Season 8: Speculation and Spoilers Discussion

[Smad]

10 hours ago, GrailKing said:

Not thinking it will happen ( I think Brienne would just leave her service ), but what if it does.

Just basing it on her look in the clip and show and books little conversations.

What is the big deal with Brienne's look? I don't get it. That's Brienne's resting face and it's never been an issue before. Why is it suddenly more significant than the other 521341263126 times she had that face?

[Colorful Mess]

38 minutes ago, Happy Harpy said:

And from 8x03 on, none of this will matter anymore since chances are high there will be little, if anything, left of the North.

The WW just conveniently wipe out all of Dany's obstacles or complications? Terrible writing.

The show is now about the reaction to Jon's parentage as Weiss says.

The WW battle is about how characters respond to an existential threat as Benioff says.

Something isn't going to go smoothly in these two plotlines. My guess is there will be a fraction in the alliance, as there ALWAYS is on this show.

2 minutes ago, tangerine95 said:

The means of actual people,armies,weapons etc.Dany has them very much outnumbered and overpowered if they try something against her.How is all the Starks learned about putting Dany on the throne unless they betray her,kill her or something?She can easily get the IT without any Starks help so I don't really get what you mean by that tbh.

She ruled in Dragon's Bay after freeing slaves,who also willingly helped her free them.It was a difficult situation with many setbacks but she managed to pull through pretty well and by the end of season 6 there was peace.She's not just a conqueror no matter how good she is at  that.There's no rule that says a conqueror automatically means a bad ruler,it sure wasn't the case for Aegon the conqueror who Dany is compared to so much.

The idea that she has them all hostage because she overpowers them is exactly why they would want to fight her. "She can easily get the Iron Throne without the Starks' help" - yes, by CONQUERING. That means melting castles and turning Winterfell and the Red Keep into new Harrenhals and cooking Lannisters and Starks in their armor. If she doesn't want to do that she has to curry favor with the Lords and actually handle their complicated issues herself. 

She was a fitting ruler for Essos, which she had to rule like a police state. That's her training and that's the environment she learned in. She has no practical experience with dealing with "ruling with the support of the rich" aka the lords, as Tyrion points out. 

Aegon the Conqueror wasn't a hero. He massacred thousands of people for his ambitions. The story ending with Dany ruling after having destroyed every house to get there isn't exactly...good.

[tangerine95]

18 minutes ago, Colorful Mess said:

The WW just conveniently wipe out all of Dany's obstacles or complications? Terrible writing.

The show is now about the reaction to Jon's parentage as Weiss says.

The WW battle is about how characters respond to an existential threat as Benioff says.

Something isn't going to go smoothly in these two plotlines. My guess is there will be a fraction in the alliance, as there ALWAYS is on this show.

The idea that she has them all hostage because she overpowers them is exactly why they would want to fight her. "She can easily get the Iron Throne without the Starks' help" - yes, by CONQUERING. That means melting castles and turning Winterfell and the Red Keep into new Harrenhals and cooking Lannisters and Starks in their armor. If she doesn't want to do that she has to curry favor with the Lords and actually handle their complicated issues herself. 

She was a fitting ruler for Essos, which she had to rule like a police state. That's her training and that's the environment she learned in. She has no practical experience with dealing with "ruling with the support of the rich" aka the lords, as Tyrion points out. 

Aegon the Conqueror wasn't a hero. He massacred thousands of people for his ambitions. The story ending with Dany ruling after having destroyed every house to get there isn't exactly...good.

I'm talking about the hypothetical situation if the north decides they want to wage war against Dany or try to betray her in some way.She's not going to walk in there and be a tyrant who expects them all to surrender everything they have,who hurts people for fun,she's not going to take WF from the Starks or hurt them in anyway.She's coming to help them.In return all they need to give is the basic fealty to her as a queen which is something the north didn't have a problem with until Joffrey cut off Ned Stark's head.And she didn't even require that after she realized how serious the threat of the AOTD was but Jon gave it anyway after she saved his life.I really don't see how that's a sign that the north is suddenly subjugated to a monster and she's as bad a threat to them as the NK.

You do realize no one can get anything in this fictional world unless they conquer it?She can't exactly run a campaign for the next election.Jon and Sansa literally had to do the same thing in season 6.They had to take back WF by force even tho a large number of the northern lords didn't want them to and a lot of people died in horrible ways on the battlefield so they can achieve that.Or is fire the only bad way to kill someone in battle and everything else is okay and painless?

She sure managed to get the support of nobles in Westeros tho?There was the Tyrells,Martells,Greyjoys and she got the support of the KiTN.So I wouldn't say she can't get favour from anyone unless of course the only valuable opinions are the northern lords?You know the guys that largely fought for the Boltons against the Starks in season 6.

Edited January 11, 2019 by tangerine95

[GrailKing]

1 hour ago, Smad said:

What is the big deal with Brienne's look? I don't get it. That's Brienne's resting face and it's never been an issue before. Why is it suddenly more significant than the other 521341263126 times she had that face?

To me it looks like a worried or non trusting look, her lips are tight, eyes look stern and from that angle it looks like she's watching Sansa.

I asked a what if.

[Smad]

1 hour ago, Colorful Mess said:

The story ending with Dany ruling after having destroyed every house to get there isn't exactly...good.

I've always assumed that is what 'breaking the wheel' meant to Dany. What other meaning is there since there are no slaves in Westeros as there are in Essos? She feels entitled to the throne, as absolute monarch, she has made that clear. In the same breath talking about 'breaking the wheel', the wheel being all the powerful houses we have come to know. To become absolute monarch by breaking the wheel, she has to break the spokes first. The spokes in this case are the houses of Westeros. And the only way to achieve that is by subjugation or elimination via death. To be on the safe side and hope for no uprising, the latter option of death would be preferable to an absolute monarch.

31 minutes ago, GrailKing said:

To me it looks like a worried or non trusting look, her lips are tight, eyes look stern and from that angle it looks like she's watching Sansa.

It's not just you who commented on that look. I just don't understand what the problem is. I see nothing special in it, hence I don't get the drama that's made of her look. Her look says nothing to me really. Looks like 'resting face' to me.

[screamin]

3 hours ago, Happy Harpy said:

The first part of your post, about Sam, reads as (sorry) complete OOC fanfiction to me, so I'm not going to touch it. I don't see any of those characters behaving like this.

Jon's parentage reveal changes nothing for the North. He became KITN because he had Stark blood and he ousted the Boltons. After the reveal, he still has that Stark blo

Okay, what do you see Sam doing when he's suddenly faced with the news that his mother and sister are bereaved because his father and brother  were burned to death by Jon's girlfriend, who's justifying their death on the grounds that as their queen she had the right to slay prisoners of war who would not vow fealty right where they stood? If, in the middle of that shock and upset he had one bit of information that would knock her pretensions and justifications out from under her and cause her a miniscule part of the emotional pain she'd caused his family - do you think that in the middle of his horror he'd decide to  just do nothing with that info and limit himself to silently pouting at her when he sees her? I really don't think we can say lashing out  verbally under an extreme loss is something OOC for Sam when we've never actually seen him suffer that kind of loss before. Regardless, I think the showrunners' deliberate choice to have Sam get the news of his dad and brother's death at around the same time Dany comes back - while giving Sam a weapon to strike at Dany with - is deliberately setting up a Chekov's gun. It would be sloppy writing to just forget about it. (Though I could also see Bran being the one to drop the turd in the punch bowl based on weird Recondite Raven Reasons, and Sam playing the spiteful secondary role of providing the material evidence to back him up.)

 

3 hours ago, Happy Harpy said:

Finally, I'm sorry I wasn't clear enough because it seems you missed my main point: in 8x01, the Northern lords have zero leverage or clout because they are beggars, not choosers. And from 8x03 on, none of this will matter anymore since chances are high there will be little, if anything, left of the North.

I'm aware of that spoiler, too. And since I really doubt the NK's going to arrive on WF the same day Dany does, what she and her armies  and the Northern lords and probably the Vale forces do in the meantime to prepare to fight him is of vital importance. Jon himself says they need every man, so they must be united. If Dany's army with dragons is so VERY superior, one wonders WHY WF collapses under the NK's onslaught so easily. Might it have been disunity at the HQ?

 

2 hours ago, tangerine95 said:

The means of actual people,armies,weapons etc.Dany has them very much outnumbered and overpowered if they try something against her.How is all the Starks learned about putting Dany on the throne unless they betray her,kill her or something?She can easily get the IT without any Starks help so I don't really get what you mean by that tbh.

You think? I'm sure Dany felt perfectly secure when she first conquered the slaver cities with a brand spanking new army of Dothraki and superior Unsullied soldiers still unworn by prolonged battle, their ranks swelled further by freed slaves. And for that matter, I'm sure Napoleon felt secure in Moscow after he conquered that capital city with the most sophisticated army in the world at the time. Napoleon and Dany, as well as other leaders have learned that large armies and sophisticated weapons (whether WMD or dragons) have serious limits when confronted by decentralized covert resistance and a fatal lack of familiarity with the ambient they're trying to fight in.

Dany's numbers may look big compared to the Northern lords' men - but she isn't trying to fight THEM to get the Iron Throne. She has to kill the NK before she can even THINK about the Iron Throne. Sure, in a pitched battle she could flatten the Northmen - but that would likely doom her quest for the Iron Throne. The spoilers seem to indicate the Vale forces are leaving the North - whether before or after Dany arrives isn't clear, but Lord Royce has the legitimate excuse that he cannot make alliances for Sweetrobin without consulting him. Dany might try to threaten him into leaving his forces behind under her command, but Jon would be likely reluctant to threaten an ally who saved his ass in the Battle of the Bastards, and Dany would likely follow his lead, before things really start going to hell.

So the Vale goes. How are Dany's numbers looking then? Still, she can afford to disregard the Northmen, can't she, even after her battle losses suffered since arrival in Westeros? Well...there's that whole "unfamiliarity with the ambient" thing. However much the Northern forces may be disdained, they do know how to survive and fight in the extreme cold. Dothraki and the Unsullied seem to only know warm weather - not to mention the Dothraki have strings of horses who are ALSO not used to the cold AND will require large amounts of grain that will have to come from the Northmen's winter storage - grain they will likely worry may not be enough to feed their children. If the Northmen have enough resolve and trust in their leaders to keep them safe from threats and get more food before everyone starves, they CAN teach Dany's armies how to manage the cold and keep bringing them food. But if they  lose faith and decide, for whatever reason, NOT to remain united? As I said, they probably won't start guerrilla tactics against Dany - but they CAN quietly desert in the snowy night, stop supplying food and taking what they have to their most withdrawn manors in hopes of waiting out the winter with their families. Even if Dany tried to chase them down with her dragons and burn every holdfast, she can't get them all, and won't get her food back that way. Send her frostbitten armies to find them on a hundred different unfamiliar snowed-over Northern roads? While waiting for the NK to arrive? Really?

And yes, it WOULD be a stupid, ultimately self-defeating move on the Northmen's parts. But most of them have never seen the walking dead and probably don't believe in their extreme danger even now - there's a Wall, isn't there? And Jon didn't think to show THEM the walking dead - he considered their fealty to him enough. But then he replaced himself with Dany. He and she can blame the Northmen for the fall of WF all they like - but it's still the leaders' ultimate responsibility to keep the faith of the fearful and the stupid as well as the brave. The buck stops with them. And I think the failure in leadership will probably start with issues over Dany's rule - including the revelation of Jon's kingship.

Edited January 11, 2019 by screamin

[glowbug]

Why can’t people accept that Dany is not the main villain/antagonist in this story? Last season put an end to that theory. Jon, the show’s moral compass, who always seems to hate everyone we know to be evil and like everyone we know to be good-ish (or at least the people who have redeeming qualities like Tyrion and Mance Rayder), said Dany is worthy of being queen and has fallen in love with her. That doesn’t mean she doesn’t make mistakes but she is not evil or an antagonist. The White Walkers are the main antagonist. I believe GRRM has said as much in the context of the War of Five Kings and in the leaked outline.

That scene where Jon figuratively bends the knee to Dany is telling. She agrees to fight the WW without requiring Jon to swear fealty to her. She recognizes the threat of the WW is more important than her quest for the throne. She also says that her sacrifice (losing her “child” and nearly a third of her power) was worth it because seeing the WW was the only ways she would have understood the threat. After Jon swears loyalty to her he tells her that the northern lords will come to see her as worthy of being queen like he has. Dany responds with gratitude, not entitlement, and then says she hopes she deserves it, showing both that she cares about whether or not she is worthy and that she has doubts about her abilities (i.e. humility). These are not the words of a despotic ruler, at least  by GOT standards (the closest thing Westeros has to a democracy is the Ironborn and they suck). Dany isn’t going to turn her back on the north in season 8 when the northern lords and Sansa inevitably give her the cold shoulder. She isn’t going to be happy about it but she understands the threat the WW pose and defeating them, even at great cost to herself, is what is most important to her as shown in the aforementioned scene. When Sansa (and Arya if she has her doubts about Dany) finally understands the threat the WW pose (neither of them have seen it, which, as Dany says, is necessary to understand it) and sees that Dany wants to help them and is willing to sacrifice her armies, her dragons (who she views as children), and her own life to protect the North and all of Westeros, they are going to view her as an ally.

As others have pointed out, Dany has earned loyalty without using force. She freed the Unsullied and they chose to follow her, as did many of the other slaves. A small group of Dothraki also followed her after Drogo died without her having to force them. Jorah and Barristan both supported her as well. In the show, she made alliances with Dorne, half the Ironborn (the good-ish half), and the Queen of Thorns/Tyrells without using force. She is supported by the less bad/good characters. Tyrion (as opposed to Cersei), the Tyrells/Dorne (as opposed to the Lannisters and Sam’s dad), Varys (as opposed to Qyburn/Little Finger), reformed Theon/Yara (as opposed to Euron), Jon, Davos, Grey Worm, and Missande. I could see any of these characters/groups choosing the wrong side but not all of them. 

I wish we didn’t spend so much time debating how good or bad the main female characters (aside from Cersei—I think we all agree she’s evil) on this show are. I swear, 50% of the time is spent debating whether or not Sansa is going to betray her family or is a good leader, 40% or the time is spent debating whether or not Dany is the Mad Queen or an unworthy despotic ruler, and the last 10% of the time is spent debating whether Arya is a psychopathic killer who can no longer live in civilized society or not. As with Dany, I think season seven also put to rest “evil Sansa” and “evil Arya”. They may not always get along but ultimately they are all on the same side against both Cersei (the main human antagonist) and the WW (the main antagonist). 

Edited January 11, 2019 by glowbug

[GraceK]

7 minutes ago, glowbug said:

Why can’t peole accept that Dany is not the main villain/antagonist in this story? Last season put an end to that theory. Jon, the show’s moral compass, who always seems to hate everyone we know to be evil and like everyone we know to be good-ish (or at least the people who have redeeming qualities like Tyrion and Mance Rayder), said Dany is worthy of being queen and has fallen in love with her. That doesn’t mean she doesn’t make mistakes but she is not evil or an antagonist. The White Walkers are the main antagonist. I believe GRRM has said as much in the context of the War of Five Kings and in the leaked outline.

That scene where Jon figuratively bends the knee to Dany is telling. She agrees to fight the WW without requiring Jon to swear fealty to her. She recognizes the threat of the WW is more important than her quest for the throne. She also says that her sacrifice (losing her “child” and nearly a third of her power) was worth it because seeing the WW was the only ways she would have understood the threat. After Jon swears loyalty to her he tells her that the northern lords will come to see her as worthy of being queen like he has. Dany responds with gratitude, not entitlement, and then says she hopes she deserves it, showing both that she cares about whether or not she is worthy and that she has doubts about her abilities (i.e. humility). These are not the words of a despotic ruler, at least  by GOT standards (the closest thing Westeros has to a democracy is the Ironborn and they suck). Dany isn’t going to turn her back on the north in season 8 when the northern lords and Sansa inevitably give her the cold shoulder. She isn’t going to be happy about it but she understands the threat the WW pose and defeating them, even at great cost to herself, is what is most important to her as shown in the aforementioned scene. When Sansa (and Arya if she has her doubts about Dany) finally understands the threat the WW pose (neither of them have seen it, which, as Dany says, is necessary to understand it) and sees that Dany wants to help them and is willing to sacrifice her armies, her dragons (who she views as children), and her own life to protect the North and all of Westeros, they are going to view her as an ally.

As others have pointed out, Dany has earned loyalty without using force. She freed the Unsullied and they chose to follow her, as did many of the other slaves. A small group of Dothraki also followed her after Drogo died without her having to force them. Jorah and Barristan both supported her as well. In the show, she made alliances with Dorne, half the Ironborn (the good-ish half), and the Queen of Thorns/Tyrells without using force. She is supported by the less bad/good characters. Tyrion (as opposed to Cersei), the Tyrells/Dorne (as opposed to the Lannisters and Sam’s dad), Varys (as opposed to Qyburn/Little Finger), reformed Theon/Yara (as opposed to Euron), Jon, Davos, Grey Worm, and Missande. I could see any of these characters/groups choosing the wrong side but not all of them. 

I wish we didn’t spend so much time debating how good or bad the main female characters (aside from Cersei—I think we all agree she’s evil) on this show are. I swear, 50% of the time is spent debating whether or not Sansa is going to betray her family or is a good leader, 40% or the time is spent debating whether or not Dany is the Mad Queen or an unworthy despotic ruler, and the last 10% of the time is spent debating whether Arya is a psychopathic killer who can no longer live in civilized society or not. As with Dany, I think season seven also put to rest “evil Sansa” and “evil Arya”. They may not always get along but ultimately they are all on the same side against both Cersei (the main human antagonist) and the WW (the main antagonist). 

 

[anamika]

1 hour ago, glowbug said:

When Sansa (and Arya if she has her doubts about Dany) finally understands the threat the WW pose

Two seasons of Jon and Sansa interacting and I still don't know what Sansa's opinion is about the WW and the army of the dead. Does she believe in them? Or does she not believe in them and thinks Jon is making it all up? Her conversation with Jon in early season 7 seemed to indicate that she knows that WW exists but thinks that Cersei is more dangerous than the undead. She was asking everyone to bring their grain to WF - was that for a WW attack or Cersei attack? I am not really sure because for some strange reason, Jon and Sansa - leaders of the North - never discussed this very important issue. It's the same with the Northern lords - Jon has been talking to them only about the army of the dead and preparing the North for their attack. So do they realize that dead people are coming their way? The way they respond to anything Jon says makes me doubt this. 

In a way I can understand why Jon grasped at the wight hunt plan - three seasons of no one ever believing him and even the Northerners not being too bothered about it - he must have decided to give this last option a try. Even if it was 'mental' in Kit Harington's words.

With respect to Dany and ruling, this is what GRRM has to say on the matter:

Quote

One thing that I am trying to get at in the books, the political aspect if you would, is to kind of show that this stuff is hard. I think that an awful lot of fantasy and even some great fantasy falls under the mistake of assuming that a good man would be a good king and all that is necessary is to be a decent human being and then when you are king everything will go swimmingly. Tolkien is great but we never get into the nitty gritty of Aragorn ruling. What is his tax policy? How does he feel about crop rotation? How does he handle land disputes between two nobles, both of whom think that they should have the village, so they burn it down to establish their claim. This is the hard part of ruling be it in the middle ages or now. It’s not enough to be a good man to be an effective ruler. It’s complicated and it’s hard and I wanted to show that with repeated examples in my books with my kings and hand of the kings - the prime minister if you would - trying to rule. And whether it be Ned Stark or Tyrion Lannister or Tywin Lannister or Daenerys Targaryen or Cersei Lannister trying to deal with the real challenges that affect anyone trying to rule the 7K or even a city like Meereen and it’s hard. You know, we can all read the books or read history and say oh, so and so was stupid and made a lot of mistakes and look at all these stupid mistakes they make. But these kind of mistakes are always much more apparent in hind sight than when you are actually faced with the decision about, oh my God, what would I do in this situation. How do I resolve this thing? Do I do the moral thing? But what about  the political consequences of the moral thing? Do I do the pragmatic, cynical thing and kind of screw the people who are screwed by it? I mean, it is HARD. And I want to get to all of that - GRRM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJCb3xyWyAg

GRRM's rulers are flawed people and flawed rulers. They are not perfect. They make mistakes, they make morally wrong but pragmatic choices, they make morally right but politically wrong decisions, they screw up, they get it right, thousands could die because of their decisions, thousands more may live - because as GRRM frustratingly explains in that video, ruling is HARD. Characters don't magically become the best, most flawless, perfect rulers in the books. That's why I get frustrated when Ned and Robb are criticized for their 'stupid mistakes'. As GRRM says, Hindsight is 20-20 and everything worked against Ned in KL - from Bobby B going boar hunting and getting killed, Cat arresting Tyrion,  his daughter tattling to Cersei, LF, Renly etc. Did Ned make mistakes? Sure. But that's GRRM point - it's hard to make these decisions. For Ned it was -  do I warn Cersei to help three children, or do I stand by and see 3 children murdered for no fault of their own. This is especially true for characters like Dany and Jon who are currently 15 and 16 years old in the book. Robb was 15 when he was killed.

More from GRRM with respect to his heroes and villains:

Quote

His characters, from royals to peasants, tend to be ethically mutable. So-called good people, like the noblemen Ned Stark, his son Robb Stark or the indomitable Daenerys Targaryen (“the Mother of Dragons”), make terrible mistakes — out of weakness, pride or an overly rigid sense of right and wrong. And horrible people, like Jaime Lannister, known as “the Kingslayer,” do terrible things and then, over the course of several books, reveal themselves to be capable of heroism and sacrifice.

As we’re discussing this in the theater, Martin quotes Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar” from memory: “The evil that men do lives after them;/ The good is oft interred with their bones.” Then he adds his own version: “We shouldn’t forget about the evil that good men do. But we shouldn’t forget about the good either,” he says. “I do think a society needs heroes. They don’t have to be flawless.”

And finally, the AOTD is marching on WF! That's all that matters. That's all that should matter to all of the Northerners - an existential, apocalyptic threat is headed their way and the North is first in line. As we know from filming spoilers, even Dany's dragons and armies are not enough because it looks like WF and the North falls and everyone flees south. That's how bad the threat is. So characters should put aside petty politics and just unite behind a leader. Discuss, argue, debate, fight over who should rule over whom after this threat is defeated - characters who understand this will be the smart people in the room.

Edited January 11, 2019 by anamika

[Smad]

2 hours ago, glowbug said:

Why can’t people accept that Dany is not the main villain/antagonist in this story? Last season put an end to that theory.

IMO that depends on who you ask. Not everyone has to think that Dany is the second coming. She has plenty of negative traits and plenty of things she has done that are at the very least questionable. That starts at the end of S1 (her burning of Mirrah Maz Duhr (sp?), being all happy as Drogo proclaims to rape and destroy Westeros) up to and including S7. If someone doesn't like her much or outright hates her character for it, they are IMO well within their rights. *shrugs*

And since I still have no idea what Dany actually plans to do with Westros once she has the throne, I can only go with what I understand her character to be and the few things she has said and put them into perspective. I could counter point a lot of your points, especially when it comes to Dany and the followers she has acquired but I think it's just a matter of different perspective.

2 hours ago, glowbug said:

Jon, the show’s moral compass, who always seems to hate everyone we know to be evil and like everyone we know to be good-ish (or at least the people who have redeeming qualities like Tyrion and Mance Rayder), said Dany is worthy of being queen and has fallen in love with her.

The guy who murdered a child by hanging (his watch ended with his death so he had no authority to kill Olly and he had told Edd he quit) and exiled a woman who burned a child at the stake and has broken every oath he ever swore, is the moral compass of the show? No thanks, I rather use my own moral compass. Just because the show tells me to think this way or that about a character, doesn't mean I will. I make up my own mind.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Smad

[BadAssRobinArryn]

3 hours ago, anamika said:

Two seasons of Jon and Sansa interacting and I still don't know what Sansa's opinion is about the WW and the army of the dead. Does she believe in them? Or does she not believe in them and thinks Jon is making it all up? Her conversation with Jon in early season 7 seemed to indicate that she knows that WW exists but thinks that Cersei is more dangerous than the undead.  

 

Which is wrong but from her point of view sort of understandable. She believes that the White Walkers are basically trapped behind the wall. Cersei isn't. Also, she has lived near Cersei long enough to know that Cersei not only is power hungry and dangerous but also completely unpredictable. Neither Dany nor Jon can have that much knowledge about Cersei, because they never were as close to her as Sansa was for quite a few years.

[anamika]

2 hours ago, BadAssRobinArryn said:

Which is wrong but from her point of view sort of understandable. She believes that the White Walkers are basically trapped behind the wall. Cersei isn't. Also, she has lived near Cersei long enough to know that Cersei not only is power hungry and dangerous but also completely unpredictable. Neither Dany nor Jon can have that much knowledge about Cersei, because they never were as close to her as Sansa was for quite a few years.

I still don't get it. Sansa thinks that Cersei is more unpredictable and dangerous than an undead Zombie? The whole reason why everyone is worried about this army of wights and WW is because magic is unpredictable and no one really knows much about what these things are and how they work - including the 3ER/Bran. Jon himself is only finding out new stuff each time he fights them. What if they can go around the wall if the sea freezes?

So Jon can say with some certainty that a human southern army would be unable to cross the harsh winter in the North and reach WF undetected and attack them. But he would be unable to predict what the NK and his army can do. 

Especially if Sansa grew up on Old Nan's tales and Jon is now telling her that it's all true, her nonchalance about the whole thing is baffling.... 

Old Nan describing the long night - scary indeed.

I really hope we get to see the pale spiders big as hounds next season!

Edited January 11, 2019 by anamika

[Happy Harpy]

8 hours ago, screamin said:

Okay, what do you see Sam doing when he's suddenly faced with the news that his mother and sister are bereaved because his father and brother  were burned to death by Jon's girlfriend

I see John Bradley who didn't mention Sam's mother and sister's grief and said Sam's father and brother deserved their fate. The promo monkeys are trying to hype conflict, especially involving Daenerys, while not spoiling any new fact; and yet an actor would have missed the perfect opportunity to not hype one which wouldn't spoil any new fact? Doesn't seem to quite gel. Before the con, I saw Sam upset (a bit, mostly for his brother or because of the mode of execution, since Tyrion was drama-queeny about it) and Jon serving Sam with the same discourse Sam did when it came to asking Roose Bolton for men.

Also, it would be sloppy writing if a voice of reason character decides not to act dumb and place the greater good above his personal beef, but it wouldn't be sloppy writing for the Northern lords to act dumb whereas they have a self-evident, easier and smarter strategy, just in order to create drama? Not my perspective.

I have the feeling that you're getting upset, and my goal isn't to upset you, just to debate. I think it's a case of irreconciliable POVs so for me it's better to stop here :)

[onyxrose81]

7 hours ago, Smad said:

IMO that depends on who you ask. Not everyone has to think that Dany is the second coming. She has plenty of negative traits and plenty of things she has done that are at the very least questionable. That starts at the end of S1 (her burning of Mirrah Maz Duhr (sp?), being all happy as Drogo proclaims to rape and destroy Westeros) up to and including S7. If someone doesn't like her much or outright hates her character for it, they are IMO well within their rights. *shrugs*

And since I still have no idea what Dany actually plans to do with Westros once she has the throne, I can only go with what I understand her character to be and the few things she has said and put them into perspective. I could counter point a lot of your points, especially when it comes to Dany and the followers she has acquired but I think it's just a matter of different perspective.

The guy who murdered a child by hanging (his watch ended with his death so he had no authority to kill Olly and he had told Edd he quit) and exiled a woman who burned a child at the stake and has broken every oath he ever swore, is the moral compass of the show? No thanks, I rather use my own moral compass. Just because the show tells me to think this way or that about a character, doesn't mean I will. I make up my own mind.

People want to act like Daenerys is going to be the reincarnation of Maegor the Cruel and we've heard enough from the people who are actually behind the books and the show to understand that's not the case.  She might make some unpopular decisions, just like everyone else on the show but people get giddy over wanting her to be the Mad Queen.  There's nothing anyone can show or any facts that can be told to make them think otherwise so it's obviously just best to agree to disagree because everything that I've seen has told me differently.  

[Eyes High]

3 hours ago, anamika said:

I still don't get it. Sansa thinks that Cersei is more unpredictable and dangerous than an undead Zombie? The whole reason why everyone is worried about this army of wights and WW is because magic is unpredictable and no one really knows much about what these things are and how they work - including the 3ER/Bran. Jon himself is only finding out new stuff each time he fights them. What if they can go around the wall if the sea freezes?

So Jon can say with some certainty that a human southern army would be unable to cross the harsh winter in the North and reach WF undetected and attack them. But he would be unable to predict what the NK and his army can do. 

Especially if Sansa grew up on Old Nan's tales and Jon is now telling her that it's all true, her nonchalance about the whole thing is baffling.... 

 

Cynically, I think Sansa in the show is less an actual character with organic motivations and opinions of her own and less a mutable vessel for whatever the writers need her to be to move the plot forward.

Less cynically, I think it makes sense that Sansa is nonchalant about the WW threat compared to Cersei. First, she has little dealings with magic, and Old Nan's stories aside, it makes sense that ice zombies wouldn't really register with her, while she has seen Cersei for herself. Second of all, Cersei is a human, manageable sort of evil, while the threat of the WWs is almost too big and too apocalyptic to comprehend, and when people are confronted with an apocalyptic, world-ending threat, denial is a common reaction. Lastly, she has no firsthand exposure to the WWs in the show, and as was emphasized in S7, you have to see them to grasp the threat. So I can easily believe that Sansa is terrified of Cersei but unconcerned about the WWs.

I fully expect that Sansa is going to get a forcible attitude adjustment in 8x03 when (I assume) she sees the WWs and the AOTD firsthand.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Eyes High

[Colorful Mess]

Critiques of Dany and ya'll jump to Maegor. Have some perspective on shades of grey. 

She's not Maegor the Cruel, although the showrunners have talked about her capacity for cruelty widening even as her empathy widens. 

She's more like Aegon I/Stannis. Stannis had his heroic moments and Aegon had his benevolent moments  Neither were mad but her empathy is being lessened the more she wants the throne. Unless Dany was a conqueror but is now a soft pastel easy going queen just because Jon fucked her? Fierce women on a mission for themselves redirecting their life's goal because they hook up with a man is pretty sexist. I'd prefer if she just continue to be a dragon if that's the case.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Colorful Mess

[Colorful Mess]

11 hours ago, Smad said:

I've always assumed that is what 'breaking the wheel' meant to Dany. What other meaning is there since there are no slaves in Westeros as there are in Essos? She feels entitled to the throne, as absolute monarch, she has made that clear. In the same breath talking about 'breaking the wheel', the wheel being all the powerful houses we have come to know. To become absolute monarch by breaking the wheel, she has to break the spokes first. The spokes in this case are the houses of Westeros. And the only way to achieve that is by subjugation or elimination via death. To be on the safe side and hope for no uprising, the latter option of death would be preferable to an absolute monarch.

I agree with this tbh, its not a hippy speech about bringing peace and love to Westeros, its her saying to Tyrion she's going to destroy, not rebuild. She also put House Targaryen on the wheel, which I always saw more as foreshadowing for the end of her House. If the wheel means ending the game of thrones though, good luck! Lol

[Minneapple]

Re: Sansa not understanding the threat from the White Walkers.

NOBODY has understood the threat until they've seen it. Not Dany, not Cersei, not anybody. Ned didn't see it either; he executed a guy in the pilot because he thought the guy was lying about the White Walkers. 

Sansa has not seen the threat. But she has seen Cersei at work and knows what Cersei can do. Dany and Jon's biggest problem may be not understanding Cersei's ruthlessness. Let's face it, they'll defeat the White Walkers. That's not in question. The only question is how they'll do it and who they'll lose along the way. The other question is what Cersei is going to do and how everyone else responds to that. 

[screamin]

6 hours ago, Happy Harpy said:

I see John Bradley who didn't mention Sam's mother and sister's grief and said Sam's father and brother deserved their fate. The promo monkeys are trying to hype conflict, especially involving Daenerys, while not spoiling any new fact; and yet an actor would have missed the perfect opportunity to not hype one which wouldn't spoil any new fact? Doesn't seem to quite gel. Before the con, I saw Sam upset (a bit, mostly for his brother or because of the mode of execution, since Tyrion was drama-queeny about it) and Jon serving Sam with the same discourse Sam did when it came to asking Roose Bolton for men.

John Bradley may say that Sam won't react badly to his father and brother's deaths. He may say it because it's true, or he may say it because his reaction may be linked to a vital plot point he isn't supposed to be hinting at. Imagining Sam getting the news about his father and brother while he's in WF with the woman responsible, being totally uncaring about the impact on his mother and sister, and shrugging with bovine indifference, "Good job. They had it coming..." and nothing more? That seems to me far more OOC for Sam, so it seems to me Bradley's misdirecting. But that's just my opinion.

6 hours ago, Happy Harpy said:

Also, it would be sloppy writing if a voice of reason character decides not to act dumb and place the greater good above his personal beef, but it wouldn't be sloppy writing for the Northern lords to act dumb whereas they have a self-evident, easier and smarter strategy, just in order to create drama? Not my perspective.

I have the feeling that you're getting upset, and my goal isn't to upset you, just to debate. I think it's a case of irreconciliable POVs so for me it's better to stop here :)

It's sloppy writing when writers set up a plot point with potential repercussions (Dany kills the brother and father of her future lover's best friend), take valuable time to go back to that plot point and underline it (the maesters of Oldtown deciding they will not tell Sam the news, so he won't learn it till he's at WF, probably with the woman responsible)...and then do nothing with that plot point. It makes all the above wasted time in the narrative.

As for it being "sloppy writing" for the Northern lords to "act dumb" and obstructively to their rulers - do you think the Northern lords have acted smartly until now? As far as I can tell, they've been obstinately dumb and obstructive throughout, causing significant plot complications along the way. To me it would seem both OOC and sloppy writing if the weathervanes suddenly decided to be wisely docile to their leader and cause no further problems. It would also leave us wondering why WF falls to the NK, when it has Dany's oh-so-superior army and two dragons to the NK's one to defend it. Disunity at HQ seems like a good explanation to me.

And no, I'm not at all upset, though it's sweet of you to worry. Feel free to continue debating if you want to.

Edited January 11, 2019 by screamin

[John Potts]

42 minutes ago, Minneapple said:

Ned didn't see it either; he executed a guy in the pilot because he thought the guy was lying about the White Walkers. 

No he didn't: he executed him because he abandoned his post, the penalty for which is death. He listened to the guy saying that the Walkers had returned (before executing him) and reported that back to his brother, the First Ranger. You can argue that he could (or should) have done more, but he didn't ignore it.

[Eyes High]

HBO has announced on their Twitter feed that there will be an official premiere date announcement on Sunday night, before True Detective.

My money’s on the 28th, mostly because I think that if it were any earlier they would have already announced the date.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Eyes High

[GraceK]

We should start a poll 😂. I’m gonna go with April 7th...just to be really outrageously optimistic!!

[Happy Harpy]

3 hours ago, screamin said:

And no, I'm not at all upset, though it's sweet of you to worry. Feel free to continue debating if you want to.

 

Good! As I said, POVs seem irreconciliable so no need to drag it longer. We're going to rehash :)

31 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

HBO has announced on their Twitter feed that there will be an official premiere date announcement on Sunday night, before True Detective.

My money’s on the 28th, mostly because I think that if it were any earlier they would have already announced the date.

 

I think Thrones can be announced later since it's the biggest show on earth right now. But it's wishful thinking since the sooner, the better. I already have my tools ready for the next promo round.

 

Edited January 11, 2019 by Happy Harpy

[Stella]

19 minutes ago, GraceK said:

I’m gonna go with April 7th...just to be really outrageously optimistic!!

I actually agree. The series they are promoting - Euphoria & Watchmen - are both 10 episodes. That doesn't fit into GOT starting in April since they would both run into May. We already know BLL is in June.

There is a mini-series - Catherine The Great - which is 4 episodes. That could slot in after True Detective and give us the 4/7 start for GOT. Or they could show movies, specials what have you for 4 weeks. I think the earlier date is looking realistic.

[WindyNights]

18 hours ago, Happy Harpy said:

The first part of your post, about Sam, reads as (sorry) complete OOC fanfiction to me, so I'm not going to touch it. I don't see any of those characters behaving like this.

Jon's parentage reveal changes nothing for the North. He became KITN because he had Stark blood and he ousted the Boltons. After the reveal, he still has that Stark blood and he still ousted the Boltons. His Targaryen blood gives him a claim over the Iron Throne, and the Northern lords have no business deciding who sits on it for the whole Seven Kingdoms. They don't even have a say over the North anymore, because a king isn't a president and a kingdom isn't a democracy. Jon didn't consult them, nor did he have to, when he chose Daenerys as his queen for reasons that, I repeat, are also unchanged by the reveal. They're still Jon's vassals except he now answers to Daenerys, just like it happened for Torrhen Stark's vassals after he bent the knee.

Finally, I'm sorry I wasn't clear enough because it seems you missed my main point: in 8x01, the Northern lords have zero leverage or clout because they are beggars, not choosers. And from 8x03 on, none of this will matter anymore since chances are high there will be little, if anything, left of the North.

He was made king on the basis that he's Ned's son. He's not. And he's not a Stark at all even if he has Stark blood. He's a Targaryen and many in the North still don't like Targs because Aerys burned their families.

 

On 1/9/2019 at 10:12 PM, Smad said:

But it doesn't matter if it's not on the screen. 100% of the people who watch the episodes see what's on screen as canon. What % of that actually bothers to read every script if they are released, watch/read all interviews? A very tiny %, that's for sure. I'm one of those people who doesn't do that because the only thing that matters for discussion is what is ACTUALLY on screen. Intend matters little, whether that's writing or directing or acting. All that matters is what's on screen because only that is 100% canon. And it's the only thing that's canon for everyone.

But it was. Arya doesn't trust Sansa because she thinks that Sansa wants to overthrow Jon. It's explicitly said over and over again.

[Smad]

5 hours ago, onyxrose81 said:

People want to act like Daenerys is going to be the reincarnation of Maegor the Cruel and we've heard enough from the people who are actually behind the books and the show to understand that's not the case.  She might make some unpopular decisions, just like everyone else on the show but people get giddy over wanting her to be the Mad Queen.  There's nothing anyone can show or any facts that can be told to make them think otherwise so it's obviously just best to agree to disagree because everything that I've seen has told me differently.  

And when have I ever compared her to her relatives? Not once that I can remember. So I would appreciate it if people don't put words in my mouth. All I'm saying is that people are allowed to hate or not like Dany (like any other character ever in any tv show/movie) and that there have been plenty of situations in the show that might cause someone to feel that way about her. And it doesn't make the person wrong in their opinion, just different from you.

[Eyes High]

1 hour ago, GraceK said:

We should start a poll 😂. I’m gonna go with April 7th...just to be really outrageously optimistic!!

I like your optimism!

45 minutes ago, Happy Harpy said:

Good! As I said, POVs seem irreconciliable so no need to drag it longer. We're going to rehash :)

I think Thrones can be announced later since it's the biggest show on earth right now. But it's wishful thinking since the sooner, the better. I already have my tools ready for the next promo round.

 

I guess what I was getting at is that they release certain things at certain times relative to the premiere date, and going off when the premiere date was announced in previous seasons, it seems that if they allowed the same amount of time before the premiere date to announce the S8 premiere date, then if the premiere date was any earlier than April 28th, it would have been announced already (going off previous seasons).

That said, you're right, and there's no rule per se. It's the last season and they can do whatever they want.

42 minutes ago, Stella said:

I actually agree. The series they are promoting - Euphoria & Watchmen - are both 10 episodes. That doesn't fit into GOT starting in April since they would both run into May. We already know BLL is in June.

There is a mini-series - Catherine The Great - which is 4 episodes. That could slot in after True Detective and give us the 4/7 start for GOT. Or they could show movies, specials what have you for 4 weeks. I think the earlier date is looking realistic.

It's entirely possible that GOT got moved up after BLL got bumped to June, because otherwise there will be seven weeks of nothing but movies and such between True Detective's finale and GOT's premiere. Also, if the red carpet premiere is March 25th, it seems unlikely that the actual premiere will be more than a month after the red carpet premiere, since in past seasons there's at most a two-week lag between the two (which would put the premiere at the 7th).

On the other hand, the source that said to expect a teaser between the 10th and the 15th also said to expect a 28th premiere date. So we'll see.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Eyes High

[WindyNights]

14 hours ago, glowbug said:

Why can’t people accept that Dany is not the main villain/antagonist in this story? Last season put an end to that theory. Jon, the show’s moral compass, who always seems to hate everyone we know to be evil and like everyone we know to be good-ish (or at least the people who have redeeming qualities like Tyrion and Mance Rayder), said Dany is worthy of being queen and has fallen in love with her. That doesn’t mean she doesn’t make mistakes but she is not evil or an antagonist. The White Walkers are the main antagonist. I believe GRRM has said as much in the context of the War of Five Kings and in the leaked outline.

That scene where Jon figuratively bends the knee to Dany is telling. She agrees to fight the WW without requiring Jon to swear fealty to her. She recognizes the threat of the WW is more important than her quest for the throne. She also says that her sacrifice (losing her “child” and nearly a third of her power) was worth it because seeing the WW was the only ways she would have understood the threat. After Jon swears loyalty to her he tells her that the northern lords will come to see her as worthy of being queen like he has. Dany responds with gratitude, not entitlement, and then says she hopes she deserves it, showing both that she cares about whether or not she is worthy and that she has doubts about her abilities (i.e. humility). These are not the words of a despotic ruler, at least  by GOT standards (the closest thing Westeros has to a democracy is the Ironborn and they suck). Dany isn’t going to turn her back on the north in season 8 when the northern lords and Sansa inevitably give her the cold shoulder. She isn’t going to be happy about it but she understands the threat the WW pose and defeating them, even at great cost to herself, is what is most important to her as shown in the aforementioned scene. When Sansa (and Arya if she has her doubts about Dany) finally understands the threat the WW pose (neither of them have seen it, which, as Dany says, is necessary to understand it) and sees that Dany wants to help them and is willing to sacrifice her armies, her dragons (who she views as children), and her own life to protect the North and all of Westeros, they are going to view her as an ally.

As others have pointed out, Dany has earned loyalty without using force. She freed the Unsullied and they chose to follow her, as did many of the other slaves. A small group of Dothraki also followed her after Drogo died without her having to force them. Jorah and Barristan both supported her as well. In the show, she made alliances with Dorne, half the Ironborn (the good-ish half), and the Queen of Thorns/Tyrells without using force. She is supported by the less bad/good characters. Tyrion (as opposed to Cersei), the Tyrells/Dorne (as opposed to the Lannisters and Sam’s dad), Varys (as opposed to Qyburn/Little Finger), reformed Theon/Yara (as opposed to Euron), Jon, Davos, Grey Worm, and Missande. I could see any of these characters/groups choosing the wrong side but not all of them. 

I wish we didn’t spend so much time debating how good or bad the main female characters (aside from Cersei—I think we all agree she’s evil) on this show are. I swear, 50% of the time is spent debating whether or not Sansa is going to betray her family or is a good leader, 40% or the time is spent debating whether or not Dany is the Mad Queen or an unworthy despotic ruler, and the last 10% of the time is spent debating whether Arya is a psychopathic killer who can no longer live in civilized society or not. As with Dany, I think season seven also put to rest “evil Sansa” and “evil Arya”. They may not always get along but ultimately they are all on the same side against both Cersei (the main human antagonist) and the WW (the main antagonist). 

Take into account that Tyrion and Varys have also questioned Dany's sanity and the script points out that Tyrion believes Dany is her father's daughter after all. Daeneys is meant to be a controversial figure for the audience. I just don't think the show is doing a good job of it.

The showrunners and directors have also mentioned that there's something frightening about Daenerys.

"At the end of the scene, you should be somewhat roused by her and a little horrified," Bender says in clip about Daenerys riding on Drogon's back and giving a speech to the Dothraki. "She's not Hitler at Nuremberg, but she's got the power."

She's not turning evil but you're supposed to be a little scared of her at least.

[Smad]

11 minutes ago, WindyNights said:

But it was. Arya doesn't trust Sansa because she thinks that Sansa wants to overthrow Jon. It's explicitly said over and over again.

It's said once. In one episode. And the reason Arya thinks that is because Sansa didn't cut off the heads of people. What kind of logic is that? Arya doesn't like Sansa because she still thinks of her as the kid she was in S1 (like the fandom), that's also made clear in the Season. She thinks Sansa can't do anything right because Arya is emotionally not mature enough to accept that people change. She doesn't understand what duress is. And lets not forget Arya's selective memory and hypocrisy. I could go on as to the very different reasons as to why Arya does what she does and says what she does in regards to Sansa. So 'said over and over again' as to what drives Arya when it comes to her behavior in regards to Sansa? Hardly.

[WindyNights]

Oh and here's another supposed leak: 

 

Supposedly a hacked email.

 

Basically: 

 

Daenerys doesn't make it to the end. 

The hadn't talks to have Bran killed off instead but GRRM surprisingly insisted that it had to be Daenerys.

They're hoping to make it as shocking as Ned's death or Sansa & Bolton (guessing the rape)

Ned's death was a great wave to ride but was never matched later in the series.

etc.

Edited January 11, 2019 by WindyNights

[GraceK]

Yes because clearly, Bran And Daenarys are interchangeable. What really matters to HBO and D&D is just the pure shock value of a good a death twist 🙄

also, that email looks totally legit. Seriously, I know that I write all my emails like I hope people on the internet will read them 😂😂😂😂

Honestly I don’t know why I even bother responding to all these fake leaks...it’s like I’m a glutton for punishment 🤮 

[bubble sparkly]

Also, as if HBO give a flying fuck about GRRM’s demands lol. He has no power to force them to do anything and hasn’t really had any involvement in the show for years.

Plus, Dany may well die but there’s no way she is dying early in the season lol. If a Dany/Jon/other main character is dying it will be in the last episode.

[anamika]

8 hours ago, Eyes High said:

Cynically, I think Sansa in the show is less an actual character with organic motivations and opinions of her own and less a mutable vessel for whatever the writers need her to be to move the plot forward.

Less cynically, I think it makes sense that Sansa is nonchalant about the WW threat compared to Cersei. First, she has little dealings with magic, and Old Nan's stories aside, it makes sense that ice zombies wouldn't really register with her, while she has seen Cersei for herself. Second of all, Cersei is a human, manageable sort of evil, while the threat of the WWs is almost too big and too apocalyptic to comprehend, and when people are confronted with an apocalyptic, world-ending threat, denial is a common reaction. Lastly, she has no firsthand exposure to the WWs in the show, and as was emphasized in S7, you have to see them to grasp the threat. So I can easily believe that Sansa is terrified of Cersei but unconcerned about the WWs.

I fully expect that Sansa is going to get a forcible attitude adjustment in 8x03 when (I assume) she sees the WWs and the AOTD firsthand.

 

No, I get that, but the problem is that we have never got Sansa's opinions or reactions to the WW other than the one line about how Cersei is more dangerous than literal ice zombies. We never got Jon and Sansa discussing this and Jon telling Sansa after they met - listen there are these things that can kill us and Old Nan's stories are all true. We never see Sansa's response to this and whether she believes it, does not believe, believes it but thinks it's no big deal etc.

For example the WF Maester sends a message to the Citadel about the WW threat, asking for help. Did Sansa know about this and ask him to send this? Or did the Maester do it by himself? Bran sends a Raven to Jon at Dragonstone warning him about the thousands of wights and NK nearing Eastwatch. Did Sansa know about this letter send to Jon and it's contents? What is her response to an army of the undead marching on the wall? Did she send reinforcements to the wall? Did she send a message to Tormund and the Wildlings at Eastwatch asking for a report on what was happening there? Did she ignore it because she did not believe it?

Did Sansa tell Arya about why Jon has gone south? We know she complains to Arya about Jon being gone. But did she say - "well Jon thinks that there are dead zombies out there who are more dangerous than Cersei lol and has gone to ask for help in defeating this imaginary threat". Or did she say - "well as per Jon and the Wildlings, there are dead zombies marching on the wall and he considers it a pressing threat and so we need to prepare for that as well". Or did she say - " Well, Jon has gone south for some silly reason leaving me in charge". Did she tell Arya about the WW? Does Arya know?

And that's what I am talking about. There's this complete disconnect between the NK/WW and the current leader of the North. Dany and Tyrion talked about and discussed about the army of the dead more than Jon and Sansa did. We actually see Dany tackle the topic of the WW - going from someone who scoffs at Jon's talk of WW, then discusses it with Tyrion and considers the possibility of it being true, then believing in it a little more after seeing the wall paintings in those caves, then almost believing it and sending Jorah and co. on the wight hunt to convince Cersei, then fully believing it after seeing the threat and agreeing to help Jon. 

Hell, currently Cersei  has discussed more about and thought more about the WW than Sansa has done. We don't know what Sansa thinks about the WW/AOTD because the show has not bothered to show us her thoughts on this and except for that one instance of Sansa telling Jon that Cersei is the more immediate danger, we have never seen them discuss this.

Jon should not have killed that wight for his demo. He should have probably put it back in the box and taken it North so that the likes of Glover and Royce could also see it. But again, that's where the problem with the North plot on the show comes from - do these guys know about and believe in this threat? Or do they not? We now know where the all the leaders of the south stand on this issue because of the Dragonpit Summit. Looks like Jon will have to do another wight demo for the North next season. By which time the actual wights may end up at WF and end up doing the demo themselves for Glover and Royce.

Edited January 11, 2019 by anamika

[YaddaYadda]

38 minutes ago, anamika said:

Jon should not have killed that wight for his demo. He should have probably put it back in the box and taken it North so that the likes of Glover and Royce could also see it.

Hope Royce comes face to face with his son, see how much he likes that.

[WindyNights]

4 hours ago, GraceK said:

Yes because clearly, Bran And Daenarys are interchangeable. What really matters to HBO and D&D is just the pure shock value of a good a death twist 🙄

also, that email looks totally legit. Seriously, I know that I write all my emails like I hope people on the internet will read them 😂😂😂😂

Honestly I don’t know why I even bother responding to all these fake leaks...it’s like I’m a glutton for punishment 🤮 

Trust me. Corporate executives write like shit. I would know. I work with them.

The old Sony hack had people writing the same way.

 

2 hours ago, bubble sparkly said:

Also, as if HBO give a flying fuck about GRRM’s demands lol. He has no power to force them to do anything and hasn’t really had any involvement in the show for years.

Plus, Dany may well die but there’s no way she is dying early in the season lol. If a Dany/Jon/other main character is dying it will be in the last episode.

D & D still have GRRM check over their scripts so he has to have some influence. And they're also making new deals with GRRM so he has a little leverage left.

And that person is speculating that it'll probably happen early not that it will.

[Colorful Mess]

Sansa called him "The Night King" and said there's a Wall there. Why would she say that if she thought he was Jon's imaginary friend? She also said that she's preparing Winterfell from whichever direction the threat comes. I take that to mean North or South, she's preparing for Cersei or the evil guy whom she mentioned in Episode 1 who she believes exists.

Its really not a big deal. They are all shown preparing for war. Its not like they're going to stop preparing. There's no scene where the NL tell Jon that the Others are children's tales like Luwin did. 

6 hours ago, anamika said:

No, I get that, but the problem is that we have never got Sansa's opinions or reactions to the WW other than the one line about how Cersei is more dangerous than literal ice zombies. We never got Jon and Sansa discussing this and Jon telling Sansa after they met - listen there are these things that can kill us and Old Nan's stories are all true. We never see Sansa's response to this and whether she believes it, does not believe, believes it but thinks it's no big deal etc.

[Eyes High]

In addition to all the other valid points raised upthread regarding the substance of the email, I'm pretty sure the Kary Antholis email was determined to be a fake back when this "email" first surfaced several months ago. I admit that it seems like a lot of trouble to find real people, especially someone like Kary Antholis not directly involved with GOT (as opposed to the HBO Head of Programming or whatever) and a real asset media storage company (Empress) and build a fake email around them, but maybe someone had a lot of time on their hands.

In terms of real filming information, we know that Emilia filmed a big scene for the 8x03 Winterfell sequence filmed at the exterior Winterfell set at Moneyglass, probably from the end of the battle since she filmed it at the tail end of the Moneyglass filming in late February/early March. So Dany doesn't die early on in the season as the email suggests, and why would she? She's going to be at Winterfell, presumably. Unless Lyanna Mormont bayonets her in a fit of rage or something, she's as safe as she can be for the first two episodes. Lastly, Emilia finished filming in mid-June, about a month and a half after David Nutter, who directs the first two episodes, stopped working on GOT. If she really perished in the first two episodes as the email claims, then she wouldn't be filming well after he left the production.

[GrailKing]

17 hours ago, bubble sparkly said:

Also, as if HBO give a flying fuck about GRRM’s demands lol. He has no power to force them to do anything and hasn’t really had any involvement in the show for years.

Plus, Dany may well die but there’s no way she is dying early in the season lol. If a Dany/Jon/other main character is dying it will be in the last episode.

They still did and do consult with him.

It was GRRM who gave the okay to omit Sansa running to the Queen, as the point of that scene was Ned not able to play the game, going to Cersei before having a ship and getting the household out of harms way., he and Cat, without evidence, takes Tyrion as a prisoner;  and later Robb, breaking an oath to Walder Frey making the more serious blunders. This goes along with what he stated, can't totally exonerate Sansa and or Arya, they all had a part to play in the house down fall, but  primarily ,it's the adults.

I'm also pretty sure we may see Bran's part in all of this, as we have been following what he has done.

[screamin]

Two thoughts have occurred to me, both about food. Since food is probably going to turn out to be more precious than gold in the dead of winter, it will probably be a prime mover of the plot.

So I started wondering whether the Tarlys were killed close enough to Horn Hill for Dany's forces to confiscate their winter stores. They must have food in abundance; their homestead was never invaded and sacked, and their army were fairly late participants in the war, meaning their peasants had more time to plant and harvest before being drafted into the army. Not to mention that though we were shown Tarly reporting the food of Highgarden was mostly shipped to KL, Tarly could well have taken a share for Horn Hill. He doesn't want his family seat to have to deal with a rebellion of starving Reach peasants in midwinter, who are now HIS responsibility as new Warden of the Reach.

So then Randyl and Dickon are put to death by Dany's forces as unrepentant rebels against her rule. An executed traitor's property is generally forfeit to the crown. We don't know exactly where the Tarlys met their death. But even if it were several days' travel from Horn Hill, an army marches on its stomach, and we'd seen Dany burn a hundred wagonloads of badly needed food recently. It would be worth her while to send a force to Horn Hill to get the food - maybe confiscated outright if they decide that as a traitor Randyll lost his right to leave his property to his heirs. Or, if Dany decides to be less draconian (heh) and allow Tarlly's daughter to keep the manor if she vows fealty, she could still order the food commandeered for the army in exchange for an IOU, as armies do even from property owners on their own side when they're in desperate straits. If Sam finds out that not only did his mother and sister have to deal with the bereavement of getting their husband/son/brother back in a very small urn, they also have to worry about starving in the winter, it might influence his view of Dany further toward the negative.

The other thought about food that occurred to me was about the food in WF. Sansa collected the Northern lords' winter food stores in WF. The publicly stated reason was to keep it safe, with the lords' assurance that they would be fed and sheltered at WF even if their own homes fell to whatever enemy. There was also an unspoken reason; to tie the Northern lords fealty tighter to WF; they can't rebel against WF without being cut off from their own food supply.

So I was wondering - why DOES WF fall so quickly, with the entire food supply of the North in their larder for a siege, and 2 dragons to defend it from the NK's one? Cersei's mercenaries have to enter into the matter. I thought at first that they might use the same tactic that Theon did to capture WF; wait until it was mostly unmanned, with most of its soldiers away at a war, and take it in a swift covert operation. But then I realized that both Jon and Bran are aware of this tactic (Bran was actually in charge of WF when Theon took it). They'd look like idiots if they let WF fall a second time to the same trick. So WF will be better defended this time. How will it fall to Cersei's mercs?

Maybe some of the Northern weathervanes have become convinced that Dany will keep their winter stores for her armies and let them starve through the winter. Why? Maybe they insulted her with the implication she should resign the throne in favor of Jon, and they're afraid she'll retaliate against them; maybe some other reason. But they can't rebel against her till they get their food back. So the weathervanes make a deal with Cersei. They'll signal the Golden Company when Jon and Dany march out to meet the NK. They'll leave some of their men among those manning WF against invasion in Jon and Dany's absence. Those men will open the gates to the Golden Company and bring their food back home while the Golden Company sacks WF. 

Yes, doing so will stupidly leave them open to the NK's attack. But likely even if they do believe in the NK, they underestimate his danger. There's a Wall to keep him back. And with any luck Dany will beat him but be weakened enough by the victory to be negotiated with or even outright defeated. And if she loses - well, they're all doomed anyway, so what does it matter if they backstab her before they all die? They probably don't believe in an actual Apocalypse as a possibilty anyway. It's basically the same calculation Cersei made - so Cersei's a natural ally to such traitors.

[Eyes High]

25 minutes ago, GrailKing said:

They still did and do consult with him.

It seems clear to me that GRRM has a vastly reduced role compared to the earlier seasons. For better or for worse, apart from certain plot points, the show is entirely D&D's creature now, and the characters in some cases are so different from their book selves that they might as well be entirely different people, so there's not much assistance that GRRM can really render. Frankly, judging from what we now know about GRRM's ridiculous original 4x02 script, it's probably for the best that his involvement is limited. GRRM has so many projects on the go now compared to those earlier years that I doubt he has the time for any consultations, anyway, although to hear the hardcore show haters tell it, GRRM's displeasure with some of the changes made for the show has led him to distance himself. I don't know whether there's a capital-f Feud between D&D and GRRM, but the seemingly passive-aggressive timing of certain TWOW chapter releases has led me to wonder.

I do know that back when D&D were collaborating more with GRRM, GRRM made it clear--spitefully clear, some would say--that when he was unhappy with a particular plot point, D&D overruled him: helmets, killing off Mago, etc. So GRRM was never free to "insist" on anything, as this fake email contends. Again, that was probably for the best, given some of GRRM's dumber ideas for the show and his own selfish interest in dragging out the show as long as possible to give him more time to work on TWOW.

Edited January 12, 2019 by Eyes High

[Colorful Mess]

10 minutes ago, screamin said:

How will it fall to Cersei's mercs?

I don't think it will. Cersei said she's going to use them to "take back what is ours." Maybe ours=Casterly Rock? She could mean the North too, but she also said she'd let the zombies kill them.

Seems like a waste to send sellswords up there if she expects them to die anyway? 

Euron betraying her and using them for his own purposes could work too I suppose, but I wouldn't most just become zombies? 

Also I don't see WF falling to the Golden Company with a track record like theirs. They've been defeated in Westeros every time. And yeah having it fall like it did with Theon again is pretty stupid.

You kind of have to introduce sellswords, the bank, if they're going to play a role later. But I dont see them playing a major role. They're more like quick scenes to show "okay this person has power." They're treated like monopoly money.

[screamin]

1 hour ago, Colorful Mess said:

I don't think it will. Cersei said she's going to use them to "take back what is ours." Maybe ours=Casterly Rock? She could mean the North too, but she also said she'd let the zombies kill them.

Seems like a waste to send sellswords up there if she expects them to die anyway? 

Euron betraying her and using them for his own purposes could work too I suppose, but I wouldn't most just become zombies? 

Also I don't see WF falling to the Golden Company with a track record like theirs. They've been defeated in Westeros every time. And yeah having it fall like it did with Theon again is pretty stupid.

You kind of have to introduce sellswords, the bank, if they're going to play a role later. But I dont see them playing a major role. They're more like quick scenes to show "okay this person has power." They're treated like monopoly money.

Cersei's aim would be to weaken Jon and Dany's alliance so that if they DO come back alive and victorious from their fight with the NK, they'll be enfeebled enough to leave Cersei in a much better position to fight or bargain. To that end, depriving WF of its winter stores and taking some important hostages to protect herself from dragonfire and as bargaining chips would accomplish a lot. She probably gave that assignment to the Golden Company. I'm speculating that in covertly scouting the territory in preparation for their attack, the GC decided the best way to accomplish their assignment would be to make a secret agreement with some of the North's more untrustworthy subjects.

ETA: Casterly Rock is valueless now without its winter stores; I can't see Cersei expending her limited resources to take it back, when she's made up her mind to live and die on the Iron Throne. Taking down WF while its larders are full and its owners are away would be a valuable military victory that might help her keep that throne. As for "Taking back what is ours" I think she might be talking about Sansa, who was a valuable Lannister hostage and had the insolence to abscond without their permission.

Edited January 12, 2019 by screamin

[Colorful Mess]

32 minutes ago, screamin said:

Cersei's aim would be to weaken Jon and Dany's alliance so that if they DO come back alive and victorious from their fight with the NK, they'll be enfeebled enough to leave Cersei in a much better position to fight or bargain. To that end, depriving WF of its winter stores and taking some important hostages to protect herself from dragonfire and as bargaining chips would accomplish a lot. She probably gave that assignment to the Golden Company. I'm speculating that in covertly scouting the territory in preparation for their attack, the GC decided the best way to accomplish their assignment would be to make a secret agreement with some of the North's more untrustworthy subjects.

ETA: Casterly Rock is valueless now without its winter stores; I can't see Cersei expending her limited resources to take it back, when she's made up her mind to live and die on the Iron Throne. Taking down WF while its larders are full and its owners are away would be a valuable military victory that might help her keep that throne. As for "Taking back what is ours" I think she might be talking about Sansa, who was a valuable Lannister hostage and had the insolence to abscond without their permission.

I see what you mean. Yes that's possible if she steals the grain and Sansa. I just hate kidnapping plots. UGH please no lol

[GrailKing]

9 minutes ago, Colorful Mess said:

I see what you mean. Yes that's possible if she steals the grain and Sansa. I just hate kidnapping plots. UGH please no lol

Well the crumbs for kidnapping have been dropped: S2-9 BOBW Cersie , Sansa and paid guards, in the Eyrie in the books 3 strangers in the employ of LF, at least one of them is looking for Sansa Stark, Sansa and Brienne on trusting the guards, LF and Sansa on her feeling of safety, Arya and Sansa " you need better guards".

So it looks like a high probability.

[Minneapple]

A kidnapping plot would annoy me, but I would like to see a final confrontation between Cersei and Sansa.

[Eyes High]

4 hours ago, GrailKing said:

Well the crumbs for kidnapping have been dropped: S2-9 BOBW Cersie , Sansa and paid guards, in the Eyrie in the books 3 strangers in the employ of LF, at least one of them is looking for Sansa Stark, Sansa and Brienne on trusting the guards, LF and Sansa on her feeling of safety, Arya and Sansa " you need better guards".

So it looks like a high probability.

There is also Sophie talking about filming a fake scene in Dubrovnik in the first person (meaning that Sophie may have filmed a real scene in Dubrovnik and that Sansa could make it to KL prior to Tyrion's postwar trial). Sophie also said that Sansa finds herself thrown into the deep end this year again, or words to that effect (although that could be a reference to Winterfell being attacked). I tend to doubt it, because if Sansa is in KL with everyone else one would have expected Sophie to film at least one scene during the KL exterior sequences filmed in May and June when Sansa is presumably sprung from the Red Keep by Arya or whoever, but who knows?

Assuming that's what happens, it will be amusing to see how Sophie puts her usual "Sansa is so empowered and in charge of her destiny and warrior queen of everything" spin on Sansa being imprisoned and tortured again, this time by Cersei. 

Edited January 12, 2019 by Eyes High

[bubble sparkly]

If someone does get kidnapped on Cersei's orders, then I suppose Sansa does make the most sense.  Given Jon and Arya's proficiency with weapons it seems less likely they could be overpowered by Cersei's goons.  Dany normally has a gaggle of unsullied/dothraki close to her, plus the dragons would surely roast any would-be kidnappers in short order.  Bran and Sansa are both unable to defend themselves, and could possibly get separated from Brienne/Arya/Jon etc. during the WF attack.  However, Sansa and Cersei's previous relationship would probably vault Sansa to the top of the victim list.

[BadAssRobinArryn]

I wouldn't rule it out. My only problem is, that I have no idea how a Sansa kidnapping would fit in the storyline. But then, it would give Cersei someone to interact with other than the usual suspects, which now, that Jaime has left, and since Bronn is out of question, basically are Euron, Qyburn and the Mountain.

[GraceK]

I want Bran to be kidnapped just for the pure comedy value of a Cersei and Bran scene. To have Cersei evil monologuing to a vacant three eyed raven Bran would just be gold 😂😂😂

Edited January 13, 2019 by GraceK

[screamin]

23 minutes ago, bubble sparkly said:

If someone does get kidnapped on Cersei's orders, then I suppose Sansa does make the most sense.  Given Jon and Arya's proficiency with weapons it seems less likely they could be overpowered by Cersei's goons.  Dany normally has a gaggle of unsullied/dothraki close to her, plus the dragons would surely roast any would-be kidnappers in short order.  Bran and Sansa are both unable to defend themselves, and could possibly get separated from Brienne/Arya/Jon etc. during the WF attack.  However, Sansa and Cersei's previous relationship would probably vault Sansa to the top of the victim list.

True. Also Cersei is operating on old news; likely when she sent the Golden Company she didn't know about Arya and Bran being alive. When Dany and Jon go off to war, they'd take the bulk of their forces, and Sansa at home in WF would be a natural target for Cersei to designate for hostage-taking.

Not to mention that Cersei still has a bit of grudge against Sansa, and currently indulging her grudges are one of the few things she still lives for. She used to get occasional sadistic jollies from tormenting Sansa back in the good old days when Joffrey was alive; no doubt she still has some nostalgia for the experience.