Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Samwell_Tarly

Viserion....

Recommended Posts

Look, it's all gotten so silly now that I seriously want to see the ice dragon flash freeze another dragon in the air so that it crashes into the ground and shatters. Then there can be this great FX shot with frozen chunks of dragon squashing the unsullied or something. And Dany and Jon can do puppy dog eyes at each other and Cersie can sneer and it will all be B grade fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TommyJ said:

What i don't get from last episode, how does a dragon can turn into a WW?

A dragon spits fire and fire should destroy a WW.

Will Viserion die when he spits fire? I mean he'll probably die from inside.

Or am I totally wrong?

Well.... having received my PhD in Dragon Biology...... ;)

Honestly - I think they way it's working on the show - going on what we've witnessed so far - I think the fuel, or flammable bile they produce, isn't flammable until it hits oxygen. Hence Viserion's mini backdraft explosion when he was hit by the lance. 

WW biology has shown us they can walk thru fire and dampen it. So he's more fireproof than before - which would be bad if the fire was in his throat.

Both of these events suggest Viserion will be fine with fire, since it's the fire itself isn't in their throat, but more like a high-pressure firehose shooting flammable bile into the air, which isn't on fire until it's in the open. 

And as much as I think it would look cool if he shot ice... I don't think that makes sense biologically - even in the magic sense... (I realize how silly that last sentence is.)

I also don't think we'll know until next season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, falcotron said:

Sorry for the rant here—you're just the 69105th person to talk about canon, and you didn't say anything nearly as bothersome as most of the 69104 before you, and you didn't even call it "cannon", but…

I've never understood why so many people care about "canon" so much. The idea of canon started off as part of a fun little game by Sherlock Holmes fans, but modern fans have turned it into a weird obsession that serves no purpose except to prevent them from enjoying things.

I can understand the obsession with canon in cases where you're worried that an inferior work being considered canonical will constrain the possibilities for a later superior work (e.g., imagine that George Lucas took Splinter of the Mind's Eye as canon, and therefore decided he couldn't let Lawrence Kasdan do half the cool stuff he wanted to in Empire Strikes Back because it contradicted stuff from that book). But that's obviously not relevant here.

And otherwise, what's the issue? None of it "really happened"—that's the whole point of fiction. And canon doesn't tell you what's worth reading or watching—the quality of the individual stories or versions is all that matters for that.

And meanwhile, the show wasn't "canon" from the start, and couldn't possibly have been. There's no way 70-odd hours of mass-market TV could have contained the entire story. Even if they'd had hundreds of hours, an unlimited budget, and no interest in ratings, there are still tons of things they'd have to change simply because the medium is different—I mean, half the story in the novels is characters' internal monologues. So right from the start, you know you were going to end up with two conflicting versions of the story, and if you care about canon, one of those can't be canon.

OK, rant over, back to talking about whether Viserion is a wight or a white walker and what that means for the Night King's gas bill.

So much THIS. :agree:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ser Hyle said:

You're welcome. I'm glad you now understand why more astute fans are aware that the show will continue to be significantly different from the books if they're ever actually completed and released.

Your mansplaining skills are off the charts.

Thank you so much for telling me how stupid I am. I felt awesome this morning, and now, well.... might as well kill myself. 

Thanks. 

Yes. I'll literally shaking I feel so bad - not being sarcastic here. Clearly I'm taking up space... and you don't even know me, yet my stupidity must be off the fucking charts to draw such ire from afar. The world definitely doesn't need more stupid people. 

Thanks for making me see the light.

I hate the internet, I hate feeling like this, I hate my life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, JordanJH1993 said:

The point is, I do enjoy the show. I openly admit that I love the show, in fact. Which is something it seems, from this forum anyway, that is almost blasphemy to come from a book reader. Part of the reason I think I can love both is because I can separate both instead of criticising everything that hasn't come from GRRM's brain. Maybe bandying the term 'canon' around is wrong, I admit. But to me, a lot of what has happened in the last season and this season are just completely made up for the show.

As I said, yours is far from the worst use of "canon", and barely problematic at all, and it wasn't fair to target my rant at you, but I just had to rant. Your attitude to the show is perfectly reasonable (even though it's not far from mine, and I'm not perfectly reasonable that often…). You just don't need the notion of "canon" to get there.

Let me just ask you this: If the books had flaws and plot holes and the TV show fixed them all, would you still care that the books were original? Usually—as in this case—the original story is better, so you don't have to think about the question. But with The Shining, I think the movie is better than the book (while with Neverwhere, the book is better than the TV show). If someone asks me what happened to Jack Torrance, the movie version is probably what they're asking about, and it's also what I'm more interested in talking about, so I'm probably going to give them the movie version. Or maybe I'll tell them "It depends which version" and then tell them both. If someone asks me what happens to Sansa Stark, I'd learn toward the book version—although if they ask me what happens to Sansa after she marries Ramsay, I'd obviously talk about the show (although maybe I'd still mention that in the book version her story is pretty different at that point and she never marries Ramsay). And I think you'd do the same thing.

Anyway, this isn't that big a point, and I don't think it's worth arguing about. I'm more bothered by the people who, e.g., refuse to accept when the TV show goes by what happened earlier in the TV show because that wasn't canon and therefore the TV show is being stupid, and things like that. You're not saying anything unreasonable. So again, apologies if you took my rant personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, falcotron said:

As I said, yours is far from the worst use of "canon", and barely problematic at all, and it wasn't fair to target my rant at you, but I just had to rant. Your attitude to the show is perfectly reasonable (even though it's not far from mine, and I'm not perfectly reasonable that often…). You just don't need the notion of "canon" to get there.

Let me just ask you this: If the books had flaws and plot holes and the TV show fixed them all, would you still care that the books were original? Usually—as in this case—the original story is better, so you don't have to think about the question. But with The Shining, I think the movie is better than the book (while with Neverwhere, the book is better than the TV show). If someone asks me what happened to Jack Torrance, the movie version is probably what they're asking about, and it's also what I'm more interested in talking about, so I'm probably going to give them the movie version. Or maybe I'll tell them "It depends which version" and then tell them both. If someone asks me what happens to Sansa Stark, I'd learn toward the book version—although if they ask me what happens to Sansa after she marries Ramsay, I'd obviously talk about the show (although maybe I'd still mention that in the book version her story is pretty different at that point and she never marries Ramsay). And I think you'd do the same thing.

Anyway, this isn't that big a point, and I don't think it's worth arguing about. I'm more bothered by the people who, e.g., refuse to accept when the TV show goes by what happened earlier in the TV show because that wasn't canon and therefore the TV show is being stupid, and things like that. You're not saying anything unreasonable. So again, apologies if you took my rant personally.

That's a good question, actually. When it comes to the story in question, it is so hard to imagine that the show would be doing the fixing. Given some of the dubious choices they have made so far that I can't imagine they'd fix problems GRRM created. In my eyes, they have created multiple problems by leaving things out or by certain changes they have made, mainly the death of Stannis and leaving out Aegon. But I know that is my personal preference and many people are glad Aegon was left out, for example.

The example of the Shining you give is a very good one. I've read the book and watched the movie and I remember preferring the book, but if someone was to ask me the story, I'd tell them what happened in the film. Probably as I remember it better having seen it multiple times and there is less explaining to do when giving an account of the film. And, in my opinion, the film did a very good job in telling the story despite some of the changes.

I watch Game of Thrones with my mum and my girlfriend, neither of whom have read the books. My mum is particularly invested in the show and reads a lot up about it outside of watching it, so when we talk about it, I try my best not to reference book facts unless they make sense to the show story. Going on about Aegon, for example, would mean nothing to her.

One of my good friends has read the books and watches the show, so we discuss both. It really just depends on which medium someone found the story on whether I'd talk about the book story or the show story.

And, please, do not think I took your rant personally. Many would have come out with an all guns blazing attack; you responded civilly and at no point did you come across brash. 

It seems, when we zone in on it closer, that you and I have a very similar view on this matter. You just know better when to use 'canon' than I do!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ShadowKitteh said:

Your mansplaining skills are off the charts.

Thank you so much for telling me how stupid I am. I felt awesome this morning, and now, well.... might as well kill myself. 

Thanks. 

Yes. I'll literally shaking I feel so bad - not being sarcastic here. Clearly I'm taking up space... and you don't even know me, yet my stupidity must be off the fucking charts to draw such ire from afar. The world definitely doesn't need more stupid people. 

Thanks for making me see the light.

I hate the internet, I hate feeling like this, I hate my life. 

If you are being at all serious then you should disengage from the Internet. Call someone.  Family member?  Friends?  Get help. 

I'm not joking.  There are more people than you realize that are going or have gone through what you appear to be going through.  There are people that can help you.

Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Lurid Jester said:

If you are being at all serious then you should disengage from the Internet. Call someone.  Family member?  Friends?  Get help. 

I'm not joking.  There are more people than you realize that are going or have gone through what you appear to be going through.  There are people that can help you.

Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance

Thank you. You're doing the right thing. Tone can ambiguous through text and easy to misinterpret. Also coming from a person who can relate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JordanJH1993 said:

I watch Game of Thrones with my mum and my girlfriend, neither of whom have read the books. My mum is particularly invested in the show and reads a lot up about it outside of watching it, so when we talk about it, I try my best not to reference book facts unless they make sense to the show story. Going on about Aegon, for example, would mean nothing to her.

The person I usually watch the show with hasn't read the books, but she does sometimes read up on things on awoiaf, and always wants to know how each scene played out differently in the books, no matter how many times I explain that the books haven't gotten to this point yet, and enough of the background is different enough that there probably won't be anything directly corresponding to this scene even when the books do get here, and so on. I wish she would just read the books, but she doesn't want to start them because of the chance they'll never be finished… At least I've got her reading Dunk & Egg, so we can talk about stuff like the parallels between show!Dany and Aegon V instead of me reminding her for the 50th time that book!Jon is still lying bleeding from his stabbing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remain slightly unconvinced that Viserion has been fully converted by the NK. I am willing to accept that maybe I am still in the bargaining stage of grief after such a sad death.

There have been lots of people throughout the series that have tried to take the dragons for themselves and failed. It leads me to wonder if the NK would meet the same fate. Their connection to DT is always billed as special. When she was returned to them in the house of the undying they burned the warlock and when the slaver tried to buy them, they burned him too. I get that being dead may change this but I question why it was included if there is no relevance. If a dragon is not a slave does that also mean it isn't a WW.

I have also been questioning why DT chose to give her dragons commands in Valaryian. Just doesn't entirely make sense when it was not her native tongue, even if the Targs and dragons originally came from there it doesn't mean that they would only understand the Valaryian language so again is there more to it than that?

The main thing that is confusing me is that Dragons are considered magical as are children of the forest. At the TER cave we saw COF being attacked by the undead and yet in the beyond the wall episode there were no undead COF chasing the living. Why is that? Is it just an oversight or can they not be turned? If that is the case is it their magic that gives them immunity and if so would that give dragons immunity as well? I feel that they must have some immunity to be able to save Benjen / Coldhands without being turned. Anyone have any thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a really good point. Why would dragons be vulnerable to 'Ice Magic' but CotF would not?  For that matter, why wouldn't the NK have raised Bryndon (TER v.1)? I know he poofed away in Bran's vision but I'd assume his corpse was still in the tree. I guess maybe he would have just been a wight stuck in roots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, [email protected] said:

I remain slightly unconvinced that Viserion has been fully converted by the NK. I am willing to accept that maybe I am still in the bargaining stage of grief after such a sad death.

There have been lots of people throughout the series that have tried to take the dragons for themselves and failed. It leads me to wonder if the NK would meet the same fate. Their connection to DT is always billed as special. When she was returned to them in the house of the undying they burned the warlock and when the slaver tried to buy them, they burned him too. I get that being dead may change this but I question why it was included if there is no relevance. If a dragon is not a slave does that also mean it isn't a WW.

I have also been questioning why DT chose to give her dragons commands in Valaryian. Just doesn't entirely make sense when it was not her native tongue, even if the Targs and dragons originally came from there it doesn't mean that they would only understand the Valaryian language so again is there more to it than that?

The main thing that is confusing me is that Dragons are considered magical as are children of the forest. At the TER cave we saw COF being attacked by the undead and yet in the beyond the wall episode there were no undead COF chasing the living. Why is that? Is it just an oversight or can they not be turned? If that is the case is it their magic that gives them immunity and if so would that give dragons immunity as well? I feel that they must have some immunity to be able to save Benjen / Coldhands without being turned. Anyone have any thoughts?

Good questions. I think Viserion will be controlled because he died, so he has no agency anymore, and is nothing  more than an empty vessel controlled by the NK. Sorry :(

Beside the origins, the dragons being commanded in Valyrian....well it's like a magic spell, so it needs to sound cool. 

I wondered about CotF and wight Benjens too, but I don't think these things will be addressed in the show. I would like to think that at least the CotF are "immune" to that, but I think once dead, anything can be resurrected by the NK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, jandslegate said:

That's a really good point. Why would dragons be vulnerable to 'Ice Magic' but CotF would not?  For that matter, why wouldn't the NK have raised Bryndon (TER v.1)? I know he poofed away in Bran's vision but I'd assume his corpse was still in the tree. I guess maybe he would have just been a wight stuck in roots?

Maybe his remains were also blown up in the cave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said it's probably denial and bargaining in grief ;)

I wondered if it would make a difference to the NK's ability to control him if he can't speak. Of course he might be able to speak and now I'm imagining he has a really girly voice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25-8-2017 at 11:25 AM, Dawn of Fyre said:

What you're writing in relation to this "no sense" argument makes no sense. What you're criticizing is that they should know better than to trust Cersei, which is a fact. The whole armistice makes sense. Jon does not want to be at war with Cersei while the true war is the North. How in the fucking world does that not make sense?

So stop saying it makes no sense, and start saying that they are foolish enough to think Cersei won't try to murder them while this pseudo-peace is enacted. Which, I may add, Daenerys is aware that Cersei will try to have them murdered. I would hope that Daenerys is planning some way to murder Cersei in return. Although that is not what a 'hero' does, fuck being a hero. Kill the bitch and save the realm.

Slay the whore and bang the king, is what I would advise Daenerys :P

Yeah I meant that I understand why they are trying to convince cersei but that as a viewer I'm not happy with the development, that this would probably end really bad

I meant the "no sense" in relation that thinking that this will end good is no sense

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TommyJ said:

Yeah I meant that I understand why they are trying to convince cersei but that as a viewer I'm not happy with the development, that this would probably end really bad

I meant the "no sense" in relation that thinking that this will end good is no sense

Cersei is dead, IMO. Not matter what she tries, she's doomed to fail. The Targaryen Dynasty will survive and continue. For Daenerys to die without having a child and securing the future would be like throwing out her whole plot for the lat 7 sevens. Jon could continue the Targaryen line, sure - but with so few episodes left, Daenerys is the logical choice to be his baby-momma. At this point, introducing some random lady to be his queen would be bad writing.

So, I have no fear from what Cersei will do. Some people might die, hell, lots of people will die. But the key 'heroes' will survive - the show is diverging so much from the canon that it is not unthinkable to see Daenerys, Jon, Arya, Bran, Tyrion, and Sansa survive the ending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, [email protected] said:

Thanks, I hadn't even considered the TER but I am now thinking this over too. I was also expecting to see Hodor in the army but I wonder if they're saving it for another time. 

Hodor was in the last episode.  He got fried by Rhaegal. 

True story. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/08/2017 at 9:33 AM, [email protected] said:

Like I said it's probably denial and bargaining in grief ;)

I wondered if it would make a difference to the NK's ability to control him if he can't speak. Of course he might be able to speak and now I'm imagining he has a really girly voice. 

Like this guy

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×