Jump to content
Hodor's Dragon

"Bittersweet" can't happen in the show

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Nightwish said:

Tolkien can’t be more straightforward in his books. It is a classical good evil story where the good guys ALL surviving after accomplishing a very difficult task and the bad guys lose. To be honest I don’t know what GM means in the quote above. People remember LOTR for the epic journey it offered, the meaningful messages it had and the satisfaction it delivered. 

If he judges that people remember the sadness he judges it wrong. Perhaps he does but already his book is filled with death and crimes and betrayal. I don’t understand how he can think of his own end being bittersweet after all the tragedy he offers? 

The ending can have some good to it. Also not all the heros in the lord of the rings survive. I can't remember his name but in the movie sean bean plays him. That character died. Golems story was tragic.

 

 

I think that GRRM's book can have hapiness in the ending. His book is alot darker then tolkiens and if he doesn't see that then something is wrong. However even with the horrors in game of thrones there can still be happiness if they can overcome the challenge. And for the record I am talking about the books when I say the ending doesn't have to be tragic. At this point I don't see it being possible on the show unless you hate every character except one and that one gets a happy ending.

 

Tolkien's book should be remembered for not just the journey but the imagination and the fact that he is the original "big" fantasy writer who started it for other fantasy writers who would come later. I really don't see where the big sadness that GRRM speaks of came from. Tolkien even wrote in a way to save frodo who sacrificed so much as well as his uncle. To show that "goodness" and nobility is rewarded.

Edited by snow is the man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Nightwish said:

here you have the opposite: a bitter sad story which is balanced with what? A more sad, depressed and nihilistic closure? :bang::bang:

What I am reading? 

 

 

Well technically, what we have in Show GOT is a villain who was disguised as a good guy for the longest possible time. But since they're going out of their way to portray Dany's final choice as evil, it is actually a classic good vs evil story. It just took a long time to reveal who the ultimate bad guy was. In that sense, the ending is "bittersweet": Bitter, because we have come to care for the villain, but sweet, because the good guys triumph over evil.

(Not defending the writing. I think this was poorly done. I wonder how specific the author was when he described Dany's fall to the show writers. Did he tell them that she destroys a city that has surrendered to her, or did he just say that she burns King's Landing, and it's up to them to get her there? I'd like to know.)

Edited by Vanadis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, snow is the man said:

The ending can have some good to it. Also not all the heroes in the lord of the rings survive. I can't remember his name but in the show sean bean plays him. That character died.

Sam Gamgee died?  He died?!

 Ha ha ha ha!

In 1482 following the death of his wife Rose, Sam bequeathed the Red Book of Westmarch to Elanor of the Towers, continued passed the Towers to the Grey Havens where he took ship into the Undying Lands of the Uttermost West, last of the Ringerbearers to depart Middle Earth.

Kids these days!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CrypticWeirwood said:

Sam Gamgee died?  He died?!

 Ha ha ha ha!

In 1482 following the death of his wife Rose, Sam bequeathed the Red Book of Westmarch to Elanor of the Towers, continued passed the Towers to the Grey Havens where he took ship into the Undying Lands of the Uttermost West, last of the Ringerbearers to depart Middle Earth.

Kids these days!

 

No his name his boromir. I just looked it up. I said the character sean bean plays. Sean bean you know the guy who played ned stark? Boromir dies in the first book.

Share this post


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

Well technically, what we have in Show GOT is a villain who was disguised as a good guy for the longest possible time. But since they're going out of their way to portray Dany's final choice as evil, it is actually a classic good vs evil story. It just took a long time to reveal who the ultimate bad guy was. In that sense, the ending is "bittersweet": Bitter, because we have come to care for the villain, but sweet, because the good guys triumph over evil.

(Not defending the writing. I think this was poorly done. I wonder how specific the author was when he described Dany's fall to the show writers. Did he tell them that she destroys a city that has surrendered to her, or did he just say that she burns King's Landing, and it's up to them to get her there? I'd like to know.)

Really? Because it’s just Dany, all the rest of the characters and the universe that compiles the world of GOT is a happy place. The theme of GOT is dark, bitter, pessimistic and holds most of the weight, when the story will be judged. And on top of that GM says he wants a sad end to be remembered? In an already sad story?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Vanadis said:

Well technically, what we have in Show GOT is a villain who was disguised as a good guy for the longest possible time. But since they're going out of their way to portray Dany's final choice as evil, it is actually a classic good vs evil story. It just took a long time to reveal who the ultimate bad guy was. In that sense, the ending is "bittersweet": Bitter, because we have come to care for the villain, but sweet, because the good guys triumph over evil.

(Not defending the writing. I think this was poorly done. I wonder how specific the author was when he described Dany's fall to the show writers. Did he tell them that she destroys a city that has surrendered to her, or did he just say that she burns King's Landing, and it's up to them to get her there? I'd like to know.)

I think it's the second one. I can see a dozen scenarios where she burns KL and it comes off as her being brutal but not the mad queen and I can also see her hitting the cache of wildfire and turning the city into a crater. Or her attacking caused a garrison caused a fire to spread across the city. Those two alone would be different from what happened since it would be an accident or her taking a big risk that she hoped the fire wouldn't spread and it ended up destroying the city.  Those both have the same outcome but it makes a BIG difference in how the readers see it and how characters would percieve dany and it would change dany's entire character from what we saw in the show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, snow is the man said:

I think that GRRM's book can have hapiness in the ending. His book is alot darker then tolkiens ...

Then you don't know Tolkien.

His great hero Túrin, who killed the terrible dragon Glaurung, accidentally slew his best friend Beleg with Beleg’s own sword. It gets much worse. He killed a friend who gave him bad news, and he even unknowingly married his sister.  When she discovered the truth, she took her own life. And when he learned what befell her and why, he addressed his sword thus:

'Hail Gurthang! No lord or loyalty dost thou know, save the hand that wieldeth thee. From no blood wilt thou shrink. Wilt thou therefore take Túrin Turambar, wilt thou slay me swiftly?'

And from the blade rang a cold voice in answer: 'Yea, I will drink thy blood gladly, that so I may forget the blood of Beleg my master, and the blood of Brandir slain unjustly. I will slay thee swiftly.' 

Yet it is Túrin who shall ultimately slay evil forever, for when Morgoth the Liar  sneaks back into Arda through the Door of Night, it shall be Turin Turambar who delivers the death blow with the black sword.

See how simple Tolkien is? He's obviously just dumb good-vs-evil crap, no grey characters at all.

That must be why Tolkien alone has a goddess of sorrow in his mythos. No such thing in Martin, thank goodness!

 

Edited by CrypticWeirwood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
54 minutes ago, CrypticWeirwood said:

Clearly not Tolkien if that's what you think of it. Tolkien could not have been more nuanced!

No Tolkien, I am reading GM’s interview and he wants to top a dark story with even more darkness, because that’s how TLOR is remembered?

This is why I said that writers shouldn’t speak before writing and documenting their work. Because right now he sounds like a lunatic. :lmao:

Edited by Nightwish

Share this post


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

No Tolkien, I am reading GM’s interview and he wants to top a dark story with even more darkness, because that’s how TLOR is remembered?

This is why I said that writers shouldn’t speak before writing and documenting their work. Because right now he sounds like a lunatic. :lmao:

Oops sorry, I misread you then.

And people probably shouldn't have named their daughters after Dany until they know how she turns out in the end. But they did. Oops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, snow is the man said:

The ending can have some good to it. 

 

Tolkien's book should be remembered for not just the journey but the imagination and the fact that he is the original "big" fantasy writer who started it for other fantasy writers who would come later. I really don't see where the big sadness that GRRM speaks of came from. Tolkien even wrote in a way to save frodo who sacrificed so much as well as his uncle. To show that "goodness" and nobility is rewarded.

Yes exactly. I want to see the last episode to see what kind of meaning will come out of this. 

Tolkien doesn’t kill his main characters, the ones who hold the weight of the journey. 

martin is a writer who doesn’t hesitate killing characters to progress his story. And I don’t blame that but the fans in Martin books live a sorrow through multiple characters that are lost and were portrayed as important. See Ned, Robb, now Dany apparently, also Stannis. And this creates grief. Why would a writer want to add more grief I don’t know, perhaps he is a very pessimistic writer himself not realizing it, but grief after grief, this has nothing to do with LOTR. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a character-level, 8 out of the 9 members of the fellowship ultimately survives the whole ordeal. The one who dies does turns evil, but only briefly and doesn't really cause any real lasting problems in doing so, is ultimately redeemed and is remembered as a hero.

On a story-level, the grand evil and his forces are vanquished and the good wise king is reinstated, who continues to usher in a new age of peace and prosperity alongside his loving wife and their child.

Are there sad elements? Absolutely; A lot of people die in the process, the elves are leaving the world, Frodo, Sam and Bilbo has to basically go to "heaven" (not quite, I know) in order to find lasting peace and even after the main victory there are evil elements left in the world (SotS).

Ultimately, LotR (not talking about The Hobbit or some of his other works like The Silmarillion) is a pretty cut and dry Good triumphs over Evil-story with what I'd consider a pretty happy ending. Arguably a bittersweet ending, but one with definitely more sweet than bitter, and absolutely not a tragic, let alone nihilistic ending. 

Can we please stop comparing LotR with GoT now?
It should be clear to everyone at this point that GRRM either lied or has a very very twisted definition of the term "bittersweet", when he stated that he was planning on having a "bittersweet ending akin to that of LotR for aSoIaF". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MinscS2 said:

<snip>
Can we please stop comparing LotR with GoT now?

YES PLEASE IT'S NOT THAT ENLIGHTENING

It should be clear to everyone at this point that GRRM either lied or has a very very twisted definition of the term "bittersweet", when he stated that he was planning on having a "bittersweet ending akin to that of LotR for aSoIaF". 

Much more likely that the show-runners just got it wrong in some important particular. We know for a fact already they are appallingly incompetent at plotting--so many things in the past 3 seasons that make no sense, why not assume 1 more? Especially since Martin appears to be a master at putting all the threads in the right places to be pulled into the right shape at the right time. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With three minutes to go, I am even less hopeful about this finale. 

It's the last ever episode and I can't help but think there's going to be enough content to rant for ages - disappointment knows no boundaries with D&D.

Bitter sweet may be too late now or if possible may be some compensation towards how bad this season was. That's if they can get it right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, Erkan12 said:

I didn't make the rules, it's a sin according to Faith of the Seven.

And he doesn't care about the succession as well when he usurped his brother Stannis's right to the throne for no valid reason, I would understand if Stannis was crippled or mentally unstable like Sweet Robin is, but he wasn't, instead Stannis was a proven battle commander, and that ''boy sucker'' (according Meryn Tyrant) Renly would be a terrible example for the future generations and his secret on his sexuality would be always get in his way as it's potentially can be used against him.

Basically, Renly is a terrible character and a very bad example for the people in Westeros.

As for Robert, I doubt it's equally big sin as sleeping with other men, especially in Westeros, all soldiers pay for prostitutes, but not the majority sleeps with other men, also Robert was a proven leader and a war hero and he never tried to usurp others right for no reason, despite what Targaryens calls him, he had a solid reason to fight against the crown, while Renly didn't have any logical reason to fight against Stannis and usurp his rights.

As Stannis says;

''Good men and true will fight for Joffrey, wrongly believing him the true king. A northman might even say the same of Robb Stark. But these lords who flocked to my brother's banners knew him for a usurper.''

Renly's sexuality is not such a terrible thing as you suggest, there are no laws against it (as Joffrey wonders if he should make it illegal to Margaery), and it's only when Cersei armed the Faith militant that that they were given the power to imprison, kill and torture others. 

And the Faith also considers bastardy and adultery a sin, that's three strikes against Robert. 

Whatever you mentioned does not say anything about Renly's qualities as a ruler, Show Renly would definitely be a better king than Robert or Stannis, since he was actually interested in the well being of the people, hated War, was well loved by the commons, and would not waste his time whoring and drinking. His in-laws the Tyrells although ambitious, were still benevolent, and would steer the kingdom in the right direction.

And he had every right to go against Stannis, as Stannis would make a terrible king, proven when he later doomed his cause by burning his daughter alive to get through a snowstorm. He thinks he is owed the people's loyalty, and does nothing to earn it. He would be an autocratic despot who would be overthrown after a few months, especially since he practised a  foreign religion. 

Edited by Headfallsoff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn. That is a bittersweet ending for ol' Jon.  More bitter than sweet, I'd say though. And, yeah, totes bitter for Daeny, but we all knew that was coming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, PetyrPunkinhead said:

Damn. That is a bittersweet ending for ol' Jon.  More bitter than sweet, I'd say though. And, yeah, totes bitter for Daeny, but we all knew that was coming.

I mean its sad he cant chill with his family, but they all took separate paths anyway. I think he'd be happier beyond the Wall with Ghost and his Wildling friends more than anywhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, azor_ahaiii said:

I mean its sad he cant chill with his family, but they all took separate paths anyway. I think he'd be happier beyond the Wall with Ghost and his Wildling friends more than anywhere else.

He killed the woman he loved. Betrayed his word. He's shook.

And is he going to get to live with the Wildings? That was kind of ambiguous. He was wearing the black, riding a horse. Maybe he was just escorting them and had to return to Castle Black?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PetyrPunkinhead said:

He killed the woman he loved. Betrayed his word. He's shook.

And is he going to get to live with the Wildings? That was kind of ambiguous. He was wearing the black, riding a horse. Maybe he was just escorting them and had to return to Castle Black?

She went psycho, he'll get over it. He saved the world.

I took him looking back at the door closing as meaning he'd be leaving everything South behind and living with the wildlings. Like he said, is there even a Nights Watch anymore? What would they be guarding anyway? The Others are dead and the wildlings are friendly now.

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

×