S02.E20: Bad Reception

[thewhiteowl]

Kirkman negotiates the release of an American held overseas, while the investigation continues.

[marinw]

I do not get Electric Car Guy’s motivation. At all. Kirkman is very into clean energy and all over technical inovation. Conventional car manufacturers are the ones who would feel threatened. But Electric Car Man is angry at the government in general? WTF?

It’s nice Mike got a win. After POTUS got shot and FLOTUS killed by a drunk driver he may have been thinking of a change of careers.

Now Tom doesn’t need to feel sad about Audrey! Yet. Yeah!  They have a connection because they remember being together in a previous life.

[secnarf]

Hey part of this episode (the scene with Hannah and Kiefer's "friend" in the beginning) was filmed in the University of Toronto building where I spent 4 long years! It was nice to see it on TV.

[paigow]

Andrea: I am a widow...

Tom: I know...I tortured him before he took a bullet for me...

Andrea: wtf???!!!!!

[aemom]

3 hours ago, marinw said:

I do not get Electric Car Guy’s motivation. At all. Kirkman is very into clean energy and all over technical inovation. Conventional car manufacturers are the ones who would feel threatened. But Electric Car Man is angry at the government in general? WTF?

I forget the exact details,  but there was something that he had to hold off manufacturing or producing something for a while, which would cost him a lot of money.

If I was the President,  I would have the Oval office swept for bugs every single day

Edited May 3, 2018 by AEMom
Not finished

[The Wild Sow]

Awright!  Yinz guys called it, with the fakeout-firing, and Chekhov's Model Car!

I figured about halfway through that Hannah (the world's ONLY FBI agent, who was at least wearing tennis shoes this time!) was in Dax's house, not Frost's.

[Bobbin]

Yay, Tom! Jack is back!

[atlantaloves]

We got it right! Yahoooooooo 

[shapeshifter]

Why would a kid on an international music scholarship paint a smilie face on a wall? 
I mean, besides to get to the other side of the plot.
And other than: Because it was there.
And, yes, he is a teenager, but Mom still wants to know why.

 

2 hours ago, AEMom said:

If I was the President,  I would have the Oval office swept for bugs every single day

Yeah, isn't that part of somebody's job? Shouldn't there at least have been a reveal that  POTUS's "best friend" had paid off some one inside to not find the bug?

And does the POTUS's ex bestie live alone in his mansion with no housekeepers or anyone for Hannah to have to put a sleeper hold on or anything?

I guess packing two plots into 42 minutes is going to leave a lot of unknowns.

 

ETA: But my new fav show Barry manages to neatly tie up its A and B plots in less than 30 minutes—with action and humor to boot.
 

Edited May 3, 2018 by shapeshifter

[Dowel Jones]

ON the way to jail, Dax gets a text:  "Sorry you had to go down. We'll make it right. They'll never think to look for the second bug, now.  See you in San Francisco.  Andrea."

[dwmarch]

Kendra and Emily had the best conversation I think any two characters in this show have ever had. I do not watch Designated Survivor for nuance but in light of current events... wow!

[shapeshifter]

1 hour ago, dwmarch said:

Kendra and Emily had the best conversation I think any two characters in this show have ever had. I do not watch Designated Survivor for nuance but in light of current events... wow!

I too appreciated the nuance, and yet, now I'm noticing, paradoxically, that Kendra and Emily's conversation would not pass the Bechdel test.

[TheGreenWave]

13 hours ago, marinw said:

I do not get Electric Car Guy’s motivation. At all. Kirkman is very into clean energy and all over technical inovation. Conventional car manufacturers are the ones who would feel threatened. But Electric Car Man is angry at the government in general? WTF?

I agree.  Hacking into a power grid, posting the therapy read-outs of the freaking President, and whatever else he did in retaliation for over-regulating the industry = so weak.  That was a most unsatisfactory conclusion to the storyline.  And they were super good friends??  And why did they say that Damian got killed?  By whom?  They tried so hard to tie that one up in 30 seconds and I missed it.

So, does Hannah's hiatus from the FBI mean that the showrunners are going to attempt to take this show in a different direction for next season?  And why would she turn in her badge and pass to the National Security Advisor??  Ok, it's Aaron...but still....

[AAEBoiler]

Good grief, I'm surprised Chuck didn't get whiplash from switching back and forth between the two plots! You mean there's no one else who can do computer work?

[preeya]

Hannah "Fuckn" Wells has morphed into Spider Woman.

[AnimeMania]

1 hour ago, TheGreenWave said:

So, does Hannah's hiatus from the FBI mean that the showrunners are going to attempt to take this show in a different direction for next season?  And why would she turn in her badge and pass to the National Security Advisor??  Ok, it's Aaron...but still....

The female Russian spy tried to kill Hannah, Hannah told her she better not miss the next time she tried. Hannah will now show her how it is done.

[TheGreenWave]

26 minutes ago, preeya said:

Hannah "Fuckn" Wells has morphed into Spider Woman.

And I'm absolutely sure she had a search warrant in her costume.  Or did she break into a U.S. citizen's home without a warrant upon orders from the President?  That's a comforting thought.

24 minutes ago, AnimeMania said:

The female Russian spy tried to kill Hannah, Hannah told her she better not miss the next time she tried. Hannah will now show her how it is done.

Thank you.  I almost forgot about the Russians.

[Dowel Jones]

2 hours ago, preeya said:

Hannah "Fuckn" Wells

Great title for a spinoff!

[paigow]

4 hours ago, TheGreenWave said:

 And why would she turn in her badge and pass to the National Security Advisor??  

The subway ride to the Hoover Building takes too long....

[Bobbin]

13 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

Yeah, isn't that part of somebody's job? Shouldn't there at least have been a reveal that  POTUS's "best friend" had paid off some one inside to not find the bug?

I'm still waiting to find out who in the FBI or Secret Service got paid to not find all of those bombs planted in the Capitol Building ahead of the SOTU address.

[BasilSeal]

9 hours ago, TheGreenWave said:

So, does Hannah's hiatus from the FBI mean that the showrunners are going to attempt to take this show in a different direction for next season? 

As far as i'm aware they are yet to commission a third series, and it's very possible that they won't based on the viewing figures for this one, although i understand they make enough money off the netflix deal to cover costs and put it in profit. Another negative is that this season hasn't been that well received by the critics, and in all fairness, that's largely because it wasn't very good. I mean we predicted exactly how this episode would play out last week, and i've never been so disappointed to have second guessed the writers successfully because in this case it was like shooting fish in a barrel and the way the model car was flagged up as the source of the leaks last week was so blatant i started to hope it was a misdirection and they had some twist up their sleeve.

 

I'm not expecting a great deal from this show , but keeping us guessing to the last reel wouldn't be too much to ask, surely?

[Addie1917]

Wish they would take the show back to its original format. Such a shame, with all the amazing actors that the showrunners  ran this show into the ground. Had so much potential, im still holding on to hope that they will renew it, but its unlikely.

Intrested to see where hannah's new beginning will take her. Hopefully she will be kicking ass like in the Nikita days.

Pretty good plot twist with Hannahs firing. I suspected something was weird the way she smiled at kirkman at the end.

two more episodes till the finale. Maybe they'll save the show  in two weeks?

[MaryHedwig]

2 minutes ago, Addie1917 said:

Intrested to see where hannah's new beginning will take her. Hopefully she will be kicking ass like in the Nikita days.

Maybe the new beginning will be a series of Hannah's own.

Too precious of a coincidence to have the Michael J. Fox character connected to the aunt of the imprisoned teenager.  Wasn't he just last week a special council lawyer to take down the president? And he is also an expert in toxicity law (or whatever they called it). I googled as MJF requested and could find nothing to support this.

I get that the producers want to have Michael J. Fox as their very special guest star, but please give him a credible, consistent storyline.

[DesertCyclist]

There should be an entire series of Aaron jogging.  Oh -- and maybe showering!

[shapeshifter]

1 hour ago, DesertCyclist said:

There should be an entire series of Aaron jogging.  Oh -- and maybe showering!

Spinoff, please: President Aaron Shore.

He will be every bit as ethical as Kirkman, with an emphasis on supporting women, immigrants, education, social justice, science, the arts, and the environment.

[TheGreenWave]

12 hours ago, MaryHedwig said:

Maybe the new beginning will be a series of Hannah's own.

Too precious of a coincidence to have the Michael J. Fox character connected to the aunt of the imprisoned teenager.  Wasn't he just last week a special council lawyer to take down the president? And he is also an expert in toxicity law (or whatever they called it). I googled as MJF requested and could find nothing to support this.

I get that the producers want to have Michael J. Fox as their very special guest star, but please give him a credible, consistent storyline.

That was a WTH moment for me too (and now he's after Moss??).  If they do get another season, that's why I was wondering if they might take it in another direction: Hannah is gone and so are the conspiracy theory storylines, and MJF is in with a more run-of-the-mill West Wing redux ones from here on out.

[sonyab]

On 5/2/2018 at 11:05 PM, paigow said:

Andrea: I am a widow...

Tom: I know...I tortured him before he took a bullet for me...

Andrea: wtf???!!!!!

ROFL!

[jhlipton]

So once again, Kirkman feels that the US can dictate another country's legal system and dictate what it does with its own land!  If Not-Singapore wants to strip one of its islands to bare rock, no one has the authority to stop them (if they did, the US would be up to its knees in class actions for strip mining, and Flint!!).  But we're 'Murica, so of course we're right!

On 5/2/2018 at 5:03 PM, marinw said:

I do not get Electric Car Guy’s motivation

That was Libertarianism 101.  Gubment is eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevil because it protects us from bad actors!

On 5/3/2018 at 2:35 AM, dwmarch said:

Kendra and Emily had the best conversation I think any two characters in this show have ever had. I do not watch Designated Survivor for nuance but in light of current events... wow!

I think Kendra was too quick to call off the appointment and too quick to call Flannery's actions wrong.  There was no indication that he exerted any power, and for her to say, 10 (or however many) years after that there was any kind of undue influence seemed a bit squicky to me.  She's essentially saying that she didn't have the ability to say no, when up to that point she said it was totally consensual -- ifr she thoughtr about that night over the years, she didn't think he had done anything wrong.

To use the Tea as Consent analogy, she was saying, "you know, I really didn't like that tea I had X years ago."  No one would buy that.

On 5/3/2018 at 6:46 PM, MaryHedwig said:

 he is also an expert in toxicity law

International toxicity law, no less!  (The Hague can't get nations to sign on to war crimes tribunals, and the UN can't get agreements on climate control, but toxicity, sure no problem!)  That got a chuckle from me.

[Dowel Jones]

21 minutes ago, jhlipton said:

That was Libertarianism 101.  Gubment is eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevil because it protects us from bad actors!

How about bad plotlines?

[BasilSeal]

4 hours ago, jhlipton said:

I think Kendra was too quick to call off the appointment and too quick to call Flannery's actions wrong.  There was no indication that he exerted any power, and for her to say, 10 (or however many) years after that there was any kind of undue influence seemed a bit squicky to me.  She's essentially saying that she didn't have the ability to say no, when up to that point she said it was totally consensual -- ifr she thoughtr about that night over the years, she didn't think he had done anything wrong.

I disagree, this was one of the more subtle pieces of writing, and even then they essentially hit us over the head with the moral message as 50 something senior law partner hits on not one but two 20 something interns seconds after breaking off his conversation about a senior judicial appointment with Kendra.

There's supposed to be some moral ambiguity here, Flannery isn't forcing himself on anyone, but just because he's a bit of a silver fox and his attentions aren't entirely unwelcome from his star struck underlings, there's a massive imbalance of power between the two parties and as Seth's friend demonstrates (in the traditional clunky DS manner), what happens if you turn him down?

I think we're supposed to question whether Kendra has made the right choice, because she isn't sure she's made the right one herself.

[jhlipton]

I think it's largely due to the fact that this show isn't exactly known for its moral subtlety... Every once in a while, a different director will sneak onto the set with a different writer's room and sneak in a scene or two that isn't Kirkman sanctimoniously telling someone else (all too often a head of state).  So when there is a spot with a bit of moral complexity, it feels like another show.

As for imbalance of power, there are ranges.  For Seth's friend, Flannery held the power of her promotion over her.  (We don't know that she was partner material -- it is possible that Flannery asked her out to let her down gently.)  In that case, it was improper of him to initiate any kind of sexual request.  For Kendra, it's a little vaguer.  She didn't sound like he would lower her grade if she didn't go out with him.  So it's a bit murkier.  He didn't hit on Ivor's employee -- he offered her a position on his staff.  Once she was onboard, he could have used his power, but we don't know.  Finally, he put his hand near (or on??) Walk-Out Woman's waist.  But he had exactly zero power over her.  So we have 3 vague incidents in 20 to 30 years and two maybe-if-we-squint possibilities.  To me, this reduces the women's agency to say "No".   Consent is extremely important to me, but it has to go both ways -- and we need to be sure that these women had enough power of their own.  This especially true in the case of Kendra's Wild Night.  That sounded more like a woman hooking up with a sports star, and she never said she felt pressure other than in her own mind.

On the other hand, Kendra used her authority to deny him a "promotion" based on feelings she herself said she wasn't sure of.  That, to me, was more of a blatant abuse of power than anything Flannery did, other than with the potential partner.

This is a far cry from what Wenstein did, for example.  In his case, he absolutely used his power to get sexual favors, and withheld favors if denied.

ETA: As a man, I haven't experienced this first hand, and I'm definitely not trying to mansplain.   So I am quite willing to be wrong.

Edited May 5, 2018 by jhlipton

[Guest]

We had a storm Wednesday so my recording cut out several key moments. I don’t find this episode intriguing enough to watch it OnDemand. 

I think I got the main gist from here and what I did see if the episode.

[Dowel Jones]

I think the team, Kendra especially, is looking more toward what might, and probably will, happen if he did receive an appointment to the Federal bench.  If he starts hitting on women then, or harassing staff, it becomes a huge scandal for Kirkman. 

12 hours ago, jhlipton said:

So once again, Kirkman feels that the US can dictate another country's legal system and dictate what it does with its own land! 

When the subject first came up, I thought they were saying Bhutan instead of Bulandia (?).  I said to the tv, if Bhutan suddenly has a coastline, there are probably much more important issues to deal with at the moment.

[jhlipton]

11 hours ago, Dowel Jones said:

if Bhutan suddenly has a coastline, there are probably much more important issues to deal with at the moment.

LOL

[queenanne]

On 5/3/2018 at 10:00 AM, AAEBoiler said:

Good grief, I'm surprised Chuck didn't get whiplash from switching back and forth between the two plots! You mean there's no one else who can do computer work?

I thought it was funnier how Chuck garbled out some gobbledygook and Hannah’s all ‘Yep, yep, right on it.’ in the secret basement server farm.  She didn’t even ask for an explanation, never mind knowing how to do whatever it is.

On 5/4/2018 at 1:35 AM, shapeshifter said:

Spinoff, please: President Aaron Shore.

He will be every bit as ethical as Kirkman, with an emphasis on supporting women, immigrants, education, social justice, science, the arts, and the environment.

Just not at the same time, please.  They already tried that type of thing with Kirkman.  It doesn’t make for very good episodes. :)

Edited May 6, 2018 by queenanne

[nutty1]

I just watched this episode. 

Heres what I got....

After all the hacking and leaks, they never swept the POTUS office for bugs??!!

Mike and Chuck working together....yes!

Kendra’s hair looks 1000 times better than her first episode. 

Emily has gorgeous eyes. 

I still like this stupid show. 

Edited May 7, 2018 by nutty1

[Emma9]

I always fixate on the weirdest aspects of plots, but: unless I'm massively misinformed about how such things go, the removal of a single tree, no matter how sprawling, wouldn't magically fix pipes that its roots have already grown through; the cracks and debris will still be there. The pipes would need to be dug up and re-laid, tree or no tree. Sure, the same thing could just happen again a couple of years down the line (although there are newer pipes and techniques to lessen the odds of it) but by then the property would already be sold and it would be the new owner's problem.

[TV Diva Queen]

8 hours ago, Emma9 said:

I always fixate on the weirdest aspects of plots, but: unless I'm massively misinformed about how such things go, the removal of a single tree, no matter how sprawling, wouldn't magically fix pipes that its roots have already grown through; the cracks and debris will still be there. The pipes would need to be dug up and re-laid, tree or no tree. Sure, the same thing could just happen again a couple of years down the line (although there are newer pipes and techniques to lessen the odds of it) but by then the property would already be sold and it would be the new owner's problem.

Yep - a tree removal company once told me that the "roots don't know the tree is gone, they're going to keep on growing".  

Is Hannah really gone?  

[BasilSeal]

15 hours ago, TV Diva Queen said:

Is Hannah really gone?

I doubt it, she's going to prove how much she really didn't care about Damien by throwing in her career and hunting down foxy Russian assassin she thinks got Damien killed, that will no doubt occupy her for the next two episodes, and then *if* the show is renewed for a third season (big if, there), some plot twist will bring her back into the fold, for some reason.

[Roseanna]

On ‎5‎.‎5‎.‎2018 at 9:00 AM, jhlipton said:

I think Kendra was too quick to call off the appointment and too quick to call Flannery's actions wrong.  There was no indication that he exerted any power, and for her to say, 10 (or however many) years after that there was any kind of undue influence seemed a bit squicky to me.  She's essentially saying that she didn't have the ability to say no, when up to that point she said it was totally consensual -- ifr she thoughtr about that night over the years, she didn't think he had done anything wrong.

To use the Tea as Consent analogy, she was saying, "you know, I really didn't like that tea I had X years ago."  No one would buy that.

 

On ‎5‎.‎5‎.‎2018 at 3:55 PM, BasilSeal said:

I disagree, this was one of the more subtle pieces of writing, and even then they essentially hit us over the head with the moral message as 50 something senior law partner hits on not one but two 20 something interns seconds after breaking off his conversation about a senior judicial appointment with Kendra.

There's supposed to be some moral ambiguity here, Flannery isn't forcing himself on anyone, but just because he's a bit of a silver fox and his attentions aren't entirely unwelcome from his star struck underlings, there's a massive imbalance of power between the two parties and as Seth's friend demonstrates (in the traditional clunky DS manner), what happens if you turn him down?

I think we're supposed to question whether Kendra has made the right choice, because she isn't sure she's made the right one herself.

 

On ‎5‎.‎5‎.‎2018 at 5:15 PM, jhlipton said:

I think it's largely due to the fact that this show isn't exactly known for its moral subtlety... Every once in a while, a different director will sneak onto the set with a different writer's room and sneak in a scene or two that isn't Kirkman sanctimoniously telling someone else (all too often a head of state).  So when there is a spot with a bit of moral complexity, it feels like another show.

As for imbalance of power, there are ranges.  For Seth's friend, Flannery held the power of her promotion over her.  (We don't know that she was partner material -- it is possible that Flannery asked her out to let her down gently.)  In that case, it was improper of him to initiate any kind of sexual request.  For Kendra, it's a little vaguer.  She didn't sound like he would lower her grade if she didn't go out with him.  So it's a bit murkier.  He didn't hit on Ivor's employee -- he offered her a position on his staff.  Once she was onboard, he could have used his power, but we don't know.  Finally, he put his hand near (or on??) Walk-Out Woman's waist.  But he had exactly zero power over her.  So we have 3 vague incidents in 20 to 30 years and two maybe-if-we-squint possibilities.  To me, this reduces the women's agency to say "No".   Consent is extremely important to me, but it has to go both ways -- and we need to be sure that these women had enough power of their own.  This especially true in the case of Kendra's Wild Night.  That sounded more like a woman hooking up with a sports star, and she never said she felt pressure other than in her own mind.

On the other hand, Kendra used her authority to deny him a "promotion" based on feelings she herself said she wasn't sure of.  That, to me, was more of a blatant abuse of power than anything Flannery did, other than with the potential partner.

This is a far cry from what Wenstein did, for example.  In his case, he absolutely used his power to get sexual favors, and withheld favors if denied.

ETA: As a man, I haven't experienced this first hand, and I'm definitely not trying to mansplain.   So I am quite willing to be wrong.

 

On ‎5‎.‎5‎.‎2018 at 9:48 PM, Dowel Jones said:

I think the team, Kendra especially, is looking more toward what might, and probably will, happen if he did receive an appointment to the Federal bench.  If he starts hitting on women then, or harassing staff, it becomes a huge scandal for Kirkman. 

I agree with Jhlipman. 

I doubt that standard as high and especially as vague as Kendra has, she would find any man or woman fit an appointment. Or if such a paragon existed, he or she would have no undertanding towards ordinary mortals.