[Poll] How would you rate episode 805?

[Caligula_K3]

25 minutes ago, Wsc48 said:

Currently 111 rating it at 1/10

Speaks much to the current state of the show. 

Or to the insane expectations of the fanbase and the irrational anger and outrage produced by fandom culture. I'm sorry, even if somebody didn't like this episode, or thinks the script wasn't good, to rate an episode a 1 is to say that it's an abomination with no redeeming features: music, acting, plot, script, cinematography, direction, effects, etc... There is no way someone can in good faith argue that any of these elements were so bad they deserve a 1, let alone all of them. Much online fan criticism seems to believe that something has to be the best thing ever or the worst thing ever; god forbid there's anything in between. 

 

Edited May 15, 2019 by Caligula_K3

[Wsc48]

Personally what matters to me is the story. The writing. The characters. If the story doesn't make sense and it's filled with plot holes and lazy writing, unearned moments and characters assassinated or acting out of character...it's a 1 for me. I don't care how pretty it is. This show is a dumpster fire. And a lot of the hate is because it was once so good but now... 

It's like a parody of it's former self. 

[Vanadis]

10 minutes ago, Caligula_K3 said:

Or to the insane expectations of the fanbase and the irrational anger and outrage produced by fandom culture. I'm sorry, even if somebody didn't like this episode, or thinks the script wasn't good, to rate an episode a 1 is to say that it's an abomination with no redeeming features: music, acting, plot, script, cinematography, direction, effects, etc... There is no way someone can in good faith argue that any of these elements were so bad they deserve a 1, let alone all of them. Much online fan criticism seems to believe that something has to be the best thing ever or the worst thing ever; god forbid there's anything in between. 

 

I humbly disagree. If you watch a movie and the sound is so noisy that you can't hear a word anyone is saying, to the point that it's not possible to understand what is going on, it doesn't matter if everything else is perfect. You have every right to give it a 1. 

Likewise, if the writing is so bad that you feel it's impossible to understand what is going on anymore, same thing. Especially if the writing deviates from a high standard you got used to in earlier seasons.

[Caligula_K3]

Just now, Wsc48 said:

Personally what matters to me is the story. The writing. The characters. If the story doesn't make sense and it's filled with plot holes and lazy writing, unearned moments and characters assassinated or acting out of character...it's a 1 for me. I don't care how pretty it is. This show is a dumpster fire. And a lot of the hate is because it was once so good but now... 

It's like a parody of it's former self. 

People throw out these buzzphrases like "plot holes" and "lazy writing" and they seem to have lost all meaning. There were no pIot holes in the last episode. I can apply the term lazy writing to anything and it will be meaningless. As for character assassination; I know that Dany's turn is controversial, as is Jaime's, and maybe you wish they'd gone another way or that these developments had more time, but a character acting in a way you don't want them to when they've shown these same traits throughout the story is not character assassination.

But even if all these things were true; is this really what 1 writing looks like to you? Have you seen other TV? People complain about the dialogue on this show declining since they ran out of the books, and it is true that the dialogue is generally not as good as it used to be, but Jesus Christ, I watched Aquaman over the weekend and every third line was as bad as this show's dialogue at its very, very worst which we get once a season (bad pussy). And Aquaman's script does not deserve a 1 either. 

[Vanadis]

3 minutes ago, Caligula_K3 said:

People throw out these buzzphrases like "plot holes" and "lazy writing" and they seem to have lost all meaning. There were no pIot holes in the last episode. I can apply the term lazy writing to anything and it will be meaningless. As for character assassination; I know that Dany's turn is controversial, as is Jaime's, and maybe you wish they'd gone another way or that these developments had more time, but a character acting in a way you don't want them to when they've shown these same traits throughout the story is not character assassination.

But even if all these things were true; is this really what 1 writing looks like to you? Have you seen other TV? People complain about the dialogue on this show declining since they ran out of the books, and it is true that the dialogue is generally not as good as it used to be, but Jesus Christ, I watched Aquaman over the weekend and every third line was as bad as this show's dialogue at its very, very worst which we get once a season (bad pussy). And Aquaman's script does not deserve a 1 either. 

Heh, if it's okay that Dany burned a city to the ground after it surrendered to her, then surely it's okay that I gave the episode a 1 too. Who needs logic anyway?
 

[GilletteMace]

I dont care about how well a show or movie is done technically. I wasnt supportive of one or another character. Up until last season i wouldnt have voted it below 5, but it has evolved into the typical mainstream Hollywood trash. Its the lack of any creativity and it is offensiveness to anyone who has seen all the episodes before, it has gotten just plainly stupid at this point. If you cant see this, i cant help you. I think the points of those rating the show a 1 are far more convincing than those who gave it 3 or more. Seen in the context and history of this show, the last episodes have truely been an abomination, a parody of its former self. (as wsc rightly said before) 

Edited May 15, 2019 by GilletteMace

[House Cambodia]

11 minutes ago, Caligula_K3 said:

There were no pIot holes in the last episode.

One simple example: in episode 3 we saw the whole Dothraki horde make a cavalry charge into the wights at Winterfell. We saw precisely NONE return alive. Suddenly there are hundreds charging through Kings Landing; where did they come from? It was never explained.

[Stego]

Is this the thread where we wish cancer on D+D, or is that somewhere else?

[Stonelands]

2 hours ago, Vanadis said:

Is Daenerys going dark interesting? Yes!

Is a raging Daenerys flying over King's Landing on her magnificent dragon burning everything to the ground while women, children and men run screaming in the streets an epic, powerful image that evokes a range of emotions in the viewers? Yes!

Does it say something about how power corrupts? Yes!

Was it earned? No!  ... !!!!!

It was a cool scene, an interesting turn, but since we've followed Dany through several seasons, it made no sense.

"She is a Targaryen" just isn't enough of an explanation. By that logic, Jon is just as dangerous as her, and Varys shouldn't have supported her from the beginning.

I don't mind where the story went, I just mind that it didn't take us there on a step by step journey until we could look back at her snapping and realize that it was inevitable. Instead it gave us a few instances where Dany was unstable and ruthless, and used that as an excuse to teleport to a conclusion for the story that just isn't earned.

It's bad writing. The characters deserve better. The fans deserve better. The show deserves better. George deserves better. 

These writers don't understand human psychology. They don't understand storytelling. They don't understand what made GOT great in the first place. 

But it's not their fault. Someone should have recognized this a long time ago and replaced those writers with someone competent. I blame HBO. I hope they have the decency to apologize.

I think you're overlooking the fact that she has had some serious knocks in the last few episodes that would speed up her transition a lot,  losing Jorah,  learning of Jon's identity and realizing that he's loved when she isn't, losing a second dragon and then losing Missandei.  I don't think the transition is perfect but I think it's a lot better than a lot of people are giving it credit for. 

[Stonelands]

32 minutes ago, House Cambodia said:

One simple example: in episode 3 we saw the whole Dothraki horde make a cavalry charge into the wights at Winterfell. We saw precisely NONE return alive. Suddenly there are hundreds charging through Kings Landing; where did they come from? It was never explained.

That wasn't the whole horde that was present in episode 3.

[House Cambodia]

2 minutes ago, Stonelands said:

That wasn't the whole horde that was present in episode 3.

Evidently, but was that mentioned? What were the rest doing?

[Vanadis]

3 minutes ago, Stonelands said:

I think you're overlooking the fact that she has had some serious knocks in the last few episodes that would speed up her transition a lot,  losing Jorah,  learning of Jon's identity and realizing that he's loved when she isn't, losing a second dragon and then losing Missandei.  I don't think the transition is perfect but I think it's a lot better than a lot of people are giving it credit for. 

She had taken many knocks in earlier seasons too.
If, as someone suggested, she had flown directly to the Red Keep and laid waste to it only, that would have made sense.
But it didn't make sense for her to burn the city after it surrendered to her.

Or, they could have edited what they had differently, made the beats of her arc more prominent, made the city not surrender and the deaths of her friends and loved ones happen at more critical points, they could have played the betrayal card fully until she truly was alone, and it could all have made more sense that way.

But I think they never wanted her descent into darkness to be plausible or worthy of her character. They just wanted it to come as as big a shock as possible.

I'm all for Dark Dany, but the writing in this episode wasn't worthy of a B-movie.

[Wsc48]

25 minutes ago, Vanadis said:

But I think they never wanted her descent into darkness to be plausible or worthy of her character. They just wanted it to come as as big a shock as possible.

Exactly, they did not want to telegraph it so that they could get the most "shock" value. Even if in the end it appears to make no sense. 

[Caligula_K3]

51 minutes ago, Vanadis said:

She had taken many knocks in earlier seasons too.
If, as someone suggested, she had flown directly to the Red Keep and laid waste to it only, that would have made sense.
But it didn't make sense for her to burn the city after it surrendered to her.

Or, they could have edited what they had differently, made the beats of her arc more prominent, made the city not surrender and the deaths of her friends and loved ones happen at more critical points, they could have played the betrayal card fully until she truly was alone, and it could all have made more sense that way.

But I think they never wanted her descent into darkness to be plausible or worthy of her character. They just wanted it to come as as big a shock as possible.

I'm all for Dark Dany, but the writing in this episode wasn't worthy of a B-movie.

People have been actively predicting this turn as of season 7 episode 4 last season; many thought it would come much sooner.  It's definitely been a possibility in the show since the middle of season 6,  when she gave her speech to the Dothraki. After The Last Stark, it was all but certain. After that first scene with Varys and her dialogue with Tyrion and Jon this episode, I would have been deeply shocked if Dany's descent into darkness didn't happen. I can see this "shock" criticism with some aspects of the series' plot in the last two seasons, like the Littlefinger reveal at the end of last season. I can see criticisms of the pacing of Dany's descent. But her decision was built up and hinted at to a far greater extent than other "shocks" in this series, from Ned's beheading to the Red Wedding. 

@House CambodiaThis would be a plot hole if it was ever made clear that these were all the Dothraki at the siege of winterfell. But it wasn't. You can say that it's weak direction in episode 3 to not show the other Dothraki or many of the ones who survived the charge; but this is different than a plot hole, and not even really a good example of bad writing. It's an example of bad direction, or perhaps bad editing if they had the shots. Stuff like this is kind of why I feel that a lot of these critical buzzphrases have lost all meaning.   

Edited May 15, 2019 by Caligula_K3

[Vanadis]

11 minutes ago, Caligula_K3 said:

People have been actively predicting this turn as of season 7 episode 4 last season; many thought it would come much sooner.  It's definitely been a possibility in the show since the middle of season 6,  when she gave her speech to the Dothraki. After The Last Stark, it was all but certain. After that first scene with Varys and her dialogue with Tyrion and Jon this episode, I would have been deeply shocked if Dany's descent into darkness didn't happen. I can see this "shock" criticism with some aspects of the series' plot in the last two seasons, like the Littlefinger reveal at the end of last season. I can see criticisms of the pacing of Dany's descent. But her decision was built up and hinted at to a far greater extent than other "shocks" in this series, from Ned's beheading to the Red Wedding. 

 

Again, I find myself humbly disagreeing with another person on the Internet =)

Is this the scene you talk about from season 6? 

Her speech:

"Every khal who ever lived chose three blood riders to fight beside him and guard his way.
But I am not a khal. I will not choose three blood riders. I choose you all.
I will ask more of you than any khal has ever asked of his khalassar!
Will you ride the wooden horses across the black salt sea?
Will you kill my enemies in their iron suits and tear down their stone houses?
Will you give me the Seven Kingdoms, the gift Khal Drogo promised me before the Mother of Mountains?
Are you with me? Now and always?"

No, not seeing her going insane.

In the beginning of this clip, her lover has this to say about her:
"You weren't made to sit on a chair in a palace. ... You're a conqueror, Daenerys Stromborn."

That is who she is. A brilliant (or insanely lucky) conqueror, but not a terribly good ruler.

However, for being a conqueror at heart, it is quite amazing how concerned she has been with slaves, innocents, and children. It's almost been a bit too much. She loved Khal Drogo who certainly was ruthless without that aspect rubbing off on her. She wanted to save slaves when she could. She enslaved her own dragons for fear they might kill another innocent.

Dany was ruthless and emotional but never insane until the last episode.

As for the recent foreshadowing, it has no basis in anything Dany did. It's basis was in Varys suddenly becoming suspicious of her. We were meant to wonder: Could he be right? But apart from her feeling left out when Tormund patted Jon on the shoulder, there really was nothing to see. There was no way to draw the conclusion that this means she will turn on one of her core beliefs and start killing innocents, except for the fact that it was Varys who was worried.

And again, I'm not against a Dark Dany storyline. But it needs to be handled with care. Not as a means to get a Dragon Burns The City Because It's Awesome scene.
 

[Jewel]

2 hours ago, Caligula_K3 said:

People throw out these buzzphrases like "plot holes" and "lazy writing" and they seem to have lost all meaning. There were no pIot holes in the last episode. I can apply the term lazy writing to anything and it will be meaningless. As for character assassination; I know that Dany's turn is controversial, as is Jaime's, and maybe you wish they'd gone another way or that these developments had more time, but a character acting in a way you don't want them to when they've shown these same traits throughout the story is not character assassination.

But even if all these things were true; is this really what 1 writing looks like to you? Have you seen other TV? People complain about the dialogue on this show declining since they ran out of the books, and it is true that the dialogue is generally not as good as it used to be, but Jesus Christ, I watched Aquaman over the weekend and every third line was as bad as this show's dialogue at its very, very worst which we get once a season (bad pussy). And Aquaman's script does not deserve a 1 either. 

No plot holes? Let's go over them for a second.

- The bells have never meant surrender, they were a sign that a monarch had died (Davos even mentions how the bells never mean surrender in S2)
- Tyrion asking Davos if he's the greatest smuggler alive- he knows this, as Davos has smuggled Tyrion into King's Landing before
- The "Game Revealed" episode mentions how Dany wanted to make it personal- how? She knows Cersei doesn't give a fuck about King's Landing or its people
- Cersei mentioning how the Red Keep has never fallen, yet it has fallen to Tywin Lannister during Robert's Rebellion
- Tyrion turning to Dany about Varys committing treason, and instantly committing treason himself

That's just this episode. There's even more in the entire season. 

We aren't upset that "a character isn't acting in a way we don't want them to", we are upset that there's been NO set up for this. Yes, Dany has been ruthless throughout the show- to people that deserved it, or she felt needed to be brought to justice. She's shown regret when killing someone she wasn't sure was guilty. She has never slaughtered or thought about slaughtering innocent people. Never. Ever. She's fought for innocent people. Hell, in episode 3 she was fighting for innocent people. That suddenly switches in ONE episode? ONE? She locked up her dragons- against the counsel of her advisors, because they killed an innocent child. She stayed in Meereen, against the counsel of her advisors, because she couldn't leave the people. During the entire show we've been made to feel empathy for Dany, to cheer when she burns the people who betray her, and now suddenly we have to be horrified of her? Because she's a Targaryen? No, not a good enough reason. Jon is a Targaryen, should we be horrified of him? Rhaegar was a Targaryen, there have been many good Targaryens, more than there have been mad Targaryens. 

There was no set-up for Dany to become the mad queen. None. If D&D wanted this to be even remotely believable, then they should've taken HBO's offer to increase the budget for more episodes and have her descent into madness shown from the start, but they didn't. Because they don't care about the story.

I don't mind Dany as mad queen, I really don't, and should this arc happen for her in the books then I have full trust in George to handle it well and showcase a slow progression of madness- as was the case with her father, who slowly went mad and planned to burn the city after losing it BECAUSE he went mad.

I don't accept D&D's mad queen, because it doesn't fit the character we've been shown.

Edited May 15, 2019 by Jewel
spelling mistake

[Caligula_K3]

30 minutes ago, Vanadis said:

Again, I find myself humbly disagreeing with another person on the Internet =)

Is this the scene you talk about from season 6? 

Her speech:

"Every khal who ever lived chose three blood riders to fight beside him and guard his way.
But I am not a khal. I will not choose three blood riders. I choose you all.
I will ask more of you than any khal has ever asked of his khalassar!
Will you ride the wooden horses across the black salt sea?
Will you kill my enemies in their iron suits and tear down their stone houses?
Will you give me the Seven Kingdoms, the gift Khal Drogo promised me before the Mother of Mountains?
Are you with me? Now and always?"

No, not seeing her going insane.

In the beginning of this clip, her lover has this to say about her:
"You weren't made to sit on a chair in a palace. ... You're a conqueror, Daenerys Stromborn."

That is who she is. A brilliant (or insanely lucky) conqueror, but not a terribly good ruler.

However, for being a conqueror at heart, it is quite amazing how concerned she has been with slaves, innocents, and children. It's almost been a bit too much. She loved Khal Drogo who certainly was ruthless without that aspect rubbing off on her. She wanted to save slaves when she could. She enslaved her own dragons for fear they might kill another innocent.

Dany was ruthless and emotional but never insane until the last episode.

As for the recent foreshadowing, it has no basis in anything Dany did. It's basis was in Varys suddenly becoming suspicious of her. We were meant to wonder: Could he be right? But apart from her feeling left out when Tormund patted Jon on the shoulder, there really was nothing to see. There was no way to draw the conclusion that this means she will turn on one of her core beliefs and start killing innocents, except for the fact that it was Varys who was worried.

And again, I'm not against a Dark Dany storyline. But it needs to be handled with care. Not as a means to get a Dragon Burns The City Because It's Awesome scene.
 

I think a major difference in our interpretation of the scene and the character (and the reason why we can humbly disagree) is that I don't think Dany has gone insane. I think that this is a part of her personality that's been there from the end of season 1, and season 2 at the least. You're right that her belief in vengeance, brutality, and achieving her destiny at any costs have been tempered by many positive qualities: empathy for the downtrodden and a willingness to listen to advisors who advocate for mercy are among them. Even in many of those moments, she's shown a certain cruelty and self-righteousness. Without her advisors, with her belief in her destiny as the last Targaryen destroyed by Jon, with her dragons and her friends dead, and with the realization that she is nothing to Westeros but a foreign conqueror even after fighting for its survival, it's very believable to me that she'd give in to her worst impulses; not because she's insane, but because she's angry and realizes that fear is the only thing she has going for her in Westeros.

@Jewel Again, none of these are plot holes; the closest is the bells thing. I have to admit that I don't remember that line in season 2, but if it is there, it is as tiny of a plot hole as you can get, an inconsistency akin to Tyrion being able to do cartwheels in one chapter and never again, or arrows in ASoS being able to reach the top of the wall despite it being 800 feet high. Tyrion asking Davos if he's the greatest smuggler alive is a way of opening a conversation in a somewhat lighthearted way and hinting to the audience that Davos will be using his smuggling skills; it is not Tyrion forgetting that Davos is a smuggler. The point of Cersei's comment is that the Red Keep has never been captured with a full on assault; Tywin got in through betrayal. Dany does make it personal by destroying Cersei's entire legacy and city, and in any case, if you want to argue that she misunderstands another character, that's not a plot hole. Tyrion rats Varys out not just for committing treason but for undermining the stability of Dany's rule and inciting more violence, while Tyrion hopes to stabilize her rule and for as peaceful a solution as possible. Etc... By this logic, you can go through the entire series, books and show, and point to just about any  piece of dialogue or event and call it a plot hole.     

Edit: And I'd say the fact that we've been called to empathize with Dany is exactly the point, and as true to the themes of this series as an ending can get. We empathize with her because we've seen her be a victim and be brutalized; it's empowering to see her rise to power. When she does brutal things, we tend to excuse it because she's a protagonist, we get her perspective and she seems to mean well, and the people she kills tend to follow a moral and legal code we find repugnant - slavery. Her conquests in Essos always led to the deaths of many innocent people; but we just didn't care as much. We excused it because her cause was noble. But now in King's Landing, we see what the real price of conquest and vengeance and wanting to achieve power is. And that in the end is what Dany has wanted since Season 2. I think it's brilliant, personally; all the more so because I don't think Dany is insane. Insanity is just a convenient lens for other characters to view her by, given what past Targaryens have been like.  

Edited May 15, 2019 by Caligula_K3
To add the final paragraph

[Vanadis]

3 minutes ago, Caligula_K3 said:

Without her advisors, with her belief in her destiny as the last Targaryen destroyed by Jon, with her dragons and her friends dead, and with the realization that she is nothing to Westeros but a foreign conqueror even after fighting for its survival, it's very believable to me that she'd give in to her worst impulses; not because she's insane, but because she's angry and realizes that fear is the only thing she has going for her in Westeros.

And if it had happened under different circumstances, it could have worked.

But it happened after the city surrendered.

And why did it happen at that moment? Why did they introduce the bells as a signal in this episode at all? So that they could build a Point of Most Shock. That's all there is to it. There is no character development. There is no story. It's just a series of spectacles at this point. 

And as a note to the 'plot hole' argument, viewers and fans will naturally fill the plot holes with their own internal reasoning and find their own personal explanations. That is just how we work as human beings. But even if we have the ability and the proclivity as humans to find patterns in chaos, this level of inconsistency is still bad writing. 

[Vanadis]

(What a beautiful man Daario Naharis was. I never appreciated him enough. Gods, Jon is useless.)

[Caligula_K3]

19 minutes ago, Vanadis said:

And if it had happened under different circumstances, it could have worked.

But it happened after the city surrendered.

And why did it happen at that moment? Why did they introduce the bells as a signal in this episode at all? So that they could build a Point of Most Shock. That's all there is to it. There is no character development. There is no story. It's just a series of spectacles at this point. 

And as a note to the 'plot hole' argument, viewers and fans will naturally fill the plot holes with their own internal reasoning and find their own personal explanations. That is just how we work as human beings. But even if we have the ability and the proclivity as humans to find patterns in chaos, this level of inconsistency is still bad writing. 

But the level of nitpickiness has risen to such a level that you can make these claims about any event in the story. Why did Ned tell Cersei he knew about the incest when he thinks she killed Jon Arryn and knows her much better than Dany knows Cersei? Why does Jon choose to ignore Ghost when he's freaking out before the assassination? Why does Jon Snow ask Tyrion who he is when he first meets him when he knows who Tyrion is? Unless we want our fiction to be a series of monologues where robotic characters explain to us their entirely 100% logical explanations at all times, then anything can be nitpicked apart to the degree that this season is. And I believe such nitpickiness, and the stark divide where everything is either a masterpiece or garbage, are just uninteresting ways to approach fiction. And to be clear, this is something I think has taken hold "nerd" fandom more broadly, not just Game of Thrones; I think it's a pity.

The bells are there to make Dany's choice all the starker. That moment had been built to throughout the entire episode, and in my opinion, the past season. Emilia's acting says it all at that moment; she knows she has the choice to end it all there, and deal with the consequences of Aejon and failing to earn Westeros' love. Or she can give into her pain and inflict it on the queen she wants vengeance on, the people who she believes refused to follow her, and the city that destroyed her life. And she can rule with fear, all for the greater good. Again, you found this to be a big shock, but nobody I was watching with did; we were all expecting some variation on these events in this episode. I would have been surprised if Dany resisted her worst impulses at this point.   Hell, even my Dad, who's as casual a show watcher as you can get, thought this was coming based on the buildup of the past episodes. What I was shocked by was the willingness of the writing and directing to show the brutality of Dany's choice; and again, I'm glad they did that, because it turns a character shift into a beautiful and horrifying statement of the themes of this series.

But I think it's fair to say that we won't convince each other on this point. I hope you enjoy the finale more, and that we all get the books soon so we can see how GRRM handles it!          

Edited May 15, 2019 by Caligula_K3