[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/hobby/ - Hobby

"Our hands pass down the skills of the last generation to the next"
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon

File: 1608525806813.jpg (32.88 KB, 590x332, 0_big.jpg)

 No.4210[Last 50 Posts]

Now that the dust has settled, what's your verdict?


Well it turned into complete shit for the later seasons.
I didn't think that was even up for debate.
Now as for whether the early seasons are good, I'd say yes.
Whether you put the cutoff for good at season 3 or 4 (or 2 or 1 even; though I think that was just /tv/ contrarianism), is up for debate.
But there is no argument for the shear and utter catastrophe of writing the show became.


It heralded annoying fantasy trends that most people like to have nowadays.


Pic related is my opinion on the show.


Used to have good sex scenes tho


You know that feel when you shit and it's all nice and hard and doesn't even leave a shit smear on the ass crack type poop at the start but then it gets softer… and softer… and then the gates of hell open and it just sounds like you are spilling out old soup into the toilet bowl but it's actually just you? That's GoT.


Good first 4 seasons and based second last episode of the last season. Rest of it is not worth watching except for 2-3 episodes here and there.


So brave


Battle of the Bastards was pretty cool, all things considered


Well, I only saw the second to fourth season. And later the last one. Oh god, it was garbage, Disney broke the show they were promised right?


Disney can’t make a good story for shit


It went to shit by Season 5 and became even more shit when they ran out of book material to adapt. A lot of characters were turned into parodies of themselves.


last 4 seasons were shit, 7 and 8 were exceptionally shit. But at the end of the day it's just swordshit, and the people who got super worked up about it are massive faggots.


Well, I was reading ASOIAF since I was old enough to read that kind of stuff. Seeing it being slaughtered by two dumb reddit tier TV writers was a bit of a stick to the heart. And I'm saying this as someone who thought the first four seasons was probably the best fantasy type of television ever put on screen.


Unfortunately the author of ASOIAF is such a slow writer that he will probably die before publishing the next two books.


Really enjoyed S1 and 2, enjoyed 3-5. The rest was mediocre, and the last season was simply disastrous. The show died with Stannis.


File: 1608525825312.png (338.89 KB, 432x445, STANNIS.png)



I think it's funny that fans always praised the show for being "realistic" and not doing tropes, and then got extremely angery when the show didn't give the Night King a predictably epic Hollywood-style final showdown.

Most of the things I liked about it were thought up by GRRM for ASOIAF. Without his work to go off of, the show fell apart.


They ruined Stannis after season four though. They made him burn his own daughter and had him dying like a useless pussy. In the end his entire storyline ended up being absolutely useless other than to move Melisandre north so she could revive Jon.


>absolutely useless other than to move Melisandre north so she could revive Jon.
How was Jon useful again? there was a prophecy right? Something important


I'm going to say it.
I wish the dragon lady won in the end. Fuck the bitchass moralfags.


Frankly the best end would be loss of control of the dragons after Daeneris died, the cities get destroyed and become the den of the dragons and every faction either retreats or in the case of king cold, gets dragonfired.


Stannis' downfall was straight up character assassination and bad writing. Dude is a legendary commander and gets his army camp raided by "20 good men", kills his daughter, loses again to Ramsay, survives and gets killed for something that happened 3 seasons behind. I think the writers just hated him.


I think the people who said "this why D&D are liberals, because apparently you can't have a revolution if you break a few eggs" are sort of presupposing that a revolution has to be led by a literal madmen who kills millions of the toiling masses out of spite. This isn't what revolutionaries do. Robespierre, Lenin, Mao, Castro weren't crazy, they didn't hold contempt for the common men who used to live under their enemies. Only Pol Pot started mass-killing his own people like Daenerys, and he can not be called a comrade or genuine revolutionary.

D&D are libs, of course, but I feel there is a bit more to it. Daenerys isn't some marginalized people's hero, she comes from the most powerful feudal dynasty that just happened to lose a civil war before, one that is known for inbreeding in madness. Her compassion to the common folk, like to slaves, is completely patronising, if they don't reciprocate it, they have to die. The masses of King's Landing didn't want her "love" so they had to do die. Even if you look at progressive historical figures like Julius Caesar or Napoleon Bonaparte, they didn't do shit like that. Jon, on the other hand, is a marginalized bastard son, and even though he ends up turning out to be Aegon's son, he's more genuinely people's oriented than Daeneryses cult.


I think they've grown to hate him, don't know why. Probably because they had no idea what to do with him. Basically all of his scenes of season 3 and 4 were filler until the last episode of season 4, in season 2 he was portrayed decently. In the Battle of Blackwater, it was a bit out of character for him to go into the vanguard, but it was also kind of cool to see him kick ass, it kinda fitted "show Stannis"


Exactly. The whole character was a critique of Hillary Clinton-esque "leaders". People who feel such absurd unbridled entitlement to power and get mass support only because they have a shallow appearance of being something different, when they're not.


The last season was nowhere near as bad people say, it just seemed worse because the early-mid seasons were so good. The show will go down as a classic. People hated the Sopranos ending at the time too.

The "what" of the ending - what actually happens, where all the characters end up, etc. - is perfect, and undoubtedly is lifted straight from GRRM. The burning of King's Landing as the culmination of Dany's arc was genius. The problem was with how it was done in the show. In a word: it was rushed.

But it's annoying how everything just gets swept up into the wave of neckbeard outrage. All the legitimate criticisms get mixed in with the retarded criticism so the consensus becomes a braindead, unnuanced "it's shit!" People even retroactively re-label the earlier season as shit because of it. Bitch, you obviously loved the show, stop lying to yourself. THE REASON you were so angry at the last season is because you loved it so much.


Did you watch the show? He goes borderline insane with his entitlement to power and superstition over Melisandre. Don't complain about "bad writing" if you don't even understand the basics of character motivation. You're talking like these events just happened for no reason.


>Defending D&D's writing
Not even the actor playing him understood what his motivation was.


Truly a song of ice and fire!


File: 1608525828738.jpg (179.44 KB, 828x626, 1503338187344.jpg)



File: 1608525828841.jpg (24.38 KB, 1146x1148, bait.jpg)


This level of bait is simply masterful


>This bait is masterful.
>Nobody has taken it.
GoT season 8 is so bad that to describe it we must revive the phrase "epic fail."


worst meme
literal reddit tier
fucking fred flintstone


File: 1608525830205.gif (1.1 MB, 244x240, tenor.gif)



People have rated last two episodes way lower than the rest of episodes.
She cute


File: 1608525830955.png (1.04 MB, 639x983, Gendry.png)


File: 1608525831145.jpg (186.76 KB, 1275x1700, 20goodmenbinladen.jpg)


File: 1608525832787.jpg (1.26 MB, 2258x3298, John Brown.jpg)

I don't need an army. I just need 20 good men.


It's from /tv/s /GoT/ actually


File: 1608525838402.jpg (24.7 KB, 680x383, GODSIWASBIGGUYTHEN.jpg)



GoT is like a gory lemon-filled rip-off of LOTR


File: 1608525843129.png (646.52 KB, 1838x2202, 1589220711213.png)

Potentially relevant copypast about the whole series.
I agree with it, but I didn't write it.


Eh. The story has plenty of romances, it's just that they often turn out badly, but in their description they are just as kitsch as traditional fantasy. There are also plenty of heros and villains. I also disagree that the deaths are pointless, at least for the most part, they always seem to reshuffle the balance of power necessary for the plot to go forward.

Idk, that poster seems really triggered.


>first sentences praises Goodkind
Dismissed. Not only is he a plagiarist with tired rehashes of fantasy cliches, but he's an asshole to his own illustrators, and is a Ayn Rand objectivist who wholly lives up to her hypocritical sociopathic ideology in both books and real life. Pic 2 is just an example of his 'writing'.


Ah I misinterpreted the screencap, they actually talk of Goodkind as being predictable. Nevermind.


>where are the descriptions of variously sized dongs swinging within the confines of absurdly detailed clothing
Also worth noting is that dicks are generally less visible than tits, and GRRM writes excessive detail about everybody's clothing and armor. I don't think this person even read any of the books.

Obviously this is one of those people who think femininity is sacred and a fat neckbeard describing a woman's appearance is profaning the temple of womanhood.


File: 1608525849094.jpg (23.09 KB, 389x489, lion.jpg)

More swine your grace?


>is a Lannister
>is also celibate
>name is Lancel
BRAVO MARTIN, truly the American Tolkien


I hated this guy so much in the show. Is he as bad in the books?


In the books he is less of a whimp and actually looks decent. In the show he's just the ultimate fuckboi.


But what about the dragons? I think they were poorly utilized.


That's a pretty retarded and deliberately contrarian take on GoT. It's not super avante-garde high art or anything, but it's a lot more nuanced than just mindless violence and domination. In the books at least, one of the main themes of the story is all of the pointless suffering, violence and death that results from all these petty power-struggles between the noble houses. It's not meant as a glorification of all the violence, it's a condemnation if anything. And then you have the whole white walker thing, (which is pretty obviously an allegory for climate change) basically saying that if these rich assholes vying for power don't get their shit together, then everyone is gonna die and none of it will have mattered anyway.

Also Peter Joseph is a complete fucking sperglord lmao.


>I think it's funny that fans always praised the show for being "realistic" and not doing tropes, and then got extremely angery when the show didn't give the Night King a predictably epic Hollywood-style final showdown.

That's not what people were complaining about though, people were mad because instead of the fucking ice-zombie apocalypse was ended overnight in a single battle and everything went back to normal as if it never happened. People wanted the white walkers to have an actual tangible affect on the world.


Also the epic Hollywood showdown is exactly what they did


>In the Battle of Blackwater, it was a bit out of character for him to go into the vanguard

That's because that episode was written by GRRM himself, so he was portrayed more accurately.


>People wanted the white walkers to have an actual tangible affect on the world.
The irony of this is that their threat, despite being known since Season 1 only came back in the final Seasons and is just mentioned in other Seasons without actually holding up in the plot.


File: 1608525879783.jpg (24.78 KB, 640x602, got_season_tiers.jpg)

>a pretty retarded and deliberately contrarian take
It really isn't. Like a lot of shows that are its contemporaries its edgy, gory "realism" is what appealed to fans.
>a lot more nuanced than just mindless violence and domination
Its not. It just hides behind complex political and military back n' forth.
>It's not meant as a glorification of all the violence
No-one said it was. They agree, it demonstrates all the most beastly characteristics of humans in a gory low-fantasy story with fairly predictable shit about political wayfinding, betrayal and other shit.
The first 2 Seasons were good and I enjoyed it, and then the rest went to shit because they couldn't get past "hurr I betrayed you, hurr incest, hurr power!"


File: 1608525880263.png (1.59 MB, 2280x972, kingslayer.png)

Thinking GoT is high art is pretty embarrassing but not as embarrassing as acting smug over knowing it's not.

>I think it's funny that fans always praised the show for being "realistic" and not doing tropes, and then got extremely angery when the show didn't give the Night King a predictably epic Hollywood-style final showdown.
People were mad that they did an epic showdown that had no basis in any of the foreshadowing, character development, or themes that the show had built up to that point. Pic related would be an example of an ending that makes sense given the context. Instead of something that made sense or even something actually subversive, they picked a random character to beat him and executed it in a way that made no sense. She teleported past like 100 white walkers and stabbed a convenient gap in his armor using a sleight of hand trick. lolsorandumb is not the same thing as subverting the tropes.

>I think the people who said "this why D&D are liberals, because apparently you can't have a revolution if you break a few eggs" are sort of presupposing that a revolution has to be led by a literal madmen who kills millions of the toiling masses out of spite.
But the only reason she did that (in the show) is because "revolutionaries are psycho mass murderers." Her actions make no sense otherwise. Up to that point she went out of her way to avoid hurting random civilians. She would be brutal but only toward the ruling classes. There are plenty of faults but bloodlust directed at the commoners comes completely out of nowhere.
>D&D are libs, of course, but I feel there is a bit more to it. Daenerys isn't some marginalized people's hero, she comes from the most powerful feudal dynasty that just happened to lose a civil war before, one that is known for inbreeding in madness. Her compassion to the common folk, like to slaves, is completely patronising, if they don't reciprocate it, they have to die.
This is a product of D&D not grasping the source material. She's written this way by GRRM, as a kind of mighty whitey who thinks she's a savior but is arguably making things worse. D&D interpret this as a revolutionary who wants to improve things but that doesn't work and revolution is just worse than the status quo because reasons. GRRM is a liberal too of course, but he has a much better grasp on politics than Dumb & Dumber. The books make it a lot clearer that she's unhinged and detached from the commoners. The show plays her heroism straight until suddenly it doesn't.


>acting smug over knowing it's not
How is that smug tho?


If calling it "low art" isn't obvious enough, that's followed by "There I said it." This is a really common opinion I've seen people have where they actively act smug for not liking a popular show, including but not limited to GoT.


>There I said it
That's not being smug and neither is calling something low art… jesus how fucked are we if casual phrases are now "smug"
>seen people have where they actively act smug for not liking a popular show
Derisive and smug are not the same thing.


How is that not smug though? If someone said that in a real life conversation, it would come across as smug.


I wouldn't say that's really smug, just disdainful and perhaps annoyed. I would be to considering how much GoT is harped about in the media and online like its the second coming of christ (or satan), when most of it past the first 2-3 seasons was just mediocre.


It's smug because saying it's beneath your taste in contrast to its popularity is directly implying that your taste is better than most people's.


Yeah that was my impression too. None of the main characters except Theon died if I remember correctly, and the entire concept of the Night King was poorly written: while a creature like that is not (yet) introduced in the books as nothing but a myth (with some indication that it might have something to do with the main story), in the show they revealed the origin of the Night King early on as something the Children of the Forest have created, to which the audience doesn't really have a connection to. He was established as some type of dark lord that you just need to kill to make his entire army dead, without any explanation, including the motive of the White Walkers to move south in the first place. I think ideally, we should have gotten much more mystical and hidden White Walkers and some form of a Long Night covering parts of Westeros where people live in some form of apocalyptic hell with giant spiders hunting in the dark and zombified villages for a good season, instead of giving it a single battle climax right after they break through the wall and then everybody pretending nothing ever happened. You don't have to cover all of Westeros in the Long Night, but at least let this have some sort of impact.

I think it is clear what parts Martin envisioned and what he told D&D: the ending of Jon stabbing a mad Dany in the throne room in front of a burning city, with Drogon then burning the Iron Throne is actually an ending I believe that Martin did envision, it's the "bittersweet ending" he always talks about, but he hasn't really found out a way to get there, and he doesn't really know how to get to the conclusion of the threat of the Others (White Walkers in the books) either I believe.


The point is, it's like some NuAtheist telling the family on the dinner table on Christmas Eve "you know what, GOD NOT REAL" just for the sake of edginess (and Peter Joseph kinda is that type).


> implying that your taste is better than most people
Maybe I'm weird but I think that's wrong, and more of something people who do like it interpret when someone doesn't think GoT is all that great.

I can get that and Peter probably is like that, I just meant that the specific tweet was pretty neautral IMO.



Epitome of ShitLibism


>Not liking an over-rated show that is a low-fantasy despite denial is ShitLib
&ltIf you're a liberal even a basic post is related to your politics even if the content has nothing political
Pure Ideology

Not so much poorly utilized so much as underused and inconsistent. They were supposed to be nigh unbeatable as adults, yet one is killed by ship-borne ballista from afar with Daeneris not even bothering to maneuver in her attack.


>that spacing
Epitome of redditardism


What video game is this screenshot from?


What a waste of lucky trips… its a scene from the Game of Throne's series imbecile.


Unironically state-funded neoliberal political education for zoomies, complete with might-is-right, will-to-power, do-what-thou-wilt wagnerian aesthetics. So obvious in its intent, that after a right wing electoral victory the gutter press in my country attributed it to young people learning "western values" or somesuch from GoT.


>after a right wing electoral victory the gutter press in my country attributed it to young people learning "western values" or somesuch from GoT.
Fucking what? Source?!


>might-is-right, will-to-power, do-what-thou-wilt wagnerian aesthetics
That shit always had entertainment appeal, beyond capitalism I would claim, you can find this in Shakespeare already. I see no value in moralizing about this, it's clearly depicting feudal relations and dynastic conflict for the viewer to see as such, it only got politicized in the later seasons where braindead neoliberal cultural analysts compared some of the characters to American politicians and shit like that. GRRM himself, despite the liberal he is, has explicitly distanced himself from any allgeoric interpretation of his work. It's more of an example of a good story being hijacked over time through the virtue of being successful, so you see massive commercialization, pop culture references, self-references, etc. evermore increasing the popular it gets - and D&D seem to have zero values of their own.


> you can find this in Shakespeare already
Except shakespeare seemed to condemn this in most of his plays.


True. At least A Feast for Crows focuses on the plight of the common folk somewhat, the show cut that out almost completely.


>fucking ice-zombie apocalypse was ended overnight in a single battle
Sorry to tell yall but the prophecy was always about destroying the iron throne and not about the whitewalkers. They were only the "water" part of the prophecy. And dany is gonna go mad in the books too. Doesn't change the fact that D&D wrote it horribly but the general ending is how Dreams is gonna end


this 100%. The ending is straight GRRM roughly skethced up by D&D.


GRRM confirmed that Stannis burning his daughter is straight from Winds


>Have you ever sowed the field, Lady Olenna? Have you ever reaped the grain? Has anyone in House Tyrell? A lifetime of wealth and power has left you blind in one eye. You are the few, we are the many. And when the many stop fearing the few…
Was he our guy?





The sparrows were based on Protestantism, and Protestantism was probably the closest you'll get to a "progressive" movement for the masses in the middle ages so yes


Funny how its already forgotten for the most part as soon as it ended.


Elvis the Alien did a decent review of why the final season is so bad.


Was I the only one reminded of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, when Jown hid from the ice-dragon's flames behind rocks? That shit looks exactly like that.


So are there any updates for a spinoff?


>Whimpers of an Autistic Wilder Beast No Sane Woman Should Make


No he was just butthurt that the the people were ruled over by backstabbing hedonists instead of being ruled over by face-mutilating prudes.


File: 1630582247643.png (305.31 KB, 400x400, TywinLannisterCP.png)

Tywin chads.


File: 1643786084684.png (519.24 KB, 590x350, ClipboardImage.png)

I think the reason the last two seasons of game of thrones were so bad was because GoT got so popular and featured a multiracial revolutionary army returning to topple established power structures. so the CIA threatened the showrunners to change the Daenarys into a typical "you cant trust revolutionary leaders they will turn on you too" type character, so that this did not become a focus point for rebellions around this time. this is why the showrunners wont do interviews about it.


D&D claimed that GRRM told them the ending. So it may not exactly work out like that in GRRM's notes, but the main twists (Danny losing it, the throne being destroyed) are probably the same.
>multiracial army
GoT was far from "woke". The entire main cast are white characters, and the relationship between Missandei and Greyworm was probably just added to give some screentime to PoC. The two gay characters are kind of asshole-ish, and women making out only exists to pleasure a man.
>last two seasons
GoT lost it with season 5 already. Even though season 5 is somewhat watchable (the Cersei storyline is somewhat interesting), with the finale of season 5 you know this shit is unsalvagable (Stannis senselessly sacrificing Shereen only to die with his orc army against the Boltons, Ramsey just killing his dad without whom he would have no support whatsoever, etc.). You can actually see red flags in season 4 already, the dialog just got much weaker and lines felt like fallen out of time - characters suddenly started talking like modern people. However, the first three seasons and most of season 4 was the best stuff that television has ever produced, and I stand by this take.


>>22775 (me)
Also, what I was wondering, why didn't they take over the Reek/Ramsay bait-and-switch storyline from book two? That was way more coherent and elegant than just "Theon giving a speech and just gets knocked out by his soldiers because fuck it". It also would give them some material for season 3, instead of just torture porn.


> TywinLannisterCP
questionable name

Man I wish I was there for this show's hype, Please tell me there'll be something like GoT again

Do you think the new spin-off will do anything?


Season 1-4 great television
Season 5 was okay
Season 6 was okay to below average
Season 7 was absolute garbage
Season 8 was trash


>Final verdict
It was based because it inflated my ego due to me accurately predicting who will become king before the last season aired and getting to laugh and say "I told you so" at a few aqauintances. Outside of that its just a nice TV slurry that gets blander the more you drink of it, but I don't care, it was good enough to kill time and relax with an episode to close the day, but a hubdred other TV shows do the same, and a lot of them do it better. TLDR GoT was that weird sausage that you bought from the new store that looks exactly like the one from the old one just in a different package, but which tasted slightly worse, yet you ate it anyway because its still acceptable sausage.


Man I miss the magic of the first few seasons of this show. So will the upcoming prequel be any good?


>So will the upcoming prequel be any good?
Not likely IMO


>The new GoT prequel spinoff came out
<It's horrid
Perhaps I treated you too harshly Season 8…. Nah


bullshit, its a lot better than later seasons of GoT, it's pretty good even.


LMAO who are you kidding, it's stilted as fuck


Edged us for years, and then just chopped off our dick right at the end. No refunds.

I don't understand the capitalist function at play here really, there was so much more material they could have milked out of it, waaay more details story wise, different tracts and sub plots that don't even exist in the show.

Why did they have to rush to the end like that? Its a huge show, surely they have the viewership to keep it going and make even more.


>Why did they have to rush to the end like that
Because the books depicting that portion of the story hadn't been written yet and they had a deadline, so they just made some shit up.


Shortsighted capitalist thinking since the GOT showrunners were being given control of the Star Wars franchise, they thought they had an even bigger payday coming, so they squeezed out enough GOT to meet their contractual obligations and then left as soon as possible.

Too bad it didn't work out for them lol


Martin told them the ending. Now he's probably gonna rewrite it now that he knows people's reaction. The lead up to it was probably made up though.


It's a show about court intrigues with every character being nobility. What do you expect it to be?


Game of Thrones is Stark propaganda. It fails because the Starks never do anything wrong or bad and only get repeatedly betrayed and shit on but mustache twirling villains.





why would a capitalist invest more, when a choppy product gets the job done?

Wrong opinino, It's okay


dan and dabid kinda forgot to follow through with writing the series


Besides obvious scumbags like Frey or Bolton the Stark's enemies are fledged out after a couple of episodes with their ony motivations.

But yes, essentially you are right. Besides Ned behading a guy they never do anything evil. Which I like House of the Dragon more so far, because all sides there are grey. I find it hard to believe that someone can rule a fiefdom/kingdom as vast as the North with multiple opposing clans that seek to replace you without ever doing anything ruthless.

They paid dearly with their entire careers for it. Did they ever got that Star Wars job? I don't watch SW so I don't know.


iirc Disney dropped them like a pile of bricks after seeing what happened to got


Doesn't the show end up being written down as a history in-universe by Sam Tarly? He's an unreliable narrator given his friendship with Jon and the fact he ends up serving Bran.


What do people even see in this show? Is it saying something that one of the biggest media spectacles of the past decade was just one of war and death in itself as the spectacle?
Any remotely interesting character introduction and development gets cut off by pointless violence, the 2 biggest drivers of the plot are a war of succession/civil war and a looming apocalyptic threat that only gets vaguely alluded to in extremely sparse moments up until it actually happens. Which is like the most contrived and shitty writing imaginable
Fuck anyone that likes this, watching paint dry is more interesting


Yeh they do, Ned starks oldest son forget his name, but he goes back on his marriage to (other dude forget his name)'s daughter, and because this the red wedding happens


Except even that is shown in an understandable manner as Robb wanting to do the right thing and marry the first girl he had sex with to honor her, and he desperately tries to make it up to the family he was betrothed to but gets betrayed so like I said GoT is basically an extended African charity ad except instead of getting you to sympathize with starving Africans it's getting you to sympathize with a bunch of white fake scandinavians who are literally
>too pure and kind for this cold cruel world
Yeah but even in the books it's clear that you're meant to sympathize with the Starks and they are the ones you should always root for regardless of circumstances
Yeah House of Dragon is more grey.


yeh but them being
>muh honourable
gets them all killed, in the end, and arguably leads to the destruction of the realm


tbh it's less them being "honorable" that gets them killed and more them being rigid and conservative. Over and over again, the people that try to maintain the status quo or revert to the status quo ante get murdered, while the ones willing to innovate or change get to live. In the books at least, Jon Snow is probably the most innovative night's watch commander in the past thousand years. It ends up getting him killed, but the plot armor theme is so strong that he comes right back to life again.


>the ones willing to innovate or change get to live
Yeah that's why this status quo hater and warmonger got killed off amirite


File: 1669012251763.png (147.34 KB, 300x479, ClipboardImage.png)

I will always prefer Lena Headey's performance as Sarah Connor over her portrayal of Cersei. Mostly because Cersei becomes written into an utter idiot and cunt that makes her character intolerable. Headey is a great actress, but the character is just toxic sadly.
On a sidenote, she was a much better and believable Sarah Connor than Daenerys/Emilia Clarke.


But Lena wasn't even the best actress in TSCC.


File: 1669020333540.gif (717.46 KB, 500x281, Cameron.gif)

True, but everyone knows Summer is a queen, it's not fair competition. besides I'm talking about this in relation to GoT


I think the two main themes of ASOIAF are cause and effect, and return of fantasy. There is no karmatic reward for your actions, just consequences of them. Ned didnt die because he did honorable thing, but a stupid one. The same goes for Robb and Jon. They all antagonise someone and then proceed to make no effort to protect themselves from payback. But then ocassionaly magic comes in play, and cause and effect is out of the window. Danny, instead of dying at the end of book 1 as direct consequence of her actions, becoming the protagonist of the story thank to dragons. Stannis never cared about making friends and as such shut eat shit come War of Five Kings, but then shadowpeople put him into plot relevance. Jon about to be ressurrected. So the magic in the books isnt just random spectacle to make them cooler, but a way to make the story follow conventions of fantasy.
Anyway, that is why I thing in the next book there is going to be sort of Roar of the Astral World event that will completely shift the focus from grounded politics and scheming into full fantasy.


Didn't Martin outright say that the series starts pretty grounded and then shifts and leans more and more into magic and prophecy as it gets closer to the end? So it was all planned from the beginning even though the fucking lazy ass fatty types one word a week because he doesn't know how to connect plot point a to b and get to his already finished conclusion.


File: 1670393109764.png (1.81 MB, 1600x1200, ClipboardImage.png)


Dumb Heiress Tard Aryan




File: 1672775358672.jpg (186.08 KB, 855x1200, DHHOPKuXkAAxO60.jpg)

Seethe more incel


grimderp shit, basically glorified porn.


1-4 10/10
5-end 3/10



HotD has much less porn, there is only one scene that could be considered porn, but keeps the grimdark shit. The porn shit in GoT was unbearable, some of the actresses were actual pornstars.

1-3: 10/10
4: 8 (red flags start to show up)
5: 5
6: 3
8: 0


File: 1672811527549.png (402.6 KB, 528x1131, ClipboardImage.png)

LMAO no, touch grass, see real women. Most aren't stacked like in your porn. Not to mention it's a cuirass type LARP clothing, that flattens the chest if worn. Summer has a pretty damn nice bust.

I think they meant porn as in gore excessiveness - i.e. gore porn.


8 is -[sum of previous seasons] because it retroactively ruins the entire series



GoT is proof that art under capitalism is compromised.

They could have just stopped at season 4 and waited for r martin to catch up, but no they needed to rush out *something* to keep that money rolling in and what we got was one of the biggest nose dives/lost opportunties of a lifetime.


no ass


Are you blind?


It's more specifically that the showrunners stopped caring. HBO and Martin were happy to have like 12 seasons but Dumb and Dumber wanted to leave and convinced them to let them end it instead of letting someone else take up the reins.


tbh im an absolutist, I think the show just went to complete shit the moment they went off of the book script

I can take s1-4 as being perfect adapations of the first few books but its so plainly apparent when they run out of material.

GoT is one of those shows someone will do perfectly in like 50-100 years (sort of like LORT) but untill then lol

I just hope im alive long enough


>implying Martin will finish the books


hank hill ass


if he doesnt then whatever but the show shouldnt have tried to jump the gun so to speak


There was money to be made


which ties into my point about how they shat the bed on what could have been great


Meh, it's just sword-and-sandal shit with high production value, not sure how it could have been "great"


File: 1673060729991.png (1.11 MB, 1758x1536, ClipboardImage.png)

Get glasses ya porn-tainted raisin, FR.


Just finished it, very good.


That's not even really the issue, they had GRRM on board willing to help write the show (he wrote for several episodes earlier on). HBO was willing to keep the show going for like 11 seasons (which you can tell by their desire to make half a dozen spinoffs immediately). The problem was the showrunners being dipshit booj failsons who only cared about the show as a feather in their cap and wanted to keep advancing in their career. They went against HBO and Martin by deciding to wrap up the show early because Disney promised them a Star Wars trilogy. Obviously that didn't happen, and probably was never going to, just a competing monopoly doing a little trolling to damage a major rival's flagship brand.


can't even hold up her massive 6head


You mean the book right?


What's a book?


File: 1676229811893.png (433.25 KB, 731x666, ClipboardImage.png)

>replying over a month later to just repeat the same blind BS
Concession accepted


The War of the Five Kings is historically progressive because most of the aristocracy die, causing upward pressure for the peasantry who accumulate land and capital and abolish serfdom, becoming the early modern bourgeoisie


Nah it's just Martin is shit as a writer. He stole enough plot from war of the roses and plagiarized robert howard to write three decent books in his entire fucking career. After that it was a downward slope. Just read his books after the Storm of Swords (or any other series). It's a boring slog that loses it's plot as it goes. Feast for Crows was already a slogfest of boredom, but Dance with Dragons was barely readable crap. Why do you think he just stopped writing this series more than 10 years ago? Because he can't do the justice to the first three books and he knows it. Maybe he wasn't even the one who wrote them, who knows. But that doesn't matter. What matters is Martin wouldn't been able to save it because he can't even save the book series. The good stuff endd after third season/book after which both went downhill. If Martin wrote sixth and seventh book it would be just as bad as the tv show.


I think he does have 2 or 3 other works outside of GoT that are decent, it's nobody ever reads them. Stealing from historical events is something every fantasy writer does, because it is almost always imitating Europe's feudalism.

A Feast for Crows was decent, it wasn't action-packed but incredibly atmospheric. I always found Jon's, Bran's and Dany's storylines to be the most boring ones so having new characters was nice.

He is a slob who won't continue writing and wrote himself into a corner, I'll admit that, but he is not a bad writer per se.


Nah, i've actually read plenty of his works even before he got famous. It's mediocre at best, unreadable crap at worst.

>Stealing from historical events is something every fantasy writer does

First of all, not true. Second, the difference between stealing and inspiring is wherever you can actually think of a good plot on your own. Martin can't.

You also forgot the plagiarizing stuff. I remember reading some blogpost where it shows that occasionally he just copies huge swabs of text from other authors.

>A Feast for Crows was decent

Nah, it wasn't, but even you will admit that it was worse than previous three books. And Dance with Dragons was even worse than that.

>he is not a bad writer per se.

He pretty much a definition of one.

Regardless, the point was that people say "oh if only the Martin was able to write the script it would be better". It wouldn't be. Show got worse because source material got worse. Simple as.


Game of Thrones was always bad.
There's a lot to talk about, but it all boils down to poor writing. Structurally it's a complete mess (is there any structure at all?) and it's overall completely meaningless. It's a nihilistic shit show, and it's not even as realistic as it pretends to be. Not to mention Martin is a lunatic, a literal creep who's obsessed with incest, has no sense of morals (just take a look at the characters we're supposed to like) and writes every character in conflict with the setting itself.
The reason it sucks, but so many people like it, is that it's not a fantasy show, it's actually a soap opera. They're books for people who like the idea of enjoying fantasy novels. "Oh, look, it has sex and gore, that means it's mature, and the books are very thick, which means that I'm smart for reading them."
It's a fashion statement, not something that's good on any merits of plot or characters or milieu.
"If it subverts expectations, it's good!". It was all setups, but never any payoffs. Fans got the ending they deserved. They loved the show for subverting expectations, so it is only just that it subverted the expectations fans had in the show's ending.


>muh nihilism
instantly stopped reading


Stannis makes more sense in the show. He's an old military man who thinks he's striving for power but really just cuts off pieces of himself slowly before falling into the abyss, same as Tywin, Cersei, Jaime, Robb, Catelyn and Daenarys. There's a "the meek shall inherit the earth" theme that's solidified by the characters of Jon Snow, Tyrion and Bran.


The ending was horrible, really horrible
Literally the most mediocre ending to probably the best epic fiction in decades
They had the opportunity to expand the story in so many directions


Though if the spin-offs get off the ground, they could be cool


That's a lot of contempt for a show you clearly don't understand shit about.
brain-dead take
>I don't appreciate the show so everyone who likes it must be a poser!!111!


The ending seems to have as many made up parts as it did actual plot points Martin wanted.

Parts that made sense:
1) Bran being the final King makes sense thematically as the Starks rise from near extinction to holding the most powerful position that they never even wanted in the first place but it's a hollow victory since it's the 3 Eyed Raven
2) Likewise Sansa ascending to power in the North seems likely given how much time she's spending around Baelish and how there must always be a Stark in Winterfell yada yada and that certainly wouldn't be Arya or Jon although she will be running a post-apocalyptic wasteland after the Others are through with the North
3) Jon staying beyond the Wall is retarded but it's retarded in a way that I really do think this is his actual ending. Perhaps he becomes the new king of the freefolk or whatever since he likes Val a lot. The earliest plot outline Martin stated that he and Bran would somehow become enemies - perhaps he's also staying away because Bran has given orders to kill him since he's a potential contender to the throne.
4) Unsullied/Dothraki/etc. all leaving for Essos when Dany dies. Dany is the only main motivation for them to stay in Westeros so as soon as she's dead they have no reason to stay.
5) Winter being resolved before Cersei. I agree that Cersei will be the final villain of the series as a pathetic and insignificant figure who is easily overwhelmed by whatever array of forces happen to still be alive after the long night. I don't think Cersei will be able to kill any of the main cast however by that point as the long night will have eliminated many characters so an easy win over Cersei will be the "sweet" part of the "bittersweet" ending after a long and grueling battle against the Others.

Parts that seem to be made up:
1) Varys being executed by Dany for treason. I don't rule out Dany killing Varys but in the book series he is backing another contender to the throne (Aegon) and not Dany so it won't be a betrayal but just Varys losing and being killed for his defiance
2) Jaime dying with Cersei (no explanation needed here)
3) Tyrion turning on Dany in favor of Jon and Sansa (lol)
4) Dany going mad and Holocausting everyone at King's Landing. There is simply no inciting reason for her to do so. I think the most likely event is actually her dying during the fight against the Others because it's her brother who lost the coin flip for sanity ("when a Targ is born the gods flip a coin to decide whether they're sane or not" etc.) so she is explicitly the sane one and there's also the Azor Ahai prophecy which suggests her sacrifice is needed for Jon to activate the uber sword.
5) Arya deciding to travel the world. Her entire shtick is that she's the only one of all the Starks who remembers that they need to stay together to have a chance against their enemies. She'll hang out with either Sansa in Winterfell or Jon past the Wall when everything is done and since she's biased towards Jon and will take his side in any dispute she won't be bodyguarding Bran.
6. Arya killing the Night King and Theon dying in direct combat against the Others. In the book series Theon is tortured way worse than in the show and he is not fit for fighting at all. I agree Theon will be redeemed but it won't be such a heroic death. And Jon is definitely the one to fight the final battle against whoever leads the Others.


The entire Aegon plot is gone from the show which means they probably had to rework a lot of the ending since it's not like Tyrion, Varys, and a whole faction contending for the throne are going to just disappear from the story.


The books are better. The show is more like a soap opera with expensive effects and cartoonish gore, although it was a fun social watch when the hype still existed.


The show is alright. It's just a melodrama about fantasy aristocrats killing each other. It's not very emotionally complex or whatever.


The last season of the Game of Thrones has prompted public outcry and culminated in a petition (signed by almost 1 million outraged viewers) to disqualify the entire season and re-shoot a new one. The ferocity of the debate is in itself a proof that the ideological stakes must be high.

The dissatisfaction turned on a couple of points: bad scenario (under the pressure to quickly end the series, the complexity of the narrative was simplified), bad psychology (Daenerys’ turn to “Mad Queen” was not justified by her character development), etc.

One of the few intelligent voices in the debate was that of the author Stephen King who noted that dissatisfaction was not generated by the bad ending but the fact of the ending itself. In our epoch of series which in principle could go on indefinitely, the idea of narrative closure becomes intolerable.

It is true that, in the series’ swift denouement, a strange logic takes over, a logic that does not violate credible psychology but rather the narrative presuppositions of a TV series. In the last season, it is simply the preparation for a battle, mourning and destruction after the battle, and of the battler itself in all its meaninglessness – much more realistic for me than the usual gothic melodramatic plots.

Season eight stages three consecutive struggles. The first one is between humanity and its inhuman “Others” (the Night Army from the North led by the Night King); between the two main groups of humans (the evil Lannisters and the coalition against them led by Daenerys and Starks); and the inner conflict between Daenerys and the Starks.

This is why the battles in season eight follow a logical path from an external opposition to the inner split: the defeat of the inhuman Night Army, the defeat of Lannisters and the destruction of King’s Landing; the last struggle between the Starks and Daenerys – ultimately between traditional “good” nobility (Starks) faithfully protecting their subjects from bad tyrants, and Daenerys as a new type of a strong leader, a kind of progressive bonapartist acting on behalf of the underprivileged.

The stakes in the final conflict are thus: should the revolt against tyranny be just a fight for the return of the old kinder version of the same hierarchical order, or should it develop into the search for a new order that is needed?

The finale combines the rejection of a radical change with an old anti-feminist motif at work in Wagner. For Wagner, there is nothing more disgusting than a woman who intervenes in political life, driven by the desire for power. In contrast to male ambition, a woman wants power in order to promote her own narrow family interests or, even worse, her personal caprice, incapable as she is of perceiving the universal dimension of state politics.

The same femininity which, within the close circle of family life, is the power of protective love, turns into obscene frenzy when displayed at the level of public and state affairs. Recall the lowest point in the dialogue of Game of Thrones when Daenerys tells Jon that if he cannot love her as a queen then fear should reign – the embarrassing, vulgar motif of a sexually unsatisfied woman who explodes into destructive fury.

But – let’s bite our sour apple now – what about Daenerys’ murderous outbursts? Can the ruthless killing of the thousands of ordinary people in King’s Landing really be justified as a necessary step to universal freedom? At this point, we should remember that the scenario was written by two men.

Daenerys as the Mad Queen is strictly a male fantasy, so the critics were right when they pointed out that her descent into madness was psychologically not justified. The view of Daenerys with mad-furious expression flying on a dragon and burning houses and people expresses patriarchal ideology with its fear of a strong political woman.

The final destiny of the leading women in Game of Thrones fits these coordinates. Even if the good Daenerys wins and destroys the bad Cersei, power corrupts her. Arya (who saved them all by single-handedly killing the Night King) also disappears, sailing to the West of the West (as if to colonise America).

The one who remains (as the queen of the autonomous kingdom of the North) is Sansa, a type of women beloved by today’s capitalism: she combines feminine softness and understanding with a good dose of intrigue, and thus fully fits the new power relations. This marginalisation of women is a key moment of the general liberal-conservative lesson of the finale: revolutions have to go wrong, they bring new tyranny, or, as Jon put it to Daenerys:

“The people who follow you know that you made something impossible happen. Maybe that helps them believe that you can make other impossible things happen: build a world that’s different from the shit one they’ve always known. But if you use dragons to melt castles and burn cities, you’re no different.”

Consequently, Jon kills out of love (saving the cursed woman from herself, as the old male-chauvinist formula says) the only social agent in the series who really fought for something new, for a new world that would put an end to old injustices.

So justice prevailed – but what kind of justice? The new king is Bran: crippled, all-knowing, who wants nothing – with the evocation of the insipid wisdom that the best rulers are those who do not want power. A dismissive laughter that ensues when one of the new elite proposes a more democratic selection of the king tells it all.

And one cannot help but note that those faithful to Daenerys to the end are more diverse – her military commander is black – while the new rulers are clearly white Nordic. The radical queen who wanted more freedom for everyone irrespective of their social standing and race is eliminated, things are brought back to normal.


Daenarys was a "progressive bonapartist" when she was fighting and abolishing the slaver cities, but in Westeros where slavery didn't exist and even some primitive form of bourgeois property was developing, she just became another warlord


In fact, Jorah Mormont's backstory is proof that slavery is outright outlawed in Westeros, and even feudalists will be punished for it


Both Ned and Robb are entitled douchebags that help cause the ruin of their families along with a massive war that causes untold suffering
Catelyn is also pretty cruel and indifferent to the consequences of her actions
The rest have complex character developments where they turn from shitheads into nuanced people




>One of the few intelligent voices in the debate was that of the author Stephen King who noted that dissatisfaction was not generated by the bad ending but the fact of the ending itself.
common Stephen King dogshit take


I go to nazi rallies every weekend btw if that matters.


t. ywin lannister


>And one cannot help but note that those faithful to Daenerys to the end are more diverse – her military commander is black – while the new rulers are clearly white Nordic. The radical queen who wanted more freedom for everyone irrespective of their social standing and race is eliminated, things are brought back to normal.
Dany is depicted as progressive for this, also Grey Worm leaves to free slaves in the Summer Isles


The Lannisters are more obviously shitheads, while the Starks are more hypocritical


The problem isn't that Dany is progressive and diverse, it's that she's a liberal who doesn't care for realpolitik and actually wielding power. She moves on to the next place before things get challenging. Yeah, she goes and topples slave societies, but she doesn't replace them with anything, meaning that eventually (and probably not long) things will mostly go back how they were.

Unique IPs: 45

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]