American Gothic (2016) Anticipation & Speculation

[Meredith Quill]

Anticipate, then Speculate here!

[Iguana]

Whoa, hold the phone.  There's a new version of American Gothic coming next year?  How did I not know about this?  I loved the all too short season back in the 1990's. 

 

Okay, having gone to the interntz to look this up, I see that all the new series coming in summer 2016 has in common with the old one is the name.  It's going to be totally different.  That's too bad.  But I still would like a revised thread title:  "American Gothic (2016) Anticipation:  Someone's At The Door".

[LakeGal]

I plan to check this one out.  It sounds interesting.

[SoSueMe]

On 11/15/2015 at 4:14 PM, Iguana said:

Whoa, hold the phone.  There's a new version of American Gothic coming next year?  How did I not know about this?  I loved the all too short season back in the 1990's. 

 

Okay, having gone to the interntz to look this up, I see that all the new series coming in summer 2016 has in common with the old one is the name.  It's going to be totally different.  That's too bad.  But I still would like a revised thread title:  "American Gothic (2016) Anticipation:  Someone's At The Door".

Yeah, I just saw this advertised. Something to look forward to. I still try to use a Southern drawl when I say "someone's at the door", lol.

But when I see Lucas Black on NCIS New Orleans it brings me down a little. Time flies.

[candall]

"Someone's at the door" always makes me smile.

  Summun's at the doh-uh.

 

.

Edited May 2, 2016 by candall

[curiously]

I'm thinking that Sophie might be the SBK/accomplice somehow (I'm guessing she's the accomplice to Papa Hawthorne's SBK). Of all the actors on the show receiving starring credit, Stephanie Leonidas plays the character most likely to be a killer: Brady and Tessa were watching the live broadcast of the kidnapping of the reporter in the last episode, it's not Garrett or Jack (would've been awesome if it was Jack, by the way, but this is not a sci-fi show), Mama Hawthorne asked Garrett "What did you do?" in the flashback (and just seems to be the "know a lot but isn't the one who did it" character), Alison would've benefited more from using the reporter to her advantage, which leaves Cam and Sophie. Frankly, if Sophie doesn't have a bigger role to play in all of this, I would've expected her to be a recurring guest star...

Furthermore, where does Jack's psychopathic tendencies come from anyway? I remember reading somewhere that they wanted Jack's psychopathy to be an interesting "nature or nurture" question, but to make it interesting the "nature" part must come from somewhere...Cam seems to be the red herring here to the true psychopath Sophie. Sophie's behavior throughout the series, her possessiveness of Cam, is also consistent with her being a psychopath...

What do people think?

[sugarbaker design]

I like you're theory, it would be ironic if Jack's psycho behavior came from his mom's side and not his dad's.

At the very least, I don't think it's a blood family member.  My original pick is Tom, (and now) with Sophie as a close second.

Edited August 24, 2016 by sugarbaker design

[Sayla Vee]

How old would Sophie have been 14 years ago?  Would Mama Hawthorne have offed Daddy Hawthorne to protect Sophie?  Would she even have killed him to protect Jack?

This is my problem with anyone outside the immediate family.  Who or what could possibly frighten Madeline enough for her to murder Mitch.........and why the heck does Garrett accept his mother's act with just a sigh.

[Guest]

I'd like it more if there were clues in the story that it was her.  I don't think a good mystery has its clues in the credits.  I think Jack could've gotten psychopathy from his father's side of the family, but it's interesting to consider it could be from Sophie's.  

Sayla Vee, I agree.  That's what makes me think they're protecting Tessa.  Who else would they go to such extremes for?  Even doing it for Tessa is a little silly... killing your husband, Garrett hiding in the woods for 14 years.  Or maybe there's someone we haven't met yet who needs protecting even more than Tessa.  Kind of lame to hide a killer until the final eps in a whodunit, though.  

[sugarbaker design]

We know Mama Hawthorne is protecting someone, most likely one of her children.  But couldn't she be wrong?  Mystery fiction is full of moms/dads/husbands/wives who have protected someone they thought was guilty, only to find out later after the case has been solved, that they have been wrong for decades.

[sugarbaker design]

40 minutes ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

Kind of lame to hide a killer until the final eps in a whodunit, though.  

Isn't that what a whodunit is?

[Sayla Vee]

28 minutes ago, sugarbaker design said:

Isn't that what a whodunit is?

Not for me.  A whodunit should (in my view) introduce me to all the characters, give me reasons why each could have or could NOT have dun it, and then let me guess or analyze. 

[sugarbaker design]

I agree, but most of the whodunits I read didn't reveal the identity of the killer until the final pages.

Edited August 24, 2016 by sugarbaker design

[Guest]

30 minutes ago, sugarbaker design said:

I agree, but most of the whodunits I read didn't reveal the identity of the killer until the final pages.

Right, I meant if the killer is a character that hasn't even been introduced to the story yet.  Or "someone we haven't met yet", as I put it above.  Like in episode 13 we find out the killer is none of these characters, it's Tessa's evil twin who's locked in an asylum.  

[sugarbaker design]

Gotcha!  I agree, that is totally not fair.  Agatha Christie pulled that shit all the time.

[Cardie]

1 hour ago, sugarbaker design said:

Agatha Christie pulled that shit all the time.

No, she didn't. Christie had the killer character appear somewhere in the novel or story but would often seem to rule them out conclusively. I don't recall any of her murderers popping up for the first time in the last few pages.

[sjohnson]

Agree, Agatha Christie always showed us the murderer. One of her most notorious mysteries, the one that really kicked off her career, was narrated by the murderer. You can't get the killer much more up front than that.  Her mysteries played tricky but they were fair tricks. In the end her mysteries were as tightly plotted as Ellery Queen or S.S. Van Dine. She passed Ronald Knox's rules for mysteries. 

But I suspect Raymond Chandler's murderers were more or less pulled from his nether parts. This is curious since he devised his own set of rules for mysteries, and blasted Christie for one for not following them.

But then, one of Chandler's criticisms was that Christie is boring. Unfortunately for every would be critic, boringness is not a property of any literary or dramatic work. They may be vague, diffuse, unresolved, slow paced, padded, confusing...but boredom is the emotional state all these (or any combination thereof,) may evoke in the reader or viewers. I have yet to finish reading a Chandler and can't remember much from a Chandler movie adaptation, but I've usually found Christie exciting enough. It's the thrill of the hunt, because you have a chance to beat the detective to the prey.  

[Sayla Vee]

14 minutes ago, sjohnson said:

Agree, Agatha Christie always showed us the murderer. One of her most notorious mysteries, the one that really kicked off her career, was narrated by the murderer. You can't get the killer much more up front than that.  Her mysteries played tricky but they were fair tricks. In the end her mysteries were as tightly plotted as Ellery Queen or S.S. Van Dine. She passed Ronald Knox's rules for mysteries. 

But I suspect Raymond Chandler's murderers were more or less pulled from his nether parts. This is curious since he devised his own set of rules for mysteries, and blasted Christie for one for not following them.

But then, one of Chandler's criticisms was that Christie is boring. Unfortunately for every would be critic, boringness is not a property of any literary or dramatic work. They may be vague, diffuse, unresolved, slow paced, padded, confusing...but boredom is the emotional state all these (or any combination thereof,) may evoke in the reader or viewers. I have yet to finish reading a Chandler and can't remember much from a Chandler movie adaptation, but I've usually found Christie exciting enough. It's the thrill of the hunt, because you have a chance to beat the detective to the prey.  

Agree with your whole post, but the bolded explains why I never liked Mary Higgins Clark books.

[nkotb]

My speculation: I think that somehow Tessa is involved, but I can't quite pinpoint what role I think she played. She was probably too young to be the actual SBK killer. My only concrete thought is that it might be some sort of amnesia where she'd blocked everything out. However, if I learned anything from "Harper's Island", the killer must be connected to everyone somehow, and the killer must be a shocker. Tessa is the only one who fits; she's a Hawthorne, Cam seems particularly close to her/protective of her, her husband is a detective on the case, she's so sweet she'd give taffy a toothache, she just makes sense, even if it doesn't make sense. 

Having said that, I'm totally intrigued with the thought of Sophie being involved. Jack is seriously the creepiest kid I've ever seen on TV, & I watch a lot of tv, so for him to get the crazy & murderous instincts from his mother's side instead of his father's side would be a swerve I could definitely get behind. 

[sjohnson]

My prediction is that whatever they come up with, it will involve one or more Hawthorne's doing something really, really foolish. The best candidate at the moment is Garrett running away to the woods for fourteen years because of an hilarious misunderstanding. The second best is Madeline killing Mitchell under the mistaken impression he was going to confess to being SBK. 

Seriously, I kind of expect there never to be any convincing reason given for SBK (primary or accomplice) to heat up the investigation by killing the reporter. 

[curiously]

8 hours ago, nkotb said:

My speculation: I think that somehow Tessa is involved, but I can't quite pinpoint what role I think she played. She was probably too young to be the actual SBK killer.

As it turns out, Tessa was the actual SBK killer! :P (Edit: actually, Garrett was, but Tessa came close!)

You were right, of course, that she was too young to be the actual SB killer, hehe....

Edited September 1, 2016 by curiously