Matt Smith, Olivia Cooke, Emma D’Arcy Cast in House of the Dragon

[The Bard of Banefort]

6 minutes ago, Ran said:

Paddy Considine was a major secondary character in The Outsider. These new ones, nope, none of them have been on HBO before I think.

Thanks! I've been out of the loop on HBO shows ever since GOT ended. 

[The Dragon Demands]

What if Michael K Williams was Racallio Ryndoon?

[The Bard of Banefort]

2 hours ago, The Dragon Demands said:

What if Michael K Williams was Racallio Ryndoon?

. . . that's not a half-bad idea.

[Lord Varys]

6 hours ago, The Dragon Demands said:

(sigh)

okay, even Deadline only heard that Danny Sapani was a leading contender to play Corlys Velaryon, and we don't have confirmation.

I'm concerned that Rhaenyra's official description emphasizes that she's "Of Pure Valyrian Blood".....perhaps because Laenor won't be?

BUT maybe that's just to point out that there's no reason to doubt her personal claim to the Iron Throne, the way it's phrased: "of pure Valyrian blood and a dragon-rider" - i.e. she has everything right except being a man.

I think that will have more to do with her status as Heir Apparent. She is a woman, but she is also of impeccable Valyrian descent, unlike her half-siblings who are half-Hightowers - and, in addition, half-Hightowers from a lesser branch of the family. This whole thing of Otto Hightower - a mere knight - overreaching himself by making his daughter the queen is not something the Rhaenyra fan boys pull out of their asses.

FaB doesn't dwell on that much, but we do know that one argument of Lyman Beesbury why Rhaenyra should get the throne is that she has more Targaryen blood than her half-brothers.

And to be sure, we don't know who Rhaenyra's mother is going to be until she is mentioned as being cast. They could go with a sister of Viserys I for her, if they want to drop the Arryn thing ... or just to familiarize the reader more with Targaryen incest - which doesn't really take place during the reign of Viserys I. You just have cousin and one avuncular marriage with Rhaenyra-Daemon ... until, in the end, there is Aegon-Helaena.

But to make it clear to the viewer in the beginning they do have to properly establish the sibling incest as the ideal or the norm. Could also work by mentioning Jaehaerys-Alysanne and Alyssa-Baelon, but they might not bother much with that.

As to elaborate a little bit on the thematic premise of the show:

To salvage of the backwater, outdated plot of 'should/can a woman (be allowed) to rule' they really have to make the female characters to work. They have the audience to understand Alicent, Rhaenyra, Rhaenys, and Mysaria (who seem to be the big female players in the first season, and they have to make Alicent's anti-feminist defense of the patriarchy something one cannot relate with, even if one doesn't agree with that attitude.

If that doesn't work, if the show were to send the message that women should, indeed, be excluded from power, then this would just suck pretty hard. And it is basically what to take from the overall outline of the story if you think about Rhaenyra's demise. In dynastic terms, her damaged son eventually getting the throne doesn't really change that.

One should also keep in mind that there should little be left from FaB when this adapted. A lot of the anecdotes are mutually exclusive, so they have to settle on one version ... or come up with a synthesis or better alternative, to better fit with the overall narrative they are going to tell. This will be a TV show, and not a collection of historical anecdotes. And all the characters they show have to be actual characters, not just background figures - like King Viserys I is in FaB, for instance. We have to know what they are about and how their relationships are to all the other characters, not just in the few cases Gyldayn cared to elaborate on. There are a lot of blank spaces there, especially in the 'Heirs of the Dragon' prelude to the Dance.

[The Dragon Demands]

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

This whole thing of Otto Hightower - a mere knight - overreaching himself by making his daughter the queen is not something the Rhaenyra fan boys pull out of their asses.

No ser, we did not.

[The Bard of Banefort]

15 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I think that will have more to do with her status as Heir Apparent. She is a woman, but she is also of impeccable Valyrian descent, unlike her half-siblings who are half-Hightowers - and, in addition, half-Hightowers from a lesser branch of the family. This whole thing of Otto Hightower - a mere knight - overreaching himself by making his daughter the queen is not something the Rhaenyra fan boys pull out of their asses.

FaB doesn't dwell on that much, but we do know that one argument of Lyman Beesbury why Rhaenyra should get the throne is that she has more Targaryen blood than her half-brothers.

And to be sure, we don't know who Rhaenyra's mother is going to be until she is mentioned as being cast. They could go with a sister of Viserys I for her, if they want to drop the Arryn thing ... or just to familiarize the reader more with Targaryen incest - which doesn't really take place during the reign of Viserys I. You just have cousin and one avuncular marriage with Rhaenyra-Daemon ... until, in the end, there is Aegon-Helaena.

But to make it clear to the viewer in the beginning they do have to properly establish the sibling incest as the ideal or the norm. Could also work by mentioning Jaehaerys-Alysanne and Alyssa-Baelon, but they might not bother much with that.

As to elaborate a little bit on the thematic premise of the show:

To salvage of the backwater, outdated plot of 'should/can a woman (be allowed) to rule' they really have to make the female characters to work. They have the audience to understand Alicent, Rhaenyra, Rhaenys, and Mysaria (who seem to be the big female players in the first season, and they have to make Alicent's anti-feminist defense of the patriarchy something one cannot relate with, even if one doesn't agree with that attitude.

If that doesn't work, if the show were to send the message that women should, indeed, be excluded from power, then this would just suck pretty hard. And it is basically what to take from the overall outline of the story if you think about Rhaenyra's demise. In dynastic terms, her damaged son eventually getting the throne doesn't really change that.

One should also keep in mind that there should little be left from FaB when this adapted. A lot of the anecdotes are mutually exclusive, so they have to settle on one version ... or come up with a synthesis or better alternative, to better fit with the overall narrative they are going to tell. This will be a TV show, and not a collection of historical anecdotes. And all the characters they show have to be actual characters, not just background figures - like King Viserys I is in FaB, for instance. We have to know what they are about and how their relationships are to all the other characters, not just in the few cases Gyldayn cared to elaborate on. There are a lot of blank spaces there, especially in the 'Heirs of the Dragon' prelude to the Dance.

I think they'll probably drop the Arryn connection, which really doesn't bother me much. It's a small detail, and they can come up with another reason for why the Vale supports Rhaenyra.

They'll probably show Alicent to be fiercely loyal to her family and their desperation for power, which will be used to explain why she doesn't support Rhaenyra. It'll be in-character for her, and it's already something we saw a lot of on GOT, with both the Tyrells and the Lannisters. 

[Lord Varys]

12 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I think they'll probably drop the Arryn connection, which really doesn't bother me much. It's a small detail, and they can come up with another reason for why the Vale supports Rhaenyra.

Oh, I'd not count on that. Aemma Arryn is still a granddaughter of the Old King and Viserys' first cousin. They can use her without this having any impact on Rhaenyra being a pure-blooded Valyrian - which is just some line they use as a character description, not something to be broken down and interpreted by a bunch 'expert fans' ;-).

I was just tossing around the idea that there might be a narrative reason why they would make Rhaenyra's mother a full-blooded Targaryen and Viserys' sister.

And by the way - we can expect this show to drop the ridiculous simplification from the GoT bonus material which made Princess Rhaenys a sister of Viserys I. As his sister, she would have never vied with her brother for the throne ... not to mention that they would then have most likely been married to each other.

And thinking of that - if they focus somewhat on the past with the Great Council and everything, then they might even come up with an explanation for 'the root of evil' GRRM chose to even touch upon ... namely, why Rhaenys and Viserys were not married to each other. This would especially then be a topic for discussion if Corlys Velaryon were conceived somewhat differently than he in FaB.

12 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

They'll probably show Alicent to be fiercely loyal to her family and their desperation for power, which will be used to explain why she doesn't support Rhaenyra. It'll be in-character for her, and it's already something we saw a lot of on GOT, with both the Tyrells and the Lannisters. 

Oh, but in the end she clearly is the leader of the Green faction. Her father might be recalled as Hand, but that is done at her suggestion. He is at her disposal now, not the other way around. She is the one calling the shots, the one controlling Criston Cole, etc. As a young woman she might be more of a pawn, but the obvious way to go with her relationship with Viserys is that they realize, after Aemma's death (if we assume the show does indeed start in 105 AC with Aemma's death in childbirth), the king can marry her now, meaning we might see 'the comeliest woman of the Seven Kingdoms' seduce the grieving king ... even if she actually loves Prince Daemon in light of the fact that she cannot marry Daemon (who would be married to Rhea).

And it is still a long way from 'I'm the new queen and my stepdaughter is the heir' to 'I've sons of my own and must insist that succeed the king to the point that I will cause a succession war'.

That is the difference between Visenya and Alicent. Visenya also despised her nephew Aenys, undermined him, and made it clear she wanted Maegor to rule. But she never turned actively against her king (so far as we know) and even tried to give him good advice when his reign was crumbling.

But Alicent is basically a woman who seems to have lived for the moment she could supplant Rhaenyra with her children since, well, 111 or 113 AC.

The way to portray that in a remotely sympathetic fashion would be that this was not how it had to be, at least not from the start. That the coup/war scenario is something that is very late in the making, and not something that's already set in stone when Aegon the Elder is born. Basically, that this is friendship gone bad where the whole succession issue is eventually - at least on Alicent's part - just used as means to and end - to hurt Rhaenyra, rather than something she was obsessed with from the start. With Cole it should be the same thing - he had no trouble with Rhaenyra being the Heir Apparent while he was her sworn shield. He only realized that she should not possibly rule after they had their falling-out.

And the best way for that, I guess, is that they actually like each other pretty well, are friends, until rank and privilege make them rivals, partly even against their own will.

I mean, even in FaB it is rather clear that Rhaenyra cannot have hated Alicent all that much ... else she would have executed her along with Otto and the other men on the Green Council - or would have commanded to do that before she fled the city. This kind of leniency doesn't really work if we imagine these two women as hellbent on destroying each other. It might be different on the other side, of course, as Aegon II's actions show.

Meaning if the show were to make them mortal enemies, they would likely have change the story so Alicent never becomes Rhaenyra's prisoner.

Oh, and thinking about Cole a little bit:

We should not only assume that the entire pedophile angle of their relationship is gone now, since Rhaenyra seems to have been aged up and Cole is introduced not as a KG but a mere knight in the description, but also that they won't go with the ridiculous 'Daemon taught Rhaenyra how to fuck' plot line taken from Choderlos de Laclos, since Rhaenyra won't be a child at the point the show starts, and we can't expect their romance thing to start only after he has joined the KG and become her bodyguard.

We still can get Rhaenyra-Daemon have sex, go to orgies and stuff, but not with the purpose to prepare Rhaenyra to seduce Cole.

[Dragon in the North]

On 12/11/2020 at 5:54 PM, The Dragon Demands said:

There was no "TV-Arya" by Season 6, as a coherent fictional character, even one we disliked.  It was random actions - not for shock value, but to pander the actors for Emmy awards.  "We reconceived the role to make it worthy of the actor's talents".  

Yes, there was a TV Arya, played by Maisie Williams. Do you actually read your posts before you send them? You’re not making any sense.

[The Dragon Demands]

34 minutes ago, Dragon in the North said:

Yes, there was a TV Arya, played by Maisie Williams. Do you actually read your posts before you send them? You’re not making any sense.

"One cannot stress this thing enough. D&D didn't 'adapt a book series'. They wrote scenes for actors (or rather: people who are actors in other productions but 'playing' more or less themselves in this one) doing what they like those actors doing. If they had cast Anthony Hopkins for, say, Doran Martell or Pycelle they would have him do some Hannibal-Lecter-like stuff - or other things they knew or liked him doing in some of the great movies he was in." - Lord Varys  

[The Bard of Banefort]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And thinking of that - if they focus somewhat on the past with the Great Council and everything, then they might even come up with an explanation for 'the root of evil' GRRM chose to even touch upon ... namely, why Rhaenys and Viserys were not married to each other. This would especially then be a topic for discussion if Corlys Velaryon were conceived somewhat differently than he in FaB.

What are you referring to here?

[Macklunkey]

I wonder if we'll get Mushroom?

[The Grey Wolf]

Whenever I read Lyman Beesbury say Rhaenyra has more Targ blood so her claim's better I want to tell the old man to go stuff himself. Seriously, that is the exact same argument Castamir the Usurper used in LOTR and it's just as ugly an idea then as now. Unfortunately, GRRM seems to endorse it what with him going out of his way to make the Hightower-Targaryens unsympathetic, to the point he gives them the only case of physical deformities not involving stillbirths despite Aegon-Helaena being less in-bred than Rhaenyra-Daemon, Corlys-Rhaenys, etc.

As for Cole, another reason I can't buy Eustace's version is the fact that he became Rhaenyra's sworn shield when he was 23 and she was 7. People don't develop sexual feelings for children who literally grow up in their presence (and unlike in the case of Lyn Corbray there are no hints of Criston being a pedophile). On top of that Cole is elsewhere shown to be downright asexual, if not fundamentalist, and given the fact he was a charming, handsome man popular with ladies at court you'd think there would have been rumors of him, an upjumped steward's son, sleeping around with trueborn, blue-blooded noblewomen if his sex drive was strong enough to cause actual conflict with his Kingsguard vow of celibacy.

[Annara Snow]

19 hours ago, Werthead said:

The White Queen had twenty-something actors playing the same characters as teenagers and forty-somethings across thirty years of the Wars of the Roses, even when they had children played by actors as old as themselves. They did some great work with moderate aging makeup on that show.

Not so much with Edward IV. He just looked the same, but with an obviously fake belly.

[Dragon in the North]

7 hours ago, The Dragon Demands said:

"One cannot stress this thing enough. D&D didn't 'adapt a book series'. They wrote scenes for actors (or rather: people who are actors in other productions but 'playing' more or less themselves in this one) doing what they like those actors doing. If they had cast Anthony Hopkins for, say, Doran Martell or Pycelle they would have him do some Hannibal-Lecter-like stuff - or other things they knew or liked him doing in some of the great movies he was in." - Lord Varys  

Are you quoting Varys from the series, because I’m sure he never said that.
 

I’ve seen cast interviews. Maisie Williams is nothing like Arya, Lena Headey is nothing like Cersei, Emilia Clarke is nothing like Danerys, etc. These actors/actresses are playing characters, not themselves. Even the example you gave makes no sense. Hannibal Lecter and Anthony Hopkins are not the same person.

 

D&D most definitely adapted books, until they ran out of useable material and had to go their own way. I don’t see how anyone could claim differently.

[Annara Snow]

42 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Whenever I read Lyman Beesbury say Rhaenyra has more Targ blood so her claim's better I want to tell the old man to go stuff himself. Seriously, that is the exact same argument Castamir the Usurper used in LOTR and it's just as ugly an idea then as now. Unfortunately, GRRM seems to endorse it what with him going out of his way to make the Hightower-Targaryens unsympathetic, to the point he gives them the only case of physical deformities not involving stillbirths despite Aegon-Helaena being less in-bred than Rhaenyra-Daemon, Corlys-Rhaenys, etc.

I'm really confused as to what you're trying to say there. You seem to be using "inbred" for couples rather than individual people - so I assume you actually meant that their relationships are more incestuous and their children more inbred? That's wrong. Individually, Aegon and Helaena were not inbred at all, since their parents were not related. But their marriage is definitely more incestuous and their children likely to be more inbred than Corlys/Rhaenys or Daemon/Rhaenyra, since they are full siblings.

BTW, we know that 1) GRRM doesn't understand genetics and 2) many of the stillborn deformed children of Targaryens are children who weren't inbred at all, i.e. their parents aren't  related (Rhaego, Maegor's children with his non-Targaryen wives), and the stillbirth and deformities may be about weird magical stuff going on (or its due to GRRM not understanding basic genetics).

[Annara Snow]

22 minutes ago, Dragon in the North said:

Are you quoting Varys from the series, because I’m sure he never said that.
 

I’ve seen cast interviews. Maisie Williams is nothing like Arya, Lena Headey is nothing like Cersei, Emilia Clarke is nothing like Danerys, etc. These actors/actresses are playing characters, not themselves. Even the example you gave makes no sense. Hannibal Lecter and Anthony Hopkins are not the same person.

 

D&D most definitely adapted books, until they ran out of useable material and had to go their own way. I don’t see how anyone could claim differently.

Anyone who's read said books can claim differently. I don't see how anyone can claim that season 5 was, in any meaningful way, an adaptation of A Feast for Crows and A Dance with Dragons, rather than a different narrative full of original plotlines loosely "inspired" by a few events in these books.

[Eltharion21]

1 hour ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Whenever I read Lyman Beesbury say Rhaenyra has more Targ blood so her claim's better I want to tell the old man to go stuff himself. Seriously, that is the exact same argument Castamir the Usurper used in LOTR and it's just as ugly an idea then as now. Unfortunately, GRRM seems to endorse it what with him going out of his way to make the Hightower-Targaryens unsympathetic, to the point he gives them the only case of physical deformities not involving stillbirths despite Aegon-Helaena being less in-bred than Rhaenyra-Daemon, Corlys-Rhaenys, etc.

As for Cole, another reason I can't buy Eustace's version is the fact that he became Rhaenyra's sworn shield when he was 23 and she was 7. People don't develop sexual feelings for children who literally grow up in their presence (and unlike in the case of Lyn Corbray there are no hints of Criston being a pedophile). On top of that Cole is elsewhere shown to be downright asexual, if not fundamentalist, and given the fact he was a charming, handsome man popular with ladies at court you'd think there would have been rumors of him, an upjumped steward's son, sleeping around with trueborn, blue-blooded noblewomen if his sex drive was strong enough to cause actual conflict with his Kingsguard vow of celibacy.

I agree  absolutely, whole Idea of Targaryen kings being above law they practice or Doctrine of Exceptionalism is idiotic and despicable. Whole Rhaenyra's claim is based on "Kings can do whatever they like - change laws, go against will of all the lords in realm, proclaim bastards as heirs to the Throne". In truth they can't none of that, the Iron Throne  itself and it's barbs are proof.

Also about Ser Cole I find it doubtful that he fell in love with child he baby sited since age of 7, especially he did spent entire time of her until she came of age. His motivation about deciding to get involved in Game of Thrones is what interest me the most , he seems reviled by some characters Barristan, Arys Oakhart, Arianne yet understood by some as Jaime.

Quote

"The best of them overcame their flaws, did their duty, and died with their swords in their hands. The worst ...
The worst were those who played the game of thrones."

"Loras: The heroes will always be remembered. The best.
Jaime: The best and the worst. And a few who were a bit of both. Like him."

 

[Annara Snow]

1 hour ago, Eltharion21 said:

I agree  absolutely, whole Idea of Targaryen kings being above law they practice or Doctrine of Exceptionalism is idiotic and despicable. Whole Rhaenyra's claim is based on "Kings can do whatever they like - change laws, go against will of all the lords in realm, proclaim bastards as heirs to the Throne". In truth they can't none of that, the Iron Throne  itself and it's barbs are proof.

 

Kings (arguably) having the right to choose their own heir - especially when the succession is very unclear and murky and there is no obvious heir by usual rules - isn't something GRRM invented, or "exceptionalism". He was just following history. Unsurprisingly, succession was often contested in these cases (usually after the king's death) - e.g. Henry I naming his daughter Mathilda (Empress Maud) as his heir and having his noblemen swear fealty to her as future queen, including his nephew (his sister's son) Stephen of Blois, who later took the throne for himself while Maud was still away on the continent after Henry's death, starting the civil war ("Anarchy") that inspired GRRM for Dance of the Dragons. Or, William of Conqueror (then still known as William the Bastard) claiming that the late king Edward the Confessor promised him the throne years before, while Harold Godwinsson claimed Edward had named him as his heir on his deathbed.  An extremely successful example was Edward VI naming his Protestant cousin Jane Grey as his heir rather than his (Catholic) eldest half sister Mary (or his other half sister Elizabeth), which didn't go well for the poor Jane, the "Nine Days' queen".

[Dragon in the North]

3 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

Anyone who's read said books can claim differently. I don't see how anyone can claim that season 5 was, in any meaningful way, an adaptation of A Feast for Crows and A Dance with Dragons, rather than a different narrative full of original plotlines loosely "inspired" by a few events in these books.

I said they were faithful until they ran out of useable material. Feast and Dance had way too much filler to be faithfully adapted into a television series.

[Lord Varys]

On 12/13/2020 at 5:37 AM, The Bard of Banefort said:

What are you referring to here?

The fact that this whole succession starts with Rhaenys and Viserys not marrying each other. George failed to answer that question in his book, and that is a mistake. The Dance of the Dragons is a consequence of Jaehaerys I having no clear heir, and the royal dynasty and the entire Realm getting 'cursed' by the Great Council which took place at Harrenhal.

19 hours ago, Macklunkey said:

I wonder if we'll get Mushroom?

Perhaps, I guess we don't have all main characters so far.

19 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Whenever I read Lyman Beesbury say Rhaenyra has more Targ blood so her claim's better I want to tell the old man to go stuff himself. Seriously, that is the exact same argument Castamir the Usurper used in LOTR and it's just as ugly an idea then as now. Unfortunately, GRRM seems to endorse it what with him going out of his way to make the Hightower-Targaryens unsympathetic, to the point he gives them the only case of physical deformities not involving stillbirths despite Aegon-Helaena being less in-bred than Rhaenyra-Daemon, Corlys-Rhaenys, etc.

George created all those people, he decides who he thinks should get off as sympathetic or unsympathetic, they are not real people that deserve that we give the benefit of the doubt. I mean, next you walk around and say Ramsay should be some perverse shithead, or we should cut Gregor or Euron some slack because it cannot be that the author made them into murderous psychopaths...

Purity of blood is an important criterion in a monarchistic setting, especially one where royal blood is as 'special' as it is with the Targaryens who rarely marry outsiders or their own subjects. But Viserys I just did that with Alicent Hightower, and she isn't really a very suited queen, being merely the daughter of a landless knight, basically.

Even if Aemma Arryn weren't a Targaryen on her mother's side - she would outrank Lady Alicent simply by virtue of being the daughter of a great lord.

Quote

As for Cole, another reason I can't buy Eustace's version is the fact that he became Rhaenyra's sworn shield when he was 23 and she was 7. People don't develop sexual feelings for children who literally grow up in their presence (and unlike in the case of Lyn Corbray there are no hints of Criston being a pedophile). On top of that Cole is elsewhere shown to be downright asexual, if not fundamentalist, and given the fact he was a charming, handsome man popular with ladies at court you'd think there would have been rumors of him, an upjumped steward's son, sleeping around with trueborn, blue-blooded noblewomen if his sex drive was strong enough to cause actual conflict with his Kingsguard vow of celibacy.

We don't need hints for Cole having the hots for the most beautiful woman of her generation ... besides his interest in Rhaenyra. I mean, you can prefer the Mushroom nonsense there if you like ... but the chance that HoD is going with this unrealistic take on things is pretty ludicrous. The potential of that making a successful, compelling story with a modern audience is about zero.

That would break down Cole's motivation to crown Aegon II to silly 'the man must rule' crap ... and that is not the message a modern show will champion. It has to be something more than that, meaning jealousy and misogyny. We certainly will have other unsympathetic characters champion 'only men can rule' stuff, but not Criston Cole.

And to be sure - Cole can very well be a second Lucamore in this show, with Rhaenyra merely being the latest of his conquests, or him becoming the secret lover of Queen Alicent after he switches sides.

18 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

I'm really confused as to what you're trying to say there. You seem to be using "inbred" for couples rather than individual people - so I assume you actually meant that their relationships are more incestuous and their children more inbred? That's wrong. Individually, Aegon and Helaena were not inbred at all, since their parents were not related. But their marriage is definitely more incestuous and their children likely to be more inbred than Corlys/Rhaenys or Daemon/Rhaenyra, since they are full siblings.

Of course they are inbred, since they are descended from a father whose parents were brother and sister - as were his grandparents. But, yes, it is rather noteworthy that Aegon-Helaena are the only sibling couple in the Dance setting, with there only being cousin and avuncular marriages/betrothals on the Black side - which was the reason why I could see Rhaenyra's mother being turned into Viserys' sister to familiarize the audience more with the fact that the standard Targaryen marriage custom is sibling incest. Something that wasn't really touched upon much in GoT.

Quote

BTW, we know that 1) GRRM doesn't understand genetics and 2) many of the stillborn deformed children of Targaryens are children who weren't inbred at all, i.e. their parents aren't  related (Rhaego, Maegor's children with his non-Targaryen wives), and the stillbirth and deformities may be about weird magical stuff going on (or its due to GRRM not understanding basic genetics).

Sure, but even if one wants to attribute the freak children and fertility problems to the incest stuff then Aegon/Helaena's children turning out the be defective fits very well with things - they were brother and sister, after all, and just because your grandfather wasn't related to your grandmother doesn't erase all the genetic baggage you did inherit from your inbred ancestors. Hence it makes no sense to complain that Rhaegel or Aerion turned out to be bad apples, citing that there parents don't seem to have been that closely related - or related at all.

17 hours ago, Eltharion21 said:

I agree  absolutely, whole Idea of Targaryen kings being above law they practice or Doctrine of Exceptionalism is idiotic and despicable. Whole Rhaenyra's claim is based on "Kings can do whatever they like - change laws, go against will of all the lords in realm, proclaim bastards as heirs to the Throne". In truth they can't none of that, the Iron Throne  itself and it's barbs are proof.

This show is not going to espouse your view that women should not rule and that only men are eligible to rule because a bunch of bigoted men said so. And thinking the degree of royal blood matters in a dynastic setting has nothing to do with the Doctrine of Exceptionalism - that is only about royal incest, not about the fact that only people with sufficient royal blood are eligible to inherit a throne - that is common sense in a hereditary monarchy. The guys who flaunt the Doctrine of Exceptionalism the most in the Dance era are the Greens, when Aegon the Elder marries his sister Helaena - which is the first brother-sister marriage since Baelon and Alyssa.

Quote

Also about Ser Cole I find it doubtful that he fell in love with child he baby sited since age of 7, especially he did spent entire time of her until she came of age. His motivation about deciding to get involved in Game of Thrones is what interest me the most , he seems reviled by some characters Barristan, Arys Oakhart, Arianne yet understood by some as Jaime.

This is clearly not the scenario in this show, since Rhaenyra Targaryen is not going to be a child of seven when she first meets Ser Criston Cole as far as we know. The woman cast as Rhaenyra is an adult, and the casting sheet for Criston Cole specifies that he isn't a KG when this show starts, meaning Criston Cole will become the sworn shield of a young woman, not a seven-year-old girl - assuming they go with this plot line.