[Spoilers] Episode 110 Discussion

[Winterfell is Burning]

6 hours ago, ShadowKitteh said:

Makes complete sense in the show:

• Aegon confesses to Aemond in Ep 7 at Laena’s funeral that he has no interest in Helaena whatsoever, and Aemond responds he’d happily do his duty if he was the one who’d been betrothed to her.
• What she says about Aegon in her toast to Baela and Rhaena at the dinner in Ep 8, regarding marriage, “Mostly he just ignores you… except when he’s really drunk.” Sounds like a straight up confession how there’s little to no chance they’ve ever had sex.
• Her reaction to Otto asking her, “He’s not in his rooms?” in Ep 9 and-
• The way she and Aemond look at each other when he walks into that room in the same scene after Otto’s exit.

It also makes complete sense for his reaction after he realizes just how much damage he’s done and the ramifications going forward of hanging onto his animosity towards Luc at the end of Ep 10.

I would LOVE it if that’s the direction the show is going.

You're overthinking this: her saying Aegon mostly ignores her when he's drunk doesn't mean they never had sex- pretty sure Aegon would notice and care his wife is getting pregnant without they ever sleeping together 

[dsjj251]

9 hours ago, RumHam said:

I feel like they should have introduced the idea that they don't have full control over the dragons before this. There was Visery's speech in the first episode but I didn't take that literally.

I kind of like that it wasn't Aemond's intention to murder his nephew and that it just got out of hand. I can buy that dragons aren't used to fighting other dragons and share their riders animosities but not the self control to not straight up try to murder each other.

I mean, Dany never had all that much control over Drogon, he  did his own thing, and the whole " a dragon is not a slave " thing. 

[Corvinus85]

So my biggest annoyance with the show is that after one full season we weren't given promised in-universe explanation as to why the dragon on the Targaryen sigil has 4 legs. I'm pretty sure Condal said we would.

[butterweedstrover]

7 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I mean, on these forums, the sheer volume of people calling her a fool and incompetent for endangering her claim through her actions is without limit.

I mean, besides none of these foolish decisions having resurfaced in the plot (Rhaenyra still gets Corlys full support without doing anything despite the death of both Laenor and Vaemond). Her bastards haven't actually been a deal breaker for anyone, and it is not like that was her fault. 

But more specifically, and you can get out from under this no matter how hard you try, she has never done anything morally questionable. Ned Stark also made mistakes but that didn't besmirch his moral character. Rhaenyra is even greater than Ned, she does not sully the name of her enemies with foul language, she is never angry at her best friend for trying to destroy her but always forgiving, she loves her sons and her sons are perfect boys raised in the language of peace (making the whole "the rivalry lives on through the children" think even dumber). 

Try as you might none of her perfections are true to the book, it was just an invention that made this show a whole lot worse. 

[Adaneth]

6 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

He makes it seem Cole rejects Rhaenyra for Alicent. 

Is that a clear thing? I'm asking because I really don't remember. But I always had the feeling that Rhaenyra might've rejected him, at some point, because he's very much set against her and it feels too much butthurt going on with him. It could be that he genuinely did thought that she was a terrible choice as a Queen though.

[dsjj251]

2 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

I mean, besides none of these foolish decisions having resurfaced in the plot (Rhaenyra still gets Corlys full support without doing anything despite the death of both Laenor and Vaemond). Her bastards haven't actually been a deal breaker for anyone, and it is not like that was her fault. 

But more specifically, and you can get out from under this no matter how hard you try, she has never done anything morally questionable. Ned Stark also made mistakes but that didn't besmirch his moral character. Rhaenyra is even greater than Ned, she does not sully the name of her enemies with foul language, she is never angry at her best friend for trying to destroy her but always forgiving, she loves her sons and her sons are perfect boys raised in the language of peace (making the whole "the rivalry lives on through the children" think even dumber). 

Try as you might none of her perfections are true to the book, it was just an invention that made this show a whole lot worse. 

The problem with your argument is that all the same things happen in the book.  So again, you are mad at GRRM's writing rather than any liberties the show writers took. 

[dsjj251]

4 minutes ago, Adaneth said:

Is that a clear thing? I'm asking because I really don't remember. But I always had the feeling that Rhaenyra might've rejected him, at some point, because he's very much set against her and it feels too much butthurt going on with him. It could be that he genuinely did thought that she was a terrible choice as a Queen though.

Yea, the book makes it seem like Cole switched sides by his choice, it just never says if that is by him being angry, or simply choosing Alicent

Edited October 24, 2022 by dsjj251

[Adaneth]

27 minutes ago, sifth said:

So season 2 will start with Blood and Cheese, it seems.

I'm still waiting for Rhaenyra's reply to Otto. So, I'm hoping it will start with: "Tell my half-brother I will have my throne or his head."  

Edited October 24, 2022 by Adaneth

[Adaneth]

4 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

Yea, the book makes it seem like Cole switched sides by his choice, it just never says if that is by him being angry, or simply choosing Alicent

Okay, yeah, that's how I remembered it. Both makes sense to me. But I always felt a bit suspicious in regards to his animosity towards Rhaenyra. As I said though, he could genuinely have a low opinion about her.

[Lady Anna]

I absolutely loved it. Best of the season for me, probably.

I do prefer this part of the story - the second half of the season - much more and it delivered. Honestly, if they had omitted the first 5 episodes, and made the other 5 into 8 or 10 episodes, I think a lot of issues on the show could have been resolved, namely regarding the supporting characters and plot points that are very undercooked or were quickly dealt with and forgotten, and reduce the amount of time skips/actor changes in such a short amount of time.

Either way, I felt they did a good job with this season.

Edited October 24, 2022 by Lady Anna

[Winterfell is Burning]

5 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

Only if you go with the most egregious versions of the rumors provided by the different sources. And again, most of our sources are biased against him to begin with.

What are the evil deeds that we are sure that Daemon committed? Whoring and gambling? Making an tasteless joke about her nephew's death? Slaying Laena's bethroted in a duel?

The show's version of Daemon is not someone that would be described as "made of light and darkness in equal parts." Is not someone that Laena Velaryon or anyone else would have been happily married with. They have invented new evil deeds for him (such as killing Rhea) and have cut anything that could have made him look good.

I think impetuous, ill-tempered and moody would have been more interesting that outright psycho.

They had murder Rhea because they didn't have him murder Laenor. Which, yes, he clearly did in the book.

 

[Adaneth]

17 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

I mean, Dany never had all that much control over Drogon, he  did his own thing, and the whole " a dragon is not a slave " thing. 

Yeah, I think people did have a vague idea about that, so this isn't totally out of the blue. But I do think they are doing a much better job with the Dragons in this show. In GOT, except for Drogon, the other two were just there as extras.

[butterweedstrover]

7 hours ago, Minsc said:

I saying don't use Mushroom's obviously unreliable account for Aegon.  He still be a shitty individual without making him a rapist and such which just makes him completely unsympathetic. 

Well, viewers have to know the Greens are evil because otherwise they might be emotionally conflicted watching the two sides go at it. 

7 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Aegon II has always been completely unsympathetic. 

Sure, whatever. But having the potentially sympathetic people around him be the cause of his despicable behavior and then putting him on the throne anyways makes them all complicit in the evil. And they didn't need to make him a rapist who his own mother disowns right before putting him on the throne. 

7 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

It was Helena

Helaena is now a cryptic quest giver whose saving grace is that she makes fun of her own family and implicitly provides legitimacy to the blacks (like outing Aegon at the toast and dancing with Jacerys). 

7 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

, her children

They're babies, they are sympathetic in the same way a puppy is sympathetic. There is nothing going on there but emotional manipulation. There characters don't have fundamentally sound motivations that make them sympathetic. 

7 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

, and Daeron

Not even in it. 

7 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

who were sympathetic on the Greens. Fuck, Aemond is a war criminal even by Westerosi standards and he's more sympathetic than the way Aegon II was. 

Yes, so the Greens should all be the worse to the absolute max and the Blacks should be made (unlike the book) to be filled with unstoppable forgiveness that would make the Buddha blush. Her boys always turn the other cheek when insulted, always sue for peace, and like their mother are level headed and clam. 

One side with no reason for wanting the throne and deploying explicitly awful methods vs. another sided with every reason for wanting the throne but not a shred of vice in their souls isn't an interesting conflict.  

7 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I'm confused at the idea the show should go out and make him sympathetic when he was never written as anything remotely resembling it.

 

The show deciding to make him a rapist who is disowned by his own mother before ascending to the throne kind of ruins the dynamic they were going for.  

Meanwhile Rhaenyra was absolutely changed for the better despite never being written as a forgiving, peaceful, calm, and beautiful queen who can do no wrong. Yet they decided to go that direction so they might as well have softened his character slightly, but nah...

7 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

Call me weird but, logically speaking, I think you can be a rapist and still be sympathetic at the same time. 

Nope. That is called tragicbackstoryTM 

What is does is offer past trauma to explain the moral depravity of the current self. It does not add nuance to the motivations, but more importantly, the person to blame, if that is the case, for him becoming a rapist is Alicent. 

Which makes the Greens look even worse. 

7 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

Just like you can be a murderer who is also sympathetic. 

True, but Aegon is not sympathetic in this case. He is not raping women for any reason other than the fact that he is an asshole. Oh, and by the end he wants to be king anyways. 

7 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

Two things can be true at once.

Not in this case. 

7 hours ago, GeorgeIAF said:

I always thought that Aemond is an idiot for starting the war and killing Luke for a squabble about his missing eye. I thought that starting a war when Rhaenyra was ready to negotiate was an idiotic thing to do. I really like that in the show it as all by accident and not controlling his dragon, this is a very good change in my opinion !

At the very least, yes, I agree this was a good change. 

Edited October 24, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[Lady Anna]

10 hours ago, Ingelheim said:

It definitely resonates with Viserys' statement on dragons earlier this season, "a power men should have never trifled with". I think it also gives both Aemond and the Dance a complexity it didn't have before.

Luke's death is more tragic because he actually had escaped Vhagar, it was Arrax who attacked her. Dragons are fearless and will fight to the death, not matter the cost. Vhagar must have been so offended by the little dragon even daring to attack her that she said: f*ck this.

On the other hand, it keeps on with the whitewashing of certaing Green characters, like Aemond and Alicent. Which I like, but I can also understand certain people will have problem with it

Agree with this completely. Now that the season is over, I see how the writers wanted to convey all of this, in a more humanized, complex, tragic way than the book. I, for one, totally support it.

[butterweedstrover]

39 minutes ago, Adaneth said:

Is that a clear thing? I'm asking because I really don't remember. But I always had the feeling that Rhaenyra might've rejected him, at some point, because he's very much set against her and it feels too much butthurt going on with him. It could be that he genuinely did thought that she was a terrible choice as a Queen though.

Keep a few things in mind: In the book Alicent and Rhaenyra are sworn enemies in a deep rivalry. The book makes clear Rhaenyra has grown fat and ugly while Alicent is as beautiful as ever. 

Then Cole jumps ship from Rhaenyra to Alicent. The impression I got was he was rejecting her, adding fuel to the hatred shared between the Princess and the Queen.  

These are only impressions, but the show went out of its way to assure us Rhaenyra rejected him and Cole is just a bitter loser with no redeeming qualities. 

Edited October 24, 2022 by butterweedstrover

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

10 hours ago, Ingelheim said:

According to Ryan Condal on the Inside Episode, he didn't want to kill him, just scare him...

He chased him for a really long time, though. And he really seemed to want Luke's eye.

[Ingelheim]

7 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

He chased him for a really long time, though. And he really seemed to want Luke's eye.

That's my take on it; he was going for his eye. He probably thought Luke would stop flying and ask for mercy

[butterweedstrover]

18 minutes ago, dsjj251 said:

The problem with your argument is that all the same things happen in the book.  So again, you are mad at GRRM's writing rather than any liberties the show writers took. 

There is no such problem, and people like yourself need to stop sticking their heads in the sand. 

Rhaenyra is pure because she is not even touched with emotional vice. Emotional vice includes feelings of Anger, Rage, Vengeance, Selfishness, and Carnal Pleasures (more on this one last). 

Rhaenyra in the book has such vices. She despises her step-mother and revels in a deal of animosity towards her. Rhaenyra does not think to forgive Alicent nor mend ties. When on Dragonstone she does not consider peace, but war. She screams and demands for blood. Daemon is the one who calms her down, in the show she is the one with the ethereal calm calling it "Daemon's war" and reasoning with the men to take a leveled approach. 

In the show she is untainted by anger towards Alicent. Despite Alicent attempting to destroy her she is forgiving always and kind always. Her perfect children are shown (repeatedly) to reject the instigations of Aemond and Aegon calling for peace at every juncture due to their mother's influence. 

Martin depicts her as jealous, as angry, as sexually demanding, as physically unappealing, and as not above violent tendencies. Her sexual escapades aren't framed as female liberation, but as carnal desires invoking a sense of self-centered indulgence on her part. 

Rhaenyra's bastards, Vaemond, Laenor, etc. were all reframed in the show. She doesn't have Vaemond killed for speaking the truth. She doesn't have Laenor killed, and the bastards weren't a result of her infidelity but Laenor's infidelity. She is absolved of everything, and you can lie to yourself as much as you want but that is the truth. 

[Adaneth]

5 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Keep a few things in mind: In the book Alicent and Rhaenyra are sworn enemies in a deep rivalry. The book makes clear Rhaenyra has grown fat and ugly while Alicent is as beautiful as ever. 

Then Cole jumps ship from Rhaenyra to Alicent. The impression I got was he was rejecting her, adding fuel to the hatred shared between the Princess and the Queen.  

Yes, exactly. But that's why his hate towards Rhaenyra was suspicious to me. I mean, if I reject someone's advances I'm not angry towards them. Least of all butthurt. If anything, is the other way around. Unless, of course, he think she's bad and would make for a bad queen. 

Quote

 

These are only impressions, but the show went out of its way to assure as Rhaenyra rejected him and Cole is just a bitter loser with no redeeming qualities. 

 

I'm not crazy about book Cole either. But I do agree that show Cole is pathetic. I think they have done a poor job with him. Also, as someone mentioned a couple of days ago, it doesn't help that he hasn't changed one bit. He comes off as a sulking pretty boy with a very unpleasant personality. 

[Ingelheim]

By the way, I've said this quite a few times on Reddit already but I'm extremly doubtful they'll do Blood and Cheese as in the books.