Triceratops Ballet wrote: » The darkness I have to admit was a bit of a pain, I turned up the brightness on my TV to view it, but it's not like this is unexpected, the show has always been lit this way, they use naturalistic lighting on purpose to give the audience an immersive feeling. We're supposed to be able to imagine what it must be like to be in that situation. It's a technique they've used in most battle episodes to disorient us in the same way the characters are disoriented.
Necro wrote: » I mean, you're comparing a TV show battle with less of a budget to a blockbuster film. Dont you think that's a bit mental? Also, as others have said. They were fighting the Night King. That should be an indication there on why it was so dark. Rewatched it last night again and either I have a better TV than all of you or there's too much complaining. I could see all I needed to see. Really dont get the hullabaloo at all.
Mokuba wrote: » The Merrett Frey bit is supposed to highlight that not every Frey was directly implicated and that not all Frey's are pure evil. LSH didn't discriminate though, just as Arya didn't.
2ndcoming wrote: » The vast majority of people claimed last week that Brienne was "obviously" dying, along with Grey Worm, Jaime, Tormund, Sam etc. However the problem this week is you never thought they were going to die because "plot armour". You can't have it both ways, like. It's one thing wanting to be shocked by deaths of characters. The whole world predicted it en masse a week ago so that was hardly going to be shocking. Complaining then that a bunch of main characters we've followed for a decade didn't die in a way that wouldn't have shocked anyone anyway just so your prediction could be right is a bit tragic, surely? I'm not for one second suggesting much of the criticism is coming from a bunch of edgelords wanting to poke holes in something exceptionally popular. But to read the thread some may well believe that.
Gbear wrote: Of course, the tone that LOTR goes for isn't the same. LOTR is a fairy tale. But there's something to be said for it not feeling like someone has rubbed a load of dirt on your eyeballs.
Jofspring wrote: Epic Battle episode but very worrying for the rest of the season. As others have mentioned there has been a huge mystery behind the Night King, wights etc... So are we now just to accept that the night king wanted to kill Bran as somehow that would help him alive forever (even though he has already lived for thousands of years) and that's all there is to it?
Tired Gardener wrote: » This robs the previous episode of its impact, this is what I think annoys me the most. Episode two was brilliant, easily one of the best episodes in TV, and now it has lost all impact, all that atmosphere built up that this is their last night, all that emotion displayed is rendered pointless.
Pter wrote: » I was thinking about the dothraki tactics, placement of trench and placement of trebuchets today since it was brought up on thread. I think it panned out the way it did because they were facing the dead. Yes a cavalry charge on the flanks would relieve pressure on the centre if the enemy were human and looking to preserve their number. But the enemy doesn't care about their soliders getting injured, nor do they care about their number depleting. As such the dothraki would have been useless if only used on the flanks. Likewise why not have the trebuchets up front. You get extra range out of it, and the dead weren't looking to capture and use them, so why not. The dead were always going to rush forward anyway, so their use would be neutralised once it became close quarter fighting. And finally the trench. This was placed behind the formed ranks because it wasn't supposed to stop the deads advance, merely slow it for a period to allow retreat into the castle. Or something.... As you can tell i haven't given it much thought.
The Hound Gone Wild wrote: » Really wanted Bran to address the Night King by his original human name during the stare off. Bran: "Hello Jim"
2ndcoming wrote: » I read he only brought her back because he felt too attached to the Catelyn character and worried he had gotten rid of too many others in a storm of swords, and also wanted one more wow moment in the epilogue. The Frey pie fell to Wyman Manderly and The North Remembers conspiracy in the books, Lady Stoneheart's only involvement of note I can remember since ASOS is Brienne's last chapter to date, which never happened in the show anyway. The books and show are now so wildly different they're basically different stories, there's not much point comparing them directly imo
Mokuba wrote: » GRRM wrote Stoneheart avenging the Red Wedding in the books to show you the ugly face of revenge, a soulless killing machine indistinguishable from the crimes committed against the Starks. In the show they gave Arya her storyline, had her massacre a family and all it's relatives and acted as if it was a great moment. Arya's storyline and characterisation in the show is horrendously bad.
LastLagoon wrote: Yeah not great. What was the point of building up The NK and white walkers for all those years for it to be ended like that by a character who has had nothing to do with the NK story all these years? (A character who had one of the worst major character arcs -Braavos /faceless men) I see they did throw in some lame foreshadowing last season to make themselves look clever but really it was a letdown story wise. It’s like Star Wars/a marvel movie now , ridiculous plot armor on the characters the masses love , Dondarrion and the night watch lad are not major characters to kill off , neither were the 2 Mormonts or Theon either tbh.
LastLagoon wrote: this is not the Game of Thrones that dragged me in years ago
yourdeadwright wrote: » So is it comfirmed the NK was Targaryen ? Hence why he didnt burn ? Also did Jons Dragon die or just get hurt ?
Tazzimus wrote: » Where's that from? I've read them twice and don't remember that part.
RobbingBandit wrote: » even Tywin being poisoned.