Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Westeros

More Dragon Casting Announced

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Daeron the Daring said:

The marriage was in 114 AC, and Mushroom found the two in bed at the morning in 113 AC. Tho the betrothal I don't know when exactly was, the marriage surely wasn't done yet. I mean, Ser Harwin came into the picture after what happened with Daemon. We are told that Daemon asked for her hand from Viserys, because noone else would marry her 'this way'. Then she let Ser Harwin into her bed, right after Daemon got banished, and when Rhaenyra wasn't yet betrothed to anyone.

You are confusing things here. Rhaenyra's fling with Daemon happened in 111 AC, after his temporary return from the Stepstones, Rhaenyra's one night with Harwin was the result of her break-up/whatever with Criston Cole, which took place at the same day as Viserys I forcing his daughter to go through with the Laenor marriage. Meaning they were already betrothed and scheduled to marry when the Harwin thing took place. And we have to take that with a grain of salt since the source in Mushroom - whose account on Rhaenyra-Daemon and Cole being 'as chaste as an old septa' is not exactly all that convincing.

And this whole thing had nothing to do with fathering children but was a way to blow off steam. I'm not saying Rhaenyra had nothing going for Harwin ... just that he was clearly her third choice after her dear uncle and Criston Cole. And in the end only Daemon seems to have been viewed by her as the man worthy of her hand. Definitely not KG Cole, and also not Harwin Strong who was the heir to a great lordship. The man had proposed to her earlier as had other great heirs like the Lannister twins.

5 hours ago, Daeron the Daring said:

And  I am writing down again what I wrote down earlier: It's written down in F&B that Rhaenyra approached Daemon right after Laena's death. And I mean right after.

Yes, and as I said - this kind of thing does happen even if the widower in question isn't just the hot uncle you had a thing for as a girl. It is not uncommon that people comfort each other if they were suffering from a loss and this results in them starting a relationship.

And regardless of the Laena issue - this definitely illustrates the fact that Harwin still being there did not stop Rhaenyra from having sex with Daemon after Laena's death.

5 hours ago, Daeron the Daring said:

And then there's also the fact that Daemon had no son, but two daughters, one of them married to Rhaenyra's heir, the other one to Laenor's. How would she benefit from marrying Daemon, if Daemon already was on her side (at least trough the betrothals of his daughters)? And why would she let Daemon, a monster, who she know well, if not for love? And also, Daemon would only benefit from this if he'll get direct control over the IT trough her (and we really didn't see that happening during the Dance...he wasn't really more than her closest advisor). Otherwise, his descendants would be quenns and kings anyway.

The children were betrothed to each other ... and the marriages still over a decade or more away. Neither Baela nor Rhaena were ever married to any of Rhaenyra's sons. A lot of things could happen in the meantime ... betrothals can be dissolved, after all. By 120 AC none of Alicent's children were yet married. The Greens could have recruited Daemon to their side by offering him Helaena's hand ... and Rhaenyra could have ended up with Aegon or Aemond as a second husband for this or that reason. If that had happened they would have likely also dissolved those betrothals.

As for political motivations in this - Daemon without Rhaenyra as his wife would just be a landless prince without influence or seat. Rhaenyra without Daemon would be without a strong man at her side. If there was ever going to be a conflict with the Green faction then Rhaenyra having Daemon on her side would make sense for her, no?

Not to mention that the explanation we get for the rushed wedding is Rhaenyra's pregnancy ... although that's a bad theory in light of the fact that Rhaenyra could have passed Aegon the Younger as Laenor's final child. If she got pregnant before his death and while she was still comforting Daemon for Laena, Laenor could have been the father. And perhaps he was. We actually do not know ;-). After all, the man lived at High Tide, too, just as Daemon and Laena did at the time of Laena's death. And while we think about that - who is to say Harwin isn't the father of Aegon III? If Rhaenyra got pregnant before Laenor's death/Harwin's return to Harrenhal and she had sex with him at that time then this would certainly be possible.

But, again, FaB really doesn't elaborate much about the family life there. We don't even get Rhaenyra's - or Aegon the Younger's or Baela/Rhaena's - reaction to Daemon's death at Harrenhal, nor what the children thought about the entire Nettles affair. We don't know if Daemon was still interested in power when the Dance began ... or whether that had changed over the years.

Share this post


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

You are confusing things here. Rhaenyra's fling with Daemon happened in 111 AC, after his temporary return from the Stepstones, Rhaenyra's one night with Harwin was the result of her break-up/whatever with Criston Cole, which took place at the same day as Viserys I forcing his daughter to go through with the Laenor marriage. Meaning they were already betrothed and scheduled to marry when the Harwin thing took place. And we have to take that with a grain of salt since the source in Mushroom - whose account on Rhaenyra-Daemon and Cole being 'as chaste as an old septa' is not exactly all that convincing.

Sorry, I was wrong about when things with Daemon happened. Either way, their first night (if ever happened) happened before the marriage. Not so long before, but still. That does make Ser Harwin her toy in her weak moment, pretty much, but not her sperm donor.

 

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Yes, and as I said - this kind of thing does happen even if the widower in question isn't just the hot uncle you had a thing for as a girl. It is not uncommon that people comfort each other if they were suffering from a loss and this results in them starting a relationship.

And regardless of the Laena issue - this definitely illustrates the fact that Harwin still being there did not stop Rhaenyra from having sex with Daemon after Laena's death.

My guess is that Rhaenyra always had a thing a thing on Daemon. We can't really say she loved Ser Criston or Ser Harwin, yet she chose to sleep with Ser Harwin regularly. 

What I'm just tryna say is that if she would've grown fond of Laena that eay, she wouldn't have approached him immediately after her death. I mean, it's still an amoral thing.

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The Greens could have recruited Daemon to their side by offering him Helaena's hand .

Except Daemon hated on Viserys' son for the fact that they pushed him even further away. 

At last, we surely don't know what Daemon aimed for in his later life, but Viserys tought that the betrothals of his daughters still didn't calm him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Sorry, I was wrong about when things with Daemon happened. Either way, their first night (if ever happened) happened before the marriage. Not so long before, but still. That does make Ser Harwin her toy in her weak moment, pretty much, but not her sperm donor.

Yes, of course, I never said it didn't happen before the marriage, I just corrected your claim that it happened before marriage and betrothal.

The idea if we go with Harwin as father of the children would be that Rhaenyra offered Harwin the role of her protector and secret paramour when they had that first night. She seems to have had something like that in mind for Criston Cole and when he rejected her she went to the next best man.

But in light of the fact that she seems to have been in love with Criston at that time chances are very low that her relationship with Harwin was rooted in love ... more like attraction and convenience. Because we can also be reasonably certain that Rhaenyra loathing Laenor to the degree she did made it very unlikely from the start she was willing to have a proper marriage with him ... even if he had been determined to do his part (which he apparently wasn't).

Again, the idea is that this general impression people seem to have - that Harwin was an important person in Rhaenyra's life - is clearly not very well-founded by the text. Unlike the entire Laena thing.

1 hour ago, Daeron the Daring said:

What I'm just tryna say is that if she would've grown fond of Laena that eay, she wouldn't have approached him immediately after her death. I mean, it's still an amoral thing.

Of course, but so what? It was also vastly improper for both Daemon and Rhaenyra to marry as quickly after the deaths of their respective spouses, yet they did that, too. And we do not have to imagine this whole thing as something that was planned. Rhaenyra was there when Laena died, she and Daemon exchance memories of her, they start to drink, start to remember their own past, and then it happens. With their history that it isn't surprising at all.

1 hour ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Except Daemon hated on Viserys' son for the fact that they pushed him even further away. 

Of course, but this entire story has a lot of queer bedfellows, no? It starts with Corlys and Daemon preparing to start a succession war in 101 AC before the Great Council. And then later they team up because neither has the prominent place as the court of Viserys I they wanted ... and Daemon eventually even marries Corlys' daughter - a woman whose claim he was fighting against in 101 AC. In the 110s Laena Velaryon suddenly looked attractive to him.

And it is actually somewhat similar with Rhaenyra. Originally in 103-105 AC Daemon viewed Rhaenyra as his own rival. He wanted to be his brother's heir, he wanted to be king one day. He did not want to be the prince/king consort at Rhaenyra's side. But when Rhaenyra was installed as the Heir Apparent Daemon quickly changed his approach, realizing his way to the Iron Throne now went through Rhaenyra, by seducing and marrying her.

It is completely within the mindset of this man to forget the issues he had with Otto and Alicent and join their team if they would have him. Daemon Targaryen only becomes a Black in 120 AC when he marries Rhaenyra. Prior to that he wasn't part of either party, only sort of tangentially connected to Rhaenyra via Laena and Laenor.

If we assume for a moment that Daemon doesn't marry Rhaenyra in 120 AC then a lot of things could have happened. If he had married Helaena he could have offered Baela and Rhaena to Aegon the Elder and Aemond, respectively.

We also see those shifting alliances on the other side - originally Otto Hightower makes Rhaenyra the Heir Apparent and then later he does anything in his power to stop her. And Viserys I was also easy to persuade most of the time. He banished Daemon multiple times but always allowed him to return ... just as he dismissed Otto once only to recall him later.

So we can also imagine that with Rhaenyra widowed Otto and Alicent would push the king again for the match they had suggested back in 113 AC - Rhaenyra marrying her half-brother Aegon the Elder.

In light of everything that had gone wrong in 120 AC this could have been something Viserys I may have even accepted or considered a good idea now to bind this family closer together that clearly started to fray.

What basically finally forms the two factions as we know them is Daemon marrying Rhaenyra in 120 AC and Aegon marrying Helaena a couple of years later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically it should be Princess Rhaenys Velaryon, just as Catelyn Tully became Catelyn Stark. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing the direction the show will clearly take.

Blacks= good guys, Greens= bad guys.

I was kinda hoping for them to actually paint both sides as both righteous and bad. This would force the viewer to choose either the blacks or the greens. Give both factions some flavour to make them likeable and dislikable.

It would create this opinion between viewers, like for example “I am a black supporter” or “I am a green supporter”, “I think the greens will/should win” etc.

But the great twist at the end is that the war technically ends in some sort of draw. And in overall it would blow viewers mind.

But one can only dream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, The Young Maester said:

Seeing the direction the show will clearly take.

Blacks= good guys, Greens= bad guys.

I was kinda hoping for them to actually paint both sides as both righteous and bad. This would force the viewer to choose either the blacks or the greens. Give both factions some flavour to make them likeable and dislikable.

It would create this opinion between viewers, like for example “I am a black supporter” or “I am a green supporter”, “I think the greens will/should win” etc.

But the great twist at the end is that the war technically ends in some sort of draw. And in overall it would blow viewers mind.

But one can only dream.

There is pretty much no basis for this speculation so far since we have not the slightest idea how they are going to portray Aegon II, Helaena, Aemond, and Daeron. They could certainly play up the villainy aspects of Otto, Alicent, and Criston Cole ... and exonerate Alicent's children in the process of that.

Chances are pretty good, all things considered, that they are going to portray Aegon II more like a bumbling pawn in the hands of his mother and grandfather than a willing participant/leader in this entire enterprise.

I'm not sure he'll ever be as sympathetic as Tommen is in the books - who is a complete pawn - but he doesn't have to be another Joffrey.

But if they take the source material seriously then it is quite clear that the Green Targaryens are pretty much all stupid scum (with the partial exception of Daeron), and their lackeys are also driven by ambition, revenge, and a number of other selfish interests.

The best guys in Aegon II's service is, in the end, a man like Marston Waters - who can be seen at least as a decent guy to a point - whereas the rest are just scum.

In that sense - it is the intention of the author that the Greens come across as (mostly) selfish and evil - sort of like the Lannisters in ASoIaF - whereas the Blacks are the good guys (despite the fact that some of them are flawed).

Share this post


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

There is pretty much no basis for this speculation so far since we have not the slightest idea how they are going to portray Aegon II, Helaena, Aemond, and Daeron. They could certainly play up the villainy aspects of Otto, Alicent, and Criston Cole ... and exonerate Alicent's children in the process of that.

Chances are pretty good, all things considered, that they are going to portray Aegon II more like a bumbling pawn in the hands of his mother and grandfather than a willing participant/leader in this entire enterprise.

I'm not sure he'll ever be as sympathetic as Tommen is in the books - who is a complete pawn - but he doesn't have to be another Joffrey.

But if they take the source material seriously then it is quite clear that the Green Targaryens are pretty much all stupid scum (with the partial exception of Daeron), and their lackeys are also driven by ambition, revenge, and a number of other selfish interests.

The best guys in Aegon II's service is, in the end, a man like Marston Waters - who can be seen at least as a decent guy to a point - whereas the rest are just scum.

In that sense - it is the intention of the author that the Greens come across as (mostly) selfish and evil - sort of like the Lannisters in ASoIaF - whereas the Blacks are the good guys (despite the fact that some of them are flawed).

Question is how true to the source material will they remain. Lots of the tv show fans hated season 8 because it villainised Daenerys (not because of bad writing). And I’m sure hbo is aware of that, so they might just not turn Rhaenyra into the ruthless women she was during the end of the dance.

If I remember reading correctly (don’t really keep up with these news), they cut the strongs from the show, which are in my opinion at least an important family to the story. 

I remember reading somewhere. One of the hbo guys (shareholder or something), said that the new tv show will have all the amazing dragons that viewers loved and even more. This just turned me off, mainly because whoever said this seems to have forgotten that the show didn’t gain massive popularity because of meh dragons. It became what it is today because it was something new and never seen before. The beautiful dialogue, rich story, amazing plots, literally no plot armour. All these things are what made it great, and hbo being the typical corporate company that is in it for the money, makes me worry what they actually think made the show so big, and what approach they will carry on.

One of my greatest worry’s is the lack of dialogue, and that would mean the writers would have to come up with the dialogues.

But in overall, I agree we get the impression that the blacks were the good guys in the war. But at the same time I never actually saw any moral differences between each side. Like I believe both sides were equally immoral with their actions. With the lads probably being one of the only exceptions since they are pretty likeable and just are a couple teens playing at conqueror.

The making aegon a pawn of his family’s scheme seems like a possibility. During the beginning of the dance that is actually the impression we get since aegon had to be convinced into taking the throne.

In general it depends how they paint characters. One thing I noticed with dumb and dumber is that they had their own bias views against certain characters/actors. And some would get thrown under the bus if they didn’t like either the actor or the book character itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

Question is how true to the source material will they remain. Lots of the tv show fans hated season 8 because it villainised Daenerys (not because of bad writing). And I’m sure hbo is aware of that, so they might just not turn Rhaenyra into the ruthless women she was during the end of the dance.

Rhaenyra isn't a particularly ruthless woman. She makes grievous mistakes, but she doesn't run amok or anything. The Nettles thing is very ugly, but that's just one person. It is like saying Tyrion is a complete monster because he had the singer murdered.

In the end, Rhaenyra is a tragic character. Too weak to save the dragons, too weak to hold the capital, too stupid to keep her allies and loyalists in the Crownlands happy. Whatever mistakes she made she effectively atones for during her flight to Duskendale and then by being captured and murdered by her brother.

What we know conceptually about the show Rhaenyra is that they are not going to portray her as a perfect person, but rather a future queen with flaws ... meaning she will be an tragic or antihero from the start.

9 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

If I remember reading correctly (don’t really keep up with these news), they cut the strongs from the show, which are in my opinion at least an important family to the story. 

As far as I know that's just speculation so far. We were tossing around ideas how things might be simplified.

9 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

One of my greatest worry’s is the lack of dialogue, and that would mean the writers would have to come up with the dialogues.

Of course, it is not just the lack of good dialogue, but also the fact that the Dance as such isn't a good story. It doesn't progress like a novel or series of novels with the stakes slowly rising, things being build up for a gigantic explosion, etc. Instead, the biggest dragon battles are in the beginning/middle of the war, and the end of the Dance is a pathetic whimper, basically a chamber play depicting court intrigue.

The way to make it interesting is to get people invested into the characters in the years before the Dance - during the reign of Viserys I. If that doesn't work, the show will fail.

And how much they will part from the source material will depend on how they write the characters before the Dance. They will have their butterfly effects with the way the characters interact and stuff, and that might then cause them to change crucial aspects of the story further down the line.

I mean, the story will be greatly affected by as simple decision as what version of a particular anecdote of the history as given by Gyldayn they will take.

But in general it is quite clear that this cannot be just an adaptation. They will have to invent a lot of scenes and they have to flesh out crucial parts of many characters - things like the relationship between Rhaenyra, Daemon, and their children, the dynamics between Otto, Alicent, and Criston Cole. We can expect them to include the big scenes George invented, but they cannot just go with those. They have to make these people into living characters. And we have to be invested in the war they are going to fight.

9 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

But in overall, I agree we get the impression that the blacks were the good guys in the war. But at the same time I never actually saw any moral differences between each side. Like I believe both sides were equally immoral with their actions. With the lads probably being one of the only exceptions since they are pretty likeable and just are a couple teens playing at conqueror.

Overall, the Blacks are almost exclusively reactionary - they react to the coup, they react to the murder of Lucerys, they react to the invasion of the Riverlands, react to the attack on Duskendale and Rook's Rest, etc. They are not the war mongers in this conflict ... never mind that Rhaenyra rejected Alicent's desperate pleas for peace when it looked like her side had lost.

Also, you never have any positive idealists siding with the Greens - even most of the people siding with them on principle, because a son should come before a daughter, are thugs like the traitors at Tumbleton (not the Two Betrayers but the others) or the Dragonstonian traitors helping Aegon II. Whereas the most positive description of loyal folks are the humble Riverlanders who take up arms to defend Rhaenyra's claim in the beginning of the war. Those are the greatest heroes (if there are any) in this conflict. And as you say, this kind of thing continues in the Riverlands with the Lads, etc.

9 minutes ago, The Young Maester said:

The making aegon a pawn of his family’s scheme seems like a possibility. During the beginning of the dance that is actually the impression we get since aegon had to be convinced into taking the throne.

In the book Septon Eustace claims Aegon II was unwilling to take the throne because he considered it a betrayal. That doesn't fit with the other quotes from him we have before and after the coup. He hated his half-sister. That said, he still may not have been keen - or could be portrayed as not being keen - to actually become king because he was never groomed for the role by his father, etc.

But in general I think to downplay the actual quarrels between the siblings and their children in favor to focus on the conflicts between Rhaenyra-Alicent and Daemon-Otto could help make the conflict as such tragic.

I'm also all for there being an actual friendship between Jacaerys Velaryon and Daeron Targaryen and Helaena being pretty close with Rhaenyra and/or one of her sons.

 

Share this post


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

Rhaenyra isn't a particularly ruthless woman. She makes grievous mistakes, but she doesn't run amok or anything. The Nettles thing is very ugly, but that's just one person. It is like saying Tyrion is a complete monster because he had the singer murdered.

In the end, Rhaenyra is a tragic character. Too weak to save the dragons, too weak to hold the capital, too stupid to keep her allies and loyalists in the Crownlands happy. Whatever mistakes she made she effectively atones for during her flight to Duskendale and then by being captured and murdered by her brother.

What we know conceptually about the show Rhaenyra is that they are not going to portray her as a perfect person, but rather a future queen with flaws ... meaning she will be an tragic or antihero from the start.

 

I agree with that. I think one thing that will hit the audience the most is the fact that she watches almost all of her sons die. I can see many people shedding a tear for such a tragedy.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Of course, it is not just the lack of good dialogue, but also the fact that the Dance as such isn't a good story. It doesn't progress like a novel or series of novels with the stakes slowly rising, things being build up for a gigantic explosion, etc. Instead, the biggest dragon battles are in the beginning/middle of the war, and the end of the Dance is a pathetic whimper, basically a chamber play depicting court intrigue.

The dance is essential all out war. But this is what worries me, that they will focus on the war side of things (like s8 did), and not put that much effort into the story. Because one thing I’ve learned from the average joe viewer is that they love a good action movie/series. And the dance isn’t really lacking on violence tbh. So I can easily see them take this approach, especially considering it is allot easier than actually writing dialogues and a story.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

The way to make it interesting is to get people invested into the characters in the years before the Dance - during the reign of Viserys I. If that doesn't work, the show will fail.

And how much they will part from the source material will depend on how they write the characters before the Dance. They will have their butterfly effects with the way the characters interact and stuff, and that might then cause them to change crucial aspects of the story further down the line.

I mean, the story will be greatly affected by as simple decision as what version of a particular anecdote of the history as given by Gyldayn they will take.

This is one thing that I really want. Maybe start the show before rhaenyra marries. Like this we get to see the greens grow up, and even maybe sympathy’s with them, same for the blacks and all their actions. However if they do the approach that I mentioned above (more action than story), than theyd probably cut most of the prelude of the dance and just start the story  just before viserys dies.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

But in general it is quite clear that this cannot be just an adaptation. They will have to invent a lot of scenes and they have to flesh out crucial parts of many characters - things like the relationship between Rhaenyra, Daemon, and their children, the dynamics between Otto, Alicent, and Criston Cole. We can expect them to include the big scenes George invented, but they cannot just go with those. They have to make these people into living characters. And we have to be invested in the war they are going to fight.

They need a good writer and someone who’s aware of how medieval courtly affairs worked etc. Looking at the two show runners it seems one has a pretty good track record whilst the other dosent seem so. But we shall see how it turns out.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Overall, the Blacks are almost exclusively reactionary - they react to the coup, they react to the murder of Lucerys, they react to the invasion of the Riverlands, react to the attack on Duskendale and Rook's Rest, etc. They are not the war mongers in this conflict ... never mind that Rhaenyra rejected Alicent's desperate pleas for peace when it looked like her side had lost.

Also, you never have any positive idealists siding with the Greens - even most of the people siding with them on principle, because a son should come before a daughter, are thugs like the traitors at Tumbleton (not the Two Betrayers but the others) or the Dragonstonian traitors helping Aegon II. Whereas the most positive description of loyal folks are the humble Riverlanders who take up arms to defend Rhaenyra's claim in the beginning of the war. Those are the greatest heroes (if there are any) in this conflict. And as you say, this kind of thing continues in the Riverlands with the Lads, etc.

Naturally people will always sympathy’s with the blacks, especially considering that they were stolen their inheritance. I can easily see lots of people siding with the blacks because their queen is a female character that had what is hers by right stolen by ambitious lords. Same as it seems the blacks were in a defensive war from the start of the war.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

In the book Septon Eustace claims Aegon II was unwilling to take the throne because he considered it a betrayal. That doesn't fit with the other quotes from him we have before and after the coup. He hated his half-sister. That said, he still may not have been keen - or could be portrayed as not being keen - to actually become king because he was never groomed for the role by his father, etc.

I reckon they will either make aegon an antagonist that stole the throne. Or a humble lad that was coerced into taking the throne by his ambitious mother and kingsguard. And later after all the tragedies aegon suffered we will see him turn cruel and ruthless. It would make a nice story of a good person gone bad. Similar to what breaking bad was, like the main purpose of that story wasnt the drugs, it was a good person being turned into a bad person. And that is something I can enjoy to watch.

It might not be accurate to the source material. But as you said they might have to come up with other shenanigans to make the story intriguing.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

But in general I think to downplay the actual quarrels between the siblings and their children in favor to focus on the conflicts between Rhaenyra-Alicent and Daemon-Otto could help make the conflict as such tragic.

I'm also all for there being an actual friendship between Jacaerys Velaryon and Daeron Targaryen and Helaena being pretty close with Rhaenyra and/or one of her sons.

Anything that makes the story feel rich and good.

One key factor that disappointed me from the show was the inaccuracies of most customs. Everything from the armour of household guards to the attire that certain people wore, was abysmal and inaccurate. What I like about book adaptions is actually watching all the details we get from the book be re-enacted on tv. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

There is pretty much no basis for this speculation so far since we have not the slightest idea how they are going to portray Aegon II, Helaena, Aemond, and Daeron. They could certainly play up the villainy aspects of Otto, Alicent, and Criston Cole ... and exonerate Alicent's children in the process of that.

Chances are pretty good, all things considered, that they are going to portray Aegon II more like a bumbling pawn in the hands of his mother and grandfather than a willing participant/leader in this entire enterprise.

I'm not sure he'll ever be as sympathetic as Tommen is in the books - who is a complete pawn - but he doesn't have to be another Joffrey.

But if they take the source material seriously then it is quite clear that the Green Targaryens are pretty much all stupid scum (with the partial exception of Daeron), and their lackeys are also driven by ambition, revenge, and a number of other selfish interests.

The best guys in Aegon II's service is, in the end, a man like Marston Waters - who can be seen at least as a decent guy to a point - whereas the rest are just scum.

In that sense - it is the intention of the author that the Greens come across as (mostly) selfish and evil - sort of like the Lannisters in ASoIaF - whereas the Blacks are the good guys (despite the fact that some of them are flawed).

Ha, you are hardly person to judge who is scum Kimdissi. Especially since you are being fan of her on this since before the story was published, just searching term "Rhaenyra"  you spring up like mushroom after rain, even in 2010.

And Rhaenyra certainly was cruel, cruel as or more than her brother Aegon II - known as Maegor with teats, "question him sharply" was her catchphrase.

Both sides in Civil war had their vile acts and it is impossible to make  compelling story with depicting either side as purely good or bad. Least of all using unconfirmed and conflicting quasi historical sources that have their own agenda when they write about historical events.

To be honest I much prefer Silmarillion  to GRRMarillion (Fire & Blood) for sole reason that I consider it braver to present events as they happened and not leave room for readers to choose what really happened.

Edited by Eltharion21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Eltharion21 said:

Ha, you are hardly person to judge who is scum Kimdissi. Especially since you are being fan of her on this since before the story was published, just searching term "Rhaenyra"  you pop up like mushroom after rain even in 2010.

I was always interested in the Dance ... but I actually don't like Rhaenyra as portrayed as a character. She is far too stupid for me ... and too pitiful, turning into this sad fat lady who is mocked by her own septon and cheated on her by her consort.

I also don't like it that she is basically a ripoff of Empress Matilda. I expected/wanted her to be the usurper, an elder sister who thought she was the better ruler, who should rule because she was the eldest child ... not a pampered woman who was basically just in her position because she was her father's favorite. I wanted her to be able to split the Realm in two not because of the favors showered on her by her father but by virtue of character and charisma ... like Daemon Blackfyre later would.

I'd have liked it - and I imagined her - as being more like Visenya.

But this doesn't change the fact that she is still massively better than her enemies.

You, on the other hand, seem to be mostly on those boards to lead some kind of Green crusade as quotes like that show much better than I ever could:

3 minutes ago, Eltharion21 said:

And Rhaenyra certainly was cruel, cruel as or more than her brother Aegon II - known as Maegor with teats, "question him sharply" was her catchphrase.

That's just nonsense. Rhaenyra only started to execute Greens after her enemies had started to imprison and execute and murder her friends. Both sides targeted women and children, but Rhaenyra didn't command any of those actions, nor did she execute any of her half-siblings (unlike Aegon II). If you cut things down in size then Otto and Alicent and Criston sit on heaps of corpses just for starting the Dance, for starting very ugly campaigns in the Crownlands, the Reach and the Riverlands and the Gullet ... and if you go to personal responibility you have Daeron the Daring burn and sack an entire walled down, killing thousands in the process, have him work with thugs and cravens and turncloaks at Tumbleton, you have Aemond personally bathing in Strong blood and killing hundreds of innocent smallfolk with his monstrous dragon, and you have the cripple king who murdered his own half-sister and queen, who burned hundreds of Kingslanders who previously had hounded his half-sister out of the city, who threatened his cousin and nephew, etc.

Rhaenyra personally targeted only two innocent people in the war - Nettles and Addam. The other folks she put down all more or less deserved it and were legitimate targets of her wrath.

Her flaws are mainly secondary - trusting the wrong people, appointing inefficient/problematic officials (like Bartimos Celtigar), giving in to stupid advice (like the nonsense Corlys suggested with the Rosbys and Stokeworths or to mistrust the bastard dragonriders).

She is not a sadistic nutcase like Aemond or a vindictive, incompetent glutton like Aegon II ... who was even more stupid in the adviser department than his half-sister as his trust in Cole (who nearly got him killed), Luthor Largent (who betrayed him), and, especially, in Larys Strong showed.

3 minutes ago, Eltharion21 said:

Both sides in Civil war had their vile acts and it is impossible to make  compelling story with depicting either side as purely good or bad. Least of all using unconfirmed and conflicting quasi historical sources that have their own agenda when they write about historical events.

We are not likely going to get conflicting sources for the TV shows, so it definitely will matter there who is the good guy and who is the bad guy. But that is also clear in FaB. The Blacks are, overall, the good guys, the underdogs who suffered greatly but are vindicated in the end ... whereas the Greens are the pompous and entitled asses who are cast down and destroyed utterly for their presumptions ... at least that's what you can take from the fact that the line of Alicent Hightower is eradicated whereas Rhaenyra's bloodline triumphs in the end.

On the question whether an elder daughter can become queen in place of younger son the Green ideology sort of won the war ... but if you view it as a dynastic dispute - and that's what it was in the end - then the Blacks won it since Rhaenyra's sons continued the Targaryen bloodline, not the grandchildren of Alicent Hightower. Aegon II is basically the same kind of dynastic dead end as Maegor the Cruel ... and even more of a footnote to Westerosi history. It doesn't matter which son of King Aenys succeeded Maegor ... the important thing is that one of his sons did. And while Rhaenyra died, her sons prevailed and Aegon II was cast down in the name of Aegon III.

And it is actually very ironic that Aegon II's last offspring - Jaehaera Targaryen - is actually murdered at the command of a man who is described as a die-hard Green. That is hardly a coincidence.

3 minutes ago, Eltharion21 said:

To be honest I much prefer Silmarillion  to GRRMarillion (Fire & Blood) for sole reason that I consider it braver to present events as they happened and not leave room for readers to choose what really happened.

In light of the fact that Tolkien's Silmarillion was always intended by the author to be a collection of myths recorded by various invented scribes and scholars we also have no clue 'what actually happened' there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.indiewire.com/2021/03/house-of-the-dragon-sexist-violence-thrones-1234622661/amp/

Quote

 

Olivia Cooke: ‘House of the Dragon’ Won’t Have ‘Graphic Violence Towards Women’ Like ‘Thrones’

“I wouldn’t feel comfortable in being a part of anything that has just egregious graphic violence towards women for no reason whatsoever, just because they want it to be tantalizing in a way that gets viewers,” Cooke said. “I was lucky enough to read the [prequel] script before, and it has changed a lot from the first few seasons [of ‘Thrones’]. I don’t think they’d be in their right minds to include any of that any more.”

 

I am not sure if this is a good thing or not but it is hilarious.

:lmao:

Share this post


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

https://www.indiewire.com/2021/03/house-of-the-dragon-sexist-violence-thrones-1234622661/amp/

I am not sure if this is a good thing or not but it is hilarious.

:lmao:

I mean, what she just said is just not relevant at all. Alicent witnessed nothing that can be called graphic violence towards women ever, except for Mushroom's claim that Rhaenyra had her and Helaena tied out at the streets of KL and anyone who paid some could fuck her, but that obviously is Mushroom's serious bullshit and noone else ever mentioned it.

The other way around, the story itself doesn't include too much violence towards women, but does regarding children and other things.

Still, violence is a major part of Martin's work, and GoT pulled another layer on it, but I won't have much problem with it as far as it's accurate and will not choose to be too PC on this matter too, since the chance of sudden violence regularly managed to put a weight on GoT's story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

No violence against women?! What happened to Rhaenyra, Rhaenys, Baela, Mysaria, Sharis Footly, the Westerlands women attacked by Ironborn, the women of Tumbleton, etc.?

Edited by The Grey Wolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If she just read stuff based on the reign of Viserys I then there won't be a lot of violence against women aside from Daemon's treatment of Mysaria and Rhea.

If she had read the relevant in chapters in FaB she would likely have a different view...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/7/2021 at 1:43 PM, Eltharion21 said:

To be honest I much prefer Silmarillion  to GRRMarillion (Fire & Blood) for sole reason that I consider it braver to present events as they happened and not leave room for readers to choose what really happened.

I agree!

How will they handle the vagueness on the TV show? Will they just drop the pretense and show it as it happened?

Usually when events are kept vague/unclear on TV, writers choose to have characters not talk to each other about important events, or ask important questions. That's what happened on LOST and it was frustratingly bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The remark relates to having seen one script, presumably the first episode, so ... I mean, I can't think anything of note happening there regarding violence towards women.

I do think she was probably thinking of stuff like the early "sexposition" of the series, and then related matter like the murder of Ros and some other similar things. Whether she's aware of what actually happens over the course of the Dance, who knows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

No violence against women?! What happened to Rhaenyra, Rhaenys, Baela, Mysaria, Sharis Footly, the Westerlands women attacked by Ironborn, the women of Tumbleton, etc.?

Yeah I dont think she knows what she's getting into.

Blood raped six year old Jaehaera in front of her mother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Yeah I dont think she knows what she's getting into.

Blood raped six year old Jaehaera in front of her mother.

He only threatened to. (Still horrible.)

Share this post


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

I agree!

How will they handle the vagueness on the TV show? Will they just drop the pretense and show it as it happened?

Usually when events are kept vague/unclear on TV, writers choose to have characters not talk to each other about important events, or ask important questions. That's what happened on LOST and it was frustratingly bad.

They will most likely show 'what really happened', not to mention filling out the blanks George deliberately left. The reign of Viserys I is just a very superficial draft of a story. There is little to no characterization there. They will all have to do that in the script.

This show is not going to be an adaptation of a novel series.

They could also keep the conflicting sources stuff by giving us different versions of certain events - and that could be fun and would make it a very experimental, courageous show - but I'm not very confident that they will do that.

I expect them to go with one version or event their own story if they do not like any of the possibilities George gave them.

1 hour ago, Ran said:

I do think she was probably thinking of stuff like the early "sexposition" of the series, and then related matter like the murder of Ros and some other similar things. Whether she's aware of what actually happens over the course of the Dance, who knows?

Yes, that was my thinking, too.

If she had read things and did know that Alicent Hightower might get the Unella treatment (and would get said treatment if D&D were running HotD) then this would be a very odd remark. Her end is pretty horrible, too - Rhaenyra remains defiant until the end, but Alicent is completely broken when she is allowed to die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...