On September 07 2017 05:56 ComaDose wrote: yeah I think jamie was #1 at the tourneys and a force to be reckoned with on the field. but Brianne is probably top 5 fighters at this point, she beat the hound (was that a fair fight?), and won renley's tournament. but if jamie's hands wern't tied together and he wasn't exhausted he def would have won.
Jaime told Brienne that only 3 would beat him. Pretty sure said three are Sandor, Gregor, and Barristan.
On September 06 2017 23:43 Plansix wrote: My metric for nitpicking is if it sounds like something the Simpsons Comic book guy would say. Or if I think it would be on Cinema Sins.
I mean in general you don't seem to acknowledge any criticism tbh. GoT has really big flaws compared to before, if you think all of that is on nitpick level then it's only logical that there won't ever be something we agree on. Though it boils down to your art pov, everything is subjective.
I acknowledge plenty of criticism when it isn’t presented in a condescending, pretentious tone with rife unearned authority. Presentation and tone matter, which is a criticism you often disregard by claiming “but the criticisms are valid” as some sort of talismanic shield.
And yet you make up alternative facts such as "money doesn't matter anymore - there are no mercanaries left" in order to deflect criticism of the show. Not just was this proven wrong, but you presented it as if it was a fact even though it was complete speculation from your side.
Or what about comparing decisions made under WW2 to the bad councilling by Tyrion while offering no deeper analysis or showing no real understanding on why decisions were made under WW2.
I think it's obvious that your mind is predetermined to reflect all types of criticism regardless of its valid or not.
Presentation and tone matter, which is a criticism you often disregard by claiming “but the criticisms are valid” as some sort of talismanic shield.
Which shouldn't matter when it comes to whether the criticism is valid or not. I guess whenever someone questions authority in a condescending matter, you jump to the defense - while never actually looking at the arguments presented by the person.
I read over a thousands of your post rejecting criticism - yet I can't remember a single time where you attempted to asses all of the arguments by the poster and explain why they were wrong.
You are not completely wrong, my responses could be better. My annoyance with the derisive tone of this thread and its overall relentless negativity made it a chore to respond to the criticisms of a specific poster every time they were brought up. As the same issues were rehashed season after season, my desire to address these points again and again ended. From pacing to nitpicking the battle of the bastards tactics not being that of Total War. So this season I just decided I wasn’t going to bother since it was the same shit. That likely wasn’t the best call, but this is the pro-wrestling of prestige TV.
However, you completely missed the point of my “valid criticism” comment. All criticism is valid. All of it. Two people can hold different views on a piece of art and they are both equally true. A single person can hold two conflicting criticisms of a piece of art that are both equally true. Criticism is not quantitative. Critiquing art does not have the end goal of proving if said art is good or bad. If art is good or bad is sort of irrelevant.
Well here's a though, don't respond to that type of criticism.
For instance I dont care about minor details the show gets wrong, heck until last season I absolutely didn't care about the teleportation because it didnt really affect the story or the characters in a meaningful way. I still dont care about it as long as the events aren't happening in a very short time (like the raven-dragons thing this season) or doesnt ask of me to completely suspend my disbelief, because Im not used to doing that for this show.
Perhaps all criticism is valid, but unlike you, I think it can be quantified. Its not the same when someone criticizes the show because Cersei's hair doesn't grow or if someone says the storylines are poor and there is no substance left anymore or something on that level. The former criticizes the show on a superficial level, the later on a fundamental level. I weigh these two types of criticism differently and I do think those are quantitatively different types of criticism. Some replies in this thread are also like this: some people point out fundamental flaws but get superficial replies that completely miss the point or fail to address the core of their complaint.
My opinions are very close to those of Theredviper, Sent and Scrubbles and I think they articulate the show's problems very well. Since Im not very good at that, here's a video that will do it for me (note: I dont agree with his ending thoughts though)
On September 07 2017 05:56 ComaDose wrote: yeah I think jamie was #1 at the tourneys and a force to be reckoned with on the field. but Brianne is probably top 5 fighters at this point, she beat the hound (was that a fair fight?), and won renley's tournament. but if jamie's hands wern't tied together and he wasn't exhausted he def would have won.
Acknowledging the silliness of the whole "power level tiers" thing, the show at least has gone out of its way to show Brienne as the best fighter around (with some possible weird exceptions around the margins): Loras, Jaime, and the Hound all get talked way up, then she dismantles each of them... usually with relative ease. What's more, she's shown competing with each of them in their "element": Loras in a tournament, Jaime in a duel, and the Hound in a no-holds-barred brawl. Her fighting style is totally different in each fight as she matches her opponent and beats them at their own game. Watch the Jaime fight again... she beats him not once but several times (and withholds the killing blow because her game is to keep him alive). His hands are shackled, but that hardly affects his use of the sword.
There's also the minor matter where Jaime has some of the worst actual sword work on screen from a purely technical standpoint, if that comes into it.
I understand the book has a somewhat different view on this, but in the show Brienne is repeatedly shown to be the best fighter around, maybe inferior only to monsters like the Mountain or demigods like Oberyn/Drogo.
Too bad in the show he didn't get the legends of the Sword of the Morning.GOAT. Everyone else can keep their dark valyrian blades. This dude has a shining white sword made from some alien metals. Every dude that claimed to be a big deal looked up to the guy.
I think that the thing people keep forgetting is that this isn't an anime. You don't have power levels. A billion tiny factors go into a fight and in the right circumstances, an amateur can kill a master. A random blow from a blind spot, a gust of wind, sand in the eyes, lack of attention for a moment - all of these can end even the most experienced fighter. And that's in a 1v1. In a battle, you can forget about "power level" entirely.
There are so many random elements like arrows, spears from all directions, a charging horse, the environment (like mud) that will kill anyone. Individual skill might help someone survive a battle but it is not the definitive factor by any stretch of the imagination.
On September 07 2017 08:21 FreakyDroid wrote: Well here's a though, don't respond to that type of criticism.
For instance I dont care about minor details the show gets wrong, heck until last season I absolutely didn't care about the teleportation because it didnt really affect the story or the characters in a meaningful way. I still dont care about it as long as the events aren't happening in a very short time (like the raven-dragons thing this season) or doesnt ask of me to completely suspend my disbelief, because Im not used to doing that for this show.
Perhaps all criticism is valid, but unlike you, I think it can be quantified. Its not the same when someone criticizes the show because Cersei's hair doesn't grow or if someone says the storylines are poor and there is no substance left anymore or something on that level. The former criticizes the show on a superficial level, the later on a fundamental level. I weigh these two types of criticism differently and I do think those are quantitatively different types of criticism. Some replies in this thread are also like this: some people point out fundamental flaws but get superficial replies that completely miss the point or fail to address the core of their complaint.
My opinions are very close to those of Theredviper, Sent and Scrubbles and I think they articulate the show's problems very well. Since Im not very good at that, here's a video that will do it for me (note: I dont agree with his ending thoughts though)
Nice video. I too disagree with his ending thoughts, but he did a great job at describing what some of us felt when things stopped making sense in the show. The Titanic part of the video made me lol.
Months of starvation in a cage surely effects ones ability to sword fight, as does months of near starvation in the wilderness, run down equipment and a possible infection. Obviously briennes quite good, and I can't predict or understand the internal logic anymore as it seems to have collapsed, but it seems she is slightly over hyped like most leaders and soldiers in this world. Even Jon is being called the worlds best swordsman
On September 08 2017 04:33 Hyperbola wrote: I think that the thing people keep forgetting is that this isn't an anime. You don't have power levels. A billion tiny factors go into a fight and in the right circumstances, an amateur can kill a master. A random blow from a blind spot, a gust of wind, sand in the eyes, lack of attention for a moment - all of these can end even the most experienced fighter. And that's in a 1v1. In a battle, you can forget about "power level" entirely.
There are so many random elements like arrows, spears from all directions, a charging horse, the environment (like mud) that will kill anyone. Individual skill might help someone survive a battle but it is not the definitive factor by any stretch of the imagination.
Yes. Otherwise the Arthur would still be alive with his white shining meteor sword.
On September 08 2017 06:27 Dazed. wrote: Months of starvation in a cage surely effects ones ability to sword fight, as does months of near starvation in the wilderness, run down equipment and a possible infection. Obviously briennes quite good, and I can't predict or understand the internal logic anymore as it seems to have collapsed, but it seems she is slightly over hyped like most leaders and soldiers in this world. Even Jon is being called the worlds best swordsman
Did Jon even won a serious fight in books? The only reason he managed to kill half-hand was because half-hand let him do it, at least Jons believes that. And as far as I remember , he never had another death sword battle.
On September 08 2017 06:27 Dazed. wrote: Months of starvation in a cage surely effects ones ability to sword fight, as does months of near starvation in the wilderness, run down equipment and a possible infection. Obviously briennes quite good, and I can't predict or understand the internal logic anymore as it seems to have collapsed, but it seems she is slightly over hyped like most leaders and soldiers in this world. Even Jon is being called the worlds best swordsman
Did Jon even won a serious fight in books? The only reason he managed to kill half-hand was because half-hand let him do it, at least Jons believes that. And as far as I remember , he never had another death sword battle.
It depends, he killed a wight which is no small feat, but is probably his biggest win in anything resembling head to head combat. The book doesn't (or hasn't yet) had the ninja effect on wights like the show has and I think the wight was unarmed?
EPT
(note: I dont agree with his ending thoughts though)
