GOT fans: Who Will Kill Cercei Lannister? Predictions?

[kittygrrl]

Originally Posted by dark_crystal

Dany could survive tomorrow night by announcing her pregnancy

yes..but this dark tale will not have a happy ending..i think that is the whole point of his books..we are doomed..if not, i would love it however i don't think so..

[Gemme]

Originally Posted by dark_crystal

Dany could survive tomorrow night by announcing her pregnancy

Thanks to her, there's not many people left to hear it.

[charley]

I really liked the ending...

[Gemme]

I think everyone is where they should be. Good job!

[Martina]

I want to be a fly on the wall at future council meetings. What a crew!

I was bummed at Jon's exile till I saw them leaving for what I assume is a new life beyond the wall. His talents won't be wasted. And he has Tormund and Ghost. Also, there was that sprig of green making you think Winter may be over.

Wonder why Drogon didn't roast Jon Snow? Because he's a Targaryen?

Arya's ending was fine. I wanted to slap Sansa, but she will be a good Queen of the North.

The Unsullied are going to Naath to protect Missandei's people from slavers and enjoy some peace, I assume. They definitely need to chill, so good ending.

They have been trying to make Bran a little more human, so I think he's not the worst choice for King, especially with the all too human Tyrion as Hand.

[dark_crystal]

Originally Posted by dark_crystal

My prediction for next week is that the third dragon dies, and possibly Dany, and possibly Jon. Dany seems tainted, but we may be told that this is the dragon's fault. Maybe we'll find out that the dragons made the Targaryens crazy. Maybe the writers will set it up that by killing the dragon, Dany could be redeemed.

I don't think Jon will take the throne bc that would be boring and he is boring.

I think Tyrion could end up in charge, as i have said, bc i see him as the main character, and he has been the most consistently ethical and compassionate.

And isn't he kind of technically the King now? Him or Gendry are technically the king until Westeros formally surrenders to Dany, which isn't going to happen. If Gendry dies, the Lannisters are still the ruling family. If Tyrion takes up the Lannister banner against Dany, he represents a cleansed house which maybe deserves to rule?

OR Gendry, Jon, Tyrion, and Dany all die and Sansa takes the throne as a Lannister, by virtue of her marriage to Tyrion. That would be super ironic in a very appropriate way.

If i were writing i would bring the Night King back OR have the Lord of Light show up.

Because, like, shouldn't everyone be converting to Melisandre and Beric Dondarrion's religion? R'hllor, also known as the Lord of Light, the Heart of Fire, the God of Flame and Shadow, has done a LOT-- resurrecting Jon and Dondarrion, killing Renly, killing Shireen, resurrecting Catelyn.

He is the only deity besides Bran & co. that is manifesting real miracles where everyone sees them. He was fighting the Night King from way back. Sure, the Shireen thing was bad, but that was Melisandre failing to understand she was looking for Jon.

Should there be a showdown between R'hllor, the Night King, and the three-eyed raven? Catelyn is still out there, with Nymeria. Both of them need to show up next week, too.

There's a metaphysical storyline that needs to be wrapped up. This has to be about more than who sits a throne. There is a forces of evil vs forces of good situation and we don't know which one R'hllor is. A lot of what has happened is R'hllor's doing.

So maybe someone has to confront R'hllor. Obviously Bran, and who is R'hllor's remaining representative? His mom!!

Ok, i wasn't THAT wrong.

[Gemme]

Originally Posted by Martina

Wonder why Drogon didn't roast Jon Snow? Because he's a Targaryen?

He took his grief out on the throne and I think that's because he understood that it was that obsession that ultimately led to Danaerys' death.

Maybe he felt Jon's grief.

I'm glad that they showed he was more than just a giant flying flame thrower and had some cognitive thought processes.

[dark_crystal]

This was a good article

(Scientific American) The Real Reason Fans Hate the Last Season of Game of Thrones-- It's not just bad storytelling—it’s because the storytelling style changed from sociological to psychological, By Zeynep Tufekci

The show did indeed take a turn for the worse, but the reasons for that downturn goes way deeper than the usual suspects that have been identified (new and inferior writers, shortened season, too many plot holes). It’s not that these are incorrect, but they’re just superficial shifts. In fact, the souring of Game of Thrones exposes a fundamental shortcoming of our storytelling culture in general: we don’t really know how to tell sociological stories.

At its best, GOT was a beast as rare as a friendly dragon in King’s Landing: it was sociological and institutional storytelling in a medium dominated by the psychological and the individual. This structural storytelling era of the show lasted through the seasons when it was based on the novels by George R. R. Martin, who seemed to specialize in having characters evolve in response to the broader institutional settings, incentives and norms that surround them.

After the show ran ahead of the novels, however, it was taken over by powerful Hollywood showrunners David Benioff and D. B. Weiss. Some fans and critics have been assuming that the duo changed the narrative to fit Hollywood tropes or to speed things up, but that’s unlikely. In fact, they probably stuck to the narrative points that were given to them, if only in outline form, by the original author. What they did is something different, but in many ways more fundamental: Benioff and Weiss steer the narrative lane away from the sociological and shifted to the psychological. That’s the main, and often only, way Hollywood and most television writers tell stories.

[snip]

The initial fan interest and ensuing loyalty wasn’t just about the brilliant acting and superb cinematography, sound, editing and directing. None of those are that unique to GOT, and all of them remain excellent through this otherwise terrible last season.

One clue is clearly the show’s willingness to kill off major characters, early and often, without losing the thread of the story. TV shows that travel in the psychological lane rarely do that because they depend on viewers identifying with the characters and becoming invested in them to carry the story, rather than looking at the bigger picture of the society, institutions and norms that we interact with and which shape us. They can’t just kill major characters because those are the key tools with which they’re building the story and using as hooks to hold viewers.

In contrast, Game of Thrones killed Ned Stark abruptly at the end of the first season, after building the whole season and, by implication, the entire series around him. The second season developed a replacement Stark heir, which appeared like a more traditional continuation of the narrative. The third season, however, had him and his pregnant wife murdered in a particularly bloody way. And so it went. The story moved on; many characters did not.

The appeal of a show that routinely kills major characters signals a different kind of storytelling, where a single charismatic and/or powerful individual, along with his or her internal dynamics, doesn’t carry the whole narrative and explanatory burden. Given the dearth of such narratives in fiction and in TV, this approach clearly resonated with a large fan base that latched on to the show.

In sociological storytelling, the characters have personal stories and agency, of course, but those are also greatly shaped by institutions and events around them. The incentives for characters’ behavior come noticeably from these external forces, too, and even strongly influence their inner life.

[snip]

When someone wrongs us, we tend to think they are evil, misguided or selfish: a personalized explanation. But when we misbehave, we are better at recognizing the external pressures on us that shape our actions: a situational understanding. If you snap at a coworker, for example, you may rationalize your behavior by remembering that you had difficulty sleeping last night and had financial struggles this month. You’re not evil, just stressed! The coworker who snaps at you, however, is more likely to be interpreted as a jerk, without going through the same kind of rationalization. This is convenient for our peace of mind, and fits with our domain of knowledge, too. We know what pressures us, but not necessarily others.

That tension between internal stories and desires, psychology and external pressures, institutions, norms and events was exactly what Game of Thrones showed us for many of its characters, creating rich tapestries of psychology but also behavior that was neither saintly nor fully evil at any one point. It was something more than that: you could understand why even the characters undertaking evil acts were doing what they did, how their good intentions got subverted, and how incentives structured behavior. The complexity made it much richer than a simplistic morality tale, where unadulterated good fights with evil.

The hallmark of sociological storytelling is if it can encourage us to put ourselves in the place of any character, not just the main hero/heroine, and imagine ourselves making similar choices. “Yeah, I can see myself doing that under such circumstances” is a way into a broader, deeper understanding. It’s not just empathy: we of course empathize with victims and good people, not with evildoers.

But if we can better understand how and why characters make their choices, we can also think about how to structure our world that encourages better choices for everyone.

[dark_crystal]

Originally Posted by Martina

I want to be a fly on the wall at future council meetings. What a crew!

I was bummed at Jon's exile till I saw them leaving for what I assume is a new life beyond the wall. His talents won't be wasted. And he has Tormund and Ghost. Also, there was that sprig of green making you think Winter may be over.

Wonder why Drogon didn't roast Jon Snow? Because he's a Targaryen?

Arya's ending was fine. I wanted to slap Sansa, but she will be a good Queen of the North.

The Unsullied are going to Naath to protect Missandei's people from slavers and enjoy some peace, I assume. They definitely need to chill, so good ending.

They have been trying to make Bran a little more human, so I think he's not the worst choice for King, especially with the all too human Tyrion as Hand.

"They need to chill"

People are asking "what was the point of making Jon a Targaryen" and i think that was it. No one else could have gotten past Drogon or survived Drogon's grief.

Crowning Bran was a good ending to the TV series. I hope GRRM goes another route.

[charley]

I can't seem to remove the smile off my face at how it all ends for GOT - Bran, Sansa, Arya, and Jon all survived. Martin was brilliant tying it all up like that. And, I liked that Danaerys had to be killed off - after destroying Cersei, only to become another tyrant herself. I also liked that Bran was elected. And, Sansa crowned Queen of her own kingdom - she was radiant in her happiness. And, there was a beaming Arya sailing off to adventure and discovery. Jon moving off with his direwolf, Ghost, and all the Wildings for a new life. And, Tyrion even survived to become Hand and is left dealing with the politics of the Council - absolutely marvellous - I had to chuckle at Tyrion's fate.

I think that with some of the negativity of those who didn't like how the 8th season went had to do with people not wanting GOT to ever end. But, Martin wrote it in a way that we all know that all their lives will carry on.

[kittygrrl]

the only thing that worked for me in this ending is that dracarys survived...Jon killing Danny did not make sense to me..you dont kill someone you truly love..not on purpose..it is a ruined ideal to believe killing one to save thousands is the greater good...killing never makes things right and i resent the writers for perpetuating this lie

[Lyte]

My feelings are mixed … I liked the first 10 mins and the last 15 minutes of the episode.

Jon was the only one who could get close enough to kill Dani - agreed

Since when did the dragons have feelings re: the iron throne - weird

Too much pontificating from Tyrion - tedious

[Gemme]

Originally Posted by kittygrrl

the only thing that worked for me in this ending is that dracarys survived...Jon killing Danny did not make sense to me..you dont kill someone you truly love..not on purpose..it is a ruined ideal to believe killing one to save thousands is the greater good...killing never makes things right and i resent the writers for perpetuating this lie

I respectfully disagree. I believe one who purposefully burns thousands of children and innocent people alive should die, regardless of who or what they are and who they love or who loves them. Dany turned bad, like spoiled milk. Can't have that mentality going into a more civilized, peaceful time.

Hey, did anyone see the water bottles? lol I can't decide if the crew was having fun with us or was getting lazy.

[kittygrrl]

Originally Posted by Gemme

I respectfully disagree. I believe one who purposefully burns thousands of children and innocent people alive should die, regardless of who or what they are and who they love or who loves them. Dany turned bad, like spoiled milk. Can't have that mentality going into a more civilized, peaceful time.

Hey, did anyone see the water bottles? lol I can't decide if the crew was having fun with us or was getting lazy.

i'm not implying it shouldn't be dealt with..but killing will never give a lasting peace to a people/ country that uses it as a means to an end. It defies logic. Violence begets violence. Peace under such circumstances will never last.

[kittygrrl]

i've been reading about where dracarys could have taken danny.. it won't come to fruition since the series has ended but i'm feeling a bit better..

[Gemme]

Originally Posted by kittygrrl

i'm not implying it shouldn't be dealt with..but killing will never give a lasting peace to a people/ country that uses it as a means to an end. It defies logic. Violence begets violence. Peace under such circumstances will never last.

I understand your point but you have to take the setting into consideration. In those times, it was far more likely to kill than to imprison. Also, how would the story work with Dany not dead? It had to happen for the storyline.

Originally Posted by kittygrrl

i've been reading about where dracarys could have taken danny.. it won't come to fruition since the series has ended but i'm feeling a bit better..

I've also been reading what different folks think happened afterwards with Drogon and it's super interesting. I'm tempted to go back and read the books as there's a lot of in between that didn't make it onto the show.

[kittygrrl]

Originally Posted by Gemme

I understand your point but you have to take the setting into consideration. In those times, it was far more likely to kill than to imprison. Also, how would the story work with Dany not dead? It had to happen for the storyline.

A storyline written by an exclusive male writing team and a male director. No women were involved for the last season..it was a given she would die.. was it necessary? Maybe, but this story line was poorly written..they could have written a believable plot of a warrior queen with a heart that slowly goes mad but instead they make her nuts in 6 episodes..it's bad writing..There were so many bad scenes and the reasons behind them for the last season, I don't even know where to start and it's probably at this point, not very relevant..but i don't agree her death was necessary. This storyline was awful..even i could have written a better ending....now back to my bad dream

[charley]

Originally Posted by kittygrrl

A storyline written by an exclusive male writing team and a male director. No women were involved for the last season..it was a given she would die.. was it necessary? Maybe, but this story line was poorly written..they could have written a believable plot of a warrior queen with a heart that slowly goes mad but instead they make her nuts in 6 episodes..it's bad writing..There were so many bad scenes and the reasons behind them for the last season, I don't even know where to start and it's probably at this point, not very relevant..but i don't agree her death was necessary. This storyline was awful..even i could have written a better ending....now back to my bad dream

Martin wrote the story - the whole story; it all came out of his head, his thoughts. In his mind, the Buddha was not written into the story. It is a high fantasy, created by his thought where, in his mind, all the tyrants die. When I began watching GOT, like any story, I used the old rule of thumb of "Once upon a time..." and I suspended belief, and just went with it. It is one of the fables of all stories, whether written by women or men, that because the brain requires security, will "believe" that the battles that are fought are justified, even that battles in themselves are the way life works - and all the illusions perpetrated by the brain that there must always be a fight or flight response, that there must be effort, etc. etc. etc. Personally, I do not believe that, I do not buy into that. From what I understand of life, thought itself cannot resolve anything at all, because thought itself is limited. What one knows in terms of thought can never be a final truth; thought is always adding to itself. Knowledge in itself is always imperfect.

But, in the context of a film, a fantasy, a drama, I do understand that any brain [which, of course, is using thought] will try to resolve conflict by a cathartic end. I think that it is important not to confuse reality (or truth) with what is fabricated by the brain by an artist. In that sense, I can appreciate what Martin wrote for what it was, not for what I would like it to be. In that sense, I accept works of art for what they are. Insofar as I am concerned, what Martin wrote was for entertainment, for pleasure; it was not an essay on truth or reality. It was just for fun.

[kittygrrl]

fyi-maybe i'm weird, but i didn't get any entertainment or fun out of watching Danny's death and for the record although Danny will probably die in the books (i've heard) no doubt the author will handle it with a great deal more finesse, thought and detail then the writers of this last season..it's an opinion, and not written in stone..shrug