Voice_of_Reason

Game of Thrones Season 8

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Destino said:

Unpopular opinion, Jon Snow ****ed up.

He ****ed up by not blowing her back out. Can't be pulling back cause she's your Aunt when you already been smashing. Jon failed the realm.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bran had the ability to warg Drogon when Dany was committing genocide....yet he did nothing....but he's going to go warg him now that he's gone rogue?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Momma There Goes That Man said:

 

What is dead may never die 

 

This thread needs a new title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Destino said:

I think she burned the city in hopes that it would force the remaining nobles, most notably Sansa, to yield without yet another war.  She even said that if they wouldn't accept her out of love, than fear would have to do.  She wasn't talking about the peasants when she said this.  She was talking about the ruling class. 

 

And why did the US drop nuclear weapons?  They did it to force and unconditional surrender, and maybe to send other powers in the world a message.  These are the same reasons Dani held. 

 

Some nobles were better than others, but together they all served to prop eachother up.  For every Ned Stark there was a Tywin Lannister or Roose Bolton.  The nobles were not benevolent rulers. 

 

Well i disagree with us using nuclear weapons to end WW2 but it’s also a different world so it’s hard to compare the scenarios.

 

It’s hard to look at her actions as noble now when she outright wanted to rule the world under fascism and she would serve as judge of what is right and what is good for everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, DCSaints_fan said:

 

So she's fine with the status quo of feudalism and hereditary nobility, as long the nobles bent the knee.

 

Doesn't sound like much of a revolutionary to me. 

I got the feeling of the ancient Greek tyrannos who would claim to save the masses from corruption and oppression of the aristocracy.  

 

https://www.britannica.com/topic/tyrant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, DCSaints_fan said:

 

So she's fine with the status quo of feudalism and hereditary nobility, as long the nobles bent the knee.

 

Doesn't sound like much of a revolutionary to me. 

Democracy did not exist and she never had a chance to rule Westeros, we’ve no idea what she would do with the nobles.  I doubt she’d have tolerated nobles like Roose Bolton the way Westeros did.  The series is filled with examples of how they treated the common man. 

 

There was one ruler that was willing to stop abuses.  The rest concerned themselves with their own power and maintaining the status quo.  

 

Jon Snow killed the breaker of chains, and his reward was banishment so that he could not challenge for power.  Do we think the kings, queens, and lords of Westeros were committed to an agreement made with Gray Worm, who they viewed as a peasant?  They agreed because it was convenient for them.  If he had remained in the north, Sansa wouldn’t have a throne.  If he had remained in the south he’d have a claim to the throne.  Their every action is concerned with power and personal gain.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What galls me about debating Dany's motivations and mindset is that we really shouldn't have to. It was a (profoundly stupid) creative choice to have Dany go AWOL for much of episode 5 in order to help the audience experience (and I quote D&D) "the horrors of war" through the eyes of characters we don't care about.

 

She's a ****ing POV character we spent nearly a decade with and we have to discuss amongst ourselves why she made her decisions? LOL what hacks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

http://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2019/05/20/an-ending/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

 

The way this reads he seems pretty noncommittal on whether this ends the same way as the show. Have assumed the ending was his told to D&D. But maybe he just laid out the ending. But there’s a damn good chance Martin gets us there in a much more satisfying way. More Bran context (as we had gotten in the books from his chapters), Jon making his own decision to go north. Dany’s path making a lot more sense. I mean I think it’s pretty clear at the end of Book 5 that Greyworm is dead. That right there changes the entirety of the way this can / should end. 

 

GRRM is very complementary of everyone involved but sounds like he’s interested in hammering this story home the way it was intended 

Edited by JamesMadisonSkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The citizens of King's landing were not collateral damage in a battle.  They were the victims of probably the worst atrocity ever committed in their world (I'm guessing, as I don't know the history of Westeros).  Once the surrender happened, Danny decided to commit mass murder on a scale that was horrific.  She became far more evil than Cersei at that point.  She had to be stopped.  Jon did the right thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

 

Well i disagree with us using nuclear weapons to end WW2 but it’s also a different world so it’s hard to compare the scenarios.

 

It’s hard to look at her actions as noble now when she outright wanted to rule the world under fascism and she would serve as judge of what is right and what is good for everyone.

 

I agree the scenarios are very different.  In WW2, at least Japan was shown the devistating effect of the bomb, and given a chance to surrender.  Then after they refused, one bomb was dropped and they were asked to surrender again before the final bomb was dropped.

 

No one would debate whether it was appropriate to drop the bombs at the end of WW2 if Japan had already surrendered.  That would be pure evil.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

5-It was definitely evil. Dany committed an atrocity that made her worse than Cersei, Ramsey, Roose, Joffrey, Tywin, Aerys, Aegon and anyone else. 

 

It doesnt matter what her intentions were. Her idea of ending tyranny is murdering innocents so that new generations will appreciate her form of tyranny.

 

I expect her to retire to her room to watch the sunset on a grateful world lol

 

4 minutes ago, Barry.Randolphe said:

Didn't Cersei essentially nuke the city with wildfire?

 

A small part of it. She may have killed 5,000- 10,000 people max but likely not that much. Dany killed hundreds of thousands 

Edited by Momma There Goes That Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nerm said:

 

I agree the scenarios are very different.  In WW2, at least Japan was shown the devistating effect of the bomb, and given a chance to surrender.  Then after they refused, one bomb was dropped and they were asked to surrender again before the final bomb was dropped.

 

No one would debate whether it was appropriate to drop the bombs at the end of WW2 if Japan had already surrendered.  That would be pure evil.

The city surrendered.  Dani wasn't after a single city or a single lord.  She was after Westeros entirely, which had not surrendered.  Sansa made that clear.  Burning the city very much equates to stopping and asking for surrender again before continuing the war.  The alternative was to accept the cities surrender and fight another war immediately afterwards.  Treat each lord as a separate war entirely and fighting each one in turn, while trying to hold onto control to the previously defeated areas.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Destino said:

The city surrendered.  Dani wasn't after a single city or a single lord.  She was after Westeros entirely, which had not surrendered.  Sansa made that clear.  Burning the city very much equates to stopping and asking for surrender again before continuing the war.  The alternative was to accept the cities surrender and fight another war immediately afterwards.  Treat each lord as a separate war entirely and fighting each one in turn, while trying to hold onto control to the previously defeated areas.   

 

 

I disagree.  I don't know of anyone who would say it is ok to kill thousands of civilians after a battle has ended, just because the rest of the world had not also surrendered.  Who else was supposed to surrender at that point?  She wasn't even at war with anyone else.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Destino said:

The city surrendered.  Dani wasn't after a single city or a single lord.  She was after Westeros entirely, which had not surrendered.  Sansa made that clear.  Burning the city very much equates to stopping and asking for surrender again before continuing the war.  The alternative was to accept the cities surrender and fight another war immediately afterwards.  Treat each lord as a separate war entirely and fighting each one in turn, while trying to hold onto control to the previously defeated areas.   

 

Pretty sure the Northerners at King's Landing could report back to Sansa about the dragon running roughshod over KL's defenses and let her know we got no chance.  There's no moral ambiguity here.  Writers could have gone the moral ambiguity way, but they went out of their way to ensure that there was no question (lannister soldiers even threw down their weapons).  Short of a big flashing "Dany is now evil" sign (well, there was the Targaryen Nuremberg banner), what more do you need?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

 

A small part of it. She may have killed 5,000- 10,000 people max but likely not that much. Dany killed hundreds of thousands 

 

I don't know man.  The population density per square kilometer in that region was likely in the range of about 12,000, and I think the blast radius was about 3 kilometers, with another 2 kilometers in the death/significant injury zone.  So Pi * (5*5) = 78.5 = ~942,000 in casualties, roughly 340,000 certain deaths, with the actual number likely upwards of 500,000.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With so many people feeling letdown by the final season, is anybody going to rewatch the series in maybe 5-10 years from now?

I've rewatched all the big boys (Sopranos, Wire, Breaking Bad, Dexter, The Shield, Deadwood, etc) 5+ years after the finale aired.  I like to give it some time before watching epic shows again so they can age a bit and I've forgotten about most of the smaller details from the story.  That said, I'll probably rewatch GoT in like 2025.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Cooked Crack said:

He ****ed up by not blowing her back out. 

 

hmm...  That's a new one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Chew said:

With so many people feeling letdown by the final season, is anybody going to rewatch the series in maybe 5-10 years from now?

 

Probably. Seasons 2-5 have some of the most amazing ensemble acting you'll ever see (in a fantasy show!).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Chew said:

With so many people feeling letdown by the final season, is anybody going to rewatch the series in maybe 5-10 years from now?

I've rewatched all the big boys (Sopranos, Wire, Breaking Bad, Dexter, The Shield, Deadwood, etc) 5+ years after the finale aired.  I like to give it some time before watching epic shows again so they can age a bit and I've forgotten about most of the smaller details from the story.  That said, I'll probably rewatch GoT in like 2025.  

I've tried to rewatch many of those, and can't get through them again. The exception is Deadwood, which I did recently, because of the movie coming out and it's only 3 seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, kfrankie said:

 

hmm...  That's a new one. 

Can't argue with it tho. If Jon laid it down proper none of this would have happened. Instead he acted like an incel nerd and hundred thousands died.

Edited by Cooked Crack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.