The Map Guy Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Davos' first line. Yes ... GRRM wrote this script back in Season 2. Thank you D&D for that super epic long moment of everyone hoping the bells would ring into King's Landing's official surrender. Way to keep it consistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoo Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Great find Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darmody Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 2 hours ago, The Map Guy said: Davos' first line. Yes ... GRRM wrote this script back in Season 2. Thank you D&D for that super epic long moment of everyone hoping the bells would ring into King's Landing's official surrender. Way to keep it consistent. Yeah, yeah. Except bells mean lots of things and they didn't mean surrender at the Blackwater, did they? Tyrion making such a big dang deal of them was just weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kajjo Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Davos: "I never known bells to mean surrender." That's it. The pivotal question is whether Tyrions set the bell thing up to betray Daenerys? Was he true or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneColdJorahMormont Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Guess it depends on the chime, do they play different tunes like a doorbell ? maybe something upbeat means ready the men and downbeat means we surrender I can see how someone could fail to understand the bells not meaning surrender.... but when all fighting stops and men throw down their swords I would imagine it far easier to figure out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kajjo Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 1 hour ago, darmody said: Except bells mean lots of things and they didn't mean surrender at the Blackwater, That's exactly what the thread opener meant. 1 hour ago, darmody said: Tyrion making such a big dang deal of them was just weird. Yes. Was it a trick or his last mistake? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LearnToBeNoOne Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 1 hour ago, Kajjo said: Davos: "I never known bells to mean surrender." That's it. The pivotal question is whether Tyrions set the bell thing up to betray Daenerys? Was he true or not? I mean the way he went on about them with such emphasis I'm willing to entertaint that idea. Dany clearly didn't trust him at least we saw that much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kajjo Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 3 minutes ago, LearnToBeNoOne said: I mean the way he went on about them with such emphasis I'm willing to entertaint that idea. Dany clearly didn't trust him at least we saw that much. Why did Tyrion believe in bells signalling surrender? Why on earth? The Davon quote is so meaningful. Maybe Tyrion betrays her, too. We already know that Tyrion set Jaime free and that was betrayal, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneColdJorahMormont Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 3 hours ago, darmody said: Yeah, yeah. Except bells mean lots of things and they didn't mean surrender at the Blackwater, did they? Tyrion making such a big dang deal of them was just weird. Tyrion truly believed the bells would mean surrender... the earlier line from Davos was obviously overlooked when writing last night episode. Once the men lay down their swords.. the bells were chimed so it all adds up, I just think Dany saw red and didn't want submission she had hoped for full on retaliation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LearnToBeNoOne Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 9 minutes ago, Kajjo said: Why did Tyrion believe in bells signalling surrender? Why on earth? The Davon quote is so meaningful. Exactly, Davos is one of the more senior members so him saying that carries a lot of importance because he's literally talking from experience. Tyrion was acting Hand of the King in that battle and leading KL's defence. Tyrion was obviously aware of the bells in that battle so why would it now suddenly mean to surrender when it didn't back then? Probably means something along the lines of we will not surrender you have to take it by force - which Dany played right inot. 9 minutes ago, Kajjo said: Maybe Tyrion betrays her, too. We already know that Tyrion set Jaime free and that was betrayal, too. That could be the next big thing, it would make sense. We saw how much Jaime means to him so he maybe it shows he wouldn't hurt Cersei because it would mean hurting Jaime. Bran could reveal something about Tyrion and Cersei that causes Jon to change his mind about her or something like that. Tyrion being exposed as a traitor would change things a lot. Got to mention Bran once more, last chance for him to get involved haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torienne Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 3 hours ago, Kajjo said: Davos: "I never known bells to mean surrender." That's it. The pivotal question is whether Tyrions set the bell thing up to betray Daenerys? That's it. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter prince Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 It's not just bells that mattered to Tyrion. "Bells ringing, gates open" I think his emphasis on the bells was to shorten the thought and is because he believes that's how Jaime survives. He did not want his brother to die and knew he would if the battle continued and the dragon was used on the Red Keep. The bells ringing, gates open to Tyrion basically meant all clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martianmister Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 It's way too perfect. Foreshadowing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwiceBorn Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 "The Battle of the Bells was a battle fought during Robert's Rebellion between royalist and rebel forces at Stoney Sept in the southwestern riverlands. It is so-named because at the beginning of the battle the town's sept tolled its bells to warn the citizens of the battle and to persuade them to stay inside their houses." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madhikun Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 3 hours ago, LearnToBeNoOne said: Exactly, Davos is one of the more senior members so him saying that carries a lot of importance because he's literally talking from experience. Tyrion was acting Hand of the King in that battle and leading KL's defence. Tyrion was obviously aware of the bells in that battle so why would it now suddenly mean to surrender when it didn't back then? Probably means something along the lines of we will not surrender you have to take it by force - which Dany played right inot. That could be the next big thing, it would make sense. We saw how much Jaime means to him so he maybe it shows he wouldn't hurt Cersei because it would mean hurting Jaime. Bran could reveal something about Tyrion and Cersei that causes Jon to change his mind about her or something like that. Tyrion being exposed as a traitor would change things a lot. Got to mention Bran once more, last chance for him to get involved haha. See, now THIS would be a great twist. Tyrion has never done right by Dany. I don't blame her for not following his awful advice again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a girl knows nothing Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 5 hours ago, Kajjo said: The pivotal question is whether Tyrions set the bell thing up to betray Daenerys? Was he true or not? I can't think what he would be setting her up for since they had clearly won the battle when the bells rang. Yes he freed Jaime, which was a betrayal, but I don't see how that plays into a larger betrayal. I thought he really just wanted to save Jaime, Cersei, and their baby and also prevent unnecessary bloodshed. Also when the Lannister army yielded, that's when a whole bunch of people started yelling to ring the bells. In this case I think it did mean surrender. What else could it mean if they were defeated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azor_ahaiii Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Maybe the official surrender signal changes every month and this month it was bells Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoonKnight21 Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 10 hours ago, The Map Guy said: Davos' first line. Yes ... GRRM wrote this script back in Season 2. Thank you D&D for that super epic long moment of everyone hoping the bells would ring into King's Landing's official surrender. Way to keep it consistent. Watching this just made me sad. Reminds me of what the show used to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Jon Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Just so sloppy by D&D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTN02 Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 better title would be: the battle of the mad queens... probably to spoilery to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.