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!

[SeanF]

8 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Yeah, but even that is totally inconsistent, both Varys and Tyrion have never been averse to breaking a few eggs collateral civilian damage to achieve their goals. What is Varys objection here?  He already knew about dragons, savage slaver Dothraki horde, pillager slaver Iron Born, and foreign army of Unsullied.  He didn't do jack to save KL back during Bob's war, so now, again in the space of a basically 5 minutes of screen time goes full treason,  not even defecting to someone else or just fucking off back to Essos, but to kill her because she's going to sack King's Landing?  Ridiculous. 

He was the guy who promised Olenna fire and blood. Tyrion was the guy who handed people over to Joffrey and blew them up with wildfire.

[Cas Stark]

1 minute ago, SeanF said:

He was the guy who promised Olenna fire and blood. Tyrion was the guy who handed people over to Joffrey and blew them up with wildfire.

Also, no objections from either when Tywin sent the Mountain's band of rapist, murdering thugs to abuse the innocent people of the Riverlands.  Based on what the show had set up before, Dany would have needed to conceive some kind of completely insane Kill All My Enemies By Fire plan and started implementing it, she would have needed to give her speech and then start executing POWs right and left in totally crazy horrific manner, BEFORE Varys may have changed his mind about her, again, you would need a full season of increasingly Ramsay Bolton level behavior on a broad scale for it to make sense.  Granted, me and my dragon burned down King's Landing for 'reasons' is not a good way to start your rule of benevolence....but any way you look at it, especially throw the prism of the show's previous handling of other 21st century war crimes type behavior, it should not have come close to causing either Tyrion or Varys to abandon her.  Maybe pretty boy too nice for this world Jon Snow would have fucked off back to the North with his men, but he still wouldn't have killed her or been involved in her assassination. 

 

[Le Cygne]

6 minutes ago, SeanF said:

He was the guy who promised Olenna fire and blood. Tyrion was the guy who handed people over to Joffrey and blew them up with wildfire.

Quite the double standard on the part of Benioff and Weiss.

[Angel Eyes]

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

One thing that had me scratching her head is why she never wears armour or safety chains.

I remember I talked about that a couple years ago.

[Angel Eyes]

54 minutes ago, Le Cygne said:

Continuity is for 8th graders.

She's indestructible for nearly 8 seasons, until a gaping fool tricks her. Her clothing, however, was destructible for boob opps. She's naked in the season 1 and season 5 fires (but has indestructible hair later, because that's hotter) because Benioff and Weiss wanted to see her boobs.

Let's do the audience filling in the gaps thing. Maybe she became one with Drogon, and thus assumed his characteristics. But they never showed that, and they wouldn't let her honor the man she named him for. Her sun and stars didn't warrant a mention in the end.

Only a fool could have missed it in the books (so they might have an excuse after all), where she honors Drogo constantly, she wears his lion pelt and thanks him for making her khaleesi and encouraging her. And there's all that talk about meeting in death, even on the show, but that meant something, so they forgot.

All that meaningful stuff was the GRRM story so it wasn't what was "best for the show." And yet, it was on the show in the beginning, however bungled. You see, it's best for a main character to have no last words. Stab stab stab, oh I see I'm dying, let me say... NOTHING. Like all the good stories do.

She walked out of a fire in Season 6, not 5.

[SeanF]

20 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Also, no objections from either when Tywin sent the Mountain's band of rapist, murdering thugs to abuse the innocent people of the Riverlands.  Based on what the show had set up before, Dany would have needed to conceive some kind of completely insane Kill All My Enemies By Fire plan and started implementing it, she would have needed to give her speech and then start executing POWs right and left in totally crazy horrific manner, BEFORE Varys may have changed his mind about her, again, you would need a full season of increasingly Ramsay Bolton level behavior on a broad scale for it to make sense.  Granted, me and my dragon burned down King's Landing for 'reasons' is not a good way to start your rule of benevolence....but any way you look at it, especially throw the prism of the show's previous handling of other 21st century war crimes type behavior, it should not have come close to causing either Tyrion or Varys to abandon her.  Maybe pretty boy too nice for this world Jon Snow would have fucked off back to the North with his men, but he still wouldn't have killed her or been involved in her assassination. 

 

One thing the show actually got right (inadvertently) was the Northmen going on the rampage when the city fell.  These men had Ned Stark and his retainers to avenge, the Red Wedding to avenge, and the fact they were left in the lurch by Cersei to fight the dead. No way would they would they march 1,000 miles, and not put the city to the sack.  They would take the view that the inhabitants had chosen their side, and must now face the reckoning.   People in a medieval world would consider Cersei sealed the city’s fate when she rejected quarter and killed Missandei.

[Cas Stark]

1 minute ago, SeanF said:

One thing the show actually got right (inadvertently) was the Northmen going on the rampage when the city fell.  These men had Ned Stark and his retainers to avenge, the Red Wedding to avenge, and the fact they were left in the lurch by Cersei to fight the dead. No way would they would they march 1,000 miles, and not put the city to the sack.  They would take the view that the inhabitants had chosen their side, and must now face the reckoning.   People in a medieval world would consider Cersei sealed the city’s fate when she rejected quarter and killed Missandei.

Indeed.  And I can't say that I disagreed with that view that the people of KL had made their choice, they could have rioted and revolted, but they didn't.  Of course in real life, they WOULD have been rioting and revolting since she torched the Sept of Baylor, showing herself to be a kinslayer and queenslayer and a heretic among other unsavory things.

[Le Cygne]

Tyrion, who got revenge by arming the hill tribes who terrorized the countryside (that was on the show in season 1), is the most moral man in the universe. Cersei, who committed countless attrocities, was just a girl who needed the comfort of a man. And Tywin, who ordered the Mountain to terrorize the countryside, after ordering the gang rape of his son's wife (also on the show), was a lawful neutral!

So here they are in season 4 saying it's fine to be ruthless, and Tywin is awesome and not evil at all. And yet in season 8, Dany is "her Satanic Majesty"! Yeah, right, boys.

Weiss: Well, I don’t think Tywin is a villain.

Benioff: That’s a fair point. If you read the story from the Stark point of view…

Weiss: …then I guess he would be a villain.

Benioff: But Tywin isn’t torturing prostitutes for pleasure. He’s not a sadist. He’s ruthless, for sure. But there’s an argument to be made that Westeros needs ruthlessness. You look at Daenerys across the sea — she’s crucifying 163 masters; she’s pretty ruthless, too. So you love Daenerys even when she’s killing people and condemn Tywin. I think somebody asked Charles about that in an interview and he was quite resistant to the idea of Tywin as a villain. I think Dan’s right. I don’t think of him as evil.

Weiss: I would call him Lawful Neutral.

https://ew.com/article/2014/06/15/game-of-thrones-showrunners-on-season-4-finale-twists/

There's also this, with similar rationalizations, that others have rightly cited as evidence that they were just making things up as they went along:

She's not her father and she's not insane and she's not a sadist, but there's a Targaryen ruthlessness that comes with even the good Targaryens.

[SeanF]

It’s a black joke in-universe to condemn “Dothraki savages” when the chivalry of Westeros are basically Dothraki with coats of arms.  Even the nicest leaders, like Robb or Arianne, have no qualms about total war.

[SeanF]

15 minutes ago, Le Cygne said:

Tyrion, who got revenge by arming the hill tribes who terrorized the countryside (that was on the show in season 1), is the most moral man in the universe. Cersei, who committed countless attrocities, was just a girl who needed the comfort of a man. And Tywin, who ordered the Mountain to terrorize the countryside, after ordering the gang rape of his son's wife (also on the show), was a lawful neutral!

So here they are in season 4 saying it's fine to be ruthless, and Tywin is awesome and not evil at all. And yet in season 8, Dany is "her Satanic Majesty"! Yeah, right, boys.

Benioff: But Tywin isn’t torturing prostitutes for pleasure. He’s not a sadist. He’s ruthless, for sure. But there’s an argument to be made that Westeros needs ruthlessness. You look at Daenerys across the sea — she’s crucifying 163 masters; she’s pretty ruthless, too. So you love Daenerys even when she’s killing people and condemn Tywin. I think somebody asked Charles about that in an interview and he was quite resistant to the idea of Tywin as a villain. I think Dan’s right. I don’t think of him as evil.

Weiss: I would call him Lawful Neutral.

https://ew.com/article/2014/06/15/game-of-thrones-showrunners-on-season-4-finale-twists/

The first four seasons followed the books, in which the strategies and tactics of The Hundred Years War were unleashed on the population.  Varys and Tyrion were in the thick of it.  And, if Stannis had taken Kings Landing, the city would have been brutally sacked.

Come Seasons 7 and 8, Tyrion and Varys have become followers of Gandhi.

[SeanF]

36 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Indeed.  And I can't say that I disagreed with that view that the people of KL had made their choice, they could have rioted and revolted, but they didn't.  Of course in real life, they WOULD have been rioting and revolting since she torched the Sept of Baylor, showing herself to be a kinslayer and queenslayer and a heretic among other unsavory things.

They were cheering for Euron Greyjoy.  Anyone who suffered at Lannister hands would have raised a glass when they heard of the sack and burning of Kings Landing.

[Ghostlydragon]

1 hour ago, Cas Stark said:

 Or, I mean, why is Varys trying to fucking poison her before she's even done anything? Dragons being destructive cannot have come as a surprise to him.   The same dude who sad idly by while her father burned people alive and plotted the destruction of the capital city.  But, OMG Khaleesi is acting like Tywin Lannister so Must. Poison. Now.  But, at least they allowed Varys to recruit allies to his plot no matter how dumb, unlike Littlefinger who did nothing but blab to Sansa for two seasons, no spies, nothing, just leaning on the walls and tgalking trash. 

Exactly. And at that moment, what terrible things had she done to make him decide she has to die so that Jon, a guy who isn't strong enough to rule along side her, is the best man for the job?

[Ghostlydragon]

48 minutes ago, SeanF said:

One thing the show actually got right (inadvertently) was the Northmen going on the rampage when the city fell.  These men had Ned Stark and his retainers to avenge, the Red Wedding to avenge, and the fact they were left in the lurch by Cersei to fight the dead. No way would they would they march 1,000 miles, and not put the city to the sack.  They would take the view that the inhabitants had chosen their side, and must now face the reckoning.   People in a medieval world would consider Cersei sealed the city’s fate when she rejected quarter and killed Missandei.

Agreed. The beast that stirs in every man when you give him a sword was the only part of that episode that made total sense and was 100% consistent. 

[SeanF]

11 minutes ago, Ghostlydragon said:

Agreed. The beast that stirs in every man when you give him a sword was the only part of that episode that made total sense and was 100% consistent. 

The general view was “Vae victis”, once the attackers breached the walls.

Shakespeare sums it up perfectly with Henry V’s speech outside Harfleur, offering quarter, but warning of the dire consequences should the offer be rejected.  Imagine the fate of Harfleur if the defending commander responded by beheading Henry’s best friend on the ramparts.  And contemporaries would have held the defending commander to blame.

[BlackLightning]

The bigger problem is how Daenerys was haphazardly killing her own men when just an episode before she was lamenting having led and lost so many to death.

[Angel Eyes]

You know, I was thinking about something: during The Long Night, the humans weren't using the castle because they were protecting the walls of Winterfell from the wights. Just look at the wights bashing through stone in the crypts.

[Count Balerion]

FCKAD most recent chapter:

there are no themes. there are themes. "GOT was never about 'themes'. but season 5 had a theme." the theme turns out to be that fundies are bad. it's not clear whether they're talking specifically about fanatics, or about religion in general. also, they're under the impression that stannis is a religious fanatic. NO. lord cmdr dunn chap oserves that cogman is the one who talks about themes; the Ds don't.

also the Ds think their "fanaticism" is shown by their believing in magic, even though shadowbabies and jon's resurrection show magic is real. fantasy provides a cockeyed window into the minds of people who will do terrible things for irrational reasons, or something like that. poses the question: did burning the leeches "plump w/ gendry's blood" kill robb, balon, and joffrey, or more mundane factors? but we know there is magic; see above.

season 5 follows "classic story structure", and represents the end of act 2. the heroes are tested by having bad stuff happen to them. it's the "darkest and most troubling season". the characters are made to go through hell, but "a carefully thought out hell". NO.

we're taking stuff out of our you-know-where. mark mylod, director, arrives w/ no idea what to expect and is prey to "blind terror" before jonathan pryce in particular. "i would have to pull something out of my butt", or words to that effect. there was a strict rule that actors could make absolutely no changes to their words, but pryce changed words. mylod told him not to, but cogman glared at him murtherously and went w/ pryce.

mylod gave diana riggs a suggestion, but she explained why she'd done it the way she did, and then said "thank you, go away." we love dame diana riggs. "so i enjoyed killing her later on."

the actors sometimes echo the face face face face thing. septa unella's actress was made to make a face again and again, "less is more". eventually she told them you might as well get a dinner plate w/ a wimple if she makes the face any less ... whatever it was. that's hannah waddingham.
 

[Count Balerion]

more from chapter

the book actually mentions ian mcilkenny. it even refers somewhat respectfully to his objections to being killed off, noting that as he'd read the books he "naturally expected that his character would continue in the show". but then hibberd tries to justify the way he was killed off, as follows: 1. the audience expects surprises. 2. they needed a vacancy so tyrion could join dany's council.

there's an unnamed actor who protested "vociferously" against the way his character was killed off, phoning them and talked half an hour. according to (i think) weiss, he's still complaining on "whatever dumb forums he's on". incidentally, hibberd still hasn't mentioned siddig, by name anyway.

stannis is an "uptight would-be king". carice van houten says the whole shireen burning thing was "genius dramatically" (a variant of "dramatically satisfying"?). hibberd concedes that the "book version will play out a bit differently".

Hardhome. the showrunners praise kit for being a trooper and helping others in cast. but then we get into nutters territory: extras required to go outside at 1 AM and lie around playing dead while cold rain drizzles onto them. dunn chap asks why they couldn't use prosthetic dead. APOCALYPSE NOW used real cadavers, which is even worse.

apparently the Ds came up w/ children creating WW, which is actually pretty good. but then they kinda forgot.

the silent ending of HARDHOME was a "happy mistake": someone kinda forgot the music. NK raising dead was meant to look like conductor leading a symphony but came off more "come at me, bro'", by book's own admission.

hibberd confuses KL and oldtwon.

[BlackLightning]

double post

[BlackLightning]

52 minutes ago, Count Balerion said:

season 5 follows "classic story structure", and represents the end of act 2. the heroes are tested by having bad stuff happen to them. it's the "darkest and most troubling season". the characters are made to go through hell, but "a carefully thought out hell"

Lies.

I'm not calling you a liar @Count Balerion

But there are so many lies in this statement on so many different levels.

51 minutes ago, Count Balerion said:

there's an unnamed actor who protested "vociferously" against the way his character was killed off, phoning them and talked half an hour. according to (i think) weiss, he's still complaining on "whatever dumb forums he's on". incidentally, hibberd still hasn't mentioned siddig, by name anyway.

Methinks it is either Ian McKinnley, Stephen Dillane, Alexander Siddig or Tony Sebastian, the actor who played Trystane Martell. Or maybe even Charles Dance.

Pilou Asbæk? Nikolaj Coster-Waldau?

51 minutes ago, Count Balerion said:

apparently the Ds came up w/ children creating WW, which is actually pretty good. but then they kinda forgot.

51 minutes ago, Count Balerion said:

someone kinda forgot the music

If you want to talk about themes, I have one for you.