Katsullivan

Aren't the spin-offs set in the past? Probably during a time when the dragons were dead, to save CGI budget costs?

She killed him in a specifically, deliberately monstrous way. If you act like a monster, you are a monster. The story is so skewed towards witnessing Ramsay getting his "just desserts" that it is easy to overlook the kind of psychological deconstruction that was done on Sansa to make her use that specific method - Ramsay's method to murder him. This statement is actually contradictory, and it also assumes that "good" is an intrinsic, static condition that cannot be altered by environment or circumstances.

Sansa's killing of Ramsey is one of the most brutal things that has ever been done by one of the "good guys" on this show. Period. Even more horrifying is the clear glee she takes from witnessing it. It was sadistic and grotesque and would have signaled that Sansa had "become the monster to fight monsters". It would have made the entire Lady Sansa Bolton arc worthwhile if the show had intended to follow through on that. But apparently, that was supposed to be a "girl power" moment with no repercussions or long-term ripple effects. Sansa committed this action and moved on with her psyche perfectly intact. The rest of the North and Jon, who apparently knew about this action of Sansa, are not appalled at her capability for cruelty, nor do they question her sanity. It might as well have never happened.

Or simpler - Dany was never barren in the first place. All we had was Mirri's insinuation that she was.

Viserys also got burned when he was given his golden crown. Dany's fire-immunity is a show-only super-power unique to her. The only person who reacted with non-verbal appropriateness was Tormund. This show is so contrived now that it's ridiculous. It was Jorah's idea to capture a wight in an offer that seemed more about the show making Jon jealous than anything that's consistent with Jorah's job as Dany's military advisor/Head of her Queens guard.

Thank you for this. I can't with people still spouting that Dany is not thinking about making people's lives better - apparently she only liberated Slaver's Bay for shits and giggles - or that she's selfish for not having a succession plan for a Throne she hasn't claimed. People argue that Jon is a reluctant leader and didn't want to be crowned, and yet act shocked that the moment he finally sees that Dany is a worthy Queen - a ruler who is willing to risk herself and those she loves for the greater good - he bends the knee? At this rate, I'm not even sure the North or Westeros deserve Dany. I'd be OK with an ending where she defeats the NW and they're all begging to crown her, and she's like "Nope. I'm outta here. You guys are ingrates." I think that Dany was still shell-shocked from losing one of her babies, and that's why she pulled away at the end. Then there's the trite, but always delicious, 'mixed signals' trope where they, in turn, feel that they are feeling more than the other person. I don't see how Dany could have missed the puppy dog eyes he was throwing at her, and it must have made her uncomfortable/confused so close to Viserion's death while he, in turn felt so guilty over that, then possible worry that now that he's wearing his heart on his sleeve, she's "not that into him." At least I know they can't drag it out indefinitely - they need to establish this relationship and build on it in what - 7 episodes or less. Thank goodness for that. I guess there's something to be said about keeping the two destined love interests apart for 90% of the story. No room for 'will they/won't they stay together' when they finally get on the same page. :D OK, this came up in the Season 7 speculation thread and Tyrion confirms it in this episode when he told Dany that her "admirers" are trying to out-do who can do the most stupid, bravest things. Plus it's so clear in that scene. Jorah comes up with the idea after a long pause where no one seems to know what to do. Dany looks distraught, and Jon cuts his eyes from her face to Jorah and back, as if her concern for Jorah bothered him. He obviously volunteered partly to take the 'shine' off Jorah. I honestly don't know what people mean when they say that the Jon/Dany relationship is one-sided (on Dany's part) because how did you miss scenes like this? When Jorah showed up in Dragonstone, Jon was all pleasant to him until Dany hugged him, and then he's glaring so hard at Jorah that Jorah can't even enjoy his beloved Khaleesi because Jon's eyes are boring holes into his skull and Jorah has to pause and give him a 'what's your problem, bro?' look. Then earlier that episode, there's Jon just chilling at the edge of a cliff, looking out in the skies and waiting - for gods know how long - for Dany to return from battle.

Upvoted. Dany offered the Tarlys Life+Wealth+Titles vs Death. They chose Death. As the producers of the show said, "it was a win-win situation and the Tarlys still found a way to lose."

All this "Dany is the same as everyone else so how is she breaking the wheel" posts keep missing the point that Dany can't break the wheel until she is ruling Westeros, and to rule Westeros she has to win this war. I mean we all love that presidential candidate that won't play hardball during election cycles because of their principles but if those "principles" cost Team Good the election, and it ends up going to Team Evil.... then all those lovely principles ended up doing diddly-squat for the common people.

When Dany refuses to take Jon at his word, leave her war and take her dragons and army to the North to fight the White Walkers - she's an entitled bitch who doesn't care about Westeros. When Dany takes her dragons, risks her own life and theirs to help Jon fight the White Walkers - she's the stupid bitch who caused the Long Night. ---stares at the camera like in The Office---

Well it's still bringing up Sansa in relation to Sandor Clegane. Considering how many little strands of continuity they've dropped along the way, it's telling that this is one thing that they picked up again. The books definitely set up something between these two. Until the show's over, I won't dismiss the possibility of Endgame SanSan absolutely. Well said. In a world where the Red Wedding exists, the concept of a Crown Prince dissolving a marriage on a whim is positively anachronistic.

Yeah, that's all sorts of nonsense. The marriage was not invalid so it couldn't have been annulled. Just because some corrupted High Septon claims that it was (and on what basis? is any reason even given for this?) doesn't make it binding. Henry 8 gave a bullshit reason for the annulment which he would have probably got away with if not for the present politics - but it didn't make it any less a bullshit reason and even when he made himself King, and annulled the marriage, there was still a lot of instability in England for many decades because of what he started. That Rhaegar can just get the High Septon to write a piece of paper that declares Elia's children illegitimate and she, Elia who's basically a Princess of Dorne, no better than a mistress, and that this is regarded as uncontroversially binding is laughable. Dorne would see it as a great insult and rise up against the Iron Throne. The North would almost certainly be dragged into the war because an invalid annulment would make their Princess-equivalent a whore. The Baratheons will be offended, etc, etc, etc. Present day, the sentiments will be about the same and at the very least, the Kingdoms will take sides over which claimants to back - Jon, on the basis of this controversial "annulment" or Dany in defiance of it. TL DR... There's nothing in this piece of paper that binds Dany or any of her supporters into accepting Jon as a legitimate issue of Rhaegar and therefore a better claim to the Iron Throne, and she can defy it. And that's without even going into the fact that Aerys bypassed Rhaegar's line entirely when he made Viserys his heir - without any opposition. The Council was only called when the rightful heir was unclear. In one case, the King himself called the Council. In the second case, the Hand of the late King did so. There's no event where a Council was called to overrule a King's choice as heir. Rhaenyra was her father Viserys I's choice as Heir to the Iron Throne. When he died and Dowager Queen Alicent, her step-mother, tried to steal her throne for her own son, one of her 'tactics' was to suggest that a Great Council be called and Rhaenyra laughed that out of the water because she guessed (rightly) that a Council of Old Men would not choose a woman as Queen, regardless of what her father wanted. A civil war followed. This, so far, is the only case in the history of Westeros where the King's choice of heir ended up being overruled, and it wasn't done by a Great Council. It was done by the second claimant waging war on the rightful heir. Basically, it was a coup. As far as we know, since no objection was placed against Viserys as the King's heir at that time, and he was indeed declared King, then he was Aerys's heir, and Daenerys in turn becomes his heir. If the show were to do this realistically, and Dany and Jon agreed to it (remember again that Rhaenyra refused to subject to a Great Council and none was ever called), then a Great Council could be called to decide this - based on Jon's "legitimacy" and Aerys's own declaration of Viserys as his heir, knowing that he did so without being aware that Jon existed so there is some leeway in that. But apart from depending on both claimants subjecting to a Great Council, it would mean that there is a conflict in the first place, which will obviously not be happening at this rate on the show. Of course, the show will hand-wave all this, fly the annulment paper in Dany's face and she and Jon co-rule, so all this is academic anyway.

The show marrying Sansa off to Ramsay and all the raping and abuse that followed set the bar for gross and inappropriate things. Letting these two broken birds find love with each other doesn't even come close to that. By bringing Sandor not and having him mention Sansa, not Arya with whom he was longer acquainted, to Jon, they might be setting the groundwork for it. There has to be a reason why Sandor Clegane has lasted on the show for this long and it's more than just Cleganbowl. As you pointed out, I doubt that the average audience member even remembers that Sandor and the Mountain are brothers.

The theory I heard was that Varys was behind this. Rhaegar entrusted him with the task of sending out the ravens and he didn't. ::shrugs:: We'll probably never know what GRRM had in mind for this. More's the pity.

Oh thank you for saying this. I'm a book purist as everyone probably knows by now but I won't mind these seasons so much if they let their narratives make sense for the story they're trying to tell us.

??? Wish I could give this a ? likes.

Well I still think it's a mix of both. They won't have been able to change the Superhoodie plot if Simon was played by another actor. But Iwan Rheon gave them an excuse they were already willing to use.

By the end of season 6, Cersei had committed the same action that The Mad King had only attempted to do, and yet she still has the backing of the nobles? Cersei has done far more now than Aerys did to start Robert's Rebellion. Then the outrage was that he had killed the head and heir of a Great House. Well by the season 6 finale, Cersei had murdered the High Septon and the Queen of Westeros. There is no semblance of coherency or logic in this story any more. With every episode of this license fan-fiction, D & D make it glaringly obvious that the entirety of the brilliance of this show's earlier seasons was the source material. Left to navigate on their own, they crash and burn. And don't forget: "It was the dragons we married. And now the dragons are dead." The Northerners were specifically rebelling against non-Targaryen Southron rule.

Hard to aim through fire.

Tyrion didn't want Dany to risk her life scouting on the dragons. WHY he thought she'd be at risk then when at that point in time, no one knew about Qyburn's scorpions is ridiculous. Especially after Dany did the same thing in Mereen when she bombed the ships attacking the city and won victory on that day. But this plot convenient amnesia keeps happening as the show strays farther and farther from its source material. All through the "Loot Wagon"* Battle, Tyrion looked horrified at Dany using dragonfire but he did the same thing with wildfyre at the Battle of the Blackwater. *Seriously, D & D? That was the best you could come up with???

I've never paid much attention to music theme-analysis, but if I were to guess at anything apart from the obvious as you stated, it would be that after their journeys paralleling in so many aspects, including their first "loves", Jon and Dany finally find true love with each other, with their firsts being a "heralding" of what they'll share together. I don't doubt that Jon loved Ygritte or that Dany loved Drogo. But both romances started out with various degrees of abuse and coercion. Jon and Dany falling in love with each other will be the first true love that they will fall in of their own will. *Not counting Daario because why I believe Dany cared for him, that was more physical than anything else. It was never proven if this was really Drogo or a set up by the Sons of the Harpy to get Dany to conveniently lock up her dragons. Considering that there were no other incidents of children being consumed before and after, of Drogon or any of the other two after they were released... I'm going to say that Drogon is innocent until proven guilty.

Sofie Turner's one of the weakest actors in the show and that's half of the problem with Sansa. But in all fairness to her, the writers are usually so all over the place about Sansa (and this is the second half of the problem) that Sofie probably didn't know what Sansa's face was supposed to emoting in that scene.

@amandawoods Dany is not a foreigner. She's a Targaryen which is as Westerosi as they come considering that her family built the Iron Throne in the first place. I think the North's relationship with the Targaryens is far more complicated than we've been let to see on the show but I agree that there'll be some tension, like @SeanC said. What made it read as fanficcy to me was all the emphasis on How Sansa Feels about Jonerys. In fact, Book!Sansa is probably going to advocate a Dany/Jon because she, of all people, would see its advantages to the North. What path the story goes is left to anyone's guess but I don't think this is liking.

What this proves is that Robb knew that he was about to start a blood feud by killing Lord Karstark and he still went ahead to do so. Jon did the opposite. As you highlighted, Harrior Karstark could not openly forgive his father's killer. Well now that old Lord Karstark, and his son and whichever Lord Karstark was in the Bolton army are dead - and Robb Stark is dead - perhaps the blood feud has finally ended. The only thing Sansa's decision would have done was to extend that blood feud. Jon sued for peace which is always the smart thing to do in this situation because someone has to break the cycle. It's either that or the Starks should take it upon themselves to completely annihilate the House of Karstark. If Robb had done the same - sued for peace - the blood feud would never have started in the first place.

It's still the same question - what's the UK incentive to help a non-colony that is refusing to become a colony? "Maybe they'll agree to be a colony after they survive the pirates" is not good business or "empire-building" sense. The Randall Tarly presented on screen is supposed to be a pragmatist who obeys Cersei because he's (rightfully) afraid of her propensity to use wildfire to torch her enemies. (Although he needs to sleep on this, and Jaimie is OK with letting him.) Essentially, his character and arc make no sense. Everything at this point is just plot-by-numbers so don't expect it to.

Thank you. I mean, jeez! It's like they're not even trying to make the story make any sense! Yeah, it was cool.