Paloma

This was not one of my favorite BM episodes, partly because for a significant part of the episode I was confused about the identity of the young woman having these strange experiences. There was a quick scene where we saw a glamorous starlet with long straight blond hair and nightclub-type dress being chased by paps in LA (I think), then a scene in Czechoslovakia (or Czech Republic) with an actress in period costume and very different hairstyle (but still blond), and then the rest of the scenes with a somewhat plain-looking young woman who had shorter hair that wasn't so blond. It took me quite a while to figure out that these were all the same person. Besides that confusion, the werewolf scenes looked like a grade B horror film, and I didn't see a connection to the typical BM theme of advanced technology gone wrong unless you consider regular cameras to be advanced technology. And the characters were mostly one-dimensional and unsympathetic. Although it was probably meant to be ambiguous, and it could have gone either way, I'm pretty sure that the photographer gave the gun to Mazey so that Mazey could kill herself. killed Mazey. Not only was Mazey pleading to be killed, the photographer (I forget her name--Zoe?) had already shown some compassion for the celebrities she chased, and had wanted to help Mazey when she was chained in the cabin. After witnessing Mazey's horrific transition and the killings that resulted, and probably understanding that this would happen again, the photographer likely felt that the most compassionate thing for Mazey was to grant her wish for death. So in a way the photographer redeemed herself by killing Mazey. Thanks to @Lady Calypso for correcting my faulty memory on this scene and the photographer's name. I was giving too much credit to Bo (not Zoe) for being compassionate in doing a mercy killing of Mazey, when in fact Bo let Mazey kill herself so that Bo could get the ultimate photo to sell.

Good point! There was a clear contrast between the warm and loving relationship David had with his family and the cool (detached) relationship Cliff had with his wife and son. Cliff did not show any affection toward his wife, and he was strict and not particularly affectionate with his son. In fact, I remember being surprised to see him being affectionate toward the dog in the house (I forget when that happened but think it was in one of the later scenes)--it just seemed out of character. Or was that scene when it was really David appearing as Cliff? I can't remember.

Gaap was so entertaining, I wouldn't mind spending eternal oblivion with him--especially if the alternative was burning to death in a nuclear apocalypse.

LOL, it took me until I was in my late 20s and divorced to realize I should look for the good boys. Luckily, I found one, and we've been married 43 years.

Yea, I could totally relate to that even though my teenage years are many decades in the past. I was a nerdy academic teen, not as competitive as Devi but very focused on getting good grades. I was also dateless in high school (except for being asked out once in freshman year by a creep, and I asked a male friend to go to junior prom with me). But I had a series of crushes on "bad boys" who mostly didn't know I was alive. One of them actually did ask me out, but when he "parked" and tried to make out, he realized I was too prudish (and inexperienced) to go beyond kissing, so there were no more dates. But my crush on him continued for at least a couple of years after high school, even though I never had contact with him. And my first husband, whom I married at 20, was also a "bad boy." I think the whole bad boy crush is a common thing for girls (and young women) who are raised strictly and are academically oriented. These bad boys represent freedom from expectations and make us feel desirable (if they notice us) or at least like there is more to us than being nerdy.

I was equally surprised/shocked--from what little we'd seen of David before his family was murdered, he seemed like a genuinely nice guy and not a secret psychopath. After the murders he was traumatized, grieving, and depressed, but those emotions shouldn't have turned him turn into a murderer unless it was to get revenge on the people who murdered his family. It's true that Cliff said some pretty harsh (and untrue, I think) things to David about how Lana felt about David's behavior, but that still seems unlikely to cause David to murder both Lana and Henry, and in such an over-the-top bloody way. Same here. Before Cliff told him that Lana didn't want anything to do with David, my husband and I were expecting David to use Cliff's neural link to stay on Earth permanently and take Cliff's place. I'm not sure if that would have worked--maybe Cliff could have disconnected the neural link when David didn't come back after a reasonable time. And the mission required two people, so if only one person was left to operate and repair things, they might have both died if something went wrong.

It seemed like the fictional show was only a few minutes (or less) behind the actual events of Joan's life, so I assume that if a viewer tried to fast forward during the current day's "episode" the screen would go dark after reaching the most recent thing that happened. But it would only stay dark for a few seconds or minutes, until the quamputer caught up with what Joan was doing. What didn't make sense to me is how the fictional show could so exactly replicate Joan's behavior and reactions when she was alone, if they were getting the data for the script from her phone. Did they also have surveillance cameras in her apartment and car? (They probably did have a camera in her office, to surveil her and other employees.) And how did they know what was said between her and Krish outside when he was leaving and she was begging him to stay? He asked to see her phone (to see if there were texts to/from Mac) and she said her phone was inside the house--if true, her phone couldn't have been recording this interaction. But I guess his phone could have recorded it and fed the data into the computer for Joan's episode. I doubt that the permissions could be revoked, and I don't think uninstalling it from the phone would be enough if you still watch streaming shows on TV or your computer. But look how many big breaches of privacy have already happened, and people have accepted it because they want the benefits of online shopping, social media, etc. Netflix as well as other streamers (and regular TV producers) seem to have no problem with making shows that are unoriginal. This BM episode has probably inspired them! @markx Sorry for quoting pieces of your comment out of order, but I was responding to what you said as things occurred to me (plus I'm not fully awake yet).

I forgot that Nalini told her to apply to safety schools (though I don't remember her using the word "safety"--just that she should apply to other schools in case Princeton didn't come through). And I agree that Nalini probably nagged, but the way the apology was worded in this episode made it sound like she was hands-off in the process, and that was unrealistic. I do remember the counselor telling her to apply to safety schools, and you're right that nothing would have changed Devi's single-minded ambition. I'm not sure that she would have been eventually accepted if the person from the college fair hadn't been sympathetic to her. And I'm not sure that the essay was the determining factor for her being taken off the waitlist. Equally likely is that many high-achieving students applied to multiple Ivies, like she did, and got accepted to more than one; then they decided to go to one of the others, thus opening up spaces from the waitlist. My daughter was applying to college in 1999-2000, and it was common practice for students to apply to multiple colleges with the Common App. Students in honors programs like AP and IB often applied to multiple Ivies, and at least some of them in my daughter's class got accepted to 2 or even 3 Ivies plus other selective schools. All of this is probably still true for high school seniors. I too would have liked to see Devi's college dream shatter so that she could explore other options, including a gap year. Although I loved the characters on this show and wanted them to have happy endings, there are various ways to have happy endings that are not necessarily everything coming together in fairy-tale fashion at one time.

I just read the comment by @shapeshifter in the New Jersey episode thread and wanted to comment here since it was about Nalini's apology for letting Devi control the admissions process. I'm sure that some parents do let high school seniors make all the decisions about where to apply and don't nag (er, follow up with) their kids about filling out the applications, writing the essays, etc. But those parents would definitely not include mothers like Nalini, who are focused on their kids being well behaved and successful and tend to be controlling of their kids' lives. I was very much like Nalini and had a similar conflicted relationship with my daughter, and--like Devi--my daughter was convinced that only one very competitive school was for her and was highly motivated to get into that school. However, I was afraid that the odds were against her getting into Juilliard, so I insisted that she apply to at least 3 other schools with good dance programs. To put it mildly, there was a lot of tension in our house during the college admissions process, as I (and to some extent my husband) felt it was our responsibility as parents to make sure she was doing the applications to the other schools.

That line did not ring true, and I'll make a more detailed comment in the finale thread.

There was quite a bit of unrealistic stuff in this episode, starting with Devi's cleavage. The gown was beautiful and she looked great in it, but I found it hard to believe that her mother would let her wear something so revealing and even that Devi would be comfortable wearing it. She was literally busting out of it. More unbelievable was that they were drinking straight vodka from the bottle, and it seemed to be quite a bit, yet none of them showed signs of drunkenness in either speech or being able to walk or stand steadily. I'm aware that drinking is common in teens, but these three do not drink regularly and should show the effects. It's also a bad message to send to teen viewers, that you can do that kind of drinking with no consequences.

Both things are true, and even if you go to your dream school it may turn out to be not what you expected and/or too stressful. My daughter was in Juilliard's Dance Division, and with only 18-26 students admitted each year, the demands were too much for some. It was a good fit for my daughter, but about 10-15% drop out or are asked to leave before graduation. I'm not sure that's true. Although there are probably plenty of working actors who didn't go to college or didn't go to a performing arts school, going to Juilliard or another conservatory definitely gives actors, musicians, and dancers an edge in getting jobs. Part of it has to do with the talent needed to get in, part of it has to do with the specialized and intensive training you get there, and part of it has to do with the connections that the administration and teachers help you make. There have been many successful actors from Juilliard, including (to name just a few, in no particular order) Laura Linney, Jessica Chastain, Adam Driver, Oscar Isaac, Anthony Mackie, Viola Davis, Mandy Patinkin, Patti LuPone, Christine Baranski, and Wendell Pierce. Bringing all this back to Eleanor, it was clear that while she may have sufficient talent for school shows and local theater, it's unlikely she will make it big or even be able to make a living as an actor. As disappointing as her audition was, it's better to find out when you are still young enough to find another path to fulfill your dreams.

Now that was much better than the first episode, at least to me. More realistic dialogue and several laugh-out-loud moments. And it's always fun to have Kamala and Devi's grandmother in an episode. I loved how the family all supported Nirmala (I think that's her name).

I'm not sure why she should feel violated, since going to his house to have sex was her idea. IIRC, he seemed a bit stunned by her wanting to do that. I guess he could have said no, but it certainly didn't seem like he was pushing her into it. The problem was afterward, when they both misinterpreted the way the other person was acting. She expected it to be more meaningful and for a romantic relationship to develop (not that she let him know that), and he might have wanted that but, thanks to Dwight Howard's analysis of the period after "Hey", Ben assumed she did not want that. I've never been a fan of Ben, but he's probably right in his reason for why they should not be together. But Margot can be pretty nasty, so it won't necessarily be any easier to be with her. I doubt this is the end of Bevi (or whatever their couple name is). Overall, I did not enjoy this episode as much as most of the first three seasons. Maybe because a lot of the dialogue seemed stilted or unnatural, in order to provide information to new viewers or to old viewers who had forgotten what happened before.

I was getting "assisted suicide" vibes from the dialogue between Superman and Peia near the end (along the lines of she wanted it to end, and he could help her), but it's unclear what he actually did for her when he flew her up into the clouds. Did he do this so she could safely let out one final blast of sound with her dying breath, without causing further destruction on Earth? Or did taking her up to space or wherever he took her actually render her unconscious (with little or no oxygen) and ultimately dead? I thought that it was interesting for the writers to even hint at assisted suicide, because it is so controversial. But it is a topic that often comes up in relation to terminal patients who have unmanageable pain (or pain that can only be managed by possibly fatal doses of morphine).

Catching up several months later, my husband and I found the series interesting, especially when viewed as a black comedy, but had similar complaints as most posters here regarding the premise and how the characters behaved. But if you accept the part of the premise that shows a highly educated death row prisoner who is a Sherlock Holmes, it makes sense that he would be treated as a favored prisoner. The warden clearly does not want him to be executed, which may be as much because of Grieff's usefulness in solving criminal cases as because the warden respects his civilized behavior (presumably in contrast to most ordinary inmates) and wanting to atone for his horrific crime by taking cases based on moral worth. I don't remember how long ago Grieff murdered his wife, but I got the impression that he has been on death row for several years--long enough to form a somewhat personal relationship with the warden. However, it didn't seem like the guards treated Grieff with the same respect as the warden did. I just thought of another thing that did not make sense: When the father of Grieff's wife assaulted Grieff, the warden let it happen so he could get the assault on video and then blackmail the father to use his connections to either delay or stop Grieff's execution. The father was apparently a criminal boss, and the warden threatened to turn the video over to the FBI if the father didn't do this. But the father was British (as was Grieff's wife, I think), and I assume that his criminal activities were in England. Would the FBI even have jurisdiction? It would have made more sense to threaten to turn the video over to British police or Interpol, but I guess it's possible that the father's criminal activities were in the US.

I think the explosion was the plane crashing, and the guy was shot to eliminate any witnesses. (He seemed to be just some random guy living out there, not a passenger.) I assume that the heavily armed guys in black captured the pilot (and I guess the woman he took with him), but I don't know how they made the plane disappear.

I had to read this very slowly and more than once, but I got it this time! The funny thing is that I do genealogy for my family and am usually able to rattle off relationships of various levels of aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. for multiple branches of the tree. But I guess it's easier when you have a personal connection than when it is a fictional family.

The "lusty tornado" scene (where Kate was intensely flirting with and being flirted with by her husband and the foreign secretary) was ridiculous to me. Not only did it seem totally out of character for Kate's normally brusque personality, but it was out of character for Dennison's reserved and proper personality, and inappropriate behavior for an ambassador representing her country at a function. I also have a hard time believing in this possible romantic triangle because I see zero chemistry between Kate and Dennison, and it bugs me that a show can't have a strong female lead without softening her with flirtation and romance.

My head just exploded trying to follow this, LOL. More seriously, before they knew this was a scam, did one of the characters say that Sophie was Sam's great-aunt? I thought there was some mention of them being cousins.

Well, I was in my late 20s in the late 70s and loved pop/rock music as well as other genres, but even though the group's name sounds familiar, I don't remember knowing their music. Also, Sam was presumably a career military guy and straight-laced, so it's believable that he would not have been into music or not familiar with any artists except the most famous ones (Beatles, Stones, etc.) in that era.

I was bored by the first episode (though a little more interested when we rewatched after vacation), but at least something interesting happened in the second episode. Still, the whole kidnapping thing seemed unrealistic.

My husband and I started watching this on vacation, but I couldn't even get through the first episode because (1) I didn't want to think about politics on vacation (even fictional politics) and (2) the situation and dialogue (including husband-wife interactions) felt too artificial. But we've been home a week now and my husband wanted to give it another chance, so we rewatched the first episode last night. This time I was able to get through the episode, though it still didn't grab me. However, my husband likes it. I'll see how I feel after the second episode, but there are so many things to watch on Netflix and other streamers that I don't want to waste time on shows that are not really compelling or at least entertaining.

This is exactly why the show is not as compelling to me as the book. The show makes it look like all of this started in our present day, but (IIRC) the book was framed as a thesis or research project on how society developed as one based on female power. I remember that there were drawings of historical or archeological finds that dated long before present day (maybe 1500+ years as you mention), although much of the narrative did seem to take place in a modern context (the storylines we see in the show).

I'm sorry to hear that you know this from personal experience. Hope you are doing well.