House of the Targaryen Child Endangerment Problem | S2E1
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 июн 2024
- If you want to see more of my work like this, your support on Patreon is so so important / hellofutureme thank you if you already do!
FREE DISCORD / discord
READ MY PUBLISHED WORK + GET ON WRITING AND WORLDBUILDING VOL II I linktr.ee/timhickson
Thank you patrons - without you, I wouldn't be able to do the work I do. (come join the Discord/writing workshops!)
INSTAGRAM: / tim_hickson_hfm
TWITTER / timhickson1
A WIZARD DID IT MUG store.nebula.app/collections/...
EMAIL hellofuturemeyt@gmail.com
GOODREADS / 18990222.timothy_hickson
What did YOU think of episode 1?
~ Tim
TBH IDK 😶😐
I love the new visuals for the opening and think it's a lot more fitting than S1's, but I still would prefer different music (as great as the GoT theme is, I wish HotD had its own distinct tone-setting tune and give it more of its own identity).
Some things I liked: Seeing Aemond and Criston doing war plans (behind the others' backs). Larys having a private word with the king to get him to reconsider who his Hand ought to be. (I haven't read the books, but I'm guessing this is setup for him replacing Otto as the Hand. Interested how things develop whether it goes that direction or not.) The wall guards having scorpions ready and prepared for invading dragons (and knowing how to identify between friendly and enemy dragons). Concerns about resources and Aegon trying to be a good likeable king but having to retract some promises following Otto's counsel. Daemon acknowledging that he cannot beat Vhagar alone. The cool dragon cave and returning dragons (looks well thought-out - though I'm not architect). Alicent lighting a candle for Lucerys. Rhanerya and Jacaerys trying to be professional and trying not to let the grief take over and then succumbing to the emotions and tears with the two hugging it out.
Regarding the lack of security, I wonder are we to take the part where the king is drinking with the guardsmen at the throne that that's where they are? And that the king's hedonism and/or want for validation and to be liked has extended to him removing his guards from their posts to drink with him? Of course, even if we suppose that's true, that seems too few guardsmen for the castle to be as empty as it is. I appreciate that we get the framing for someone knowing they're way around and so can avoid much of the security, but it's still surprising to see how unguarded the higher levels (which he's unfamiliar with) are. Still not sure what to make of that.
Glad to get your thoughts on the episode. I appreciate your perspective on things.
I'd give it a 7.5/10.
I thought Blood and Cheese was underwhelming but I think the show's version still was effective and it does set up a more interesting conflict for Alicent than the book's version then. The rest of the episode was good but I will say it felt more like we were being re-introduced to everybody and there wasn't significant plot progression until the very end. Understandable given it's been a little under 2 years since we've seen these characters but I still wished we got more story. I feel they put off some events that have already happened in Fire and Blood because they didn't want any movement until Blood and Cheese happened.
The black and green dragons of flesh weaving dragons of thread was a prophecy about opposing war banners, wasn't it? Brilliant channel!
I think Daemon did actually give them a secondary order if they couldn't find Aemond. Cheese asks what to do if they can't find him and Daemon gives them a smirk and then the scene ends.
Oh that's a great theory! Totally in line with Daemon too.
~ Tim
I thought that was heavily implied, I'm surprised that so many people missed it.
@@twothefuturethanks for signing your name we wouldn’t have known who commented without it 😂
It definitely felt like Blood and Cheese were quoting Daemon when they said "a son for a son" and knew to kill Jaehereys
@@herefortheshrimp1469 Even is Dameon said "A son for a son" He could have ment Alison's sons. Meaning if you can't kill Ameond kill Ageon instead. So one can still think blood and cheese interpret it differently Leading to Helena's son death. Just a taught
I think the show version was more realistic than these two master assassins taking out kingsguard and holding the royal family hostage in order to play mind games on a two year old, who if they did remember this moment, which is unlikely, wouldn't for very long as anyone who has read the book already knows.
Agree, I always thought it was over the top that two random dudes pulled off the street were basically Ramsey Snow. Having them need Helena to identify the boy rather than playing a sadistic game with her made more sense to me, as did how messy the plan was.
The official story sound like a lie to cover the incompetence of the guards...
Well you have to understand the context that Fire and Blood isn’t an objective telling of the history of the Targaryens, it’s actually an in-universe book written by a maester, so it’s very likely that the recounting of these events are trying to eliminate any incompetence on the part of the kingsguard. So it’s certainly very possible that the show is simply showing what objectively happened that the book tries to sweep under the rug
@@jackyoh971 More like the lack of guards because Criston and Alicent were having an affair. I'm pretty sure only Kingsguard are allowed into the royal apartments and there already is a shortage of them because they're split between the two monarchs. So I believe Criston was supposed to be making the rounds that night but decided to carry on his affair with Alicent. I also think we'll see Alicent placed at the scene of incident like in the books as a cover story.
@@jackyoh971ooh, yes! 🤘🏾
I think the fact that the "ratcatchers" don't confront any guards adds to showing the incompetence of the kingsguard and the arrogance of the greens overall. Their house is fragile, not in order, easily cut down by lowly assassins. It's a metaphorical reflection of their character and their claim--weak.
Well, they did lose half their kingsguard a week ago and need to man the walls to look out for dragons. So that lightens their case a bit, though it certainly doesn’t help that the Lord Commander is so regularly… *occupied*
@@Isuream6331and now all of the royal servants are under Larys' control. And he has his reasons for wanting to expose the relationship between Alicent and Criston.
@liamdamon I find it suspicious that there was ONE other person in the complex. As you covered, the servants are now the eyes, ears and fingers of Larys. If he wanted protection around the Greens, there would be protection around the Greens. Even if there were no Kingsguard available, there could be maid servants coming and going, night and day. Alicent knows it, there were tons around Helaena earlier. Now? One, who does nothing. Meanwhile, at least symbolically, the rats are watching events play out. I don't believe a man who so thoroughly has his pulse on court events and intrigue would be caught napping. I don't know if Larys is directly involved but he is clearly okay with them being left wide open in a time where retribution should be expected.
i'd say the change in the show struck me as helaena realizing right at that moment that she can't change the outcome of her vision and so just tried to save the other child.
The dog is now my fave character from both series
Doggo was A Very Good Boi
I really like the idea that Blood and Cheese couldn't tell the siblings apart since it plays into the themes of gender roles. Like how Cersei talks about how she and Jamie looked so alike that even the Maesters couldn't tell them apart but they were treated so differently, Cersei so much worse, just for being a girl. Here we see it goes the other way too, where this little boy get murdered just because the enemy views boys as 'more important' for something he has no control over. The little touches of Aegon mentioning how Jaeherys is the future king in that small council meeting is there to remind us of that too.
+++
I prefered the scene in the books, but this change highlights gender in an interesting way, which is the cause of so much of the conflict
I actually enjoyed the blood and cheese changes. If we view the book as a story to make the main characters seem more sympathetic, having helaena seem like she was broken by the events and her quirks be based of her insanity from the shock would be a way to do it.
And honestly, I found the events equally terrifying in a different way. You hear the implied cuts and the screams from an innocent child, you got to see was a sweet boy, dying one of the most painful deaths he could die from. But even more so is the mother left that boy without a second thought..... honestly, cheeses shock really put the cherry on top for me.
I dont know where they're taking the stories with this, but from my point of view, it doesn't take away any bite from the book. Or, at the very least, it's not taking away anything we haven't seen a dozen times over in the entire series
I think they intentionally made a contrast from the drama of the book with the "reality" of the show...
The show a lot of times has specifically contrasted with the book, being a history later on recording the reports of the events of the time.
I think the show is giving us the trauma of what growing up and living in a toxic family like the Targaryens does to a sensitive soul like Haelena: she doesn't beg and plead because she knows that won't work BECAUSE SHE'S SEEN WHAT HER FAMILY DOES. She makes an initial attempt at negotiation, and you can see the cautious calculation in her face, then when they explain they are here for revenge, she considers... And goes for the pragmatic option that saves the most people. EVEN B&C ARE SHOCKED at her response, but she gets the child she CAN save and she gets out of there as quickly and quietly as possible, because that's all she thinks she can do because she's always been ignored and her family has always hurt each other regardless of what she does or says. Not to mention she already "prophesized" this event... In her mind, it's inevitable now, and no one listened to her.
I think next episode will have the characters reacting EXACTLY as the audience is to her doing this, and they will make up the dramatic story from the book to spread generally because it saves face for their house and it's more useful for their politics. But in the end Haelena is a Cassandra who increasingly becomes stoically and pessimistically nihilistic, because she can see what her family is doing to themselves, but NO ONE LISTENS so she can't stop it. That's the point of the contrast.
Some further supporting evidence regarding the trauma of Maelor... Maelor is canonically 2-years old at the time of B&C; how many people have ANY memory from when they were 2-years old??? VERY few, if any, and the memories from around that age (even traumatic ones) are usually fuzzy, fractured, and distorted, if they aren't fully repressed. AND all memory is reconstructed anyway, so most of Maelor's memory of this event from when he was literally a toddler was going to be influenced by hearing other people talking about it - this pivotal core event of his childhood that made him the heir and set off the Dance of the Dragons in earnest...
So regardless of how it really happened... Who ACTUALLY reinforced the trauma of this event on a toddler? His family telling and retelling it for their political ends and not for the well-being of the people traumatized. We didn't need the t*rture corn of 🩸& 🧀 doing to Haelena and Maelor what is described in the books... Because the t*rture corn IS the show! What's already happened to Haelena is what forces her to make the choice she did, and what is GOING to happen to Maelor is what drives him to make the choices he does.
It would be very thematic for the show to frame it in a way that the reality wasn't that two peasants hired as assassins were truly to blame, but to re-emphasize the core theme of the show: the Targaryans do this to themselves as aristocracy obsessed with political power. It's not this storybook dramatic moment perpetrated by peasant villains, it's the slow toxic wearing down of their souls that the structure of hierarchical power they both live within and propagate/represent that is the true villain.
I find your point about Blood and Cheese interesting. I can totally see them overestimated by the Maesters. Like how a writer makes a villain more competent.
Idk i like it better, seems way more realistic that a ratcatcher wouldnt really be all that good at infiltration and murder. Furthermore, keeping going on the disimpowerment of women theme in this show making the choice between a boy and girl seems more apt. The book ("meisters version") just doesnt seem as dirty and human as this one to me. What i like about game of thrones and house of the dragon is in how it unglamorizes medieval fantasy where all villains are completely evil, this felt way more plausible to me and my ability to buy into it immediately relates to the emotions of horror, shock, disgust and pity that they want me to feel
yeah agree, to me it felt more realistic that the closer they got to actual murder, the more human they obviously became. I think it all reads well in the book, but on screen it would of just felt OTT to me, too much like immature, neck beard, torture p*rn.
If the ratcatcher and a goldcloak weren't good at those things, how would them being able to kill the freaking heir to the throne be a believable, let alone realistic, scene?
However, Its ironic that jahaerys died literally only because he was born a boy, and his sister is alive because she's a girl. Showing that their rules harms men as well in other was.
@@sarwatarannya8786 okay, so I'm gonna presume that english aint your first language. Yes, it was set up that Aemond was a good fighter so they'd have to be careful, probably stab him in the back or surprise him. So again, yes, if they'd just strolled up to him and beat him that would of been weird... that didn't happen though so I don't get your point?
How is it ironic that Jahaerys died? Irony has a couple of definitions but one is, "the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect." They went in to kill one son, but got spooked and killed another? Sorry but I don't see the irony in men being seen to have more strategic value. That seems right in the middle of expectations for the setting?
Do explain yourself more fully if you meant something else.
There's not even a consideration. The girl doesn't matter in their eyes. Great point
Cheese is not just a ratcatcher. His past is completely mysterious. That's just his current job. It's like saying you wouldn't expect a guy like Jaime Lannister to be dangerous when he was captured and on the run just because he looks weak
I think blood&cheese worked very well in the universe of the show, specially the Helena part. She is very different from the book, so her scenes will play out in other ways.
We saw her cover her ears when Valarion guy's head gets choped off. She detaches in the time of stress
The blood intro was very screensaver-esque and I liked that, wish they created a new song for this separate show instead.
I think the change in Blood and Cheese asking for who’s a boy is meant to jab at the central issue of the story. This war is all about whether the realm would ever accept a female ruler. Yet, when assassins are sent to kill a royal son, they can’t tell the difference between son and daughter.
The only thing that bothered me was how easy it was for them to reach the royal family rooms, to threaten and kill one of them and take its time to so, I find it very odd that there were no guards at the door or even near by, it seems to me that they have a big security problem.
Idk I think the episode implied that Cristian Cole was supposed to be guarding Haelena and the kids. He likely cleared out at least some of the guards because, well, he didn’t want to be caught having sex with Alicent.
They only have three Kingsguard at the moment to begin with, plus there was the thing earlier about Larys getting rid of the Red Keep’s staff who he thought were suspicious. So overall I thought it was decently foreshadowed.
@@true_emu8333 Makes sense , I didn't think about that.
@@true_emu8333I think it's 100% intentional that they're left wide open. Alicent is safe. The king is surrounded by people. All the right chess pieces are being protected. How sad and regrettable that collateral damage was left vulnerable leading to further escalation, intrigue and power brokering. As a clever man once said, chaos is a ladder. Or an elevator for Larys.
To bring it back to your point of “when the queen speaks people listen” and F&B being an unreliable source, the book version of blood and cheese sounds like a propagandised version of events that Alicent would release to the public. ‘Of course B&C had to kill multiple kings guards to get in, and took me hostage as well, because I was totally with Helena.’
I love the new intro, even if you don't know the whole story it tells much more than the previous one.
I appreciate that they toned down the Blood and Cheese part because it was absolutly horrific as it was. I also really like how Haelena is a bit of a Cassandra in that nobody believes in her warnings, and in the moment she wants them to think she is lying, the moment she needs them to think she is lying, somebody believes her truth.
I really like that they are pushing how dramatic a civil war is.
Lots of strong counter-arguments in defence of the B&C changes here, I also like how it seems to put Aegon in the same position as Viserys (no male heir, only a daughter).
I also liked the scene with Alicent and Viserys on his deathbed. I feel like deep down she probably knows that isn’t what he meant, but she’s just so desperate for all the suffering she’s endured and everything she’s sacrificed to MEAN something that she latched on to it anyway.
Honestly just really love this show. To me it feels more in line with George’s writing than Game of Thrones ever did, despite making its own drastic changes to the source material.
I agree with you about the accidental happenings aren’t always handled well. I wish they’d just let characters make bad decisions on their own, without it being a misunderstanding.
As for the change with Blood and Cheese: while I do agree that the horror of choosing the child Helaena wanted to save was more terrifying, I can see why they changed it to focus on the twins. One of the prevailing themes of HOTD is the gender inequality and how unfair it is. Daemon told them a son for a son, because in that world, a son is more valuable. The whole conflict with Rhaenyra and Aegon’s war for the throne hinges on this.
What’s really interesting though, is now Aegon has been put into the same situation as his father: now his only heir is a girl, who is considered inferior just for her gender, and the next in line would then be his dangerous, murder-happy brother who cannot be controlled. Daemon and Aemond mirror one another. We are seeing history repeat itself in a vicious cycle. I’m looking forward to seeing how this comes into play later in the season.
I read whole meister version as just dramatic as fuck version as common with actual historical sorces
"irredeemable murder hobos" was not a phrase i expected to ever hear 😂 that being said i do think that the show is trying (YMMV on how well they do this) to make a point about how the worst tragedies happen not because of evil people or worst intentions, but because of accidents and misunderstandings and coincidences, and that no one is truly innocent.
I think that the way things went with Blood and Cheese makes perfect sense for how history remembers it. The Greens would be incentivized to portray the act as far more calculated and brutal than it was (don't get me wrong, it was plenty brutal, but adding in a few narratives about the pair killing several guards and servants, along with forcing the queen to make an impossible decision and then cruelly killing the child she wanted to save, is about right with what we've seen from the Hightower faction).
I think it really shows how much history distorts reality, and that rash, in the moment decisions can have a legacy that lasts generations, remembered as far less human than they actually were.
Game of Thrones barely held the viewers' hands when explaining things so I don't see the old title having an issue.
The og title was a clearly visible map, where key locations were rendered in 3d, in relation to each other, and clearly labeled in English. It was a brilliant tool for helping audiences get a grip on the world. The hotd season 1 title was aiming for the same informational value but missed the mark widely, as characters on the family tree were only represented by fairly abstract symbols and it was often too dark to make out. The tapestry is an improvement.
some ratcatchers not being able to do an elaborate assassination plan makes much more sense tbh. And it is implied that Daemon didn't even really care who died, he just wanted to get back at them and possibly incite violence and war because he clearly wants this war to happen. So ye completely disagree on the characters losing agency part,i think it was clear every character wanted to further their own gains this episode and had more than enough agency.
Cheese's past is mysterious his job was just being a ratcatcher and now assassin. Also, blood is not a ratcatcher he is a former goldcloak citywatch
@@FencingMessiah yes and its impossible to convey all that in a tv show format. I would like these episodes all be 300 minutes and explain every minor character with extreme details but it aint happening.
I really enjoyed the episode. That said, a whole lot of nothing actually happens until the end. I do like how Aegon dislikes Otto and his in action and impertinent behaviour and I think it could play a large role in the response to his eldest sons death
Having only seen the show, I’m a little mystified by your reaction to this episode. I thought it was very clear that the two assassins went looking for their primary target first (we see them scope out his room), and then when unable to find him, go looking for another target (either because they received that order off camera from Daemon or because they chose to do so themselves). SImilarly, it seemed very clear that Helena was given a choice of which child to kill, with the implication being that they wanted to kill the boy (since obviously the heir would be a bigger deal to assassins). So regardless of the apparent gender swap from the book, the resulting scene was still “mother must choose which child these assassins are going to kill.”
Basically, I don’t see how agency was removed from any of these characters when compared with the book versions as you describe it. Maybe I’m missing something.
I think having only the twins, a boy and a girl, and killing the boy leaves Aegon in a parallel situation to his father. He now only has a female heir or his more dangerous/chaotic younger brother.
Going forward, I am going to need more out of Queen Rhaenyra than a bunch of pensive or sad looks.
The way they protraited it, it gave me the impression Helaena wanted her son to die, like she secretely hated him maybe because she hates Aegon. Like when Blood said a mother would never give her son away that easily but Cheese saw in her eyes she was telling the truth and then later when she said "they killed the *boy*" not even adressing him by name, not even "my son", not "the heir", no, just "the boy" wtf?
She's on the spectrum, so she's not going to act 100% how socially adept people would. She's in shock and trying not escalate things, fairly paralyzed by fear and confusion. I think she knows she can't save everyone and just tries to exit the situation as quickly as possible with whoever she can. She reacts to stress and danger with avoidance not confrontation. She's not a fighter.
I thought Helaena would have more agency, but otherwise I think this all comes down to a practical reason: I think HBO couldn't or wouldn't green-lit the boys murder as it was described in the book, for it being too horrific.
In no case would they have a child killed in-shot. The book says he was decapitated in one stroke, but in the show you hear multiple stabs and slices and squishing noises. To me that’s worse
@@alisaurus4224Yeah this is plenty horrific in its casual brutality and visceralness. They weren't Ramsay Snow and criminal masterminds. These are thugs off the street.
Great video.
Suggestion
Best brutal violence award: the kingmaker may be a front-runner
Best underhanded tactic award
Best Vengeance award
Best war criminal: I think all the dragon Riders have a good shot at this
Best Shot Yourself in the Foot award: the two monarchs are locked for this
Best Stupid Princelings award
I thought the blood and Cheese scene worked. Got the job done. There was one thing that irked me more. In the books we read all the time how 'dangerous' the Iron throne can be; It nicking and cutting you as you sit in it; kings having festering sores because of it. An there is Aegon just lounging in it like it's the comfiest of chairs! (the Spanish Inquisition likes to get there hands on one I guess)
Aegon even changes from one lounge position to another without cutting himself.
I was like ... What?!! Minor irking but still...
the opening should be a book
Practically, I think they didn't want to traumatize toddler actors to film the book version of the scene.
What happened to your mic quality? There's a lot of pops and I can't listen for it. :(
the Blood and Cheese changes I feel reinforce an element of the S1 finale.
"illusion of control" , I believe this whole "we don't really control the dragons" is also a show-original element but it has worked really well
As Viserys said to Rhaenyra in the beginning of season 1, the Targaryens and all Valyrians for that matter deluded themselves into believing their control over Dragons (and everything else) was absolute. Aemond realizes the hard way that when it comes down to it, he can no more control Vaghar than a weathervane can control a storm.
S2 E1 I felt reinforced the "illusion of control" theme, Daemon, Criston, Otto and everyone else thinks their control over people and situations nigh absolute, only to see it unravel.
Now truth be told, the show cuts away when Daemon is asked "what if we don't find him ?" and it's strange that the dynamic duo seem to be as much in the dark as the audience is when that situation arises (which is more of a criticism I have with the episode).
I like the messy/panicky escalation to unpredictable violence, it creates suspense for every subsequent decision each side makes "is this person in their right mind ? / what could go out of control ? / have they considered potential outcomes going belly-up ?"
I don't think they are removing the agency from characters. They are all still making decision and they have consequences. What they are adding is some degree of unintended consequences, failure, and miscommunication. I think that is a brilliant decision. It seems to me that a theme of the show is that these Dragon Lords do not truly have control. Like Viserys said in the first season: 'the idea that we control the dragons is an illusion.' It is impossible to hold the power they have responsibly.
I enjoyed the episode a lot. I haven't read the books, but I knew helaena had to choose which of his children dies, and I was kinda confused in that scene... why blood and cheese had trouble identifying the boy, then believe the kids mother withouth checkin, and then both men focus on killing the boy instead of one of them holding helaena so she does dot run or scream... why would daemon hire dumb assasins.... didn't make much sense to me but had fun anyway
I dont like how Lucerys' death was an accident because it results in Aemond taking a hit in the intelligence department.
It's malicious negligence. He's a bully not a mastermind and he's blinded by arrogance and rage. He's too young and inexperienced to know his limits. His dragon bond is too weak exercise subtlety like Daemon/Rhaenys. Vhagar even plays along a little bit she goes for the kill out of anger and for being attacked against his wishes.
I do agree lack of agency was a problem in Season 1 but I don't think it was an issue here. We do see Cheese ask Daemon what to do if they can't find Aemond and it's heavily implied he told them "a son for a son" given that Blood quotes it later.
I feel the main issue with the scene stems more from the fact that they save the aftermath for next episode. I do like the idea of Alicent being away and Helaena going into shock but it loses the emotional response to really sell the horror of the scene. I'm glad D&D are far away from ASOIAF but I feel this is a scene they would have executed to perfection because they understand how to convey brutality to the audience.
I'm so glad that the B&C bits were toned down, especially as in the book, one was definitely a...pdf, shall we say. 🤢
I'd bet that the constant misunderstandings and oopsie doodles at the start of the Dance will turn into bloodthirsty, definitive action, as more and more blood is shed. But it's very interesting to see the "real" history (maaaaaybe), as opposed to the unreliable narrators GRRM set forth in the book. Can't wait for more!
In regards to the agency thing for Blood and Cheese, I think the showrunners sort of wrote themselves into a corner. They wanted the mission to be "kill Aemon" and so had to have that mission spin out of control to get Blood and Cheese in a position to kill Jahaerys. That doesn't explain, or in my opinion excuse, forgetting that Maelor should exist and be present for that scene. As you said, Blood and Cheese are already full murder-hobo, why pull the punch from what it was in the book?
Here's my kinda meta-level theory on why they made some of the changes to the Blood and Cheese sequence.
Spoiler Space for those who haven't read Fire & Blood
Viserys and Allicent have a third son in the books, who has never even so much as been mentioned. In theory, he hasn't been written out yet, but at this point, his appearance will seem to come out of nowhere to non-book readers. Why does this matter? Because Daeron's main storyline is tied to Maelor's. So by eliminating the one, they can eliminate the other.
Otherwise, I have little issue with the change made. Even the question of which one was Jaehaerys, as at that age, it actually is difficult to tell boys and girls apart without tertiary indicators (clothing, hair length, etc) Both kids had long hair, both kids were in their night clothes - so probably just a long white tunic. And it gives the moment of ... will she try it? Will Haelena try to sacrifice her daughter for her son? And she knew the odds were too long, and it was better to be honest (and I'm not sure that Show!Haelena even can lie.)
Wow 😳
I disagree about the lack of depth of the scene, I believe that they had agency over who they killed - they were however very rushed. Heleana’s reaction during the scene for me was extremely deep and traumatic, also very true to her show character
the way the show staged the blood and cheese plot, it's as if everyone was there to protect helaena yet they were all too caught up in their own thing that helaena was left all alone to fend for herself and the children. for sure, alicent and krispy will feel guilty. aegon in particular would feel horrible because we see in the throne room that he was surrounded by his kingsguard while helaena was with nobody. otto off-handedly said that they were lacking security (also because some went over to rhaenyra) yet he wasn't in such a hurry to address this security issue. and where is aemond after his secret war council with krispy? did he go to the red light district or something?
on top of all that, helaena is still our tragic cassandra telling anyone within earshot about her visions and still being totally dismissed as a quirky eccentric.
The whole scene just felt kinda dumb to be honest. There were apparently 0 guards there. Haleena never screams, which I guess could be justified by her being weird, but there were no way Blood and Cheese would know that, and they just let her wander off like they hadn't literally killed a prince.
0 guards because the queen is having an affair
@@vladu__e I thought about that, but they made a point of showing Haelena running down several flights of stair to reach her mother's room, so I don't think that point stands
After beheading Ned and the Red wedding the bar was set high for gore HOTD 👑⚔️🐉 let down 👇 the fans with this adaptation
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
I actually think the changes to Blood and Cheese is a good adaptational decision. I think the vibe of a botched hit on Aemond is more believable than the story presented in Fire and Blood, which I'll get into further down. I also think that having the events play out as in the book would have ruined any plausible deniability (in the minds of the audience) that Daemon wasn't ultimately responsible for the murder. It seems very deliberate that they don't show us his answer when the killers ask what they should do if they can't find Aemond and I think they'll play on that ambiguity further on in the season. It also continues the theme of the previous season, that the events of history are sometimes out of our control and that it's possible to cross a point of no return without necessarily intending to. In this context, it's entirely appropriate for the characters not to have perfect agency.
As for the story of Blood and Cheese presented in the book, it always struck me as the sort of tale that comes down to us after having been filtered through at least a generation of rumour, hearsay and folklore - like the story of how Richard III's assassins killed his brother Clarence by drowning him in a barrel of wine. Fire and Blood is after all a diegetic text which presents itself as a work of history compiled generations after the events depicted. It seems very likely to me that an event like Blood & Cheese would be heavily mythologized after the fact, especially given that the two primary witnesses to the events - Helaena and Alicent - would not have been easily accessible by chroniclers and one of the perpetrators - Cheese - confessed under torture. Furthermore, we know that none of Archmaester Gildayne's sources for the Dance were present at the actual event, but he still manages to quote verbatim what Cheese supposedly whispered to Helaena?
Even in a crapsack world like Westeros, the "game" they play with Helaena always struck me personally as unnecessarily and overcomplicatedly sadistic, and it raises questions that stretch my suspension of disbelief. Did Daemon give them detailed instructions about how to carry out the murder? Did they come up with it themselves? If so, why? Did they talk it over beforehand or was it more of a spur of the moment thing? Either way, I think the characters of Blood and Cheese end up being less believable for it. I think HOTD is better off presenting them as two violent, unimaginative idiots in way over their head.
by the end of the Dance, every major event will have been an unintended consequence or mistake if they keep going this route
next thing you know, they'll have Daemon wanting to help Aemond climb off a dying Vhagar, but his sword accidentally slips out of its scabbard
@@enderman_666 Yeah I don't think we're there yet but I take your point. I also would not like for the show to turn into Daemon slipping on banana peels and accidentally marrying his niece on the way down
On the Blood & Cheese discussion, I actually liked that Daemon ordered them to kill Aemond not the children but I think it would have been better if after agreeing they decided "screw that, Aemond targaryen can fight, a sons a son, lets kill one of the kids" and still keep all the horror from the book in the actual scene as decisions made by B&C
It seems a lot of people missed this but they do ask what they should do if they can't find Aemond and you see Daemon give a tiny smirk before it cuts away. And then right before they perform the deed, Blood says "he said a son for a son" which implies Daemon gave them tacit approval to kill any royal son, not just Aemond.
did you even watch the episode? It is very clearly implied that daemon ordered the child murder if they couldnt find aemond
Let’s talk about B&C specifically (That’s the name of the two guys who killed Aegon’s son if you’re a non book reader who didn’t have subtitles on):
The whole reason why B&C is an iconic scene in the source material isn’t because of child murder, it’s because Helaena was sadistically tortured by Cheese and forced to pick between one of her sons with the only alternative being all her children, her mother and herself dying. And even when she tries to pick the younger, they kill the other one anyway with the intention of making him and Helaena remember she picked him to die.
But in this version, they don’t even need her. Why don’t they kill them both? Or check to be sure? If they’re capable of going this far, why not go all the way? If the point isn’t to mentally scar Helaena as well, why even bother doing including her in the scene?
It’s just a muted mistranslation of what was one of the most scarring and horrific moments in this entire saga. I wasn’t expecting them to show the killing blow but at least show Helaena plead for their lives, throw herself in their place, beg them to try anything else in the desperate hope of saving her children’s lives. But instead she just gives her son up for death immediately after trying to pawn off a necklace didn’t work, which weirdly only makes Helaena look worse in a scene that’s supposed that be the most sympathetic you can possibly feel for her given what she’s going through.
I wasn’t expecting a literal recreation of the book scene but if you’re not willing to try and emulate the drama and horror of the moment, why even bother putting it in at all?
Precisely this. It's almost like they were too scared to portray something that horrific in the show. Which is weird, because this is a prequel to Game of Thrones, one of the most violent shows in recent history. (Take the Red Wedding for example). Whilst it certainly would've shocked people, it would have been in keeping with the tone of the series.
I hear your point, but it gets to the stage where I don't get the clamouring for torture p*rn. The message was the same, and this may come as a surprise but phrases like, "Why don’t they kill them both?", and "If they’re capable of going this far, why not go all the way?" Show a distinct immaturity, taking a life may seem easy from your armchair, but it tears people apart... have a serious conversation with anyone who's served to find out.
Showing a Mother in anguish having to choose between who of her children are murdered will always play out differently on the page as opposed to on screen.
@@LightsOnTrees this is just a bad take. They literally started cutting the little kids head off before he was dead. These guys had no issues in taking extra lives
@@Andreopimentel Rewatch the episode and look at all the hesitation that prefaced the action. All the energy they put into mustering the motivation to follow through and project the air of violent criminals, when their conviction wavered.
I'm not making it the black and white issue like you seem to be. What they did was incredibly violent and cruel, no doubt. But I would argue that the show was displaying nuance within that, i.e. that violent people aren't infinitely violent, that the argument that because they killed one, killing two should of been easy is immature and not realistic.
Hence why I call the alternative torture p*rn, because I see it as a choice between showing the more complicated truth of horrific violence always being committed by confused and unsure human beings, and just taking any excuse to be mindlessly violent for the sake of the narrow few audience members that get off on it.
Which to me matches with the overall themes. Without getting into spoilers the whole point of The Dance, is that GRRM is making the explicit point that everyone loses in war, and power struggles. That they aren't the fetshised heroics that they are in most of fantasy, but instead a great pile of calamity, accident, and stupidity by people who all knew better and were capable of better choices.
@@LightsOnTrees the alternative is not torture p*rn, there were several other ways to handle this scene. If the justification to how they acted is "they had moral qualms about killing more people" that is a stupid justification, or at least it was really poorly executed.
Changing is not bad per see, but changing it and making it unnecessarily convoluted is a big problem.
Haven't read the book. It felt idiotic that two guys who are ok with cutting the head off a child are not ok lifting up nightclothes to check the sex. They kept the mothers choice from the book but it doesn't make sense without the two boys to choose between. Also the lack of security was bit too convenient.
They were trying to keep things quiet not being squeamish.
I honestly hated the last scene. They told the assassin "Silver hair AND ONE EYE" and they just forget that part? Feels like convenient miscommunication and plot contrivance
I loved the episode up until the last scene I just didn't feel it. B&C is supposed to be a red wedding level event. They errd by not taking time to get us to care about the children more.
Great video as always Tim
I wonder why you'd think it's a red wedding level event? It's barely 2 pages of the book. Yes it is pivotal, but small moments can be pivotal
No it wasn’t meant to be a red wedding level event.
The red wedding in the books involved major character.
Aegon’s kids had a few pages at most.
This was never going to the red wedding 2.0
People who say it was supposed to be a Red Wedding event completely missed why the Red Wedding was such a seminal event. B&C had barely any emotional weight to the reader. Really the only reason it gets hyped is the gratuitous violence. Several more events in the Dance hold greater emotional weight.
I think it's more like bran getting thrown out the window. It's important and has ripple effects but it isn't built up as much as the red wedding
@@unc54It's not about the violence, it's the emotional torture of being forced into a Sophie's choice then having your choice thrown back into your face.
you can tell the direction of the show changed, the visuals are still stunning but the ep felt kinda off except a couple of scenes (the ones with Rhaenyra mostly) but the rest...B&C was poorly managed, both writing and acting wise, the outcome was totally anticlimatic...
Conflicts born out of misunderstandings are something for soap operas.
I complete agree about the Blood & Cheese scene. Could have been much better.
Even leaving the disappointing rendition of B&C and the butchering of Alicent and Criston’s characters by having them hook up, this was just a very dry season premiere.
Aegon was surprisingly the highlight, being the only character having any fun while everyone else is either too sad or too depressed about the war. His genuine sympathy for the smallfolk was surprisingly endearing, given how he was portrayed in S1, and this is what I wanted to see out of this character- a King who was a chauvinistic prick, but also sympathetic and understandable. I really have a feeling Tom will be the standout actor this season.
Rhaenyra is another standout. She says one line but what Emma portrays in saying nothing else is far more powerful, the scene where she comforts Jace her son while he’s trying to be Prince Jacaerys mirroring Daemon’s earlier comment about the mother/queen was so moving and touching. I really did enjoy that.
But while all the other scenes were serviceable, but none really impacted me. Daemon’s scenes were fine, Otto’s scenes were fine, but it felt like retreading a lot of ground we’ve already been through with not much new being added. I don’t know if you could cut any of it necessarily but it definitely felt like a lot of it could have been improved.
Especially Cregan Stark’s actor, holy fuck what were they thinking going with that voice? 💀 The acting was terrible, the voice doesn’t match and the dialogue was stilted as hell. And why were they on the Wall instead of Winterfell? Such a strange, strange scene to open the episode on.
Overall, a lot of good stuff here but still feels lacking in comparison to what it could have been.
The forced diversity and Alicent banging nonstop was annoying and the ending (although still disturbing) was but a whimper compared to the book. Also, everyone addressing Aegon with condescension was immersion breaking, unrealistic to me. There are good scenes but overall, a disappointing episode for me.
The intro? Couldn't care less. The rest? More of the same, a semi-competent show that looks beautiful, but dragged down by simple plotting, very weak dialogue and strange casting. Far behind the titans of television, and not even remotely close to early GoT.