Anyway, the most egregious issue is Dany's characterization, which is a shame because I think I get the general idea intended which makes some sense. (...) and there wasn't even really an explanation of what she was thinking, so.
It does, but there's a huge storytelling problem here that I'm not sure how they could have solved - but I'm almost sure they didn't even see the problem. A lot of people pointed out ways they could have had Dany's actions make more sense (one of my favourites: Don't kill the other dragon in the previous episode - have Dany attack KL with two dragons, and then have one of them get killed by a lone sniper just after the city surrenders, so that Dany's actions come from a place of shock and grief shared by the audience). But the problem with that is, they don't WANT the audience to be on Dany's side; we're supposed to suddenly think she's nothing but a dangerous dictator who Must Be Stopped At All Cost. After EIGHT SEASONS of building her up as a protagonist. They can't (or don't think they can) afford to have the story be ambiguous here; Jon must be justified. (You can't sell Buffy killing Angel if Acathla never actually opens up.)
Dany never once appears to consider that her own value system should demand that Jon take the throne.
True, and that would open up a lot of potential story with the Aegon thing, as opposed to just have Jon tell everyone who'd listen that he didn't want to be king, waaah. But then again Dany doesn't seem to have any form of value system whatsoever in the last few episodes.
Relatedly, the idea that Jon stabbing Dany is a solution is itself kind of crazy -- I mean, like, you are seriously telling me that the Dothraki and Unsullied and Drogon are all going to just chill out and stop looting and pillaging and burning and killing once Dany is dead?
Hey, it worked for the Night King. That's how you solve problems in a world run on complex politics. That's why the kingdom was famously at peace for decades after Jaime killed the Mad King.
HOW COULD A SONG OF ICE AND FIRE NOT MENTION TYRION. HE WAS THE HAND OR ACTING HAND TO THREE DIFFERENT MONARCHS FFS AND WAS CONVICTED OF KILLING ONE THE KING, KILLED ANOTHER ACTUAL HAND AND SUGGESTED THE ASSASSINATION OF ANOTHER QUEEN. HOLY SHIT.
And begs the question of which important character whose actions explain everything was left out of the version of the story that WE got to see.
(I did like the dragon burning the throne though.)
One thing that bugs me about this series and character endings: there's a lot of mealy-mouthed stuff where characters have to choose between two things -- between what they once thought they wanted, and what they maybe now want -- and then they choose one and then go and choose the other. It just feels like they are trying to have it both ways -- like there's where character growth will take them, and then what fanservice demands.
Yeah.
It's like they need to tell both the story of the man whose perverse undying love destroys him but never fails, and the one who is moved to change and redeem himself by the example of a brave and noble person, and they just can't pick one or the other. And I mean, it is a tension baked into the character and has been since he met Brienne, but at a certain point it gets frustrating, and it feels like Jaime's backsliding is only written as "I don't deserve any better" because they can't figure out a better reason for him to go back on the choice he's just made. And they have him still fight Euron pointlessly because it's like they are unable to actually come up with any variations on what types of stories this guy can be in besides "he's a fighter," even though that was taken from him years ago.
OH yeah. And I mean, they could have sold this if the show had allowed for ambiguity, for the surviving characters possibly being wrong in their reading of the story. But under D&D, it just doesn't. That could have saved this ending; if we'd just had some clue that just maybe Jon wildly misread Dany's goals and killed her over nothing, that Tyrion's idea of Bran The Broken might really be as dumb as it looks, that Brienne's image of Jaime is partly her own need to see him redeemed rather than him actually being redeemed... But that would require them to have actual character beats as opposed to just a story that takes us from A to B to Z.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2019-12-03 12:01 am (UTC)Anyway, the most egregious issue is Dany's characterization, which is a shame because I think I get the general idea intended which makes some sense. (...) and there wasn't even really an explanation of what she was thinking, so.
It does, but there's a huge storytelling problem here that I'm not sure how they could have solved - but I'm almost sure they didn't even see the problem. A lot of people pointed out ways they could have had Dany's actions make more sense (one of my favourites: Don't kill the other dragon in the previous episode - have Dany attack KL with two dragons, and then have one of them get killed by a lone sniper just after the city surrenders, so that Dany's actions come from a place of shock and grief shared by the audience). But the problem with that is, they don't WANT the audience to be on Dany's side; we're supposed to suddenly think she's nothing but a dangerous dictator who Must Be Stopped At All Cost. After EIGHT SEASONS of building her up as a protagonist. They can't (or don't think they can) afford to have the story be ambiguous here; Jon must be justified. (You can't sell Buffy killing Angel if Acathla never actually opens up.)
Dany never once appears to consider that her own value system should demand that Jon take the throne.
True, and that would open up a lot of potential story with the Aegon thing, as opposed to just have Jon tell everyone who'd listen that he didn't want to be king, waaah. But then again Dany doesn't seem to have any form of value system whatsoever in the last few episodes.
Relatedly, the idea that Jon stabbing Dany is a solution is itself kind of crazy -- I mean, like, you are seriously telling me that the Dothraki and Unsullied and Drogon are all going to just chill out and stop looting and pillaging and burning and killing once Dany is dead?
Hey, it worked for the Night King. That's how you solve problems in a world run on complex politics. That's why the kingdom was famously at peace for decades after Jaime killed the Mad King.
HOW COULD A SONG OF ICE AND FIRE NOT MENTION TYRION. HE WAS THE HAND OR ACTING HAND TO THREE DIFFERENT MONARCHS FFS AND WAS CONVICTED OF KILLING ONE THE KING, KILLED ANOTHER ACTUAL HAND AND SUGGESTED THE ASSASSINATION OF ANOTHER QUEEN. HOLY SHIT.
And begs the question of which important character whose actions explain everything was left out of the version of the story that WE got to see.
(I did like the dragon burning the throne though.)
One thing that bugs me about this series and character endings: there's a lot of mealy-mouthed stuff where characters have to choose between two things -- between what they once thought they wanted, and what they maybe now want -- and then they choose one and then go and choose the other. It just feels like they are trying to have it both ways -- like there's where character growth will take them, and then what fanservice demands.
Yeah.
It's like they need to tell both the story of the man whose perverse undying love destroys him but never fails, and the one who is moved to change and redeem himself by the example of a brave and noble person, and they just can't pick one or the other. And I mean, it is a tension baked into the character and has been since he met Brienne, but at a certain point it gets frustrating, and it feels like Jaime's backsliding is only written as "I don't deserve any better" because they can't figure out a better reason for him to go back on the choice he's just made. And they have him still fight Euron pointlessly because it's like they are unable to actually come up with any variations on what types of stories this guy can be in besides "he's a fighter," even though that was taken from him years ago.
OH yeah. And I mean, they could have sold this if the show had allowed for ambiguity, for the surviving characters possibly being wrong in their reading of the story. But under D&D, it just doesn't. That could have saved this ending; if we'd just had some clue that just maybe Jon wildly misread Dany's goals and killed her over nothing, that Tyrion's idea of Bran The Broken might really be as dumb as it looks, that Brienne's image of Jaime is partly her own need to see him redeemed rather than him actually being redeemed... But that would require them to have actual character beats as opposed to just a story that takes us from A to B to Z.