S01.E05: V

[Snazzy Daisy]

Quote

I had to tell the world the truth.

Air Date: Oct 25, 2024

 

[aghst]

Not sure if there isn’t one character in this show who isn’t despicable.

Still Stephen’s plan is to torment Nicholas, drive him to suicide?

Yes his family was destroyed by Jonathan’s death, though Nancy’s spiral seems implausible.

But Stephen took up the mantle of revenge, to sociopathic levels.  So a boring professor, driven by grief and rage, is able to read people and manipulate them so easily?

Show is beautifully photographed but the story is setting off BS detectors.

[Mindthinkr]

This is so dark. Both in its content and cinematography. I can’t possibly think of any bright conclusion for most of the characters. Even the cats. 

[aghst]

The theory seems to be that the Italy scenes -- the sex, the rescue, the drowning -- are all from the book or Nancy Brigstock's hero-edit view of her son, so Catherine coldly watching him drown and saying nothing is her imagined POV of Catherine's villainy.

Now of course adopted by Stephen as well.

Robert, Nicholas and all of Catherine's colleagues are quick to believe Stephen's planted narrative, easily gaslit by Stephen.

They're basically taking the word of a stranger against the wife, mother and colleague whom they'd known for years.

Though to be sure, if Catherine saw things differently or behaved differently, she's not forcefully speaking up for herself either.

[Kenz]

Aghst, thank you for summarizing so well. There are only two more episodes in which I guess we will get Catherines's side of the story.

[shelley1234]

It seems to be whatever happened in Italy, Catherine is carrying such shame about it that she doesn't want to talk about it, even in defending herself.   She just keeps trying to run away from it.  

And yeah, I always assume that Nancy was an unreliable narrator because she couldn't know the intimate details of what happened because he died before he could tell the story.  Nancy saw the pics, knew that Catherine said she didn't know him before the drowning and therefore she was a liar and everything else is a recreated imagining of what she thinks happened up to her son's death.  

However, it is accurate enough to at least spook Catherine.  So it can't be all fiction.  

The targeting of Nick though...that's too far, even for the grief rage that Stephen has going on.  Whatever happened in Italy, he was an innocent child. 

 

[SoMuchTV]

2 hours ago, aghst said:

Robert, Nicholas and all of Catherine's colleagues are quick to believe Stephen's planted narrative, easily gaslit by Stephen.

They're basically taking the word of a stranger against the wife, mother and colleague whom they'd known for years.

First, just let me say, what must be the cat budget for this show?!  They are easily the highlight for me.  Although I do worry about their living situations, each in different ways.

The quote above is exactly what I was thinking all through the episode!  I don't think there's a likeable character in the whole show, and that by itself isn't necessarily bad, but nothing any of the characters do seems to make any sense!  Robert, Nicholas and all of Catherine's colleagues have no problem believing what appears to a doddering old man (who is actually a mustache-twirling, bug murdering super villain out for revenge), and Cathy is doing nothing to defend herself, other than against nicknames.  Maybe her mother will have a lucid moment in the final episode and set everyone straight.

[NeenerNeener]

1 hour ago, Kenz said:

I guess we will get Catherines's side of the story.

Catherine's side of the story is when Indira Varma is narrating. 

If they follow the book there's a reason Catherine isn't telling her side:

Spoiler

Jonathan raped her and she doesn't care to relive the experience and tell it over and over.

 

[aghst]

The narration is weird.  First it sounds weird, the audio is lower and kind of distant-sounding.

But the Varma narration also covers other characters as well.

And if I'm not mistaken, it's only narration of present day scenes, not the flashback to 15-20 years ago.

 

[Snazzy Daisy]

The first episode without flashbacks and it focuses on the least interesting character — the pathetic Nicholas Ravenscroft.

Stephen spends 1/3 of this episode in trolling mode — meticulously catfishing and toying with Nicholas using 19yo Jonathan’s finsta. He gleefully (and cruelly) ends it by sending Nicholas the explicit photos of his mom.

Robert is pathetic too. He has dinner with Stephen, whining to the person who is responsible for his marriage falling apart. He never questions Stephen’s motives or actions, why?

I wish we could hear Catherine confessing to her sleeping mom. That annoying voice-over. 😏

Surprisingly, it only takes a little effort and a little amount of time for Stephen to turn Catherine’s colleagues against her, including Jisoo.

Quote

“You’re so canceled!”

This episode has (sort of) confirmed that Catherine is not the villain in this story.

 

[sadie]

17 hours ago, aghst said:

The theory seems to be that the Italy scenes -- the sex, the rescue, the drowning -- are all from the book or Nancy Brigstock's hero-edit view of her son, so Catherine coldly watching him drown and saying nothing is her imagined POV of Catherine's villainy.

Now of course adopted by Stephen as well.

Robert, Nicholas and all of Catherine's colleagues are quick to believe Stephen's planted narrative, easily gaslit by Stephen.

They're basically taking the word of a stranger against the wife, mother and colleague whom they'd known for years.

Though to be sure, if Catherine saw things differently or behaved differently, she's not forcefully speaking up for herself either.

This times 1,000%. No one in her orbit thinks this work of fiction, that’s what it is, is suspect. Unless Jonathan’s mom had a spy cam in the hotel room with him and Catherine, everything in this book is MADE UP. How do people you’ve known for years turn on you so quickly, it makes no sense. This book is based on some sexy photos and the fact that her son did indeed drown saving a child - that’s it, nothing more. I hope the truth whatever it is comes out and all these people in Catherine’s orbit pound sand. Mrs Bridgecofts behavior after her son died clearly spoke of mental illness which her brilliant loving husband never got her help for and let her dies rotting locked up in Jonathan’s room? And yet he views himself as some avenging angel.
 

And don’t  get me started on the psychopath that is Bridgescroft, doddering around in his wife’s old sweater in a filthy house with bugs crawling on the counters and yet he’s such a mastermind that he’s managed to turn everyone in her orbit against her. and sorry Catherine but your husband is a whiny shit and your son is a horrible human. You’re better off without them.  Geesh.

[catsitter]

In the "flashbacks" to what happened in Italy, Nicholas is definitely 4, but in the present day, Catherine says he was 5. Nancy getting it wrong, or Catherine can't remember how old her son was when he nearly died? I hope that the last two episodes will clear up the question of whether people had mobile (cell) phones 20 years previously since they don't seem to have them in the "flashbacks", yet the present day seems to be about now?

[SoMuchTV]

1 hour ago, catsitter said:

In the "flashbacks" to what happened in Italy, Nicholas is definitely 4, but in the present day, Catherine says he was 5. Nancy getting it wrong, or Catherine can't remember how old her son was when he nearly died? I hope that the last two episodes will clear up the question of whether people had mobile (cell) phones 20 years previously since they don't seem to have them in the "flashbacks", yet the present day seems to be about now?

Now I’m questioning whether what we saw in episode one (before Jonathan’s girlfriend left) was real or “flashback” (Nancy’s version). I was also curious about the timeline, when the gondolier’s price was in euros. I guess I could look up when they came into use in Italy. 

[aghst]

The Euro was launched in 1999.

Jonathan was using a film Nikon camera. Digital SLRs I think became more common much later, because the first digital cameras, not necessarily SLRs, were much more expensive.

The decor in the Brigstock home though is distinctly much older.

Robert has an old Mercedes though, kind of weird choice.

 

[Snazzy Daisy]

DISCLAIMER* — Inside Chapter V: Cate Blanchett and Hoyeon on the Downfall of Catherine | Apple TV+

 

[MicheleinPhilly]

This was the first episode that elicited serious side eye from me. You mean to tell me that Catherine's colleagues all read a full book in about an hour and then were giving her stank face when she arrived? The whole thing, particularly her assistant telling her she was cancelled, was so damn cringeworthy. 

Also, I'm FAR from 25 but would someone who is that age just start DMing with a total stranger? Hell, I don't even accept friend requests from people I know. 

[aghst]

Plus I guess Cathryn works in some media or book publishing so the people are suppose to be more sophisticated.

They believe the whole narrative which was written by a first time book writer?

Actually, was Nancy even intending to publish a book or Stephen took it and had it self-published.

So they believe that over a co-worker with whom they've worked for years?

Though TBH, Cathryn hasn't even tried to tell her side of the story, because there's the whole unreliable narrator thing going on.