The Leaks and Spoilers discussion (*MAJOR SPOILER WARNING*)

[ludovica]

She is reasonable, which is why she listens to other people and at times try other methods, which makes her do more than just one single thing like you suggested. Another thing she does herself is to take time to listen to her subjects and hear their pleas and suggestions, in order to establish a more lasting order. She doesn't just threaten everyone with fire, she's more open to other ways than most of the nobles in the show. Even Eddard Stark executed all law breakers of severe crimes himself without exception. Not that this is particularly relevant to the current discussion as it's more about whether she protects or deliberately murders the innocent masses.

If you think it's shallow to be the savior you're automatically saying that she's been shallow for most of the show, as that's the role that she's had. That she eventually went mad in the end doesn't change those parts whatsoever since she was in no way touched by madness back then, which the writers have explained in the post-episode talks. I would disagree with the opinion that she was shallow myself, she's definitely had depth to her during those parts. That anyone has seen her as a saint is just a straw-man from you.

Was she really a savior, or was that a mean to an end?
Personally I think a bit of both, tipped a bit to the latter.

 

[Mjolnir Reborn]

Was she really a savior, or was that a mean to an end?
Personally I think a bit of both, tipped a bit to the latter.

She was a savior in Essos, taking in and protecting the poor and weak, freeing slaves, etc. All because she genuinely cared and hated seeing them oppressed. She also talked about how she was going to break the wheel of conflict between the noble houses because it only made the people suffer. She was for a long time made to look like the ruler Westeros needed.

I don't know to what other end the means freeing Slaver's Bay was to be. She was just slowed down by caring for so many weak people that traveled with her, and she was bogged down a long time trying to make her new order of equality last. She didn't gain anything from it that made her a stronger force in Westeros, other than that she by chance flew away on Drogon and got captured by Dothraki, which she managed to take over.

Storytelling-wise it's of course a lot about having Daenerys learn the reality of ruling, and how hard it is, but that's not the reason behind the intent of the character's decision to help the weak. She does that because she used to be one that was only doing what she was told, and she was sold away by her own brother.

Her troubles in Meereen of course told us that things wouldn't be that simple though, just as the general brutal realism of the story has done.

 

[ludovica]

She was a savior in Essos, taking in and protecting the poor and weak, freeing slaves, etc. All because she genuinely cared and hated seeing them oppressed. She also talked about how she was going to break the wheel of conflict between the noble houses because it only made the people suffer. She was for a long time made to look like the ruler Westeros needed.

I don't know to what other end the means freeing Slaver's Bay was to be. She was just slowed down by caring for so many weak people that traveled with her, and she was bogged down a long time trying to make her new order of equality last. She didn't gain anything from it that made her a stronger force in Westeros, other than that she by chance flew away on Drogon and got captured by Dothraki, which she managed to take over.

Storytelling-wise it's of course a lot about having Daenerys learn the reality of ruling, and how hard it is, but that's not the reason behind the intent of the character's decision to help the weak. She does that because she used to be one that was only doing what she was told, and she was sold away by her own brother.

Her troubles in Meereen of course told us that things wouldn't be that simple though, just as the general brutal realism of the story has done.

I do not totally disagree, I just think she was mostly driven by a savior complex more than genuine compassion.
And the turn of events in-story corroborates this possible reading.
Again, of course storywise it could have been executed a lot better, even if I personally am satisfied by what we got.

 

[_Superman_]

In all honesty the only reason why I am upset or disappointed is unless a miracle happens and GRRM decides to get back to writing and finishes the books this is going to be the ending we have. Normally I would be fine with it but they should've added on one more season to flesh things out better because everything just seems rushed and underwhelming. And it's just strange that Jon Snow for the most part has done nothing so far.

 

[The Big G]

Of course, this is the point to mention that while Dany is a Targaryen...

...so is Jon.

So why hasn’t he snapped and gone mad? He’s done questionable things morally throughout the show too.

The excuse ‘she mad now ‘coz she a Targ’ doesn’t really wash, does it?

The funny thing is that the Starks have the Wolfsblood which is another kind of Blood craze hot headness that Ned comments that Brandon and Lyanna had. And honestly Jon should go nuts.

Mad Jon> Mad Dany any day of the week.

Dany next episode?

When George showed up on set to help...we all should have seen this coming....

In that moment she basically climbed the clocktower and started unloading on randoms...who knows how lucid she’s gonna be when it’s all done.

according to some of the leaks, like in the early part of the episode she gives this big speech about how they're going to liberate the world from its oppressors. She very well may be completely consumed by her own myth. But I think she might have one last bit of lucidity left.

One thing I wonder... everyone is saying Jon will kill Dany, and maybe that's true. But what's he going to do about Drogon? I don't think Valyrian steel swords can pierce dragon scales, and all of those stupid scorpions have been destroyed. Or maybe Drogon will submit to Jon, since he's a Targ also? I hope not though. I want to see Jon slay a dragon, at close range, that's something we haven't seen yet and it would be a good spectacle. And it would sort of fit the whole "Song of Ice and Fire" thing, if that's a thing in the show (at this point who knows).

Again going with the leeks, supposedly Drogon goes nuts upon seeing Dany dead with Jon and then takes her body and leaves. Like how does Jon not get turned to Ash? We all know how protective Drogon is of her. Plus Drogon was giving him the stare back in episode one....

All and all...things are kinda vague and open to Night Queen Dany as the big final plot twist at the end. The cycle starts all over again.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Again going with the leeks, supposedly Drogon goes nuts upon seeing Dany dead with Jon and then takes her body and leaves. Like how does Jon not get turned to Ash? We all know how protective Drogon is of her. Plus Drogon was giving him the stare back in episode one....

All and all...things are kinda vague and open to Night Queen Dany as the big final plot twist at the end. The cycle starts all over again.

Wow. That sounds pathetic and completely disappointing. Which is why it will probably happen.

 

[CaptainWagner]

She is reasonable, which is why she listens to other people and at times try other methods, which makes her do more than just one single thing like you suggested. Another thing she does herself is to take time to listen to her subjects and hear their pleas and suggestions, in order to establish a more lasting order. She doesn't just threaten everyone with fire, she's more open to other ways than most of the nobles in the show. Even Eddard Stark executed all law breakers of severe crimes himself without exception. Not that this is particularly relevant to the current discussion as it's more about whether she protects or deliberately murders the innocent masses.

If you think it's shallow to be the savior you're automatically saying that she's been shallow for most of the show, as that's the role that she's had. That she eventually went mad in the end doesn't change those parts whatsoever since she was in no way touched by madness back then, which the writers have explained in the post-episode talks. I would disagree with the opinion that she was shallow myself, she's definitely had depth to her during those parts. That anyone has seen her as a saint is just a straw-man from you.

She has always listened to the people she trusts, that is what kept her on a good path. Now those people are dead or betrayed her trust, and the people she came to lead and "liberate" have no love for her.

I feel like we've been watching completely different shows. I have always seen her as an extremely complex character because of the savior complex and her underlining dark tendencies. It just feels like people saying that "this came out of nowhere" took her role as savior at face value, basically buying into her hype just as she herself did.

You mean the same leaders who crucified slave children?

Well, firstly she crucified the masters responsible for killing the children. The ones she decided to feed to the dragons were their heirs. But the point remains, viewers are fine to watch her brutally kill to get her way if its people who have done terrible things. Justification of war crimes starts with that and inevitably ends with the destruction of Kings Landing.

 

[Mjolnir Reborn]

She has always listened to the people she trusts, that is what kept her on a good path. Now those people are dead or betrayed her trust, and the people she came to lead and "liberate" have no love for her.

I feel like we've been watching completely different shows. I have always seen her as an extremely complex character because of the savior complex and her underlining dark tendencies. It just feels like people saying that "this came out of nowhere" took her role as savior at face value, basically buying into her hype just as she herself did.

It did come out of nowhere. She went from someone that cared about the smallfolk to the single biggest murderer of them in a couple of episodes. She even went after them before going after Cersei, entirely unprovoked.

Daenerys isn't just someone with a savior complex, she genuinely wants to help and make the world a better place. The show directly adapts the books in the beginning and it's quite clear there. That she's often ruthless against tyrants and enemies doesn't put her in any special light at all in this world. Even Eddard Stark executes people without exception if that person has broken the law.

I've been part of discussions of whether Daenerys could turn out mad since before the show was created. It's not that it couldn't happen, it's that it's been handled extremely poorly in the show. I can certainly see her falling into madness in the books, but I expect that to feel earned and appropriately tragic. The notion of the would be savior falling to the curse of her house in the end is certainly something you can write to be a very compelling character arc.

 

[The Big G]

Wow. That sounds pathetic and completely disappointing. Which is why it will probably happen.

For me personally? I'll take NQ Dany over Drogon just flying away with her body and Jon going into exile at the Wall. At least if she were to become the NQ it would give some meaning to Jon going to the Wall (again) when the NW isn't really needed anymore.

 

[Deck Rickard]

For me personally? I'll take NQ Dany over Drogon just flying away with her body and Jon going into exile at the Wall. At least if she were to become the NQ it would give some meaning to Jon going to the Wall (again) when the NW isn't really needed anymore.

LOL, no I meant the ending with Drogon flying away with Dany's body would be the most disappointing ending ever. Dany becoming the NQ might actually have some potential.

 

[The Big G]

LOL, no I meant the ending with Drogon flying away with Dany's body would be the most disappointing ending ever. Dany becoming the NQ might actually have some potential.

No worries. But yeah I think NQD might make things interesting down the line.

 

[Donner]

Well, firstly she crucified the masters responsible for killing the children. The ones she decided to feed to the dragons were their heirs. But the point remains, viewers are fine to watch her brutally kill to get her way if its people who have done terrible things. Justification of war crimes starts with that and inevitably ends with the destruction of Kings Landing.

I thought the people she fed to the dragons were the ones helping the Harpies.
Treason means death. If every time Dany killed someone for treason was a clue to her eventual "madness", half the lords in Westeros would be mad as well. Stannis burned people for praying to the Seven. Is he not a Mad King?

The point isn't that this is justifiable. The point is that other people in the show would have done the same or worse (and have) and they aren't called mad. It's just because of Dany's father and her destiny to be the Mad Queen that everyone looks at her past and finds these "clues." It's still ****ty writing.
Dany could have been the Mad Queen with more time. Going from killing Varys (you know, for trying to kill her) and then burning down all of King's Landing doesn't make sense.

 

[Madam-Shogun]

Mileage may vary: not a too small number of people called this outcome years in advance, it was in the text of the tv series (I did not read the books), obviously different people read differently into scenes and symbologies.
That's to say that I do not think who called it is somehow more clever or attentive, just more proclive to those themes and this type of story.
Speaking of which, even if some criticisms of this season are quite understandable, I am convinced that most people not enjoying it are really disappointed in not getting what they would have done as showrunners.
We can not always get what we want, but sometimes we get what we need. Jury is still out in this case IMO.

Yeah, I definitely would have written a better "Long Night"

 

[Black Narcissus]

 

[CaptainWagner]

It did come out of nowhere. She went from someone that cared about the smallfolk to the single biggest murderer of them in a couple of episodes. She even went after them before going after Cersei, entirely unprovoked.

Daenerys isn't just someone with a savior complex, she genuinely wants to help and make the world a better place. The show directly adapts the books in the beginning and it's quite clear there. That she's often ruthless against tyrants and enemies doesn't put her in any special light at all in this world. Even Eddard Stark executes people without exception if that person has broken the law.

I've been part of discussions of whether Daenerys could turn out mad since before the show was created. It's not that it couldn't happen, it's that it's been handled extremely poorly in the show. I can certainly see her falling into madness in the books, but I expect that to feel earned and appropriately tragic. The notion of the would be savior falling to the curse of her house in the end is certainly something you can write to be a very compelling character arc.

I guess we took completely different messages from our experiences watching the show, because we saw completely different things here. As a writer, I do tend to read more into a story than what is actually shown, so maybe that's what I'm done here. But it 100% honestly didn't feel out of nowhere for me at all.

 

[CaptainWagner]

I thought the people she fed to the dragons were the ones helping the Harpies.
Treason means death. If every time Dany killed someone for treason was a clue to her eventual "madness", half the lords in Westeros would be mad as well. Stannis burned people for praying to the Seven. Is he not a Mad King?

The point isn't that this is justifiable. The point is that other people in the show would have done the same or worse (and have) and they aren't called mad. It's just because of Dany's father and her destiny to be the Mad Queen that everyone looks at her past and finds these "clues." It's still ****ty writing.
Dany could have been the Mad Queen with more time. Going from killing Varys (you know, for trying to kill her) and then burning down all of King's Landing doesn't make sense.

She simply suspected them, and intended to kill them one by one until someone confessed. I don't think jumping to "Mad Queen" is necessarily the right thing to do. It's fans (and Varys) that are calling her that. I think it's much more nuanced than that.

Also, Stannis was not exactly the most stable guy under Melisandre's influence.

 

[_Superman_]

She simply suspected them, and intended to kill them one by one until someone confessed. I don't think jumping to "Mad Queen" is necessarily the right thing to do. It's fans (and Varys) that are calling her that. I think it's much more nuanced than that.

Also, Stannis was not exactly the most stable guy under Melisandre's influence.

 

[Marvolo]

Regarding who becomes the new monarch of the kingdoms...

The ending I read was a council chooses Bran to be king because of his memories and knowledge and because of his unbiased lack of emotion and desires and Sansa is his regent dealing with the day to day ruling of the kingdoms. Jon's involvement with Dany makes him political poison and he blames himself and refuses the throne regardless.

Frankly I think choosing Bran and his sister as regent is the most potentially dangerous thing the kingdoms could do. Yes his memories and omniscience and lack of personal desires makes him potentially unbiased, but the people around him have desires and bias. They will use him. His sister most of all. And while immediately after Dany's destruction people will have good intentions eventually the person in charge will start to think, "What will it hurt to use Bran to spy on my enemies?" And "Its for the greater good." And they will use his abilities. And the the next time it will be a little easier. And so on and so forth.

They would essentially be naming a god as their king. A god that can pass his ability to someone of his choosing. And because he has no emotions and is indifferent towards human experience he could easily decide the ends justify the means and then it gets really scary for everyone in the world.

Long story short, Bran should be exiled to some unknown and unrecorded location in Westeros or he should be sent to the far east of Essos. Where his memories of the world can be preserved and his powers can be kept away from other humans.

 

[TheVileOne]

As an outside observer, that sounds like one of the worst endings they can possibly write, whether its George RR Martin's idea or not.

 

[Marvolo]

After what Sansa has done this season I'd be infuriated if she received that much power. Jon should exile her ass and strip her of her birthright. I'd prefer he just execute her but hes too soft for that.

 

[TheVileOne]

After what Sansa has done this season I'd be infuriated if she received that much power. Jon should exile her ass and strip her of her birthright. I'd prefer he just execute her but hes too soft for that.

She is an oathbreaker. She swore in front of the family Weirwood tree.



Thought this video was hilarious.

 

[CaptainWagner]

Hey, I love Stannis, too. Dude just got a bit.... rash at times is all.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Bran as king. Yeah, I could see that happening.

"It's what I do. I sit and do nothing."

 

[Donner]

Bran would be such a boring king.

 

[TheVileOne]

I guess that's the good bittersweet ending