[Spoilers] Rant & Rave without Repercussion, Final edition

[Lady Fevre Dream]

OH MY!!  Look at the chart on this tweet.  I haven't hit the article yet, gotta see how many NYT freebies I have left. 

 

[Jaime the Goldenhand]

2 minutes ago, Tianzi said:

Can we give a small shout out to Cersei, who turned out to be the final person sittiny on the IT?

Also, that poor piece of furniture did nothing to deserve Drogon's wrath, it patiently bore the burden of Robert Baratheon's unsightly ass, as well as several others', and the history would be no different if they put another chair in it's place.

Bran foresaw the problem. Brought his own chair. 

[SeanF]

 

Another interview with Emilia Clarke in Entertainment Weekly where she says that Dany's turn "came out of f*cking nowhere."

[Ygrain]

21 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Even worse than the idea of Dany going mad in two and a half episodes and turning into Daenerys, She Wolf of the SS, is the alternative theory being put out by the show runners that she turned evil when she let Drogo kill Viserys (the guy, who had just threatened to cut out her child).

 

18 minutes ago, Tadco26 said:

And also sold her to Drogo get an army for himself.  But she didn't show enough empathy when he was killed, so we should have seen the burning of King's Landing and all it's citizens coming.

Nah, gentlemen. The award for the worst reasoning why Dany went mad goes to "she's Targaryen". I guess Ramsay was a secret Targ, and Gregor, and everyone else and their wife, too.

- Of course, I completely agree. Were it my brother who had just threatened to cut my unborn child from my belly, I would have lent Drogo my own potholders.

[Ice Queen]

1 minute ago, SeanF said:

 

Another interview with Emilia Clarke in Entertainment Weekly where she says that Dany's turn "came out of f*cking nowhere."

Then she bought into her own character's hype. It was pretty obvious where she was headed. 

[SeanF]

2 minutes ago, Lady Fevre Dream said:

OH MY!!  Look at the chart on this tweet.  I haven't hit the article yet, gotta see how many NYT freebies I have left. 

 

91,000 have rated The Iron Throne 4.6.

[Higgins86]

1 minute ago, Ice Queen said:

Maybe there was nothing he could do to change the slaughter at KL. Dany saw it in her own vision in the HotU. All he could do was mitigate the damage. 

Bookwise, I always saw Bran as a potential villain, but that's not the way this played out. 

But I mean you could argue that it was her isolation and paranoia of Jon that really set this is motion. If Bran doesn't insist on Sam telling Jon then do we still get the same end result? Surely being in a loving relationship with someone who could check her own worst impulses would have changed the outcome?

[Ser Drewy]

Looking back at Visery's death in Vaes Dothrak, Dany's reaction appears one of shock to me, not indifference or cruelty. Much like Melisandre's comment on the eyes Arya will close, this seems like B&W retroactively trying use this stuff to excuse/explain away their dreck and poor choices. 

[Ygrain]

3 minutes ago, Jaime the Goldenhand said:

Bran foresaw the problem. Brought his own chair. 

[ramla]

2 minutes ago, Ice Queen said:

Maybe there was nothing he could do to change the slaughter at KL. Dany saw it in her own vision in the HotU. All he could do was mitigate the damage. 

Bookwise, I always saw Bran as a potential villain, but that's not the way this played out. 

Thats probably true. But, i just wonder... Had Jon never knew his parentage which, really played only one role at the end. To divide he and dany. Had he never known his love for her wouldn't have wavered and she would have probably felt less threatened by Jons popularity or what have you. Because they all knew he was heir to the throne yet sent him to the wall. So that info served 1 purpose seemingly. 

[SeanF]

3 minutes ago, Higgins86 said:

But I mean you could argue that it was her isolation and paranoia of Jon that really set this is motion. If Bran doesn't insist on Sam telling Jon then do we still get the same end result? Surely being in a loving relationship with someone who could check her own worst impulses would have changed the outcome?

IMHO Bran and Sansa were determined  to take her down, and it's made justified in retrospect by her actions at Kings Landing, even though their behaviour played a part in what took place at Kings Landing.

[Ice Queen]

Just now, Higgins86 said:

But I mean you could argue that it was her isolation and paranoia of Jon that really set this is motion. If Bran doesn't insist on Sam telling Jon then do we still get the same end result? Surely being in a loving relationship with someone who could check her own worst impulses would have changed the outcome?

No one save Jorah and Missy could check her impulses and even they enabled her to a certain extent. I think she would have been worse without Jon and his claim to the throne because there would be NO ONE to challenge her. In Ep 4, she didn't really make an effort to get to know the northmen. She sat there like a queen bee--she caused her own isolation because she was too uppity to let people get to know her as a human being. 

And then she asked Jon to be party to her atrocities. Any sane person would have refused her flat out and saw her for the threat she was. 

[Ygrain]

2 minutes ago, Ser Drewy said:

Looking back at Visery's death in Vaes Dothrak, Dany's reaction appears one of shock to me, not indifference or cruelty. Much like Melisandre's comment on the eyes Arya will close, this seems like B&W retroactively trying use this stuff to excuse/explain away their dreck and poor choices. 

Dany's reaction came over as a sort of emotional numbness induced by the shock caused to her by Viserys' threat to cut out her baby from her womb. That is such a horrible thing to do. It had absolutely nothing to do with her later actions.

[darksellsword]

2 minutes ago, Ser Drewy said:

Looking back at Visery's death in Vaes Dothrak, Dany's reaction appears one of shock to me, not indifference or cruelty. Much like Melisandre's comment on the eyes Arya will close, this seems like B&W retroactively trying use this stuff to excuse/explain away their dreck and poor choices. 

It doesn't even make sense when you take into account the fact Emilia Clarke had no clue about the twist so she was emoting something completely different, hell who knows what she was emoting. I think it might've been a good idea to let her in on that integral detail of her character at some point I dunno at least 4 seasons previous.

[Tianzi]

5 minutes ago, Jaime the Goldenhand said:

Bran foresaw the problem. Brought his own chair. 

The most popular Flea Bottom taverns' threat from now on: 'Say that againmotherf***** and I'll put you on a throne!'

[Ice Queen]

8 minutes ago, ramla said:

Thats probably true. But, i just wonder... Had Jon never knew his parentage which, really played only one role at the end. To divide he and dany. Had he never known his love for her wouldn't have wavered and she would have probably felt less threatened by Jons popularity or what have you. Because they all knew he was heir to the throne yet sent him to the wall. So that info served 1 purpose seemingly. 

How many times did he tell her he didn't want the throne, though? She's like an insecure teenager who lives in their imaginary angst. If you don't have anything to worry about, invent something. 

He tried to reassure her over and over again. She chose to not trust him, and without that trust you don't have much of a relationship or future together. Had she only done that, the outcome might have been different. It was all up to her, and she chose poorly. 

Edit: Jon wasn't the heir to the throne the second Dany legitimized Gendry. Gendry was. Dany never had a claim to the throne at all. 

[Jaime the Goldenhand]

Ok, why did Bran NEED to tell Jon his parentage IN ORDER to have Jon kill Dany. It seems that telling Jon led to further conflict between him and Dany. If Dany hadn't felt insecure about her claim, she might not have burned KL. But, KL did burn and then Jon needed to be the one to kill Dany, effectively leading to his exile and Bran becoming King. It seems like, if Bran didn't tell Jon anything at all, he and Dany would have been the one's the rule the 7 kingdoms. 

If Dany was DESTINED (or some nonsense) to be mad and needed to be killed, couldn't it have been anyone else? Did it have to be Jon? Couldn't Bran help Varys' plot to poison her before reaching KL? Too many logical alternative possibilities?

Does this not follow? Everything else remaining the same (which is a stretch), didn't Bran's actions simply lead to him becoming King, while leading to unnecessary death and destruction?

 

[darksellsword]

3 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

Dany was right, she did need to break the Wheels of Brans wheelchair right before she killed him because he is pure evil, maybe she had a dragon dream about the nightmarish dystopian future brought about by Bran the broken, the wheelchair that mounts the world.

[Wingednosering]

Looking forward to the spinoff:  Weekend at Drogon's.

[SeanF]

Just now, Jaime the Goldenhand said:

Ok, why did Bran NEED to tell Jon his parentage IN ORDER to have Jon kill Dany. It seems that telling Jon led to further conflict between him and Dany. If Dany hadn't felt insecure about her claim, she might not have burned KL. But, KL did burn and then Jon needed to be the one to kill Dany, effectively leading to his exile and Bran becoming King. It seems like, if Bran didn't tell Jon anything at all, he and Dany would have been the one's the rule the 7 kingdoms. 

If Dany was DESTINED (or some nonsense) to be mad and needed to be killed, couldn't it have been anyone else? Did it have to be Jon? Couldn't Bran help Varys' plot to poison her before reaching KL? Too many logical alternative possibilities?

Does this not follow? Everything else remaining the same (which is a stretch), didn't Bran's actions simply lead to him becoming King, while leading to unnecessary death and destruction?

 

Good question.

Bran is omniscient.  He could therefore see where it would lead.