Page 351 of 444

PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 6:20 am
by Pasong Tirad
Infected Mushroom wrote:
The Huskar Social Union wrote:Rhaegar is a bit of a dick


TBH I dislike all of the Targs

are any of them likable at all?

Maester Aemon.

PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 6:38 am
by Infected Mushroom
Tarsonis wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
TBH I dislike all of the Targs

are any of them likable at all?


John Snow


Recently, he's basically become Ned Stark except with more plot armour

he lost all credibility and likability as a character for me
when he decided to run BY HIMSELF straight at the entire Bolton army. I know it was meant to be dramatic and to illustrate his pure anger but it was reaching parody levels of stupidity.

PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 6:49 am
by Baltenstein
Tarsonis wrote:That sort of thing wasn’t all that uncommon mind you. Medieval wives were expected to back their husbands. A good example of this is Elizabeth de Burgh, who backed her husbands rebellion (Robert the Bruce) even though her family was firmly on the English side.


Now ifyou study the history of Roberts rebellion, Rhaegar wasn’t actually really involved. He was in Dorne until they lost the battle of the bells. Then King Aegon recalled Rhaegar from Dorne to defend kings landing, and what’s he supposed to do, say no? He marched out to the battle of the Trident, which was his first engagement of the war. It’s probably no accident that Robert and Rhaegar found each other on the battle field, the goal was to probably kill him and end the war rather than an outright militaristic victory. I can imagine Lyanna wouldn’t care too much if Robert died.


There are even more recent examples actually, with Napoleon's second wife Marie-Louise supporting her husband when he was at war with her father, the Austrian Emperor.

Anyway, I jokingly exaggerate, but my main point is that both Rhaegar and Lyanna acted irresponsibly and selfishly, like a pair of horny teenagers, plunging the realm in a massive war and getting thousands of people killed in the process. What we now know about Rhaegar in regard to his first wife and his children with her makes the whole ordeal that much more awful.
If the show wants to sell it as a tragic love story to which Aragorn's Jon's final victory and ascension to the throne will be the healing happy ending, I'm not buying it.

PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 6:58 am
by Tarsonis
Baltenstein wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:That sort of thing wasn’t all that uncommon mind you. Medieval wives were expected to back their husbands. A good example of this is Elizabeth de Burgh, who backed her husbands rebellion (Robert the Bruce) even though her family was firmly on the English side.


Now ifyou study the history of Roberts rebellion, Rhaegar wasn’t actually really involved. He was in Dorne until they lost the battle of the bells. Then King Aegon recalled Rhaegar from Dorne to defend kings landing, and what’s he supposed to do, say no? He marched out to the battle of the Trident, which was his first engagement of the war. It’s probably no accident that Robert and Rhaegar found each other on the battle field, the goal was to probably kill him and end the war rather than an outright militaristic victory. I can imagine Lyanna wouldn’t care too much if Robert died.


There are even more recent examples actually, with Napoleon's second wife Marie-Louise supporting her husband when he was at war with her father, the Austrian Emperor.

Anyway, I jokingly exaggerate, but my main point is that both Rhaegar and Lyanna acted irresponsibly and selfishly, like a pair of horny teenagers, plunging the realm in a massive war and getting thousands of people killed in the process. What we now know about Rhaegar in regard to his first wife and his children with her makes the whole ordeal that much more awful.
If the show wants to sell it as a tragic love story to which Aragorn's Jon's final victory and ascension to the throne will be the healing happy ending, I'm not buying it.


I don’t think it’s trying to sell us on that at all. They hardly talk about it really. The show seems to handle it with the air of “oh yeah this happened, surprising, for the 3% of you that didn’t guess this after season 1”. I mean we can look at it as a tragic love story with some rose colored glasses sure. But I think all tragic love stories require that. I mean take Romeo and Juliet. One of the greatest love stories of all time allegedly,... but when you think about it, it’s really a case of horny teenagers meeting, marrying, banging, and committing suicide over the course of a few days. Not to mention all the people who got killed along the way. Most Tragic love stories fall apart when you cynically take the rational perspective, but in a way that’s what makes love stories so tragically. Love stories aren’t rational at all.

PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 7:00 am
by Baltenstein
Infected Mushroom wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
John Snow


Recently, he's basically become Ned Stark except with more plot armour

he lost all credibility and likability as a character for me
when he decided to run BY HIMSELF straight at the entire Bolton army. I know it was meant to be dramatic and to illustrate his pure anger but it was reaching parody levels of stupidity.


Jon is really not a good leader in any position. He constantly disregards his advisors' and underlings' advise and insists on doing every risky, life-threatening task one could think of in person - meeting Mance Rayder for a truce, meeting the Wildling elders for a truce, evacuating the Wildling refugees, leading the Stark army against Ramsay, brokering an alliance with Dany on Dragonstone and going beyond the Wall to catch a frikkin' wight. Every single one of those times he had people and duties he was responsible for and left with no backup-plan.
What Jon is meant to be is a champion, a symbol for a cause. But not the guy in charge of said cause.

PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 7:15 am
by Ethel mermania
Tarsonis wrote:
Baltenstein wrote:
There are even more recent examples actually, with Napoleon's second wife Marie-Louise supporting her husband when he was at war with her father, the Austrian Emperor.

Anyway, I jokingly exaggerate, but my main point is that both Rhaegar and Lyanna acted irresponsibly and selfishly, like a pair of horny teenagers, plunging the realm in a massive war and getting thousands of people killed in the process. What we now know about Rhaegar in regard to his first wife and his children with her makes the whole ordeal that much more awful.
If the show wants to sell it as a tragic love story to which Aragorn's Jon's final victory and ascension to the throne will be the healing happy ending, I'm not buying it.


I don’t think it’s trying to sell us on that at all. They hardly talk about it really. The show seems to handle it with the air of “oh yeah this happened, surprising, for the 3% of you that didn’t guess this after season 1”. I mean we can look at it as a tragic love story with some rose colored glasses sure. But I think all tragic love stories require that. I mean take Romeo and Juliet. One of the greatest love stories of all time allegedly,... but when you think about it, it’s really a case of horny teenagers meeting, marrying, banging, and committing suicide over the course of a few days. Not to mention all the people who got killed along the way. Most Tragic love stories fall apart when you cynically take the rational perspective, but in a way that’s what makes love stories so tragically. Love stories aren’t rational at all.

Yeah, it's a heck of a plot hole it you put any thought into it. Its amusing.

PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 7:16 am
by Tarsonis
Infected Mushroom wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
John Snow


Recently, he's basically become Ned Stark except with more plot armour

he lost all credibility and likability as a character for me
when he decided to run BY HIMSELF straight at the entire Bolton army. I know it was meant to be dramatic and to illustrate his pure anger but it was reaching parody levels of stupidity.


Don’t think you need to spoiler the battle of the bastards. But i would say I disagree. Remember he wasn’t just angry at Ramsey, he was pissed at existence. He had died once already, and had been ripped back to reality from wherever. His charging at the Bolton army was both, “i’ll kill You all” and “ kill me again already.” You’ll notice his character changed again after that battle, because he has an “I choose life moment” when he’s getting squished by other soldiers. He could just die, but then he scrambles to the top taking a deep breath like when he was brought back to life. That was his true resurrection.
Baltenstein wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
Recently, he's basically become Ned Stark except with more plot armour

he lost all credibility and likability as a character for me
when he decided to run BY HIMSELF straight at the entire Bolton army. I know it was meant to be dramatic and to illustrate his pure anger but it was reaching parody levels of stupidity.


Jon is really not a good leader in any position. He constantly disregards his advisors' and underlings' advise and insists on doing every risky, life-threatening task one could think of in person - meeting Mance Rayder for a truce, meeting the Wildling elders for a truce, evacuating the Wildling refugees, leading the Stark army against Ramsay, brokering an alliance with Dany on Dragonstone and going beyond the Wall to catch a frikkin' wight. Every single one of those times he had people and duties he was responsible for and left with no backup-plan.
What Jon is meant to be is a champion, a symbol for a cause. But not the guy in charge of said cause.


He’s not the most politically savvy person sure. But as a military leader, I’m gonna disagree. Historically The most respected leaders are those who shoulder the bulk of the burden and suffer with their men, rather than delegating it to subordinates. To be a plebeian consul, Roman Generals usually had to show their scars in public to demonstrate the wounds they’ve born for Rome.

You already touched in it with the Aragorn quip but John takes on the role of the heroic noble king trope in fantasy. He’s involved in all the fighting and tough stuff while “weaker” less noble kings hide in their ivory towers, sending men to die on their behalf.

See Aragorn v Denathor for similar comparison.

PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 7:17 am
by Tarsonis
Ethel mermania wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
I don’t think it’s trying to sell us on that at all. They hardly talk about it really. The show seems to handle it with the air of “oh yeah this happened, surprising, for the 3% of you that didn’t guess this after season 1”. I mean we can look at it as a tragic love story with some rose colored glasses sure. But I think all tragic love stories require that. I mean take Romeo and Juliet. One of the greatest love stories of all time allegedly,... but when you think about it, it’s really a case of horny teenagers meeting, marrying, banging, and committing suicide over the course of a few days. Not to mention all the people who got killed along the way. Most Tragic love stories fall apart when you cynically take the rational perspective, but in a way that’s what makes love stories so tragically. Love stories aren’t rational at all.

Yeah, it's a heck of a plot hole it you put any thought into it. Its amusing.


Not really a plot hole, more just weak writing

PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 3:00 pm
by Platypus Bureaucracy
It was okay.

PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2019 3:55 pm
by New haven america
Tarsonis wrote:
Baltenstein wrote:
There are even more recent examples actually, with Napoleon's second wife Marie-Louise supporting her husband when he was at war with her father, the Austrian Emperor.

Anyway, I jokingly exaggerate, but my main point is that both Rhaegar and Lyanna acted irresponsibly and selfishly, like a pair of horny teenagers, plunging the realm in a massive war and getting thousands of people killed in the process. What we now know about Rhaegar in regard to his first wife and his children with her makes the whole ordeal that much more awful.
If the show wants to sell it as a tragic love story to which Aragorn's Jon's final victory and ascension to the throne will be the healing happy ending, I'm not buying it.


I don’t think it’s trying to sell us on that at all. They hardly talk about it really. The show seems to handle it with the air of “oh yeah this happened, surprising, for the 3% of you that didn’t guess this after season 1”. I mean we can look at it as a tragic love story with some rose colored glasses sure. But I think all tragic love stories require that. I mean take Romeo and Juliet. One of the greatest love stories of all time allegedly,... but when you think about it, it’s really a case of horny teenagers meeting, marrying, banging, and committing suicide over the course of a few days. Not to mention all the people who got killed along the way. Most Tragic love stories fall apart when you cynically take the rational perspective, but in a way that’s what makes love stories so tragically. Love stories aren’t rational at all.

Romeo and Juliet was never supposed to be taken seriously, it's kinda a story showing off Shakespeare's slightly sick sense of humor. He's making fun of the idea of young and true love and looking at it through a cynical lens.

PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2019 9:45 am
by Baltenstein
Tarsonis wrote:He’s not the most politically savvy person sure. But as a military leader, I’m gonna disagree. Historically The most respected leaders are those who shoulder the bulk of the burden and suffer with their men, rather than delegating it to subordinates. To be a plebeian consul, Roman Generals usually had to show their scars in public to demonstrate the wounds they’ve born for Rome.

You already touched in it with the Aragorn quip but John takes on the role of the heroic noble king trope in fantasy. He’s involved in all the fighting and tough stuff while “weaker” less noble kings hide in their ivory towers, sending men to die on their behalf.

See Aragorn v Denathor for similar comparison.


The problem is, in several of the examples I mentioned, it's not Jon "fighting alongside his men", but Jon making off with a minimum number of companions, while telling the vast majority of the people under his authority to stay behind and wait while he puts himself in danger. In two cases (him going to Hardhome and him going to Dragonstone) this explicitedly leads to severe dissent in the ranks in his absence.
Also note that in several of the cited examples, Jon screwed up his original plan and had to be rescued from almost certain death by an unexpected third party (Stannis, Sansa and the Knights of the Vale, Dany, Benjen Stark). In any of these cases he could have easily gotten himself killed, leaving those under his command behind without a leader.

PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2019 10:24 am
by Ethel mermania
Baltenstein wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:He’s not the most politically savvy person sure. But as a military leader, I’m gonna disagree. Historically The most respected leaders are those who shoulder the bulk of the burden and suffer with their men, rather than delegating it to subordinates. To be a plebeian consul, Roman Generals usually had to show their scars in public to demonstrate the wounds they’ve born for Rome.

You already touched in it with the Aragorn quip but John takes on the role of the heroic noble king trope in fantasy. He’s involved in all the fighting and tough stuff while “weaker” less noble kings hide in their ivory towers, sending men to die on their behalf.

See Aragorn v Denathor for similar comparison.


The problem is, in several of the examples I mentioned, it's not Jon "fighting alongside his men", but Jon making off with a minimum number of companions, while telling the vast majority of the people under his authority to stay behind and wait while he puts himself in danger. In two cases (him going to Hardhome and him going to Dragonstone) this explicitedly leads to severe dissent in the ranks in his absence.
Also note that in several of the cited examples, Jon screwed up his original plan and had to be rescued from almost certain death by an unexpected third party (Stannis, Sansa and the Knights of the Vale, Dany, Benjen Stark). In any of these cases he could have easily gotten himself killed, leaving those under his command behind without a leader.


I think the point is well made that Sansa is smarter and more savvy than jon

PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2019 10:31 am
by Fedel
Ethel mermania wrote:
Baltenstein wrote:
The problem is, in several of the examples I mentioned, it's not Jon "fighting alongside his men", but Jon making off with a minimum number of companions, while telling the vast majority of the people under his authority to stay behind and wait while he puts himself in danger. In two cases (him going to Hardhome and him going to Dragonstone) this explicitedly leads to severe dissent in the ranks in his absence.
Also note that in several of the cited examples, Jon screwed up his original plan and had to be rescued from almost certain death by an unexpected third party (Stannis, Sansa and the Knights of the Vale, Dany, Benjen Stark). In any of these cases he could have easily gotten himself killed, leaving those under his command behind without a leader.


I think the point is well made that Sansa is smarter and more savvy than jon


I think another point that's well made in the show is that Jon is the only one who's truly taking the White Walker threat as seriously as it should be and that Sansa's bitterness may be affecting her judgement.

PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2019 10:45 am
by Andsed
Fedel wrote:
Ethel mermania wrote:
I think the point is well made that Sansa is smarter and more savvy than jon


I think another point that's well made in the show is that Jon is the only one who's truly taking the White Walker threat as seriously as it should be and that Sansa's bitterness may be affecting her judgement.

Agreed, I like Jon because he seems to be the only one who cares more about the threat of white walkers than titles or trying to take the iron throne.

PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2019 10:48 am
by The Huskar Social Union
Fedel wrote:
Ethel mermania wrote:
I think the point is well made that Sansa is smarter and more savvy than jon


I think another point that's well made in the show is that Jon is the only one who's truly taking the White Walker threat as seriously as it should be and that Sansa's bitterness may be affecting her judgement.

Well Stannis did as well, granted more of a later problem to be tackled after knocking in heads in the south.

But he died.

PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2019 12:46 pm
by Fedel
The Huskar Social Union wrote:
Fedel wrote:
I think another point that's well made in the show is that Jon is the only one who's truly taking the White Walker threat as seriously as it should be and that Sansa's bitterness may be affecting her judgement.

Well Stannis did as well, granted more of a later problem to be tackled after knocking in heads in the south.

But he died.


Yeeee.

PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:45 am
by Infected Mushroom
Should I be worried that Jaime Lannister will die next episode?

He came all the way to Winterfell for redemption only for the main players to spend half an episode hosting court and then executing him suddenly for his controversial past actions?

What if those pictures of him in armor was just all to mislead us and were never used in the final cut?

PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:48 am
by The Huskar Social Union
Infected Mushroom wrote:
Should I be worried that Jaime Lannister will die next episode?

He came all the way to Winterfell for redemption only for the main players to spend half an episode hosting court and then executing him suddenly for his controversial past actions?

What if those pictures of him in armor was just all to mislead us and were never used in the final cut?

Doubt it

PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:52 am
by Infected Mushroom
The Huskar Social Union wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
Should I be worried that Jaime Lannister will die next episode?

He came all the way to Winterfell for redemption only for the main players to spend half an episode hosting court and then executing him suddenly for his controversial past actions?

What if those pictures of him in armor was just all to mislead us and were never used in the final cut?

Doubt it


it would be too big of a waste of a good character?

PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:01 am
by The Huskar Social Union
Infected Mushroom wrote:
The Huskar Social Union wrote:Doubt it


it would be too big of a waste of a good character?

Yes i believe it would be a waste

Also i dont think they are doing a misdirection, you can see him in the trailers wearing northern style armour and preparing for the fight against the dead, as far as i am aware they have never done a major misdirection with a character like that in this show

PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:05 am
by Infected Mushroom
The Huskar Social Union wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
it would be too big of a waste of a good character?

Yes i believe it would be a waste

Also i dont think they are doing a misdirection, you can see him in the trailers wearing northern style armour and preparing for the fight against the dead, as far as i am aware they have never done a major misdirection with a character like that in this show


Ah I see...

Good then, because I support him

PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:08 am
by The Huskar Social Union
Infected Mushroom wrote:
The Huskar Social Union wrote:Yes i believe it would be a waste

Also i dont think they are doing a misdirection, you can see him in the trailers wearing northern style armour and preparing for the fight against the dead, as far as i am aware they have never done a major misdirection with a character like that in this show


Ah I see...

Good then, because I support him

It would also be a completely anti-climactic end to his story.

Jaime i think is destined to have at least one more major scene with Cersei, in fact i think he will be the one to kill her.

PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:59 am
by Baltenstein
During Season 6, I speculated that Cersei would go down first before the plot concentrates on defeating the WW in the big finale. However, after this first episode, with all the players gathering in Winterfell and the Army of the Dead likely hitting the place in either the second or the third episode (Personally I believe the 2nd episode will end with the dead having arrived at the gates of Winterfell, beginning their full-scale assault in the next episode) I think that's becoming increasingly unlikely. It looks like Cersei might actually outlive the White Walkers. Of course, in order for her and the GC to pose any significant threat whatsoever, the dragons have to be taken out of the equation...maybe they both die in the fight against the Night King?

Also, I'm wondering how this "Jon vs Dany as rightful heir to the throne" thing they are obviously setting up will penn out.

PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:13 am
by The Huskar Social Union
Baltenstein wrote:
During Season 6, I speculated that Cersei would go down first before the plot concentrates on defeating the WW in the big finale. However, after this first episode, with all the players gathering in Winterfell and the Army of the Dead likely hitting the place in either the second or the third episode (Personally I believe the 2nd episode will end with the dead having arrived at the gates of Winterfell, beginning their full-scale assault in the next episode) I think that's becoming increasingly unlikely. It looks like Cersei might actually outlive the White Walkers. Of course, in order for her and the GC to pose any significant threat whatsoever, the dragons have to be taken out of the equation...maybe they both die in the fight against the Night King?

Also, I'm wondering how this "Jon vs Dany as rightful heir to the throne" thing they are obviously setting up will penn out.

I do not think for a second that if it came to it Daenerys would give up the throne for Jon. Not a chance imo

But i also dont think Jon would press the issue anyway.

PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:21 am
by Fedel
The Huskar Social Union wrote:
Baltenstein wrote:
During Season 6, I speculated that Cersei would go down first before the plot concentrates on defeating the WW in the big finale. However, after this first episode, with all the players gathering in Winterfell and the Army of the Dead likely hitting the place in either the second or the third episode (Personally I believe the 2nd episode will end with the dead having arrived at the gates of Winterfell, beginning their full-scale assault in the next episode) I think that's becoming increasingly unlikely. It looks like Cersei might actually outlive the White Walkers. Of course, in order for her and the GC to pose any significant threat whatsoever, the dragons have to be taken out of the equation...maybe they both die in the fight against the Night King?

Also, I'm wondering how this "Jon vs Dany as rightful heir to the throne" thing they are obviously setting up will penn out.

I do not think for a second that if it came to it Daenerys would give up the throne for Jon. Not a chance imo

But i also dont think Jon would press the issue anyway.


He might if she seems like she might be bad for the 7 Kingdoms.