[Spoilers] Episode 108 Discussion

[Theda Baratheon]

29 minutes ago, Leticia Stark said:

I’m seeing a lot of people liking/rooting for Aemond so you may get the balance you ask for soon enough.

I agree. I like Aemond. I think the show has portrayed him very favourably so I’m not really sure what the argument is haha. 
 

also people are gushing over Daemon cos he’s proper fit. Not everything is so deep  he’s done plenty of awful things in show and I’m sure he’ll do plenty more evil things later on. 
 

i definitely agree that it seems the show is much more Team Black than Team Green but I don’t think it’s quite so unbalanced as the poster up thread would suggest. 

[Bael's Bastard]

On 10/10/2022 at 9:54 AM, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

Which means that there was no need for the prophecy scene at all.

Nah, it's fine, there's rarely just one reason why events happen in history

[El Guapo]

https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2022/10/11/random-musings/

George is saying 4 seasons on his blog and is also saying that Alicent does have 4 children they just didn’t have time to fit Dareon in this season.

Edited October 11, 2022 by El Guapo

[Corvinus85]

aha, so Daeron really is Ser-not-appearing-in-this-movie. 

[Leticia Stark]

Daeron appearing from nowhere will be very confusing to casuals.

 

[C.T. Phipps]

2 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

Given how much people online are gushing over him I'd say, regardless of intent, that is the outcome. But again, he is a badass fighting for the right side and only every commits atrocities when they are well deserved (FYI: I don't think any of them were well deserved, just that the show wants us to think they are.)

Not that I expect you to be persuaded but could you explain how murdering his wife was justified?

I feel like that was grossly out of character but designed to address the kind of things you claim he is being whitewashed of.

Edited October 11, 2022 by C.T. Phipps

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

I didn't notice it myself until others pointed it out, but Helaena was actually about to clap for Aemond's toast before the fight broke out. A funny little moment.

[butterweedstrover]

1 hour ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Not that I expect you to be persuaded but could you explain how murdering his wife was justified?

I feel like that was grossly out of character but designed to address the kind of things you claim he is being whitewashed of.

I was going to reply to DMC but anyways: 

Daemon only becomes a hero after the time skip. His crimes in the first five episodes however are only portrayed as superficially bad to accentuate his abilities for when he later comes to the side of the good. 
 

They do a lot of legwork in episode 6 by showing him to be a loving husband to Laena, but about the first wife. 
 

Notice some things- 

1. She exists to be killed off (audience have no preexisting connection to her) 

2. Rather than behaving vulnerably she spews vulgarities to test his resolve 

3. Her death has no consequences either politically or emotionally meaning they can be safely ignored. 
 

Compare that to the Greens: 

Cole’s murder of Joffrey has 2/3 (#3 is missing: Laenor’s visceral tears add shame to the act). Aegon’s rape of the maid has only 1/3 (#s 2 and 3 are missing). Otto gets a 0/3 for the manipulation of his own daughter. Larys gets a 0/3 for the slaughter of his family. And Aemond gets a 0/3 for trying to kill Lucerys with a rock.  

Daemon’s crimes are ALL safely in the 3/3 category. If they had actually gone through with the murder of Laenor that would force the showrunners to have him kill off an established character and deal with the political/emotional ramifications it would bare on house Velaryon.  
 

That means the episodes that tried to reflect Daemon’s capacity for cruelty (which will be used in service of the good) does not damage his credibility with viewers. Intellectually we know him murdering his wife is bad, but we care much less than say when Otto tries to convince Viserys to drink milk of the poppy. 
 

Nominally the former is much worst, but the show has less narrative integration for Daemon giving his actions a sort of globe vibe helping the audience root for him when he officially becomes the good guy in episode 6.  
 

It’s no accident people love Daemon and cheer for him while being repulsed by Larys, Otto, Cole, Aemond, and Aegon. 
 

No one was reacting with “lol, so toxic” about Aegon when the maid was crying, or about Cole when he smash Joffrey’s skull, or when Larys admitted to slaughtering his family.

Edited October 11, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[butterweedstrover]

2 hours ago, DMC said:

Killing Rhea certainly wasn't "well deserved." 

Read my reply above. 

2 hours ago, DMC said:

Nor snapping a dude's neck to fake Laenor's death. 

We already talked about this. Nameless guard was killed for heroic ends (helping Rhaenyra and Laenor). 

2 hours ago, DMC said:

Nor skulking at Dragonstone in Episode 2 like an impetuous child. 

He was given bad guy traits in the first five episodes to mold his abilities. But all these bad guy traits are superficial (unlike the Greens) so viewers can laugh it off (which they do). 

2 hours ago, DMC said:

 

He's explicitly being depicted as Daemon 2.0.  Which he should be. 

Aemond tries to murder his kin with a rock whereas Daemon is fiercely loyal to his family and only screws with a bunch of nobodies unrelated to the plot.  

2 hours ago, DMC said:

 

Other than Cole's (which I agree, was way over the top), what crimes have been depicted as horrific?  Aegon raping a girl?  Well, we also see Viserys rape Alicent...which is why Alicent is so disgusted herself.  Is Alicent's disgust supposed to demonize the greens?  Isn't Alicent the matriarch of the greens?

Ok, so here is where we get into the Greens. 

Cole's murder of Joffrey is shown to be horrific because we see the visceral emotions from Laenor in reaction to his death. We are made to feel shame over the act. Aegon's rape is Aegon's crime. Alicent's horrified reaction (just like her horrified reaction to Larys) is meant to add narrative depth to the crimes. 

We see the reaction from the victim of Aegon and live with the emotional damage Alicent has to relive. With Larys we see what it is like for the Strong boys to lose their father and deal with the political ramifications of such an atrocity, and the terror felt by others. 

What Viserys did was marital rape, and given how Alicent is sent to seduce Viserys by order of Otto it does not turn the audience against him, or the Blacks in general. 

Otto giving Viserys milk of the poppy against his will is is underlined by the king's loss of agency, and the manipulative influence of Otto who attempts underhandly to subvert the King's desires in the court of law. 

Meanwhile Daemon hurts people we don't know, with zero ramification (emotionally or politically), and is met by stern back talk testing his resolve by the respective victims. 

[DMC]

7 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

He was given bad guy traits in the first five episodes to mold his abilities. But all these bad guy traits are superficial (unlike the Greens) so viewers can laugh it off (which they do). 

You keep on making these random and unfounded caveats - Daemon was only bad in the first five episodes (as if half the season doesn't count for some reason), Daemon only killed some nameless guard (whereas other than Larys the greens thus far have killed..nobody but Cole killing Joffrey, who is very little more than a nameless guard), Daemon killing Rhea didn't mean as much because she wasn't "vulnerable" or something (like seriously what the fuck).  And then apply these absurd delineations to make broad declarations about not only how the show is depicting things, but also how Martin himself "would have wanted it" - even as he literally states just the opposite.  It's laughably pathetic argumentation.

12 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Aemond tries to murder his kin with a rock whereas Daemon is fiercely loyal to his family and only screws with a bunch of nobodies unrelated to the plot.  

Aemond is attacked by four other kids and earlier is bullied by Jace, Luke, and Aegon.  He didn't try to "murder his kin," you are literally making things up and flagrantly misrepresenting what happened in the show.

15 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Alicent's horrified reaction (just like her horrified reaction to Larys) is meant to add narrative depth to the crimes. 

It also inherently makes Alicent more sympathetic to the viewer.  Who, again, is basically the leader of the greens.  Her righteous outrage at Aegon's behavior is just that -- righteous.  Yet you continue to elide this.

17 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

What Viserys did was marital rape, and given how Alicent is sent to seduce Viserys by order of Otto it does not turn the audience against him, or the Blacks in general. 

Er..no.  Otto sending her to Viserys does not excuse Viserys' actions.  That's really fucking gross.

18 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Otto giving Viserys milk of the poppy against his will is is underlined by the king's loss of agency

It's made very clear Viserys does indeed need milk of the poppy.  I definitely don't blame him and Alicent for that.  It's attempting to act in what is obviously direct contradiction to Viserys' wishes in his name - i.e. the anticipated naming of Vaemond as heir - that is the problem.

Look, Larys is definitely straight up evil, and yes he's a green.  Cole is depicted as an incel shit, and he's also a green.  Otto is portrayed as power hungry and obsessed with putting his grandson on the throne.  None of these characterizations are different than their book counterparts.  Meanwhile, Alicent has been portrayed unevenly, I agree, but also often sympathetic all the way up to her last conversation with Rhaenyra in this episode.  

[The Bard of Banefort]

2 hours ago, Leticia Stark said:

Daeron appearing from nowhere will be very confusing to casuals.

 

It’s incredibly weird that he hasn’t come up by now, especially during all those toasts.

1 hour ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Not that I expect you to be persuaded but could you explain how murdering his wife was justified?

I feel like that was grossly out of character but designed to address the kind of things you claim he is being whitewashed of.

My bigger issue is that the show is acting like it never happened. It’s not something that should just be brushed over. Much like the allegations that Rhaenyra killed Laenor, these rumors should be haunting her and Daemon now.

I’m not an Elizabethan expert, but wasn’t her paramour Robert Dudley undone by rumors that he murdered his wife, even though most historians don’t believe he did?

[Painted Dog]

I always felt like Daemon's decision to take on Aemond was about his desire to die a hero and go down in history in the most dramatic way possible.  Not because he was suicidal over a woman.  He was spending time with Nettles as what he saw as the best bet to take Aemond down (surviving a one on one battle was always going go be near impossible against Vhagar).  The obsession was more with Aemond than anything.  There's a weird mirror or connection between Aemond and Daemon so that they always were going to try to kill each other even if Rhaenyra was out of the picture (The show seems to be emphasizing this too with how Aemond looks).  When the options were removed to keep hunting in a way that he'd survive, Daemon sped up the timeline and added in an extra-dramatic blaze of glory.

I felt like Rhaenyra turning on the Dragonseeds was a terrible and hypocritical act considering she'd happily kill or wage war for her own bastards. They were allies (not even well-compensated) and it was especially unfair in the case of Addam and Nettles who had not been proven disloyal.   Early on, she would have had killed those who gossiped about her, but in the end would kill someone else over gossip.  Made me go from liking Rhaenyra to really disliking her.

[The Bard of Banefort]

I didn’t get a chance to respond to this in the last thread, but regarding how Septon Eustace absolves Rhaenyra of guilt by portraying her as a pawn, and whether that’s sexist on its own, it’s a bit like the horseshoe theory of sexual harassment that we have today. The example I usually use (because remarkably few people are offended by it) is Bill Clinton. In the 90s, conservatives thought he was a creep who preyed on young women, whereas liberals defended him and called his critics prudes. Conservatives still feel the same way today, only now young liberals also think Clinton is a creep who preys on young women, and he’s treated as a kind of embarrassing uncle that everyone wishes would just go away. So Eustace may be more conservative and “old school,” but that tends to come across as being sympathetic to Rhaenyra to readers today.

[The Bard of Banefort]

Just now, Painted Dog said:

I always felt like Daemon's decision to take on Aemond was about his desire to die a hero and go down in history in the most dramatic way possible.  Not because he was suicidal over a woman.  He was spending time with Nettles as what he saw as the best bet to take Aemond down (surviving a one on one battle was always going go be near impossible against Vhagar).  The obsession was more with Aemond than anything.  There's a weird mirror or connection between Aemond and Daemon so that they always were going to try to kill each other even if Rhaenyra was out of the picture (The show seems to be emphasizing this too with how Aemond looks).  When the options were removed to keep hunting in a way that he'd survive, Daemon sped up the timeline and added in an extra-dramatic blaze of glory.

I felt like Rhaenyra turning on the Dragonseeds was a terrible and hypocritical act considering she'd happily kill or wage war for her own bastards. They were allies (not even well-compensated) and it was especially unfair in the case of Addam and Nettles who had not been proven disloyal.   Early on, she would have had killed those who gossiped about her, but in the end would kill someone else over gossip.  Made me go from liking Rhaenyra to really disliking her.

I agree. I think Daemon’s death was more about his desire to kill Aemond, who had eluded him for so long, than about protecting his family.  Notice how he didn’t send any final word to his daughters or little Aegon in all the time he waited at Harrenhal.

[butterweedstrover]

51 minutes ago, DMC said:

You keep on making these random and unfounded caveats - Daemon was only bad in the first five episodes (as if half the season doesn't count for some reason) 

No, I said he was given bad guy traits early on to help stylize his character. He only became a hero in the second half where he can utilize his cruelty for the forces of good (like murdering Vaemond and the Guard). Because Daemon doesn't give a fuck and people laugh about it. 

When Vaemond calls his wife a whore, that is the cue for Daemon to be Daemon. There was for example a reaction on Youtube I was watching where, after Vaemond had said that, they were like 'come on, do your thing Daemon.' 

But his surface level mannerism of being a badass with swagger is developed in such a way that does not condemn him in any integral way to the narrative or his character. 

51 minutes ago, DMC said:

, Daemon only killed some nameless guard 

A nameless guard who is given no emotional or political weight, and whose death served to aid Rhaenyra (the good guy) and her gay husband. 

51 minutes ago, DMC said:

whereas other than Larys the greens thus far have killed..nobody 

Technically not true, but even if so characters can do bad things onto others that do not constitute as "killing'. 

They can commit acts of rape, they can use their power to abuse their children, they can take advantage of the elderly, attempt at murder, and much more. 

Many of these things can be more affective at gaining the audience's ire. Otto didn't murder anyone but his actions in the first episode alone garnered a lot of ill will.

51 minutes ago, DMC said:

Daemon killing Rhea didn't mean as much because she wasn't "vulnerable" or something (like seriously what the fuck). 

Making Rhea test his resolve and verbally abuse him went a long way in softening the blow. 

What happened beforehand (the total lack of characterization given to Rhea as a person or as a player in the story) and afterwards (the lack of emotional or political consequences) are what allowed viewers to react with a shrug. 

Which they did. That is the hurdle you have to get passed, people were making jokes online about it while no one was doing the same when Cole smashed Joffrey's skull into pieces. 

51 minutes ago, DMC said:

He didn't try to "murder his kin,"  

Watch the scene with the rock again. 

51 minutes ago, DMC said:

It also inherently makes Alicent more sympathetic to the viewer. 

It shows she has the emotional intelligence to know right from wrong, and still sides with wrong. Despite her horrors she still aligns with Larys. And despite her son being a rapist she still crowns him King. 

People might understand what turned her evil (I don't), but her actions themselves have zero moral ambiguity. 

51 minutes ago, DMC said:

Er..no.  Otto sending her to Viserys does not excuse Viserys' actions.  That's really fucking gross. 

I want you to try and think back to when the scene first aired. There was a lot of discussion about how Alicent's life has become unfortunate, but there was little condemnation of Viserys' character. 

People were far more grossed out by Otto telling his daughter to wear her mother's dress than they were of Viserys for visiting her in their marital bed. In fact, in his epic return to the throne in this most recent episode, no one has been reacting negatively to him for (as you seem to feel) raping a young girl and feel more than a little comfortable in seeing him stand up for his daughter. 

51 minutes ago, DMC said:

It's made very clear Viserys does indeed need milk of the poppy. 

No, it's made clear Otto and Alicent gain from having his senses dulled and out of the way, especially at this pivotal moment where they are to subvert his will and name Vaemond heir to Driftmark. 

51 minutes ago, DMC said:

None of these characterizations are different than their book counterparts. 

Larys was a black box in the book. Now he is just a psychopath. Cole's situation was seen as ambiguous and he was no way this pathetic incel. Otto was ambitious but his despicable mannerisms in the show are a creative decision made to help viewers hate on him (in case they couldn't do that themselves). 

51 minutes ago, DMC said:

Meanwhile, Alicent has been portrayed unevenly, I agree, but also often sympathetic all the way up to her last conversation with Rhaenyra in this episode.  

She is only sympathetic when she sides with Rhaenyra. She has the typical tragicbackstoryTM thing going that disney does to its villains. 

But the villain is still just that. She might be skeptical, but in the end her actions are clearly wrong and have zero moral ambiguity. Putting her rapist son on the throne is wrong. Siding with a psychopath who murdered his entire family is wrong. Manipulating the king to overthrow his own daughter is wrong. 

None of these actions are given the slightest bit of justification. Alicent is given no moral claim in the actions she decides upon and the viewers have no difficulty in rooting for her to fail in that course. 

As to what you said about Martin, he has claimed this story isn't about having characters that are easy to root for, and yet that is exactly what the showrunners have created. Honestly the Skyrim civil war was more nuanced than the Targaryen civil war, and Skyrim is widely denounced for have cheap writing and poor story telling yet it better fleshed out the two warring factions than what HBO is doing with HotD. 

Edited October 12, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[DMC]

12 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Watch the scene with the rock again. 

I did!  Aemond has a rock, aye, while the FOUR OTHERS have a knife.  And, ya know, take out his eye.

The rest of this is not worth responding to except to say this - you seem obsessively preoccupied with how "the viewers will see it."  Ignoring that you're manifestly wrong, why do you care so much?  It makes no sense to me.  It's like you're rooting for a sports team instead of trying to enjoy a show (or a book).  It's silly and juvenile and, well, sad.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

4 hours ago, DMC said:

Killing Rhea certainly wasn't "well deserved."  Nor snapping a dude's neck to fake Laenor's death.  Nor skulking at Dragonstone in Episode 2 like an impetuous child.  Obviously all viewers have their own interpretations, but "people online gushing over him" doesn't mean anything.  You can find evidence of people saying literally any manner of things about any popular television show online.

He's explicitly being depicted as Daemon 2.0.  Which he should be.

LOL.  It takes a special type of delusion to pretend your blatantly biased interpretations are "true."

Other than Cole's (which I agree, was way over the top), what crimes have been depicted as horrific?  Aegon raping a girl?  Well, we also see Viserys rape Alicent...which is why Alicent is so disgusted herself.  Is Alicent's disgust supposed to demonize the greens?  Isn't Alicent the matriarch of the greens?

I saw someone call Aemond the “Wal-Mart brand” version of Daemon… it gave me a chuckle…

[C.T. Phipps]

I unapologetically hope they portray the Greens as aboslute evil and scum and the Blacks as flawed heroes who need to destroy the Greens utterly.

[butterweedstrover]

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

I did!  Aemond has a rock, aye, while the FOUR OTHERS have a knife.  And, ya know, take out his eye. 

He was the one getting ready to kill first. He brought death to the table. 

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

The rest of this is not worth responding to except to say this - you seem obsessively preoccupied with how "the viewers will see it."  Ignoring that you're manifestly wrong, why do you care so much?  It makes no sense to me.  It's like you're rooting for a sports team instead of trying to enjoy a show (or a book).  It's silly and juvenile and, well, sad.

Because it provides evidence counter to your arguments. I gave a perfectly thorough explanation as to why Daemon's crimes are treated superficially. 

You responded with, "but the bad things are still bad."

So I, instead of repeating myself, made reference to the public reaction as further evidence.

But really, I have disseminated a few of your comments in this last post which you seem reluctant to admit were wrong. So let me give you two as an example: 

1. You said the characterization of Larys, Cole, and Otto were entirely from the source material.  

2. You said Alicent acknowledging evil (and yet going down that route nonetheless) makes her more sympathetic 

Instead of saying I am "manifestly" wrong and not responding to any of my substantive replies, try to own up to the faults in your own analysis. 

[DMC]

4 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

So I, instead of repeating myself, made reference to the public reaction as further evidence.

But really, I have disseminated a few of your comments in this last post which you seem reluctant to admit were wrong. So let me give you two as an example: 

1. You said the characterization of Larys, Cole, and Otto were entirely from the source material.  

2. You said Alicent acknowledging evil (and yet going down that route nonetheless) makes her more sympathetic 

Instead of saying I am "manifestly" wrong and not responding to any of my substantive replies, try to own up to the faults in your own analysis. 

You really are a legend in your own mind.

My issue is you asserting you know how viewers will interpret scenes when it's patently clear you have no idea.  And then, you try to tell people Martin "wouldn't want" the show to be depicted this way on the same exact day he literally makes a blog post saying how much he loves the show.  It's ludicrous.