Game of Thrones Final Season Discussion Thread. (SPOILERS ABOUND, YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED)

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . . . 15 NEXT
 

Samtemdo8:
http://www.ladbible.com/technology/gaming-total-war-players-not-impressed-with-the-tactics-in-game-of-thrones-20190501

HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA

Hehe, my favourite comment:

Honestly, this battle only served to demonstrate how truly fucked the balance is.

It doesn't matter what my stack contains. I have the best light cav in the whole game, several RoR spearmen units, artillery, two legendary lords on dragons as well as several high level heroes decked out in rare items, but the 100% upkeep reduction on Undead chaff units means they can just bruteforce their way to victory (yeah yeah - they had two monstrous units, big deal).

I want a deleted scene where they go over the battle plans.

"Grey Worm, you and the Unsullied will be stationed in front of the trenches, the spikes and the walls."
"In front? You mean behind, surely?"
"No no, in front. You see we need you defend the trenches with your lives. And don't call me Shirley."
"So you want us to... defend the defences."
"Correct."
"With our lives."
"With your lives."
"Wouldn't it be better if we were *behind* the defences? The archers could use flaming arrows, and the drag..."
"Grey Worm, Grey Worm, Grey Worm, stop asking questions. Who's in charge around here?"
"Errr.....I don't actually know. The only plan we have is from the creepy kid in the wheelchair."
"Exactly. And his plan involves you making sure they don't reach the flaming trenches and hurt anyone with a character arc."
"Okay, fine. They're undisciplined and mindless, we're a trained army. Well use our spears and shields in a phalanx as usual, and..."
"What's that? No no, you'll stand individually and spin your spears around in one on one combat. None of this phalanx business."
"But we're an army of soldiers. We fight as a unit."
"Not today."

KingsGambit:
Hehe, my favourite comment:

I read one comment on Reddit that made a monstrous amount of sense in retrospect, but doesn't necessarily bode well for Dany (or anyone else involved for that matter)...

The gist of it is they know perfectly well the Dothraki were going to be a massive liability in the long run. As long as Dany was associated with them, as Tyrion said back in season 7, she'd never, ever be accepted in Westeros. And, as Sansa said there isn't enough food for them (or grasslands to support their livestock).

So, better to maneuver them into a position where they'll voluntarily commit mass suicide, whereby they can be remembered as martyrs to bolster Dany's reputation. It's unlikely the Dothraki would have been a great asset against the Golden Company, even without elephants, since the running gag with the Dothraki is they're kinda shit at attacking prepared, entrenched, and disciplined forces who aren't going to cower and flee before their reputation.

Sacrificing the Unsullied to protect the Northern bannermen, on the other hand, was just all kinds of exceptional.

Eacaraxe:
I read one comment on Reddit that made a monstrous amount of sense in retrospect, but doesn't necessarily bode well for Dany (or anyone else involved for that matter)...

The gist of it is they know perfectly well the Dothraki were going to be a massive liability in the long run. As long as Dany was associated with them, as Tyrion said back in season 7, she'd never, ever be accepted in Westeros. And, as Sansa said there isn't enough food for them (or grasslands to support their livestock).

So, better to maneuver them into a position where they'll voluntarily commit mass suicide, whereby they can be remembered as martyrs to bolster Dany's reputation. It's unlikely the Dothraki would have been a great asset against the Golden Company, even without elephants, since the running gag with the Dothraki is they're kinda shit at attacking prepared, entrenched, and disciplined forces who aren't going to cower and flee before their reputation.

Sacrificing the Unsullied to protect the Northern bannermen, on the other hand, was just all kinds of exceptional.

I mean...maybe? That sounds like it could be legit, even if a bit of a reach. But let's say that it's entirely true, it still requires either a) the writers to bludgeon the script to put everyone where they need to be for the next episode or b) the Dothraki to be so dumb as to raise the question of how they didn't die off generations earlier. I don't believe the Darwin Award can be presented to an entire fictional tribe, but they would be front-runners were they eligible.

But here's the thing...with all the politicking and betrayals, by the time Team Dany arrived in the West, she had the Iron Islands, Dorne and High Garden on her side, while Cersei had only King's Landing and Casterly Rock (Arya took out the Freys at the same time). The Baratheons were all dead and the North was fighting the BotB. Apparently there were only 6 people living in all of Dorne, all of them related to Oberyn Martell, so they're gone along with the Tyrells. Dany took Casterly Rock last I remember.

Since making an alliance with the North (and therefore the Vale), and Euron siding with Cersei....let's see. Cersei has two Kingdoms (Crownlands, Iron Islands), Dany has The North and the Vale (maybe the Wildlings?), and Dorne, Riverlands, Stormlands, Westerlands and The Reach are all defeated. I don't think having the Dothraki floating around will change much, particularly when Cersei herself just hired an Essos mercenary company.

If they died because the writers needed them gone, it's a tragic way to tie up a loose end. In fairness tho, GoT wouldn't be the first show to do such a thing. I wish I understood why they insisted on a 6 episode season, but it is what it is. They chose to film it this way, they opted to put spectacle ahead of drama and making sense. They could've done it so much better. They could have had the battle last much longer, maybe span two episodes, taking a greater toll on the allies. The threats could've escalated and the last shot before the NK's demise would've been the ones of Sam, Brienne, etc being overwhelmed. They're capable of making great battles...the Blackwater, Hardhome, both riveting. This one was a mess and didn't feel gratifying.

Gethsemani:

trunkage:
You can't make drama without stupid

Sure you can. I know Tarantino has said (and probably paraphrased someone else) that the key to good drama is to put people with different outlooks and goals in the same room and getting them to interact.
Steven Spielberg famously told the producers of Jaws, when they objected to the ending, that "I've had the audience eating out of my hand for two hours, they'll believe anything I tell them".

My point is that drama can be stupid, but that either means your plots or characters are inconsistent or that you've failed to convince the audience of the make believe you are selling. Whichever it is, it is a fault with the writing and directing. That so many people are bouncing of The Long Night because it is stupid is not a problem with drama, it is a problem with the writing and directing.

I mean, Luke Skywalker somehow nailing a 3 foot wide exhaust port with a proton torpedo without using his targeting computer because he trusts the Force is pretty stupid on its face. But the movie leading up to that scene manages to sell the idea that the Force does this and that Luke can do it very well, which turns a stupid scene into this hugely gratifying dramatic conclusion. Drama only becomes stupid when the writer and director bungles their job.

My 6 year old self thought that Star Wars sold that. I am no longer 6 and continually point out that Star Wars is poorly written.

Drama requires you to let go of logic and go for the feels. Endgame is only good if you let go of the logic. Because none of it makes sense. 3 guys, by themselves, chasing down a massive shark doesn't make sense.

Reservoir Dogs might fit this description. It deliberately set up why people SHOULDN'T have full knowledge of what's going on. It's the only reason why it works. But Tarantino has elected to go for stupendously evil characters from then on which means you can't understand the bad guys. I'm a Nazi. Automatic evil. I'm a slave owner. Automatic evil. Having opposing ideals is great. Apparently that's why Killmonger was seen as great. But you're committing genocide... I don't care what logic you have. It's not relatable.

Or maybe I should say: I hope it's not relatable for most people

Tarantino cares more about style and cares little about substance. Same with Spielberg

trunkage:
I'm a Nazi. Automatic evil. I'm a slave owner. Automatic evil.

If you're alluding to Hans Landa and Calvin Candie, you're missing the point. No shit they're evil. It's that they're evil in ways that subvert societal perceptions and expectations of evil, and how they navigate societies that justify, permit, or even applaud evil. But most importantly, how perception of evil reflects societal values, especially as demonstrated through catharsis and schadenfreude.

Ever notice how Inglorious Basterds turns the tables on the WWII film genre by depicting Nazis how other genre films depict Allies, while showing the titular Basterds act the same way other films show Nazis acting? Or, let me just throw this one out here...

In Inglorious Basterds, Nazis die and suffer in brutal, over the top, horrific and gory ways...that we typically see of Allied soldiers in works such as Saving Private Ryan or Band of Brothers. But when Allies die, it's in quick and relatively bloodless ways devoid of suffering that get little screen time or notice...just like how Nazis die in movies like Saving Private Ryan or Band of Brothers.

But, at the same time, in Inglorious Basterds Nazi deaths are sources of comedic catharsis, while Allied deaths are sources of dramatic tension. In other WWII works, Nazi deaths are sources of dramatic tension, while Allied deaths are also sources of dramatic tension, except in the case of leading characters, in which case they're sources of tragic catharsis. Let me put that together...

Genre films: Allies act like Allies, suffer and die horribly, and maybe we're expected to cry.
Inglorious Basterds: Allies act like Nazis, die anonymously and painlessly, we're not expected to care.
Genre films: Nazis act like Nazis, die anonymously and painlessly, we're not expected to care.
Inglorious Basterds: Nazis act like Allies, suffer and die horribly, but we're expected to laugh.

Eacaraxe:

If you're alluding to Hans Landa and Calvin Candie, you're missing the point. No shit they're evil. It's that they're evil in ways that subvert societal perceptions and expectations of evil, and how they navigate societies that justify, permit, or even applaud evil. But most importantly, how perception of evil reflects societal values, especially as demonstrated through catharsis and schadenfreude.

Ever notice how Inglorious Basterds turns the tables on the WWII film genre by depicting Nazis how other genre films depict Allies, while showing the titular Basterds act the same way other films show Nazis acting? Or, let me just throw this one out here...

Tarantino makes this abundantly clear in the climax of the movie, when we see the Nazi's watch a film about a heroic German sniper killing hundreds of Americans and cheering every time he gets a kill. On top of that Hans Landa and several other nazis are affable, kind people while the Basterds are all murderous, assholes to a man. Despite that we tend to root for the Basterds, because we know they fight for the side wanting to stop a genocidal regime. Inglorious Basterds certainly has something to say about our perception of evil and cinematic portrayals of it.

trunkage:

Drama requires you to let go of logic and go for the feels

Some times, yes. Well written drama can still maintain internal consistency and "logic" though. The specific problem of GoT is that it was a show that adapted books full of details and internal logic and mostly stuck to that for the first 3-4 seasons. After that it ditched all of it. It made for a jarring transition for people who came to see a show where travelling Westeros from Winterfell to King's Landing in Seasons 1 took 3 episodes and some characters made similar journeys over the course of 2 seasons. Only for people to somehow make that journey off screen in 10 minutes in Season 7. The problem is not with the drama itself, but with how very poorly written the entire show is to achieve cheap drama.

trunkage:
But Tarantino has elected to go for stupendously evil characters from then on which means you can't understand the bad guys. I'm a Nazi. Automatic evil. I'm a slave owner. Automatic evil. Having opposing ideals is great. Apparently that's why Killmonger was seen as great. But you're committing genocide... I don't care what logic you have. It's not relatable.

Or maybe I should say: I hope it's not relatable for most people

Relatable is not the same as logic or logical. I mean, I can hardly relate to Hitler, Stalin, Josef Fritszl or Charles Manson yet these are de facto people that have existed. That the antagonist is chaotic evil and runs on a logic alien from my own does not mean that they necessarily lack logic. Take Thanos in Infinity War as an example: his solution is obviously pants on head stupid, but Thanos as an antagonist is not about whether he's right or not, he's an antagonist that's all about believing in his own righteousness and doing anything to establish his will. We are not meant to relate to Thanos, but we are meant to see Thanos as a relatable villain in that we can see that people like Thanos, with really stupid ideas, will go to pretty much any lengths to make those ideas come true.

trunkage:
Drama requires you to let go of logic and go for the feels. Endgame is only good if you let go of the logic. Because none of it makes sense. 3 guys, by themselves, chasing down a massive shark doesn't make sense.

Drama that is illogical disrupts immersion and engagement.

It doesn't haven't to be completely watertight, but what is too inconsistent, silly, random etc. yanks the audience out of the experience. Like shit battle scenes in GoT.

Gethsemani:
Inglorious Basterds certainly has something to say about our perception of evil and cinematic portrayals of it.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but I believe Inglorious Basterds at its core is a condemnation of propaganda for its pernicious and oft-hypocritical nature, and wholesale indictment of Hollywood's complicity...that never went away, just became more subtle and pernicious as the film industry matured. Here's the crux of it:

Despite that we tend to root for the Basterds, because we know they fight for the side wanting to stop a genocidal regime.

Aldo "the Apache" Raine is a character so thick with layered commentary, you could say it's nothing short of Kubrickian proportions. Here we have a character who is said to be the descendant of Native Americans and frontiersmen, who habitually snuffs tobacco (America's first real export crop which fueled early economic sustenance and expansion) and is said to be a moonshiner (alcohol being a key weapon in American cultural warfare against Native Americans). He hails from a region that was the site of near-constant warfare between American colonials (and later "just" Americans) and Native-Americans for nearly a century, which was also a key venue for Native displacement throughout that entire time, culminating in the Trail of Tears. Last, of course, he has a lynching scar.

This is the man who commands his troops to dispatch German soldiers with the same ferocity and brutality attributed to Native-Americans, most of said attribution being propaganda to justify and popularize Native-American genocide.

when we see the Nazi's watch a film about a heroic German sniper killing hundreds of Americans and cheering every time he gets a kill.

Parting note, what makes this all the more telling, is Zoller is a call to American utilization of veterans in war bond tours and propaganda films, mingling celebrity and war heroism. See, Charles Kelly, Audie Murphy, and John Basilone just off the top of my head.

Word of forewarning to everyone, the last three episodes have apparently leaked so exercise caution.

Eacaraxe:
Word of forewarning to everyone, the last three episodes have apparently leaked so exercise caution.

Avoiding anything Game of Thrones related on youtube then.

There are no leaks on Pirate Bay or free streaming sites, and thus you can safely assume these leaked episodes either don't exist or aren't being shared. And yes I just went to take a look at tpb for info.

McElroy:
There are no leaks on Pirate Bay or free streaming sites, and thus you can safely assume these leaked episodes either don't exist or aren't being shared. And yes I just went to take a look at tpb for info.

Yeah, that's because some idiots in Thailand got their hands on the episode and leaked clips online, and were holding the rest of the next episode for people to pay them to release it (the reserve of what happened in season...six?). Then on Facebook, they synopsized the rest of the episode on Facebook and it turned out the only thing anyone would want to watch in the first place, was what they already leaked as proof of having the episode.

So basically they shot the hostage, and tried to hold the corpse ransom. Spoilers ahead and I fucking mean it:

The whole leak's on r/freefolk, and they had links to clips as of three or so hours ago which may or may not have already been DMCA'd by HBO. I've been taking a nap, so I can't personally speak to whether they're still up or not.

1 hour till showtime guys

I just wanna say that my beef with the Battle at Winterfell is I feel they made the Wights naturally too strong. Like I don't know if its established that the Zombies have Super Strength. But I feel the Unsullied Shield Wall/Phalanax could have held the Zombies longer then that.

Its show time guys.

1. Ghost Lives my friends.

2. HOUSE BARATHEON LIVES!!!!

3. JAIME X BREIENNE!!!!

4. RIP Rheagal. Also Missandai is MIA.

Samtemdo8:
I just wanna say that my beef with the Battle at Winterfell is I feel they made the Wights naturally too strong. Like I don't know if its established that the Zombies have Super Strength. But I feel the Unsullied Shield Wall/Phalanax could have held the Zombies longer then that.

Thing is, when a press of bodies is essentially a tidal wave, and the front line does not care for its safety, even a phalanx will be overwhelmed.

That said, they had so long to prepare the battlefield, they should have put multiple trenches leading up to their positions. All they needed to do was dig pits and it would have broken/slowed the horde multiple times. But no, they had to have their massive cavalry charge into the darkness rather than consider a proper defensive position.

Samtemdo8:
I just wanna say that my beef with the Battle at Winterfell is I feel they made the Wights naturally too strong. Like I don't know if its established that the Zombies have Super Strength. But I feel the Unsullied Shield Wall/Phalanax could have held the Zombies longer then that.

Eh, there's a lot to be angry about regarding the Battle of Winterfell. I think this video neatly shows just how atrociously bad the battleplan is both by showcasing the chain of events and through contrast with their own plan.

Summing it up: the cavalry were entirely wasted. No effort was made to control the enemy's movement until the last stand. The artillery was misplaced, undefended and perplexingly held fire after the first volley. It is only after both the cavalry and artillery get wiped out that the now undefended infantry get involved, and it's only after this that the dragons even get deployed. At this point the overwhelmed infantry has to retreat, and the defensive stakeline forces the retreating defenders into a chokepoint, forcing further casualties. The single fire trench proved almost entirely ineffective and Winterfell confusingly didn't use any of the time it allotted them to actually thin the ranks of the wights. So long story short, the strategies employed by Winterfell ended up working to the advantage of the wights rather than themselves.

In retrospect, I think there's a fair comparison to be made with the Victory Fleet in Mass Effect 3 in that the strategy pretty much boiled down to "fight the enemy on the terms most advantageous to them" rather than...you know, actual strategy.

Should have grabbed Cersei and jumped.

Let the Battle to end all Battles....begin.

I have changed my mind again; Danny gonna betray Jon :D

Man...this almost feels like vintage Thrones again with this last episode. People gathering information, scheming against one another, and somebody getting a bolt through the neck out of nowhere. Come on writers, do me proud...

Saelune:
Should have grabbed Cersei and jumped.

Not gonna lie, that would have been a fucking hilarious end to the episode.

There is no way a ballista with that kind of range can be mounted on a vessel without being within line of sight of that which it is attacking - and especially could not be that accurate.

Becoming increasingly suspicious that the writers don't know how crossbows work. They do realise those things need to be redrawn after you fire once right, you can't just keep shooting away like they're guns with arrows

Pretty cool episode. Ending felt like an alternative take on snowwhite vs the wicked stepmother.

Samtemdo8:
1. Ghost Lives my friends.

2. HOUSE BARATHEON LIVES!!!!

Yeah, but Gendry still needs an heir at some point, and Arya isn't stepping up apparently so...

Also Missandai is MIA.

More like KIA.

Poor Danny, she just isn't made to be a conqueror. Ever since the poor thing left Essos its been one humiliation after the other. She started with Dragonstone, the entire south of Westeros and three dragons. One and a half season later and Danny just has Dragonstone and a single dragon without anything to show for it. Being repeatedly humiliated by Cersei and the wreckage of the Lanisters must sting, especially considering Cersei started out in such a bad state.

Hades:
Poor Danny, she just isn't made to be a conqueror. Ever since the poor thing left Essos its been one humiliation after the other. She started with Dragonstone, the entire south of Westeros and three dragons. One and a half season later and Danny just has Dragonstone and a single dragon without anything to show for it. Being repeatedly humiliated by Cersei and the wreckage of the Lanisters must sting, especially considering Cersei started out in such a bad state.

She needs to get over her entitlement. She should have stayed in Essos and ruled there, freeing slaves and ensuring it stayed ended. She gives too much a fuck about 'Rightful Heirs' while hypocritically conquering Essos. I really want someone to tell her that 'rightful heirs' is a stupid way of thinking.

(For the record though, she was right in her argument with Jon. I do think Jon needs to learn that sometimes being Ned Start means losing your head for no good reason)

Also Tormund is a mass murderer who slaughtered entire villages, and it was evil of him to do it. Yes he is funny and charming in his own way, but he still is a horrible person. Jaime atleast hasn't forgotten he has done unforgivable things.

Abomination:
There is no way a ballista with that kind of range can be mounted on a vessel without being within line of sight of that which it is attacking - and especially could not be that accurate.

There are so many things wrong with those ballistas on a fuckin' ship, you could write a book about it. And it still isn't the dumbest fuckin' thing from last night's episode. I can forgive a lot of stupidity in a TV show. But this was too much.

Abomination:
There is no way a ballista with that kind of range can be mounted on a vessel without being within line of sight of that which it is attacking - and especially could not be that accurate.

There's no truly realistic way for a ballista to take down a flying dragon, even without it being on a ship on water.

Seriously, they get like one shot a minute, and historically, needed trained engineers to aim and fire them at standing, static targets, and even then they weren't precise enough that you could snipe somebody in particularly. You wanna take that, and aim it up into the air, and hit a moving target? Yeah fucking right. Back in the world wars, it was tough to hit a fighter from the ground even with automatic guns, which are a hell of a lot easier to train for, aim, fire, and put out far more shots. Even from the start of ground to air warfare, it was obvious that armies needed explosive shells to have decent odds of hitting aircraft, and it still took a couple of decades to work out the kinks.

The bottomline is, in a pre-gunpowder age, there is no technological solution to marauding dragons (its what makes them such forces of nature). Any such solution forced for dramatic purposes is gonna be contrived to one extent or another. And honestly, its not the worst contrivance the show's ever had. It's not nearly as cool as if Euron had his horn from the books, used it to enslave one of the dragons, and set them to fight each other, and Dany had to kill the mind controlled one, but hey, ballista is cheaper on the CGI budget.

SupahEwok:

Abomination:
There is no way a ballista with that kind of range can be mounted on a vessel without being within line of sight of that which it is attacking - and especially could not be that accurate.

There's no truly realistic way for a ballista to take down a flying dragon, even without it being on a ship on water.

Seriously, they get like one shot a minute, and historically, needed trained engineers to aim and fire them at standing, static targets, and even then they weren't precise enough that you could snipe somebody in particularly. You wanna take that, and aim it up into the air, and hit a moving target? Yeah fucking right. Back in the world wars, it was tough to hit a fighter from the ground even with automatic guns, which are a hell of a lot easier to train for, aim, fire, and put out far more shots. Even from the start of ground to air warfare, it was obvious that armies needed explosive shells to have decent odds of hitting aircraft, and it still took a couple of decades to work out the kinks.

The bottomline is, in a pre-gunpowder age, there is no technological solution to marauding dragons (its what makes them such forces of nature). Any such solution forced for dramatic purposes is gonna be contrived to one extent or another. And honestly, its not the worst contrivance the show's ever had. It's not nearly as cool as if Euron had his horn from the books, used it to enslave one of the dragons, and set them to fight each other, and Dany had to kill the mind controlled one, but hey, ballista is cheaper on the CGI budget.

Really, the more you think on it the stupider it gets. As you note, Ballista required special trained engineers to fire them at standing targets. That's when they're mounted on land. And this happened on a moving boat, and in three shots managed three hits against a strafing target that (judging on Drogan's size during the 'down the barrel' viewpoint we saw after a few seconds of charging) seems to have been several hundred meters away. In the case of the Scorpio, the range (against ground targets) is about 100 meters for precision shooting and 400 for parabolic shooting...and could be fired about 3-4 times a minute. Contrast this (and Bron taking about 40 seconds to reload a scorpion last season) with the aforementioned range and seemingly instant reload time.

I repeat all of this due to one thing that compounds the issue: experience. They managed three right shots on aerial targets that move faster than horses and were moving perpendicular, approaching the maximum range for ground targets (while nobody apparently had line of sight, to boot). This is something that there would never have been any cause to prepare or practice for. How the hell did they pull off three shots with sniper accuracy against something that they would never have had any experience tracking with those ballistae? How did they figure out the lead time to get the shots so tight? By rights they should not have had any frame of reference to judge that by.

Asita:
Really, the more you think on it the stupider it gets. As you note, Ballista required special trained engineers to fire them at standing targets. That's when they're mounted on land. And this happened on a moving boat, and in three shots managed three hits against a strafing target that (judging on Drogan's size during the 'down the barrel' viewpoint we saw after a few seconds of charging) seems to have been several hundred meters away. In the case of the Scorpio, the range (against ground targets) is about 100 meters for precision shooting and 400 for parabolic shooting...and could be fired about 3-4 times a minute. Contrast this (and Bron taking about 40 seconds to reload a scorpion last season) with the aforementioned range and seemingly instant reload time.

I repeat all of this due to one thing that compounds the issue: experience. They just pulled sniper shots on aerial targets that move faster than horses and were moving perpendicular, approaching the maximum range for ground targets (while nobody apparently had line of sight, to boot). This is something that there would never have been any cause to prepare or practice for. How the hell did they pull off three shots with sniper accuracy against something that they would never have had any experience tracking with those ballistae? How did they figure out the lead time to get the shots so tight? By rights they should not have had any frame of reference to judge that by.

The plot COULD have revolved around Dany being torn between employing the dragons against the city, possibly murdering most of the inhabitants, or engaging in "traditional" siege warfare despite having a clear way of ending it then and there. But the dragons were "too powerful" and D&D decided to take one of the player characters magic items away in a way that implies they can not use them in that way or they'll lose the other.

Contrived and stupid, I thought the dragon getting hit by ballista was a dream sequence due to how utterly impossible it was for her to NOT know where the bolts were coming from.

Anyone else want a coffee?

Ok, not too bad. Seems I was right that a dragon would get shot down by one of those ballistae. Expected it to be Bronn, but I suppose D&D had to give their cartoon villain something to do. Not that that whole scene wasn't some heinous bullshit. GRRM gave Danaerys 3 flying flame tanks that fully grown should be near invincible to a medieval tech military, so the writers had no choice but to ass pull. Other than that the episode actually had a little something to it. There's once again some actual scheming going on. Not the most subtle scheming, but hey, that ship had long since sailed to 360 noscope a bolt through a dragon's neck.

Silentpony:
Anyone else want a coffee?

Will there be biscuits? If not, I have some, I can bring em if need be.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . . . 15 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here