Jump to content

[Spoilers] Episode 109 Discussion


Ran
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

Again, people have to stop making my case for me; I don't need the help. 

Ned was a vastly inexperienced player set about by veteran players. His "mistake" is that he warns somebody bc he incorrectly assumes she will realize how bad her posture is. 

Rhaeyns does not have this excuse. She is incredibly experienced at this.  If your argument is that its okay for a very keen and aware character to act, instead, like an blissfully ignorant one ... 

... well... that's one way to see things, I guess... 

It wasn't a case of inexperience.

It was a case of morality.

He warned them because he didn't want to kill children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Caligula_K3 said:

I think there's a difference between Ned Stark warning Cersei, which is informed by his longstanding moral principle that children shouldn't be harmed, vs. Rhaenys randomly murdering 50+ innocents, staring down her enemies, and then flying off.

Like, I have nothing against Rhaenys not wanting to murder Alicent and co. at this point. But to come right after she just killed a bunch of people just felt very, very odd. Like a lot of the violence in HOTD, the whole scene felt random.

Yes, Rhaenys killed them because she had to in order to escape.

Killing the Hightowers would be because she wants to eliminate them as threats and probably start a war.

She was held prisoner but no harm was done to her otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, C.T. Phipps said:

It wasn't a case of inexperience.

It was a case of morality.

He warned them because he didn't want to kill children.

Please describe to me how the only way to save children's lives was to tell Cersei Lannister his plan? Seems like an oxymoron but I'm willing to listen... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, chrisdaw said:

Criticism sadly most often mounts to, "I wouldn't have done X, so therefore it makes no sense character Y did X." 

It's even sadder when it's "I totally would have incinerated a dozen or so people - three of which are my cousin's children including a completely innocent young mother - so therefore it's ignorant and stupid the character didn't do it because I know exactly what's going to transpire and she should too."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DMC said:

It's even sadder when it's "I totally would have incinerated a dozen or so people - three of which are my cousin's children including a completely innocent young mother - so therefore it's ignorant and stupid the character didn't do it because I know exactly what's going to transpire and she should too."

... after I just murdered like 150 innocent people... 

... you keep forgetting that part. 

 

For some odd reason.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, chrisdaw said:

Criticism sadly most often mounts to, "I wouldn't have done X, so therefore it makes no sense character Y did X." 

I mean you're right the criticism is too often focused on circumstantial scenes that while overtly ridiculous are bad in isolation to everything else. 

But the overwhelming positivity focuses in on these minor quibbles to ignore the supermassive holes in the script that ruin any pretense of a coherent narrative or theme, destroying the entire concept of a war that should last us three more seasons. 

Edited by butterweedstrover
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

Please describe to me how the only way to save children's lives was to tell Cersei Lannister his plan? Seems like an oxymoron but I'm willing to listen... 

To get them out of the city. Because really they would have been killed because Robert was a monster.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Rockroi said:

... after I just murdered like 150 innocent people... 

... you keep forgetting that part. 

 

For some odd reason.  

Nope.  Again, we already discussed this last night.  You keep on forgetting that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These kind of debates always tend to get too nuanced considering what was shown on screen, it used to happen with GOT as well.

Rhaenys doesn't murder the Greens because:

A) She doesn't want to murder Alicent. She has respect for her, she watches her tremble in fear in front of her children and decides to spare her

B ) She probably hasn't murdered anyone in her entire life. It's not like killing 10 people (and don't forget some of them are children even by Westerosi standards) is easy.

And...that's it. The whole scene is quite straightforward, we spend like 1 whole minute of stares between Rhaenys and Alicent alone. The scene with the two of them arguing before is there for a reason.

Edited by Ingelheim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ingelheim said:

B ) She probably hasn't murdered anyone in her entire life. It's not like killing 10 people (and don't forget some of them are children even by Westerosi standards) is easy.

... except ... for the 100-150 she killed in the prior 30 seconds... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

And it still makes no sense. 

Well, you seemed to accept it last night...

20 hours ago, Rockroi said:

I think there is a good argument to be made that Targs are just terrible people when it comes to the smallfolk.  And if that's the case, then Viserys was the better choice and that argument (if there ever was one) is forever foreclosed.  

However, that only explains her being awful to the smallfolk.  I can get that. Why does she not go all the way? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Well, you seemed to accept it last night...

 

You have to put it all together, though  - once she has killed these people, she can no longer hide behind it being bloodless, or she has never killed before, or she does notw ant to hurt people etc etc etc .

You are now in the realm of "Killing solves things." Things like "escaping."  And "stopping a civil war," 

She doesn't.  Why? 

Its Alicent.  That reason is bad.  

She's a bad/dumb person for not doing it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Yes, Rhaenys killed them because she had to in order to escape.

Killing the Hightowers would be because she wants to eliminate them as threats and probably start a war.

She was held prisoner but no harm was done to her otherwise.

Is the only way out of the dragonpit really to smash through the floor of a building that has a capacity of 10,000 people? If yes, that is very poor architectural design.

But seriously, nothing was conveyed onscreen that made it seem like Rhaenys had to do this to escape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rockroi said:

She doesn't.  Why? 

Because she views the people on that dais as fundamentally different to the people she wantonly killed in order to escape.  Most every noble - and even much of the smallfolk themselves - in all the books and shows does.  This is patently obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DMC said:

Because she views the people on that dais as fundamentally different to the people she wantonly killed in order to escape.  Most every noble - and even much of the smallfolk themselves - in all the books and shows does.  This is patently obvious.

Then she's a terrible person who is willing to kill people for her feelings and not kill others for those same feelings.

That's Dumb. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Rockroi said:

Then she's a terrible person who is willing to kill people for her feelings and not kill others for those same feelings.

That's Dumb. 

Fair enough.  But again, that makes most of the characters in Westeros terrible and dumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ingelheim said:

These kind of debates always tend to get too nuanced considering what was shown on screen, it used to happen with GOT as well.

Rhaenys doesn't murder the Greens because:

A) She doesn't want to murder Alicent. She has respect for her, she watches her tremble in fear in front of her children and decides to spare her

B ) She probably hasn't murdered anyone in her entire life. It's not like killing 10 people (and don't forget some of them are children even by Westerosi standards) is easy.

And...that's it. The whole scene is quite straightforward, we spend like 1 whole minute of stares between Rhaenys and Alicent alone. The scene with the two of them arguing before is there for a reason.

Agreed. Really the only one she should consider killing is Aemond, and only because of Vhagar. You can't blame her for not thinking of that though, and the idea that she should immolate that entire branch of the family to take him and/or Aegon out is ...fucking nuts. Helena was there!

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...