GAME OF THRONES

[TheBaxter]

quick thoughts...

this was one dark episode. by which i mean, the way it was filmed. it makes sense the dead would attack at night, but unfortunately that means a lot of the battle sequences were so dark and chaotic it was hard to watch at times. eventually i just decided that if anyone important died, they'd probably slow down enough to make sure you knew about it.

i guess when you're being attacked by a guy who can raise the dead, maybe hiding out in a crypt ain't such a hot idea after all.

the night king may be really powerful, but a strategic genius he ain't. considering that pretty much the only weakness of his army is that they all disintegrate if he gets killed, it doesn't make much sense for him to put himself out there and at risk as much as he does. he could just hide way up north of the wall and keep sending his hordes after the living, only showing up every once in a while to replenish his forces, and sooner or later, he'd win just through attrition. overconfidence i suppose.

jon snow may be heir to the throne, but once again he shows himself to be pretty ineffectual as a warrior and ultimately, just like the battle of the bastards or his mission to capture a wight, he needs a woman to come along at the last minute to save his bacon.

biggest surprise of this episode is that nobody very important died.

and last but not least.... WHERE THE FUCK DID GHOST GO?!?!? seriously, ghost finally shows up, goes charging into the army of the dead in the first wave alongside the dothraki (damn, he really must be in jon's doghouse.... i see what i did there) and is never seen again. did he live? did he die? did he finally wise up and just keep running past the dead, thinking "fuck jon snow, he doesn't care about me anymore, i'ma gonna go find me some fresh little bitch to lay down with and sire me some pups, these stupid fucking humans can deal with their own damn zombies!" i thought Ghost was supposed to get some badass moments this week, but a couple of shots of him running next to dothraki hardly qualifies. #Justice4Ghost #WhitewolfPower

[TheBaxter]

oh, one other thing... the Hound is a pussy

and one other other thing... is it finally time now to rename this thread ENDGAME OF THRONES?

[Peven]

quick thoughts...

this was one dark episode. by which i mean, the way it was filmed. it makes sense the dead would attack at night, but unfortunately that means a lot of the battle sequences were so dark and chaotic it was hard to watch at times. eventually i just decided that if anyone important died, they'd probably slow down enough to make sure you knew about it.



biggest surprise of this episode is that nobody very important died.

and last but not least.... WHERE THE FUCK DID GHOST GO?!?!? seriously, ghost finally shows up, goes charging into the army of the dead in the first wave alongside the dothraki (damn, he really must be in jon's doghouse.... i see what i did there) and is never seen again. did he live? did he die? did he finally wise up and just keep running past the dead, thinking "fuck jon snow, he doesn't care about me anymore, i'ma gonna go find me some fresh little bitch to lay down with and sire me some pups, these stupid fucking humans can deal with their own damn zombies!" i thought Ghost was supposed to get some badass moments this week, but a couple of shots of him running next to dothraki hardly qualifies. #Justice4Ghost #WhitewolfPower

it's disturbing how much I agree with the first two points.


maybe Ghost went to shack up with Niberia(sp?) after seeing his master bang his aunt.

[so sorry]

biggest surprise of this episode is that nobody very important died.

I thought for sure that Sam died, he was laying down being overrun when Jon ran by him. But then again, I also thought Jamie Brianne and Pod were dead too when they were pinned up against the wall. I certainly wasn't going into this episode demanding high-profile character's deaths, but c'mon, that was ridiculous that all of them made it thru. Even freaking Greyworm lived.

I know the Dothraki charge into the darkness was a cool dramatic effect, the slow burn beginning of the frantic battle, but man did they go out like a bunch of pussies or what?

Ghost... Jeebus I wish they just killed him north of the wall a few seasons ago. Such a misuse of a cool concept (warging/terrifying killer). I'm sure he survived as well.

We all knew the Winterfell Crypt was going to come "alive", too predictable.

Winterfell is going to STINK for quite a while with that many rotting bodies lying around.

Good to see Arya act scared again... little Miss No One Can Stop Me had to be saved by someone on her list!

I guess another dragon died right? Jon's crashlanded, and Drogon flew into the night sky covered in zombies. I have no idea which one showed up at the end.

[Wolfpack]

I guess another dragon died right? Jon's crashlanded, and Drogon flew into the night sky covered in zombies. I have no idea which one showed up at the end.

Well, maybe if the Lord of Light had lived up to his name properly then we would have been able to see enough to tell.

[so sorry]

I also thought that Mellisandre was going to walk out into the zombie hoard, clutch her amulet, and explode in a fantastic fashion, buying Jon a small bit of time to get to Bran. I guess her real job was to get to Arya and tell her she had a pretty important kill to take care of?

[Fievel]

Did that make Arya to be Azor Ahai?
Jon the rightful heir to the throne?
Dany just a chick with a cool ride/pet?

And don't forget that we lost Jorah...and Theon the Brave. Both of those characters were just abused throughout the series....survived when they had no business surviving......and went out like warriors....also Lady Mormont!! Badass to the end!!!

So good.
And so difficult to process after also seeing Endgame.

[TheBaxter]

apparently Ghost lived and so did both still living dragons. same with Sam, basically if it wasn't made completely obvious that someone notable died, then they are still alive. i assumed it was Drogon at the end landing next to Dany since he's Dany's personal dragon. in the dark, though, you really can't tell the dragons apart except by who's riding on back of them. even the ice dragon wasn't always distinguishable.

and that's one of the problems with this episode. i get that it was a huge and complicated battle to write and film, but you can't just completely forget about certain characters or leave them unresolved. and like it or not, Ghost and Rhaegal and other non-humans ARE characters and the audience cares about them and wants to know what happened to them. you can't just have Ghost run off into battle and not see him at all the rest of the episode, or have Rhaegal crash land and then disappear without a trace. they'll probably say he got knocked out and slept through the rest of the battle or something, and i understand they wanted to end on that last shot of Melisandre, but it's not cool leaving us hanging on the fates of so many others.

as for Ghost, i pretty much just expect him to show up again in the background of some random shot with no explanation of where he was the whole rest of the time, and then go back to being ignored.

don't get me wrong, i enjoyed the episode over all and there were plenty of cool moments, like Lady Mormont vs. the Giant and some of the dragon dogfighting action. it just wasn't as amazing as it was hyped up to be, and dropped the ball in a few places.

Melisandre was pretty useless when you think about it. not just for most of the series, when she mistakenly thought Stannis was the chosen one (guess we'll never find out how she came to realize it was Arya instead). but especially for this episode. she rides in, sets a bunch of swords on fire which then promptly go and get snuffed out. then she sets the trench on fire, which bought a little time i guess, but even the dumb zombies figured out how to make a zombie bridge to get over it. i guess her only real purpose in this episode was to remind Arya that she can kill people.

speaking of, i don't know if anyone watches the after-show "making of" but they said how they hoped people had forgotten about Arya by the time she jumped out to stab the Night King, so that it would be a surprise. really? they must have a pretty low opinion of their audience. after Melisandre basically tells her she's destined to kill the Night King by reminding her she can kill people with "blue eyes" and she storms off, i was basically waiting the whole rest of the episode for just that to happen. it was so obvious i actually thought they'd subvert the moment by having the Night King kill her, and then somebody else comes along to finish him off. or have Bran go "surprise, sucker! i'm not crippled after all!" and stab him with his own Valyrian blade. i dunno, something not so obvious.

hey maybe that's what they're doing with Ghost. they're hoping we'll forget about Ghost, so that when ultimately he ends up killing Cersei and we find out that he was their secret weapon all along, we'll all be really surprised. only problem is, WE'LL NEVER FORGET ABOUT GHOST!

[TheBaxter]

this review pretty much sums up my feelings about this episode.

i think my ultimate dissatisfaction with this episode isn't necessarily anything to do with the episode itself, specifically, but how conveniently and quickly the ultimate threat within the series was dispatched. in both in the books and the tv series, literally from the very beginning in each, the white walkers are the primary threat. sure, cersei is nasty and cruel and evil and all, but she's only human. westeros has survived worse than her. she's trump, basically... she's a bad person who does bad things and hurts people, but she's not an existential threat to humanity's very existence. she'll be gone, one way or another, sooner or later. but the white walkers and the army of the dead, that was a threat to the entire existence of humanity. it's the threat that has been consistently built up the entire series, like i said, literally from the very first scene. and just like that, now the threat is gone.

i understand the argument that the night king and the army of the dead were a one-dimensional, simplistic threat, and that the human stuff has more complexity and is more interesting. if cersei is trump, then the dead were global warming: the impersonal threat that is coming to wipe out humanity while they argued and squabbled over all their petty bullshit while ignoring the real danger. and that's also part of the problem: the night king shouldn't have been such a simplistic threat. there should have been more complexity and background to that character, some kind of motivation to his actions which, if not exactly sympathetic, at least gave him some dimensionality. as it is, now that the "true threat" has been dealt with, they can all just go back to their petty squabbles and fights, after having such a "stark" reminder of just how petty those squabbles really are. even if cersei wins and keeps the throne, and jon and dany and sansa and tyrion and arya and everyone else dies horrible deaths, and the dragons and direwolves are all killed off, it still feels like a win overall, because at least they got rid of the white walkers, and someone will come along sooner or later to replace cersei.

i guess what i was really hoping for, was that they would find a way to more directly tie the white walker threat in with the "game of thrones" outcome itself. that the night king and his army would have a more direct impact on the outcome of who comes out on top for the iron throne. sure, they've pretty much decimated jon and dany's army, the dothraki are done (well-done), not much is left of the unsullied, and the north never really had much of an army to begin with. except for two dragons (and Ghost!) the targaryen forces are no match for cersei, the lannister army, the golden company, and euron greyjoy's fleet. but that's an indirect consequence of the battle of winterfell. there were so many more ways this could have gone that would have been more interesting: what if, right before winterfell fell, it was cersei who showed up with the lannister army (and more of those dragon spears from last season, except this time tipped with dragonglass)? they take out zombie viserion, the night king falls to the ground where somebody with valyrian steel (jon, or brienne, or jaime, or even arya) takes him out. now, on top of the northern forces being decimated, you have cersei taking credit as the saviour of humanity, which only strengthens her hold on power. then the battle of winterfell actually has a direct outcome on the fight for the throne. or... what if the battle of winterfell had just been a distraction, the night king sends his zombie horde to attack winterfell and keep them busy, while he flies south on viserion and takes out an unsuspecting cersei and her army. presumably king's landing has crypts too... just another army waiting for the night king to raise them. with the city crumbling around her, cersei tries to escape with her bodyguard, the Mountain, only to come face to face with the Night King, who uses his zombie-raising powers to "raise" the already-zombified Gregor Clegane, placing him under the King's control, who then stabs Cersei in the back. now, the not-quite-as-decimated-but-still-pretty-weak northern army has to march south to take King's Landing and the Iron Throne, not from Cersei, but from the Night King himself.

i didn't necessarily expect either of these or any of the other crazy endings that people have predicted, but i was hoping at least for something like that, something that tied the two main storylines of the series (the White Walker invasion and the fight for the Iron Throne) together in some satisfying or interesting way. instead, they treated the white walkers basically as a distraction to dispense with in one battle so they can move on with the human storylines. no matter how cool it was, Arya killing Night King in the moment and the army of the dead falling to pieces, that's all it was, a cool moment... not a more deeply satisfying conclusion to one of the most important storylines of the series.

[so sorry]

One of the things that will ultimately bother me the most is that one of the worst characters on the show will seemingly have an impact on the final few episodes... fucking Euron Greyjoy and his horrible character and actor. The less I see of this douche the better, and it looks like he's going to be around til the end.

Like I said earlier, I was hoping the Night King and Bran were going to have a bit of a verbal throwdown before the inevitable Arya stabby-stabby, just to help to understand if there was any other motivation behind the evil being other than, well, being evil. That said, the name of the show is Game of Thrones, played by very living humans, and we all loved the intrigue, backstabbing, and jockying of the players involved to get to this point, so that's what the end of the series should come down to.

Yes, I too was disappointing with the way it went last night, but I enjoyed it for the most part, and I'm ready to move on. I'll always have Hardhome as the pinnacle white walker episode to look back on fondly.

[Peven]

holy shit, bax, invested in the series much?

and I hate to bring you down, but....wait a sec, what am I saying??? of course I like to bring you down, bwahahahahahahahahahahaha ...

...anyway, but...I see the school nurse a lot due to the needs of the student I work with and she is an RN, a bachelor's degree, 39 years old, hundreds of kids under her care every day.....and she was telling me this morning that she had forgotten all about Arya until she came jumping out. I was so disappointed and it was all I could do to maintain a neutral expression as I said, "I kept looking for her the entire time since she ran off after saying "not today" to the Red Witch." can you believe I sold it? I know, right? she didn't skip a beat and just kept on talking about how shocked she was because she was so caught up in all the chaos and drama in the battle. so, the showrunners weren't insulting the viewers, they just know their audience.

[Al Shut]

she's trump, basically... she's a bad person who does bad things and hurts people, but she's not an existential threat to humanity's very existence.

Wait a minute, weren't you one of the people who declared Trump a threat to humanity's very existence in the politics thread?

[TheBaxter]

she's trump, basically... she's a bad person who does bad things and hurts people, but she's not an existential threat to humanity's very existence.

Wait a minute, weren't you one of the people who declared Trump a threat to humanity's very existence in the politics thread?

technically, he's a threat as long as he has the nuclear codes. i think what's been shown up to this point is that, when trump asks people to do crazy stuff, they usually ignore him. that's what the mueller report basically said. i do think there are enough people in the military who would defy an order to launch if he gave one, so i guess i'm a little more optimistic than usual this morning.

the closest cersei comes to that is wildfire, but she was only able to destroy the sept and a good swath of king's landing with it, not the entire planet. so it's not a perfect metaphor. i do think it works in the sense of comparing the white walkers to global warming. cersei, like trump, is willing to put her own interests above even something as important as saving the world, even after being directly confronted with irrefutable evidence of the threat. global warming is a threat to our species existence... the greatest danger from people like cersei or trump is that they are willing to turn a blind eye to that threat until it's too late to overcome it. of course, that metaphor is ruined now... the overarching threat is gone. unfortunately in the real world, we can't just stab global warming with a magic dagger and make it go away in a single night.

[Peven]

so you're arguing that a world ruled by ruled Cersei and Euron and the Mountain is a better alternative than the Night King? hhmmmm, that is certainly a discussion to be had in philosophy 101 because it goes to the heart of existentialism, doesn't it. the commonly held mentality in the US during the Cold War was that it was better to eradicate all life on earth with a retaliatory strike than to let the Soviets win if they had launched a first strike against us. it was the position of the Russian government to do the same is the US ever launched first. peace depended on it. mutually assured destruction.

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

I'm not with TheBaxter on this.

If you think that The Night King should kill Cersei then you're kinda missing the point. The killing of Cersei is meant to be about human justice to her by one of the human characters killing her off, i.e. the Starks for revenge on Ned Stark. Or a more full redemption for Jaime if he killed her.

I dunno man, Zoners, I just shake my head at the idiocy of the internet, fucking hell.

As for what the Winterfell battle has done, well it's united enemies together, which is the twist of how things first began, Jaime/Tyrion Lannister vs the Starks vs Daenarys and her crew.

Now we have their alliance and the question of who they will relate to each other after the larger danger has been vanquished, what does this mean for Jaime who still has to atone for his earlier crimes and after his betrayal from Cersei for abandoning him in the White Walker fight, what will his moves be towards her? Likely he will now play a hand in bringing her down, possibly giving him the full genuine redemption arc?

Quite simply - you.JUST.didn't.getit.

Right now you have a lot of walking about in a dark field talking to yourself at night to be doing...

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

I'm with TheBaxter on this.

Apart from - TheBaxter - DRAW YOUR FUCKING CURTAINS AND TURN YOUR LIGHTS OFF!!!

Yet again Jon Snow shows himself to be pretty idiotic as a battle tactician. What the fuck was he doing presenting himself in front of the Ice Dragon and just shouting at him? When he could have run away. Fucking hell.

I don't know if Jon ever will have his payoff as being a victorious force to be reckoned with military leader. So much of things reeks of "Don't worry, we're saving this for later" only for it not to be delivered. Kinda like George Lucas's handling of the prequels, delaying all the good bits for far too long only to then conclude them too fast - similar to what you said about the White Walkers being dispatched too instantly. When Bran revealed his plan last week it all sounded too convenient, too quick, and a disappointment frankly, like the writers needed a dramatic compacted visceral visually satisfying moment to show how this threat was to be dealt with because heh it's cinematic storytelling - not having anything take too long and having a nice thrilling punch scene to satisfy audiences. I'm in 2 minds really in how it was executed, it does feel a bit quick and easy.

[Peven]

I see what you are saying except that i'm not so sure the fight against the Night King has strengthened the coalition that will stand against Cersei all that much. let's just look at numbers alone. they lost the Dothraki. the Unsullied are mostly gone. the Dornish army? nada. the Tyrell army? meat. one dragon is dead and the other two are wounded. the army of the North is decimated.


and.....

there is no reason to think that Dany is going to quietly step aside and let Jon take the Iron Throne and has shown a maniacal streak of late. Jorah was a northerner and would have been a trusted adviser to help her navigate the situation. he's dead now. Dany's advisor and Grey Worm have no use for the North. remember the outburst in the crypts when she overheard Tyrion and Sansa talking. so there is a lack of strength in the bond holding together the core of the alliance between the North and Dany's army.

btw, with the deaths of both Lady Mormant and Jorah the house of Mormant is gone now, too, added to the pile of noble family bones. there are less and less spokes of the wheel remaining.....

I had really hoped Theon was going to get his redemption by killing his sleazy uncle. ah well. I guess that has been reserved for a girl power moment.

[Peven]

Jon Snow has shown that he is not the brightest Targaryan or Stark who ever swung a sword

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

I guess that was kinda the point of the unification of different forces being reduced by the White Walker fight. The intervention of this story cutting into the fight against the Lannisters has the consequence of making the numbers fighting against King's Landing to be much weaker.

I felt cheated when the revelation of Jon's identity to Dany was interrupted by the "The Walkers are coming!" announcement. Hopefully the real dilemma, conflict and drama of who should get the phone will play out satisfyingly now that the Walkers are gone, and not be conveniently shoulder shrugged off by some throwaway moment or line bit like the way Bran basically said "Whatever" to Jaime for pushing him off the wall as a kid.

On the whole I was satisfied with this episode anyway. I understand that battles can't be too drawn out in an attempt to pay justice to a long 7 season build up, and we have around like 70 minutes of battling and a good long arc to it (I thought we would sign off this episode with a cliffhanger when the King made the dead rise, but was joyed to see that there was around 20 minutes still to go).

But still the Night King and his Walkers were dispatched so conveniently quick. Did the Night King riding a converted Ice Dragon really give that much of a threat to Dany and her dragons, thus the overall fight that much? Feels like another story set up the didn't really deliver as much as was feared it would. Part of me wonders if the long discovery of Dragonglass really pay off enough to deliver that much of a difference in this battle? How many Walkers were killed by this weapon in the end, and how significant was their deaths in giving a tactful advantage to winning the battle?

The practical plot picker mind of me is gonna go away for a little bit and ponder just how much of this battle was even that necessary if at the end of the day it's all down to the Dues Ex Machina moment of getting Villain X to be in Location X with Character Bait X and for Saviour Character X to jump out and kill Villain X. If the whole victory is all down to this inevitable confrontation shouldn't there not bother being a big battle at all? Just have all the humans just hide underground and at least let the Night King find Bran and everyone be waiting hidden nearby for the big "Now! Get him!" signal.

[TheBaxter]

so you're arguing that a world ruled by ruled Cersei and Euron and the Mountain is a better alternative than the Night King? hhmmmm, that is certainly a discussion to be had in philosophy 101 because it goes to the heart of existentialism, doesn't it. the commonly held mentality in the US during the Cold War was that it was better to eradicate all life on earth with a retaliatory strike than to let the Soviets win if they had launched a first strike against us. it was the position of the Russian government to do the same is the US ever launched first. peace depended on it. mutually assured destruction.

before Trump's election, i would have said yes. nowadays... i'm not so sure. sooner or later we're gonna figure out how to travel to other planets. we've already ruined one planet, maybe it's a good thing if we go extinct before we ruin any more.

[so sorry]

So how does everyone feel about Theon Greyjoy's "redemption"?

He was a petulant womanizer as a teen, was a complete asshole to everyone but Robb, then he betrays Robb (which indirectly can be said lead to his death), beheaded Winterfell's man at arms (who trained him), killed two innocent boys, sent Bran and Rickon into hiding, did some unspeakable things for Ramsey Snow (under duress though), etc etc.

Yes, he helps Sansa escape. Yes, he rescues his sister (in the show), yes, he stands with House Stark and dies for Bran. Yes, Sansa and Bran give him absolution for his previous sins, but do they have the right to?

I know this is a deeper philosophical question, one that is a real-world conversation, not just related to Game of Thrones. Does a life's worth of creating misery and suffering get cancelled out if you come around at the end and realize what you've done is wrong and terrible, and try to make amends with those you caused harm to?

[Peven]

holy shit, you really hate Theon, don't you? i mean, you're a bloodthirsty dude, no getting around it. how much torture does someone have to endure before it is enough? you're right, this DOES go to things outside the show, it displays that there are a lot of real savages left in this "modern" world who give lip service to ideals of forgiveness and humanity but don't really believe in them when it comes time to be tested. in the "real" world you are a citizen of a country that is guilty of genocide and slavery, you use money that has a slaveowner's portrait on it, one that you and others like you forgive without thought for owning other people, and you continue to live and benefit from the wealth that comes from that genocide and slavery and yet I have never seen you say anything about wanting to right the wrongs that gave you this life that is more safe and healthy and prosperous than the majority of the people who have EVER lived on Earth......but you are bent that a fictional character was let off the hook too easily after being given away as a piece of meat by his father as a small boy,his life used as a bargaining chip, rejected by that same father when he returned, brutally tortured for weeks and weeks, including having his genitals chopped off without anesthesia? you're the same dude who was fine with Arya killing people and feeding them to their parent but got all uncomfortable when she had sex. and you want to talk abut fucked up values and morality because Theon wasn't handled brutally enough for you??? it's like someone transported you from the time of the puritans to 2019.


also let's not forget, your boy Ned Stark helped a raping murderer like Robert Baratheon conquer Westeros. you want to start moralizing about what characters in this show do and have done and you're opening up a real pandora's box

[so sorry]

holy shit, you really hate Theon, don't you? i mean, you're a bloodthirsty dude, no getting around it. how much torture does someone have to endure before it is enough? you're right, this DOES go to things outside the show, it displays that there are a lot of real savages left in this "modern" world who give lip service to ideals of forgiveness and humanity but don't really believe in them when it comes time to be tested. in the "real" world you are a citizen of a country that is guilty of genocide and slavery, you use money that has a slaveowner's portrait on it, one that you and others like you forgive without thought for owning other people, and you continue to live and benefit from the wealth that comes from that genocide and slavery and yet I have never seen you say anything about wanting to right the wrongs that gave you this life that is more safe and healthy and prosperous than the majority of the people who have EVER lived on Earth......but you are bent that a fictional character was let off the hook too easily after being given away as a piece of meat by his father as a small boy,his life used as a bargaining chip, rejected by that same father when he returned, brutally tortured for weeks and weeks, including having his genitals chopped off without anesthesia? you're the same dude who was fine with Arya killing people and feeding them to their parent but got all uncomfortable when she had sex. and you want to talk abut fucked up values and morality because Theon wasn't handled brutally enough for you??? it's like someone transported you from the time of the puritans to 2019.


also let's not forget, your boy Ned Stark helped a raping murderer like Robert Baratheon conquer Westeros. you want to start moralizing about what characters in this show do and have done and you're opening up a real pandora's box

Dude, I asked the question, i didn't offer an opinion one way or the other. I stated facts only, then posed the question. I should have known that you would not be able to offer your opinion without insulting me, since you know me so well. Oh wait, I forgot the emoticon, which always absolves you of your dickery.

And you might want to go back and edit some of those "you"s into "we".... you live is the same world I do, you use the same money I use, and you benefit just as much as I do from what came before us. I guess I need to do more self flagellation like you do, right?

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

So how does everyone feel about Theon Greyjoy's "redemption"?

He was a petulant womanizer as a teen, was a complete asshole to everyone but Robb, then he betrays Robb (which indirectly can be said lead to his death), beheaded Winterfell's man at arms (who trained him), killed two innocent boys, sent Bran and Rickon into hiding, did some unspeakable things for Ramsey Snow (under duress though), etc etc.

Yes, he helps Sansa escape. Yes, he rescues his sister (in the show), yes, he stands with House Stark and dies for Bran. Yes, Sansa and Bran give him absolution for his previous sins, but do they have the right to?

I know this is a deeper philosophical question, one that is a real-world conversation, not just related to Game of Thrones. Does a life's worth of creating misery and suffering get cancelled out if you come around at the end and realize what you've done is wrong and terrible, and try to make amends with those you caused harm to?

I really am not a big fan or believer in 'redemption'. It doesn't make your harm and sins go away, they still happened. DON'T BLOODY DO IT IN THE FIRST PLACE IF YOU'RE GONNA FEEL THEY NEED MAKING UP FOR!

All the things he does shows his natural good side, or that he did these things as a CONSCIOUS decision to do good, which isn't as genuine or the same as doing good deeds simply because this is who you are. At the end of the day the character that makes one do bad things still is there and still lingers deep down, the dark side doesn't go away. Yes the next time those situations come around again he may resist doing them due to his new reformed person, but what if the same EQUIVALENT temptations come around that are as strong for his new self as they were for his old self? When he reaches the same breaking point, will he still break? Or will his experiences and regrets make him resist the new equally strong temptations again? That's a true test of his new character.

But still, again, the deaths he caused are still there, they still happened. Do you think the ones that suffered and died under his hand give a flying fuck if this person 'redeemed' himself and did good deeds to save other people? These killed people are still dead, so do you think they're ok with his new persona, or that they should be? I feel that good deeds can't make up for bad deeds if those bad deeds and the consequences of them are still done and can't be changed.

Redemption is very hard for me to accept, it's a concept I don't know to truly exist. Any person can do sinful things, and can do noble acts, one doesn't make the other go away, and for that, I wonder if a good gesture can absolve a cruel gesture. Those people are dead and nothing can reverse that, so nothing you can do can change that, hence true Redemption may not be real.

A person needs to a long way, a very very long and extreme way to do good things or to truly genuinely make himself a much more naturally decent person to make up for the murders etc. that Theon did. He hasn't been punished for them for a start, and even if he did and made a real change around, those people still suffered under his hand, so I don't know if I can truly ever forgive such a person for doing all of that, no matter how many thousands he may have saved since.

I have this same problem with Jaime.

[TheBaxter]

holy shit, you really hate Theon, don't you? i mean, you're a bloodthirsty dude, no getting around it. how much torture does someone have to endure before it is enough? you're right, this DOES go to things outside the show, it displays that there are a lot of real savages left in this "modern" world who give lip service to ideals of forgiveness and humanity but don't really believe in them when it comes time to be tested. in the "real" world you are a citizen of a country that is guilty of genocide and slavery, you use money that has a slaveowner's portrait on it, one that you and others like you forgive without thought for owning other people, and you continue to live and benefit from the wealth that comes from that genocide and slavery and yet I have never seen you say anything about wanting to right the wrongs that gave you this life that is more safe and healthy and prosperous than the majority of the people who have EVER lived on Earth......but you are bent that a fictional character was let off the hook too easily after being given away as a piece of meat by his father as a small boy,his life used as a bargaining chip, rejected by that same father when he returned, brutally tortured for weeks and weeks, including having his genitals chopped off without anesthesia? you're the same dude who was fine with Arya killing people and feeding them to their parent but got all uncomfortable when she had sex. and you want to talk abut fucked up values and morality because Theon wasn't handled brutally enough for you??? it's like someone transported you from the time of the puritans to 2019.


also let's not forget, your boy Ned Stark helped a raping murderer like Robert Baratheon conquer Westeros. you want to start moralizing about what characters in this show do and have done and you're opening up a real pandora's box

just when i thought Peven couldn't go and make more of an ass of himself, he posts this. the self-righteousness, hypocrisy, judgmentalism, and lack of self-awareness would be stunning coming from anyone else... from him it just elicits another face

[TheBaxter]

So how does everyone feel about Theon Greyjoy's "redemption"?

He was a petulant womanizer as a teen, was a complete asshole to everyone but Robb, then he betrays Robb (which indirectly can be said lead to his death), beheaded Winterfell's man at arms (who trained him), killed two innocent boys, sent Bran and Rickon into hiding, did some unspeakable things for Ramsey Snow (under duress though), etc etc.

Yes, he helps Sansa escape. Yes, he rescues his sister (in the show), yes, he stands with House Stark and dies for Bran. Yes, Sansa and Bran give him absolution for his previous sins, but do they have the right to?

I know this is a deeper philosophical question, one that is a real-world conversation, not just related to Game of Thrones. Does a life's worth of creating misery and suffering get cancelled out if you come around at the end and realize what you've done is wrong and terrible, and try to make amends with those you caused harm to?

i don't know if he did redeem himself, or could do enough to redeem himself, but i wasn't impressed with the rather heavyhanded and obvious way the show handled it. i've always felt like this series treated its characters as more complex, with more gray area. no one on this show is perfect, even the basically "good" characters, like ned stark or jon snow, have done questionable things, or have faults that have undermined them at times. ned stark was so honorbound it led him to make some poor decisions that, if handled differently, could have prevented a lot of the bloodshed that came later. jon snow is a knob (and all the people who suddenly turned against Danaerys for executing those two guys last season because they happened to be Sam's daddy and bro, seem to conveniently forget the time Jon Snow hung a child with a noose).

sometimes you have to simplify things when going from the page to the screen (yeah, i'm gonna start talking about the books again, deal with it) and you can't always dramatize everything going on in people's heads in 60 minutes of tv, like you can when you've got 1000+ page books to explore these characters in depth. but it does seem like, ever since they moved past the books a few season ago, the show has strayed more and more into traditional "good vs. evil" fantasy-land, something GRRM studiously avoided in the books. i think theon's "redemption story" is one example of that. like so much on the show lately, it feels rushed and simplified and overly convenient. there's nothing inherently wrong with redemption stories, they are one of the standard dramatic character arcs for a reason. i think they really dropped the ball with it though, when Bran told Theon "you're a good man." that seemed to dismiss all of his earlier misdeeds a little too conveniently. it would have been better if Bran, rather than absolving him in his last moments, had said something more ambiguous.... something like "i forgive you for what you did to my family. your other crimes will be judged soon enough."

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

I go with what you said up until the last part where you said that Bran should forgive him. Well I don't think that forgiveness comes that easily even with Theon's noble behaviours, and if you're gonna forgive Theon, then that means his redemption is complete in a sense. As I said before, the dark spirit that made him do those unethical acts before still lingers and can come out again if situations change. So with that regard I don't think anyone can fully genuinely redeem. If you want to be a good person - already be aware of how hard it is to do so and the dangers that can detract from being so - and just be more determined not to do any bad shit when the temptation arises!

[Peven]

Bran isn't Bran, he is the 3 eyed raven, all seeing, all knowing. right? he sees the big picture.

are you saying one can't be a good man unless they have been a good man every day of their lives up to that point? there are many in history who have done worse than Theon and for various reasons found their way back to what was right and became good people who made contributions great and small. the idea that a person can redeem themselves through good works and self-sacrifice is one associated with the advancement of civilization, part of an idealism that is supposed to call to our higher/greater sense of selves. the ideals of redemption and self sacrifice are supposed to be cornerstones of the western moral bedrock. supposed to be.....

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

People who have bad things may have 'changed' and done good things and are presented as good men and contributed towards helping or saving others, but I don't think that true redemption can be attributed to them (also don't forget that their efforts to do noble acts are many times consciously done not genuinely out of decency but for self serving reasons to save their own souls. Would they have done such sacrificing acts to help others if they didn't feel guilty or fear of hell or their own self destruction and wanted to better themselves? In many cases no they wouldn't).

I don't care who or how famous or big they are, or their contributions to the world, the bad blood still lurks in them and still exists, it's harder to come out maybe, but it still can and with the right push, one day it may just happen. And you can't change the past too, people you've killed are still dead, they don't come back etc. You new decent hearted ethics and acts can't reverse time, you can't bring those people, or animals back - and the dark side of you that made all that happen, believe it or not, it still exists in you - you're just trying to covet it, hide and control it. You may now be a good man in what you're doing right now or for X amount of years, but you've also been a bad man, and you're still capable of being so again, and when push comes to shove you may still revert back to those bad sinful acts.

So are these people truly 100% and genuinely good? No I can't say they completely are. Are they redeemed? No, not fully. Saving 1000 doesn't mean that you murdered 1many years ago, that person, or animal, is still dead - and believe it or not, the Devil that did it is still inside you.

[Peven]

ok then, that is where you and I differ. the past happened, it was real, it matters, but it does not exist today. if someone is genuinely acting for the good of others, NOW, and willing to make sacrifices and contributions for the good of all going forward then that puts them solidly on the path of being a truly good person. imho.

tell me, if someone has lived a "good" life and then commits an act or rape or murder or lying, cheating, stealing when they are 70.....do you insist that they are a good person because of the years leading up to that time that they did the right thing?

just where is the line of action that is the point of no return? a person who is guilty of a murder or rape? a man who votes for policies that deprive others of decent living conditions leading to generations of families with increased disease and death and misery? a person who votes for that politician because they think they will get a tax cut out of it? a person who only looks out for themselves when they have the ability to help others in need? who gets to decide which is more immoral and just where that line of no return is?

you see, the judgment you are proposing damns almost all people to being less than good people, regardless of what they do in the now and going forward. what about societies? looking at them in your fashion there are no "good" societies, no "good" cultures. everyone and all cultures are inevitably irredeemable going by your standards.

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

Yeah it is where me and others, maybe nearly all, differ. I simply have a hard time thinking that genuine redemption actually exists. For me, redemption basically is about reversing the actual sin itself, to bring that person or animal back from the dead though the sinner's now noble acts. As you said, it happened, it's real, no matter what that person does, that crime and hurt still exists, and if you can't reverse that actual act, then it is out there existing because you did it - and nothing you can do can change that. Hence, I can't ever believe in redemption, at least fully.

If we're talking about the worst kinds of sin, murder or rape, either by one person who has done 1 or a handful of these crimes, or a society that has exacted genocide - and then they spend half a dozen decades doing good things, saving lives, at the best case scenario they are doing this out of genuine sincere compassionate reasons, well no I would never consider them to be fully good. They're inherent of a lot of cruelty and evil in their heart, (they've already proven it) even it's buried deep down and sat on and controlled.

No I would never consider them to be fully good, I will never completely trust them. I say this about myself too. I won't believe it if someone calls me a good person or that I'm 100% a good person, as deep down I know the bad things I've done to people, and that to me STANDS OUT, whether it's a recent act or one that is decades old. I know I'm capable of doing it again, and I believe to a certain degree that leopards don't change their spots.

Can myself or other people do something that there is no return from? You can return from the most horrible of acts but there has to be punishment for it, atonement, and a fucking long long time of doing good deeds to try to make up for it - but at the end of the day you can't FULLY return, I don't think I will ever completely return to being a good enough person that I want to be based on the bad that I've done.

If it's the other way round and you've done a sinful act like rape or murder after 70 years of sincere good hearted work, well your soul is now tarnished though it doesn't eradicate all the decency you've done, but now you have to make up for this evil act the best that you can still. The issue here isn't whether you are capable of doing so or not, but do you have time? So it' hard to answer if you can make up for it the best that you can unless the hypathetics of enough time can become actual.

At the end of the day it's about percentages, people who have done murder in the past but spend the rest of their lives saving people, heh I could call them 30 or 40% bad, 60 or 70% good by measurement of their act, or if we look truly into their heart and soul to find out what their actual nature is, heh those amounts of bad and good in them could tip either way (depending on the genuine intent of their bad and good acts).

No black and white answer can be given on how good a person is, there's no absolute good or bad to be found in people, maybe with the odd exception. Best answer I can give you is that no I don't believe there are 100% good people and certainly not societies.

[so sorry]

Next Topic:
Has the prophecy of Azor Azai been fulfilled, by Arya? Or will the real AA still be revealed? Or how about this one, the prophecy is never fulfilled, it was just a red herring all along?

[TheBaxter]

I go with what you said up until the last part where you said that Bran should forgive him. Well I don't think that forgiveness comes that easily even with Theon's noble behaviours, and if you're gonna forgive Theon, then that means his redemption is complete in a sense. As I said before, the dark spirit that made him do those unethical acts before still lingers and can come out again if situations change. So with that regard I don't think anyone can fully genuinely redeem. If you want to be a good person - already be aware of how hard it is to do so and the dangers that can detract from being so - and just be more determined not to do any bad shit when the temptation arises!

a wise person (or probably a bunch of them) whose name i can't remember once said, forgiveness isn't about the person being forgiven, it's about the person doing the forgiving. you forgive to free yourself of unnecessary anger and resentment and baggage, not to resolve the other person of their guilt. that's in keeping with where bran aka 3-eyed raven is at that point of the story.

[TheBaxter]

Bran isn't Bran, he is the 3 eyed raven, all seeing, all knowing. right? he sees the big picture.

are you saying one can't be a good man unless they have been a good man every day of their lives up to that point? there are many in history who have done worse than Theon and for various reasons found their way back to what was right and became good people who made contributions great and small. the idea that a person can redeem themselves through good works and self-sacrifice is one associated with the advancement of civilization, part of an idealism that is supposed to call to our higher/greater sense of selves. the ideals of redemption and self sacrifice are supposed to be cornerstones of the western moral bedrock. supposed to be.....

someone who sees the big picture shouldn't see people in terms as simplistic as "good" or "bad" in the first place. that's what's been lost on this show, that sense of complexity, the idea that there is good AND bad in pretty much everyone. some people have more of some or the other, but simply pronouncing somebody to be a good person or a bad person as some kind of final judgment basically discards the more nuanced consideration of those characters the series had been working to establish in earlier seasons. the 3-eyed raven, of all people, who can see the entirety of a person's life if he wishes, from the very beginning to the very end, everything they've done both good and bad, the motivations or extenuating circumstances, the entire arc of their life's journey, i would hope such a person wouldn't reduce all of that complexity into such a trite judgment at the end. it's one more sign of how a series that once treated its characters as complicated people is now reverting to the standard "good guys vs. bad guys" formula of lesser works.

i'd like to think that he told Theon that because he had to in order for Theon to do what he needed to do to bring about the outcome Bran was trying to make happen. after all, Bran gave Arya the dagger that she ultimately used to kill the Night King, it was Bran's idea to wait for him to lure him into the Weirwood garden, and ultimately it worked out, so it seems likely he foresaw that the plan would work, and how it would work (not with Jon and Dany and their dragons, but through Arya). but Theon does nothing of consequence after that statement, he just makes a final charge and gets himself killed. hell, if he just waited a little longer, maybe Arya would have come along and killed the Night King before he died, and he'd still be alive to act like Sansa's puppy dog. maybe Bran told him that specifically to get him to rush to his death. maybe that was Bran's revenge after all. but probably not. probably just what it seemed, a forced absolution for the character before discarding him.

[TheBaxter]

Next Topic:
Has the prophecy of Azor Azai been fulfilled, by Arya? Or will the real AA still be revealed? Or how about this one, the prophecy is never fulfilled, it was just a red herring all along?

there are lots of prophesies on this show, and i don't really expect any of them to be fulfilled completely. there's Cersei's prophecy from the witch (partly fulfilled for her kids, but not yet for her), Dany's visions in the House of the Undying, the "dragon has three heads" and of course Azor Ahai.... i don't see how they can all be fulfilled in any coherent way. i think the series has already established how unreliable prophecies are, and even more unreliable how they are interpreted by the characters (cersei thought Margery Tyrell was the one who would take her place, obviously it wasn't; and of course, Melisandre has been wrong about Stannis and a bunch of things).

i think though that the notion of fate and inevitability and their roles in the outcome of the series are becoming more apparent. besides Bran's Plan and Arya's role (apparently foreshadowed way back by Melisandre), as well as Mel's showing up just in time for the final battle, and Berric's final death apparently fulfilling his purpose which was to save Arya so she could carry out her destiny in destroying the Night King, it all kind of points to the idea that some kind of inevitable destiny is playing out in the current events of the story. those propecies, the 3-eyed ravens visions, Melisandre's visions... they are all just imperfect and misunderstood glimpses of what that eventual fate will be.

[TheBaxter]

if you thought the Battle of Winterfell was too dark and confusing to follow, it's YOUR FAULT

just like it was our fault for noticing discrepancies in the timing of events last season or the rushed pace. you know what, screw these guys. if this is their attitude towards the audience and the series they've been entrusted with, it doesn't exactly fill me with confidence that i'm going to be happy with how they wrap things up.

[so sorry]

if you thought the Battle of Winterfell was too dark and confusing to follow, it's YOUR FAULT

just like it was our fault for noticing discrepancies in the timing of events last season or the rushed pace. you know what, screw these guys. if this is their attitude towards the audience and the series they've been entrusted with, it doesn't exactly fill me with confidence that i'm going to be happy with how they wrap things up.

I re watched the episode on my iPad Monday night, and honestly thought it looked better than my Sunday night viewing on a large screen plasma TV. Maybe it was because my face was so much closer to the screen...

[TheBaxter]

if you thought the Battle of Winterfell was too dark and confusing to follow, it's YOUR FAULT

just like it was our fault for noticing discrepancies in the timing of events last season or the rushed pace. you know what, screw these guys. if this is their attitude towards the audience and the series they've been entrusted with, it doesn't exactly fill me with confidence that i'm going to be happy with how they wrap things up.

I re watched the episode on my iPad Monday night, and honestly thought it looked better than my Sunday night viewing on a large screen plasma TV. Maybe it was because my face was so much closer to the screen...

i watched it on a 60" calibrated LED HDTV in a completely dark room, and it looked muddled and dark. i would never want to watch this show on an ipad or phone, but i can imagine this particular episode would be easier to at least see what was going on, since the main issue was darkness and those devices usually have brighter screens. also, quick edits and fast motion can be easier to follow on smaller screens, since there's less area for your eyes to have to follow.

that whole excuse about people TV's not being "properly tuned" is complete bullshit. i have spent the time to configure mine, paying particular attention to brightness and contrast levels, which are the pertinent calibrations for this particular problem. i have a calibration DVD with test patterns designed to make the proper settings on these, it only takes a couple minutes to do it properly. i can't speak for others, but at least for myself, my TV is as "properly tuned" as it can get, and the episode was still way too dark. i've watched plenty of other tv shows and movies on the same TV with dark scenes, and this show was much darker than average. moreover, most people who don't have "properly tuned" TVs, typically have their TVs set to be TOO BRIGHT, not too dark. they come configured that way out of the box (because most of these TVs get displayed in a Best Buy showroom, so TV makers make the default settings overly bright to compete with the bright store lights and the other TVs, people are typically attracted to the TVs on the showroom with the brightest picture) and people buy them and then are too lazy to change the settings. if you're TV is still on a picture mode like Standard or Vivid or something like that, then it's almost certainly too bright (though that might be OK if you're watching in a brightly lit room). but in this case, having a too-bright TV would actually HELP the episode look better. you can't blame the episode being too dark on people having TVs that aren't dark enough.

bottom line: they screwed up the light level on this episode. hopefully it will be corrected or re-mastered, and we can get a brighter, better looking, easier to watch version of this episode in the blu-ray release.

[Ribbons]

I'm not quite at the same level of outrage you are, but the huge, passionate and fiercely loyal fanbase are what's made this show the success that it is. The consistent disdain its creators seem to have for them on the rare occasions that they lodge a valid complaint is somewhat baffling.

[TheBaxter]

i wouldn't call it outrage exactly... it might look like that because i wrote so many words, but that's just because i'm longwinded.

apparently it was the cinematographer who said that, and i wonder if he even watched this episode on anything resembling a normal TV. he's probably got the equivalent of a ferrari of a home theater of his own. it just seems so tone-deaf, especially coming after the way the showrunners were so dismissive of criticisms of last season's pacing and willy-nilly flinging of its characters all over the map. they sound like they're one personal tragedy away from telling us all to wake the fuck up and stop living in a fucking dream world.

[Peven]

I'm not quite at the same level of outrage you are, but the huge, passionate and fiercely loyal fanbase are what's made this show the success that it is. The consistent disdain its creators seem to have for them on the rare occasions that they lodge a valid complaint is somewhat baffling.

the fanbase did not make the show a success. the people who wrote, produced, acted in, and directed the series are who made the show a success. they don't owe the fans anything, they are the ones who should be owed for making a show people have been able to enjoy so much. the show has earned such a huge following year to year to year because of the hard work and dedication by everyone involved in making the show, and so they have the wherewithall to realize they would be stupid to start listening to complaining fans who just sit on their studly asses and click through their streaming channels to be entertained as if they had anything worthwhile to to contribute. we're talking about the same populace that can't wait to watch the next episode of Dancing With the Stars and The Bachelor. consumers need to shut their traps and stick to what they do best. consuming.

[TheBaxter]

I'm not quite at the same level of outrage you are, but the huge, passionate and fiercely loyal fanbase are what's made this show the success that it is. The consistent disdain its creators seem to have for them on the rare occasions that they lodge a valid complaint is somewhat baffling.

the fanbase did not make the show a success. the people who wrote, produced, acted in, and directed the series are who made the show a success. they don't owe the fans anything, they are the ones who should be owed for making a show people have been able to enjoy so much. the show has earned such a huge following year to year to year because of the hard work and dedication by everyone involved in making the show, and so they have the wherewithall to realize they would be stupid to start listening to complaining fans who just sit on their studly asses and click through their streaming channels to be entertained as if they had anything worthwhile to to contribute. we're talking about the same populace that can't wait to watch the next episode of Dancing With the Stars and The Bachelor. consumers need to shut their traps and stick to what they do best. consuming.

great, the guy who's always on here complaining about the lack of discussion or conversation about various movies and tv shows, now is coming out in favor of everyone just shutting up and mindlessly consuming whatever crap is available to them. so much for consistency. oh wait, it's Peven. i'm convinced he sits at home arguing with himself Gollum/Smeagol style half the time anyway.

yeah, GoT and reality tv show competitions are definitely targeted at the same audience

[Wolfpack]

Live shot of Peven right now:

[Ribbons]

That image is shockingly specific to this conversation. I'm kind of scared.

[so sorry]

I feel like I just watched a 90 minute soap opera with cursing. Not so say I didn't enjoy the episode, lots of chess pieces moving.

Greyworm just refuses to die.

They are sure doing their best to set us up for a Danaryus "heel turn" next week. The dirty looks, the inner-monologue face she was giving (again, back to the soap opera feel). Kill off another dragon and her bestie too? Oh, this girl is going to roast that city something fierce.

I thought that Jamie's he's a good guy he's a bad guy back and forth had finally come to an end until he took off like that. But after I think about it, I'm guessing his "I have a lot of hate too" or whatever that line was, was him basically saying he's hateful enough to go kill his sister?? I don't know, maybe I'm reading into it the wrong way.

Jon to Sansa: " got a big secret, keep it in-house"
Sansa to Jon" "um, yeah, sure"
Sansa to Tyrion: "so...."
Arya: "hey guys, I'll be right back..."

I seriously thought Messendi was going to rip her face off, revealing Arya, who turned around and stabbed Cersi.

Maybe all this Dany going Mad Queen stuff is just a feint, seems a bit heavy handed and obvious that's where its headed, right?

They played it up like Tyrion MAYBE was getting thru to Cersei, almost bringing her back from the brink of whatever mental issues she has. Then she "snaps out of it" and beheads the girl. Why, WHY, would she just let Tyrion walk away at that point. She's already declared that there is no negotiations gonna happen with her. She wants to kill everyone one of them. She has the person she hates the most, right there in front of her, with a hundred arrows at her disposal, she could have turned him into a pincushion and checked one of her enemies off her list.

And last but certainly not least, poor fucking Ghost. After all that, all he does for Jon, to just send him off like that. What a bullshit way to treat that relationship. Are you telling me they couldn't find some money in the budget to have had Ghost die defending Jon against that ice dragon or something? Jeebus that pisses me off more than anything how this was mishandled.

[Peven]

meaty episode. the next two should be as dense as a month old fruitcake.

[Wolfpack]

That was a pretty slick move Jaime pulled - "Uh, it's so hot in here. We should take our clothes off."

[so sorry]

And Bronn... how many characters are we up to now that can kill at will, out of nowhere, and slip away without harm? I don't see Jamie surviving the next two shows anyway, but if Tyrion is going to make it out alive, will they acknowledge the Bronn nugget hanging out there?

[TheBaxter]

I feel like I just watched a 90 minute soap opera with cursing. Not so say I didn't enjoy the episode, lots of chess pieces moving.

felt more like a sitcom to me: Everybody Loves Aegon.

what's with all this "war hero" BS? he's not a war hero. he's a war hero because he fell off a dragon. i like people who don't fall off dragons.
he can barely hold on to a dragon, while Dany is zipping all over the place, burning up wights and saving Jon's ass from the Night King but he still manages to get tossed. then he rushes the Night King only to get himself surrounded by wights (again!) until Dany comes in with her dragon to save his ass (again!). then he rushes back to Winterfell to try to get to Bran but ends up pinned down by the ice dragon, so he stands up and yells at it, and just when he's about to get fried, Arya leaps out, kills the Night King, the dragons shatters into pieces and once again, Jon's life is saved at the last minute by a girl...

... and now he's a war hero

and if nothing else, the way he treated Ghost shows he doesn't deserve to be king. after all the loyalty and sacrifice Ghost has made on his behalf, after making him wait in a cage in Winterfell while went around flying dragons and fucking his aunt, after sending him into a giant crowd of zombies to almost certain death, he just says "go away now, we don't need you any more"... doesn't even give him one last pat on the head or anything, just walks away. what a douchebag. that's how he repays loyalty. not great king material if you ask me. he'll be wishing he had Ghost back when he finds out his shiny new dragon just got killed.

the worst thing to happen to Jon Snow was Ygritte dying, because she was the only one who had him figured out: "you know nothing, jon snow." and after all these years, he still knows nothing. he tells Sansa, who he knows can't stand Dany, about who he really is, and actually believes she won't immediately run and tell everyone who might help her support Jon instead of Dany to take the iron throne. and what's with Bran? "it's your choice." at the end of last season Bran's all "he needs to know who he really is" and now he's just all "whatevs, tell em if you want, i don't care." i thought the 3-Eyed Raven was supposed to be able to see the future as well as the past... maybe not as clearly as the past, since it hasn't happened yet and could still be changed, but at least to be able to foresee the outcomes of different chains of events. so does it even matter if Jon tells them or not, because the outcome would still be the same? or maybe some of those crazy internet theories are right and Bran really is the next Night King, or possessed by the Night King or turned evil by the Night King's touch.

this episode also felt really sexist. not just because of Varys' "the ruler needs a cock" speech (he's only now just realizing this, after championing Dany for so long?), that's actually fine because they live in a sexist world and having it stated so explicitly is a good reminder of that fact. no, what bothers me is that the underlying theme of this show seems to be, if you kill a mother's children, she'll automatically turn into a vengeful killer psycho bitch. it made sense with cersei, she was a psycho bitch even before her children started dying off. but with Dany, it's too much. when Viserion got killed last season, i thought maybe they were setting that up as a way to demonstrated the difference between Cersei and Dany, how Dany responded in a more rational way, and she did, she used the death of her dragon to realize how important it was to put her own ruling ambitions on hold, even to ally with her enemy if necessary to stop the army of the dead. but now dragon #2 dies and she wants to burn Kings Landing down to the ground. i also hope this is a feint, and the reasonable Dany will re-emerge. but i kind of keep going back to GRRM saying he told the showrunners his master plan for the series, and it makes sense, in terms of the books, how he could set up Dany as this slave-freeing savior coming to free Westeros, only to be corrupted once getting there and ending up just as bad or worse than the ones she came to overthrow. that would be a neat arc for the series. but the way the show has rushed through these past couple seasons, it hasn't been enough time to play that shift out in a satisfying manner, if that's what they are truly going for.

[TheBaxter]

Greyworm just refuses to die.

he's pretty much the only person loyal to Dany left. she's got him and her one dragon left. Jorah is gone, Missandei gone, two dragons down, Varys is already plotting against her, and Tyrion is wavering, whether he wants to admit it to himself yet or not. Jon's already chosen his family over her when he told Sansa and Arya about his lineage (nevermind whether it was a good idea of Dany to tell him to lie about it in the first place). she's really backed into a corner now. but every time she's been backed into a corner before, whether captured by Dothraki or in the slave pits or whatnot, she's gotten out and come out of it stronger.

I thought that Jamie's he's a good guy he's a bad guy back and forth had finally come to an end until he took off like that. But after I think about it, I'm guessing his "I have a lot of hate too" or whatever that line was, was him basically saying he's hateful enough to go kill his sister?? I don't know, maybe I'm reading into it the wrong way.

i think the line was something like "She (Cersei) is hateful. and i'm hateful too". i'm not exactly sure what he's planning when he leaves either. he knows Cersei just offered Bronn a lordship to kill him, does he really think she'd take him back? also, he left after finding out Dany lost another dragon and more ships, so if anything Cersei is in LESS danger, not more. seems an odd time to suddenly decide to ride to her rescue. how long does it take to ride a horse from Winterfell to King's Landing anyway? oh, that's right... as long or as short as the writers need it to take.

all i know is, Thormund left Winterfell too early. he could've been there to comfort Brienne after Jaime left, but he missed his chance. he'll be kicking himself later.

Jon to Sansa: " got a big secret, keep it in-house"
Sansa to Jon" "um, yeah, sure"
Sansa to Tyrion: "so...."
Arya: "hey guys, I'll be right back..."

I seriously thought Messendi was going to rip her face off, revealing Arya, who turned around and stabbed Cersi.

i suppose she could have rode one of those magical lightning quick horses to get down there fast enough. i would be annoyed though if Arya killed Cersei. she's already had her moment, killing the Night King. killing Cersei too means she's taken out BOTH of the main villains of this show, that's too easy. maybe Jaime couldve shown up on his own lightning fast horse and saved his sister at the last moment.

we know who the Hound is going south to kill, and it seems like Arya's target should be Cersei. it is suspicious the timing, her leaving right after finding out about Jon's true identity. i can't think that that would make her want to kill Dany though. she was the one who partially defended Dany before Jon's reveal. unlike Sansa, she doesn't have an irrational hatred of her. Dany hasn't done anything personally to her, or her family, like Cersei has done. so i think it was more just awkward timing, she had to be given the truth about Jon before she left Winterfell, but that isn't going to change her ultimate target. it should still be Cersei, but i don't think she'll be successful.

They played it up like Tyrion MAYBE was getting thru to Cersei, almost bringing her back from the brink of whatever mental issues she has. Then she "snaps out of it" and beheads the girl. Why, WHY, would she just let Tyrion walk away at that point. She's already declared that there is no negotiations gonna happen with her. She wants to kill everyone one of them. She has the person she hates the most, right there in front of her, with a hundred arrows at her disposal, she could have turned him into a pincushion and checked one of her enemies off her list.

i'm guessing she was too exposed, Dany was right there with her dragon and while it probably would have meant the death of both of them if she attacked, they'd probably have enough time to take Cersei out with them. not worth taking the risk of inciting her even more.

the one that really bugged me was when Rhaegal gets shot out of the sky, and we see Euron's ships with their dragonspears all mounted on the FRONT of the ships... Dany's on a dragon. dragons can fly really fast and maneuver really fast. how easy would it have been for her to fly up or around, out of range of the spears, get behind the fleet and burn all those ship up from behind? she could have done that before they had the time to spin around and aim those dragonspears at her, plus they would have had to fire them through their own masts and sails, assuming they could even spin around that far. they would've ended up like Indy's dad shooting off the tail rudder of their plane. big sailing ships like that can't turn very fast either. they were basically sitting ducks for her, and instead she dives straight at them FROM THE FRONT, where all the dangerous spears are, and then veers away at the last minute. she could've ended Euron's fleet then and there.

speaking of Euron (surprised you didn't mention him), when they showed him after shooting down that dragon, i half-expected him to start twirling his moustache. i guess he's got the wrong kind of moustache for that. he's such an over-the-top cliche of a ridiculous villain, he makes Ramsay Snow seem subtle. i'm not happy to see another dragon die, but it works as a shocking dramatic moment. but it really sucks that THAT GUY was the one to take one down. if a dragon is going to die, it should be at the hands of someone more worthy.

Are you telling me they couldn't find some money in the budget to have had Ghost die defending Jon against that ice dragon or something?

i believe it. they didn't even have enough left in the FX budget to CGI out this Starbucks coffee cup.