The show worked as a slow meditation/thriller on power politics. I'm not sure if turning it into an Avengers movie about defeating Ice Thanos really plays to its strengths, but it's possible that it still would have been better than what we got.
Part of what made the later seasons bad was that the intriguing "power politics" component of the show became worse and worse written. Blowing up the Sept (which Bryan keeps in his version) is an exemplar of this tendency. It's basically insane as an act of medieval power politics, it's something a 10-year-old would come up with: "Put all my enemies in a building that happens to be the holiest place in our kingdom's primary religion, blow it up, KABOOM, no more enemies. I, a childless widow with no particular talents or qualities besides ruthlessness, win politics forever with the help of my two remaining political allies, Amoral Mad Scientist and Crippled Incest Brother."
I think your version over-humanizes the night king and the others. Having them besiege a town for example. Can you imagine ice zombies digging trenches and scouting the perimeter? Martin is clearly writing the others as a metaphor for death (fear of death is a big theme in his work), rather than a sort of punishment. An impersonal, unstoppable force that can’t be reasoned with and comes for the good and evil alike.
I’d also say your ending is a bit too happy and predictable to the point of being contrary to the spirit of the series. Daenerys, the character positioned as the messiah, must either 1) die; or 2) if she wins and lives, only at such a personal cost that she becomes a tyrant. The only way the good guys can win and rule well imo is if Jon becomes king but loses everything personally and had to accept a miserable, lonely life of kingship that he never wanted for the sake of everyone else.
Killing off secondary characters doesn’t satisfy my bloodlust I guess for the end to be satisfactorily bittersweet. Jon and Dany can’t both survive, rule well, and be happy. At most you get 2 out of 3 of those.
What's the proper way to act in a world that is perpetually static and systematically zero sum?
The World of Ice and Fire is the most static world imaginable. Not only is it stuck in a Malthusian loop even greater then our own world was, its even more static (its been stuck in the Middle Ages for thousands of years, whereas our own Middle Ages lasted only a few centuries). Even the great houses rise and fall with less frequency than our own timeline.
People can still be people in such a world. They can have a code of ethics. They can be strong or weak. Their life stories can be incredibly compelling at a human level. The early books are good precisely because the characters are excellent and its a compelling human story.
But they can't bring about systematic change, even if they want to. In many ways they can't even fathom systematic change as they've never observed it.
There is a scene in the last season where the Maesters of the citadel basically spell this out. They can't change anything fundamental and all they can do is bring a little civilization to a fundamentally uncivilized world.
And it isn't the only example. Aegon V was a wise king that tried to reform society for the small folk. But he couldn't have any lasting impression, and his obsession to brith dragons so he could force his reforms ended him. Jaeharys I did amazing things for the kingdom, but it still was a medieval kingdom. Even having dragons, and the ability to be an absolute monarch in ways no real world absolute monarch could ever be, did little to change the status quo no matter how well intentioned.
Meanwhile, Martin seems to relish in characters like Bloodraven or Littlefinger or Tyrion, none of which he casts as particularly heroic. They get things done, but ultimately they accomplish nothing fundamental. Even Tyrion in the books admits at the hight of his deeds that he hasn't really accomplished much.
So I don't think that a meta commentary about the Night King scolding people for failing to live up to moral standards is really in the cards.
You've got to appreciate the work as a work of how pre modern characters have to navigate life. Its precisely when modern conceptions intrude that it feels very uncanny valley.
*Ironically Martin's world of long and extreme summers and winters that alternate would probably have raised peoples IQs enough to help bring about an Industrial Revolution by now, but it hasn't happened.
As a big show fan for the first 4 seasons, this hits the big point for me, which is that winter is actually a crisis that takes up the whole second half of the series, and people make mistakes and undercut each other in the process of beating it back. If that means ignoring books, so be it
The nerd criticism @TGGP posted is mostly incomprehensible to me.
On the other hand I literally stopped watching narrative TV after GoT and I think my life is better for it
I find the it hard to imagine that A Dream of Spring would have much abatement of Winter or that the end of Winter would have much of a role in weakening the Others. Everything in the books has set up the expectations of a long Winter following its long absence (and it’s kind of unbelievable that it will be survivable, with wars burning resources and preventing any surplus for storage).
But perhaps that means the Winter that is coming will have to be cut short by supernatural means, since it can’t be survived otherwise.
I’ve been re-watching game of thrones I think it’s season 5 and 6? Skipping to the parts with the Faith Militant. I’m not quite sure what I’m going to say yet, they’re tactics are a lot like antifa. But their values are conservative. And why did we think they were the bad guys? They were so scary they made us feel bad for Cersei! But putting that aside they did made some good points and the ruling class was being abusive. But there’s something about a group of fanatics that can’t be reasoned with or even bribed and are willing to kill and die for the cause that is really scary, similar to the zombies in the north.
Before Daenerys invades the Seven Kingdoms, her actions are not relevant to the rest of the story. They are hardly relevant to her, because the other characters she interacts with are either brushed aside or become her servants. What they lack is balance, and that balance gets increasingly lost in Game of Thrones as main characters get separated. Afterwards, the threat by wildlings and white walkers cannot rescue the plot, because these new opponents are too powerful to be defeated by any means until they get obliterated by lucky chance.
Aside: In its early seasons, Game of Thrones was funny. Its plot was often farcical. Once the show took itself more seriously, it lost much of its appeal.
(1) Make use of the wight mechanic to bring back some beloved characters as wights in the Night King's army. This gives the audience a second chance to see some of their favourites, as well as increasing the number of "opposition" characters without having to introduce a whole stable of generic named White Walkers.
(2) Lean into the "magic bloodlines" of the Great Houses -- when the Night King sieges Winterfell, the Stark wights rise on the side of the living due to Stark magic (this is why Uncle Benjen / Coldhands was a living-aligned wight), the Gardener-descended Tyrells can push winter back from a handful of strong places, the Trickster-descended Lannisters are the one house that the Night King cannot properly predict with his own visions of the future, etc.
It should’ve ended with Little finger maneuvering his way into having the throne while all of his enemies kill each other in their ultimately successful effort to save humanity against the Others, followed by a pregnant Sansa, his wife, committing suicide to spite him, to deprive him of the one thing he wanted most (her mother’s likeness as his Queen) and his unborn son, finishing with a shot of Littlefinger on the iron throne looking resentful and unhappy despite having won it all.
Westeros is in ruins, it’s clear that Winter came and mattered as much as it was supposed to, the spoils go to the most ruthlessly political and self interested party, and our flawed human nature devours itself.
That way Jon Snow and Danny can still have ultimately heroic character resolutions, giving their lives for humanity, and we can live up to Little Finger’s endless hyping-up in the earlier seasons as “the most dangerous man in all of Westeros” (says Vareys). Instead of him dying pathetically, what a wasted opportunity that was.
WOW.
also, first!
Bret Devereaux's thoughts on GoT are interesting, e.g. here:
https://acoup.blog/2019/06/04/new-acquisitions-how-it-wasnt-game-of-thrones-and-the-middle-ages-part-ii/
The show worked as a slow meditation/thriller on power politics. I'm not sure if turning it into an Avengers movie about defeating Ice Thanos really plays to its strengths, but it's possible that it still would have been better than what we got.
Part of what made the later seasons bad was that the intriguing "power politics" component of the show became worse and worse written. Blowing up the Sept (which Bryan keeps in his version) is an exemplar of this tendency. It's basically insane as an act of medieval power politics, it's something a 10-year-old would come up with: "Put all my enemies in a building that happens to be the holiest place in our kingdom's primary religion, blow it up, KABOOM, no more enemies. I, a childless widow with no particular talents or qualities besides ruthlessness, win politics forever with the help of my two remaining political allies, Amoral Mad Scientist and Crippled Incest Brother."
I think your version over-humanizes the night king and the others. Having them besiege a town for example. Can you imagine ice zombies digging trenches and scouting the perimeter? Martin is clearly writing the others as a metaphor for death (fear of death is a big theme in his work), rather than a sort of punishment. An impersonal, unstoppable force that can’t be reasoned with and comes for the good and evil alike.
I’d also say your ending is a bit too happy and predictable to the point of being contrary to the spirit of the series. Daenerys, the character positioned as the messiah, must either 1) die; or 2) if she wins and lives, only at such a personal cost that she becomes a tyrant. The only way the good guys can win and rule well imo is if Jon becomes king but loses everything personally and had to accept a miserable, lonely life of kingship that he never wanted for the sake of everyone else.
Killing off secondary characters doesn’t satisfy my bloodlust I guess for the end to be satisfactorily bittersweet. Jon and Dany can’t both survive, rule well, and be happy. At most you get 2 out of 3 of those.
What's the proper way to act in a world that is perpetually static and systematically zero sum?
The World of Ice and Fire is the most static world imaginable. Not only is it stuck in a Malthusian loop even greater then our own world was, its even more static (its been stuck in the Middle Ages for thousands of years, whereas our own Middle Ages lasted only a few centuries). Even the great houses rise and fall with less frequency than our own timeline.
People can still be people in such a world. They can have a code of ethics. They can be strong or weak. Their life stories can be incredibly compelling at a human level. The early books are good precisely because the characters are excellent and its a compelling human story.
But they can't bring about systematic change, even if they want to. In many ways they can't even fathom systematic change as they've never observed it.
There is a scene in the last season where the Maesters of the citadel basically spell this out. They can't change anything fundamental and all they can do is bring a little civilization to a fundamentally uncivilized world.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jC9sms4Gmwk
And it isn't the only example. Aegon V was a wise king that tried to reform society for the small folk. But he couldn't have any lasting impression, and his obsession to brith dragons so he could force his reforms ended him. Jaeharys I did amazing things for the kingdom, but it still was a medieval kingdom. Even having dragons, and the ability to be an absolute monarch in ways no real world absolute monarch could ever be, did little to change the status quo no matter how well intentioned.
Meanwhile, Martin seems to relish in characters like Bloodraven or Littlefinger or Tyrion, none of which he casts as particularly heroic. They get things done, but ultimately they accomplish nothing fundamental. Even Tyrion in the books admits at the hight of his deeds that he hasn't really accomplished much.
So I don't think that a meta commentary about the Night King scolding people for failing to live up to moral standards is really in the cards.
You've got to appreciate the work as a work of how pre modern characters have to navigate life. Its precisely when modern conceptions intrude that it feels very uncanny valley.
*Ironically Martin's world of long and extreme summers and winters that alternate would probably have raised peoples IQs enough to help bring about an Industrial Revolution by now, but it hasn't happened.
As a big show fan for the first 4 seasons, this hits the big point for me, which is that winter is actually a crisis that takes up the whole second half of the series, and people make mistakes and undercut each other in the process of beating it back. If that means ignoring books, so be it
The nerd criticism @TGGP posted is mostly incomprehensible to me.
On the other hand I literally stopped watching narrative TV after GoT and I think my life is better for it
I find the it hard to imagine that A Dream of Spring would have much abatement of Winter or that the end of Winter would have much of a role in weakening the Others. Everything in the books has set up the expectations of a long Winter following its long absence (and it’s kind of unbelievable that it will be survivable, with wars burning resources and preventing any surplus for storage).
But perhaps that means the Winter that is coming will have to be cut short by supernatural means, since it can’t be survived otherwise.
I recall you posted this earlier:
https://www.facebook.com/bryan.caplan.1/posts/10156879949196900
And some nerds discuss it here:
https://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/154140-a-proposed-rewriting-of-the-last-seasonsbooks/
Dany is a mad despotic tyrant. That's no hope for the future.
I’ve been re-watching game of thrones I think it’s season 5 and 6? Skipping to the parts with the Faith Militant. I’m not quite sure what I’m going to say yet, they’re tactics are a lot like antifa. But their values are conservative. And why did we think they were the bad guys? They were so scary they made us feel bad for Cersei! But putting that aside they did made some good points and the ruling class was being abusive. But there’s something about a group of fanatics that can’t be reasoned with or even bribed and are willing to kill and die for the cause that is really scary, similar to the zombies in the north.
Before Daenerys invades the Seven Kingdoms, her actions are not relevant to the rest of the story. They are hardly relevant to her, because the other characters she interacts with are either brushed aside or become her servants. What they lack is balance, and that balance gets increasingly lost in Game of Thrones as main characters get separated. Afterwards, the threat by wildlings and white walkers cannot rescue the plot, because these new opponents are too powerful to be defeated by any means until they get obliterated by lucky chance.
Aside: In its early seasons, Game of Thrones was funny. Its plot was often farcical. Once the show took itself more seriously, it lost much of its appeal.
Wow, Bryan. I would have watched the heck out of that show.
This is a very compelling plot skeleton!
The main two things I'd suggest adding would be:
(1) Make use of the wight mechanic to bring back some beloved characters as wights in the Night King's army. This gives the audience a second chance to see some of their favourites, as well as increasing the number of "opposition" characters without having to introduce a whole stable of generic named White Walkers.
(2) Lean into the "magic bloodlines" of the Great Houses -- when the Night King sieges Winterfell, the Stark wights rise on the side of the living due to Stark magic (this is why Uncle Benjen / Coldhands was a living-aligned wight), the Gardener-descended Tyrells can push winter back from a handful of strong places, the Trickster-descended Lannisters are the one house that the Night King cannot properly predict with his own visions of the future, etc.
It should’ve ended with Little finger maneuvering his way into having the throne while all of his enemies kill each other in their ultimately successful effort to save humanity against the Others, followed by a pregnant Sansa, his wife, committing suicide to spite him, to deprive him of the one thing he wanted most (her mother’s likeness as his Queen) and his unborn son, finishing with a shot of Littlefinger on the iron throne looking resentful and unhappy despite having won it all.
Westeros is in ruins, it’s clear that Winter came and mattered as much as it was supposed to, the spoils go to the most ruthlessly political and self interested party, and our flawed human nature devours itself.
That way Jon Snow and Danny can still have ultimately heroic character resolutions, giving their lives for humanity, and we can live up to Little Finger’s endless hyping-up in the earlier seasons as “the most dangerous man in all of Westeros” (says Vareys). Instead of him dying pathetically, what a wasted opportunity that was.
Like the idea that littlefinger has a plan that carries over into the magical era of the books, but why not let him be successful!?
Or at least have a better reason why it doesn't work than having the undead dragon do the work.
Impressive!!! You have missed your calling as a fiction author/ screen writer.’
He also wrote a graphic novel titled "Amore Infernale":
https://www.econlib.org/reflections-on-my-illustration-contest/
50% probability that this post was AI generated.
I linked to his Facebook post of basically the same content from 2019.