Jump to content

Tyrion1991

Members
  • Content count

    744
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tyrion1991

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,064 profile views
  1. Tyrion1991

    Season 8 Predictions?

    But doesn't GRRM talk a lot about people choosing their matches for love bringing doom and death? For example in Arrianes POV she says of Dany that young girls always prefer dashing rogues to good boys who do their duty. This is in reference to Quentyn and her rebutting him could ruin her plans to win House Martel. Now, in books you could argue Jon Snow IS one of the good boys who does his duty but Iam not remotely convinced; I think GRRM intended him to be an "I will not bow before some ranger from the North" character. He's Aragon and especially on the show he's very much an idealised hero. He is the guy you want to be. So Dany loving Jon could bring doom and death for future generations. Marrying for love and incest has arguably caused the downfall of House targaryen and killed millions. Surely the bittersweet thing is for Dany to deny her heart for the sake of others?
  2. Tyrion1991

    Season 8 Predictions?

    But isn't the point that it would be the perfect political alliance if it weren't for the incest? Dany gets to unite the realm and be alongside the man she loves. Aragon and Arwen. It's too perfect. GRRM has, I think subverted the "hidden royal lineage" trope. Instead of it being something great that brings people together, it creates chaos and breaks what should have been a good thing. The show hasn't normalised incest. Craster. Joffrey. Targaryens generally. If you wanted to normalise incest you would play it down or avoid mentioning it. Indeed all the ills of the world can be traced to Cersei and Jamie's incest love. Basically, they already spent a season falling in love. The incest reveal has to be something to tear them apart.
  3. Tyrion1991

    Season 8 Predictions?

    OP I think they might be trying to mislead people with Jorah/Dany. Most of the second half of season 7 involved a lot Jorah seemingly acquiescing or even approving the budding relationship between Jon and Dany. Even to the point of the whole talk over Longclaw about kids. So its very much stressing that he is gracefully stepping aside and letting the better man come in. But, by the same token, this went hand in hand with them really pushing the relationship as this sweet and beautiful thing. Which in turn, is subverted at the end with the reveal that she is his Aunt. Making the relationship incest. Judging by Inside the Episode and the way it was shot and the whole "we have to tell him"; this is not going to end well. D&D even spelt this out emphatically "shes his aunt" and how what seemed so perfect and able to solve everything won't work out. Which I think means they must have been trying to throw us off, by implying that this was the final nail in the coffin for Jorah getting with Daenerys. But it can't be if Jon/Dany isn't going to pan out. Which itself raises the possibility that, actually Dany is going to end up with the guy whos been by her side from the beginning. Why would this happen? Three scenarios: 1. Jorah full on confesses his love for Dany and she returns his affection: In the show he actually hasn't done this. In season 7, there are a few moments, like at the beach where he's about to say something but cuts it short instead when Jon shows up. Plus when he learnt that Dany was going with Jon and the boat he did look a bit forlorn. So perhaps he decides to say how he actually feels and with all that's happening, end of the world, etc etc Dany does actually feel something and returns his love. A bit like the scene from A Storm of Swords only, it works out. 2. The Northern Lords/Vale/Riverlands makes their allegiance to Dany conditional on her marrying a Northern Lord Its already been teased that the Northern Lords, Vale and presumably Riverlords will have a problem with the Mad Queens Daughter. Sansa is clearly going to take exception to this. They all objected to Jon going, especially Lyanna Mormont. So they don't like Dany and adamantly want a free North. Now, Jon marrying Dany is the perfect get out of dodge thing here. But, D&D have made it clear that this Aragon/Arwen thing that solves everything won't happen because incest. So if she can't marry a Stark, then surely they will insist on the next best compromise which is that Dany marry a good Northern Lord to reassure them that their interests will be looked after. Which is a very short list when you think about it. Dany already told Daario that she was fully prepared to marry somebody for duty and to secure the realm. If she has to marry a Northerner to win over three realms then; may as well be Jorah. Which would be hilarious. Just think, who is most likely to be shouting this at Dany? Lyanna Mormont. Which means Dany can just drop the mike when she says she going to marry her cousin. 3. The Incest Child Okay hear me out on this next one. There was a lot of baby talk in season 7. There is very likely to be an incest baby inbound. However, they can't marry because of incest. The child will be a fatherless bastard because the secret has to be kept. This will cause big problems for Dany. Yes, she can legitimise bastards but this has risks and the very fact the father isn't known could lead people to suspect the truth that its Jon's child and that could in turn lead to the darker truth of the child being born of incest. Nobody, especially not the child, must know. So what Dany needs. - Is somebody with Northern blood to explain the childs features. - Somebody willing to raise another mans child. (which would be hilarious after the sword conversation with Jon) - Somebody who can keep a secret. - Somebody who she can convincingly turn around and say she had a relationship with. Some Northerner in her retinue who always by her side perhaps? Now a lot of this third one depends on Jon and theres A LOT of variables to that. He might die facing the Night King in single combat. He might not know he had a son by Dany as she might conceal it from him. He might go along with the lie out of respect for Danys wishes. It would be an interesting parallel to Ned and himself and a way of bringing the story full circle. BTW: Given how awesome the She Bears are it would be really great if Dany and Jorah had a daughter.
  4. Its probably the most irrelevant battle on the show ever. All the other big battles have had major ramifications and have seriously changed the direction of the series. But rather than reversing the endless series of catastrophes inflicted by Euron's 1000 teleporting ships and the Lannisters 250,000 invisible men steam roll everything; it simply ends with Dany & Co having to beg Cersei to help them. There was a lot of Dothraki that bowed before Dany last season and I am pretty sure her allies had more men by themselves. Plus I still call bull on Euron, even in the books I do not understand where the Greyjoys get 1000 ships from; its an obscene number. So burning all the grain in the Reach - Irrelevant. Killing Lannister soldiers - Irrelevant. More will rise from the pits of Isengard. Cersei gets the gold anyway Cersei doesn't lose any territory, unlike Dany Cersei doesn't lose any major allies, unlike Dany Jamie stays loyal until the whole "risks the dead winning" thing and he is just one man. So yeah it contributed a little towards Jamie leaving Cersei. Big deal, losing him is going to clearly make all difference for her. Tarly dead - Who cares there were a lot more Southern Lords ready to fight Dany. Obviously Dany has committed some horrific and monstrous act against the Reach Lords like getting a load of them in a Church and blowing it up. Oh wait, yeah that's good Queen Cersei. A few hundred Lannisters bend the knee. Again who cares, the pits of Isengard will spring forth more of these abominations. Which is a little cruel actually since Uruk Hai are actually cool and impressive as opposed to men with free will to do good but choose to be rapists, thieves, murderers and join the army which committed the Red Wedding. Much more evil than Orcs. From a story telling perspective the battle had no relevance or importance. Nothing changes. The Lannisters are still winning. Still more powerful. No land changes hands. The Southern Lords are still universal in their hatred of Dany; because reasons.
  5. Tyrion1991

    Why do people think the Others are morally grey?

    Which is how everybody understands evil. I know that the commandant of Auschwitz was a good family man. I know that he was probably just a Prussian Officer, a man of his time, doing his orders; etc etc. But it was nothing less than justice to hang that man and I hate the notion that he could be described as anything other than evil. Its why I hate this celebration of "morally grey" characters and this implicit notion that its not realistic for evil to exist in the world and that you should never claim that somebody is evil. If you study history then you know that there are many people, in the last century alone, who could easily be called evil without any hesitation. I don't call Stalin evil because I don't get "his side of the story". Plus, if real life has so many obviously evil people then why is that implausible in a fictional setting? So I do not care if the Others think Dany is going to cause the second doom. Or that they have broke some sort of peace treaty. Or that they feel threatened. Even if those things turn out to be true and GRRM would have had to massively mislead his audience for any of those things to be true. If they are stupid enough to attack, without trying to talk this through and murder everyone and everything they encounter. To use the corpses of children as soldiers. Then I am sorry but I don't care. Yes, maybe they aren't the Demons from 40k; that doesn't mean they aren't evil. What they are doing makes them evil, not what they are. I mean am I just a bit behind the times here or something? Morally grey means a neutral depiction, where you cannot clearly say that an action is either right or wrong. Killing kids is almost never justifiable and the Others kill kids. What do you think they were doing at Hardholme? The Wildlings would not have fled if they weren't being attacked. Osha tells us that she was attacked by her dead husband. Somebody earlier suggested they were just harvesting people dying of the cold; that's just nonsense. There is no just cause here. Even at her worst, Daenerys usually has some sort of just cause behind what she does. To take a bizarre example, when she restores order in Mereen by chopping the penises off rapists and hurling them in a basket big enough for two men to carry. That's morally grey. There is a just cause, restoring order to stop the violence in a city she has liberated from the slavers. However its made grey because Daenerys uses an unnecessary and disproportionate (and a little too creative) amount of violence without any sort of trial. But there is no just cause with the Others invasion. What could justify the Long Night and the extermination of humanity and all life? Before people say "oh but they aren't trying to do that". How? GRRM has been bigging the Others up as a huge threat to Westeros for a few novels. If they did not actually want to kill us, and they don't seem to want to just rule us as evidenced by the Wildlings; then why make such a big deal about the wall coming down. Surely there has to be a threat and the Others want us all dead. Unless like my friend you really think the Night King will knock the wall down and politely ask for Jon to kill Danys dragons and that they'll leave. Just all a big misunderstanding and oh so morally grey that the Others refusal to start a dialogue meant their army killed so many people. Somebody earlier on mentioned that they haven't killed the giants because we have Wun Wun. Yes, he is "the last giant". Kind of proves my point that they're all dead. The Wildlings talk about entire clans of giants before this. Which were fleeing the Others with Mance Rayder. Now they are all dead. That is genocide. Sure there was competition for food with the wildlings but this was no different than the inter clan rivalry of all the free folk; hence why they had no issue joining Mance because they still saw themselves as one people. I doubt Ygritte and the other wildlings would be singing songs about the giants otherwise. So the wildlings are not the ones who killed the giants. That is entirely the fault of the Others. It is not morally grey to commit genocide on a race that had lived on Westeros since the dawn of time and had no hand in whatever peace treaty the Others are so raging about. I mean the Others must have been so wounded and hurt in spirit. I feel, so, so sorry for them and their plight in all this. They truly are the misunderstood victims in this series. If only we had the humanity to see past our narrow prejudice and forgive then the world would be a better and kinder place.
  6. Tyrion1991

    Why do people think the Others are morally grey?

    Genocide isn't morally grey. What the Others did to the Wildlings and Giants constitutes genocide. They murdered tens of thousands and innocent women and children. There simply isn't any reason that exists to justify that. It it isn't a trope to say that genocide and mass slaughter is morally repugnant. It's simple human decency and to do otherwise would be to implicitly validate historical examples of it. If GRRM wanted the Others to be morally grey then he wouldn't have them killing thousands of children and exterminating entire species.
  7. Do people really think that the show is going to invalidate Danny's claim to the throne on the basis of gender? Dany has spent her entire arc fighting to become Queen. Jon literally just found out he has a better claim in part 1 of the last season. The audience has invested in Dany claiming the throne and if Jon can't or won't marry Dany then the get out of jail card won't work. I can't see why they would invalidate Danny's entire arc just to allow Jon to be King of the North AND a Targaryen King; which we have been given no reason to want to see.
  8. Tyrion1991

    Why do people think the Others are morally grey?

    Then like rational people they would try to contact the humans and sort this out through diplomacy. They wouldn't remain aloof for thousands of years and then start killing people oblivious to pacts they never signed and which likely had nothing to do with the Others. To attack without caring to make such investigations and dialogue is evil in of itself. Also how does that excuse committing genocide on the Giants? Surely they were innocent in breaking any pact?
  9. Tyrion1991

    Why do people think the Others are morally grey?

    If they were a rogue group then why do none of the myths make reference to these good others and why haven't they tried to prevent the expansion of the Others? Plus, from a story telling standpoint, we already had Bran go out seeking the aid of those knowledgeable in ice magic; the Children. They ARE the "good" ice magic people trying to stop the Others. So it's unlikely that there are any more allies. I think we are splitting hairs here. Evil implies self awareness and intent. Being monstrous implies something mindlessly destructive and inhuman. But in either case, both represent something that within the world of Tolkien is really two sides of the same coin. They are a monstrous, existential threat to all life and have to be opposed. I do not think the purpose of the Others is to subvert the fantasy trope of the ultimate threat coming to kill everyone. The focus is on our "heroes" and the last alliance. The others simply serve as a situation to deal with IMO.
  10. Me and my friends were talking about the books and we got on to talking about the Others and one of them said, "oh yeah, its probably going to end in a truce with the Others.". I didn't say anything at the time, he may as well have added "then they can join the Starks and fight Dany with her dragons". Theres a few major problems that I have with this view and I simply don't see how GRRM could say the Others are morally grey. To list a few of the big reasons. * They have actually committed genocide on the Giants. Even if you were to argue, as some people insist, that this is all because we the evil humans committed some monstrous act that has brought a vengeful response down from this other power. What do the giants have to do with fire magic or humanity? Why kill all the animals? This seems like destruction for its own sake. * Theres a deeply cynical attempt to compare the atrocities committed by various people on the show to the actions of the Others. This wilfully ignores the fact that this is all completely indiscriminate killing of men, women and children. Again, even if humanity has somehow committed some sort of offence against the Others or their God, this is not a proportionate response. Some people point to them "letting the Wildlings go" and "letting the Nights Watch go". Again, that can be explained away as them wanting the Wildlings to kill as many Northmen as possible to clear a path. Its also quite possible that the Others simply failed to kill the Nights Watch at the Fist. I mean Tywin Lannister did not order every man, woman and child in the Riverlands killed. Not every Lannister and Stark soldier is a sociopath. We see a lot of nuance in peoples behaviour and Tywin stops once he achieves his political goals. Conquering Westeros and turning everyone into zombies; not really comparable. * Theres some attempt to argue that the Others are merely responding to the rise of Fire magic in the world. So, of course, Daenerys and her dragons must die to set the world to right and restore balance to ice and fire. Few issues with that: 1 - The Wildlings have nothing to do with Fire Magic and neither does most of humanity. Seems pretty evil to kill entire nations just to go kill Dany. 2 - Dragons, Fire Priests and the like have been shown as being capable of being integrated into a functioning human society. How can these things be more evil? What has made these things evil has been the people using them. Case in point Thoros vs Melisandre. No such variation among the Others. 3 - Dragons and Fire Priests have been around for millennia. Aegon had dragons in Westeros but no move was made by the Others. Its just as likely that the rise in fire magic and Danys dragons are the response of fire magic/lord of light to the aggressive actions of the Others; if not more so given Melisandre's behaviour and the various prophecies. 4 - If some humans meddling in Fire Magic was really going to cause a second doom of valyria and so the Others are trying to kill humanity to stop this from happening why wouldn't they have just talked this out and why focus their attention on killing factions not connected to fire magic? 5 - Why not make common cause with all the factions opposed to the worship of fire and the use of magic? * People confuse the warging and children of the forest with the Others. This is important, because obviously these things are shown as good and associated with the Starks. Since its a story of ice and fire, many people make the assumption that a balance needs to be established between the magic of Ice and Fire. The problem is that this assumes that this means the Others are on the same side as all the people who use ice magic, that the Others aren't an evil perversion of this magic and that the ultimate threat comes from fire magic. This is where theories involving Dany killing her dragons will end the Long Night come in; since obviously the problem is the rise of fire magic. However I think this is getting it the wrong way round. The threat is the extreme of the ice magic represented by the Others and the common cause needs to be made between the moderate ice and fire groups. There probably is some insane stuff in Ashai; but we're far too late in the books to ever see any of that stuff. I personally think that the Others are a supernatural force that are simply moving with the "Seasons of Magic" as ice and fire waxes and wanes. So as magic returns into the world, both forces are pushing against the Other.
  11. Tyrion1991

    [Spoilers] EP707 Discussion

    Dammit Arthas, do you not understand the meaning of the word restraint!
  12. Tyrion1991

    [Spoilers] EP707 Discussion

    So clearly Cersei has more soldiers than Daenerys, the North, Vale and the support of all the Lords of Westeros? How else can you explain her still being in a position to dictate terms to Dany and for her participation to be so crucial. I mean, why does it matter if the crazy woman in the capital doesn't support them?
  13. Okay, seriously, to all the reviewers still saying that "oh Dany made the right call on exiling Jorah". “Emotionally for me it was so intricate,” Clarke says. “Jorah’s been with me since day one, season one. The scene itself is unpleasant because I — Emilia — know that what Dany is doing is wrong, And it was the first time I’ve ever felt that.” http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/06/01/emilia-clarke-dany-ser-jorah/ Its a mistake, its all part of her downwards spiral into ADWD territory, which, of course, she will bounce back from. But its good to have your heroes actually put on the back foot and make mistakes. A lot of reviews I've seen act like Dany can do no wrong and every decision she takes is meant to be the right choice as she is a great ruler. No, that is not what HBO are doing. I honestly think that it is going to take caging the dragons for them to really start criticizing her and get what HBO has been trying to hammer into people the whole season.
  14. Yep, they managed to make Dany look like an ungrateful bitch whos making the wrong decision. For me they really needed to hammer home how betrayed and hurt she was over the fact that her bear did this to her. Plus, Jorah is a lot more contrite than he is in the books and doesn't argue with Daenerys "us sewer rats saved your city" where hes indignant with her. As it is, Dany, especially at the end of the scene, comes across as way too hateful how shes staring him down. In the books, she can't bring herself to look at him as hes dragged out and has to excuse herself because shes that upset about it. Indeed, when she first hears about his spying (which we don't see in the show admittedly) shes reduced to tears. Plus, the part where Dany says "don't you ever dare presume to touch me or call me by name". That is true to the books and I am sort of glad it was put in. But it makes no sense in the context of the show as its specifically referring to the chapter where he kissed her and called her Daenerys. Jorah in the show has never once, that I can think of called her by name or presumed to touch her. So this just comes across as a venomous retort whereas in the books its making reference to his prior bad conduct. A far better line, especially in light of last weeks argument, would have been to retain when she says "you told me to trust nobody else but you", yet the show conspicuously removed those lines. Theres also not the same of sense of shock when she repeatedly asks him if he told them about Drogos child. In the books this is something which it takes a few chapters for her to realize this and its "something unspeakable occured to her". Indeed, when she initially finds out about the spying she refuses to believe it. But in this scene, there is no sense of shock or disbelief, which makes it seem like Dany is far too quick to pass judgement and doesn't take it any where near as badly. This was not a moment for the imperious Queen routine and it really harmed Danys portrayal. Its particularly worrying because the "inside the episode" videos lay such stress on how betrayed and hurt Dany is but they've specifically removed those aspects from the books in their adaptation and focused exclusively on the arrogant stern Queenly figure passing judgement. Plus, in the background, this is obviously a forgery by Tywin Lannister due to his lines last week in the council and because in the show we saw Jorah get given the real pardon in season 1. So it actually is a forgery even if it is true. The show even hammers the point home by having Jorah point out that creating discord is in the interests of Tywin. Its like big flashing lights shouting "Danys making a stupid mistake" and this really colors her actions in a negative in what should be a very personal matter. In this context its obvious that Dany should just keep Jorah on and simply end how close they are too eachother due to their broken trust. Exiling him is not in her interests and whilst that might be also true in the books GRRM is much more subtle and point isn't really made until ADWD after the decision that Jorah was kind of useful to have around.
  15. Tyrion1991

    [Book Spoilers] EP407 Discussion

    I thought the Dany scenes were a mixed bag. It was good to see her relationship with Daario and this cause tension between her and Jorah. This is what happens in the books. Also I totally called it on Jorah being a member of the Golden Company. :cool4: The problem I had is that they start arguing by about his "disapproval" and rather than calling out the heart of the issue (Jorah is jealous and loves her) like she does in the book, it sort of drifts into a morality lesson about the slavers. So we end up having a totally different conversation. It felt very odd and jarring, almost as if they wrote this as two separate scenes and then decided to mash them together. You could say that Dany and the audience are fully aware why Jorah does not approve of Daario; but in the books Dany is much more direct and blunt with Jorah over this issue. Jorah comes across more as a disapproving father figure than being jealous of Danys lover. Really Dany shouldn't entertain such a facade and would confront him with the real reason for his objections. Also, it does really feel rather late in the day to be having Jorah act jealous around Daario. Especially since he shouldn't even be in Meereen at this point. Plus and I was reserving judgement from a previous scene but the show has made it much clearer now. In the books, Dany makes the decision to act defensively, to turn away from war and DOES NOT attempt to nip the Yunkish problem in the bud. She COULD have done this. Many, many reviewers and readers of ADWD would say that she was weak and made many mistakes in not confronting the slavers directly early on. This is a huge deviation from the books and frankly is an attempt to shift blame. D&D is aware that Danys ADWD arc took flack for her being weak and vaciliating with her inaction. So they are putting this down to Jorahs bad advice which makes her follow the path of weakness; when in the novels Jorah tells her to get out of dodge...twice...once as a ghost. He does not tell her to be gentle with the slavers. It also creates a huge problem going forward. When Jorah gets exiled, why on earth would Dany continue to follow his prior advice and stay in Meereen to rule as a Queen peacefully? Surely she would adopt a warlike path of violence as is her clear and obvious preference on the show without Jorah telling her otherwise. Unless they continue to alter Danys ADWD arc the show could end up with really muddying the waters about Danys behavior and actions.
×