I'm not outraged about GoT--it's just a TV show based on a book about swords and sorcery written by a guy who appears to have misappropriated JRR Tolkien's middle initials--but are we really supposed to believe that a feudal medieval society chooses a king without any discussion or debate, tossing aside a man who built a coalition of armed forces of wildly disparate cultures (some of which hated each other for centuries) from different continents to defeat a magical army of undead zombies and their nearly undefeatable zombie overlords; who rode a frigging dragon into battle against said army of undead; who then helped overthrow a tyrant; who then killed the tyrant who replaced that tyrant; who earlier freed the North from a maniacal sadistic warden; who was once proclaimed King of the North; who appears to be the greatest fighter in the world; who once came back from the dead; who always puts duty and honor before his personal feelings; and who, by the way, is actually the true heir to the throne; and instead they pick a guy with zero emotional capacity, who has never displayed an ounce of leadership ability or good decision-making skills, because a guy from the House that caused all of the turmoil from the past 8 seasons suggested he would be good at it? No one wants to kick that around at all? And the North gets to be free because the new King's sister says "I want the North to be free" and no one has a bone to pick with that, not even the Lady from the Iron Islands, to whom one of the murdered tyrants previously promised independence? Really?
those are good points-- but you can't go stabbing the queen in a civilized society. and john always wanted to go back to his wildling ways and wildling women. my problem is with the food supply. winter is coming and you have these huge armies-- the show should be about farming, pickling and cooking-- preparing for winter.
4 comments:
I'm not outraged about GoT--it's just a TV show based on a book about swords and sorcery written by a guy who appears to have misappropriated JRR Tolkien's middle initials--but are we really supposed to believe that a feudal medieval society chooses a king without any discussion or debate, tossing aside a man who built a coalition of armed forces of wildly disparate cultures (some of which hated each other for centuries) from different continents to defeat a magical army of undead zombies and their nearly undefeatable zombie overlords; who rode a frigging dragon into battle against said army of undead; who then helped overthrow a tyrant; who then killed the tyrant who replaced that tyrant; who earlier freed the North from a maniacal sadistic warden; who was once proclaimed King of the North; who appears to be the greatest fighter in the world; who once came back from the dead; who always puts duty and honor before his personal feelings; and who, by the way, is actually the true heir to the throne; and instead they pick a guy with zero emotional capacity, who has never displayed an ounce of leadership ability or good decision-making skills, because a guy from the House that caused all of the turmoil from the past 8 seasons suggested he would be good at it? No one wants to kick that around at all? And the North gets to be free because the new King's sister says "I want the North to be free" and no one has a bone to pick with that, not even the Lady from the Iron Islands, to whom one of the murdered tyrants previously promised independence? Really?
And doesn't Bran need to be near a Weirwood tree in order to do his three eyed raven stuff? Do they have a Weirwood tree at King's Landing?
a farcical fictional committee is no basis for a system of government
those are good points-- but you can't go stabbing the queen in a civilized society. and john always wanted to go back to his wildling ways and wildling women. my problem is with the food supply. winter is coming and you have these huge armies-- the show should be about farming, pickling and cooking-- preparing for winter.
Post a Comment