iprayiam

Members
  • Content count

    78
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About iprayiam

  • Rank
    Sellsword
  1. Agreed. Earning things off screen is very bad storytelling. When things happen off screen, it should be done intentionally to highlight : That our characters did not experience it (it's hearsay) That it was not very relevant to our characters That it was mysterious for our characters That it was mundane (like bathroom breaks or sleeping) To subvert audience expectations (Not a fan of this, it's gimmicky, but can be fair storytelling) D&D use offscreen to just avoid addressing logistics of the story and obstacles they don't feel like dealing with all together. It's cheap, it's lazy, and it's objectively bad storytelling because it objectively diminishes the coherence of the story. This isn't a different tastes thing. All your examples are good ones, and the impossible travel times are the same.
  2. This has become a hallmark of the laziness of the show this season. Basically, anything we the audience are assumed to know is just hand waived by characters on screen. The show has no consistency, logic, or depth about what a character should actually know or believe in world. Other Example: The audience knew the wall was coming down, so Jon basically treated it like it didn't exist The audience knows Jon rose from the dead, and believes himself free from the Watch, so no other character questions his apparent oath breaking. In fact they all talk about what a man of his word he is. The audience knows Jon is telling the truth about the WWs so Tyrion and Dany quickly believe him for plot convenience. The audience knows Cersei is a creator's pet, so nobody questions her reign or allying with her. The audience knows Cersei has plot armor, so everybody acts like it would be difficult to defeat her and stupid to try, when there's logistically and ethically no reason either would be true. The audience knows Tyrion is "smart" so everyone goes along with everything stupid he come up with. The audience knows the show is going to make a ton of money, so nobody does anything reasonable or logical ever
  3. And to say that he doesn't break oaths in this one. I guess it's possible, but I don't really see how that plays out logistically or effectively. And moreover, I still hate it when TV shows regress a character from their growth, just to let them get it back again. At best, it's bad pacing.
  4. so let's try to understand this: lord of light is against the WWs lord of light raises Jon raised Jon is the reason Dany ends up north of the wall with her dragons dragons north of the wall is the way for the NK to get through it Wouldn't everybody be better off if Jon had just stayed dead? Sure you can work out a thousand theoretical reasons this was still the best way for it to work out. But when the major narrative foundation of the show becomes dominos falling behind a curtain you're not allowed to look behind or acknowledge, then the story is broken.
  5. It's not popular opinion, but I feel Jon's character was ruined when he walked away from the Watch. Killing him was dumb, bringing him back was even dumber, but leaving the Watch ruined him. Jon begins as a guy very obsessed with who he is, and eager to be someone great. At the wall he learns humility and the importance of putting responsibility before self-satisfaction in a series of increasing tests. What is important is how he lives. This development dead ends when he is (narratively) prematurely made Lord Commander. That should have been the destination of his character development, instead it was a dead end. Leaving the wall completely reverses his growth. It turns into a journey of what he accomplishes and who he is again:Stark, King in the North, Targaryian, Prince that Was Promised. It should have been the opposite. The lesson should have been that those things don't truly matter. He doesn't need to be the hero to be the hero. Ultimately, it shows that the writers have the same shallow misunderstanding of what makes a man great that Jon started out with and originally grew out of!
  6. I've always had a major problem with Jon leaving the Watch. It ruined his character, and every episode reconfirms it for me with his growing Choseniest of the Chosen Ones role. Jon grew up with a chip on his shoulder about not being true-born. His first lesson at the Night's Watch was to let that go and understand that name, rank, and titles don't make a man. It's what he does in the life he's given. This whole Aegon Rhaegar things reverses that completely, making "who he is" extremely significant, to the point of ensuring his legitimacy. It undermines, what was originally a subversion of the Chosen One trope, to instead play it so straight and fan servicey that it is nauseating. Don't get me wrong, it's fine that Jon is Targaryean by birth and the PTWP. But the interesting subversion would have been that he never even knows and ends up defeating the WWs as a nobody under a humble oath that he stays true too. It's interesting because you would compare the life that "could have been": Crown Prince, inherits the Targaryean throne and defeats the WW with glory, honor, and recognition. Instead he achieves the same great task as a simple Watchman, an unsung hero by virtue of his character, not his name. And the same man (Ned) that helped destroy the first scenario was the man who shaped him into the person he needed to be for the second. It would have been an awesome flip on the secret prince trope, chosen ones, prophesies, happy endings, etc. But NO. We get the fan-servicey King Hero who both EARNED IT AND INHERITED IT with constant lip service from every other character in Westeros about how great and cool he is. What a wasted opportunity (though this is likely on GRRM the most)
  7. Why the talk of Honest Jon always keeping his word? Wouldn't most of the people there believe him to be an oath breaking deserter? i never bought the died means free excuse, but I get that Jon feels right with it. But that's not knowledge to everyone else. Littlefinger's death was so predictable and contrived and cheap. The sisters didn't actually have to work for it or resolve their differences. Instead Bran spoon fed the resolution off screen. They sacrifices a coherent narrative for the "surprise", and was anyone actually surprised at that. I don't get why people don't think Jon and Dany is gross as hell. Jamie and Cersei is bad enough, but at least it's presented as twisted. People are actually clapping about this. So the wight hunt gave team Dany... nothing. What's Cersei's plan here exactly? How long before they realize team Lannister isn't beside them, marching North? What did this gain Cersei over just saying no, a week? And if she needs the Gold Cloaks to fortify their hold after Dany's entire army has cleared out AND team Dany doesn't know about the gold cloaks, then what did they think they were gaining from this treaty? None of it makes any sense as soon as you scratch the surface. This is just an opinion, but I hate the self-fulfilling prophesy trope with the dragon. The WW were only actually a threat because they were treated like a threat, thus giving them the opportunity to become a threat. it's perfectly fair story telling, but it doesn't do it for me. Would have preferred to see the WWs have a different way of getting past the wall or having the dragon be a plan B.
  8. Why did everyone go on about Jon's trustworthiness and his commitment to duty? Shouldn't he be in most of their eyes a deserter? I get that he believes himself free from his Night's Watch oath, but does anyone in Cersei's party (or most people in Dany's) know anything about his death and resurrection?
  9. The problem I had is that nobody had to solve anything or put any pieces together. They were just spoon fed the truth from Branbot offscreen to wrap it up quickly. Contrast that with Sam and Bran each having half of the puzzle several episodes back and needing to exchange info to put the pieces together. That made for a more interesting scenario. In both we viewers already knew the truth, but in the latter we watched the characters unwrap it vs just being told offscreen
  10. I disagree. Years back, seeing my roommate watch a random episode got me hooked in minutes and I went back and powered through the whole thing. Of course part of that is taste. But for a season finale that sets up the final season, it was slow as shit. My wife's opinion highlights the fact that most of us are just riding on investment. As an isolated piece of media it was slow and boring. Good TV series should be comprised of good episodes should be comprised of good scenes should be comprised of good lines. And each of those should be able to be appreciated at their own level for what they are worth in addition to being enriched by the larger picture.
  11. Did we learn these facts in show or is this book knowledge?
  12. Poor Aegon 1. Imagine if your dad divorced your mom, disowned you, and then named his new kid your name on top of it. What a kick in the nuts
  13. Also what a super boring episode. Why so long? It was the first one my wife has ever seen and she was in shock that people watch the show. She thought it was insufferably boring
  14. So, this episode implied both that Bran cannot see the future and that the NK can. I wonder what the implications of this will be or whether it will never be addressed or straight contradicted. It's kind of disappointing for me that the way South of the wall was built on a self fulfilling prophesy. It's not my favorite plot device.