whirledweary

Despite the faux-science and faux-tech in this show, I like it for its pace and imagination. Tonight's episode brought up an interesting dilemma about public distrust of government and government agencies. Even if a government is mostly good, signs of corruption can alienate the public and make other governing options more attractive. Court marshaling Dr. Rachel Scott and insisting Jeff be made President because good guys follow the letter of the law seems extreme. (Meanwhile, I'm sure they must be breaking as many laws as they are upholding.) It's a slippery slope. If you start making up your own laws, then anyone can, and the result is chaos. Then the ultimate winners would be the best armed and/or the trickiest/most charming con artists. So, I guess if 80% of the population died out, it would be best to stick to the laws already made rather than start from scratch. I peeked at the imbd list of all of the characters -- wow, the casting budget must be huge. Like GOT huge. Maybe if they'd hire a few fact checkers instead of one-line actors, the show could win back credibility. It seems doable. Zoo gets more fun with campy dialog and outlandish plot turns, but I think this show needs to be credible to be good.

One of those pneumatic containers with the gunky yellow stuff would make a great Christmas gift. Maybe the show could make back some money with a retail line. Teddy bears with armored stuffing? I'm sure I'll see someone walking around with defiant pupil contact lenses for Halloween.

Bring on the "zeal" of killer zebras! I found the plural forms for groups of animals here: http://www.rinkworks.com/words/collective.shtml (We'll need these to TWOP/snark future episodes.) Jean-Michel is hilarious. I hope the show finds more ways for him to be animal bait. We need a Zoo bingo game. But no shots every time a character drinks because we wouldn't make it through the show. Maybe drink every time there is a preposterous new scientific theory? Or every time they introduce a new character who speaks a language we haven't heard yet on the show? Or every time they take another flight somewhere and a black screen tells us where they are? Extra points for guessing the next murderous animal and its special genetically modified super power. Maybe a band of X-Animals will come to mankind's rescue. Even the make-up people who create the mauled dead bodies must be having fun. More gnarly slashes and peeled back blood smeared clothing! They probably get to make dozens of versions of the defiant pupil too. (Which looks like the Monster drink logo to me.) I want their job.

Karen, made in the likeness of Leo’s biological mom, Beatrice, was the last conscious synth that Dr. Elster made. Maybe he put something extra in her coding (besides his wife's likeness) to control the others. I vaguely remember Asimov’s books having laws for robots, so I looked them up and I found this “zeroth” law: A robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm. If Karen has this kind of coding maybe it over-rides any other sympathy she has for her synth family. George quoted Nietzsche to Niska (does anyone remember what he said exactly?) I found this Nietzsche quote that might be apply to the human v synth dilemna: “The strongest knowledge (that of the total freedom of the human will) is nonetheless the poorest in successes: for it always has the strongest opponent, human vanity.” This episode showed a bit more of Fred’s personality. He seems to be the synth with the most talent, and he’s got a lot of pride (taught himself football and music, didn’t want to admit he has some sort of malfunction). In terms of human(e) qualities Niska is the most passionate, Max is the most forgiving, Mia is the most caring, Leo has the most heart (because it’s a human heart?) Anyway, the differences in their personalities reminded me of the seven sins and seven virtues: Lust/Chastity Gluttony/Temperance Greed/Charity Sloth/Diligence Wrath/Patience Envy/Kindness Pride/Humility I guess the show is telling us that each synth has different combinations of human characteristics coded into them, and certain characteristics that are learned. (Like us.) So what’s the common conscious that the five of them combined can create? A God-like knowledge that’s spread to all the other synths? I hope we get some more answers next week. One more thought: Power is literal. If the synths can’t power up they lose their abilities forever. So whoever controls the power grid controls the future of the synths.

I'm out. The writers are recycling the same tired stereotyped storylines. The fun-loving, "everyone-who-is-cool-is-doing-it" portrayal of hard partying and womanizing isn't entertaining to me, it's sad. Is their target demographic teen boys? Worse, they're stone deaf to the serious issues about treatment of women. Did anyone hear the multiple rape investigation of former NFL star Darren Sharper on NPR? http://www.npr.org/podcasts/381444908/fresh-air Now that Ballers has been renewed, why can't they get some decent writers so it could be more like Friday Night Lights? Dang. I love football and Rob Corddry. I really wanted to like this show!

I think Gideon is a powerless sell-out trying to keep the kids on track to a life of serving E Corp. I'm worried that the show might be running out of plot options. If everyone is either a victim or lackey of corporate greed, then it's just different versions of Godzilla v King Kong.

If my spouse wanted to have sex with the vacuum cleaner, I'd think it was weird, but not cheating. I’m sure there are all kinds of sex fetishes that don't hurt anyone. I agree with clanstarling and izabella that if it felt wrong to Joe and he was doing it to spite Laura, then it's on him to make it right. It’s totally believable to me that our society would make synths as sexy as possible, and that manufacturers would see a way to make more money by offering certain “enhancements”. But then wouldn’t we also have Jerry Springer-like talk shows exploiting synth sex from all sides? And wouldn’t dating couples talk about their opinions about sex with synths when they are getting to know each other? Shouldn’t people disclose their sexual preferences, turn-offs, and hang ups when they are dating to make sure they are with the right person? Maybe Laura told Joe that she didn’t want him to have sex with any synth that also cares for their children. Then it makes sense that she’d be upset. Otherwise, to me it still seems on the same level as watching porn or sniffing underwear (like on Orange is the New Black). I love that this show is manipulating us to question human behavior and our morale judgments about right and wrong.

Psychopaths are not supposed to feel remorse, but maybe Tyrell was upset because he fucked up the plan by killing the CTO's wife? Tyrell's wife might compete with Vera as the show's most evil psychopath. I love this show, but they need to keep around some people to root for. If they do anything to Flipper, I may need to stop watching.

I don't see why Joe having sex with Anita was wrong. From the "over-18" app and the uncut version of this episode, we know that all synths, male or female, are built to function as sex toys. If Laura has such a strong morale judgement about having sex with synths, then she should have talked with Joe about this, or insisted they get a male synth or a less attractive (and probably less expensive) synth, like George's new synth. At this point in the story, no one knows synths have feelings and can feel violated by sex or bodily harm. They make real-looking dolls for sex nowadays, eg Sinthetics.com Having sex with a doll, no matter how realistic it looks (or behaves) is not hurting or violating anyone. I cannot imagine being jealous of someone having sex with a synth. If Joe knew that Anita could feel and was a conscious being, then that's completely different. I'm fascinated by how the synths have personalities that are a reflection of how they've been treated. I hope Max can be revived. It's interesting that he is trying to connect with God and persuade the other synths to forgive humans.

This show is sweet, smart revenge for decades of network TV's clichéd roles for women. Thank you writers for having so much fun with the script. Each woman on this show is struggling with what's real, what's important, and what's needed to get what they want. Just like all of us. We all are manipulative and portray ourselves in inauthentic ways to get what we want. The higher the stakes, the crazier we get. We want it all. We want true, romantic love and we want to be bad asses at our jobs without everyone hating us. And why is it that the men with the biggest egos get strokes for being misogynistic? /smirk/ I want Rachel and Quinn to produce Donald Trump's next reality show.

Nigel needs to retire. His pandering, objectification of women, homophopia, self-congratulation, and pretend embrace of street dance ruins my enjoyment of the show. Instead of having the dancers run off the stage without comment, I wished the judges were silent (or not even present!) and we could have heard from and seen more of the dancers. Witney was just nominated for an Emmy for her choreography and she won DWTS, but she wasn't mentioned at all. Ryan Seacrest needs a vacation. He's probably depressed to be tied to such a loser of a new show. Fox needs to get rid of the old geezers who control programming. Sheesh.

Seriously show? Lesbians listening to Oasis? I'm looking forward to the part where the kitty cats take over the LAPD. I love that the animals are devising new and entertaining ways to kill and that they have some sort of wacky morale code. (I've been letting my dog sleep on the couch. I'm going to need her on my side when scat/shit happens in my neighborhood.) More Mitch, more Abe, please. Plus we need a female character with levity. Can the cast of "The Last Man on Earth" join the French Government's team? Carol's raisin balls would clean the animal products out of their digestive systems, for starters.

I'm with Sarah B on this. I don't like to be spoon fed the obvious, and I'm enjoying the insider references. On the other hand, I'd love to hear from a coder who could debunk the cheesy hacker screenshots. I like the bleak social commentary. The 1% control the 99% who are oblivious are pawns/victims of corporate greed. Only a few even know they're being controlled, watched, manipulated. The 1% are falling all over each other to take their share of power. No one's a hero. Elliot's addiction rings true to me, though Vera is an over-simplified bad guy. The female characters intrigue me the most, and I hope the writers don't get lazy with them. The Muslim girl could have an interesting back story. And I like that Shayla is trying to make an honest living without an education or tech skills. I guess she represents the new cynical American dream: stay clean and pay your bills. Also, will her and the other 99% have a better or worse life if the fsociety succeeds with their financial system take down? One of the screenshots from a previous episode showed that Angela owes something like $190,000 in student loans. That and the fact that her father is seriously ill and in debt (courtesy of E Corp) sets her up to join the fsociety. I like her chemistry with Elliot, and she seems to bring out his sane and hopeful side. Maybe she can pry him away from Mr. Robot. I hope Mr. Robot is not a alter ego of Elliot's. I like him as a psychopath who tempts malcontents to abandon their morality. I like the Swedish psychopaths too. Wine swigging, partner swapping, and S&M is going to create a messed up baby. The China Dark Army subplot is clever. In real life the Chinese seem to be hacking into everything, and that might well be the current biggest threat to modern civil society. (When Wall Street closed down for a few hours a couple weeks ago at the same time that the Chinese stocks were tumbling, it certainly seemed plausible that hackers could be manipulating the system to prevent loses. Grassy knolls can be fun to ponder!) If the writers keep on their game and steer clear of cliches, I'll be a happy camper.