quangtran
-
Posts
143 -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by quangtran
-
-
10 hours ago, SnarkShark said:
I. Don't. Get. The. Point. Of. This. Season.
I thought it became clear as the season went on that the theme of the season was women.
- It started off with her being angry at all the men, like: Shy, the police who kept sending her to jail, the club owner who banned her for life, people like Eugene who was reveling in her downfall, and those hack comedians.
- This led to her improving conditions at the strip joint and bringing in more women customers.- This led to her coming in conflict with other working women, like: her mother, the columnist (who she assumed was a man), and rival Sophie
- The season ended with her doing a set in honor of nurses and womenfolk in general
QuoteI am not sure how I feel about Lenny and Midge sleeping together. It seemed… anti-climatic.
Did it have to be climatic? I'm generally an anti-shipper, and I thought it was written as well as needed. They gave into their attraction for each other, she insisted that he always sees her as a comedian, and they reiterated that he still has problems and that a real romance is not going to happen.
-
15
-
-
10 hours ago, eejm said:
What was up with Aurora Fane’s pained look when Raikes was chatting up the woman beside him?
There was also the knowing look between the Fanes at the opera, after they heard Marion talk to Betha about Raikes not having any money, so the writers are 100% dropping hints that they know something more is going on.
7 hours ago, izabella said:Mrs. Fane is one of my favorites. I've been impressed with the actress from the start, and enjoy her character. I give Aurora credit for diving right in to help Bertha break into society.
I like Aurora as well, but part of me thinks she's still somewhat angry at the Russell and just does a better job at hiding it than Anne Morris.
-
8
-
-
7 hours ago, Bulldog said:
Noticed Peggy referred to Marion as her friend. I guess the boot incident is now forgotten.
To me it was obvious that they were friends even during the boot incident and that she only said they weren't out of anger. It also kinda annoyed me that everyone took that comment literally, stating that people like Peggy can't ever truly be friends with Marion, which I don't think is at all true or the message the show was trying to send.
-
2
-
9
-
-
7 hours ago, iMonrey said:
Lots of speculation about this, but if you watch those "Inside the Episode" shorts, the actor playing Raikes seems to think his character is genuine. Which leads me to believe the writing is just kind of lazy in regards to this storyline.
7 hours ago, dmc said:Or Fellows hasn’t told him he’s shady yet.
I haven't heard the podcast yet, but based on all every actor interview I've read, all of them were taught to treat their character as the hero in their own story despite whatever terrible things the writers make them do, so Thomas Cocquerel playing him from a sympathetic angle isn't indicative of Raikes not being a con artist.
-
2
-
4
-
-
On 1/12/2022 at 11:58 PM, Sycophant4Lease said:
Will Thony remain a "cleaning lady" throughout the entire series?
Given the penchant for titles with double meanings, I just assumed that her job will evolve to the "cleaner" positions seen like shows like Nikita, where those people would dispose of unwanted dead bodies via dissolving them via acid though the bathtub. But given the creator talking about wanting positive and sympathetic depiction of asians and immigrants, I doubt they'll go too dark for the lead.
-
2
-
-
20 hours ago, Ottis said:
Claire and Mitch's obsession seemed contrived.
I think the opposite, in that it has been long established that all the Pritchett's are obsessed with being right and proving others wrong.
-
1
-
4
-
-
11 hours ago, RoadFullOfPromise said:
Oh, trust me - I agree completely on that front! My issue is definitely not that she isn’t gorgeous (bc she absolutely is and the show is full of beautiful people of all types) but just that the show bends over backwards to kiss her ass at least once a scene and I find it exhausting.
Does the show actually do this?
They have a running joke about Bex being a 7.
They have a running joke about women finding Greg so sexy.
They treat Valencia and Nathaniel like they are both 10's.
Entire plotlines and songs were written around how hot the men are.
Other than people constantly complementing Bex's boobs, it seems like there has been a conscious effort to place praise over the supporting cast over her own character..-
4
-
-
3 hours ago, Yeah No said:
And I don't believe people change THAT much. So I don't see it. Plus I didn't even feel it. Where would they even go together? Suddenly he comes back and now everything's OK? Not buying that.
The Raging Waters episodes covered this. Greg and Bex has clearly changed a lot since when we first saw them in season 1, but still faced the same hurdles of his misanthropy and her not being able to deal with adult problems without spiralling.
QuoteCXG is telling us, this is what love looks like.
Not buying that for a second. It is a huge leap to conclude that Josh and Nathaniel have both lost their one true love just because they haven't had other love interests.
QuoteWhen Rebecca got all dressed up for her date with Nathaniel I thought it was gross. The premise of this whole thing is really disgusting. How is this believable? I don't mean realistic - it's a comedy. But believable, with an internal logic to it? So her first date is with Josh and its super intimate, they kiss, fall asleep in each other's arms. Then she resets and goes on another date with another guy where it's basically the same beats. Again, gross. Is this how intimacy works? It isn't. It's like the ability to generate it with three guys in three days just damages the credibility of ANY Of the relationships, not to mention Rebecca's own emotional credibility.
I'll be disagreeing with a lot of what you wrote, because the show clearly is aware of the grossness of the whole Bachelor setup, and the dates were shown to be emotionally draining on her after the second one. But on a macro level there isn't anything gross about a single person having romantic date with other single people, especially compared to Bex's old pattern of running off her dates to sleep with other dudes.
-
1
-
5
-
-
3 hours ago, ElectricBoogaloo said:
I kind of hope she bombs the audition but gets cast in a minor role because doing what you love doesn't always mean that you're good enough to pursue it full time or make a living at it. I would like Rebecca to have a realistic happy ending where she is doing community theater (as opposed to suddenly becoming an overnight Broadway sensation, which is unlikely given that we know that Rebecca can only sing on key in her fantasies).
That where I see this plot going. Rebecca was perfectly happy to be an extra in South Pacific and Moby Dick, so her simply being allowed to contribute in the smallest possible way would be a good enough hobby for her.
4 minutes ago, SomeTameGazelle said:What role does Rebetzel's play if it's not financially sustainable and not Rebecca's passion?
It couldn't have been her dream or passion given that she did it on a whim. Starting up Rebetzels was more about her not wanting to be a lawyer.
I kind of figured that this that musical theatre was the solution to her problems since literally day one, given that the butter ad asking "when was the last time you were truely happy", she flashed back to her the singing South Pacific number (and mistook her last happy moment to be with Josh and not being in a musical).
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, doesntworkonwood said:
The problem they had was that they got Rebecca and Greg together at the end of an episode, followed up with an episode entirely from Nathanial's point of view, followed by this episode where Rebecca is suddenly backsliding. There should have been an episode in between to a) show us the development of Greg and Rebecca's relationship and b) imply to us that Rebecca was avoiding therapy.
I see no problem with this story structure. There's no drama or conflict in detailing Greg and Rebecca's few weeks of couple bliss, so they can keep that off-screen and do a concept episode on Nathanial instead.
QuoteThen because they wanted to make a different point in this episode, they reveal she was substituting a relationship high for therapy and meds. That is NOT what the show was showing us in prior episodes.
That that IS what they showed us, in that both the show and Bex focused completely on her relationships at the expense of her therapy. She was making all the right decisions in some aspects and just assumed that it would be enough.
-
10
-
-
1 hour ago, Irlandesa said:
The Paula/Rebecca "real love story" talk came later in the series. And while Josh might not be end game, it still doesn't explain why their male lead was shoved to the background in favor of others.
White Josh isn't a regular.
SMF and David Hull were both upgraded to regular in season 3, but Hull was quietly placed back to guest star status in season 4.
Also, Josh wasn't really the male lead. He was barely in the pilot and wasn't developed into episode 3. Season one had just as much Greg as it did Josh. Also, the show perfectly explained why Josh's role was reduced. When Bex stopped obsessing over him, he became "irrelevant", thus became a supporting player like Valencia and Heather.
-
18 hours ago, Irlandesa said:
But then again, this show also made a huge deal about casting an Asian Bro as the male lead/love interest for Rebecca and yet, they went out and created the Nathaniel character, gave him a lot of screen time and pushed Josh into the background.
Nathaniel was given a lot of screen time since his first episode in season 2, and Josh was pushed into the background halfway into season 3. Second, Josh was clearly never intended as the endgame love interest or a lead character, with the writers always being addement that Paula was the second lead.
QuoteI was thinking that it's impressive how much more central Rebecca's (former) coworkers have become to the story. Who would've thought George and Maya would be such key players back in the early days?
This episode make it clear how the writers have struggled to find a place for White Josh, given how Maya, Jim and Tim have all done more singing on the show. WhiJo not directly being a friend of Bex or a a co-worker means he had no place in this episode or last week's.
QuoteI can't recall any other character, other than Rebecca, that had a full episode dedicated to their POV.
Getting Over Jeff was a Paula-centric episode, with Bex and Josh having smaller roles.
On 28/01/2019 at 2:45 AM, Yeah No said:Plus, the show is almost looking like it's deliberately making a caricature out of her relationship with new Greg.
That was part of the gag. Marcy had a squeeky voice in the dream (and kept saying "I'm Marcy") based solely on Maya's impression of her, Greg's douche personality was purely because Nate was jealous, and Bex constantly telling Greg he is funny was because Nate heard them laugh.
-
2
-
-
Maybe my standards have dropped due to me hating last week's so much, but I liked that and I thought it was cute. I should have predicted where it was going, but I chuckled when the two successful kids and two burnout kids walked out on stage. I'm glad Glora has finally concidered a career again, because it seemed like she was content to be a trophy wife for most of the series. I can't help but like the photoshoot storyline because it played out almost exactly like MF plot I envisioned in my head, where the Dunphy family are act as stock models for a real estate campaign.
-
3
-
-
I like that Scott didn't let Paula explain away with ridiculousness and outright told her she was wrong. I get so tired of shows like Modern Family where stories end with characters having a vulnerable moment to justify schemes or lies.
2 hours ago, possibilities said:I want to know they aren't actually upsetting any babies!
Babies are notoriously difficult to work with, so it wouldn't have to wait long to film a naturally crying baby (or if the baby is crying too much, an actor is forced to with an empty cot or stroller).
-
1
-
-
Quote
I didn't love the Bert/Darryl storyline, but it was not at all surprising that it escalated until Paula used her mom skills to separate them.
I've grown to hate the way the writers never seems to tell us why we should side with Darryl. Bert has been trying to create a friendlier work enviroment, everyone (including Nathaniel) has been receptive to this, and Darryl has a problem with it because people now like else? And then he attacks Bert for no reason?
-
11
-
-
On 12/29/2018 at 2:34 PM, txhorns79 said:
Maybe I'm missing something in watching both, but while there are some superficial similarities, like the dancers' outfits, the dance being done in the Shirley Ellis video is fairly different from what they are doing in the Maisel episode.
I don't see the similarities either. Heck, I'd go as far as saying that the cheographers were going for opposite dance language, in that Nitty Gritty is all about them shuffling left and right, while Pink Shoelaces was all about them bopping up and down.
-
You don't agree that he did all that because he wanted to sleep with her?! Even though that's exactly what was shown on screen?
Declan: Are you sure I can't get you to sleep with me?
Midge: Nope.
Declan: Even after I told you my sad, lonely story? I mean, my God, that was my very best line.
-
5
-
-
5 hours ago, rose711 said:
No he didn’t pay much attention until he saw the painting. Then he made her tell him why it appealed to her and why she bought it. That’s why he wanted to know her.
I admit that I was already over finding the selfish, arrogant and rude Midge charming by this point. But I’m certain he was intrigued by the painting.
It was just another way to show how Midge is oh so special because she goes away from the main collectors and sees something else that everyone ignores.
As a result she gets to see the fabled painting by the best artist. She spent probably 15 minutes talking with him? That’s just how good the writer wants us to believe Midge is - she’s a superhero character.
It doesn't have to be just one thing. Also, the writers intentionally undercut the loftiness of the scene by making it clear that him showing her tha fabled painting and giving her the long spiel was a move to get her to sleep with him.
-
5
-
-
8 hours ago, Geillis said:
Ok, I may catch some flack for this but I have to air a couple thoughts. While the official story sounds like she was being oversensitive to some lewd jokes, and her side sounds like he was being a total jerk and ass to her, the truth is probably somewhere between. I wasn't there and haven't seen any tapes. Different people have different tolerances and appreciations for different types of humor influenced by life experiences, situations and family taught values. What some find funny and acceptable, others find unacceptable and offensive, but without honest conversations, behavior doesn't alter and misunderstandings and hurt feelings continue. I would like to know how did she approach him with her discomfort to his behavior, and his response. Did she have an honest attempt to discuss her feelings with him in private, or was it an aggressive confrontation? I am not victim blaming, but am just pointing out that when you feel offended by someone's behavior or comments, if you are confrontational about it, the other person becomes defensive and feels a need to save face, so a private conversation usually gets better results and no hard feelings. So we don't really know exactly what has transpired, but an honest private conversation may have made a complaint to HR unnecessary.
Having said that, she may have been written out regardless of any onset disagreements. I liked her as Faith in Buffy and Angel and I liked her in Dollhouse, but I found this character annoying so I am not bothered by having this character not in future episodes.
What I find most annoying about this whole affair is that the publicity around it does not help awareness or sympathy for women who are truly in similar situations. Even if she was fired the way she claims and for the reasons she claims, she was not hurt financially. She got a 9 million dollar settlement. Invested wisely, she and her husband need never work again if they chose and could live very well. Other women facing the same situation, getting fired for complaining about hostile work environments, or reporting hostile work environments are either laid off, fired, or given the option to quit and then must make do with unemployment insurance or their savings until they can find other employment. If they chose a legal action, it is costly and could take them years to get any compensation. These are the stories that should be getting more media attention, the stories of real women getting hurt, who lose their jobs, and can't pay their bills, or who have no choice but to stay in those jobs for financial reasons, not someone who, while she may actually had an unpleasant, uncomfortable experience came out of it with a 9 million dollar payout. Her story diminishes theirs.
I'll be one of those throwing some flak.
- Women who are harassed are in no way obligated to confront and appease those who are harassing them. Speculating that she was defensive or confrontational does sound like victim blaming.
- The whole "somewhere in the middle" argument doesn't work when there's video evidence, and is guesswork based on absolutely nothing.
- I call bullshit on this case not raising awareness and diminishing other stories. So much of this discussion of forums and reddit has been about how harassment isn't just Hollywood and politics, but everywhere. She's very much another example of a real women who lost her job.
-
15
-
-
On 12/18/2018 at 1:10 AM, Netfoot said:
Which nowadays, is inappropriate behaviour, harassment, and molestation, and earns you dismissal from your job and life-long condemnation. Meanwhile, any long-time friends who speak out on your behalf get accused of rape-apology and other disappointing behaviour, but people who don't know you from a rat's ass, get to spout off about it with all the self-gratification that only virtue-signalling can deliver.
No offense, but I think this argument is a complete load, and in this case clearly not based on reality. Michael was/is protected by the network because he was their star. so clearly him making making stupid and lewd jokes isn't going to get him fired and accused of molestation. If that does happen I'll gladly come back to say I was wrong.
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, DrSpaceman73 said:
I am confused.
Is Phil a realtor right now or not?
So he owns a magic shop, is a realtor and a community college professor?
I thought he was fired by his old group as a realtor.
More work of convenience for all these people.
He does all these things. I know several realtors who runs several bussineses.
QuoteSo he owns a magic shop, is a realtor and a community college professor?
I thought he was fired by his old group as a realtor.
Phil never stopped selling houses. He went out on his own and tried to sell the house full of bees after getting kicked out of this old group, and tried to sell a house to Chris Martin after owning the magic shop.
-
2
-
-
I didn't like Joel in season one, thought he was mostly okay in season 2 but hope his screentime is reduced in season 3.
On 12/7/2018 at 6:46 AM, qtpye said:My greatest nitpick would be the rehabilitation of Joel at the expense of other characters, though thankfully not Midge (at least not usually).
This season his parents are idiots who are hiding money all over the place (that they can not find) and need Joel to explain the benefits of a bank loan. Joel’s mother was never the posh fashion plate Midge’s mother is, but she still looked nice last season. This year she looks like a crazy person in unflattering dresses and gambling all night at mahjong. Joel is comes off looking like a saint for taking care and loving these two. I hated it when Joel had to rescue Susie from the closet and was ever so manly punching out the guy that would not pay them.
Not sure I completely agree with this. Some of the stuff with Joel's parent's didn't make sense (like how they took huge loans but had lots saved) but they aren't significant enough for me to care whether they were ruined just to prop up Joel. Also, his rehabilitation has already started in season one when he fought for a promotion and worked hard to set his family for life. Him suggesting that this father own the building is no different then convincing the board of his old job to become the supplier.
6 hours ago, Jadzia said:There were several episodes where Joel lamented about how he just wanted to be forgiven, blah blah. But in the first episode flashback, they showed that Miriam did want to take him back, but HE was the one who couldn't handle her making comedy about their relationship.
I don't see this as a story issue, but as a more realistic take on a guilty person. Midge's forgiveness alone isn't going to make him quash all his guilt. It'll hang over his head for the rest of his life and everyone will perceive him differently.
-
2
-
-
On 12/10/2018 at 1:58 AM, Blakeston said:
I agree with pretty much everything everyone has said!
1. I'm disgusted that the show keeps sending the message with Gloria's plotlines that it's okay to be abusive to your partner if you're a hot woman. Jay has plenty of his own flaws, but he doesn't cross the line into abuse. Destroying your spouse's cell phone because you're angry that they were right about something? He should have demanded a divorce right then and there. (And don't get me started on how often these characters destroy expensive things and think nothing of it.)
I never got the impression from the writers that Gloria is implicitly getting away with this the stuff she does because she is gorgeous (though I have no that comes with lots of privilege). I'm more bothered with the way the writers insist that Mitch, Claire and Jay are being bad spouses and parents for always trying to be right, which is stupid because for me the only people who says this that are those who also insist THEY are right but are often proven wrong, like with Gloria and the phone. Also, reason with this storyline is that these actions are supposed to be peppered with humor, but there was nothing funny about Gloria destroying the phone. Like what was said earlier, it just made her look like a huge bitch.
As for the status Jay and Gloria's marriage, I sometimes dislike their dynamic (like her insisting that its okay to shout at your partner), but that has only happened a handful of times within the last ten tears, as opposed to Cam and Mitch where Cam annoys me many times every season.
QuoteMy dislike of Cam began way back when Mitch surprised him with the flashmob.
I didn't mind that story, but in hindsight that was the moment where the writers started mining Cam's hystertical oversensitivity for the sake of cheap laughs. Phil and Cam used to be neck and neck for polls for favourite character, and since around that time in season 2, Cam started dropping and Phil went up.
-
2
-
-
On 12/6/2018 at 6:08 AM, veronicalodge44 said:
i've been a big fan of marin hinkle's ever since her turn as sela ward's sister on once and again
I've always liked Marin in Once and Again, but getting used to her role in that and then see her play the mother of 20-somethings just makes me feel old.
It's always good a see Michael Torpey pop up in things after being a fan of his fairly obscure web series a few years back, but of course he plays one of the jerk comics (especially given how everyone hated him on OITNB).
I'm finding myself liking Joel a bit more this season.
-
3
-
Season 4: Marvelous Full-Season Discussion
in The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
They are only comparable when framed in the absolute broadest possible way. I'd say the endings were vastly different from both an event and emotional standpoint.
I'd say she performed many times. Off the top of my head I remember the "revenge" set at the Gaslight, her doing the set with her pretending to be a typical male comic, the one where Lenny was throwing things at her, her warming up for Sophie, the one that Rose say and then copied, the one at luncheon, and the one in honor of women at the end. So that's one one per episode.