Jump to content

[Spoilers] Episode 105 Discussion


Ran
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

You know how you get tired of seeing Marvel movies everywhere?

You don't have to watch them. I don't (still haven't even seen Endgame). I don't really care that much about what other people enjoy so long as stuff I enjoy isn't getting crowded out, and I think that's a good approach to this sort of thing. It should not reflect negatively on HotD that there are people who watch it because it's a GoT prequel.

I definitely don't think a second show that's a prequel with 170 years separation is really running the fatigue risk. It's when the fourth or fifth show hits, when it's the Sea Snake on Wednesday and Dunk and Egg on Friday and Snow on Sunday that I think there's a danger. But I think one smart thing they can do is just avoid trying to tie everything together. They shouldn't spend all the Dunk & Egg show foreshadowing Summerhall or pushing at the "Song of Ice and Fire", they shouldn't have the Sea Snake constantly doing things that echo events of HotD, etc. Let them be their own slices with the World of Ice and Fire with only occasional nods to the wider world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Ran said:

You don't have to watch them. I don't (still haven't even seen Endgame). I don't really care that much about what other people enjoy so long as stuff I enjoy isn't getting crowded out, and I think that's a good approach to this sort of thing. It should not reflect negatively on HotD that there are people who watch it because it's a GoT prequel.

I definitely don't think a second show that's a prequel with 170 years separation is really running the fatigue risk. It's when the fourth or fifth show hits, when it's the Sea Snake on Wednesday and Dunk and Egg on Friday and Snow on Sunday that I think there's a danger. But I think one smart thing they can do is just avoid trying to tie everything together. They shouldn't spend all the Dunk & Egg show foreshadowing Summerhall or pushing at the "Song of Ice and Fire", they shouldn't have the Sea Snake constantly doing things that echo events of HotD, etc. Let them be their own slices with the World of Ice and Fire with only occasional nods to the wider world.

My point is that cultural phenomena touches all pop culture, regardless of whether or not you engage with it. I’ve never watched Lost or Breaking Bad, but I still hear about them all the time. “You don’t have to watch it” isn’t relevant here. Plenty of people on here (including the mods) kept discussing GOT despite quitting mid-show.

There are things I like about HOTD, there are things I don’t like about HOTD. Nothing I say will affect the show’s performance, so there’s nothing to worry about.

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

3 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Plenty of people on here (including the mods) kept discussing GOT despite quitting mid-show.

They weren't fatigued by it, obviously?

I don't know. I definitely go long stretches of my day hearing nothing about Marvel shows, other than seeing there's some post or other in the MCU thread. If I weren't interested in all things ASoIaF, it'd be easy enough to not see anything about those shows just by deciding to not partake in forums about it, and just treat it all more casually. 

I really think the fatigue someone like the author of that piece might feel is purely driven by their choice to engage with it. Curate their own life a bit better and HotD would be the occasional overheard snatch of conversation at a Starbucks or a billboard glimpsed in passing in a car. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be sure, GoT may have been a global hit show, but it is only American/English speaking folks where this was really phenomenon that was constantly referenced in other media, talk shows, etc.

The same is true for the Marvel stuff ... which really doesn't interest a lot of people over here in Germany (and, to my knowledge, in Europe in general). Most people here cannot even keep DC and Marvel apart, nor do many people actually know the comics (DC's Batman and Superman are much better known over here than the Marvel stuff aside from, perhaps, Spider-Man).

The linked article seems to be playing up GoT's cultural phenomenon role too much. In fact, I'd compare HotD more to historical drama shows about scheming and infighting royalty, etc. - it is basically Rome with dragons, not really a fantasy show as such. If the dragons were absent it could just as well be some historical show about an Anarchy with incest. Hell, you could even pretend the characters on screen are named Ptolemy and Cleopatra and Arsinoe rather than Aegon and Rhaenys and Daemon.

That the patriarchal setting is somewhat silly as I pointed out earlier - the role of royal women in an incestuous family (and the role of the queen) would be much greater than it seems to be in this world. But somehow this clearly is breaking up and one imagines the show actually wanted to depict that - Viserys used the fact that he named Rhaenyra to introduce Dornish succession customs for the Iron Throne (and that actually makes sense for the book as well if we assume that Viserys, Corlys, Rhaenys, Rhaenyra, Laenor, etc. ever discussed whether Rhaenyra's own heir would be her eldest child or her eldest son - the idea that they would have insisted that it must be her eldest son isn't that likely), and we have seen in the preview that both Alicent and Rhaenyr have a seat on the council in the next episode. Things do change there.

Although in context it is kind of strange that Aemma Arryn as successor of the Good Queen Alysanne didn't also have a hand in the governance of the Realm - or that Viserys didn't also invite Rhaenys on his council if she actually lived at court along with Corlys and their children.

There is no good reason to tell another story about a woman who is literally eaten by a monster for the crime of wanting to rule and then expect to be applauded for that. But that's George's fault, not the fault of the show.

So far I must say I like both Rhaenyra and Alicent very well, and I'm looking forward to Helaena. Rhaenys could have been better - more ambitious, more passionate, more angry. The one tidbit about her actual character George gave us is the barely disguised hint that Corlys feared the wrath of his wife the same way Rogar feared Rhaena's wrath after her threat - which would have been the reason why he kept the Hull boys a secret.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what it’s worth, at least according to Google, Star Wars has been more popular than GOT in the US (although there was one hell of a spike during S8). Harry Potter is also bigger on the world stage.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today 5-y&q=%2Fm%2F06mmr,%2Fm%2F078ffw,%2Fm%2F0524b41,%2Fm%2F0by1sn_

SW truly is a cultural phenomenon here because I didn’t watch the movies until right before The Force Awakens came out, and I still knew all the main characters and catchphrases.

What’s a popular franchise in Europe that Americans don’t watch?

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

8 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

For what it’s worth, at least according to Google, Star Wars has been more popular than GOT in the US and Canada (although there was one hell of a spike during S8). Harry Potter is also bigger on the world stage.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today 5-y&q=%2Fm%2F06mmr,%2Fm%2F078ffw,%2Fm%2F0524b41,%2Fm%2F0by1sn_

 

The spike for GoT's final season is amazing. Just dwarfs everything. Crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

What’s a popular franchise in Europe that Americans don’t watch?

Oh, well, that's difficult to say. Most of our big things do come from the US, but there are things that are known/made in the US or the UK which are pretty big hits here but not that successful in the US or vice versa (the Marvel thing). Also, stuff that's popular elsewhere is rarely actually just watched in the US as it is (in a dubbed version, say) but rather remade. The Millennium crime movies with Lisbeth Salander spring to mind.

Thinking about comics Asterix, Tintin, and quite a few other French(-speaking) comics are really huge in Europe but, to my knowledge, not all that successful in the US. Ditto with Duckburg comics (which are, for instance, almost a natural treasure in Finland of all places). Superhero comics are a comparatively small business over here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/23/2022 at 4:42 PM, The Bard of Banefort said:

I’m noticing some trends among the entertainment outlets. Forbes and The Ringer shill hard for HOTD and rip TROP, while The Guardian and The Daily Beast are doing the reverse.

You know where the money goes I guess.

For me, so long it entertains me, which it does and it great manner, and does enough decent numbers to keep it running. Don't really care whether it comes first or thirteen.

Btw. Trop isn't half bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, frenin said:

You know where the money goes I guess.

For me, so long it entertains me, which it does and it great manner, and does enough decent numbers to keep it running. Don't really care whether it comes first or thirteen.

Btw. Trop isn't half bad.

I like TROP too. I think it’s easier to like if you haven’t read the books (which I haven’t).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

In truth, the only way we get more interesting fantasy television is by diving into a completely new world. There are plenty of amazing fantasy books that are just waiting for a big budget adaptation like Game of Thrones, and we all deserve to see a new franchise take the spotlight.

I mean, many fantasy stories have been adapted to the screen just in the last few years, and none of them have come close to GoT in terms of popularity.

Edited by Takiedevushkikakzvezdy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

I mean, many fantasy stories have been adapted to the screen just in the last few years, and none of them have come close to GoT in terms of popularity.

I think it's because fantasy still carries the stigma of being a mindless source of entertainment (aka "popcorn films") and a genre for children and neckbeards. Especially if we're talking about high fantasy that takes place in the medieval/Renaissance/early modern world.

The genre's relationship with the masses is still very casual and fly-by-night. But with the popularity of the Witcher and to a lesser extent Marvel, things are changing. Even so, there is still a pressure to dial down the more fantastical, uncanny elements of fantasy and up the realism.

The Game of Thrones universe or whatever it's going to be called has struck the perfect balance...for now. And even with House of the Dragon, the more mind-blowingly fantasy aspects have still been muted. Like there's still this weird relationship that they have with using flashbacks and dreams (especially the dreams!!!) as narrative devices even though they serve as major aspects of the ASOIAF universe. We should've seen Viserys' dream of the iron crown on a newborn babe's head and Aegon's original dream of the Long Night already.

 

All in all, the true high fantasy what with its magical creatures, moralistic themes and sweeping stories that dominated storytelling for thousands of years might be coming back thanks to this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

The fact that Martin’s world is still pulling such numbers is befuddling to me. 
 

This has to be a bubble. The books are good but his world isn’t very original or unique. And the concept of grimdak is nothing new. Actually if we’re using the definition of Martin I guess Euphoria is grimdark as well as every other television drama. 
 

This pseudo-medieval society has nothing that can make it survive as a cinematic universe and the I iconic characters are already dead.

This is probably not the forum to be arguing this.

Martin's books are, to me, the best fantasy aside from Tolkien.

I mean in the entire genre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

There is no good reason to tell another story about a woman who is literally eaten by a monster for the crime of wanting to rule and then expect to be applauded for that. But that's George's fault, not the fault of the show.

This is something I don't get and wonder if it's an American modern phenomenon. Have we really gotten to the point that tragedies aren't respected as a medium anymore. To make an odd comparison, there's petition right now to change the ending of CYBERPUNK: EDGERUNNERS on Netflix despite it being a magnificent story of a person's road to self-destruction. It was tragic, beautiful, and well-written but because people wanted a happy ending, there's a hundred thousand signatures to rewrite the ending.

The feminism of House of the Dragon is incredible with the primary conflict between two powerful women and how they change the entirety of the Realm around them as well as navigate a patriarchal society. The fact Rhaenyra doesn't win the Game of Thrones, something we know by the fact it remains a terrible place that is unjust on a sysemtic level, doesn't make the story worse or less feminist.

It just means its a tragedy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

The feminism of House of the Dragon is incredible with the primary conflict between two powerful women and how they change the entirety of the Realm around them as well as navigate a patriarchal society. The fact Rhaenyra doesn't win the Game of Thrones, something we know by the fact it remains a terrible place that is unjust on a sysemtic level, doesn't make the story worse or less feminist.

It just means its a tragedy.

I don't think Rhaenyra's story is a tragedy. For that the book character lacks gravitas, depth, and character. Reread the old character file on Rhaenyra from George's description for her portrait ... and then compare that to the FaB historical figure. She does have more substance in that brief paragraph than in the book. There is described as a proud woman who dressed richly, who harbored grudges and never forgot slights. A woman who was prone to neurotic behavior. That Rhaenyra may have been complex. The one we get in the book is, for the most part, an absent, grieving coward. For an entire year of the war she does nothing, and then her husband and her other men put her on the throne. And then she is basically brought down by her own tax policy ... and her eventual death is no tragedy but basically just an unlucky accident.

We never get to know Rhaenyra as a person, never learn (in the book) what she thought of Otto and Alicent and Criston (after the fallout), what her feelings were towards her father and mother, her two husbands, her alleged lover, her sons, her stepdaughters, etc. We don't know what the grudges were she kept, nor the slights she never forgot. Most importantly, we don't understand most of her decisions (all that well). Why did she have three sons with Harwin if that happened? Why did she marry Daemon? Why didn't she prepare for a coup attempt or a succession war? Why didn't she use her dragons to cow the Green houses into submission? The Hightowers and Lannisters only marched because no Black dragons ever showed up above Lannisport or Oldtown. If Maegor and Visenya could do it back in 43 AC, why not Rhaenyra in 129 AC?

It is all very superficial. And that makes the character and her entire journey very shallow. The problem there is that the material is not detailed enough. FaB's account on the later Regency and the early reign of Jaehaerys is much more detailed. Queen Rhaena is hundred times more complex and alive that Rhaenyra Targaryen.

But my general point was more about the fact that we most definitely didn't need a story about another mad Targaryen queen who ends up being killed for no good reason. GoT already gave us that.

I've no problem with historical tragedies - I'd love to watch a show about the English Anarchy with an HotD budget. It would also be a pointless succession war, of course, but one that actually happened.

Fantasy is likely to retain the whole monarchy thing for quite awhile - although one should hope that folks perhaps try to move away from that thing - but it doesn't have to be over-the-top patriarchal as George's Westeros - and, especially, the show universe Westeros.

I think the show does a great job showing how such a patriarchal society actually works - and with Alicent it might also address how crucial a role mothers play in perpetuating such a system. We also saw that with Queen Aemma preparing Rhaenyra for motherhood, Rhaenys putting her husband's (and/or her own) ambition over the needs and well-being of her young daughter. But this doesn't mean we needed a show about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

I mean the longevity. Game of Thrones worked at the time because it was coming off of fantasy like Harry Potter and LotR as an adult version with a gripping story. 
 

Now it’s assets are a world without much to differentiate itself, the standard dark self serious tone, and stories separate from the main series 

Is this any different from any other mega franchise like Star Wars, Marvel, DC, Toy Story, The Disney Princesses, Barbie, James Bond etc?

18 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

A lot of you probably won’t like this article, but it touches on some things that have been discussed here in the past, such as whether grimdark is still appealing, and how there can’t be any progress in terms of injustice because this story is a prequel.

https://www.pastemagazine.com/tv/hbo/house-of-the-dragon-women-game-of-thrones-fantasy-tv/

The only thing I got out of this article was " Why become a pop culture writer if you can't accept the underlying mechanics of pop culture?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I like TROP too. I think it’s easier to like if you haven’t read the books (which I haven’t).

Subscribe word for word.

About the article, several fantasy shows have been aired ever since GoT ended, all of them trying to get the mantle without shame, they were all received with lukewarm at best when not outright distate.

I normally don't pay attention to neither articles or opinions on youtube but this run with both RoP and HotD i have put my toe in for a little and yikes.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

This is probably not the forum to be arguing this.

Martin's books are, to me, the best fantasy aside from Tolkien.

My point isn't to argue the merit of Martin's story, but the longevity of the world as a cinematic universe. Say ASOIAF had the best story ever and the best characters ever. It wouldn't change the fact that those characters have had their entire narrative written and the specific story structure of the books has already been adapted. 

For HBO to continue, they can't just fall back onto the same people so they have to invent or adapt new stories unrelated to the main one. And the actual world is not something with the same iconic classification as it is more just a generic medieval backdrop with some oriental elements.  

With Star Wars for example even without Luke or Anakin, you have a specific moral philosophy behind the jedi, the sith, the republic, etc. that can be built upon into an interconnective web of media. 

With comic books the characters reinvent themselves. You can writer a hundred origin stories to Spiderman, a hundred deaths, and have a similar number of canonical universes. In ASOIAF you only have one so once Jaime's story is told there is nothing else to do with him. 

All they have is writing new stories with new characters which really amounts to the same as writing new medieval fantasy. There would be hints and easter eggs as to the main series with banners, sigils, and familiar surnames, but in the end that is all superficial, and the only thing keeping hardcore fans connected is Martin's writing, and a cinematic universe would have to exist beyond his lifespan. 

Take the Gates of Xi animated film. The location is just handwaving about ancient china. So you have a medieval story about ancient china with maybe some fantastical elements. How does it feed into a collective universe or at least into an identifiable world that can fit the brand "Game of Thrones"? Game of Thrones does not have a tone or message that is very specific to its show. It is dark and gritty but many write dark and gritty shows. Its claim to fame is killing off main characters but that is running off the memory of the red wedding with nothing to compare of since.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Cashless Society said:

Is this any different from any other mega franchise like Star Wars, Marvel, DC, Toy Story, The Disney Princesses, Barbie, James Bond etc?

Yeah, I wrote this in another reply but I'll give it again. All those property have either iconic characterization, styles, morals, or aesthetics that draw people to the brand and form an interconnective structure regardless of what rendition the media is produced in. 

Comic books have the same characters reinvent themselves time and time again. There is a sort language to their mannerisms that is identifiable regardless of actor or animator (like James Bond) that allows them to exist in a hundred canonical settings. Spiderman can have a hundred origin stories and a hundred deaths, the character is the brand not a specific narrative. 

In ASOIAF, take a fan favorite character (say Jaime Lannister). When Jaime Lannister dies his story is over. He can only be adapted once and isn't the basis for new content or more adventures. The media produced thereafter aren't going to be about the characters we loved or hated in the main series, it is going to be about random people in a generic world. 

Which brings us to the philosophical basis for the universe. Star Wars even without Anakin or Luke has a specific moral code given to the Jedi, the Sith, and the republic which alongside their specific fashion allows for a breadth of stories within the expansive galaxy to be told in a breadth of time periods. If you read about the old republic, or play games set in that era, it is distinct but it is still star wars with the same organizations like the Jedi Order, the Bounty Hunters, the Sith, and the Republic fighting with more or less the same motivations that can be exploited by the narrative in similar ways. 

ASOIAF doesn't have lightsabers, it has swords. It's moral façade is heavily plot driven, with the shocking deaths driven less by a coherent sort of nihilism but by a will to surprise. The generic European style of Westeros has nothing that is not the standard for all of Tolkienesque fantasy besides its grimness, and grimness is everywhere in television today. 

The question is, if you subtract Martin from the writing (which if it were a cinematic universe is a prerequisite) what about his world outside of the story being told in ASOIAF merits the cultivation of singular identity across multiple productions? You can have the brand "Game of Thrones" but that will only play up to nostalgia for so long especially as the characters and stories will have nothing to do with Game of Thrones outside of a few name drops and familiar sigils. 

It has dragons I guess. But are dragons enough to sustain a global brand that can produce hundreds of stories with little to no underlining basis for connecting them outside of the heading or subheading "GOT"? I don't know, but I find it very hard to believe.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

ASOIAF doesn't have lightsabers, it has swords.

Well, it also has Valyrian steel.  Pretty sure Filoni Star Wars ripped Martin off with the introduction of beskar. 

Your argument that ASOIAF can't be a profitable/tentpole IP like LOTR or Star Wars or Marvel is ludicrous on its face.  We are seeing them do exactly that right now.  If you don't like HotD or think it will ultimately fail, fair enough, but stop trying to tell people to believe you instead of their lying eyes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Reread the old character file on Rhaenyra from George's description for her portrait ... and then compare that to the FaB historical figure. She does have more substance in that brief paragraph than in the book. There is described as a proud woman who dressed richly, who harbored grudges and never forgot slights. A woman who was prone to neurotic behavior.

I think GRRM decided to give some of those characteristics to Alicent somewhere down the line.

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...