butterweedstrover

So wait, after saying for pages Rhaenyra is no threat to Alicent’s children you believe Alicent thinks that because something Otto said at one time? And this episode kills that theory since the only thing the show could do to give her a reason is use there BS prophecy. So again, after calling Alicent a villain, you think show Alicent (after episode 5) is doing this out of legitimate fear for her children?

Another travesty. Alicent’s king to be is a rapist, and Alicent gaslights the victim like a thug. Meanwhile over at Dragonstone saint Rhaenyra raises three (four) pure hearted children, one who wants to learn Valyrian to be a good king even though he has many years to go. Meanwhile the Greens are practicing elder abuse just in case you couldn’t figure out they were the bad guys. Then hero Daemon comes out and kills the guy who calls his girl a whore like a true ally. Oh and in case you still don’t know Alicent is evil they put a lot of religious iconography because ya know, religious woman = bad. Oh, and that ending just nukes any case for character motivation. They couldn’t come up with a reason for Alicent to take the throne so they decide to go with a misunderstanding over their stupid prophecy BS that no one who is watching HotD for the first time will understand. Wonderful acting wasted on a garbage script.

Ok, ok dsjj. You are on another level. You shift the discussion from show to book when it suits you. So let me try one more time: What is Alicent’s motivation to take the throne in THE SHOW?

What are you talking about? If Alicent truly feared for her children she would not behave in the way she is behaving. That is the show contradicting itself to water down her character. Do you really believe Alicent in the show (of the last two episodes) is afraid for her children. Yes. He is, otherwise he wouldn't have been added in. It doesn't matter what you think, that is what is happening. Viserys is sending her away. Even if it was her idea (which we don't know) that is publicly what it comes off as. So why did it happen? You get this isn't a real history book? It's a drama. George is writing as if they have a rivalry not because future events retroactively color the past, because that is what he wants readers to believe. If the book is telling us they had a fraught relationship in court, then that is what is. The show insinuates Alicent is Jealous of Rhaenyra. The book does not. Do you get it? Again, Rhaenyra doesn't have to threaten the children, in fact the threat might not even come from her. But if they were married then that would certainly go a ways to mitigating that threat. Great, so is Alicent afraid for her children or is she against bastards on the throne? What is her motivating factor in the show? Literally everyone on this thread is talking about how Alicent in the show is jealous of Rhaenyra. About how Rhaenyra has more freedoms to behave in such a way and how the rules are unfair towards her. I mean if you don't think Alicent is jealous, and don't think Rhaenyra poses a threat to her children, what are Alicent's motives? Yeah, and then the show contradicts itself by having Alicent not show even a slight concern for her children. When she physically attacks Rhaenyra she denounces her for being above the rules, not posing a threat to her children. If Alicent believed that, she might be sympathetic. Instead she is just obsessed with bringing Rhaenyra down for no apparent reason besides jealousy or power. That is what everyone else is saying, not just me. But if it isn't jealousy, and it isn't about her kids, then what? Because that last two episodes did nothing to prove Alicent is concerned for her children which is why she rejects every olive branch which might protect them. The threat Rhaenyra poses to Alicent's kids doesn't come from Aemond killing Luke. I mean what are you talking about? The threat they pose is if Rhaenyra ascends and people reject her, they'd look to Aegon after which point Rhaenyra would have to kill them, not that she would want to. That was Otto's argument. You pretend the source material is one way and yet can't be pinned down. You are all over the place using this forum as cover. So do you disagree with the vast majority of people here and think show Alicent isn't jealous? Well that is something you should explain rather than assuming it is fact. I mean what is her motivation according to you? Have you even said it?

Yeah, because the show didn't do that. Instead the show decided to expand upon the source material in a far less interesting way. Yes it does. I did once: She lost the moniker because she was bitter and harsh, not because she was ugly. As for her leaving Dragonstone, the book only gives Viserys' public reasoning. Rhaenyra is his heir and had she wanted to stay she might have argued the point. Instead she is unofficially exiled, why? Because her relationship with Alicent was deteriorating, something you deny is part of the source material. It's all over the book. The narrator mentions their rivalry with every chance, even the artwork does it. It is why Alicent spreads rumors about Rhaenyra's children being bastards, and it's why there is an ongoing cold war between them at court (before Viserys forces the issue). I gave you the quote again. The book is written by Martin who introduces concepts important to the story. And the show is arguing the opposite. Which is my point, the show took MORE liberties with the source material to water down Alicent's character than my suggestions would have. You're removing any agency from Alicent's character. She is best friends with Rhaenyra, not Otto. She has ten years to figure out Rhaenyra who from what we see offers Alicent's children de facto immunity. So Alicent rejecting the offer isn't her being afraid Rhaenyra might kill her kids, it is her being either jealous or power hungry, something Otto didn't scare her into believing. Do you see the problem? In Episode 5 Otto pressures Alicent by arguing her children are in danger. In Episode 6 Alicent shows no more interest in keeping her kids safe and want the throne for reasons of jealousy or power. And having Alicent take the throne out of fear for her children would be more in line with the source material than having her take it out of jealousy. Which is my point, all of this is a creative decision meant to water down the story's potential. Aemond isn't Alicent. You can figure out what page it was when Viserys orders Rhaenyra away from court. The thing about F&B is that it is not a novel, nor does it provide motivations. We only know what happens, adding to the character psychology isn't deviating from the book.

Well yeah, the show is portraying it in a way that seems unbelievable. But the show didn't have to do that, it was a creative decision.

You know I don't think this point is made enough, but they really wasted the potential of Alicent and Rhaenyra's friendship. That was honestly a brilliant premise they did nothing with, and yeah it was an invention of the show but it added emotional depth and conflict to the story where before there was just a cliche evil step-mother/step-daughter trope. How do they deal with being put at opposite political ends, how do they try to preserve their relationship, and how does their fallout feed into a more deep seated hatred which, more than anything, might be the cause of war? The fact that they were too close and now enemies driving this underlining passion that burns the realm. There were so many thematic choices, some routes they could have taken, and instead they're just going for a very uninvolved and emotionally distant narrative of two sides that want power over the other (like with the War of Five kings) and it hurts more knowing the leg work they already did to get us there and then dropped. Take this: Alicent doesn't struggle with her flimsy motivations because she honestly doesn't care about Rhaenyra anymore. She doesn't have any internal debate between doing what she thinks is right and betraying her friend. There is never any doubt in her mind about the path to follow, its just a very rigid and uninspired psychological take that leaves little room for further exploration. Meanwhile Rhaenyra doesn't have any residual feelings for Alicent at all. She shows no passion as regards to Alicent and the Greens wanting to take her down. She is composed, level-headed, and distant when dealing with her ex-best friend. It doesn't fuel her with rage that the person she was closest with in all the world is now dedicated to see her dead (which, if she is passed over, will be the end result). Rhaenyra treats Alicent like a stranger. Her dislike of her step-mother is muted and practical. Even when Alicent runs at her with a knife Rhaenyra doesn't stew with anguish or lash out, she simply points out that Alicent is a hypocrite and continues afterwards to prepare for war between the two factions as if they were an invading army from the north. Sure it's easier to root for a woman who shows no emotional challenge and against one who is made to have one for all the wrong reasons. Sure it makes for any easier story to follow, it gives audiences an easy choice where they can just turn off their brains and enjoy. But it ruins the chance to make some seriously compelling drama that I think would have lasted longer than what we have now which is disjointed mess of motives and psychology.

The point is that they are unattractive. That it leaves the greens with no moral claim and casts the Blacks in a heroic light which is a problem when you have a duel narrative. And it does a determinate to black supporters as it makes their stance less a one of principle and more a one of common sense. But as for the text, jealousy was never prescribed to Alicent in the text, but it was to Rhaenyra. So I don't know where you're coming from with that. And as for the first five episodes of the show, it made clear Alicent has zero ambition for the throne. And yet now she is putting the lives of her children at risk just for that. It might not be the reason the show wants us to think, but that is where sloppy writing leaves us. In the last two episodes it is made clear that she has no serious deficit when it comes to ruling. The first five showed her to be flippant and undiplomatic while the book showed her to be jealous, bitter, and isolated. Any of which might have bolstered Alicent's perception of doing what needs to be done. But because the show casts such a positive light on Rhaenyra, it ruins any practical motivation she has for crowning Aegon and strips her of nuance and complexity. Also, it was Alicent that convinced Viserys to send aid against the Crabfeeder (which wasn't even needed in the end of the day). We can piece it together in our minds since jealousy is a very common human emotion, but it isn't well established. It isn't something built into Alicent in the first five episodes and by episodes 6 & 7 Rhaenyra is stuck in a fake marriage, raising three kids on her own while having to keep their true father at a distance. Wary of all the rumors she is hardly free to break rules, if anything she is more restricted by them. And while it can be realistic, there isn't a lot sympathy offered to Alicent for starting a war over her pettiness, especially when the audience isn't given much character development, shifting us five years and expecting us to accept this new dynamic (which was no where to be found in the book). I was actually referencing Alicent's greed. Alicent in the first five episodes was shown to have no ambition for the throne (or even to become queen) and could only be persuaded down that route if she was convinced her children's lives were endanger. Post time skip she is putting her own children's lives at risk, rejecting any offer of protection they might receive, and all so that her line might ascend. The implied greed here is just not compelling because its not part of what we know of her and it has very little moral fidelity as a reason for starting a war.

It also doesn't create textual evidence that she didn't. There was enough room within the breadth of of F&B the hypothesize on that or some other genuinely sympathetic reason, like a real concern for the realm if Rhaenyra ruled. In fact the show in its first five episodes sets that up. Until it decides to forgo whatever development happened before and run with a fairly uninteresting dynamic. No, they don't. Because even if Rhaenyra wasn't planning on sending the headsmen for them the day of her coronation, there was a reason to believe that the threat remained. It wouldn't happen on the first day of her reign, but given Rhaenyra's lack of capacity to rule, her marital relationship with Daemon, and her fraught relationship with Alicent, things could always have degraded. And foreseeing events and trying to stop them beforehand does much to add a layer of complexity to the Greens that makes them more than villains. Jealousy and Greed are just not that compelling, especially when we are given no reason to think why this or that character should feel this way. Ok cool, and that could be your opinion. But giving the other side some moral fidelity would just make your position that much stronger. It's easy to stick by a set of principles when they are clearly right, but sticking by them through ambiguous situations makes them more durable. If Alicent was more than just a jealous woman out for power, if the greens had actual moral arguments behind their claim, you sticking besides Rhaenyra in spite all that would have been a statement on your dedication to this mindset. Now all the weight behind the rule of law subsides under the shadow of basic common sense, that the unhinged power hungry woman shouldn't have the throne. In the first five episodes yeah. But I don't understand where Alicent's lack of concern for her children's safety, her unrelenting hatred of Rhaenyra, and her unrelenting will for the throne come from. They total undo all the development in the first five episodes and leave a character that is sort of unhinged emotionally.

Here is the thing you and @dsjj251 don't get. The Greens starting the war does not preclude moral judgment based on their motivation. The Germans in WW1 were the first to mobilize their troops entering through Belgium, but if you were in the mind of the Kaiser and the war was thought inevitable this action would not be deemed as instigating a war but more so a preemptive attack. The same could be assumed of the Japanese during Pearl Harbor if they thought the US was going to enter the war regardless. As such we require a deeper understanding of the characters to see why the Greens would have reason to believe such a course should be taken. If the Greens believed the Blacks wanted them dead then seizing power would not clearly delineate good vs. bad. It would be morally ambiguous certainly, but such is a compelling narrative since waiting around like sitting ducks wouldn't be morally righteous. F&B does not determine one approach against the other. It allows room for us to hypothesize on what motivations Alicent might of had, especially in the personal animosity between her and Rhaenyra. And as the latter did portray hints of jealousy, bitterness, and even violence it could have been further explored down a route that was somewhat interesting. Instead, as a change to the book, the show (in the last two episodes) clarifies that Rhaenyra would never harm the children beyond a reasonable doubt. It creates in Rhaenyra a more friendly disposition towards Alicent. It depicts Rhaenyra as being diplomatic and without the many flaws Gyldan's narrative bestows upon her. Which leaves Alicent with no motivation at all besides Jealousy or a lust for power. And instigating a war for either of those things removes any ability the audience may have to connect with her. For neither the jealousy or the determination for power were ever previously established as part of her psychology. The only reason we have to believe so is because there is no other possible reasoning behind her actions. Which is bad writing. But I do. I gave reference to where Rhaenyra is shown to be jealous of Alicent. I gave reference to where Rhaenyra is depicted as bitter and unlikable. I gave reference to her lost of the moniker the realm's delight, and her retreat to Dragonstone (which was not necessary) away from her own court. You did none of that, instead you falsely misinterpret the book to say there is no animosity between Alicent and Rhaenyra when the entire premise of F&B is their rivalry. Which, even if you disagree with the book as written and decide upon your personal head canon that she was not, doesn't make it any more likely that the opposite is true which is what the show is doing, and as such going beyond the source material to demonize Alicent. Like @Lord Varys you think because the Greens struck first their motivations don't matter automatically turning them into the villain. But as I said to Varys, their motivations affect how viewers can understand and comprehend these characters and their morals. Something that F&B permitted us to hypothesize about without ever indulging the true psychological rational behind it. The show, going further than books, leaves us with the exclusive perception that it was done for two highly irrational reasons leaving the greens with no morality worth discussing, proving them to be evil without much nuance. And as I said before and again, F&B does not go nearly as far as these last two episodes. F&B indulged into serious criticism of Rhaenyra's character and left room to hypothesize on Alicent's motivation. The show as of recent has gone beyond the book by adding detailed personalities which leaves nothing else to be determined. And what we have is a generic villains vs. heroes plot which hurts the format of the narrative which is by its nature duel perspective. Oh it added motivation to their characters. But their motivation is so shallow and pathetic that all it draws is disinterest especially given the fact that in Alicent's case none of her desires post episode 5 were ever established in the first five episodes.

You can selectively quote my posts all day long, but I have. I literally have told you what I am arguing in the simplest of terms. I have bolded the sentences, I have repeated, and I have argued it throughout the whole thread. You reply with stuff like 'Rhaenyra would never harm Alicent's children' or 'Alicent and Rhaenyra didn't hate each other in the book'. Or act as if Alicent is jealous of Rhaenyra something never even alluded to in the book. And then you just keep going, referencing head-canon and misinterpreting F&B for no reason. So before I continue to exert energy on this please tell me: What is my argument? and why do you disagree. Because if we can't establish that then we can't continue.

Granted I didn’t watch the last SW film but how does this comparison work?

Oh they absolutely could have, Aegon was not just some random cousin, he is the king's eldest trueborn son. But more to the point, this threat isn't exclusively coming from Rhaenyra. If Rhaenyra doesn't know how to rule the lords will start looking to Aegon on their own accord. How Alicent balances her loyalty to her life long friend, to her king, to her children in this environment might have been a fascinating psychological drama. There were so many possibilities and instead they used this low hanging fruit called 'jealousy' to extinguish in Alicent any favor she might have had towards Rhaenyra and removed from Rhaenyra any systemic flaw that might have drawn attention towards Aegon as a viable alternative. They went the most boring route and I think the entire narrative framework of a duel perspective suffers as such.

You're not making arguments about what I'm saying. Therefore tossing around language like 'I proved you wrong' is even more foolish as you don't seem to grasp how that does or does not play into what I'm saying. And it's funny that your bringing up "the page" as I have referenced the book multiple times as to how the show is being selective within its portrayal of Alicent and Rhaenyra, even against its own set up. How is this conversation suppose to work when you make stuff up. That comment was in response to you saying it doesn't matter why Alicent betrayed Rhaenyra, only that she did. I mean seriously, if you're not interested in these questions then you don't want to see the narrative adapted. You assume it to be fundamentally evil and therefore don't understand how her motivations might add or remove moral depth behind her faction. Do you even hear yourself? I argue that without that possibility Alicent's character falls through. In the show it was established that the only reason Alicent would oppose Rhaenyra's claim is if she were to believe that her children's lives could be in danger. There are a multitude of ways to do this. What we need is a rational for her to think this a possible outcome, either because of Rhaenyra or because of some inability for Rhaenyra to rule. By removing any question of that in the last two episodes, it makes Alicent's primary motivation a lust for power and jealousy against the princess. Which does not give her faction any moral or political standing and casts the Blacks into a heroic framing. The book does not definitively put its weight on one side or the other. It leaves room to imagine Alicent had such thoughts in her head by building up the rivalry between her and Rhaenyra, disclosing hints about Rhaenyra's morally dubious outings, suggesting her to be bitter or jealous, etc. All of that might or might not provide grounds for Alicent to have some sort of moral fidelity behind her position either from fear for her children or fear for the realm. In its last two episodes however it is made clear beyond a reasonable doubt that Rhaenyra would not do that and she even offers an olive branch to Alicent as protection for her children. Alicent ignoring these approaches leaves her with a lack of compelling motive as even lust for power is not something we are given reason to expect her to have and leaves the entire conflict at the center of this narrative to be relatively one-dimensional. Oh dude come on, there is always a threat if not from Rhaenyra directly then someone else. Rhaenyra offering that pact however means Alicent is no longer driven by a love for her children. And the alternative motivations lack any depth for her character as she has not before shown a great lust for power and jealousy which itself is such a shallow and unsympathetic excuse for war. If the show does not offer a compelling reason for her to oppose Rhaenyra, the only two things left are power and jealousy, neither of which have much moral authority in the eyes of the viewer or much nuance in themselves to explore as neither jealousy or a lust for power were established in her character before hand. It's not established which is why leaving us with that impression is such bad writing. She shows no real lust for power in the early episodes yet now that, alongside jealousy, are the only possibly motivating factors left. The show might want us to believe she still fears for her children, but it does nothing to support that leaving in its place a villain who lacks nuance. If you strive for something without being given a rational ulterior motive, then it comes off as wanting that thing all along. I think you might want to read F&B one more time. You said before Alicent and Rhaenyra don't have a rivalry in the book, which is just not true. They despise each other, but more to the point Rhaenyra is given room for this animosity. She becomes bitter, removed, and somewhat emotionally unhinged. F&B is not a traditional novel with in depth psychology, it is a book of perceptions that the show was suppose to add nuance and flavor to. And it did only for in the last two episodes to transfer upon Alicent all the negativity. Alicent is now undiplomatic like Rhaenyra originally was in the show and jealous like Rhaenyra was in the book. Meanwhile Rhaenyra is given attributes including a calmness, diplomatic eloquence, and a fundamental sense of duty that was never assigned to her in F&B or the previous episodes. Well then there isn't much to talk about with someone like you. It's beyond me how your post gets a single like at all, you are either being deliberately obtuse or just rushing to reply to my comment without any interest in having a discussion.

Oh I agree there are reasons you can come up with for why Alicent is unhappy. My question was pertaining to the creative decision to go down that root. Because what we are left with is an imbittered character devoid of any real moral argument as to her position. As for your offered rational, it is not properly established in the show and functions more as head-canon. For example Alicent in the early episodes shows no desire to ride a dragon, or have a plethora of men at her beck and call, or even have any at all. We can hypothesize that all of this is a front and she wants to be just like Rhaenyra, but that is not what's established. What we do know from the screen is that Alicent was a friend to the princess who had no desire to take the throne and could only be convinced of that path when believing the lives of her children were at stake. Elsewise she did everything to undermine her father in that pursuit and attempted to keep good relations with Rhaenyra. But by removing any rational fear for her children that perceived jealousy (which was not attributed to her in F&B) gets promoted into a motivating factor behind her pursuit for the throne. It makes her patently disagreeable, and suggests some craving for power which was not part of her characterization in the first five episodes. Meanwhile, any of those attributes either from the initial episodes or the book that cast a poor light on Rhaenyra have been done away with, making for an irrational moral deficit behind Alicent betraying her best friend. So really there are three things the showrunners decided to do on their own accord which they did not have to be done: 1. Primarily situate Alicent's character around jealousy and ambition in the course of two episodes 2. Remove any flaws that might be suggested onto Rhaenyra by the first five episodes or the book so that viewers will like her 3. Transfer those flaws over to Alicent The work done to make a compelling character with Alicent are gone. The hypothetical reasons you offered might work on an intellectual level, but for audiences her behavior AND overarching goal are not sensible or emotionally resonant. Having a backstory that retroactively explains a villains origins does not make their actions as the villain any more sympathetic. By turning Rhaenyra into a person without those systemic flaws (from either the book or the show) such as her undiplomatic nature, her entitlement, her disinterest in duty, her jealousy, or her bitterness Alicent gets the short end of the stick. It removes from the Greens any rational and in turns puts the Blacks into a heroic framework as their end goal, that is to protect the female claimants rights, is fundamentally good. So now all their crimes are diluted into a means to the end like their murder of that nameless guard. And for a story with two duel perspectives offering ambiguous morality this set up fails.

I'm not angry dude, and I'm not talking about head-canon. Like if you want a conversation you have to try to understand what the other person is saying and not just throw around a bunch of colorful language. It's hard for you to prove me wrong when you argue stuff like: Rhaenyra never threatened Alicent's kids. Because that is my point. The Rhaenyra from the last two episodes was providing Alicent's children protection via a marriage pact. The problem with that is it ruins Alicent's perceived motivations and bestows onto her a lust for power not established in the previous five episodes. The characters from the book both had their share of flaws and could be conceived in a multitude of ways by the showrunners, but they decided to exclude any of the worst characteristics of Rhaenyra from the book while adding faults to Alicent not directly apparent from F&B (which already portrayed her in a negative light). Which not only undermines the characterization of the initial episodes, but also frames the Blacks and Greens in terms of hero vs. villains diluting the actions of the players based on which team they're on making for less compelling television (IMO).

Their cause is depicted as heroic which dilutes much of their methods. Meanwhile Alicent's motivations aren't even coherent as her lust for power isn't given a reason to exist, especially as it is at the expense of her own children.

It's a flaw given the first five episodes, and it is a flaw in how it hurts the main premise which is a duel perspective between two factions. This isn't AGOT where the Starks were clearly our main family. Here both the Greens and the Blacks share the perspective role and behave as main characters to the story. That is why Martin wanted both sides to have nuance and sympathy rather than allow for one to to be cast in a heroic light. At least for these last two episodes, that is what has happened. And in that regard the character dynamics have been diluted into the framework of good vs evil.

Well I do too but only because its obvious the showrunners want me to hate Alicent and love Rhaenyra.

Yeah, but it does that for the Blacks as well. The show was suppose to add nuance to the characters by adding to their motivations, psychological depth, and personal history. Which again it did in the first five episodes. Rhaenyra was shown to be entitled, flippant, repellent to duty, while also wanting the throne more than anything. Alicent showed no predisposition towards wanting the throne and could only be convinced of that direction if her children's lives were at stake. Then all the sudden she spurns every offer of protection in favor of putting her eldest on the throne. What are her motivations but a lust for power? And in that case why should be care since there is no basis for that predisposition that we can understand besides "muh, Alicent evil".

You're shooting from the hip right now and need to stop with the "I have no idea". Reading your reply it seems obvious we are talking passed one another, maybe you need to slow down and go back to my original post. The only point I was making was that F&B never depicted Alicent as being jealous of Rhaenyra. As for Rhaenyra, when the book openly provides passages that imply a certain dynamic, it is not just fake information since Martin is writing a drama, not an actual history. For what we have we know Alicent, her stepmother, outshines her step-daughter in court, surpassing her in beauty, as the princess loses her moniker the "realms delight" and retreats from the public eye. Having possession of Dragonstone doesn't require one to live there, no more than Stannis disappearing from public eye was deemed suspicious. There are multiple passages where Rhaenyra is described as unlikable and choosing to ignore them doesn't play well to this idea that there is a definitive source material. But really, this is getting a little out of hand seeing as you think I'm trying to make out Alicent from the book into hero which I'm not. We don't have to be this combative, since especially Alicent and Rhaenyra were feuding in the books and not just over one being skinny and the other not. But it doesn't really matter because this is not really what we're talking about. Yes they are. Ok, ok. I am not making that argument. I don't think it's true and it's obvious from reading this you think I'm arguing something that I'm not. I said IF Alicent had reason to believe this or if Rhaenyra showed herself capable of doing it that might give the Greens some real moral fidelity that as of now doesn't exist. As in the first five episodes the more multifaceted version of Alicent was shown to have no ambition for the throne and would only desire it if the lives of her children were at risk. But then in the time jump she shows neither concern for children's well being but just pure ambition for power which contradicts the first five episodes and makes for a less compelling story with a more generic villain. I was taking you are argument to it's logical conclusion. If it doesn't matter why Alicent did what she did what are we discussing? I mean do you even know what my position is? Can you recite because elsewise I think we are arguing about different things. Incidentally, I think if you understood what my point was you'd be a lot less combative. My point isn't that Rhaenyra is actually evil, my point is the show excised her potential flaws from both the book and the first five episodes to make a character against which Alicent loses all credibility and becomes a generic unlikable villain. Which is bad for a story trying to get us to sympathize with two perspective sides and argue among ourselves. I'm not saying that, like slow it down from a sec. I'm saying that making someone do an evil think for evil reasons does not leave said character with a lot of nuance nor does it all viewers to sympathize with their faction. I'm agreeing that is what the show as of the last two episodes is depicting, and I'm saying it is making the story worst. F&B was vague enough to give the showrunners room to invent their own motivations and dynamics in the characters, which they did. Now it is even worse because Rhaenyra has been made more upright and heroic than in the books dilluting not just her faction but removing any depth to Alicent. Now the greens are just power hungry usurpers while the Blacks are narratively speaking the heroes. All the Black characters will be consequence be framed under the supervision of this heroic goal that whitewashes them and dilutes the emotional conflict into a one sided affair. I'm not saying she does. Are you certain you read my post? And they shouldn't be. Which is my point. F&B gave enough room for the Blacks to be characterized as villains and the Greens. It was the shows prerogative to ad nuance to both sides (as Martin so wishes) and make for a compelling duel perspective narrative but instead after five episodes of set up drops the ball and turns the Greens into generic villains when they didn't have to. But like it doesn't have to. Hereditary rule is not the be all end of all of leadership. Alicent could have been given real reason to not want to see Rhaenyra in power. Instead she is willing to put her children in harms way for a throne we are given no explicit motivation for why she should want. Which dilutes the character depth on both sides. Incidentally I agree, which is what makes this show suck so hard post time skip. I have no clue how your post got two likes when you didn't read my reply or understand what I was saying. I feel like I just wasted 7 minutes writing this up right, please don't make that so.

Not really because this narrative is framed with both sides sharing the main perspective while AGOT was literally from the viewpoint of the Starks. They were the main characters and Tyrion was just the black sheep meant to signify how evil the Lannisters could be while keeping track of their movements. The story post book 3 is something else entirely to the point it doesn't really have a narrative core yet.

I had a dream Harwin Strong is still alive. Did he survive the fire because I think they showed him escaping the fire in a cloak.

I think Ryan said HotD is the definitive retelling of F&B. Being faithful to Martin’s canon would require keeping to the events in the order they happen (which incidentally has been to the show’s detriment) but the actual character psychology was left to the showrunners. If we go by F&B Rhaenyra is a bitter and vengeful queen. Alicent is the wicked step mother out for stepdaughter’s inheritance. Niether are very compelling because it’s a shallow framework from which to understand the mindset of a person and does not allow for a great deal of investment. If HBO is to stay true to the spirit of Martin, then we should take him at his word when he says this story he envisions (but was not able to fully realize) is not about bad vs. good but a nuanced rivalry where both sides might garner sympathy. It’s possible, but the question is if it is desirable for the show to frame it as such. If Alicent is driven by jealousy then her side has very little moral fidelity and her character becomes a device to make Rhaenyra more likable offering viewers an easy side to root for. But a conflict where both sides are given a perspective yet one is not able to capture any support plays into a one dimensional narrative experience that to me does not make good television. Martin isn’t a historian and is prone to adding drama and suspense to his fake history. It is not trying to be a dry or scientific retelling but a broad overview with personality, color, and tension good enough for a TV adaption. F&B also had murder mysteries were the answer was not immediately revealed as to play up the readers engagement rather than have them become bored or disinterested. It all DOES have baring on the truth as he is writing the story the way he wants. Sympathetic in that their characters can not only be understood on an intellectual level but can also garner an emotional understanding from viewers that develops alongside the character. Alicent disregarding the safety of her children in pursuit of the throne against an old friend who is attempting to mend ties might be comprehended on an intellectual level but that character lacks any nuance in her hatred and does not give a convincing reason as to why we should care about her motives. Which just leaves a generic villain that frames all the Blacks in terms of the ‘good’ side diluting their characters as well. Alicent doesn’t need to be a generic villain. She could be given nuance and depth as for her reasons in opposing Rhaenyra. That would have made both sides more compelling. It was not the fault of the first five episodes for establishing a complex emotional relationship, it’s the fault of the last two episodes for ignoring that setup.

It is somewhat ironic as someone who argues that the show's recent representation of Alicent/Rhaenyra is consistent with the source material you reject stuff that was actually alluded to in the book while believing something that was never even implied. Regardless of what houses the Blacks were able to rally, at court Alicent outshone Rhaenyra who was not actually described as a free spirit but someone who lost much of her acclaim and had to retreat from the eyes of the public. You can believe the opposite, but really it goes back to the point: Why did the show excise the negative attributes from Rhaenyra and shift them over to Alicent. Rhaenyra does not show real frustration or bitterness at the fact that her step-mother is dedicated to seeing her fail. She takes it at the chin and has these general likeability that makes Alicent seem even more despicable in her crusade to the point the greens lose any nuance they might have had in order to better the story.