About to hit the 5000 post mark on the old thread, the first season 7 trailer today seems like the right time to start the final Game of Thones thread.
I'm going back to the original rules pre-2015. I don't think we need supervision or bannings. Just don't be a dick. Post anything you find online that hasn't aired yet inside of spoiler tags. That's pretty much it. I think we can all handle that...
Originally Posted by temper11:
If they gave the fans what they want, theyd have gotten crushed for it. Don't give the fans what they want... getting crushed for that too.
If you want to like the ending of a story... then write it yourself.
Don't ever criticize anything ever again then...don't like it, do it yourself.
Hey the Chiefs cut someone that I don't agree with...."hurr hurr go GM your own team blehhhhh" :-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by Fish:
The bolded sentences make this a pretty hard sell. Coupled with the rest of the Stark family nopeing out of the kingdom directly after Bran is elected. I just don't get it.... this is just begging for another civil war in the near future...
Until bran wargs into drogon and brings him back. Then people will stay the f in their lane. Thats why he left the meeting. Job 1... get the dragon. [Reply]
Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider:
Dragons are supposed to be intelligent, some more intelligent than humans.
I didn't find it all that far fetched Drogon may have decided the Iron Throne has lead his person to a bad death.
Yeah, I understand what they were trying for. It just had too much over the top pandering to force the plot. I'm just poking fun. This is still probably my favorite TV series of all time. I love it regardless of the ham-fisted ending. [Reply]
It isn't Bran. It's the 3-eyed Raven. He says it over and over and over again through out the show. That USE to be Bran. It's just Bran's body that's been possessed by whomever the 3-Eyed Raven is.
We know the 3-eyed Raven can go back in time and change the future. And we know he can see the future.
Which means of course he knew the outcome all along. And since he has shown that he can go back in time and manipulate people/outcomes, it's likely that he manipulated these events to place himself on the throne.
If he manipulated these events to place himself on the throne, does that make him an evil being?
Could the Night's King have been trying to SAVE mankind by destroying the 3-eyed raven before he could conquer mankind as he did?
Was the REAL game between the 3-eyed raven and the Night's King?
If so, we could see this arc fleshed out during the prequel. Something like...maybe the 3-eyed raven caused King Aerys to go mad? [Reply]
Originally Posted by RustShack:
Bronn being around at the end seems kinda weird. So does Winterfell becoming independent when a Stark is named King. Grey Worm probably would have killed Jon instead of taking him prisoner too.
All in all, pretty happy ending for everyone though. Kinda surprised Jon didn’t have any votes in his favor, and that Bran still sent/let him go north even though Bran pulled the King card to name Tyrion Hand. But Jon is King beyond the wall now.
Should have had Grey Worm walk in at the moment Jon kills Dany, and then he goes for Jon, who is saved by Drogon...would have been awesome. Plus it leaves Jon in the clear because Grey Worm was really his only problem. [Reply]
If anyone is looking to scratch a television itch now that Thrones has wrapped up, you should check out Westworld if you haven’t yet. They just released a trailer for season 3 and it looks like Aaron Paul will play a prominent role and I’m so damn stoked for that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Amnorix:
All absolutely true, but the North went independent AFTER Bran had received the approval votes of most or all of the Southern houses.
But let's face it, unless Bran can Warg into Drogon, he's going to have his hands full with wannabe usurpers, starting with his own Master of Coin.
All that said, all those usupers need to batten down their own power base. It's not like Bronn walks in and everyone in the region that had pledged fealty to House Tyrell for all those years quickly bends the knee. Will take years to sort it all out. Years that Bran might be able to use to his advantage if he's politically adept (WHICH WE HAVE NO PROOF WHATSOEVER OF).
To start off I absolutely hate that Bran is King. Jon Snow should be King. Its pretty much the only thing I hated this season. I have never complained about anything in this show.
Now that I got that out of the way, I want to say good luck to anyone that is going to try to be sneaky and try to overthrow Bran. How are you going to even attempt to plot to kill someone that sees and knows everything. He can crush any uprising before it evens begin. No need for trials anymore either. Bran saw it happen. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
It isn't Bran. It's the 3-eyed Raven. He says it over and over and over again through out the show. That USE to be Bran. It's just Bran's body that's been possessed by whomever the 3-Eyed Raven is.
We know the 3-eyed Raven can go back in time and change the future. And we know he can see the future.
Which means of course he knew the outcome all along. And since he has shown that he can go back in time and manipulate people/outcomes, it's likely that he manipulated these events to place himself on the throne.
If he manipulated these events to place himself on the throne, does that make him an evil being?
Could the Night's King have been trying to SAVE mankind by destroying the 3-eyed raven before he could conquer mankind as he did?
Was the REAL game between the 3-eyed raven and the Night's King?
If so, we could see this arc fleshed out during the prequel. Something like...maybe the 3-eyed raven caused King Aerys to go mad?
"the ink is dry...."
By all accounts, the 3-eyed raven can't really alter the past. He can do some stuff that may effect the future (often involuntarily), but there are few, if any, indications that the 3-eyed raven can really play God as you're suggesting.
They'd have to retcon the shit out of things if that was something they ever wanted to try. [Reply]
Originally Posted by InChiefsHell:
Should have had Grey Worm walk in at the moment Jon kills Dany, and then he goes for Jon, who is saved by Drogon...would have been awesome. Plus it leaves Jon in the clear because Grey Worm was really his only problem.
I was really wanting to see Jon vs Grey Worm. [Reply]
I also thought it was kinda weird that there was just zero consideration for Jon Snow to be King after he shanked Dany. He was still clearly the rightful heir. He had more than arguable reason to kill her after she murdered all the innocents in Kings Landing. I mean let's not ignore the long long history of rulers being taken out and replaced in similar fashion. But that was clearly not even a consideration by anyone, even though Grey Worm seemed to be the only person completely hating on Jon. They just chose to completely ignore Jon's right to the throne, and it didn't feel like the reasoning was supported by much of anything. The folks who urged Jon to murder Dany, like Tyrion, forgot all about that and instead called for Bran. Jon didn't say shit when he should have had at least an arguable claim to the throne, and everybody just ignores that and banishes him to the Wall. Thanks, bud. Kbye. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Fish:
I also thought it was kinda weird that there was just zero consideration for Jon Snow to be King after he shanked Dany. He was still clearly the rightful heir. He had more than arguable reason to kill her after she murdered all the innocents in Kings Landing. I mean let's not ignore the long long history of rulers being taken out and replaced in similar fashion. But that was clearly not even a consideration by anyone, even though Grey Worm seemed to be the only person completely hating on Jon. They just chose to completely ignore Jon's right to the throne, and it didn't feel like the reasoning was supported by much of anything. The folks who urged Jon to murder Dany, like Tyrion, forgot all about that and instead called for Bran. Jon didn't say shit when he should have had at least an arguable claim to the throne, and everybody just ignores that and banishes him to the Wall. Thanks, bud. Kbye.
Not only that but they completely curb Gendry who is the rightful heir after being legitimized. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Fish:
I also thought it was kinda weird that there was just zero consideration for Jon Snow to be King after he shanked Dany. He was still clearly the rightful heir. He had more than arguable reason to kill her after she murdered all the innocents in Kings Landing. I mean let's not ignore the long long history of rulers being taken out and replaced in similar fashion. But that was clearly not even a consideration by anyone, even though Grey Worm seemed to be the only person completely hating on Jon. They just chose to completely ignore Jon's right to the throne, and it didn't feel like the reasoning was supported by much of anything. The folks who urged Jon to murder Dany, like Tyrion, forgot all about that and instead called for Bran. Jon didn't say shit when he should have had at least an arguable claim to the throne, and everybody just ignores that and banishes him to the Wall. Thanks, bud. Kbye.
Didn't think that was poorly explained. If he is freed, danys loyalists would raise hell. If he is held captive, everyone else will raise hell. He may have earned the throne, but that doesn't mean danys loyalists would bend the knee. It would heighten division. Jon sacrificing status for the good of realm is very much in character, much less for a throne he never wanted. [Reply]
