The Seanchan

[TheDreadReader]

19 hours ago, king of nowhere said:

that tsunami makes no sense.

 

Depends. 

 

From a military perspective, assuming there are populated/fortified areas within the scope of the wave's landing zone, it is an effective way to bring death, destruction, and general disruption along a wide area during the battlefield prep stage.   It would be much more effective then trying sling channeled fireballs for example.   

 

Having that combat capability would have certainly made a number of military operations easier in our history.

 

19 hours ago, king of nowhere said:

he whole scene is dumb. it attempts to convey an emotional impact, and it does if you disconnect your brain and don't think of the implications.

 

Generally disagree.   As a scene in a visual medium it did what it is supposed to do. 

 

[king of nowhere]

17 minutes ago, TheDreadReader said:

 

Depends. 

 

From a military perspective, assuming there are populated/fortified areas within the scope of the wave's landing zone, it is an effective way to bring death, destruction, and general disruption along a wide area during the battlefield prep stage.   It would be much more effective then trying sling channeled fireballs for example.   

 

Having that combat capability would have certainly made a number of military operations easier in our history.

 

yes, the problems are that

- there are no populated/fortified areas within the scope of the wave, not that we see at least

- there is a tall cliff behind the shore, so the wave will stop there

- the seanchan are there to conquer and turn to their side, not to destroy. it makes a lot more strategical sense to subdue a city with intimidation and gain access to its resources, than to destroy the city completely

- book seanchans would land, destroy any resistance, make everybody swear oaths, then leave. throwing tsunamis does not accomplish any of that.

 

throwing tsunamis is a great power, i object to its usage in that specific circumstance.

now, if they start season 2 by showing a city nearby, and a seanchan envoy telling the city leadership "surrender to us, or we'll do the same to your city", then the scene would make perfect sense. but there's none of that. there's a deserted coast with a child and a reef

[SingleMort]

17 minutes ago, TheDreadReader said:

 

Depends. 

 

From a military perspective, assuming there are populated/fortified areas within the scope of the wave's landing zone, it is an effective way to bring death, destruction, and general disruption along a wide area during the battlefield prep stage.   It would be much more effective then trying sling channeled fireballs for example.   

 

But (in the books) the Seanchan are not there to destroy but to reclaim the lands that they feel are theirs by rights of their rulers' decendancy from Artur Hawkwind. They plan to settle and bring these "lost" peoples back to the ways of "enlightenment". We see in the books that many people are happy to swear allegiance to the Seanchan because they see they are treated fairly by them and allowed to continue with their lives much the same as before because the Seanchan do not consider these people enemies but rather their own people who have lost their way. If there are fortifications it does not appear from the short clip we saw that they were being used to defend against the Seacnchan (maybe season 2 will prove me wrong on this) so destroying merely means the Seanchan will be depriving themselves of such defenses.     

[TheDreadReader]

16 minutes ago, SingleMort said:

But (in the books) the Seanchan are not there to destroy but to reclaim the lands that they feel are theirs by rights of their rulers' decendancy from Artur Hawkwind.

 

Logically, any "invasion" would include the potential for destruction.  You cannot make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.  And, preparing the battlefield for an easy landing is a more realistic choice if you are starting from an offensive posture. 

 

 

16 minutes ago, SingleMort said:

 

They plan to settle and bring these "lost" peoples back to the ways of "enlightenment".

 

Yes, which can be done after you break stuff.  Breaking things tends to make people seek enlightenment.

 

 

16 minutes ago, SingleMort said:

We see in the books that many people are happy to swear allegiance to the Seanchan because they see they are treated fairly by them and allowed to continue with their lives much the same as before because the Seanchan do not consider these people enemies but rather their own people who have lost their way. If there are fortifications it does not appear from the short clip we saw that they were being used to defend against the Seacnchan (maybe season 2 will prove me wrong on this) so destroying merely means the Seanchan will be depriving themselves of such defenses.     

 

There are no fortifications visible nor does my argument depend on there being fortifications.  It only depends on the concept of preparing the battlefield and a rather realistic sense of war/offensive operations.

 

There are certainly other ways that the seanchan can accomplish this (considering they have a vertical envelope capability in the books that is an option).   The show writers have options to pick from.   A big wave crashing on the shore to cause destruction and disruption is one of those options.   And, it is a pretty realistic one given the combat capabilities of channelers.

 

 

 

[TheSmurf]

Also, while I completely agree with TheDreadReader's reasoning (intimidate first, conquer second) even for for the book Seanchan, we have absolutely no idea what TV Seanchan are like... They might be there to commit mass genocide and re-populate the lands. 

[Artagel]

We do not know the purpose of the wave. It is possible they are trying to raise the sea in order to make landing in an otherwise impossible location. Anyways the scene accomplishes its general porpose.

I like the look of the Seanchan, also great that they seem to have really different musical theme as well. I love the gold look. I suspect biggest reason to skip leashes is logistical. It would just be a nightmare to shoot action scenes and the like with multiple Damane with all the people and the leashes in between. It really restricts the movements of people.

[Skipp]

13 minutes ago, Artagel said:

We do not know the purpose of the wave. It is possible they are trying to raise the sea in order to make landing in an otherwise impossible location. Anyways the scene accomplishes its general porpose.

I like the look of the Seanchan, also great that they seem to have really different musical theme as well. I love the gold look. I suspect biggest reason to skip leashes is logistical. It would just be a nightmare to shoot action scenes and the like with multiple Damane with all the people and the leashes in between. It really restricts the movements of people.

I agree, I think leashing two people together, especially if they do any horseback scenes, would be a nightmare for filming.

 

But in their short appearance I know the Seanchan made an impact on my nonbook reading friends.  A Slightly confusing impact but they understand that they are dangerous.

[DaddyFinn]

3 hours ago, Artagel said:

I suspect biggest reason to skip leashes is logistical. It would just be a nightmare to shoot action scenes and the like with multiple Damane with all the people and the leashes in between. It really restricts the movements of people.

That's a good point. And since the leashes were not even needed in the books as Elayne(?) found out..

[expat]

It looked to me to be a warning shot across the bow.  Ensure that some of the local populace was withing viewing distance, then show them what they are up against without inflicting any damage since the cliffs would prevent the water from leveling anything.  You get your point across without forcing the population to fight you to revenge the people killed.  Surrender or die.  You can't fight this.

[Guire]

I agree with the thought that tsunami ing that beach could be a reasonable military action.  Given the attention to detail in all other military or soldier related areas of show, I am left to conclude the Seanchan just really hate little girls beach combing.

[Wassup]

She was combing the beach like she was one of the Blood and had to be punished appropriately!

[Artagel]

It is possible the gag is not part of the Adam, just an extra device to keep them under cotrol and prevent speaking.

[TheSmurf]

Anything is possible. For all we know, those mouthpieces are special, wave-creating ter'angreal ??

[DigificWriter]

The gold-plated pacifier gags add a much different connotation to the Seanchan culture of slavery and make it more unsettling and disturbing because they imply a deeper level of subservience and dehumanization than collars and physical leashes ever could.

Edited December 27, 2021 by DigificWriter

[WhiteVeils]

20 hours ago, expat said:

It looked to me to be a warning shot across the bow.  Ensure that some of the local populace was withing viewing distance, then show them what they are up against without inflicting any damage since the cliffs would prevent the water from leveling anything.  You get your point across without forcing the population to fight you to revenge the people killed.  Surrender or die.  You can't fight this.

True.  They could be doing it against the most uninhabited part of the shoreline to minimize casualties. That there happened to be one person there would be considered "acceptable losses" to make the greater point. 

[Sabio]

Doing a warning where hardly anyone will see it isn't much of a warning since no one saw it.  Well I guess the little girl saw it and I assume she was intimidated.  But a warning isn't very useful when no one is about to see it.

Edited December 28, 2021 by Sabio

[TheDreadReader]

4 minutes ago, Sabio said:

Doing a warning were hardly anyone will see it isn't much of a warning since no one saw it.  Well I guess the little girl saw it and I assume she was intimidated.  But a warning isn't very useful when no one is about to see it.

 

Just because we were not shown someone other than the girl in the frame it doesn't mean that others outside of frame did not exist.  We just don't know.

 

To be honest, it was just a money shot from the CGI budget.  I find it amusing that people focus on the little girl so much.  My first thought watching it was to remember this shot from an older tv show.

 

[TheSmurf]

For all we know, they were saving the girl from something off screen, and just don't have any concept of 'reasonable methods' ?

[Brytac]

On 12/25/2021 at 10:44 PM, Fox said:

I think the collar and leash on the damane wouldn't have been received well. The gag still gets across their treatment of channelers, without really triggering some groups of people. 

Cant just commit the worlds worst act and....dare I say it.....OFFEND somebody can they now.  What do you think this is???  ?

 

 

[Brytac]

2 hours ago, TheDreadReader said:

 

Just because we were not shown someone other than the girl in the frame it doesn't mean that others outside of frame did not exist.  We just don't know.

 

To be honest, it was just a money shot from the CGI budget.  I find it amusing that people focus on the little girl so much.  My first thought watching it was to remember this shot from an older tv show.

 

 

Wouldnt a better season ending sequence be better if they showed something that meant something to people watching?

 

Rather than they might have done that for a reason...they might not have.  Exciting stuff!!!!

 

 

 

They have done some really bad things on this.  The ships meant absolutely nothing to most people watching.

 

In 3 seconds ive improved it...a very very quick scene at a border/shore watch post...a guy rides in and says Sir....we have seen enemy ships approaching the coastline, they have attacked and sunk one of our vessels, it looks like an invasion(im sure it can be improved upon).  My wife just thought they were more AS coming to help.

 

It was a season closing sequence that meant absolutely nothing whatsoever to any none book person.

 

 

 

 

[TheDreadReader]

1 hour ago, Brytac said:

 

Wouldnt a better season ending sequence be better if they showed something that meant something to people watching?

 

[...]

 

 The ships meant absolutely nothing to most people watching.

 

 

The ships don't have to "mean" anything in that context beyond getting a baseline average viewer to ask "what are those ships?"   

 

It is the equivalent of a Marvel post-credit scene.   Or, a movie teaser with a few pictures and a coming soon.

 

One does not have to overthink the simple stuff.  ?

 

[Brytac]

5 hours ago, TheDreadReader said:

 

The ships don't have to "mean" anything in that context beyond getting a baseline average viewer to ask "what are those ships?"   

 

It is the equivalent of a Marvel post-credit scene.   Or, a movie teaser with a few pictures and a coming soon.

 

One does not have to overthink the simple stuff.  ?

 

 

 

The way I see it...its not a post credit scene though, its the ending to WOT Season 1 and to many people such as my wife who have not read the books, it simply didn't mean anything.  No emotion, no elation, no nothing.

 

I hate to bring it up again but I do believe its relevant.  Compare it to the ending of S1 GOT from any none book reader perspective.   Ending of GOT had people elated.  My wife at the end of S1 WOT(and bare in mind she generally enjoyed WOT) just said 'what was all that about'?  It means nothing at all.   It wasnt an invasion, it wasnt anything...some people created a tidal wave against nothing.  Thats what was portrayed.

 

 The endings of the 2 shows simply dont stack up for none book readers...who fantasy shows must draw in to become a success.

 

 

I am sure we all here want WOT to be seen through to its conclusion.  They need to become much more clever to build its success unless they want it to become a footnote 'WOT TV Show, cancelled Season 2/3'.

 

 

 

 

[SingleMort]

6 hours ago, Brytac said:

The way I see it...its not a post credit scene though, its the ending to WOT Season 1 and to many people such as my wife who have not read the books, it simply didn't mean anything.  No emotion, no elation, no nothing.

Much as it pains me I'm forced to agree. There was not really any indication that this was a foreign invading army. They should have probably drawn out the scene some more and had it from the perspective of someone from the shore with dialogue and showing panic or alternatively a good place to introduce Bayle Domon from his ship seeing this oncoming armada and reacting to it.

Edited December 28, 2021 by SingleMort

[TheDreadReader]

1 hour ago, SingleMort said:

Much as it pains me I'm forced to agree. There was not really any indication that this was a foreign invading army. They should have probably drawn out the scene some more and had it from the perspective of someone from the shore with dialogue and showing panic or alternatively a good place to introduce Bayle Domon from his ship seeing this oncoming armada and reacting to it.

 

One of the great things about doing things visually is the way that criticism of a scene like that is actually evidence that it worked as intended. 

 

If you're talking about it then it worked. ?

 

Sometimes, how you withhold information is more effective than how you communicate information.  

 

 

[Sabio]

One girl on the beach didn't seem very effective.  I agree that seeing it from the POV of Falme, watching these ships in the distance and a giant tidal wave coming in would have conveyed so much more.  but seeing just one girl on the beach sort of was like, ummm ok.