Animation Revelation Forum

Other Entertainment => The Telly => Topic started by: Lord Dalek on April 07, 2012, 11:19:49 AM

Title: Game of Thrones
Post by: Lord Dalek on April 07, 2012, 11:19:49 AM
(http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://i.qkme.me/6cry.jpg&sa=X&ei=9miAT7qLEsz2ggevqrDqBw&ved=0CAoQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNF65DLY-67FsqDfcF_F_N6qp455sQ)

What? Everyone else is making a thread!
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 07, 2012, 02:04:23 PM
Waiting for the books to be fucking finished (yes, I know) before I can dig into it.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on April 07, 2012, 02:08:55 PM
A really cute girl in one of my classes reads and watches the series. She says that the show is quite faithful to the books, and the changes don't really affect the series in a bad way.

I'm totally planning on starting either up so I can talk to her about it.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Angus on April 09, 2012, 04:23:03 PM
Has this escaped premium cable yet?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 09, 2012, 08:01:30 PM
Quote from: Angus on April 09, 2012, 04:23:03 PM
Has this escaped premium cable yet?
It's on DVD.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Rosalinas Spare Wand on April 10, 2012, 02:38:14 AM
I haven't made it past the first 2 episodes. All I can remember is bare titties, some dick kid being a dick towards girls and dogs, and another kid being thrown off a window perch by some douche.

Sounds like a mighty fine show though.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Pharass on April 10, 2012, 08:18:33 AM
Quote from: Rosalinas Spare Wand on April 10, 2012, 02:38:14 AM
I haven't made it past the first 2 episodes. All I can remember is bare titties, some dick kid being a dick towards girls and dogs, and another kid being thrown off a window perch by some douche.

Sounds like a mighty fine show though.

The douche's name is Jaime Lannister and while I started out hating him when I first read the books, he has since become one of my favorite characters. That said, for all the moral ambiguity in this series, there are some really evil bastards living in Westeros.

Also, I really should pick up A Dance With Dragons soon. Ah, so many books, so little time.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on May 10, 2013, 07:47:07 PM
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/493ba9b43840bc458162f94193b2da09/tumblr_mmeya2yvGO1qzmtz8o1_500.jpg)

Yes.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on June 13, 2013, 02:57:07 PM
I fucking love this show, it's (in my humble opinion) the best TV series currently airing. I think it was the events of the Red Wedding that solidified this for me.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on June 13, 2013, 06:02:21 PM
I have to echo the sentiments. Seriously though, it's almost like the high-end fantasy equivalent of the Wire. As a fan of both the books and the show, OI don't see why you shouldn't try to get into it.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on October 07, 2013, 11:10:34 AM
Out of all the TV shows I've ever tried to sell to people, this one has been the most difficult, and I'm not talking about "normal people", I'm talking about other geeks. I don't get it. This isn't only the best geek show of the last five years, it's probably the best show of the last five years, period. Three seasons in, and it might be in the top half of my all time Top Ten.

The writing is spectacular. The acting is phenomenal. Everything about it is a home run... why can't I sell people on this one?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 07, 2013, 11:22:33 AM
Mostly due to the "what if they catch up with the novels" issue that occasionally pops up.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: LumRanmaYasha on October 07, 2013, 11:28:49 AM
How are you trying to sell it to them?  ??? It seems odd that other "geeks" wouldn't want to watch a show like this. Why don't they want to watch it or dismiss it, do you know? I don't see why the catching up to the novels issue is a big deal either.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Foggle on October 07, 2013, 02:49:49 PM
Surprised it's such a hard sell. Great fantasy stuff is hard to come by these days when it comes to film and television. Really, the only reason I haven't watched it yet is one part laziness and one part that I think I'll enjoy it more if I experience the whole thing after it ends (like The Wire).
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on October 07, 2013, 05:06:43 PM
GOT is basically the fantasy equivalent of The Wire. It's worth the watch and/or read, trust me.

As for it being a hard sell, maybe it's the incest.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on October 08, 2013, 01:34:27 AM
Quote from: Cartoon X on October 07, 2013, 11:28:49 AM
How are you trying to sell it to them?  ??? It seems odd that other "geeks" wouldn't want to watch a show like this. Why don't they want to watch it or dismiss it, do you know? I don't see why the catching up to the novels issue is a big deal either.

I usually go on about how well written it is, how wonderful the actors are, the characters. How badass it is. How so much of it is allegory for the War of the Roses in a fantasy setting, etc.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on December 03, 2013, 05:28:30 PM
I've watched the first six episodes of Game of Thrones. This is definitely as awesome as people said it would be. So far, my favorite characters are Tyrion, Daenarys, Snow, and Snow's little sister (I forget her name). I was overjoyed when they killed off Daenarys' worthless brother. He was annoying and not interesting to me in the least.


So far, I don't really hate Joffrey. I can't wait to see how the Lannisters take over the throne since it's the only spoiler in this show I know about.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on December 03, 2013, 05:34:33 PM
Joffrey, yeah, you should see why he's so hated soon.

And do you mean Arya when you mentioned Jon Snow's little sister? There's also Sansa, but most people don't tend to like her until sometime into the second book/season.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on December 03, 2013, 07:48:50 PM
Quote from: Peanutbutter on December 03, 2013, 05:28:30 PM
I've watched the first six episodes of Game of Thrones. This is definitely as awesome as people said it would be. So far, my favorite characters are Tyrion, Daenarys, Snow, and Snow's little sister (I forget her name). I was overjoyed when they killed off Daenarys' worthless brother. He was annoying and not interesting to me in the least.


So far, I don't really hate Joffrey. I can't wait to see how the Lannisters take over the throne since it's the only spoiler in this show I know about.

Glad you're enjoying it. Pretty sure you're talking about Arya when you mention Jon Snow's little sister.

As for Joffrey, keep watching.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on December 03, 2013, 07:51:05 PM
Yeah, that's right it was Arya. I love that we have an interesting female character who happens to be a kid too. As for Sansa, right now I think she deserves Joffrey. Maybe she is better in the second season.



Oh I already get why Joffrey is hated. Depending on how things play out, he may end up as a villain I love to hate.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on December 03, 2013, 08:06:09 PM
I don't want to spoil it for you, but Sansa's development over the course of the franchise is one of my favorite parts of it. She grows from a character worth despising into a tragic figure in a sharp, respective manner.

Oh, and you're right about Viserys getting what he deserved earlier. The guy's a dick and a moron, but like most every other character on the show, his downfall was utterly fascinating to watch unravel.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on December 03, 2013, 09:15:38 PM
Well, I'm sure it will be. I'll watch the rest of season one tonight or tomorrow. With Viserys, at least I think he was intentionally made the way he was because that barbarian guy and Daenarys are the real focus.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on January 12, 2014, 10:41:36 PM
Trailer for season four...

http://www.geeksaresexy.net/2014/01/12/first-game-of-thrones-season-4-trailer-video/
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on January 12, 2014, 10:51:55 PM
My #1 rule is to not spoil to show watchers.

But yeah, this season is going to be intense.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on January 13, 2014, 07:20:26 AM
Can't wait! I watched all three seasons a couple weeks ago. It's definitely deserving of being called one of the best shows of all time. Really looking forward to how Danyrys' story plays out, as well what happens next for Jon and Arya since after the Red Wedding they're the only Starks left if you leave out Bran and Rican.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on January 13, 2014, 10:34:06 AM
Sansa's still around as well.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on January 13, 2014, 12:43:22 PM
Yeah she is, but she's still surrounded by the Lannisters and their men. Arya and Jon are the only active Starks left.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on January 18, 2014, 12:32:16 AM
Maybe it's my Doctor bias talking, but Red Wedding aside, Walder Frey seems like a cool lord who acts feeble on the outside but a cruel chessmaster on the inside.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on January 18, 2014, 09:57:03 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on January 18, 2014, 12:32:16 AM
Maybe it's my Doctor bias talking, but Red Wedding aside, Walder Frey seems like a cool lord who acts feeble on the outside but a cruel chessmaster on the inside.

Yeah, but Tywin Lannister was the chessmaster in this scenario.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on January 18, 2014, 10:26:14 PM
Didn't mean that he was the sole planner in that business. He's cool too though. Aside from Cersei, I'm growing fond of most of the Lannisters. Even Joffrey.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on January 19, 2014, 11:32:59 AM
The Lannisters' roundtable scenes are some of my favorites on the show.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on February 01, 2014, 01:43:38 AM
(http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/tywin-dance.gif)

A Dance With Tywins
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on February 27, 2014, 03:01:00 PM
New trailer for season four!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2ZNaLQD60Y

Easily the best show on television that is currently in production.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on March 10, 2014, 03:04:16 PM
New "Game of Thrones" trailer!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIASaUUwklk

Hmm, any chance this thread can get more posts than the "Agents of SHIELD" thread?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on March 10, 2014, 03:08:49 PM
Well we still have a couple of weeks before the new season starts. Hopefully we'll get good discussion by then!

Also, I'm considering re-reading the books after season 4 ends, provided that my deadbeat friend lends me back my copies of the first 2. This is about the best possible time to re-evaulate them, and think of how the show will handle the next two books.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: LumRanmaYasha on March 10, 2014, 06:50:54 PM
I still haven't gotten a chance to go through season 2 and 3 yet and probably won't be able to do so until mid-May. Once I do, though, hopefully I can start watching the latter half of season 4 as it's airing.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Inkwolf on March 12, 2014, 04:54:32 PM
I've been a fan of the books for some time, and am really enjoying the series. It does seem pretty faithful to the books (though on G.R.R.M.'s Livejournal, he mentioned that one of Daenerys's men was killed in the TV show who will later play an important part in the books! :D Fun to wait and see how they fix that.)

I can only watch them on DVD (no cable) and always look forward to the new release.  My only quibbles are:

1. Brandon's story seemed much more interesting in the books, and on the show his adventure seems more like an afterthought, possibly because they can't use him in Quibble #2:
2. Especially in Season Three, they seem to take every possible opportunity to cram in a sex or torture scene, whether it advances the plot or interrupts it.
3. The characters keep stopping everything to have long, earnest, expository discussions about their backstories, motives, plans, opinions, etc. I suppose when the story is broken into chunks over a long time. people need to be slapped in the face with character profiles, but still.

Anyway, if they keep padding out the show with sex, violence, and talk-show interviews, they might be able to stretch the series long enough for Martin to get the next book out! :D

Also annoyed with Season Three because (spoiler alert)
Spoiler
I expected it to end with Katelyn Stark, the vengeful undead, rising from the river with burning eyes! Not that she's done a heck of a lot in the books since coming back from the dead.
[close]
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on March 15, 2014, 10:41:34 PM
Finally got to the infamous Red Wedding. Robb had it coming, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on March 16, 2014, 11:29:37 AM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on March 15, 2014, 10:41:34 PM
Finally got to the infamous Red Wedding. Robb had it coming, in my opinion.

I wouldn't say he had it coming. But he could have avoided it if he didn't make some very stupid mistakes.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Inkwolf on March 19, 2014, 08:22:29 AM
Being wary of spoilers, I will hide this whole post...

Spoiler
Well, historically in that time period (remember this is based on the War of the Roses) one of the worst crimes you could commit was to attack a guest to whom you had offered hospitality.  If Walder Frey had any honor, he would have simply refused further alliance and openly joined the enemy.  Once he had invited them into his house and fed them, it was unthinkable to do what he did.

This event  was actually based on a similar betrayals in real-life history (http://www.nerdist.com/2013/06/george-r-r-martin-explains-the-red-weddings-historical-roots/).

But, yeah, Rob failed to play politics and married someone he loved...bad move for a wanna-be king, especially one who needs Walder Frey's good will and jilts his daughters.
[close]
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on March 23, 2014, 12:14:32 PM
Robb did make mistakes, that certainly doesn't mean he deserved to die. That's what makes it all the more tragic.


Not having been able to read the books yet, the Red Wedding is a big part of why I'm pumped for the next season to start. I really want to see what happens next with Arya and Jon.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on March 25, 2014, 12:12:50 AM
Nah, Robb was a pansy fuck who didn't know anything about being a king. He knew Frey was unhinged, and he should've wised up and watched his steps during that wedding. And honestly, I believe what he got was soft. If I was Frey, I would start trying to hunt down the rest of the Starks, or possibly have Ned temporarily survive and watch as Tulisa slowly gets tortured. Maybe wait for the baby to be born to break Robb's spirit even more. That kind of punishment is what cements word of your strength. Nobody would challenge a lord who did any of that to his former allies.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on March 25, 2014, 08:56:28 PM
Judging by al the battles he won (although they were unfortunately offscreen), I'd say he actually was a good king. He just lowered his guard at the wrong possible time partly because of how many victories he received.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on March 26, 2014, 05:14:42 PM
Quote from: Peanutbutter on March 25, 2014, 08:56:28 PM
Judging by al the battles he won (although they were unfortunately offscreen), I'd say he actually was a good king. He just lowered his guard at the wrong possible time partly because of how many victories he received.

Being a good general doesn't make you a good king.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on March 26, 2014, 08:51:02 PM
On the battlefield, he lead and inspired his men to victory. But yes, off the field he didn't think far enough ahead and it cost him.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on April 06, 2014, 09:20:40 PM
The best show on television is back! I absolutely loved the premiere... and awww, Arya Stark, like all young girls, wants a pony.   ;D
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on April 07, 2014, 07:25:29 AM
I see her as an Applejack girl, myself.

And I think my highlight was Sansa's speech with Tyrion. It's fascinating to see how little she represents the naive little girl she started off as in the show... mostly.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on April 08, 2014, 01:54:17 PM
In case you had any doubts that the show would keep on trucking. (http://winteriscoming.net/2014/04/game-of-thrones-renewed-for-seasons-five-and-six/)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on April 08, 2014, 08:06:06 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on April 08, 2014, 01:54:17 PM
In case you had any doubts that the show would keep on trucking. (http://winteriscoming.net/2014/04/game-of-thrones-renewed-for-seasons-five-and-six/)

I couldn't be happier.  :thumbup:
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: LumRanmaYasha on April 09, 2014, 02:47:39 AM
Like there was any doubt it would get renewed.    :awesome:

Still great to hear, though.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on April 09, 2014, 09:51:45 AM
Yeah, the plan is 7 seasons, depending on how much content is in the last 2 books. The next two don't have much happening despite their length, and quite a bit of fluff (which the show runners have even confessed to most likely trimming), so the best way to go with those is to combine their timeline and make 2 seasons out of them total.

But yeah, Martin needs to step his game up fast.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 09, 2014, 12:00:11 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BkyzcdUCIAEYPLQ.png)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on April 13, 2014, 09:06:34 PM
Best. Wedding. Ever.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 13, 2014, 11:59:59 PM
Shame about Tyrion though. As well as Margaery's goals. Oh well, at least this means I get to see Cersei suffer.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on April 14, 2014, 04:06:02 PM
Yeah, this is not going to be a good season for the Lannisters.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on April 14, 2014, 04:26:09 PM
I'm going to say this, if Jack Gleeson was not such a fantastic actor, no one would have cared either way. For as slimy and despicable as he was, for as much as we all wanted him dead, Joffrey was a great character.

The difference between Joffrey and, let's say Skye, Skye has no redeemable qualities. Not smart, not funny, not strong, not charismatic, not entertaining. Nothing. I hate her for just being there. Joffrey, on the other hand, was fun to hate.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on April 14, 2014, 04:36:57 PM
True, and that's a difference between prose and screen. Joffrey was just unbearable in the books, but in the show, Gleason made the character far more entertaining than he had any right to be.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on April 21, 2014, 12:02:33 AM
And Littlefinger just happens to be there to spirit Sansa away?  ;D

I love that Tywin has moved on to Tommen as his new project. A King who is easier to control, that's for sure.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on April 21, 2014, 08:01:25 PM
So, about that scene everyone was talking about last night, here is Martin's 2 cents on it. (http://winteriscoming.net/2014/04/21/george-r-r-martin-responds-fans-concern-breaker-chains/)

It's fair, and there definitely have been worse rape scenes on TV. Although if I can bring up the Race for the Best Show on TelevisionTM, Bryan Fuller has gone out of his way to make sure that any potential rape storylines don't make it onto Hannibal. In fact, Margot Verder just appeared on the show, and not only did Fuller find a way to deliberately walk around her history of abuse, but he's also decided to avoid expected tropes for lesbian or trans (which she has been believed to be) women with the writing and casting of her character. Which I think is a great move.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on April 21, 2014, 10:52:26 PM
Okay, I love this show. I think it's the best show on television. This was a mistake (understatement of the day) and they deserve the angry feedback they've been getting.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 22, 2014, 09:24:26 AM
I think the reason people are taking umbrage over this scene is that Jaime's supposed to be going through a redemption arc, and it's hard to believe he's going through such redemption when raping his sister a few inches away from his son's corpse. It makes all that time with Brienne seem pointless if Jaime hasn't learned anything from the first season.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 26, 2014, 01:52:24 AM
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/4fa4cccfb02462b4c65caf2b27dee388/tumblr_n0rgbaJwGq1r00543o4_r2_250.gif)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on April 26, 2014, 01:41:59 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on April 26, 2014, 01:52:24 AM
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/4fa4cccfb02462b4c65caf2b27dee388/tumblr_n0rgbaJwGq1r00543o4_r2_250.gif)

YES!
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on April 26, 2014, 02:29:45 PM
(http://www.hooping.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/dinklagesm.png)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on April 27, 2014, 10:34:14 PM
WHAT THE FUCK WAS THAT THING?!
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on April 27, 2014, 11:48:53 PM
Yeah, that White Walker was a new addition.

This was kind of a dry episode, but I'm curious about the development towards this.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 02, 2014, 03:47:00 AM
(http://37.media.tumblr.com/3bf62d8e401a3c818019ab27dff1515f/tumblr_n40ykyTzTw1qzduz1o1_1280.jpg)

Game of Beach Parties IV: Bare Abs on the Baratheons
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on May 05, 2014, 02:45:09 PM
So... He's Lord of Harrenhal, and after tonight he has the Vale behind him. Even though Robin is Lord of the Vale, Littlefinger can operate as Acting Lord until Robin comes of age.

Since the Stark boys are "dead," Sansa is the last remaining Stark and would be the holder of Winterfell were it not for the Boltons. Of course, the Boltons aren't very popular and the North might rise to put a Stark back in charge. Especially Sansa who went through so much torment.

So if Lysa were to die and Littlefinger were to marry Sansa, he'd have Harrenhal, The Eyrie, and Winterfell to his name. That's a pretty substantial force, especially if Stannis, the Tyrells, and the Greyjoys continue to fight each other.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 10, 2014, 05:58:28 PM
I'm almost caught up with the show, but man does this series never fail to impress me. Each season has been better than the last, and as of the first 3 episodes, this season looks to be continuing that trend.

Spoiler
In the first 2 episodes alone, we get to see Arya get her first vengeance kill on a minor character, but it was still really satisfying to see something of her way, finally. We also got to see Joffrey die....yeah, that's going to be really hard to top as far as satisfying moments go. My only complaint is that he deserved way worse than being poisoned to death, but it was still nice to see Cersei finally hurt for all of the shit she's done against the Starks.
[close]

On another note, my current top 3 favorite characters are:

1. Arya
2. Tyrion
3. Daenerys

Of course, this series is full of great and memorable characters, so the list could really fluctuate, but unless they get killed off anytime soon, I don't see Arya or Tyrion being replaced by anyone else, for me.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 10, 2014, 06:04:13 PM
I guess my favorite characters would be:

1. Tywin Lannister
2. Bronn
3. Margaery Tyrell
4. Tyrion Lannister
5. Daenerys Targaryen
6. Arya Stark
7. Brienne of Tarth
8. Olenna Tyrell
9. Ramsay Snow
10. Samwell Tarly
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 10, 2014, 11:57:17 PM
Quote from: GregX on May 05, 2014, 02:45:09 PMSo if Lysa were to die and Littlefinger were to marry Sansa, he'd have Harrenhal, The Eyrie, and Winterfell to his name. That's a pretty substantial force, especially if Stannis, the Tyrells, and the Greyjoys continue to fight each other.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't Tyrion also have to die in order for that plan to work, what with him being Sansa's current husband (even if he is about to go on trial for treason)? I suppose Littlefinger expects that he will be found guilty and executed, but I'm hoping that he can use his wits to get out of this situation just like he did with the last "trial" that he was subject to.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 11, 2014, 11:38:22 PM
That last scene with Tyrion was brilliant. I loved seeing him finally stand up to his father. It was also great to see Jaime bargain for Tyrion's life. Hopefully a trial by combat will go as well for him this time as it did the last time.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on May 12, 2014, 12:34:38 AM
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on May 11, 2014, 11:38:22 PM
That last scene with Tyrion was brilliant. I loved seeing him finally stand up to his father. It was also great to see Jaime bargain for Tyrion's life. Hopefully a trial by combat will go as well for him this time as it did the last time.

Every man has a breaking point, and Shae testifying against Tyrion (when he had already agreed to plead for mercy and take the black) was his. This was years and years of anger and hate at how he had been treated finally erupting... and it was glorious to see. Glorious.

Look at this show, now look at "Agents of SHIELD". Now look back at this show... "Agents" should be ashamed of itself.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 12, 2014, 01:25:42 AM
The Yara scene seemed a bit filler-y. All the grandstanding she does in last year's finale about bringing her brother home, and she gets scared off by a dog. And I've been told she doesn't do any of this in the books, which adds some credence to the theory.

Daenerys' new role as ruler of Mereen is proving refreshing, especially when people are calling her out for paying evil unto evil. To these people, to some who probably had no business with slaves or pitied them just as much as she did, they see Daenerys as the conqueror who's taking their world and replacing it with hers. No matter how much she genuinely believes her cause is just and with no ill will, everyone else is just going to see her as the mad lady who punishes with dragonfire.

The court scene with Tyrion was excellent, with Tyrion and Tywin pulling off any schemes they have in order to demonize the other. I wasn't expecting Tywin to bring Shae out against Tyrion, and it was heartbreaking to see that relationship end like that. It's also interesting for Tyrion to pull the same trick he did back with Lysa Arryn. I expect Tywin and Cersei will try to take Bronn out of the picture, so Tyrion will be stuck with his own two hands rather than another's for this predicament.

Also, I liked Mark Gatiss' little cameo. His appearances are always welcomed.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 12, 2014, 11:19:12 AM
I hope that "taking Bronn out of the picture" somehow does not mean killing him off. His chemistry with Tyrion has contributed to many of my favorite scenes and moments within the series. In fact, if I had just one minor complaint, it's that his role has been severely underplayed this season, thus far.

As for the trial by combat itself, though, I wonder if Jaime will step up to represent Tyrion, now that the deal with his father is probably off. It'd be the best way to both defend his brother and also prove his worth as a member of the Kingsguard, despite only having one hand to fight with (which he has trained with Bronn to be able to fight with, as previously established).
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on May 19, 2014, 03:13:16 PM
Brienne's interaction with Hot Pie and her learning of Arya's fate is an invention of the show, one that I'm curious to see how the show tackles later on.

But boy, wasn't that ending scene rewarding?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on May 19, 2014, 05:11:33 PM
Yes, yes it was.

"Hello! My name is Oberyn Martell. You slaughtered my nieces and nephews, then raped and killed my sister. Prepare to die."
?a line of dialogue I'm half-hoping will be in the next episode.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 02, 2014, 02:45:38 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/mrP0u2T.png)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 02, 2014, 10:44:49 AM
You know, I'm probably going to sound like an ass-hole but he kind of had that coming. That's what happens when you mess around with a guy called the fucking mountain. He had the perfect opportunity to finish him off and didn't take it because of getting that confession that he so badly wanted. But, at least he fatally wounded the other guy (I think), so consider that his one and only consolation prize.

Still, you've gotta love the irony of the line "size doesn't matter when you're laying flat on your back." Apparently it kind of does. Really, though, I feel worse for Tyrion than anyone else, in all of this. Part of me hopes that something last minute will prevent his execution, but the rest of me remembers that Deus Ex Machina and this show rarely ever mix, so as far as I know this may be Peter Dinklage's last season on the show. I'd love to be proven wrong, though.

The real star of this episode for me, though, was Sansa. She's come a long way from being that naive little girl that she was in season 1, hasn't she? Her performance in front of the counsel of the Vale was arguably on par with Dinklage's performance at the trial scene in an earlier episode of this season.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on June 02, 2014, 11:33:59 AM
That episode... wow. I was shouting at my TV "you fucking idiot! You fucking idiot! You fucking idiot!" Stop playing with him and just kill him!
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on June 02, 2014, 02:05:47 PM
My link needed refreshing in the middle of that scene, so it ended up literally freezing mid-splatter.

It was kind of annoying, but hella cool when I think about it. And yeah, he is definitely someone who let his emotions get the better of him, so it's not surprising for that to be his downfall.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 02, 2014, 02:11:52 PM
Actually, now that I think about it, that confession served another purpose. If Dorne gets wind of what really happened, it'll give them grounds to rebel against the Lannisters. Also, isn't Cersei's daughter supposed to be in Dorne right now? She'd basically be in an instant hostage for them, not unlike how Sansa was for the Lannisters as leverage against the Starks.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on June 03, 2014, 11:18:17 AM
(https://31.media.tumblr.com/6735b1e1f8d995d08e0beaae897b3974/tumblr_n6lorcovIQ1rhuguao1_500.jpg)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 08, 2014, 07:56:46 PM
So, in just a few minutes we will see Jon Snow and the Night's Watch engage in an effort to defend the wall, in an episode which I'm hoping reminds me of Blackwater in all of the right ways. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that Jon and Sam survive this season, but since this is GOT that doesn't mean shit, so their chances are as 50/50 as ever (as far as I know).
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 08, 2014, 09:58:34 PM
And thus ends the "You know nothing Jon Snow," meme. Man was that an intense as fuck episode. I loved every minute of it. This is going to be one crazy finale.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on June 09, 2014, 01:54:31 PM
It was wonderfully directed, but I have to admit, this might have been my lesser favorite pre-season finale to date. I like Jon, but I've always found it hard to be especially attached to him and the Night's Watch.

They did a fantastic job handling the meat of the action, though.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 09, 2014, 02:12:22 PM
I don't know if I agree. I liked it a little bit more than Blackwater, which itself was an awesome episode, but wasn't as intense for me because aside from wanting Tyrion to live through it, I really wanted to see Stannis win the fight and take Joffrey's head. With this episode, I cared about the outcomes of not only Jon and Sam, but I wanted to see the Night's Watch remain in tact so that Jon could take over command of it eventually (which is what it seems like the series has been building up to).

Also, there were tons of bad-ass scenes, like the giant shooting an arrow that carried a guy all the way to the other side of the wall, Ghost absolutely mutilating a Wildling, and that fucking scythe that just tore through any poor-sap who was attempting to scale the wall when they dropped it. Last I checked, Blackwater didn't have any of those. ;)

And of course, "Let's light the fuckers up!" was a bad-ass motivational line both in and out of context, whereas "Let's go fuck them in their asses!" can be taken entirely the wrong way out of context, you have to admit. :humhumhum:
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on June 09, 2014, 02:17:24 PM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 09, 2014, 02:12:22 PM
And of course, "Let's light the fuckers up!" was a bad-ass motivational line both in and out of context, whereas "Let's go fuck them in their asses!" can be taken entirely the wrong way out of context, you have to admit. :humhumhum:
haha, fair enough. This is definitely an episode that I want to rewatch when I get to collecting ti, which is a good thing. Especially since there's a couple from this season that I'm ambivalent to returning to.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on June 11, 2014, 12:29:07 PM
I preferred "Blackwater", but this was still great. Very well choreographed, and as great a battle as you will ever see on any television budget. It felt a lot like the Battle of Helms Deep without being too over-the-top.

And, hey, GIANTS RIDING MAMMOTHS!

I can't wait for the finale.

And how come the thread for "Agents of S.H.I.T." is bigger than this one? We need to correct that.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 11, 2014, 01:29:27 PM
Once this season is finished, I'm probably going to attempt to catch up with the books before season 5 premieres, next year.

Quote from: GregX on June 11, 2014, 12:29:07 PMAnd how come the thread for "Agents of S.H.I.T." is bigger than this one? We need to correct that.

I think that we all just love ragging on that show too much. :sly:
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on June 11, 2014, 01:39:22 PM
I think my guy at the flea market might have a copy of the first season for cheap. I'm not sure if it's the DVD or Blu, though, but if it is the Blu, I'll try to save so I can buy and watch it with my mom.

Maybe I'll even try to get my copies of the first 2 books back from my friend and read the first again at the same time, and post notes on here.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 15, 2014, 06:39:39 PM
116 minute finale. (http://grrm.livejournal.com/375768.html) GoT version of the Super Bowl starts in 80 minutes. There will be no survivors.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 15, 2014, 06:42:41 PM
I was wondering how they were going to wrap up all of the unfinished plot-threads in just a single episode. Shit just got real. Yet, the only thing that I really care about that much is what will happen to Tyrion, and to a lesser degree, Jon Snow. I'm just going to go in assuming that they're both fucked from the get-go.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 15, 2014, 07:36:56 PM
So GRRM was misinformed, and the episode is 66 minutes rather than feature-length. Still enough for a packed finale.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 15, 2014, 07:40:52 PM
This is my disappointed face: :wth:
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 15, 2014, 09:05:16 PM
This show just made me cry.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 15, 2014, 09:27:31 PM
I'm not going to lie....I'm going to miss Tywin. Sure, he was a villain (you could argue otherwise, but he's still mostly portrayed as an antagonist), but he was a damn well-written character, and Charles Dance was arguably the best actor on the show, IMO. At the same time, I have to kind of admit that I love the humiliation of such a so-called "dignified" man being killed in the most undignified way: while taking a shit. That was seriously low, even if Tyrion had been wronged by him to such a degree. :P

In all seriousness, though, I'm mostly pleased with how the season ended. I'm most excited to see where Arya's story will head in season 5, but since that's a year off, it looks like I'll be finding out via the booms until then.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 15, 2014, 10:27:18 PM
And too bad that Brienne forgot to show Arya the pastry Hot Pie made to show she was telling the truth.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 15, 2014, 10:52:25 PM
You know, I was hoping that scene would pay off, but it didn't. To be fair to Brienne, it's easy to forget about such a thing when put on the spot like that.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on June 15, 2014, 11:12:46 PM
Loved it! LOVED IT! LOVED IT!

Tywin's death was a bittersweet moment. He had it coming, but I'm going to miss Charles Dance as Tywin. And for personal reasons, it was also a very cathartic moment for me.

More to say later, but I loved it!
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: GregX on June 16, 2014, 01:15:55 PM
Full thoughts here: http://gregxb.blogspot.com/2014/06/valar-morghulis.html

And last night I was informed that Marvel submitted the "actor" who plays Grant Ward on AoS for an Emmy. So, I was scrolling through the list and look who was directly below him, alphabetical order. I couldn't resist.

(http://37.media.tumblr.com/4b7ad09ca837af6a360402e6cf365be4/tumblr_n790fhWfVG1rhuguao1_1280.jpg)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on June 16, 2014, 03:13:45 PM
Ultimately, I don't think that this season was as strong as the past 2, but you really do have to give it credit for shaking things up from the series so far. The big holy shit moments that are usually saved for the penultimate episode were spaced apart for the second and last, sticking to the book's chronology. Meanwhile, there have been more and more changes to the storylines in the books, for Bran and Arya in particular, and for the most part, they work. There are a couple of things that haven't worked, but it's another solid year.

And yes, the finale was excellent. I can't decide if I'd rather see Peter Dinklage or Charles Dance win the Emmy this year.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Skeeter Valentine on June 16, 2014, 08:45:38 PM
They majorly fucked up Tyrion's escape. He's supposed to curse his brother for betraying him and swear revenge on him. Also, the whole reason Tyrion killer Tywin was because he was enraged about his father's role in killing his first love and lying about it. It didn't have diddly dick to do with Shae, whom Tyrion was glad to have killed as she was a lying whore.

Quote from: GregX on June 15, 2014, 11:12:46 PM
And for personal reasons, it was also a very cathartic moment for me.

(http://i638.photobucket.com/albums/uu103/varisator/bender_zpsc4c57933.jpg)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 17, 2014, 08:52:10 PM
While Season 4 was very good, it did seem to affirm the old joke South Park made about when things will actually happen or not. Like Stannis' arc, where it took him last season and this one to quit moping about losing in Blackwater and do something that could make gains for a potential reign. Arcs like the Sansa/Littlefinger one have good enough pacing, but then there are ones like Jaime's redemption plot that give the character little development for what takes place throughout ten episodes.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on June 18, 2014, 09:47:25 AM
In hindsight, I do wonder if it would have been better for the show to have a 16 or so-episode third season cut in 2 parts, rather than cut the third book in two full seasons, which they did here. With less episodes, there would have been more time to trim the fat and hopefully cut out some of the elements that didn't work, like the Jaime and Cersei scene, to put extra focus on development.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 12, 2014, 10:07:06 AM
So GOT just for 19 Emmy nominations.

It'll be interesting to see it compete with Breaking Bad for best drama series. If the winner in that category is not either of those shows, I'll be truly surprised.

:EDIT:

So Charles Dance didn't receive a nomination for best supporting actor in a drama series. That's a shame, especially since it's his last season on the show, but at least Peter Dinklage got it.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on July 12, 2014, 11:57:00 AM
Smart money is on Breaking Bad for Best Drama, with True Detective as a possible upset. Even Martin admits that he doesn't think GOT stands a chance against Breaking Bad's final batch.

And yeah, I was disappointed that Charles Dance and Dean Norris didn't get nominated this year. I always preferred Hank to Jesse, myself. So I guess my vote will go to Dinklage, who still deserves it for that fantastic speech. Although I have to admit that even though I think Lena Headley is fantastic, I'm not sure if I'd pick her this year as well.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 12, 2014, 01:50:56 PM
I'd pick Anna Gunn, myself. Nothing against Lena, who is terrific, but Anna's just stood out as a stronger performance to me.

And Breaking Bad is what I most want to win best drama, so I have no qualms about it potentially beating out GOT, as much as I love that series as well.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on July 12, 2014, 03:24:49 PM
Yeah, Anna Gunn really pulled her A-game out for "Ozymandias". Part of me really wants to see Christina Hendricks finally win, though, which is why I'm split.

Oh, and Diana Rigg was nominated for Guest Actress as Lady Olenna, which is another decision that I am completely down for.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on July 18, 2014, 02:54:46 PM
At a local pawn shop here, I found the GOT Blu-Ray sets for $8 each. Since I'm not loaded but had enough money (I actually was planning to go to WalMart to see if they still had season 1 of Courage, since we're finally getting 2 out), I decided to get the first 2 seasons. I didn't really have enough for the third, which is missing its slipcover anyway, so I won't be too disappointed if it's bought out buy the time I can get it.

So now I can try to convince my mom to see it with me! And even if she doesn't want to, they come with DVD copies for me to watch in my room if I just feel like watching it again.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 18, 2014, 03:02:38 PM
I've been re-watching the first season after reading the book, myself. While a lot of minor details had to be cut out, I have to say that they did a good job of cramming in as much as they could. At first I thought that there was even more details left out, but many are actually in there. It's just that they are usually mentioned by characters in passing, and it's easy to miss them on your first time through the show, unless you've already read the book.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 25, 2014, 10:25:22 PM
I just finished re-watching season 1 after having read the book. This is definitely a show that benefits from. A re-watch. Being based on a novel with such a rich world of lore and mythos, there are a ton of details packed into each episode that it's far too easy to miss on a first viewing. The writing here is dense, and while the show does a good job of simplifying many things from the books to streamline the story, it is still full of many nice little touches that are rewarding to notice on re-watches. This especially counts for things that become important later on. In my first viewing, I didn't pay full attention to scenes like the one where Lady Stark was making negotiations with Walder Frey, but after realizing how important that would become later on, I really viewed the scene with a new fascination on my re-watch. It really is an amazing show, and I plan to re-watch the 2nd season after I finish ACOK (which I would've been done with by now if I had more time to read).
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on July 26, 2014, 02:00:52 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BtZYKYBIAAArMNq.png)

If only he had that when fighting the Mountain.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 26, 2014, 09:03:52 AM
Martell Prism Power!

I call for a re-match!
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Daikun on August 01, 2014, 12:59:53 PM
Aimee Richardson won't be returning for season 5. (http://uinterview.com/news/aimee-richardson-is-a-princess-for-hire-after-game-of-thrones-recasting-12313)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 04, 2014, 07:02:28 PM
(http://photos-a.ak.instagram.com/hphotos-ak-xfp1/10546927_756431447713264_654486195_n.jpg)

Robb Stark can now say that he's been murdered and kissed by the Doctor.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 14, 2014, 01:44:59 AM
As I did for Buffy and Angel, here are my top 10 episodes for this show (so far):

10. And Now His Watch Is Ended
9. The Pointy End
8. The Laws of Gods and Men
7. The Bear and the Maiden Fair
6. The Rains of Castamere
5. Fire and Blood
4. Garden of Bones
3. Blackwater
2. The Watchers on the Wall
1. The Lion and the Rose

One of the weaknesses of this show is that with multiple story-lines, even in my favorite episodes, not every moment is great, but from the ones I picked, it's usually one two very prominent story-lines from each episode which really make them so special, and a ton of fun to re-watch.

Of course, I left out The Mountain and The Viper, but honestly, aside from the awesome fight at the end and Sansa's scene, the rest of the episode was just kind of average, IMO.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on October 14, 2014, 02:41:32 AM
Huh, I'm not sure how I'd rank the episodes, since I feel that a show as heavily serialized as GOT is harder to rank in this scenario, but I know that "The Rains of Castamere" would be higher, and "Baelor" would likely find a slot in mine, as well.

I'm surprised to see "Blackwater" rank so high in your list, though, since I thought you said that you weren't that impressed with it. I guess you only meant in comparison to "The Watchers on the Wall", though.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 14, 2014, 02:44:21 AM
Yeah, I think that it's a great episode, but I'm probably the only person who actually thought that Watchers was even stronger. Perhaps because I'm among the very few people who actually really like. Jon Snow as a character, whereas he's among most other people's least favorite.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 21, 2014, 12:09:21 PM
Guess who's back?

Spoiler
(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--kHFe7gx1--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/j2migo8mlrxvoekrzfsx.jpg)
Water bottle is back.
[close]

Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on October 21, 2014, 01:46:46 PM
Damn it, Missandei, get your shit together.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on December 05, 2014, 06:14:41 PM
While I would normally talk about this in the video game thread, nobody over there really seems to watch or read GOT, so I thought that I'd just mention it here. A friend and I played through Telltale's first episode of their Game of Throne tie-in series that they are working on right now. To be fair, it's a point and click adventure and completely story driven, rather than being a traditional game.

All things considered, so far as tie-ins go, we both thought that it was pretty decent for what it was. You take multiple perspectives from members of House Forrester, and they are clearly meant to be an analogue to the Starks, albeit they are a much lesser house. Some familiar faces show up in the first episode, such as Tyrion, Ramsay, and so on. Out of all of them, Ramsay is portrayed particularly well. And actually seems to have the most to do with this particular story, so far. The choices really remind me of KOTOR/Mass Effect's dialogue sequences, except it's much harder to pick the right decision because just trying to be the good guy, unlike in those games, can seriously fuck you over. In this episode alone your choices don't seem to have too many reprucussions until you reach the very end of the episode, but the previews for the next episode indicate how important a part they will play later on.

It's not as great as the show or books, but it's interesting enough to keep me coming back for more when future episodes drop. Just FYI, you could watch the multiple decision routes in their entirety on YouTube, so there's no need to actually buy the game for yourself.

On another note, I've been reading more of the third book, and I liked the scene where Robb Stark brought up to Catelyn that he wanted to legitimize Jon Snow as his heir should he fall in battle, which I know was because he didn't want the rights to Winterfell to fall in Tyrion's hands, but it also shows how much trust he has in his bastard brother to carry on the family legacy. I understand why the show cut that scene out, but it was just nice to read in the book.

Oh yeah, and it's old news, but this season we will finally be getting flashbacks. What do people think about that? I'm not sure how those will play out, since what I've seen in the books so far aren't really flash-backs as much as they are specific character takes on past events (which may not be entirely true), but it would be a nice way to further flesh out the lore of this world for show watchers.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on January 19, 2015, 01:42:11 PM
I kind of wish I could see those episodes that they will be airing in IMAX, but it just won't be possible from where I'm at, unfortunately. At any rate, now that I've caught up to the books, I thought that it'd be fun to post about the things that I prefer from each version. I'll start with characters:

Top 5 Characters Done Better In The Show (So Far):
Arya Stark
Robb Stark
Jorah Mormont
Bronn
Tywin Lannister

Top 5 Characters Done Better In The Books:
Ramsay Snow/Bolton
Theon/Reek
Varys
Petyr Baelish/Littlefinger
Jon Snow

Interestingly, it's mostly the protagonists that the show manages to nail, but I feel that it cuts out a lot of the nuance and general plot points that make the more villainous or morally ambiguous characters in the book so interesting. While I'm cool with Ramsay's pretty amusing portrayal on the show, his and Theon's plot really does feel like it got hacked up in translation to the show. Theon's story-line is one of my favorite parts of ADWD, so I'm hoping that season 5 manages to finally do it proper justice this time. I am bummed out to see so many other story-lines getting cut out, but I can completely understand why. I just wish that Young Griff didn't have to be one of those casualties.

Still, I'm really pumped for the next season of the show, and am actually glad to see that it's going in a very different direction than the books, sine it'll still hold plenty of surprises for me.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on January 20, 2015, 07:59:35 PM
On another note, I have a legitimate question, here:

What exactly are the producers going to do after this season? Based on how much they are cutting out from the books, they'll be caught up with ADWD by the end of the season, for the most part. So, is the show just going to come up with its own conclusion from there (which I'm totally fine with, as long as it's well-written), or will it go on hiatus?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on January 20, 2015, 09:38:20 PM
GRRM told the producers the ending on the chance that he would be unable to finish writing the books.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on January 20, 2015, 10:27:23 PM
So, in other words, massive spoilers for book readers? Bummer.

I honestly wouldn't have minded the show going in its own direction, since it deviated so much from the books as it is, but on the other hand, at least it'll probably make for a more fitting finale.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on January 30, 2015, 08:30:57 AM
It's in low quality, but here is our first look at season 5: http://youtu.be/ZMKhdDlKHNE

Some huge changes from the books, yet the show still looks more epic than ever. I can't wait.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on January 30, 2015, 10:02:28 PM
High quality version of Game of Thrones Season 5 Trailer is up!

http://youtu.be/ZDb4sJVK2wU
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on February 05, 2015, 05:29:05 PM
Man, I just want the show back already. I miss Tyrion, Jon, Arya, Daenerys, Brianne, and Sam so much......



And I ESPECIALLY miss Jaqen (or as I prefer to call him, Jaqen the Medieval Ninja).  :cry:
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on February 05, 2015, 05:38:32 PM
I have to say that, surprisingly enough, my favorite story-line from ADWD is Theon's. I really hope that they don't skip too much of it in this season.

Also, Cersei's story-line will be incredibly entertaining. I won't spoil anything for anyone, but for a character that I've always hated, she somehow had the most interesting things happen around her throughout AFFC.

Of course, the biggest story-lines this season will be from Danaerys, Tyrion, and Jon.

Oh, and going by the trailer, it looks like Jaime and Bronn will be in Dorne. I'm really interested to see where that goes.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 09, 2015, 11:18:03 PM
New Trailer of Game of Thrones Season 5: http://youtu.be/vwRdVw82Jd8

I'm still super pumped. I'm most interested to see how they handle Jon Snow's character arc and the Dorne plot, since those seem to be the biggest changes from the book, which makes them less predictable, which makes me more excited to see them. Tyrion's also looks to be different, but I have a pretty good idea of where it's going.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 06, 2015, 06:15:41 PM
The all-ages trailer for Game of Thrones season 5. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhWUFXvaZjo&feature=youtu.be)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 06, 2015, 06:34:54 PM
One day, maybe 10 years from now, some kid who watched this will get all nostalgic about SM and come across this skit again. They will then get curious about what it was parodying and check out the show, at which point they will have the most amazing "WTF" reaction to anything ever. :lol:

I love how they just casually mock/reference murder, betrayal, beheadings, and incest. Just as child-appropriate as ever....
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 13, 2015, 01:34:41 PM
I loved the season premiere. Very different from the books, but in a good way, for the most part.

They didn't do much with Tyrion in this episode, but his exchanges with Varys and the general chemistry between those two characters is excellent.

Jon Snow killing Mance before the fire could make him screen was a big risk, but just foes to show how much respect he really had for the guy. Of course, since this is GOT, don't expect that action of his to just go away without any consequences. Stannis will remember.

Cersei realizing right away that Jaime let Tyrion escape is one of the better changes from the books, and makes her out to be less stupid and narrow-minded. I also like that they stared off the episode with flash-back to the prophecy she heard when she was a child, though, noticeably they cut out the bit about the "Valonquar," which indicates that they may not be doing anything with that aspect of the prophecy in the show.

Littlefinger and Sansa didn't do much in this episode, either, but at least they managed to drop off young Robert in a safe place so that they can focus on more important business without him getting in the way, and it appears that Brienne and Pod are close by.

And finally, Dany has her hands full dealing with The Sons of the Harpy, and also must now deal with political problems in terms of refusing to reopen Daznak's Pit, as well as the fact that her dragons hate her now.

Several other characters were noticeably absent from this premiere, but such is expected when you have too many characters to deal with. I'll be really interested to see them in future episodes, as well as how current story-lines play out.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on April 13, 2015, 06:16:40 PM
This was a pretty typical Game of Thrones premiere, in that it reintroduces most of your favorite surviving characters, while giving hints towards how the majority of their stories are going to transpire this season. But after five seasons, the formula is well known and still used strongly enough to allow this to not be a negative at all, but rather a welcome return to the show we love. Great stuff.

There were plenty of strong dialogue moments throughout, but the opening and ending sequences in particular contains some of the best direction in the episode, but the latter isn't surprising, as the Night's Watch's sequences are usually among the best paced. Jon's shot to Mance was a great touch, done perfectly. And considering how the show has been diverting from the novels, I'm excited to see what direction this year goes from here on out.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 13, 2015, 06:26:34 PM
They did say that they would be killing off characters who were still alive in the books, and it looks like Mance is one of those casualties. It really leaves you not knowing what to expect.

Book Spoiler:
Spoiler
And no, clearly that was the real Mance who got burned alive in the show. They definitely aren't doing the book plot where he was disguised as Rattleshirt.
[close]
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 20, 2015, 01:56:11 PM
People may have their complaints about it, but I really did love Dany's Mereen plot in the books,and I like it so far in the show as well. I just love the concept of how ruling is never as simple as it seems, and in this case Dany tries to make the right choice by upholding the law, but while that may work out in the long run, it's hard when that means you have to execute one of your biggest supporters and basically suffer the immediate consequence of receiving the hatred of the entire former-slave population for it.

It's great to see Lord Commander Jon Snow as a thing in the show. I wasn't sure if they were going to do that part from the books, but I'm glad that they did. Now if only we can get that Janos Slynt scene that we've all really been wanting to see. ;)

Jaime going off with Bronn should be an interesting plot point in terms of how they deal with the people of Dorne, especially the Martells.

As for Arya, Sansa,Tyrion, and most of the other characters, their plots are progressing nicely, but there isn't too much to say about them, yet. Overall, Brienne and Pod is probably the only one that I'm not really feeling at the moment. Not that it's bad, but it just feels a bit too predictable right now. It's the least interesting thing going on in the show this far, but of course that could always change.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 27, 2015, 02:31:45 PM
Three episodes into this season and the show is already back in its groove. This is also probably the closest it has been to the books this season so far, despite plenty of changes still present. Tyrion's story is finally picking up, and I'm really into Sansa's story right now, especially since I have no idea where it's going. And of course we've got one of my favorite Jon Snow scenes in the entire series, so overall it was a great episode with a lot of high points.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 05, 2015, 04:26:20 PM
Damn, I wouldn't be surprised to see Grey Worm go, but I wouldn't have expected Ser Barristan to get killed off since he  was supposed to be one of the best fighters from Westeros,  and even past his prime, he should not have had so much trouble with taking on untrained Masters from the Sons of the Harpy. But, at least he managed to finish off the rest of them mostly by himself, so he still kind of got to go out like a bad-ass.

Meanwhile, HBO isn't being the least bit subtle about Mellisandre's intentions for Jon Snow. And on that end, is it just me or did this episode clearly just show support for the R + L = J theory?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on May 05, 2015, 04:46:17 PM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 05, 2015, 04:26:20 PM
Meanwhile, HBO isn't being the least bit subtle about Mellisandre's intentions for Jon Snow. And on that end, is it just me or did this episode clearly just show support for the R + L = J theory?
Nah, that seems to be the speculation. And I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case.

There were some great fight scenes in this episode. The ending especially, but Jaime and Bronn's battle against the guards in Dorne was exciting to watch too.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 05, 2015, 06:31:50 PM
Yeah, I'm really interested in where that story-line is headed.

In terms of Dorne, though, I'm not buying the Sand Snakes' accents, for whatever reason.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 10, 2015, 11:24:23 PM
Not particularly interested in the Boltons. At this point, it just feels like the show's marking time until Stannis finally gets there to fight them. But I like seeing Tyrion and Jorah fight together. Wish more footage will go to that.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 11, 2015, 02:00:57 PM
I'm really liking the Bolton plot, myself. Ramsay is a completely different character in the show than in the books, but arguably just as twisted and unpredictable, and I really enjoyed that dinner table scene where Roose came back at Ramsay for his cockiness. Theon interacting with Sansa was also interesting, and it'll be interesting to see if he ever reveals to her that Bran and Rickon are still alive.

Tyrion and Jorah are Game of Thrones's new best buddy-cop duo. And really, have you guys noticed how much this show loves pairing people together? It's that one trope that I'm surprised to not see more people point out and bring up in parodies or jokes. Also, Jorah getting Greyscale and that whole stonemen scene in general shows me that the show is combining his plot with Jon Connington's.

Jon Snow going to Hardhome is a really interesting turn in the plot. I wonder if they are going to still manage to work in that "For the Watch" scene, somehow.

Really, I'm enjoying every plot-line this season so far except for two: Brienne and Pod, and Dorne, the latter of which will probably get more interesting when Jamie finally makes it there. As for Brienne and Pod....I don't know. That just feels like complete filler to me, so far.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 17, 2015, 10:08:44 PM
Well out of all the ways to get people to pay more attention to your show instead of Mad Men, this wasn't what I expected.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on May 17, 2015, 10:25:34 PM
Poor salsa.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on May 17, 2015, 10:43:42 PM
Who's Salsa? Another one of Ramsay's hunted girls?



All I know is, Sansa had it pretty rough this episode.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 17, 2015, 11:02:06 PM
Other than that scene, I was not feeling this episode at all. The whipping scene with Arya felt forced (like why was she giving false details about her history). Littlefinger's gambit now has more questions now that he spilled Sansa's location to Cersei, and I'm extra confused why he didn't get some Knights of the Vale to guard Sansa from the Boltons. And there's how the Iron Bank of Braavos don't seem to have pushed their hand onto the Lannisters, or why the Tyrells don't just threaten Cersei with their military might in order to get their family members back. If they're supposed to be in debt and in dire need of support, they certainly aren't acting like it judging from the past few episodes. And I know Cersei's supposed to be crazy and stupid at this point, but not enough to be completely blind to those matters.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 18, 2015, 01:07:38 PM
I think that I'm just going to have to agree to disagree with you, here. Not that I don't respect your opinion, but personally most of the stuff that you have been complaining about I personally thought was done well.

The whipping scene didn't feel forced at all to me. They are disciplining/training Arya. I'm not exactly sure about how else to portray that. She was giving false details about her history because she's practicing the skill of lying about her identity. To be a faceless man/woman, you have to not be bound by your former identity and also be able to become anyone at anytime. You have to be able to lie to people about who you are and be so damn good at it that they could never tell or suspect otherwise. When Arya lies about her past, that's her way of trying to prove that she can utilize that skill, and each time she gets slapped, it's a negative feedback that they can tell that she's lying due to subtle hints that she gives away without realizing it. If you also pay attention, you'll notice that as her story goes on her lies get smaller and smaller as she loses confidence, which only makes it that much more obvious what she's lying about. When the Waife tells her a story and then asks her whether it was true or not, that's the perfect example of where Arya needs to get to in order to master that particular skill. That's the Game of Faces. They never stop playing the game. It's also a clever metaphor for her attachment to her old life. As long as she remains attached to her identity as Arya Stark, she will never be able to gain the skills that she desires, but giving up her identity to get the means to carry out her revenge also means giving up her revenge in the first place, which is another great bit of dramatic irony.

Littlefinger's gambit makes sense to me. As the guy who single-handedly started and orchestrated The War of the Five Kings behind the scenes, he's playing the game and turning all of the great houses against each other. Just like with his speech in season 3, he is climbing the ladder created by chaos. Now, yes, his plot has some holes in it, but whether he's aware of them or not remains to be seen. In the books he is a much more careful and calculated character and always has back-up plans. In season 4 of the show the writers screwed up with his murder of Lysa and made him seem like an idiot. This season they seem to be a bit better at writing him, but we'll have to wait to see how things play out to be sure. As for leaving Sansa with the Boltons without protection, I think that you are assuming that he definitely needs Sansa alive (or cares about her on an emotional level, which he most likely doesn't, despite his love for Catelyn). We don't know exactly what he knows, but he is a master of gathering information, so it's entirely possible that he knows that there are other Starks alive, and even if he doesn't, he probably has a backup plan to secure his hold on the North if Sansa dies. I could link you to a video that does a decent job of explaining how he operates and plots the way that he does and why it logically works, at least in the books. The bottom line being that, he's weakening or getting rid of whoever could stand in his way, and whoever comes out on top is who he pretends to support for just long enough to get them out of the way or use them to get someone else out of the way. That's what playing the Game of Thrones is.

As for The Iron Bank, they explained in an earlier episode that they would use the Tyrells' fortune to try and pay them off for now, hence why Cersei sent Lord Mace Tyrell to meet with them. In the books Kevan Lannister uses his own funds temporarily. Either way, it's clearly explained.

With the Tyrells, do recall that Olenna did mention that she could stop sending food and supplies from Highgarden to Kings Landing, and also recall that Kings Landing was going through famine before their alliance with the Tyrells, so that in and of itself is a pretty sufficent threat without using violent means. In the books Cersei needs them to use their armies for fighting off Ironborn and other enemies, but Mace Tyrell refuses to use any Tyrell military forces for the Lannisters until his daughter is absolved of her crimes (Loras's sexuality is never brought into question in that version of the story, but the general layout is similar).

And yes, Cersei is that stupid. She believes herself to be smart, but can you think of one example besides Eddard Stark (who was blinded by his honor and was a way worse politician than even Cersei) in the show where she ever out-maneuvered anyone? In season 2, Tyrion made a fool of her at every turn. In season 3, Tywin put her in her place. In seasons 4 and 5, she let Maergery totally play Tommen and didn't even prepare for that. She is a complete fool. And now that she has less people to stand in her way, it has only become more apparent.

Now, I can completely understand if the show isn't doing anything for you. That's fine if that's your opinion, and I have nothing against that. However, with the exception of Baelish (who to be fair we can't judge at all until his plan actually has time to unfold as we clearly don't know all of it yet), everything else you pointed out as a flaw have legitimate, definitive explanations behind them that are addressed on the show itself.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 18, 2015, 01:46:13 PM
And one more thing about Lord Baelish is that, thanks to his meeting with Cersei, he has effectively cut off all outside support from the Boltons.

On another note, Tyrion telling Jorah about his father and the bit with the slavers was great. Also the trial scene in Kings Landing with with Loras's lover testifying against him is a great parallel of what happened between Tyrion and Shae at his trial last season.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 18, 2015, 10:17:15 PM
By the way, did anyone notice that Bronn got nicked by one of the Sand Snakes' blades?

Uh-oh....
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 19, 2015, 07:25:48 AM
I'm thinking I'm giving the false impression that I hate the show now, and it's not true. I just hated this episode for the stated reasons and others that have already been discussed thoroughly on certain other sites. I'm sure that once other parts of the plot like Stannis finally meeting the Boltons and Lancel telling the High Sparrow about Cersei's perversions happen, it will get better.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 19, 2015, 09:08:48 AM
Not liking the way those scenes were portrayed is completely understandable, and I'm not trying to argue with you about that. I was just addressing your complaints concerning the logic in those scenes and plot points, in that they all had objective in-show explanations to address them, such as with Arya, the Tyrells, the Iron Bank, and so on.

As for reviews, a majority of them have been positive about the season on the whole, so far, with some common complaints. As far as I can see, this latest episode is the only one that stirred up very mixed reactions from critics, with a lot of heat going to that Sansa scene in particular.

Personally, I enjoyed the episode, but do think that it's one of the weaker ones of the season, overall. The only part that I downright disliked, though, is the fight in the Water Gardens and that whole sloppy situation in general. It felt like a combination of bad choreography and bad writing.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 19, 2015, 10:30:20 AM
Well, I love this review of the episode. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1idj28tziY)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on May 24, 2015, 09:19:27 PM
Cersei's finally getting knocked down several pegs. I've been waiting four seasons for this.  :shakeshakeshake:
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 25, 2015, 12:23:37 AM
I liked Olenna and the High Sparrow arguing. Seeing Tyrells call out and get called is always fun.

Still not won over by the Winterfell arc since it feels like Sansa's character went back to square one. If anything, she probably had more agency in the first season since she almost threw Joffrey off a castle had The Hound not gotten in the way, whereas she needs Theon's help to light the candle in the tower. I know it's meant to show how broken she is under the Bolton's control, but we already had that with the Lannisters. I'm expecting one of the Bolton soldiers to shout "Here we go again!" in a sitcom voice every time something bad happens to Sansa. Like the Krillin Owned Count.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 25, 2015, 03:49:47 PM
I do actually agree about Sansa, overall. I'm liking the Bolton story-line, myself, and unlike most people I found the rape scene from last episode to be necessary to show that despite all of the horrible stuff that Sansa has gone through so far, it will only get worse and she will have to manage somehow until she can learn to play the game better and take advantage of her situation. Having her beg Theon for help in this episode was not only an incredibly stupid season one move that you'd expect her to make, but also feels so off considering that, as far as she knows, he killed her younger brothers. I should mention that the books handled Theon's character arc much better than this.

That, and Dorne was once again a disappointment in this episode. I'm just going to come right out and say it: the actresses for the Sand Snakes are terrible. I'm not sure who cast them, but they really fucked up. And what's worse is that they are getting much more focus than more interesting characters like Doran, who's barely had any screen-time on the show so far. Furthermore, when Bronn got poisoned in the last episode I expected a better pay-off than what we got, but to be fair maybe that'll still come back into play.

Having said that, I loved the rest of the episode. Tyrion and Jorah were great (though I'm super disappointed about how underwhelming Daznak's Pit is in the show, even if they can't match the scale of the books), and hey, we finally got to the major plot point that we were hoping for. And as for Dany, did anyone notice that Daario basically suggested for her to organize a Red Wedding-type scenario? It may not seem as bad since she's still considered to be one of the good guys, but it's funny how it's basically just as bad as what the Freys and Boltons pulled on the Starks. I also loved seeing Olenna get talked down to for once. And finally there's Cersei, who after so long is finally beginning her long-awaited downfall. To someone like her the idea of a pure, incorruptible person is nothing more than a myth, but by giving so much power to such a man, she has ensured her own demise. And I have to say, Jonathan Pryce is killing it as the High Sparrow. It almost makes up for the horrible acting of the Sand Snakes.

The scene of Sam saving Gilli was cute, nothing more. I did like how they did Maester Aemon's death and funeral scenes, though. He's that rare GOT character that had a nice long life and a peaceful, natural death. Turning down the offer to become the King was the best decision that he ever made. And finally we have Millsandre trying to convince Stannis to sacrifice his daughter to ensure his victory. I have no idea how that's going to turn out, so I'm really interested to see how it unfolds.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 26, 2015, 06:33:48 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/e3OBdZn.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/4RVzJY6.jpg)

Egg... I dreamed I was a head in a tube.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 27, 2015, 07:58:36 PM
Can you guess who is who? (http://watchersonthewall.com/game-of-thrones-season-6-casting-has-begun-and-heres-the-list/)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 31, 2015, 11:09:31 PM
RIP Karsi the Wildling Lady.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 01, 2015, 02:31:56 PM
So that's what happened at Hardhome! Damn....no wonder Cotter Pyke sounded so pissed in his letter.

This was a far better action scene than in the previous few episodes, though not quite as well-shot as Blackwater and The Watchers on the Wall.

Also, Dan & Dave totally just spoiled the fact that the White Walker we saw staring down Jon was the Night's King. Thanks, guys....

Aside from that, Tyrion and Dany stole the show.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 02, 2015, 07:19:27 PM
Does anyone else find it weird that the White Walkers and their minions apparently can't swim? That aspect of how things were left off after the fight kind of bothered me. It makes them feel a bit less threatening when they are willing to throw themselves off of cliffs in hordes to attack people, but can't stand to get a little wet.

That said, it's just a minor gripe on my part.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 02, 2015, 07:38:45 PM
Well the White Walkers are ice creatures, so I'd assume swimming would just turn the resulting water into ice and make them sink. Though that doesn't explain why the Wights just can't go underwater and walk.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 02, 2015, 08:02:26 PM
Well, I probably should have used my vocabulary a bit better. The White Walkers and Night's King are like the generals of the army and thus actually have value for their own lives since they are intelligent beings that control the Wights. That said, the Wights themselves are completely expendable, so like you suggested, they should be fine with pursuing the living survivors through the water, and seeing as how they are basically just re-animated corpses, they probably aren't that heavy and thus can probably swim.

That said, to be fair, there is still a lot that we don't know about them, yet.

Anyways, we are approaching the dreaded episode 9, and no major character has died yet, so....yeah, it's anyone's guess who's going to be off'd. Aside from one certain character who  I won't mention for potential spoiler reasons, I have a bad feeling about Bronn and/or Jaime.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 07, 2015, 04:44:13 PM
So who likes their Shireen medium rare? (http://streamable.com/0m2k)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on June 07, 2015, 09:20:00 PM
Can't believe how many people didn't see that coming, I mean come on! It's called dramatic irony! What's really ridiculous is seeing some say they're ditching the show. So, the rapes didn't make you leave, but a child being burned to death is your limit? Well, okay then.


Seriously, it was obvious from the get-go how much Stannis believed Melisandre. Just because Ned died trying to put him on the throne doesn't mean he's a great person. I'm curious of Jon's reaction though.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 08, 2015, 12:15:52 AM
So what makes Stannis think that the North or anyone will support a Kinslayer?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 08, 2015, 02:42:21 PM
It's worth mentioning that in the books, Stannis actually leaves his wife and Shireen back at Castle Black (Shireen's sacrifice hasn't happened in the books yet), so if this scene happens there, I don't expect that Stannis will be the one to decide on it since he's stuck with his men in the snow, leagues away from The Wall.

At any rate, I was impressed with how they managed to pull off such a big scene like Daznak's Pit with a TV budget (even for an expensive show like this). This season finale is going to be intense, and I'm still really curious to see if they are indeed going to pull off the most infamous scene from ADWD or leave it out. If they do it, I think that it could turn out to be a pretty great scene.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 08, 2015, 02:52:23 PM
Quote from: Peanutbutter on June 07, 2015, 09:20:00 PM
Can't believe how many people didn't see that coming, I mean come on! It's called dramatic irony! What's really ridiculous is seeing some say they're ditching the show. So, the rapes didn't make you leave, but a child being burned to death is your limit? Well, okay then.

I'm not exactly sure, but are you insinuating that burning a child to death is not that bad compared to rape? Both are horrible things, but being burned to death is not only excrutiatingly painful, but you're also dead by the end of it. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that's the worse of these two.

Personally, though, I find that so many people are incredibly narrow-minded in their complaints about either of those scenes. I agreed that the Jaime/Cersei rape scene was terrible because it wasn't suppoosed to be a rape scene in the first placed and was completely out of character for Jaime. That Sansa scene was a completely different situation, though. It wasn't a rape scene trying to be passed off as sexy or for mere shock value. It's showing how dire her situation is, as well as how cruel a medieval-style society could be towards women. The fact that people can't separate that from the Jaime/Cersei scene in terms of context is absurd.

As for Shirreen, yes, what happened to her was horrible. So was babies being killed backin season 2, Robb Stark, his pregnant wife, and mother being brutally murdered in season 3, and countless other atrocities that have happened in this series so far. How exactly do people seem to be forgetting all of that stuff by this point in the series?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 08, 2015, 03:02:03 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on June 08, 2015, 12:15:52 AMSo what makes Stannis think that the North or anyone will support a Kinslayer?

Going just by show logic since the circumstances are different, here: He's banking on the hopes that they hate the Boltons more for not only betraying the Starks, but also being responsible for the death of several Northern Lords, just like how Robert's Rebellion started back when Aerys Targeryan executed the Lords of several great houses at once. So Stannis seems to assume that the Northern Lords, whether they hate Stannis or not, will consider him the lesser of two evils compared to the House that literally betrayed the North.

That, of course, isn't to say that he's right or that his logic is sound. In fact, as we've seen in the past, his logic has failed him before. When he had Renly assassinated, the Tyrells allied themselves with the Lannisters over him, even though he expected them to default to his side. Stannis isn't exactly the best at understanding how other people will think and react to his decisions, but that logic is probably what's going through his head, I imagine.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 08, 2015, 11:18:25 PM
Daenerys Moonchild Targaryen (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqHS-CAG4PI)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 15, 2015, 12:50:56 AM
So how exactly will the Night's Watch handle thousands of Wildlings (including a giant and Tormund) now that the only thing close to an ambassador between both of them is disposed?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 15, 2015, 03:16:03 PM
They pulled off the "For The Watch" scene! And....they still left it off as a cliffhanger.....

Now, the circumstances for how this happens in the books versus the show are completely different. The book does the "Pink Letter" which I won't talk about for potential spoiler reasons. As for the show, we'll have to wait and see how they handle the wildlings, but keep in mind that most of them are women and children who can't fight, so if worse came to worse, the Night's Watch would have an advantage. At any rate, this whole stabbing scene, unlike the Red Wedding, seems more spontaneous than properly planned out. Additionally, while it goes against this series's usual standards, the fact that Mellisandre made it back to The Wall and we have seen firsthand that the power of the Red God (or at least Red Magic) can resurrect people, is not a  mere coincidence in my eyes. They also clearly did this scene last for a reason. I think that if you put two-and-two together, Jon Snow may not have seen his final days just yet.

Anyways, it looks like they went against expectations and did the "Holy Shit!" events in the season finale rather than the penultimate episode. Personally I loved it.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on June 15, 2015, 05:28:37 PM
I actually liked this season overall. Too bad a number of people are dumping on it because of Arya and Sansa not doing enough "cool stuff". Nevermind the situations they're both in. I'm positive that everything was building towards a lot of bigger payoffs especially since next season will outrun the books.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 15, 2015, 06:53:02 PM
This season still has a very high rating on RT, so clearly the people turned off by this season are in the minority. In fact, several (most) TV critics that I follow still love this show, and were happy with the season minus a few notable complaints.

There were some story-line changes that made little sense, but that could be said of every season so far, and it's hardly unique to this one. Other than that, a majority of the heat that this season got had less to do with story and characters and more to do with its controversial scenes involving women. As for that, people can be baffling at times. I mean, nobody raised hell when Dany literally got raped on her wedding night in the very first episode (and most people even claimed to like Drogo as a character), but they say that the show is going too far when Ramsay Bolton (a known terrible person), rapes Sansa just because they know her better now. So, in other words, people are willing to turn a blind eye to the depiction of rape when it happens to people that they don't care about, but it's only right to say that it's going too far when it happens to someone that you're familiar with? That in itself is pretty despicable double-standards, IMO.

Really, I only find myself agreeing that Dorne felt like an incredibly pointless story-line this season. Other than that, the majority of everything else was up to the standards that we have come to expect from this show.

I did get a bit annoyed at Sansa not being able to help herself, though. As for Arya, I actually quite liked the "Karate Kid" for assassins type training that she went through, and I was invested the whole way through that story-line, myself.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 30, 2015, 10:12:06 PM
The show has been confirmed to at least be getting 8 seasons: http://www.ew.com/article/2015/07/30/game-thrones-eight-seasons

I know that D&D always said since the beginning that they wanted to end this show at season 7 or 8, which makes sense given where the story is at right now. Having it end with the eighth season seems like just enough time to wrap up the story without it feeling too rushed. However, HBO executives want this show to run for much longer due to its massive world-wide success, and I sincerely hope that they don't end up forcing that on the showrunners, because I'd absolutely hate to see a great show get dragged out way past its prime just for some extra profit.

I'm for the spin-off idea, myself. After this show ends with season 8, do some spin-off mini-series' or movies exploring the rich history of this Universe, like The Dance of the Dragons, The Tales of Dunk and Egg, or Robert's Rebellion, for example. That way you can at least leave the main story-line alone.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 05, 2015, 07:53:55 PM
Somehow this qualifies as news, but I find it amusing all the same. http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/2540152-teammates-dropping-game-of-thrones-spoilers-is-tearing-the-nfl-camps-apart

Television that was once meant for nerds has now affected television that's meant for jocks....or at least just the millions of Americans who watch sports. Oh, the irony. :humhumhum:
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Daikun on August 09, 2015, 01:37:24 AM
I hope this gets a live broadcast. (http://www.thewrap.com/game-of-thrones-superfan-demands-trial-by-combat-in-new-york-supreme-court-case)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Daikun on August 22, 2015, 02:50:14 AM
The show may finish before the books. (http://www.inquisitr.com/2355559/game-of-thrones-tv-show-may-finish-before-books)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Foggle on August 22, 2015, 03:32:54 AM
I think that's a given at this point. ;)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 22, 2015, 10:49:29 AM
That's been highly suspected by fans for years. Martin takes an average of about five years between book releases. Going by that logic, we might get TWOW by late next year, but even then it would take at least another five years for the final novel to come out. The show will have to wrap up long before then.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 20, 2015, 10:32:18 PM
http://www.ew.com/article/2015/09/20/game-thrones-emmys

It's funny how the most controversial season of the show (both in terms of PC outrage and quality) is the one that finally won the Emmy for best drama.

Personally, while I would've picked Saul for best drama this year, I'm not complaining, too much. While I agree that this season had its flaws, I found a lot of the major criticisms to be kind of ridiculous, since the controversial scenes fit the context of the story, while most of the story and character complaints were kind of unwarranted if you just payed attention (most stuff was explained). My only major gripes of the season was Dorne, which sucked, and a few big shock-value moments which I felt were poorly handled.

That said, I would've rather had this series win for an earlier season, myself, when it was at it's highest level of quality.

I also find it a bit questionable that Dinklage won for best supporting actor for THIS season, considering how underpayed his role was. Literally any other season would've made sense for him to win (and he DID already win once for the first season), but personally I feel like Jonathan Banks got robbed this year. And I absolutely love Dinklage, but he barely got to do anything this season.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on September 20, 2015, 10:55:29 PM
I would have supported the show winning for season 3, but this year, OITNB, Mad Men, and Saul were all better candidates IMO.

It's hard to argue that a lot of its Emmys weren't well-deserved, though.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 20, 2015, 11:17:05 PM
Award ceremonies are always kind of BS in that way.

Personally, I feel like the show could have easily won for seasons 2 or 4, as well as Dinklage for best supporting actor for those years. But while GOT was still a great show this year, there's no question that it wasn't its strongest output.

This felt more like an "overdue" win. Like the Emmy's were admitting that the show got snubbed the win in earlier years, and finally threw it a bone, when it should've just won for an earlier season to begin with.

For example, while I love Breaking Bad, my favorite season was the fourth. While I still loved the final season, I actually honestly feel that GOT season four was stronger, that year. It should've won for that, IMO.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 08, 2016, 06:20:55 PM
Season 6 trailer is out: http://youtu.be/CuH3tJPiP-U

Jon Snow being resurrected is the worst kept secret in the history of television. But they are still trying their darnedest to convince us that he's not coming back.

Also, here's hoping for Cleganebowl.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on March 09, 2016, 12:44:12 AM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 08, 2016, 06:20:55 PM
Season 6 trailer is out: http://youtu.be/CuH3tJPiP-U

Jon Snow being resurrected is the worst kept secret in the history of television. But they are still trying their darnedest to convince us that he's not coming back.

Also, here's hoping for Cleganebowl.



I must be in the minority than, because I'm NOT convinced yet he's coming back. I hope for it yes, I am not putting past them to keep him dead or do a bait-and-switch.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 09, 2016, 12:57:53 AM
If you read the books and pay attention to the show, all of the clues are already there.

Also, it was leaked months ago that Kit Harington was seen on-set during the filming of an outdoor scene, and he was wearing a battle armor costume.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on March 16, 2016, 07:12:19 AM
Stannis the Meh-nis. (http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/stannis-baratheon-actor-stephen-dillane-doesnt-understand-game-of-thrones-success-a6933916.html)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 16, 2016, 09:08:30 AM
So basically, Stephen Dillan is to Game of Thrones what Orson Wells was to Transformers.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on March 28, 2016, 03:05:45 AM
(http://photos1.meetupstatic.com/photos/event/5/f/c/0/600_440544512.jpeg)

So after getting poisoned, Jack Gleeson performs in a family puppet show.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 24, 2016, 11:18:59 PM
I enjoyed the premiere, overall. Granted, everything that happened in this episode was pretty predictable for the most part.

Like last season, my only real strong gripe so far is with the Dorne plot-line.

Spoiler
While I don't mind them killing off Doran, Areo, and Trystane, since they were pretty boring, useless characters on the show, it does cement in the fact that we'll never get the great versions of the former two characters from the books. And it's really a shame, because The Dornish Master Plan could have been so interesting on the show if handled right. My only real gripe is that the actor who played Doran actually has some talent, so killing him off and letting the Sand Snakes (who are portrayed by terrible actresses) live on just lowers the quality even further. But, hey, even if we don't get the awesome Dorne plot from the books, at least we won't have to deal with the show version for much longer. In case you haven't noticed, Ellaria and the Sand Snakes aren't very smart, so they are sure to be dead before the end of this season if it follows typical Game of Thrones logic. In the end, Oberyn was the only Dornish character worth a shit on the show.
[close]
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 24, 2016, 11:31:48 PM
Spoiler
I was wondering if Jaime was so intent on getting revenge, why did he simply not turn his ship back and get Doran to help him fight the Sand Snakes? He knew that he and Ellaria weren't seeing eye-to-eye. Or he could've gone to some mercenaries and use his Lannister name to send them into Dorne.
[close]

That said, I liked it more than I expected.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 24, 2016, 11:42:40 PM
Yeah, I was complaining about that since last season, but then I got the idea that the Dan and Dave knew what a disaster the Dorne story-line was, and decided to just fuck everything rather than try to make sense of it all. I really do expect them to find a way to kill off Ellaria and the Sand Snakes this season, or at least write them off of the show so that they don't have to deal with Dorne anymore. I see it as a case of trying to get rid of something that's already broken beyond repair. At least, I hope that's what they're doing, here.

Also, since nobody else is going to say it:

Arya is Daredevil, and Stannis fucked a 200 year-old woman. Just give that a moment to sink in.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 25, 2016, 05:33:26 AM
Spoiler
Thinking about it, Ellaria really blew her chances at getting revenge at the Lannisters since her alternative plan could have been:

1. Let Trystane and Myrcella go to King's Landing, but with Dorne assassins disguised as guardsmen
2. Have the assassins kill King Tommen in a way that looks like an accident
3. With the newly crowned King Trystane, slowly bring in more Dorne soldiers while claiming it's to boost King's Landing's security after how incompetent Tommen was at handling the Sparrows.
4. As soon as Myrcella gives birth to a child, have Ellaria come in and raise it.
5. Kill Trystane and Myrcella in another staged accident.
6. Ellaria rules over Westeros with figurehead king.
7. Profit

Sure, that wouldn't factor outside threats like the White Walkers and etc, but Ellaria wouldn't know that.
[close]
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 25, 2016, 07:53:12 AM
Well, the problem with that is assuming that it would actually be easy to pull any of that off. Tommen has taste testers sample everything before they reach his lips (after the way that Joffrey died), so poison is a no go, and as King, he is constantly under guard, so it'd take someone with the skills of faceless men to actually pull off the kind of set-up kill which you're suggesting.

And since Cersei hates Dorne, and especially disrespects bastards (Ellaria is of course a Sand), there's no way that she would trust her sending in anymore Dornishmen to King's landing. Most higher-ups in King's landing wouldn't trust her, for that matter.

Granted, I agree that she's an idiot on the show. I'm just not so sure that specific plan would be plausible.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 27, 2016, 05:45:31 AM
The Game Grumps asked Grey Worm to do an American accent. This was the result. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQcHhwuRy8I)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 30, 2016, 08:28:26 PM
(http://static1.squarespace.com/static/52fc05c9e4b08fc45bd99090/571e2d0f4c2f858f265f109f/571e2d0f8a65e2b3ce174a15/1461595596379/mgot-601-death-scroll-1200x800.jpg)

Damn it, Jaime.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 30, 2016, 09:50:13 PM
Alright, after letting it stew in my mind for some time, I have to admit that there are a lot more flaws in this episode than just Dorne. I mean, Dorne is garbage: Ellaria and the Sand Snakes plan to avenge Oberyn's death by....killing his only brother and nephew; way to go guys, I'm sure that the Lannisters are shaking in their boots. I mean, it's not like using Trystane's betrothal to Myrcella to give the Martells a claim to the throne would be a good idea. Only an idiot would come up with that.

However, that shit story aside, while not horrible, I'm noticing a lot of holes and issues in the other story-lines.

For one thing, Davos's state of mind makes absolutely no sense. He has devoted his life to Stannis, and he should either be trying to kill Milisandre for revenge (who he has always hated) or at least be in a state of grief or depression at the deaths of Stannis and Shireen. Also, It's far too convenient that the men most loyal to John happened to come across his body before Thorne and the others came back to collect it. Furthermore, out of all of the reasons that Thorne gave for justifying John's assassination, why didn't he just go with the most obvious and sensible one? Jon allied himself with Stannis, Stannis and all of his men are dead, so the Boltons will demand retribution for The Watch playing a part in the war (which is completely against their vows), and thus killing Jon was the best way to make clear their neutral stance in opposition to his.

Meanwhile, Tyrion and Varys walking around Mereen without guards is fucking stupid. Where did the dogs run off to during Brienne's attack on the Bolton instead of fighting back or trying to kill Sansa and Theon? The logical thing for Jaime to do would be to hold Trystane hostage in King's Landing to ensure Doran's compliance with his demands. Yes, Ellaria kills Doran, but there's no way that Jaime would know about that at that time. And how come Melisandre's glamour wears off when she takes off her necklace in this episode, when she looked completely normal with it off back in season four?

I could go into a lot more issues which I picked up on, but to be fair it's more nit-picky stuff. Even so, while I still enjoy the series, it does feel like its biggest flaws are in trying to tie into the books, even loosely. I honestly wish that they'd just go completely off book and make up their own ending instead of tethering their plot to where GRRM wants to end it. The ending that he's going for takes years of planning and far more content to get to. Trying to do that in just two and a half seasons will lead to some pretty messy results, IMO.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 01, 2016, 09:05:44 PM
Sigh, more Ramsay shenanigans.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 02, 2016, 12:14:51 AM
OK....this episode sucked. The script was awful (say what you will about Dan and Dave, but they at least come up with interesting dialogue; too bad that they didn't handle this one). The direction was sporadic. The acting was underwhelming. And it was the most fan-service pandering thing that I've ever seen out of this show. I honestly felt that I was watching bad fan-fiction at times.

Ramsay killing Roose was so telegraphed that there's no way that it wouldn't have happened, but did it have to be in the most idiotic set-up ever? I refuse to believe that the same Roose who played a part in planning the Red Wedding was stupid enough to not expect his son to make an attempt on his life. Ramsay having his dogs kill Walda and his brother was one of the most unintentionally funny scenes that I've seen from a show like this.

Tyrion risking his life on a whim that the dragons would be friendly with him is one of the most out of character moments that I've seen in this series. The Tyrion of past seasons would be able to outsmart other people into doing his dirty work for him. What if the dragons weren't friendly? He could have died. A calm and collected Tyrion would think about these things. He wouldn't just impulsively do it and only retrospectively realize how stupid it was to do that.

And despite it being the worst kept secret in TV history that Jon would be resurrected, I at least wished that it would have been executed in a better episode, with better writing and directing.

For the record, I blame the writer and director of this episode. It doesn't sour my opinion of the whole season, and I still look forward to future episodes. This episode was just ass, though, and it has nothing to do with being wildly different from the books. It was just bad TV. Though, also for the record, yes, I fully expect the future books to be better.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 02, 2016, 12:47:16 AM
Also, speaking of Jon Snow's resurrection, the entire scene plays out like a bad rip-off of Buffy's resurrection scene from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The resemblance is so uncanny that it's kind of hilarious. They even both happen at the very end of their respective episodes, with a red-haired witch casting a resurrection spell on the deceased character, believing that they have failed after nothing happens and leaving along with the group, and then having the main character wake up when nobody is around to see it. Both also happen during each show's sixth season.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 02, 2016, 08:26:22 AM
One of my biggest gripes with Game of Thrones is how characters are so easily willing to ally with openly monstrous people without questioning a potential betrayal or fallout from such a pact. I can understand when Cersei did it when she got Joffrey to become the king, but not when the half the cast do it. Unless Roose had a death wish for himself and his own House.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 02, 2016, 08:59:47 AM
While there have been other shaky alliances in the past, who else besides Cersei and Roose have unquestioningly allied themselves with monsters? I certainly can't apply that to half of the cast, myself.

As for characters making questionable decisions, that has always been more of a product of the show. In the books, there are a lot less one-dimensionally evil characters, and a lot more rationale is given to weighty decisions and alliances. In that version, Roose never mentions anything about having another son, and even if he was going to, he'd never be stupid enough to gloat to Ramsay about it. Furthermore, Ramsay is not nearly the biggest threat to his life. That honor would have to go to House Manderly, who has yet to appear on the show.

To be fair, though, I've always understood that the show doesn't have the time and luxury of explaining every little detail with great care, so I've always let it slide when characters make rather questionable decisions so long as they don't idiotically let their guards down. So my gripe with Roose's death has less to do with who killed him and more to do with how it happened. A better scenario would be him finding out that his son was born, trying to send someone to kill Ramsay since he would know that Ramsay will try the same on him, and then being double-crossed by his own men who have become more loyal to Ramsay lately. It's far from perfect reasoning, but it's better than what the show came up with. At least that version of Roose would have died from being outsmarted like he should have, rather than from being a trusting moron.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 02, 2016, 05:48:01 PM
I'm kind of taken aback by how many people seem to genuinely like this episode. This is the only video which I found that points out all of the problems on display, here: https://youtu.be/IjFrn4S1H4k
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 02, 2016, 05:53:04 PM
I sort of liked Bran's scene with the Three-Eyed Raven, and Euron's entrance was all right. I guess people were relieved to get a Dorneless episode this week.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 02, 2016, 05:58:59 PM
My dislike for this episode has more to do with numerous major characters being uncharacteristically stupid. It had a few good scenes, but way more that pissed me off.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 02, 2016, 06:05:40 PM
I'm still wondering why Thorne even let Jon and the Wildlings into Castle Black in the first place if he was just going to kill one and try to exile the others.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 02, 2016, 07:25:20 PM
Probably because if he did, then some men loyal to Jon would have overthrown him and opened the gate in his place. If he instead killed Jon along with a number of other Brothers, then much like Julius Caesar's assassination, the blame would be shared and other men would be more reluctant to retaliate.

Here's a better question: Why did Thorne even need to wait for Davos and the others to come out in the first place? He could have either sent in other men to kill them all, or he could have just let them starve there since there's really no need for him to retrieve Jon's body. Well, technically the reason could be that they need to burn his body for ceremonies reasons and select a new Lord Commander after that, but it's not like he was following tradition by killing Jon in the first place.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 04, 2016, 08:34:59 PM
Despite my negative feelings about the previous episode, I'm obviously still a fan of this show, but one thing that troubles me is the clear Hollywood-ication of the story and characters. It's making people think that this story is about the "True Rulers" like Jon and Daenerys uniting forces, vanquishing the evil Whitewalkers, and having the rest of the surviving cast living happily ever after. However, this is definitely not the case, at least in the books.

The bottom line of this entire story is that things like magic, prophecy, religious zealots, royal blood-lines, and true good and evil are complete bull-shit, and if you've ever read or watched an interview with GRRM, you'd probably get that out of what he says. Yes, Jon Snow probably belongs to a royal lineage, but most of the story so far is how the idea of a feudal monarchy is almost always a terrible form of government, as evidenced by people like Aerys, Robert, and Joffrey. Furthermore, some of the smartest people on the show like Tyrion, Varys, and Littlefinger have no royal lineage behind them, yet would arguably be more effective rulers than most schmucks who inherit that position as a birthright, regardless of whether they are good people or not. And while Jon Snow being resurrected is exciting for the story, I don't believe that it's for the reasons that people think. If you see what Martin did with Lady Stoneheart, I'm similarly expecting a lot of negative consequences to Jon's resurrection.

It's also very telling that people liked Mellisandre because she was with Stannis, hated her after sacrificing Shireen, and now love her again for reviving Jon. People like when she's doing awesome things for the characters that they like, but never stopped to realize that she was exactly as bad as the High Sparrow the whole time: a religious zealot who sees herself as justified by following her religion, and thus is behind the loss of tons of lives in the name of her god. If you think that killing Shireen was somehow any worse or different from what she was already doing, then clearly you missed the whole point. What she and Stannis did in the name of religion was always wrong, regardless of whether it negatively affected characters that you like or not.

Similarly, people tend to assume that the Whitewalkers are the Armies of Mordor of this story and that characters like Bloodraven and the Children of the Forest are complete good. In the show, this might be the case, however keep in mind that Martin has made it clear that he hates one-dimensionally good or evil characters, and in the novels there is actually no hard evidence to suggest that the Whitewalkers are actually pure evil; meanwhile several clues point to Bloodraven and the Children of the Forest having some ulterior motives that they're hiding from Bran.

My overall point being that the overarching themes of this story have either been severely downplayed, highly manipulated, or even completely removed from the show. Now, don't get me wrong, Game of Thrones is still great television for the most part. I just wanted to point out, though, how the product that we are getting as it is now does very much seem to be pro-Hollywood-fiction-entertainment-values rather than what Martin originally intended for it to be.

Of course, this could easily just be me blowing steam out of my ass and being a pretentious prick, so take my words with a grain of salt.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 08, 2016, 11:50:09 PM
So they're going the cock-tease route with the whole Ned and Lyanna Stark flashbacks, eh? Not really a fan of that approach, but I do kind of understand why they need to do it in order to build up dramatic effect.

On the whole, I liked this episode much better than the previous one; though seeing as how a lot of people loved that episode simply because shit happened, even if it was stupid shit, I expect a lot of people to complain about this episode being "too slow and boring." Honestly, I've always preferred the more somber and character development-heavy episodes myself, as opposed to ones just trying to force the plot forward, myself.

I do still have a number of problems here, though, mostly due to the more Hollywood approach of this season. For one thing, why does Gilly's child apparently never age? Clearly a few years have passed over the course of the show, but Gilly's child has always been in the cradling phase since season two, apparently.

As for Jon, if he's going the loophole route of having his watch end because he technically died and thus fulfilled his vows, what exactly gave him the authority to execute the perpetrators of his murder in the first place? You can't exactly have it both ways. Either you give up your Lord Commander status from the start or you're stuck with it, I believe. Of course, this is really just a nitpick since I'm sure that whoever took his place as Lord Commander would have started out by doing the same, anyways. Still, do the writers realize that Jon can't just give the command of the Night's Watch to whoever he wants to run it? The new Lord Commander is always decided by an election.

While it's not really a flaw or anything in terms of the show, it's worth pointing out that the Umbers turning over Rickon Stark to the Boltons would never happen in the books. Not simply because Rickon isn't even with the Umbers in the books, but because the Umbers fucking hate the Boltons, being that one of their own Lords was killed at the Red Wedding, including several of their men. The popular theory is that Rickon Stark will be one of the flayed bodies that we see during the battle which will presumably take place by the end of the season. I wouldn't be surprised by it, since he's always been a pretty useless character, even in the books, but it does feel odd that the show would bring the character back just to be killed off immediately.

Putting those and other minor gripes aside, though, I found the rest of the episode to be fairly enjoyable. It's not the great television that the first four seasons of the show were, IMO, but it's well above average entertainment for what it is.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 09, 2016, 01:30:34 AM
Wondering where they're going with Daenery's arc. Some of it just feels like a retread of the worst she went through back in season 1, it's hard to imagine an end that doesn't involve either Daario sacrificing himself, Jorah succumbing to Grayscale, or both somehow surviving and bringing her back to Meereen.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 09, 2016, 08:09:29 AM
She'll most likely bend the entire Khalasar to her will with Drogon, be inspired to not waste any more time, gather her forces, and sail for Westeros.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on May 09, 2016, 10:40:27 AM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 08, 2016, 11:50:09 PM

As for Jon, if he's going the loophole route of having his watch end because he technically died and thus fulfilled his vows, what exactly gave him the authority to execute the perpetrators of his murder in the first place? You can't exactly have it both ways. Either you give up your Lord Commander status from the start or you're stuck with it, I believe. Of course, this is really just a nitpick since I'm sure that whoever took his place as Lord Commander would have started out by doing the same, anyways. Still, do the writers realize that Jon can't just give the command of the Night's Watch to whoever he wants to run it? The new Lord Commander is always decided by an election.

While it's not really a flaw or anything in terms of the show, it's worth pointing out that the Umbers turning over Rickon Stark to the Boltons would never happen in the books. Not simply because Rickon isn't even with the Umbers in the books, but because the Umbers fucking hate the Boltons, being that one of their own Lords was killed at the Red Wedding, including several of their men. The popular theory is that Rickon Stark will be one of the flayed bodies that we see during the battle which will presumably take place by the end of the season. I wouldn't be surprised by it, since he's always been a pretty useless character, even in the books, but it does feel odd that the show would bring the character back just to be killed off immediately.



It was after he killed the mutineers that he officially quit. That's why he was able to execute them.



As for Ricon, I've heard its because that the Umbers might be doing it to destroy Ramsay's army from within. Basically playing the long game to kill him when he puts down his guard. We'll have to see if it happens that way. Personally, I liked both episodes and I'm ecstatic that finally Jon doesn't have to be at the Wall anymore and can finally interact with a lot more of the cast.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 09, 2016, 11:29:47 AM
You missed my point: Only the Lord Commander of the Night's Watch has that kind of authority. Jon uses the loophole that since he died, his watch has ended, and he is no longer tied to his vows to the Night's Watch. That in and of itself is fine, but before bringing up that loophole, he does assume the responsibility of the Lord Commander by executing the mutineers, which technically he couldn't do unless he had re-sworn all of his oaths like the first time when he became a Brother of the Night's Watch. The point being that Jon Snow technically had no right to take the responsibilities of a Lord Commander again after being resurrected since his death absolved him of his previous oath.

The theory that you are bringing up about the Umbers is something that only applies to the books. In the books, several Northern houses, most notably House Manderly (who seems to have been cut from the show), in addition to Houses Mormont, Umber, Dustin, and several others seem to clearly be conspiring against the Boltons and Freys, pretending to be loyal to them while clearly plotting to overthrow them from behind their backs. The Great Northern Conspiracy theory is that they are planning to make Jon Snow the next King in the North since in the books, Robb named Jon as his heir should he die during their war with the Lannisters, and many of the allied Northern houses are attempting to honor that by first finding a way to get rid of the Boltons and Stannis (who is still very much alive and with a full-fledged army in the books) and clear a path for the Starks to make a comeback. This isn't just because Robb's death at the Red Wedding pissed them off, but because they also lost a lot of their own high lords and men at the Red Wedding as well, so they are just as pissed off as the Starks about it, hence the phrase "The North Remembers."

There are a few problems with that theory working out in the show. Firstly, they killed Rickon's Direwolf as proof that he's a Stark. Had they brought it alive and caged up, that might be one thing, but outright killing it is a pretty clear sign that they do not support the Starks anymore. Furthermore, the fact that Small Jon is the Lord of the Umbers now is in itself already a huge departure from the books, since he was one of the casualties of the Red Wedding in that version of the story, but in the show he's portrayed as a son who doesn't really care about the old generation of Northern Lords who have mostly been wiped out at this point. Thirdly is that since Lord Umber clearly knows that Ramsay killed his father, he should be well aware that he's rather unpredictable and a complete nut-case, so bringing Rickon directly to him would be way too dangerous. If it were Roose in his place, that would be one thing, since Roose would understand that Rickon is a valuable hostage and should be kept alive, but as we've already seen, Ramsay has absolutely zero interest in good political strategies. The fact that he killed off Walda and her baby is proof of that, since he essentially just made enemies of the Freys by doing so, which was a loss of valuable backing that the Boltons needed considering that they already lost the support of the Lannisters with Tywin's death and Ramsay's marriage to Sansa. To trust someone like that with the life of a Stark is just flat-out absurd.

If the Umbers are indeed playing the long-game in the show and plan to turn on Ramsay and Lord Karstark, then as far as the show goes, it will have been a poorly set-up twist and if it works out, it would have been relying on way too much luck to do so.

I understand that non-book readers probably don't notice and don't care about these things, and that's fine. I have no problem with enjoying the show as just good, entertaining television. But I'm only pointing out that there is a clear drop in quality from being great television in the first four seasons, and a lot of that has to do with how much the show has departed from the books while still trying to loosely tie key plot points to the books at the same time. As I've said multiple times before, the show would just be better off going completely in its own direction at this point, and disregarding the books altogether. Trying to work its way around a lot of important aspects of the books while still trying to show off all of the main events causes glaring plot-holes and awkward character motivations like we've been getting since the fifth season, IMO.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on May 09, 2016, 12:34:20 PM
I didn't miss anything. I'm pretty sure there's never been a case within the Night's Watch where they had someone die only temporary. There's no precedent that says when someone dies they must re-take the oath.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 09, 2016, 01:19:12 PM
I already said that it wasn't even that big of a deal, just a nitpick. But since you are so persistent on trying to argue the point, here's the definitive response to what you claim.

Quote from: Peanutbutter on May 09, 2016, 12:34:20 PMI didn't miss anything. I'm pretty sure there's never been a case within the Night's Watch where they had someone die only temporary. There's no precedent that says when someone dies they must re-take the oath.

Quote"Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come."

That pretty clearly, unarguably says that your membership with the Night's Watch ends upon your death. Jon dies. His watch is ended. He is resurrected, but it doesn't change the fact that he died and thus fulfilled his vows. That means that when he comes back to life, he is no longer a Brother of the Night's Watch, and Jon even follows this logic at the end of the episode. Except before that he carried out the duties of a Lord Commander even though he technically had no authority to.

Obviously the people who originated those vows probably didn't know anything about the possibility to resurrect people. But, just because it doesn't say anything about re-taking an oath doesn't mean that you wouldn't have to. If you fulfill your vows by dying and end your brotherhood with the Watch, and then are resurrected as a free man, obviously you would have to to re-take your oath to become a Brother again. Jon Snow did not do this, and thus had no right to be acting as the Lord Commander.

Like I said though, I merely just pointed it out, but said it didn't really matter that much in the grand scheme of things.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 12, 2016, 12:31:25 AM
Reminded of Ser Barristan today, and I'm still a little pissed off at his death. Not because of his character, but due to his actor Ian McElhinney being very devoted to his role and quit some other acting jobs to focus on playing Barristan.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 12, 2016, 01:21:58 AM
Not to mention that he's still alive in the books (and he's a POV character, at that), was incredibly underutilized on the show, and had a disappointingly underwhelming death scene for one of the best fighters in Westeros.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 12, 2016, 01:30:01 AM
And McElhinney even wrote to D&D, telling them why killing off Barristan was a bad idea and how they could bolster his characterization instead. (http://watchersonthewall.com/oxford-union-panel-with-dd-kit-harington-and-john-bradley/)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 16, 2016, 12:25:45 AM
Alright, this was a good episode. Yes, there were some plot contrivance and Ramsay is still a cartoon character to me, but the majority of it felt like classic Game of Thrones and it had me hooked the whole way through.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 22, 2016, 09:29:12 PM
Sad ending aside, I'm wondering what exactly Bran has gained from the Three-Eyed Raven that was worth going all the way up North and losing three of his friends. And how is sending Brienne less conspicuous than sending a raven, Sansa? It just seems like an excuse to send her to her death.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 22, 2016, 10:50:18 PM
So that's what Hodor means! I actually do expect this to be in the books, since it's a very George R. R. Martin-esque plot-twist in how it brings things full circle.

Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on May 22, 2016, 09:29:12 PMSad ending aside, I'm wondering what exactly Bran has gained from the Three-Eyed Raven that was worth going all the way up North and losing three of his friends. And how is sending Brienne less conspicuous than sending a raven, Sansa? It just seems like an excuse to send her to her death.

On the first point, I was expecting to see a certain important reveal in one of Bran's flashbacks, but it's possible that he learned something off-screen that we aren't privy to just yet. We'll have to wait and see when he wakes up.

As for Sansa sending Brienne instead of a Raven, you are aware that Raven's are incredibly risky to send since they can easily be intercepted by enemies, right? Sansa sending a trusted person rather than a Raven to a specific recipient is the same sort of logic that one would use to deliver a message that they don't want listened in on by having their phone tapped. She wants to send for help from her uncle without Ramsay or his supporters catching wind of it, thus only expecting opposition from Jon and underestimating the amount of men aligned against them. It's actually one of the more sensible strategies which she could employ; although, that's assuming that Littlefinger isn't just giving her faulty information on his part.

Anyways, this is the best episode of the season by far, IMO. It truly had me engrossed the entire way through and some scenes sent chills down my spine.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 23, 2016, 07:00:29 AM
I know they said the raven would be less fragile of a messenger, but I'm wondering how Brienne-a over six-foot tall knight with a mixed success rate in keeping herself covert and who has only now been accepted as an ally after seasons of distrust from Arya and Sansa-would be a preferable choice. It just seems like a flawed tactic on Sansa's behalf not to tell everyone of Littlefinger's involvement so they can better handle the situation rather than send her limited resources to take care of it.

Not saying I disliked the episode, it's definitely the best in this season so far. I do quite lament wasting Max Von Sydow here. It seemed strange to recast the Three-Eyed Raven with a much higher-profile actor only to have him be either stuck in a tree or monologue to Bran for a handful of episodes before dying.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 23, 2016, 12:06:34 PM
Brienne definitely isn't the brightest bulb, but it's pretty clear to Sansa that she can trust her after Brienne never gave up on rescuing her from Ramsay. And Sansa not telling everyone about Littlefinger is exactly what she learned from Littlefinger, about keeping your sources of information to yourself. It's the same concept of Varys having his "little birds," and it's a key component to playing the game of thrones. As for sending her alone, I figure that sending a large party is conspicuous, whereas sending someone who's both loyal and can fend for themself s a bit more ideal.

As for wasting a great actor in Max Von Sydow, I wasn't too surprised given how badly they already wasted Doran's actor in favor of the Sandsnakes  (ugghhh....); even Jonothan Pryce has been really underutilized. Aside from Sean Bean, no other big actor from films has ever been given much presence on this show. I suppose that the showrunners maybe don't want them to overshadow the main cast. That's about the best explanation that I can think of.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 23, 2016, 03:41:53 PM
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTC1CRVBCAbrNZO1P4BsqKcDePIjBZuYnRjEtV7VSu684CbdnQtSXZw)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 29, 2016, 09:58:47 PM
Wondering why the Braavosi play romanticized Joffrey and Cersei liked that given their reputation in Westeros, Dorne, and probably more nations. Wonder if they just didn't get the message.

But on the bright side, finally! Benjen!
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 29, 2016, 11:26:10 PM
Interesting. George R. R. Martin has sworn that in the books, Cold Hands is not Benjen, and his identity remains a popular fan-debated mystery to this day. It looks like the show decided to simplify things and introduce him as Benjen, though, who's whereabouts are still unknown in the books. While I don't mind this liberty being taken, I do question why they waited so long to reveal him when he should have turned up as far back as season four in order to lead Bran to Bloodraven in the first place. It kind of feels like Deus Ex Machina that he just happened to get to Bran and Meera in the nick of time rather than having been their travel companion for quite a while. It's a nitpick on my part, but certainly worth mentioning.

As for the play treating Joffrey and Cersei like heroes, it's important to know that while most characters that we know from the show and books think of them as terrible people (and rightfully so), the less educated commoners don't know any better, and thanks to Margaery giving to the poor and convincing Joffrey to do so as well, they actually have a pretty good reputation among many commoners. The same was true of Aerys II Targaryen (aka "The Mad King"), who in the books many commoners still think was a just and noble king. Add on to that the fact that Braavosi who live on a different continent entirely would be even more oblivious to the politics of Westeros, and it's easy to see how they have the rather skewed interpretation of reality that they do.

I have to question why Sam saw fit to take Heartsbane. It's like he's asking to have his father make good on his threat to kill him. I understand that The Watch needs Valayrian steel swords in order to fight the White Walkers, but it's not like one extra sword will make a difference, and I doubt that's what his logic for taking it was in the first place. That said, I also must question why his father hates wildlings so much. It makes sense for northern lords to hate them because they frequently raid their villages and cause havoc in their lands. Southern lords, with the exception of those who are actually members of the Night's Watch, have never had to deal with wildlings, don't even take them that seriously, and typically couldn't care less about them. In fact, while Sam hasn't met up with his family again in the books yet, he still plans to send Gilly and Sam Jr. to stay with them, and doesn't even contemplate hiding the fact that she's a wildling since he knows that nobody over there will make a big deal out of it.

As for the stuff in King's Landing, I'm pretty positive now that the High Sparrow is full of shit. He's totally a player in the game of thrones, and he has everyone convinced that he's a man of pure faith. Clearly he has ulterior motives, and real skills at getting what he wants by the way that he managed to manipulate Tommen to back his cause.

And finally, we return the the plot from the Riverlands. It's about damn time that we address the aftermath of the Red Wedding that the show completely neglected for the last two-and-a-half seasons for some reason. It's cool to see the Freys again and we know from the trailers that Jaime will be heading down to Riverrun just like he does in the books. Also we get to see Edmure again, and it'll be interesting to see how the show handles this version of the plot-line involving him and the Blackfish.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 30, 2016, 12:24:13 AM
Yeah, the twist with Benjen did seem too by-the-books for Game of Thrones. Like why the Children of the Forest pick him? Why not other Night's Watch members? And why not more Night's Watch members so they could've defended their cave a little better?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 30, 2016, 02:29:14 AM
Well, actually there is a reason for why they would pick him over others: He's a Stark. The Starks are supposedly the closest descendents of the First Men, who were well acquainted with the Children of the Forest. For whatever reason, Starks apparently have some special characteristics about them which make them more suceptibilities to the Children's magic.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 30, 2016, 05:53:31 AM
I just realized for people who will watch this season in marathon format, Benjen arriving to save the kids happens only a few minutes after Hodor sacrificed himself. Kind of devalues that scene when viewed that way.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 30, 2016, 10:16:45 AM
 You could argue that Hodor's sacrifice bought them just enough time for Benjen to reach them, though.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on May 30, 2016, 08:57:43 PM
I'm really liking where Bran's story is going. Now with Benjen it feels like a lot is about to happen. Such a nice contrast to those horrible Sand Snakes that have thankfully not shown up in a while.....
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 05, 2016, 11:03:17 PM
So, what exactly is the big rush for Jon to go into battle against the Boltons? It'd make sense if it was established that Ramsay and/or Lord Umber were marching forces against him, but it wouldn't make sense for them to leave the strategic stronghold of Winterfell, especially since they have Rickon as a hostage, and it's not like Jon moving to fight them any faster will change that fact. As dumb as Sansa has been in the past, including in this season, she's oddly enough the more sensible battle strategist here. There are still at least half a dozen other houses that Jon could ask to fight for him, and he really needs the men.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 06, 2016, 06:27:11 AM
It does annoy me how "The North Remembers" now means "Remember that Robb broke a wedding vow but choose to forget that a flaying traitor and a literal troll with a bridge betrayed your guys". I know that was a dumb part on Robb's, but that's like watching a house go on fire and blaming the victims because they had to rush in and save an heirloom. Maybe Jon should have asked Melisandre to work some magic to convince the Northern houses. That said, I liked this episode. If only to see Sandor back. Also liked Lyanna Mormont's scene. Didn't like how Arya's Braavos arc is still slogging on.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 06, 2016, 11:39:23 AM
On the contrary, I think that Arya's story-line is being incredibly rushed. She couldn't have learned that much from the House of Black and White in such a short amount of time, as all we saw her do is learn to fight with a stick and use face disguises....which she no longer even has access to. Most viewers look at it and just get bored that nothing "big" is happening, but in the books it's a throughly fascinating character arc for Arya. In the show they just rush past everything to try and get to crowd-pleasing moments, but Arya barely changes at all from her time there, and ultimately it feels meaningless for her to have come in the first place.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 14, 2016, 06:02:10 PM
So, this is what happens when you veer off book way too much and then try to loosely tie into story-lines from the source material without actually having had the same set-up and circumstances as in that version.

Literally every story-line presented in this episode has glaring plot-holes. The Jaime Riverrun scene is in the books, but the character motivations are wildly different and actually make sense. At this point in the story, Jaime has outright broken up with Cersei and is undergoing the final phase of his redemption arc. You know, that thing that he was going through after meeting Brienne. That thing that the show writers clearly flat-out forgot about since any progress that Jaime made between seasons one and four has now been completely undone, begging the question for what the whole point of it even was in regard to the show. Why develop a character and then undo all of the progress that was made by that character?

Also, Blackfish on the show has pretty much been ruined. They turned him into an ass-hole for no reason and had him act like a total dick to Edmure for absolutely no reason at all in the earlier seasons. I'm sure the writers thought that it would make him look cool or bad-ass if he gave no fucks. That was just a shallow character trait that caused him to look like an ass-hole and their insistence on sticking to that personality for him really bit them in the ass in this episode. Now, for once again no good reason at all, he decides to stay back and die in Riverrun because he says that it's his home....except in both the books AND THE SHOW it was established that he was estranged from his brother and didn't even live in Riverrun for most of his life past his youth. So he should really have no strong attachment to that location. Furthermore, whether he has met her in a long time or not, Sansa is his direct family. She's some of his last remaining family. Even if he has no men to take to her, why not come and be a military adviser, which she desperately needs and which he is supposedly a genius at. For the record, Jaime does send Edmure into Riverrun in the books (though under different pretenses and without threatening to kill his family), and tells him to deliver them the Blackfish in chains in exchange for sparing the lives of him and all of his men. But since Edmure and his uncle aren't on such bad terms in the books since his Uncle actually respects his family, he lets him escape and just tells Jaime that he got past their guards, and there's nothing that Jaime can really do about it (and yes, he still spares Edmure and his men because he's not a cold-blooded ass-hole anymore). Also, Brienne does show up in the Riverlands and meets up with Jaime, but not at castle Riverrun, and once again under much different circumstances and serving a character that the show cut-out for no reason.

I could go on a bunch about how poor the quality of the writing and lack of logic is for all of the other story-lines in this episode, but instead I'll just finally give my thoughts on how they handled Arya's story-line: It's some of the dumbest writing that I've ever seen from a show as big as this. So, Arya clearly knew that the faceless men were after her yet went around in broad daylight gallivanting around the city? Well, how did that turn out? Oh, she got stabbed and almost killed? No shit. Then she runs into the only person who she knows in the city and who just so happens to have Maester-level healing skills, but even then she can only do as much as to stitch her up and dull her pain so that she can rest. Yet, miraculously in less than a day she is healed enough to run around the city and jump from pretty dangerous heights even for a completely healthy and uninjured person. Also, it's a really lucky thing that the Waif decided to kill Lady Crane but kindly wait for Arya to wake up so that she could talk to her like a Bond villain and then give her a chance to escape. After running around for a while and being incredibly reckless, it's only when Arya is strategically next to a point of tactical advantage that her stitches decide to open up, but it's OK, because now she's close enough to just limp her way into a dead-end. The Waif follows her like a clueless idiot and then it's another lucky thing that she decides to close the door behind her so as to block out any extra light so that Arya can put out the candle and fight her in the darkness so that she has a tactical advantage. What if the Waif didn't decide to close the door? Did Arya have a plan for that? And then once she delivers the Waif's face to the the House of Black and White, she is miraculously healed again. Did she redo her own stitches before coming there? Because, the last time that we saw her she was bleeding out pretty badly. Then she threatens Jaquen by holding a sword to his chest and says that she's Arya Stark and that she's going home. And....that's it. Doesn't she think that maybe, just maybe, Jaquen can still come after her, or even send someone else after her? (Or maybe not, since on the show he appears to be the only actual faceless man in existence). I mean, why wouldn't he come after her? What changed after she killed the Waif? But, OK, she just lets him go and he just lets her walk out. Maybe there's a clever, well thought-out motive for each of them here. Or, maybe it's all just lazy writing.

Look, I'm a fan of the show, and I clearly spoke up in defense of things that other people have complained about when I felt that it was unjustified or unwarranted. I have praised the things that I like about it, so this isn't just me being a nitpicky book reader. That said, I bring up the books because while the show is clearly trying to follow the back-bone of that story, there is a clear difference between something that was carefully thought out and written with much more detail and with many other plot-lines and characters over the course of two decades as opposed to something that literally three writers came up with in just a few months and with less than ten hours of screen-time to cram in well over a thousand pages worth of content. And I get it, making a show is hard work and I don't fully blame the showrunners for all of the show's problems. Some things are just unavoidable. That said, I'm going to call out when I think that something is of poor quality or outright shit, and this episode was just dumb. I didn't like it at all. It's not as bad as episode two was for me, but it's still pretty bad, and I had to get that off my chest because it really pissed me off as a fan of the source material.

Having said that, I'm still looking forward to BastardBowl next week, even though the set-up itself is already rife with plot-holes and gigantic lapses in logic. I'm just going to turn off my brain for that one and enjoy the carnage.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 14, 2016, 07:30:30 PM
I was watching the episode while on a skype call, and everyone could hear me groaning at the Jaime and Arya scenes. I heard someone suggest that Jaime's threat to Edmure was just all talk and he's secretly developing, but there's nothing further to believe in such a notion.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 19, 2016, 11:37:46 PM
Well, that was a fun turn off your brain sort of episode. Not a whole lot of logic there, but to be fair, the big battles scenes in the show have always been more about Hollywood style convenient timing than the more realistic strategies of the books.

Ramsay playing that little game with Rickon really irritated me, though. He should have killed him outright. Letting him run off just on a chance of luring out Jon Snow and killing him early was one of the most idiotic things that Ramsay could do. I mean, yes, he did actually kill him because, again, convenience; but what if he missed and didn't succeed at killing either Rickon or Jon Snow? He would have just let his most valuable hostage AND biggest threat wander straight into his enemy's hands. That's just cheap writing, IMO.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 20, 2016, 12:02:34 AM
I'm intrigued by the growing trend of the fan theories for more questionable decisions being dashed. Like the one that suggested the Waif had stabbed a fake Arya because of the latter's odd actions beforehand, or that Shaggydog was alive because that head was far too small to be a wolf's head.

For the episode itself, I thought it was the show trying to repeat the successes from Blackwater and Hardhome but only getting a fraction of what made those episodes great. It was entertaining, sure, but felt like everything that Game of Thrones was meant to subvert back in the early seasons. A Jon Snow who's been resurrected and has amassed his own following of lowborn free folk has to go up against a unquestionably evil man who will shoot arrows at his own troops and takes pleasure more in reveling in his villainy than actually getting the quick kill (he had two chances to shoot Jon Snow, but decided to shoot Rickon and Wun Wun instead because we need to be reminded that he's a dick). There's no moral gray area in there, or anything that makes you think deeply about how both sides are going into this. But that said, the directing was wonderful and it's nice to finally see the Bolton subplot get resolved. It's just that comparing this to earlier, more strategic battles from the show feels like comparing Abrams Trek to show Trek. More focus on blood and action than a focus on tactics, leading to a battle of who can punch the hardest than one of wits.

On a lighter note, even Rickon agrees that he should've serpentined. (https://twitter.com/art_parkinson/status/744999252984729600)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 20, 2016, 08:28:09 PM
https://youtu.be/3xSeUl66rXM

That basically sums up how little any of this battle makes sense for anyone actually paying attention to logic.

Really, with how much critical acclaim this series still gets despite the writers clearly being lost without George's material to ape from, I'm just waiting for the day that we get a remake more accurate to the the novels, once those are actually finished, called Game of Thrones: Starkhood. Everyone will then call it the greatest show of all time and everyone who claimed that the first show was a perfect masterpiece will suddenly turn on it and say that it sucked ass whereas the remake is flawless and anyone who doesn't love it is immediately a vial shadow demon-spawn and must have had their brain rotted by greyscale.

Anime has proved that this is the way that people think.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 20, 2016, 11:28:09 PM
Watching Preston's videos right now. He reminds me of SFDebris if he sounded like hbi2k.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 20, 2016, 11:56:16 PM
Admittedly, Preston can be a bit of a nut-job with his crackpot theories on the books (though he fully admits that they're probably wrong), but it's fun to watch him obsess over GRRM's material so much, and also hilarious to see how over-analytical he can get with his interpretations of GRRM's writing that even Martin himself said that he was overreaching a bit in one of his questions to him (yes, he has met him in person).

But the dude definitely knows his shit. He actually inspired me to read the books a second time through and completely reinterpret many scenes and characters with his WYAM video series going through each episode of GOT since the beginning and highlighting all of the major story-line differences between the book and show.

As for Internet reviewers who he reminds me of, I get a lot of YMS vibes from his "Preston Watches" series (it really reminds me of YMS's The Walking Dead review), though obviously a lot more tongue-in-cheek.

I mainly like how he's one of the few book purists who doesn't act like an obnoxious ass-hole to fans of the show, even if he disagrees with them. We already have Comic Book Girl 19 for that. :srs:
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 22, 2016, 02:16:42 PM
Here's a video of two Israeli guys picking apart this season: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXDxNq08UNY

I know it sounds redundant when people like me bitch and moan about how things were "so much better in the books," and I try to avoid that as much as possible, but it's also important to note that it's not that the show is different from the books that pisses me off. It's that it won't even follow its own goddamn logic without any source material to directly rip its content from. It has created numerous inexcusable plot-holes based on stuff from this season contradicting plot points from earlier seasons which were completely original to the show to begin with.

I started my obsession with A Song of Ice and Fire thanks to the show, so I will always be grateful to it and the people behind it for introducing me to such an awesome book series in the first place. And I still stand by my opinion that the first four seasons of Game of Thrones are some of the best television in the history of the medium, while season five is flawed but overall good television. While season six has definitely had its moments ("The Door" was a legitimately good episode, FWIW) and is entertaining on the whole (though, far too often for the wrong reasons), it truly is glorified fan-service. For the people who do still like this season, that's fine, go on liking it, but for those of you dissatisfied with how the writers have handled things since Martin has detached himself from the show entirely (which, not coincidentally, happened right after season four), I really do implore you to check out the books someday. While I can't guarantee that you'll like it (to be fair, some people find it a bit boring since it's decidedly anti-Hollywood in its narrative and is notorious for getting stuck in detailed exposition about it's world and character backstories), I can at least promise that you will get a coherent and incredibly well-through-out ensemble story with interesting characters and plot twists that are earned through good build-up rather than something that the writers pulled out of their asses to make a scene come off as "cool" or "epic" regardless of whether it made any sense within the context of the story or not.

At this point, I'm really just keeping up with the show more so to see Preston make fun of it in silly character voices rather than out of actual interest in seeing the plot unfold. The sad thing is that most of the main actors are still turning in great performances, but their talent is wasted here. Peter Dinklage in particular has really been criminally underutilized.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 26, 2016, 06:44:32 AM
Remembering one of my favorite groups of characters in the earlier seasons, Tyrion, Shae, Podrick, and Bronn. Out of all the characters herds, I liked them the most for their chemistry and occasional camaraderie. And as of now in the show:

Shae: Betrays her lover (understandable) and Sansa (less so) then gets strangled and barely gets mentioned by Tyrion nowadays.
Podrick: Became Brienne's slave.
Bronn: Follows Jaime's shit despite getting nothing in return.
Tyrion: Shitty ruler whose previous military and leadership expertise from the earlier seasons is completely absent here.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 26, 2016, 09:57:26 AM
So far in the books, Tyrion, Jorah, and Penny have joined rank with The Second Sons (who are NOT lead by Daario), who have currently switched sides and joined the slavers, betraying Danaerys in the process. However they know that the slavers will be a lot cause before long, so Tyrion joined under the pretense that he could use his skills to find a way to get their leader back into Dany's good graces, along with himself and Jorah. He also happens to have inside information on another Targaryen claimant who is after the iron throne. Yes, that's kind of a huge deal. No idea why the show decided to cut that one out when there are several other story-lines that felt like filler or padding.

For whatever reason the showrunners really wanted to rush towards teaming him up with Dany, but one has to wonder what the point of it was when he has been given nothing to do this season.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 26, 2016, 09:36:58 PM
This was in my head when watching the episode. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuqHK7fu8iI)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 27, 2016, 12:08:18 AM
Only in this episode? At least it took Arya more than an episode to make it to Westeros. I'm still trying to get over the fact that apparently Littlefinger learned the Instant Transmission technique, and apparently the Sand Snakes as well.

I won't lie, this episode had about as many writing problems as previous episodes, but the directing was brilliant, as was the acting. That's what makes it so much more hurtful when the writers can't keep up to snuff with the story. I see episodes like this and want this to still be one of my favorite shows so badly, but the heart and spirit just isn't there anymore. Is it bad television? No, not even close. Even several other shows that I like such as Arrow or The Flash can't even begin to compare to this. But when you compare this to the first four seasons of the show, or stuff like Breaking Bad or Better Call Saul, it just doesn't hold a candle to them.

If I had to rate this season on a scale where season one of Game of Thrones was an A+ (definitely the best season by far, in retrospect), and seasons two through four were a solid A, and season five was a notable step down but still retained some of that spirit to hold its own as a solid B, then this season would be a C+ for me. As general television it's undeniably entertaining with unrivaled spectacle and great acting. And in episodes like this and The Door, I just have to acknowledge when something is directed really well. On all of those levels the show succeeds greatly, and it makes it an entertaining watch. But was that why people fell in love with the show in the first place? Perhaps to an extent, but I believe the main reason was because of the story and characters. So few shows could tell a great story of this caliber and keep running with it. And for a while, when they still had great material to pull from, the show did run with a great story. But now those elements have taken a complete backseat to the spectacle. And when traces of GRRM's writing make it into a season like this, it's terrific. Unfortunately, that's not enough to make up for an incredibly sloppy plot encompassing the rest of what we got this season.

In a way, this season has become the equivalent of an Uncharted game. Emphasis in writing seems to be more on having an excuse for the characters to take part in cool action set-pieces, and the story is written around that rather than naturally flowing of its own accord. The same goes for the character development. And for that reason, this season was really lacking.

I'd say that I was disappointed, but if I'm to be honest, this is about what I was expecting once the series veered so far off the path of the books last season. So, at this point I'll just take the show for what it is, glorified fan-fiction. That doesn't mean that I can't enjoy it, but all of the themes and meaning and original intent of the story are all but lost.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 27, 2016, 01:10:57 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek2O6bVAIQQ

Alright, I know that I bitch about the show a lot and how much I like the books. I don't want to be one of those people who doesn't shut up about it, so now that I've gotten my thoughts out so many times, and linked to that video which helps to sum up a lot of my own viewpoints on this season, I'm just going to go into the next season and just judge it at face value.

Of course, seeing as how the writers seem to have trouble even keeping up with their own continuity, I'll still probably find things to complain about, but for all that I do complain about it, I still do enjoy the show a lot. I don't hate it by any means. I just wish that this season was better than it was.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 27, 2016, 08:16:51 PM
https://youtu.be/mnyseAZ4xU8

Ok, seriously now, last time. I just couldn't resist. :D
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 28, 2016, 07:25:55 PM
Jesus Christ... (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvFF2GEKAwg)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 30, 2016, 04:13:14 PM
So the guy who directed the last two episodes won't be coming back. (http://watchersonthewall.com/season-7-directors-announced/?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=socialnetwork) Yet the guy who directed the 8th episode this season along with the Sand Snakes fight will. Fuck.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on June 30, 2016, 04:36:09 PM
Miguel Sapochnik also directed Hardhome. For as much as I complained about the writing in this season, we still got some great television through brilliant direction and production values, and Sapochnik's episodes particularly showed his talent at visually keeping us engaged. I think that he's a talented director and I'm actually excited to see what projects he moves onto next, because I totally want to check them out.

In a way, you could say that his talents are sort of being held back by Dan and Dave's sloppy writing for this series. And for the record, I don't actually hate Dan and Dave. I think that they are doing the best that they can with only a few months worth of time to write over half a season's worth of content, seeing as how this is a story that was in development for over two decades, while they have less than ten-hours worth of content per season to somehow cram so much story and character development into and still balance everything out. I acknowledge how hard that must be to do. But, just because I acknowledge it doesn't change the fact that the writing is still all over the place.

Now, just imagine what Sapochnik could do in a series with writing quality on par with Breaking Bad or The Wire.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 03, 2016, 01:14:17 AM
So, now that we've all had our share of criticisms on this season, here is a video on a more positive note that predicts how this series will probably end: http://youtu.be/wxG03oBY5zU

I'm in the camp of fans that also thinks that this is what Martin is going for.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 08, 2016, 04:15:30 PM
So, going by recent news articles, it looks as though season seven will be delayed to account for winter finally coming to Weteros.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on July 08, 2016, 08:54:13 PM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 08, 2016, 04:15:30 PM
So, going by recent news articles, it looks as though season seven will be delayed to account for winter finally coming to Weteros.


It makes sense. They had to do that with the first few seasons of the show, didn't they?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 08, 2016, 09:13:44 PM
No, Game of Thrones has always premiered between March and April for each year of its run. This year, filming won't start for several months since the show needs to account for the winter weather on most if not all of their outdoor sets. Because of this, filming will also wrap up later than ususal, so the next season may be delayed by a few months in its premiere.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on July 11, 2016, 08:12:05 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/OJJAjMJ.png)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 12, 2016, 03:59:26 PM
Looks like someone has had it with these mother fuckin' dragons on this mother fuckin' show! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6N4gEJ_ED98)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on November 10, 2016, 09:48:09 AM
So Season 7 spoilers may have leaked, and what I've read was worrisome.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on March 13, 2017, 09:18:52 PM
 So, Preston went ahead and cut together his own teaser for season seven: http://youtu.be/3vPt1wtGzAM
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 25, 2017, 08:27:05 PM
Preston made a video analyzing the trailer. (https://youtu.be/NKtNDT4gyXQ) I also rewatched some of his other videos, and I realized "Oh no, Cersei's arc is going to be their Trump allegory". Like when Jon's arc in season 5 was about whether the Wildlings should be let in correlated with the refugee crisis at the time, or the Faith Militant becoming anti-gay crusaders. I always found much of GOT's attempts to mirror modern real world politics to be awkward at best, and almost every form of media right now rolling out their hot take on Trump has already left me with fatigue. But I dread that D&D will probably focus on that instead of exploring the ramifications of Cersei destroying the King's Landing version of the Vatican or her inexplicably having a massive army to outdo Dany's despite the Lannisters having no money, their main liaison between the Iron Bank blown up, her claim to the Throne in question since she's a woman with no blood relations to any Baratheons. Or maybe Euron amassed a huge fleet of Greyjoy ships to help her.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 25, 2017, 10:10:40 PM
Dan and Dave threw out any sense of coherency or logic way back in season five, and it has just been a roller coaster of big-budget fanfiction since then. I'm mainly going into this season to enjoy the spectacle and hopefully get some cool scenes from the better actors of the show.

And for the record, I don't care that the show is different from the books. I care that the show doesn't seem to follow any of its own logic or established lore and backstory, though. The writers are clearly just making up whatever they need to move the story along and facilitate cool action scenes without actually earning them through careful setup like they did in the first four seasons.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 16, 2017, 11:41:58 PM
So, in all honesty I'm trying to dial back the cynicism going forward and just view the show as fun fan-service, which for me at least is basically what it has become since it has long since gone past the point of holding up to any plot scrutiny.

That said, the opening scene alone had me rolling my eyes. Can't wait to see Preston tear into all of the logic holes with that one. The rest of the episode pretty much panned out as expected. Overall, The Hound's material was the best stuff here.

Also, I cracked up at the scene where they use Jorah's hand reaching out as a jump scare, but I get the odd sensation that it wasn't actually meant to be funny.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on July 17, 2017, 02:05:22 AM
God, that Ed Sheeran cameo was dumb, making him a Lannister soldier, but a nice soldier who will give food to strangers and doesn't even think of rape. I was especially annoyed by the close ups of his face, as if the director wanted to go "Hey, it's special guest star Ed Sheeran!"
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 17, 2017, 06:45:09 AM
Oh yeah, that. Kind of funny how they scrapped the George R. R. Martin cameo from the first episode, but this is just A-OK for them. Because, you know, nothing screams Game of Thrones material like Ed-fucking-Sheeran.

Having people like Roy Detrice show up in season two makes sense since he actually has something to do with this property. On the other hand, what did Ed Sheeran even do other than be popular? Is there some new Game of Thrones album he recorded that I'm not aware of?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on July 17, 2017, 06:44:09 PM
There was a scene that Preston skimmed over that I personally didn't like: The one where Lyanna Mormont's calling out the Northern Lords for not letting women become soldiers. It just felt hamfisted and out of tone to me, like last season when Ellaria gave a speech over how Dorne wouldn't be ruled by weak men anymore, as she backstabbed an innocent crippled man who only wanted peace. Like I get it, Lyanna's cool for giving her soldiers to Jon while the other Lords chickened out at first. But it's still a 12-year-old girl arguing with middle-aged men and winning, so it seemed kind of silly.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on July 18, 2017, 11:42:13 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/mB7dyyE.png)

So what was the in-universe reason for redesigning him? Hell, what was the behind the scenes reason for redesigning him? The gold armor looked better. Now he looks like a reject Cylon.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 21, 2017, 12:40:27 PM
Preston released a Q&A for episode 1 of this season: https://youtu.be/r8jD6VL1QiE

I really like his answer to the question about D&D and agree with him completely. It also shows that he is not just a smarmy, biased book reader mindlessly bashing the show (he has even gone on record numerous times clarifying that he doesn't hate the show). Unlike others who don't comprehend how difficult writing is, Preston points out how insanely complex ASOIAF is, and how both D&D have written good material well before they worked on GOT. The Difference is in their fundamental values of writers in stark contrast  (pun fully intended) to GRRM. They tend to value thematic story-telling, which is why GOT makes sense in terms of how its themes progress. However, GRRM as a writer highly values logic and realism over simply telling a straightforward tale of good and evil. Using Arya as the case in point was the perfect example to send this message home. Not only would the cold open for this season never have happened in GRRM's books for logical reasons, but Arya also wouldn't exclusively kill one-dimensionally evil jerks and spare everyone else. The whole point of her story arc in the first place is that while she acquires the fighting skills that she always wanted, she ends up using them for means just as selfish and immoral as the people she hates. Her quest for revenge isn't some glorified crusade to slay evildoers, but just violence for the sake of violence.

Now, obviously I get that seeing a young girl brutally murder countless people without them seeming like pure evil wouldn't sit well with most casual audiences, which is why D&D have to write characters like Meryn Trant as a pedophile, or make all of the Freys into GOT's equivalent of a generic army of orcs from Mordor. However in doing this they sacrifice any real sense of logic in order to make the situation fit the themes that they want to explore. In GRRM's books, the very fact that the situations present don't fit the themes that we as people typically value in traditional story-telling is kind of sort of the whole entire point of this series from beginning to end.

For what it's worth, I also don't hate the show. I wouldn't still be watching it if I did. But to me it really is just fan-service of the week at this point. It's something that I watch for simple fun, rather than a genuinely intriguing story. On that level, it still works for me. However, I can't in my right mind call anything passed season four legitimately good television outside of some really impressive spectacle, because it's just not true from my perspective.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on July 21, 2017, 07:59:21 PM
Quotewhich is why D&D have to write characters like Meryn Trant as a pedophile, or make all of the Freys into GOT's equivalent of a generic army of orcs from Mordor.
The Meryn Trant deal still annoys me, because it could've been an opportunity to show that Meryn was just as human as everyone else even if he was an asshole, and that Arya killing him would've have had its own moral repercussions for both her and the viewers. But instead, he's a crazed pedophile who gets off to beating little girls, meaning the audiences doesn't have to feel the least bit bad about Arya mercilessly stabbing him. Along with how they made they implied that Harald Karstark liked little boys and how the Umbers betrayed the Starks out of prejudice for Wildlings, not to mention how the reason why the Night's Watch betrayed Jon is rewritten to make it seem like they killed him out of xenophobia for Wildlings instead of legitimate issues with his commanding, it just seems like D&D are trying too hard to make this a story between straight-up good guys and bad guys instead of what Martin intended. Where Jon, Arya, Dany, and Tyrion can do no wrong, while the villains have to be the kind who kick baby puppies until they're bloody pulps.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 21, 2017, 11:25:35 PM
I was especially surprised by Tyrion in the books as he's far less morally-inclined than his show counterpart.

As for Jon, the funny thing is that he's a better ruler in the books than in the show. At least in the former he makes a number of fairly good decisions which benefit the Night's Watch. Yet he still gets killed for his more rash decision-making, particularly in that he clearly takes Stannis's side in the war, breaking his oath numerous times to help him out against the Boltons, which makes the Night's Watch a target of Cersei. He's killed for directly putting The Watch in danger by meddling in the affairs of Westeros, which has always been forbidden for that very reason just mentioned. While it's true that many of Jon's fellow commanding officers hate the Wildlings, they obey Jon's decision to let them through the gates as his point stands true that it's for the sake of their survival against the White Walkers. In the show Ser Alliser (who actually isn't present for Jon's stabbing in the books) claims that he killed Jin for letting the Wildlings through the gate, but then that brings up the question: just why the hell didn't he have him killed before Jon could do that. He knew at least days to weeks in advance what Jon was planning, and there isn't any reason that he couldn't have deat with him before then in the same way that he did afterwards.

And yeah, we already discussed where Arya's show story-line went off the rails. The X-Men Origins: Wolverine analogy works scarily well here.

I will say that thematically, Dany in the show is probably much closer to her book counterpart than most other main characters in the show, in that in both cases she's displayed as a fairly adept conqueror but a terrible politician who couldn't lead a country in peace time without her advisors. Either way, though, she's personally one of my least favorite characters from the main cast.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on July 23, 2017, 09:20:07 PM
The final ten minutes with Euron was fun, but I hate that my "Cersei is a Trump allegory" fears are right. So she's gonna rally former Tyrell houses by appealing to their xenophobia and traditionalism, against an army that consists of multiple races and creeds, led by generals of multiple sexual orientations and classes? Feels too on the nose. I don't even know why the Tarlys are helping Cersei when her blowing up all the Tyrells is well-known by this point. Is "racism against Dothraki and Unsullied" really a good enough reason to forsake their loyalty to the Tyrells in favor of those who killed the Tyrells?

Anyway, I know the leaks are definitely real, but I really wish they aren't for episode 3. The spoilers I read for that one in particular sound dreadful.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 23, 2017, 09:43:10 PM
Yara is the leader of the portion of the Ironborn that supports Dany's claim. Ellaria is the leader of Dorne (which in and of itself is a whole mess of logic, but I'll just ignore that for now). So I just have to ask this, who's bright idea was it to place the leaders of two of Dany's three biggest allies on the same fucking ship? What happened at the end of this episode is pretty much the reason why anyone with a lick of common sense would never do this.

Also, did anyone watch this week's "Inside the Episode" bit? The comments that D&D made about how seeing so many women in power made the council scene more interesting really rubbed me the wrong way. It's like they are saying: "having so many females leading roles that would normally be associated with men is, like, super progressive, guys. That is such good writing and in fact, this scene would be so much worse if it wasn't specifically so centered around women in power." And all this, of course, is ignoring the whole point of feminism being about equality, not gender role-reversal. To be clear, I draw no issue with the fact in and of itself that this scene was dominated by female characters or that so many females have prominent roles in the show in general. I merely only draw issue with the writers specifically pointing it out and claiming that this very fact alone automatically makes it better writing. Personally, I just find that outright obnoxious.

As I said earlier, though, I'm trying not to be cynical here and just enjoy the fanservice since, much like the current arc of Dragon Ball Super, that's pretty much all this show is to me now. On that end, I genuinely liked the scene with Arya and Nymeria. Also, it was neat seeing her briefly reunite with Hot Pie. It felt a lot truer to her character than anything that we've seen from the show in years. Olenna playing Dany against Tyrion is also a very interesting angle that feels very true to the type of story that Game of Thrones is supposed to be. And hey, the Sand Snakes finally got killed off, so I certainly can't say that I didn't enjoy watching that.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Foggle on July 23, 2017, 11:43:28 PM
The more I hear about/see from the later seasons, the more I'm glad I never took the time to get into this show. I'd still like to read the books when the final one gets published in 2045, though.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 24, 2017, 12:35:06 AM
To be fair, me and Dr. Insomniac are technically in the minority. Most people (including critics) are praising the show as much as ever. Even the more casual book readers seem fine with it. If we're talking about the first four seasons, I'd still legitimately vouch for them as great television (GRRM himself even wrote episodes for those). I'd say that stuff like "Blackwater" and "The Rains of Castamere" rank among the best television episodes of all time and absolutely deserve to be viewed. And hell, Charles Dance's performance as Tywin Lannister, one of the most well-written "villains" of all time alone makes my time with the show worth it.

Also, I admittedly never would have gotten into the books without the show, so for as much as I rag on it now, I do have to stress that I don't hate it. By normal TV standards it's probably above average. By the standards of the early material, though, it's a massive drop in quality, IMO. Essentially, when the show started running out of material to adapt from the novels, the cracks really showed since there were so many unresolved plot-thread that there is just no reasonable way that a couple of writers could reasonably tie them up when the original author has spent over two full decades of his life meticulously plotting every little detail of the story and still hasn't managed to finish it himself.

But my real major issue with the show is how it essentially turned the narrative into the type of story that the books make their whole point about criticizing in the first place. I believe that this video sums it up perfectly without giving away any major spoilers: https://youtu.be/ek2O6bVAIQQ
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on July 24, 2017, 02:35:15 PM
I don't know. Most of the praise I've seen isn't so much aimed at the storytelling as it is individual moments, like people excited that Hot Pie shows up or seeing Euron kill the Sand Snakes. It reminds me of that one RLM video where Rich masturbates to The Force Awakens trailer, or when some dumbass cums themselves over the latest Twin Peaks without explaining why. Thanks to hyperbole being celebrated over anything else, obnoxious praise and vitriol alike are so over-the-top regarding any reception toward a show that it grows increasingly hard to find a general consensus.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 24, 2017, 02:58:18 PM
The sad thing is that the show is still getting legitimately praised by fans and genuine professional critics on the whole. Just look at the RT reviews or the IMDB page. Yes, people are focusing on the "epicness" and style over the actual story, but it really baffles me how few people are calling out how messy and incoherent the plot has gotten, or even how phoned in some of the performances have become. I literally feel like Peter Dinklage isn't even trying anymore, which I can hardly blame him for given how little he has had to work with over the past few seasons.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on July 24, 2017, 04:50:57 PM
At least they had enough decency that when Jim Broadbent's character mentioned writing a book about King Robert, he didn't say "I shall call it... Game of Thrones."
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Foggle on July 25, 2017, 12:47:09 AM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on July 24, 2017, 02:35:15 PM
or when some dumbass cums themselves over the latest Twin Peaks without explaining why.
Why the hostility? It's a great fucking show from a writing, directing, acting, editing, and sound design standpoint. Don't try to bring up the Log Lady's acting as bad because her actress was literally dying when she filmed those scenes and she did the best she possibly could under the circumstances. I watch every episode on the edge of my seat and can hardly wait for the next one to air. I think about the lore and individual moments while I'm at work each day. I've laughed more at single episodes (and episodes of the original series, for that matter) than I have at entire seasons of actual comedies. Some scenes are genuinely frightening, others evoke a sense of warm nostalgia. I don't necessarily like watching a band play one of their songs for five minutes every other episode but it is what it is. At this point, I can only assume you're subtweeting me here. Same with that one on the Admin board I just responded to. It's fine if you think Twin Peaks season 3 is shit or if you hate socialist ideology and/or the way people express it online - hell, it's fine if you think I'm a tasteless and self-righteous idiot, too - but I've always been overzealous in my support of things I'm passionate about. I genuinely believe the things I say and do, and if I'm objectively wrong about something, that's on me, and I'll own it. I have visceral reactions to almost everything - that's just who I am - and sniping at me on the forum I own and operate is not particularly constructive.

Anyway, maybe there just is no general consensus on Game of Thrones or Twin Peaks. Maybe some people love the shows so much that their overpraise seems accurate to them and some legitimately hate them to the point where their hyperbolic vitriol feels the same. I can easily see hardcore fans of GRRM's novels finding the recent GOT seasons preposterous to the point of developing hatred for them or the average fantasy fan being completely taken in the by the spectacle and loving every episode. Some folks adore the new direction of TP because they like seeing Lynch and Frost do whatever the hell they want while others don't take kindly to how different or esoteric it is compared to the original. Personally, I don't see a lot of people being on the fence about either work, as they're extremely divisive by nature. I also don't see the problem with someone loving the new seasons of GOT even if they're terrible compared to the books from a writing standpoint. I mean, I watched the HOLD THE DOOR scene and thought it was cringe-worthy, but I've also seen plenty of people who legit cried to it. We can laugh about it or make fun of them, but at the end of the day, if a piece of media brings someone joy, that's good enough for both them and the creators of said media.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on July 25, 2017, 12:54:57 AM
QuoteI can only assume you're subtweeting me here.
I'm not. I've just been irritable lately. Sorry if I'm being an asshole. I haven't even watched season 3 of Twin Peaks yet, been busy watching the old episodes so I could get a handle on the new ones. I'm planning to start sometime this week.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Foggle on July 25, 2017, 01:17:19 AM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on July 25, 2017, 12:54:57 AM
I'm not. I've just been irritable lately. Sorry if I'm being an asshole. I haven't even watched season 3 of Twin Peaks yet, been busy watching the old episodes so I could get a handle on the new ones. I'm planning to start sometime this week.
It's okay! Sorry if I came on too strong as well. I tend to take things way too personally when I'm tired, and I usually don't get home from my second shift until after 11pm, so I'm kind of exhausted when I read forum posts and tweets. :(

I hope you end up liking The Return! I think it's exceptional but I can see why some might find it tedious or stupid. It does a lot of stuff I normally hate with its focus on long drawn-out shots and surreal humor, but it does them so much better than anything else I've seen, including David Lynch's previous works. It's kind of like if the second season of True Detective was actually good, and was somehow combined with an actually good version of those weird [adult swim] live action shows. I feel as if I should hate it, but I love it with all my heart. Damn good TV.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on July 30, 2017, 09:27:25 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/2PafrDf.png)

Dany had every possible advantage against Cersei, and she lost them all in 2 episodes thanks to Euron's magic teleporting navy. Wow.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on July 30, 2017, 09:41:23 PM
Yeah, I was just about to point out how there's no logical way that the Ironborn could have been there in time for the Unsullied attack after they were just on the other side of the continent.

But, you know Dr. Insomniac, the funny thing is that I also wasn't surprised by this. Do you have any idea how many times the show has ignored the geography of its own world? It's actually quit baffling how even some book readers haven't called it out for that. For another example of this, check out the location of Hardhome, and it will seem insanely laughable when you recall that Jon showed up at the gates of Castle Black....BEHIND THE FUCKING WALL!

Honestly, though, I just kind of feel bad for Tyrion. Truth be told, while he was never nearly as clever as a lot of people think he was (he's actually made a lot of dumb mistakes even early on), the writing has now made him look downright incompetent. He should have known above anyone else that there was no value in taking Casterly Rock, which is on entirely the opposite side of the continent.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on July 30, 2017, 10:01:37 PM
Also, I didn't get why Dany demanded Jon serve her because she was a Targaryen, yet also tell him not to judge her for the Targaryen's crimes. So she wants loyalty because of familial heritage, but she also wants Jon to completely forget that the Targaryens roasted the Starks a couple decades ago? Doesn't help at all that Emilia Clarke's acting has just gotten weaker lately, so she doesn't do anything to persuade Jon (or the audience) why her cause is just. She refused to listen to Yara's perfectly valid strategy of torching all of King's Landing, in favor of spreading her troops all across Westeros and letting them get mowed down by teleporting Ironborn boats. Why would I be supposed to root for her?

Oh yeah, if the Tyrells and Martells went down this easily, this means Tywin was a complete idiot for spending several seasons trying to establish an alliance with both of them.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 06, 2017, 09:30:11 PM
This episode was basically subject to much of the same shenanigans of plot contrivances and logic missteps that I've already had to get used to since the fifth season, so I'm not really going to bother harping on it here since it's just pretty redundant at this point. I'll even give this episode some credit for being entertaining for what it was, even if the quality of the writing wasn't particularly any better than usual for the post season four stuff. I do, however, feel the need to comment on a little bit from this week's "Inside the Episode."

One of the D's (can't really be bothered to remember which): "For the first time in the show's history we have two sets of main characters fighting against each other on opposing sides of a battle."

Me: "So then what was Blackwater?"
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 06, 2017, 09:52:13 PM
Given their writing of Stannis in season 5, I don't think they saw him as a main character. I'm more annoyed how Bran's personality didn't deteriorate at all last season, but he's now Dr. Manhattan here. Meera even reacted as if he retroactively always acted like this after escaping the cave, so I'm not too sure what they're doing here. I'm just going to assume he'll say more awkward things about rape before finally telling everybody that Littlefinger killed Ned and Jon's a Targaryen.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 06, 2017, 09:56:31 PM
Oh, well, there is one other thing that kind of peeved me in this episode besides the usual fare: Bronn was way out of character. Firstly, telling Jaime to flee as soon as Dany's forces showed up makes sense, but he'd include himself in that proposal as well. Staying behind to fight valiantly and with honor is something that his character has specifically stated is a dumb thing to do and has always followed that logic before this point. Maybe if he had an arc leading up to his change of heart his bravery in this episode would make sense, but no such arc occurred. Putting his life in unecessary jeopardy to try and take out a dragon and even risking it again to save Jaime is not something that I could envision him doing at any earlier point in the show, and it doesn't really make any sense that he would at this point, either, especially for a guy who hasn't kept any of his promises of rewards to him so far. I honestly kind of expected him to abandon the fight as soon as he lost his gold and decided to let it go. But, I suppose that'd be giving D&D too much credit since they just love their faservice, and wanted to cater to the fans who somehow miss the whole point of Bronn's character and think of him as some kind of bad-ass hero.

Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 06, 2017, 09:52:13 PMGiven their writing of Stannis in season 5, I don't think they saw him as a main character.

I wasn't just referring to Stannis, though. In season two they were still following the books rather accurately for the most part, and Davos was a POV character in both that and subsequent books. Also, the episode "Blackwater" was written by GRRM himself, and he clearly gave characters on both sides equal attention. Though, I probably just answered my own question. D&D not acknowledging that battle as already having done what they claimed to be a series first in this season makes more sense when you consider that they didn't actually write that previous episode in question.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 06, 2017, 10:14:24 PM
Yeah, Bronn's characterization lately has been awful. No reason at all for him to still be working for Jaime. I'm also annoyed by characters introduced late in the show having such erratic writing too, like Randyll Tarly. In his debut, they established him for two things, absolute loyalty to the House his family served, and his hatred for Sam if he dared besmirch their family's reputation. And now, he's betrayed the House his family served for poorly explained reasons, while doing nothing to Sam for taking the family sword and running off for the Citadel, with the leaks stating he'll die before even lifting a finger to even intimidate his son. What a waste.

I guess seeing Drogon light the Lannisters on fire was cool to watch, but not as cool as D&D intended because I can't root for Dany when she's been hypocritical, an idiot planner, and played by an Emilia Clarke who's getting even more wooden by the episode. Perhaps I should commend them for not having Euron's ships teleport in the middle of the air and spear Drogon?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 14, 2017, 12:08:11 AM
Wait, so Tormund's angry that Jorah's a Mormont, yet he had no problem serving alongside Lyanna last season? I guess we have an episode and a half until we get this long awaited aunt/nephew sex scene that the writers have painstakingly crafted to have as much chemistry as Anakin and Padme.

(http://i.imgur.com/DKeJV0A.jpg)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 19, 2017, 06:53:13 PM
So I read the season 8 leaks, and... yeah. GRRM's editor needs to nab whatever manuscripts he's written for Winds and Dream and organize a Game of Thrones Brotherhood show years from now.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 20, 2017, 09:52:35 PM
So, can we all just assume that every Game of Thrones character has the Instant Transmission ability from Dragonball? Because, literally in the span of one afternoon, Jon and company hiked dozens of miles from the Wall (on foot as opposed to horseback), then sent Gendry back dozens of miles to the Wall, then had him send a Raven to Dragonstone, then had Danaerys fly with her Dragons all of the way back to the Wall and beyond to where they were, AND had her arrive just in the nick of time for some Deus Ex Machina bull-shit, then had her fly back, and then had Jon arrive on horseback while there was STILL fucking daylight in the sky....in the middle of Winter....and it wasn't even twilight.

And you know what....people are going to fucking ignore it. I watch YouTube reviewers and read published articles by professional TV critics about how great this season has been and how shit is finally going down, and not fucking one of them addresses the massive holes in logic or how this show has basically become the contrived and dramatically-convenient fantasy tripe that it used to be the antithesis to (you know, the whole thing that made it so fresh and interesting in the first place). It fucking bothers me that I'm somehow among the minority that actually seems to notice how pants-shittingly stupid the writing has become. And yes, from a film-making standpoint the directing is well done, the score for the show is amazing as it always has been, and the best actors still left do an amazing job like Rory McCann and Iain Glen (the bro moments between them, Tormund, and The Brotherhood were legitimately the best parts of this episode since it involved good actors actually getting to ignore the garbage plot and interact with each other in memorable ways).

And no, I'm not holding it against the show for being off-book, and I'm utterly sick of people using that excuse to defend it from any criticism from any book readers. If I hated the show for being too different from the books, I'd hate everything after season one because it starts taking a lot of liberties after that point. But I still stand by my opinion that everything up through season four, barring some flaws, is genuinely excellent television. However, when D&D ran out of source material to adapt completely, they basically turned the story into their own personal fan-fic, but it's hard for me to even enjoy it as that with writing this insultingly terrible.

The thing is, it doesn't bother me that characters we like actually win sometime for a change. That happens in the books, too....on multiple sides, which is kind of the point. It breaks down the pure good and evil archetypes of most fantasy, or even fiction in general, and rather than making it between pure good guys versus pure bad guys, the battle between good and evil happens internally within each character, and what you are left with is just people clashing with other people, rather than a one-dimensional army of monsters, and that's what makes the story interesting. And when big events happen, they don't just happen because it's convenient, and they certainly don't bail characters out of tight spots in the nick of time. When characters triumph, they have to earn those moments by either planning ahead of time or thinking quickly on their feet to find a way to survive. Their may be a little bit of luck involved, but it most certainly doesn't come in the form of three Dragons teleporting across half a continent to save them before they suffer any major losses. And if people are going to defend this by saying that both Thoros and one of the Dragons die in the battle with the White Walkers, I ask you if you honestly really give a shit about either of those characters other than their role in the story. Now Dany has one less Dragon to fight with (though, one was plenty to roast an entire army like it was nothing), and Thoros had been absent from the plot for many seasons to the point where I'd have to ask if you honestly felt any emotional weight whatsoever to this death for losing the character himself, as opposed to the party losing their White Mage and running out of Phoenix Downs?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 21, 2017, 09:31:08 AM
I was more annoyed at the Arya and Sansa scenes, where Arya's pissed off at Sansa even though she knows that she was forced to write that letter under threat of death. Like she was going to endanger the Northern Lords' already shaky alliance just because Sansa wore a pretty dress when Ned got executed? A few episodes ago, she was ready to praise Sansa because she thought her sister killed Joffrey, and now she's taunting and threatening her for little reason? What the hell?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 22, 2017, 04:25:22 PM
Preston had a very good point in this week's video: What's the point of catching a Wight? Daenerys was already willing to help in Jon's crusade, and he's gotten enough word from Sansa to know that Cersei wouldn't give a shit if White Walkers existed. Who was Jon hoping to convince?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 22, 2017, 04:55:04 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on August 22, 2017, 04:25:22 PM
Preston had a very good point in this week's video: What's the point of catching a Wight? Daenerys was already willing to help in Jon's crusade, and he's gotten enough word from Sansa to know that Cersei wouldn't give a shit if White Walkers existed. Who was Jon hoping to convince?

Preston made an interesting point in an earlier video of how Jon's stupid decisions in the show would make a lot more sense if his encounter with death and being resurrected had a big emotional impact on him that left him drained and depressed and unable to go back to living his life like he used to, and thus it caused him to subconsciously make borderline suicidal decisions.

Unfortunately, D&D didn't actually write him that way. They didn't even change the character in any significant way, and most people seem to either completely ignore or regret that he came back from the dead, so he's not even Game of Thrones Jesus since nobody gives any more of a shit about him for essentially defying the laws of nature as has been known for the entirety of existence on Planetos. So I really have to wonder what was even the point of killing him in the show? Everything that happened since his resurrection could just as easily have happened if he didn't die in the first place. Unless the whole point of his death and resurrection was meant to make him more stupid and also gain the ability to convince other people that his nonsensical logic was actually a good idea? Because, you know, he definitely has that down, for whatever reason.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 27, 2017, 10:17:12 PM
Well, time to watch cutscenes from Wrath of the Lich King and pretend that's season 8.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Rynnec on August 27, 2017, 10:40:47 PM
Adding discount Elric and Stormbringer is one way to get me to watch the show.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 28, 2017, 12:08:06 AM
Was it intentional to make that Rhaegar/Lyanna flashback so schmaltzy in its romance, or did D&D forget that this scene means Rhaegar dumped Elia and disinherited their children rendering their deaths even more meaningless than they already were, while Lyanna now comes off as a homewrecker who unwittingly caused a war? Hammering home the fact that Jon and Dany are aunt and nephew while they were having sex was weird enough, but trying to paint Rhaegar and Lyanna as too loving and pure to live in Westeros when they caused all that bloodshed? Really?

So Lyanna doesn't tell her family in secret that she's not Rhaegar's prisoner, leading to her father and brother getting burned to death by Aerys. And not only that, but Rhaegar essentially doomed his family to near extinction, causing his mother to die in agonizing childbirth at Dragonstone, his child brother to live a horrible life only to have his scalp smelted by gold, and for the Lannisters to get their hands on the throne. By answering the mystery, Jon's birth parents are now horrible, stupid people who let countless lives and even their own family members die all because they let their hearts get in the way of common sense.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 28, 2017, 07:36:24 AM
While Jon's parents haven't been revealed in the books yet, it's almost certain to be R + L over there as well. The funny thing, though, is that taking a fantasy trope like that and showing its awful repercussions in a more realistic setting would be much in line with GRRM's writing style. However, for whatever reason the show wants to portray it as this magical and heartwarming thing that's meant to be seen as true love.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 29, 2017, 02:45:03 AM
But even if they wanted to deconstruct that aspect of fantasy, it still sounds nonsensical, like Robert's Rebellion wouldn't have happened, or at least wouldn't have been as deadly, had Lyanna simply just told her family that she wasn't Rhaegar's prisoner so her brother and father wouldn't have gotten themselves killed by Aerys.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 29, 2017, 07:44:13 AM
Eh, while it's a fair criticism in some regards, you're relying a bit too heavily on the show and some potential misinformation (or currently lacking information, for that matter) in the books to make that assertion.

There's a lot more reasons to why the rebellion happened than the one that the show gives. The Mad King had already pissed off several great houses long before the whole Lyanna incident, and the rebellion DID NOT immediately start after she eloped with Rhaegar. It was the unpredictable actions of the Mad King that started the war. Ned's father and elder brother went to King's Landing to confront Aerys about it in a civilized manner, as pissed off as they were. And more importantly they went with high ranking members of supporting great houses. Aerys essentially pulled a Joffrey and had them both executed in horrific ways, while either imprisoning or also executing anyone that came with them, which nobody could have predicted would happen.

We also have yet to learn of several key details of why Lyanna was so secretive since the books haven't even gotten to that reveal yet.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 29, 2017, 05:18:10 PM
And....https://youtu.be/zqj_GvdP1TE

Yep, as you would expect, Preston had a lot to say about this finale in particular. People really need to watch his breakdown of how fucking stupid the Littlefinger scene was. I have seen countless people on the Internet praising it and it just boggles my mind how anyone can't see how it makes not the slightest bit of fucking sense on any level.

What's even funnier is back a few weeks ago when Preston correctly predicted this exact scene happening verbatim on his podcast with RTR. It was especially funny when he mentioned something along the lines of how Sansa would probably follow it up with the wolf speech from the trailer, only to pause and then be hit with a sudden realization in which he blurted out: "Oh shit! They're totally going to do that! Oh no! I was just joking and they're actually going to do that! It's going to be so bad!" Seriously had me laughing my ass off, and it's even funnier now that his prediction came true.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 30, 2017, 02:36:41 PM
Does anyone believe in the "Bran is the Night King" theory? Because even though it's stupid, makes little sense, and every post I've seen that knows of the theory is against it, I think D&D might actually make this happen.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 30, 2017, 02:47:08 PM
Fun fact: Most theories that you hear about Game of Thrones originated from book readers and were developed years before the show even came out. This one did not. It's brand new. Go figure.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 30, 2017, 02:50:38 PM
I think it mostly developed because of how the Night King's facial features were slightly redesigned.

Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/kLgM6QG.jpg)
[close]

And someone joked that he looked a little like Isaac Hempstead-Wright, which then snowballed into this theory.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 06, 2017, 12:37:42 PM
Also, since you were complaining about it earlier, Dr. Insomniac, here's Preston's take on the whole "Rhaegar and Lyanna loved each other" bit and why he thinks it's most likely a Dan and Dave thing: https://youtu.be/wMg5Rne4LQc

It's around the 1:00:15 mark.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on September 06, 2017, 09:50:03 PM
Yeah, I listened to it earlier. I agree with their sentiment that Littlefinger's death felt hollow and unearned. Instead of feeling like the Starks finally getting a victorious revenge on the man who brought them so much misery in the last seven years, it read more like D&D killing him off because they ran out of shit for Aidan Gillen to do. And they wanted to give another person for Arya to kill. There just hasn't been a villain death in a while that's gotten much emotion out of me. Compared to the ironic and bittersweet ways Tywin and Joffrey died, Walder and Ramsay dying last season were just cheap attempts to get a rise out of the audience. Like the show going "Hey, we finally killed that guy you hated! Clap!"
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 16, 2017, 10:32:00 PM
Preston explains how he would make Season 7 watchable. (https://youtu.be/BFUtVmIIAxM)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 16, 2017, 10:59:16 PM
I agree with some of his ideas, while others, despite being more logical, wouldn't really make for an engaging story-line. Like I'm down with his idea of Littlefinger convincing Sansa to retake the Riverlands, or Samwell actually studying at the Citadel while meeting up with one of the Sand Snakes, but his Arya story idea doesn't maje much sense since she never even met her uncle Edmure and she probably wouldn't care about rescuing him. Killing Illyn Payne would be a good enough motivation, but I have no clue why he would be given the responsibility to hold Casterly Rock, especially when he's a mute who can't possibly command or govern men, even if it's a relatively small group.

Of course in Preston's defense, much of his story ideas are in the wake of trying to deal with all of the writing fuck-ups that D&D made in the previous two seasons, so he doesn't have much of a choice in some cases.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on March 01, 2019, 02:14:05 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D0giso3XQAYTNxU.jpg)

Really? These ads want to convince me Euron has a chance of winning the throne? He has as much depth as a 90s DBZ villain, and is only here so Theon has a mini-boss to fight.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on March 06, 2019, 08:46:51 PM
With a new trailer comes more Preston. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6TYHk6uGZ8)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 14, 2019, 09:11:04 PM
So, who wants to take bets that somehow Bronn and Theon will arrive in Winterfell in the span of a single episode?

Also, knowing Dan and Dave this was clearly unintentional, but I couldn't help but laugh every time a character went bug-eyed at seeing Bran just creepily staring at them. I don't think that it was intended to be funny, though....

Oh, and speaking of stuff that was intended to be funny, Tyrion's line to Varys, "because you don't have balls," was so cringe-worthy. I legitimately feel bad for Peter Dinklage. He's a talented actor, but D&D haven't given him any genuinely interesting material to work with for the past few years. He's basically being wasted  at this point.

At any rate, the most surprising thing about this episode is how little really progressed story-wise. This season is only six episodes long and this show somehow still finds a way to make things feel dragged out.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on April 14, 2019, 09:44:37 PM
First episode was okay, but nothing really happened other than Jon finding out R + J = him. Kind of hoping that fan theory that it's actually Danerys that was the lost love child is true because while I still like Jon I'm hoping it's not him who takes the Iron Throne at the end because it just doesn't fit his character arc.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 14, 2019, 09:56:25 PM
Jon being the rightful heir is canon now. Having Dany be the secret love child between Raegar and Lyanna wouldn't make sense from a narrative standpoint since either way she's seen as the true successor the the Iron Throne. The whole point of revealing Jon's lineage is that it throws a complication into what at first seemed to be a simple matter. That doesn't actually mean that he will be sitting on the Iron Throne by the end of the series. It's just a plot device to create tension. It would actually surprise me if he ends up as King by the end of the series as it doesn't fit in line with GRRM's writing style as one of the themes of his books is how bloodlines are really kind of bull-shit when you get down to it. And while I would expect D&D to do something like that, GRRM himself still insists that he told them how the story-lines of the main characters would end and that they agreed to stick to that, so if nothing else, the broad strokes of where the story ends up will be what he intended. Keeping that in mind, I don't expect Jon or Dany to be rulers by the end of this. Both of their story-lines parallel each other and by the end Ice and Fire must have balanced roles, so it wouldn't make sense for one to be on top and the other below.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 14, 2019, 10:31:19 PM
For how padded out that was, it's surprising there wasn't a scene between Jorah and the rest of House Mormont. He and Lyanna were in the same room, yet they don't share a word. And I'm not sure why D&D didn't send Bronn to Winterfell along with Jaime. Because Jerome Flynn and Lena Headey apparently have a clause in their contract saying they won't share any scenes together thanks to a bad falling out in real life, that means we'll get plenty of awkward scenes where Cersei sends Qyburn to order Bronn around, and Bronn sends Qyburn back to tell Cersei something. Or they could have killed Bronn off last season if they didn't know what to do with him.

Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 14, 2019, 09:11:04 PM
Oh, and speaking of stuff that was intended to be funny, Tyrion's line to Varys, "because you don't have balls," was so cringe-worthy. I legitimately feel bad for Peter Dinklage. He's a talented actor, but D&D haven't given him any genuinely interesting material to work with for the past few years. He's basically being wasted  at this point.
The dialogue in the show went so downhill after season 4. It's either characters saying faux-inspirational quotes that will inevitably get printed on a t-shirt (a store I go to always has an "I drink and I know things." shirt on front display), or cock and ball jokes like all of Bronn's recent lines or Bad Pussy. Tyrion especially is a victim. Don't know why D&D have made him so stupid that he thinks appealing to Cersei's humanity is a valid strategy.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 15, 2019, 11:16:51 AM
Also, gotta love how Preston called that there would he a lot of padding in the premiere, even when RTR questioned him on whether they would really do that with only 6 episodes left:

https://youtu.be/gZNzOA6D4I0
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 17, 2019, 07:49:41 PM
And with a new season of Game of Thrones, we also get treated to a new season of Preston breaking down why the fuck this writing makes no sense: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0d3y9dH9ps4
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 17, 2019, 08:55:12 PM
Kinda makes Jon pardoning Ned Umber narratively meaningless if the kid was just going to die all for a jumpscare.

And nitpicking here, but unless Gendry is using magic, he shouldn't be making so many, if any, Dragonglass weapons in so short a time. (https://youtu.be/CA3lIuN_zVE) Making obsidian swords is next to impossible with modern technology. Don't know how he's doing it with Westeros utilities.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 18, 2019, 02:35:23 PM
The Lannister conflict will end in an unexpected way. (https://youtu.be/l2ppLtHbag4)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 21, 2019, 05:49:41 PM
Found a video trying to rationalize why Tyrion has been acting so stupid in the past few seasons: https://youtu.be/ju8WXvLVNRM

Not that I don't appreciate the effort, but like many people in the comments wrote, I just don't think that the writers of this show understand how to write for smart characters (Littlefinger and Varys also suffered from this). People complain about how slow GRRM's writing process is, but people don't realize just how much thought and care he puts into every detail of his characters, plot, and world-building. People also complain about the books having too much "filler," but don't realize that all of those additional interconnected plot-lines also provide much of the substance that give the many characters of the series something to work with. The show has the disadvantage of having to come out on a schedule, so the writing process is rushed. Without the books to have pre-existing material to already work off of, the writers are only focused on carrying the plot to an ending point rather than having the characters drive the plot. Thus, certain characters have to suffer simply because the plot can't afford to have them actually think logically or not be cartoonishly evil in order to progress the plot the way the writers need it to in order to reach an ending.

You can also tell which parts of this ending come from the show writers and which are from GRRM's pitched version of the ending to them. As Preston pointed out in his latest podcast episode, the context in which Jon's parentage is revealed to him is VERY much in style with GRRM's writing in terms of thematic implications. One of the major points of this book series is just how terrible and broken the familial succession system is, and whereas a reveal like Jon's lineage would be a positive turning point moment in traditional story-telling, it's reveal here is a massive complication that makes things worse for the characters. The typical solution to the problem in this kind of story has been subverted to only adding to the problem as it will force one character to be at odds with another.

So, there are traces of good story concepts in there, but it's unfortunately muddled by a lot of outright bad writing choices to even get us to that point.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 21, 2019, 09:28:26 PM
Another episode of setup. Felt like you could edit this and the premiere together into one 75 to 90 minute episode with little loss.

Like that Arya and Gendry sex scene... no. No.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 21, 2019, 09:33:16 PM
Well, I appreciated that "A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms" reference. I'm also OK with building up to the battle like in previous battle episodes by giving the characters some final bonding moments together. But, you know, those episodes also managed to actually do that and still get to the actual battle. No idea how with only five episodes left from the beginning of this one, the writers thought it was a good idea to actually take up the whole entire episode on sentimental moments.

You know, I should probably be clear: for as much as I bitch about this show, I honestly don't want to be doing so. It's just that if the writing itself is not baffling me with how nonsensical some of it's decisions are, the choice in pacing is as with the first two episodes of this season.

Also, I just wanted to point out that now Theon, too, has learned the power of using warp zones.

At any rate, at least the next episode has no excuses. Anyone want to take bets on who dies? My guesses are:

Greyworm (the most obvious choice)

Theon (the second most obvious choice)

Davos (pretty safe bet since he's completely outlived his usefulness to the narrative)

Beric (same as Davos)

Jamie or Brienne (one dies defending the other, with Jamie being more likely)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 21, 2019, 09:38:21 PM
It would be funny if Lyanna Mormont turned into a Wight, and Jorah was forced to hurt his family yet again and kill her.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 21, 2019, 09:50:28 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on April 21, 2019, 09:38:21 PMIt would be funny if Lyanna Mormont turned into a Wight, and Jorah was forced to hurt his family yet again and kill her.

Oh shit, Jorah, I knew I was forgetting someone. Yeah, add him to the list, too.

I doubt Lyanna will die if only because D&D love their "little girl bad-ass" characters, hence why Arya will also be safe. Mind you, I find it completely cringe-worthy, especially since Lyanna's actress is pretty bad (nothing against the person behind the role, but few child actors are tolerable), but that's just what those two seem to think makes a good character. With logic like that, it's no wonder we had to suffer the Sand Snakes for two and a half seasons.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 21, 2019, 10:15:37 PM
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 21, 2019, 09:50:28 PM
I doubt Lyanna will die if only because D&D love their "little girl bad-ass" characters, hence why Arya will also be safe. Mind you, I find it completely cringe-worthy, especially since Lyanna's actress is pretty bad (nothing against the person behind the role, but few child actors are tolerable), but that's just what those two seem to think makes a good character. With logic like that, it's no wonder we had to suffer the Sand Snakes for two and a half seasons.
I think the acting is due to bad direction than anything. Lyanna's actress was all right in that Hilda cartoon. And Maisie Williams gave a more dynamic performance as a nameless killer in her four episodes of Doctor Who than she had in the last three seasons of GOT.

And I wonder if the show's love of strong little girl characters is meant to be a last-minute backpedal after complaints about the show's treatment of women like giving Sansa a frustrating rape and revenge plot she didn't have in the books, or dumbing down several female characters like the Sand Snakes and Yara. And especially how Margaery and Olenna died for bullshit plot reasons.

Also, telling your civilians to go to the crypt for shelter when you're fighting an army of necromancers sounds like a horrible idea.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 28, 2019, 09:36:30 PM
So despite everything working in the favor of the army of the dead, the Night King lost because he had to conveniently walk to Bran super slowly and then let his guard down with Arya. Yeah, you can tell Dave and Dan wrote this.

It was a really well-directed episode, at least.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 28, 2019, 09:41:25 PM
Was it well-directed? I could barely see anything because of how dark most of the episode was.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 28, 2019, 09:47:40 PM
The battle scenes were not good. It was too much shaky cam and was clearly meant to disguise the budget. However, that was mostly over with after the first third of the episode when a lot of people were dead. The scenes not involving large scale fighting were pretty good at ratcheting up the tension. For example, the scene with Arya sneaking around the White Walkers was a legitimately well-directed scene. It's also nice that we actually saw genuine fear in her for once and we weren't forced into a cringe-inducing "girl-power" moment where she obnoxiously tries to act like a bad-ass at all times. Likewise, the build-up to the battle was very effective.

I suppose I shouldn't say that it was well-directed on the whole, especially with better battle scenes like in Battle of the Bastards, but the actual bits with main and supporting characters trying to survive once most of the stock soldiers in any given area were dead were well-done, IMO.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on April 28, 2019, 10:02:06 PM
Yeah, I liked those scenes.

So in hindsight, the Night King was a weak villain. Vague agenda that we only get from Bran. Stupid tactics like ice-spearing Viserion instead of Drogon while Dany and several main characters were on top of him. Spent so long walking to Winterfell that the wrath of the White Walkers became a meme. And being a silent antagonist meant he had little character to speak of. Guess you could argue he was more of a force of nature than a character, but Sauron was basically a force of nature, and he was more interesting throughout LOTR than the Night King was here.

Now that's all settled, what bullshit's going to happen to prevent Arya from masking herself as a Lannister servant and gutting Cersei in her sleep?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 02, 2019, 08:46:16 AM
Been seeing these "The Night King isn't really dead. He wouldn't be that stupid to let Arya kill him so easily" and "The Dothraki are just hiding. Daenerys wouldn't let her beloved soldiers sacrifice themselves so easily" theories. And they're all the same wishful thinking that fueled people who thought the Umbers were actually scheming to overthrow Ramsay, or thinking the Waif stabbed Jaqen H'ghar disguised as Arya.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 02, 2019, 05:36:32 PM
I can't be too harsh on them. I too was in this denial period for most of season five and even the beginning of season six. The thing is, the first three and a half seasons of the show were legitimately great (season four admittedly had the start of many of these problems, but I still cut it a lot of slack). Nobody wanted to admit that one of their favorite shows was rapidly becoming this bad from what it used to be. However, looking back on it, you can clearly see that the show's success relied heavily on the strong source material that it had to draw from. People give GRRM way too much shit for how slow his writing process is, but don't seem to understand that he puts a ridiculous amount of time and thought into his characters and world, exploring themes and messages while rarely ever betraying the established logic and rules of his Universe to make that happen. That's what made the series so special and stand-out in it's genre to begin with.

Comparatively, if you ask any team of writers to follow up on that by filling out entire seasons worth of content with only mere weeks worth of time to script it out between production shoots, this is exactly what you're going to end up with; a bastardized Hollywood version of what used to be a story that subverted such cliche writing. The thing is, I don't hate Dan and Dave like so many people do. I get that they are just two guys trying their best to hold things together after they got stuck doing this show without a strong backbone of a story to work off of. In all fairness, even GRRM himself admitted that finishing the books before the show got that far was always originally the plan. However, he's also the kind of writer who won't rush anything out before it's ready, but an HBO show with constantly aging actors who continually need work or will leave for other projects doesn't have that luxury. So, in the end, we're just left with a half-assed mess that is bound to disappoint everyone.

The White Walkers, so far as the show goes, were essentially an enemy built up over a decade only to be defeated in the most deus-ex-bullshit anticlimax ever. This is so unlike GRRM's writing style that I feel confident in claiming it to be an invention of the showrunners, and we kind of have no choice but to just deal with it. I'm really just in it to see how bad of a clusterfuck the ending will be.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 05, 2019, 10:13:02 PM
So, Bronn just waltzes into Winterfell with a loaded crossbow and makes it all the way to the inner castle without anyone batting an eye? Well, if nothing else, at least the writers are consistent with the general incompetence of the guards and basic defense protocols in this series.

Compared to the crap that we've been getting, it's not that bad of an episode on it's own, and David Nutter (same guy who directed The Reigns of Castamere) knows how to ratchet up the tension in key scenes, so it has some good direction going on. That said, it still suffers from so much of the bull-shit leading up to it, which is to say that the whole situation at hand is nonsensical because of all of the nonsense writing that lead to it in the first place. There's genuinely know way for this series to redeem itself for a satisfying ending like so many people are hoping. The damage done is too strong for the story to even begin to make a lick of logical sense anymore.

Like, one of Dany's two remaining dragons being killed feels like a big deal, but it's utterly stupid to expose it like that in the first place when she knew full well that they had ballistae that her dragons were vulnerable to in the first place back when Drogon took a direct hit from one last season. It just seems like another massive bout of incompetence that she and her two closest advisers would allow her to expose herself like that when they already have the information of what their enemy is equipped with. Beyond even that, didn't they already say that there plan would be to mount a siege to starve the kingdom and make them turn on Cersei? If that were the case, they have no reason to be that close to the castle. They need to block the key points in the routes leading there, which would have been a more effective use of Dany's remaining army and dragons. I guess D & D really wanted that pointless staredown between Dany and Cersei.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 06, 2019, 02:45:35 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D53XFj1U8AIRdIC.jpg:large)
Glad that they built a Starbucks up in the North.

So either Jaime throws away seasons of character development to join Cersei again, or he's being an asshole to Brienne for no reason other than to drag viewers on like the Arya/Sansa fight last season.

And what was with that scene where Sansa says getting raped by Ramsay made her a better person? Spending 30 whole minutes on the characters getting drunk was so self-indulgent. Then again, I would have preferred a scene where Jon goes to Deepwood Motte and beheads some traitorous Glovers, so who am I to judge?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on May 06, 2019, 01:46:59 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on May 06, 2019, 02:45:35 AM
And what was with that scene where Sansa says getting raped by Ramsay made her a better person?
Yeah, that line rubbed me the wrong way. Trauma doesn't have to be the only way to give a person experience and growth, unless you're D&D I guess.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 06, 2019, 03:10:50 PM
Why does Tormund even want to go back North of the Wall? There's no wildlife or anything edible up there thanks to the White Walkers. It's all dead land unless the Night King was secretly planting wheat up and tending to cows in his ice fortress.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 07, 2019, 09:27:23 AM
(https://preview.redd.it/0wd84ftxtqw21.png?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=3f33e8d8bc060014bdbba4471f39a8d9c23c38dc)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on May 09, 2019, 01:43:23 PM
Something I've thought about- doesn't Daenerys validating Gendry's status as a Baratheon also validate his claim to the throne, if anything adding another heir to take it before her?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 09, 2019, 02:03:58 PM
Yeah, but given Cersei's still on the throne despite having no legitimate claim, and nobody at King's Landing is disputing it like they did for Joffrey even though she killed their equivalent to the Pope, succession rights have been thrown out the window. Maybe Dany's just really, really hoping Gendry will be too thankful with his new status to consider usurping her.

Spoiler
And if the last episode leaks are true, the claim to the throne will be entirely moot.
[close]
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 09, 2019, 02:40:09 PM
Preston actually brought up how Dany naming Gendry as a Baratheon basically gives him a competing claim to the throne....if this series aas still following any sense of the feudal rules and logic that it used to.

Likewise, he also pointed out how stupid it was that Tyrion and others were making a big deal out of Brienne being a virgin when that's in fact a pretty basic fucking expectation of any highborn woman who has not yet been married.

He also points out how ludicrous it is that the episode itself reminds us that Dany still has the full support of Dorne yet we have not seen a single unit of the Dornish army and not even a mention of them having been in any battles with the Crown's forces (and of course they don't show up outside of King's Landing with Dany and her forces). The same goes for the armies of The Reach which she did get to re-swear fealty to her last season after she fucked up an entire unit with Drogon.

Also, the fact that nobody knows who currently holds Storm's End, despite it being the second biggest military stronghold next to King's Landing is fucking laughable. And the fact that Gendry, whi has never been officially recognized as Robert's bastard has assigned himself the sir-name Rivers really proves to me that D&D don't give a shit anymore, since even a basic book fan like myself knew that Rivers wouldn't make sense given that Gendry was born to a father from Storm's End.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 09, 2019, 02:42:21 PM
And how there's apparently a new prince of Dorne, but we have no idea if it's Quentyn, Arianne in drag, or someone who found Doran's chair and claimed dibs.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 09, 2019, 03:23:20 PM
The show established that Trystane was his only son, and that Oberyn only had three legitimized bastards, and since they said it was a prince of Dorne as opposed to a princess, it would have to either be a nephew of Doran's estranged wife Mellario or some other random house that won out in a power struggle.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 09, 2019, 06:26:00 PM
Speaking of the claim to the throne, I'm thinking about how the writers seemed to learn the wrong lessons from writing Joffrey. They were apparently too pleased when he became a breakout character that they attempted to make new Joffreys with Ramsay and modern Cersei. But forgot as evil as Joffrey was, he still suffered consequences just like the heroes did. None of his advisers respected him, and after killing Ned and killing Robert's bastards, he was essentially a puppet king with no genuine power of his own thanks to his age and lack of experience. But then they forgot all that with Ramsay, letting him kill his family members and fight on the frontlines of battles without any side-effect, and continued doing that when Cersei never went through any losses after blowing up the Great Sept or let random servants see her incestuous relationship. It's like if Joffrey killed Tywin in front of all of King's Landing, revealed he was a product of incest with not a trace of Robert's blood, and then ripped open his clothes to reveal a six-pack. All while every Westerosi clapped.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 09, 2019, 06:55:50 PM
You can tell that show Ramsay and his actions were largely an invention of D & D to be the next Joffrey when his show role was significantly expanded from his book role. He's a terrible person in the books, but firstly he's more isolated to Theon's story-line (of which Sansa isn't even close to involved with), and he's also given nowhere near as much actual power and authority as his show counterpart.

In general, looking back on everything past season four (the last season that George R. R. Martin wrote an episode four and confirmed to have consulted with the show-runners), it seems like with limited source material to work with, the two of them weren't sure how to carry the story forward with the same appeal that it had up to that point, so they decided it would somehow be better to exaggerate the elements of the show that fans had the most positive reactions to and dial those up to over-the-top levels to the point of bordering on self-parody. People liked the clever one-liners? Easy, they'll just throw a few of those in every episode, except without any of the wit or context or implied double-meanings to go with it. Everyone likes how smart of a character people like Tyrion, Littlefinger, and Varys are? Great, now we can have every scene they're in just be the stereotypical "I'm plotting" shtick with the characters talking about how smart and clever they're being without actually doing anything smart or clever within the context of the plot (It's a wonder how Dany hasn't burned Tyrion alive at this point for all of his major fuck-ups). The show did well with feminists for it's progressive portrayal of female figures by showing how they survive and rise to the occasion in a feudal system that puts them down while also realistically working within the confines of that system? Blah! George R. R. Martin is a hack! The show writers can do it ten times better by having every woman in the show act like they are on top of the world and make any male characters who dare question them in any capacity look like the biggest douches. You think Arya is a troubled character who has been taken to a supremely dark place after having to witness many consecutive horrifying and traumatizing experiences at such a young age? Nope. She's a complete bad-ass that can savagely kill anyone she wants without any consequences, and they are always unquestionably evil while she is a paragon of justice. It's also alright that she acts like a complete bitch to everyone she meets from after her training is complete. It's not a character flaw, she's perfect in every way. Should we do the same exact thing with Dany? Yep, though her characterization will inexplicably be changed to her going crazy in the last two seasons even though she doesn't act any differently than normal and this change will only be reflected in how other characters react to her for no good reason at all. Also, rinse and repeat with Sansa Stark, the Sand Snakes, Olenna Tyrell, Cersei, and so on and so forth. Fuck people like Catelyn Stark, she didn't go nuts killing other people, she just supported and counseled her son and tried to save her family to the best of her ability. Not enough stabbing people. And I think there was another character called Brienne....but you know, she barely has to be put to any use once Jaimie is in the middle of another story-line.

Also, the writers do address how people said the pacing of the show is too slow at times. So now characters will conveniently warp to whatever location that they need to be at, time, distance, and reasonable methods of travel be damned. The plot needs to move forward somehow. Though, Gilly's baby can and will always stay the same exact age even though apparently everyone else ages by years.

And, that's pretty much what we're dealing with, here.

This video is somehow even more relevant now than it was a couple of years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek2O6bVAIQQ
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 09, 2019, 07:29:24 PM
You know that it's bad when even the casual fans have caught on to the BS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahoHDU0T44I
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on May 09, 2019, 10:39:48 PM
I'm seeing that a lot of people aren't happy with the way the show is treating Dany in the last episode, even calling out a lot of Tyrion and Varys' bad calls. And I really can't help but blame them, since her descent is feeling pretty forced. And it doesn't even have to, as the Targaryen's mental health has always been suspect (I mean, all that incest...), but while she's always had her questionable moments, the show and Martin have always tried to build Dany to be a little more stable as opposed to Viserys' meltdowns or Aerys own descent. If this is Martin's intent, it really feels like D&D were struggling to come up with how to build to it and hoped that we'd take Sansa's sense of distrust and Jon's sense of duty over her. Except if anything, it's only seeming to make Sansa more dislikable, and prove how dim and unfit Jon is.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 10, 2019, 06:37:45 AM
(https://preview.redd.it/fvxqp9lrx8x21.png?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=8c7c2f0230448fceea11ce268f259bafb04f19c8)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 10, 2019, 03:29:19 PM
So had he won, what was the Night King going to do after turning all of humanity into Wights? At least with Infinity War, Thanos' answer was retire to a garden. What was the Night King's plan after human extinction? What was he even doing in those thousands of years before finding Craster babies to transmogrify? Sleeping? Meditating? It reminds me of that episode of JLU where after hearing about Brainiac's plan to absorb and destroy all information, Luthor mocks it for being unambitious and hijacks the plan for something more grandiose. What was the Night King going to do with a barren ice planet?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 10, 2019, 08:11:47 PM
I'd like to point out that the image of Whites as "Ice Zombies" as so many people put it, is completely an invention of the show. The White Walkers themselves are not described to be particularly ugly or monstrous in appearance, and actually do occasionally talk, albeit in a language that no character in the books thus far can discern. The Whites that act as their foot soldiers also have some level of intelligence and memories of their past lives as evidenced by the Night's Watchmen turned into Whites from book/season one knowing the layout of Castle Black and also exactly where to go to attack commander Mormont.

It's also implied that the Children of the Forest and Bloodraven aren't as nobly intentioned as they let on, with a lot of people (including Preston), theorizing that the White Walkers aren't a generic evil force.

Also, no Night's King exists as far as we know, yet. There's just an ancient legend of one having existed thousands of years ago.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 11, 2019, 01:02:02 PM
Even Power Rangers writers are mocking the Night King for being a flat villain. (https://twitter.com/bhaumikamit/status/1122561115458695168)

(https://preview.redd.it/crakk934bmx21.png?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=d9b0095ac148c9f168f92cb2aba5aa31b03b8a15)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 12, 2019, 10:22:27 AM
The ending we should have gotten. (https://www.reddit.com/r/freefolk/comments/bnmbbb/season_8_episode_5_battle_clip_leaked/)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 12, 2019, 06:16:43 PM
Ser Barristan's actor said a very surprising thing regarding the last two books. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1901&v=FeftoI3c81c) That GRRM told him they have already been completed and he made an agreement with HBO not to publish them until the show's over. Whether he's lying, saying a he-said she-said thing, going senile, or he's actually telling the truth, I have no idea.

Meanwhile, Randyll Tarly's actor wants his sword back. (https://twitter.com/jamessfaulkner/status/1126871545085931522)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 12, 2019, 09:42:02 PM
Well, I for one am so glad that D & D saw fit to take all of this time to cut back to that one sub-plot of Arya trying to save a random family that ends up being killed anyways. That was totally worth all of the other rushed story-telling to get to what really matters. Between this, and spending a full third of this season building up to an anticlimactic resolution to a story-line that has only been around since literally the prologue of episode one, it's clear that these are writers who know how to prioritize.

Also, violence is bad, guys. I'm not sure if you got that message, as D & D were REALLY subtle about it, but you may have noticed a few small scenes of people running in terror from Dany's forces and Drogon. There were also lots of corpses strewn about, but I fear the episode may not have focused on that enough in order for people to comprehend the moral being taught here.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 12, 2019, 10:42:13 PM
Yeah, those were definitely scenes where Arya tried to save some civilians only to fail. Again. And again. And again. Then a horse showed up.

That was definitely a Cleganebowl. Wasn't particularly hyped.

Those Stark soldiers suddenly activating Order 66 was a thing.

Jaime indeed throwing away seasons of character development and having a meaningless fight with Euron was also a thing.

That Golden Company sure existed.

Yeah...
(https://data.whicdn.com/images/319734072/large.jpg)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on May 13, 2019, 03:10:26 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on May 12, 2019, 06:16:43 PM
Ser Barristan's actor said a very surprising thing regarding the last two books. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1901&v=FeftoI3c81c) That GRRM told him they have already been completed and he made an agreement with HBO not to publish them until the show's over. Whether he's lying, saying a he-said she-said thing, going senile, or he's actually telling the truth, I have no idea.

Meanwhile, Randyll Tarly's actor wants his sword back. (https://twitter.com/jamessfaulkner/status/1126871545085931522)




...........I have a very big feeling he wasn't lying. It makes way too many things in retrospect make sense to be false.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 13, 2019, 05:01:28 PM
I found the perfect visual representation of the quality of this show for the past few seasons: https://youtu.be/dk60P_dzgk8
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 13, 2019, 05:40:43 PM
I don't know why people say that the last two seasons would have been improved if D&D made them 10-episode seasons instead of shortening them so they could leave the show faster. This last season had plenty of fluff as it was, like the 30-minute drinking scene. Increasing the amount of episodes would have only led to more padding instead of time spent on characterization.

And it sucks to see people defending Dany's shift by saying "She was always destined to do this if you watched the show closely!" For starters, have they watched the show? Because up until this episode, the majority of the people she killed were those who wronged her. She killed Mirri Maaz Durr for killing her child and destroying Drogo's mind. She burned the House of the Undying because Pyat Pree was a shit. She burned all of those slavers because they were slavers. She burned those Khals in season 6 because they were going to rape her. She burned the Tarlys because they were enemy soldiers who refused to surrender and take the black. The people she killed who didn't deserve it were often murdered by accident or as victims of circumstance, not by her going insane and burning everything in front of her. That's like arguing just because Batman used a gun all the way back in those Golden Age comics excuses him becoming a crazy gun nut in Dawn of Justice.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 13, 2019, 07:07:25 PM
For what it's worth, though, the people defending the show has steadily decreased over time to the point of those fans being in the minority. I was worried that this show would continue to get undue praise after a lot of otherwise legitimate critics were praising season six as being one of the series' best, but it was honestly just as horse-shit as the stuff that we're getting now. However, from season seven to now, those same people, as well as even a number of casual fans, seem to have caught on to how bad the writing in this show has truly gotten.

It also says a lot to D & D's actual level of "talent" that all of these problems for the show really started to come into play once they started running out of book material to adapt, and that the story-telling and characterization became completely nonsensical by mid-way into season five.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 13, 2019, 08:56:56 PM
It turned out everyone who shit on Jaime for being a selfish Kingslayer were completely right, and Catelyn should have killed him when she had the chance.
It turned out everyone who called Dany a crazy mass murderer like her father were completely right, and Robert should have killed him when he had the chance.
It turned out everyone who thought Tyrion was nothing but a duplicitous imp were completely right, and Tywin should have killed him when he had the chance.

By the way, GRRM refutes Ser Barristan's claim that the books are all done. (http://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2019/05/13/idiocy-on-the-internet/)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Peanutbutter on May 15, 2019, 02:56:44 AM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on May 13, 2019, 08:56:56 PM
It turned out everyone who shit on Jaime for being a selfish Kingslayer were completely right, and Catelyn should have killed him when she had the chance.
It turned out everyone who called Dany a crazy mass murderer like her father were completely right, and Robert should have killed him when he had the chance.
It turned out everyone who thought Tyrion was nothing but a duplicitous imp were completely right, and Tywin should have killed him when he had the chance.

By the way, GRRM refutes Ser Barristan's claim that the books are all done. (http://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2019/05/13/idiocy-on-the-internet/)


Problem is GRRM himself has lied. He didn't address who it was that made the claim. It could be he didn't finish the books, but this could just be him muddying the waters.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on May 15, 2019, 05:32:03 PM
Honestly, Dany going insane could have been a great reveal, if D&D weren't so hellbent on keeping her in badass mode up until this season, and actually spent more time building up to her downfall. It really just feels like a lazy last-minute twist.

Besides that, I can't tell if I'm more disappointed by Cersei and Jaime's blink and you'll miss it demise, or how underwhelming Cleganebowl turned out. I will give credit that it was a well-directed episode, at least. The impact felt bigger than "The Long Night". Not to mention that you could actually see stuff this time.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 15, 2019, 06:33:50 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on May 15, 2019, 05:32:03 PMhow underwhelming Cleganebowl turned out.
I never got much hype for Cleganebowl. Gregor was already a walking corpse so any personal stakes were already gone, and because of where it took place, both opponents were already doomed to die no matter who won. The only thing it could accomplish was spectacle, and it wasn't any more spectacular than any other fight in the show. The Hound's fight with Brienne was more fun to watch, as was the Mountain's duel with Oberyn.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 19, 2019, 09:30:10 PM
Well, gotta hand it to Dan & Dave....I was expecting this finale to be utter trash....but somehow they still managed to exceed my expectations. I mean, hey, if you're gonna fail, at least fail spectacularly. Bravo! :>
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 19, 2019, 09:56:50 PM
Also, I'm just going to temporarily ignore the fact that Robin Arryn wasn't at that counsel meeting to decide the new King of Westeros, since you know, he's the lord of the Vale, last time I checked, and it was never even mentioned that he died or was too unhealthy to attend. Let's just say for the sake of argument that he sent Nestor Royce in his place. Did the Lords of the Vale not pledge fealty to the North when Jon was declared as King of the North? Even after Jon pledged fealty to Dany, Royce still remained at Winterfell as a close adviser to Sansa, implying that their was still a loyalty and alliance between the Vale and Winterfell. So when Tyrion, who might I remind you was a prisoner being tried for treason (in which all his lordly powers should have been suspended), named Bran ruler of the six kingdoms (that's a whole other can of worms that I'm not even going to attempt to address right this minute) after Sansa declared that the North would go back to being an independent monarchy, I kind of had to do a double-take. I mean, not even a single acknowledgement of their previous agreement was mentioned. Tyrion just went ahead and said that Bran will be ruling the other six kingdoms and not a single question came up of the Vale's previous allegiance to the North, in which they were already supposed to be a part of that separate kingdom, so it should automatically be assumed that Bran is ruler of the five Kingdoms unless the territory of the Vale was explicitly renegotiated.

The sheer level of oversight in the writing with huge instances like this is a clear giveaway that D&D beyond just being bad at their job, clearly don't give a fuck about any sense of internal logic within the world of the show.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 20, 2019, 01:18:10 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D6-nctAXkAcuJob.jpg)

Robin did show up at the meeting, but he looked so different since we last saw him that it was hard to notice. Same thing with the new prince of Dorne. They just kind of sat there as cameos. Though it begs to question why it was a unanimous decision to not only initiate a Stark supremacy, but also exclusive Stark independence in the North.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 20, 2019, 05:53:01 AM
Ah, OK, yeah that one's on me. Completely didn't notice him at first. Still stand by what I said about the Vale, though.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 20, 2019, 01:25:23 PM
Since Bran saw visions of King's Landing in flames before it actually happened, that means he could have stopped Dany from murdering hundreds of thousands of people, but chose not to. He could have alerted Arya and Sansa, or told Jon that he has to do everything in his power to console Dany. Or maybe he could have told Dany to remember the Iron Fleet and make sure they don't kill her allies. But no, he allowed all this shit to happen when he had the power to stop it all. Those aren't the actions of a man who deserves to be king. Why would anyone want a king who knowingly lets more deaths to happen than the entire War of the Five Kings? It's like if Watchmen ended with everyone agreeing that Dr. Manhattan should be king of the world.

Not to mention Jon having a crisis of identity, and refusing to bed Dany? That was all him. He was the one who made Sam tell Jon he was actually Aegon. If he kept his mouth shut, Jon and Dany would have stayed a couple. Dany wouldn't have lost her remaining restraining bolt that prevented her from burning innocent folk alive. But no. Bran apparently couldn't let some truths stay hidden, even when their reveal gives no benefit to anyone involved. Maybe he foresaw Jon and Dany's eventual child would have been an evil incest king who made Aerys, Ramsay, and Euron combined look like saints, but he never tells us that. For all we know, he destroyed their relationship and turned Dany crazy simply because he wanted to.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on May 20, 2019, 04:21:12 PM
Actually, at least in Dr. Manhattan's case he had the excuse of not being able to see a speguc point in the future that Ozymandias blocked off to him. It does require a bit of a plot contrivance, but at least it's acknowledged and explained.

Also, I don't get why the writers even decided to give Bran the power of foresight. Unless this is revealed later in the books, he is established to only be able to see through Weirwood trees in the present into the past, as well as ravens and other animals, which limits how ridiculously OP his abilities are with how the show lets him see anything at anytime anywhere. Yet, this ignores the numerous plot holes that it would inevitably set up.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 20, 2019, 04:53:15 PM
I hated how they kept repeating the message that the best ruler is someone who doesn't want to rule. It isn't leadership skills, charisma, or even empathy for your common man that makes you a good leader, no. It's that you don't want to lead.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Daikun on May 20, 2019, 10:07:26 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TCn4jNCv_8
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 21, 2019, 12:23:04 AM
Not even GRRM's sure if the book ending will be like the show ending. (http://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2019/05/20/an-ending/)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on May 21, 2019, 04:02:59 PM
A political professor analyzed Game of Thrones' ending, and wasn't convinced by the implications. (https://twitter.com/BrentSirota/status/1130422047291715584?s=19)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 29, 2019, 08:08:33 PM
A recent interview from D&D's been making the news, (https://external-preview.redd.it/SzKMAD-HHLtRCzAjtn8yx-_DvW3khE2vYzRM-uYkWRE.jpg?auto=webp&s=17d1d3ce49eb45dfbeb49bf18872689d213375ff) and I noticed how pissed people were by the two wanting to expand their show's accessibility to moms and NFL players by toning down the fantasy. Someone else even pointed out that approach ultimately didn't work out for one of those demographics. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/05/20/nfl-nba-players-were-not-impressed-with-game-thrones-finale/) I can understand wanting to tailor GOT to be more in line with HBO's other work by nerfing Melisandre, cutting out Lady Stoneheart, or removing all of Euron's sorcery, but when the fantasy genre had been more or less accepted by the masses thanks to Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter making money at the box office, it sounds backwards to suggest the show's fantastical elements had to be either erased or limited in order to appeal to casual audiences. Especially when the show was at the stage when it had no option other than to depict fantasy concepts like the White Walkers or the Three-Eyed Raven, only to prove they didn't understand these ideas. If D&D understood the ramifications of the Three-Eyed Raven, Bran's entire arc in the last two seasons wouldn't have been so awkward to watch.

Also, one of the prequels got cancelled before it could make it to air. But another's been ordered. (https://twitter.com/GameOfThrones/status/1189330936300756992)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 08, 2020, 05:14:47 PM
(https://i.redd.it/l5cqm9y98kr51.png)

It could have been worse.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: talonmalon333 on October 30, 2020, 08:50:15 PM
It's wild to think about how much Game of Thrones disappeared from pop culture after it ended. I know that's what happens when a show ends, but it just feels more noticeable since that was the show everyone was talking about for years. It's telling how an ending that bad can really burn whatever good-will a show has built up over years of dominating pop culture, and I feel like its legacy will be as a once great show that ended badly, instead of being known as the biggest show of the 2010s.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 30, 2020, 10:23:38 PM
There's always that one sci-fi/fantasy show every few years that breaks out of a genre audience and reaches mainstream acclaim, but then fails to stick the landing and goes from must-see TV to maligned in just a few weeks. It happened with Lost, BSG, X-Files.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 31, 2020, 08:12:25 AM
To be fair, though, people tend to still remember those shows for having really good runs for their first few seasons. I think after a few years you'll see much the same for GOT. People will still rightly hate the last few seasons, but at least the first four seasons will be remembered as classic TV.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: talonmalon333 on October 31, 2020, 10:41:06 AM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on October 30, 2020, 10:23:38 PM
There's always that one sci-fi/fantasy show every few years that breaks out of a genre audience and reaches mainstream acclaim, but then fails to stick the landing and goes from must-see TV to maligned in just a few weeks. It happened with Lost, BSG, X-Files.

That's true (though I can't speak for X-Files as I never saw the last few seasons). Admittedly, I think I'm more forgiving of the Battlestar Galactica ending now than I used to be, maybe after having seen worse endings. I do think the ending of Game of Thrones is exceptionally bad, though, even in comparison to those ones.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on October 31, 2020, 04:42:53 PM
Right now, Game of Thrones is almost making HIMYM's ending seem beloved by comparison. That one's pre-finale reputation has been slightly rehabilitated over the years, but it still stings to many, and most seem to prefer similar series instead like Friends or New Girl. I think the same will happen to GOT.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 31, 2020, 08:13:46 PM
Funny to remember that ages ago, The Sopranos' ending used to be seen as one of the infamously bad TV show endings, (https://thechaselounge.net/viewtopic.php?f=103&t=1937) but then fans took a while to digest it and now understand what Chase intended.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on November 28, 2020, 11:30:57 PM
Listening to Preston tear apart the show never gets old for me. In this case he was pointing out why D&D's recent defenses of season 8 are utter bull-shit and don't even hold consistent to their own sense of logic: https://youtu.be/O5AE6zHXC5c
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on November 29, 2020, 04:08:28 PM
I recall a month ago, there were interviews with the GOT writers where they thought Tywin was "lawful neutral" and they didn't understand why audiences cheered when Dany killed Randyll Tarly. And it's curious where they reached those conclusions. Tywin might believe his cause to be right, but he's ordered so many murders and rapes of innocent people that you can't possibly look at them and think the ends justified the means. Even when demoting the Tysha plot to happenstance in the show, he still commanded his soldiers to gang-rape a prostitute to humiliate Tyrion. What exactly's "lawful neutral" about that? And why should anyone care about Randyll's life? The show spent years reminding us he was such a horrible father to Sam, and he's no better once he shows up in-person. But we're supposed to think Dany's horrifying for murdering a character we're obviously supposed to hate? Dickon's death's a pity, but we never spend enough time with him to think his execution's unforgivable.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Daikun on March 27, 2021, 03:23:53 PM
GRRM has signed a five-year deal with HBO. (https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/26/22353416/hbo-george-r-r-martin-game-of-thrones-five-year-eight-figure-deal)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 08, 2021, 09:16:27 PM
For all his railing against the show, Preston will call out GRRM's very own plot-holes as well: https://youtu.be/hiHsV_bTn6w

I find it amusing because admittedly I never put too much thought into the massive leap in logic that this crucial plot point that kicks off the whole main story takes. That said, when you think about it, yeah, it's a really big leap, even for a fantasy series.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Daikun on April 14, 2021, 07:09:44 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ey9BUIAW8AMAcgK.jpg)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Daikun on July 16, 2021, 07:03:53 PM
GoT is getting two animated series for HBO Max. (https://uproxx.com/tv/game-of-thrones-animated-series-golden-empire-of-yi-ti-hbo-max)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Daikun on October 06, 2021, 02:37:17 AM
House of the Dragon trailer is out. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNwwt25mheo)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 11, 2021, 06:41:13 AM
They should have cast an actor I don't recognize, because seeing Matt Smith in that wig is annoying. Even if this show turns out to be genuinely good, I won't be able to look past that.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 24, 2022, 06:55:22 PM
GRRM will help with an extended epilogue for the show before Winds comes out. (https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2022/06/23/snow-and-other-stuff/)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Daikun on June 25, 2022, 05:05:18 AM
You mean GRRM will actually write something? :sly:
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Avaitor on June 25, 2022, 12:24:53 PM
Oh, he's done plenty of writing. He just won't work on the books.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on June 26, 2022, 01:02:19 AM
He did release two ASOIAF books after Dance, they were just prequels and history books.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 22, 2022, 10:32:33 AM
The House of the Dragon Premiere was actually pretty decent, all things considered. Part of this may be far lower expectations after the abysmal last couple of seasons of Game of Thrones, but you can tell the new showrunner has a distinct creative vision that sets this show's style apart from D&D on Game of Thrones.

Not sure how I feel about Matt Smith as Daemon, though. He does a pretty good job of portraying a brash and impulsive dick-head who still has a lot more wit about him than someone like Joffrey, but I also can't help but be reminded of Doctor Who everything I see him. Maybe that will phase out over time.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 22, 2022, 06:45:53 PM
I'm more confused that Matt Smith's typecast as villains now. Skynet, Milo Morbius, the guy from Last House in Soho, that rumor he was going to play a young Palpatine in Star Wars. He's good at doing evil, but it's a bit weird that's what casting directors consistently get from him.

He's also the only one of the cast who instantly stood out to me. Everyone else just kinda blended into the background.

EDIT: It didn't occur to me on first viewing, but Preston's video is making me wonder why the jousting tournament here was a lot more bloody than in Robert's reign?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 26, 2022, 05:43:45 PM
I forgot how much I enjoyed Preston's takes on these episodes. By his own admission he exaggerates his criticisms somewhat in the watch videos since it's supposed to be a bit more humorous, but he still points out some pretty stark (no pun intended) flaws and inconsistencies.

I also have to admit that I let the jousting tournament slide on initial viewing but it really is a case of catering to the casual fan rather than making any logical sense. There was one death in Robert's tourney from the show of a minor knight, and even that was treated as an unusual and unfortunate occurrence (even though it was planned). Having numerous people associated with numerous great houses just get slaughtered like it's nothing is just absurd, especially since these aren't supposed to be fights to the death in the first place, and they have clear-cut rules to them as well, which are completely ignored.

Also, I never noticed the line about the tourney being a way for men to metaphorically get off after multiple generations of relative peace in the realm. Surely enough it was there when I went back and watched, and yes it's laughably stupid. Can't blame that one on D&D for a change, at least.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 26, 2022, 06:49:04 PM
The part at the end where Viserys tells Rhaenyra about the battle with the White Walkers 200 years from now was also dumb, both from what Preston said about how the line of succession works and the secret doesn't even really matter in the long run since I remember Jon and Dany, the only Targaryens involved in the battle, found out about it on their own.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 28, 2022, 09:36:50 PM
You know, for as much shit as D&D get (a fair bit of it is deserved), one thing I have to give them credit for is knowing how to balance the tone of the show and make the politics more appealing to a casual audience. For lack of a better description, they made it entertaining, at least in the first few seasons. I mean, book fans will get what's going on but this episode felt like one of those set-up episodes from GOT without an ounce of personality, and I can't help but see most casual viewers getting bored by it. My cousin actually called me today to have me explain the first episode going into this one because he legit had trouble following what was going on (and he followed GOT just fine).

Also, while it is kind of unavoidable, the long gaps of in-universe time between these initial episodes makes the narrative feel disjointed. To be at least a little fair to the staff for this show in comparison to GOT, though, they have far less source material to work with than that show did for it's first five seasons.

On the positive side I will say that I'm buying Matt Smith as Daemon the more that I see him. The cast has actually been all around good, with performances ranging from solid to excellent. That said, the writing hasn't allowed for much depth or nuance to these characters yet. They didn't have any depth or nuance in the source material since those were a collection of in-universe recountings of historical events written by maesters and meant to read like scholarly texts rather than actual fictional stories. So this show bares the burden of filling in the blanks. That could work in it's favor if done well, but so far not much has been added, IMO.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 28, 2022, 09:49:30 PM
Yeah, I found myself nodding along until Daemon showed up. The show has an uphill battle to climb, not only figuring out how to win back the critical portion of the audience, but how to make the Targaryen dynasty something I'd actually like to watch. Watching the political scenes honestly felt staler than the ones in GOT, even late-season GOT. Those were also dumb, but at least they had Lena Headey to help carry the scenes. While here, the only thing worth notice is that the Small Council are all egg connoisseurs. (https://i.redd.it/zywsp1z9shk91.jpg)

Also, how's that Jon Snow show going to fare? Unlike HOTD, that doesn't even have a book to rely on, and it's hard to see anything worth telling about Jon Snow's post-GOT life. I hope they don't do what I expect like making the Night King actually a slightly stronger White Walker and the true Night King was still farther up North.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 28, 2022, 10:04:04 PM
People seem to point out GRRM's supposed "involvement" with these shows being an indication that they can be good without source material, but also seem to forget that he's had his name attached to several projects with minimal to no real input from him. Also, let's not forget that he's been involved with a decent amount of less than stellar television (seriously, try watching some of that Beauty and the Beast series, and you can see he can produce crap just like anyone else).

I imagine it will be like how Elden Ring had his name attached to it but nobody even brings that up anymore because it just came off like any other FromSoftware game's story with nothing feeling put of place from the kind of cryptic stories that Souls games usually have. It feels like they would have made the same exact game without GRRM's involvement.

Like many others, I strongly suspect that he stopped giving a shit years ago once he realized he could make millions off of licensing his IPs and using his name value from GOT's massive popularity to promote sub-par projects to big studios and production companies. On the one hand, I can't really blame him for taking it easy and milking his past work to make out a nice living for himself in his old age. Just, you know, it'd be kind of nice to at least finish what he started, which I've given up hope on ever happening at this point.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 28, 2022, 10:33:56 PM
God, I tried watching a little of his Beauty and the Beast show when I found it once on TV. It's so hokey, one of those urban fantasy TV series that came out before Buffy showed people how to do it well. You can tell why even after GOT became a global phenomenon, nobody's tried to seriously reappraise GRRM's older TV work like that or the 80s Twilight Zone show. Or that Nightflyers show that stumbled its way to Syfy instead of a channel that's actually worth anything. Kinda surprised Wild Cards hasn't become a show yet even though "superhero show with the Game of Thrones guy's name on it" should be pure, concentrated gold to studio execs.

GRRM reminds me of how Neil Gaiman's now spending most of his life showrunning adaptations of his older work and putting "Neil Gaiman Presents" on things he has next to no involvement with. And I get it, that's where the money is, and if I were in his shoes, I would remind everybody I wrote Sandman and Good Omens on a constant basis too, but I wish he'd find the time to write a new novel. Meanwhile, while I haven't liked his recent work, I can at least admire Stephen King for still doing new books long after he found mainstream success.

Though I also suspect GRRM's more embarrassed by Season 8's poor reception than he lets on and hastily scrapped and rewrote giant chunks of his Winds/Dream manuscripts in response.

Oh yeah, on a more shallow note, I'm really disappointed HOTD's opening theme is just GOT's again.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on August 29, 2022, 10:32:35 PM
Now that I've had some time to look at other opinions, I have to admit that I have been wrong so far about how some of the more casual fans have taken to this show. A lot of people seem to be unanimously liking what they have seen so far. I have a feeling that this will probably go over well as long as they don't do anything monumentally stupid since the abysmal final two seasons of GOT managed to lower expectations so much that it is relatively easier to surpass them for most audiences.

That said, I also do notice that a lot of reviewers, while enjoying the main story so far, do seem to be confused on a lot of background details as I suspected they might be. I suppose it probably doesn't matter too much to most as long as the core story and characters land home. We'll see how this goes.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on August 30, 2022, 09:23:11 AM
Yeah, even the Freefolk subreddit's cautiously optimistic. Most I've seen is people making Crab People jokes about last episode's ending.

I suppose in the age of fanwikis and YouTube videos explaining all the lore, excessive continuity doesn't matter all that much as long as there's something cool on screen.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 01, 2022, 07:24:51 PM
Just watched Preston's breakdown of episode 2 of HOT n' Spicy D, and while I managed to successfully predict most of the things that he would nitpick or completely tear down (based on it's level of absurdity when held up to any sense of logic), I must admit I myself now feel stupid for not realizing just how stupid Otto's plan actually was in this episode. I mean, I knew that he would make fun of how dumb it was for him to bring only 20 men with him to Dragon Stone to face down Daemon (how they were even allowed on the island with their weapons is itself ludicrous when you consider that Dragon Stone is fortified to withstand an entire fleet with ease), and on that end I'm just more surprised that he didn't find a way to make an obvious "Give me 20 good men" joke/reference out of the whole situation. That said, when he pointed out how there was no way that this situation could have gone down without Rhaenyra's interference (which Otto was most certainly not counting on) that would be of any benefit to Otto or King Viserys, I had to sort of do a double-take once I realized just how dumb this really was. In a realistic scenario Daemon would just laughably slaughter Otto and his men or at the very least hold them hostage. Again, this is just 20 men against literally all of the forces of Dragon Stone that Daemon has rallied to his side. However, also consider that even if Otto did somehow manage to get the egg back from Daemon, he would just piss him off enough to get him to retaliate and considering that Daemon is a dragon rider, that's like openly asking for the enemy to launch their nuke on you. Since he clearly doesn't want to support Viserys marrying into house Valeryon in order to maneuver his own daughter into a position of power as the King's bride for the sake of his family, it's not exactly in his best interest to quite literally instigate the other dragon. And if someone were to argue that he was trying to negotiate peacefully with Daemon, putting aside that Daemon is notoriously impulsive and hard to reason with (he's called "The Rogue Prince" for a reason), he clearly is the worst person to involve himself in a negotiation of any sort with Daemon considering how much they both bitterly dislike each other as demonstrated in the tourney in the first episode. It's like Preston said: "What was Otto's plan, exactly?" It's like, it was obviously going to go bad, and even if he got what he wanted in that exact instance against all odds and reason, it still would have ended up going badly for him anyways.

The only way this would make any real sense is if the show were trying to demonstrate that Otto is actually not a very competent Hand of the King, but it's so obvious that the writers are trying to position him into being this show's Tywin, but without the actual understanding of what made Tywin such a legitimately intelligent and ruthless leader and political power.

Anyways, to the episode's credit, most of the other logic wasn't that bad so most of Preston's criticisms were on the nitpick level in this case. On his criticism of why Rhaenyra was allowed in the small counsel meeting, I actually feel that, while it's a justifiable nitpick given her presence as a cupbearer, he could have mentioned that this was an easy fix for the writers: just have her present as a member of the small counsel. There was already a precedent for female royalty being allowed into the small counsel, however rare it may have been, and considering that Viserys had already named Rhaenyra his heir at this point in the show, this would have made complete sense within the context of the show's own logic.

Also, I will actually point out the one time I disagreed with one of his criticisms. When Rhaenyra chose Sir Criston Cole because of his combat experience, Preston pointed out that combat situations weren't ever the cause of any of the previous kings' deaths up to this point. But, like, that doesn't still mean that it isn't an important factor. While out of the four previous rulers since Aegon, only Maegor was the one to be ruled as anything other than natural causes (officially deemed a suicide, but almost certainly was a murder since nobody slits their own wrists AND also makes the extra effort to stab themselves through the throat for good measure), it doesn't exactly rule out the need for a well seasoned fighter to be in service to the king. It was the one time where I felt he was stretching a bit too much to criticise something, even if it wasn't meant to be taken entirely too seriously.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on September 01, 2022, 07:39:35 PM
Maybe each of Otto's 20 good men had tiny, portable scorpions to shoot dragons with? And they were all Clegane ancestors or something...?

But seriously, that scene was dumb and is just there because the episode needed at least one tense standoff scene to show how much Daemon means business, but didn't know how to set it up right. There's a consistently weird lack of reaction from the characters when shit like murders at jousting tournaments or hostile dragons occur.

In other news, the shows' playing musical chairs with showrunners. (https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/1/23332807/house-of-the-dragon-miguel-sapochnik-exit)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 04, 2022, 09:49:54 PM
Anyone remember Blackwater? It was built up over the course of an entire season (really since season one even), and it took up a whole episode and had multiple stages to the battle and it all also made complete sense (mostly) with occasional lapses in logic that could be forgiven due to production restrictions and also liberties that needed to be taken for creative fluorishes to make for a more entertaining episode (perfectly reasonable stuff, at that). It was glorious television and still holds up today, ten years after it originally aired (it still feels brand new). I recently just re-watched it.

Watching the whole battle ordeal from today's episode really shows me that they took the wrong lessons from that with how they proceeded with doing big battles in this franchise. Now, granted, I know that this wasn't being presented as an equivalent to something like Blackwater or Watchers on the Wall, or even Battle of the Bastards (which was bad from a writing standpoint, for the record, but still a different sort of affair altogether), but the point still stands that this is going to be somewhat compared to stuff like that, and I guarentee that you are going to see a bunch of reviewers praising it as some sort of return to the glory days of Game of Thrones. Except it's infuratingly stupid if you really stop to think about it. We know from the context of it being Aegon's second birthday that over two years have passed since the last episode, which means that Daemon and House Valeryon have been at this for almost that long. Except when you actually realize that they had such a measley group of men and one leader to take out to win this whole ordeal, it makes them look stupid rather than impressive that they took this long to do it, and even then only managed to on a desperate last-minute whim of a plan. Daemon being forced into despiration to achieve something to get full credit for it before his brother intervenes is actually a good plot beat, giving credit where it's due, but when you establish just how limited the enemies' forces and tactics are, and how easily they can take them out once they draw them into the open, it just gets marred by huge leaps in the logic of how these kinds of battles would actually work.

Here's the thing, I can see where they are taking their main influences from in terms of the source material. The Targaryens' failed invavsion attempts of Dorne are what this really draws back to, which is actually a really cool concept to go by. See, Aegon's Conquest saw all of the other major Kings of Westeros bow down to him and his sisters with relative ease (not that it was all as easy as it seems, but I'm using the term "relative" appropriately here), but they actually couldn't get Dorne. Like, they didn't ever conqer Dorne (they eventually joined the Seven Kingdoms through a political marriage, in case anyone is wondering). However, even with all of their forces (including the added forces of the rest of the Westerosi lords they had conquered) and the use of their Dragons, they couldn't even come close to forcing Dorne into submission. The terrain was rocky, and sandy, and hilly, and had lots of caves and crevices for the native Dornish to hide in that would easily shield them from Dragonfire. It also let them set up tons of traps and ambushes for foot-soldiers, many of whom had much difficulty navigating the Dornish terrain (horses didn't fare much better). They admittedly couldn't do too much to openly fight back but they managed to force Aegon to expend much of his forces and resources since many men got stranded and starved while getting lost wandering that unfamiliar area for months to years on end, and they could never actually find any of the Dornish leaders to take their heads. At one point they just tried to place their own lords in positions at Dorne when the other territories were seemingly abandoned with much of their leaders and forces in hiding, but then as soon as the Targaryen's left back home with their Dragons and the bulk of their forces, the Dornish quickly came out of hiding and reconquered those areas with ease and had those newly placed lords executed.

It got to the point where the new King of Dorne who ascended to the position after his mother died wrote a letter appealing to Aegon to just give it up and call a truce, and while the details are fuzzy, Aegon essentially said "fuck it" and just gave up on it because it wasn't worth the effort (and it also cost him the life of one of his sisters). Now....imagine if he had just one small area to conquer and one leader to kill and then Dorne would be conquered. All of a sudden it'd seem pretty stupid if it took him years to achieve that feat and then he does it in a matter of minutes in a last-ditch effort that just as easily could have gotten him killed.

The whole reason I went on this spiel was to spell out how interesting a concept like that is and why it works for this kind of source material. However with this show it's like they take influence from certain aspects of it but fail to understand what makes these kinds of concepts interesting and sensical, and instead just try to throw out what they think will look cool in an action scene. Admittedly it's all very nice to look at but Game of Thrones always sold itself to me as a fantasy series that really gave a shit about the consistency of it's narrative and lore making logical sense within the context of it's Universe. Other series could get away with the fell good moments and pure entertainment value because they were built to be that way. However, Game of Thrones used to feel like it held itself to a higher standard, and when it nailed the writing needed to sustain that standard, it really was a cut above everything else, IMO. But watching stuff like this just makes me feel frustrated.

I get that it's just me, and if people enjoy this, good for them. I have nothing against anyone having a good time with any work of fiction. This is just a personal issue of mine where I have a very specific idea for what I want and I have just come to terms with the fact that this series just isn't for me anymore. Granted, of course I will still probably keep watching and bitching about it for some time to come, but it'll probably just be in good fun for the most part going forward. I just can't bring myself to really take it seriously anymore.

Oh, and in case your wondering, in the original story Daemon and Corlys do try to subdue the Steptones and it takes even longer than in the show, but as you might guess the circumstances are completely different. He has a Triarchy to deal with in addition to several other leaders and political figures from the free cities. And oh yeah, their good old friends the Dornish ally themselves with said Free Cities, for various reasons, but also partly to stick it to the Targaryens again. So, yes, it makes sense why it takes so long.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on September 05, 2022, 03:53:58 AM
Yeah, Blackwater's like the Wrath of Khan of GOT where the creators keep trying to replicate it to lesser results. The shows' chief conundrum is it actively teaches the audience to expect more complexities within their battle scenes, or to focus on the consequences which an action scene from a regular series would overlook, but then to fall back on typical action/fantasy film cliches later on. Like how the lack of safety amongst the leads critics celebrated GOT for got traded off for heavy-duty plot armor in later seasons. It's the series making a mission statement, and then failing to follow its own words after 4 or 5 years. At least with your Marvels or your Fast and the Furiouses, they know what they are and don't pretend to be above that. While HOTD insists it's still the dark, subversive political drama in GOT's early days, but with no evidence to back that up.

Though I watched the series premiere of LOTR: Rings of Power, and compared to that, at least HOTD has something resembling a sense of direction. That first episode just kept raining main characters at me without giving any of them an establishing moment, or any reason to think "Yes, I should pay attention to these characters instead of wondering when Isildur will inevitably kill Sauron, take his ring, keep the ring, die, and so on". With HOTD, at the minimum there's a theme going on regarding the eventual collapse of the Targaryen dynasty and the pit that awaits most of the main cast, while Rings of Power was all meandering.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 05, 2022, 08:47:58 AM
True, with HOTD you can at least see where the plot is going even if the narrative feels disjointed. The Rings of Power feels like such a fucking slof that I had to take two breaks in-between watching the premiere episodes.

The funny thing is that I had a strong feeling that this would happen. Both of these are spin-offs of series that were already strongly compared to each other (despite being very different at their core), and both are based on supplemental lore material rather than any actual novels. That said, at least HOTD has access to all of that lore, whereas TROP is cut off from a lot of actual interesting material and can't even use certain character names to reference them due to rights issues. They can't do any of the stuff that would actually be interesting from The Silmarillion or other Middle-Earth lore books, so you have a plot that feels aimless like it's trying to find some kind of purpose. The Lord of the Rings has a slow start as well, but it can get away with it because the big exposition dump at the beginning at least establishes agency for where the plot is going. After 2 hours of TV, TROP still has yet to do this so I'm struggling to find a reason to care about anything thus far.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on September 05, 2022, 03:03:16 PM
And everyone's already said it, but Rings of Power is such a bland title. Just saying it evokes Power Rangers more than Tolkien.

Speaking of, the Crabfeeder gave me PR monster vibes (maybe that's why it took 2 years to kill him, both his forces and Daemon's just fought small 1v5 skirmishes once a week). Mostly there to give the episode an action scene that doesn't involve Viserys killing a CGI deer, while reminding viewers who didn't watch the first two episodes that Daemon is emotionally unstable and likes to fight dirty. A blatant attempt to keep the audience's attention now that everybody mocked all the "sexposition" scenes in GOT to death. And that's not even a bad thing, most HBO shows do it. I remember a David Chase interview where he admits he put in a lot more murders in The Sopranos than Tony could realistically get away with in order to keep viewers glued for everything else. But the problem here is the lack of rhythm that lets the dumb action scenes complement the politicking.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 05, 2022, 03:17:55 PM
I mean, if the actual politics were taken seriously and made sense than I as well could excuse the other lapses in logic with the show, but as we've already seen even the actual politics are strongly bent to having the writers achieve what they want to with the characters rather than making them feel like a real government system in a world that feels real in it's presentation. However, it's clearly possible to both have good writing for the politicking and still have compelling character dynamics and development to go along with it.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on September 05, 2022, 04:00:03 PM
The inherent problem with the political drama is we already know where this will all go. Robert's Rebellion. Daenerys. Jon living the rest of his life out far North. Everything the characters argue and fight for within this show will all be for nothing, and the universe's reputation as a world where people backstab each other and get themselves all killed adds a lot of apathy to it all. And once again, that's not bad in itself. The KOTOR games are fully aware that their stories won't affect the Star Wars stories thousands of years into the future, so they spend that time instead focusing on what it really means to be a Jedi or a Sith. But here, it's all sort of shallow. Most of the Rhaenyra or Viserys scenes remind me more of later-season Downton Abbey than the crumbling empire we're supposed to get later on for the Targaryens.

Not to mention the show's still suffering from the flaws of later GOT, where Cersei can just blow up a sprawling new religion and nobody in King's Landing reacts to it, or how Kinslaying just became normal. Any pretense of political drama that felt real and consequential was thrown out in those seasons, and it definitely hasn't grown back.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 05, 2022, 05:01:19 PM
I somewhat disagree about the political tension not mattering. While everyone obviously knows how GOT (as a show) ends, this show is far enough removed from those events that at least non-book readers don't know how the brewing Targaryen civil war will play out. There are still potential stakes there depending on which characters people get invested in. The issue then becomes if you are actually investing in any of the characters or not, and on that end, despite some admittedly good acting for the most part (I actually think that Paddy Considine as Viserys does quite well), the writing has made it hard for me to really get behind any of these characters. Thus, I don't feel too strongly about what happens to them.

This show was never built on the foundation of White Walkers or any of the other high-fantasy elements of GOT, so I don't think that anybody is going into this expecting the series to strongly tie into any of that. However, the show to me effectively feels like an extension of GOT's later seasons in it's very similar writing quality, or lack thereof, which is why it doesn't really work for me. I think of Better Call Saul as my ideal example of how to do a character-based prequel.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on September 05, 2022, 05:33:45 PM
Though I'd argue making a show that focuses on the era of Targaryens when they have 17 (a number the promotional material I read really liked to emphasize) dragons is meant to appeal to the viewers most engaged with seeing Daenerys burn people in GOT, so I think they are waving the high-fantasy keychain at people to keep them interested.

The other problems is, like you said with Otto Hightower being too much like a poor man's Tywin, is how much the characters are just echoes of GOT characters but with little of what made the originals work. It's extra concerning in Daemon's part, since the amount of random brutalities they give him (like killing one of his own guys in the opening scene last episode) and his increasing demands to be seen by his family is reminding me of Ramsay. And the last thing we need is a somehow shallower version of Ramsay.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on September 09, 2022, 03:31:36 AM
(https://i.redd.it/qsl9nxpp7nm91.jpg)

Took a look at all the GOT spinoffs in development, and not feeling any of them besides maybe the Dunk and Egg show. Corlys is all right in HOTD so far, but I don't like him enough to want a whole prequel spinoff about him. I'm a little confused why there aren't more sequels in development if the Jon Snow show's a thing (though I've read the idea is more Kit Harrington's than anything). Thought pushing Arya on a boat and having her go sailing west of Westeros was spinoff bait, but haven't heard anything more about that.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 09, 2022, 06:43:25 AM
The Hedge Knight is the one show that I have some hope could be genuinely good. It's a much more singular and focused series of short stories following two main characters and has a more traditional adventure style theme to it while still feeling like it fits in that Universe. It also helps that Dunk and Egg are both pretty likeable leads. It doesn't concern itself too much with politics outside of background details so it'd give them far less opportunity to screw that up.

The animated shows could be interesting if they decided to cover some of the crazier lore, like pre-Aegon's Conquest.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on September 11, 2022, 04:28:17 AM
Thinking about it, if I had were an HBO exec, even if he disappointed me in the second half of the show, I'd have gone for a Bronn spinoff than anything else. A whole show about him using his sellsword wit while in Bran's reign. Make it like that Discworld book Going Postal but in the GOTverse.

Also, Preston's weird rant in his latest video where he got mad at Viserys saying he never imagined remarrying stuck out to me. Like Viserys is clearly a pretty emotional guy who's still having a difficult time mourning his first wife, all while struggling to be a strong, silent leader in public, and no one who says "I never thought I'd remarry" is that literal-minded about it. I was surprised that pissed him off more than the Crabfeeder fight.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 11, 2022, 09:49:33 AM
I think that's him exaggerating his nitpick since that's part of his shtick in these videos. He tends to go easier on stuff like that or completely ignore them in his serious Q&A's, but yeah, that's not really a flaw with the show. They give the characters more modern sensibilities to allow viewers to emotionally connect with them, which is actually one of the things the show does right, IMO. I think it's more of a case of how re-marrying was not at all an uncommon concept in the books since it was natural for many people to die early deaths either in childbirth or due to any number of causes.

His criticism of people referring to Aegon as second of his name being a mistake was also off, since while that implies he is the heir over Rhaenyra, that's completely the point. It is meant to show that people automatically see a male heir as the next obvious successor to the iron throne over Rhaenyra despite Viserys clearly naming her his heir.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 11, 2022, 09:28:23 PM
So, I'll just get the negatives out of the way, which is the usual stuff of the show just adding in violence for the sake of it ,like the court scene with the suitors in the beginning. I mean, yeah, this is a brutal, old-timey world that can be pretty cruel, but fights between high-born nobles don't just happen like that without a formal challenge being issued. They would still have guards try to stop any conflict or pull apart people like this trying to fight to avoid any major political conflicts from brewing. Also, while it makes sense for Daemon to abandon the Stepstones since he just wants credit for securing them and doesn't care about holding that territory, it's really stupid that they didn't leave any forces there to hold it. Wasn't the whole point that they had people blocking trade routes from House Valeryon's ships which was significantly affecting their economic status? You'd think at least Corlys would leave someone in charge of that area to prevent that issue from springing up again. Of course, there are countless scenes like this in the show so I'm not going to waste my time nitpicking them all the time.

I will actually say that, overall, this was surprisingly decent and my favorite episode so far, easily. It focused more on the family drama between the core characters and kept the politics in the background, and to it's credit this show and these actors do a much better job of generating personal drama. I still have my issues here as well, but mostly minor, and this is the first episode of this season that I found myself invested in mostly the entire way through.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on September 11, 2022, 09:44:31 PM
Yeah, it was a lot more focused than the last few episodes. No Crabfeeders or bargain bin Lannisters. Allicent actually gets something to do. Don't know what else to say though.

I do ask who's the king after Viserys who finally had the intelligence to dull the edges on each sword of the Iron Throne? Did Robert get a cut and decide to sandpaper everything?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 14, 2022, 10:26:53 PM
Even Preston couldn't go too hard on the most recent episode, some people half-jokingly attribute this to the fact that it confirmed one of his long speculated fan-theories. However, he also pointed out at least two instances of it improving things over the source material, which goes to show that he's not just criticizing the show to be a book snob.

Also, I meant to mention it earlier, but yes, the rats were a pretty excellent use of foreshadowing to a truly horrific moment that will happen quite a bit later (at this story's pace, not until late season 2 or 3, I would imagine).
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 18, 2022, 09:38:16 PM
What's so frustrating about this show is that parts of it are legitimately good, but it's so hard to appreciate it because it almost immediately throws in some horrendously stupid writing to clash with it. The beginning of the episode with how they portrayed Daemon killing his wife was actually unintentionally funny with how stupidly it was executed. But that was at least a bit easier for me to ignore.

That wedding....really brought me back to what the later seasons of Game of Thrones felt like. The behind the scenes bit at the end was basically the writers admitting that they are just deriving this shit from what was successful before. Because the Red Wedding was such a big deal, now every wedding scene has to have bloodshed and drama whether it makes sense or not.

Having Criston Cole snap and murder an innocent man (probably belonging to a noble house) without cause should have him immediately stripped of his cloak and at best be sent to the Wall, or even possibly executed if they find out about why he made that attack. How can he possibly come back from this? Minor spoilers, but he is a major player in this story, so the writers are going to have to make an excuse for why he is still allowed to not only be acquitted of any punishment, but also still get to keep his role as a member of the Kingsguard. If they wanted to have him at conflict and kill another character in his rage but still make it make sense, they could have had him do it at a tourney (which is absolutely an appropriate event for a royal wedding). Now they are going to come up with some even bigger bullshit to excuse all of this, or even worse ignore the entire event and it's implicated consequences completely.

What's most annoying is that almost everything in-between the first and last scene was actually GOOD. Much like episode 4, I was ready to praise this episode a bit and say that it was actually giving me some hope again. As it stands, I am once again reminded of what these writers' priorities are.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on September 19, 2022, 03:42:48 AM
Yeah, next week's apparently the big time skip episode, so they might unfortunately handwave that even if he just first-degree murdered a guy in front of dozens of witnesses, including the guy who runs the nation. It's like if a police officer went psycho at a congressional ball, killed a senator's close friend/secret lover in front of every politician there, and was just let off the hook without even any attempt at a court martial. Maybe Criston or Alicent will give an extremely compelling argument that he killed Joffrey in self-defense that nobody could imagine them pulling off in the last 5 episodes, and everyone just believes it without question.

I also noticed nobody even bothered to mop up Joffrey's blood when they continued the wedding. Why were they suddenly in a hurry to wed that they couldn't delay it for at least a day or even a couple hours so any cleaners could take care of the place?

On another note, I was listening to Brian Cox's autobiography, and found out the GOT producers wanted him to play Robert but he turned it down because he was unimpressed by the pay and didn't want to play a character who died in a single season. Because that would have stopped him from asking for a bigger salary during between-season negotiations. Also found out from a panel video on YouTube that the late David Warner refused to be on GOT because while he had nothing against the show and knew a ton of the cast, he hated the idea of spending months at a time filming in freezing winter conditions, which leads me to assume he was offered the role of Mance or the Three-Eyed Raven.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 23, 2022, 10:54:21 AM
Calling the most recent episode of HOTD a reverse shit sandwich was probably the most fitting terminology that I've heard in a while.

Just like with me, Preston pointed out that the middle of the episode was actually quite good but the first and last scenes essentially ruined it.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on September 23, 2022, 11:07:59 AM
It probably says a lot of me that I'm more confused by David Tennant's son playing Aegon next episode than by Matt Smith as Daemon. Maybe it's the less convincing wig?

And I see in a lot of the comments in Preston's video attempts at explaining how and why Daemon flipped Rhea's horse, to mixed results.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on September 25, 2022, 09:41:43 PM
I think my confusion was vindicated, because now I'm thinking "How did David and Georgia Tennant react to watching their son do that on screen?"

But better episode than last week's, even if the timeskip is too heavy and it just feels like they skipped over a whole season of the show, so all the new character dynamics are off.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on September 26, 2022, 07:10:34 AM
This was actually a pretty good episode on it's own, but as a series the narrative feels so disjointed and I feel like we are missing crucial character arcs in-between all of these time skips, most likely because we are. Also there are some stark (no pun intended) contradictions in how things work in between episodes. Like, Sir Criston Cole as expected got away scott free with openly murdering a guy but Harwyn Strong is sent away for assaulting Sir Criston because now people decide to adhere to laws all of a sudden.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 02, 2022, 09:37:56 PM
For what it's worth I actually did like several scenes in this episode and once again the acting has been pretty great overall. That said, the biggest thing on my mind is: What is it with GOT and HOTD and making the Kingsguard the most fucking useless, incompetent people ever? Like, they don't even try to stop Alicent from harming anyone even when Rhaenyra is struggling with her.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 02, 2022, 11:16:33 PM
If I had a nickel for every time a Matt Smith character got married while orchestrating a faked death plot in the beginning of October, I'd have 2 nickels. Which isn't a lot, but it's weird it happened twice.

And yeah, I can get Viserys not lifting a finger because he's just too mentally checked out (he didn't even remember what Alicent's name was this episode), but the Kingsguard just standing there while an heir almost died was dumb.

Also, the show's gotta stop reminding me (https://i.redd.it/fxhp2z1ceir91.jpg) of South Park. (https://preview.redd.it/j3cdh9qygir91.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=06dfe1de33a25384a9ee647886dc3652e5e0c3cc) The crab people and the uncle fucking were bad enough. And why is Aegon going to de-age in the next time skip? (https://i.redd.it/zw54ibkc8ir91.jpg) He looks like Draco Malfoy now.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 09, 2022, 09:44:38 PM
I've just come to accept that the HBO GOT Universe just has a different set of laws that allows for acts of violence to be dished out suddenly from one party to another. People may raise some questions on it but nobody faces any sort of legal repercussions for it except for a few random times when the story decides that it actually matters every now and then. Criston Cole can beat a a noble to death and be promoted for it, and Prince Daemon can cut half a guy's head off from behind instead of having actual Kingsguard officials reprimand him per the King's orders who have the actual authority to execute people in such cases. On that note, I have also come to except that the HBO King's Guard will forever be the most useless group of glorified bodyguards in existence.

I actually enjoyed the episode, BTW. Just couldn't resist the urge to poke fun at how the writers seem to think that Westeros has no laws that they take seriously other than those of succession and inheritance.

I was waiting for the dinner scene to be adapted, and personally I really like how it was handled. I kind of feel like it was a missed opportunity to establish some personal tension between Daemon and Aemond because....reasons.

What I don't like is how the show, through another time jump, conveniently passed over everyone's reactions to Rhaenyra marrying Daemon. Like, even by the show's own logic it was a huge deal in the early season that Daemon even "might" have gotten intimate with his neice. Now Rhaenyra and her Uncle waltz into King's landing as husband and wife, having married presumably almost immediately after Laenor's apparent death, and it's treated like the most normal thing ever.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 10, 2022, 11:42:18 AM
Show, please settle with the SP references. They're getting distracting.

(https://preview.redd.it/l335j06c1ws91.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=26175252eb1e54f2f7870e11bd53561d1dec2a0f)

But yeah, great episode. Kudos to Paddy Considine, especially at the end. And yeah, the time skips are still frustrating, because I know they're trying to do I Claudius with Derek Jacobi and how that show went through mountains of time skips between every other episode, except that show knew when to pace itself and show important details while glossing over the gaps, but I'm slowly getting used to it. And judging from interviews, the cast assure that the show will ease up on the time skips next season now they're at the start of the Dance of the Dragons.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 11, 2022, 07:23:40 PM
One thing I do really want to give this show credit for is in how it really doesn't try to play up one side as more heroic or villainous than the other. Game of Thrones may have had moral ambiguity but nobody would question that the Starks were our heroes and that Cersei was a villain from start to finish.

Knowing how the broad strokes of the story play out and seeing how the show has gone so far, they clearly have committed to actually forgoing that traditional narrative crutch and will show that each side is capable of being equally as conniving and horrendous as the other as much as some of them can be virtuous at times.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 11, 2022, 08:14:35 PM
Yeah, I remember a GRRM quote right around the second half of the show when he said he didn't think the story had any real villains, and I laughed at that thinking "When did the Mountain have a sympathetic POV or any sign of moral greyness? Or Ramsay? Or Walder Frey?" While this show's been a lot murkier on that front. Particularly with how they've gone with Alicent. Been really liking the way both of her actresses have expressed her character arc this whole season.

Another note, Viserys' obsession with the Prince Who Was Promised prophecy, which I found funny the first time he mentioned it in the show because we all know what happens there, becomes tragic here. He spent most of his reign believing in this vision, believing in it so much that his mutterings of it will accidentally split the Targaryen dynasty apart, and it's all going to be for nothing.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 16, 2022, 09:13:14 PM
So, on the one hand the final scene with Rhaenys on dragonback is a show original scene that essentially has her be the one to deliver the news to Rhaenyra of the Hightower usurping of her throne. It may or may not create a plot hole later on depending on how the writers accommodate the story to deal with the change, which was clearly done to be more dramatic for viewers of the show.

On the other hand, I won't lie, it was pretty damn successful at doing it's job for me. I'm sure some people will find logical issues here and there, but this is one of those scenes (and mostly the whole episode) that was done well enough that I can honestly overlook certain other issues.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 16, 2022, 09:55:19 PM
Not sure what to make of this referencing the crack baby basketball episode of SP. That came out of nowhere.

And this is going to be a really anal nitpick, but I just couldn't get over how Olivia Cooke is only like 2 or 3 years older than the actors playing her children, and it shows more in this episode than the last one. It took a while to register to me that Alicent already had 3 fully adult children.

But yeah, the Rhaenys scene was cool. Though I kinda wish this episode had more oomph to it like all the other penultimate episodes of GOT seasons.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 17, 2022, 12:24:01 AM
I have to say, looking at the preview, I'm eager to see how they handle one of the most iconic scenes from the book. It's going to be pretty memorable and remind people that this is still Game of Thrones, and shit will go down.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 19, 2022, 07:25:39 PM
The show already has its own version of "No! You guys weren't supposed to root when Dany murdered Sam's shitty dad! You were supposed to be horrified and think she was turning evil!" (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/house-of-the-dragon-matt-smith-daemon-targaryen-crush-1235242470/)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 23, 2022, 09:09:45 PM
Gotta hand it to the writers and directors in this case, this was a great finale. As a whole, this season is of very mixed quality to me, but when it's good, it's peak television just like the early seasons of GOT.

Very interesting choice they made with the final confrontation as well:

Spoiler
In the book, which is meant to have some historical inaccuracies, it's suggested by various sources that Aemond fully intended to kill Luke outside of Storm's End. The show gets to make different decisions and fill in the blanks since nothing is ever 100% confirmed in the book which is an in-universe recounting of events by an Arch Maester. This actually grays the lines a bit by making Aemond lose control of Vhaegar. It's not hard to believe that Aemond killed Luke with full intention in Fire and Blood because he's only ever presented as a one-dimensional ass-hole. Even Otto and his mother give him shit about this since he basically pulled a Joffrey and ignited a War. But it seems like the show will be adding layers to him here which is very reassuring. Also, I was anticipating this scene ever since I read it years ago, and it did not disappoint.
[close]
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 23, 2022, 09:13:39 PM
Yeah, I like how this show's a lot grayer than GOT was. Like how even though Aegon's clearly in the Joffrey mold, he at least has some self-awareness to know he shouldn't be king, and he only becomes one because his Hightower family forces him into it.

That said, how much of that's due to the writing and not the actors? Because I saw in an article that most of Daemon's more human moments in the show came from Matt Smith improvising or ad-libbing instead of sticking to the script.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 23, 2022, 09:33:30 PM
A lot of it is the actors, for sure, but it is clear that the show is intentionally being written to be more morally gray. The ASOIAF books are VERY morally ambiguous but much of that ambiguity was oversimplified in GOT making it pretty clear cut who good guys and bad guys were. F&B by design doesn't have that level of detail behind it, but it does still present both sides on equal terms in regard to having both virtuous and abysmal aspects to them. That said, characters, or what little amount of character that can be found there, are essentially just one-dimensional interpretations of what various sources present them as or think that they might have been like. So this is the opposite case from GOT and the showrunners have to do the heavy lifting to add to the source material. The results are entirely a mixed bag but stuff like this and episode 8 before it are mostly examples of them doing a good job of expanding on that material.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on October 23, 2022, 09:53:43 PM
And speaking of Joffrey, a lot of HOTD's casual viewers looking for something to watch/re-watch while waiting for season 2 will surely be pissed. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i9EyFwh09U)
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on October 23, 2022, 10:06:45 PM
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on October 23, 2022, 09:53:43 PM
And speaking of Joffrey, a lot of HOTD's casual viewers looking for something to watch/re-watch while waiting for season 2 will surely be pissed. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i9EyFwh09U)

Oddly fitting for Joffrey to spoil a major plot point for viewers and chuckle about it. At least it's not the ending of the story, just the war. I mean....

Spoiler
Aegon doesn't exactly outlive Rhaenyra by long, and he's in miserable pain until his last days, so it's kind of an everyone loses scenario. Also very fitting that Joffrey failed to acknowledge that part of the story.
[close]
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on November 06, 2022, 04:12:26 PM
Preston's full season review of HOTD: https://youtu.be/sFGU8Pt3Iz0

A lot of people think that Preston is just a book purist who hates the show because he nitpicks a lot of details (mostly for humor in his weekly reviews), but I like how he points out that he's not a fan of Fire and Blood to begin with and actually gives the show props for doing it's own thing and making a mostly cohesive story out of it. And pointing out that he wouldn't criticize it so extensively if he didn't think it had any value also shows that he's not as harsh about it as his weekly reviews make him seem.

As for his criticisms, the only one I disagreed with is how Rhaenyra and Alicent didn't try to change the system that they were brought up in and instead ended up making the same mistakes as their parents. Not that he's wrong in making that observation, but that it's not a flaw at all, but one of the core points of the show's stance on how politics can change people into what they hate.

Every other criticism was on the money, though. Most notably how inconsistent the character arcs and their personal motivations and conflicts feel between time-jumps. A lot of these rivalries or mending of relationships feel so jarring most of the time because there is so much context missing. Like, one episode Viserys kicks Daemon out of King's Landing for flirting with Rhaenyra and then a few episodes later they're married under extremely controversial circumstances and he treats it like it's completely normal and they are all on good terms. How exactly did we get to that point?
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on November 06, 2022, 05:37:17 PM
Yeah, there was a Downton Abbey-ness to all the timeskips and character arcs. And even with DA, you can chalk that up to unexpected cast departures hampering the show's season plans.
Title: Re: Game of Thrones
Post by: Dr. Insomniac on December 31, 2022, 10:36:34 AM
Not exactly HOTD-related but since this is basically a Preston thread too, his and Carmine's top TV shows of 2022. (https://youtu.be/HH3f4dyvd80)