MovieChat Forums > Game of Thrones (2011) Discussion > Daenerys' rampage after King's Landing s...

Daenerys' rampage after King's Landing surrenders makes COMPLETE SENSE


So many people saying it makes no sense that Dany would go on a rampage killing innocents after King's Landing surrendered. You're not paying attention to that episode if you think that!

Recall the scene earlier on in episode 5, between Dany and Jon. Some of the things Dany says in this scene:

"What did I say would happen if you told your sister?..."
"far more people in Westeros love you more than they love me. I don't have love here, I only have fear."
(after failed kiss) "All right then. Let it be fear."

It's clear that Dany's great apprehension is more people finding out about Jon's true heritage. Because Jon is more loved in Westeros, and he is a male Targaryen and therefore the rightful heir to the throne, Dany's place on the throne would be under serious question when more people find out.

Dany realises that the only way she can secure her place on the throne even with people inevitably finding out about Jon's heritage, is if everyone is frightened to death of her. "Let it be fear". In her fragile state of mind, it wasn't enough to fly around with her dragon killing the King's Landing soldiers. She needed to do something far more extreme, if the people were to be fearful enough of her to never question her place on the throne. That's why she went on her rampage, even when the bells rang signalled surrender.

It was obvious to me on a first watch, can't believe how little this has been discussed. Everyone arguing about the validity of the 'descent to madness' angle and looking back into many earlier seasons....as far as I'm concerned that angle is only a backdrop to Dany's rampage, the MAIN reason she did what she did, is the stuff I explained above. All the answers are in the past few episodes! It wasn't pure madness, it was calculated madness to ensure nobody challenged her when she took the throne, given the truth about Jon.

(mind you, it was the wrong decision that will probably lead to Arya executing her in the next episode, but that's another topic entirely...)






reply

You know who doesn't fear Daenerys? Dead people­.

reply

Correct.

And up until she's been very aware of that, and terrorized people with the dragons selectively, leaving most alive to obey her from then on. Like when she burned one invading ship out of a hundred and accepted the surrender of the other 99. Or when she fried the Tarlys, and let the Lannister soldiers who saw it go free if they promised not to fight her again, she knew they wouldn't.

They really have made a mess of the Mad Queen thing, and it could have been so great!

reply


Like when she burned one invading ship out of a hundred and accepted the surrender of the other 99.


While I agree with you on the Tarlys/Lannister soldiers bit, I don’t agree here.
She spared 99 ships because she NEEDED ships. We now can speculate what she would have done if that hadn’t been the case, but that… well, would be speculation.

reply

When the Sons of the Harpy were becoming a problem, she took some Mereenish lords she suspected of being involved down to see the dragons at lunchtime, and all but one of them left. There were probably other times, but when she can achieve her goals by making an example of someone and letting the rest go home to change the pants they soiled in terror, she's done it instead of mass slaughter.

Until now, of course. They really did miss a trick, in not creating more suspense about her mental state, they should have started last year at the latest.

reply


they should have started last year at the latest.


Here, I can agree again.

The ONLY thing that (in my opinion) can be said in favor of the writing is: If they had build up her madness over a long time, nobody would’ve been surprised at her rampage. We just would have said: "Oh yeah, I expected that."
Now, I was like: "Hey, what? WHAT? She really goes Mad Queen?!? NOW????"
Getting surprised is a good thing, usually. But here, I really would’ve preferred some decent character development.

reply

If they'd built up her destabilizing mental state over a long time, then ideally the events at King's Landing would have been like the events at the Sept of Baylor, a huge shocker that made perfect sense.

It really is sad to contemplate how much the show has deteriorated in just two seasons. I jumped and gasped out loud when the green fire rolled through King's Landing, and I rolled my eyes when the dragon fire did the same thing.

reply

You guys should take your conversation to another more relevant thread, because you are missing the whole point of this thread. The whole point of this thread which I started, is that Dany's madness thing is NOT important in explaining why she went around torching innocents in the last episode. To talk about that here, is irrelevant to my point.

What I'm saying is important, is that Dany did what she did to ensure everyone was scared of her, so she could rule the remaining people in Westeros with fear. That, is what my thread is about, if you read the original post again. If you want to discuss the 'mad queen' angle, there are many, many other threads on this website dedicated to that discussion.





reply

Oh, I'll start a thread on how they should have handled it, this Sunday night!

In the meantime, you seem to have missed all my points about how her previous use of terror was selective and usually involved making an example of someone and letting everyone who saw it live, and how that kind mass brutality was totally out of character for the sane character we've known and not loved for seven season. So I've disagreed with your original point many times over already, and here you are making me do it again.

PS: Just so you know, starting a thread doesn't give anyone a right to control the discussion.

reply

I know, you can talk about whatever you like within the rules of the forum. But so can I...and calling people out for diverting from the OP's topic doesn't contravene any rules of the forum, so it is my right to do that also.

I agree what she did is nothing like the actions of her character from seasons 1-7. But she isn't the same character she was in seasons 1-7. Losing many of her loved ones, and finding out the truth about Jon...she hasn't been the same since. Whilst the pacing certainly could have been better and it was a sudden turn, that hasn't been much of an issue for me like it has been with many of you. Which I'm thankful for, as I'm still loving season 8!

reply

"I'm still loving season 8!"

You're trolling.

You have to be!

reply

You make it sound like I'm the only person who's loving it. About half of the people I know watch GoT, and I'd say about half of them are still enjoying season 8.

Also, check out the social media posts from media outlets etc criticising season 8, or posts about the petition to get season 8 re-done. Look at the comments under those posts - so many people defending the season saying they have enjoyed/loved it.

Nobody can deny the writing/pacing issues, but people have varying degrees of how much that impacts their enjoyment of this season. On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being it completely ruins this season, and 1 being it doesn't ruin this season at all - I'd put myself as a 2.









reply

Really? Where I've been, the response to season 8 has been uniformly negative. I've never see this kind of unanimity in a large fandom.

So much so that I suspect you of trolling, or being an intern for the show's publicist.

reply

Time to get out of that bubble.

reply

Intern.

reply

I've seen a lot of positive commentary about Season 8 on Reddit.

reply

Or you could say that ONLY half of them are still enjoying it.

reply

She didn’t go there to rule Kings Landing only, that’s just the capital city - but to rule all of Westeros. The other cities have plenty of living people left who will hear of it.

reply

Except that she could have eliminated the threat of a rival claim by marrying him, instead of devastating her Capitol city and pissing off her subjects and leaving herself without a viable seat of government. He'd be the kind of husband who did whatever his much smarter wife said, and she loved him and wanted to marry him anyway! She knows Westerosians are more drawn to him than her, she could have used him to appeal to any lords who see her as a foreign threat, and yes, she IS smart enough to think that way

A Mad Queen arc could have been great, but they really did make a mess of it.

reply

As much as all that made sense, she's his aunt. As Varys said. The marriage might have still been an option if they managed to reignite their passion in that scene in episode 5 - but they just couldn't do it. After that failed kiss, any politically sensible options you described were thrown out of the window.

Makes perfect sense to me.




reply

Oh, she could have talked him into it with a little effort, he's not real bright and he hadn't had a girlfriend since season 3. And that would have given her a good way to shut him up about his parentage, too! She could have convinced him that thd lords of Westeros and his sisters would never accept their marriage if they knew, so he really couldn't tell anyone. So if she'd dragged him to the altar, all her problems would have been solved!

She's been smart enough to think that sort of thing through, at least she was in seasons 1-7.

reply

Honestly, Jon's reluctance to be intimate with Dany has nothing to do with smarts but his own moral qualms about her being blood relations. Why is that so hard for people to relate to?
I do think that with a little time and Dany not acting so strangely erratic and insecure he would've warmed back to her.. He still loved her after all .
But her lack of confidence once in Winterfell was not bringing out the best side of her all season..And sure, it was some bad times for her..but she wasn't the only one suffering through crisis and chaos..

And it's not like any of them had had time to process and digest it all either ..A little time without putting out fires (figuratively) could've changed many things and Jon probably would've seen the positive advantage of uniting with Dany.
That is if she could've been capable of sharing..

But..oops...too late now.

reply

That's the other reason the "If they don't love me let them fear me" thing doesnt make any sense. She just helped to save all Westeros from the Dead, and the rest of Westeros hadn't had time to digest the fact that Danerys worked to save them while Cersei did squat. There wouldnt be an immediate reaction from the rest if Westeros, news travels slowly, but it'd have come soon and she'd have know it because shes an intelligent politician.

Of course she wouldnt get that reaction from the other people at Winterfell, because they all fought beside her and risked just as much as she did if not more. From them, she can expect a "Well fought", and ought to give the same in return.

Really, they've bungled what could have been a great "Mad Queen" arc.

PS: re Jon's scruples... he's got a low IQ and as dick that thinks it was about to die of starvation. His scruples could have been overcome.

reply

Jon is stubborn in his beliefs, while, in time, he maybe would have come around, she only sees the now and rejection. Not far fetched at all.

About having saved the people from the undead. You think people that have not been near there would know or believe any of that? They’ve never seen a walker, or a wight - they think of all of that as legends from long ago. People don’t care about a threat that they’ve never experienced and don’t have to worry about anymore. And the people who where there, didn’t (in her eyes) respect her and appreciated her role in saving them - they all want Jon...who, again, in her mind, rejected her now too.

reply

"...she only sees the now and rejection."

And you don't think that "only seeing the now" might be a bit out of character for someone who's spent her whole life playing the long game, who spent years and years plotting to sieze the throne of Westeros and slowly building up the kind of armies and power base that could make it happen? Look, Dany loves Jon but they haven't made it clear that it's the kind of earthshaking, world-changing love that leaves you shattered when it goes, any more than they've made it clear that she's slowly going nuts. That's the problem with rushing things the way they have been.

And it's true, I've said myself that nobody really believes in zombies until they've seen one with their own eyes. However, the clever and politically astute Danerys of seaons 1-7 would have called her advisors together and asked them how to make it clear the rest of Westeros that she'd just save their asses, while Season 8 Dany is just whining that nobody loves her. It's a big, sad, needless, sloppy change.

reply

Well, you pretty much answered your own question.
She was always pretty impulsive and impatient- she only made more long term decisions because of her original
Advisors.
Also, she was given illusions by them. Saying how things would be. That people would want her, needed her etc...and then when she gets there, they don’t. Then she loses everyone...and all of her original friends and advisors. The only ones left she feels she can’t trust - one openly talks treason and the other has continuously given her advice that backfired- and the last one would have the right to replace her and rejects her love.
And then deciding to rule by fear is also a decision made for the long term.
While I agree that the timing we see on screen has been rushed, the time that logically past (also has been hinted at in the show) is not unreasonable for her descend of mental state. And even a person who has seemed to be a strong and confident character can break down...she had plenty reasons to and no support left (again, in her mind).

reply

She was never impulsive or impatient during seasons 1-7. Okay, once, her one impulsive act was the crucify the Masters of Mereen after they crucified thousands of slave children just to piss her off (who wouldn't), and she regretted it later. No, she's been patient enough to spend her days in Mereen hearing petitions from anyone who walks into the palace, patient enough to spend years building armies and waiting for the dragons to grow up and learn to fight, patient enough to carve out a realm on Slaver's Bay and think of it as nothing but a stepping stone to Westeros, etc. She can act quickly when she needs to, as when she toasted the Khals, but that was a cool and rational decision.

No, during seaons 2-7 she was intelligent, calm, rational, a master strategist both in the short-term and the long term, and able to make plans without their input. They were shocked when she took Astapore by tricking the Masters, that was all her. As for deciding to rule by fear in the long term, it makes no sense for her to do that, when she has absolutely no idea how Westeros has taken the fact that she's saved them from the Undead! She should have been working that for political advantage after the battle, not deciding that she wants to kill everyone!

Look, I don't think you have a lot of experience with trauma or mental illness, and don't have a good idea of what it takes to make an intelligent adult lose their rationality. Sure, this season she lost her friends and advisors and had a fight with her boyfriend, but in season 1 she lost her husband and her baby and brother and her health and her 40,000 followers, she's actually been through worse than this without losing it. They just haven't fleshed out the "madness" plotline enough to make it believable, they haven't fleshed ANYTHING out enough to make it believable.

reply

She was, she always asked if they could go now...then was told: nope, your dragons are still too small; nope, your army still too small, nope not yet either because you need more money for ships and so on... she learned to be patient out of need but she wasn’t inherently so.

About the understanding of mental breakdown- on the contrary. I actually have a bunch :p
First off, not everyone is the same and will react the same. Also, just because she went through hard situations before, doesn’t mean things don’t affect her now. It’s not like you get used to it or it’s unimportant just because you’ve seen it before.
People have gone through traumatic events, like wars, coped well, made rational decisions and then years later hurt others over spilled coffee.

My point is that the mind is much more complicated than you make it out to be.

Also, it does make a difference that she was on familiar ground at the beginning, being supported through bad times by familiar people. Little things like that make a big difference.

Edit: you are right that they have not „fleshed it out“ to be believable for everyone- but it’s a bit on the spoon-fed side of things if they would make it more obvious and the show (nor the books) has never really done that.

reply

Yes, different people have different tolerances. My point is that someone who's been widowed, deposed, orphaned, betrayed, imprisoned, suffered invasion and war and insurrection and found herself stranded in the middle of the desert with nothing but a dragon and who came back with a new army following her... has an intrinsically high stress tolerance and isn't going to crack up over ordinary losses and relationship issues.


Another point I've made in other threads is that they didn't just need to flesh out the crackup, they needed to make it an ongoing point of dramatic tension. I could believe that she'd snap and go postal at King's Landing if I'd spent the last two years watching her gradually dissolve and pull herself together and wonder if losing the first dragon would be enough to send her around the bend and watching her get it together and fight the Night's King... That crackup should have been the climax of a year or more of ongoing drama, like when the incredible feuds and drama at the end of Tommen's reign all exploded along with the Sept of Baylor. By rushing through the Madness story, they've cost themselves the chance to make any real drama out of it.

reply

There are usually certain events that trigger a mental break down - a death of a certain person (even if that individual has seen death before, it’s triggered by a special person, sometimes even someone they consider a rival/enemy etc); also by unfamiliar surroundings or unfamiliar emotions.
I think this is exactly what happened to Dany. Unfamiliar environment that made her feel uncomfortable (she’s used to the east, surroundings and culture) and the loss of people who have been around in most of her previous hardships.

It would not have made sense if she would have been showing a decline for a while/past seasons, because the things that triggered her „madness“ where not present before.

reply

I still don't think you're looking at Danerys as she's actually been presented. She's been through a huge number of changes of environment and lifestyle - from a spoiled princess in the Free Cities to a Khaleesi who lived on horseback to a beggar queen in Qarth to the conqueror of Slaver's Bay, and finally a general invading Westeros. That's more changes of local, language, lifestyle, income level, and environment than the average modern person faces in a lifetime. She's also faced the loss of people close to her many times before - her parents, brother, husband, baby, the handmaiden/companion who preceded Meissandre, Ser Whatshisname the kingsguard guy who took Jorah's place, most of her blood riders, her Mereenish fiancée and Dario, etc etc etc. Plus she's seen many many people die, and killed many herself. Some at very close range, remember the time she made an example of that Son of the Harpy during the caged dragons' lunchtime?

Face it, this is one tough chick!!

So IMHO there may be a lot of people who'd crack up when they lost their father figure, their boyfriend, their best friend, and their pets, but Danyers isn't one of them. She wouldn't have gotten into the position of the conqueror of half of Essos and all of Westeros if she were.

reply

I guess we are allowed to have different opinions :p there is no convincing other of us on the others opinion :)

reply

"Danyers isn't one of them."

Dany grieved a great deal when she lost her first dragon, but with time and support she was able to recover. Now she has multiple losses happening within a short time and no support this time since her best friend and father figure are dead and her lover rejected her.

Yes, she's strong, but not invincible. Nobody is. She chose fear for her own survival as a future queen, but the extreme actions in killing so many innocents is more about her mental state. A nervous breakdown can happen pretty quickly like it does with her.

reply

My complaint isnt that she chose fear, she's always used fear when she needed to. My complaint is that she used fear in stupid and counterproductive ways, unlike her previous conquests. This is her first contact with the people of KL, she didnt even give them a chance to grovel.

But then, the writers have been putting a lot of stupid and counterproductive things into the S8 scripts.

reply

She won't be rational if she's crazy.

No time to grovel with only six episodes this season.

The scripts are very sloppy. I still like the overall direction, but the execution isn't as good as previous seasons.

reply

Agree about the sloppiness. The writing used to be beautifully detailed and free of plot holes!

reply

that's what hillary did

reply

Her whole life has been leading up to this point but the others will question her leadership now and it will be her downfall.

reply

That's why she went on her rampage, even when the bells rang signalled surrender.


No, the bells ringing reminded her of the marriage between her and Jon that will never be...thus the female inclination to go on a rampage.

reply

First off, that doesn't even follow.

Suppose Jon kisses her back. She's still under the impression they'd love him more than her. And his claim to the throne is still stronger than hers. Her obstacle is Jon, not anonymous peasants.

It's also bullshit because people claim the breaker of chains wanted to "burn cities to the ground" early on, so why does she even care about the love of the people in the first place? Burn them all. She's long killed nobles and masters, yet this is somehow in keeping with her character. Pants.

Cersei's responsible for killing one of her "children," executing Missandei (why strategically take a hostage when you can be cruel for the sake of cruelty?), reneged on a vow to fight the Night King, and has been a tyrant to the people. So Daenerys kills the people. Yeah, that's totally true to the character.

Apologists for the US dropping atom bombs on Japan point out that after detonating one (and firebombing Tokoyo), the Japanese STILL didn't surrender. They could've done something like that with the show. Her WMD dragon smokes the city, but people keep fighting. Maybe some even WANT to surrender, but they're afraid of Cersei. What happened instead was just stupid and pointless.

reply

"And his claim to the throne is still stronger than hers."

Only in the most technical dynastic terms. In realpolitik terms, she's the one with the dragons and the armies, and the well-known Targaryan parentage, but it's the dragon and the armies are the reason her claim is being taken seriously. Without them, she's just Viserys's sister the Beggar Queen. To the rest of Westeros, Jon is nothing but Ned Stark's bastard and a deserter from the Night's Watch, even if he's been calling himself Kinginthenorth.

Honestly, she and Varys are the only people who ever really cared about Jon's parentage, and now she's the only one. And if she were in her right mind, she'd see what a minimal threat to her ambitions he really was, but going nuts in the course of a week does cloud the judgement.

reply

I think there was a line in the show recently about how regular people don't really care whose ass sits on the throne. But for the people who hold the throne, it's long mattered (going back to King Robert, who felt threatened by the existence of Targaryen children, and the reason Ned had to conceal Jon's identity).

Birthright is what she's staked her claim on, so it's not particularly easy to say, after all these years, "Oh, yeah, lineage doesn't actually matter. I have dragons." A line of inheritance is also a potentially useful construct. If anyone can just seize power, then there'd be more bloodshed.

Of course some people are highly adept at abandoning their "principles" (unless it involves senselessly slaughtering tens of thousands, apparently). I recall someone who said "under God" should be in the pledge as a matter of tradition. "It was always there and it shouldn't be changed in times of 'political correctness.'" It was pointed out that "under God" did not appear in the original pledge but was inserted later. "Well," his response went, "there are new traditions."

Daenerys' messianic destiny has been confirmed to her in part by beating impossible odds and performing miraculous feats. She's intensely curious to know what was meant by Jon taking a knife to the heart. Even though she believes he's not actively making a play, she inhabits a universe of prophecies. For all the power of Greek gods and titans, not even they could avoid their fate. This did not stop them from trying, of course, but efforts to subvert their destiny would ironically secure it.

reply

"...she inhabits a universe of prophecies"

Yeah, well she also lives in a universe of extremely realistic politics, and if they weren't rushing through the fucking season like HBO had told them to wrap things up before the show got cancelled, instead of begging them to keep it going for years, they should have had a scene where her advisors point out that Jon is not a realistic threat and has no political power outside the North, and she just gets wound up and obsesses over his ancestry because she's slowly going nuts.


Sadly, the insane need to wrap everything up overnight has made such subtlety and character development impossible. What a mess they've made of the Mad Queen story, it could have been SO GREAT if they'd taken the time to do it right!

reply

I wish they had included the scene in the House of the Undying where she's told of the treasons she'd know. They could have so easily followed up with that later on, with her talking to some of her advisers or friends about it. There could have been a scene with her and Missandei or Tyrion or Barriston where she expresses her fears of being betrayed. She could have mentioned it to Jorah during his trial. Or maybe to Daario when she leaves him: and her fear that he might one day betray her could have been viewed as just as legit of a reason to leave him in Mereen, as well as speak to a possible growing paranoia within her.

reply

Pretty much everything this season would have been better if they've fleshed it out, including that! And yeah, I keep saying that they should have started with the signs of instability back in Mereen, that might be one way to do it.

Which would have made both rival queens haunted by a prophecy, even if they did dispense with the bit about "the valonquar" finally killing Cersei, and how that affected her relationship with Tyrion. I'll include your ideas on the list of things they should have done!

And speaking of prophecies, it looks like Dany's vision in the House of the Undying is about to come true (reunion with her husband and baby, SNOW ON THE IRON THRONE). But the prophecies about Azor Ahai reborn and the Prince That Was Promised don't seem to be amounting to much, there was no prince or flaming sword involved in ending The Long Night.

reply

I mainly agree with you. But I guess people are discussing it because, whether calculated or not, it’s still madness. So the “why”s do matter.
And since the pacing is off or at least not explained well, most feel that this is rushed (even though, if one calculates the time, it actually makes sense).
I don’t think that Arya will kill her though - I think Jon will (or should). He was appalled by what she has done, it would warrant a death sentence for anyone else, and Starks always do the dirty work themselves.

reply

They made a point of showing there was wildfire stashed in some areas. One reason could be to reference the end of season 6 when she blew up the sept, and it shows the scale of her damage compared to what Dany just did.

In the scene where she tells Tyrion she caught Jaime, she also said Cersei is good at using her enemies' weakness against them. She sees Tyrion's plan with the bells as the kind of mercy that could fit that weakness. Dany views mercy a bit differently in this moment- basically arguing that the ends justify the means, which turns it into a strength in her mind. However, she is not completely sold on this position. She knows Tyrion's plan is well-intentioned and probably the right thing to do.

Whether or not there was really a plan in place (probably not), Dany knows that Cersei could very well be using Tyrion to lay a trap. They get near the Red Keep and she blows the wildfire. Dany hasn't decided what she is going to do until the bells start to ring. Then she saw Cersei in the balcony while grieving her losses, also remembering how badly Tyrion's advice had recently turned out. She ultimately chose to go with her instinct, which has always since day 1 been fire and blood.

reply

The wildfire is from the mad kings times, they had mentioned it before that he had laid traps all over the city that they later couldn’t find (so I guess this also confirmed that it was true and he probably really had the intention to „burn them all“).

And I am not disagreeing on any of your points.
There definitely was reasoning behind what she did. But there are many levels of madness. And killing so many innocent people (that at one point she wanted to liberate) is madness.
But no denying, she had her reasons behind it and yes, without her advisors she has always had the impulse to go the ‚fire and blood‘ route...

reply

She is a true follower of Lord of Light after all: not only she burns the King's offspring but the whole King's city!

reply

Except she wan't loved in exile either. She eventually became a powerhouse by NOT being the very person we saw this last episode. IF she had made a move to permanently silence those that knew of Jon's secret, it would have been a bit of a cold move, but somewhat staying in character. If she had killed Jon outright so there could be no claim, It would have been out of character but an interesting plot twist for her character. Killing a ton of innocents because they didn't open up the gates and let your Dothraki hordes freely rape and pillage... I don't know...

I'm actually no fan of Dany, so I really didn't care that she went full blown crazy. However, I do see other people's point that the build up to the insanity wasn't handled well, and I can't see how anyone would see what Danny did as a good strategic move. Even a dragon can't protect you from poison.

reply

She was loved in exile, to some degree. The Blood Riders and freed slaves who saw her in the ashes of her husband's pyre with baby dragons loved her as long as they lived, the freed slaves of Mereen, Astapor, and Yunkai loved her, even after they realized that freedom meant homelessness and poverty for most. Of course the Masters and their allies hated her, as did the Baratheons, so she actually was being used to being loved by some of her subjects.


However, for her to go into a homicidal fury because the Lords of the North didn't fall worshipping at her feet is just silly! What they should have done is establish that nobody in the rest of Westeros believed that there had been another Long Night and that she'd saved them all, at the cost of her beloved dragon. Because even in Westeros, nobody believes in Zombies until they've seen one. That'd make sense and provide a valid reason for her to be pissed at all the people of Westeros, right?

reply

I was more referring to her in the beginning of exile. The slaves loved her cause she was freeing them. She never gave the innocents of King's Landing that same opportunity. The Dothraki didn't seem to care for her at all early on, they just wouldn't go against her husband, and remember most of them did abandon her as soon as he died.

And I would have enjoyed your version of slipping into madness over the shows. However, your idea would have still seemed forced if they tried to do it all in 1 episode. Both of these ideas would have been better served with a few episodes of turmoil to better flesh it out.

reply

Just about everything would have been better with a few episodes of turmoil to flesh it out. Like, why did the Hound go south to kill his brother, when he had the chance to make a new life for himself in the North? He could have hired on with some lord who'd seen him fight, or maybe Sansa would have given him the Umber castle, and put him between Winterfell and the wildlings.

The same could be said for absolutely everything we've been complaining about. I just don't get why they wanted to cram it all into six episodes, it's like watching the "for young readers" version.

reply

Agreed! All of this needed to be over a few seasons.

reply

I would say three seasons.

One to fight The Long Night, one to deal with Cersei (not necessarily in that order), and one for Jon and Dany to become enemies square off against each other, with a two-hour epilogue where the seven kingdoms are divvied up and everyone left standing goes off to life a new life and arrange a marriage.

Cramming all that into six episodes just couldn't work.

reply

"However, I do see other people's point that the build up to the insanity wasn't handled well, and I can't see how anyone would see what Danny did as a good strategic move."
I don't think what Dany did was a good strategic move, but I think part of the point here is that she is no longer making the correct decisions. In terms of the love-fear arc, I thought it explained her (clouded) judgement perfectly. I agree they needed more time to build it up, but unlike many others, it didn't ruin anything for me - I absolutely loved the last episode!

reply