1. #27301
    Quote Originally Posted by xcess View Post
    Having Jon snow on the throne isnt safe too, hes got some mad Targaryen genes too
    And when have they ever flared?
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    wE doNt kNoW wHat PlAyeRs wAnT FoR CHarACteR CrEaTioN MOdelS

  2. #27302
    Scarab Lord Logwyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Dagobah
    Posts
    4,939
    Quote Originally Posted by Zaktar View Post
    They weren't innocent, they had betrayed her. They sought shelter with her enemy. Moreover she had a specific problem which she needed to solve - who is undisputed ruler? You can throw your weight behind the slightly better claimant - a waffling twat who continuously turns on his own supporters and can't lead his most loyal soldiers, or the one who turns cities which don't obey her into ash. Which do you choose?

    She is a ruthless conqueror, well established as one, and acted like one. She isn't #triggered by the babies she killed, she said herself that she was carrying out a greater good. It's not at all out of character for her, nor is it insane - just fucking evil.

    Edit: not to say that she won't quickly be overthrown, seems pretty obvious that that is where this is leading.

    She has to kill Tyrion now. Last Lannister left he has claim since Cersi is dead. Daey has to pluck them out root and stem. Tyrion has to go!

    The men of the north remember the red wedding and what the Lannisters did. The North remembers!!!!

    I think the biggest problem is that the real-time length to get to this point. All of the Lannister plotting and murders of innocents have been forgotten.... They were surrendering well in the same place the Lannisters would have slaughtered their enemies. They've done it time and time again.

    And wait.... All those innocent people in King's Landing where were they when the Night King came calling at the door to end all humanity? Safe and warm in Kings Landing.
    Last edited by Logwyn; 2019-05-14 at 05:07 AM.

  3. #27303
    I don't know how many times it has to be said - people aren't angry over Dany going mad. They are mad at how rushed and forced it was. Just like with Arya killing the NK.

    More episodes and different writers would have fixed it.

  4. #27304
    Dany has always been this just none of you gave a shit before because her madness was aimed at objectively bad people.
    ☭Politics Understander and Haver of Good Takes☭Posting Is A Human Right☭
    Quote Originally Posted by TheGravemind View Post
    If I was in his boots (and forced to join the SS in 1939 or whenever he joined), I would have tried to liberate the camp myself or die trying. He did not. He traded his life for the life of thousands of people, thus he should face the consequences
    Quote Originally Posted by Proberly View Post
    Oh would you now? It truly is amazing how many heroic people we have wasting their time on internet.

  5. #27305
    Quote Originally Posted by Chelly View Post
    I don't know how many times it has to be said - people aren't angry over Dany going mad. They are mad at how rushed and forced it was. Just like with Arya killing the NK.

    More episodes and different writers would have fixed it.
    Some are mad about what you're describing, others are mad that she turned at all. To me it didn't feel 1/5th as rushed or forced as, say, the Clegane fight; Queen of Ashes has been coming for a long time and her thinking and choices seemed fairly well ordered. Were people not listening to the conversations she was having?
    Last edited by Zaktar; 2019-05-14 at 05:14 AM.

  6. #27306
    Quote Originally Posted by Zaktar View Post
    They weren't innocent, they had betrayed her. They sought shelter with her enemy. Moreover she had a specific problem which she needed to solve - who is undisputed ruler? You can throw your weight behind the slightly better claimant - a waffling twat who continuously turns on his own supporters and can't lead his most loyal soldiers, or the one who turns cities which don't obey her into ash. Which do you choose?

    She is a ruthless conqueror, well established as one, and acted like one. She isn't #triggered by the babies she killed, she said herself that she was carrying out a greater good. It's not at all out of character for her, nor is it insane - just fucking evil.

    Edit: not to say that she won't quickly be overthrown, seems pretty obvious that that is where this is leading.
    That is the weakest bullshit justification I've ever heard. They're smallfolk, they don't care who is on the throne. They have more pressing concerns, like how to survive day to day. They're not complicit in Cersei's crimes in any way. GRRM dedicated a whole book to this in the series, A Feast for Crows. The High Sparrow storyline, Lancel Lannister, the priest The Hound hung out with last season, the Brotherhood without Banners, they were all supposed to illustrate this storyline, but Dumb & Dumber turned the High Sparrow plotline into something about religious zealotry, and killed off The Hound's time off in the country in an episode.

    They didn't seek shelter with her enemy. They literally LIVED there. And as peasants, they often can't just up and move.

    Your justification is like saying the German people should have been wiped off the map because of the Nazis - and even then, the comparison is bad, because the Nazis pervaded society much more deeply than Cersei does.

  7. #27307
    They had a way of salvaging this season "Daenarys turns bad" arc that I saw on reddit (might have been here honestly)...

    Basically, leave Rhaegal alive instead of him dying to Jack Sparrow last episode.... Let the bells ring AND THEN have some renegade soldier shoot the last scorpion and murder Rhaegal.... Dany loses her mind watching her kid die, and burns the city to the ground in the moment.


    Sadly we're beyond that now... and the only way to redeem the show NOW:

    We saw that Bran can effectively influence the past, when he calls out to Young Ned at the Tower of Joy. We've also seen that this is a CLOSED LOOP system. Bran isn't changing the past, but rather fulfilling whatever his role in it was. So what if every single time he was greenseeing recently, he was doing it with the express purpose of driving Daenarys crazy? The leaks put him as the one who takes "the throne" (it's really a council, but he's apparently more or less the guy in charge of it). What if everything he's doing was literally just some Machiavellian scheme to get himself (specifically the 3ER) in charge? He's the Keyzer Soze of the whole series, manipulating everyone, even across time, to take power for himself.

  8. #27308
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    That is the weakest bullshit justification I've ever heard. They're smallfolk, they don't care who is on the throne. They have more pressing concerns, like how to survive day to day. They're not complicit in Cersei's crimes in any way. GRRM dedicated a whole book to this in the series, A Feast for Crows. The High Sparrow storyline, Lancel Lannister, the priest The Hound hung out with last season, the Brotherhood without Banners, they were all supposed to illustrate this storyline, but Dumb & Dumber turned the High Sparrow plotline into something about religious zealotry, and killed off The Hound's time off in the country in an episode.

    They didn't seek shelter with her enemy. They literally LIVED there. And as peasants, they often can't just up and move.

    Your justification is like saying the German people should have been wiped off the map because of the Nazis - and even then, the comparison is bad, because the Nazis pervaded society much more deeply than Cersei does.
    Yes, it is a terrible and evil way of looking at it. It is also how that character was looking at things, which is why her decision was not a surprise.

  9. #27309
    Quote Originally Posted by Zaktar View Post
    Yes, it is a terrible and evil way of looking at it. It is also how that character was looking at things, which is why her decision was not a surprise.
    But that is an irrational "snap" into madness. Whcih, as I said earlier, is a narrative choice, but a weak one in this case. It is 1) unjustified by her previous sympathies with these very kind of folk, and 2) makes her a cartoonish villain with no nuance, no justification, no remorse for when someone, likely Jon, inevitably has to kill her and remove her from power.

  10. #27310
    Quote Originally Posted by Chelly View Post
    I don't know how many times it has to be said - people aren't angry over Dany going mad. They are mad at how rushed and forced it was. Just like with Arya killing the NK.

    More episodes and different writers would have fixed it.
    Actually I'm angry at both.

    Them turning her into the bad guy, and the VERY sloppy way they did it.

    This is Sylvanas all over again, but multiplied by a thousand. Because Sylvanas at least had demonstrated how horrible she could be in the past.

    Compare and Contrast to the Journey from hero to villain that Walter White goes through on Breaking Bad. It took several seasons for him to morph from the sympathetic, harmless, nerdy, somewhat endearing little dweeb he was on the first episode, to the full blown psychopath he was by season 5.

    Danny went from Varian, to Gul'dan within the span of a single episode.

    Por que odiar si amar es mas dulce? (*^_^*)

  11. #27311
    Herald of the Titans Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Vienna
    Posts
    2,518
    Do i think Daenarys skips a few steps in character development? Yes.

    But what really annoyed me:

    Scorpions. I was literally shaking my head for 5 minutes when all of the scorpions just go puff. Really? I know Dany destroys everything this episode, but also logic?

    What annoys me way more: Pushing Jon as the "better" king.

    Isn't one of the messages of the whole story that honorable man are bad rulers? Now all of a sudden, this is what we want. Especially for Jon: He already was a ruler, and not a good one. Didn't see the plot coming and died!

    If this is now the new message "honorable man are the perfect rulers" - we could have ended the whole series in episode 7 with Ned arresting Cersei and a happy ending.

  12. #27312
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    But that is an irrational "snap" into madness. Whcih, as I said earlier, is a narrative choice, but a weak one in this case. It is 1) unjustified by her previous sympathies with these very kind of folk, and 2) makes her a cartoonish villain with no nuance, no justification, no remorse for when someone, likely Jon, inevitably has to kill her and remove her from power.
    There was no snap, that is who she was, and you don't have to be cartoonishly evil to butcher innocent people. Real people do and have done that, and they didn't lack nuance, they were human beings. Evil, and damned if you believe in damnation, but not cartoonish.

    Like any person she had good impulses and bad, and the people who fed her best impulses disappeared or grew small in her eyes, and in a moment high on destructive power she used it to do something she had clearly rationalized. Once she burned the first innocent person there was no point in stopping. Did you think previously when she talked about burning cities, she was just imagining doing it to real estate, or calmly marching all the innocents out first, or that it was an empty threat? If you rewatch the scene early in the episode where Tyrion is imploring her not to burn the city, she lays out her rationale and it's in character.

  13. #27313
    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    Do i think Daenarys skips a few steps in character development? Yes.

    But what really annoyed me:

    Scorpions. I was literally shaking my head for 5 minutes when all of the scorpions just go puff. Really? I know Dany destroys everything this episode, but also logic?

    What annoys me way more: Pushing Jon as the "better" king.

    Isn't one of the messages of the whole story that honorable man are bad rulers? Now all of a sudden, this is what we want.

    If this is now the new message "honorable man are the perfect rulers" - we could have ended the whole series in episode 7 with Ned arresting Cersei and a happy ending.
    It's a bit strange how naive everyone is about Jon being a good king. He might be ok with the right council, but he himself lacks many qualities of a good ruler.

  14. #27314
    I didn't really catch how Varys betrayed Danny. I saw him writing something at the start of the episode but couldn't really read it. Was he trying to kill her or something?

  15. #27315
    Quote Originally Posted by Very Tired View Post
    I didn't really catch how Varys betrayed Danny. I saw him writing something at the start of the episode but couldn't really read it. Was he trying to kill her or something?
    Spreading the word about Jon's claim to the throne, supporting him rather than her.

  16. #27316
    Herald of the Titans Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Vienna
    Posts
    2,518
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayma View Post
    It's a bit strange how naive everyone is about Jon being a good king. He might be ok with the right council, but he himself lacks many qualities of a good ruler.
    I'm actually ok with the people in the series itself believing that. It's a trope, we do too. Just look at our own stories, where a happy ending is the rightful and honorable king coming back and everything is fine (e.g Sean Connery as the english king (with thick scottish accent) at the end of every Robing Hood movie). Song and Ice of Fire plays with these tropes all the time, and shows us the reality.

    That's what i always liked about the story. It takes our own preconceptions of how a story should go, and instead shows us how the real world works.

    I'm fine with people on the ground believing a good king is honorable, but the shows explicitly tells us again and again that these honorable types will all be victims of more ambitious people.

    Well, let's see what they have in store for us for the last episode.

    To add to that: Another trope that comes up more and more is the idea that the right ruler is someone who doesn't want to be ruler. While there are a few examples in the real world, there are way more examples of rulers who didn't want to rule being actually awful. Who would have guessed.
    Last edited by Pannonian; 2019-05-14 at 05:50 AM.

  17. #27317
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellorion View Post
    And when have they ever flared?
    Well people didnt think Dany was capable of burning innocents and children

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Very Tired View Post
    I didn't really catch how Varys betrayed Danny. I saw him writing something at the start of the episode but couldn't really read it. Was he trying to kill her or something?
    He tried to poison her food

  18. #27318
    Mechagnome Asaliah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    506
    The only good moment was the dialogue between Tyrion and Jaime

  19. #27319
    Herald of the Titans Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Vienna
    Posts
    2,518
    Quote Originally Posted by Asaliah View Post
    The only good moment was the dialogue between Tyrion and Jaime
    "Sandor, thank you" was also quite nice. Felt like a real payoff after 8 years.

  20. #27320
    Quote Originally Posted by Zaktar View Post
    There was no snap, that is who she was, and you don't have to be cartoonishly evil to butcher innocent people. Real people do and have done that, and they didn't lack nuance, they were human beings. Evil, and damned if you believe in damnation, but not cartoonish.

    Like any person she had good impulses and bad, and the people who fed her best impulses disappeared or grew small in her eyes, and in a moment high on destructive power she used it to do something she had clearly rationalized. Once she burned the first innocent person there was no point in stopping. Did you think previously when she talked about burning cities, she was just imagining doing it to real estate, or calmly marching all the innocents out first, or that it was an empty threat? If you rewatch the scene early in the episode where Tyrion is imploring her not to burn the city, she lays out her rationale and it's in character.
    It's absolutely not in character to kill thousands of innocent people for a battle she's already won. Most of the king's landing talks centered around the Red Keep which seemed the least of her priorities this episode. The bells were clearly used in some dumb way to depict her breaking point.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •