Unpopular Opinions Thread

[chocolatine]

I thought Sanjay was initially played as the typical Wall Street guy who tries to one-up everyone (and it was a two-way street since Randall was an equal participant in the one-upmanship), but that once he recognized that Randall was close to cracking, he tried to help him. Sanjay is probably the kind of guy who likes healthy competition, "to be the best you have to beat the best" sort of mentality, but wouldn't kick a man while he's down.

I agree the boss should have intervened privately and much sooner. But he doesn't strike me as someone who has "people skills".

[Crs97]

He did tell Randall that Randall was still his number one guy when he split their accounts.  Maybe we weren't supposed to believe him, but it did seem like they were trying.

[laurakaye]

On 3/9/2017 at 3:07 PM, Aloeonatable said:

Question: I've seen some posters on this thread also speak of "hate-watching" this show. Why would anyone waste their time watching a show they dislike? Just curious, not passing judgement. 

*sheepishly raises hand*

I have mentioned that I "hate-watch" This is Us.  For the first 3 or 4 episodes or so, I was honestly waiting for this show to grab me and shake me to my core as it seems to do for so many friends and people that I follow on social media.  But after awhile, it kind of got to the point where I could guess exactly what was going to happen next based on the swelling music, or sensing that another heavy-handed plot point was on the horizon.  I don't recall ever having hate-watched anything that wasn't reality-based (I also gleefully hate-watch The Bachelor).  Normally if a drama doesn't grab me in the first couple of episodes, I give up and move on.  But I find it interesting to compare and contrast my own feelings about this show with my friends who need to buy stock in Kleenex before each episode, and feel compelled to post their "ugly-cry" stories on Facebook the next morning.  I understand that many people relate to a character, or a plot, or something.  I do, too.  I compared this show to the book "The Fault in Our Stars" in terms of wanting to know what happens to the characters, but then feeling incredibly manipulated because of the sledgehammer approach to letting storylines play out.  This show is missing the subtlety factor, IMO.  It bothers me, yet I continue to watch for...I don't know, my own smug satisfaction that I'm above all the mass-marketing hysteria?  I have ticked off more than one person with my honest opinion about this show, which has never happened to me before.  There seems to be a group mentality that if you don't adore this show, then you must not have a soul.  This is really interesting to me, so I keep watching.  It's more of an experiment for me at this point, if that makes sense.

 

On 3/9/2017 at 9:41 PM, kieyra said:

Briefly, for those of us who are able to see the calculated/manipulative nature of this show, anyone feel like shouting out current shows that *don't* make you feel that way? I don't want the thread to go off topic, but it's clear there are a number of us having the same side-eye reaction and I'm wondering what we all consider a contrasting show. 

Right now I'm obsessed with Happy Valley, a Netflix import that really earns its emotional gut-punches. It's like Broadchurch meets Fargo meets Trainspotting.

The best contrast I can think of, because I just finished it on Netflix, is "Stranger Things."  And for me, the huge glaring difference was that a character on ST could gut me with just a facial expression.  Even though ST is basically a re-hash of so many 1980's movies, and I guessed what would happen by the season's end, it still sucked me in because the actors were fantastic and multi-dimensional.  On This is Us, I have yet to really see any dimension to the characters other than what the show has labeled them as...Kevin is the flighty one, Randall is the driven one, Beth is the sassy one, Jack is the Saint, etc.

 

On 3/9/2017 at 10:22 PM, pennben said:

To me 'This Is Us' is the slideshow from that episode, I see the manipulation, even though I may fall for it like the folks in that room.  Mad Men is much better at hiding the strings, in my opinion, because it told its story over the season and damn, by the end of the season I'm stunned that I'm holding my breath hoping the drunk, cheating, identity-stealing ass makes it home before his family left, only to be crushed like him when he was too late.

Also, the show never told me what was coming or how I was supposed to feel in any advertising....it essentially told us nothing in the ads for it and just let each episode speak for itself and build towards the story the show was telling each season.

Anyway, that's my example.  I hope it makes sense. 

++++++1 to all of this, but especially the bolded parts.

Edited March 12, 2017 by laurakaye

[Neurochick]

20 hours ago, bitchin camaro said:

I guess my unpopular opinion is that it's fine to quit your job if you can afford to, and if you've made bank like Randall apparently has, surely you'd have enough savings to do for a while. I don't think having a job is the be-all-end-all and if I could spend one year (much less ten) making Randall-money, I'd bank it, and do whatever the heck I feel like doing for a while. 

True, but there is the health insurance.

A show that moves me, strangely enough, is Baskets on FX.

Edited March 12, 2017 by Neurochick

[kieyra]

@laurakaye, I know what you mean by experiment. Sometimes I can be more interested in what's going on behind the scenes and in the fandom of a show than the show itself, and this is an example. I don't even watch it anymore--I tried a few after the Christmas episode, but unfortunately that was the episode when I realized these were definitely never going to be real characters, just vehicles for WTF moments, and thus I stopped caring what happens to them. Really, only Randall and Beth were "real" to me for a bit, but after some deconstruction of those characters in this thread, even that stopped being true.

The last time I continued following a show that I wasn't actually watching (similar to hate-watching but takes less time?) was Sleepy Hollow, a show that went down in flames spectacularly as the showrunners kept trying to bury--literally and figuratively--their black female lead. (They succeeded in the end. The whole thing was a dumpster fire and I couldn't look away, or at least couldn't stop reading the forums.)

Edited March 12, 2017 by kieyra

[Crs97]

Show I hate watch?  Suits

Why do I watch it?  Husband enjoys it and we don't have a lot of time for the two of us just to hang out and veg.  I watch so that we can be together and he thinks it is hilarious when I make him pause so that I can rant for a few minutes.  I might as well find out what happens to these characters who ARE TOO STUPID TO LIVE!

[jhlipton]

On 3/7/2017 at 10:02 PM, SimoneS said:

Go, Randall! I loved how he told off his shitty boss and crappy co-workers. The peace out was hilarious.

He didn't say it, but I was hoping he was thinking, "Oh, and BTW, I'm taking my clients back, too."

[chocolatine]

9 minutes ago, jhlipton said:

He didn't say it, but I was hoping he was thinking, "Oh, and BTW, I'm taking my clients back, too."

He didn't say that because he has a noncompete clause, and should he so much as try, he would be sued into oblivion. At least that's how it works in real life.

Edited March 12, 2017 by chocolatine

[SlackerInc]

6 hours ago, chocolatine said:

I thought Sanjay was initially played as the typical Wall Street guy who tries to one-up everyone (and it was a two-way street since Randall was an equal participant in the one-upmanship), but that once he recognized that Randall was close to cracking, he tried to help him. Sanjay is probably the kind of guy who likes healthy competition, "to be the best you have to beat the best" sort of mentality, but wouldn't kick a man while he's down.

I agree the boss should have intervened privately and much sooner. But he doesn't strike me as someone who has "people skills".

I think these are very salient observations.  But let's give due credit to the show and acknowledge that this is a description of subtle and nuanced characterization, not the "sledgehammer" variety.

4 hours ago, laurakaye said:

This show is missing the subtlety factor, IMO.  It bothers me, yet I continue to watch for...I don't know, my own smug satisfaction that I'm above all the mass-marketing hysteria?  I have ticked off more than one person with my honest opinion about this show, which has never happened to me before.  There seems to be a group mentality that if you don't adore this show, then you must not have a soul.

I would respectfully suggest that what may have ticked people off about your honest opinion is not about groupthink, not about whether you adore the show or whether you have a heart, but that "smug satisfaction" you mentioned.  No one with any perspicacity can hear "missing the subtlety factor", "mass marketed hysteria", etc., without making the obvious inference that you see the show's ardent fans as rubes who are easily conned by slick marketing that you yourself are too smart and sophisticated to fall for.  You have every right to feel that way, but just own it and don't be surprised that your message isn't well received by the viewers for whom it expresses barely implicit contempt.

Edited March 12, 2017 by SlackerInc
Typo

[pennben]

Quote

You have every right to feel that way, but just own it and don't be surprised that your message isn't well received by the viewers for whom it expresses barely implicit contempt.

Given that she's in the 'unpopular opinions' thread, I thinks she's got it covered.  I guess that I, too, am a bit fascinated by how aggressively some folks like this show. 

But for the folks that love it, I sincerely hope they have many years with a show they like.  I do mean that. I  get that not everything is for everyone and understand why folks might side-eye me for some of my preferences.  Doesn't mean I'm gonna stop side-eyeing some of theirs.  Online or in person!

One thing I always hate, no matter what I feel about a show, is folks saying 'is this show still on" or 'I hate this show, it should be cancelled".  Just change the channel or stick to the unpopular opinions thread!

Edited March 12, 2017 by pennben

[bunnywithanaxe]

10 hours ago, Crs97 said:

He did tell Randall that Randall was still his number one guy when he split their accounts.  Maybe we weren't supposed to believe him, but it did seem like they were trying.

Oh, I agree the boss was a clodhopping boob, and that they should have not hinted at concern but expressed it, but I think they were trying to save Russell from burnout. Agreed, in other words.

[MsJamieDornan]

7 hours ago, chocolatine said:

He didn't say that because he has a noncompete clause

How do you know that ?

[biakbiak]

13 minutes ago, MsJamieDornan said:

How do you know that ?

Because it I'd so standard that if they didn't have one it would be inconceivable.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, biakbiak said:

Because it I'd so standard that if they didn't have one it would be inconceivable.

It's standard for employers to ask employees to sign it but not all employees sign them.  Then the employer has a decision to make.  In my experience, someone as essential as Randall and a partner, they wouldn't fire him (without a non-compete) for not signing a non-compete.  

And as a founding partner he'd have had input on the partnership contract and it could be anything.  If they write it that he can poach clients, I think that'd be no more unrealistic than any other aspect of how his job's been presented, personally.  

7 hours ago, pennben said:

Given that she's in the 'unpopular opinions' thread, I thinks she's got it covered.  I guess that I, too, am a bit fascinated by how aggressively some folks like this show. 

But for the folks that love it, I sincerely hope they have many years with a show they like.  I do mean that. I  get that not everything is for everyone and understand why folks might side-eye me for some of my preferences.  Doesn't mean I'm gonna stop side-eyeing some of theirs.  Online or in person!

One thing I always hate, no matter what I feel about a show, is folks saying 'is this show still on" or 'I hate this show, it should be cancelled".  Just change the channel or stick to the unpopular opinions thread!

I know!  I haven't seen that in a while, but yeah, that's a weird one.  Its very existence is offensive to someone.  

[laurakaye]

9 hours ago, pennben said:

But for the folks that love it, I sincerely hope they have many years with a show they like.  I do mean that. I  get that not everything is for everyone and understand why folks might side-eye me for some of my preferences.  Doesn't mean I'm gonna stop side-eyeing some of theirs.  Online or in person!

One thing I always hate, no matter what I feel about a show, is folks saying 'is this show still on" or 'I hate this show, it should be cancelled".  Just change the channel or stick to the unpopular opinions thread!

Great post.  I would never outright say that I think the show should be off the air.  Obviously it fills a need for many, many people, and that's a good thing.  I have been eye-rolled many times when I geek out over another season of Survivor, but it won't stop me from watching.  Opinions vary, that's what makes us unique.  What surprises me is the vehemence of the reactions to loving this show.  You kind of have to be all-in or you're not feeling the feels correctly.

[talktoomuch]

23 minutes ago, laurakaye said:

What surprises me is the vehemence of the reactions to loving this show.  You kind of have to be all-in or you're not feeling the feels correctly.

To be fair that sentiment is much more prevalent in social media than in these forums. It seems that we in UO tend towards derision of the show (and sometimes by extension its "feelers") much more than they do conversely. 

[SlackerInc]

6 hours ago, talktoomuch said:

To be fair that sentiment is much more prevalent in social media than in these forums. It seems that we in UO tend towards derision of the show (and sometimes by extension its "feelers") much more than they do conversely. 

Interesting.  I haven't seen anything on social media about this show, so I only have the reactions on threads here to go by.

[xtwheeler]

On 2/22/2017 at 9:08 PM, kieyra said:

Yikes. I didn't even watch the episode (I'm at the point now where I just read the threads). That sounds super cornball. 

The show feels more like a finely-tuned product than a piece of art. Can't hold it against them; it's obviously working for them, and they seem to have figured out what soap opera America wants to watch Right Now. 

I have found my people!

I am currently living through having just admitted my dad to hospice care, and have just heard from my mom a few minutes ago that my dad has so far been unresponsive today. If at THIS point in my life TIU cannot move me to tears with not one but two stories about fathers dying then the TV show is doing something wrong. That "something" is "beating me over the head with a sledgehammer" rather than exploring genuine emotion, I think.

And for good measure, Kate makes me bananas. I cannot stand her. She is constantly, consistently, unrelentingly unpleasant. She is selfish and self-centered and just a total wet blanket. 

I feel so much better.

[methodwriter85]

I dealt with having my mother's elderly boyfriend set up a hospice in our actual house while he was dying of cancer (and it was quick- we're talking less than three weeks between his diagnosis and death) because he didn't want to be in a hospital. On the last weekend he was alive, the stress of the situation led to an all-out fight between me and my mom where I punched the wall in front of the hospice worker. (I have a lovely untreated boxer's fracture to remind me of that moment.) The next day, he was finally taken to the hospital where he died because it just was beyond the both of us to care for him.

And yep, dry as a bone. And rolling my eyes at William seeing his mother once again young in heaven.

Less really is more. I wish the show would get that, but then again, shows that did take that approach didn't usually make it to syndication.

Edited March 13, 2017 by methodwriter85

[ItCouldBeWorse]

On 3/12/2017 at 10:35 AM, Winston9-DT3 said:

On 3/12/2017 at 3:15 AM, pennben said:

One thing I always hate, no matter what I feel about a show, is folks saying 'is this show still on" or 'I hate this show, it should be cancelled".  Just change the channel or stick to the unpopular opinions thread!

I know!  I haven't seen that in a while, but yeah, that's a weird one.  Its very existence is offensive to someone.  

It's all over the Suits board. I agree that that show has gotten ridiculous, but no one is forced to keep watching it. I think some people have an obsessive need to finish what they started so they hope for cancellation to rescue them.

On the other hand, I don't understand people who have to tell you how many more episodes they are going to watch until they are "out ," or how many hours they've wasted watching or how much free time they now plan to have as a result. No one is going to beg you to stay. Just stop watching if you don't enjoy it. And for heaven's sake, if you do stop watching, stop posting about the show based upon what you've read in the posts of people who are still watching!  Embrace your newly free time!

Edited March 13, 2017 by ItCouldBeWorse

[SlackerInc]

9 hours ago, xtwheeler said:

And for good measure, Kate makes me bananas. I cannot stand her. She is constantly, consistently, unrelentingly unpleasant. She is selfish and self-centered and just a total wet blanket. 

I'm not sure that this is actually an unpopular opinion, but I certainly agree with you.

[kieyra]

I think a lot of us started from a place of wanting to like Kate, partially due to the lack of representation of morbid obesity on this kind of nighttime soap ... or at least wanting to root for her. They didn't make it easy.

[pennben]

23 hours ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

On the other hand, I don't understand people who have to tell you how many more episodes they are going to watch until they are "out ," or how many hours they've wasted watching or how much free time they now plan to have as a result. No one is going to beg you to stay. Just stop watching if you don't enjoy it. And for heaven's sake, if you do stop watching, stop posting about the show based upon what you've read in the posts of people who are still watching!  Embrace your newly free time!

Whoops! I'm guilty of talking about giving up if the show doesn't turn around soon.  I promise to leave like a mouse if I do! It will be as if I was never here:) 

Edited March 14, 2017 by pennben

[Aloeonatable]

On 3/12/2017 at 11:24 PM, ItCouldBeWorse said:

On the other hand, I don't understand people who have to tell you how many more episodes they are going to watch until they are "out ," or how many hours they've wasted watching or how much free time they now plan to have as a result. No one is going to beg you to stay. Just stop watching if you don't enjoy it. And for heaven's sake, if you do stop watching, stop posting about the show based upon what you've read in the posts of people who are still watching!  Embrace your newly free time!

Excellent post. I often find myself losing interest in a show I used to obsess about. I still sometimes go to their boards to read about the show, but I never post a comment.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, pennben said:

Whoops! I'm guilty of talking about giving up if the show doesn't turn around soon.  I promise to leave like a mouse if I do! It will be as if I was never here:) 

Post what you want to post and if you want to go out with a post announcing it, go out with a bang, if you want!  You can't please everyone.  For everyone who hates one type of post there is probably as many people who appreciate those posts.  

[Phoebe70]

My unpopular opinion....I don't like Beth.  As in, I can't stand her.  Never have liked her.  I thought she was a you-know-what when she "played the marriage card," making Randall miss an important work meeting for a chess tournament.  A lot of viewers think she's great.  I think she's a b****.

There.  I feel better now  :)

[SlackerInc]

@Phoebe70 I don't like Beth either!  I think that's actually what originally brought me to this thread, to vent about my dislike for her.

[Guest]

There are a few of us.  I want to like her.  I originally liked her.  I like the actor and character, I just don't like the writing and direction sometimes.  Like this ep, they gave her the line about "they don't make black doves" which I felt was just to get her trademark saucy sass in there, but didn't make much sense as a joke to me.  Clearly Randall wasn't questioning their color.  I'd rather they lay off the sauciness and let her just be a real woman, not anything so near to a tv trope.  

[Neurochick]

I don't get why people don't like Beth.  I'm just glad to see a black woman on TV who doesn't look like she's wearing an Indian woman's hair on her head and rolling her neck, like too many TV shows have us do.

My UO is I guess I'm not moved by the show.  I mentioned the FX show "Baskets," now THAT show moves me.  There was a scene when Christine Baskets had a romantic moment with a man she met, that was sweet and really did move me.  For those who don't know the show, Christine Baskets is played by Louie Anderson, he's playing the part, in the more classic tradition of men playing women, rather than the Tyler Perry "Madea" tradition; Anderson is playing a woman, not a caricature of a woman.  What made the romantic scene work for me was it wasn't played for laughs or shits and giggles, like "oh, look at these two average looking middle aged people kiss, how cute!"  It was played as natural, something I can see happening in real life.  

I think the problem with this show is the folksy music in the background, the guitar.  Sometimes shows work best when they don't have a soundtrack.

[aw86]

I actually laughed out loud when Rebecca's "angelic" voice stopped Jack from grabbing the money out of the cash register.  I think this show is too cheesy for me.  And they have dragged out the death way too long.  I'm out

[SlackerInc]

@Neurochick: I do like Beth's hair and style in general.  I don't like how she approaches everything with negativity and skepticism rather than positivity and openness.  Nor do I like how she bosses Randall around and speaks so bluntly to his relatives.  People sometimes defend someone by saying they are "just blunt".  I don't consider that a defense because I don't like it when people are blunt.  I prefer people to exercise diplomacy and radiate kindness.

[StaceyNotStacie]

I like the show, but I think there's a bit too much overexposure. It seems like every day there is at least one article on my Facebook feed about the show. Every other article from the entertainment sites is about a fan theory of how Jack died and ten minutes after the show airs there's an article about the shocking secrets that were revealed in the last episode. It seems like this show has become the new trendy thing, that we have to feel a certain way about the characters and should be crying our eyes out by the end of each episode. It's a good show, but the hype is just too much. 

[Lady Calypso]

I guess I'll be the one to say that I don't think Rebecca's all that bad, and I'm not really on Jack's side. It's a shame they forced his flaws in the last three episodes and we couldn't see them develop naturally, but he was incredibly mean to her in this finale. Oh no! Rebecca wants to go on a tour to go after the dream that she wanted so many years ago! Oh no, she's going with her ex boyfriend who he just found out about! Clearly, Jack had not trusted her enough, or else he wouldn't have flipped out, started drinking, and acted a bit crazy. He wasn't fine with her singing career before, but the revelation of Ben just seemed to bring out all his issues at once. Having him be yet another person to tell Rebecca that her dreams would not take her anywhere was not a nice thing to do. So no, he doesn't get redeemed by his last speech. He was still an asshole to her. 

Let me add that it's not to say that Rebecca was in the right either with what she said to him. I just think that maybe, just maybe, Rebecca isn't this horrible person and Jack isn't this saint just because he gets all these speeches and he gets to "make the right choice" at the end, or he says the right thing. I fully blame that on the writing, since they could just as easily have Rebecca give similar speeches to Jack and to the kids. They just choose not to. Consistency is good, but not when it outweighs the other person's actions. 

[pennben]

I now remember why I took such a long timeout this season and it was the horrible way they have positioned Rebecca vis-a-vis Jack. And how quickly folks have followed what they see as "clues" from the writers to hate her and love Jack.  I kept hoping the writers hadn't realized how things were being received, but repeatedly, over and over and over this season they've recreated the same dynamic, Rebecca is "wrong" and Jack is the hero, that I feel like they either intend it or haven't the foggiest of notions of how to course correct.

I simply do not have the patience for this nonsense.

Edited March 15, 2017 by pennben

[HeyThere83]

Mr. Fogelman and Milo keep saying OF COURSE JACK HAS FLAWS!!!!!!!!! YOU WILL SEE THEM!!!!!!!! But they know darn well how things are being presented.

[Wings]

So I sat through the last 4 shows (I was going to quit) to learn how Jack died.  ***bangs head on wall***

[photo fox]

Guys, this thread is not the place to make snide comments about your fellow posters. If you think a post is misogynistic, you can: 

• Ignore the post, or (quietly) put them permanently on ignore.
• Be the better person and respond civilly.

OR

• Report the post, and if the mods judge that they've violated forum policy, it will be removed.

 

Also, just a reminder to please try to stay on topic. Many of the posts on the past few pages have been unrelated to the show and would have been better suited in the Small Talk thread. 

[laurakaye]

I can't get on board with Jack and Rebecca having a huge blowout fight, Rebecca tells Jack to move out, and he responds with a moving soliloquy about the method that each of their children will use to surprise them in the future, leaving Rebecca smiling and crying.  I was like - are they fighting or not?  If their marriage has been built up over the season as being this incredible love-fest/fairy tale, why did Rebecca kick Jack out after what we saw to be one transgression?  Didn't she say that he'd been sober for 7 years?  If there was tension (other than the two week/two months singing gig) did I miss it?

I laughed at the "bad guys" poker game, complete with smoky room and scowling men shooting each other looks across the table.  Like lots of other parts of This is Us, the scene seemed to be ripped right out of the "Stereotype" handbook.

Kate and Kevin are cardboard characters to me.  I feel like I know next to nothing about them, even after 18 episodes.  There's really nothing to root for with either of them.  I know that this show is going to go a few more seasons and perhaps they will be fleshed out at a later date, but that's like an author who writes a lousy first book of a trilogy, but promises that everything will be answered in books 2 and 3.  The show has to give us something to hold onto in order to ensure that the viewers will come back.  I don't think they've done that.

Edited March 15, 2017 by laurakaye

[Guest]

On 3/12/2017 at 10:35 AM, Winston9-DT3 said:

It's standard for employers to ask employees to sign it but not all employees sign them.  Then the employer has a decision to make.  In my experience, someone as essential as Randall and a partner, they wouldn't fire him (without a non-compete) for not signing a non-compete.  

And as a founding partner he'd have had input on the partnership contract and it could be anything.  If they write it that he can poach clients, I think that'd be no more unrealistic than any other aspect of how his job's been presented, personally.

I don't think he was a founding partner.  I think he was one of the first hires (came on board when there were 6 people) and he eventually was made a partner.  I would think the non-compete would have been signed prior to the point of them realizing how essential he was.  

[Guest]

Ah, ok.  I thought it was mentioned that he was one of the founders of the firm.  I still don't think the writers are bound by the assumption of a non-compete.  I work in the investment field and have coworkers who refuse to sign them who don't lose their job, and I've had parent companies that don't ask us to, or don't ask us to for many years after acquiring us.  Why would they bother writing Randall take those clients when they can hand-wave his finances or a new client base however they want like the rest of their careers/finances?  I just wouldn't worry about it.  

[Katy M]

31 minutes ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

I work in the investment field and have coworkers who refuse to sign them who don't lose their job,

I don't even think I quite understand the concept of that.  Why would you ask an employee to sign a non-compete after they were already working for you.  I would think you would have them sign it up front, as a condition of employment.  But, otherwise, if you are asking during the middle of employment, and they refuse, I see no reason to fire them, as they'll just steal the clients they haven't been barred from stealing.

[ProudMary]

UO:  I don't care when Jack died.  We already know, via the funeral flashback scene, that the big three were teenagers at the time of Jack's death.  Does it really matter if they were 15?  Or 16?  Or 17?  Or 18?  Is it somehow better if Jack died when they were 18 as opposed to 15?  No, of course not.  They were kids when they had to bury their father.  Heartbreaking.  That's enough for me.
I also don't have to know RIGHT NOW! how Jack died.  We know he's not alive in the present day.  That's also enough for me.
I'm tired of the fact that the how and when of Jack's death has become the overriding story arc for the entire show.  I'm much more interested in the present day life stories of the big three.  The effects of the loss of a parent in their teenage years, while huge, is not the only thing that gives shape to their lives almost two decades later.  I'm pretty sick of having that rammed down my throat.

Second UO:  During the Jack/Rebecca argument in the S1 finale, all I could think was:  Here's their Emmy submission; and I thought that in a pretty cynical way.

While I plan to watch the series again when autumn rolls around, my affection for the show is definitely diminishing.

[Katy M]

39 minutes ago, ProudMary said:

I'm tired of the fact that the how and when of Jack's death has become the overriding story arc for the entire show.

Me, too. if they had ended it last night, or even better yet a few epis ago, it would have been fine.  But, they've dragged it on so long, that however he died, is going to have so epically bizarre to justify all this buildup to it.  Seriously, if he didn't spontaneously combust, I'm going to be disappointed.

[Guest]

53 minutes ago, Katy M said:

I don't even think I quite understand the concept of that.  Why would you ask an employee to sign a non-compete after they were already working for you.  I would think you would have them sign it up front, as a condition of employment.  But, otherwise, if you are asking during the middle of employment, and they refuse, I see no reason to fire them, as they'll just steal the clients they haven't been barred from stealing.

In my case, it happens under various scenarios like acquisitions and new policies.  If a company acquires another one, they wait until the process is done and then try to integrate the acquired employees to their own procedures.  Or a company didn't decide to institute them until they'd been in business already for quite some time.  

[luna1122]

Didn't Sterling Brown say 'Jack died as he lived'?....which: how does he know? They've really filled the cast in on something that's not going to happen til at least next season? Tho, with this show, who knows, it might still be seven years down the road? Ugh. I agree, they've dragged this out so much that by the time it's revealed, it had BETTER be something crazy and unimagined. He's murdered, in defense of his family? Takes down a terrorist on a plane, in defense of his country? Mauled by coyotes, struck by lightning, crushed by livestock?   Hard to work out Kate feeling responsible, but she'll figure out a way to do that. I'm still unconvinced the writers or show runners even know for sure themselves, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

[Katy M]

39 minutes ago, luna1122 said:

Didn't Sterling Brown say 'Jack died as he lived'?....

I thought Randall said that in an episode.  But, maybe I'm imagining it.  Except that I feel like I heard him say that and I don't generally listen to interviews and stuff.

[ClareWalks]

Oh my GAWD, I so do not give a single shit how Jack died at this point. I am so over all of the misdirection and the "oh you'll learn this episode NO YOU WON'T LOL WE R SO GREAT AT SUSPENSE." This show is so full of itself it's unreal. I enjoy the show and care about the characters for the most part but this particular bit about how Jack died is so tired. Talk about beating a dead horse. The horse has decomposed and returned as dust to the earth. The other horses have evolved into something else entirely. Yet the show still beats away at the long-gone bones and will apparently continue to do so until the sun absorbs the earth in its dying giantess. Gag me with a spoon.

[luna1122]

2 hours ago, Katy M said:

I thought Randall said that in an episode.  But, maybe I'm imagining it.  Except that I feel like I heard him say that and I don't generally listen to interviews and stuff.

Randall might have but I did read an interview yesterday where Sterling himself said it. But maybe he's kind of just quoting his own character, I don't know.

[potatoradio]

Perhaps dear show has misinterpreted all the tears. Those are tears of frustration, not the sadz. Just kill the damn guy already. He is not the first beloved parent and husband to ever die in the history of mankind. Then again, if what we're looking at watching post-Jack-kicks-bucket is Kate trying maintain a singing career and her self-hating mope fest schedule and Kevin agonizing over how to manage twue wuv and an acting career he doesn't even struggle with and Randall suddenly deciding to add a dozen kids or so to the home that already didn't have a guest room....well, I can see the hesitation. 

Edited March 15, 2017 by potatoradio

[JudyObscure]

My very unpopular opinion is that I don't care if the writers paint Jack as a saint and Rebecca as less than.  Where does it say that a couple on TV must be equally paired in faults?  Most of the couples on "Mad Men," consisted of  women who were wonderful paired with men who were absolute philandering, near rapist jerks.  (Think Pete and Trudy.)  I still loved both of them.  The couples I know in real life usually have one giver and one taker, I've never known a couple where I liked both equally.  My husband and I always joke that to be with our best friends we accept that we all three have to do whatever she wants to do or nobody's going to be happy.  That's life!  It's real.  I enjoy disliking Rebecca just as I enjoy disliking Toby. It doesn't make me or the writers misogynist if all their female characters aren't saints.

Edited March 15, 2017 by JudyObscure