Why Daenerys as the Mad Queen?

[BlackLightning]

It was easy to do, it was cheap enough for them to really get behind and they knew it would make for great spectacle.

That is all.

We are privvy to the thoughts of the book version of Daenerys. And the girl has a deeply compassionate heart that often gets her into trouble.

[Angel Eyes]

15 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

It was easy to do, it was cheap enough for them to really get behind and they knew it would make for great spectacle.

That is all.

We are privvy to the thoughts of the book version of Daenerys. And the girl has a deeply compassionate heart that often gets her into trouble.

And I'm saying that it would have been easier to have Cersei as the Mad Queen.

[BlackLightning]

2 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

And I'm saying that it would have been easier to have Cersei as the Mad Queen.

I agree lol

I was using sarcasm!

D&D played favorites with their characters and actors. They didn't care for Sansa so they gave her the Jeyne Poole storyline...only for them to switch up and make Sansa the Queen of her own kingdom in the finale because of the backlash. They liked Indira Varma so much that they made her this major figure who wants vengeance at all costs and neglected to cast Arianne. They liked Tyrion Lannister so much that they white-washed. Etc.

[Angel Eyes]

29 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

I agree lol

I was using sarcasm!

D&D played favorites with their characters and actors. They didn't care for Sansa so they gave her the Jeyne Poole storyline...only for them to switch up and make Sansa the Queen of her own kingdom in the finale because of the backlash. They liked Indira Varma so much that they made her this major figure who wants vengeance at all costs and neglected to cast Arianne. They liked Tyrion Lannister so much that they white-washed. Etc.

Even then, I'm not sure if they played favorites. Cersei was sold short in Season 8; I would have had fun watching Cersei pull out a good fight scene vs Arya (and this would have been perfect pandering to Lena Headey considering her roles in films like 300: Rise of an Empire and Dredd). The Tyrells were also whitewashed, then they got wildfired. It ain't easy being green. Making Sansa the Queen in the North was not the right way to go about making up for the backlash, make no mistake; the best way would have been for her to find someone who didn't love her for her claim (and I'm not talking about Tyrion, The Hound or Littlefinger).

[Wholala17]

Because it's the shoehorned book ending they didn't do a good enough job building up to. instead they provided yes kween fanservice for years since running out of books to copy. haven't people figured this out?

[redwolf@winterhell]

I feel as if Daenerys going mad was the perfect end for her, I just really didn't like how D & D forced it on us so fast. But Daenerys working on how to not be mad like her father is a big part of her storyline. There was a scene between her and Tyrion and season 5 when they talk about how Daenerys should not follow in her dad's footsteps, and Daenerys goes on about how she will break the wheel. TBH Daenerys has gone through so many horrible things that I can't keep count, I am actually surprised that she went full on crazy in season 8. And I feel as she has always been a little extreme with her punishments.

[GoldenGail3]

Dany as mad Queen in the books would be epic... don’t anybody deny it, it would be so epic seeing her destroy that asshat Cersei and all her power... 

[Rose of Red Lake]

I think Dany has more of a turbulent/loose canon personality than Cersei. I recall GRRM saying that she is "someone who really might do anything." Its the last trait wanted for someone who has flying nukes. I think Cersei has a bit of that, but you know whatever action she'll take will be self serving. There was a study that showed how a boss who was unpredictable and a loose canon caused more anxiety and stress for their employees than a boss who was consistently a jerk. 

[Darryk]

There's nothing in the show that can really be pointed to as a "sign of madness" from Dany, certainly not anything that foreshadows her burning down all of King's Landing. Arya did far worsen things than Dany throughout the series, including murdering an entire family. There's better foreshadowing for her becoming a villain at the end than there is for Dany.

Fact is D+D are a bunch of shock jockeys who love pulling the rug out from under the audience and creating shocking moments, even if those moments haven't been earned. They built Dany up to be a saint and then turned her into a villain within two episodes, character development is too much work for them. "You thought this character was good but GUESS WHAT SHE'S BAD NOW. HAHAHA GOT YOU THERE" is more their style.

[MissM]

22 minutes ago, Darryk said:

There's nothing in the show that can really be pointed to as a "sign of madness" from Dany, certainly not anything that foreshadows her burning down all of King's Landing. Arya did far worsen things than Dany throughout the series, including murdering an entire family. There's better foreshadowing for her becoming a villain at the end than there is for Dany.

LOL jokes.

[Rose of Red Lake]

Arya doesn't have mass destruction capabilities so why would that make sense. In the books, Arya saved people from the village being burned by the Lannisters, even the awful people who were in cages, she saved. Dany would be like "light em up!!"  That's foreshadowing for her Arya doing exactly what she did in the show. Seeking vengeance but then turning away to save people from fire tyrants. Dany was on an inverse arc, seeking vengeance, turning away from that to help people momentarily, then back to vengeance and letting nothing get in the way of that. "Dragons plant no trees" is the most ridiculously dark line ever.

[Darryk]

58 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Arya doesn't have mass destruction capabilities so why would that make sense. In the books, Arya saved people from the village being burned by the Lannisters, even the awful people who were in cages, she saved. Dany would be like "light em up!!"  That's foreshadowing for her Arya doing exactly what she did in the show. Seeking vengeance but then turning away to save people from fire tyrants. Dany was on an inverse arc, seeking vengeance, turning away from that to help people momentarily, then back to vengeance and letting nothing get in the way of that. "Dragons plant no trees" is the most ridiculously dark line ever.

Well that's the on thing she lacked, weapons of mass destruction. But that doesn't make her more noble than Dany. I'd hate the idea of dragons in the hands of someone who poisons entire families and bakes people into pies.

Dany saved people too, entire cities worth of people. When she sought vengeance it was on slavers and other scum.

She had the occasional arrogant line of dialogue and people think that qualifies as foreshadowing for her becoming the villain.

I don't buy it. As far as I can see, Dany was portrayed as the second coming right up until shock jockeys D+D decided they wanted to pull the rug out from under the audience by turning her into a villain in two episodes.

They attempt[t to explain that on DVD commentaries with their usual drivel. "well there was that time she didn't care that her brother was killed by Drogo" Yeah, like she should give a shit about her brother who abused her. Also, Sansa smiled when Ramsay got torn apart by his dogs, so by D+D logic she is also mad queen material.

The whole thing is just one massive narrative mess.

[SeanF]

3 hours ago, Darryk said:

Well that's the on thing she lacked, weapons of mass destruction. But that doesn't make her more noble than Dany. I'd hate the idea of dragons in the hands of someone who poisons entire families and bakes people into pies.

 

Trying to draw a big moral distinction between people who kill up close and personal, and people who use WMD is pretty futile, IMHO.  In real life the Mongols, the An Lushan rebels, the Khmer Rouge, the Interahamwe, and the Taiping were the most destructive killers, relative to the populations they were fighting, and they killed their victims up close and personal.  Dead is dead.

 

[Rose of Red Lake]

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

Trying to draw a big moral distinction between people who kill up close and personal, and people who use WMD is pretty futile, IMHO.  In real life the Mongols, the An Lushan rebels, the Khmer Rouge, the Interahamwe, and the Taiping were the most destructive killers, relative to the populations they were fighting, and they killed their victims up close and personal.  Dead is dead.

Do you not understand scale of destruction? Today in America, any civilian can walk into a store and buy an AR-15 and shoot 80 people in 2 minutes in a night club.

If the psycho had walked in with a sword, he wouldnt have killed so many, so fast, and would have been overpowered.

If he had reigned down a dragon on those people it would be even worse.

It's the scale of destruction that one is capable of, with almost zero resistance possible.

No one in this story can fly except Dany, no one has else has a dragon. 

4 hours ago, Darryk said:

Well that's the on thing she lacked, weapons of mass destruction. But that doesn't make her more noble than Dany. I'd hate the idea of dragons in the hands of someone who poisons entire families and bakes people into pies.

Dany saved people too, entire cities worth of people. When she sought vengeance it was on slavers and other scum.

She was always ready to seek vengence on Westeros, from Book 1. "But first she must conquer." Did you think that meant only hurting "the bad guys," like in an Indiana Jones film?

4 hours ago, Darryk said:

She had the occasional arrogant line of dialogue and people think that qualifies as foreshadowing for her becoming the villain.

It's hugely significant. It was a line that put her on the path of Saruman. If you destroy trees, you're the monster of the story, especially since they're religious sites. Trees doesnt have to be literal either it means, dragons are meant to destroy life.

4 hours ago, Darryk said:

They attempt[t to explain that on DVD commentaries with their usual drivel. "well there was that time she didn't care that her brother was killed by Drogo" Yeah, like she should give a shit about her brother who abused her. 

Well, I recall there being a lot more stuff after that. Its just a pattern of behavior. Sometimes she helps folks, sometimes she doesn't. We all have good sides and bad sides. Dany gave into her bad side. Get over it.

4 hours ago, Darryk said:

Also, Sansa smiled when Ramsay got torn apart by his dogs, so by D+D logic she is also mad queen material.

Sansa didnt have dragons. They corrupt people because they're the most powerful weapons in this universe. Absolute power and all that. 

[Angel Eyes]

On 6/1/2020 at 11:59 PM, GoldenGail3 said:

Dany as mad Queen in the books would be epic... don’t anybody deny it, it would be so epic seeing her destroy that asshat Cersei and all her power... 

It would be epic, but a) is it necessary since there's already a Mad Queen and b) while the concept is good, the execution was botched (like Theon and Rodrik Cassel).

[Rose of Red Lake]

1 hour ago, Angel Eyes said:

It would be epic, but a) is it necessary since there's already a Mad Queen and b) while the concept is good, the execution was botched (like Theon and Rodrik Cassel).

I think Cersei is too... unsurprising, and expected? 

The story has to surprise somehow; the author is trying extra hard to do this.

But its difficult to write...how do you foreshadow things but also surprise people at the same time? The foreshadowing can't be too obvious. Lines like the rotting, corrupt heart floating in the HotU are vague but looking back... it would tell you everything you need to know. 

[Angel Eyes]

1 hour ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

I think Cersei is too... unsurprising, and expected? 

The story has to surprise somehow; the author is trying extra hard to do this.

But its difficult to write...how do you foreshadow things but also surprise people at the same time? The foreshadowing can't be too obvious. Lines like the rotting, corrupt heart floating in the HotU are vague but looking back... it would tell you everything you need to know. 

Well they were trying too hard to surprise; that’s why Arya was the one to kill the Night King, which had no real foreshadowing.

[SeanF]

9 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Do you not understand scale of destruction? Today in America, any civilian can walk into a store and buy an AR-15 and shoot 80 people in 2 minutes in a night club.

If the psycho had walked in with a sword, he wouldnt have killed so many, so fast, and would have been overpowered.

If he had reigned down a dragon on those people it would be even worse.

It's the scale of destruction that one is capable of, with almost zero resistance possible.

No one in this story can fly except Dany, no one has else has a dragon. 

 

In practice, far more people have died at the wrong end of sword or machete, than at the wrong end of a Weapon of Mass Destruction.  That's why I cited the examples I did. 

An Lushan killed around one sixth of the world's population, at the time.

[Rose of Red Lake]

6 hours ago, Angel Eyes said:

Well they were trying too hard to surprise; that’s why Arya was the one to kill the Night King, which had no real foreshadowing.

The Night King was an invented thing so I didn't really care much. I liked how the "big heroes" were useless, while the overlooked little girl saved the day. Its Tolkienesque. Most of the Stark fandom knew dragons would be useless anyway. Bran's role was pretty stupid though. 

[Rose of Red Lake]

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

In practice, far more people have died at the wrong end of sword or machete, than at the wrong end of a Weapon of Mass Destruction.  That's why I cited the examples I did. 

If you're one of the hundreds of thousands being slaughtered by the Mongols at Herat, it's pretty cold comfort that you were killed intimately.

Why are you talking about them though? Dany has dragons. No one in the Mongol era had that kind of firepower or could kill so many people without having to do much of anything. Dragons put the story closer to our own era. Or, even worse Mongols +dragons which means far more dead and a multiplier effect?