DianeDobbler

Agreed. The way they're writing him, he could be played by anybody. In fact, I find the entire show underwritten this season. Still don't know the point of Catalina. Despite Petra having perfect children and doing her usual hate sex relationship (Jesus does JTV like to hit the same note over and over) the writing for her feels rushed and forced. The writing for Jane isn't much better. I am frustrated that one of the only characters they really write for is Justin Baldoni's, who has improved, but is probably the weakest actor still among the core cast. Chavira was so good on DH. I believe originally he was meant to be merely a foil/obstacle for Eva Longoria's character as her younger wife cheated on him and perhaps schemed. But, he was so funny, and had such a good rapport with Longoria that they became the root-for duo, and he had good chemistry with the other actresses as well. At the moment it feels as if JTV is more about Rafael than about Jane.

It seems that Yael Grobglas has been instructed to speak very rapidly in an extra clipped, sharp voice. It feels forced to me. She naturally speaks that way, no need to push it. I don't like the forced feeling I get from this show right now. I thought Jane's way of coping with Matteo was good - the chart, the thunder. However, we weren't told what penalty Matteo would receive for a rainy day. Doesn't have to be major, but a time out or a withholding of a privilege is pretty typical. I completely understand Jane not wanting Petra to discipline Mateo. At the same time, Petra is the mother of his half-sisters, so some leeway there might be allowed. When my niece interacts with her cousins, my brother will order them all to shape up if they're out of line. If Jane's method isn't enough to stop Matteo from dumping carrots on his sister or pulling hair, I think it's fine for the mother of the kid to say something.

Oh geez Coconuts, I forgot about the alcoholism. In terms of its elements, Californication really hit the trifecta, maybe the superfecta, of skeeze.

It's on Netflix now.

I think Nathanial is going to be fairly needy himself, what with that Dad. He's a mess under there. I am also considering that he's a high powered guy who, no matter how he came across, was sent to fucking WEST COVINA by his dad. The other Whitefeather-ites haven't processed that piece of it. Here son, manage a strip mall law firm, and don't screw it up. I think he psyched himself up to get the big client, but his dad withheld it, so now he has to maintain the front at what has to feel like a fifth-rate environment to him. Rebecca is hot and has so much passion and energy, I think a lot of guys are going to want to have sex with her, if not have a relationship with her. I was very dubious at SMH and Nathanial initially. I felt very been there, done that with the type, and like many viewers I am sure I accurately predicted every step of his introduction. But, I realized I liked the actor, and how he hit his character's beats. I agree with Aline Brosh McKenna's flattering assessment of the qualities he brings to the show. Part of my welcoming attitude is that in my binge watching, I find I really, really hate Greg, and if I'd watched in real time I don't know if I could have stuck out the Greg heavy parts of S1. Every time he showed up - oh God, is that him STILL at her house after the damn party is over? Oh, seriously Greg, you are hanging out outside her house after she ditched your date and hooked up with someone else? And nauseated when he materialized at the end of the wrong text episode. There was something about that character that personified, to me, the notorious "nice guy", even though Greg didn't embody all of it. But there was a "if you were healthy and doing the right thing, you would be with me" vibe that turned me off so bad. There was what he said, and there was his being so fucking AROUND like barnacle or stalker (even when subsequent plot points moved him away from her or moved away from that phase.). He just hit a nerve with me that I think prior characters on prior shows have hit - the wrong nerve. OTOH, I really do like Josh (that did take awhile), and when he and Rebecca are clicking, there is something so joyous and unselfconscious about them together, something I don't think she's able to get with anyone else. But, I am not resisting Nathanial. SMH has real charisma and is a good fit with the show, and his song ("Let's have intercourse") was really funny. He knows how to be sincere while also enabling the rhythm of a sitcom. So, I'm relieved, because at first my reaction was "Oh THIS guy. The guy they'll force a connection with, the guy they'll OT sexual tension with because they need it for the plot. The guy who will push while she resists, but is her resistance genuine? And we're supposed to see she's in denial, but the fact is, her resistance seems totally believable and legit to me!" I've seen that third wheel trope a bunch, and I was really happy to discover I enjoyed SMH and Nathanial in his own right.

I re-watched to make sure, and the judge said the "conviction" would be stricken. I checked because of the discussion here that, as a lawyer, Rebecca would be expected to disclose the conviction in interviews, even if it were stricken from her record. So I thought, well, I remember dialogue about if she got mental health treatment this event wouldn't be on her record, so maybe it's not a conviction, but a hearing, or a plea. But in the rewatch, I confirmed that the judge says straight up that the conviction would be stricken. Seems like something that would have been pled out before any trial or ruling. About narcissistic mothers - I read Doris Roberts' very entertaining autobiography. Her concept of Marie was that Marie was very concerned with remaining relevant in the lives of her family, and that was behind her undercutting Ray's wife, always being the person that knew best, did it better, etc. That made a lot of sense to me. If a woman of a certain disposition has spent most of her life as a homemaker, and her kid(s) grow up, marry, move on, she may feel that her relevance has expired. Particularly if she was a very strong presence when her kids were younger, and now she's more on the sidelines. There are plenty of women who pursue their own interests at that stage of life, but I bet there are those who keep pushing to remain influential, because they're unable to reconceive their role in life in this new stage. Curious about Naomi's lifestyle. She's still in Scarsdale, has the house, doesn't seem hurting for money even though she's unemployed. Her ex-husband, however, is a ne'er do well Irish Catholic guy who hits his daughter up for money (don't think for one second the money was actually for his kid's braces). Doesn't seem like a guy who'd have been in a position to support his ex-wife in Scarsdale and fund his child's education at Harvard and Yale, not to mention what looked like paying for an outrageously expensive stay in a mental health rehab facility (the lawn, the chair, the discreet nursing staff that appears on the lawn to give you your meds, versus you having to show up for it yourself). Silas doesn't seem like a guy who'd have been able to establish that lifestyle even before he walked out. So where did the Harvard/Yale/Sanitarium money come from? Is Naomi retired from a lucrative career in law, finance or medicine?

Another show title: "Californication". NO THANK YOU. Duchovny, California, and f*cking. I needed a shower just reading the title on the subway posters. Subsequently, long after the show was on the air, I read things that suggested there were actual characterizations and relationships on this show, but it was too late. With Crazy Ex-Girlfriend, I figured it wasn't anti-feminist, but I DID assume it was whimsical and quirky, a couple of things I really hate.

Well, I know about Darryl's daughter song, but what I mean is, I think CEG could have created an icky father / daughter relationship a la Hector and his mom, and the ickiness wasn't dependent on the respective genders. My take on Darryl's song wasn't that it was dealing with his love for his daughter, but dealing with the weirdness of songs about father / daughter love, because in country music MAN are there some icky ones. And I believe that would make Darryl self-conscious explaining his love for his daughter. The icky songs become really popular, which is disconcerting. The all time champion in this category, IMO, is called "Daddy's Hands". "Daddy's hands were soft and kind when I was cryin', Daddy's hands were hard as steel when I'd done wrong Daddy's hands weren't always gentle but I've come to understand, There was always love in daddy's hands." And then a song sung by a father called "Butterfly Kisses." I'll bet anything CEG shows Josh living in the seminary, just the way we see young girls in old movies knock on the convent door and gaining admission. That always kills me,

I have been binge-watching on netflicks. I've looked at Gabrielle Ruiz's youtube videos and she totally suits this role. She is totally a glamour model type, not a supermodel or fashion model type, and both Ruiz and Valencia could easily get glamour model work if they wanted (though maybe not a big market in West Covina). You know, the hot girl who advertises something else - the car dealership, a dating service - or participates in a Tropicana bikini contest. I knew a guy who dated nothing but Gabrielle Ruiz types, one of whom went on to become a successful actress. Her body is proportionate, she's wicked toned, she has the most important requisite for being photogenic, which is a clean, sharp, absolutely defined jawline and long neck. The softer shape of her lips offsets her angular face. She's also like a couple of girls I know (not many) who just do not leave the house unless they're done to a tee. Every hair in place, and they monitor everything from their teeth to needing to go to the spa to get a depilatory on everything but the hair on their head, and they are very competitive on that level, often out of naked insecurity. It is a high maintenance look and the girls I know who are like her tend not to be dating the high status guy unless they were born into it somehow. It's also not a look you run into in Scarsdale, NYC or the Ivies, so I could see a girl like Rebecca being absolutely at a loss in how to compete. I also believe Josh's guy friends don't like Valencia. That happens. You can not like someone's boyfriend or girlfriend for years but just go along to get along. Everything about her screams control freak, including her looks, but Josh is so mellow this probably doesn't bug him the way it bugs the other guys. I get the feeling Josh does what he wants most of the time and lets a lot of her suggestions and demands roll off his back, especially if she's not 100% direct. He can just not get it, or pretend not to get it. Whereas a more easily irritated guy wouldn't last long. In this episode, I think a big difference between Heather and Valencia is Valencia was passive aggressive and bitchy, while Heather is direct, but there's no malice behind what she's saying. As I watch, Greg is incredibly distracting to me because he seems so much older than anyone else. Rebecca is meant to be mid-late twenties (going by Rachel Bloom's age and also Rebecca talking about her camp romance with Josh as 10 years in the past). He might be that same age but a lot of the time he reads much older than his supposed peers. This distracted me during a lot of Greg episodes, particularly the one where he visited his family. He seemed miscast for the "I'm still being bitchy about my mom leaving my dad". That's how someone much younger than Greg would roll. I think a guy Greg's age would be more dry, but I guess we're meant to think he's as young as the others. I liked him in this episode but I thought he stuck out like a sore thumb age-wise, more like the older guy still hanging out with the younger guys. He also does have that sour Ross Geller deal going on (Chandler was endearing, IMO, at least when younger, and genuinely funny - and very self-deprecating.) The pole dance was horrific. I definitely think Rebecca talking about the pole dancing class as being a "feminist" pole dancing class was a straight up send-up, just the way she did in that song 'Be hot for yourself." But my God, it was horrifying in a hilarious way. I guess if you're going to do something that outrageous, it's not going to work unless you push it to the max. I just started laughing by the time White Josh and Darryl began to react, particularly the upside down twerking, and I still laugh when I think about it. The outfit, the shorts, the camera angles - my God. But I also think we learned a whole lot about Rebecca because of it.

Must strongly disagree with the article NO, four year old boys are not worse than four year old girls. I would like to introduce the author to my recently-turned-five niece who for nearly three years has made Mateo look like Shirley Temple. And not in "girl ways". In every type of way you can conceive of a four year old boy acting out, she has acted out and misbehaved.

I'm just wondering if anybody makes a snap judgment about the show from hearing the title, that's all. It's happened a couple of times with Jane the Virgin, three times, if I include myself (and I made a snap judgment without knowing anything about the show except the title). Somebody even said to me, about JTV - "With that title alone, no thanks." and I had to go on and explain the premise and that the show was great. The title, though, seemed to suggest to some people that "I know what this is about, I've seen it - pass." *I* had the same experience with Crazy Ex Girlfriend from the title and the cover art on Netflix. I was scrolling through Netflix, saw it and thought - "Nah." I thought it was a quirky girl comedy. Just wondering if certain titles might make people think they already know what the show will deliver, because the title and maybe poster evokes shows they've seen and weren't impressed by, or similar. IOW, initially serve as a barrier. In retrospect, both titles suit the shows really well, but I had to hurdle the title in order to be motivated to check out either one. In the case of Jane, I ran across a positive review of an episode that made me realize I didn't actually have the right idea about it, and with CEG a post on some TV forum said Rachel Bloom was brilliant and CEG great. Otherwise, based no the title and premise, I'd never have looked at it.

Was reading an interview with the show runners who said that S3 would explore Rebecca's mental illness issues, but ALSO said that there is probably a little boy in kindergarten sporting a Rebecca Bunch-shaped scar somewhere. So, this is very much Rebecca, and Robert wasn't necessarily THE primal event. Also, while every town has every sort of person, I think the bigger the place, the more crazy / wild / dramatic types of people you might know. I think *I* might have pegged Rebecca as "crazy" maybe the second time she cycled back around. I'd probably have a flag up knowing she had the resume she had, but ended up in West Covina. AND observing how old she was, how insanely hard she worked, but how out of control the rest of her life often is. I think the other West Convina-ites might have done the same if they were from, say, L.A.

I found the legal piece of things a little confusing. The professor requested a restraining order, which was granted. I don't see how Rebecca would be convicted. She went to trial? Seems like a straight up plea situation where you have a hearing and agree to mental health treatment in exchange for charges being dropped So the judge saying the conviction would be expunged seemed weird because I don't think this would have proceeded far enough to conviction. A deal would have been worked out. I don't blame Naomi for anything. I think she's fairly typical. To bring my own ex-wild friend into it, she's very bright, everyone else in the family was married with a status job (good marriages, too, from what I've observed), and I think the family believed that if she had a good, stable spouse and a good job, it would create a structure to contain her craziness. They would get very upset by the guys she dated (low hanging fruit). I think Naomi sort of hoped that Rebecca's job in NYC and success would straighten her out. Besides, a lot of families don't know the full extent of their children's issues. Up until the arson event, I could imagine Naomi saw her daughter as rebellious, a bit promiscuous, and unconventional in ways she wished were otherwise, but not mentally ill. And also as somebody that managed to behave herself / function in her own sphere but who insisted on reverting to adolescence when at home. Naomi herself seems to have thrived decently after her divorce (mentioning that her vagina had gotten good reviews lately). Not mentioned yet is the father / daughter dance rehearsal, and Rebecca's giddiness when the choreographer thought she and her father were a couple. Hard to express it, but I thought that was done so well, and I completely understood why that would make Rebecca happy. She thought the choreographer saw a connection between herself and her father, that they belonged together in some way, and that made her ecstatic. Hector and his mother - I thought it was a good point about would we react this way if it were a father and daughter BUT I think we are clearly meant to see the relationship as inappropriate, with weird sexual overtones / lack of boundaries, and I believe CEG would be able to convey the same thing with a daughter / father. I also think they'd be able to do a son / mom who liked each other without the creepy edge. A bit OT, but this past Xmas I was at a midnight mass sitting behind a son / mother / father. It took me a bit to sort it out, because there was very little interaction between the guy I thought was the dad, and the other two. Instead, the "son" stroked the older woman's back, looked into her eyes, tickled her lower back, ran his hand up her neck and massaged / stroke the back of her head, and in general appeared to be looking for excuses to touch her. She didn't do the same to him but did not seem uncomfortable about how much he was touching her, including wrapping his arm around her lower back /hips when they sat down. I kept thinking, ok, this could very easily be May / December, and maybe the older guy is the older lady's brother. But nope, it was mother /son. Got the same creepy vibe from Hector and his mother, although less overt. Just things like "Wait til they play OUR songs." I've seen plenty of moms / sons who like each other, and daughters / moms, daughters / dads - this isn't that.

I think the point of the four year jump is she has moved on so we don't have to watch her do it. The show was definitely my happy place as well, not for shipper reasons, but because the writers seemed to have such a strong handle on the story. Pieces of story that many shows would have held onto, this show would quickly pay off - i.e., Petra artificially inseminating herself. Everyone knew about it pretty quickly. This season hasn't been that much fun. Even the stuff that's praised, I'm sort of eh about. For example, Jane losing her virginity. It was only one episode, but DAMN did they beat a dead horse. I GET it. It might take work for even a couple that has chemistry and is in love to get themselves in sync so that both are fulfilled in the sack. This was one case where I would have been happy with "less show, more tell" in getting that point across. If it had worked, it would have been great, but IMO it didn't really work. And while I know why now, when Michael was trying out new careers, that was ridiculous. Even if he'd been good at it "I'm going to be a stand up" isn't a career, and we shouldn't have had to pretend that it was one. Even if he ended up the new Louis C.K., the reality is that for a long time he'd have been home during the day, doing stand-up at night and not earning any $$. Then all the new characters who were immediately treated as established characters. If all of this happened because the show was treading water waiting for Michael's death, that's not very adroit, and a stupid decision, IMO.

VixenbyNight, yes, I understand Betty "chose herself" but the show left open the possibility of Betty/Daniel down the line. I don't know explicitly what they did to suggest that, but fans still watching felt that was what the writers had done. If we are fast forwarding four years, we are to believe that it's 2020 or 21 then? And Rogelio and his new girlfriend last four years? What about Catarina's story? What was the point? If there was one, why wasn't it ever on screen? This was a character that I thought would provide more storyline than she provided. For instance, I figured perhaps Petra and Jane would interact, Petra making some snarky remark about Caterina and then saying "Oh, I'm sorry. I know she's your cousin." And Jane doing that thing where she's trying to straddle what's polite and what she really means, like "Oh, no, it's ok - I mean, I hardly know her." because she's dying to vent a little, and then Petra pointing out she's not jealous of Caterina and Jane assuring Petra she isn't either, and then maybe the two of them doing a little frenemies style snooping on the side to figure out Caterina's deal. It seemed like a gimme. Instead - I just don't understand the point of this season so far.

From a different angle, remember the gym scene with Michael and Rafael? Michael had to get in shape for his physical, while Rafael was doing what looked to me almost like a narcissist workout (is there a reason a hotelier has to have a build that cut and defined? Couldn't he take it down a notch and still be fit. There are male models who don't take it that far. Now male "glamour" models - they do.)? Michael seemed a bit thin and frail. I figured it was for the plot - he was paler, he was wearing sort of a plain loose polo shirt, and it was meant to contrast with Rafael and work on Michael's ego. But then I think back to his cop days and I wonder if Brett Dier didn't drop a few pounds to set up this plot point. I think he looked a bit thinner and more wan this season than in previous.

I don't think the Bad Girl is a good trope on soaps. I think that's the good girl, with the bad girl as a foil. The bad girl is easier to write, so writers fall into that habit. IMO some of the soapy bad girls listed above, while many had a cult following, were more popular with the writers than with the general audience, if one tracks ratings when they were the focus of the show. In the past fifteen or so years, Bad Girls often won, or at least the good girl certainly did not. Crazy Ex-Girlfriend really is ground-breaking IMO, because Rebecca in many ways has the patina of a good girl. Good family (meaning educated family with money, nothing more), high achieving. Very good at her job, and it's a high status job. She's socially elite as well, more or less. She has girlfriends who are not her stooges or foils - or oblivious. When they do enable her, it's not because Rebecca is the stronger personality, but because her girlfriends have their own issues or enjoy the drama. She does remind me a bit of the wild girl, more than the bad girl. Just the way she slammed back a slug from the bottle before dumping some on the bed and setting fire to it had a little of that recklessness. This is not something I see on television so much as in real life. If this were a more realistic show she'd be a pretty regular recreational drug user and hopping into bed with more than one person from time to time. I've known girls like this. One is a good friend. She had the grounding in good family, good education, good job, but my God, the drama. She, also, tended to date "down" as far as the guys she chose were slackers without "real" careers and had problems of their own (such as alcoholism), or nowhere near as bright as she is. I think she literally grew out of it - I'd swear it was delayed frontal lobe/impulse control maturation because by the time she was in her late twenties she had slowed down an enormous amount without her external circumstances changing, and now she is happily married. She did go to therapy. Wild girls on television tend to opt for wildness even when it's going to destroy a key stability pillar in their lives. Wild girls I've personally known who were like Rebecca, compartmentalize. They fly their freak flag in their personal life, but even if it means no sleep, hungover, bad breakup the night before or any other misadventure or even humiliation, by God they get that paper written or the rent paid. It's like being a functional alcoholic.

In my opinion they should have moved on from the idea of Jane/Rafael once they saw the two lacked chemistry. Instead of killing off the guy she DID have chemistry with, to preserve what? A format? Because I do think that's the end game at this point. There is no other reason. It's having it both ways. Look, a perfect love but limited sub-arc story with Michael, but we keep our end game and format! Except the end game and format doesn't work. And adhering to it doesn't reflect well on the creativity of the writers. I can already name every beat of every Rogelio story as soon as it starts, so having a show laid out like this for Jane doesn't work. Everything in between is going to feel like a beat. The show is already feeling uninvested and mechanical. The show has been running long enough for the writers to know what Justin Baldoni is and isn't as an actor. To barrel ahead despite is perverse. And they've set themselves up with a crap dynamic. What are we going to see? Petra, Rafael, Jane in separate romances? That doesn't cohere. A new triangle at the end of the day where the person Raf has chemistry with - Petra - is the third wheel because that's what a telenova demands? This is just annoying. I'm over the inability of a television show to switch it up, especially when that inability has torpedo'd some really good shows. Remember Ugly Betty? Yes, there was the Betty/Daniel group. There are people who show up for American versions of telenovas expecting and demanding the trope. But IMO writers have to write for what shows up on screen. With Ugly Betty, what showed up was Betty / Henry. But a story originally intended to be Henry's girlfriend falsely claiming he was the father of her baby became a story about Henry actually being the baby's father when the writers panicked and thought it was too soon to shut Betty down with her true love. They thought the show would run a long time. As it happened, the show, by forcing organic developments off the show because they didn't fit a formula destroyed itself and ended prematurely, never again really coming up with a strong story for Betty. I was annoyed that the writers felt "Happily ever after" was the only alternative to writing off Henry, so they "had to" write off Henry. As it turned out, they had to write him off about three more times after the first time and it still didn't really "take" because he was the only thing that felt true. This feels like that, complete with every news outlet proclaiming that writing off Michael was genius. Sure it is. As for Friends, and I know this is a tangent, Ross/Rachel was the worst. I think considerations like Matt LeBlanc getting signed for "Joey" in S8 did influence the show regressing back to Ross/Rachel though, so I forgive it.

Just to say I completely clocked that moment when it happened too, and I found it just as annoying as you did. It's astro-turfing, period. (That's when anyone manufactures grass roots support for something when that support actually doesn't exist). As if that's what people were speculating about / hoping for / looking forward to when Petra came out of the coma. Maybe they do want a new show. I don't recognizes the dynamics on screen. All I'm seeing are mechanics. All it looks like to me is they are running longer as a show so they have to stretch stuff out, and that's exactly how it comes across. Nothing has real value in its own right.

This conversation, particularly Joana's comments, made me consider what I do, or did, enjoy about Jane the Virgin, and how the show and I aren't on the same page anymore. I, too, probably enjoyed Michael and Petra the most as individual characters. Michael's gone, and Petra may as well be since I imagine in the writers' wisdom, they brought her back to "bitch" because they think it will enrich things when they finally revisit the more complex Petra. Well, no. They've missed the boat and the payoff on too many plot points for that to happen, most especially on her coming out of the coma. I'm sure many fans were looking forward to both Rafael and Petra's compassionate reaction, and Petra responding to that, but those expectations were obviously completely unfounded. Paying that off didn't mean Petra had to become touchy feely and redeemed. Jane the Virgin could have had her backslide on a million pretexts. So that was a disappointment even before they killed off Michael. I enjoy Petra and Rafael a lot, particularly the more comedic angles when they try to accommodate each other's crazy, or each knows the other knows that THEY know (Friends shout out) but won't cop to it. That works much better than the drama. I enjoy Jane's school, and her prickly dynamic with her advisor. Now the show has ff three years, I'm going to assume she's done with grad school. Really one of the biggest WTF's for me of all time is Xo/Bruce. Sure, we knew about Bruce in the premiere. Yes, I get they want to keep Xo and Rogelio apart. Ok, bringing in a guy for Xo could work. What I didn't expect was for Bruce/Xo to get on the express train as an insta-couple with an insta-obstacle. Who the hell cares? Do they not care about actually writing this show anymore or is it all about hitting plot points?

What Joana said: All of this. It's both. The way they handled Michael's death, the way they've handled Petra, and the why the hell am I supposed to care/what's the point again of all the stories so far this season does not inspire me with confidence that the writers will pay this off. I do like the regulars, and many of the recurring (such as Jane's advisor played by Melanie Mayron), but the writers don't seem invested in the material, a lot of it seems forced in order to keep the plot going (such as Petra's re-set - her entire arc has seemed forced this season), Rafael really can't carry a story about identity - the actor doesn't have the chops - and GOD AM I TIRED OF ROSE!!!! Move the hell on already. I was already disappointed at Michael's career change because being a detective in Miami has a lot more plot potential and cast integration potential than law school/being a lawyer, but I guess it makes sense now why they did it. And, as talented as Gina Rodriguez is, I think it's really difficult to find good chemistry. I didn't think she and "Sam" had it, nor Gina and the guy who played her professor, and the "light" side of her and Rafael when he was trying to be part of her family was torture. Given the track record, I'm not really on board for Jane's future dating life. I tuned in this season and instead of say, Petra, I got Catarina, I got Scott and Aneshka, then it was as if Petra never came back because when she woke up she was a bot. This season they also decided that there was no need for Petra/Jane, scenes I'd been waiting for. I now have no idea why they bothered developing these two as frenemies in prior seasons. Xo decided she was into Bruce and immediately WHO is supposed to give a shit that his teen-age daughter is an obstacle to a relationship nobody cares about that was just rushed into being? Who are these people, and what's the point? I think they're trying to "open up the show" and give all the main characters more material that will then feed into the primary dynamics, BUT they have lost the plot. And no, there is no reason the format of the show requires Rafael as a co-lead or co-tentpole to Jane. It's Jane the Virgin, not Jane and her baby daddy. You don't double down on a colorless actor. His strength is playing opposite Yael Grobglas, and he's decent as part of an ensemble. What he absolutely isn't is a guy who can center his own emotional story arc, who can get most of the audience (versus Raf-specific fans) to worry about him. I, too, was unimpressed by the show runner's letter. It was stupid. "We decided to kill Michael off before the show even premiered, but Brett Dier was so fabulous we delayed his death." WTF? Nobody does that. Plenty of characters on television were supposed to die early but the story changed because the actor and character were a hit. She's a writer. There's no inherent virtue in sticking to your plan just because it was your original plan. I GET from the early episodes that Michael was meant to be a bit darker (his insisting Jane quit her job at the hotel) but that changed because of Dier. So why couldn't the rest change? She makes it seem noble, that they made themselves kill him despite loving him so much, that they dropped the hints in the narration to force themselves to do it, as if not doing it would be artistic weakness. Spare me. Before you kill off a character like that, look at the rest of the show and figure out if it's in shape to lose that character. Look at the casting landscape and see if there's any way you can possibly interest the audience in any other guy you bring in. How are you doing with other newbies? Bruce rocking anybody's socks? Is Rafael's true birth identity making Jane destination television for anyone? Is Rose/Sinrostro lighting up twitter? Are Petra's fans grooving to her new storyline or have you pretty much discouraged them (good job on that, btw, show. Take the character backwards AND give it very little time and writing while doing so). Do an assessment and then decide if you still should stick to the plan.

I thought the first half of this season was off. So maybe it was all about giving Michael/Jane fans their payoff, so they stalled out to play that while showing us basically filler. A big problem with Michael's departure, for me, is the other two male leads aren't strong enough. Jaime Camill is incredibly talented and handsome, but his character's stories have become strained and repetitive, and they don't seem to write for him to maximize his comedy. Justin Baldoni has relaxed more but his chemistry is better with Yael Grobglas, and I just can't care about the more dramatic parts of his storyline. I guess with him I feel he's more comfortable enabling other characters than he is carrying his own arc. I really enjoyed Michael being a detective and was not on board with him becoming a lawyer. I thought the detective piece really opened up his character and helped propel the plot engine of the various murders, schemes, etc. I was sick to death of Rose a long time ago, but the show runner absolutely seems to love the character.

I'm on the fence with this season as well. I love Yael Grobglas, and I guess I made assumptions about this season about what to expect for her character, and so far it's been nothing. I don't see the point of Anezka or in having Petra petrified - nothing new came from it except she was "bad" again, but her being "bad" lasted on episode before she was out maneuvered. That could have been accomplished a million ways without setting us up to expect so much more from the twin switch and her paralysis. Jennie the showrunner talked so much about Luisa/Rose in her Season 3 previews I thought there would be much more, not that I'm complaining. I've realized now that when she previews a season, she can be talking about just ONE and done episode, not an ongoing theme or issue. I think it was a missed opportunity not to have Petra react to Catalina. Even though Petra is angry at Rafael, 10-1 she'd have seen through Catalina in one second, and IMO we missed snark she could have thrown out there in front of Jane, Rafael or Michael - the sort of thing where they'd be "Well, that's just Petra being bitchy." but it also plants a seed.

Yes, the women the matchmaker paired with Rogelio were ridiculous. Every single one of them is pushing fifty. And why were they all celebrities? If there's a dead horse that Jane the Virgin is beating to death, it's cameo appearances from the C list that the show pretends is A list. I am so damn tired of it. As well, no sooner were we introduced to the matchmaker that I thought - it's going to be HER. Only I didn't think she was the one who would propose it - I thought it would be Rogelio. However, she too, is on the far side of the fertility spectrum. As is Rogelio himself. The age of the father CAN impact the health of a child. I have to agree they need to write out Luisa/Rose or integrate them into the show. Right now they don't fit. Luisa checks in with Rafael from time to time, and that's it. I also don't know what's going on with Yael Grobglas's availability, but this is unacceptable.