mcjen

Okay, I bow down - gotta love anyone who can make Cato funny!

I hate saying this because I've enjoyed Alexander Ludwig in other things and even in his earlier years in Vikings. But I find every time the camera holds on his face for any length of time, I find myself thinking it's as expressive as a big slab of beef. And his eyes are pee-holes in the snow. I just don't get a sense of anything going on there. Whereas Fimmel had eyes that were constantly alert and allows indicators of thoughts and feelings. I may not have known exactly what Ragnar was thinking, but I knew something was going on in that head.

Well, maybe because she received a full share of the tip on all the other charters without ever pulling her full share of the work? I could see where it would be possible to interpret it as she owes My Seanna a couple of days of effort. And seriously, since she would have had to leave before the next charter arrived, we're really only talking about one full day of work. I'm sure she would have booked first thing in the morning with the charter arriving mid-day. I've read a few times where people supposed it was production that encouraged Caroline to hang around a couple of days beyond quitting, because it might have taken time to make her arrangements. Yet when Chandler was let go, he had no problem with packing and leaving immediately, as has every other person I can recall who got the ax on BD. So, while it may have been production's interference, I'm more inclined to believe that it was Caroline's choice, because she hadn't gotten the big reaction she wanted the night before, OR she was hoping they would beg her to stay, OR she wanted to talk to Capt. Lee before going. Or, all of the above.

I suspect Caroline may have been left alone because, if things had gone according to plan, either Kate or Josiah would have returned with the guests, leaving a stew behind to assist a deckhand or two with the breakdown of the pig roast setup. And if Chandler had only notified her of Capt. Lee's instructions to return with the tinders, she might have been able to make some arrangement to flow with that plan, so that Caroline would not have been left alone to receive all 10 guests. Or, at worst, not left alone for so long.

I also thought there was a moment in previews where an off-camera Ross said "Watch the attitude." to Rhylee and she responded with heavy sarcasm, "Yes, sir!" That had me wondering if Ross was promoted to bosun and she didn't care for his supervision any more than Chandler's. I hope I'm wrong. I suppose the off-camera voice might have been Ashton's. It didn't sound like Chandler's American accent.

I considered this issue with the first BD episode I ever saw and decided right away that "equal-shares-for-all, unless-you-get-a-ticket-home" might be the only way to do this to avoid endless squabbles. On any given charter, any single crew member might have an off-day or operate at less than their best; we've even seen crew members be waylaid by illness or injury for an entire charter. Nevertheless, all are given equal shares. Sometimes, if a crew person has been absent for an entire charter, I'd like to think they might have the honesty to split up their share with the rest of the crew for covering them while they were down (have we ever seen that done?) However, if it fell upon the captain to try to assess who deserved less tip, and by how much, for each and every charter, I think it would lead to all kinds of nastiness. How much do you have to screw up to rate a penalty? What's an understandable error versus an honest-to-god fubar? Is there a sliding scale for penalties? If someone messed up but it didn't come to the captain's attention, would it lead to crew members constantly trying to rat each other out in order to gain a larger slice of the pie?

I didn't read it as sarcasm at all. She seemed to be sincerely thanking her "pack" (as she identified them) and seemed to choke up when she said they are helping to keep her strong. I'm in the camp that finds her slightly delusional.

Same. This almost feels like murder porn, and I don't feel very good about myself for watching it. The fact that the bulk of this episode is drawn from imagination, since no one knows what went on between Jeff's and David's murders, isn't helping. And I totally give David a pass on not escaping, since we can't possibly know what actual constraints he was under or what opportunities were presented. If I'm left scratching my head as to why David didn't escape through the bar's restroom window, I put that down to vague writing. OTOH, I think the memories/fantasies of earlier times with his father combined with that final "vision" as he ran toward the trailer was inspired.

I had an English teacher who tried to be very cool in the 70's, presenting a unit that employed pop lyrics. He translated "Jesus Christ Superstar" as "Pizza pie, pizza pie, who are you what have you sacrificed." ;-)

I also found this odd. I guess it's because you can shoot prettier pictures in sunny cemeteries than in funeral home chapels. I'm not one to ordinarily defend "Hollywood" aesthetics, but, as a person who worked on television shows in the 80's and 90's, I feel a duty to point out that the industry gravitated to southern California in the early 20th century precisely because of the dependability of the weather. Throughout most of the year, you can schedule exterior scenes with a very reasonable certainty that you will actually be able to shoot on the day (as opposed to the radical variability of the Midwest where I live now.) Yes, there are a few months in the winter that get rain, but it's hard to count on, and, frankly, it's always miserable to be shooting in those conditions. (To this day, I still get mildly annoyed when I hear actors/actresses on late night television complaining about how horrible conditions were on this or that shoot, knowing that odds are good they had a Plush Mobile Home to retire to between set-ups, and that some poor soaked-to-the-skin schmo was likely holding an umbrella over the actor's head up until the moment the cameras rolled!) Again, there is often cloud cover for a few hours in the morning which might enable them to catch an overcast look, but those clouds could easily burn off before those outdoor funeral scenes were complete, giving you a distinct mismatch from one shot to the next. As a one-hour weekly drama, This Is Us probably shoots on an incredibly tight schedule. (What we used to call "episodics" back then were notoriously tighter than half-hour sit-coms, 2 hr. tv-movies or pilots of any length. ) Because they utilize minor children in the regular cast (two sets of three each), they have also to contend with the limited hours minors can have on set, along with the requirement to get so-many-hours of school time logged. So, I expect scheduling this show is quite a logistical headache; being able to eliminate intemperate weather from the variables is a plus. Given a decision has been made to shoot the series in the Los Angeles area, I doubt that no one gives a crap where the show is set, but I do accept as inevitable that backgrounds and/or weather will sometimes reveal where they really are. But heck...I watched Little House on the Prairie for years when I was young without it ever dawning on me those golden hills looked less like any part of Minnesota I'd ever seen and more like Simi Valley! I'm not excusing the failure to costume accordingly for Pennsylvania weather at the time of a Super Bowl, nor can I explain why a family would hold a funeral service outdoors without an interment. Certainly the show Six Feet Under was able to shoot services in funeral homes and chapels successfully. Perhaps Rebecca was carrying to extremes Jack's wish to be "outside"? Lastly, another poster (whom I can't locate now) mentioned hearing Mandy Moore say somewhere that they were freezing while shooting the scenes on the street when the house was burning. That was certainly shot at night and, being a desert region, L.A. can get quite chilly at night, especially if they filmed that in December or early January. I didn't happen to notice the street behind them but, on most street scenes I worked on, the director of photography usually called for a water truck to wet the street down. If they did that for this, it would have put some mist in the air, which would have made it even chillier. (Personally, I've never understood the cinematographers' preference for wet streets. "Why?" I asked several of them. "Because it looks better," was the only answer I ever got. "No, it looks like it just rained. Is it supposed to have just rained?")

Sami = Ninja Ewoks This. There was a point in this scene where I had trouble hearing the sound, but, given the Seer's tone of voice, I thoroughly imagined he was saying, "Man, what is with you people? Get the hell out!"

I read three or four reviews last night before turning in, and they all seemed to like the episode (one raved). But this was the one I found most interesting: https://www.avclub.com/in-its-bloody-mid-season-finale-vikings-finds-some-red-1822383062 A couple highlights: I've been increasingly aware of how much I miss Travis Fimmel/Ragnar this season, since I never thought of myself as particularly entranced by him to begin with. But I must admit, his silences were compelling; they always left me with the impression that there was a thought-process going on inside his head...even if I might not know what it was. Now, over and over again, I find myself looking at many of the current cast members' faces, staring glumly and vaguely toward camera, and I inevitably think: big slab of meat. (Ivar is my exception here.) I honestly don't know if this suggests Fimmel was that much better or if some novel aspect of the show has just worn off on me. Likewise, the narrative feels like it's not going anywhere, for me. Or, again, maybe it only feels that way because I'm having such a hard time caring about any of the characters particularly. Honestly, I felt more invested in Earl Haraldson, Siggy, and Jarl Borg than I do in any character now. And I'm getting pretty tired of all the battle scenes. That's how I find them now - tiresome. I remember when I used to be on the edge of my seat when things finally developed to the point of battle. And yet...I suspect I'll keep watching until this show ends. Mostly because I'm a sucker for historical series, and because this is a time period that hasn't been explored much in television or films. But I do wish often that the creators had approached it as a limited run series (of 2 or 3 seasons) with a definite story arc in mind, rather than following the standard American television model of, "Hey, let's see how long we can keep milking this!"

That's an interesting idea. The preview for the next half-season seemed to imply Ivar was going to make a sacrifice of her; I don't want to see that. Actually, almost every time we saw Lagertha pause and stare off meaningfully in the midst of the battle, I expected to see her P.O.V. shot of a young farmer/warrior Ragnar, smiling and striding down a hillside toward her, untouched by all the mayhem around him. That would have been the one "vision" - and the one cameo - that would have had some significance for me. Just as a viewer.

Wow. I found myself peculiarly unmoved by the whole mess.

I thought she only wore it pulled-back on the side that still had an ear. The earless side had sort of a Princess Leia bun-roll.

And I thought, when did the Vikings adopt Japanese samurai warrior-type flags? And how does it just happen that the two sides opposed in this fight have perfectly matched flags in opposing colors? I do love how other posters have likened them to color guard flags. "And now, taking the field, the Kattegut Drum & Bugle Corps, playing "Let It Go", followed by a medley from "Hamilton"! Let's give 'em a big hand!"

Thanks, LaChavalina - you stated that much more clearly than I did. And I would add to it the examination of a man who has waited in the wings his entire lifetime, until well into his senior years, before finally getting his chance to take center stage. And then...blows it. I understand that some were put off by the blank verse and I'll admit I wasn't immediately a fan. But, very quickly, it felt right. It lent just the right amount of gravitas, without jumping off the cliff into a sea of "thou varlet"s and such. Without the blank verse, I'm not sure I would have made the connection to Shakespearean tragedy; mightn't it all have seemed to just be a very fanciful biopic, as you might see on Lifetime or Oxygen channel? And the mix of stately language with occasional vernacular had me chuckling aloud in a few places. Example: Harry: (coming down the stairs at night) I'm sure I heard a scream. William: So did I. Harry: So like our mother's voice. It freaked me out! Iambic pentameter (if you add William's short line to Harry's first line). But the naturalness of "it freaked me out" - it cracked me up. I also thought the use of Diana was fine. Imagine if Shakespeare had such a figure to hand in a tragedy or a history: a former princess, spurned, tragically deceased, ex-wife to the new king and mother to his heirs...? Of course, Shakespeare would have had her appear, commenting on the action! I liked that it wasn't overdone - just a few appearances, with "prophecies" that were open to different interpretations. And the choir chanting "Lacrimosa" underneath. Yep, I'm definitely a fan of this. I've already re-watched at PBS online.

Count me as another who enjoyed it. Quite a lot, actually. Perhaps because, very early on (like within the first couple of minutes), I was divorced from the notion that this was any kind of biopic. Rather, for me, it was a modern Shakespearean tragedy, based loosely on known personages from our present-day. (Which is not so unlike what Shakespeare did himself. ) I wasn't put off by any of the characters, nor did it feel to me like Kate and William were presented as odious. No one was a straight-out villain; everyone had good reasons, from their particular point of view. I could have wished for a little more time developing the Harry & Jess storyline; that felt a bit rushed to me. Someone above wrote that is was more developed in the play so perhaps I'll have to read that. Lastly, I loved the music!

Most of my reactions have been covered by others. In general, I enjoyed the episode, but here were a few of my thoughts; The Red-Haired Other Bus Woman - Given the ambiguity of the text messages, I kept expecting some surprise to be revealed about her relationship to John. At one point, I thought she was going to be someone set up to do this by Mary somehow, perhaps keeping John distracted so she (Mary) could take off for that sudden trip abroad. Except, it didn't make any sense, since Mary wrote him a letter basically admitting hey, I have to take off to take care of something. So why would she need to set up a decoy? Also, I'd have to rewatch to see if Red-Haired Girl appeared before or after Mary found out AJ of AGRA had re-emerged. The whole AGRA thing - as mentioned in the Previously article: This seemed beyond stupid to me. Yeah, super-secret mercenaries are going to carry around flash drives on their persons with all the identity info on everyone in the group. Seriously, I would think even possessing such a thing - under lock and key, in the safetyest of safety deposit boxes - would be sufficient grounds to get you drummed out of Super Secret Mercenary Clubs for all time. Much as I've enjoyed this whole Sherlock remake, I don't think I'm going to be sorry if they wind it up this season. They are, indeed, running out of ideas. As 7thton wrote: Yep. The over-arching concept to me has always seemed to be "Is Sherlock actually nuts, or will he go nuts?", with corollaries of "Can Sherlock accept how much he needs human contact (John)? Can John continue to be a friend to someone who is so demanding?" The same latter two issues were always underlying in the original Conan Doyle stories, but they were very much subtext and they only bubbled to the surface infrequently. When you turn the burner on high on these things right from the beginning as "Sherlock" does, you wind up having to ramp events/emotions up to 11 all the time. And then to 12, and then to 13. Until, eventually, the manipulation simply stops being effective. So, much as I've enjoyed it all, I think I'll be just fine if this series is the last.

Isn't Judith the daughter of King Aelle, and isn't that alliance still of some importance to Ecbert? The whole torture at the stake thing was terrifying (I initially thought they were going to burn her), but it also seemed over-the-top for people of their station. I could see clergy and townspeople ganging up for some crazed mutilation-punishment on some poor village girl, but a king's daughter? Wife of the expected heir to the throne? I would have thought the more customary treatment would have been to pack Judith and child off in disgrace back to her papa. I realize adultery is treasonous when you're married into the royal line, but still. Or is there lore of Dark Age wives of royal status being punished this way? I may just be uninformed.

Wonder if the massacre of the viking settlement in Wessex could be the "harvest celebrated in blood"? It's seems like they'd just planted recently, but I find the passage of time sometimes hard to track in this show. Someone upthread mentioned the seer being hard to understand at times because he mumbles, and I concur. Damn - a seer with a speech impediment! Next thing we'll learn is, he has no sense of rhythm either.

I can imagine it devolving into this: Mrs. Hudson: (walks into kitchen) Her Ladyship has some requests for tomorrow's luncheon. Has anyone seen Mrs. Patmore? Daisy: She went into the village for some supplies. Been gone awhile; I wonder she's not back yet. (knock on the back door) Police Inspector: I'm here to arrest John Bates for the murder of Beryl Patmore. And so and so on. Every time anyone leaves the house, Bates is suspected of murder.

That seems to be the consensus. To be frank, I can't recall which times Edith may have been "going down to London tomorrow" to actually go into the office and which times were trips to see a doctor and find out if she was pregnant, or to visit an abortion doctor, or whatever else. Guess that's why I would have loved to have scene an actual scene with her, meeting with people at the office.

You all make very good points about the likelihood that Edith is now the owner, not the managing editor. It makes good sense and I can accept that. I suppose because Gregson appeared to be both owner and managing editor I was conflating the two positions; clearly, there is no reason to do that. I still wish, though, that Fellows could have thrown us a bone along the way to see how Edith's position and relationships at the office developed in Gregson's absence. Just one scene, meeting with staff or dept. heads would establish a lot. Even now, while the managing editor may handle the day-to-day issues, I expect the owner has to be consulted for some decisions. Wouldn't it be a hoot if it turned out Edith has more of an innate head for business than Robert does?

Red Hawk wrote: [spoken in Cora's voice] "Oh, I think that would be sweet." Brilliant! And though it hardly needs said, you could have added the stage direction [chin tilted down]. Re: Edith's situation: among the plethora of Scenes We Never Got to See, I'm wondering just how Edith's takeover of the management of Gregson's magazine/newspaper/earliest-blog-in-history publication worked. Was it Robert who told Cora that Gregson had left Edith the paper (or whatever) and was that immediately after someone (the editor? or was it a solicitor?) came to give her the news that he was officially deceased. Assuming that was all handled legally in Gregson's will, the employees at the publication would likely have had to accept that Edith is now the de facto "boss". But, meanwhile, someone else has been running things for the last couple of years, presumably said "editor". It's not like we've been treated to any scenes of Edith running down to London to take care of business. Certainly it wasn't on her agenda at all during the "Trip to Switzerland to Improve Her French". We're to believe she's kept her column writing because the Dowager C inquired about that recently, but I expect with all of Edith's time/attention absorbed with stalking small children she's probably been an infrequent contributor at best. So how and when did she swan into the office and take charge? The receptionist who tried to steer Cora away clearly was following instructions not to let certain visitors get through to Edith, and I'm fascinated by the dynamics of that. I honestly am...it's possible Edith was a much-loved figure around the office - the lady aristocrat who wrote a column about ordinary things, who may possibly have treated co-workers very kindly. I would love to have known about that. Or maybe they viewed her as a dilettante who was playing "pretend journalist"; maybe they felt it was an insult to their professionalism. Or maybe some saw her as a talented amateur who they were happy to have around. I don't know, because we haven't seen any of that. What I do suspect, though, is that there are almost certainly some long-time employees at the paper who knew well that Gregson was married and knew about his unfortunate wife's condition. Did any of them catch on to his interest in Edith? Was it viewed with sympathy or suspicion? Is there not a Thomas anywhere amidst that crowd of worker bees? Aside from the undoubted suspicion of villagers around Downton about Lady Edith's "ward", I would think the London office is another place where her story may unravel. (As someone else pointed out upthread.) After all, they are journalists. Would they really all just accept the situation as they're told or wouldn't someone look into it? I realize it's no valet-falling-off-a-crowded-sidewalk-and-getting-hit-by-a-bus mystery, but surely it would provoke a few questions, if only around the office. God knows, Scotland Yard has its hands full with all those trips to Yorkshire.