wv wrote:

…is GrayWorm dead? I kinda hope so. Nevermuch liked his character. I just never bought into his
great-warrior persona. He just doesn’t have the body for it. I think he’s miscast as a tough, battle-hardened warrior. Reminds me of the frail, skinny Klingons of the early tv-star-trek shows.

If yer gonna cast a Warrior — cast someone with a warrior’s body.

Are ALL the Dothraki dead?

w
v

I’d have to watch the episode again, but I think he survived. Few of his brethren did, if memory serves, and I think all the Dothraki died in that initial charge.

(As I was watching them ride off half-crazed, I expected them to return after a brief pause in the form of the undead. Glad I was wrong. That would have been more of that “too much” thing.)

Agree about the actor. He doesn’t really fit the image of arguably the best fighters in the world of the books . . . though, at times, the Dothraki seem to hold that crown.

Your comment also reminds me of the Netflix Marvel show, Iron Fist, which had all kinds of issues, including casting. The actor playing the lead (a Game of Thrones alumni) was bad enough along those lines, but his chief nemesis (Davos) was even worse. He just wasn’t believable as this awesome Martial Arts expert.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3322310/

Back in my twenties, I was a bouncer for a bit while going to school. The owner of the bar hired a bunch of us based on the premise that he wanted order and protection for customers and merchandise, but he didn’t want mountains guarding the gate. So, pretty much everyone I worked with was really good in Martial Arts, in great shape but just average sized. My own lane was more boxing and wrestling, but I respected the Martial Arts stuff a ton, and knew just enough to get myself into big trouble. So I never tried that out in public.

Anyway, to make a long story short, it’s believable to me that a great fighter could be relatively small, but it’s not if they’re weak.

wv wrote:

====================

Ahhh. I also was confused about the nightking’s dragon showing up alive. So he got re-animated. Its all problematic isnt it. I mean, how many times can he reanimate things? Over and over again? Can he re-animate pieces of things? Fingers? Eyeballs?

I agree on the “too unfair for words” feeling. There were times that was how i was feeling watching it. I dont know whether to give them credit for building that feeling or to criticize it. I guess its what they were goin for given the storyline. But it does raise questions about just how dark is ‘too dark’? Is there such a thing? Is there a limit?

w
v

Sometimes I think writers set up impossibly hopeless conflicts and dilemmas, and it seems they trap themselves in the process. This sometimes necessitates sudden, almost too easy answers that resolve the conflict all at once. In this case, killing the Night King instantly wipes out the entire Army of the Dead, which a few of the characters suspected would happen way back. But then why didn’t they concentrate on all of that from Day One?

Of course, that would have meant the journey itself wasn’t necessary, so writers can’t do that. We’d all be out of work!!

So, yeah. You can go too dark. And then it almost means you have to truncate and over-simplify the way out, instead of perhaps dialing back the impossibility and hopelessness of things, and maybe end the crisis with a bit more complexity and time factored in.

JJ Abrams tends to choose the impossible, hopeless odds, and then the too clever by half resolution. A lot of showrunners follow his lead.

All of that said, my complaints about “too much” made me also think of Tom Hanks and his “There is no crying in zombie killing battles.” So I have to look at it from that angle, too.

All in all, I favor the depiction of epic encounters with monsters and beasts, requiring all kinds of courage and tenacity, but I think you have to give the heroes legit chances to survive. The momentum of the story should be able to work without Deus ex Machinas, in general.

nittany ram wrote:

See, I thought the dragon fight was hard to follow. And it was difficult to tell what the outcome was. Immediately after the fight when John’s dragon sorta crash landed, they never showed it again. However, I’m pretty sure it’s ok. I assumed the Night King’s dragon was dead so I was surprised to see it wreaking havoc inside Winterfell later on.

Apologies, Nittany, if I’m saying something here you already knew:

The Night King reanimated all the dead, including his blue-flame dragon. That’s why he was able to wreak that havoc inside Winterfell later on.

And part of me was just thinking, “Oh, come on!! Enough is enough!!” The fighting was close to too much even before the reanimation — as in, it’s kinda just too unfair for words, going up against an endless horde of zombies. Like, the Rams having to face the Patriots defense without an offensive line and shackles on Goff’s feet.

The refs should have stepped in and flagged the Night King for unsportsman-like reanimations.

I think a lot of this comes down to Gurley’s own attitude about splitting time.

This is a total guess. I have no proof to support the guess. But, IMO, Gurley likely pouted a bit (away from the public) in the past over even the idea of splitting carries, so that factored into his workload. It made it heavier. His pride got in the way. His sense of his own capacity for doing it all got in the way.

(Of course his world-class results made the above more than logical)

Now? I think he fully understands that there is no choice. He’s never going to be a bell-cow running back again. Those days are gone forever, and I think he knows this. Even as recently as the CJ Anderson games prior to the Super Bowl, I think it bothered him. But from the Super Bowl on, I’m betting he’s seen the light.

Long story short: He’s good with the new draft pick and McVay will make this work. They’ll be a dynamic duo — and Brown will add one more excellent back to the mix. Not sure the order of RB2 or RB3. And it may not even matter. But McVay will make it work.

zn wrote:

Rocket and Thor go to Asgard. Skippable. I took time out to see that too and shouldn’t have. But my daughter and I have a standing deal to see the MCU films every opening night.

Thanks again.

Nice tradition to have with your daughter.

I want to see it as soon as possible, but know I won’t make it through the full three hours. I can always see it again, later, via DVD or streaming (to catch the skipped part) . . .

Hope all is well.

WV,

Waaay off topic:

Did you catch my review of the new book, This Life, by Martin Hagglund? I think all the leftists here would love it, but it’s especially right up your alley, I’m betting.

IMO, it’s immensely important philosophy, and he makes a provocative case for democratic socialism along the way. Builds up to it. Takes us on a journey, etc. by critiquing both religion and capitalism.

It’s not as exciting as Game of Thrones, and there aren’t any dragons or zombies in it, at least that I remember, but it’s damn good all the same.

Just a rough guess. Most NFL linebackers are in the 4.7 range. A bunch run faster, in the 4.6 range. A smaller bunch in the 4.5s. Very rare to find them faster than 4.5.

Both Devins this year are in the 4.4 range. Doesn’t happen often. Pittsburgh drafted one of them to replace Shazier, who may have been the fastest linebacker in the NFL before his devastating injury.

In the 4.3s.

Another thing I’ve noticed about draft reports: They can be all over the map. I’ve forgotten their names, but I looked at some of the UDFAs online, and a few of them had comments ranging from “below average athleticism” to “freakishly athletic.”

As in, the same guy was described in wildly different ways.

I think that wide range is more frequent for the lesser known players. Another guess. The guys with the relatively consistent grades — Top 100, give or take — seem to provoke a more narrow subjective response.

In general, with all kinds of contingencies afoot and in play, your first three rounds should yield starters now or in the future. If you get that from your 4th rounder too, that’s a good draft. Beyond the fourth round? Tremendous draft.

Of course, the better a team is, the more difficult this becomes. The best teams in any given year may not get any starters from their drafts, period, and they may still draft really, really well.

The Rams are, as we all know, a really good team. But they do have holes. The draft still should bring them starters, upgrades, etc. etc.

I think they got a likely future starter in Rapp, Gaines (he might start sooner than later), Long (nickel) and Henderson (if Gurley falters). Evans and Edwards appear to offer solid O-line depth, which every team needs.

I’m betting Scott gives them an immediate “starter” on special teams, and will contribute heavily as a rookie. Finding someone like that in the 7th round is a coup. Dakota Allen, despite his awesome name, strikes me as a likely cut. We’ll see.

All in all, a pretty good draft, though I would have preferred a different safety instead of Rapp. If his forty was impacted by his hip injury, I feel better about the pick. But even then, I think the Rams had better options. He still should start for them when Weddle leaves, which is a good thing.

Overall, a solid B.

I don’t remember seeing him play, but likely watched him a time or two without focusing, etc. As a Maryland fan, Michigan is in the picture.

He tested off the charts when it comes to the short shuttle and 3-cone, for whatever that’s worth, and his vert is excellent. Fast in the 40, too, at 4.45.

To the degree the testing tells us anything, he’s jitterbug quick. Should be excellent in the slot, and probably would have done a nice job on Edelman.

Had excellent grades in school as well, and is another young player. Just turned 21 this past February.

joemad wrote:

I think The Wildling, who was breast fed by a “giant”, wants to breed with Jaime the Knight…..

You mean, with Brienne the knight. Right?

I am. Liking it. Helped to rewatch all of last season before this one started.

Reminded me how good it is, from the standpoint of production values, writing, acting, drama. Seriously compelling. For TV, it’s top of the heap, IMO. Many scenes rate that for “film” too.

Trying to avoid spoilers, but, suffice it to say, next week (episode three) is gonna be the Biggie.

That looks like a great list. Want to read several on it.

Have read just two. The Overstory and The Tangled Tree, which I’ve mentioned before. Both well worth reading.

Richard Powers recently won a Pulitzer for The Overstory. A brilliant, important book, that will last.

wv wrote:

Do you think the Rep-Amerikunz and the Dem-Amerikunz are ever gonna…um….wake up?

I’ve never watched this show before, and don’t know the host, but he starts off with a howler, claiming Nicole Wallace is “from the left.” She’s a conservative Republican, worked for Dubya on his communications staff, and was a senior advisor to McCain in his campaign for president.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolle_Wallace

Anyone who watches her show knows she’s conservative. Yes, she’s a Never-Trumper, but she hews to center-right positions politically.

Methinks the host assumed she was “from the left” because she’s on MSNBC. Not a good assumption.

Anyway, as for the discussion: I am worried about the heightened tensions in America. But I personally think “the left” makes a big mistake whenever it thinks this is a symmetrical issue. It’s not. The vast majority of the tension is generated by Republicans and the hard-right.

. . . Right-wing Dems are a part of it as well, especially those who stand in front of AIPAC and denounce Ilhan Omar — thus making her point for her. But in general, this is primarily on Republicans, IMO.

(Nothing in politics is symmetrical. The two parties aren’t equivalent on anything, really. They’re both rotten and need to go away. But they’re rotten to different degrees, for different reasons, and with different effects. And their “bases” are ever further apart.)