Jump to content

[Spoilers] Episode 108 Discussion


Ran
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I’m surprised by how many fans loved this episode. I mostly found it really boring.

Think people are finding it boring. Last episode's thread was into 8 pages within four hours after airing lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ran said:

What's your issue with the dragonkeepers? They must be around on Dragonstone to help with dragons and their eggs. It's certainly different from the books, of course.

I'd say that my issue is that the Daemon we've seen so far wouldn't risk his life to collaborate with an institution (the dragonkeepers) that at the time are controlled by the greens (through the Hand). Providing them with dragon eggs equals to potentially giving them huge weapons that can be used against him in the future. Does that make sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tywin's Wallet said:

Let's say Rhaenyra tells the truth and then what? Rhaenys flies across the sea to drag Laenor back just to find out Laenor is happy with Qarl or another man in complete rejection of Rhaenys' traditions and desires causing more strife, hurt and more rumors. Just leave it alone - some family separations are actually good. Rhaenys and Corlys should have accepted Laenor and stood by him and work out their own succession issues. Dead or alive losing Laenor was Rahenys' and Corlys' doing.

We'll have to wait and see if they get back to Laenor and Qarl. They should in some fashion. And if Laenor either comes back or Qarl shows up, revealing that Laenor was never killed back at Driftmark, then they should dig deeper into why nobody ever told Corlys and Rhaenys.

No idea why they didn't, although it could have been Laenor's condition for agreeing to the plan - he could have feared that his father would look for him and drag his sorry ass back to Driftmark to do his duty.

The idea that Rhaenyra would keep this thing a secret from her parents-in-law on her own accord makes no sense at all, considering it cost her rather dearly. If Viserys died earlier, the Velaryons may not have supported her rise to the throne, staying neutral or outright backing a Green coup.

But the Velaryons suspecting Rhaenyra-Daemon having had a hand in Laenor's death is spot on. In the book it makes absolutely no sense that they would not suspect them, especially since the truth was apparently never discovered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, frenin said:

Why would you expect that? I'm curious.

The toast is a major moment in the book and HBO actually advertised it in the promo stills before the episode. I guess they decided to give more weight to Viserys' last stand instead.

Edited by Takiedevushkikakzvezdy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Ran said:

I think Daemon is satisfied with his life at that time. He's on Dragonstone, he has sons, he has dragons, his wife will be queen and he will be her consort. 

He seems fine enough, but the passion already seems to have cooled down on his part, if it was ever there. Which is fine, too. Their marriage is not going to be a success, after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

I'd say that my issue is that the Daemon we've seen so far wouldn't risk his life to collaborate with an institution (the dragonkeepers) that at the time are controlled by the greens (through the Hand). Providing them with dragon eggs equals to potentially giving them huge weapons that can be used against him in the future. Does that make sense?

Oh,  I don't think they are "controlled" by the Greens. Their loyalty is to the dragons. They're presented as something of a cult. The people he's handing it to are dragonkeepers who live and labor on Dragonstone, and certainly are not going to be taking those eggs to King's Landing, or damaging them or whatever, in my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

Did he call Rhaenyra a whore? Cause I think they just added that to make sure we knew he got what was coming for him. And they made sure that Rhaenyra herself is totally absolved of any involvement just in case viewers might think there is any ambiguity going on here. 

Not exactly book accurate with that. And since you are willing to overlook one-dimensional characterization due to accuracy, then why feel the need to alter the material so that things are even less interesting. 

Are you saying that Rhaenyra was in on the beheading -- in the book?  In order to solve the Driftmark inheritance issue or some other reason?  As a viewer, we did see her thinking about what she should do but I did not think she was involved in the violence at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, lakin1013 said:

Are you saying that Rhaenyra was in on the beheading -- in the book?  In order to solve the Driftmark inheritance issue or some other reason?  As a viewer, we did see her thinking about what she should do but I did not think she was involved in the violence at all.

Yes. Vaemond starts going on about the sons being bastards, and Rhaenyra dispatches Daemon to Driftmark to take his head... and then bring back the body so she can feed them to Syrax. 

The show definitely makes her uninvolved in this particular violence, but she seems ultimately unbothered by it, as what Vaemond was saying was treason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

I'd say that my issue is that the Daemon we've seen so far wouldn't risk his life to collaborate with an institution (the dragonkeepers) that at the time are controlled by the greens (through the Hand). Providing them with dragon eggs equals to potentially giving them huge weapons that can be used against him in the future. Does that make sense?

You seem to get ahead of yourself there. Is there any evidence that the coningent of the Dragonkeepers on Dragonstone do take orders from KL? Daemon doesn't steal eggs there, he collects them from Syrax's lair and hands them to the people in charge of taking care of them in the caverns of Dragonstone.

1 minute ago, Ran said:

Oh,  I don't think they are "controlled" by the Greens. Their loyalty is to the dragons. They're presented as something of a cult. The people he's handing it to are dragonkeepers who live and labor on Dragonstone, and certainly are not going to be taking those eggs to King's Landing, or damaging them or whatever, in my mind.

Yes, I guess one could get the impression they do report to KL and stuff from episode 2 ... but that was a special case of a prince taking possession of Dragonstone unlawfully. And of him stealing an egg that was destined for the cradle of the king's son. Daemon Targaryen now is the consort of the Princess of Dragonstone who is in charge of the island and all the dragons and dragon eggs on it.

We already saw that Rhaenyra, personally, had jurisdiction over Syrax's dragon eggs when she offered Aemond a choice from a hypothetical clutch of Syrax's eggs. Viserys made it clear that this was a generous gift ... indicating that the Crown didn't really have or exert any power over the dragon eggs of the dragons from other dragonriders.

This also allows us to speculate that the eggs of Baela and Rhaena were not eggs given to the girls by the king or Rhaenyra, but eggs from a clutch laid by Vhagar in Essos. It seems the girls were born not in Westeros, so there was actually no opportunity for them to go back and get some dragon eggs.

Ditto, Meleys may have provided the Velaryons with an egg/hatchling they gave to Laenor. With neither of them asking permission from Jaehaerys I (or in the show Viserys I).

7 minutes ago, lakin1013 said:

Are you saying that Rhaenyra was in on the beheading -- in the book?  In order to solve the Driftmark inheritance issue or some other reason?  As a viewer, we did see her thinking about what she should do but I did not think she was involved in the violence at all.

The quote in the book goes like that:

Quote

That same year, across Blackwater Bay, the Sea Snake was stricken by a sudden fever. As he took to his bed, surrounded by maesters, the issue arose as to who should succeed him as Lord of the Tides and Master of Driftmark should the sickness claim him. With both his trueborn children dead, by law his lands and titles should pass to his eldest grandson, Jacaerys…but since Jace would presumably ascend the Iron Throne after his mother, Princess Rhaenyra urged her good-father to name instead her second son, Lucerys. Lord Corlys also had half a dozen nephews, however, and the eldest of them, Ser Vaemond Velaryon, protested that the inheritance by rights should pass to him…on the grounds that Rhaenyra’s sons were bastards sired by Harwin Strong. The princess was not slow in answering this charge. She dispatched Prince Daemon to seize Ser Vaemond, had his head removed, and fed his carcass to her dragon, Syrax.

I think the logistical context there is that Rhaenyra and Daemon were on Driftmark when all that was happening. Corlys was apparently dying, so Rhaenyra and Daemon travelled to High Tide to plead with Corlys to name Luke his heir. In that she was challenged right then and there by Vaemond, who presumably made his accusations in Corlys' presence and to his face.

Afterward he left the room and/or the castle to go wherever he lived, after which Rhaenyra had Daemon seize him, fetch him back, to try and execute him as the liege lady of the Velaryons. After his beheading Vaemond's corpse was then fed to Syrax (who would have been there because Rhaenyra had flown to Driftmark on her dragon).

Daemon is not actually said to have killed Vaemond in the book. He merely seized the man. It was Rhaenyra who 'had [Vaemond's] head removed'. It is possible that Daemon acted as her headsman there, albeit not very likely. It is more likely that whatever headsman the Velaryons kept on Driftmark actually did the deed. The royals rarely, if ever, do act as their own headsmen.

Alternatively, we can speculate that Vaemond only protested Luke's installation as heir after Rhaenyra had returned to Dragonstone - then Daemon would have gone to Driftmark to fetch Vaemond to trial and execution on Dragonstone - but this strikes me as less likely since Luke would have been installed as heir by the time Rhaenyra left Driftmark. Vaemond's protestation only makes sense if it happened at the same time as Rhaenyra urged Corlys to name Luke the heir, i.e. the way it is presented in the show in KL where competing factions make their petitions at the same time.

Vaemond's wife and children as well as his cousins wouldn't have lived at High Tide, either, but at other Velaryon holdings from which they fled to KL after they learned what had happened to Vaemond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

He seems fine enough, but the passion already seems to have cooled down on his part, if it was ever there. Which is fine, too. Their marriage is not going to be a success, after all.

She is pregnant again, carrying his 2nd? 3rd (it is third, right?) child.  Are you referring to his passion to her or to life in general because clearly they engage each other.  I cannot tell if I missed something in the show?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I don't think it was clear at all.

I think she was THINKING about it but Alicent has been on this road for 16 years. Do we really think she would be turned around by Viserys' speech at the table?

She was turned around by Rhaenyra's speech. When Rhaenyra showed appreciation for the fact she took care of her father during the time Rhaenyra was at dragonstone.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen several people who seem to feel like Rhaenyra and Daemon have cooled their passions, but... on what evidence? Because they aren't ripping one another's clothing off in the episode? He separated a guy's head from his lower jaw for the insult dealt to her, what greater proof of love hath a man?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tought I will have a hard time with Viserys finally going. It took so fucking long (in in-universe years) and it was so ridiculous that it became a relief to me, with no feelings attached. 

If only they showed him as this real family person who cared about his other children (and grandchildren) beside Rhaenyra, who finds joy in telling Helaena's children stories of the Targaryens of the past, like in the book.

I really don't like that part about his character. I may at this point think that there wasn't enough material for 2 seasons (altough with a limited amount of subplots and stuff added, that could've been achieveable too) for the pre-Dance era, this season really could've used 13-14 episodes total. 

I also don't like how they want to keep the pan hot by throwing sudden violence in my face, this time with Vaemond.

And even if Daeron isn't cut, I find his absence or of a mention of him a mistake at this point, with the toasts and all that never even mentioning him. I wonder why would he even feel attached to the Greens or be passionate about the death of his own kin if he doesn't even know them (especially not the children of Aegon and Helaena).

The mistakes are becoming overwhelming to me, but I think I should have a casual sense of what the show is, not one who read the books, to judge it. And despite the complaints (again, from a reader of the source material), this is quality TV  content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

Yes- he's a bad person.  Lots of bad people live in Westeroes and Aegon is one of them.  

But I disagree with Alicent's role.  First and foremost, Alicent treads lightly and actually DOES sympathize with Dianna.  Dianna knows how much trouble she is in and that she could be killed.  Lord knows what Cersei would have done.  Or Dany... Joff ... Tywin ...  Arya... Sansa... fuck Westeroes is filled with morally ambiguous people... its almost like that's the point of the series or something. 

Alicent uses her sympathy to pressure her into silence. Just because this is less cruel than what Gregor Clegane would do doesn't change the fact the show is trying to cast her behavior as fundamentally negative, no matter how uncomfortable she is going through with the act. 

34 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

Anyway, she then hugs her, calms her and lets the girl know she believes her- which she assuredly does.  She then says to her (paraphrasing)  "Look, others will not be so kind to you as I have been so you probably don't want to tell anyone else about this, even though you've told too many people already" (fact check: true).  The then gives her money and, yeah, Moon tea.   

Silence money and NDAs aren't portrayed as acts of virtue in any other show. Watch Succession or the Boys, the audience is habituated with the framing of this acts as having a malicious undertone. And Alicent using her relatability is even more manipulative.  

34 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

So to sum up, Alicent is very smart, effective, and protects her side. Stop. The. Presses.  Oh, and she's also understanding, sympathetic and treats the girl as well as anyone would be in Westeroes.  No (further) harm will befall her and her time at the Keep is at an end.  In this universe, its in the top 5 most successful Employments in King Landing's history.   Seriously, its not gaslighting if its legitimately true and the girl is as protected as she can be under the circumstances.  

Again, claiming there are people more cruel than Alicent is besides the point. Everything the show does wants to clarify to viewers who the villains are and who the good guys are. 

Alicent silencing her son's rape victim is meant to juxtapose with Jace wanting to be a good king. Rhaenyra's kids are good and Alicent's are bad just in case people start feeling conflicted about who they should support. 

And oh yeah, Helena has the mental aptitude of a child and functions more to highlight the cruelty of her other sons. No Daeron to speak of either. 

34 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

 

Except its absolutely not elder abuse.  Alicent states plainly that Viserys is in unbearable paid without milk of the poppy.  The show then illustrates this as the King spends several hours without milk of the poppy and is in horrible pain the whole time (while also being amazing).  So... they say he is in constant pain s needs MotP; and without MotP he is in constant pain.  So...  

It is dude. Manipulating an old man into doing what he wants and using his estate (the kingdom) against his will is the MO of the evil step family coming in and taking what is left from a victim. Read David Copperfield or something, this trope isn't new or original. 

Like the religious stuff, the point was to depict Alicent and Otto as the true rulers while Viserys is kept safely away. 

34 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

Look, yeah, they are trying to maneuver their will and try to keep the King on the sidelines.   

Elder abuse. Because they can only do this as long as the king is too weak/unable to stop them.

34 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

But did you see the way Alicent looks at him as he ascends the throne?  Yes, she is upset that her plan is thwarted, but that makes her look all the more powerful: she is deeply and obviously concerned over the King's horrible deterioration.  And its her who embraces him as he says he needs to set things right. That's not elder abuse. And when Aemond makes that crack about the "strong" boys, she immediately jumps at him.   

Being concerned is nice, but it doesn't negate the fact that everything she stands for is evil. It's like writing a story about the reluctant abuser who hates what they are doing. Doesn't change the fact that the audience is given no reason to support Alicent making the conflict one sided. 

Like with her position towards Vaemond. She knows Viserys would disagree, and rather than following through with his will she attempts to undermine. It doesn't matter how bad she feels while doing it. 

34 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

Yes, I am not rooting for Alicent, but it only means she is on the darker side of this gray, not deep black.  Also known as "Cersei Black."   

The thing is, that falls in line with the TragicBackstoryTM. It's like saying we understand why Gregor Clegane is a monster since his father beat him up or something. 

It doesn't change the moral fidelity of their behavior. And having Alicent play the role of the evil step-mother with no legitimate reason for taking the throne leaves her as a less than one dimensional character since what she is doing is illogical.  

34 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

As... as opposed to Uncle-Fuckers?  And considering the King asks for the prayer?  I think you must be living near Highgarden because this is a Reach.   

We are made to support that uncle-fucker whose love story plays out like a real heroes tale. Daemon, that verifiable POS, is portrayed as an ally when he lops off the guy who called his wife a whore. He is the badass fall guy we all love. 

Compare that to Aemond who is just an asshole for no specific reason. He is not protecting his loved ones or supporting his queen, he is just nothingness. 

34 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

I mean, maybe you would like something more attuned to your tastes like "Rings of Power" or a story involving three pigs and a mean wolf. 

Lol, I would like this story to have actual grey morality, not this black-white dichotomy. Right now the show is literally three pigs and the big bad wolf. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lightoftheast said:

Daemon is turned into this medium of gobbling Rhaenyra's bad traits. She doesnt pass her cruel order like in FAB by her uncle-husband to kill Vaemond nor she feeds him to her Syrax. She supports her way-ward black husband and fully admires and supports his tastes. She is created as a character to fill out every boxes for tv audience against great evil "Trump voter" faction as the showrunner said.

Are you sympathetic to the “evil ‘Trump voter’ faction”?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Are you sympathetic to the “evil ‘Trump voter’ faction”?

Well I can't speak for that person, but I hate people who can only see things from their own perspective and water down their opponents into caricatures with only the worst possible attributes.  

But more specifically, this seems like a dodge on your part. Because if you, like the showrunners, just view them as pure evil then why base half the perspective characters off of them. It makes your dual narrative one sided. 

The poster you were responding to was referencing how Rhaenyra's character is white washed making the storyline one sided and one dimensional. Meanwhile the Greens were told point blank to act like the 'evil trump voters' https://www.indiewire.com/2022/09/house-of-the-dragon-olivia-cooke-trump-1234766026/ 

Which, if this is supposedly a story of ambiguous morality (as was the case with the first five episodes), way to go in destroying your own concept and narrative potential. 

The show sucks. 

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...