txhorns79

I may be wrong, but my understanding of the job was that Joan would read scripts and decide if material might be bad for a client who was advertising during the episode. I agree she seemed to be good at it, but I didn't get the impression the job required much beyond basic reading comprehension and knowing the client. And while Joan may have been disappointed at not being considered for the job, she already was the office manager. It seems like going to that job, where she would lose her supervisory duties and be under Harry's purview, would have been a step down.

I'd also say that a seller can set whatever price they want for a book. It does not mean anyone is going to actually buy it at that price. The Court really looks at the best interests of the child. One thing Betty proved during the divorce that was that her behavior was, at best, erratic, she ignored the law when it didn't suit her needs and she was not above using the children as ammunition to hurt Dan.

I just binged the first season and this made me crazy. I don't think your employer can really mandate you go on a 10 mile bike ride, and Gabe's weird aggression over Annie's weight was just wrong. However, Annie is kind of awful as an employee. What really got me was that she seemed not to really understand that it was wrong of her to post a non-approved story to the website. Her explanations to Gabe were absurd, and that she was arguing over this at all left me waiting for the moment where she would be fired. I liked Julia Sweeney in this a lot. You can see that she very much cares about her daughter, but really is trapped in the pattern of trying to fix her daughter that appears to be left over from childhood.

It was interesting, and gives you a good idea of what could have happened had Betty had a lawyer. The lawyer could have asked the right questions and focused in on the topics Betty stumbled over. For example, some good directly focused questions on Betty's role at the beginning of the marriage (i.e. focusing on Betty's role as caregiver supporting Dan and the kids) where Dan would have difficultly obfuscating. Also, a lawyer would have had a better handle on Dan's financials and would have been able to get Dan's current law firm earnings versus what happened where Betty found out only at trial that Dan had not submitted them.

I do wish we got more insight into Linda and her views. Even if she loved Dan and was able to justify the affair to herself, it amazes me that she stayed through Betty's reign of terror. For me, after the umpteenth break in or obscene message, I probably would have decided that none of this was worth it and left.

Part of the reason the Epstein credits took so much of the settlement was because Betty didn't have a lawyer, and did things to drag out the proceedings. If she had a lawyer from the beginning, followed that person's advice and kept her composure, the divorce could have taken a year or slightly more, instead of the five years it actually took.

In real life, had Betty kept an attorney and followed court procedures, she very much could have had her say. Instead, Betty let her attorneys go, skipped hearings and violated numerous court orders. She engaged in actions against Dan that, at best, would be described as self-defeating. It wasn't that Dan could do whatever he wanted, it was that Betty apparently decided if she just ignored something (i.e. the divorce), it would go away, and when it came time for reality to intrude (i.e. the trial), Betty self-sabotaged again by going into the trial having no idea what she was doing. My point was never that Betty should have been meek or a "good girl," it was that Betty repeatedly self-sabotaged. However, even with her own self-sabotage, she still ended up doing better than most people. So no, I don't feel badly for her on that score.

I think the initial idea was to keep it so he would have a place to go when he left her. I don't feel sorry for Betty as to any of this. She appeared to have two different competent attorneys willing to work with her, and she blew up those relationships. She dragged out her divorce with stupid stunts which only served to antagonize the judge. Even though she got a small settlement, she's getting nearly $200,000.00 a year in alimony in the 1980s. I'm sure if she had better representation she could have gotten more, but even with this, she's living better than most people.

I thought she was an interesting character. I look at her this way: She is first and foremost Perry's mother. She's in a situation where she (rightly) believes she is not being told the whole story regarding his death, she sees Celeste acting erratically and she starts getting told all these awful things about her son, who is no longer alive to answer for anything. I don't know that most people would respond by trying to get sole custody of the grandchildren, but I think it is an incredibly difficult spot to be in. And I don't even think that gets into the fact that Mary Louise appears to have a naturally abrasive personality. I think it was Reese's production company that helped put the whole project together, so I presume she would have a big say in how the episodes turn out.

I think that was a fantasy sequence. It was Betty who was imagining that was what was happening, but it didn't actually happen.

I presume it wouldn't have lasted because I personally think it would be very hard to maintain a marriage that began as an affair. If I remember right, this is the same kid who played one of Nicole Kidman's twins on Big Little Lies. I'm sure he's well versed in understanding the difference between acting and reality.

Apple is currently selling the entire series for streaming at $34.99, essentially five bucks a season, so if you have Apple TV, it's a great deal. They are and they aren't. Realistically, there are some characters who I would find it interesting to see where they were, let's say in 5 or 10 years of the series ending, but I don't know that it would be enough to sustain a series.

I really get the impression that in Betty's mind, she felt entitled to do whatever she wanted, regardless of the consequence.

And any complaint to HR would go to Dan. He's the ultimate authority at his own firm. He likely sets the job description for his secretary and can have her do personal dictation for him if he wants.

I mean, presumably she gets paid to follow Dan's directions, even if she doesn't love the assignment. Besides, even in today's environment, who would she be complaining to about the work? It's Dan's firm.