Jump to content

Lord Varys

Members
  • Posts

    25,265
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Lord Varys

  1. The two-parter establishes that he just met him in passing when Pike was promoted to Fleet Captain. Yes, and one could use that fact if they actually want to do another Kirk show after SNW. Sulu wears a lot of heads in the show, so that's not indicative of much.
  2. This change does effect the lore to no small degree. ASoIaF established the Velaryons as very close cousins to the Targaryens - their defining trait in ACoK when Davos first encounters Lord Monford Velaryon is that they provided brides for three Targaryen princes. They are one step away from royalty themselves. Since the Targaryen looks in the show don't reflect their Velaryon ancestry (assuming they are all black as seems to be the case) this marriage would be by default unusual and thus more akin to Prince Harry marrying Meghan Markle than, say, Elizabeth Windsor marrying Philip Battenberg. It makes the Targaryens less elitist, less focused on 'purity of blood' and is thus quite a substantial change. It will also encourage interpretations viewing the Velaryons as outsiders and upstarts, adding a racial dimension to the rejection of Rhaenys and Laenor as monarchs that clearly isn't there in the book. Even if the show doesn't make that explicit, it will be implicitly there since the audience does live in a racist world. Corlys Velaryon is the epitome of nobility and greatness in the books. He is the most famous man of his generation, the richest lord in Westeros, a man more than well-suited to be the consort of a queen. He neither looks like an outsider nor is he one.
  3. Well, usally Star Trek doesn't kill a lot of the main cast, anyway, so knowing how Pike and Sam Kirk end up or knowing that Uhura and Chapel won't get killed doesn't change *that much*. And there are interesting new characters to be explored her - Number One, the Khan girl, Sam Kirk (which we don't know exactly). I certainly do agree that this isn't exactly the best era to make another Star Trek show - but that was already the problem with Discovery. If they had wanted to make a silly war, then they should have gone back to the Enterprise era to cover the Earth-Romulan war, and if you want to make a kind of blank slate, the early Federation era could have been great, too, or as I said, about fifty years before TNG. Or they could have just repeated the TNG stick and jumped ahead a hundred years into the future, possibly by picking up where DS9 left off, and showing us how the Dominion folks are joining the Federation, and exploration of the Gamma Quadrant is really taking up speed. Or one could go with a really new thing (for Trek) and have either have a ship explore another galaxy or have them make contact with an extragalactic species.
  4. She knew. She tells people when discussing the death of Jon Arryn. LOL, no. The boar was Cersei being very lucky. Just because Robert is completely drunk doesn't mean he will get himself killed. And Cersei only went with that after Ned told her he would tell Robert about the twincest. She couldn't foresee that they would be facing a huge boar now the circumstances if or when they were facing it. In fact, this whole thing is so tangential that you cannot really say Robert was murdered. Lancel feels that he killed him, but that's just his guilt talking. Possibly, but Robert wasn't that bad of a fighter and they were fighting with tourney weapons. Dealing him a mortal blow and not looking like an actual assassin who wielded real steel would have been kind of difficult. But in any case - I just don't think Cersei had a large pool of willing kingslayers at her disposal. Not if she actually thought Hugh may have known something about the twincest. And not if she knew Ned wanted to question him ... which he did, and which she could have easily found out.
  5. She knew Jon had been investigating the parentage of her children and she feared that he may have told Lysa something about that. According to Varys, Cersei intended to murder Robert during the melée which is why she publicly forbid him to join the fighters, goading him into defying her and definitely participating. Ned felt that was improper for a king and dissuaded his old buddy, but we cannot rule out the possibility that Cersei had an actual plan how to kill Robert during the melée. And Gregor would be the best candidate there since I don't see anybody else (aside from Jaime, who never indicates to have been privy to such a conspiracy) having the audacity or strength to try to do this. And if he was Cersei's man for that, she could very well have also told him to murder somebody as unimportant as Hugh. We know why - Lysa went to Littlefinger for help because Jon had told her and Walder Frey at the nameday tourney that young Robert would go as ward to Stannis to live on Dragonstone. She wanted to prevent that. That she would kill for that is made pretty explicit in AGoT already when she threatens to kill Catelyn should she try to take her son from her - when Cat leaves the Eyrie she offers to make Robert a ward at Winterfell. Littlefinger (and perhaps Lysa as well) know about the twincest which is why they decided that Lysa sent the letter to Cat implicating the Lannisters. They know the Lannisters have an even better motive to murder Jon.
  6. I honestly don't think SNW is going to (intend to) reboot TOS. They have their own cast, there might be guest appearances and stuff, but their goal isn't to make a new TOS. A show more like TOS, yes, but not a carbon copy or new version of it. What I could see is that they might end up with a spinoff Kirk show, but even that they could do with first having him as a captain of another ship (with some of the TOS crew already there, say, Bones) only for him to eventually take over the Enterprise. If they had a new Enterprise show with Kirk then they could, in my opinion, even jump ahead in the timeline and stuff, but they should try not to contradict any of the old episodes. It could be fun for such a series to finish the five year journey of the Enterprise under Kirk, for instance, and revisiting some of the old places or continue interesting plotlines.
  7. Yes, that's possible, although I'd say that it could then be a TOS prequel - the show doesn't start when Kirk takes over the Enterprise, he has been commanding it for some time, so there would be room for one or a couple of seasons with Kirk in command without that 'replacing' TOS as such. Yes, of course, that's shit, but design changes are just part of that. They happened all the time, although rarely in this radical manner.
  8. I don't think they bothered much with continuity back then, but they tried later. And while I'm by no means an expert, I'm also not aware of any glaring inconsistencies in TOS. True enough, I only think they will get to the wheelchair if they write a proper conclusion for the series. If they end it earlier they don't have to revisit this thing, of course.
  9. Well, Kirk with a Klingon half-brother would, so far, not contradict any established facts ;-). Don't think they intend to be incoherent. I mean, they went with the entire Delta ray accident of Pike's in Discovery and also have that as a crucial plot point in SNW. That's not something you do when you don't bother with established facts.
  10. A consort to a monarch - especially a woman - can and often is her spouse's most important adviser. That isn't a given if the marriage is just arranged and the spouses don't get along, but in a working marriage that's often how it goes. And Sansa clearly is groomed for that role - the role of a queen consort or a lady consort. But both things also prepare her to rule in her own right, in the name of an absent husband, or a minor child. Once you understand how power works, you can use female coded power to also rule on your own. We have to wait and see - I just find it sad that Rhaenyra either doesn't have a lively, happy side in the show or they chose to not show that at a moment when she should be very happy. In addition, she doesn't seem particularly angry at her own wedding when this clearly should have been the case. Rhaenyra would be a person who doesn't bite her tongue, who doesn't control her face or her emotion so that people see her as a dutiful and obedient daughter. She would have shown to everyone that she didn't like Laenor and didn't like it that they forced her to marry him. As for Eustace: Folks who view him as a Green partisan are, in my opinion, dead wrong. Gyldayn only tells us that he allegedly didn't like Rhaenyra, personally, while Mushroom supposedly did like her (although that affection didn't stop Mushroom from spreading and inventing ugly tales about Rhaenyra, so one cannot say that Mushroom liking somebody resulted in him not throwing dirt at them) but that isn't the same as Eustace being a Green partisan. Him exonerating Aegon II by claiming he did not want to be king turns Aegon into a better person, but isn't a statement that he should have been king. And the story about Rhaenyra bleeding on the Iron Throne is a classic symbol/plot device of doom in Westeros, which may have more to do with the fact that her rule was indeed short and she was killed, not so much a statement that she had no right to sit there. Well, they certainly are free to change the ending if they so choose. I think they should be faithful to the source material, but I'd not complain all that loudly if they changed Rhaenyra's death from the pitiful thing we get in the book to a more heroic death scene and/or turn the rise of Aegon III into something that's clearly Rhaenyra being triumphant in death - which she pretty much is in the book but it is not emphasized all that much. The war is continued and won in Rhaenyra's name (e.g. the Lads fighting under Rhaenyra's banner on the Kingsroad) and the war effort continued because of the letters Rhaenyra wrote and received at Duskendale. Cregan and Jeyne raised their last armies on behalf of Rhaenyra, not in the name of Aegon III, nor did they only raise those armies once Aegon II didn't offer them favorable terms. I wrote a long post in the past about how no real world historian would consider Rhaenyra a pretender if she was a real world medieval monarch. She was crowned and she actually commanded all the necessary trappings of power (sat on the Iron Throne). The decrees and laws she made during her reign survived her downfall (she legitimized the Hull boys, her tax laws were only overturned by Tyland Lannister as Hand of Aegon III, she named new Lords of Stokeworth and Rosby, etc.) She is based on Empress Matilda - but Matilda is not considered the first post-Conquest English queen regnant because she was never properly crowned queen, so the parallel doesn't really fit. The original AGoT appendix implies that Aegon II was the rightful/chosen heir of his father, and Rhaenyra was a kind of Daemon Blackfyre who challenged Aegon because she felt she should be queen - there is no indication there that she was her father's chosen heir nor that she actually sat the Iron Throne and ruled the Realm for a time. Even more so, Aegon II is formally deposed when Rhaenyra takes the capital in 130 AC and is only formally restored to the throne at the end of that year. No real world historian would say Aegon II reigned or ruled while Rhaenyra sat on the Iron Throne nor during the interregnum between Rhaenyra's flight and Aegon's formal restoration. The appendix of AGoT is wrong when it claims Aegon II was king from 129-131 AC. A correct list would go like that: Viserys I (103-129 AC) Aegon II (129-130 AC; deposed) Rhaenyra (130 AC) [Interregum, 'Moon of Madness' (130 AC; three rival pretenders)] Aegon II (restored; 130-131 AC) Aegon III (131-157 AC) That is even more the case since George actually dropped/cut the sentence from TPatQ claiming that Aegon II had formally decreed that Rhaenyra never was a queen. Something like that certainly could have unmade Rhaenyra's queenship in the eyes of the general public. We don't know why that is the case, folks did point it out during the editing process. I guess one reason could be that George feels that neither Aegon III nor Viserys II or their descendants would allow such a decree to stand. Even if both brothers ended up loathing their mother and father for the war they had to suffer through - both would have hated their step-grandmother Alicent and her ilk much more - and Aegon III desperately tried to defend his mother against his evil uncle, so it is pretty much out of the question that he wouldn't clear her name and honor her memory if he had to do that due to a decree made by Aegon II. As you say, if Maegor isn't a mere pretender, then Rhaenyra shouldn't be, either. Just because her reign was much shorter doesn't change the fact that she did rule - and her claim was certainly much better than Maegor's ever was since he was neither the chosen heir of the Conqueror nor the heir of King Aenys. And when George created his new big pretender in FaB with Aenys' eldest son, Aegon, then the youth's moniker 'Aegon the Uncrowned' and 'Aegon the Pretender' reflects the fact that, unlike Maegor or Rhaenyra, Aegon was never actually crowned king. That is a big part of the reason why he isn't counted as an official monarch, either. The other is that he never actually ruled, never sat on the Iron Throne, but was basically just a rebel with a not-so-large army. That is usually not enough to be counted as a monarch even if you are the rightful heir. I'm going with the idea that all Velaryons are black - which is what I think is implied by the fact that there are much more black Velaryons to be seen in the mass scenes in the teaser trailer than just the immediate descendants of Corlys. Certainly, they could go with the second Daemon and Corlys' father (who is not confirmed to be Corwyn so far) having married black women and I'd appreciate it if they did that - but I'm not holding my breath.
  11. Sure, but it is never wrong to think how things still might make sense, no? And Kirk not really knowing Christopher Pike is a very crucial plot point in the TOS two-parter. If they are respecting things, they would not go really against that.
  12. A few thoughts about SNW: Rewatching 'The Menagerie' definitely establishes that Jim never worked under Pike. He just met him in passing when he was promoted to Fleet Captain, so whatever role Jim might play in the second season of the show shouldn't involve him serving on the Enterprise but rather include interactions with other crew members - one would think about his brother and Spock. In fact, they could depict their first meeting and the beginning of the their friendship there. More importantly, despite the bleakness of the vision of Pike's ultimate fate there are ways around that. We don't know what kind of life awaits him on Talos IV nor how long it is going to last. The Talosians are a very advanced species, so it might actually be possible that he is going to be healed there. They could even combine that with a plot to rejuvenate Talosian culture - the kind of bleak pronouncement that interaction with them is going to infect others with the same kind of mental game decadence the Talosians were suffering from doesn't feel right to me. Back to 'Picard': That show really liked to kill people, no? Original Soji (which I actually think was the best character played by the actress), Bruce Maddox, Icheb & Hugh (which both sucked very hard!), Will and Deanna's son, Data, possibly Evil Soji, biological Picard, Elnor, Fake Laris, in a sense Jurati, Rios, and Q (sort of, since we never saw him die). Most, if not all of them, sucked, perhaps with the exception of Data's death. And speaking of Elnor - shouldn't he have been there in any case, regardless whether Q offered a surprise or not. If the gang are back right before the explosion then all people who still lived back then should also be back alive. After all, Elnor only died in an alternative reality.
  13. I don't think such a small family tree would make much sense as an intro, even more so since most of Jaehaerys' children are dead ends. If they were to do that one would expect that they highlight the kings, specifically, and that would mean to start with Aegon the Conqueror and his sister-wives (they could drop their parents, of course). And thinking about this - so far no indication that there will be cameos of the obscure Targaryens who might still be alive in the era? Archmaester Vaegon should be at the Great Council, at least, as should be Saera's sons. All of them, including Saera, could pop up later during the show for some reason. That kind of thing could be fun.
  14. If they were to include Valaena and Alyssa Velaryon in such a family tree they would really have some explaining to do ;-). But given the title of the show it would make sense to actually depict a Targaryen family tree in the intro. The idea isn't bad, though. Although I'm sure the setting will be explained - there could be a Prologue in the first episodes giving us a voiceover narration of some Targaryen history, or we could have dialogue explaining the background. Harrold Westerling was described as a man of the old guard in the promo material, a man who still remembers stuff from the times of the Old King, etc. Since they have the Great Council there will be a Jaehaerys I in that show - and he, too, could be used as somebody who establishes certain things for the general audience by talking to young Alicent, say. In fact, one would expect them include nursemaid Alicent or references to her in the show in light of that. I'd imagine that they also go with text giving years (101 AC, 103 AC, 105 AC, etc.) whenever necessary. If they establish that this means 'after Aegon's Conquest' early in the show, then it certainly should work and it would be a better solution than having them text telling 'two years earlier' or 'three years later'. And they are also likely to go with place name text in the first episode(s).
  15. While that certainly is true, George certainly has a tendency to have a broader variety among men than among women. It is good, for instance, that Aegon II is petulant, incompetent man-child and not some kind of awesome warrior-king. But for variety we do have Aemond and Daeron at his side, just as we have Daemon. And if you look at all the princes in the books it is a kind of letdown that both Aenys' sons and Jaehaerys I's elder sons are all great and perfect princes. Aemon and Baelon are super guys, and Aegon the Uncrowned and his brother Viserys are also all fine warriors and knights-to-be. There are no eccentricities there, not even so much a hint of 'Targaryen madness' nor of the physical and mental frailties they could have suffered from. The only non-conforming Targaryen woman is Visenya. All the others could just as well be common noblewomen - that their are royalty or even dragonriders doesn't change anything. In context, though, the character of Rhaenyra certainly had the potential of being exceptional simply because of the framework of the plot (which originally, in the appendix of AGoT, indicated that she was the usurper, the one who couldn't suffer the idea that Aegon was following their father). She is defying the rules and leads one faction in a devastating civil war. One can make a case that she should have been more like a female version or Daeron I, Aegon I, or perhaps even Maegor the Cruel than just a normal/average woman. Rhaenyra could have had female warriors in her employ (like Alysanne had a female bodyguard), she could have had women on her council, etc. And while it is good to see the likes of Rhaena, Aerea, Alyssa, and Baela (even Saera) in the book they are all failures who cannot be warriors or really openly defy gender rules or take their lives into their own hands. I mean, we have another character like that with Daena the Defiant (and perhaps other Targaryen women further down the road) and folks certainly had good reasons to imagine that a dragonrider would have had more freedoms and more ways to express herself and influence politics than a dragonless princess. And the problem with title of 'The Princess and the Queen' just is that it doesn't finish the story of the queen nor is it, in the end, really a conflict between the two women. That's just a small part of the larger story and their story isn't even at the heart of the novella. If that's Criston Cole and Harwin or Joffrey - and I'm not really bothering with the actors these days - then the setting was changed, since this really seems to be indoors rather than on the tourney ground out in the open. Another instance of overdramatisation, since tourney injuries can be ignored or explained away more easily (think of Gregor's madness during the Tourney of the Hand which had no consequences) than a brawl or outright attack in the throne room or wherever that scene takes place. Alysanne isn't so much a ruler but a ruler's consort and first/principal adviser. She certainly shapes policy to a very large degree ... but mostly behind the scenes as the person who either puts an idea in Jaehaerys' head or the person who forces him to go through with something. How little actual power she had can, I think, best be drawn from the rather pitiful scene where she speaks to the Archmaesters of the Citadel and they all nod and smile and then basically tell the queen to go fuck herself because they won't change anything. If she had had real power there, then there would have been female students at the Citadel - and eventually female maesters in Westeros. And it context it is a pity that this didn't actually happen for a time. If Rhaenys/Visenya or Alysanne had insisted that a daughter or other close female relation of theirs wanted to be a maester ... then, well, this should have happened. That is the power of royalty. In fact, one imagines that even Alicent Hightower could have pulled that one off - combining in her person the power of House Targaryen as well as the power of the Hightowers of Oldtown. 'Pampered princess' to me means in this context that Rhaenyra never had to fight for anything (until she had). She was her daddy's favorite and he spoiled her, much more, one imagines, than Jaehaerys spoiled Saera, and that shaped her personality. She should be portrayed and act as if the world revolved around her, belonged to her, and nothing would ever change that. When her father forces her to marry Laenor, for instance, the way to depict her wouldn't be to show her being afraid but very angry that her father dared to take something away from her she viewed as her own. The vibe you get from the girl in the teaser is that she is pretty little doll which is used as a pawn. How to deal with Viserys' story is one of the big mysteries in the show. The other is the disappearance of Aegon II. If they show what he does on Dragonstone then they spoil the surprise. If he is absent all that time he is simply not really an important character. But they should take the risk of turning him mostly into a puppet/absent guy, so that the focus can remain on Alicent. They also could show Viserys' survival and give him a story of his own in Essos, creating tension about if and how he is going to be united with his family. It would also need only minor tweaks in the plot to help him make an impact in the Dance, say, by moving the role the Arryn navy plays at the end of the war to Viserys and Alyn. They could also give him an interesting love story with Larra and have him show his political talents by convincing the Rogares to enter into the war on his mother's side and perhaps even sway the rulers of Lys in some public speech to follow their example. Since that would all happen in the wake of the Gullet this would be no small feat at all. Originally, I thought George wanted Viserys to be the Arya of the Dance era - that he would have a pretty big journey all on his own until he was reunited with his brother. That is something the show could do easily enough without much changes - say, by having disguise himself in Lys and having some adventures of his own before he ends up with the Rogares. Hell, one could even turn this into a rather interesting courtship scenario where a disguised Viserys meets and befriends the most beautiful Larra Rogare before she actually knows who he is.
  16. Both ideas do make sense. Sandor knows his brother's cruelty, but Cersei also does have a motive. She wouldn't want to silence him because she murdered Jon Arryn (she didn't) but like Ned she may have suspected that Jon told his squire something he shouldn't know (twincest stuff). After all, Cersei also is afraid that Lysa knows something which is why she wanted young Robert to become Tywin's ward at Casterly Rock. We should also consider that, according to Varys at least, Cersei planned to murder Robert via the tourney, so it would fit her modus operandi to use Gregor as an instrument there. Who knows? Perhaps she wanted to have Gregor to fight in the melée as well, dealing Robert a mortal blow in the fighting. Robert was a very big man, drunk or not, so you would need a pretty strong and determined man to kill him. If this was actually Cersei's plan then Gregor is the best candidate there - I honestly cannot think of any other candidate. Sandor would likely not dare, Cersei's pets in the KG are even less likely to do something like that, and Cersei doesn't have any other lickspittles who are willing to slay a king. There is always Jaime, of course. He would have done it ... but he would be an utter fool to become a kingslayer twice over.
  17. I guess there is potential for flashbacks, especially since it seems to be very modern these days to use them all the time. For instance, the Rhaenys-Rhaenyra talk taking place around the time of her investiture could mean that we are going to get the Great Council basically as a story Rhaenys is telling Rhaenyra to illustrate why she might face adversity in the future. But then, of course, Rhaenyra would have been at the Great Council with her father, and since young Rhaenyra seems to have been aged up she may have been there as a young woman in the show, too. LOL, I just remembered how the first novella there was named 'The Princess and the Queen', ending with the princess being eaten and the queen disappearing without a trace. That was about as anti-feminist as you can get. I'd say Rhaenyra's ending is much worse than Dany's - Dany at least accomplishes something, turns herself into a 'great figure' (although, of course, she is an utter and complete failure in the end) from scratch, while Rhaenyra is just her daddy's favorite and cannot really cope with the fact that her stepmother and half-siblings don't want to submit to her. That isn't exactly the setting you want for a heroic or good character. And then Rhaenyra is destroyed completely, both mentally and physically and almost nothing remains of her (I hope George has the decency to eventually reveal that Aegon II or Aegon III cremated the remnants of her leg and interred the ashes with the other Targaryens - if Daenerys or Aegon ever get to Dragonstone we might get a scenes where they pay a visit to the great ancestors they never met). But then - Rhaenyra isn't a girlboss character. She is a pampered princess and about as progressive as Queen Victoria (who ensured that women would not become physicians), Maggie Thatcher, or Angela Merkel. She is not fighting for her sex/gender nor is she in any other way reformist. A faithful adaptation would include all that. Of course, it is not that likely that the show will do that, capering to modern audiences and the like. In a faithful setting Syrax will also only be Rhaenyra's mount. She will not ride her in battle, ever, and one can assume that the character in the book found the idea that she would have 'to fight' beneath her unless absolutely necessary (one imagines her returning to Dragonstone for another dragon implies she (also) wanted to use that dragon to fight). Aegon III's rise to the throne is also nothing good in context. He is a broken child, unable to rule in his own right, basically the worst kind of king the Westerosi could get after a civil war.
  18. Yes, with the weirdo pilot and all that ... but the entire premise so anti Star Trek starting with 'shoot first' and then on to the spore drive nonsense, the drama over Burnham's 'crime', a mirror universe guy masquerading as a Starfleet captain who happens to be the best help in the war, all that martial Klingon stuff, etc. And while I really like Burnham as the show progresses, turning her into Spock's foster sister whose parents developed super tech was also a little bit much to put it mildly. But much of what they were doing could have worked in a different era, say, set about 50 years or so prior to TNG (certainly not the Klingon war, but some other war, perhaps, or at least the general attitude). Just binged most episodes of Prodigy - and that is a truly great show, not just to introduce young audiences to Star Trek but also as a spinoff show to the Voyager stuff. I'm not sure why this is the case, but arcs and character development seem to work much better in cartoon shows these days.
  19. If it is Daemon, then this can make sense, although that would be another overly dramatic scene. One can only hope that they have not completely butchered the character of Viserys I. He and Aenys are the last kings one would expect to have their brothers thrown at their feet. I'm guessing 'the procession scene' with Mysaria and 'Daemon's guys' in the background where he has a dragon egg with him and is confronted by Otto, the Grand Maester, and some Kingsguard might either be his formal arrest or the funeral of Queen Aemma where Daemon might return the dragon egg. Hopefully the dragon egg stuff revolves around Mysaria wanting to get her hands on a dragon and we don't get other brazier shenanigans. Yes, it seems like that. If stoney-faced, controlled Rhaenyra is their general take on the character then they have completely changed her. George's Rhaenyra is a compulsive, slightly unhinged person, who is prone to work herself into a frenzy. It is far to early to tell, of course, but I'm not sure if that's a good sign. The way to present her would be to make her much more open - a pampered, spoiled princess isn't reserved, she has no need to. She follows her whims and always gets what she wants. And Rhaenyra apparently did think she would get her iron chair - after all her 'faction' was not just ill-prepared for a coup or a subsequent succession war ... they were not prepared at all. The way she is presented - this kind of determinism indicating she is surrounded by enemies she has to fight against - could very well indicate she is Rhaenys' daughter and she had to reclaim what had been withheld from her mother when in truth her father gives her what actually should have been given to Rhaenys' son. While I do like that Rhaenys and Rhaenyra seem to be presented as having a close relationship I also think that's something that they should (have) develop(ed) only after Rhaenyra married Laenor and she and the Velaryons had reasons to get close(r). But Rhaenys talks with young Rhaenyra in the scene, and the dialogue suggests they talk around the time Rhaenyra is named Heir Apparent. There Rhaenys should be bitter that the throne isn't hers and that Rhaenyra is now promised a throne that by right should go to her son. Oh, like with Aemond's betrothal, they would not have to go through with something like that. Just draw up a contract/form an alliance and set the date for the wedding in the post-war era. Jace also made such marriage contracts for his younger brother and unborn children. It could also just have come up with Alicent refusing to do it - once she stepped down as queen the true power at court past back to her father and eventually Aegon II and Criston Cole. The latter two could have had a vested interest to get rid of Alicent for this or that reason. And it is not that there weren't suitable matches Alicent there. For example, Lord Tyrell was a child, true, but there would have been male Tyrells at Highgarden - uncles, cousins, and male relations of the dowager lady. Oh, that one is also a kind of weirdo underdeveloped plotline. Rogar took the Targaryens in, and they must have spent time together before the proclamation, possibly hiding them for years at Storm's End. Jaehaerys (and Gyldayn) may not have known, but the way to interpret this would be that both the Handship and Alyssa's hand were the price for Baratheon support in the war against Maegor. Rogar not remarrying after the death of his first wife would indicate that he was originally content to leave Storm's End to Borys and his children ... which only changed with the late arrival of Boremund. That is what I mean by underdeveloped. The show can now either develop this more, giving individual characters their own motivations - inventing friendships and marriage ties and other things - or go with a bland, generic 'women should not rule' take ... which is likely a too easy answer for the outcome of the Great Council just as 'Egg being the best claimant' is likely a far too easy answer for the outcome of the second Great Council. For the later Blacks we do have a kind of solid basis at the Great Council with the Velaryons supporters, but the Greens are completely undeveloped. The Hightowers are relations of Aegon II, and the Lannisters seem to have been bought with a seat on the Small Council, and Borros has to be recruited after Viserys' death. It could have been great to see how, say, fervent supporters of Viserys in 101 AC subsequently become determined Blacks because Rhaenyra happens to be Viserys's daughter - and the loyalty to the father is transferred to the daughter who he chose to be his heir (this seems to be the case with Lyman Beesbury who most likely supported Viserys rather than Laenor in 101 AC) - while others end up in the Green camp for different reasons. Completely different thing: Since Corlys is the guy with the voiceover lines - I suddenly realized that this is the kind of stuff you might tell yourself or your homosexual son when discussing whether your (grand)sons truly have to be your blood or not - 'History remembers names, not blood' - that kind of thing. And the legacy he is talking about that is that the Velaryon name be never forgotten ... never mind who fathered said Velaryons. Or so one could interpret that. Also - what about Viserys' crown? That thing looks pretty ugly - why couldn't they go with the circlet with the gemstones. That looks nice enough and it would also make a fine crown for Rhaenyra later on.
  20. I'm actually still flabbergasted that Discovery wasn't what SNW is now. Philippa and Michael could have been and done what they are now - it wouldn't have been hard at all. Discovery's first season is really crazy. And all it takes for that is some good lines and a lighter tone. And a decent attempt to recapture the designs of TOS (if you have to have to do it in that era).
  21. Adult Rhaenyra doesn't look like a pretty doll, true, but the one scene where she shows any other emotion than stony-faced determination is the little smile she gives Daemon during what seems to be this blood pact scene on the beach (not sure about that since the Green Council where the blood pact guys in the book ... and one shouldn't overdo that kind of thing). I guess that's going to turn out to be the scene where they decide to marry in the wake of Laena and Laenor's death, possibly before or immediately after the Vhagar incident. After the Rhaenyra fling is over Criston becomes more or less a background character with no agency of his own aside from organizing the Green war effort. That wouldn't be enough for him in the show, so I think the chance that he and Alicent will be more than just queen and Kingsguard is not unlikely. They could even make it so that they only start this affair after Viserys' death. In any case, though, I think both characters will have a private life of sorts throughout the show. George kind of dropped the ball with Alicent in the marriage department. Like Alyssa Velaryon, Alicent Hightower is a powerful dawager queen and still young enough to remarry and bear children when her husband dies. That they didn't reach out to great lords offering her hand in marriage in exchange for support doesn't make much sense. More importantly, after Rhaenyra's flight Alicent's hand in marriage would be the natural way to solidify the reign of the pretender kings - I very much liked the idea that Perkin forced Alicent to marry Trystane to strengthen his claim and give him more legitimacy ... and that this may have been the reason why Aegon II executed Trystane. George has precious few widows as it is ... but that they wouldn't (try) to remarry just makes no sense. In relation the sex/gender troubles in the succession department: Imagining a detailed adaptation kind of makes it clear that George greatly underdeveloped the earlier conflict leading up to the Great Council. Aside from Ellard Stark's alleged motivation to support Laenor (paypack for the New Gift) and the Velaryon-Baratheon kinship nobody gives us any reason why people would support the Velaryons. More importantly, we have no clue why individual lords leaned towards Viserys. And later, we have no idea at all why people became Blacks or Greens. The Great Council in itself is also kind of a missed chance since the whole conciliatory approach of Jaehaerys I could have resulted in a preliminary ruling - Viserys becoming the Heir Apparent but Laenor second in line as long as Viserys had no sons of his own (kind of mimicking the situation when Maegor died, when Aerea of the better claim was the presumptive heir while Jaehaerys had no children of his own). Viserys doubling down on that later in 105 AC to later re-include Laenor in his succession plans could have made this whole a more detailed mess, referencing both ancient (think about Augustus forcing Tiberius to adapt Germanicus to ensure the succession into the next generation, Henry VIII ruling drawing up the succession of his children, earlier Plantagenet kings making provisions for their various daughters should their sons predecease them, etc.). After all, the lords at the Great Council would have known that Viserys didn't have any sons yet, meaning that while the succession of the Old King would be settled there, his succession was unclear. Daemon as rival to Viserys/Rhaenyra doesn't make as much sense as a Velaryon rival having the better claim and controlling more and larger dragons.
  22. I guess that will turn out to be misdirection. Young Rhaenyra is very much shown as a pretty little doll with no agency of her own in the trailer ... but that's just the impression the images create (and it is clearly intentional that they don't allow her to speak). There might be some subtlety there with Daemon and Rhaenyra exchanging looks during the wedding dance, but the Rhaenyra from the book had to be forced to agree to the wedding ... she is not all that likely to participate in some kind of ritual dance. I must say I really don't like her facial expression in the investiture scene - she should be happy there or at least give any indication that she is emotionally involved. In the book she is much younger in 105 AC, of course, but one imagines that precocious seven-year-old Rhaenyra was enjoying herself when all the great dignitaries of the Realm did obeisance to her. But in the show she is much older, so she should be involved and very much enjoying the fact that she is now the Heir Apparent of the Iron Throne since that's most likely something she actually wants to be - else she would have told her dad to stick to Daemon. Having the Rhaenyra-Laenor wedding in the Red Keep adds another potential location to that event, by the way. FaB is inconsistent about the location, it could either have been on Driftmark or Dragonstone.
  23. General thing: What do you think? Should Star Trek just abandon the silly 'Our present has to be Trek's history' crap? That has to be constantly retconned. I mean, what are they going to do when World War III doesn't happen? Or when Zefram Cochrane isn't going to be born and the Vulcans don't show up on First Contact Day? It isn't that far away these days.
  24. Rewatch the TOS first season episode 'What Are Little Girls Made Of?' written by Robert Bloch. It is one of my favorites from the first season despite the fact that I misspelled his name - he is actually Dr. Roger Korby. In the first movie she is indeed a medical doctor in Starfleet, but in TOS it is confirmed that she is a lateral entry employee insofar as Starfleet is concerned - which can help explain why she is a nurse despite her scientific background. I meant Jim with the Kirk stuff. His brother only has to end up on Deneva in time so he can die there.
  25. Chapel is a trained biologist in TOS and only joined Kirk on the five year mission because she hoped she might find her husband-to-be. Once Roger turns out to be a robot she ends up joining the crew permanently. If they want consistency in SNW (and that's of a course a big 'if') then it can make sense for Chapel to be on the Enterprise for a limited gig, but she cannot really become a proper member of the crew. And so far that seems to be what they are flying with - she is only there because as a liaison because of that science joint venture with Starfleet. Similarly, I think, the show should also try to figure Kirk's biography in their show, for instance, referencing his time away from Earth on Tarsus IV where he met Kodos and stuff. Must say I really like the Khan girl in SNW. Anyway, random thought - I actually tried to rewatch the first Abrams movies some time ago but couldn't continue watching after the movie randomly mentioned fucking Cardassians. That was just so uncalled for and pointless. As for the Picard finale:
×
×
  • Create New...