[Spoilers] Episode 110 Discussion

[Khloey]

7 hours ago, Leticia Stark said:

From “Dany kinda forgot about the ships” to “Aemond chased Lucerys but didn’t want to kill him, it was an accident ”

Both can't be compared. The first one is an obvious mistake. The second is very plausible. It could have been intentionnel or it could have been accidental. They decided to go for the last one. It's a choice but it's a perfectly plausible choice. Rather than Dany being in a war and forgetting about the ennemy's fleet.

You can desagree with that choice, but don't compare it to a stupid scene, that wasn't stupid (Unlike their take on Laenor's fate).

[nara]

5 hours ago, jjcha314 said:

On that weird Daemon-Vermithor scene, what are we supposed to take away from that? 

I thought that Daemon was trying to see if he could bond with an additional dragon—kinda like fighting with a sword in. Each hand.

[frenin]

9 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

In fact, I'd say that now having two major plot points rely on some kind of accident or misunderstanding (Luke's death and Viserys' last words) was a bad move. It's the sort of thing that happens in sitcoms, not political dramas.

It's the sort of thing that happens in tragedies tho. And the Dance is nothing but a tragedy.

 

9 hours ago, nara said:

Honestly, not a fan of making it an accident. They did the same with Alicent misunderstanding Viserys’s dying words and is a cop out.  Aemond holding a grudge for his lost eye and taking an opportunity to kill Luke is in keeping with his personality (and not totally unreasonable). 

To each... Aemond killing his nephew always seemed a step too far. Show Aemond can be a bully but he certainly has two braincells in him, unlike his book counterpart. Him taking out Luke is overkill.

 

8 hours ago, Winterfell is Burning said:

I don't think they're whitewashing anyone- as pointed out numerous times, the book is based on conflicting and in many cases biased stories. It also just makes more sense to have the characters keep escalating in awfulness as the war wages on. Season 1 Aemond won't be a ruthless murderer spreading terror throughout the Riverlands, s03 will be.

I mean, it's very much whitewashing.

I've come to like it better tho. Book Aemond is a moron and psycho and Alicent seems more approachable, even if she's been reduced to a victim.

There are several accounts on details that are biased and conflicted, there are many others that aren't, Aemond asking the leave to chase Luke being burned with the sickest burns of all, "you don't have balls".

 

 

 

[Fool Stands On Giant’s Toe]

16 minutes ago, Mark Antony said:

a petty idiot who chased his nephew out in the skies to try and take his eye

The direction should of been AemonD pushing back against his bullying as a child against his cousins. After being inpowered by his half dragon soul, I mean demon soul, doh! I meant Daemon soul…I don’t know anymore.

but yea I agree. Grinning lunatic or expressing pent up rage from a childhood tramua or repressed feelings. Pick a character direction.

reminds me of the Rocky Horror Picture Show    
 “He didn’t like me! He never liked me!”

Edited October 24, 2022 by Fool Stands On Giant’s Toe

[nara]

4 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

 

• Otto certainly seems to love suicidal visits to Dragonstone's bridge. I don't think it's very realistic to have him there. Maester Orwyle would make much more sense. Even if Rhaenyra was unwilling to harm Alicent's father, it's not like her only options were killing him or leaving him go free. Why not taking all of them as hostages? At the very least made them stay until she decides on how to answer to Alicent's terms.

I thought it underscored that the norm is to treat envoys well—even if they are jackasses like Otto—in the lead up to sending Jace and Luke as envoys.

Plus, they make use of one of their better known actors—which is efficient. But I agree that story wise it makes more sense to have Orwyle do it.

[Khloey]

6 hours ago, Minsc said:

Does the show do anything to portray those actions as being horrible in eyes of the viewers?

Why would they do that ? Of course modern viewers wouldn't see her as a whore. Maybe a little stupid not to take a lover with silver hair like her to father her kids but definitly not a whore. Otherwise every male character in Westeros is also a whore.

I never though once she was a whore reading the book.

[Adaneth]

9 hours ago, nara said:

Honestly, not a fan of making it an accident. They did the same with Alicent misunderstanding Viserys’s dying words and is a cop out.  Aemond holding a grudge for his lost eye and taking an opportunity to kill Luke is in keeping with his personality (and not totally unreasonable). 

Alicent misunderstanding Viserys’s dying words was BS. I didn't care for that and I didn't believe it for a second. Aemond scene was totally credible. But two "misunderstandings" are a bit too much for me. Which is a pity because I like the way they went with Aemond. Alicent scene shouldn't have been there. 

[Fool Stands On Giant’s Toe]

I never thought I would ever be concerned nor even interested in who may be or who may not be a (the) Whore.

Thanks GRRM! This is my life now…judgmental and prudent. Keeping up with the Kim Targashyens.

Edited October 24, 2022 by Fool Stands On Giant’s Toe

[frenin]

7 hours ago, Minsc said:

How has making Aegon a rapist that watches blood sports involving children softening him up?

He is insecure about taking the throne, he literally hides away from it. Offering to be sent away to never come back.

He literally states that his father never wanted him to be King yadda yadda yadda.

Yes, he is a rapist. Yes, there is much more than that going on for him.

[dsjj251]

5 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

Things that I didn't like:

• Erryk claims that Otto's ship arrives at Dragonstone with a three-headed green dragon banner. I would have preferred to keep the golden dragon from the source. Also, I feel it's a little too early for any faction to develop a separate emblem, not to mention to produce them. How long does it takes to sew one of those?

 

A green dragon makes more sense, does the book even explain why the dragon is golden(is it meant to represent Sunfyre ?) ?????

 

5 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

Are we supposed to assume that Erryk jumped on the black bandwagon without saying a word to his brother? I'll add the Cargyll twins to the list of sadly underdeveloped stories.

 

I dont understand why keeping your original oath is seem as the surprising thing

5 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

• Rhaenyra mentions that Jeyne Arryn was her mother's cousin. I don't think that's consistent with the few hints we have in FiB. Aemma was the daughter of Lord Rodrik, who had elder sons. The most logical scenario would be for lord Jeyne's father (a Lord of the Eyre) being one of those sons, making Aemma Jeyne's half-aunt. In order to Aemma be Jeyne's cousin, all of Rodrik's sons hsould have died, and then the succession bypass Aemma, which a Targaryen king wouldn't allow..

 

 

Rodrik's sons and Daella( Aemma's mother) are brothers and sister.

Aemma would be their children's first cousin. Not aunt. Aemma would only be their aunt if she had a older brother, and as we know Daella died after the one child. 

Edited October 24, 2022 by dsjj251

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

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 guess now we know what it was.

[frenin]

7 hours ago, Minsc said:

Isn't the only person that suggest that about Aegon is Mushroom that easily least reliable source and who wasn't even in King's Landing at the time.

Eustace never contradicts Mushroom, he just says that the girl is the daughter of a wealthy merchant.

 

[Fool Stands On Giant’s Toe]

12 minutes ago, frenin said:

Yes, he is a rapist. Yes, there is much more than that going on for him.

Are you acknowledging that there was more going on in that scene?  
Or. 
He’s a rapist that has a lot going on for him? Like a crown and kingdom and stress, family trouble?

Edited October 24, 2022 by Fool Stands On Giant’s Toe

[frenin]

2 minutes ago, Fool Stands On Giant’s Toe said:

Are you acknowledging that there was more going on in that scene?  
Or. 
He’s a rapist that has a lot going on for him? Like a crown and kingdom and stress, family trouble?

No, I'm saying than there's much more to the character tham him being a rapist and an asshole.

Unlie his book counterpart.

Even after being a rapist he's much more humanized than no one could realistically hoped him to be.

[butterweedstrover]

7 hours ago, DMC said:

 She goes to a brothel with Daemon and is seduced by him. 

No one saw this as a negative thing and it does not besmirch her character, because it doesn't go anywhere. And even if it did it was clear Daemon isn't some random guy but a person she has deep feelings for and trusts implicitly.

7 hours ago, DMC said:

 She seduces and sleeps with Cole. 

And rejects him. A big part of the implication in the book is that she wants Sir Criston who chooses Alicent over her. In the show it is made clear Rhaenyra rejects him.

7 hours ago, DMC said:

She - depicted much more openly than in the books - has three bastards. 

Which is explained as a result of Laenor's inability to perform. There we can neither blame her or deem this as sexually promiscuous. She needs children and she goes to only one other man for all three.  

7 hours ago, DMC said:

The only thing in the books not in the show is Mushroom's account of Daemon and himself "training" her, which always sounded over the top and, even if it were true, not worth showing.  

But Mushroom's story's were meant to cast a negative light on Rhaenyra. They were suppose to show her as self-indulgent, sexually demanding, and vengeful. 

When she screams after hearing the news of Aegon's ascension it is a sign of anger and rage. She does not consider peace, but war. Because again she was never explicitly shown to be anything like what the show depicts her as: kind, soft of heart, reluctant for power, modest (no seriously), and loyal. There is no serious counter-narrative showing any of these things. 

My point is, the way in which it (supposedly) implements Mushroom's version does not tarnish Rhaenyra's character. She comes off as pure and perfect in a way the book never suggested. 

6 hours ago, C.T. Phipps said:

I think everyone knows that the description is Westeros' insulting perception of her. Basically, Mushroom draws a horrible picture of her by the standards of the time and the show goes with that.

But it literally doesn't. The horrible picture isn't there because the context of her infidelity, her seduction, or anything else does not translate into a promiscuous women besot by jealously and demanding of war. The context of these actions are made in such a way that Rhaenyra's actions are above question as is her unwavering morality.   

[sifth]

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

[butterweedstrover]

7 hours ago, DMC said:

No.  Does Martin do anything to portray those actions as being horrible in the eyes of the readers?

Yes, potentially and directly. Rhaenyra does not come off as a pure and forgiving saint. She can comes off as selfish, sexually demanding, jealous, and mad. 

He makes it seem Cole rejects Rhaenyra for Alicent. He makes it seem Rhaenyra is jealous of Alicent or at the least possessing of anger towards her step-mother. He makes it seem that the bastards are a result of infidelity and a lack of concern for the rules. 

In the show she has no rivalry with Alicent. She shows nothing but grace and forgiveness even when Alicent is actively trying to destroy her. She has bastards when left with no other choice. She rejects Cole, not the other way around. In the book she was the one who in her entitlement demands Vaemond be killed for telling the truth. She is the one that screams on news of the usurpation and can think of nothing but war and vengeance.    

The show's decision to make her blameless and free of any fault isn't a creation of the book. He portrays her sexual escapades not as a women embracing her freedoms but that of an overweight daughter competing with her over-attractive step mother. There is jealousy involved, anger, and violence. 

In the show all of this is excised from her. You can stick your head in the sand and deny it but it will always be true.

[dsjj251]

32 minutes ago, Adaneth said:

Alicent misunderstanding Viserys’s dying words was BS. I didn't care for that and I didn't believe it for a second. Aemond scene was totally credible. But two "misunderstandings" are a bit too much for me. Which is a pity because I like the way they went with Aemond. Alicent scene shouldn't have been there. 

I forgot to mention this 2 weeks ago, but this is the perfect time. 

When GOT Season 7 leaked almost 3 months before the premiere , we got the actual internal monologue /thoughts of the characters because it was written down(scene leaks were proven true, so I assume the internal stuff is true too). It said Tyrion was in love with Dany and so on and so forth. 

Well, because we now know the leaks for this season of HOTD were true, and that they filmed out of order and supposedly the inner working of the filming were leaked, do we believe the reddit thread ?  That this is the original version of the script and that the rewrite was filmed and footage lost ?

I tried to find the thread and cant, but it basically said when Viserys is dying, he thinks he is talking to Aemma about Baelon. And he basically repeats the "I saw our son wearing the conqueror's crown ....dragons roaring" line and that is why he is crowned the way he is.  But that this was the second shoot after rewrites and the footage was lost and they couldnt film a 3rd time so they just left it in. 

 

That misunderstanding would make sense.

Edited October 24, 2022 by dsjj251

[Takiedevushkikakzvezdy]

10 hours ago, Ingelheim said:

What's your take on Aemond not wanting to kill Luke and losing control of Vhagar?

To me it's the most significant change they've made to the book story, even more than Alicent's.

I don't mind it per se, but I don't understand why Aemond kept chasing Luke if he didn't mean to kill him.

[butterweedstrover]

7 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

He's protective of both Alicent

He is?

7 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

and Helaena

Sure, but I also think part that is wanting what his brother has, reinforcing him as lacking in any loyalty to his own brother's claim. 

7 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

, is compensating for childhood insecurities, and is diligent in his studies.

I don't consider any of these good traits morally speaking. 

7 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

That's more than what the books gave us.

Yeah, he is also pretty awful in the book. But I don't remember him being prepared to betray his own brother (something that if we were going for similarities to Daemon he would at least have been loyal to).