Jump to content
Hodor's Dragon

Protagonist suddenly goes crazy in last chapter of epic

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Petitephlox said:

Is Tyrion also crazypants because he murdered his father and lover in a jealous rage? How about Arya making Frey pie? Sansa with the dogs? Theon for killing two farmer boys to take Winterfell? Brutality and murder and vengeance were commonplace in Westeros and Essos, so let’s not judge Daenerys by our modern standards. If Arya were in Dany’s shoes, she would have crucified those masters in the same way. And who gives a rat’s ass that she burned the Tarlys? They told her they would remain her enemy. Ned Stark’s execution method was to use his sword. Her dragon is her sword. 

Important thoughts. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Petitephlox said:

Is Tyrion also crazypants because he murdered his father and lover in a jealous rage? How about Arya making Frey pie? Sansa with the dogs? Theon for killing two farmer boys to take Winterfell? Brutality and murder and vengeance were commonplace in Westeros and Essos, so let’s not judge Daenerys by our modern standards. If Arya were in Dany’s shoes, she would have crucified those masters in the same way. And who gives a rat’s ass that she burned the Tarlys? They told her they would remain her enemy. Ned Stark’s execution method was to use his sword. Her dragon is her sword. 

Actually, i think show Arya is psychopath.  Burning was the execution method of aerys the mad and its not at all like a sword.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember when people rolled their eyes at fans complaining how they butchered Stannis's character in S5............yeah now you understand.

 

Also it its fairly obvious in the books that Dany was going to lose it later in the story but I imagine a much bigger build up and actual reason. This is like Stannis/Shireen twist, completely forced but the OMG moment satisfied most people. It was awful writing with little to no build up and went against the character they had built up. Exactly like Dany. Its just shock for TV without a believable lead up. 

Share this post


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

Remember when people rolled their eyes at fans complaining how they butchered Stannis's character in S5............yeah now you understand.

 

Also it its fairly obvious in the books that Dany was going to lose it later in the story but I imagine a much bigger build up and actual reason. This is like Stannis/Shireen twist, completely forced but the OMG moment satisfied most people. It was awful writing with little to no build up and went against the character they had built up. Exactly like Dany. Its just shock for TV without a believable lead up. 

Stannis murdered his own brother with black magic. He was obviously going down, from the get-go, the only question was when.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Hodor's Dragon said:

Stannis murdered his own brother with black magic. He was obviously going down, from the get-go, the only question was when.

My problem with Stannis back then wasn't that he didn't have it in him to be ruthless, but that his decision to murder his daughter seemed to come out of nowhere.

First they make him love his daughter. Then he kills her, because that creates the biggest shock effect.

Even if Martin means for Shireen to die, I'm sure when her end comes in the books it will feel inevitable.

The difference is - 
When Ned Stark dies, it is shocking, but you don't have to ask "why on earth this happen?" You know. Ned Stark's death was a result of him being him and the people around him being the people around him.

Shireen's death was a result of a shocking plot point having to be made. It had nothing to do with who she was as a character or who Stannis was or even who Melisandre was. 

Sansa marrying Bolton was a result of a shocking plot point having to be made.

Myrcella's death was a result of a shocking plot point having to be made.

Dany's burning of King's Landing, whether or not she is ruthless of nature, is a result of a shocking plot point having to be made.

The show used to be character driven, but the last few seasons it has been spectacle driven.

I still love the show, the actors are amazing, the special effects are amazing, the music is amazing, the world building is amazing. But I don't see any reason to engage in a discussion about why certain characters do what they do. They do it because the plot demands it of them. That's the only fulfilling answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right, they are hacks. I could see this being in the books but differently. Have they said what the final twist is? Season too short anyway.

There are 3 very similar threads about this.

 

She is ruthless and thinks to rule by fear (Machiavelli in this world?!) yes, but such is only effective on people with power or and people that disobey/oppose you. It can only be then that she thinks they took sides so they suffer for treason with the rest of them.

 

 

Share this post


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

My problem with Stannis back then wasn't that he didn't have it in him to be ruthless, but that his decision to murder his daughter seemed to come out of nowhere.

First they make him love his daughter. Then he kills her, because that creates the biggest shock effect.

 

A lot of viewers let this slip or didn't notice it but now that nearly every major plot point is just shock effect they have finally started taking notice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I think I'm the only one who thinks there was a cold calculating reason for what Dany did and a sound strategy. Don't get me wrong it's horrific but bear with me:

- Dany knows Jon's secret is out

- she knows Sansa likely has 3 regions prepping against her

- she knows everyone prefers Jon, see the love in they've all been having with him & that her own advisors have been whispering behind her back about Jon's claim. If they were not considering him they would have spoke to her first. 

So Dany needs to send a message that says, I am the true Targarean and don't think of resisting me advisors/Sansa or anyone else in Westeros. If they don't stay on her side for love they'll stay for fear. In her mind she may even think this is preventing a future war between her and Jon/Sansa. The first moves in the war had already started despite Jon's reluctance so it was coming unless Dany did something. KL had surrendered but she had no intention of letting them live no matter what happened, if anything the doing it after the bells increases the merciless message she wanted to get across. 

GRRM will do this a lot better I'm sure & i think D&D did need a Dario or someone on screen reminding us this is a military option. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hodor's Dragon said:

Stannis murdered his own brother with black magic. He was obviously going down, from the get-go, the only question was when.

Didnt Daenerys just stood there and watched emotionless when her brother was killed by molten gold running from his head? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, T and A said:

Didnt Daenerys just stood there and watched emotionless when her brother was killed by molten gold running from his head? 

 

Stannis is bad because Renly jumped the line of succession and left orders to kill Stannis and his men in the morning. There has always been a huge denial on this forum when it comes to Daenerys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Nightwish said:

Well since this isn't a Disney Fairytale you have no problem with Dany getting the throne. If you wanted reality stick with the history books because everybody here should be dead. 

John ressurected? Dany came out of the flames alive? Arya survived because of faceless men? The Starks got the winterfell? Giants and the night king? 

Bran survives falling from a tower and becomes a raven? Jamie is not dead despite they cut his hand with no medical care? The Frey’s are dead because Arya changes faces?  

Reality doesn’t work when it’s convenient. 

Marin books are based on the real history, the War of the Roses. Hopefully, Martin can help, he explains about the gritty realism of the historical fiction:

https://www.maximumfun.org/sound-young-america/george-r-r-martin-author-song-ice-and-fire-series-interview-sound-young-america#transcript

GEORGE R.R. MARTIN: As I said, I read a lot of different things, not just science fiction/fantasy. One of the things I read a lot of is history and historical fiction. I'm a big fan of historical fiction. I did read fantasy as well. As I read that, I sort of had a problem with a lot of the fantasy I was reading, because it seemed to me that the middle ages or some version of the quasi middle ages was the preferred setting of a vast majority of the fantasy novels that I was reading by Tolkien imitators and other fantasists, yet they were getting it all wrong. It was a sort of Disneyland middle ages, where they had castles and princesses and all that. The trappings of a class system, but they didn't seem to understand what a class system actually meant.

 

GEORGE R.R. MARTIN: It was like a Ren Fair Middle Ages. Even though you had castles and princesses and walled cities and all that, the sensibilities were those of 20th century Americans. You didn't see that in good historical fiction. There were people who were writing fine historical fiction that really grasp it. In my kind of cross-genre/genre-bending kind of way was to go, you know, what I'd like to do is write an epic fantasy that had the imagination and the sense of wonder that you get in the best fantasy, but the gritty realism of the best historical fiction. If I could combine those two threads, I might have something fairly unique and well worth reading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Nightwish said:

According to your previous comment, this is reality, don’t wait for any closure or justice served because this would be Disney. You have answered yourself already with your previous quote: 

 

 

No. My quote is not the answer in this case. I'm trying to explain why Westerosi would consider Dany as the Mad Queen because she is not better than Aeries. They would think that she is another crazy Targ because she's not better than Aeries. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Roza Ahai said:

Marin books are based on the real history, the War of the Roses. Hopefully, Martin can help, he explains about the gritty realism of the historical fiction:

https://www.maximumfun.org/sound-young-america/george-r-r-martin-author-song-ice-and-fire-series-interview-sound-young-america#transcript

GEORGE R.R. MARTIN: As I said, I read a lot of different things, not just science fiction/fantasy. One of the things I read a lot of is history and historical fiction. I'm a big fan of historical fiction. I did read fantasy as well. As I read that, I sort of had a problem with a lot of the fantasy I was reading, because it seemed to me that the middle ages or some version of the quasi middle ages was the preferred setting of a vast majority of the fantasy novels that I was reading by Tolkien imitators and other fantasists, yet they were getting it all wrong. It was a sort of Disneyland middle ages, where they had castles and princesses and all that. The trappings of a class system, but they didn't seem to understand what a class system actually meant.

 

GEORGE R.R. MARTIN: It was like a Ren Fair Middle Ages. Even though you had castles and princesses and walled cities and all that, the sensibilities were those of 20th century Americans. You didn't see that in good historical fiction. There were people who were writing fine historical fiction that really grasp it. In my kind of cross-genre/genre-bending kind of way was to go, you know, what I'd like to do is write an epic fantasy that had the imagination and the sense of wonder that you get in the best fantasy, but the gritty realism of the best historical fiction. If I could combine those two threads, I might have something fairly unique and well worth reading.

Yes I know about Martin’s inspirations but when totally fantasy elements are used to provide solutions or save the characters who posse magic skills all of the sudden such as Brans fall etc.. don’t tell me it’s not Disney or that the end can’t be Disney unless you are Martin. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“All it takes is one bad day to reduce the sanest man alive to lunacy. That's how far the world is from where I am. Just one bad day.” - The Joker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Roza Ahai said:

No. My quote is not the answer in this case. I'm trying to explain why Westerosi would consider Dany as the Mad Queen because she is not better than Aeries. They would think that she is another crazy Targ because she's not better than Aeries. 

Sorry but why did you quote me in the first place? I was not referring to Aeries at all. Well apparently, even they find her ok or not ok, you will accept it as “reality” so nevermind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/13/2019 at 8:46 AM, Green Knight said:

This was almost worth it just for the Dany fan tears. :bawl: :D

No but seriously, anyone who thinks this is not a GRRM outcome just hasn’t read the books and was expecting a Disney ending as someone already pointed out. The thing that bothers me and is really inconsistent is Jon’s  role in all this and his “leadership”.  WTF? 

Dumb and Dumber are not really good in having the show characters convey their thoughts and feelings. In the books this is much easier, granted, but the show IMO would be more interesting and a higher caliber if they spent more time on character development and less on the visuals. What we get in this series are shows full of explosions and CGI action rather than plot development.

It worked for them apparently. The show has been a great success despite the lazy writing- or maybe because of it. Maybe that’s what most people want in general.  

I was a book reader and that’s how I came to the show. For those of us that did it’s a mixed bag. We get a lot of what is happening because of our experience with the real story despite the changes -and there are a lot. OTOH, Folks who only watch the show aren’t always privy to a lot of the background and are confused when stuff goes down seemingly out of thin air. Again, character build up is not D&D’s strong suit. 

there is also a lot of real time inner dialogue for the characters that is basically impossible to translate on screen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Nightwish said:

Yes I know about Martin’s inspirations but when totally fantasy elements are used to provide solutions or save the characters who posse magic skills all of the sudden such as Brans fall etc.. don’t tell me it’s not Disney or that the end can’t be Disney unless you are Martin. 

That's why I brought Martin's words. The ending will be bittersweet. There is no "happily ever after". So, it's not Disney. It's a cross-genre historical fiction and fantasy ( magic, dragons). You were talking the heroes ( Dany)  should be rewarded. Why? I'm explaining that it is not Disney, and all heroes won't get "happily ever after" rewards. Martin was talking about the "gritty realism" of the historical fiction" he uses in his works. So, he doesn't view his realm as Disneyland. It's in his interview. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Roza Ahai said:

That's why I brought Martin's words. The ending will be bittersweet. There is no "happily ever after". So, it's not Disney. It's a cross-genre historical fiction and fantasy ( magic, dragons). You were talking the heroes ( Dany)  should be rewarded. Why? I'm explaining that it is not Disney, and all heroes won't get "happily ever after" rewards. Martin was talking about the "gritty realism" of the historical fiction" he uses in his works. So, he doesn't view his realm as Disneyland. It's in his interview. 

So according to your view you will be ok with all characters dead for example. This is gritty realism so let’s blew everybody up in the end because an explosion happened at the crypts of winterfell. Good characters, bad characters, characters who tried, characters who didn’t try. It’s gritty and it’s historical. It doesn’t need to have meaning, characters, plot, resolution, closure, development. You will be ok. 

Edited by Nightwish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Nightwish said:

So according to your view you will be ok with all characters dead for example. This is gritty realism so let’s blew everybody up in the end because an explosion happened at the crypts of winterfell. Good characters, bad characters, characters who tried, characters who didn’t try. It’s gritty and it’s historical. It doesn’t need to have meaning, characters, plot, resolution, closure, development. You will be ok. 

Of course, I'll will be ok. If all characters die, it would be called tragedy. I would be probably cry at my very young age, but I wouldn't cry about the death of fictional characters now. Ned Stark tried a lot to save lifes, but he was executed, not rewarded. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Roza Ahai said:

Of course, I'll will be ok. If all characters die, it would be called tragedy. I would be probably cry at my very young age, but I wouldn't cry about the death of fictional characters now. Ned Stark tried a lot to save lifes, but he was executed, not rewarded. 

Well ok, your problem solved. Please remember to accept everything as it comes and be happy about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×