Daenerys 'Stormborn' Targaryen: The Breaker Of Chains, Mother Of Dragons Etc

[Umbelina]

19 minutes ago, RobertDeSneero said:

I adamantly believe that showing Arya, Jon, and Sansa talk about his birth is only useful if the goal is to show conflict between the three.  What exactly are they supposed to talk about that the audience needs to hear?  The important part of that scene is that Sansa makes a promise that she breaks.  We don't need Bran to retell a story that everyone should know.  And Sansa and Arya probably reacted by not saying anything and shuffling off to think about it on their own, anyways.  Well, Sansa probably did.  Arya probably shrugged and went back to practicing archery because it doesn't affect her plan to kill Cersei.

The people who should be talking about the implications of his birth are Jon and Dany, because of how it affects his claim, and Tyrion and Varys. 

I strongly disagree.  One of the biggest secrets was brushed off.  Bran certainly COULD have added important things, like WHY Rhaegar did that, was it really going to be reduced to a stupid love affair?  In the books?  I highly doubt it.

That conversation should and could have showed WHY Sansa decided to tell Tyrion as well.  We could have seen Jon at least process the fact that he was in danger, and Sansa certainly wouldn't be the only one to see that.  Neither Arya, Bran, or Sansa are the types to "shuffle around and think about it their own ways."  This was gigantic, with massive implications for them, for their family, for the realm, and for their brother.

That could have easily led to further discussions with Vary and Tyrion, but these showrunners didn't want WORDS, they wanted wars!  dragons!  action!

19 minutes ago, RobertDeSneero said:

I think her descent into madness, and I'm not convinced it was madness that made her burn King's Landing, is supposed to come off as more sudden than you want it to be.  It's supposed to be a change in her that is sufficiently rapid that you don't think Jon and Tyrion are stupid for not noticing where she was heading.

I'm positive that in the books it's not a "sudden" turn, for one thing, we will be in her mind. 

They made Jon and Tyrion (and unforgivably) Varys as stupid as possible to facilitate this mess of a season.

I completely understand why people who watched the show are furious.  I'm very unhappy with the WAY these assholes ended this.  I'm not unhappy with this as an ending for the books though, it will make sense, and it will be earned, if the books are ever finished. 

Edited May 16, 2019 by Umbelina
sh

[sistermagpie]

7 hours ago, domina89 said:

Here's a great video explaining the reasoning behind why many fans believe Dany's turn to darkness hasn't been earned or handled very well by the writers.

Foreshadowing Is Not Character Development:

https://youtu.be/2mlNyqhnc1M 

That's the phrase that's been in my mind as well--that foreshadowing is not character development. 

Personally, I can see how Dany got to where she was, but it's like I'm seeing the blueprint and wishing the show had made it play out organically in front of me. I don't think she's gone mad, I think she's made a decision that, as was described above, was always a possibility for her, but wasn't her fate. It's easy to for me to see how her continuing to go for the IT would tip her away from her better impulses and I didn't need that much leading up to it since we're basically talking about one decision here, not, imo, a descent into madness. But the moment didn't work as well as it could for me.

[Hana Chan]

A mad act (which the burning of KL certainly is) doesn't necessarily need to be the result of mental illness or defect. Unquestionably, Dany was under tremendous emotional stress. She had just survived a horrific battle and lose one of her closest and most trusted advisers. She learned that her lover is not just a close relation, but that his claim to the throne supersedes hers. She then loses another of her dragons, and then watches as her closest friend is executed in front of her. That she might be on edge would be more than understandable.

But that she made a clear and calculated decision to ignore the surrender of the city, raze it to the ground before destroying the Red Keep doesn't strike me as he being out of control. She no longer trusted Tyrion, so she was not inclined to agree to his plans. She felt that he was too close to his family and that his sympathies would hinder her from taking control of the kingdom in a decisive way. She knew that she had little real support from any Westerosi forces and needed to ensure that she unquestionably claimed rulership before anyone inclined to support Jon could move against her. 

Her actions were cruel and cold-hearted, but effective and (to me at least) make a lot of sense. The rest of the world might consider her to be her father's daughter, but I don't think she was out of control or "snapped". She made a decision and now has to live with the consequences.

[Hana Chan]

4 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

Personally, I can see how Dany got to where she was, but it's like I'm seeing the blueprint and wishing the show had made it play out organically in front of me.

We has a certain luxury with the books in that we could directly tap into Dany's POV ourselves. In a tv show, we are shown and told what motivates her. It's just the nature of the medium. No matter how many episodes might be used to tell us that Dany's temperament was being called into question, it was always going to be something we are told by another character rather than seeing Dany's own thoughts. 

And we so have the limits on the number of episodes this past season for this to play out more broadly. But even if we did have multiple episodes showing that Dany was giving into her impulses and casting off restraint, I think a lot of fans would still reject the storyline because they were so personally invested in her character for so long.

[Umbelina]

10 minutes ago, Hana Chan said:

We has a certain luxury with the books in that we could directly tap into Dany's POV ourselves. In a tv show, we are shown and told what motivates her. It's just the nature of the medium. No matter how many episodes might be used to tell us that Dany's temperament was being called into question, it was always going to be something we are told by another character rather than seeing Dany's own thoughts. 

And we so have the limits on the number of episodes this past season for this to play out more broadly. But even if we did have multiple episodes showing that Dany was giving into her impulses and casting off restraint, I think a lot of fans would still reject the storyline because they were so personally invested in her character for so long.

I think that's a cop out.  *not you, the writers*

The Mockinjay movies were adapted from completely first person novels, we were in her mind the entire time.  The adaption was beautiful, what they added that was out of her POV worked, made sense, added to the story.  We WERE able to understand her motivations and thoughts. 

Why?  BECAUSE THEY GAVE HER and other characters WORDS.

These writers have decided to skip words and make this strictly and action series ending, screw the characters, let's have lots of CGI, and stunts!

Edited May 16, 2019 by Umbelina

[sistermagpie]

9 minutes ago, Hana Chan said:

But that she made a clear and calculated decision to ignore the surrender of the city, raze it to the ground before destroying the Red Keep doesn't strike me as he being out of control.

Absolutely. I'd actually consider it the opposite of "out of control." All those things that happened to her were so terrible because they made her feel out of control. This is someone who's trying to become the ruler of 7 entire kingdoms. Obviously she likes the idea of being the one in control.

Advisors talking behind her back or plotting to get rid of her, people with better claims to her throne, lovers that say things about themselves she ordered them not to say, lovers' sisters who are openly unhappy with her plans to her face, the person she personally protects being beheaded in front of her, the guy she's in the past counted on to come back actually dying for real, her all-powerful dragons being killed by mere weapons?

All those things threaten her sense of control. She's not just sad because she lost people she cared about, she's threatened by how things that matter to her can just be taken away or killed by other people. Doing this got a sense of control back. She wasn't going to allow a peaceful transition where people were still walking around feeling free to complain about her or scheme. 

I do think they could have set up a story and scenes that made this more clear even without us being in her head, but I agree it was always going to be a problem to put across.

[RobertDeSneero]

13 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

I strongly disagree.  One of the biggest secrets was brushed off.  Bran certainly COULD have added important things, like WHY Rhaegar did that, was it really going to be reduced to a stupid love affair?  In the books?  I highly doubt it.

That conversation should and could have showed WHY Sansa decided to tell Tyrion as well.  We could have seen Jon at least process the fact that he was in danger, and Sansa certainly wouldn't be the only one to see that.  Neither Arya, Bran, or Sansa are the types to "shuffle around and think about it their own ways."  This was gigantic, with massive implications for them, for their family, for the realm, and for their brother.

That could have easily led to further discussions with Vary and Tyrion, but these showrunners didn't want WORDS, they wanted wars!  dragons!  action!

I'm positive that in the books it's not a "sudden" turn, for one thing, we will be in her mind. 

They made Jon and Tyrion (and unforgivably) Varys as stupid as possible to facilitate this mess of a season.

I completely understand why people who watched the show are furious.  I'm very unhappy with the WAY these assholes ended this.  I'm not unhappy with this as an ending for the books though, it will make sense, and it will be earned, if the books are ever finished. 

You advocate a bunch of telling and not showing with filler conversations.

The show has de-emphasized the importance of prophecy.  See, for example, no mention of the valonqar in Cersei's prophesy.  I believe that the showrunners want to simplify the story by not delving into the prophesy about the Prince That Was Promised, mentioning it a few times as a bit of fan service to book readers, but not making it an essential part of the story.  In the show, Rhaegar did it for love.  In the books, there may be more than that, but in adapting it to television, you have to make choices.  This is a very reasonable choice to make because dropping it doesn't change the shape of the story and you don't have to choose between explaining it via Bran talking and talking and talking or filming a flashback scene.

You don't need a conversation to show why Sansa tells Tyrion.  Obviously, she is trying to manipulate him.  She doesn't trust Daenerys and wants this information to be used against her.  If you do need to show why she told him, then the correct way to portray that would be to have her conversation with Tyrion be longer.  Maybe he wonders aloud why she is telling him and hypothesizes about possible motives.  She looks at him but doesn't react, so we are left to wonder a bit, but at least we have some ideas and it makes Tyrion look smart.

Bran doesn't have an emotional stake in how this is resolved, now that he is the Three-Eyed Raven.  He is now the memory of the world.  He cares about there still being a world to remember.  He is more detached when it comes to how that world exists.

Arya cares only about crossing another name of her list.  How does discussing it help her kill Cersei?

Jon doesn't think he is in any danger to process.  He loves her and she loves him.  He believes she wouldn't harm her.

In the books, I suspect that she won't be mad, but that Martin will instead try to make her seem like she is doing this for rational reasons.

If I were writing this, one addition I would have made would be to have Varys comment a few times on how Dany reminds him of her father, who he served.  The first few times would be when she is doing something that the audience considers positive and he might remark on how Aerys was once a good man.  The goal is to be subtle about it and avoid hitting viewers over the head with a clue-by-four that, of course, she's going to turn.

The story I would want to tell is not that Dany is a good woman gone mad, but that she isn't quite as good as people assumed she was and that she said she was going to break the wheel when really she is just going to perpetuate it.   In our modern world, are we not used to politicians who claim that they are better, that they are going to clean house, and turn out to be just as bad and sometimes worse than the bums they want thrown out?

I get that people want Dany to be the triumphant hero who changes things for the better, but Martin grew up in an age which made people like him cynical about politics and war.  It seems more in keeping with this story that someone who gets built up as that hero ends up either dead or not a hero.

[Constantinople]

Dany's not crazy
She's the Seven Kingdom's first Bolshevik
 

Quote

If it is a question of seeking formal contradictions, then obviously we must do so on the side of the White Terror, which is the weapon of classes which consider themselves “Christian,” patronize idealist philosophy, and are firmly convinced that the individuality (their own) is an end-in-itself. As for us, we were never concerned with the Kantian-priestly and vegetarian-Quaker prattle about the “sacredness of human life.” We were revolutionaries in opposition, and have remained revolutionaries in power. To make the individual sacred we must destroy the social order which crucifies him. And this problem can only be solved by blood and iron fire and blood - Trotsky

[ShellsandCheese]

This is a good summation of why people's reactions to episode five weren't probably what D&D were hoping they would be;

Dany has shown that she has tyrannical-adjacent tendencies, but never once showed any sign that she's capable of mass murder. What was the point of killing all these people? We know it didn't bother Cersei.

If we look back at Daenerys' most violent moments throughout this series, there was always some moral justification of it. In Season Five she crucifies 163 masters as punishment for the 163 slaves they crucified. In Season Six she burned the remaining khals alive as punishment for taking her prisoner. Even burning the Tarlys, which was a bad move in Season Seven, still could be justified in her mind. They fought against her and she killed them.

Never has Daenerys shown any hint of violence toward innocent people. In fact, she's done everything in her power to protect the innocent, which was always her greatest strength—one she learned from her hatred of a violent, evil older brother. These character traits have been fundamentally part of Daenerys from the very beginning only to be undone in one hour.

In general, the author calls out a lot of things that have had those of us read the books and watched the show scratching our heads. 

 Game of Thrones Has Become A Cynical Clusterf*ck

[GraceK]

Shock value. Really. She methodically goes street by street , purposely taking out innocent children and civilians, completely ignoring Cersei and giving her time to escape, after just staring her down. Come on. That is so ridiculous and off the charts evil and OOC you have to really dislike Dany to think it’s not off brand for her. Even the show runners couldn’t explain it. “ She’s  a Targaryen “ and “ the red keep symbolized everything her family built and she snaps” was their reasoning in the behind the episode. Really? 🤦🏻‍♀️ It’s purely for shock and twist and to make her irredeemable. Spectacle over character. 

[MadameKillerB]

eh. I'm not concerned with whether her bell-induced killing spree was telegraphed or not. I just think the acting direction and the execution (no pun intended) of the scene was subpar. 

[GraceK]

10 minutes ago, MadameKillerB said:

eh. I'm not concerned with whether her bell-induced killing spree was telegraphed or not. I just think the acting direction and the execution (no pun intended) of the scene was subpar. 

I think Emilia did a great job considering she was on a robotic machine against a green screen. I think she’s done her best work this season honestly, it’s just a shame the writing sucks. 

[rmontro]

7 hours ago, ursula said:

Dany's ineffective against the terrorists because she is not violent enough! Even though she's adopted the Westeros practice of taking cupbearers, she can't bring herself to harm any of them. (Compare to Ned Stark who would have killed Theon Greyjoy at Robert's command. He won't have liked doing it, but he would have done it all the same).

Great point, that's another example of Dany's compassion.  She is not a sociopath, because sociopaths have no empathy, but Dany has it in spades.  Until the moment they flip the light switch on her and decide she doesn't.  We lived with these characters for eight years.  Don't spend all this time showing me how much compassion someone has toward the weak, and then have her murder thousands of innocent men, women, and children.  Because all it does is anger me.

I can see why the actor playing Varys was dissatisfied also, his character arc made no sense either.  He came to Winterfall a Daenerys supporter.  Finds out about Jon's lineage, decides he should be king instead.  Never mind that he has virtually the same personality as Ned Stark, and Varys scoffed at his ability to govern.  One episode Varys thinks Jon might be the better ruler, the next episode he decides Dany is worse than her father.  Because she's gotten depressed in the meantime, I guess?  That's quite a leap.

[RobertDeSneero]

31 minutes ago, GraceK said:

Shock value. Really. She methodically goes street by street , purposely taking out innocent children and civilians, completely ignoring Cersei and giving her time to escape, after just staring her down. Come on. That is so ridiculous and off the charts evil and OOC you have to really dislike Dany to think it’s not off brand for her. Even the show runners couldn’t explain it. “ She’s  a Targaryen “ and “ the red keep symbolized everything her family built and she snaps” was their reasoning in the behind the episode. Really? 🤦🏻‍♀️ It’s purely for shock and twist and to make her irredeemable. Spectacle over character. 

She doesn't see them as innocents.  She points out that innocents in Mereen turned on their masters and liberated the city themselves when she arrived.  They don't celebrate her arrival in King's Landing.  They don't even celebrate the bells ringing.  When that fails to occur, she knows in her heart that they are enemies and not innocents.  At least, that's what the explanation should be.

I think the show has demonstrated that Dany is capable of being ruthless towards her enemies.  Is there any way that the show could convince you that she viewed the common folk as her enemy if they didn't bow down to her without it being out of character?   And without you hating that other characters didn't try harder to stop her?  If that's not something you can ever accept, then I don't know if this show's ending could ever have made you happy.

[ShellsandCheese]

10 minutes ago, RobertDeSneero said:

She doesn't see them as innocents.  She points out that innocents in Mereen turned on their masters and liberated the city themselves when she arrived.  They don't celebrate her arrival in King's Landing.  They don't even celebrate the bells ringing.  When that fails to occur, she knows in her heart that they are enemies and not innocents.  At least, that's what the explanation should be.

I think the show has demonstrated that Dany is capable of being ruthless towards her enemies.  Is there any way that the show could convince you that she viewed the common folk as her enemy if they didn't bow down to her without it being out of character?   And without you hating that other characters didn't try harder to stop her?  If that's not something you can ever accept, then I don't know if this show's ending could ever have made you happy.

Here's a good video that sums up why a lot of people are not happy with episode 5.  Foreshadowing is not character development. I personally think he is spot on in his assessment. 

[ursula]

54 minutes ago, GraceK said:

She methodically goes street by street , purposely taking out innocent children and civilians, completely ignoring Cersei and giving her time to escape, after just staring her down.

You'd think Dany would be a tad more focused on burning the person that just murdered her friend than burning citizens that didn't bow down to her.

But apparently we've got it all wrong. 🤷 Thank goodness for Drogon that there weren't any random fishermen in the water when she approached Euron's fleet. Clearly, Dany would have focused on attacking said fishermen and completely ignored the scorpions. 🤣🤣🤣

[sistermagpie]

17 minutes ago, RobertDeSneero said:

I think the show has demonstrated that Dany is capable of being ruthless towards her enemies.  Is there any way that the show could convince you that she viewed the common folk as her enemy if they didn't bow down to her without it being out of character?   And without you hating that other characters didn't try harder to stop her?  If that's not something you can ever accept, then I don't know if this show's ending could ever have made you happy.

Also, a person who considers them compassionate in such a way that they consider themselves the protector of the weak and powerless could absolutely see putting themselves in power as part of the greater good. Dany's got a savior complex. You can't have a savior complex without wanting to save people. Many saviors drew people in first by being so kind and compassionate. Dany has been going through an evolution throughout the story. She didn't have a brand yet, like Ned Stark did since he was an older person. We meet her just as she starts her rise to power and that journey is going to affect her. The rise is of course going to be bright and full of promise. That doesn't make a potential tragic ending OOC. Her whole story is about gaining power. Her compassion and mercy is one way the power manifests. She's very empathetic to those she identifies with as fellow helpless people who were oppressed and cold to people she does not identify with that way. She's merciful and compassionate because she's powerful, she's not powerful because she's merciful and compassionate. She just proclaims the opposite.

5 minutes ago, ursula said:

But apparently we've got it all wrong. 🤷 Thank goodness for Drogon that there weren't any random fishermen in the water when she approached Euron's fleet. Clearly, Dany would have focused on attacking said fishermen and completely ignored the scorpions. 🤣🤣🤣

Probably not, since she was still conquering at that point. The whole thing with the bells is that she knows she's safe at that point. She's no longer fighting anybody. She could accept a more uneasy surrender. She's not distracted in those scenes, she's finished the first thing she came there to do.

Edited May 17, 2019 by sistermagpie

[GraceK]

35 minutes ago, RobertDeSneero said:

And without you hating that other characters didn't try harder to stop her?  If that's not something you can ever accept, then I don't know if this show's ending could ever have made you happy.

When did I say that I hated the other characters for not trying to stop her? Apparently, they’ve been trying to stop her from carpetbombing Kings Landing all season, because apparently, she’s been going insane all season  and they have been proven correct!!’ That’s my problem. 

Yes, she’s ruthless with her enemies. Like everyone else in this show. Before Jon got a makeover, so was he. So was Tyrion, Varys, Sansa, Tywin, Arya, yeah pretty much everyone except Podrick and Brienne . She also locked up her baby Dragons at the first idea that Drogon burned a child. The sight of 163 crucifed children drove her to be ruthless to the slave masters.  

She has always loved children, and been a protector of women. And Cersei is her enemy, but the writing has you believe she ignored the woman who murdered her friend and just starts mass murdering innocent civilians on a scale that’s unheard of. Come on 🙄 it works for you? Fine. For the majority it doesn’t. 

I would have been fine with a mad queen Dany. Would it be my favorite? No. But i can see it happening. Tyrion sucks as an advisor and Varys is always shifting loyalty. More time to develop them preferring Jon , more time to have her make questionable decisions so Varys turns on her I would find plausible. They didn’t do that. 

She does everything right this season.  Defends the North, listens to her advisors. And out of nowhere, as soon as Jon’s parentage is revealed, Varys changes sides. Dany is depressed at one feast and he’s convinced she’s going crazy. She loses her friend, dragon and bestie in the span of two episodes,  and then just like that Varys is openly plotting to overthrow her and is trying to kill her, Tyrion Is committing treason and releasing Jaime to free CERSEI,,,,and she’s the mad one? Of choose she’s paranoid.  They are telling us she’s crazy and dangerous when all around her she is literally being gaslighted. Then bells ring and she commits genocide. Nice. Now they are vindicated apparently. They were clairvoyant and knew before she did that by virtue of not being Jon Snow she was gonna go crazy. 

That’s why I’m mad. It’s clearly rushed and forced .  

They could have even done the same thing, with better execution even. Let her go for the Red Keep first, for Cersei, like it seemed like she was gonna do. Burn that shit  down, and have the rage just take  over. That even makes more sense. It’s like, her vengeance is sated and she’s still mad, or hollow, and the dragon awakens. Something more organic than this shit. You have the same result but it feels more earned somehow . Or she knows that Tyrion set Jaime free and is like fuck my advisor, it’s all his fault I lost everything, burn it all!!! Something rational that we can understand. 

I made a post about the Battle of the Bells. Even a flashback or a voiceover of Viserys telling Dany that story of how Robert crushed her father and sacked Kings Landing in that battle could have set her off and she decided to recreate it. 

Edited May 17, 2019 by GraceK

[Umbelina]

Characters having conversations is not "telling not showing." 

Characters having conversations is valuing the characters enough to give them words and emotions to play, instead of words to facilitate CGI and BIG MOMENTS!

The words saying "Jon and Dany love each other" are bullshit.  What we needed to see and hear is Dany and Jon actually having conversations and falling in love, and that doesn't happen on the back of a dragon.

[lucindabelle]

21 hours ago, Colorful Mess said:

She also had darker theme music whenever she burns someone. The show intended that.

The music helps create audience perception which is at odds with the visual imagery, in other words, it is used to deceive in some cases. In the S6 Dothraki speech she's talking about war, mass murder, death, and the music is just so inspiring!

NOPE.  Actually if you go back and watch any of these scenes and which were told there was foreshadowing, and by the way, I agree that foreshadowing is not character development, they are edited and shot and lit and scored to make us root for Dann. You can argue until the cows come home that she was wrong to treat Kraznys , but the way that it’s  shot were meant to cheer when she speaks high Valeryian. Also, earlier in that same episode, Ser Barristan tells her that  slaves won’t fight for her the way people who are really loyal to her will. So what’s the first thing she does? Have the unsullied kill the masters then give them their freedom. And after that they fight for her because they love her. And the show cuts to an APPROVING LOOK between ser Jorah and Barristan. Music swells. 

Theres no fucking way in Hell that was meant to be foreshadowing of madness. That was a heroic edit.

and that’s why some of us are so damn angry. For seven years, we’ve seen the woman who tried to give water to a dying slave. Who took the time to tell the unsullied not to kill a child, the woman who chained up her own beloved dragon, as a heroic figure rising from a position of no power at all, a woman who was raped by her husband until she got him to love her, a woman who stood up for women and children, and now, we’re told bitch be crazy. It’s completely unsatisfying.

the show runners didn’t give these scenes their logical conclusion.

The show runners made a huge mistake trying to make the plot fit Martin,‘s pot points rather than ending the show that they actually gave us complete with specific music and camera angles to manipulate us to feel a certain way.

im so damn angry I’m not even watching Sunday.

in EVERY OTHER SAD EVENT, characters made fucking decisions that came from their characters. This is misogynistic horseshit.

the little girl who was raped goes crazy because a boy wouldn’t kiss her. Snort.

[Solace247]

So, watching the finale with Emilia’s gonna be pretty awkward, eh? I’d hate to be in that position, pretending to appreciate one iota of what I’m seeing onscreen. Compliments on the performances I guess.

[rmontro]

I'm trying to think if there is another literary character like this who spends 96% of the story getting the heroic character arc, then turns supremely evil like this.  

I got that number from there being 73 episodes of Game of Thrones, and I'll say she's evil for the last three (which is fairly conservative, others might argue she's only evil in the last two).

Yes, there were hints and foreshadowings about her, but she was most certainly still on the heroes side in S08 E03, because she and her forces are fighting on the good side - the side of the living and all the ungrateful Northerners lol.

26 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

The words saying "Jon and Dany love each other" are bullshit.  What we needed to see and hear is Dany and Jon actually having conversations and falling in love, and that doesn't happen on the back of a dragon.

I'm not even convinced that Jon does love Dany.  I do think she loves him, but I'm confused as to whether or not I'm supposed to think that he loves her - or rather, loved her (past tense) before the family relationship reveal.  I believe maybe he could have loved her, in different circumstances.  Maybe we'll get a little more insight when he kills her, but honestly I don't expect it.

Edited May 17, 2019 by rmontro

[RobertDeSneero]

14 minutes ago, ShellsandCheese said:

Here's a good video that sums up why a lot of people are not happy with episode 5.  Foreshadowing is not character development. I personally think he is spot on in his assessment. 

My contention is that the evidence that Dany would do what she did is not foreshadowing.  I believe that the actual show tells us that she told Tyrion that she planned on burning the city, that he got her to concede that she wouldn't do it if the bells rang, then she decided to do it anyways.  Thus, she had already shown that she was willing to attack those that viewers presumably see as innocents.  I agree that it is a large gap for her to leap if she goes from bring brutal only towards the guilty to being brutal towards wide swaths of innocents.  It is less of a leap if she goes from being willing to burn civilians unless they surrender to being willing to burn civilians even if they surrender.

[GraceK]

1 minute ago, rmontro said:

I'm trying to think if there is another literary character like this who spends 96% of the story getting the heroic character arc, then turns supremely evil like this.  

I got that number from there being 73 episodes of Game of Thrones, and I'll say she's evil for the last three (which is fairly conservative, others might argue she's only evil in the last two).

Yes, there were hints and foreshadowings about her, but she was most certainly still on the heroes side in S08 E03, because she and her forces are fighting on the good side - the side of the living and all the ungrateful Northerners lol.

I'm not even convinced that Jon does love Dany.  I do think she loves him, but I'm confused as to whether or not I'm supposed to think that he loves her - or rather, loved her (past tense) before the family relationship reveal.  I believe maybe he could have loved her, in different circumstances  Maybe we'll get a little more insight when he kills her, but honestly I don't expect it.

They are playing it like Fatal Attraction and its even  more disgusting. He acts one part terrified and enslaved by her and she acts like she’s obsessed with him. It’s horrible.  That’s what did really. She lost her friends and Jon won’t love her anymore. That’s the arc she ends on. That pushed her over. 🤦🏻‍♀️ And he’s not even worth this shit. This hollow out zombie version of Jon Snow can’t hold a candle to Drogo or Daario. I hate this whole thing I don’t blame Emilia for being devastated.

[lucindabelle]

Foreshadowing isn’t character development.

she got swelling music, heroic camera angles, and noble and caring moments. Even in those moments were now supposed to see as “seeds.” I call bullshit.

[Umbelina]

9 minutes ago, Solace247 said:

So, watching the finale with Emilia’s gonna be pretty awkward, eh? I’d hate to be in that position, pretending to appreciate one iota of what I’m seeing onscreen. Compliments on the performances I guess.

Get drunk with her and laugh their asses off.

It could be a hell of a lot of fun, she seems very cool.  Snark together all the way through it.

[RobertDeSneero]

3 minutes ago, rmontro said:

I'm trying to think if there is another literary character like this who spends 96% of the story getting the heroic character arc, then turns supremely evil like this.  

I honestly think that Martin wanted to subvert tropes by creating the first one, although I wouldn't say she is supremely evil.

This is a man who was a conscientious objector during Vietnam.  This is supposed to be an anti-war series where the action is just brutal.  Ultimately, this is a series about politics.  Politicians who get the hero edit in real life turn out to be bad.  Success is often more about being lucky to be in the right place at the right time and not virtue being rewarded.  Breaking the wheel is the new draining the swamp.  You promise to do it, but you turn out to be replacing the old guard with more of the same and possibly worse.

[rmontro]

2 minutes ago, lucindabelle said:

Foreshadowing isn’t character development.

Without going into any detail, I'd been thinking for awhile now about buying some Game of Thrones merchandise.  Then episode five dropped, which made me sick to my stomach, and now I can't stand the thought of having that stuff in my house.  So if nothing else, this sloppy writing saved me some money!

I am, however, thinking about getting a t-shirt that says "Foreshadowing isn’t character development"   🤣   Although if I did, everyone would probably come up to me and say "Oh, you saw Game of Thrones, huh?".

2 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

Get drunk with her and laugh their asses off.

It could be a hell of a lot of fun, she seems very cool.  Snark together all the way through it.

Then afterwards, you could go throw eggs at D&D's house.  

[lucindabelle]

31 minutes ago, rmontro said:

Without going into any detail, I'd been thinking for awhile now about buying some Game of Thrones merchandise.  Then episode five dropped, which made me sick to my stomach, and now I can't stand the thought of having that stuff in my house.  So if nothing else, this sloppy writing saved me some money!

I   

It’s not my observation (foreshadowing..) but it’s true.

But I’ll take it even further actually. There really was no foreshadowing. Every single thing people have listed as evidence that she was always a psychopath were not lit scored edited or cut to show any darkness in her. au contraire . I know a little something about this, and the way that she was presented was unquestionably heroic. The music swelled, she was lit beautifully, people we trust gave her approving looks or bowed to her. To tell us now that we were wrong about all that is completely insulting to the viewer. It’s also just plain not true. It’s kind of like when this is us, we know that the actor played his character as if his brother was dead. Then just last season    we learn the brother is alive so it means that CHARACTER was an impeccable actor- or LIAR! The writers desire for a big twist upended a whole premise of the show. Another character is suddenly presented as having a thwarted passion for an art form we never heard one line of dialogue about in three years.

and this is why the last two episodes of this is us are still hanging out on my vcr and why I won’t watch next year.

and why I won’t watch game of thrones Sunday.

none of us were idiots to believe Daenerys was a heroine. That’s how she was presented in every damn way. She was powerless, raped and abused, and took power through love and courage.

then genetics?

fuck that. 

31 minutes ago, RobertDeSneero said:

I honestly think that Martin wanted to subvert tropes by creating the first one, although I wouldn't say she is supremely evil.

This is a man who was a conscientious objector during Vietnam.  This is supposed to be an anti-war series where the action is just brutal.  Ultimately, this is a series about politics.  Politicians who get the hero edit in real life turn out to be bad.  Success is often more about being lucky to be in the right place at the right time and not virtue being rewarded.  Breaking the wheel is the new draining the swamp.  You promise to do it, but you turn out to be replacing the old guard with more of the same and possibly worse.

And that may be true in the books if he ever finishes them. But it’s not what happens in the show.

the ONLY character seen to slaughter innocents is Dany- who was coincidentally the only one who said “harm no child.” The long lingering shots of dying women and children, when in every other battle we only saw soldiers and named characters die, was some misogyny right there. 

Edited May 17, 2019 by lucindabelle

[Sakura12]

3 hours ago, RobertDeSneero said:

I get that people want Dany to be the triumphant hero who changes things for the better, but Martin grew up in an age which made people like him cynical about politics and war.  It seems more in keeping with this story that someone who gets built up as that hero ends up either dead or not a hero.

I don't think any of us expected Dany to be the hero and get a happy ending. That's not what this show is about. I never expected her to win the throne. I did however expect good storytelling for me to understand why Dany did what she did. What these writers did was simplify everything and expect me to just go with it. She went from human in one episode to non-human the next.  

Dany wasn't anymore ruthless than the other characters she just had access to a better weapon. And you can't tell me if those characters had dragons they wouldn't use them to burn their enemies. I would rather have seen Dany chase Cersei down Kings Landing and burning anyone that got in the way. Saw Jamie down there trying to rescue her and knowing that Tyrion let him out and getting even more angry and start burning down everything. 

Edited May 17, 2019 by Sakura12

[rmontro]

4 minutes ago, lucindabelle said:

none of us were idiots to believe Daenerys was a heroine. That’s how she was presented in every damn way. She was powerless, raped and abused, and took power through love and courage.

You are right, the way they presented her story was heroic, uplifting, and inspiring.  Sure, there was foreshadowing, but that doesn't change the above.  It's no surprise that some of us are going to be angry about the bait and switch, after eight frigging years of becoming invested in these characters.  Someone should have warned me "Hey, don't get caught up in this, it's a waste of your time".  Or maybe I just should have known better.  Well, at least she took Cersei out, and at least she got to sit on the Iron Throne (if the spoilers are to be believed).

I didn't really expect her to get the Iron Throne, I expected her to be killed.  But I thought her death would mean something.

[ursula]

34 minutes ago, lucindabelle said:

The show runners made a huge mistake trying to make the plot fit Martin,‘s

Chill. It's not Martin's plot anymore than Sansa being raped or Ellaria killing children is Martin's plot. D & D got to write their very expensive fanfiction (tagged: "Cersei is my Queen", "Jaime/Cersei 4eva!", "Dany sux", "Rape is Growth", etc) and by Sunday, it'll be all over.

[GraceK]

Honestly, the only way I’ve made sense of this in my head, is that she genuinely feels these people don’t deserve to live and that this city deserves to burn . 🤷🏻‍♀️ That they are all complicit in the reign of a tyrant and did nothing to help themselves. That after all she feels she has done to help them, fighting the Night King and the AOTD, sacrificing Viserion saving Jon, losing Rhaegal,  Missendei and Jorah, all she had suffered to get there...and they hate her anyway.  Her advisors betrayed her, they rather have Jon. Her victory is hollow and empty because she will never be loved. And while this is going through her mind, that sense of emptiness, she’s sitting on a firebrand that can cause massive destruction with no one to anchor her that she can trust. And she unleashes her rage and she decides to raze KL to the ground and start fresh. 

And from that angle I can see it better . Do I like it? No. But it’s what we got. 

Edited May 17, 2019 by GraceK

[Spartan Girl]

43 minutes ago, rmontro said:

You are right, the way they presented her story was heroic, uplifting, and inspiring.  Sure, there was foreshadowing, but that doesn't change the above.  It's no surprise that some of us are going to be angry about the bait and switch, after eight frigging years of becoming invested in these characters.  Someone should have warned me "Hey, don't get caught up in this, it's a waste of your time".  Or maybe I just should have known better.  Well, at least she took Cersei out, and at least she got to sit on the Iron Throne (if the spoilers are to be believed).

I didn't really expect her to get the Iron Throne, I expected her to be killed.  But I thought her death would mean something.

I didn't expect her to have a happy ending. I thought they'd at least give her the dignity of a heroic death, going out in a blaze of glory.

Or if she lived because Jon sacrificed himself to save her, but upcon getting the Iron Throne she wanted, realized after all her losses that Drogo was right: it really was just a chair. She saved the Kingdoms and broke the wheel, but not for herself. And after passing the kingdom to Gendry or Tyrion or whoever to rule in her stead, she leaves Westeros on Drogon to heal and find peace like Frodo in LOTR.

Either one would have been so much better than this. 

Edited May 17, 2019 by Spartan Girl

[sistermagpie]

16 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

I didn't expect her to have a happy ending. I thought they'd at least give her the dignity of a heroic death, going out in a blaze of glory.

Or if she lived because Jon sacrificed himself to save her, but upon getting the Iron Throne she wanted, realized after all her losses that Drogo was right: it really was just a chair. She saved the Kingdoms and broke the wheel, but not for herself. And after passing the kingdom to Gendry or Tyrion or whoever to rule in her stead, she leaves Westeros on Drogon to heal and find peace like Frodo in LOTR. 

This isn't a defense of what they did, but I don't see how either of those work with her story at all. Dany is not Frodo making a sacrifice to save a kingdom, she's spending the whole show trying to rule 7 kingdoms. You can't spend your whole story gathering armies and conquering kingdoms and winning and a throne and then be a sacrificial lamb like Frodo. If Dany was going to get the throne and not be happy it would always have to be a personal tragedy like this one. It didn't have to involve the burning down of a city and mass murder, but it would have to be a conquerer's end. She's the most powerful person in the story because she's got dragons. If her victory is hollow it would be because the power was hollow not because she sacrificed her own happiness to make the world better for others. She didn't do that. She's been going after the One Ring, not trying to destroy it.

Edited May 17, 2019 by sistermagpie

[rmontro]

28 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

She's been going after the One Ring, not trying to destroy it.

There are parallels between the Iron Throne and the One Ring, but those parallels are not perfect.  There HAVE been good Targaryen kings, so if it was simply the throne that corrupted, it should have corrupted all of them.  IF the analogy between the RIng and the Iron Throne were perfect.

This is like the Dick Van Dyke show.  Five seasons, just as we saw it.  Then, in the very last episode it says:

"Laura burned down the neighborhood, killing everyone.

So Rob had to kill her.  He's going to jail now.

Mel is taking over head writer duties".

[sistermagpie]

31 minutes ago, rmontro said:

There are parallels between the Iron Throne and the One Ring, but those parallels are not perfect.  There HAVE been good Targaryen kings, so if it was simply the throne that corrupted, it should have corrupted all of them.  IF the analogy between the RIng and the Iron Throne were perfect.

I wasn't trying to say they were exactly the same, but the seeking the IT absolutely means you are seeking power. That's constant throughout Dany's story. It's there when she's conquering cities or imagining her baby with Drogo will be "the stallion that mounts the world" or demanding people bend the knee. It's also there when she's heroically freeing slaves and inviting them rather than ordering them to join her. When she does something that isn't just about getting the throne--like showing kindness to people or helping the North etc.--it's significant because the goal of the throne is always there but she has other motivations too and some of those might conflict with it.

But it seems like this drive for power sometimes gets sort of brushed aside like it's just a situation Dany was born into and isn't at the center of most of her scenes no matter what's going on. Suggesting her abandoning the throne would be like Frodo saving the Shire but not for him or that she's like Laura Petry seems to be doing the same thing. If she believes she's saving the city, she's not just saving it or for the people there, she's saving it for herself to rule (in name if not in practice).

[rmontro]

24 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

I wasn't trying to say they were exactly the same, but the seeking the IT absolutely means you are seeking power.

I got what you were saying, and you're right, there are analogies between the Ring of Power and the Iron Throne, I believe GRRM has even said there was.  I'm just pointing out that it's not a perfect analogy, because it hasn't been a a curse to everybody.  In other words, it's not inevitable that you will be cursed if you seek the Iron Throne.  

Dany has definitely sought to rule, but her reasons have always seemed to be valid.  She wanted to restore her family's legacy, she wanted to avoid her father's mistakes, and she wanted to use her position to do good, and free the slaves.   She specifically has wanted to avoid becoming what her father was, and yet in the space of about an episode she does (I think she starts the transformation during the post war celebration at Winterfell, and it is arguably complete by the beginning of the next episode).

This has no basis in the show really, but when they were talking about her not eating for two weeks, I was thinking maybe she was fasting in order to do the really heavy dragon magic performance she puts in, taking out the Iron Fleet and KL.  The magical connection between Targaryens and their dragons are interesting, like the way she can just will Drogon to come up behind her and toast Varys.  She does use the command dracarys, but he appears behind her as soon as she is ready to use him.

[RobertDeSneero]

Dany is not the Frodo of this story, she's the Aragorn.  And Martin wanted to tell a story about what if the character with the arc of hero who becomes King turned out to be something other than a wise and just ruler.  She's supposed to be portrayed as someone who you expect to get a typical heroic ending through the fight of the living against the dead because you are conditioned by your exposure to conventions of the genre.  Except after the war, things don't go so great and  - boom - she turns.  

[GraceK]

I finally figured out my issue with Danys last minute heel turn and why it bothers me. It’s the writers explanation for it. That’s what sticks, and the lack of self awareness in show of how wrong Varys is.

David and Dan basically say after the episode that she’s a “Targaryen “ and that wins out. That she “ snaps”, that you can look back and see it. That’s bullshit. These same people defended her for years . They are dumb.

Shes not crazy. She’s ANGRY. Cop to it. Admit it. I would have been okay with this episode if they admitted that Tyrion has been giving her shit advice for two years to minimize the damage inflicted on his family. That she’s mad that she’s not getting any love from the North for her sacrifices and Sansa is being hateful for no reason. That her soft serve approach to Cersei has lost her Missendei  and Rhaegal and  that was Tyrion’s advice she listened too. OWN IT. Admit that Varys is a traitor and trying to poison her and that she’s right to be paranoid And that finally, she hates these people. After all her losses, she looks at Kings Landing, at the Red Keep, at the seat of HER FAMILY, her rightful place, and all she has suffered and lost to come home, and she feels like an outsider and she’s alone and miserable and resentful and ANGRY as hell. And that’s what motivates her in that moment. Because that makes sense. Instead we get a dumb excuse about how it’s her Targaryen genes 🙄

[ursula]

4 minutes ago, GraceK said:

Instead we get a dumb excuse about how it’s her Targaryen genes 🙄

Don't forget how her First Sign of Madness was not reacting "appropriately" to her abuser's death.

[GraceK]

4 minutes ago, ursula said:

Don't forget how her First Sign of Madness was not reacting "appropriately" to her abuser's death.

Seriously. I can understand rage. What we saw in this episode was RAGE. It wasn’t madness, because she has been right this whole time. Her advisors are plotting against her. One is trying to kill her. Sansa is trying to plan a overthrow  . Two of her children are dead. So are Jorah and Missendai. Jon doesn’t love her anymore and won’t even try to love her as family. She is PISSED. And she just helped saved the world and it means nothing to anyone. She didn’t want surrender. She wanted vengeance. So just SAY IT. Fans will understand. They will hate her or love her but they will understand. This shit???? No. We hate it and that’s the backlash. 

Edited May 17, 2019 by GraceK

[rmontro]

2 minutes ago, GraceK said:

David and Dan basically say after the episode that she’s a “Targaryen “ and that wins out. That she “ snaps”, that you can look back and see it. That’s bullshit. These same people defended her for years . They are dumb.

Some are saying that it's not that she's gone mad, she's just a bad person, or has become a bad person because of her ambition/obsession.  IMO the show is saying she is mad though, because they kept referring to the Targaryen "flip a coin" rule. 

It doesn't really matter to me which is the case, because in either case it's unearned IMO.  Either way it ruins the character.

I can't wait to hear this speech she's going to give about her future plans.  Spoilers say that it's about freeing the slaves.  My memory may be faulty, but there are no slaves in Westeros, are there?  I'm wondering is she will talk about going city to city, "freeing" those who are under the rule of their local leaders, unless they bend the knee, and if they don't they all burn.  That would likely goad Jon into killing her, if he hadn't already decided to.  I also wonder if she directs any threats toward Sansa.

[GraceK]

6 minutes ago, rmontro said:

Some are saying that it's not that she's gone mad, she's just a bad person, or has become a bad person because of her ambition/obsession.  IMO the show is saying she is mad though, because they kept referring to the Targaryen "flip a coin" rule. 

It doesn't really matter to me which is the case, because in either case it's unearned IMO.  Either way it ruins the character.

I can't wait to hear this speech she's going to give about her future plans.  Spoilers say that it's about freeing the slaves.  My memory may be faulty, but there are no slaves in Westeros, are there?  I'm wondering is she will talk about going city to city, "freeing" those who are under the rule of their local leaders, unless they bend the knee, and if they don't they all burn.  That would likely goad Jon into killing her, if he hadn't already decided to.  I also wonder if she directs any threats toward Sansa.

That’s the point. They don’t want us to feel sympathy or understand her. She’s a villain now who has to die. The shocking twist won . That’s what’s bitter. They don’t care. Not even Cersei got this treatment. But now a character that for seven years genuinely was a good human being and was loved will possibly be murdered by someone she loves and die a a crazy mad villain who is on the level of genocidal  maniacs. Forget everything over the past 7 years. It meant nothing. She’s Stalin now.

Edited May 17, 2019 by GraceK

[rmontro]

21 minutes ago, GraceK said:

That’s the point. They don’t want us to feel sympathy or understand her. She’s a villain now who has to die. The shocking twist won . That’s what’s bitter. They don’t care. Not even Cersei got this treatment. But now a character that for seven years genuinely was a good human being and was loved will possibly be murdered by someone she loves and die a a crazy mad villain who is on the level of genocidal  maniacs. Forget everything over the past 7 years. It meant nothing. She’s Stalin now.

I know, and that's what makes me angry.  Even Cersei got a fairly surpisingly sympathetic death.  Euron went out happy as a clam.  But I don't doubt that there will be some sad music playing when Dany dies and Drogon flies off with her body (if that's what happens.  I'm still waiting for the armor Drogon was supposed to wear).

I just saw on Stephen Colbert he mentioned news reports about parents who had named their children Daenerys or Khaleesi.  They undoubtedly thought that they had named their daughters after a strong, inspiring character, and now they find out that they've named them after a mass murderer.  Just one more tragic ending connected to this abomination.

Edited May 17, 2019 by rmontro

[Umbelina]

So now it's OK to murder innocents if people don't bow to you, or don't like you, or don't love you in a sexual way when they find out you're a close relative, or fail you, or don't trust you, or hurt your feelings?

She already killed the man who tried to poison her.

What did those people she's never even met in Kings Landing do to deserve that? 

This sounds very much like what school shooters say. 

Also, that throne isn't her "rightful place."  By her own definition?  It's Jon's place.

I agree the writers suck, but not that burning innocents is in any way justified.  Ever.  Certainly not after they have surrendered.

Edited May 17, 2019 by Umbelina

[rmontro]

4 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

So now it's OK to murder innocents if people don't bow to you, or don't like you, or don't love you in a sexual way when they find out you're a close relative, or fail you, or don't trust you, or hurt your feelings?

I don't think anyone has said that.

Some people are struggling with how to explain these recent actions, because they are so inconsistent with how her character has been presented up till now.  So they're seeking some rationale for it.  

Is Dany insane, or just evil?  It has to be one of the two, but people can't seem to agree on which it is.  Which is a sign of the bad writing.  IMO she's insane (because of all the "flip a coin" references).  But we'll probably get a better picture of it Sunday.  Maybe.

[Andromeda]

I love this article.  

Saying ‘Game of Thrones' fans should regret naming kids after Daenerys is sexist. Stop it!

[GraceK]

32 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

So now it's OK to murder innocents if people don't bow to you, or don't like you, or don't love you in a sexual way when they find out you're a close relative, or fail you, or don't trust you, or hurt your feelings?

She already killed the man who tried to poison her.

What did those people she's never even met in Kings Landing do to deserve that? 

This sounds very much like what school shooters say. 

Also, that throne isn't her "rightful place."  By her own definition?  It's Jon's place.

I agree the writers suck, but not that burning innocents is in any way justified.  Ever.  Certainly not after they have surrendered.

Omg seriously. Look at my post. I literally said she looks at the seat of HER FAMILY, HER RIGHTFUL PLACE. I am in her head here. Ok? I’m literally discussing how Daenarys, herself, can justify what she’s doing. How the writers can just straight up ADMIT she is mad ( angry mad) and pissed off and go with that rational explanation, instead of the stupid “ she a cray cray bitch “ one they went with. Because what they are saying does NOT ADD UP. 🤦🏻‍♀️ Jesus. It’s really pathetic when the writing on a show is such shit that fans have to literally create  better motivations than the writers. I’m trying to make sense of her actions so it lines up with what we saw on screen. Because what we saw on screen was her advisors betraying, plotting and gaslighting her for no reason. A woman in grief was suddenly insane. 🤦🏻‍♀️ What’s better to you? A woman JUSTIFIABLY  angry at advisors who aren’t loyal, whose  military plans lost her key allies, who are trying to kill her , who prefer a male claimant,  and are constantly helping her enemies? Or a woman who suddenly hears bells and goes insane?

Im saying that it makes more sense narratively that she didn’t really want the bells to ring. She didn’t want surrender. That’s she’s ANGRY and wants revenge. That she realizes that she HATES these people of Kings Landing. Why? Maybe for betraying her family. Maybe for not overthrowing Cersei. Maybe for not being grateful to her for saving them from the NK. Maybe for them fearing her. Who knows? But all of these are more interesting and less insulting than she hears bells and didn't get dick from Jon and goes crazy.

Edited May 17, 2019 by GraceK

[Andromeda]

It all Bran's fault.