SnarkySheep

Personally I don't think so. In JJ's case, I think he simply feels that he already HAS enough help, via Kenneth. Many individuals who have service animals likely depend on them solely, or mostly. We know that JJ likes to be as independent as he possibly can, so having a full-time helper AND a service dog (not to mention Maya as a mom!) probably seemed like a bit of an overkill to him.

Have they mentioned it before? It was definitely news to me! And the whole time, I couldn't figure out what on earth they were talking about, as the Dunphys don't live in a condo or 50+ community or anything, just a neighborhood. Is this a California thing? I'm confused. I've never heard of an HOA for a regular neighborhood. Not to mention, weren't Cam and Mitch just complaining about their finances, what with Pam living upstairs rent free for the past year? A party for a dozen girls complete with all kinds of special hair products and makeup, etc. probably wouldn't be too cheap.

When you mentioned empathy, I think that hits it right on the said, as far as what I was trying to say. It's like Natalie being a parent herself means she's the only one who can truly "get it" - as though Will, Connor, Maggie or whoever can't possibly empathize with the situation because they don't have kids themselves. (They did the same to April for a bit, although not to the same extent, for obvious reasons.) FWIW, I think this is actually true to life to some extent. For instance, I work for a school district. If I have to tell any parent something they don't want to hear, I invariably get, "Do YOU have kids yourself??" Honestly, it makes zero difference if I do or don't; there are rules I have to follow, regardless, and if someone is indicating a hardship and it's within my power to help in some way, I will. I just can't stand the implied "we parents stick together" kind of thing, which is kind of what's going on with Natalie here.

Which, IMO, is totally ridiculous, because a good writer IS able to keep the story interesting even when a couple is together. Jay and Erin, for instance, were a pretty solid couple (and would likely have married, had Sophia Bush not chosen to leave) but you could never say that they ran out of issues. Other shows, like Bones, have had the leads marry and even have kids. It can and does work.

Not to mention, JJ also has other challenges on top of it, such as being in his chair. Dylan only chose one thing, which made things considerably easier for her. As for the dog - I hate when things are left dangling. It was clearly stated that a dog was against the terms of their lease, as well as JJ stating that the dog was not a service dog. So what happened? Did someone speak to the landlord and get him/her to make an exception? Are they going to try to hide it (which of course never works and is horrible anyways, because a dog isn't something you just pass around from home to home). We can all speculate but IMO it's bad writing not to state it.

Olinsky and Voight, while neither big on feelings and personal talk, HAVE been seen several times doing just that when alone together. TPTB have missed a huge opportunity for insight/character development by not showing them talking about the obvious, the fact that both now have lost children. While I'm equally glad he did get a storyline with the kids, IMO they handled it wrong. Instead of having him ship them off to some random aunt in another state - most likely never to be seen or heard from again - they should simply have had Atwater move to another neighborhood with them. They could have maybe had them move into Hermann's extra apartment, the one that Gabby and the foster child had initially been living in. Not only would that have allowed the storyline to continue (maybe issues adjusting to a different neighborhood, whatever) but also allow for some crossover with the other show's characters, which fans generally enjoy.

Finally got around to watching the Christmas episode... For once, I really liked Chale - he showed a lot more class than Kendra. I don't care if it's her dad or a stranger on the street; you do NOT get to throw a hissy fit at age twenty-whatever because you don't think you got a good enough gift. Last time I checked, Kevin is already giving them a HUGE gift in getting to save money on rent (and likely groceries, utilities, etc.) He literally does not owe them any of that, much less a huge extravagant gift on holidays on top of it. Re: Kendra's age - They specifically mentioned that Kevin and Vanessa had met 23 years ago. Kevin had only just met Donna at that time, no real relationship. But Kendra is in law school for the past year, meaning she is at LEAST 23 now, if not older. Unless Donna was pregnant with someone else's kid at the time, the timeline absolutely does not fit. This annoys me, not so much because it matters in the big picture, but because it's such an easy thing to give a more fitting number. Re: Kyle - Again, as with many other similar situations in sitcoms, I had the distinct impression the writers thought this "storyline" was humorous, but I was literally cringing as I watched. A grown man, throwing a hissy fit over not getting a Christmas gift, especially when he had just SAID he didn't want to exchange gifts? This is something that annoys me in real life too. Dude, you are a grown man. If you want something, say so. Don't tell people one thing and then get mad that they didn't magically guess what you actually wanted to do.

That's why I've actually been happy that Sophia Bush was gone - 90% of the storylines revolved around her. I had hopes that they would start pulling other characters forward more, and I still hope they will. They do have half a season, after all.

Of course it's about money, at least for a lot of people. Do you honestly believe that people would be so willing to put up with bad behaviors if they didn't feel it was "worth" it in other respects? Once again, the problem is that the women made specific choices...in some cases that have come to light recently, they have specifically said that they went to auditions when they were still unknowns and there was already harassment. Yet they chose to say nothing and not to walk away. Of course abuse/harassment is never ok. But the women did not have guns to their heads. They could easily have walked away. But they chose not to, instead valuing the fame and fortune ahead of them more than personal integrity. So yes, they are not entirely innocent victims in the whole problem. All of these people expect "someone" to do something about stopping abusers, yet they don't say anything and they don't stop auditioning for them and supporting their projects. So how exactly was it supposed to have happened, magic? Once again, there is WAY too much money for actors. If we set regular salaries, then we wouldn't have so many people willing to do whatever it takes to get it. If it's truly your passion to act, then you can have any job, and do it as a hobby like thousands of other people. Someone like Sophia Bush have never truly "worked" a day in her life. I'm sure she doesn't want to start now.

I hear what you're saying. But IMO a lot of the current problems that Hollywood is revealing are because those involved were too into the glitter of fame and money to step away. None of us know Sophia Bush personally, so we can't say for certain why she did what she did. We also don't know what the "abuse" actually is, because it was never really specified - and like anything else, what is considered "harassment" to one is not to another. So there is a lot of room for speculation, which is my point, not just everyone gushing about how brave and wonderful SB is without knowing or probably even really considering what really did or didn't happen. IMO none of these people deserve the huge money they are earning - they are making many, many times what the rest of us do, and for what? Like you said, most of them are there because it's their passion. It's not right, but we as a society enable them, so it's really us to blame, not them. We should hold Hollywood to the same kinds of salaries as everyone else, and then perhaps we might see some changes.

IMO it wasn't that Stohl didn't understand but that he was being practical, as is his wont. It isn't the hospital's job to worry about what happens to the patient afterward; and also, if he is really in potential danger from gang members, then what different does it make that he'll stay in the hospital another day or two? It was said that some older brother or whoever would "look out for him" but what on earth could anyone really do against some vengeful guys with guns? IMO this subplot wasn't portrayed too well. Agreed. Personally I liked April with her ex (whose name I've already forgotten, sorry) and it seemed like they broke them up simply because they didn't know what to do with them. But there was a lot going there, including potential issues with the little boy (who mysteriously disappeared after the two got together). Then, Ethan was around during all of April's issues, including the lost baby, broken engagement AND the TB. He should have started being a friend to April, not encouraging her into a rebound relationship, if anything else. IMO that's why Will and Natalie work better as a couple, because they have the background of friendship, while Ethan and April seem only about the physical.

What do you want to bet that guy opts for those hologram Christmas lights next year that he can set up on the ground? It's been a long time since Connor had a non-Robin storyline. Remember his dad and sister, both of whom he has difficult relationships with? What about the story that was hinted at, that his mom's suicide may have had more to it? What about his relationship with Dr. Latham and how he was helping him understand social norms? There's a lot they can pick up on with this character, and I really hope they do, rather than embark on the Bekker trek.

I don't think it's a coincidence that the actress bears more than a passing resemblance to Sophia Bush. IMO they wasted a HUGE opportunity by having Fire end last season with Mouch's heart attack/collapse...and then having NO mention of it on PD. It would have given Platt a solid storyline for once.

Re: Al - He's all but disappeared, yet there are numerous storylines that have been started and abruptly dropped with him. How is he coping after Lexi's death? What happened with Michelle, his maybe-daughter? Does he still see her? Does Michelle still go to the boxing gym that everyone's forgotten Antonio bought?

If he did - and they are apparently very local - then why didn't they come up when Ruzek and Burgess were engaged and all the family members were meeting up? Total speculation here, but from what we know of Voight, I've always thought that he probably doesn't keep anything too consequential on his work computer. He knows how things work,

And yet, she and many other females associated with that show have recently come forward to address how horrible it supposedly was there. That may certainly be the case...but if so, why didn't Sophia (or anyone else) step forward at the time to say something and/or leave? IMO it takes a lot of credibility away from your claims when you're still willing to stick around for your fame and money. OTH made Sophia Bush who she is today, and I'm sure she was well aware of it. She's always going on and on about feminism, standing up for what's right, etc etc....but only from a distance when it can't hurt her. While I certainly don't wish anyone unfavorable working conditions, I'm sick of pampered celebrities feeling "stifled" (as SB actually says in some articles) by TV or movie environments. If that's how they really feel, let them try taking a regular job in a store or an office for a tiny fraction of what they're used to making...then they'll truly know what "stifled" means.

I found it really hard to believe that Kenneth wouldn't have thought of security cameras at the school until Dr. Miller brought it up. Seriously? In today's world it's pretty much a given that there are cameras everywhere, let alone a school after hours...

Yes and no - yes, they do mention money, but then the Heck family is always doing things like eating takeout for dinner. A family of five would definitely not be doing that multiple times a week, as even McD's could rack up $30-$40 a meal. But IMO a sitcom can't entirely be bound by the realities of finance, simply because it limits their storylines. At least shows like The Middle throw a nod to the subject, whereas MF doesn't at all. What difference does it make that Mitch and Cam made a passing mention of losing the income of the upstairs apartment for the last year when we have seen absolutely NO changes in their lifestyle? IIRC, in the episode where Lionel mentioned horseback riding lessons and Lily wanted them too, Mitch and Cam's sole objection was having to wake up early on Saturdays and drive her, not that it would be a big expense.

I get the distinct impression that the writers think Pam is this funny, quirky character....but IMO she comes off more as "undiagnosed mental disorder" than anything else. And once when Lily was younger and Larry went missing, they didn't want to explain that he was probably dead, so they invented this whole crazy story about how he was probably off visiting his girlfriend...and Lily asked, "Why not his boyfriend?" and Mitch and Cam were all AWWW.

IMO it doesn't even really make sense...Kevin was riding Chale all of last year about living in the garage and not contributing financially. But NOW he gets a job at Enzo's? If he were so inclined, surely he could have done that before? Huh. Ha, or Bob Newhart...

Because we already ran the lawsuit storyline with Will, no doubt...

I feel like now that Bones is over, this show has seamlessly taken its place in the "eat your dinner beforehand" category. I hate how she seems to think that actually being a parent herself is more of a qualification than, y'know, MED SCHOOL.

Ditto. I also have the hardest time understanding her speech - made all the worse by the fact that she's speaking from behind a surgical mask half the time. She's a pediatrician, so yeah. I don't claim to have any real knowledge of psychiatric treatments, but my first thought was would they really have left that guy unrestrained in a regular ED room? With him ranting about demons being everywhere, it was all but a given that he'd leap at someone and try to hurt them. What if it was another patient instead of Dr Charles? That would be one huge lawsuit. As for the relationships - I actually like Will and Natalie a lot better than Ethan and April. Will and Natalie actually get along and seem to have things in common, things to talk about, etc. while Ethan and April are either making out or else snarling at each other. Not good.

Cousin Ira is a judge now! It honestly took me a few minutes to recognize the actor; I have never seen him in such a serious role. As for Ruzek...why exactly couldn't he just wear a wire when dealing with Woods? Maybe it wouldn't keep him (Ruzek) out of trouble, but hell, may as well bring the other guy down with you, right?

Another thing...where was Lily in this episode? We got everyone's .02, even Joe's. Somehow I can imagine Lily giving a snarky commentary about how she doesn't care about celebrities...