Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish
Good rundown of the severe flaws in battle strategy. As stated in the conclusion, we can't expect things to be completely realistic in a show like this. But this battle and the way they went about it was just so starkly different from previous battles in terms of realistic outcomes and characters overcoming completely impossible odds. An ounce of common sense would have made this episode so much better...
|
I'll go to my grave about the Dothraki argument - but the other points are all fair. Arguably points like these can be applied to almost any cinematic battle. This doesn't excuse Game of Thrones, simply because the first two battles we saw (Blackwater and WOW) as well as the S1-2 battles that were
described had such stellar, historically and logically grounded plans from both sides (as well as thematically sensible twists). This elevated our expectations for battles on the show, and it makes sense that those were the battles that had the most influence from GRRM, who was a professor of history for decades before he began ASOIAF.
The battles since Season 4 have all had leaps of logic and logistical problems, which makes complete sense since D&D have been largely on their own. From a filmmaking perspective they've been excellent (since they are filmmakers). Hell, my wife's fitbit logged 55 minutes of exercise during that episode. However, the sound historical logic we saw in the first four seasons has more or less gone to the wayside.