nara
-
Posts
727 -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by nara
-
-
I hope the "deadly assassin" mentioned above doesn't assinated Avram who is the only one (aside from the cow) who I really like.
Nice to see Cohen's grandfather again because I was confusing him with the old guy in Shiva (?) from last week.
I was thinking the whole time that I like Avram and the cow more than any other characters! I will be seriously pissed if anything happens to them. Is the guy who is after them the same one who shot at them before the boat ride?
For some reason, I'm struggling with telling some actors apart in this show, which is making it harder to follow the plot.
Also, I'm wondering if Golan being gay will actually matter in the plot...
-
3
-
-
I think he said they had been together for 20 years. Not necessarily married. My husband and I have been together for 14 years, married for 11.
For a second, I thought there was another child who mysteriously disappeared! Oh well.
I like that we finally know why Cornell is focusing on Ben.
-
Please tell me I didn't see it wrongly but is the US Ambassador wearing one of the gems on her necklace? The hidden in plain sight thing is quite clever! That said, I didn't see it coming with her being one of the co-conspirators, until the scene in New Mexico where the camera panned to one of the photos in Ted Billingham's office and she was in it...and so was Joe Biden (ha!)
The other thing that stood out to me was that Peter surmised that Emma was only in the marketplace that day to hand her gem over to Yusef Kahlid. If that was the case and the exchange didn't happen because they arrested Kahlid, why would she slip the gem into Peter's pocket? It's still the one thing that bugs me.
Not sure (will have to re-watch), but I could have sworn there was also a photo of Billingham with Mitt Romney. Guess it's a BiPartisan Apocalypse :P
So who are the Essene? Is that the name of the NM Cult, or is that a 3rd group that's now in the mix of things? In the Pilot thread, IIRC, there was speculation that Team Norway and Team New Mexico were in cahoots, but after tonight, nope -- there is no way such a deeply devout sect of Orthodox Jews would embrace and accept any group practicing the oxymoronic idea of Messianic Judaism. However, I highly suspect that Billingham's group doesn't ascribe to any of the tenets of Judaism; in order for Josh 2.0 to fulfill his role in whatever the fuck it is they're doing, the Bar Mitzvah was a necessary step/requirement, just as he had to be "pure" by having never set so much as a foot on the ground.
At this point, I think it's fairly clear (at least IMO) that Team Red Heifer are all about fulfilling the prophecy of rebuilding Solomon's Temple, and Team Black/White heifer are aiming to unleash Armageddon.
The questions/wild cards I have as of now are:
1) Who is Khalid working to round all of the gemstones up for?
2) Who are the Essene and what is their role in this?
3) Is it possible that Billingham's cult has been grooming Josh not as a priest to communicate with God (or even as JC), but as the Antichrist in order to hasten Jesus' return to do battle with him (any and all help on this subject would be wonderful as I'm a bit sketchy on the details concerning the Book of Revelations and Armageddon - for some reason, we weren't taught about Revelations in Hebrew School :P )
I also thought that the moment I saw the Ambassador's necklace! The only thing is that, if she has all the other stones in her safe, why continue to wear one around. I was also under the impression that she put the stone in the breastplate (but I deleted the show off my DVR before I thought to rewatch that scene, so I could be wrong). If that's the case, are there 2 breast plates and 2 competing groups trying to complete a breast plate? If so, Emma could be on one side and Yussef Khalid on another. I do like the idea of competing teams, perhaps one of them trying to do bad things, like raise the antichrist. However, it looks like many people are willing to kill for the cause, so there may not be a clear good vs. bad.
BTW, has anyone checked out digdecoded.com? Is it worth it? I saw the promotion for it, but have not had a chance to go there yet
-
In addition to the flashlight, I think the backyard bum friend knows more about what Ben did that night than he has admitted. Plus, the African American neighbor who hates Ben so much probably saw something too--like Ben going into Jess's house. Between the two of them, they will finally get Ben arrested.
-
Regarding the flashlight, Ben and the detective had looked in his car for the flashlight and couldn't find it. If he had reported finding it immediately, the fact that Cornell had previously searched the car may have worked in his favor. Of course, he believes that Cornell is not interested in how the evidence exonerates him--and frankly, I think that sentiment is justified--so I guess it's understandable that he does not trust her. I was actually wondering if the flashlight was planted by Cornell to see how he would react to it.
Is it me, or is Cornell trying to display some empathy in her conversations with them? Not saying she's successful, but still...
How is it possible that Ben still doesn't have a lawyer? I know that the one lawyer was not interested until Ben was arrested, but surely there are others who would want a high-profile client like this. Someone needs to tell the family to stop speaking to the police without a lawyer. Yeesh! Based on the way they're behaving, you'd think that Law & Order hadn't been on for 20+ seasons!
Regarding Natalie, I was hoping that someone would think of calling the police to bust a party with underage people getting served alcohol, but of course Ben had to come and threaten to kill someone! I did get the impression that Cornell was exasperated with him regarding his stupidity, rather than seeing it as a sign of his guilt. Maybe that's progress?
-
I thought in some ways this ep was brilliant (in concept) and in others cringeworthy (in execution)
I hope Canning is dead – I love MJF but enough of this character.
I love Marissa and I hope Sarah Steele becomes a regular if her theater career doesn’t get in the way. She and AC are a great comedy team. I’d watch their spinoff (The Golds), if they had one.
My sentiments exactly.
Fake Will was horrible. I was hoping they would throw in an "I'm starting to forget the sound of your voice and the look of your face" to explain that travesty. You would not think that casting a Josh Charles type would be that hard.
-
And what's the deal with the writers thinking Stamper is some sort of sex symbol. He has one beautiful woman after another jumping into bed with him, with him showing minimal personality of any good sort. His looks are that great? ROFL And why show the actor in a nude scene. He's supposed to be hot? I think I hear Twilight Zone music playing in the background.
LOL, that was my same reaction. Remy is the hot one on this show. He should be getting the action!
Although I agree that there was a lot about this season that screamed "transition" or "filler", I thought that the disintegration of the Underwood marriage was a very good storyline and critical to the next phase of the show. For it to make sense, they had to show a number of elements: Claire's ambition unleashed, the Russian president kissing her without consequence (oh, how I wanted Frank to push him down the stairs!), the courage of the gay activist/prisoner to stay true to his principles at the cost of his life, the forced resignation, the popularity of Claire feeding her ambition, etc. Therefore, it made sense to make it last the whole season.
I am looking forward to Claire's next incarnation, though I think her timing was unfair to the agreement she had with Frank. I actually thought she wasn't bad as an Ambassador and seemed quite tactful and persuasive, until she 1) let her emotions get in the way of diplomacy and 2) was played by the Russian ambassador. She succeeded in winning the support of the Secretary of State and forging the alliance. However, she tried to jump steps by going straight to very visible, international position without having clearly established her credentials. Will she next go after a position that is a good learning and proving ground or will she go to Heather or some TBD Republican candidate and demand to be the VP on the ticket?
Also, am I the only one who hoped that America Works would revive somehow?
-
1
-
-
rho1640, I thought it was one of the jewels from the beastplate.
I read a good review of this and like Jason Isaacs but I am not sure about this. I will give it a couple more episodes before I decide.
I am still not sure why the FBI is in Israel. I got the impression Peter is assigned there but would that really happen?
Yes, it was one of the jewels. I'm sure we'll track down the others by the end of the series
I believe that Peter is in Israel to track down the criminal because the crime was committed in the US and affected an influential US politician.
-
1
-
-
Seriously, this! The one time that KaDee Strickland's heavy southern drawl would fit the setting, NOW she decides to tone it down?
Perhaps they thought her southern accent would serve to call our attention to the fact that no one else has one and asked her to tone it down? Maybe they are trying to make it seem like "this could be any town in America"?
-
Very intriguing, and a little hard to follow all the threads. Worth continued viewing next week.
First of all, did Peter really almost hook up with a girl who reminded him of his daughter? That was strange...
I'm guessing that little Josh is meant to be the high priest who will communicate with god using that breastplate thing and the calf will be a sacrifice. Or maybe they are both sacrifices. Purity seems to be important in both cases...
Anyway, I look forward to seeing more.
-
What damaging or incriminating information can the new prosecutor get from Asher? One risky area is his relationship with Bonnie. While I think Bonnie is completely devoted to Annalise, she could unintentionally let something slip. If Asher actively works with the prosecutor, he could even try to mine her for info.
As someone mentioned above, Asher is clearly different from the others in that he isn't scared to death of something, so Prosecutor is separating him from the herd. Or, as the son of someone important, he might be considered to have "the most to lose" and therefore the most amenable to working with the prosecutor for a deal.
Asher can talk about what he saw when he arrived at the house the night Sam was killed. He might remember more details when questioned. Also, he can attest to the fact that the trophy that was stolen from him was intact and is now broken, which could lead to the weapon that killed Sam. I do like the idea of Asher having a bigger role. I'm hoping that he doesn't get corrupted, but I wouldn't put money on it.
-
What is this trend of murdered boys? Change it up and have a murdered girl next time. I hope this is a limited series, because I can't see multiple seasons over this one case.
Not sure what you mean by this trend. Usually it's murdered girls/young women. The Killing, How to Get Away with Murder, Pretty Little Liars, Twisted, Veronica Mars, most episodes of Law & Order SVU, oldie but goodie Twin Peaks, etc. Certainly, there are also shows with murdered boys, but I'm curious as to why you think that's the trend.
-
4
-
-
I thought Ryan was surprisingly believable in the role. He didn't make me cringe, even when forced into too many cliches.
And speaking of cliches, please tell me we weren't already given a nice big fat signal of who the real killer is?! As Ryan walked/jogged the street the day after, there was Melissa Gilbert trying mightily to steer her big, strapping, uncooperative son on to the school bus. The boy is developmentally disabled, but big, as in he doesn't know his own strength. And I think it's significant that there's been no hint of a sexual assault on the poor little Tom. Please let me be wrong about Gilbert's son because that solution will make me angry.
Ryan Philippe generally plays bad guys well. Whether or not he is actually the killer, he's meant to look guilty to everyone, and the actor does a great job. I was one of the people who thought he looked too young for the role (even though the character is only 36 or so and Ryan is 40), but he acts well.
Re: Melissa Gilbert's son, during the funeral he says he wants Tyler (or something like that). I got the impression that Tyler is a brother who is off at school somewhere. Ben asks if he is back and Melissa Gilbert's character says no and looks flustered. Sounds like the brother might really be back and implicated somehow...
I know I am alone here because there is clearly some RP love going on here, but I think he comes across as appearing guilty. He has a very evasive way of speaking with people...even family members...and NEVER looks anyone in the eye when answering questions. To an over-zealous detective who thinks she has her man and just needs to prove it, this evasiveness would seem very "guilt-like".
One of the lessons to be learned here (and it is unfortunate that it is a reality), is that whenever one is questioned by the police, one should ALWAYS have representation, regardless of how innocent one is. There have been many cases in which guilty pleas have been extracted from innocent folks through manipulation, twisting of words and endless hours of badgering and interrogation.
I'm an avid viewer of Law & Order and there have been many occasions on that show when the police have bullied people into not consulting with lawyers by suggesting that if they have nothing to hide, they shouldn't need a lawyer. People should ALWAYS have a lawyer with them, especially if you are the last person to see a dead/missing person or if you're the one who found them or if you are involved in any business or personal relationships with them. Apparently Ben doesn't watch enough TV!
-
1
-
-
While watching this episode, I remember thinking, luckily for Katie Findlay (who plays Rebecca) that at least she's not the dead girl at the center of the mystery like she was in The Killing. Oops!
-
1
-
-
Even with all the hints of his shadiness, I didn't peg Frank as Lila's murderer. Bonnie, I think, is completely in the dark about it, but I'd love to know more about her complicated relationship with Annalise. But now I'm a bit scared for her, too. If she becomes too much of a liability, will Frank kill her? And how much does Annalise know?
Bonnie knows. She said at one point that there are things she knows about Frank, which is why she feels he won't reveal her relationship with Asher. My theory is that she is the one that Sam called and that she arrived at the roof in time to see Frank kill Lila.
w/e sympathy I could have garnered for rebecca went out the window when she insinuated to Connor that Wes killed his mother, and then poor rudy. I don't know if I wanted her dead, but I wanted her gone.
I wonder if Wes's mother (or adopted mother if you buy the Annalise is his mom theory) was murdered. Something about Rebecca's comment made me think it wasn't just a cheap shot, but something she had researched. However, if this is true Wes could either be or not be the killer
If he was not the killer, it could explain why he killed Sam--a desire to protect a woman-- when he had previously failed to protect his mother.
On the other hand, there's something suspicious about how the initial killing of Sam went down. There were many witnesses to the fact that they were defending themselves. Perhaps Wes was worried that the police would research the suspicious death in his past and link the two. Therefore, he sent the group down a path of cover-up.
Could Connor also be HIV positive? We didn't hear the nurse give him his results, did we? He coud have lied. Or is this show making me paranoid?
I assumed that Connor was also positive and lied to Asher because he was in denial.
-
Will Gardner was my favorite character and the show is not quite the same without him, in my opinion. However, I think it made sense to kill the character when the actor decided to move on. 1) The Will/Alicia relationship was played out. I loved them together, but it was clear for a while that there was more commitment on his end than hers. That storyline had to end. Even if Will moved to another city, got married, etc., there would always be a contingent of us that hoped they would get back together. I think it was good to close off that option so that Alicia could explore new relationships. 2) I think that the shock of the death was good for the show, though I do agree that it would have made more sense for it to have been in the context of Peter's political shennanigans or something related to Lamont Bishop. The death helped the characters put aside their fighting and created an avenue for Diane to reunite with Alicia and Cary.
-
1
-
-
My dislike of Frank came from the very first episode. It was obvious that he strayed during his time away from Claire. And yeah, that is probably a little bit of transference from my personal life reflected on any character that strays. ::giggle::
It intensified when I saw who he was related to. I still feel the smack down of the people that led him on about the reward in this episode was a little too over the top, but that is just me.
That's how I felt too, Biz. When Frank said something like "It's understandable that in the circumstances one would stray" or whatever, when asking Claire about it, I was like, "yup, he cheated." What I thought was weird is that Claire never asked him if he cheated.
I really don't believe that Frank ever cheated on Claire. Reverend Wakefield's housekeeper said that Claire's Mount of Venus suggested her husband would not stray from her bed. She was right about everything else she said from the tea leaves and Claire's palm, so I'm inclined to believe her...and to believe it applies to both Frank and Jamie.
-
2
-
-
Do we think there's any chance that either of the deserters that Claire and Jamie killed could be this Horrocks guy who could clear Jamie?
-
Seeing how it's the premise of the book --- it is something the audience is supposed to accept.. I get that. But what I see is that Jamie is in love with THE IDEA of Claire --- not Claire herself. I say this because he doesn't know a thing about her. He doesn't even know her real name.
And for Claire? She is in the wrong place. The wrong time. Any relationships established in that time and place are based on lies.
I don't think I agree that Jamie is only in love with the idea of Claire. While I agree that there are some very basic pieces of information that Jamie does not know about Claire, I think he has gotten to see a lot about her essential character. He's seen the good stuff: the way she defied everyone to help the "possessed" boy, her compassion for the boy nailed to the pillory, her willingness to work with the other women even though it included "warm piss", etc.. He's also seen the bad stuff: drinking too much, jumping to conclusions, sulking when the others don't include her, etc. I think he's seen enough to be actually in love with the woman herself.
-
9
-
-
To be fair to Jamie, they were BOTH satisfying THEIR sexual desires. Claire has been established as a sexual being, not just some passive partner who has to close her eyes and think of England while fulfilling her wifely duties. She was fully enjoying herself and glad to have snuck away with Jamie, up until she wasn't.
I get the idea that she's a basket full of raw emotions after what I perceive was a rape, albeit a perfunctory one (sorry, show, I'm going to go by what is shown, not what people say in interviews). And I do understand that those we're closest to may bear the brunt of our emotional upheaval at times. What I don't get is how or why, after what Jamie clearly thought was a traumatic rape, he's just leaving her. It's just too disjointed, and there was enough going on in the "honeymoon" period that all the cuts to Frank were a disservice to developing all that was happening with Claire and Jamie.
Claire was definitely an active participant, but Jamie is the one more knowledgeable about the danger around them. Personally, I don't blame Jamie for what happened, but I can see how he would blame himself and even why Claire would be (temporarily) upset with him.
At this point, I think Jamie's back story isn't fleshed out enough to convey the urgency of why he would leave her in this situation. Yes, he's an outlaw, he tells us this every episode, but it seems like such an empty threat at this point. Why does he so desperately want this price lifted from his head when nobody seems to be looking for him? They've touted through towns where people didn't have enough money to pay their rent and had to give up their only source of food to get by, yet NO ONE was tempted to collect the ransom money from the outlaw who was being paraded about? I know it's almost certain death to go against the War Chieften of the clan, but desperate times call for desperate measures, and that would have been an easy way to show that Jamie's freedom was threatened. Even having one of the deserters recognize him would have tied to the danger he was in and given motivation to clear his name right.now.
I think they've laid the groundwork, we know Jamie is loyal to the Frasers and his home because he wouldn't take the MacKenzie oath and he refused to wear anything but Fraser colors at his wedding, and we know he wants to settle down and be a family with Claire at Lallybroch, but I think they could have spent more time with Jamie and Claire developing that rather than all of Frank's adventures. Jamie and Claire have two options right now, stay with the MacKenzie's where they will be "protected" or secure Jamie's freedom and get out from under Dougal's thumb (which, by the way, why is Dougal even helping Jamie with this Horrocks thing when he's got Jamie and Claire comfortably in his pocket, and obviously wouldn't want Claire running off to Lallybroch when he's still trying to seduce her...) I think they could have made that all more clear to justify why Jamie would leave Claire alone after the trauma.
I agree that it was strange that Jamie would leave her alone. In his position, I would have her right by my side every second--even when she needed to go to the bathroom. Or, in a pinch, I would leave the more experienced Murtagh to protect her, rather than young Willie. This is particularly true since she knows she had a tendency to run (e.g., during Sassenach and the Gathering) and is in a terrible state of mind. He would want someone wiser left with her. I assumed it was just a plot device to give her an opportunity to run, and accepted it for that.
However, 1) Maybe Jamie doesn't think she wants to be around him right now so he sees this as a way to give her some space, 2) the threat really is so much in the town that she is really safer in the woods. I agree that we don't have enough info about the threat to him yet, and 3) the redcoats generally travel in big enough groups that Claire and Willie can easily hide from them. It isn't as though there are a LOT of deserters wandering around.
Regarding Dougal's motivations, I do think he's fond of Jamie (as evidenced by their hug), even if he sees him as a rival, and wants him to be safe and happy. Having Jamie back in Lallybroch would also serve Dougal's political purposes by keeping Jamie away from the seat of power and pushing him back into the Fraser camp. Also, now that he's seen Claire and Jamie together, I don't think he's planning to hit on Claire again. However, if she and Jamie are so torn apart by the events in this episode that he thinks she might be willing, he might give it a casual try.
-
1
-
-
Slightly off-topic, but I'm really hoping they get back to Leoch soon (in the new episodes). I want to see everyone's (especially Mrs. Fitz) reactions to the marriage of Claire and Jamie and somehow I think that Christmas at Leoch might be fun. We need some happy (non-sex) moments. Even the wedding scene was not really happy and this episode was depressing too.
-
6
-
-
How did Jamie let her down? I don't understand this at all. He slit the throat of the renegade red coat because he was going to kill both of them. He laid his life on the line for her. Then in her narrative (again) she says she was angry and didn't know why but it was a "pivotal point in her life". Suddenly she's treating Jamie with contempt, but isn't Jamie the man that she was she was enamored with just minutes before their ambush? This is a woman that's seen a lot of war wounds, tons of blood and twisted flesh. Was the trauma caused to her because she took a life in self defense? This woman's thinking just isn't adding up for me.
Here's the thinking. Jamie promised her the protection of his body (plus his clan, etc.) However, at the very first threat to her, he was first careless (not paying attention/pulling her away from the safety of the group to satisfy his sexual desires) and then helpless. If she hadn't first killed one deserter, he would have not been able to kill the other one. The fact that she wasn't raped was due to her own ability to fight, not his.
Claire isn't really angry with him, but in her distress over almost being raped and having to kill a man for the first time, she lashes out at the nearest person. Pretty normal reaction.
-
5
-
-
Randall is pretty much just the latest in a long line of Hollywood caricatures that equate British Redcoats as sadistic, Nazi-type villains. The type who believes the best way to interrogate a woman is to rape her. Sorry if my prior post seemed limited to the deserters -- I was really commenting on essentially every Redcoat other than Lt. Foster and Lord Thomas.
I do agree on that and I made a similar comment on the Garrison Commander episode thread. :)
-
I completely agree. If you're going to show a scene that may or may not be rape, you'd better be pretty clear you indicate it is NOT rape, if that's what you're going for. I don't feel I need to do "homework" to hear various explanations that, no, really I'm just being overly sensitive.
The way show left off the relationship with Claire and Jamie, with her being resentful and angry with him regarding what I perceived as her being raped, and his feeling this great shame and distance between them, was not very satisfactory. I guess all is just to be forgiven, swept under the rug by his appearing in the window at Fort William. But why is the show sweeping anything related to the development of Jamie and Claire's relationship under the rug, rather than mining it? Especially if it's in service of a tacked-on, overly long, and unnecessary "Frank's Adventures in Inverness" storyline.
Was Claire raped? Did Claire realize in order to save herself and save Jamie, she'd have to let her attacker get very close to and maybe violate her in order to kill him? Did she have any concern for Jamie, or just herself in that moment? There's some interesting, complex stuff there, perhaps turning the "hero saves heroine from rape" trope on its head, in giving Claire agency in saving Jamie from getting shot. For all of Jamie's talk about the protection of his body, was this her way of giving him the protection of her body, doing what she had to do get the TWO of them out of this situation? Where was the omnipresent narration? Why was Claire silent at this moment? If there's a point to her narrative silence (she's shutting down, in shock, etc.), fine, but why then is there no follow-up conversation between Jamie and Claire about what happened, which, frankly, just doesn't seem at all like the relationship these two have developed, such that we've been allowed to see.
I actually don't think all will be forgiven so quickly. Claire may forgive Jamie sooner, but I doubt he'll forgive himself very quickly for not protecting her during the attack, even if he does manage to rescue her from BJR. I anticipate angst in the next few episodes. :(
Regarding a post-attack conversation, I believe she said something along the lines of her being afraid to talk about it because she was so emotional that she was worried she would reveal more than she wanted, including her time traveling.
As much as I love watching Jamie and Claire being all lovey-dovey, it probably is better storytelling if they have some obstacles to overcome.
S01.E05: The Jacket
in Secrets And Lies [V]
Don't worry, he will be on Ben's suspect list soon and we'll find out why he's so sure Ben is guilty. I think he actually saw Ben go to Jess's house that night.
Perhaps someone fished out the tablet for Matt when they were stealing the jacket? That would have to be one tough tablet to survive the water!
I was also very curious about whether Cornell is repeat offender when it comes to fixating on a suspect.
That is EXACTLY what I was thinking. The Supercriminal who can hack into phones, cars, etc. Also in this episode, Dave mentioned how smart Matt is. Are we supposed to believe that he a secret computer genious who is stalking Ben? Another similarity to Pretty Little Liars-- the main characters are complete idiots who would have been better off revealing the truth from the beginning rather than lying and trying to investigate everything themselves.
Did anyone else notice that Cornell has become less wooden since she revealed to Ben the vmail evidence against him? Kinda reminds me of a former boss who was annoyed by something I did and got more and more annoyed because he kept it in. Once I got him to tell me what was wrong, he was much nicer to me! She seems to be the same way...
On the plus side, Natalie finally behaves like a normal person! Stop the presses!
Christy--loved the speech on how she can't be angry. It was human and very realistic. However, I don't know what's up with accepting gifts from her clients--seems inappropriate for a married woman to accept expensive gifts from another man. Of course, it's possible that she bought them herself and is just taking revenge on her husband by hinting at an affair. Fits in with the idea that she cannot hate him when his son has just died.