About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

Toy Soldier · 14-05-2019, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramsay

GRRM already dismissed that rumour about the books being finished

https://www.digitalspy.com/tv/ustv/a...ast-two-books/

Sounds like exactly what someone who had finished the books would say

Toy Soldier · 14-05-2019, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vicky.

...like playing snake slowly on her way to Cersei while roasting kids.

I saw someone on Twitter describe it as "Firey Pacman"

Niamh. · 14-05-2019, 10:34 AM

So, eventhough I did find the character progression a bit unbelievable, I have to say that I do also I agree with this reviewer (on the positives of the episode)

While "The Long Night" showed us an army that was outgunned and outnumbered, but one that had nevertheless chosen to fight, the true horror of "The Bells" was that these casualties were innocent civilians - people who have no role to play in the game of thrones, and probably don't give a damn who's wearing the crown as long as they can still feed their family and keep a roof over their heads. It's the most realistic depiction of war the show has ever given us, seeming to purposefully evoke some of the horrifying images we've seen in the Middle East and even closer to home in recent years - with bloodied civilians covered in ash, desperately searching for loved ones.

Whether you agree with some of the characters' choices or not, the destruction of King's Landing gets to the heart of what George R. R. Martin seemed to be exploring when he began writing A Song of Ice and Fire - that even if you win a war, you still lose, and that those who suffer most are usually the ones who have the least power. If Game of Thrones leaves us with that nihilistic (but ultimately honest) message in the finale, it won't have all been for naught, even if the events of this penultimate episode seem to guarantee that the final installment will be a divisive one.

https://ie.ign.com/articles/2019/05/...s8-ep-5-review

Toy Soldier · 14-05-2019, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niamh.

So, eventhough I did find the character progression a bit unbelievable, I have to say that I do also I agree with this reviewer (on the positives of the episode)

While "The Long Night" showed us an army that was outgunned and outnumbered, but one that had nevertheless chosen to fight, the true horror of "The Bells" was that these casualties were innocent civilians - people who have no role to play in the game of thrones, and probably don't give a damn who's wearing the crown as long as they can still feed their family and keep a roof over their heads. It's the most realistic depiction of war the show has ever given us, seeming to purposefully evoke some of the horrifying images we've seen in the Middle East and even closer to home in recent years - with bloodied civilians covered in ash, desperately searching for loved ones.

Whether you agree with some of the characters' choices or not, the destruction of King's Landing gets to the heart of what George R. R. Martin seemed to be exploring when he began writing A Song of Ice and Fire - that even if you win a war, you still lose, and that those who suffer most are usually the ones who have the least power. If Game of Thrones leaves us with that nihilistic (but ultimately honest) message in the finale, it won't have all been for naught, even if the events of this penultimate episode seem to guarantee that the final installment will be a divisive one.

https://ie.ign.com/articles/2019/05/...s8-ep-5-review

Well yes his message all along has essentially been about power always ultimately leading to corruption; or making those who don't want it miserable (Robert Baratheon by the time of the story, Tommen, Jon Snow...). Then you had the likes of Joffrey, Cersei, Ramsay Bolton... and Daenerys has always been on the path to having the most power, and being someone who wants it.

It makes narrative sense but only if it had been a several season progression. She's shown empathy for her friends and allies and the innocent FAR too recently for it to be believable that she's now torching cities. And again even compared to modern war... the issue is the insane intent of it. If they had made it clear that the King's Landing armies were simply "mixed in" with the civilians and she was just ignoring the presence of those people to burn the army out, with heaps of collateral damage due to her careless rage, that would be one thing... but she was going up and down the streets PURPOSEFULLY burning non-combatants and that's a whole other thing

. Even in the horrendous bombings in the Middle East etc. the images we see are of people who have tragically been caught in the crossfire of military targets. Dropping bombs on civilians on purpose would be an absolutely massive breach of international law. She's effectively a terrorist at this point.

Niamh. · 14-05-2019, 10:46 AM

Fair points

It is just such a u turn in such a short space of time, from breaker of chains to burner of brains

Scarlett. · 14-05-2019, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Well yes his message all along has essentially been about power always ultimately leading to corruption; or making those who don't want it miserable (Robert Baratheon by the time of the story, Tommen, Jon Snow...). Then you had the likes of Joffrey, Cersei, Ramsay Bolton... and Daenerys has always been on the path to having the most power, and being someone who wants it.

It makes narrative sense but only if it had been a several season progression. She's shown empathy for her friends and allies and the innocent FAR too recently for it to be believable that she's now torching cities. And again even compared to modern war... the issue is the insane intent of it. If they had made it clear that the King's Landing armies were simply "mixed in" with the civilians and she was just ignoring the presence of those people to burn the army out, with heaps of collateral damage due to her careless rage, that would be one thing... but she was going up and down the streets PURPOSEFULLY burning non-combatants and that's a whole other thing

. Even in the horrendous bombings in the Middle East etc. the images we see are of people who have tragically been caught in the crossfire of military targets. Dropping bombs on civilians on purpose would be an absolutely massive breach of international law. She's effectively a terrorist at this point.

The best comparison is if America nuked a third city after Japan surrendered in WWII

Toy Soldier · 14-05-2019, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dia.

The best comparison is if America nuked a third city after Japan surrendered in WWII

What makes it even more hard to believe though is that it's not even a snap decision like dropping a nuke. You could see a commander in a blind rage being like "**** it, drop the bomb!" and that's why Dany charging the Red Keep and destroying it in minutes after the surrender would have made SOME sense. It's a sort of "seeing red" blind rage that can and does happen in "normal psychology" - crimes of passion, etc... someone killing a loved one in a frenzy and then immediately thinking "oh **** what have I done" but the thing is, rage like that only lasts a few minutes, long enough for a few out-of-character destructive acts before snapping back to reality and being horrified. That would have worked.

But the burning of Kings Landing... it would take a lot longer than that! It's not realistic rage. To be realistic she would have burned the soldiers then a few streets of the civilian population before starting to come out of the haze and look around at the carnage and stop, and be horrified with what she had done, even if she then tried to justify it afterwards.

It's the systematic "up and down the streets for hours" that doesn't make sense as an act of rage. It's too... orderly... and determined.

Toy Soldier · 14-05-2019, 11:33 AM

So yeah I've decided that what would have made most sense would be her charging directly for the keep - maybe zig-zagging and burning the city at random along the way, destroying the keep and then flying away. You could still have had the carnage in the streets with the soldiers (lead by Grey Worm) due to the surrender being violated, and a lot more civilians killed as a result of that, without Drogon Pacman.

bitontheslide · 14-05-2019, 11:35 AM

i wanted to stop, but Drogon didn't let me

Niamh. · 14-05-2019, 11:37 AM

So is there going to be a throne to sit on by the end do we think? And if so who will sit there? Surely Sansa is the only decent option at this point.

The Slim Reaper · 14-05-2019, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niamh.

So is there going to be a throne to sit on by the end do we think? And if so who will sit there? Surely Sansa is the only decent option at this point.

Gendry is actually the rightful heir at this point.

Ramsay · 14-05-2019, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Gendry is actually the rightful heir at this point.

Ahh! I was the only one who voted for Gendry in the other thread! It's coming home boys!

Niamh. · 14-05-2019, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Gendry is actually the rightful heir at this point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramsay

Ahh! I was the only one who voted for Gendry in the other thread! It's coming home boys!

Jon is I thought, since the Targaryens took it back from the Baratheons

The Slim Reaper · 14-05-2019, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Jon is I thought, since the Targaryens took it back from the Baratheons

Well yeah, but before last episode it was Gendry. There are only 2 Targaryens left in the world and no way do they both live past the finale. No way Jon sits on the throne - he'd rather pet Ghost before he becomes King, and we all know that's not going to happen.

After the accidental burning to death of hundreds of thousands of innocents, then probably leaving a Targaryen on the throne wouldn't be the right thing to do.

Wouldn't be surprised to see them give the power back to the kingdoms, which would probably please everyone.

Niamh. · 14-05-2019, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Well yeah, but before last episode it was Gendry. There are only 2 Targaryens left in the world and no way do they both live past the finale. No way Jon sits on the throne - he'd rather pet Ghost before he becomes King, and we all know that's not going to happen.

After the accidental burning to death of hundreds of thousands of innocents, then probably leaving a Targaryen on the throne wouldn't be the right thing to do.

Wouldn't be surprised to see them give the power back to the kingdoms, which would probably please everyone.

Is there even any head of houses left in the kingdoms bar Sansa and Gendry? Oh actually Tryion is now head of Casterly Rock isn't he?

That might be good, a council of all kingdoms, we'd have

Sansa
Tyrion
Gendry
Jon Arryn
Yara

and two more? maybe the kid who was supposed to marry Cerseis daughter?

Vicky. · 14-05-2019, 12:06 PM

Huge huge spoiler. Have read leaks in my annoyance.

Spoiler:

The Slim Reaper · 14-05-2019, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Is there even any head of houses left in the kingdoms bar Sansa and Gendry? Oh actually Tryion is now head of Casterly Rock isn't he?

That might be good, a council of all kingdoms, we'd have

Sansa
Tyrion
Gendry
Jon Arryn
Yara

and two more? maybe the kid who was supposed to marry Cerseis daughter?

They have mentioned there was a new prince in Dorne, think it was ep 4.

Mokka · 14-05-2019, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramsay

Ahh! I was the only one who voted for Gendry in the other thread! It's coming home boys!

I've said Gendry and Arya from the start

Toy Soldier · 14-05-2019, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Is there even any head of houses left in the kingdoms bar Sansa and Gendry? Oh actually Tryion is now head of Casterly Rock isn't he?

That might be good, a council of all kingdoms, we'd have

Sansa
Tyrion
Gendry
Jon Arryn
Yara

and two more? maybe the kid who was supposed to marry Cerseis daughter?

You'd assume the "new Prince" in Dorne, and there only being six kingdoms with the Dragonstone part forgotten about / merged into the other southern kingdoms due to Dany's actions.

reece(: · 14-05-2019, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Is there even any head of houses left in the kingdoms bar Sansa and Gendry? Oh actually Tryion is now head of Casterly Rock isn't he?

That might be good, a council of all kingdoms, we'd have

Sansa
Tyrion
Gendry
Jon Arryn
Yara

and two more? maybe the kid who was supposed to marry Cerseis daughter?

Robin Arryn

Jon Arryn died before Episode 1

Niamh. · 14-05-2019, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reece(:

Robin Arryn

Jon Arryn died before Episode 1

oh woops, and Robert Arryn in the books

Vicky. · 14-05-2019, 01:32 PM

https://uk.ign.com/articles/2019/04/...ng-differences

GRRM says show would need another 5 seasons to be faithful to the books..

If only. Would much have preferred more talking, less action and the story actually told properly, things left to develp at a sensible pace rather than turning Dany into a bipolar psycho overnight

Niamh. · 14-05-2019, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vicky.

https://uk.ign.com/articles/2019/04/...ng-differences

GRRM says show would need another 5 seasons to be faithful to the books..

If only. Would much have preferred more talking, less action and the story actually told properly, things left to develp at a sensible pace rather than turning Dany into a bipolar psycho overnight

Have you read the first comment after that article? ffs.....it's now feminists fault that Season 8 was bad

Its all about the women now and been that way since the books stopped being really used. Feminist were super hyper cause it wasn't going their way and told women to stop watching. Of course they did what their feminist masters said to do, from social media.

Now they got control and women control everything in a world of men. I guess that looks normal to the feminist that ruin everything they touch. Empowered by fiction, the feminist way of life. Boring though and extremely predictable.

Toy Soldier · 14-05-2019, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vicky.

https://uk.ign.com/articles/2019/04/...ng-differences

GRRM says show would need another 5 seasons to be faithful to the books..

If only. Would much have preferred more talking, less action and the story actually told properly, things left to develp at a sensible pace rather than turning Dany into a bipolar psycho overnight

At least, I'd have thought... the pace has upped dramatically since season 4. I was watching a season 1 episode yesterday and I swear half of the run time of the episode was taken up by TWO face to face conversations... and they didn't even drag... it had my attention the entire time. These days they'd have killed two supporting characters and 10,000 redshirts in that time.

Plus the passing of time is much more realistic; it takes them 3 episodes to travel from Winterfell to King's Landing when Ned Stark and Robert Baratheon etc are travelling there, and there are indications that the journey took weeks (e.g.Joffrey is bitten by Nymeria on the journey, and by ep 3 when Cersei is changing his dressing in KL it's almost healed and he's worrying about the scar). How long did it take Arya and The Hound to ride to KL?? An hour and a half??