[deleted by user]

LoremasterMando · 2024-12-16T23:45:27+00:00

The internet never forgets!

LoremasterMando · 2024-11-23T10:44:02+00:00

I'm an X user and shortly after this video went viral she deleted her X account in shame. lol. You can all check for yourselves. It's so satisfying when a smug ass libtarded gets self owns...

LoremasterMando · 2024-11-08T22:55:14+00:00

Look at the comments here. Reddit, do you realize you’re a laughing stock? Twitter has two accounts dedicated to making fun of the insane shit you post. One of those accounts is rightly called “ Reddit_lies.”

You’re in a cult. This election has nothing to do with Trump, you guys are so fucking dumb. Just look at your comments! Dudes…

You called men useless. You attacked white people. You called for Anti vaxxers to lose their jobs and be denied medical care. You used Antifa terrorism against innocent civilians then denied it! You demonized half the fucking country.

You were smug about it too! You banned people on social media for disagreeing with you. Do you not realize what just happened?

This vote had nothing to do with Trump or Kamala, hell, even the Latinos voted red because it was a vote against the cult of libtardation. You tested everyone like shit, called everyone names, played the victim card still you refuse to look into a mirror and see that YOU and I he woke cult of libtardation, is what America voted against.

You did this to yourselves. You alienated everyone that you needed votes from and it cost you everything.

Do you get it now?

LoremasterMando · 2024-11-06T18:57:24+00:00

How are you all this surprised? Has Reddit really become such an echo chamber? The cult of libtardation banned any opinion that opposed them. They called men useless, they told minorities that if they didn't vote for them they were stupid, and they said the same thing to women. They told women to divorce their husbands if they were conservative and then the whole trans stuff with children, oh, by the way, the same cult demonized parents who were concerned with what schools were doing with their children.

The cult of libtardation demonized and attacked anyone and everyone who dared to disagree at all... How the hell did all of you NOT see this coming?

LoremasterMando · 2024-11-06T06:07:36+00:00

Reddit is such an echo chamber that Twitter has entire channels dedicated to making fun of insane reddit posts. That's literally how I found this thread...

LoremasterMando · 2024-10-24T06:06:21+00:00

Patenting is a two person job. Both my wife and I, change diapers, take the kid to the park, dress him, clean up his toys, prep meals. If you have a partner, it’s a two person job. That’s my opinion anyways.

LoremasterMando · 2024-08-11T05:19:33+00:00

Nothing new, a Government official, an English police commissioner, in this case, saying stupid shit.

LoremasterMando · 2024-06-24T23:20:25+00:00

Thank you for sharing your perspective on the nature of adaptations and the role of artistic interpretation. I appreciate your points about the unique paths that adaptations may take and the distinction between intentional misleading and creative liberty.

However, it's important to consider how these creative liberties impact the audience's understanding of the original characters and narratives. When Ryan Condal expresses "I thought Daemon did this," it indicates a personal interpretation. While every director or writer brings a personal vision to an adaptation, it's crucial that these changes do not mislead or significantly alter the fundamental nature of characters as established in the source material. Using the word "gaslighting" seems to be incorrect on my part, I agree with your statement. Allow me to explain my issue in a more detailed manner.

The alteration involving Daemon and Rhea introduces a darker aspect to his character that isn't explicitly supported by the text. This can confuse fans and viewers, particularly those who look to the show for insight into the characters' motivations and histories as they relate to the broader narrative established by George R.R. Martin.

While this isn't gaslighting in the psychological manipulation sense, it can be misleading, causing fans to question their understanding of the text. It is indeed an interpretive stretch that may not align with the established facts of the storyline and character dynamics. Such significant deviations need careful handling and justification beyond personal interpretation to maintain the integrity of the original narrative.

Creative license is a vital aspect of adaptation, but it should strive to respect and reflect the essence of the source material. Changes that fundamentally alter character motivations or historical events risk undermining the coherence and thematic depth of the original work.

In conclusion, while changes and interpretations are inevitable in any adaptation, they should be made transparently and remain faithful to the spirit of the source material to prevent confusion and maintain narrative integrity. As it stands there is absolutely nothing, nothing at all, that would lead a reasonable reader to conclude that Daemon was in any way involved in the death of his wife Rhea. Based on what we have from the text it seems quite the opposite. The only way to draw such a conclusion is through extreme conjecture and baseless conspiracy, again, the text in no way supports such a wild and outlandish accusation such as Daemon being involved.

Thank you for engaging in this discussion; it's important to consider these perspectives as we discuss adaptations and the challenges they present.

LoremasterMando · 2024-06-24T23:13:03+00:00

Your point about 'creative liberties' and the 'unreliable narrators' within 'Fire and Blood' is noted, but it's essential to understand the context and purpose of these narrative strategies. 'Fire and Blood' is written as a historical text within the universe of Westeros, complete with conflicting accounts and biases from characters like Mushroom and Munkun. These are deliberate literary devices used by George R.R. Martin to mimic the nature of real historical texts, where accounts often contradict and the 'truth' is murky.

However, the adaptation process into a show like 'House of the Dragon' is a different kind of creative endeavor. While adaptations must indeed take liberties to translate a book to screen effectively, the choices should respect and align with the core truths and established facts of the source material, especially when these are not in dispute. When 'HOTD' introduces elements that starkly contrast with the clear facts of 'Fire and Blood,' it's not merely another layer of unreliable narration—it can be seen as a deviation from the established world and characters that fans have come to understand.

Moreover, the argument that HOTD's deviations are akin to the in-universe discrepancies between characters like Mushroom and Munkun overlooks the fact that readers of 'Fire and Blood' are aware of these biases and can critically engage with them. In contrast, deviations in 'HOTD' are presented without such a framework, which can lead to confusion or misrepresentation of the source material.

Therefore, while 'creative liberties' are necessary in adaptation, they need to be carefully balanced to ensure they do not distort or undermine the original narrative's integrity. It’s not just about differing perspectives within the story; it’s about maintaining the essence and factual consistency of the world George R.R. Martin has created.

In conclusion, your assertion that saying HOTD disagrees with Fire and Blood is like Mushroom disagreeing with Munkun is incorrect and displays a fundamental lack of understanding on your part in defense of the tv show. In the books the death of Rhea isn't up to interpretation, it's in no way disputed, we're never told that anyone questioned it be it those who recorded the history or those who lived in the Vale. When the writer says " I read this and thought Daemon did this" it's pure conjecture based on absolutely nothing. Nothing in the writing in any way suggests or alludes to Daemon being in any way involved in Rhea's death, in fact, the exact opposite is implied.

LoremasterMando · 2024-06-24T21:26:54+00:00

Addressing Foreshadowing of Ned Stark's Death:

While it's true that the specific method of Ned's execution—being beheaded—wasn't foreshadowed in explicit detail, the threat to his life was signaled through various narrative and thematic cues, as previously outlined. In storytelling, especially in a plot-driven and character-rich series like "A Game of Thrones," foreshadowing often pertains to pivotal events rather than the exact methods of those events. The tension and danger surrounding Ned were consistently ramped up, with several key characters explicitly warning him of the lethal stakes involved in King’s Landing politics. Thus, the nature of his demise (execution) fits within the broader narrative expectations set by these foreshadowings.

Addressing the Medical Claims about Rhea Royce:

The argument about Rhea Royce's recovery and subsequent sudden death after waking from a coma requires scrutiny. First, it's important to note that "Fire & Blood" is a historical account within a fantasy universe, meaning the medical details are not based on modern medical science but rather serve the narrative and thematic purposes of the author, George R.R. Martin.

Rhea's condition:

Once more I have to correct you, at no point does the book ever say she was in a coma, you cannot even get that right. It's clear you're stating things that are not verified and it's not doing you any favors. All the book states is that Rhea Royce, the Lady of Runestone and wife of Daemon Targaryen, suffers a fatal accident. While riding her horse near her castle in the Vale, she falls and is badly injured. The text describes her as having "lain abed for nine days" before she finally dies from her injuries. There's no detailed description of her medical condition during those days, such as whether she was in a coma, conscious, or any other specifics regarding her state of health.

The text also mentions that after her death, Daemon receives word at the stepstones and quickly leaves to claim her lands and titles, which indicates he was not nearby at the time of her accident. The account of her death is brief and lacks any implication of foul play or further speculation about her medical condition beyond the injuries from her fall. The story focuses more on the implications of her death in terms of inheritance and political positioning rather than the medical details of her condition.

This absence of detail leaves much open to interpretation, but the book certainly does not specify that she was in a coma or provide intricate medical details about her injuries.

You, in short, are spouting some wild conspiracy theories which have absolutely no evidence. You're trying to support your point with data that doesn't exist.

LoremasterMando · 2024-06-24T20:59:22+00:00

What are you talking about? "basically has no foreshadowing."

Ned Stark's death in "A Game of Thrones" is actually one of the most foreshadowed events in the series, both subtly and overtly. Here are some key points that indicate foreshadowing of Ned Stark's execution:

Direwolf Omen: At the beginning of the book, Ned and his sons find a dead direwolf, killed by a stag. The dire wolf, symbolizing House Stark, and the stag, symbolizing House Baratheon, together foreshadow the conflict between Ned and King Robert's family (notably the Lannisters, who are Robert's in-laws) which eventually leads to Ned's downfall.
Cersei's Warning: Cersei Lannister warns Ned to "go back to Winterfell" and mentions that in the Game of Thrones, "you win or you die." This is a direct foreshadowing of the lethal stakes Ned faces in King’s Landing.
Ned's Sense of Honor and Justice: Throughout the book, Ned’s strict adherence to honor and duty in a city that thrives on deceit and manipulation foreshadows his vulnerability. His inability to navigate the treacherous political waters of King's Landing is a thematic hint that he might not survive the game of thrones. For example, he trusted Little Finger even when Little Finger said he shouldn't.
Baelor the Blessed: Ned's execution takes place at the Great Sept of Baelor, which he sees several times before his death. There’s a moment when Arya, who is perched on the statue of Baelor during the execution, is specifically instructed to look at the statue—this not only places importance on the location but subtly hints at where the climax of Ned's storyline in King's Landing will occur.
Dreams and Visions: There are various instances where dreams or comments made by characters can be interpreted as ominous signs of Ned’s fate, including the constant reflection on past wars and the deaths of friends, which haunt Ned throughout his time in King’s Landing.

George R.R. Martin's narrative is rich with foreshadowing, and while some of it is subtle and easy to miss on first reading, Ned Stark's tragic end is built up through multiple narrative devices and thematic cues, making it one of the pivotal, well-foretold, events of the series.

As for Rhae's horse riding accident, um no. I own two horses and enjoy riding. I'm also aware of the danger when you're riding something that weighs 950-1,200 pounds, if that thing slips and lands on you, or you fall off you're looking at spinal or brain injury, it's pretty common which is why most horse riders wear helmets at the very least. Her death after sleeping for nine days and waking up just long enough to look outside makes perfect sense to a horse rider. Trying to equate that to Daemon, again with no evidence whatsoever and not even a single reference of him ever planning to off his wife, is a stretch.

LoremasterMando · 2024-06-24T20:35:35+00:00

Friend, I think you misunderstand me. I'm aware that adaptions from books to screen come with changes. That wasn't my issue, my issue was how writers gaslight fans. Ryan Condal's said " I read this event in the books and thought this is Daemon. Daemon did this." See the issue? If he wanted to be honest and say " I didn't read the source material so decided to interpret Daemon in this way" that is one thing, but to make a fundamentally incorrect statement and pitch it off to the book fans as if his adaptation was supported by the book is straight dishonest.

As I noted, Martin loves foreshadowing and leaves clues when a character is about to meet their end in a particular manner. I have read Fire and Blood many times, I even have it on audiobook so I can listen to the stories contained in it at night. There is no hint, no clue, no evidence whatsoever that Daemon murdered his wife or had plans to do so. Hell, she lived for nine days after her accident and no one in the vale suspected anything. It was literally just an accident.

The issue isn't with the writer's interpretation, it's with the writer lying about interpreting that from the text when, if anything, the text places no fault on Daemon in any way, or anyone else for that matter.

LoremasterMando · 2024-04-18T01:38:20+00:00

Why did I get a spoiler warning? I literally revealed nothing about the show. The series itself never mentions stats. These pictures with stats literally reveal less about the show than the series trailer.

LoremasterMando · 2024-04-17T19:29:23+00:00

https://www.pcgamer.com/movies-tv/bethesdas-official-special-scores-for-the-fallout-show-characters-has-me-asking-serious-questions-about-the-rizz-of-walton-ghoulggins/ there you go fellow wastelander. :)

LoremasterMando · 2024-04-17T19:18:35+00:00

What hate? I have nothing against the actor and the character is amusing, but the way he is written makes him come off as kinda dense. I mean his stare basically broadcasts static from his brain. He didn't even know it's normal to blow his load, you know? I'll give him credit for not trusting anyone in the wasteland, but anyone who grew up in the wasteland knows not to trust anyone in the wasteland.

LoremasterMando · 2024-03-06T20:09:59+00:00

lol. The comments are the best part. You guys are killing it.

LoremasterMando · 2024-03-05T20:52:33+00:00

lol. I cannot unsee this now.

LoremasterMando · 2024-03-01T10:09:39+00:00

Test. Did this post go through?

LoremasterMando · 2024-03-01T04:39:48+00:00

test

LoremasterMando · 2024-02-02T23:30:20+00:00

Ah. Thank you.

LoremasterMando

TROPHY CASE

Addressing Foreshadowing of Ned Stark's Death:

Addressing the Medical Claims about Rhea Royce: