Darkstream

Ugh! There is a lot of this on the forum today. I'm just going to copy and paste a response I just gave on another thread. GRRM is not responsible for d&d's incompetence. They are professional writers, making a shit load of money. If they can receive an Emmy for their writing - all be it completely undeserved - then they should be held responsible for the pathetic drivel that they have put out the past couple of seasons. I have seen several members of this forum, just in the span of the last day, come up with far more intelligent and plausible scenarios to make d&d's shit story work better than they have.

Thank you @sweetsunray --- I have to say, I personally find it unfathomable that this episode received any ten votes at all, but I can't say that I'm surprised. To each their own I suppose. Now let me make it clear, I am not criticizing anyone who gave this episode a good rating. Obviously, everyone has their own method of scoring, and we are all entitled to our opinion, as well as one's enjoyment of a television program being quite subjective. However, I must say, if you gave this episode a passing grade, and are one of those who have accused others of being trolls in the past, then you need to take a long, hard look in the mirror; YOU my friend, are the troll!

Well, I don't even know what to say. At this point, criticizing this show is like a grown man beating up a new born baby. I will not be voting this week, as the lowest possible vote is a one, and there is no way in Seven hells that I am going to up-vote this pathetic episode to a one. Perhaps someone would be kind enough to post the poll results, as I am curious to see how many of the people who are constantly calling others that give the show a low score trolls, gave this episode a ten.

Well, I'd be the wrong person to ask that question, as I'm not one to watch much television, and haven't seen many of the programs that would be comparable to GoT. The only reason I started watching this show was because of my passion for the source material, and the excitement and curiosity of seeing one of my favorite stories of all time being adapted to a visual medium. Contrary to what I expected, the show runners did an excellent job in the first couple of seasons, and I considered GoT to be substantially better than any other shows on television. Were there issues with the show, and decisions they made that I didn't like? Sure, but they were understandable considering the medium, and not nearly as prevalent as they are now. So, if I were to use any show in comparison when rating the episodes from this season, it would be to that of Got in the first few seasons. While my ratings for the first 20-30 episodes would have varied from probably 6-9, and possibly one or two 10s, using that as a standard, I cannot justify giving any episodes from the past three seasons a rating any higher than a 1-2, with maybe the odd 3 in there. See, and that is what I was like during the first three seasons. I couldn't wait for Sunday night, and was filled with excitement and anticipation, even though I already knew what was going to happen. Now, I don't know what is going to happen, but lack the desire and motivation to sit down for a full hour to watch the show. So, for me, using that as a measuring stick, I cannot justify giving this show a passing grade.

I cry at the end of every episode... Tears shed for what could have been.

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you there. Sure, the show is successful, but that is not indicative of good story telling. Do you honestly think the show would be as popular as it is if they had a substantial smaller budget to work with? Would as many people tune in if there were no CGI dragons or battle scenes? If they didn't have amazingly elaborate sets, and beautiful locals to film their story at? A large majority of viewers tune in for the spectacle that is GoT, not because of the quality story. Would you say that movies like the Transformers are telling a good story, or programs like Jersey shore and the Kardashiawhatevers? All very popular and successful programs.

Wow, atrociously corny and contrived writing. I would say that this show has officially jumped the shark, however that moment has long since passed. With this episode, d&d have officially jumped the Megalodon. As with many past episodes, I feel like this deserves a negative rating, however, having absolutely no expectations of seeing a quality program coming in, and feeling generous: +1 for the CGI; essentially a point for the budget, nothing to do with the show runners. +1 for Davos' retort to Tyrion when coming ashore KL. Tyrion: "Last time I was here I killed my father." Davos: "Last time I was here, you killed my son with wildfire." First time I was genuinely amused by a line in GoT in a long time. Gotta love that Davos. 2/10 ...and I'm shocked with myself that I rated it this high.

Confess d$d, confess that it felt good, it felt good to destroy GRRM's story, You didn't adapt ASOIAF because you care about the story, you did it because it made you rich and famous, it fed your insatiable ego's and that felt good. I understand, yeah, I'm watching the show...I'm watching because it feels good to watch d$d burn, it feels good to imagine them falling from their undeserved pedestal. No thought has ever given me greater joy than to know once the smoke dissipates, and the mirrors tarnish, d$d will be revealed as the talent-less hacks that they are. Hmph, even confessing feels good under the right circumstances. There, that should be an intelligent and profound enough excuse to convince all of you show defending naysayers as to my motivations for why I'm still watching. ...such brilliant writing ... not only is it just dumb, simple minded dialogue, it's inconsistent and conflicts with what the show has spent the past few seasons establishing. I'm just so happy for the mother of the year, Carol, that she can have this moment of feeling so good right after her third and last child has died. A suicide caused by her actions non the less. So, what's the only thing that is important to her, is it her children? Or is it power? I guess it depends on which episode (or scene) you are watching, and what creatively made sense at the particular moment.

Well, I wish your argument would have held ground back when I was in high school, receiving failing grades in my creative writing class. At least there is one thing we can agree on, we will never agree on this matter.

As opposed to what, being reliant on grumpkins and snarks? Yeah, to a degree, as I said, seasons one through four could be debated, seasons five and six, the severity of disregard for these standards would take human opinion out of the equation, no argument to the contrary can be taken seriously at this point, it's a fact, not an opinion, Got is a poorly written show.

If I had the answers to these questions I could make an objective, although rudimentary, judgement on whether or not the Learning Tree is a well written book without even reading it. That's not to say that this judgement wouldn't be lacking, or without a degree of flaw, as I will admit, even an objective analyse does pertain an element of subjective analyse. I'm not trying to assert that a work of literature can be judged in terms of a quantifiable right or wrong, as it would seem you are under the impression that I am. And sure, you could challenge me on some of the flaws that I find in the show regarding plot holes, and character motivations and such. In the earlier seasons, you would of even had a respectable case, that warranted debate. But at this point, with the undeniable extent of which the show has failed to even address any of the issues I've eluded to above, such as plausibility of plot, characterization, continuity, etc. there is no way that an assertion that Got is not a poorly written show is even considerable to be a valid stance. As I've said before, if these issues don't bother you, and don't take away from your viewing experience, then you can rightfully so claim that Got is a quality show in regards to the entertainment value that it provides you, but to deny that these flaws even exist, and say that it is a well written work of literature is just a blatantly erroneous assertion.

it's quite apparent what you are trying to do here. Do you think that if I can't provide you with a "report card" grading the example you've given, that it supports your assertion that a piece of literature cannot be judged objectively? Sorry, but it doesn't. I'm sure there has been an academic evaluation of the Learning Tree, but the seven hells if I'm going to wade through the piles of crap online to find one, just to prove a point, that by all means should be accepted by anyone with a shred of common sense. But anyway, I'll somewhat play along. Now, I have not myself read the Learning Tree, so I cannot give you a personal evaluation based on objective academic standards, but I'm assuming that you have read it, so let me ask you a couple of questions regarding the Learning Tree. ... Is there a meaningful and consistent theme presented throughout? And, in light of the fact that we are using this as a contrast to Got, let me also ask, is the portrayal of this theme hamfisted and offensive? Does the plot make sense? Does it progress in a plausible and logical manner? Are there gaping plot holes in nearly every scene? Does one have to look to outside sources to explain what or why something is happening? Has the sequence of events been presented in a linear and/or understandable and logical sequence? Has the passage of time between events been properly represented or explained? Is the continuity of previously established facts, dialogue and so forth maintained throughout the story? Are the established in-universe laws and rules maintained throughout, or do they fluctuate in accordance to meet the needs of the narrative? Is the characterization realistic and consistent? Do the characters actions and motivations seem plausible and conform to that of the established traits of said character, or do they make illogical decision for the purpose of moving the plot from point x to y? Do they, unless intentionally and with relation to the story been inflicted with a personality disorder or sickness, show signs similar to that of a person with schizophrenia, who's personality changes according to what's needed for the plot? Or, do the characters develop sudden amnesia, and then miraculously shake off this debilitation once it suits the plot?

Of course these standards are used to judge books, movies, and TV scripts. Why do you think movies such as Transformers, Jurassic World, Independence day, etc. , although commercially successful and popular, are not considered to be great works of literature? These established standards are the only way to objectively judge any form of art, which for the most part is judged by subjective opinions. My assertion is not that Got cannot be judged as a good show for what it is, it is great spectacle that millions of people enjoy watching, which would validate it as a great show, subjectively speaking. But to claim it is an intelligently written show that meets the established standards of quality writing is just nonsense. You are missing the point about the fireworks, you may find them boring, but millions of people around the world would disagree. All sorts of people watch fireworks every year, even though it is basically just tinfoil chasing, that does not make them dim witted, as you stated I was implying. I brought up the fireworks to illustrate that I don't think you are dim witted just because you enjoy something that I would consider tinfoil chasing. You seem to have the impression that I am looking down on people who love and enjoy watching Got, but you could not be further from the truth. If you look at my post history, I have never replied to any of the posts gushing about how great the show is. The only time I've responded to someone is when the go off calling people who are expressing their opinions, or rating the show poorly, a troll. Calling out the show as a poorly written program, is a perfectly valid observation and is the objective truth. If the writing doesn't bother you, and doesn't affect you viewing pleasure, you have every right to claim that it is a great show, just as I have a right to point out the flaws and rate it as low as I subjectively feel is validated. If someone can ignore the flaws and rate it a ten, then I am justified in ignoring the production values, and rating it a one. Until people start deducting points for flaws that they very often admit to, why should I have to give points just because there are some admirable aspects to the show? I can admit that there are good things about the show, but I am unable to enjoy them because I am constantly being pulled out of submersion due to the ridiculous plots and characters, and the cringworthy dialogue. If I am unable to enjoy the awesome cinematography, sets, and cgi because of this, I don't feel obligated to give it any credit in my rating.

OK, well I don't agree that if you enjoy "tin foil chasing" it implies that you are dim witted. That was not my intent, and if that is how you took it, then I apologize. Take a fireworks display for an example, you do not need to be smart to enjoy them, and it doesn't involve making sense out of them to enjoy them either. People watch them because they look cool and beautiful, does that make anyone that enjoys fireworks dim witted? Of course it doesn't. And I don't fail to recognize that people view the show differently, and I'm perfectly fine with the fact that they do. If the issues that I have with the show don't bother you, then great, but to flat out refute that these flaws exist is just stubbornness or denial. There are established academic standards that can be used to judge a piece of literature objectively, and when using these standards to judge the writing in Got, it fails miserably in every way. If the script from the show was being marked by a professor in an academic institution, it would receive a failing grade. That is not just my opinion, but a fact.

Stop putting words in my mouth. I never once stated or implied that anyone was dim witted. Do you even read the posts that you quote? In the very quote of mine that you decided to reply to, and make unfounded accusations against me with, it specifically states I myself have my own guilty pleasures that I would consider to be tinfoil chasing. Are you implying that I am calling myself dim witted? You really need to start paying more attention to the posts that you read if you are going to reply to them. Try reading what I'm actually saying instead of skimming through and picking out random words and then attacking people due to your own insecurities. I fully understand why people enjoy watching Got, and don't think there is anything wrong with it. As stated, I myself engage in the same types of guilty pleasures, but unlike you, I am not in denial about it. And you're right, me saying something doesn't make it so, but an objective, unbiased observation would confirm that Got is a poorly written show, that is all flash and spectacle, with no substance at all. That is a fact, not an opinion. Enjoy it if that's what you like, but don't come to a forum that's sole purpose is for sharing opinions and discussing the show, if you can't handle hearing the truth about it.

My ratings for seasons one and two, if I remember correctly, ranged from 7-9. Season three dropped a bit for me, 5-8, with Blackwater the only 10 I've ever given. Season four was more varied, 3-7, a 9 for Red viper, despite some very troubling scenes. Season five is where I felt extremely disappointed, 2-4, a 6 for Watchers on the Wall, Hardhome, very disappointing, and overrated in my opinion. This season, all ones, except 5 &10, I gave a two. I do try to be fair with my ratings, but I feel like the last two seasons, not only has the negatives become far worse, but they have become so bad, that it also affects my ability to enjoy the aspects that are still good. I find it difficult to enjoy the production and cool cgi, when my immersion is constantly disrupted by the illogical plot, and cringworthy dialogue. This is why I feel, despite some good things, it deserves mostly ones from me, not as an attempt to troll.

Yes, but not this season.

Just as people can say, there are many flaws, but I still enjoyed it, so I rated it a ten, I can still enjoy certain aspects of watching, but still be disappointed with many things, that in my opinion warrant a rating of one. If people can rate an obvious and undeniably flawed show a ten, then I have the right to vote a show that admittedly has some quality aspects to it a one. In my view, throwing a ton of money into the production to make a show look good, does not override a blatant and obvious disregard for telling a coherent or plausible story. If the results of this poll in any way realistically represented an accurate assessment of the show, I might be inclined to give a point or two for the production values. But it doesn't, there is no way that an objective and realistic evaluation of this show could result in a rating of a ten.

Yeah, I saw that as well. They were going to kill off Ghost, but decided to use Wun Wun in his role because it wasn't as difficult to film. It just goes to show how meaningless and interchangeable the characters in d$d's story are. The direwolves were stripped of all the importance they had in the books, and were only used as props to be killed off and emotionally manipulate the audience.

I don't consider d$d's portrayal to be an accurate representation of Ghost, so that's the nickname he's been given amongst the regular posters in r&r thread.

Wait, Ghost Rover was at Castle Black? I had just assumed that he sailed South with Sam on his way to the Citadel Horn Hill with Gilly his family.

Why are you trying to put words in my mouth? I have numerous times, specifically stated the opposite of what you are accusing me of. Maybe you should try reading what I actually say before responding.

Well, to be blunt, if you like Got you are a tinfoil chaser. I'm not saying this makes you simple minded or that there is anything wrong with it. I myself have my own guilty pleasures that I would consider to be tinfoil chasing. I just don't go around pretending that I like those things for something that they obviously are not.

No, it is a fact, as I've already stated in this very thread:

I never stated anything of the such. In fact I had quoted a poster up thread and said that I respected his opinion and a rating of an eleven out of ten because he at least had the mind to actually admit what the show really is, and that was why he loved it. It is not an opinion that the show is poorly written, it is a fact. And I wouldn't say that people are simple minded because they enjoy the show, only that they don't care about these undeniable flaws with it. If what you watch the show for are the shiny lights and enjoy it because of this, then that's great, and I can understand that, so all the power to you, but don't sit here and tell me that it is a well written story. That does make you come off as simple minded