<i>Why would Veidt have a plan A, but not use it? He said, “A little elephant told me...”</i>

I’ve been enjoying this series as well. It’s unfortunate that it isn’t getting more attention, but I can guess why it’s not. When the main villain in your story is physics, you’re forced to create dramatic tension between people and things, when stories “want” to be about tension between people and. . other people.…

The show was very clever, early on, in how it anticipated and then played on peoples’ sympathy for Walter as a relatable nerd who finds his inner badass. The conceit of the show is that he’s basically a nice guy who fakes his way into posing as a criminal kingpin, but of course he isn’t really.

The blood sacrifice will be Kendall. Logan is happy to forgive Kendall’s weaknesses and betrayal - after all, he defeated Kendall’s machinations in the end, and his character flaws are what make him one of Logan’s most useful pawns.

Between Payton’s traumatic backstory and his frustrated ambition, it’s surprising that he doesn’t just take his singing talent and create a Broadway play that explores the themes that shaped his life: things like teenage suicide, the burden of lies, and the power of social media to shape perception, especially among…

One of the advantages of streaming a show on Netflix is that each episode can be as as long or as short as it needs to be to tell its piece of the story. There’s no time slot, as such, so episodes don’t need to be cut or stretched into equal-sized 50 minute chunks.

If I recall correctly, Richard II was also a play about the dangers awaiting a ruler who tries to abdicate or even step back from their duties. A ruler has to rule, or else be nothing, not even a subject. That’s a burdensome truth that both Logan and the matriarch of the Pierce family (whose name for the moment escapes…

About the same weird, I guess. That’s sort of the role she has for him now, too.

MW4000, it will take a lot more than the Pierces to get me to root for the Roys. Both families are fraudulent to their core, but it was a delight to see the Roys and Pierces grinding each others’ faces into the ugly truth about their respective positions in the world.

Beat me to it. 

The dragons were also wearing chains, very conspicuously, and for a very long time. Danaerys broke those chains as well. That was. . . not an unambiguously good decision, even at the time.

Breaking the chains of slaves is inherently benevolent. Breaking the chains of dragons, however, is not.

Time flies, it doesn’t seem a minute

Arya will go back to Gendry and enjoy a peaceful life? No. Literally nothing in her character development, from S1E1 to now, points to this. She gave up on killing Cersei because she’d finally learned the futility of killing for the sake of mere revenge. There are higher, better reasons to kill people. And there are…

The ultimate kill is not Cersei. The ultimate kill is what’s waiting the end of Arya’s arc.

Maybe he collapses on top of her beneath the falling rubble and chokes the life from her that way. 

Yes. She was the “breaker of chains” and the “mother of dragons,” but if you read those titles as unambiguously benevolent, that’s on you. The moral valence of breaking chains depends a great deal on who (or what) is wearing the chains that get broken.

Dany’s decision wasn’t random. Her heel turn was lovingly crafted far in advance, step by step. She was massacring her enemies as far back as Astapor, and burning people alive (who might not even have been her enemies) as far back as Mereen.  

68Comments, that almost had to have been a lie on Bran’s part, though. The Night’s King was completely confident that he had nothing whatsoever to fear from Drogon’s fire. How could he have known that, if it had never been tried on him before?

necgray, almost anything would been a more tactically wise plan than what the defenders came up with. They should have just kept hammering the Wights with their artillery (and dragonfire) for as long as it took them to slog their way across all that open ground.