Game of Thrones

Clutch said:
This is the greatest single moment in GOT so far.

Click to expand...

That was great one in a series with so many epic moments, but I think my most epic moment was the Dothraki charge sequence on the Lannister loot train.


One of my other favorites as the Hardhome scene where Jon is floating away and the Night King raises all the dead
 
Richard Baker said:
I do think that it shows no matter how prepared you are, the unexpected can disrupt your plans. The Faceless Assassins came about well after he was trapped up north- he had no idea about them or their abilities. Arya trained with them and was the best fighter in the Battle of Winterfell- it is not surprising to me that the Night King was done in by the one warrior he never expected to face...
Click to expand...

I'm actually quite okay with the way he died. It makes sense that through the extreme training (and magic) of the faceless assassins, Arya could take him out the way she did. I also loved how she did the deed with the same dagger that started everything.

But from a narrative standpoint, having the White Walkers built up for nearly a decade as this unstoppable force to bring about the end of the world made me expect a much more cataclysmic GOT-style ending. For a series that's built on the idea of facing the consequences of your actions, I would have thought that Westeros would have needed to face a much more drastic consequence for failing to unite against this threat of complete annihilation.

Although the episode had many great moments (despite the incredibly distracting and unrealistic way several of the characters were able to survive), I felt quite empty by the end.
 
While I dont 'mind' that they chose Arya to be the one to kill him (she been getting pretty popular lately)..

There was no lead up... or even any scenes to prove/show she was sneaking or going anywhere TOWARDS the NK..

So to me it just felt like a quick 'plot twist' the writers thought was fun and going to 'get the audience'..

The lack of 'build up' or even a notion that she was going there did the end result a dis-service IMHO.. (not that it was 'terrible'.. just could have been better)..

Or how about a few main characters say: "I need to end this.. I'm going after the NK".. so at least there is a build up and a pre-/proven acceptance from us (the crowd)... and THEN surprise us with they pick to 'do the deed'..

There was A LOT of build up over the years/seasons toward this... and while I get the 'war' shouldnt be the focus (they led us to believe it was so) so the quick and abrupt ending was a bit...... "really?" to me.. (but still ok).. LOL

So many main characters 'survived'... (which was a bit odd).. but I'm sure they are going to kill them off in the next 3 episodes..

Random thoughts:

Why is Gendry (sp) still around? Gotta be for SOMETHING?

* if the Targaryn's were legitimately over-thrown by the Berathean's ..... Do the Targaryn's still have a legitimate claim to the thrown?
Or does Gendry still have some claim being a ******* of Roberts?

I re-watched SE1:EP3 (I think it was).. and I could have SWORN (after Tyrion's found witht he dogs after a night of drinking and whoring).. and walks into breakfast with his family.. I heard him say good morning younger brother/sister... but isnt he a YOUNGER brother? (with potential to fulfill the prophecy of Cersi?)

I need to go back and watch it again to make sure he said that. :)

Bronn - whats gonan be his role?
Jaime/Tyrion = whos gonna kill Cersi?
Bran = whats his story/purpose now? (3ER has nothing to do now?...wait?)
Samwell = he has brought up what Dany did to his dad/brother a few times now.. (is gonna try to convince Jon about something? or play a role against Dany somehow?)


Question:

If this has happened before? (3-Eye Raven/Night King saga).. how was it stopped before? They have killed him before? (ie: NK defeated?)
Does that mean this will happen again?
 
Jamie and cersi are twins, but Jamie is a few minutes younger than cersi (which has been mentioned once or twice in the show).

Tyrion is younger then both of them.

And the only person with a "legitimate" claim to the throne, is whoever won the most recent war to sit on the throne. It's changed hands so many times over history that no one actually is due the throne. The whole "I'm REALLY the legitimate ruler" nonsense is all just driven by house loyalties and which horse the Lords want to bet on.
 
xl97 said:
Or how about a few main characters say: "I need to end this.. I'm going after the NK".. so at least there is a build up and a pre-/proven acceptance from us (the crowd)... and THEN surprise us with they pick to 'do the deed'..
Click to expand...
Isn't that exactly what Jon did? Said “Bran...”, grabbed his sword and ran to the Godswood?
 
xl97 said:
While I dont 'mind' that they chose Arya to be the one to kill him (she been getting pretty popular lately)..

There was no lead up... or even any scenes to prove/show she was sneaking or going anywhere TOWARDS the NK..
Click to expand...

While most people probably did not pay attention to it, or did not want to believe it, they pretty much telegraphed what was going to happen when Beric dies saving Arya fulfilling his role in the lord of light;s plan and Melisandre reminds here about the many eyes thing stressing the blue eyes part and reminds her "What do we say to the god of death...not today" thing

Also, back when she showed Gendry the drawing of the special weapon she wanted, I had a felling she was going to go after the Night King
 
Vladimir Furdik (aka the Night King'). Maybe he is just trollling, or maybe not?

Capture.PNG


He also has some cool pics on his twitter feed Vladimir Furdik (@Vladimir_furdik) | Twitter

D5Y6URlX4AAi9k9.jpg


Vladimir Furdik on Twitter
 
Prob said before, but Gendry ******* Borathian is still around to marry Princes Arya Stark, so it’s easier to buy Arya on the throne.
 
Strikerkc said:
And the only person with a "legitimate" claim to the throne, is whoever won the most recent war to sit on the throne. It's changed hands so many times over history that no one actually is due the throne. The whole "I'm REALLY the legitimate ruler" nonsense is all just driven by house loyalties and which horse the Lords want to bet on.
Click to expand...

Yeah, thats not at all accurate. Aegon I Targaryen conquered Westeros over the course of a year or so and got all but Dorne to bend the knee. For the next 283 years or so, Westeros was ruled by a Targaryen. Even after Robert Baratheon overthrew the Targaryen dynasty, he attempted to legitimize his rule by the fact that he was part Targaryen on his father's side and also because the Baratheon line was started by Aegon I's ******* brother.
 
JoeG said:
Yeah, thats not at all accurate...
Click to expand...

So you're saying that Aegon had "rightful" claim to rule westeros, because, at the time, he'd won the most recent war to control westeros?

But his family lost another war for who controls it, but they're still the rightful leaders? Even though the Targryans lost control the same way that the people Aegon conquered lost control? But even though his family lost control the same way the people he took control from had lost their control, his family is still the "rightful" controler?

Hmmm, by those rules, that means Aegon was never the rightful ruler of westeros, even though he'd won the war to unite them, because all those kingdoms already had rightful rulers of their own (if the Targaryans "can't" be deposed by having the job taken from them, that means they also can't take control by taking the job from others). And I'll bet those rulers of the 7 kingdoms weren't elected in, meaning they took control by force from someone else, or some other groups; so they aren't the rightful rulers of their kingdoms either. So based on the rules of "rightful" leadership, only ever the very very first rulers are to be considered the rightful heirs. Looks like they need to go find each area's largest colony of ants from back in the day, and bend the knee to the first natural rulers of that land.

Kingdoms, in all instances, have been ruled by those that could take control (if they were the ones starting a dynasty), or could keep control (if they were the ones maintaining a dynasty). The only rightful ruler is the one doing the ruling at the time, anything else is posturing and propaganda on the part of others trying to change who's in charge.

The Targaryans failed to maintain their dynasty, so they're out until such time that they take back control of their Dynasty.
 
History it thousands of years old in westeros, the leadership has been all over the place, congealed, broken apart, recongealed. They manned a wall they don't know who built, against an enemy they hadn't seen, that's how old history is. but the Targaryans are the only rightful ruler. gotcha.
 
The Targaryen Dynasty is one in the same with the Iron Throne and Seven Kingdoms. They united them into one and served as the ruling monarchs for generations, with bloodlines and birthrights as a determining factor for succession.

Robert’s Rebellion toppled that Dynasty, and regardless of his extended ancestry many people continued to view him as a usurper and want to see a rightful heir on the throne. If we want to take uprisings and “breaking the wheel” into account then sure it’s whoever can win the war that will be the ruler, but that hasn’t been the case when it comes to the history of the Seven Kingdoms as a unified body.
 
xl97 said:
While I dont 'mind' that they chose Arya to be the one to kill him (she been getting pretty popular lately)..

There was no lead up... or even any scenes to prove/show she was sneaking or going anywhere TOWARDS the NK..

So to me it just felt like a quick 'plot twist' the writers thought was fun and going to 'get the audience'..

The lack of 'build up' or even a notion that she was going there did the end result a dis-service IMHO.. (not that it was 'terrible'.. just could have been better)..

Or how about a few main characters say: "I need to end this.. I'm going after the NK".. so at least there is a build up and a pre-/proven acceptance from us (the crowd)... and THEN surprise us with they pick to 'do the deed'..

There was A LOT of build up over the years/seasons toward this... and while I get the 'war' shouldnt be the focus (they led us to believe it was so) so the quick and abrupt ending was a bit...... "really?" to me.. (but still ok).. LOL

So many main characters 'survived'... (which was a bit odd).. but I'm sure they are going to kill them off in the next 3 episodes..

Random thoughts:

Why is Gendry (sp) still around? Gotta be for SOMETHING?

* if the Targaryn's were legitimately over-thrown by the Berathean's ..... Do the Targaryn's still have a legitimate claim to the thrown?
Or does Gendry still have some claim being a ******* of Roberts?

I re-watched SE1:EP3 (I think it was).. and I could have SWORN (after Tyrion's found witht he dogs after a night of drinking and whoring).. and walks into breakfast with his family.. I heard him say good morning younger brother/sister... but isnt he a YOUNGER brother? (with potential to fulfill the prophecy of Cersi?)

I need to go back and watch it again to make sure he said that. :)

Bronn - whats gonan be his role?
Jaime/Tyrion = whos gonna kill Cersi?
Bran = whats his story/purpose now? (3ER has nothing to do now?...wait?)
Samwell = he has brought up what Dany did to his dad/brother a few times now.. (is gonna try to convince Jon about something? or play a role against Dany somehow?)


Question:

If this has happened before? (3-Eye Raven/Night King saga).. how was it stopped before? They have killed him before? (ie: NK defeated?)
Does that mean this will happen again?
Click to expand...

Real life history (especially British history that the author admits to using) is that even when the throne was won by conquest, it did not stop the deposed/deposed's heir/family, from claiming they were the rightful King. The War of the Roses is a hood example. Gendry wouldn't have a claim due to being illegitimate and not acknowledged openly by Robert (Gendry didn't realise who he was).

Tyrion is definitely the youngest.

Best guess about previous Long Nights is that;

- previous 3ERs were protected by the Children of the Forest,

- the Night's watch hadn't forgotten their purpose like they had by the time of the books/show,

- The Starks were not almost wiped out, and the Boltons/Umbers/Karstarks etc, were all at full strength,

- The army of the dead didn't have a numerical advantage against the living like they did now,

- The seven kingdoms were able to join together, and had not just had years of costly civil war.


All of those are just assumptions on my part. However, I can't see why they are beyond being reasonable guesses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

1StopProps
Interest Hound Helmet from Game of Thrones
Replies
3
Views
502
1StopProps
1StopProps
Bloop
RoboDoc - 4-part RoboCop documentary
Replies
5
Views
415
Tan Djarka
Tan Djarka
rocketeer25
The Last Of Us HBO S2
2
Replies
37
Views
3,103
Halliwax
Halliwax
Bloop
Neverending nepotism in Hollywood?
2 3 4
Replies
65
Views
4,255
laellee
laellee
TheSweatshop
The Lost Art of Westwood’s Blade Runner (1997)
Replies
0
Views
578
TheSweatshop
TheSweatshop
Back
Top