Rant & Rave Season 8 [Spoilers]: When you are cool like a cucumber, as evil as the mother of madness, but never as perfect as the pet!

[The Dragon Demands]

yeah

[The Dragon Demands]

yeah

[The Dragon Demands]

yeah

[The Dragon Demands]

James Hibberd Lies to Game of Thrones Fans at SDCC & in his New Book, " Fire Cannot Kill A Dragon "

 

[Le Cygne]

6 hours ago, The Dragon Demands said:

I don't think it occurred to D&D or to Hibberd that within the same page of quotes, they desperately claim "we were setting up Arya as the one to kill the Night King!" and then admitting "actually for a while there we thought we might make it Sandor Clegane"....admitting just how in flux all of this was until Season 8 itself.

When exactly was the change made?  Apparently during filming on Season 7 itself.  Because while there IS a picture of a Valyrian steel dagger...maybe that scene was a late addition.

Season 7 feels like things were changing mid-stream; mid-filming; relic scenes like talking about Daenerys's not-pregnancy, or A SCENE EXPLAINING THE PRINCE THAT WAS PROMISED PROPHECY that same year they claim they abandoned it?

(shrug)

Well "Season 7" is a long time period, a process, lasting months.  I do think they got the idea "very late in production on Season 7" but not merely "when we made Season 7"...no, not when you started it.

Other quotes are out there like "we got the idea that Arya would use that knife drop move to kill the Night King when we saw her do it to Brienne"...NO, it wasn't "foreshadowing" anymore than Mel's Season 3 "blue eyes" line.  They got the idea FROM the Brienne scene. The only question is, "do you mean they got the whole idea for her to kill the Night King in that scene, or just that she'd use that specific finishing move?"

Yes. That book appears to be a mishmash of out of context quotes trying to justify failure. Sure, they meant to do that, just like Pee Wee Herman meant to fall from his bike.

Basically Hibberd carrying water for them, and them being smug and smarmy. The usual.

It's clear through all the lies and retcons and doubletalk and patting themselves on the back that there was no story at all. Watching the show was a complete waste of time.

[The Dragon Demands]

yeah

[Angel Eyes]

On 10/12/2020 at 11:14 AM, ThotKiller said:

Well if we go what they erase and adapted poorly what comes to mind is: Renly and Loras, Raeghar and Lyanna, Jaime and Brienne, Arianne and Arys, Alys karstark and Sigorn, Jon and Val....

A lot of GRRM's romance is messed up in the first place.

[SeanF]

Benioff "He (Tywin) was ruthless for sure, but there's an argument to be had that Westeros needs ruthlessness.  I don't think of him as evil." 

Weiss: " I would call him "lawful neutral." 

The gang-rape of Tysha, the murder of Elia and her children, the enslavement of captives, the massacre of Riverlands peasants, is "lawful neutral." 

OTOH, executing Lord Randyll Tarly or slave drivers was very sinister.  That says quite a lot about the two D's politics. 

[Ser Drewy]

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

Benioff "He (Tywin) was ruthless for sure, but there's an argument to be had that Westeros needs ruthlessness.  I don't think of him as evil." 

Weiss: " I would call him "lawful neutral." 

The gang-rape of Tysha, the murder of Elia and her children, the enslavement of captives, the massacre of Riverlands peasants, is "lawful neutral." 

OTOH, executing Lord Randyll Tarly or slave drivers was very sinister.  That says quite a lot about the two D's politics. 

Weird quotes. The 'point' of Tywin is Martin exploring a morally rotten man who is a very good administrator. A 'good person doesn't necessarily make a good ruler' discussion. Of course, in the books, Tywin's brutal nature and narcissism is his downfall. Martin does an interesting job contrasting the (moving) response to Lord Eddard - a fair and just ruler - with the chaos that Tywin leaves behind. Which they cut out... So no Northmen rallying to save 'The Ned's Girl' from the beastly Ramsay, or his loyal subjects conspiring to restore his family to their seat, a testament to the legacy of his leadership. Really this just made the storyline feel devoid of hope and more an exercise in nihilism. 

[SeanF]

21 minutes ago, Ser Drewy said:

Weird quotes. The 'point' of Tywin is Martin exploring a morally rotten man who is a very good administrator. A 'good person doesn't necessarily make a good ruler' discussion. Of course, in the books, Tywin's brutal nature and narcissism is his downfall. Martin does an interesting job contrasting the (moving) response to Lord Eddard - a fair and just ruler - with the chaos that Tywin leaves behind. Which they cut out... So no Northmen rallying to save 'The Ned's Girl' from the beastly Ramsay, or his loyal subjects conspiring to restore his family to their seat, a testament to the legacy of his leadership. Really this just made the storyline feel devoid of hope and more an exercise in nihilism. 

In the Show, most of the North was loyal to Ramsay, and hostile to Jon and Sansa, for some reason. They only won with the aid  of the Freefolk and Vale soldiers.

[Le Cygne]

7 hours ago, SeanF said:

Benioff "He (Tywin) was ruthless for sure, but there's an argument to be had that Westeros needs ruthlessness.  I don't think of him as evil." 

Weiss: " I would call him "lawful neutral." 

The gang-rape of Tysha, the murder of Elia and her children, the enslavement of captives, the massacre of Riverlands peasants, is "lawful neutral." 

OTOH, executing Lord Randyll Tarly or slave drivers was very sinister.  That says quite a lot about the two D's politics. 

All the horrors that Tywin inflicted, and he inflicted many of them on the show, too.  For example, the atrocities of his henchman Gregor Clegane were a big part of the story.

And they had Sandor throw away his life for nothing. What they did to Sandor was extremely cruel, the burn victim is burned alive for a meme, for their own enjoyment.

What stands out the most about this show is that the writers are truly lacking basic empathy for the characters as human beings. The audience always had to fill in for them.

Benioff/Weiss/Cogman repeatedly demonstrate a lack of basic morality and any understanding or compassion for the human condition. They normalize evil.

Unlike the show, the books condemn the atrocities of Tywin, Gregor, Ramsay, Littlefinger, etc. in clear terms, all of them. Because truly what would be the point of a story otherwise.

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Le Cygne said:

All the horrors that Tywin inflicted, and he inflicted many of them on the show, too.  For example, the atrocities of his henchman Gregor Clegane were a big part of the story.

And they had Sandor throw away his life for nothing. What they did to Sandor was extremely cruel, the burn victim is burned alive for a meme, for their own enjoyment.

What stands out the most about this show is that the writers are truly lacking basic empathy for the characters as human beings. The audience always had to fill in for them.

Benioff/Weiss/Cogman repeatedly demonstrate a lack basic morality and any understanding or compassion for the human condition. They normalize evil.

Unlike the show, the books condemn the atrocities of Tywin, Gregor, Ramsay, Littlefinger, etc. in clear terms, all of them. Because truly what would be the point of a story otherwise.

I've discussed it with @Cas Starkbut I'm really unsure what we're meant to take away from the show in terms of attitudes towards violence.  The two D's and Bryan Cogman seems to have treated extreme violence as being laudable if it was carried out by a character they liked (eg Tywin, Cersei) or against people they disliked (Walder Frey and his brood, Olly and Ser Allister Throne, Meryn Trant).  They thought Ramsay was a "badass" but still had Sansa grinning as she fed him to hounds.  It was cool for Arya to do things like gouging out eyes, torturing, baking people in pies, etc.  Tyrion blew people up with wildfire to keep Joffrey in power, and Varys kept a sorcerer locked in a box for torture, yet both abruptly turned into near pacifists in Season 7, for ….reasons. It was badass when Tyrion murdered Tywin, and noble and tragic when he strangled Shae.  Dany's violence in Seasons 3, 4, 6 was usually accompanied by heroic uplifting music, and inflicted on people who were portrayed as utterly disgusting - yet now they try and claim it was meant to be sinister.   Everything and anything was changed and retconned to suit the needs of a particular episode.

[Le Cygne]

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

I've discussed it with @Cas Starkbut I'm really unsure what we're meant to take away from the show in terms of attitudes towards violence.  The two D's and Bryan Cogman seems to have treated extreme violence as being laudable if it was carried out by a character they liked (eg Tywin, Cersei) or against people they disliked (Walder Frey and his brood, Olly and Ser Allister Throne, Meryn Trant).  They thought Ramsay was a "badass" but still had Sansa grinning as she fed him to hounds.  It was cool for Arya to do things like gouging out eyes, torturing, baking people in pies, etc.  Tyrion blew people up with wildfire to keep Joffrey in power, and Varys kept a sorcerer locked in a box for torture, yet both abruptly turned into near pacifists in Season 7, for ….reasons. It was badass when Tyrion murdered Tywin, and noble and tragic when he strangled Shae.  Dany's violence in Seasons 3, 4, 6 was usually accompanied by heroic uplifting music, and inflicted on people who were portrayed as utterly disgusting - yet now they try and claim it was meant to be sinister.   Everything and anything was changed and retconned to suit the needs of a particular episode.

I, Claudius was a show about horrible people, but you were supposed to think they were horrible. Here, they say the horrible people are awesome, and everyone should be horrible, because that's awesome.

So they don't think Tywin is evil, well then, what does that say about Tyrion for murdering him? It should say something, but it said nothing at all. Murder Tywin, Shae, Dany, whatever. Time to talk about brothels.

Basically whatever they say, whatever they write, it's just nonsense. That's what makes the book so funny, it's a book about nothing. At one point, I couldn't stop laughing. What are they even talking about? Nothing!

[Cas Stark]

50 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I've discussed it with @Cas Starkbut I'm really unsure what we're meant to take away from the show in terms of attitudes towards violence.  The two D's and Bryan Cogman seems to have treated extreme violence as being laudable if it was carried out by a character they liked (eg Tywin, Cersei) or against people they disliked (Walder Frey and his brood, Olly and Ser Allister Throne, Meryn Trant).  They thought Ramsay was a "badass" but still had Sansa grinning as she fed him to hounds.  It was cool for Arya to do things like gouging out eyes, torturing, baking people in pies, etc.  Tyrion blew people up with wildfire to keep Joffrey in power, and Varys kept a sorcerer locked in a box for torture, yet both abruptly turned into near pacifists in Season 7, for ….reasons. It was badass when Tyrion murdered Tywin, and noble and tragic when he strangled Shae.  Dany's violence in Seasons 3, 4, 6 was usually accompanied by heroic uplifting music, and inflicted on people who were portrayed as utterly disgusting - yet now they try and claim it was meant to be sinister.   Everything and anything was changed and retconned to suit the needs of a particular episode.

LOL. right?  In the uproar about Dany's 20 minute turn from hero to villain everyone forgot about the abject stupidity of these two ruthless pragmatists who had been killing people for years in pursuit of their goals with barely even a sad face for the collateral damage to innocent bystanders, suddenly, Tyrion can't stand the idea of a sack of KL and Varys is so worried for the smallfolk he decides to poison Dany...before she's even done anything ON PAR, mind, not 'worse' but 'the same' as Tywin 'lawful neutral' Lannister.  Until her KL freakout, she had killed no children, had taken pains to help the smallfolk, and only really vented her rage on her enemies, people who had sworn to kill her. [Note that I don't find her actions to be laudable or excusable, or that she was/is a good ruler with the necessary good judgement......but she was certainly no worse and many respects much less harsh than Tywin or Roose Bolton]

[Le Cygne]

22 hours ago, The Dragon Demands said:

This gaslighting is exhausting.  I take some solace in the fact that LARGE numbers of people in my YouTube comments who did a quick read of it all give the same description:  that even to casual readers, it comes off as smug, deflecting, or blaming the fans.

what I wouldn’t give to have a real moderator actually grill Cogman over the Sansa rape and not let up:  HOW he filmed that one scene is irrelevant and a deflection.

Oh yeah, he's never been properly questioned. They all dodged that, that's why they used Hibberd as their mouthpiece. Cogman can't handle criticism.

Did you see the part in the book where Cogman blasted the filming of LOTR? The way we lit the scene is the way a night scene is supposed to be lit.

Like, has the moon ever been out where he lives? It's pretty darn bright. And you can actually see what's going on. The nanny's husband is a lighting expert, too.

[Angel Eyes]

56 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

LOL. right?  In the uproar about Dany's 20 minute turn from hero to villain everyone forgot about the abject stupidity of these two ruthless pragmatists who had been killing people for years in pursuit of their goals with barely even a sad face for the collateral damage to innocent bystanders, suddenly, Tyrion can't stand the idea of a sack of KL and Varys is so worried for the smallfolk he decides to poison Dany...before she's even done anything ON PAR, mind, not 'worse' but 'the same' as Tywin 'lawful neutral' Lannister.  Until her KL freakout, she had killed no children, had taken pains to help the smallfolk, and only really vented her rage on her enemies, people who had sworn to kill her. [Note that I don't find her actions to be laudable or excusable, or that she was/is a good ruler with the necessary good judgement......but she was certainly no worse and many respects much less harsh than Tywin or Roose Bolton]

Why couldn't they (as in D&D) just send Arya to assassinate Cersei? D&D like Cersei doing awesome things (just watch her bringing herself back from the brink in Season 7), they like Arya doing awesome things (like killing the Night King to subvert expectations), so why not have them put two and two together by having Daenerys send Arya to kill Cersei? From an in-universe perspective Daenerys gets to get the war over in a jiffy by cutting off the head of the snake with one possible casualty and out of universe maybe Cersei gets a worthy end by going out with a bang (we all know how her death was wasted).

[SeanF]

2 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

LOL. right?  In the uproar about Dany's 20 minute turn from hero to villain everyone forgot about the abject stupidity of these two ruthless pragmatists who had been killing people for years in pursuit of their goals with barely even a sad face for the collateral damage to innocent bystanders, suddenly, Tyrion can't stand the idea of a sack of KL and Varys is so worried for the smallfolk he decides to poison Dany...before she's even done anything ON PAR, mind, not 'worse' but 'the same' as Tywin 'lawful neutral' Lannister.  Until her KL freakout, she had killed no children, had taken pains to help the smallfolk, and only really vented her rage on her enemies, people who had sworn to kill her. [Note that I don't find her actions to be laudable or excusable, or that she was/is a good ruler with the necessary good judgement......but she was certainly no worse and many respects much less harsh than Tywin or Roose Bolton]

Indeed, the pair were advocating starving the inhabitants to death.

[Lord Varys]

9 hours ago, Ser Drewy said:

Weird quotes. The 'point' of Tywin is Martin exploring a morally rotten man who is a very good administrator. A 'good person doesn't necessarily make a good ruler' discussion. Of course, in the books, Tywin's brutal nature and narcissism is his downfall. Martin does an interesting job contrasting the (moving) response to Lord Eddard - a fair and just ruler - with the chaos that Tywin leaves behind. Which they cut out... So no Northmen rallying to save 'The Ned's Girl' from the beastly Ramsay, or his loyal subjects conspiring to restore his family to their seat, a testament to the legacy of his leadership. Really this just made the storyline feel devoid of hope and more an exercise in nihilism. 

Tywin was a good administrator ... back during the reign of Aerys II. During the main series he lives off the reputation he cultivated over the years but he doesn't make any genuine good administrative decisions in AGoT-ASoS.

His success is based on the fact that other people search him out and won't act without his permission/approval. Neither the Blackwater nor the Red Wedding are his idea.

In that sense Tywin's story in the books is the story of a man who was great in his youth/middle age but sort of lost the grip on things as he grows old.

[Ghostlydragon]

50 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Indeed, the pair were advocating starving the inhabitants to death.

Exactly. How was that meant to be humane? I wish someone had called the writers and characters out on that.

[Angel Eyes]

1 hour ago, Ghostlydragon said:

Exactly. How was that meant to be humane? I wish someone had called the writers and characters out on that.

What were other options regarding tactics other than a siege?