Season 8: Speculation and Spoilers Discussion

[screamin]

2 hours ago, Eyes High said:

It's not a self-evident truth that hot water comes out of the hot water faucet, but is it generally true? Yes.

To explain why a crew member's perspective on the show is more reliable than that of a passionate fan, passionate fans get awfully attached to their idea of the show. They write shipper manifestos, they have blogs or Twitter accounts largely devoted to GOT (even if it's just to bash the show!). So when they don't get what they want from the show, they get...upset. However, their anger at being denied their ship or plot development of choice doesn't mean that the developments of the show are necessarily bad, only that fans are salty because they didn't get what they want and write off the show as bad as a result.

So going back to crew members, I trust them a lot more than I trust passionate GOT fans, because unlike the latter, who have all kinds of ideas about how everything should be, they have no dog in this hunt. They don't care passionately about Jon and Dany ending up together, they don't care whether Stannis is the One True King, they have less than no interest in whether Dorne is based more on Wales than on Spain or whatever the hot historical comparison is over at /asoiaf, and they haven't spent 20+ years of their lives waiting for some sort of closure on the ASOIAF story. All they care about is what every professional cares about: doing good work and being associated with a project that they can be proud of at the end of the day. So if they're not proud of that project at the end of the day? That means not that they're unhappy because they're salty about a ship not being endgame or that they're mad that their fave didn't end up on the throne. It means that they're not happy with the project, period.

Bottom line, I trust the opinion of random crew members who couldn't tell a Blackwood from a Bracken if you paid them a lot more than passionate GOT fans, because at least with crew members the only dog they have in the hunt is whether or not the show has a good ending. If they don't think so, I trust that opinion a lot more than I would trust the opinion of passionate GOT fans who have preconceived notions about every aspect of the show coming out of every orifice, or the expressed opinions of actors who are being paid to hype Season 8.

"I thought the ending sucked" is not a leak. "I thought the ending where it's revealed that Bruce Willis was a ghost the whole time sucked" (just kidding, that was awesome) is a leak. And /EveryfckngChicken was very clear that the crew members didn't explain what the ending was.

I can and do judge them as automatically superior to passionate GOT fans, which is what I'm talking about (not "critics"), for reasons I've extensively explained. Posters are trying to write off the opinions of crew members by saying that passionate fans have different opinions about how the show should end, but crew members aren't actually fans, so the comparison falls apart.

http://www.reddit.com/user/EveryFckngChicken/

What you're presenting is something you're saying about what somebody ELSE said about what yet ANOTHER person said on their social media who is supposedly a crew member, who thought the ending sucked, absolutely no reason or context given.

You're saying that this does NOT count as a leak and that (presumably) therefore the crewperson does NOT risk his job and livelihood by publically trashing his own company's product. If that's the case, why the total anonymity? I happen to disagree that emitting opinions about a future product that is still unfinished IS a leak by the employees, since it's the giveaway of information that only employees are privy to that is damaging to the company. But even if it isn't - do you think that an employee who trashes their company's product on public media risks NOTHING by doing so? IMO, s/he absolutely risks present employment and future employability by doing so (and if you disagree, please provide proof of current HBO employees comfortably emitting negative opinions about HBO's product under their own names in public with no repercussions). Regardless of nitpicks about whether it counts as a leak, it's fireable behavior and my point stands - if an employee is willing to risk firing to get their negative opinion about a TV show ending heard, that suggests a greater emotional investment in the show than the uninvested objective Not-fans you say they are.

The other problem I have with your assumption that if this supposed crewmember said the ending sucked then it MUST have is that no one's judgement is infallible, not even a crew member's. And we know nothing about the reasons this person thinks it sucks or any history about why this particular person's judgement is to be trusted besides that he's an employee. Yes, the ending COULD suck. OR maybe it's a downer ending and this employee doesn't like downer endings even if it's Chinatown or Casablanca. Or maybe there's not enough tits. Or disembowelments. Or TOO MANY tits/disembowelments. Or yes, maybe that crewmember likes Tyrion or Pod or Sansa or Jaime especially and feels the character was hard done by. For that matter, the crewmember could like Peter or Lena or Sophie or whoever and feel that HBO did them wrong...or that HBO did the crewmember themself wrong. Or the crewmember may simply want attention and "the ending SUCKS!" gets more of that than echoing what HBO's saying. Yes, the crewmember could be absolutely right. But I don't think the fact that they are a crewmember logically excludes any of the other possibilities.

[Colorful Mess]

On 8/30/2018 at 2:46 AM, Dezzdemona said:

Behind the scenes, I think she will do everything possible to undermine Jon.

Sorry, I disagree with most of your post.

Arya: "In winter we must protect ourselves and look after one another."

Sansa: "When the snows fall and the white winds blow...the lone wolf dies, but the pack survives."

I think quoting these words of wisdom from their father is a good bet the Starks will be a united front in S8. 

[SimoneS]

If there are crew members posting that they don't like the ending, I lean towards either Jon or/and Dany dying or not sitting on the Iron Throne. I think that it is safe to say that most people have been trained by Hollywood as well as the sci fantasy genre to expect happy endings. The ending is probably unsatisfying and open-ended which is usually annoying as hell in a tv series finale or in books. I have been going back and forth, but that does make sense to me. Also, I have always thought that HBO is delaying showing the last season so that the prequel can air soon after to keep the audience. And if GoT ends on a down note, I can why HBO is desperate to get the prequel on the air quickly. 

[nikma]

I am 90% sure that Daenerys dies.

[bubble sparkly]

Maybe D&D have decided on a Soprano's style ending lol: Jon and the NK stare at each other, millimetres apart.  They raise their weapons in preparation for the final parry, both knowing that the war is about to end, the only uncertainty is who will be the victor.  They strike at the same time....then fade to black.  We don't know who wins, who dies, who ends up together etc.

In all seriousness, I have always thought it was quite likely the Big 5 survive because GRRM's initial outline seemed to imply that they did.  Of course he could have changed his mind over the years, but the fact the his initial plan seemingly involved them all surviving would suggest he was leaning towards some sort of typical happy ending.

I also thought that once s7 happened and Jon and Dany fell in love, it was probable that they would end up ruling together in some capacity.  The main reason for this being that there don't seem to be any other viable candidates for endgame ruler, and both of their journeys have dealt with learning to rule, making mistakes and earning loyalty etc. more than any other characters on the show.

I just keep coming back to, if Jon and Dany die or bunk off to live away from Westeros, who would rule? I can't see people supporting Tyrion because he has always been looked down on for being a dwarf (and frankly he sucked so hard as Hand in s7 that any claims of him being cleverer than the other contenders no longer apply imo).  Gendry might have Baratheon blood but he is an illiterate fleabottom bastard, so again Westerosi prejudices would suggest people won't support him. Sansa is a woman without the same bloodlines as recent Kings/Queens and she isn't psychotic like Cersei and doesn't command hard power (i.e. dragons and an army of devoted followers) like Dany, so prevailing Westerosi misogyny would suggest people also wouldn't support her as Queen.  Is there anyone else with either bloodline or alleged leadership qualities that could be a contender?

I guess one of Jon/Dany could die and the other could live, raise the kid and rule.  If that is what happens in the end I think there is more chance of Jon dying simply because he's already died once, and the only reason Mel revived him was for the fight against the dead.  If Jon kills the NK then he arguably fulfils his purpose.

But I don't want Jon, Dany, Tyrion, Arya, Bran or Sansa to die, so I'm going to live in my bubble of hope until we get any legit spoilers suggesting any of them die lol.  It seems pretty certain that Jaimie dies, which I think most people were already expecting. Cersei is surely going out in a blaze of scenery chewing madness.  Sam, as GRRM's stand in, is certain to survive and write his history book and hopefully finally marry Gilly.  I'm pulling for Davos and Brienne to make it through, but everyone else I don't mind too much either way.

Edited September 1, 2018 by bubble sparkly

[Dezzdemona]

13 hours ago, Colorful Mess said:

Sorry, I disagree with most of your post.

Arya: "In winter we must protect ourselves and look after one another."

Sansa: "When the snows fall and the white winds blow...the lone wolf dies, but the pack survives."

I think quoting these words of wisdom from their father is a good bet the Starks will be a united front in S8. 

I do hope you're right.   Arya and Sansa did seem to end season 7 united.  I am leery for two reasons.  First, I have trouble seeing Sansa as fully accepting Dany.  Secondly,  Sansa has a streak of ambition that sometimes gets the better of her. and she has been shown to act impulsively at times.  I hope she can keep a grip on those tendencies.   I would dearly love to see the Starks well and truly united through season 8.  I developed a great affection for all of them at the beginning and would love to come full circle with that, just as a matter of personal preference.

[GraceK]

Found this on freefolk and thought it was hilarious ????

[Colorful Mess]

Ambitious and impulsive? That sounds like Dany to me. It's kind of crazy how we have completely opposite views on these two characters. Is that a sign that the show has failed or succeeded? I'm not sure.

[GrailKing]

3 hours ago, Dezzdemona said:

I do hope you're right.   Arya and Sansa did seem to end season 7 united.  I am leery for two reasons.  First, I have trouble seeing Sansa as fully accepting Dany.  Secondly,  Sansa has a streak of ambition that sometimes gets the better of her. and she has been shown to act impulsively at times.  I hope she can keep a grip on those tendencies.   I would dearly love to see the Starks well and truly united through season 8.  I developed a great affection for all of them at the beginning and would love to come full circle with that, just as a matter of personal preference.

EVERY Stark acted impulsively at times, Arya rushes headlong to attack the dais in KL, with Illyn Payne and KG there, her emotional naming of petty kills in Harrenhal , attempted to kill the Hound with Needle, Sansa running to the King /Queen wanting to stay in KL, attempting to kill Joffery on traitors bridge. Bran, not listening to the 3er, Jon, being out maneuvered by Ramsey, Cat taking Tyrion, we can add Cersei, Danny, Jaime etc. on a scale of 1-10 with 10 being max impulsiveness, Sansa somewhere around 3 or 4.and she was 11-13 for the most part, she thinks more than the average Stark before she acts, doesn't always pan out.

Ambition is a double edge sword to be sure, Sansa hasn't shown anywhere the same level of ambition as Cersei, Danny, LF, or Margery.

Edited September 1, 2018 by GrailKing

[screamin]

I think Sansa and Dany are both similar in that while they are both with some ambition, neither are ambitious for power for its own sake. Sansa wants power to ensure the safety of herself and her own, and IMO, she would happily acquiesce to someone else holding the power as long as they do it in what she perceives as a generally respectful and wise manner that would most likely maintain safety. Dany ALSO is interested in using power to maintain the safety of herself and hers. But her ambition is more complex in that she sees all Westeros as 'hers' and besides wanting to protect it, her claim makes her feel that getting Westeros back is a duty that she owes them as their rightful kinder ruler as well as something she owes herself and her ancestors. It's kind of a grim and hollow pursuit for her, since she's convinced she can't have kids and therefore can't reestablish the dynasty whose reputation she's trying to rehabilitate. So instead she's embraced the role of messianic mother to the oppressed, and wedded herself to the idea of 'breaking the wheel', and she's half fallen in love with her own hype that she will build a new world where there will be no more oppression and in that way keep her people safe in a world that will protect them and live on afterwards when she can't. Trouble is, even though she IS a messianic supernatural figure of prophecy, building a true utopia in GRRM's world is impossible even for a messiah. So she's set herself for a failure there, and being GRRM's world, it's likely to be an especially painful one, that will involve her losing nost of her devoted followers. My guess is that that will put her off ambition for good, and when she has the child she thought she couldn't have (probably losing Jon and the dragons in saving the world) she'll decide that leaving Westeros in a tolerable state of survival is as good as the world is going to get, and she'll turn away from ambition and go off with what remains of her followers to find a place to raise her child like the house with the red door she always nostalgically yearns for where her child can grow up more happily than s/he ever could as a dragonless monarch in a constant state of peril in a treacherous backstabbing court.

To me that would be a good (if somewhat downer) ending, but I sympathize with those who would think it sucks.

[screamin]

Tl;dr, basically I think that while Sansa and Dany might initially bump heads based on their mutual suspicions about the risk the other poses toward each other's hard won safety, they will probably eventually agree to some truce based on their mutual interest in keeping their collective people as safe as possible (which in Westeros isn't very.)

[Dezzdemona]

4 hours ago, Colorful Mess said:

Ambitious and impulsive? That sounds like Dany to me. It's kind of crazy how we have completely opposite views on these two characters. Is that a sign that the show has failed or succeeded? I'm not sure.

Dany is ambition personified.  She not only embraces it, she breathes it every waking second of every day.   It's impossible for me to even imagine Dany without those huge ambitions.   IMO Sansa, OTOH, is not comfortable with her ambitious side.  When Arya asks her why she didn't tell John she had called on the Vale, she answers that she doesn't know and I believe that's genuine.  She doesn't really know where it came from, so I see her as not embracing her ambitious side.  I think that could change, but her ambitions are nothing the size of Dany's at all.   So I do see them as very different from one another.

 

Quote

Ambition is a double edge sword to be sure, Sansa hasn't shown anywhere the same level of ambition as Cersei, Danny, LF, or Margery.

I completely agree.

Edited September 1, 2018 by Dezzdemona

[SeanC]

7 hours ago, Dezzdemona said:

Secondly,  Sansa has a streak of ambition that sometimes gets the better of her. and she has been shown to act impulsively at times. 

Going off the show, I don't particularly see either of those things -- granted, the matter of how ambitious Sansa is or to what extent she's acted on it is an incredible muddle because of the writing, but impulsive is one of the last words I'd use to describe Sansa (in either medium, honestly).  Going off the last few seasons, when she doesn't like somebody she's far more likely to just stew on it as opposed to actually doing anything.

[GodsBeloved]

22 hours ago, screamin said:

Tl;dr, basically I think that while Sansa and Dany might initially bump heads based on their mutual suspicions about the risk the other poses toward each other's hard won safety, they will probably eventually agree to some truce based on their mutual interest in keeping their collective people as safe as possible (which in Westeros isn't very.)

I hope you are right. I don't what these writers to go to either extreme. Don't have Sansa walking around shooting daggers at her but don't have her walking around with f'ing heart eyes for DT either.

[WindyNights]

On 9/1/2018 at 6:59 AM, bubble sparkly said:

Maybe D&D have decided on a Soprano's style ending lol: Jon and the NK stare at each other, millimetres apart.  They raise their weapons in preparation for the final parry, both knowing that the war is about to end, the only uncertainty is who will be the victor.  They strike at the same time....then fade to black.  We don't know who wins, who dies, who ends up together etc.

In all seriousness, I have always thought it was quite likely the Big 5 survive because GRRM's initial outline seemed to imply that they did.  Of course he could have changed his mind over the years, but the fact the his initial plan seemingly involved them all surviving would suggest he was leaning towards some sort of typical happy ending.

I also thought that once s7 happened and Jon and Dany fell in love, it was probable that they would end up ruling together in some capacity.  The main reason for this being that there don't seem to be any other viable candidates for endgame ruler, and both of their journeys have dealt with learning to rule, making mistakes and earning loyalty etc. more than any other characters on the show.

I just keep coming back to, if Jon and Dany die or bunk off to live away from Westeros, who would rule? I can't see people supporting Tyrion because he has always been looked down on for being a dwarf (and frankly he sucked so hard as Hand in s7 that any claims of him being cleverer than the other contenders no longer apply imo).  Gendry might have Baratheon blood but he is an illiterate fleabottom bastard, so again Westerosi prejudices would suggest people won't support him. Sansa is a woman without the same bloodlines as recent Kings/Queens and she isn't psychotic like Cersei and doesn't command hard power (i.e. dragons and an army of devoted followers) like Dany, so prevailing Westerosi misogyny would suggest people also wouldn't support her as Queen.  Is there anyone else with either bloodline or alleged leadership qualities that could be a contender?

I guess one of Jon/Dany could die and the other could live, raise the kid and rule.  If that is what happens in the end I think there is more chance of Jon dying simply because he's already died once, and the only reason Mel revived him was for the fight against the dead.  If Jon kills the NK then he arguably fulfils his purpose.

But I don't want Jon, Dany, Tyrion, Arya, Bran or Sansa to die, so I'm going to live in my bubble of hope until we get any legit spoilers suggesting any of them die lol.  It seems pretty certain that Jaimie dies, which I think most people were already expecting. Cersei is surely going out in a blaze of scenery chewing madness.  Sam, as GRRM's stand in, is certain to survive and write his history book and hopefully finally marry Gilly.  I'm pulling for Davos and Brienne to make it through, but everyone else I don't mind too much either way.

Jon hasn't really earned loyalty. Jon couldn't even manage 50 men without being assassinated.  And the wildlings are a couple hundred guys that like Jon but won't bow down to him.

Some of the Northern and Vale lords seem to already want to switch support from Jon to Sansa.

[Colorful Mess]

If Jon really does think Dany would be a better ruler of the North than he ever could and he gave up his kingdom against the explicit wishes of his subjects for no other reason than DANY IS AMAZEBALLS, then I think Sansa has valid reason to make sure he doesnt have power to make any important decisions for the North ever again. If Jon is cool with Dany burning  people because they don't pay the proper lip service/gratitude to their local conqueror, then Jon Snow is probably one of the most cringe-worthy protagonists in the history of medieval fantasy. 

Edited September 2, 2018 by Colorful Mess

[GrailKing]

1 hour ago, Colorful Mess said:

If Jon really does think Dany would be a better ruler of the North than he ever could and he gave up his kingdom against the explicit wishes of his subjects for no other reason than DANY IS AMAZEBALLS, then I think Sansa has valid reason to make sure he doesnt have power to make any important decisions for the North ever again. If Jon is cool with Dany burning  people because they don't pay the proper lip service/gratitude to their local conqueror, then Jon Snow is probably one of the most cringe-worthy protagonists in the history of medieval fantasy. 

I don't see Jon being ok with burning people if they verbally disagree, if they physically attack her that may be something else.

With this said, I think the one Stark that dreamed  of bright lights and greener pasture's, is the one moving and supporting Northern rights, more then the other Starks and this includes Arya, who blindly follows Jon, and if he ( more or less did in show ) abdicates his leadership, I think Sansa be wholly in her rights, to replace him.

I still in my head believe Jon listened to Sansa, and while he may not betray Danny, I think the realm and North comes first with him; namely he plays smarter.

[Colorful Mess]

4 hours ago, GrailKing said:

I think Sansa be wholly in her rights, to replace him.

True. Although I don't think Sansa would do this while Dany is there. If the Lords want to elect her as their Queen she would have to decline again. Sansa as Queen in the North? No way Dany will let that happen. If Jon continues his stupid streak, he might say something like: "Hey thanks for all the work you did for the North while I was gone. Dany will take over from here. The Lords are going to love her!" But if Jon is being smart, he might say: "You handle the Lords, I'll handle Dany."

Still, I'm worried about this, because I see R+L=J and the Cersei betrayal as a big distraction for Dany. The Starks are also in a precarious situation if Dany wants their subjugation in return for her help and the Lords/free folk don't want to give it to her. 

Another thing that worries me is that the only reason Dany didn't want Jon to bend the knee anymore is because she fell in love with him. It would be better if she realized that the North has a right to choose their leaders. I hope she understands that his people should decide who they want their leader to be even if that king has abdicated. That would be character growth and would be reassurance to me that she will help people without expectation of reward. Jon should have learned that his dick shouldn't decide who is the best leader for his people; Dany should have learned she can't be a conqueror, queen, and hero at the same time.

Edited September 3, 2018 by Colorful Mess

[GrailKing]

37 minutes ago, Colorful Mess said:

True. Although I don't think Sansa would do this while Dany is there. If the Lords want to elect her as their Queen she would have to decline again. Sansa as Queen in the North? No way Dany will let that happen. If Jon continues his stupid streak, he might say something like: "Hey thanks for all the work you did for the North while I was gone. Dany will take over from here. The Lords are going to love her!" But if Jon is being smart, he might say: "You handle the Lords, I'll handle Dany."

Still, I'm worried about this, because I see R+L=J and the Cersei betrayal as a big distraction for Dany. The Starks are also in a precarious situation if Dany wants their subjugation in return for her help and the Lords/free folk don't want to give it to her. 

Another thing that worries me is that the only reason Dany didn't want Jon to bend the knee anymore is because she fell in love with him. It would be better if she realized that the North has a right to choose their leaders. I hope she understands that his people should decide who they want their leader to be even if that king has abdicated. That would be character growth and would be reassurance to me that she will help people without expectation of reward. Jon should have learned that his dick shouldn't decide who is the best leader for his people; Dany should have learned she can't be a conqueror, queen, and hero at the same time.

To be honest, I don't think Danny wants their subjugation, just perhaps their respect that she came for them; first she needs to convince Sansa and Arya, then let Sansa and Arya convince / deal with those lords as they deem necessary.

[Colorful Mess]

2 hours ago, GrailKing said:

To be honest, I don't think Danny wants their subjugation, just perhaps their respect that she came for them; first she needs to convince Sansa and Arya, then let Sansa and Arya convince / deal with those lords as they deem necessary.

If Dany doesn't want their subjugation then she should be fine with the Lords declaring Sansa as Queen in the North.

[OhOkayWhat]

1 hour ago, Colorful Mess said:

If Dany doesn't want their subjugation then she should be fine with the Lords declaring Sansa as Queen in the North.

Exactly. She should let them elect their own leader and respect that. If she wants respect she needs to respect them too.

Edited September 3, 2018 by OhOkayWhat

[Meredith Quill]

The show trailers will 100% play up to the hyperbole over what the North will think of the Dany/Jon situation but it must pale into insignificance within one episode, two at the very most, but my money is on one. Here's why:

It seems to me that intricate speculation placed on what Dany should do, what Sansa could do and what Jon may or may not do is sidetracking from the biggest plot point of the show. >A big fucking army of undead is on the march headed their way, so any squabbling over "I'm in charge!" will almost instantly become irrelevant and by the time the NK is defeated there may not be many (any?) of these characters left to argue with each other about who did what and who deserves what. Not to mention, the War for The Dawn itself will likely have profound game-changing consequences for every single survivor. 

This is why I find it hard to care about what any of them say or do pre TWFTD, because what will matter is what they say or do during TWFTD and that is what will have the biggest impact on who ends up being the one, or ones, in charge after all is said and done.

[bubble sparkly]

7 hours ago, Colorful Mess said:

It would be better if she realized that the North has a right to choose their leaders. I hope she understands that his people should decide who they want their leader to be even if that king has abdicated

It seems like the Starks need to learn this lesson as well, after all season 6 showed us that the Starks are only okay with the North choosing a leader as long as the leader is a Stark.  When Sansa and Jon went from house to house trying to get support to fight the Boltons (who had been named Wardens of theNorth by the KO7K), they were told by pretty much every Northern house excepts the Mormonts that they had no desire to fight Ramsey and were happy for him to stay in charge.  Despite this, Sansa and Jon decided they had the right to try and reclaim Winterfell, even though the KO7K had given it to the Boltons.  The Northern Lords only decided they were okay with a Stark being in charge once Jon had already won the battle and was obviously in a position of power.

In fact, Sansa was so incensed that the Northerners did not want to fight for the Starks that she suggested Jon force children from their homes and give away the castles to others.  This is clearly not the actions of someone who thinks people have a right to vote for any leader.  She was advocating punishment for people who did not "vote" for her family.

The Starks and Dany have exactly the same sense of entitlement, the only difference is the Starks think they are entitled to the North and Dany thinks she is entitled to the 7 Kingdoms.

4 hours ago, Colorful Mess said:

If Dany doesn't want their subjugation then she should be fine with the Lords declaring Sansa as Queen in the North.

Does Sansa actually want to be Queen, especially during a war?  If Sansa is declared QITN then as Queen she has a duty to be on the front lines fighting the AOTD.  After all as Dany said, what sort of Queen isn't prepared to die for her people?  A Queen who isn't willing to risk her life in battle would be the ultimate coward, similar to Joffrey during the Blackwater stuff.

Last season Jon ordered all men, women and children to learn how to fight, however we never saw Sansa engaging in any kind of weapons training.  In fact, when Sansa sentenced Littlefinger to death she didn't follow the Northern tradition of the one who passes the sentence swinging the sword, and passed the job off to Arya.  She could have easily been the one to slit LF's throat, but it seems she has no interest in even minimal contact with weapons.  Based on this I don't get the sense that Sansa plans on setting foot on a battlefield.  She might be initially flattered if the Lords propose to name her QITN, but I think if she thought about it for a few minutes she might decide that now is not a great time for her to be QITN.

Also, the Northern Lords are pretty cowardly.  They grumbled last season but no one was actually prepared to call a vote or press Sansa's weak protestations that Jon was King.  Even if they hate Dany and are pissed at Jon for bending the knee, they have proven themselves to be such weaklings that I would be surprised if any of them had the balls to tell Jon to his face that they are replacing him.

1 hour ago, SilverStormm said:

The show trailers will 100% play up to the hyperbole over what the North will think of the Dany/Jon situation but it must pale into insignificance within one episode, two at the very most, but my money is on one. Here's why:

I agree it's all going to be pretty much a moot point.  We know that Winterfell gets attacked at the end of episode 2 / start of episode 3.  Those first 2 episodes will probably be full of bitching, but then Winterfell will be under attack and the AOTD will be making its way closer to KL.  People will have a hard enough time staying alive, there won't be too much time for politicking.

[whateverdgaf]

I would actually prefer it if instead of there being squabbles over power to start, before everyone smartens up and focuses on the main threat, for it to be the other way around. If everyone starts of intending to put aside their doubts and mistrust and personal desires with the aim of working together, only for as time passes their resolve to weaken, I can imagine that would ring very true. As food runs out and the body count grows, and the days grows short and the sun is fleeting, for the distrust and resentment to grow and work up to a fever pitch would be an interesting take. For fear and anger and hunger to gradually override good sense. And yet at the same time to see bonds between previous enemies begin to be forged as they face the dead together. That would be my preference.

[GraceK]

4 hours ago, OhOkayWhat said:

Exactly. She should let them elect their own leader and respect that. If she wants respect she needs to respect them too.

While she’s at it, she should offer pensions and universal healthcare. ?

[Meredith Quill]

When it comes to potential political squabbling in the North or anywhere in Westeros for that matter: 

Quote - "Anything that comes before the word 'but' is horseshit" - TWFTD is going to be the biggest 'BUT' in Westerosi history.

 

Had to do it, sorry, I made myself laugh with that one :D

[Colorful Mess]

6 hours ago, SilverStormm said:

This is why I find it hard to care about what any of them say or do pre TWFTD, because what will matter is what they say or do during TWFTD and that is what will have the biggest impact on who ends up being the one, or ones, in charge after all is said and done.

Pretty much my thinking too. Which is why even during the fighting I wouldn't be surprised if Dany had doubts. Mainly because after she saw the AOTD she decided she needed to go play politics with Cersei first so she wouldn't have to lose to her, and Cersei gave her a false promise. So that seems like a anvil that will drop. Plus, if the Lord of the Rings can have someone more focused on their own grief, loss, and disinheritance during a battle  (Pelennor Fields - Denethor) then Game of Thrones can too. There's also the theme of broken men running away from the fight. They did this with Janos Slynt during the battle for the Wall, the Hound at Blackwater, and Theon in S7 - some people get PTSD and are just afraid to fight or they cut their losses and run. Not everyone is going to be a hero and that is realistic. I can see these things muddying the waters for political outcomes later.

Any battles after the War for the Dawn is defeated or beaten back will be heavily-involved with politics because it will now be a fight over who will rule Westeros. If politics never comes up then the zombie war is a convenient way for R+L=J and Northern independence to not matter at all.

If the Northern Lords do declare for Sansa at that point, I'd have my popcorn ready. I just want to see how Mr. "I Cannot Serve Two Queens" and Ms. "Bend the Knee or Die" respond.

Edited September 3, 2018 by Colorful Mess

[glowbug]

I don’t think the Northern Lords are going to declare for Sansa and even if they did she is loyal to Jon and would likely express that. In fact, I would hope Sansa, now that Bran has explained the threat to her, would also tell the lords to shut it, that there are more important things to worry about like the army of the dead coming for them all. I don’t think there is going to be much discord between the Starks this coming season. I think last season was about resolving the issues between Sansa and Arya, and putting to rest Sansa’s personal ambitions and conflicted loyalty. Littlefinger represented personal ambition and distrust, and she has him killed by her sister. It was a symbolic death as well as a physical one. I’m sure there will be some initial suspicions towards Dany but she’ll either shelve them to deal with the bigger threat or come to support Dany as well. Once she sees all the sacrifices Dany makes during TWFTD I think she’ll end up supporting her or her nephew if Dany dies. If they had more time and episodes it would have been nice to see a scene between Sansa and Dany where the two talk it out woman to woman. They actually have some things in common and I bet they could come to an understanding. 

[Meredith Quill]

1 hour ago, Colorful Mess said:

If the Northern Lords do declare for Sansa at that point, I'd have my popcorn ready. I just want to see how Mr. "I Cannot Serve Two Queens" and Ms. "Bend the Knee or Die" respond.

An unlikely scenario in my view. Because that's the point; none of those three may even survive and if any of them do then I highly doubt the likes of Lords Glover and Manderley or Bronze Yohn Royce will have made it through TWFTD alive. I honestly think that the political landscape, movers and shakers will all be vastly different once the fighting is done, rendering many of the criticisms and concerns that are being expressed as moot.

As a wise man once said, "We shouldn't believe a thing to be true just because we want to believe it". 

[OhOkayWhat]

1 hour ago, Colorful Mess said:

If the Northern Lords do declare for Sansa at that point,

I think Dany should respect them if people decide to elect their own leader. And with this I'm not saying they should elect Sansa.

4 hours ago, GraceK said:

While she’s at it, she should offer pensions and universal healthcare.

Any leader should offer that, whatever those systems are named, at any time in history. 

It's nice.

It's good.

As good it's to respect if you want respect.

[GraceK]

18 minutes ago, OhOkayWhat said:

I think Dany should respect them if people decide to elect their own leader. And with this I'm not saying they should elect Sansa.

4 hours ago, GraceK said:

I didn’t realize we were watching VEEP or House of Cards. I thought the title of the show was Game of Thrones, my apologies, I didn’t realize I was watching a political drama based on 21st century forms of government .  Did I miss the part where Stannis, Cersei and Dany all held campaign rallies ? #Dany2020

18 minutes ago, OhOkayWhat said:

Any leader should offer that, whatever those systems are named, at any time in history. 

It's nice.

It's good.

As good it's to respect if you want respect.

Yes it’s very nice. Puppies are nice too. They are soft and fluffy, and cuddly. They also have nothing to do with Game of thrones. Neither does pensions and universal healthcare in the world of the show. So can we stop with the absurd please? Seeing that at the end of season 7 Dany is heading to North with every intention of saving their asses, allied with Jon and in love with him, there is nothing to predict that she will disrespect the North in any way. Any lack of respect will come from their end.  

Edited September 3, 2018 by GraceK

[nikma]

1 minute ago, GraceK said:

 Did I miss the part where Stannis, Cersei and Dany all held campaign rallies ?

I just imgained that LOL. 

[tangerine95]

I really don't see what benefit declaring Sansa as queen brings other than it's flattering for Sansa.The north doesn't have the resources to fight even Cersei,let alone the NK.Jon is coming back with a 100k army and two dragons.Dany is going there with a strong alliance to Jon to put it mildly and definitely isn't hostile towards them or will be some tyrant towards them.She didn't even require him to bend the knee at the end, but he did because when someone has and  is about to make huge sacrifices to save them,it's kinda the decent thing to do.Her and Jon seem aware that the north will be wary and were already thinking about ways to show them she's not a threat and they're united.So if they refuse to listen and accept help,then imo they're just dumb and too proud.Especially for people who accepted Boltons and refused the Starks just two seasons ago and spent centuries being part of the seven kingdoms and were fine with it.

I mean it be kinda funny to watch them refuse Dany, Jon,the huge armies and dragons and then rely on Sansa in the face of an apocalypse but I doubt it happens.I totally agree that this will be an issue that won't last long ,basically until the NK attacks and they see what they're up against.

[glowbug]

6 minutes ago, GraceK said:

I didn’t realize we were watching VEEP or House of Cards. I thought the title of the show was Game of Thrones, my apologies, I didn’t realize I was watching a political drama based on 21st century forms of government .  Did I miss the part where Stannis, Cersei and Dany all held campaign rallies ? #Dany2020

https://ew.com/article/2016/08/12/game-thrones-jon-snow-daenerys-campaign-ads/amp/

Sorry, couldn’t resist. ?

[GraceK]

1 minute ago, glowbug said:

https://ew.com/article/2016/08/12/game-thrones-jon-snow-daenerys-campaign-ads/amp/

Sorry, couldn’t resist. ?

Omg thank you for this!!! ????

[whateverdgaf]

24 minutes ago, OhOkayWhat said:

I think Dany should respect them if people decide to elect their own leader. And with this I'm not saying they should elect Sansa.

Any leader should offer that, whatever those systems are named, at any time in history. 

It's nice.

It's good.

As good it's to respect if you want respect.

I'm not sure why this is being treated as ludicrous. Isn't Dany meant to be a hero? What good is her defeating the WW if her people all end up living in poverty and dying anyway. If whoever ascends the throne is meant to be part of the sweet in 'bittersweet', then there has to be some indication that they are going to strive for some social reforms, providing for the most vulnerable for example. Westeros is a hell hole and if things continue on as they are, then however it ends will constitute a tragedy.

Edited September 3, 2018 by whateverdgaf

[Colorful Mess]

4 minutes ago, SilverStormm said:

I honestly believe that the political landscape, movers and shakers will all be vastly different once the fighting is done, rendering many of the criticisms and concerns that are expressed as moot.

As a wise man once said, "We shouldn't believe a thing to be true just because we want to believe it". 

Can you be a bit more specific about what you think this vastly different landscape could look like? Since I don't believe the post-battle landscape (after Episode 3) will descend into a leaderless state of anarchy or a representative democracy where everyone decides they don't need kings/queens anymore, "vastly different" to me is:

• Before: Westeros faces a threat from ice. 
• After: Westeros faces a threat from fire.

 

• Before: Jon and Dany are allied.
• After: The alliance is broken.

 

• Before: Jon has no claims whatsoever and people shun him.
• After: Jon has a claim to the South and people support him.

 

• Before:  Dany intends to save the North
• After: ???

 

• Before: Sansa is overlooked for her contributions again (food storage, warm clothing).
• After: Sansa ends up in a stable position of power. 

Even if I'm off base here, through it all I think there is one thing that won't change: Starks working together to protect each other.

[Meredith Quill]

1 hour ago, Colorful Mess said:

Any battles after the War for the Dawn is defeated or beaten back will be heavily-involved with politics because it will now be a fight over who will rule Westeros. If politics never comes up then the zombie war is a convenient way for R+L=J and Northern independence to not matter at all.

On this aspect - I think there's a danger of allowing ourselves to be overly invested in semantics and/or details that simply won't come up.

Once TWFTD is won, if other fantasy storytelling is any indicator; a clear victorious leader will have emerged/been born in battle and everyone will accept that person, or persons, as their ruler(s). Moreover, as there are only six episodes left to complete this very long story, that really doesn't leave much, if any, time for in-fighting once the war is won, which seems to be happening in episode five if not six. After that the show will want to give the audience closure (whether good or bad) and wrap up the story. 

[Happy Harpy]

I saw a post on Freefolk wondering if Ellaria and Tyene would be reanimated once the AOTD invades KL.

It made me realize how much I'd love it if Cersei had to face the literal skeletons in her closet dungeon.

I know it's going to be Jaime, Tyrion or (dark horse) Arya, but as a Dorne non-hater I'd ROTFLMAO if Tyene of all people was the valonqar.

[tangerine95]

6 minutes ago, glowbug said:

https://ew.com/article/2016/08/12/game-thrones-jon-snow-daenerys-campaign-ads/amp/

Sorry, couldn’t resist. ?

Omg I never saw these promos.I love it lol

[GraceK]

16 minutes ago, Happy Harpy said:

 

I saw a post on Freefolk wondering if Ellaria and Tyene would be reanimated once the AOTD invades KL.

 

Isn’t Ellaria still alive? I thought the point of Cersei’s torture was to keep her alive to see  Tyenes rotting corpse for the rest of her life. She wanted Ellaria to live out her days with the bones of her daughter or something gruesome like that.

Edited September 3, 2018 by GraceK

[Meredith Quill]

18 minutes ago, Colorful Mess said:

Can you be a bit more specific about what you think this vastly different landscape could look like?

I'm referring to the potential for things being vastly different from the current political landscape and players:

• The death of characters who are competing for or could become the endgame ruler of the 7K/North/Name Your Region Here. 
• The death of characters who support or oppose the above factions.
• What kind of leadership will come out of the result of the war? Monarchy? Government? Both? Neither?
• Will ruling Houses even still exist? Who knows.

The writers didn't include the whole 'break the wheel' declaration (more than once) for no reason - they're foreshadowing that there'll be something different from what's gone before once the war is over, no matter who wins.

[shireenbamfatheon]

10 hours ago, SilverStormm said:

An unlikely scenario in my view. Because that's the point; none of those three may even survive and if any of them do then I highly doubt the likes of Lords Glover and Manderley or Bronze Yohn Royce will have made it through TWFTD alive. I honestly believe that the political landscape, movers and shakers will all be vastly different once the fighting is done, rendering many of the criticisms and concerns that are expressed as moot.

As a wise man once said, "We shouldn't believe a thing to be true just because we want to believe it". 

Yohn Royce has filmed for episode six which means the likelihood of him dying is very small (though not non-existent). He's also the only Valesman the audience is familiar with aside from Sweetrobin who also makes it till the finale, so the chances of D&D killing him off and severing the audience's only connection to the Vale is slim to none. It seems that at least one major character from each kingdom makes it: Yara, Tyrion, Sansa/Arya/Bran, Brienne, Sam, Gendry, Sweetrobin, Yohn Royce, Edmure (I think he was spotted?). That's assuming that the scenes filmed were for the end of the finale, of course, which is looking increasingly likely.

 

16 hours ago, whateverdgaf said:

I would actually prefer it if instead of there being squabbles over power to start, before everyone smartens up and focuses on the main threat, for it to be the other way around. 

1

I would love this scenario where people start giving in to despair and have to fight like hell to persevere instead of constant battles with no exploration of the mental toll the Long Night is taking on people's mental states during the war. Old Nan's story about the Long Night was so terrifying and I would love the show to become a full-out horror series instead of purely action. People killing their own loved ones because of lack of food supplies, depression and PTSD kicking in and civilians turning on each other, everything freezing over, constant darkness etc. I love apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic stories.

 

On 3/9/2018 at 5:47 AM, Colorful Mess said:

Another thing that worries me is that the only reason Dany didn't want Jon to bend the knee anymore is because she fell in love with him. It would be better if she realized that the North has a right to choose their leaders. 

 

1

I feel like this was either a major misstep in season seven or something that'll be explored in the next season, because it did feel like both characters made decisions about their campaign, so to say,  primarily based on their feelings for each other and not so much from a moral/strategic standpoint. Missandei made a big deal of hyping up Daenerys because they chose her as their leader, and Dany herself promised the Lannister/Reach soldiers that she wasn't there to put them in chains, but her decision to back down on wanting the North was purely driven by her love for Jon and not her realizing that the North should have the right to choose their own rulers. They could have had her acting on her words instead of just giving various spiels on the breaking the wheel without actually following through on it.

 

 

10 hours ago, GraceK said:

I didn’t realize we were watching VEEP or House of Cards. I thought the title of the show was Game of Thrones, my apologies, I didn’t realize I was watching a political drama based on 21st century forms of government .  Did I miss the part where Stannis, Cersei and Dany all held campaign rallies ? #Dany2020

 

 

4

Eh Dany's own people made a big deal out of their choice to have her lead them. Freedom is literally one of the biggest themes in her arc and one she's used to amass so much support and manpower.  It's something she has routinely campaigned on and justified her actions by. Tyrion too supported the closest thing they have to democratic elections in Westeros, so the idea that people should get to choose their leaders is hardly preposterous considering how heavy-handed the show's been with it these past few seasons. Jon's crowning was such a big deal and cathartic partly because he was chosen by his own people. It's not outrageous to want Dany to actually stay true to her words instead of just cherry-picking when it applies and for whom it's appropriate. If Dany doesn't actually care about allowing people free choice, she shouldn't use Breaker of Chains as a title, nor should her people boast about how special she is because they chose to follow her. Cersei is a villain and Stannis burned his own daughter alive so it's not like we're supposed to expect much of them, but Dany is a grey character whose invasion is based on the pretense of wanting to bring freedom to an oppressed people, so either she should allow them that freedom she considers so precious, or just admit that her ambition trumps their freedom.  Hopefully, this arc will have an actual resolution to it instead of just being ignored. I don't even care how it turns out, I just want it to have meant something.

Edited September 4, 2018 by shireenbamfatheon

[OhOkayWhat]

28 minutes ago, GraceK said:

Did I miss the part where Stannis, Cersei and Dany all held campaign rallies ? 

Jon was elected by acclamation.

 

28 minutes ago, GraceK said:

Yes it’s very nice. Puppies are nice too. They are soft and fluffy, and cuddly. They also have nothing to do with Game of thrones.

Kitties? Everyone forgets Ser Pounce!!

28 minutes ago, GraceK said:

Neither does pensions and universal healthcare in the world of the show

Support systems in case of bad times are possible even in that world.

 

28 minutes ago, GraceK said:

Dany is heading to North with every intention of saving their...

If she wants to be elected, she better helps. Also if she wants living subjects. Or if she wants to stay in the Living-Team because the Night King will never stop.

[Happy Harpy]

3 minutes ago, GraceK said:

Isn’t Ellaria still alive? I thought the point of Cersei’s torture was to keep her alive to see  Tyenes rotting corpse for the rest of her life. She wanted Ellaria to live out her days with the bones of her daughter or something gruesome like that.

With the timelines on GoT, you never know :)

[Colorful Mess]

7 minutes ago, SilverStormm said:

On this aspect - I think there's a danger of allowing ourselves to be overly invested in semantics and/or details that simply won't come up.

Once TWFTD is won, if other fantasy storytelling is any indicator; a clear victorious leader will have emerged/been born in battle and everyone will accept that person, or persons, as their ruler(s). Moreover, as there are only six episodes left to complete this very long story, that really doesn't leave much, if any, time for in-fighting once the war is won, which seems to be happening in episode five if not six. After that the show will want to give the audience closure (whether good or bad) and wrap up the story. 

R+L=J is a semantic detail? Who controls the North - semantics? Sorry I just cant agree with that.

If its just one long humans vs. zombies battle, it should be even shorter. Like 3 episodes max:

• Episode 1: Reunions,
• Episode 2: 60 minutes of fighting, 
• Episode 3: Aftermath. 

But since we have 3 EXTRA episodes I don't think I'm crazy to expect the series title to come back up again. I do think one of the major themes of the series is when you play the game of thrones, you win or you die. Seasons 1-7 has involved Starks learning lessons about survival, how to balance honor and dishonor, how to be smarter in a world where everyone wants them dead. They must play for their survival and they must also play smarter to survive. If they don't get to apply what they've learned...what does it matter?

[GraceK]

2 minutes ago, OhOkayWhat said:

Jon was elected by acclamation.

 

Kitties? Everyone forgets Ser Pounce!!

Support systems in case of bad times are possible even in that world.

 

If she wants to be elected, she better helps. Also if she wants living subjects. Or if she wants to stay in the Living-Team because the Night King will never stop.

You make very good points .?

[shireenbamfatheon]

I keep thinking about NCW saying that season eight will show that everything has been connected since season one. I know there's supposed to be a third shocking reveal, but I don't feel like there's been a missing link or red thread since the beginning of the show. The overall plot has been pretty cohesive and not that complex so I'm so curious to learn what he's talking about? Could it be that Bran accidentally or deliberately set everything in motion? Did the NK set something in motion at the beginning of the series? I feel like it has to be connected to something magic-related. Maybe it's something to do with R'hollor? I can't make sense of it.

[GraceK]

15 minutes ago, shireenbamfatheon said:

Eh Dany's own people made a big deal out of their choice to have her lead them. Freedom is literally one of the biggest themes in her arc and one she's used to amass so much support and manpower.  It's something she has routinely campaigned on and justified her actions by. Tyrion too supported the closest thing they have to democratic elections in Westeros, so the idea that people should get to choose their leaders is hardly preposterous considering how heavy-handed the show's been with it these past few seasons. Jon's crowning was such a big deal and cathartic partly because he was chosen by his own people. It's not outrageous to want Dany to actually stay true to her words instead of just cherry-picking when it applies and for whom it's appropriate. If Dany doesn't actually care about allowing people free choice, she shouldn't use Breaker of Chains as a title, nor should her people boast about how special she is because they chose to follow her. Cersei is a villain and Stannis burned his own daughter alive so it's not like we're supposed to expect much of them, but Dany is a grey character whose invasion is based on the pretense of wanting to bring freedom to an oppressed people, so either she should allow them that freedom she considers so precious, or just admit that her ambition trumps their freedom.  Hopefully, this arc will have an actual resolution  to it instead of just being ignored. I don't even care how it turns out, I just want it to have meant something.

You got me there. I can’t disagree  ?

Edited September 3, 2018 by GraceK

[whateverdgaf]

6 minutes ago, shireenbamfatheon said:

would love this scenario where people start giving in to despair and have to fight like hell to persevere instead of constant battles with no exploration of the mental toll the Long Night is taking on people's mental states during the war. Old Nan's story about the Long Night was so terrifying and I would love the show to become a full-out horror series instead of purely action. People killing their own loved ones because of lack of food supplies, depression and PTSD kicking in and civilians turning on each other, everything freezing over, constant darkness etc. I love apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic stories.

Exactly. This is the battle that has been built up from the start, it has to have a greater impact than any other. It would also be more realistic in that grudges and resentments are not overlooked and yet the characters are only shown succumbing to them as their situation grows ever more dire. At the same time by fully exploring the bleakness and emotional toll of the situation, there is also a great scope for some truly heart-warming and inspiring moments of perseverance and camaraderie, even amongst former enemies.