|
All book discussion in this thread is now allowed. |
On August 04 2017 00:11 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2017 00:07 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2017 23:51 Logo wrote:On August 03 2017 10:41 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2017 10:29 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I realize that it's a joke, but your joke misses the point My joke is on point, it isn't my fault your sense of humor is broken. Don't get me started on the Unsullied's comically large shield and renaissance fair armor with no equipment and one spear each. Only one tiny spear and huge shield. TBH I don't get the point; the point that sticks out would be that you can't tell the difference between things that are illogical for convenience or cinematic purposes and things that are illogical or character inconsistent that drive the plot. Because those are subjective. Just because a lot of people in the thread say “that is so out of character, look at my logic and reason” doesn’t make the statement less subjective. Look at the discussion about the secret entrance to the sewer. People say it is out of character for Tyrion to build it, that he wanted to please his father. But his father also didn’t approve of whoring, so why did Tyrion do that at all? Maybe he designed the fortress and also secretly wanted to screw over his father? Maybe that is why he hatched the terrible plan to attack the Rock in the first place, for the joy of knowing his father’s castle would be sacked? You can argue both sides of this and they can both be true, because that is how motivation works. It's subjective if the complaint is valid, but that doesn't mean it's subjective if the complaint is of the same nature as wearing a hat or not wearing a hat. Even if the complaint isn't a good one or people disagree, it's still a complaint over Tyrions character which is relevant to the story where hats are just... not.
But it is all the same thing. Critique isn’t valid or invalid. That isn’t how critique works. The choice for the characters not to wear hats is an artistic one. They are forgoing realism for imagery. They like the way the characters look in full costume, like a stage play. The choice of how to show or not show a battle is the same thing, artistic. Why show another siege when we really just want to see the Queen of Thorns chug wine and deliver one last dagger on the way out? Also artistic. Leaving the motivations of all gods and other worldly things unclear is also part of that, even if they are not consistent. And leaving out the specific logistics of fleets and armies. If people want to critique creative works, they can’t just limit it to the aspects they think logic applies and that other stuff doesn’t matter.
|
I mean art is always subjective to some extent, but we can still analyze different things on their own based on definitions what "good" means in the context. If Jon Snow would behave completely differently in every scene he is in, that would be obviously bad even though it objectively isn't. But we defined it as bad based on creatign a consistent character who doesn't change his motviation every two seconds. (at least in a show which obviously doesn't use it as a stylistic device)
So no, "everything is subjective anyway" is imo a rather lazy copout, because at that point you can justify anything.
On August 04 2017 00:20 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2017 00:11 Logo wrote:On August 04 2017 00:07 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2017 23:51 Logo wrote:On August 03 2017 10:41 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2017 10:29 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I realize that it's a joke, but your joke misses the point My joke is on point, it isn't my fault your sense of humor is broken. Don't get me started on the Unsullied's comically large shield and renaissance fair armor with no equipment and one spear each. Only one tiny spear and huge shield. TBH I don't get the point; the point that sticks out would be that you can't tell the difference between things that are illogical for convenience or cinematic purposes and things that are illogical or character inconsistent that drive the plot. Because those are subjective. Just because a lot of people in the thread say “that is so out of character, look at my logic and reason” doesn’t make the statement less subjective. Look at the discussion about the secret entrance to the sewer. People say it is out of character for Tyrion to build it, that he wanted to please his father. But his father also didn’t approve of whoring, so why did Tyrion do that at all? Maybe he designed the fortress and also secretly wanted to screw over his father? Maybe that is why he hatched the terrible plan to attack the Rock in the first place, for the joy of knowing his father’s castle would be sacked? You can argue both sides of this and they can both be true, because that is how motivation works. It's subjective if the complaint is valid, but that doesn't mean it's subjective if the complaint is of the same nature as wearing a hat or not wearing a hat. Even if the complaint isn't a good one or people disagree, it's still a complaint over Tyrions character which is relevant to the story where hats are just... not. But it is all the same thing. Critique isn’t valid or invalid. That isn’t how critique works. The choice for the characters not to wear hats is an artistic one. They are forgoing realism for imagery. They like the way the characters look in full costume, like a stage play. The choice of how to show or not show a battle is the same thing, artistic. Why show another siege when we really just want to see the Queen of Thorns chug wine and deliver one last dagger on the way out? Also artistic. Leaving the motivations of all gods and other worldly things unclear is also part of that, even if they are not consistent. And leaving out the specific logistics of fleets and armies. If people want to critique creative works, they can’t just limit it to the aspects they think logic applies and that other stuff doesn’t matter.
Ofc you can do just that. Everybody here knows that it will never be 100% realistic/logical. You are basically saying "hey it will never be 100% "perfect" thus any criticism is invalid".
You speak about "artistic choices", that's fine. But if you establish the show as rather realistic one which doesn't play a lot with actual artistic choices (compare it to something like twin peaks for example), then you also need to be on a certain level. You cannot just ignore army sizes and general army movement completely simply to have a specific scene the way you want it to.
I already said how absurd the highgarden battle was and how they tried to justify it (Olenna saying the tyrells were never good at fighting; Ok it's not like they always had the biggest adn most feared army)
You also cannot establish greyscale as the oh so feared illness and then have sam curing it by "following the instructions". It doesn't work, it's lazy.
|
On August 04 2017 00:20 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2017 00:11 Logo wrote:On August 04 2017 00:07 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2017 23:51 Logo wrote:On August 03 2017 10:41 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2017 10:29 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I realize that it's a joke, but your joke misses the point My joke is on point, it isn't my fault your sense of humor is broken. Don't get me started on the Unsullied's comically large shield and renaissance fair armor with no equipment and one spear each. Only one tiny spear and huge shield. TBH I don't get the point; the point that sticks out would be that you can't tell the difference between things that are illogical for convenience or cinematic purposes and things that are illogical or character inconsistent that drive the plot. Because those are subjective. Just because a lot of people in the thread say “that is so out of character, look at my logic and reason” doesn’t make the statement less subjective. Look at the discussion about the secret entrance to the sewer. People say it is out of character for Tyrion to build it, that he wanted to please his father. But his father also didn’t approve of whoring, so why did Tyrion do that at all? Maybe he designed the fortress and also secretly wanted to screw over his father? Maybe that is why he hatched the terrible plan to attack the Rock in the first place, for the joy of knowing his father’s castle would be sacked? You can argue both sides of this and they can both be true, because that is how motivation works. It's subjective if the complaint is valid, but that doesn't mean it's subjective if the complaint is of the same nature as wearing a hat or not wearing a hat. Even if the complaint isn't a good one or people disagree, it's still a complaint over Tyrions character which is relevant to the story where hats are just... not. But it is all the same thing. Critique isn’t valid or invalid. That isn’t how critique works. The choice for the characters not to wear hats is an artistic one. They are forgoing realism for imagery. They like the way the characters look in full costume, like a stage play. The choice of how to show or not show a battle is the same thing, artistic. Why show another siege when we really just want to see the Queen of Thorns chug wine and deliver one last dagger on the way out? Also artistic. Leaving the motivations of all gods and other worldly things unclear is also part of that, even if they are not consistent. And leaving out the specific logistics of fleets and armies. If people want to critique creative works, they can’t just limit it to the aspects they think logic applies and that other stuff doesn’t matter.
I can't really parse this, it's just a ridiculously reductive way to think about everything in some weird attempt to dismiss all criticism and hand waves over the part of your position that's actually difficult for you to defend.
People may have complained about not showing battles or wanting to see more of this or that which is fine, and sure is like your hat example, but that's again not the same as using an inconsistency to drive the plot (say Euron knowing Dany's actions before she's decided on them herself).
|
People need to get away from the valid vs invalid criticism argument. This is the core problem with these discussions. This isn’t math, we are not trying to prove the other side is wrong. You don’t disprove someone’s critique. And conversely, saying the same critique over and over doesn’t make it more valid.
The lack of logistics and contexts to the major battles is a change from the previous seasons and does alter the tone of the series. It removes some of the topography from the world that was featured in previous seasons and added to the lived in feel of the series. I miss it, but understand why it isn’t a feature in these later seasons where the major characters are clashing with massive forces. It also makes tracking the time passed between scenes more challenging and can lead to narrative confusion.
On August 04 2017 00:31 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2017 00:20 Plansix wrote:On August 04 2017 00:11 Logo wrote:On August 04 2017 00:07 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2017 23:51 Logo wrote:On August 03 2017 10:41 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2017 10:29 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I realize that it's a joke, but your joke misses the point My joke is on point, it isn't my fault your sense of humor is broken. Don't get me started on the Unsullied's comically large shield and renaissance fair armor with no equipment and one spear each. Only one tiny spear and huge shield. TBH I don't get the point; the point that sticks out would be that you can't tell the difference between things that are illogical for convenience or cinematic purposes and things that are illogical or character inconsistent that drive the plot. Because those are subjective. Just because a lot of people in the thread say “that is so out of character, look at my logic and reason” doesn’t make the statement less subjective. Look at the discussion about the secret entrance to the sewer. People say it is out of character for Tyrion to build it, that he wanted to please his father. But his father also didn’t approve of whoring, so why did Tyrion do that at all? Maybe he designed the fortress and also secretly wanted to screw over his father? Maybe that is why he hatched the terrible plan to attack the Rock in the first place, for the joy of knowing his father’s castle would be sacked? You can argue both sides of this and they can both be true, because that is how motivation works. It's subjective if the complaint is valid, but that doesn't mean it's subjective if the complaint is of the same nature as wearing a hat or not wearing a hat. Even if the complaint isn't a good one or people disagree, it's still a complaint over Tyrions character which is relevant to the story where hats are just... not. But it is all the same thing. Critique isn’t valid or invalid. That isn’t how critique works. The choice for the characters not to wear hats is an artistic one. They are forgoing realism for imagery. They like the way the characters look in full costume, like a stage play. The choice of how to show or not show a battle is the same thing, artistic. Why show another siege when we really just want to see the Queen of Thorns chug wine and deliver one last dagger on the way out? Also artistic. Leaving the motivations of all gods and other worldly things unclear is also part of that, even if they are not consistent. And leaving out the specific logistics of fleets and armies. If people want to critique creative works, they can’t just limit it to the aspects they think logic applies and that other stuff doesn’t matter. I can't really parse this, it's just a ridiculously reductive way to think about everything in some weird attempt to dismiss all criticism and hand waves over the part of your position that's actually difficult for you to defend. People may have complained about not showing battles or wanting to see more of this or that which is fine, and sure is like your hat example, but that's again not the same as using an inconsistency to drive the plot (say Euron knowing Dany's actions before she's decided on them herself).
Or he set out to try and capture the folks from Dorne and found out they were on the fleet. That was his plan all along. We don’t really know where the Iron Fleet was and that is a big of a narrative hole. But I also never assumed he was dragging it around with him everywhere he went. If that is a big problem for you, that is fine. I don’t need them to explain to me exactly how he found them, since I can think of ten different ways it happened in my head and they are seem fine to me.
|
I mean you are basically saying no matter how the execution is we can never actually say it's bad because someone else might be ok with it. I disagree with that.
|
On August 04 2017 00:35 Plansix wrote:
The lack of logistics and contexts to the major battles is a change from the previous seasons and does alter the tone of the series. It removes some of the topography from the world that was featured in previous seasons and added to the lived in feel of the series. I miss it, but understand why it isn’t a feature in these later seasons where the major characters are clashing with massive forces. It also makes tracking the time passed between scenes more challenging and can lead to narrative confusion.
I feel like this isn't really understanding the complaints, or at least the complaints I agree with. It's one thing to not see the logistics of battle, we don't know how Highgarden was taken but that's fine. It'd also be fine if we didn't know how the Unsullied took Casterly Rock (though we do in this case). What's starkly missing though is justification for the actions we *do* get to see. We have no idea why Olenna stayed in Highgarden or how Euron knew to send ships to Casterly Rock but we instead got to see 2 explanations for how the Lannisters abandoned Casterly Rock.
The problem isn't the lack of certain logistics, we didn't get to see how Euron fed his crew on the two long journeys they took or how Olenna sailed to Highgarden or whatever other logistical stuff we may have seen if it was more like the earlier season and that's fine. But what the show is leaving out is the major reasons for why other highly critical and surprising to the plot actions are happening. The equivalent would be we didn't see Robb marry someone else and the Red Wedding omitted the words "The Lannisters send their regards" and we weren't told about the forged alliance. It would just be something that happens that's sort of believable but is devoid of anything that grounds it as a reasonable action rather than just something to make the plot have something happen.
Or he set out to try and capture the folks from Dorne and found out they were on the fleet. That was his plan all along. We don’t really know where the Iron Fleet was and that is a big of a narrative hole. But I also never assumed he was dragging it around with him everywhere he went. If that is a big problem for you, that is fine. I don’t need them to explain to me exactly how he found them, since I can think of ten different ways it happened in my head and they are seem fine to me.
Finding the Dornish part of the fleet is improbable, but we can say ok stuff like that happens (the problem plot wise is the improbability of it + the unfitting resolution of everything Dornish, but even that we can say ok fine whatever). But to then take that same good fortune, send most of the fleet around the entire continent and get lucky again by finding Unsullied at Casterly Rock all with Euron having set out before Dany decided that she was going to take this course of action? That's *really* stretching things (I'd also argue it's unnecessary because even with their ships the Unsullied would be stranded just by the fact that Euron's fleet exists and is between them and Dragonstone).
|
The issue with Olenna staying is interesting. But she is an old lady who played out the game, lost most all of her children and now her home. I never really thought she would leave. It seems perfectly in character for her to stay to the bitter end. The rest of how people knew which army would go where seems pretty easy to explain as both sides being aware of the valuable assets in the war. The iron fleet, or part of it, was there to defend the Rock. But then Jamie had the idea of sending them away and letting it fall, so he could trap the army there. I sort of accept that the game of chess is happening, even if I don’t see all the pieces moving.
|
On August 04 2017 01:02 Plansix wrote:
The issue with Olenna staying is interesting. But she is an old lady who played out the game, lost most all of her children and now her home. I never really thought she would leave. It seems perfectly in character for her to stay to the bitter end. The rest of how people knew which army would go where seems pretty easy to explain as both sides being aware of the valuable assets in the war. The iron fleet, or part of it, was there to defend the Rock. But then Jamie had the idea of sending them away and letting it fall, so he could trap the army there. I sort of accept that the game of chess is happening, even if I don’t see all the pieces moving.
But the timing of that doesn't work since the Iron Fleet was first at King's Landing then around the shores of Dorne while the Unsullied were already sailing out. When Euron initially left King's Landing he wasn't at all trusted by Cersei so it makes no sense at that point to divulge important military information to him. Like there's no time in the series of events where someone like Jaime can say "oh by the way Euron, Dany is going to Casterly Rock can you go sink her ships?"
Jaime's actions make sense to me by comparison. I can easily buy that with the time and advantage of communicating by ravens he could piece together Dany's potential targeting of Casterly Rock and move the troops away. And if it's not worth much militarily or financially there's little risk by leaving just a small garrison there. If no one attacks it then no one attacks it and no big loss. Though it's weird no one seems concerned with defending King's Landing like they all know Dany isn't going to attack there.
Olenna I agree it makes sense with her character for her to not retreat, in this case I wish they just acknowledged it a bit better. Even something simple as her cursing the Tarlys loyalty briefly would have been sufficient to me to cement that sequence of events. But it's like a fleeting problem in isolation; I think complaints about that part only have bite because of what's also happened with Euron and Dorne.
A great example in the other direction, and a plot point I really like is John/Davos talking to Dany. When they're trying to hype of Johns credentials it's like "Why the hell don't you mention that you've died then come back to life!?". Then Davos does mention it it's clearly something John doesn't want brought up. Then suddenly this weird inconsistency isn't one and it is cemented in a ton of intrigue and character development and it becomes one of my favorite bits of the last episode instead of a glaring omission. Even Bran's weird responses to Sansa felt cemented because of his detachment and slipping grip of reality.
|
I am not saying it shouldn’t bother you. The magical Iron Fleet of travel super fast is one of the amusing parts of this season. I’m saying does not detract from my enjoyment and it wasn’t hard for me to think of reasons it happened(like the Iron Fleet split up to follow/find both of Dany’s fleets). That was my experience. If you had a different one, that is totally valid and your experience. Neither are right or wrong.
|
sam is clearly a prodigy
highgarden army wasnt home or was with the tarleys
tyrion literally spelled out for jon the way he acted wasnt reasonable.
i dont know why eurons fleet can teleport but hes the most badass pirate of the 14 seas.
olenna is a badass
|
Is there any backstory as to the number of seas?
|
cause this universe is 2x as cool as earth
|
On August 04 2017 02:38 ComaDose wrote:
cause this universe is 2x as cool as earth
Two seas per kingdom, makes perfect sense.
|
Hey sam is a prodigy, let's hope he figures out how to create valyrian steel as well, hopefully there are some instructions for him in some old book
|
i wonder how they make those valyrian steel links for maesters that practice magic. maybe one of those scrolls is from valyria from before its doom!
|
I love that of all the tropes of fantasy that Martin avoided, the magical metal for cool swords that they forgot how to make still made it through. It was just to fun to pass up dope swords that don’t break and get cool names.
|
"Widow's Wail" - he really was a cunt
|
On August 04 2017 03:19 Plansix wrote:
I love that of all the tropes of fantasy that Martin avoided, the magical metal for cool swords that they forgot how to make still made it through. It was just to fun to pass up dope swords that don’t break and get cool names.
Martin rarely avoids tropes, he just does different things with them
|
I am very sorry that you guys can't get enough reinforcement of your opinions in this thread because that's what it's all about right? You come here, you want to talk about how awesome the show was but then there are more people here that didn't think it was 10/10 and that must be super hard. We want to discuss the show as well and we have the same right to get reinforcement of our value as a person due to our opinion being the same as others. If there are 8 out of ten people in this thread saying that the show is still entertaining but now has bad writing that pisses people off, maybe that is just what it is. Maybe we have to split the thread into to, one with criticism allowed and one for the people that think they are the majority but only complain about people not sharing their opinion.
And so to not only complain about the complains about complains:
On August 02 2017 21:58 Pontual wrote:
Just saw a theory that Missandei may be the informant for Cersei. The reasoning behind this is: Sir Davos asked about her accent and his facial expression seemed to not believe what she said, he further asked about the landscape to try to find out something. She layed down with greyworm the night before the casterly rock attack.
I didn't catch the davos doubtful facial expression, but imo she and varys are the ones that are under my radar.
In my opinion, that would be a really stupid thing to do. There is basically no way someone could change the affiliation of Missandei. What would her motivation be to betray? What would she gain? She was loyal to her queen since she was freed and there is no reason to believe she was bought as a person before she met Dany. I am not saying it can't happen because the writers have shown they don't care about character portrayals if it fits their plot and if they have a plot where Dany is super pissed at her closest friend and kills her for treason they will probably do it for th lulz.
|
I like how Valayrian steel is basically just Damascus steel with only a singular magical property of being able to kill wights (so far?). It's still the trope of magical steel and what not, but I like that it's pretty rooted still and that smiths can reforge the weapons and all that. While the blades are highly prized and stuff they always seem more like a status symbol than some incredible edge in battle which I appreciate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
