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.
“The fact that all it took for Dany to break bad was the death of a few friends, the loss of two dragons, and some accidental competition from Jon Snow”
Wait, what!? I would call the writing worse if she wasn’t affected by the death of 2 of her, as she puts it, children and her closest friends. Not to mention knowing that your advisor has been a traitor, your hand has failed you numerous times always seeming to put his Lannister family first.
If she had heeded Tyrion’s words and stopped attacking at the bell and Cersei had then sprung some sort of trap or scheme, I bet you would write just how predictable that was. Danny needed it done. She needed Cersei crushed. I can see the rational rationale in the writing. The last couple of seasons have been rushed but still have fleshed these events out far more than any movie would be able to. It has obeyed themes going back seasons (including Dany’s do anything for the throne attitude) so I really fail to understand how you can slate episode after episode offering weak (and often impossible) alternatives. You’ve already made a prediction for next week, it’s not bad but will you have the maturity to not slate an alternative or be blinded by your need to see your own theories come to life... My prediction is no.
@jeepguy16: It's difficult to say about the dragon, on one hand, yes they should be vigilant and aware of the weapon as you say, on the other it was a carefully planned ambush designed to deceive and catch them off guard by hiding the ships. I wouldn't say this defies logic, if the scene seemed wrong to you then I would say the director has not correctly displayed his vision to you, the intention clearly is that they are meant to be at a location where they have a sense of security, perhaps this would've been better further out to sea, behind an island etc. The same can be said about the meeting at the gate, surely they are out of range, if they appear too close, perhaps the director should've used a wider angle.
There reaches a point after the treachery and deception over the whole show where it can be said, everyone should be aware of every threat all the time, I'm sure if a red wedding happened now, everyone would say just how predictable this outcome was. Realistically though, someone is going to outsmart someone somewhere, blame the fatigue of battle, say the other party got it wrong etc.
@Icarian: I wouldn't say that he has no say, as per the interview you posted, he says "I am involved in the show, of course" and "I’m still here whenever they want to talk to me, and I’m always glad to weigh in. David and Dan have come to Santa Fe and we’ve discussed many of the ultimate developments, those landmarks that I spoke to at the end of the road that we’re both driving for. So I don’t need to be quite as involved as I was at the beginning."
We can all speculate on how much input exactly this results in but I think it's extremely unlikely as critics posit that the show-runners are now running wild and butchering everything completely beyond his vision.
I find it laughable that the reviewer accuses the show of being "nonsensical" and criticizes the writing when all that is offered up are half baked "better" alternatives that make absolutely zero sense. Last week your suggestions that Jon be immune to fire and Arya be disguised as Bran actually made me LOL! The absurdness of these comments and the lack of knowledge on your behalf is shocking from someone who so boldly criticizes the actual show, perhaps you don't understand the show and the motivations of its characters. I can only imagine your scathing comments had the show runners actually used your half baked ideas, throwing themes, lore and story built over seasons out the window for some added flare. (Like you, Let's randomly start this assessment from last week)
This week, the suggestion that the conflict is easily resolved through a wedding sounds like a Disney princess movie. Sure, let them get married and everyone lives happily ever after, united under the King and Queen! Let's forget that she's his aunt, let's forget that he is actually viewed as Ned Stark's son in the North where even then they chastised his behavior for bending the knee to the queen who they still do not trust. Let's pretend the North would be absolutely fine when they find out he is actually a Targaryan who is now married to his aunt when he bent that knee, surely the Northerners would take no aversion to this at all! You mention Varys having an aversion to her wearing the pants, but not his fear that she becomes a tyrant before and on the throne, something his purpose of the entire show has been to avoid. The ambush by Euron was just that an ambush, we can't see the error of parallax, we don't know her height in the air, they were not flying into combat, why not assume they were well hidden and unnoticed during an ambush? Should they check for scorpions under their beds every night? This is the most ridiculous blindside since the Lannister's hijacked the red wedding which surely every one should've seen coming as well!
Long story short is, the reviewer clearly fancies himself smarter than "the smartest (Dumbest) minds in Westeros" and the showrunners, oh and GRR himself who in fact does consult to the show and the show does so things "his way". Surely if he were hand of the Queen/King, no one would ever out strategize him in war, people would randomly be bestowed with powers they don't have, people that have had motivations for ages would suddenly forget these and of course there would be peace in the seven kingdoms... Boring!
@Thanatos2k: I disagree, I find them very different to your general free for all, the map, the scavenge, the closing areas etc. if you haven't tried the games I'd say give them a go and you may be pleasantly surprised. If you have played them then I suppose we just evaluate similarities and differences differently. :-)
@gaijin: I played a lot in the 90s. These battle royale games are actually a very different take. Sure it can be argued it's all incremental changes that led here but give these new ones a go, I think you'll find them novel and different.
dunkstar1's comments