Wow, Daenerys is not helping her "entitled little bitch" characterization. There was her giving Sansa that spiteful look during the meeting, and whining to Jon about Sansa being mean to her, and after the episode was over the writers were defending her as having a reasonable complaint, but Sansa didn't say anything wrong! She said the proper words in that situation, and the only thing she mentioned during the movie was that their food supplies were being unexpectedly strained (why didn't Dany & co bring provisions north with them?). And Dany didn't help with that smug line that her dragons eat whatever they want. It's winter. It's going to last for years, and starvation is always an issue, but Dany's being all arrogant about her dragons eating multiple meat animals a day, each of which could feed several people. And that's when they're eating light, because they don't like the cold.

Any halfway decent politician or ruler would at least be apologetic about the dragons' appetites, and marginally competent people would be playing up the necessity of that firey metabolism to fight the White Walkers and undead. Or is the extent of Tyrion's PR talents telling people who were already preaching in favor of Daenerys to keep preaching in her favor? Furthermore, Lyanna Mormont's reaction to the whole new setup proves that there are tensions about Daenerys' new overlordship she has yet to do anything to earn, aside from decimating their meat reserves. Sansa's been the one on the homefront for the last year or so, carrying water for Jon and supporting his reign, when she could very well have taken his place, considering she IS Ned's rightful heir, if Bran's magical preoccupations (how long WAS he waiting in the courtyard for Jaime to show up, assuming that's the "friend" he mentions Sam) take him out of the equation, and even if they don't, Sansa is next in line after Bran, who is unlikely to have heirs of his body, given his condition. Without Sansa's active support of Jon, Daenerys would have showed up in the North telling them "Jon bent the knee to me" and they'd all have been like "that's nice, what does our queen's bastard half-brother's life choices have to do with the Kingdom of the North?"

They had to be aware of the political sensitivities, because that's the only reason I can see why Daenerys would have ridden on horseback into Winterfell, instead of Drogon. Riding on horseback alongside Jon, who is supposed to be her vassal is all about sending a message of respect for the North. Flying in on dragonback is how she sends a message of power and dominance. And that's good politics, what we see in the opening scene. The rest of Daenerys' dialog concerning politics in Winterfell doesn't fit with her concilatory arrival, and belongs in the mouth of a conqueror who swooped in on a dragon, and established her dominance, after Jon opened the gate for her army to secure the castle.

There was also Arya's crayon-sketch weapon schematic. Why can't she just tell Gendry that she wants him to make a spear with a removable head, or whatever? But at least she's not threatening to skin her sister's face off for wearing a pretty dress to what Sansa thought was going to be her father's royal pardoning.

This stuff, on top of the mishandling of Jon's first dragonflight make it hard to appreciate the little moments, like Sam's reaction to his family's deaths and how that shades his revelation to Jon, or the various reunions, or the elephant jokes concerning the Golden Company. They went to ridiculous lengths last season to keep Jon from riding Drogon so he could have his own dragon, because of the line from the books that you can only ever ride on one dragon. Shouldn't Jon's first ride have been played in a way that emphasizes, demonstrates or proves his Targaryen ancestry?