Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER

WearyTraveler

Member
  • Content Count

    1.5k
  • Joined

Everything posted by WearyTraveler

  1. I hated Simon. I thought they took it too far. I watched almost all of Without a Trace, and Anthony fine in it. Must have been a director/script thing with Simon. I liked Gertrude as the annoying mother. But also thought she had overstayed her welcome
  2. To me, it made perfect sense for Ricard. He knew Shan was in the African American alliance of 4 and he was a fifth only as a number. He knew the 4 were gunning for anyone that was not them, as in the tribal councils after the merge they have been picking off everyone else and threw down the names of people they were supposedly working with (e.g. Naseer). They have got rid of Tiffany, Evvie, and Naseer, and have thrown out Xander, Erika and Heather's names more than once. Clearly, the writing was on the wall for Ricard to read: if he voted with the 4, Xander, Erika and Heather would have b
  3. Yes, I think so too! They thought she ran away from all the responsibility of being a mom (perhaps even a teenage mom?), but it will turn out she didn't.
  4. The way I understand it is that she went to the motel. After taking a shower she found the champagne and strawberries, which she consumed. One of them was drugged, as was implied by her wonky behaviour after she ingested them. Next time we see her she wakes up and discovers the door had no handle on the inside, which indicates, to me, that she was moved when she was asleep to a room that is a replica of the hotel room, or at least close enough for someone coming out of a drugged haze to mistake it for the hotel room. The missing handle would be something a person notices when they first enter
  5. I think I have one of those faces! Strangers on the bus, subway, planes tell me the most incredible things. Once there was a lady I sat next to in a train ride, who told me the entire story of how her son was a drug addict and was spending time in a detox facility, and all the anguish that was causing her and her family. Never met her before, have never seen her again. Whenever I remember this, I find myself hoping that family found a way to get through it and came out ok. And that's only one of the stories I've heard. There are quite a few others I could tell, but that's neither here nor
  6. Well, sometimes people find the need to rediscover/transmit their culture later in life. I had a colleague who is Jewish but wasn't practicing much when I met him. A couple of years later he was very keen on keeping kosher and observing the Shabbat. It happens.
  7. I tend to agree. This is where Australian Survivor is better, IMO. They manage to blindside people and surprise the audience, and you never see people scrambling like crazy and having full blown conferences in the middle of tribal. Plus, you could see who was voting with whom, your alliances are totally outed. People will remember that Erika ran to the group with Danny and Deshawn, for example, so if she was hoping to forge an alliance with the people she basically saved from tribal or even to play double agent for the group she trusts (still baffled she does not seem to realize she's at t
  8. I binged the first 6 episodes, so I am not sure, 3 or 4, maybe? Perhaps searching the PTV recaps for Erika's name will yield you an answer.
  9. That, and then she also pitched voting out Daniel to DeShawn (sp?). I think she pitched it to the same person too, so, they see her as someone who started to stir the pot when there was no need yet for pot-stirring, as they were winning every challenge at the time
  10. Taraji has been on two long running and very popular TV shows: Person of Interest and Empire. I liked her in both but I stopped watching Empire after the 2nd season because it was getting too Dinasty for my taste. Taraji was great in both. She has also done movies, but I don't recall what they were and I'm too lazy to look them up. I thought she did as good a job as a guest job as others have. At least she wasn't snarky or rude.
  11. Way back in season 1, they were. LOL. But, they have to keep upping the ante as time goes by, or the show would get stale for the regular viewers. I watch an embarrassing amount of true crime shows (so much so, that I can recognise the cases when two different shows do it at different times), and from what I can tell, there are some really devious, sophisticated killers out there who have almost gotten away with it. But, yeah, the norm is simple killers, with simple motives who are not half as clever as they think they are.
  12. Maybe her podcasts are not about murders she committed herself, but I do like the theory that she committed the Bunny murder to frame our trio because she didn't want more competition and could tell that these guys were good and gaining listeners. She wouldn't be the first person who thinks they can commit a murder because they know a lot about crime and how investigations are conducted.
  13. Makes perfect sense. It's Schroedinger's Grissom!!!
  14. When I was a business consultant, I had the chance to see the FBI pull up to a government office to execute a warrant and to take some people into custody. It wasn't related to the project I was working on, but it was in the same building. Later, in a totally unrelated matter, my ex-boyfriend had to go through a security clearance check for a job and the company hired to do that had ex-FBI agents doing the job. One of them asked me for an interview and even though it was in an informal setting (coffee shop), it felt really intimidating. It does something to you when you see/interact
  15. I particularly liked the loud stapling of documents after Linda, fully power tripping, made that woman in the first episode go back and staple a document she had delivered with a clip saying: "around here we use staples" ๐Ÿ˜†
  16. I couldn't fine one clip with the entire sequence, but I was able to find two clips that overlap. You can see how the argument started, the slaps and the nose pulling in the first one. The second one has the nose pulling and the conversation that came after, where they talk about how hard the slapping was
  17. Just watched a clip on YouTube and there are like 5 or 6 reciprocal slaps. One time, after Diane tells Sam not to slap her, he's actually the one to slap first
  18. It was weird because Diane slaps him first and he slaps her back in like a nanosecond, as if it were a reflex reaction. She slaps him again twice, IIRC, and both times he slaps her back, and that's when they turn to the nose pulling which was clearly intended to be the funny part as it makes them progressively get lower and lower until they end up on the floor. After that is when they had the conversation and she decides to leave. It's uncomfortable because it's a comedy and we sort of want to laugh but the face-slapping is not a laughing matter, but the nose pulling totally is. I d
  19. That's precisely why I think it would not be well received in this day and age. By making it "funny", they are sort of diminishing the impact. I didn't remember this scene when I started my re-watch and Sam slapping Diane made me actually jump back. I get what they were trying to do and they did manage to make me smile when the physical comedy turned to them pulling each other's noses. But, a slap in the face is just so much more serious. And this was probably not the only show to trivialise it by making it a "funny" thing. In a drama it's different because when we see face-slapping o
  20. Love this series and just finished a full re-watch. Holds up well, except for two fight scenes where Sam actually slaps women (one with Diane where they slap each other several times, and one with Rebecca where she is drunk at Woody's in-laws because she thought she was going to be a guest/date of Woody's father in law and ended up being the bartender). I don't think those scenes would be very well received in current times. I've seen it mentioned several times that Sam and Diane were the first TV couple to use the "will they?/won't they?" device, but this is not true. There are several
  21. As I understand it, game show regulations in the UK and Australia, are even more stringent than in the US
  22. I think game show regulations would prohibit that, but, off course, there's no way to know unless someone associated with the production blabs
  23. Of the other players left, I don't think any of them has the resume to go against George or Haley. IMO, Wai is the one with the weakest resume; she hasn't pulled any big moves since parting ways with George way back at the beginning and that was because his game was too chaotic for her tastes, which is not, IMO, a game valid reason. She obviously likes and excels at the puzzles, but she has not made any noteworthy strategic moves, and she has only been a follower rather than a leader. Andrew and Hayley have pretty much controlled her vote throughout the game, and even George exerted some con
  24. At this point, the only people that deserve to win, IMO, are George and Hayley, both of whom have played really smart games. If they both end up pitching their games to the jury, it will be a tough and suspenseful decision. Will the jury forget the many Hayley betrayals? After all, she has flipped more times than George, who only really flipped alliances after merge when the Brawn were picking off brains one by one. And that was something the Brawn saw coming because everyone there knew George and Cara were at the bottom of that alliance. I think the jury would understand/forgive tha
×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size