POLL: @GameOfThrones – Final Season #GoTS8

Some time ago I posted a faux titles video of Game Of Thrones which showed Rome being built instead of the GoT world.  I was surprised at the reactions I got.  Of course I hadn’t seen any of the show when I posted that.

In any event, tonight people are abuzz because the final season of Game Of Thrones will begin.

Let’s have a poll, which is an implication of precisely nothing.

Pick your best answer.  Yes, yes… there are other possible answers, but I don’t care.

Anyone can vote, but only approved, registered users can comment.

What about "Game Of Thrones" the Final Season?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Here’s the video I mentioned.  It’s pretty clever.  I’m amazed at how people can do this stuff.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Lighter fare, POLLS and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. acardnal says:

    Too much graphic sex/nudity. And I mean graphic! I do not watch it. If they made a “clean” version, I would probably watch it.

  2. Missouri Knight says:


  3. Diana says:

    That video is awesome!! I love it when people use their talents to make beautiful things.

  4. brasscow says:

    Haven’t watched but have heard enough to know I will ravenously avoid it.

  5. Philmont237 says:

    If there was a version without the graphic sex and nudity, I would be a huge fan.

  6. brasscow: ravenously avoid

    Creative! Kudos.

  7. bibi1003 says:

    I watched some episodes from the first season and decided not to go on because of the sex/nudity/incest. There are pictures in my mind that will never go away. If you haven’t watched it, don’t.

  8. majuscule says:

    I have only watched a brief parody of it (from Bad Lip Reading I believe).

    Trouble is, if you know nothing about the original, most of the parody means nothing!

  9. Midwest St. Michael says:

    I’m with acardinal and Missouri Knight. [I suffered through the books – and then tossed them in our dumpster at work. Decided not to chance the show because of the se*ual content.]

  10. Akita says:

    I’m told it’s soft porn. Do those who watch and then confess have a firm purpose of amending their lives?

  11. David says:

    The series of books started out as fine fantasy/sci-fi, but unfortunately Mr. Martin developed a terminal case of Robert Jordan syndrome – book after book wasted on minor characters and plot rabbit holes sufficient to completely lose the thread. If (big if) he ever actually finishes the series, it might be worth reading the second half, throwing out the trash in the middle. As for the screen production – far too much glorification of wrong-doing and evil for watching to be good for you. To a degree, you tend to become like what you pay attention to. This is still excellent advice for life: “Whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.”

  12. JustaSinner says:

    Like my motherly Sisters said in grade school: He who runs with the rats, becomes a rat. I have an aversion to rodents.

  13. Grant M says:

    Now my interest is piqued. Maybe I will start to watch the series, knowing that the Indonesian censor has doubtless provided the clean version that acardnal recommends.

  14. Atra Dicenda, Rubra Agenda says:

    To be fair, I read the books back in undergraduate before there was a show OR I had discovered this blog.

    Clearly I’m an outlier in the bottom 1% of your reprobate readership who has read and watched Thrones…

  15. Paul of St Paul says:

    GOT didn’t grab me.
    But Vikings and Last Kingdom sure did.
    I would be interested in Fr Z reader comments on Vikings, particularly the first two or three series with Athelstan

  16. carn says:

    “Some time ago I posted a faux titles video of Game Of Thrones which showed Rome being built instead of the GoT world. I was surprised at the reactions I got. Of course I hadn’t seen any of the show when I posted that.”

    You should stick with that.

    I read about 3/4 of the first book and watched maybe 5 episodes (or snippets amounting to that). I quit reading the book, cause at about 3/4 of the first book i concluded that the only possible just and good possible ending left were if the ice zombies killed everyone; anything else would not be just.

    Right this morning me and my wife jocked about binge watching GOT as actual binge watching – that means every time you see a bare breast, you have ato empty one small shot of booze.

    My wife guessed watching 3 episodes would be more than sufficient that its binge watching with real binge.

    in my opinion the entire series is a sophisticated attempt to destroy the so to say morale universe of fantasy; not just questioning it or criticizing it, but to turn good and evil so often times round and round and upside down, that in the end the terms have no meaning left.

    There is a very visiual example i think in seson 7, episode “Spoils of War”.

    What is the absolute classic picture of heroic chivalry since centuries?
    The knight on his horse with a lance in his hand charging the dragon to save the maiden, which the dragon wants to devour.

    What visiual does GOT provide in that episode?

    A knight in the thick of a battle seeing the dragon landed and the “maiden” (well a yound woman; but there are no maidens in GOT i guess) not too far away; and a spear at hand.

    The actor i think makes quite a good job of demonstrating how the knight has to muster has will and bravery to grab the spear and charge towards the dragon (after all, charging a fire breathing beast with claws and teeth three or more times the size and weight of an elephant with a pointy stick instead of some anti-tank weapons takes some bravery and foolishness).

    But this is GOT; so the knight does not charge in to kill the dragon to save the “maiden”; he aims his spear for the “maiden” (cause she is the commander of the opposing army and the dragon); and the dragon saves her.

    So instead of:
    The knight on his horse with a lance in his hand charging the dragon to save the maiden, which the dragon wants to devour.

    We get in GOT in an attempt to perfectly confound our senses of right and wrong in full visual:

    The knight on his horse with a lance in his hand charging the dragon to kill the maiden, which the dragon wants to save.

  17. carn says:

    If its acceptable to prove the point of the near perfect inversion the video just showing the scene i describe (no nudity, “just” a battlefield):


  18. xraytango says:

    I really enjoyed book 1 but around book 3 it got monotonous and I stopped somewhere in the middle. I hated the sexual content in the books and especially the HBO version so I stopped watching it.

    For anyone interested in that kind of fantasy writing but without all the sexual nonsense I highly recommend The Stormlight Archive.

  19. Geoffrey says:

    I could not get past the first two episodes.

  20. mwa says:

    Apparently, HBO is suing the website “pornhub” for breach of copyright on account of the scenes directly from GoT that are on the website. The website has also reported that hits decrease dramatically during GoT episode broadcasts, taking 4 hours after broadcast to return to average numbers.

  21. Facta Non Verba says:

    Yesterday, the National Review on-line had an interesting article called, “The Gospel according to Game of Thrones.” It discussed the strong Catholic themes running through the show. While there are some scandalous scenes, count me among those who are big fans of the show.

  22. Semper Gumby says:

    Thought I’d chip in two cents. First though, I haven’t seen an episode and have no interest in GoT.

    From a 2017 opinion-piece at The Week about GoT:

    “My wife had gone to bed, and I was sitting up having just finished the penultimate episode of the show’s sixth season on my laptop. Then it occurred to me:

    “My goodness. I’ve just spent an hour watching to see if a guy who raped a teenage girl at bow-and-arrow point is going to be eaten alive by the animals he has spent the last few seasons subjecting to forms of cruelty that make Michael Vick look like a PETA ambassador or beaten to death in the freezing cold by his victim’s half-brother. Thank goodness the guy who set his terminally ill daughter on fire in a pyromantic oblation to a heathen god at the behest of a witch who never seems to wear any clothes is not around to prevent justice from being carried out here — the woman whose size makes her the frequent butt of bestiality-related jokes killed him just in time! Lucky that she has a wealthy and well-connected benefactor in a one-armed knight whose hobbies from childhood on have included killing people and sleeping with his queen sister — including in a church right next to the corpse of one of their unacknowledged sons — to whom we were first introduced when he pushed the little brother of the above-mentioned rape victim out of a window to conceal his incest from her drunken prostitute-addicted domestic-abuser husband! Almighty God has made me in His own image and endowed me with faculties of reason and sense perception and given me free will so that I can tune in next week to see whether the unidextrous dueling champ’s royal sister sets her daughter-in-law and the rest of her extended family on fire or just a bunch of priests. Hallelujah!”


    In the comments above there is a comment by “carn”:

    “…But this is GOT; so the knight does not charge in to kill the dragon to save the “maiden”; he aims his spear for the “maiden” (cause she is the commander of the opposing army and the dragon); and the dragon saves her.

    “So instead of:
    The knight on his horse with a lance in his hand charging the dragon to save the maiden, which the dragon wants to devour.

    “We get in GOT in an attempt to perfectly confound our senses of right and wrong in full visual:

    The knight on his horse with a lance in his hand charging the dragon to kill the maiden, which the dragon wants to save.”

    Interesting comment. To follow-up, here is an excerpt from Michael D. O’Brien’s book “A Landscape with Dragons- The Battle for Your Child’s Mind.” This excerpt is from David Sloan’s Introduction:

    “The role of symbols is one of O’Brien’s central concerns. The symbols employed in traditional storytelling signified real presences in the invisible world, be they angels or devils. They offered spiritual insight into the nature of the Christian cosmos, imparting to the reader some essential insights into the invisible realm and the struggle between it and the natural realm where we must live. The book examines one image in particular—the dragon. The author describes how this symbol is common to almost all cultures in some form or other, and how in Western literature it has represented the antagonist in a clearly defined battle between good and evil. The battle lines have become blurred because of a growing moral illiteracy and departure from traditional use of classical symbols. It is now widely held that dragons are merely misguided, in need of compassion, and in some cases misjudged altogether. The monster is being tamed. This kind of reversal of symbolism constitutes an invasion of the imagination, undermining our ability to recognize truth.

    “Because of man’s vulnerability to the power of impressions, he is becoming less able to grasp reality itself. Good is no longer perceived as good, nor evil as evil; traditional Christian values are considered to be the product of a narrow-minded prejudice. This has led to a blend of human and diabolical concepts in the written word. A new world view is being propagated, one which attempts to convince the young that demons are friends or cuddly pets, and that people can use evil means to achieve “good” ends. The author maintains that the growing confusion which has resulted draws modern man away from traditional Christian spirituality and prepares him to accept occult replacements.”

    Again, I haven’t seen GoT, but commenter carn and David Sloan seem to be on to something.

    There are numerous comments above about the pornographic element in GoT. These days, viewing pornography is not just a problem for many males, but also for a growing number of females (Evangelical pastor Rick Warren’s wife wrote a book about her struggle with pornography).

    This brings to mind a book by Carrie Gress “The Anti-Mary Exposed: Rescuing the Culture from Toxic Femininity.” Here’s an excerpt from Gress’ book about two sisters, Kate (the author of “Sexual Politics”) and Mallory Millet:

    Mallory spent a period devoted to her sister Kate and her radical ideas before returning to the Catholic faith of their childhood. She eventually left Kate’s inner circle when things just got too weird. But she spent enough time with women in the movement to see its underbelly. Mallory has dark stories that make it clear these women were involved in the occult, with a Marxist twist.

    “It was 1969 and she (Kate) took me to a meeting at her friend, Lila Karp’s place, in Greenwich Village,” Mallory explains. “At a consciousness raising (an idea imported from Mao’s China), twelve women gathered at a large table. They opened with a type of Litany from the Catholic Church. But this time it was Marxism, the church of the Left.”

    “Why are we here today?” the chairwoman asked. “To make revolution,” they answered.

    “What kind of revolution?” she replied. “The Cultural Revolution,” they chanted.

    “And how do we make Cultural Revolution?” she demanded.

    “By destroying the American family!” they answered.

    “How do we destroy the family?” she came back.

    “By destroying the American Patriarch,” they cried exuberantly.

    “And how do we destroy the American Patriarch?” she probed.

    “By taking away his power!” “How do we do that?”

    “By destroying monogamy!” they shouted. “How can we destroy monogamy?”

    “By promoting promiscuity, eroticism, prostitution, abortion and homosexuality!” they resounded.”


  23. carn says:

    “Interesting comment. To follow-up, here is an excerpt from Michael D. O’Brien’s book “A Landscape with Dragons- The Battle for Your Child’s Mind.” This excerpt is from David Sloan’s Introduction: …”

    I think O’Brien might be mostly correct.

    There have been the last 30 years countless films/series in which vampires, werewolves, witches, undead, dragons and [select any “classical” villian] are either not that bad at all (e.g. vampires satisfying their needs via blood banks while struggling with temptations to get something “fresh”) to being actual heroes.

    A noticeable outlier is the Hobbit adaption by Peter Jackson, which – probably due to Jackson trying to keep story along the lines of source material – portrays a truly frightening and monstrous dragon sowing pain and destruction just for pleasure, greed and revenge for his former victims trying to retake what is theirs. And the dragon is only brought down by a honourable and brave man (and his son in the movies) striking a weak spot barely noticed in time.

    But otherwise, there seems to be just a lockstep march to ensure that symbols that were in the past considered evil, are to be considered neutral or even good.

    Only exception: nobody ever paints a the world is not black and white, so we must make things grey picture of the Nazis and the Inquisition, especially the Spanish (though the first group i think actually deserves this; but the latter are just kept as villians due to animosity to Church i think; after all, one spanish inquisitor had the glorious and mind-boggling idea, that if one accused of being a witch says the devil sat on that stone during the coven while another accused says that during that coven the devil sat on another stone, that then at least one testimony lacks credibility and that therefore maybe nobody should be burned for being a witch and that maybe one should not import the witch hunt craziness engulfing central europe to spain)

    About GOT, it is actually nearly an explicit expressed intent by the author, to turn good and evil round and round:

    ” Attracted to gray characters instead of orcs and angels, Martin regards the hero as the villain on the other side.[40] The Wall’s Night’s Watch, whom Martin described as “criminal scum [who] are also heroes and they wear black”, was a deliberate twist on fantasy stereotypes.[19] Furthermore, the use of black as the identifying color for the essentially good Night’s Watch and the use of white for the much corrupted Kingsguard is another example of Martin subverting traditional fantasy which tends to link light colors with good and darker ones with evil. The actions and politics in the novels leave it to the reader to decide about who is good and evil.[4] Characters are explored from many sides through the multiple viewpoint structure so that, unlike in a lot of other fantasy, the supposed villains can provide their viewpoint.[41] This is necessary since in the real world throughout history, most human beings have justified their deeds as the right thing and the opponent’s as villainous.[42] It may not always be easy to determine who represents the good and evil side in real life,[36] as some of the darkest villains in history had some good things about them, the greatest heroes had weaknesses and flaws. However, according to Martin, Tyrion Lannister is the most morally neutral main character in the book, which, along with his cynicism, is what makes him his favorite character.[5]”

    The supposedly “most morally neutral” character strangles out of jealousness and revenge the woman he loved/loves and kills his father while his father is offering him to overcome the differences between them (which are quite large; the father had him sentenced to death in a show trial for supposedly killing the nephew; and the father had pinched the woman he loved) because his father makes a negative comment about the woman the “most morally neutral” character strangeld to death just 5 minutes beforehand.

    As that is one of the most neutral characters according to the author, i think the ice zombies or white walkers killing them all would be an ending remotely in accordance with what justice deserves.

    Also, GOT serves as some sort of exculpation for modern people in my view. That is especially due to many people erroneously claiming that GOT is a somewhat realistic depiction of middle age politics, human interaction, society and warfare. If the “good guys” in GOT are good guys even although murdering their lovers, fathers or some other people, then what most modern people do wrong (e.g. watching porn, cheating on taxes, divorcing and adultery, having abortions, etc.) looks a lot more like non-serious evil.

    “erroneously” cause what GOT depicts is what the middle ages would have looked like, if every cultural positive element, like chivalry, duty between lord and liege for both sides, culture, religion as a socially cohesive element, etc. had been totally absent or throughfully dishonest and perverted; but: according to world lore, the GOT world regularly faces year-long or longer winters and the civilization of the main continent has a hundreds of years spanning history; no civilization can cope with regular year-long winters and last centuries unless there is something binding people together and keep the absolutely necessary preparations to survive the next winter going no matter what political turmoil is just going on; so its not realistic, but very unrealistic. (think of having a year without summer or worse every 5 years or so https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer)

Comments are closed.