Spoilers Game of Thrones: The Final Season

[Professor Zoom]

It doesn't, but the writers gave one anyway, so now that's canon.

Canon? Meh. It’s sort of like an author saying after a series that a major character was gay, even though there was no evidence in the text or on screen while all the heterosexual characters were heterosexualing everywhere, and there’s still no evidence in the supplementary series also featuring said character.

Canon. Sure.

 

[Cyrus]

The amount of nit picking in the last episode surprises me. We are starting to sound like Star Trek fans. oh wait!

 

[StarMan]

The amount of nit picking in the last episode surprises me. We are starting to sound like Star Trek fans. oh wait!

It's not just here. I guess the actors did warn us.

I don't know. I'm going to reserve final judgement until the last episode. I watched a video earlier where the guy ranted on about subverting expectations. I found myself agreeing with that particular point. I want a satisfying conclusion, not a story ducking and weaving to continually keep us off balance for shock value. When they had more time per season they were able to flesh more out -- I somewhat miss the days of Arya and Tywin together at Harrenhal.

Don't get me wrong, I am loving the ride so far. How it will stand in hindsight remains to be seen... well, we'll see in two weeks.

 

[Kelthaz]

There is one major battle to come, and one more episode before that. More named characters died in this battle than died as a result of the Battle of the Bastards. How many did people want to see go? It looks like we will lose quite a few people in The Last War including major characters.

I didn't have a specific death count in mind, but if a character looks like they should die I would rather them die than get saved by plot armour. There were numerous instances of major characters in imminent mortal peril that were miraculously saved without explanation in this episode, but let's look at the most egregious example of Sam.

While Jon ran through Winterfell to reach Bran, we saw Sam literally lying under a pile of wights moments away from death and Jon abandoned him because reaching Bran was more important. Sam should have died. Instead, a minute or two later, we cut back to Sam after the Night King has died and he's perfectly fine. That's bullshit. If the writers didn't want Sam to die than they shouldn't have written that scene where Sam was in such mortal danger without a plausible way for him to survive. But they did write that scene, so I expect the realistic consequences of those actions to play out. They didn't and that's why I'm annoyed.

 

[Professor Zoom]

I didn't have a specific death count in mind, but if a character looks like they should die I would rather them die than get saved by plot armour. There were numerous instances of major characters in imminent mortal peril that were miraculously saved without explanation in this episode, but let's look at the most egregious example of Sam.

While Jon ran through Winterfell to reach Bran, we saw Sam literally lying under a pile of wights moments away from death and Jon abandoned him because reaching Bran was more important. Sam should have died. Instead, a minute or two later, we cut back to Sam after the Night King has died and he's perfectly fine. That's bullshit. If the writers didn't want Sam to die than they shouldn't have written that scene where Sam was in such mortal danger without a plausible way for him to survive. But they did write that scene, so I expect the realistic consequences of those actions to play out. They didn't and that's why I'm annoyed.

Ultimately, the universe of the TV Game of Thrones isn't fair. Those that should die, might not. Those that shouldn't, just might.

 

[stj]

The moment the orc army broke into Helm's Deep everyone outside the caves charge, The charge was quickly stopped. They all would have been killed within minutes. The undead army breaks into Winterfell and nobody is killed for a rather lengthy period of time. The life-saving charge by Gandalf came moments after Theoden and his men were surrounded and about to die. The men in Winterfell weren't even in a single body, they were all outnumbered but still survived.

As to the relative lack of magic in LOTR? The fact that Gandalf didn't use magic to save Helm's Deep is an excellent example. The magic ring is never actually used properly, as Galadriel, Gandalf, Aragorn and Faramir refuse to take it. A magic ring that doesn't save Frodo cannot properly be said to be working serious magic, in my opinion. There are the palantir, but again, the point is not to use them. I really don't think it's reasonable to say magic that doesn't change anything in the plot really counts in the way it does in the overwhelming majority (all other?) heroic fantasy. There's the self-untying rope, and there's the glowstick that drives away Shelob, neither overwhelmingly importantl to worry about. Possible weather control and possible healing magic touch of the king are too subtle for me, though maybe not you. About the only thing that counts as major magic is the destruction of Barad-dur when the ring is destroyed. Or, if you include magic without a magician, which seems kind of an oxymoron to me, there's the resurrection of Gandalf. That I read as divine intervention, also something that strongly distinguishes LOTR from its horde of supposed imitators.

My opinion of course.

 

[The Lensman]

Very little magic!? It’s literally about getting rid of a magic ring.

No, he's right. There are only five wizards in Middle Earth, and not a one of them is casually casting spells. The magic in Lord Of The Rings is incredibly subdued, typically presented as clouding minds, sensing thoughts, bending wills. It's not like today where you have Doctor Fate / Doctor Strange spell slingers casting spells left and right. LotR doesn't have that kind of D&D spell casting.

First, this isn't Lord of the Rings; in fact early in the series, one of the most important distinctions between it and LotR is that its characters were not safe, did not have plot armor.

Every character that's survived has had plot armor.

I didn't have a specific death count in mind, but if a character looks like they should die I would rather them die than get saved by plot armour. There were numerous instances of major characters in imminent mortal peril that were miraculously saved without explanation in this episode, but let's look at the most egregious example of Sam.

While Jon ran through Winterfell to reach Bran, we saw Sam literally lying under a pile of wights moments away from death and Jon abandoned him because reaching Bran was more important. Sam should have died. Instead, a minute or two later, we cut back to Sam after the Night King has died and he's perfectly fine. That's bullshit. If the writers didn't want Sam to die than they shouldn't have written that scene where Sam was in such mortal danger without a plausible way for him to survive. But they did write that scene, so I expect the realistic consequences of those actions to play out. They didn't and that's why I'm annoyed.

Yep, Sam should've been dead in the first minutes of the battle. Tyrion should've been killed in the Blackwater.

Ultimately, the universe of the TV Game of Thrones isn't fair. Those that should die, might not. Those that shouldn't, just might.

So basically like every tv show, and book then.

 

[Professor Zoom]

No, he's right. There are only five wizards in Middle Earth, and not a one of them is casually casting spells. The magic in Lord Of The Rings is incredibly subdued, typically presented as clouding minds, sensing thoughts, bending wills. It's not like today where you have Doctor Fate / Doctor Strange spell slingers casting spells left and right. LotR doesn't have that kind of D&D spell casting.

Just because it doesn't have as much as something else, doesn't mean there's "little" magic. Frodo has the sword that glows when monsters show up... that's magic. Gandalf comes back as a new form, that's magic. That eye that Christopher Lee is using, that's magic. That King that gets all seduced to the dark side, that's magic. Gandalf and Lee fight, that's magic. The villain is a giant eyeball at the top of a tower... that's magic.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

...also the password-activated door to the Mines of Moria, Galadriel's seeing pool (the mirror of Galadriel), the horse-mounted Nazgûl being swept away by the raging river at the ford of Bruinen, Saruman creating Uruk-hai from clay, the elven stealth cloaks worn by Frodo and Sam...

 

[DigificWriter]

It's really rather strange that people don't think the quintessential High Fantasy series, LotR, involves magic.

A Song of Ice and Fantasy is more of a Historical/War series than it is Fantasy, even though there are Fantasy elements present in it.p

 

[dahj]

A Song of Ice and Fantasy is more of a Historical/War series than it is Fantasy, even though there are Fantasy elements present in it.p

Have you read the books?

 

[DigificWriter]

Have you read the books?

No, but I've listened to people who have and am also aware of the real-life historical wars that inspired GRRM to write the books in the first place.

As somebody from the Winter is Coming website put it, ASoIaF is more of a "political series with Fantasy trappings" than it is "a Fantasy series with political trappings", and the Game of Thrones TV series follows suit.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

No, but I've listened to people who have and am also aware of the real-life historical wars that inspired GRRM to write the books in the first place.

As somebody from the Winter is Coming website put it, ASoIaF is more of a "political series with Fantasy trappings" than it is "a Fantasy series with political trappings", and the Game of Thrones TV series follows suit.

Do us a favor. Read the books before you place them in a certain genre construct, instead of basing it on what you've heard from others.

If you had read them, you would know magic plays an extensive role to the series, not unlike Lord of the Rings.

 

[dahj]

As somebody from the Winter is Coming website put it, ASoIaF is more of a "political series with Fantasy trappings" than it is "a Fantasy series with political trappings", and the Game of Thrones TV series follows suit.

Well, humble little me might not be "somebody" but...

There's dragons, there's magic, there's prophecies, there's ice zombies, eternal conflict between forces of light and darkness, cataclysmic continent shatterings, magical artifacts, giants, forest beings, skinchangers, warging, legendary characters, hidden princes, it's about as epic fantasy as it can possibly get and books are getting ever progressively more steeped in it.

And while yes, the books are famous for playing out "realistic" consequences of our heroes' choices and actions, it emphatically does not subvert any of those high fantasy conventions, all of those things are real within the world and they have rules. That is quite literally the definition of a high fantasy setting.

Anyone saying ASoIaF and GoT don't count as fantasy because "there's politics in them" probably hasn't read much fantasy, because this is hardly the first that had such intrigues and plots and twisty backstabings in it...

 

[DigificWriter]

If you had read them, you would know magic plays an extensive role to the series, not unlike Lord of the Rings.

Most of the High Fantasy series I'm familiar with - and a fan of - make the magical and fantastical a central part of the worlds in which they take place and the core part of their narratives rather than relegating said elements to the 'background'.

Describing ASoIaF as Political/Historical/War Fantasy rather than High Fantasy doesn't make it any less "of" the Fantasy genre any more than describing, for example, Terry Brooks' Shannara and Word and Void series as Dystopian Fantasy and Contemporary Fantasy (despite the former series very much being perceived as High Fantasy), respectively, does.

 

[dahj]

Describing ASoIaF as Political/Historical/War Fantasy rather than High Fantasy

Would be kinda wrong....

Historical fantasy refers to fantasy set in history of Earth. It can be Medieval, Ancient Greek, etc. but always on Earth.

Political/War fantasy aren't a thing. Any kind of fantasy can have political elements, and quite a lot has wars and battles.

ASoIaF is High Fantasy because that's the genre it is.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Of course whenever lots of beloved characters die, people complain in the other direction, that the writers are going for shock value.

 

[DigificWriter]

Political/War fantasy aren't a thing. Any kind of fantasy can have political elements, and quite a lot has wars and battles.

ASoIaF is High Fantasy because that's the genre it is.

Political Fantasy is a sub-genre of Fantasy wherein the narrative is centered on - and driven by - politics.

A good example of the genre that I can think of off the top of my head would be Frank Beddor's The Looking Glass Wars Trilogy, which is essentially a 'reimagining' of the Alice in Wonderland stories through the politics of a realm called Underland and the war to take said realm back from the "Queen of Hearts/Red Queen" (whose first name is literally 'Redd' by Alice (Alyss) and a resistance movement.

 

[Scout101]

Fascinating watching you argue about the exact characteristics of a book series you haven’t cracked the cover on yet. But clearly you’re right and the people that have read them are wrong.

You should mention the War of the Roses again, I don’t think anyone has heard that before.

 

[DigificWriter]

My description of ASoIaF as more of a "political series with Fantasy trappings" came, as I noted, from individuals at the Game of Thrones website Winter is Coming whom I know have read the novels because they said as much in the segment I watched wherein the series was described thusly, but is also clearly my own opinion, which you are very much free to disagree with.