Daenerys was always the villain! You were tricked... 

that’s exactly what i thought too!!! i was so annoyed by people’s obsession with her because she immediately turned into a narcissist when she was constantly shouting “i am the breaker of chains” and demanding everything as her blood right. i expected to like her in the beginning but she was always a self entitled greedy person

Actually in the books it is Missandei who wants to go through all the titles and Daenerys thinks it is silly. Now in GoT (which I argue is a different story) we don't see a scene indicating that but we had seen multiple where Daenerys displays empathy or sympathy for other people, thus making it unlikely she is a narcissist. Also recognizing that Daenerys has a bloodline claim and would be at least a marginally better ruler than the other rulers around (in this cause the main other candidate is Cersei as Jon removed himself from the running) is hardly getting caught up in "meglomania". Lachlan, in case you didn't notice bloodline claims are how alot of things got arranged in terms of medieval or fantasy (which is based on medieval) settings. So having a bloodline claim doesn't make one insane, just as typical as the next noble. If it wasn't for bloodline claims (or at least believed bloodline claims) and some battles going a certain way then the Starks would not be in charge of Winterfell when season 7 started. But I don't blame the Starks for that. Most nobles in Westeros that have some piece of land somewhere hold it because of a bloodline claim. Also something that is ironic that I've seen is that multiple youtubers I've come across said they didn't like Daenerys since season 1. But found they sympathized with or for Dany in season 8 because of how out of character the character assassination aimed at Dany in season 8 is.

@@pplr1 The fact that you think a 'bloodline' claim is recognisable in making a more valid claim to leadership or that it gives anyone a right to power over others or that you think 'do what I want or I'll burn you' is anything close to a sign of a good leader is the whole point of her story and why she was the narcissistic tyrannical villain all along who only slid under the radar because fans bought into her megalomania. Dany and Cersei are the same except Cersei is more honest about her ambition and what motivates her. The comparison is made even more clear by the Starks 'bloodline claim' which they view as a duty. George had Ned saying 'he who passes the sentence swings the sword' for a reason. The Starks understand the power they hold. They understand they are in service to the people whereas Dany believes the people are there to serve her, to die for her, to kill for her, to make her dreams come true so she can feel better and more powerful. She spends season one convincing Drogo to start an unnecessary war because she thinks she is owed power and glory. She burns the woman who was raped because the Dothraki were gathering resources for HER war. She basically wets herself with pleasure when she hears Drogo going off over how he's going to rape, enslave and murder every man, woman and child who stands against her. She spends season 2 demanding entrance to other cities and threatening to burn them to the ground unless she gets her own way. She gathers a slave army, slaves who have no other viable choice of freedom since they don't have any independent structure or resources and she collects them to fight, kill and die yet again for her unnecessary war. She gives Missandei two choices; stay a slave or come to war and work for me and then the writers have the nerve to have Missandei talking about how she 'chose' her. And even when she kills people who by a lot of standards deserve to die, she does it in the most horrific, bloodthirsty way because she ENJOYS it. She enjoys starving people, scorching people, slaughtering people... the same way she smirked when she saw the the Northerners were afraid of the dragons flying over them. She took pleasure in their fear and displaying her power over them. She takes over a kingdom without any sort of plan to re-structure it and is so oblivious to the fact that the people she freed were actually real people with real needs that they end up BEGGING for the right to sell themselves back into slavery. She compels slaves to rise up against the masters while it will get her the access to the kingdoms that she wants but when one guys takes it upon himself to rise up against the master, she has him beheaded for it. She brags about how she has men who are willing to die for her and her throne and her ambition. And this is mostly through the earlier seasons so nobody can use the excuse that the writers dropped the ball. She has been power-hungry, bloodthirsty and hypocritical since day one and has been willing use real human people (in fic world of course) to serve HER purposes, to make HER the most powerful, to make HER dreams come true, to give HER the power that she feels is owed to HER simply because she was born into a certain family. Cersei is the honest tyrant. Cersei plays into how we as viewers want to believe we would react when faced with a duty to criticised question our leaders...that we would be able to spot another Hitler from a mile away but Dany is the honest portrayal of how tyrant gain support and power. They pretend to care or convince themselves they care, they have conviction in their own ideology though only as it serves them, they use charm, charisma, vulnerability, they cold read what is important to others, what drives others, what other would be willing to fight for, they manipulate, they shut down and destroy any who might speak out against them, they use others, they believe their ambition is most important above all others, that others are expandable to fulfil their dreams etc. She is the perfect vehicle for how tyrants manipulate people and get a foothold in power because they're either delusional enough to by into their own ideology or manipulatibe enough to convince others to buy into it. And it's even more clear in the books.

​@@dani-ell-ah I'll number and quote you in my responses to make it easier to keep track of things. Part 1 of my response. 1. "The fact that you think a 'bloodline' claim is recognisable in making a more valid claim to leadership or that it gives anyone a right to power over others or that you think 'do what I want or I'll burn you' is anything close to a sign of a good leader is the whole point of her story and why she was the narcissistic tyrannical villain all along who only slid under the radar because fans bought into her megalomania." No. I'm generally not impressed with bloodline claims but it would be missing a lot not to notice that in GoT society bloodline claims are what usually defines who is officially in charge. Interestingly enough Daenerys is the only leader we see introduce democracy to an area (Meereen in season six). Also considering Daenerys is a character that frequently let other people have their say in a situation means she is not someone who typically says 'do what I want or I'll burn you' and that actually misrepresents her character. Also executions are common in GoT-including to enforce authority. Jon killed someone for refusing to obey his orders as the guy was apologizing and saying he would do what Jon wanted. Is Jon a "narcissistic tyrannical villain" with "megalomania"? 2. "Dany and Cersei are the same except Cersei is more honest about her ambition and what motivates her." Easy to call bs on. Daenerys puts off gaining the 7 kingdoms in order to help other people. She turns down most of a bribe of gold and ships because she puts the slave's lives ahead of her getting the crown. Then in season 7 Daenerys helps make a truce in order to put the war with Cersei on hold in order to do the responsible thing and go protect Westeros from undead. Meanwhile Cersei lies about helping. The differences between them are pretty clear and one of those differences is that Daenerys care about what happens to other people more. 3. "The comparison is made even more clear by the Starks 'bloodline claim' which they view as a duty. George had Ned saying 'he who passes the sentence swings the sword' for a reason." Actually Sansa, even before season 8 Sansafinger, was more ambitious than that. She suddenly approved of Jon leaving in season 7 after he said she could be in charge. In season 8 Bran arguably manipulated the situation to kill hundreds of thousands of innocents killed just so he could get Jon and Dany out of his way. Now maybe this is just the writers being incompetent (again) but Mr. "Why do you think I came all this way?" looks very suspicious. It is interesting that you mentioned duty however. Because while she is pushing her family's claim Daenerys often tries to do what she sees as her duty to people around her-including trying to do right but the people of Meereen even if it comes at personal stress or unhappiness for her. 4. "The Starks understand the power they hold. They understand they are in service to the people whereas Dany believes the people are there to serve her, to die for her, to kill for her, to make her dreams come true so she can feel better and more powerful." Pretty sure I just disproved this claim as I already mentioned Daenerys showed she tried to honor her duty to others. Additionally in the season 8-with all its character assassination of Dany-this claim of yours is disproven about Bran and Sansafinger. Sansafinger was anti-Dany even after most Northerners came to support of Dany as she had proven herself to them. So Sansafinger was being a stubborn holdout, and one without regard to the wishes of the people of The North. Bran is even worse, even if Bran isn't a scheming mass murderer (though season 8 details indicate he is) Bran shows no regard for if the people in his kingdoms live or die. For example he considers a meeting where the rebuilding of King's Landing (a major rebuilding effort thus important to the kingdom) and a spreading deadly disease (a threat to the lives of the people in his kingdoms) to be not worth his time. 5. "She spends season one convincing Drogo to start an unnecessary war because she thinks she is owed power and glory. She burns the woman who was raped because the Dothraki were gathering resources for HER war. She basically wets herself with pleasure when she hears Drogo going off over how he's going to rape, enslave and murder every man, woman and child who stands against her." I notice you are doing some pretty heavy selective editing here. Mirri was burned because she poisoned Drogo into being braindead and killed Daenerys's unborn child. Now I can sympathize with Mirri because she suffered from the Dothraki herself and wanted to prevent a conqueror causing others to suffer. But Daenerys tried to save Mirri herself and others from being raped and put the respect the Dothraki showed to Daenerys herself at risk in doing it. That you mention Mirri was raped but not that Mirri killed an unborn child or that Daenerys tried to prevent Mirri from being raped is a very misleading way to put things.

​@@dani-ell-ah Part 2 Six. "She spends season 2 demanding entrance to other cities and threatening to burn them to the ground unless she gets her own way. She gathers a slave army, slaves who have no other viable choice of freedom since they don't have any independent structure or resources and she collects them to fight, kill and die yet again for her unnecessary war." This is actually has more than 1 claim but in each way you are being misleading or wrong. She threatens 1 city (not "cities") but only in a life or death situation-if she didn't get into that city at that time the she and everyone with her would starve to death. Also it was arguably a bluff because the city guards could kill her right then and there. Now I won't say it is a good thing but it was something done out of being in a dire situation that was life or death for both her and her friends. Additionally this is evidence the books and show are 2 different stories because in the books Daenerys is welcomed into the city when she arrives and there are no threats whatsoever. To say her army is a "slave army" is very wrong and it is easy to disprove. The very first day she got the UnSullied she told them that they were free and every single one of them could leave if they wanted to. They chose to follow her. Plus for many of the slaves she frees she does so without the expectation that they will fight for her. Now your argument that they was no "viable" way for them to exist without her is actually a sneaky way to avoid giving her credit were credit is due. The former slaves could've tried to sail off somewhere or become farmers in some relatively unvisited piece of land but the larger ending of slavery would not have happened at that time without Daenerys. Her army was the only one going through Slaver's Bay and liberating slaves. So the primary hope of ending slavery comes through her. That isn't making others slaves but it is recognizing how vital her efforts are. There have been prior slave revolts but the masters proved they could defeat them (possibly with their own actual slave soldiers). So Daenerys being there is giving the slaves a real chance-very different from her supposedly enslaving them when the truth is she did the opposite. 7 "She gives Missandei two choices; stay a slave or come to war and work for me and then the writers have the nerve to have Missandei talking about how she 'chose' her." This comment is both wrong and ridiculous. Technically Missandei was given to Daenerys as a slave. But when Daenerys ends slavery that applies to all slaves in the area Daenerys has some control or influence over-thus it applies to Missandei as well. If Missandei wanted to she could have picked a new career. That line in season 7 you are critical of is actually mostly in line with earlier seasons. The writers were ridiculous in season 7 (and more so in season 8) but that line was not. After slavery ended following Daenerys became Missandei's choice. 8 "And even when she kills people who by a lot of standards deserve to die, she does it in the most horrific, bloodthirsty way because she ENJOYS it. She enjoys starving people, scorching people, slaughtering people... the same way she smirked when she saw the the Northerners were afraid of the dragons flying over them. She took pleasure in their fear and displaying her power over them. " The smirk in season 8 was likely part of the character assassination that season 8 was loaded with. One does not blame the character for the character assassination done against him or, in this case, her. Now she feels she is bringing justice by doing cruel things to cruel people that still doesn't translate to harming innocent people-that is something she made clear she opposed. Also is this concern over cruelty done to cruel people based on double standards? What were your thoughts on Sansa feeding Ramsey to his own dogs? She smirked so she clearly enjoyed both that Ramsey was dying and that he was suffering. Arya enjoyed what she did to the Freys-including feeding a man 2 of his own sons. Based on what you already said about the Starks this seems like a double standard. 9 "She takes over a kingdom without any sort of plan to re-structure it and is so oblivious to the fact that the people she freed were actually real people with real needs that they end up BEGGING for the right to sell themselves back into slavery." No they don't. In that very conversation the old former slave who admitted he was too old to change mentioned younger former slaves were happy and glad to have future where they choose their own careers. Daenerys even tried to provide food and shelter for former slaves came up. When she first hers of gangs stealing from former slaves her first response to say she will make those shelters "safe" for people. That shows Daenerys is willing to listen to the complaints others have and to try to adjust if something isn't going to plan. Additionally that she does care about the people under her-unlike Bran. 10. "She compels slaves to rise up against the masters while it will get her the access to the kingdoms that she wants but when one guys takes it upon himself to rise up against the master, she has him beheaded for it." Flat out wrong. She assists the slaves in rebelling. She makes it clear to them that it is possible and then provides the weapons for it to actually be successful. Plus she sticks around for a bit to ensure slavery doesn't come back. The guy who was beheaded was executed for killing someone who was already a prisoner and with whom Daenerys had agreed with Sir Barristan would have trial. I can sympathize with the guy who killed the prisoner because he had been a slave and had suffered during his time as a slave but at that point the prisoner wasn't a master. So what the guy who was beheaded had done was commit murder while going against what Daenerys had already agreed would be done. Daenerys didn't want to have him executed but felt she had to in order to uphold the law.

Yes, this is actually why I love the series so much. All characters have good and evil traits. Especially Ned And Arya Stark are often seen as 'good', and Sansa was seen as superficial and stupid. When in reality, Arya Stark was kind of a brat, and very disrespectful to her sister, just because they were different. And though she does have trauma as the reason, she is 'worshipped' for going on a killing spree. Ned Stark beheaded a terrified man, said all the 'righteous' words. But he actually did a lot of questionable deeds himself. Sansa may act a bit superficial in the beginning - but she is literally 13 years old (a child), and as the eldest daughter of a noble house, she would have literally been raised to marry a rich lord, and learned the skills she would need to be his lady. In many ways, Sansa is the one with the least amount of negative traits, but because she is forced to run from psychopaths, and grey rock through life, she gets the most hate. Sansa may be the only true 'good' character in GOT - and Geffory and Ramsay the only true 'evil' one. The 'good' and 'evil' characters paired up - coincidence? Hmm...

You don't understand at all. There are few villains as far as the books. Everyone is an individual that does good and bad and grows to be better or worse it's not Star Wars there is no good or Badi in a cruel world, people find their own way to adapt to it.

@@HereIAm247 Huh? Ayra was Graped and Tortured and is completely traumatized lol. Sansa was always the brat... hello half brother Rob Ayra Bran Rickon... hello brother. jon is a bastard - sansa jon is our brother - the other siblings. euron greyjoy was the scariest guy in all of game of throne who every single person feared including kings landing. this was a guy who went to valiryia took the dragon horn which bind blood and dragon together and is the only person in the history of westeros survived. the problem is the show left out loads of shit and like GRRM said it should've been 10 seasons not 8.

Westerosi are slaves. Except it's called serfdom. Also THANK YOU for calling olenna out. She's terrible.

I loved Olenna, but her bitterness towards Cersei made me laugh. I'm thinking "bitch, it's karma!"

@@janellejulianajoy Killing Joffrey was karma, I agree.

But she is purdy.

And we now must feel bad when Dany kills Lannister soldiers when the stark did so for the seasons for completely shallow reasons of vengeance and after the Lannisters burnt people with wildfire and wiped out the tyrells and starks. The Tarly’s got what they deserved for killing olenna.

Season 3: Jorah: “If you want to sit on the throne your ancestors built, you must win it. That will mean blood on your hands before the thing is done.” Daenerys: “The blood of my enemies not the blood of innocents” she feels remorse for crucifying ALL the masters after realizing not ALL wanted the children crucified. That’s season 3 Daenerys. Also everyone in this fantasy world kills their enemies, Ned stark, jon snow, even the guys largely known as the more moral guys in the GoT universe. They just do it with swords, Daenerys does it with fire. Also why didn’t Stannis try taking the throne by asking nicely instead of waging war? How about Robert? Why didn’t jon take back winterfell in another way that didn’t involve war? Why did Robb and catelyn wage war? It’s only wrong when Daenerys does it by your logic. You think every fray had a part in the red wedding? Robb went back on his promise. Yet Arya kills every single one. Most characters in GoT have narcissistic murderous tendencies haha

@@elizabethstarke9390 spot on!

@@elizabethstarke9390 But the person Dany should have "revenge" on is no one. Her father was mad, which she accepts, so why is she salty they killed him? What WERE the people going to do - raise the children of the mad king so the Targaryen incest dynasty lived on forever? Uh. No. The reason why GRRM probably wrote the book in the first place was to get out of the Targ dynasty after hundreds of years of horrible dictatorship ruling.

@@queenb2450 Exactly. On the show, Daenerys did start out as a genuine victim with a tragic background. She had every right to feel angry with her abusers, to escape them, and defend herself from them. She became increasingly evil when she took it too far by repeatedly making the decision to deal with her anger, desire for power, and past trauma in a needlessly cruel and vengeful manner instead. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to defend yourself from an abuser, escape them, or take them down because they are causing you and/or those you care about unnecessary pain. However, when you’re attempting to eliminate that cycle of abuse, tyranny, vengeance, and violence with *more* of that shit to try get ahead or hold onto security, then how are you really being any different from the monsters who terrorized you because they claimed it was “necessary” and “for the greater good?” You’re not actually breaking any cycle of abuse or crime that you claim to be fighting against anymore in this scenario. In actuality, deep down, you’re being a coward emotionally/morally by continuing to perpetuate the cycle of toxicity to hold onto control, to hold onto security of self and loved ones, and/or to get revenge because it’s *easier* than taking the *risk* to *deal* with openly arguing against, calling out, negotiating, reasoning with, and/or escaping from those abusive, corrupt, deceitful, manipulative, and terrifying forces in your life instead. It’s toxic to completely refuse to accept the possibility of being hurt, being in danger, failing, and/or losing. That’s how a victim of traumatic abuse, crime, exploitation, manipulation, oppression, and tyranny can go on to become just as bad, if not worse, than those who hurt them and/or those they care(d) about. That’s where Daenerys went wrong. A similar thing happened to Anakin Skywalker, the old Jedi Order, and the old Republic in the prequels of Star Wars. They were victims of abusive and corrupt authority within broken systems. They had good reasons to feel afraid, angry, insecure, lonely, and oppressed because of them. Rather than actually taking the risk to *deal* with overcoming those issues in a brave, honest, and healthy manner, they went on to enable and perpetuate the same abuse, crime, elitism, oppression, tyranny, violence, and othering within these systems that they claimed to be fighting against to try to hold onto control and personal security at all costs under pressure because that was easier than risking losing it by doing the right thing. Doing the right thing is always going to be harder than doing the right thing, especially under the pressure and trauma of abuse, exploitation, lack of support, manipulation, oppression, and tyranny. That’s why it’s not fair to blame it on *just* Anakin, Obi-Wan, Yoda, the Jedi elders, Padme, Daenerys, Jamie, Tyrion (in the books), and Cersei for growing up to be the horrifying disasters they did. They didn’t create all those shitty circumstances that abused, hurt, murdered, and/or endangered them and/or those they cared about. They had valid reasons to feel angry, misunderstood, oppressed, and terrified of the authority figures and enemies around them who hurt them and/or those they loved. However, they did still have an option to risk doing better because they had consciences. They knew right from wrong, but repeatedly chose wrong because it was easier and safer to survive and/or move on (or at least pretend to move on). They couldn’t bear facing the natural consequences and risks of being a better person that would have come from dealing with their harsh realities, choices, and trauma openly. Instead, they chose to obsessively dwell on being secure, taking control, and/or get revenge at all costs.

@@Schoolgirl325 which makes Dany an even BETTER villain because it makes her story super tragic and up there with Anakin! The general audience are too dense to see that but GRRM subverted our expectations in the best GRRM way. Idk why people actually were stupid enough to believe Jon and Dany would have at all a happy ending. Jon would defend his family (Sansa, Arya, Bran) over some stranger aunt that forces him to bend the knee.

Its still out of character and character breaking. The actual character Daenerys both had to come to terms with that her father was a terrible king (which she did) and that his actions shouldn't be repeated (something she easily did).

You’ve been dumb

Yeah it was the white skin that got me

Not how birthrights work. But I'm not surprised to see you were wrong about something again. Anyway birthright claims occur if you have a family member that held a throne or piece of land. It doesn't matter if he or she lost it recently. A person's claim still exists. What may or may not happen is if someone else has a better claim or if the person in question has the ability to enforce his or her claim even if his or her claim is the best.

Declaring a debate victory is what one does when his argument can't stand on its own.

@@pplr1 Actually that is how birthright works. If you lose hold of property. You lose such claims. That's is what is going on in the Middle East. If one can reclaim it that is another matter. But yes you can lose birthrights.

@@cliffd8380 Not really. Not in real life nor the story. In story people are seen as having a claim due to their family. That is why Jon, seen as having Stark blood, is seen as having enough credibility to challenge Ramsey Bolton. It is also why Bobby B lives in fear of Targaryens. Even if one loses property they don't lose a claim to it. In the real world stolen property is not seen as the property of the thief who takes it.

@@pplr1 if someone takes something from you its no longer your property. The targs lost westeros due to Aerys piss poor ruling . Dany has no right to the iron throne.

She was a villain all along even if she didn't realize it. The reason people get raped and murdered by Khal Drogo's people is because of Dany's desire to conquer Westeros. And she doesn't even comprehend that. She says in episode 10 of season 1 that "those who have harmed you will die screaming," but to her not helping her is harming her. She threatens to burn them alive for not wanting to help her not once but twice. She demands help because she is the "mother of dragons," but people aren't obligated to help because you have magical creatures. And her being ruthlessly violent towards evil characters arguably "deserve it" makes her no bettet than said evil characters. She burn and feeds people to her dragons with no trail and with zero evidence as to them being guilty or innocent. If this was Queen Cersei or Melisandre y'all would call them the most evil c words ever. She was ALWAYS the villain who THOUGHT was a hero.

@@tsxtina2919 The series did a bad job depicting Dany's dark side. In the books, her internal struggle and crazy tendencies are A LOT better developed.

The problem with discussing foreshadowing when it comes to the tv series is because it isn't there or was faked foreshadowing. A Red Priestess supposedly repeating a line she told Arya seasons ago that was actually told with the intention to foreshadow something different and actually had somewhat different wording is faking foreshadowing. The writers had no intention of having that line mean Arya would kill the Night King when it was first added to the script. They changed the wording in season 8 to emphasize blue eyes because the emphasis was not there in the earlier season. The writers of the show are making things up as they go and then trying to trick people into believing this has been thought out for a long time. What they referred to as foreshadowing in the show isn't. Drogo killed Daenerys's abusive brother for not only threatening to kill Daenerys and his unborn child but doing so after pulling out a sword to do it with while standing in what is functionally Drogo's court. Ask yourself if most Westerosi kings or lords would have let him live after he if he pulled a stunt like that in their courts. This is creating a double standard in order to pretend there was foreshadowing when it wasn't really there. Now Daenerys could end up as a villain except the situation in the show not only doesn't push her towards that but both the situation and her character's development take her in the opposite direction. Daenerys's time in Meereen shows her repeatedly expanding the liberty of the people living there-generally not being tyrannical. The situation in Westeros is one where people should arguably welcome Daenerys. There is no FAegon that may be more popular than her and pressing his own claim. Instead the only person with a claim to rival hers abdicates in her favor. Meanwhile Cersei is unwanted and unpopular-many in Westeros would give Daenerys a chance just to be rid of Cersei Lannister. Season 8 tries to ignore the situation that developed in Westeros and the characters that are in it-not take them to a logical conclusion for their journey. Being contradicted by earlier seasons is something that happens for more than just characters. Season 2 told viewers through Davos that bells don't mean surrender in King's Landing and events show him to be correct-show it very clearly. Thus multiple aspects of season 8 are contradicted by rather than supported by seasons 1-7 of GoT. So not only is the foreshadowing actually rather lacking for season 8, but the logic of the situation-which is more important-goes against it.

Nope, she was a villain. Everything she ever did was to get the iron throne in honor of her psychotic tyrannical family. And she did everything to get it. From brutality to nice deeds. Good deeds don't take away the evil and selfish intentions.

estecyprus33 So when Jorah is telling Daenerys to forget about freeing slaves and just head right to Westeros because she will get the crown faster her decision to stay and free more slaves is out of "evil and selfish intentions"? That sounds like the opposite of truth. Also I already pointed Daenerys herself not only freed slaves but expanded the rights of the people of Meereen before making the place something of a democracy. Not exactly "tyrannical". The problem with proclaiming show Daenerys the villain is that the argument for it is largely based on falsehoods rather than examining the show. Was Daenerys perfect? No. Was she average or even better than most rulers in the tv series? Yes. Would she have been more or less a decent queen if she ruled Westeros? Yes. Now if you want to oppose everyone that has a claim to land based on their "family" then I'm for it. That includes all the Starks, Lannisters, and on (including the lower houses like the Tarly family). If not then you're engaging in double standards and most specifically placing them against a character who was either average or better than average-thus without a sound moral argument for such treatment.

They also have a point, contempt and complacency doesn’t overthrow Dictators.

THIS!

Did you even watch the video?

The entire series was her descent into madness

Nah they did it within seconds lol

@@artizonartizon3912 if you think Danny was after season 1 then maybe you’re also mad

Just the weak and stupid ones.

Excellent point. Even worse, not only do we now fetishize victimhood, but we also fetishize blind ideological obedience. That is why Dany's brand of ideological purity ('they can live in my new world or die in my old world') never rung any alarm bells with many people. Many had absolutely no problem praising upon Dany ('she is my queen forever!') the kind of praise dictators are accustomed to getting.

@@SerbAtheist True. The idea of parental minded people in positions of power knowing how we can, and should, live our lives better then we do has sadly become very normal.

I'll disagree Ryan. It isn't just that Daenerys dealt with suffering or overcoming odds, it is that she actively is concerned about the plight of people other than herself and has shown a willingness to put her goals and even herself at risk in order to assist others. Hi SerbAtheist. I think you miss the context of that comment. It wasn't blind obedience Daenerys was requiring but the end of slavery-something that had existed in that society for a long time so ending it was a major change. But that change is far from blind obedience and while the the fantasy or medieval setting lends itself to bloodline based military dictatorships and thus the idea people had to have blind obedience Daenerys is actually a positive change from that due to her recognition people have individual rights as displayed in Meereen. I wonder how much of the effort to defend season 8 stems from a devotion to thinking the writers are always right even when the story they create lacks logic and is contradicted by the storyworld as already created and is sometimes contradicted by the various comments of those specific writers. Blind devotion to writers could explain some of the embrace of season 8 by those who do it despite its apparent flaws-both those flaws that are damaging to many characters and those that stick out as wrong for the setting (such as soldiers yelling "fire" to launch scorpion bolts rather than saying "loose".) Ryan, SebAtheist has probably heard me point this out but there is evidence that the nonsensical burning of King's Landing was a change made by D and D after season 8 was starting to be made. There is evidence indicates the earlier plan for King's Landing was that it would burn but due to wildfire. Computer effects people were told the plan then later told to change the scenes to "not wildfire". Link: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3qACpk4xWJg.html This is just 1 bit of evidence wildfire was the earlier intended way King's Landing would burn, there are other bits but I think this is important because it shows someone was directly told to change their part of making season 8. Now if D and D are changing around decisions as large as why one of the most important cities in the series burns then there is a good argument they left GRRM a long time ago and this wasn't part of his plan nor theirs. Did D and D even have much of a plan if they were changing things around as important as this? And yes it can be proven that D and D have changed things from GRRM's story look at the differences between book and show Tyrion and Eurion. In the books Tyrion is arguably headed towards villainhood to at least some degree after he murderred Shae without remorse (not defended himself against and had remorse still as in the show but murdered after she simply talked to him and said the reason she testified against him was out of fear of one of his family members). Here are some links on that. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-UZaUwH0wmTw.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7INXNKbIXi0.html GRRM may not be perfect himself (he is human thus not likely to be), but please don't put the faults of D and D on him nor miss the possibility that they were simply ridiculous changes D and D made themselves. Saying season 8 was somehow GRRM's plan does that when we, as viewers, don't know what GRRM is planning and may not without the remaining books.

@@pplr1 I wasn't criticizing Martin just saying it was bad timing socially. To paraphrase the Hound screw the writers. I have no loyalty to them. The story of Damy being an entitled tyrant goes back seasons. Let me in or I'll come back and burn it down with Quarth. Sell a dragon to get Unsullied then murder the man she sold him to and take tge dragon back. Accept gold to leave a city alone and still take the city. Live in my new world or die in their only with slavers. Bend the knee or burn with the Tarlys. Live in her new world and no one else gets a say in the final conversation with Jon. She was never an honest actor and always an entitled tyrant.

​@@ryanphillips4218 Thanks for the reply. That scene outside of Qarth was arguably an invention of D and D. If you check the books Daenerys was actually welcomed into the city and people there were happy to see her. The visions in the House of the UnDying were also very different. Though the magic users there still wanted to trap Daenerys to use her and her dragons to fuel their magic. Now what Daenerys did to the slavers that were selling UnSullied was very deceitful. Yet it also helped make Essos a better place through ending slavery and also putting a stop to the process of making UnSullied which involved not only enslaving people but having every UnSullied kill a baby as part of their training. So the slavers built a business on mass suffering and death, deceiving them is very easy to argue a lesser evil or greater good type event. Daenerys didn't accept the gold to leave the city alone. She kept the sample they brought which was bit greedy or petty of her but she turned most of it down and the boats that would come with it. The gold we saw her keep was only a small amount of the total the slavers offered her. What they offered her was essentially a bribe to give up fighting against slavery-she was making fighting slavery the basis of her campaign at the time. If you rewatch the scene you may notice that the demand she gives them in order for there to be peace is for them to free all their slaves and give those slaves some belongings or property (not her). Thus she actually did say she was willing to not attack their city but only if they stopped practicing slavery and gave the slaves something. Now the bend the knee or die is something that actually was like what a dictator would say. The problem is we are in Westeros at the time where bloodline based dictatorships are the social norm. So what she said was actually within social norms for Westeros. Especially if you remember that the people she was talking to were part of the military force that had just attacked an ally of hers and kept no prisoners alive when they did so-even Lady Olenna was executed. Now Lady Olenna was given a nicer execution because Jamie was involved but it was still an execution she had no way out of and if Jamie wasn't there Lady Olenna probably would've been tortured before she was killed (as Cersei had wanted). So Daenerys was still offering Randyll Tarly more mercy than he and the army under his command offered others. It was Randyll Tarly who turned down not just 1 but 2 chances to live, chances Lady Olenna was never given. Perhaps Randyll was given harsher treatment due to attacking one of Daenerys's allies as Jon was never harmed despite refusing to bend the knee for much of season 7. Live in her new world or die in their old one was a reference to telling slavers they weren't allowed to start practicing slavery again. Not exactly a bad thing, nor a sign someone is actually a tyrant as slavery itself is a tyrannical practice denying people their own liberty. The season 8 comment to Jon is arguably just part of season 8's effort to character assassinate and not something that Daenerys would say. Daenerys frequently made it so other people could choose. Not only did she end slavery but in Meereen she officially recognized that people could pick their own careers even if those career choices made her uncomfortable. This is recognizing a level of individual rights. To top that off she transitioned Meereen to a democracy in season six-specifically saying the "people" would pick their rulers there. Now this is probably closer to a constitutional monarchy where the Mayor would be elected and they may have a parliament while the royal family still exists but it is a lot more freedom than people there or in Westeros were typically given. Thus the opposite of tyrannical. Now Daenerys can be dishonest like with the slavers. Yet she is also willing to be very honest. Her campaign against slavery was an honest one. When she promised Jon she would help fight the undead she honored that promise. Compared to some of the other people in Westeros Daenerys was actually acting pretty trustworthy. Considering that all the characters of Arya and Sansafinger actually saw in season 8 was Dany honoring her promise they don't have good reason to distrust Dany in season 8. That Sansafinger (I use that word for her because it can be debated if this is the same character as Sansa from earlier seasons who could be dishonest herself but often against dishonest and cruel people like Joffery) become an oathbreaker in an attempt to undermine the Dany-Jon alliance actually speaks to Sansafinger's own untrustworthiness and (yes this is the right word for it despite the line D and D put in Arya's mouth) stupidity. I say stupidity because Sansa herself warned Jon near the beginning of season 7 that Cersei would try to kill them both. So a Sansa that gives this warning to Jon in season 7 should be happy to find Jon is on good terms with someone who can protect them from Cersei. Even worse if Sansafinger had been successful in breaking up the Dany and Jon alliance that could put Jon in a three way war where Jon has the smallest army and Cersei the largest-potentially giving Cersei a chance to win and signing off on Jon's and Sansafinger's own death warrants. This gets even worse. Since Sansafinger had done this after Dany had helped the North fight the undead thus gained the respect of many Northerners Sansafinger herself is a stubborn holdout as many of the people of the North now appreciated Dany even if they liked Jon more. Plus Sansafinger would damage a favored position the North would have thanks to Jon if Dany did become Queen of the 7 kingdoms. The North could use being in a favored position since it sometimes had to deal with food shortages anyway and aid from other kingdoms would be useful. Now not only did Jon abdicate-making Dany the legit heir-but if Sansafinger was serious about pushing Jon's claim then she should've mentioned it during the council where they were picking who would be king (same issue goes for Bran). A Sansa who was once eager to marry Joffery cannot really claim to honestly be a longtime fan of independence for the North earlier. What D and D did with Sansa or Sansafinger is have her be called smart while she was trying to commit one of the worst political and strategic blunders of season 8. Anyway I went on for a bit about Sansafinger, but look back to each of the things you mentioned about Daenerys. Many of them can actually be used to make the case that Daenerys is a source of increased liberty in GoT rather than decreased. Or at least Daenerys is marginal improvement over many other rulers in GoT's bloodline dictatorship based society.

I mean, Jon Snow also beheaded a dude but he’s the most compassionate character on the show

@@pysky4u I agree with this so much. Tyrion killed his father and he's not mad. Arya killed the Frey's and she's not mad. Sansa fed Ramsey to his dogs and she's not mad. This whole "Dany was always mad, you just didn't pay attention" shit is nonsense. People just can't accept bad writing. So, she made some threats and killed some people, big deal. Every main character has made threats and killed people lol. So, she lost some people. Everybody has lost people lol. She feels out of place and not loved. Everyone has felt out of place and not loved. That twist was so fucking stupid.

For all those feminists who support her: she burned a women alive who avenged her family. The Dothraki maniacs which this dumb queen brought raped their women and killed their men

This is great info!

I think you're right. That being said, with the Dothraki, she soon became Khaleesi. She had a title of her own. She took part to events of which she was the center of attention. With the Northerners, she was in a society made for men, lead by men. Jon Snow was "The King in the North", no title for her. She, who was the Breaker of chains and this and that, in the North she got stripped of all that authority and became nothing more than the pretty woman with Jon Snow. No one cared who she was, nor everything she accomplished. She lost two of her dragons to their cause, no word about that either when everyone got drunk with the brothers in arms. Once the help was done, to them, she was just an outsider they were glad to forget. You're a great leader, great conqueror, but then you become just the wife of Jo Blo, who is the only one who is celebrated? He's the only hero of the evening? Of course, no way.

And how free are they really when they have no food, no money and nowhere to go. How much choice did they realistically have. At the point where she "freed" the Unsullied there was still slavery going on in all the other slave cities, so what would have stopped other slavers from capturing them if they had come upon some Unsullied on their own. Their strength was in numbers.

When she burnt Sam's dad and brother alive, I have no idea how people thought that was a boss move. It was supposed to show the stupid audience that burning people alive because they won't bend the knee isn't the way to go

And maybe I’m dense but I think her actions where no worse than other leader in the show besides Jon snow. Everybody was killing everybody . Though this is a fictional world, but throughout history rulers and conquers aren’t so kind to the the people they ruled and conquered so me personally didn’t see her as villain.

Actually it doesn't. Daenerys as a character was shown to be able to suffer and stay sane. She wasn't a perfect person but she is a sane one. Moreover one of the writers directly told viewers Daenerys is "not her father" nor "insane" nor "a sadist" in an Inside the Episode in season six. What happened in season 8 is they tried to contradict their earlier storyline in multiple ways for multiple characters. Varys, a seasoned spymaster, forgot how to be sneaky. Tyrion had long forgotten how to be smart despite showing it earlier. And the writers forgot that bells don't mean surrender in King's Landing and that not only did Davos say so in season 2 but events proved him correct. It isn't just that the execution is terrible, it is, but the direction they tried to take things was illogical and contradicted by what had come before it.

@@pplr1 That's why I said "madness". Since she is traumatized, lonely and stressed I can somewhat understand her becoming cruel. A lot of characters have done that already, so it wouldnt be surprising for her to do so. The meaning of the bells did change a couple of times+dumb and dumber wanted to quickly wrap up the season so they could move on to their next project. That's why everything feels sloppy in this season.

@@random_meta They really did. Though speaking of being sloppy there is that is another reason why season 8 may have been what it was from a story perspective. Evidence has come to light indicating the earlier plan for season 8 itself was for wildfire to destroy most of King's Landing. Mix a fire breathing dragon doing battle in to a city laced with wildfire stashes put there with the purpose of destroying the city and it isn't hard to see how a tragic disaster occurs on accident. I suspect the writers realized Jon probably wouldn't agree to an assassination attempt over something Dany never wanted to have happen in the 1st place. So rather than drop a scene that they couldn't justify happening they decided to shoehorn it in with character assassination. That is bad editing of one's story. And D and D have done major last minute changes before. You may not have heard but they filmed a miscarriage scene for Cersei in season 7 but then cut it. That kind of change would have ripple effects with any characters she interacted with later like Jamie, Tyrion, and Euron. You are correct that a situation can make people be far more cruel than they usually would be. However if Dany wanted to be cruel to someone then a person to be cruel to is right there yet season 8 portrayed Dany as ignoring Cersei during the ridiculous city burning. Don't forget how long it took Drogon to even get to the Red Keep and then he flies away from it after finally getting there. That just doesn't make sense even from the understanding that someone has hit a point where he or she wants to lash out. Thank you for trying to explain your earlier comment and referring to how people can be hurt emotionally. Yes people can be, but even that doesn't go to what they portrayed for this character in season 8.

@@pplr1 I was so pissed over that season, I've tried to justify it so many times.. I agree with your perspective. Btw, have you heard of the theory that Bran is the villain? Controlling people just so he can have the throne? (From the ending we got, personally I'd rather have that kind of twist ending)

@@random_meta Thank you. And I've heard of "evil Bran theory". Now evil Bran theory may have the strength it does because the writers were so inept that they didn't realize they were putting evidence in season 8 that makes Bran look guilty. However if one takes season 8 seriously (not something I recommend) then the evidence is there to make Bran look like a betrayer and mass murderer. It was Bran who pushed Jon's linage more than anyone else. He pushed Sam to tell Jon when Sam was getting cold feet and also just happened to be in an anti-Dany mood (allowing Bran to use Sam in 2 ways at once-to both complicate things between Jon and Dany via Jon's linage and also use Sam to badmouth Dany early on). Then it was Bran who said that Jon had a choice about his linage in front of who Jon thought of as his half-sisters when that isn't the kind of thing people have a choice about and isn't something they would let go if they heard a hint about. Then there is that Bran can track 1 guy on a horse (Jamie) coming North from King's Landing which means tracking Euron's fleet should have been easy for him. So did Bran not warn anyone about that it would be armed with anti-dragon weapons and be near Dragonstone because Bran wanted another dragon to die and Missandei to be executed in front of Dany? Was Bran trying to make Dany break mentally because he knew King's Landing would burn as a result and that would serve to get both Jon and Dany out of his way at the same time? Did Bran not tell others that Jamie pushed him out of a window not to actually save Jamie's life but to make sure Jamie died at the most useful time. If Jamie dies at Winterfell for trying to kill a Stark child it is harder for Tyrion to blame Dany for his death. If Bran really wanted Jamie to live then why didn't he back Brienne up when she caught Jamie leaving? There are a few more things but yes season 8 has evidence that Bran was manipulating people to cause King's Landing to burn. He is like an evil version of Dr. Strange (who could see multiple possible futures and tried to manipulate events to make a particular one happen-in Endgame that Thanos was defeated). Plus after he became king both the biggest rebuilding project in Westeros and the spread of a deadly disease are things he treats as not worth his time so neither the welfare of his kingdom nor the lives of his people are portrayed as things that matter to Bran. Bran is not impartial as some claim but indifferent. An impartial person is valuable because they do care about things like being fair and other things will not interfere with that concern so their judgement will likely be just. An indifferent person may not care about being fair or just. So Bran's actions as king lend themselves to the latter.

Except not a single time did she say she was going to burn down King's Landing in specific and multiple times she did show she didn't want to hurt innocent people and followed up those statements with actions that proved she was speaking honestly. The facade wasn't dropped with season 8, it was made there. Or it was just one of many screwups and contradictions-like saying bells mean surrender when season 2 showed they don't in King's Landing and it did so very clearly.

@@pplr1 she said multiple times how she desired to burn kings landing down

@@pplr1 : Did it ever occur to you that those claims that she "didn't want to hurt innocent people," were just part of her manipulations? I don't buy those claims for one moment.

@@thekittenthatwantschicken8018 Where? I would like to see the season and episode mentioned where supposedly "she said multiple times how she desired to burn kings landing down". If you really want to prove it find a link on youtube to a clip. As things are I call bs because for part of season 7 she went against the idea of attacking King's Landing specifically in an attempt to avoid harm. And even when she did come up with something to attack herself it was to attack the "Red Keep" rather than the entire city.

@@Chocobear555 Already tested that theory a long time ago. The often the people she said it to were already on her side so she didn't need to say it to win them over (such as with Sir Barristan or Jorah). Also she tended to back up those comments with actions such as-but not limited to-chaining her own dragons despite the pain it caused her in an effort to avoid harm to innocents.

Yeah dude. Just look at the 20th century alone, with the most horrible dictators promising people their ideological utopia. And we haven't exactly changed for the better. Her fans outed themselves in the most pathetic way possible.

Yeah and in a parallel universe (here and now)ant Russians believe they are liberating Ukraine with Putin "freeing" the Ukranian ppl...meanwhile they aren't asking to be freed by anyone. He is the tyrant, yet there are those who believe he is a hero.

Well, I don't see anyone complaining about Aegon the Conqueror and his sister-wives, Rhaenys and Visenya. How do you think they conquered Westeros? giving flowers? No, they brought the six kingdoms of Westeros to their knees and brought them Fire and Blood. That's the Targaryen motto. They are conquerors, and that is what conquerors do.

She was written to have a God Complex from the very beginning of the show. Her saying, "Fire can not kill a Dragon" while she is watching her brother get burned alive is not so much a subtle hint as it is a screaming alarm. The show even treats these executions as foils, with other characters like Melisandre and Ned; highlighting the impersonal nature of death by fire as "the purest death" in comparison to death by the sword - being taken by nature vs being taken by man. There was never a future where she wouldn't be the supreme ruler, by and for WHATEVER reason. Even when she is being "merciful" in her conquest for world domination, her mercy is more a matter of pride than it is one of sympathy. "how great i am to allow you this and how grateful you must be to belong to me" vs "this sort of thing shouldn't happen to a person" Danys power does not come from the people of Westeros and their will, it comes from the slave army she amassed and their ability to massacre everyone. Yes, Dany "wants the consent of the governed" but NOT out of respect for others - she is not there to serve, it is more accurate to say that she "wants the consent of the governed" meaning she wants others to abide and to acknowledge that she is supreme ruler. If that means killing them, that's fine. If they were to bend the knee, that's even better.

@@MikeSW Nothing about that is a bad thing in the world she lives in!

Exactly!

GRRM may have been against violence and war but D and D are not. One of the things GRRM showed is that violence can have consequences. Like Ned Stark getting killed after Joffery promised he would not be resulted in a war starting. Apply this same lesson to season 8 and Jon agreeing to assassinate Dany should've resulted in Grey Worm not only killing Jon but possibly declaring war on the North. Especially if Missandei told him what Sansafinger (I call her that because it can be argued the Sansa from earlier seasons is a different character) said while they were in the crypts during the battle of with the Night King. To make matters worse Daenerys had a problem with raping and pillaging which is why she tried to get Drogo's Dothraki to stop raping women in the town they attacked and why Daenerys also required Yara to agree to reforming Greyjoys so they didn't rape and pillage any more. If there is no Dany in Westeros keeping Dothraki in line then the Dothraki could become a major problem for anyone in Westeros. Now I will say where I think D and D may have broken with GRRM's plan for King's Landing. GRRM hasn't finished the books so we don't know what his plans are. But there is evidence the earlier plan for season 8 was that King's Landing would burn due to wildfire, not dragonfire but wildfire. Throughout the majority of the series King's Landing has basically been a city with a big bomb underneath it. If there is a battle involving a fire breathing dragon it isn't hard to see how one of the fuses to that bomb could get lit on accident. This would be a tragedy because Dany would never want the city to burn. Plus Bobby B., Tyrion, Tywin, and Cersei were never responsible enough to have the wildfire moved outside the city. Remember Bronn was so concerned about wildfire that he didn't want it near the city walls while he and Tyrion were defending against Stannis. D and D wrecked a perfectly good tv series and broke with multiple characters and they likely did it just for shock value and to failingly try to excuse scenes that shouldn't have happened. 1. Yes, commentary from computer effects people is evidence that a change was made and an earlier plan for season 8 was for most of King's Landing to burn due to wildfire, they were told the plan then later told to change the scenes to "not wildfire". Link: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3qACpk4xWJg.html This is just 1 bit of evidence wildfire was the earlier intended way King's Landing would burn, there are other bits but I think this is important because it shows someone was directly told to change their part of making season 8. 2. That means Jon would not have agreed to assassinate Dany as a massive wildfire disaster was never what she wanted. 3. And if the start of season 8's episode six did play out then the ending wouldn't have happened. A Grey Worm already killing prisoners would've killed Jon and Tyrion day 1, not waiting for a council to assemble that he doesn't take orders from anyway. 4. And if a council was formed to pick a new king then both Jon and Gendry have better claims to the crown so their names would have been discussed first, not Bran's. 5. If Tyrion's brain was functioning Bran telling him "Why do you think I came all this way?" would've been a clue to Tyrion that Bran either planned all this and is a mass murderer including of Tyrion's brother or (if one doesn't think Bran is quietly being a puppet master) it would still let Tyrion know Bran foresaw one of the worst disasters to hit Westeros and let it happen just so he could be king meaning Bran is utterly useless. Either way Tyrion would probably go scratch that Bran the Broken idea and say someone else should be king (and if the former is true Tyrion may try to think of a way to kill Bran as both revenge and to rid Westeros of him). So I figure D and D were trying to go for scenes they had no good excuse for having as a way to quickly wrap things up.

Also against logic. She's a mad radical, with no knowledge or skills, who uses extreme violence to mindlessly tear down existing structures. Doesn't mean season 8 got it right though. Watch the earlier seasons, they try to pass her off as just another mary-sue. A saint and a badass, feared by her enemies, beloved by all.

Why did George write Aegon and Jaehaerys as imperialist that made Westeros better under a absolute monarchy for decades just to make the one slave abolitionist be the only absolute monarch to do it wrong

The idea wasn't wrong, it was the execution that was lacking.

I forgot that. Thank you for mentioning. For me the first time I got suspucious was how she looked at her brother dying with this look on her face and the flat tone of voice.

Whats more disturbing is the people who still don't see it when when pointe out to them.

Bariston Selmy tried to tell her too: you keep winning and more and more you're gonna think you're always in the right.

Same. When you think about it, she had lots of indicators that her morality was all virtue signaling, but it was done so hastily.

her morals and jugement started tipping back in mereen, but i agree. there should have been 10 episodes for EVERY episode. i hated how they shortened the final seasons🥲

@@kesslerstarr7036there’s 8 seasons of her being talked out of her true ambitions by Jorah,Sir Barristan, and Tyrion. By season 7 and 8 they were all gone and lady Olenna told her to stop fucking around and burn them.

you're just mad that you hadn't notice it sooner and was rooting for her

The entire show is the build up.

No she didn't. Moreover her advisors told her to be less moral that she actually was a lot of the time and she was better for not following their advice. Jorah told her to stop freeing slaves and just go conquer Westeros sooner. Daario encouraged her to massacre all the nobles in Meereen-she refused saying she isn not a "butcherer". Tyrion wanted her to leave Jon to die while Jon was off on a mission Tyrion himself thought up. The only time (it only happened 1 time in all of seasons 1-7) show Daenerys threatened to destroy armies and burn cities to the ground was when she was outside Qarth. It was likely both out of desperation (since if they didn't get into the city she and everyone with her would starve to death) and a bluff (the city guards could've killed them all then and there). People also tell her no all the time and even if she still disagrees with them she gives them a chance to make their argument. Jon flat out refuses to bend the knee to who for most of season 7 and he gets to wander around Dragonstone plus receives free dragonglass.

@@pplr1 I didn't say she doesn't have compassion or mercy, but my point is that she was very quick to want to kill everybody long before that "sudden" turn in the last episode. She was talked out of it by Tyrion and Jon quite a few times. And Jon's refusal to bend the knee, as he said, came from his claim that he didn't know her and it would make no sense. She waited, because she liked him. But she definitely insisted on it from everyone else.

@@erikanicole2971 "She was talked out of it by Tyrion and Jon quite a few times." This statement is factually wrong. She was "talked out of it" a total of 1 times by Tyrion. And that was while a pro-slavery fleet (a practice which she had already seen the cruelty of) was actively trying to burn down Meereen-making her plan closer to an eye for an eye. Still brutal but that. And Tyrion talked her out of that based on moral reasons alone. So not only does Tyrion do it 1 time and 1 time only, but during a situation where she is actively hearing (and has seen) what others are trying to do to her subjects as they speak. Not exactly a stress free time. Also I'm not disagreeing with the idea that Jon could wait to see more of Daenerys before deciding if he would bend the knee. As things were that 1st meeting between the 2 of them didn't strike me as them wanting each other. And Jon never talked Dany out of a mass murder in all of seasons 1-7. Daenerys, if anything, had made clear she didn't want civilians to suffer to her own supporters already-and before Jon and her met.

@@erikanicole2971 she didn't insist on it from Yara. Yara came in and was like the iron islands want freedom, we'll help you for freedom from the 7 kingdoms. Dany said cool stop raping and pillaging and we got a deal. Yara said chill, let's go. Shake hands buddy buddy inspiring cool shot of dany, her team, her dragons, and her massive army. She was calm, kind, open to listening, welcoming, made a deal, did not demand bending the knee. Then next season, like 2 episodes later she's a completely different person to jon. That convo with jon is the first time she starts demanding anyone bend the knee. It's a drastic character switch when you compare the two scenes.

@@pplr1 Jon talks her out of it while they’re on the Beach at dragon stone. I think it’s S7E5 perhaps? Also in season 5 she threatened to burn down the city several times. She even tells Hizdar (whom she treated worse than Joffrey treated Sansa) that she was going to return his city to the dirt

I don't care what the shows say, I care what George RR Martin's final word in the books says, and that's it. And the means of production in Essos are not just slaves, the people of Essos have great economic power in other areas as well. How do you think her ancestors (Aegon, Visenya and Rhaenys) conquered the seven kingdoms of Westeros? Giving them flowers? No, they brought Fire and Blood. Aegon called himself The Conqueror, so is that megalomaniac of him too?

If only Viserys told his someone else about the dagger, he might have stop all this madness.

Arya do be crazy huh? Baking people into pies to feed to their father is one of the most disturbing things done on the show when you think about it. And it takes so much time and work just for the disturbing and cruel nature of it. And she just gets to walk away scott free, no consequences for a single one of her actions. Crazy man. I'd say brienne, Sam and gilly, podrick, davos, and jon are all pretty pure good guys though. Maybe gendry too but he's more neutral.

Brienne, Sam, Gilly, Davos, Ned, and Measter Aemon were all pretty good people

​@@roll14tiderollapart from Ned no one had power out all them

She does not feel for the slaves? She postponed her invasion of Westeros and stayed in Essos to govern just to make sure the slaves stayed free, was willing to follow Meereenese costumes for peace sake even if it meant giving up power, then also locked up her dragons the moment they killed one innocent child.

I wish I could like this 1000%. Yes, she cracked in Season 8, but it also makes complete sense why she did. She lost one of her "children" in her dragons. She lost Jorah. She lost Missandei. And she knew she was about to lose John to his family. So she was already veering toward villain and then she lost everyone else she cared for in S8. So, ya, she snapped. I also think it's very GRR Martin to take someone you'd been built up to love and rip her down to size so I hope he doesn't change that part in the book.

Let’s NOT act like seasons 5-8 are written well tho 😂😅 Yes George said she will eventually turn evil however the WAY she turned evil in the show as just awful

You are doing an incredible job of covering for D and D’s terrible writing lol. When she kills the 143 nobles and learns not all we’re guilty, she expresses remorse for her mistake, not very mad queen of her. When she commits capital punishment on the guy who committed capital punishment, yeah sure you could argue it’s hypocritical, but I don’t think it’s a stretch to say honorable characters like Jon would’ve done the same, he literally clapped Janos slynt for disobeying orders lmao. Also Danny talks about how she imagines the throne room in the pyramid of mereen was built to intimidate the common men and demonstrates by walking down the steps that she has no intent of using it like that. For that reason gonna have to hard disagree on the pyramid being a metaphor for tyranny, I just saw it as a strategic move to hole up in there during the riots. As for the Dothraki in S6, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. She was going to be sentenced to live out her days with the other khaleesis in some shithole hut, a display of force was her only way out of that. They couldn’t fight the whole khalasar so it had to be something she did. You see it as tyrannical I see it as self preserving/serving. Her refusal to acknowledge the north’s independence is the only one of the instances you listed that I can accept as evidence of her madness

@@kennyjohnson8055 the writing took a nosedive after season 4, the book material is what we care about now

@@Jermrants I’ve just ordered the first book after my 4th rewatch of the show and I couldn’t be more excited. I’ve been wanting a deeper dive into the characters and Idk why it’s taken me this long to do it. How do you like HOT D so far?

Correct. They couldn't cut the story that much without making major changes so this isn't even GRRM story at ths point.

It doesn’t matter what the actors think, they’re biased to their characters and don’t fully understand the story. This isn’t a tropical fantasy story with a happy ending.

Jordan samuel. The ending can be tragic. But it shouldn't be littered with plot holes, out of character actions, and logic failures by the writers to get it there. Saying people are unhappy just because there wasn't a happy ending misrepresents the problem-and diverts criticism from where it belongs.

@@pplr1 That’s a different argument altogether regarding plot holes because the writing was indeed rushed and not of the highest quality. I’m not saying people are upset because there wasn’t a happy ending I’d rather say it’s because they completely misunderstood many of the characters and Daenerys is a massive example of this being true, as is Jaime. What In your view are the out of character actions though?

​@@ItsSVO "What In your view are the out of character actions though?" Thank you for asking and I'll add that is a good question because-if we were debating or not-it actually focuses on asking what points did someone else notice and then thinking over if there is something to those points. I'll run through some of the characters (some may surprise you and some not) and number them (not saying most in or out of character with each character but simply keeping things organized). 1. Daenerys, season 8 Dany is not Daenerys flat out. Daenerys can be irritating or entitled but she means it when she said she doesn't want innocents to die. Also she has shown she is very willing to punish those she sees as guilty. So season 8's burning of King's Landing is character breaking in not just 1 but 2 ways. 1st random people on the street (innocents) are targeted. 2nd Cersei (who is guilty of many things) is ignored rather than punished-did you notice how long it took Drogon to even reach the Red Keep-and then once he is finally there he flies away while most of it is still standing. That is ignoring (not punishing) Cersei (who is guilty). 2. Varys "kinda forgot" how to be sneaky. Varys has been a spymaster for years yet lets himself get caught in season 8. This is not the Varys who had an escape plan for both himself and Tyrion to get out of King's Landing when he was betraying the people in charge there at the time. Varys repeatedly limits risks to himself in the early seasons of GoT and-to those he is willing to be honest with-makes no bones about it and he is often cautious and only makes a move (if he does) when he thinks it is the correct time to and he is unlikely to be harmed. This Varys would not decide to send notes all over Westeros proclaiming Jon is king without even bothering to get Jon to agree to it. This is also not the same Varys who would try to poison Dany when the likely result of a successful attempt would be that Cersei continues to rule and Jon becomes a hunted man (Cersei would kill Jon). 3. Cersei she is cruel and scheming as a person, yet has no grand plan to defeat Daenerys other than sit in the Red Keep and hope her army wins for her? 4. Tyrion, he started GoT as a smart person and-as well as reading many books-could figure things out. Even in season 7 when his military planning didn't work out he was still able to talk with both Daenerys and Jon and get them work something out on the dragonglass (which Daenerys ends up giving to Jon for free). If he was in season 8 and heard there was a linage issue he would've talked to both Jon and Dany directly (not just Varys and then do nothing) to see if he could work things out. 5. Jon he may not have been brilliant but Jon was a man of both principles and action. If a bunch of Lannister soldiers surrendered to him them he would likely accept their surrender right then and there. If season 8 Dany had told him surrender was not to be accepted then he wouldn't have stopped fighting them in the 1st place long enough for them to decide-as a group-to drop their swords. 6. Sansa or Sansafinger (I am using 2 different but similar names to refer to possibly different but similar looking characters). There are people who question Sansa's honesty or loyalty to Jon from earlier seasons since she never told him about the Knights of the Vale when she knew he wanted more men before the Battle of the Bastards. But Sansa was not suicidally stupid like Sansafinger is in season 8. Season 8 Sansafinger decides to start bad blood with season 8 Dany when season 8 Dany is a vital ally in currently trying to save Sansafinger's homeland from frozen undead. Even worse Dany and her army is the only thing keeping Cersei too busy to kill off Jon and her (Sansafinger). Sansa told Jon that Cersei was a mortal danger to both of them near the start of season 7. Jon wants to get allies to help against the undead. Sansa is worried about Cersei. A successful alliance between Jon and Dany helps deal with both problems. But Sansafinger becomes an oathbreaker (was Ned Stark not her father??) to Jon (of all people) in order to spread word of his linage when he doesn't want her to and not long after hearing that Cersei has reinforced her army so it is as large as Jon's and Dany's armies combined. If the alliance between Jon and Dany breaks down then Cersei has the largest army in Westeros. So by trying to break up the Jon-Dany alliance Sansafinger is both really stupid and trying to get herself and Jon killed (likely by Cersei). And Sansafinger cannot even claim it is because she found something out about Dany since Sansafinger never bothered trying before starting bad relations with her. Additionally Northerners had grown in their respect and acceptance of Season 8 Dany after the battle with the Night King so Sansafinger isn't really representing them either. Sansafinger is just being a stubborn holdout-and a suicidally stupid one at that. 7. The Dothraki, Daenerys is their current leader and the 1 pushing them towards reform-thus no more raping or slavery for them. Their warriors were made bloodriders to her which grants them more status but if someone actually does kill Daenerys it obligates them to hunt down that person and kill them. (This custom may help make Dothraki leaders be more assassination resistant since even a successful assassination won't help the person behind it for long when it comes to lifespan.) This means if something happened to season 8 Dany the Dothraki would either kill Jon or go on a raping and pillaging spree since their main reformer is no longer there to continue to encourage them stay reformed rather than go back to their old ways. Maybe both would happen. 8. Grey Worm and the other UnSullied they follow Daenerys because they like and approve of her. If someone tries to harm her they would step in. If someone was successful they would probably avenge her. And they wouldn't care about a bunch of Northerners who are fewer in number than they are anyway. Plus if Missandei told Grey Worm about the bad mouthing Sansafinger was doing of season 8 Dany and that Sansafinger considered loyalty to both her and Dany to be divided loyalties that were too distant to be reconciled in the crypts while Dany and the UnSullied were out risking their lives to help fight undead that may motivate Grey Worm to think there was a plot against Dany in the North and he may march the the UnSullied right back to The North to topple Sansafinger after having killed Jon. 9. Arya, she has wanted to kill Cersei for a long time now. If she went south to do so and left before an army that took time to get organized then she wouldn't be too slow to get to King's Landing until after that army did when she left 1st. Also she probably would not decide to give up getting revenge just before she reaches Cersei after she has already killed a bunch of other people already while getting revenge. I'm sure there are probably more that I could talk about but this has gotten to be a long comment already and I've given you a number of things to consider with just it as it is. If you respond and agree or disagree please keep the numbering for the sake of better organization.

Correct. Even worse for the claims made in this video is that the earlier plan for season 8 itself was for wildfire to be what destroyed King's Landing and season 8's writer changed things. Yes, commentary from computer effects people is evidence that a change was made and an earlier plan for season 8 was for most of King's Landing to burn due to wildfire, they were told the plan then later told to change the scenes to "not wildfire". Link: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3qACpk4xWJg.html This is just 1 bit of evidence wildfire was the earlier intended way King's Landing would burn, there are other bits but I think this is important because it shows someone was directly told to change their part of making season 8. This means there was no grand plan to have Dany go bad and the writer likely made that change for both shock value and in an failing attempt to cover plot holes-an attempt that created more plot holes.

Except she didnt. She didnt have a problem with mass murder before at all. The difference is just that when she killed all slave owners without any trial or chance for redemption, they viewers were led to believe that they all deserved it, and therefore didnt mind. When she burned the city she too believed that they deserved it for supporting Cersei. This time we just didnt agree with her moral reasoning, as the people of King's landing and their conflicts with the rulers were explored much more in depth, so we know that they arent all guilty. She did it before, just at a smaller scale, with a little more of her sanity left. And she already threatend to burn down entrire cities back in season 5 or so.

Polynomdivision That actually isn't true. "She didnt have a problem with mass murder before at all." Daenerys herself specifically said she would get her crown back but not by the blood of innocents. And she repeatedly tried to live up to that saying. Other things you said aren't true or misrepresent the context as well. I'll go through some of them below. "killed all slave owners without any trial or chance for redemption" Where? In Astapor right after she got the UnSullied she did. But that was both in a win or die situation and after she had seen that the slave masters there had made killing thousands of babies something that is routine. A harsh way to put an end to an atrocity but it was an on going atrocity that she ended. In Meereen you were just flat out wrong. When she took the city in the show most of the former slave owners lived. She had many of them executed but in exactly the same number to the number of slave children they had killed in similar fashion. Thus she was trying to avenge an atrocity. Any former slave masters beyond that were lived and she was willing to treat as citizens of the city as shown that Hizdar had the same ability to make appeals to her that every other citizen of Meereen had. When a former slaver city started going back to practicing slavery Jorah convinced her to give the slave masters there a 2nd chance to give up slavery and she did-indicating both that she did give them a chance and redemption and that "all" of them had not been killed. Now in 1 of the many places the show breaks from the books in the books Daenerys involved other people in picking which slave masters in Meereen should be executed. They didn't do that in GoT. Additionally in the books Hizdar is a dishonest jerk trying to undermine Daenerys's efforts to end slavery and his mom is likely a leader of the Sons of the Harpy-that is another difference between show and books. In the show as far as we know Hizdar is sincere when he said his father opposed the mass murder of slave children. That creates an issue Daenerys in the show has to face about group punishment and if she mistakenly mixed in some of the innocent with the guilty. She relented and allowed Hizdar and all the other families of the slave masters she had executed have their bodies back when she had planned on leaving them as the mass murdered slave children had been left hanging. The 1st time someone in the show actually suggests a trial (this is Sir Barristan) she agrees. So the lack of trials is actually a bit wrongheaded put just on her since if Sir Barristan had spoken up earlier he may have ended up making sure only those slave masters who were part of mass murdering children were executed. There really isn't much of a legal system in GoT and real trials don't happen for most people. The closest we came was the trial for Tyrion and that was put on by Tywin to create a public spectacle and show trial rather than a real trial since they had already manipulated the witnesses to put blame on Tyrion before the trial was held. Thus about the most honest trial someone in GoT may get is a 1 minute conversation with Ned Stark before he decides if he will cut his head off-and Ned Stark (seen as honorable in the show) did. Also in none of those situations did Daenerys kill the slaves for the actions of the slave masters. Thus people should not expect random people on the streets of King's Landing to be killed for the actions of Cersei Lannister. I'll try to be shorter with some of the other things you said but there was a lot wrong with that comment. "When she burned the city she too believed that they deserved it for supporting Cersei." No she didn't. Despite the nonsense that is season 8, season 8 Dany had already been told the people of King's Landing hated Cersei. Viewers of seasons 1-7 know that Cersei and the people of King's Landing have a dislike for each other. Season 8 Dany even told Jon they were innocent in the only season 8 episode six discussion with Jon. Now like I said before the earlier plan for season 8 was for wildfire to destroy the city. But when season 8 Dany takes off after the battle her plan may have been to attack only the Red Keep with Cersei in it. Don't forget Cersei was purposefully packing the Red Keep with civilians with the intention of using them as human shields. If that was part of the wildfire plan and the writers of season 8 had stuck with that plan season 8 Dany would still be sane. But when they made that change then that makes season 8 Dany insane with remarks that don't make sense. "she already threatend to burn down entrire cities back in season 5" Actually that was worse than a threat. It was part of a plan she told Tyrion as a pro-slavery fleet was trying to burn down Meereen (notice the bombardment of flaming objects). And he talked her out of that based on moral reasons alone-specifically with the points of knowing she didn't want to be her father and that innocent people will be hurt or killed if entire cities are burned down. That was 1 of the few times Tyrion actually did talk her down but he used her own morality to do it. Show Daenerys never mentioned burning down a city again afterwards.

She only didn’t commit mass murder before because she always had an advisor in her ear talking her down.. but on the dragon all alone where no one could reason with her her nature took over

@@pplr1 you’re taking a villains word for things. Hitler thought what he was doing was right and benevolent too, does it make him right? Absolutely not.

A true hero wouldn't stoop to the level of the villain.

I only saw season 1 and I thought she was the most crazy and evil person. I am surprised that people are surprised :D

This is why Cersei is my favorite. I love Dany as well as I can accept the fact thT she isn't perfect and she had a dark side. I'm telling you being a Cersei fan makes you upfront and brutally honest about any character you love.

#CerseiDidNothingWrong

Man this vid pissed me of these to r trying to be smart to me there both straight thick

This comment got a bit long but you may find some value in it. There is evidence for "evil Bran theory" in season 8. The writers may be so inept they didn't realize they were putting it in but there are indications that Bran manipulated events to cause the burning of King's Landing as a method of getting both Jon and Dany out of his way. Bran is the 1 who pushed Sam to tell Jon of his linage just when Sam was in an anti-Dany mood. Bran also kept quiet about Cersei and Euron's planned naval ambush near Dragonstone when it is clear that Bran's magic powers should have made that something easy for him to know about-after all Bran tracked 1 guy on a horse (Jamie) coming North from King's Landing so a fleet should be easy for him to watch. Did Bran want both another dragon and Missandei to die in front of Dany? Bran's conversation with Jamie may have been intended to make Bran look better by showing that Bran didn't want Jamie to die. But it clearly showed that Bran knew he could manipulate the situation by purposefully withholding information from others-thus making the lack of warning about Euron's ambush all the more questionable. Also Bran may have not been trying to save Jamie's life but just have him die at the most useful time. If Jamie dies in Winterfell for trying to kill a Stark (pushing a Stark child-Bran-out of a window) then Tyrion really cannot blame Dany for it. And that doesn't help Bran. If Bran wanted to manipulate things then he wants Tyrion to blame Dany for Jamie's death which means Jamie would have to live long enough to rejoin Cersei and die with for that purpose to be served. If he wanted to save Jamie he could've backed up Brienne. By even saying "Why do you think I came all this way?" Bran evil admitted to Tyrion that he came to the ruins of King's Landing planning to be King. Like I said, the writers were so inept they may never have realized they were putting evidence in season 8 that makes Bran look guilty. But those details are in season 8. About Daenerys.. She was pretty and the people trying to defend season 8 often try to use that as an excuse for others supposedly not noticing her faults but this claim is actually false. Daenerys repeatedly tried to help other people-that is one of the things people noticed about her. Her character wasn't pure but she often tried to leave other people in a better position than they were before-thus freeing all those slaves. Daenerys may have been very dishonest with the slavemasters that were selling UnSullied in Astapor but by doing what she did she put a stop to the mass murder of thousands of babies that had become routine there. She also stopped slavery which saved who knows how many from not just forced work but torture and death-remember the tortured slave she tried to give water to when he had been hung in the sun to die there. Daenerys wasn't just pretty, she actually left Essos a better place than it was before she came along. Also I'll point out the plans earlier plans season 8 itself had wildfire destroying King's Landing so that wasn't part of some long plan the writers for the show had but a last minute change likely done for the sake of shock value and character assassination. No joke, there are multiple pieces of evidence that indicate the plans for season 8 were to have wildfire destroy the city. If you want I can dig up a link but one of the computer effects people even flat out said a scene from King's Landing with buildings burning was originally supposed to be "a wildfire shot" but they were told to change it to "not a wildfire shot". This means people were directly admitted a change was made.

Finally!! People that know bran was evil!!!

Yeah I’m also of the Evil Bran Ilk. At least the way the shoe did it- seemed he could have been warning people before stuff happened but didn’t AND it seemed he could have warged dragons but never did. He could have done a lot more - but didn’t - because it was all going to work for him to be in power. He even says “why do you think I came all this way?” I mean instead of the John Snow spin off why don’t we see his character evolution?

It seemed like a "heroic" moment because it was one. They got the ability to walk away if they wanted to. If they tried while under an actual slave master they would've been tortured and killed. Not so with Daenerys. This is further born out by when Daenerys goes around freeing other slaves for the sake of ending slavery and helping those slaves themselves..

Thank you another person said it, they where never free just became slaves again and this time they chose it.

@@naleybaby Not even close. They picked their commanders from amongst themselves. They had the option to leave if they wanted. And Daenerys did what she could to increase the respect they had for themselves such as telling them to pick whatever name they wanted since they had been given names to make themselves feel like dirt.

@@pplr1 oh, hello a sad person answering everybody. Nobody agrees with you. The show is finished. Daeneris was always crazy. You lost, deal with it and go home now

@@YanaPetruk Actually a lot of people agree with me. From a number of the people who signed a petition to redo season 8 to just people that are rightfully critical of season 8. 1 of the GoT writers themselves said Daenerys was not "insane" in season six. So not only are you "sad" (to borrow your word for it) enough to reply to me about something a few years over but you still managed to be wrong when you did it. Speaking about being wrong. I someone doesn't want someone else to not point how and why someone else is wrong about something they wrote in a comment then they shouldn't put out comments that are wrong about something. Thought it may also help if that person didn't fall for a video that is wrong about many things in the 1st place.

The problem was earlier seasons trying to pass her off as a benevolent goddess for the twitter hashtags, no matter how horrible she was. It's as hypocritical as Goebbels coming out of the bunker in '45 to tell people Hitler was evil.

She’s actually quite similar to Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader from Star Wars in the sense that she’s supposed to be an an anti-villain, Byronic Hero, tragic hero, and tragic villain. However, Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader had a far more sympathetic characterization and motivations for becoming addicted to the power of the force, becoming a monster, turning on the Jedi, and remaining a monster. For one thing, in spite of not being completely innocent himself, since he also did act in revenge at times and stop trying after going dark, too, Anakin also was a constant victim with severely compromised agency to ever feel safe doing better or escaping to anything better under a constant series of abusive, arrogant, corrupt, deceitful, manipulative, and oppressive authority figures. He became dangerously obsessed with power for more agency and security of himself and his loved ones in a world of authority figures, laws, and restrictions that were constantly compromising his ability to fairly and safely obtain it. They still didn’t deserve to have their entire Order mass murdered, but Obi-Wan was a terribly arrogant and self-centered friend and guardian who was constantly willing to betray, deceive, dismiss, manipulate, and mistreat Anakin and nearly anyone else Yoda and the rest of the elders in the Jedi Order Council told him to in order to fit in. The Jedi Order were abusive, arrogant, deceitful, hypocritical, manipulative, oppressive, and self-righteous assholes who were running a corrupt system, in spite of their good intentions. Yes, he had his instances of evil personal revenge and collateral damage, too, but unlike Daenerys, while he does feel a momentary sense of catharsis from abusing his power of authority to lash out at those who hurt him and/or those he cares about, Anakin’s never ultimately truly *content* and *joyful* about having sunk to that level, even if he learns to lie to himself that he feels no remorse over time and hides behind several layers of feigned apathy and denial to compartmentalize his guilt. He hates himself for it. Also, while the whole “You and I can rule the galaxy together” line could be interpreted as being cartoonishly evil, I always saw it as more of a desperate cry for freedom from Luke, Ahsoka, Padme, and Obi-Wan in those moments because never does he hold any interest in ruling the galaxy before pledging himself to Palpatine and becoming Vader and that becomes the only way he feels he can be safe finding freedom from Sidious as someone with a slave mentality, no real experience living in a real democracy, and constant fear. I’m not saying that Anakin’s crimes should be excused, but unlike Daenerys in the show after mid-season one ish, the writers of Star Wars actually went out of their way to make him both inexcusably horrifying and tragically relatable in his internal conflict, motivations and background. The problem isn’t that Daenerys became an objectively awful person who wasn’t meant to be redeemed at the end. The problem is that, at least on the show, aside from S1, there isn’t much sympathy of tragedy to be felt for her character falling to the dark side because she has all the power to easily change it after S2. She feels little to no remorse too easily and quickly. She is way too at ease with being a monster “for the greater good” way too quickly. She takes joy in being that way far too easily, and she has no real sympathetic core or vulnerability underneath it on the show.

@@reasonablyserious they never presented her as benevolent they presented her as the better of two evils quite cleverly. This means we overlook what she’s doing because the people shes doing to are “worse” therefore we miss the true context of her actions. It’s just brilliant storytelling.

Eren Yeager: I think we were born for this.

@SmallmoneyYT except like they said she had no right. Jon was the successor before her. By bloodright she was next in line not first. Also using the its my blood right actually gendry had a right to the thrones as well once he was legitimized. She brought a slave army and another army only known for attacking villages killing and raping. Anyone could see the problems that would bring. Tyrion even calls it out that they use her allies Martell greyjoy, and Tyrell armies because lords of Westeros will see a foreign invasion which it was.

@SmallmoneyYT Why is it hers by right? Her family were deposed. So it is not hers anymore. And with the existence of Jon, even if the Targaryens had a right, the right wasn't hers. She was a usurper.

@SmallmoneyYT Of course there are usurpers. Even if we take into account the idea of the Iron Throne (and a 'united' Westeros) having been built under Targaryen rule, thus giving Targaryens the ultimate claim to that seat of power - by the rules her own family laid out, she was still a usurper, as soon as Jon came onto the scene.

​@SmallmoneyYT That's not how it works. He is not given the chance to formally abdicate - she simply doesn't want his parentage to become known, at all - condemning him to living a lie, for her own power-hungry, selfish reasons. She knows that if it were known she was not the only living Targaryen, nobody would want her. The only reason Daenerys has any followers is because of her parentage and her god complex. She is a tyrant, who goes from city to city murdering people and upturning the existing order, without replacing it with anything worthwhile. She sacks cities, kills leaders, and enslaves the population while claiming to be 'freeing' them from slavery. She is not only mad, but a hypocrite. They are 'free' to follow, fight and die for her - that is not freedom. She is and always was an awful person and a terrible ruler, who is bored by the day to day workings of actually governing because it doesn't involve burning people alive (about the only bit she's actually interested in).

@SmallmoneyYT Have you ever read the books - or watched the show? That's her entire plot. Going from place to place, dismantling the order, and then going somewhere else and doing the same because she's not able to govern. She was a terrible ruler. Great conqueror, awful ruler.

She is not fire proof. That is something the show did for effect. But in the book she is not and her ancestors are not.

I think for me it was season 6 I was hardcore against her because it made me realize....if she comes to Westeros she's going to want the throne and to rule everyone. I love the Starks and will always be for them. We saw a WHOLE season 6 Jon and Sansa literally fight for their home that was taken by a tyrant. Jon was named King of the North - yay they're free!! Or so we think. Season 7 and 8? Dany was the new tyrant. I don't know how EVERYONE did not put two and two together. Why on EARTH would Sansa be friends with Dany, who would not give her Northern Independence like ROBB STARK fought and died for? People are stupid I guess. Dany also was not going to help Jon unless he bent the knee. Like. She was not going to save "her" own kingdom unless Jon bent the knee. It was hilarious how she was saying how prideful Jon was when Dany was the proud one. If you watch season 7 again, it's all there.

She was no more villainous than any other character in the series. Jon beheaded Janos slynt for talking back, sansa smiled as Ramsey was ripped to shreds… did they turn into dragon hitler? Everybody did fucked up shit, you can’t ignore everybody else’s misdeeds when they’re just as bad or worse as Danny’s.

@@kennyjohnson8055 It’s the same when you go back in History, every country did something messed up at some point.

If you remember that scene Daenerys decided the slaves should be freed long before they started to cheer her. Her own guards didn't know what to expect. You may be well intentioned and trying to make up excuses for the writers or find logic for yourself where they didn't provide it. If she wanted to rule via fear then Cersei had to die terribly and in public (not that Dany wouldn't want that for simple revenge). Instead Cersei was ignored. If Dany wanted crowds to cheer her then she would've waited for them to assemble to do so, she was not portrayed as doing that in season 8 but just opting to burn the city because.. a reason really wasn't given. And the conversation with Jon in the episode after it in season 8 just made her appear out of touch with reality. Something that could be an actual reason except that is contradicted by earlier seasons showing that the actual Daenerys can suffer and stay sane. Tyrion's speech to Jon was not only illogical but disgraceful if you realize where the writers stole from to write it. The illogical part is that Tyrion tried to claim punishing "evil men" for doing evil things results in targeting innocents who haven't. The claim is illogical. But the poem they borrowed from when coming up with the pattern of speech was Niemoller's First They Came which was about Nazis oppressing and murdering groups of people. The narrator (and thus others) allowed the Nazis to do it because the groups of other people were different in some way-this could be political party, religion, or ethnic group. Point is they were always generally innocent but that they were different meant that their suffering was accepted by the narrator until the Nazis came for him too. So the writers arguably tried to put real world innocent victims of the Nazis on a similar moral level as fantasy rapists, slavers, and child killers. That is arguably a disgrace.

@@pplr1 This is sad. I hope you don't defend despots in real life just because they're pretty.

@@cortster12 I don't here nor in GoT. Do you? A lot of those who defend season 8 overlook that making Bran king creates a surveillance state. Specifically a bloodline dictatorship since democracy was laughed off and the only way someone gets to be one of the oligarchs that picks who the new dictator is whenever the king dies is to be part of the richest and most powerful families in Westeros-the people who laughed off Sam's idea to give everyone including commoners a vote. One other thing. Those that like to criticize Daenerys often ignore or overlook that in Meereen she transitioned the place to a democracy back in season six. She specifically said the "people" would pick their "rulers". That sounds like it includes commoners and the former slaves she played a major part in freeing. So it is a real good idea to ask if the defenders of season 8 defend despots. The answer seems to be yes. Now I've already talked about illogical and out of character with relation to season 8 and Dany. But that those who try to defend season 8 resort to misrepresenting Dany and often try to overlook the dystopia season 8 creates is a warning about how little they pay attention and how little they recognize and value freedom.

@@pplr1 I, uh, don't disagree with any of this as I also disliked season 8. So yay?

@@cortster12 Then yay. Though you should probably be more careful about making comments similar to what you did earlier-it seemed to be implying I liked the Daenerys character just because she was pretty rather than that she tried to help others and actually created a democracy. But, beyond that, a simple yay works.

they don't understand the concept of freedom. So no she didn't free them cause she knew they would not leave since they know nothing else

@@thekittenthatwantschicken8018 She did free them, they could have left and nothing would have been done about it.

no they couldn't they didn't understand the concept of freedom they would not know what to do with themselves@@voluntarism335

@@voluntarism335 you don’t understand

Anybody with dragons can do the same... Not impressive

@@24framedavinci13 clearly that’s not true otherwise dragons wouldn’t have went missing for as long as they did and her family would have had greater numbers.

She threatened them first. Plus we knew they were bud guys already.

She did threaten them first, which allowed Pyat Pree and Xoros to see (and convince others) that she was the right catalyst to get their coup rolling. That doesn't make her at fault for the their plan, and several of the deaths she's responsible for seem perfectly justified. Ultimately, she is one of the biggest villains because she gained enough power that when she got pissed, she made everyone feel it. Others tried that crap too, but how much power you have determines the difference between low-life criminal, tyrant, or super villain. We see a lot of tyrants and thugs, but Dany is the one who gained enough power to become a super villain

@@xuexxiong @Heather Oh she threatened them did she? She threatened then with a starving army and dragons who had shown no ability to breathe fire yet. And was, rightfully, called out by the 13 as being unable to do shit. Her threats were empty and done out of desperation to save herself and the people following her. I am not trying to say, that Dany wasn't overall a villain in the grand scheme of things. But using Qarth as an example of this is a demonization, cause the (introduced) people in Qarth wanted to use and manipulate her, and were very close to getting their way. I don't see a need to twist this part of the story against Dany, when she has shown enough examples of being the villain, with Qarth not being one of them, maybe even just showing a reason for her world view and therefore reason to be a villain

Thinking for yourself involves looking at the facts and trying to figure out what they mean. This guy made up his own and ignored the facts as presented in earlier seasons when they didn't agree with claims he was pushing. Slavers were crucified directly as punishment for the crucifying of slave children-it wasn't over someone's ideology like the video maker claimed. The video maker here was just making stuff up to suit his argument.

@@pplr1 she just had 300 random slavers executed. Didn’t even try to conduct an investigation to see who was actually responsible for the crucifixion of the children. She also had some guy fed to her dragon and even admitted she didn’t know if he was innocent or not and she didn’t much care.

@@edienandy It was actually 100 some, the exact same number of slave children who were crucified. Show Daenerys made an assumption that all Meereen's slaver masters were in on that atrocity. That her assumption was wrong was dealt with in that season with Hizdar, book Daenerys tries to include other people from Meereen in deciding who among the slave masters should be executed in that way so she doesn't make the same mistake and we see a change from the books (1 of many). In the story that is the show (not the books) she does it as collective punishment. But, like I said, that is because she assumed (wrongly) they were all in on that particular crime against humanity. Trying to punish a crime against humanity-in this case the mass murder of children-isn't a sign someone is evil or insane. Oddly enough neither of the more experienced knights with her think of holding trials or an investigation in the show at that point. The guy she fed to a dragon was from amongst the group of what could be thought of as the usual suspects whom she was trying to scare into not orchestrating attacks on her troops. She had been told by not just 1 but 2 of her advisors that this particular group of people were arranging the Sons of the Harpy attacks on her troops thus likely not "innocent". Did you notice there were zero, as in no, random people off the street in that group? That group was chosen for its likelihood to not be innocent according to what she was told.

@@pplr1 cool story

@@edienandy ASoIF is a cool story. Too bad the makers of GoT decided not to follow it.

Yeah, he wanted to kill a teenager. Something she never tried to do. But no one wants to say Robert is evil.

@@kevinstfort yeah as the audience we align morally with Ned initially. It’s only in hindsight that we see what kind of story is unfolding. I’ve never read the books, but the whole ice and fire theme works as the 2 threats making its way to Westeros.

@@CPKerney there's this thing called the Pact of Ice and Fire in the books. Essentially it's the Starks and Targaryens uniting and dealing with another threat. Something that Rhaegar was (allegedly) interested in.

Ned was always an "Honorable fool"

Yup. It's pretty obvious to people who aren't enthralled by her.

This is great info!!

Aside from freeing the unsullied, how does freeing slaves and staying in meereen help her with the throne? She never, not once, frees slaves with the intention of having them fight for her. We're in her POV in the books, we know her thoughts and motivations. While some of the freedmen become fighters for her, majority of the freed slaves are drags on resources. What would be beneficial is to kill or otherwise get rid of the slaves that can't fight if the only reason to free them is to have fuel for her army. Does she do that? No. When freed slaves come to meereen to seek her out and for help, dying of the pale mare disease quarantined outside the city, she goes out to them to help them, risking herself in the process. How does that help her get the throne? When one peasant child is supposedly killed by drogon (there are doubts in the book and in real life theories that this was even true) she locks up her dragons. How does that help her get the throne? Once she has the unsullied and she offered gold and ships and the means to go back to westeros, she turns it down because slaves would not be freed. How does that help her get the throne? How does stopping random lazereen women from being raped help her get the throne? It does the opposite since those women were supposed to be sold into slavery so they could buy ships to go to westeros. I'm not against dany doing something terrible to win the throne and become a villian. But its diengenuous to say every good thing she did was only in service of getting the throne. She's the human heart in conflict with herself. She wants to good, she wants to help people, but she has the power and means to do it the brutal easy way and is constantly fighting the urge to do that because she wants to do good. She has good instincts and acts on that (slavery is wrong, killing children is wrong, etc.) Directly in contrast with her goal of taking the throne time and time again.

@@chandrawagner4061 she literally calls the unsullied fat slaves who can’t ride horses therefore they’re not worth buying as Jorah first suggests. She’s only interested in them once she devises a way to get them for free.

@@ItsSVO ya, that really doesn't have anything to do with my comment. I said "aside from the unsullied" implying yes, freeing unsullied or even buying them, the whole reason she was there, was because she could use them. My comment was about how other good things she does doesn't benefit her at all and even her mental process is just "I need to do this because it's right" not "doing this will get me the iron throne".

@@chandrawagner4061 of course her mental process is “I’m doing this because it’s right” I’m sure hitlers was the same, the reality is her actions are in most cases done to get her more power and ultimately with that power the iron throne regardless of how she personally justifies each one.

It's not not they were defending Cersei.

Cersei is sort of to Game of Thrones what Joel is to The Last of Us

No. She had a complex look to herself. She could do great things and questionable/dastardly things, but they all had a cause and effect. She was not always having the Mad King’s genes in him. Will people with a brain get this straight in their heads. She does fucked up things, but only for reason. Missandei didn’t push her, it was D&D’s execution that was the main villain of the story.

Captain Marvel Wilson shut up. You’re wrong. You’ll always be wrong and nothing you can say will change that so just keep your mouth shut, child.

@@GreatOldOne9866 you know you are just being rude?

As a great fan of the novels, I can just say that the Deanerys in the books is much more complex than the show's. Most of the thing they are blaming for in this video just didn't happen, not yet at least, but that's why many people like me continued believing in her.

@@Alessandro-hw3bx I serve crueler forces than you could ever imagine. I am eternal.

ACFAviator Then perhaps you weren't paying attention. The person you called a "bad egg" from the start is one of the few who actually both wants to and does actively help other people. Now not only does she put a stop to the mass murder of babies that has become routine in Astapor and free what is likely add up to over a million of slaves if not more but she goes on to do what she can to make sure they and commoners have better lives and more say. Specifically that "the people" in Meereen will pick their "rulers"-meaning she is giving them a level of political power they likely haven't had before. Thus leaving something better than most of the peasants in Westeros get. Also if you guys payed close attention to the video here on youtube and GoT seasons 1-7 you may notice how often the guys that made this video either were flat out wrong in what they described happening or misrepresented the situations Daenerys was in thus her decisions.

*Mass murderer

Finally! I see people that actually paid attention to her behavior since the beginning. When I see people complaining that the show ruined her character I think to my self ‘don’t you see the contradictions between what she preached and what she does’. The personality cult that she wanted and the ‘it’s all about me’ self centered behavior made me doubt her since the beginning. What would have been of her without her super power of not burning and her dragons …… nothing

CC Accept multiple parts of this video are flat out wrong or misrepresent what happened. Also what the actual character Daenerys preached about not wanting to hurt innocent people/civilians she repeatedly tried to live up to. Thus showing there was no a contradiction. She did it even if it made her weaker or put her at greater risk. An example is when she chained her dragons in order to try to prevent them from hurting any other civilians in Meereen. That is far from the only example. Also when Daenerys said she intended to fight slavery she did it. So again there is not a contradiction.

Only guy worth cheering for was Stannis the Mannis.

You mean to say her wiping out the entirety of the Dothraki leadership _didn't_ cause fear, & wasn't done *specifically* to manipulate them into following her? Ok There's also her deliberately ignoring Dothraki religious custom- because it meant nothing to her, to kick off her journey of conquest... We might not think much of it, but it was an important part of the culture that she was adopted into through marriage- & she just happened to think she was above it

@@OcarinaSapphr- "The Dothraki follow strength above all else Khaleesi." - Ser Jorah. I mean, if the Dothraki themselves are willing to bend their own tradition and practice without much resistance nor second thought; I guess that justifies Daenerys truly being a trailblazer in that aspect. She never forced them to follow her as well, but what she did, what they saw converted them and they followed her on their own accord.

Arya - murders all of House Frey during a feast, including those innocent of the Red Wedding Sansa - lies to protect a murderer from execution in order to benefit herself, feeds her abusive husband to his dogs Jon - executes a child who was coerced by Night’s Watch leadership to kill their Lord Commander for what they perceived to be a violation of their sworn oaths, murders a woman in cold blood on the advice of a prisoner and his own belief that she’ll go on to do evil things Robert - orders the murder of a innocent girl because he doesn’t want her to produce a son and possible heir Catelyn - cuts the throat of an innocent bystander to spite her child’s murderer Tyrion - murders a woman who cheated and lied in court about him, murders his father for calling her a whore and for pursuing him to take the fall for his nephew’s death Jaime - betrayed his oath and killed his former king in order to spare the city while also smashing in his cousin’s head with a rock in order to create a deception and escape Theon - has two innocent boys murdered and burned in order to pass them off as the Stark children None of these characters are viewed as villains but Daenerys is already a villain for watching her abusive brother that traded her off to be the property of a warlord in exchange for his army’s support be executed for violating rites, stealing and threatening her and her unborn baby with a sword?

That line about Qarth doesn’t exist in the books.

​@@ousseynougueye5949 did he say he was reading the books?

Nope. Freeing the slaves in Meereen-not evil. Establishing that former slaves had the right to pick their own careers even if those choices made her, the ruler at the time, uncomfortable-not evil. Deciding the "people" of Meereen would pick their "rulers" in season six, also not evil. Requiring Yara agree to reform the Greyjoys to give up raping and pillaging as part of a condition of making an alliance with her-not evil. Paying a guy triple what his animal was worth because 1 of her dragons killed it-not evil (and giving him more than compensation for it). Agreeing to hold a trial the 1st time someone suggested it (Sir Barristan), not evil. Refusing Daario's suggestion that she simply just kill all the nobles and former slave masters in Meereen to consolidate power (she said she was not a "butcherer" when she refused)-not evil. There is more so I can keep going but the point is that it is relatively easy to see that "everything" she did in Meereen was not evil-many things were actually the opposite. Also she usually has pretty clear and generally logical reasons for making the decisions she does in seasons 1-7 so she is not "crazy" either.

That doesn't mean the nonsense in season 8 is justified. Interestingly enough Daenerys may have followed the spirit or meaning of what you mentioned. The reason a Ned said you have to be the 1 to swing the sword is because you had to be the 1 who listened to the story of the person on the receiving end and decide if the person on deserved it or not. Daenerys usually listened to the stories of people she had executed and gave them a chance to make their arguments. That aside season 8 is still nonsense. And that nonsense is made worse by the changes the writers made to it so as not having wildfire be what destroyed King's Landing like the earlier plan for season 8 had. Yes, commentary from computer effects people is evidence that a change was made and an earlier plan for season 8 was for most of King's Landing to burn due to wildfire, they were told the plan then later told to change the scenes to "not wildfire". Link: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3qACpk4xWJg.html This is just 1 bit of evidence wildfire was the earlier intended way King's Landing would burn, there are other bits but I think this is important because it shows someone was directly told to change their part of making season 8. So there was never this plan to have season 8 Dany wreck King's Landing on purpose. Acting as the executioner or not doesn't determine if someone with going to pointlessly burn a city. That just is not logical.

@@pplr1 whether KL was to be ruined by dragon fire or wild fire isnt my point. I was trying to say that the signs of dany going mad were evident from the start. I saw the signs when her brother died before her eyes and there wasnt a single hint of loss from her. Did i think visaerys deserved his death? Yes. Did i also see signs of dany being a cold hearted conqueror? Also yes. And i was still on her side. After all she had been through i was on her side then. However i still had hope for dany and i still wanted whatever cud have been the best outcome for her. But then i saw her interaction with miri mas dur. And i knew dany was not stable in any way. When dany went into miri mas durs village it was after the scene where she tried to entice her husband to go for the iron throne. Her last statement in that scene was "a throne, for a king or for a queen" which showed me that even then veey early on she had imagined what it wud be like for her to sit on the throne and she liked the thought. Then she sees the village after her husband had promised her and his unborn son that he wud give them the iron throne. So when dany walked through the ruin i believe a part of her knew she was responsible for what happened to the ppl of that village which is why she tried to save the females who hadnt been killed. But even when miri mas dur had told her what they went thru, and knowing she had a part in pushing kal drogo to go for more than what his ppl are used to, we see a small sliver of regret which isbquickly replaced by anger and rage at what HER wishes had led them to. It was dany who wanted kal to bring her home, ut was dany who continuously tried to convince kal drogo that the iron throne was something they wanted when all along it was what she wanted. And then when jal drogo promises her exactly what she wanted she sees what happens when the dothraki prepare for war. But instead of apologizing to mir mas dur for what happened to her village and ger ppl, what does she do? She ties her to a post and burns her alive. I understand that she was in pain and anger for what happened to her husband, but it was what she pushed her husband to in the first place not to mention we saw how she doesnt realky try to fully understand the people under her rule. The dothraki had certain traditions and ways, and her tryung to change those ways before even tryung to understand them, is what did her husband in in the first place. She always went w her emotions and what she believed to be right, and at almost every turn, she had harmed ppl, whether directly or indirectly. It was her whim of taking the dothraki mens mounts that led to her kal fighting one of his own. Then when he was injured she didnt listen to him when he told it was just a scratch. Had she listened to him he might have lived. But she in her foreign state of mind had to get sum1 to heal him for her benefit of mind. And she chose sum1 from the very village that her ppl burned and pillaged. Then her own ppl, the dothraki tried to tell it ut was a bad idea. Did she listen? No. And what did it cost her? Her husband and ger child. She has shown time and time again that she isnt willing to listen to anyone unless they agree with what she wants or believes. And we have been shown time and time again that her decisions like that end badly. Then we see how poorly she does at politics when we get to the gates of quarth. What the thirteen asked of was nothing much. Just proof that she had dragons. She cud havejust shown them one of her dragons. Just one. Take it out if the cage and ket it sit on her shoulders and thats it, they wud have been granted entry. Or she cud have bargained. Let her and ger ppl in and she will show them one of her dragons. But no she chose to threaten instead. "Turn us away and yhu will be the frist to burn." All she knows is how to threaten. She didnt even know how to compromise. She was always distant w ppl unless they benefit her or go along w what she believed or wanted. She never truly tried to understand the comminities she conquered. And her not knowing what it means to take life w her own hands, distanced her from ppl even more. Thats why i mentioned what ned said in episode 1. For a kind or ruler to be the one to handle the sentences personally allows them to hold their ppls lives more dearly than if they just passed the sentence and then watched as someone else did the killing. And dany already being distant from her ppl, had never not once, killed w her own hands. It was her dragons ir sum1 else who served her who got theur hands dirty. And thats what put her, in her minds eye, on a pedestal so high, she no longer cared what ppl under her rule went thru. Hence her ending statement, "i do know what is good because i am good." Followed by her answer to jon "they wont get to choose". A direct sign of how far up she has risen her own pedestal. How righteous she sees herself.

Oh, yeah, she has no concept of what it actually means to take a life. She uses the dragons to burn armies without ever thinking of the consequences.

"whether KL was to be ruined by dragon fire or wild fire isnt my point" It should impact your point a great deal since it indicates if season 8 Dany would want King's Landing to burn or not and is "mad" or not "the signs of dany going mad were evident from the start" Actually no. The actual character Daenerys generally did things for pretty clear and understandable reasons. Thus is sane. To backup that point even more 1 of the GoT authors themselves said Daenerys is not "insane" nor "a sadist" nor "her father" in a season six Inside the Episode. That puts a stop on the idea Daenerys is "mad" or "insane". Also if the season 8 that aired was a major change from the earlier plans where wildfire is what destroyed King's Landing then that also puts a major dent in any argument that this was planned from "the start" since not only was it not but it was a change done in season 8 after there was already a different plan for that season. "So when dany walked through the ruin i believe a part of her knew she was responsible for what happened to the ppl of that village which is why she tried to save the females who hadnt been killed" Thus indicating that if she was in charge of how a war was fought and not Drogo then Daenerys would fight it a different way and harm to civilians would still be avoided as much as possible. Which is also 1 of the reasons she gets the UnSullied later-they don't rape and pillage. "I understand that she was in pain and anger for what happened to her husband" Then you can understand there is still a sane reason Daenerys would want Mirri dead. And Mirri didn't just kill her husband (braindead) but also her unborn child. If someone killed both a spouse and a child of someone else it is not insane for the person who lost their family members to want punishment or revenge. The situation has both Mirri and Daenerys with understandable reasons for wanting who they killed to be dead. "She always went w her emotions and what she believed to be right, and at almost every turn, she had harmed ppl, whether directly or indirectly. It was her whim of taking the dothraki mens mounts that led to her kal fighting one of his own." People are allowed to have emotions or make mistakes and not be "mad". She was naive, not insane. Also she was doing what she could to stop those women from being raped and then enslaved. That probably is the morally right decision-and brave because she was doing it in a situation where most of the Dothraki wanted to rape and enslave others. "All she knows is how to threaten." She did threaten in that situation, but not in others. Often she listened to other people's concerns when making a decision. Also the line ""Turn us away and we will burn you first" is what I believed she said in GoT (your quote was close but not word for word). Funny thing is that it wasn't in the books. Thus it is more evidence the show writers were willing to make changes. In the books Daenerys is welcomed into the city and the people there are happy to have her. That the writers for the show changed things is telling-especially since this is the only time during the who series where show Daenerys generally threatens to burn down cities and lay waste to armies. Thus the show writers are not only changing things but changing the characters they have into different characters. But even then the situation is very different than in season 8. In this situation that Daenerys is dealing with if she and those with her don't get into the city then they all die. And even then the city guards could kill her right then and there so it is possibly just a bluff. "She was always distant w ppl unless they benefit her or go along w what she believed or wanted." She didn't want to marry Hizdar nor reopen the fighting pits but did it as part of trying to compromise to get peace in Meereen. Yes Daenerys has beliefs and will fight for them but we also see her listen to other people so we know she is wiling to consider other points of view and-as rigid as she can be in fighting for her beliefs-she can change her mind about something. "And dany already being distant from her ppl, had never not once, killed w her own hands." This is reverting to confusing refusing to listen to people and understand their lives have value with being willing to stab someone yourself. Daenerys had 1 of her advisors executed because he killed someone. She didn't want to have him executed but felt it was the only way she could be fair under the law. Giving the order to execute him and standing there while it is being done doesn't involve any less listening to his story and understanding his perspective than trying to cut off his head herself. That is misrepresenting arm strength (some people would have a hard time cutting someone else's head off) with listening to others. I'm pretty sure Dothraki warriors under Drogo cut off a lot of people's heads. They even had a pile of them put together for him. Yet that doesn't mean they stopped to listen to the stories and concerns of the people they were beheading as they were beheading them-all does is show they could swing a blade hard enough to kill someone, not value the person being killed. ''Hence her ending statement, "i do know what is good because i am good." Followed by her answer to jon "they wont get to choose".' This is season 8 character assassination and nonsense. The actual character Daenerys transitioned Meereen into a democracy or semi-democracy back in season six. She specifically told Daario the "people" of Meereen would "pick" their "rulers". An ongoing theme of the character Daenerys is that she tends to bring people more freedom and more of an ability to "choose" than they had before. She freed slaves thus giving them more freedom and choices. She established that people could pick their own careers even if those careers choices made her-the ruler-uncomfortable thus created "rights" without using the word and ensured people had more choices than they had before. When transitioning Meereen she gives more political power to common people and former slaves than they likely ever had in their lives before-the ability to choose who the local ruler was. The actual character Daenerys is not likely to have uttered those words from season 8. They are simply more character assassination. Thank you for trying to explain your post to me, I separated different paragraphs and points by hitting the return key. Please do that as well since it makes what you write easier to read and understand.

mellowenglishgal We see how unhappy she is even as she orders an advisor to be executed for committing murder. Thus she knows other people's lives have value. You're repeating the mistake of confusing arm strength (if you are strong enough yourself to cut someone's head off) with listening to his concerns or point of view. Taking the time to listen to other people shows she valued other people's lives. That she repeated tried to limit or avoid harm coming to civilians does too. Also for most of the series her dragons weren't big enough to burn armies. During most of the fighting against the slavers her most important assets were not dragons but armies-of UnSullied in specific.

This and the similarly undiscovered gem @Hill'sAlive are my favorite GoT channels, although props to Glidus and Preston.

I've seen many reviewers who did a better analysis and would be willing to share links if you want some. I pointed out some of the many flaws in this video some time ago as well. You may be late getting here but you didn't miss as much as you thought you did.

@@pplr1your danys biggest fan. There’s 2 sides to this.

She locks the dragons away because she doesn’t have the control over them that she needs and is trying to appeal to the concerns of those in Meereen. Dragon pits were used by generations of Targaryens before her for this very purpose, they only held power for as long as they held the perception of control over the dragons. You argue that it takes consistent work to have control over the dragons but these are three giant creatures and the first to grace the world in 145 years, there isn’t a person alive who knows how to control them and Daenerys realised this very issue when she employed a dragon pit in Meereen to contain them. Book-Daenerys has only just shown dominance to her eldest and fled with him whereas show-Danaerys has some unexplained connection with Drogon and somehow assumes automatic control of all three later on in the series. None of this translates to her suddenly deciding to attack innocent bystanders and burn all of King’s Landing street by street after she is offered her enemy’s surrender

You might like this video! Sounds like we agree on a lot, lol ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-SB7Z_Z8Rz0Y.html

She didn't "basically order her brothers execution" man. Rewatch the show. He turns up drunk to a feast, armed ( which is against Dothraki tradition and likely to get him fucked up anyway) and put his sword to her belly unprovoked. After that she does literally nothing and makes no orders apart from telling him to stop. She may be the villain but Viserys' death was 100% on him.

@@IshtarNike You are right , I didn’t use the right word so it changed the meaning I intended ! (English is actually my third language !). Allowed, agreed, would be a better word, I don’t know I remember Drogo being translated whatever His Highness Drunkass was saying, and then I remember she tried to shut her brother up…so he attacked her , then Dany was translating too , and Drogo got angrier and angrier rightfully so…and I remember Dany and Drogo kind of exchanging a look before he got up and basically ordered gold to be melted ! Also I never said that Viserys’death wasn’t 100% his fault ! It absolutely is , I would never defend that piece of shit ! But Dany did took the news pretty damn well and watched her brother die with no kind of emotional reaction ! Which is explainable too ! One , she was feed up with being ordered around by her brother, which is one off the reasons she took so well too Dothraki culture, she felt freed from her brother , had basically already more status then him , cause she was basically the queen of the tribe ! Even tho the other reason is cause she developed Stockholm syndrome towards her rapist-husband ! She still disassociated during his execution and started to adopt some of his traits with the « I am the blood of the Dragon » « Dragons don’t burn » …plus his death meant she was next in line !

Ohh excellent point. She’s a dragon all along, that just made her realize she got to be that dragon, bad killing self righteous dragon.

Even people who didn't like Daenerys knew season 8 was bs and a couple of them explained why. Specifically they knew it had been well established she didn't want to hurt innocents yet season 8 tried to portray Dany as targeting them and not going after Cersei. Yes not going after Cersei, the Red Keep was ignored-it took a long time for Drogon to reach it and then he flew away after finally getting there while most of it was just fine. That is flat out ridiculous. There are a bunch of other screwups in season 8 but that is a major one as it relates to Dany and multiple people who said they don't like Daenerys (so I'm pretty sure they didn't name any kids after her) saw it and said so.

Butthurt people? The writer of the books. The cast, the creator of the new starwars who was supposed to work with d and d after they'd rushed got saw it and decided working with these two was a bad idea. They were afraid the same thing that happened to season 8 was gonna happen to starwars.