Feature Article

Game Of Thrones Season 8 Finale: Daenerys Can't Break The Wheel, Turns Out

GameSpot may receive revenue from affiliate and advertising partnerships for sharing this content and from purchases through links.

"The Bells" toll for thee.

Be warned: Beyond this point, there are massive spoilers for Game of Thrones Season 8's Episode 5 and Episode 6 finale.

Even after her devastating choice in Episode 5, Daenerys was apparently still intent on breaking the wheel in the finale. And not just in Westeros, but across the world, as she delivers an inspirational speech to her army that asks them to support her in continuing the endeavor of breaking the wheel. But her means for doing so aren't enough to convince Jon, who prevents the potential massacre of further innocent lives by killing Dany as they embrace. But her death does lead to the potential breaking of the wheel, as Tyrion proposes a king in Bran who is unable to father children, meaning his eventual replacement will be chosen (by people like Robin Arryn, who showed up out of nowhere), not granted the title by birthright. Read on for our thoughts about Dany's turn to Mad Queen after Episode 5.

Please use a html5 video capable browser to watch videos.
This video has an invalid file format.
00:00:00
Sorry, but you can't access this content!
Please enter your date of birth to view this video

By clicking 'enter', you agree to GameSpot's
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

Now Playing: Game Of Thrones Season 8 Finale: Daenerys's Descent Into Madness

For a lot of viewers, the most recent season of Game of Thrones feels different than previous ones. It might be that there are no new books to act as a map for where the show is headed, or that shorter final seasons make it feel like character development has been pushed aside in favor of major plot moves. Regardless of the cause, there's a general reaction among many that something just feels off.

There’s something else fundamentally underpinning reactions, though, even if fans aren't not as aware of it. Game of Thrones, it turns out, is not about what we all thought it was about.

In Episode 5, "The Bells," Game of Thrones finally takes Daenerys Targaryen from "worryingly willing to burn to death anyone who disagrees with her, but generally out for good" to full-on "child-murdering Mad Queen." She accomplishes what her father never could: She "burns them all" in King's Landing, regardless of whether they're civilian or soldier, or whether it wins her the throne or not. Daenerys's reactions to the loss of two of her dragons, the betrayals in her ranks, and the unwillingness of Westeros to bend to her will finally cause her to snap, and from the back of her last dragon, Drogon, she brings fire and blood to her former home.

Ask many fans/viewers/etc. and they'll say the show has been foreshadowing Daenerys bringing destruction to King's Landing all along. Dany has always been a ruthless character when she has to be, often electing to execute people in a generally cruel and unusual way: by burning them alive with dragon fire. She's particularly unforgiving to people who oppose her, especially when they don't immediately bend the knee. There have been plenty of times when Dany has wanted to just ravage everyone in her path, only to be curbed from her most merciless instincts by her advisers (most notably Jorah Mormont). With most of those people now dead and Daenerys currently at her lowest, she finally gave in to her Targaryen rage.

No Caption Provided

It's true that Game of Thrones has been foreshadowing that this could happen, but it's unfair to say that it always suggested that it would happen. Really, this goes to the fundamental conflict of Daenerys's character: She's struggling not to become her father, or to fall into the patterns of other monarchs who use their power mercilessly. Daenerys can be ruthless, but she learned a lot in Meereen not just about how to conquer, but how to rule. She has a highly tuned sense of justice. She considers herself the Breaker of Chains, and this is just as an essential part of her identity as being the Mother of Dragons.

Midway through "The Bells," we finally get Game of Thrones' overall thesis statement. The show is a tragedy in which the characters can't break free of their pasts. Power corrupts the powerful, even those with the best intentions. Monarchy is bad. The world is a cold, hard place, where you'll probably die badly and abruptly for no reason; if you're lucky, you'll die badly and abruptly because of a mistake you made two seasons earlier, but at least it'll feel deserved.

The trouble is that Game of Thrones has made thesis statements in the past--or at least, it felt like it did. The most notable was a declaration from Daenerys herself from Season 5, in which she explained her intention to "break the wheel." The system of inherited wealth and power, and constant war over both, destroy people needlessly. It makes the world a bad place to live. It could be better. And Daenerys intended to use her considerable power to improve it.

Daenerys made another similar statement to the same effect when talking to Tyrion in Season 5. Tyrion dispelled Dany's notions of her family being unjustly evicted from the Iron Throne by explaining why her father, the Mad King Aerys Targaryen, was deposed: He became a paranoid and vicious tyrant. With an understanding of what her father had become, Daenerys made a decision to become something else.

"Our fathers were evil men," Daenerys said. "All of us here. They left the world worse than they found it. We're going to leave the world better than we found it."

No Caption Provided

Over and over again, Game of Thrones has felt like this was what it was really about: When given the choice, even in the face of tragedy and hardship, what do you leave in the world? It's central to the stories of the Stark kids: Jon Snow fights for the good of the realm, up to and beyond his own murder; Sansa Stark learns how to be the best power-seeker in Westeros, but uses those lessons to win independence for the North; Arya Stark is driven by nothing but revenge, until she reestablishes her connections with her family. It was Daenerys's story too, obviously. And it was the story of the Lannisters, who represented the other side of the coin, fully willing to add ruin to the world so long as they were protected. Really, just about every character, from Jaime Lannister to Brienne of Tarth to Sandor Clegane, is trying to shake off the weight of their pasts, to turn away from the path determined by what they've done and what was expected of them, with each achieving varying degrees of success.

In fact, this line of thinking was why the elimination of the Night King mid-season could have been a brilliant move for the show. Fighting the army of the dead brought unity to a variety of people, including former enemies, in the middle of Season 8--but unity against a common enemy only survives as long as that enemy does. When the Night King is vanquished, can you resist the inertial pull to go back to the old petty squabbles that end up costing lives? Dealing with that question is what made Cersei Lannister a better villain than the wordless Night King because she held up a dark mirror of what Daenerys (and other rulers) could easily become. The Night King was an external existential threat, but Cersei represented the threat the characters pose to themselves and each other.

With Daenerys's choice to go full war criminal over King's Landing as the bells start ringing, Game of Thrones makes a choice about which show it is. If Daenerys had felt rage and suffering and considered giving in to those feelings (how easily someone with her power could), but turned away from that choice even with no better angels like Jorah or Tyrion to mutter in her ear, the show really would be about breaking the wheel. Its ultimate message would be that people aren't beholden to our cycles and our baggage, or to the sins and expectations of our parents. The world can be better, but you have to make it better, just like you have to make yourself better.

No Caption Provided

Instead, Game of Thrones chooses a darker, more nihilistic meaning. Throughout "The Bells," characters fall back into their old ways. No matter how good a man Jaime tries to become, the one person he can't convince that he's changed is himself. No matter how much Sandor Clegane might hope for a life free of violence, the desire for vengeance consumes him. Cersei can't give up her stranglehold on power and control, even in the face of annihilation. Jon Snow's unyielding dedication to his father's ideals of honor leaves him complicit in a massacre. No amount of good intentions (or slaves freed, or cruel institutions crushed) can keep Daenerys from giving in to her worst impulses and becoming the Mad Queen.

The world is bad, it's going to stay bad, and we can't break free of our pasts. Your baggage defines you and even if you try to improve, you're always an inch away from backsliding into becoming the very thing you feared and hated. Life is nasty, brutish, short, and most of all, explicitly, extremely sad because of what we do to each other. The wheel is much bigger than any one person or even any 300-year dynasty, and not even dragon fire can break it. This is just another war in a history full of them.

That seems to be the finality that Game of Thrones has chosen. It's an end that, in a way, has always been written into the show's DNA--but it also seemed as though the whole point of the show was for its characters to overcome it. After having meant so much to so many people, it seems a shame that the "bittersweet" ending Game of Thrones' creators have chosen leans so hard into bitter, and so little into sweet.

Game of Thrones Season 8 concludes this Sunday with Episode 6, the series finale. You can get an idea of where things are going in our finale theories roundup, watching the Episode 6 preview trailer, and checking out new photos HBO has released from Episode 6. We've also gone ahead and explained why some fans are talking about somebody called Young Griff.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com


philhornshaw

Phil Hornshaw

Phil Hornshaw is a former senior writer at GameSpot and worked as a journalist for newspapers and websites for more than a decade, covering video games, technology, and entertainment for nearly that long. A freelancer before he joined the GameSpot team as an editor out of Los Angeles, his work appeared at Playboy, IGN, Kotaku, Complex, Polygon, TheWrap, Digital Trends, The Escapist, GameFront, and The Huffington Post. Outside the realm of games, he's the co-author of So You Created a Wormhole: The Time Traveler's Guide to Time Travel and The Space Hero's Guide to Glory. If he's not writing about video games, he's probably doing a deep dive into game lore.

Back To Top
37 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for jsprunk
jsprunk

2378

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 5

Edited By jsprunk

The face that Daenerys makes before she burns King's Landing is the same face my 2 year old makes when she's making poopy in her diaper in the corner.

2 • 
Avatar image for Zandeus
Zandeus

3126

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

People say this season was garbage and while it did feel rushed and had some obvious fan service moments... if things played out how people wanted or predicted, everyone would be screaming about how predictable it all was.

There is no making the rabid fans happy.... and only being able to predict 1 or 2 things.... means this season was still a win, despite its drawbacks.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Zandeus
Zandeus

3126

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Maybe cuz she dead...?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for fud_sang
Fud_Sang

528

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Seems to me a bit of a letdown. Everyone more or less ended up where they started but with more than they started with with exception to those that ended up dead. Jon ends up at the wall where he started really but now he's king beyond the wall (they said nothing of the sort but we all know). Arya started off seeing the world (at the time heading to kings landing was seeing the world as she had never left winterfell) and where is she now but exploring the rest of it. Sansa started off a foolish girl with dreams of being queen and barring all the horrible things that befell her ended up more or less where she wanted to and where she thought she would be. Grey Worm started out a slave in a distant land now he is freeing slaves in a distant land. Sir Davos started off an advisor to a would be king now is an advisor to a different actual king. Tyrion started off an imp taking an unlikely post as hand of the king and now is serving as the hand of a very different king but a king nonetheless. Just to name a few.

The only people that didn't end up where anyone thought they would be was Bran and of course Drogon. Not saying he was a bad choice for king but not who I think anyone would have chosen which made it a tolerable conclusion to that bit of business. Drogon on the other hand, not so much. Jon Snow will live on in song through the 7 kingdoms as being the luckiest man who ever lived. That dragon would have and should have killed him but instead melts the throne and carries his mother off (most likely to eat her there I said it). I figured if Jon didn't get eaten or burned for his part in that mess, the dragon would follow him north (dragon blood and all that) but that didn't happen either. In either case he lived to tell the tale and becomes the luckiest man in Westeros....ever.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

I have no problem with Dany ending up as mad. I jsut thought showrunners did horrible job of selling that to audience.

3 • 
Avatar image for bigbluefluff
BigBlueFluff

9

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

Edited By BigBlueFluff

I love how Gamespot immediately jumps to the conclusion "Monarchy is bad." Not saying we should bring monarchism back but it actually unites a people more efficiently than any republic, democracy, or any form of congressional and presidential rule ever will. Monarchy is bad in Game of Thrones yes, it was bad in our world. But Bhutan an absolute monarchy is a surprisingly stable nation and their monarch has made lots of pro-citizen reforms. Just a thought, because I hate when these publishers make bold statements like that.

3 • 
Avatar image for MigGui
MigGui

2061

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

@bigbluefluff: Gamespot never said monarchy is bad. It (he, actually) said GoT made a statement that “characters can't break free of their pasts, power corrupts the powerful, even those with the best intentions, monarchy is bad and the world is a cold, hard place”. Which refers to GoT world, not real world.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for dunkstar1
dunkstar1

75

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

An interesting read. Relating this to endings of shows like Breaking Bad and Dexter, often despite how much we as an audience can root for the good in less than good characters, it is their fate to suffer for their awful actions when all is said and done. It avoids the cliche happy ending but can leave the audience feeling dissatisfied that the "protagonists" have not ended up in a happy space. In my opinion for darker shows this is probably a more fitting, if not comfortable, end.

2 • 
Avatar image for JustinGoSka
JustinGoSka

1261

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Daenerys has always just been about ruling the seven kingdoms. The breaker of chains spiel was just a way to justify what she was doing. Her true colors show anytime her rulership is opposed or brought in to question.

3 • 
Avatar image for izraal
Izraal

466

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@JustinGoSka: Absolutely - honestly it's getting very vexing to see all of the articles and comments using the phrase "going mad queen." Why are people willing to accept that nearly every character is capable of deception, but when Daenerys executes on the end of her long term charade so many people call it "going mad"? It feels like people aren't willing to give the character credit for being able to play the game as well as she did. I'm not sure if it is because the character is young, or female, that people refuse to give her credit and instead blame "madness," or if they simply fell in love with the false front she presented rather than empathizing with her underlying character (childhood revenge fantasy, long term plotting, taking on a messianic role, etc.)

2 • 
Avatar image for James_xeno
James_xeno

650

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By James_xeno

"With Daenerys's choice to go full war criminal over King's Landing as the bells start ringing, Game of Thrones makes a choice about which show it is. If Daenerys had felt rage and suffering and considered giving in to those feelings (how easily someone with her power could), but turned away from that choice even with no better angels like Jorah or Tyrion to mutter in her ear, the show really would be about breaking the wheel. Its ultimate message would be that people aren't beholden to our cycles and our baggage, or to the sins and expectations of our parents. The world can be better, but you have to make it better, just like you have to make yourself better."

"After having meant so much to so many people, it seems a shame that the "bittersweet" ending Game of Thrones' creators have chosen leans so hard into bitter, and so little into sweet."

------------------

Welcome to the state of writing and fiction in 2019. Where everybody seems obsessed with fiction/fantasy adhering ever so strictly to a very precise and narrow notion of "realism"... Which basically comes in the form of needlessly dark, nihilistic, grim, tragic, edgy, perverted, apathetic hopelessness. If the story didn't go down this path then there would be a shit storm over the supposed "fairy tale" turn the story took. Because for many, "realism" = grim-dark nihilism.. And seemingly the most important thing about a fictional/fantasy story now, is how realistic it is.. -_- ugh

I mean just even look at family and child fiction.. Being "fairy tale" isn't usually allowed in actual fairy tales anymore!

4 • 
Avatar image for joalopes
joalopes

248

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The issue is that Dany has been following the path of good during almost all seasons.

The issue is that they changed Dany personality completely in just a couple of episodes or so.
The citizens of King's Landing were no different then the slaves Dany freed. So what is the logic here?

Why didn't she accept their surrender?

Sure, I can understand she wants to take revenge. But the person she wanted to take revenge on is Cersei and those who helped her, no one else.

At this point, no one knows about Jon's secret. And no one needs to know has long as she turns out to be a good Queen.

The real reason why the few people that know the secret may betray her is simply because during the last few episodes she completely changed her personality.
There were no doubts before.

And this is the issue why some people don't like the path the show has taken.
It doesn't make sense. Had Dany showed her motivations and tendency for evil actions before it would make sense. But now?

Go watch previous seasons of Game Of Thrones. And if after watching you still think this path makes sense good for you.

For me, it seems like the writers simply needed a big plot twist to fill the last season with episodes.
In fact from the way this is going, the show could and should have ended last season.

In one episode the entire Winter Death army was defeated. With a dagger.
In one episode Cersei was defeated.
And now in one episode Jon Snow or Aria or whatever will defeat Dany.

Most likely Jon will sit on the Iron throne.
End of series.

5 • 
Avatar image for dts15
dts15

397

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By dts15

I like the idea of eschewing the usual conceit of a “happy ending”. If it keeps going like it is it might just be that Dany does break the chain of tyranny and monarchy, but not directly. If she ends up having to die for what she’s done and Jon decides to peace out maybe it will lay the path for a proto democracy of sorts. Having the characters not truly get the end they wanted but to have the “realm” be the one with the actual happy ending would really underpin a lot of the themes and character stories.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for claspico
claspico

20

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

One thing the show failed to get across that the books did was dany was not all there. She heard voices, had visions, and was in constant morality struggle in her head to not be her father.

Truth be told, if 2 of my children were killed in front on me, then my best friend, then my lover was going to take everything away from me, damn. I dont know if I would be sane after that either.

4 • 
Avatar image for ms555
ms555

2665

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Edited By ms555

This article points out the greatest, most fascinating state of the GOT fanbase....

Ned's beheading and the Red Wedding told us EXACTLY what kind of show we were watching. Its crazy to think the fans forgot the show's nature! Either that, or the fan's thought those miserable events were a fluke, and we were still getting a happy ending. This misunderstanding is 1000% on the fans, not the creators. This was a show about misery and loss from day one.

George RR Martin himself, NOT HBO, said that he hated how LOTR ended happily. People forget that??

7 • 
Avatar image for boodger
Boodger

2521

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@ms555: bad things happening mid-story does not define how the story plays out in the end. That is how conflict in a narrative works. Things get bad, but there is still a point to the suffering, and a resolution to the story. Neds execution and The Red Wedding were not defining moments for the tone of the story. They were simply events adding to the confict. Co flict helps characters grow. Rob Stark, Ned Stark... they were never the main characters of the show. Killing them was just character growth for the real main characters. Many stories with happy endings have grim middles. Star Wars, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, and so on. They all have important character deaths early on or in the middle. But those events dont define the story. So your point that those things that happened early on defined the type of show this was is absurd.

Dont get me wrong, I dont think this should have had a happy ending. But the ending they have given us is not appropriate for the story they told all along. It is subverting expectations for the sake of subverting and surprises dont necessarily equate to good storytelling.

They took a character that had fantastically deep characterization and growth over 8 seasons (Jamie) and reduced him back to his season 1 self in a single episode. In the end, there was no growth there. They alluded to the Night King for 8 seasons. And then he lost in the first battle he got in. Just poor storytelling all around.

4 • 
Avatar image for mogan
mogan

19981

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

mogan  Moderator

@P00DGE: "bad things happening mid-story does not define how the story plays out in the end. That is how conflict in a narrative works."

Exactly. Things didn't HAVE to go this way. The show writers chose this twist at the end.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for James_xeno
James_xeno

650

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@ms555: "George RR Martin himself, NOT HBO, said that he hated how LOTR ended happily. People forget that??"

Ugh.. must have missed that.. what a hack.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for aross2004
aross2004

7618

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

Edited By aross2004

@ms555: OR, maybe some people are less pissed about how it actually played out, and more pissed about how the show has gotten us there in the last couple of seasons.

It truly feels like D and D said "Here's how we want the whole thing to end", and worked backwards from there. The problem with that is any number of stupid and ridiculous choices they made to satisfy that ending.

Character arcs were decimated, plot threads were left dangling, many things that had come before in the earlier seasons were either completely ignored or "rolled back". And the gaping holes in basic logic completely strained credulity. Any kind of believability, (or as much as you can have in a fantasy series), was completely thrown out the window, and character motivations that were carefully crafted in the beginning of the series were forgotten or tossed aside with little respect. Again, all for the sake of the ending.

I'm not at all pissed that the ending headed in a very dark direction, (I actually would have cried foul if they went the happily ever after route), but there is no disputing that the show runners really did a disservice to the show by focusing too much on how it would end as opposed to how we got to that point, and respecting everything that came before.

4 • 
Avatar image for CTBradums
CTBradums

239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@aross2004: I think you may have hit the nail on the head. Both D&D and GRRM confirmed long ago that D&D had most of the story written for them through the books, and that D&D were given a basic outline of what would happen towards the end and allowed to fill in the blanks. That said, I absolutely feel that D&D were working back from the end and plugging stuff in as they thought of it to fit Point X to Point Z. How else would it go from the level of detail and plot cohesiveness of S1-4, to somewhat cohesive in S5-S6, to completely off the established rails in S7-8?

That "horse drawing" meme is the most accurate analogy I've seen. S1-4 were detailed, deep, and full of meaningful consequences drawn from the plot and characters. S5-6 had terrible plot decisions by D&D, but were mostly solid and didn't take away from the important stuff. S7-8 are when they had full creative control over what happened in the plot with little guideline other than the ending (by their own and GRRM's admission), and stuff starts falling apart, there's little explanation for a lot of things, former major plot points and information is thrown out the window, and it feels more like a rush to the finish line than anything else.

2 • 
Avatar image for Bread_or_Decide
Bread_or_Decide

29761

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

You expected a show where they stab a pregnant woman in the belly to end with hope?

Delusional.

4 • 
Avatar image for Jerrytt2
Jerrytt2

76

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

"but she learned a lot in Meereen not just about how to conquer, but how to rule" wtf are you talking about, she didn't learn a dang thing about ruling, she didn't established rules and laws, burned everyone who offended her, bringing nothing but chaos to the city, and I can go on and on, she's a good conqueror that's why Lady Olenna told her to ignore her advisors and BE A DRAGON, Dragons destroy, that's their best attribute.

2 • 
Avatar image for drnknnmd
drnknnmd

248

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Jerrytt2: exactly. In Meereen she constantly ignored her advisors. She killed the masters wholesale, whether or not they were complicit in any plot against her, when the very people who had lived there all their lives told her it was a bad idea. She locked a woman in a vault to slowly suffocate to death after being betrayed. How is that showing how she learned to rule? She learned only more interesting ways to kill people. I've said since the beginning that the only difference between Cersei and Daenerys is that Cersei knows what she is and doesn't try to hide behind a false morality. All either one of them has ever wanted was power and the throne and they don't care who has to die for them to get it.

2 • 
Avatar image for randomoaf
randomoaf

86

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The way that Daenerys turned out is just perfect in my opinion. In the developer commentary, they talk about how she lost almost all the ones she loved or trusted. She lost two of her dragons, Sir Jorah, Missandei and she was betrayed by Varys. Jon turned his back on her when she needed him most. Daenerys's lack of love in her life turned her to the dark side and these events added little by little until she ultimately slipped. Jon was the tipping point. He could've and should've returned her love. There was no reason not to. They could've ruled Westeros together.

3 • 
Avatar image for drnknnmd
drnknnmd

248

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@randomoaf: maybe he's just not as down with incest as she is.

3 • 
Avatar image for randomoaf
randomoaf

86

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@drnknnmd: Yes and that's what the show's creators want you to think. It is the logical and rational choice. However this choice contributed to Daenerys losing it. So you question whether Jon made the right choice or not. We won't know that until next episode.

2 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-6793e8ba0e8bf
deactivated-6793e8ba0e8bf

5517

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

What I really appreciated about the books was that there was no sugar coating, good will conquering, happy ending type characters. As depressing as that can be at times, it feels more grounded in that respect. Good intentions can often lead to worse unintended consequences and people are generally terrible. While they can grow and overcome their base desires, they can very easily slip back into self destructive tendencies. Especially if you control dragons...it would take a literal saint not to abuse such power. Power corrupts without fail, sometimes it takes longer, sometimes it's quicker.

3 • 
Avatar image for darthbluntsaber
DarthBluntSaber

236

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By DarthBluntSaber

I dont really think that Snow was complicit in the massacre. He tried to stop it numerous times and was even shown to end up fighting both sides after the massacre started. I dont really think that's being complicit. And his character does still offer that chance for a better world and breaking the cycle. Or maybe not, but it's a bit too early to decide.

2 • 
Avatar image for CTBradums
CTBradums

239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@darthbluntsaber: He didn't try to stop it numerous times. He stopped one guy, then ordered a retreat after they had already raped and pillaged their way into the heart of the city. Other than that, he watched it happen - shock, hesitation, or whatever the reason may be.

As the king, and being in direct face-to-face command of his men, he could've ordered them to stop or order a retreat at any point after the Lannisters surrendered and Dany went apeshit on the city. He didn't, he watched it unfold around him. And proof that he could've stopped it is in the fact that he literally does it well after the raping and pillaging is underway, and no one defies him or breaks ranks, they fall in line and retreat.

Doesn't mean he's a rapist or a murderer, just means he's the one responsible for the rapists and murderers, and he didn't stop them until he had already watched them wade knee-deep into it. Everyone's using the one guy he stopped to absolve him of all responsibility for his men.

2 • 
Avatar image for drnknnmd
drnknnmd

248

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@darthbluntsaber: yeah they missed the target on that point. Jon even killed his own soldier when he caught him trying to rape that woman. He wasn't complicit, he wanted to accept their surrender and was dumbfounded when Daenerys and her army started slaughtering innocents.

2 • 
Avatar image for Richardthe3rd
Richardthe3rd

3844

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

I actually think Dany's movement to the mad Queen makes a lot of sense.

Everyone who's made a play for the iron throne ends up succumbing to their flaws, all the way back to Ned Stark. And the point of it is to espouse that the inherent desire for the iron throne is hamartia that essentially seals their fate. Jon Snow lacks this flaw, which makes him the best candidate to rule, and ironically why he wont.

In a way, Dany's destruction of King's Landing is the first step towards breaking the wheel; destroying the iron throne and the seat of power and allowing the seven kingdoms to rule themselves. She likely doesnt understand that, but I predict the game ends when the iron throne is destroyed.

4 • 
Avatar image for jedijax
jedijax

687

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By jedijax

I think that was exactly the point. They wanted you to be emotionally invested in these characters because people like to believe they can change, that it is something you can will yourself to do. In most fiction, people change their nature simply by wishing hard enough. Maybe the audience feels betrayed because GoT broke this unspoken bond, the escapism, the "fictional" part that shows you things turn out different to reality. I, for one, like how things have turned out, in principle. It's the execution that was terrible.

5 • 
Avatar image for linusa
Linusa

410

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jedijax: Yeah, I don't think the show itself fooled people, I think their own preconceptions did. We've seen the story that Phil thinks the show should've given us plenty often.

3 • 
Avatar image for jedijax
jedijax

687

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@linusa: That's the thing! It is totally a matter of preconceptions, but authors PLAY that to their favor. They know people tend to do it, and so they keep toying with it. The "will they won't they" trick is based on this. Pretty much, all entertainment is based on it. Make believe, so to speak. Of course, if things turn out right for you, it was all planned this way! If it doesn't, oh boy, it's your fault, because you had all these expectations! It's a win-win for content creators.

2 • 
Avatar image for doodoflife
doodoflife

345

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Serious question to the GS staff, how come Phil isn’t writing the reviews for GoT? This is the kind of well articulated piece that the show deserves instead of the trash readers must endure from your other writer Miguel.

Great job Phil.

4 • 
Avatar image for gamingdevil800
gamingdevil800

7159

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 76

User Lists: 0

Hopefully we'll get A Song Of Ice And Fire animated series at some point if George finishes the books.

3 •