I thought it would be appropriate to open a discussion here about this. So, this episode was probably the biggest in television history (cost and people), but also attracted a lot of criticism about its cinematography choices. What is your opinion?
At first, I thought:
1- They chose a very dark set and color grading to reduce costs in post-production, as it is easier to "hide" details in shadows (the fast cuts also helps in this point)
2 - To maintain realism. In medieval times people didn't have electric lights, let's remember that
3- That choice was coherent with the story line. The "darkest" moment is in a nigh battle and, at the end, the sun rises (hope)
One thing that called my attention was the rolling speed:


I understand using 23,976 fps, as they needed to use NTSC standard. But why not use 180 degree in scenes with no slow-motion instead of 172.8? Also, why use 90 degree in scenes with 23,976? Those inconsistent values are not common practice. Might be to create a euphoric movement (just like in "Saving Private Ryan")...
And why not get a faster set of lenses? They seem to be using Alexa with Cooke S4 (source: imdb), but I personally think this was an error from their part. Using Primos (f/1.8) or even Summilux-C (f/1.4) they would be able to get +1-2 stop and reduce the ISO to 800, getting more dynamic range to work with and less noise.
The color grading was very strange too. Apart from the near crushed shadows, the pallete was heavily bi-chromatic (teal-orange). This made the blood artificial. Take a look on one shot from the BtS and one from the final show:


A part from these points and the bad screenwriting, the show was good. In special CGI nailed it.
Images from the Behind the Scenes: