Jump to content

New Peek at House of the Dragon


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, EggBlue said:

I forgot about that... still, they are better than most Westerosi parents.

adultRhaenyra: I agree. 

young-Rhaenyra: I don't . she's one of the few who looks good.

the rest: Rhaenys is horrible . Daemon's worse . Viserys's the worst . 

and what is with the eyebrows? won't they look better if eyebrows and beards have the same color as hair?

I forgot where I saw it, but someone compared Rhaenys' hair to a sea shell and now I can't unsee it. I think that's maybe what they were going for. 

I do like young Rhaenyra's hair, especially the wedding feast updo with the jewels inlaid. 

I like Velaryon wigs for the most part, Corlys looks amazing. The contrast of dark skin, white/silver hair looks cool and otherworldly. I don't know what's happening with Laenor's wig though. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Sotan said:

I like Velaryon wigs for the most part, Corlys looks amazing. The contrast of dark skin, white/silver hair looks cool and otherworldly. I don't know what's happening with Laenor's wig though. 

 

agreed . but yeah Laenor's wig is too unnatural.

with all the critics against black Velaryons ( some of which I agree with , most I don't ) they look pretty good . in fact , it would've worked well in my opinion all the Valyrian heritage people to be black with purple eyes and silver hair and silver eyebrows. they'd be so otherworldly.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

GRRM has said that despite all the changes, this is still his story. But this is quite a big departure from it, no?

Yes. It's not a thing that this show is canonical with the books. It is an alternative take, as befits something in a separate universe. Rhaenyra was 9 years younger than Alicent, they weren't going to be bosom buddies. They have aged one up or one down, or perhaps they have aged Rhaenyra up and Alicent down and have them meet halfway more-or-less. 

We see the tourney where Criston Cole fights Daemon Targaryen in what is supposed to be 104 AC, but that was to celebrate his ascension, where Rhaenyra would be 7 and Alicent 16. I suspect they've just skipped Aemma's earlier miscarriages and had her have Rhaenyra right off the bat, and also moved the marriage date earlier. That, or they kept the marriage date and moved the tourney later? Something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

GRRM has said that despite all the changes, this is still his story. But this is quite a big departure from it, no?

not necessarily . not in Alicent-Rhaenyra's relationship anyway. of course with almost a decade between them they were never best friends in the books but Alicent's initial good behavior towards Rhaenyra may  have been genuine and they might have been able to grow into friends in the books as well if not (in my assumption) for Otto's manipulation . so the tragedy between the two women and what they could have been to each other is somewhat the same , ie , George's story . what it becomes a huge deviation from the book is when it comes to Alicent-Viserys relationship which could be interpreted as a healthy romantic relationship in the books (as healthy as it can get in Westeros ) . whereas in the show.. I just don't know how they are  going to avoid portraying Viserys as just another old dude who marries someone his daughter's age. which is completely different from the book where Viserys seems positively in love with someone who is not that much younger. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EggBlue said:

they were never best friends in the books

That is in fact a big change, though. So I'm not sure what you mean by "not necessarily". Yes, they got along in the initial years of Alicent being her step-mother, but that suggests to me that prior to that Alicent didn't actually have that much interaction with the very young Rhaenyra. A good relationship between Queen Alicent and Princess Rhaenyra is very different from a good relationship between two young friends. Especially in terms of confidences they may share.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Ran said:

That is in fact a big change, though. So I'm not sure what you mean by "not necessarily". Yes, they got along in the initial years of Alicent being her step-mother, but that suggests to me that prior to that Alicent didn't actually have that much interaction with the very young Rhaenyra. A good relationship between Queen Alicent and Princess Rhaenyra is very different from a good relationship between two young friends. Especially in terms of confidences they may share.

 

by that I mean you don't have to alter the characters altogether to have that change. you see .. as far as I remember we do not have anything in the text that suggests Alicent had been scheming Rhaenyra's downfall from the beginning or something . what we have is a young woman who for some reasons (probably her father's push) gradually becomes hostile towards her teenage stepdaughter. the same could be true in the show where Rhaenyra and Alicent are friends . it only makes Alicent's position that much harder and the divide in their relationship would be more two sided since Rhanyra's not a kid. so the characters can stay pretty much the same but they are put in a little different situation at the beginning and are taken to the same ending anyway . after all "friends to enemies" is just an extreme version of "acquaintances to enemies" . 

where it does make a big change though would be with Viserys in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EW said they’d have new scoops for HOTD every day this week, and by that they meant stuff like. . . this:

https://ew.com/tv/house-of-the-dragon-showrunner-teases-new-targaryen-sigil/
 

Lol. They really need to reassign a new reporter here, because this guy is really bad at conveying the message. It really makes you appreciate just how much work James Hibberd and Joanna Robinson put into covering GOT (reading the books, researching fan theories, etc.)

What do you guys think is the in-universe reason for the change?

Edited by The Bard of Banefort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

EW said they’d have new scoops for HOTD every day this week, and by that they meant stuff like. . . this:

https://ew.com/tv/house-of-the-dragon-showrunner-teases-new-targaryen-sigil/
 

Lol. They really need to reassign a new reporter here, because this guy is really bad at conveying the message. It really makes you appreciate just how much work James Hibberd and Joanna Robinson put into covering GOT (reading the books, researching fan theories, etc.)

What do you guys think is the in-universe reason for the change?

I don't know, but I would like to thank Ryan Condal for freeing the book cannon from the show, which now I can say it has its own cannon. This confirms that the choice for the Velaryon sigil was also on purpose. Whatever happens in the show I will absolutely try to judge on its own merits. The blood of Old Valyria is a mixed blood in the show, and that's fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

I don't know. They seem to be making a lot of stylistic changes from GoT, for some reason, and this is just one of them.

In the article, Ryan Condal says there’s a reason for the change that we’ll learn a out on the show.

Man, how stupid would it be if that’s how they differentiate the banners, with Aegon using the two-legged dragon and Rhaenyra using the four-legged? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My expectation is that Condal knew that GoT screwed up the assets and confusingly used two and four legged dragons, and he's decided to retcon an explanation to fix the continuity. Which is fine, and more power to him in taking on the challenge of fixing the GoT screw up. I am going to indeed guess that the two-legged dragon will be a thing representing Aegon (maybe the idea of him and Aemond as the left and right claws,, since Daeron seems not to be cast?)), Rhaenyra sticks to four legs (which, you know, is wrong for a Targaryen sigil originally, but whatever!), and then Aegon III and so on stick to the the two-legged version for the most part until it's resurrected by Dany.

But also I suspect HBO is happy because this means they'll have all new four-legged dragon merch to sell to people who want the "right" one.

Edited by Ran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Ran said:

My expectation is that Condal knew that GoT screwed up the assets and confusingly used two and four legged dragons, and he's decided to retcon an explanation to fix the continuity. Which is fine, and more power to him in taking on the challenge of fixing the GoT screw up. I am going to indeed guess that the two-legged dragon will be a thing representing Aegon (maybe the idea of him and Aemond as the left and right claws,, since Daeron seems not to be cast?)), Rhaenyra sticks to four legs (which, you know, is wrong for a Targaryen sigil originally, but whatever!), and then Aegon III and so on stick to the the two-legged version for the most part until it's resurrected by Dany.

But also I suspect HBO is happy because this means they'll have all new four-legged dragon merch to sell to people who want the "right" one.

Hopefully they still use different colors, since it’ll still be hard to tell the two apart, especially from afar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Man, how stupid would it be if that’s how they differentiate the banners, with Aegon using the two-legged dragon and Rhaenyra using the four-legged? :lol:

Knight: Your grace, we need more scouts. 

Monarch: Why? What happened to the previous guys.

Knight: It's difficult to determine if the approaching host is made of friends or foes. They march under Targaryen banners, but our scouts need to get within bow shot range to ascertain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Corvinus85 said:

Knight: Your grace, we need more scouts. 

Monarch: Why? What happened to the previous guys.

Knight: It's difficult to determine if the approaching host is made of friends or foes. They march under Targaryen banners, but our scouts need to get within bow shot range to ascertain.

Yes, they'll have to give Aegon his golden dragon sigil to make it work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, what is the show canon universe for the original sigil, as we see on Daemon's shield, to be with 4 legs? All dragons have two legs, (and one head, of course) The symbol of 3 heads presumably refers to Aegon I and his sisters as is in the book canon. What does just one extra pair of legs and I think wings as well represent? 

From answering this question we can determine how the change to what is the book sigil would make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Corvinus85 said:

OK, what is the show canon universe for the original sigil, as we see on Daemon's shield, to be with 4 legs? All dragons have two legs, (and one head, of course) The symbol of 3 heads presumably refers to Aegon I and his sisters as is in the book canon. What does just one extra pair of legs and I think wings as well represent? 

That sounds like a problem Condal will either solve, or ignore.

If I had to come up with a sloppy interpretation... perhaps Visenya was thinking this way: 4 limbs + 3 heads = 7 gods/kingdoms. 

Alternatively, they can go a different way: 2 legs is the original, 4 legs is something used by a belligerent in some conflict (Maegor? Jaehaerys?), 2 legs reasserts itself later (post-Dance?) until Dany (and apparently Rhaegar?) resurrect the four legged variant.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Ran said:

That sounds like a problem Condal will either solve, or ignore.

If I had to come up with a sloppy interpretation... perhaps Visenya was thinking this way: 4 limbs + 3 heads = 7 gods/kingdoms. 

Alternatively, they can go a different way: 2 legs is the original, 4 legs is something used by a belligerent in some conflict (Maegor? Jaehaerys?), 2 legs reasserts itself later (post-Dance?) until Dany (and apparently Rhaegar?) resurrect the four legged variant.

 

The 4-legged dragon is shown at Viserys's court in the trailers. So there is no belligerent here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Corvinus85 said:

The 4-legged dragon is shown at Viserys's court in the trailers. So there is no belligerent here. 

That's why I mentioned Maegor and Jaehaerys. Jaehaerys might have taken it to distinguish him from Maegor and Viserys kept it.

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...