# Game of Thrones "Oathkeeper" 4/27/14 S4E4



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Poor Tommen. He looked like a deer in the headlights.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

astrohip said:


> Poor Tommen. He looked like a deer in the headlights.


I'd be glad to trade places with him. I certainly don't think Margaery means him any harm.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

So the question is solved as to how Joffrey was killed. As many here suspected, thanks to gentle prodding from the book readers, it was Lady Olenna with the Poison Gem in at the Head Table. As to when she put the gem/poison in the goblet, we don't know, since it seemed they filmed her dropping something in a goblet or carafe right after taking the gem from Sansa's necklace, but that was early in the wedding party, and the death didn't actually occur until much later, so it's unlikely nobody had drunk from that vessel during that entire time. More likely is that she put it in his cup after Tyrion filled it and handed it to him, probably while Joffrey was slicing open the pie.

So remind me what Locke's mission is? Did Roos Bolton send him to kill Jon Snow and the Stark boys? If so, he really struck gold with Jon's proposed mission.

So is there a difference between the zombies (the one that took the baby and was riding the horse) and the White Walkers (the one that picked up the baby and turned his eyes blue? Is the zombie just an undead version of a White Walker?

How old is Tommen supposed to be at this point? And how old is Margaery supposed to be?

Why would Baelish be telling Sansa all the details of his plot? Does he really think that if she ever gets a chance to tell someone else, she's going to be loyal to him?

Which sword did Jamie give to Brienne? Was it the one Tywin gave to Jamie, or the one Tywin gave to Joffrey? Either way, I'm guessing Tywin's not going to be too happy if/when he finds out that his precious Valeryian Steel sword is no longer in the family.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

DevdogAZ said:


> So the question is solved as to how Joffrey was killed.


The question of who and what is solved. I still do not see HOW it was done.









































































How did Olenna grab the cup, put the poison in, and put the cup back all in a few seconds, without that guard noticing?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

The answer must be that Olenna is capable of magically teleporting herself and people and objects. She practices her teleporting trick on herself and Mace during the performance of the War of the Five Kings.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Why would Baelish be telling Sansa all the details of his plot? Does he really think that if she ever gets a chance to tell someone else, she's going to be loyal to him?


 Since Sansa is wanted for treason, if she's found at all she's going to be killed and if Baelish is found harboring her he will too. Probably he thinks Sansa will realize it's in her best interests to _not_ be found if she knows how much she's implicated (her necklace etc.)


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> So the question is solved as to how Joffrey was killed. As many here suspected, thanks to gentle prodding from the book readers, it was Lady Olenna with the Poison Gem in at the Head Table. As to when she put the gem/poison in the goblet, we don't know, since it seemed they filmed her dropping something in a goblet or carafe right after taking the gem from Sansa's necklace, but that was early in the wedding party, and the death didn't actually occur until much later, so it's unlikely nobody had drunk from that vessel during that entire time. More likely is that she put it in his cup after Tyrion filled it and handed it to him, probably while Joffrey was slicing open the pie.
> 
> So remind me what Locke's mission is? Did Roos Bolton send him to kill Jon Snow and the Stark boys? If so, he really struck gold with Jon's proposed mission.
> 
> ...


I'll answer the things I know or can guess:

Loche's mission is to kill Jon Snow, Bran, and Rikkon. He will get 1,000 something (acres?) of land and a keep (or something like that). A King's ransom, basically.

To date, we've seen 2 kinds of white walkers. The regular dead people that you can kill by burning them and the ice white people with blue eyes that you kill with dragonglass. We may now have seen a third kind, and they seem to be the leaders of the whole gang.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Anubys said:


> To date, we've seen 2 kinds of white walkers. The regular dead people that you can kill by burning them and the ice white people with blue eyes that you kill with dragonglass. We may now have seen a third kind, and they seem to be the leaders of the whole gang.


The reanimated dead are "wights". The creatures that can create wights out of dead bodies, and can only be killed with dragonglass are the "White Walkers". I'm not sure what the difference is between the creature that brought the baby to the altar, and the creatures arrayed behind the altar. Maybe they are all White Walkers, but of different tribes or different hierarchies?


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

How bad are the Kingsguard? Then again, Margaery probably batted a few eyelashes


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

Yeah they are pretty lame, they went to storm trooper academy I guess.


----------



## dslunceford (Oct 19, 2000)

Anubys said:


> To date, we've seen 2 kinds of white walkers. The regular dead people that you can kill by burning them and the ice white people with blue eyes that you kill with dragonglass. We may now have seen a third kind, and they seem to be the leaders of the whole gang.





john4200 said:


> The reanimated dead are "wights". The creatures that can create wights out of dead bodies, and can only be killed with dragonglass are the "White Walkers". I'm not sure what the difference is between the creature that brought the baby to the altar, and the creatures arrayed behind the altar. Maybe they are all White Walkers, but of different tribes or different hierarchies?


The background on the Walkers haven't been totally fleshed out in the books as far as I recall. There are a couple of stories out today that seem to agree with that thought:

For once, 'Game of Thrones' bamboozled book readers just as much, if not more, than show-only viewers.

And this story that has links to an HBO synopsis with more clues that was subsequently pulled by the network: 'Game of Thrones' Season 4 'Oathkeeper' synopsis confirms major White Walker theory


----------



## MarkL (Jul 1, 2005)

DevdogAZ said:


> Which sword did Jamie give to Brienne? Was it the one Tywin gave to Jamie, or the one Tywin gave to Joffrey? Either way, I'm guessing Tywin's not going to be too happy if/when he finds out that his precious Valeryian Steel sword is no longer in the family.


At the end of the scene where Tywin gives the sword to Jamie, he says "Keep it. A man without a hand or a family will need all the help he can get". Tywin is threatening Jamie with disownment, so in Tywin's mind, perhaps the sword has already left House Lannister.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

john4200 said:


> The question of who and what is solved. I still do not see HOW it was done.
> 
> How did Olenna grab the cup, put the poison in, and put the cup back all in a few seconds, without that guard noticing?


It really doesn't matter at this point. We know who did it, we mostly know why. We can debate the politics behind this castle intrigue all day, but can we pleeeease stop debating the how. It really doesn't matter HOW!



MarkL said:


> At the end of the scene where Tywin gives the sword to Jamie, he says "Keep it. A man without a hand or a family will need all the help he can get". Tywin is threatening Jamie with disownment, so in Tywin's mind, perhaps the sword has already left House Lannister.


I doubt Jaime would give up his own sword. But someone with screencap abilities (and Lord knows, we seem to have a surfeit of them) can determine if it's the same one Tywin gave him.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

astrohip said:


> I doubt Jaime would give up his own sword. But someone with screencap abilities (and Lord knows, we seem to have a surfeit of them) can determine if it's the same one Tywin gave him.


Spoiler on origin of the sword. This is NOT a spoiler in any sense of the word, but since it comes from another source, I am spoilerizing it. This is from HBO's own synopsis of the episode:


Spoiler



It's Jaime's sword.
http://viewers-guide.hbo.com/game-of-thrones/season-4/episode-4/home/34



http://viewers-guide.hbo.com/game-of-thrones/season-4/episode-4/home/34


----------



## dslunceford (Oct 19, 2000)

astrohip said:


> It really doesn't matter at this point. We know who did it, we mostly know why. We can debate the politics behind this castle intrigue all day, but can we pleeeease stop debating the how. It really doesn't matter HOW!


Well, the how does matter. In the sense that it was a plot involving Baelish, the creation of a necklace of poison that Sansa wears, and that Olenna is the one that uses the poison from that necklace. That part of the how certainly matters.

Whether the filming of the death scene took enough care to make that series of events more plausible is another issue, and yeah, doesn't matter in the bigger sense.

But it would have been nice if they could have taken more care to better line up the scene details in a way that mapped perfectly after the fact. I mean, they do know their audience will be debating this type of stuff, don't they?


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

"Baby, resistance is futile, you will be assimilated."

Remind me: What happened to the wilding that helped Bran espace, O??? I seem to remember that she just set out on her own.

Who are those other two kids? The other Starks?

Why is Bram's group north of the wall? Bram's vision is sending them there?

If Littlefinger is taking Sansa to the Eyrie, and the hound and Arya are on the way, and Briene gets a Raven (what happened to those?) we're in for a fun climax.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

astrohip said:


> Poor Tommen. He looked like a deer in the headlights.


I was thinking in the _<whatever>_ movie where the Playboy bunny crashes through the ceiling into the kid's bed and he says, "Thank You, God!"


----------



## MarkL (Jul 1, 2005)

MikeAndrews said:


> "Baby, resistance is futile, you will be assimilated."
> 
> Remind me: What happened to the wilding that helped Bran espace, O??? I seem to remember that she just set out on her own.


Osha and Rickon are headed somewhere else. I forget where.



> Who are those other two kids? The other Starks?


The Reeds. The Reeds are a minor house and bannermen of House Stark. Jojen is the boy and has visions like Bran and is guiding Bran through his warg journey. Meera is the sister.



> Why is Bram's group north of the wall? Bram's vision is sending them there?


Right.



> If Littlefinger is taking Sansa to the Eyrie, and the hound and Arya are ont he way, and Briene gets a Raven (what happened to those?) we're in for a fun climax.


Ravens travel to other cities, so unless Brienne stays in Kings Landing (which she's not) she really won't be receiving any raven messages. And yes, it's going to get more interesting-er


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

MikeAndrews said:


> I was thinking in the _<whatever>_ movie where the Playboy bunny crashes through the ceiling into the kid's bed and he says, "Thank You, God!"


That would be Animal House:


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I can think of 2 reasons why it's Jaime's sword:

1. They showed the clip about Jaime's sword in the "previously on". Not of Tywin giving Joffrey the other sword.

2. Jaime's sword is his to give.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Slight hijack... The new HBO series they previewed before this episode did not look like anything I want to watch. I ffwd'd through half of it.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

gossamer88 said:


> That would be Animal House:


I remembered it was Animal House but I COULD NOT find that.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> Slight hijack... The new HBO series they previewed before this episode did not look like anything I want to watch. I ffwd'd through half of it.


And a looooong preview too.


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

What HBO series?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I don't get why Jaime can't just tell Cersei "what if you're wrong about Tyrion?". First, you'll be killing your brother. Second, you will be letting the real killer off the hook.

Tywin was absolutely correct. Cersei is not as smart as she thinks she is.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Anubys said:


> I don't get why Jaime can't just tell Cersei "what if you're wrong about Tyrion?". First, you'll be killing your brother. Second, you will be letting the real killer off the hook.


The same reason all men do dumb things, he wants to have sex with her.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> Slight hijack... The new HBO series they previewed before this episode did not look like anything I want to watch. I ffwd'd through half of it.


It (The Leftovers) looked like an HBO-ified version of the early parts of the 4400. I will be watching for sure, despite or because of Lindelof's involvement (depending on if it's any good)


----------



## jollygrunt777 (Feb 28, 2012)

Anyone know what Tommen's age is supposed to be? 

If, and when, they marry, is he going to have to perform his husbandly duties that night, or would they wait until he's older? 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk


----------



## Dawghows (May 17, 2001)

Anubys said:


> I don't get why Jaime can't just tell Cersei "what if you're wrong about Tyrion?". First, you'll be killing your brother. Second, you will be letting the real killer off the hook.
> 
> Tywin was absolutely correct. Cersei is not as smart as she thinks she is.


Cersei is more interested in getting what she wants than in getting justice. She probably really does believe that Tyrion did it, but regardless of that, she hates Tyrion, and wants him dead. Pinning Joffrey's murder on him is just a convenient way to accomplish that goal, whether he is actually guilty or not.

(This is my take on it, based solely on what we have seen in the show. I don't know if it is accurate according to the books.)


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

jollygrunt777 said:


> Anyone know what Tommen's age is supposed to be?
> 
> If, and when, they marry, is he going to have to perform his husbandly duties that night, or would they wait until he's older?
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk


Young, around 13, he is much younger in the books. Getting married means the bedding happens that night! Otherwise they could be married now and let the bedding wait until later.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Shaunnick said:


> Young, around 13, he is much younger in the books. Getting married means the bedding happens that night! Otherwise they could be married now and let the bedding wait until later.


How old was Joffrey, in the show and in the books?


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

DUDE_NJX said:


> What HBO series?


The Leftovers.

Actually it looked interesting.


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> So remind me what Locke's mission is? Did Roos Bolton send him to kill Jon Snow and the Stark boys? If so, he really struck gold with Jon's proposed mission.


And Jon too, depending on who wins. Bran wasn't planning on stopping at Craster's like Jon thought, but ended up there anyway. Whether that is good or bad luck will remain to be seen.



Anubys said:


> Loche's mission is to kill Jon Snow, Bran, and Rikkon. He will get 1,000 something (acres?) of land and a keep (or something like that). A King's ransom, basically.


I'm surprised Locke was willing to take The Oath in order to get close to Jon and potentially Bran. That would effectively nullify any reward he would get.

I guess he figures Roose will have enough influence to pardon his breaking of his oath, but does he really think Roose will want to stand up to the Night's Watch for him? Or maybe the Lord Commander is already in Bolton's pocket. At the very least, he wouldn't mind Jon being taken out, so perhaps he would be willing to let Locke's oath slide in exchange for his "services".

At least in the short term, however, his plan is a lot better than the one I originally thought he was going to do that involved him showing up with an army to make demands of the Night's Watch.

Locke would certainly fit in with the crowd up at Craster's. So he'll probably try to get a message to them about working together to take out Jon and the rest of his men. Perhaps after there is a big fight and most people end up dying, Jon (assuming he isn't one of the dead) will continue on with Bran to find the Tree of Knowledge and/or the three-eyed crow.



dslunceford said:


> Well, the how does matter. In the sense that it was a plot involving Baelish, the creation of a necklace of poison that Sansa wears, and that Olenna is the one that uses the poison from that necklace. That part of the how certainly matters.
> 
> Whether the filming of the death scene took enough care to make that series of events more plausible is another issue, and yeah, doesn't matter in the bigger sense.
> 
> But it would have been nice if they could have taken more care to better line up the scene details in a way that mapped perfectly after the fact. I mean, they do know their audience will be debating this type of stuff, don't they?


I do think there is still more explanation yet to come. The fact that it would have been hard for Olenna to poison the cup without the guards seeing is one more indication that Tywin was also involved, and made sure those guards were ones who would keep their mouths shut. It might also explain how Margaery was able to get past the Kingsguard so easily. They might have been told to let Margaery through, and not let Cersei find out about it.


----------



## ducker (Feb 21, 2006)

MarkL said:


> The Reeds. The Reeds are a minor house and bannermen of House Stark. Jojen is the boy and has visions like Bran and is guiding Bran through his warg journey. Meera is the sister.


What's up with Jojen? He looks deathly sick, I guess it's a bit of a spoiler to know now, since it looks like he's sick on poison or something.

Prior to that though, did anything happen to him that I'm just forgetting? Ate a poison plant? etc...


----------



## ducker (Feb 21, 2006)

astrohip said:


> Poor Tommen. He looked like a deer in the headlights.


Ha!!! any boy in their early teens having a hot woman sneak in to their room would be!

That was a great scene... Having Margaery who we already know will willingly use her sexuality to manipulate a situation, downplayed it wonderfully. You know that Tommen wouldn't have been able to sleep the rest of that night!!!


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

Was wondering, does Jorah know his dad is dead?


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

ducker said:


> What's up with Jojen? He looks deathly sick, I guess it's a bit of a spoiler to know now, since it looks like he's sick on poison or something.
> 
> Prior to that though, did anything happen to him that I'm just forgetting? Ate a poison plant? etc...


I think his seizures are normal, I think he mentioned he had some problem that actually activated his seizures and visions.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

ducker said:


> What's up with Jojen? He looks deathly sick, I guess it's a bit of a spoiler to know now, since it looks like he's sick on poison or something.
> 
> Prior to that though, did anything happen to him that I'm just forgetting? Ate a poison plant? etc...





vertigo235 said:


> I think his seizures are normal, I think he mentioned he had some problem that actually activated his seizures and visions.


We have seen him have a seizure before. When he gets his visions, he goes into that seizure and his sister holds him and makes sure he doesn't bite his tongue off.


----------



## Legion (Aug 24, 2005)

Anubys said:


> I'll answer the things I know or can guess:
> 
> Loche's mission is to kill Jon Snow, Bran, and Rikkon. He will get 1,000 something (acres?) of land and a keep (or something like that). A King's ransom, basically.


I dont agree on the Jon Snow part. Bolton's promise came after Ramsay told him what Theon had done by using two other boys to fool everyone into thinking he had killed Bran and Rickon. And since it is Winterfell they are after, Snow doesnt matter because he cannot inherit the title as he is a bastard.

So it is only the younger two Locke is really after.

That was a good scene near the end with Jaime and Brienne as well. Him handing over his new sword to her was a nice touch. And her name for it was a nice homage to him.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Legion said:


> ...
> That was a good scene near the end with Jaime and Brienne as well. Him handing over his new sword to her was a nice touch. And her name for it was a nice homage to him.


I missed that. Did she name her sword "Jamie?"

When she meets the hound that'll prove his point that only c*s name their swords.


----------



## hairyblue (Feb 25, 2002)

I thought Jamie may warn the warrior women that his sister may send assassins after Sonsah.

And I agree that Jamie should have said to his sister that if they kill their brother who is innocent, then the real murderer is still out there and could kill someone she loves again.

I'd like to see Sam become a wizard. hehe


----------



## hairyblue (Feb 25, 2002)

MikeAndrews said:


> I missed that. Did she name her sword "Jamie?"
> 
> When she meets the hound that'll prove his point that only c*s name their swords.


She called it Oathkeeper and the episode is called the same.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

BitbyBlit said:


> I do think there is still more explanation yet to come.


I doubt there is more explanation to come.

I guess that what happened is that they (the showrunners) were not able to shoot that critical scene all on the same day. I joked about Olenna teleporting, but probably what happened is that Diana Rigg was not available on one of the days they were shooting. That explains her disappearing and appearing, and also a lot of the weird camera angles where they would awkwardly frame the scene so you could see the edge of Joffrey's table but could not see Olenna (and vice-versa). It also explains how Joffrey's cup disappears and appears -- discontinuity error from one day of shooting to the next.

So, I think they have explained things as well as they are going to.


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

hairyblue said:


> She called it Oathkeeper and the episode is called the same.


Can also be seen as a dig at Jaimie who is not an Oathkeepr.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

gossamer88 said:


> Can also be seen as a dig at Jaimie who is not an Oathkeepr.


Actually, Brienne is one of the few that knows the real story of why he killed the Mad King, and I'd say that she considers him to have kept his oath, not broken it.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

Legion said:


> I dont agree on the Jon Snow part. Bolton's promise came after Ramsay told him what Theon had done by using two other boys to fool everyone into thinking he had killed Bran and Rickon. And since it is Winterfell they are after, Snow doesnt matter because he cannot inherit the title as he is a bastard.
> 
> So it is only the younger two Locke is really after.


Not necessarily. As they noted in the last ep, the people in the North have always followed the Starks, so I think that Bolton fears that even if all of the Starks were killed off, the Northmen might rally around Jon Snow in the absence of any other Starks to follow, even if only to drive Bolton out.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> How old was Joffrey, in the show and in the books?


In the books, Joffrey is 12 when he ascends to the throne. In the show they've aged him significantly (as they have all the child characters). I don't think we know for sure, but I'd guess in the show he's 16-17 when he takes the throne (the show wiki lists him as 19 when he dies).

In the books, Tommen is 9 when Joffrey dies, and in the show he's 12.


----------



## Legion (Aug 24, 2005)

gossamer88 said:


> Can also be seen as a dig at Jaimie who is not an Oathkeepr.


No I think it is the opposite. She is recognizing the fact that he is in fact keeping his oath to Katlyn Stark by sending Brienne (and Pod) out to to find the Stark girls and see them to safety.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

DreadPirateRob said:


> Not necessarily. As they noted in the last ep, the people in the North have always followed the Starks, so I think that Bolton fears that even if all of the Starks were killed off, the Northmen might rally around Jon Snow in the absence of any other Starks to follow, even if only to drive Bolton out.


I agree. In the "Previously on", Ramsey says something along the lines of "he's half-Stark, he can cause trouble".

And to be exact, Locke is offered 1,000 acres and a HoldFast. Whatever the heck a HoldFast is. I don't think it makes him a Lord, but he will have land and some type of small castle or Keep. Locke will pretty much kill his own mother for such a reward.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

Holy moly...the name butchery has to stop!

It's not Katlyn, it's Catelyn
It's not Sonsah, it's Sansa
It's not Bram, it's Bran


----------



## The Spud (Aug 28, 2002)

Legion said:


> No I think it is the opposite. She is recognizing the fact that he is in fact keeping his oath to Katlyn Stark by sending Brienne (and Pod) out to to find the Stark girls and see them to safety.


This is how I took it as well.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

DavidTigerFan said:


> Holy moly...the name butchery has to stop!
> 
> It's not Katlyn, it's Catelyn
> It's not Sonsah, it's Sansa
> It's not Bram, it's Bran


why is that such a big deal, Dhavid?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DavidTigerFan said:


> Holy moly...the name butchery has to stop!


Not from around here, are you...


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Anubys said:


> why is that such a big deal, Dhavid?


It only matters if your reeding teh bhookes.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

MikeAndrews said:


> It only matters if your reeding teh bhookes.


No, it matters if you read the threads as well. You've got 10 people spelling a name correctly and then someone will come in and spell it totally different, as if they either didn't notice the way it was spelled throughout the thread, or they're intentionally trying to introduce an alternate spelling. Either way, it's highly annoying.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Reading the books didn't help me. I never even noticed that Robb was spelled with 2 b's even after 5 books. Why can't they just spell familiar names like normal?


----------



## ADG (Aug 20, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> No, it matters if you read the threads as well. You've got 10 people spelling a name correctly and then someone will come in and spell it totally different, as if they either didn't notice the way it was spelled throughout the thread, or they're intentionally trying to introduce an alternate spelling. Either way, it's highly annoying.


You know what I find highly annoying? Checking a show thread to read about things I might have missed or might find interesting and finding a dozen posts about how someone's name is spelled or should be spelled


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Interesting article at AV Club discussing where the show has changed things from the books. For the most part, this isn't spoilery, because these changes have already been made so the book info provided is exclusive to the books.

http://www.avclub.com/article/well-actually-books-15-differences-text-tv-game-th-203713


----------



## nlsinger (Feb 8, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> Interesting article at AV Club discussing where the show has changed things from the books. For the most part, this isn't spoilery, because these changes have already been made so the book info provided is exclusive to the books.
> 
> http://www.avclub.com/article/well-...ocialMarketing&utm_campaign=Default:1:Default


Thanks, that was really helpful. I haven't wanted to reread the books for fear of being irritated at the changes if the books were fresh in my mind.


----------



## hairyblue (Feb 25, 2002)

DavidTigerFan said:


> Holy moly...the name butchery has to stop!
> 
> It's not Katlyn, it's Catelyn
> It's not Sonsah, it's Sansa
> It's not Bram, it's Bran


hehe, I didn't know there would be a test, I thought this thread was for fun reading.

Let me get out my paper and start taking notes. <grin>

thanks Dahvid!


----------



## JETarpon (Jan 1, 2003)

Legion said:


> And since it is Winterfell they are after, Snow doesnt matter because he cannot inherit the title as he is a bastard.


And a sworn brother of the Night's Watch. Bastards can be legitimized by the throne, but a sworn brother is a sworn brother until death.



> Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

Of course, Locke is now a sworn brother as well. We'll see how seriously he takes his oath.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

DreadPirateRob said:


> Of course, Locke is now a sworn brother as well. We'll see how seriously he takes his oath.


Kinda hard for Ned or any other Stark to take his head for leaving his post.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

What language was Grey Worm speaking when he mangled that sentence to Danerys?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

cheesesteak said:


> What language was Grey Worm speaking when he mangled that sentence to Danerys?


Westeros..ian? I think they're teaching him in preparation for the invasion.


----------



## Kablemodem (May 26, 2001)

Hodor


----------



## LordKronos (Dec 28, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> The same reason all men do dumb things, he wants to have sex with her.


And????? I mean, it's not like her needs her permission or anything.


----------



## LordKronos (Dec 28, 2003)

MarkL said:


> At the end of the scene where Tywin gives the sword to Jamie, he says "Keep it. A man without a hand or a family will need all the help he can get". Tywin is threatening Jamie with disownment, so in Tywin's mind, perhaps the sword has already left House Lannister.


I don't think Tywin was doing anything of the sort. He wants Jamie to go back to rule Casterly Rock, which presumably would entail him starting a family (it seem all the Lords we've seen so far have had both a wife and kids). Tywin was just acknowledging (in an irritated way) that, as a King's Guard, Jamie will not be able to do that.


----------



## LordKronos (Dec 28, 2003)

Anubys said:


> And to be exact, Locke is offered 1,000 acres and a HoldFast. Whatever the heck a HoldFast is.


Here are some possible meanings. Pick the one you think most appropriately fits:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holdfast_(disambiguation)


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Kablemodem said:


> Hodor


That reminds me of a preview show they did, where they asked various cast members what their character's most bad-ass line was.

Hodor's response was...predictable.


----------



## LordKronos (Dec 28, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Interesting article at AV Club discussing where the show has changed things from the books. For the most part, this isn't spoilery, because these changes have already been made so the book info provided is exclusive to the books.
> 
> http://www.avclub.com/article/well-actually-books-15-differences-text-tv-game-th-203713


Thanks. There were a lot of really interesting things covered in there, and it was pretty spoiler free for people who haven't read the books. Several of the links had some interesting info, too (though I took extreme caution in which ones, and how much of them, I read).

Even though I don't think anything I'm about to say are spoilers, I'll tag it since it contains knowledge outside of the show:


Spoiler



The Talisa theory, though seemingly meant as a joke, and though it had a few holes in it, for the most part fit together really well. It did seem a bit far fetched, but then I said the same thing about the whole necklace poision theory: the pieces fit, but seemed overly elaborate and thus far fetched.

The "promise me" link also contains some back story which we will probably never see in the show (since all the characters involved are dead), but that I think adds a little support to one of the theories someone here came up with earlier this season about Jon.


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

john4200 said:


> I doubt there is more explanation to come.
> 
> I guess that what happened is that they (the showrunners) were not able to shoot that critical scene all on the same day. I joked about Olenna teleporting, but probably what happened is that Diana Rigg was not available on one of the days they were shooting. That explains her disappearing and appearing, and also a lot of the weird camera angles where they would awkwardly frame the scene so you could see the edge of Joffrey's table but could not see Olenna (and vice-versa). It also explains how Joffrey's cup disappears and appears -- discontinuity error from one day of shooting to the next.
> 
> So, I think they have explained things as well as they are going to.


If just the Tyrells were behind Joffrey's murder, then I think you're probably right. But I still think Tywin was somehow involved, and we will eventually find that out.



Anubys said:


> We have seen him have a seizure before. When he gets his visions, he goes into that seizure and his sister holds him and makes sure he doesn't bite his tongue off.


And the way the ending was shot, it seemed to indicate that he was getting visions of the baby being taken by the White Walker. Since we had already seen the White Walker carrying the baby from a third person perspective, I'm guessing that showing us the White Walker from the baby's point of view was to show us what Jojen was seeing.

Him connecting with the baby might be what caused the seizure in the first place.

I am curious how the White Walkers initially communicated their desire for babies to Craster. Did one of them walk into his keep, and take a baby, and that's how he knew? The women seemed to know that the "sacrifices" kept the White Walkers away, so it had to have been more than simply Craster not wanting the boys, and the White Walkers merely taking advantage of that.

Now knowing how they reproduce, their anger does make more sense, however. They get none of the fun of reproduction, and all of the burden of raising somebody else's kids.

"Timmy! How many times have I told you to kill your toys when you are done playing with them?! Next time you leave them running around alive, I will burn them!"



Rob Helmerichs said:


> That reminds me of a preview show they did, where they asked various cast members what their character's most bad-ass line was.
> 
> Hodor's response was...predictable.


Speaking of Hodor, poor Hodor. I hope he gets free so he can Hodor his captors' Hodors with a Hodor, and then Hodor their Hodors up their Hodors.

Pardon my Hodor.


----------



## tiassa (Jul 2, 2008)

BitbyBlit said:


> If just the Tyrells were behind Joffrey's murder, then I think you're probably right. But I still think Tywin was somehow involved, and we will eventually find that out.


I think so as well, Tywin is just cold blooded enough to realize that Joffrey would have likely been "bad for he realm" and that he can influence Tommeno be a better king.



BitbyBlit said:


> I am curious how the White Walkers initially communicated their desire for babies to Craster. Did one of them walk into his keep, and take a baby, and that's how he knew? The women seemed to know that the "sacrifices" kept the White Walkers away, so it had to have been more than simply Craster not wanting the boys, and the White Walkers merely taking advantage of that.


There is probably an old Westerosian legend (which we now know is based in fact) about White Walkers coming and stealing baby boys, the kind of thing that parents tell their kids to get them to behave "if you aren't good the White Walkers will come and get you!". Craster used that to "justify" his exposing his sons to save his daughter/wives.



BitbyBlit said:


> Now knowing how they reproduce, their anger does make more sense, however. They get none of the fun of reproduction, and all of the burden of raising somebody else's kids.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

tiassa said:


> I think so as well, Tywin is just cold blooded enough to realize that Joffrey would have likely been "bad for he realm" and that he can influence *Tommeno* be a better king.


Oh come on. You did that on purpose!


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

tiassa said:


> I think so as well, Tywin is just cold blooded enough to realize that Joffrey would have likely been "bad for he realm" and that he can influence Tommeno be a better king.


Not just bad for the realm, but more importantly (to him), bad for his family. He knows what happened to the last mad king, and rather than wait until somebody else attempted to overthrow Joffrey, he might have decided to take it upon himself to do so in order to maintain control of who would succeed him.

So I don't doubt his willingness to be part of Joffrey's murder, only his opportunity. I get the feeling, though, that this was his idea, and that is what gave Olenna and Petyr the confidence to be a part of it. Tywin needed them in order to isolate himself from the actual events, and they needed him to ensure that holes were left open in the proper places to let them get away with it.

I also think that although he would never admit it in public, nor perhaps even out loud in private, deep down he knows that the rumors about Cersei and Jaime are true. Having a stable, married king (whose sister is far away ) would help to divert attention away from those rumors. He's already tried sending Jaime back to Casterly Rock, and once Cersei is no longer Queen Regent, he probably plans to try to send her away as well. If Cersei leaves Kings Landing, then it's a win-win for him. Either Jaime stays as head of the Kingsguard, thus keeping them separate, or he leaves, and people stop thinking about them.


----------



## MarkL (Jul 1, 2005)

LordKronos said:


> I don't think Tywin was doing anything of the sort. He wants Jamie to go back to rule Casterly Rock, which presumably would entail him starting a family (it seem all the Lords we've seen so far have had both a wife and kids). Tywin was just acknowledging (in an irritated way) that, as a King's Guard, Jamie will not be able to do that.


Tywin sees Jamie's refusal to go take his place at Casterly Rock as a betrayal against the family, and with Tywin, duty to family trumps all other concerns. He is telling Jamie that if Jamie won't do his family duty (especially considering that in Tywin's eyes, the other two Lannister siblings are completely unsuitable for the job), he's not really a Lannister in Tywin's eyes. It's a threat of disownment. I dont think Tywin is going to go all Fredo Corleone on him, but the threat of disownment is clear, IMHO. Tywin fully expects Jamie to resign as a member of the Kingsguard and take up Casterly Rock ... if Jamie won't do that, Tywin has no further use for him.


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

I really doubt Tywin had anything to do with Joff's death. He takes lineage pretty seriously....otherwise Tyrion would never have grown out of his swaddling cloths.

...and just for the record - some of us that misspell names, do so to poke fun at the people that make a big deal out of it.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Maybe Margery offed Jeffy so she wouldn't have to deflower the bastid.


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

MonsterJoe said:


> I really doubt Tywin had anything to do with Joff's death. He takes lineage pretty seriously....otherwise Tyrion would never have grown out of his swaddling cloths.
> 
> ...and just for the record - some of us that misspell names, do so to poke fun at the people that make a big deal out of it.


Especially since he knows what a pure Lannister he was


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

BitbyBlit said:


> If just the Tyrells were behind Joffrey's murder, then I think you're probably right. But I still think Tywin was somehow involved, and we will eventually find that out.


What does that have to do with how the poison got in the cup? That is what we were talking about. Tywin was much further away from the action than Olenna.


----------



## LordKronos (Dec 28, 2003)

MikeAndrews said:


> Maybe Margery offed Jeffy so she wouldn't have to deflower the bastid.


Uhhh...we saw a scene with nobody but Margaery and Lady Olenna, where Olenna claimed she did it. There was nobody else there to put on a show for. You really think Margaery put on a show for Olenna and pretended she had nothing to do with it so that Olenna could continue to believe she was the one that really did it? I'm confused on how you could even think that makes sense. Are you sure you aren't a week or 2 behind and meant to post in the S4E2 or or SrE3 threads?


----------



## LordKronos (Dec 28, 2003)

MonsterJoe said:


> I really doubt Tywin had anything to do with Joff's death. He takes lineage pretty seriously....otherwise Tyrion would never have grown out of his swaddling cloths.


The thing is, Tyrion is really no threat to the Lannister name or legacy. Joffrey, on the other hand, had the potential to completely destroy that legacy, and maybe even wipe out the entire family (Targaryen style). He was nothing but a threat. They only thing that could be done was to try to keep him under control, but even their ability to do that was diminishing. He didn't listen to his mom any more. He was initially afraid of Tyrion but that quickly wore off. He used to show great respect for Jamie, but that disappeared. The only one he seemed to cower to was Tywin, and near the end, he was even getting brave/stupid enough to not fear Tywin anymore.

He was only a very short time away from being completely out of control, to where the only person to possibly have any influence over him was Margaery. That certainly wouldn't be to Tywin's liking either.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

The plan was to poison Joffrey and frame Sansa. Tywin would not consider this to be in his best interest since his plan was to control Winterfell through the offspring of Tyrion and Sansa. 

Recall that Tywin gave Bolton control of the North until the Tyrion/Sansa offspring came of age.

So unless the "frame Sansa" part of the plan was an improvisation on the Tyrels and Littlefinger (which is possible, but not probable, IMO), Tywin had nothing to do with the assassination.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

tiassa said:


> I think so as well, Tywin is just cold blooded enough to realize that Joffrey would have likely been "bad for he realm" and that he can influence Tommeno be a better king.


I am thinking that Tywin was not directly involved in the murder, but gave his blessing as part of his arrangement with the Tyrells. As you mentioned he knew that Joff was a loose cannon and has already seen evidence of his trying to go against Tywin (and losing). Once Joff got older, he would have been a LOT harder to control.

If this is the case, it will be interesting to see what happens when Ceirce finds out.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I thought that direwolves were supposed to be badass.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

cheesesteak said:


> I thought that direwolves were supposed to be badass.


It seems like Ghost should have been able to chew through the cage or break out fairly quickly.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Anubys said:


> So unless the "frame Sansa" part of the plan was an improvisation on the Tyrels and Littlefinger (which is possible, but not probable, IMO), Tywin had nothing to do with the assassination.


I assumed that involving Sansa was Littlefinger's idea since he obviously wants her and she had already refused to go with him once. If she and Tyrion had been able to spend a little time together it's possible she would have figured out that he really isn't that bad of a husband considering the alternatives and then she would never have run off with Petyr or paid him any attention. Instead, people are screaming that she killed the king, and she has no choice but to run.



john4200 said:


> It seems like Ghost should have been able to chew through the cage or break out fairly quickly.


Yeah, I was thinking this too. Aren't the wolves supposed to grow a little more?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

stellie93 said:


> I assumed that involving Sansa was Littlefinger's idea since he obviously wants her and she had already refused to go with him once. If she and Tyrion had been able to spend a little time together it's possible she would have figured out that he really isn't that bad of a husband considering the alternatives and then she would never have run off with Petyr or paid him any attention. Instead, people are screaming that she killed the king, and she has no choice but to run.


No argument from me. My point was that it would not have been Tywin's idea and he would not have sanctioned it. Tywin is not the kind of guy who would leave details such as who is to be framed to others. Ergo, Tywin was not involved or Littlefinger has made himself an extremely powerful enemy. And Littlefinger is not the kind of guy who would needlessly make an enemy of Tywin (he would betray him behind his back, but not to his face).

Moreover, LF made a point of saying that he did this with his new friends and betrayed his old friends. There is no betrayal if Tywin was on board.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> I thought that direwolves were supposed to be badass.


Not only, but Bram and Arya's wolves are still out there.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

MikeAndrews said:


> Not only, but Bram and Arya's wolves are still out there.


You mean Rikkon's, not Bran's, right?

I don't know the names, but Jon's (Ghost) and Bran's (Summer?) are caught at Craster's keep. Rikkon's (name?) is with him. Arya's (name?) ran away and we don't know where it is. The rest are dead.

Is my accounting correct?


----------



## jehma (Jan 22, 2003)

Anubys said:


> You mean Rikkon's, not Bran's, right?
> 
> I don't know the names, but Jon's (Ghost) and Bran's (Summer?) are caught at Craster's keep. Rikkon's (name?) is with him. Arya's (name?) ran away and we don't know where it is. The rest are dead.
> 
> Is my accounting correct?


Rickon's is Shaggydog and Arya's is Nymeria. The other 2 are dead.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Anubys said:


> I don't know the names, but Jon's (Ghost) and Bran's (Summer?) are caught at Craster's keep. Rikkon's (name?) is with him. Arya's (name?) ran away and we don't know where it is. The rest are dead.
> 
> Is my accounting correct?


Rickon's Shaggydog was with him, last we saw. Arya's Nymeria was running wild last we saw. Robb's Grey Wind and Sansa's Lady are dead.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

LordKronos said:


> Uhhh...we saw a scene with nobody but Margaery and Lady Olenna, where Olenna claimed she did it. There was nobody else there to put on a show for. You really think Margaery put on a show for Olenna and pretended she had nothing to do with it so that Olenna could continue to believe she was the one that really did it? I'm confused on how you could even think that makes sense. Are you sure you aren't a week or 2 behind and meant to post in the S4E2 or or SrE3 threads?


It was a yoke, son. I'm not getting into CSI King's Landing.


----------



## LordKronos (Dec 28, 2003)

MikeAndrews said:


> It was a yoke, son.


Huh? Are you trying to say there's egg on my face?


----------



## LlamaLarry (Apr 30, 2003)

Did Littlefinger have a different accent this episode than previously? Seemed a little coarser than I recall.


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

LlamaLarry said:


> Did Littlefinger have a different accent this episode than previously? Seemed a little coarser than I recall.


I noticed that too - I just figured I hadn't been paying attention before.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

LlamaLarry said:


> Did Littlefinger have a different accent this episode than previously? Seemed a little coarser than I recall.


I've noticed that it's pretty common with that character, I suspect it's the actor just being a bit inconsistent.

More on accents (and a fun read) http://gawker.com/what-is-going-on-with-the-accents-in-game-of-thrones-485816507


----------



## SullyND (Dec 30, 2004)

MonsterJoe said:


> I noticed that too - I just figured I hadn't been paying attention before.


I noticed as well, for a moment I wondered if they replaced him.


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

Lets bring CSI:KL in. Maybe it's a hint as to his true whereabouts since the last time we saw him.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

dianebrat said:


> I've noticed that it's pretty common with that character, I suspect it's the actor just being a bit inconsistent.


I think it's more a case of where and to whom he's speaking. At court with the royals, he sounds more BBC British; when he's alone with somebody who "doesn't matter" (when he's being himself, as opposed to putting on a persona) his rough Irish comes out more.


----------



## LlamaLarry (Apr 30, 2003)

True, I wouldn't trust a Master of Coin with that brogue, but it did work well for monologuing to Sansa. Ned wouldn't have trusted this Baelish even a tiny bit.


----------



## jakerock (Dec 9, 2002)

I guess I should spoilerize this since I don't think all the show watchers are aware of it.



Spoiler



It could be that it's a new season, been over a year since the actor has played the role and good grief you guys are ridiculous. You do realize it is just a show right? I mean really good one but it's not actually real.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

As long as Garcetti doesn't make an appearance.


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

jakerock said:


> I guess I should spoilerize this since I don't think all the show watchers are aware of it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

That's exactly what he sounds like in the book.


----------



## jehma (Jan 22, 2003)

DUDE_NJX said:


> That's exactly what he sounds like in the book.


:up:


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

Anubys said:


> You mean Rikkon's, not Bran's, right?
> 
> I don't know the names, but Jon's (Ghost) and Bran's (Summer?) are caught at Craster's keep. Rikkon's (name?) is with him. Arya's (name?) ran away and we don't know where it is. The rest are dead.
> 
> Is my accounting correct?


Shaggydog and Nymeria.

And yes.


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

john4200 said:


> What does that have to do with how the poison got in the cup? That is what we were talking about. Tywin was much further away from the action than Olenna.


It would have made things easier for Olenna if Tywin had arranged for people in key positions to look the other way.

If the Tyrells were the only ones at the wedding involved (or perhaps even just Olenna specifically), then we'll probably just need to accept that she found some short window of opportunity to use her ninja reflexes to make things happen. The one benefit Martin had in writing the book is that he could describe only what needed to be described, thus leaving room for Olenna to commit her act. But with TV, one needs to keep track of everything going on in the background.

But if the book described everything as shown on TV, then Olenna took a huge risk hinging her entire plan not only on being able to get the gem from Sansa's necklace, but also being able to find a time to slip poison into Joffrey's wine without anyone else noticing.

Olenna is bold, but she seems far too calculating to take such a big risk. If she wanted to kill Joffrey on her own, I think she would have found another way.

But with Tywin's help, the plan would have been a lot more reasonable, albeit still risky. Not only would he have arranged for holes in the security at the wedding, but his order to lock down the kingdom would have been designed to have the opposite of its perceived effect. It would have allowed Sansa to get out of the city and Petyr's ship to leave without anyone seeing them.

Having Sansa disappear makes her seem far more guilty than having her executed while pleading her innocence. Not having Tywin's help in getting her out of the city would have made the chances of her getting caught far riskier. And again, it seems like far too risky of a plan for Olenna or even Petyr to want to be a part of.



Anubys said:


> The plan was to poison Joffrey and frame Sansa. Tywin would not consider this to be in his best interest since his plan was to control Winterfell through the offspring of Tyrion and Sansa.


That depends on whether he really wanted Tyrion to impregnate Sansa or that was merely a cover for why he truly wanted Tyrion and Sansa to be married. If Sansa was to be framed, she needed a reason not only to be at the wedding, but to be in a position where it was plausible she would have had access to poison Joffrey. Being married to Tyrion would have allowed her to be in such a position.

This is another reason why I think Tywin was involved. He was the one who set up that marriage. While Olenna might have simply taken advantage of that situation, I think it was part of their plan.



Anubys said:


> Recall that Tywin gave Bolton control of the North until the Tyrion/Sansa offspring came of age.


Perhaps, though, the agreement was that Bolton got control of the North permanently in exchange for his betrayal. He seemed far too interested in wanting Bran and Rickon dead to have been willing to give up control to Sansa's child, and he knew Sansa was in King's Landing under the control of the Lannisters.

Assuming he made his agreement with Tywin to betray Robb sometime after the Kalstarks left, at that time Sansa would have been the only known remaining threat to his control over the North. Perhaps Tywin gave him assurances that Sansa would not be a problem.

Now, it's possible that Tywin lied to him, and his arrangement of Tyrion to Sansa was meant to stab Bolton in the back. But it's also possible that Tywin realized that attempting to control the North was more trouble than it was worth, and he never really expected Tyrion to give Sansa a child.



Anubys said:


> Moreover, LF made a point of saying that he did this with his new friends and betrayed his old friends. There is no betrayal if Tywin was on board.


But he also made a point of saying he liked to keep people confused as to his true intentions. Why stop then? It was Sansa who suggested that he had betrayed the Lannisters as a family. He might have left her believing that, but he never outright confirmed it.

All he talked about was his "new friends" who were reasonable. Both Tywin Lannister and Olenna Tyrell fit that description.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

MikeAndrews said:


> Asx long as Garcetti doesn't make an appearance.[/QUOTE
> 
> Carcetti


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Why did they have to poison Jeffy at the wedding? That could have been done at any time.

And since they had no idea that Jeffy was going to torment "Uncle" they couldn't have planned such a direct way to blame Tyrion & Sansa.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

MikeAndrews said:


> Why did they have to poison Jeffy at the wedding? That could have been done at any time.


i thought it was aimed at tywin by olenna, as a statement on tywin's roll in the red wedding.

she mentioned in conversation with tywin her feelings on the massacre taking place at a wedding, as she and tywin were walking together before joffrey and margaery's ceremony. she had already conspired to kill joffrey, might as well take to opportunity to throw some karma towards the lannister's direction.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

MikeAndrews said:


> Why did they have to poison Jeffy at the wedding? That could have been done at any time.
> 
> And since they had no idea that Jeffy was going to torment "Uncle" they couldn't have planned such a direct way to blame Tyrion & Sansa.


Probably they had heard about the search for 5 Dwarfs and assumed that, as usual, Joff was going to torment Tyrion. 



BitbyBlit said:


> It would have made things easier for Olenna if Tywin had arranged for people in key positions to look the other way.
> 
> Olenna is bold, but she seems far too calculating to take such a big risk. If she wanted to kill Joffrey on her own, I think she would have found another way.
> 
> Now, it's possible that Tywin lied to him, and his arrangement of Tyrion to Sansa was meant to stab Bolton in the back. But it's also possible that Tywin realized that attempting to control the North was more trouble than it was worth, and he never really expected Tyrion to give Sansa a child.


If just that one guard standing behind Joffrey toward Olena's table had been bought off--maybe by the Lannisters, or maybe the Tyrells--it would have been a big help. And If people saw her play with Sansa's necklace, she could have used that poison, or if she didn't manage to get it, she may have had some herself.

I think Tywin's good intentions toward Tyrion pretty much ended with not killing him as a baby. I doubt that he really cared if he had the north or if Boltons did. Luckily the North is far away and probably will be overrun when Winter comes anyway.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I'm torn between letting it go and disagreeing with everything BitbyBlit wrote and counter-arguing everything he posted.

Everything you say is certainly possible. I simply disagree with every single point you made!


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

stellie93 said:


> I think Tywin's good intentions toward Tyrion pretty much ended with not killing him as a baby. I doubt that he really cared if he had the north or if Boltons did. Luckily the North is far away and probably will be overrun when Winter comes anyway.


ok. Now you're the second person to make this point so I have to say something! 

Tywin doesn't care about the North?

If you think Tywin would give up control of one acre of land for any reason, I would say you simply have not been paying attention. Total and complete control of everything is what Tywin is all about.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I agree that Tywin wants control of the North. But if there is trouble in the North, it isn't as big a problem as if one of the other houses revolts. 

Also, is he sure that he would control Tyrion any better than the Boltons? For instance, if Bran or Rickon appeared at Winterfell, would Tyrion kill them on his father's order? Bolton would only hesitate as long as it took to flay them. 

(you have a good point--Tywin would not cede 1 acre of the kingdom if he could avoid it. I'm just playing devil's advocate here.  )


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

I'm confused about why the poisoning had to be so complex. Why bother hiding it in Sansa's necklace? Are we to believe that everyone who came to the wedding was strip searched? I understand that they were trying to frame her, but it's not like anyone has even mentioned the jewel as far as evidence against her.


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

gweempose said:


> I'm confused about why the poisoning had to be so complex. Why bother hiding it in Sansa's necklace? Are we to believe that everyone who came to the wedding was strip searched? I understand that they were trying to frame her, but it's not like anyone has even mentioned the jewel as far as evidence against her.


This bothers me a bit too.


----------



## tiassa (Jul 2, 2008)

I'm not 100% convinced that the poison was hidden in, on or around, the gem. I think the function of the gem (assuming the plot was to implicate Sansa) was that it would be found in or near Joffrey's body, thereby implicating Sansa, as in "The Gem must have fallen off her necklace while she was delivering the poison".


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

gweempose said:


> I'm confused about why the poisoning had to be so complex. Why bother hiding it in Sansa's necklace? Are we to believe that everyone who came to the wedding was strip searched? I understand that they were trying to frame her, but it's not like anyone has even mentioned the jewel as far as evidence against her.


it had to be complex not only frame sansa, but hide the conspiracy at the same time, overwhelming evidence to eliminate anyone else. with so many enemies, everyone around joffrey would be a suspect.

once the necklace is discovered (or planted), the framing will be complete, and the conspirators safe. if it's found in time, it will also clear tyrion.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Another thing: Brother Sir Jamie as Lord of the King's Guard, kinda did a real bad job.


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

NorthAlabama said:


> once the necklace is discovered (or planted), the framing will be complete, and the conspirators safe. if it's found in time, it will also clear tyrion.


But I think when Sansa met Littlefinger on his boat, he took the necklace from Sansa, smashed one of the jewels to show they that they're just cheap glass, then threw the necklace into the sea.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Yeah, even if there is a part of the "glass" necklace in the cup Joffrey drank from, who is going to recognize it as coming from Sansa's necklace--unless Olena speaks up? Maybe Jaime will look into it, since he's the only one who believes Tyrion is innocent. I haven't heard anything said about investigating the murder at all.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Jeeters said:


> But I think when Sansa met Littlefinger on his boat, he took the necklace from Sansa, smashed one of the jewels to show they that they're just cheap glass, then threw the necklace into the sea.


He didn't throw it into the sea, he threw it onto clown-boy's body in the rowboat.

Presumably, all the "gems" are poison. So there will be a lot of evidence in that boat, all pointing at Sansa.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

So are they supposed to think that Sansa killed the fool and left the incriminating necklace with him? Or that she had some mysterious partner working with her who could be almost anyone but Littlefinger?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> He didn't throw it into the sea, he threw it onto clown-boy's body in the rowboat.
> 
> Presumably, all the "gems" are poison. So there will be a lot of evidence in that boat, all pointing at Sansa.


But do we think Littlefinger intended for the necklace to land on the Fool's boat, or was that just coincidence? Littlefinger seemed to nonchalantly flick the necklace off the railing, without taking any care or aim for where it fell. It seemed to me that he was simply illustrating to Sansa that it was a worthless piece of crap, and the fact that the Fool's rowboat was still there and happened to "catch" the necklace was just pure chance.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

stellie93 said:


> So are they supposed to think that Sansa killed the fool and left the incriminating necklace with him? Or that she had some mysterious partner working with her who could be almost anyone but Littlefinger?


Well, you know how devious and traitorous those Starks are! 


DevdogAZ said:


> But do we think Littlefinger intended for the necklace to land on the Fool's boat, or was that just coincidence? Littlefinger seemed to nonchalantly flick the necklace off the railing, without taking any care or aim for where it fell. It seemed to me that he was simply illustrating to Sansa that it was a worthless piece of crap, and the fact that the Fool's rowboat was still there and happened to "catch" the necklace was just pure chance.


But that would defeat the entire purpose of the necklace...


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

LordKronos said:


> I don't think Tywin was doing anything of the sort. He wants Jamie to go back to rule Casterly Rock, which presumably would entail him starting a family (it seem all the Lords we've seen so far have had both a wife and kids). Tywin was just acknowledging (in an irritated way) that, as a King's Guard, Jamie will not be able to do that.


I'm not sure why you're arguing this point. Tywin most definitely did disown Jamie. He said, "A one-handed man with no family needs all the help he can get." Then later in the episode, when Jamie was talking to Cersei, he says, "Father disowned me today."

Now whether Tywin follows through on the disownment remains to be seen, but I don't think you can reasonably argue that what he said (and the way Jamie understood it) was meant to imply that Jamie was disowned.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But that would defeat the entire purpose of the necklace...


Agreed. I'm sure it was intended. But I just wish that if so, they would have portrayed it as more deliberate. The way he just flicked the necklace over the side, it could have just as easily landed in the sea, and then if the necklace was necessary for some frame job, it would be been completely ruined.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

DevdogAZ said:


> Agreed. I'm sure it was intended. But I just wish that if so, they would have portrayed it as more deliberate. The way he just flicked the necklace over the side, it could have just as easily landed in the sea, and then if the necklace was necessary for some frame job, it would be been completely ruined.


If one of the gems from the necklace turns up in a suspicious spot at some point, Olenna could chime in with, "I remember Sansa wearing a necklace with a gem just like that". And then I'm sure Cersei would say, "I saw it, too!"


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> Agreed. I'm sure it was intended. But I just wish that if so, they would have portrayed it as more deliberate. The way he just flicked the necklace over the side, it could have just as easily landed in the sea, and then if the necklace was necessary for some frame job, it would be been completely ruined.


You mean like they telegraphed the necklace during the wedding. (That was sarcasm. It took stop action and intense examination to see the necklace lost a stone.)

This show is wonderful but sometimes they stage things oddly.


----------



## LordKronos (Dec 28, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> I'm not sure why you're arguing this point. Tywin most definitely did disown Jamie. He said, "A one-handed man with no family needs all the help he can get." Then later in the episode, when Jamie was talking to Cersei, he says, "Father disowned me today."
> 
> Now whether Tywin follows through on the disownment remains to be seen, but I don't think you can reasonably argue that what he said (and the way Jamie understood it) was meant to imply that Jamie was disowned.


I most certainly can argue it. Jamie could have simply misunderstood it the same as you. In real life, it's actually extremely common for a snarky comment to have more read into it than was intended.

And as Cersei immediately replied to Jamie, "Father can't disown you, you are all he's got". Do you think Tywin doesn't realize that? Or do you think he's just the type to make idle threats he has no real intention to follow through on? That's not the same Tywin I've been watching for 4 seasons.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

LordKronos said:


> I most certainly can argue it. Jamie could have simply misunderstood it the same as you. In real life, it's actually extremely common for a snarky comment to have more read into it than was intended.
> 
> And as Cersei immediately replied to Jamie, "Father can't disown you, you are all he's got". Do you think Tywin doesn't realize that? Or do you think he's just the type to make idle threats he has no real intention to follow through on? That's not the same Tywin I've been watching for 4 seasons.


Of course Tywin isn't making an idle threat. That's why I don't understand your position. As for Cersei saying that Jamie is all he's got, that was said with the understanding that he wouldn't remain in the Kings Guard, which she asked him about immediately after, and he implied that he was planning to remain. It was the fact that Jamie wanted to remain in the Kings Guard and did not want a wife or children that caused Tywin to disown him in the first place.

Now whether Jamie will change his mind now that he sees that Cersei no longer wants anything to do with him, and if Tywin would then reinstate Jamie, that remains to be seen. But from what we've seen on screen so far, it seems to me that Jamie was disowned, and it was further punctuated by the fact that Jamie gave away the sword that Tywin made for him, since it no longer has any familial significance for him.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> But from what we've seen on screen so far, it seems to me that Jamie was disowned, and it was further punctuated by the fact that Jamie gave away the sword that Tywin made for him, since it no longer has any familial significance for him.


And really, he effectively disowned himself, since by remaining in the Kingsguard he made it impossible to serve as the head of the family.

Of course, he did that in the hope of remaining with his "wife" and children, so as you say, who knows how Cersei's rejection will affect his thinking in that regard.


----------



## tlc (May 30, 2002)

NorthAlabama said:


> once the necklace is discovered (or planted), the framing will be complete, and the conspirators safe. *if it's found in time, it will also clear tyrion.*


Not really. She's his wife. Guilt by association.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

The most important detail in framing Sansa was not the necklace. The necklace is there simply to add weight to the accusation. The most important part of the plot was to have Sansa run away. Add the bead from the necklace, and she is 100% guilty in the eyes of everyone.

Sansa was an idiot to stay behind when the Hound gave her an out. And she was a bigger idiot to run away when the fool told her to.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> Of course Tywin isn't making an idle threat. That's why I don't understand your position. As for Cersei saying that Jamie is all he's got, that was said with the understanding that he wouldn't remain in the Kings Guard, which she asked him about immediately after, and he implied that he was planning to remain. It was the fact that Jamie wanted to remain in the Kings Guard and did not want a wife or children that caused Tywin to disown him in the first place.
> 
> Now whether Jamie will change his mind now that he sees that Cersei no longer wants anything to do with him, and if Tywin would then reinstate Jamie, that remains to be seen. But from what we've seen on screen so far, it seems to me that Jamie was disowned, and it was further punctuated by the fact that Jamie gave away the sword that Tywin made for him, since it no longer has any familial significance for him.


I agree with Lordkronos. Jaime did not do what Tywin wanted. Tywin - for the moment - could do nothing about it. So Tywin got the last word by saying as nasty and as biting a remark as he could make. He was getting his frustration out and having the last word.

He still gave Jaime the sword. he would not have done so if Jaime was no longer a Lannister.

Jaime was whining to his sister that Tywin was mean to him. I think that is all that happened there. I think you're talking things way too literally.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Anubys said:


> Sansa was an idiot to stay behind when the Hound gave her an out. And she was a bigger idiot to run away when the fool told her to.


You just keep talking and talking. You could have stopped at four words.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

tlc said:


> Not really. She's his wife. Guilt by association.


in an arranged marriage that neither wanted?


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> You just keep talking and talking. You could have stopped at four words.


Listening to talkers makes me thirsty.

Given how *I* post, that explains why I'm always thirsty!


----------



## tlc (May 30, 2002)

BTW, there's a show called The Writer's Room on Sundance and Netflix. On the GoT episode, the show's writer/producers discuss discovering GoT and working with GRRM and mistakes they've made. It's enjoyable and has no spoilers.

One tidbit for the book readers: At one point GRRM quizzed them to see if they really read the books. He asked who Jon Snow's mother was. They didn't say what their answer was, but they said they got it right. So apparently it is guessable from the books so far.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

tlc said:


> One tidbit for the book readers: At one point GRRM quizzed them to see if they really read the books. He asked who Jon Snow's mother was. They didn't say what their answer was, but they said they got it right. So apparently it is guessable from the books so far.


Unless the correct answer is "we don't know".


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

Lady Snow, duh.


----------



## wedgecon (Dec 28, 2002)

DUDE_NJX said:


> Lady Snow, duh.


I am pretty sure if she was a "lady" he would not be a bastard!


----------



## tigercat74 (Aug 7, 2004)

wedgecon said:


> I am pretty sure if she was a "lady" he would not be a bastard!


Aren't you a bastard if your born with your parents not being married.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DUDE_NJX said:


> Lady Snow, duh.





wedgecon said:


> I am pretty sure if she was a "lady" he would not be a bastard!





tigercat74 said:


> Aren't you a bastard if you're born with your parents not being married.


True.

On the other hand, if you're a Snow you're a bastard yourself, and thus no Lady.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

heySkippy said:


> Unless the correct answer is "we don't know".


LOL :up:

I'm sticking by my theory that it's Ned's sister's baby from the Targaryan prince


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> True.
> 
> On the other hand, if you're a Snow you're a bastard yourself, and thus no Lady.


So what happens if Jon Snow marries and has kids. Is their kids last name still Snow even though they are NOT bastards?

Yeah, I'm over thinking this.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

If Game of Thrones took place entirely on Facebook - Season 4, Episode 4

http://happyplace.someecards.com/30945/game-of-thrones-facebook-recap-season-4-episode-4


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

wedgecon said:


> I am pretty sure if she was a "lady" he would not be a bastard!


Edric Storm (a character from the books that we will never see) was one of Robert Baratheon's many bastards. His mother was a noble woman Robert knocked up. So even in Westoros to not be a bastard your parents have to be married.


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

Shaunnick said:


> Edric Storm (a character from the books that we will never see) was one of Robert Baratheon's many bastards. His mother was a noble woman Robert knocked up. So even in Westoros to not be a bastard your parents have to be married.


Well, your _mother_ has to be married; just not necessarily to your father  (unless the husband figures it out; then you're a Snow again)


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

Jonathan_S said:


> Well, your _mother_ has to be married; just not necessarily to your father  (unless the husband figures it out; then you're a Snow again)


Or a Pyke, or Stone, or Rivers, or Flowers, or Sand.

What's the bastard name for people from Lannister lands, Nugget?


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

Hill


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Shaunnick said:


> What's the bastard name for people from Lannister lands, Nugget?


Your Highness?


----------



## bikegeek (Dec 28, 2006)

astrohip said:


> If Game of Thrones took place entirely on Facebook - Season 4, Episode 4
> 
> http://happyplace.someecards.com/30945/game-of-thrones-facebook-recap-season-4-episode-4


That was great, thanks for sharing.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> Slight hijack... The new HBO series they previewed before this episode did not look like anything I want to watch. I ffwd'd through half of it.


 Really, I thought it had potential.  I'll definitely watch the first episode to see how they go with it.



Anubys said:


> I'm sticking by my theory that it's Ned's sister's baby from the Targaryan prince


The thing about that theory is the Jon Snow looks _nothing_ like a Targaryan. You'd think he'd have some hint of Targaryan in him if he was 50%. But, maybe Stark blood is much stronger.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

madscientist said:


> The thing about that theory is the Jon Snow looks _nothing_ like a Targaryan. You'd think he'd have some hint of Targaryan in him if he was 50%. But, maybe Stark blood is much stronger.


Although he doesn't look that much like a Stark, either. More like a Baratheon.

Not that I'm suggesting anything. I just think they were a little loosey-goosey with their casting sometimes.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

Interesting comment, Rob, considering how many people complained in the first season that they couldn't tell Jon Snow from Rob Stark.


----------



## JETarpon (Jan 1, 2003)

That's a lot easier to do now, at least.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Ereth said:


> Interesting comment, Rob, considering how many people complained in the first season that they couldn't tell Jon Snow from Rob Stark.


Rob & Jon both look different from the rest of the Starks, who generally have lighter, straighter hair. (And I never had any trouble telling them apart, although knowing the characters as well as I did from the books probably helped distinguish them.

But the families are much more homogeneous in the books. The TV families tend to be all over the map (except for the Targaryens, or at least the two we've seen...well, three, but he was too old to tell). E.g., the Lannister siblings don't even look much like siblings, much less two of them twins.

I think looks are like accents in Westeros...they took what they could get.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Not that I'm suggesting anything. I just think they were a little loosey-goosey with their casting sometimes.


Well sure it's not wise to read too much familial similarity into the looks of the actors in a television show, but even in the books (from what I recall) Jon looks a lot more like a Stark (dark hair, dark eyes, etc.) than a Targaryan (silver/white hair, light eyes, etc.)


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

madscientist said:


> Well sure it's not wise to read too much familial similarity into the looks of the actors in a television show, but even in the books (from what I recall) Jon looks a lot more like a Stark (dark hair, dark eyes, etc.) than a Targaryan (silver/white hair, light eyes, etc.)


Right, I was talking about Robb looking more like Jon than the other Starks.

Jon definitely does not look like a Targaryen, and if that turns out to be the case, GRRM has some 'splaining to do.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Jon definitely does not look like a Targaryen, and if that turns out to be the case, GRRM has some 'splaining to do.


Maybe the Targaryen genes are recessive. Hence, why the Targaryens had a tendency to inbreed, to make the recessive genes more likely to express.


----------



## LordKronos (Dec 28, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> E.g., the Lannister siblings don't even look much like siblings, much less two of them twins.


FYI male-female twins are genetically no more similar than any 2 non-twin sibblings, and thus there is no reason they should look any more alike Than a typical brother and sister (other than the lack of an age difference)


----------



## jakerock (Dec 9, 2002)

You're discussing how much the characters on the show resemble each other as evidence of their shared heredity? This two weeks after people are complaining that the same character doesn't look anything like himself from one season to the next??? Heh.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

jakerock said:


> You're discussing how much the characters on the show resemble each other as evidence of their shared heredity? This two weeks after people are complaining that the same character doesn't look anything like himself from one season to the next??? Heh.


Well, it's really just an observation in light of how much is made of the family resemblances in the books...all the families have very distinctive looks, and on the show, they obviously went more for actors who worked well together than ones who had very similar looks.

HOW COULD THEY DO SUCH A THING?!? THE SHOW IS RUINED NOW FOREVER!!!!!


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

jakerock said:


> You're discussing how much the characters on the show resemble each other as evidence of their shared heredity? This two weeks after people are complaining that the same character doesn't look anything like himself from one season to the next??? Heh.


Please see post #160


----------

