Game of Thrones - vol II - NO SPOILERS
Discussion
Durzel said:
No one seemed to have any problem with Bran having foresight of hundreds of thousands of innocent people being barbequed in KL, and doing or saying nothing to stop it, because to do so would presumably have interfered with him becoming king....
I think that if Bran had been able to see into the future, it would have been made explicit. You can probably give a reasonably good impression that you can, though, if you can see everything in the present and past.Lucas Ayde said:
It would have been more satisfying had Jon been the one to put both the Night King and Mad Queen down, thus him being the one who ended two threats to the Realm - one from Ice, one from Fire. A certain symmetry about it.
I don't agree. That would have simply played to the tired "male white hero" trope. I liked it that Arya stole his thunder and got the job done on the Night King. Although I still say that no silent assassin would have done a battle cry and given up the element of surprise. But then we wouldn't have had her "sick move" of dropping the dagger and then catching it with her other hand, I guess. Because Hollywood.
otolith said:
Durzel said:
No one seemed to have any problem with Bran having foresight of hundreds of thousands of innocent people being barbequed in KL, and doing or saying nothing to stop it, because to do so would presumably have interfered with him becoming king....
I think that if Bran had been able to see into the future, it would have been made explicit. You can probably give a reasonably good impression that you can, though, if you can see everything in the present and past.Clockwork Cupcake said:
Lucas Ayde said:
It would have been more satisfying had Jon been the one to put both the Night King and Mad Queen down, thus him being the one who ended two threats to the Realm - one from Ice, one from Fire. A certain symmetry about it.
I don't agree. That would have simply played to the tired "male white hero" trope. Edited by Durzel on Tuesday 21st May 16:04
Shakermaker said:
Guvernator said:
Why do people keep calling her Sandra? Is this some sort of in-joke I've missed?
Its not "people" it's just Halb I think 
(And I don't care if she's referred to thus in the Millennial-free books
)V8mate said:
I was aghast that Daenerys was referred to and addressed as 'Dany' during the last season. Just seemed like Millennial cretinacy gawn mad, I tell ya.
(And I don't care if she's referred to thus in the Millennial-free books )
Wasn't it mostly Jon that referred to her thus? They'd been knocking boots for a while so perhaps a shorter nickname isn't too out of place? She could of course have insisted that he referred to her by her full title which would have been amusing or perhaps Queenie which would have also been amusing.(And I don't care if she's referred to thus in the Millennial-free books
)Durzel said:
otolith said:
Durzel said:
No one seemed to have any problem with Bran having foresight of hundreds of thousands of innocent people being barbequed in KL, and doing or saying nothing to stop it, because to do so would presumably have interfered with him becoming king....
I think that if Bran had been able to see into the future, it would have been made explicit. You can probably give a reasonably good impression that you can, though, if you can see everything in the present and past.Guvernator said:
Wasn't it mostly Jon that referred to her thus? They'd been knocking boots for a while so perhaps a shorter nickname isn't too out of place? She could of course have insisted that he referred to her by her full title which would have been amusing .
Particularly if it was while they were getting it on.JagLover said:
Guvernator said:
Wasn't it mostly Jon that referred to her thus? They'd been knocking boots for a while so perhaps a shorter nickname isn't too out of place? She could of course have insisted that he referred to her by her full title which would have been amusing .
Particularly if it was while they were getting it on.He'd probably be just about done by the time he finished saying it.
Guvernator said:
Wasn't it mostly Jon that referred to her thus? They'd been knocking boots for a while so perhaps a shorter nickname isn't too out of place? She could of course have insisted that he referred to her by her full title which would have been amusing or perhaps Queenie which would have also been amusing.
"Aunt Daenerys"?Guvernator said:
V8mate said:
I was aghast that Daenerys was referred to and addressed as 'Dany' during the last season. Just seemed like Millennial cretinacy gawn mad, I tell ya.
(And I don't care if she's referred to thus in the Millennial-free books )
Wasn't it mostly Jon that referred to her thus? They'd been knocking boots for a while so perhaps a shorter nickname isn't too out of place? She could of course have insisted that he referred to her by her full title which would have been amusing or perhaps Queenie which would have also been amusing.(And I don't care if she's referred to thus in the Millennial-free books
)Durzel said:
Well, he said to Jon that he was exactly where he was supposed to be, which heavily implies that he had foresight of how things were going to play out.
Indeed. The foresight to know what would happen but not necessarily the ability to change / influence it that much. Hence unable to save all the people at King's Landing despite knowing how many would die. I did think his smug "Why do you think I am here?" at the council meeting just before he was declared King was a little, well, smug though.
JagLover said:
I think the show has always presented Tormund as being one of his best friends and he was happy for a time with Ygritte.
I think Jon had a bittersweet ending rather than a bad one. He killed the woman he loves and will be exiled from his family but he can still have a good life in the future, just wont be having many beach parties.
Yeah, I think he will now have the best future. SOmetimes we won't choose what is best for us, this choice was forced upon him,but it's best for him. He was almost unlucky enough to have force killed his first love too...I think Jon had a bittersweet ending rather than a bad one. He killed the woman he loves and will be exiled from his family but he can still have a good life in the future, just wont be having many beach parties.
The Starks and the WIldlings have a special connection.
For any interested, this is a nice theory bu PJ on why Quorin Halfhand chose Blockhead to go on the ranging with him. Don't forget, the programme is not the book.
Night's Watch: The Schemes of the Halfhand, Part 1
https://youtu.be/HcsWtTtdmdI
toasty said:
I'd have liked Jon to notice the snowdrop sprouting north of the wall, break the fourth wall and with a cheeky wink to the camera say...
Spring is Coming.
I think for him to say that would have been quite nice - not to camera of course - it would be a nice genesis denouement type thingy.Spring is Coming.
another thing that REALLY pissed me off.
forgive me if I misquote here
jon "I let you down, I should have been there"
bran "you were exactly where you were meant to be"
Scriptwriters rejoice - we don't have to explain ANYTHING, just keep using that line.
that it what I mean by lazy flat writing. the series in itself was not terrible, but in comparison to what we have seen before it was shoddy and dismissive writing.
Calza said:
While I don't understand why Bronn was made master of coin, what I really don't understand is why the throne was asking for a loan from Highgarden.
Didn't the Lannisters/throne steal all their money?
Yes. The Reach is the breadbasket of the continent though, and does feed most of the rest, so their incomes are YUGE! THey are effectively, the economic powerhouse now the gold in the Westerlands has goneDidn't the Lannisters/throne steal all their money?
Clockwork Cupcake said:
Durzel said:
Well, he said to Jon that he was exactly where he was supposed to be, which heavily implies that he had foresight of how things were going to play out.
Indeed. The foresight to know what would happen but not necessarily the ability to change / influence it that much. Hence unable to save all the people at King's Landing despite knowing how many would die. I did think his smug "Why do you think I am here?" at the council meeting just before he was declared King was a little, well, smug though.
HealeyV8 said:
Dany is bad for torching KL?
I had this argument with my misses. As the show is based on late Medieval European times this is normal practice. You want to have a swift time conquering a domian you make an example of the first town by razing it to the ground and killing all the people, women and children included. Other states / cities then surrender without bloodshed. Lets face it Dany had the 7 kingdoms to conquer, it wasn't over with just KL. So for the perceived time period she was following normal mecriful practice and Jon killed her for doing nothing, for the period, wrong.
Had a nice 'what if' with a friend today. What if Dani had listened to Olenna Tyrell and smashed KL immediately? She kills Cercei and co, take the continent south of the Neck and still has three dragons....blockhead goes cap in hand for the 'real' enemy, and then the armies of the south face the NK... I had this argument with my misses. As the show is based on late Medieval European times this is normal practice. You want to have a swift time conquering a domian you make an example of the first town by razing it to the ground and killing all the people, women and children included. Other states / cities then surrender without bloodshed. Lets face it Dany had the 7 kingdoms to conquer, it wasn't over with just KL. So for the perceived time period she was following normal mecriful practice and Jon killed her for doing nothing, for the period, wrong.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff