Unpopular Opinions Thread

[MJS]

My unpopular opinion? (and forgive me if it's been discussed- only skimmed the entire thread, but read most of the last few pages).

 

It always makes me sad that they never mention the baby who died. No visits to the grave site, no mention on their shared birthday, etc. It's like the baby was erased because they ended up bring home three anyway. I just can't believe that any parents who lost a child during birth would never mention it.

[ItCouldBeWorse]

3 hours ago, MJS said:

It always makes me sad that they never mention the baby who died. No visits to the grave site, no mention on their shared birthday, etc. It's like the baby was erased because they ended up bring home three anyway. I just can't believe that any parents who lost a child during birth would never mention it.

I certainly wouldn't dwell on the dead baby with the living children.  The parents will have told the other kids off screen, I'm sure, but if they mourn every birthday, they should do so privately, I think.  Why make the surviving kids feel guilty for surviving, or make Randall feel like a replacement?  It would not help the child who died.

This does not mean that children shouldn't know about death, or visit family graves.  But, this child was not a part of their lives, and being told their birth/adoption story occasionally should be plenty.

By the way, I feel the same about younger children who grow up in the shadow of an older child who has died, especially if the death took place before their birth or when they were too young to remember him/her. It's certainly normal for the parents to miss that child, maybe even desperately, but the much younger children should not have to mourn every year or wonder if they would have even been born if only that older child had survived. A picture and an occasional happy story about the missing child should be plenty.  With a child who died at birth, there are no happy stories to tell.

Edited March 1, 2017 by ItCouldBeWorse

[MJS]

That is certainly true, but we've never even seen the parents mention the baby between themselves. We had an entire episode devoted to the "Big 3" birthday parties, but not even a single brief mention between the parents who lost their child.  As adult children now, they've mentioned Jack's ashes a bunch of times, of course William's terminal illness, and their childhood in general, and not a mention about thinking about their other sibling. It's not as if the adult kids don't know the story. It's an important story about how Randall joined their family. I'm just surprised it's never been mentioned.

I agree you don't want to be a huge part of the surviving kids life, but in a show that all about children and family, not even a mention has been jarring at times, at least to me. 

Edited March 1, 2017 by MJS

[ItCouldBeWorse]

58 minutes ago, MJS said:

That is certainly true, but we've never even seen the parents mention the baby between themselves. We had an entire episode devoted to the "Big 3" birthday parties, but not even a single brief mention between the parents who lost their child.  As adult children now, they've mentioned Jack's ashes a bunch of times, of course William's terminal illness, and their childhood in general, and not a mention about thinking about their other sibling. It's not as if the adult kids don't know the story. It's an important story about how Randall joined their family. I'm just surprised it's never been mentioned.

I agree you don't want to be a huge part of the surviving kids life, but in a show that all about children and family, not even a mention has been jarring at times, at least to me. 

Perhaps as to the parents, but I doubt the children really think about a sibling they never knew, and of whom there are no pictures, even though he was Kate and Kevin's triplet. Certainly not Randall.  If Kate or Kevin were an only child, perhaps they would muse about the what if, but this seems realistic to me.

Edited March 1, 2017 by ItCouldBeWorse

[OtterMommy]

19 minutes ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

Perhaps as to the parents, but I doubt the children really think about a sibling they never knew, and of whom there are no pictures, even though he was Kate and Kevin's triplet. Certainly not Randall.  If Kate or Kevin were an only child, perhaps they would muse about the what if, but this seems realistic to me.

I can't remember, but do Kevin and Kate even know that there was a third baby...or do they think that they were twins and then Randall was adopted?  I can't remember if any of the characters mentioned anything to indicate that either way....

[topanga]

3 hours ago, MJS said:

My unpopular opinion? (and forgive me if it's been discussed- only skimmed the entire thread, but read most of the last few pages).

 

It always makes me sad that they never mention the baby who died. No visits to the grave site, no mention on their shared birthday, etc. It's like the baby was erased because they ended up bring home three anyway. I just can't believe that any parents who lost a child during birth would never mention it.

 

1 hour ago, MJS said:

That is certainly true, but we've never even seen the parents mention the baby between themselves. We had an entire episode devoted to the "Big 3" birthday parties, but not even a single brief mention between the parents who lost their child.  As adult children now, they've mentioned Jack's ashes a bunch of times, of course William's terminal illness, and their childhood in general, and not a mention about thinking about their other sibling. It's not as if the adult kids don't know the story. It's an important story about how Randall joined their family. I'm just surprised it's never been mentioned.

I remember Rebecca crying soon after the babies were born. She said she was crying because she was having a hard time getting Randall to bond (he was still Kyle then), and he wouldn't take the bottle. Even during that teary conversation with Jack, she never mentioned the baby who died. Maybe some of the tears were for Kyle, but she wasn't able to articulate it. And this wasn't a miscarriage--not that miscarriages are easy--but this was a baby that was either stillborn or died due to childbirth complications. No way Rebecca and Jack wouldn't be affected, even though they were busy with triplets, one of whom was newly-adopted. 

[ItCouldBeWorse]

22 minutes ago, OtterMommy said:

42 minutes ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

Perhaps as to the parents, but I doubt the children really think about a sibling they never knew, and of whom there are no pictures, even though he was Kate and Kevin's triplet. Certainly not Randall.  If Kate or Kevin were an only child, perhaps they would muse about the what if, but this seems realistic to me.

I can't remember, but do Kevin and Kate even know that there was a third baby...or do they think that they were twins and then Randall was adopted?  I can't remember if any of the characters mentioned anything to indicate that either way....

This is not direct evidence, but I believe they have seen videos of themselves in the Big 3 knitted onesies right after they were born, which would have been made before their birth, so I believe they know but we have not seen them discuss it.  They've also seen pictures of their very pregnant Mom, so I choose to believe that they know.  I don't think there will be another reveal where Kate and Kevin are furious at Rebecca  for "lying" to them by omission about their dead sibling.

Edited March 1, 2017 by ItCouldBeWorse

[PRgal]

Maybe I'm mis-remembering, but I'm fairly sure (adult or teen) Kate or Kevin have mentioned a dead sibling. 

[SlackerInc]

8 hours ago, MJS said:

My unpopular opinion? (and forgive me if it's been discussed- only skimmed the entire thread, but read most of the last few pages).

 

It always makes me sad that they never mention the baby who died. No visits to the grave site, no mention on their shared birthday, etc. It's like the baby was erased because they ended up bring home three anyway. I just can't believe that any parents who lost a child during birth would never mention it.

I don't think that has been discussed, and it's a very interesting point.

6 hours ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

I certainly wouldn't dwell on the dead baby with the living children.  The parents will have told the other kids off screen, I'm sure, but if they mourn every birthday, they should do so privately, I think.  Why make the surviving kids feel guilty for surviving, or make Randall feel like a replacement?  It would not help the child who died.

This does not mean that children shouldn't know about death, or visit family graves.  But, this child was not a part of their lives, and being told their birth/adoption story occasionally should be plenty.

It's a tough issue.  I expressed the (almost certainly unpopular) opinion that while I can very easily understand the deep grief a family would feel if a singleton pregnancy ended in a stillbirth, it was hard for me to imagine that it would be like that if you still got two live babies--particularly if the third was never alive out of the womb.

I have a good friend in a little different situation, in which she had two singleton pregnancies that resulted in healthy babies, that are still her grade school and middle school age son and daughter to this day.  But her last pregnancy was of twins, born prematurely, who died within a week or two of birth.  I'm not sure how much of this gets conveyed to her surviving children, but every year on the anniversary of the twins' deaths, she expresses intense grief about it on Facebook.  I have wondered if this is healthy, but I of course have never said anything to her.

5 hours ago, MJS said:

That is certainly true, but we've never even seen the parents mention the baby between themselves. We had an entire episode devoted to the "Big 3" birthday parties, but not even a single brief mention between the parents who lost their child.  As adult children now, they've mentioned Jack's ashes a bunch of times, of course William's terminal illness, and their childhood in general, and not a mention about thinking about their other sibling. It's not as if the adult kids don't know the story. It's an important story about how Randall joined their family. I'm just surprised it's never been mentioned.

It's actually even more surprising, come to think of it, given the speech the doctor delivered to Jack.  Didn't he really lay it on thick about how this would be an intensely painful loss they would feel for the rest of their days?

[MaryPatShelby]

On 2/28/2017 at 10:36 AM, CleoCaesar said:

Ugh they actually did that? That's just gross. I am so over the "I AM CRYING SO HARD GUYS CAN YOU SEE HOW HARD I'M CRYING" circlejerk.

This thread, you are my people.

I had to excuse myself from an on-line discussion when it turned to what various commenters had used instead of kleenex.  

[ItCouldBeWorse]

18 minutes ago, SlackerInc said:

I have a good friend in a little different situation, in which she had two singleton pregnancies that resulted in healthy babies, that are still her grade school and middle school age son and daughter to this day.  But her last pregnancy was of twins, born prematurely, who died within a week or two of birth.  I'm not sure how much of this gets conveyed to her surviving children, but every year on the anniversary of the twins' deaths, she expresses intense grief about it on Facebook.  I have wondered if this is healthy, but I of course have never said anything to her.

If you met the babies, just say that you remember them too, but not on Facebook for the world to see.  You are right not to have said anything critical. She wants to know that people remember them.  Every dead baby is a tragedy, but she ended her pregnancy years on an unusually bad note. A subsequent living baby does not make up for the dead one, but it does distract you over the years.  Even though she still had 2 older children, she was anticipating babies and her arms were empty, and remain empty until today.

[SlackerInc]

Good point: that is indeed how she ended those years.  Makes sense.

[pennben]

Okay, so I loved this show at first, then started to be really annoyed by it, so I decided to skip a number of episodes (but kept up with these boards) and tune back in at the end of the season to see what I thought about where they are heading. 

I guess my first reaction is: are you fucking kidding me that Rebecca's tour is only for two weeks...TWO WEEKS...she's been seen as a bad mom who is selfish and awful and doesn't appreciate what she has with St. Jack by deciding to go on this whirlwind tour??!!  Did I miss something in the episodes I skipped? The way some reaction I've seen implied she was leaving for months and it was Exhibit GG of her being awful. Intentionally or not, they've made her a character folks hate on, and I don't see most changing their minds  and that frustrates me.  She didn't have to be 'bad' to make Jack look 'good', but here we are again with another show  and the same dynamics.

As for Randall, good for him for quitting if it wasn't working for him anymore. But as to him feeling aggrieved and hurt...."that's what the money is for".  I get that he was unhappy and changed his mind about his priorities, but he was making a ton of money (enough to speak of really early reirement plans with Beth (and be mad at her when she thought she was pregnant and screwing that up)). No one made him not take a vacation for three years, he chose that. He's not fighting some great injustice, he's just deciding that he's not willing to sacrifice his personal life to that extent anymore for the massive paycheck he was getting. I'm not feeling the Norma Rae "Union Now" moment I think they want me to feel.

i promised myself I'd watch the finale and the first episode next season, but I don't see a lot of hope for me turning around on my annoyance with this show (despite my enjoyment of this thread). 

[chocolatine]

1 hour ago, pennben said:

"that's what the money is for"

You're making me miss that show. I wish this one was half as good.

Edited March 8, 2017 by chocolatine

[Katy M]

5 hours ago, pennben said:

I guess my first reaction is: are you fucking kidding me that Rebecca's tour is only for two weeks...TWO WEEKS...she's been seen as a bad mom who is selfish and awful and doesn't appreciate what she has with St. Jack by deciding to go on this whirlwind tour??!!  

I know.  The way they were acting, I thought it was for a couple of months, not a couple of weeks.  That is a huge difference.  She ought to be able to leave for two weeks, especially prepping things beforehand, without it being a problem.  Being on the road with the ex is a different aspect, but Jack was upset that she was leaving before he knew about that.

[Guest]

Yeah, I thought they had said Rebecca's tour was 2 months before, but I must have either misheard or guessed wrong.

My UO is (I think) shared by many in this thread - the show is going downhill as they attempt to make things so meaningful and poignant that instead it's becoming predictable and boring.

[laurakaye]

I haven't seen the latest episode yet, but I did see a blurb on NBC saying that these next two episodes were going to "destroy America."

Really, This is Us?! 

I feel like I might have been able to get more into this show (rather than hate-watch as I'm doing now) if the show didn't tell me, in big bold letters, how I am supposed to feel every week.  Can I not take the parts I relate to and feel my own feelings?  Am I doing it wrong if I don't go through the entire box of tissue and have to resort to using my sleeves to wipe the almighty tears?  The hyperbole is getting rather ridiculous.

Reading through the latest episode thread, I see that several people are bothered by the more detailed aspects of the show...like the example of Rebecca's tour only being two weeks (I too thought she was going to be absent for a couple of months), and Randall walking away from his job, where I thought he was supposed to be a partner or something?  At this point, do the show producers think that we won't notice these small but important details because we're all too busy blowing our noses?

Edited March 8, 2017 by laurakaye

[Katy M]

34 minutes ago, laurakaye said:

I haven't seen the latest episode yet, but I did see a blurb on NBC saying that these next two episodes were going to "destroy America."

Really, This is Us?! 

I feel like I might have been able to get more into this show (rather than hate-watch as I'm doing now) if the show didn't tell me, in big bold letters, how I am supposed to feel every week.  Can I not take the parts I relate to and feel my own feelings?  Am I doing it wrong if I don't go through the entire box of tissue and have to resort to using my sleeves to wipe the almighty tears?  The hyperbole is getting rather ridiculous.

Reading through the latest episode thread, I see that several people are bothered by the more detailed aspects of the show...like the example of Rebecca's tour only being two weeks (I too thought she was going to be absent for a couple of months), and Randall walking away from his job, where I thought he was supposed to be a partner or something?  At this point, do the show producers think that we won't notice these small but important details because we're all too busy blowing our noses?

I didn't see that blurb, but that seems ridiculous.  Why would they say it would "destroy"America? Wouldn't that be a bad thing?

I have a bigger problem with Rebecca's tour only being twoweeks than I do with RAndall walking out on his job.  That happens every day when people get burnt out and/or realize the company doesn't care about them.  I imagine they have savings that will tide them over until he finds something else.  I also have a problem with him saying that he works 20 hour days.  I guess once in a while, but he made it sound like aregular thing.  So, let's see, he has at least an hour travel time, he jogs every morning, one would hope showers after, so does he only sleep 2 hours a night?  Plus, the very first time we see him, he is as his kids' soccer games.  And he went to a play and a chess match, and it seems that this is stuff that he does regularly.  His wife and kids know who he is by sight and everything.  I call BS on 20 hour days.

[talktoomuch]

Ignoring all the weeping and gnashing of teeth by the show runners, actors, media, and fans is the main reason I still love this show. When it does get too precious, I just assume it's for Those Viewers and glom on to the things I love.

[Lady Calypso]

47 minutes ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

Jack said he was about to parent alone for a month last ep, I think.  

It was actually two months. I remember them stating it would be for two months, which is why people got so upset last episode. Now, it's apparently two weeks. Two weeks is absolutely nothing. Two weeks is more than manageable and I think if they stated that first earlier, then there'd be a lot less upset. But then again, they decide that now Jack is going to not want Rebecca on the tour because of an ex boyfriend. If he's not comfortable enough in his marriage and if he can't trust Rebecca to not cheat with her ex boyfriend, then I think they have way more problems. I mean, he didn't want her going out on tour before he found out about Rebecca and Ben, but he seemed to kick his overreaction into overdrive once he found out. None of this is Rebecca's fault; this is all on Jack and his insecurities, even after being with Rebecca for 20 years. It's not like they've been together for two years or five years. It's well around 20 years. Come on, man! Try to trust your wife here! 

[Aloeonatable]

I guess my UO is that I don't take things literally when it comes to things like Randall saying he works 20 hour days. Obviously he is not at the office for that many hours, nor is he working at a desk at home, but mentally he might be "at his job," for more than the average work day. I know my husband, who was in sales for an international company, would often come home from the office and work at his computer until 10:00 at night. This happened because he was on the road (in his car and/or out of town) and had to do his paperwork later. 

I also don't find it odd that Jack would not be happy with Rebecca going on tour for 2 weeks or 2 months. The time is not the issue, IMO. 

[potatoradio]

On "destroying America." Erm...we don't need any more help with that, thanks. Just write and act a decent drama that isn't straight out of a The More You Know commercial and I'll hand sew every one of you patriots your very own flag, k?

Quote

Okay, so I loved this show at first, then started to be really annoyed by it, so I decided to skip a number of episodes (but kept up with these boards) and tune back in at the end of the season to see what I thought about where they are heading. 

I guess my first reaction is: are you fucking kidding me that Rebecca's tour is only for two weeks...TWO WEEKS...she's been seen as a bad mom who is selfish and awful and doesn't appreciate what she has with St. Jack by deciding to go on this whirlwind tour??!!  Did I miss something in the episodes I skipped? The way some reaction I've seen implied she was leaving for months and it was Exhibit GG of her being awful. Intentionally or not, they've made her a character folks hate on, and I don't see most changing their minds  and that frustrates me.  She didn't have to be 'bad' to make Jack look 'good', but here we are again with another show  and the same dynamics.

As for Randall, good for him for quitting if it wasn't working for him anymore. But as to him feeling aggrieved and hurt...."that's what the money is for".  I get that he was unhappy and changed his mind about his priorities, but he was making a ton of money (enough to speak of really early reirement plans with Beth (and be mad at her when she thought she was pregnant and screwing that up)). No one made him not take a vacation for three years, he chose that. He's not fighting some great injustice, he's just deciding that he's not willing to sacrifice his personal life to that extent anymore for the massive paycheck he was getting. I'm not feeling the Norma Rae "Union Now" moment I think they want me to feel.

i promised myself I'd watch the finale and the first episode next season, but I don't see a lot of hope for me turning around on my annoyance with this show (despite my enjoyment of this thread). 

Dear @pennben Post: Will you marry me? I promise, it'll be a fantastic cliched marriage from the 1980s. We're the only people in the history of humankind who get  irredeemably bitter when, turns out, marriage is kinda hard when treated like a nonstop contest for Queen for a Day martyrdom. We won't get therapy or anything, like a lot of folks did in the 80s, because we don't want to be TOO cliched. No warm fuzzies or healing the toxic shame for us. Nope. One of us will drink. One of us will sulk. One of us will DIE and THAT'LL show the other one, damn it. Don't worry - the death will be pretty and probably have a bird flying around or a pretty light and you can die in peace knowing you've given everyone one final cry and guilt trip.

This is one mawkish and terrible mashup of thirtysomething and parenthood and I'm about one more confused, consternated look from poor old kate before I can't even muster enough interest to hatewatch. 

[Crs97]

Quote

As for Randall, good for him for quitting if it wasn't working for him anymore. But as to him feeling aggrieved and hurt...."that's what the money is for".  I get that he was unhappy and changed his mind about his priorities, but he was making a ton of money (enough to speak of really early reirement plans with Beth (and be mad at her when she thought she was pregnant and screwing that up)). No one made him not take a vacation for three years, he chose that. He's not fighting some great injustice, he's just deciding that he's not willing to sacrifice his personal life to that extent anymore for the massive paycheck he was getting.

THIS!  Thank you!  It is not the company's responsibility to force work-life balance on you.  If you didn't like the hours, you should have quit sooner.  It was too bad they didn't remember you are allergic to pears, but they acknowledged your loss.  Have others gotten more personalized bereavement gifts?  Do you know all your employees' personal histories?  And why single out Sanjay when the last time we saw him he was trying to help you during your mental breakdown?  Misplaced self-righteousness seems to be a Pearson family trait.

[ShadowFacts]

23 minutes ago, Crs97 said:

 And why single out Sanjay when the last time we saw him he was trying to help you during your mental breakdown?  Misplaced self-righteousness seems to be a Pearson family trait.

It hit me a different way.  I thought he was saying, without saying, you're top dog now, Sanjay, good luck with that and all that comes with it.  I didn't see the self-righteous.  But it was definitely open to your interpretation.  

[luna1122]

Ugh, apparently now the mawkish mailman scene is twitter-inspiring people to seek out and force hugs on their mailmen. I'm all for random connections and kindness but I just keep visualizing all these poor postal workers trying to duck forcible embraces from This is Us zealots. It's like the Oprah book club pod people, reading a book only cuz it's Oprah endorsed. 'Hug the mail man! This is Us says we should!'  

I'm a bitch. 

[laurakaye]

LOLOLZ, just peeked at Twitter...people are saying not to be alarmed if their mail is late, it's just because legions of This is Us fans are stopping all the mailmen in their tracks to talk to them and hug them.  

If you're a bitch, @luna1122, then so am I.  I find this both hysterically funny and completely pathetic.  I'm also 99.9% positive that my next-door neighbor is baking cookies for our mailman as I type this.

[OtterMommy]

5 minutes ago, laurakaye said:

LOLOLZ, just peeked at Twitter...people are saying not to be alarmed if their mail is late, it's just because legions of This is Us fans are stopping all the mailmen in their tracks to talk to them and hug them.  

If you're a bitch, @luna1122, then so am I.  I find this both hysterically funny and completely pathetic.  I'm also 99.9% positive that my next-door neighbor is baking cookies for our mailman as I type this.

I just don't get this...the whole mailman thing.  Honestly, when that scene happened, I thought it was touching and completely unrealistic.  Our mail deliverers (who, half the time, are women) are always so busy and on such a deadline to finish their route by 5pm or whatever time that they don't talk to anyone.  

So, you all, please don't stop these very busy people who are trying to finish their jobs so they can go home to their families and inflict hugs on them because a TV show had to remind you to be nice to people whose job it is to do things for you.

(Man, I sound like a bitch there....)

[Katy M]

24 minutes ago, OtterMommy said:

I just don't get this...the whole mailman thing.  Honestly, when that scene happened, I thought it was touching and completely unrealistic.  Our mail deliverers (who, half the time, are women) are always so busy and on such a deadline to finish their route by 5pm or whatever time that they don't talk to anyone.  

So, you all, please don't stop these very busy people who are trying to finish their jobs so they can go home to their families and inflict hugs on them because a TV show had to remind you to be nice to people whose job it is to do things for you.

(Man, I sound like a bitch there....)

I know, I don't understand either.  If I pass a mail carrier (and I often do as I'm on a walk route and I also walk to work), I'll smile and say hi.  But, I do that for everybody.  I don't stop complete strangers on the street and have long conversations with them.  Maybe I'm missing out on some opportunity, but it just feels weird.

[laurakaye]

10 minutes ago, Katy M said:

I know, I don't understand either.  If I pass a mail carrier (and I often do as I'm on a walk route and I also walk to work), I'll smile and say hi.  But, I do that for everybody.  I don't stop complete strangers on the street and have long conversations with them.  Maybe I'm missing out on some opportunity, but it just feels weird.

I sense that a lot of mail carriers are not only going to get randomly hugged by strangers today, they are also going to be subjected to long-winded, emotionally wrought soliloquies, heavily laden with every heart-tugging cliche known to mankind.

Edited March 8, 2017 by laurakaye

[pennben]

30 minutes ago, OtterMommy said:

I just don't get this...the whole mailman thing.  Honestly, when that scene happened, I thought it was touching and completely unrealistic.  Our mail deliverers (who, half the time, are women) are always so busy and on such a deadline to finish their route by 5pm or whatever time that they don't talk to anyone.  

So, you all, please don't stop these very busy people who are trying to finish their jobs so they can go home to their families and inflict hugs on them because a TV show had to remind you to be nice to people whose job it is to do things for you.

(Man, I sound like a bitch there....)

If I were a mailperson and folks along my route randomly decided they needed to hug me because of a tv show, I would remind them that "going postal" is a well-known saying and move along to the next house. 

[ShadowFacts]

1 hour ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

There was a comment in the media, probably the long Parade article, that seemed to suggest the creators (or the writer, maybe?) think the show is a hit partly because America just really needs a good hard cry.  I might argue that this show's success and other odd events of 2016 are more a sign of how many Americans are very susceptible to media manipulation.

I think both points can be true.  It was Fogelman who said there is a lot of pent-up emotion in the country, and there is, but a lot of it isn't so pent-up.  There are probably also pretty high levels of failure of independent thinking, which can lead to manipulation.  I'd rather see people manipulated by family drama than other ugly agendas, I suppose, but really none of it bodes that well.

[Katy M]

19 minutes ago, laurakaye said:

I sense that a lot of mail carriers are not only going to get randomly hugged by strangers today, they are also going to be subjected to long-winded, emotionally wrought soliloquies, heavily laden with every heart-tugging cliche known to mankind.

speaking of getting random hugs, I hate being touched by strangers. I mean a handshake or something is OK, but not a hug.  And that really isn't a requirement of being a postal worker.  It's practically assault as far as I'm concerned.  No, I wouldn't call the cops on a stranger who hugged me.  But, not everyone likes hugs from strangers. 

[Aloeonatable]

Quote

There was a comment in the media, probably the long Parade article, that seemed to suggest the creators (or the writer, maybe?) think the show is a hit partly because America just really needs a good hard cry.  I might argue that this show's success and other odd events of 2016 are more a sign of how many Americans are very susceptible to media manipulation.

I think we all process things differently and to say that those who respond with strong emotions to this show are being manipulated is unfair. Most of the posts I read on social media, seem genuine. It cannot be denied that this show has touched a lot of people. I can't see a problem with expressing emotions, whether laughing or crying. 

As far as the marketing goes, whatever gets viewers to watch is going to be promoted. Take it with a grain of salt or an eye roll, whatever works for you.

[ClareWalks]

16 minutes ago, Aloeonatable said:

I think we all process things differently and to say that those who respond with strong emotions to this show are being manipulated is unfair. Most of the posts I read on social media, seem genuine. It cannot be denied that this show has touched a lot of people. I can't see a problem with expressing emotions, whether laughing or crying. 

"Unpopular Opinions Thread." Just sayin' ;)

I agree that the overwrought hand-wringing is a bit extreme. Yes, this show makes me cry sometimes, but I do feel ridiculous for it afterward. And sometimes during. I can't stop being aware that this is just a television show LOL.

[Aloeonatable]

Quote

Is it really unfair to say it in the unpopular opinions thread?

I think respectfully questioning someone's UO is allowed in this thread, if I'm not mistaken. We aren't all going to agree about everything in this thread, and as long as we are respectful, I don't see anything wrong with questioning someone's opinion. 

[talktoomuch]

2 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

With social media, I guess since it's all just print words without verbal emphasis or body language people have to use vocabulary to stress the depth and importance of their feelings.  

I suppose you're right. Would be nice if that "vocabulary" were expanded beyond hyperbole, word misuse, and extreme quotation though. 

[SlackerInc]

@pennben I am positive two weeks is a retcon (or more generously, a compromise made offscreen?) and that they previously said it would be a month.

BTW, if you tuned back in starting this week, you missed what is nearly universally regarded as the best episode of the series, the one right before this one titled "Memphis".

[NutMeg]

2 hours ago, SlackerInc said:

@pennben I am positive two weeks is a retcon (or more generously, a compromise made offscreen?) and that they previously said it would be a month.

BTW, if you tuned back in starting this week, you missed what is nearly universally regarded as the best episode of the series, the one right before this one titled "Memphis".

I don't even think we had a previous indication of how long the tour would be, but only got the number of cities. Then again, I may be remembering wrong, after all I ended up spending more time on the threads here where speculation was running rampant than I did watching the episode itself.

@Slackerinc, thanks for opening up the way you did here, I'm sure your story wasn't easy to tell/write, and I trust it felt good to have done so. And if there were any more tears while writing it I hope they were cathartic. I find this show's hidden strength is not what it shows or says but rather how it seems to unlock old and even forgotten emotions or otherwise resonate deeply with a good chunk of viewers, in a way that goes beyond the story as such. I find it quite therapeutic, actually :)

And no, not gonna hug the mailman or anything like that! I'm glad I don't follow the show runners, main actors etc. on social media. For me, that would be a way to ruin the experience. Then again, I'm also the person who goes into a museum or an exhibition without wanting any guide and just looking to experience the emotional impact the artwork will have (or not) on me. Some dear friends of mine would never dream of not having done their research or having interesting info at their disposal as they go. Different sensibilities and preferences, I guess. 

Also, while tears or no tears seems to be a big part of viewers' experience, it's often more interesting to me to know the reasons why there are or aren't tears. Maybe we should create new threads: tears or no tears, will you be brave enough to share why: The Couch and The Snark :) I'm joking, obviously, because it's already being done in the various threads, but these could still be active long after the show has ended.        

[bichonblitz]

Oh, Mandy Moore, shut up. The reveal of Jack's death isn't going to destroy anything. Get over yourself. 

Edited March 9, 2017 by bichonblitz

[Crs97]

Meh, Mandy isn't the only one.  Justin called the season finale a "dangerous episode" and reminded the viewers to "just breathe" while watching it.  And yet I still haven't shed a tear.

[HeyThere83]

1 hour ago, Crs97 said:

 Justin called the season finale a "dangerous episode" and reminded the viewers to "just breathe" while watching it.  

Oh for cryin out loud.....

Ugh, I just said cryin

[Aloeonatable]

Quote

 I see "that's not fair..." and the suggestion to roll my eyes and presumably shut up.

I'm sorry that you've misinterpreted my post. In no way would I imply that someone "shut up." In fact, if one finds the marketing over the top, an eye roll is more than appropriate. 

[Court]

I swear they said 2 months or 5 weeks. 

[mojito]

Quote

I just don't get this...the whole mailman thing.  Honestly, when that scene happened, I thought it was touching and completely unrealistic.  Our mail deliverers (who, half the time, are women) are always so busy and on such a deadline to finish their route by 5pm or whatever time that they don't talk to anyone.  

So, you all, please don't stop these very busy people who are trying to finish their jobs so they can go home to their families and inflict hugs on them because a TV show had to remind you to be nice to people whose job it is to do things for you.

William and the mailman met on William's morning walks. A minute or two a day for several days a week for a few months adds up. It doesn't take much to build a rapport with someone. My now-retired mailman greets me with a hug when I run into him. I don't even know his last name. But all that depends on the personalities of the two people. Some people are more distant and impersonal.

My UO is that people don't see the possibility of situations and interactions beyond their experiences. 

[Court]

I thought community boxes were only at apartments or townhomes. I don't really know my mailman. But I do know the trashmen well. I stay at home and the kids get so excited when they come by. They wave,honk, and have even let them throw the trash in the back. The kids take them bottled water when it's hot. While this is unusual for some places, it's not  my town. 

Here's something sort of similar. My parent's cat is an inside/outside cat. The neighbors know him. They know his name. He really is the sweetest friendliest cat. Well, he got in a fight with some animal a couple of weeks ago so he hasn't gone outside. I was there last weekend and a neighbor stopped me and asked if Henry was ok and her kids thought he passed away. She was overjoyed when I explained what happened. 

[izabella]

5 minutes ago, mojito said:

William and the mailman met on William's morning walks. A minute or two a day for several days a week for a few months adds up. It doesn't take much to build a rapport with someone. My now-retired mailman greets me with a hug when I run into him. I don't even know his last name. But all that depends on the personalities of the two people. Some people are more distant and impersonal.

My UO is that people don't see the possibility of situations and interactions beyond their experiences. 

Oh, man, I still remember Jim from the gas station that my dad always went to after grocery shopping on Saturdays.  Like clockwork, we'd load up at the grocery store, swing by the gas station, and there Jim would be (back in the day when full service gas stations were all there was!).  Jim knew what kind of fill-up dad wanted, and he'd swing into action as soon as he saw the car, filling the tank and washing the windows, chatting with us and waving to me in the back seat as he washed.  Tips weren't really a thing, but my dad always gave him some extra bucks at Christmas time just because Jim was so awesome.

It makes perfect sense to me that William would have gotten to know the mailman, and I thought that was a really nice touch in this episode. 

[luna1122]

I don't think most people are questioning that you can be friendly and have rapport with the mail person, the barista, the sales clerk, the whoever-you-encounter-on-a-daily-basis-person-whose-name-you-might-not-actually-know, or that they might ask after you if you're sick, or be sad about it, or vice versa. That's not what most of us who objected to the scene with the mail guy actually objected to, it was (what some of us saw as) the overwrought cheesiness of the scene. Even some of those of us not moved by it might actually talk to service folks or neighbors or random strangers. Or not.

[Lady Calypso]

18 minutes ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

William was in their lives for two months?  And Beth, who told him just weeks ago that he was overstaying his welcome, is that wrecked over his death and mad at him over it, when they all knew from the start it was impending?

Well, William was part of their lives since August 31st, so it's more like six months or so. That's still a good amount of time to get to know someone and get close to them. I think it's the fact that Beth never got to say a proper goodbye to him and she didn't know that she wasn't going to. I remember when my aunt was in hospice for the last week of her life. My sister almost didn't show up that weekend to visit because she not only doesn't do well with goodbyes and death, but she thought that she might have more time. Luckily, my parents convinced her to visit, and it was a good thing because my aunt died two days later. 

I'm ok with them making these characters somewhat unlikable. I can't help but compare this show to Parenthood, where the characters were all mostly unlikable but they were made to be right about everything 100% of the time and they were supposed to be great people. I can count on one hand the number of characters I liked on that show. At least with this one, we're supposed to see some of their actions as unlikable (I think). Jack's not supposed to be shown as right when he's passive aggressively treating his wife like a cheater. I do think we're supposed to see Kevin as self absorbed and making huge speeches when he shouldn't be. 

But I totally empathize with your feelings, because TV family dramas do manipulate feelings. If it were a better written show, then I think there'd be different feelings but this is a show part of a major network. Its initial premise is all about stirring up feelings, and unfortunately, manipulation comes with the territory. Plus, with the short amount of time that they have to tell everyone's stories in an ensemble, we're often left with missing information which really does suck. I would love more moments of Kevin interacting with his parents, or Kate interacting with Randall, or William with Beth, but those are mostly lost moments. We might not see many flashbacks with William/Beth, if any. And we'll see in season 2 if the show will continue to center around Randall and Rebecca or they'll shift the screen time to Kevin and Kate. 

[Katy M]

13 minutes ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

Yeah.  I just want to be shown not told sometimes.  Like what we've been shown about Randall's job before this was mostly that it's cushy and flexible and he was very proud of it.  

I personally wouldn't hire someone stupid enough to eat a fruit they're deathly allergic to on a job interview.  I thought that whole pears thing was hokey.

And didn't Kevin move to NY just to try his hand at theater in general?  He monologued to the critic that he moved there for THIS PLAY because THIS PLAY was so important to him.  Then a couple scenes later he's revealing to Sophie that he actually conveniently just realized he moved there for her.  It's like they just revise history to serve up the most dramatic lines of each scene.  

Maybe none of the Pearsons like pears and it was the first time he had one and thus didn't know he was allergic.  But, he stated it was in a salad and maybe he didn't think there would be pears in a salad so he didn't ask.  Or, he did ask and was told no.  That happens sometimes.

Yes, Kevin moved to NY for theater in general.  I don't really consider it a problem for him to embellish to a critic that he moved there specifically for that play because it's so great. 

Also, yes, it might be hokey, but it's not technically revising history to have Kevin say that now that he's here, he feels like the true purpose of moving back to NY is for her.

I just had to go back to make sure I spelled Pearson right.  His name is Pear-son and he's allergic to pears.   That's funny. Or, I'm just easily amused.  Most likely the latter.

Edit: Now I'm wondering if that's why they sent him pears.  Or maybe it was some weird communication screw up.  Bad handwriting.  "What does this say?" "Not sure.  Something about pears?  Maybe they're ordering a box of pears.  Let's just send them."

Edited March 9, 2017 by Katy M

[Guest]

Yeah, we can jump through hoops like assume a grown man had never eaten a pear, but I prefer stories that don't require so much heavy jumping.  : )