S01.E10: We Are Gone

[Earlwoode]

3 hours ago, Osmigo said:

I was uncertain about this, too.  When I saw that final shot, at first I thought it was a still photo.  Then I saw the snow blowing, but Crozier et. al. were ABSOLUTELY motionless, like statues. My conclusion was that they had frozen to death.  So everybody's saying they were alive? I found it a little dissatisfying for the show to end with this uncertainty.  Thoughts, comments?

I think he was seal hunting.  Didn't someone mention that it took a long time to learn to hunt seals and you have to wait motionless by an ice hole until they come up for air?  I presume the child behind him was to show he maybe now had an Eskimo son?

Also something that occurred to me after I watched the show:  Goodsir deliberately murdered those men by poisoning his body and knowing they would eat it - in fact, he was counting on it.  So he wasn't such a goody-goody after all.  Granted they were mutineers but they were also incredibly desperate men: starving, poisoned by lead, terrified by a stalking supernatural monster, totally at the end of their tether and perhaps not in their right minds.  So maybe they shouldn't be judged too harshly?  Glad he didn't turn out to be just a saint in disguise - it made him more human because he certainly irritated me at times during the series with his saintly stance.

I also don't agree with the people who said Silence was so expressive with her face.  One of my criticisms of her is that her emotions were hard to read. All I saw was a wooden face with a never-changing expression.  I didn't see that she particularly expressed any emotion at all when she saw Goodsir's body.  She looked indifferent to me - not devastated.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Earlwoode

[Fellaway]

24 minutes ago, zobot81 said:

This is not really meant as evidence of anything regarding the final shot, but I do think that the show's creators had a holistic vision for the show's aesthetic  -- right down to the show's promotional material and website. 

I shared these "period portraits" from AMC.com, on "The Terror in the Media" thread, simply because I love them....beautiful and haunting...

Portrait Group #1

Portrait Group #2

Thank you for those!  They are absolutely stunning!

5 minutes ago, SoSueMe said:

I will have to re-watch but I could swear I saw a small movement from one of them, sort of a twitch. With all the fur garments blending into each other it was hard to tell, but I think the child moved just slightly.

I thought I saw the child move, as well.

[SoSueMe]

I just found the final scene on Youtube. At approx. 2:30 the child's hand/wrist moves. This may have been unintentional, it is very subtle. But then again, they could have freeze-framed it, so who knows?

[mrspidey]

13 hours ago, Crone said:

 In the book, tuunbaq survived and refused to eat Hickey.

You know, this is exactly what i thought was going to happen, Tuunbaq refusing to eat Hickey because he has no soul to devour. And in a way, I think that's what we got. There was a moment, when Tuunbaq was done killing some guy and turned its attention to Hickey but didn't seem interested in eating him at all. It wasn't until Hickey offered his tongue that Tuunbaq ate him. 

Edited May 22, 2018 by mrspidey

[zobot81]

1 hour ago, SoSueMe said:

I just found the final scene on Youtube. At approx. 2:30 the child's hand/wrist moves. This may have been unintentional, it is very subtle. But then again, they could have freeze-framed it, so who knows?

I think she's asleep and dreaming...ya know how ppl flinch while they're having a dream? That's what I thought, anyway.

[proserpina65]

1 hour ago, Earlwoode said:

Granted they were mutineers but they were also incredibly desperate men: starving, poisoned by lead, terrified by a stalking supernatural monster, totally at the end of their tether and perhaps not in their right minds. 

The rest of the mutineers, maybe not.  Hickey?  Absolutely.  He was a horrible person from before the time he joined the crew, and continued to be horrible, and completely insane, to the very end.

[peeayebee]

12 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

Then begging Francis to take the ring the guy way back when had for his sister, and giving it to her if he could.

And he couldn't remember the young man's name. It was so sad. Francis kindly simply told him he would deliver the ring (even without a name).

 

Quote

Poor Jopson. I hope this show has an afterlife, and he can see that his beloved Captain really didnt abandon him to die. Its just too sad to contemplate him dying alone and in pain, thinking his friend and captain left him behind without a thought, after everything they went through together.

What a sad, horrible death, to go out believing that this man you loved and respected would treat you like that. This is possibly the worst death on the show.

 

11 hours ago, thuganomics85 said:

I guess there is a bright side that he helped take Hickey and his lot down with him by poisoning his body

I didn't think about it at the time, but the only reason he slit his wrists was so no one would suspect he died of poisoning. 

 

Quote

Was confused over why Edward suddenly was covered with gold chains when Francis found their camp.  

I guess the only explanation for this is what's been posted earlier, that IRL a body was found festooned with chains. It's easy to believe that Edward's mind was damaged by the lead, so no further reason is really needed.

BTW, I noticed in the one shot where Francis is walking across the ice with other Eskimos that his sleeve appears empty. I assume that more amputation was needed after LS cut off his hand.

I am eager to watch this entire show again. I'll tell my BIL and sister about it then watch with them.

[Sighed I]

Normally after each episode, I have so much to say I don't know where to begin. This time I don't know where to begin because it's still sinking in. It brings to mind the final shot, alone with one's thoughts, yet not alone, surrounded by everything and nothing at all. This is going to linger with me for a long time. Bravo, gentlemen and ladies, bravo.

One thing I do want comment on is the opening theme. I don't remember which one it was, but several episodes back I remember hearing the theme and thinking it had changed somewhat, but it was a subtle enough difference I thought maybe I was imagining it. After hearing how altered it was last night, I realize it wasn't my imagination after all. This show is so multilayered with so many beautiful touches. Start to finish, The Terror is sublime.

[slothgirl]

1 hour ago, Earlwoode said:

I think he was seal hunting.  Didn't someone mention that it took a long time to learn to hunt seals and you have to wait motionless by an ice hole until they come up for air?  I presume the child behind him was to show he maybe now had an Eskimo son?

Also something that occurred to me after I watched the show:  Goodsir deliberately murdered those men by poisoning his body and knowing they would eat it - in fact, he was counting on it.  So he wasn't such a goody-goody after all.  Granted they were mutineers but they were also incredibly desperate men: starving, poisoned by lead, terrified by a stalking supernatural monster, totally at the end of their tether and perhaps not in their right minds.  So maybe they shouldn't be judged too harshly?  Glad he didn't turn out to be just a saint in disguise - it made him more human because he certainly irritated me at times during the series with his saintly stance.

 

There seems to be some confusion as to whether the child is male or female. Posters have called the kid a son and a daughter. To me, it doesn't matter.. Crozier has a child. He is coompletely Aglook (sp?) now

I too was sometimes bothered by Goodsir's doormat goody-goodyness. But he did develop over time into someone less deferential and at the end, vengeful. I understood him killing himself because he most likely assumed that Hickey would kill Crozier to eat him. So by offering himself as a meal, he could buy Crozier some time, which would benefit others besides just Crozier himself.

I found the poison thing rather confusing though. How much poison could have found it's way into all his tissues if his blood stopped moving shortly after he ingested it, and while it WAS moving, it was flowing OUT of him? Was the poison designed to KILL the men who ate him or just make them ill enough to think twice about cannibalism (and again.. to buy Crozier time and make him the strongest person there). I also thought he had rubbed some sort of poison on his skin after washing himself. That would have been more effective as a delivery system to the cannibals.

There's so much possible interpretations of the analogies and symbolism in this entire story. If he DID intend to kill the men who ingest him, he is in some ways the anti-Tuunbaq... he kills by being devoured after his soul has been lost to him, instead of taking souls while devouring.

Or perhaps is is actually Tuunbaq 2.0... He is helping restore the natural balance by getting rid of some humans who are an abomination to the land. Tuunbaq the improved version who does not kill indiscriminately but by "assisting" demise of creatures through their own actions. Of all the death "dream sequences" his is the only one depicting only the perfection of the natural world with no humans. His images are of animal, vegetable, and mineral... The perfect spiral of a shell and the wonder of crystals.

1 hour ago, mrspidey said:

You know, this is exactly what i thought was going to happen, Tuunbaq refusing to eat Hickey because he has no soul to devour. And in a way, I think that's what we got. There was a moment, when Tuunbaq was done killing some guy and turned its attention to Hickey but didn't seem interested in eating him at all. It wasn't until Hickey offered his tongue that Tuunbaq ate him. 

 

I never really liked the disjointed purpose of Tuunbaq. If he's primarily restoring the natural balance, what's with devouring souls? If he's deliberately devouring souls... why? And does that make him evil in some way? The scales of natural order are not good or evil.. by definition they are balance. I think devouring the souls was an unnecessary twist as was the weird magical ability to stack pieces of bodies. Or if Tuunbaq represents the worst of mankind, then it's not a force for balance. 

For me, this was the weakest part of the story... so much possibility in the character, and instead of leaving it somewhat vague and open to analysis with several potential "right" interpretations, they gave us conflicting information that makes all interpretations feel wrong.

I think the offering of the tongue is not a guarantee that Tuunbaq will accept the offerer as shaman, even when LS or her father attempted it. It was probably a risky move that would always result in either death or success for the native shamans. In Hickey's case, Tuunbaq was all "Nope. Nope. SO much nope!". From that scene episodes ago where Tuunbaq brought LS a seal, it seems that the shaman is first chosen by Tuunbaq.. not the other way around. And that makes sense with the idea of Tuunbaq being a force for balance.

There is no balance achieved if Hickey is his shaman. The balance comes in having a will that is different from Tuunbaq's as the shaman... ok.. maybe it does make sense that Tuunbaq is like an unruly toddler with body parts and vengeance. Ironically, Hickey wants to bond with the creature because he thinks he is it's equal, and yet he has the same colonialism mindset that governs the whole expedition and the British culture. In Hickey's mind, Tuunbaq is there for Hickey to use for his own gain, and he has no understanding, respect, or appreciation for the thing he seeks to "colonize".

15 minutes ago, peeayebee said:

I didn't think about it at the time, but the only reason he slit his wrists was so no one would suspect he died of poisoning. 

Or because once you've committed to suicide, you might as well go as quickly and painlessly as possible. Why would he willingly suffer from the poison if he was going to die at the end of it anyway?

12 minutes ago, Sighed I said:

One thing I do want comment on is the opening theme. I don't remember which one it was, but several episodes back I remember hearing the theme and thinking it had changed somewhat, but it was a subtle enough difference I thought maybe I was imagining it. After hearing how altered it was last night, I realize it wasn't my imagination after all. T

One of the articles I read talks about how the music changes over the course of the series. They also had a different "wind" for each episode. I've read quite a few in the last few days so I doubt I could find it again. As a side note, the composer died and the Marcus the show is dedicated to at the end is he.

Edited May 22, 2018 by slothgirl

[tiredofwork]

Quote

Even Lady Silence; who we finally found it is names Silna; has a tragic end, as she is basically booted from her camp after the Tuunbaq dies.  And her reaction to seeing Goodsir's half-eaten body was crushing

Yea, her totally stopping and staring at the lifeless, carved up body of Goodsir was powerful..  She was devastated..  It was like she was thinking, What  kind of freaking savage animals could do this to one of their own and a fine person at that..   Perhaps she found solace in the last words from Goodsir on their separation when he clumsily tried to tell her that the British were better than that.. that it may be hard for her to see, but he tried to really tell her at present, this was not who they were..

I was a little disappointed with the ending though it seemed rushed and incomplete..

[SimoneS]

1 hour ago, Earlwoode said:

Also something that occurred to me after I watched the show:  Goodsir deliberately murdered those men by poisoning his body and knowing they would eat it - in fact, he was counting on it.  So he wasn't such a goody-goody after all.  Granted they were mutineers but they were also incredibly desperate men: starving, poisoned by lead, terrified by a stalking supernatural monster, totally at the end of their tether and perhaps not in their right minds.  So maybe they shouldn't be judged too harshly?  Glad he didn't turn out to be just a saint in disguise - it made him more human because he certainly irritated me at times during the series with his saintly stance.

To the end, Goodsir was a "goody-goody" by your standards because part of the reason that he poisoned and killed himself was not just to escape his torment, but to buy time so that save Cozier and the other men could be saved or save themselves from the butchers who had captured them.

[zobot81]

This might be a super annoying thing to say.  I'm just being 1000% honest and I have no evidence -- but since we're talking so much about the final scene -- I instantly thought the child was Lady Silence.  Not literally.  I don't even know why exactly I thought such a thing. Maybe because I want to remember them in their idealistic roles -- Crozier as the stolid captain and protector, and Lady Silence the innocent, dreaming child-shaman.

Isn't there a lot of importance and power in Shamanic dreaming?

Anyway, it's prolly dumb, I just wanted to put that out there, as one aspect of my first impressions of the scene.

[Earlwoode]

9 hours ago, slothgirl said:

I also thought he had rubbed some sort of poison on his skin after washing himself. That would have been more effective as a delivery system to the cannibals.

Umm, he didn't just "wash" himself - what looked like washing was him rubbing the poison on his skin presumably to make it more potent.  That's why he told Crozier to only eat his feet (ugh!) where he didn't rub the poison in.  We saw him pouring the potions into the basin and then dipping in the cloth he was rubbing all over his skin.

I too wish they'd left out the silly CGI bear.  His whole existence was just dumb.  There was enough horror around without adding in this craziness.  I don't buy any of this theory that he was "protecting" the landscape?  Protecting it from what exactly since no one else had presumably come there and he existed just for the natives way before the "evil" white men came?  Makes no sense IMO.

9 hours ago, SimoneS said:

To the end, Goodsir was a "goody-goody" by your standards because part of the reason that he poisoned and killed himself was not just to escape his torment, but to buy time so that save Cozier and the other men could be saved or save themselves from the butchers who had captured them.

How do you know that?  Did anyone suggest he was killing himself so that Crozier and others wouldn't be eaten?  It must have been obvious to all that Hickey was stark raving mad at that point - though of course, most of the men were going crazy themselves.  One of the things that didn't make any sense at all was why Crozier seemed totally unaffected by either starvation, scurvy or lead poisoning.  Guess being the lead in a show exempts you from that, lol!

9 hours ago, tiredofwork said:

was a little disappointed with the ending though it seemed rushed and incomplete.

Ditto.  To me it was the worst episode of an otherwise really good series.  Quite disappointing.

9 hours ago, tiredofwork said:

Freakin psychopath has to go kill the real Hickey and all he had to do was follow him to the ship and sign up...

What he really wanted was a vacation in Hawaii, lol.

[tiredofwork]

Quote

"You could have just joined up." was probably the funniest line of the whole season. Especially because you could almost hear Francis adding "dumbass" to the end of that. 

I forgot about this.  It was hilarious..  Freakin psychopath has to go kill the real Hickey and all he had to do was follow him to the ship and sign up...

[Hazel55]

All of the Hickey stuff-- his claiming to Crozier to be Crozier's "equal"! His "rousing" speech atop the boat at the 11th hour! His bizarro sacrifice to Tuunbaq! His inexplicable belief that Tuunbaq would accept a white imperialist invader as his next shaman!-- was an unintentional comedic tour de force. I got bored with both the character and the actor from episode 7 onwards, but I've got to hand it to Adam Negatis-- in this episode, he just sunk his teeth right into the "all out KRAZY" of this role, and swallowed the meat whole.

Was it a coincidence that Tuunbaq came off, in the end, as more of a noble savage than an actual villain after he killed Hickey? Or was he just glorified in my eyes by killing Hickey before he could make yet another semi coherent speech? 

Edited May 22, 2018 by Hazel55

[slothgirl]

12 minutes ago, Earlwoode said:

Umm, he didn't just "wash" himself - what looked like washing was him rubbing the poison on his skin presumably to make it more potent.  That's why he told Crozier to only eat his feet (ugh!) where he didn't rub the poison in.  We saw him pouring the potions into the basin and then dipping in the cloth he was rubbing all over his skin.

 

I too wish they'd left out the silly CGI bear.  His whole existence was just dumb.  There was enough horror around without adding in this craziness.  I don't buy any of this theory that he was "protecting" the landscape?  Protecting it from what exactly since no one else had presumably come there and he existed just for the natives way before the "evil" white men came?  Makes no sense IMO.

there is a scene in a previous episode where a group of Inuit discuss the fact that Tuunbaq restores the natural balance. In the past he has done this when there was an excess of caribou and another time with an excess of some other animal. At the moment, we have an excess of humans (and destructive ones at that) so it's Tuunbaq's purpose to eliminate some of them.

6 minutes ago, Earlwoode said:

Ditto.  To me it was the worst episode of an otherwise really good series.  Quite disappointing.

I didn't find it dissapointing, so much as rushed. I would have liked a 2 hour finale (but not by adding another hour long episode.. I don't think I could have waited another week for the end!)

5 minutes ago, Hazel55 said:

I've got to hand it to Adam Negatis-- in this episode, he just sunk his teeth right into the "all out KRAZY" of this role, and swallowed the meat whole.

 

I see what you did there. ;)

Edited May 22, 2018 by slothgirl

[Earlwoode]

23 minutes ago, slothgirl said:

There is a scene in a previous episode where a group of Inuit discuss the fact that Tuunbaq restores the natural balance. In the past he has done this when there was an excess of caribou and another time with an excess of some other animal. At the moment, we have an excess of humans (and destructive ones at that) so it's Tuunbaq's purpose to eliminate some of them.

Yes well I just don't buy into this theory of Gods or Nature or whatever restoring any balance.  But maybe that's just my unromantic nature, lol.  And the idea that there was ever an abundance of anything (let alone caribou) in that desolate, desert landscape is just ludicrous. What the heck would the caribou eat?

I really enjoyed Hickey's descent into madness - especially him breaking out into song while wearing long johns and trying to lead a rousing chorus.  It lent a few moments of mirth into an otherwise bleak episode.  He always was my favourite character, haha.

[AZChristian]

I thought that Goodsir might have poisoned his skin so the others would die sooner - which could almost have been an act of kindness on his part. That would be more in keeping with his character. Then he slit his wrists to sacrifice himself sooner . . . for their ultimate benefit.

[Earlwoode]

1 minute ago, AZChristian said:

Then he slit his wrists to sacrifice himself sooner . . . for their ultimate benefit.

Ah so he decided to kill them quicker?  Hmm, not a very moral decision is it?  Why would he get to decide who dies?  How would he know they might not get rescued at the last minute like Crozier did when Silence found him?  It was murder, pure and simple in my eyes.

[Hazel55]

27 minutes ago, tiredofwork said:

I forgot about this.  It was hilarious..  Freakin psychopath has to go kill the real Hickey and all he had to do was follow him to the ship and sign up...

Actually, Hickey may have had good reason for this. 

When Crozier asks Hickey why he didn't just sign up, Hickey asserts that he "needed to disappear," implying that Hickey had committed some sort of crime that necessitated he go on the run and assume a new identity. (Knowing what we do of Hickey, how many of us would be willing to bet that this crime was murder?) If he was indeed a wanted man, Hickey couldn't "just sign up."  Another man may have simply made up a false name; but Hickey, being Hickey, of course had to murder a man and steal his identity. 

[SoSueMe]

Anyone have thoughts on why Hickey cold-cocked the man sitting next to him at the table after forcing Crozier to partake?

 

Also, am I the only one wondering why Crozier didn't stab Hickey in the back with the knife he was going to use on Goodsir? He might have gotten shot but Hickey would be out of the picture and by that time there was already dissension in the group.

Edited May 22, 2018 by SoSueMe

[Mahamid Frauded Me]

I had to watch Goodsir cutting his wrists through my fingers... I normally am not squeamish like that, but I found it disturbing along with his partially eaten body on the table.  I think I will have to re-watch this entire series again with sub titles - so many things I think I missed the meaning of....   

[proserpina65]

1 hour ago, Earlwoode said:

Ah so he decided to kill them quicker?  Hmm, not a very moral decision is it?  Why would he get to decide who dies?  How would he know they might not get rescued at the last minute like Crozier did when Silence found him?  It was murder, pure and simple in my eyes.

Given that the group was under the sway of an evil, vile murdering psychopath, it would've been kindness.  His sacrificing himself to try and end Hickey's reign was noble.

[slothgirl]

14 minutes ago, SoSueMe said:

Anyone have thoughts on why Hickey cold-cocked the man sitting next to him at the table after forcing Crozier to partake?

 

Also, am I the only one wondering why Crozier didn't stab Hickey in the back with the knife he was going to use on Goodsir? He might have gotten shot but Hickey would be out of the picture and by that time there was already dissension in the group.

I was thinking that either 

A) He was making a space at the table for Crozier in his usual hamfisted way

B) He was showing Crozier that there would consequences to the others if Crozier refused to eat Goodsir's flesh

1 hour ago, Earlwoode said:

Ah so he decided to kill them quicker?  Hmm, not a very moral decision is it?  Why would he get to decide who dies?  How would he know they might not get rescued at the last minute like Crozier did when Silence found him?  It was murder, pure and simple in my eyes.

Rescued by who or what? What possible rescue could have appeared that wouldn't also result in bloodshed.. possibly innocent bloodshed, if the rescuers were Inuit? 

If you kill a murderer to protect likely victims (natives, or their own crew members that they are stalking), is it murder? 

[slothgirl]

1 hour ago, Hazel55 said:

When Crozier asks Hickey why he didn't just sign up, Hickey asserts that he "needed to disappear," implying that Hickey had committed some sort of crime that necessitated he go on the run and assume a new identity. If he was indeed a wanted man, Hickey couldn't "just sign up."  

yeah, but then we wouldn't have the unspoken "dumbass" to follow Crozier's comment. ;)

[Lamima]

It was after Crozier ate Goodsirs foot flesh and he already told the other dude at the end to get up. He hit whats.his.name and then the scene ended. Show came back to Hickey atop sledge with men chained to it including whats.his.name that he hit in the head. So I assumed he hit him to knock him out so he could chain him to the sledge. You hear whats.his.name yell 'get this chain off me'.

And the needed to disappear was before Crozier's 'why didn't you just sign up'.

[amazinglybored]

They got really hamfisted about good vs bad by the end. For as good as this show was it got clunky towards the end with Tuunbaq and the dipiction of the good Crozier side compared to the evil Hickey side. Crozier living... 

 

I would have preferred something more about pure survival. 

[Portia]

With regard to whether or not Goodsir remained a goody-goody . . . I don't recall the actual dialogue, and maybe I just imagined this, but didn't he and Crozier talk about God when they were alone in the tent? I got the impression that Goodsir considered himself lost. That was the moment that I thought "He's going to try to kill Hickey, maybe others."

Then again, I feel like I understand about 10% of this show at any given moment. I am really looking forward to doing a re-watch this summer.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Portia

[Osmigo]

3 hours ago, zobot81 said:

I think she's asleep and dreaming...ya know how ppl flinch while they're having a dream? That's what I thought, anyway.

Another little datapoint on that final scene.  There are *4* of them going across the ice.  But there can't be 4 in that very last image.  So who are those people? Is that just Crozier and his daughter?  Remember also this is only after 2 years have passed. That girl with him is clearly 6 to 8.

Also, Crozier isn't holding the spear on his lap; he's holding it up in the air, several inches over his leg (note the shadow).  And crossways to the hole, if there is one.  That doesn't look at all like he's waiting for a seal's head to pop up. And obviously that's not a position you could hold for very long.

Perhaps it's a combination of both: the girl is sleeping, while Crozier has frozen.  Just speculation, of course, which may be exactly what the author intended, although it doesn't give the viewer much sense of closure.

It would be nice if we could communicate with the author or screenwriter and just ASK them.

[patty1h]

I was finally able to turn on the subtitles this episode, so I was able to catch so much more dialogue.  This was a quick throw-away line, but it jumped out at me.  Crozier is in a tent and Hickey comes in to see him - Hickey says something about having the men take "a sick nap".  I found the term interesting and I interpreted it as an enforced rest since they were operating under brutal conditions, starvation, lead poisoning, etc.   Unless this "sick nap" was a military protocol that Hickey was following to try to keep the crew feeling like proper Englishman and not renegade scoundrels, this made Hickey look a bit sympathetic towards the men following him.   Or, he was just doing it to make sure they stayed alive longer to do his bidding....

[Dowel Jones]

18 hours ago, Ohwell said:

I did love it when Hickey offered up his tongue and Tuunbaq basically said nope nope nope and proceeded to eat his arm..

I had a mental image of all those horror stories and warnings from the NPS about feeding bears in Yellowstone Park.

I realize life was difficult for sailors of that period, and they expected hardship, but for the life of me I can't understand why they would undertake to pull by hand two gigantic boats through the Arctic wildness.  The effort alone would sap their energy so rapidly as to doom them.  Not to mention all the useless weight they piled in those boats.  Why not dismantle one and make a sled or two, much like Silna's, so that you could haul the essentials over the distance of some 800 miles?  And then Hickey has the mutineers pull one UP to a ridge, only for them to discover that he means to have a final confrontation with the beast.  I hope they all damned him with their final breaths.

The ending reminds me of the ending to Open Range, in a way.  "All this, for more cows?"  Basically, that was, and still is, the entire purpose of the Northwest Passage.  More trade.  And glory.

[true north]

1 hour ago, Osmigo said:

Also, Crozier isn't holding the spear on his lap; he's holding it up in the air, several inches over his leg (note the shadow).  And crossways to the hole, if there is one.  That doesn't look at all like he's waiting for a seal's head to pop up. And obviously that's not a position you could hold for very long.

 

Actually, it looks like a nod to the end of the book, where Crozier helps Silna with seal hunting. That scene is really, REALLY long, but the gist of it is that seals make small breathing holes in the ice, and a hunter must wait above such hole for hours without moving or making any noise. And then when a seal swims to that hole to take a breath, the hunter flings his/her harpoon vertically down the hole and kills the seal. 

[tiredofwork]

Does anyone recall in one of the last few episodes when one of the officers saw a seagull or some bird flying and asked if anyone else saw it?  I never saw a followup to that.  I thought it might be foretelling of some sort of open water or vegetation?

[seacliffsal]

Was there any rhyme or reason for who Hickey had chained to the boat versus free-walking at the end?  I found it interesting that Tozer (the Marine) was initially Hickey's biggest supporter and then Hickey had him chained to the boat.  Perhaps Hickey was afraid that Tozer would try to take him out.

When Francis was looking for his men with Lady Silence, he immediately read the scene at the sick camp when he saw the cans stacked in front of each tent.  Those men never had a chance and Jopson's death was heartbreaking as he thought Francis left him.

I think Goodsir just couldn't live with what he had done even though he had been forced into his actions.  Perhaps he thought that he was helping Edward and the men that Francis believed were coming for them.  By weakening the mutineers (punishable by death in the courts), Edward and the others would have had much better odds in defeating Hickey and the mutineers.  Francis really believed that they would come and he told both Goodsir and Magnus that they would be there soon.  There didn't seem to be enough poison on his body and in his system to kill the men, but probably enough to weaken them.  So, in my opinion, he was not a murderer but he was trying to help facilitate the rescue that Francis so clearly thought was coming.

I really enjoyed this series even though there were many times that I did not understand what was happening and many times I could not tell the characters apart (more at the beginning when there were way more of them...).

[Earlwoode]

7 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

His sacrificing himself to try and end Hickey's reign was noble.

I don’t see it like that. He could have just killed him. Picked up gun and shot him.  I’m sure HIckey wouldn’t have suspected the mild mannered doctor would do something like that.  After all, he wasn’t tied up like Crozier or chained.  Nope, I see it as murder, pure and simple..

7 hours ago, slothgirl said:

If you kill a murderer to protect likely victims (natives, or their own crew members that they are stalking), is it murder

I was talking about the other mutineers.  They weren’t murderers, just desperate men like they all were.  They were cannibals yes but then the last group of non mutineers that Crozier came upon also resorted to cannibalism.  If Silence had offered them food and help, I doubt they would have said no at that stage.  With the  exception of Hickey, of course, who was by then stark raving mad.

6 hours ago, Osmigo said:

That girl with him is clearly 6 to 8.

Girl?  I thought it was a boy.  Why do you think it’s a girl?  I didn’t at all get an impression he was frozen and dead.  I still think he was just fishing.

Good series but I will not be watching again.  Far too violent - I had to co er my eyes in a lot of horrible scenes.  Why must we now see so much explicit violence in every single show?  Even sewing up a wound is  now shown in great and gory detail  never mind slitting throats and blood spattering bullets in slow motion.  Others might really love this stuff but it’s not my cup of tea.

Edited May 23, 2018 by Earlwoode

[tennisgurl]

2 hours ago, Dowel Jones said:

The ending reminds me of the ending to Open Range, in a way.  "All this, for more cows?"  Basically, that was, and still is, the entire purpose of the Northwest Passage.  More trade.  And glory.

Yeah, I liked that we got that flash of the rich guys in England talking about being all excited about the Northwest Passage, and were reminded of why all of this happened. All of this, for a quicker commute. 

[Captanne]

Magnificent. 

[SimoneS]

8 hours ago, slothgirl said:

There seems to be some confusion as to whether the child is male or female. Posters have called the kid a son and a daughter. To me, it doesn't matter.. Crozier has a child. He is coompletely Aglook (sp?) now

I agree. Since it was two years later, the child clearly wasn't his biological offspring, but from the body language, Francis had taken on the parental role. And we know how completely devoted Francis is when he loves for someone. Unless the show says otherwise, I interpret the scene as Francis practicing the Inuit traditional seal hunting technique.

[spritz]

The finale was a letdown. But it was a fantastic series nevertheless. 

 

When Hickey mentioned to Crozier about the drinks they had earlier, it was funny that Crozier reminded Hickey that Hickey was holding dog turd on his hand. I don't know if it was meant to be ironic, but Hickey held his severed tongue on his hand when he offered it to Tuunbaq. Both items presumably were extremely unappetizing.

 

The kid at the end may not have been Crozier's biological child. Since only two years had past, maybe it was his adopted child who was orphaned.

[slothgirl]

7 hours ago, true north said:

when a seal swims to that hole to take a breath, the hunter flings his/her harpoon vertically down the hole and kills the seal. 

and gets the seal out, how? Cause the hole is the size of a seal snout, not the size of a seal body!

I mean, I know you're right, I just can't picture what happens after the hunter stabs the seal down the hole. I guess they just have to keep it on the harpoon while they enlarge the hole?

5 hours ago, Earlwoode said:

I was talking about the other mutineers.  They weren’t murderers, just desperate men like they all were.  They were cannibals yes but then the last group of non mutineers that Crozier came upon also resorted to cannibalism.  If Silence had offered them food and help, I doubt they would have said no at that stage.  With the  exception of Hickey, of course, who was by then stark raving mad.

Girl?  I thought it was a boy.  Why do you think it’s a girl?  I didn’t at all get an impression he was frozen and dead.  I still think he was just fishing.

 

WHY on earth would LS have offered them anything at that point?

Anyway, Goodsir DIDN"T kill them. He made them sick. We don't know if they would have died from what Goodsir did had Tuunbaq not come along and done the job. It's possible that he was only trying to weaken them for when Little and others came to rescue Crozier. So he isn't a murderer for killing them because he didn't kill them. And we don't know if he is an "attempted murderer" because we don't know if he intended to kill them or just substantially (and maybe temporarily) weaken them. Unless I am remembering wrong (which is possible.. the whole scene at the boat with Tuunbaq and folks puling chains and getting eaten and puking up their guts was pretty hectic and confusing) none of the crew at that place dies from food poisoning.. Tuunbaq gets them all.

 I agree.. I didn't think Crozier was frozen. He was fishing.

4 hours ago, SimoneS said:

Since it was two years later, the child clearly wasn't his biological offspring, but from the body language, Francis had taken on the parental role. And we know how completely devoted Francis is when he loves for someone. Unless the show says otherwise, I interpret the scene as Francis practicing the Inuit traditional seal hunting technique.

I'm not sure where the idea comes from that it's only been 2 years when we see Crozier and the child. Yes, only 2 years passed when Crozier is outside the tent as the rescue team talks to the Inuit. But ANY amount of time could have passed when we come to that final tableau. It actually makes more sense to me that more years have subsequently passed since the brits came and failed to find him. It's his future in which he has fully assimilated. Maybe I missed something, but my impression as I was watching the final sequences was that even more time had passed, which is why he was able to hunt seals in the first place by then and why he has a child that isn't an infant or toddler. Trying to rationalize the child as someone else's or an orphan doesn't make sense to me.. it introduces an element that leaves too much unrelated. It makes more sense to me that it is his child and more years have passed when we come to that scene. I didn't get the impression that the tableau happens immediately after his fake-out with the rescue party (Although it does beg the question.. where's Mom? Maybe she has other responsibilities while he is fishing.. or she fishes a separate spot.)

Edited May 23, 2018 by slothgirl

[slothgirl]

Found this interview which clarifies that it is a boy and we were supposed to know that it is NOT Crozier's child.

Seems to me they failed on both counts.

http://collider.com/the-terror-ending-explained/#crozier

[Earlwoode]

7 hours ago, slothgirl said:

WHY on earth would LS have offered them anything at that point?

Why on earth did she rescue Crozier then? He was the captain, not even Goodsir with whom she had had a special bond with and you could see her rescuing him.  Why Crozier?  And why did she spend time rescuing and nursing him back to health?  Oh and the totally ridiculous premise where she chews a couple of....whatever and applies it to his  wounds and he comes out with this perfectly cured stump in a couple of what? Days? Weeks?  It’s so silly as to border on the ludicrous.  That is some magic spit she’s had there, lol!

 

And with that, a quiet note of gratitude, Hugh and Kajganich send off one of the best new series of the year, and one of the best horror series in ages. No doubt it’s on people will be mulling over for a while.

One of the best series, yes best horror series in ages?  You just be joking - the bear was ridiculous, not scary in the least.  In fact, he was quite laughable and I, for one, thought he should have been left out altogether.  It would have made for a better psychological thriller.  And Jeez Thank God they didn’t go the way of a romance between Crozier and Silence. Even more unbelievable, IMO.

I agree with the posters who say they failed miserably to convey a lot of things they wanted to at the end.  It was the one biggest problems with this series: confusing sets, confusing scenes and confusing people.  Hope they do better next season.

Edited May 23, 2018 by Earlwoode

[peeayebee]

Someone had linked to an interview with the show's creators and FX people about the bear. It's a good article. One of the interviewees says that without this particular horror element the show wouldn't have been made. I find that sad but understandable. I would have watched this show without a supernatural element, but I can imagine that they needed more of a hook or gimmick to attract viewers' attention.

[slothgirl]

4 hours ago, Earlwoode said:

Why on earth did she rescue Crozier then? He was the captain, not even Goodsir with whom she had had a special bond with and you could see her rescuing him.  Why Crozier?  And why did she spend time rescuing and nursing him back to health?  Oh and the totally ridiculous premise where she chews a couple of....whatever and applies it to his  wounds and he comes out with this perfectly cured stump in a couple of what? Days? Weeks?  It’s so silly as to border on the ludicrous.  That is some magic spit she’s had there, lol!

 

It would be a far bigger risk for LS to attempt to help a large group of people of people she KNOWS to be dangerous to her (especially Hickey who already kidnapped her once) than to rescue the lone survivor in a slew of dead bodies. She did have evidence that Crozier himself was not like the others.

How would she have rescued the whole lot of them even if she wanted to? She certainly wouldn't have brought along additional help after what happened to her father and to the little family. Alone, she was the one in more danger from them than they were from anything else, since they already viewed her an an enemy. The idea that Goodsir should have held out hope because it was a possibility that she might try, is laughable to me. There's NO WAY Silence would have even gone NEAR Hickey's group while Hickey and some of the others were alive.

Besides, she was on a mission to deal with Tuunbaq at that point. It was her sacred role. Getting distracted trying to save dozens of invaders wasn't something she could take the time to do. She only saved Crozier AFTER it was clear to her that Tuunbaq was dead. I'm pretty sure that more than days went by while Crozier was recovering. Given the state of the other camps when he was finally able to go for a walkabout, I'd say that more than weeks went by also. I'm guessing maybe a couple of months. If I'd been paying more attention to everything they said about the seasons, it might be clear, since at that point Crozier is telling her that it's getting colder and they need to start moving. (I remember that because it was just another example of that subtle arrogance... like he knows better than she does when and where they need to be, based on the local weather)

We don't know what she put on his wounds, but clearly the locals would have had their own medicine practices or they would all be dead from various things. I find it more ludicrous that Blanky wasn't in far worse shape given the level of necrosis in his amputated leg. I couldn't tell how his prosthesis even stayed on or how he walked on it since it looked like the stump didn't even meet it. But then Blankey is a total bad-ass... Crozier is a badass in his own way too.

Edited May 23, 2018 by slothgirl

[jnymph]

21 hours ago, slothgirl said:

I never really liked the disjointed purpose of Tuunbaq. If he's primarily restoring the natural balance, what's with devouring souls? If he's deliberately devouring souls... why? And does that make him evil in some way? The scales of natural order are not good or evil.. by definition they are balance. I think devouring the souls was an unnecessary twist as was the weird magical ability to stack pieces of bodies. Or if Tuunbaq represents the worst of mankind, then it's not a force for balance. 

One of the articles I read talks about how the music changes over the course of the series. They also had a different "wind" for each episode. I've read quite a few in the last few days so I doubt I could find it again. As a side note, the composer died and the Marcus the show is dedicated to at the end is he.

Slothgirl:  UGHHH I agree on Tuunbaq.  I thought it was awkward and confusing.

I noticed the music shift as well.  It was beautiful, and how sad that the composer Marcus died !! (saw the tribute at the end too )  He must have composed that haunting music when Collins did the dive.   I loved that.

21 hours ago, Earlwoode said:

I too wish they'd left out the silly CGI bear.  His whole existence was just dumb.  There was enough horror around without adding in this craziness.  I don't buy any of this theory that he was "protecting" the landscape?  Protecting it from what exactly since no one else had presumably come there and he existed just for the natives way before the "evil" white men came?  Makes no sense IMO.

Ditto.  To me it was the worst episode of an otherwise really good series.  Quite disappointing.

What he really wanted was a vacation in Hawaii, lol.

Earlwoode: I completely  agree with you on your Tuunbaq comments; and this being the worst episode.     And I LOL'd at the vacation in Hawaii.   Hickey - "Oahu - Maui - sounds nice "   LOL !

 

My thoughts on the finale:

I was very disappointed in what was otherwise an incredible series.    I just did not care for the whole Tuunbaq aspect.   Supernatural monster-ish creatures are just not my thing.   Despite that fact, I watched because the story was intensely compelling and the acting was OFF THE CHARTS phenomenal.     I was actually holding out hope that Tuunbaq was part of their lead poisoning hallucinations; that would have made much more sense to me !    Sorry, but the whole final Tuunbaq death scene was laughable to me. 

And I am not saying this just because I’m a Goodsir/Silence shipper;  but I thought their storyline fell completely flat.  So he commits suicide and she sees him all chewed up, with simply a sad face.  Not horror or sorrow ?  WHY show their connection in the first place ?    And why show Goodsir comforting and guiding David Young to the other side (very early on) , and when it was his turn to go, NO one is there but some images in his head.  And Silna has to die because of the stupid creature ? And the explanation is "Just accept it."?   Ugh.  There was nothing cohesive there.

However, I did appreciate the ending.   Crozier fitting in with the Inuit and living a new life.  I did like that aspect of the story.   (even though I was effing SPOILED!!! ) 

[jnymph]

36 minutes ago, peeayebee said:

Someone had linked to an interview with the show's creators and FX people about the bear. It's a good article. One of the interviewees says that without this particular horror element the show wouldn't have been made. I find that sad but understandable. I would have watched this show without a supernatural element, but I can imagine that they needed more of a hook or gimmick to attract viewers' attention.

GAH!  That's just sad, frustrating and telling.   These days you can't simply tell a story, because the audience has zero attention span unless there's some stupid CGI !? Kids these days. Bah. 

IMO non-fiction is far more fascinating.  

[Captanne]

I thought the episode was masterful.  The entire series is just so far and above the rest of the miniseries being put forward in CableLand.  I'm so proud of the entire ensemble who put this together.  

That said, I don't see the questions that have arisen at the end from viewers.  I have followed the Franklin Expedition (IRL) for years so I'm aware of the Inuit tales about Crozier's survival.  For me, the show was very clear that he survived.  Also, the beautiful scene at the end was a wonderful homage to his life choice -- rather than to return to England where he would surely be vilified, he elected to stay with the Inuit and adopt/adapt to their way of life.  (His willingness to do that is very telling as to why he is the lone survivor.)  The still-life at the end told me two things -- one, that he was now so trusted that children slept at his side and, in the static image, it tells me that he has become a myth or legend in his own right.  He has been "frozen in time."  (If I may give Beattie's 1987 book of that title a nod.)

It was lovely.

I read no more into that scene because that's enough for me.

As for the Tuunbaq -- I read an article yesterday that waxed lyrical about how hard they worked on creating the monster.  I feel for them, I do.  Because, for all their devotion, I feel Tuunbaq was the weakest link.  First, I don't think she needed to be real.  The only real, corporeal Terror needed was the ship, bless her heart.  Otherwise, the rest of the terror would be better served, imo, as one's mental interpretation of Evil. 

[Earlwoode]

1 hour ago, slothgirl said:

I'm pretty sure that more than days went by while Crozier was recovering. Given the state of the other camps when he was finally able to go for a walkabout, I'd say that more than weeks went by also. I'm guessing maybe a couple of months.

I'm not saying rescue would have necessarily been the Eskimos or Silence.  It could have been or it could have been some expedition sent to find them.  Who knows? 

It couldn't possibly have been a couple of months because one of the soldiers (Little?) was still alive when she and Crozier found the camp.  You think he survived months without food and in the shape they were in?  Not possible in my estimation.   Which is why that beautiful stump (which looked like it had a least six months to heal) was so ridiculous.  Ditto the magic spit.  And then there is the little fact neither Crozier, nor Goodsir or Hickey showed the slightest sign of either poisoning, starvation or scurvy.   It's plot holes like these which irritate me as a viewer because they strain your credibility to the point of non-belief.  Good series but I do so wish the writers wouldn't assume we are all stupid and just won't notice.

And as someone said above, I too would have watched the show without the silly bear.  I think they could have perfectly sold it as a psychological thriller and not as a terror series because for me, it was anything but terrifying, lol as I found the beast totally laughable which kind of spoiled the desired effect.

That said, I'm looking forward to Season 2 if indeed it is going to be made.

 

PS-I found this article which exactly describes the problems a lot of us had in relation to keeping track of characters and situations:

But you know what? A few episodes into AMC's Ridley Scott-produced thriller, I'm realising something: it's a little bit hard to keep track of who everyone is, where they rank on the ships, and how they feel about getting torn apart by supernatural ice bears. (Just kidding about that last one.) It's even harder when you take into account how the men are dressed in near-identical uniforms and constantly bundled up in face-obscuring Winter gear. With the exception of Lady Silence, of course.

https://www.popsugar.co.uk/entertainment/Terror-Cast-44737747?utm_medium=redirect&utm_campaign=US:PT&utm_source=direct

Too bad I didn't find this at the beginning of the series - it would have helped immensely.

[Captanne]

Throughout the literature, one of the common threads is criticism about the British uniforms.  So, I'm sorry that the same uniforms on all of them confused the writer of the article but -- looking the same is kind of the very definition of a "uniform".

I agree that the characters were hard to tell apart.  I find that to be a common complaint about a lot of these shows -- particularly in all male casts.  There was a pirate show that had that problem.  There have been a lot of medieval shows recently about the Vikings (to wit:  Vikings, The Last Kingdom, and The Bastard Executioner to name three) in which the characters are nearly impossible to tell apart.  Also, Sons of Anarchy.  I had a lot of trouble with the character recognition in that one, too.

Back to Terror -- the common thread (pun intended) seems to be British hubris.  A part of that hubris was their absolute unwillingness to adapt to the local ways.  Wearing loose fitting animal skins, travelling in smaller groups, hunting and eating local food (notice, the Inuit didn't suffer from scurvy; there seems to be an obvious lesson there) are all good examples of the British refusal to adapt even when their own survival was clearly at stake.

Edited May 23, 2018 by Captanne

[slothgirl]

2 hours ago, jnymph said:

I was very disappointed in what was otherwise an incredible series.    I just did not care for the whole Tuunbaq aspect.   Supernatural monster-ish creatures are just not my thing.   Despite that fact, I watched because the story was intensely compelling and the acting was OFF THE CHARTS phenomenal.     I was actually holding out hope that Tuunbaq was part of their lead poisoning hallucinations; that would have made much more sense to me !    Sorry, but the whole final Tuunbaq death scene was laughable to me. 

  And why show Goodsir comforting and guiding David Young to the other side (very early on) , and when it was his turn to go, NO one is there but some images in his head.  And Silna has to die because of the stupid creature ? And the explanation is "Just accept it."?   Ugh.  There was nothing cohesive there.

I LOVE the fact that Goodsir does not envision humans in his last minutes, but rather the natural world and his innate love and curiosity for it. As he says to Crozier, the place is still beautiful to him even now. Humans on the other hand are no longer beautiful to him. They have destroyed his soul, and the only peace he can see would be a world without humans. Goodsir's character arc was a little slow to get moving in the series, but it's one of the most fascinating ones by the end. For me, his return to a love of the perfection found in nature (as depicted by the perfect spiral of a shell, a flower, and crystalline structure - which also bring to mind earth, air, and sea) ... that redemption is what turns his tragic corporeal end into something beautiful and true to character. Had he imagined Silence or any other human (and really, who else could he have seen at the end? We never knew anything about his family or friends prior to the voyage) for me, that would have been too cheesy. His death visions were sublime and perfect, IMO.

I don't believe Silna was condemned to die. She was cast out of the group and condemned to solitude... no longer with Tuunbaq or other humans as companions. She managed to survive on her own quite a bit up to that point, and probably would survive physically for quite awhile, perhaps even a normal lifespan. But like Crozier, she could no longer be part of the human culture she always knew. I liked the symmetry of their parallel destinies. I also like it far better that they have these destinies apart from one another. But then I hate the trope of pairing up as a wrap-up to stories and would have groaned if it had happened here with LS and Crozier or Goodsir. IRL, people don't live happily ever after.

1 hour ago, Captanne said:

, the beautiful scene at the end was a wonderful homage to his life choice -- rather than to return to England where he would surely be vilified, he elected to stay with the Inuit and adopt/adapt to their way of life.  (His willingness to do that is very telling as to why he is the lone survivor.)  The still-life at the end told me two things -- one, that he was now so trusted that children slept at his side and, in the static image, it tells me that he has become a myth or legend in his own right.  He has been "frozen in time."  (If I may give Beattie's 1987 book of that title a nod.)

As for the Tuunbaq -- I read an article yesterday that waxed lyrical about how hard they worked on creating the monster.  I feel for them, I do.  Because, for all their devotion, I feel Tuunbaq was the weakest link.  First, I don't think she needed to be real.  The only real, corporeal Terror needed was the ship, bless her heart.  Otherwise, the rest of the terror would be better served, imo, as one's mental interpretation of Evil. 

I think it would have been interesting if Tuunbaq had been real, but less corporeally solid. I envision a force made of wind (especially since the wind played such an important role in the scoring of the show) and it was only ever partly formed with other parts appearing and disappearing in a sorta swirling fashion as though it was made of smoke being blown about. A smoke bear. I also think they made a huge mistake giving it a human face. It looked clownish, and I kept getting distracted trying to decide if it looked like Crozier and that that was supposed to mean something.

It would have also been cool if in it's ghostly, smoky, windy, not quite formed way, each crew member saw it differently. So then it is a real force, and yet it is also personal, like a lead induced hallucination would be.

Unlike many, I liked the IDEA of Tuunbaq. The execution just didn't quite work, both in the actual graphic and the explanation/continuity of explanation.

1 hour ago, Earlwoode said:

I'm not saying rescue would have necessarily been the Eskimos or Silence.  It could have been or it could have been some expedition sent to find them.  Who knows? 

It couldn't possibly have been a couple of months because one of the soldiers (Little?) was still alive when she and Crozier found the camp.  You think he survived months without food and in the shape they were in?  Not possible in my estimation.  

I think we have to agree to disagree on this whole idea of rescue being something they should have considered possible. For one thing, Goodsir would never have gone back to England once he had practiced cannibalism, and also knowing that he would have to continue to do so to stay alive waiting for a rescue that would probably not come. What Hickey forced him to do destroyed him. The others thought that Hickey was going to keep them alive until they could reach help; they wanted to live. Goodsir saw the truth and knew that salvation of any kind was forever beyond their reach now; he wanted to die.

As a practical matter, if help from the brits did come, how would they find these little encampments in hundreds of miles of terrain? Dumb luck? Their best chance of being FOUND was staying on the ships. Crozier knew that help wouldn't come soon enough to save them on the ships and they would have to head for a place known to be inhabited rather than expect anyone to come to them. Why would he or any of the others think that help would come soon enough somewhere in the vast expanse of King William Island where no one even knew where they were if it wasn't going to reach them on the ships? Anyone coming would have to also go where the ships were and no one could get there unless it thawed, which was looking pretty unlikely. No one would mount a land expedition on KWI to look for them without have SOME idea of how far they got on water. Just heading out north on KWI in hopes of finding the crew going south wouldn't make any sense... they had no way to know the sailors were even on King William. They could have been ANYWHERE.

Little's party did have food. They took almost everything and put a few token cans outside the tents of the sick. I don't recall discussion about how much provisions they had left at that point, but with so few people, and the possiblity of finding game if they continued south, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect they could have survived at least a month if not 2. They survived long enough to go completely stark raving mad and they seemed pretty clear-headed when they set out.

Edited May 23, 2018 by slothgirl