Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

S02.E03: 203


Tara Ariano
  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

It's genuinely fascinating to me how others can see this show in a diametrically opposite way as I do.  I saw something similar on Twitter, on replies to Sarah Treem's timeline, before coming on here ("The only reason I'm still watching is to find out who killed Scotty").

 

For my part, I could do without the whole storyline involving Scotty, the lawyer (even though I do love Schiff in the role), etc.  But I thought this episode was absolutely riveting until that last few minutes in the attorney's office.  In particular, I feel that adding the characters of Robert and Yvonne this season was a triumph of writing and casting.  The scenes at dinner and on the walk looking for the dog were just tremendous.

 

But then, I am a huge fan of movies like Closer, Margaret, Crimes and Misdemeanors, Another Year, Things You Can Tell Just By Looking at Her, Metropolitan, Blue Jasmine, and Margot at the Wedding.  None of which did much box office, and all of which most people would probably find really dull.  But I absolutely adore character dramas like these (mostly involving upscale Northeasterners or Londoners, and their dysfunctional marriages and/or families), and the scenes with Robert and Yvonne very much feel like they could fit right into the types of films I listed.  

 

I'm all for character studies. I love character dramas. But I don't feel that this episode told us anything about these characters that we didn't already know. I disagree on Robert and Yvonne. While I find them interesting in a sense, I also think that their characterization borders on caricature. Particularly Yvonne who practically transformed into Cruella Deville before our eyes. I'm not saying that it was bad writing, and it could be part of the narrative device that the show uses. 

 

In total, the episode felt like it was stalling for time by retreading the same character flaws and traits that we've seen over the past season and a half. 

 

Finding an episode dull does not equal merely watching for plot. That's an important distinction. I'm not on pins and needles to see who killed Scotty because I am enjoying the ride. But I would enjoy it a lot more if it turned in more episodes like the premiere, an episode that really ripped into Helen in a fascinating way, than this one, which was a redux of season one. 

Edited by DB in CMH
  • Love 4
Link to comment

I feel for Alison for her loss and her lost-ness, but agree she is otherwise kind of boring.  No interests, no passions, no ambitions.  But perhaps that is intentional and we are meant to see her as sort of sleepwalking through life because she hasn't been able to move forward from Gabriel's death.  In the "present day" scenes from last season, I think it was mentioned that she had a job?  So maybe she was able to develop interests and/or skills.

I think it is intentional because remember she did have interests and passions; she was nurse and she was a mother.  Then her child died. She stopped being a nurse, probably too much suffering, and took a mindless job like waiting tables to help pay the bills.     But she was lost.  And despite this grand love affair, I thinks she remains lost.  I'm hopeful her time with Robert and Yvonne will help her figure things out. 

Edited by Cosmocrush
  • Love 2
Link to comment

This was one of my least favorite episodes of the entire series. I just don't buy what Sarah Treem is selling about Noah and Alison. I dislike both characters, and I find their relationship really problematic in terms of believability as well as rootability (yes, I know that's not a word). I don't believe that they truly love each other because I can't see why either of them would love the other. Even when they act like they're in love it seems hollow because the build up just isn't there. I see lust but not love between them and it's not because I dislike both characters. When written well I can see why someone might love another person I personally find reprehensible. Often the relationship is toxic and most of the time I'm not rooting for them (although admittedly there are exceptions) but I still see why the characters love each other. In this show I'm just not buying it.

 

The other problematic aspect of their relationship is that we already know how it ends. Their problems are boring because we already know that they work through them. There's no suspense, no reason to have hope or lose hope (depending on whether you want them to make it or not) because it might break them up. Even if they do break up we know it's only temporary. I'm really disappointed that we didn't see Helen or Cole's POV because I find both of them more likable and more interesting.

  • Love 5
Link to comment

I do buy their love affair and root for them, but I will back you on one point which is that I do think rootability is a word. :)

Would love to hear your reasons for believing they are in love.  Maybe you can change my mind because I've not seen love between them, yet.

  • Love 5
Link to comment

I also can't see Noah and Alison being so in love. I think they're deeply in lust and they're all about the shiny new thing for the moment. I fail to see how they make each other better, and I fail to see how they end up together and happy with a child. I think the pool scene would have been better if they hadn't ducked, because it would have shown me that Noah gets Alison's aversion to water and is there to support her through it.

  • Love 5
Link to comment

It may be an impossible obstacle, to have the two main characters (protagonists?) who are cheaters, come off in any way sympathetic.

 

In Noah's POV, she went after him as much as he pursued her.  In Allison's POV, she's this wounded lamb, still not over the trauma of her life, going from one asshole to another, with the difference that the second asshole has asshole wife (soon to be ex), asshole daughter.

 

Helen, in the one segment from her POV, is also this gentle soul who was done wrong by Noah, whom she chose because he was a doormat.  Now, she's sleeping with Max, who's another kind of doormat if he waited what, 20-30 years for her?

 

I'd forgotten that Noah was also friends with Max and went to him after he got kicked by Helen.  Max and Helen's father.  There are no innocents around them, they're all pretty horrible people.

 

Maybe only the younger kids are good human beings, or at least have a chance to become good human beings.

  • Love 1
Link to comment

I did a quick re-watch to confirm something. All during the episode, particularly when Noah was trying to get Alison in the pool and didn't seem to understand why she wouldn't, I kept thinking, "but Noah knows Gabriel drowned, so how can he not put it together why she won't go in the water?" I was sure Alison told him about it in the episode when they spent the day on the island at the bed and breakfast place. So I watched again and sure enough she did. Of course that was Alison's version of things but can you really be off in your memory in terms of sharing something that horrific and tragic with someone?

 

So with that I'm even more confused as to how I'm supposed to feel about these people, particularly Noah. Well that's not really true - I know how I feel about Noah. And frankly this is just another piece of evidence to add to my opinion of him being a self-centered, grade A douchebag and why I fervently agree with others that I have yet to see this great love story I'm supposed to be buying. How can Noah love Alison so much and not recognize why she wouldn't go into the water, after KNOWING how Gabriel died? 

 

I don't get it. As someone else said, those two don't seem to make each other better people in any way, they don't seem to have that much in common in my opinion, they don't seem to truly talk about things (I felt like some moments clearly depicted the cheating couple where the bloom is off the rose and suddenly reality comes crashing too hard and they're both being very polite because they can't or won't say how they really feel for fear the other will leave and realize the whole thing was a mistake) and there isn't this intense and amazing emotional connection, in my opinion. I just don't buy it and as someone said, there is no suspense since we know in present time they're married with a kid. But frankly the more I see of the relationship in the past, the harder a time I'm having buying that present. 

Edited by truthaboutluv
  • Love 9
Link to comment

One thing that comes to mind after watching this episode, I really doubt they would have made it as far as marriage with a new baby if Noah's book wasn't successful.  They don't deal well together with any conflicts (they only see their own side of things) and if money was an issue, I can't see them going through that type of hardship to work things out.

Link to comment

Even THIS season Treem is trying to sell us on the romance?! Hell, I slept through a quarter of the episode and even I could tell that neither one of them seems to think this marriage is a good idea. I thought the literal car accident was an allegory of this figurative crash these two are on--train wreck marriage ahead!! Noah's proposal was in response to Allison clearly telling him she has secrets and is a mess and is in no way planning on opening up to him. Granted, she spewed out some things about Cole and her old boss AFTER they were engaged but was all, you don't want to marry me! And, likewise, Allison clearly saw with Whitney that Noah has a lot he needs to focus on with his children foremost; additionally, nightmare situation being the step mother there! And so forth down to the mention that she hates to read and yet is marrying a writer. Not that spouses have to have an interest in each other's careers, but it just seemed to illustrate that they have NOTHING in common and don't seem to know each other AT ALL. I mean Noah apparently forgot Allison's son drowned?!? WTF?! Hell, the sex isn't even good any more (awkward opening scene). This entire episode was like an after school special public service announcement of what happens when the lust fades and you're with a stranger. What do they have left? Whelp, I busted up my whole life and even though this is clearly worse than what I had going on before, I might as well double down--let's get married (despite the fact that we're both still married to other people)!

  • Love 2
Link to comment

I also can't see Noah and Alison being so in love. I think they're deeply in lust and they're all about the shiny new thing for the moment. I fail to see how they make each other better, and I fail to see how they end up together and happy with a child. I think the pool scene would have been better if they hadn't ducked, because it would have shown me that Noah gets Alison's aversion to water and is there to support her through it.

 

I don't see how I can prove with bullet points that they are in love.  I mean, Noah was there for Alison at least three times when she really needed him, but really it's just something that either exudes from the screen for you, or it doesn't.  For me, it definitely does: go back and look at my latecomer posts in S1 as I binged the show starting a few weeks ago.  I was talking about it being a "dizzying" and "swoon-inducing" romance from the very early episodes.  I do think this is what Treem intended, FWIW, as she responded in the affirmative in a recent interview when asked if she sees Noah and Alison as "soulmates".

 

It may be an impossible obstacle, to have the two main characters (protagonists?) who are cheaters, come off in any way sympathetic.

 

[snip]

 

There are no innocents around them, they're all pretty horrible people.

 

Maybe only the younger kids are good human beings, or at least have a chance to become good human beings.

 

It will come as no surprise to anyone who's been reading my posts that I enthusiastically cosign the comments Ruth Wilson made in a recent interview:

 

THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER: You’ve said that part of the reason you took on the role was because you wanted to challenge the stigma of affairs. Do you feel like monogamy is antiquated?

 

RUTH WILSON: Certainly in North America and in the U.K., we’re very rigidly conventional in a way. We’re upholding these institutions and I’m not sure work anymore. I don’t know. I mean, that’s a question — it’s a big debate. The Ashley Madison website that got hacked — 37 million people were signed on to an infidelity site — kind of suggests that infidelity happens an awful lot. We treat it with such stigma, but actually so many people do it. I’m not sure why the stigma exists in a way. Not that I’m saying it doesn’t have consequences. That’s the problem — it has huge ramifications, but the source of that might be because we’ve put so much expectation on what marriage should be. Maybe our expectations are wrong.

 

 

All the hostile posts here and the barrage Treem has faced on Twitter serve to show what an uphill battle they are facing.

  • Love 4
Link to comment

Slacker, we apparently posted at the same time, so not sure whether you saw my post above yours. I'd be willing to accept the affair and believe it was a romance between soul mates if they showed us ANYTHING to illustrate that these two really get each other and bring out the best in each other, etc. Did you really think THIS episode was romantic?! To me this was clearly written as an ill-advised marriage track to leave the viewers saying nooooooooooo!!! How the fuck can you get engaged when you can't even TALK to each other?!?!

  • Love 3
Link to comment

It goes beyond lust.  Remember, Noah had this period between when Helen kicked him out and he and Allison went back to each other where he was screwing left and right.

 

Especially after a successful book, if he's only about sex with young women, he could get it.  He had opportunities when he was some lowly high school teacher too,

 

In S1, he found himself seeking her out and Allison likewise went into the city to see if she could run into him.

 

Maybe it's codependency, not the gauzy romance of Harlequin.

Link to comment

I honestly do not understand why issues with Noah and Alison and not liking the pairing and not believing they are in love often gets put down to people's attitude about fidelity and monogamy and marriage and all that. Admittedly I haven't read other places online so I may have missed it but judging by this board, I feel like many posters issue is more the fact that it comes down to simply not liking Noah and Alison, especially Noah. And no, it's not just because he cheated on and left his wife and children but simply that he is not a likable person. 

 

Again, I know that's my issue. I have watched PLENTY of shows and movies where people cheated and liked the characters but in my humble opinion, I do not find Alison and Noah likable, I do not find them rootable, I do not believe they are in love, meant to be, soulmates, etc. And that is why I do not root for them. It's not because as a Western person I'm so puritanical and not "evolved" enough to accept that people cheat and people fall out love with their spouse. It's because I do not like and support assholes and Noah is an asshole and Alison a weepy, whiny bore. So my opinion is if Treem and company wanted me to root for her cheating leads, make them more likable and interesting next time and their "love story" more believable.

 

He had opportunities when he was some lowly high school teacher too,

 

 

Opportunities in his memory. Noah the stud - getting hit on at the pool and has to rush to put the ring on to stave off the hot young woman ready to jump him. And let's talk about that laughable sex-a-thon after he left Helen. Noah just walked down the street and he could get laid. All that stuff told me was that Noah truly was the definition of going through a mid-life crisis, not to mention being an egotistical blowhard. It's the same reason all his memories of Alison had her looking like the oversexed vamp always ready and willing for him. Hell in his version of the finale, Helen practically had to yell at Alison to stop looking at Noah because Alison just couldn't help herself around him even with his wife and daughter there. Spare me...

Edited by truthaboutluv
  • Love 10
Link to comment

I don't see how I can prove with bullet points that they are in love. 

 

Really? So others cannot have a different point of view? I don't think that this has a right or wrong answer. And I really object when a showrunner tells me what I should be thinking.

 

In a show where perception rather than absolute truth defines the narrative, it seems logical that the life circumstances of each viewer would inform their take-away about love, marriage and fidelity.

 

I honestly do not understand why issues with Noah and Alison and not liking the pairing and not believing they are in love often gets put down to people's attitude about fidelity and monogamy and marriage and all that...

 

Again, I know that's my issue. I have watched PLENTY of shows and movies where people cheated and liked the characters but in my humble opinion, I do not find Alison and Noah likable, I do not find them rootable, I do not believe they are in love, meant to be, soulmates, etc. 

 

Well said. I make no judgements about these characters because of the choices that they have made in their lives. We are given a story about the complexities of married life today. This was always going to stir up controversy and it should.

 

I don't like Noah...not because he left his wife but because he is a selfish asshole. Marriages end for a variety of reasons but not everyone behaves like Noah. He is destructive. I'm not sure that Noah can find happiness with any woman. Alternatively, I am ambivalent about Alison because I see her more as a sad, troubled young woman and less as a temptress. Her marriage to Cole may have been beyond salvation but I can't see that Noah will bring her long term happiness. 

 

As others have mentioned above, neither Noah or Alison seem to bring out the best in each other. Once again, this is perception. I am not obligated to believe that these two are soul mates in order to enjoy this show. Rather, I think that it is incredibly interesting that viewers have such varying perceptions about the core characters and their relationship. I'd like to think that this is the entire point.

  • Love 2
Link to comment

I agree with Ruth Wilson's comments, and I also wonder if people watching this show who don't like the two leads and sympathize with the jilted spouses do feel an inherent negative reaction to the entire premise of being asked to root for two people who had an affair in the first place.

 

I don't feel that way, but I've also never been married, so maybe I'd feel differently about this if I was. But a lot of the arguments that I've seen here (and other places), especially the sympathizing with a character like Cole (who really comes across to me as an abusive and dangerous asshole) make me think people are just extremely personally offended by the whole idea of affairs and cheating. Despite the fact that we all know how common it is, nobody wants to think it will happen to them and everyone wants the person who cheats to be vilified.

 

This show's protagonists are two cheaters though, and that seems to turn off a lot of people. I don't have any problem with it, I think the show's absorbing and entertaining, but I never get caught up in judging the characters (except for Whitney, who's a demon-child, and I guess Cole, as I said before).

  • Love 7
Link to comment

I was hoping that Max would casually blurt out "I fucked Helen" between refills of coffee. Max must really want that divorce bad if he's willing to give Noah 50 grand.

 

Noah will completely lose his shit when he finds out Max and Helen are boning. (Helen doesn't look super into Max though...) I'm cringing in advance of how uncomfortable and/or violent that conversation will be.

  • Love 3
Link to comment

It drives me crazy how Noah and Alison ALWAYS make squeaking sound when they kiss! It's so annoying, hasn't anyone else noticed that? It seems like Ruth Wilson in sucking the air in while kissing or something...

 

I never thought of Alison as trying to be a victim until I read this forum. I think of her as being deeply depressed. She always seems so sad and as Noah once said "darkness is written all over her face". To me, it seems like she feels sad all the time and she lives in her world of darkness which follows her everywhere.

  • Love 2
Link to comment

 

Even THIS season Treem is trying to sell us on the romance?!

 

I think she fails badly on this part. To be honest, I don't care about their "romance" or how much they duck. The ducking isn't even all that sexy. I care more about the fallout of the affair. I care more about how this affects Helen and Cole. I care more about Whitney being a complete snot to Alison. I even care more about who killed Scotty because I'm hoping beyond hope that either Noah or Alison did it just to see them suffer.

 

I wonder if Treem is going out of her way to demonize Cole's character by making him extra menacing this season. I never really got the feeling that he would talk to Alison the way that he did in her POV because he just didn't talk to her like that in season 1, not even during his break.

  • Love 3
Link to comment
I never thought of Alison as trying to be a victim until I read this forum. I think of her as being deeply depressed. She always seems so sad and as Noah once said "darkness is written all over her face". To me, it seems like she feels sad all the time and she lives in her world of darkness which follows her everywhere.

 

 

I feel like it's both. She is depressed and she does have this deep-seated sadness within her from her tragedy. At the same time, when I see her memory and it's filled with everyone being mean to her and treating her badly, it does make me feel like she sees herself as a victim. That's why I've said the way I watch the show is that while I'm cognizant of there's two sides to every story and then the truth,  I think there is something to be said about how a person remembers events and incidents.

 

It's why I thought Noah's whole four months sex-a-thon was ridiculous and telling about his character and let's not forget the guy calling him his hero after he writes his amazing bestseller while in grown up detention for his on campus sex. Like really dude...come on. And so, I do find it interesting that Alison's memories often have her being yelled at by someone, treated dismissively, condescended to or even threatened. It does give off a sense that she sees herself as a perpetual victim. YMMV of course...

  • Love 4
Link to comment

Add me to the list of people that don't see any great love affair between these two.  It seems that most are in agreement that Noah is a selfish, massive douchebag, but I don't think much more of Allison.  She chose to enter into an affair with a man who has four children, hell she saw the whole crew the first time she met him.  In my book, her pain just doesn't give her a pass for that.  

 

I just don't see or feel much of anything between these two.  Noah is enjoying his complete and total lack of parental responsibilities while the two of them are vacationing in a waterfront guest house, it's like they're playing house.  It's not real.  

 

The thing that I most both interesting and frustrating about this show is the differing POV's.  I don't actually think that Helen's mother is anywhere as toxic as everyone else does because with the exception of the one episode with Helen's POV, we only ever see her through Noah's eyes.  I'm pretty sure he's not interested in portraying her in a flattering way.  And she will forever have my admiration for her 'how the fuck do you' comment.  Love her. Same with Cole, and I really don't find him menacing at all.

  • Love 5
Link to comment

Also, I can't say I'm really rooting for anyone here, but I am very fascinated by all of these characters. I like how messy they are. I like that you can't fully trust any version of these events, so who people find themselves relating to/despising most, I think says more about the individual viewer than the characters themselves. (Kind of like real life...) I'm fascinated to see where this all goes. 

Edited by TrapRegent
  • Love 4
Link to comment

For me the reason I don't find the romance compelling is simple. In my opinion, Dominic West and Ruth Wilson have absolutely zero chemistry. They're both good actors, so it's not that. I just don't sense any spark between them. If I mentally recast the roles with an actor and actress who sizzle together on screen, Noah and Allison suddenly seem sexy and compelling.

But the unsexy pairing of West and Wilson does absolutely nothing for me.

Edited by CleoCaesar
  • Love 8
Link to comment

I wonder if Treem is going out of her way to demonize Cole's character by making him extra menacing this season. I never really got the feeling that he would talk to Alison the way that he did in her POV because he just didn't talk to her like that in season 1, not even during his break.

 

In season 1 he pointed a gun at her and threatened to kill her with it.

  • Love 1
Link to comment

 

I do think this is what Treem intended, FWIW,

 

It's worth very very little. Authorial intent is not relevant and largely unknowable, IMO, often to the writer themself.  A piece of art has to stand on it's own without a cliff notes from it's creator. One of my favorite directors Hal Hartley made a film called Henry Fool with an ending HE intended to be clear and unequivocal, but a considerable amount of the audience read it as *ambiguous* and it was debated in the press and on the internet, was it option A or option B? His response was not option A is what I intended and that's it, his response was that's SO INTERESTING, I love that the audience has reacted in this unexpected way and made me see my own story in a new light and question my own intent and creative choices, maybe it is option B! 

 

I'd say a show that is so defined by the malleability of truth, with only subjective conflicting POV's  would fairly obviously inflame that kind of reading schism even more.

I will say I thought this episode was the first episode to really dig into the PROBLEMS with Noah/Allison (rather than Noah and Allison), and thus they're "love" and connection to one another felt REAL for the first time, not healthy or rootable but believable and understandable. I mean Allison seems fully aware of what a horrible asshole Noah is and still seems to love him anyway so, you know, that's kind of what you need in partner someone who has seen the worst you are and can be and who loves you anyway,  I just wish I had more evidence of what exactly makes Noah so enchanting and addicting, I mean DAMN Dominic you've made McNulty look like Man of the Goddamn Year, compared to the scowling ass monkey that is Noah.

  • Love 6
Link to comment

In season 1 he pointed a gun at her and threatened to kill her with it.

 

Well that depends on whose version of the story you believe because in Noah's version, Cole pulled a gun on him to get him off his brother Scotty. That's the thing about this show, particularly in the moments when the versions vary so wildly. As I noted before, the only thing we can be fully sure of is that at some point Cole brandished a gun. The exact circumstances and what followed depends on whose version you believe.

 

Now I guess one can say Alison's version is closer to the truth because of Witney screaming about having a gun pointed at her, which she wanted to write about for her college essay. But even then, did Cole pull a gun on Alison and threaten her or did he pull the gun on Noah, with Witney and Helen caught in the crossfire? And for the record neither is a good thing to be clear but it does challenge the Cole being so abusive or threatening to Alison.

 

Cole suspected Alison was cheating and didn't say one word to her (the scene when he walked back in and saw her getting dressed when she said she was staying home all day), when he did find out she cheated, he just made her walk away and said nothing until their confrontation in NY and then he was more than willing to take her back. After they tried working on their marriage, she pushed him away when he tried to help with her grandmother.

 

And yet in usual Alison fashion, when she got back home, she acted hurt and wounded and made him seem like cold and callous person who barely seemed to care how she was doing after what she'd gone through.  Except the way I saw that whole situation was that Cole basically just reacted to what Alison gave him. Since she'd basically made it clear she wanted him nowhere near her and didn't want his support with her grandmother, he reacted in kind when she got back home. 

 

Similarly, the drug selling situation that some judge Cole for bringing Alison into because she apparently had no mind of her own. Noah's version of events showed Alison to be a cold and more than willing accomplice in that. Hell she looked like she was practically controlling things. Alison's version of course was her wounded and just so broken that she didn't care about breaking the law because she didn't even care what happened to her. 

 

For the record, I don't necessarily love Cole or Helen and goodness knows I was never rooting for Cole/Alison or  Helen/Noah. I just think in a show that is all about the unreliability of our memories and perceptions that it is interesting how harshly those two were judged based on the memories of two people both trying to justify their affair. That's why I appreciate their having their own voice this season.

 

And frankly, IMHO, even in Noah and Alison's skewed version of things, I didn't think Helen or Cole were bad guys and I feel like the attempts to make Cole a bad guy seem a stretch. Frankly Cole and Alison both seemed checked out on their marriage and each other for most of the early episodes of the season and he barely said or did much until the latter part of the season. And yet somehow he got labeled as abusive to poor wounded and broken Alison. 

Edited by truthaboutluv
  • Love 7
Link to comment

Thank you, SlackerInc, for your reply.  It is an interesting argument, that because so many marriages are failing, affairs should not be stigmatized, or, at least in this instance, this is a love so great it is worth shattering so many people's lives. I think, though, that I would not be rooting for these two even if it wasn't an affair because I have not seen any real love between them. 

 

I know that Treem has said that she considers Alison and Noah to be soulmates, whatever that means.  As for the thought that there should be no stigma attached to having an affair, because so many people are doing it, well, not sure I can reason it that way.  To me, an affair is really about selfishness and self-delusion.  The desire for the other person is there, the conscious decision is made to betray the current relationship and once the breach of the current relationship has been made, it's impossible to ever have that back. Affairs are destructive, not just to the spouses or partners left behind, I believe they are destructive to the participants as well. 

 

But most people, in their lust, do not think about that. And our ideas about romantic love are certainly tied to the popular cultural notion of hot sex, and few responsibilities (and something new and shiny). 

 

Statistically, an affair is not a great start to a lasting relationship.  The percentages of second, and third, marriages that end in divorce are higher even than the divorce percentages for first marriages. Generally an affair is not the answer to finding a lasting relationship.  And so far, I think the show has done an outstanding job of showing the patterns that occur in affairs, and the aftermath.That is why I keep watching. To see Helen and Cole going through the grief that all left-behind spouses must go through, and to have it portrayed so well is fascinating to me. And to see Noah and Alison begin to navigate through the reality of their situation is interesting as well. 

 

It may be that the idea of what a marriage is and how one maintains it does need to be changed. People used to get married to have families and to build wealth. Maybe it will evolve to stages.  Starter marriage, child raising marriage, soul mate marriage.

 

But even if you believe that the institution of marriage is outdated, people who commit to each other, and agree to be exclusive and have a history together (kids, property, experiences) will still be cheaters and cheating, if they step out of that commitment, and lie and hide that they have done so. People will still be hurt.  

 

I'm really surprised that Treem is surprised by the backlash against her lovers. 

 

And finally, I'm now wondering if the baby Alison has is Oscar's given that she told Noah it was a couple of weeks ago that she had slept with him.  

  • Love 3
Link to comment

THE WORST MAN ON TV: DOES ‘THE AFFAIR’ WANT US TO DETEST NOAH?

 

 

http://www.villagevoice.com/film/the-worst-man-on-tv-does-the-affair-want-us-to-detest-noah-7814976

The funny part is that Treem doesn't. She wants us to buy that his actions are okay, and it's not. I think back to the first episode when he tells his youngest son about why he and Helen are separated. It's a complete dick move to tell his child that he's in love with someone else. Of course, this is the same child he yelled at for wanting to join him on a morning run.

  • Love 2
Link to comment
Of course, this is the same child he yelled at for wanting to join him on a morning run.

 

Exactly. This is why I've been saying that Noah is an asshole even in his own memory of the situation which makes it hard to not believe that at the end of the day he's just an asshole. Dude was so desperate for his booty call he snapped at his young son who just wanted to spend some time with him, like the child was a bother. A half-way decent person would have sent Alison a message that he would have to see her later and taken his kid with him but not our father of the year Noah. 

  • Love 3
Link to comment

It seems that most are in agreement that Noah is a selfish, massive douchebag, but I don't think much more of Allison.  She chose to enter into an affair with a man who has four children, hell she saw the whole crew the first time she met him.  In my book, her pain just doesn't give her a pass for that.

 

Exactly, I see her as selfish as Noah if not more.  And now that she is married to Noah with a child, what would she think of someone who pursued Noah and had an affair with him who had interacted with her child. 

  • Love 4
Link to comment

Exactly, I see her as selfish as Noah if not more.  And now that she is married to Noah with a child, what would she think of someone who pursued Noah and had an affair with him who had interacted with her child. 

Oh, let's not forget she also banged Oscar while married to Cole. Does he even know about that?

Link to comment

Here is a question that I ask myself:

 

The "Noah" that we see in the flashforward/murder investigation timeline is successful. His book has been published, is a huge hit and is being made into a movie. He lives in a swanky, modern apartment so he has considerable income from his book. Once this glow of success subsides, what happens to Noah? Has he found contentment or will his insecurities reappear? Will he eventually cheat on Alison, too? What is the aftermath of all of this for him (assuming that it isn't prison)?

 

For me, Noah is a self-involved ego maniac. I can't imagine that his success or that Alison/new baby will bring him contentment. He will always be looking for something else, something better.

  • Love 1
Link to comment

I'm finding the multiple viewpoints fascinating and frustrating.  The problem is, I don't think it necessarily inspires the viewer to be open minded.  Instead, I think the unreliable narrator is believed or disbelieved depending on who the viewer likes, which isn't the best way to write and create a character.

 

For instance, if one sympathizes with Cole, he's a man broken by a manipulative woman, and he's non-violent except to protect his loved ones.  It doesn't matter that Noah witnessed an ambiguous scene of Cole roughly having sex with Alison.  Noah interpreted that before he knew much about them, and he certainly never viewed Alison as a victim (she was the aggressive temptress), so what motivation to see Alison in that way?  We also know Cole drew a gun - everyone (including Helen and Whitney) acknowledge this fact.  Scotty wasn't in danger of being beaten to death, and fights are broken up every day without use of a gun.  Cole was also negligent in watching Gabriel, which led to his drowning - Cole never denied he was in charge of the child at the time.  But if you like Cole, this is simply an accident.  Even Cole's own viewpoint of being a drugged-out, dangerous and reckless driver is simply dismissed as Cole being too hard on himself.  Even the clear fact that Cole was in charge of the drug operation is credited to Alison, who seemed to only be responsible for riding her bike and picking up the cooler.

 

Similarly, everyone - Helen, Noah, Whitney, and Helen's father - seem to despise Helen's mother.  She's never been shown as anything other than a snake in a grass.  Even the way she spoke to Alison - oh you're that poor girl that lost your child - was completely condescending, and something that was flat out cruel to do to someone in that situation.  She knows that Alison was the townie server, and had to take whatever was said.  But some view this woman as heroic since she's mean to Noah.  But that seems to dismiss the fact that she's toxic to her daughter and grandchildren, as well.

 

If you dislike Alison, you see her as playing victim, and using her tragedy to gain sympathy.  You see a manipulative woman whose "arrogance" (per Cherry) caused her son's death.  You see a predatorial temptress who dumps out Helen's expensive shampoo for fun, and who selfishly steals a man from his family.  From above, I guess you also see the ringleader of the Montauk drug trade, and possibly the cause of the farm being lost.  But you can also see a woman who feels powerless in all things, bogged down in grief and fear.  She's unable to turn to the only person who understands her loss, because depression locks you into isolation.

 

Helen is sympathetic as the woman left behind, the woman who doesn't have the luxury of living with a new lover because she's stuck with the four kids.  But you can also see a spoiled snob who undermined her husband with the children, and stood back while her parents attacked him.  She's a woman who tells her husband she only married him because he's too boring to ever cheat on her.  They struggled financially, but she seemingly let Noah bear the burden while she had her vanity store, and turned to her parents to subsidize the lifestyle she wanted for herself and her children. But we also see a woman who's using medical marijuana to cope, and who feels she's unsuccessfully shielding her children from the drama.  She's also indulging in the ego fest of letting Max bang her and praise her perfection, when she's actually suffocated by his attention.  I feel a powerlessness to Helen's viewpoint, but nowhere near the level of Alison.

 

Noah is just about universally hated, so if his viewpoint contradicts anyone else's, it's not believed.  And although Helen herself thinks Noah was faithful to her before Alison, he's looked at as a faithless cheater, who will probably cheat on Alison as well.  Although we've seen moments that imply that Noah sees his children are out of control and he tries to intervene (Martin trying to hang himself, Whitney the bully, keeping W's friend from drinking, seeking the father of Whitney's baby), we also see that he sees himself as impatient with his children, and staying with Alison rather than leaving with Helen/Whitney after the Cole drama.

 

Two characters that I find universally unlikable are Oscar and Whitney.  Whitney was a total bitch when her parents were still happily married.  She was a bully - why in the world would Noah lie about that?   I also believe she really pushed Alison for Scotty's number, never minding the fact that there's a restraining order, and Scotty will go to jail if he's seen with her.  Oscar was perfectly cool with a major drug ring in town until he doesn't get what he wants.  He was nasty to Alison, Noah, and Cole, and had no problem barging into Helen's parents home and making a huge scene.   I'll throw in Helen's father because he's a total dick, and he and his wife deserve each other.

 

Reading over what I've written, I see that the strategy adds a nuance to the characters, and that's the part I find fascinating.  It's also interesting to contemplate that it's the "victims" of the affair who may be the greatest liars.

  • Love 3
Link to comment

For me the reason I don't find the romance compelling is simple. In my opinion, Dominic West and Ruth Wilson have absolutely zero chemistry. They're both good actors, so it's not that. I just don't sense any spark between them. If I mentally recast the roles with an actor and actress who sizzle together on screen, Noah and Allison suddenly seem sexy and compelling.

But the unsexy pairing of West and Wilson does absolutely nothing for me.

I don't think they're in love. I think that Noah was going through a midlife crisis, and Allison needed something really different in her life to make her feel alive. When they met, they filled those roles. I think we're starting to see them figure out that they're not as in love as they thought they were, but they can't go back at this point .

  • Love 1
Link to comment

I'm finding the multiple viewpoints fascinating and frustrating.  The problem is, I don't think it necessarily inspires the viewer to be open minded.  Instead, I think the unreliable narrator is believed or disbelieved depending on who the viewer likes, which isn't the best way to write and create a character.

 

For instance, if one sympathizes with Cole, he's a man broken by a manipulative woman, and he's non-violent except to protect his loved ones.  It doesn't matter that Noah witnessed an ambiguous scene of Cole roughly having sex with Alison.  Noah interpreted that before he knew much about them, and he certainly never viewed Alison as a victim (she was the aggressive temptress), so what motivation to see Alison in that way?  We also know Cole drew a gun - everyone (including Helen and Whitney) acknowledge this fact.  Scotty wasn't in danger of being beaten to death, and fights are broken up every day without use of a gun.  Cole was also negligent in watching Gabriel, which led to his drowning - Cole never denied he was in charge of the child at the time.  But if you like Cole, this is simply an accident.  Even Cole's own viewpoint of being a drugged-out, dangerous and reckless driver is simply dismissed as Cole being too hard on himself.  Even the clear fact that Cole was in charge of the drug operation is credited to Alison, who seemed to only be responsible for riding her bike and picking up the cooler.

 

Similarly, everyone - Helen, Noah, Whitney, and Helen's father - seem to despise Helen's mother.  She's never been shown as anything other than a snake in a grass.  Even the way she spoke to Alison - oh you're that poor girl that lost your child - was completely condescending, and something that was flat out cruel to do to someone in that situation.  She knows that Alison was the townie server, and had to take whatever was said.  But some view this woman as heroic since she's mean to Noah.  But that seems to dismiss the fact that she's toxic to her daughter and grandchildren, as well.

 

If you dislike Alison, you see her as playing victim, and using her tragedy to gain sympathy.  You see a manipulative woman whose "arrogance" (per Cherry) caused her son's death.  You see a predatorial temptress who dumps out Helen's expensive shampoo for fun, and who selfishly steals a man from his family.  From above, I guess you also see the ringleader of the Montauk drug trade, and possibly the cause of the farm being lost.  But you can also see a woman who feels powerless in all things, bogged down in grief and fear.  She's unable to turn to the only person who understands her loss, because depression locks you into isolation.

 

Helen is sympathetic as the woman left behind, the woman who doesn't have the luxury of living with a new lover because she's stuck with the four kids.  But you can also see a spoiled snob who undermined her husband with the children, and stood back while her parents attacked him.  She's a woman who tells her husband she only married him because he's too boring to ever cheat on her.  They struggled financially, but she seemingly let Noah bear the burden while she had her vanity store, and turned to her parents to subsidize the lifestyle she wanted for herself and her children. But we also see a woman who's using medical marijuana to cope, and who feels she's unsuccessfully shielding her children from the drama.  She's also indulging in the ego fest of letting Max bang her and praise her perfection, when she's actually suffocated by his attention.  I feel a powerlessness to Helen's viewpoint, but nowhere near the level of Alison.

 

Noah is just about universally hated, so if his viewpoint contradicts anyone else's, it's not believed.  And although Helen herself thinks Noah was faithful to her before Alison, he's looked at as a faithless cheater, who will probably cheat on Alison as well.  Although we've seen moments that imply that Noah sees his children are out of control and he tries to intervene (Martin trying to hang himself, Whitney the bully, keeping W's friend from drinking, seeking the father of Whitney's baby), we also see that he sees himself as impatient with his children, and staying with Alison rather than leaving with Helen/Whitney after the Cole drama.

 

Two characters that I find universally unlikable are Oscar and Whitney.  Whitney was a total bitch when her parents were still happily married.  She was a bully - why in the world would Noah lie about that?   I also believe she really pushed Alison for Scotty's number, never minding the fact that there's a restraining order, and Scotty will go to jail if he's seen with her.  Oscar was perfectly cool with a major drug ring in town until he doesn't get what he wants.  He was nasty to Alison, Noah, and Cole, and had no problem barging into Helen's parents home and making a huge scene.   I'll throw in Helen's father because he's a total dick, and he and his wife deserve each other.

 

Reading over what I've written, I see that the strategy adds a nuance to the characters, and that's the part I find fascinating.  It's also interesting to contemplate that it's the "victims" of the affair who may be the greatest liars.

I have some other thoughts to add in reply to other posts when I have more time, but first I just wanted to give this extremely thoughtful post a standing ovation. A simple "like" would be far from sufficient. Bravo.

  • Love 2
Link to comment
It doesn't matter that Noah witnessed an ambiguous scene of Cole roughly having sex with Alison.  Noah interpreted that before he knew much about them, and he certainly never viewed Alison as a victim (she was the aggressive temptress), so what motivation to see Alison in that way?

 

 

He saw what he interpreted as an aggressive moment because you're right he didn't know them and what was really going on. When he made a move to approach, Alison very clearly puts her hand out to stop him and he stands there watching the entire scene. So if you interpret this scene as Cole violating Alison in some way, what does it say for Noah to stand there and watch? And didn't he imagine her in that position in the next episode when he was fantasizing about her in the shower, when Helen tried to get in with him?

 

Also, Alison's memory later filled in the blanks of that moment by making it clear that she initiated the sex with Cole who tried to bring her inside but she made clear she wanted to do it right there on the car. She was clearly in a lot of pain in that moment and wanted it to stop somehow. Now yes you can debate the unreliable narrator construct but I don't think I have to like Cole to take Alison's word for what happened there versus Noah who couldn't hear what was happening and didn't really know Alison or Cole or their situation at the time.

 

Cole was also negligent in watching Gabriel, which led to his drowning - Cole never denied he was in charge of the child at the time.  But if you like Cole, this is simply an accident.

 

 

And if you like Alison you don't judge or blame her for not taking Gabriel to the hospital for a checkup even after Cherry apparently suggested it. Or you can be like most viewers, including myself, who views the situation as just a horrific and tragic accident. 

 

Even the clear fact that Cole was in charge of the drug operation is credited to Alison, who seemed to only be responsible for riding her bike and picking up the cooler.

 

 

As one who has referenced Alison looking like she was in control and practically running things, my point was not that I believe that was what was happening but rather that it was interesting that NOAH seemed to see her that way. It was in NOAH's memory that when he confronts Alison about the drug dealing, she is cold, nonchalant at his reaction and the second he turns away you see her running to Cole and telling him what Oscar has done and that they need to move. It's NOAH that apparently remembered her that way, which I thought was rather interesting.

 

But some view this woman as heroic since she's mean to Noah.

 

 

I haven't read many comments considering Margaret some hero or people even liking her. But you can dislike a character and still agree with something they've said. And yeah Margaret is a bitch but I absolutely agreed with her throwing Noah's words back in his face about how she can live with herself. Because this is the problem, one of many, with Noah in my opinion. That despite all his shittiness, he acts like he is the good guy and he's not, in my opinion. Doesn't make other people good or better but just means he's just as shitty as some of the people he seems to think are awful. 

 

The problem is, I don't think it necessarily inspires the viewer to be open minded.  Instead, I think the unreliable narrator is believed or disbelieved depending on who the viewer likes, which isn't the best way to write and create a character.

 

 

As always I can only speak for myself but as I have said before, I do allow for the reality that not every action or event happened as the individual remembered it. That being said, what I judge these characters on is HOW they choose to remember these things and it has nothing to do with liking one or the other and not willing to give leeway to another. Because for the record, I don't particularly love any one character. Sure I loathe Noah but Alison mostly just bores me and I don't dislike Cole or Helen but doesn't mean I love them. 

 

As I said in another post, I think Alison is both a woman buried in grief, as well as someone who sees herself as a victim because that's the image I've gotten seeing the events through her eyes. Forget what happened in Noah's versions or Cole's this season. I judge her by the actions in her own memories and how she sees herself. The lawyer dismissing her, Noah being an asshole to her because he had a bad day and then his apparently not realizing why she won't go in the water, Cole threatening her. Maybe it's all true but in the case of Cole for example, the two versions are wildly different so the only truth we really know is that he brought her her stuff. And no, I'm not going to say one is telling the truth because I like one character. Instead I look at how they chose to remember that day and what I think it says about each and their feelings toward the other. 

 

It's the same with Noah. Almost from the start of the show, I noticed and found it interesting how Noah saw and remembered Alison in his version. From the barely there waitress skirt right from the start when they met, to the undressing and inviting him into a shower with her. The two images were so different it was jarring and made me wonder about what Noah thinks and how he really sees Alison and what that says about him. 

 

Similarly, Helen's very over the top memory of Noah in the mediation tells me that she believes Noah doesn't give a shit about the children and that he is mean and downright viscous to her. Doesn't make it so but it's clear that's how she sees him and the situation which interestingly brings to mind Noah's version of events all last season where Helen was the emasculating wife who made him feel not good enough. Though I will say that his version of her got worse the deeper into his affair he got, which I also thought was interesting.

 

So to me, what is telling about the characters is how both see themselves in the situation and see each other. Clearly Helen believes Noah is the bad guy and Noah believes Helen was an emasculating, dismissive woman, right down to mocking his advance in the mediation. The only truth we really know is that they went through mediation and as much as I have made no secret of disliking Noah, I thought Helen's version of him at the meeting was highly exaggerated. But I do feel like I can draw some conclusions and feelings about these characters based on their own versions of the truth.

 

eta: I will also add that I think some viewers may allow for some generosity in opinion about Cole and Helen because up until this season, they were only seen and known through Alison and Noah's eyes. And when you factor the whole construct of an unreliable narrator and how perceptions can be skewed, it is understandable that some questioned the views of the spouses by two people in some ways looking to justify their affair. 

Edited by truthaboutluv
  • Love 3
Link to comment

Would love to hear your reasons for believing they are in love.  Maybe you can change my mind because I've not seen love between them, yet.

 

The question wasn't directed at me but let me stab at it. Until this episode, for me Noah's actions spoke louder than words. But those actions are a double-edged sword - a romantic gesture towards Alison is by default a middle finger to Helen (the kids' situation would be a bit more complicated than what that analogy suggests.) It's easy to only look at one side of that equation and only see Noah's selfishness and other less redeeming qualities and forget about the other side: standing by Alison and seeing her, when she thought she was ghosting past life. 

 

I for one was, for lack of a better word, a "shipper" from the start (shipper is probably the wrong word, as it has other connotations I don't want to highlight). There was promise of more meaningful drama if Noah and Alison had more than just a summer fling and if his marriage (in particular) was seemingly healthy. I really don't value most tv dramas where one side of a triangle is demeaned so as to make the choice of the other two inevitable and palatable. It's a cheap get-out clause.

 

Sarah Treem, on the other hand, asked a more nuanced question. What happens if you meet a person you think is your soulmate and yet you're in a seemingly satisfactory and, by many standards, decent marriage? If you pursue the soulmate, are you being hurtful or honest or if both, where on the scale? By definition (i.e., considering the soulmate issue) that Noah's marriage was substandard, isn't it? Or was it? Was he trying to make an upgrade or is it all just a midlife crisis? So many variables can be brought in. All that went through my head as I watched the pilot. Alison's situation was a more straightforward moral question: most marriages wouldn't have survived a death of a kid and it was a case of asking why she didn't leave Cole sooner and if she has any culpability in breaking up Noah and Helen's marriage and whether that was a good thing at all. Or as Ruth Wilson suggests, should that even be the question?

 

So for me this where the show is going and  I want to see what the answers are. My analysis falls apart if Noah isn't in love with Alison, and vice versa, but it holds if they both simply think they are in love with each other. What you think and do, does it not ultimately reflect what you are in any case? So when Alison finally left Cole and subsequently committed to Noah, stirring herself after years of being in a grieving stupor, does it not show she is in love with him, or at the very least, his positive influence on her? Jumping into a pool for him, after a bit of hesitancy and reflection. No longer suicidal anymore after being with him. Similarly for him, he has taken the hardest route, busting a stable marriage and career, only because of his conviction of his feelings for her. But he did more - being with her when her grandmother, who raised her, died for example. So every bit is a piece of the jigsaw: courage, selfishness, empathy, lust, sacrifice, passion, etc. What does the mosaic paint, love or illusion of love? We know they ultimately gave it a good go, starting a family and (I think) believing it was all worth it. The beauty of the second season is that we'll see the carnage they left behind and we, the viewers, will mostly tend to judge whether it was worth it but that not the question Treem is asking of us, isn't it? She's just saying that Noah and Alison thought it was worth it. Ultimately, it doesn't matter whether we think they are in love, the characters think they are and their actions flow from that. And Treem is in charge of those actions.

 

I did a quick re-watch to confirm something. All during the episode, particularly when Noah was trying to get Alison in the pool and didn't seem to understand why she wouldn't, I kept thinking, "but Noah knows Gabriel drowned, so how can he not put it together why she won't go in the water?" I was sure Alison told him about it in the episode when they spent the day on the island at the bed and breakfast place. So I watched again and sure enough she did. 

 

He did understand though, didn't he? And she knew he sorta understood. He was asking her if she was ready to move past the grief. That's why during the episode he kept saying, "talk to me, you can tell me anything". And when she was ready to look beyond Gabriel's death, she told Noah by jumping into the pool. His reaction also showed he understood exactly what had just happened. That first scene  of the episode informs the last one.

 

It's why I thought Noah's whole four months sex-a-thon was ridiculous and telling about his character and let's not forget the guy calling him his hero after he writes his amazing bestseller while in grown up detention for his on campus sex. Like really dude...come on. 

 

I just thought it was a man finding himself shackle-free from both his marriage and at that time Alison as well. At the very least he was entitled to it, though not on school property (suitably punished). I thought that was telling about his state of mind, rather than character. YMMV.

Edited by Boundary
  • Love 3
Link to comment
He did understand though, didn't he? And she knew he sorta understood. He was asking her if she was ready to move past the grief. That's why during the episode he kept saying, "talk to me, you can tell me anything".

 

 

YMMV but that is not how I saw that scene at all. He starts off telling her she's never gone in the pool and asking her about it. He seems, in my opinion, genuinely ignorant as to why she's not going in. Alison tries to deflect by saying she just doesn't want to. He then proceeds to try to playfully force her in until she snaps at him and the moment gets incredibly uncomfortable. That told me even more that Noah clearly really didn't know why she wasn't going in, to the point that he would think it's okay to playfully try to force her in. I took his telling her that she can tell him anything as his being genuinely clueless but realizing that obviously there's a significant reason she didn't want to go in. And to me that he has to ask her because he clearly has no clue doesn't speak well of him or their relationship.

 

I just thought it was a man finding himself shackle-free from both his marriage and at that time Alison as well. At the very least he was entitled to it, though not on school property (suitably punished). I thought that was telling about his state of mind, rather than character. YMMV.

 

 

And I think it was both. The two aren't mutually exclusive. I believe he was hooking up a lot and having meaningless sex because he was enjoying his "no wife and kids" freedom for the first time in some 20 years. However, I also think the fact that he remembers the period as the hookups all being these very young and hot women, him being some virile stud, him catching these hot women's eyes by just walking down the street, indicative of an egotistical man. And the "you're my hero..." note - really? Because he spent his time in adult juvie typing away on his laptop? Did this guy just telepathically know Noah was writing this next great American novel? The whole thing just felt so over the top and fanciful, much like his classroom scene who as someone hilariously noted in the episode thread, all it was missing was an "O Captain my captain" moment a la Dead Poets Society. 

Edited by truthaboutluv
  • Love 2
Link to comment

The question wasn't directed at me but let me stab at it. Until this episode, for me Noah's actions spoke louder than words. But those actions are a double-edged sword - a romantic gesture towards Alison is by default a middle finger to Helen (the kids' situation would be a bit more complicated than what that analogy suggests.) It's easy to only look at one side of that equation and only see Noah's selfishness and other less redeeming qualities and forget about the other side: standing by Alison and seeing her, when she thought she was ghosting past life.

I for one was, for lack of a better word, a "shipper" from the start (shipper is probably the wrong word, as it has other connotations I don't want to highlight). There was promise of more meaningful drama if Noah and Alison had more than just a summer fling and if his marriage (in particular) was seemingly healthy. I really don't value most tv dramas where one side of a triangle is demeaned so as to make the choice of the other two inevitable and palatable. It's a cheap get-out clause.

Sarah Treem, on the other hand, asked a more nuanced question. What happens if you meet a person you think is your soulmate and yet you're in a seemingly satisfactory and, by many standards, decent marriage? If you pursue the soulmate, are you being hurtful or honest or if both, where on the scale? By definition (i.e., considering the soulmate issue) that Noah's marriage was substandard, isn't it? Or was it? Was he trying to make an upgrade or is it all just a midlife crisis? So many variables can be brought in. All that went through my head as I watched the pilot. Alison's situation was a more straightforward moral question: most marriages wouldn't have survived a death of a kid and it was a case of asking why she didn't leave Cole sooner and if she has any culpability in breaking up Noah and Helen's marriage and whether that was a good thing at all. Or as Ruth Wilson suggests, should that even be the question?

So for me this where the show is going and I want to see what the answers are. My analysis falls apart if Noah isn't in love with Alison, and vice versa, but it holds if they both simply think they are in love with each other. What you think and do, does it not ultimately reflect what you are in any case? So when Alison finally left Cole and subsequently committed to Noah, stirring herself after years of being in a grieving stupor, does it not show she is in love with him, or at the very least, his positive influence on her? Jumping into a pool for him, after a bit of hesitancy and reflection. No longer suicidal anymore after being with him. Similarly for him, he has taken the hardest route, busting a stable marriage and career, only because of his conviction of his feelings for her. But he did more - being with her when her grandmother, who raised her, died for example. So every bit is a piece of the jigsaw: courage, selfishness, empathy, lust, sacrifice, passion, etc. What does the mosaic paint, love or illusion of love? We know they ultimately gave it a good go, starting a family and (I think) believing it was all worth it. The beauty of the second season is that we'll see the carnage they left behind and we, the viewers, will mostly tend to judge whether it was worth it but that not the question Treem is asking of us, isn't it? She's just saying that Noah and Alison thought it was worth it. Ultimately, it doesn't matter whether we think they are in love, the characters think they are and their actions flow from that. And Treem is in charge of those actions.

I see what you are saying, and I agree with a lot of it. I don't think it's much different from me saying that they are in lust (which many people mistake for love) and I am interested in seeing if they build a genuinely loving and caring life from this start. I doubt they will.

What I do think the show has done well so far is show the fallout from Noah and Allison's actions.

Having watched many of my friends go through the dissolution of long-term marriages that they, at least, were happy in, I will say that all affairs and break ups of long term marriages have similar patterns and the show shows that very well. And I'm certain that my own experiences color my view of what is happening in the show, but that would be true of any show I'm watching.

So I will continue to watch, as I find it well acted and well written, and I am interested in the murder mystery, but I doubt that I'm gonna root for Alison or Noah. Maybe Alison, but Noah is going to have to show me he's got a heart somewhere.

Edited by cardigirl
  • Love 1
Link to comment

I'm aware that he pulled a gun, however, I never believed for an instant that he was actually going to harm her. 

 

That strikes me as an example of the kind of bias RedheadZombie was talking about.  Cole also menaced Helen and Whitney with the gun, and they looked completely terrified and traumatized in Alison's memory of it (not sure why she would mentally "lie" there).  That's the kind of thing that can give someone PTSD.

 

It's worth very very little. Authorial intent is not relevant and largely unknowable, IMO, often to the writer themself.  A piece of art has to stand on it's own without a cliff notes from it's creator. One of my favorite directors Hal Hartley made a film called Henry Fool with an ending HE intended to be clear and unequivocal, but a considerable amount of the audience read it as *ambiguous* and it was debated in the press and on the internet, was it option A or option B?

 

That's pretty wild.  Henry Fool is one of my very favorite movies*, but I had no idea there was any controversy.  To my memory of it (and I've seen it several times but not in a few years) there was no ambiguity: Henry is

running toward the plane.

 But rewatching it just now, I can see how people might think that

his pausing was indicative of his turning around and running back (though I don't know why it would be so fast).

 It's interesting how people can interpret endings differently; I have noticed that a lot of people put a perverse (IMO) spin on two movies with endings I take literally and they do not: Take Shelter and All is Lost.

 

A couple thoughts on that.  First, when it's the ending of a movie (or, I suppose, the ending of a series finale), it's not really as consequential in a way for people to interpret it "wrong" (or, if you prefer, differently than the creator intended).  It's over, and having a different idea of what happened than the writer does won't impact on anything going forward.**  But in the case of a TV show, I think watching it "against the grain" of the author's intent is going to lead to trouble later (and I think we've already seen signs of this in much of the commentary).  

 

I appreciate that a complex portrayal of humanity can be interpreted differently by different people, just as in RL (I know people who think I'm awesome, and others that think I'm just the worst).  But if you are sure Noah and Alison are not really in love, and that Noah is just a bad person, then if Noah later does something inarguably heroic and self-sacrificing for Alison, at the very least this will be seen as inconsistent characterization, even though Treem (and I, and Boundary, and RedheadZombie, and maybe EyesGlazed...give a shoutout if someone else wants to join our "true love caucus" that I've missed naming, LOL) would consider it completely consistent.

I guess what I'm saying is that watching a show this way seems very unlikely to be a stable, satisfying experience.  If you feel you're seeing something different than what the creator thinks she's writing, it's hard to see how she is going to develop the story going forward in a way that makes sense to you.

 

Thank you, SlackerInc, for your reply.  It is an interesting argument, that because so many marriages are failing, affairs should not be stigmatized, or, at least in this instance, this is a love so great it is worth shattering so many people's lives. I think, though, that I would not be rooting for these two even if it wasn't an affair because I have not seen any real love between them. 

 

I know that Treem has said that she considers Alison and Noah to be soulmates, whatever that means.  As for the thought that there should be no stigma attached to having an affair, because so many people are doing it, well, not sure I can reason it that way.  To me, an affair is really about selfishness and self-delusion.  The desire for the other person is there, the conscious decision is made to betray the current relationship and once the breach of the current relationship has been made, it's impossible to ever have that back. Affairs are destructive, not just to the spouses or partners left behind, I believe they are destructive to the participants as well. 

 

But most people, in their lust, do not think about that. And our ideas about romantic love are certainly tied to the popular cultural notion of hot sex, and few responsibilities (and something new and shiny). 

 

Statistically, an affair is not a great start to a lasting relationship.  The percentages of second, and third, marriages that end in divorce are higher even than the divorce percentages for first marriages. Generally an affair is not the answer to finding a lasting relationship.  And so far, I think the show has done an outstanding job of showing the patterns that occur in affairs, and the aftermath.That is why I keep watching. To see Helen and Cole going through the grief that all left-behind spouses must go through, and to have it portrayed so well is fascinating to me. And to see Noah and Alison begin to navigate through the reality of their situation is interesting as well. 

 

It may be that the idea of what a marriage is and how one maintains it does need to be changed. People used to get married to have families and to build wealth. Maybe it will evolve to stages.  Starter marriage, child raising marriage, soul mate marriage.

 

But even if you believe that the institution of marriage is outdated, people who commit to each other, and agree to be exclusive and have a history together (kids, property, experiences) will still be cheaters and cheating, if they step out of that commitment, and lie and hide that they have done so. People will still be hurt.  

 

I'm really surprised that Treem is surprised by the backlash against her lovers.   

 

I appreciate your response as well.  Lots of food for thought there, even if we disagree on a lot of things.

 

I think what you are saying here is still tied up deeply in a kind of circular, begging the question mindset: "Infidelity is wrong, so cheaters are bad".  When I argue with people that monogamy isn't really natural for humans, I often hear back something like "Well, then don't promise anyone you'll be monogamous then", and these people claim that it's really the dishonesty and promise breaking they are against, not the non-monogamy per se.  (You say something similar in your paragraph starting "But even if you believe...".)

 

And I did learn this lesson with my second (current) wife, and had a talk with her before we got married about how I felt (basically, I favor a "don't ask, don't tell, be discreet" policy).  But she was alarmed by this at first, and many people would have called off the engagement upon hearing this proposal.  The social conditioning in our society (at least in some parts of the world; I think Wilson is implying that it is less so in continental Europe, probably especially France as I understand their culture) makes it hard for people to even explore these ideas, much less suggest them.  There is a strong social pressure to hew to conventional morality in this respect, even though we see the failure again and again around us.

 

The author of the article I linked just above explores how this pathologizes human nature:

 

Few mainstream therapists would contemplate trying to persuade a gay man or lesbian to "grow up, get real, and stop being gay." But most insist that long-term sexual monogamy is "normal," while the curiosity and novelty-seeking inherent in human sexuality are signs of pathology. Thus, couples are led to believe that waning sexual passion in enduring marriages or sexual interest in anyone but their partner portend a failed relationship, when in reality these things often signify nothing more than that we are Homo sapiens.

 

 

He goes into a lot of evidence, both from pre-agricultural human societies and from comparisons with our fellow great apes, to back up his thesis.

 

As for why Treem is surprised by the reaction, I think this is emblematic of a disconnect between elite, artistic/intellectual culture and mainstream American culture.  I've seen it repeatedly: cinematic auteurs like to explore infidelity from a perspective that does not judge the "cheaters", nor require that their significant others are monstrous or that their established relationship (the one from which they are "straying") is even a bad one.  And I really like these movies, as you might imagine.  Examples include too many Woody Allen films to name (and I am definitely an Allen devotee), plus three others I would like to single out for recommendation: 28 Hotel Rooms, Two Lovers, and Life in Flight.

But oh man do those movies get an absolutely scathing response if you look at the low ratings people give, and the vitriol aimed at them in the message boards.  (Another one that takes similar heat, but which I would not recommend for other reasons, is The Good Girl, which was a real disappointment given that a collaboration between Miguel Arteta and Mike White would seem like a can't-miss proposition.)  My interpretation, which will obviously be hotly contested by many, is that all this outrage is an expression of insecurity and a suppression of the deep-down knowledge that indeed, monogamy is not natural (something the artsy intellectuals implicitly understand but don't try to suppress as much, nor do they realize how assiduously the wider society is still doing so even into the 21st century).  It's like they are shouting so loudly to convince themselves.  And the same applies in regard to the reaction to this show.  JMO as always! 

 

I don't think they're in love. I think that Noah was going through a midlife crisis, and Allison needed something really different in her life to make her feel alive. When they met, they filled those roles. I think we're starting to see them figure out that they're not as in love as they thought they were, but they can't go back at this point .

 

I think we are certainly beginning to see that their relationship isn't perfect.  Those like you and many others commenting who don't believe they are "really in love" will of course seize upon that as evidence for their position.  But I would argue first of all that people can be truly in love, yet not have a perfect relationship (certainly that's the case with my wife and me).  Furthermore, I just don't think there's any dramatic "juice" in a narrative about two starcrossed lovers with a perfect relationship--which is surely a big reason why such relationships are rarely seen on TV, especially between the main protagonists (having secondary characters with a blissful union, fine).  It would be boring, with very little story to tell, unless maybe they were battling an alien invasion or something.

 

And I just go back to wondering: these are after all fictional characters, not real people.  If the people writing their dialogue think they're in love, and the people saying their dialogue think they're in love, then what does it even mean to argue that "they aren't, really"?

 

--------

*Specifically, it's #32 of over 1250 movies I've ranked.  But if that doesn't sound like a "very favorite" (stillshimpy knows what I'm talking about here), keep in mind that more than a thousand of those are at least marginally "thumbs up", as I don't rank movies I haven't watched all the way through, and I don't usually start movies I expect to be bad, nor do I finish bad movies unless I'm stuck in a social situation where I have to, or they turn really bad right at the end.  Nearly all my top 250, I love enough to give five out of five stars on Netflix.  But only the top 41, including Henry Fool, get a 10/10 rating from me on IMDb.

 

**I still think endings can in some cases just be blatantly misunderstood to the point of being almost objectively wrong, however.  David Chase seems to be frustrated with the way most viewers (including critics) have interpreted the ending of the Sopranos finale (and FWIW, I was originally one of those he seems frustrated with, but have come around in recent years to seeing it differently).  He expressed that frustration as follows:

 

“Somebody said it would be a good idea if we said something about the ending. I really wasn't going to go into it,” Chase said. “When I was going to Stanford University graduate film school, 23 years old, I went and saw 'Planet of the Apes' with my wife. When the movie was over I said, 'Wow, so they had a Statue of Liberty, too.' So that's what you're up against.”

 

 

Did Chase really just have his own, perfectly valid, interpretation of the Apes ending?  I don't think so.

Edited by SlackerInc
  • Love 3
Link to comment

Really interesting thoughts SlaterInc, not surprisingly I agree. But to avoid repetition I'll mention something else.

A show about affairs was always going to be a hard sell for reasons you eloquently point out. Three things immediately stood out to me right at the beginning: 1. Sarah Treem apparently is a recently happily married woman, 2. the show is on cable and 3. the cast. Here's why. Treem wasn't on either 'a let's demonise affairs' or 'blatantly broach taboos' trip. Either of those approaches wouldn't have smelled right to any sub-group of the viewership and the writing would have come up short. She is, as SlaterInc points out, an intellectual cultural creature. Her attitude is, "I'm happily married, so let me explore what affairs entail intellectually, without the inherent bias a mainstream reaction would require." That attitude wouldn't have been acceptable on a broadcast network but on cable you can find a niche ... until your show nabs a couple of Golden Grobes on its debut season! Finally, the cast on this show is of a certain calibre, Ruth Wilson isn't a conventionally beautiful femme fatale (comments about her appearance in the S1 threads bear this out), her previous character was the deliciously psychopathic Alice on Luther (as has been mentioned previously, please check it out); Dominic West was once McNulty, enuff said. Even though Pacey (and his fandom) follows Joshua Jackson, his recent outing on Fringe suitably shows his calibre. Similar arguments for Maura Tierney. So all main characters are allowed to stretch into areas a conventional show wouldn't dare. Bringing me to this point:

 

 But if you are sure Noah and Alison are not really in love, and that Noah is just a bad person, then if Noah later does something inarguably heroic and self-sacrificing for Alison, at the very least this will be seen as inconsistent characterization, even though Treem (and I, and Boundary, and RedheadZombie, and maybe EyesGlazed...give a shoutout if someone else wants to join our "true love caucus" that I've missed naming, LOL) would consider it completely consistent.

 

I hadn't considered it this way before but you are right. I always allowed the space in my comments for most of our fellow viewers to vent against Noah and Alison, that being their prerogative after all and what's probably to be expected, given the subject matter. But your point about characterization seems important. If Noah is "mischaracterized" by a majority of viewers and something crucial happens, as you say, then who would be wrong? Hmm.

 

PS#1 SlaterInc - kudos for the 28 Hotel Rooms shoutout, brilliant film. Indulgent but I absolutely loved it.

PS#2 I think you can add Higgs to the "True Love Caucus" LOL but he (hope it's a he) hasn't shown up yet on S2 discussions.

Edited by Boundary
Link to comment
If Noah is "mischaracterized" by a majority of viewers and something crucial happens, as you say, then who would be wrong? Hmm.

 

 

But why does anyone have to be wrong? Why can it not simply be that two different people watch this show and due to their own history, beliefs, personality characteristics, etc. they view the story and characters in a different way. Hell isn't that in some way the crux of this show - that people's memories and perceptions are skewed based on who they are, their feelings, etc? Why does anyone have to be wrong in their opinions and interpretation of this show? 

 

I don't think the people who like Alison and Noah and think they are in love are wrong in that belief, I simply politely disagree with that opinion and see it in a different way. And that's why I get a little irritated with the references to Treem and her interviews and comments because maybe that's not the intent, but it does feel a little like saying, "well this is what the author is saying and this is what the author believes so it must be so and your opinion is wrong." Yeah no...disagree vehemently with that. 

  • Love 8
Link to comment

I appreciate your response as well.  Lots of food for thought there, even if we disagree on a lot of things.

 

I think what you are saying here is still tied up deeply in a kind of circular, begging the question mindset: "Infidelity is wrong, so cheaters are bad".  When I argue with people that monogamy isn't really natural for humans, I often hear back something like "Well, then don't promise anyone you'll be monogamous then", and these people claim that it's really the dishonesty and promise breaking they are against, not the non-monogamy per se.  (You say something similar in your paragraph starting "But even if you believe...".)

 

And I did learn this lesson with my second (current) wife, and had a talk with her before we got married about how I felt (basically, I favor a "don't ask, don't tell, be discreet" policy).  But she was alarmed by this at first, and many people would have called off the engagement upon hearing this proposal.  The social conditioning in our society (at least in some parts of the world; I think Wilson is implying that it is less so in continental Europe, probably especially France as I understand their culture) makes it hard for people to even explore these ideas, much less suggest them.  There is a strong social pressure to hew to conventional morality in this respect, even though we see the failure again and again around us.

 

The author of the article I linked just above explores how this pathologizes human nature:

 

 

He goes into a lot of evidence, both from pre-agricultural human societies and from comparisons with our fellow great apes, to back up his thesis.

 

As for why Treem is surprised by the reaction, I think this is emblematic of a disconnect between elite, artistic/intellectual culture and mainstream American culture.  I've seen it repeatedly: cinematic auteurs like to explore infidelity from a perspective that does not judge the "cheaters", nor require that their significant others are monstrous or that their established relationship (the one from which they are "straying") is even a bad one.  And I really like these movies, as you might imagine.  Examples include too many Woody Allen films to name (and I am definitely an Allen devotee), plus three others I would like to single out for recommendation: 28 Hotel Rooms, Two Lovers, and Life in Flight.

But oh man do those movies get an absolutely scathing response if you look at the low ratings people give, and the vitriol aimed at them in the message boards.  (Another one that takes similar heat, but which I would not recommend for other reasons, is The Good Girl, which was a real disappointment given that a collaboration between Miguel Arteta and Mike White would seem like a can't-miss proposition.)  My interpretation, which will obviously be hotly contested by many, is that all this outrage is an expression of insecurity and a suppression of the deep-down knowledge that indeed, monogamy is not natural (something the artsy intellectuals implicitly understand but don't try to suppress as much, nor do they realize how assiduously the wider society is still doing so even into the 21st century).  It's like they are shouting so loudly to convince themselves.  And the same applies in regard to the reaction to this show.  JMO as always! 

 

 

I think we are certainly beginning to see that their relationship isn't perfect.  Those like you and many others commenting who don't believe they are "really in love" will of course seize upon that as evidence for their position.  But I would argue first of all that people can be truly in love, yet not have a perfect relationship (certainly that's the case with my wife and me).  Furthermore, I just don't think there's any dramatic "juice" in a narrative about two starcrossed lovers with a perfect relationship--which is surely a big reason why such relationships are rarely seen on TV, especially between the main protagonists (having secondary characters with a blissful union, fine).  It would be boring, with very little story to tell, unless maybe they were battling an alien invasion or something.

 

 

 

Hoo boy, there is a lot in this response, some I liked and agreed with, and some, maybe not so much.

 

First, I love Woody Allen movies too.  One of my favorites is A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy, which is charming and fun. 

 

And somehow I knew that part of your argument for affairs being a part of healthy long-term relationships would be to say 'look at the French.'  ;)   

 

I'm not certain why one would choose to marry if they had no real intention of faithfulness, OR at least the 'out' of, as long as the partner never knows, it's okay to have relationships outside of the marriage.  If two people agree that they will have an "open" marriage, that's a different thing and involves both partners agreeing to it. (Although my experience with that is that one partner has one foot out the door, and the other partner agrees to it as a means to keep the marriage, and not because they enthusiastically endorse the lifestyle.) 

 

Fidelity, in my view, requires being considerate of the other partner's needs, emotions, etc. Many times an affair, or additional relationship, takes something away from the initial coupling. 

Regardless of what people say, having sex with someone creates a bond with that person. I really believe that.  Recreational sex, so to speak, isn't really possible.  And if it is purely recreational, at some point it will not be fulfilling. A recent movie,  Don John, did a wonderful job of pointing out that it is the affection and love between people that makes sex wonderful, and not how 'perfect' someone looks. Real intimacy comes from knowing our partners well and that comes from much time spent together.

 

And yes, no relationship is perfect.  But I don't think Noah and Alison are not in love because they are starting to adjust to the realities of being together.  I just haven't seen what I consider real love between them.  My opinion. Maybe they will get there. I think it's unlikely they will. 

Link to comment

There have been some incredibly thoughtful and thought-provoking posts here, and if I read them all with an objective mind, I see valid points on all sides of the "are they or aren't they" in love angle.  From my POV, it's still a waiting game to see if these two characters are genuinely in love or just in the first infatuation stage, which lasts for 2-3 years and then either flames out or develops into a more realistic and mature kind of love.  

 

Noah is a self centered schmuck who is definitely infatuated with Alison, and he genuinely seems to want to get married - does that mean he loves her? - and start his life over (good luck with that fantasy, Noah).  But Noah is also profoundly destructive to people in his life, and if the way his two older kids behave is any barometer, that destructiveness began long before he started an affair with Alison.  Alison is a more difficult read for me because she has been so shut down with grief and anger, and because all of her truly awful acting-out behavior has been in direct association with her relationship with Noah.  But right before the pretend shooting of the dog when Robert asked her how much she loves Noah she replied "very very much" and I believed her - although I also wonder if any reasonably successful and attractive man who fell for her wouldn't have fit the escape-bill as well as Noah does.    

 

No problem with ambiguity for me - and I LOVED the ending of The Sopranos.  The movies The Affair reminds me of most are Woody Allen's "Crimes and Misdemeanors" and Mike Nichols' brilliant "Closer."   Smart, dark, funny and scathing examinations of the range of human emotions and behaviors that leave you (or me, at least) certain that there is no such thing as a complete resolution to difficult, complex human relationships.  And if a complete resolution (like a happy ending) is what we are given in a smart book, series or movie, that's simply fiction.  In real life, 'resolution' is just like the weather: wait five minutes and it will change.   

  • Love 2
Link to comment

But why does anyone have to be wrong? Why can it not simply be that two different people watch this show and due to their own history, beliefs, personality characteristics, etc. they view the story and characters in a different way. Hell isn't that in some way the crux of this show - that people's memories and perceptions are skewed based on who they are, their feelings, etc? Why does anyone have to be wrong in their opinions and interpretation of this show? 

 

I don't think the people who like Alison and Noah and think they are in love are wrong in that belief, I simply politely disagree with that opinion and see it in a different way. And that's why I get a little irritated with the references to Treem and her interviews and comments because maybe that's not the intent, but it does feel a little like saying, "well this is what the author is saying and this is what the author believes so it must be so and your opinion is wrong." Yeah no...disagree vehemently with that. 

 

Thanks so much for this post. It is exactly what I was thinking. I tried to say it above but apparently I was not as articulate.

 

Why indeed is there a right or wrong answer? This is a complex show and people experience it in different ways and their perceptions are colored by their world view. And yes, IMO, this is exactly the point of the show. 

 

I completely agree about Treem...I don't want any show runner telling me what to think. I prefer to think for myself. I want to view their "creations" thru my eyes with my perceptions not theirs.

Edited by Ellaria Sand
  • Love 2
Link to comment

I'm always interested in authorial intent, even if only to see how much it seems to stray from what is actually presented to people or the way it's actually received! (Maybe also because my professional job is a book editor who often has to help the author get their intent clearly conveyed on the page.) What I find conflicting about Treem's statements and attitude (and I've read most interviews with her and follow her on Twitter) is that she kind of wants to have her cake and eat it too. She (and all the other cast/crew) that speak about the show praise it/take pride in how it never wants to tell you an objective truth, that everything is subjective because it's filtered by memory and personal perception and gender and everything else. So then, why should she be "surprised" when there are people who don't care for Noah and Allison and/or don't find their affair romantic or think they are soulmates? Every possible option should be equally valid, right? So then shouldn't she be saying "Are they soulmates? I don't know--that's up to the audience to decide." Not "Yes they're definitely soulmates. We wanted to see how this epic love would disrupt lives with real consequences." 

 

If there's no objective truth, there is no objective lie either. No one is or can be interpreting anything incorrectly or in a way you didn't intend if you proclaim to have no solid intention. 

 

But...you can't tell me that a creator, a storyteller doesn't have some kind of idea of her story, some kind of feelings about the characters to shape the framing. Not everything can be possible because then how do you frame the story, how do you formulate a plot, how do you make any writing decisions? There has to be an endgame. I'm guessing the murder plot will be fairly concrete. There will be a correct answer, a guilty party, a final verdict. But everything up to that will be nebulous and shifting. Maybe you'll even have doubt as to whether the final guilty party was the guilty party--I could see them pulling that off. But someone has to get the blame for Scotty's murder in the end because it would be terribly anti-climactic and unsatisfying not to have the story climax somehow.

 

That being said, I think the reason they are surprised is because they are trying so hard not to frame the story that they are failing to convey even what they think are the basic uncontestable truths (that Noah and Allison have a love for the ages). The majority of commenters are not fond of Noah and Allison, for various reasons, but I think a large part of it is that ....they're trying to write a romance without any signs of romance! There is sex, but there are none of the steps of emotional bonding that good romances have--they don't really confide in each other, they don't really work together on a common goal ever, there's no buliding of trust, and there is no sentiment to their romance. It almost always is portrayed as a difficult choice with hard and numerous complications, because they didn't want it to be seen through rose-colored glasses. Well so then is it any surprise the audience doesn't find it romantic? (I should add that my day job as an editor is for a romance novel imprint. So yeah...this show is fascinating on a lot of levels for me.) If these two seemed like they just had an irrepressible connection that couldn't be ignored (and I feel the show has tried repeatedly to TELL us they do but haven't actually SHOWN us they do through their actions--other than sex), then I'd be all in. I'd be swooning and I wouldn't really care if they'd been married if I felt they were soulmates that had always been meant to be but only found each other too late, etc. 

 

In addition to the soulmate romance, the other area I find unbelievable is Cole's characterization. I feel like for all the other characters, the differences between POVs are very subtle--Helen is slightly more elitist, Noah is slightly more selfish than normal, Alison is slightly more lost/or a victim or alternately slightly more slutty, etc. But Cole's personality seems to swing far and wide. They keep describing him as a stoic Marlboro-type man who bottled up all his feelings about Gabriel's death in interviews, that's not what I saw on the show though--the guy got a tattoo of his son's name, he talks about Gabriel to Allison quite frequently in S1 but his position is that they can't dwell on the past, but have to find a way to move on. I never got the impression that he wasn't grieving for the boy though and aside from the pilot's sex scene and the gun-waving finale, he was always pretty tender and understanding to Allison in my opinion. He had the breakdown on the sidewalk in episode 7 that was just completely touching, and right before that he was awfully chivalrous, telling Allison not to sit on the dirty curb and mess up her dress and laying down newspaper for her. That didn't jive with the cold, brutish man we're supposed to believe Cole can be. He also was established as a man who wanted to keep commercialization/corruption out of their local community, but then they revealed him to be head of a local drug ring--those two traits made no logical sense to me as coexisting in this same guy. I think the writing for him was completely disjointed and over the top, as opposed to all the other characters that are more nuanced and thus believable to some degree. I love Joshua Jackson because he was Pacey and freely admit that bias--but I don't think that bias prevents me from ever seeing him be a bad guy. He's just fine, really good even, at playing "menacing" when the script calls for it. I just wish those moments didn't come so infrequently that they feel like they're wildly off target. Someone recently suggested to me that Josh just isn't good at playing "distant", but I think if it was there on the page he'd play that but their actual writing of the character didn't ultimately support their original vision, I don't think. (Early on I thought he was very miscast. That they'd wanted a Heath Ledger type but cast a (younger) George Clooney type instead. But I think he's a good actor and has some very very good moments--so I don't think he wouldn't be up to the task of playing distant or cold or anything the script called for, but it has to be there for him to really know to play it.

 

I wish we'd gotten Helen and Cole's POVs in S1 actually. it might have evened a lot of this story out. 

Edited by taragel
  • Love 16
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...