Krishtotter

Agreed, it may be that the showrunners selected Bran because a TV show needs a familiar face. Although, we won't know for sure for a while. But the "theme" will be the same, as I noted in my above post. Someone, whether Bran or other, will fulfil the same purpose with the same fantasy-subverting, anti-Aragorn elevation to the throne. It must happen, because GRRM is not a quasi-fascist "divine ruler/chosen hero" theorist as most fantasy authors (unfortunately) tend to be, if accidentally. The end ruler will not be a "conquering hero" with a claim by inheritance.

Absolutely loved this final episode. I rated it 10/10. What a pity much of what had come before it was worse than rotten, and I rate a lot of it 1-3 out of 10. Especially episode 3 with its appalling termination of the Night King plot and episode 4, with its numerous plot holes and logical implausibilities. But I could tell that this was George RR Martin's ending to the series rather than D&D's. They merely executed his wishes. And they didn't "get there" particularly well but the there when reached was actually very good. Jon returns to the "real north" and becomes the new King-beyond-the-Wall of the Freefolk. That was where he always belonged, with his and Ygritte's people, the successor to Mance Rayder, side-by-side with his faithful pup Ghost. Sansa finally gains the independence of the North and becomes rightful Queen of a free kingdom, no longer under Southron dominance, as daughter of Ned and Catelyn Stark - and didn't she deserve it. After everything she and her family endured, she has more than vindicated the memory of her parents and ancestors. Her ancestor knelt to a Targaryen, whereas she bravely resisted the tyrant Queen and after her demise became the champion and leader of her people. That's my girl!!!! Arya, the girl who never wanted to be a "lady" and who learned at the end to forgo the cycle of vengeance that had driven her after her family's slaughter, becomes the Christopher Columbus of Westeros - the adventurer-in-chief, complete with her own hardy crew. And she doesn't marry Gendry, which is GREAT because she don't need no man. G'day captain Arya. Bran becoming King of the Six Kingdoms of Westeros (sans the Iron Throne) after an election by the nobility - I honestly thought, when I first reader the spoiler, that this was going to be absolute bollocks. Only it wasn't. In fact, it made perfect sense and fitted in with the overarching thematic agenda of the show and books, that no "divine right/born to rule" stock fantasy heroes like Aragorn (i.e. Dany or Jon Snow) win the throne but that a disabled boy, who would be a far better ruler because he actually has the requisite qualities and skills, is appointed to the role on the basis of merit rather than by inheritance. It's a great subversion of fantasy tropes, which typically exude an almost kind of "fascist" feel in supporting the claims of "destined" Chosen Ones. Real life isn't about "destiny" or assumed absolute right to rule, because there is no such thing. We make our own destinies. Very ASoIAF that surprising result. Dany, Dany, Dany....she ends exactly as I predicted and expected from the books: an idealistic, Robespierran anti-hero/villain with the best of intentions but the worst of methods and a grandiose self-righteous entitlement, messiah complex to go with her never-ending revolutionary world gospel of liberationist salvation through fire and blood. She could not have ended any other way and Jon did the underhand but ultimately noble, self-sacrificing act in saving millions of human beings in Westeros and around the world from her impending holocaust/final solution, by stabbing to death the woman he truly loved (the vulnerable girl at the beginning of the books and TV show, longing for her home with the red door) to take out the Dragon Queen dictator-in-the-making. It was beautifully acted by both Emilia and Kit. What a fantastic anti-hero/villain Daenerys was: it's extremely hard to depict a truly sympathetic villain and she is that ++++++. A lot more to say, about other characters (such as Tyrion) and the episode more generally but that will do for now. I thought it a very fitting end to the series as a whole and an oddly good finish to the ropiest season of television ever.

Not a valid criticism imo. Big swathes of the episode were dire but Dany's characterisation is consistent with her character arc in the books and show, where she has long been becoming an idealistic dictator capable of brutality in the name of utopian aims and the pursuit of her narrow-minded life agenda for the throne. Her end-state is the one GRRM intended. D&D haven't got there particularly well in places but they can't be blamed for the way GRRM wrote her and many have understood her, including myself. I think a lot of undue hate is coming from Dany fans, who are 'burnt' that their girl is turning out the way Dany critics have long predicted. One reviewer, for instance, writing in the Telegraph fumed that "Daenerys goes from messiah to antichrist in a single bound". That's grossly unfair - I, among many other people, have been warning that she evidenced deeply worrying signs for ages! It is consistent and not inconsistent with her character, and is indeed the logical outcome of the way GRRM wrote her.

I rated this episode a 6 because it was really a "tale of two halves": the first segment of the episode was actually very good (deserving of the "8" that 33 posters decided to give it) whilst the second segment was badder than bad, literally without a single redeeming quality (and hence worthy of the inglorious "1" that 35 of our fellow posters decided to give it). On Rotten Tomatoes and IMBD, it is apparent that no episode of GoT has divided its audience more than this one. Partly, this has to do with justifiable outrage at the narrative idiocy of the preceding episode and its hamfisted anticlimax in terms of what was supposed to be 'the Great War' since season 1, and partly on the merits of this episode itself (when viewed as a single unit without considering the context from last episode). When the episode opened, I initially thought, "ok, after the unremitting disaster and logic by-pass that was episode 3, after which I almost abandoned the show entirely because of its premature termination of the NK/White Walker plot without any real meaningful pay-off, this is actually back to old-style GoT". The Good I liked the 'wake', with the long-panning shots over the pyres of the dead, which I thought was delicately handled and appropriately reverential. The 'drinking' scenes reminded me of those screened in RoK in LoTR after the Battle of Helms Deep and again, there was some decent characterisation here, as we saw Dany becoming jealous of, and paranoid about, the respect given naturally to Jon in the North, which is supposed to be one of her Seven Kingdoms. This evidently dented Dany's composure, because she has both a lesser claim to the throne than he does by primogeniture and evokes much less devotion from any but her freed slaves and Dothraki hordes back in Essos. Her discussion with Jon was good and revealing about her true aims: her 'love' for him is entirely subordinate to gaining the throne. I enjoyed the machiavellian, skull-skulduggery scenes involving Sansa and Daenerys, Sansa and Tyrion, and Tyrion and Varys. Finally, we have oodles of old-fashioned GoT intrigue and the growing coup d'etat amongst Dany's advisors, as they rightly discern what I've been saying all along - that she is an idealistic, revolutionary Robespierran-dictator in the making, who is potentially capable of inflicting a holocaust to implement her vision of a utopia under her singular rule, when cleansed of all tyrants and traitors - and respond differently to the revelation of Jon's birthright and greater claim. The Bad The episode was incredibly rushed at the end. It started with Brienne's characterisation in this episode - one sex scene with Jaime and she ends up a sobbing wreck pleading with him not to leave for Kings Landing. Something about that doesn't ring quite true for me. Then, we had the 'intrusion' of that extremely silly scene where Bronn just 'appears' from the shadows in the middle of heavily fortified Winterfell - as if he is the great stealth-ninja there ever was! That was shit, frankly. After that, the story suddenly and unevenly changes out of nowhere: Euron - freaking Euron, a pirate! - manages to do what no one save the Night King, even in the middle of last season's huge Goldroad Battle, unilaterally take out Rhaegal. It just happens without any narrative build-up - as if the D&D just thought, "this'll shock 'em". In the books, Euron has a special kind of horn that he harvested from the ruins of Old Valyria, which can be used to "bind" and control dragons. In his book role as "dragonbinder", Euron would indeed be the most formidable enemy of Dany's dragons and potentially be able to kill them - but the TV series never introduced this crucial weapon and so Euron's random deus ex machina felling of Rhaegal is completely illogical within the scope of the show. We then 'teleport' to Kings Landing from Dragonstone, where Dany's army and advisors soon turn up and are treated to that god awful scene where Missandei is killed for shock-value and Tyrion attempts to parley with Cersei by appealing to her innate goodness and love for her children (I mean, really?). The Round-up In light of the foregoing, it does not surprise me that some professional reviewers online have opined that, "the bulk of [episode 4] was filled with the sort of palace intrigue and character dynamics that made the show" great in its heyday and that it was returning to its "machiavellian best", whilst others have complained that "this episode was one of the biggest disappointments of the season so far" and that it was unremittingly atrocious. In truth, both are right - this episode showcased the best and worst of what GoT has become since season 4.

It's a wasted opportunity that Cogman, who "gets" GRRM's creation a million times over D&D, wasn't given the chance of being showrunner to conclude the series. His script last week was so greatly superior to this one by D&D, it's almost painful to watch them in succession. Amazon have been fortunate to have nabbed Cogman, even though we still don't know which shows he's working for them on.

Its not that I think she should have been on a battlefield. It's that my respect for her as a person has dropped after seeing her semi-plot-stirring behind the scenes, at a safe remove, while the person she's directing her snipes against (a person I seriously don't like btw but fair is fair) is risking her neck for her home, while she isn't.

It just boggles my mind that the Night King... A huge magical wall of ice built to defend the Seven Kingdoms from him. And he can't even win one bloody battle against the living. Death, literal death, comes for them and hardly anyone dies. I just can't fathom that.

Agreed, she was a sniping coward in this episode. Only thinking about her feud with Daenerys and personal safety. Grossly irritating when Dany was risking her neck and losing her main advisor. And I say that as a long-standing critic of Dany.

I'm happy, actually, with Arya being the princess that was promised. I just don't like how they handled it, by killing the Night King off so early and making his entire arc feel like a waste of time. Same with Melisandre. I'm just like, "that's it. All that. And that's it?"

Because it makes his entire plot feel redundant. To me at least anyway.

Personally, I feel a bit empty and dissatisfied right now. I haven't even looked at the preview for episode 4, and I'm not terribly sure I'm interested given that I don't have a clue what 8 seasons of this White Walker drivel was all about, if the endgame is just back to medieval politics. They might as well have just chosen one story or the other if they aren't coming together as a seamless whole. What is going on?

If you compare it with the defeat of Sauron in LoTR, whether in the prologue by Isildur or at the end of Return of the King, those scenes were far more tense, impactful and haunting in my opinion.

I know...mundane and boring.

One thing I do know... The dialogue last episode was way better. Battle or no battle, it was obvious that Cogman wrote the last script and that D&D wrote this one. Painfully obvious. And since they are writing the remaining scripts, I'm not overly confident. Indeed, at this hour I don't really know what the whole thing is about. A supernatural evil threatening Westeros for centuries and emphasised since both book 1, and season 1 of the show, just gone? And the remaining plot is back to politics after a short, high fantasy interlude, but this time without the big evil menace in the background to put their petty quarrelling into perspective? Wasn't that, like...kind of the point of ASOIAF and the double-pronged Other/White Walker threat matched up against the internecine, self-harming dynastic squabbling while Rome burns? The way their approaching this seems awfully disjointed rather than holistic, unless I'm misunderstanding where they intend to go. The Night King turned out not to be even a poor man's Sauron. And to have far less interesting motives (or none at all) than him as well.

Ah, right - thanks! I had thought it was Rhaegal at the end. My mistake.