[Poll] How would you rate episode 704?

[Modesty Lannister]

So, here we go:

Jamie overseeing transport of gold: This scene is what GRRM was warning against from day 1. The butterfly effect of all the unnecessary changes D&D made. Had they not invented that Lannisters were broke (which they are not in the books), we wouldn't have this chain of events. Bronn has to have some screen time, so let's have this conversation about rewards and castles for the umptieth time. Why not? -1

Cersei and the IBoB - the nonsense continues. -1

LF gives the Valyrian steel dagger to Bran - good scene. I like it, because (if D&D are consulting with GRRM about these things at all and that's a big if) it sort of confirms my theory about who was behind attack on Bran. So, I'm smug. Also, I like it, because we have seen a drawing of the said dagger in one of the Citadel books Sam was reading. So, a bit of consistency there. The dagger has a role to play. +1

Meera says goodbye to Bran - a bit of character development there. This is the forth attempt by D&D to show us how detached Bran became since he developed his greenseering skills. 0

Arya arrives at WF - a call back to season 1 and Arya's return to the Red Keep after chasing a cat through the dungeons. It's there to show us how much she changed. Nice meeting between her and Sansa in the crypts. It makes sense that Arya is closed towards Sansa. Well acted. +2

Bran gives Arya the dagger - I like that this ritual passing of the weapon similar to what the FM used for human sacrifices when triggering wierwoods is done in the Godswood. I wonder if D&D are aware of this aspect at all, but it worked. Also, I liked how Arya was unsurprised by Bran's state of mind while Sansa cannot get over it and treats Bran as a weirdo. +1

Pod & Brienne - some screen time for fan fav characters. An oath fulfilled?! Really?! How?! -1

Jon and Daenerys in the caves of Dragonstone - apart from the exchange between Daenerys and Missandei that made me cringe, this was good. Gave the unsullied watchers some necessary background information. Also, good set design. +2

Beach council - not bad. I like how Daenerys doubts Tyrion (at last) and turns for Jon Snow's advice. +1

Brienne fights Arya - I liked this scene for many reasons. I loved the facial expressions of Arya and Brienne when the fight was over with a tie. That glowing satisfaction with a good fight and the fact that there are other women but themselves who enjoy fighting more than any girly activity. I liked how Sansa disliked it. It is a good call back to season 1, but it also showsa growing suspicion towards Arya that started with her mentioning her list and jealousy due to the prospect of losing her female protector. LF was excellent in this scene. As a Braavosi, he was the only one to recognise what Arya meant with her reply "no one" and acknowledge it with a smile and a nod. Does this hint that LF is an agent for the FM? I'd say so. I think that was hinted in Bran's dream back in AGOT, but hey... +2

Jon Snow talks to Missandei and Theon arrives - the talk was necessary for Jon's arc, so ok. Theon arriving and telling us what we already know is just bad writing 0 (+1 and -1 respectively)

Daenerys crushes Lannister army - this was great. Well directed. Superbly choreographed. Apart from Bronn who is fireproof. Maybe he is channeling Timmet son of Timmet, but that is just too much stupidity to watch. I loved CGI and I was so rooting for Dhrogo that I couldn't bear to watch. I love these dragons and that's it. +2

8 in total

 

 

Edited August 8, 2017 by Modesty Lannister

[Mikkel]

Best thing in this episode was this:
Jaime: Lord Rickon..
Billy Bones. Dick-on
Bronn: *snort*

[GeorgeIAF]

Gave it a 10, best episode of the season so far, and time flied so quickly, fast paced and full of action. I loved it.

[Illiterati]

4 hours ago, GeorgeIAF said:

Gave it a 10, best episode of the season so far, and time flied so quickly, fast paced and full of action. I loved it.

I gave it an 9 when I first voted.  I've watched it back 4 times since.  I underrated it. I realize now that the major thing I didn't like about it was a character error, not a writing or directing error.  I agree it's a 10, and I'm likely to watch it several times more.

Edited August 9, 2017 by Illiterati

[JagLover]

I liked it more on a second viewing. Aside from Brienne vs Arya I loved the whole episode.

I think as well that there is one area where the show is going to be better than the books. From the first season the Lannister army has been the enemy (though we might like individual Lannisters like Jamie or Tyrion). We might have had idoicies like Queen Cersei but how satisfying was it to see a long jet of fire incinerate some more Lannisters? , with no other enemy, aside from now dead Frey's or Boltons, would it have had the same impact. 

By contrast in the books most think it is most likely that Dany with fight Faegon when she eventually gets to Westeros.

 

 

[johndance]

On 8/8/2017 at 1:53 PM, SuperMario said:

Except training with a bo staff is different than training with a fencing epee/sabre. If you remember she actually hid Needle when she reached Braavos and didn't retrieve it until she left. So other than some basic initial training with Syrio, she had no formal sword training.

Not a chance in hell she could parry Brienne's attacks. The writers did it for pure fan service, plain and simple. And it was one of the dumber things I've seen this season.

She literally has been doing her water dancing training every morning for the past however many weeks, months (years!) however long it's been since season 1. She's had extensive training with the FM, including while she was blind. We as viewers have only seen a small percentage of this. She's obviously had formal sword training and a lot of it. This scene was very plausible and very realistic. 

[Kingmonkey]

On 07/08/2017 at 1:06 PM, StepStark said:

That's why I said that one should try to bring some perspective, and it goes without saying that I had some objective perspective in mind. Now of course, nothing is completely objective and that's why it is fun to debate different opinions, but it doesn't mean that anything can pass. If "everything is subjective" then you're essentially subscribing to absurdist point of view where nothing makes any sense because even sense is subjective. So just to be clear, I'm not denying that there will always be some subjectivity to every rating (and I'm definitely NOT advocating for robots!), but that ratings rooted only in subjectivity shouldn't be taken seriously.

The problem is that there can be no basis for objective judgement without specifying the nature of that judgement. We're asked to score the show from 1-10, but on what basis? Is this a rating of the literary qualities of the show? Of its entertainment value? Of how accurately it follows the books? That isn't specified. 

On top of that, what does a rating of x actually mean? Does a 10 mean absolute perfection and a 1 mean absolute failure, in which case those scores should never be given? If so, what's the point of having them? Or should we see the scores as percentiles, in which case a 10 is simply a way of saying it's one of the best 10% of episodes. Or should that be amongst the best 10% of TV shows in general? Or maybe it's a logarithmic scale, and the extremes are the best or worst 0.1%?

I chose to judge the show based on the simple calculus of how much I enjoyed the hour spent watching the show. This is, after all, entertainment. Entertainment is a good basis for judgement because it encompasses a lot of separate factors. Is there spectacle? Did it make us think? Did the acting transport us? Everything comes into it. This episode was undoubtedly flawed, and there were many nits to pick. Nevertheless I gave it a 10 on the simple basis that I'm hard pressed to think of an hour I spent watching a TV show that I enjoyed as much as this. What's the point of having a 10 in the scale if you won't give it? Was Arya's fight with Brienne a bit silly? Yes, yes it was. However that doesn't really bother me, and it was fun to watch. Someone else might be more bothered by it, to the degree that it significantly mars their enjoyment of the show. And hey ho, we're back to subjectivity.

I assume that people who scored it a 1 are working on a similar basis to me. They really, really, didn't enjoy the show. For whatever subjective reason, they hated spending an hour watching it, felt their time had been stolen. Maybe that's because they were impassioned to see a show that fitted their expectations from the book, and didn't get that. Well, fair enough, though it baffles me that anyone who would score this episode a 1 would bother watching the show at all. That's a lot more sensible than suggesting they honestly thought that it was worse than 90% of the programming on television, for example. 

 

[SuperMario]

44 minutes ago, johndance said:

She literally has been doing her water dancing training every morning for the past however many weeks, months (years!) however long it's been since season 1. She's had extensive training with the FM, including while she was blind. We as viewers have only seen a small percentage of this. She's obviously had formal sword training and a lot of it. This scene was very plausible and very realistic. 

Has she? Let's look at this rationally. She was on the run/held captive pretty much through season 4. Not sure how much training she got during that time. That covered three seasons. Then she was on a boat to Braavos. Again, not sure who was training her on the high seas. Then she hides her sword before joining the FM. The FM have no swords inside The House of Black and White, and she doesn't retrieve her sword until she leaves Braavos. Then she is back on the boat over to Westeros before somehow making it to The Twins to murder Lord Frey. Even if she was practicing her water dancing and steps, at no time was she training and sparring with another person with a sword. I can punch a speed bag for years, but I don't think that's going to give me enough skills when I actually box someone who punches back.

The only thing that's obvious with the sparring scene with Brienne is that the showrunners want you not think too hard on the implausibility of Arya's "skills" and her ability to beat Brienne.

[StepStark]

1 hour ago, Kingmonkey said:

The problem is that there can be no basis for objective judgement without specifying the nature of that judgement. We're asked to score the show from 1-10, but on what basis? Is this a rating of the literary qualities of the show? Of its entertainment value? Of how accurately it follows the books? That isn't specified. 

On top of that, what does a rating of x actually mean? Does a 10 mean absolute perfection and a 1 mean absolute failure, in which case those scores should never be given? If so, what's the point of having them? Or should we see the scores as percentiles, in which case a 10 is simply a way of saying it's one of the best 10% of episodes. Or should that be amongst the best 10% of TV shows in general? Or maybe it's a logarithmic scale, and the extremes are the best or worst 0.1%?

I don't see what any of this has to do with what I posted. I only said that, essentially, subjective feelings aren't a good basis for analysis or discussion. I didn't say that objectivity is simple or clear cut. And in that sense, I agree with your questions here, I guess.

1 hour ago, Kingmonkey said:

I chose to judge the show based on the simple calculus of how much I enjoyed the hour spent watching the show. This is, after all, entertainment. Entertainment is a good basis for judgement because it encompasses a lot of separate factors. Is there spectacle? Did it make us think? Did the acting transport us? Everything comes into it. This episode was undoubtedly flawed, and there were many nits to pick. Nevertheless I gave it a 10 on the simple basis that I'm hard pressed to think of an hour I spent watching a TV show that I enjoyed as much as this. What's the point of having a 10 in the scale if you won't give it? Was Arya's fight with Brienne a bit silly? Yes, yes it was. However that doesn't really bother me, and it was fun to watch. Someone else might be more bothered by it, to the degree that it significantly mars their enjoyment of the show. And hey ho, we're back to subjectivity.

Now this is a part I usually have problem with, because you're mixing subjective with objective. When you ask "Did it make us think?", the answer to that question has to be objective, or at least trying to be objective, because you're asking in the name of "us", and not in the name of yourself. But then you go on and talk about how much you enjoyed the episode, which is highly subjective.

I'm not saying that I have a perfect formula for separating subjective from objective, but at the very least I don't think subjective feelings should be elevated to objective judgement.

And anyway, it's okay to like something that isn't objectively as good as it realistically could be. I don't understand why people who like the show have to go around and constantly force other people to agree that GOT is some sort of masterpiece. If you have to keep saying out loud that you are a king, you aren't much of an authority, are you?

1 hour ago, Kingmonkey said:

I assume that people who scored it a 1 are working on a similar basis to me. They really, really, didn't enjoy the show. For whatever subjective reason, they hated spending an hour watching it, felt their time had been stolen. Maybe that's because they were impassioned to see a show that fitted their expectations from the book, and didn't get that. Well, fair enough, though it baffles me that anyone who would score this episode a 1 would bother watching the show at all. That's a lot more sensible than suggesting they honestly thought that it was worse than 90% of the programming on television, for example. 

But how could you know that? You don't have a problem with stupidity in the show, and okay, you don't have to, but maybe these people do have a big problem with the stupidity in the show and that's why they're rating it 1. It really doesn't have to be because of their "expectations from the books", maybe it's because of their expectations from any story to make sense. And sorry to say, GOT often doesn't make any sense at all, and you can't expect of everyone to be as tolerant about it as you are.

[Meera of Tarth]

Difficult choice. I didn't rate it.

Why?

I'd say the first part is a 4.5/10, whilst the battle is a solid 8.5/10

I feel the episode has two completely different parts.

[lancerman]

This show if nothing else will have the best televised battles of all time 

-Blackwater

-Battle at Castle Black

-Hardhome

-Battle of the Bastards

-Field of Fire 2 (needs a better name) 

should just bite the bullet and do Robert's Rebellion. So many good battles 

[Kingmonkey]

2 hours ago, StepStark said:

I don't see what any of this has to do with what I posted. I only said that, essentially, subjective feelings aren't a good basis for analysis or discussion. I didn't say that objectivity is simple or clear cut. And in that sense, I agree with your questions here, I guess.

Subjective feelings are the only thing that can be discussed when the scale is subjective, which an undefined scale is. 

2 hours ago, StepStark said:

Now this is a part I usually have problem with, because you're mixing subjective with objective. When you ask "Did it make us think?", the answer to that question has to be objective, or at least trying to be objective, because you're asking in the name of "us", and not in the name of yourself. But then you go on and talk about how much you enjoyed the episode, which is highly subjective.

"Us" as in those of us answering the question. It's not a universal yes or no answer -- it will make some people think, it will not make other people think. Again, this is subjective. 

2 hours ago, StepStark said:

I'm not saying that I have a perfect formula for separating subjective from objective, but at the very least I don't think subjective feelings should be elevated to objective judgement.

I entirely agree that  a subjective judgement should not be considered equal to an objective judgement, but some things can only really be judged subjectively. Is GoT better than Breaking Bad? Does chicken taste nicer than lamb? Tastes differ. We could of course discuss elements of the show from an objective viewpoint -- does character motivation make sense, is it well acted, does the pacing hold up, so on. However when the question is "how do you rate this episode", that's not the question being asked. 

2 hours ago, StepStark said:

But how could you know that? You don't have a problem with stupidity in the show, and okay, you don't have to, but maybe these people do have a big problem with the stupidity in the show and that's why they're rating it 1. It really doesn't have to be because of their "expectations from the books", maybe it's because of their expectations from any story to make sense. And sorry to say, GOT often doesn't make any sense at all, and you can't expect of everyone to be as tolerant about it as you are.

I said "Maybe that's because..." not "That is because..." because I *don't* know that. It was an example. Nor do I expect everyone to be as tolerant of it as me -- I did indeed say "well fair enough". However this too is a subjective matter.

You say "GoT often doesn't make any sense at all, and you can't expect everyone to be as tolerant about it as you are," but what makes one person more tolerant than another? Why does a bit of nonsense in GoT raise such ire and intolerance amongst some fans? Is it really so much more nonsensical than other shows? I really don't think so. Consider the eagles problem in LoTR, for example. Or how nobody can tell that Clark Kent is Superman because he wears glasses. These are examples of grade A nonsense that anything GoT has done pales in comparison to, but the almost universal reaction is to have a bit of a laugh about it, make a meme or two out of it, and shrug your shoulders. We can of course objectively discuss the degree of nonsense there is in GoT (though even the discussions of that are rarely objective), but how important that is to our enjoyment of the show remains entirely subjective. 

[SansaJonRule]

On 8/8/2017 at 1:53 PM, SuperMario said:

Except training with a bo staff is different than training with a fencing epee/sabre. If you remember she actually hid Needle when she reached Braavos and didn't retrieve it until she left. So other than some basic initial training with Syrio, she had no formal sword training.

Not a chance in hell she could parry Brienne's attacks. The writers did it for pure fan service, plain and simple. And it was one of the dumber things I've seen this season.

How do you know she had no formal sword training with the FM.  There is a whole lot we did not see about her training, and training an assassin with only one weapon would be stupid.  I think the scene was more to show her agility and speed, which she learned from both Syrio and the FM and which is always going to be her strongest asset in fighting.  She is never going to be big and strong like Brienne.

I do agree though about parrying Brienne's attacks, because how did her skinny Needle not break under the force of such a heavy Valyrian steel sword?

[SansaJonRule]

18 hours ago, Mikkel said:

Best thing in this episode was this:
Jaime: Lord Rickon..
Billy Bones. Dick-on
Bronn: *snort*

Yeah, that was priceless.

So is your tagline.

[SansaJonRule]

3 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Difficult choice. I didn't rate it.

Why?

I'd say the first part is a 4.5/10, whilst the battle is a solid 8.5/10

I feel the episode has two completely different parts.

Funny, I like the character and plot development better than the battles as a rule.  The battle of the bastards was exceptional.  The only reason this one was not just another battle is because it has a dragon.  I like dragons.  But the battle was still not my favorite part.

[SansaJonRule]

On 8/8/2017 at 5:03 PM, Modesty Lannister said:

So, here we go:

Jamie overseeing transport of gold: This scene is what GRRM was warning against from day 1. The butterfly effect of all the unnecessary changes D&D made. Had they not invented that Lannisters were broke (which they are not in the books), we wouldn't have this chain of events. Bronn has to have some screen time, so let's have this conversation about rewards and castles for the umptieth time. Why not? -

So, why did he let them make those changes?  Isn't he supposed to be the consultant with the final say?

[TheKitttenGuard]

3 hours ago, SansaJonRule said:

So, why did he let them make those changes?  Isn't he supposed to be the consultant with the final say?

No he does not final say. D&D are the ones in charge of the T.V show.

[Gaz0680]

3 hours ago, SansaJonRule said:

How do you know she had no formal sword training with the FM.  There is a whole lot we did not see about her training, and training an assassin with only one weapon would be stupid.  I think the scene was more to show her agility and speed, which she learned from both Syrio and the FM and which is always going to be her strongest asset in fighting.  She is never going to be big and strong like Brienne.

I do agree though about parrying Brienne's attacks, because how did her skinny Needle not break under the force of such a heavy Valyrian steel sword?

Brienne wasn't wielding Oathkeeper (her Valyrian steel sword). She had a blunted training sword.

[SansaJonRule]

21 minutes ago, Gaz0680 said:

Brienne wasn't wielding Oathkeeper (her Valyrian steel sword). She had a blunted training sword.

Oh, no wonder it wasn't shiny and glistening like I thought it should be.  I guess it would be stupid to use VS for training.  It still seems her sword should have broken Arya's.  Unless the way in which it was forged gave it uncommon strength.

[Gaz0680]

23 minutes ago, SansaJonRule said:

Oh, no wonder it wasn't shiny and glistening like I thought it should be.  I guess it would be stupid to use VS for training.  It still seems her sword should have broken Arya's.  Unless the way in which it was forged gave it uncommon strength.

Needle is strong castle forged steel, so is very strong, but is not Valyrian Steel.