Trillian

I laughed when they did the closeup of the first dead guy (Alexandrian?) who was literally wearing a red shirt.

Even if I didn't agree with the sentiment, this would've deserved the like for the hilarious - and grammatically correct - use of the word "literally"!

You're not the only one. I got a kick out of seeing Martha - and yelled like everyone else - but I'd be quite happy if that was the last glimpse of her. Yup, she's still alive, and wearing head scarves with what looked like very American clothes, but what else is there to say? One thing I love about this show is that it's not propaganda for either side - it's hard to imagine how the adventures of Martha in Moscow wouldn't degenerate into that. Then again, as has been noted before, these writers can make the digging of a hole into a highly suspensive moment, so maybe they could do something with it.

That's how I took it: "relax, son. Stop worrying about the perfect route and just enjoy the journey". I haven't seen this mentioned here, and forgive me if it's been addressed, but did Randall switch to "dad" from William or "old man" right at the end? That's what I thought I heard - and that choked me up more than anything else in the episode (I'm in the non-crying segment of the audience)

Now I'm really confused - I hadn't picked up on the timing. Doesn't school start after Labour Day? Or is that only in the land where we spell it labour and not labor :)? Why would they be handing invitations at the school at all in August?

Miss Manners once had a touching bit of etiquette advice on the subject of a widow(er)'s continuing to wear the wedding band: one wears the band as long as one feels connected to the marriage and removes it to signify that one is ready to entertain the prospect of a new romance. What was touching about it was that she went on to say that there is no way to signify the perfectly normal desire to do both. I could imagine a little of both of those factors in play in Dr K.. Taking off the ring would probably feel disloyal to his wife. Especially since he's a handsome, charming, successful physician in an age demographic where women far outnumber the men - that ring is the only thing warding off attention from similarly-aged widows.

Ok. I have loved this show but it never made me cry. Until tonight. And I'm glad to know the cat was taken care of. I think I need to focus on that because I can't take in everything all at once.

I actually feel a lot of sympathy for Rebecca's situation. She made the intitial decision to hide her knowledge of William for good reasons. She then made the second decision when Randall was 8 for maybe not so good but totally understandable reasons (although I think if a stranger with a potential legal claim to parenthood of my child started talking so excitedly about my child sleeping over I'd have run too). But once she made those decisions, she was totally trapped by the lie (of omission) she'd perpetrated. She couldn't tell anyone what she knew without exposing the fact that she'd lied and lied and lied over the years. She must have known that telling the truth would cause a serious breach of trust, even if she later regretted it and wanted to tell. That must have eaten her up. Or, as her precious baby boy put it, that must have been so lonely.

In addition to all the other explanations given, there is an additional factor: if Philip kept his titles, his children could inherit them and inherit his place in any lines of succession for foreign thrones. That sort of thing gets politically messy - and has been the cause of many wars, a la the English claim to Aquitaine through the marriage of Eleanor of Aquitaine to the English king.

This! I was raised in a home where everyone talked through tv shows. I didn't even realize this wasn't universally done until I got married to someone who believes tv should be watched in deep meditative silence. And my husband didn't realize that I wasn't being rude until my sister was over to watch an important sports match in which we were all intensely interested - and she and I talked throughout, driving him nuts. It's the same with the whole dropping in unannounced thing of the last few episodes. When I was growing up, barely a week went by without someone in the extended family dropping in on another member of the family. And, while we have grown out of the habit in favour of the more reserved North-American way of doing things, we still will exclaim "why didn't you drop by" upon hearing a family member or close friend was within a 10 km radius and didn't do so. On the other hand, I don't see my husband's family unless one of us has practically issued an engraved invitation. Different strokes.

I'm going to defend Toby (whom, I will admit, I do rather like), because I think this plot line is where the show gets a little too contrived in the name of having a twist at the end. Because, basically, I don't understand why she kept her father's death from him. Why would that be a big secret worthy of the dramatic reveal - except for the fact that the writers wanted a big reveal? In real life, she could've, and should've and (I think) would've, said "I used to watch the games with my father, and, since he died, I like to watch alone because [pick one or find another]: I feel like we're still watching together/I'm honouring his memory/I find it depressing that he's not with me". She could even have added "I don't even let Kevin join me for games" and that would've stopped him cold. And THEN, if he kept at it, he could be declared to be an ass. I find it a little bizarre that it had never come up in the first place that her dad is dead. These two are dating and not just f-buddies. He had already told her he had been married before and he's met her brother, and she's met his aunt, so family talk must have come up (they must occasionally talk about something other than their weight, don't they?). But, even if it hadn't, it makes no sense that she wouldn't have given it as the reason for not watching with him because having a deceased parent is not a deep dark secret to which adults don't like to admit in public. So, I blame the writers and not Toby (as if Toby has an existence independent of the writers! but, you know what I mean - I hope). If they were going to have her act so weird about not telling him, they had to have him act so weird about getting it out of her. And that contrivance disappointed me a little, since I otherwise pretty much worship the ground this show walks on.

Was I the only one who thought recently-promoted-because-his-boss-is-dead Press Secretary was about to say that, oh yeah, the President has a plan - a secret plan to fight inflation?

Not to mention that, only on tv and in movies do professional historians know dates. Historians specialize; they do not know all things about all eras of history. And even within their own fields, they cannot reel off every date - right down to the time of day (according to Lucy) - of every historical event ever. Historical significance, contributing factors and ultimate impact - yes; May 29th 1453 at exactly 2:15am (with the exemption of some very very major events of international importance) - no.

Do you have a best friend? Is he smarter than you? Would you trust him with your life? That's your Chief of Staff. I went back and replayed Pres. Bartlett's talk with his Designated Survivor (although I am proud to say, as a major West Wing geeky fan, that I remembered the above without the rewatch). Bartlett outlines to the DS what to do if a catastrophe happens: first thing, get your Commanders together, appoint Joint Chiefs, appoint a Chairman, take us to Defcon 4; have the Governors send emergency delegates to Washington; the Assistant Attorney General is going to be the Acting Attorney General; if he tells you to bring out the National Guard, do what he tells you. I'm enjoying this show, and I don't claim to be an expert of any kind in American government or emergency preparedness, but I think Aaron Sorkin got it much closer to what should (or would) happen than this show. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lKWmlIExRAo

It bugged me that he was told to watch her in the first place. Ok, a lot of people died, but there's not a single staffer or Secret Service agent who can keep an eye on the First Kid when the President and First Lady are out on official business? If First Teenager had been doing something else, would the President have had to find some local teenager somewhere to babysit and then stayed home if he couldn't find said teenager? And the kid was just supposed to sit there hugging her stuffed animal while her brother sat there and stared at her? Get the kid some toys or books, put on a video or some children's programming or something - and have a responsible adult supervise her, for God's sake.

I have been waiting for that song since the first episode. I still haven't given up hope, but it's too much to have it play as background. Maybe Paige (or even Henry?) will discover it and play it in the house?

There was such a Godfather feel to that final scene with Rossi closing the door on his ex. Kay, don't ask me about my business. And it followed his protestations that things would be different in the future, that he would spend more time with his family - mirroring in 5 years, the Corleone family will be completely legitimate. Either it was entirely coincidental - am I the only one who thinks she noticed it?- or it was a clumsy homage.

I so associate John Slattery with the politician with the - um, unorthodox sexual practices who he played on Sex and the City that I was more creeped out than I was supposed to be by his offering to shake Gary's hand.

Philip did destroy a human being and did use her loneliness against her, but it wasn't cruel, per se, it was his job. I think he regrets it immensely. When he gave her the dignity of an honest answer to her plaintive "not even to visit?", his personal feelings came though clearly. If he was really cruel, he would have followed Elizabeth's advice and said he'd join her in Moscow later so that she'd go more easily. He may get to return to his wife and family, but I think knowing what he did is going to eat him up.

There was a case a few years back that made the news here in Canada where the foreperson coughed between "we find the accused" and "guilty". Everyone heard it as "not guilty". As I recall, the accused was actually released before the powers that be caught the error. So, yeah, super awkward

IIRC, it was a family party - Elizabeth and the kids and some unidentified others were there too. As was appropriate for the time, the guys gathered together, the women watched the children, and secretaries were apparently not invited.

Yes to that. When Stan walked into the apartment, I said, oh my God, he's going to find the wedding picture, which Martha keeps out. Then when he started going through her drawers, I said, oh my God, he's going to find the wedding picture, which Martha sometimes tucks into a drawer. Then,when he left, I said, why hasn't he found the wedding picture? Where's the goddamn wedding picture? I can't believe that's an oversight in a series with such great, tight writing. Has Martha moved the picture to "Clark's" apartment? Or is its absence a sign of something else? I'm starting to wonder if Martha is indeed smarter than I've given her credit for. And I hate Stan.

Parents in the 80s just weren't friends with their kids like we're expected to be today. Other than being spies and all - admittedly a rather big thing - Philip and Elizabeth aren't unusual parents for the time in their interaction with their kids.We've seen Philip, at least, go to a school function (the astronaut thingy in Season 1) and help the kids with their homework. That was quite enough for the time. As Hecate7 pointed out, Stan doesn't have the boundaries of a dad. He's more like a fun uncle, who doesn't have to impose discipline so he can have more fun with Henry. While it's sad that Stan's lonely, having lost his own family from his day to day life, it's not particularly weird or creepy that he'd enjoy playing uncle to the boy next door who admires him and looks to him for advice.

Isnt that because, if she marries a title, she moves up? But if she divorced, she'd still be entitled to Lady first name, wouldn't she? I'm thinking of Diana Spencer, who, of course, was never properly Princess Diana (whatever the press said), who was quoted as saying at least she could revert to Lady Diana if they took away her marriage titles at divorce.

Late to the party, but a further complication to women's titles: Rosamund is Lady Rosamund, ie, Lady [first name] because she was born to it. She is Lady Rosamund regardless of whom she marries. Cora is Lady Grantham, ie Lady [last name] because the title is hers only by virtue of her marriage - the "Lady" is roughly the equivalent of "Mrs". The distinction between being born to it and marrying into it is apparently an issue among royal and aristocratic circles, with those born to a title apparently looking down on those who married into it, even if the latter may technically outrank them (as the case may be).