Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

It wasn't 100% what I wanted, but it wasn't terrible. I think I might need more time to digest it but I walked away feeling "eh, not great but could have been worse".

I thought it was terrible. The acting, cinematography etc were great, but the writing my god. Absolute nonsense and a betrayal of nearly every character.

What a waste... the night king... Dany... Jon... Bran... Arya. All the set-up and allusions to just throw away on the quickest, most plot armored and anticlimactic final seasons of all time.

Got is still one of the greatest shows to air, but its failure is unto itself and its own standards IMHO.

A buddy of mine put it best I think 'GoT is the hottest girl you ever dated that you were absolutely blissfully head over heels for, but then she started acting really, really weird and eventually left you. ' lol, that about hits it for me.

A very satisfying ending. Not exciting or riveting, but true to the story. Definitely some failures in how it was told, but I'm happy with where everything lands.

That said, a rant below on Danny's character arc and how it ties in to the series as a whole, with some off hand spoilers for tonight's episode:

I have no strong feelings about the final episode of Game of Thrones.



Which is a massive improvement over the earlier episodes of the season. But also, flipping heck, considering the potential of the show, especially from the start... That is really yikes.

 LunarSol wrote:
Tyrion makes a great case for the idea that Danny's actions have always been monstrous but applauded because they were aimed at "the right people". This is a GREAT arc and really probably what's intended from the start

Yes, I think you're right.

I read two articles today that really do cement that I was wrong when I said after last episode that I felt like Dany's heel turn felt abrupt, and that while I was OK with it getting there, I wish they had more runway - that it was somewhat underdeveloped. Those articles (the better one is here) point out that Dany has actually been relatively horrific since the beginning and the viewer has a tendency to handwave it away because the character is likeable and the people she is burning, murdering, or crucifying are terrible, but at the end of the day, this is a character who burned people to death every single season, and who has always had a cruel streak.

So after having had some time to turn it around in my head, I think where they landed is maybe the best place they could have landed with the tracks laying as they did. It's not the story I ultimately wanted but if I had paid more attention, I would have known that much sooner.

I feel it was a bit anticlimatic, and a bit too clean cut. And lukewarm for what always seemed like a nihilistic world. Then again, I was rooting for daenerys. I feel like this will end up like breaking bad for me. Fond memories, but no desire to ever rewatch it again because knowing the end result takes steam out of the journey of rewatching. This was a show where bad thiings always happened to seemingly good people. And then they gave everyone some slack this season.

Well, that’s that, then.

A genuine landmark in TV done and dusted.

Mixed bag of a final season, but that’s nothing particularly new in itself.

Ending I enjoyed, though there were missteps along the way.

Dany - "They don't get to choose"

*gets stabbed*

Council of Lords & Ladies -"They don't get to choose"

*laughter*

So turns out Dany was correct that they just used Jon's birthright to destroy them both. Everybody forgot about "Aegon" after he served his purpose.

So with the Night King defeated, are the Nights Watch essentially just Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs now?

I think giving rapists and murderers a fortified position with absolutely no purpose now is probably a bad idea. I don't think the Wildlings will be coming back as it is implied the thaw is going beyond the wall.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I mean, what's the moral of the show for you? As a standalone entity? I'd love to hear everybody's takes.

That was feething dire.

Turns out Bran was the evil overlord all long. given he could see the future then you can look back the few things he actually did this season and all of them only achieved one thing, which was putting him on the throne.

For example the revelation of Jon’s parentage it served no other purpose than splitting Dany and Jon and contributing to her isolation and as an excuse for her going Evil, what was the point of that vision in show?
It literally existed as a short cut for the hack writers to turn people against Dany as quickly as possible without any actual ground work.

 Compel wrote:
So with the Night King defeated, are the Nights Watch essentially just Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs now?

Yeah, I have no idea why that organization even exists. Does it even, really - or was it just a fig leaf to allow Jon Snow to go off with the Wildlings?

I have to say, compared to other episodes this season, that was not as bad as I feared.

I'm not sure they could have ended it any other way although I would have changed one thing.



Also calling it: Maisey Williams is getting her own spin off TV show:



LOL.

Turns out I'm not the only one thinking about an Arya spin off......

Game of Thrones or how I learned to stop worrying after a magic tree possessed a cripple and everybody lived just as before.

I still see it as Bran doing a Dr Strange.

He's seen the future, or futures. And he's going for the least bad option. And as he told Jon at Winterfell, he can't say what he's doing, or why, or it won't happen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I was initially surprised that Sansa wasn't named Queen. But, after a wee bit of thought, it does make sense.

She saw how The North reacted to Jon kneeling to Dany. And she's loyal to The North first and foremost. Better to be Queen in The North and have that support, than a more tenuous position for all of Westeros.

and of course putting prescient wizards in charge always ends well...

The least bad option according to an ancient entity? It's not Bran anymore, he says it multiple times himself. It's a weird ending. What right does Bran have to the 7 Kingdoms and under what authority does he grant independence to the North? Why not just disband the rest of the Kingdoms? The least bad option is letting Dany burn down King's Landing? What are we basing that on? There's nothing in the show to indicate that the Bran husk will make a good king. It's not even like he's a host for one of the seven, who are actually worshipped in the rest of Westeros. He's a host for some ancient entity of the old gods.

What's my takeaway with this ending?

 Gael Knight wrote:
The least bad option according to an ancient entity? It's not Bran anymore, he says it multiple times himself. It's a weird ending. What right does Bran have to the 7 Kingdoms and under what authority does he grant independence to the North? Why not just disband the rest of the Kingdoms? The least bad option is letting Dany burn down King's Landing? What are we basing that on? There's nothing in the show to indicate that the Bran husk will make a good king. It's not even like he's a host for one of the seven, who are actually worshipped in the rest of Westeros. He's a host for some ancient entity of the old gods.

Those are easy enough.

If you want a leader to bring stability to a war ravaged country - you can do a heck of a lot worse than a near omniscient kid in a wheelchair. He'll see plots as they unfold, and who's involved. Any crime reported to him? Yep, he can check that out too. And that he has the instant support of The Great Houses, by mutual consent, that's quite a strong hand to start with. He's not an usurper, just the nominee after the last bloodline more or less died. You cannot successfully plot against him. Not ever. He sees all, he knows all. He can become the prime source of absolute justice. High Born bumped off in suspicious circumstances? Oh yeah, that was Ser X, who did it in league with Sers A, B and Lady Q. Sorted.

He's The King - that's his authority to grant The North independence. That's the sort of power a King has. And to refuse? Probably another war. Which nobody can afford. The others appear to want/need the current arrangement of mutual support (High Garden as bread basket etc). Again, it's all about regaining stability, and rebuilding what's been destroyed in the preceding few years.

The least bad option does not make it a good option. What if the alternatives were a grinding stalemate, more burnination, and vengeful Cersei grinding Westeros even harder under her boot?

Maybe he is just being selfish, and planned this all along? Just makes him no better nor worse than anyone else after The Throne, no?

So what is it? Least bad or no better?

So Bran now has perfect vision of the future and all possibilities? I don't remember that being mentioned and how is that of any worth if somebody plans to plot against him at some point but hasn't yet acted. Does he simply wait until they are mid plot then have somebody arrest them. If he's possessed of such clarity of vision why didn't he stop King's Landing from being burned down? In many ways he instigated it when he instructed Sam to tell Jon. You can't save this with some "Dr. Strange" horsegak because it's not in the same setting.

Why does the throne get melted if the message is just the literal throne does not matter but the power stays with the same class of people? Because it looked cool? The show has come to an end and there's no clear message beyond nothing really matters it'll all end up the same. Just hack pop nihilism.

 Ouze wrote:

 Compel wrote:
So with the Night King defeated, are the Nights Watch essentially just Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs now?

Yeah, I have no idea why that organization even exists. Does it even, really - or was it just a fig leaf to allow Jon Snow to go off with the Wildlings?

Yes - Maybe?

These claims about the Nights Watch no longer having a purpose seem like jumping the gun. Sure the wildlings are on good terms with Westeros for now, but that's no guarantee they always will be. They still technically exist beyond the authority of the Seven Kingdoms. That means they are free to do whatever they want, including raiding if they so choose or even organizing an invasion. Tormund may be down with Jon and the southernors, but will Tormund's sons be? The sons of Tormund's sons?

Besides, it is convenient to have a place to exile people.Throughout the history of Westeros entire wars have been averted due to defeated political opponents being sent to the wall instead of executed. I mean, Jon's sentencing is proof of that. The North would never allow him to be executed, Dany's loyalists would never allow him to walk. The Wall serves as a compromise.

 Gael Knight wrote:
So what is it? Least bad or no better?

So Bran now has perfect vision of the future and all possibilities? I don't remember that being mentioned and how is that of any worth if somebody plans to plot against him at some point but hasn't yet acted. Does he simply wait until they are mid plot then have somebody arrest them. If he's possessed of such clarity of vision why didn't he stop King's Landing from being burned down? In many ways he instigated it when he instructed Sam to tell Jon. You can't save this with some "Dr. Strange" horsegak because it's not in the same setting.

Why does the throne get melted if the message is just the literal throne does not matter but the power stays with the same class of people? Because it looked cool? The show has come to an end and there's no clear message beyond nothing really matters it'll all end up the same. Just hack pop nihilism.

I don't think that's the takeaway.

The show(we can't speak to the books until they're done, if they ever are) seems to be saying: "You can have fast change, or you can have stable change - "progress" in your eyes is not justification for slaughter and dictatorship, and a paradise built on violence is a castle built on sand". Things don't end up the same, Westeros has moved from an absolute dynastic monarchy to a system of "elector counts". It's not democracy, but the idea you can take a basically medieval society and just skip over hundreds of years of social development actually is laughable - that's why Dany's perfect world would have required her to butcher her way across the country and enforce her new ideals with fear & violence while she reigned as absolute ruler of the world.

Sansa just looked a little too smug at the end for my tastes, but I guess she deserves to, after all she has been through.

Call me crazy, but the few character arcs I really wanted to follow all along was Brienne and Arya. If Arya gets a spin-off (she should - go Maisie!!), I am not sure if there will be any logical reason to bring in any old characters, as she will be far out west on new adventures. This obviously gives a new show unfettered free reign on any world and story line they choose. If it is truly good, I hope it gains traction - good luck to all.

Regarding the NW, it's also important to remember that the show isn't the books.

For a variety of reasons, it seems like a very solid bet that the Others storyline won't be resolved in the same way as the WWs story in the show. And although the show completely ignores the question of the WWs motivations down the stretch -- after all, winter comes regularly, so why invade THIS winter -- I hazard to guess that ending won't be a complete defeat of the Others but a return to detente. And with that comes the need for a NW...but perhaps in their original(?) conception as a peacekeeping force at the DMZ.

And so that part of the ending may make more sense in the books. As I've been saying, Jon's conclusion was foreshadowed in the person of Maester Aemon, his great-great uncle.

There was a ton of absurd things just for the moments. Greyworm teleporting, the crypts of Kings Landing being completely destroyed past episode and now theres just a little rubble, enough to kill Cersei and Jaime but enough for Tyrion to quickly remove it to see the bodies...

Also for everybody saying that Daenerys was gonna get mad from episode 1, I have to remember D&D in the after episode interviews and how "She's definetely not her father"?

And the ease everybody just accepts Brandon as the new king... or the independence of the north.

They should have told the german tribes thats how you build a Holy Empire with an elective monarchy. Why all those centuries of bickering and war?

Jon Character was completely anihilated. It served no purpose. This last two episode have destroyed the archs of Jaime and Jon, and nobody batted an eye about that. Quite the contrary, internet is full of people trying to justify it.

Guys, we know. It hurts. I had this when ME3 ended. But when a final sucks it sucks. No need to try to justify it.

There was a ton of filler in the episode, a ton of fanserviced ends to plots and in general, it leaved a very bad taste in my mouth. Or that would have been what I said, if I was still invested in the show. The reality is that I laughed my ass off to both the episode and all the outrage and memes that came after it.

And I'm still doing it.

In my opinion the best finale would have been to Daenerys to just win and destroy everyone or subyugate them. That would have been a tragic and both moralistic finale: If you want to change the world, do it the right way. Conquest and genocide only leaves to another tyrant. Much more fitting for the series.
Also, a Song of Fire and Ice. Really Sam? Why?

Also props for Drogon the Dragon philosopher

Can we take a moment to appreciate the character with the greatest arc?

 MDSW wrote:
Sansa just looked a little too smug at the end for my tastes, but I guess she deserves to, after all she has been through.

Call me crazy, but the few character arcs I really wanted to follow all along was Brienne and Arya. If Arya gets a spin-off (she should - go Maisie!!), I am not sure if there will be any logical reason to bring in any old characters, as she will be far out west on new adventures. This obviously gives a new show unfettered free reign on any world and story line they choose. If it is truly good, I hope it gains traction - good luck to all.

Maisie Williams definitely has the acting chops for it. In this season, she's convincingly switched between stone cold killer, and 'still just really a kid'.

I didn't hate the most basic points of the conclusion. I expected that GRRM's ending had Daenerys dead and Jon back in the North...I just wasn't sure the the showrunners would pull the trigger on Daenerys until last week's episode. Ultimately, both Targaryens ended up being weapons that were used and discarded by the traditional powers of the land once they were no longer useful. That feels like like a GRRM ending. Bran on the throne is...very weird though.

But like I said in the other post, this is GRRM's finish line but with a lead-up from other writers. So there's a lot that's not going to feel quite right. I'm confident that Jon will have a bigger role in the conflict with the Others in the books, and that will better fulfill the Azor Ahai prophecy -- and make it more poignant and more parallel with Daenerys when he's ultimately cast aside. Bran will presumably -- hopefully? -- be different in the books. Who really knows with that one, because show Bran went weird. And I have to think that whatever types of negotiation go on post-Daenerys, they'll make a little more sense in the books. Because I felt like some things weren't quite tracking.

I assume they wanted to leave things on a happy-ish note since they have $pinoffs to create. But I thought the whimsical touches in the council meeting were off. Tyrion really knived Jon, just in a less literal way than Jon knived Daenerys. There were other ways of getting it done that end up with Jon as a decent king and not in prison...they just end up with dead Tyrion. Taking care of it immediately and personally in that way -- while foreshadowed by Ned Stark's first scene in the story and fitting Jon's code and character -- was the only option that allows Tyrion to live and ultimately come Hand again. Setting aside the nonsense of how a prisoner gets to decide the new form of government, Tyrion played a ridiculously gak hand well and ended up running the kingdom for an absent, compromise king. To me, this feels like a dark note for him and not a redemption...that ultimately he's a smart maneuverer, but a manipulator of good people and not truly a good person himself.