S01.E16: The Red Scare

[dubbel zout]

19 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

You need someone to be actively trying to change time to protect it from being changed.

Lucy's diary could be the history of record, and they go back to fix things because present day is terrible. Or something along those lines.

[ketose]

9 hours ago, Clanstarling said:

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.

Apparently, the lawyers were part of less secret Rittenhouse. Carol was part of the important, unseen Rittenhouse. That's why she was.. an historian? Exactly why the hell did Carol need to be an historian AND make sure her daughter followed in her footsteps?

1 hour ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

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.

That would have been cool. Even better if the disposable fiancee is also Rittenhouse. By the way, why would Rittenhouse want to inbreed like that. Any halfway decent biologist knows that intermingling in such a small genetic pool turns offspring into idiots, not geniuses.

39 minutes ago, dubbel zout said:

Lucy's diary could be the history of record, and they go back to fix things because present day is terrible. Or something along those lines.

I recall the diary being somewhat disjointed or crazy. Maybe she starts keeping it next season (ha ha) now that she knows Flynn isn't as bad of an enemy.

[Tardislass]

5 hours ago, iMonrey said:

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.

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

It's kind of like the X-files in that in today's world, someone would leak something to the press. Recordings, photos. Our own government can't keep it's secrets so I'm supposed to believe this super-secret organization can?

[henripootel]

5 hours ago, ketose said:

By the way, why would Rittenhouse want to inbreed like that. Any halfway decent biologist knows that intermingling in such a small genetic pool turns offspring into idiots, not geniuses.

Well, it's not that bad, depending on how big Rittenhouse is and if they sufficiently refresh the gene pool.  Which they probably do considering rapey-old original 1780s Rittenhouse was raw-doggin' everything that came his way.  Even if they encouraged first-cousin level marriages, a large enough group should prevent too many lethals coming to the fore.

Again brings up just how big Rittenhouse really is, and I'm far from alone here ...

15 hours ago, Clanstarling said:

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.

I was underwhelmed at how few people this exposed.  I mean I know that they probably weren't through rounding folks up but 140?  I was thinking Rittenhouse would have to be in the thousands, more likely tens of thousands by now.  They're pretty much a poor-man's illuminati, right?  I figured the top brass alone would be a few dozen.  If they're that big and that evil, I'd say let Flynn go ahead with his bomb back in the 50s.  No way even a half-assed organization wouldn't have taken steps to protect themselves from being exposed entirely.

Edited February 24, 2017 by henripootel
fix a citation - sorry Clanstarling

[Clanstarling]

43 minutes ago, henripootel said:

I was underwhelmed at how few people this exposed.  I mean I know that they probably weren't through rounding folks up but 140?  I was thinking Rittenhouse would have to be in the thousands, more likely tens of thousands by now.  They're pretty much a poor-man's illuminati, right?  I figured the top brass alone would be a few dozen.  If they're that big and that evil, I'd say let Flynn go ahead with his bomb back in the 50s.  No way even a half-assed organization wouldn't have taken steps to protect themselves from being exposed entirely.

Somehow my comment got attributed to Ketose. I agree with you, I assumed Rittenhouse would be much larger - especially if they're breeding for it. The other thing that might have made it more interesting is to have at least a few notables in the list - not necessarily by name but by position or something. Such as a CEO of a major corporation, an advisor to someone with power, etc.

[KaveDweller]

20 hours ago, Dowel Jones said:

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

They have video of Flynn busting into the warehouse with guns and stealing the time machine. And of "abducting" Anthony, which means they could easily get him convicted of Anthony's murder (even though we know Anthony wasn't actually kidnapped). Plus, there was one early episode where they found Flynn's location and tried to arrest him and Flynn's men shot up all the agents/cops/whatever. That would be on record too.

Also, didn't Flynn kill that ex-NASA guy in the present? He went and visited him, said he was writing a book and asked about the moon landing and his ID badge. Then he shot the guy, and after that he went back to 1969. He probably left fingerprints or something there that could convict him. 

4 hours ago, ketose said:

Apparently, the lawyers were part of less secret Rittenhouse. Carol was part of the important, unseen Rittenhouse. That's why she was.. an historian? Exactly why the hell did Carol need to be an historian AND make sure her daughter followed in her footsteps?

That would have been cool. Even better if the disposable fiancee is also Rittenhouse. By the way, why would Rittenhouse want to inbreed like that. Any halfway decent biologist knows that intermingling in such a small genetic pool turns offspring into idiots, not geniuses.

I recall the diary being somewhat disjointed or crazy. Maybe she starts keeping it next season (ha ha) now that she knows Flynn isn't as bad of an enemy.

Maybe they wanted a historian on Rittenhouse so they knew what changes would have the biggest impact when they do get control of a time machine. They must have either been hoping for it or were tipped off by a time traveler it was coming. If Emma was in the 1800s for years and is Rittenhouse, she could have told other Rittenhouse members exactly when it would be invented. 

[wilnil]

One thing that threw me was when Flynn suggested that his plan to bomb the '50s Rittenhouse meeting might endanger Lucy's existence by killing her ancestor(s). If he thought that was even a possibility, why would he have dared to mess with his own mother's past (in 1969 during the Apollo 11 mission, IIRC)? It would seem, by the rules the show has implied, that at worst she'd return to a present timeline where she hadn't been born and thus no one but her traveling companions knew her.

Not that I'm even sure he could've erased her birth. Given how little everybody's changes to the past have altered the present, I'm now thinking this is more of an "Elastic" time-travel model, where the timeline can be changed but only in minor ways because similar events happen in place of the original ones, so Lucy's family situation being different is about the biggest shift that's possible. At least that's the only way we can handwave away things like the untimely death of Cornwallis or there being no real fallout from the attempted sabotage of the first moon landing (which should've really heated up the Cold War). 

[Camera One]

I finally watched the finale.  I enjoyed most of the episode, but the ending left me cold.  I was disappointed that if there is a Season 2, it will be AngryFlynn and Rittenhouse once again.  I was hoping for those two aspects of the show along with the journal to disappear into a wormhole, and maybe they could have spent time coming up with better worldbuilding for Season 2. 

I liked Lucy and her grandfather, but the "solution" was too easy if Rittenhouse was so far-reaching and powerful.  The grandfather working against Rittenhouse had zero impact on his son, who ended up in the exact same place?  They appeared out of nowhere to storm the warehouse but couldn't find the grandfather's stash of evidence to destroy when Agent Christopher and the team were casually talking there?

I don't buy Kripke claiming they didn't change their plan in case the series got cancelled.  The transition between the grandfather in the 1950s and now was abrupt as hell.

I also wasn't impressed with the reveal of Lucy's mother, considering we hardly saw her.  I loved the actress in "Once and Again" but she was totally bland during the "I am Rittenhouse" reveal. 

I haven't seen the actress who plays Emma in other shows, so I couldn't care less about her either.  I found her incredibly abrasive and annoying.  So Rittenhouse was planning to go back in time and kill Flynn's mother but they told Emma to stand by and let Flynn identify the big gathering in the 1950s?  

I'm thankful Jiya didn't die, but the backflash vision seems like another ill-defined contrivance they didn't think too deeply about.

I still want the show renewed, though.  

Edited February 24, 2017 by Camera One

[henripootel]

39 minutes ago, KaveDweller said:

Also, didn't Flynn kill that ex-NASA guy in the present? He went and visited him, said he was writing a book and asked about the moon landing and his ID badge. Then he shot the guy, and after that he went back to 1969. He probably left fingerprints or something there that could convict him. 

That one at least was probably a 'self-cleaner'.  Flynn killing the guy in the past meant that he wasn't there to be killed again in 2017, so that 'never happened', so to speak. 

31 minutes ago, Camera One said:

The grandfather working against Rittenhouse had zero impact on his son, who ended up in the exact same place?

This one could almost be explained away, although it doesn't make much sense.  It could be that, in Lucy's timeline, Lucy already went back, met her grandpa, and got him to flip on Rittenhouse.  Lucy never knew this nor did anyone else, but going back into the past might not have changed the timeline at all, only revealed to Lucy herself that grandpa's stash of evidence would one day be waiting.

Why this makes no sense: why would turncoat grandpa still raise his own son to be a Rittenhouse shitbag?  Are we not pretty sure that Lucy's dad is a true believer?  Why would a guy who'd turned against Rittenhouse do that?  

[Camera One]

why would turncoat grandpa still raise his own son to be a Rittenhouse shitbag?

That's the part that makes no sense to me.  The only rationale I can think of is the grandfather couldn't blow his cover and had to bring the son into the fold.  But as other people said above, Lucy's Ultra-Evil mother didn't see the need to bring her into the fold.

[henripootel]

4 minutes ago, Camera One said:

The only rationale I can think of is the grandfather couldn't blow his cover and had to bring the son into the fold.  But as other people said above, Lucy's Ultra-Evil mother didn't see the need to bring her into the fold.

I guess, but that is some damn hard long-term planning.  And that for a guy who once upon a time, met a girl who said she was his granddaughter and apparently showed him a disappearing time ship.  Once.  That's a lifetime of not only lying to your own son, but (presumably) indoctrinating him into the glories of a group you know to be evil. 

And why didn't Lucy's mom bring her into the fold?  What's the good of having a multigenerational organization if not to breed the next generation of solid members?  

Neither of these make much sense.

[ketose]

Time continuity is one of the worst written aspects of the show. I can look back at a show like Continuum and understand the internal logic of time travel there and how it folds in on itself. Timeless is just all over the place. Famous people are killed and notable events are radically altered and somehow the most drastic change happened in the first episode during the first trip back in time.

If the writers wanted to make history porn, they could have come up with a different sci-fi premise than a time machine chase. Frankly, the history porn is the best part of the show. Rittenhouse just drags it down and the time travel science is laughable.

[Camera One]

Yet the Writers want to continue building on Rittenhouse.  How can you build on a premise which has been so flimsy from the beginning?  The organization is threatening and scary when they want it to be, but easy to thwart to bring everything back to status quo.  Within the same episode.  Why didn't Rittenhouse send some new government person to take over Mason Enterprises at the end?  Why didn't they get rid of Agent Christopher and Mason?  Why wouldn't they have a few couple spare pilots trained and ready?  

[STOPSHOUTING]

OK, maybe the fact that I missed a lot of these things while watching tells me that the show isn't really working, even though we watched the whole season; enthusiastically at first, and then less so. My kids really liked it until somewhere around the middle, when I felt they really got bogged down in their own mythology vs the more interesting "history of the week" adventures. I cared very little about Rittenhouse, and didn't even realize they "took it down" with those papers -- assumed it wouldn't be anywhere near that easy, as it's a centuries old shadow organization controlling the entire country but, ahem -- until the mom reveal. Did enjoy the grandpa-is-gay twist, but when he talked about his wife and son, I realized they could have just done Flynn's plan, blown everyone up, and Lucy would still exist, because her dad was already born. 

Anyway, the mama-is-even-bigger-Rittenhouse twist was actually OK, but I didn't even recognize the pilot (Emma, apparently) who'd been living in the old west when she was on board the ship. I was vaguely like, 'Are we supposed to know who that is?' But that didn't track until I read a recap/review, and even then I had to look up who "Emma" was for a reminder. The show also did the SUPER lame, 'Someone dies' teaser and then, guess what, no one did.

I think the Jiya "time sickness" could be a cool place to go; but the logic that the ship "knew" she was the fourth passenger and, therefore, the only one effected is L-A-M-E.

When we first started watching this show, my older kids, 9 & 6, were super excited about it and it reminded me a lot of a short-lived show I really liked when I was about that age called Voyagers. Anyone else remember that one? A kid and a guy go through history "fixing" stuff to protect important people, usually before they became historically important, sometimes obvious, sometimes less so.

IF this show comes back, they really need to up the goofy, fun, history-is-cool elements and put the Rittenhouse mythology on the back burner, because I think the writers/creators have completely missed what is interesting about their show. (HINT: It's NEVER, EVER the shadowy, illogical, irrational conspiracy group. See: X-Files, et al.)

Edited February 24, 2017 by STOPSHOUTING

[Arnella]

15 hours ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

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.

I wish you were writing the show.

I also like a previously stated idea of Christopher being a different person every time they jumped for a running gag but this would take the show down a much more interesting path.

[Netfoot]

15 hours ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

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.

That would be the first change to the present timeline since episode #1!

[Arnella]

22 minutes ago, STOPSHOUTING said:

When we first started watching this show, my older kids, 9 & 6, were super excited about it and it reminded me a lot of a short-lived show I really liked when I about that age called Voyagers. Anyone else remember that one? A kid and a guy go through history "fixing" stuff to protect important people, usually before they became historically important, sometimes obvious, sometimes less so.

IF this show comes back, they really need to up the goofy fun, history-is-cool elements and put the Rittenhouse mythology on the back burner, because I think the writers/creators have completely missed what is interesting about their show. (HINT: It's NEVER the shadowy, illogical, irrational, international conspiracy. Ever. See: X-Files, et al.)

Heck yeah!  I think I may be unconsciously hoping for this every time I get excited about a time travel show!  OH Jon Eric Hexum - sigh

Edited February 24, 2017 by Arnella

[Clanstarling]

26 minutes ago, STOPSHOUTING said:

But when he talked about his wife and son, I realized they could have just done Flynn's plan, blown everyone up, and Lucy would still exist because he dad was already born.

Me too.

The show bugs, because some things are excellent. The casting and acting of all the notable people in history was great - particularly Bonnie and Clyde. They seemed to pop to me more than the main cast.

They are really low on pay-off about the results of changing the past, which given that their whole premise (at least initially) is to stop Flynn so he doesn't change the past. It feels like a bait and switch to me when they do things that clearly change the past and then only yammer on about Lucy's lost sister.

The big bad Rittenhouse hasn't really been shown to be big and bad. It's all just talk. Yes, they threatened a few people, so they're nasty, and supposedly killed Flynn's family (we only have his word for it, and he's not exactly a reliable witness and kills people left and right without need), but to think of them as this uber threat, they have to be more than nasty on an individual level - there has to be something awful on a world wide (or even nationwide) scale that we can look at and say "oh yes, they're evil and they need to be taken down," not just vague talk.

It's just frustrating. I really want to like this show all the time, not just for portions of episode.

[CooperTV]

4 minutes ago, Clanstarling said:

The big bad Rittenhouse hasn't really been shown to be big and bad. It's all just talk.

I doubt Rittenhouse is worse than the Stalin regime or the Khmer Rouge or the Franco dictatorship or freaking Nazis or any other horrendous governments that actually existed during the time Rittenhouse was coming to power. I mean, I guess it explains a lot that US tv writers are clueless enough to consider this weird shadowy organization to be more sinister that the actual terrorists because The X-Files throwbacks are life. But.

[Clanstarling]

8 minutes ago, CooperTV said:

I doubt Rittenhouse is worse than the Stalin regime or the Khmer Rouge or the Franco dictatorship or freaking Nazis or any other horrendous governments that actually existed during the time Rittenhouse was coming to power. I mean, I guess it explains a lot that US tv writers are clueless enough to consider this weird shadowy organization to be more sinister that the actual terrorists because The X-Files throwbacks are life.

Agreed. It's precisely the fact that we have so many past (and current) evil governments/dictators (not making any comment about US politics, just the world) that merely saying Rittenhouse is horrible doesn't mean a thing. There's a tangible reason why the common time travel discussion is about whether you'd go back and kill Hitler (and further discussion on why that might, or might not, have the impact on history that you intend). For Rittenhouse - bupkus.

[benteen]

16 hours ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

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.

Agreed that you need a threat against time to justify the time traveling by the Scooby gang.  I just prefer it wasn't Rittenhouse, which is just an ill-defined mess.  I'd prefer a foreign government got their own time travel technology and this has basically set off a temporal arms race.

I agree with an earlier poster in that nobody can keep secrets anymore.  We're supposed to believe that an organization like Rittenhouse can?

Edited February 24, 2017 by benteen

[Arnella]

9 minutes ago, benteen said:

I agree with an earlier poster in that nobody can keep secrets anymore.  We're supposed to believe that an organization like Rittenhouse can?

And what secrets are they even keeping?  That some "corporate lawyers" belong to the club - who cares!  If you going with this story line, how about some actual CORPORATIONS or POLITICIANS??  I get that would be too controversial but it's a fantasy show already so make up some (possibly thinly veiled) corporations and politicians.  Either it's the big bad or just a lame frat with good underground PR.

[henripootel]

24 minutes ago, benteen said:

Agreed that you need a threat against time to justify the time traveling by the Scooby gang.  I just prefer it wasn't Rittenhouse, which is just an ill-defined mess.  I'd prefer a foreign government got their own time travel technology and this has basically set off a temporal arms race.

I think it might have gone better to bring this on slowly. The show functions best as, as Ketose says above, history porn.  They should have started with this, using the time ship for research purposes, then become slowly aware that after a trip or two, the Time Team's recollection of history is not the one everyone else back at base remembers.  

Once they rule out that his is the result of the Team's own actions, they are forced to conclude that somebody else out there has their own time machine, and is re-shaping history for a specific purpose.  It soon dawns on them that the (apparently benign) conglomerate called 'Rittenhouse' must be behind it, because neither Lucy, Wyatt, or Rufus have ever heard of them, even though 'now' they're a huge mega-industry with ties into everything.

Then they meet Flynn, who says he stole Rittenhouse's time machine and is just trying to put back what Rittenhouse has already changed.  Is Rittenhouse really evil?  Is Flynn trying to just put things back or re-shape history for his own ends?  Who's side should they be on?  

I think this would have spun out in much more interesting ways than the muddled mess they have now.  It would have a clearer endpoint (put things back the way they 'should be') and a more interesting question (Who's to say how things 'should be'?).   Just my $.02.

[STOPSHOUTING]

1 hour ago, henripootel said:

I think it might have gone better to bring this on slowly. The show functions best as, as Ketose says above, history porn.  They should have started with this, using the time ship for research purposes, then become slowly aware that after a trip or two, the Time Team's recollection of history is not the one everyone else back at base remembers.  

Once they rule out that his is the result of the Team's own actions, they are forced to conclude that somebody else out there has their own time machine, and is re-shaping history for a specific purpose.  It soon dawns on them that the (apparently benign) conglomerate called 'Rittenhouse' must be behind it, because neither Lucy, Wyatt, or Rufus have ever heard of them, even though 'now' they're a huge mega-industry with ties into everything.

Then they meet Flynn, who says he stole Rittenhouse's time machine and is just trying to put back what Rittenhouse has already changed.  Is Rittenhouse really evil?  Is Flynn trying to just put things back or re-shape history for his own ends?  Who's side should they be on?  

I think this would have spun out in much more interesting ways than the muddled mess they have now.  It would have a clearer endpoint (put things back the way they 'should be') and a more interesting question (Who's to say how things 'should be'?).   Just my $.02.

 

Sounds better than what they actually did. They should have focused on the history and adventure elements, getting the cast to gel, etc. -- i.e. in testing/developing the time machine they realized they changed history, oops, and are just trying to change it back -- and then slowly, if they must, dribble in the mythology elements. For a show you actually want to keep going, adding that for the first time in the season finale, for instance, could have made a great and really exciting cliffhanger.

e.g. They assume it's the developers of the time machine that inadvertently, and unintentionally, changed history, they've been trying to "fix" up to that point -- so you could still have the new team assembled once the scientists figured out their uh-oh -- then in the finale they meet Flynn for the first time, think he's the villain and he mentions Rittenhouse at the very end, or whatever and everyone could be intrigued and guessing, rather than already done with the tired, poorly thought out thing.

The reveal that Lucy's sister no longer existed after the first mission was a great coda that hinted at larger repercussions for time travel ... But then, even though they prattled on endlessly about said sister, who we couldn't possibly be invested in since we knew for all of six seconds, it was such a stupid red herring because nothing else they did seemed to change the present AT ALL, minus that new James Bond film (And, seriously, film, not book? C'mon show!) we heard about. And that after they made some MAJOR changes, to some incredibly famous historical events. So, yeah, not buying, nor caring, about the vanished sister bit, not even a little.

Edited February 24, 2017 by STOPSHOUTING

[CooperTV]

I've re-watched The Watergate Tape episode, and something have occurred to me. Flynn said something to Wyatt when he was holding him hostage that Lucy wrote about him in her journal.

Quote

Lucy didn't write about everything. And what is written does sometimes sound crazy, like a different Lucy.

...

"Wyatt's obsessed with his wife's death. He needs to let go, move on." Lucy's words. Not mine.

Is it possible our Lucy is the alternative version of the Original!Lucy that was raised and indoctrinated into Rittenhouse. At some point something in that  timeline went wrong (Flynn? the Team EyeBall?) and we got Our!Lucy instead, who has no idea about her Rittenhouse legacy? Because Journal!Lucy does sound way more detached about Wyatt than Our!Lucy who is super empathetic and specifically empathetic about Wyatt's issues, due to them both having similar losses?

Edited February 24, 2017 by CooperTV

[LoneHaranguer]

16 hours ago, ketose said:

By the way, why would Rittenhouse want to inbreed like that. Any halfway decent biologist knows that intermingling in such a small genetic pool turns offspring into idiots, not geniuses.

Actually, it cuts both ways, and some experts have suggested it may not be so bad now that we have genetic testing (and in some cases, therapy) to deal with the downside. A group as (allegedly) ruthless as Rittenhouse would have just disowned any offspring that didn't measure up.

1 hour ago, Arnella said:

And what secrets are they even keeping?  That some "corporate lawyers" belong to the club - who cares!  If you going with this story line, how about some actual CORPORATIONS or POLITICIANS??

If you're going to have lawyers in the fold, wouldn't they be more useful as prosecutors and judges?

[Clanstarling]

1 hour ago, Arnella said:

Either it's the big bad or just a lame frat with good underground PR.

Great line - love it.

49 minutes ago, STOPSHOUTING said:

The reveal that Lucy's sister no longer existed after the first mission was a great coda that hinted at larger repercussions for time travel ... But then, even though they prattled on endlessly about said sister, who we couldn't possibly be invested in since we knew for all of six seconds, it was such a stupid red herring because nothing else they did seemed to change history AT ALL, minus that new James Bond film (And, seriously, film, not book? C'mon show!) we heard about. And that after they made some MAJOR changes, to some incredibly famous historical events. So, yeah, not buying, nor caring, about the vanished sister bit, not even a little.

Amen.

3 minutes ago, LoneHaranguer said:

If you're going to have lawyers in the fold, wouldn't they be more useful as prosecutors and judges?

I know, right? If you're going to set up a big bad, apply some logic when it comes to their underhanded influence.

[Camera One]

That's a good point about seeing Lucy's sister for a few seconds in a single episode and assuming we'd care.  Ditto for Wyatt's wife.  Finally, in this episode, they show Flynn with his wife and daughter, so we'd feel sorry for him?  It's manipulative and cheap storytelling.  

I suppose the positive is that it's possible to ignore that aspect of the show since it's basically used as bookends and cliffhanger fodder, and just watch for the history-of-the-week story.

[possibilities]

3 hours ago, STOPSHOUTING said:

IF this show comes back, they really need to up the goofy, fun, history-is-cool elements and put the Rittenhouse mythology on the back burner

I'd be more than fine with that, but they've dug themselves in pretty deep and I don't know if they've got the skill to dispose of it in any credible way. They seem to really like their conspiracy.

3 hours ago, Clanstarling said:

The show bugs, because some things are excellent.

That sums it up perfectly! They do somethings so well, I want to watch. And the other stuff is terrible, so you either have to ignore it and just pretend it isn't there, or get irritated by it if you pay attention.

56 minutes ago, Camera One said:

I suppose the positive is that it's possible to ignore that aspect of the show since it's basically used as bookends and cliffhanger fodder, and just watch for the history-of-the-week story.

This.

[CaptainE]

Did I miss it or was it not explained why Wyatt is the only one who can't get his loved ones back?

Flynn?  Yes.

Lucy?  Yes.

Wyatt? No?

[orza]

12 minutes ago, CaptainE said:

Did I miss it or was it not explained why Wyatt is the only one who can't get his loved ones back?

Flynn?  Yes.

Lucy?  Yes.

Wyatt? No?

Wyatt was chasing down the wrong guy. His wife's killer was not who he thought he was so preventing the guy's birth had no effect. After that Wyatt decided to accept the reality that his wife was gone and move on with his life. Lucy and Flynn have not done that. They still think they can get their loved ones back by manipulating history. Whether they really can remains to be seen.

Edited February 24, 2017 by orza

[iMonrey]

Quote

I mean I know that they probably weren't through rounding folks up but 140?

I'd like to know what they were arrested for, as well. I mean, the feds can't just bust into some corporate lawyer's office and say "you're under arrest for being part of Rittenhouse." Part of a what now? Imagine the red tape of sorting out who and what Rittenhouse even was and what they did before they could start arresting people for being involved. It's irritating to think they could just "wrap it up" with a room full of evidence of their shadowy misdeeds when we don't have a clue what they actually do.

Quote

Timeless is just all over the place. Famous people are killed and notable events are radically altered and somehow the most drastic change happened in the first episode during the first trip back in time.

They never even explained why Lucy suddenly had a fiance. We know why Amy disappeared, more or less, but where did the fiance come from? Did she also kill the woman who was supposed to be that guy's fiance? I don't get it. Terrible waste of Daniel DiTomasso, and I still miss Witches of East End.

Quote

Is it possible our Lucy is the alternative version of the Original!Lucy that was raised and indoctrinated into Rittenhouse.

You know the show isn't that ambitious or clever. I think the reference to Lucy's journal sounding "crazy" and like a "different Lucy" was simply meant to illustrate that at some point in the future, Lucy came to realize that Flynn was right about how dangerous Rittenhouse was. Because at the time, nobody could imagine any of them working with him or agreeing with him about anything. Neither Wyatt nor Rufus knew anything about Rittenhouse at that point.

[CaptainE]

3 hours ago, orza said:

Wyatt was chasing down the wrong guy. His wife's killer was not who he thought he was so preventing the guy's birth had no effect. After that Wyatt decided to accept the reality that his wife was gone and move on with his life. Lucy and Flynn have not done that. They still think they can get their loved ones back by manipulating history. Whether they really can remains to be seen.

I must have missed Wyatt saying that.

We're also still waiting for more on the notebook.  Lucy has made no entries so far.  I wonder what the plan was, if the writers had a plan that is.

[KaveDweller]

3 hours ago, iMonrey said:

They never even explained why Lucy suddenly had a fiance. We know why Amy disappeared, more or less, but where did the fiance come from? Did she also kill the woman who was supposed to be that guy's fiance? I don't get it. Terrible waste of Daniel DiTomasso, and I still miss Witches of East End.

They didn't explain it, but they made a point of saying Lucy was acting like a totally different person. So, I guess we're supposed to assume that since she acted like a different person, she met someone she didn't meet previously? I feel really bad for the fiance because he has no idea what happened to the woman he thought loved him.

Her sister evidently pushed her to make her own choices and not do whatever the mother wanted. So this other Lucy we never saw should probably have been more under her mom's thumb, and maybe would have been more ready to join Rittenhouse? Oooh, maybe the fiance was Rittenhouse too and he's the one who reported their location after Lucy called him to help Rufus? Or maybe that's assuming the character had more of a point than he did.

8 hours ago, CooperTV said:

I've re-watched The Watergate Tape episode, and something have occurred to me. Flynn said something to Wyatt when he was holding him hostage that Lucy wrote about him in her journal.

Is it possible our Lucy is the alternative version of the Original!Lucy that was raised and indoctrinated into Rittenhouse. At some point something in that  timeline went wrong (Flynn? the Team EyeBall?) and we got Our!Lucy instead, who has no idea about her Rittenhouse legacy? Because Journal!Lucy does sound way more detached about Wyatt than Our!Lucy who is super empathetic and specifically empathetic about Wyatt's issues, due to them both having similar losses?

Maybe Lucy wrote it in the future after she and Wyatt try to date and break up because he isn't really over his wife dying? So she gets bitter about it.

[Camera One]

They didn't explain it, but they made a point of saying Lucy was acting like a totally different person.

That's possible, though I assumed they were referring to Lucy acting like she had never met the fiancé before, distancing herself from him, and being away for days at a time.

[CooperTV]

9 hours ago, CaptainE said:

I must have missed Wyatt saying that.

I think after the Karma Chameleon he was really fatalistic and resigned to the fact Jessica is gone and he would never able to stop it. He moved on around the end of episode 16, though.

6 hours ago, KaveDweller said:

Maybe Lucy wrote it in the future after she and Wyatt try to date and break up because he isn't really over his wife dying? So she gets bitter about it.

It's a weirdly specific detail about Lucy's personality to Flynn to focus, I'd say. That's why I think you write that Our!Lucy is now in the reality of Journal!Lucy. And Journal!Lucy was always under the influence of her Rittenhouse mother and was living the plan her parents created. The fiance was most likely the part of that plan.

Edited February 25, 2017 by CooperTV

[bros402]

17 hours ago, STOPSHOUTING said:

I think the Jiya "time sickness" could be a cool place to go; but the logic that the ship "knew" she was the fourth passenger and, therefore, the only one effected is L-A-M-E.

I prefer the theory that because she wasn't strapped down, the timestream grazed her - she was sort of near the edge of the ship, maybe the seats are where they are for a reason

[CooperTV]

15 minutes ago, bros402 said:

I prefer the theory that because she wasn't strapped down, the timestream grazed her - she was sort of near the edge of the ship, maybe the seats are where they are for a reason

I thought that it had something to do with weight requirements/limit, lol. But I then I started thinking of Wyatt's 50 kilos of grenades in The Alamo episode, and was again confused. Lucy's entire get-up from 1700s weights at least ten kilograms with all those petticoats, right?

[dubbel zout]

9 hours ago, CooperTV said:

And Journal!Lucy was always under the influence of her Rittenhouse mother and was living the plan her parents created.

Maybe Journal!Lucy was living the plan her parents created in order to break up Rittenhouse from the inside, and when she crossed paths with Flynn, she gave him her journal so he could try from the outside. He never seemed completely antagonistic toward her or the others; he simply didn't want them interfering with his chance to get his family back.

[CaptainE]

Quote

I think after the Karma Chameleon he was really fatalistic and resigned to the fact Jessica is gone and he would never able to stop it. He moved on around the end of episode 16, though.

Cooper tv said^^^^^^

I think it just isn't addressed for plot reasons (Lucy/Wyatt).   Otherwise Lucy should be encouraging him when Wyatt helps her with her 'mission'.  

To not help him see that he can change history too is nothing but selfish on her part.

Edited February 25, 2017 by CaptainE

[CooperTV]

59 minutes ago, CaptainE said:

I think it just isn't addressed for plot reasons (Lucy/Wyatt).   Otherwise Lucy should be encouraging him when Wyatt helps her with her 'mission'.  

To not help him see that he can change history too is nothing but selfish on her part.

But Lucy knew about him all about bringing Jessica back from the very beginning. They had an argument about what events are "supposed to" happen and what aren't in Stranded and in The Assassination of Abraham Lincoln (like Lucy's sister is supposed to exist and Wyatt's wife isn't). Since then Lucy changed her mind about that and they were cool. But after that Wyatt tried to prevent the alleged Jessica's killer from being born to save her, had (another) breakdown after this and said, hey, maybe I can't change the past because I have another purpose in life.

But the current situation with Jessica's death is that Wyatt has no idea who killed her, anymore. I mean, I'm convinced Riitenhouse got Jessica killed because she was somehow involved in it or was trying to expose it. It would give her agency and purpose apart from being Wyatt's Fridged St. Jessica. But that's clearly a storyline for another season that would cause the major angst for Wyatt yet again.

And if somehow he'd know it was Rittenhouse behind her murder, he can't come back to the time she was kidnapped and killed because of the Timeless time travel rules (you can't travel to the time where you already existed).

I'm not actually sure how Flynn was supposed to eliminate his family's killers before that happen, since they could very well be 30-year-olds, and Flynn existed 30 years ago. Hmm...

[ketose]

So, watching the end again, Carol referred to Emma as "an operative" on the mothership. I assume that means Emma is not Rittenhouse, but was recruited because she knows how to pilot. It makes sense. Emma hides from Rittenhouse because she knows what they're going to do. Maybe she was hoping for Anthony to come back when everything was fixed. Flynn shows up and she goes with him. Then Flynn kills Anthony and Emma figures she's expendable at some point and decides that time machine pilots are useful enough that she can make a deal.

What do we know about Rittenhouse now? They seem to believe in Eugenics. They don't believe in democracy because they're a secret organization that wants to control society without input from regular people. They do seem to be pretty clever. David Rittenhouse had Flynn and Wyatt figured out pretty easily. They also believe in murder as a means of information control. They also keeps secrets from each other, the Cahills apparently not knowing about Carol being Rittenhouse.

What we don't know is if they are a death cult, i.e. plan to kill all but the worthy people or if they just want to control the world's assets. There is at least one Black (former) member of Rittenhouse, so we don't know if they have specific plans against other races or gender identities. We also don't know to what extent their power extends beyond the United States. Finally, we have no idea the effect they've had on the history of the world, only that they meet a lot.

Edited February 25, 2017 by ketose
Clarifying the Cahill family stuff.

[legaleagle53]

4 minutes ago, ketose said:

What do we know about Rittenhouse now? They seem to believe in Eugenics. They don't believe in democracy because they're a secret organization that wants to control society without input from regular people. They do seem to be pretty clever. David Rittenhouse had Flynn and Wyatt figured out pretty easily. They also believe in murder as a means of information control. They also keeps secrets from each other, Ben apparently not knowing about Carol.

I don't know about that.  Didn't Carol reveal that she and Ben met because Rittenhouse arranged it, and that she's been subtly grooming Lucy her entire life to assume her role in Rittenhouse as part of its "royalty"?  Ben definitely knew who Lucy was (and his father specifically mentioned that Ben's mention of Lucy's birth was what gave him the hope he needed to carry out such a daunting and dangerous assignment from Lucy over a period of 63 years even though he had often wanted to just quit).

Actually, the whole episode was one of the show's strongest yet, and that last scene with Carol and Lucy -- wow!  I could actually feel Lucy's horror as Carol suddenly started talking about Rittenhouse and the time machines in a way that showed that she had known about their existence and Lucy's time-trips all along because Carol herself was a high-ranking member of Rittenhouse (according to the show-runners, Carol actually outranks Ben in that organization, so it's not at all a surprise that she would have ordered Ben to stay away from Lucy until the time was right to reveal her Rittenhouse "heritage" to her).  It's a bit like finding out that you're Satan's daughter and the rightful heir to the throne of Hell.

[ketose]

21 minutes ago, legaleagle53 said:

I don't know about that.  Didn't Carol reveal that she and Ben met because Rittenhouse arranged it, and that she's been subtly grooming Lucy her entire life to assume her role in Rittenhouse as part of its "royalty"?  Ben definitely knew who Lucy was (and his father specifically mentioned that Ben's mention of Lucy's birth was what gave him the hope he needed to carry out such a daunting and dangerous assignment from Lucy over a period of 63 years even though he had often wanted to just quit).

Actually, the whole episode was one of the show's strongest yet, and that last scene with Carol and Lucy -- wow!  I could actually feel Lucy's horror as Carol suddenly started talking about Rittenhouse and the time machines in a way that showed that she had known about their existence and Lucy's time-trips all along because Carol herself was a high-ranking member of Rittenhouse (according to the show-runners, Carol actually outranks Ben in that organization, so it's not at all a surprise that she would have ordered Ben to stay away from Lucy until the time was right to reveal her Rittenhouse "heritage" to her).  It's a bit like finding out that you're Satan's daughter and the rightful heir to the throne of Hell.

Oops. I meant Ethan Cahill, Lucy's grandfather / mole. It seems like the Cahills had no idea that Carol Preston was from a Rittenhouse family.

Edited February 25, 2017 by ketose

[CooperTV]

33 minutes ago, ketose said:

Finally, we have no idea the effect they've had on the history of the world, only that they meet a lot.

I'm now picturing a board meeting of CEOs of Evi, Spectre style, with the Creepy Mom going all Christoph Waltz on Lucy.

[CaptainE]

58 minutes ago, CooperTV said:

But Lucy knew about him all about bringing Jessica back from the very beginning. They had an argument about what events are "supposed to" happen and what aren't in Stranded and in The Assassination of Abraham Lincoln (like Lucy's sister is supposed to exist and Wyatt's wife isn't). Since then Lucy changed her mind about that and they were cool. But after that Wyatt tried to prevent the alleged Jessica's killer from being born to save her, had (another) breakdown after this and said, hey, maybe I can't change the past because I have another purpose in life.

But the current situation with Jessica's death is that Wyatt has no idea who killed her, anymore. I mean, I'm convinced Riitenhouse got Jessica killed because she was somehow involved in it or was trying to expose it. It would give her agency and purpose apart from being Wyatt's Fridged St. Jessica. But that's clearly a storyline for another season that would cause the major angst for Wyatt yet again.

And if somehow he'd know it was Rittenhouse behind her murder, he can't come back to the time she was kidnapped and killed because of the Timeless time travel rules (you can't travel to the time where you already existed).

I'm not actually sure how Flynn was supposed to eliminate his family's killers before that happen, since they could very well be 30-year-olds, and Flynn existed 30 years ago. Hmm...

That's the problem I have with the exposition, or lack thereof.

Why hasn't Wyatt gone to Flynn for an explanation of why he named the wrong killer?  They have had plenty of scenes together.  

[CooperTV]

8 minutes ago, CaptainE said:

Why hasn't Wyatt gone to Flynn for an explanation of why he named the wrong killer?  They have had plenty of scenes together.  

I'm not sure Flynn, who didn't even know who from Riitenhouse specifically had killed his family until the last episode, would know more than the basic facts on the murderer apart from that he had being active in the area Jessica had died and that he'd killed another two women. But that's my attempt at filling in the blanks about Flynn being informed here.

Edited February 25, 2017 by CooperTV

[legaleagle53]

5 hours ago, ketose said:

Oops. I meant Ethan Cahill, Lucy's grandfather / mole. It seems like the Cahills had no idea that Carol Preston was from a Rittenhouse family.

Which makes no sense, since by the time Lucy, Agent Christopher, and Mason found Ethan's secret stash of records, it was clear that Ethan knew everything there was to know about Rittenhouse, especially who was in it.  There's no way he wouldn't have known that his daughter-in-law Carol was Rittenhouse.  Of course, that begs the question of why he didn't bother to give Lucy that little bit of information before she went to see Carol.

As a gay man myself, I felt sorry for young Ethan being tasked with living a double life for his entire life, especially given that he was already living one as a closeted gay man (and it didn't help that the actor playing him was a cute "guy next door" type whom I'd fall for myself if I ever met him or Ethan in a gay bar, or anywhere else).  I have to wonder whether Ethan ever found the courage to come out once public opinion started changing so he could be the man he was always meant to be and love whom he was meant to love.  I suspect he probably never did come out lest he draw unwanted attention from Rittenhouse, which would have endangered the mission that Lucy entrusted him with.  He's now in his late 80s or early 90s. What a tragic waste to have to live his whole life never being free to be himself and having to deny himself the true, honest love he deserved.

Edited February 26, 2017 by legaleagle53

[Camera One]

40 minutes ago, CaptainE said:

That's the problem I have with the exposition, or lack thereof.

Why hasn't Wyatt gone to Flynn for an explanation of why he named the wrong killer?  They have had plenty of scenes together.  

That's a good point.  Wyatt is such a hothead that he would definitely confront Flynn over that.  But it falls in line with the random dropping of subplots and arcs for multiple episodes at a time before bringing it back up as if it were important (eg. notebook, The Mom, The Dad, etc.).

[Driad]

Is there a trope name for the structure of this episode? They tied up a batch of loose ends, then the last act generated a veritable pompom of loose ends. Sounded like "We need another season!"