Jump to content

Larger than Average Finger

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Larger than Average Finger

  1. The problem was not with her turn, or even with the speed at which it happened.  The problem was that it was insufficiently justified by the plot. 

    Had it happened when Rhaegal fell, perhaps with Jon on his back, thinking she had lost both, maybe as he did something stupid to avoid hurting civilians, it would make sense.  Then when after rather than realizing it was a mistake, she realized that was her true self. 

  2. I believe this is pure Martin, and is almost the core theme of the Story.

    He wants us to feel bad that we supported the things the hero was doing, because of who it was being done to.  He wants to show that people who do these things to people they hate, do not stop doing them when all the people they hate are gone, they just find new people to hate.

  3. 39 minutes ago, King Jon Snow Stark said:


    The wildlings would not follow Sansa. Plus Jon was only Northern Leader who fought the Dead and people believed him. Sansa was civil administer and Jon was the military lead.  Everyone was there to fight Jon’s War like Dany said. 

    Exactly, saying Jon played no role in beating the dead, is like saying Eisenhauer, Patton, Zhukov, Montgomery  played no role in beating the Germans because none of them were the one who killed Hitler. 

  4. 20 minutes ago, MinscS2 said:

    Except for Daenerys' last words before Jon kissed her and plunged a dagger in her heart was literally "stay and rule with me"...

    Yes, for now, until they disagree on something...  

  5. 36 minutes ago, Erkan12 said:

    Possible, but why didn't he leave his black coat and outfits otherwise? I think he was leading the Free Folk and helping them to settle as a ranger.

    Clearly, and to protect them from what ever they may find 

  6. 13 hours ago, anjulibai said:

    Was it really to just drive Dany nuts when it came out? Because it seems like it had no other affect on the story. 

    It was to make Jon into someone Danny could never allow to live in the long run. Someone she would inevitably see as a threat that would need to be removed.


  7. 9 minutes ago, Saturno said:

    I would say that she became a generic tyrant but will all the talk about redemtion, utopia, fairness and oppression I've felt a strong message against communism/socialism. It is the only political ideology these days which states "we need to kill these people to reach paradise". Nazism goes more like "we need to kill these people because they are scum".

    I don't see any commentary on either.

    More about the inevitable outcome of war being used to settle conflicts.

  8. 1 minute ago, Krishtotter said:

    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. 

    On the other hand, once the North leaves the Kingdom, it makes some sense for a Northerner who will have no heir to be the one chosen, because it will force this to happen again.

  9. 4 minutes ago, Krishtotter said:

    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.  




    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 rule 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. 

    Very ASoIAF that surprising result. 



    I am not convinced Martin will have Bran be the one who sits on the throne, but the ending will be a council selecting the next king, and the person selected will not be the head of a major house.  

  10. 1 hour ago, Beardy the Wildling said:

    This exactly. D&D don't give a fuck about prophesy, heck, the valonqar was fucking bricks.

    The word valonquar was purposefully left out of the show, its not part of that prophesy.

  11. In truth, he should have told her something like "The people here don't love you YET, because they don't know you yet.  When they know what you want for them they will, unless you f it up in how you take the throne".    

  12. 22 hours ago, Jabar of House Titan said:

    HBO offered D&D 10 seasons each with 10 episodes and as much CGI money as they would need.

    What did D&D say?

    Where did you see that?  That is not what I have read.

    Its also the fact the cast wanted to move on as well.

  13. 19 hours ago, Tadco26 said:

    So do you also consider Tywin to be crazy?  He actually had a well established history of killing commoners from season 1.  He ordered the Mountain to go rape and pillage and enslave the people in the River Lands.  He planned the Red Wedding.  He disowned his sons.  He slept with his son's whore, while forbidding him from associating with whores.  He condemned Tyrion to death.   But I haven't seen any arguments that this means he was crazy.

    The difference between Tywin and Danny is the nature of the weapons at their disposal, not the lengths they would go to, to get what they want.

  14. I think the real point is that Martin is a pacifist, and hates war period.  There is little doubt this part of the story is from him.  The path to get here will be longer and more nuanced, but this is his destination.


    Could it be the Blitz bombings of London? Yep.

    Could it be Dresden? For all the reasons above and more.

    Could it be Nagasaki? Probably, Japan was not going to keep fighting after Hiroshima.

    Could it be Japan's actions in occupied China and Korea?...

    100,000 + Iraqi civilians died when an outside force eliminated their tyrant.


    The point Martin is making is that if you use war to solve your issues, this is where it always ends.