Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

FAN: Discuss various fictional worlds that don't qualify for SF.

Moderator: Steve

Post Reply
User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19054
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-06-06 01:26pm

Esquire wrote:
2019-06-06 01:18pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2019-06-06 12:22pm
Esquire wrote:
2019-06-06 12:14pm
Is it... at all possible that y'all are reading too much into this? I know that's what we do here, but are you seriously worried about the IRL-politics implications of the show?
Yes. As we should be. Media has always been shaped by, and used to shape, political opinions. People saying "Its just entertainment, its not political" are fooling themselves. And people saying "It shouldn't be political" are generally being disingenuous, because I guarantee you that very few people mind when their entertainment reflects their political views. When people say "stop making shows political", what they generally mean is "I don't want it to say/show something I disagree with."

Everything is political. Literally any topic has political implications, because people disagree, and politics is simply a word for the processes by which people disagree about issues on a societal level. You can choose to ignore it and focus on other aspects of a story. That's your choice. Sometimes its nice to turn your higher brain functions off for a bit. But it will still be political, whether you choose to think about it or not. You can either be consciously political or unconsciously political. You cannot be apolitical.
Jesus Christ, it must be exhausting to be you.

No, everything is not political. You can politicize anything, but it doesn't start that way. Game of Thrones has no position on e.g. Northern Ireland, and trying to spin one out is not a useful project. Clearly I'm not going to change your mind here, but do you at least realize that this kind of thing makes you sound like a loon to anybody who doesn't already completely agree with you?
Whether Game of Thrones has a position on every single given issue doesn't change the fact that its stories and themes are relevant to other issues, and have political implications. Insulting me will not change it either.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
Coop D'etat
Jedi Knight
Posts: 561
Joined: 2007-02-23 01:38pm
Location: UBC Unincorporated land

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by Coop D'etat » 2019-06-06 10:16pm

Westeros isn't W. Europe, where a powerful centralized state fulls the military-industrial-organizational development. It has no external threats of nite due to geography.

Hence a new dracocracy is just as apt to fuel centralized ostentation and corruption, producing stagnation.


Plus, Dany is looking to perpetuate the historical trend of Eossi imperialists bringing fire and the sword suppress the historically oppressed Westerosi inhabitants. She's the last gasp of thousands of years of Valyrean privilege that will need to be removed if the Andals and First Men can achieve ethnic equality and political self-determination.


You can interpret the politics of these things in all sorts of facile ways once you learn the trick of it. That's why contemporary art popular criticism which is so obsessed with advancing political points tends to be so facile.

User avatar
K. A. Pital
Glamorous Commie
Posts: 20727
Joined: 2003-02-26 11:39am
Location: Elysium

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by K. A. Pital » 2019-06-07 02:54am

Sure you can, but ASOIAF is War of the Roses plus some fantasy elements, so jokingly or otherwise referencing British history is all but inevitable.

I mean, Sansa Sturgeon has a nice ring to it :lol:
Lì ci sono chiese, macerie, moschee e questure, lì frontiere, prezzi inaccessibile e freddure
Lì paludi, minacce, cecchini coi fucili, documenti, file notturne e clandestini
Qui incontri, lotte, passi sincronizzati, colori, capannelli non autorizzati,
Uccelli migratori, reti, informazioni, piazze di Tutti i like pazze di passioni...

...La tranquillità è importante ma la libertà è tutto!
Assalti Frontali

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19054
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-06-07 05:27am

Coop D'etat wrote:
2019-06-06 10:16pm
Westeros isn't W. Europe, where a powerful centralized state fulls the military-industrial-organizational development. It has no external threats of nite due to geography.
That it faces no outside threats is arguably in contradiction to your later characterization of Daenerys and her place in Essosi/Westerosi history, but otherwise, yes.
Hence a new dracocracy is just as apt to fuel centralized ostentation and corruption, producing stagnation.
Doubtful, considering that Daenerys would already be bringing an overseas empire with her (Mereen), and that Westeros would likely end up involved in Essosi wars and building a further Essosi empire (if you consider that a good thing, at least in terms of avoiding stagnation).

There's also a lot of room for expansion and settlement in the now mostly depopulated far North.
Plus, Dany is looking to perpetuate the historical trend of Eossi imperialists bringing fire and the sword suppress the historically oppressed Westerosi inhabitants. She's the last gasp of thousands of years of Valyrean privilege that will need to be removed if the Andals and First Men can achieve ethnic equality and political self-determination.
That's actually a fair critique of Danaerys, and ties into how her actions in Essos can be seen as Western liberator/white (wo)Man's Burden wish fulfillment. The scenes of liberator Danny being praised and worshiped by crowds of mostly brown freed slaves are just cringe-worthy.

The counterargument would be that Valyria has been dead 500 years, that Daenerys arguably identifies as much with Westrosi and Dothraki culture as with Valyerian, that she was born in Westeros and raised by Westrosi, and that her policies generally have nothing to do with Valyerian supremacy except insofar as she happens to have Valeryain ancestry/speaks Valyerian.
You can interpret the politics of these things in all sorts of facile ways once you learn the trick of it. That's why contemporary art popular criticism which is so obsessed with advancing political points tends to be so facile.
That people can twist things to make dubious interpretations does not mean that no valid parallels exist, though. And the very fact that people will use the story, rightly or wrongly, to reinforce their views gives it political significance in popular culture.

People seem to think here that my point is simply that "Game of Thrones supports (x) political view" and are trying to critique that. It isn't. Its that all media inherently has political implications, even if its only those that other people give it by their interpretations.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19054
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-06-12 04:52am

You know, I've just been thinking how much it must suck to be George RR Martin right now. Because whatever ending he writes to the books, its going to be measured against the show. People who defend the show's ending, especially wrt Daenerys, are going to expect the books to vindicate them by conforming to it, at least in broad strokes, and people who hate it are expecting Martin to vindicate them by doing it differently. I'm already seeing people asserting how the books will totally make Danny the Mad Queen, and others saying they won't. No matter what he writes, he's probably going to piss off a large portion of the fan base.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
Alferd Packer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3677
Joined: 2002-07-19 09:22pm
Location: Slumgullion Pass
Contact:

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by Alferd Packer » 2019-06-12 08:58am

Assuming he ever writes the final book (TWoW is reportedly close to done, so we should at least get that). After all, he's already given away the ending in broad strokes--the story's been told. The urgency of having to tell the whole story is gone.

And yes, he could have an epiphany that causes him to change things, thus reintroducing the urgency and pushing him to finish the book. But I'm not gonna bet on that.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance--that principle is contempt prior to investigation." -Herbert Spencer

"Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain." - Schiller, Die Jungfrau von Orleans, III vi.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19054
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-06-12 10:46am

I do hope that he finishes. Otherwise, the question of how much of the show's ending was his will go forever unanswered.

Or maybe it will anyway. For all we know, he might feel pressured to modify his earlier ideas to be closer to the show.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
FaxModem1
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7453
Joined: 2002-10-30 06:40pm
Location: In a dark reflection of a better world

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by FaxModem1 » 2019-06-12 02:52pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2019-06-12 10:46am
I do hope that he finishes. Otherwise, the question of how much of the show's ending was his will go forever unanswered.

Or maybe it will anyway. For all we know, he might feel pressured to modify his earlier ideas to be closer to the show.
That's pretty much his own darn fault for agreeing to adapt the series in the first place when it wasn't finished and continuing to not write the main series, instead focusing on prequels, spin offs, and side stories while he was on a ticking clock of how fast the show was going through his already published material.
Image

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19054
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-06-12 08:49pm

FaxModem1 wrote:
2019-06-12 02:52pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2019-06-12 10:46am
I do hope that he finishes. Otherwise, the question of how much of the show's ending was his will go forever unanswered.

Or maybe it will anyway. For all we know, he might feel pressured to modify his earlier ideas to be closer to the show.
That's pretty much his own darn fault for agreeing to adapt the series in the first place when it wasn't finished and continuing to not write the main series, instead focusing on prequels, spin offs, and side stories while he was on a ticking clock of how fast the show was going through his already published material.
Yeah, he definitely should have wrapped it up before the show. If he had, we might not be in this mess.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
Alferd Packer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3677
Joined: 2002-07-19 09:22pm
Location: Slumgullion Pass
Contact:

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by Alferd Packer » 2019-06-13 08:04am

Eh, plenty of series are ended poorly. If we had had a 10 episode season, and they hadn't dicked around for the first 2 episodes, Dany's heel turn could've gone great. All the required elements are there, we just got them in a sloppy, rushed, hamfisted couple of hours.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance--that principle is contempt prior to investigation." -Herbert Spencer

"Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain." - Schiller, Die Jungfrau von Orleans, III vi.

User avatar
PREDATOR490
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1747
Joined: 2006-03-13 08:04am
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by PREDATOR490 » 2019-06-13 11:11am

For the most part Game of Thrones has certainly been a significant success and Martin is the kind of guy that would give the finger to fans by intentionally not finishing the books. What are they going to do, real-life Misery ?

User avatar
Themightytom
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2813
Joined: 2007-12-22 11:11am
Location: United States

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by Themightytom » 2019-06-14 10:43pm

So given how it all ultimately turned out, I'm curious what people think, would it have made a difference if Danaerys had just gone forward with her original plan and attacked King's landing at the end of season 7 instead of negotiating? I don't think she ended up getting anything useful out of Cersei or the Lannisters, it doesn't seem like she took any heavy losses sacking King's landing with the survivors of the battle of winterfell, and it didn't even take more than a day, so what would have been the drawback to just plowing through King's Landing and THEN helping out the North? Would it have even turned out better politically in some ways, doing it in that order?

"Since when is "the west" a nation?"-Styphon
"ACORN= Cobra obviously." AMT
This topic is... oh Village Idiot. Carry on then.--Havok

User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 8224
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by Solauren » 2019-06-15 08:39am

Themightytom wrote:
2019-06-14 10:43pm
So given how it all ultimately turned out, I'm curious what people think, would it have made a difference if Danaerys had just gone forward with her original plan and attacked King's landing at the end of season 7 instead of negotiating? I don't think she ended up getting anything useful out of Cersei or the Lannisters, it doesn't seem like she took any heavy losses sacking King's landing with the survivors of the battle of winterfell, and it didn't even take more than a day, so what would have been the drawback to just plowing through King's Landing and THEN helping out the North? Would it have even turned out better politically in some ways, doing it in that order?
Let's see..
First, odds are, the Golden Company would not have arrived. Fine. They didn't make a difference.
So, you have her full army hit King's landing, and hit hard. We saw the effect.

We also have the fact Danaerys still has her best friend with her (Melissandre), and doesn't konw about Jon yet.

This would have given her a massive (and easy victory), against a hated Tyrant.

This would put Danaerys in a much, much better place mentally and emotionally. She just achieved her destiny.

She can then take her complete army north, with all three of her Dragons, and reinforce against the Dead.

And, since she would have told Jon 'Oh, I'm going to take King's Landing, with the dragons it won't be a problem, I'm coming north Irregardless because of the evidence I've seen on Dragonstone', she'd have all three of her dragons, and wouldn't have to rescue Jon + co.

That would actually keep the dead contained North of the Wall, unless the Dead found the Horn of Winter. (Magical artifact that was said to be able to bring down the Wall).
If I was writing the series, I'd have the White walkers bring a few Children of the Forest, and the Three-Eyed Raven that Bran learned from, before the Night's king as Dany declared victory in the South, and then show another flashback to the Children using that to raise the Wall. The Three-Eyed Raven warns the Night King that using the Horn might bring down the wall, but will spell his doom. Part of the Wall comes down, and an ice dragon rises up for the Night King to ride.

This leads us to the build up at WInterfell, including possibly Jon asking Dany to marry him. Bran sees this, and he and Sam decide not to say anything. (Bran sees no need, as Dany isn't about to go off the deep end) The Battle of Winterfell happens, with the Dany and Jon riding the dragons into battle, and Bran Wogging the third, against the Night King and his Ice Dragon. It is still heavily in favor of the undead, however, and goes more or less as is did in the TV show. Up to and including Arya killing the Night King. (Just because I thought that was ironic, the little girl everyone over looked saving their entire fucking world).

The series then ends with either Dany and Jon on the throne, or Dany dying in childbirth.

Dany dying in childbirth would leave Jon on the throne (Which he never wanted), and grant Dany the last thing she wanted, children, while paying the ultimate price for it.
\

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19054
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-06-15 09:41am

Themightytom wrote:
2019-06-14 10:43pm
So given how it all ultimately turned out, I'm curious what people think, would it have made a difference if Danaerys had just gone forward with her original plan and attacked King's landing at the end of season 7 instead of negotiating? I don't think she ended up getting anything useful out of Cersei or the Lannisters, it doesn't seem like she took any heavy losses sacking King's landing with the survivors of the battle of winterfell, and it didn't even take more than a day, so what would have been the drawback to just plowing through King's Landing and THEN helping out the North? Would it have even turned out better politically in some ways, doing it in that order?
She arguably got a break in Cersei attacking her while she fought the undead (which Cersei used to build up her forces, however), and she got Jaime Lannister. That's it.

I think it was worth making the effort given the stakes, and needing as much manpower as they could get, but with hindsight, it probably would have been better just to take King's Landing. But she's a woman, and taking an enemy's city is proof of madness if you're a woman in this universe. :roll: So it probably would have just mean Varys/Tyrion/Jon backstabbing her earlier.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
Themightytom
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2813
Joined: 2007-12-22 11:11am
Location: United States

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by Themightytom » 2019-06-16 08:14am

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2019-06-15 09:41am
Themightytom wrote:
2019-06-14 10:43pm
So given how it all ultimately turned out, I'm curious what people think, would it have made a difference if Danaerys had just gone forward with her original plan and attacked King's landing at the end of season 7 instead of negotiating? I don't think she ended up getting anything useful out of Cersei or the Lannisters, it doesn't seem like she took any heavy losses sacking King's landing with the survivors of the battle of winterfell, and it didn't even take more than a day, so what would have been the drawback to just plowing through King's Landing and THEN helping out the North? Would it have even turned out better politically in some ways, doing it in that order?
She arguably got a break in Cersei attacking her while she fought the undead (which Cersei used to build up her forces, however), and she got Jaime Lannister. That's it.

I think it was worth making the effort given the stakes, and needing as much manpower as they could get, but with hindsight, it probably would have been better just to take King's Landing. But she's a woman, and taking an enemy's city is proof of madness if you're a woman in this universe. :roll: So it probably would have just mean Varys/Tyrion/Jon backstabbing her earlier.
She would have still had Jorah and Missandei at her side after taking King's landing, as well as the giant army and several dragons. She had a shield of advisors, most of the time, in season 7 and earlier. She really started to isolate after losing Jorah, Missandei and her second dragon in quick succession.

I think Varys particularly became more influential, the weaker she became, he may not have felt able to betray as readily, and Jon wouldn't necessarily have had the relationship that he exploited to get her to drop her guard, any sooner. He would have still needed her help to end the threat of the Night King, so unless she decided to nuke winterfell over Sansa's refusal, she wouldn't necessarily have needed to make a second demonstration. Cersei was the crazy one, and no one took HER out.

"Since when is "the west" a nation?"-Styphon
"ACORN= Cobra obviously." AMT
This topic is... oh Village Idiot. Carry on then.--Havok

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19054
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-06-16 11:48pm

Themightytom wrote:
2019-06-16 08:14am
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2019-06-15 09:41am
Themightytom wrote:
2019-06-14 10:43pm
So given how it all ultimately turned out, I'm curious what people think, would it have made a difference if Danaerys had just gone forward with her original plan and attacked King's landing at the end of season 7 instead of negotiating? I don't think she ended up getting anything useful out of Cersei or the Lannisters, it doesn't seem like she took any heavy losses sacking King's landing with the survivors of the battle of winterfell, and it didn't even take more than a day, so what would have been the drawback to just plowing through King's Landing and THEN helping out the North? Would it have even turned out better politically in some ways, doing it in that order?
She arguably got a break in Cersei attacking her while she fought the undead (which Cersei used to build up her forces, however), and she got Jaime Lannister. That's it.

I think it was worth making the effort given the stakes, and needing as much manpower as they could get, but with hindsight, it probably would have been better just to take King's Landing. But she's a woman, and taking an enemy's city is proof of madness if you're a woman in this universe. :roll: So it probably would have just mean Varys/Tyrion/Jon backstabbing her earlier.
She would have still had Jorah and Missandei at her side after taking King's landing, as well as the giant army and several dragons. She had a shield of advisors, most of the time, in season 7 and earlier. She really started to isolate after losing Jorah, Missandei and her second dragon in quick succession.
There is an argument to be made, yes. I believe conventional strategic wisdom is that when you face two separate enemy forces, and have a more mobile force (and pitting them against each other isn't an option), the best course of action is to defeat them in detail, picking off the smaller, weaker forces first. Which means smashing Cersei, then turning North.

Of course, the delay in taking and securing King's Landing might have given time for the Night King to take Winterfell, in which case you'd probably be fighting him at the Neck or the Twins, and without the support of the Northern army.
I think Varys particularly became more influential, the weaker she became, he may not have felt able to betray as readily, and Jon wouldn't necessarily have had the relationship that he exploited to get her to drop her guard, any sooner. He would have still needed her help to end the threat of the Night King, so unless she decided to nuke winterfell over Sansa's refusal, she wouldn't necessarily have needed to make a second demonstration. Cersei was the crazy one, and no one took HER out.
Maybe. But then, I don't think she needed to make any demonstration. One blast of dragon fire to the walls, and her army is more than strong enough to take the city, easily. Especially since the Golden Company hadn't arrived yet.

Later, when Danny took the city post-white walkers, she should have just had Arya go in and do her thing. Varys could have supplied the know-how (secret passages into the Red Keep) if he wasn't being a misogynist dip shit traitor.

After that, its entirely possible that with their leadership gone, the remaining defenders might accept surrender, at least if generous terms were offered. I doubt they'll be eager to follow Euron. If Euron causes trouble, wait for Yara to show up with more ships, then take him. Or have the dragons hit him at night/in poor weather, so the ballistas won't be as accurate.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19054
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-06-20 09:34pm

You know, with all the God Emperor Bran theorizing, it just occurred to me...

Him repeating Littlefinger's "Chaos is a ladder" line in season seven is really foreshadowy and infinitely more creepy in hindsight, given who actually ended up on the throne.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19054
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-16 09:43pm

GRRM has weighed in:

https://ew.com/tv/2019/07/15/george-rr- ... tions/amp/
Game of Thrones fans obviously had a lot of strong feelings about the plot twists in the show’s final season — at least some of which were inspired by saga author George R.R. Martin.

But Martin says none of the outspoken reactions, positive or negative, will change anything he has planned for his final two A Song of Ice and Fire novels (though the author admits there can be a certain degree of temptation to do so).

“The internet affects all this to a degree it was never affected before,” Martin tells EW when asked about fan reaction to the final season. “Like Jon Snow’s parentage. There were early hints about [who Snow’s parents were] in the books, but only one reader in 100 put it together. And before the internet that was fine — for 99 readers out of 100 when Jon Snow’s parentage gets revealed it would be, ‘Oh, that’s a great twist!’ But in the age of the internet, even if only one person in 100 figures it out then that one person posts it online and the other 99 people read it and go, ‘Oh, that makes sense.’ Suddenly the twist you’re building towards is out there. And there is a temptation to then change it [in the upcoming books] — ‘Oh my god, it’s screwed up, I have to come up with something different.’ But that’s wrong. Because you’ve been planning for a certain ending and if you suddenly change direction just because somebody figured it out, or because they don’t like it, then it screws up the whole structure. So no, I don’t read the fan sites. I want to write the book I’ve always intended to write all along. And when it comes out they can like it or they can not like it.”

Martin added that watching the recent GoT final season was a bit of a strange experience given the different version he’s still writing. “The whole last three years have been strange since the show got ahead of the books,” he says. “Yes, I told [showrunners David Benioff and Dan Weiss] a number of things years ago. And some of them they did do. But at the same time, it’s different. I have very fixed ideas in my head as I’m writing The Winds of Winter and beyond that in terms of where things are going. It’s like two alternate realities existing side by side. I have to double down and do my version of it which is what I’ve been doing.”

Asked if he feels more pressure or less now that the HBO series has concluded, Martin explained that the pressure already peaked for him a few years ago.

“I felt a tremendous amount of pressure for years now,” he says. “The most pressure I felt was a few years ago when I was desperately trying to stay ahead of the show. There was a point when the show was coming out in April and my editors said if I could finish the book by December they’d rush it out. And the pressure I felt that fall was the greatest pressure I’ve ever felt and then at a certain point it became apparent I’m not going to finish it by then. I don’t only want to finish it, I want to make it as good as I possibly can. Since then there’s been pressure but not like there was at that point. There’s no longer a race. The show is over. I’m writing the book. It will be done when it’s done.”
So he confirms (without giving specifics) that he did give the showrunners certain ideas he had about the future of the series, and that some, but not all, were used in the show. He also confirms that he will not be deviating from his planned ending to accomadate the show.

So there's some hope for people who thought this ending sucked donkey balls, at least presuming the old coot ever finishes the damn thing. ;)
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19054
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-16 10:06pm

Well, it doesn't look like the Emmy Awards are bothered by the controversy: they just nominated Game of Thrones' last season for... looks like ten nominations total, bringing its series total to a record 32 nominations. Amusingly, fully two-thirds of the supporting actress category is Game of Thrones nominations, with Gwendoline Christie, Sophie Turner, Maisie Williams, and Lena Heady all nominated (along with Emilia Clarke in the best actress category and Kit Harrington for best actor, and Alfie Allen, Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, and Peter Dinklage for supporting actor).

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainme ... ix/594061/
The question that’s going to define the future of television is a simple one: Quality or quantity? Last year, Netflix’s throw-shows-at-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks business model led to a major Emmy Awards triumph when the streaming service landed more nominations than its rival HBO for the first time. For the previous 17 years, HBO had dominated the Emmy landscape unchallenged, and today the premium-cable network reclaimed its crown, scoring an astonishing 137 Emmy nominations to Netflix’s 117. The final season of Game of Thrones, HBO’s ratings juggernaut, received 32 nominations all on its own, a new record for any TV series.

While the dragons-and-decapitation drama is the shiniest sword in HBO’s Iron Throne (and its loss will be felt), what was notable was how many different HBO products were recognized in the major categories. There was Chernobyl, Craig Mazin’s astonishingly detailed miniseries about nuclear disaster in the Soviet Union, getting 19 nominations. Barry, Bill Hader and Alec Berg’s bleak comedy about a disaffected hitman with Hollywood ambitions, was next up on HBO’s slate, with 17. True Detective and Veep—the noirish crime drama and the long-running Washington, D.C., satire starring Julia Louis-Dreyfus, respectively—each scored nine nominations. Deadwood, the movie follow-up to David Milch’s Western drama, and Sharp Objects, Marti Noxon and Jean-Marc Vallée’s Gothic murder-mystery, each got eight. HBO commanded the category for Outstanding Television Movie, with nominations for Deadwood, Brexit, and My Dinner With Hervé. It also led in documentaries, scooping up nods for The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley, Jane Fonda in Five Acts, and Leaving Neverland.

Without Game of Thrones and Veep, of course, the landscape for HBO in 2020 is a more challenging one. While Netflix has fewer star shows in its constellation at the moment—the most nominations it received was 16, for Ava DuVernay’s superb When They See Us, followed by 13, for Russian Doll—it has so many current series and so many more in development that its flood-the-market strategy might well see it through. That’s a model that other networks, including HBO, are looking to emulate, as Jonah Weiner reported in an insightful article about Hollywood’s streaming wars for The New York Times Magazine. HBO’s brand of boutique television, tightly controlled for quality and meticulously curated, might help it on the road to Emmy glory. But as the competition for viewing eyeballs intensifies, quantity could win out.

One thing that was notable about today’s nominations was how surprisingly open-minded they were. While Game of Thrones’ swan-song season led to its cast members dominating the supporting-actor categories, for the most part the nominations eschewed old chestnuts and embraced critical favorites. The Outstanding Comedy Series category honored not only Barry, Veep, and Amazon’s The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, but also more innovative shows such as Russian Doll, Amazon’s Fleabag, and Pop TV’s Canadian import Schitt’s Creek. The drama category recognized a host of old reliables (Thrones, Better Call Saul, Ozark, This Is Us), as well as FX’s Pose and HBO’s Succession. (The spectacular work done by many of the stars on Pose was one casualty of the Game of Thrones crest, although the series’ Billy Porter was nominated for Outstanding Lead Actor in a Drama.)

The limited-series acting categories were the most intriguing, with a wealth of names claiming their first-ever Emmy nomination. Jharrel Jerome, whose role in When They See Us required him to convey his character’s journey from innocent boy to wrongly incarcerated man, was nominated for lead actor, alongside other Emmy first-timers including Sam Rockwell for Fosse/Verdon, Benicio del Toro for Escape at Dannemora, and the sprightly unknown Hugh Grant for A Very English Scandal. In the lead-actress category, Amy Adams (for Sharp Objects), Aunjanue Ellis (When They See Us), Joey King (The Act), and Michelle Williams (Fosse/Verdon) all scored their first Emmy nomination.

One major movie star went un-nominated this year: Julia Roberts, who played a woman trying to pull together her fragmented memories in Sam Esmail’s Amazon series Homecoming. The show was snubbed in relative terms, receiving a single nomination for cinematography. Pamela Adlon’s Better Things, a critical darling that received nods in its first two seasons, failed to score any this year. But the 11 nominations for Fleabag and the recognition for stellar series such as Chernobyl and Russian Doll make griping harder than usual this year, even if the amount of love for Netflix’s Ozark feels disproportionate at best. The Television Academy, its chairman and CEO, Frank Scherma, said in an opening statement, has “a commitment and an obligation to spark creativity, honor innovation, advocate for inclusion, and celebrate excellence.” And for once, it’s tough to argue that the Emmys didn’t manage to do just that.



Outstanding Comedy Series

Barry, HBO
Fleabag, Amazon
The Good Place, NBC
The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, Amazon
Russian Doll, Netflix
Schitt’s Creek, Pop
Veep, HBO

Outstanding Drama Series

Better Call Saul, AMC
Bodyguard, Netflix
Game of Thrones, HBO
Killing Eve, BBC America
Ozark, Netflix
Pose, FX
Succession, HBO
This Is Us, NBC

Outstanding Limited Series

Chernobyl, HBO
Escape at Dannemora, Showtime
Fosse/Verdon, FX
Sharp Objects, HBO
When They See Us, Netflix

Outstanding TV Movie

Bandersnatch, Netflix
Brexit, HBO
Deadwood, HBO
King Lear, Amazon
My Dinner With Hervé, HBO

Outstanding Documentary or Nonfiction Special

Fyre: The Greatest Party That Never Happened, Netflix
The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley, HBO
Jane Fonda in Five Acts, HBO
Leaving Neverland, HBO
Love, Gilda, CNN
Minding the Gap, Hulu

Lead Actress in a Drama Series

Emilia Clarke, Game of Thrones
Jodie Comer, Killing Eve
Viola Davis, How to Get Away With Murder
Laura Linney, Ozark
Mandy Moore, This Is Us
Sandra Oh, Killing Eve
Robin Wright, House of Cards

Lead Actor in a Drama Series

Jason Bateman, Ozark
Sterling K. Brown, This Is Us
Kit Harington, Game of Thrones
Bob Odenkirk, Better Call Saul
Billy Porter, Pose
Milo Ventimiglia, This Is Us

Lead Actress in a Comedy Series

Christina Applegate, Dead to Me
Rachel Brosnahan, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Veep
Natasha Lyonne, Russian Doll
Catherine O’Hara, Schitt’s Creek
Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Fleabag

Lead Actor in a Comedy Series

Anthony Anderson, Black-ish
Don Cheadle, Black Monday
Ted Danson, The Good Place
Michael Douglas, The Kominsky Method
Bill Hader, Barry
Eugene Levy, Schitt’s Creek

Lead Actress in a Limited Series or Movie

Amy Adams, Sharp Objects
Patricia Arquette, Escape at Dannemora
Aunjanue Ellis, When They See Us
Joey King, The Act
Niecy Nash, When They See Us
Michelle Williams, Fosse/Verdon

Lead Actor in a Limited Series or Movie

Mahershala Ali, True Detective
Benicio del Toro, Escape at Dannemora
Hugh Grant, A Very English Scandal
Jared Harris, Chernobyl
Jharrel Jerome, When They See Us
Sam Rockwell, Fosse/Verdon

Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series

Sarah Goldberg, Barry
Sian Clifford, Fleabag
Olivia Colman, Fleabag
Betty Gilpin, GLOW
Alex Borstein, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Marin Hinkle, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Kate McKinnon, Saturday Night Live
Anna Chlumsky, Veep

Supporting Actor in a Comedy Series

Anthony Carrigan, Barry
Stephen Root, Barry
Henry Winkler, Barry
Alan Arkin, The Kominsky Method
Tony Shalhoub, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Tony Hale, Veep

Supporting Actress in a Drama Series

Gwendoline Christie, Game of Thrones
Lena Headey, Game of Thrones
Sophie Turner, Game of Thrones
Maisie Williams, Game of Thrones
Fiona Shaw, Killing Eve
Julia Garner, Ozark

Supporting Actor in a Drama Series

Jonathan Banks, Better Call Saul
Giancarlo Esposito, Better Call Saul
Alfie Allen, Game of Thrones
Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, Game of Thrones
Peter Dinklage, Game of Thrones
Michael Kelly, House of Cards
Chris Sullivan, This Is Us



Supporting Actress in a Limited Series or Movie

Patricia Arquette, The Act
Emily Watson, Chernobyl
Margaret Qualley, Fosse/Verdon
Patricia Clarkson, Sharp Objects
Marsha Stephanie Blake, When They See Us
Vera Farmiga, When They See Us

Supporting Actor in a Limited Series or Movie

Stellan Skarsgård, Chernobyl
Paul Dano, Escape at Dannemora
Ben Whishaw, A Very English Scandal
Asante Blackk, When They See Us
John Leguizamo, When They See Us
Michael K. Williams, When They See Us

Outstanding Variety Talk Series

The Daily Show With Trevor Noah, Comedy Central
Full Frontal With Samantha Bee, TBS
Jimmy Kimmel Live, ABC
Last Week Tonight With John Oliver, HBO
The Late Late Show With James Corden, CBS
The Late Show With Stephen Colbert, CBS

Outstanding Variety Sketch Series

At Home With Amy Sedaris, TruTV
Documentary Now!, IFC
Drunk History, Comedy Central
I Love You, America, Hulu
Saturday Night Live, NBC
Who Is America, Showtime

Outstanding Competition or Reality Series

The Amazing Race, CBS
American Ninja Warrior, NBC
Nailed It!, Netflix
RuPaul’s Drag Race, VH1
Top Chef, Bravo
The Voice, NBC
All I'll say is, they can throw all the acting awards at it they want (and I want Emilia Clarke to win, as compensation for having to remain professional and not phone it in after the character she devoted a decade of her life to was unceremoniously destroyed by misogynist hacks), but if they get best drama for that tripe, I'll be fucking pissed.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
Tribble
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2697
Joined: 2008-11-18 11:28am
Location: stardestroyer.net

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by Tribble » 2019-07-16 10:11pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:There is an argument to be made, yes. I believe conventional strategic wisdom is that when you face two separate enemy forces, and have a more mobile force (and pitting them against each other isn't an option), the best course of action is to defeat them in detail, picking off the smaller, weaker forces first. Which means smashing Cersei, then turning North.

Of course, the delay in taking and securing King's Landing might have given time for the Night King to take Winterfell, in which case you'd probably be fighting him at the Neck or the Twins, and without the support of the Northern army.
On the other hand a big part of the Night King's success was due to having access to an undead dragon to melt the Wall. Would he be able to even breach it, or take it? IIRC it was more than just a wall of ice as it had magic properties to help ward off the White Walkers.

Even if the Night Kind had sufficient forces / magic at that point to successfully take the Wall without the dragon the attack doing so would probably still things long enough for Dany to warp things up in King's Landing and head north.
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" - The official Troll motto, as stated by Adam Savage

User avatar
FaxModem1
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7453
Joined: 2002-10-30 06:40pm
Location: In a dark reflection of a better world

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by FaxModem1 » 2019-07-16 11:29pm

Regarding George RR Martin, I call BS on the pressure. As it appears the pressure really didn't do anything for him, as he just focused on side stories and prequels. It sounds more like the pressure of a kid who is on the school bus and realizes his assignment is due, and that still isn't enough to make him finish it.
Image

User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 8224
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by Solauren » 2019-07-19 06:21pm

Tribble wrote:
2019-07-16 10:11pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:There is an argument to be made, yes. I believe conventional strategic wisdom is that when you face two separate enemy forces, and have a more mobile force (and pitting them against each other isn't an option), the best course of action is to defeat them in detail, picking off the smaller, weaker forces first. Which means smashing Cersei, then turning North.

Of course, the delay in taking and securing King's Landing might have given time for the Night King to take Winterfell, in which case you'd probably be fighting him at the Neck or the Twins, and without the support of the Northern army.
On the other hand a big part of the Night King's success was due to having access to an undead dragon to melt the Wall. Would he be able to even breach it, or take it? IIRC it was more than just a wall of ice as it had magic properties to help ward off the White Walkers.

Even if the Night Kind had sufficient forces / magic at that point to successfully take the Wall without the dragon the attack doing so would probably still things long enough for Dany to warp things up in King's Landing and head north.
In the books, the Free-Folk, and presumably the Night's King, was looking for a magical artifact called 'the Horn of Winter'. It was said to be able to give rise to giants, and had the power to bring down at least a section of the wall.

Presumably, the Night's King might know where it is, and (in the TV series) decided he didn't need it, as he had a dragon.

The question is, with the Horn taking down the wall in place of an undead dragon, would Dany have had the time with only a few days? Probably not.

Then again, with three dragons, she might have been tempted to, at the peace ceremony, warn everyone 'I'm just killing Cersei and being doing with it'.
\

User avatar
Alferd Packer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3677
Joined: 2002-07-19 09:22pm
Location: Slumgullion Pass
Contact:

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by Alferd Packer » 2019-07-20 08:48am

FaxModem1 wrote:
2019-07-16 11:29pm
Regarding George RR Martin, I call BS on the pressure. As it appears the pressure really didn't do anything for him, as he just focused on side stories and prequels. It sounds more like the pressure of a kid who is on the school bus and realizes his assignment is due, and that still isn't enough to make him finish it.
Yeah, if anything, seeing some version of the story be told, even if it wasn't his exact vision, would have the opposite effect: "There, it's done. I can take my time and do it right."

Honestly, we'll probably get TWoW from him eventually(because it sounds like it's mostly written), but A Dream of Spring? I wouldn't bet on it.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance--that principle is contempt prior to investigation." -Herbert Spencer

"Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain." - Schiller, Die Jungfrau von Orleans, III vi.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19054
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-21 02:55am

Alferd Packer wrote:
2019-07-20 08:48am
FaxModem1 wrote:
2019-07-16 11:29pm
Regarding George RR Martin, I call BS on the pressure. As it appears the pressure really didn't do anything for him, as he just focused on side stories and prequels. It sounds more like the pressure of a kid who is on the school bus and realizes his assignment is due, and that still isn't enough to make him finish it.
Yeah, if anything, seeing some version of the story be told, even if it wasn't his exact vision, would have the opposite effect: "There, it's done. I can take my time and do it right."

Honestly, we'll probably get TWoW from him eventually(because it sounds like it's mostly written), but A Dream of Spring? I wouldn't bet on it.
So "Female leader goes mad and commits mass murder because she didn't know her place" is going to be the only canon ending?

There's a cheery thought to start the day.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
Alferd Packer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3677
Joined: 2002-07-19 09:22pm
Location: Slumgullion Pass
Contact:

Re: Game Of Thrones: Final Season --SPOILERS!

Post by Alferd Packer » 2019-07-21 06:34am

Well, that pragmatist in me sees it going like this: he finishes TWoW in the next year or so. He begins working in earnest on ADoS, but dies before he can finish it. Whoever is in charge of his estate commissions an author to use what was written and what notes exist to finish the book, and we eventually, many years down the road, get that as our conclusion. It's closer than the show, but it's not 100% GRRM.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance--that principle is contempt prior to investigation." -Herbert Spencer

"Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain." - Schiller, Die Jungfrau von Orleans, III vi.

Post Reply