HOTD Musings

[The Bard of Banefort]

1 hour ago, Annara Snow said:

They've neither made them virtuous nor boring. If "the show sucks because they didn't go with the in-universe's historians' misogynistic tropes where the women are all evil, crazy and catty to each other" reviews are an example of "good critiques", I don't want to know what the bad ones are 

I’m glad that you didn’t find the women on this show boring. Sadly, I did. (If it’s any consolation, I found most of the men underwhelming too, although at least there’s some potential for the younger guys in the seasons ahead). And there were plenty of different ways they could have written the characters without them being “evil, crazy and catty.” But this is what we were given, so I guess I’ll just have to live with that.

[Annara Snow]

2 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I’m glad that you didn’t find the women on this show boring. Sadly, I did. (If it’s any consolation, I found most of the men underwhelming too, although at least there’s some potential for the younger guys in the seasons ahead). And there were plenty of different ways they could have written the characters without them being “evil, crazy and catty.” But this is what we were given, so I guess I’ll just have to live with that.

For instance? I'd love to see your ideas of how the characters sjetched in F&B should've been writtenon HotD that would make them more fun but not evil, ctazy and catty.

[The Bard of Banefort]

58 minutes ago, Annara Snow said:

For instance? I'd love to see your ideas of how the characters sjetched in F&B should've been writtenon HotD that would make them more fun but not evil, ctazy and catty.

Okay, sure.

Both the books and show insist that Rhaenyra and Alicent are driven by a desire to protect their children. One change I hated was how Rhaenyra handled Vaemond. In the books, she dealt with him herself. In the show, she went running to daddy to save her from her own mistakes. I see no reason to change this besides making Rhaenyra look scared and helpless. In both cases, Daemon kills Vaemond. In both cases, Rhaenyra is complicit in something heinous in order to protect her sons. But in the books, Rhaenyra takes responsibility into her own hands. 

The showrunners decided that Larys needed to have a foot fetish. They could have had Alicent casually kick her shoes off around him to manipulate him (think Erin Brokovich). Instead we got her crawled up in fetal position like a wounded animal while Larys jacks off. She’s still dealing with the patriarchy either way—no dude would have to indulge Larys’ sexual whims to get what they want, and Alicent should realistically be pissed as hell about it. But whereas one scenario would at least allow her to maintain some dignity and control, the other turns her into an all-around victim. 

And as far as Mysaria goes, I just found the change silly. Even on the show, she was pimping out virgins at her brothel, but now she’s Karl Marx? Lol.

Edited March 27, 2023 by The Bard of Banefort

[Annara Snow]

3 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Okay, sure.

Both the books and show insist that Rhaenyra and Alicent are driven by a desire to protect their children. One change I hated was how Rhaenyra handled Vaemond. In the books, she dealt with him herself. In the show, she went running to daddy to save her from her own mistakes. I see no reason to change this besides making Rhaenyra look scared and helpless. In both cases, Daemon kills Vaemond. In both cases, Rhaenyra is complicit in something heinous in order to protect her sons. But in the books, Rhaenyra takes responsibility into her own hands. 

The showrunners decided that Larys needed to have a foot fetish. They could have had Alicent casually kick her shoes off around him to manipulate him (think Erin Brokovich). Instead we got her crawled up in fetal position like a wounded animal while Larys jacks off. She’s still dealing with the patriarchy either way—no dude would have to indulge Larys’ sexual whims to get what they want, and Alicent should realistically be pissed as hell about it. But whereas one scenario would at least allow her to maintain some dignity and control, the other turns her into an all-around victim. 

So the way to make the female characters less "boring" is to avoid showing them as victims, instead showing how they are in fact real empowered girlbosses...even when they have to give sexual favors in exchange for info,. God forbid we show women suffering under patriarchy, that turns people of, it's much cooler portray them as "empowered" seductresses, which is more "dignified" than being a puny victim. We also can't have women act more realistically in accordance with the different upbringing and expectations placed on them in a patriarchy- where they're reluctant to use direct violence, instead they should commit violence oprenly and directly like a girlboss, with no concern how that would be seen.

To each their own. I find your versions boring and tropey. And worst of all, Benioff-and-Weissy. I can see your Rhaenyra saying "I choose violemce" and your Alicent, played by Natalie Dormer, saying "I want to be the Queen!" 

(I'm not gonna comment on Mysaris because she hasn't bee n fully developed and don't know where they're going with her)

[The Bard of Banefort]

37 minutes ago, Annara Snow said:

So the way to make the female characters less "boring" is to avoid showing them as victims, instead showing how they are in fact real empowered girlbosses...even when they have to give sexual favors in exchange for info,. God forbid we show women suffering under patriarchy, that turns people of, it's much cooler portray them as "empowered" seductresses, which is more "dignified" than being a puny victim. We also can't have women act more realistically in accordance with the different upbringing and expectations placed on them in a patriarchy- where they're reluctant to use direct violence, instead they should commit violence oprenly and directly like a girlboss, with no concern how that would be seen.

To each their own. I find your versions boring and tropey. And worst of all, Benioff-and-Weissy. I can see your Rhaenyra saying "I choose violemce" and your Alicent, played by Natalie Dormer, saying "I want to be the Queen!" 

(I'm not gonna comment on Mysaris because she hasn't bee n fully developed and don't know where they're going with her)

I’m not sure how you got any of that out of my comment, but at this point I don’t think there’s anything I could say that wouldn’t piss you off. Judging by this thread, I’m not sure there’s anything any of us could say that would avoid that.

Quote

Benioff-and-Weissy 

Does this include the eight-figure salary? If so, then please, call me David 

[Annara Snow]

7 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I’m not sure how you got any of that out of my comment, but at this point I don’t think there’s anything I could say that wouldn’t piss you off. Judging by this thread, I’m not sure there’s anything any of us could say that would avoid that.

Does this include the eight-figure salary? If so, then please, call me David 

 Sorry, that part only happens if you're a nepo baby like Dave. Is your dad rich and influential?

[The Bard of Banefort]

WOTW is now saying that filming won’t start until the end of May. No idea why.

[Ran]

1 hour ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

WOTW is now saying that filming won’t start until the end of May. No idea why.

Not correct, according to someone who would definitively know.

Maybe they mean production in Spain has been pushed to late May from mid-May? Not impossible, I suppose, but overall production is starting "very soon" I was told just a couple of days ago by the person definitively in the know.

Edited March 28, 2023 by Ran

[The Bard of Banefort]

Yeah, it sounded a little off, but I figured I’d throw it out there.

[Lord Varys]

Sorry, Alicent Hightower being the terrified foot whore of Larys the Clubfoot is arguably the stupidest scenario the writers could come up with. The Alicent Hightower of the books is clearly a very shrewd and ambitious politician - no royal by birth, the simple daughter of a second son of a prestigious house, she did not only become queen but a queen who successfully ousted the chosen and anointed heir of her royal husband and replaced him with her own son. How cunning and capable she is we also see with her grand gestures during the war - her offer to call a Great Council, her calculated public humiliation in front of the Iron Throne, her later negotiations in the name of Aegon II. Those are no small feats at all, and while the show certainly had the liberty to move most of the maneuvering there to Otto and his cronies, they actually do not have the liberty to turn Alicent into a frightened pawn in the hands of Larys Strong. What they could have done is have Larys and Alicent start a thing before the moment in the show where Alicent comes into her own in episode 5.

If there is something Alicent Hightower as written by George never would have done, then whore herself out to Larys Strong in the manner depicted by the show. Anyone defending such a scenario clearly doesn't understand what queens are in a setting such as this, and what power they wield. Cersei shows us how this is done - you sleep with men to bind them to you, to turn them into your creatures. You don't do it to become a creature of the men.

As @The Bard of Banefort says - and I have said before - this scenario could have worked if Alicent had taken advantage of the foot freak there. Not the other way around. It would also be kind of measured - showing off your feet, allowing somebody to watch them, etc. isn't the same as sleeping around. But the way the show presented it Larys all but rapes Alicent there. She is pretty much as much at his mercy as she was earlier at Viserys'. And that she would never, ever be in an interaction with a man who doesn't even sit on the Small Council. This is just a joke.

And as a setting it really doesn't actually fit with them depicting Alicent as a mover and shaker during the succession struggle. Why would Rhaenys take the foot whore seriously? Why should we, the audience, take her seriously? She clearly isn't her own woman in this very episode when she interacts with Larys, so why should it matter that she has Aegon's person in the end? Can't the strong men take him from her again? If Larys had actual blackmail material on her things could be different while Viserys was still alive. But at the moment we are talking about here Alicent and Otto Hightower are per virtue of being the queen dowager and the Hand the most powerful people in KL. At least until a new monarch is proclaimed and crowned. The notion that this is the moment where a creature like Larys can push and force the queen to indulge his perversions is just utter nonsense. If Larys had the power to give Alicent she desperately wanted or needed then, perhaps, it could make sense. But that's not the case.

On the Vaemond incident I'd concede that the show scenario took away agency from Rhaenyra but I think the condensed version they went with also has a certain appeal, especially at setting up the two factions and the power the Greens have built at court - something they didn't show before. Also connecting Vaemond's attempted coup explicitly to the Greens was pretty good. But I admit that Viserys sitting stony faced on the throne and saying in a Palpatine-like voice 'YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!' before Larys Strong and his cronies cut out five tongues - and perhaps even more than that - in a big gory scene could have had a certain appeal. That could have shown the cost the Strong boys story had - even if the show wanted to go with it being an okay thing to do (which it clearly did).

[The Bard of Banefort]

Interesting news. Is this so they can stretch it out to four seasons instead of three?

https://deadline.com/2023/03/house-of-the-dragon-season-2-episode-count-season-3-greenlight-season-4-hbo-1235312044/

This article mentions a major battle being moved to S3. That has to be the Battle of the Gullet, right? If so, then we won’t see Rhaenyra take the Iron Throne next season. What will be the climax of S2 though?

Edited March 29, 2023 by The Bard of Banefort

[Annara Snow]

8 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Interesting news. Is this so they can stretch it out to four seasons instead of three?

https://deadline.com/2023/03/house-of-the-dragon-season-2-episode-count-season-3-greenlight-season-4-hbo-1235312044/

This article mentions a major battle being moved to S3. That has to be the Battle of the Gullet, right? If so, then we won’t see Rhaenyra take the Iron Throne next season. What will be the climax of S2 though?

"Stretch it out" is an odd word to use.

GRRM has been saying from the start that the show needs 4 seasons to tell the show properly, and that's certainly true unless they were planning to have season 2 and 3 have 12 or 13 episodes each, or to have a 10-episode season 2 and then a 13 or 16 episode season 4. Or have really, really extra-long episodes very often.

If they actually thought they might only get season 3 and not 4, then I'm 100% sure that Rhaenyra taking King's Landing was supposed to be the end of season 2. But now that's obviously going to happen in early season 3. I assume that's the major battle being moved.

And while I firmly believe that, at the very least, they need to do a full episode about the Hour of the Wolf and then at least an extra-long finale about the aftermath of the war and the fates of various characters (including Alicent's death, and preferably squeezing Viserys' return and reunion with Aegon somehow, even if they need to change the timeline or do a minor time skip just for that scene), even I don't see the events after Rhaenyra's death stretched out to last the entirety of season 4. It seems tricky what to have in season 3 and what in season 4. But if Rhaenyra doesn't take KL in season 2, and at this point it seems she won't, it's far less likely to have the Storming of the Dragonpit happen before early season 4.  It will certainly be tricky to decide how to divide season 3 and season 4. 

Edited March 29, 2023 by Annara Snow

[The Bard of Banefort]

4 minutes ago, Annara Snow said:

"Stretch it out" is an odd word to use.

GRRM has been saying from the start that the show needs 4 seasons to tell the show properly, and that's certainly true unless they were planning to have season 2 and 3 have 12 or 13 episodes each, or to have a 10-episode season 2 and then a 13 or 16 episode season 4. Or have really, really extra-long episodes very often.

If they actually thought they might only get season 3 and not 4, then I'm 100% sure that Rhaenyra taking King's Landing was supposed to be the end of season 2. But now that's obviously going to happen in early season 3. I assume that's the major battle being moved.

Assuming they don’t add subplots, a four-season plan would mean losing almost the entire main cast by S4. Unless they moved the Battle Above the Gods Eye until after the Storming of the Dragonpit somehow, Daemon and Aemond would both realistically be dead by the end of S3. Rhaenyra would die fairly early on in S4, and most of the final season would just be a severely traumatized Alicent, Corlys, and Aegon (and Aegon). Even if people like Cregan Stark or Tyland Lannister or whoever, they’re nevertheless tertiary characters. They’d basically be introducing a whole new cast in the last season.

[Annara Snow]

13 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Assuming they don’t add subplots, a four-season plan would mean losing almost the entire main cast by S4. Unless they moved the Battle Above the Gods Eye until after the Storming of the Dragonpit somehow, Daemon and Aemond would both realistically be dead by the end of S3. Rhaenyra would die fairly early on in S4, and most of the final season would just be a severely traumatized Alicent, Corlys, and Aegon (and Aegon). Even if people like Cregan Stark or Tyland Lannister or whoever, they’re nevertheless tertiary characters. They’d basically be introducing a whole new cast in the last season.

They don't need to add subplots, just expand on what's already there.

The whole of the War of the Five Kings would be less than 100 pages if you told it the way the Dance is told in Fire & Blood.

God's Eye can't happen before the Storming of the Dragonpit, but the latter follows not long after God's Eye.

They could either end season 3 with God's Eye and have the Storming fo the Dragonpit happen in early season 4; or, as some are speculating, push God's Eye to early season 4 out of fear of losing the two most popular  male characters before the final season.  But then it's less clear what the climax of season 3 would be.

This is in any case more likely if season 3 is also just 8 episodes, and if with this news that they have pushed "a part of the plot, including a major battle, to season 3".

This plot/major battle being moved could only be either:

1) Rhaenyra taking King's Landing, 

or

2) some have speculated they've going to change the order of events and have the Battle of the Gullet happen after the fall of KL and be pushed to early season 3.

The latter might work better narratively because it would shake things up dramatically, as you expect from a season ending, to have Rhaenyra take KL, rather than just lose another son, and then they'd also have Aemond and Criston get to the Riverlands by the end of season 2 and set up a new plotline for season 3.

[Lord Varys]

If they don't have the Fall of KL and the Gullet in season 2, then my take on the finale would be both the Honeywine (after large Black armies actually threatened and besieged Oldtown) as well as Rook's Rest moved a little bit further into the future, with more fighting depicted in the Crownlands and the Riverlands.

With eight episodes they could have Rook's Rest in, say, episode 6 or 7, dealing with the fallout in the final 1-2 episodes. Cliffhanger for the Greens could be Aemond's moronic battle plan.

The first couple of episodes could take time to cover Blood and Cheese and its aftermath and then, especially, also the Cargyll attempt in great(er) detail. On Dragonstone and in KL pretty much nothing happens after Rook's Rest and the Fall of KL, anyway, aside from the Gullet.

[The Bard of Banefort]

Is there any way to find out what the viewer demographics are for HOTD (and GOT)? The online fandom seems young and female, but that’s just one slice of the viewership.

[The Bard of Banefort]

I’m starting to wonder if one of the reasons why Miguel left is because he didn’t want to have to direct the Battle of the Gullet lol. That must be a nightmare to shoot.

[SeanF]

WRT the portrayal of women, well there are plenty of historical figures to choose from who were neither victims, nor empowered girlbosses.

Catherine the Great, Maria Theresa of Austria, Elizaveta, Catherine de Medici, Isabella of France etc.

Edited April 15, 2023 by SeanF

[$erPounce]

While I am generally pleased with how the female characters in HOTD are written (except Mysaria), I also understand the criticism.  It is clear that in the show both Rhaenyra and Alicent are whitewashed and portrayed as more reasonable than their book counterparts. They are pretty much considered the moral heart of the show. Both have a very pacifist approach, compared to most of the male characters who are more willing to use violence. Some probably see in this the "Closer to Earth trope" and thus a form of positive discrimination for the female characters.

I must say that how Rheanyra and Alicent are written in HOTD is similar to what happened to Cersei in the GOT show. Show-Cersei is much also much more rational, reasonable and sympathetic than the book version. Almost all the bad deeds that book-Cersei did are done in the GOT show by other characters (such as Joffrey and Margaery), or were presented in such a way that they were justified and done for sympathetic reasons (for example, protecting her children). I don't recall show-Cersei doing anything immoral and unjust between the period after Robert's death (late season 1) and the use of wildfire to kill her enemies (late season 6).

D&D's version of Cersei was very well received by many. There are also many book readers who prefer the show's version of Cersei to the original of the books. This survey shows that.

I think it is possible that the showrunners and writers of HOTD were somewhat influenced by show-Cersei when writing Rhaenyra and Alicent.
 

[Lord Varys]

36 minutes ago, $erPounce said:

While I am generally pleased with how the female characters in HOTD are written (except Mysaria), I also understand the criticism.  It is clear that in the show both Rhaenyra and Alicent are whitewashed and portrayed as more reasonable than their book counterparts. They are pretty much considered the moral heart of the show. Both have a very pacifist approach, compared to most of the male characters who are more willing to use violence. Some probably see in this the "Closer to Earth trope" and thus a form of positive discrimination for the female characters.

Not sure how you make this assessment. I mean, okay, Rhaenyra doesn't have Daemon fetch Vaemond Velaryon and doesn't command his subsequent execution.

But that's basically the only meaningful change where 'cruel intentions' are concerned.

Alicent and Rhaenyra both don't do anything truly ugly to the point the story advanced in the first season - and Alicent doesn't do many ugly things, either, in the book.

Her role in the coup is more complex ... but we cannot say we know the heart of book Alicent there. She may have had doubts, may have not been the prime mover of things. Her father could have been in charge there, too.

The flaw here lies with the account in FaB. It fails to address the motivations and feelings of the conspirators. Alicent was married to Viserys for 23 years. She knew his mind on things. And she still defied him. Why? The book doesn't ask the question and doesn't answer it. The show tries to do that.

There is, of course, also the changed dynamic due to Alicent-Rhaenyra being besties and of the same age. But even if that hadn't been the case it wouldn't have made sense to have the Greens relish the idea of murder and kinslaying or plunging the Realm into a civil war.

The book fails to address how the Green Council thinks to get away with Aegon's coronation. Gyldayn doesn't tell us how they thought they would deal with Rhaenyra and Daemon. The show tries to address this and it is good that they do that.

There are, of course, rather weird scenes of 'female solidarity' like the one between Alicent and Rhaenys. That kind of thing wouldn't have happened.