S01.E02: New Day

[peachmangosteen]

Quote

A cautiously optimistic Belinda walks a fine line with Tanya, while Armond brainstorms ways to deal with Shane. After her husband belittles her work, Rachel approaches Nicole for advice. Paula and Olivia lose track of their stash, while a revived Mark attempts to connect with Quinn.

Airs July 18th.

[DoubleUTeeEff]

I loved the beginning with all the guests waking up in the morning happy as could be and all the employees showing up for work with "here we go with this shit again" faces.

The conversation between Nicole and Rachel was so good. The way it turned was so fantastic. I wonder if Rachel is oblivious to how she really wrote the article or if Nicole took it too seriously. Maybe a combo of both but you'd think Nicole would be used to criticism. Possibly it was just a chance for Nicole to talk back so she seized it even though for Rachel it was just a puff piece.

The way Rachel framed her problem as a "career" problem to Nicole seemed more like a marriage problem to me. I guess she's still in denial about the whole thing. I get why Shane would have an issue with Nicole working on an article on their honeymoon but the way he goes about trying to solve it, "he'll pay her double" is so clueless.

 A lot of obsession this episode. Mark was obsessed with not being diagnosed with cancer (and now looks like he'll get obsessed about his dad), Tanya was obsessed with Belinda, Shane was still obsessed with the room, Rachel was obsessed about the article and her career and Olivia was obsessed with her friend and the busboy. I wonder if she's jealous of her friend or the busboy. Or maybe she's insecure that a guy likes her friend and not her.

Armand! I was hoping he wouldn't take the drugs. Frankly as soon as he mentioned how much he wanted a drink I was sure he would fall off the wagon at some point. I just didn't realize it'd be so soon.

[Traveller519]

I don't know where we're going, yet, but I'm strangely engrossed by everyone's story.

I do wonder if we're going to get a Shane redemption of sort to come. He's the only one who's seemed devoid of positive traits thus far.

[MerBearStare]

49 minutes ago, DoubleUTeeEff said:

The way it turned was so fantastic. I wonder if Rachel is oblivious to how she really wrote the article or if Nicole took it too seriously. Maybe a combo of both but you'd think Nicole would be used to criticism.

It reminds me of the saying "The axe forgets. The tree remembers." I think the truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Rachel probably wrote matter of factly or slightly critically about a person who was theoretical to her, but then the actual person reacted badly to that slight criticism. I think Nicole took the criticism more personally because it sounds like Rachel may have been implying that Nicole used a Me Too situation to her advantage to get promoted and Nicole seems like a Lean In feminist who wouldn't like that implication (even if deep down inside she knows it might be slightly true).

[chocolatine]

1 hour ago, DoubleUTeeEff said:

The conversation between Nicole and Rachel was so good. The way it turned was so fantastic. I wonder if Rachel is oblivious to how she really wrote the article or if Nicole took it too seriously. Maybe a combo of both but you'd think Nicole would be used to criticism. Possibly it was just a chance for Nicole to talk back so she seized it even though for Rachel it was just a puff piece.

Between the kind of work she's being offered and the admission that she copied the information about Nicole from another article, I get the impression that Rachel is not a good journalist and oblivious to how her writing affects the subject. (I still think Shane was an asshole for belittling her work though.)

Mark said that Nicole "runs one of the country's most profitable search engines" so she must be earning at least eight figures a year in total comp. She can easily afford to rent a villa with dedicated staff on a private island for her vacation rather than a one-bedroom suite in what looks like a four-star hotel. She could have at least sprung for a two-bedroom suite; that way they'd all still be together but Quinn would get his own space.

Finally, is it normal for teenage girls to carry around such a huge assortment of drugs these days? In my day (the '90s) we mostly stuck to pot and/or alcohol. Mixing so many different drugs seems very risky.

[Cheezwiz]

Still loving this series - I'm completely engrossed by everyone's stories so far. The gorgeous scenery is an added bonus.

At first I didn't get why Armand wanted to hold on to Paula's knapsack and lie about it, but then I realized "oh, right, former addict having a bit of a meltdown, suddenly has his hands on a stash".

I'm glad they didn't drag out the cancer scare for Steve Zahn's character. It looks like Mike White is incorporating some of his own story with that character - apparently his Dad was a christian minister who came out late in life as gay (although he did not die of AIDS).

It was hilarious seeing the different characters converse about their fellow guests at dinner - a kaleidoscope of opinions!

Curious as to where the Jennifer Coolidge story is going. I really feel for Belinda.

Also curious as to whether Olivia is simply envious that her friend Paula is getting male attention, or if she's actually attracted to her. I like that they gave the poor awkward brother a nice moment by himself at the end of the episode.

[ShellsandCheese]

Truthfully, I'm bored with Olivia and Paula. Not interesting at all. The actress who plays Paula is quite pretty but I don't think she or Sydney Sweeney (Olivia) are good actresses. I agree with the comments about the Mossbacher family, if Nicole is this huge CEO, why is her entire family + a family friend staying in a suite with just one bedroom? Make it make sense. I would also like to add that both Mossbacher parents are shitty for allowing their daughter to rule the roost and treat her brother the way she treats him. 

Quote

Finally, is it normal for teenage girls to carry around such a huge assortment of drugs these days? In my day (the '90s) we mostly stuck to pot and/or alcohol. Mixing so many different drugs seems very risky.

No, it's really not. But HBO is obsessed with shows about teens doing drugs and having lots of sex even though sex and drug use amongst teens has been steadily decreasing - and it was never that high in the first place.

Edited July 19, 2021 by ShellsandCheese

[thuganomics85]

Definitely glad to get more Connie Britton awesomeness this go around!  The scene between Nicole and Rachel certainly went in an unexpected direction.  Right now, I'm in the camp that thinks it is somewhere in the middle.  I got a sense that the article probably really wasn't all that great (who knows if Rachel is actually good at being a journalist?), but I get the sense that Nicole is someone who probably would get more worked up than expected over what she perceived was a slight.  Although it did sound like Nicole's biggest issue was Rachel inadvertently (?) claiming that Nicole's success was due to a MeToo situation.  I wonder what that was all about?  Either way, I thought the scene was probably one of the best ones so far, and while Britton was her normal outstanding self, I thought Alexandra Daddario more than held her own as well.

You know, taken by itself, I could actually understand Shane's annoyance over Rachel possibly working on their honeymoon, but I just can't help but get the sense that he doesn't want her to work at all, and it's not out of a sense of love, but wanting to control what she does and not do her own thing.  Similarly, I think Shane has a point over not getting the original room and Armond's way of handling it, but Shane continues to handle it in an unflattering way (seriously, how many times must he name drop his mom?  I suspect it's something he has done quite a bit in his life...)  In short, even he's right, Shane seems to embodied the infamous "You're not wrong, You're just an asshole" line from The Big Lebowski movie.

Mark doesn't have cancer after-all, but instead finds out that his dad had actually died of AIDS and was sleeping with men.  Considering his somewhat stereotypical view on masculinity (referring to his dad as an "alpha" and his speech last week how the "good old days" when "men could be men"), I imagine this will shake him up a bit.

I think Tanya is sincere with her admiration towards Belinda, but it's really getting into obsessive territory already.

Olivia and Paula continue to be obnoxious, but I still think Sydney Sweeney and Brittany O'Grady are really nailing down how a lot of modern teenagers act: if maybe a little amplified due to their wealth and status.

Between this and True Detective, I guess Daddario has it in her contract to at least show her breasts once in the second episode of her HBO shows!

Armond is barely holding it together and now he's got a whole bunch of those drugs that Olivia and Paula accidentally left behind.  This is going to get crazy!

Still finding this to be intriguing and well-acted.

[bobbyjoe]

Run, Belinda!  Do not go into business with Tanya— there is no way that’s going to end well, when her flighty obsessions turn to something else and she forgets you.

Not only is this show ridiculously well cast, but Mike White’s writing is consistently brilliant.  Case in point:  when Nicole and Rachel have their talk, Rachel says she mostly just echoed “The Post.” This may seem like a small thing, but it’s the kind of perfect move White does to keep that scene ambiguous.  Notice he doesn’t clarify whether she means The Washington Post or The New York Post.  Either way, Rachel may have ripped off somebody else’s take on Nicole, but if it’s the New York Post, it likely was a tabloid hatchet job and Nicole is genuinely annoyed with a cheap shot from lazy writing.  If it’s The Washington Post though (which from what we know likely lines up more ideologically with Nicole), then there’s maybe some real criticism that got under Nicole’s skin, perhaps because she recognizes some truth there. 
 

And I like how we can simultaneously feel that Rachel is probably a bad writer but still feel sad  and frustrated for her when Shane bullies her about her career; the same way we can worry that Tanya is going to hurt someone like Belinda while at the same time we feel compassionate to Tanya about how lost she seems and how in pain over her mother.  Just like he was on Enlightened, Mike White is one of our best writers at capturing these kinds of ambiguities and complications of human nature.

[anniebird]

Shane has spent this entire honeymoon obsessing over getting the wrong room and paying little attention to his wife but he doesn't want her working because it would take time away from him? He is a typical controlling asshole.

[Empress1]

9 hours ago, thuganomics85 said:

You know, taken by itself, I could actually understand Shane's annoyance over Rachel possibly working on their honeymoon, but I just can't help but get the sense that he doesn't want her to work at all, and it's not out of a sense of love, but wanting to control what she does and not do her own thing. 

Me too. I would be annoyed if my hypothetical husband worked on our honeymoon - why would you want to spend your honeymoon working? If there's flexibility with the deadline, arrange to do it when you're back; if there isn't, you say "I'm on my honeymoon so I'm not working, but I'd love to touch base about some other projects when I'm back on the grid."

BUT. Shane offering to pay his wife is such a fucked-up dynamic that I'm not comfortable with. He very clearly expects to ... own her, for lack of a better phrase, and he doesn't want her to work because he wants her at his disposal and doesn't seem to care that her work means something to her (however trivial the stuff she writes about is), and that is a really shitty take. The phrase "I'll pay you" also indicates that he sees his money as his money and not their money, even though he was talking about how her financial situation had changed. It keeps her "in her place."

I was also with Nicole re: Rachel working overall - if her marriage goes south and she doesn't have "set me up for life" money in the pre-nup, she'll need something to fall back on. I listened to an interesting podcast called Death, Sex, and Money and they had someone on there who had been married to someone wealthy and thus didn't need to work, and her husband left her for his pregnant mistress. Her lawyer told her point blank that the life she'd had with her ex was over and she wasn't going to be living in luxury anymore, and it was and she didn't. She wasn't destitute but "support her in the lifestyle to which she'd become accustomed" is much less common now, and that's not what she ended up with.

2 hours ago, bobbyjoe said:

Either way, Rachel may have ripped off somebody else’s take on Nicole, but if it’s the New York Post, it likely was a tabloid hatchet job and Nicole is genuinely annoyed with a cheap shot from lazy writing.

My first thought - I assumed it was the NY Post since Rachel lives in NYC, and if Rachel ripped that off, it was almost certainly trashy. Also admitting that you ripped something off is ... not a great look.

11 hours ago, ShellsandCheese said:

I would also like to add that both Mossbacher parents are shitty for allowing their daughter to rule the roost and treat her brother the way she treats him. 

If I had told my parents that I didn't want my brother around on a vacation they were paying for, they'd have told me "Too bad" and that would have been the end of it. I can't stand seeing bratty-ass kids on TV and in movies. (I do agree that for someone as rich as Nicole is supposed to be, the brother should have an actual bed.)

14 hours ago, DoubleUTeeEff said:

I loved the beginning with all the guests waking up in the morning happy as could be and all the employees showing up for work with "here we go with this shit again" faces.

Natasha Rothwell's face was perfect. I can't remember if she actually gave a heavy sigh, but if she didn't it was written all over her face.

[Mr. R0b0t]

I don't think the Mossbacher's fully understand how the sister treats the brother when they aren't around.  

So we are to believe both those girls managed to get that amount of elicit drugs (almost casually) from home to vacation?  Props to the one girl for travelling with a bong that had water in it carried loosely in a bag...that takes some skill.  Also, from my observations, people who use drugs know EXACTLY what drugs they have and how much they have left. 

So why are Papa Mossbacher's balls swollen, or is it psychosomatic?  

Every Tanya scene has be dying from second-hand cringe.

[Empress1]

12 minutes ago, Mr. R0b0t said:

So we are to believe both those girls managed to get that amount of elicit drugs (almost casually) from home to vacation? 

Most of the pills were prescribed, I think - Paula mentioned not taking all of a certain one because she actually needed it.

[candle96]

20 minutes ago, Empress1 said:

 

If I had told my parents that I didn't want my brother around on a vacation they were paying for, they'd have told me "Too bad" and that would have been the end of it. I can't stand seeing bratty-ass kids on TV and in movies. (I do agree that for someone as rich as Nicole is supposed to be, the brother should have an actual bed.)

I don't think I've ever hated a character as much as that daughter! So good job to the writers on that one, because I do think that's the point. Her friend is marginally better, but not by much. I really can't stand rich kids who complain about their parents' career choices while also benefiting from said careers. 

I have become fixated on the fact that this family has a 1-bedroom suite. I do really feel for the brother.

Spoiler

This is speculation, but I wonder if finances are not as stable as Nicole's family thinks they are. Maybe Nicole knows something is coming with her company, her compensation is in stock and the stock is tanking, etc.

 

[Mr. R0b0t]

5 minutes ago, Empress1 said:

Most of the pills were prescribed, I think - Paula mentioned not taking all of a certain one because she actually needed it.

Yes, they were prescription, but for the uninitiated that was a lot of Ketamine.

 

[MerBearStare]

4 minutes ago, candle96 said:

Her friend is marginally better, but not by much. I really can't stand rich kids who complain about their parents' career choices while also benefiting from said careers. 

Ugh, YES! It reminds me of one of Rupert Murdoch's kids disavowing Fox News a year or two ago. My reaction was, "So you're gonna give all that money back?"

Also, the friend. You just got a free awesome vacation, so maybe don't act like such a twat. It's one thing to be shitty to your own family (I think we were all probably shitty to our families at that age); it's another to be shitty to someone else's family when you're a guest on their vacation.

[dmc]

I like the show although it’s so weird.  I keep waiting for there to be something sci-fi or magical happening.  Is it rich people’s’ hell?

 

Also I know no one’s name so bear with me

The journalist that wrote the article is like somebody who pieces together other peoples’ pieces.  So she would be like the person who reworked an US weekly article for a online publication that no one’s heard of….So unless Nicole Is someone who reads all press it would be surprising that she would know about it and that she would be more upset about the reworked third rate article than the actual original in which she got the material.  I’m not saying that’s not possible it’s just weird. Does Jeff Bezos read The Heavy’s 5 things to know about Jeff Bezos?  Does Mark Zuckerberg read Cheat Sheet?

 

The honeymoon couple is on their last leg. The guy has spent the entire last two days obsessed with this hotel room.  And I’m not even going to judge him on it because I would be obsessed with paying more and not getting what I paid for as well.  Especially since the place completely gaslit him over it. All they had to do is reduce his cost for the other room.  Why the drama?

But the hypocrisy lies in the fact that it’s OK for him to be obsessed with the hotel room but it’s not OK for her to write one article.

 

The manager guy at the hotel is just a complete weirdo.  I feel like people being double booked is like a common occurrence in hotels you just give one person the inferior room and then give the money back or don’t charge them as much.  Then you comp a treatment or two. Why keep lying about it? 

 

Why is the wealthy family only staying in a one room suite?  That poor son…

 

Watch Connie Britton’s face on the bed through the entire phone AIDS discussion.  Her Face is priceless 

Edited July 19, 2021 by dmc

[Cheezwiz]

1 hour ago, anniebird said:

Shane has spent this entire honeymoon obsessing over getting the wrong room and paying little attention to his wife but he doesn't want her working because it would take time away from him? He is a typical controlling asshole.

Also I noted in this episode, how much he seemed to enjoy declaring that he had a "hot" wife. As if in his eyes, that was pretty much the only thing of value about her as a person.

Mike White is an amazing writer - he really slips in  a lot of nuances and ambiguities even with characters who are clearly meant to be jerks or stock villains.

[preeya]

1 hour ago, Mr. R0b0t said:

So why are Papa Mossbacher's balls swollen, or is it psychosomatic?  

Maybe lack of nookie. The wife did say in E01 that she hadn't seen them in quite awhile.

[BingeyKohan]

I too am baffled why the Mossbachers (? why is that the only name from this show I can remember) are staying in that one suite with so many people. Also, was it supposed to be a joke they were so bummed to be drug-less then kept reaching into bags and producing more and more? It was like Mary Poppins and her carpetbag full of ... drugs.

I am 100% on Rachel's side about her work (well 92%; obviously if her assigning editor knew she was on her honeymoon she wouldn't have reached out in the first place and probably would be appalled to know Rachel was actually going to do it) ... BUT if she's doing cut and paste listicles and accepting a few hundred dollars for the job she just turned down - she'd have to have a plan b for her future career whether she maintains it until her inevitable divorce or not. Unless she wants to live with a bunch of roommates as a divorcee. Which, she might! 

[One Imaginary Girl]

I actually liked the turn that Nicole and Rachel's conversation took.  Bravo to Nicole for expressing her dislike of the article--no need for her to pussyfoot around or politely lie about it.  Neither she nor Mark seems so terrible so far, apart from apparently cheaping out a bit on their accommodations, so how did they end up with such a horrible daughter?  So glad that the bag of drugs was lost and probably won't be returned, because I was bored senseless by the scene of Olivia and Paula doing drugs.   Drug-oriented people are not as interesting as they think they are.

[aghst]

Is Nicole that great?  Look at the daughter she raised.  Yeah if she is a high-profile CEO, she'd probably have assistants around, not be reading her emails here and there.

I don't know how exclusive the White Lotus is.  I guess it's on a separate, small island.  High-level tech CEOs probably aren't in some resort with other people around, especially if they're well off.

And that room situation is really odd, for a party of 5 you'd think they'd have rented at least two suites or villas.

Shane does want to control her while Rachel sees doing gigs as a hedge, if her marriage ends.  He was going to spoil their honeymoon by obsessing over money but when she wants to try to have some measure of financial independence, he won't have it -- he flat out said "NO" before offering her double not to take the job.  Come on, she could have done the job while he was lounging by the pool or eating.  She still would have had time to service him sexually, since that seems to be the big draw for him about being married to her.  Why did Rachel end up with him though?  She doesn't feel secure financially, even with the prenup.  They're clashing during their honeymoon, may be downhill from here on out.

They seem to give a lot of screen time to the two girls though.  Not sure why that is, unless they figure in the dead person's plot.

 

[chocolatine]

One small detail I noticed but forgot to mention in my original post, when the Mossbachers and Paula were having dinner, Nicole made an unkind comment about Lena Dunham as part of her argument with Olivia and Paula. That was surprising to me because Lena's show, Girls, ran on HBO and I'm pretty sure she has/had other projects with them in development. I wonder if there's been a falling-out, and this is HBO's passive aggressive way of getting back at her.

[dmc]

Just now, chocolatine said:

One small detail I noticed but forgot to mention in my original post, when the Mossbachers and Paula were having dinner, Nicole made an unkind comment about Lena Dunham as part of her argument with Olivia and Paula. That was surprising to me because Lena's show, Girls, ran on HBO and I'm pretty sure she has/had other projects with them in development. I wonder if there's been a falling-out, and this is HBO's passive aggressive way of getting back at her.

I think it was just harmless snark, there's some snark about Hillary Clinton.  I like to think famous people can take one liner snark 

[chocolatine]

Just now, dmc said:

I think it was just harmless snark, there's some snark about Hillary Clinton.  I like to think famous people can take one liner snark 

I get snarking on random celebrities and public figures, but Lena Dunham has (or had) a working relationship with HBO. I thought it was an odd choice to diss one of their own stars, unless it was done with Lena's knowledge and approval. I don't watch a ton of HBO shows, so I'm not sure whether it's something they do regularly as an inside joke and it's considered a badge of honor to get a shout-out, or whether it's a veiled insult.

[dmc]

Just now, chocolatine said:

I get snarking on random celebrities and public figures, but Lena Dunham has (or had) a working relationship with HBO. I thought it was an odd choice to diss one of their own stars, unless it was done with Lena's knowledge and approval. I don't watch a ton of HBO shows, so I'm not sure whether it's something they do regularly as an inside joke and it's considered a badge of honor to get a shout-out, or whether it's a veiled insult.

Honestly that's more of a reason to do it like a little shout out.  Yes like a badge of honor and name recognition...

[Adgirl]

13 hours ago, thuganomics85 said:

who knows if Rachel is actually good at being a journalist?

If Rachel is a good journalist how come she doesn't know her husband is an asshole. 
 I agree with the person above about Nicole's reaction.  In her reaction she laid out exactly why she thought the piece was bogus. Rachel agreed she said "rode the wave of MeToo". I think any woman who survived the bad old days takes exception to the idea that we haven't worked hard and suffered much to get to where we are now. If we get the big title because a company is covering their ass, that's the company's deal for not recognizing talent prior to MeToo. 

Quote

think Tanya is sincere with her admiration towards Belinda, 

Nope that's classic magical negro energy Belinda is giving.

[questionfear]

2 hours ago, Mr. R0b0t said:

I don't think the Mossbacher's fully understand how the sister treats the brother when they aren't around.  

So we are to believe both those girls managed to get that amount of elicit drugs (almost casually) from home to vacation?  Props to the one girl for travelling with a bong that had water in it carried loosely in a bag...that takes some skill.  Also, from my observations, people who use drugs know EXACTLY what drugs they have and how much they have left. 

So why are Papa Mossbacher's balls swollen, or is it psychosomatic?  

Every Tanya scene has be dying from second-hand cringe.

My mom and I were discussing this show when we spoke this AM, and she asked the same thing (about how they got that volume of drugs all the way to the vacation). I pointed out that we can handwave that the family had upgraded TSA checks and probably they tucked a lot of the drugs inside the prescription bottles. Also, TSA doesn't care about drugs unless you're smuggling like 5lbs of something, and it's totally believable that young and attractive women wouldn't get questioned about the water pipe. Technically it's not illegal to own it, just depends on what you smoke out of it. I didn't catch that they had water in it though-that is both impressive and unsanitary (who wants to inhale smoke that went through water that was chilling in your bag?? Ew.)

Just now, chocolatine said:

I get snarking on random celebrities and public figures, but Lena Dunham has (or had) a working relationship with HBO. I thought it was an odd choice to diss one of their own stars, unless it was done with Lena's knowledge and approval. I don't watch a ton of HBO shows, so I'm not sure whether it's something they do regularly as an inside joke and it's considered a badge of honor to get a shout-out, or whether it's a veiled insult.

I think Lena Dunham is well aware she's a bit of a generational punchline. Plus maybe her people and HBO saw it as synergy-reminding everyone she exists before her new show comes out. 

[dmc]

1 hour ago, Adgirl said:

If Rachel is a good journalist how come she doesn't know her husband is an asshole. 
 I agree with the person above about Nicole's reaction.  In her reaction she laid out exactly why she thought the piece was bogus. Rachel agreed she said "rode the wave of MeToo". I think any woman who survived the bad old days takes exception to the idea that we haven't worked hard and suffered much to get to where we are now. If we get the big title because a company is covering their ass, that's the company's deal for not recognizing talent prior to MeToo. 

Nope that's classic magical negro energy Belinda is giving.

Rachel is not a journalist, a journalist pitches ideas and writes original content based on them.  Rachel is a splicer, she cuts and pastes other articles into one for usually unnamed online publications.  She may be talented but her work wouldn't be indicative of it because it heavily using others' work.  That means that other journalists wrote articles saying this woman rode the "me too" movement and all she did was organize it into an online publication.  That's what she was trying to tell Nicole.  So yeah, Nicole can be angry that she mindlessly cuts and pastes narratives without asking if they are true for a living.  But to me the blame lies with the orginal journalist who pitched this idea, wrote the piece and to the editor that greenlighted it for publication.  

 

Edited July 19, 2021 by dmc

[Bulldog]

I don't know how I feel about the fact that Shane, who is clearly getting the villain edit, is the one character I seem to consistently be finding myself in agreement with his opinions.  First, as I mentioned last week, on the room situation, you should get the room that you (or in this case, mommy) paid for.  I would not obsess over it the way Shane has, but its not unreasonable.  I did like the manager suggested trade-off of offering him a room with an extra toilet in exchange for the room with the ocean view.   This week, I think its a perfectly reasonable request to not want your spouse to spend your freaking honeymoon working.  I suspect if the roles were reversed, Rachel would be getting much more sympathy for the exact same situation.  And yes, he should not have offered to "pay" her not to work -- that was a dick move -- but Rachel should have not put him in a position of feeling that he had to make such an offer.  She should have simply replied to her editor/agent/whomever that she was on her honeymoon and would be available when she returned on "x" date.  

LOVED the Rachel/Nicole conversation and all its glorious awkwardness.  So, does Rachel do those top 10 lists things you see at the bottom of web pages?  Is that really journalism?  And for all Rachel's aw shucks innocence and naivete, she was pretty quick to describe Nicole and the daughter as "bitches" when she saw them in the dining room. (Not that I disagree about the daughter.)

Not sure where the whole Grandpa Mosbacher was gay and had AIDS thing is going, but that was certainly an unexpected curveball.  Interested how it will fit in with the rest of the story. 

I'm not so sure that Tanya's business offer to Belinda was such a bad thing (although I'd be very wary of accepting).  When she made the proposal to Belinda, then turned to tell the Mosbachers that they had a lovely family before Belinda could reply, I thought for certain it would be an example of how flaky and self absorbed Tanya was and that she couldn't remember what she was talking about mere seconds earlier.  But, instead she worked the conversation back around to what a great massage Belinda gave her, and then turned to Belinda and said she could be her PR person as well.  I think Tanya might be smarter than most are giving her credit for.   

3 hours ago, dmc said:

Watch Connie Britton’s face on the bed through the entire phone AIDS discussion.  Her Face is priceless 

Britton can do more with one facial expression than most performers can with an entire script of dialogue.  

[peachmangosteen]

3 hours ago, dmc said:

I keep waiting for there to be something sci-fi or magical happening.

Same lol.

1 hour ago, Adgirl said:

If Rachel is a good journalist how come she doesn't know her husband is an asshole. 

Oh, she knows.

I find this very dull and I guess I'm too stupid to see all these amazing nuances everyone else is seeing. Still, I'm gonna keep watching if only because I can not understand what the point of it is and I wanna know if there is one.

[Irlandesa]

15 hours ago, thuganomics85 said:

Although it did sound like Nicole's biggest issue was Rachel inadvertently (?) claiming that Nicole's success was due to a MeToo situation.  I wonder what that was all about? 

She probably thoughtlessly regurgitated information from another article without really thinking what the article was trying to say.  There have been profiles of accomplished women (and people of color) that highlight their previous accomplishments, achievements and skills but that also feel the need to discuss under what kind of circumstances that person rose into that position.  If I were to speculate, I wonder if the previous CEO of Nicole's company had to be fired because he got taken down by a #metoo situation or the company overall had many #metoo problems.  Then the company went out and selected Nicole, a woman, as its next CEO.  Regardless of her skills and accomplishments, there's always going to be the cynical opinion that she only got that job because the company was trying to do damage control.

So even if she were the top candidate, now she has to deal with a narrative that she was only selected because of optics and not because she's the best person for the job. And sometimes, even if she were the best or top candidate for the job, companies are also that cynical and might have overlooked her had it not been for the #metoo situation.

Quote

You know, taken by itself, I could actually understand Shane's annoyance over Rachel possibly working on their honeymoon, but I just can't help but get the sense that he doesn't want her to work at all, and it's not out of a sense of love, but wanting to control what she does and not do her own thing.

Yep.  He offered to pay her.  And he wanted to make it clear that she didn't have to work. Ever.  For him, it's the best case scenario because he'd have a wife around for his convenience.  If they stay together forever, it could be a perfectly reasonable solution.  But if there's any chance that the marriage doesn't last, she's not the person with family money.  She could be up a creek.

That said, even though I think that's what he wants. I also kind of think that's what she wants too.  We've seen she's kind of a lazy "journalist."  I think she knows it's smart to have a career but I don't think she's passionate about it.  I also don't think she trusts her marriage. 

 

4 hours ago, Mr. R0b0t said:

So why are Papa Mossbacher's balls swollen, or is it psychosomatic? 

They said it was a weird reaction to a virus.

4 hours ago, dmc said:

IThe manager guy at the hotel is just a complete weirdo.  I feel like people being double booked is like a common occurrence in hotels you just give one person the inferior room and then give the money back or don’t charge them as much.  Then you comp a treatment or two. Why keep lying about it?

Yep.  There's an undercurrent of anger there.  Maybe he's thinking that this guy likely has so much money but he's there fighting over what could be a couple of hundred dollars.  The standard practice would be to apologize, refund the difference and comp him a massage or so. 

2 hours ago, aghst said:

Is Nicole that great?  Look at the daughter she raised.

Even decentish people can raise brats. 

44 minutes ago, Bulldog said:

Not sure where the whole Grandpa Mosbacher was gay and had AIDS thing is going, but that was certainly an unexpected curveball.  Interested how it will fit in with the rest of the story. 

I suspect the son is gay and it's leading to that discovery.  There was an off hand comment about the kid being "in the closet" or "coming out of the closet" when talking about him sleeping in the kitchen.

Quote

I'm not so sure that Tanya's business offer to Belinda was such a bad thing (although I'd be very wary of accepting).  When she made the proposal to Belinda, then turned to tell the Mosbachers that they had a lovely family before Belinda could reply, I thought for certain it would be an example of how flaky and self absorbed Tanya was and that she couldn't remember what she was talking about mere seconds earlier.  But, instead she worked the conversation back around to what a great massage Belinda gave her, and then turned to Belinda and said she could be her PR person as well.  I think Tanya might be smarter than most are giving her credit for.  

Except Tanya didn't even listen to Belinda's response.  So I do think it's still an example of her flightiness.

I do have to say that I find this show to be a mood.  That last shot was something else. 

Edited July 19, 2021 by Irlandesa

[dmc]

10 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

She probably thoughtlessly regurgitated information from another article without really thinking what the article was trying to say.  There have been profiles of accomplished women (and people of color) that highlight their previous accomplishments, achievements and skills but that also feel the need to discuss under what kind of circumstances that person rose into that position.  If I were to speculate, I wonder if the previous CEO of Nicole's company had to be fired because he got taken down by a #metoo situation or the company overall had many #metoo problems.  Then the company went out and selected Nicole, a woman, as its next CEO.  Regardless of her skills and accomplishments, there's always going to be the cynical opinion that she only got that job because the company was trying to do damage control.

So even if she were the top candidate, now she has to deal with a narrative that she was only selected because of optics and not because she's the best person for the job. And sometimes, even if she were the best or top candidate for the job, companies are also that cynical and might have overlooked her had it not been for the #metoo situation.

You know, taken by itself, I could actually understand Shane's annoyance over Rachel possibly working on their honeymoon, but I just can't help but get the sense that he doesn't want her to work at all, and it's not out of a sense of love, but wanting to control what she does and not do her own thing.

Yep.  He offered to pay her.  And he wanted to make it clear that she didn't have to work.  For him, it's the best case scenario because he'd have a wife around for his convenience.  If they stay together forever, it could be a perfectly reasonable solution.  But if there's any chance that the marriage doesn't last, she's not the person with family money.  She could be up a creek.

That said, even though I think that's what he wants. I also kind of think that's what she wants too.  We've seen she's kind of a lazy "journalist."  I think she knows it's smart to have a career but I don't think she's passionate about it.  I also don't think she trusts her marriage. 

 

They said it was a weird reaction to a virus.

Yep.  There's an undercurrent of anger there.  Maybe he's thinking that this guy likely has so much money but he's there fighting over what could be a couple of hundred dollars.  The standard practice would be to apologize, refund the difference and comp him a massage or so. 

Even decentish people can raise brats. 

I suspect the son is gay and it's leading to that discovery.  There was an off hand comment about the kid being "in the closet" or "coming out of the closet" when talking about him sleeping in the kitchen.

Except Tanya didn't even listen to Belinda's response.  So I do think it's still an example of her flightiness.

I do have to say that I find this show to be a mood.  That last shot was something else. 

Yes passive aggressive anger…I would think it would be less work to just be done with that guy and the pineapple suite…which is a dumb name  for a room 

Edited July 19, 2021 by dmc

[peachmangosteen]

4 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

I suspect the son is gay and it's leading to that discovery.  There was an off hand comment about the kid being "in the closet" or "coming out of the closet" when talking about him sleeping in the kitchen.

Yea, I've figured the son was gay since that comment as well. The son is one of the few characters I am actually invested in.

5 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

That last shot was something else. 

That shot and the music was the best part of the ep.

[dmc]

5 minutes ago, peachmangosteen said:

Yea, I've figured the son was gay since that comment as well. The son is one of the few characters I am actually invested in.

That shot and the music was the best part of the ep.

I’m also invested in the son. I have been ever since he had that conversation with his dad.  His dad was like it must be hard to be a guy now.  And the son was like why because we can’t harass girls anymore. You tell him! It’s not hard 

 

 

Edited July 19, 2021 by dmc

[DiabLOL]

I’ve been thinking the entire family is gay since the first episode. Also Tanya and maybe Belinda. 

Speaking of I was extremely put off by the dinner “invite”. Belinda not only didn’t seem to have the option of saying thanks but no thanks she was told to show up two minutes after she gets off work. Major res flags waving here! Which really linked up with the whole “I’ll pay you to have fun on our honeymoon “ from Shane to Rachel which is even more appalling than insisting she turn down the job. She really really needs to really figure her whole deal with him. While she’s very possibly a bad lazy writer right now she’s young and could very well be limited by her options. She got excellent advice from Nicole luckily before the whole confrontation.

[Empress1]

4 hours ago, aghst said:

Why did Rachel end up with him though?  She doesn't feel secure financially, even with the prenup.

Their dynamic is interesting to me. She said in the first episode that Shane basically talked her into it - she said he really wanted to get married and he was very convincing. (I have never understood why you'd want to marry someone you had to talk into it.) She doesn't seem particularly in love with him - it's not as though she was swept off her feet and so doesn't see him clearly, and the financial security is only there as long as she's married to him, and even that doesn't seem to be a selling point; she doesn't seem to be a golddigger. She seems very "well, OK, I guess so" about her marriage, at a point when she should have a "newlywed glow," as Nicole put it.

[mjc570]

I liked the first episode, but I couldn't even make it more than 10 minutes into this one.  I was so completely bored by the girls drug stuff and whatever came after it that I deleted not just the episode but the entire series from the recording queue.  

[dmc]

1 hour ago, DiabLOL said:

I’ve been thinking the entire family is gay since the first episode. Also Tanya and maybe Belinda. 

Speaking of I was extremely put off by the dinner “invite”. Belinda not only didn’t seem to have the option of saying thanks but no thanks she was told to show up two minutes after she gets off work. Major res flags waving here! Which really linked up with the whole “I’ll pay you to have fun on our honeymoon “ from Shane to Rachel which is even more appalling than insisting she turn down the job. She really really needs to really figure her whole deal with him. While she’s very possibly a bad lazy writer right now she’s young and could very well be limited by her options. She got excellent advice from Nicole luckily before the whole confrontation.

I also think the entire family is gay and Tanya and Belinda...I was truly expecting Tanya to offer money for starting a business in return for something...

And yes it was very much forced on Belinda...

[Broderbits]

3 hours ago, peachmangosteen said:

I find this very dull and I guess I'm too stupid to see all these amazing nuances everyone else is seeing. Still, I'm gonna keep watching if only because I can not understand what the point of it is and I wanna know if there is one.

I feel the same way! I loved Enlightened but this is boring the pants off me and I just leave the room when the teenage girls are on.

[txhorns79]

7 hours ago, candle96 said:

 

I have become fixated on the fact that this family has a 1-bedroom suite. I do really feel for the brother.

It does seem poorly planned.  That hotel has two or three bedroom suites so it isn't as though they couldn't get one and still have the family together.  Or maybe they are the kind of family where the kids are expected to "rough it" (as much as one can at fancy resort in Hawaii) while the parents have comfort. 

I did love the Nicole/Rachel scene and how it turned so quickly.  I also kind of loved that Nicole was using it to brag to the family later that she had been recognized and complimented.  

7 hours ago, dmc said:

 

Watch Connie Britton’s face on the bed through the entire phone AIDS discussion.  Her Face is priceless 

I loved her face.  She's has the "I'm shocked mixed with this is hot gos" face.  That was a very odd curveball to the plotline.  

 

1 hour ago, DiabLOL said:

Which really linked up with the whole “I’ll pay you to have fun on our honeymoon “ from Shane to Rachel which is even more appalling than insisting she turn down the job.

Part of me does understand Shane's frustration with the room and the runaround he's getting from the front desk, but I also want to be like: Get a refund, get some freebies and let it go.  Also, start treating your wife like a person and not a possession.      

[DiabLOL]

35 minutes ago, txhorns79 said:

It does seem poorly planned.  That hotel has two or three bedroom suites so it isn't as though they couldn't get one and still have the family together.  Or maybe they are the kind of family where the kids are expected to "rough it" (as much as one can at fancy resort in Hawaii) while the parents have comfort. 

I did love the Nicole/Rachel scene and how it turned so quickly.  I also kind of loved that Nicole was using it to brag to the family later that she had been recognized and complimented.  

I loved her face.  She's has the "I'm shocked mixed with this is hot gos" face.  That was a very odd curveball to the plotline.  

 

Part of me does understand Shane's frustration with the room and the runaround he's getting from the front desk, but I also want to be like: Get a refund, get some freebies and let it go.  Also, start treating your wife like a person and not a possession.      

Oh for sure and in his position I’ve had private chats with managers etc and it was fine. I also agree with those who think the manager here is being frustratingly weird about it all and it seems like as much as an excuse to conjure up scenes as the teenager sleeping on a cot ridiculousness does.

[txhorns79]

1 hour ago, DiabLOL said:

Oh for sure and in his position I’ve had private chats with managers etc and it was fine. I also agree with those who think the manager here is being frustratingly weird about it all

It does feel like they are in some kind of odd power struggle.    

[DiabLOL]

34 minutes ago, txhorns79 said:

It does feel like they are in some kind of odd power struggle.    

Come to think of it, he’s really been giving me a Fawlty Towers sort of vibe.

[Nellise]

The music was doing an awful lot of heavy lifting to try to make this episode interesting. There were a bunch of jaunty "isn't this wacky" music cues for very mundane scenes.

Like some of the others, I guess I don't get this show because I've found it really boring. I'm pretty much hate watching from now on because all these people suck. None of them are interesting. I thought Rachel was going to be our way in to these lives, but she sucks too. I hate siding with Shane, but he's been pretty much right about everything even if he isn't doing things in the most elegant manner. Rachel said she hadn't worked for months before the honeymoon and decides on her honeymoon she's going to work? I think most partners would be annoyed at that regardless of their financial situation.

 

 

[edhopper]

I've  come around to think Shane is acting a little more reasonable and the manager is being a jerk. 5hey should get some big comps for the mix up. Rachael should in no way take work on her honeymoon. And Shane was spot on about her job writing click bait. Why not take Shane up on his offer and write something that isn't  dependent on making a quick buck.

All that said, we have to ignore how unrealistic this show is to actually staying at the Four Seasons in Waillea. Where they have a much bigger staff, the manager doesn't run the front desk, wealthy families get suites with multiple bedrooms and there are constant activities for families to enjoy.

 

[khyber]

21 hours ago, Mr. R0b0t said:

 Props to the one girl for travelling with a bong that had water in it carried loosely in a bag...that takes some skill. 

Yeah, I immediately said, "Wait, did they fill that with water?"

[candle96]

14 hours ago, edhopper said:

I've  come around to think Shane is acting a little more reasonable and the manager is being a jerk. 5hey should get some big comps for the mix up. Rachael should in no way take work on her honeymoon. And Shane was spot on about her job writing click bait. Why not take Shane up on his offer and write something that isn't  dependent on making a quick buck.

All that said, we have to ignore how unrealistic this show is to actually staying at the Four Seasons in Waillea. Where they have a much bigger staff, the manager doesn't run the front desk, wealthy families get suites with multiple bedrooms and there are constant activities for families to enjoy.

 

Yeah, I think they're cluing us in to the fact that The White Lotus isn't quite as nice as they pretend to be. The room mixup, the lack of activities for the father and son, the one-bedroom suites (which, while certainly more expensive than I what could afford, don't actually look that amazing), I even chuckled at the manager bringing Shane and Rachael the free bottle of Veuve Clicquot. If these are super VIP guests, I'd think only Dom or Cristal would be acceptable. And yes, I realize that's super nitpicky, just wondering if it's a deliberate choice.

I'm assuming the Four Seasons is actually much nicer.

[txhorns79]

1 hour ago, candle96 said:

Yeah, I think they're cluing us in to the fact that The White Lotus isn't quite as nice as they pretend to be. The room mixup, the lack of activities for the father and son, the one-bedroom suites (which, while certainly more expensive than I what could afford, don't actually look that amazing),

I feel like I'm missing something.  I presumed the Mossbacher's are in a one bedroom suite by choice, not because the resort doesn't offer anything bigger.  In terms of the activities, I got the impression the son was simply not interested in hanging out with his father, not that the resort did not offer adequate activities for families. 

[dmc]

2 hours ago, candle96 said:

Yeah, I think they're cluing us in to the fact that The White Lotus isn't quite as nice as they pretend to be. The room mixup, the lack of activities for the father and son, the one-bedroom suites (which, while certainly more expensive than I what could afford, don't actually look that amazing), I even chuckled at the manager bringing Shane and Rachael the free bottle of Veuve Clicquot. If these are super VIP guests, I'd think only Dom or Cristal would be acceptable. And yes, I realize that's super nitpicky, just wondering if it's a deliberate choice.

I'm assuming the Four Seasons is actually much nicer.

agreed I said this above something weird is going on there, not sure what yet...even the score is like suspense music...

Edited July 20, 2021 by dmc