Game of Thrones (TV, fantasy) Thread

[ErHaO]

I absolutely enjoyed the episode. It was well directed and had some great moments.

Buuut, unless there is some plottwist coming, it feels lacking given the amount of build up. Yeah, we are near the end and it makes sense for this storyline to get to an end. But I don't know, for a series that usually does a great job building up plot points and laying out the history that led to major events, this feels a bit like "is that it...?



I honestly am not feeling much for the upcoming war against Cersei. A lot of previous Game of Thrones conflicts were so great because you knew both sides and there were a lot of compelling characters. There were a lot of personal conflicts on many levels that elevated the material. Cersei has had a good arc and I think she is a great villain, but I think Euron is a lame ass villain and I don't care for monstro mountain and that evil scientist. What they will do with Bron in regards to the Lannister brothers will be interesting though, that is an example of personal conflicts that make this series so great.


For this (presumably) last batttle I wonder how things will go. I hope it is not a repeat of the previous three episodes (two episodes of downtime followed by one major battle).

[lonestar]

So I'm watching it a second time and I swear HBO did something to make it more visible, I feel it's not half as dark as it was Sunday night.

[King Postwhore]

Well that was glorious.   I am so looking to see Cersei's head on a stick.

[KevShmev]

Can we give more love to Rhaegal?  Drogon gets all the love, but Rhaegal fought like a beast and tore half off Viserion's face off before Drogon came in late and knocked the Night King off and sent him tumbling to the ground.

[The Walrus]

Definitely the coolest episode for dragon action ever.

[RuRoRul]

Definitely, it was easy to almost forget about it because the ending (and the fact that it had ended) dominated my thoughts, but in fact I think all the dragon flying scenes were much better than any in the show before and the dragon fight was really cool (probably the best dragon on dragon fight in anything). It was quite dark and chaotic but I was able to follow it well enough, the way Rhaegal tore at Viserion and tore half his face off was brilliant. Only criticism is the after the fight ended, I was unsure if it was intended that Rhaegal and Viserion were dead, the way Rhaegal crashed onto the ground then went out of frame and how Viserion was getting chomped on by Drogon. Only when Viserion reappeared in the battle did I figure that Rhaegal was probably alive too.

[Chino]

So I'm watching it a second time and I swear HBO did something to make it more visible, I feel it's not half as dark as it was Sunday night.

My money is on the servers get so overloaded on Sunday night, that there is some black magic compression fuckery going on that reduces the quality a bit. In my circle of people, anyone that had trouble seeing the episode was streaming it through either HBO Go or HBO Now. The two guys that have Dish had no issues.

[KevShmev]

I watched the episode with the lights off and everything sealed off so the room was pitch black except for the TV.  And even with that, there were still moments that could have been not so dark, but I get why it was.  And I am someone who has long vented my frustration with how dark certain things are shot nowadays (Boardwalk Empire aggravated me with that at times).

[KevShmev]

Definitely, it was easy to almost forget about it because the ending (and the fact that it had ended) dominated my thoughts, but in fact I think all the dragon flying scenes were much better than any in the show before and the dragon fight was really cool (probably the best dragon on dragon fight in anything). It was quite dark and chaotic but I was able to follow it well enough, the way Rhaegal tore at Viserion and tore half his face off was brilliant. Only criticism is the after the fight ended, I was unsure if it was intended that Rhaegal and Viserion were dead, the way Rhaegal crashed onto the ground then went out of frame and how Viserion was getting chomped on by Drogon. Only when Viserion reappeared in the battle did I figure that Rhaegal was probably alive too.

Honestly, had it been a fight during the day where it was bright and you could see everything, it might have looked almost cartoon-ish.  Having it at night with wind and snow blowing added a really cool element, even if there were moments where you lost track of what was going on for a few seconds.

[Adami]

My prediction....

Dany will take her army of 25 people to fight Cersei's army of thousands. Somehow they will survive (at least the non red-shirts). One of them, probably Sansa will sneak in and kill Cersei, causing all of her armies to also die instantly.

[Bolsters]

I wouldn't normally post something like this in such a discussion-heavy thread, but I thought it was too funny not to share.

[lonestar]

So I'm watching it a second time and I swear HBO did something to make it more visible, I feel it's not half as dark as it was Sunday night.

My money is on the servers get so overloaded on Sunday night, that there is some black magic compression fuckery going on that reduces the quality a bit. In my circle of people, anyone that had trouble seeing the episode was streaming it through either HBO Go or HBO Now. The two guys that have Dish had no issues.

I was at a meeting for the first showing, but the peeps I live with DVR'd it, and that's what I watched. It'd make sense, my dad was using my HBO Go account and said it was dark af.

[gmillerdrake]

So I'm watching it a second time and I swear HBO did something to make it more visible, I feel it's not half as dark as it was Sunday night.

I'm 40 minutes into my first rewatch and I can see a difference. Not sure 'why' that is but it's noticable.

[gmillerdrake]

Yeah....upon second watch.....that episode is pretty freaking awesome. And whether it was a compression issue or HBO responded to the darkness complaints by having them adjust the levels....it's definitely looking different than Sunday nights broadcast.

[ariich]

Because it was the general assumption of many, many, many people that the entire overarching story was "People squabble for this and that throne and fail to see the bigger menace". Yes, the game of thrones is what actually make people interested, but the beautiful narrative device was that, in the biggest scheme of things, it didn't really matter - remember Commander Mormont to Jon Snow at the end of Season 1? "When dead things and worse come for us, do you think it matters who sits on the Iron Throne?" NO, IT WASN'T MEANT TO MATTER. At least that's how I and many other people saw it.

If you re-read the Lord of the Rings, you notice the hints that Gandalf drops about how you shouldn't mindlessly kill people, and that even Gollum has a part to play in the end. Imagine now that it was not just hints here and there, but it was made the whole point of the book: "Don't kill people for nothing", just like it was so evidently hammered home that "the only war that matters is the one against the dead". Now imagine that, with Lord of the Rings being almost every second page (or scene, if you think the movie) a reminder of "Don't kill people just for the sake of killing", Frodo at the end kills Gollum for no deep reason and heroically throws the Ring into the fire with a badass one-liner. The entire point of the story was that Gollum with his stupidity and carelessness was to accidentally destroy the ring, Frodo killing him would negate the entire premise.

Ah, I'll just let Tywin Lannister himself explain it.

I know your post wasn't specifically about about this but I think it's part of an overarching discussion (and I see it as a good jumping off point for me) about the White Walker threat being resolved now and the last 3 episodes focusing on (apparently) political and human conflicts such as who sits on the Iron Throne, and whether that is right for Game of Thrones / ASOIAF because of the previous point that was hammered home that the bigger threat matters more than the fighting over rule.

I don't see it as a question of either the message about the bigger threat was wrong, or the show is betraying its own message by not making the fight against the White Walkers the "endgame" (as I've seen many commenters elsewhere refer to it as). And that's because this was the endgame, this was the climax to the "biggest" story arc in the show, the fight against the potentially world ending threat.

Based on some discussions I'd seen elsewhere where people were acting as though the White Walkers had been dealt with so early and how that indicated they were just a sideplot or a plot device for some bigger "endgame", I did a little number crunching to help demonstrate my point: as of the end of the episode The Long Night, we are 94% of the way through Game of Thrones. And yes, that's accurate down to minutes of runtime (based on the estimated lengths for the last 3 episodes, which might be approximate placeholders rather than exact, but still). So when we're talking about the White Walker storyline and whether or not that was set aside too early, we're talking about a storyline that was introduced in the first scene and had it's climax 94% of the way through the entire story. So it's not over because it was set aside for a "bigger endgame" - it's over because it's near the end of the story.

You mention Lord of the Rings in your post and, although it's not related to the point you were making from it, it reminds me of GRRM's appreciation for Lord of the Rings and specifically the ending (as quoted earlier):

GRRM: " I've said before that the tone of the ending that I'm going for is bittersweet. I mean, it's no secret that Tolkien has been a huge influence on me, and I love the way he ended Lord of the Rings. It ends with victory, but it's a bittersweet victory. Frodo is never whole again, and he goes away to the Undying Lands, and the other people live their lives. And the scouring of the Shire—brilliant piece of work, which I didn't understand when I was 13 years old: "Why is this here? The story's over?" But every time I read it I understand the brilliance of that segment more and more. All I can say is that's the kind of tone I will be aiming for. Whether I achieve it or not, that will be up to people like you and my readers to judge."

In Lord of the Rings a lot was made of how important the quest to destroy the ring is. Do you know at what stage of the books the ring is destroyed? It's 91% of the way through. A whole couple of chapters before the equivalent stage of the story where the Night King was killed in Game of Thrones. I don't think the fact that the story moved on to include other things after the destruction of the ring invalidated the claims that it was the most important task or undercut that storyline. It's just that the story isn't over when the world ending threat is defeated. And for GRRM, that "what happens after the world is saved?" is an even bigger interest than Tolkien (he's pretty much stated that's one of the things that inspired him, taking a high fantasy story and delving into the human complications that would arise out of it). That's why I don't think Game of Thrones having some part of its story (6%, remember) addressing the conflict that occurs "after" the great war necessarily undercuts the importance of the great war that came before it.

I do think that the poor structure of these last two seasons has heightened this feeling for people though. If they had somehow managed to produce these last two seasons as one extended 13 episode season (or even just labelled them Season 7A and 7B) then I think people wouldn't mind as much the battle against the Others falling in episode 10. Because 94% of the story or not, there's no way to stop people feeling like "halfway through a season" is leaving too much for after the Night King if he was supposed to be the greatest threat.

Edit: Also  at the gif. I hate and avoid that place because if the slightest leak comes out they spam it everywhere (thankfully leaks have been very limited this season so it's not as big a concern) but it's a shame as there's some funny content made there.

This is a long post that seems to assume that the problem people have is simply that the battle should have come at the end rather than the 4th-last episode (correct me if I'm wrong). But I don't recognise that as being the issue at all (or at least not directly). The issue is the narrative arc being anti-climactic and jarring with key themes of the show/books.

If after all this time, the theme has turned from "we should stop squabbling over who rules and work together to defeat bigger threats" to "let other people deal with bigger threats so you get a competitive advantage over them" then the show just suddenly became a whole lot less meaningful for a whole lot of people.

[MirrorMask]

Very excellent post, RuRoRul! it didn't deserve to disappear in the last post of the previous page so good job on Ariich quoting it.

It's  a very nice and well thought comparison to Lord of the Rings, that surely helps a lot to understand the mindset of people fine with how the show's going.... but I'll have to disagree anyway  not because, as I previously said  to Kev, I'm right and the other are wrong, it's just good fun discussing different points of view.

Ariich said it nicely for me - it feels that the overarching theme of the show was just derailed. I completely accept and understand the premise of "the scouring of the Shire" - but, as important Saruman was, there was no doubt that the big issue of the book was destroying the Ring and that had happened. Cersei is not a secondary villain that survived the big bad, she's one of the ovearching villains of the story. A more fitting equivalent of the scouring of the Shire would be the White Walkers defeated, Cersei dethroned, and the Starks coming home to find Euron has conquered Winterfell.

I didn't want either a big battle in the last episode - but I wanted, and I assumed the story hinted as such, the White Walkers to invade all of Westeros, and every single person realizing "Oh shit, we should have paid attention to the importance of the Wall and how some people told us that the real menace was all along beyond the wall". I thought and assumed that the two issues, the battle for the Iron Throne and the existential menace, would merge into a dramatic meleè.

My thoughts and my assumptions are my own, the show writers are not wrong for having different plans in mind, and nobody who disagrees with me is wrong - heck, I'm actually envious of people who are truly riveting in the excitement of the episode, wish I could be one of them! but I know I'm not alone in thinking that we went from "Soon the whole world will realize how stupid and selfish they were" to "Look, Cersei was right all along, let your enemies destroy each other" and that this is a poor change.

Uh well, let's see what the actual, final battle for the Iron Throne will bring!

[Podaar]

The issue is the narrative arc being anti-climactic and jarring with key themes of the show/books.

Ned, Kal Drogo, Oberon, Tywin, Lysa, Rob, Catelyn, and many others, would like a word with you. I thought anti-climatic and jarring endings ARE the theme of the show.

[KevShmev]

Emilia Clarke was on Jimmy Kimmel last night and gave no spoilers (of course), but merely said to get the biggest TV you can find for when you watch episode 5.

[The Walrus]

If after all this time, the theme has turned from "we should stop squabbling over who rules and work together to defeat bigger threats" to "let other people deal with bigger threats so you get a competitive advantage over them" then the show just suddenly became a whole lot less meaningful for a whole lot of people.

But that isn't what's going on. They DID work together to conquer a bigger threat. That Cersei betrayed them is 100% in line with her character.

[cramx3]

Definitely the coolest episode for dragon action ever.

The shot of them above the storm clouds with the moon was awesome

[The Walrus]

Definitely the coolest episode for dragon action ever.

The shot of them above the storm clouds with the moon was awesome

A few days ago someone on Reddit worked that shot into a phone wallpaper. Now my phone is dragonful 

[ariich]

If after all this time, the theme has turned from "we should stop squabbling over who rules and work together to defeat bigger threats" to "let other people deal with bigger threats so you get a competitive advantage over them" then the show just suddenly became a whole lot less meaningful for a whole lot of people.

But that isn't what's going on. They DID work together to conquer a bigger threat. That Cersei betrayed them is 100% in line with her character.

Exactly, and now she has a competitive advantage she wouldn't otherwise have had. That's a message I cannot get behind.

But I'll reiterate the very first word of what you quoted from my earlier post: "If". *If* Cersei is the endgame and the whole winter/mysticism/religion storyline is entirely finished, then that is how I will feel regardless of what happens.

However, I'm increasingly open to the idea of this not being the case and cautiously interested in what surprises they might have for us. Lots of very interesting theories about where this could go. I'm not setting myself any expectation of a particular one because that just leads to disappointment, but there's plenty of scope to do something more exciting and meaningful than just a battle for which human gets to rule.

[The Walrus]

Sorry ariich, I must not be understanding - Cersei announced last season she didn't plan to help out in the North, and I think it's been clear for at least a full season that they're attacking the undead army first before Cersei. There's no bait and switch so I'm curious why this is suddenly an issue for you. I think we all just assumed there was 'more to come' re: Night King and white walkers but again we were told literally everything about them already. I guess I'm just not really understanding the beef with Cersei being the final obstacle to conquer. To me it fits like a glove...

[Adami]

I just want to comment on one minor thing. I've seen a number of people (here and other places) talk about how brilliant Cersei was when she didn't fight for the North, cause now her army should be able to take out Dany's without much problem, and how it was such a genius strategy.

I am calling BS on that. It was a terrible strategy that paid off by pure luck and only because the writers made it go that way. In all realistic sense, the North should have lost the battle at Winterfell. They won only because the plot called for it. The dead should have overtaken Winterfell, killed them all, and then had a HUGE army with three undead dragons.

So no, Cersei was not being brilliant. She WAS being very much in line with her character, definitely, but her character has never been that smart. She just happens to have a lot of other smart and powerful people making sure she's okay.

[ariich]

Not sure how else to explain what I said before. It would reverse the key theme of the show from something that resonates strongly with me to something that doesn't speak to me at all.

I just want to comment on one minor thing. I've seen a number of people (here and other places) talk about how brilliant Cersei was when she didn't fight for the North, cause now her army should be able to take out Dany's without much problem, and how it was such a genius strategy.

I am calling BS on that. It was a terrible strategy that paid off by pure luck and only because the writers made it go that way. In all realistic sense, the North should have lost the battle at Winterfell. They won only because the plot called for it. The dead should have overtaken Winterfell, killed them all, and then had a HUGE army with three undead dragons.

So no, Cersei was not being brilliant. She WAS being very much in line with her character, definitely, but her character has never been that smart. She just happens to have a lot of other smart and powerful people making sure she's okay.

Yes, all of that too.

EDIT: This probably comes across as flippant, so actually I will try and explain myself more fully as I enjoy these debates. Longer (but not super-long) post shortly.

[cramx3]

I just want to comment on one minor thing. I've seen a number of people (here and other places) talk about how brilliant Cersei was when she didn't fight for the North, cause now her army should be able to take out Dany's without much problem, and how it was such a genius strategy.

I am calling BS on that. It was a terrible strategy that paid off by pure luck and only because the writers made it go that way. In all realistic sense, the North should have lost the battle at Winterfell. They won only because the plot called for it. The dead should have overtaken Winterfell, killed them all, and then had a HUGE army with three undead dragons.

So no, Cersei was not being brilliant. She WAS being very much in line with her character, definitely, but her character has never been that smart. She just happens to have a lot of other smart and powerful people making sure she's okay.

Honestly, based on what that dead army really looked like, no one had any chance.  Cersei refusing bought her life more time IMO, so going North was suicide and staying south well, also suicide but you get to live a bit longer. The smartest was Euron to GTFO which goes back to the Wildling strategy of just fleeing.  If we are going to remove what the plot calls for, everyone should be dead in Westeros and even Essos once the Night King flies across the Narrow Sea.

[kaos2900]

I guess I've always assumed the primary story line of the show/books was who ends up on the throne, not the Night King. That was the unifying force that brought (almost) everyone together, at least in the short term. Was there really any other option to how it ended with out a lame cliff hanger? They either all die, kill the night king, or a small group of the main characters run away.

[The Walrus]

I think what I disagree with then is that this is a key theme of the show. It's not. It's part of the plot, but not a theme. Cersei and the game of thrones has been the real obstacle all along. I'm genuinely not trying to be contrarian, I either don't agree with people's arguments about the overall series or just don't understand where the criticism is suddenly coming from. Up until this season premiered there was nothing but praise, the only backlash was against the speed of the 'beyond the wall' episode and how useless Dorne is. Then it premieres and the Night King finally gets killed and suddenly everything is wrong with the show. I am genuinely stumped here.

I guess I've always assumed the primary story line of the show/books was who ends up on the throne, not the Night King. That was the unifying force that brought (almost) everyone together, at least in the short term. Was there really any other option to how it ended with out a lame cliff hanger? They either all die, kill the night king, or a small group of the main characters run away.

Yeah, this, seriously. Was Cersei, a major character, very deep and complex, supposed to somehow die before... the Night King?

God I'm frustrated. I really wish I could agree with the lambasting the series is getting but I just can't - I'm disappointed to a certain extent but overall it's still bloody amazing.

EDIT 2: Found on Reddit from season 1 episode 1...

[MirrorMask]

Well, if at all, I wish I could agree with everyone enjoing the latest outcome 

It's basically points of view. Some people accept the White Walkers as a diversion and are fine with the battle for the Iron Throne being the ultimate end game. Some others bought into the "the real menace is the one coming from beyond the wall" and were led to believe and expect that Westeros would have been fully taken over by the White Walkers, with every single person south of Winterfell going "Shit, we should have listened to the Night's Watch and realize that you don't build a magical 700 ft tall wall just to keep out some illegal immigrants wildlings".

In the years before World War II, everyone who chose to ignore Hitler saw how wrong they were. Nobody south of the Twins will even believe that icy nazis were real, or realize that Arya is literally the saviour of the entire continent.

[ariich]

Ok, more detailed thoughts on the provisional issue I have with the last episode *if* the winter is coming/mysticism/religion side of the show is finished and the last 3 episodes are all about the battle for which human(s) get to rule Westeros.

Firstly, to reiterate some points i've made a number of times already, a key theme of both the books AND the show has always been that fighting over who rules is in the grand scheme of things a petty squabble, and not only ignores bigger threats but actively harms the ability to address them because it weakens everyone. This isn't just a plot point, GRRM has said that this is ultimately what the books are about, and the show has definitely embraced it including during the current season. The implied direction of the rest of the season scraps and arguably even reverses this theme, as I said before.

Another important point is about prophecy. Do prophecies need to always come true? No. But again the show has very much established that prophecies do come true (Cersei's 3 children being blonde and dying, Dany being unable to conceive, etc) even if they've left some out from the books. And while it may not have come up very often and casual viewers might not even recognise it, prophecies about the Lord of Light, Azor Ahai, balance between ice and fire, etc. have been covered in the show. It's therefore a reasonable expectation that these should mean something, given that other prophecies have meant something. *If* the rest of the season is as speculated in my opening paragrpah, then none of these mean anything. The Lord of Light didn't do anything particularly special (he allowed Melisandre to bring Jon Snow back but he wasn't that important in the end), and the concept of balance is irrelevant.

Cersei announced last season she didn't plan to help out in the North, and I think it's been clear for at least a full season that they're attacking the undead army first before Cersei.

Indeed, but precisely because she didn't offer proper support, and given the key theme of the show as explained above, I and many others did not expect that to be the end of this story arc. I certainly expected it to fail in some way. Now, as I said before, I'm increasingly open to some of the interesting ways this could go, and there are some good theories about how although this particular fight didn't fail, actually the bigger and/or real threat is something else (and no I don't mean Cersei).

I think we all just assumed there was 'more to come' re: Night King and white walkers but again we were told literally everything about them already.

Just to clarify: That's not my issue. I also have no problem with things that some have complained about like "how did Arya even get there?". Stuff like that is explained and set up well enough IMO.

I guess I'm just not really understanding the beef with Cersei being the final obstacle to conquer. To me it fits like a glove...

Why is Cersei the big bad? She's just the latest in a long line of nasty rulers. And she's only recently become the ruler. If that's the big endgame to the story then it's just really not very interesting to me. If they defeat her, cool, but there'll be another nasty ruler along later on.

And I'll say once again, this is all provisional depending on what they do with the last three episodes.

[The Walrus]

Ariich, first, thanks a lot for taking the time to write all that up.

Another important point is about prophecy. Do prophecies need to always come true? No. But again the show has very much established that prophecies do come true (Cersei's 3 children being blonde and dying, Dany being unable to conceive, etc) even if they've left some out from the books. And while it may not have come up very often and casual viewers might not even recognise it, prophecies about the Lord of Light, Azor Ahai, balance between ice and fire, etc. have been covered in the show. It's therefore a reasonable expectation that these should mean something, given that other prophecies have meant something. *If* the rest of the season is as speculated in my opening paragrpah, then none of these mean anything. The Lord of Light didn't do anything particularly special (he allowed Melisandre to bring Jon Snow back but he wasn't that important in the end), and the concept of balance is irrelevant.

The show has also very much established that prophecies do not come true. That is the entire point of them sacrificing Shireen and the horror on Melisandre's face when she realizes the prophecy was bunk. I don't believe every prophecy needs to be fulfilled or even addressed. Prophecies are prophecies - they are fleeting, they are not to be trusted except by those with the faith.

You say Jon Snow wasn't "that important" in the end... Tell me, would the North even entertain the idea of fighting alongside Daenerys, the Dothraki, the Unsullied, without Jon being there to unite the North and its lords? If Jon wasn't revived, Winterfell would have been lost.

Just to clarify: That's not my issue. I also have no problem with things that some have complained about like "how did Arya even get there?". Stuff like that is explained and set up well enough IMO.

Common ground!

I guess I'm just not really understanding the beef with Cersei being the final obstacle to conquer. To me it fits like a glove...

Why is Cersei the big bad? She's just the latest in a long line of nasty rulers. And she's only recently become the ruler. If that's the big endgame to the story then it's just really not very interesting to me. If they defeat her, cool, but there'll be another nasty ruler along later on.

And I'll say once again, this is all provisional depending on what they do with the last three episodes.

Cersei is the big bad (in my opinion) because she has been scheming from the very beginning. She planned the death of Robert Baratheon, which led into the War of the Five Kings. She then plotted and schemed to get Ned Stark not only off the throne but killed, and we all know everything spiraled out of control after that. Cersei is the big bad because she blew up a huge chunk of her city - and the entire freaking religious HQ - and a number of very powerful people. She betrays even her own family (Lancel first, then much later Jaime and Tyrion). Even after her downfall and walk of shame, she clings to power with an iron fist and will do anything to ensure that she stays on the throne. She threatens any and all opposition with force, Gregor Clegane is the manifestation of her strength (political power made flesh). Everything she's done and gone through has made her a true villain in every sense of the word. She doesn't want what is good for the common people, or humanity as a whole - she wants absolute power, she only cares (at this point) for her and the child in her belly, and even wants the rest of her family dead. I argue she officially became the Mad Queen when she decided to use that wildfire to destroy her own city, just like Aerys Targaryen planned to.

It all goes back to what she told Ned at the very start of the show. "When you play the Game of Thrones, you win or die. There is no middle ground." She's done the best at that job. The Mad King, dead. Robert Baratheon, dead. Joffrey Baratheon, dead. Tommen Baratheon, dead. Margaery Tyrell, dead. Cersei Lannister... alive and proud. A good villain is smart and cunning. That's Cersei in a nutshell, and she's outlived almost everybody else, which is amazing given how high up on the ladder of power she is.

[ariich]

Thanks for responding! Lots to answer.

The show has also very much established that prophecies do not come true. That is the entire point of them sacrificing Shireen and the horror on Melisandre's face when she realizes the prophecy was bunk. I don't believe every prophecy needs to be fulfilled or even addressed. Prophecies are prophecies - they are fleeting, they are not to be trusted except by those with the faith.

Not sure I agree with this. The sacrificing of Shireen was Melisandre (mis)interpreting what she was seeing, and she was the only one bigging up Stannis. But the importance of Jon Snow doesn't only come from Melisandre saying it but links in with other themes like the balance of ice and fire (with Jon being both a Stark and Targaeryan). There's been a big narrative build up for this over many seasons/books.

You say Jon Snow wasn't "that important" in the end... Tell me, would the North even entertain the idea of fighting alongside Daenerys, the Dothraki, the Unsullied, without Jon being there to unite the North and its lords? If Jon wasn't revived, Winterfell would have been lost.

But at the same time Jon has also done loads of things badly and got a lot of people killed who might have been able to help (he only survived the Battle of the Bastards because of Sansa, and the Dothraki were wiped out because of his terrible tactics). I'm not saying he did nothing of value but he doesn't seem to have been (so far) any more significant than lots of other characters.

Just to clarify: That's not my issue. I also have no problem with things that some have complained about like "how did Arya even get there?". Stuff like that is explained and set up well enough IMO.

Common ground!

Woot!

Cersei is the big bad (in my opinion) because she has been scheming from the very beginning. She planned the death of Robert Baratheon, which led into the War of the Five Kings. She then plotted and schemed to get Ned Stark not only off the throne but killed, and we all know everything spiraled out of control after that.

She didn't want him killed, she just wanted him to bend the knee to Joffrey. It was Joffrey who kicked everything out of control.

Cersei is the big bad because she blew up a huge chunk of her city - and the entire freaking religious HQ - and a number of very powerful people. She betrays even her own family (Lancel first, then much later Jaime and Tyrion). Even after her downfall and walk of shame, she clings to power with an iron fist and will do anything to ensure that she stays on the throne. She threatens any and all opposition with force, Gregor Clegane is the manifestation of her strength (political power made flesh). Everything she's done and gone through has made her a true villain in every sense of the word. She doesn't want what is good for the common people, or humanity as a whole - she wants absolute power, she only cares (at this point) for her and the child in her belly, and even wants the rest of her family dead. I argue she officially became the Mad Queen when she decided to use that wildfire to destroy her own city, just like Aerys Targaryen planned to.

Yeah she's extremely villainous, but lots of others have been, as you say like the Mad King who was probably worse. And she's far from the only one who wants power above all else (including Dany).

It all goes back to what she told Ned at the very start of the show. "When you play the Game of Thrones, you win or die. There is no middle ground." She's done the best at that job. The Mad King, dead. Robert Baratheon, dead. Joffrey Baratheon, dead. Tommen Baratheon, dead. Margaery Tyrell, dead. Cersei Lannister... alive and proud. A good villain is smart and cunning. That's Cersei in a nutshell, and she's outlived almost everybody else, which is amazing given how high up on the ladder of power she is.

Ok but her story isn't finished yet, and if she ends up dead, then she was exactly the same as all those other power-hungry villains.

[The Walrus]

Not sure I agree with this. The sacrificing of Shireen was Melisandre (mis)interpreting what she was seeing, and she was the only one bigging up Stannis. But the importance of Jon Snow doesn't only come from Melisandre saying it but links in with other themes like the balance of ice and fire (with Jon being both a Stark and Targaeryan). There's been a big narrative build up for this over many seasons/books.

Well, I agree to an extent, they definitely have been building it up. But don't get me wrong, I don't think the revival to be at Winterfell was his only purpose - the reveal of his ancestry is going to play a huge part in these last few episodes. The conflict between him and Dany could easily tear them apart either before or after Cersei is killed. As for Shireen, I think that's the point: Melisandre misinterpreted the prophecies, which goes to show that even those with the faith and magical powers can't always be trusted to be correct. Melisandre doesn't know everything, but I think towards the end, she started to get things correct - kind of like how you'll struggle with a jigsaw puzzle for a long time, and then as you get closer to finishing, you're figuring out the correct pieces more quickly and you'll eventually know which piece goes where right away.

But at the same time Jon has also done loads of things badly and got a lot of people killed who might have been able to help (he only survived the Battle of the Bastards because of Sansa, and the Dothraki were wiped out because of his terrible tactics). I'm not saying he did nothing of value but he doesn't seem to have been (so far) any more significant than lots of other characters.

Oh, I agree - Jon is far from a brilliant tactician, but he never claimed to be (we see this in the Battle of Winterfell; he does no commanding at all). He never wanted to be a leader in the first place. I think his significance comes from the fact that he is secretly a Targaryen and has the proper claim to the throne. He has a heart of gold and cares for his family and his people, but is reluctant to lead. He's essentially the polar opposite of Cersei. But I think it's good that he isn't THAT much more significant than everybody else, otherwise he'd just be a typical fantasy hero-king.

Ok but her story isn't finished yet, and if she ends up dead, then she was exactly the same as all those other power-hungry villains.

I disagree with this strongly, but if I am to entertain what you just wrote here: wouldn't that be the point? That for all her cunning, all her sacrifices and things she's lost and everything she's been through, that she ends up dead just like everyone else? Remember when Dany was warned - by Tyrion I believe - about ruling with an iron fist and how it makes your power brittle because everyone beneath you wants to see you dead? Cersei isn't destined to own the throne, I think she's destined to lose it tragically despite sacrificing her entire family for it.

[KevShmev]

Cersei sacrificed her whole family?  Wait, what?

[The Walrus]

Cersei sacrificed her whole family?  Wait, what?

Maybe sacrifice isn't the right word, although there is plenty of hubris and selfishness involved with getting Joffrey and then Tommen onto the throne for her own gain, and in the end she is turning her back on Jaime and Tyrion (one a former ally, another someone she's always hated but never wanted dead) and now she feels the need to get rid of both of them to hold on to her position. But she also got her former husband killed in order to put Joffrey on the throne. I dunno, I used the wrong word there, but regardless, she has lost her whole family and her baby hasn't even been born yet, so that's about all she's got left to protect. Damn the realm, damn its people - for Cersei it's all about her and her kid.