The Big Thing You Might Have Missed In Yesterday's Game Of Thrones

The Big Thing You Might've Missed In Last Night's Game of Thrones

They say the devil is in the details -- that's certainly the case in Game of Thrones, at least. If you haven't watched the latest two episodes of Game of Thrones, and if you don't mind discussion of what will probably become a big plot point in future episodes, you should stop reading now -- this article contains spoilers.

So, the purple wedding. How did it happen? How did Joffrey get poisoned; who did it? Readers of the books might already be in the know, but while the show hasn't outright told us who the culprit is, we all watched the poisoning happen. Most of us didn't realise it, though -- but you can catch it if you look closely.

Remember the necklace that Ser Dontos gave Sansa in the start of the season, in that weird scene that seemed to have nothing to do with anything?

The Big Thing You Might've Missed In Last Night's Game of Thrones

The scene is actually pretty important, as is the necklace. Count the crystals. There are seven of them. OK, now fast forward to last night's episode. Much of the episode slyly focuses on Olenna Tyrell -- take, for instance, this ominous shot that happens during the wedding.

The Big Thing You Might've Missed In Last Night's Game of Thrones

Later, after the ceremony is over, Olenna comes over and speaks to Sansa...

The Big Thing You Might've Missed In Last Night's Game of Thrones

She fiddlers with Sansa's hair, she fiddles with her necklace, she offers Sansa comfort. It seems harmless! Except, weirdly, when Olenna leaves, Sansa's necklace only has six crystals -- notice that the far right crystal is no longer there:

The Big Thing You Might've Missed In Last Night's Game of Thrones

Where did that last crystal go? Hmm.

Notice how, when Tyrion brings the cup full of wine up to Joffrey, the shot focuses on Olenna again?

The Big Thing You Might've Missed In Last Night's Game of Thrones

That's because she did it. She poisoned him. She asked the Tyrell women to buy the best necklaces in the land, and then presumably gave one of those necklaces to Ser Dontos. Then, when the poisoning happens, we know that the cup was within her reach -- she took the poison crystal from Sansa's necklace and put it in Joffrey's wine. That's why Joffrey ends up looking like this:

The Big Thing You Might've Missed In Last Night's Game of Thrones

Not that anyone feels sorry for Joffrey, of course. But the best part about this all? It's that when Olenna takes the necklace from Sansa, she says "War is war, but killing a man at a wedding? Horrid. What sort of monster would do such a thing?"

Perfect.

EDIT: some of you are asking, how can a crystal be poisonous? Well, this is a special crystal -- it's a poison called "The Strangler." Here's how it works, according to the Game of Thrones wiki:

The poison is made from plants that are only found on islands in the Jade Sea. The leaves of the plant are picked and aged, then soaked in a wash of limes, sugar water and rare spices from the Summer Islands. The leaves are then discarded, but the liquid is kept and thickened with ash and allowed to crystallize.

Pictures: imgur, Vanity Fair


Comments

    Ah, well spotted.

      It wasn't well spotted, someone read the books.

        Since it was Sansa's hairnet rather than a necklace in the books, it's still pretty well spotted.

          not really, I mean the key point is that its a piece of jewellery given to her by the former Sir Dontos, anybody who read the books wasn't fooled by the switch of specifics. I think it is interesting how they didn't show the conversation/instructions that went with the hand-over, but, that will probably be a '"flashback" scene in the next epesode

          Yes well spotted, but not by the author, by the original poster on Reddit.

            I can't see where this is sourced from reddit. Are we doing that thing where someone saw it first on reddit and assumes that this is the only possible source for an idea? Lots and lots of people noticed the necklace thing.

    for her to reach joffrey's cup from there she would have to lean over or throw it in and there is a kings-guard standing right in front of it. just something that's annoying me.

      Joffery put it down right in front of her side in front of margery after tyrion gave it to him.

        The problem with this is that she could not have known he would do so...so there is alot of planning for an event that might not even happen.

          She could have simply taken the opportunity then when she had the chance to poison him. She was more than likely biding her time n waiting for the pwrfect opportunity and took it the moment she got one.

    umm... way to fucking spoil who did it for those who haven't read the books, I guess.

      As the author says:
      " If you haven’t watched the latest two episodes of Game of Thrones, and if you don’t mind discussion of what will probably become a big plot point in future episodes, you should stop reading now — this article contains spoilers."

        "discussion of" and "probable plot point" are a bit misleading when she then proceeds to explain in detail the answer to the who done it mystery.

        These are not 'show spoilers,' but rather book spoilers. Even if you're 100% up to date, Patricia Hernandez just ruined it for you by relinking content she probably found on reddit (like everything else she posts), and then confirmed from the goddamn wiki.

        I've never had much respect for Patricia Hernandez's writing but this is basic shit... You don't need to tell people that 'Snape killed Dumbledore!' to feel special.

    Goddamnit it Patrica, that’s some clickbait you got here.

    I was expecting some trivia, hints or whodunit theories, not an outright explanation of something that could be revealed in the future.

    Should of said "*Even* if you’ve watched the last two episodes, this article contains spoilers for future episodes"

    A stolen gemstone doesn’t extrapolate to ‘poison’ unless you have non-show information, which I've seen Patrica's done by linking a book-based wiki.

    They say the devil is in the details — that’s certainly the case in Game of Thrones, at least. If you haven’t watched the latest two episodes of Game of Thrones, and if you don’t mind discussion of what will probably become a big plot point in future episodes, you should stop reading now — this article contains spoilers.

      This article contains BOOK spoilers. is what it should have read. There's a big difference. I'm up to date with the show, so I thought I could safely engage in some theories and discussion. It's important to remember that relative to the show watching audience, most people haven't read the books. I think an article like this will spoil it for more watchers of the TV show than it will be interesting for readers of the books.

      Last edited 15/04/14 11:08 pm

        Why... why would want to discuss something when some people already know the definitive, indisputable answer to?...
        "I want to discuss and talk about X, but not with anyone that already knows the answer to X."
        ..... that's kinda dumb...

          Most people don't know the answers to the things we want to discuss. Try to imagine that there are no books and that Game of Thrones was a TV series only. After that episode the first thing heaps of people would want to do would be to gather together and discuss the "who dunnit". Now just because the books exist, doesn't mean people don't still want to engage in theories and discussion, but I guess we can't do that because there'll always be that one arsehole who comes in and says "Here's a spoiler bitches!" and ruins the pleasure for everyone.

          There's a bit of a "who dunnit" in Harry Potter, where Snape's allegiance isn't obvious until the end of the series. You know the answer and you hear to Potter fans excitedly talking about what they think of Snape - Do you think that it would be okay for you to spoil that twist to them, because "why would they want to discuss something when people already know the definitive, indisputable answer to?". Try to put yourself in their shoes.

          Most people haven't read the books, we're like those Potter fans who haven't finished all the books, and Patricia is like the person wearing a "Dumbledoor dies" t-shirt and ruining everyone's fun.

            Except she isn't, because she specifically warned you. The analogy would be her wearing the tshirt, but yelling through a megaphone beforehand that she was wearing the tshirt, under a jumper, and was about to take the jumper off so you better look away.

              You get that there's tv spoilers and then there's book spoilers right?

                Yes. Hence why the article mentioned spoilers. As the show is based off books, it's pretty tough to avoid spoilers. So if you are worried about anything being spoiled, don't read articles with spoiler tags. I have read the books, so I tend to like reading discussions where the show and the books are compared, so this was a good article. It's also not a book spoiler, it is a discussion based on what happened from the show. The only reason she mentions the books at all is to point out that we already know who the culprit was.

                  You're probably right, but you should probably expand that to "anything to do with Game of Thrones, period" - even in the article above this which is just a funny skit about George R R Martin being a wedding planner, people in the comments think it's okay to spout potential spoilers just for shits and giggles.

                You get that there is common sense and no sense ?
                The title and pre-text of the article alludes to a spoiler.
                There is a very clear spoiler alert in the first paragraph
                At this point, you should have got some inkling, that you are going to be told a spoiler.
                If you're going to argue that you need more warning, then here is a solid piece of advice - if you drive a vehicle, please stop doing so, because roadside spoilers such as STOP signs only appear once.

                If the TV series is based off the book, then it's not a large leap of logic to assume that any spoliers - clearly identified as such - may have a strong correlation to both TV series and the source material, in this case, the books.
                Are you just looking for someone to blame because you were too fucking stupid to stop reading ?
                Furthermore your analogy is shit.
                Here's a better one. You're all discussing the murder, and someone walks in and says "I've got a pretty good idea of who did it, but anyone who doesn't want to hear it, better leave now".
                You don't want to hear it, but you didn't leave the room.
                Doesn't matter if it was a book, TV series or even a sodding ballad written in Norse, if you don't want to know, leave the room.

                As you're still here, evidently you wanted to know.

    Yup. Agreed. Dick move Patricia. Does anyone give fuck about terrible writing anymore. Or do u guys earn money by how many people read your articles.

      Shitaku strikes again. Who allows a discussion thread with book spoilers....

      I agree. Thanks for ruining the next however many episodes, Patricia. People who have read the books would clearly have no interest in reading such an article as they already know what happens. This was not discussion or speculation, it was simply a spoiler learned from a wiki and possibly by reading the books. Great job Dick Tracy.

    I thought the general consensus when it came to spoilers (especially GoT spoilers) was to NEVER talk about ANYTHING spoiler related?
    Why post an article like this? Pfft.

    Thanks, managed to Avoid spoilers for 3 years!
    Does anyone edit this shit!!!
    Seriously, that's season 4 spoiled then...
    Slow clap for a writer I'll active avoid from now on!

    I just don't get why she bothered with the Sansa and necklace thing? Why didn't she just hide the poison on herself. Seems like a few logic leaps and luck in her plan.

      Probably so she and Tyrion would be made suspects. Since tyrion is prime suspect, sansa, his wife, has a motive to want Joffrey dead (more than anyone) and "oh what's this? the necklace has poisoned crystals?" case closed.

        And if Sansa makes a dash with the fool then she will be considered guilty in absence (you should see the world while you can!)

        Its what seems to be the GRR Martin magic - give us new storytelling tropes to give us something new in this reboot filled world - Like killing characters indiscriminately, having no moral story arc to give us vindication, making it like real history rather than an idealised version of it

    I was thinking the same thing, why go through all the trouble to get it to Sansa, if you are only going to take it from Sansa to use later, I guess I put the poison in my pocket wasn't as thrilling....

    Ugh nicejob spoiling. The article warning says if you haven't watched the last 2 episodes anddon't mind ddiscussion then mentions facts with links to the wiki? That's a spoiler not discussion. Discussion is theory based only onthe episodes without facts from other sources. Way to ruin it

    It was actually Littlefinger, wasn't it?

    If you don't want spoilers, DON'T READ ARTICLES DISCUSSING GAME OF THRONES

      Every single other article on Kotaku that discusses Game of Thrones makes it clear that the discussion is for people who enjoy the tv show and there are to be NO BOOK SPOILERS. This is because the amount of people who only watch the tv show far outnumber the amount of people who have read the books. People went into this article assuming the same rules held.

      Do you think there shouldn't be a place where people can discuss the show and not have book spoilers revealed?

    Oh so you guys farm stories from reddit now?

    http://imgur.com/a/2DtPH

    Thanks for ruining that, I was up to date with the show and expected "spoilers" to cover material from the latest episode, that people who aren't up to date with the show would find to be spoilers. I will personally avoid any article written by you in the future.

    I spent the last year not reading about it, not watching trailers and teasers etc.
    Then I thought, "i'm up to date with Game of thrones, i can safely read something about last nights episode"
    And then you proceed to spell out the entire whodunnit.
    Thanks assholes.

    Change the title to "whodunnit revealed" to save others from falling for this bullshit.

    Last edited 16/04/14 11:57 am

    Really enjoyed the episode, because I saw it spoiler free, which would have been impossible if I waited for legal access outside watching it on foxtel.

    Now I have to ban myself from checking details on Wiki (looked up 'the strangler' poison, and it gave away major spoilers) - I have read enough fantasy epics in my time, somehow missed GOT, and I choose to enjoy it as a TV show
    really find the elitism of the book crowd annoying -but -

    If GRR Martin dies before he writes the books, he has filled in the TV scriptwriters with the story arcs so in a M Night shamblyman twist - The TV show will hold the secrets that the book elites will have to wait for .......

      Pretty sure you have not read more than 5 books in your life.

    "it's like Lenin said.. you look for who will benefit and um ...you know...um you know..."
    Jeff "the dude" Lebowski, 1992.

      Iam the walrus

    Wait, I'm confused, who killed Dumbledore?

    Ok for all those complaining about book spoilers verses series spoilers:STOP! They both suck but it is going to happen. And I for one came on this site specifically to find out who killed and how Joffery died. I have not read the books and dont care where the information has come from. I simply wanted an answer and one was provided. If you wanted to debate on what happened you should put bebate or decussions in your search box to avoid this sort of problem or simply not partake at all and wait patently. It is not right to put down others because you are unsatisfied. Other are satisfied. If you disagree then do it nicely and with respect or say nothing at all. It ruins the discussion often times-at least for me-to read such arguements and put downs.

Join the discussion!