S03.E11: Mom City

[LilJen]

Sigh. I WANT to enjoy it. . . but the easy solutions & resolutions that haven't been properly earned are taking away from my enjoyment.

[iRarelyWatchTV36]

On 5/24/2023 at 8:47 PM, Grumpbump said:

Here's the thing about Nate.  He's the type that has punished himself so much more than any of "us" ever could.  I truly believe that although the writers aren't hitting us over the head with that....Nate has suffered internally so much more than any outward punishment could be portrayed.  

Even though this is fiction, I am surprised there are a large number of us who can't find any good in Nate.  I feel like you might be missing a really big part of the message of this show.....

It has never really been about this, for me.

I absolutely think Nate is redeemable and do not believe that he isn't deep down, or lacks the capacity to be, a good person.

Its the total unearned complete forgiveness that everyone - aside from Beard originally (& maybe Rebecca, as I think she might be totally unaware of the whole 'let's bring Nate back!' plan going into the end credits in this episode) - is willing to award Nate with.  When the only thing he's done to atone with anybody is doing part of Will's job for him one time.

EVERY time Ted reached out to mend fences or let him know there was no hard feelings, Nate either ignored the gesture or shut him down.  I know Ted loves and forgives everyone, but that isn't something that is just brushed under the rug and forgotten;  even by the most saintly.

The unearned total and complete forgiveness is my problem with the whole story line.  Not that I believe that Nate is evil incarnate and is irredeemable.

 

Edited May 28, 2023 by iRarelyWatchTV36

[lgprimes]

i have an FU:

FU to this episode and it’s stupid shiny wrapped up in a bow platitudinous happy endings.

 

I will now scroll up and see if anybody else hated this episode as much as I did.

 

[PurpleTentacle]

21 hours ago, SHD said:

Anyone know what the opening song was? The one when Ted was walking down the street greeting everyone. Sounded Herman’s Hermits-y, but I can’t place it. Also, the slow montage song near the end about bitterness?

Other people have answered this already. So just a tip for the future: google music search can find pretty much anything. It found the title of this song in 5 seconds.

2 hours ago, lasu said:

I thought this show had fully written itself into a corner with Nate.  I wasn't buying his redemption, at least not on the timeline we're being shown.  But then they pulled an ace out of their sleeve and had the chance at redemption come as a gift from Beard.  You don't earn gifts - just like Beard hadn't when Ted gave him another chance.  But sometimes you live up to them - just like Beard did when Ted gave him another chance.  No, Nate hasn't earned his redemption, at least not yet. But I appreciate the way they made the story work.  Nate can live up to his gift over time - I think we what we have been shown so far is hope and potential. It was incredibly well played to have it be about Beard passing forward a gift he himself had received, rather than about what Nate has actually earned.

I mean it's nice that everybody on this shows seems to have bought foregiveness on sale and is now handing it to Nate as a gift, without him earning it in the slightest. That still doesn't mean that I as a viewer have to do the same or think he deserves it.

[Juneau Gal]

1 hour ago, Grumpbump said:

Here's the thing about Nate.  He's the type that has punished himself so much more than any of "us" ever could.  I truly believe that although the writers aren't hitting us over the head with that....Nate has suffered internally so much more than any outward punishment could be portrayed.  

Even though this is fiction, I am surprised there are a large number of us who can't find any good in Nate.  I feel like you might be missing a really big part of the message of this show.....

I get the message of the show and, in general, I agree and personally adhere to it. I've never liked the Nate character, from the very first time he was on our screens running across the pitch angrily yelling at Ted and Beard to get off of it. He was a mean-spirited, officious git from the very start. The writers took an unlikable character, tried to make him fluffy by being initially bumbling, and then made him ever increasingly more unlikable. That I, and many others, now don't care to have him be a focus of the last season, don't buy his off-screen only growth or redemption, is on the writers not on us the viewer and our ability to understand the overarching message of Ted Lasso.

 

[iRarelyWatchTV36]

1 hour ago, lgprimes said:

i have an FU:

FU to this episode and it’s stupid shiny wrapped up in a bow platitudinous happy endings.

 

I will now scroll up and see if anybody else hated this episode as much as I did.

 

I'm waiting to see how the series ends next week before I officially say I didn't like - or even hated - this episode or not.

No matter what happens next week, there's still parts of this episode that rang true with a couple of the characters.  Roy being mostly Roy, Jamie still being one of the best S3 characters, Will missing out on a good Roy/Jamie boot room powwow and even some actual SOCCER.

[scenicbyway]

I do wonder if Ted’s truth bomb for Rebecca is that he’s hired Nate back. Surely she would have a response to that. I could see unless “Oklahomaed” that he might keep leaving to himself.

Nate is not completely misunderstood like he’s being portrayed and Ted is not as forgiving or saintly as he’s being portrayed (the fight with his mom showed us that) they are two wounded men but Nate should’ve apologized months ago. Ted presumably sending everyone in to get Nate back is a bit much. He could probably get a job anywhere, why does he have to come back to Richmond? So everyone believes in the goldfish philosophy? Because that’s also how you get taken advantaged of.

[lgprimes]

14 minutes ago, iRarelyWatchTV36 said:

and even some actual SOCCER

Sorry but do you watch actual soccer often? I watch the premier league weekly (Up the Villa!!) and the soccer game shown in this episode was FARCICAL. First off a small team winning 15 games in a row is a ridiculous claim. The acrobatics by the Richmond plates were obviously exaggerated. But most importantly the thought that a team would encourage an important team member to play injured (and even play a man down while waiting for him) is horrifying! These players are worth millions and supposedly Richmond has to play for the championship next week. They were already up 1-0 and they are going to potentially lose Jamie for next week or maybe ruin his career by continuing to play? NO WAY.

 Nothing about that “game” was realistic.

I understand it’s just a TV show but this episode was just one unrealistic scene followed by another. The best I can do is try to accept the whole thing as a fairy tale as described by another poster.  
 

i truly miss season one when this show was more witty than sappy.

[iRarelyWatchTV36]

10 minutes ago, lgprimes said:

Sorry but do you watch actual soccer often? I watch the premier league weekly (Up the Villa!!) and the soccer game shown in this episode was FARCICAL. First off a small team winning 15 games in a row is a ridiculous claim. The acrobatics by the Richmond plates were obviously exaggerated. But most importantly the thought that a team would encourage an important team member to play injured (and even play a man down while waiting for him) is horrifying! These players are worth millions and supposedly Richmond has to play for the championship next week. They were already up 1-0 and they are going to potentially lose Jamie for next week or maybe ruin his career by continuing to play? NO WAY.

 Nothing about that “game” was realistic.

I understand it’s just a TV show but this episode was just one unrealistic scene followed by another. The best I can do is try to accept the whole thing as a fairy tale as described by another poster.  
 

i truly miss season one when this show was more witty than sappy.

I hear ya.

I just mostly meant it was nice to see actual gameplay instead of just constant mentions of x-amount of games won in a row or how the season is going instead of seeing anything at all on the actual pitch - aside from bits of practices/training.

Edited May 25, 2023 by iRarelyWatchTV36

[lgprimes]

17 hours ago, DEL901 said:

It was very carefully not mentioned by the announcers who Richmond will be playing next week, but it has to be West Ham.

Yes it does have to be West Ham. Nate will know their strategies and use that knowledge to help Richmond, to help earn his redemption. I only pray Richmond doesn’t win the Premiere League…it’s just a step too far for me to suspend my disbelief. 

[Schweedie]

2 hours ago, lgprimes said:

I only pray Richmond doesn’t win the Premiere League…it’s just a step too far for me to suspend my disbelief. 

I will be completely fine suspending disbelief if they win it - I saw Leicester do it in 2016 (after finishing 14th the year before and being promoted for the first time since 2004 the year before that, and it's now looking like they're getting relegated again) when everyone was saying the whole season their form wouldn't last, they wouldn't last all the way. But they did, with a lead striker who wasn't even playing League football two years before he came to Leicester, and it was amazing. Richmond's story has been modelled on them since season one, I'm sure. Or I hope, because I really really do want them to win the whole thing.

10 hours ago, Quickbeam said:

Love Jamie and his mother. Their physicality could have been creepy but felt so real. When I was a social worker I saw a lot of teen moms and kids have that kind of intimate closeness. 

I felt the same way, I found it so sweet. I was surprised that some found it weird! She definitely looked like she had him young.

Kieran O'Brien cleans up nice. I don't particularly want Jamie and his dad to reconcile, but I appreciate getting to see what James might've been like when things were good, why Georgie might've been with him in the first place.

[EtheltoTillie]

7 hours ago, Phebemarie said:

Have you watched She Loves Me?  It’s based on The Shop Around the Corner.  It’s one of my favorite musicals. 

I've seen it on Broadway--it's fun.  But it doesn't pull the heartstrings in the same way as the two movies.  (I regard In the Good Old Summertime as a silly abomination.)

I too was surprised about Jamie's mom.  She looked to be the same age as Jamie.

I thought it was fun when the kids outside were razzing him, but they acted like they didn't know his mother lived next door.  Wouldn't they have known that?

[debraran]

The show is about forgiveness and working together. Ted is moral compass. Everyone did something dumb or worse. Beard was saying how Ted forgave him when others would have said after the slap in the face with car stealing, "You bit my hand, I'm done".  Ted always was shown forgiving Nate (he stayed on lego board, the scene at game)  and it doesn't bother me if we see him read the toned down letter. I accept begrudgingly that the writers want us for another episode to do their job and fill in the blanks so I did. They had tons happen behind the scenes and I have to accept it since they wont rewind and rewrite it. If you don't like Nate, fine, but, forgiveness is healing. Ted is right. I've seen people in my own family not let things go, it's like a cancer. Doesn't mean you are a door mat or have to engage with someone who is truly evil or would harm you, but Nate isn't Satan.  His life wont be perfect but the players wont be harmed by it.

Jade is written so badly, I wonder how they direct it..."no, too much emotion Edyta, no don't smile, smirk. No you have to look bored or bewildered" I wont hate her, it was a job, but I know the actress must think it doesn't highlight anything of her at all but she is on a top rated show.

[Grumpbump]

6 hours ago, Juneau Gal said:

I get the message of the show and, in general, I agree and personally adhere to it. I've never liked the Nate character, from the very first time he was on our screens running across the pitch angrily yelling at Ted and Beard to get off of it. He was a mean-spirited, officious git from the very start. The writers took an unlikable character, tried to make him fluffy by being initially bumbling, and then made him ever increasingly more unlikable. That I, and many others, now don't care to have him be a focus of the last season, don't buy his off-screen only growth or redemption, is on the writers not on us the viewer and our ability to understand the overarching message of Ted Lasso.

 

Clearly the writing of Nate the character is problematic for a lot of you.  Understood.  I find Nate more relatable because he is so flawed.  Maybe he doesn't deserve the no-strings-attached redemption.  However, no amount of onscreen punishment will equal how much Nate has subjected himself to.  Nate is a  complicated character and clearly "pleasant" or "sweet" are not the first (or even fiftieth) words you would use to describe him.   But there is Ted..out there in Nate's world, as this saving grace.  I receive that message loud and clear; and find it hopeful.  Perhaps I am rewarding lazy writing.  I am okay with that if just for the idea that second chances really are a thing.   

Edited May 25, 2023 by Grumpbump

[Blakeston]

1 hour ago, debraran said:

If you don't like Nate, fine, but, forgiveness is healing. Ted is right. I've seen people in my own family not let things go, it's like a cancer. Doesn't mean you are a door mat or have to engage with someone who is truly evil or would harm you, but Nate isn't Satan.  His life wont be perfect but the players wont be harmed by it.

If Nate is anything like he used to be, the players (and staff) will be harmed by his vicious bullying.

I'm sure the writers want us to believe that Nate has put his bullying behind him. But Ted has no reason to believe that Nate has changed that much.

[lgprimes]

4 hours ago, Schweedie said:

I will be completely fine suspending disbelief if they win it - I saw Leicester do it in 2016

Props to you for knowing about the exception that proves the rule. I am wholeheartedly rooting for Leicester to stay up (every Villa fan has a soft spot for Dean Smith). They need to win for me though because it’s crucial that Leeds win as well to take out the Spurs and clear our path to Europe! Leicester has Leeds on goal differential so both wishes can come true.

 To bring this back to Ted Lasso and keep the mods happy, I will watch next week's episode thinking of the team as Leicester and that will help, thank you.

[bosawks]

15 hours ago, AD55 said:

I adore The Shop around the Corner and think it's a much better movie than An Affair to Remember. The problems I have with YGM don't exist in The Shop around the Corner.

I also love the musical version, "She Loves Me".

Although I'm still sad the revival recording of the cast I saw does not include the great Judy Kuhn, although you can YouTube her version of vanilla ice cream.

I believe Ted would endorse my love of this musical......

Edited May 25, 2023 by bosawks

[AD55]

18 minutes ago, bosawks said:

I also love the musical version, "She Loves Me".

Although I'm still sad the revival recording of the cast I same does not include the great Judy Kuhn, although you can YouTube her version of vanilla ice cream.

I believe Ted would endorse my love of this musical......

How did I not know about this?!! I just watched the Judy Kuhn clip--delightful! Ted would definitely include a reference to this performance in one of his signature digressions.

[Thalia]

5 hours ago, Schweedie said:

Kieran O'Brien cleans up nice. I don't particularly want Jamie and his dad to reconcile, but I appreciate getting to see what James might've been like when things were good, why Georgie might've been with him in the first place.

I was thinking about Jamie's dad this morning.  Hopefully, something happened that caused him to want to change and enter rehab and he isn't there unwillingly because of a judge.  Whichever, I hope that the next time he wants to reach for a pint he remembers how he was able to enjoy his son when he was sober.  Probably needs to stay away from his mates Denby and Bug ("Its his legal name.  Had it changed.  'Cause he eats bugs for money.")

PS, it occurs to me I should mention that I know Jamie's dad is fictional.  Altho I really hope Jamie Tartt is a real live sexy little baby.  

Edited May 25, 2023 by Thalia

[Ellaria]

A few thoughts because my reactions to this season are mixed and complicated. I still love this show but I love the characters together and not apart and, IMO, there was too much of that this season. 

Since we are so close to the end, I’m comfortable saying that the character arcs were poorly paced. I won’t repeat my complaints about Keeley’s because others have said it better.

Nate is another issue. I’m fine with the show telling us that he deserves a second chance. However, I’m not fine with much of it happening off screen. What happened at West Ham that drove him out? It’s being hinted that Rupert’s bad behavior (sexual harassment, etc) may have been cause. Why not provide more insight into Nate’s thought process or decision making?

Equally, I love that the Richmond players want him back but why not show us their process in making that decision? Giving a second chance to someone that has hurt you or disappointed you is not easy or automatic. It should come with a certain amount of reflection and discussion. I love the scenes of the Richmond players together. Too often it is comedic; this was an opportunity to take it in a more serious tone.

Finally, I loved Jamie’s visit home. His mom is great. My only complaint: the scene with his dad (in rehab?) was too brief. It took me awhile to recognize his dad (cleaned up and smiling) and then to figure that it was likely a rehab facility. Maybe a bit more time could have been spent establishing that fact.

Regardless, I love this show and will be terribly sad to see it end.

Edited May 25, 2023 by Ellaria Sand

[DEL901]

Re why Bex and Rupert’s former assistant showed up on Rebecca’s doorstep…what if Nate was the catalyst?  What if he gave Bex she ammo she needed?  And that is why he left West Ham and figured he’d never manage again (because Rupert would blackball him).

[Sakura12]

I know Ted forgives Nate, I'm not forgiving him. Nate has to earn his second chance. We didn't see the catalyst for his sudden change of heart. And so far his apology tour seems to be all about his feelings not what he did. He didn't tell Jade what he did either. Not that would really matter since Jade is barely a character. 

I also don't get why they are saying he's such a genius wonder kid that is great at everything he does. That is not making him a sympathetic character. It's like they are saying he is so great we should want him forgiven and be given everything he wants. 

I'm not saying people don't deserve second chances I just have to see remorse and a reason for it. Nate hasn't done much. Beard just telling a story about what happened shows more remorse than I've seen from Nate. So I don't see Nate punishing himself at all.

[AD55]

2 hours ago, DEL901 said:

Re why Bex and Rupert’s former assistant showed up on Rebecca’s doorstep…what if Nate was the catalyst?  What if he gave Bex she ammo she needed?  And that is why he left West Ham and figured he’d never manage again (because Rupert would blackball him).

That's an intriguing speculation. I mentioned in another thread that Rupert invites underlings into his confidence to corrupt/control them. That's what he did with Higgins. This would offer an alternative narrative to Higgins's failure to inform Rebecca about Rupert's cheating. I think most of us have forgiven Higgins for that. Showing Nate taking a principled stand in a similar context would be demonstrating, rather than telling, that he is becoming more empathetic. If this is how it plays out, I hope the writers show his concern extends to Bex's daughter, relationships between parents and children being a central preoccupation in TL.

ETA: I still think this will be too little, too late in filling in the many gaps in the Nate redemption arc.

Edited May 25, 2023 by AD55

[Biggie B]

27 minutes ago, Sakura12 said:

I'm not saying people don't deserve second chances I just have to see remorse and a reason for it. Nate hasn't done much. Beard just telling a story about what happened shows more remorse than I've seen from Nate. So I don't see Nate punishing himself at all.

Agree completely. 

I think what sealed the deal for my reluctance with Nate was when Ted and Henry attended that game as spectators and waved/called to Nate. Then, after the game, Rupert texted Nate to "apologize" that Ted and Henry were permitted in and that he (Rupert) wouldn't allow it to ever happen again. Nate started texting back with something like, "Oh, it's OK,"  but then changed his mind and replied, "Thanks." BOOM. At that point, if I had even the smallest amount of good will towards Nate, or the slightest thought that he deserved a bit of a second chance, it vanished. I totally do not feel that Nate has punished himself in any way for the absolutely awful things he said and did. 

Edited May 25, 2023 by Biggie B

[Emcber]

“Ted Lasso's speed run of these key plot points is a disappointingly hand-wave-y approach to storytelling, and the mishandling of Nate's story is by far the most egregious example. You're telling me we can spend an entire episode watching the Greyhounds debate what to do for a night out in Amsterdam, but we can't get one quick scene of them talking about forgiving Nate? I will gladly forgo a million jokes about Dutch sex shows and tulips in order to get one ounce of that team discussion we missed out on.”

This quote succinctly sums up my frustration with this season and especially the Nate redemption storyline. 

https://mashable.com/article/ted-lasso-nate-quit-villain-redemption-arc

[xhoipolloix]

Isn't one of the fundamental rules of television writing to show not tell? Ted Lasso sure violated that rule. Nevertheless, I am willing to suspend disbelief and enjoy it. Not sure why. Richmond seems like a magical place so I guess it's more of a fairytale and not real.

[ML89]

At this point, I just want to know if Rebecca did buy a horse and whether it was to ride or race or have someone show?

I just didn't feel the episode at all. I did like Ted's Mom giving props to Trent's hair, but other than that...

While Beard's confession was fascinating, I think I would have preferred if it was always just unknown.

Also, that winning streak - how many games are they playing for a season? When does the season start? How did Ted's Mom know when to make the food - the way he was talking, I thought they were going up to Manchester to play that day (glad I was wrong on that).

Why was May's answer about family in quotes in close captioning - was that a quote from someone?

I share the "Nate should not prosper" sentiment and I wonder about Jade and who she really is (and what DOES she have over Manager Dude). Is Rupert sick or is Team Anti-Rupert going to make his life miserable? (please be answer B!)

 

Edited May 25, 2023 by ML89

[Dac22]

7 hours ago, debraran said:

The show is about forgiveness and working together. Ted is moral compass. Everyone did something dumb or worse.

It's not like Jamie did anything to earn his second chance at Richmond, either.

He was a self-involved jerk throughout season one, he ditched Man City for a reality show, it's implied he did some scummy things on said reality show, and then he is given a second chance at Richmond because of Ted.

All he did was have a single talk with Ted about how crappy his father was and ask to come back.

And while Ted initially declines, Ted being Ted eventually allows him to come back despite knowing the others don't want him because he had a bad dad. 

There was nothing Jamie did to earn his second chance at Richmond as he didn't even really apologize to anyone until after he was back on the team. But Jamie did ultimately grow as a person and made the most out of his second chance.

Now there is a difference in that Jamie wasn't initially welcomed back by the team where as with Nate they asked him to come back, but that change is a show of Ted's influence after all of this time.  

So the real difference between Nate and Jamie/Rebecca for me isn't so much about earning a second chance, but that the latter two have had significantly more time to make the most of the second chance they were given.

[Ilovepie]

I loved this episode! So much good here. Ted's Thank you/Fuck you speech to his mom - wow. I wish I had the courage to have the same with my parents - what a perfect moment to show how messy family is even when there is a loving relationship. How much we keep in just to keep the peace. And her response was just an arrow through the heart. No anger or offense, just "Your son misses you".  Gutted.

And then Beard, another wow. His speech to Nate was so much, yet had moments of perfect Beard humor - just like Les Mis, except I stole a loaf of Meth - Ha! I am frustrated by Nate's redemption arc, mostly because I would prefer him to just be an ass, but that's not this show. I would have even preferred for him to fail spectacularly and have Rupert embarrass him publicly and sack him. He deserved it. Then maybe I would be okay with some redemption. But he got everything he wanted on his terms and now just "Sorry"?????? No. I think the players seeking him out was a little too much - why exactly do they need him? They are winning without him using their current strategy.

I was on the edge of my seat for Rebecca's truth bomb, but what an awesome flip! I am glad Ted is going back to his son. It's the right call for this character.

Other things I enjoyed: Those Roy and Keeley posters! Keeley calling out Jamie's horrible hair! Van Damme's face mask! Mae's poem! Leslie's pose! The start of the fall of Rupert!

And I if I was visiting, I would 100% want to meet Dani Rojas first too.

[DearEvette]

3 minutes ago, Dac22 said:

So the real difference between Nate and Jamie/Rebecca for me isn't so much about earning a second chance, but that the latter two have had significantly more time to make the most of the second chance they were given.

Right. And I think this is what most people who are dissatisfied with the Nate storyline are arguing by and large.  We are not getting to see the whole redemption are play out. 

We got to see all of Nate's villainous asshole-ishness play out on screen, we should also get to see him rebuild our trust on screen as well.  The episodes this season were all over 45 mins running time with at least 3 of them running over an hour.  They had the time and space to tell the story, but they chose to fritter it away with people we did not care about: Zava and Jack and Shandy.  The stuff we are seeing this episode should have happened somewhere around episode five.  Nate really should have had his epiphany about Rupert right after Ep 4. Can you imagine how much richer his story would  have been had we had the last 4-5 episodes in which to watch Nate work to earn all the forgiveness he is being granted and to show us it was right to trust him?

But, I could almost feel the show telling me in the Ted Lasso folksy way "Y'all know we gon' get Nate the Great back, don't you worry about those pesky little details!"

The problem is, with the way they are actually doing it, instead of a message of forgiveness and grace and second chances, it almost feels like it is saying instead, that there are really no consequences to terrible behavior.

[bourbon]

I'm trying to decide whether Keeley and Roy NOT ending up together is either on brand or off brand for this show.

For the on brand argument...I feel like this show is about being the best version of yourself, and the argument can be made that in order to do that, Keeley and Roy need to be alone for awhile. Keeley has probably been someone's girlfriend for most of her adult life. Roy is only just learning how to be vulnerable. Maybe they need to figure out how to be alone first.

On the other hand, this show borders on magic realism for me. It's a modern fairytale where Ted is a warped fairy godfather. It would be off brand to have a downbeat, realistic ending where Keeley says it's too late for her and Roy to be anything other than friends. And it would super suck if Nate is the only one coming out of this show in a healthy, stable relationship. 

All that said, I won't accept anything other than a KJRK happy ending. 

[Dac22]

25 minutes ago, DearEvette said:

We got to see all of Nate's villainous asshole-ishness play out on screen, we should also get to see him rebuild our trust on screen as well. 

Except I'd argue he has done that, to the viewers, in the last few episodes.

He's someone who has grown comfortable in his own skin so he's no longer trying to be something different to feel better about himself. He is no longer looking and longing for validation because he has found it himself. 

We visibly get to see that through his relationship with Jade, the scene with his father, his decision to quit at West Ham, and other smaller moments.

The self-loathing and insecurities, and the behavior as the result, have been tempered because he has finally found peace when it comes to who he is.

As viewers, I do think we have seen the change in him the way we eventually saw it with Jamie. 

Now there is some discourse between what we the viewers know and what the other characters know, and we are seeing his change in a different setting than where his awful behavior took place, but we also have an episode left to see if they can stick the landing.

Edited May 25, 2023 by Dac22

[Schweedie]

42 minutes ago, DearEvette said:

Right. And I think this is what most people who are dissatisfied with the Nate storyline are arguing by and large.  We are not getting to see the whole redemption are play out. 

 

17 minutes ago, Dac22 said:

Except I'd argue he has done that, to the viewers, in the last few episodes.

I think that's what DearEvette is saying - "the last few episodes" isn't enough time for it to feel earned, for many of us. It feels too rushed. I think Jamie's arc feels different because we saw several moments already back in season one showing there *was* more behind the dickish exterior, so that when he came back in season two his change didn't feel that sudden. (Although I do actually still think it should've taken more than one episode for him to be accepted by the team.) Nate's just been stagnant for so much of the season and we haven't seen the reason why he's suddenly changed now. Why did he actually quit West Ham? What made him realise that how things ended at Richmond was his fault? It feels like they've skipped scenes that should've been there.

[Dac22]

27 minutes ago, Schweedie said:

and we haven't seen the reason why he's suddenly changed now. Why did he actually quit West Ham? 

But, again, I think we have.

As I said before, he is no longer looking and longing for validation because he as found it. His relationship with Jade was the catalyst as having someone who genuinely likes and accepts you for who you are in your life is a big deal. 

Now it's true we haven't been given the specifics about what happened at West Ham, but Nate no longer needing validation from someone like Rupert and what the coaching gig brings allowed him to walk away because he doesn't need it anymore. 

He is perfectly at peace simply working as a waiter at the restaurant because he is finally at peace with who he is as a person.

Him coming to accept and be comfortable with who he is changes his perspective and allows him to re-examine some of his past actions through a different scope which is why he acknowledges Richmond was all his fault.  

There's still another episode left so the full story hasn't been told yet. We'll have to wait and see, but I also do understand why his character and the handling  of his story has been divisive as well. 

Edited May 25, 2023 by Dac22

[Blakeston]

If we get no further explanation for Nate leaving West Ham, then I think we know everything we need to know.

Rupert encouraged Nate to cheat on Jade, which finally opened Nate’s eyes to Rupert’s true nature. Nate had no desire to work with a toxic snake, so he left.

The conversation Nate had with Jade after the announcement that he left West Ham made it clear that quitting was his choice, not Rupert’s.

[EtheltoTillie]

wrong thread NM.

Edited May 25, 2023 by EtheltoTillie

[AD55]

I understand the frustration of those who believe some of us are setting a higher bar for Nate's redemption than for Rebecca's and Jamie's. I've said before that one of the reasons Nate's actions hit differently with me is because his attacks on the team, and especially Ted, were intensely personal.

Related to this is that my expectations of Rebecca and Jamie were low to begin with. Both of them were almost cartoon villains when the series started. The writers stacked the cards against Nate. They encouraged us to root for him, and we felt betrayed when he turned on people who had helped and encouraged him and whom viewers held in affection.

I think it is harder to forgive someone who has been presented as flawed but essentially decent--as part of Team Lasso--than it is to grow to like someone who started out as a bastard. Viewers identify with the characters we respect and/or love. As the team came to sympathize with Jamie, we did, too. As Keeley uncovered Rebecca's good qualities, we saw them as well. The writers did Nate a disservice by removing him to West Ham, where he interacted only with people viewers are indifferent to (Jade, his coworkers) or loath (Rupert). I care about what Roy and Sam think of Jamie, or what Keeley and Ted think of Rebecca, and their judgments affect mine. This doesn't quite work in reverse. That a scumbag like Rupert treats Nate with contempt doesn't make me like Nate more. I don't care about Rupert's opinion of Nate, and I think less of Nate that he does care. Nate has turned on his boss, but for a genius, he's been slow to grasp how despicable Rupert is.

I don't believe Nate is unredeemable, and I have been persuaded by folks on this forum that what he did was not worse than what Rebecca and Jamie did. But the writers set themselves a difficult task by making us first like and then loath Nate, and then attempting to redeem him out of context. Perhaps they will pull it off, now that Nate has rejected Rupert and is returning to Richmond, but I think it would have been easier had they not waited until the last two episodes.

 

[Baltimore Betty]

Do we think KC was beckoning Ted back home or what, the Wizard of Oz pinball machine, the song during the closing credits from The Wiz, the tee shirt that combined all four of the well known BBQ places (Gates is the best in my opinion, Arthur Bryant's is too vinegary), his mother showing up, etc...

Rupert's current wife and his assistant/side piece have joined forces and paying a visit to Rebecca? Something is afoot. 

What a surprising backstory Beard had, I would have never guessed.

I will miss this show a lot.

[iRarelyWatchTV36]

1 hour ago, AD55 said:

I don't believe Nate is unredeemable, and I have been persuaded by folks on this forum that what he did was not worse than what Rebecca and Jamie did. But the writers set themselves a difficult task by making us first like and then loath Nate, and then attempting to redeem him out of context. Perhaps they will pull it off, now that Nate has rejected Rupert and is returning to Richmond, but I think it would have been easier had they not waited until the last two episodes.

1 billion times this.

So. much. this.

The redemption arc isn't the problem.  Not even close.  But how it was handled is the biggest gripe that most of us have, that don't like the whole story line.  It feels like it came out of nowhere.

Edited May 26, 2023 by iRarelyWatchTV36

[Dobian]

The dynamic between Jamie and his mom was a little weird.  First was the fact that she didn't look more than ten years older than him.  And then the chemistry between them didn't feel very, ahem, mom-son.  It reminded me of when Barry Williams said the director had to stop a scene between Greg and Marcia on the Brady Bunch because they were getting too hot and not sibling-like while sitting on the bed.  They had to re-shoot it lol.

[Schweedie]

9 hours ago, AD55 said:

I understand the frustration of those who believe some of us are setting a higher bar for Nate's redemption than for Rebecca's and Jamie's. I've said before that one of the reasons Nate's actions hit differently with me is because his attacks on the team, and especially Ted, were intensely personal.

Related to this is that my expectations of Rebecca and Jamie were low to begin with. Both of them were almost cartoon villains when the series started. The writers stacked the cards against Nate. They encouraged us to root for him, and we felt betrayed when he turned on people who had helped and encouraged him and whom viewers held in affection.

I think it is harder to forgive someone who has been presented as flawed but essentially decent--as part of Team Lasso--than it is to grow to like someone who started out as a bastard. Viewers identify with the characters we respect and/or love. As the team came to sympathize with Jamie, we did, too. As Keeley uncovered Rebecca's good qualities, we saw them as well. The writers did Nate a disservice by removing him to West Ham, where he interacted only with people viewers are indifferent to (Jade, his coworkers) or loath (Rupert). I care about what Roy and Sam think of Jamie, or what Keeley and Ted think of Rebecca, and their judgments affect mine. This doesn't quite work in reverse. That a scumbag like Rupert treats Nate with contempt doesn't make me like Nate more. I don't care about Rupert's opinion of Nate, and I think less of Nate that he does care. Nate has turned on his boss, but for a genius, he's been slow to grasp how despicable Rupert is.

I don't believe Nate is unredeemable, and I have been persuaded by folks on this forum that what he did was not worse than what Rebecca and Jamie did. But the writers set themselves a difficult task by making us first like and then loath Nate, and then attempting to redeem him out of context. Perhaps they will pull it off, now that Nate has rejected Rupert and is returning to Richmond, but I think it would have been easier had they not waited until the last two episodes.

You said it way better than I could.

4 hours ago, Dobian said:

The dynamic between Jamie and his mom was a little weird.  First was the fact that she didn't look more than ten years older than him.  And then the chemistry between them didn't feel very, ahem, mom-son.  It reminded me of when Barry Williams said the director had to stop a scene between Greg and Marcia on the Brady Bunch because they were getting too hot and not sibling-like while sitting on the bed.

They reminded me of Lorelai and Rory Gilmore, young mother who's developed a close relationship with her kid. Would people still have found their closeness and dynamic weird if Jamie's mum looked more like Ted's mum, I wonder?

Jamie's always been shown to be a touch-y person, hanging on and leaning into people - makes total sense to me that he and his mum are that way.

[AllyB]

On 5/24/2023 at 12:51 PM, Schweedie said:

I'm not sure I love Ted's advice to forgive his dad. I get the idea of not doing it for them but doing it for yourself, but there's a difference between forgiving someone and letting go of the pain they caused. It was nice to see that Jamie's dad was in rehab, but Jamie reaching out to him, probably on the back of what Ted said... I don't know how I feel about that.

100%!!!! There is a huge range of possibilities between either being consumed with hurt and anger or forgiving and forgetting. I don't think forgive and forget is the remotely correct thing to do in Jamie's situation. Especially at a point when as far as he knew his dad was still an incredibly abusive, angry drunk. Letting go of your active anger but remembering why you were angry in order to maintain healthy boundaries and moving forward is far better. Especially as people often repeat abusive patterns either by getting in a relationship with another abusive person or being abusive themselves in future relationships. Recognising what triggers you and what your red flags are is essential to ongoing contentment and stability. And that tends to involve not forgetting.

I had an abusive ex husband. I don't carry active hurt and anger but I remember it in a way that I feel mostly detached from. And while I have a relatively civil relationship with him now for the sake of my son, what I feel for him is a mixture of mild contempt and mild pity for the person he could have been and the life he could have had. While also being constantly on guard to prevent him causing any damage to or son.

[Schweedie]

1 hour ago, AllyB said:

100%!!!! There is a huge range of possibilities between either being consumed with hurt and anger or forgiving and forgetting. I don't think forgive and forget is the remotely correct thing to do in Jamie's situation. Especially at a point when as far as he knew his dad was still an incredibly abusive, angry drunk. Letting go of your active anger but remembering why you were angry in order to maintain healthy boundaries and moving forward is far better.

Exactly that. There were much better options for advice Ted could've given him. "Your dad doesn't need to have anything to do with your motivation. You got plenty of other things. He's got nothing to do with who you are now, not as a player, not as a person." Those are things I'd much rather hear Ted tell Jamie instead of just to forgive his abusive dad.

[Capricasix]

7 hours ago, Dobian said:

The dynamic between Jamie and his mom was a little weird.  First was the fact that she didn't look more than ten years older than him. 

A poster upthread said that as a former social worker, she knew a lot of teen mothers who were very close with their children and their relationships often looked like Jamie’s and his mom’s. It makes sense to me that a teen mom would be close to her child(ren) like that, as she would likely still have been almost a child herself when they were born.

[Night Cheese]

I know that Phil Dunster in real life is probably 30 or so, but I always got the feeling that Jamie was supposed to be in his early-mid 20s. So his mom being 40ish made sense for a teen mom, although the actress is most like not old enough to be Phil's mom. 

Their unusually close relationship made sense for a teen mom situation, especially if they had to play 2vs1 against Jamie's abusive, shithead dad. They were probably each other's only support system for many years.

[Lady Calypso]

12 minutes ago, Night Cheese said:

I know that Phil Dunster in real life is probably 30 or so, but I always got the feeling that Jamie was supposed to be in his early-mid 20s. So his mom being 40ish made sense for a teen mom, although the actress is most like not old enough to be Phil's mom. 

In season 1, Keeley said that Jamie was 23 (she made a comment about her being almost 30 and dating a 23 year old). So, he'd be about 25 now. Leanne Best, who plays Georgie, is 43 so, if she's playing her age, Georgie would have had Jamie at 18. (Phil Dunster is 31 so, yeah, a 12 year age gap between him and Leanne).

[Good Queen Jane]

I noticed that any time Nick went to introduce Jade in the restaurant, she disappeared. I'm beginning to get "I see dead people" vibes about her.

[Night Cheese]

3 minutes ago, Lady Calypso said:

In season 1, Keeley said that Jamie was 23 (she made a comment about her being almost 30 and dating a 23 year old). So, he'd be about 25 now. Leanne Best, who plays Georgie, is 43 so, if she's playing her age, Georgie would have had Jamie at 18. (Phil Dunster is 31 so, yeah, a 12 year age gap between him and Leanne).

Thank you! You did the googling work that I didn't feel like doing, haha. Keeley saying Jamie was 23 in season 1 must be exactly why I thought he was early-to- mid 20s. I remember that scene now, it was where she and Rebecca first bonded at the auction. 

[AncientNewbie]

I liked the ambiguity I felt about Beard's confession. Sure, it was opening to Nate to discuss forgiveness. But was it also cribbed straight from Les Mis? Perhaps because I enjoy Beard as a weird enigma I will just imagine that we will never know. 

[Athena]

On 5/24/2023 at 6:13 PM, Capricasix said:

It’s perplexing that so many shows can’t seem to find the sweet spot between too many eps per season (Daredevil for example, much as I loved it, was a bit bloated) and too few (many Disney Marvel series IMO). And it’s not even that this season had too many eps, it’s just that they seemed poorly planned, and several of them ended without the plot being advanced in any meaningful way.

A lot of big production American shows are still trying to find this sweet spot. UK shows have shorter seasons and that has always been the standard. There are a couple of reasons to this: there are often less writers on UK shows and in some cases, less involvement by the execs. This additional order from Apple for 2 extra episodes probably affected the pacing and they were missing the influence of a more seasoned show runner like Bill Lawrence. This has not been the worse season for me but it's been more uneven compared to S1 and S2.

 

1 hour ago, Good Queen Jane said:

I noticed that any time Nick went to introduce Jade in the restaurant, she disappeared. I'm beginning to get "I see dead people" vibes about her.

I like Jade and the actress. She's very different compared to other characters you see on American TV shows and very dry which you see more Europe and the UK. They could have developed her further but they've shown consistently how she observes people. She spent most of this episode sneaking away and trying to push Nate back out now that he seems to be feeling better about himself.

A line that I liked which I don't think has been mentioned is Katy Wix's Barbara line to Roy: "Oh this... I got it at a car boot sale for £2." I got a laugh from her switch from being dry to being flattered and it's so realistic that would buy work clothing from a boot sale. She's an excellent comedienne and I wish we had seen her interact more with the other characters.