July 26, 2025, is a date branded on the pop culture lexicon. The finale toGame of Thrones, the television phenomenon that single-handedly revitalized the fantasy genre and redefined what “event television” meant, aired to thecollective disappointment of millions of fans. The show’s decline in quality had begun in season 7, with some questionable choices happening as far back as season 5, but the train wreck that was season 8 was beyond words. Consistency went out the window in favor of spectacle, resulting in a rushed season that reduced the world’s greatest TV show into a sad shadow of its former self.
The controversial finale put a seemingly permanent stain onGame of Thrones. In the years leading up to its conclusion, HBO expressed interest in creating a franchise based around George R. R. Martin’s World of Ice and Fire. However, the episode’s terrible reception put the network’s plan in doubt, with many wondering if theGame of Thronesbrand was in a healthy enough place to support a franchise. Things got worse when the first spinoff, starring Naomi Watts,got unceremoniously axed— even after shooting a $30 million pilot — spelling doom for the would-be franchise. Alas, not all was lost;GoTstill had an ace up its sleeve, and it was called House Targaryen.
Mother of Dragons
Let’s start with the obvious:Daenerys Targaryen wasGame ofThrones‘ undeniable star. The perfect combination of relatable and inspiring, Daenerys was the perfect hero audiences could root for, the easiest character to like and support. Dany had the traditional hero’s journey, rising above her initial situation and becoming a near messianic figure.
Dany wasThrones‘ ultimate champion — unlike Tyrion, she had actual power; unlike Jon, she wasn’t afraid to use it. Daenerys represented the best ofGame of Thrones; she was strong, willfull, imperfect, and captivating, an inspiring but ruthless character who had everything necessary to take the Iron Throne.
Above all, Daenerys had dragons. I cannot stress how important the dragons were toGame of Thrones‘ success. These mighty beasts are crucial to any fantasy story — all the best have at least one memorable dragon, from Smaug to Saphira. Dragons embody the fantasy genre, representing the power and enchanting nature of these fascinating and reality-defying worlds. Political intrigue madeGame of Thrones, but dragons elevated it to the apex of pop culture.
The outrage forGoT‘s ending mainly focused on Daenerys’ fate, which many fans considered character assassination. Dany was always a fierce and ruthless young woman, but she was never cruel or stupid; her actions during the show’s penultimate episode,The Bells, were both. And while no one can deny she had shown signs of the infamous Targaryen madness, Daenerys was never the Mad Queen in the making.
GoTneeded more time and patience to make her descent into tyranny work; instead, it settled for cheap shortcuts, fridging Missandei and turning Tyrion into a failure. However, the show’s most egregious crime was nerfing the dragons, turning them from powerful weapons to flying plot devices. By undermining the dragons, the show ultimately undermined itself.
Be a dragon
If dragons builtGame of Thrones,dragons would also save it. HBO knew the show messed up the Targaryen storyline, ruining Daenerys’ legacy and casting a shadow on its reputation. Thus, if D&D killed the Targaryens, HBO would resurrect them. A spin-off centered on the Targaryens should be a no-brainer. The house of the dragon has a rich story in the source material, with Martin spending considerable time expanding it in recent years. But choosing the Dance of the Dragons as the main focus for the spinoff was a clear and blatant indication that HBO understoodGoT‘s mistakes and wasn’t planning on repeating them.
More than political conflict, which it has, and fascinating characters, which it also has, the Dance of Dragons has precisely that: dragons. A ton of them. The Dance has dragons up the wazoo, to the point where many fans doubted it would ever receive an adaptation because of how pricey it would be. We’re talking about epic, full-scale dragon battles that will makethe loot train attackseem like child’s play.
Game of Throneswaited years before Dany rode a dragon and even more before she used her children in battle.House of the Dragonwastes no time introducing its dragons, but its antidote toGoT‘s restraint is not excess. Season 1 serves as the prelude for the Dance, setting the stage and the main players but saving the best for later. Still, the show provided enough hints of what was to come for fans to trust it could pull off the Dance’s most important battles.
The last seconds of the season’s finale, “The Black Queen,” were all we needed to believe inHouse of the Dragon‘s power. Thefour-minute scenewas a genre-blending triumph, a masterclass in execution. And if the show could do this much with a relatively simple scene, the possibilities for the more fearsome dragon battles down the line were endless. The Battle at Rook’s Rest, the storming of the Dragonpit, and above all, the Battle above the God’s Eye are all promises thatHouse of the Dragonmade; judging from what they already delivered, there’s no reason to doubt them.
The dragon queen
At its core,the Dance of the Dragons is a story about female rage. Sure, it has an abundance of men — this is Westeros, after all — but the source of the conflict, the power behind it, is made of two women. And after the Daenerys debacle, HBO needed a powerful female character to drive the franchise’s future. In the Dance of the Dragons, it found two.
Rhaenyra and Alicent are intriguing, if somewhat one-dimensional, characters on the page. Martin remains as engaging a storyteller as ever, but the sheer scope ofFire & Bloodprevents him from fully exploring the intricate inner workings of any of its characters; the book is about the game, not the players. Thus, Rhaenyra and Alicent exist as ideas rather than fully-fledged characters, which fits the “history retold” angle thatFire & Bloodadopts. Still, this approach prevents them from being as fascinating as Daenerys was.
House of the Dragonchanged that. By placing Rhaenyra and Alicent front and center, the show turned them into developed figures full of agency and layers. Whereas the book presents them as bitter enemies arguing over petty things — literally, the source of their conflict is often reduced to each wanting to be “the first lady of the realm” — the show portrays them as friends-turned-rivals with conflicting feelings for each other.House of the Dragonmakes several changes to their basic storylines, mainly turning them into more sympathetic figures than their book counterparts. But how could it not when its predecessor so mistreated its female characters?
GoThad a problem with its women. The show used excessive sexual violence to prove its point, putting women through hell and back before “allowing” them to earn their victory. ButHouse of the Dragonactively rejects this approach. Rhaenyra is free to pursue her sexual desires and make her own choices, enjoying a freedom previous female characters in the franchise did not share. And although she spends most of the season dealing with the repercussions of said choices, that comes with the liberty to make them. More importantly, the show never condemns her and instead shows remarkable and constant empathy toward her, thus allowing us to see and appreciate her strengths and flaws.
For her part, Alicent receives a genuine and compelling motive for her actions beyond jealousy and power lust.GoTnever shied away from portraying sympathetic antagonists, crafting some of the most engaging villains in modern television, and Alicent lives up to that legacy. Even if the show encourages us to stand against her, her journey, coupled with Olivia Cooke’s vulnerable performance,makes Alicent one of the best characters inHouse of the Dragon. Television needs more complex antiheroines that dismantle the generic “strong female character” trope; Alicent and Rhaenyra live up to this task, picking up where Daenerys left off and carrying her spiritual legacy. In many ways, they are avenging the Mother of Dragons.
Reign of the dragon
In the end,House of the Dragon‘s greatest triumph was its ability to give fans something they no longer had: hope. Whereas we used to look down at the idea ofGoTspin-offs — why want more of something that already spat on our faces — we are now enthusiastic about the idea of more Westerosi content. Before, it was a full-me-once situation, but things are different now; we have faith again.House of the Dragoncelebrated the World of Ice and Fire and Daenerys Targaryen. It represents all the best parts of the franchise without any of the ugliness ofGoTseason 8.
Above all,House of the Dragonopened a door thatGame of Thronesaccidentally closed, inviting us to demandmore stories, Targaryen or otherwise. A Sea Snake spin-off? Of course! A show about Princess Nymeria? Why the hell not?A Jon Snow sequel? Sure, I guess. And what about the Dunk and Egg stories? That’s supposed to happen eventually; bring it on! Hell, resuscitate theBloodmoonspin-off; there is a demand for that.
House of the Dragonmade Westeros appealing again. It reminded us of the power and complexity of Martin’s world and cemented HBO asthenetwork for prestige TV. More importantly, it restoredGame of Thrones‘s fractured legacy. No longer is “The Iron Throne” the hated finale to one of the all-time best television shows, but a bad chapter in an ongoing story. Not a period, but a semicolon. And frankly, television is all the better because of it.
You can stream all ofGame of Thronesand season one ofHouse of the Dragonon HBO Max.
