S05.E13: The Soviet Division

[sistermagpie]

6 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I was going to say that I wouldn't care for Tuan even if his foster family and past was showed. But thinking again, it might really have given the show something extra and just in the central question of this question. For wasn't Tuan's family who was killed by the Americans probably innocent (or at least the small children if the parents and older children were helping Vietcong)?

It would have been bizarre though, imo. Why would we be seeing flashbacks to a character like Tuan? It's not suddenly Tuan's story. We got this information from him telling Philip and Elizabeth, just as we got all the necessary info about Lucia from her talking about her past and didn't need to see her flashbacks to her father being taken away or her decision to work for the KGB. (Or Gregory's or Charles Deluth's or Hans' or the other South African agent's, etc..). It's not like it's a mystery. Tuan works for the Vietnamese government for the same reason P&E work for the KGB. He's working with them because the Vietnamese gave him an order to work with them because they made some deal with the KGB.

6 hours ago, Roseanna said:

(BTV, I find Gabriel's background unlikely: operation officers didn't execute people but others did it, and anyway Gabriel was propably already abroad in 1937-8.)

This makes me realize I can't remember--was Gabriel meant to have executed people? I could be forgetting it, but didn't he mostly talk about arresting people rather than killing them? If he referred to "us" killing people he could have just been speaking for the whole system.

[Umbelina]

Yes, Gabe killed people, including Russians he knew to be innocent.  It was that or die himself.

I'm not talking about "morals" when I say the Jennings killed innocent Americans.  I'm talking about the American courts reaction to that should they be discovered.  "We" let the other illegals go home, or deported them, or traded them.  Would "we" let the Jennings go back to Russia after the murders, or would we send them to court and jail or execute them?  I pointed it out because the choice is DIFFERENT from what really happened when the USA busted the illegals here a few years ago.  Those spies didn't kill anyone.

The Jennings body-count is high, and many were bystanders, not people working against the USSR.

Spies kill people all the time, all sides, whether by their own hand or by their exposure and uncovering operations, such as the bio weapon being used by the Russians.

I'm not looking at the killings as a moral failure, I'm looking at them because the outcome for Philip and Elizabeth would likely be different because their actions have been different that the illegals we did catch.  Basically in thinking ahead to how this series will end.

As for Tuan, maybe people "hate" him because we don't KNOW him at all?  Because we don't.  At all.  The writers left everything so vague and confusing.  This was a season-long character with as much screen time as several of the peripheral characters we did get to know and pretty well in past seasons.

Nitpicking "Vietnam War Scenes" as out there and unneeded is missing the point entirely, and we know from past seasons that YES, these writers are capable of making supporting cast characters real and interesting and multi sided and understandable with a few small scenes of them doing something besides giving Philip and Elizabeth something to do.  (plot driven)  That was just one idea, and I gave others, and YES!  I would have loved to see some of those.

As for "hating" or "liking" Tuan?  Of course we all disagree.  There was no "there there."  He was not explained, not real, he could be a hero, a villain, a victim, a fool, a monster, or a PSTD ridden basket case, depending on your personal experiences and/or biases.  They didn't bother to tell us who he was, they made his story a major story this year, only they didn't bother to share whatever intentions they had about him, if they had any at all.

Edited November 12, 2017 by Umbelina

[Roseanna]

1 hour ago, Umbelina said:

Yes, Gabe killed people, including Russians he knew to be innocent.  It was that or die himself.

I'm not talking about "morals" when I say the Jennings killed innocent Americans.  I'm talking about the American courts reaction to that should they be discovered.  "We" let the other illegals go home, or deported them, or traded them.  Would "we" let the Jennings go back to Russia after the murders, or would we send them to court and jail or execute them?  I pointed it out because the choice is DIFFERENT from what really happened when the USA busted the illegals here a few years ago.  Those spies didn't kill anyone.

The Jennings body-count is high, and many were bystanders, not people working against the USSR.

Spies kill people all the time, all sides, whether by their own hand or by their exposure and uncovering operations, such as the bio weapon being used by the Russians.

I'm not looking at the killings as a moral failure, I'm looking at them because the outcome for Philip and Elizabeth would likely be different because their actions have been different that the illegals we did catch.  Basically in thinking ahead to how this series will end.

Does the FBI or anyone else even know that P&E have killed people? 

[Roseanna]

2 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

It would have been bizarre though, imo. Why would we be seeing flashbacks to a character like Tuan? It's not suddenly Tuan's story. We got this information from him telling Philip and Elizabeth, just as we got all the necessary info about Lucia from her talking about her past and didn't need to see her flashbacks to her father being taken away or her decision to work for the KGB. (Or Gregory's or Charles Deluth's or Hans' or the other South African agent's, etc..). It's not like it's a mystery. Tuan works for the Vietnamese government for the same reason P&E work for the KGB. He's working with them because the Vietnamese gave him an order to work with them because they made some deal with the KGB.

 

1 hour ago, Umbelina said:

As for Tuan, maybe people "hate" him because we don't KNOW him at all?  Because we don't.  At all.  The writers left everything so vague and confusing.  This was a season-long character with as much screen time as several of the peripheral characters we did get to know and pretty well in past seasons.

Nitpicking "Vietnam War Scenes" as out there and unneeded is missing the point entirely, and we know from past seasons that YES, these writers are capable of making supporting cast characters real and interesting and multi sided and understandable with a few small scenes of them doing something besides giving Philip and Elizabeth something to do.  (plot driven)  That was just one idea, and I gave others, and YES!  I would have loved to see some of those.

As for "hating" or "liking" Tuan?  Of course we all disagree.  There was no "there there."  He was not explained, not real, he could be a hero, a villain, a victim, a fool, a monster, or a PSTD ridden basket case, depending on your personal experiences and/or biases.  They didn't bother to tell us who he was, they made his story a major story this year, only they didn't bother to share whatever intentions they had about him, if they had any at all.

I must admit that I have changed my opinion. It would have been better if Tuan hadn't been so flat a character. For unlike P&E who look WASP, Tuan's looks are that of "the other". And, unlike Jenningses, he is not won over by American consumer goods which many have said should be the motiavation for P&E dedect. 

In addition, Alexei was a sterotype who bored even his own family by telling constantly about the same matters (bad Russia, good America) while being totally indifferent how unhappy his wife and son were. If the writers had given him individual stories about his bad experiences the Societ Union he would have been much more interesting. 

[sistermagpie]

29 minutes ago, Roseanna said:

I must admit that I have changed my opinion. It would have been better if Tuan hadn't been so flat a character. For unlike P&E who look WASP, Tuan's looks are that of "the other". And, unlike Jenningses, he is not won over by American consumer goods which many have said should be the motiavation for P&E dedect. 

Well, Elizabeth isn't won over by US goods either--just ask her! But I'm sure Tuan thinks she is!

I don't know that I'd really call Tuan flat or say we didn't know him compared to other supporting characters. Compare him to William, for instance. Mostly it was important that he was jaded and thought their bosses didn't know what they were doing--and that ultimately he was lonely and envied what he imagined the Jennings life to be. We didn't have to know how he became an Illegal, what happened to his wife, how he felt about his wife. We didn't have to see him interacting with people at work. He was just as flat. And yet he certainly didn't seem that way.

Compare to that Tuan and I think we know about the same amount. Tuan was maybe a flatter personality because he was a zealot (or trying to be). William's conflict was about being jaded and cynical but couldn't quit his country. Tuan's conflict were the few times he was tempted by bourgeoisie concerns, including caring about whether an American boy who loved him had leukemia. But Tuan was young and fresh so in the end he just recommitted himself, just as young Elizabeth would have done. The show chose to start the story when Elizabeth started to crack.

So why were the minor characters less engaging than in past seasons? Because it definitely seemed like they were. But it doesn't seem like the reason could be the vague backstory or Tuan being any less realistic than other characters because I really don't think he was. Something about the way he was written made him just not work as well for me (though I didn't hate him). I think it was more that usually the interactions between P&E and the minor character were more coherent and consistent. It wasn't, for me, that Tuan himself wasn't understandable because he does seem pretty clear. It was his interactions with P&E that didn't add up to something clear enough for me. It seemed to meander all over the place (like their story in general). That, to me, was what made the story really annoying and as if it (and Tuan) wasn't going anywhere until that last thing with Pasha (which you could see coming from a mile away but still without feeling to me like there was any momentum to the story as there was with characters like Lucia or William).

So yeah, I guess for me it comes down to the problem not being that we didn't know Tuan or get enough about him, but that all the stuff we had didn't seem used in a coherent way when it could totally have been. Knowing more about Tuan might have just made it meander even more. The problem to me seemed like they never really communicated what the Tuan story was with Philip/Tuan/Elizabeth. Which is weird because from the set up you'd think they'd have had a clear idea of where to go.

Edited November 12, 2017 by sistermagpie

[Umbelina]

5 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Does the FBI or anyone else even know that P&E have killed people? 

They have Philip's fingerprint from the apartment, they know someone rigged the mail robot machine, and Martha probably did place the bug in Gaad's office, despite Philip murdering and framing the tech guy.  They know that the day the mail robot was being serviced, a woman died.  Lot's of things to put together, including eye witnesses, and all they need to do is match the fingerprint.  So, do they know?  No.  WOULD they know?  Very possibly, with photos the two marks about the wheat would identify them as well, thus leading to the murder of the scientist.  It's like dominoes.
 

Quote

 

I must admit that I have changed my opinion. It would have been better if Tuan hadn't been so flat a character. For unlike P&E who look WASP, Tuan's looks are that of "the other". And, unlike Jenningses, he is not won over by American consumer goods which many have said should be the motiavation for P&E dedect. 

In addition, Alexei was a sterotype who bored even his own family by telling constantly about the same matters (bad Russia, good America) while being totally indifferent how unhappy his wife and son were. If the writers had given him individual stories about his bad experiences the Societ Union he would have been much more interesting. 

 

Yes, it's not just Tuan who was wasted, stupid Tori (WHO CARES?) but Oleg's family and bosses in Russia, which were handled slightly better, but not by much, the bad-teeth woman who I REALLY wanted to get to know!  Was the hockey player really KGB or a spy, what was his interest in a single mother who seemed dense, drab, and boring, since we didn't get to know her either, with a teenage son (or was he, who knows, we never saw him.)  WHY is she really willing to spy?  What's her job like?  Where does she live?  How is her son adapting to America, think how interesting that might have been paralleling Pasha's story.  Did we even see the new residentura people this season?  What happened to Tatiana?  Does Oleg call her?  Does she know he ruined her mission? 

Again, this doesn't require a lot of scenes, it just requires good writing.  In sixty seconds on screen we could see bad teeth lady leave work, FF, arrive at the apartment, and greet her *happy, sad, whatever son.  We would know SO much more, even looking at the way people live tells so much!  Her son could have a new American friend or two over...so we knew he's adjusting, etc.  What was with the rapid love story? 

But, NO, let's talk about boring Paige some more, let's discuss wheat ad nauseam, a story that essentially went no where, except they murdered an innocent man involved in making wheat better for all.  Let's see Philip at EST some more, for the piecemealed out back story.  Let's spend several minutes digging a grave.  Good God!

 

4 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

Well, Elizabeth isn't won over by US goods either--just ask her! But I'm sure Tuan thinks she is!

I don't know that I'd really call Tuan flat or say we didn't know him compared to other supporting characters. Compare him to William, for instance. Mostly it was important that he was jaded and thought their bosses didn't know what they were doing--and that ultimately he was lonely and envied what he imagined the Jennings life to be. We didn't have to know how he became an Illegal, what happened to his wife, how he felt about his wife. We didn't have to see him interacting with people at work. He was just as flat. And yet he certainly didn't seem that way.

Compare to that Tuan and I think we know about the same amount. Tuan was maybe a flatter personality because he was a zealot (or trying to be). William's conflict was about being jaded and cynical but couldn't quit his country. Tuan's conflict were the few times he was tempted by bourgeoisie concerns, including caring about whether an American boy who loved him had leukemia. But Tuan was young and fresh so in the end he just recommitted himself, just as young Elizabeth would have done. The show chose to start the story when Elizabeth started to crack.

So why were the minor characters less engaging than in past seasons? Because it definitely seemed like they were. But it doesn't seem like the reason could be the vague backstory or Tuan being any less realistic than other characters because I really don't think he was. Something about the way he was written made him just not work as well for me (though I didn't hate him). I think it was more that usually the interactions between P&E and the minor character were more coherent and consistent. It wasn't, for me, that Tuan himself wasn't understandable because he does seem pretty clear. It was his interactions with P&E that didn't add up to something clear enough for me. It seemed to meander all over the place (like their story in general). That, to me, was what made the story really annoying and as if it (and Tuan) wasn't going anywhere until that last thing with Pasha (which you could see coming from a mile away but still without feeling to me like there was any momentum to the story as there was with characters like Lucia or William).

So yeah, I guess for me it comes down to the problem not being that we didn't know Tuan or get enough about him, but that all the stuff we had didn't seem used in a coherent way when it could totally have been. Knowing more about Tuan might have just made it meander even more. The problem to me seemed like they never really communicated what the Tuan story was with Philip/Tuan/Elizabeth. Which is weird because from the set up you'd think they'd have had a clear idea of where to go.

We knew plenty about William, he poured his heart out to Philip, he also talked to the FBI at the end, and from Gabe.  He sacrificed his life as well, for something he (rightly!) didn't really want the USSR to have.  By the way, interesting interview with "William."  https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/09/arts/television/dylan-baker-on-the-americans-finale.html

Aside from that, that was a season FULL of well rounded and interesting characters.  Just LOOK at this cast, and we got to know almost ALL of them.  It honestly doesn't take much to "know" a character, but this season, they didn't bother to define anyone except as need to push (boring) plot. Spoiler tagged for length only.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Americans_(season_4) 

 

Spoiler

 

Dylan Baker as William Crandall, a biochemical warfare scientist

Lev Gorn as Arkady Ivanovich Zokov, the KGB's Resident

Annet Mahendru as Nina Sergeevna Krilova, a prisoner in the Soviet Union

Costa Ronin as Oleg Igorevich Burov, a KGB officer

Keidrich Sellati as Henry Jennings, Elizabeth and Philip's son

Holly Taylor as Paige Jennings, Elizabeth and Philip's daughter

Richard Thomas as Agent Frank Gaad, Special Agent In Charge of the FBI Counterintelligence Division

Alison Wright as Martha Hanson, Agent Gaad's secretary and Philip's informant

Noah Emmerich as FBI agent Stan Beeman

Brandon J. Dirden as FBI agent Dennis Aderholt

Recurring

Michael Aronov as Anton Baklanov, a scientist involved in stealth technology

Kelly AuCoin as Pastor Tim, the head of a church Paige Jennings attends

Daniel Flaherty as Matthew Beeman, Stan's son

Vera Cherny as Tatiana Evgenyevna Ruslanova, KGB officer working at the Rezidentura

Julia Garner as Kimberly Breland, the daughter of the head of the CIA's Afghan group

Peter Jacobson as Agent Wolfe, Gaad's replacement at the FBI

Peter Mark Kendall as Hans, a graduate student and KGB informant being trained by Elizabeth

Boris Krutonog as Igor Burov, Oleg's father.

Frank Langella as Gabriel, the Jennings' KGB handler

Margo Martindale as Claudia, the Jennings' KGB supervisor

Ruthie Ann Miles as Young Hee Seong, a Korean immigrant and Mary Kay consultant whom Elizabeth befriends

Susan Misner as Sandra Beeman, Stan's estranged wife

Karen Pittman as Lisa, a Northrop employee from whom Elizabeth is gleaning information

Callie Thorne as Tori, Stan's girlfriend

Peter Von Berg as Vasili Nikolaevich, a former KGB Resident

Rob Yang as Don Seong, Young Hee's husband, who is of special interest to the KGB

 

This season?  Blech.  All COULD have been interesting but the writers didn't bother much, they all ended up being back-drop for the main characters emotions.

I think Liz is more fond than she realizes of her perks, she certainly wears expensive boots.

I don't think Tuan was a zealot at all.  I think he hated the USA (for extremely good reasons, better than Phil and Liz's.) I think he wanted to succeed at his first big job.  Who knows though, either of us could be right or wrong because the writers didn't bother to even partially draw him.  I think he was meant to be a parallel to first season Liz and Liz now, who is pretending to give a shit about things to please Phil.

Anyway, I feel like I'm repeating myself too much.  Also?  I seriously HATED this last season, haven't even rewatched it, because it pissed me off that much the first time around.  I own all the other DVD's and watch them, but unless somehow the final season makes all the shit we endured this season worth owning?  I'll skip it.

I'll add something new.

I know for many the love story between Philip and Elizabeth made it all worth it.   They loved the wedding and blah blah shipper-cakes especially since our stars married and have a child in real life now.  Yay!  Love!

For me?  It was the exact opposite.  I thought the wedding was boring and too long.  I thought the risks about marrying in a traditional religious ceremony were not only whack, but why did they trust that priest, and will he report it, if only because he should?  Will that cause Moscow to have even more doubts about Philip, and his corrupting influence on Elizabeth, their formerly Tuan-twin but better trained and more experienced spy?

This season made me hate and lose all respect for Philip.  He's sacrificing his children for Elizabeth.  He's sacrificing everything he does care about for Elizabeth.  He is pussy whipped to the extreme, and what's more?  I can't forgive him for the things he does, because he's not doing it out of patriotism, belief, or loyalty.  He HATES what he does.  He certainly isn't doing it for his children.  He is only doing it for one reason.  Elizabeth.  YUCK and spineless!

At least with Liz?  She believes.  She swallows it all, hook, line, and sinker, and will do ANYTHING it takes.  Sound like Tuan?  Why yes, yes it does.  She's thrilled to sacrifice her children for her country, she's happy as hell about it.  I can respect her, if not like her.

So, I can't fall back on the love story or the family story after this season to make the rest of the crap they served up palatable.  I pretty much hate Philip now, and I'm not terribly thrilled with Liz either, but at least she's courageous and acting from convictions.

Edited November 13, 2017 by Umbelina

[Roseanna]

14 hours ago, Umbelina said:

We knew plenty about William, he poured his heart out to Philip, he also talked to the FBI at the end, and from Gabe.  He sacrificed his life as well, for something he (rightly!) didn't really want the USSR to have.  By the way, interesting interview with "William."  https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/09/arts/television/dylan-baker-on-the-americans-finale.html

That was interesting, especially this: "Just looking at the quality of the show, you have to take a leap of faith. I’ve done jobs where nothing has come of promises, but these guys are just so good at what they do. They had an idea where it was going, but they watched how William’s relationship developed with Matthew Rhys and Keri Russell’s characters to build a more interesting and deeply layered role."

Could it be that Tuan's actor wasn't as capable? 

[SusanSunflower]

I would be hesitant to blame the actor.  Henry or the actor who plays Henry had an extended scene (iirc) in the last episode where he blew me out of the water (and made Paige (character and actor) seem depressingly dull and limited).   Henry was ready to take over the scene like a breath of fresh air, animated, clearly "thinking" and thoughtful and excited about his future.   The character of Paige -- as written -- is for the most part very limited and dull, as are many or most part for "young people" as part of being "young" unless they're playing deviants  (which arguably Tuan verges on being). 

I've thought Tuan has actually created a presence and a character even with his limited screen time of accumulated quite short scenes.  See also Stan's son Matthew who managed -- despite being given very little to actually do or say -- to convey a non-generic good natured nerdy teen (although his character did not develop his first season potential for goofy humor, imho).  

Tuan may vanish in season 6, killed off quickly or via reassignment.  I think he's managed to embody both someone I feel sorry for and someone I suspect may evolve into a real menace in the same under-explained character.  How old is this young man anyway?  Is there really a foster brother with leukemia in Seattle? 

[sistermagpie]

1 hour ago, SusanSunflower said:

Tuan may vanish in season 6, killed off quickly or via reassignment.  I think he's managed to embody both someone I feel sorry for and someone I suspect may evolve into a real menace in the same under-explained character.  How old is this young man anyway?  Is there really a foster brother with leukemia in Seattle? 

I don't see any reason to doubt the brother exists--how could he not? That was the reason Tuan broke the rules and showed weakness and petty bourgeoisie concerns and there was no other reason for him to be leaving the state to make a phone call. He'll go on being a spy and either take Elizabeth's advice or not and either have a long career or not, I assume. 

I don't think he'll need to be killed off or be reassigned--his story is finished. Pasha is gone, so there's no need for a Tuan/Pasha relationship. Alexei doesn't seem to be central anymore--they're keeping tabs on the wheat stuff with Deirdre and Ben.

But I agree, I think the actor was just fine. I thought he put across whatever he needed to put across. For me, like I said, it seemed more like the problem was they just weren't able to be clear about what he meant for P&E except for being a convenient way to jump off to different things in different scenes. (Also I agree that Henry last season was like a breath of fresh air the way he could command a scene in a natural way--by contrast with Paige it almost feels like whenever she opens her mouth all other characters have to stop and give her center stage until she says whatever she has to say or else you'd naturally not pay attention to her.)

2 hours ago, SusanSunflower said:

Stan's son Matthew who managed -- despite being given very little to actually do or say -- to convey a non-generic good natured nerdy teen (although his character did not develop his first season potential for goofy humor, imho). 

I think Matthew's been done pretty well in his way, actually. It feels to me like they gave him a pretty clear development with his father throughout the series). If you track Matthew's scenes they've always found, imo, organic ways to have him talk about his troubled relationship with his father, his sadness about it, and ultimately the way he seems to often use his father as a negative role model. Without giving him much screentime I've felt like they did a really good job showing how Matthew's relationship with his father has shaped his life.  Matthew in S1 was an awkward, more generic teenager. By S5 he was making some choices about who he was and wasn't (he was a terrible musician, for instance) and who he wanted to be (like when he tells Paige he's *not* like his dad and if he's made a mistake he wants to fix it). 

I guess in a way he reflects the other kids too. Like Paige when she was younger decided she wanted to be this church person, and now that she's older she's finding what parts of that are actually her and what parts aren't. Then this last season Henry got excited about wanting to be a prep school overachiever (after trying out some other interests throughout). They're all in transition periods.

[Umbelina]

17 hours ago, Roseanna said:

That was interesting, especially this: "Just looking at the quality of the show, you have to take a leap of faith. I’ve done jobs where nothing has come of promises, but these guys are just so good at what they do. They had an idea where it was going, but they watched how William’s relationship developed with Matthew Rhys and Keri Russell’s characters to build a more interesting and deeply layered role."

Could it be that Tuan's actor wasn't as capable? 

While there is no doubt what a skilled and amazing actor Dylan Baker is, I don't think Ivan Mok was incapable of delivering a fully drawn and compelling character.  The writing was the key, Dylan got great writing, Tuan got to move Philip and Liz's plot forward.  BTW, interesting article here about Ivan.  https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/americans-actor-ivan-mok-draws-inspiration-family-history-n765961

Quote

 

Mok added that he doesn’t see Tuan as brutal so much as passionate: “He’s not a weak character,” Mok said. “He knows what he wants to do.”

Tuan is also highly damaged by war and loss before he arrived in the U.S., Mok noted.

“He was on the streets and starving, then recruited by a communist training program.

 

 

16 hours ago, SusanSunflower said:

I would be hesitant to blame the actor.  Henry or the actor who plays Henry had an extended scene (iirc) in the last episode where he blew me out of the water (and made Paige (character and actor) seem depressingly dull and limited).   Henry was ready to take over the scene like a breath of fresh air, animated, clearly "thinking" and thoughtful and excited about his future.   The character of Paige -- as written -- is for the most part very limited and dull, as are many or most part for "young people" as part of being "young" unless they're playing deviants  (which arguably Tuan verges on being). 

I've thought Tuan has actually created a presence and a character even with his limited screen time of accumulated quite short scenes.  See also Stan's son Matthew who managed -- despite being given very little to actually do or say -- to convey a non-generic good natured nerdy teen (although his character did not develop his first season potential for goofy humor, imho).  

Tuan may vanish in season 6, killed off quickly or via reassignment.  I think he's managed to embody both someone I feel sorry for and someone I suspect may evolve into a real menace in the same under-explained character.  How old is this young man anyway?  Is there really a foster brother with leukemia in Seattle? 

Yeah, Tuan was only there for plot.  I'd be shocked if we see him again, unless it's something about Philip, for example, repercussions from Center because of Philip nearly exposing all of them because of an emotional outburst.  Even then?  We would probably just hear about it, rather than have Tuan on screen.

Although personally?  I would LOVE that!  Finally give Ivan/Tuan something meaty to do, let him bring down Philip!  ON SCREEN.  I wish we could have really seen the whole suicide discussion with Pasha, and frankly, a few more scenes with Tuan alone with Pasha and/or his family.  See the light of opportunity dawn in Tuan when Pasha confesses thinking about suicide.  We may have cared more, understood Tuan more, and the tension could have begun right then.

13 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

I don't see any reason to doubt the brother exists--how could he not? That was the reason Tuan broke the rules and showed weakness and petty bourgeoisie concerns and there was no other reason for him to be leaving the state to make a phone call. He'll go on being a spy and either take Elizabeth's advice or not and either have a long career or not, I assume. 

I don't think he'll need to be killed off or be reassigned--his story is finished. Pasha is gone, so there's no need for a Tuan/Pasha relationship. Alexei doesn't seem to be central anymore--they're keeping tabs on the wheat stuff with Deirdre and Ben.

But I agree, I think the actor was just fine. I thought he put across whatever he needed to put across. For me, like I said, it seemed more like the problem was they just weren't able to be clear about what he meant for P&E except for being a convenient way to jump off to different things in different scenes. (Also I agree that Henry last season was like a breath of fresh air the way he could command a scene in a natural way--by contrast with Paige it almost feels like whenever she opens her mouth all other characters have to stop and give her center stage until she says whatever she has to say or else you'd naturally not pay attention to her.)

I think Matthew's been done pretty well in his way, actually. It feels to me like they gave him a pretty clear development with his father throughout the series). If you track Matthew's scenes they've always found, imo, organic ways to have him talk about his troubled relationship with his father, his sadness about it, and ultimately the way he seems to often use his father as a negative role model. Without giving him much screentime I've felt like they did a really good job showing how Matthew's relationship with his father has shaped his life.  Matthew in S1 was an awkward, more generic teenager. By S5 he was making some choices about who he was and wasn't (he was a terrible musician, for instance) and who he wanted to be (like when he tells Paige he's *not* like his dad and if he's made a mistake he wants to fix it). 

I guess in a way he reflects the other kids too. Like Paige when she was younger decided she wanted to be this church person, and now that she's older she's finding what parts of that are actually her and what parts aren't. Then this last season Henry got excited about wanting to be a prep school overachiever (after trying out some other interests throughout). They're all in transition periods.

I get that there is this trend not to blame the younger actors, and in general I applaud that, but it can be taken too far.

Holly Taylor is 20 this year.  She just doesn't have "it" or again, perhaps it is bad writing or bad directing?  Her scenes all just lay there, and there is "the eyebrows of doom" issue.  She was OK in the scene when she ratted out her parents to Pastor Tim, she was OK as the petulant hitch-hiker who insisted on grabbing a ride home from the creep in spite of Henry's objections.  I liked her stuff on the bus with the girl we all thought might be a spy at first.  Other than that?  I dread her scenes, writing, acting, direction, all of it.

Sometimes with good direction young actors shine (Mad Men's Keirnan Shipka, who sucked in her first movie, but was mostly compelling and believable on Mad Men, for example.)  Sometimes child and young actors are just crazy-talented, too many to list really, DiCaprio, Paquin, Lawrence, many child soap stars,  http://www.imdb.com/list/ls071842043/. 

I also feel that most good show writers notice when actors shine or lay flat, and are willing to change their story to either cut their losses or capitalize on an actor who surprises them.  A great example is True Blood.  Layfayette was supposed to die at the end of the first season.  Jessica was supposed to only be on two episodes, just a plot point for Bill, have to turn her into a vampire, can't rescue Sookie.  Jason and Andy were never supposed to end up a team.  The WRITERS saw the talent and chemistry and adjusted, thankfully.  There were others, some they couldn't keep on screen even though they wanted to *many shows have done this, but I'm rewatching True Blood right now.  Ha.  My point is they we aware of the entire production and the "whole" not just their piece of the pie (acting or directing or whatever.)

I feel like they should have done that on this show, but it feels like they have an end game that is heavily dependent on Paige and they are going to stick to that plan no matter what.   I've always found Henry (Keidrich Sellati) by FAR the more compelling of the Jennings kids.  When he does get the chance to act, I believe him, and I want more, but the Parents and cameras always hustle off to fine droning, boring Paige.  Where is Henry?  http://www.vulture.com/2017/03/the-americans-where-is-henry-jennings.html

I think with Paige it's a disaster with several components.  Could she be good with a better story?  Probably.  She's been stuffed down our throats so much, first with the boring religious fever, then the boring "bring her in to the KGB!" story.  Think about that, they were able to make what should have been a fascinating story annoying.  Again, acting, direction, writing?  Who is to blame?  Maybe all of them.  She may eventually act in something else and shine, but on this show?  UGH!

I liked Mathew's acting and the casting department did a great job there.  Both he and his "dad" have that short, high, but thick nose, they look like father and son.  He wasn't shoved down our throats, and he felt "real" in his character.

Tuan?  I believed him.  I wanted more.  His acting was not the problem, neither was directing.  It was the writing.

 

ETA fixed name, thanks @sistermagpie

Edited November 14, 2017 by Umbelina

[SusanSunflower]

Oh, I think Tuan will be around next season because of the "next generation" angle that has been being played throughout all series ... the old guard keeps working past burn-out in large part because the next generation team is not yet "ready"... It's a universal issue in the US these days as the boomers (finally) start to retire, even as they and nostalgia and "re-makes" continue to dominate.   Claudia and Gabriel are at retirement age ... but I can't see either P or E taking over that sort of babysitting yet, or wanting to, though they may be pushed into that role, hence this collaboration with Tuan may have hidden significance  in that regard. Hans wasn't P&E only failure to launch was he?  Memory is fuzzy but I seem to remember one or two other brief collaborations with younger agents.  

I think Tuan could also catalyze Paige's transition -- good or bad -- because at the rate Paige is "progressing" it could be a long while before she's useful for things like surveillance or dead drops.... although giving her "something to do" might help relieve her angst (either that or a real boyfriend who can take her mind off her angst). 

As far as I remember they haven't let Holly Taylor cry or get mad, much less act out.  I was also very sorry that the "girl on the bus" did not stay around as Holly's new best friend.  (She like Matthew added some spark of energy and levity)  These days, Henry's out every night with his new circle of friends, P&E are working and Paige has got much too much time alone to fret and dread.  The imminent departure of Pastor and Mrs. Tim may be happily anticipated, but that just leaves Paige even more alone, particularly with Matthew off-limits.  (One can hope we are spared some new crisis when Pastor Tim briefs the new guy on the members of his flock and that harpy Mrs. Tim is too busy worrying about her child in a foreign clime to get all one-last-word about Paige.)

Edited November 13, 2017 by SusanSunflower

[sistermagpie]

5 hours ago, Umbelina said:

I feel like they should have done that on this show, but it feels like they have an end game that is heavily dependent on Paige and they are going to stick to that plan no matter what.   I've always found Henry (Patrick Harbron) by FAR the more compelling of the Jennings kids.  When he does get the chance to act, I believe him, and I want more, but the Parents and cameras always hustle off to fine droning, boring Paige.

(I assume you meant Keidrich Sellati as Henry there.) I agree--I'm disappointed they ignored Henry so much. I get that they clearly thought from the beginning that they wanted to deal with a kid finding out and Paige was written to be that kid. Her whole arc from the start was that she was the kid who was nosy about the parents and had interests that went along with theirs. It seems like they maybe cast HT because she had a soulfullness they thought would be good for that. Unfortunately, it sometimes seems like that's all she has. I can't blame it all on the actress--the directors and writers are there too. But this is also just a show that relies on actors to play characters' inner evolution. Martha had plenty of repetitious scenes, one could say, but AW was always on top of how it was different. Of course, she's an adult with a lot more experience--it's hard for a kid to do that. But I really think Paige's scenes would have played differently if they were performed differently. She tends to play exactly what the lines say. Maybe directors are telling her to always be this way, but it seems unlikely. I think often with young actors shows try to play within their comfort zones for obvious reasons, though of course Paige still has to play the crazy situations Paige is in on the show. (I wouldn't be surprised if they're using something of KS for Henry too.)

I don't know why they decided to just not really use Henry because the kid's fun to watch. I don't want to overpraise him based on just a few scenes but it's funny how the parents so often seem like they're be very gentle talking to Paige while Henry can hold his ground with them. It really feels like a giant red flag that when they did this story with Henry this year almost *all* the interpretations of it I saw on line were meta. It was explained by saying the writers didn't think KS was a good actor, that he was too young to be featured any more due to child labor laws, that he'd gotten too tall, that they just didn't know what to do with him. None of those explanations make any sense, but it seems significant that that's the only place people could really go. Or else to project whatever we think about the Jennings as parents onto Henry.  It's so weird given the show's obviously really committed to being about family that they didn't even seem to really want to do a story about what it's like when one person is on the outside of the family. I'm sure many people interpret Henry wanting to go to boarding school as that, but the show itself didn't really dig into it that way (at least not yet) and anyway that's not a solution to that problem.

I mean, it was cute that the family spent the whole season gossiping with each other about what Henry was up to since he wasn't volunteering the info, like that Chris is like a girlfriend but maybe still isn't his girlfriend? But they didn't exactly use it for too much fun even though I think the showrunners described the story beforehand as "fun."

[Umbelina]

Thanks for the name head's up!  WTH?

Anyway, I agree with your post about the kids issues on this show.

I think it has to do with Elizabeth, and her daughter, the end game that is.  Maybe not, but that would explain not pivoting around this pretty obvious issue of Paige's story just not really working.  I absolutely think that in the hands of a better actor (and it's not always age) even this writing could have worked.  There was so MUCH to play with for a great actor, Jennifer Lawrence would have killed us in this role.  So much depends on subtle little things, a look, a twitching finger, shoulders.  There have been so many amazing child actors, and certainly teen actors. 

Would one of them have made this work?  It's just hard to say.

That said, it didn't work here.  If there isn't some end game specifically dependent on the daughter, WHY did they stick with this whole thing? 

They basically got an extra season here, and they had plenty of time to switch things up somehow.  Or, to focus on Henry for awhile, and just mention how well Paige is coming along in passing, or have her flat out rebel and be sent to Grandma Claudia's for punishment.  Ha!  I don't know, I just feel that we didn't need to have so many scenes with her for so long, when almost all of them dragged the show down.  Have Paige leave with Liz and Philip and Henry do stuff.  Liz comes home and tells Philip all about how well it went with Paige and what they did.

Anyway, I still have hopes for this finale season.  Cockeyed optimist here.

[Roseanna]

14 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

I don't see any reason to doubt the brother exists--how could he not? That was the reason Tuan broke the rules and showed weakness and petty bourgeoisie concerns and there was no other reason for him to be leaving the state to make a phone call. 

It could have been KGB's test to prove whether K&E will report on Tuan's breaking rules. If they don't, what else do they hold back from themselves?

[SusanSunflower]

At the time that episode aired, I was confused by some comments wondering if Tuan was gay which led me to wonder if he was going out of state to simply have some safe social interaction (gay or not) that he could not enjoy anywhere near the "home" they were using to stage the operation.  I didn't (and don't) understand what difference crossing a state line makes wrt to a cross-country long-distance call and avoiding detection (not to mention the 3 hour time difference, meaning that Tuan was calling from the East Coast at say 2 a.m. to Seattle at 11 pm the prior night, somehow (I'd assume) also avoiding "detection" of his foster parents, but reaching his foster brother (who apparently wasn't/isn't in the hospital with leukemia and/or someone with knowledge of his condition) ... with or without some prearrangement?    It all seemed very convoluted as an reason for Tuan to take a bus to another state in the wee wee hours of the morning (and of course return "home" undetected before dawn and nosy neighbors picking up their newspapers from their driveways and/or walking their dogs.  (I never saw any indication that Tuan was gay or had some secret private life, etc. but thought he might be bored to death and maybe took the bus to simply get out of the house -- to go to midnight IHOP for a grand slam breakfast)  There was also talk at that time that Tuan might be in his 20's masquerading as a teenager ... 

There was nothing to refute Tuan's claim, but ... I dunno ... again who would be watching Tuan's ex-foster family's phone or home and why? 

Edited November 14, 2017 by SusanSunflower
got my timezones backwards.

[Umbelina]

3 hours ago, Roseanna said:

It could have been KGB's test to prove whether K&E will report on Tuan's breaking rules. If they don't, what else do they hold back from themselves?

In one of (former CIA chief of station) Bob Baer's books, and on the DVD commentary he did for RED, he said that spies always assume they are being spied on by everyone including their own agency for any reason at all.  He said lying is a given, if he's on the phone to his mom and says he's going to the coast, it means he's probably headed to the mountains.

Tuan is on his first KGB assignment, they will be watching him, and certainly his former foster family and anyone else he may be close to.  Vietnamese Intelligence probably is as well.  A call to his former family from his known location would be stupid.

I completely believed the brother story though. 

Edited November 14, 2017 by Umbelina

[SusanSunflower]

Where do the Morosov's live?  The IHOP was in Harrisburg PA (eastern part of the state).  The east coast is so densely populated with so many cities (unlike the midwest) Harrisburg seems a far way to go.   A solo teen traveling late at night on an east coast greyhound would be less conspicuous than a solo teen in a rural area. 

Tuan had been keeping in touch so I was curious how often he made such trips.  Outing Tuan's travels might be also reinforce P&E inattentiveness.  Setting up a safe line of communication might be preferable to all involved.   Tuan had no control or knowledge of who would pick up the phone in Seattle. 

Watching P&E (and squad) follow Tuan made me realize that Tuan could probably similarly follow P&E back to Washington DC, if he hadn't done so already.  

If there is no brother, then Tuan would know that P&E were checking up on his story if they confronted him with that fact (and they'd likely have a hard time concealing that amount of anger at that degree of betrayal).  

Tuan was (and is) a character about whom much can be questioned and conjectured.  If he's really 20+ years old, he must be frustrated to have no car and no chance to socialize.  

[sistermagpie]

13 hours ago, Roseanna said:

It could have been KGB's test to prove whether K&E will report on Tuan's breaking rules. If they don't, what else do they hold back from themselves?

Yeah, but that takes the story away from the people we know and makes it into a convoluted plot by people we don't know. Plus it ended with Tuan telling them he was going to report himself for that so if he was lying about it then Tuan not only has even less actual character but he's still, for some reason, making up a story when they've already failed the test. If he was just there the whole time testing them there's no reason to even confront them. In fact, it would have made more sense to be grateful to them and encourage them to reveal even more indiscretions to him. 

13 hours ago, SusanSunflower said:

There was nothing to refute Tuan's claim, but ... I dunno ... again who would be watching Tuan's ex-foster family's phone or home and why? 

Nobody, but he ran away from home and doesn't want them to know exactly where he is. It's a precaution he took in case they just look at the number he called from and saw him in Pennsylvania rather than Maryland. His family would have good reason to possibly try to trace the call. They care about him.

 

6 hours ago, SusanSunflower said:

Tuan had been keeping in touch so I was curious how often he made such trips.  Outing Tuan's travels might be also reinforce P&E inattentiveness.  Setting up a safe line of communication might be preferable to all involved.   Tuan had no control or knowledge of who would pick up the phone in Seattle. 

But why would they do that? His bosses don't care about Tuan's brother.  They just told him not to contact anybody and expected him to not do that. Setting him up for regular communication is just asking for more trouble.

6 hours ago, SusanSunflower said:

Watching P&E (and squad) follow Tuan made me realize that Tuan could probably similarly follow P&E back to Washington DC, if he hadn't done so already.  

 

They watch for tails, though. Tuan noticed them, they would probably notice him. I'm not sure why he'd want to follow them to Falls Church but I think the KGB would be angry if he did so. Might cause quite an incident between the Russians and the Vietnamese.

6 hours ago, SusanSunflower said:

Tuan was (and is) a character about whom much can be questioned and conjectured.  If he's really 20+ years old, he must be frustrated to have no car and no chance to socialize.  

But that ranks pretty low on the scale of what the other embedded spies have had to deal with, so I doubt it would show up on anybody's radar. 

14 hours ago, Umbelina said:

I don't know, I just feel that we didn't need to have so many scenes with her for so long, when almost all of them dragged the show down.  Have Paige leave with Liz and Philip and Henry do stuff.  Liz comes home and tells Philip all about how well it went with Paige and what they did.

The more I think about it, what surprised me is less that they did all this stuff with Paige but that when they finally decided to do something with Henry it offered no interesting interactions with his family whatsoever. The Paige stuff in S5 mostly did have a point I could see--they got her from being afraid to being on her feet again. They got her to seeing Pastor Tim as a threat she wanted gone. She tried out a regular relationship and it didn't work. She met Gabriel. She asked more about their work. I didn't often like these scenes, but I could see how on paper she was evolving. 

The Henry story I get how it's realistic development. It's like Stan being bemused by Matthew wearing eyeliner and going off to Rocky Horror or having a band. It's far more normal for a kid that age to be focused on his friends than his parents and for them to just let him do that and be pleased that he's doing so well. But still, this story is about the family and it's been years since Henry's had any interaction with his parents that wasn't him snarking at them about something so it's hard to know the stakes here. Even when he drops this bomb on them nobody talks to him or about him about it. Paige folds it into her ongoing "oh, to be a normal child without my terrible burdens and depth" stuff, Elizabeth, who was sent into a panic by youth group and refused to hand Paige over to a Bible camp for the summer and once suggested wanting her kids to be socialists, can't see why anyone wouldn't send their kid to a prep school for the upper classes, Philip objects, but inconsistently and incoherently.

They even tease us with these vague hints of a parallel between Philip and Henry here, but it goes nowhere--maybe the real pay-off was Mischa Jr. hearing his previously unheard-of uncle tell him the father he's never known was smart. Which still makes him 100% more engaged with his father than Henry is. Maybe it's just the family curse that the sons in the family only know their fathers' true selves based on hearsay while the moms and daughters never stop revealing themselves to each other.

Edited November 14, 2017 by sistermagpie

[kokapetl]

An early twenties Asian would be logical for a high school assignment in DC, white people would estimate his age to be younger than he really would be.

Elizabeth would never be followed home. She’s too vigilant, and the KGB seem to have instructed her and Philip in practically flawless methods of evading the FBI’s net. That 4 hour long 20 mile an hour chase from the Breeland open house made that clear.  They’re super KGB spies against non super FBI special agents. 

As things stand, Stan and the FBI cannot plausibly uncover the Jennings identities, they’re not nearly competent enough. The Jennings must expose themselves. 

[sistermagpie]

6 hours ago, Kokapetl said:

As things stand, Stan and the FBI cannot plausibly uncover the Jennings identities, they’re not nearly competent enough. The Jennings must expose themselves. 

Sure they could. They proved that back in S1 when Elizabeth almost got caught picking up the tape. Sure they had Philip get them away in an unlikely escape which made the FBI look bad to many, but the only reason Philip was there was due to Nina getting a tip from Stan. And yes, one could of course chalk that up to Stan being a dolt for being too happy in front of Nina, but that was still a very specific set of circumstances that made them lucky that day. William (and Zinaida) got caught due to similar circumstances on the FBI side with Oleg being an anti-Nina. It wouldn't really be OOC for Stan to be able to draw the right conclusion.

Of course, it'll be hard now that the audience has gotten used to P&E getting away with everything, but they're capable of writing them into believable danger. It's not a murder mystery so the FBI doesn't have to figure out who the spy is like Sherlock Holmes, but we have seen Stan deduce things like that. But if he doesn't, it's not cheating for somebody to flip on them.

[Clanstarling]

1 hour ago, sistermagpie said:

Sure they could. They proved that back in S1 when Elizabeth almost got caught picking up the tape. Sure they had Philip get them away in an unlikely escape which made the FBI look bad to many, but the only reason Philip was there was due to Nina getting a tip from Stan. And yes, one could of course chalk that up to Stan being a dolt for being too happy in front of Nina, but that was still a very specific set of circumstances that made them lucky that day. William (and Zinaida) got caught due to similar circumstances on the FBI side with Oleg being an anti-Nina. It wouldn't really be OOC for Stan to be able to draw the right conclusion.

Of course, it'll be hard now that the audience has gotten used to P&E getting away with everything, but they're capable of writing them into believable danger. It's not a murder mystery so the FBI doesn't have to figure out who the spy is like Sherlock Holmes, but we have seen Stan deduce things like that. But if he doesn't, it's not cheating for somebody to flip on them.

Not to mention, in the very first episode, Stan was suspicious of them, broke into their garage and checked the trunk of their car - which had previously held the guy they'd kidnapped (then killed). He didn't find anything - so he figured it was only his paranoia. When in fact, he was actually right. Stan's got skills, but he's not going to be thinking of the people he's already cleared. 

[sistermagpie]

11 hours ago, Clanstarling said:

Not to mention, in the very first episode, Stan was suspicious of them, broke into their garage and checked the trunk of their car - which had previously held the guy they'd kidnapped (then killed). He didn't find anything - so he figured it was only his paranoia. When in fact, he was actually right. Stan's got skills, but he's not going to be thinking of the people he's already cleared.

It's like what Elizabeth explained to Paige about the Tims after the Ethiopia threat (which also applied to Paige herself). The fact that Alice wrongly suspected the Jennings once made her feel guilty and more likely to give them the benefit of the doubt now. At this point he's not feeling guilty about that or anything, but he's got plenty of emotional reasons to not want them to be guilty too, and years of them really not being suspicious in front of him. So yeah, the fact that Stan hasn't picked up on anything has nothing to do with Stan being dim.

In fact, I think he still naturally makes connections between them and things he hears. For instance, when William talked about the couple where the woman was pretty and the guy was lucky, many people noticed Stan sort of looking at Philip when he got home. Some thought this was supposed to be Stan figuring something out, but of course that would be silly. Stan had no reason to think William was talking about Philip. But he *did* have reason to think to himself that Philip also had a pretty wife and maybe connect his own envy of Philip to William's.

[kokapetl]

In the first episode, Stan did almost discover that guy tied up in the car boot, but Philip was hiding in the shadows with a gun pointed at Stan. Stan may have instincts and training, but I think Elizabeth and Philip’s instincts and training more than counter that.

[Umbelina]

On 11/28/2017 at 8:00 PM, Clanstarling said:

Not to mention, in the very first episode, Stan was suspicious of them, broke into their garage and checked the trunk of their car - which had previously held the guy they'd kidnapped (then killed). He didn't find anything - so he figured it was only his paranoia. When in fact, he was actually right. Stan's got skills, but he's not going to be thinking of the people he's already cleared. 

 

On 11/28/2017 at 11:57 AM, Kokapetl said:

An early twenties Asian would be logical for a high school assignment in DC, white people would estimate his age to be younger than he really would be.

Elizabeth would never be followed home. She’s too vigilant, and the KGB seem to have instructed her and Philip in practically flawless methods of evading the FBI’s net. That 4 hour long 20 mile an hour chase from the Breeland open house made that clear.  They’re super KGB spies against non super FBI special agents. 

As things stand, Stan and the FBI cannot plausibly uncover the Jennings identities, they’re not nearly competent enough. The Jennings must expose themselves. 

 

On 11/30/2017 at 10:46 AM, Kokapetl said:

In the first episode, Stan did almost discover that guy tied up in the car boot, but Philip was hiding in the shadows with a gun pointed at Stan. Stan may have instincts and training, but I think Elizabeth and Philip’s instincts and training more than counter that.

I pretty much agree with everything @sistermagpie said, but I want to add a couple of thoughts.

I don't think Stan or the FBI is incompetent at all.  I'm pretty sure I posted something in his thread detailing WHY I think that about him, and the other FBI agents, in his thread, so I won't repeat it too much here.

The ADVANTAGE the Jennings (KGB) have over the FBI in this situation is that they, the KGB, is both ALWAYS on guard since they are on foreign soil without diplomatic cover, and they know who the FBI is, while the FBI do not know who they are.  (Yet.)  So it can make them look incompetent, but honestly, they have quite a bit on Philip now, including a fingerprint and an eye witness (the supe at his apartment.)  All it takes is one domino to fall, and they will have them, because the others will tumble right after them. 

In addition, once they do have them?  Photos of them will likely be blasted all over the news, which will probably bring in other witnesses/ops, because they will most certainly mention they wear disguises.  Wheat guy and gal might recognize them, Kimmie might as well, Martha's parents, etc.  They even know some of those disguises, and could throw on a mustache or different hair pretty easily as examples of what they might look like while disguised.

Edited December 5, 2017 by Umbelina

[sistermagpie]

8 hours ago, Umbelina said:

So it can make them look incompetent, but honestly, they have quite a bit on Philip now, including a fingerprint and an eye witness (the supe at his apartment.)  All it takes is one domino to fall, and they will have them, because the others will tumble right after them. 

Also--I don't know if this would really be an issue, but there's that necklace Martha had. I believe we saw Stan specifically looking at it. It originally belonged to Elizabeth--Philip asked for jewelry to give her to make up for not seeing her when she was supposed to because he was kidnapped. We don't know what the background of the necklace was, but it seemed by his reaction and the spiteful way she gave it to him that it had been important. Maybe they had Stan look at it just as a good beat in that scene, one that was there for the audience to remember the necklace. But it's also one more thing they've seeded in there.

No idea if Stan would actually recognize it if he saw an old picture of Elizabeth wearing it or whatever, but it seems like it would be make a sad sense dramatically for their lovers' spat to lead to any kind of clue. Especially since the action even originally came from Elizabeth. Like in Breaking Bad 

Spoiler

where Walter White is given away by his fatal flaw, his arrogance.

[cleo]

I'm not sure where to put this bc it's kind of about the season as a whole. I made it to episode 8 this season and bailed. Read spoilers for the rest & feel like I made a good decision. I just don't want to watch a plot to bully a teen and get him to try to commit suicide for entertainment. I'm not sure when I started to actively root against Philip and Elizabeth, sometime in the middle of last season. I was really hoping Martha would turn them in. Just tired of seeing them destroy people's lives with little real conscience, including fucking up their own daughter.  This season I thought it was interesting they stuck with their targets on the wheat thing even after learning the US was not trying to poison the USSR. Struck me as very different than covert war, and more like standard corporate espionage...their product is better than ours. But they continue to justify their actions essentially. Killed a guy and it wasn't quite for the reason we thought- oops. But hey, let's keep going anyway. 

Early on I thought this season might be about each of them- Philip and Elizabeth, Stan, and Oleg- realize that the ideals and institutions they devoted themselves to were deeply flawed. For example: if the FBI had continued to go after Oleg, Stan would have realized that the fact he is a 'good man' doesn't matter, and that the FBI in turn will do morally questionable things to meet their ends, even if good people end up as casualties. Oleg seeing the problems in the USSR bc of his mother's treatment and also the people at the grocery stores struggling to get by. Maybe Stan and Oleg then teaming up somehow to do something positive. The wheat thing and Young Hee corroding P&E's faith to the point where they seriously question continuing.  I would have preferred something like that. 

Anyway, season 5 was a very disappointing slog that I just couldn't make it through. I will try Season 6 when it comes but I'm ambivalent about this show and have been the last couple seasons.  I think my ultimate feeling for it, and whether it was worthwhile, will depend on how it ends. 

[Dowel Jones]

Take a look at the thread "The Soviet Union Is No More" for a glimpse at where S6 is going.  Could be interesting, could be complete nonsense just to fill out the episodes.

[TheBride]

On 5/23/2017 at 11:48 PM, Tara Ariano said:

Stan faces an uncertain future.

There's something weird about his lady friend who wants to work with the FBI. And that darned mail cart is still roaming around, collecting intel!!