Season 8: Speculation and Spoilers Discussion

[Moxie Cat]

7 hours ago, YaddaYadda said:

I'd rather Ghost stays off screen. Off screen direwolves mean living direwolves

Except for poor Shaggy. Offscreen for what, 2 seasons, and then all of a sudden, just a head.

[Happy Harpy]

1 hour ago, Moxie Cat said:

Except for poor Shaggy. Offscreen for what, 2 seasons, and then all of a sudden, just a head.

Pretty much mirrors Rickon's destiny. Although we'll never know if Shaggy could zig-zag. (Too soon?)

Edited September 1, 2017 by Happy Harpy

[WearyTraveler]

I'm very much liking the humorous tone of this thread.  We're gonna need that while we stand our Watch until the final season

[bubble sparkly]

Do you think they will show another Rhaegar flashback in s7 now that he has officially been revealed as Jon's bio-dad?  I could maybe see Bran going into another one where Rhaegar talks with Lyanna about TPWWP stuff, since TPWWP/AA is bound to be mentioned again in s8 with the WW army on the move.

I also wonder if they will do something "magic" so Jon can see R+L and have a conversation with them.  Perhaps through a vision like Dany had in s2, or a near-death dream type thing?  NGL even though R+L appear to be selfish asshats, I would probably be here for Jon getting one vision/dream scene with them so they can tell him they love him etc.

[ShellsandCheese]

I hope we get an epic scene that involves those with Valeryian steel swords facing off against some of the larger / older white walkers. How great would it be to see Jon Snow, Brienne of Tarth, and Jamie Lannister facing off against a trio of white walkers. Also do we know the fate of Heartsbane? Still with Sam? Any other known Valeryian steel swords hanging out waiting to reappear as a convienent plot decide? 

 

Also it took me five books, seven television seasons, and 20 years to realize that this whole thing is all about Jon. All.About.Jon. I assumed it was Dany and Jon but nope, Jon is fire and ice. In the end no matter what happens, he’ll be the undisputed hero of the story. 

 

It seens to me a a lot of stuff is coming full circle. I predict Cersei will either die a gruesome death or she will be the one to die after giving birth to a dwarf, just like the brother she hates. Jamie will probably die too and the only surviving Lannisters will be Tyrion the dwarf and his nephew the dwarf; that would be very poetic considering Tywin and Cersei’s treatment of Tyrion his whole life. 

Dany/Jon seem to be reliving Lyanna/Rhaegar with a gender reversal, but this time instead of a Stark - Targaryen romance sparking war and destruction, it will help save Westeros and usher in some new more “modern” type era. 

Death toll is going to be through the roof next year / 2019 but of the main / semi-main characters, I hope Ned’s remaining children live, along with Drogon, Ghost, Edd, Jon/Dany, Brienne, Davos, GW/Messendei, Brienne, Sam and co., Pod, Yara, Lyanna Mormont, and Tormund. 

Edited September 2, 2017 by ShellsandCheese

[Eyes High]

5 hours ago, ShellsandCheese said:

Also it took me five books, seven television seasons, and 20 years to realize that this whole thing is all about Jon. All.About.Jon. I assumed it was Dany and Jon

It is Dany and Jon. GRRM supposedly said as much to Alan Taylor when Taylor was filming Season 1, as Taylor recently revealed in an interview.

[Eyes High]

42 minutes ago, doram said:

Nope, it's Jon. 

GRRM (allegedly) said the whole series is about Dany and Jon, and he's the one writing the books, so...

I think in Season 7 we got a number of broad clues or outright statements as to what will happen in Season 8, beyond the whole WW thing. Here's my list, in no particular order:

1. Varys and Melisandre will die. There seemed to be a number of hints in S7 that both Jon and Dany are doomed, but that's much less clear.

2. Golden Company! They mentioned elephants. I wonder if they'll try to get real elephants.

3. Tycho Nestoris is back for two episodes, according to Mark Gatiss.

4. Euron vs. Theon, although Theon thinks Euron's headed to Pyke when we know he's going to Essos, so I don't know how that's going to play out.

5. Miracle Dany pregnancy. 

6. Jon/Dany marriage (LF seemed to be hinting at it, and I'm guessing Jon will insist if he wasn't already leaning that way once Dany gets knocked up).

7. Cleganebowl! (Get hype.)

8. Jon finding out about his parentage and legitimacy and some form of conflict with Dany over this (although it may only be conflict in the sense that Jon vs. Sansa in S7 was a "conflict").

9. Reunions: Jon/Arya, Jon/Bran, Jon/Sam, Beric/Hound ("We'll meet again"), Arya/Melisandre ("We'll meet again"), etc.

10. Cersei's miscarriage (put over from S7).

ETA: IrishThrones on Twitter is on the case! They're generally a good source of reporting NI filming information (activity around GOT sets), although they've been led astray a few times.

Their most recent reports:

(1) "Season 8 news! As well as Titanic Studios Belfast, Linenmill studios in Corbet outside Banbridge to be used extensively..."

(2) "S8 News. Sets at Corbet- work is well underway & very busy. The Riverrun castle front still up and operational & v. busy!!"

(3) "S8 News. Corbet set-A lot of work also on field facing Riverrun castle,portable flooring also on grass/mud near river."

Looks like Riverrun is going to feature in Season 8.

The Corbet set has 1) exterior and interior Riverrun sets, 2) a ship set (it's where the S7 Euron/Yara battle was filmed), and 3) a large indoor set (used for the Hodor "hold the door" scene, among other things). If you recall the paparazzi shots snapped of Kit, Isaac, Maisie, and others in costume from October 2016, they were also snapped at Linenmill studios in Corbet. (Alys Karstark's actress was also snapped at Corbet, so the Winterfell great hall set must be at Corbet as well.)

Edited September 2, 2017 by Eyes High

[Brn2bwild]

2 minutes ago, doram said:

Like I said, I think GRRM thinks he's writing a story about Dany and Jon. But there's a reason why it's not enough for Jon to be a bastard love child of Rhaegar and Lyanna but a true-born heir as well. And now that the two have met, whose story is servicing the other? Never discount the insidiousness of internalised prejudices. 

I think I'd lose my shit if after everything Dany's gone through, she died right before the end and Jon got her dragons, army, etc.  That said, I think the miracle baby anvil portends that she'll be there in the end.  If it were based on George RR Martin's writing, I'd say that the "miracle baby" anvil trope would be turned on its head and she would die anyway, but D&D have been very obvious with their foreshadowing in other matters.

Ideally, Dany and Jon would both live, but if Jon died, there is the sense at least he would be fulfilling his destiny.  His father saw him in a prophecy as fighting the undead.  His entire mission since Season 2 has been to unite South of the Wall and North of the Wall against their common enemy.  If Jon dies after killing the Night King (and only then), it would be the completion of a story arc set in motions seasons ago.

That said, this being D&D, Dany will probably die right before the end in the most horrible way possible, her last words: "You are the true king of Westeros, Jon.  My dragons and armies are yours." 

[Eyes High]

34 minutes ago, Brn2bwild said:

I think I'd lose my shit if after everything Dany's gone through, she died right before the end and Jon got her dragons, army, etc.  That said, I think the miracle baby anvil portends that she'll be there in the end.  If it were based on George RR Martin's writing, I'd say that the "miracle baby" anvil trope would be turned on its head and she would die anyway, but D&D have been very obvious with their foreshadowing in other matters.

Ideally, Dany and Jon would both live, but if Jon died, there is the sense at least he would be fulfilling his destiny.  His father saw him in a prophecy as fighting the undead.  His entire mission since Season 2 has been to unite South of the Wall and North of the Wall against their common enemy.  If Jon dies after killing the Night King (and only then), it would be the completion of a story arc set in motions seasons ago.

That said, this being D&D, Dany will probably die right before the end in the most horrible way possible, her last words: "You are the true king of Westeros, Jon.  My dragons and armies are yours." 

My guess is that Dany and Jon's fates are going to be the same: either they both live (Aragorn/Arwen ending), or they both die. The whole ice/fire Jon/Dany parallelism fails if one of them dies and the other lives, in my opinion. 

As for Jon, he's been complaining a few times since his resurrection about not knowing why the Lord of Light brought him back. Personally, I doubt the answer is "To bring lasting peace and prosperity to Westeros and to reign wisely and justly for 100 years," and I really doubt the answer is "To have a long, happy marriage with the love of his life, father a passel of adorable Targ children, bring lasting peace and prosperity to Westeros, and reign wisely and justly for 100 years." On the other hand, that's pretty much what happened in the two fantasy series which inspired GRRM when writing ASOIAF--LOTR and the Memory, Sorrow and Thorn trilogy--so it's possible.

Dany seems more obviously doomed than Jon. I didn't get the sense in S7 that D&D were trying to sell her as an endgame ruler, even with the suggestion that Jon can temper her wild nature; there was too much emphasis on how she needed to be controlled and reined in by cooler heads, and their limited ability to control her. Plus, you had Tyrion openly discussing what will happen after her death (albeit in a conditional sense predicated on Dany's infertility, but still).

Edited September 2, 2017 by Eyes High

[Brn2bwild]

13 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

Dany seems more obviously doomed than Jon. I didn't get the sense in S7 that D&D were trying to sell her as an endgame ruler, even with the suggestion that Jon can temper her wild nature; there was too much emphasis on how she needed to be controlled and reined in by cooler heads, and their limited ability to control her. Plus, you had Tyrion openly discussing what will happen after her death (albeit in a conditional sense predicated on Dany's infertility, but still).

At the same time, a woman not ruling in the end because men decided she couldn't be controlled would be a really shitty ending.  You have a situation with two powerful woman rulers, and this ending would require that both of them be defeated/killed for the sake of a "better" man.  I can't imagine D&D would be so tone deaf to think they could get away with that in this day and age, but then again... Confederate.

Edited September 2, 2017 by Brn2bwild

[fnftw]

There's something that has been bothering me since episode 706, regarding Jon's fate. While on their wight hunt, Jon and Beric exchange some words about the lord of light and fighting for life, when Beric says: "You and I will not find much joy while we're here, but we can keep others alive. We can defend those who can't defend themselves". Jon responds with: "I'm the shield that guards the realms of men", then adds: "maybe that's enough" with a resigned half smile. That scene immediately threw me, thinking that maybe Jon is destined to end up serving some cause in a new form of the Night's Watch.

Then I remembered GRRM saying that when you come back from the dead you lose part(s) of yourself. That you're a little "less". And so, if Jon's no longer 'normal', I kind of doubt GRRM will give him a happy ending (as considered by the average person). On the show, Jon's resurrection doesn't seem to have any effect on him, either in personality or physicality (aside a few scars). However, I'm sure it will be noticeable in the books, and assuming they're not going to completely change his destiny on the show from what it's supposed to be in the books, he won't end up much happier on the show. So now I'm thinking his child with Dany will be the one to 'change the world' and make it better, but Jon won't be there to raise him/her, guide him/her, or enjoy fatherhood. He'll end up as some kind of ranger, defending those who can't defend themselves for the rest of his days believing he's fighting for a just cause or whatever and find little joy in general, just like Beric says in that episode. 

The thought that Jon may be the "bitter" part in the bittersweet ending of the story, depresses the hell out of me. He's the ONE character I want to see happy by the end of this and I fear his fate will be just sad.

I try to comfort myself thinking of all the dumb things they write on the show, like Beric telling Jon at that same conversation that he looks nothing like his father. Of course they meant to remind us who Jon's mother is and prepare us for the great!reveal!, but since Beric meant Ned, it was a really stupid thing to write for him since we know how much Jon looks like a Stark. So maybe that whole "You and I will not find much joy while we're here" doesn't have an important meaning for Jon after all and somehow even with the 'back from the dead' and no longer entirely human idea, GRRM still intends to give him the sweet part of the bittersweet ending, and D&D will follow. Sigh. A girl can dream.

[herbz]

20 minutes ago, Brn2bwild said:

At the same time, a woman not ruling in the end because men decided she couldn't be controlled would be a really shitty ending.  You have a situation with two powerful woman rulers, and this ending would require that both of them be defeated/killed for the sake of a "better" man.  I can't imagine D&D would be so tone deaf to think they could get away with that in this day and age, but then again... Confederate.

I don't think D&D have any sensitivity whatsoever, and they've screwed up quite a lot with regards to the representation of female characters, but I don't think they'll dramatically alter George's endgame, whatever that is. Whoever George has on the throne in ADOS will be there on the show, so I hope it'll be a bit more nuanced than 'Dany's too hot tempered to rule'. Jon and Dany are so intrinsically linked now that I do think it'll be a both live/both die/both decide to walk away from the throne scenario. But if they're both out of the picture...who rules? Jumping straight to a democracy is unlikely and they've not really set anybody else up as a leader capable enough to rebuild Westeros (Tyrion? More of a behind the scenes guy, and the last season undermined his ability a bit. Sansa? Perhaps, but the execution was slightly iffy and I don't see her going South willingly again.) 

Edited September 2, 2017 by herbz

[Eyes High]

9 minutes ago, Brn2bwild said:

At the same time, a woman not ruling in the end because men decided she couldn't be controlled would be a really shitty ending.  You have a situation with two powerful woman rulers, and this ending would require that both of them be defeated/killed for the sake of a "better" man.  I can't imagine D&D would be so tone deaf to think they could get away with that in this day and age, but then again... Confederate.

D&D congratulated themselves on having a war council scene full of women leaders, right before killing off two of those leaders and having the third captured by her sadistic uncle, so I really don't think they're alive to such concerns.

I don't think that Dany would die because male characters decided she couldn't be controlled, since those same men are on board with her plan to save Westeros by helping Jon (which she never would have agreed to do were she as wild as believed)--although I doubt a female character like Sansa would have a different opinion of Dany if she found out about the Tarlys getting BBQed--only that the writers pointing out that she can't be controlled could be a hint that she's not going to end up in power at the end of the series. (The 7x07 leaked summary also had a bit where Bronn, needling Tyrion about his attraction to Dany, warned him that she wasn't "manageable." TV Bronn is usually the writers' way of speaking their views on things: Jaime and Brienne want to bang, Jaime's suicidal run at Dany was incredibly stupid, etc.)

Ultimately, though, as has been pointed out, it's GRRM's ending that D&D are barreling towards, so any blame about the optics of an ending where a bold, innovative, visionary queen is conveniently offed to make way for a more "manageable" male leader can be laid at his feet.

 

3 minutes ago, fnftw said:

There's something that has been bothering me since episode 706, regarding Jon's fate. While on their wight hunt, Jon and Beric exchange some words about the lord of light and fighting for life, when Beric says: "You and I will not find much joy while we're here, but we can keep others alive. We can defend those who can't defend themselves". Jon responds with: "I'm the shield that guards the realms of men", then adds: "maybe that's enough" with a resigned half smile. That scene immediately threw me, thinking that maybe Jon is destined to end up serving some cause in a new form of the Night's Watch.

Could be a hint that Jon dies fighting the WWs, or it could be a hint that Jon is the endgame king (since what does a ruler do but guard the realms of men?). 

 

Quote

I try to comfort myself thinking of all the dumb things they write on the show, like Beric telling Jon at that same conversation that he looks nothing like his father. Of course they meant to remind us who Jon's mother is and prepare us for the great!reveal!, but since Beric meant Ned, it was a really stupid thing to write for him since we know how much Jon looks like a Stark. 

To be fair, I don't believe that in the show that it's ever been mentioned that TV Jon resembles TV Ned, much like the show has downplayed mentions of TV Tyrion's hideousness since TV Tyrion is obviously not hideous. And also, to be fair, TV Jon doesn't resemble TV Ned in the slightest. Sean Bean and Kit Harington look nothing alike. 

 

4 minutes ago, herbz said:

I don't think D&D have any sensitivity whatsoever, and they've screwed up quite a lot with regards to the representation of female characters, but I don't think they'll dramatically alter George's endgame, whatever that is. Whoever George has on the throne in ADOS will be there on the show, so I hope it'll be a bit more nuanced than 'Dany's too hot tempered to rule'.

I don't think Dany will be denied the throne because Varys or whoever thinks she's too hot-tempered, only that D&D may be leaning on her hot temper to provide a sop down the road to those who will be distraught if she dies in Season 8 (sort of like "Don't feel too badly about Dany never getting to rule, she would have been a shitty queen in any event"). That's assuming Dany will die, of course.

 

Quote

But if they're both out of the picture...who rules? Jumping straight to a democracy is unlikely and they've not really set anybody else up as a leader capable enough to rebuild Westeros (Tyrion? More of a behind the scenes guy, and the last season undermined his ability a bit. Sansa? Perhaps, but the execution was slightly iffy and I don't see her going South willingly again.) 

The writing in S7 has focused on Tyrion's obsession with the long term (and in fact many of his mistakes could be chalked up to the fact that he was thinking too much about the big picture), which points to a post-war role of some kind, whether it's advising whoever of Jon/Dany survives or whether it's establishing some sort of crude elective monarchy. That 7x06 conversation could be interpreted to be hinting that Tyrion will be the one to continue Dany's work of "breaking the wheel" after her death (although as I said his discussion of democracy was predicated on the assumption that Dany was infertile, so it may not be a hint at all).

The writing in S7 also made much of how capable Sansa supposedly is as a ruler. While I doubt she'd go south willingly again, her statement in 7x06 was that she wouldn't set foot in KL "while Cersei Lannister is queen."

Beyond Tyrion and/or Sansa, though, I agree the field of possible leaders is pretty sparse. Gendry was written in S7 as a well-meaning lunkhead who swings a hammer real good, so I doubt he's being set up as an endgame leader.

[GraceK]

I'm not a Sansa hater by any means, I actually really love her past season 1. I'm just wondering why would Sansa be endgame queen? I've seen that a lot in the fandom and it makes no sense . Queen in the North, definitely, that's something I can see her wanting or moving towards. But Queen of Westeros? Uh how?? Is it just because she might be the only main character left at the end? Even then, how does that make her Queen? I'm genuinely curious how people are coming to that conclusion.

[herbz]

12 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

 

Beyond Tyrion and/or Sansa, though, I agree the field of possible leaders is pretty sparse. Gendry was written in S7 as a well-meaning lunkhead who swings a hammer real good, so I doubt he's being set up as an endgame leader.

Much as I love Gendry, and can see him being legitimised, he definitely doesn't have the sort of political education needed to be an endgame leader. I sooner see him running off to see the world with Arya. I might have made a case for Jaime had the show adapted his 'learning how to be a diplomat in the Riverlands because he can no longer rely on his swordsmanship' arc from AFFC and not given half his brains to show!Cersei for 3 seasons, but they sent him to Dorne instead so that's out. I think Davos will have a part to play. Other than that, I'm drawing a blank. Westeros is screwed :p 

[herbz]

5 minutes ago, GraceK said:

I'm not a Sansa hater by any means, I actually really love her past season 1. I'm just wondering why would Sansa be endgame queen? I've seen that a lot in the fandom and it makes no sense . Queen in the North, definitely, that's something I can see her wanting or moving towards. But Queen of Westeros? Uh how?? Is it just because she might be the only main character left at the end? Even then, how does that make her Queen? I'm genuinely curious how people are coming to that conclusion.

I think most people who see it are working from the viewpoint that, if Jon and Dany are taken off the table, Sansa's the other major character left who's arc has revolved around leadership. I don't think it was done amazingly well, but I think what we were supposed to take from S7 with regards to her is that she's a capable politician and player of the game. If that were to happen she'd probably get chosen by a Great Council, I imagine? I don't see it happening personally, but can see why others would. 

[Eyes High]

2 minutes ago, herbz said:

Much as I love Gendry, and can see him being legitimised, he definitely doesn't have the sort of political education needed to be an endgame leader. I sooner see him running off to see the world with Arya. I might have made a case for Jaime had the show adapted his 'learning how to be a diplomat in the Riverlands because he can no longer rely on his swordsmanship' arc from AFFC and not given half his brains to show!Cersei for 3 seasons, but they sent him to Dorne instead so that's out. I think Davos will have a part to play. Other than that, I'm drawing a blank. Westeros is screwed :p 

I don't think that D&D disagree with TV Cersei's tart assessment in 7x07 that TV Jaime has always been the stupidest Lannister, although to be fair to Gendry and Jaime, it's not as if Robert was any sort of brain trust. 

 

3 minutes ago, herbz said:

I think most people who see it are working from the viewpoint that, if Jon and Dany are taken off the table, Sansa's the other major character left who's arc has revolved around leadership. I don't think it was done amazingly well, but I think what we were supposed to take from S7 with regards to her is that she's a capable politician and player of the game. If that were to happen she'd probably get chosen by a Great Council, I imagine? I don't see it happening personally, but can see why others would. 

Some fans also see Sansa as the most likely endgame queen consort.

[fnftw]

23 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

Could be a hint that Jon dies fighting the WWs, or it could be a hint that Jon is the endgame king (since what does a ruler do but guard the realms of men?).

What bothers me about Beric's words is the "you and I will not find much joy while we're here" (here = alive) part. I assume that if Jon is King, he'll at least get to raise his kid(s) which will give him joy, as well as the connection to his other relations. So even if he doesn't like the job (being king) he can still have joy in his life. Of course, it can mean he dies for the greater good, but Beric's words seem to imply he has more to do in this life. Ending up fighting for others all by his lonesome (kind of like Benjen) is what I fear will be his fate (while his offspring rules Westeros). I really hate this idea.

24 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

To be fair, I don't believe that in the show that it's ever been mentioned that TV Jon resembles TV Ned, much like the show has downplayed mentions of TV Tyrion's hideousness since TV Tyrion is obviously not hideous.

Fair point.

[herbz]

16 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

I don't think that D&D disagree with TV Cersei's tart assessment in 7x07 that TV Jaime has always been the stupidest Lannister, although to be fair to Gendry and Jaime, it's not as if Robert was any sort of brain trust. 

 

Some fans also see Sansa as the most likely endgame queen consort.

I really struggle with D&Ds adaptation of Cersei and Jaime. I genuinely wonder if we read the same books. Book Cersei is a drunken paranoid mess incapable of rational thought who believes herself to be a devious and effective schemer and Jaime to be her dumb henchman who just doesn't get her genius. And the show from 4x01 to 7x07 pretty much interpreted Cersei and Jaime as...a schemer and a dumb henchman. Huh? Jaime's entire development after his hand was cut off was him figuring out that he could be more than a jock. He's definitely not the stupidest Lannister. He leads his host well in the Riverlands (though I think he's going to get a major comeuppance because he's underestimated how much the Lannisters are hated. I think just about everyone we meet in the Riverlands is a spy for the Brotherhood. Red Wedding 2.0) His men respect him. There definitely isn't time to show that now.

Queen Consort as in married to Jon? I don't know how I feel about that. Or as in remarried to Tyrion? I don't know how I feel about that either. 

[Eyes High]

19 minutes ago, herbz said:

Queen Consort as in married to Jon? I don't know how I feel about that. Or as in remarried to Tyrion? I don't know how I feel about that either. 

Jon, Gendry, Tyrion, Sweetrobin, Jaime...pick one, really. I think some fans want Sansa as queen and don't very much care how it will happen or whether it makes any sense for the character.

Edited September 2, 2017 by Eyes High

[MadMouse]

I know people bring up Jon not wanting to rule but Dany doesn't either contrary to all her birthright speeches. Her happiest and fondest thoughts are about the house with the Red Door from her childhood. So much has been made about what "bittersweet" means in regards to the ending. Dany and Jon together happy but ruling a Kingdom that's learned nothing from the Second Long Night would fit that mold. All these lords come together to fight for survival and in the end they revert to bitching about taxes or the some peasant poaching deer on their lands.

[TarotQueen]

4 hours ago, Eyes High said:

Their most recent reports:

(1) "Season 8 news! As well as Titanic Studios Belfast, Linenmill studios in Corbet outside Banbridge to be used extensively..."

(2) "S8 News. Sets at Corbet- work is well underway & very busy. The Riverrun castle front still up and operational & v. busy!!"

(3) "S8 News. Corbet set-A lot of work also on field facing Riverrun castle,portable flooring also on grass/mud near river."

Looks like Riverrun is going to feature in Season 8.

The Corbet set has 1) exterior and interior Riverrun sets, 2) a ship set (it's where the S7 Euron/Yara battle was filmed), and 3) a large indoor set (used for the Hodor "hold the door" scene, among other things). If you recall the paparazzi shots snapped of Kit, Isaac, Maisie, and others in costume from October 2016, they were also snapped at Linenmill studios in Corbet. (Alys Karstark's actress was also snapped at Corbet, so the Winterfell great hall set must be at Corbet as well.)

Okay so there's the BFD II and then still possible political warring with Cersei's dumb ass.  Which do we figure Riverrun will play into?  It seems unlikely to me to be a flashback location for  Bran's powers but there could be something I'm forgetting.

[herbz]

Is there a Lannister garrison at Riverrun still? I know Ed Sheeran and co were running around the Riverlands. Perhaps Jaime, having understandably fled King's Landing pretty sharpish, goes to see if he can rally the troops? Or maybe the WWs push them back that far, in which case the North is completely screwed. 

[Blonde Gator]

5 hours ago, doram said:

I don't know whether to laugh or to cry. 

By the way, isn't it interesting the way we never actually see Jon bend the knee to Dany? I mean, I don't doubt that he has in everything but the literal sense. The letter he signed to Sansa clearly states that he's the Warden in the North now. But the visual symbolism of Jon bending the knee was carefully, cleverly left off-screen (if it ever happened). There's a reason for it. And I'm willing to bet that come season 8, when the tables are reversed, they'll not leave Dany bending the knee off-screen. 

Check out the very beginning of Boatsex.  Jon bending (big time) the knee.  Hee hee.

[cambridgeguy]

5 hours ago, Eyes High said:

Could be a hint that Jon dies fighting the WWs, or it could be a hint that Jon is the endgame king (since what does a ruler do but guard the realms of men?). 

If the Night's Watch is still needed then I could actually see Jon ending the series as Lord Commander again.  He'll be doing the hero thing of guarding the realm and he'll eliminate the potential issue of folks choosing between him and Dany if he's off at the Wall.  Having him there could also help transform the Night's Watch back into something other than a glorified penal colony.

All that being said, I'm not sure why the Wall needs to be manned if the NK is decisively beaten back.  The Wildlings are either dead or have already made peace with the North so there's no reason for a bunch of guys to freeze their butts off to prevent an attack that will never come, especially as long as Bran is around to keep an eye on things with ravens.

[bubble sparkly]

9 hours ago, doram said:

By the way, isn't it interesting the way we never actually see Jon bend the knee to Dany? I mean, I don't doubt that he has in everything but the literal sense. The letter he signed to Sansa clearly states that he's the Warden in the North now. But the visual symbolism of Jon bending the knee was carefully, cleverly left off-screen (if it ever happened). There's a reason for it. And I'm willing to bet that come season 8, when the tables are reversed, they'll not leave Dany bending the knee off-screen. 

I feel like, especially in the last 2 episodes of s7, they really hammered home the "together" stuff with D+J (we will defeat the night king and his army together, we should arrive together, okay we sail together).  Plus they seemed to make it a point that before and after Jon bent the knee, he and Dany interacted like equals.  Asking and giving each other advice, discussing leadership, planning etc.  If they both survive the series, I think it has definitely been set up that they will be co-rulers.  You even had Davos and Missandei both speechifying about how D+J are leaders who have been chosen by the people and are not in their positions because of birthright, but because the people believe in them etc.

If they do continue with the (kind of gross and misogynistic) thread about Dany being impulsive and hot-tempered (*cough* fire *cough*) and needing someone to temper her darker urges, then I also think they have set it up for Jon to be that person (*cough* ice *cough*).  When Dany talked about flying her dragons to the red keep in 7x04, Jon was the one who got her to change her mind (Tyrion's words did not sway her).  She didn't like the thought of Jon not being pleased with her actions when she returned in 7x05.  Jon was also the one who got her to give consent for the wight hunt in 7x05.  In 7x06 she dashes off to help after receiving Jon's raven (well technically Gendry sent it but I'm assuming the gist of the message was "Jon asked if you could come and save our asses").  She then pledges to fight the WW with Jon and tells him she should have trusted him from the beginning.  Finally, she disregards worries of her personal safety and agrees to Jon's plan for them to sail together to the North (complete with hilarious facial expressions from Jorah and Tyrion as they seem to realise that Jon has effectively now risen to the role of Dany's #1 advisor).

[Chiny11]

Hi...this is my first post on the GOT forum. I've  loved reading your interesting  thoughts/theories/ speculations  about season 8. :)

 

There's this theory I read on Tumblr and I wanted to share it here to see what you guys thought of it. I apologize ahead of time if it has already been discussed. 

We all know that the Night King has a thing for taking babies and turning them. So the theory is - If Dany does get pregnant,  do you think the Night King will go after her or the child (even though I don't see how we get to see her have a child within 6 episodes. Unless there is a flash forward. Which in turn would mean the war against the dead goes on for months... but I digress)?

So what do think of the Night King  being interested in Dany/Jon's baby? 

Edited September 3, 2017 by Chiny11

[MadMouse]

Does anyone think the long wait between the books has ruined the series? Not that the last two or three books will be terrible but the fans will hate them no matter what. I browse r Asoiaf and listen to podcasts while working out and I've noticed a negative turn in the community. Now that the show has moved past the books and things are being spoiled it seems like people are calling every moment or revealation bullshit or cliche. Shireen's death, Jon being true born, his name being Aegon, Jon and Dany hookup, hell I still see people hanging on to the idea that R+L isn't true. It's like the long wait has let people buy into every crazy theory or the idea that Martin isn't writing a fantasy epic. 

I'm not calling out anyone here because I find this place the most enjoyable as everyone might have different opinions but the conversations are fun. 

[paigow]

There will be no need to guard the Wall if the Night King is defeated. All those he raised will finally die...including any Craster babies. The Children of the Forest are extinct, so Night King 2.0 is impossible.

[YaddaYadda]

1 hour ago, MadMouse said:

Shireen's death, Jon being true born, his name being Aegon, Jon and Dany hookup, hell I still see people hanging on to the idea that R+L isn't true. It's like the long wait has let people buy into every crazy theory or the idea that Martin isn't writing a fantasy epic. 

With the regard to R+L, GRRM asked D&D who Jon's mother was before he allowed them to take the show. I know that a lot of people are hanging on to Jon being Ned and Ashara because of Dawn. If GRRM wants Jon to have Dawn, then he already inserted a Dayne in his family tree. Personally, I think it's a moot point since I'm not convinced Arthur Dayne is even dead. 

I think there's foreshadowing of Shireen's death in the book. At the very least there are strong hints that her greyscale is coming back. I don't think it goes down the same way in the books, especially since it seems Stannis wants Shireen to sit the Iron Throne should he die. She's going to burn, but I don't think Stannis feeds her to the flames like he did on the show. 

I think the Aegon name is total bullshit, but I also think the show has merged (f)Aegon and Jon together. I'll be a donkey's mother if Jon's true name is Aegon in the books.

I think what the show has done is muddy the waters with things like the annulment. Beric Dondarrion is alive on the show, and very much dead in the books. Beric has a cool sword and a voice that makes me drool a little, but that's all he's got going. And the show muddied the waters further with this, because what's the difference between show!Beric and show!Jon? Because I don't see any.

Cersei isn't the second coming of Tywin Lannister. Euron is trying to bring about the apocalypse because he is fucking crazy and Jaime would not have stood by Cersei after she pulled the stunt he killed Aerys for. The Iron Bank has abandoned the Iron Throne and has thrown its weight behind Stannis instead. And I don't recognize these characters anymore.

I don't give a crap about Cleganebowl. And the Battle of the Bastards isn't going to happen (or not the way we've seen it) because Jon is stabbed and dead and he's never had the chance to go to Hardhome and see a White Walker, let alone kill one. And Coldhands is not Benjen. 

So for me, just looking at that, I already know that this stuff is going to be completely different. I find that using the show to speculate something in the books is a complete waste of time. 

The show is the show and the books are the books. I'm still very much looking forward to Winds. The magical aspect, the political game. Bring it.

Edited September 3, 2017 by YaddaYadda

[WearyTraveler]

1 hour ago, YaddaYadda said:

I think there's foreshadowing of Shireen's death in the book. At the very least there are strong hints that her greyscale is coming back. I don't think it goes down the same way in the books, especially since it seems Stannis wants Shireen to sit the Iron Throne should he die. She's going to burn, but I don't think Stannis feeds her to the flames like he did on the show. 

I thought D&D confirmed that it was Stannis who gave his consent to burn Shireen.  When that happened on the show and D&D commented on it afterward, I seem to remember having a discussion here with people asking how would book Stannis even order Shireen's burning since the girl and her mother are at Eastwacth by the Sea (or some other NW castle) and Stannis is neck deep in Northern snows.

Edited September 3, 2017 by WearyTraveler

[SimoneS]

23 hours ago, doram said:

Like I said, I think GRRM thinks he's writing a story about Dany and Jon. But there's a reason why it's not enough for Jon to be a bastard love child of Rhaegar and Lyanna but a true-born heir as well. And now that the two have met, whose story is servicing the other? Never discount the insidiousness of internalised prejudices. 

The title of the series is "Song of Ice and Fire" which made it pretty obvious that Jon is the lead protagonist. However, compared to many other books in the sci fantasy genre where men are the lead and women are mostly supporting or sidelined characters, Daenerys is a well defined protagonist who is intended to be a partner not a supporter.

 

23 hours ago, doram said:

By the way, isn't it interesting the way we never actually see Jon bend the knee to Dany? I mean, I don't doubt that he has in everything but the literal sense. The letter he signed to Sansa clearly states that he's the Warden in the North now. But the visual symbolism of Jon bending the knee was carefully, cleverly left off-screen (if it ever happened). There's a reason for it. And I'm willing to bet that come season 8, when the tables are reversed, they'll not leave Dany bending the knee off-screen. 

I noticed that also. It is clearly deliberate. I wonder if they are saving it for Jon to physically bend the knee in front of the northern lords or because they intend for neither Jon or Dany to bend the knee to each other. I honestly can't believe that they are going to have Dany physically bend a knee to Jon when he has not done so or rather I hope not.

Edited September 3, 2017 by SimoneS

[herbz]

13 minutes ago, WearyTraveler said:

I thought D&D confirmed that it was Stannis who gave his consent to burn Shireen.  When that happened on the show and D&D commented on it afterward, I seem to remember having a discussion here with people here asking how would book Stannis even order Shireen's burning since the girl and her mother are at Eastwacth by the Sea (or some other NW castle) and Stannis is neck deep in Northern snows.

Yeah, they did confirm it. Most people I've talked to about it believe it's likely to be a Nissa Nissa situation, where they get stuck in a hopeless situation against the Others, and Stannis will send for her on Melisandre's advice because he believes he has to sacrifice her to save the world. I could see book!Stannis rationalising that. And then he'll learn, of course, that he was never Azor Ahai at all, and it was for nothing. I can't see it going down anything like it did on the show, but the end point remains the same. 

Edited September 3, 2017 by herbz

[YaddaYadda]

8 minutes ago, WearyTraveler said:

I thought D&D confirmed that it was Stannis who gave his consent to burn Shireen.  When that happened on the show and D&D commented on it afterward, I seem to remember having a discussion here with people here asking how would book Stannis even order Shireen's burning since the girl and her mother are at Eastwacth by the Sea (or some other NW castle) and Stannis is neck deep in Northern snows.

I know they confirmed that Shireen was going to be burned, but I don't know if they said it would be with Stannis's consent. Shireen and Selyse are at Castle Black though with a handful of queen's men and Melisandre. I always assumed that Mel would be able to burn her using the Shireen's greyscale as her springboard to get it done.

[WearyTraveler]

3 minutes ago, YaddaYadda said:

I know they confirmed that Shireen was going to be burned, but I don't know if they said it would be with Stannis's consent. Shireen and Selyse are at Castle Black though with a handful of queen's men and Melisandre. I always assumed that Mel would be able to burn her using the Shireen's greyscale as her springboard to get it done.

Al the outrage and controversy in the forums sprouted precisely because they confirmed that Stannis consented.  They said that was one of the three "Oh, shit!" moments, not that Shireen burned, but that it was Stannis who made her burn

[SimoneS]

4 hours ago, YaddaYadda said:

I think the Aegon name is total bullshit, but I also think the show has merged (f)Aegon and Jon together. I'll be a donkey's mother if Jon's true name is Aegon in the books.

I always thought GRRM laid the groundwork and dropped enough clues that Jon's real name was Aegon and I don't believe that D&D would make up or change such a critical detail.  However, unless he gets a ghost writer, GRRM will likely not finish the books so this debate might never end.  

Edited September 3, 2017 by SimoneS

[WearyTraveler]

Telegraph article dated March 14th, 2016 for reference: Game of Thrones: George RR Martin always intended for Shireen to meet her controversial end

Quote

 

CinemaBlend points out that:

In the Game of Thrones: The Complete Fifth Season Blu-ray set, there's a segment featuring footage from A Song of Ice and Fire series writer George RR Martin, who notes "his intention" has always been that Shireen would be sacrificed by her father, Stannis Baratheon, and burnt alive.

Weiss and his co-writer David Benioff said on an HBO "inside the episode" that aired on the network at the time that the idea for the scene came from Martin, and were "shocked" by it. But readers were yet to encounter it in the books. Now we've heard from Martin himself, it seems far more likely that his long-awaited (and overdue) sixth book will include the grisly scene. 

 

[YaddaYadda]

43 minutes ago, SimoneS said:

I always thought GRRM laid the groundwork and dropped enough clues that Jon's real name was Aegon and I don't believe that D&D would make up or change such a critical detail.  However, unless he gets a ghost writer, GRRM will likely finish the books so this debate might never end.  

If there are clues for Aegon, I have skipped right over them. I've seen clues for Aemon and even Daeron (especially when we take into consideration where Jon was born), but not Aegon. If you could point me to clues, that'd be great. 

@WearyTraveler, I stand corrected. If anything, this confirms that Stannis survives battle and that the pink letter is full of BS. Got to wonder if it's not the fall of Storm's End that pushes him over the edge. 

Edited September 3, 2017 by YaddaYadda

[Eyes High]

Pilou Asbaek (Euron) said on Twitter "We start filming in a few months" (although granted, this was preceded by Pilou jokingly observing that he's paid to lie every day). While general filming is expected to start in October 2017, it is true that Euron may not be needed for a while: Gemma Whelan (Yara) is very pregnant, so they might be scheduling filming of the Ironborn storyline to accommodate her. With an extended filming schedule, they likely have more freedom to move filming around.

[Brn2bwild]

My thoughts: Even if Jon acknowledged that he was Aegon Targaryen, the legitimate son of Rhaegar and Lyanna and the "true" king of Westeros, he would know that meant absolutely nothing.  Even if they survived the war, no one was going to open their arms to the person indirectly responsible for Robert's Rebellion and thousands (millions?) of lives lost.  Especially when no one living had witnessed Robert and Lyanna's marriage (except for Bran... and that's a whole other subject).  Did Sam even remember to bring the book Gilly read the passage from?

Once Daenerys accepts Sam and Bran's account, she will probably declare (with mixed feelings) that she will support Jon's claim to the throne, because to do otherwise would mean she was as much of a usurper as Robert.  Jon would then tell her that there was only one "true" ruler of Westeros, and that was Daenerys.  If the people offered him the crown, he would step aside. 

[paigow]

Bran will view the birth of Dany, but freak out because there was no "weather event" at the time...Missandei frantically rewrites her "titles" list....

[madam magpie]

On 9/2/2017 at 8:04 AM, doram said:

Nope, it's Jon. Even Dany is basically there to serve as his Endgame Love Interest. A very well-developed, bad-ass Love Interest who will provide Jon with a "pure blood" Targaryen son, the countries she's conquered in Essos, and with insta-full-grown dragons that he won't have to trade his dead lover and unborn child and murder a witch to get... but in the end, even Dany's story is in service to Jon. 

Assuming those of us who think Dany will die so Jon can rise to power are right, this looks sort of true. BUT! I think you can also have a story about two main characters where one of them dies in the end, and I don't see Dany's role being as narrow as an endgame love interest. So far, I think this story is more Dany's than Jon's, and one could argue that his entire story until now has served hers. Plus, if, say, Dany dies and Jon takes the throne to serve her vision, allow their kid to fulfill the prophecy, and ultimately have the child rise to power, GoT is still her story, even if she's not the one left standing in the end. It also opens the door to the baby's story...

On 9/2/2017 at 8:44 AM, doram said:

Like I said, I think GRRM thinks he's writing a story about Dany and Jon. But there's a reason why it's not enough for Jon to be a bastard love child of Rhaegar and Lyanna but a true-born heir as well. And now that the two have met, whose story is servicing the other? Never discount the insidiousness of internalised prejudices. 

I'm totally with you on internalized misogyny. It's EVERYWHERE. But I think it's too early to say that Dany is another plot structure trick and actually a secondary character meant to serve the protagonist Jon. Right now, she looks like the protagonist to me. I will concede that the staging of the sex scene where Jon ends up on top doesn't bode well symbolically for Dany to be the one with the power. But I'm not willing to write her off as a tool for Jon just yet. Right now, she's got way too much power within the narrative, and everything Jon has done thus far has led him to crash into her plotline and disrupt it like a foil. She didn't crash into his.

Edited September 3, 2017 by madam magpie

[domina89]

I think ASOIAF has always been about the Targaryens, so that includes both Jon and Dany.  GRRM loves the Targs, and I believe ASOIAF has been set up in a way to make you think it is about the Starks, but it is actually about the restoration of the Targaryen family, if not their dynasty.  I'm not sure about the "breaking the wheel" concept- I guess we will see where that goes, but the story has always been about Jon and Dany and their parallel journeys to come together and rule together.  This idea was reinforced to me in the season 7 finale when Jon and Dany are talking in the dragonpit.  Dany says that the dragonpit was "the beginning of the end for her family," which I think is actually foreshadowing he opposite.  The dragonpit is now the beginning of the restoration of her family because now she and Jon can potentially have a child, which they discuss (indirectly). We later see Rhaegar and Lyanna whose love destroyed Dany's family and caused much harm to the realm.  I think the opposite will take place also with Jon and Dany- their love will heal the realm and as they fight together to save it, they will restore the realm's faith in the Targaryens as rulers/leaders.  I truly believe it will require both of them to do this- there has been way to much emphasis on them working together this past season to just throw one of them aside for the other at this point,- at least I hope so, anyway, since I care for both characters and don't want either of them sacrificed for the narrative.

[SimoneS]

30 minutes ago, domina89 said:

I think ASOIAF has always been about the Targaryens, so that includes both Jon and Dany.  GRRM loves the Targs, and I believe ASOIAF has been set up in a way to make you think it is about the Starks, but it is actually about the restoration of the Targaryen family, if not their dynasty.  I'm not sure about the "breaking the wheel" concept- I guess we will see where that goes, but the story has always been about Jon and Dany and their parallel journeys to come together and rule together.  This idea was reinforced to me in the season 7 finale when Jon and Dany are talking in the dragonpit.  Dany says that the dragonpit was "the beginning of the end for her family," which I think is actually foreshadowing he opposite.  The dragonpit is now the beginning of the restoration of her family because now she and Jon can potentially have a child, which they discuss (indirectly). We later see Rhaegar and Lyanna whose love destroyed Dany's family and caused much harm to the realm.  I think the opposite will take place also with Jon and Dany- their love will heal the realm and as they fight together to save it, they will restore the realm's faith in the Targaryens as rulers/leaders.  I truly believe it will require both of them to do this- there has been way to much emphasis on them working together this past season to just throw one of them aside for the other at this point,- at least I hope so, anyway, since I care for both characters and don't want either of them sacrificed for the narrative.

ITA. I viewed Daenerys as Jon's partner which is unusual in the sci fantasy genre where there is a male lead. For me, Dany's control of her dragons is key. By giving her the dragons, GRRM has made her indispensable for the upcoming wars. Jon has the Valyrian sword which can kill the NK and the walkers, but to get past the wights, he needs Dany, her dragons, and her armies. Neither Jon or Dany can defeat their ultimate enemy, the NK, without each other. Falling in love strengthens their partnership and the child I expect them to have will make it unbreakable. This can only benefit Westeros as they rule together.  

[Blonde Gator]

24 minutes ago, SimoneS said:

ITA. I viewed Daenerys as Jon's partner which is unusual in the sci fantasy genre where there is a male lead. For me, Dany's control of her dragons is key. By giving her the dragons, GRRM has made her indispensable for the upcoming wars. Jon has the Valyrian sword which can kill the NK and the walkers, but to get past the wights, he needs Dany, her dragons, and her armies. Neither Jon or Dany can defeat their ultimate enemy, the NK, without each other. Falling in love strengthens their partnership and the child I expect them to have will make it unbreakable. This can only benefit Westeros as they rule together.  

I hope you both are correct, but if that's the case, the only thing I can forsee is that for the two of them to survive (with or without a biological heir), and rule together, is that they both lose everything/everyone else that matters to them both.  Dragons....gone.  Starks as a great house, gone.  Missandei, Grey Worm, Davos, gone.  Like that. 

I am still not convinced that the "end points" are going to be the same in any meaningful way between the show and the books. 

If GRRM is to drop this book before Christmas, we should be getting an announcement any day.   If not, it's going to be a very, very long wait for the beginning of Season 8.  What, January 2019?

[MadMouse]

5 hours ago, YaddaYadda said:

With the regard to R+L, GRRM asked D&D who Jon's mother was before he allowed them to take the show. I know that a lot of people are hanging on to Jon being Ned and Ashara because of Dawn. If GRRM wants Jon to have Dawn, then he already inserted a Dayne in his family tree. Personally, I think it's a moot point since I'm not convinced Arthur Dayne is even dead. 

I think there's foreshadowing of Shireen's death in the book. At the very least there are strong hints that her greyscale is coming back. I don't think it goes down the same way in the books, especially since it seems Stannis wants Shireen to sit the Iron Throne should he die. She's going to burn, but I don't think Stannis feeds her to the flames like he did on the show. 

I think the Aegon name is total bullshit, but I also think the show has merged (f)Aegon and Jon together. I'll be a donkey's mother if Jon's true name is Aegon in the books.

I think what the show has done is muddy the waters with things like the annulment. Beric Dondarrion is alive on the show, and very much dead in the books. Beric has a cool sword and a voice that makes me drool a little, but that's all he's got going. And the show muddied the waters further with this, because what's the difference between show!Beric and show!Jon? Because I don't see any.

Cersei isn't the second coming of Tywin Lannister. Euron is trying to bring about the apocalypse because he is fucking crazy and Jaime would not have stood by Cersei after she pulled the stunt he killed Aerys for. The Iron Bank has abandoned the Iron Throne and has thrown its weight behind Stannis instead. And I don't recognize these characters anymore.

I don't give a crap about Cleganebowl. And the Battle of the Bastards isn't going to happen (or not the way we've seen it) because Jon is stabbed and dead and he's never had the chance to go to Hardhome and see a White Walker, let alone kill one. And Coldhands is not Benjen. 

So for me, just looking at that, I already know that this stuff is going to be completely different. I find that using the show to speculate something in the books is a complete waste of time. 

The show is the show and the books are the books. I'm still very much looking forward to Winds. The magical aspect, the political game. Bring it.

No doubt the journey of all these characters will be completely different, I'm talking about the fates of what I call the major players. Jon, Dany, Tyrion, Arya, Sansa,Jaime and Cersei. For arguments sake let say Arya killed Sansa is the show took her face and then murdered Littlefinger. I would be shocked but they have constantly said the ending and fates will be the same. 

The other things yeah I agree, obviously they gave Arya Manderly's tasting menu and Stoneheart's vengeance. I'm going to disagree about Jon/Faegon. I think Cersei is filling that role. The early Jon/ Dany conflict I think is a hint of what their issues with each will be. The books have hinted at a Dance of Dragons Two and we know Martin loves history repeating itself. And that conflicted ended began with one "false" Aegon claiming the throne and ends with the true Aegon. So his name being Aegon might not be that far fetched.

Sansa and Jon's quest to take back Wintefell is Stannis's campaign from the books and I think there's a good chance when Shireen burns, Jon is resurrected and Stannis's Northmen allies turn on him for killing her. But no way the show would do that. That would have required keeping Kit "dead" for the majority of the season and people cheering for his return on the back of a child's murder.

[Blonde Gator]

15 minutes ago, MadMouse said:

Sansa and Jon's quest to take back Wintefell is Stannis's campaign from the books and I think there's a good chance when Shireen burns, Jon is resurrected and Stannis's Northmen allies turn on him for killing her. But no way the show would do that. That would have required keeping Kit "dead" for the majority of the season and people cheering for his return on the back of a child's murder.

That is an excellent theory, one which I've not heard before.

Thanks.

[madam magpie]

5 hours ago, doram said:

That's what I meant when I said her story now services his own. Dany has joined his battle against the Night King not him joining her battle for the Iron Throne. And ironically, even Dany's story - to claim the Iron Throne as the Heir to the Targ Dynasty - will soon be given to Jon. Even if she does sit on the IT,  it will be by the grace of her husband, not by on her own right. Assuming, of course, that she doesn't die birthing his pure Targaryen son.

I get it...I really do. And with all the talk flying around about GRRM being a misogynist, I do worry about how this story will end up. But Jon being a foil for Dany inherently makes him secondary. (If he actually is a foil. We probably won't know until the very end.) Right now, all we know is that he's disrupted her march to the Iron Throne. That's happened before, though, with other, much less significant events, and disruption is essential to the hero's story. To prove her character and worth within the narrative and to the audience, Dany has to be constantly confronted with problems and choices, make choices, fail, succeed, re-evaluate, etc. Right now, Jon is just another super-important choice. What the consequences of that choice are, we don't know yet. But I don't think the NK is just his story. To rule and to win and to unite the kingdoms, Dany has to defeat him. She just didn't know that before.

Also, we don't actually know yet what Dany's destiny is. She thinks it's to sit on the throne. She's been telling us that since the beginning. But we've already gotten multiple clues that her purpose is a lot more than that. The throne represents an archaic system that she's come to want to change, even as she continues to keep her focus on it. I'm hoping that becomes a conflict for her down the line. And if it does, this "the throne is my destiny" mantra will have all been another fantastic misdirect. To believe that Dany's destiny is the throne, you have to trust her as a reliable narrator. I'm not sure I do completely. For example, I don't believe she should rule because she was born into a particular family, even though she's been telling us that's why it's her right from the start. I'm Team Dany because her character has the makings of a powerful and compassionate leader. If Jon is the one to teach her that, it doesn't turn him into the protagonist. 

That said, yes, if she dies only to birth a male heir, I will be pretty disappointed. Because of how this has all been set up thus far, I don't think that singular result is where we're going. But writers are unpredictable and misogyny is rampant. So I really do understand your concern.

Edited September 4, 2017 by madam magpie

[AshleyN]

On 8/30/2017 at 6:09 PM, Eyes High said:

In other news: Jeremy Podeswa will not be back for Season 8. For those who missed it, Matt Shakman won't be returning for S8, either.

I'm actually quite curious about what director they're going to go with for the final showdown with the White Walkers. They've been trying to raise the bar when it comes to spectacle and battle sequences every season, and given that this is the battle that the entire series has been leading up to it really needs to deliver. Ideally they'd get Miguel Sapochnik back, but looking at IMDB he has two project currently in development and I think anyone who signs on for this season, and especially this episode, is going to be making a major time commitment. In the early seasons they recruited Neil Marshall specifically for their first two major battles, but he's got a full plate with Hellboy. And now Shakman (who of the two battle sequence directors this season definitely came out on top for me) is apparently out of the picture. The most obvious answer is probably Alan Taylor, but I kind of hope not, because writing issues aside I can't say that anything regarding his handling of the action really stood out to me in "Beyond the Wall". David Nutter has been the other go-to "big episode" director (and am I wrong in saying that he was originally supposed to direct "The Spoils of War"?) and while I don't think any of his episodes on this show have involved battles, he definitely has experience with action stuff, including working on both Band of Brothers and The Pacific. I'd love for them to bring back Michelle MacLaren, for any episode really, but given that she last worked on the show three seasons ago it seems unlikely. Same goes for Jack Bender. They could also recruit someone new, but they seem to be more comfortable these days picking from their own established stable of directors (again, the one newbie this season was brought in as a replacement I believe) so maybe not.

[Blonde Gator]

9 minutes ago, AshleyN said:

I'm actually quite curious about what director they're going to go with for the final showdown with the White Walkers. They've been trying to raise the bar when it comes to spectacle and battle sequences every season, and given that this is the battle that the entire series has been leading up to it really needs to deliver. Ideally they'd get Miguel Sapochnik back, but looking at IMDB he has two project currently in development and I think anyone who signs on for this season, and especially this episode, is going to be making a major time commitment. In the early seasons they recruited Neil Marshall specifically for their first two major battles, but he's got a full plate with Hellboy. And now Shakman (who of the two battle sequence directors this season definitely came out on top for me) is apparently out of the picture. The most obvious answer is probably Alan Taylor, but I kind of hope not, because writing issues aside I can't say that anything regarding his handling of the action really stood out to me in "Beyond the Wall". David Nutter has been the other go-to "big episode" director (and am I wrong in saying that he was originally supposed to direct "The Spoils of War"?) and while I don't think any of his episodes on this show have involved battles, he definitely has experience with action stuff, including working on both Band of Brothers and The Pacific. I'd love for them to bring back Michelle MacLaren, for any episode really, but given that she last worked on the show three seasons ago it seems unlikely. Same goes for Jack Bender. They could also recruit someone new, but they seem to be more comfortable these days picking from their own established stable of directors (again, the one newbie this season was brought in as a replacement I believe) so maybe not.

Interesting.

I think a mitigating factor in the hunt for a director, though, is that the Special Effects crew of GOT has advanced some of the techniques to the point that I'm not sure a director is a driving factor in the big action episodes.  I could be wrong, I really know nothing about film-making, but of everything that I've seen (merely as a viewer) on this show, the sheer awesomeness of the special effects appears to have more to do with the spectacle, rather than what the actors are doing within the spectacle.   It would seem that it's more in the preparation and set up (i.e. the dragons buzzing Jon on the walkway at Dragonstone), than a director telling Kit how to play that scene.  Of course, I'd welcome any correction of my misconceptions from someone who is more knowledgeable about television production(s).