I mean depicting feudal lords as child-marrying creeps isn't exactly an endorsement of said behavior so much as an accurate depiction of what feudal lords were (ignore the part where they have dragons)
It's not an accurate depiction. Europeans generally didn't marry as children in the time period they're roughly portraying. They're doing it for titillations.
while enjoying this product meant for entertainment purposes.
well that's the thing, isn't it? Humans often listen to songs that make them sad, or watch documentaries that make them mad, or read books that make them think. The vague assertion that something is "entertainment" implies that anything gross or excessive being depicted by said "entertainment" is intended to be enjoyed for its exploitative qualities, like some kind of gladiatorial bloodsport.
Entertainment leads to the provocation of various emotions, both positive and negative, which leads to reflection on the part of the audience. Entertainment often makes us uncomfortable. It's not purely for enjoyment or titillation. The depiction of people with complicated lives and problematic behavior is often misconstrued as an endorsement of said behavior or even an exploitative attempt at titillating sickos. I think this might somewhat be the case with Gambo Thrones, so I'm not gonna stick my neck out too hard to defend it, but I find this analysis has its limitations. I endorse exploitation-free entertainment, content warnings, and people being free to not watch things that disturb them. But I don't think a depiction of something problematic is inherently meant to "titillate" regardless of context.
I agree with everything you said here, especially the stuff about the exploitation of the actresses, in particular Emilia Clarke, and keep in mind I was making a much more abstract case about so called "entertainment" in general, and not about these particular banker inheritance hogs. I even said
I think this might somewhat be the case with Gambo Thrones, so I’m not gonna stick my neck out too hard to defend it
I don't want to defend any of the exploitation that went into this particular show.
there’s a possibility that her character assassination in the final season was a sort of retaliation against her for that.
The banker inheritance hogs David and Dan are really really shitty writers and really really shitty people who didn't know how to end a story once they ran out of source material from the novels. They upward failed their way into an even bigger writing contract and so shortened the final seasons of GoT so they could be done with it. But you're probably right that they were also retaliating against Clarke. That wouldn't surprise me. There's actually another example where they admitted they were doing that. I remember seeing an interview with them where they were talking about how an actor (the old guy who plays Ser Barriston Selmy) approached them about the poor writing surrounding his characters' death and Dan Weiss (or David Benioff, I get the two confused) said "that made me want to kill him even more." (i.e. kill his character off so he didn't have to work with the actor anymore) As though the protestations of the actors against the shitty show running was justification for petty retaliation. So you definitely might have a point there. I had actually forgotten that and your commend reminded me.
You made this exact assertion in this exact struggle session and did not respond to Harry Limes who pointed out you were wrong. Why do you continue being wrong on purpose?
Average age for nobility or average age overall? Because GRRM based his world on the war of the roses and there’s a giant notable example of this during the war of the roses. You really just hate GRRM I think and don’t accept new info
You're criticizing a show you haven't seen for portraying elites as creepy pedos who treat women like objects. How do you want them to portray elites? Because aristocratic elites are creepy pedos who treat women like objects. The show also does zero of the titillating you're accusing it of. It definitely applies to GoT, but HoTD definately feels aware of the criticisms GoT recieved while staying true to the source material.
I was reading Reddit threads and there were people making it seem like this distinction is very important and it's a serious problem if people don't understand it...
They didn't do that, and so far there has been zero sexual violence. The only nudity has been in a whorehouse because one of the main characters has a romantic relationship with a prostitute and she was only nude in that one scene. Later in that episode there is some background nudity when the same main character has a party at the same establishment.
I’m sitting here imagining bazinga brain dude bros watching Come and See, would they actually be moved by it or reject it because it’s from gommulist country and not Saving Private Ryan?
Ngl I thought the first two episodes were pretty decent. The CGI was a little iffy at times but other than that it aight
The child bride stuff tho is pretty wtf...
I mean depicting feudal lords as child-marrying creeps isn't exactly an endorsement of said behavior so much as an accurate depiction of what feudal lords were (ignore the part where they have dragons)
It's not an accurate depiction. Europeans generally didn't marry as children in the time period they're roughly portraying. They're doing it for titillations.
i'm not going to shed too many tears at feudal lords being unfairly slandered by the fantasy TV show for a thing they only did sometimes
deleted by creator
well that's the thing, isn't it? Humans often listen to songs that make them sad, or watch documentaries that make them mad, or read books that make them think. The vague assertion that something is "entertainment" implies that anything gross or excessive being depicted by said "entertainment" is intended to be enjoyed for its exploitative qualities, like some kind of gladiatorial bloodsport.
Entertainment leads to the provocation of various emotions, both positive and negative, which leads to reflection on the part of the audience. Entertainment often makes us uncomfortable. It's not purely for enjoyment or titillation. The depiction of people with complicated lives and problematic behavior is often misconstrued as an endorsement of said behavior or even an exploitative attempt at titillating sickos. I think this might somewhat be the case with Gambo Thrones, so I'm not gonna stick my neck out too hard to defend it, but I find this analysis has its limitations. I endorse exploitation-free entertainment, content warnings, and people being free to not watch things that disturb them. But I don't think a depiction of something problematic is inherently meant to "titillate" regardless of context.
deleted by creator
I agree with everything you said here, especially the stuff about the exploitation of the actresses, in particular Emilia Clarke, and keep in mind I was making a much more abstract case about so called "entertainment" in general, and not about these particular banker inheritance hogs. I even said
I don't want to defend any of the exploitation that went into this particular show.
The banker inheritance hogs David and Dan are really really shitty writers and really really shitty people who didn't know how to end a story once they ran out of source material from the novels. They upward failed their way into an even bigger writing contract and so shortened the final seasons of GoT so they could be done with it. But you're probably right that they were also retaliating against Clarke. That wouldn't surprise me. There's actually another example where they admitted they were doing that. I remember seeing an interview with them where they were talking about how an actor (the old guy who plays Ser Barriston Selmy) approached them about the poor writing surrounding his characters' death and Dan Weiss (or David Benioff, I get the two confused) said "that made me want to kill him even more." (i.e. kill his character off so he didn't have to work with the actor anymore) As though the protestations of the actors against the shitty show running was justification for petty retaliation. So you definitely might have a point there. I had actually forgotten that and your commend reminded me.
deleted by creator
there's 6 minutes of just raw footage of these guys in interviews being the biggest failson dickweasels known to mankind
deleted by creator
wait, they are doing The Three Body Problem?!
FUCKING SHIT. IT WAS FUNNY WHEN IT WAS A WORK I DIDN'T KNOW OR CARE ABOUT please let this die in development hell
https://hexbear.net/post/216515/comment/2755727
You made this exact assertion in this exact struggle session and did not respond to Harry Limes who pointed out you were wrong. Why do you continue being wrong on purpose?
I said the average age of marriage was 18-25. Harry pointed out one specific example of an exception that rule. Do with that what you will.
deleted by creator
Fair enough.
deleted by creator
Average age for nobility or average age overall? Because GRRM based his world on the war of the roses and there’s a giant notable example of this during the war of the roses. You really just hate GRRM I think and don’t accept new info
deleted by creator
Yeah, peasants weren't marrying off 14 year olds, but the aristocrats definately were.
deleted by creator
You're criticizing a show you haven't seen for portraying elites as creepy pedos who treat women like objects. How do you want them to portray elites? Because aristocratic elites are creepy pedos who treat women like objects. The show also does zero of the titillating you're accusing it of. It definitely applies to GoT, but HoTD definately feels aware of the criticisms GoT recieved while staying true to the source material.
deleted by creator
They were very untitilating scenes. Extremely so.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
He’s not a pedophile he’s an ephebophile 🤢
Redditor King
He actually is. He has a soy funko-valyria collection and decides to marry a 15 year old girl because she shared his interest in miniatures
I was reading Reddit threads and there were people making it seem like this distinction is very important and it's a serious problem if people don't understand it...
deleted by creator
There is a material difference between the 40-50 yr old king marrying his 12 yr old cousin and him marrying his daughters 15 yr old best friend. /s
🤮
I hate Reddit.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
They didn't do that, and so far there has been zero sexual violence. The only nudity has been in a whorehouse because one of the main characters has a romantic relationship with a prostitute and she was only nude in that one scene. Later in that episode there is some background nudity when the same main character has a party at the same establishment.
deleted by creator
I’m sitting here imagining bazinga brain dude bros watching Come and See, would they actually be moved by it or reject it because it’s from gommulist country and not Saving Private Ryan?
deleted by creator
Depends on how it pays off. Gambo 1 also started off with child bride stuff, and that gave us Dany who was pretty cool until she very suddenly wasn't.
deleted by creator
The proposed child bride in question is both never seen on screen and the king literally chooses someone else anyway
deleted by creator
It's actually not terrible. Although my expectations were lower than the floor to begin with.
I'm also not paying for it :cool-bean:
We desperately need a pirate flag emoji wtf
deleted by creator
They don't even need to do child brides. Age of first marriage in Europe was like 22.
deleted by creator