Azaelia

I did love things about this episode. I had a longer post typed up, actually, but I pressed backspace after pausing and we all know what happens when you do that. Short version: I loved Donna being awesome, Gerry being awesome, Tom having a successful book about failure (PLEASE have someone at NBC or Aziz Ansari write that for real), Leslie being governor, seeing Ann and Chris again (if briefly).... However, I have to admit I was a little disappointed. Because it's because the whole season's been in the future, I didn't think we really... needed more future. I would rather have seen Leslie as Indiana governor or something for a season. Mostly I think I loved season six's finale so much, and I was expecting that level of emotion and everything, and we didn't get it.

I think that's definitely part of it. We mostly see Lanie when she's working, and she and Kate don't necessarily work together in the same way as Ryan and Esposito. They don't even share an office. The only thing I can think of that really strikes me as "best friendsy" with them is when Kate was being taken to the hospital after being shot at the beginning of season four, and Lanie was wigging out even more than Castle. Honestly, I think they have a very typical TV female friendship, which is that they're two female characters who talk sometimes, so we're supposed to assume they're besties and that's it. I do think it's a bit of a shame, though - if the show goes out of their way to explore Ryan and Espo's dynamic, surely they can find a way to make it work with Kate and Lanie? Like I said, it IS a bit easier to do it with Ryan and Esposito when they work in the same building (all the time) and are partners, but still.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. ;) Okay, TPB jokes aside, that's very possible. I can also see Ben having a grandparent or something with that name.

I'll take a leap and say I was even expecting the exact opposite altogether - Laurel seemed like someone who was from a very well-adjusted family that maybe even spoiled her a bit; her reaction to Bonnie's "I'm not a nice person, that's just my face" speech certainly made her seem like someone not used to such a harsh verbal rejection. (Although in hindsight, it might just be that she tries seeking approval and comfort from people who do appear to want/need her around, which might also explain why she dated two guys, and even her insistence that they stick together.) whereas I pictured Connor as having a more distant family.

Didn't Grey's Anatomy have a character date a ghost? (I know more details than that, just trying not to spoil, though I haven't actually seen more than one Grey's episode.) I mean... how is that not soapy? It's not necessarily a bad thing, I just don't see how Shonda can deny that.

chlban: Interesting perspective! I've actually come across people who grew up around the same time who didn't like the show for those reasons, heh. But it does seem to give a more realistic image of the 60's than a lot of other media. Although of course everyone's outlook and experiences will have been different. Mad Men's closer to how my baby boomer parents and their parents would've experienced the sixties, yet at the same time, they weren't rich WASPs either. Which I think makes the show interesting for people in my generation to watch - it's really a look at what it what the times were like for much of America, because most people weren't out there protesting the war, but rather, just trying to live their lives - if still impacted by the world, whether on a smaller or larger scale.

i actually wonder if the reason they'd killed Sam was planned all along? Or was it while they were filming? Because it does seemsto me like they were setting up that all five of them (if we include Rebecca) were directly involved initially (rather than being in the wrong place at the wrong time), then decided not to go for that. Or maybe that was just my impression; I think that would have made more sense, personally. ALL of them going to confront Sam/find evidence, Annalise putting ALL of them up to it, and then things ending really badly. I still like the show as a concept, but these characters need to be more likable for me to really care what happens to them. I feel like they're relying on tropes and basic character traits, rather than building on them. Yeah, I thought so too. But I also seem to remember seeing a flashback where it was obvious something went wrong, like someone had broken in?

I was actually relieved that they didn't drag out Laurel, Connor and Michaela not knowing about Annalise knowing/orchestrating what they'd do with Sam's body. I do wonder why Rebecca didn't have a bit of less smug reaction to getting off, but then again, Rebecca doesn't seem like someone who really shows her true emotions. i mean, she lied about not being friends with Lila when she clearly was; you have to be pretty hard to say you weren't friends with someone you just found out was murdered. Although you could argue that the "friendship" was really one-sided on Lila's part.

One thing that puzzled me was - do graduate/law schools usually have sororities? That seems very undergrad to me. Or was Lilah supposed to be an undergrad, and I missed that? What about Rebecca? My initial impression was that she was another student, but now I'm questioning whether she just happened to have an apartment near the campus. I have no idea why, but it seriously seems to me like people who write movies and shows have never been in an actual school before. Because you're right, often it's very unrealistic. (Although I did have a teacher who would leave us for fifteen minutes at a time, but we all knew she wasn't supposed to do it.) Is it that they've been out so long, they forget and rely on tropes from other movies? I DO think that to a point, portraying less realistic scenarios is easier, of course. Using your school example, showing kids doing five hours of homework doesn't make for an engaging show. At the same time, I do notice how realistic versus unrealistic they are.

I do wish Ann had been given more character development, and felt some things about her character were unrealistic. For instance, she was supposed to be a nurse, but had time for P&R shenanigans; the nurses I know of don't have such luxuries. I know all sitcoms tend to do this (Friends was the worst), but still. It did become more realistic when she started working for City Hall, though, since that's presumably 9-5 and she could stop by the Parks Dept here and there. But honestly, other than those things I loved her character. I found her friendship with Leslie far more realistic than most "best friends" on television and in movies (who don't really act any closer than friendly acquaintances would and only talk about guys and perfume), and I missed their friendship when the show started focusing more on her relationship with Chris and Leslie's relationship with Ben, even if it was sadly true to what often ends up happening. Also, people say Ann doesn't have personality, but I'd argue that she does - it's just more subtle than the personalities of the rest of the cast, which I actually find refreshing.

While I realize season one's been retconned and shouldn't be taken too much into account, I do think Leslie's character matured a lot even in the second season, so I can see why she would have been into him once. . As she had to deal with bigger issues than annoying town hall meetings, she lost a lot of that initial Pollyanna-ness, and with that the side of her who would fall for a guy like Mark. Ann, though, I'm not sure - it never seemed like she was really that into him. She only technically went on that first date with Mark because Leslie set it up for her, and while I realize Ann's main concern was hurting Leslie, it just never seemed like Ann was as into Mark as Mark was into her. I would have loved for Mark to have shown up at some point. At the very least, it's too bad there haven't even been references made to him. I did like his character, and aside from logistics it's hard for me to believe he wouldn't have been there when Leslie was going through all the recall stuff. In my headcanon, he moved away from Pawnee, finding it all too frustrating.

Same here. I think I'd prefer it if Gary/Jerry/Larry/Terry were actually as incompetent as he seems, maybe even a bit of a Michael Scott type who could be a bit nasty too (if unintentionally), then I'd get it. Or if it was mostly Tom taking the piss, because that seems in character for him more than anyone else. But it seems most of his screw ups are innocent mistakes blown out of proportion by his colleagues, or not even mistakes at all, just... things that happen to come out of his mouth. It was especially hard for me to watch when I was the target of office bullying myself for a while.

I love Andy, but it's a little hard to know how to piece together season one and early season two Andy with who he becomes later - because they're completely different people! Even after they made Andy more of a well-intentioned manchild than a jerk, he basically stalked Ann and I had no idea why April was into him. Fortunately he turned into the sauce that makes everything awesome later in season two. :) Though I do wish they wouldn't make him so clueless about music - I realize it's a sitcom and he's supposed to be the manchild character, but it would be nice for him to at least know that "We Are the World" did have an "actual impact on society."

Am I right in thinking Greg Poehler's actually had the show based on his own experiences? If so, the fact that he made some mistakes typical of Bruce - arguing with the critic of his show - doesn't surprise me. And yet it also depresses me. Yeah, I'm not sure. Amy Poehler's also presumably made a lot of the writing/cameo decisions. Between this and finding some of the things she's said elsewhere (irrelevant to this particular show). i'm beginning to view her negatively, which is a shame as I've always enjoyed her on Parks and Recreation.

I watched the last three episodes at once, so I forget what order in which things happened exactly - forgive me if something belongs in a previous thread. sjohnson, I see your point, but sitcoms can still have intelligent storylines and make us laugh. That's why I like Parks and Recreation, and I have a feeling a lot of P&R fans are the ones trying out this show. Amy Poehler is capable of much better comedy. Plus, I haven't necessarily found everything funny. Is Emma's brother supposed to be mentally challenged or mentally ill or something? Because he seriously comes off that way, and it's cringeworthy to watch. As for Bruce... had I been Emma, I would've just told him to stay in America after abandoning the family at the hospital because he just can't take any more of Sweden. Emma knows full well that's his issue. If something were actually going on at home, or they were seriously broke and needed the money, that would be one thing, but apparently they have enough money to buy multiple tickets back and forth. As for Aubrey, I think even April Ludgate would stop at trying to rape someone. I'm sorry, if that had been played with the opposite genders, it wouldn't have been for laughs. Male rape isn't any funnier. However, I'm hoping if they lay off the cameos (that seemed promotional more than anything else) and make Bruce actually want to be in Sweden next episode, the show will be better. I keep reminding myself that a lot of first seasons aren't that great, and I do think the show has potential. How has it been received in Sweden? I heard it aired there first?

Someone asked if this was filmed last summer - I think it actually aired in Sweden earlier this year (presumably with English subtitles), so yes, it was filmed last summer. I like the show for the potential it has. I liked the episode with Bruce's parents, because Bruce acted like a decent person, not a complete idiot. I actually laughed a few times. One of my problems with Welcome to Sweden apart from Bruce's personality is that we don't really have any buildup on Bruce or Emma, at least not that I can tell. Why was she in the US? Was she originally studying in school, or working abroad for a given amount of time before moving back? How long have they been dating? I think the show would have served itself better had it actually begun a bit before them moving. And condensed some episodes into one. My thinking though is that shows often have trouble finding their footing the first season, so I'll hope they're just trying to smooth things over. Amy Poehler's own Parks and Recreation had a pretty slow season. Hopefully in season two there won't be as many cameos (I'm actually not a fan of "as themselves" cameos if the cameos aren't very brief - just a viewing quirk of mine), and maybe with Bruce in America for a bit we can almost start over a bit and figure out where he and Emma started.

possibilities, I felt the same way. I actually think the show is better when it's other people's awkwardness. I think his reaction to the pregnancy MAY have been more that he knew how his parents would react, and they were there and he didn't know what to do about it. But I agree it was odd. And you'd think the fact that Swedes often don't marry would've come up between him and Emma before.

I was confused by the sudden shift in research too. OTOH, I do genealogy and sometimes that happens to us in real life - we reach a dead end, so we focus on someone else. But not without preamble. And you usually reach the dead end going forward, not backwards... I did wonder why they felt the need to rehash the causes of the Revolutionary War? I would have liked to have known a bit more about what loyalists went through when they came to Canada, as opposed to information I learned in school. But the show does this often, it seems. Is it for international viewers? People who didn't pay as much attention in history as I did? Because the latter I can understand.

Glad to see I'm not the only one who doesn't quite... get Cam and Mitchell - if nothing else, they seem like a new couple still trying to understand each other, not a couple who've been together quite some time with a child. They do have great moments where I feel they love each other deeply, case in point being the more recent episode where Jay insults Mitchell's wedding and Cam just gives him this look, but the rest of the time they don't seem to really get one another. Then again, none of the couples on this show seem to. I actually like most of them as characters, just... not the way they sometimes treat each other. And Lily just isn't funny, but while I'm not sure it's intentional or we're supposed to see it as cute, I do know parents who kind of condone their children's bratty comments, because "aww, well (s)he doesn't really know what that means." Except if you keep letting it happen, the kid's never going to stop, especially after they know perfectly well what it means because they can get away with it. But the showrunners may also think bratty kids are funny.

One thing I didn't get about this episode was how apparently, in America, strangers talk on the street all the time. While I think this is very true to New York, I'd say my own town, for instance, is far more like "Sweden" according to this episode. People just don't talk to you beyond polite hellos unless they have a reason. I thought the episode had moments of humor, but my biggest issue overall is that I honestly think every one of the past several episodes could've had some parts taken out, and others condensed to make one. Then it might also be more entertaining. Instead we're getting a day-by-day glimpse, and that just doesn't work for plot.