Jump to content

Mystical

Members
  • Content count

    438
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Mystical

  • Rank
    Landed Knight

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Mystical

    The character assassination of Daenerys

    Not every virtuous act is about just wanting to feel good. And certainly not every such act starts out like that. And she might have stayed but she did little. And what little she did often backfired. Nothing about Meereen seemed to be in good shape and it would be in shambles not long after she left with slavery reigning supreme again. But that's what you would get with leaving a sellsword in charge who once said 'fuck the people (of Meereen)'. Only if you establish a new economy that's not based on slavery. And Dany had none in place. The show in fact made it a point that slaves were living in shelters which were maintained badly since no one told Dany of the abuse happening there. All property is probably owned by the rich (slavers, masters etc.). So for the slaves to get property (and better living conditions with it), the slaves would need some kind of income to buy or at least maintain any property. We are also never shown the former slaves getting employment or education to make a living. So the slaves were free but nothing else had changed, they still had no way to make any money (see the woman and her baby) or have productive jobs where they would make something that could be traded.
  2. Mystical

    The character assassination of Daenerys

    Was Dany really more altruistic than other characters? Was her desire to free slaves really all that altruistic or did it, in the words of Cersei, 'make her feel good'? She freed the Unsullied from slave masters and gave them a choice. But is it really a choice when you have known no other life? It's not like we saw Dany getting them any kind of alternative way of life. Bring in a musician, maybe some of those Unsullied would be talented singers or good with instruments. Or maybe painters, translators, farmers, builders etc.. She never showed them another way of life because soldiers is what she wanted/needed. The same can be said of the slaves in the cities that she freed. She liberated them but she did it in such a poor fashion that you have to wonder if she actually cared about these people at all. You don't go in and overthrow a system without a plan as to what to replace said system with. Especially when it concerns economy. She freed slaves in one city only to move on to the next right after. She didn't establish a stable government or new economy and she didn't leave any soldiers behind to ensure that these things would be enforced. It's pretty much 'I freed you, now you figure it out for yourselves.'. Even in Mereen, she did nothing to establish a new economy or get the slaves any kind of alternative occupation (similar to the Unsullied) in order to make a living. Instead she apparently build shelters where slaves were abusing each other to the point that some even wanted to go back to their masters because life was better for them then. She never came up with an alternative economy. The former masters of the cities she 'liberated' created an uprising (Sons of the Harpies) that killed many innocent people. And they were only able to do that because she had abandoned those cities. She had no understanding of their culture (see fighting pits). She pretty much forced a man to marry her.
  3. Mystical

    I guess the Starks will just die out?

    Sansa brought up succession for a reason, so it's clearly something she is concerned about. The North is it's own Kingdom and she is Queen, she can make whatever rules she wants. And that includes not adopting the new system of the 6 Kingdoms (which is nonsense anyway because as soon as Bran dies, there will be war for the throne). She doesn't even have to marry to have an heir. What is said in interviews has no place in a discussion about the canon of the show.
  4. Mystical

    The problem with Bran being king narrative wise

    People should not be required to watch/read an entirely different work in order to understand the story. It was D&D's job to explain it to us, not the people writing the prequel. This was D&D's story, plain and simple. It was up to them to explain to us what a 3ER is, how it works, who the previous 3ER was, the involvement of the children and the extend of the 3ER's powers, Bran's/3ER's weird behavior etc..
  5. Doesn't really matter if GRRM wrote the ending of GoT or not. Lindelof at least finished his story (and the last Season of Lost was 100 times better than the crap fest of S8 GoT). And so did GoT (bad though it was). GRRM hasn't finished his story and he never will, so maybe he should stfu and actually write his freaking books. But he can't because he wrote himself into a corner with his self indulgence (pages upon pages describing food, introduce a character in someone's POV and then 10 pages of that new character's history) instead all that wasted space could have been used to tighten the story. And he focused on anything but his main series. Someone incapable of finishing his own story maybe should be quiet in regards to other peoples works. Makes one look like an idiot.
  6. The only smart things I can remember when it comes to Tyrion are from the first two Seasons. After that his story becomes only about his relationship with Shae and he doesn't do much of anything else. After S4 though he became one of the biggest idiots whose moronic plans lead to disasters in both Essos and Westeros. People complain about Sansa being hailed as a smarty pants (while ignoring that only Arya said so) yet every freaking character has to constantly tell us how smart Tyrion is even when he fails in epic ways all the damn time. Cersei is a mixed bag. She didn't have much opportunity in the early Seasons due to her son and father limiting what she can do. And the Sparrow thing was a giant miscalculation on her part. However in the later Seasons she was the only one with a brain (not just in her family but the show). A foreign conqueror was coming to Westeros so she wanted more and better trained men. The Lannister gold mines were empty so she sacked the gold of a rival House (and their food which is important). She made a deal with the House that had the biggest naval fleet. She appealed to other Lords of Westeros to join her (promising titles etc. which is how it's done). The end of S7 showcased how smart Cersei is. She agreed to a ceasefire with her enemies (while in secret hiring the GC, building anti-dragon weapons), staged a fake 'I'm out.' with Euron so that he can ferry the hired sellswords over to Westeros and agreed to send soldiers to help fight the dead (which she had no intention of doing). And S8 proved her right. She shouldn't have and didn't need to send her own men north. She also seemed to be the only one who still had an active spy network thanks to Qyburn. She knew the wall fell but characters in Dany's camp (which includes freaking Varys) didn't. When it comes to Jamie, I don't understand why he is even included in the topic to begin with, lol.
  7. Mystical

    Who got the most screwed over

    Probably had something close to a stroke when LF announced his motivation to sit on the Iron Throne in S6 (which I don't believe is AT ALL LF's goal in the books). But then GRRM had long stopped watching the show by that point so who knows. Not sure how much GRRM even knows about the later Seasons other than what people brought to him, like fans flooding his site after the 'Sansa as Jeyne Poole' fiasco.
  8. Mystical

    The problem with Bran being king narrative wise

    He never even moves a facial muscle. Emotions can be seen, even surpressed ones. 3ER literally has a complete blank face 100% of the time. You'd think with all the death he's causing there might be something but nope, he does that with a complete blank look as well. What else is there other than face value? This is D&D, they don't do deep. This doesn't even make sense in terms of this discussion. No character in the show has an internal monologue so we all can only judge what the characters say/do and that's what we have to do for the 3ER as well. Saying 'well we don't have in the show what we have in the books' is meaningless, this isn't the books. There are no what-ifs or maybe-s, there is only the canon on your screen. So what the 3ER says/does/doesn't do is all you can interpret/discuss. What makes you think the ultimate goal of the 3ER was to never leave the place? Because guess what, 3ER DID leave the place back in S6 and in a shiny new body to boot. Btw you do realize that his predecessor and Bran are the same freaking entity with the same freaking goal (whatever that is). They are the 3ER. They have no identity beyond that. And again, we don't know enough about the 3ER to make a definitive statement on if he always tells the truth or if he lies to achieve certain goals. His claiming he doesn't want anymore could have been in service of his end goal (being King) because we have been told over and over in S8 that a good ruler is one 'who doesn't want it'. 3ER can spy on everyone, every conversation. You don't think he listened in on some of Tyrion's and Varys' talks? He did nothing to defeat the NK. He already knew the battle before it happened. All he had to do was chill while sitting in the Godswood. Unless you mean that active in this case means that he didn't stop the wight hunt plan which brought down the wall, he might as well have killed Theon himself, he didn't find a better strategy to minimize the body count. Cause he doesn't care, he just needed meat shields to get rid of his arch-nemesis. Or how he didn't stop the burning of KL, probably because he knew it was his ticket to the throne. He decided when and how to reveal Jon's parentage with the maximum amount of damage. And you really don't read other peoples posts, do you? 'Why would he do all that?' was answered in the show, TO BECOME KING. Considering the damage the 3ER has caused via actions and inactions his goal is pretty damn clear to me. He is anti-humanity. So there is your answer. A non-human is on the throne and doesn't have any fucks to give about humans. But now he rules over them anyway. Somewhere the Old Gods and Children are celebrating. That's why he chose Tyrion as Hand as well because Tyrion had a massive hand in all the slaughter/murder/burning/death of the past 2 Seasons in Westeros. If you are anti-humanity, you of course chose someone who gets people killed in droves.
  9. Mystical

    The problem with Bran being king narrative wise

    Didn't require a lot for me to work to get there. There is plenty to indicate 3ER ( NOT BRAN) is anti-humanity (I never said evil). And I frankly never care what a writer's/director's/showrunner's intention is, what I care about is what's on screen. And really, plenty of people thought of the 3ER as 'evil' after the finale, to the point that it was even a question at Comic Con. From serious reviewers to casual watchers, you name it. And it doesn't even take much to come to that conclusion, you make it sound as if it takes a lot of work. The show is easy. But he is just a body. I mean think about it, Bran was lured north by the last 3ER. Since 3ER knows the future, he knew Bran would go exploring without permission. That would lead to him being marked, the AotD to be able to breach the cave and for the 3ER to body snatch Bran (because NK kills him). Then we have the 3ER constantly reminding us that he is not Bran. He can remember Bran Stark and his life but it's not Bran. What is in Bran's body is the entity known as 3ER. And since we have no idea if 3ER serves anyone's agenda (Old Gods, Children or no one at all) you can only look at that entities actions or inactions and the consequences of those. And to me they clearly point to anti-human mindset. 3ER knew the future and not only let it happen but helped it along. How convenient that all 3 contenders for the throne (Cersei, Dany, Jon) are out of the running at the end. And even more convenient how 'Bran' took the time to tell Tyrion his life story when previously and any other time in S8 the guy barely speaks a sentence to anyone, much less explains (with exception of NK goals) anything.
  10. Mystical

    The problem with Bran being king narrative wise

    It can make sense, in the show anyway, depending on your head canon. As the show flat out refused to tell us anything about the 3ER, the audience is forced to assume their own canon. For example we don't know if the 3ER is a creation of the Old Gods, having been around as long as them. Was the 3ER, like the NK, a creation of the Children of the Forest? If it was the Old Gods, we don't know what their goal was with this creation. If it was the Children, well we can assume that just like the NK, the 3ER was an anti-human weapon. Because why would they make anything other than a pro-Children weapon? Was the 3ER created once the NK went rogue as a countermeasure (since they were arch-enemies in the show)? We simply don't know. So if you look at the 3ER's powers (I refuse to call him Bran since he's not Bran in the show) which are a combo of formerly Bran Stark's greenseeing/warging abilities and the 3ER skills and put them into context with what happened on the show, it's hard not to come away thinking that the 3ER orchestrated the events in such a way to become King. The only question is why would he want to be King? If the 3ER is a creation of the Children, then it makes all the sense in the world. Bran had visions of the future in past Seasons, they were only flashes to us (due to time constraints and because it's more mysterious for us) but one would assume Bran had the full knowledge of these events eventually. He saw the dragon shadow over KL and the destroyed throne room all the way back in S4 and the blowing up of the Sept in S6. There is no reason not to assume that he didn't already know the future. So if the 3ER is a creation of the Children, having him not stop atrocities or even facilitating them and wanting to be King makes all the sense in the world. The 3ER is anti-humanity, destruction of humans is what he's about. In that context, all of show!3ER actions make sense. Not stopping the wight hunt plan which leads to the fall of the wall. Facilitating Dany going mad. Giving Arya the dagger (because he knew she would kill his arch-enemy). Even his choice of small council makes sense, at least in the most important positions. Hand of the King (power), Master of Coin (finances) and Grand Maester (knowledge). The 3 people chosen for these are under qualified or downright not qualified at all. Putting Tyrion in that power position is a smart move if you want people to die. The wall falling was on him. Dany could have been sitting on the IT in 7x02 if she had never listened to Tyrion, instead his constant council is what eventually resulted in the catastrophe we saw in 8x05. Tyrion is perfect if you want large scale destruction of humans. Bronn is absolutely not in any way, shape or form qualified to be Master of Coin. He will wreck it and bankrupt the realm which will lead to nothing good. However I have no idea how GRRM can possibly swing it in the books (not that he ever will release another book). I understand from Martin's other work that he has a fondness for hive-minded beings (like 3EC in aSoIaF) and god like beings that save everyone. But in the world this story takes place, getting Bran in the position of King would be hard to swallow, even if he does something monumental in regards to the Others or Westeros. Kid is still in a damn cave at this point.
  11. Just because Bran knows the future doesn't mean Sansa does. She wouldn't have needed to take an army south if she did, an army probably only comprised of soldiers not fit to travel when the Jon went to KL in episode 4. The Sansa of S7/8 would have rather left them to recuperate in the North. Sansa wanted Jon free. And she clearly wanted him to be King in the North after. Again, Jon hasn't been King since S7 so the only reason for Sansa to say 'they lost their King' is if she intended to free him and him to be King again. Her saying that makes no sense otherwise.
  12. Except Sansa clearly went down to KL to get Jon out and for him to rule as King again. She freaking said so. I hate the writing in S8 as much as the next person but canon is canon. There is no proof in the text as to your assertion. But there is for the opposite.
  13. And if Sansa had relented on independence because a 'Stark' is on the IT, people would have been complaining about her character even more since apparently it was her front for not accepting Dany. As crappy as this story was, I prefer that she stuck to her guns in regards to independence, no matter who is on the IT. Because this way there is no doubt that it had nothing to do with Dany personally. It was about independence, period.
  14. Mystical

    Tyrion and Sansa...

    It's not illogical as that was the story in S7. They had Theon freaking come to Dragonstone to ask Dany for help with a captured Yara. And we saw him leave empty handed. I think like all things this was an accident because D&D are that dumb. But I thought 'gee Dany doesn't care much for allies unless she really, really wants to bone them, does she?'. It's not illogical or irrational Dany hate when that's something that actually happened, whether accidental due to crappy writing or not.
  15. Mystical

    Who got the most screwed over

    Except Dany declared herself Queen of the 7K, aka Protector of the Realm. Why does someone need special treatment for doing their duty? Why would anyone be happy when help only comes with a demand for subjugation? And of course it depends on how much people know about the mission beyond the wall. And it gave the NK the means to break through the wall, meaning it's Team Dany's fault the dead are in Westeros. No that wasn't mentioned in the show but people in the North weren't surprised when Bran said for all to hear that the NK+army were in Westeros with an undead dragon. The chances of no one asking questions as to how that all happened are slim to none. You don't get extra points for cleaning up the mess you created.
×