Superb Owl

I've actually seen some Reddit comments defending Rebecca; the basic premise of those comments is that she glommed onto Warren due to trauma and guilt about her brother's death. It appears that was truly the case, as per this excerpt from a Vulture interview with the showrunner: The character Rebecca’s feelings about her brother are an important part of the show and one of the reasons she’s able to relate to these kids so much, especially Warren, the only boy accused in the crime. Was that something Rebecca was feeling at the time and just didn’t put it in the book because she wasn’t a character herself? I think Rebecca was processing some of that during our development. In the first conversation we had about how directly the show was linked to her loss of her brother, she said that a lot of people in her life had suggested that Warren must have reminded her of her brother because she lost her brother when he was the exact same age. The final conversations I had with her right before she passed were about the fact that in the end, she realized that it was more about what she saw of herself in him than anything else. She felt that so much of his way of moving through the world would be shaped forever by guilt. I think her quest to make people understand how someone can do a bad thing came from a place of feeling like she had been capable of bad things when she was a kid. If you want to read the whole interview, it's here: https://www.vulture.com/article/under-the-bridge-rebecca-godfrey-hulu-quinn-shephard.html At the risk of sounding too harsh, I still have a hard time drumming up sympathy for her. At the very least, I agree that there's way too much emphasis on Rebecca on UTB. I understand the concept of her being there in the script, but there's just too much of her and so much is made up, and just her whole persona is...odd to me (although she apparently did meet 'the kids' , shortly after they were all arrested). I guess I should read the book, but I really do find her character off-putting enough that I'm not enthused about doing so.

I find it so bizarre that 'real life' Rebecca was a significant collaborator for this show and I ~think~ is even credited as Executive Producer. She comes across as really unlikeable and really blasé about Reena. I know she wasn't personally involved with the case IRL the way she is on the show; I'm not sure she even met any of those involved other than following the investigation and trial (I haven't read the book, can somebody who has tell me if that is accurate?) Anyway, we obviously can't get her perspective on it now, but holy smokes I just want to slap the "show Rebecca" at times. Yes, Warren "was a kid" and caught up in something out of his depth, but Rebecca's overprotectiveness completely excuses his, you know, active participation in a brutal murder. It's really kinda icky.

The entire essay is behind a paywall, but this article covers a good deal of it, including that Stephen King called it "one of the best things I have seen". https://www.nme.com/news/film/stephen-king-calls-baby-reindeer-one-of-best-things-3753329

I'm not a big Dulce fan (I know I'm in the minority, but that's ok), but I'm wondering where she is these days. She still has only had 1 day hosting (last year) IIRC and she's not done any bits this week, but Grace has done a couple. It seems odd. @Lantern7 I really miss Roy too. I think the correspondents have been doing a really good job for the most part, but I wish they'd find a way to bring Roy back.

Ronnie Chieng was on Late Night with Seth Meyers last night and confirmed tht the correspondents will handle hosting duties Tuesday-Friday.

Roy Wood Jr. and Jordan Klepper co-hosting would be my dream team for the non-Jon shows. Regardless, I hope they continue have Jordan do his excellent field work. Out of the guest hosts, I liked Kai Penn the most. I'm giddy about Jon returning!

I agree with this (I was pretty self-sufficient at 9 y.o. myself; both my parents worked at the business they owned and were gone 12-15 hours a day); but IIRC, nothing was modified or adapted for her height--kitchen counters, cooking areas, etc.) so I'm not sure how she adapted to that aspect, let alone get up & down both the inside stairs and the steps leading up to the apartment house. Most apartments don't have washers or dryers; how did she keep her clothes clean? Or herself, could she get in & out of a bathtub? It really does boggle the mind and there's no doubt she had to learn survival skills and grow up FAST, so those who make comments about her "not being sweet and innocent" may consider how "sweet and innocent" a child may be after being shuffled around an orphanage, a number of foster homes, emotionally abused, and finally abandoned in an apartment at age 9. Add in the factor that she very well could have been sexually abused (at the very least, at the orphanage if not beyond that) and yeah, there's some major damage there. I truly hope she has had or is getting therapy.

This story has me so fascinated that I did what I never thought I'd do; I created a TikTok account. Natalia has her own Tiktok account (recently created); so do the Mans. It appears that on 12/29/23, Natalia made her first post about how 2024 was going to be incredible. That was followed by a comment from the Mans which said: "I love you so much, my forever baby"; Natalia replied "I love you too". The timeline, as far as what I can piece together, is that Natalia was formally adopted by the Mans in June '23 (after living with them for I believe 10 years), and that phone call was placed in mid-December. While I don't doubt that Natalia suffered severe trauma in her first 10 years of life, and exhibited inappropriate behavior at times as a result, I just can't fathom what could have changed in the 10+ years the Mans have cared for her, and a mere 6 months after her adoption, to trigger a phone call like the one we heard. And going by the Tiktok exchange, if there was anything truly difficult happening a few weeks back from that, it's all patched up by now???? So very many questions. Although I'm not a huge fan of religion in general, and in particular the rabid, rigid christianity that the Mans seemed to follow, they did seem to care for her a great deal and didn't try to whitewash past behavior of hers. I guess you just never know with "reality tv", even one that presents itself as a documentary, what is exaggerated/staged/edited to be more dramatic and what the actual truth is (although I think there's plenty of reason to believe, from all sources, that the Barnetts are just garbage people). I hope we're not kept in suspense until the inevitable Season 3, although I'm sure the producers would prefer it that way.

It's his basement room, he lives there. it was mentioned in Season 1. Very weird, since it appears to be a fairly good-size house from the exterior shots, so I'm sure it has more than one bedroom. Which reminds me of Michael crying (of course) in S1, E1, that he "has nothing" and I think he specifically mentioned not having a house and a car. But he has a big house (probably a rental, but who the bleep knows), a yellow Corvette sitting out front that's "broken", but also has what looks like a late-model white sports car that he drove to the trial and to the meeting with Natalia (and away from, as we all witnessed the temper tantrum). I guess he hides that somewhere? What a douche.

Oh, and another thing I was wondering...I think it was the last episode of Season 1....when Jacob (oldest son) declared he was done with his interview, but forgot to take his mic off...and then proceeded to go upstairs and have a conversation with daddy dearest about "I didn't say anything about 'falling down the stairs" like you told me, then they both repeated the"falling down the stairs" line a number of times before Jacob realized he was still mic'd. But there was no follow-up to that! Who fell down the stairs (I imagine Natalia, but what was the story? )God, what shitty people. I do feel sorry for Jacob. From outgoing child prodigy to just being this repressed, affectless shell of a person. And so vulnerable to brainwashing from both parents.So very sad.

Yeah, I was wondering the same thing about lack of documentation (including all you said and more....how about the supposed feces on the car window?) considering the amount of random stuff they *did* record. And also...if your 6-year-old child had publc hair and then started having periods, would you NOT take her to the doctor toot suite? Yes, it's not completely unheard of, but it's certainly unusual enough to get her checked out. But they were just like "huh, that's weird, oh well" Did they take her to a doctor/pediatrician at all? doesn't sound like it. But then again, it was driving me nuts during Season I when they never talked about taking her to the dentist, who could also give an estimate of her age. But then it turned out they DID, and then just blatantly lied about what was said. Every episode of this blows my mind a little more. What evil, foul, malicious people the Barnetts are.

Apparently the alert was sent in error or whatever, because it didn't happen. BM's website says "Real Time is returning! The date will be announced soon!" I've also seen references elsewhere to a Sept. 29 return. I really don't think anyone has a clue right now, including BM. For those who haven't seen it, BM and Howard Stern are currently feuding because BM went off on some weird tangent on his podcast about how Howard Stern talks too much about how he loves his wife and that must hurt the feelings of his ex-wife of 22+ years ago. (huh? yep). Howard, understandably , called the rant bizarre and sexist (if Howard Stern is calling you sexist, well....) and just pretty much trashed Bill. I never would have predicted 15 years ago that Bill Maher would regress into the creepy cranky narcissist he is and Howard Stern would turn into an evolved, "woke" (his words) human being.

Bwah ha ha🤣 🤣 But you're right, and now I can't unsee it.

But what happened to the 3-horned sheep that was kept in the jail cell? Only half-joking. I'm sure there was a symbolism there, but I'm not sure what it was. Does anyone have any answers/theories? Was that an element in the books?

Yes, exactly, I said something similar earlier in the thread. Seeing how they both treated John, I said to Mr. Superb Owl while watching the episode that "this is child abuse". Maybe it wasn't meant to be taken so seriously but man, it was brutal to me. Question, was the kid that John was fighting with when the episode started the same kid who was teaching him baseball? Maybe when the shit hits the fan with Barry & Sally, John can go live with that kid's family who at least seemed closer to normal. I'm obviously thinking about this too much.

I neither loved it or hated it. I just mostly felt sad for that poor kid. And I don't even like kids that much.

My completely unqualified opinion is that Nutsa will be around for awhile. Because she's talented? No. Because she's charismatic? Ha. Because my recollection of AI (haven't watched it in *many* seasons) is that there's always somebody, every year, who wears out their welcome real quick (although I'm not sure Nutsa even had a welcome to wear out), but somehow persists in hanging on, week after week, as more qualified contestants get flicked off, collectively making the viewers groan "WHY is he/she still here??? WHY????" Let's face it, the producers LOVE the drama. You can never convince me there isn't some manipulation going on. Part of why I quit watching, but here I am again. Glutton for punishment, I guess. I'll be glad when the show gets down to a manageable hour every week. Right now all I have time for is to go through the clips. Nobody blew me away, but We Ani and Iam remain my favorites so far. One problem is that I'm getting too old to know not only the songs but the mentors. But at least the contestants get to sing songs they're familiar with, even though most aren't my jam. Does the show still have Motown night and Elvis night and all those old corny theme nights for old people like me? 😁

I haven't watched Idol since Season Ten (!) because I got sick of the obvious machinations of the judges/producers, and I couldn't stand that year's winner. I don't know if the favoritism aspect has gotten any better, but at least they're not body-shaming the contestants anymore, thank god. What sucked me into watching was when I heard that Clay was appearing as a mentor. I've always loved him and thought he did a really good job with his advice. I cannot stand shouty songs (And I am Telling You) or shouty singers (Nutsa) so I tuned both of those performances out. I think my favorites from tonight were Ian (or is it Iam?) and the girl who sang her original song, something about What Are You Good For? I was not paying attention during the introduction, but found the song so catchy that I was searching for it online, unaware that it was a original song being debuted that evening. She was great, and I love the dichotomy between her singing and speaking voice. Looks like I'm hooked again, at least for the time being.

I guess I could be in the minority, but I really enjoyed this week's shows and Al Franken as a host (but I've been a fan of his since the old SNL days and might be the only one who actually loved the Stuart Smalley movie) I'm familiar with the cadence of his speech, which some might find annoying, and his bone-dry humor. The Lindsay Graham interview was a total flop, but the show got better after that. Jordan Klepper on Wednesday (?) was stellar as usual, and Michael Kosta I think did his best work as "Tucker Carlson's face coach". Al's impressions of the various senators on Thursday's show totally cracked me up. I can't see Al being the permanent host, but I did enjoy this week.

None of the guest hosts so far have knocked my socks off, but I'm finding that once I'm comfortable with something/someone (in this case, Trevor), the more resistant I am to change. I think Kal did a pretty good job, at the very least better than some others did. He certainly did milk the "I worked at the White House" thing, but then again, he announced at week's beginning that he would, so I guess he felt the need to follow through on that?? One thing I really liked about Trevor is that he seem genuinely interested in his guests and appeared to have done his homework when interviewing them. I can see Kal following that pattern as well. I'm not 100% sold on him by any means, but maybe that will be the case with anyone filling in.

I thought Wayans had some really good lines too, but him laughing at his own jokes half the time was annoying, as was the vanity bit about his own movies. I FF'd as well. I haven't watched a single Scream movie, so I had no idea who Mason Gooding was. On a superficial note, he was mighty purty. But Wayans relating anecdotes about how drunk his dad (Cuba) used to get was weird and a little uncomfortable, especially since there's been reports of him acting uh, kinda ickily during those drunken benders. Looking forward to Kal Penn.

But I don't understand why somebody so sguigged out as what they perceive as an inappropriate man/child relationship is still watching the show. (This was asked previously by another poster, so if it's been answered already, my apologies).

I agree, and I will add a third example; one that several others have mentioned: The DiGrassos plan this BIG trip to Sicily to "rediscover their roots" but don't do a SINGLE bit of planning. They don't learn Italian, nor do they plan for a translator. They do no genealogy. It apparently never occurred to them to do any internet research. They just traipse off one day "oh la la, we'll go into town and ask around", and then they just show up at somebody's house out of the blue, babbling entirely in English, and expect...what? "We're from America". Well BFD. I am first generation Italian (my dad was born in Italy) and it would never EVER occur to me to just show up at somebody's house. I've done Ancestry, I've googled, I've Facebooked, and I know there are apparently distant relatives still living in that same small town. Were I to plan a trip, I would, what's the word, oh yeah, PREPARE if I wanted to meet them. Not travel halfway across the world and expect the sea to part for me. And then Burt gets all mopey and depressed because he didn't get his "homecoming". I am just flabbergasted. I can only hope that was to illustrate how entitled both he & his son seem to be. Which maybe Albie could have jumped in and had a line of dialogue like "see, I told you that you guys needed to plan this better". I just don't get it, and frankly it pisses me off much more than a "rich people acting stupid" show should, LOL. It's just lazy writing, as you said, to have this storyline proceed like the internet hasn't been invented yet.