S08.E05: The Bells

[UNOSEZ]

27 minutes ago, taurusrose said:

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

So there's more of US???... But the Internet said we can't... And ima man so I probably shouldn't.. Oh what to do

[Umbelina]

3 minutes ago, catrice2 said:

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...

It was set in the fifties/sixties, and mostly took place on Madison Ave.  There were still no black advertising executives on Madison Ave when this show began.

I think it did deal with racism, and the few black characters they had, didn't fail for me.

The ending failed for me though.

[GraceK]

[catrice2]

44 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

It was set in the fifties/sixties, and mostly took place on Madison Ave.  There were still no black advertising executives on Madison Ave when this show began.

I think it did deal with racism, and the few black characters they had, didn't fail for me.

The ending failed for me though.

It lost me after a few seasons for being so depressing and predictable, but I remember the traditional maid....that was kind, but was fired....the prostitute/party girl that Lane was involved with...the black girl that Harry (?) dated for shock value....and the only opportunity that they had to integrate a character ....Don's secretary. who by the nature of being at the firm was "in advertising, but hey, they developed a story for Peggy rising from clerical work...and they never did develop a story for her after hyping the fact that she was joining the show.  The only other reference I remember was Pete talking about advertising in a black magazine.  The difference between it and Game of Thrones was that there was fantastic acting in Mad Men...and the writing was good at the start.  It should have probably ended a season or two before it did. 

So I really wonder what was so great about the few seconds of screen time those characters had did it for you...Especially since their roles so "adequately" reflected the time period? 

Perhaps you should read the article from NPR about black people in advertising in the sixties and Mad Men...and get back to me.  Did you know that the CLIO award statue was designed by a black man?  You know....the one that Don Draper won....and that a black woman rose similar to Peggy and created her own agency in that era?  

Back to Game of Thrones.....

[ShellsandCheese]

4 hours ago, Helena Dax said:

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.

She wanted to but kept getting talked out of it by Varys and Tyrion. Ultimately, I think that’s why she went on that rampage. When those bells rang out, she realized that she should have followed her instincts all along and taken King’s Landing as she initially planned. She’d probably still have all her dragons and her besties. 

[RealReality]

1 hour ago, WatchrTina said:

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?

True, but if Jon is a Targaryen might they be conflicted but not mad if he does it?  

[RealReality]

3 hours ago, catrice2 said:

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....

I remember that grey work stopped when the bells rang and I think he only started again when it was clear that Dany was bringing drogon back.  Or that's how I remember it.  

I think that had Dany accepted the surrender he would have stopped, because he has been trained to follow orders.  But once it was clear that the surrender wasn't going to be a thing, he let his rage out.

[Umbelina]

17 minutes ago, catrice2 said:

It lost me after a few seasons for being so depressing and predictable, but I remember the traditional maid....that was kind, but was fired....the prostitute/party girl that Lane was involved with...the black girl that Harry (?) dated for shock value....and the only opportunity that they had to integrate a character ....Don's secretary. who by the nature of being at the firm was "in advertising, but hey, they developed a story for Peggy rising from clerical work...and they never did develop a story for her after hyping the fact that she was joining the show.  The only other reference I remember was Pete talking about advertising in a black magazine.  The difference between it and Game of Thrones was that there was fantastic acting in Mad Men...and the writing was good at the start.  It should have probably ended a season or two before it did. 

So I really wonder what was so great about the few seconds of screen time those characters had did it for you...Especially since their roles so "adequately" reflected the time period? 

Perhaps you should read the article from NPR about black people in advertising in the sixties and Mad Men...and get back to me.  Did you know that the CLIO award statue was designed by a black man?  You know....the one that Don Draper won....and that a black woman rose similar to Peggy and created her own agency in that era?  

Back to Game of Thrones.....

I'll tag it so it's not too annoying, sorry mods!  Mad Men crap follows.

Spoiler

Lane's girlfriend wasn't a prostitute, she was a Playboy Bunny, and they made good money in NYC at that time.  It served to show that racism wasn't just a USA thing, the objecting father was British.

I liked the two secretaries best.  I loved the scenes when Peggy looked at her purse when she was drunk, and had brought the secretary home with her for safety.  I loved that secretary a lot, and she brought in issues like busses and riots, and being more afraid of the police.  I really loved the last black secretary that came on and bounced rather than stay on Madison Ave when the whole group moved, and she talked frankly about the lack of advancement possibilities.  I loved their contrasting styles, one traditional fifties, and the other swinging sixties, and how both navigated their way in a white world because they needed the jobs.

I also liked Peggy's boyfriend/fiance trying to fight for equality, refusing to describe his attacker because he was black, and the reporter didn't trust the police, contrasting with Peggy not wanting to die from crime.

I would have hated them pretending that race relations were hunky dorey on Madison Ave, or in wealthy suburbs where Betty lived.  They weren't.  It was segregated, and in ad agencies in the sixties there were NO black ad execs, and in the commentary they mention that there still aren't on Madison Ave.

That said, it all began to feel like Weiner's perverted sexual fantasies being worked out and it lost me in later episodes as well.

8 minutes ago, RealReality said:

I remember that grey work stopped when the bells rang and I think he only started again when it was clear that Dany was bringing drogon back.  Or that's how I remember it.  

I think that had Dany accepted the surrender he would have stopped, because he has been trained to follow orders.  But once it was clear that the surrender wasn't going to be a thing, he let his rage out.

Exactly.

Grey Worm does what Dany tells him to do, what he was trained to do.

Did he want to revenge Missandei as well?  Of course.

Edited May 15, 2019 by Umbelina
typo

[RealReality]

1 minute ago, Umbelina said:

I'll tag it so it's not too annoying, sorry mods!  Mad Men crap follows.

  Reveal spoiler

Lane's girlfriend wasn't a prostitute, she was a Playboy Bunny, and they made good money in NYC at that time.  It served to show that racism wasn't just a USA thing, the objecting father was British.

I liked the two secretaries best.  I loved the scenes when Peggy looked at her purse when she was drunk, and had brought the secretary home with her for safety.  I loved that secretary a lot, and she brought in riots, and being more afraid of the police.  I really loved the last black secretary that came on and bounced rather than stay on Madison Ave when the whole group moved, and she talked frankly about the lack of advancement possibilities.  I loved their contrasting styles, one traditional fifties, and the other swinging sixties, and how both navigated their way in a white world because they needed the jobs.

I also liked Peggy's boyfriend/fiance trying to fight for equality, refusing to describe his attacker because he was black, and the reporter didn't trust the police.

I would have hated them pretending that race relations were hunky dorey on Madison Ave, or in wealthy suburbs when Betty lived.  They weren't.  It was segregated, and in ad agencies in the sixties there were NO black ad execs, and in the commentary they mention that their still aren't on Madison Ave.

That said, it all began to feel like Weiner's perverted sexual fantasies being worked out and it lost me in later episodes as well.

Exactly.

Grey Worm does what Dany tells him to do, what he was trained to do.

Did he want to revenge Missandei as well?  Of course.

Exactly.  If given the opportunity he was going to get his revenge.  I don't think he had any deep moral debate at all....I also only remember him killing soliders, not women, children and random townies.  But it all happened fast so I could have missed it.

[Heckler52317]

I wish there had been a scene where Samwell lugs some books he had stolen that told the tales of the dragonlords of old into a meeting with Daenerys- "you see your Grace, they would strike from on high-out of the sun- and take their foes by surprise. And flying low at great speed they were very hard to hit. And I'm sorry how I reacted to the news about my jerk dad and idiot brother...'

[RealReality]

I've generally been okay with most endings that weren't the sopranos or lost.  And I was upset about lost mostly because I was so confused.  

With GOT, I don't need a rosy ending, but I'd like an ending that didn't crush my faith in humanity.  Also, I'd like Pod to live and for tommen and brienne to make giant babies.  I also like bronn in spite of myself so it'd be nice if he made it.  I was passionate about seeing Tyrion and arya survive....but I'm not as invested anymore.

[Daisy]

2 hours ago, taurusrose said:

a lover who can't get past the knowledge that they're related and can't be her lover anymore

LOL to be fair that's a pretty big thing to get over. 

[GraceK]

56 minutes ago, RealReality said:

Exactly.  If given the opportunity he was going to get his revenge.  I don't think he had any deep moral debate at all....I also only remember him killing soliders, not women, children and random townies.  But it all happened fast so I could have missed it.

It was the northern soldiers doing most of the raping and killing of women I noticed .

[Detective005]

On 5/13/2019 at 9:34 PM, proserpina65 said:

Except in modern warfare, generally once a city has surrendered, the fighting/bombing stops.

This is what they want us to believe...

[Detective005]

However, leaving out the writing of the story, this episode is technically perfect. Maybe the best of got

[TigerLynx]

11 hours ago, UNOSEZ said:

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

Eight seasons of watching the characters' actions and inactions while all kinds of atrocities are being committed around them.

[TigerLynx]

8 hours ago, WatchrTina said:

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?

I'm not sure why, but this really made me laugh.

[Giselle]

It's all Missandrys fault.

She could have averted all this destruction. Cersei was in front of and to the side of her she could have quickly pushed her over the edge.

There. No flaming tantrum.

[Constantinople]

Quote

It's tempting to see your enemies as evil, all of them, but there's good and evil on both sides in every war ever fought - Jorah Mormont (Mockingbird S4 E7)

By that standard, The Bells is a failure

[UNOSEZ]

54 minutes ago, TigerLynx said:

Eight seasons of watching the characters' actions and inactions while all kinds of atrocities are being committed around them.

Ignoring that my comment specifically said.. What in this episode led to the conclusion that the poster came to ( was it initially you or someone else  forgive me the memory is wonky)  if we wanna take the series in general into question what has Jon done that would even be considered  an atrocity?  Because the initial post... And I'm paraphrasing... Was basically saying that if the point of the episode was to walk away from it thinking Dany was Bad and Jon was Good then they ( writers/showrunners)  failed..to which I asked how??  after watching that episode.. Regardless of how we got here and what they felt about the writing.. Did they reach that conclusion 

[slf]

Daenerys slaughtered a whole city of civilians as punishment for the murder of her friend. That's it. Doesn't matter who surrendered what or when or any of the rest of it.

[Friendly kitty]

9 hours ago, WatchrTina said:

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?

Therefore, you must first kill the dragon, and only then you can go to kill Deyneris. Otherwise, nothing happens.

43 minutes ago, Giselle said:

It's all Missandrys fault.

She could have averted all this destruction. Cersei was in front of and to the side of her she could have quickly pushed her over the edge.

If...
Naturally, if the Missandea pushed Cersei from the roof everything would have ended well. But the writers needed a sudden turnaround ... so Missandea died, and Deineris went crazy and became the main villain. Now Cersei looks white and fluffy compared to Deineris. She did not even burn the surrendered people indiscriminately ...

Edited May 15, 2019 by Friendly kitty

[Bryce Lynch]

12 hours ago, catrice2 said:

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....

I think the fundamental difference that many seem to ignore is the difference between those who deserve killing and those who don't.   

Pretty much everyone on Arya's list deserved to die, most of them very much so.  They had all killed or been involved in the killing of innocent people who she cared about, except Beric (who got dropped from the list) but she probably assumed he was selling Gendry to a witch to be killed.  Most of the people on her list also deserved to die, even without the things they had done to Arya.

Arya also spared innocent people, like the Frey women and the Lannister soldiers who offered her food.  

That said, Grey Worm killing an enemy soldier who had surrendered, was small potatoes compared to what Dany did.   He was at least a combatant and it was one, not tens of thousands.  Plus, he was essentially following orders, by following Dany's lead.  

[TaurusRose]

8 hours ago, Daisy said:

LOL to be fair that's a pretty big thing to get over. 

Daenerys is a Targaryen.  From her POV Jon's lack of affection is rejection without reason. She doesn't understand it.  It's one more brick in the pity sack she's carrying.  

[Bryce Lynch]

42 minutes ago, Friendly kitty said:

Therefore, you must first kill the dragon, and only then you can go to kill Deyneris. Otherwise, nothing happens.

If...
Naturally, if the Missandea pushed Cersei from the roof everything would have ended well. But the writers needed a sudden turnaround ... so Missandea died, and Deineris went crazy and became the main villain. Now Cersei looks white and fluffy compared to Deineris. She did not even burn the surrendered people indiscriminately ...

I think they can kill Daenerys without killing Drogon unless she becomes so paranoid that has him guard her constantly.  While I hated the way Varys turned on her, given that the writers have suddenly turned Dany into a genocidal monster, and Drogon might engage in unprecedented carnage if he sees her murdered, his plan to poison her was probably the best way to kill her.  Drogon might not realize she was murdered.   

What Dany did really was far worse than anything Cersei ever did and with worse motives.  Giving Cersei and Jaime an ending that legitimized their "love" and all the horrible things they did for it, was pathetic.  

[Bryce Lynch]

14 hours 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. 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. 
 

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

yah. pretty much. 

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

Those Masters were not innocent people.  They were brutal slave owners.  Given that they were active participants in that horrible system, I don't really care if a few who may have opposed the crucifixion of the children were crucified along with the others.  If they were really "innocent" men, they would have stopped the horrific crime against those 163 innocent children, or died trying. 

Opposition along the lines of:

"Innocent" Master: -  "Isn't crucifying kids a little extreme?"

"Evil" Masters - "Nah, it's happening, step aside.

"Innocent" Master - "OK, but I think this is a mistake".

Is not nearly enough to absolve the Masters who were supposedly "opposed".  

[Sarnia]

5 hours ago, Detective005 said:

However, leaving out the writing of the story, this episode is technically perfect.

That sums up perfectly the showrunners' investment in their show at this point.

[DarkRaichu]

9 hours ago, Heckler52317 said:

I wish there had been a scene where Samwell lugs some books he had stolen that told the tales of the dragonlords of old into a meeting with Daenerys- "you see your Grace, they would strike from on high-out of the sun- and take their foes by surprise. And flying low at great speed they were very hard to hit. And I'm sorry how I reacted to the news about my jerk dad and idiot brother...'

Your grace, thanks to the books, I was able to contact D&D and they had agreed to significantly nerf all ballistas and give Drogon the God Mode upgrade.  So you should be invincible tomorrow.

[JennyMominFL]

But its not about who the slave masters were, its about who Dany is. And she is someone who choose to  collectively execute people in the most painful way. This says way more about her than about the slave masters. There is no way i will EVER think its OK to crucify someone

[DarkRaichu]

1 hour ago, Friendly kitty said:

She did not even burn the surrendered people indiscriminately ...

Nope. She blew them up during peace time when least expected

[Bryce Lynch]

14 hours ago, screamin said:

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.

That was a situation where you could argue both women were "right" from their own perspectives.  Dany,  had shown Mirri kindness and mercy, and probably all that she had the power to do.  Then, Mirri betrayed her and killed her husband and son.   But, Drogon was an enemy of Mirri's people, who had done terrible things to them.   

[Julyolo]

19 hours 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.

A lot of folks seem to think someone will kill Daenerys. Mental health work informs me that the homicidal are suicidal. She might off herself. She seems devoid of any rationale to continue now. Then Jon will go insane because it is his genetic fate as well.

Edited May 15, 2019 by Julyolo

[Bryce Lynch]

1 minute ago, DarkRaichu said:

Nope. She blew them up during peace time when least expected

I hate Cersei, but it was not peace time for Cersei.  She was in a fight for her life.  If she didn't blow up the Sept of Baelor, the High Sparrow would have had her executed.  The trial was a formality.   She was guilty and was going to be found guilty even if she wasn't.   

It was a horrible crime to blow up all those innocent people to save herself.  But, Dany had no reason at all to kill the tens of thousands of innocent people she killed.  

[screamin]

6 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

But, Drogon was an enemy of Mirri's people, who had done terrible things to them.   

Not to mention Mirri was a prophetess who foresaw that Dany's unborn son would be a vicious conqueror who would do to the world what Drogon had done to her people. (Either that, or the mistreatment of Mirri drove her mad and gave her delusions; same difference to Mirri). Mirri knew she would pay horribly for what she was doing, she still did it for what she considered the needs of the future, not just her revenge. I still find her a heroic figure.

Edited May 15, 2019 by screamin

[terrymct]

On 5/13/2019 at 6:29 PM, AuntieMame said:

The one thing I did love last night was Sandor and Arya and Sandor pulling Arya into a moment of clarity. That and Tyrion and Jaime's farewell scene was earned and poignant. But both of these were well set-up in Martin's writing. The Hound really did protect and care for Arya, not to mention trained her for the world she was in, when Arya was still too young to protect herself. He was also good to Sansa even if conflicted. And while Sandor might not get showily heroic about it, I think he would have disgust and cynicism at the slaughter of innocents which replaces the resignation of previous seasons. 

I agree that those two scenes are wonderful.  I have to point out though that the set up for them in Martin's writing is irrelevant in this forum since this in No Book talk.  We're only looking at the set up within the series itself.  

[TaurusRose]

1 hour ago, Friendly kitty said:

Therefore, you must first kill the dragon, and only then you can go to kill Deyneris Daenerys. Otherwise, nothing happens.

If...
Naturally, if the Missandea Missandei pushed Cersei from the roof everything would have ended well. But the writers needed a sudden turnaround ... so Missandea Missandei died, and Deineris went crazy and became the main villain. Now Cersei looks white and fluffy compared to Deineris Daenerys.  She did not even burn the surrendered people indiscriminately ...

Fixed those pesky typos for you. 😏 Cersei will never look "white and fluffy" to me.  She was a true monster.  Just as vicious and cruel as Daenerys was in KL.  The only difference is Cersei schemed and plotted behind the scenes while Daenerys was right up front with her atrocities.  Cersei always looked arrogant and smug when she was destroying someone and gave me the impression, that somewhere inside herself, she was really enjoying inflicting pain and suffering.  She wanted to torture and mutilate Olenna who had been defeated (and who had also surrendered).  The only reason she didn't is because Jaime got there first.  On the other hand, Daenerys looked grim and pissed off when she torched KL.  She wore the face of someone who wanted the worst kind of revenge. She didn't look like she was enjoying the city's destruction or the slaughter of its people.  She wasn't smirking when the Tarlys went up in flames or when she fed a nameless highborn lord to the dragons in Meereen.  Both were/are capable of monstrous actions.  Up until KL, Dany was willing to go against her most disastrous instincts.  Cersei never was. 

[DarkRaichu]

Just now, Bryce Lynch said:

I hate Cersei, but it was not peace time for Cersei.  She was in a fight for her life.  If she didn't blow up the Sept of Baelor, the High Sparrow would have had her executed.  The trial was a formality.   She was guilty and was going to be found guilty even if she wasn't.   

It was a horrible crime to blow up all those innocent people to save herself.  But, Dany had no reason at all to kill the tens of thousands of innocent people she killed.  

It was peace time for the attendance of that trial who got blown up and they did not expect to die.  It was war time for the people in KL in 8.05 so there was a good chance they could die (even without dragon).

[Bryce Lynch]

1 minute ago, screamin said:

Not to mention Mirri was a prophetess who foresaw that Dany's unborn son would be a vicious conqueror who would do to the world what Drogon had done to her people. (Either that, or the mistreatment of Mirri drove her mad and gave her delusions; same difference to Mirri). Mirri knew she would pay horribly for what she was doing, she still did it. I still find her a heroic figure.

Mirri was a hero to her own people and a villain to Daenerys.  I don't blame her for what she did to Drogon and Rhaego and I don't blame Dany for what she did to Mirri.  

Both of their actions were appropriate to their situations and from their perspectives.  

[DarkRaichu]

13 hours ago, RealReality 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.  

I say own it and teach them Bruce Banner's line: "Don't make me angry. You wouldn't like it when I am angry" 😄

[Bryce Lynch]

1 minute ago, DarkRaichu said:

It was peace time for the attendance of that trial who got blown up and they did not expect to die.  It was war time for the people in KL in 8.05 so there was a good chance they could die (even without dragon).

The way I see it, peace time vs. war time is not the issue, as much as whether the victims were killed out of some sort of necessity to the killer or out of a pointless lust for blood. 

Cersei would kill anybody she needed to kill to protect herself and her family and to maintain or expand her power.  This was often quite evil  She wold also kill for revenge against people who had wronged her (Ellaria and Tyene being the best example).

Dany killed all those innocent civilians for no reason but whatever perverse pleasure she received from doing it, or simply out of madness.  I hate the they wrote Dany this way. 

Of course Cersei probably also took pleasure in a lot of her killing, but it was not her motivation  

[screamin]

5 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

Mirri was a hero to her own people and a villain to Daenerys.  I don't blame her for what she did to Drogon and Rhaego and I don't blame Dany for what she did to Mirri.  

Both of their actions were appropriate to their situations and from their perspectives.  

Just makes my point though, that the god who watches both cases from above and decides that the woman who burns the old lady to death in revenge deserves three deadly dragons as a reward is a pretty amoral god we probably wouldn't trust to be kind.

[Francie]

14 hours ago, Bryce Lynch said:

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.

No one is defending slavery or the cruelty that Kraznys committed. 

There is a specific action undertaken by Dany in that instance that showed that she was not committed to rule of law or sense of fairness. She bargained with another entity (and this is where, to understand the story and the points being made, one has to put aside how odious Kraznys was) in bad faith and murdered him to get what she wanted (a slave army) rather that pay the price.

To say Kraznys didn’t deserve humane treatment, and thus excusing Dany for what she did means to as God and judge who deserves life and death. And that’s been a theme of this story. Was Rickard Karstark right when he wanted to kill Jaime Lannister for killing his sons? Was Robert Baratheon right when wanting to kill Dany because she could grow up to be a threat? Was Ned right in beheading Will, the nights watchman? Was the Hound right in killing Mycah because his king commanded him to find the boy who he claims attacked him?

Now, the show made Dany vs. Kraznys easy. They made Kraznys as odious as possible. They made Dany seem like a white savior with her telling them they were free before she asked them to join her (though note that was only after she ordered them to commit murder as slaves by ordering them to kill all the guards and masters while they were still slaves under her control). So it’s easy to play God in that situation. It’s easy to whitewash Dany’s actions, to the point that it didn’t even seem like whitewashing.

But the fact remains. Everything Kraznys was legal in his country and culture. He was operating a legitimate business. And Dany broke the laws of that country, killed a legitimate business man, killed every single one of his employees, absconded with his "merchandise," and committed fraud in claiming she would pay for what she was buying.

Further, Dany came in and broke that wheel not out of an overriding sense of liberation. She’s no Frederick Douglass or Harriet Tubman.  She wanted an army. And she didn’t have the coin to pay for it and she wasn’t willing to give up her most valuable asset. 

There is a lot of excusing of Dany's actions by saying her victims "deserved" it in order to get to the point of saying, "Woah! Her utter destruction of King's Landing is a total surprise!" Many have observed for a long while now that Dany's always been the same.  It's just that we didn't know the stories of the people she killed beforehand (and the show was admittedly a bit manipulative in having many of her victims be odious men of means), and now  we identify with the people she is killing. 

[TaurusRose]

22 minutes ago, JennyMominFL said:

But its not about who the slave masters were, its about who Dany is. And she is someone who choose to  collectively execute people in the most painful way. This says way more about her than about the slave masters. There is no way i will EVER think its OK to crucify someone

No one has clean hands in this scenario; therefore, no one can play the "victim" or "hero" card.  Everyone concerned behaved poorly towards fellow human beings.  At this point, people are just trying to "one up" each other in who is worse.  They all are worse!

[Bryce Lynch]

1 minute ago, screamin said:

Just makes my point though, that the god who watches both cases from above and decides that the woman who burns the old lady to death in revenge deserves three deadly dragons as a reward is a pretty amoral god we probably wouldn't trust to be kind.

I'm not sure how much any god was supposed to be involved.   I think it was more like the blood magic that Mirri engaged in.

But, again, I think Dany had every reason to burn Mirri in revenge. She betrayed her horribly and killed her husband and son.  But, I also get why Mirri did what she did.

I would see Mirri as sort of like a Major John Andre, a spy who served his side well, got caught and was executed.  He did what he was supposed to do and the colonists responded as they should have., by executing him.  As Omar Little would say, "All in the game."   

Like Omar, before her KL rampage Dany ain't never put her dragons on no citizen.  Now she has abandoned her code completely and become a mass murderer.    

[steelyis]

7 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

I hate Cersei, but it was not peace time for Cersei.  She was in a fight for her life.  If she didn't blow up the Sept of Baelor, the High Sparrow would have had her executed.  The trial was a formality.   She was guilty and was going to be found guilty even if she wasn't.   

It was a horrible crime to blow up all those innocent people to save herself.  But, Dany had no reason at all to kill the tens of thousands of innocent people she killed.  

2 minutes ago, DarkRaichu said:

It was peace time for the attendance of that trial who got blown up and they did not expect to die.  It was war time for the people in KL in 8.05 so there was a good chance they could die (even without dragon).

It wasn't a war in the usual sense, but the High Septon was definitely pulling off a Coup d'état. He wanted the Faith Militant to rule Westeros through Tommen. He had all but succeeded before he died.

I won't say everyone in the Great Sept of Baelor deserved to die, because they didn't (especially my fave Margaery), but I think Cersei had solid reasons to consider everyone at her "trial" participants in the High Sparrow's Coup.

[UNOSEZ]

1 minute ago, taurusrose said:

No one has clean hands in this scenario; therefore, no one can play the "victim" or "hero" card.  Everyone concerned behaved poorly towards fellow human beings.  At this point, people are just trying to "one up" each other in who is worse.  They all are worse!

That's not true.. Dany said she was crucifying these ppl because they strung up innocent slave children.. Except that's not what she did... She indiscriminately took out the masters regardless of their culpability in that particular atrocity... If she's just killing the masters that's one thing.. But that's not what this was presented as... While there are no saints on this show im comfortable in saying that the "good guys" are the ones who only strike those who have already attacked them.. Or in the defense of others... The bad guys have mostly struck out at percieved threats or to hobble would be opponents or done something dastardly solely for advancement

[Daisy]

21 minutes ago, taurusrose said:

Daenerys is a Targaryen.  From her POV Jon's lack of affection is rejection without reason. She doesn't understand it.  It's one more brick in the pity sack she's carrying.  

OH i know. 
but i mean again. it's still something extremely hard for anyone to get over just like that.

6 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

Those Masters were not innocent people.  They were brutal slave owners.  Given that they were active participants in that horrible system, I don't really care if a few who may have opposed the crucifixion of the children were crucified along with the others.  If they were really "innocent" men, they would have stopped the horrific crime against those 163 innocent children, or died trying. 

Opposition along the lines of:

"Innocent" Master: -  "Isn't crucifying kids a little extreme?"

"Evil" Masters - "Nah, it's happening, step aside.

"Innocent" Master - "OK, but I think this is a mistake".

Is not nearly enough to absolve the Masters who were supposedly "opposed".  

okay but take it from another tact. what if he was one of those people who fought from the inside to bring change? You can't fight chang if you are dead. and I think that's the point. We don't know how hard he fought - we don't know if he also had little children or others dependant on him, We don't know if he was a brutal slave owner  (yes. we all know that slavery is wrong but i think that's key. we don't know if he (or others) treated their slaves fairly  - basically the only thing wrong was that they were owned) or a slave owner at all. 

Dany didn't know - she didn't take the time to figure out. 

She did the same with those who she thought killed Selmy. she had no idea if they were innocent or not, or were against it, or tried to even help. They were accused, and therefore. nothing else mattered.

A wise ruler would judge fairly, not just make sweeping judgements because of what was on the surface. 

[Bryce Lynch]

1 minute ago, steelyis said:

It wasn't a war in the usual sense, but the High Septon was definitely pulling off a Coup d'état. He wanted the Faith Militant to rule Westeros through Tommen. He had all but succeeded before he died.

I won't say everyone in the Great Sept of Baelor deserved to die, because they didn't (especially my fave Margaery), but I think Cersei had solid reasons to consider everyone at her "trial" participants in the High Sparrow's Coup.

Right.  It was abominable for Ceresei to blow up all the innocent people to destroy her enemies and save herself.  But, for her, it was a necessary abomination.   She didn't do it just for the fun of killing people, like Dany did at KL.  

If the HS hadn't overplayed his hand and gotten Tommen to ban Trial by Combat, only one poor sucker would have had to die at the hands of Ser Gregor.   Of course, the High Sparrow's Cersei problem would have remained.  

[Bryce Lynch]

Just now, Daisy said:

OH i know. 
but i mean again. it's still something extremely hard for anyone to get over just like that.

okay but take it from another tact. what if he was one of those people who fought from the inside to bring change? You can't fight chang if you are dead. and I think that's the point. We don't know how hard he fought - we don't know if he also had little children or others dependant on him, We don't know if he was a brutal slave owner  (yes. we all know that slavery is wrong but i think that's key. we don't know if he (or others) treated their slaves fairly  - basically the only thing wrong was that they were owned) or a slave owner at all. 

Dany didn't know - she didn't take the time to figure out. 

She did the same with those who she thought killed Selmy. she had no idea if they were innocent or not, or were against it, or tried to even help. They were accused, and therefore. nothing else mattered.

A wise ruler would judge fairly, not just make sweeping judgements because of what was on the surface. 

I really wouldn't expect a revolutionary conqueror and liberator of slaves to try to mete out precision justice in response to an abomination like the crucifixions of the 163 innocent children, especially in the medieval type world of GOT.   163 brutal slave masters for a 163 children seemed fair enough to me in those circumstances.  YMMV.  

[TaurusRose]

3 minutes ago, UNOSEZ said:

That's not true.. Dany said she was crucifying these ppl because they strung up innocent slave children.. Except that's not what she did... She indiscriminately took out the masters regardless of their culpability in that particular atrocity... If she's just killing the masters that's one thing.. But that's not what this was presented as... While there are no saints on this show im comfortable in saying that the "good guys" are the ones who only strike those who have already attacked them.. Or in the defense of others... The bad guys have mostly struck out at percieved threats or to hobble would be opponents or done something dastardly solely for advancement

Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree since we're looking at this differently.  Whoever was responsible for crucifying the slave children, they were dead wrong and they were monstrous.  They made innocents suffer to make a point to (from their perspective) an upstart invader.  Those who were part of the "master class" who argued against that particular crime were still complicit in the act--they didn't do anything to prevent the crucifixion of children--and were guilty of other crimes against people (enslaving them).  Dany made a point of destroying the "master class" to show them who was boss without benefit of trial or discussion.  She was conquering a nation on her way to becoming Queen of Westeros.  She wasn't about trying to be just in everyone's eyes, just hers. She was about flexing her muscle and expanding her power.  As I said, there were no good guys in this scenario.  Just different perspectives which led to people committing crimes against other people.  Neither side learned anything except to dig in in favor of their beliefs.