The "moral" of Game of Thrones

[Regina]

Martin is a fan of history and one thing that becomes apparent when you read historical events is how often the 'good' guys don't win. That is the exact opposite message that Hollywood would have us believe. In most movies, the good guy is honorable and eventually overcomes all obstacles.  In Game of Thrones a character can do everything that the viewer believes is right and still die or have something terrible happen to them.

Martin said that his stories are about struggle and you can see that in how much hell certain characters have to overcome. Also, Martin seems to understand that most people, even those who do horrible things, believe that they are good. I don't think that any of his characters believe that they are bad so when you read a chapter from their point of view you get to see their reasoning for their actions.  I do think that the morals of Game of Thrones are subjective, for the most part. Martin is very good at creating complex characters who are neither good nor bad or if they are bad, also do good things.

This. I think Hollywood (traditionally anyway) always has too much of a clear-cut image. We have the good guy, who we know is good and he knows it. Then we have the bad guy, who has some simple over-simplified goal, and has no apparent weaknesses (until the end) or justification for doing bad things. It's never fully fleshed out.

I feel like in Game of Thrones you have characters who all have different agendas, and are more three-dimensional in that they will do either good or bad things as long as it will advance their agenda. I'd say the only truly "evil" characters in thrones are the white walkers, since their entire existence just seems to be killing with no apparent reason. Joffrey could easily be described as "evil", but I think "selfish corrupted brat" works better.

I'd agree with what some others have said though, the prevailing theme seems to be that life isn't fair, and that being good won't necessarily make you win.