Jump to content

House of the Dragon Filming in Spain in October


Westeros
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 12/5/2021 at 4:40 AM, The Bard of Banefort said:

Some people are wondering if this "Targaryen Thursdays" thing is leading up to the full trailer dropping, but I don't think we'll be getting the full trailer for a while, since it looks like HOTD won't premiere until well into 2022. My dream would be for it to lead to announcement for FaB pt. 2, but I know better than to hope for it.

This family tree must be at least a few years old, since Rogar is still Robar, but if the illustrations were based on George's notes, then there are a few notable things: Shaera had dark hair, Rhae was chubby, and Daella had hair like Daeron's, cut short. Since Daella is probably the sister who had an affair with Dunk, I hope she isn't written as a #notlikeothergirsl Cool Girl type. Thankfully, George is usually pretty good at avoiding tropes like that (although Lyanna might be an exception).

This picture is old. Not sure how old, but I saw it. Also not sure if its from TWOIAF or not. But I don't remember that book having faces to the names. 

What occured to me back then (at least a year ago, at best 2 or 2,5 years ago I saw this picture first) is that Jaehaerys II doesn't have the roman numbers along his name. Makes me wonder now when did we first hear about Jae II. Probably when Jaime talked about how the Blackfish told him stories about the Ninepenny King, or when Barristan told Daenerys he knew her grandfather. Might be a mistake tho, since he is illustrated with a crown. Shaera being dark haired occured to me as well (she was a known character when I looked at this picture), the others not so much (I speak of Daella). What's more interesting is that Dyanna Dayne seems to have valyrian features, yet two of her and Maekar's children don't. Also, why do some female Targaryens look like men? Look at Elaena and Daella. But that's it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/5/2021 at 3:40 AM, The Bard of Banefort said:

but if the illustrations were based on George's notes...

They surely aren't. It's fan art, from a French freelance artist. It's very cool and does a great job at capturing the essence of many characters, but it has a few mistakes (Daemon Blackfyre's twins died at 12 yet here they are depicted as grown-up men, Elaena lacks her golden streak, Ormund Baratheon is misspelled,...), and makes a few dubious hair choices.

Edited by The hairy bear
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Barret sounds find. Names like Borrell and Bettley have a similar enough naming pattern that this is one of those occasions where they've come up with a decent name.

Why they needed his full name, I'm, not sure, but I guess he's some minor sea captain character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ran said:

Barret sounds find. Names like Borrell and Bettley have a similar enough naming pattern that this is one of those occasions where they've come up with a decent name.

Why they needed his full name, I'm, not sure, but I guess he's some minor sea captain character.

Ah, I think I was thrown off because I was thinking of Barret from Final Fantasy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/25/2021 at 4:57 PM, Lord Varys said:

But instead we are expected to buy the scenario that a dragonless guy throwing parties could actually control over a dozen of dragonriders with ease.

Never underestimate the appeal of a good party

But  you're right. I do hope that they change some things. GRRM is gifted but Fire and Blood has a lot of plotholes, inconsistencies and weak points. I'm not sure if this was done on purpose or whatever...

For example, there's a lot about dragon reproduction and sexuality that we should have gotten understanding of in Fire and Blood. Also, there should've been a lot more Targaryens and dragons by the time of the Dance...and there should've been another cadet branch of House Targaryen.

I still don't understand why the Conqueror only had one son by his favorite wife.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

Never underestimate the appeal of a good party

And having the fealty of every lord in Westeros, and of all the dragonriders.

If one or two of them want to try and rebel, there are many more that will side with the king because they see he has the might of Westeros behind them that they do not, and they will lose. If they want to go and take off and carve out a kingdom elsewhere... well, we saw that with Daemon, and suffice it to say a dragon is not the key all on its own to vast power and kingdoms, and those who say otherwise are just not paying attention. Years of effort won him a few rocks, for awhile, and that palled against life at court and in the Seven Kingdoms and he gave it up.

 

Edited by Ran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ran said:

And having the fealty of every lord in Westeros, and of all the dragonriders.

If one or two of them want to try and rebel, there are many more that will side with the king because they see he has the might of Westeros behind them that they do not, and they will lose. If they want to go and take off and carve out a kingdom elsewhere... well, we saw that with Daemon, and suffice it to say a dragon is not the key all on its own to vast power and kingdoms, and those who say otherwise are just not paying attention. Years of effort won him a few rocks, for awhile, and that palled against life at court and in the Seven Kingdoms and he gave it up.

That doesn't address the issue. George himself tells everybody who wants to hear it that back when the Targaryens still had dragons they were 'more powerful' and 'could do whatever the hell they wanted', etc. And he does want to send the message that a Targaryen king without dragons is less powerful than one with a dragon.

His decision to make the most powerful Targaryen king not a dragonrider is thus pretty weird and something you can and should have issue with. Even more so since Viserys I didn't exactly rise to the throne without difficulty nor was his claim acknowledged by all.

The very idea that Westeros would have stood with the dragonless fat guy and his young daughter if the Velaryons and Daemon had decided to pull an Aegon the Conqueror in 105-115 AC and send hundreds of letters to the major lords of Westeros that there was a new king/queen in Westeros now [insert: Daemon, Rhaenys, Laena, or Laenor] and they could either bend the knee to him or her or face the fate of Harren the Black or ... then you can be very sure that they wouldn't have stood with the dragonless fat guy.

At least in a realistic scenario they wouldn't have - because Viserys had literally no dragonrider on his side while Daemon/the Velaryons controlled four between them, and one of those was mighty Vhagar. In an unrealistic scenario we pretend that a dragonless king could magically keep many dragonriders in line and that he is magically perceived and treated as the guy with the power.

We can also say that the Stepstones war is somewhat weird as well. Daemon's allies are the Velaryons, so where are Meleys, Vhagar, and Seasmoke during the (later) phase of the war (it is clear that Laena and Laenor may have been deemed too young to fight when the conflict began)? And how, well, insane are the Free City folks and pirates on the Stepstones to actually continue to defy a dragonrider and his armies rather than turning their cloaks and joining him?

Didn't the guys running the Triarchy fear that Myr, Tyrosh, and Lys might be consumed by dragonfire? And what's later when they attack Dragonstone? They had luck and killed one dragon ... but did nobody fear Rhaenyra might send her dragonriders over the Narrow Sea to exact vengeance for their unprovoked attack?

4 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

But  you're right. I do hope that they change some things. GRRM is gifted but Fire and Blood has a lot of plotholes, inconsistencies and weak points. I'm not sure if this was done on purpose or whatever...

They seem to include the Velaryon dragonriders in the Stepstones war, which is definitely a good thing. If Viserys I were a dragonless king throughout the series it would feel very weird and stupid. It is one thing to have to deal with in a brief account of his reign ... and quite another to get it rubbed into your face whenever he is in conflict with a dragonrider that his crown and throne should make him 'more powerful' than the folks controlling the actual power base of House Targaryen.

Realistically, there should have been a rebellion against Viserys I as soon as Aegon II and Aemond were old enough to properly mount their dragons ... because then the Greens could have just staged a coup. They could have deposed and imprisoned the fat guy to crown Aegon II in his stead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That doesn't address the issue. George himself tells everybody who wants to hear it that back when the Targaryens still had dragons they were 'more powerful' and 'could do whatever the hell they wanted', etc. And he does want to send the message that a Targaryen king without dragons is less powerful than one with a dragon.

His decision to make the most powerful Targaryen king not a dragonrider is thus pretty weird and something you can and should have issue with. Even more so since Viserys I didn't exactly rise to the throne without difficulty nor was his claim acknowledged by all.

The very idea that Westeros would have stood with the dragonless fat guy and his young daughter if the Velaryons and Daemon had decided to pull an Aegon the Conqueror in 105-115 AC and send hundreds of letters to the major lords of Westeros that there was a new king/queen in Westeros now [insert: Daemon, Rhaenys, Laena, or Laenor] and they could either bend the knee to him or her or face the fate of Harren the Black or ... then you can be very sure that they wouldn't have stood with the dragonless fat guy.

At least in a realistic scenario they wouldn't have - because Viserys had literally no dragonrider on his side while Daemon/the Velaryons controlled four between them, and one of those was mighty Vhagar. In an unrealistic scenario we pretend that a dragonless king could magically keep many dragonriders in line and that he is magically perceived and treated as the guy with the power.

We can also say that the Stepstones war is somewhat weird as well. Daemon's allies are the Velaryons, so where are Meleys, Vhagar, and Seasmoke during the (later) phase of the war (it is clear that Laena and Laenor may have been deemed too young to fight when the conflict began)? And how, well, insane are the Free City folks and pirates on the Stepstones to actually continue to defy a dragonrider and his armies rather than turning their cloaks and joining him?

Didn't the guys running the Triarchy fear that Myr, Tyrosh, and Lys might be consumed by dragonfire? And what's later when they attack Dragonstone? They had luck and killed one dragon ... but did nobody fear Rhaenyra might send her dragonriders over the Narrow Sea to exact vengeance for their unprovoked attack?

They seem to include the Velaryon dragonriders in the Stepstones war, which is definitely a good thing. If Viserys I were a dragonless king throughout the series it would feel very weird and stupid. It is one thing to have to deal with in a brief account of his reign ... and quite another to get it rubbed into your face whenever he is in conflict with a dragonrider that his crown and throne should make him 'more powerful' than the folks controlling the actual power base of House Targaryen.

Realistically, there should have been a rebellion against Viserys I as soon as Aegon II and Aemond were old enough to properly mount their dragons ... because then the Greens could have just staged a coup. They could have deposed and imprisoned the fat guy to crown Aegon II in his stead.

This might actually imply that Daemon really did love his brother and had a line he wouldn’t cross. For all his stunts, Daemon never tried to challenge Viserys’ rule. The only other person who could have proved a threat was Rhaenys, and she was clearly too smart to try.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

House Targaryen with no dragons is more vulnerable than House Targaryen with dragons.

A stable Targaryen king that doesn't ride a dragon but essentially has all the world's dragonriders at his command is not a vulnerable king.

I agree. For all Viserys’ supposed weaknesses, he clearly inspired love and loyalty in his subjects, at least while he was alive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Ran said:

And having the fealty of every lord in Westeros, and of all the dragonriders.

If one or two of them want to try and rebel, there are many more that will side with the king because they see he has the might of Westeros behind them that they do not, and they will lose. If they want to go and take off and carve out a kingdom elsewhere... well, we saw that with Daemon, and suffice it to say a dragon is not the key all on its own to vast power and kingdoms, and those who say otherwise are just not paying attention. Years of effort won him a few rocks, for awhile, and that palled against life at court and in the Seven Kingdoms and he gave it up.

 

But that's the thing.

A lot of people (both in the series and in real life) tend to blow off or downplay soft skills such as being able to make people laugh, knowing who is who and knowing what's happening with everyone, being a creative talent and being able to organize and host good parties.

It was the key to the success of Aegon I and Viserys I. It was the key in the downfall of both Rhaenyra and Aegon II. And it will be the key to the success of Sansa, Arya and Bran.

1 hour ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

How much do you want to bet that Rhaenyra and Laenor’s wedding night on the show is going to be a repeat of Margaery trying to seduce Loras on GOT?

You mean Renly?

I think Rhaenyra and Laenor's wedding night may start off rough but it probably will end with a mutual understanding and agreement. Who knows? If they want to go the "cuckolding bastard" route (**more on that later**), then they could have Rhaenyra and Laenor looking for and ranking men like the classic girl and gay best friend. Much like Daenerys, Missandei and "many things?" Maybe Rhaenyra and Laenor can come to an agreement on Harys Strong after evaluating potential "candidates."

It'd make for good comedy and it would work as an effective means of illustrating their relationship and that with their family and it could introduce us to some minor characters local to the Crownlands who would make reappearances later on. Like maybe Ulf the White.

 

**However, I'd prefer that they make it so that Rhaenyra's children are the legitimate sons of Laenor. Granted, the paternity of Rhaenyra's sons are irrelevant (it literally could be any man) to the succession to the Iron Throne, the fact that they may or may not be bastards is a huge problem.

The biggest challenge that this show will face for the entirety of its run (but especially the beginning) is to differentiate and distance themselves from GOT as much as possible. Regardless of whether you respected the endpoints and plot beats of the show, GOT ended disastrously. A show as big as that should still be talked about but no one talks about it anymore....and if they do, it's done so negatively.

One of the bigger problems with the last two seasons of GOT is that the (idiotic) showrunners communicated an extremely troubling message about women in power. The Cersei and Daenerys comparisons are going to be there regardless at the beginning but I think it's best that the showrunners of HotD do their best to make their female characters (particularly Rhaenyra, Alicient and Helaena) completely distinct and 3D. 

Having two shows back-to-back about a fictional medieval world revolve around women who are either (inexplicably) mentally unstable, emotionally codependent to the point of being incapacitated, deeply traumatized or connivingly malevolent affixed with crowns and wielding large amounts of power is a BAD look.

Making it so that Rhaenyra is knowingly trying to put her secret bastard children by a one-trick-pony of a knight on the Iron Throne and to have people rise in revolt against that is way too similar to the situation with the Lannisters. And it makes Rhaenyra look unnecessarily bad. But to have Rhaenyra's children be trueborn and to make it so people who accuse her of fraud and adultery are being homophobic, foolish or malevolent is a nice change.

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...