pbutler111

Being the mother of two children doesn't automatically confer wisdom and maturity. 25 is 25. Kathryn still behaves with more maturity than Thomas, who's 30 years her senior, or Landon, a bitter old woman at 35. As far as I know (which is probably only slightly more or less than anyone who isn't personally acquainted with the principles knows), Kathryn has been through rehab, has taken the tests required of her, and is determined to do whatever's necessary to regain custody of her children, all while under the heavy scrutiny of a judgmental public. I don't see her every day, so I don't know. I also don't ever recall seeing her incoherent or seeming to be altered on the show. That doesn't mean she wasn't, but, if she was, she remained perfectly functional throughout.

If Kathryn were really after Thomas just for his money, and really wanted to "trap" him into marrying her, if she's really the femme fatale folks make her out to be, then I think she'd be wily enough to treat him like a king until he makes things legal, then start nagging him about his childish, boorish behavior. Speaking frankly to him, even yelling at him, about his godawful behavior before she's locked things down with him is hardly the behavior of a vile seducer.

Immaturity at 25 is forgivable; the same level of immaturity at 35 is not. Never mind that that's not at all what he portrayed on the TV show.

Though you'd hope it wouldn't be outwardly manifested, it would be kind of weird if he loved someone else's kid as unconditionally as his own. But I wonder what we were meant to take from that brief little interaction during the funeral? It seemed so suggestive of something under the surface.

Thomas is a douche of the first order, to be sure. And if we're to believe that he's really decided to go after Landon as a romantic partner, the douche-factor shoots off the charts. If you have two children with a woman who is not your romantic partner, how fucking stupid do you have to be to decide to partner up with that woman's arch enemy? You really think the mother of your children is going to be cool to have someone who treats her like shit on her shoe be a step parent to her children? He keeps his kids in an elegant outhouse like pets because he's afraid they'll soil the carpets and then expects the world to throw him a testimonial dinner because he's paying some woman to take care of his own fucking children. Thomas needs to get his head out of his ass and grow the fuck up already. Landon has her own arrested development to contend with and is certainly not going to help with that.

Was there anything in the book about Ed having some kind of inappropriate goings-on with Maddie's older daughter? I had thought when she moved out there might have been a plot point along those lines, but nothing came of it. But, watching the finale again, I noticed for the first time that when Ed moved to comfort her at the funeral she looked really uncomfortable and moved away from him. Was there anything about that in the book?

Kathryn isn't a "mother", she's a mother. And I don't see her as a victim, or "poor widdle Kathryn", nor do I think she was taken advantage of, though you'd think a man more than twice her age would be at least as mature but, alas, no. And both Landon and her skanky sister are raging bitches at the best of times. They sit around and screechy-voice judge everything Kathryn does, while, at the same time, Landon is quite obviously jealous as hell that, at her worst, Kathryn's life still has more purpose than hers. Kathryn did too much, too soon, and made bad decisions that I have no doubt she's regretting pretty strongly right now. But that's really none of Landon's business, nor has Landon achieved anything in her much longer life to really justify her being such a see-you-next-Tuesday over anything Kathryn's done or said. Kathryn will likely mature and wise up. Landon? I doubt it.

I just watched it again, thinking maybe I'd missed something. There was nothing to suggest that either twin heard anything, let alone that one twin was listening and the other had headphones on; they weren't even there. We don't see them until Max comes from down the hall to get his mother to take them to school and is headed off by his father. Maybe this was laid out differently in the book, but it was never shown in the TV show that either twin was aware of anything violent going on in their home.

I loved it! I thought it was a brilliant choice, and perfect for someone as tiny as Reese. She looked adorable! I thought that, too! I may be in the minority, but I don't think the twins ever witnessed their parents being violent with each other. To me, the suggestion was that, while Jane was spending so much time worrying that Ziggy might have inherited this tendency toward violence from his biological father, Max, in fact, actually did.

That sounds like a gentlemanly way of saying Landon's a nasty bitch, which is entirely true and requires no apology.

Her weed lecture was nothing but a really awkward way for her to insult Kathryn. I fucking hate Patricia.

I hate Landon so much I may have to seek therapy. The second she came on screen I wanted to call her on the phone and do a Corky St. Clair on her ass: "I HATE YOU AND I HATE YOUR ASS FACE!" And if I have to hear that screechy, whiny voice again, I'm going to turn my ears inside out, spray paint them gold, and sell them at a local art festival.

There really couldn't logically be a second season. What would we see? Five women living their lives? I'd absolutely despise a second season that revolved around that idiot lighter-clicking detective character trying to prove murder. Some things should just be a one-off, a little treat. Yes! We find ourselves watching far more British TV than American TV, mostly limited run series.

Sorry, I thought it was obvious I was joking about Dr. Phil. About the rest, we just disagree. I had that thought, briefly. But, as far as I know, Bonnie has been around a while, and, while it's understandable that Jane hadn't yet seen Perry, it seems unlikely that Bonnie hasn't met him or at least seen him at school functions. My takeaway was that Bonnie either had been an abuse victim or was raised in a home with a father/stepfather who abused her mother. Maybe her background is explained a bit more in the book?

I'm no expert, either, though I have a PhD in watching abuse victims on Dr. Phil. I've yet to see one of them that didn't follow a well worn path of isolating their victim. Celeste, by comparison, seems free as a bird. I was under the impression that Trivia Night was a fundraiser that involved anyone who wanted to buy a ticket.

I know what you mean. I'll have to watch it again and pay more attention, now that I know the outcome. I could've sworn in the first episode they said the victim had been shot. If he was attempting to isolate her, he was doing a piss poor job of it. Women who are isolated don't tend to have nannies and frequent meals out with friends.

You may want to watch that again. Gordon didn't raise his glass at Tom, he made a gun with his hand and "shot" him. Not a come on, more like a threat.

Perry didn't actually run exactly on track with the typical abuser, since he never did anything to isolate Celeste. They had a nanny who, if not live-in, was there a lot. Celeste had easy access to money, to transportation, to communication devices, and to her friends. Typical abusers don't allow their victims that sort of freedom. That could be why Celeste assumed that communications on her phone would be safe/private.

I couldn't agree with you more on this aspect! Not only was it pointless, but it was unrealistic as well. No detective worth her salt is going to be wasting time on a case that's so obviously unwinnable. No DA would ever take on such a case. The suggestion that she's basically stalking them on the beach was just so beyond. And that lighter clicking was SO annoying! It felt so forced. That character could have been (should have been) lifted right out of the proceedings and not been missed a bit.

Here's an article about it. The story's made the rounds to a lot of publications, but all saying basically the same thing. http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/kidman-bruises-big-lies-devastated-urban-article-1.3011214

I just read an interview with Nicole Kidman who said that her husband would be upset because she'd come home covered in real bruises from those scenes. http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/kidman-bruises-big-lies-devastated-urban-article-1.3011214

I thought about that!!

It did have a very Chris Isaak sound to it. At least the person singing for Nathan sounded like Nathan. The person singing for Ed sounded nothing like Ed. I don't know. I took the many variations on it as foggy memory/fantasy, but I took the last one as literal. I could be misinterpreting.

I think even someone who may have assaulted a number of women over the years would still remember the one who pointed a gun at him but couldn't pull the trigger.

That's why I find it a bit hard to believe that her seasoned therapist who knows enough to tell her to rent and apartment and stock the fridge didn't think to mention that she should also get a second phone that Perry doesn't know about to use for all these arrangements.