WearyTraveler

I think more than a few people would disagree with the statement that "there is no such thing as bad publicity". Weiner, the mayor of Toronto, all the celebrities that have to issue extended apologies and jump through hoops to rebuild their image after a scandal, etc. But, I'll just agree to disagree and move on.

What cliffhanger? What suspense? You say that bookwalkers are a marginal part of the audience, and I agree with that. But the only people for whom this ending would be a cliffhanger would be the bookwalkers that were not sure if Jon would be resurrected, and they are even a smaller part of the audience, given that they are a subset of the smallest group of fans. A cliffhanger by definition leaves some room for doubt as to the outcome. A cliffhanger would have been if we see Jon stabbed but still alive. That way the suspense would be "Did Jon die?" "Will someone come to save him?". It's not suspenseful, or a cliffhanger to categorically affirm that he is dead, dead, not coming back, done with story. Let's look at it from an unsullied perspective: In S1 Ned looked like the hero, the good guy, the one you are meant to root for... WOOSH! off with his head. Then it was Robb.... BAM! Red Wedding Oberyn looked like the guy who would give the Lannisters a taste of their own medicine... CRACK! Brains on sand. Jeor Mormont... murdered by his own men Jorah... gets greyscale Doran and the Sandsnakes.... total fail, not well received by the audience, almost no one is rooting for them, plus the unsullied still don't know their purpose yet Tyrion... shipped half a world away in a city at war, not likely he will be coming back to Westeros to deal with White Walkers any time soon Danny... even further away than Tyrion, it's been 5 seasons and she's still not headed to Westeros and has just now taken her first flight on a dragon Varys...iffy at best, no one knows his real agenda Stannis... sacrificed his own daughter to the fire God and still lost against the Boltons Davos... lost his King, went back to the NW who is now under the command of the traitors who murdered Jon Snow Melissandre... pushed Stannis into perhaps the most heinous crime of the series and although her magic has worked in the past, it failed big time now Jamie... lost his hand, his son, and his daughter Sansa... manipulated by LF, raped and abused by Ramsay, some think she jumped to her death Theon... betrayed the Starks, murdered innocents, got the most horrible punishment and is now a broken, crippled man, perhaps on a road to redemption, perhaps dead with Sansa Cersei... mean, evil, manipulative character, got a horrible punishment, but still has a sinister supporter in Qyburn and his "warrior" Brienne... missed Sansa's signal, will she find her again? will she be too late and see her dead outside Winterfell? Can she alone defeat the Boltons? Meanwhile, bad guys like Littlefinger, Roose, Ramsay and Frey are still walking around enjoying the spoils of their evil actions. Who is there to root for if Jon Snow is dead, dead? Why would the Unsullied believe Jon's death is any different than Ned's or Robb's when this story so far has killed and beaten down all the good guys? Because Thoros of Myr resurrected Dondarion two seasons ago? Few people remember that or even make the connection between Melissandre and Thoros. Because Melissandre is a powerful witch? She just failed miserably with Stannis. Plus everyone from HBO, and the show, insisted Jon was dead, dead. So, what's the cliffhanger here for the Unsullied who have not had the benefit of knowing all we do about Rhaegar and Lyanna and the prophecies talked about in the books? Where is the suspense? What is there to get excited about with Jon's death? With all due respect, there's no comparison. "Who shot JR?" was a true cliffhanger, "Jon Snow is dead, dead, never, ever coming back" is an affirmation that was intended to leave no room for doubt. It looks like the intent was to later surprise the viewers big time with the resurrection, but that seems to have backfired because many people found out about it beforehand. And those who didn't expressed their anger and disappointment in such a way that now the first official poster for the season has Jon Snow in it. So, if the intention was to have a shocking surprise in episode 1, 2 or 3 when Jon is officially resurrected, then, that was a big, big fail. Their marketing failed at having the unsullied hordes excited about the new season. Their marketing succeeded in having the Unsullied hordes very angry at losing, once again, the one character for whom they were were rooting. Ergo, Jon Snow poster.

Yes, she was basically responsible for Mike killing Otto, the head of the family. No bigger sin than that in mob life, I think.

I think trending briefly is not a big PR win. There's no way of confirming this for sure, but I believe a better strategy would have been to end the season with Jon's resurrection instead of with his death. IMO that would have generated a lot more buzz because it would have affected more people. For example, bookwalkers, who have for the past four years been 99.9% convinced that Jon lives. For me, it was a missed opportunity at a really big PR blowout. So, when I say I don't understand their logic, I mean I don't understand it in relation to the other option they had, which was to end with Jon triumphantly being brought back from the dead. As it stands now, Jon's resurrection, arguably the most important event of the series, loses part of its punch.

True, but given the history of this show's filming process and how easy it is for stuff to get leaked, why would they think they could keep up the charade? The minute KH came within a 5 mile radius of a GOT filming location, his picture was plastered all over the internet and then all over the big entertainment news outlets, and that was months ago. All the hype they generated with Jon's "death" was incredibly short-lived. Maybe they were hoping that "leaks" about Jon's return would generate even more buzz, but if that was their strategy, it backfired majorly as it seems most people are respectful of spoiler phobics and don't actually spread that kind of information around. I don't know, I think the whole thing was a huge fail. Off course I don't think Jon's dead. But I'm a bookwalker, and I understand that my knowledge of the written story being more complete than someone's who is only a show watcher colors my perceptions and my theories. As was stated above, many unsullied watchers actually believed Jon was dead. Some even believed Sansa jumped to her death, even though jumping off a castle wall into a mound of snow is more likely to leave you alive than a dozen of your "brothers" stabbing you repeatedly. I have a friend who is an unsullied, and at her request, I filled her in on some of the backstory that was not on the show before S5 ended. After the finale she came to me all confused: "They killed Jon Snow! The showrunners said he was dead, dead. KH said he wasn't coming back! What does that mean?". So, yes, they fooled some people for a while, but that was, as I stated, very short lived since just a few weeks into filming S6 there were sightings of KH around the set. The whole thing makes no sense from a PR perspective.

I really don't understand their rationale for ending the season with Jon's "death". I have friends and family who have not read the books and have spoiler phobia. When I talk to them about the show, I feel like I'm walking on a mine field and have to bite my tongue quite often. I would love to post this on my social media and show my excitement, but I'm afraid they'll accuse me of spoiling them, so you guys are the only people with whom I can share my joy. I imagine many other people are in the same situation, but isn't the objective of a promo poster to generate buzz, particularly through social media? There was just no logic here from HBO / the show.

I'm getting all tingly!

Thanks, weaver!

I'm sorry, my recording cut off after Quinn got hit on the head. What happened after that? How does Carrie know that Allison is involved?

I liked it! I like how crazy this show is. I never know what's going to happen next and the surprises are well done, they don't feel like the writers are doing surprises just to get that gotcha moment, they feel earned. Also, being shallow for a second, JT is a fine looking man.

It is an anthology. Watching season 1 is not required to understand anything happening in season 2. That said, there are some characters in Season 1 that are present in season 2, so, for those of us that saw Season 1, it's a nice little connection. Also, since the inspiration for this series was the movie Fargo, there are some thematic aspects that are common to all three (the movie, S1 and S2). Notably, off course, the town of Fargo, the speech patterns, the kind of people, etc. Finally, the movie and the series have that Coen brothers vibe and elements that they do in all their projects. So, you might read analyses comparing and contrasting elements of all these things. Season one's protagonist is Molly, Lou's daughter, all grown up and a cop herself. Lester and Malvo were characters in season 1 who had some traits that are present in other characters in Coen projects, so, you see them mentioned. The parallels between Season 1 and the movie Fargo are more apparent than in season 2; For example, Molly being very similar to Marge Gunderson and Lester being very similar to Jerry Lundegaard. So, you may see people wondering "who is the "Jerry" of season 2?" and things like that. Season two's protagonist is Lou, doing his own case. Same character, different actor (because the character is way younger), and a self-contained, different case. But, for those of us who have watched season 1, it's interesting to remember some of the dialog and speculate. For example, we heard Lou say something about staying up all night doing a vigil of his own, and this season, we think we saw that vigil. But that is not knowledge necessary to understand this case or this season. It's just a little connection that is cool for those of us who saw the first season. I think it's kind of brilliant how they can do that: put in some connections for the viewers who watched the first season while at the same time keeping it all self contained so that watching one season is not necessary to enjoy the other season. All of that said, Season 1 was pretty good, maybe you should give it a try.

It looked to me like the box was destroyed by the energy released from the tree after Abbie went in there. If so, does that mean all the monsters are unleashed?

I don't think this is a fair assessment. A lot of people on this show are angry, male and female (see Kevin's reactions to the GR last season, John, this season, Matt for part of his ordeal... It would take too long to name them all). Anger is one of the stages of grief, and the departure has definitely caused a lot of grief. It's only natural that some of the characters are still angry.

When Virgil emptied the syringe I was like "Noooooooo!!!!". This show....!

Can't he give his speech in the middle of a banquet? 3:-)

Dare I dream of Frey pie?

I think the intention is to keep Matt's actions ambiguous, but, given what he was saying right before he shut off the camera, I tend to agree with BettyBee. Matt was going on about how he was doing everything he had done that same day exactly the same way, down to the food they were eating; then he suddenly stopped mid-phrase, and looked at the camera as if realizing that filming was not something he had done that day, and so he immediately turned it off.

Well, I loved Lost, and I loved the ending, so, there's another perspective for you. I say you give it a try and judge for yourself. Maybe you won't like it, maybe you will.

Being in the camp that thinks that something supernatural is going on (or as Cardie put it, unseen spiritual forces), I'm leaning toward consensual sex. Mary woke up and it happened as Matt said it did. So, I also don't think he was atoning for that. But I do think he was atoning for having said "Yes" to John the first time John asked him to lie and for putting himself first before the little boy; for thinking for a few seconds of taking that wristband that belonged to him, instead of letting the boy, who needed it more, have it. He's atoning for his "selfishness", for taking Mary out of town when it wasn't really necessary. I think in his mind, this all started because he was selfishly trying to get her to wake up again, for him, not for her; and in his mind, he took her out the safety of the town because he didn't have enough faith to be patient and await God's will. It's a very Old Testament way of thinking. Lindelof was born Jewish but converted to Catholicism later on. Both religions share the Old Testament as a core belief, so, IMO, that's probably why some of his characters seem to have the biblical archetype of the Old Testament.

No, that didn't happen, that I recall. The one who was in bed with a woman other than his wife was Kevin, not Matt. Perhaps the OP has their names confused.

The show is Schroedinger's cat! I agree with your analysis here, and I think that Damon was more for always giving Lost a supernatural explanation but several things happened that prevented that. I have no way of knowing if my theory is true, and this is a topic to discuss this episode of The Leftovers, so, I'll not go into it. What I will say, though is that I don't think this show is as unfocused as Lost seemed to me at times (and I loved Lost, I thought the character study was quite effective, even if I didn't much like the crazy science). I think this show has a very clear direction and is quite tight with its themes. I know the episode title is probably meant to remind us of Mary and Joseph, but I thought Matt's physical and emotional journey here had some very strong parallels with Jonah's (from the bible). He even walked into the dark "belly" of the "big fish", and was expelled in a gush of water, ending up in the camp grounds (Nineveh?) and doing the repentance himself. This episode made me think a lot and I have a ton of ideas swirling in my head. I don't know if I'll get around to posting all of them (busy time at work), but I liked that this show has me pondering stuff. Good times!

A while ago, I watched a few episodes of Cutthroat Kitchen (just bear with me for a minute). On that show 4 chefs compete against each other for money. Each chef gets the same amount of money at the beginning of the competition; then, during each round chefs get the opportunity to bid for different objects and perks while they are cooking their dishes. These objects could be something to make life easier for them (for example an extra ingredient, or piece of equipment), or something to hinder a competitor (for example, the opportunity to make a competitor stop working for a few minutes, or cook with child size implements, etc.). At the end of the competition, the winning chef gets to keep all the money he/she didn't use to bid. After each round another chef who has not been privy to the shenanigans during the cooking portion (i.e. the chef doesn't know who had less time for cooking, or was hindered by another competitor), tastes the food and declares a winner. The contestants are not allowed to explain to the judge why their food is not up to par, other than describing their dish, they can't say anything else. I wonder what would happen in Project Runway if contestants and judges didn't meet each other until Fashion Week. Imagine that the judges only judge the clothes, with no commentary from the designer, much like it happens today in the fashion world anyway. We see pictures and fashion shows but we don't get a detailed account of what every garment represents. People critiquing / reviewing these collections may say things like "this dress pays celebrates nature because of its color" or something like that, and then the designer gets to say something in interviews, but not much before. So, PR could do a completely anonymous season. The designers never talk to the judges, and they watch the runway through a TV screen, getting the critiques that way. They can call out top and bottom looks right after the runway with all the models standing there without the designers, the models can then immediately walk down to the judges for the closer look portion. Winners and losers can then be announced. They can keep all their workroom "drama" and the TG save if they want, the judges wouldn't necessarily know that a designer was saved. We wouldn't get sob stories trying to sway the judges, and we would eliminate any biases (conscious or unconscious) on the judges' part.

Me too. I think we are meant to surmise that he hits his wife and other women with whom he sleeps. No. The plan was for Ed to hit the tree head-on, but the car skidded on the ice, so he ended up hitting it in the rear. When the tow truck is there, Peggy and Ed have a conversation in which he says that he "got it right the second time" and we see damage to the front of the car. Peggy also says that if anyone asks, they are supposed to say that the damage to the back of the car was because she backed into their garage door, which wouldn't produce that kind of damage, but Peggy apparently thinks people will just buy their story. ETA: Cristina beat me to it by a few seconds. I have to learn to be more succinct! LOL!

You know? I think if Candace took the black jacket and put in with red outfit and vice versa, she might have gotten a less harsh critique.

I'm late to this party! I didn't know we had started and only found out today, but I'll try to catch up. Lady S. I think that Tyrion didn't have Janos go overboard because he was made a Lord, while Deem wasn't. Two deaths are more suspicious than one and if one of them is a Lord maybe the King is bound to take an interest, particularly since this King made Janos a Lord. In short, I think the decision was more political than moral.