S03.E15: That's The Way Love Goes

[LotusFlower]

The discussion on this show is hard to follow when characters from other shows are constantly mentioned.  There is no one named Tami Taylor on Nashville.

 

Alas...

[Sutton]

Never watch FNL but people have told me what a good show it was. If Tami Taylor had a happy marriage in that series and the series was successful then why can't we have a happy marriage between Deacon and Rayna. (I read last year that Connie told FNL that she did not want either Tami or Kyle to have an affair in the series) Why can't Deacon/Rayna go through what couples go through working hard to keep the marriage solid. Why is happiness between the two main characters in a series that have so much chemistry together a killer? Isn't there any couple in the Country Music Industry happy? Deacon/Rayna are the end game but I don't want to have to wait 5 years before we get them together. Who knows if they are even going to get a season #4 or 5.

[madam magpie]

The discussion on this show is hard to follow when characters from other shows are constantly mentioned.  There is no one named Tami Taylor on Nashville.

 

But see...if there were, everyone on this show would get their shit together with very little lip, starting with Rayna.

 

Rayna and Deacon are obviously end game, but happiness is always a killer on television.  They need more conflict, and I'd like to see a more organic and natural challenge versus another cheating storyline.  That's why I dislike how much Maddie is pushing them to get together.  It would be more interesting if Maddie was mature enough to see how dysfunctional they've always been and resist the coupling.  That's far more organic than a potential shooting from a D level character or Rayna being tempted away by yet another man. Maybe let sweet Daphne attempt to sabotage the relationship due to her loyalty to Teddy.  I prefer watching all the interpersonal dynamics inherent to remarriages and step-fathers.  I ultimately want them a happy family, but not too quickly or easy, it's far more satisfying when they struggle a bit first.  And please no more car accidents, comas, or cancer.  And no soap opera twist like Pam walking into Deacon's hospital room with a nine month pregnant belly.

 

 

Bite yo' tongue!

 

I totally agree that watching Rayna and Deacon try to create and maintain a functional relationship would be fascinating to watch. They're both so messed up that they'd struggle I'm sure, but the chemistry between the actors is so strong that the show is just much more interesting when Rayna and Deacon interact regularly.

 

My suspicion is that neither of the girls is particularly hung up on Teddy because the show wants Rayna/Deacon/the kids to be the family, so the girls have to be on that team. But I agree that it's bizarre that their loyalty to him never comes up. I get it from Maddie; Teddy lied to her, cheated on her mother, was awful to Deacon, etc. But Daphne should be much more conflicted. I suppose she'd have to be allowed a realistic personality to be conflicted, though.

Edited March 9, 2015 by madam magpie

[dmc]

A transplant surgeon.  But then on television, any old MD does organ transplants.

 

 

I was never a big fan of Luke's, but I'm interested in him sticking around.  His history with Rayna makes me more invested in the label rivalry.  I would like them to avoid the easy route and have Luke actually be sensitive with Will's revelation.  Luke is fabulously wealthy, but he was able to hang out with Gunnar and Will and seemed like just one of the guys.  He reminds me of the Toby Keith song, White Trash with Money.  He's just a blue collar guy at heart.  I wish they would bring back Tandy for him, I thought the two had great chemistry, and I would like to see how Rayna would react.

 

Rayna and Deacon are obviously end game, but happiness is always a killer on television.  They need more conflict, and I'd like to see a more organic and natural challenge versus another cheating storyline.  That's why I dislike how much Maddie is pushing them to get together.  It would be more interesting if Maddie was mature enough to see how dysfunctional they've always been and resist the coupling.  That's far more organic than a potential shooting from a D level character or Rayna being tempted away by yet another man. Maybe let sweet Daphne attempt to sabotage the relationship due to her loyalty to Teddy.  I prefer watching all the interpersonal dynamics inherent to remarriages and step-fathers.  I ultimately want them a happy family, but not too quickly or easy, it's far more satisfying when they struggle a bit first.  And please no more car accidents, comas, or cancer.  And no soap opera twist like Pam walking into Deacon's hospital room with a nine month pregnant belly.

 

I am wondering about this as well.  Unlike most people, I am iffy on Rayna and Deacon together.  It's not like I don't think they have chemistry because I do.  However, I don't like it when television shows have endgame couples.  I think it completely limits the writing plotwise.  A lot of television shows do this and try to stick with it through the course of the show and all it does is create poor writing.  Also, it limits the potential chemistry actors could have with future characters and makes any storyline the actor has romantically with someone else seem contrived.  Rayna's whole relationship with Luke felt like a plot device to keep her and Deacon apart.  To me, the writing on this show is touch and go as it is. 

 

I would love to see them as a functional couple trying to make it work but I don't think that will happen on a show like this one until the series finale. 

[Clemgo3165]

 

But Daphne should be much more conflicted.

 

That's the only part that gets me. Daphne's OK with Teddy moving out, she's OK with Luke moving in - loves him to pieces in fact, and is all smiles when it appears that Deacon is coming back on the scene. There's bit little bits here and there - asking Teddy why they're not staying at his place and putting up a little fuss when her Mom told her the wedding was off. But Daphne's so entirely well-adjusted it makes me wonder when she's gonna crack.

 

I think Deacon and Rayna can surely work as a functional couple - there'll be hurdles, but after all they've been through they should be able to weather any storm together by now. Plenty of things to cause turmoil that don't include cheating or other people's babies.

[Sutton]

That's the only part that gets me. Daphne's OK with Teddy moving out, she's OK with Luke moving in - loves him to pieces in fact, and is all smiles when it appears that Deacon is coming back on the scene. There's bit little bits here and there - asking Teddy why they're not staying at his place and putting up a little fuss when her Mom told her the wedding was off. But Daphne's so entirely well-adjusted it makes me wonder when she's gonna crack.

 

I think Deacon and Rayna can surely work as a functional couple - there'll be hurdles, but after all they've been through they should be able to weather any storm together by now. Plenty of things to cause turmoil that don't include cheating or other people's babies.

Clemgo3165 - What a great idea Deacon/Rayna can surely work as a functional couple. I think you should send that idea to the writers of the series because I don't think anyone there thought of it. Like MM said it would be fascinating to watch them interacting as a married couple and talk about drama and just think of the make-up sex they can have which us viewers are all waiting for.

 

It was strange how Daphne attached herself the Luke so quickly. Teddy is her father and yet there is no interaction between her and him. You never see her hugging him or even have any kind of conversation on what she's doing in school. That's the fault of the writers. Maybe Daphne is just a go with the flow kind of kid doesn't want to make any waves but sooner or later something has to snap.

[DeLurker]

Daphne is basically an orphan.

[Soup333]

It is strange how much she loved Luke and she really seemed to take to Sage too. They were two orphans thrown together.

Those girls have been through some upheaval lately, but the focus is only ever really on Maddie. I guess two brats are too much.

[madam magpie]

None of these kids are orphans. I mean... come on, now. I've certainly criticized Rayna for how she quit paying clear attention to her kids, but that lasted less than a year and she's now turning it around. Luke's kids, while shipped off to boarding school, are basically just rich. Luke hasn't been especially attentive, but he does take care of them. They have a home, family, etc. None of these kids are abused.

The issue for me is how they're presented. With the exception of Maddie, the kids lack depth. Colt is starting to show a wee bit (now that he's a hipster, apparently he has real feelings), and Daphne occasionally gets to speak up, but Sage is nothing but filler. I wish they'd just not included her at all. I don't know why the show's creators do that, introduce irrelevant characters, but Sage, etc. is just one of those.

[John Ramos]

Not for nothing, but I will admit that I'm occasionally and momentarily confused by the fact that Chris Carmack used to play a macho dunderhead called "Luke," and now plays a fellow named "Will" and Will Chase plays a macho dunderhead named "Luke"? It's just me, right?

Nope. It's embarrassing how often I have to check my work when writing about those two.

[Soup333]

None of these kids are orphans. I mean... come on, now. I've certainly criticized Rayna for how she quit paying clear attention to her kids, but that lasted less than a year and she's now turning it around. Luke's kids, while shipped off to boarding school, are basically just rich. Luke hasn't been especially attentive, but he does take care of them. They have a home, family, etc. None of these kids are abused.

The issue for me is how they're presented. With the exception of Maddie, the kids lack depth. Colt is starting to show a wee bit (now that he's a hipster, apparently he has real feelings), and Daphne occasionally gets to speak up, but Sage is nothing but filler. I wish they'd just not included her at all. I don't know why the show's creators do that, introduce irrelevant characters, but Sage, etc. is just one of those.

 

Okay, you're right, mm, about them not being orphans in the true sense of the word. Perhaps that is a bit harsh. And Rayna is turning things around. I do think though, that Daphne at least would have some issues, separate from her parent's divorce (and her step-mother's murder, grandfather dying, Aunt Tandy moving away, etc.) about being the child of the unmusical Teddy, while Maddie is Deacon's daughter and he and Rayna have this great, unrequited love. Maddie is constantly pushing for them to get back together (btw, I don't really fault Maddie for wanting her parents to be together, but I do think she presses the issue a bit too much). I figure Daphne would have been at least slightly jealous about Maddie taking guitar lessons from Deacon while she has expressed a desire to take lessons as well, but hasn't gotten to - or if she has, we don't know about it. It was probably only mentioned to make Teddy feel even more alienated from his children, honestly. Then to top it off, only her sister was in the spotlight at the Opry.  It'd be nice to see her in the spotlight.

 

As far as Luke's kids, I wonder if they really even know him. One of the sons on Empire said that he didn't really know his father growing up because he'd been so busy building the business/his brand. I wonder if Luke's kids feel the same way about him. He seems to think that they'll just adjust to whatever, without really stopping to see if they are adjusting. Clearly, his son wants to spend more time with him. Maybe Sage does too. I would say though, that you can have all your needs met, even exceedingly met, and still feel neglected.

[madam magpie]

The thing is, I don't think the kids, Sage especially, are meant to be much to the plot except filler for scenes or a means of rounding out the characters of their parents. I don't think the show's creators see Luke as neglectful, though I do think Rayna was meant to be seen as losing her way, and one way that was shown was in how she related to her children. Sage has no real character traits to speak of; she's nothing more than a set dressing. That's why I wish she'd just never been introduced at all. Daphne is a fairly important character, though, and like you, I wish the writers would allow her a real personality, rather than just having her chime in with random dialogue when it's needed to suit the other characters. She doesn't need to be as developed as a primary player, but yeah, it would be nice if she behaved in a way that felt like a real child. I get that she knows and loves Deacon, for example. I believe that completey since it's been established that she grew up with him. But things have changed dramatically for her and her family, and her sister has become the one everyone, including Deacon, pays an exceeding amount of attention to. That should have been hard for Daphne, and we should have seen her struggle. I'd have liked to see Rayna, Teddy, and Deacon all care about that. But that wasn't the story the show wanted to tell, so we saw nothing from her really, just that one quick scene with her asking Teddy about whether or not she and Maddie would be separated along "dad" lines now. My point really is just that I don't think any of the kids are neglected or mistreated. I think they're badly written, so I can't really read much into the way their characters behave or what they seem to lack because I don't buy them from the outset. Except Maddie. She's been written a bit better, but on some level, she's still a cliche. I don't think the people who write this show have a very good grasp of how children actually behave. Micah's another one. He was supposed to be ten, but acted half his age and never expressed any real emotion about what his mother was doing to him. He was there for no reason except to serve Gunnar's plot. That annoys me, especially when you have a principle player like Daphne being written that way, but I don't think it means anything in terms of story.

Edited March 10, 2015 by madam magpie

[Clanstarling]

I get why everyone is upset with Teddy, but let's face it, he's just the top rung on the ladder of stupid where everyone on this show lives. 

Best metaphor ever!

[Soup333]

Micah's another one. He was supposed to be ten, but acted half his age and never expressed any real emotion about what his mother was doing to him. He was there for no reason except to serve Gunnar's plot. That annoys me, especially when you have a principle player like Daphne being written that way, but I don't think it means anything in terms of story.

 

I wanted to respond to this because it made me think of the scene in 3.8 when Gunnar, Zoey and Micah were getting ready for the CMAs and Micah asked what a ball and chain is. Zoey responds, "Oh, it's when you're stuck with someone," which I took as her referring to being stuck with Micah. I thought that was a cruel thing to say to a kid that you didn't want around and a bold thing to say about that kid in front of his father. Micah then asks, "like my mom was stuck with me?" I thought it would have been nice if Gunnar hadn't been in the room and Zoey had to respond to that question (Damn, I don't want this kid around, but he is hurting...etc.) But at that point, both she and Micah were there to serve Gunnar's plot, and it was his abandonment and loss that we were supposed to be invested in. 

 

Derek Hough's character was another one that was nothing more than window dressing. Derek Hough was there to offer his support and suggest that he and Juliette "see where this goes," mirroring what Teddy offered to Rayna when she was pregnant with Maddie. He was also there to interrupt Avery and Juliette in the hospital room. Had he not been there, it's doubtful that Avery would have stormed out and they may have had an actual conversation about their situation.  

 

Scarlett's homeless dude (whose name I can't even remember) was another one. I'm still wondering what the hell. Is he still out on the streets drinking? I mean, he seemed to be better off before she became his "manager." But, again, he was only there to help get her back on stage. His sobriety isn't our concern. They literally never mentioned the guy again. He could have died of alcohol poisoning that night. Why waste time building a backstory for him for him to fall off the face of the earth one episode later?

[MaryPatShelby]

Yeah...I get that Raina was upset, both that Deacon didn't tell her sooner, and that it was just a really emotional moment, but was it really a great idea to have Raina smack her ex boyfriend right after the whole big "evils of domestic abuse" story-line? I mean, I get its totally not the same thing, within context, but it seemed like a REALLY crappy time to pull out a dramatic slap. Like, damn Raina I know it`s a lot to take in, but the guy has freaking cancer. Lay off the slapping.  

 Really well said! I hate this trope in TV/movies. When is it EVER ok to slap someone, especially someone you love? And its always portrayed as just something that women do, and everyone's just ok with it!  It`s not, ok? If its a man or a woman, its not a justifiable reaction. It`s not even like Raina is a particularly violent or volatile person. It was just a really weird reaction, and with the domestic abuse story, it made for really bad timing.  

Hey!  They should make a show about a slap, and the ramifications of that slap.  They could call it "The Slap" and....oh wait.