S08.E05: The Bells

[kittykat]

I think it's poetic Justice that Cersei, who always made her examples with such pomposity and farfare, got the most unceremonious death.  She would have sopped up the crowds at a public execution or been martyred.  Everything has always gone her way or there's been someone to bail her out.  Not this time; in her death she finally didn't get her way.

Another small note, I totally appreciated the detail of small bursts of wildfire going off in the city.  Looks like that line drop of Aerys' hidden caches finally paid off.

[WaltersHair]

Zhivago: "It seems you've burnt the wrong village." Pasha: "They always say that, and what does it matter? A village betrays us, a village is burned. The point is made."

Zhivago: "Your point - their village."

[GiuliettaMasina]

Ah...I see one point I can clear up. I don't think Dany, the Dothraki, or the Unsullied are heroes. I don't think any of the main characters on this show is a hero; they're medieval warlords, they're all trash. I was never invested in Dany's white savoir quest, nor was I ever under any delusion she would get a happy ending. It seemed clear that only one of her or Jon was going to make it, and it was always going to be Jon. I was perfectly okay with it--my 2nd fav characters are Jon and Sansa who will likely get endings that lean more towards sweet than bitter, so it's not like I'm crushed cause "my guy" didn't win. My others guys will, and, I never thought she'd win to begin it. My problem is entirely in the execution.

Edited May 14, 2019 by GiuliettaMasina

[Bryce Lynch]

18 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

She doesn't know Varys sent those ravens though.

Dany's "character" is to do whatever it takes to be Queen of Westeros.

It only become part of her "character" in this episode.  If she had been willing to do "whatever it takes", she would have been on the IT seasons ago.  She could have taken the deal from the Masters for gold and a fleet of ships, but she was unwilling to sell the hundreds of thousands of slaves she had freed back into bondage.

She could have taken her 3 dragons, huge fleet, 40,000 Dothraki and 8,000 Unsullied and taken Kings Landing easily at the start of Season 6, but instead she listened to her lousy advisors, because she didn't want to kill thousands of innocent civilians.

She could have ignored Jon's plea for help fighting the NK and Tyiron's ridiculous plan to get Cersei to join the fight and taken KL at the end of Season 7.

She had already conquered KL, while deliberately avoiding large civilian casualties, when the writers decided she would suddenly take on a totally different character than she had displayed for years, and slaughter tens or hundreds of thousands of innocents, for no reason.  

[Umbelina]

No, it's been HER CHARACTER since her brother died.

Before that it was HER CHARACTER to be her brother's Queen to his King ruling Westeros.

It's been her story since we first met her on the show or read about her in the books.

[BitterApple]

The worst part about Dany going Mad Queen is it set up the most utterly predictable series finale ever.

Here's where I think they could've done a better job:

Instead of having post-bells Dany blaze trails throughout KL, they should've had her focus solely on the Red Keep. This would've accomplished several things:

1) Dany would've destroyed the physical seat of Lannister power in the Seven Kingdoms, thus literally breaking The Wheel

2) Cersei going out in a blaze of dragon fire would've been poetic. Missandei's "dracarys" would've came full circle. 

3) Civilians still would've died in large enough numbers to give everyone pause

4) Civilians would've died after the surrender but as collateral damage, not targets

I think the combination of these factors would've created the perfect gray area for E06. Dany wouldn't have gone full-on insane but she would've handled certain things badly enough to make Jon and Tyrion seriously question whether she's fit to rule. Obviously the girl ain't all there, but is she at the point where she needs to be disposed? It would've created much greater suspense than the obvious "Jon or Arya is going to kill her" that we all know is coming. 

Eta: apologies in advance if this has already been suggested. I haven't had time to read the entire thread.

Edited May 14, 2019 by BitterApple

[seacliffsal]

At least this battle was shot with light so that we could actually see it.  However, I would have preferred to have seen more of the Battle for Winterfell as I truly was concerned for the survival of many characters throughout that battle.

I also noticed the very different make-up and lighting that they used for Dany prior to the battle.  They were showing a physical decline, the effects of stress, or initial symptoms of poisoning in her face.  They held the shot a bit to ensure it would be noticed.  She really looked different from all of the previous episodes.  I thought it was foreshadowing when I first saw it.

[TaurusRose]

5 hours ago, Lady Iris said:

I did enjoy Cersei scampering away from Cleganebowl. It was most unqueenly.

LOL That cracked me up. She was seriously deflated.

[arty]

8 minutes ago, seacliffsal said:

I also noticed the very different make-up and lighting that they used for Dany prior to the battle.  They were showing a physical decline, the effects of stress, or initial symptoms of poisoning in her face.  They held the shot a bit to ensure it would be noticed.  She really looked different from all of the previous episodes.  I thought it was foreshadowing when I first saw it.

I thought that for the first time in the series, she physically resembled her Targaryen family members that we've seen, specifically her father and Viserys, with her flowing pale blond locks and long, gaunt face. It was quite a trick making round-faced Emilia look long in the face! 

[Daisy]

5 hours ago, Law Mom said:

I was just rewatching the scene where Dany obtained the Unsullied, back in Season 3. At the time it all seemed very heroic, but really she lied and cheated her way through that whole transaction. She traded Drogon for the army, and then even though she did not own Drogon anymore she ordered him to Dracarys Kras. That's like paying with a bad check. Then she took Drogon back, when he should have gone to Kras's heirs. Even pretending to not speak Valyrian was a deception, although a smart one. We cheered because the person Dany murdered was a bad guy, like the absolute worst. We were distracted from seeing this as a moral conundrum, as we should have at the time.

Also in that scene, Dany failed to tell her advisers about her plan so when she offered up a dragon they tried to talk her out of it. In exchange for their efforts to protect her from this terrible idea, she, of course, threatened to fire them for contradicting her in public, in that Journey-to-Madness tone of voice she liked to use.

I brought this up last week in another thread. and someone's response was "but he was a slave owner tho." So? He was a douchecanoe, he insulted her - but at the end of the day, he did the business transaction fairly. He gave Dany everything she wanted for the price  i'm pretty sure she  named. (Dragon. biggest one (his Term).). Dany had zero intentions of honouring it - and she destroyed everyone there and she stood there with a cold, "that's right." face that she had several times. 
 

4 hours ago, UNOSEZ said:

"But but but.. We needed more scenes so we could prepare ourselves and not fall in love with the villain.. Instead they made us overlook it all with their bad writing and now we don't have a more reasonable excuse for why the lady who constantly promised fire and blood rained down fire and blood... Damn you D&D".... 

Smh 

pretty much this argument i've had two days now. we had it. it was cultivated for the sympathetic oohh yaaaah (for most people).

1 hour ago, proserpina65 said:

Except Dany has previously threatened to burn cities to the ground with absolutely no regard for the people in those cities (Qarth, Astapor, Yunkai).  We may have only seen her act against her enemies, but it's only because people talked her out of destroying cities before.

Except it was acknowledged.  It was specifically mentioned in those episodes in Season 2 and Season 6.

yah. pretty much. 

1 hour ago, Chris24601 said:

Actually, the point is to overcome the shadow and become the true positive expression of the archetype. The king must have enough self-confidence to both trust his own judgments (i.e. not give his power away) and to not need external shows of their power to boost their own confidence. The true king can confidently reside in a hovel and still be able to provide order and the opportunities for his people to grow.

And I went into this in a past episode thread, but it bears repeating; the two shadows don’t complement each other, they always make each other worse because they both suffer the same flaw (insecurity with their power in the case of the king) they just express that flaw differently.

In the case of an Impotent King and a Tyrant King, the Impotent King is insecure with their power and so gives it to the Tyrant, who just uses that power for even more grandiose displays to mask their insecurity.

That fact (and the show running on reverses) is why I could predict that the premiere would be the high point for Jon and Dany... because they are toxic for each other.

The key distinction, and why season five for me particularly, is that Sansa and Arya targeted people they specifically knew were guilty. Dany didn’t.

Ramsey’s death was actually the height of irony. Those were HIS own dogs that he’d chosen to starve for a week so they’d tear apart whoever he threw in there after the battle (I believe his plan was Jon, after he’d raped Sansa in front of him).

If he’d just treated his own dogs humanely and fed them, he’d have had nothing to fear from being locked in that pen with them. He was literally undone by his own cruelty.

Likewise, even as Arya killed all the adult male Freys who’d been involved in the Red Wedding, she was careful not to let any innocents drink the poison. Her desire was to punish those who were guilty and no one else.

But for Dany, the moment where I became utterly convinced by the narrative that Dany would ultimately be the villain though was when we she threw a man to her dragons to be burned and ripped apart AFTER admitting she didn’t know if he was guilty or innocent. All she cared about was her pain at Selmy’s death and scaring the others into line.

Before that it was the moment that Hizdhar informed Dany that his father, whom she’d crucified, had been opposed to the Masters’ crucifixion of the slaves for which she’d had 163 random Masters crucified as punishment. She didn’t care enough to find out who was innocent or guilty of the particular crime, she just wanted people to suffer for it and her self-righteousness to be assuaged.

That’s actually been the most defining trait of Dany’s violence... she cares more about shows of power when she feels she’s been wronged than with actually punishing the guilty... going all the way back to Mirri Maz Dur who was burned alive for killing the warlord who ordered her village burned, her people killed and her to be gang raped... because Dany cared more about the Warlord than the slave seeking justice.

Another key distinction is that in the case of Sansa, Arya and Tyrion... they were punishing someone who had done wrong to them first. Dany was the one who started the fight with all the Masters, starting with going back on her deal with the slavers who sold her the Unsullied and killing them all.

Yes, slavery is bad, but she went in with zero plan for the long term with the subtlety of a sledgehammer, then got pissed at people when it turned out to not be as easy as a Saturday Morning Cartoon to deal with... and didn’t particularly care whether the particular person she was punishing because she was pissed off was innocent or guilty.

I understand that people read things differently, but how much of that reading you made came down to how Dany felt about things vs. objective facts?

The Dothraki are objectively murderous raping pillagers, but because they were helping Dany they were “good guys” and the slave who killed Dany’s dreams of conquering Westeros with Khal Drogo’s horde was the “villain.”

Objectively, Dany bargained in bad faith with the Unsullied slave traders and betrayed them, but that’s okay because they were asshole victims and Dany got an army to replace the Dothraki with.

Objectively, Dany crucified 163 people selected at random from the Masters of Mereen without even bothering to determine who had actually decided to crucify the slaves along the roadside. But that’s okay because they were slavers and probably guilty of something (if the crime is being a slaver... execute them all. If the crime is crucifying slaves, execute the ones who actually ordered it... that’s what actually makes it tyrannical).

She fed a man of uncertain guilt to her dragons, but that’s okay because Selmy had been murdered by the Sons of the Harpy last episode and someone needed to be made an example of to keep the former Masters in line.

And in retrospect he was almost certainly innocent since the Sons of the Harpy were later learned to have been funded by forces outside Mereen... so the idea that Dany doesn’t kill innocents to keep her subjects in line has actually been disproven since season five when she did precisely that.

That’s the difference between Sansa, Arya and Tyrion punishing the guilty for their specific crimes and Dany punishing people based on what will best keep her subjects in line.

Daenerys has always been “More of the Same.” It’s now just too obvious for people to be able to make excuses for it anymore.

I’m actually kinda relieved it went that way. I was dreading years of debates over whether what Dany did was justifed or not if they’d gone with something more muddy... like the city didn’t surrender and she’d just gone nuclear on the Red Keep and the innocents within died from the collateral damage.

We’ve been spared that. There’s no room for doubt anymore that she’s a monster. Madness or deliberate choice is largely irrelevant... the monster needs to be stopped regardless.

the bold is so important. 
she's murdered innocent people before. now it's amplified. 
this is who dany is. 

[Chris24601]

48 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

Oh! So the show is practically a blueprint of that conflict. Jon handed all power to Dany, but it just made her more insecure.

Well, as I said, there's a reason Jungian archetypes show up all over the place in fiction (its probably as or more common than the Cambellian Monomyth and the two aren't mutually exclusive).

That reason is because they do give the author a pre-established conflict (a blueprint as you will) via the simple formula of "Shadow Archetype 1 tries to become the True Archetype while opposed by Shadow Archetype 2."

In this case an Impotent King (which could also be someone who doesn't know they're supposed to be the king) needs to become the True King while being opposed by a Tyrant King (or a series of them depending on the story; many of Jon's adversaries have had tyrant traits; Thorne, Ramsey, Dany, even the Night King (when he was showboating) to an extent.

Typically in heroic tales the protagonist's shadow archetype is the more passive of the two alternatives because going from passive to active is seen as heroic. The more aggressive archetype is more generally used in redemption stories where learning restraint is an important step in achieving their redemption.

The archetypes can further be used to establish a supporting cast. The King archetype isn't achieved on its own. They need someone to motivate and inspire them to start down the path (the Lover), they need to receive instruction in who they really are (the Magician who provides hidden insights), and they need to be reminded of the importance of duty and family (the Warrior).

Throw in shadow archetypes for the King, Lover, Magician and Warrior and you've now got multiple conflicts to wrap your story around.

[millennium]

1 hour ago, proserpina65 said:

That would actually make me care more FOR them.  Cersei deserved every moment of that walk.

I tend to believe two wrongs don't make a right.   By throwing feces at a naked, incarcerated woman, hurling degrading sexual insults, exposing their penises at her, etc., the fine citizens of King's Landing somewhat justified Cersei's hatred and mistreatment of them. 

[screamin]

13 minutes ago, Daisy said:

I brought this up last week in another thread. and someone's response was "but he was a slave owner tho." So? He was a douchecanoe, he insulted her - but at the end of the day, he did the business transaction fairly.

Yeah, no. He was brutalizing and mutilating children to sell. People who castrate little boys for profit have kind of renounced their right to humane treatment.

I do think her, 'don't ever question me in public' to her advisers that she had not told her plan to in private WAS a harbinger of future problems, though.

Edited May 14, 2019 by screamin

[TigerLynx]

If they are expecting me to see Dany = bad, but Jon = good, it's not working.

[Bryce Lynch]

1 hour ago, Umbelina said:

No, it's been HER CHARACTER since her brother died.

Before that it was HER CHARACTER to be her brother's Queen to his King ruling Westeros.

It's been her story since we first met her on the show or read about her in the books.

It was never in her character to slaughter masses of innocents, especially women and children.

Yes, she was determined to sit on the Iron Throne.  But, she was never willing to do whatever it took. I listed several opportunities she had to take the IT long ago,. but declined to avoid bringing harm to innocent people.

Her massacre of the innocent women and children of KL, had nothing to do with her desire to become Queen.

She had already conquered  KL and Westeros, while striking only military targets, and could have taken the throne within minutes.

Her slaughter of thousands was gratuitous cruelty and violence, that had no military or political value 

[kieyra]

23 minutes ago, TigerLynx said:

If they are expecting me to see Dany = bad, but Jon = good, it's not working.

Really? I’m pretty dispassionate about the whole thing at this point, but what’s Jon done that’s on par with torching a city? 

Or do you mean the fact that he didn’t try harder to stop her?

[Hana Chan]

6 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

Her massacre of the innocent women and children of KL, had nothing to do with her desire to become Queen.

No, it was about punishing a population that refused to embrace her as their rightful queen and give her the respect/adulation that she demanded. And it was to send a message to the rest of Westeros that she would not hesitate to do the same to any other city/territory that defied her. Especially the North.

It was easy to handwave any other time Dany went over the line because, as I and others have said, her targets were usually really unsavory characters. Slavers, Dorthraki warlords, rapists... but she had killed at least one relatively innocent man that we know of because she wasn't taking care to make sure that she only punished the evil. It was only going to be a matter of time before killing people who hadn't committed any horrific acts would be seen by her as a justifiable cost.

[UNOSEZ]

30 minutes ago, TigerLynx said:

If they are expecting me to see Dany = bad, but Jon = good, it's not working.

Based solely on the episode how is that possible?...  Dany leveled a city with tons of ppl who weren't in conflict with her and soldiers who had given up... Jon stopped his soldiers ( as best he could)  from wonton murder.. Pillaging and rape... Like im legit asking what I'm missing that ur seeing

[Bryce Lynch]

37 minutes ago, screamin said:

Yeah, no. He was brutalizing and mutilating children to sell. People who castrate little boys for profit have kind of renounced their right to humane treatment.

I do think her, 'don't ever question me in public' to her advisers that she had not told her plan to in private WAS a harbinger of future problems, though.

Not only that, Kraznys made each Unsullied murder a slave baby to earn his shield.

He was a monster and needed dracarysin'.  

It is amazing the monsters people will defend to try to prove that Dany was always evil.

[screamin]

Quote

It was easy to handwave any other time Dany went over the line because, as I and others have said, her targets were usually really unsavory characters. Slavers, Dorthraki warlords, rapists... but she had killed at least one relatively innocent man that we know of because she wasn't taking care to make sure that she only punished the evil. It was only going to be a matter of time before killing people who hadn't committed any horrific acts would be seen by her as a justifiable cost.

I really do think Mirri Maz Duur was kind of heroic, though. Dany's vengeful impulse to kill her was completely understandable - but it showed that whatever god granted Dany her dragons was an amoral one.

Edited May 14, 2019 by screamin

[UNOSEZ]

13 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

It was never in her character to slaughter masses of innocents, especially women and children.

Yes, she was determined to sit on the Iron Throne.  But, she was never willing to do whatever it took. I listed several opportunities she had to take the IT long ago,. but declined to avoid bringing harm to innocent people.

Her massacre of the innocent women and children of KL, had nothing to do with her desire to become Queen.

She had already conquered  KL and Westeros, while striking only military targets, and could have taken the throne within minutes.

Her slaughter of thousands was gratuitous cruelty and violence, that had no military or political value 

Based on her talk at dragonstone I believe that her in show reasoning for just burning it down is that no one will oppose her for fear of another KL... This assuring that future generations grow up under her benevolent rule( and if she isn't killed that might actually be true)  I mean if she can compare mental use what she's just done.. As an extreme but necessary move.. Then she could go on to rule in the way she's always dreamed ahead would and of anyone stepped outta line.. Well look what happened to Cersei and the Red Keep... That's why I prefer that it played out this way instead of episodes of her growing paranoia or cruelty.. Because then she has no agency.. Its just her being a crazy Targ.. Up until she flew off with Drogon after the bells I honestly didn't know how it was gonna go down.. I knew that KL was toast. But didn't know if she would kick it off.. If cersei would do something and in response ahead did something... Weeks of buildup take the responsibility of this outta her hands.. This way a character we've watched struggle with violent tendencies but generally with help managed to curtail them got to make a choice... One most of us hate.. But her choice.. And I believe it was a measured. Cold.. Calculated choice

[Helena Dax]

I think one of the reasons her actions didn't work for me is because I was already annoyed because it's been a while since things felt organic in the story.  Like the fact that Euron was able to kill Rhaego with one single shot, but no one at King's Landing was able to hit Drogon.  And it seemed so easy to take the city that I kept wondering why she hadn't done it the moment she arrived to Westeros. 

The thing is, either you put a king in the throne (or thrones, if the kingdoms became independent) or you're left with anarchy because I doubt this is going to end with the foundation of the Federal Republic of Westeros. 

And you know, it doesn't have to be a happy ending. But I think it's going to be a disappointing, weak ending with no-emotional payoff. I hope I'm wrong, but the writing hasn't been exactly stellar since they left the books behind.

Edited May 15, 2019 by Helena Dax

[Law Mom]

Dany made her decision when Jon refused to kiss her. "Let it be fear." Even though he just told her he loved her. It would have been a good time for Jon to have reassured her that the people will love her once they get to know her. After all, she had only been to KL once and a two hour meeting at the airport hotel doesn't count as a visit to the city. Take the throne, do some Margaery style good deeds, offer free dragon rides for the kids and the people would eventually get on board. I think Jorah might have been able to talk her down.

I tell you what, the apologists scare me a little, with the arguments that she did it because she was sad and lonely. How many times have we suffered through school shootings and were told that the shooter was bullied at school? Does that make it okay to take out a few classmates and teachers? "No one wanted to be his friend so it's totally understandable he would kill some of them." Because that it exactly the same argument.

[JennyMominFL]

50 minutes ago, Hana Chan said:

No, it was about punishing a population that refused to embrace her as their rightful queen and give her the respect/adulation that she demanded. And it was to send a message to the rest of Westeros that she would not hesitate to do the same to any other city/territory that defied her. Especially the North.

It was easy to handwave any other time Dany went over the line because, as I and others have said, her targets were usually really unsavory characters. Slavers, Dorthraki warlords, rapists... but she had killed at least one relatively innocent man that we know of because she wasn't taking care to make sure that she only punished the evil. It was only going to be a matter of time before killing people who hadn't committed any horrific acts would be seen by her as a justifiable cost.

And in those cases the innocent people were worshiping her and grateful. They people of Westeros, not so much

[Francie]

On 5/13/2019 at 5:51 PM, Couver said:

The show didn't present the Tarlys as honorable though. I suppose some wiggle room is there for viewers interpret them in our own way.

But they betrayed Olenna who they had sworn oaths to. Randall did it purely to get Highgarden in the bargain. His betrayal lead to a lot of dead Tyrells.

And both were given a choice between life and death.

Again I suppose the method of execution is the issue here. To me the dragon fire is no different than Ned or Robb behading people who disobeyed them. It's certainly not the level of torture Cersei inflicted on people like Ellaria and Septa Unella. That is prolonged suffering. Dragon fire seems to have it over and done with in seconds.

Randyll Tarly did not decide one day to overthrow his liege lady for personal gain. His liege lady decided, out of pure spite and revenge, to seek out a foreign adversary and align with her all for personal payback. Olenna wasn’t thinking about the people of Highgarden or the Reach or of Westeros when she accepted Varys’s deal. She wanted the woman who killed her son and grandchildren obliterated. That was it. Olenna’s greatest heart’s desire at that point was personal revenge. 

Olenna abandoned her responsibilities to her subjects.  And Randyll Tarly was called to the capitol.  He even debated which queen to support. And Cersei made a good case. She factually laid out what Dany had done, with only some editorial flourish. But Dany had crucified 163 maesters. She did pick one random lord-like person and fed him to her dragon. 

Thus, I don’t buy this argument that Randyll Tarly was engaging in treason when he chose to defend Westeros with the widow of the king he served, Robert Baratheon.  Painting Randyll Tarly as some sort of upstart driven by personal ambition is why someone can easily miss that Dany was acting as a tyrant when she executed him dragon fire after he had surrender.  Randyll Tarly may have been a shit to Sam, but he was not treasonous to his country. 

[tennisgurl]

 I think that Dany really truly, until she got to Westeros, thought that people would be thrilled to see her and embrace her instantly as their true queen. It makes sense, considering its the story she was raised with, and she spent so much time with advisers who, while they gave her good advice, all loved her and either considered her their rightful leader or owed her everything, so she continued to think that it would be that easy, once she defeated the Lannisters. When it didnt happen, she got increasingly upset and confused, and didnt really get why people didnt instantly consider her their queen. She never really grasped that her family left a VERY complicated legacy in Westeros, and that her father, the last Targ on the throne, was a monster who was hated and feared by both the nobility and the commoners. Them embracing his daughter, riding around on dragons, having never lived in Westeros or hardly even known anyone from there, with a seemingly strange foreign army, was always going to be a hard sell. I dont think it would be impossible, and I think if she sat on the throne after defeating Cersei and had some festivals, did some good PR with cute kids, gave some lands and titles to nobles (like with Genry) tried to integrate her army in with the populace as much as possible, or emphasize how they and her dragon babies are there to protect the people, not to subjugate them, and maybe run on a kind of "return to normalcy" PR campaign, emphasizing the good things that Targs did over the years and how they had lots of stable years of them, and emphasized that she had lots of Westerosi advisers and do some traveling to get to know the place and people, it could have worked. 

But then she kind of roasted an entire populace because the welcome wagon wasnt put out fast enough, so thats kind of over. 

Like I've said before, this whole Dany goes dark thing could have worked, there was stuff established to allow it to happen in a way that felt organic, if not happy, but that didnt happen. It was more like "God I hate that my boyfriend/nephew wont make out with me now die!!", or like the show had to manipulate things to happen so quickly and so improbably, so that Dany would have reason to crack. Its just so lame, no matter if you think this in character or not. 

Edited May 15, 2019 by tennisgurl

[Wulfsige]

4 minutes ago, Francie said:

Thus, I don’t buy this argument that Randyll Tarly was engaging in treason when he chose to defend Westeros with the widow of the king he served, Robert Baratheon.  Painting Randyll Tarly as some sort of upstart driven by personal ambition is why someone can easily miss that Dany was acting as a tyrant when she executed him dragon fire after he had surrender.  Randyll Tarly may have been a shit to Sam, but he was not treasonous to his country. 

Yep. And Dany did not burn Tarly because he was a shit to his son or a shit in general, but solely because he didn't kneel to her. 

[GraceK]

another goody 😂

[RealReality]

5 hours ago, MadameKillerB said:

Did anyone laugh out loud at Qyburn being just shoved? And then Cersei slinking by? That cracked my shit up.

That was one moment of unexpected hilarity.  I wasn't expecting it given how heavy the episode was overall.

[RealReality]

7 hours ago, VCRTracking said:

I'm sorry, but if you named your kid daenrys or khaleesi, you deserve what you get, though your poor child deserves none of it.  Hopefully people were talked into reasonable middle names.  

[catrice2]

3 hours ago, Absurda said:

I do wonder if Dany would have had trouble controlling the Dothraki if they didn't get to have some raping, pillaging and murdering.  I don't think a peaceful surrender would have satisfied them.

Someone up thread asked why Grey Worm isn't being called out for his actions (attacking a surrendered enemy) as much as Dany.  My guess is it's one or more of the following:

1.  As a subordinate of Dany's he's seen to have less agency than she does.  The old "I was only following orders" thing.  He didn't start until he saw her attack again

2.  He's had no hint of crazy in his backstory.  Part of the debate around Dany is whether or not she did this out of madness

3.  He's not the one who wants to rule these people so he has no reason to care about them like Dany should. 

Any other theories? 

As for who Dany will go after next, who knows?  Could be Jon.  Doing away with any rival claimants to the throne is solid policy.  There's a rich history of it in the show and in the real world.  Robert Baratheon the great hero did it to her family and tried to do it to her.  Joffery did it to Robert's bastards.  Being all the way up North could make Sansa less of a priority, though I can see her in trouble if she doesn't keep her head down.    Tyrion for sure once Dany finds out he freed Jamie.  There's no reason for her not to hear of it, unless the showrunners decide to drop that thread and not deal with it.

Why should he be?  People are excusing Arya killing people from a pre planned list as PTSD and justice (just as Sansa and the hounds) ...so wouldn't we think a man taken from his family at birth, mutilated, trained to be a killer, humiliated constantly because of his mutilation....finds some humanity and then has to sacrifice his men to help WINTERFELL as well as watch the only good thing ever in his life be killed in front of him.....might also have some PTSD??!! 

The other answer is that viewers just don't care enough about Greyworm to think about why he did what he did....just as the writers didn't....

[raven]

12 minutes ago, Francie said:

Olenna wasn’t thinking about the people of Highgarden or the Reach or of Westeros when she accepted Varys’s deal. She wanted the woman who killed her son and grandchildren obliterated.

Cersei was an unfit queen and murdered Olenna's family.  Olenna wanted vengeance, yes, and to gamble on what she thought would a better queen; she lost because Tarly was a coward and betrayed whatever principles he thought he had. 

Quote

"I'm a Tarly. That name means something. We're not oathbreakers, we're not schemers. We don't stab our rivals in the back, or cut their throats at weddings. I swore an oath to House Tyrell..."

Apparently it doesn't mean anything, because you know, scary foreigners!!!  The Lannisters appealed to Tarly's xenophobia and then his word didn't mean anything.

12 minutes ago, Francie said:

Randyll Tarly may have been a shit to Sam, but he was not treasonous to his country. 

He was treasonous by betraying the Tarlys and died because of it.

[sistermagpie]

2 hours ago, Bryce Lynch said:

She could have taken her 3 dragons, huge fleet, 40,000 Dothraki and 8,000 Unsullied and taken Kings Landing easily at the start of Season 6, but instead she listened to her lousy advisors, because she didn't want to kill thousands of innocent civilians.

Isn't this the whole solution here? She listened to her stupid and advisors and wanted to avoid killing innocent civilians and as a result wasn't sitting on the throne. So now she was going to forget the advisors and the civilians make sure she was on the throne and everyone knew it was her throne. Avoiding those deaths wasn't ultimately the most important thing to her.  They had to be sacrificed to start her reign with a strong foundation.

Those times when she didn't go full out she had full hope that when she did make her attack she would be welcomed the way she imagined. She was still following the script where she'd burn the tyrant overlords and the people would be thrilled by her. Her view going into this battle was that these people were never going to get it so she'd have to force them to their knees in fear and then she could raise them up again when she chose. No more half measures or holding back to allow rebellion to grow.

1 hour ago, Chris24601 said:

Throw in shadow archetypes for the King, Lover, Magician and Warrior and you've now got multiple conflicts to wrap your story around.

And it seemed like the story really did just intentionally send the other three Starks out on their individual journeys to find their True archetype. Arya in this ep finally completely embraced life as herself instead of dying for her self-assigned revenge quest. Interesting that Bran started out the story stumbling on secret knowledge that got him injured and wound up with knowledge of everything. (I'm not sure exactly how his story would map out but I'm sure it fits.) i guess Sansa's most obvious shadow figure to conquer was Littlefinger--she stopped imagining "the worst thing" a person could be doing and joined with her family. She's not living her life by manipulating people or using their feelings against them--though she can manipulate things when she chooses. She just doesn't do it compulsively.

37 minutes ago, Law Mom said:

Dany made her decision when Jon refused to kiss her. "Let it be fear." Even though he just told her he loved her. It would have been a good time for Jon to have reassured her that the people will love her once they get to know her. After all, she had only been to KL once and a two hour meeting at the airport hotel doesn't count as a visit to the city. Take the throne, do some Margaery style good deeds, offer free dragon rides for the kids and the people would eventually get on board. I think Jorah might have been able to talk her down.

Really, her story has always been about power. And sometimes it was just really satisfying watching her get it. The Dothraki were an excellent place for her to start coming into her own this way because they were a society that was so into strength and Dany absolutely rose to the challenge of appearing strong--riding a horse, eating that stallion heart. She had a husband she loved who was a big strong guy who would kill anyone for her and so made her strong there too. She awed them all with her strength when she walked into the flames and came out with dragons. She had visions of herself using her great power to break the chains of other powerless people like her and sometimes she did, but ultimately she always had to be the one with the *most* power. The greatest satisfaction was in the act of breaking of the chains. She had a harder time identifying with slaves who couldn't support themselves afterwards.

[Kate47]

2 hours ago, screamin said:

I do think her, 'don't ever question me in public' to her advisers that she had not told her plan to in private WAS a harbinger of future problems, though.

The thing is, a queen who has her advisors publicly double checking her decisions looks weak. It looks like she doesn't know what she's doing and needed to have smarter people course correcting her during a trade negotiation.

It worked for the purposes of her ruse, but (like so many people said when Sansa publicly questioned Jon's decisions) Jorah or Ser Barristan need to bring up doubts in private counsel.

To me, that's not a sign of Dany's mental health. My apologies if I misinterpreted your comment tho.

Edited May 15, 2019 by Kate47

[RealReality]

WRT civilian casualties in war, I agree with people who say they happen.  I don't think they happened very often once everyone surrendered and the war was won.  Maybe Vikings who really wanted the land so they wanted to kill everyone on the land no matter what?  But generally, in Roman times they enslaved and then absorbed people after surrender and I can't really think of a significant number of wars where it was clear one side had surrendered and the other leaders made it a point to kill the women and children.  

[screamin]

7 minutes ago, Kate47 said:

The thing is, a queen who has her advisors publicly double checking her decisions looks weak. It looks like she doesn't know what she's doing and needed to have smarter people course correcting her during a trade negotiation.

It worked for the purposes of her ruse, but (like so many people said when Sansa publicly questioned Jon's decisions) Jorah or Ser Barristan need to bring up doubts in private counsel.

Yes, it's true they should not have corrected her in public. But IMO, it was more important in the long run to let her trusted people in on critical plans beforehand than to educate them on points of etiquette in front of people she planned to slaughter anyway. She was queen of nearly nothing then; her early success with a ruse that shouldn't have been so easily worked (really, it never occurred to the slavemasters not to brutally train the Unsullied never to turn on them the way they brutally trained them to everything else?) gave her the false idea of her own destined success.

Edited May 15, 2019 by screamin

[RealReality]

9 hours ago, lucindabelle said:

Oh? My late father and uncles who fought in WWII disagreed.

dany going rogue after the surrender is of course preposterous. Still doesn’t make her Hitler and as a Jew I have to say that’s incredibly offensive in every respect.  Dany was trying to subdue a city not “exterminate” a particular group of people. 

Cersei deliberately used her own people as a human shield. She started a war. She blew up the sept. If you’re suggesting she is somehow the Jews or Europe that Hitler subdued you’re also saying those people were evil too. 

That comparison is really beyond. And again: backwards. 

While I'm sure your uncle and father had a unique perspective, I'm not sure that dropping a nuke on a city has been accepted as reasonable or okay.  This is why I believe we have such tight control over this type of weaponry today and we don't really think of using it in military conflicts.  I don't think anyone else has used it in war since Hiroshima.  But your father and uncle are as entitled to their opinion as I am to mine.  

"Subdue a city?" By roasting women, children and soliders who had given up?  How much more "subduing" did they need?  I mean I don't even know that Dany would use that rationalization, because everyone was pretty subdued by the time she chose to burn the city folk alive.

It also seems that her actions were designed to exterminate a group of people as she went street by street...exterminating a group of people.

Cersei used her people as human Shields, and Dany killed them and she killed all the people who were not shielding the red keep and had already given up.  That's on Dany and no one else.

While I don't mind people making fact based presumptions, I do not think it's reasonable or acceptable to assume I or anyone else is calling Jews or Europeans evil.  I think that's a bridge wayy to far.

Edited May 15, 2019 by RealReality

[RealReality]

RE: Dany

I don't think I've been a huge fan, but she had me saying "you go girl" quite a few times.  I also will always think slavery is the worst, so I'm likely to forgive a lot to end it....so I was possibly blinded.

[VCRTracking]

Two reviews from The Los Angeles Review of Books

[GraceK]

I honestly think they had her do this so its more palatable to the audience when Jon kills her. It’s another reason they didn’t focus on her face when she was destroying the city. They dehumanized her completely, she was an apocalyptic demon raining hellfire. This was purposely done so the audience truly despises her, and that’s why people are mad. It’s not just” Dany Stan’s “, or “ denial”.  It’s shitty writing and it’s forced as hell and that’s it. If critics , media and unbiased people are all coming down hard, and the actors themselves are unhappy, that means something. People are right, there were seeds for Dany going dark, there were seeds that she has a violent nature. However, committing mass genocide at the flip of a switch, in the span of two episodes, after people surrendered, on a level of Dresden, and at the sound of BELLS,  is out of nowhere and that is certainly not how it will go down in the books, I doubt it. David and Dan are clearly over it, they need to get to the mad queen ending and have no problem sacrificing logic on the way.  

[Law Mom]

Ozzy Man's reviews are always great. 

[Francie]

51 minutes ago, raven said:

Cersei was an unfit queen and murdered Olenna's family.  Olenna wanted vengeance, yes, and to gamble on what she thought would a better queen

No, Olenna just wanted revenge. Ellaria and Varys had her at “Hello.”*

*The “my name is Danaerys Targaryen. Prepare to die, is implied. 

[tennisgurl]

Personally, I am hoping that after all of the ashes are cleared and the bodies are buried, the true hero arises from hiding, and takes the Iron Throne to rule with justice and decency...Ser Pounce! Fish and snuggles for all!

[Umbelina]

13 minutes ago, GraceK said:

I honestly think they had her do this so its more palatable to the audience when Jon kills her. It’s another reason they didn’t focus on her face when she was destroying the city. They dehumanized her completely, she was an apocalyptic demon raining hellfire. This was purposely done so the audience truly despises her, and that’s why people are mad. It’s not just” Dany Stan’s “, or “ denial”.  It’s shitty writing and it’s forced as hell and that’s it. If critics , media and unbiased people are all coming down hard, and the actors themselves are unhappy, that means something. People are right, there were seeds for Dany going dark, there were seeds that she has a violent nature. However, committing mass genocide at the flip of a switch, in the span of two episodes, after people surrendered, on a level of Dresden, and at the sound of BELLS,  is out of nowhere and that is certainly not how it will go down in the books, I doubt it. David and Dan are clearly over it, they need to get to the mad queen ending and have no problem sacrificing logic on the way.  

One interpretation that's out there is that Dany had BECOME the Dragon, since Drogon was doing everything Dany wanted, there was no need to show her face.

Personally, I think it would have been nice to see her face, but the tech on this episode was fantastic, I will give them that.  Building an entire city to carefully burn down, more people on fire at the same time than ever before, the stunt work, amputees hired to play the victims, incredible make up work...and of course the CGI on the dragon.

[Francie]

46 minutes ago, screamin said:

Yes, it's true they should not have corrected her in public. But IMO, it was more important in the long run to let her trusted people in on critical plans beforehand than to educate them on points of etiquette in front of people she planned to slaughter anyway. She was queen of nearly nothing then; her early success with a ruse that shouldn't have been so easily worked (really, it never occurred to the slavemasters not to brutally train the Unsullied never to turn on them the way they brutally trained them to everything else?) gave her the false idea of her own destined success.

You’re saying something that occurred to me awhile ago on a re-watch (though, admittedly not the first, second, or third time I saw that scene.). Dany can’t have been the first person to try to dupe Kraznys, given the chance. Sure, she is the first one with a dragon. But given that Kraznys is about to turn over an entire army who will obey the every command of the person to whom he give that whip, I can’t believe for a second that Kraznys would have been within 3 miles of actual army during the exchange.  

[Hiacios]

I'm sick and tired of people butchering Revelation 6:2-8. For the love of God the white horse is not the horse of death!

I looked, and there before me was a pale horse! Its rider was named Death, and Hades was following close behind him.

[TaurusRose]

20 hours ago, Umbelina said:

She came to Westeros, held filled with her crazy brother's promises of love and celebration and flowers thrown at their feet, and the whole 7 Kingdoms rejoiced at a Targ return.

She arrived and they didn't even like her, let alone love her, and the last thing they wanted is her to be their Queen.  It was a let down.  All that suffering, all those sacrifices, and none of it has gotten her anything.  So, as she says, she will use fear, fire, and blood.

If Kings Landing had cheered her, she wouldn't of killed them all.  They did not.  They were terrified of dragons, as were the Westeros people before the Targ invaders were finally defeated before.  They had a right to that terror, as she burned them to death, crushed what little they had, and left those not burned, badly wounded and suffering.

I don't think Daenerys believed the hokey stories that Viserys did.  I remember her telling someone (Jorah? Selmy?) that her brother was a fool who believed people were drinking toasts to the Targaryens and waiting for them to return. She clearly hadn't drank that kool-aid.  However, I think once Dany began conquering cities, liberating the enslaved and being received with waves of love, she may have begun to expect that sort of treatment everywhere she went.  In reality the people of KL probably thought about Daenerys as much as they thought about Cersei.  As long as Cersei wasn't actively making their lives miserable she was probably ignored.  They didn't care about Cersei.  They hated Cersei, that much was proved when she was forced to walk naked through throngs of them to get back to the Red Keep.  But once Cersei started her propaganda campaign against Daenerys the citizens of KL probably decided on the devil they knew rather than the one they didn't.  

But back to Daenerys and her rage against KL.  I've always been a Dany fan and I've cheered her on throughout the seasons, but I wasn't blind to her tendency to want to crush and destroy her enemies when they pushed her.  I heard her talk a lot of smack to fire up the troops, but I honestly thought it was just that...smack talk.  I didn't ever expect her to destroy KL; but I can't say that her doing so was a shocking surprise.  I also don't consider Daenerys mad (as insane) or mad (as in furious).  I think she's had enough of all the BS (bad advice, traitors in her company, a lover who can't get past the knowledge that they're related and can't be her lover anymore, ungrateful people, the loss of trusted and beloved friends, the loss of her damn dragons!) and she doesn't care anymore.  I've always thought she had a warm, generous and caring side.  But I've never doubted that she had a ruthless, vicious side either.  I saw something snap in her when she glared at the Red Keep and heard the bells ringing. She probably thought, "I shouldn't have lost everything I had to get here and you fuckers are gonna pay."  What she did was wrong in the extreme, but I get where her head was at.  This is what I would do if I had dragons and wasn't scared of burning in hell.  So....yeah, I still like her and I'm curious to see how this ends for her.   Oh.  I still love Jon Snow, too; so I'm in a pickle.  LOL

Edited May 15, 2019 by taurusrose

[Growsonwalls]

I've been thinking about the audience anger to this last episode and thinking that maybe D&D and GRRM in 2011 never expected their characters to take on a life of their own. I think they expected a big CGI medieval thriller. But when they cast, I don't think they ever expected that, say, Nikolaj Coster-Waldau would bring so much humanity to Jaime that him ending up at square one with Cersei at the end would crush viewers. I don't think they ever expected Lena Headey to be such a hateful, compelling villain that viewers were disappointed with her anti-climactic death. Don't think they expected that parents named their kids Dany and Arya because they viewed them as strong role models, so when Dany torched women and children the audience would be so angry. And part of this is due again to Emilia Clarke's acting. Yes we had seen Dany's ruthless, entitled side. But Emilia Clarke again had shown us so much depth of feeling as Dany that her non-chalant torching of KL just wasn't believable.

I know this is a weird comparison but I can't help but think of the Mad Men writers who started off with each character in a neat box but realized the depth of talent they had in their cast and thus gave them all satisfying endings. 

[WatchrTina]

11 hours ago, RealReality said:

Also, everyone knows that dragons are mortal and vulnerable.... Two died with relatively basic weapons. 

I feel certain that under the reign of Queen Dany the owning of a ballista -- or even the plans for one -- will be a crime punishable by death (by dragon breath, naturally.)

Then again, I don't think Queen Dany is ever going to reign.  And if I'm right and she dies, but Drogon does not . . . what then?  We've seen how dangerous grief-stricken Grey Worm is.  What might a grief-stricken dragon get up to?

[catrice2]

21 minutes ago, Growsonwalls said:

I've been thinking about the audience anger to this last episode and thinking that maybe D&D and GRRM in 2011 never expected their characters to take on a life of their own. I think they expected a big CGI medieval thriller. But when they cast, I don't think they ever expected that, say, Nikolaj Coster-Waldau would bring so much humanity to Jaime that him ending up at square one with Cersei at the end would crush viewers. I don't think they ever expected Lena Headey to be such a hateful, compelling villain that viewers were disappointed with her anti-climactic death. Don't think they expected that parents named their kids Dany and Arya because they viewed them as strong role models, so when Dany torched women and children the audience would be so angry. And part of this is due again to Emilia Clarke's acting. Yes we had seen Dany's ruthless, entitled side. But Emilia Clarke again had shown us so much depth of feeling as Dany that her non-chalant torching of KL just wasn't believable.

I know this is a weird comparison but I can't help but think of the Mad Men writers who started off with each character in a neat box but realized the depth of talent they had in their cast and thus gave them all satisfying endings. 

What satisfying endings? I think I hated just about every ending on Mad Men...another show without black people and when they did bring them on it was a fail...