Some interesting comments so far, and I'm glad to see that people have found my article engaging at the very least. The Zydrate and Morti criticism are the ones that I think most deserve an immediate answer.
I'll reiterate that I don't think the show needed to do this exact storyline. I certainly do NOT agree that something like this would have been the subject of an entire episode in itself (that's not how the show structures developments anyway). This is something that can be scattered across a season, small character choices and actions that drive her propulsive story. Maybe have a scene where she's sitting in the tower all day doing the tiresome paperwork her father did, get bored and pissed, throw a jar of wine at the wall, and then summon a slave girl for her to dominate and feel powerful. Or a scene where she's having more nightmares about the prophecy that's haunting her that causes her to act impulsively in a way that clearly indicts her competence as a ruler, or alienates others in her family. There are a million ways to work the details out into a coherent story. All I'm asking is that there be one, and not just where we're checking in on her once every episode where she can muse on about something cynical like an average episode of "The Walking Dead." But as far as the show goes, Cersei has only one conflict. I get that it's meant to change her, and this is where I disagree that the wildfire was really a "mistake." Is it going to backfire on her? Absolutely. Is it ironic, given what it drove Tommen into doing? Definitely. But Cersei even says in the first episode of the season that she's effectively made peace with the fact that even Tommen will die before her. She doesn't care, and thus she isn't doing anything for him anymore; just herself. But the show doesn't probe further. We're just to take that for granted and wait out the standoff for ten episodes until she demolishes the Sept of Baelor. To eschew her complexity doesn't just go against the spirit of the books, but it goes against the spirit of the show itself as per its brilliantly executed first two/three seasons that embraced characters' humanity and wasn't afraid to examine them closely.
Otherwise, even if we assume that you're right - that one episode can accomplish something like what I was hoping for - what exactly do HBO and the showrunners have to lose at this point? Are we really making excuses for a show this big, this widely watched, and widely beloved? It is strange to see people argue that "Game of Thrones" is in some kind of difficult narrative position when it comes to the direction of its characters and journey towards the end, that forces tough choices. If we're going to praise the show for the way it engages throughout depicting its compelling character adventures and political developments, we are implicitly saying that these are the very things that matter most about the show, not just the endpoint or momentary thrilling climaxes.
Followup thoughts are welcome, but I don't think I'll be able to answer them for a bit.