Ironically, After Falling In Love With GoT For Being Anti-Trope, Many Fans Now Seem To Want...The Tropes???

[Daske]

Agree with OP. And...

36 minutes ago, Kajjo said:

Of course I like to exchange thoughts. But not to tell authors what happens. We can analyse what happened and we can try to predict what will happen but these silly whining about "it should have been different" is nonsense. 

Life itself and storylines in particular are not easy to predict and what GRRM came up with for the Daenerys arc is fine and believable. No matter whether some fanboys like it or not.

It's funny that those screaming that the show had just become fanservice are the same ones now screaming that it didn't turn out how they wanted it to. It's only fanservice if it's what someone else wanted apparently.

 

[Relic]

1 hour ago, Relic said:

i don't want tropes, i want a proper adaptation of incredible source material, instead of dumbed down dreck. I've felt this way every since Season 2's "Power is power" bullshit. However, this steaming pile of donkey shit just gets dumber and dumber and dumber...

in fact, for me the first real sign of trouble with this show was when Bran failed ot have his visions while laying a coma. It became apparent that the creators had no real idea how to handle most of GRRM's rather incredible foreshadowing, world building, and prophecies. 

[sifth]

Just now, Daske said:

Agree with OP. And...

It's funny that those screaming that the show had just become fanservice are the same ones now screaming that it didn't turn out how they wanted it to. It's only fanservice if it's what someone else wanted apparently.

 

Even if you subvert expectations, you still need to do it in a satisfying way that makes sense. You can’t just randomly throw out character development in one episode and expect people to be happy.

[Bambi]

56 minutes ago, Kajjo said:

Of course I like to exchange thoughts. But not to tell authors what happens. We can analyse what happened and we can try to predict what will happen but these silly whining about "it should have been different" is nonsense. 

Life itself and storylines in particular are not easy to predict and what GRRM came up with for the Daenerys arc is fine and believable. No matter whether some fanboys like it or not.

No one is telling "authors" what to happen, it has already happened obviously, people are expressing their opinion about possible narrative mistakes. Just take a step back with going personal with this "fanboy-sh*t". 

[Relic]

1 hour ago, sifth said:

Even if you subvert expectations, you still need to do it in a satisfying way that makes sense. You can’t just randomly throw out character development in one episode and expect people to be happy.

You can, if what makes the lowest common denominator happy is dragon fire.

[sifth]

Just now, Relic said:

in fact, for me the first real sign of trouble with this show was when Bran failed ot have his visions while laying a coma. It became apparent that the creators had no real idea how to handle most of GRRM's rather incredible foreshadowing, world building, and prophecies. 

Same for me, the fact that the bird never spoke to Bran was a real let down. Bran just randomly wakes up at the end of episode 2 like it’s nothing. 

[sifth]

1 minute ago, Relic said:

You can, if what makes the lowest common denominator happy is dragon fire.

You know I honestly miss the first season of this show, when they couldn’t afford the battles.

[Nictarion]

2 minutes ago, Relic said:

You can, if what makes the lowest common denominator happy is dragon fire.

Well, we got more dragon fire last episode than all the others combined and it’s been one of the most negatively received episodes of the entire show...

[Anarchosaurus Rex]

No, contrived/contradictory writing is not "trope busting." Unless "good storytelling" is a "trope" of some sort, that is. GRRM busts some tropes, sure, but he does so in a way that is dramatically and thematically satisfying (i.e. a way that makes sense). GRRM doesn't lead his readers down a dead end - or over a cliff - and then say, "Surprise! Shocked?"

Were my expectations subverted when Jaime said that he didn't care about the people of King's Landing? Yes, they were. Given that he once sacrificed his honor to protect the people of King's Landing (and had to wear it through his life like a badge of dishonor), I didn't expect that. It didn't make sense. Were my expectations subverted when Jaime's last act was to try and save Cersei's life? Yes, they were. Given his "redemption arc" (not to mention the fact that she just tried to kill him and his brother), I didn't expect that. It didn't make sense. Having a character die after a series of inconsistent and incoherent actions is indeed "anticlimactic." It has nothing to do with how he died, but why. Imagine if he had died the same way, but with Brienne instead.

[Daske]

Just now, sifth said:

Even if you subvert expectations, you still need to do it in a satisfying way that makes sense. You can’t just randomly throw out character development in one episode and expect people to be happy.

People don't make sense a lot of the time!

Linear progression and neat bow-tied storylines are mostly not what happens in real life.

Some people revert to type, some strive and never get where they are going, some go back to smoking after 20 years off it, the sociopath show his true colours after being the helpful neighbour for decades, some get killed before they finish building their house, some close friends die without saying a goodbye and so on.

GRRM was doing this kind of thing all over the places in the books. Would anyone be happy (if not in the books) if show Loras killed a couple of friendly guards just because he was upset? His character has been ruined! Or (if not in the books) Drogo died weakly in bed from infection? He should have gone out in an epic battle with so-and-so, what a disservice to his character! It's just a matter of perspective imo.

 

[Tadco26]

22 minutes ago, Kajjo said:

Right.

I feel different. Very many members here predicted that after the events of E4, particularly the beheading of Missandei. Further evidence was provided throughout all the previous seasons. It is just not true that there were no clues to that possibility. 

Thousands of users discussed Daenerys going mad over and over in hundreds of Youtube videos since quite a time. 

I predicted she would go mad too... The Varys story made it obvious that this was the plotline they were set on forcing in.  I just didn't expect the execution to be so poor.

22 minutes ago, Kajjo said:

Yes, season 8 is in general a bit rushed, but Daenerys being on the verge was built up quite well. The lonesome wake feast scene, Jon retracting his affections, she feeling lonely... how much built up do you want?!

We have 7 seasons of protecting the innocent being one of her primary drives and one shortened season of her being lonely to justify her now being a mass murderer.

22 minutes ago, Kajjo said:

Both advisors had to talk Daenerys out of a lot of bloodshed over and over in Essos. Simply not true what you say here.

Not at all. There is a notable difference between snapping out and being evil, between mad and evil anyway. 

There is a big difference between being merciless to your enemies and randomly actively trying to kill innocent civillians.  Every past and present leader on the show has done something that could be considered merciless to their enemies including Jon hanging a 10 year old.

22 minutes ago, Kajjo said:

The road to evil is paved with good intentions. We see Daenerys again and again as warmhearted person, as wanting the right things, but she also all the time had violent and callous streaks. Extreme greed for power was always one of her primary personality traits. That doesn't come out of nowhere, but was played out very openly and directly. Only some fanboys declared it to be oh-so-good if a pretty young lady is power-hungry. It's not. No matter how pretty, no matter which gender, no matter which age.

Only those who bent their knee and she wanted to rule.

Which potential ruler would OK with their enemy not bending the knee? 

Every ruler was ruthless at one point or another to their enemies and those who defied them.  Robb killed the Karstarks for murdering Lannister prisoners.  Tywin sent the Mountain and other raiding parties to rape and pillage the river lands, and arranged the Red Wedding.  Stannis cut off Davos fingers AFTER he saved him from the siege and burned his own daughter.  The Tyrells had Joffery poisoned.  Littlefinger committed numerous atrocities.  Dorne poisoned Myrcella.  Robert Baratheon wanted to kill Targaryen children.  None of these were considered precursors to madness or mass slaughtering of innocents.

[BlackLightning]

I'm a bit astonished that people think this season and last season have been well-written.

Where was the character development?

[Kajjo]

4 minutes ago, Tadco26 said:

protecting the innocent being one of her primary drives

I never really saw this. That was Hollywoodish hoping for the best, too positive an interpretation all the time.

Daenerys wants people to bend their knee (and protect them then) or to kill them. Either or. She doesn't protect the innocent, she protects whoever bend their knee. 

5 minutes ago, Tadco26 said:

to justify her now being a mass murderer.

It not about justifying, it's about her snapping, her reaching a breaking point where she just cannot cope with all the losses and fails anymore.

No one justifies killing children here. I certainly don't. I just tell you why this happens and why it is believable to happen.

[Tadco26]

1 minute ago, Kajjo said:

I never really saw this. That was Hollywoodish hoping for the best, too positive an interpretation all the time.

Daenerys wants people to bend their knee (and protect them then) or to kill them. Either or. She doesn't protect the innocent, she protects whoever bend their knee. 

There is a lot more evidence to suggest that protecting the innocent is a primary goal than there is to suggest she is going mad prior to randomly burning King's Landing. 

From season 1 she believes she is saving the witch who kills Khal Drogo.  She orders her Dothraki to not rape.  Ending slavery is a primary driving goal for her, not just conquering for the sake of conquest.  And the risk of the cities she leaves falling back into slavery is a primary factor in not going to Westeros faster than she has. 

 

Which potential ruler would be OK with their enemy not bending the knee after being defeated?  Killing enemies who refuse to submit is still a long way from killing people who just surrendered.  Especially civilians (and her own soldiers who might happen to be caught in the fires). 

1 minute ago, Kajjo said:

It not about justifying, it's about her snapping, her reaching a breaking point where she just cannot cope with all the losses and fails anymore.

No one justifies killing children here. I certainly don't. I just tell you why this happens and why it is believable to happen.

We will have to agree to disagree that it was believable.  

[David Selig]

Avoiding tropes at all costs is terrible writing. When your main goal is "Subverting expectations", it leads to completely nonsensical "edgy" stuff like the last few seasons of this show. It's always better to write something predictable or cliched than something that doesn't make any sense but is "unexpected" or "totally original". If you want your plot and ending to be "anti-trope", you should set them up properly and not just come up with ass pull after ass pull. That's where the showrunners failed big time.

Compared that with the books. Ned's death may be "anti-trope", but it made perfect sense given the events earlier in the book. Same for the Red Wedding.

[Kajjo]

12 minutes ago, David Selig said:

Avoiding tropes at all costs is terrible writing.

Agreed. And they don't do that.

12 minutes ago, David Selig said:

When your main goal is "Subverting expectations"

They don't.

12 minutes ago, David Selig said:

stuff like the last few seasons of this show.

What? E5 contained the critical snapping. But what else? 

E3 was even lame with no real surprises and less victims than most people were afraid of. E4 was very normal in that respect, too. Beheading Missandei was a slight surprise but not a show-changer. Most people had bet on Misssandei and Grey Worm dying in E3.

No, one again to much moaning. S8 is neither trope or subversion. It is in-between and fine.

[ramla]

The problem with all this is that, Trope busting is a product of GRRM’s great storytelling… He doesn’t do it for the sake of doing it. He does it to tell a great story with twists and turns. But not even trope is busted, because if the trope fits the story then so be it. That’s the bottom line. George doesn’t use Trope busting as a Gimmick. But the show does. Dany may go mad queen in the books… But it won’t be or feel forced. Its all about the story NOT the gimmick!

[Tadco26]

I'd argue the show is more full of tropes than ever, and the "surprises" are only surprising because they make little sense in the context of what has been going on.  

Main characters have been transformed into heroes who are now consistently put in situations where death is the only likely outcome, but they come out unscathed.  How many times were Sam and Jaime and Brienne surrounded by wights and we come back and they are fine.  Jaime gets run thru twice and then manages just get up and go find Cersei.  This happens in action movies all the time, but season 1 getting stabbed would have been a death right then and there.   How many times does Arya have to avoid what should be certain death running thru King's Landing?

It's not to say that the characters should have died in those spots.  It's quite possible to create dangerous situations that aren't so dangerous that death is the only realistic outcome.  In the last few seasons the "heroes" fight off dozens of foes and every foe dies with one swing and every hero gives little sense of being in danger at all.  Dragons are either worthless or completely unstoppable based on the whims of the plot.  None of the most intelligent characters have actually done anything intelligent in several years now.  The Iron Fleet destroys Dany's navy, but Dany is still able to easily ferry people back and forth from Dragon Stone.  The consequence of losing her navy has no effect on the story.

There are plenty of shows and movies where this is expected, and can even be entertaining, but it's a far cry from the more realistic portrayal of danger in earlier seasons.  It's not about the show ending character's story arcs in a way that isn't how I wanted things to end.  It's about story arcs with minimal logic to support the direction they are taking being forced in.  It's about going from a show where it felt like any character could die at any moment if they were put in a life threatening situation, to a show where heroes are put in life threatening situations all the time with no consequences.

 

 

[Dragonslack]

Anti-trope? What are you talking about, it's just that the red shirts were not the ones you thought. They were still children and lasted until the end, didn't they? Daenerys, Jon (bastard but secretly the promised prince lol), arya (little girl that kicks ass), sansa (pretty but very clever princess), imp (smart beast) etc. Ned, Robb and others were sacrificial pieces to develop the main characters. Remember even soap operas start with the main goodies suffering. 

 

The point is the very bad storytelling by two hacks that only know how to adapt not create. Good luck star wars lol.

Biggest sin is the subverting of expectations trope that is the joker that trumps all other tropes. Unpredictable, non sensical. In the end Ned wakes and it was all a dream. They all take off their faces and are all Jaqar or a space lizard.

 

It is not favoring tropes  to expect that chekovs gun is used. Very bad storytelling to have all this time invested in a million chekovs guns to not have used them. It's like if the dragon was not used in battle with no explanation.

 

Trying to complain and whine about people giving a bad score? How is not ass licking to give this a ten? Not even the most adept professionals gave it a terribly good score. Worse than the trope of Im angry so score of 1 is the trope of Im going against the 1's people and give it a 10,  just 'cause.

 

 

 

 

 

[Cron]

17 hours ago, starklover said:

hes likely wont be. i think there will be no throne at the end.

Great point.

I think I saw some talk about whether the Iron Throne even exists anymore (it may have been destroyed in 805)

Regarding Jon, though, I think it will be a big "anti-trope" for him if he is not on the Iron Throne at the end, and I don't think he will be on the Throne, even if the Throne is intact and someone (or more than one person) is on it.