Jump to content
Areisius

The character assassination of Daenerys

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, ummester said:

Ned forsake his honor in the end, it was not rigid. He lied for his daughters - unlike Jon, who (even in the show's terrible writing) would not lie for a greater good.

Ned did that at the very end when it was too late. And Jon did lie plenty for the greater good in the early Seasons, namely when he was tasked to infiltrate the Wildlings. The Jon you are talking about is the later Seasons Jon, namely the one of S7-8.

4 hours ago, ummester said:

Renley was only one option - there were many ways to potentially stop the war of the 5 kings and many other ways, beyond Ned's death, that it could have started. Robert realized the realms were ripe for war because (I think he recognized he had become weak) and the houses were all bitching at each other. Westeros was on the knife's edge of turmoil regardless.

Renly was one option yes, and there were plenty for Ned. I'm talking about a way that was literally delivered to him that he could have taken. Maybe Ned should have exercised his power as Hand and Protector of the Realm, as such he had the power to replace anyone with people he trusted. He could have replaced the small council and the guards but instead he left them all in their positions. Sorry but I don't make a habit of excusing stupidity just because someone is framed as 'the good guy', especially when someone is so dumb you wonder how they manage to dress themselves, as is the case with Ned. Or because 'it would have happened eventually', what-ifs are pointless to discuss as they have no effect on canon.

1 hour ago, Tagganaro said:

I don't think it was that insane that Dany didn't roll up to KL, she wanted to and then Jon talked her out of it by appealing to her wanting to be a hero and different from other rulers.

It was insane because S6 and 8 showed us it was. All Dany needed was 1 dragon. No army, no allies and really no effort needed. And in S7 there weren't even scorpions on the walls yet. Literally 8x05 showed us that all she needed was 1 dragon. She wouldn't even destroy the entire Red Keep if she went there directly because S6 showed us that she can control her dragons and the damage they cause. 3 dragons attacking one ship in S6 managed to keep the damage contained to an area not bigger than said ship. So if she went directly to Cersei's window and dracarys, at most she would destroy that floor of the building. That's literally the most bloodless and least damage causing way she could have won.

Not to mention that she wouldn't even need dragons so those who were concerned about that (like Jon and Tyrion) could rest easy. Both S7 (Davos getting Gendry, Tyrion meeting Jamie) and 8 (Tyrion's escape plan for his siblings) showed us that you can infiltrate KL without problems via secret entrances. Dany could have send her Unsullied into the city through those secret passages while she uses herself on a dragon and the Dothraki outside the city as a distraction.

That's the domino effect. D&D do this crap all the time and then you go back and ask yourself 'what the hell was the point?'.

Share this post


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

It was very strange how they totally changed Tyrion's view of Cersei in the last two seasons.  He tells her she's not a monster, even though she is one of the worst, he cries at her death, he tries to save her and before that, he insanely believes she will not do what she has always done, always, always, always, which is betray X for whatever short term gain she identifies.

Yeah.  I don't get this.  Show Cersei is a little less evil than book Cersei, but in both she's a villain.  And Tyrion has more reason to hate her than almost anyone else.

I guess he forgot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mystical said:

Ned did that at the very end when it was too late. And Jon did lie plenty for the greater good in the early Seasons, namely when he was tasked to infiltrate the Wildlings. The Jon you are talking about is the later Seasons Jon, namely the one of S7-8.

Renly was one option yes, and there were plenty for Ned. I'm talking about a way that was literally delivered to him that he could have taken. Maybe Ned should have exercised his power as Hand and Protector of the Realm, as such he had the power to replace anyone with people he trusted. He could have replaced the small council and the guards but instead he left them all in their positions. Sorry but I don't make a habit of excusing stupidity just because someone is framed as 'the good guy', especially when someone is so dumb you wonder how they manage to dress themselves, as is the case with Ned. Or because 'it would have happened eventually', what-ifs are pointless to discuss as they have no effect on canon.

It was insane because S6 and 8 showed us it was. All Dany needed was 1 dragon. No army, no allies and really no effort needed. And in S7 there weren't even scorpions on the walls yet. Literally 8x05 showed us that all she needed was 1 dragon. She wouldn't even destroy the entire Red Keep if she went there directly because S6 showed us that she can control her dragons and the damage they cause. 3 dragons attacking one ship in S6 managed to keep the damage contained to an area not bigger than said ship. So if she went directly to Cersei's window and dracarys, at most she would destroy that floor of the building. That's literally the most bloodless and least damage causing way she could have won.

Not to mention that she wouldn't even need dragons so those who were concerned about that (like Jon and Tyrion) could rest easy. Both S7 (Davos getting Gendry, Tyrion meeting Jamie) and 8 (Tyrion's escape plan for his siblings) showed us that you can infiltrate KL without problems via secret entrances. Dany could have send her Unsullied into the city through those secret passages while she uses herself on a dragon and the Dothraki outside the city as a distraction.

That's the domino effect. D&D do this crap all the time and then you go back and ask yourself 'what the hell was the point?'.

Hey, blood’s thicker than water. Maybe he he was trying to preserve what was left of his house, since now with every other Lannister dead (except for maybe Reginald) he’s the last of the Lannisters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

It was.  The people of KL already knew that Cersei wasn't opposed to a little genocide herself.  So, if Dany comes to the gates with, at the time, 3 dragons, the unsullied, the Dothraki, the Greyjoy fleet and the Tyrell army....not an arrow would need to be fired.  Realistically, Cersei's generals and the people would have capitulated.  And if not, she can burn the Red Keep. Or, she can blockade the city until they topple Cersei. Done and done.

It seems like D&D forgot (or more like hoping the audience forgot) that Stannis almost won the battle of BW. Granted that Tywin and most of the Lannister force was away, but Stannis didn’t have 3 grown dragons, dothraki and the unsullied. The funniest part of Cersei’s strength (apart from the people of KL and the nobles of Westeros like Tarly all of a sudden beginning to support her non-existent claim to the IT) was her magically multiplying Lannister army. It’s like Qyburn began cloning Lannisters soldiers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, Daenerys was never portrayed well in the series. She was always either the victim, or the flawless leader while she was neither of those in the books (she plays the game willingly from the start of the books). She also is not humanized in the series at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, teej6 said:

It seems like D&D forgot (or more like hoping the audience forgot) that Stannis almost won the battle of BW. Granted that Tywin and most of the Lannister force was away, but Stannis didn’t have 3 grown dragons, dothraki and the unsullied. The funniest part of Cersei’s strength (apart from the people of KL and the nobles of Westeros like Tarly all of a sudden beginning to support her non-existent claim to the IT) was her magically multiplying Lannister army. It’s like Qyburn began cloning Lannisters soldiers. 

The last season were so sloppy.  It's sad.  I have such a hard time when I listen to people talk about all the work/effort, especially the showrunners, when it seems so clear that the writing and plotting was dead last as a priority, and this is why it all fell apart finally at the end.  So many loose ends, dangling threads, backtracks, retcons, logic fails. I can't even imagine what they were thinking with something like Arya killing the NK, making both the battle and Jon's whole story irrelevant, or why they had Dany turn villain in such a short time with barely any ground laid for it.

Share this post


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

The last season were so sloppy.  It's sad.  I have such a hard time when I listen to people talk about all the work/effort, especially the showrunners, when it seems so clear that the writing and plotting was dead last as a priority, and this is why it all fell apart finally at the end.  So many loose ends, dangling threads, backtracks, retcons, logic fails. I can't even imagine what they were thinking with something like Arya killing the NK, making both the battle and Jon's whole story irrelevant, or why they had Dany turn villain in such a short time with barely any ground laid for it.

You’ve prolly seen this already but this is a good summary of how awful it was:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/19/2019 at 11:46 AM, Cas Stark said:

It was.  The people of KL already knew that Cersei wasn't opposed to a little genocide herself.  So, if Dany comes to the gates with, at the time, 3 dragons, the unsullied, the Dothraki, the Greyjoy fleet and the Tyrell army....not an arrow would need to be fired.  Realistically, Cersei's generals and the people would have capitulated.  And if not, she can burn the Red Keep. Or, she can blockade the city until they topple Cersei. Done and done.

It was very strange how they totally changed Tyrion's view of Cersei in the last two seasons.  He tells her she's not a monster, even though she is one of the worst, he cries at her death, he tries to save her and before that, he insanely believes she will not do what she has always done, always, always, always, which is betray X for whatever short term gain she identifies.

ETA, I also don't thinks she went 'mad' having her devolve from mental illness would be a complete waste of her whole story, having her accomplishments and idealism curdle into something else due to trauma+events, there is a message there.

On 8/19/2019 at 12:40 PM, Mystical said:

It was insane because S6 and 8 showed us it was. All Dany needed was 1 dragon. No army, no allies and really no effort needed. And in S7 there weren't even scorpions on the walls yet. Literally 8x05 showed us that all she needed was 1 dragon. She wouldn't even destroy the entire Red Keep if she went there directly because S6 showed us that she can control her dragons and the damage they cause. 3 dragons attacking one ship in S6 managed to keep the damage contained to an area not bigger than said ship. So if she went directly to Cersei's window and dracarys, at most she would destroy that floor of the building. That's literally the most bloodless and least damage causing way she could have won.

Not to mention that she wouldn't even need dragons so those who were concerned about that (like Jon and Tyrion) could rest easy. Both S7 (Davos getting Gendry, Tyrion meeting Jamie) and 8 (Tyrion's escape plan for his siblings) showed us that you can infiltrate KL without problems via secret entrances. Dany could have send her Unsullied into the city through those secret passages while she uses herself on a dragon and the Dothraki outside the city as a distraction.

That's the domino effect. D&D do this crap all the time and then you go back and ask yourself 'what the hell was the point?'.

This may be true or not, but I think it's sort of unfair.  This may be "logical" but it's not entertaining.  I've said this before, but showrunners were kind of held hostage by Lena Heady and Cersei. She was too popular and too good in that role for them to kill her off when they probably should have.  As a result, they had to plan for her to be one of the final villians, and Dany just easily dispatching of her with no battle would not have made for good TV.  Beyond that, I also think the show never really knew what to do with the dragons- they were overpowered or completely nerfed depending on the situation.  It's tough to reconcile Rhaegal being easily killed by a few crossbows on moving ships while Drogon is able to completely annihilate both those same ships plus all the wall-mounted crossbows at KL without ever being in any danger.

I was referring to mad more from a "mad king" POV, in terms of burning KL.  I honestly think Dany's story had it gotten more time would have been very good- the idea of her so badly wanting to be perceived as a hero, doing the heroic thing helping to save the realm from the NK, only to have her watch all her closest allies die and watch as the remaining ones pick Jon over her is pretty awful.  I think with just a few more episodes after Winterfell exploring her increasing anger, paranoia, and desperation could have done wonders.  Instead, like most of the past 2 seasons, it was insanely rushed.

19 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

The last season were so sloppy.  It's sad.  I have such a hard time when I listen to people talk about all the work/effort, especially the showrunners, when it seems so clear that the writing and plotting was dead last as a priority, and this is why it all fell apart finally at the end.  So many loose ends, dangling threads, backtracks, retcons, logic fails. I can't even imagine what they were thinking with something like Arya killing the NK, making both the battle and Jon's whole story irrelevant, or why they had Dany turn villain in such a short time with barely any ground laid for it.

I can't really disagree with this.  I think it was overall very sloppy and there were too many loose threads, plus missed opportunities at the end (I think the finale and the Battle of Winterfell were both way too simple and straight-forward and was disappointed by the lack of any real twists, it felt a bit perfunctory IMO).  I will say however that I cut the showrunners a little more slack, I think they were put in an impossible situation as well as being just burnt out from the whole thing.  Part of me can look back and wish HBO had said no when D & D asked for the shorter seasons to wrap it up and brought in some new fresh faces and minds.  But of course I can understand why that didn't happen.

 

Share this post


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

This may be true or not, but I think it's sort of unfair.  This may be "logical" but it's not entertaining.  I've said this before, but showrunners were kind of held hostage by Lena Heady and Cersei. She was too popular and too good in that role for them to kill her off when they probably should have.  As a result, they had to plan for her to be one of the final villians, and Dany just easily dispatching of her with no battle would not have made for good TV.  Beyond that, I also think the show never really knew what to do with the dragons- they were overpowered or completely nerfed depending on the situation.  It's tough to reconcile Rhaegal being easily killed by a few crossbows on moving ships while Drogon is able to completely annihilate both those same ships plus all the wall-mounted crossbows at KL without ever being in any danger.

I was referring to mad more from a "mad king" POV, in terms of burning KL.  I honestly think Dany's story had it gotten more time would have been very good- the idea of her so badly wanting to be perceived as a hero, doing the heroic thing helping to save the realm from the NK, only to have her watch all her closest allies die and watch as the remaining ones pick Jon over her is pretty awful.  I think with just a few more episodes after Winterfell exploring her increasing anger, paranoia, and desperation could have done wonders.  Instead, like most of the past 2 seasons, it was insanely rushed.

I can't really disagree with this.  I think it was overall very sloppy and there were too many loose threads, plus missed opportunities at the end (I think the finale and the Battle of Winterfell were both way too simple and straight-forward and was disappointed by the lack of any real twists, it felt a bit perfunctory IMO).  I will say however that I cut the showrunners a little more slack, I think they were put in an impossible situation as well as being just burnt out from the whole thing.  Part of me can look back and wish HBO had said no when D & D asked for the shorter seasons to wrap it up and brought in some new fresh faces and minds.  But of course I can understand why that didn't happen.

 

The whole Battle of Winterfell was sloppy, from the tactics, the lighting, the fake-out with Arya killing the Night King. I mean, whose idea was it to put all the civilians in the crypts, defenseless? Jon really dropped the ball on training everyone; the entire civilian population could have been slaughtered if Arya hadn't killed the Night King. 

Offhand, something tells me that Arya was not intended to survive the Long Night. She did very little of consequence in the last three episodes; turned down Gendry, abandoned her List, nearly got trampled, sat and watched Daenerys' speech, decided to go west of Westeros.

Edited by Angel Eyes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Tagganaro said:

This may be true or not, but I think it's sort of unfair.  This may be "logical" but it's not entertaining.  I've said this before, but showrunners were kind of held hostage by Lena Heady and Cersei. She was too popular and too good in that role for them to kill her off when they probably should have.  As a result, they had to plan for her to be one of the final villians, and Dany just easily dispatching of her with no battle would not have made for good TV.  Beyond that, I also think the show never really knew what to do with the dragons- they were overpowered or completely nerfed depending on the situation.  It's tough to reconcile Rhaegal being easily killed by a few crossbows on moving ships while Drogon is able to completely annihilate both those same ships plus all the wall-mounted crossbows at KL without ever being in any danger.

How is this unfair? How is it unfair to expect INTERNAL logic and consistency from a show/story? You can't have the same character (Tyrion) say 'don't use dragons because it's bad optics' while the same character uses secret entrances (and doesn't mention this as an option) that you could smuggle your army through and then there is no need for dragons. You can't nerf or overpower someone/something depending on plot because that's stupid and everyone will then pointing out how stupid it is. Good TV isn't just something looking good or epic, writing is the most important thing.

And Cersei isn't popular unless you mean 'popular to hate'. Dany has more fans that love her character and they had no problem to radically change and dispatch her in 2 episodes. D&D love Cersei and Lena and they let that dictate their story, NO ONE held them hostage, certainly not the fans. By all rights of the world the characters live in, Cersei would and should have been done, at the latest, when she blew up the Vatikan. And she didn't even do anything AT ALL in S8 so why was she even there? To stare out of a window while drinking wine? How is that interesting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt Dany's invasion will go well in the books either; I dont know how useful it is to think of ways for Dany to succeed with an invasion, because the author is obviously putting roadblocks in front of her ability to conquer Westeros. He's talked about how people don't want resumed Targaryen rule as well. For sure, the show runners could have come up with better obstacles to get her to delay an attack, like explain that innocents are in the Red Keep, explain the concerns about wildfire, ect ect. Tyrion brought it up once, but it never came up again. But I dont think characters giving conflicting advice is bad writing; if they support Dany they romanticize dragons and are blind to what war machines actually mean and delude themselves about how bad it will be, even Dany to some extent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 8/19/2019 at 8:04 AM, Cas Stark said:

INSANE that Dany didn't simply roll up to KL with her full force and demand Cersei's head, or if she was somehow totally unwilling for any battle, do what Tyrion advised in season 8, blockade the city and starve them out.

I mean she could do that but Dany isn't invincible just because she has the most firepower. Cersei would have just hid like Robert at Stoney Sept and then what is Dany going to do. And the blockade didn't work because of Euron. It seems more likely that the author will come up with some reasonable ways to make it harder for Dany since he did that effectively with Dorne.

Edited by Rose of Red Lake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

I doubt Dany's invasion will go well in the books either; I dont know how useful it is to think of ways for Dany to succeed with an invasion, because the author is obviously putting roadblocks in front of her ability to conquer Westeros. He's talked about how people don't want resumed Targaryen rule as well. For sure, the show runners could have come up with better obstacles to get her to delay an attack, like explain that innocents are in the Red Keep, explain the concerns about wildfire, ect ect. Tyrion brought it up once, but it never came up again. But I dont think characters giving conflicting advice is bad writing; if they support Dany they romanticize dragons and are blind to what war machines actually mean and delude themselves about how bad it will be, even Dany to some extent.

In the books, there is quite a lot of evidence that the Targaryens are remembered with affection, both among the Smallfolk and some nobles.  I think a Targaryen restoration will attract a lot of support, but it will go to Aegon, not Daenerys.

Share this post


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

This may be true or not, but I think it's sort of unfair.  This may be "logical" but it's not entertaining.  I've said this before, but showrunners were kind of held hostage by Lena Heady and Cersei. She was too popular and too good in that role for them to kill her off when they probably should have.  As a result, they had to plan for her to be one of the final villians, and Dany just easily dispatching of her with no battle would not have made for good TV.  Beyond that, I also think the show never really knew what to do with the dragons- they were overpowered or completely nerfed depending on the situation.  It's tough to reconcile Rhaegal being easily killed by a few crossbows on moving ships while Drogon is able to completely annihilate both those same ships plus all the wall-mounted crossbows at KL without ever being in any danger.

snipped

 

I understand that the Cersei they made was an integral part of the show...but, still, they kept her alive and literally, all she did was whisper while staring out a window or over a balcony.  She had zero big scenes.  Even her death scene was pedestrian.  No Cersei drunken ranting and raving.  Totally boring, like they drained the blood out of her but somehow kept her alive, propped up.  If they were going to keep her and make her the 'equal' of Dany and the final villain, why not DO SOMETHING.  Have her SAY SOMETHING.  And the whole baby thing was just ridiculous soap opera level of bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tagganaro said:

I can't really disagree with this.  I think it was overall very sloppy and there were too many loose threads, plus missed opportunities at the end (I think the finale and the Battle of Winterfell were both way too simple and straight-forward and was disappointed by the lack of any real twists, it felt a bit perfunctory IMO).  I will say however that I cut the showrunners a little more slack, I think they were put in an impossible situation as well as being just burnt out from the whole thing.  Part of me can look back and wish HBO had said no when D & D asked for the shorter seasons to wrap it up and brought in some new fresh faces and minds.  But of course I can understand why that didn't happen.

The blame is squarely on D&D’s shoulders for the show being so bad. If they were lost after they ran out of book material, or were bored, or were burned out, or whatever, they should have walked away. I guarantee you that HBO would have found several other competent writers and filmmakers willing to finish the series in as many seasons HBO wanted. And, we know that HBO wanted more seasons and was willing to put up the money for it. But D&D’s ego and hubris was such that they had to finish it themselves. They probably thought if someone else helmed the show, they would have lost the credit for it. I mean even when they had book material, they thought they could tell the story better than Martin and we saw the outcome of that in many instances. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, teej6 said:

The blame is squarely on D&D’s shoulders for the show being so bad. If they were lost after they ran out of book material, or were bored, or were burned out, or whatever, they should have walked away. I guarantee you that HBO would have found several other competent writers and filmmakers willing to finish the series in as many seasons HBO wanted. And, we know that HBO wanted more seasons and was willing to put up the money for it. But D&D’s ego and hubris was such that they had to finish it themselves. They probably thought if someone else helmed the show, they would have lost the credit for it. I mean even when they had book material, they thought they could tell the story better than Martin and we saw the outcome of that in many instances. 

D&D should have walked away after the Red Wedding. That was always their goal with the show. Get to that event. If that's all they wanted to achieve, they could have handed the show over and I'm sure HBO would have had no trouble finding someone who wants to continue the show. But the show was getting more popular and for narcissists like Benioff, the attention is what they want. Plus I'm sure the money was getting better.

I don't buy for a second that D&D were burned out. They had the least to do with the show. Watching the documentary made that abundantly clear IMO. Also hearing that actors talk about D&D's almost complete absence during the final Season. It seems like their only responsibility was to write (and direct an episode here and there), so while everyone else was working, they had a grand ole time doing nothing. Except pitching a fit when they wanted something to be on the show, even when people said it's not possible. Seriously hearing directors and actors talk and seeing the documentary, what were D&D doing while everyone else worked their asses off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, teej6 said:

The blame is squarely on D&D’s shoulders for the show being so bad. If they were lost after they ran out of book material, or were bored, or were burned out, or whatever, they should have walked away. I guarantee you that HBO would have found several other competent writers and filmmakers willing to finish the series in as many seasons HBO wanted. And, we know that HBO wanted more seasons and was willing to put up the money for it. But D&D’s ego and hubris was such that they had to finish it themselves. They probably thought if someone else helmed the show, they would have lost the credit for it. I mean even when they had book material, they thought they could tell the story better than Martin and we saw the outcome of that in many instances. 

I don't think they were "lost" after running out of book material, nor do I think the show was "so bad."  But to each his own.  I think the final season was sloppy and rushed, and overall disappointing, but I was still thoroughly entertained by it and still think it was among the best TV I've seen this year (I'd put Episode 2 of this season as a top 5, if not top 3 all-time personally for the show).  And I had my issues with Season 7 as well but it's still largely considered to be among the best seasons, not to mention Season 6 is widely considered to be one of the best.  So it's not like they were completely lost after running out of book material, just that I think S 8 in particular was very rushed and sloppy.  

17 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

I understand that the Cersei they made was an integral part of the show...but, still, they kept her alive and literally, all she did was whisper while staring out a window or over a balcony.  She had zero big scenes.  Even her death scene was pedestrian.  No Cersei drunken ranting and raving.  Totally boring, like they drained the blood out of her but somehow kept her alive, propped up.  If they were going to keep her and make her the 'equal' of Dany and the final villain, why not DO SOMETHING.  Have her SAY SOMETHING.  And the whole baby thing was just ridiculous soap opera level of bad.

I mean, they had her kill Missandei and send Bronn after Jaime and Tyrion, as well as the stuff with Euron.  It wasn't ideal to say the least, but it was much better than whatever the hell they were doing with the Night King.  But yes, I obviously agree that she was largely wasted in Season 8.

19 hours ago, Mystical said:

How is this unfair? How is it unfair to expect INTERNAL logic and consistency from a show/story? You can't have the same character (Tyrion) say 'don't use dragons because it's bad optics' while the same character uses secret entrances (and doesn't mention this as an option) that you could smuggle your army through and then there is no need for dragons. You can't nerf or overpower someone/something depending on plot because that's stupid and everyone will then pointing out how stupid it is. Good TV isn't just something looking good or epic, writing is the most important thing.

And Cersei isn't popular unless you mean 'popular to hate'. Dany has more fans that love her character and they had no problem to radically change and dispatch her in 2 episodes. D&D love Cersei and Lena and they let that dictate their story, NO ONE held them hostage, certainly not the fans. By all rights of the world the characters live in, Cersei would and should have been done, at the latest, when she blew up the Vatikan. And she didn't even do anything AT ALL in S8 so why was she even there? To stare out of a window while drinking wine? How is that interesting?

I will repeat that I think it's unfair to expect the show to do something that simply wouldn't be entertaining nor would it fill any time.  I don't understand why we would differentiate popular based on whether they are loved or hated- either way the character is still popular.  Not that it's dispositive, but pretty much any list of the best characters on GOT will have Cersei top 5 and if you asked anybody who was the best villain on GOT they'd say Cersei hands-down.  From that perspective, I think it's easy to understand why they kept her around.

 

Share this post


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

I don't think they were "lost" after running out of book material, nor do I think the show was "so bad."  But to each his own.  I think the final season was sloppy and rushed, and overall disappointing, but I was still thoroughly entertained by it and still think it was among the best TV I've seen this year (I'd put Episode 2 of this season as a top 5, if not top 3 all-time personally for the show).  And I had my issues with Season 7 as well but it's still largely considered to be among the best seasons, not to mention Season 6 is widely considered to be one of the best.  So it's not like they were completely lost after running out of book material, just that I think S 8 in particular was very rushed and sloppy.  

The show became a shitfest long before S8.  To me, the show was awful after S4. I felt S1 was the best followed by S2. To put it simply, as long as Martin remained engaged the two idiots managed to show something coherent and logical. After that, all logic in plot and storytelling, coherence, character arcs went out the window and we were left with “bad pussy” and the awful Dorne plot. When I think of the juvenile dialogue and scenes D&D came up with, it makes me want to gag. Oh yeah, there was more special effects and bigger dragons and all that money HBO threw at the show. That may suffice for some but not for me and for most of the book readers I know that prefer a good story than spectacle. And like you said to each his/her own. 

As to your assertion that S6 is “widely” considered to be one of the best, I’ve never kept much stock in TV critics or the audience’s opinions when it came to GoT. IIRC, critics didn’t start universally praising the show until after the Red Wedding... after which the show became a global phenomenon and then every critic and his mum joined the “GoT is the greatest TV of all time” bandwagon, never mind the significant drop in the quality of the show’s story and script. 

Edited by teej6

Share this post


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

I will repeat that I think it's unfair to expect the show to do something that simply wouldn't be entertaining nor would it fill any time.  I don't understand why we would differentiate popular based on whether they are loved or hated- either way the character is still popular.  Not that it's dispositive, but pretty much any list of the best characters on GOT will have Cersei top 5 and if you asked anybody who was the best villain on GOT they'd say Cersei hands-down.  From that perspective, I think it's easy to understand why they kept her around.

Wanna know what's entertaining? Good writing. Shocks, big battles and big spectacle are boring. That only works on the dumb audience who are hypnotized every time you jingle the keys. Interesting characters and plot is what makes something both good and entertaining. And when you have a fantasy or sci-fi show, you better make the rules clear and stick to them. You fail as a writer and take any believability out of your story if your characters only survive due to plot armor, if you keep changing the rules and if your characters are slaves to the plot and end up with multiple personalities. And paving over that with spectacle or your show looking pretty won't change that it's crap due to writing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care which way you cut it.

There is absolutely no excuse for what happened in these last two seasons (but especially season 8)

No excuse.

And yes, because this was just so poorly devised and executed, what happened to Daenerys Targaryen was character assassination. It didn't even make sense.

In a medieval world at war, only a strange bird would object to a city held by a openly hostile force being sacked or torched. No one would complain about how burning people at the stake is an improper way to execute people.

Levelling the whole city -- as it was presented in the show -- and causing the death of hundreds of thousands of people was unnecessary, reckless and in poor taste. Not necessarily evil and sadistic.

Too many people are approaching it from a 21st century "woke" armchair point of view.

The fact that Tyrion literally gets away with murder (and much more) and gets to have a happy ending makes it even worse.

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

×