S01.E16: The Red Scare

[Riplet68]

Even with plot holes, this is one of my favorite shows. I love the chemistry of the three and how they play off each other. Love the snarky comments one or all of them make. Love them fan girling over historical characters   DO NOT want it to become an all dark and mesningful show. There are plenty of those. 

 

One change I would like...more repercussions when they return. Nothing totally history altering, but there should be something. I'm still mad there wasn't any fall out from the benidect Arnold episode. 

[Sandman]

2 hours ago, CooperTV said:

But the Timeless writer seemed too clueless to make the obvious parallels there and tie it organically with Lucy's snark.

I don't think the writer was being clueless at all. Wyatt's reaction to Lucy's remark shows that he acknowledges that he was (a) maybe over-reacting -- the look the other guy gave him was too benign, I'd say, to really qualify as looking at Wyatt as if he were "a piece of meat"; and (b) aware of the fact that, while men can be treated as sexual objects, in any time period, overwhelmingly this is something that women have to deal with far more than men. Men and women can both, arguably, be victims of patriarchal culture, but it's hardly an even split. I think if that scene had tied back more overtly to Ethan's experience would be too on-the-nose, since they don't know him or his times well enough to relate directly. Sometimes making the obvious parallels just gets you, well, the obvious.

Edited February 22, 2017 by Sandman

[shapeshifter]

7 hours ago, saber5055 said:

I still don't know WTH Rittenhouse is. I just wish it would go away. . .

. . . This episode actually made me like Wyatt for the first time, especially when he took down the two henchmen, then put McCarthy out for "one hour. Maybe two."

6 hours ago, henripootel said:

. . . Really liked when he took out McCarthy's guards quickly and elegantly - finally the Wyatt I've been waiting for. 

Also, knocking somebody out - not without risk. I know it's tv so it's like a super-safe off switch but in reality, he could easily have ended McCarthy right there and then. 

Yes. "Quickly and elegantly." It was like a super hero ballet and old west bar fight all rolled into one.
But @henripootel, how could offing McCarthy not be a good thing?
And @saber5055, re: "I still don't know WTH Rittenhouse is. I just wish it would go away," puts into words my thoughts exactly. This show didn't need a Rittenhouse, but rather, as many upthread(s) have repeatedly posted, more fun results of temporal tampering.

Did anyone else think that some of the McCarthy-Wyatt conversation was edited to reflect current (unmentionable here by name) political personalities?:

Quote

McCarthy: I don't deserve this.  Crooked press attacks me.  People laughing at me.  Enemies everywhere.  I'm a patriot.
Wyatt: Everyone's the hero of their own story.
McCarthy: Like you.

Edited February 22, 2017 by shapeshifter

[Randomosity]

6 minutes ago, shapeshifter said:

Did anyone else think that some of the McCarthy-Wyatt conversation was edited to reflect current (unmentionable here by name) political personalities?:

Indeed. Well, not necessarily edited. Could have been originally written that way on purpose, for the same reason you mentioned. I believe Wyatt also called McCarthy a bully, right?

[legaleagle53]

37 minutes ago, Sandman said:

I don't think the writer was being clueless at all. Wyatt's reaction to Lucy's remark shows that he acknowledges that he was (a) maybe over-reacting -- the look the other guy gave him was too benign, I'd say, to really qualify as looking at Wyatt as if he was "a piece of meat"; and (b) aware of the fact that, while men can be treated as sexual objects, in any time period, overwhelmingly this is something that women have to deal with far more than men. Men and women can both, arguably, victims of patriarchal culture, but it's hardly an even split. I think if that scene had tied back more overtly to Ethan's experience would be too on-the-nose, since they don't know him or his times well enough to relate directly. Sometimes making the obvious parallels just gets you, well, the obvious.

To say nothing of the fact that Wyatt's (over)reaction demonstrates more than just a slight case of homophobia on his part.  I mean, God forbid that a gay man in a gay bar should find Wyatt sexually attractive, because that might mean that -- the horror! -- Wyatt is somehow throwing off some subtle signal that he's gay, and we just can't have people thinking that now, can we?

Come on, Wyatt. You're from 2017, long after "dont ask, don't tell" bit the dust.  You know better than that, or at least you should.

Edited February 22, 2017 by legaleagle53

[shapeshifter]

10 minutes ago, Randomosity said:

Indeed. Well, not necessarily edited. Could have been originally written that way on purpose, for the same reason you mentioned. I believe Wyatt also called McCarthy a bully, right?

Yes. Right before McCarthy ordered his henchmen to (try) to teach Wyatt (a SEAL) a lesson, Wyatt taunted McCarthy with:

Quote

You're arrogant and loud-mouthed and terrified people will find out you're a fraud, just like every bully

[Sandman]

I think the fact that Wyatt chuckled at Lucy's jibe (and at himself?) meant that he realized he was overreacting, and calmed down.

And I agree with shapeshifter that the McCarthy-Wyatt conversation definitely had present-day echoes built into it.

Edited February 22, 2017 by Sandman

[RemoteControlFreak]

Am I the only one who doesn't understand what's so bad about Rittenhouse? We keep hearing about how evil they are, but the show never showed or described Rittenhouse really doing anything.  Wyatt and Flynn killed more people than we knew Rittenhouse killing.  

[Sandman]

8 minutes ago, RemoteControlFreak said:

Am I the only one who doesn't understand what's so bad about Rittenhouse? We keep hearing about how evil they are, but the show never showed or described Rittenhouse really doing anything.  Wyatt and Flynn killed more people than we knew Rittenhouse killing.  

We don't know how many people Rittenhouse has killed, but the members we've seen certainly have no problem threatening innocent people. The group's long-term goal appears to be shaping reality, or at least the parts of it involving American history, to benefit themselves -- for reasons of either profit or power. The lust for power of a few who are willing to destroy or disenfranchise many for their own gain is one definition of evil, I'd say. The power to actually re-shape what is accepted as real also, arguably, has present-day echoes built into it.

Edited February 22, 2017 by Sandman

[legaleagle53]

9 minutes ago, RemoteControlFreak said:

Am I the only one who doesn't understand what's so bad about Rittenhouse? We keep hearing about how evil they are, but the show never showed or described Rittenhouse really doing anything.  Wyatt and Flynn killed more people than we knew Rittenhouse killing.  

Did you forget that Rittenhouse brutally murdered Flynn's wife and daughter in retaliation for Flynn's blowing the whistle on it, which is why Flynn hates Rittenhouse and is hell-bent on wiping it out of history in the first place?  Or that Rittenhouse routinely tried to keep Rufus in line by not-so-subtly threatening HIS family, until Rufus finally told Rittenhouse to fuck off?  And then there's the Rittenhouse Doctrine as set forth by both its founder David Rittenhouse and his heir apparent, his son John Rittenhouse, which is that mankind in general is so ignorant that it needs to be constantly manipulated for its own good, with Rittenhouse in the role of the master manipulator and sole judge of what's good for mankind. Organizations that literally seek to play God the way Rittenhouse does are organizations to be shunned and thwarted, not embraced.

Edited February 22, 2017 by legaleagle53

[Mabel]

Just a random thought (and mb somebody has already posted this): what if Flynn was somehow set up by Rittenhouse to go on his missions precisely with the aim of making Lucy's mom well again (since she is apparently some big wig in the organization) and bringing back Emma? Mb Rittenhouse is some kind of female club with women calling the shots and masterminding the whole operation))))))

On another note - the episode was quite enjoyable. But what's with Mason's personality transplant? That was awfully convenient (just like doctor/fiance being readily available to patch Rufus up. Was it mentioned previously that he was a surgeon?). And what were Jiya's visions for? Her only purpose in this episode was to keep Rufus company while Wyatt and Lucy went about their mission.

Overall, despite all its shortcomings hope the show gets renewed.  Would love for Goran Visnjic to get better storylines next season (but that probably is not gonna happen. Regrettably )

[NorthstarATL]

I loved Wyatt's coat/jacket! I had one like that a few years ago, and I think an ex has it now. Perhaps time to look him up? Jiya's powers don't make much sense, unless she herself has some innate abilities, which would be odd for a show that tries to be grounded except for the time travel. There have been numerous travelers between the two ships, and no one else has had that reaction. I WAS initially annoyed to find that "3" was sort of arbitrary, because a medical person as a fourth would have been invaluable on previous missions.

  So Wyatt has never been leered at in the present? Poor boy. I don't doubt that some of the patrons at the bar would look, but he was so obviously unkempt that they would have steered clear if they were closeted, as most were back then.

  I agree about the present-day relevance as well, what with the current McCarthy-style seeing "Russkies" under every bed! The more things change...

[CooperTV]

1 hour ago, legaleagle53 said:

I mean, God forbid that a gay man in a gay bar should find Wyatt sexually attractive, because that might mean that -- the horror! -- Wyatt is somehow throwing off some subtle signal that he's gay, and we just can't have people thinking that now, can we?

Really? As I said before, that scene was pretty much created for Lucy to comment on women being harassed and objectified. The writers just obviously didn't care about that thing called modern feminism or intersectionality or toxic masculinity or whatever. Or they made it look like they write progressive stuff but it's all come off as the Agent Carter writing: like someone time-travel from 1995 and now feels #woke about feminism and homophobia while has zero understanding how dated it all looks. It's not actually at all progressive when Lucy first lectures men in 1968 about gender equality (instead of one of the women from the time doing that maybe?), or when Rufus, a man, doing Katherine Johnson's work she was supposed to be done in reality...

[Dowel Jones]

2 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

Did anyone else think that some of the McCarthy-Wyatt conversation was edited to reflect current (unmentionable here by name) political personalities?:

The writers did give him the line "Communism is a cancer", to be turned into "Islam is a cancer" by the recently departed Michael Flynn.

[bros402]

17 hours ago, dubbel zout said:

With Grimm ending this season, there's a Friday opening. Timeless has a few too many flaws for me to actively want its renewal, but I think this show could take over its slot successfully.

The title of this ep was rather misleading. It was only superficially concerned with the Red Scare. (I know they had to name it something that wouldn't give away all the twists.)

I think this lined it up for a soft reboot for a second season - they can change the Rittenhouse stuff a bit, define WHAT they want, maybe have it be like "HERE IS AN EVIL-ER RITTENHOUSE FACTION THAT WANTS TO RULE THE COUNTRY OPENLY INSTEAD OF FROM THE SHADOWS"

[BooBear]

17 hours ago, CooperTV said:

It was incredibly underwhelming, not that I was expecting anything else from Timeless season (show?) finale, considering its track record. Well, the grandpa Cahill was interesting, I suppose, but they could have done so much more with him. Or even introduce him three episodes before that for viewers to actually be invested in him, since he was rather bland individual overall. I liked the resolution, with him giving Lucy and Wyatt all the Rittenhouse files and seeing them after 60 years. But it was pretty much a Deus Ex Machina situation and should have been built at least from episode 2 or 3.

I was also underwhelmed. I do think NBC should let this show go.

First, I didn't understand the entire way this was resolved. If you are dealing with a centuries old evil organization you do not take them down by "evidence". That never works. But the show seemed to have this thought that it would. Ok, but then, Mom is Rittenhouse and not arrested? What... how did granddad not get that name?  And that raises serious doubts as to if many other Rittenhouse are still out there. I also didn't buy that Flynn would go along with Lucy's plan. After killing all around the timeline are you going to give up your opportunity?   I didn't like the soft reboots they gave to Flynn and Mason just for this plot purpose. 

Jiya developing time traveling capabilities her head... super stupid.   Not to mention as was suggested above..why did she develop these problems as opposed to Wyatt / Lucy.  Seriously that seemed like a jump the shark moment. 

[legaleagle53]

5 hours ago, CooperTV said:

Really? As I said before, that scene was pretty much created for Lucy to comment on women being harassed and objectified. The writers just obviously didn't care about that thing called modern feminism or intersectionality or toxic masculinity or whatever. Or they made it look like they write progressive stuff but it's all come off as the Agent Carter writing: like someone time-travel from 1995 and now feels #woke about feminism and homophobia while has zero understanding how dated it all looks. It's not actually at all progressive when Lucy first lectures men in 1968 about gender equality (instead of one of the women from the time doing that maybe?), or when Rufus, a man, doing Katherine Johnson's work she was supposed to be done in reality...

Yes, really.

It wouldn't have made sense for the women in 1969 to give that creep a lecture about gender equality; in fact, it would have been out of character for them to do so, since they could (and in all likelihood would) have been fired for insubordination for mouthing off to a superior, and they knew it.  That's why they all gave subtle approval to Lucy's speech at the end -- you couldn't miss the big smiles on their faces after she had finished her rant. Lucy could do it because she had nothing to lose -- they couldn't because they had everything to lose.

And Rufus didn't really do the heavy lifting in that episode.  Katherine Johnson still did.  Rufus only did enough to prove to her that he knew what he was talking about in an attempt to convince her to help, otherwise, she never would have taken him seriously.  He was supposed to be a mere janitor, remember?

Nope, my issue is purely with Wyatt's homophobic overreaction to another man finding him sexually attractive.  As a man of 2017 and one who served in the military with men who by that time could be openly gay without repercussions -- surely at least one man in his Special Forces unit had to have been openly gay -- he should have known better than to have such an outdated, paranoid reaction.

[Netfoot]

6 hours ago, CooperTV said:

The writers just obviously didn't care about that thing called modern feminism or intersectionality or toxic masculinity or whatever.

Toxic masculinity?  That's a thing?  I guess I'm going to have to look it up.  

[CooperTV]

45 minutes ago, legaleagle53 said:

Nope, my issue is purely with Wyatt's homophobic overreaction to another man finding him sexually attractive.

Yeah, I think I'm done talking about that. This is getting out of hand into the realm of speculations and projections, and I'm not doing that.

Edited February 22, 2017 by CooperTV

[Netfoot]

2 hours ago, legaleagle53 said:

As a man of 2017 and one who served in the military with men who by that time could be openly gay without repercussions -- surely at least one man in his Special Forces unit had to have been openly gay -- he should have known better than to have such an outdated, paranoid reaction.

I'm considering the possibility that his outdated reaction might actually have been perfectly dated, considering that he is a time traveler from 2017 who finds himself in 1954...  

[MrSmith]

Well, finally got to watch the episode last night. It was interesting in some ways. Enough so that I've moved from "Please get canceled" to "If you don't get canceled, you're on a 3 episode probation next season". The thing with Jiya, while interesting, seems like they need someone somewhat (or actually) super-powered because they're setting Rittenhouse up to be some super-powerful organization that our three main characters from this season wouldn't be able to overcome without help. And that's just not that interesting to me. As for the rest of the episode, I don't feel there's much I can add that hasn't already been said (and probably said better) by other posters already.

[iMonrey]

Quote

Yes, Emma works for Rittenhouse. She might have been in the past as a safety measure, e.g., in case other pilots were killed. Maybe she didn't take out Flynn earlier because she wanted to see what he was up to? We don't know how serious she is about Rittenhouse. She might be something of a mercenary without them knowing it.

The whole thing with Emma doesn't really make sense. She faked her own death to escape from Rittenhouse, or at least that's what she initially told Flynn. That's how badly they scared her. Now we find out she's really a Rittenhouse agent? I suppose we're meant to think she was playing a long con, but how on earth could she have known - at the time of her disappearance - that Flynn would steal the mothership and find his way back to rescue her? Her grand plan - whether devised by her or Rittenhouse - would be dependent on clairvoyance. Unfortunately, we'll probably never get an answer to this, even if the show does get renewed. 

Lucy's mother being part of Rittenhouse doesn't make sense either. So both she and Lucy's father were both high-ranking Rittenhouse agents/operatives, yet her whole life Lucy was raised to believe some other guy was her father. Just so she could eventually be tricked into doing Rittenhouse's bidding? How did her parents know, from birth, that they would need Lucy to go chasing after Flynn one day?

 

Quote

So Wyatt has never been leered at in the present?

The line was nothing more than a clumsy way to get Lucy to point out that women are ogled all the time. It should have been deleted. It was seriously misplaced. At best it makes Wyatt sound arrogant as hell for needing to boast that some guy was eyeballing him. Someone who looks like Wyatt has definitely been leered at before, believe me. I guess it was supposed to be an amusing "gay panic" moment but it wasn't a good look on him.

[CooperTV]

7 minutes ago, iMonrey said:

Lucy's mother being part of Rittenhouse doesn't make sense either. So both she and Lucy's father were both high-ranking Rittenhouse agents/operatives, yet her whole life Lucy was raised to believe some other guy was her father.

There's a possibility that in the alternative timeline that was created after episodes 1 and 16 Lucy's mother embraced her Rittenhouse roots instead of rejecting them and marrying a random guy and having a child with him. It would explained supposed plot holes. I also think that the Baby Daddy Cahill could be a good guy in this new AU where the Creepy Mom came to be because of Lucy's Grandfather and his influence on him. We just didn't see it, yet.

[Dowel Jones]

I'm curious as to just how the government is going to prosecute a case of terrorism against Flynn in the present day.  It seems to me that all the evidence they have on him is based off the use of the time machine, the existence of which no one is going to willingly admit.  Defense attorney:  "So, Mr. Flynn, the prosecution stated that you killed an engineer in the space program in 1962.  Was this before you went back to WW2 and met Ian Fleming, or was it after you went to the Alamo and met General Santa Ana?"

[CooperTV]

4 minutes ago, Dowel Jones said:

I'm curious as to just how the government is going to prosecute a case of terrorism against Flynn in the present day.

Like, stealing of the government top-secret property, murder, The Gunpowder treason and plot?

[Arnella]

I haven't posted before because this show didn't move me to post as some others do.  I love historical recreations and time travel stories and this has good fashion porn as well.

I was ok with the antagonist being a nebulous evil secret society McGuffin (as opposed to the attractive, sympathetic guy who kills people every week) and didn't give it much thought until the finale.  Where can they possibly go with this (if they get renewed)? 

So they can't go back to where/when they've been even though those were the big Rittenhouse dates?

They have established that Rittenhouse's founder was racist and misogynist and all things evil indicating that the organization must be?  If Rittenhouse is all those things AND is somehow in control of America, how did we develop into a nation with civil rights for all?

If they are just a criminal organization that makes it's own members rich and powerful with the only aim to stay rich and powerful, that's not exactly unique in history.

From what we have seen they were not allied with Anarchists, Communists, Nazis (even though they apparently "made" Lindbergh talk smack about it), etc  since the country they are supposedly in charge of fought and won against all those things.

If their end game is to overtly take over America, they could have done it at any number of low points in history.  This show hasn't gone so far as to say that any president was Rittenhouse.  Probably because that would be too controversial and lose some audience but wouldn't that be par for the course if take over is Rittenhouse end game? 

Were they a complete failure at everything they wanted to do and that is why they need the time machine to go back and do it evilly right?  If they are so incompetent that they couldn't do it in 250 years with all the resources that are apparently at their disposal, how are they even a threat?  Especially, now that a huge number of them are being indicted with evidence provided by one of they own.  How smart are they if they didn't even notice him doing that for 50 years? 

If they do come back for a 2nd season, I hope they take the hiatus to come up with some reasonable motivations.

[Arnella]

Oops, double post somehow!

Edited February 22, 2017 by Arnella
Double post

[ketose]

On 2/21/2017 at 0:38 PM, kili said:

TVLine asked the same question:

She’s always been Rittenhouse. This is something that Eric [Kripke] and I had talked about even as we were making the pilot, before we even had writers on staff, that we felt that Lucy’s mother was Rittenhouse. We just debated when and how to reveal that. She’s someone who in both timelines… has always been a secret and an important member of Rittenhouse.

The creators also said:

Lucy’s mom pretty far outranks Ben Cahill. So it all comes down to Ben revealed himself, and Carol didn’t because that was exactly the way Carol wanted it for reasons that’ll be illuminated in Season 2.

They seem to talk about Season 2 as if it will happen.

This is really dumb. So, there's a SECRET Rittenhouse inside regular super-secret Rittenhouse. Next year, when they stop secret Rittenhouse, will there be a Double-Secret Rittenhouse to replace that, too?

21 hours ago, Tardislass said:

De-lurking here. I've been watching Timeless off and on, mainly because I love it's "inspiration" Spain's 'El Ministerio del Tiempo' or Ministery of Time. However, as much as I want to like this show, it's not really doing much for me. First, it can't quite decide whether it wants to be a campy Sci-Fi comic book show or a dramatic one. Spain's version was pretty adept at finding a balance between the two-even if it was that they the writers know it's crazy but just go with it. Second, while Spain's version was a bit too long at 1.5 hours, Timeless feels choppy and not fully formed with the numerous commercials in between. To me, it always feels like they cut 10 minutes off of the script that explains the plot. 

The Ministry of Time sounds a little better, but ABC did that with the Timecop series.

 

18 hours ago, legaleagle53 said:

Did you forget that Rittenhouse brutally murdered Flynn's wife and daughter in retaliation for Flynn's blowing the whistle on it, which is why Flynn hates Rittenhouse and is hell-bent on wiping it out of history in the first place?  Or that Rittenhouse routinely tried to keep Rufus in line by not-so-subtly threatening HIS family, until Rufus finally told Rittenhouse to fuck off?  And then there's the Rittenhouse Doctrine as set forth by both its founder David Rittenhouse and his heir apparent, his son John Rittenhouse, which is that mankind in general is so ignorant that it needs to be constantly manipulated for its own good, with Rittenhouse in the role of the master manipulator and sole judge of what's good for mankind. Organizations that literally seek to play God the way Rittenhouse does are organizations to be shunned and thwarted, not embraced.

Considering all the people who tried to or did leave Rittenhouse, it sounds like a crappy club. The downside is that if Rittenhouse's influence is so big, ending them decades in the past could change everything you know. I think something like RH should be ended in the present, but if Flynn is murdering through time to stop them, what gives him the right to end or change lives in the present day. That's worse than RH.

[Tardislass]

So from the writers quotes above I see that Rittenhouse is going to here for the foreseeable future and I'm getting bad flashbacks to the X-Files alien conspiracy. The one where people could follow the timeline and who was who for the first 3 seasons and then CC started murking up the waters until by the end you really didn't care. And an all powerful cabal seems so 1980s in our political climate today, where there are leaks everyday. 

 I'm still watching mainly for Goran Visnjic because he's marvelous with good scripts and I still love ER's Luka. I'm pretty much liking Jiya and Rufus, yet Wyatt is annoying 50% of the time which is why I can't get completely behind Wyatt/Lucy. That and the fact that he'd dump Lucy like a hot potato if his wife ever came back in the timeline. I'm thinking perhaps Netflix could buy the show and air it. It might have a better chance with no commercials and a lower budget.

Edited February 23, 2017 by Tardislass

[Netfoot]

4 hours ago, Dowel Jones said:

I'm curious as to just how the government is going to prosecute a case of terrorism against Flynn in the present day.  It seems to me that all the evidence they have on him is based off the use of the time machine, the existence of which no one is going to willingly admit.

Surely you don't think that it will be necessary for them to prosecute a case?  With evidence?  In a court?

This is happening in America, don't forget.  Where a citizen can be snatched off the street and vanish for ever, with no right to legal representation, a speedy trial, or any trial in fact, no phone call, no habeas corpus, no friends or family to be informed what's become of them, the state not reqiored to produce them or even admit they've got them, or nothing.  And all perfectly legal.  It's called The Patriot Act.

I mean, you could get snatched off the streets of Bridgetown too, but at least they'd be doing it illegally!

[KaveDweller]

5 hours ago, CooperTV said:

There's a possibility that in the alternative timeline that was created after episodes 1 and 16 Lucy's mother embraced her Rittenhouse roots instead of rejecting them and marrying a random guy and having a child with him. It would explained supposed plot holes. I also think that the Baby Daddy Cahill could be a good guy in this new AU where the Creepy Mom came to be because of Lucy's Grandfather and his influence on him. We just didn't see it, yet.

Maybe the other guy Lucy's mom married was also Rittenhouse? Do we know what happened to him?

In the Watergate episode, Rufus called someone in the past to give them info, and then when they got to the present we found out he called Ben Cahill in the past. Maybe in some timeline, Rittenhouse has control of the time machine in the future and sent messages back to other Rittenhouse members in other time periods. That could explain why Emma was in hiding in the past, why Lucy didn't know who her dad was, etc.

[legaleagle53]

12 hours ago, Netfoot said:

I'm considering the possibility that his outdated reaction might actually have been perfectly dated, considering that he is a time traveler from 2017 who finds himself in 1954...  

That doesn't matter.  He's from 2017, not 1954.  Therefore, he should know better.

[Netfoot]

1 minute ago, legaleagle53 said:

That doesn't matter.  He's from 2017, not 1954.  Therefore, he should know better.

He should know better than to act like he's from 2017 you mean?

[legaleagle53]

4 hours ago, Arnella said:

So they can't go back to where/when they've been even though those were the big Rittenhouse dates?

No.  Rittenhouse has nothing to do with that rule of time travel.

2 minutes ago, Netfoot said:

He should know better than to act like he's from 2017 you mean?

No, I mean he should know better than to have that attitude.  He only spoke about it to Lucy, not in front of the whole bar.  Why would he have needed to act like a 1954 homophobic jerk if he was only talking to Lucy and to nobody else?  And what did he THINK would happen in a gay bar where he's surrounded by gay men?

[legaleagle53]

3 hours ago, ketose said:

This is really dumb. So, there's a SECRET Rittenhouse inside regular super-secret Rittenhouse. Next year, when they stop secret Rittenhouse, will there be a Double-Secret Rittenhouse to replace that, too?

The Ministry of Time sounds a little better, but ABC did that with the Timecop series.

 

Considering all the people who tried to or did leave Rittenhouse, it sounds like a crappy club. The downside is that if Rittenhouse's influence is so big, ending them decades in the past could change everything you know. I think something like RH should be ended in the present, but if Flynn is murdering through time to stop them, what gives him the right to end or change lives in the present day. That's worse than RH.

Point taken.  In fact, I think that's why Flynn eventually started doubting the justification of his actions.  He'd started to see that he had become (or was becoming) the very thing he hated and set out to destroy.

[bros402]

11 hours ago, Dowel Jones said:

I'm curious as to just how the government is going to prosecute a case of terrorism against Flynn in the present day.  It seems to me that all the evidence they have on him is based off the use of the time machine, the existence of which no one is going to willingly admit.  Defense attorney:  "So, Mr. Flynn, the prosecution stated that you killed an engineer in the space program in 1962.  Was this before you went back to WW2 and met Ian Fleming, or was it after you went to the Alamo and met General Santa Ana?"

Blowing up the warehouse with Anthony in it is terrorism.

[Dowel Jones]

They will need some sort of hard evidence that he did that.

[RemoteControlFreak]

On 2/21/2017 at 11:26 PM, legaleagle53 said:

Did you forget that Rittenhouse brutally murdered Flynn's wife and daughter in retaliation for Flynn's blowing the whistle on it, which is why Flynn hates Rittenhouse and is hell-bent on wiping it out of history in the first place?  Or that Rittenhouse routinely tried to keep Rufus in line by not-so-subtly threatening HIS family, until Rufus finally told Rittenhouse to fuck off?  And then there's the Rittenhouse Doctrine as set forth by both its founder David Rittenhouse and his heir apparent, his son John Rittenhouse, which is that mankind in general is so ignorant that it needs to be constantly manipulated for its own good, with Rittenhouse in the role of the master manipulator and sole judge of what's good for mankind. Organizations that literally seek to play God the way Rittenhouse does are organizations to be shunned and thwarted, not embraced.

Rittenhouse has been around for hundreds of years and we only know of two murders -- Flynn's wife and daughter and a subtle threat to one person.  The series needs to do a much better job of convincing us that Rittenhouse is the evil empire.

[Clanstarling]

2 hours ago, RemoteControlFreak said:

Rittenhouse has been around for hundreds of years and we only know of two murders -- Flynn's wife and daughter and a subtle threat to one person.  The series needs to do a much better job of convincing us that Rittenhouse is the evil empire.

I was pretty underwhelmed by the list of "important people" who were Rittenhouse. Corporate lawyers, really? That sounds more like a cheap shot at lawyers than positions for people who seemingly want to rule the world.

The big bad is so ill defined that the whole Rittenhouse plot leaves me cold. Frankly, Flynn's bomb at the 50's meeting seemed like a more viable solution than taking them to court, for goodness sake. And I hate Flynn and his methods.

[CooperTV]

2 hours ago, RemoteControlFreak said:

Rittenhouse has been around for hundreds of years and we only know of two murders -- Flynn's wife and daughter and a subtle threat to one person.  The series needs to do a much better job of convincing us that Rittenhouse is the evil empire.

Seriously. They screwed up their main villain to the point of them being just vaguely bigoted (because we only seen Rittenhouse himself, and he was from 18th century, where everyone was bigots and racists) and try to make Flynn sympathetic by... writing him and crazy asshole who kills and torture innocent people around the timeline? I don't like either of them, but I want Flynn dead yesterday, unlike mildly power-hungry politicians and lobbyists from Rittenhouse.

[Arnella]

12 hours ago, legaleagle53 said:

17 hours ago, Arnella said:

So they can't go back to where/when they've been even though those were the big Rittenhouse dates?

No.  Rittenhouse has nothing to do with that rule of time travel.

Not because of Rittenhouse but because they can't meet themselves in history.  I meant they've visited those big Rittenhouse dates/meetings so where to now?  Although, I'm sure the writers can come up with other big Rittenhouse gatherings through history to visit for more contrived reasons...

[iMonrey]

Quote

There's a possibility that in the alternative timeline that was created after episodes 1 and 16 Lucy's mother embraced her Rittenhouse roots instead of rejecting them and marrying a random guy and having a child with him. 

The show-runners have stated they intended for her to be a big Rittenhouse baddie from the very start, but good on you for giving them more credit than they deserve.

Quote

And an all powerful cabal seems so 1980s in our political climate today

I know right? Not to get all political but I fail to see how Rittenhouse could be worse than our currently elected officials. 

[rove4]

6 minutes ago, iMonrey said:

I know right? Not to get all political but I fail to see how Rittenhouse could be worse than our currently elected officials. 

One can almost see how Rittenhouse might have come to its conclusion that society is too dumb to make good decisions.

People make good points about plot holes/inconsistencies but I find I just don't care. This show is (was?) a piece of candy floss that I looked forward to each week. A fun escape from reality. That, and my son and I did look up quite a few things during the course of the season and learned some historical tidbits we never knew. That's a win in my book.

[LoneHaranguer]

1 hour ago, rove4 said:

One can almost see how Rittenhouse might have come to its conclusion that society is too dumb to make good decisions.

The right to vote in the U.S. was initially limited. Senators were picked by state legislators, not voters, until the early 1900's. So why would an 18th century Rittenhouse have the same concern? Was it just conceit?

[Dowel Jones]

I was amused by the scene at Mason Industries where there was a crew pressure washing the lifeboat after its arrival.  Even in supersecret laboratories, someone has to clean up.  Would it kill them to give it a good paint job so it looks kind of like the eyeball?

[basiltherat]

I thought somehow that the power-wash of the eyeball reflected that Jiya's eyeball was in need of some Murine!

Dammit if I don't read more into this show that I should, but I am a graduate of the Lost school of multiple plot meanings.

[CooperTV]

11 minutes ago, Dowel Jones said:

Would it kill them to give it a good paint job so it looks kind of like the eyeball?

Agent Christopher would be scandalized! And Connor Mason would be bitchy for a week.

I'd rather they install a clear look-through wall between tech people and the Eyeball. All those tachyon particles flying 'round!

[dubbel zout]

6 hours ago, Arnella said:

I meant they've visited those big Rittenhouse dates/meetings

Have they? They met the OG Rittenhouse, and Flynn had planned to hit the one in 1954, but Lucy's idea to have her grandfather collect all the dirt so she could hand it over to Agent Christopher. The big meetings were every 25 years, and they didn't learn that until the Lindbergh episode, IIRC. And we don't know how long the quarter-century meetings had been going on.

[Clanstarling]

3 minutes ago, dubbel zout said:

Have they? They met the OG Rittenhouse, and Flynn had planned to hit the one in 1954, but Lucy's idea to have her grandfather collect all the dirt so she could hand it over to Agent Christopher. The big meetings were every 25 years, and they didn't learn that until the Lindbergh episode, IIRC. And we don't know how long the quarter-century meetings had been going on.

Heh, gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "quarterly meetings."

[Spaceman Spiff]

I always thought once they revealed that Lucy's dad was Rittenhouse, and Rittenhouse took over through the NSA, that they would have an episode where the team would return and all the NSA dudes would be greeting Lucy with Ma'am this and Ma'am that, indicating the timeline they returned to was different, where Lucy displaced her father and was now the bigwig in Rittenhouse.

It was a decent season/series finale. But I will be one to miss it if it doesn't comes back, and that includes scruffy Wyatt. I thought the three leads had some really good chemistry. I was introduced to Abigail Spencer only through Suits, so seeing her here was nice, she showed some great comedic timing with some of her line reads and expressions. Plus I would miss Rufus's snarky comments like "So what we become the United States of France where everyone has a bad attitude and no one picks up their dog poop...."

I honestly didn't see the mom twist coming until Lucy started explaining to her what she had been doing, and the Jiya time jumping would be interesting next season, if there is one.

I understand the displeasure with the whole Rittenhouse cabal as the big bad, and that they weren't really shown to be bad, exactly, and that everyone would prefer the fun wacky jaunts to the past meeting historical figures only, but without a big bad who is altering time, or a lesser bad who is altering time to stop the big bad from existing, like Flynn, there is no reason to jump through time and therefore no show. This isn't Legends of Tomorrow where the futuristic space ship can tell them of time anomalies that need fixing. You need someone to be actively trying to change time to protect it from being changed.