[Spoilers] Episode 109 Discussion

[Denam_Pavel]

7 hours ago, IFR said:

One country unilaterally controlling nukes I think would have a significant impact in any geopolitical structure. The US bombed Japan into submission quite readily. The geopolitics quickly changed when the Soviets developed nukes only a few years later.

People can account for Rhaenys' behavior as one of morality, but I cannot see it as a decision of good sense.

If she toasted Alicent and company, she could return to the Blacks. I very much doubt that Daemon or Rhaenyra would care at all that Rhaenys murdered family. Nobles might be angered, but Rhaenyra would assume power. If called for Rhaenys could be exiled for a few years. The Blacks would have enough supporters that with dragons everyone else would be cowed. Rhaenys granddaughters could then be married to the Strong children, and Rhaenys legacy would be secured. Rhaenyra and Daemon could then work to stifle any discontent, and at some point Rhaenys could return.

But this is a fictional world. It's hard enough to speculate on the real world, much less a fantasy one. But to me the clear and practical path would have been to kill Alicent and her family.

If? Rhaenys would have toasted the king, his siblings, the Queen Dowager, his children, the Hand, the Grandmaester, the high Septon and other septons, half the Kingsguard, hundreds of smallfolk. You think there's doubt that there would be calls for her exile for at least few years? Daemon was exiled for nothing by comparison. There is no way Rhaenyra wouldn't suffer demands to declare Rhaenys a monster and an enemy of the realm for the rest of her reign. Rhaenys would be remembered as the equivalent to Maegor the Cruel and it is only a question if Rhaenyra is likewise remembered as a tyrant by defending her in any way.

Edited October 19, 2022 by Denam_Pavel

[IFR]

9 hours ago, DMC said:

Her grandchildren would be in just as perilous a position, indeed even more so, for all the reasons I said above.  Moreover, you're asking Rhaenys to consider all these permutations within minutes.  It's absurd.

We know from the story that is written that attempts are made on their lives by the Greens in the path of civil war. Even without the aid of knowing the future narrative, this seems all but inevitable, especially with Baela, since she's daughter to the Greens' rival (Daemon) and a dragon rider, which of course makes her a threat.

We can only speculate on how things would occur if Rhaenys had ended the Greens. You speculate that this is a perilous decision that would haunt Rhaenys, and presumably extend to her kin, but this is a meta narrative commentary, and I don't think it's a reasonable estimate that such a deed performed by Rhaenys would have consequences that extend to her grandchildren - either from a meta narrative viewpoint, or in the minds of the people of the realm. As opposed to the Red Wedding, which was a conspiracy of the entire Frey household this would have been an individual act by Rhaenys, so who can say that the consequences would extend beyond her?

It is, again, speculation about a fantasy world.

9 hours ago, DMC said:

Because, again, no one would stop the US from doing so - nor respond with nukes.  I've made that clear.

A scenario where multiple factions have nukes is entirely different than a scenario where only one faction has nukes. You hypothesize that the world would not respond with nukes if the US employed nukes against Iraq. I agree. But the manner in how the world responds would be very different with other countries possessing nukes than if they didn't, even if nukes aren't used in their response.

Which is why I don't think the scenarios are comparable. Even the bombing of Japan is only loosely comparable because attitudes of WW2 and this show are so dramatically different. It would be more like giving Henry VIII nukes. Would he risk outraging the world by nuking other countries and going on a bloody path of conquest and forcing all to submit to him? I wouldn't doubt it.

2 hours ago, Denam_Pavel said:

If? Rhaenys would have toasted the king, his siblings, the Queen Dowager, his children, the Hand, the Grandmaester, the high Septon and other septons, half the Kingsguard, hundreds of smallfolk. You think there's doubt that there would be calls for her exile for at least few years? Daemon was exiled for nothing by comparison. There is no way Rhaenyra wouldn't suffer demands to declare Rhaenys a monster and an enemy of the realm for the rest of her reign. Rhaenys would be remembered as the equivalent to Maegor the Cruel and it is only a question if Rhaenyra is likewise remembered as a tyrant by defending her in any way.

She already ought to have a blackened reputation. She butchered many innocent people with her dragon - possibly dozens, maybe hundreds. The Greens have control, there wouldn't be a favorable spin here.

By destroying the Greens, the Blacks would have control and the narrative would be in their hands. They would have absolute dominance, and power to quell opposition.

But anyway, this is once again speculating on a fantasy world. I doubt we're going to find agreement here.

And really, all of this is a detour conversation when the main issue is that Rhaenys shouldn't have burst into the room in the first place. That is the truly objectionable part of all of this. Whether she should have followed through and killed the Greens after that initial insane decision is a minor topic of speculation. It was certainly dramatically unsatisfying, whatever one's opinions of if it was good sense.

Edited October 19, 2022 by IFR

[Denam_Pavel]

18 minutes ago, IFR said:

We know from the story that is written that attempts are made on their lives by the Greens in the path of civil war. Even without the aid of knowing the future narrative, this seems all but inevitable, especially with Baela, since she's daughter to the Greens' rival (Daemon) and a dragon rider, which of course makes her a threat.

We can only speculate on how things would occur if Rhaenys had ended the Greens. You speculate that this is a perilous decision that would haunt Rhaenys, and presumably extend to her kin, but this is a meta narrative commentary, and I don't think it's a reasonable estimate that such a deed performed by Rhaenys would have consequences that extend to her grandchildren - either from a meta narrative viewpoint, or in the minds of the people of the realm. As opposed to the Red Wedding, which was a conspiracy of the entire Frey household this would have been an individual act by Rhaenys, so who can say that the consequences would extend beyond her?

It is, again, speculation about a fantasy world.

A scenario where multiple factions have nukes is entirely different than a scenario where only one faction has nukes. You hypothesize that the world would not respond with nukes if the US employed nukes against Iraq. I agree. But the manner in how the world responds would be very different with other countries possessing nukes than if they didn't, even if nukes aren't used in their response.

Which is why I don't think the scenarios are comparable. Even the bombing of Japan is only loosely comparable because attitudes of WW2 and this show are so dramatically different. It would be more like giving Henry VIII nukes. Would he risk outraging the world by nuking other countries and going on a bloody path of conquest and forcing all to submit to him? I wouldn't doubt it.

She already ought to have a blackened reputation. She butchered many innocent people with her dragon - possibly dozens, maybe hundreds. The Greens have control, there wouldn't be a favorable spin here.

By destroying the Greens, the Blacks would have control and the narrative would be in their hands. They would have absolute dominance, and power to quell opposition.

But anyway, this is once again speculating on a fantasy world. I doubt we're going to find agreement here.

And really, all of this is a detour conversation when the main issue is that Rhaenys shouldn't have burst into the room in the first place. That is the truly objectionable part of all of this. Whether she should have followed through and killed the Greens after that initial insane decision is a minor topic of speculation. It was certainly dramatically unsatisfying, whatever one's opinions of if it was good sense.

Dominance and power sure, but not control of the narrative, it's still a dragonride to Driftmark and dragonstone and a boatride back, longer if they have to assemble enough forces to seal off King's Landing. There's no stopping the story of the whole governing body being incinerated at the coronation from escaping King's Landing before Rhaenyra can do anything, nor the ravens with Otto's messages from making it too their intended destination before anything else arrives. As powerful as the dragons are, they are still a singular unwieldy creatures. They can't seal off cities or stop the spread of information.

[EggBlue]

17 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

Her reaction is equal to her emotional reluctance. She has schizophrenia so she responds with her emotional position which is that she loves Rhaenyra.  

But both her behavior and her thought process are in line with the conspiracy so this surprise does not manifest itself into any perceivable change of course making it fundamentally superfluous rather than idiotic. It would be idiotic if she tried to stop the coup she herself was planning for over a decade, that is not what is happening. 

She (Alicent) needs to be surprised to go through with Crowning Aegon as king because she is doing it as a dutiful wife, just as she had opposed Rhaenyra incessantly for her lack of duty.  

I wouldn't know much about the clinical diagnosis of schizophrenia. but frankly, I doubt it was intentional on the writers' part to make Alicent anything but a sympathetic antagonist. whether a schizophrenia patient or a stupid naïve girl without agency,  she has become an incompetent villain which is just boring. 

[DMC]

42 minutes ago, IFR said:

We know from the story that is written that attempts are made on their lives by the Greens in the path of civil war.

Exactly.  We know.  She doesn't.  It would by funny if it wasn't so sad that you think the "rational" decision in order to secure her granddaughters' safety is to incinerate a dozen people that represent virtually all the political institutions of Westeros - including two or three objectively innocent people.  For Rhaenys, the war hasn't even started yet.  It's basic common sense that such an aggressive action that would be deplored by all of her society would put her family in more danger. 

And I don't know why you're calling this "meta narrative commentary."  It's obviously hypothetical and speculation, but again that's the point.  For Rhaenys, all of this is hypothetical and speculation.  And from her perspective, it'd be extremely naive of her to expect the nobility of Westeros to accept Rhaenyra - a woman - stepping over the ashes of her family to take the throne and for there not to be dire consequences.

50 minutes ago, IFR said:

A scenario where multiple factions have nukes is entirely different than a scenario where only one faction has nukes. You hypothesize that the world would not respond with nukes if the US employed nukes against Iraq. I agree.

  If you agree then I don't see what you're whining about.  Obviously you aren't going to find a perfect real world analogy.  Especially a modern one.  The point is the reason the US doesn't use nuclear weapons since the Cold War has less to do with MAD than it does with legitimacy.  

[IFR]

@DMC

I mean, what more can be said? We disagree. I do not find your points at all persuasive, and it seems you are not moved by my points.

Also, you may not be aware of it, but calling my remarks "delusional" and accusing me of "whining" is aggressive language. I appreciate that you're invested in this conversation, but this conversation should be fun, not hostile. 

We're having a nerdy discussion about some minor scene in a pretty decent tv show. It's not worth being passionate about.

At any rate, I personally have become bored of the topic, and seeing how we are at an impasse, it was fun while it lasted, but that's it for me. I look forward to future discussions!

[DMC]

9 minutes ago, IFR said:

Also, you may not be aware of it, but calling my remarks "delusional" and accusing me of "whining" is aggressive language. I appreciate that you're invested in this conversation, but this conversation should be fun, not hostile. 

We all have fun in our own ways.  I used the "aggressive" language of "delusional" and "whining" because I find your arguments to be delusional and whiny.  And btw, you should realize you've used similar aggressive - and hyperbolic - language to describe how "dumb" both Rhaenys and the writers are, and the clear implication in such a discussion is that applies to those defending their decisions.  And no, I'm not at all passionate nor invested about Rhaenys' decision.

[The Bard of Banefort]

6 hours ago, Ran said:

I'm not always on board with Franich's takes (he pushed Star Trek V to the #4 spot in the Screen Drafts Star Trek Super Draft, the madman!), but that was a very interesting paragraph he wrote:

OTOH, asking these shows to be more like Primal is weird. In animation, the cost difference between an animated frame showing intense action and an animate frame showing a dude and a dinosaur walking in a desert is very low. In live action shows, not so much.

@RumHam

She doesn't know what the dreams are. They're just things that strike her fancy or capture her attention and she spouts them off at random because she's neurodivergent. The actual dreams aren't flashes of the actual events, they are symbolic or metaphorical and are very much up to interpretation.

Yep, that was the part that caught my eye too. I didn’t feel enough of a connection to Rhaenyra and Alicent’s friendship for their falling out to feel like the great tragedy the show was aiming for—Alicent was always clearly subservient to Rhaenyra, who never seemed to care much how her supposed best friend was handling things—and by making them both pawns and victims, they’ve been sapped of a lot of their vitality. There’s a reason people found characters like Cersei so engaging.

[IFR]

11 minutes ago, DMC said:

We all have fun in our own ways.  I used the "aggressive" language of "delusional" and "whining" because I find your arguments to be delusional and whiny.  And btw, you should realize you've used similar aggressive - and hyperbolic - language to describe how "dumb" both Rhaenys and the writers are, and the clear implication in such a discussion is that applies to those defending their decisions.  And no, I'm not at all passionate nor invested about Rhaenys' decision.

 Have it your way. If you feel like insulting people is the best way to approach these conversations, there's nothing I can do to stop you.

I think writing can be dumb without the writers or those who enjoy the writing being dumb. I've expressed this sentiment many times before, and I am happy to express it again here and now. I don't think you're dumb for liking what occurred in this show - so there you have an explicit statement to override anything you may have inferred from my words.

Edit: I'm pretty sure my only personal comment about the writers is when I said that I found Sara Hess to be a perfectly capable writer.

Edited October 19, 2022 by IFR

[Adaneth]

I thought HBO had learned at least one big lesson from D&D. Apparently not. Le sigh!

Stop with the "Inside Episode" crap, and stop talking with the media after each episode. You only make things worse. If you need to explain scenes, character's motivation etc., for every episode, you ain't doing a good job. 

Use the "Inside Episode" to show other aspects of the show, like directing, costume design, settings and locations. You know, production and people behind the screen, which have always done a great job.

Edited October 19, 2022 by Adaneth

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, IFR said:

I think writing can be dumb without the writers or those who enjoy the writing being dumb. I've expressed this sentiment many times before, and I am happy to express it again here and now. I don't think you're dumb for liking what occurred in this show - so there you have an explicit statement to override anything you may have inferred from my words.

....just as I can find your arguments to be dumb without thinking you're dumb.  You're really splitting hairs here to try and shame me and act like your argumentation is morally superior.

[IFR]

Just now, DMC said:

....just as I can find your arguments to be dumb without thinking you're dumb.  You're really splitting hairs here to try and shame me and act like your argumentation is morally superior.

I assure you I'm not. If you want to discuss this further we can take it to DM. I promise that I do not want to shame or embarrass you in any way. 

I like to have fun with these conversations. I have no problem castigating writing, but I make it a point to have any derision be explicitly about writing. I have no interest in being personally antagonistic.

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

12 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I didn’t feel enough of a connection to Rhaenyra and Alicent’s friendship for their falling out to feel like the great tragedy the show was aiming for.

The fact that several important scenes, including Rhaenyra and Alicent having a fight after Viserys announced the marriage, certainly didn't help.

Edited October 19, 2022 by Takiedevushkikakzvezdy

[Adaneth]

3 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

The fact that several important scenes, including Rhaenyra and Alicent having a fight after Viserys announced the marriage, certainly didn't help.

Did we ever had a scene where Rhaenyra asked Alicent how was she coping, or feeling, after she got married? I don't mean right after it but during this whole time. I don't remember it and I could perfectly have missed it. I haven't re-watched the episodes. I might re-watch the whole season after it ends.

[Adaneth]

7 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I came across a critique of HOTD and ROP from EW. Interestingly, it also suggests that the writers seem afraid to make Alicent and Rhaenyra more morally ambiguous:

https://ew.com/tv/tv-reviews/house-of-the-dragon-rings-of-power-finales-review/

Thanks for this. His review on Rings of Cringe cracked me up. 

[butterweedstrover]

2 hours ago, EggBlue said:

I wouldn't know much about the clinical diagnosis of schizophrenia. but frankly, I doubt it was intentional on the writers' part to make Alicent anything but a sympathetic antagonist. whether a schizophrenia patient or a stupid naïve girl without agency,  she has become an incompetent villain which is just boring. 

Oh, I agree it was not their intention. 

But I don't see how a competent villain would be that much better. Why not make her a morally grey character who thinks she is doing the right thing instead of a power hungry usurper?  

The idea that she could be just pure evil unravels all the relationship build it up between her and Rhaenyra and the conflicted nature Alicent (should) be facing. As of now Rhaenyra is completely passive/diplomatic in reaction to this betrayal so there does not seem to be any emotions/passions at her end regarding Alicent. 

Granted, what they did was the worst option possible. 

Edited October 19, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[butterweedstrover]

46 minutes ago, Adaneth said:

I thought HBO had learned at least one big lesson from D&D. Apparently not. Le sigh!

Stop with the "Inside Episode" crap, and stop talking with the media after each episode. You only make things worse. If you need to explain scenes, character's motivation etc., for every episode, you ain't doing a good job. 

Use the "Inside Episode" to show other aspects of the show, like directing, costume design, settings and locations. You know, production and people behind the screen, which have always done a great job.

This is of course the right answer. Regardless of how well they fleshed out the characters in the show (which in my opinion they didn't) any narrative story is open to interpretation by the audience, the writers should not be there telling you explicitly what is going on psychologically/emotionally.  

But, there insight also kinda sucks which makes it obviously bad. 

[butterweedstrover]

7 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I came across a critique of HOTD and ROP from EW. Interestingly, it also suggests that the writers seem afraid to make Alicent and Rhaenyra more morally ambiguous:

https://ew.com/tv/tv-reviews/house-of-the-dragon-rings-of-power-finales-review/

I don't know how someone can watch episode 9 and call Alicent boring. 

She's an absolute lunatic. She forgoes any affection towards her best friend in a relentless pursuit of the throne even at the expense of her children which were the primary reason she was willing to betray Rhaenyra in the first place.

Now she is doing it out of spite since Rhaenyra is (supposedly) an undedicated wife who skirts the rules. And as the show tells us Alicent is a dedicated wife. So she responds not just be rejecting any olive branch that might secure the safety of her family but also by becoming an undedicated wife to Viserys to manipulate his authority against his own daughter. 

Then she in episode 8 disowns her own son and mends ties with Rhaenyra all for sake of being a dedicated wife (which she is remined of) and then because she is once more a dedicated wife she must listen to Viserys and put the son she had just earlier that morning disowned onto the iron throne at the expense of her best friend. 

And she doesn't even love Rhaenyra at this point, she just made the emotional decision that they are friends to suite her need to be a good wife. But she also needs to betray her to be a good wife. So she goes into the council meeting with the singular determination to both see Aegon on the throne and to not betray Rhaenyra. 

How can someone watch her enter the council chamber and be outraged at learning there was a conspiracy against her 'best friend'' who should have spent over a decade trying to destroy without hesitation and not laugh. 

It's hilarious, and not boring at all. And then she goes along with the plan anyways because her emotions are completely unrelated to her behavior and self-perception. There is nothing boring there. 

Rhaenyra, yeah Rhaenyra has the personality of rock. Nothing going on there, completely dull. She doesn't even care that for the past decade her best friend is trying to destroy her reputation. She just shrugs it off as if this were all coming from a complete stranger. 

I mean she is now unambiguously the good guy so I suppose the showrunners got what they wanted. 

[Adaneth]

30 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

But, there insight also kinda sucks which makes it obviously bad. 

It does. Which is why I don't watch them anymore, after GOT. I heard about her words by chance on YT. You just can't avoid them, even when you try. lol

But really, if the creators and producers want to say something, HBO can make a 1 hour program at the end of each season. No need to explain every single episode. 

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

31 minutes ago, Adaneth said:

But really, if the creators and producers want to say something, HBO can make a 1 hour program at the end of each season. No need to explain every single episode. 

I don't know if it's true or not, but someone said that a scene like Rhaenys' escape on her dragon had to be agreed upon by everyone in the writers room and the showrunners, since it's an expensive scene to film. So Sara Hess is the one who get all the hate, when in fact a lot of people signed off on it.

Edited October 19, 2022 by Takiedevushkikakzvezdy