Slovenly Muse

I would totally have accepted that explanation, if that had been all there was to it. But they made such a point of having LF remind Sansa how Brienne was honour-bound to protect BOTH Stark sisters (and he obviously had an agenda in saying this), that it seemed Sansa's choice to send Brienne away HAD to be a response of some sort to LF's words. I wish it had been clearer exactly what the purpose of that response was, but, as others have pointed out, there are many possibilities. I guess it's up to each of us to decide what we want to believe, because I doubt the show is ever going to close this loop. (Personally, I'm leaning towards, there was no good reason, the writers just wanted Brienne down south for the big meeting and hoped "obscure motives" would be mistaken for "brilliant plan.")

I think a Sansa/Gendry marriage is more likely, if it DOES come down to it. Mostly because marriage in this world is political, not typically romantic, and there are certain expectations (socially and politically) for a "wife" among the great houses that Sansa has been preparing for, and Arya avoiding at all cost (naturally). Plus, I like the symmetry that Sansa was engaged to a Baratheon back in season one, as a political move to unite their houses, and may end up living up to those expectations by finally marrying the only WORTHY Baratheon, and consolidating their power to defeat the Lannisters (bonus that Cersei tried to interfere with the planned Stark/Baratheon union by trying to marry Sansa to Joffrey, who was actually a Lannister, and then Tyrion. I would LOVE it if Sansa's political power-marriage was Cersei's undoing). Plus, Arya would benefit equally from having a weaponsmith as a brother-in-law or as a husband (I don't really see them as more than close friends... but then again, they haven't met up again as more mature young adults. Maybe their chemistry will have blossomed with puberty ;) But I'm totally open to the show convincing me either way! As I recall, the solid gold hand was Cersei's idea, and although he never said anything, I got the impression that Jaime didn't like it, and found it cumbersome, heavy, and ostentatious, and would have preferred something more functional. I thought he was covering it up (as well as his usual armour) to reduce the chances of being recognized while travelling. The gold hand is a pretty unique feature! Yes! This is totally it. The show hasn't given us much to go on, but I do think the sisters were genuinely experiencing conflict, as they had both endured trial-by-fire and become different people, and were trying to figure out who they were, what they wanted, and how they fit together. LF took advantage of that friction to try and create more profitable chaos, but he pushed too far when he tried to convince Sansa that Arya actually wanted to kill her for her position. There was just no way. That's likely when he ironically became the common enemy that brought them together! But with so few clues onscreen, that's only a guess. And the one big clue they DID give us, I can't make sense of: Why did Sansa send Brienne away? To protect Arya from Brienne? To protect Brienne from Arya? To protect herself from Brienne? To prevent Brienne from protecting Arya? Because Brienne just can't keep a secret and could have tipped off LF to their plan? Nothing REALLY explains it, whether you think Sansa was playing LF or was buying his BS.

In the first four seasons a whole lot of exposition like this took place in scenes with naked people. But sticking Sam and Bran in a whorehouse for the conversation about Jon's parentage really wouldn't work now. That doesn't mean they shouldn't have found a less clunky way to do it than as it was actually played, though. Oh, for sure! The show has always been exposition-heavy (or "sexposition," as one might call it when it takes place with gratuitous nudity), but it was always balanced with action. Characters would have long conversations, but they would hide their true motivations, so you had to REALLY read in to what was said to figure out why this character seemed to want whatever outcome. Then, they would take action (often at odds with their words) and the truth would be revealed. Imagine, if Joffrey had had an extended conversation with someone before it happened about how he was going to cut off Ned Stark's head no matter what... the surprise would be dulled and it just wouldn't have resulted in the same shocking moment. That's what they spent this ENTIRE EPISODE doing. Instead of having a meeting and talking about the wights... why not SEND the wight in its box disguised as a gift to Cersei and let her see what happens when it is opened in the castle. Then we could have SEEN her react to the threat and respond to the complexities of both the reality of the White Walkers and the struggle for the Iron Throne against enemies whose attentions are ALSO divided by the army of the dead. Plus, if it had killed her or anyone important to her grip on power, that would have helped Team Targaryen, and if not, she STILL wouldn't have been able to deny that the threat was real, and it still would have helped Team Targaryen! Getting together and talking it out was so lazy. I wanted to SEE Euron Greyjoy's ships sailing not for home but on a mission to retrieve the army of sellswords, I wanted to SEE the moment when Cersei took action to betray the people with whom she had agreed to a truce, and have a chance to be surprised by it. I wanted the truth about Jon's parentage to be discovered or revealed at a more crucial moment, by someone with less predictable motives. What if Dany had found out first? Or Tyrion? Or Varys? Having this conversation take place between these two characters (Jon's absolute allies, who can't DO anything with the info) at this time was a wasted opportunity for drama, and it squandered all the build-up to the truth. Exposition is fine, but it needs to be balanced with action. I can't remember the last time a season finale of GoT contained so little action! A pretty poor showing for a 90-minute episode. Beyond that, there were just all kinds of little storytelling blunders. Like, having Cersei decide whether or not to ask Frankenmountain to kill her brother TWICE, and doing it in reverse order! If she won't kill the brother she hates, she definitely won't kill the brother she loves! Could the stakes have been any lower that second time? Even if letting Tyrion live had been a ploy, the audience maybe hadn't quite figured that out yet. It's poor storytelling, plain and simple. And the thing that really drives me crazy about this season is the increased focus on the army of the dead. It's such a distraction from the power struggle over the Iron Throne, and what's worse, ever since they established old-school-vampire rules for how they work (i.e., kill the one that "turned" the group, and the whole group falls), the ENTIRE ARMY OF THE DEAD is just ANOTHER distraction, because the only real enemy is the Night King... one good shot at him and the entire army is dust. It just feels so pointless and rushed. Like they needed to come up with a quick solution for how to defeat this massive, terrifying army, and they came up with "What if the heroes only had to defeat one guy?" Is there a purpose to the Night King beyond the chaos his presence creates for Our Heroes? What does he want? Why is he coming South? Does he want to destroy the world, or rule it? Or is he only trying to borrow a cup of sugar? For a series that delves amazingly deeply into the morally grey areas of all its characters and their desires and motivations, the Night King is such a weirdly one-dimensional "evil" that is objectively "bad" just because. If he really is being positioned as the REAL enemy in the final season, I'm going to need a lot more information about who and what he is and what he wants... otherwise the complexities of the series and its characters will be nullified, as everyone just bands together against the lumbering army of evil blank slates, which... if that's what I wanted, I'd just watch a zombie movie! I'm not saying there wasn't anything to enjoy here, because there was. I'm just concerned that these final seasons are not capable of paying off the promise of the earlier ones.

Oof, this finale. I KNOW the writers are familiar with the expression "Show, don't tell," because they had Jon and company bring a wight to the meeting to SHOW the others, to convince them. So why is that entire scene just everyone sitting around talking about the wight and how they feel about it and what they want to do about it? That whole time, I just wanted to shake the TV and shout "THIS IS THE WORST WAY TO COMMUNICATE SOMETHING THIS IMPORTANT!" The whole episode, more or less, was people talking about things rather than taking action and it was so frustrating! Even when Cersei is trying to manipulate her enemies, she can't just play along and then turn and stab everyone in the back, no... she has to have an extended conversation with her brother where she explains the REAL plan, so that we can know what she wants to do without the show having to go to the trouble of her actually DOING it. Even Sam and Bran comparing notes about Jon and the Targaryen family tree was probably the most boring way to arrive at that revelation... which is very disappointing considering how well they had been hinting and building to it all through the series. After glorious hints and teases, like Gilly's interrupted revelation about the annulment, they just gave up and had someone explain it directly, in a conversation with no stakes, as if this revelation on its own (THAT WE ALREADY KNEW ABOUT) was going to blow the viewers' minds. Pairing it with incest that we already knew was coming just doubled down on the total lack of surprise. I think the trial and execution of Lord Baelish was about the only TRULY well-crafted moment of the episode (though I'm sure I am forgetting others). It's like the writers just realized how much story they had to get through in the time remaining, and just gave up on the kind of storytelling that made this show so good, and resorted to increasing series' of lazy conversations where characters just explain things to each other in order to move things along, without any of it really meaning anything.

Drink when: Something (a character or problem) that has been "resolved" suddenly pops up again (As much as I love her, I am counting Gina Torres appearing all over the place after leaving the show last year) (Could also include previously-rejected offers being dredged up and discussed again, guest stars whose stories were finished reappearing for drama's sake, characters making decisions, then changing their minds, then changing their minds again (for example, Harvey's therapist wanting to go out with him, then thinking it's wrong, then going out with him again; Mike and Rachel planning their wedding for the SECOND time after cancelling it once; opponents attacking Mike for not being a real lawyer after the show made him legit to move on from that issue, etc.)) A character KNOWS their actions are dumb, self-destructive, and going to lead to trouble, and they go ahead and do it anyway, even though they have smarter alternatives (Lookin' at you, Mike). Louis (or anyone talking ABOUT Louis) uses the term "best friend(s)." A character's name is played for laughs (Dr. Lipschitz, Sheila Zass, etc.) I am so happy we have this thread.

I think that was the purpose of the piece. The government is NOT hiring the right kind of people, and John is clarifying how Trump's proposal to increase the border patrol could be detrimental to national security by pointing out how hiring tactics have backfired historically. By pointing out things that the government does WRONG when hiring border patrol (hiring a large pool of candidates all at once without appropriate screening, advertising the job as some sort of high-octane anti-terrorism task force), he is sending a message about how the government can do more harm than good by misrepresenting the job and hiring the wrong people to do it. For example, the advertisements the government runs when hiring for border patrol seem designed to attract adrenaline junkies, which basically guarantees that they will be hiring from a pool of applicants that are not well-suited to the realities of the job, and could significantly compromise the security of the border. If border patrol really is about to experience a hiring boom, John is doing good work by clearing up the misconceptions about what border patrol does and educating people about what makes the border patrol function effectively. In this way, he can help combat the misinformation/misconceptions spread by Trump about what a "secure border" needs and looks like, which helps people to be able to vote for policies that WORK in the future. This is the way the show has always worked. Pointing out problems or misconceptions, then picking them apart, providing facts, and helping people understand what needs to be done to fix what's broken.

The FCC is supposed to be able to do that, I think. It's a form of consumer protection so that infomercial can't show things like people shoveling down a trough of whipped cream and claim it's actually whipped skim milk. In theory, the FCC would bust him Amazing that Jones can get away with ranting about the government turning frogs gay, but heaven forbid he make his milkshake look better than it really is. Jesus, this world.

They'll blather on about the "liberal media," then make fun of his hair or accent, probably call him a stupid name. Like all cowardly bullies, because they have nothing of substance to rebut any of his claims. They already whined about being taken out of context, and the show provided him with all the context needed. Yep! Or the next product Jones shills on his show could be a tactical wipe to repel Brits from the perineal region, or a tinfoil hat to protect against the transmission of liberal brainwaves. ;) Most likely, he'll claim that being "under attack" from the "liberal media" proves that he's "right" and needs people to buy more chocolate chicken sludge to keep the "liberal elite" from "winning." Guys like him, with followers like his, can make fortunes inventing wars to fight.

Gilbert Gottfried doing Jared Kushner's voice is my EVERYTHING. So glad they revisited that gag! Heh. If John feels empowered to do a piece like this about Alex Jones, I imagine that lawsuit against the coal CEO is going VERY well ;) Can't wait to hear how Jones and his ilk respond to this.

I think we were suppose to learn why he became who he now was. He started out kind and light hearted. After the incident he become uncaring and cruel. He saw inmates as something unhuman that didn't deserve respect. I wonder if that was the intended purpose. For me, I didn't achieve this AT ALL. Deleted scene or no, I thought it was pretty obvious that inmate was conning him all along. The way he WAS with Piscatella, the way he said "It's always candy with you," like he was masking his frustration at not being able to squeeze his guard bf for better benefits, and was a bit sick of Piscatella comparing him to foodstuffs, but put up with it to secure Piscatella's protection and gifts. I thought that whole backstory just made it clear that Piscatella went into his career as a prison guard as a gullible, pathetic, rule-breaking incompetent who has violent overreactions to personal slights, and hasn't changed a bit since then. I think we're going to have to go a LOT further back in Piscatella's history to find out "why" he is the way he is. Except Bayley didn't go there for forgiveness. He went there for punishment. Something he was much more likely to find from a grieving father, after the cops wouldn't arrest him and he failed at taking his own life. I've also been thinking about this. It is not AT ALL unrealistic for a woman to continue to have romantic feelings for a man even after he beats or rapes her. In fact, it's extremely common. And while Doggett's situation is not dissimilar to Celeste's from Big Little Lies, the factor that is different, I think, is the way the abusers themselves are portrayed. If people believed that Perry from BLL really DID love Celeste and could change and be a better husband, that would be one thing, but I don't think that is the case (I haven't spent too much time on the BLL forums, so correct me if I'm wrong). Perry is a pretty straightforward villain, and while we're supposed to see why Celeste is reluctant to leave him, I don't believe we're expected to see him as anything other than a sadistic abuser. In THIS case, the way Coates is portrayed is very ambiguous. Did he absolutely abuse his power and deliberately rape Doggett? Yes. No question. Does it make him a monster that he was able to hold her life in his hands, claim to love her, and choose to violently assault her anyway? Yes. Now the question becomes, is it possible for people to change? Is rehabilitation possible? If so, why not for Coates? And if not, why bother treating inmates like people at all? One of the themes of the series is the ways in which power corrupts. The way guards are given so much power over the inmates (with so little accountability) that they can get away with doing ANYTHING to the inmates, even killing them, and experience no consequences besides perhaps a relocation to a new facility. In those situations, guards are more or less encouraged to abuse their power, and when Coates had that power, he certainly abused it. But he seems to acknowledge that what he did was wrong, and genuinely regrets it (note: this does NOT mean I think he is absolved or should face no consequences, or that everything is okay now. I'm with Boo on this. It speaks to something very dark in his character that he was able to do that at all). His speech to Doggett was quite poignant, about realizing that the prisoners are there because they HAVE to be, and the guards are there because they CHOOSE to be, and he is taking control of his choices. He seems to acknowledge that getting caught up in the violent prison mindset is harmful, and wants to make different choices and be a better person. Could he be successful? Could he quit his job as a guard and be a decent partner to Doggett from here on out and never abuse her again? I guess it's possible, but I sincerely doubt it (that part of him that led him to rape her in the first place is still a part of him, after all), but the show seems to be playing up the genuine ambiguity of the situation, and I think that is what is making us dislike the plot. Viewers like clear-cut villains, but this situation is full of messy humanity and hard to nail down. Is it really fair to deny Doggett the agency to choose her own partner just because we don't like her choices? For all we know, he truly does feel repulsed by his actions, and if given the opportunity would never treat her unfairly again. It's not likely, but I accept that it is possible. What I wonder is, if Coates DID get convicted and go to prison for rape, get out after serving his time, and THEN expressed his sincere regret and commitment to being a better person and never hurting a woman again... would people feel the same way? Would we be more likely to believe that he could change if he experienced consequences for his actions and served a prison sentence? Probably, most would be at least SLIGHTLY more open to the idea. But if we accept that the prison system does more harm than good in rehabilitating people, then what's the point? And why couldn't he change for the better WITHOUT that prison experience? Certainly, this story is a mess of humanity, and Jenji Kohan has never shied away from bringing real human complexity into situations we generally think of as being fairly black and white (and typically generates some controversy in the process). But in a series about crime and rehabilitation, I think the complexity is appropriate here. Why DO people hurt others, abuse others, assert power over others? Does each day bring new choices, or are we who we are forever? I'm certainly interested to see where things go next season! As others have stated, I doubt these two have a lot of domestic bliss to look forward to. But I am looking forward to seeing it all unfold!

I can't stand them. Their characters are the most unlikable. Even the tiny bit of comic relief they used to provide is tiresome. I haven't watched beyond this episode, so I'm really hoping they get a karma smack down when it's all over. Me too! Although, they are in prison, so technically, according to society, they ARE getting their karma smackdown! It's easy to forget that many of these characters have been incarcerated simply to make them "not society's problem" anymore. Like Lorna and Suzanne, and the addicts, and the other people who need REAL help but won't receive it because it's not as lucrative for corporate America. As much as I loathe Angie and Leanne, and even though I completely understand why someone called them "cartoonish" in a previous thread, I actually find them to be very realistic. For every person who has a great idea that could actually make things better for their community, there are two empty-headed, selfish morons standing in the way of positive change. Learning to navigate those morons and implement change DESPITE them is true to life. Pretending they don't exist, and that everyone is always able to be reasonable and kind and mature and community-minded in all settings, THAT would bother me more. Having to watch good work undone by idiots is part of what really grounds the show in reality for me. That said, they are truly loathesome, and I am really looking forward to seeing them get taken down! (Or, knowing this show AND reality, richly rewarded and promoted to positions of power.) I LOVED the horror gimmick of this episode! I didn't find it frightening at all, but laughed every time Piscatella's silhouette loomed in the background, or that "spooky" breathing sound effect whenever he moved past the camera. He is a self-important sadist with something to prove, and I hope Red hands him his balls. Also, I loved Linda from Purchasing starting to lose her shit, and Caputo freezing her out (for her own protection, but still) so he could match wits with someone who is actually up to the task. Caputo has always been ineffectual, but I believe he really does care about making Litchfield better, and I hope he's able to help the inmates push for what they want. The less said about Lorna's "playing doctor" the better. I hope she and Suzanne both get the help they need... but I'm not holding my breath. Even if it does turn out that she is pregnant... the way she is behaving (making banners about it and deliberately not taking a pregnancy test, withholding Suzanne's medication so she can deny the existence of crazy) is so unhealthy and so untethered from reality that a real pregnancy would not vindicate her. There is no way she comes out of this being "right." I was lukewarm on this season at the start, but I am really looking forward to finding out how it ends!

Yeah... he SOUNDS like he's saying the right things here, but I'm not convinced. The old "I had to have an affair because you aren't nice to me anymore" approach was bullshit, even though he put all that flowery "I'm not saying this excuses me" stuff around it. The simple fact is, if your wife goes 42 days without touching you or asking how your day was, that's when you maybe.... have a conversation about it? Become concerned ABOUT her, instead of about your chances of boning her? She could be going through something (depression? crisis?) and could use your support, rather than a stab in the back. So maybe don't skip counselling and jump immediately to "sleep with her friend?" And, I'm also wondering if Mark's counsellor has explained the difference between "I acknowledge your anger" and "I'm sorry for what I did." Has he actually genuinely apologized yet? There may have been some frantic, "Shit, I got found out! I'm sorry! I'm sorry!" going on, but has he actually sincerely taken responsibility for his actions? All I've seen is him making bullshit moves to take his "power" back. Which, since the fact of their relationship is that he's a selfish drip and she's a queen with the looks, talent, AND brains of the pair, is never going to happen. She's also talking about their relationship now like, "HE wants to give it another shot," and looking undecided. But no one yet (including Mark) has actually asked her what SHE wants. I bet (and fervently hope) she ends up kicking him to the curb and beginning to look for someone who actually supports her and WANTS her to be successful, and won't feel threatened when her star is rising. I tell you, though, they really cast the best actor for this, because Harry Crane ruins everything! However, the best moment of the episode for me was BY FAR the complicated 80's pregnancy test! The urine trough! The eyedropper! All the vials! The waiting all afternoon! Oh, 80's. Never change.

Don't be fooled! Of this trio, Tulip is the badass. I thought Fiore and Cassidy's "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" hotel room drug trip was the best part of this episode... and then Ganesh's crowd, decked out in ponchos to keep his blood from ruining their clothes, enthusiastically booed his dead body for failing to come back to life. I'm so glad this show is back.

I didn't pick up for me and I didn't finish it. She needed a ghost writer to work along with her. I listened to the audiobook, read by Jenna herself, and yes, it comes across quite amateurish. But I actually enjoyed it once I got used to it. It really sounds and feels like a kid explaining what happened to her, sincerely and in her own words and voice. I also found the story a bit slowgoing at the beginning, but it did pick up for me in about the last third or so. Maybe a ghostwriter could have polished it up a bit, but I don't find anything egregiously wrong with the way Jenna tells her own story. It must have been very empowering, after leaving the church, to be able to use her own voice to tell her own story for the first time, without the "church" or ANYONE telling her she wasn't good enough or trying to silence her.

Well, I don't want to start this thread with an unpopular opinion, but I need to get this off my chest. This show is so well-done, but there's something about it that's not working for me, and I think I finally figured out what it is. I LOVE Bryan Fuller's other shows, and while the lush, meandering tone of Hannibal absolutely captivated me, in this show I'm finding it a bit wearying. And I think the reason is the material. Hannibal was at its core an extraordinarily small and simple story (two men playing a cat-and-mouse game with each other) which was drawn out into marvellous levels of depth and complexity by the way the story was told and the poetic way it was presented visually. American Gods is the opposite. This is an absolutely MASSIVE story about the biggest and most complex topics there are: Gods, religion, immigration, identity, the push-and-pull between tradition and innovation... new gods and old going to war over the American identity... This is absolutely earth-shattering stuff, and the show chooses to focus on the most superficial aspects of it: Driving across the country, playing checkers, conning banks, telling stories about lucky thieves... Essie's story this week was beautiful, but it WASN'T what I wanted to be focusing on! When this languid, atmospheric approach was applied to Hannibal, it had the effect of adding complexity to a fairly simple story and milking intense horror and suspense out of small moments. Here, I feel like it's stripping complexity out of the story and intentionally leaving the meaty stuff untouched. I don't get the sense that it's really building up a mystery, so much as filling time before having to clearly reveal what's happening and actually deal with it. I'm not blaming Bryan Fuller, because I genuinely think the problem is the source material (I wasn't hugely taken with the book, and I am usually a Gaiman fan). I REALLY want to like this series more than I am, but as much as I enjoy these side stories and backstories, I'm having a hard time with the show's stubborn refusal to actually commit to its premise, dive in and tackle the themes it seems to be dancing around. For all that Fuller has tackled similar ideas about life, death, and reanimation in his previous works, those stories always strove to illuminate and explore the complex ways that life and death affected one another. Georgia's experiences as a grim reaper on Dead Like Me served to give her a new understanding of life, and an appreciation of the gift she had thrown away. Pushing Daisies explored the ways Ned's power over life and death essentially kept him from having a life of his own, and prevented him from really finding a place among the living OR the dead. Will Graham's empathy for murderers on Hannibal became a sinkhole into which his sense of self and morality could fall at any moment, making his story about identity as much as anything. Given his storytelling past, it makes sense that Fuller wants to focus on Laura and her sort-of-reanimation more than the book did. But the difference is that Laura's death and resurrection doesn't seem to have affected her much, personality-wise, or served much purpose to the story. All these character studies, backstories, etc, that we've seen so far... they are interesting, but they're missing the sort of psychological or existential gut-punch I'm used to from Fuller. It's so frustrating, because all I want to do is jump in and luxuriate in this show the way I could with Hannibal, but I keep finding the pool to be disappointingly shallow. I will keep watching though, because it is a solidly good show. Just not quite on the level of what Bryan Fuller can deliver when he's working with his own source material, or without being beholden to the original source material (like Hannibal, which really explored the stories that WEREN'T told in the Thomas Harris books, just hinted at or suggested between the lines). Hopefully next week will turn me around!

A place to discuss comparisons between American Gods and other media, such as other works by the cast and crew, other works by Neil Gaiman or the series writers, or other works that explore similar ideas.

Hey now, don't make judgments based on Kevin Sr's age. Immortality runs in his family ;)

This is sort of the reason I think Nora's story was a lie. It's certainly a detail that doesn't make sense. If the literal truth of the situation is that a scientist built a machine to take him to where the departed had gone so he could be with them, and it worked, then he and the loved one(s) he was trying to get back to would then be in the world with the GREATEST need for the machine, all the orphans wanting to come back to their parents. Of course, life is funny, and people don't always behave in logical ways. Who knows why he wouldn't have helped to reunite those families. I don't believe Nora's story was a lie... but I also don't believe it was the literal truth. Just as Kevin's "hotel" visions may very well have been a product of his own mind, rather than a true journey into the real afterlife, it's possible that Nora's experience on the other side was a vision, rather than a literal journey. Perhaps, in that machine, her life flashed before her eyes and she had a moment of clarity, and she saw the truth of what she was doing for the first time... she saw what would happen if it worked, and she saw her children, together and happy, and she understood how out of place she would feel, and what would happen then? She would want nothing more than to come back home. And it would be ok, because if her family were still out there somewhere then they'd be together. And if they weren't, there'd be nothing she could accomplish by crossing over. Perhaps she believed this journey really happened, or perhaps it was a journey of understanding, which is still the truth. And realizing what she was doing and how the BEST CASE scenario would turn out, she used her last breath to stop the machine. Then, with the newfound understanding that she would willingly leave behind ALL of her connections in both worlds, and therefore her life would be meaningless in either one, she shut herself away, closing all her doors so as not to rebuild any of the connections she had severed... and just kept living. I don't know how Lindelof or C*** meant it, but I think I'm going to choose to believe this. Laurie's suicide then, in Certified, would have also been largely symbolic. Diving to drown the woman she used to be, and letting go of her old patterns (the coping strategies that led her to join a cult, and then become a fake psychic), so that she could begin to truly live again. I do love that the series began with a departure, and ended with a reunion. Not with anyone who was lost in the Departure, but with the person who'd been there the whole time. Because sometimes letting go of what's been lost is the only way to begin to truly rebuild. "People hold candles," but they can't move forward in a real way until they put those candles out. It doesn't resolve the divide that happened between these worlds, and these people ("We lost them"/"They lost us" - it's pointless to think of either world as an escape from the other, they are both so deeply broken), but it does provide some resolution to the series' problem of how a world can begin to heal, and find meaning and happiness again, after such an incomprehensible uncertain tragedy. Well done, show.

I am a huge fan of the book, and I think the series is being VERY true to its spirit, logic, and intent, if updated a little from the era in which it was written. The trip to Jezebels is every bit as devastating in the series as it is in the book. Taking his Handmaid out on a special "outing" to this place is just about the cruellest thing a Commander can do. It's not just dressing her up and showing her off like a doll. Handmaids have been beaten and terrorized into accepting their position, by being told ad nauseam that it is the "moral, pious" thing to do. That they are "celebrated" for their fertility, and that their imprisonment serves a purpose defined by God. What the Commander is doing is ripping away that small comfort, that ability to believe that she is being held prisoner by "religious ideals" rather than the truth: She's being held prisoner by men. There is no purpose. She is nothing more than a slave, and the Commanders know it. Moreover, they have enslaved her because they WANTED to, and that's it. They're laughing about it. They're not making any "sacrifices" for their religious lifestyle ("Everyone's human," after all), and they don't hold their own principles sacred. They claim to be pious, claim that living as a prisoner and sex slave is just the price of a moral and "good" society, and then they turn around and let a Handmaid in on the big secret: It's all bullshit. And the women that couldn't be compliant little slaves, they end up at Jezebels. Exactly the same outcome regardless of your level of cooperation, piety, or devotion, it's just in one place you're expected to lie still for the act.... Pardon me, "ceremony." Every woman lives or dies for the pleasure of the men in charge. God has nothing to do with it. Honestly, if the Commander brought his previous Handmaid to that place, I 100% understand why she couldn't go on any longer. For any Handmaid (or woman in general) who has managed to drink enough of the Kool-Aid to believe that her sacrifices mean something, and do some good for some greater purpose... Jezebels really is the death of hope. The ultimate slap in the face. No wonder Nick is terrified of June going down that same path. And yes, if he took her there, it is absolutely fair to say "What did you expect?" Nothing he couldn't live with, apparently. Nothing that made him pause before doing it again. This is an extreme example of religious hypocrisy, sure, but full to the brim with truth. People who genuinely believe in religion can use it for good, and usually do. People who want to do evil see religion as the perfect tool-the justification, the affirmation. The Commanders of Gilead (in case there was any ambiguity) are definitely the latter. And if you read that as a departure from the source material, then it's only to make the story cut deeper. This was Atwood's point from the very start.

Hmmm. It looks like the general consensus here is that Nora has decided to try and use the machine? I'm surprised, because I read that conversation differently. Since discovering these "scientists," Nora has pursued them with an obsessive determination that she CLAIMS is due to outrage that they are killing people, but has been clear to us from the start is due to her own desperation to see her children again. It's like her brain has been chasing these people to stop them, and her heart has been chasing these people to take what they are offering. When Laurie asked her if it was time to call in the authorities and shut the scientists down, Nora seemed to confront her conflicting goals. That story about the beach ball in the stadium... I interpreted that to mean that NORA felt like the children, wanting desperately to grab at this beach ball (use the machine), but knew she had to call the authorities and shut it down (be the usher who deflated the ball), and was agonizing over the possibility of revoking the only hope that some other miserable people like her (the strangely happy people on the tape) had left for seeing their loved ones again ("why would anyone want that job?"), and Laurie, by explaining that the ball had to be controlled for the common good, to keep people safe, she seemed to be affirming to Nora that shutting this operation down was the right thing to do, even though it was hard. I read that scene as Nora confessing her desire to use the machine, but committing to confronting the scientists and preventing them from hurting anyone else. Giving up the cigarettes was symbolic of giving up her quest for self-annihilation. Now that I see so many people here speculating that she's been set up to use the machine, I'm wondering why, or what I possibly missed or misunderstood. No one here has really laid out what they saw in that conversation, so I'm curious. What did you see in that scene that led you to believe she was committing to using the machine at any cost? Do you think Laurie was talking her into doing it? Why? I would love an alternative point of view on that decision!

And "Under Pressure." "There's a terror in knowing what Mr. World is about." That whole speech was amazing, especially for Bowie fans. Heck of an episode! I loved Laura's interaction with Mad Sweeney. First, her beating the crap out of him, then, him confirming what she's always believed: When you're dead, you rot. She hasn't been "brought back to life." She's just dead and rotting and ambulatory, and I can't wait to see her journey of finding out what that means. LOVED the interrogation room scene! I get the feeling Mr. Wednesday is absolutely right when he says their offer of a "new Valhalla" is just a move to get him out of the way. And highlighting the difference between Wednesday's "giving them something real" and Mr. World's "occupying their time." The mystery deepens, but also begins to clarify. I love this show.

But she isn't named Linda... That's our Kimmy! Overcoming obstacles at every turn!

I thought it was pretty clear what they meant: Every time Dong tried to kiss her or become intimate, no matter how into it she was, she would hit him with something large and heavy out of reflex, and wasn't able to finally become intimate with him until he was handcuffed and her "panic" instincts weren't triggered. That doesn't seem like the results of trauma relating to "weird sex stuff" between the women, so much as something VERY undesirable and non-consensual taking place. They also touched on it briefly in the first-season episode when Kimmy tried to have sex with Buckley's tutor: She basically attacked him (held him down very aggressively) because she didn't understand how sex worked. That moment illuminated what her frame of reference must have been. This show is really good at playing those moments for laughs without denying the gravity of them, but if you're not paying attention, or not willing to "go there," it is easy to dismiss those clues as just jokes. And maybe that's ok, to accomodate the range of audiences this show might attract, but it has certainly always been there.

"You've got her in your van. Now what? Bunko!" Oh God, Cindy! Never change!

Loved it so much! This one is my favourite of the season so far! I love that Kimmy has discovered how to use the cruel spectacle of the internet for good. Now her online identity can be determined by the ways in which she humiliates herself on purpose! That rap battle was EVERYTHING! And capping it off with doing "The Eel Roll?" I died! Titus and the Lindas was so great! And it was wonderful to see Andrea Martin again... reprising her role from 30 Rock? That whole scene is something this show does extremely well: Set up a group of people in a situation that seems designed to result in embarrassment and hurt feelings, and instead have everyone go ALL IN with love and acceptance. All the Lindas agreeing that that baby name was bonkers, THEN opening up about their experiences and counselling Titus on what he's really looking for in a relationship, AND enthusiastically inviting him for cupcakes... it was a thing of beauty. And a clever reversal of the tired trope of the gay best friend giving the straight woman protagonist advice about men. The Rachel Dratch dual-role was fabulous! "They're allowed to stay up late. They're not chickens!" And it was great to see Andrea again... more or less exactly where you might have expected to find her!