Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Birdjaguar, Feb 7, 2019.
I liked Drogon's ending.
No, they're setting up GoT series 9: the Summer War. Westeros sweats under an impossible, increasing summer heat. Sam will find some old book saying that cow farts contribute to warming, Westeros sends and army to invade Essos and kill all the cows there in a desperate attempt attempt to delay it, and then they discover that it was all a plot by the lord of light cult to turn the world into a desert. Enter zombie Dany with a horde of Dothraki...
In the last episode Arya shows up, having circumnavigated the world, and kills Dany with a magical dagger. The Dothraki don't turn into sand and kill everyone anyway because by then the ratings won't justify a tenth series.
I think the opinions here are more generous than those I tend to see elsewhere.
I think it's just lazy, a convenient way to send Arya somewhere, perhaps for a spin-off series. She's a Faceless Man, not Euron Greyjoy. What reason does she have to want to sail west into the unknown? Her being restless and wanting adventure doesn't quite cut it, because she could sail to Essos and even go east from there. Why would she suddenly want to play Colombus and risk a ship and herself on a hazardous journey west? It's abrupt and has no logic behind it.
Bran becoming king, even if he's just a figure head, is also resting on weak foundations. I can't imagine his story (since that's the entire justification) being particularly compelling for an average Westerosi peasant who has no idea about any of the mythical stuff like the Three-Eyed Raven, and who probably only has a dim notion of the White Walkers business.
Gendry, on the other hand, is actually the son of the previous king. He has some claim to the throne and his is a rags-to-riches story, having grown up in the slums of King's Landing to boot, which would have appealed much more to the common man. But hey, the sociological dimension of the show has given way completely to a psychological and personality-driven one, so what was I expecting?
I think those who really enjoyed this ending enjoy psychodrama, character stories and cool moments more than anything else the series had to offer. But that's the way TV works.
It would have made a lot more sense for Bran to become the King in the North instead of the King of the Six Kingdoms. He is the rightful heir of Rob Stark, the King of the North and of the Trident. Unlike Jon, he has the Tully blood that would help keep The Riverlands united to The North.
The Three Eyed Raven/Last Greenseer is basically one of The Old Gods. Almost everyone in the North plus a large minority of the Riverlanders would be inclined to believe in his power or even worship him outright. He would be their idea god-king.
In the rest of the Seven Kingdoms, however, the Old Gods are not widely honored. Most of the people he now rules follow the Faith of the Seven. They consider the followers of the Old Gods to be heathens who will all be damned to hell when they die. Even attending a wedding before a wierwood tree leaves some devout individuals in fear of hellfire. Some still view the wierwoods themselves as demons, as did the early Andals who tried to burn them all down to stop the Greenseers, although most have grown to tolerate the trees enough to keep one in a godswood that serves more as a decorative garden than a holy site. I expect most contemporary southerners would simply not believe that the powers of a Greenseer are real, but many would see kneeling before and pledging fealty to a Greenseer to be the worst sort of blasphemy.
It seems to me that Septons would oppose Bran's rule as fiercely as they opposed Stannis's attempt to impose a theocracy devoted to R'hllor.
(On the other hand, Catelyn did make sure that her children were educated by a septa, so they basically follow both the Old Gods and the New. Bran is very connected to his father's gods now, but his earlier ambitions to become an anointed Knight does imply he had more affinity to The Seven than most Northerners.)
That's all well and good until Bran Atreides Stark sees their future plotting and protects the Golden Path he's on by offing them with warged scorpions/horses/spiders long before they're a threat. Or the dragon he's clearly about to warg into his control.
If we take the implication he (well, the time warging god controlling him) rigged events to put himself in power on behalf of whatever agenda he serves, then it's clear he's basically Roko's Basilisk. If you're not actively helping his future, you're in danger.
Jon and Dany were removed from the picture with a few well placed words months before their fate was set. I don't think it's gonna be much trouble to have a horse kick a potential future usurper in the head (or whatever other fate) before they even know they're going to revolt.
Was watching this clip of Edmure Tully's first appearances:
That discussion about strategy from 2:04 onwards, and especially the bit with Robb getting angry about excessive losses, it doesn't even feel as the same show.
I have liked and enjoyed the end. It is and end that has a coherence what we have seen until now.
However I am unable to undestand Jon's conviction to night's watch, what do they watch now? Everybody knows that it is an empty sentence, why have the unsullied acceppted that?
Also, isn't Jon supposed to be a honorable guy? How is it possible that he breaks the conviction and goes north leaving the watch?
This is great
This was super interesting. I wish it fleshed out its argument better though, as I'm still none-the-wiser on what "good" sociological writing entails. What precisely differentiates D&D's writing from GRRM's in this respect? I also think that D&D did, in fact, try to write it "sociologically" (taking it to mean what I think it means, anyway). Dany did burn down KL for sociological reasons -- at least, her reasons for doing so were sociologically imposed on her, for all the reasons we (and she) had been talking about. Of course, she could have chosen a different path, but that's not Dany, as TF has been talking about. They didn't do it as well as GRRM did, and certainly it felt a lot more of a "character story" than one of incentives and constraints as the earlier seasons were, but I mean, it's been like that for a while, since Season 5 really. The overall point the article makes is interesting, but I'm not sure I buy it wholesale.
I thought Bran taking the throne was ridiculous and really didn't make much sense. But then I don't think there was any satisfactory solution to who sits on the Iron Throne, and I think that's largely because of the "sociological" stuff that Lexicus's article talks about. I think some of the criticisms raised about the political structure are valid, like why would the other 6 kingdoms not also want independence, or why would Grey Worm and the Dothraki accept any of this really. They lost loads of soldiers for nothing apparently, fought and died for Daenerys, who gets murdered by Jon, then they just bugger off back to Essos? Not sure I understand it all. There really isn't any resolution that would make everyone happy, and Tyrion says as much in the show itself, so I'm not expecting this peace to last very long.
I do like the idea of an Arya spin-off though. West of Westeros.
I also LOVE Arwon's idea that Bran was sewing the seeds to this the whole time. Love that interpretation.
Also I read on legal twitter: if Jon's death means the end of his obligations to the Nightswatch, why does that not mean the end to his claim on the throne too? Does his claim not, immediately upon his death, revert to Daenerys anyway? And in any event, upon taking his oath as a Nightswatchman, he renounces any claims anyway. So under no circumstances is Jon the rightful heir to anything, either because of his renunciation of them upon joining the Nightswatch, or because they have all reverted to someone else upon his death.
Nightwatch oath ends on death, his claim to the throne post resurrection would not.
He didn't swear an oath until death to not take the throne.
Jon's oath to the Nightswatch ended because he said it ended. He could have easily asserted that since he was resurrected he was still alive and thus still obligated to th Nightswatch... he just elected to use that as an excuse to leave. When he is ordered back to the watch, he has no problem with just handwaiving the assignment and going north with the Wildlings.
Jon never asserts any claim to the throne, so there isn't any need to litigate those kinds of technicalities... and if he had tried to take the throne... two episodes of investigations and trials litigating the issue would have been pretty boring.
I was satisfied with the ending. Obviously it would have been nice if we could have had a couple more seasons to go into the same detail we got with the earlier seasons (e.g. there's a whole season of potential story between Drogon flying off and everyone meeting to figure out who should be the king), but I was happy enough with the story beats and how they were executed. I feel the last couple of episodes fail to get the credit they deserve as episodes, because of more nebulous complaints people have about the series in general (in which I count narrative decisions which happen to play out in those episodes). They were wonderfully shot, scored, acted, and directed. History will probably be kind to them, because once the overall story has been internalised those who dislike how the story ended will be less likely to pin it on these specific final episodes.
Surely en ventre sa mere principles operate, i.e. once reborn, he's deemed to have retained any claim. Or even if there's a presumed divestiture, rebirth rebuts the presumption.
What reasons does she have to stay? She's done with Essos and Westeros. Exploring new frontiers is IMO right on par with her character and story arc. Just hanging around would be odd for her now. East Essos is still uncharted territory for Westerosians, so sailing there would be an adventure in itself, it's not a place you'd launch an exploration from. My only issue with Arya crossing the Sunset Sea is that it's kinda a rehash of Elissa Farman's story and her ship Sun Chaser 250 years prior. It's heavily suggested that she made it to Asshai and thus proving the world was round. So it's sort of done. But that's no biggie, there's still unanswered questions.
Arya also mentioned it in season 6.
I liked the finale in that it provided a closure. It was never going to be as elaborate as any books could (pages upon pages on what each character would be up to), and considering they simplified the whole structure so massively in season 7 and 8, this ending of handwaving a few things work.
But of course, it‘s a far stretch from the war strategies applied in season 1, the behind the scene manouvering of forces or the intricate discussion on policy. You got to accept that simplification. So while I want to underwrite that sociological aspect of the storytelling, I dispute that 5 instead of 2 last seasons (the material would have been there) would have been satisfying.
I would have loved that by the way: Jon building the Night‘s Watch Castle Black into an open town for trade and cooperation between Wildlings and the Realm, Sam and Tyrion building a strong constitution together, and so on. But that wasn‘t needed.
I‘m still looking forward to the books, they will be awesome and fill in all those details and explanations needed. And as George RR Martin wrote in his blogpost looking back on the show: some things will be different, some things will be the same.
Some click bait, so don't know how reliable. Some salaries per episode
So did Lena and Nikolaj take in a cool mil for the last episode.
Sam was a bargain for the council.
Kit Harington as Jon Snow – $500,000
Lena Headey as Cersei Lannister – $500,000
Nikolaj Coster-Waldau as Jaime Lannister – $500,000
Aidan Gillen as Littlefinger – $100,000 – $200,000
Conleth Hill as Lord Varys – $100,000 – $200,000
Rory McCann as The Hound – $100,000 – $200,000
Iain Glen as Jorah Mormont – $100,000 – $200,000
Alfie Allen as Theon Greyjoy – around $10,000
Isaac Hempstead Wright as Bran Stark – around $10,000
John Bradley as Samwell Tarly – around $10,000
Maisie Williams as Arya Stark – $100,000 – $200,000
Liam Cunningham as Davos Seaworth – $300,000
Nathalie Emmanuel as Missandei – $100,000
Gwendoline Christie as Brienne of Tarth – $100,000 – $200,000
Peter Dinklage as Tyrion Lannister – $500,000
Natalie Dormer as Margaery Tyrell – $100,000 – $200,000
Hm, that is pretty terrible. Why pay Theon so little money (compared to the others)?
Anyway, half a million/ep for a number of actors is insane. At least now they are multi millionaires, so good for them.
Not that uncommon. Stars on really popular sitcoms used to easily get a mil an episode. Friends comes to mind.
Actually Wiki shows the main GOT actors at a mil an episode so who can you believe.
It is pretty ridiculous. At least for some of them. I mean a few of the actors were great (and the show also had a major movie star in the first season, Sean Bean) but most of them were just tv actors, relatively unknown, and imo a few aren't that great actors.
Best ones were imo Dance, Dinklage (spelling?) and that Davos actor. Lena also is pretty good.
Don't forget Jack Gleeson (Joffrey)
Separate names with a comma.