Unpopular Opinions Thread

[birkenstock]

1 hour ago, CleoCaesar said:

I've seen criticisms along the lines of "This family is too white". Wtf. How many members of a different race do MOST families have?

It depends on where the show is set.  Where I live, it is just as common for my friends to be bi-racial or in an interracial relationship than to be one race.  I wouldn't criticize a show for not having a family member of a different race, but it isn't tokenism if a white family living in a place like New York, Los Angeles, Seattle or a smaller city like Charlotte, North Carolina has an Asian or black in-law.  I do look at a show suspect when it is based in a racially or ethnically diverse city and the show doesn't reflect it.      

 

ETA: I also don't see how Randall is like Dwayne Wayne or Steve Urkel. The only similarities the three characters have are that they're black, have glasses, and are smart.  I like that Randall and Beth represent an educated black middle-class couple who are part of a larger white family.  I think that Randall has been as developed as the other characters, except for Rebecca.  I know his motivation for striving to be as successful as possible, why he built a family early, and is so committed to carrying on family traditions.  I like how he is so confident with Beth and then seems to be more hesitant with the outside world.   I think that they've shown Beth as a strong woman who will protect her nuclear family no matter what. I want to know more about her and hope we get to see Randall and Beth's backstory soon.  

Edited January 24, 2017 by birkenstock

[SlackerInc]

2 hours ago, ShadowFacts said:

It's so interesting that we all have our own lenses through which we view this.  I don't see Randall as Steve Urkel tropey at all, and I think Beth has a strong personality.  Randall is not dorky, dressed in ill-fitting clothes, clumsy or annoying.  He's capable, pretty hot, successful and compassionate, but he does have his problems with intensity, which is both evident and has been alluded to (temporary blindness).  Beth is no wallflower, neither domineering nor subservient, has been take-charge and direct with William and Kevin, is witty and also compassionate.  That to me is the opposite of no personality at all.  

We do indeed have various lenses!  I agree with you that Randall is not Urkel-ish, and that Beth has a strong personality.  I wish it were a little less strong!  And that's where I disagree with you, because to me she does come across as domineering.  In any case, though: anyone who thinks she doesn't have a strong personality, I think I would be scared to be around the people you do think have strong personalities!  LOL

[Guest]

I don't really see Randall as Urkel-ish or Beth as having no personality, either.  I find her abrasive sometimes and somewhat cliche at times.  

[DayGlorious]

12 hours ago, Neurochick said:

Because too often on TV, (especially reality TV, and the news) black people are portrayed as dysfunctional; and I'd rather not see black people portrayed as dysfunctional; I'm not into "struggle porn."

So only the white characters on the show get to have issues and challenges. The black characters have to be perfect, even if it comes at the expense of their development, because anything else is "struggle porn."

I think I'm gonna air on the side of charitability and say "let's agree to disagree." 

In all fairness, maybe the writers feel like Randall's backstory alone is so fascinating that they are just letting it simmer on the back burner while giving time to other family members. Maybe they're just too lazy to develop him further. Or maybe this is just the calm before the sweeps, and something big is about to happen in his character arc besides the obvious -- I don't know. But something about the way he's just thrown in there, stuck in the same place while the other characters are unraveled like layers of an onion, with his limited sibling interaction not only reinforcing his inherent "otherness" but putting it under a magnifying glass, feels awkward and forced. It's almost as if at some point, the writers had two different show concepts, but neither could fly on its own, so they jury-rigged them together with duct tape and bubble gum. 

[Court]

Huh, I think they've developed Randall more than Kate. Almost everything we know about her centers on her weight. Her career was given half an episode and hasn't been spoken of since.

Maybe even more than Kevin as well. They've shown him having challenges. Maybe not in his marriage but definitely in his life.

I agree with @Neurochick it is refreshing to see a married functional couple that actually communicates. It's nice to see Beth as confident and a normal woman. I don't think she was saying they're perfect, just that they're normal. Randall has flaws and we've seen that. He's a perfectionist, lacks impulse control and is possibly manic. I still adore him. (If I'm wrong, I apologize for putting words in your mouth!)

[Neurochick]

"Struggle Porn" to me is a movie like "Precious." 

My UO for last night's episode is I don't have a problem with Sophie, even if she did write a mean note to Kate.  She did that when she was ten.  Many times people do change from when they were ten years old, so I can't hate adult Sophie for what she did to Kate at ten.  Now, if she was mean to her as an adult, that's a different story.

[Lady Calypso]

36 minutes ago, Neurochick said:

My UO for last night's episode is I don't have a problem with Sophie, even if she did write a mean note to Kate.  She did that when she was ten.  Many times people do change from when they were ten years old, so I can't hate adult Sophie for what she did to Kate at ten.  Now, if she was mean to her as an adult, that's a different story.

Agreed. First of all, we don't know that it's the same Sophie. Even though we got a flashback to the note a mere scene before Sophie appeared, the spellings of the name were completely different. I'd also have to go back and watch The Pool again, but it depends on if the young actress in last night's episode was the same from The Pool, if there was a third actress for Sofie. Also, even if she is the same Sophie, we don't know the circumstances of Sophie's role. She definitely didn't sign her name on the note since I figure she knows how to spell her own name, and we know for a fact she spells it Sophie. I agree that she seems to have changed and Kevin's a lot of things, but he's never hurt his sister. Plus, little Kate was friends with Sophie so clearly something changed with them. 

[AriAu]

Where is this whole thing set? Very confusing geography right now.

Remembering that Pittsburgh and New York City are like 350 miles (5+ hours driving) apart.... Does Randall live in Pittsburgh or NY? Rebecca/Miguel live near them...or so it seems based on Thanksgiving and Christmas episodes, so where do they live. In what city did Kevin and Randall have dinner-I think it is near where Randall lives since Rebecca and Miguel were supposed to join them. In what city was the club that Toby and Kevin went to....he does know the rope girl.

The cabin was only an hour from where they grew up, or so they said.....and I'm pretty sure they grew up in Pittsburgh (may be the only geography I am sure of).   If I am right that Randall/Beth and Rebecca/Miguel live in western Pennsylvania, then how does Kevin show up so much from NY? How did he have Hanukkah dinner at Sloane's and then show up for Christmas at Randall's (yes, same outfits).Also, how did they all drive there so quickly on the day after Thanksgiving? And more importantly, how did Kevin audition for plays on (or off) Broadway while living at Randall's?

If it is all NYC, where are the classic NYC exposition shots from every show we have ever watched?

Is the "fat camp" in NY or Pittsburgh?

HELP!!!!

Edited January 25, 2017 by AriAu

[ShadowFacts]

8 minutes ago, AriAu said:

Where is this whole thing set? Very confusing geography right now.

Remembering that Pittsburgh and New York City are like 350 miles (5+ hours driving) apart.... Does Randall live in Pittsburgh or NY? Rebecca/Miguel live near them...or so it seems based on Thanksgiving and Christmas episodes, so where do they live. In what city did Kevin and Randall have dinner-I think it is near where Randall lives since Rebecca and Miguel were supposed to join them. In what city was the club that Toby and Kevin went to....he does know the rope girl.

The cabin was only an hour from where they grew up, or so they said.....and I'm pretty sure they grew up in Pittsburgh (may be the only geography I am sure of).   If I am right that Randall/Beth and Rebecca/Miguel live in western Pennsylvania, then how does Kevin show up so much from NY? How did he have Hanukkah dinner at Sloane's and then show up for Christmas at Randall's (yes, same outfits).Also, how did they all drive there so quickly on the day after Thanksgiving? And more importantly, how did Kevin audition for plays on (or off) Broadway while living at Randall's?

If it is all NYC, where are the classic NYC exposition shots from every show we have ever watched?

Is the "fat camp" in NY or Pittsburgh?

HELP!!!!

For sure the fat camp was mentioned to be in the Adirondacks, so New York.  In this episode Kate asks Kevin to do something with Toby who knows nobody in New York, so that's probably where they went out.  Sloane and Olivia appear to live in NYC or its environs. 

Beyond that, some speculation is involved, and it's a bit murky.  They all started out in Pittsburgh, that's for sure.  By the time Randall finds William, William's ID gives an address of Philadelphia (though his apartments in both locales look similar, so ????).  Others on the forum have pegged Randall's current location as somewhere in New Jersey, close enough to commute to his job in NYC, and for William to take bus rides back and forth to Philadelphia.  Rebecca and Miguel seem to be relatively close to Randall as Rebecca and Kate are getting ready to drive to Randall's for Christmas Eve, and there is the stop by Randall's on their way to a Broadway show.  I think it's safe to say they all moved away from Pittsburgh at some point. 

[Court]

Randall lives in New Jersey. It's pretty common for people to commute from there to New York.

[DayGlorious]

1 hour ago, Neurochick said:

"Struggle Porn" to me is a movie like "Precious." 

My UO for last night's episode is I don't have a problem with Sophie, even if she did write a mean note to Kate.  She did that when she was ten.  Many times people do change from when they were ten years old, so I can't hate adult Sophie for what she did to Kate at ten.  Now, if she was mean to her as an adult, that's a different story.

Sure, plenty of "mean girls" change or get dealt a slice of humble pie and grow up to be okay adults, but they were still kids here. Maybe Sophie wasn't responsible for the awful letter, but at best, she was Jill Brenner in Blubber -- which would make her absolutely perfect for Kevin. 

Seeing Little Randall makes me like Big Randall a lot less. I'm having a really hard time drawing a straight line from the introverted, brilliant, out-of-the-box old soul he was to the materialistic, overcompensating Wall Street* yuppie he became, especially when his graduation from high school and (presumably) the death of his father were perfectly timed for him to take the tech route and end up in at least the same place, financially speaking. Maybe Fogelman et al. considered that plot trajectory and rejected it for being too stereotypically millennial. Maybe they're building up to some climax where between Willam's looming death and the arrival of Sanjay, he loses his job or otherwise cracks, realizes how empty his life is, moves into the family cabin, and spends the rest of his life making artisanal cheese for Whole Foods shoppers. But I'm not inclined to give them that much benefit of the doubt. 

*Well, more like Parsippany or Edison, or at the very urban-est, JC or Hoboken, if the fact that he drives to work and the availability of open parking lots for William to do donuts are any indicator.

12 hours ago, Court said:

Huh, I think they've developed Randall more than Kate. Almost everything we know about her centers on her weight. Her career was given half an episode and hasn't been spoken of since.

Point taken. In the deep childhood flashbacks, I couldn't help but notice that in a show where the casting of mini-me actors is otherwise dead-on, Really Little Kate wasn't the least bit chubby for her age. I watch "My 600 Lb. Life" religiously enough to know exactly where that story line is gonna go. 

[PRgal]

19 minutes ago, DayGlorious said:

Sure, plenty of "mean girls" change or get dealt a slice of humble pie and grow up to be okay adults, but they were still kids here. Maybe Sophie wasn't responsible for the awful letter, but at best, she was Jill Brenner in Blubber -- which would make her absolutely perfect for Kevin. 

Seeing Little Randall makes me like Big Randall a lot less. I'm having a really hard time drawing a straight line from the introverted, brilliant, out-of-the-box old soul he was to the materialistic, overcompensating Wall Street* yuppie he became, especially when his graduation from high school and (presumably) the death of his father were perfectly timed for him to take the tech route and end up in at least the same place, financially speaking. Maybe Fogelman et al. considered that plot trajectory and rejected it for being too stereotypically millennial. Maybe they're building up to some climax where between Willam's looming death and the arrival of Sanjay, he loses his job or otherwise cracks, realizes how empty his life is, moves into the family cabin, and spends the rest of his life making artisanal cheese for Whole Foods shoppers. But I'm not inclined to give them that much benefit of the doubt. 

*Well, more like Parsippany or Edison, or at the very urban-est, JC or Hoboken, if the fact that he drives to work and the availability of open parking lots for William to do donuts are any indicator.

Point taken. In the deep childhood flashbacks, I couldn't help but notice that in a show where the casting of mini-me actors is otherwise dead-on, Really Little Kate wasn't the least bit chubby for her age. I watch "My 600 Lb. Life" religiously enough to know exactly where that story line is gonna go. 

Like many others have hypothesized, Kate's weight gain probably came after Jack died.  However, she was a little overweight (I'm just comparing her to other kids I went to school with during that time).

[DayGlorious]

37 minutes ago, PRgal said:

Like many others have hypothesized, Kate's weight gain probably came after Jack died.  However, she was a little overweight (I'm just comparing her to other kids I went to school with during that time).

I'm talking about Really Little Kate. The 5-year-old, not the 9/10-year-old. At that point, people with lifelong weight issues are at least a little bit chubby or big-boned for their age. Kate was not, which suggests something traumatic happened in the next 4-5 years (and that "something" is almost universally the same awful thing). 

Edited January 25, 2017 by DayGlorious

[birkenstock]

Little Kate's weight gain could be as simple as her having more autonomy over her food intake once she entered grade school.  Rebecca can't control what she eats at school since kids share and trade food.  She was chubby at 8-10 and as a teenager, but didn't gain massive amounts of weight until Jack's death.  She was body confident at the pool until the letter from her friends which makes me think it was more metabolism and her food relationship with Rebecca than an early childhood traumatic event.  

[chocolatine]

2 hours ago, DayGlorious said:

Seeing Little Randall makes me like Big Randall a lot less. I'm having a really hard time drawing a straight line from the introverted, brilliant, out-of-the-box old soul he was to the materialistic, overcompensating Wall Street* yuppie he became, especially when his graduation from high school and (presumably) the death of his father were perfectly timed for him to take the tech route and end up in at least the same place, financially speaking. Maybe Fogelman et al. considered that plot trajectory and rejected it for being too stereotypically millennial.

The high-paying tech jobs are not necessarily less brutal than Wall Street jobs. Read the 2015 New York Times piece on Amazon for reference.

[DayGlorious]

5 hours ago, chocolatine said:

The high-paying tech jobs are not necessarily less brutal than Wall Street jobs. Read the 2015 New York Times piece on Amazon for reference.

I don't need an article to tell me what those jobs are like. I've worked in tech for 20 years and chose to stay a programmer instead of taking the tech director/CTO or startup-founder route for a reason. But Randall still seems far more suited to that career path than the one he chose, especially considering he came of age at a time when companies regularly threw $50K starting salaries at anyone with a passing command of HTML. Any family financial hardship from Jack's death would only compound that. 

[ShadowFacts]

I don't know why Randall being a serious student and a math whiz would mean he would be suited to only a couple of careers.  He could have gone into medicine or research or teaching or . . . a hundred things.  He must have liked what he chose, he doesn't seem unhappy in his job.  I won't be surprised if he starts questioning his whole life once William dies, though. 

[chocolatine]

2 minutes ago, DayGlorious said:

I don't need an article to tell me what those jobs are like. I've worked in tech for 20 years and chose to stay a programmer instead of taking the tech director/CTO or startup-founder route for a reason. But Randall still seems far more suited to that career path than the one he chose, especially considering he came of age at a time when companies regularly threw $50K starting salaries at anyone with a passing command of HTML. Any family financial hardship from Jack's death would only compound that. 

Randall strikes me as an over-achiever, so he would certainly have gone the director/CTO/founder route (and FWIW, I've been a developer in a large tech company, a director in a small tech company, and a startup founder, and I found all three stressful in different ways). Also, a tech career would have been more likely if he had grown up or gone to college on the West Coast, in the SF Bay or Seattle areas. Since he was in the Northeast, the typical over-achiever career there in the 90s was still finance, so his career choice makes perfect sense IMO.

[kieyra]

On 1/24/2017 at 3:39 PM, mansonlamps said:

What is "struggle porn?"

Not sure, but conflict is the engine that drives drama, so I'm not sure we'd have a show without it.

(I'm also not sure we'd be human without struggle.)

My possible UO: the super generic middle-America names are tough on my aging short-term memory. And the glut of super generic four-letter names: Jack Kate Toby Beth. I keep forgettiing (when reading forums) if Rebecca is the mom or the daughter. Beth sounds very WASP-y and so it always takes me a minute to place her when reading the conversations.

I'm not saying I need my characters to be named Hercules or Desiderata, but it's like they pulled names off the vanity keychain stand at the drugstore for this show.

(No offense to folks who can easily find their names on vanity items.)

(I'm also going to struggle with Sophie and Sloane henceforth, although that's a different problem. As is "Jesse" not ringing true to my ears as British boy name of that era. Maybe I'm wrong there, though.)

Edited January 26, 2017 by kieyra

[Tiger]

On 1/24/2017 at 10:38 AM, OtterMommy said:

Jumping in here...I also, generally speaking, am not a fan of dysfunctional.  First of all, what does that even mean?  Yes, there are characters who have some serious issues.  Sometimes, their character is built around that issue and sometimes it is sort of just brushed off (fan of the former, annoyed by the latter).  Secondly, I really, really, really, really do not believe that for a TV married couple to be "interesting" they have to have a "dysfunctional" relationship.  There is not a happy, functional relationship out there that doesn't have its problems.  I would much rather see a happy couple work through issues together than yet another unhappy/flawed couple fight with each other.

All that being said, I would like a bit more from Beth.  I don't think she's a flat character--I just don't think they've gone very deep with her (yet).  I think the more we get to know Beth, the more we'll be able to understand Randall.  I'm not faulting the show for this (yet)...we're only half a season into what will be at least a 3 season show.  But I do hope we see it soon.

 

On 1/24/2017 at 11:51 AM, DearEvette said:

ooh,  I don't think they've made Kate multifaceted at all.  IMO, she is the one character I think who has suffered the most when it really comes to character development.  She is all about her weight.  That is the defining characteristic about her.  I know I am one of the people who wanted her weight to just be a sympton of bigger issues.  But so far we haven't seen it.

I would put Kevin and Randal kinda equal in that what we know of them is both rooted in their pasts.  My degree in Armchair Psychology tells me that Kevin went into acting because he felt invisible and overlooked by his family and craved the attention and love that he felt he wasn't getting.  And who gets better attention and adulation that a star?  Randall's need to be perfect is probably because he knows he didn't fit in so he compensated.

I do think the writing is richer for Jack and Rebecca but it feels like they collectively get more time for us to spend with them.  The other three --  their time feels like it gets fractured and it is also intimately shared with Jack and Rebecca's stories.

I do agree that Beth needs more develoment as well.  But it is an ambitious show with a lot of stuff it is trying to explore and has had very little time to do it in so far.  And to be fair Beth is primarily a supporting character.  I think the actress does that thing where she is given little nuggets and because she is charismatic she makes them gold.  I get impatient because I want to know all the things right now too.  But I have to trust that they can breathe a little with two assured seasons and use that time to flesh out the characters a but more.

 

On 1/24/2017 at 4:38 PM, ShadowFacts said:

It's so interesting that we all have our own lenses through which we view this.  I don't see Randall as Steve Urkel tropey at all, and I think Beth has a strong personality.  Randall is not dorky, dressed in ill-fitting clothes, clumsy or annoying.  He's capable, pretty hot, successful and compassionate, but he does have his problems with intensity, which is both evident and has been alluded to (temporary blindness).  Beth is no wallflower, neither domineering nor subservient, has been take-charge and direct with William and Kevin, is witty and also compassionate.  That to me is the opposite of no personality at all. 

Well, of course, the Piersons are multiracial, and my own family is, and more and more families all the time are. 

I think Susan and the writers have done an excellent in establishing and showing Beth's personality with minimal screentime.  And while she has a strong personality, ai dont think she's domineering at all.

[Guest]

UO:  I don't really care what year Jack died.

[talktoomuch]

32 minutes ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

UO:  I don't really care what year Jack died.

Right?! What difference does it make really?

UO: I don't think Dickish Horse Guy is rape-y. Smarmy, douchey and arrogant? Yes? A serial rapist of fat girls? Not so much.

[mansonlamps]

22 hours ago, Tiger said:

 

 

I think Susan and the writers have done an excellent in establishing and showing Beth's personality with minimal screentime.  And while she has a strong personality, ai dont think she's domineering at all.

I don't think she's domineering, I just find her a bit condescending in her tone, which is something I really hate.  Hence my unpopular opinion of not worshipping this character.

[DoubleUTeeEff]

22 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

UO:  I don't really care what year Jack died.

LOL!  I don't care about a gallon vs. a half gallon of ice cream, who is considered to be a millenial or how someone would dress as Madonna in what year.

[DayGlorious]

21 hours ago, talktoomuch said:

Right?! What difference does it make really?

UO: I don't think Dickish Horse Guy is rape-y. Smarmy, douchey and arrogant? Yes? A serial rapist of fat girls? Not so much.

If behavior straight outta the PUA playbook, complete disrespect for physical boundaries, and inability to take no for an answer isn't rapey, I don't know what is. 

[SlackerInc]

On 1/25/2017 at 11:10 AM, Court said:

Randall lives in New Jersey. It's pretty common for people to commute from there to New York.

Or to Philadelphia for that matter.

[MsChicklet]

UO: I don't really care about Dr. K. Partially because of my antipathy towards Gerald McRaney.

[talktoomuch]

6 hours ago, DayGlorious said:

If behavior straight outta the PUA playbook, complete disrespect for physical boundaries, and inability to take no for an answer isn't rapey, I don't know what is. 

I understand that you and others feel that way, which is why it's my unpopular opinion. In my unpopular opinion, DHG is the equivalent of the stereotypical construction worker constantly hitting on women who show no interest in return. I reserve "rape-y" for more aggressive and/or coercive behavior.  For me, continuing to hit on a woman who says she has a fiancé, standing too close to her, and telling her "this will happen" may be distasteful or unwanted, but it's not rape-y.

[kieyra]

That negging, tho.

[chocolatine]

1 hour ago, talktoomuch said:

I understand that you and others feel that way, which is why it's my unpopular opinion. In my unpopular opinion, DHG is the equivalent of the stereotypical construction worker constantly hitting on women who show no interest in return. I reserve "rape-y" for more aggressive and/or coercive behavior.  For me, continuing to hit on a woman who says she has a fiancé, standing too close to her, and telling her "this will happen" may be distasteful or unwanted, but it's not rape-y.

To me, the way he said "this will happen" when she was obviously not receptive implied an unspoken "whether you want to or not". It's a very slippery slope from there.

[Guest]

I thought the "this" he meant would happen was them having interest in each other.  As in, he was saying Kate was a little interested and he'd make her moreso, despite her protesting.   Which I do think the actress was trying to hint at in her body language there.  Like 98% "no", 2% "maybe".  Didn't she kind of give him the 'once over' appraising look?  

Or he's going to rape or assault her.  I kind of doubt they'll go there this season.   Probably more likely the 50 Shades angle.   He gets all dominant, she lets him, we get all grossed out.  Or turned on, if that's your thing.  I'm guessing it'll be in an inappropriate place and the urgent quickie theme.  They haven't had one of those in a few episodes.  Maybe in the stables with some reins involved.   Which could get really tacky, pun intended.  

[ProudMary]

Going back to the geographic settings for the show:  I really don't understand why the writers are making it confusing.  Look, I understand that they like to play with dates and ages and that using flashbacks (and an occasional flash forward) is their thing but why can't the audience know definitively that Randall and Beth live in New Jersey?  What is the purpose of confusion on where the story takes place?  Makes no sense to me and truthfully, it pisses me off.

[Guest]

I thought it was definitively NJ.  His office location is a little slippery, though, given all the easy driving we just saw.  

[kieyra]

52 minutes ago, ProudMary said:

Going back to the geographic settings for the show:  I really don't understand why the writers are making it confusing.  Look, I understand that they like to play with dates and ages and that using flashbacks (and an occasional flash forward) is their thing but why can't the audience know definitively that Randall and Beth live in New Jersey?  What is the purpose of confusion on where the story takes place?  Makes no sense to me and truthfully, it pisses me off.

It's painfully obvious to me that they're flying by the seat of their pants and that's why they keep things so vague. Many of the "big twists" smack of sudden decision-making behind the scenes. I truly believe they're still deciding a lot of these indererminate details based on audience reaction so far. The whole thing feels very focus-grouped.

I don't get why they cast Jack and Rebecca so old as new parents, though. It's already caused problems in scenes where MV is supposed to be 46.

[Court]

I don't care where any of them live or where Randall's office is.

I don't think 36 or 46 is old to have a baby.

[kieyra]

32 minutes ago, Court said:

I don't care where any of them live or where Randall's office is.

I don't think 36 or 46 is old to have a baby.

If you were replying to me, I don't think 36 is old to have a baby. I meant MV does not look 46 in the scenes where he is supposed to be 46. I think they thought it would be some sort of nice symmetry, showing their perfect father at 36, and then the modern-day kids at 36. They just didn't think it through very well. 

[Court]

4 minutes ago, kieyra said:

If you were replying to me, I don't think 36 is old to have a baby. I meant MV does not look 46 in the scenes where he is supposed to be 46. I think they thought it would be some sort of nice symmetry, showing their perfect father at 36, and then the modern-day kids at 36. They just didn't think it through very well. 

Not you, specifically. Lots of posters have brought it up! 

I don't care but I really did care about the millennial debate so I get why it bothers so many.

[CleoCaesar]

12 hours ago, DoubleUTeeEff said:

LOL!  I don't care about a gallon vs. a half gallon of ice cream, who is considered to be a millenial or how someone would dress as Madonna in what year.

I couldn't believe how long the discussion about the freaking gallon/half-gallon of ice cream went on.

[Guest]

I figure if you want an active forum, you gotta deal with other people posting, sometimes about stuff you have zero interest in.  I'm pretty sure you're allowed to not read every sentence.  

Thankfully, people here are good at using paragraphs so it makes it easier to scan and skip ahead as needed.  And the ignore feature is nice, too, when it's the same person annoying you over and over.  

[Court]

I agree with you and it fascinates me how we all view it through our own lenses. 

I have stuff that annoys me that doesn't bother them and vice versa. 

[MsJamieDornan]

3 hours ago, CleoCaesar said:

LOL!  I don't care about a gallon vs. a half gallon of ice cream, who is considered to be a millenial or how someone would dress as Madonna in what year

Thank you.  Thank you so much.

[pennben]

5 hours ago, kieyra said:

It's painfully obvious to me that they're flying by the seat of their pants and that's why they keep things so vague. Many of the "big twists" smack of sudden decision-making behind the scenes. I truly believe they're still deciding a lot of these indererminate details based on audience reaction so far. The whole thing feels very focus-grouped.

Yup!! That is why a two season pickup for this show horrifies me....now they are thinking  about how to do twists for the next two years worth of episodes. 

[Court]

Weren't the episodes already filmed a least a year (if not more) before it aired? It was supposed to air last season, not this season. 

[talktoomuch]

11 hours ago, chocolatine said:

To me, the way he said "this will happen" when she was obviously not receptive implied an unspoken "whether you want to or not".

But whether or not Kate was receptive is an opinion not a fact, thus not "obvious." In my opinion, she was at least a little receptive because she sought him out to thank him after he was a dick the first time; she appeared to give him a once-over while he was being a dick the second time; and she stayed and continued a discourse with him while he was being a dick the second time.

11 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

I thought the "this" he meant would happen was them having interest in each other.  As in, he was saying Kate was a little interested and he'd make her moreso, despite her protesting.   Which I do think the actress was trying to hint at in her body language there.  Like 98% "no", 2% "maybe".  Didn't she kind of give him the 'once over' appraising look?  

Or he's going to rape or assault her.  I kind of doubt they'll go there this season.   Probably more likely the 50 Shades angle.   He gets all dominant, she lets him, we get all grossed out.  Or turned on, if that's your thing.

THIS all day. The bottom line is that there's simply more than one way to take these scenes. It would surprise me if this show was really going a sexual assault route. And this viewer for one didn't read it thst way, though many of you did.

TIU has gone to great pains to establish that a man being sexually interested in her and acting like a horndog for her is not only new but also exciting and attractive for Kate. Hell, she's engaged off that. That's why I think this dickish Fat Camp dude was just introduced to show Kate that horndogs who are sexually attracted to her is a group that is not just limited to Toby.

[Aloeonatable]

58 minutes ago, Court said:

Weren't the episodes already filmed a least a year (if not more) before it aired? It was supposed to air last season, not this season. 

No. The pilot was filmed in October of 2015, but the series went into production this past summer. In fact, they are still filming this season. 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, MsJamieDornan said:

http://people.com/tv/this-is-us-creator-on-jacks-death-and-kates-breakthrough/

This is interesting !

 

1 hour ago, talktoomuch said:

But whether or not Kate was receptive is an opinion not a fact, thus not "obvious." In my opinion, she was at least a little receptive because she sought him out to thank him after he was a dick the first time; she appeared to give him a once-over while he was being a dick the second time; and she stayed and continued a discourse with him while he was being a dick the second time.

THIS all day. The bottom line is that there's simply more than one way to take these scenes. It would surprise me if this show was really going a sexual assault route. And this viewer for one didn't read it thst way, though many of you did.

TIU has gone to great pains to establish that a man being sexually interested in her and acting like a horndog for her is not only new but also exciting and attractive for Kate. Hell, she's engaged off that. That's why I think this dickish Fat Camp dude was just introduced to show Kate that horndogs who are sexually attracted to her is a group that is not just limited to Toby.

That People writer saw the Duke scenes like you and I did.  

Kate made the acquaintance of the camp’s horse stable employee and reverse psychologist Duke (Adam Bartley), who boldly made known his intentions to win her over romantically. This prompted her to mention that she was engaged, but in a way that hinted at possibility, or at least tension — and made you think that Toby (Chris Sullivan) had better watch his back.

[ClareWalks]

My current unpopular opinion is that a lot of the speculation on the threads seems to be unnecessary because they have basically been resolved. For example, I think it is patently OBVIOUS that Jack died when the triplets were 15. It has been obvious since that funeral Kevin crashed where the woman said her son was 15 and Kevin got emotional and said "that's a rough age."

[SlackerInc]

14 hours ago, kieyra said:

I don't get why they cast Jack and Rebecca so old as new parents, though.

It's definitely highly unusual for a non-college educated Midwestern married couple in the 1970s to be that old as new parents, absent infertility issues.

Edited January 28, 2017 by SlackerInc

[mansonlamps]

14 hours ago, Court said:

 

I don't think 36 or 46 is old to have a baby.

Big difference between 36 and 46.  My friend had her first (and only) baby at 47 while her husband was 54.  Flash forward 21 years and, for whatever reason, their now college-age son just realized how old they are compared to other parents and they likely won't be around to celebrate his own major milestones and his children's lives.  Not to mention the high likelihood of this kid becoming a caretaker at a pretty young age.  Enter depression and therapy as they are a tight knit family since its always been the three of them.

So while it's not necessarily "too old," there can be downsides for the child.  And, yes, I realize that parents can die at any age, just talking about the odds.  

[ClareWalks]

My grandparents (extremely Catholic, at that) had their first kids in their early 30s, starting in the early 1950s. They had their last child when my grandma was in her mid 40s. I'm not sure if being 30 at first child was as unusual in the late 1970s as we might think. I guess it may also depend on what part of the country you live in - maybe the bible belt South would be much younger when they started.