S03.E13: Chapter 39

[driedfruit]

I'm of two minds about this season. On the one hand I loved the emotional consequences and the jealousies and insecurities that finally boiled up in the Underwoods' marriage. On the other, Doug's story put a real damper on everything. And I say this as a fan of his, or at least, as someone who enjoyed his character when he was shady secondary. I really wish his storyline had been minimized not expanded, because it went from unnecessary to unsavoury, and not in an entertaining way. And I could've done without the drawn out murder. 

 

Also, must we focus on a man on the downward spiral every damn season. First the party boy congressman, then Zoe's boyfriend, and this time Doug and the worst of the bunch since it was so drawn out.

 

I found Claire's downward spiral much more entertaining. Maybe because she had her triumphs, and because hers was like everything about her elegantly contained. I'm really excited to see where she goes next. 

 

I was disappointed that Iranian reporter got booted so unceremoniously to be replaced with another white woman. One thing I wish we got more of in this show is more PoC. Maybe because once Mad Men is over, this will be the whitest show in my tv line up. 

 

The monks existed for the metaphor of the beautiful creation that intentionally is destroyed- because nothing last forever. A bit heavy handed, but eh.

 

Heavy handed, I agree, but I thought the moment they destroyed the artwork was incredibly evocative, enough to warrant it being included. I don't think I've gasped as hard over any of the crazy plot twists than I did in that moment, and I knew it was coming.

Edited March 3, 2015 by driedfruit

[DrSpaceman]

The monks existed for the metaphor of the beautiful creation that intentionally is destroyed- because nothing last forever. A bit heavy handed, but eh.

Wrong thread for it, but since Mickey Doyle/Thomas Yates was mentioned, what was with the homoerotic scene with Frank; Frank is bi, yet you'd think he wouldn't be dumb enough to even subtly flirt back with the guy. I get Claire has denied him affection for a while, but it's still too huge a risk at his station. Get a mistress, or you know... that's what the loyal pit bull that is Meechum is for, Frank! :)

Actually... given how Meechum lashed out at Yates when he left, and his "take a bullet" line of fanatical loyalty, are we supposed to assume there's been continued hookups with one or both Underwoods ever since that threesome scene in Season 2?

 

 

In regard to the monks the metaphor I agree was partly about how things that take a long amount of time and effort disappear often before you realize it, and so easily, the non-permanence of any situation. 

 

I have a harder time figuring out why that brought them back together.  Best I can figure is it was the one commonality of the two of them during that month apart that they both walked by and recognzied, admired on a day to day basis but never discussed. 

 

The more I think about this though the more Claire pissed me off. 

 

She seems to be mad at Frank for making unilateral decisions without her, but it was exactly her unilateral decision, at the last moment, to speak out against the Russian president at the press conference that ruined an entire peace agreement.  And she was speaking not just as the first lady but aslo as an ambassador.  It helped her in the polls, it was mentioned, but hurt him and the country horribly. 

 

She simply could have waited until the agreement was in place and figured out a way to craft a statement later conveying the message she was hoping.  It was not the time or the place to make such a statement.  And it would be easy to explain why she didn't say anything at the time, they could simply say they had investigated things further and were releasing new or more information. 

[Ms Blue Jay]

Doug's story put a real damper on everything

 

Doug Damper

Edited March 3, 2015 by Ms Blue Jay

[prospazzinator]

I can't believe I binge watched this mess in the hopes that it would get better. Doug got way too much screen time and I couldn't care less about Claire. Watching her strutting around as the ambassador to the UN was just painful. Next season had better be her and Francis getting what they deserve. One highlight was notPutin! That guy was at least interesting to watch. 

[abelard]

I get Claire's storyline this season -- all the beats, how it was written and how it was played -- but I just don't buy it.  I am incredulous that a woman who had dedicated her entire life since she was 22 to her voraciously ambitious husband would be surprised now, 28 years later, that OMG IT IS ALL ABOUT HIS CAREER.  I am not at all saying I disagree with the sentiment -- I think it's a shame how, in general, many women devote themselves to their husbands' goals and seem to have no life of their own -- but it's just that Claire always seemed to be A-OK with the deal between her and Francis before.  WTF is she doing crying foul now?!?!  It seems to me that she never talked to him, never actually told him what was going on with her, made many moves on her own that backfired, made some moves on her own that worked, then attacked him, then threatened him, then he threatened her b/c he was like, "WTH I need you to do what I know you can and what will work for us, as per usual, as per our entire lives together", and then she walked out.

 

Why didn't she lay out some terms in front of him?  Why didn't she say, Give me this and I'll give you that?  Why didn't she throw a fit much, much earlier and say, This is not working for me the way it used to?  Keep in mind this is a couple who told one another minute details about the affairs they were having with other people, to have a good laugh about it!! (I'll never forget when Claire told Zoe about the spider that Frank killed in Zoe's apartment -- LOL Zoe, no you don't know her husband better than she does!)

 

I feel like Claire Underwood for two seasons was really really different than most women characters and than most women, period.  Just as Frank is meant to be so uniquely and supremely evil, and their marriage was supposed to be the only one of its kind, so Claire, too, seemed like the only one of her kind.  Claire and Frank were two killers (literally and figuratively) who had found one another, could only ever have been themselves by joining forces, and forged a marital bond that was wholly separate from any conventional norm of marriage.  

 

But this season Claire became somehow representative of the rich white unfulfilled under-loved under-appreciated American woman.  In Claire's monologues I could just hear all the women that I personally know who just feel absolutely nothing for their husbands after 25+ years of marriage b/c they feel it's been all about him all these years, leaving nothing for them.  I sympathize with my friends who are going through this, and I do think there are big structural problems in gender relations and societal expectations that make it hard for women to have their own thing while their husband goes out and grows a big career.  BUT BUT BUT I never thought Claire was supposed to be like "those women" -- I think she would think of all other women like that, as "those women who don't know wth they're doing, what they signed on for."  Claire of S1 and S2 would sneer and look down her nose at women who weren't smart enough to make deliberate choices and plan out their life ambitions.

 

Claire this season, by becoming more "relatable" to many women, just lost the thing that made her so distinct in seasons past, which was her very distinctiveness, the fact that she insisted on standing apart from the herd, being like no other woman she had never known, being completely herself, standing beside a life partner who, like her, has no peer, is like no one else, in a marriage that is wholly sui generis.  

[hincandenza]

I agree with everything you just said: you've expressed well my own dissatisfaction with the "new" Claire Of this season, because she doesn't make sense, and feels like a character motivated solely by the writers plot intentions: have the power couple split apart with a cliff hanger ending.

But the Claire of seasons 1 and 2 would never have been so reckless or myopic, and would have understood her power as Frank's personal confidante and closest partner- the power to sway him, to have his ear and his trust- is far greater than any ambassador or even a Senator.

Frank put her repeatedly in a position to succeed at political cost to himself, and yet she denied the most stressed himan being on the planet any affection from his own wife, and in the end it was she who walked away as if he hadn't kept up his end of their marriage.

For that matter, Frank got unusually tone deaf; the Frank of old would not have pushed Jackie or others away so often, but at least this fits the idea of power corrupting him into a tyrant. Claire transformation seems unnatural.

[cali1981]

I didn't realize that Paul Starks, who plays Tom Yates, was Mickey Doyle in Boardwalk Empire.  He was one of the most idiosyncratic characters on that series and had that bizarre little panting laugh after a lot of sentences.  Quite a transition for Starks.  I did see Kim Dickens (Kate Baldwin) recently in Gone Girls where she played the investigating detective and was excellent as was the entire movie.

[abelard]

 

 

But the Claire of seasons 1 and 2 would never have been so reckless or myopic, and would have understood her power as Frank's personal confidante and closest partner- the power to sway him, to have his ear and his trust- is far greater than any ambassador or even a Senator.

Frank put her repeatedly in a position to succeed at political cost to himself, and yet she denied the most stressed himan being on the planet any affection from his own wife, and in the end it was she who walked away as if he hadn't kept up his end of their marriage.

For that matter, Frank got unusually tone deaf; the Frank of old would not have pushed Jackie or others away so often, but at least this fits the idea of power corrupting him into a tyrant. Claire transformation seems unnatural.

Also WTF with Claire wanting to be a freaking ambassador?  Her job when Frank was in Congress was in running a big environmental NGO that she had founded.  And this season she was like, If you don't make me ambassador now before I turn 50, I'll have absolutely nothing if/when you get kicked out of office.  WTF?!?  I know Claire gave up her post at the NGO but it's not like she has zero skills or zero track record on the job market.  Seems to me that she could have gone right back into a career if it came to it (I mean, just thinking logically about her resume and all).  I'm sure she periodically had to suspend her working life, or take weeks off at a time or whatever, to campaign for Frank in the past.  What was so different this time around?  She had never been the meek little pretty puppet for Frank's political career before -- if anything, she probably PLAYED that role in the public's eye, making herself more meek than she ever actually was.  I don't get what changed so drastically for her, when there was nothing she had to do this season (this campaign) than she had ever done for her entire life. 

 

IA with what you say about Frank's arc (becoming a tyrant who is strangely tone-deaf to everyone around him, like Jackie -- and like Claire) being more understandable than Claire's arc.  Frank got the power he wanted but then he started losing and it made him selfish and angry and he made mistakes he never would have made before, I get that.  But what motivated Claire's sudden realization that she HAS to be in politics (or whatever her realization abt the ambassadorship was), that she CANNOT BEAR to ask Frank to help her (in the past, it seems to me they helped one another plenty, at every turn, in fact), and that she feels like she has only ever built up his career (an arrangement it seems they both agreed to long ago, anyway -- and plus, Claire did indeed have her own career, apart from Frank, until he became VP), and that she feels small and insignificant and hates herself for it (when she was just doing what I assume she has done for every single one of Frank's campaigns, which is putting on a great show that people can believe, so that she and Frank can reach their mutually agreed upon goals)????

[DrSpaceman]

I get Claire's storyline this season -- all the beats, how it was written and how it was played -- but I just don't buy it.  I am incredulous that a woman who had dedicated her entire life since she was 22 to her voraciously ambitious husband would be surprised now, 28 years later, that OMG IT IS ALL ABOUT HIS CAREER.  I am not at all saying I disagree with the sentiment -- I think it's a shame how, in general, many women devote themselves to their husbands' goals and seem to have no life of their own -- but it's just that Claire always seemed to be A-OK with the deal between her and Francis before.  WTF is she doing crying foul now?!?!  It seems to me that she never talked to him, never actually told him what was going on with her, made many moves on her own that backfired, made some moves on her own that worked, then attacked him, then threatened him, then he threatened her b/c he was like, "WTH I need you to do what I know you can and what will work for us, as per usual, as per our entire lives together", and then she walked out.

 

Why didn't she lay out some terms in front of him?  Why didn't she say, Give me this and I'll give you that?  Why didn't she throw a fit much, much earlier and say, This is not working for me the way it used to?  Keep in mind this is a couple who told one another minute details about the affairs they were having with other people, to have a good laugh about it!! (I'll never forget when Claire told Zoe about the spider that Frank killed in Zoe's apartment -- LOL Zoe, no you don't know her husband better than she does!)

 

I feel like Claire Underwood for two seasons was really really different than most women characters and than most women, period.  Just as Frank is meant to be so uniquely and supremely evil, and their marriage was supposed to be the only one of its kind, so Claire, too, seemed like the only one of her kind.  Claire and Frank were two killers (literally and figuratively) who had found one another, could only ever have been themselves by joining forces, and forged a marital bond that was wholly separate from any conventional norm of marriage.  

 

But this season Claire became somehow representative of the rich white unfulfilled under-loved under-appreciated American woman.  In Claire's monologues I could just hear all the women that I personally know who just feel absolutely nothing for their husbands after 25+ years of marriage b/c they feel it's been all about him all these years, leaving nothing for them.  I sympathize with my friends who are going through this, and I do think there are big structural problems in gender relations and societal expectations that make it hard for women to have their own thing while their husband goes out and grows a big career.  BUT BUT BUT I never thought Claire was supposed to be like "those women" -- I think she would think of all other women like that, as "those women who don't know wth they're doing, what they signed on for."  Claire of S1 and S2 would sneer and look down her nose at women who weren't smart enough to make deliberate choices and plan out their life ambitions.

 

Claire this season, by becoming more "relatable" to many women, just lost the thing that made her so distinct in seasons past, which was her very distinctiveness, the fact that she insisted on standing apart from the herd, being like no other woman she had never known, being completely herself, standing beside a life partner who, like her, has no peer, is like no one else, in a marriage that is wholly sui generis.

I think you make a lot of good points.

I also think maybe Claire like to THINK she was not like all those other women you mention but when it came down to it, based on this season's events, came to the realization she was more like them than she cared to admit.

At the same time she liked to think she was just as much of a politician as Frank, but when given the opportunity to prove it, she pretty well failed. The Republican congressman, whoever he was, was pretty much correct, she didn't have the experience needed. Its one thing to be a behind the scenes person and a whole other thing to be the one out front in the media as the spokesperson and the one making the decisions.

They both would have been better off finding a different position for her that wasn't as media intense and scrutinized, seeing as how she never had any real political experience and had never held any public office before. That was just hubris on their part though, I blame that on both Frank and Claire. She just assumed she could do a much bigger job than she was prepared for

[laprin]

I have always hated Doug for ruining Rachel's life, so this season just sealed the deal. This is saying something because oddly I don't even hate the Underwoods. They, at least, turn their vitriol against other disgusting people. Doug went after an innocent. I believe he enjoyed having the power to control her every move - where to live, who to speak to, etc...

Overall, I enjoyed this season although I can understand those that felt let down. This season was a very slow build whereas the last two seasons have been rollercoaster rides. I believe the writers/showrunners boxed themselves into a corner by moving Frank into the Oval office too soon. The trajectory just wasn't there as far as real political drama, so they had to focus on Frank and Claire's relationship. It will be interesting where the focus shifts for Season 4 because Frank and Claire will never be the same, even if they work out some kind of mutually beneficial arrangement. The whole season I kept thinking all they need is a picture window and some cigarettes.

[truthaboutluv]

I have always hated Doug for ruining Rachel's life,

 

 

YMMV but Rachel's life was ruined long before she met Doug as evidenced by her more or less living on the streets, prostituting herself to make money and getting beaten up by some of the guys who paid for her services. The day she met Doug for the first time, she was sporting a massive black eye and it is exactly why, according to her, she was desperate enough to try to blackmail a high standing government official, knowing how dangerous it might be because she didn't want to live the life she was living anymore. As for being entirely innocent, that's debatable - again, she helped set up Russo. Sure she felt guilty when the news report of his "apparent suicide" came out but she still willingly did it.

 

And once again, she got herself tangled in with these people by thinking she could just blackmail them and she'd get some money and that would be it. As I said, yes Rachel's death was horrible, as was Zoe's, as was the reporter guy being set up to go to prison for years (who frankly was more innocent than either of those two because he was trying to expose Frank and company's corruption and got life in prison for his efforts) but you could see where Rachel's story was going right from the start. She signed her death warrant the second she sent that letter and then got tangled in with Doug and by extension Frank and company.

 

They, at least, turn their vitriol against other disgusting people.

 

 

What did Russo do to deserve what Frank did to him? Yes he was an addict with many of an addict's compulsion but he wasn't a bad person. And Frank used his addiction and weakness as a tool and when he could no longer use him, he murdered him because Russo was a liability. This after conspiring to have the guy fall off the wagon. What about the pregnant woman Claire was happily willing to destroy. Sure she slept with a married man, that's what made her as disgusting as Frank and company because by that token, then again Rachel was no more innocent than these people either. Or what about the artist Adam whose life they almost destroyed with their lies and bullshit or hell even the President. Frank and Claire are scum as much as Doug - they are all horrible people. However while Frank and Claire are all about themselves, people like Doug pathetically try to please them. And in the end Doug will be as expendable to them as everyone else. 

Edited March 4, 2015 by truthaboutluv

[kdurmick]

I enjoyed this season, not sure it was my favorite though. I agree with a lot of you about how I hated that Doug ended up killing her anyways. The whole point of the entire season was making him more human and the ending destroyed that to me. I didn't really enjoy the Doug storyline that much anyways, creepy white man killing a bisexual woman, awful. 

 

I loved Claire though. There were some definite missteps with her as UN ambassador, but I think it will interesting because she is a huge reason why he made it in politics at all. Can Frank win an election without her? I think season 4 and/or 5 we could be seeing the fall of Frank and the rise of Claire which I think is a great direction change. I think she finally realized maybe he needs her more than she needs him anymore. Overall, I enjoyed the season and I like the focus switching to Claire a bit because Frank is becoming a dictator.  Only problem, I should have taken longer to watch it because I don't want to wait 6 months to a year for the next season. 

[Hava]

I am so happy that Claire left Frank. And although Frank can be fun to watch at times, I find him despicable and want him to be taken down like no other. But I don't think that Claire left Frank because she developed a conscience. As much as I would have liked for that to be the case, she left because she wanted more power.

 

Although Claire is just as evil as Frank, I find myself rooting for her. I feel as though she shows sparks of humanity. I also want her to be with a man who she actually loves. I was hoping for something to develop with the author because I found the author to be completely sexy. 

 

The most shocking moment for me was when Frank and Claire had sex. I had always assumed that their marriage was based on admiration, respect, and mutual ambition but that it lacked sexual attraction and romance. So when they actually went there, I was shocked and I want to know more. Do they WANT sex from each other? Do they have it often? Were they ever attracted to each other?

 

And I agree with the poster above that watching what the Monks had created be destroyed was the one that made me the gasp the loudest. I could not believe it!

 

I want to talk about Doug Stamper, but I am kind of at a loss for words. I liked Doug because I enjoyed the actor who played him, but his final act was too much, too evil. 

[hincandenza]

I enjoyed this season, not sure it was my favorite though. I agree with a lot of you about how I hated that Doug ended up killing her anyways. The whole point of the entire season was making him more human and the ending destroyed that to me. I didn't really enjoy the Doug storyline that much anyways, creepy white man killing a bisexual woman, awful.

I loved Claire though. There were some definite missteps with her as UN ambassador, but I think it will interesting because she is a huge reason why he made it in politics at all. Can Frank win an election without her? I think season 4 and/or 5 we could be seeing the fall of Frank and the rise of Claire which I think is a great direction change. I think she finally realized maybe he needs her more than she needs him anymore. Overall, I enjoyed the season and I like the focus switching to Claire a bit because Frank is becoming a dictator. Only problem, I should have taken longer to watch it because I don't want to wait 6 months to a year for the next season.

The Doug thing weirded a lot of us out; all that time spent, and yet... nothing really happened. He was basically as pitbull loyal as always, only we had to watch as he seemed to finally have grown past SS thug into something approaching a human... before he brutally killed a woman in the desert. Uh, oh well?

As for the election, Frank is already on the cusp, narrowly pulling out a victory against Dunbar in Iowa in spite of Jackie throwing her support behind Dunbar. I think if season 4, episode 1 doesn't have Claire quietly returning to the fold with the public none the wiser, his re-election is *dead*. What voter would choose an interim VP who is covered in scandal, having reneged on his one-term promise, with no real political wins and literally no allies left except Doug... and whose wife also just walked out on their marriage in the middle of a primary race, when he'd won?!? He absolutely won't get the nomination unless we go to fantasyland; the public would expect him to withdraw to focus on the country and his marriage.

Season 4- the last suit in the deck- will presumably cover his final downfall, and the public uncovering of his sins. However, I don't see how Claire gets out of this with her own political skin intact; she has nothing to offer and isn't exactly regarded in a saintly fashion. To the world she is to Frank what failed opera singer Susan was to Charles Foster Kane, a woman of middling talents propped up by her powerful husband.

Maybe by leaving, she's hoping to dodge the stink of the oncoming collapse so her own American story can have a second act down the road. That's all I can figure as her motivation.

[DarkRaichu]

And I agree with the poster above that watching what the Monks had created be destroyed was the one that made me the gasp the loudest. I could not believe it!

Wasn't that the point of the whole exercise ?  Nothing lasts forever.  It also showed that something so intricate could be wiped out in an instance (ie. house of cards, wink!)

 

 

 

ETA: Loved the line where the writer told Claire he was tired of slinging sladgehammer just to get a glimpse of truth from the Underwoods

Edited March 5, 2015 by DarkRaichu

[Ronin Jackson]

I didn't necessarily think the end of Rachel Posner's story was mysoginist or anti-lesbian, but it was terrible writing. It's hard to remember at this point that she was an link to Russo's downfall... she wasn't even directly linked to his murder. But yet they spent two seasons dragging the story out, and it had the most absurdly anti-climactic conclusion, both narratively and cinematically, that I'm irritated how much time I spent watching it. I know this is supposed to be about Doug Stamper. That would be great if I gave a crap about Doug Stamper or found him interesting.

[Chaos Theory]

I didn't necessarily think the end of Rachel Posner's story was mysoginist or anti-lesbian, but it was terrible writing. It's hard to remember at this point that she was an link to Russo's downfall... she wasn't even directly linked to his murder. But yet they spent two seasons dragging the story out, and it had the most absurdly anti-climactic conclusion, both narratively and cinematically, that I'm irritated how much time I spent watching it. I know this is supposed to be about Doug Stamper. That would be great if I gave a crap about Doug Stamper or found him interesting.

I don't get the anti-lesbian part but I do get the anti-climatic part. I understand the frustration of a woman being killed for a male storyline but hiw is it different when we thought she killed him? Besides being anti-climactic? One of them had to die. Honestly it makes more sense for it to be Rachel.

[Ellaria]

I really liked season 3. Definitely more than season 2, which got way too convoluted towards the end.

 

I also preferred this season over Season 2. I really got tired of Raymond Tusk.

 

Anyway, just wrapped up the season, and while I thought it was good and more emotionally "meaty" now that Frank doesn't win every battle, I'm not wild about the Doug story line; as someone said above, why have all that arc and humanization, just to end back where we started? He's a monster, but we already knew that; now instead of the humanized but ruthless and competent operative, he's just a deranged killer. And yeah, while we know Frank sent him out, didn't anyone else at the White House think the chief of staff disappearing for 3-4 days in the heat of a primary was noteworthy or odd?

Claire also seemed off as a character all season. I never felt I understood at any point why after 28 years she's npw so resentful. She didn't have power imbalance issues when she was running a non-profit and he was a powerful US Senator? She knew the score, knew what they were doing, and certainly didn't shy away from the trappings of wealth and influence as they piled up. She even tried to play Eleanor, and screwed up so badly she nearly started a war in her brief stint at the UN. Frank did nothing but support her and bail her out, so why the rancor? Frank is an evil, evil man yet I found myself agreeing with him in almost every argument; she was uncharacteristically childish and naive all year, which is not the same canny Ice Queen we saw in S1 and S2.

 

The Doug story line was not handled well. I didn't need to see such extensive coverage of his physical recovery and his reunion with his family only to have him slide back to his true self in the end. Maybe the journey was necessary...maybe...but way too much time was devoted to it. Obviously, TPTB think that Despicable Doug needs to be in the show and they are going to make him as heinous as possible.

 

It was only a matter of time before Claire hit the wall. She is every bit as ambitious and ruthless as Frank. The Ice Queen proved to be a failed pretense. And yes, her actions were often childish (and frankly a bit ridiculous) for a First Lady. However, I didn't care for her interaction with the author. It didn't ring true that he had to be the one to point out the truth. 

 

Doug wasn't going to be announced as the replacement for chief of staff until after the Iowa caucus, so no one would think it was suspect because he didn't have the job yet.  

 

True. But wouldn't other staffers like Seth ask, "Hey, where's Doug." He had already moved into this office. The timing was strange.

 

I can't recall whether it was in this episode or an episode or two back (Darn binge watching...), but what was up with Yates' forgetfulness at the grocery store? That seemed like it was leading somewhere, but didn't get followed up on.

 

Agree. That struck me as odd and unnecessary since it led nowhere. The explanation of "lack of sleep" doesn't make sense. 

 

I am not surprised by the end of Frank and Claire's marriage. It was inevitable. However, one of the great attractions of this show was their somewhat twisted partnership. It elevated both of them. If that is truly over - and I'm not 100% sure that it is - then the show will suffer.

Edited March 5, 2015 by Ellaria Sand

[CleoCaesar]

And I agree with the poster above that watching what the Monks had created be destroyed was the one that made me the gasp the loudest. I could not believe it!

 

My audible reaction to the monks' destroying their long, hard work was "Whoa, hey! no!". I had the exact same reaction when Claire said "I'm leaving you". I guess that was kind of the point? So much hard work down the drain. Except in the monks' case it resulted in a thing of beauty, not greed, corruption, and murder.

[Ronin Jackson]

BTW, since some are not familiar with it, all sand mandala paintings are destroyed. That's the purpose of the entire ritual. It symbolizes impermanence and non attachment, two very Buddhist principles. I'm sure that was, in some way, the theme of that episode... but honestly I didn't see it. I know that was the episode where Claire and Franks retakes their vows and Claire changes her hair color... that's part of the problem with binge watching. The episodes bleed together. I'm sure if I was watching weekly I would have thought about how the sand mandala related to what happened in that episode. Instead I just watched the next episose.

[Ronin Jackson]

I don't get the anti-lesbian part but I do get the anti-climatic part. I understand the frustration of a woman being killed for a male storyline but hiw is it different when we thought she killed him? Besides being anti-climactic? One of them had to die. Honestly it makes more sense for it to be Rachel.

Even if it makes sense for it to be Rachel, that doesn't make it a well written or constructed scene. I was irritated that they cut from the shot of Rachel turning around to see the van coming to her being buried, mostly because I'd give better odds to Rachel escaping at that point. All she has to do is run off the road into the desert. That van isn't going off roading and Doug isn't running her down with that limp. They could have cut to her being buried when she was tied up in the van and it'd be fine. But they had to wait until there had to be some kind of improbable pursuit or survival instinct lapse. I assume she was run over by the van, but they betrayed that be having her turn around soon enough to run off the road.

[hincandenza]

Yeah, that really irked me, as others noted: she would have run!  It's the most basic survival instinct of every mammal.  The almost-escape gotcha on the audience was tacky and unnecessary, like something out of a cheesy horror film.  It's as if they wanted the shock and emotional impact of that incredible scene in "Breaking Bad"

during the "Ozymandias" episode when Hank Schrader is suddenly and abruptly shot dead in the desert

... without having done any of the plot and character development to earn it.

 

I get the reasoning that Doug did all that; he felt if he didn't kill her, he'd have lied to Frank when he originally thought she was dead, and Frank is his God-King to whom he needed to prove his subservience and fierce loyalty.  But he'd never catch her on foot when she was running for her life and he still has a pronounced limp, and she might even be smart enough to lead him out and then circle back to the van and take off (or at least puncture a tire).

 

Rachel for her part probably would have kept quiet and continued with her plan to leave her old identity behind like she said... but once Doug came back yet again after setting her free, she knew she'd never be safe.  That would force her to go to the press to tell her story, just to be protected.  Boom, season 4 starts with an unimaginably huge scandal for Frank as there is a lot of information out there to corroborate significant parts of her story, not to mention a pissed-off superhacker living overseas who would want revenge against Stamper.

 

Which honestly, would have been a far better handling for the season finale cliffhanger: Rachel escapes, and the last we see of them is Doug looking completely destroyed as he stares at her or the van disappearing off in the distance.  He and the audience now realize that his psychotic obsession with her took what was a non-problem and turned it into a huge one that would finally destroy Frank Underwood, the person Doug loves most in the whole wide world.  That would have made for a "sword of Damocles" hanging over Frank as we await season 4, to go along with Claire walking out and the tight election where he has alienated all his allies... and in turn made the excessive time spent on Doug this season have meaning and purpose as it tied back into the main plot with Frank's most loyal ally becoming the unintended cause of his downfall.

 

The writers really screwed this up, and for what?  A lamely "shocking" twist.  Bad form, writers.  Bad form.

Edited March 6, 2015 by hincandenza

[Ellaria]

Yeah, that really irked me, as others noted: she would have run!  It's the most basic survival instinct of every mammal.  The almost-escape gotcha on the audience was tacky and unnecessary, like something out of a cheesy horror film...

 

The writers really screwed this up, and for what?  A lamely "shocking" twist.  Bad form, writers.  Bad form.

 

Well said. It was a mistake on so many levels. Doug was horrible before the events of S3. Now he is completely beyond redemption. I feel manipulated by his season-long journey of "the redemption that wasn't." We knew early on that he was a damaged individual. I didn't need to see his attempted rehabilitation if he was only going to sink lower then ever before. It is very disappointing and adds a sour element to S4 that can't be dismissed.

[Catt]

My ideal season finale (obviously wouldn't have worked with this season, but just generally):

 

Frank's approval rating is steadily dropping in the polls and he has to concede that it doesn't matter how cunning he is politically, how many favours he does or how many opponents he ruins, if he doesn't get the public on side, then it is all for naught. His supposed allies are in question and Doug Stamper's loyalty may be wavering after his breakdown and return to drinking. There is some suggestion that he may harbour ill-feelings towards Frank, and that some of his informing on the President to opposing parties may be genuine, rather than as a triple agent. At the same time, Doug can sense that the President is about to be disgraced and doesn't want him to have to go through that. It's getting close to the election and running out of options, Frank eventually comes up with a last ditch effort to swing public opinion and sympathies in his favour. He organises a special campaign address to announce his plan, hoping for as big a crowd as possible. Although she was originally unable to attend, Claire manages to reorganise her schedule last minute, so that she can stand beside him during the speech. She arrives, to Frank's surprise, just as he is about to step up to the lectern. Frank gives the beginning of a rousing speech, but about a minute into it, a gunshot rings out. It appears to have missed and hit the lectern instead. Meechum dives in front of Frank and takes the second shot in the centre of his back. Frank sees that Meechum is dead, as the other bodyguards try to rush him off the stage. He then looks around and notices the red seeping through on the stomach of Claire's dress. The first shot ricocheted oddly off of the lectern and hit her. She collapses.

 

First episode of the next season:

A few days before the speech, Frank goes through the motions of the day-to-day leading up to the speech. Some of the other staff are suspicious that Doug is up to something and have evidence that he is leaking intelligence. Later, he cannot be reached for a number of days. He is not at home and Claire is worried he has fallen off the wagon again. Various parties express open hostilities towards the President and tensions are high. A few minutes before he is about to give his speech, Frank puts on a bulletproof vest. We see the events of the presidential address from the gunman's perspective. Getting into position, looking through the sights etc. Frank gets a minute into his speech and the gunman fires. The bullet richochets off the lectern and hits Claire. Meechum dives in front of the President and the gunman fires again and hits Meechum in the back, killing him. Frank is dragged off stage as Claire collapses. We see that the gunman is Doug Stamper.

 

Cut to a week before the speech

Frank considers his dire situation and ever-dropping approval rating. He comes up with a plan. He meets secretly with Doug who is eager to prove his loyalty. Frank explains the idea that an assassination attempt on his life will get the public on his side and hopefully their sympathy will get him the backing he needs to win the election. Knowing that the lectern is bulletproof, he tells Doug to wait for him to reach a specific keyword in his speech and that is the cue to fire a shot into the lectern, as if he missed. Then knowing that one of the bodyguards will dive in front of the President, Doug is to wait until they do and then fire again. There has to be a sacrifice, so that there can be a hero. Even if the supposed assassination attempt is unsuccessful, it can't be bloodless, and the bullets have to be live rounds, not blanks, or it won't be convincing and someone might find out it was staged. Frank will be wearing a bulletproof just in case. Doug calls the plan reckless and asks why he should be the one to do it and Frank explains he is the only one he trusts with his life. Frank doesn't tell Claire about the plan and organises for the speech to happen at a time when she can't be there, so that she doesn't have to see it, but she manages to come anyway without him knowing or being in a postion to call it off. The first bullet ricochets unexpectedly and hits her. Frank wins the election, but possibly only because Claire was unintentionally injured. The plan itself may not have been enough. Claire survives, but eventually Frank has to admit the plan to her, which is the seeds for her eventually turning against him fully and his downfall.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Catt

[Anela]

Unless he had a gun, I am amazed that Doug would have been able to overpower Rachel, when she was untied and knew he was coming. She had plenty of notice he was coming. She was young, fit and healthy. He was partly crippled. She should have just run through the field and there's no way he could have gotten her, unless he had a gun. Even if he walked close to her, she should have been able to overpower him the instant he acted suspicious, with a quick jab to his throat or elsewhere, followed up instantly by repeated quick punches till his head was a bloody pulp.

I assumed that he hit her with the van. I knew that he was going to hurt her, when that music started up, as he told her to give him her wrists, so that he could cut the rope. Ugh!! I hate that hacker for giving her up. 

 

I'm glad that Claire left Frank, rather than letting him bully her into keeping up appearances. 

[Pike Ludwell]

I assumed that he hit her with the van. I knew that he was going to hurt her, when that music started up, as he told her to give him her wrists, so that he could cut the rope. Ugh!! I hate that hacker for giving her up. 

 

I'd definitely immediately thought about him running over her with the van, but figured she could just run through the field the second she him approaching. I re-watched and now I see there was a very high fence with apparent barbed wire in front of the field. I hadn't noticed that before. Still it just seems to me that someone with that much space in front of the fence could still outmaneuver someone in an old van like that. Stand at the fence, and as he starts charging just quickly run out of the way at the last second, get behind him and just stay out of his way no matter what he does. Perhaps he'd have hit the fence with his initial charge, so she could then get through. It still all seems to me like they portrayed her as a little too weak.

 

Same with regard to the hacker guy. He started out as a very sharp guy, always in control and on top of things - always outsmarting his opponent. All of a sudden he's making stupid mistakes, loses control and is outwitted by the brilliant Stamper!! (ROFL). I'd been hoping that hacker would be the one to bring down the house of cards. I'd also been hoping Rachel would outwit and destroy Stamper. The writers chose the opposite direction and I lose interest when the bad guys keep unrealistically winning a little too much.

Edited March 7, 2015 by riverclown

[Higgins]

I see Claire as much more ruthless than Frank. Every time he tries to get real with her, she won't allow him to go there. She is the coldest most controlled bitch much scarier than he is to me.

[elzin]

I wonder if Rachel left a "in case anything happens to me..." letter in that lockbox with her new identity papers...

 

Killing her from a cover-up standpoint was so stupid.  Because of her history as a sex worker (not judgment on my part but a reflection of the society we live in) and having no proof of anyone hiring her re: Peter, if she had disappeared she'd have been no real threat if she came forward. Sure, some people would believe it, but generally it would be a non-story because of lack of credibility and evidence to back it up. It wouldn't bring the empire down.  And that's IF she came forward.  She did all she could to hide.  She clearly was not Up To Something. 

 

It's like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Getting rid of her might be the thing that exposes them more than had they just let her be.

I didn't love this season, but it was ok enough for me until the end. It was just badly written and too beyond the suspension of disbelief for me.

[Ronin Jackson]

Does Doug Stamper actually know what happened to Russo? Because all Rachel knew was that she was hired to knock him off the wagon. She thought like everyone else that he killed himself. I suppose Stamper hiring her is a link to Underwood, but I agree with elzin-- there's nothing but an unverifiable story there about a man who ultimately is responsible for his own decision to fall off the wagon. The story thread was dragged out for two seasons seemingly on a connection to a murder that perhaps only Frank knows about. The entire thing seems ridiculous and I'm wondering if there's ever going to be a pay off. If Doug knows about the murder, perhaps it will play out with him cracking under guilty turmoil over murdering a women he had an unhealthy fixation on. But even if that's the case it seems like a narratively inept decision to have the murder playout so anti-climactic. The scene had all the drama and impact of a person tossing a banana peel in the trash. Two seasons leading up to that.

[truthaboutluv]

I don't know that he has solid proof but Doug definitely seemed to put it together when he saw Frank the morning after he left him with Russo and Frank told him if he (Doug) is ever asked about that night, to say that Frank was home the whole night. So I'm pretty sure he knows Frank killed Russo. While true Rachel's story was just an unverifiable one, when it comes to politics, one person saying something can have a massive ripple effect, especially if Rachel made it to the press and by that token the national public. 

 

At that point, she can't easily just vanish, or well she could but that would make Frank and company more suspect to the public and media. And it would be a lot harder to screw someone over as they did the journalist guy in Season 2 if multiple media publications/journalists start investigating and digging around. And once Rachel says she was told by Doug Stamper, who everyone knew to be Frank's right hand man, to help Russo fall off the wagon, that opens up the can of worms of why? Why would Frank want Russo who he was supposedly supporting, to fall off the wagon and then it spirals. Not such a crazy concept - see Nixon and Watergate.

[nara]

And what's the deal with the writers thinking Stamper is some sort of sex symbol. He has one beautiful woman after another jumping into bed with him, with him showing minimal personality of any good sort. His looks are that great? ROFL And why show the actor in a nude scene. He's supposed to be hot? I think I hear Twilight Zone music playing in the background.

LOL, that was my same reaction.  Remy is the hot one on this show.  He should be getting the action!

 

Although I agree that there was a lot about this season that screamed "transition" or "filler", I thought that the disintegration of the Underwood marriage was a very good storyline and critical to the next phase of the show.  For it to make sense, they had to show a number of elements:  Claire's ambition unleashed, the Russian president kissing her without consequence (oh, how I wanted Frank to push him down the stairs!), the courage of the gay activist/prisoner to  stay true to his principles at the cost of his life, the forced resignation, the popularity of Claire feeding her ambition, etc.  Therefore, it made sense to make it last the whole season. 

 

I am looking forward to Claire's next incarnation, though I think her timing was unfair to the agreement she had with Frank.  I actually thought she wasn't bad as an Ambassador and seemed quite tactful and persuasive, until she 1) let her emotions get in the way of diplomacy and 2) was played by the Russian ambassador.  She succeeded in winning the support of the Secretary of State and forging the alliance.  However, she tried to jump steps by going straight to very visible, international position without having clearly established her credentials.  Will she next go after a position that is a good learning and proving ground or will she go to Heather or some TBD Republican candidate and demand to be the VP on the ticket?

 

Also, am I the only one who hoped that America Works would revive somehow?

[Ronin Jackson]

DUring his physical therapy Stamper was spending time on the phone with a major presidential candidate and is known to be connected to the President himself. That gave him alpha-dog status, which, no matter how much I hate to acknowledge this, gives him more pull with the ladies than looks or personality. So I didn't find that aspect of the show unrealistic... but it's still annoying.

[lion10]

Francis was right in his argument with Claire though he absolutely shouldn't have manhandled her like that.  They both knew that the goal was the Presidency and that the room only had one chair.

[rozen]

Also I am not sure what the point was of some of the scenes and stories.

what was it that Doug learned from being around his brother and kids, other than it allowed him to get sober? He went right back to Underwood and his old life afte

What was the point of Doug sleeping with his physical therapist, who then left?

Remy getting pulled over, just a moral epiphany about how much he loves Jackie?

As someone else mentioned, the moment of lapse of the author in the store?

Even the tibetan monks, I think they were, it was a beautiful structure they made, amazing, but still not sure how that brought he and claire together again briefly. Just a shared experience?

 

Bias: I love the Doug storyline

 

Because Doug was, imo, indulging himself. In his twisted mind, love and affection are the true drug and alcohol is his medicine. Which they hit us over the head literally with the dirty syringe he fished out of the trash (ew). When it was time to work he "sobered up" and locked all those newfound feelings away.

 

I think the physical therapist was another example of how, if he walked away, Doug could actually have a pretty freaking awesome life. He got great job offers, has a great extended family, has hot women fitting his aesthetic flinging themselves at him. It shows how truly insane he is. He's not some creepo skulking in shadows, scaring everyone off. It shows what being an "ally" to Frank really means, and just how stupid everyone who enters into superficial alliances with him actually are. Including Seth, who thought he was rooster in charge until Doug came back and unceremoniously kicked his ass out in about three days.

 

I thought the pull over was to "reset" Remy. Season one Remy was all about the money and rejected political power, stating astutely that "power never lasts". His affection for Jackie sucked him back into Frank's orbit because he thought he could protect her. Once she dumped him, he probably kept going from sheer inertia and enjoyment of being Frank's no. 2. The pullover reminded him that outside of Frank's office he's still just a black man to everyone else. The power he thought he had was meaningless in the real world. So what happens when Frank loses power? Remy basically made no progress, and simply regressed back to his old self so we could see him repeat the exact same cycle that drove him away from Frank before. I expected more savvy from him, tbqh, he ended being kind of dumb and let himself be manipulated by just about everybody.

 

The monk thing showed how far they'd drifted apart. This was a couple where Frank told Claire when and how he killed a freaking spider in his mistress's apartment. There was not a single detail they did not know about each other (they thought). And now they didn't even know how the other felt about a month(s?)-long, attention calling, project right in front of their faces.

Edited March 9, 2015 by rozen

[LibertarianSlut]

I didn't really enjoy the Doug storyline that much anyways, creepy white man killing a bisexual woman, awful. 

What does this racial stuff even mean? If a black man or an Asian man killed Rachel, would that be better for her? Would she somehow be less dead?

[lion10]

What does this racial stuff even mean? If a black man or an Asian man killed Rachel, would that be better for her? Would she somehow be less dead?

Yes.

[AbFabGab]

I am done with lesbians and bisexual women serving as props to tell someone else's story.  Whether a lesbian dies so the straight characters will have some tragedy to suffer through or the bisexual woman dies so we can see how evil someone is, it is enough.    

Given how ruthless Frank Underwood has proven to be towards any straight man (Peter Russo) or woman (Zoe Barnes) who's sniffed at getting in his way, I don't think Rachel or her ex were props any more than the first victims.

 

I might also be reading too much into it, but when the hacker gave the ex Doug's name, I definitely saw that as a setup for a larger storyline in Season 4. I do fear for her safety if she should actually decide to ask him any questions.

[revbfc]

I'm glad I'm not the only person who was pissed off about Claire this season. How one goes from Lady MacBeth to Carmela Soprano is an interesting idea to explore, but I don't buy it. Not one iota. We see her change, but I didn't pick up how she developed her guilt.

Having said that, all of her statements about equality in a marriage are valid...In normal relationships. She signed up for a political power couple, and that's what she has. It's her fault she wasn't good at diplomacy, it's her fault that WWIII almost happened, and it's her fault that no one in the administration takes her seriously. She wants to sit on the throne with Frank, but that is not how our government works. Were the tables turned, I'd be pissed of at Frank for being so presumptive in believing he also ran the country, too.

[Nancybeth]

Kim Dickens was, hands down, the best part of "Gone Girl."  She was also great in HBO's "Treme."  I hope she returns for the next season of HoC.  The writer dude (Thomas Yates) I have no real feelings for. 

 

Did Frank know that Doug had gone to take care of the prostitute?  It certainly seemed like it from his rant to Claire about people doing their jobs.  And was I the only one who was expecting Doug to turn the van around and run down Rachel?  Maybe he did, it was unclear. 

[Sir RaiderDuck OMS]

At least the interminable Rachel storyline is over. I had zero interest in what had happened to her or desire to see her again.

[ApathyMonger]

Kim Dickens was, hands down, the best part of "Gone Girl."  She was also great in HBO's "Treme."  I hope she returns for the next season of HoC.  The writer dude (Thomas Yates) I have no real feelings for. 

 

Dickens is in the Walking Dead spin-off that was just picked up for two seasons, so she'll probably either appear briefly and be written out, or will be gone when S4 begins.

[DarkRaichu]

My ideal season finale (obviously wouldn't have worked with this season, but just generally):

 

Frank's approval rating is steadily dropping in the polls and he has to concede that it doesn't matter how cunning he is politically, how many favours he does or how many opponents he ruins, if he doesn't get the public on side, then it is all for naught. His supposed allies are in question and Doug Stamper's loyalty may be wavering after his breakdown and return to drinking. There is some suggestion that he may harbour ill-feelings towards Frank, and that some of his informing on the President to opposing parties may be genuine, rather than as a triple agent. At the same time, Doug can sense that the President is about to be disgraced and doesn't want him to have to go through that. It's getting close to the election and running out of options, Frank eventually comes up with a last ditch effort to swing public opinion and sympathies in his favour. He organises a special campaign address to announce his plan, hoping for as big a crowd as possible. Although she was originally unable to attend, Claire manages to reorganise her schedule last minute, so that she can stand beside him during the speech. She arrives, to Frank's surprise, just as he is about to step up to the lectern. Frank gives the beginning of a rousing speech, but about a minute into it, a gunshot rings out. It appears to have missed and hit the lectern instead. Meechum dives in front of Frank and takes the second shot in the centre of his back. Frank sees that Meechum is dead, as the other bodyguards try to rush him off the stage. He then looks around and notices the red seeping through on the stomach of Claire's dress. The first shot ricocheted oddly off of the lectern and hit her. She collapses.

 

First episode of the next season:

A few days before the speech, Frank goes through the motions of the day-to-day leading up to the speech. Some of the other staff are suspicious that Doug is up to something and have evidence that he is leaking intelligence. Later, he cannot be reached for a number of days. He is not at home and Claire is worried he has fallen off the wagon again. Various parties express open hostilities towards the President and tensions are high. A few minutes before he is about to give his speech, Frank puts on a bulletproof vest. We see the events of the presidential address from the gunman's perspective. Getting into position, looking through the sights etc. Frank gets a minute into his speech and the gunman fires. The bullet richochets off the lectern and hits Claire. Meechum dives in front of the President and the gunman fires again and hits Meechum in the back, killing him. Frank is dragged off stage as Claire collapses. We see that the gunman is Doug Stamper.

 

Cut to a week before the speech

Frank considers his dire situation and ever-dropping approval rating. He comes up with a plan. He meets secretly with Doug who is eager to prove his loyalty. Frank explains the idea that an assassination attempt on his life will get the public on his side and hopefully their sympathy will get him the backing he needs to win the election. Knowing that the lectern is bulletproof, he tells Doug to wait for him to reach a specific keyword in his speech and that is the cue to fire a shot into the lectern, as if he missed. Then knowing that one of the bodyguards will dive in front of the President, Doug is to wait until they do and then fire again. There has to be a sacrifice, so that there can be a hero. Even if the supposed assassination attempt is unsuccessful, it can't be bloodless, and the bullets have to be live rounds, not blanks, or it won't be convincing and someone might find out it was staged. Frank will be wearing a bulletproof just in case. Doug calls the plan reckless and asks why he should be the one to do it and Frank explains he is the only one he trusts with his life. Frank doesn't tell Claire about the plan and organises for the speech to happen at a time when she can't be there, so that she doesn't have to see it, but she manages to come anyway without him knowing or being in a postion to call it off. The first bullet ricochets unexpectedly and hits her. Frank wins the election, but possibly only because Claire was unintentionally injured. The plan itself may not have been enough. Claire survives, but eventually Frank has to admit the plan to her, which is the seeds for her eventually turning against him fully and his downfall.

 

Have you seen Kelsey Grammer's Boss TV series ? ;)

Edited March 9, 2015 by DarkRaichu

[Nire]

I also found the Claire story arc for this season just not fitting with her previous character.  I felt like she changed too much in too short of a period of time.  I mean right at the start of the season she was demanding the ambassador position and that just seemed like an odd move on her part.  Didn't she merely act as second lady or whatever while Frank was VP?  Given her previous experience operating a charity wouldn't having started a new initiative and doing charity work been more fitting for her character?   

I felt in general the Underwoods weren't as ruthless this season as they have been previously.  Perhaps it was because they couldn't be as ruthless.  It's a lot easier to destroy another congressman then it is the Russian president.  But even Frank had moments when he seemed to care about others and I don't remember that in previous seasons.  I also felt like their marriage unraveled really quickly.  It was odd the season seemed to drag a bit while at the same time other things seemed to change suddenly.

I hated Doug's huge role in this season.  I felt like he became nearly as big of a character as Frank or Claire for very little purpose.  They tried to humanize him just to make you realize that nope he's just as awful as ever.  I also think his brother is a freaking saint.  Doug had never even bothered to meet his niece and nephew yet his brother took off tons of time from work to care for him.  One would assume that they hadn't seen each other in many years and Doug doesn't strike me as somebody who was ever a loyal brother.   

[missy jo]

I binge-watched Season 1 and 2 again prior to this one to refresh my memory. The first episode of Season 2 epitomized to me the brilliance of HoC, with Frank throwing Zoe in front of the train (!) and ending with his monologue to the camera, "Did you think I'd forgotten about you?" and then a close-up of Meechum's gift of the monogrammed cufflinks, "F U."

 

Point being, Season 3 felt a bit "off" and flat in comparison, even though it was the logical progression of the story. I enjoyed the first few episodes for their sheer Schadenfreude and "be careful what you wish for." The Underwoods finally met their match in (Not)Putin and other players on the world stage.

 

However, it became too much of a downer (even for a show about homicidal sociopaths, LOL) and Frank seemed to break the fourth wall less and less toward the end of the season, which is one of my favorite aspects of the show.

 

Like other posters, I didn't get the point of Doug's huge role in the season or the character arc (or lack thereof). I might've missed Frank giving him his marching orders to kill Rachel (who he didn't know was alive?), because I didn't fully understand Doug's motivations. And yes, it almost felt like torture porn and made my scalp crawl, even though I'm used to violent shows like Sons of Anarchy, etc.

 

Finally, please, please let Remy get sucked back into the world of politics through Jackie, because I love his beautiful face! Team Remy!

Edited March 10, 2015 by missy jo

[notyrmomma]

Why the hell waste our time building up Doug in the eyes of the audience, just to knock him down? I guess this is why they call it House of Cards.  Can I have my 13 hours back please?  The only slightly decent people (i.e., not sociopaths) on this show are Jackie, Heather, and Remy.  I'm a conservative and I would consider voting for Heather IRL.  Other than that, if I wanted to watch the Sopranos again, I'd whip out my DVD collection...and I swear to God, if this show ends with the final scene fading to black, I will flip out.  

[Catt]

Have you seen Kelsey Grammer's Boss TV series ? ;)

 

Actually, I haven't. Don't tell me I've somehow managed to copy another show's plotline without even watching it.

[Haleth]

Did Frank know that Doug had gone to take care of the prostitute?  It certainly seemed like it from his rant to Claire about people doing their jobs.  And was I the only one who was expecting Doug to turn the van around and run down Rachel?  Maybe he did, it was unclear.

 

He did run her down and buried her.  Nothing unclear about it.  Frank wanted it done.

 

Up till then I was thinking, hey, Frank didn't kill anyone this season!  Great!  Except... no.  I had a lot of sympathy for Doug up till that point.  His struggle to regain his health and position was hard to watch but I admired his determination.  But murdering a poor kid who just wanted to remain hidden?  He lost me.  

Edited March 11, 2015 by Haleth

[islandgal140]

 

The British series wrapped in 3 seasons so I expected HOC to do the same. Guess they don't want to let go of their critical darling quite yet, so this season got dragged out. Placeholder season.

I was really and seriously under the impression that the Underwoods would be getting their comeuppance this season. It must have been somewhere around episode 5 or 6  that I realized that that wasn't going to happen and that Netflix was going to try to wring another season, or 2 or 3 from this. I would love to be able to say that I ain't gonna be here for that but I would be only kidding myself. However, I will say that I am not a happy camper. All I know is the Underwoods better not win at the end of all this.

 

I was actually happy earlier on in the season when it was reported to Doug that Rachel had died in a ditch. Not that I dislike Rachel but I knew that it was better than being alive and Doug knowing that because he would only wind up tracking her down. I actually groaned and rolled my eyes when she turned out to be alive because I knew where this was going. This was a very distasteful storyline that ate up time. I really wound up hating Gavin for giving Rachel up like that for his friend that he couldn't save anyway.

 

I don't care what he does but Jimmi Simpsons (Gavin) will always be a Liam McPoyle to me from Its Always Sunny In Philadelphia. I keep waiting for him to don a bathrobe, grab a glass a milk and make an inappropriate incestual comment about his brother Ryan. 

 

What did Russo do to deserve what Frank did to him? Yes he was an addict with many of an addict's compulsion but he wasn't a bad person. And Frank used his addiction and weakness as a tool and when he could no longer use him, he murdered him because Russo was a liability. This after conspiring to have the guy fall off the wagon. What about the pregnant woman Claire was happily willing to destroy. Sure she slept with a married man, that's what made her as disgusting as Frank and company because by that token, then again Rachel was no more innocent than these people either. Or what about the artist Adam whose life they almost destroyed with their lies and bullshit or hell even the President. Frank and Claire are scum as much as Doug - they are all horrible people. However while Frank and Claire are all about themselves, people like Doug pathetically try to please them. And in the end Doug will be as expendable to them as everyone else. 

Thanks for the reminder all of the heinous shit that the Underwoods have done. Throw in Freddy Hayes and I have flames licking at the side of my face. This is why I can't with Claire's sudden attack of conscience. This is why I can't with Claire's 180 from being Lady MacBeth to some basic suburban bitch complaining to her husband that he doesn't bring her flowers anymore while sipping on a pumpkin spiced latte. Heffa please!! I hate the development of Claire leaving Frank because it signals to me that she will not be sharing in the very public fall/comeuppance and dragging that they both equally earned and deserve. I am sorry but after decades of scheming, villainy, murder, mayhem and lawd knows what else, after what amounts to a few months of consciousness and smoopy feelings Claire should not get to trot off and find love and happiness and leave Francis to bear the brunt of all they have done together. Nope! 

 

Everytime I see Kate Baldwin I am think she looks like the love child of Elisabeth Shue and Amy Adams. 

[DarkRaichu]

Actually, I haven't. Don't tell me I've somehow managed to copy another show's plotline without even watching it.

Let's just say you would enjoy Boss as well ;)  Unfortunately, that show was cancelled after the 2nd season with a few cliffhangers.  The planned movie that would supposedly tie up the loose ends never materialized. 

[ZootSuitWyatt]

I don't care what he does but Jimmi Simpsons (Gavin) will always be a Liam McPoyle to me from Its Always Sunny In Philadelphia. I keep waiting for him to don a bathrobe, grab a glass a milk and make an inappropriate incestual comment about his brother Ryan.

 

I feel the same way.