[Spoilers] Episode 104 Discussion

[C.T. Phipps]

33 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

In light of Daemon's history of erectile dysfunction in the show, do you think part (or the) reason why his marriage to Rhea Royce didn't work is that he cannot get it hard for her? That could be something she might not take kindly to. And it could explain why he cannot suffer her presence.

I actually like they gave this manly bad boy guy such a problem. It puts things into perspective.

I think the implication is that Daemon has an incredibly large history of sexual congruity given his descriptions of working with his brother through halotry and his mistresses. It's just that we're seeing his family is the area that causes performance anxiety.

I am curious how they will portray his wife, though.

I'm predicting she's a perfectly sweet and nice person.

[EggBlue]

13 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I think the implication is that Daemon has an incredibly large history of sexual congruity given his descriptions of working with his brother through halotry and his mistresses. It's just that we're seeing his family is the area that causes performance anxiety.

yeah , it's a bit too soon to say Daemon always had a problem , even back at Vale when he didn't have anything to worry about . we've seen him only twice and once with his niece! any normal man can't get it up with his niece

13 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I am curious how they will portray his wife, though.

I'm predicting she's a perfectly sweet and nice person.

was Rhea Royce even cast? I mean , they'd have to have Daemon widowed AND married again in the next episode

[MisbornHeir]

1 minute ago, EggBlue said:

was Rhea Royce even cast? I mean, they'd have to have Daemon widowed AND married again in the next episode

Yes, she was casted. She's played by Rachel Redford and they've mentioned her since the pilot episode (daemon referred to her as his bronze b****)

[C.T. Phipps]

6 minutes ago, MisbornHeir said:

Yes, she was casted. She's played by Rachel Redford and they've mentioned her since the pilot episode (daemon referred to her as his bronze b****)

Which already suggests Daemon's lack of attraction is due to his own issues.

https://d6ehjqrqtzoun.cloudfront.net/f7677621-3872-4a74-b908-1eb67a14be96.JPG

Like the Tudors when they attempted to have Henry react to Joss Stone and say she looked like a horse. Joss Stone who got to be a video game Bond Girl.

(Which is an odd defense but one close to my heart)

[Oana_Mika]

Deleted

Edited September 14, 2022 by Oana_Mika

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

I don't think the measure of a good ruler - even in Westeros or Essos - is in how well they uphold the status quo.  Particularly the abject iniquities that compose much of that status quo.  If that were the case no progress could ever be made throughout history.

As an absolute ruler ordained by the gods - and, ya know, dragons in the Targs' case pre-Dance - most rulers have incredible opportunity to alter this status quo.  Indeed, much more so than their real life counterparts.

I don’t think that a good ruler is one who rigidly upholds the status quo, either.

It’s more that any sort of reform starts from the basis that these are the things that people believe.

 

[DMC]

10 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I don’t think that a good ruler is one who rigidly upholds the status quo, either.

It’s more that any sort of reform starts from the basis that these are the things that people believe.

 

Sure.  As the famous Weber quote goes, "politics is a strong and slow boring of hard boards."  It just seemed as if your previous response was saying a "good" ruler must submit to those "boards" as unmovable, which to me is anathema to the definition.  Also, I think it's useful to provide the rest of Weber's quote:

Quote

It requires passion as well as perspective. Certainly all historical experience confirms–that man would not have achieved the possible unless time and again he had reached out for the impossible. But to do that, a man must be a leader, and more than a leader, he must be a hero as well, in a very sober sense of the word. And even those who are neither leaders nor heroes must arm themselves with that resolve of heart which can brave even the failing of all hopes. This is necessary right now, otherwise we shall fail to attain that which it is possible to achieve today. Only he who is certain not to destroy himself in the process should hear the call of politics; he must endure even though he finds the world too stupid or too petty for that which he would offer. In the face of that he must have the resolve to say ‘and yet,’—for only then does he hear the ‘call’ of politics.

Edited September 14, 2022 by DMC

[SeanF]

17 minutes ago, DMC said:

Sure.  As the famous Weber quote goes, "politics is a strong and slow boring of hard boards."  It just seemed as if your previous response was saying a "good" ruler must submit to those "boards" as unmovable, which to me is anathema to the definition.  Also, I think it's useful to provide the rest of Weber's quote:

I agree.  A good ruler would be someone who does things like ending first night and giving rights to widows, or guaranteeing compensation for tenants who make improvements to their land, or restricting the use of capital punishment to murder and treason, and using royal judges to try such cases, or giving Kings Landing a borough council.  Those are reforms that are achievable, rather than expecting a ruler to introduce liberal democracy.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, SeanF said:

A good ruler would be someone who does things like ending first night and giving rights to widows, or guaranteeing compensation for tenants who make improvements to their land, or restricting the use of capital punishment to murder and treason, and using royal judges to try such cases, or giving Kings Landing a borough council.  Those are reforms that are achievable, rather than expecting a ruler to introduce liberal democracy.

I still think you're being unimaginative in the extent of the reforms possible, but, well, it's progress.  

[SeanF]

2 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I mean, people write about monarchy because it's exciting. Bloodshed, death, betrayal, and intrigue.

That’s true.  It’s also why stories about the Vikings and Mongols are so popular.

“I am the punishment of God.  If you had not committed such sins, he would not have sent such a punishment as I!”

Or, “man’s greatest joy is to slaughter his enemies, to crush them and drive them before him, and to listen to the lamentations of their women.”

Fantasy and historical fiction, with protagonists who leave burning cities and pyramids of human heads in their wake, will never not be popular.

 

Edited September 14, 2022 by SeanF

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

5 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I do wish they wrote Daemon and Viserys slightly differently.

Could you elaborate on that?

[Crixus]

On 9/13/2022 at 11:27 AM, Theda Baratheon said:

That’s Rhys Ifans!!! I would say it’s likely more of an issue of directing than acting because he’s bloody fantastic and EXCELS at ‘jamming it up’. I think the soft spoken stoic works well because when he finally loses it and shows some of the cracks in his demeanour then it will pack a better punch. But either way I HUGHLY doubt it’s down to a fault with Rhys Ifans - who is FANTASTIC. 

Totally agree, he's phenomenal and

Spoiler

as you can see from the trailer for episode 5, he does start losing it. 

 

[The Bard of Banefort]

3 hours ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

Could you elaborate on that?

Like I said earlier, they’re manchildren. Daemon much more so than Viserys, but still, they’re a pair of pouty whiners who are never satisfied (which is kind of the opposite of Viserys from the books).

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

13 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Like I said earlier, they’re manchildren. Daemon much more so than Viserys, but still, they’re a pair of pouty whiners who are never satisfied (which is kind of the opposite of Viserys from the books).

Although GRRM himself said that HotD's Viserys is better than the F&B version.

[DMC]

15 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Daemon much more so than Viserys, but still, they’re a pair of pouty whiners who are never satisfied (which is kind of the opposite of Viserys from the books).

Yeah, I think this is a fair criticism for the entire show.  Viserys, Daemon, Rhaenyra, Alicent, Otto.  They all have certain reasons to not be, of course, but for the five primary people that rule a continent they are VERY unhappy.

[The Bard of Banefort]

23 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

Although GRRM himself said that HotD's Viserys is better than the F&B version.

That’s his opinion. Show Viserys is definitely much more complex than his books counterpart. But if the showrunners are so set on selling the decadence and frivolousness of this era, then the main characters shouldn’t all be brooding and miserable.

[MisbornHeir]

40 minutes ago, DMC said:

Yeah, I think this is a fair criticism for the entire show.  Viserys, Daemon, Rhaenyra, Alicent, Otto.  They all have certain reasons to not be, of course, but for the five primary people that rule a continent they are VERY unhappy.

To be fair, are there many instances of rulers with such responsibilities not being unhappy? It's a burden to say the least and the many characters we've gotten to know in Kings Landing in ASOIAF weren't exactly enthused about their job either. And the 'happiness' we did see was a result of drinking or other escapism-inducing addictions.

[C.T. Phipps]

38 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

That’s his opinion. Show Viserys is definitely much more complex than his books counterpart. But if the showrunners are so set on selling the decadence and frivolousness of this era, then the main characters shouldn’t all be brooding and miserable.

Viserys oddly seems to be a good counterpart for this as he knows he has bigger responsibilities. He's just utterly ill equipped for them.

[frenin]

 

20 hours ago, Ser Yorick Ampersand said:

Its obvious the show failed to establish that Kingsguards cant marry.

Or expect them to remember from the past show. Jaime was one of the fav characters and his vows as kingsguard were a vital part of his journey.

They should just stop with this prophecy stuff for my sake.

It's a pity that the showrunners were set on starting the Dance, the Velaryons have suffered heavily because of this.

And how many seasons for the Dance can there be honestly? It's just endless and gruesome murders, one after another. How many times can you depict a Targling dying horribly till the shock start to wear off? Even in the books i was already numbed by the time Maelor dies and it's only with the regency, which imo is the best part of the book by far,  that i got hooked again.

 

Btw, the amount of times nobles start killing each other for stupid things are getting ridiculous. If they want noble assholes killing one another so much, let there be duels.

Edited September 14, 2022 by frenin

[LindsayLohan]

13 minutes ago, frenin said:

Btw, the amount of times nobles start killing each other for stupid things are getting ridiculous. If they want noble assholes killing one another so much, let there be duels.

I agree with this, 100 percent. The mass slaughter during the tournament in King’s Landing was too much to begin with. The idea of two lords baring steel in presence of the crown princess, inside Storm’s End, is ridiculous. Where is the law? Where is the King’s justice?