‘Game of Thrones’: Breaking down ‘The Last of the Starks’ | TribLIVE.com

‘Game of Thrones’: Breaking down ‘The Last of the Starks’

Patrick Varine


Opinions were sharply divided among the “Thrones’n’at” panel regarding “The Last of the Starks.” With two episodes to go, the show jumped back into political intrigue, tense throne-room conversation and characters not knowing who their true allies might be.

This week we delve into all the reasons Cassie hated this episode (“he ghosted Ghost!”), all the reasons Patrick loved this episode but hates Show Euron (mostly because Book Euron is exponentially more awesome: an insane pirate supervillain with blue lips who constantly drinks the Westerosi equivalent of LSD and wants to raise some sort of undead sea demon), and whether Dany’s rapid descent toward mad queen-ishness is going to create a brand new supervillain two episodes before the series comes to a close.

Screenshots: HBO

Patrick Varine is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Patrick at 724-850-2862, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Helen Sloan/HBO
Bran Stark (Isaac Hempstead Wright), in a promotional photo for the eighth season of HBO’s blockbuster fantasy drama, “Game of Thrones.”
Categories: AandE | Movies TV
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.