Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Bear42

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Bear42

    Jon killing Dany doesn’t work for me

    Pretty sure each of the seven kingdoms would take independence once that was an option. They only gave up their independence because of Aegon's dragons, and then later because seceding would result in war and probable destruction. But the North got to secede peacefully just by asking, no way they wouldn't all take that chance over being ruled by some weird kid with magical powers derived from a religion they don't follow. They'd be more likely to burn him at the stake.
  2. Bear42

    Why Did the Show Turn on Jon?

    Not to mention the fact they glossed right over the whole "Jon's parentage" revelation that should've been one of the series' greatest payoffs. They glossed over the whole "came back back from the dead" bit too for that matter. Never amounted to anything. That whole great council scene only gets worse the more we think about it. Why was Yara up there, which team is she on? She outright claims to be on the side of Dany so shouldn't she be negotiating with Grey Work not against him. If they weren't there to discus the selection of the king why did they assemble a great council anyway? What side is Dorne on? They declared for Dany, should they want Jon killed? The last time a monarch in Westeros died without an heir we got four seasons of conflict, this time we get a five minute meeting led by Tyrion somehow. Tyrion's speech by the way was a joke, and then a quick reveal that Bran knew this would all happen anyway? Pretty sure that makes him evil. Bran won't be king for any longer than it takes all the other lords to go home and declare themselves independent like the North. So about 15 minutes. The Stormlands can rally around Gendry, the rightful heir. The Dornish will do what the Dornish do and tell Bran to pound sand. Bronn won't pay his taxes cause he probably doesn't know what they are. The Vale will join the North since they are inexplicably under the control of Sansa anyway. The Iron Islands have wanted independence from season 1. Bran has no army or master of war. At least Jon is spared from this dumpster fire.
  3. Am I the only one who thinks Jaime's character arc isn't a circle, its just a dot. He never changed or grew. There was no redemption arc. The most honorable thing he ever did was before season 1, so the Jaime we saw in the first episode throwing Bran out a window was the same guy who sacrificed his honor for the people of King's Landing. He would always do whatever it took to be with Cersei but all the while retaining a sense of duty that had been long ingrained into his mind . We may have learned about his greatest sacrifice later on in the show but the fact is the deed was done long before he confessed it to Brienne so that hardly counts as redemption, just revelation. I don't believe there was a version of Jaime in any season where he wouldn't throw Bran out of that window for Cersei. Remember Jaime in the Riverlands? I don't get why I keep seeing people say how fitting it was to see Jaime come full circle when he really just spent 8 seasons standing still. He's not a better man in the end, he's not a changed man, I guess his hair got darker but that's about it.
  4. Isn't it funny how the first 3+ seasons were filled with the conflict that follows the death of a monarch when there are questions about the line of succession, but that same scenario is resolved in five minutes in season 8. Game of Thrones has turned into the cliff notes version of an interesting show.
  5. Bear42

    Jon & Drogon

    Drogon burned the Iron Throne because the D&D are incapable of anything more than shoehorned, ham-fisted symbolism and cool visuals. Drogon finds his mother dead with the killer standing over her corpse and is like "that damn chair that I'm seeing for the first time killed my mom." That scene was low grade fanfic quality writing and made me actually laugh out loud.
  6. By now everyone is well aware of the criticisms and defenses of Dany's turn to the dark side and in my opinion there was an easy solution. Dany's actions needed to be inspired more by Aegon the Conqueror and less by the Mad King. None of the foreshadowing pointed to as evidence of her cruelty suggests that Dany is mad like her father, every awful thing she does is done in a cold, calculated, and pragmatic way. Her actions against the Tarlys, or MMD, or the masters of Mereen were not done out of rage in the heat of the moment but in a calm matter-of-fact approach (even more chilling). She always had a reason for her actions and we always understood what it was. When Dany burns king landing it is portrayed as her "going mad" which wasn't necessary. She didn't need to snap to be capable of doing what she did and that's why it feels so unsatisfying in my opinion. Dany is a conqueror not a sadist (according to D&D). Aegon wasn't one to cry over spilled milk or show restraint in the face of opposition. Torrhen Stark didn't bend the knee because of what he thought Aegon could do, he did it because of what he knew Aegon had already done. Dany would know this story well and it lines up pretty well with the situation she was facing on Dragonstone. The North (now Sansa) is determined to remain independent even though the conqueror (now Dany) could melt them in their castles. If Aegon hadn't burned thousands of men by then perhaps the North would've fought him tooth and nail instead of pledging fealty before any blood was shed. We needed to see Dany rationalize that Aegon didn't unite the seven kingdoms by holding his dragons back, and perhaps an example needed to be made of King's Landing to ensure the cooperation of the other kingdoms. After all they'd cheer to see Drogon killed or her head on a spike. Kingdom after kingdom would take their shot at fighting back only to surrender as soon as they might lose... unless surrender wasn't an option. The wolf wouldn't dare provoke the dragon then. She could've had this dialogue with Tyrion , Jon, Grey Worm, or Selmy (RIP) so that we would have a chance to see that the same sense of riotousness and detached pragmatism that we cheered earlier in the show has manifested into something truly horrifying. They could leave us with a hope that she'll show restraint when the battle finally comes (our Dany wouldn't really do that she's just giving another one of those famous "burn their cities to the ground" speeches) and then pull the rug out as she torches the city. She didn't need to become the Mad Queen, she's already Daenerys the Conqueror. Only now we'd see what that really means for the conquered.
  7. Bear42

    What is left to be told?

    All I know is if we have to sit through one more trial my eyes will roll to the back of my head. Dany: "You stand accused of treason. How do you plead to these charges...... ME?" Expectations: Subverted
  8. I had been hoping for Mad Queen Dany for a few years now but in my opinion they went way too far way too fast. Dany burning the women and children in King's Landing after the city's surrender is so far removed from anything she has done in the past that it's not even comparable. We've seen that her sense of justice is detached and heavy handed, but she has always shown empathy for the downtrodden people helplessly caught in the middle. If she had burned the Lannister army after they surrendered, or brought the Red keep down on top of Cersei's human shield, or unintentionally started the whole city on fire resulting in thousands of needless casualties it would've been in line with the flaws we've seen since season 1 and we could've still had the mad queen ending. Instead she goes on a prolonged, relentless, and clearly intentional massacre of thousands of innocent bystanders AFTER she already won the battle. Mad Queen Dany had the potential to be an incredible end to the series, but the execution was terrible.
  9. I agree with you more than not. My point is they either went way too light on the foreshadowing, or way too heavy on the payoff. If Dany was losing the battle of KL and then burned it all out of spite, or burned soldiers who refused to surrender, or haphazardly killed innocents in her pursuit of Cersei I could've bought it. Instead we see her intentionally targeting the helpless after the battle is won. It's too far of a stretch.
  10. This is foreshadowing of her burning thousands of innocent civilians after having finally conquered Kings Landing? A smirk? After seven seasons of always protecting the disadvantaged, this smirk is what gave it away? Hardly a fine line between worrying about upsetting their delicate sensibilities and wanting to burn women and children in the streets. People are acting like because Dany wasn't portrayed as Mother Theresa it's totally understandable that she commits the worst genocide of any villain in the series.
  11. I loved the conversation at the beginning of the episode. Tyrion: They're just hostages Dany: Sometimes you have to shoot a hostage Tyrion: Not other people's hostages Dany: Well I don't have any hostages and I already brought this dragon soooooo I may be paraphrasing.
  12. I was thinking the exact same thing. I wonder what they would have to pay.
  13. There was no foreshadowing for Dany indiscriminately burning the civilians of KL after she had already won. This was completely out of character for her. The only people she has been ruthless towards in her journey were the ones who refused to bend the knee/surrender to her, and she never targeted the smallfolk. Here her enemy was isolated in the Red Keep, the city was surrendering, and the remaining army had given up... then she starts burning the women and children. She went from making a few questionable decisions regarding punishments for her enemies, to committing genocide. There is no "analysis" to be made of characters acting out of character to meet a plot point. If Jon had started killing children during the battle you wouldn't point at the execution of Olly as foreshadowing. They didn't lay out the breadcrumbs for this to make sense nor did they create a character in Dany for which this was believable. For all we know she just gets really angry when she's hungry, since her entire "descent into madness" was completely coincident with a short fast.
  14. Bear42

    Why the bells?

    I honestly believe at one point they had a story board that said something about the bells causing Cercei to lose her mind (walk of shame) but somewhere at some point it got changed to Dany and no one gave it a second thought. Tell me that doesn't make more sense than any in universe explanation. I actually read the leaks about the bells before the episode and dismissed them as fake since that literally makes zero sense. Should've known.