This episode was over an hour long and nothing significant happened except for a random, nameless kid that hadn't been in the show before getting killed. It felt like mid season filler instead of a catchy first episode. Not looking good thus far.
shareI politely disagree (forgive misspellings, I can't spellcheck right now):
We witness the effect of Luke's death on all the major players, and can gauge character status and development from their emotional and their political responses.
We see at least two sides of Aegon's character: foolish inattention at the Small Council; attempts at charity in the throne room; back to silliness and inattention.
We see the various emotional, faith related and political knots begin major ensnaring for Aliceinte.
Cracks are already beginning to form within coalitions on both sides.
This is the start of wind-up. Personally I am willing to patiently wait to see to what pitch it winds before it spins out of control.
Your spelling is close enough to get your meaning across so don't worry about it.
But, everything that you listed has already been shown and demonstrated previously or is so obvious it's redundant.
-we already know Aegon is inept and hedonistic from his parent's opinion of him and his habits of whoring around King's Landing
- we already know Alicent's faith is going to cause tension from when she swapped out royal decorations in the Red Keep with religious imagery
-obviously the two parents are going to be pissed their son was murdered and it wasn't exactly a plot reveal when they were shown to be upset
We learned almost nothing new in addition to the lack of events, minus the killing of the random royal kid that popped in for the episode. I suppose Corlys dedicating his fleet to the rebels was a plot development as well, even though it was obvious with his wife hanging out there after crashing the party at the Red Keep. That could could count as a plot development though.
Like I said, this episode came off as something typically reserved for mid season filler and took over an hour in the process.
But a character kicked a dog and a baby was beheaded, weren't you shocked? Quality TV right there.
shareThe scene where both of the thugs killing the kid turned their back on the queen and let her casually walk out of the room to tell Alicent what was going on was a fine example of quality writing.
sharealso the part where they casually walks in without any guards questioning them, is it really common for rat catchers to be around late at night?
shareFor me the hyped Blood and Cheese moment was toned down and disappointing compared to the horrible and terrifying book version of the event. It's still a scary and horrifying moment for the people who didn't read the books but a sad messed chance for the show to topple the Red Wedding.
shareI've been holding off on reading the book myself. Did the entire scene play out differently or was it just that we didn't see the details of the death on camera?
shareYes they changed how things happen compared to the book and made the death out of the scope of camera. Guess they thought it was too gruesome to be shown on TV like the book.
shareWhat are some details of what was changed? I do plan on reading that at some point and could probably look it up, but I don't want to accidentally spoil anymore than that.
shareThe whole premise of the scene was changed and the outcome is different. In the books it is considered one of the more brutal acts. I think this comes a little too early in the story compared to the novels but to get to the point, blood and cheese went into the tower of the hand were Alicent was staying. They snuck in and apprehend Alicent and wait for Heleana to bring her children to their grandmother before bed. Once Haleana and her children are in the chambers they appear and tell Heleana that she had to choose which one of her two sons were to die. Helaena offers herself but blood and cheese refuse. She would not initially choose so to get an answer from her they threatened to rape her daughter. She eventually settles on her youngest son and make sure that he knows that his mother chose him. Instead, they kill the older brother and heir much to the horror of Helaena. The two leave the others unharmed but they depart with her sons head. The grief sends Helaena mad and it is believed this led to her suicide. There is more to it but the show really missed the significance of this event.
Wow, what happened in the show is tame in comparison to how sadistic that is. There's also a lot more depth of emotion there compared to the show scene, with details like the surviving son would know his mom picked him. Thank you for that explanation
shareYou couldn’t be more wrong if I paid you to be. But I’m not surprised about many people not being happy with episode 2 of season 2, after all there was no war, dragons burning villages and the like. But freaking GREAT episode it was! It’s called a “story driven” episode. One that may not be to your tastes but one that’s totally necessary. The genius of what this episode achieved, to me anyway was getting me to appreciate characters that were until now my least favorites by bringing me around to their point of views & seeing things through their eyes, such as Otto Hightower, Rhaenyra, Alicent, etc.
In it, we saw the confrontation between Rhaenyra & Daemon that I knew was coming. She called him out on his bullshit and she was totally 200% correct to go and do that. He’s responsible for everyone including Alicent believing she’s a cold blooded monster and that’s just wrong, that Alicent her former friend/sister would believe that Rhaenyra would do THAT to HER child. As upset as she is she comes off as the more composed one out of everyone. As for Daemon he lied through his teeth which made him more of a punk and less of a tough guy in my eyes and I like Daemon, he has a lot of qualities that I envy but this showed how insecure and selfish and vain he was. He’s out for himself, screw everyone else. He came off as a whiny little b*tch! A la Fredo from “The Godfather”. “I’m smart! I can handle things, It was ME, I was passed over!”
She had to straighten him out, even if he leaves for good, say la vie, who needs a guy like this in your inner circle?
Otto, I finally saw the mastery of the man and what he was responsible for doing, a thankless task trying to keep despots in line. He was the man you needed, at the right time you needed him. He didn’t pull no punches and hold back. He told the truth whether you wanted to hear it or not and gave the best counsel out of everyone. Even Marlon Brando as Don Coreleone didn’t give the great advice this guy gave. He got major screwed for his efforts and now he has no position and no place but such is life. You gotta do what you gotta do and be happy with that. Now Aegnon is left to his own devices and we know he’s on his way out but hey it’s his funeral. Alicent was great, what more can she endure? What can she say? She has no choice but to solider on. Well she does, she can lay down and die and totally check out but she’s not which shows her strength.
I’m trying to figure out exactly how Aemond knew to look for that coin but ok and that girl, c’mon now just exactly who/what is she? Is she clairvoyant? Is that it? What do the books say about her? Aegnon’s wife, the queen, forget her name. With psychic abilities such as hers she’s more powerful than most of them. She’s such a sad sack and I do feel sympathy for her but she’s probably not going to have a happy ending I imagine.
Masterful episode, one that’s sorely needed. You may not think of it that way but it was an awesome episode that packed a lot of shocking “oh wow!” Moments into it, if you’re willing to change your pov in how you choose to see it. Now we can get on to your beheadings now that it’s over so maybe you’ll be more satisfied.
Last night's episode was by far the most interesting episode of the entire series so far. I had found the show to be very slow but last night it seemed to finally get somewhere.
shareYou typed all of that about a comment I made a week ago directed at episode one.
shareThis show is boring. I had to stop watching. I made to episode 2x03.
shareI'm completely with you. There's a constant tension in it but it goes nowhere. I don't think I've ever fallen asleep to a show more than I have to House of the Dragon when attempting to watch it on Sunday nights.
shareFor me it's a combination of boredom and annoyance. Since this show started I had a problem with the D.E.I Valyrians. Every time they are on screen it takes me out of the story and pisses me off. I reached a point where I just fast forward through their scenes. But like I said, the show is just boring. I don't care about any of the characters, there is no one to root for. Finally after watching the black girl ride a dragon in 2x03 I decided I've had enough. I'm done. If there was no black Valyrians I could muddle my way through it in the hope that maybe it will lead to something interesting. Conversely, I could put up (just barely) with the D.E.I bullshit if the story was more interesting and entertaining, but I can't do both, so I peaced out.
shareFor sure making the Valyrians black is totally nonsensical. If they were so insistent on meeting their diversity quota, they could have easily inserted a character that wasn't in the books from the Summer Isles or wherever black people come from in GoT lore. Even so, it's bad primarily because of how boring it is. It reminds me of the worst of Dragon Ball Z that I used to watch decades ago, where literally half a season would consist of a character charging some ultimate ability and grunting, and then at the end of the season there would be some massive battle or cataclysmic event. I'm not interested in a meandering slow burn and this is definitely a show where all of the shit is going to go down in the last 1-2 episodes in an attempt to generate interest for the next season. It's boring and isn't worth the time or the anticipation of watching the episodes as they come out.
shareYou're exactly right. This would not be an issue if the story incorporated some other places and houses from GoT. But they got themselves into a DEI pickle. They made a story that focuses entirely on the Valyrians. This means that the whole cast would have to be White. But because White people are not allowed to have shows anymore unless we include black people, the producers had to figure out how to shoehorn them into the story. The only solution they could come up with was to whiten their hair and pretend that they are genetically the same as all the other Valyrians (which remember is a group of people that have pale White skin and platinum hair who inbreed in order to preserve those features). It's absurd.
What I don't understand is why it doesn't bother more people? It seems like all the anti-Woke people that normally cry about diversity in the MCU and Star Wars are all OK with this. The only explanation is that they think the show is so good that they are willing to overlook it. But this still leaves me questioning what it is that they find so interesting about this show. I just don't get it.
You make logical points. The Valyrians being black really is completely absurd and blatant pandering, nothing more. For anyone interested enough in the novels to endure watching this monotonous slog, it detracts from the immersion and worsens the experience. Still, this artificial, lore breaking inclusivity is a check mark against the show that I'd be willing to endure if the act of watching an episode didn't have the same effect as consuming a handful of Dramamine.
shareWell put. I feel the same.
shareGlad to run into you outside of the politics boards by the way and well done on your 80's thread. That's still popping off with something like 600 replies now and is clearly much more interesting of a topic than the typical news article links that people post over there.
shareIt's nice to see you to man, and thanks for the compliment. Yeah, it's crazy to see that '80s thread exploding and evolving into something larger. That was my intention, though you never quite know how these things will go, they usually just peter out. I just wanted to move beyond the usual Trump/Biden, Democrat/Republican chatter and delve into something more thought-provoking and contentious, like White identity. It's been nice to see all the different debates and discussions it's sparked. I've been following them closely and engaging in some myself.
I'm going to try to provoke more conversations like this. I just have to find the right issue and the right angle. I want something that is controversial and not often talked about. Maybe some other cultural left taboo.
I'm glad you're still around in spite of all of the like of Skavau's post reports. I admire someone who is wise enough to understand that enacting change involves pushing towards a topic while assuming a firm, polar stance, with the understanding that such a position will be beneficial even if the end result is a compromise, rather than coming at a topic in a compromised position from the start. I'd say more but I'm pretty busy keeping my five month old occupied right now. Keep fighting the good fight.
shareI don't remotely report as much as you think. I report threats, and incitement to violence. In fact, from what I can tell, there are a few right-wing types on here more report-happy than I am.
shareFinally some one gets me. Thank you for your kind your kind words.
shareThe Velaryon's being black, in part, was done so the audience could distinguish the extended Targ-Velaryian family (it would have literally otherwise been a sea of white-faces and white hairs) from the Targaryens and make Rhaenyra's infidelity that much more obvious. The change that should have happened is that Rhaenys should have had dark hair like in the books, as it gave Rhaenyra plausible deniability regarding the heritage of her kids.
Was it otherwise done to just give some black actors a major part? Maybe. But it doesn't really mean much. It's a fictional world and they changed it up here. George's understanding of genetics has always been shit anyway. It doesn't really harm anything.
I can't agree that making the Valryians black was done to assist the audience in distinguishing them from the Targaryens; if the producers really believed that the audience needed such a visual cue, it could have been implemented with something like a streak of black hair running through their head, blatantly different colored eyes or whatever else might have accomplished that without contradicting the consistently of their heritage in an absurd fashion. I mean really, black people with silver hair...who originated from the same lands as white people with silver hair but have a different skin color because of their family name? It's fucking ridiculous.
Like I said to our friend above, it wasn't a deal breaker for me but it is undeniably adverse towards staying faithful to the source material, was done under the pretense of inclusion and diversity and is ultimately a stain on a show created to expand on the GoT lore and garner interest in fans of the original series. It shouldn't be excused as anything other than that.
That, however, is not my major problem with the show; it's simply boring.
>I can't agree that making the Valryians black was done to assist the audience in distinguishing them from the Targaryens; if the producers really believed that the audience needed such a visual cue, it could have been implemented with something like a streak of black hair running through their head, blatantly different colored eyes or whatever else might have accomplished that without contradicting the consistently of their heritage in an absurd fashion.
I don't think the cast wants to wear contacts. They never did that in the original too with the violet eyes for Targaryens that they also all should have.
>I mean really, black people with silver hair...who originated from the same lands as white people with silver hair but have a different skin color because of their family name? It's fucking ridiculous
Except genetics (or GRRMs understanding of them) has always been garbage in ASOIAF anyway. It doesn't need to be looked at that deeply.
And also Corlys Velaryon is well acted, so it just simply doesn't matter to me.
No, it doesn't need to be looked at that deeply; the Valyrians being black is stupid and it's really that simple.
Martin's concept of genetics may be shallow and overly simplistic in a way that almost certainly wouldn't match with reality but it has nonetheless been consistent. He may also be a money grubber at this point with no values beyond milking and cashing in on the franchise for the sake of his progeny before his heart gives out, but I'm sure even he raised a WTF eyebrow when he learned the Valyrians would be black.
>No, it doesn't need to be looked at that deeply; the Valyrians being black is stupid and it's really that simple.
It's a fantasy universe. It really doesn't matter that much to me here.
>Martin's concept of genetics may be shallow and overly simplistic in a way that almost certainly wouldn't match with reality but it has nonetheless been consistent.
Not really. All of Alicents kids have targaryen hair, but all of Rhaenyras kids with Harwin Strong have dark-brown hair. This is silly really.
https://www.thewrap.com/house-of-the-dragon-velaryons-black-reason-why/
https://winteriscoming.net/2019/10/16/george-r-r-martin-considered-making-targaryens-black/ (George's feelings on it)
"It's a fantasy universe. It really doesn't matter that much to me here."
That rhetorical dismissal was worn out even before The Little Mermaid, as I'm sure you're aware with your predilections towards Disney references.
"https://winteriscoming.net/2019/10/16/george-r-r-martin-considered-making-targaryens-black/ (George's feelings on it)"
If he considered it and ultimately rejected the proposition, what does that tell you? It tells me the author himself was opposed to the concept. That was interesting to read through though so thanks for linking that.
"Not really. All of Alicents kids have targaryen hair, but all of Rhaenyras kids with Harwin Strong have dark-brown hair. This is silly really."
Sure, but do two wrongs make a right? I don't think so.
>That rhetorical dismissal was worn out even before The Little Mermaid, as I'm sure you're aware with your predilections towards Disney references.
I don't really give a fuck about The Little Mermaid retoolings either.
>If he considered it and ultimately rejected the proposition, what does that tell you? It tells me the author himself was opposed to the concept. That was interesting to read through though so thanks for linking that.
"But in recent years, it has occurred to me from time to time that it might have made for an interesting twist if instead I had made the dragonlords of Valyria… and therefore the Targaryens… black. Maybe I could have kept the silver hair too, though… no, that comes too close to ‘dark elf’ territory, but still… if I’d had dark-skinned dragonlords invade and conquer and dominate a largely white Westeros… though that choice would have brought its own perils. The Targaryens have not all been heroic, after all… some of them have been monsters, madmen, so…Well, it’s all moot. The idea came to me about twenty years too late."
He suggested it would've been interesting. Not against it.
>Sure, but do two wrongs make a right? I don't think so.
I don't see what's wrong about this particular decision.
"He suggested it would've been interesting. Not against it."
He suggested it would be interesting, but he ultimately decided against it. The article doesn't go into detail about his reasoning for rejecting the proposition though. Why do you think the article left that part out?
"I don't see what's wrong about this particular decision."
It is immersion and lore breaking. I thought we covered that already.
As a tangent, I was just urinating in the toilet a moment ago and I saw a little black ant swimming around in the bowl. I named it Skavau right before I pulled the handle and flushed it into oblivion. God Save the Queen.
>He suggested it would be interesting, but he ultimately decided against it. The article doesn't go into detail about his reasoning for rejecting the proposition though. Why do you think the article left that part out?
It said it came to him twenty-years too late, implying if he was going to rewrite ASOIAF he might now make a different decision.
>It is immersion and lore breaking. I thought we covered that already.
I don't see how it is at all in this case. You just asserted it is rather than providing any evidence and baselessly speculated that GRRM opposed it despite zero evidence for this whatsoever.
>As a tangent, I was just urinating in the toilet a moment ago and I saw a little black ant swimming around in the bowl. I named it Skavau right before I pulled the handle and flushed it into oblivion. God Save the Queen.
Back to you behaving like a little child again.
"I don't see how it is at all in this case. You just asserted it is rather than providing any evidence and baselessly speculated that GRRM opposed it despite zero evidence for this whatsoever."
You provided all of the evidence required by linking an article that described how Martin rejected the proposition. Thanks?
"Back to you behaving like a little child again."
I thought it was funny and that I could share something like that with you after how familiar we've become after all of these debates. Also:
ὅστις οὖν ταπεινώσει ἑαυτὸν ὡς τὸ παιδίον τοῦτο, οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ μείζων ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν·
>You provided all of the evidence required by linking an article that described how Martin rejected the proposition. Thanks?
Martin said he thought about it years ago for the book. He didn't say he had any problem with the show doing it. That's your suggestion that you claimed baselessly.
"Martin said he thought about it years ago. He didn't say he had any problem with the show doing it. That's your suggestion that you claimed baselessly."
Are you therefore claiming that Martin's default reasoning for the conversion of his literature into a TV series involves departing from the source material? You're treading on thin water with that claim, and it seems obvious to assume that the opposite is true.
>Are you therefore claiming that Martin's default reasoning for the conversion of his literature into a TV series involves departing from the source material? You're treading on thin water with that claim, and it seems obvious to assume that the opposite is true.
He said that it would've been interesting if he kept to his idea of making the Targaryens black. He apparently once thought about it, and ultimately decided not to. Nowhere here is there any objection implied or otherwise to the show choosing to do it for the Velaryons. You have invented GRRM objecting to it.
https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2022/03/09/random-updates-and-bits-o-news/
"What can I tell you? Well, let’s see. Bruno Heller, the creator and showrunner of ROME, is writing his pilot script for the Corlys Velaryon series. That one started out as NINE VOYAGES, but now we’re calling it THE SEA SNAKE, since we wanted to avoid having two shows with numbers in the title. The other one TEN THOUSAND SHIPS, the Nymeria series."
"He apparently once thought about it, and ultimately decided not to."
How is this not a rejection of the concept? I asked you this before, but why do you think the article left out his reasoning for that decision?
Depends on why he chose not to do it. You do enjoy putting words in GRRMs mouth, don't you? He said it would have been interesting it he did. Do you deny he said that?
And have you considered that GRRM didn't give his reasoning for it in that exchange?
We both seem to agree that Martin rejected the concept, so how am I putting words in his mouth? I'm sorry but I don't understand where you're coming from here.
shareHe thought about doing it, and then didn't. What you're getting from that is that he must necessarily then object to the show making the Velaryons black. Does not follow.
shareSo he thought about it, decided against it but is fine with the show diverging from his decision as reflected in his opus of A Song of Ice and Fire?
It seems a bit inconsistent to me. Do you think he would feel this way if he had creative control and/or wasn't profiting immensely from the venture?
>So he thought about it, decided against it but is fine with the show diverging from his decision as reflected in his opus of A Song of Ice and Fire?
Seems like it, yes. He said it would have been interesting if he made the Targaryens black himself. What evidence do you have otherwise?
>It seems a bit inconsistent to me. Do you think he would feel this way if he had creative control and/or wasn't profiting immensely from the venture?
I don't see any reason to think GRRM would care that much about this stuff.
"Seems like it, yes. He said it would have been interesting if he made the Valyrians black himself. What evidence do you have otherwise?"
The evidence is that he decided against making them black. We're beating a dead horse here.
"I don't see any reason to think GRRM would care that much about this stuff."
GoT is the culmination of his life's work as a fantasy author and is what he will be remembered for. The burden is on you here to supply reasons for why maintaining the integrity and consistency of his work is unimportant to him.
>The evidence is that he decided against making them black. We're beating a dead horse here.
That doesn't mean he would object to an adaptation changing them. Also you're suggesting that when GRRM decided against making the Targaryens black* he thought it was an awful idea: in his own words he said it could've been interesting. Why did he say that?
*Note that the show didn't make Targaryens black, just Velaryons. So they did half of it. George doesn't seem to care according to his interview.
>GoT is the culmination of his life's work as a fantasy author and is what he will be remembered for. The burden is on you here to supply reasons for why maintaining the integrity and consistency of his work is unimportant to him.
I have George's own words where he speaks about the shows changes here and talks about it in a positive manner.
https://grrm.livejournal.com/326474.html?thread=17886026#t17886026
Also the original source for the quote was before HOTD was even a thought.
I was referring to the blacked out Valyrians, but you know that already. As far as Martin's personal views on this precise subject go, we have nothing to go off short of Martin rejecting the proposition in his own works. I'm sure you are familiar with the expression actions speak louder than words.
Skavau, do you mind me asking what your education level is as well as if you have any experience in formal, academic debate? I'm curious.
>I was referring to the blacked out Valyrians, but you know that already. As far as Martin's personal views on this precise subject go, we have nothing to go off short of Martin rejecting the proposition in his own works. I'm sure you are familiar with the expression actions speak louder than words.
And his "rejection" (not really a rejection anymore than someone in two-minds deciding against doing something is a "rejection", but debating with himself about it and then deciding not to) was soft. He found the concept interesting and implies he might have a different decision now if he was writing the books again. Why did he find it interesting?
>Skavau, do you mind me asking what your education level is as well as if you have any experience in formal, academic debate? I'm curious.
I do. I think you're a nasty person and have no interest in telling you anything about my life.
You have chummed up and defended posters who have accused me of being a pedophile. I have nothing to say to you here.
"I do. I think you're a nasty person and have no interest in telling you anything about my life."
That makes me sad. I suppose we're done here then. Until next time.
You have chummed up and defended posters who have accused me of being a pedophile. I have nothing to say to you here.
shareYou said quite a bit though. Thanks for being willing to indulge me in that at least.
shareAbout the topic of the thread. I have zero interest in talking to someone socially who thinks it's perfectly acceptable to hurl baseless accusations of pedophilia at people.
I think that's a completely reasonable position to hold.