you can point to metrics showing that people watched it even though they hated it, and kept doing so, we can talk.

Guess you haven't paid any attention to the thousands of posts here, on Youtube, reddit, Facebook, Twitter, etc. People were invested in the show and wanted to finish it, no matter how bad it became. Newcomers started to watch the show because of all the buzz.

Popularity =/= quality. Not realizing this is just sad coping.

[cubby]

Couple things:
1) I did not read the books. Think I got 100~ pages into book 1, set it down, didn't pick it up again. Still want to, but I remember hearing my best friend complain about how boring book 4 or 5 was with Brienne's story.
2) I actually liked Arya killing the NK - however... there was a lot of stupidity and shit that just made no sense.
Why are the Dothraki in the last couple episodes? We saw them all DIE in their final charge against death. Let them have their honor. Same goes for most of the Unsullied.
I know some people think this was actually how Daenarys should be, but really, no. Her shtick was always that she didn't kill innocents. She didn't want to be Queen of the Ashes. She didn't want to rule through fear and rage and fire. She didn't want to be like her father was before her.
Nah, the series ended in a really stupid way. Cersei and Jamie died in a very lackluster, who cares way, also.

Stupid.

Honestly? I think you're just too unwilling to accept reality. GoT's last two seasons, especially season 8, did not live up to the earlier seasons. The quality went South and it went South hard. I get it, believe me. If you don't want to accept reality, fine, it's just a TV show, but don't be surprised when people disagree or think you're stupid. Anyone with any understanding of film can see the blatant lack of respect for the earlier seasons that was displayed in the final seasons. The lack of respect for the show's integrity. For the show's fanbase. For the people that put their all into the show. Look at how the actors and actresses even reacted when they were reading the script! They knew the ending was horseshit! Look at how Varys' actor reacted, he was offended. Characters stopped acting like themselves. That's not right. That's bad storytelling.

I got about that far into the first book as well - and I had already gone five books into the Wheel of Time series, and typically enjoy long books (Stephen King's "It" was my first 1k page book).

Let's take a step back here - there are certainly inconsistencies in the final two series, no doubt, and I want to be sure to recognize that @Witchblade77 brought up some very good points - this answer here is for you, too.

In the end, it essentially comes down to whether you "bought" the ending or not. I did; Dany tipping over, Jamie returning to his true love, Bran becoming king (can we discuss the hint of AI there sometime?), etc. You two, and many others here, did not - as well as other aspects of the last two seasons. And I can fully agree that the last two were rushed - perhaps that's how D&D would have run the entire series had they not had the books to work from for the first 6.

And there was certainly a different flavor in the last two seasons, but there was always going to be, because GRRM hadn't finished it, right? Someone mentioned the dialogue being awful in the last season compared to the first few, and I'm keeping that in mind in my rewatch (which, btw, is fucking fantastic - holy fuck did they cast so many people so well).

So let's get to the meat of the issue.

Out of the few dozen people I've spoken to, only 2 of them had a positive feeling for Season 8 after it was all said and done - and they were still a little cringy acting about it. Everyone else feels scorned.

While I respect your point of view, you do understand how there is no way to argue against this, right? And on the flip side, I spoke with several people who thoroughly enjoyed the series and loved the ending, so we end up at a standstill.

What we would need is a kind of "did I enjoy it as much through the last two seasons and like the ending" poll, or metric, or something to really draw a conclusion. Sure there was a lot of hype on the internet, but that's what the internet is for, hype. Some people were unhappy with the ending, obviously, and it showed in articles and forums (heh) and such. But just because people are complaining about something doesn't mean those complaints are ruling (or majority) opinion about that something.

One solid metric we can use is ongoing viewership of a series. And in this case, throughout Seasons 7 & 8, almost every episode has more viewers than the previous, which means more people tuned in to watch that before. Which means either people kept watching something they continued to dislike and scorn, or something else caused them to keep watching, and bring in others - perhaps it was because they enjoyed it.

Now, I like to pride myself on intellectual honesty, so, for arguments sake, the first point I would make against myself above, is that while viewership may have increased, it doesn't necessarily mean that those increased viewers liked what they were seeing (perhaps they were just hoping it would get better), nor does it mean those viewers like the last two seasons more than the first 6 - which is both your points, if I understand it correctly.

And in the end, unless we literally poll all the viewers and ask them pointedly those questions, we'll never know. So we're left with where we started, disagreeing about the ending and the quality of the characters development and overall writing.

So, can we do this - agree to disagree, and discuss/enjoy the parts we did like collectively?


(if so, upcoming questions include: 1. timeline, 2. holy shit was Catelyn Stark start well cast - i'm sad we didn't get to see her reborn as undead, 3. tyrion and cersei's relationship)

- - - Updated - - -

Nah, I'm saying it's bad because it's a bad metric. Lots of people consuming said product =/= good product.



IMDB scores


IMDB + RT

Those are good metrics - can you link me where you found those? I can't find them on IMDB arranged the way you have them.

Season 7's score was riding on it leading up to the finish line, a massive cliffhanger towards the finale, and the visuals. That season has just as many issues as season 8 when it comes to the story, character decisions, and time-space (people zooming across Westeros in a few days at most, whereas S1-S4 showed us it took weeks for people to travel).

You can't have it both ways. If we're going to use your metrics, then we use them, not "interpreted" through your eyes.

However, the travel issue is a major issue, agreed - especially the Gandry running back to Castle Black and getting Dany back to that trapped group with her dragons.

Guess you haven't paid any attention to the thousands of posts here, on Youtube, reddit, Facebook, Twitter, etc. People were invested in the show and wanted to finish it, no matter how bad it became. Newcomers started to watch the show because of all the buzz.

You're right, I haven't - because those are literally the worst source of information, especially about what we're discussing. Complainers are ALWAYS going to be louder than the "likers", that's a known sociological phenomenon.

Popularity =/= quality. Not realizing this is just sad coping.

No need to be like that, is there? I'm being nice here, you can to, no?

[Tyris Flare]

I don't have a single friend who has watched this since the end. Even people who normally rewatch stuff a lot couldn't get through it after knowing how hilariously bad the last few seasons would be. This show completely dominated social media when it was out, and then it completely vanished into the ether as if it never existed.

This is also the reason he won't bother finishing the books btw. The show created this enormous vacuum of expectation that is impossible to fill. And it's not like he needs the money.

[cubby]

I don't have a single friend who has watched this since the end. Even people who normally rewatch stuff a lot couldn't get through it after knowing how hilariously bad the last few seasons would be. This show completely dominated social media when it was out, and then it completely vanished into the ether as if it never existed.

This is also the reason he won't bother finishing the books btw. The show created this enormous vacuum of expectation that is impossible to fill. And it's not like he needs the money.

Except that we see stories about it almost every day, and there are at least two spin-offs in development. And plenty of people have rewatched the series after the ending was released. If you don't like something, that's fine, but don't just make things up.

GRRM isn't finishing the books because he has better things to do right now. And yeah, he doesn't need the money.

[Tyris Flare]

Except that we see stories about it almost every day, and there are at least two spin-offs in development. And plenty of people have rewatched the series after the ending was released. If you don't like something, that's fine, but don't just make things up.

GRRM isn't finishing the books because he has better things to do right now. And yeah, he doesn't need the money.

"Make things up."

Not making anything up, I don't have any friends and family who have rewatched it. Anecdotal is not the same as making it up.

The social media presence has also cratered, denying that seems crazy.

[cubby]

"Make things up."

Not making anything up, I don't have any friends and family who have rewatched it. Anecdotal is not the same as making it up.

The social media presence has also cratered, denying that seems crazy.

You mean the social media presence crated after the series came to an end? Shocking development.

The part you were making up was all the "disappeared from the internet" and "completely vanished from the ether as if it never existed.

- - - Updated - - -

I’ve spoken to quite a few people (family and friends) that enjoyed the series, and they all agree that they just can’t rewatch it after the final season. Not saying people don't, but I think that season/ending ruined it for a lot of people.

I can’t even bring myself to rewatch it.

Maybe, and maybe not. The one thing we know for sure is that we'll never know, not a scale that matters.

Interestingly, I didn't post series end until just last week. Nothing to do with the ending, just other stuff to watch and no need to immediately rewatch the entire thing immediately after it ends.

- - - Updated - - -

Arya was set up as an assassin in 3.6 - the Red Priestess foretold Arya's slaughter of many people. Not that that alone sets up her NK kill. But it's nice to see her path as an assassin laid out so early.

- - - Updated - - -

Also in 3.6, Varys confirming his top priority is the realm.

[Adamas102]

Arya was set up as an assassin in 3.6 - the Red Priestess foretold Arya's slaughter of many people. Not that that alone sets up her NK kill. But it's nice to see her path as an assassin laid out so early.

- - - Updated - - -

Also in 3.6, Varys confirming his top priority is the realm.

Everyone pretty much knew Arya was going to at least go train with the Faceless Men when Jaqen gave her the coin and instructions in season 2. That isn't why people have an issue with her killing the Night King. It's also kinda silly to mention anything that Melisandre says since she ended up being a pretty pointless character by the end (like all the other red priestesses that popped up throughout the series). Her whole thing was about finding the "Prince that was Promised" and being a conduit for the Lord of Light, and it all amounted to nothing. Also, we already know that D&D hadn't planned for Arya to kill the NK at that point in time, so going back to that line for any sort of season 8 support doesn't work. It’s also a meeting that never happens in the books.

Anyway, being an assassin and killing the Night King are two completely separate narrative points. Assassins in Westeros are a dime a dozen, and while the Faceless Men are notorious in their own right, it kinda has to do with that whole changing faces thing (something that didn't come into play at all when Arya ran up to and stabbed the Night King). If all it took was someone to stab him, then anyone with a lot of money could have hired a dozen Faceless Men to get the job done.

Therein is also one of the major issues with that scene. There is no setup for what Arya does. When she runs out there to stab the NK, she has no idea what effect it will have. According to D&D he needed to be stabbed in the dragonglass shard in the center of his chest, but no one knew that. If he hadn't turned around and Arya had stabbed him in the back or in the head like she was aiming to do, apparently nothing would have happened. She didn't succeed because of any strategy or training, she just got lucky. Lucky that he turned around, lucky that he caught her, lucky that he held her at the perfect height and distance, and lucky that he just stood there doing nothing. All the setup about these supernatural villains and the supernatural forces that opposed them in the past, all the setup trying to learn about them and prepare, all the setup about prophesy and a hero reborn, all the setup with Jon's heritage and resurrection, and in the end it was all concluded by some other character showing up and getting lucky. THAT is farcical storytelling at its finest.

And again, it doesn't matter how many lines there were about Varys wanting what was good for "the realm". He'd been on councils for 3 other monarchs before Daenerys (all of them terrible people), but he was always a long-game guy. He was established as a character that would never stick his neck out when making his schemes. It's not that his motivations changed, it's that him openly discussing treason (like he did in multiple scenes) was totally out of character. He'd dealt with the Mad King, Robert, and Joffrey, but it wasn't until Dany came along that he thought "oh shit, better put the treason train into overdrive". She hadn't even done anything to suggest she would be a bad ruler, and even he himself had a line about not knowing "how her coin will land". Yet he still decided to immediately trying assassinating her, was super sloppy with his "secret" meetings, and got himself killed as a result. That's total bullshit for how the character was established over the whole first part of the show.

[cubby]

Everyone pretty much knew Arya was going to at least go train with the Faceless Men when Jaqen gave her the coin and instructions in season 2. That isn't why people have an issue with her killing the Night King. It's also kinda silly to mention anything that Melisandre says since she ended up being a pretty pointless character by the end (like all the other red priestesses that popped up throughout the series). Her whole thing was about finding the "Prince that was Promised" and being a conduit for the Lord of Light, and it all amounted to nothing. Also, we already know that D&D hadn't planned for Arya to kill the NK at that point in time, so going back to that line for any sort of season 8 support doesn't work. It’s also a meeting that never happens in the books.

Anyway, being an assassin and killing the Night King are two completely separate narrative points. Assassins in Westeros are a dime a dozen, and while the Faceless Men are notorious in their own right, it kinda has to do with that whole changing faces thing (something that didn't come into play at all when Arya ran up to and stabbed the Night King). If all it took was someone to stab him, then anyone with a lot of money could have hired a dozen Faceless Men to get the job done.

But the build up to her being an assassin, and all the skills she gained, gave her the ability to get to the NK in that scene. That's been my point the entire time - people keep saying she couldn't have even gotten to him, to even be able to leap at him, and she could have, because of the great build up of all her skills.

Therein is also one of the major issues with that scene. There is no setup for what Arya does. When she runs out there to stab the NK, she has no idea what effect it will have. According to D&D he needed to be stabbed in the dragonglass shard in the center of his chest, but no one knew that. If he hadn't turned around and Arya had stabbed him in the back or in the head like she was aiming to do, apparently nothing would have happened. She didn't succeed because of any strategy or training, she just got lucky. Lucky that he turned around, lucky that he caught her, lucky that he held her at the perfect height and distance, and lucky that he just stood there doing nothing. All the setup about these supernatural villains and the supernatural forces that opposed them in the past, all the setup trying to learn about them and prepare, all the setup about prophesy and a hero reborn, all the setup with Jon's heritage and resurrection, and in the end it was all concluded by some other character showing up and getting lucky. THAT is farcical storytelling at its finest.

Plenty of events that saved characters happened because of luck. Sam killing the first WW when he's coming back from the north with that girl and baby (sorry, name escapes me). No one knew what dragon glass would do at that point. Jon killing the WW with Valerian Steel, another lucky moment. Luck is ok in a series, and is apparently ok in several instances, so long as you or others like it.

And you're really harping on that "hold" that the NK does when she leaps and he catches her. The hold was for dramatic purposes, and it was an amazing scene - objectively - when she comes out of no where (after her "not today" line), looks like she was going to make it, then gets caught, and then uses her "move" to get the NK and save the day. It was very well done.

Also, where are you getting that the NK had to be stabbed in the chest or wherever. I never saw that in the series - can you tell me where it showed?

No, it's not farcical storytelling. Because that part of it was never developed in the series. In the series the hero reborn is after the throne, not the undead and the NK, so ignoring that aspect from the books actually works in this case.

And again, it doesn't matter how many lines there were about Varys wanting what was good for "the realm". He'd been on councils for 3 other monarchs before Daenerys (all of them terrible people), but he was always a long-game guy. He was established as a character that would never stick his neck out when making his schemes. It's not that his motivations changed, it's that him openly discussing treason (like he did in multiple scenes) was totally out of character. He'd dealt with the Mad King, Robert, and Joffrey, but it wasn't until Dany came along that he thought "oh shit, better put the treason train into overdrive". She hadn't even done anything to suggest she would be a bad ruler, and even he himself had a line about not knowing "how her coin will land". Yet he still decided to immediately trying assassinating her, was super sloppy with his "secret" meetings, and got himself killed as a result. That's total bullshit for how the character was established over the whole first part of the show.

It absolutely does matter how many lines there were - it literally establishes the character trait you're denying exists. His consistency throughout the entire series with the realm being his priority is key when it comes to his downfall. In the end, Varys saw her for what Dany would become, and did his best to change it. He couldn't let it play out, didn't have time for his long-game schemes.

I'm sorry you don't agree or find fault, but it's very easy to show the opposing point to your criticism of the character development in the last few seasons. You may disagree with my points above, and previously, but they are at least decent points, countering your view of the bad writing and plot development in the end. I think the final, truly valid criticism that can be leveled against D&D is that they rushed the plot to finish it out, did it in their own style, because they lacked the rich narrative from the books that ran out in Season 6.

[Adamas102]

But the build up to her being an assassin, and all the skills she gained, gave her the ability to get to the NK in that scene. That's been my point the entire time - people keep saying she couldn't have even gotten to him, to even be able to leap at him, and she could have, because of the great build up of all her skills.

There was no build up! There was no talk about having to sneak up on the Night King. He could fucking see and touch people who spied on him in their dreams! There was no indication he even COULD be snuck up on. There was absolutely no indication that they needed a sneaky assassin, but less I-just-got-out-of-assassin-school-like-yesterday Arya Stark. The skills we saw her learn (using faces and fighting in the dark) did NOT HELP HER. There was no setup for her being able to run so fast and so quietly that she could avoid a gaggle of white walkers, especially given the scene IN THE VERY SAME EPISODE where she had to be slow and methodical to avoid much less dangerous wights. The writers have never explained how she got to the Night King, leaving it up to people who actually liked the scene to develop their own head canon, which I think is bullshit writing for such a pivotal scene.

Plenty of events that saved characters happened because of luck. Sam killing the first WW when he's coming back from the north with that girl and baby (sorry, name escapes me). No one knew what dragon glass would do at that point. Jon killing the WW with Valerian Steel, another lucky moment. Luck is ok in a series, and is apparently ok in several instances, so long as you or others like it.

You do understand that those events were moments of discovery that drove the plot along. Moments where characters learned something they didn't know that helped the story develop. There's a big difference between that and CONCLUDING a major plot point with pure luck. I'm kinda getting the impression that you don't really understand how narrative should be structured. If you're just in it for the spectacle then yeah, GoT delivered that in spades. However, this whole argument is around the shift in narrative development. Unlike GRRM, D&D are just not good writers for story and character development, and as such have to rely on setting up impressive looking set pieces and hoping people don't think too hard about why things are happening.

And you're really harping on that "hold" that the NK does when she leaps and he catches her. The hold was for dramatic purposes, and it was an amazing scene - objectively - when she comes out of no where (after her "not today" line), looks like she was going to make it, then gets caught, and then uses her "move" to get the NK and save the day. It was very well done.

Also, where are you getting that the NK had to be stabbed in the chest or wherever. I never saw that in the series - can you tell me where it showed?

No, it's not farcical storytelling. Because that part of it was never developed in the series. In the series the hero reborn is after the throne, not the undead and the NK, so ignoring that aspect from the books actually works in this case.

Benioff mentioned the stabbing specifics in one of the behind-the-scenes clips. I don't know where the clip is, but below is the quote I pulled from an article:

“We knew it had to be Valyrian steel to the exact spot [on the Night King’s body] where the Children of the Forest put the dragonglass blade to create the Night King.”

Which is absolutely bullshit to have to explain that your big bad was defeated based on information that neither the characters NOR THE AUDIENCE had, essentially amounting to pure dumb luck.

Sorry, but all that hero reborn stuff WAS developed in the early episodes. It was Melisandre's whole thing. She wasn't concerned with the throne, she was concerned with the white walkers and the night being dark and full of terrors and finding the champion that would defeat them. They took many things from the books in the earlier seasons which developed that, but then dropped it in later seasons when they decided they wanted to surprise the audience by switching to Arya as the savior.

It absolutely does matter how many lines there were - it literally establishes the character trait you're denying exists. His consistency throughout the entire series with the realm being his priority is key when it comes to his downfall. In the end, Varys saw her for what Dany would become, and did his best to change it. He couldn't let it play out, didn't have time for his long-game schemes.

Sorry, but you're not understanding. It's not about his motivation, it's how he goes about things. I didn't deny that he does things "for the realm". However, he definitely does NOT see Dany for what she would become because he LITERALLY SAYS "I don't know how her coin will land" which means "I don't know what kind of ruler she will be". Again, his consistency is undermining bad rulers over the long term, which goes out the window in a single season with Dany. What the hell do you mean "he didn't have time"? He had time when the Mad King was burning people and setting up wildfire caches, he had time when Robert was bankrupting the country, he had time when Joffrey was terrorizing everyone in King's Landing. Dany did NOTHING to make him think he had no time for his long-game schemes. Sorry, but you're objectively wrong about this, and it's not a matter of opinion.

[Mhyroth]

Girlfriend and I have been rewatching the first couple of Seasons. Some of the conversations and plot twists (even after all those years) still give me chills.
Then we think back to the last 3 seasons, look at each other and just laugh at the stupidity.

[cubby]

I don't know who said it, but I'm at 4.1, and Arya's kill count is over 10, including several men - who she killed personally.

- - - Updated - - -

(we're arguing a lot here, and outside of these disagreements, at the end of this post, I put a couple of questions for you that I would really like your insight on - I would also like to propose that it's possible we'll never come to an agreement - perhaps we could just leave this alone, agree to disagree? - I really would like your insight on a couple of story lines from the book/series)

There was no build up! There was no talk about having to sneak up on the Night King. He could fucking see and touch people who spied on him in their dreams! There was no indication he even COULD be snuck up on. There was absolutely no indication that they needed a sneaky assassin, but less I-just-got-out-of-assassin-school-like-yesterday Arya Stark. The skills we saw her learn (using faces and fighting in the dark) did NOT HELP HER. There was no setup for her being able to run so fast and so quietly that she could avoid a gaggle of white walkers, especially given the scene IN THE VERY SAME EPISODE where she had to be slow and methodical to avoid much less dangerous wights. The writers have never explained how she got to the Night King, leaving it up to people who actually liked the scene to develop their own head canon, which I think is bullshit writing for such a pivotal scene.

Yes, there was. I'm sorry you don't remember it, but the series built up her skills remarkably - and I'm seeing that again in the rewatch. The build up was for Arya's skills to sneak past the other dead to get at the NK. There was a shit ton of build up to her abilities, including sneaking silently and moving quickly. I'm sorry you can't see such an obvious thing in the entire series, but it's there, again and again. Over and over we see Arya's abilities in play and being built upon. Leading up to her skill set in getting to the NK, and then killing him.

You do understand that those events were moments of discovery that drove the plot along. Moments where characters learned something they didn't know that helped the story develop. There's a big difference between that and CONCLUDING a major plot point with pure luck. I'm kinda getting the impression that you don't really understand how narrative should be structured. If you're just in it for the spectacle then yeah, GoT delivered that in spades. However, this whole argument is around the shift in narrative development. Unlike GRRM, D&D are just not good writers for story and character development, and as such have to rely on setting up impressive looking set pieces and hoping people don't think too hard about why things are happening.

The narrative was built up over several seasons and D&D delivered the ending in their fashion. Narratives come to an end when a series ends. The character buildup was done, and each main character story line had to be brought to a close. Which they did very well. And, as you say, they did so with impressive set pieces. People can disagree about how those characters ended, but recall, we only have D&D to know what really happened. You have claimed, for instance, that Jaime dying with Cersei wasn't right, but it was to me and many others; and the only thing we know for sure is that D&D were the MOST informed on the characters endings (because GRRM told them how it ended). You can postulate all you want, but you will be guessing, because you don't know, because we don't have the books to say what really went down.


(I really want you to pay attention to this argument/point here - it resolves the issue with Arya killing the NK)

Benioff mentioned the stabbing specifics in one of the behind-the-scenes clips. I don't know where the clip is, but below is the quote I pulled from an article:

“We knew it had to be Valyrian steel to the exact spot [on the Night King’s body] where the Children of the Forest put the dragonglass blade to create the Night King.”

Which is absolutely bullshit to have to explain that your big bad was defeated based on information that neither the characters NOR THE AUDIENCE had, essentially amounting to pure dumb luck.

I'm not sure you read what you wrote very well - you're saying a method of killing the NK only existed in the show runners minds, and they mentioned it in an interview, once, but those facts never came out in the story line. That makes my point for me - not you. All we knew in the series, JUST from the series, was that dragon glass or Valerian steel killed white walkers, and killing a WW made every WW that was borne from them die as well. So killing the NK with dragon glass or Valerian steel was the only way to stop the army of the dead. It was never mentioned, and therefore never existed, that the NK had to be stabbed in a certain place. NEVER - in the series.
You've been fixated on where the NK was stabbed, and that has been irrelevant, because it was only that he was stabbed at all, not where, that mattered. Arya used a move she foreshadowed sparring with Brienne ("no one taught me") to kill the NK. It was pure coincidence that the placement of that stab coincides with the quote from above - because as you pointed out, no one knew about it, so in the series that kill requirement never existed.

Sorry, but all that hero reborn stuff WAS developed in the early episodes. It was Melisandre's whole thing. She wasn't concerned with the throne, she was concerned with the white walkers and the night being dark and full of terrors and finding the champion that would defeat them. They took many things from the books in the earlier seasons which developed that, but then dropped it in later seasons when they decided they wanted to surprise the audience by switching to Arya as the savior.

But not for killing the NK, the hero build up for taking the throne - hence all the discussion about Jon. Not any discussion about him specifically killing the NK.

Sorry, but you're not understanding. It's not about his motivation, it's how he goes about things. I didn't deny that he does things "for the realm". However, he definitely does NOT see Dany for what she would become because he LITERALLY SAYS "I don't know how her coin will land" which means "I don't know what kind of ruler she will be". Again, his consistency is undermining bad rulers over the long term, which goes out the window in a single season with Dany. What the hell do you mean "he didn't have time"? He had time when the Mad King was burning people and setting up wildfire caches, he had time when Robert was bankrupting the country, he had time when Joffrey was terrorizing everyone in King's Landing. Dany did NOTHING to make him think he had no time for his long-game schemes. Sorry, but you're objectively wrong about this, and it's not a matter of opinion.

I am understanding - you're just not getting the bigger picture. Varys is about the realm, over and over again, his plots and rise in power are for the realm. And Dany threatens the realm - at least Varys thinks so.
You're pretending that's the only quote that exists from Varys about Dany - and it's not. As the plot played out, she became more and more unstable, and Varys saw that, hence his sped up actions, to protect the realm and put Jon on the throne instead of her.
Varys didn't have the opportunity with the Mad King, because he didn't have his influence at that time. King Robert wasn't doing anything worthy of needing to be removed (in the series King Robert has no problems with his kingdom, not like the Mad King at least - aside from the bastard issue with his children, and IIRC Varys left that alone - LittleFinger ). It was only when Varys started to see the cracks in Dany that he made his moves. And he knew he had to act fast because once she was on the throne, he wouldn't be able to do anything, hence him breaking from his sneakiness to protect the realm - the one thing he always acted to protect.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would love to step outside our conversation above and discuss these:

1. Timeline. I'm hearing from people (and the wiki fan site) that time is different in the books than in the series, and it could be a number of reasons. But in the series it seems a LOT of time passes - like a few years in even the first three or four seasons, but in the books Joffrey's wedding takes place in the same year as King Roberts death. In the books, how do they address the dragons - because they get demonstrably bigger each season, sparking the idea that years pass.

2. Little Finger. Why didn't he marry Sansa. I know the books play out that story line entirely different, but I don't know the details, and regardless, who the fuck would ever believe LF would give up Sansa. The only reasons I can think of would be that he couldn't marry her himself because he was her uncle, but marriage. OR that he gave her to Ramsay Bolton to create more chaos (chaos is a ladder).

3. Kat Stark - what happened to her in the books after she died. I read somewhere that she rose as the dead and led an army...of dead?

- - - Updated - - -

Episode 4.2 - Bran sees the burned out shell of the Throne Room in Red Keep - that's TWICE now, from two different characters, that foretell the burning of Kings Landing. Those people who are saying Dany's demise wasn't foreshadowed in the series, clearly aren't paying attention.

Dany saw it in the Warlocks Tower in a vision.
Bran saw it in a vision when he touched the tree and the three eyed raven called to him.

[draynay]

Arya is built up as a killer of men, not monsters. Its out of left field not because she isn't competent, but because the show had pointed to the importance of others and it was just D&D trying to pull a sneaky on us. People are bitter about a lack of payoff with the Snow storyline and probably also a bitter about magic-fucking-soup, at least I am, that took me completely out of the Arya story because of how ridiculous it was. There was a lot of ridiculousness in the second half of this series.

Also regarding Varys, he "broke from his sneakiness" because D&D are incapable of writing clever characters. How could he do anything clever? Nope, he became a bumbling fool when the people writing him were not equal to writing anything better. I don't know why you defend the sloppy job they did, the only people out of time were the showrunners, rushing to end the thing hoping their shortcomings wouldn't become so obvious.

Dany saw it in the Warlocks Tower in a vision.
Bran saw it in a vision when he touched the tree and the three eyed raven called to him.

Foreshadowing doesn't cure crappy storytelling. They foreshadow plenty of things that go nowhere, as outlined in the earlier complaints on this page. The fail here isn't that the destruction wasn't properly illustrated as a possibility, but that the execution in the story leading to it was rushed and embarrassing.

3. Kat Stark - what happened to her in the books after she died. I read somewhere that she rose as the dead and led an army...of dead?

She replaces Beric, the series chose to stick with him instead, which was probably for the best. There was some discussion of Lady Stoneheart earlier in the thread if you feel like doing some digging. People who spoke on it earlier know more than I do.

Regarding time, I think the show had to account for the actual passage of time as the show was produced, there's a lot of young characters not looking so young any more. I was curious about the dragon growth in the books so I've been reading up on that too. It seems more natural with the show's length of production but in the book Drogon was big enough to carry Dany while not even 2 years old. There is some mention of magic returning to the world that might explain their accelerated growth, who knows? There's a lot of text to comb through and nerdier nerds than me have spent more time on it.

(we're arguing a lot here, and outside of these disagreements, at the end of this post, I put a couple of questions for you that I would really like your insight on - I would also like to propose that it's possible we'll never come to an agreement - perhaps we could just leave this alone, agree to disagree? - I really would like your insight on a couple of story lines from the book/series)

You're probably right about the lack of fruitful conversation regarding differences of opinion, but the questions you're asking could yield more interesting results.

[Easo]

You forgot Danny listening to Tyrion, the master political tactician, and his suggestion to give Gendry his own fucking noble house.

Yes, let's give the only surviving heir of Robert Baratheon (the king that gave King's Landing peace and prosperity) land of his own and make him a noble. Instead of imprisoning/getting rid of the biggest political rival.

Such garbage writing.

To be fair it was repeatedly said that she wanted to be different, the whole breaking the wheel part. It kinda implies "let's not kill all relatives of our opponents, get them on our side instead".

[Twdft]

1) I did not read the books. Think I got 100~ pages into book 1, set it down, didn't pick it up again. Still want to, but I remember hearing my best friend complain about how boring book 4 or 5 was with Brienne's story.
2) I actually liked Arya killing the NK - however... there was a lot of stupidity and shit that just made no sense.
Why are the Dothraki in the last couple episodes? We saw them all DIE in their final charge against death. Let them have their honor. Same goes for most of the Unsullied.

1) Books 4 and 5 should have been one book but he wrote too much and had to split them. There is a spoiler freenew reader–friendly combined reading order for them you should try out. On my third reread I have read the veteran combined reading order by the same guy and it really made it better. I enjoyed both books in their original order too though.

2) This whole strategy, or rather perceived lack of, was in my opinion the only way the Night King could be beaten. In every encounter before he kept in the back and let his minions do the job for him. How would you propose to get near the sucker? Fight your way through thousands of wights and his lieutenants? No, they sacrificed pretty much everyone to make the NK believe he won, dangling Bran in front of him so he would come to claim his prize. NK wouldn't come as long as any army capable of fighting was left. This will be fucking heartbreaking in the last books, if we'll ever read them.

Btw just a general thought about Mr Martin potentially not finishing them: he is not our bitch.

[Mehrunes]

I see people posting things like this - I see writers desperate for readers pushing out what some want to hear. With respect, it cracks me up. The reasons for people disliking the last two seasons seem trivial at this point, compared with what D&D left as their legacy - possibly the greatest television series ever created.

I'm rewatching the series from the beginning, and the ending rings truer now with every episode that replays. The ending was fantastic, true to the story lines of all the main characters.

I think what people really don't like is that the ending they got (that George RR Martin told D&D of, remember) wasn't the one they wanted, and because of that they channel their bitterness into finding slights with the show. "Too rushed"; "should have taken longer"; "wasn't true to the characters" - all critiques leveled at the ending. And all wholly without merit.

The truth is that great series endings always upset some people - it would be almost impossible to say everyone can be happy with a great series' ending (I know of only one great series that ended well, without hardly a word in disfavor). And so we see with the critiques (if they can be called that) of the story D&D gave us. Desperate cries because those people didn't get what they wanted. But they did get what they deserved.

And the world got a terrific show with a fantastic ending.

It's quite telling that you're using GRRM to shield Dipshit and Dumbfuck from criticism with "but he told them the ending!!1!" (never mind that he told them the ending in broad strokes, and later on clarified that what people know from the show is "an ending but no THE ending", but whatever), but when it comes to criticism like how the show should have taken longer you're desperately trying to hand-wave it away by trying to portray it as "bitterness without merit", you merrily ignore that GRRM himself commented multiple times that the show could have gone on much longer.

What these two morons left as their "legacy" is a dumpster fire that turned a once great show into an utter joke that barely anyone really talks about anymore. To the point that even the recent anniversary of the show didn't manage to make much of a splash in pop culture. The show went fine when they were still carried by GRRM's material, but once they ran out of it their ineptitude could no longer be hidden (though like @Witchblade77 mentioned, they made pointless changes to the story even before they ran out of the source material and then expected to end in the same spot as the book would because they were too lazy to adjust the story for the consequences of those changes to make sense).

And what came as a result of that? They cut entire storylines that they had no clue what to do with (like Dorne) with the grace of a doctor performing heart surgery with a machete, flip flopped hard on their own premises (one episode scorpions have laser precision even when they are on ships swayed by the waves, the other Dany can burn everything she wants with complete impunity even when faced with much more stable wall-mounted scorpions) and made the most flimsy excuses for their sloppy writing like "Dany kind of forgot about the enemy force she discussed with Varys earlier on in that same episode".

Which, you know, is why their careers are in a ditch right now, despite them rushing GOT so they could jump onto their new Star Wars project. Hollywood finally got wind of how incompetent they are when they are not utterly carried by the source material (given how their greatest achievements before GOT was X-Men Origins: Wolverine - i.e. a complete dreck in terms of writing - for David and sweet fuck all for Dan, it sure took them a while), but right now they are pretty much radioactive in the business.

Though the even bigger joke than the train-wreck they turned the show into is your defense of it. The claim that the later season weren't true to the characters is wholly without merit because the fantastic ending was true to the storyline of all the main characters? Fascinating. You should ping that memo to Jaime "I never cared about the innocents" Lannister. Who never cared about the innocents so neverly he broke his own knightly vows and ruined his reputation to protect the innocents from the Mad King. Or master schemer Varys who turned into a lobotomized caricature of himself and was plotting against Dany right in the open.

Or Littlefinger who, despite viewing Sansa as a mixture of a substitute for Catelyn and the daughter he could have had with her sold her to Ramsay, even when he knew nothing about him. Which GRRM himself stated that it was something Littlefinger would have never done. Oh, right. You only pay attention to GRRM's statements when it's convenient to the defense of the showrunners. I guess I caught D&D-itis and kind of forgot about the exact thing I already discussed in this very episode post.

And you can miss me with your sad "desperate cries because those people didn't get what they wanted" projection. The only specific want for the ending of GoT that I had was for Daenerys to die. Would you look at that, I got what I wanted. I still think the ending was trash, because I actually have standards.

[Ihavewaffles]

I don't think cubby is posting in good faith here, as if he hasn't had the same points n them being refuted many times over in this over 29k post thread...
I'm sure there hundreds n hundreds of posts you can just copy-paste in answer to him, or just ignore the bait.

Calling someone a troll isn't allowed. Infracted.

[Koriani]

Sure it does. Being true to the character is one of those right/wrong items. For instance, Jamie returning to Cersei at the end, even if was to knowingly die with her, was absolutely "right". As was his leaving her to fight in the north - because he kept his oath to Daenerys. Both of those actions were justified by the history of the character, their actions and words and deeds.

Opinions are legion in shows/books/movies/plays, but there are also right/wrong conclusions to be drawn, and discussions to be had about them.

No - what is 'true' to a character or not is STILL an opinion.

Now, there may be less debate about it because people agree more often (about someone doing something 'true' to their character or not) but its still an opinion. An opinion with examples - but still an opinion. Someone can take the exact example you use to support your 'truth' and argue it another way to support theirs. Its not black/white equation with 'acting in character.' This is still an opinion. As is what 'conclusions' someone draws from what they read/watch - that is also an opinion, their own personal take-away.

Well, unless you're the original author =D. That's who is allowed to say what is actually 'right' or 'wrong' about the way their characters are portrayed. (IMO ha) The rest of us are just talking about our opinions.

- - - Updated - - -

Am I the only one who lost all interest in the franchise just because of the series?

I really loved the books and S1-6 but man.. season 8 just outright killed everything for me

Was there ever a explanation by D&D why they did the show dirty? They could give it to another showrunner who still has motivation. It just makes me sad.

I know there are interviews in which HBO staff told us that they wanted up to 12 seasons if they have to

This may have been answered already but in case it hasn't -

The ONLY reasoning we were ever given as to why D&D did what they did - was because Star Wars. They got the contract to do the last Star Wars movie and wanted to get to that so, even though HBO told them they had plenty of room to keep going - decided to wrap it up in Season 7/8 and do it the way they did it. I believe there are interviews where even D&D talk about this as the motivation to end the show; so they could free up their time for the new Big Deal. Which, I believe, they lost (?) but that was the original given motivation. :/