ducky23 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

IMO, expecting a show like this to remain "surprising" all the way to the end is unreasonable. At some point you need to resolve things in a dramatically satisfying way, which means you're going to have to do stuff that people have predicted would happen. I don't see any way around that. GRRM might have done it differently, but eventually he would have done it.

Even so, I think Arya being the one to deliver the final blow to the Night King WAS something of a surprise. Most people expected it would be Jon, because of the prophecy stuff surrounding him. I also wouldn't call this "unearned," since as this episode did a good job of calling back, there was ALSO some prophecy stuff surrounding her (just not as foregrounded), and we DID spend a lot of time watching her become a master assassin. I'm not even bothered by questions like, "How did she slip by the rest of the Night King's army?" They showed us a long sequence of her being quiet and stealthy and slipping past everyone's notice, as per her training. That's how she did it.

---

I'm glad you brought this up, because how they wrote the whole Arya thing is a perfect example of how the ending should've been surprising, but thru poor writing, the ending wasn't surprising at all.

First they have a scene in the very beginning where melisandre and Arya stare at each other for a long time. Ok it makes sense why Arya stares at Melisandre. You could say it's because Arya recognizes her from before, she's the one who kidnapped her blacksmith boyfriend, blah blah blah. But why is Melisandre staring at Arya so intently? Right there, it's pretty clear Melisandre thinks Arya is special. And everyone knows all Melisandre's character does the entire series is look for the one to fulfill her prophecy. So I'm sure I wasn't the only one who was thinking, hmmm maybe Arya is the one to kill the night king.

But then, the later scene where Beric dies, the writers do everything in their power to write in big bold letters, Arya is the one. First she says beric can finally die cause he did what the lord of light wanted (sacrifice himself to save Arya). Then Melisandre says the whole brown eyes, BLUE eyes, green eyes thing. And then off Arya goes. Gee, wonder where she's going.

Then they show a whole bunch of battle scenes with other people, except Arya. And during that whole time you're thinking, ok when is Arya going to come in and save the day. So when it happens it's not a surprise.

Now imagine if they had cut the scene with Arya and Melisandre staring at each other. And let's say they had cut the dialogue between Melisandre and Arya when beric dies. I think even without Melisandre directly saying it, most viewers would figure out that the reason he was brought back to life 6 times was to save Arya. Good writing is not always about explaining everything to the viewer. It's about allowing the viewer to figure it out themselves.

Same with the eyes dialogue. If you edit out that whole part, think about how much better and more surprising the ending is. Plus once people have seen the episode, they can go back and say, "oh yeah, Melisandre said that whole thing about the eyes back in season 3 or whatever. Wow, it all makes sense now." But the writers robbed us of figuring that out ourselves as well. And they definitely robbed us of the surprise of Arya coming in from out of nowhere to kill the night king.

Compare that to the red wedding. There was some foreshadowing of the red wedding, but all pretty obscure. The clearest foreshadowing was the playing of the rains of castamere. But even with that, you didn't have some character say "oh that's weird, why are they playing rains of castamere, isn't that a Lannister song?" Nope. None of that. The audience is left to figure out the significance themselves.

In my opinion, good writing shouldn't have to spell out everything for the audience. And it shouldn't cater to the lowest denominator. That's where GOT has changed from earlier seasons. It's kinda like the difference when sorkin left the west wing. It was the same characters and same story, but the writing was just not as intelligent.

---

What's great about Game of Thrones is you can rewatch it and learn something new. The Melisandre thing flew over most viewers' head. There were a million other things going on to really think about what Arya is doing. To me and many others, it wasn't that obvious.

I rewatched the entire series for the 2nd time in the 5 weeks preceding the premiere. And there is foreshadowing to the Red Wedding in Roose Bolton's interaction with Jaime Lannister and during the Red Wedding itself, when the camera lingered on Mama Stark's face showing a slight sense of worry when the doors closed.

MoragaBear said:

---

She also looked up at the musicians with a concerned expression when they started playing The Rains of Castermere, which was about the family the Lannister's wiped out to secure their power and settle a grudge.

---

Thank you. This illustrates my point. In the red wedding, she looks up at the musicians playing rains of castamere. She looks worried. no one really knows why. You know somethings off, but not sure what. But nothing is explicitly said. But there is this sense of dread that's communicated without anyone saying a single word. And then boom!

Now imagine this. What if instead of just glancing up at the musicians playing the rains of castamere, Cat says to Bolton "why is rains of castamere playing, isn't that a Lannister song, that seems odd." Think of how different that scene plays out. Think of how much better the impact of the final scene is because they made the decision to leave that type of dialogue out. That is what good writing is. Good writing expects more from the audience, and expects the audience to figure some stuff out themselves rather than spoonfeeding everything to its audience.

Lets compare to the last episode, where Melisandre spells everything out. She's basically directly telling the audience "look here, beric was brought back 6 times by the lord of light and he finally just died saving Arya. Arya is special you idiots. Oh and remember when I told Arya about the blue eyes?" Everything is laid out in the dialogue. Rather than having faith the audience could figure it out themselves, they had to make it blatantly obvious what was going on.

Now imagine if Beric just dies and no one says anything. And all that is shown is Melisandre looking at Arya with a knowing glance (a simple knowing glance should be enough to communicate to the audience and to arya that 'hey this dude we keep bringing back to life, the only purpose of all that was to save you'). And lets say you leave out the dialogue about the eyes as well. Most people paying attention will know somethings going on, but not sure what, so they will still be surprised when arya kills the night king. And for the casual viewer, sure, most won't pick up on what's going on at all. But its just like rains of castamere, no one really picked up on that until they watched it a second time or someone pointed it out to them later.


It seems like a small difference. But just eliminating that little bit of dialogue makes a huge difference and the difference between good and great are often small things. there's a reason the red wedding is considered one of the best tv scenes of all time, its the attention to detail and the little things.

Going into the season, I assumed Arya's training was there so she could assassinate Cersei. After the scene with Melisandre after Beric saves her, I said to my wife, "Arya is going to jump out of one of the Winterfell Tree branches and kill the Night King right before he kills Bran." I'm not an expert on solving endings or anything, but I was fairly confident that this would happen. If I figured it out, perhaps it was too obvious :/

ducky23 said:

---

Whereas in the last episode, Melisandre spells everything out. She's basically directly telling the audience "look here, beric was brought back 6 times by the lord of light and he finally just died saving Arya. Arya is special you idiots. Oh and remember when I told Arya about the blue eyes?" Everything is laid out in the dialogue. Rather than having faith the audience could figure it out themselves, they had to make it blatantly obvious what was going on.

---

Though again: they do this and still have people complaining that it didn't make sense for Arya to be the one to kill the big boss.

I get that different people have different standards for this stuff, but personally I'm at the point where I just find most of the criticism of GoT episodes exhausting. It reminds me of the Itchy & Stratchy kids focus group on The Simpsons:



"So you're saying you want a realistic, down-to-earth show that's completely off the wall and swarming with magic robots?"

If it does the obvious thing, it's too obvious. If it does the unpredictable thing, it doesn't make sense. If it does bad things to the heroes, it's too nihilistic. If the heroes win, then they're playing it too safe. The quiet, character-based setup episodes are too boring. The big action episodes don't have enough character development. And so on.

I can see SOME argument that the writing is not as strong as it was when the show had the Martin books for backbone. But at the same time, I think people are assuming a lot about the stuff they don't like being only the show's invention and not what Martin was planning. Maybe what Martin is struggling with in trying to finish his series is exactly this: how do you actually END a story that is about subverting expectations without making the whole thing feel pointless? There's no way to please everyone with that. At this point everyone has a way they THINK the story should go.

sycasey said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Whereas in the last episode, Melisandre spells everything out. She's basically directly telling the audience "look here, beric was brought back 6 times by the lord of light and he finally just died saving Arya. Arya is special you idiots. Oh and remember when I told Arya about the blue eyes?" Everything is laid out in the dialogue. Rather than having faith the audience could figure it out themselves, they had to make it blatantly obvious what was going on.

---

Though again: they do this and still have people complaining that it didn't make sense for Arya to be the one to kill the big boss.

I get that different people have different standards for this stuff, but personally I'm at the point where I just find most of the criticism of GoT episodes exhausting. It reminds me of the Itchy & Stratchy kids focus group on The Simpsons:



"So you're saying you want a realistic, down-to-earth show that's completely off the wall and swarming with magic robots?"

If it does the obvious thing, it's too obvious. If it does the unpredictable thing, it doesn't make sense. If it does bad things to the heroes, it's too nihilistic. If the heroes win, then they're playing it too safe. The quiet, character-based setup episodes are too boring. The big action episodes don't have enough character development. And so on.

I can see SOME argument that the writing is not as strong as it was when the show had the Martin books for backbone. But at the same time, I think people are assuming a lot about the stuff they don't like being only the show's invention and not what Martin was planning. Maybe what Martin is struggling with in trying to finish his series is exactly this: how do you actually END a story that is about subverting expectations without making the whole thing feel pointless? There's no way to please everyone with that. At this point everyone has a way they THINK the story should go.

---

The term Mary Sue was trending because many felt what Arya did was unearned.

Anyways, I thought this article was interesting in terms of GOT subverting expectations.

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/culture/2019/4/29/18522731/game-of-thrones-season-8-episode-3-battle-of-winterfell-not-that-deadly

sycasey said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Whereas in the last episode, Melisandre spells everything out. She's basically directly telling the audience "look here, beric was brought back 6 times by the lord of light and he finally just died saving Arya. Arya is special you idiots. Oh and remember when I told Arya about the blue eyes?" Everything is laid out in the dialogue. Rather than having faith the audience could figure it out themselves, they had to make it blatantly obvious what was going on.

---

Though again: they do this and still have people complaining that it didn't make sense for Arya to be the one to kill the big boss.

I get that different people have different standards for this stuff, but personally I'm at the point where I just find most of the criticism of GoT episodes exhausting. It reminds me of the Itchy & Stratchy kids focus group on The Simpsons:



"So you're saying you want a realistic, down-to-earth show that's completely off the wall and swarming with magic robots?"

If it does the obvious thing, it's too obvious. If it does the unpredictable thing, it doesn't make sense. If it does bad things to the heroes, it's too nihilistic. If the heroes win, then they're playing it too safe. The quiet, character-based setup episodes are too boring. The big action episodes don't have enough character development. And so on.

I can see SOME argument that the writing is not as strong as it was when the show had the Martin books for backbone. But at the same time, I think people are assuming a lot about the stuff they don't like being only the show's invention and not what Martin was planning. Maybe what Martin is struggling with in trying to finish his series is exactly this: how do you actually END a story that is about subverting expectations without making the whole thing feel pointless? There's no way to please everyone with that. At this point everyone has a way they THINK the story should go.

---

Ok, that's fair. But here's my response. I don't think the director/writer should give two ****s about what someone like me thinks, or what anyone thinks. They should make the best show/movie possible, not caring at all how its going to be received by critics, fans, the mass audience, etc.

And that really is my main criticism of the last episode. I think they are making certain decisions that are making the show more accessible to the masses (i think i've done my best to outline what those decisions were and why imho they were bad choices). Now if they truly believe that those decisions are making the show objectively better, then so be it. I can't complain. but if they are knowingly compromising even just a little bit of quality for the sake of making the show more accessible, then (in my opinion) that's a problem.

if you listen to a lot of peter jackson interviews, he says time and time again, i don't really care what people think, I'm going to make LOTR according to my vision. screw everyone else.

I think that's how an artist should always operate.

Now of course, its unrealistic to apply this same standard to everything. for instance, I'm watching cobra kai right now (which is awesome btw - for what it is). and i'm sure no one is going back to karate kid 3 and saying, oh that shouldn't have happened because X happened in karate kid 3.

but here's the thing. i believe that some movies/shows transcend just simple entertainment. some movies/shows straddle the line between true art and entertainment. LOTR, Godfather, Star Wars, etc. GOT deserves to be held to that type of standard. So, its my belief, that when you have the chance for greatness, reach for it with both hands. Never compromise to just please the audience or the critics or the masses. Make your art according to your vision.

That's why while i'm annoyed with all the fog (because it did make it really hard to see), i'm not going to be critical of it, because that was a ballsy decision that the director probably knew would piss a lot of people off. but other decisions made were clearly made to error on the safe side.

People also criticized Peter Jackson for changing Tolkien's narrative to make things more accessible for the masses.

I mean, he did okay with all of the money and Oscars and stuff. But just saying, LOTR fans criticized the movies on the same grounds.

okaydo said:

---

sycasey said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Whereas in the last episode, Melisandre spells everything out. She's basically directly telling the audience "look here, beric was brought back 6 times by the lord of light and he finally just died saving Arya. Arya is special you idiots. Oh and remember when I told Arya about the blue eyes?" Everything is laid out in the dialogue. Rather than having faith the audience could figure it out themselves, they had to make it blatantly obvious what was going on.

---

Though again: they do this and still have people complaining that it didn't make sense for Arya to be the one to kill the big boss.

I get that different people have different standards for this stuff, but personally I'm at the point where I just find most of the criticism of GoT episodes exhausting. It reminds me of the Itchy & Stratchy kids focus group on The Simpsons:



"So you're saying you want a realistic, down-to-earth show that's completely off the wall and swarming with magic robots?"

If it does the obvious thing, it's too obvious. If it does the unpredictable thing, it doesn't make sense. If it does bad things to the heroes, it's too nihilistic. If the heroes win, then they're playing it too safe. The quiet, character-based setup episodes are too boring. The big action episodes don't have enough character development. And so on.

I can see SOME argument that the writing is not as strong as it was when the show had the Martin books for backbone. But at the same time, I think people are assuming a lot about the stuff they don't like being only the show's invention and not what Martin was planning. Maybe what Martin is struggling with in trying to finish his series is exactly this: how do you actually END a story that is about subverting expectations without making the whole thing feel pointless? There's no way to please everyone with that. At this point everyone has a way they THINK the story should go.

---

The term Mary Sue was trending because many felt what Arya did was unearned.

Anyways, I thought this article was interesting in terms of GOT subverting expectations.

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/culture/2019/4/29/18522731/game-of-thrones-season-8-episode-3-battle-of-winterfell-not-that-deadly

---

Ugh, "Mary Sue" is such a dumb description for Arya. They literally showed her going through YEARS OF TRAINING leading up to this moment. She didn't just get her assassin abilities in an instant. It's not a contrivance.

Anyway, I kind of liked that most of the major players survived this round, because early in the series, as well-done as it was, I had concerns that the whole thing was just a big monument to nihilism: all your heroes die, you're silly to believe in them, etc. That's a kind of limited teenage worldview, to my mind. If they want to say something about real-life history and politics then it's really more of a murky middle ground between good and bad most of the time.

But it seems like the show is finally having to acknowledge the need for positive catharsis for some of the main characters. I'm sure there will be complications from here on out and not everyone will survive the end of the series, but that balance should be there. Even GRRM himself I think said that he planned for the ending to be "bittersweet," not an all-out downer.

sycasey said:

---

People also criticized Peter Jackson for changing Tolkien's narrative to make things more accessible for the masses.

I mean, he did okay with all of the money and Oscars and stuff. But just saying, LOTR fans criticized the movies on the same grounds.

---

Like I just said above, if the director truly believes that those accommodations fits his/her vision, I'm fine with that. my problem is if the director is knowingly making those compromises, with the understanding that it would effect the quality of the product.

Look, I don't know if that's what happened in GOT, but I have my suspicions.

ducky23 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

People also criticized Peter Jackson for changing Tolkien's narrative to make things more accessible for the masses.

I mean, he did okay with all of the money and Oscars and stuff. But just saying, LOTR fans criticized the movies on the same grounds.

---

Like I just said above, if the director truly believes that those accommodations fits his/her vision, I'm fine with that. my problem is if the director is knowingly making those compromises, with the understanding that it would effect the quality of the product.

Look, I don't know if that's what happened in GOT, but I have my suspicions.

---

I also think this is complicated. TV shows have different narrative needs than movies and both are very different from books, and those differences are related to how the audience receives the story. So already right there you're making compromises for the audience, but they are the kinds of compromises that every writer makes in moving from one medium to another.

Not sure how I can differentiate that from other compromises made for non-artistic reasons.

Whenever people are this attached to a show and its characters, people nit pick, it's just the way it goes. People criticize things that they love, I would presume they all enjoy the show just as much.

The show is clearly trying to tie up everything pretty economically, and it affects the narrative, often adversely.

I'm open to entering this magical land of dragons and zombies in cinema, but the internal logic has to make sense within that framework.

Basically tens of thousands died over a Night King that was pretty easy to kill, and whose lieutenants must have been enjoying the starlit sky as Arya ran up and tried to dunk on him. The way he was killed didn't do justice to him being part of the storyline since the opening episode.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/game-of-thrones-author-george-rr-martin-rips-into-giants-over-draft-picks/ar-AAAIrZV?li=BBnb7Kz

GBear4Life said:

---

Whenever people are this attached to a show and its characters, people nit pick, it's just the way it goes. People criticize things that they love, I would presume they all enjoy the show just as much.

The show is clearly trying to tie up everything pretty economically, and it affects the narrative, often adversely.

I'm open to entering this magical land of dragons and zombies in cinema, but the internal logic has to make sense within that framework.

Basically tens of thousands died over a Night King that was pretty easy to kill, and whose lieutenants must have been enjoying the starlit sky as Arya ran up and tried to dunk on him. The way he was killed didn't do justice to him being part of the storyline since the opening episode.

---

What made him "pretty easy to kill"?

If he was so "pretty easy to kill," why couldn't Jon or Dany do it?

Did you watch the seasons where Arya trained as a stealth ninja assassin?

If Arya didn't go through years of training with all her mentors, would she have been able to accomplish what she did?

GBear4Life said:

---

Basically tens of thousands died over a Night King that was pretty easy to kill, and whose lieutenants must have been enjoying the starlit sky as Arya ran up and tried to dunk on him. The way he was killed didn't do justice to him being part of the storyline since the opening episode.

---

1. He's easy to kill IF YOU CAN GET CLOSE TO HIM, but therein lies the rub. You also need the right type of blade.

2. The other issue is that he controls all of those lieutenants and whatnot, or at least it seems like their system is such that he gives all the orders and no one else thinks for themselves. If the NK isn't paying attention, they aren't either.

3. Arya is actually really good at this s***. Not everyone has the skills to slip in there like she did.

She stabbed him in the exact spot that he was created in by the children of the forest; possibly his only weakness.

Everyone knew it required dragon glass (we did not know fire couldn't kill him)

Following the internal logic established, Arya doesn't get close to him in that situation, nor would the Night King be in a trance with the reflexes of geriatric all of a sudden. And yes stabbing somebody the same way you stab any other human to kill them I'd say is easy.

GoT didn't do enough to earn that ending, IMO. I'm not disappointed overall, just my take on the Night King end.

GBear4Life said:

---

Everyone knew it required dragon glass (we did not know fire couldn't kill him)

Following the internal logic established, Arya doesn't get close to him in that situation, nor would the Night King be in a trance with the reflexes of geriatric all of a sudden. And yes stabbing somebody the same way you stab any other human to kill them I'd say is easy.

GoT didn't do enough to earn that ending, IMO. I'm not disappointed overall, just my take on the Night King end.

---

It's not dragon glass. It's a Valyrian Steel dagger. It's not just any Valyrian Steel dagger. It's the Valyrial Steel dagger that started the War of the 5 Kings.


So, yeah, they used a dagger that helped fuel the entire series since Season 1. And Arya used her skills that's she accumulated since Season 1. And it all came to a head to stop the white walkers that has been part of the series since the opening scene. But, hey, they didn't do enough to earn that ending.

https://www.vulture.com/2017/08/game-of-thrones-dagger-littlefinger-bran.html

GBear4Life said:

---

Everyone knew it required dragon glass (we did not know fire couldn't kill him)

Following the internal logic established, Arya doesn't get close to him in that situation, nor would the Night King be in a trance with the reflexes of geriatric all of a sudden. And yes stabbing somebody the same way you stab any other human to kill them I'd say is easy.

GoT didn't do enough to earn that ending, IMO. I'm not disappointed overall, just my take on the Night King end.

---

I can see both sides of this argument.

Clearly, the show did enough to established arya's credentials as a bad ass ninja that she absolutely "earned" the kill. There is zero debate about that.

But the circumstances in which she accomplished the kill is murky.

I understand what the writers were trying to do, where Arya comes out of nowhere for the kill does provide an "omg what just happened moment". And I think enough has been done in previous episodes to suggest that Arya does have the skills to sneak in ninja style for the kill. So it's probabky fine they don't actually show how she was able to sneak up on him.

With that said, I also understand the Arya ex machina argument. Everyone is about to die and suddenly out of nowhere there's Arya to save the day. It's something out of brendan frasiers the mummy.

I don't know. I think the show did enough to establish Arya as a bad ass that I think it was fine that they didn't actually show how she was able to get to him so easily.

sycasey said:

---

okaydo said:

---

sycasey said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Whereas in the last episode, Melisandre spells everything out. She's basically directly telling the audience "look here, beric was brought back 6 times by the lord of light and he finally just died saving Arya. Arya is special you idiots. Oh and remember when I told Arya about the blue eyes?" Everything is laid out in the dialogue. Rather than having faith the audience could figure it out themselves, they had to make it blatantly obvious what was going on.

---

Though again: they do this and still have people complaining that it didn't make sense for Arya to be the one to kill the big boss.

I get that different people have different standards for this stuff, but personally I'm at the point where I just find most of the criticism of GoT episodes exhausting. It reminds me of the Itchy & Stratchy kids focus group on The Simpsons:



"So you're saying you want a realistic, down-to-earth show that's completely off the wall and swarming with magic robots?"

If it does the obvious thing, it's too obvious. If it does the unpredictable thing, it doesn't make sense. If it does bad things to the heroes, it's too nihilistic. If the heroes win, then they're playing it too safe. The quiet, character-based setup episodes are too boring. The big action episodes don't have enough character development. And so on.

I can see SOME argument that the writing is not as strong as it was when the show had the Martin books for backbone. But at the same time, I think people are assuming a lot about the stuff they don't like being only the show's invention and not what Martin was planning. Maybe what Martin is struggling with in trying to finish his series is exactly this: how do you actually END a story that is about subverting expectations without making the whole thing feel pointless? There's no way to please everyone with that. At this point everyone has a way they THINK the story should go.

---

The term Mary Sue was trending because many felt what Arya did was unearned.

Anyways, I thought this article was interesting in terms of GOT subverting expectations.

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/culture/2019/4/29/18522731/game-of-thrones-season-8-episode-3-battle-of-winterfell-not-that-deadly

---

Ugh, "Mary Sue" is such a dumb description for Arya. They literally showed her going through YEARS OF TRAINING leading up to this moment. She didn't just get her assassin abilities in an instant. It's not a contrivance.

Anyway, I kind of liked that most of the major players survived this round, because early in the series, as well-done as it was, I had concerns that the whole thing was just a big monument to nihilism: all your heroes die, you're silly to believe in them, etc. That's a kind of limited teenage worldview, to my mind. If they want to say something about real-life history and politics then it's really more of a murky middle ground between good and bad most of the time.

But it seems like the show is finally having to acknowledge the need for positive catharsis for some of the main characters. I'm sure there will be complications from here on out and not everyone will survive the end of the series, but that balance should be there. Even GRRM himself I think said that he planned for the ending to be "bittersweet," not an all-out downer.

---

Frankly I think Arya has earned most of all the ability to deliver the blow.

She is the only one who has been effective at killing the Starks Enemies - Littlefinger, Frey, the Night King, all the guys she killed along the way. She left the hound alive, but that was on purpose. The rest of the family was bumbling - Rob made plenty of leadership mistakes, got himself and his mother and army murdered, while winning the war. Sansa married two Lannisters and was dreadful early on. Bran was pushed out of windows. Jon was killed at the wall by his own troops.

At the end of the day, she has been my favorite character, and I fully expected her to come through at the end. Frankly, I think she takes the throne. She was a survivor, with a singular focus and a high level of commitment.

Arya, a trained assassin, only requires a defense of her heroics because of sexism

Oski87 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

okaydo said:

---

sycasey said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Whereas in the last episode, Melisandre spells everything out. She's basically directly telling the audience "look here, beric was brought back 6 times by the lord of light and he finally just died saving Arya. Arya is special you idiots. Oh and remember when I told Arya about the blue eyes?" Everything is laid out in the dialogue. Rather than having faith the audience could figure it out themselves, they had to make it blatantly obvious what was going on.

---

Though again: they do this and still have people complaining that it didn't make sense for Arya to be the one to kill the big boss.

I get that different people have different standards for this stuff, but personally I'm at the point where I just find most of the criticism of GoT episodes exhausting. It reminds me of the Itchy & Stratchy kids focus group on The Simpsons:



"So you're saying you want a realistic, down-to-earth show that's completely off the wall and swarming with magic robots?"

If it does the obvious thing, it's too obvious. If it does the unpredictable thing, it doesn't make sense. If it does bad things to the heroes, it's too nihilistic. If the heroes win, then they're playing it too safe. The quiet, character-based setup episodes are too boring. The big action episodes don't have enough character development. And so on.

I can see SOME argument that the writing is not as strong as it was when the show had the Martin books for backbone. But at the same time, I think people are assuming a lot about the stuff they don't like being only the show's invention and not what Martin was planning. Maybe what Martin is struggling with in trying to finish his series is exactly this: how do you actually END a story that is about subverting expectations without making the whole thing feel pointless? There's no way to please everyone with that. At this point everyone has a way they THINK the story should go.

---

The term Mary Sue was trending because many felt what Arya did was unearned.

Anyways, I thought this article was interesting in terms of GOT subverting expectations.

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/culture/2019/4/29/18522731/game-of-thrones-season-8-episode-3-battle-of-winterfell-not-that-deadly

---

Ugh, "Mary Sue" is such a dumb description for Arya. They literally showed her going through YEARS OF TRAINING leading up to this moment. She didn't just get her assassin abilities in an instant. It's not a contrivance.

Anyway, I kind of liked that most of the major players survived this round, because early in the series, as well-done as it was, I had concerns that the whole thing was just a big monument to nihilism: all your heroes die, you're silly to believe in them, etc. That's a kind of limited teenage worldview, to my mind. If they want to say something about real-life history and politics then it's really more of a murky middle ground between good and bad most of the time.

But it seems like the show is finally having to acknowledge the need for positive catharsis for some of the main characters. I'm sure there will be complications from here on out and not everyone will survive the end of the series, but that balance should be there. Even GRRM himself I think said that he planned for the ending to be "bittersweet," not an all-out downer.

---

At the end of the day, she has been my favorite character, and I fully expected her to come through at the end. Frankly, I think she takes the throne. She was a survivor, with a singular focus and a high level of commitment.

---

When Tyrion and Sansa start talking about getting married again, I think something's defintely going on there. And I wouldn't be shocked if they take the throne. That would kind of make sense since the show's been trying super hard to make Sansa seem intelligent.

GBear4Life said:

---

Following the internal logic established, Arya doesn't get close to him in that situation, nor would the Night King be in a trance with the reflexes of geriatric all of a sudden. And yes stabbing somebody the same way you stab any other human to kill them I'd say is easy.

---

The Night King had perfectly good reflexes. He caught her in mid-flight. She just outsmarted him with her knife trick.

I don't know what kind of "internal logic" you're talking about. I'd say the internal logic of the show suggests that a Faceless One would be the perfect candidate to slip in close to the enemy commander without his notice.

https://slate.com/culture/2019/04/game-of-thrones-arya-night-king-battle-of-winterfell-long-night.html

dajo9 said:

---

Arya, a trained assassin, only requires a defense of her heroics because of sexism

---

I think certain people would be more satisfied if Jon Snow or even Samwell Tarley did it, even though Arya was the best prepared person to do it.

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Following the internal logic established, Arya doesn't get close to him in that situation, nor would the Night King be in a trance with the reflexes of geriatric all of a sudden. And yes stabbing somebody the same way you stab any other human to kill them I'd say is easy.

---

The Night King had perfectly good reflexes. He caught her in mid-flight. She just outsmarted him with her knife trick.

I don't know what kind of "internal logic" you're talking about. I'd say the internal logic of the show suggests that a Faceless One would be the perfect candidate to slip in close to the enemy commander without his notice.

---

Maybe this is a dumb question - as I recall when she destroyed the Freys, she can still take the image of other people, yes? Maybe she took the image of one of the Wights?

GMP said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Following the internal logic established, Arya doesn't get close to him in that situation, nor would the Night King be in a trance with the reflexes of geriatric all of a sudden. And yes stabbing somebody the same way you stab any other human to kill them I'd say is easy.

---

The Night King had perfectly good reflexes. He caught her in mid-flight. She just outsmarted him with her knife trick.

I don't know what kind of "internal logic" you're talking about. I'd say the internal logic of the show suggests that a Faceless One would be the perfect candidate to slip in close to the enemy commander without his notice.

---

Maybe this is a dumb question - as I recall when she destroyed the Freys, she can still take the image of other people, yes? Maybe she took the image of one of the Wights?

---

Some fans have speculated that she did. Given the angle of attack, I think it's more likely she got into the tree before the Night King arrived.

Oski87 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

okaydo said:

---

sycasey said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Whereas in the last episode, Melisandre spells everything out. She's basically directly telling the audience "look here, beric was brought back 6 times by the lord of light and he finally just died saving Arya. Arya is special you idiots. Oh and remember when I told Arya about the blue eyes?" Everything is laid out in the dialogue. Rather than having faith the audience could figure it out themselves, they had to make it blatantly obvious what was going on.

---

Though again: they do this and still have people complaining that it didn't make sense for Arya to be the one to kill the big boss.

I get that different people have different standards for this stuff, but personally I'm at the point where I just find most of the criticism of GoT episodes exhausting. It reminds me of the Itchy & Stratchy kids focus group on The Simpsons:



"So you're saying you want a realistic, down-to-earth show that's completely off the wall and swarming with magic robots?"

If it does the obvious thing, it's too obvious. If it does the unpredictable thing, it doesn't make sense. If it does bad things to the heroes, it's too nihilistic. If the heroes win, then they're playing it too safe. The quiet, character-based setup episodes are too boring. The big action episodes don't have enough character development. And so on.

I can see SOME argument that the writing is not as strong as it was when the show had the Martin books for backbone. But at the same time, I think people are assuming a lot about the stuff they don't like being only the show's invention and not what Martin was planning. Maybe what Martin is struggling with in trying to finish his series is exactly this: how do you actually END a story that is about subverting expectations without making the whole thing feel pointless? There's no way to please everyone with that. At this point everyone has a way they THINK the story should go.

---

The term Mary Sue was trending because many felt what Arya did was unearned.

Anyways, I thought this article was interesting in terms of GOT subverting expectations.

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/culture/2019/4/29/18522731/game-of-thrones-season-8-episode-3-battle-of-winterfell-not-that-deadly

---

Ugh, "Mary Sue" is such a dumb description for Arya. They literally showed her going through YEARS OF TRAINING leading up to this moment. She didn't just get her assassin abilities in an instant. It's not a contrivance.

Anyway, I kind of liked that most of the major players survived this round, because early in the series, as well-done as it was, I had concerns that the whole thing was just a big monument to nihilism: all your heroes die, you're silly to believe in them, etc. That's a kind of limited teenage worldview, to my mind. If they want to say something about real-life history and politics then it's really more of a murky middle ground between good and bad most of the time.

But it seems like the show is finally having to acknowledge the need for positive catharsis for some of the main characters. I'm sure there will be complications from here on out and not everyone will survive the end of the series, but that balance should be there. Even GRRM himself I think said that he planned for the ending to be "bittersweet," not an all-out downer.

---

Frankly I think Arya has earned most of all the ability to deliver the blow.

She is the only one who has been effective at killing the Starks Enemies - Littlefinger, Frey, the Night King, all the guys she killed along the way. She left the hound alive, but that was on purpose. The rest of the family was bumbling - Rob made plenty of leadership mistakes, got himself and his mother and army murdered, while winning the war. Sansa married two Lannisters and was dreadful early on. Bran was pushed out of windows. Jon was killed at the wall by his own troops.

At the end of the day, she has been my favorite character, and I fully expected her to come through at the end. Frankly, I think she takes the throne. She was a survivor, with a singular focus and a high level of commitment.

---

I agree, I was happy Arya killed the Night King and agree she "earned it."

I was less happy that we did not learn more about what the Night King wanted, and now it seems like the battle with Cersei will be anticlimactic. The Night King and his zombie army was scary. Cersei is not scary. She isn't even that evil.

I was also not happy that the living split their forces, sending the Dothraki out into the night (if you are going to attack the White Walkers, why not attack them in the day?). Defend the castle, then maybe attack with the Dothraki from the flank? Why be so stupid? The Unsullied were just thrown to the wolves.

I would have rather the Night King overrun the North with key main characters escaping, then the Night King advancing on Kings Landing, destroying the Lannister army, with Arya only taking out the Night King at the end.

Oski87 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

okaydo said:

---

sycasey said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

Whereas in the last episode, Melisandre spells everything out. She's basically directly telling the audience "look here, beric was brought back 6 times by the lord of light and he finally just died saving Arya. Arya is special you idiots. Oh and remember when I told Arya about the blue eyes?" Everything is laid out in the dialogue. Rather than having faith the audience could figure it out themselves, they had to make it blatantly obvious what was going on.

---

Though again: they do this and still have people complaining that it didn't make sense for Arya to be the one to kill the big boss.

I get that different people have different standards for this stuff, but personally I'm at the point where I just find most of the criticism of GoT episodes exhausting. It reminds me of the Itchy & Stratchy kids focus group on The Simpsons:



"So you're saying you want a realistic, down-to-earth show that's completely off the wall and swarming with magic robots?"

If it does the obvious thing, it's too obvious. If it does the unpredictable thing, it doesn't make sense. If it does bad things to the heroes, it's too nihilistic. If the heroes win, then they're playing it too safe. The quiet, character-based setup episodes are too boring. The big action episodes don't have enough character development. And so on.

I can see SOME argument that the writing is not as strong as it was when the show had the Martin books for backbone. But at the same time, I think people are assuming a lot about the stuff they don't like being only the show's invention and not what Martin was planning. Maybe what Martin is struggling with in trying to finish his series is exactly this: how do you actually END a story that is about subverting expectations without making the whole thing feel pointless? There's no way to please everyone with that. At this point everyone has a way they THINK the story should go.

---

The term Mary Sue was trending because many felt what Arya did was unearned.

Anyways, I thought this article was interesting in terms of GOT subverting expectations.

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/culture/2019/4/29/18522731/game-of-thrones-season-8-episode-3-battle-of-winterfell-not-that-deadly

---

Ugh, "Mary Sue" is such a dumb description for Arya. They literally showed her going through YEARS OF TRAINING leading up to this moment. She didn't just get her assassin abilities in an instant. It's not a contrivance.

Anyway, I kind of liked that most of the major players survived this round, because early in the series, as well-done as it was, I had concerns that the whole thing was just a big monument to nihilism: all your heroes die, you're silly to believe in them, etc. That's a kind of limited teenage worldview, to my mind. If they want to say something about real-life history and politics then it's really more of a murky middle ground between good and bad most of the time.

But it seems like the show is finally having to acknowledge the need for positive catharsis for some of the main characters. I'm sure there will be complications from here on out and not everyone will survive the end of the series, but that balance should be there. Even GRRM himself I think said that he planned for the ending to be "bittersweet," not an all-out downer.

---

Frankly I think Arya has earned most of all the ability to deliver the blow.

She is the only one who has been effective at killing the Starks Enemies - Littlefinger, Frey, the Night King, all the guys she killed along the way. She left the hound alive, but that was on purpose. The rest of the family was bumbling - Rob made plenty of leadership mistakes, got himself and his mother and army murdered, while winning the war. Sansa married two Lannisters and was dreadful early on. Bran was pushed out of windows. Jon was killed at the wall by his own troops.

At the end of the day, she has been my favorite character, and I fully expected her to come through at the end. Frankly, I think she takes the throne. She was a survivor, with a singular focus and a high level of commitment.

---

Sansa married just one Lannister and one Bolton. Not really sure how they justified the second marriage when she was technically still married, but maybe there's a scroll in Oldtown about it.

Also regarding Jon, he is a terrible military leader. He's had to be bailed out of every major battle he's ever fought. Perhaps Martin will treat him a little nicer in the books.