Few shows have made as great of a cultural impact as Game of Thrones. Whether you watched the show or not, you can likely recognize the faces of its iconic and distinct characters, or the unforgettable opening theme by Ramin Djawadi. The cultural phenomenon inspired countless parodies, endless discourse, a good deal of controversy, and effectively launched the careers of A-list stars such as Sophie Turner, Emilia Clarke, and Kit Harrington.
Over the course of eight seasons, the show introduced a number of beloved characters that it brutally killed off all the same, making the show renowned for its unpredictability and commitment to strong storytelling. The series was not without its fair share of criticism, including from those that regarded the show as little more than a high budget pornographic endeavor, with some drama tossed in the mix. Most fans can agree that this criticism was hardly a well-rounded or entirely fair take, with the favor of the majority echoed in the hundreds of awards the series was nominated for on account of its writing, production, and performances. This includes fifty-nine Emmy wins and eight Golden Globes.
MOVIEWEB VIDEO OF THE DAY
Despite being one of the most celebrated television productions in history, the tides began to turn for the HBO fantasy drama upon the release of its highly anticipated eighth season. Plot holes that became impossible to ignore began to turn up left and right, and some of the most popular characters began to unravel in ways that made them unfamiliar to a loyal audience. The most ill-received of these developments was the sudden and arguably sloppy descent of Daenerys Targaryen into tyranny. One of the worst rated episodes in the series, “The Bells”, depicted the destruction and genocide of King’s Landing by Drogon at the command of Daenerys. This development simply does not align with the values that Daenerys held fast to for the previous seven seasons, and hurried attempts to sully her character only created more inconsistencies and contradictions. Poorly developed character arc aside —-this has been already written about at length since 2019 — the destruction of King’s Landing would have made more sense and better connected the series to its prequel had a different character done the deed. Here is why Jon Snow — yes, the honorable and heroic Jon Snow — should have been the one to destroy King’s Landing.
Season Eight
Warner Bros. Television Distribution
Season eight left many people disgruntled. After seven seasons of establishing intricate and interconnected storylines, layered characters, and an incredibly complex world, the writers of Game of Thrones seemed to have dropped the ball significantly once they ran out of source material. Infamously slow as he is brilliant, A Song of Ice and Fire author George R.R. Martin has yet to complete this series. He gave the writers of the hit HBO series the general outline of how he intended to wrap up and wrap together the many converging storylines. In fact, it wasn’t until David Benioff and D.B Weiss correctly predicted Jon Snow’s true parentage that the legendary author deemed them worthy of adapting his novels for television. So how did two writers that were considered so brilliant become so largely denounced by the show’s following?
Unless one has also written a nine-part and yet still unfinished fantasy epic themselves, not many are particularly qualified to question the direction that George R.R Martin intends to take with his story. Nevertheless, the author certainly is taking his time in carefully crafting these outcomes — something the show failed to do. Despite having the green light to produce several more seasons, Game of Thrones creators rushed through the show’s final act. For most fans, it is hard to watch the final season and feel that it is up to the same par as the previous ones, as their favorite characters become irrecognizable and illogical.
Why Jon Should Have Destroyed King’s Landing
House of the Dragon, the recently released Game of Thrones prequel, established previously unknown nuances of the relationships between the Valyrian dragon lords and their dragons. To clarify, these nuances would have been unknown to those who have only watched the television adaptation of George R.R Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire. Just as in the books, House of the Dragon depicts how dragons fiercely bond to their riders for the remainder of that rider’s life. Because dragons live much longer than men, they may be subject to several consecutive riders in their own lifetime, remaining loyal to each. This bond that is only broken by death is initiated as soon as the dragon accepts its riders, as exemplified by Vaghar’s instant loyalty to a young Aemond as soon as the boy mounts her. Vaghar is loyal to Aemond despite having previously been ridden by Laena Velaryon, whose daughter presumed to claim the dragon upon her untimely demise.
If this unbending and instant, primal loyalty is the nature of the relationship between a dragon and its rider, then Raeghal should have exhibited this same loyalty to Jon Snow. Though Rhaegal and Viserion had ridden into battle alongisde Drogon and Daenerys, the mother of dragons never actually rode these two dragons. They were loyal to her as their mother, but that bond Rhaegal held with Daenerys should have been supplanted by devotion to his only rider, Jon Snow. That being said, there is no reason Daenerys should have ridden into King’s Landing upon Drogon while Rhaegal flew alongside them, riderless. Jon was a formidable military leader, but the joint army of Unsullied, Dothraki, and Northerners could have been led just as effectively by Grey Worm and Ser Davos Seaworth. This would allow Jon to participate in the battle in the capacity in which he would be most useful.
Needless to say, the writers of Game of Thrones did not opt for this version of the story — but let’s say they had. What would have happened next? Had Jon been riding Rhaegal, he would have likely remembered to mind the Iron Fleet below, or at least could have maneuvered to avoid the deadly blows the dragon suffered. Since the only storytelling purpose that this scene served was to further weaken Daenerys with the loss of another dragon, this scene would have likely been unneeded altogether in this case. This brings us to what would have been the one and only attempt at sacking the city; one where Daenerys and Jon ride side by side. Jon handled Rhaegal fairly well when he fought against the army of the dead, but how would he fare when using the fire-breathing beast to maneuver more complicated battle tactics? This time, Jon would not be facing an endless expanse of dead footmen. No longer shouting “dracarys” at the dark void, Jon would have to be careful to aim at his enemies and not his own army, or worse, the innocent citizens of King’s Landing.
House of the Dragon has demonstrated that controlling your dragon is far from easy, even in mid-flight. Despite having been bonded to each other for many years, Aemond Targaryen lost command over Vaghar, unable to stop his dragon from killing Lucerys and Arrax. The same could and likely would have happened to Jon, who lacked any significant training in the art of dragon riding and a limited vocabulary in High Valyrian commands. Had Jon lost control of Rhaegal, the dragon could have gone on to destroy King’s Landing without turning neither Jon nor Daenerys into villains. In fact, having a virtuous character like Jon struggle with the guilt of having accidentally committed an absolute atrocity would have been a very interesting watch. The rest of the story, the events that led us to this point and what ensues after, would have undoubtedly been very different from what actually played out. It’s anyone’s guess as to what that could have been, but it would have almost certainly been something far more sensical and enjoyable for an audience that was largely disappointed and disillusioned by what was once the best show on television.
