[Spoilers] E801 Discussion

[RhaenysBee]

Wow, some heated arguments going on here. And here I thought the episode was way too bland to spark such. 

I could 100% see the effort and the motivation to create a great final season. Did this manifest in a great last first episode? Nope. But at least they tried. 

The structure was trying hard to call back to season 1, I was mostly okay with that. The opening scene was okay, the ending with the dead zombie umber kid and then Jaime seeing Bran was actually quite good. 

King’s Landing was a complete utter trainwreck, that was what I expected, that was what they delivered. The fact that Euron Greyjoy’s only motivation in life is to have an intercourse with a 45-year-old unattractive, publicly humiliated widow queen is laughable. I guess the overlong discussion about elephants were to underline the fact that Cersei is batshit insane (as if we hadn’t known that for ever) and the cheating gamblers were supposed to make Euron maybe charismatic or funny? Neither happened if you ask me. Also the timeline is painfully off but what are you going to do? We’ll get back to this in the rant and rave thread. 

The North was basically a runway for every secondary supporting character to walk down before disappearing behind the scenes again. That’s understandable, but it gave the episode an sense of unnecessary rush.

Which is completely contradicted by the fact that Arya has time to play out a full high school drama script. I didn’t exactly enjoy that the first shot of a main character we got was Arya looking down on the procession with the face of a practiced school bully. Then she had a semi-sweet reunion with Jon, that was okay, though slightly underwhelming, again, because they are both such terrible actors. And then... well I’ll get to the Gendry bit in the rant and rave thread. But hey, Netflix teen movies would be proud. And Arya definitely definitely got to use a wide range of her season 7 personality-options. 

Sansa on the other hand seems to have settled in for the cold, emotionless, facial-expressionless, power and status obsessed female CEO stereotype. Because that’s what makes a strong female character. Very Rachel Duncan. Very Miranda Priestly. Except, you know, Meryl Streep and Tatiana Maslany can act.

Bran’s machine brain finally came through, I didn’t have any problems with him, except for the decision that he waited for Jon and Daenerys to go have some waterfall sex before breaking the news to him. 

Speaking of. Those two portray less chemistry than two frozen bricks in the Winterfell  battlements. You could sense the sheer repulse in that kissing scene. But again, Netflix teen dramas were made proud as Varys, Tyrion and Davos looked down on the lovebirds publicly flirting in the middle of this military camp. And so was James Cameron, the CGI crew did justice to the original scene. Drogon and Rhaegal were beautiful. What it didn’t do justice to was the Ygritte cave scene, that was just vile, to reenact that. I did like that Drogon gave them the look. That was fun and sweet. 

What else happened? There was that Last Hearth scene at the end, where Tormund and Beric magically showed up at for god knows what reason and Edd and the NW also magically happened to be there for god knows what reason, but hey who doesn’t want more unnecessary reunions between third level supporting characters. Also wights now look like Pirates of the Caribbean undead skeletons and sound like Ring Wraiths. I think we have everything covered. 

Oh sam! Sam is the first person for the past two seasons who acts like a human being when he loses a family member! Good for Sam! Good for humanity! I love Sam. Anyway that was a nice way to put tension between him and Daenerys, between Jon and Daenerys. Much better than the cat fight unfolding between our favorite strong female character and Daenerys, or the “look, I’m socio-politically relevant” mistrust with which the northern old ladies and gents measured Greyworm and Missandei. 

And oh, Jon’s heritage! That topic is such an overkill I totally forgot it was still on the table. Right. Well you know. The first thing that separated Harry Potter and Tom Riddle was their reactions to finding out they were wizards. Wee Harry Potter thought Hagrid was mistaken. Little Tom believed it on the first word. He enjoyed believing he was something special. He loved to be reassured that something set him apart from others, up for the special chosen someone he felt he was. Tom Riddle, third of his name, no wait, damn it, that was his half-brother that died in infancy. So he is 4th at best. 

All in all, the plot didn’t really move forward, we just assembled everybody to wherever they must be. I guess that was all we could ask for. I enjoyed the cgi, Drogon disapproving of the Jon and daenerys making out, Jaime’s arrival, Yara and Theon... the structural call-backs kinda... the reunion between Bran and Jon... it wasn’t as bad as I expected, in spite of all the wasted screen time, all the lost potential and all the godawful acting. Okay. I’ll stop talking now. 

 

 

 

 

[Forlong the Fat]

18 minutes ago, Raksha 2014 said:

 

Dany should really shut up about breaking the wheel, since she wants to be the Targaryen Queen of Westeros at the top of that same wheel; does she want her own power, should she win, vastly curtailed or her head put on a spike by angry peasants who took her at her word...Yes, it's rather absurd that she is talking about changing the social order while she goes on about everyone bending the knee to her as the true and only ruler of the seven kingdoms.

Well this is the major conflict in her character development. There are essays about how she sees herself--mother of dragons, breaker of chains, conqueror etc. And there is real conflict between her desire to be queen and her desire to be more just--she does have to be queen in the first place to change anything with respect to "breaking the wheel."  And the issue of how she becomes queen, and for that matter whether she should be queen simply because she believes she's the rightful heir (and now we have dramatic irony on this issue given that we know Jon has a better claim) raise all sorts of conflicts. But she can't be queen or make any changes whatsoever without engaging in some level of brutality.

[sweetsunray]

3 minutes ago, Forlong the Fat said:

I just re-watched that scene in case I missed something.  What you're saying just isn't in there.  She said she was going to break the wheel that is Cersei Lannister. And then Tarly said Cersei is his queen and he would not renounce or take the black.  He was exactly what she said she was going to break.

 

And she didn't suggest in any way that she was going to act in a democratic manner. She merely said she was going to be more just than the people in charge now. 

As viewer I cannot forget she used that break the wheel comment where she compares every house as being a spoke of the wheel and then this one is on top and then that one is on top, then her reference to it once again during the meeting with Olenna and the Dornish snakes and Varys. Cersei Lannister isn't a wheel, she's a spoke on the wheel, as is Dany. But I'll give you that Dany's break-the-wheel speech is even more nonsensical the way she delivered it to her POW than during the other occasions.

More "just"... So, it's either "blow up with a sept" or "die-by-dragonfire"... how's that more just? It ain't. She's delivering the same type of justice as the Lannisters have done since they gained political power over the throne.

[King Jon Snow Stark]

14 hours ago, Fire is coming said:

I thought that too while watching, but technically they are cousins, not brothers. So he probably just meant that and not necessarily "I'm a tree now, trees don't have humans as brothers".

As his cousin Bran should have been in the room when Jon was told. I just viewed it Bran being slightly disconnected from his family and pursuing his own agenda to fight the Night King. 

[Lord Varys]

4 minutes ago, Caligula_K3 said:

I also don't see how refusing to bend the knee right after a battle where you've just watched all your men be horribly burned to death is indicative of someone not being deserving of taking the black. Like, the Night's Watch accepts the cruellest of criminals in the best of times; at this moment, Dany knows that this is not the best of times, and that the Wall needs capable leaders and warriors. People like the Tarlys are the best possible Night's Watch recruits.

The point is that no one thinks it is a right to take the black. It is a privilege you, as king, lord, or judge can grant or refuse. It is up to you, and especially the Starks have a pretty narrow view who deserves to take the black or not. Think of Lord Alaric and, especially, of Robb. He didn't give Lord Rickard the chance to take the black, did he?

But the point is that Randyll and Dickon didn't even acknowledge they had lost, that they were under a new ruler. They were both traitors to their lawful lieges - House Tyrell - serving a mad pretender who just murdered the High Septon and essentially all the nobility that had gathered in KL. It was actually pretty kind to offer them a pardon at all.

I mean, last time I looked Jon didn't offer a pardon to the guys who murdered him, right? And didn't they have a better justification for their actions than Randyll and Dickon? So what's the issue here?

[divica]

1 minute ago, sweetsunray said:

As viewer I cannot forget she used that break the wheel comment where she compares every house as being a spoke of the wheel and then this one is on top and then that one is on top, then her reference to it once again during the meeting with Olenna and the Dornish snakes and Varys. Cersei Lannister isn't a wheel, she's a spoke on the wheel, as is Dany. But I'll give you that Dany's break-the-wheel speech is even more nonsensical the way she delivered it to her POW than during the other occasions.

More "just"... So, it's either "blow up with a sept" or "die-by-dragonfire"... how's that more just? It ain't. She's delivering the same type of justice as the Lannisters have done since they gained political power over the throne.

That breaking the wheel was one of the most stupid speeches ever. And each times she talks about the wheel it just gets worse.

She is breaking the wheel by doing what everyone else has done before her! It is like saying nonsense...

[House Cambodia]

2 minutes ago, divica said:

That breaking the wheel was one of the most stupid speeches ever. And each times she talks about the wheel it just gets worse.

She is breaking the wheel by doing what everyone else has done before her! It is like saying nonsense...

It's not 'nonsense', it's a profound meditation on the nature of power. George Orwell described it well in Animal Farm, a classic of literature.

[sweetsunray]

8 minutes ago, Forlong the Fat said:

Well this is the major conflict in her character development. There are essays about how she sees herself--mother of dragons, breaker of chains, conqueror etc. And there is real conflict between her desire to be queen and her desire to be more just--she does have to be queen in the first place to change anything with respect to "breaking the wheel."  And the issue of how she becomes queen, and for that matter whether she should be queen simply because she believes she's the rightful heir (and now we have dramatic irony on this issue given that we know Jon has a better claim) raise all sorts of conflicts. But she can't be queen or make any changes whatsoever without engaging in some level of brutality.

Agreed. Dany's dilemma is converging this idea of herself as the hero and saviour of slaves and the idea of a (rightful) totalitarian queen who has to kill non-slavers and convince non-enslaved to empower her and get another totalitarian queen of a throne.

[King Jon Snow Stark]

12 hours ago, Error-504 said:

Or he deserts Jon when he finds out about his true lineage? 

 

12 hours ago, briantw said:

He's still half-Stark, same as what he thought he was before.  

Plus, Ghost would likely have known all along. 

Jon is no longer invited to the Stark Family reunions and had to return Ghost to the Starks. 

[Caligula_K3]

36 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The point is that no one thinks it is a right to take the black. It is a privilege you, as king, lord, or judge can grant or refuse. It is up to you, and especially the Starks have a pretty narrow view who deserves to take the black or not. Think of Lord Alaric and, especially, of Robb. He didn't give Lord Rickard the chance to take the black, did he?

But the point is that Randyll and Dickon didn't even acknowledge they had lost, that they were under a new ruler. They were both traitors to their lawful lieges - House Tyrell - serving a mad pretender who just murdered the High Septon and essentially all the nobility that had gathered in KL. It was actually pretty kind to offer them a pardon at all.

I mean, last time I looked Jon didn't offer a pardon to the guys who murdered him, right? And didn't they have a better justification for their actions than Randyll and Dickon? So what's the issue here?

Everyone thought that Robb's decision was dumb though. In just about every way possible.

As for the Tarlys, their situation is more complicated. Yes, they're traitors to House Tyrell... who are traitors to Cersei, who is the person actually on the iron throne. It's Stannis' and Jaime's dilemma all over again. And from the perspective of a noble in Westeros, Cersei is evil (if you believe that she is responsible for blowing up the sept, since the official line is that Dany did it)... But Dany is the daughter of an equally evil king, leading Dothraki and with the potential to nuke Westeros. From the Tarlys' perspective, there are no good choices here.

[SeanF]

39 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The point is that no one thinks it is a right to take the black. It is a privilege you, as king, lord, or judge can grant or refuse. It is up to you, and especially the Starks have a pretty narrow view who deserves to take the black or not. Think of Lord Alaric and, especially, of Robb. He didn't give Lord Rickard the chance to take the black, did he?

But the point is that Randyll and Dickon didn't even acknowledge they had lost, that they were under a new ruler. They were both traitors to their lawful lieges - House Tyrell - serving a mad pretender who just murdered the High Septon and essentially all the nobility that had gathered in KL. It was actually pretty kind to offer them a pardon at all.

I mean, last time I looked Jon didn't offer a pardon to the guys who murdered him, right? And didn't they have a better justification for their actions than Randyll and Dickon? So what's the issue here?

Burning them in front of an army was a way of showing off, and frightening the survivors of that army into fighting for her.

The fact that Varys and Tyrion are perturbed by it suggests that in-universe, it's not considered the correct way of treating prisoners of rank.

[SeanF]

1 minute ago, Caligula_K3 said:

Everyone thought that Robb's decision was dumb though. In just about every way possible.

As for the Tarlys, their situation is more complicated. Yes, they're traitors to House Tyrell... who are traitors to Cersei, who is the person actually on the iron throne. It's Stannis' and Jaime's dilemma all over again. And from the perspective of a noble in Westeros, Cersei is evil (if you believe that she is responsible for blowing up the sept, since the official line is that Dany did it)... But Dany is the daughter of an equally evil king, leading Dothraki and with the potential to nuke Westeros. From the Tarlys' perspective, there are no good choices here.

Karstark's position is more straightforward.  He's carried out an act of mutiny, and made his King into a liar in the eyes of the world.

[RhaegoTheUnborn]

LOL! @ Jon having sexual relationship with his aunt the wholetime.

 

And can someone explain to me, why Sam got upset and most likely wont look at Daenaerys in a courteous manner, because she burned his father and brother to ashe? Like, his dad definitely showed no love to Sam and banished him from his own home. His brother was a bit more tolerable but his brother had this undying sense of loyalty toward his father, that he simply went along with every decision his father would make. And Sam knows Daenaerys is a queen and cant accept anything less than her enemies bending the knee. He's fully aware Daenaerys offered his father and brother a chance to live, but they both flat out refused it, What else was she supposed to, as a queen. Sparing enemies in that world is not an option. Sam should be fully aware of this, still he was about to cry and complained to Jon like ""youre a king, would you have spared him?"

 

I swear sometimes I sincerely depise Sams character.

[Forlong the Fat]

45 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

As viewer I cannot forget she used that break the wheel comment where she compares every house as being a spoke of the wheel and then this one is on top and then that one is on top, then her reference to it once again during the meeting with Olenna and the Dornish snakes and Varys. Cersei Lannister isn't a wheel, she's a spoke on the wheel, as is Dany. But I'll give you that Dany's break-the-wheel speech is even more nonsensical the way she delivered it to her POW than during the other occasions.

More "just"... So, it's either "blow up with a sept" or "die-by-dragonfire"... how's that more just? It ain't. She's delivering the same type of justice as the Lannisters have done since they gained political power over the throne.

Within the context of the show, I cannot agree that killing a defeated traitor who refuses to either kneel or take the equivalent of a prison sentence is the same as blowing up a bunch of people at a church. Assuming her war is just, killing people in the course of it is inevitable.

And you keep referring to prisoners of war, which is a concept with no currency in Westeros. No one in that situation would have treated the Tarlys as prisoners of war. At most, they would keep the Tarlys captive if they believed there was potential profit in it. But dealing with them as Dany did absolutely consistent with the generally accepted conduct of war. The only exception is the use of dragonfire vs. beheading. Of course, most people don't have access to dragonfire, but the Boltons would flay them, and the Iron born would drown them.

[Caligula_K3]

1 minute ago, SeanF said:

Karstark's position is more straightforward.  He's carried out an act of mutiny, and made his King into a liar in the eyes of the world.

This is also true. The Tarlys haven't actively betrayed Dany; they fought on opposing sides of a civil war for understandable reasons. Dany didn't force Jon Snow to bend the knee or die when they first met each other even though his "crimes" are ultimately similar. 

[Forlong the Fat]

1 minute ago, RhaegoTheUnborn said:

LOL! @ Jon having sexual relationship with his aunt the wholetime.

 

And can someone explain to me, why Sam got upset and most likely wont look at Daenaerys in a courteous manner, because she burned his father and brother to ashe? Like, his dad definitely showed no love to Sam and banished him from his own home. His brother was a bit more tolerable but his brother had this undying sense of loyalty toward his father, that he simply went along with every decision his father would make. And Sam knows Daenaerys is a queen and cant accept anything less than her enemies bending the knee. He's fully aware Daenaerys offered his father and brother a chance to live, but they both flat out refused it, What else was she supposed to, as a queen. Sparing enemies in that world is not an option. Sam should be fully aware of this, still he was about to cry and complained to Jon like ""youre a king, would you have spared him?"

 

I swear sometimes I sincerely depise Sams character.

If you don't understand why someone would be upset that their father and brother were burned alive, and their house was essentially ended, I don't see how we can help you.

[sweetsunray]

2 minutes ago, Forlong the Fat said:

Within the context of the show, I cannot agree that killing a defeated traitor who refuses to either kneel or take the equivalent of a prison sentence is the same as blowing up a bunch of people at a church. Assuming her war is just, killing people in the course of it is inevitable.

And you keep referring to prisoners of war, which is a concept with no currency in Westeros. No one in that situation would have treated the Tarlys as prisoners of war. At most, they would keep the Tarlys captive if they believed there was potential profit in it. But dealing with them as Dany did absolutely consistent with the generally accepted conduct of war. The only exception is the use of dragonfire vs. beheading. Of course, most people don't have access to dragonfire, but the Boltons would flay them, and the Iron born would drown them.

They do know there's a big difference between killing people on the battle field and the peope who surrendered and were captured.

Robb treated his POW according to Geneve Conventions pretty much, so they do have a concept of POW.

Edited April 15, 2019 by sweetsunray

[Caligula_K3]

1 minute ago, Forlong the Fat said:

Within the context of the show, I cannot agree that killing a defeated traitor who refuses to either kneel or take the equivalent of a prison sentence is the same as blowing up a bunch of people at a church. Assuming her war is just, killing people in the course of it is inevitable.

And you keep referring to prisoners of war, which is a concept with no currency in Westeros. No one in that situation would have treated the Tarlys as prisoners of war. At most, they would keep the Tarlys captive if they believed there was potential profit in it. But dealing with them as Dany did absolutely consistent with the generally accepted conduct of war. The only exception is the use of dragonfire vs. beheading. Of course, most people don't have access to dragonfire, but the Boltons would flay them, and the Iron born would drown them.

It's absolutely a concept with currency - for the highborn, and even occasionally for the lowborn. There have been tons of POWs taken throughout the course of the series, from Jaime Lannister to the men Arya frees at Harrenhal. Tyrion advocates for the position that they should take the Tarlys prisoner, so clearly the concept has currency.

@RhaegoTheUnborn I don't think it's hard to explain. People aren't robots. They feel things when family members die, even shitty family members.

[El Guapo]

3 minutes ago, Caligula_K3 said:

This is also true. The Tarlys haven't actively betrayed Dany; they fought on opposing sides of a civil war for understandable reasons. Dany didn't force Jon Snow to bend the knee or die when they first met each other even though his "crimes" are ultimately similar. 

They betrayed House Tyrell who had declared for Dany. So yes they betrayed Dany.

[Ice Queen]

2 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

Robb did.

And Robert Baratheon went on to help his enemies to their feet and win friends of them. 

Dany took the dictatorial "my way or the highway" approach--a foreign queen who had never set foot in Westeros, with a horde of Dothraki screamers, Unsullied and two dragons. She expected instantly loyalty because of course it's her god given right to have everyone in the world bow down before her. 

As I said in another thread, she's just like conquerors and dictators everywhere.