Marianne

Maybe my attention wandered (I find the show kind of slow and repetitive and tend to do other things while I'm watching) but I don't remember seeing the man's face when he broke into Vanessa's apartment. Well, there goes that possible pilot twist. I must think Rory is kind of creepy, I guess.

Random thoughts: Does anyone else here think that it was Rory, not Andrew, who drugged and raped Vanessa? There's just too much focus on Rory and his caring attitude--on the morning after he really wanted her to tell him what happened and and he could have been reveling in what he did just the way Andrew does. And Andrews car tracker showed that the car was not near Vanessa's place on the night it happened. And Rory knew about the juice concoctions she drank every day religiously. Why didn't Vanessa have the doctor test her for sperm and DNA if she thought she had been raped? Too easy, drama-wise? I don't believe someone of Laura's size would have been able to move the dead weight of a large man like Andrew out of the car and from the car to the building.

Haven't started Season 3 yet, but can anyone tell me if there's any difference between the episodes that are being shown on my local PBS station and the episodes that are available on the Masterpiece Channel through Amazon? The Masterpiece on Amazon channel listing describes each episode as "full UK-length Edition". Each is about 57- 59 minutes long. The first PBS episode is 2 hours. ???

Thanks for chasing that down, yourmomiseasy.

I knew the only way I could watch would be to fast forward through all of the Abby flashbacks--which I did, except for the part where she had passed out in the Vegas hotel room and I thought maybe I'd see her die. Did not happen. ( I did end up fast forwarding about 3/4 of the show. ) And the scene in the hospital with Ray pleading with the doc to say it was a "concussion thing" and the doc just standing there ominously was dumb. More Abby next week, according to previews. I'll just say "ditto" to everyone who is sick of her and the retcon. I have to mention last episode's scene in the car where the two of them were talking about what she would want if she could do anything: "open a baaaah"; no, you left Boston so you could get away from a baaaah"; "no, I really would like to open a baaaaah": oy vey, it was like a meta comment parodying their OTT Boston accents. I had a feeling LS and PM had a big laugh afterward. Also, can someone catch me up: seem that this site no longer does recaps of episodes of first run series like this, or Orphan Black or whatever. All I see are post, or mainly podcasts, about BH90210, Veronica Mars, and reality shows? I haven't visited regularly in a long time. Am I missing something? Did the focus here change?

I'm confused. I thought that in the early 19th century, the only rights a widow would have had in her husbands property was life estate in the income from 1/3 of the property. So she could collect that income for as long as she survived, but she had no right to ownership of the title and she couldn't prevent the sale of the assets by the person who inherited under the will or through intestacy. I know the law changed later to be more like the modern approach, where a disinherited spouse would get a forced share (1/3 or 1/2) of the deceased spouse's property. So it just seems to me that the show is wrong on the law, which is annoying. :)

I generally hit the mute button when Helen Weiss is talking. I'm not familiar with the actress, Jeannie Berlin, but apparently she's well-loved and has done great work. Here, to me, she seems frail and stiff and a little sleepy. Her face is unexpressive (compare her to the actress playing Naz's mom, who is stupendous IMO) and her voice is off-putting. I keep wondering if she has a medical condition that contributes to these characteristics, in which case--shame on me for being such a critic. Finally, I hated the way she leaned onto the witness box and hovered close to the defense pathologist when she questioned him. I'm pretty sure this wouldn't be allowed and I found it creepy, although I guess that was probably a director's choice.

This aspect of the plot and dialogue bothered me. The CPA implied that after the mother's death the stepfather was depending on Andrea to give him a share of the estate, and that when she didn't, he harbored a grudge. In fact, wouldn't it be that either the mother left her husband a share of her estate, or, if he were disinherited, he had the legal right to a forced spousal share? (I don't know if in New York it would be one-half--possibly one-third.) The daughter's agreement or not would be irrelevant. The husband would take the share unless there had been a pre-nuptial agreement or perhaps if the daughter or some other heir showed that the husband had abandoned or abused or even killed the mom. Anyway, he would have gotten something without him having to get Andrea to agree to it. Then, the rest of the estate would pass under the mother's will to those beneficiaries (probably Andrea), or if she had no will the rest would all go to Andrea. Then when Andrea died, her estate would either pass under Andrea's will to whomever were her beneficiaries or to her intestate heirs, who would be blood relatives that don't include the stepfather. So there! Phew! But I guess the bottom line still could be that the stepfather was not at all satisfied with whatever he got and he harbored a murderous resentment against Andrea.

I liked the series for the visuals, for Olivia Colman and some of the supporting cast, and also for Tom Hiddleston, who is very pretty and who, I thought, did a pretty decent job of acting. I agree that some of the plotting was weak and contrived, but I generally love a foreign intrigue--international spy--MI5 or MI6 tale, so that was pretty much o.k. with me. My big problem was Hugh Laurie. I have only ever watched a couple of episodes of House, and I haven't seen him in anything else that I can remember. I don't find him to be an appealing actor (o.k., multitudinous Laurie fans here, so sue me!) and I found him completely unbelievable as this Richard Roper character. I found all of his piercing stares at Pine and others to be almost comically lugubrious. Unfortunately, he often took me out of the story because I thought he was such a bad fit. And I get that the character was supposed to be the scum of the earth, but that last racist rant to his Arab customers was so over the top as to be cartoonish. I guess much of the fault for that lies with the writer and the director, but I don't think that his performance helped.

As I recall, this was also SOP a little later for the Crusaders on their way to, and in, the "Holy Land."

O.K., first, I didn't initially express myself well because I was lazy and trying to be sarcastic. My problem with the original comment was the characterization of welfare "people" as taking everything, not producing anything. I think that's an incredibly inaccurate and heartless characterization of modern welfare recipients. Apparently, some see these people simply as lazy "takers" Kind of a Mitt Romney view of the world. In fact, I think differently of a modern welfare system, such as ours, that's part of a social safety net, and I think differently of those people who benefit from it. But then, your present comment is even worse: apparently welfare recipients, like the Vikings, live like rats, tattoo their bodies, etc. Frankly, I'm stunned at these comments. Finally, let me just note that it's religious PERsecution (not prosecution) you don't like. Great! Also, I assume you think religion, not the religious persecution, is a "private thing that should be kept at home."

The "welfare of the ages"? "Produce nothing , take everything"? Not sure that I find your analogy valid. Of course, the politics of the period involve elites enslaving and impoverishing the great masses of people in order to amass power and wealth. Hasn't it always been so?

I, too, am underwhelmed by the designers this season. Random thoughts: East coast surfer dude with the $6,000 cardigan? Yikes! Cannot stand the voice of the Brother Vellies woman. Is that what they call a vocal fry? Too much menswear. All the clothes are boring except for Chromat and the Gypsy sport guy. I like him and hope he wins, but he probably won't since the panel emphasized how tiny his business was and they're looking for some one who's further on their way. Finally, why does this show have to be as numbingly repetitive as Project Runway--same intro with the extensive description of the competition and the prize, same comments multiple times by contestants and judges--winning this is really important for my future, this will help me get to the next level, blah blah. There should be so much detail re the actual clothes that could be shown instead.

--I agree re Lucifer's behavior. I think it was mostly the writing, but also Ellis's acting was a little too over the top, and one-note. It was also obvious that the social worker colleague Doyle was going to be the bad guy. And then the dialogue for him and his acting at the end were bad, almost cartoonish: "I can't afford to show weakness, especially now that I've just taken control!" "Bang, bang"

I totally agree that "kind" is not an adjective I would ever use about Carson. When Robert said it, I couldn't sputtering out loud at my TV: "No, he isn't! He isn't!" The scene with Gwen was annoying for me because I felt that she was being deceptive by not immediately identifying herself to the family. So they never looked at her long enough to remember her face. But now she was being essentially dishonest by agreeing to be a guest in their home without revealing her identity. And it seems to me that given Gwen's personality, history, personal development and especially her affection for Sybil and Sybil's crucial role in Gwen's life, that Gwen should have voluntarily revealed who she was and should have immediately told the family the whole story. She wasn't ashamed of having spent time in service, and her very purpose for being there was to validate the idea of women of her class being able to climb up the societal ladder, as she had done with Sybil's help. I disliked that she intended to keep it a secret and that apparently Anna, the odious Bates, and the other servants--save Thomas--would go along with it. And even former downstairs-er, now upstairs-er, Tom Branson was going to stay mum. This mystified me. I agree that Thomas was being a weasel again, but I did not find it credible that even he would interject himself into the luncheon table conversation, while he was serving, by addressing a personal comment to Gwen (or any guest). He would have found some other way to bring the information to the family's notice before all sat down to lunch. But if Thomas hadn't forced it, would Gwen have bothered to let the family know who she was and how generous and life-changing Sybil's friendship had been?

The thing I remember most from this episode is being continually revolted by the one dude's enormous gross beard because I am sure it ends up in all of his food.

Most viewers who took this poll think Quinn is alive. http://www.ibtimes.com/homeland-season-6-theories-spoiler-dead-showtime-twitter-page-may-hold-clue-2234586

Ii think I remember seeing Grayson taste the chorizo-corn thing with her wooden spoon and then put the spoon back in the pan, stir, taste again .... Was I mistaken? If not, ick, and she's well gone.

Our local PBS station has a hometown guy (I think he's also a station functionary) who fancies himself a chef. He has cooking shows and features local home cooks and their recipes. I can't stand to watch the guy cook because although he rolls his sleeves up to his elbows (he doesn't wear a chef's coat) his forearms are super hairy, plus he always wears a humongous watch and a couple of rings, including a signet ring. I just find it gross, thinking of his arm hair falling into the food. The jewelry strikes me as inappropriate and also likely to harbor bacteria. That said, I am also bothered by most cooking shows, including U.S. and British ones, where the contestants hair is not pulled back. For all the concern Padma et. al have about tasting spoons etc., one would think they would just require proper kitchen hair hygiene.

I agree with all of the negative things that have been said about the Noah character. My reaction to him is really more ad hominem, I guess. I cannot see Treem (or any other producer/director) choosing Dominic West for this kind of role. I suppose he is good-looking in some sense, but I have always found him somewhat off-putting and here I find him physically repellent, more and more so every week as we get to see more of the sex scenes and nudity. ( I felt the same about him as the detective in The Wire.) And why does he seem to be getting more and more tan in each episode, no matter the season? IMO, he was perfectly cast as the serial killer in Appropriate Adult, but not as a guy who would have attracted Allison or any of the succeeding younger women who have been throwing themselves at him (although at this point they are admittedly attracted by his fame and supposed wealth.)

I don't know what this website is : http://release-date.info/tv-series/the-last-kingdom-season-2-release-date-5849367281/ but the article says the show was released in the UK shortly after the US, that the ratings are good and that "no doubt the BBC intends to renew the TV series for a second season." Seems like speculation to me, but the numbers don't seem that bad. ( I do get a suspicion that the website is hyping the renewal because they offer to alert you as soon as it's renewed if you'll give them your email address :) ) I wish we had seen the queen's reaction to her son's return to health. Did she just attribute it to God and the priests showing up (as Beocca would undoubtedly prefer) or did she in fact credit Iseult at all? I still enjoy the show and am not bored by it although now I feel that I've lost the thread of exactly who Uhtred is and what he seeks to achieve. But maybe that's the point.

Mildreth annoys me, probably because she strikes me as such a fundamentalist religionist--she badgers Uhtred constantly about giving himself up to God's hands,or whatever. I suppose the attitude is common enough, at least with Alfred and the people surrounding him. Nevertheless, she didn't require him to take Jesus as his savior before she slept with him. So baptize the kid--which she did--and drop the subject with Uhtred. Which is not to say that she shouldn't be pissed that he's just up and running off with the sorceress. Then again, although he "had loved" Mildreth, he didn't pick her and was basically forced to marry her and take on her father's debt. It's not like she was deceived about his motives for marrying her.

I agree that Episode 5 was not the best. There are at least 8 story lines and the program jumps from one 30-second scene devoted to one story line to the next 30-second scene. Quite fragmented and cryptic (e.g., the Indian landowner's special distress over the theft; we find out he had a wife he loved; great; is there more to this?) I do continue to love looking at Ralphie and Aafrin, however. :) Can someone explain the dynamic that's going on with Ralph and his sexual appetite? He obviously still cared for the Tamil mother of his child, but goes back at some point--the cutting from scene to scene often doesn't give any clue as to how much time has elapsed between them. He uses a ruse to pull his fiancé away from tea so as to have mad sex in his office, while one of the house servants spies on them and then tries to act the lord of the manor with a presumably lower-ranking servant. I also enjoy scenes with Aafrin's family. The actors are all wonderful. I enjoyed Sooni's mock invocation of Ahura Mazda to remind us they're not Hindus. Finally, has Eugene, Maddie's brother, gone? I hope so. The actor's American accent was so poorly and vigorously overdone that I had to mute the sound every time he spoke.

I thought this was terrific. I hadn't heard anything about it, so I didn't have any expectations. Also, the only actor I recognized from another show was Owain Yeoman, whose villain was wonderfully different from his Mentalist character. It seems that most people on the forum recognize many of the actors from other shows. Perhaps perceptions were influenced by that. Anyway, I thought Melissa Benoist was very good. I appreciate the fact that she looks very athletic and she's not a WonderWoman-type babe. There was a lot of exposition, but I assume that was necessary in the pilot. I actually liked the time spent on explaining the rationale for "Supergirl" as appropriate name for a modern female superhero. The comic's name has to be kept, of course, but the scene told us that Kara sees herself as a Super Woman; ascribing the "girl" choice to the editor makes sense within the story and for that character. And I think it's almost like a way, perhaps counter-intuitively, to embrace the term "girl" while not subscribing to the all of the conventional connotations of that word. For me, the few seconds they spent on that exposition were pretty clever. Loved the evolution of the costumes, and I'm glad that they went for the dark tights and not naked legs with the skirt. Finally, James Olsen is wonderful.

I am still loving this. All of the characters seem to be so well drawn and defined. The writing, casting, set design, acting and directing ( I think) are top notch. I'm never bored and I'm always happy when I check the time part way through and realized that the episodes run about an hour and 15 minutes (cf. Homeland and others that only run about 45 minutes.) Even considering commercials, I feel that I'm getting my money's worth! I do enjoy Alfred and the actor and his heart-shaped face and subtle hints and his digestive maladies, but I enjoy all of the characters, including Uhtred, Brida, the guy who calls Uhtred "arseling", Ubba, young Ragnar, Alfred's wife, Alfred's lover, the dead king's disappointed son. (Maybe the priest Beocca is a little annoying. ) At the beginning of the episode I was thinking how much I loved the Brida character and her relationship with Uhtred and I was hoping that she would stay around for a while. I guessed that was a jinx because it looks like she's gone, at least for now. Loved the negotiation scene, including Alfred's attempt to play to the Danes' biggest fear (losing men) and to their pride, when he said something to the effect of "It's being written down. What people will read is the the Danes got paid in silver for peace."