Tusk to Tchaikovsky: Re-watching the Americans

[sistermagpie]

6 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

I'm half way through, so this may change, but I don't think so.  It's shocking to me how little I cared to watch Elizabeth in season 3, she was good, as always, I just didn't care.

That's really interesting. Were you were aware of why exactly? I just started re-watching Safe House and the family scene at the beginning where the parents are telling the kids they're separating--that's another scene that really encapsulates the dynamic. Paige and Elizabeth are the ones loudly in conflict there too--the two characters aren't only in conflict by any means, but they do always tend to be the most obviously trying to make an impression on the other or something like that. That's even more pronounced once Paige gets Elizabeth coming to her church group, which is a set up for Elizabeth actually getting Paige converting to her "church" instead. That scene also is the parallel to the Jennings, Elizabeth scene, with Paige accusing Elizabeth of being the cause of the separation because she's always "giving dad a hard time," followed by Philip saying that's not true and Paige getting angry that he's defending her and leaving. Paige sort of reflects Elizabeth in getting really annoyed when Philip doesn't have her back. LOL.

I think another reason behind this also might be that Elizabeth was always clearly there on the screen. As frustrating as it is to not have as clear a view into Philip's backstory and head, it leaves more things to notice and wonder and speculate about. With Elizabeth we can very often see exactly where she's at. Her flashbacks and dialogue are more explicit and her actions more obviously decisive. And her conflict remains pretty constant: follow her actual instincts towards loving her family and husband vs. sacrificing all of that to show she's loyal to the State. Especially after being confronted by Pastor Tim "stealing" Paige Elizabeth sees a solution in recruiting Paige to have it both ways.

Philip's actions are decisive in their own way, especially with the Kimmy story, but I think it's less clear where it's all coming from or how it relates to him personally. Possibly because the character himself doesn't often know exactly how he's working his own stuff out through his life. 

It occurs to me, for instance, that it's after the main Kimmy-arc that Philip goes to EST. So he's already taking a strong stand against the KGB, refusing to sleep with Kimmy just because the KGB wants him to do things the way they say, thinking it's wrong, relating it to his training. EST is just the only place he finds something like support for that kind of thinking.

[Domestic Assassin]

8 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

It occurs to me, for instance, that it's after the main Kimmy-arc that Philip goes to EST. So he's already taking a strong stand against the KGB, refusing to sleep with Kimmy just because the KGB wants him to do things the way they say, thinking it's wrong, relating it to his training. EST is just the only place he finds something like support for that kind of thinking.

IIRC Philip was going to est at the start of the Kimmy arc, though still under the guise of being there for Stan.

[sistermagpie]

14 minutes ago, Domestic Assassin said:

IIRC Philip was going to est at the start of the Kimmy arc, though still under the guise of being there for Stan.

I was totally puzzling over this trying to remember it, but I thought it was that he went with Stan starting in 3x1, but it's at the end of S3 (the last ep) when he secretly goes by himself. That's what I was thinking of as the start of Philip going to EST--although of course he'd been to meetings already. So I was thinking that the timeline was that he went to meetings with Stan, but would have stopped when Stan did, which was not that far into S3. (Once he figures out it's not going to help with Sandra.)

So most of the Kimmy stuff happens after he's been to a meeting or two with Stan, but before he actually makes the decision to go back for himself as a real participant. If he hadn't already been to a meeting he wouldn't have known to go there, but the Kimmy arc in part sends him to EST on his own rather than his being in EST being the thing that encourages him to not sleep with Kimmy. It's after he starts going to EST on his own at the end of S3 that he starts having words to describe what he's trying to do or be. 

Another funny thing is I'll bet he wasn't able to honestly try to participate until Stan was gone!

[Umbelina]

1 hour ago, sistermagpie said:

That's really interesting. Were you were aware of why exactly?

Not really.

I just kind of realized what I was watching and what I avoided watching when I was almost done for the night.  I thought, "that's curious."  It wasn't a deliberate thought out choice, I'd just see a scene come up, remember it, realize I wasn't interested and fast forward, only later and today did I reflect on what I wanted to watch.

Probably part of it was Elizabeth always yammering on and on about Paige, but I didn't watch the hotel manager scene either, and I do think that was one of Elizabeth's more interesting interactions, that one, and the mail robot lady.  Her other marks?  Honestly, they never really interested me, I never really bought that she was instant friends with Young Hee (the family dinner scene with the pepper came closest, and her scenes with the husband compromising him sexually were well done as well.) 

It's strange, but Philip's marks, recruits were much more interesting to me, maybe he really did know how to "make it real" better than his wife?  Pretty much all of Philip's?  I'd happily watch again, from the guy with the toy planes, to Annalise, to Kimmy, and certainly Martha.  Maybe in some weird way, he seemed to form connections with these people, even while exploiting them.   With Elizabeth, I always knew it was all fake, with Philip?  Not so much.  When they tried to force feed Young Hee as "real" I honestly never bought it.  I think she would have annoyed Elizabeth with all the laughing, etc.

I do see one other thing, the loss and/or downgrading of having an FBI and Residentura pretense on the show was absolutely huge for me.  I love all of those.

When they kept narrowing the plot down to *basically Elizabeth and Paige?  The show lost me.

Oh, and Hans was definitely a stand in for Paige's off-screen "training."  That also became obvious on rewatch.

ETA

I should mention that I also had some upsetting news that day, and was much less tolerant of anything "annoying" to me, the scenes I watched, took me out of that problem, the scenes I didn't watch, put me back in because I was bored, which made both the show and the problem kind of compounded annoying.

Edited December 8, 2018 by Umbelina

[Umbelina]

4 hours ago, Domestic Assassin said:

IIRC Philip was going to est at the start of the Kimmy arc, though still under the guise of being there for Stan.

yes.

I think Philip was really interested from the start though, and continues to go alone after Stan realizes he won't get Sandra back that way and quits.  All before, during, and after Kimmy.

The biggest thing with the Kimmy story and real life Philip was that she was Paige's age (well, maybe a year older.)  Paige was being recruited by Elizabeth, and in the beginning/middle of Kimmy's story, Paige was told the truth, that they were KGB.

Later of course, Kimmy's dad told her the truth as well.

Edited December 8, 2018 by Umbelina

[Roseanna]

10 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

I think another reason behind this also might be that Elizabeth was always clearly there on the screen. As frustrating as it is to not have as clear a view into Philip's backstory and head, it leaves more things to notice and wonder and speculate about. With Elizabeth we can very often see exactly where she's at. Her flashbacks and dialogue are more explicit and her actions more obviously decisive. And her conflict remains pretty constant: follow her actual instincts towards loving her family and husband vs. sacrificing all of that to show she's loyal to the State. Especially after being confronted by Pastor Tim "stealing" Paige Elizabeth sees a solution in recruiting Paige to have it both ways.

Philip's actions are decisive in their own way, especially with the Kimmy story, but I think it's less clear where it's all coming from or how it relates to him personally. Possibly because the character himself doesn't often know exactly how he's working his own stuff out through his life. 

It occurs to me, for instance, that it's after the main Kimmy-arc that Philip goes to EST. So he's already taking a strong stand against the KGB, refusing to sleep with Kimmy just because the KGB wants him to do things the way they say, thinking it's wrong, relating it to his training. EST is just the only place he finds something like support for that kind of thinking.

I think the reason why the writers didn't give us more of Philip's backstory, is simply because Philip, unlike Elizabeth, isn't dependent on his family and other background. He is a person who is able to chose freely although he of course must make his decisions in certain circumstances.   

[Roseanna]

On ‎4‎.‎12‎.‎2018 at 4:33 AM, sistermagpie said:

Also Gabriel is probably pretty good at defining "lie" in a good way. 

The Soviets had "the higher truth" (their ideology) according which they either presented the facts or, of they they didn't fit to the ideology, either omitted them or falsified them.

Because the Soviet Union was always "peace loving", unlike "imperialist great powers", it was impossible that it had made a secret treaty about the "spheres of interets" with the Nazi Germany, attacked another country, bombed civilians etc. 

[Roseanna]

11 hours ago, Umbelina said:

I've had season 2 and now 3 on while wrapping presents.

Two was really all about Paige, since they had by then decided that Paige/Elizabeth was their end game.  It really stands out now on rewatch. 

Anyway, I'm on 3 now, again tons of Paige for the finale scene on the train platform, but some other stories that were interesting enough the first time, but on re-watch I noticed something.  It's probably just for me, but still.  WHAT did I care about watching again?

I kept fast forwarding through all but certain scenes.  ALL of the FBI office scenes were my top "must watch" scenes.  Aderholt finding the bug in the pen?  Gold.  Mr. Taffett?  Gold.  Anything Martha related?  GOLD.  I also never fast forwarded through a scene with Philip, unless he was with a large group (the Africaan's murder stuff for example) or talking to Paige.  I realized that Philip, more than anyone, held this series, or at least season, together for me. 

I watched most of his scenes with Elizabeth, but not all, watched all of his scenes with Kimmie (she was also gold by the way, IMO, born out by all the work she's getting now, she is on fire.)Her are just two things showing how much work she's now getting, this article https://wwd.com/eye/people/julia-garner-ozark-maniac-dirty-john-1202890083/   and her wiki  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_Garner 

https://www.vulture.com/2015/04/americans-julia-garner-kimmys-daddy-issues.html  link about her on the Americans.

Anyway, her scenes were also must watch for me, and I remember people (not me) who didn't like her on this show...

Fast forwarded through most of Nina in prison, been there, done that, both actors were great, but it was just too removed from the main show.  The supporting cast was outstanding too, including the Danish girl she betrayed.  It's just a separate show to me.

I loved watching all of  the residentura scenes, Oleg, Tatiana, Arkady, and also especially adored all scenes with Stan and Oleg.  Speaking of that, I love the fake USSR traitor Stan exposed as well, watched all of her.

Skipped all of Elizabeth's spying scenes (the hotel guy, the black American AA couple, etc.)  I did watch the guy from South Africa tell her some truths about the USSR.

Watched all of Henry's scenes, not many. 

Watched all of Gabriel's scenes, but wasn't riveted.

So, for me, tops must watch:

1. Philip
2. The FBI
3. The Residentura
4. Martha
5. Kimmy
6. Stan
7. Henry/Gabriel

I'm half way through, so this may change, but I don't think so.  It's shocking to me how little I cared to watch Elizabeth in season 3, she was good, as always, I just didn't care.

 

10 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Not really.

I just kind of realized what I was watching and what I avoided watching when I was almost done for the night.  I thought, "that's curious."  It wasn't a deliberate thought out choice, I'd just see a scene come up, remember it, realize I wasn't interested and fast forward, only later and today did I reflect on what I wanted to watch.

Probably part of it was Elizabeth always yammering on and on about Paige, but I didn't watch the hotel manager scene either, and I do think that was one of Elizabeth's more interesting interactions, that one, and the mail robot lady.  Her other marks?  Honestly, they never really interested me, I never really bought that she was instant friends with Young Hee (the family dinner scene with the pepper came closest, and her scenes with the husband compromising him sexually were well done as well.) 

It's strange, but Philip's marks, recruits were much more interesting to me, maybe he really did know how to "make it real" better than his wife?  Pretty much all of Philip's?  I'd happily watch again, from the guy with the toy planes, to Annalise, to Kimmy, and certainly Martha.  Maybe in some weird way, he seemed to form connections with these people, even while exploiting them.   With Elizabeth, I always knew it was all fake, with Philip?  Not so much.  When they tried to force feed Young Hee as "real" I honestly never bought it.  I think she would have annoyed Elizabeth with all the laughing, etc.

I do see one other thing, the loss and/or downgrading of having an FBI and Residentura pretense on the show was absolutely huge for me.  I love all of those.

When they kept narrowing the plot down to *basically Elizabeth and Paige?  The show lost me.

Oh, and Hans was definitely a stand in for Paige's off-screen "training."  That also became obvious on rewatch.

ETA

I should mention that I also had some upsetting news that day, and was much less tolerant of anything "annoying" to me, the scenes I watched, took me out of that problem, the scenes I didn't watch, put me back in because I was bored, which made both the show and the problem kind of compounded annoying.

I have also watching S3 and like you, fast forwarded Nina scenes. But unlike you, I also did that with most of Kimmy scenes, except the one Philip tells her he serves God and the one they pray together.

I love Philip's scenes with Elizabeth - especially the one where they are high and laugh how "serving Jesus" saved Philip from sleeping with Kimmy. Even when they argue and even quarrel about Paige, they are really close. One with another they can be really honest.  

[Roseanna]

11 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

I was totally puzzling over this trying to remember it, but I thought it was that he went with Stan starting in 3x1, but it's at the end of S3 (the last ep) when he secretly goes by himself. That's what I was thinking of as the start of Philip going to EST--although of course he'd been to meetings already. So I was thinking that the timeline was that he went to meetings with Stan, but would have stopped when Stan did, which was not that far into S3. (Once he figures out it's not going to help with Sandra.)

So most of the Kimmy stuff happens after he's been to a meeting or two with Stan, but before he actually makes the decision to go back for himself as a real participant. If he hadn't already been to a meeting he wouldn't have known to go there, but the Kimmy arc in part sends him to EST on his own rather than his being in EST being the thing that encourages him to not sleep with Kimmy. It's after he starts going to EST on his own at the end of S3 that he starts having words to describe what he's trying to do or be. 

Another funny thing is I'll bet he wasn't able to honestly try to participate until Stan was gone!

It was quite natural as Philip had to be careful with Stan.

But it was perhaps more essential that, after being close and honest with Elizabeth despite their quarrels about Paige in S3, Philip knew that he must do this journey towards "knowing himself" alone. It was partly because of Elizabeth's more ideological character but only partly. Those closest of us have often a fixed image of us, so if we want to find something entirely new, it's better do it alone, at least in the beginning.

Also, even Sandra confessed to Philip that she can't be "completely honest" with her new partner - that simply isn't possible. Sometimes easier to speak about difficult matters to strangers taht we don't meet again.   

[Umbelina]

6 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I love Philip's scenes with Elizabeth - especially the one where they are high and laugh how "serving Jesus" saved Philip from sleeping with Kimmy. Even when they argue and even quarrel about Paige, they are really close. One with another they can be really honest.

Yes, as I said, I watched some of Philip and Elizabeth's scenes, and that was certainly one of them.  It was one of the few times they were actually getting along, and I watched all of the Glanders virus stuff, because I loved William, and when Elizabeth thinks she's dying, she's finally honest with Philip, and accepting of his dream and wants/needs for just about the only time in the show.  Stay, be American, blame the pastors' deaths on me, raise the kids here, it's what you've always wanted.

I was thinking last night what a different reaction I may have had to Paige if the character had been played by an actress with nuance, who could make scenes come alive, who could go toe to toe with this otherwise high caliber of acting.  It's obviously not the first time I've thought of it, but because of the discussion here about Kimmy yesterday, I tried to imagine Julia Garner in the role, since both her scenes and Holly Taylor's, as we were saying earlier, were meant to enhance each others story.   Yes, I realize Julia was 21.  She also just had that screen magic though, that ability to make a look so meaningful and poignant, for example, after the prayer they share.  Actually, every time she's on screen she does that, each moment, each scene becomes real, or touching in some way.

With Holly Taylor's scenes?  She's adequate at best, rarely if ever does she manage to add any nuance, or even change of expression or tone of voice, let alone all the subtle and critically important things fine actors do to pull you in and make you believe them.  With Holly, you could always see her acting, or at least making a half-hearted lame attempt to act. 

So it became obvious why I skipped almost all of her scenes, and all of Elizabeth's scenes where she yammered on about Paige, or berated Philip about Paige, or praised Paige's brilliance.  I'm not trying to bash the "younger actress" but I want to be EST-real right now.  I NEVER BELIEVED HER.  Not one time did she ever move me, because I simply always saw her acting, she just didn't have the skills for this particular show, and it was painfully, glaringly obvious with this otherwise outstanding group of actors.  So, when the show, IMO, "wasted time" and, as we now know, simply had to make the show all-Paige centered all the time, since they decided their ending right after season one?  It fell apart for me, because I didn't believe the main linchpin/character Paige, and of course, season 5 and 6 are even more all about Paige, and that's where they lost me completely.

Would I have adored this focus on Paige and the ending if the actress was as outstanding as the actors she had scenes with?  I think I would have, the one I usually think of is Jennifer Lawrence, since she was Holly's age while doing such moving outstanding work, but because of the whole Julia/Kimmy thing, I stuck her in Paige's role last night, and that WORKED for me too.  I actually mentally put her in some scenes I was watching of Paige, and it was a wow.

Hair that looks alike was not enough.   (Holly and Keri's only similarity really.)  Also, while I know it's technically possible, for both children to have dark brown eyes while neither parent did is kind of surprising.  More and more I think Holly Taylor's hair got her this role.  More and more I wonder if the writers were just so in love with their ending that they were blinded to seeing what they had on screen?  Or did they possibly like Holly too much to be objective about her limitations?  Either way?  It was one of the biggest problems on this show.

Then again, the show had many problems, which is sad to me, when so much of it was so freakin' good.

[sistermagpie]

19 hours ago, Umbelina said:

yes.

I think Philip was really interested from the start though, and continues to go alone after Stan realizes he won't get Sandra back that way and quits.  All before, during, and after Kimmy.

The biggest thing with the Kimmy story and real life Philip was that she was Paige's age (well, maybe a year older.)  Paige was being recruited by Elizabeth, and in the beginning/middle of Kimmy's story, Paige was told the truth, that they were KGB.

Later of course, Kimmy's dad told her the truth as well.

 

Oh yes, absolutely. I do think he was interested right away. But I think his making the decision to actually go to a session himself in secret is a big decision and it's one that comes at the end of S3 after he's been struggling with the Kimmy stuff and Paige knows etc. You can see a logic connecting all that to EST before he's consciously trying to use EST language and advice.

9 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I think the reason why the writers didn't give us more of Philip's backstory, is simply because Philip, unlike Elizabeth, isn't dependent on his family and other background. He is a person who is able to chose freely although he of course must make his decisions in certain circumstances.   

But nobody can choose completely freely. The choices we make come down to who we are, which is at least partly influenced by our experiences, especially growing up. Even Philip says he grew up thinking life was about working hard and protecting your family rather than what you wanted or liked. He has to try to cut himself off completely from the work in order to not get drawn back into it, because he always chooses to take on the responsibility. Part of that is Philip himself, but it probably also relates to his experiences in life. Compare him, for instance, to Paige whose feelings about responsibility for others come out in very different ways in part because of how she understands life given her upbringing.

Elizabeth is more aware of trying to live up to the lessons her mother explicitly taught her, but even if Philip is cut off from that he's still influenced by it.

9 hours ago, Roseanna said:

The Soviets had "the higher truth" (their ideology) according which they either presented the facts or, of they they didn't fit to the ideology, either omitted them or falsified them.

Because the Soviet Union was always "peace loving", unlike "imperialist great powers", it was impossible that it had made a secret treaty about the "spheres of interets" with the Nazi Germany, attacked another country, bombed civilians etc. 

Yup. Some Christians are the same way, even laying this out as a logical argument. And so are many other people with other beliefs. Lots of ideologies teach this kind of thinking or people just do it themselves.

8 hours ago, Roseanna said:

It was quite natural as Philip had to be careful with Stan.

But it was perhaps more essential that, after being close and honest with Elizabeth despite their quarrels about Paige in S3, Philip knew that he must do this journey towards "knowing himself" alone. It was partly because of Elizabeth's more ideological character but only partly. Those closest of us have often a fixed image of us, so if we want to find something entirely new, it's better do it alone, at least in the beginning.

Also, even Sandra confessed to Philip that she can't be "completely honest" with her new partner - that simply isn't possible. Sometimes easier to speak about difficult matters to strangers that we don't meet again.   

This always seems like one of the many reasons Philip is so challenging to Elizabeth and it speaks well of her that she's ultimately attracted to that. I mean, that she ultimately chose the guy who doesn't rigidly stick to an approved way of thinking/being that never changes. And she never completely knows what's going on in his head. He's always got secrets.

1 hour ago, Umbelina said:

I was thinking last night what a different reaction I may have had to Paige if the character had been played by an actress with nuance, who could make scenes come alive, who could go toe to toe with this otherwise high caliber of acting.  It's obviously not the first time I've thought of it, but because of the discussion here about Kimmy yesterday, I tried to imagine Julia Garner in the role, since both her scenes and Holly Taylor's, as we were saying earlier, were meant to enhance each others story.   Yes, I realize Julia was 21.  She also just had that screen magic though, that ability to make a look so meaningful and poignant, for example, after the prayer they share.  Actually, every time she's on screen she does that, each moment, each scene becomes real, or touching in some way.

With Holly Taylor's scenes?  She's adequate at best, rarely if ever does she manage to add any nuance, or even change of expression or tone of voice, let alone all the subtle and critically important things fine actors do to pull you in and make you believe them.  With Holly, you could always see her acting, or at least making a half-hearted lame attempt to act. 

So it became obvious why I skipped almost all of her scenes, and all of Elizabeth's scenes where she yammered on about Paige, or berated Philip about Paige, or praised Paige's brilliance.  I'm not trying to bash the "younger actress" but I want to be EST-real right now.  I NEVER BELIEVED HER.  Not one time did she ever move me, because I simply always saw her acting, she just didn't have the skills for this particular show, and it was painfully, glaringly obvious with this otherwise outstanding group of actors.  So, when the show, IMO, "wasted time" and, as we now know, simply had to make the show all-Paige centered all the time, since they decided their ending right after season one?  It fell apart for me, because I didn't believe the main linchpin/character Paige, and of course, season 5 and 6 are even more all about Paige, and that's where they lost me completely.

This reminds me of that great post DuVerre did about conversational reality which really seemed to nail it for me. It said:

Quote

I’d say that the problem with HT’s performance is the lack of inner life—we get only the surface, or what actors call "conversational reality"—whereas a better performance lets you sense and intuit what’s underneath the outline on the page. Paige, as written, seems very childlike and not too bright. But imagine if an actor could have played exactly the same material, but hinting at Paige's motives, inner damage, hopes and dreams, hang-ups, emotional needs. That kind of thing always lies, ultimately, with actors, whether they're given pages of lines or just a few. (I often wish that Garner had Taylor's part. She has little to work with, but her Kimmy is a fully realized young woman.)

I can use the writing to try to understand Paige and she does interest me, but this is definitely what I get from most of her scenes. It doesn't help that most of the other actors on the show are so technically proficient. I always remember at the start of the Kimmy arc that I couldn't imagine buying Philip as a guy perving on a 15-year-old. But then he (or more specifically, Matthew Rhys) did it in a way I found completely believable all the way down, both in terms of "Jim" being a believable character Kimmy would respond to and Philip being himself underneath.

There are scenes where I think Holly Taylor is very capable, but I think they're scenes that just happen to be her thing she does well. Maybe she can relate to them more naturally as herself, I don't know. It's very different from having Paige herself seem like a consistent, real person who has complex, idiosyncratic reactions to everything, as all people do.

I think that kind of actor might have brought out different things that are there in the writing too. There's a lot of stuff on the page that rarely gets talked about, I think because it isn't something that seems present in the character beyond the moment it's in the writing and the character might have been way more compelling if it was still there. With other characters, things that happen in passing often linger or seem to sink in over time, so you'll think of them in later scenes that have nothing to do with them. With Paige, for me, that only really happened when there was a writing or directing choice that pointed it out. So I have to look at the writing, sometimes looking past the performance.

Quote

Hair that looks alike was not enough.   (Holly and Keri's only similarity really.)  Also, while I know it's technically possible, for both children to have dark brown eyes while neither parent did is kind of surprising.  More and more I think Holly Taylor's hair got her this role.  More and more I wonder if the writers were just so in love with their ending that they were blinded to seeing what they had on screen?  Or did they possibly like Holly too much to be objective about her limitations?  Either way?  It was one of the biggest problems on this show.

Then again, the show had many problems, which is sad to me, when so much of it was so freakin' good.

I always thought one of the things they might have liked about her was the vulnerability that was such a contrast to Elizabeth. I did always think it was funny when people would say they looked alike when what they meant was they both had long, straight hair. And are petite.

19 hours ago, Umbelina said:

It's strange, but Philip's marks, recruits were much more interesting to me, maybe he really did know how to "make it real" better than his wife?  Pretty much all of Philip's?  I'd happily watch again, from the guy with the toy planes, to Annalise, to Kimmy, and certainly Martha.  Maybe in some weird way, he seemed to form connections with these people, even while exploiting them.   With Elizabeth, I always knew it was all fake, with Philip?  Not so much.  When they tried to force feed Young Hee as "real" I honestly never bought it.  I think she would have annoyed Elizabeth with all the laughing, etc.

I think that's definitely true and even a conscious choice of both the writers and actors. Elizabeth never really has close relationships with sources that change her unless she's being herself, like with Gregory. Sometimes she talks about her real life while in character, but that's not the same thing. Usually in order to respond to anyone with respect there has to be some obvious thing she sees as being like herself. (With Betty I thought this was comically so.) The only people she seems to really want to bond with who aren't like her are her kids. With one of them she wound up giving up. With the other she tried to turn the kid into someone more like herself than she was. She never that we saw on the show had any important long-term relationships with sources that reflected herself except with Gregory, who wasn't really a source so much as a fellow soldier who wasn't Russian. Even when she first met him undercover it was in a context where she was espousing her real views and he was agreeing with them.

With Philip they gave him these long-term relationships with Martha and Kimmy where we saw them grow together. Clark and Jim both seem like more full-blown creations than any of Elizabeth's. She intentionally goes for that conversational reality and gets scared when she develops any real positive opinions about a source, it seems. We also gets to see Clark and Jim develop along with their sources. With Clark he adjusts as Martha discovers the truth. Elizabeth, imo, would have cut and run, maybe even before that--maybe long before. In S6 Jim remains the only interesting persona on the show imo. We see how Kimmy has grown up and now relates to the Jim persona differently and in order to keep their friendship up Jim has had to adjust accordingly. When they have the conversation about Jim being stuck I felt like Kimmy was speaking to the real, core person there. She wasn't just a source off of whom Philip was bouncing an edited version of his problems. She was sensing something of the real person that also appeared in Jim--and that made sense because Jim represented a part of Philip. I guess one could say the same of Henry. He only knew the Philip persona, but responded to the parts of that persona that were real and meaningful.

This way of working, it seems to me, makes Philip seem less trustworthy to his handlers but it also allows him to work more deeply and delicately undercover. I recently watched the AMC adaptation of The Little Drummer Girl and there's things in that story that relate. (The actress actually made the character feel more real to me than she had in the book too.) The handlers in that story know they're risking her being sucked in on the other side, but they also know that they need someone able to embrace the other persona that deeply in order to succeed. Because the terrorists would never believe her otherwise. Gregory is loyal to Elizabeth (the real person who he thinks has rejected Philip entirely) to the end. Martha and Kimmy are loyal to Clark and Jim who they understand on some level has been lying.

Edited December 8, 2018 by sistermagpie

[Umbelina]

47 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

This reminds me of that great post DuVerre did about conversational reality which really seemed to nail it for me. It said:

Quote

I’d say that the problem with HT’s performance is the lack of inner life—we get only the surface, or what actors call "conversational reality"—whereas a better performance lets you sense and intuit what’s underneath the outline on the page. Paige, as written, seems very childlike and not too bright. But imagine if an actor could have played exactly the same material, but hinting at Paige's motives, inner damage, hopes and dreams, hang-ups, emotional needs. That kind of thing always lies, ultimately, with actors, whether they're given pages of lines or just a few. (I often wish that Garner had Taylor's part. She has little to work with, but her Kimmy is a fully realized young woman.)

I can use the writing to try to understand Paige and she does interest me, but this is definitely what I get from most of her scenes. It doesn't help that most of the other actors on the show are so technically proficient. I always remember at the start of the Kimmy arc that I couldn't imagine buying Philip as a guy perving on a 15-year-old. But then he (or more specifically, Matthew Rhys) did it in a way I found completely believable all the way down, both in terms of "Jim" being a believable character Kimmy would respond to and Philip being himself underneath.

There are scenes where I think Holly Taylor is very capable, but I think they're scenes that just happen to be her thing she does well. Maybe she can relate to them more naturally as herself, I don't know. It's very different from having Paige herself seem like a consistent, real person who has complex, idiosyncratic reactions to everything, as all people do.

I think that kind of actor might have brought out different things that are there in the writing too. There's a lot of stuff on the page that rarely gets talked about, I think because it isn't something that seems present in the character beyond the moment it's in the writing and the character might have been way more compelling if it was still there. With other characters, things that happen in passing often linger or seem to sink in over time, so you'll think of them in later scenes that have nothing to do with them. With Paige, for me, that only really happened when there was a writing or directing choice that pointed it out.

Honestly, the only, and I mean ONLY time I felt Holly was "capable" again, compared to the extremely high quality of this cast, was when she was picking up guys in the bar.  I believed those scenes.

@duVerre'a post was outstanding, and I agree with every word. 

I'll add, it's all the little things that "make it real" that Holly simply doesn't do.  If the scene calls for "anger" that's all you get.  Outstanding actors don't just play "anger."  They mix in guilt, they try to hold the anger back, like real people do, until it explodes, their eyes move, they are thinking, a hand may tremble, a tear may threaten which they hide, or quickly brush away, all kinds of things.  It requires really thinking about all the reasons for the anger, and the motivation for letting "ANGER" explode, or the uncontrollable nature of it, or controlling it until you can't anymore.  It's a voice breaking, or increasing in volume, it's a hundred little things that great actors do when they "make it real."

When they tell Holly "ANGER" you just get a loud rant.  Speaking of loud rants, which is basically all you ever get from her when it's an "angry" scene?  She SCREAMS without a thought several times, when Henry or someone else could hear, and that could send her parents to prison and Paige and Henry to foster care, never a single moment of thought, and this from the "brilliant" Paige.  Did the directors just give up, or was what we finally see on screen simply the best takes Holly could give?  Or were they just idiots?

Again, this goes back to the main problem for me with the ending, that decision influenced all of the seasons after season one, and on rewatch you see all of that.  WHY did they continue to go there, when they had so much absolute gold with other stories and other characters, to me it's a huge failing that they didn't adapt to what they were watching on screen, and simply plowed ahead to this final goal, in spite of the fact they were losing great stuff to focus on the least capable actor on screen.

There is a deleted scene on the DVD's season 3 I think.  It's Stan and Aderholt having a much better talk, it wasn't perfect, but it was more interesting than a single thing Holly ever did, and if they had included it, built that relationship with it, Stan's betrayal of Aderholt and the FBI would have resonated so much more.

I also think they could have still had Elizabeth devastated at the train station without SO MUCH time all about Paige, and God knows they should have killed the Pastors.  THAT may have at least got Paige's attention enough to make her quit screaming secrets, and it could have built the guilt/love/fears/choices with Paige and Elizabeth in a more unique and interesting way.

 

47 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

I always thought one of the things they might have liked about her was the vulnerability that was such a contrast to Elizabeth. I did always think it was funny when people would say they looked alike when what they meant was they both had long, straight hair. And are petite.

I think Keri is normal sized, 5''4" is considered average.  They just had the long, thick, luxurious BRECK hair, as that one employee of Gregory's said when describing Elizabeth to Stan.

Kimmy's hair, dyed dark, would have worked though, it's hair like Phillip's.

Then again the story all came down to Elizabeth, her mom, and Paige, so having a kid look like Philip, who didn't really matter to the overall arc, wouldn't work.

ETA

I also think Elizabeth showed great vulnerability several times, that's what outstanding actors do, manage to show a full, complicated human being, whether they are supposed to be "tough" or "focused" or whatever else mainly.

47 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

I think that's definitely true and even a conscious choice of both the writers and actors. Elizabeth never really has close relationships with sources that change her unless she's being herself, like with Gregory. Sometimes she talks about her real life while in character, but that's not the same thing. Usually in order to respond to anyone with respect there has to be some obvious thing she sees as being like herself. (With Betty I thought this was comically so.) The only people she seems to really want to bond with who aren't like her are her kids. With one of them she wound up giving up. With the other she tried to turn the kid into someone more like herself than she was. She never had any important long-term relationships with sources that reflected herself except with Gregory, who wasn't really a source so much as a fellow soldier who wasn't Russian. Even when she first met him undercover it was in a context where she was espousing her real views and he was agreeing with them.

With Philip they gave him these long-term relationships with Martha and Kimmy where we saw them grow together. Clark and Jim both seem like more full-blown creations than any of Elizabeth's. She intentionally goes for that conversational reality and gets scared when she develops any real positive opinions about them, it seems. We also gets to see Clark and Jim develop along with their sources. With Clark he adjusts as Martha discovers the truth. In S6 Jim remains the only interesting persona on the show imo. We see how Kimmy has grown up and now relates to the Jim persona differently and in order to keep their friendship up Jim has had to adjust accordingly. When they have the conversation about Jim being stuck I felt like Kimmy was speaking to the real, core person there. She wasn't just a source off of whom Philip was bouncing an edited version of his problems. She was sensing something of the real person that also appeared in Jim--and that made sense because Jim represented a part of Philip. I guess one could say the same of Henry. He only knew the Philip persona, but responded to the parts of that persona that were real and meaningful to Philip.

This way of working, it seems to me, makes Philip seem less trustworthy to his handlers but it also allows him to work more deeply and delicately undercover. I recently watched the AMC adaptation of The Little Drummer Girl and there's things in that story that relate. (The actress actually made the character feel more real to me than she had in the book too.) The handlers in that story know they're risking her being sucked in on the other side, but they also know that they need someone able to embrace the other persona that deeply in order to succeed. Because the terrorists would never believe her otherwise. Gregory is loyal to Elizabeth (the real person who he thinks has rejected Philip entirely) to the end. Martha and Kimmy are loyal to Clark and Jim who they understand on some level has been lying.

But the writers tried to force the Young Hee story as a "close relationship" for Elizabeth, and in some ways, the season 5 mark as well (I've blocked it.)  I wish that guy cheating on her hadn't been such a throwaway brief scene, it was the only interesting thing that happened in season 5, and it was a 4 second scene.  She obviously had that with Gregory for over a decade, but we only see flashbacks of that.

Rather than endless Paige, I would have loved more exploration of the different ways Elizabeth and Philip worked, the two of them talking more about it.  They did explore Elizabeth's insecurities with both Martha and Kimmy, and that was wonderful, but having them talk about Elizabeth not connecting, if that's what the writers were going for, which I'm honestly not sure about, would have been good.

For example, Liz looks pretty devastated when she has to kill the AA woman and comes back to Gabe's, devastated about what though?  Loss of a great source?  Her failure to manage the situation?  Because honestly, I never got the feeling she gave one damn about her, so if it was suppose to be loss of a person?  It doesn't work for me.

Edited December 8, 2018 by Umbelina

[sistermagpie]

17 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

@duVerre

I'll add, it's all the little things that "make it real" that Holly simply doesn't do.  If the scene calls for "anger" that's all you get.  Outstanding actors don't just play "anger."  They mix in guilt, they try to hold the anger back, like real people do, until it explodes, their eyes move, they are thinking, a hand may tremble, a tear may threaten which they hide, or quickly brush away, all kinds of things.  It requires really thinking about all the reasons for the anger, and the motivation for letting "ANGER" explode, or the uncontrollable nature of it, or controlling it until you can't anymore.  It's a voice breaking, or increasing in volume, it's a hundred little things that great actors do when they "make it real."

When they tell Holly "ANGER" you just get a loud rant.  Speaking of loud rants, which is basically all you ever get from her when it's an "angry" scene?  She SCREAMS without a thought several times, when Henry or someone else could hear, and that could send her parents to prison and Paige and Henry to foster care, never a single moment of thought, and this from the "brilliant" Paige.  Did the directors just give up, or was what we finally see on screen simply the best takes Holly could give?  Or were they just idiots?

For me I think what I was often missing was the feeling of anything really specific, which I think often leads to the other things you're talking about. I can't really think of scenes where I had a sense, even one I couldn't put into words, that Paige was motivated about some specific thing that came from what had happened. That's why there are some scenes that really fall flat for me on her end. The "speak Russian" scene, as I've said, plays to me like an actress lying on a bed and giving a sad sigh because she's supposed to be very upset and then the scene starts. I never actually believed in Paige lying in her bed for hours and asking her parents to speak Russian rather than asking any other particular thing for any reason other than it was in the script. There are similar scenes with other characters where I did believe that the character had been sitting there thinking about something concretely for a long time before the scene started.

Similarly in S6 when Paige blunders onto the dead General there's a scene after where she's sitting on the couch looking sad and Philip gives her a glass of water. I didn't at all in my head fill in a scene where Paige was greatly upset and needed to go home to...see her father? See her house? Confront her mother and her dad happened to be there? She didn't seem that upset in either scene. It felt like the speak Russian scene again--sit on the couch and look dazed while Dad brings you comfort. You're not working out anything in particular in your head that's leading you further into trouble or whatever.

Or, like, there's things in the writing I can use to try to understand Paige's attitude toward her father and the intern, but in the scenes themselves I don't feel like HT was playing a specific reason why Paige was dismissive of her father or why she always felt the need to tell her mother about her love life. I don't know if I watched them right now, knowing more than I knew then, if I'd suddenly understand the performance more. I never felt like the character was living in between scenes and so had a specific reason why she was, for example, now going to march in and confront her parents with this one specific thing. Or why she'd react to something like Alice's accusation by taking Alice's side in that moment--I believe it's something that could happen, but I don't feel it in the performance. Or even in the two scenes where she reacts to the idea of moving to Russia like it's nuts. It comes across less like Paige has been in denial or has worked out some fantasy here this could never happened, just that this crazy idea has never occurred to her. All those Russian culture lessons and Paige doesn't even seem to be acting like someone realizing the reality isn't the same as the fantasy.

17 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

There is a deleted scene on the DVD's season 3 I think.  It's Stan and Aderholt having a much better talk, it wasn't perfect, but it was more interesting than a single thing Holly ever did, and if they had included it, built that relationship with it, Stan's betrayal of Aderholt and the FBI would have resonated so much more.

This relationship really is so so interesting and deserving of more time. I don't think I've ever seen a Stan/Aderholdt conversation I didn't like. And it's very detailed with the racial issues and Nina and the way they're so different. Plus the way Aderholdt is always a bit isolated at the FBI. It almost makes sense he'd fit best with loner Stan, plus you can see why he'd appreciate Stan.

Stan and Gaad also had a specific relationship based on their characters. Of course this also makes me wish we'd gotten more Stan and Philip. It's surprising the writers weren't always salivating over that one knowing where that always had to go. It's also something they could have contrasted with Aderholdt, his work-friend and his home-friend who know each other in S6.

17 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

But the writers tried to force the Young Hee story as a "close relationship" for Elizabeth, and in some ways, the season 5 mark as well (I've blocked it.)  I wish that guy cheating on her hadn't been such a throwaway brief scene, it was the only interesting thing that happened in season 5, and it was a 4 second scene.  She obviously had that with Gregory for over a decade, but we only see flashbacks of that.

Rather than endless Paige, I would have loved more exploration of the different ways Elizabeth and Philip worked, the two of them talking more about it.  They did explore Elizabeth's insecurities with both Martha and Kimmy, and that was wonderful, but having them talk about Elizabeth not connecting, if that's what the writers were going for, which I'm honestly not sure about, would have been good.

For example, Liz looks pretty devastated when she has to kill the AA woman and comes back to Gabe's, devastated about what though?  Loss of a great source?  Her failure to manage the situation?  Because honestly, I never got the feeling she gave one damn about her, so if it was suppose to be loss of a person?  It doesn't work for me.

Yeah, I didn't think she cared about that AA woman either. She was stressed out and had to do this really violent, unexpected murder after everything went wrong--I don't think she cared about her personally, she was just burnt out like she was in S6. Too much one thing after another. I feel like with somebody like Young-Hee and Ben the difference is that it wasn't about Elizabeth giving or wanting to give in the relationship. She liked Young-Hee because she had fun with her. She liked Ben because he revealed himself to have her same values (he was trying to feed the hungry) and she enjoyed things he taught her. it was about Elizabeth enjoying the other person and then in Young-Hee's case destroying them. She was able to be more open with Ben because she was happy at home with Philip--she didn't necessarily ever have to do anything bad to him.

With Philip I think his connection was much deeper. He didn't feel for Martha because he was getting something personal out of her, but because he came to see her as a whole person deserving of protection. Same with Kimmy--he wanted to help her. I'm not explaining it well, but the key is that I think the key is that Philip is willing to give himself to the relationship, to feel responsible for the person, to understand the person on their own terms and empathize with them. He's giving them honest pieces of himself, even while lying.

Where as with Elizabeth she's mourning something she's losing--that's part of her insecurity about these other women with Philip, that she assumes they're giving him something she isn't. Underneath she knows she's not giving.

So Young-Hee's very different from Martha. She's someone Elizabeth enjoys and comes to like a person. She first can only express her doubts by saying she's going to miss her, but later has lingering guilt about destroying this woman and her family--it's one of the first times she really feels what Philip says later, that it was her doing this, not just the Centre giving her an order she's not responsible for. But that's as close as she comes to Philip's really feeling like he owes something to a source. Even Erika in the last season was someone giving something to Elizabeth that she appreciated without her ever giving much back besides kissing her good-bye in thank you. She was again someone who got under her skin in some way, but without Elizabeth opening herself to what she was really doing.

[Umbelina]

5 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

This relationship really is so so interesting and deserving of more time. I don't think I've ever seen a Stan/Aderholdt conversation I didn't like. And it's very detailed with the racial issues and Nina and the way they're so different. Plus the way Aderholdt is always a bit isolated at the FBI. It almost makes sense he'd fit best with loner Stan, plus you can see why he'd appreciate Stan.

Stan and Gaad also had a specific relationship based on their characters. Of course this also makes me wish we'd gotten more Stan and Philip. It's surprising the writers weren't always salivating over that one knowing where that always had to go. It's also something they could have contrasted with Aderholdt, his work-friend and his home-friend who know each other in S6.

Seriously~!

Also, it made the jettison of so many cast members so much worse when we essentially lost Stan as well, and the FBI office being non existent for so long during Elizaberth's season six unprecedented murder spree was simply bizarre.

It's why this show stays in second tier for me now, everything does build to something, and I'm unhappy not only that it built to a "no-ending ending" I'm also unhappy that the writers, in almost a seemingly stubborn way, apparently refused to see how much gold they had in this cast and either shipped them off to Russia, killed them, or ignored them during five and a lot of six.

I still say the individual episodes in 6 were good, I loved some of them, including the last episode.  I just HATE it as a finale, just exiting stage left and leaving everyone in peril.  I didn't spend so much time with these people just to make up their endings for myself.  I hate writing like that, nothing had to be tied up in a tight bow, but I did need them to at least pick up all the strings they left all over the damn floor.

[Roseanna]

15 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

But nobody can choose completely freely. The choices we make come down to who we are, which is at least partly influenced by our experiences, especially growing up. Even Philip says he grew up thinking life was about working hard and protecting your family rather than what you wanted or liked. He has to try to cut himself off completely from the work in order to not get drawn back into it, because he always chooses to take on the responsibility. Part of that is Philip himself, but it probably also relates to his experiences in life. Compare him, for instance, to Paige whose feelings about responsibility for others come out in very different ways in part because of how she understands life given her upbringing.

Elizabeth is more aware of trying to live up to the lessons her mother explicitly taught her, but even if Philip is cut off from that he's still influenced by it.

I mean free in the Dostoevkyan sense. In The Brothers Karamamazov Dmitri goes to murder his father but in the last moment, without any obvious reason, he changes his mind. If we didn't know it, we would have thought just as the jury: guilty. 

If we have been told about a ten-year-old boy who killed two boys, albeit ones who had tormented him a long time, wouldn't we call him a monster and a sociopath? I think any exlanation that the writers could have invented how such a boy becomes a man to whom the family is most important, who doubts his superiors and thinks himself, to whom Martha and Kimmy aren't only assents, would have seem insufficient to us.

[Roseanna]

21 hours ago, Umbelina said:

There is a deleted scene on the DVD's season 3 I think.  It's Stan and Aderholt having a much better talk, it wasn't perfect, but it was more interesting than a single thing Holly ever did, and if they had included it, built that relationship with it, Stan's betrayal of Aderholt and the FBI would have resonated so much more.

I also think they could have still had Elizabeth devastated at the train station without SO MUCH time all about Paige, and God knows they should have killed the Pastors.  THAT may have at least got Paige's attention enough to make her quit screaming secrets, and it could have built the guilt/love/fears/choices with Paige and Elizabeth in a more unique and interesting way.

It's true that Stan betrayed Aderholt and FBI but I understand the reasons writers gave him. Stan was never shown to be a "company man", he always made his own individual decisions and put personal relationships first (except refusing to become a traitor in order to save Nina). Maybe in some other circumstances he would have revenged to Philip for betraying him (but for some reason Stan never asked himself if his telling Philip about Gaad's journey was conneceted with his death, and he even asked to Gaad's widow whether she wanted to revenge his death and was astonished that she would). But in the moment of their final meeting happened, Philip successfully appealed to several themes: that they both had fought for their country and that, at least now, their interest of their country were common. 

As for Pastor Tim, I don't think that killing him would have been a good idea as everybody here waited for just that. Paige had ample reason to be horrified of what P&E did. F.ex. stealing some military secret (which William did) is something that most people don't accept as a principle unless there is a special reason for it. 

[sistermagpie]

7 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I mean free in the Dostoevkyan sense. In The Brothers Karamamazov Dmitri goes to murder his father but in the last moment, without any obvious reason, he changes his mind. If we didn't know it, we would have thought just as the jury: guilty. 

If we have been told about a ten-year-old boy who killed two boys, albeit ones who had tormented him a long time, wouldn't we call him a monster and a sociopath? I think any exlanation that the writers could have invented how such a boy becomes a man to whom the family is most important, who doubts his superiors and thinks himself, to whom Martha and Kimmy aren't only assents, would have seem insufficient to us.

True, I didn't want or think Philip could really be pinned down like Elizabeth was. I don't think he could have been explained completely and wouldn't want him to be--his flashbacks left me wanting more, but I also prefer them, ultimately, to Elizabeth's. Hers were usually memories of times someone gave her some kind of lesson that she was obviously struggling to follow or understand as an adult. Philip's were just silent, visceral sense memories and I wouldn't want ones that didn't fit that. (The only flashbacks that aren't like that for him are his meeting with Elizabeth where we don't know all he's thinking and Irina, where the dialogue is just pretty generic.)

But still, on the wanting more stuff, I think they could have given us more of the type of thing we got. Like, with that one story we get we don't get a big explanation for why he killed the boys that's tied to some exact incident. But they gave us that memory of him murdering the boys to tell us something important about who he was and is now. That decision was an important thing in his life. I think we could have gotten something along those lines that added some meaning to the way he was with Elizabeth, even if it was just an impression. Like that final flashback where he's begging for food. That's not there to give us some simple reason why he thinks money is important or anything like that. But it does add something about the character that's important. Early on, for instance, I remember a lot of people made up a backstory for Philip where his childhood was so much easier than Elizabeth's because he seemed less difficult, so it really added understanding to get even a glimpse of his past as being a fight for survival. (It made, imo, much more of an impression than Elizabeth's claims about how her life was like that.) It adds something to the way Philip interacts with food throughout the show.

So I would have liked to even just have a little silent scene of him interacting with his mother, or one with a little dialogue. His story about his mother getting his money back was obviously meant to do something like that--it was even superimposed on a shot of Elizabeth clearly being like his mother. (Or maybe it was just supposed to make the audience admire Elizabeth and this was a side-effect for me.)

14 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Also, it made the jettison of so many cast members so much worse when we essentially lost Stan as well, and the FBI office being non existent for so long during Elizaberth's season six unprecedented murder spree was simply bizarre.

It's funny watching S1 because back then everything P&E did had a clear reaction from the FBI. And I get why they didn't keep it that connected because it would have been much harder to keep Stan in the dark. But that doesn't apply to S6 where there were so many parallels. Like in S1 the KGB kills FBI agents and it makes it personal for the FBI we know (except Stan, who isn't in the scene where the deaths were announced), then they make this illegal plan to go after Arkady in revenge (Stan again begs off--he says because it's not approved, but we all know Stan doesn't care about that. More likely it's got something to do with not wanting to go after Nina's boss for a mixture of strategic and personal reasons.) By S5 it feels like both sides are manned by a skeleton crew with Aderholdt, Claudia and Elizabeth being the only real players who still have their head in the game--and in Elizabeth's case she's clearly past her sell-by date.

Well, actually I shouldn't say that. Arkady, Oleg and Philip are also in, but they're representing a new faction.

[Umbelina]

On to season 4, and now I'm convinced that what I thought before is true, at least the first half is my favorite season ever.

I'm not skipping anything.

There is an extended scene on the DVD's and I wish it had been included in the show.  Right after Gaad producers the marriage certificate of Clarke and Martha, the extended scene has Gaad and Stan discussing Amador's death, and realizing it's probably "Clarke" that killed him, because he "married" Martha less than a month later.

Richard Thomas brought a lot to that role, in retrospect, I see that more clearly now.  He made the head of counter-intelligence for the FBI in DC a very complicated human being, loyal to his country, volunteered for Viet Nam even though he had an out as an FBI agent at the time, compassionate with his staff, kept Martha on instead of removing her by bringing in his own secretary, and also full of human faults, like not always using the secure room when discussing secret things.  Imagine how much more impact kicking Arkady out of the country would have had if the show didn't murder him in the near-zeal to remove characters from the show?  That murder never even really paid off.  If Gaad had been the one to throw Arkady out, those scenes would have been SO much more resonant.  Having the near-stranger House guy do it?  The scene was well done, but there was no history or connection with him.

So, the downside of season 4 is that we ended up losing about half the cast, but what a ride it was. 

In retrospect, they were clearing the decks to increase the focus on Elizabeth and Paige.  I think that was a huge mistake.  H U G E  mistake, and it kind of makes me pretty sad for what might have been.

Still all of that first half was so good, very little Paige, and all the focus on FBI and KGB and those adult, complicated, fascinating, involved, dense relationships.  I suppose the idea of Paige allowed the whole Epcot plan to murder the Pastors, and heightened the Glanders story with William, another complicated ADULT who fascinated me, and compelled me.  Still I wish that was the way she'd mainly been used throughout, not on screen much, but the IDEA of her recruitment and big mouth allowing the real actors to play out intricate and serious decision making and actions that involved nearly the entire outstanding cast.

Oh show...you were so good, but you could have been great.

Edited December 10, 2018 by Umbelina

[sistermagpie]

3 hours ago, Umbelina said:

In retrospect, they were clearing the decks to increase the focus on Elizabeth and Paige.  I think that was a huge mistake.  H U G E  mistake, and it kind of makes me pretty sad for what might have been.

 

Wow, that extended scene sounded great. I think we would have all been hanging on every word in it, listening to them put things together. And of course it would also have been so resonant later because as far as we knew Stan never questioned Amador being killed by Gregory who he then connected to Elizabeth. But it would mean something if he'd actually thought it was Clark and didn't want to believe that Clark was Philip but...he could be.

I was just watching the beginning of Safe House where Stan has the party and there's a great little moment with Amador--I had remembered him asking who the "babe" was, meaning Elizabeth. And of course later he thinks she looks familiar when he's dying. But when he first comes into the kitchen he passes Philip who says excuse me and--this is great to me on rewatch--it looks like as they pass each other Philip keeps his head pretty much turned away. It doesn't look unnatural or obvious but of course in retrospect it's chilling because you know Philip's going to kill him. Amador looks at him casually after he's just passed, but he's not interested because it's Amador and he's not a gorgeous woman. Not that Elizabeth is doing anything particularly to draw attention--she's just beautiful. But I loved how Philip just instinctively made himself invisible. Ironically this is right before Amador describes himself as having shoes that are "fully lubricated" compared to Stan's, which squeak. Which seemed to mean that Stan needed to keep his rep clean while Amador was more free to join in the plot against Arkady. Or else that Stan is a good boy and Amador isn't? It was a weird metaphor. But of course Philip saw him. It's kind of funny to think of all these FBI agents with two KGB agents floating around eating hot dogs. 

When I think of the series it does really seem to go 1-4 / 5-6. The decks are cleared, all the spy storylines with momentum are pretty much over (except Kimmy). The stuff in season 5 disappears with no need for mention. There's a feeling that everyone has stayed too long. Or not everyone, but just enough people to bring everything down. The Russians have turned inward to fight against themselves. 

Even the Paige story feels that way. When Claudia first brings up the idea it is a great threat because it's about Paige as victim rather than really being a spy. But by the time she's actually working she just adds to the idea of everything disintegrating. She's not really into it, Elizabeth's generating a lot of the forward momentum all by herself by just insisting it's going somewhere. Claudia's playing Granny but there's no talk of the Centre being specifically interested in her. The fact that they're willing to let Henry go says clearer than anything that this is probably just more inertia at work. The spy storyline that matters is about keeping things from moving backwards.

This is fine for somebody like Aderholdt, though, because imo he more than anyone else in the FBI comes across as just a professional who goes against whoever's coming up. His interest in the job doesn't seem to wax and wane. He just does it without getting overly emotional and then goes home.

[Umbelina]

13 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

Wow, that extended scene sounded great. I think we would have all been hanging on every word in it, listening to them put things together. And of course it would also have been so resonant later because as far as we knew Stan never questioned Amador being killed by Gregory who he then connected to Elizabeth. But it would mean something if he'd actually thought it was Clark and didn't want to believe that Clark was Philip but...he could be.

Yeah, they knew.  Martha would not marry someone she'd known less than a month, and Amador used to date her and had shown recent renewed interest in her at the office, they whole "great shoes/legs" was just once incident Stan and Gaad observed.  I always thought Stan suspected Clarke/Philip anyway, even in the garage.  He was willing to kill the nearly painfully innocent Vlad in cold blood, but he lets Philip walk, in spite of having almost no relationship with him on screen in two seasons? 

Sure.

14 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

I was just watching the beginning of Safe House where Stan has the party and there's a great little moment with Amador--I had remembered him asking who the "babe" was, meaning Elizabeth. And of course later he thinks she looks familiar when he's dying. But when he first comes into the kitchen he passes Philip who says excuse me and--this is great to me on rewatch--it looks like as they pass each other Philip keeps his head pretty much turned away. It doesn't look unnatural or obvious but of course in retrospect it's chilling because you know Philip's going to kill him. Amador looks at him casually after he's just passed, but he's not interested because it's Amador and he's not a gorgeous woman. Not that Elizabeth is doing anything particularly to draw attention--she's just beautiful. But I loved how Philip just instinctively made himself invisible. Ironically this is right before Amador describes himself as having shoes that are "fully lubricated" compared to Stan's, which squeak.

A trained spy will notice and remember faces/clothes/voices on duty or not.  The FBI training wasn't as good as CIA or KGB, but essentially they were taught as Elizabeth taught Hans, always being aware.  It's so instinctual, especially in something like counter intelligence, I'd be shocked if it just turned off because he was at a party.

Philip knew Martha had dated Amador, so avoiding his gaze was SOP.

15 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

Even the Paige story feels that way. When Claudia first brings up the idea it is a great threat because it's about Paige as victim rather than really being a spy. But by the time she's actually working she just adds to the idea of everything disintegrating. She's not really into it, Elizabeth's generating a lot of the forward momentum all by herself by just insisting it's going somewhere. Claudia's playing Granny but there's no talk of the Centre being specifically interested in her. The fact that they're willing to let Henry go says clearer than anything that this is probably just more inertia at work. The spy storyline that matters is about keeping things from moving backwards.

The plot line made the show disintegrate.  That plot line that never made much sense and honestly required A level acting to pull off the whole trapped/tortured/conflicted/excited/fearful/empowered/nervous/pissed emotions that should have been playing across the actresses faith no matter the scene.  Dropping the idea of the much more suited/valuable Henry just added to the idiocy of the plot, and the BLATANT "we are only interested in Elizabeth" story that unhappily included her mother and daughter as her bookends.  Neither of which I ever gave one shit about.

---

Watching season 4 last night, I also reasoned that "poor Martha" was more than just some fan favorite, that character knitted the entire cast together in many ways, since she not only straddled the FBI/KGB plots, and enabled natural looks into both operations, she was also a huge scene giver to Elizabeth, who milked that jealousy/insecurity crap several times for all it was worth.  Mathew Rhys was simply outstanding in every scene with her throughout her run on the show, from the beginning to the very end, from the kama sutra awkward positions and facial comedy, to the scrambling he had to do when they found the pen, to ripping off his wig.  I honestly can't think of a single scene they had together that wasn't nearly fabulous.

Instead of putting Oleg in that stupid food story that was never resolved, explained, or even finished on screen, with WAY too much Russian all the time?  It wouldn't have been THAT big a stretch to have him, a KGB officer who just served in Martha's town, spoke perfectly good English, AND was intimately associated with one of her former coworkers, Stan, and very well aware of Martha's entire FBI CI unit, including what they'd done, what had been done to them, and who was who there to debrief Martha.

Martha, in reality, WOULD be debriefed, for ANY and all tidbits of information she might have about the FBI.  Oleg would have been a perfect person to do that, and it would have kept two beloved and interesting characters involved in some ways with the rest of the action back in DC.  Look how valuable they found the tidbit about Gaad traveling to Thailand.  Martha probably knows where half the office vacations, who cheats, who is about to get divorced, who is broke, who is connected, etc. 

Add to that, when Arkady is sent back, WHY no scenes with him and Oleg?  They had become close, nearly friends, and they shared an experience most in the USSR would never really understand.  Or hell, have Arkady be the one to debrief Martha, who, I'm sure would resist that, futilely and probably very interestingly.

Don't even get me started on Philip's son.  GAWD this show went downhill fast...sigh.

[sistermagpie]

6 hours ago, Umbelina said:

A trained spy will notice and remember faces/clothes/voices on duty or not.  The FBI training wasn't as good as CIA or KGB, but essentially they were taught as Elizabeth taught Hans, always being aware.  It's so instinctual, especially in something like counter intelligence, I'd be shocked if it just turned off because he was at a party.

And Philip was absolutely on duty. The main reason he and Elizabeth are both there together, despite having just separated, is that they know the FBI is going to be there. I just loved that while of course Philip would be looking at everyone else, they gave us that little moment that at the same time he was of course going to try as best he could without being weird about it to not make himself memorable to any FBI agents. I hadn't thought about him knowing who Amador himself was but you're right, he'd have good reason to know exactly who Martha's ex was as well as Stan's partner.

Amador, otoh, does remember Elizabeth but I don't remember him thinking Philip looked familiar.

6 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Watching season 4 last night, I also reasoned that "poor Martha" was more than just some fan favorite, that character knitted the entire cast together in many ways, since she not only straddled the FBI/KGB plots, and enabled natural looks into both operations, she was also a huge scene giver to Elizabeth, who milked that jealousy/insecurity crap several times for all it was worth.  Mathew Rhys was simply outstanding in every scene with her throughout her run on the show, from the beginning to the very end, from the kama sutra awkward positions and facial comedy, to the scrambling he had to do when they found the pen, to ripping off his wig.  I honestly can't think of a single scene they had together that wasn't nearly fabulous.

I never thought of her that way but wow, you're right. Another funny thing about Martha is I always wondered if they didn't originally intend for Annelise to be the source who was featured more with Philip. I could be wrong, but I seem to remember them saying that if they'd known we'd see Clark so often they'd have gotten him a better wig, as if they didn't think that storyline would necessarily be featured too much. (Meanwhile Scott just had contact lenses.) But it wound up being such a perfect thing where we cared about everything to do with Martha. Her interaction with Gaad and Clark and Amador and Stan and then later Aderholdt. And Elizabeth, too. She was, as you said, an excellent thing for Elizabeth to play off of even when she wasn't there.

She allowed so many characters to look good:

Amador got to hit on her and show that some of his skirt chasing was overcompensation.

Gaad got to react to her betrayal.

Stan got to display his best instincts as a detective.

Aderholdt got to show he trusted Stan's instincts and even do a little undercover work with her.

Martha was a major source of change for Philip in how he related to spying.

Elizabeth got an actual rival that made her have to question her personal qualities. She inspired, whether explicitly or not, some of Elizabeth's best moments with Philip by forcing her to make more of an effort.

Her scenes were often funny, but also often made me hold my breath--the finding of the pen was huge, but I'll never get over how fantastic Clark's de-wigging was. How was that scene so great when the audience already knew what was underneath the wig? Because we (or at least I) were so completely in Martha's pov. It was like a horror movie.

[Umbelina]

15 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

I never thought of her that way but wow, you're right. Another funny thing about Martha is I always wondered if they didn't originally intend for Annelise to be the source who was featured more with Philip. I could be wrong, but I seem to remember them saying that if they'd known we'd see Clark so often they'd have gotten him a better wig, as if they didn't think that storyline would necessarily be featured too much. (Meanwhile Scott just had contact lenses.) But it wound up being such a perfect thing where we cared about everything to do with Martha. Her interaction with Gaad and Clark and Amador and Stan and then later Aderholdt. And Elizabeth, too. She was, as you said, an excellent thing for Elizabeth to play off of even when she wasn't there.

She allowed so many characters to look good:

Amador got to hit on her and show that some of his skirt chasing was overcompensation.

Gaad got to react to her betrayal.

Stan got to display his best instincts as a detective.

Aderholdt got to show he trusted Stan's instincts and even do a little undercover work with her.

Martha was a major source of change for Philip in how he related to spying.

Elizabeth got an actual rival that made her have to question her personal qualities. She inspired, whether explicitly or not, some of Elizabeth's best moments with Philip by forcing her to make more of an effort.

Her scenes were often funny, but also often made me hold my breath--the finding of the pen was huge, but I'll never get over how fantastic Clark's de-wigging was. How was that scene so great when the audience already knew what was underneath the wig? Because we (or at least I) were so completely in Martha's pov. It was like a horror movie.

Yes, and plots revolved around Martha's information as well, and Philip got to know what the FBI was doing, Arkady as well, and she was just a major connection between everyone, Stan and Philip as well.

She was very good, a very skilled actress, and she did "dumpy" quite well, those costume designers really did a number on her body as well as the lighting people, hair and make up people.  I mean in real life, she may not be Keri Russell, but she's not bad looking at all, and would turn some heads, and those dimples we rarely saw were adorable.  Ahem, and those legs which we never really saw!  Not to mention her impressive cleavage.

They did a great job of taking all of that and turning it into this:

that woman had so many dowdy clothes, most in shades of brown, or brownish red or purple.

the most unflattering skirt length and fit possible...

Oh, and check out the placement of this belt! 

but more seriously, yeah, she, the actress, and the character, in many ways kept the separate stories together, even Tatiana and Oleg worked on getting her out, and Arkady.

Also, perhaps one of my favorite scenes ever on the show was when Aderholt discovered the bug in Gaad's pen.  The three guys were great, but Martha is the one who kept me riveted as her terror and panic was barely controlled and she destroyed her recorder in the toilet stall.

Definitely one of my top scenes, possibly number one.

I thought Analise did a lot with her part too, kinda sucks she died so soon, I liked the dilettante bored housewife who spoke French, had a degree in art history, was married to an old fart big shot, fell in fling with Clark and then fell in love with the handsome and moderate Afghani.  Still?  GREAT death, and I loved Elizabeth's "you didn't tell me she looked like THAT!"

15 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

6 hours ago, Umbelina said:

A trained spy will notice and remember faces/clothes/voices on duty or not.  The FBI training wasn't as good as CIA or KGB, but essentially they were taught as Elizabeth taught Hans, always being aware.  It's so instinctual, especially in something like counter intelligence, I'd be shocked if it just turned off because he was at a party.

And Philip was absolutely on duty. The main reason he and Elizabeth are both there together, despite having just separated, is that they know the FBI is going to be there. I just loved that while of course Philip would be looking at everyone else, they gave us that little moment that at the same time he was of course going to try as best he could without being weird about it to not make himself memorable to any FBI agents. I hadn't thought about him knowing who Amador himself was but you're right, he'd have good reason to know exactly who Martha's ex was as well as Stan's partner.

Amador, otoh, does remember Elizabeth but I don't remember him thinking Philip looked familiar.

Yeah, I should have specified, I was talking about Amador there.  I can't remember, was Philip in Clarke disguise when he killed Amador?

Also, am I the only one who is sure (without procedural knowledge here) that since the FBI KNEW Clarke was in disguise, "they are good with disguises" that they wouldn't have their sketch artist do one without glasses (or beard, etc) and with a variety of hair styles/colors?  Because that superintendent guy pretty much nailed Clarke as Philip had they done one without glasses, with dark hair, curly or not.  Ditto on the Elizabeth sketches, and please don't get me started about not one single person every noticing that pronounced mole on her lip!  Seriously guys?

[sistermagpie]

14 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Yeah, I should have specified, I was talking about Amador there.  I can't remember, was Philip in Clarke disguise when he killed Amador?

 

Yup. If he'd seen Philip himself he probably would have recognized him. But I totally believe he didn't make the connection to the bland-looking guy he didn't pay much attention to at Stan's. Especially since Philip as Clark even has a different manner of walking, it always seemed to me. But with Elizabeth he'd looked at her at the party and even in disguise saw something about her he remembered.

At least I don't recall him having any flicker of recognition with Philip. Maybe when I get to that part it'll turn out I'm wrong, but I don't think he did. It's actually kind of good that the show at least a couple of times referred to the fact that Elizabeth's looks would make her stand-out. Philip, imo, always seemed able to change more drastically in costume. (And that's not even getting into the mole on her lip.)

Of course, we're always talking about times they'd be seen more in passing. The costumes were usually more in the hope that a person would focus on some clear difference when describing them. Even with Clark keeping his glasses on as much as possible, I'm sure if Martha looked into Philip's eyes or whatever she'd recognize them as Clark's.

It definitely seems intentionally at this party, though, that Stan is the odd man out when the FBI is planning their kidnapping. He's not motivated at all by FBI agents being murdered. He will be motivated by Amador's death, in part, it seems, because he feels guilty as his partner or something. 

Also, re: Martha's looks, I remember loving the picture of her that came from the super's description. She looks more like a Disney princess. But in Hollywood terms she still easily reads as not pretty enough in the show, especially compared to Sandra and Nina and Elizabeth (and Paige, actually, though it's hard to directly compare a 20-year-old). What helped, imo, was that not only were her clothes frumpy, Martha was clearly going for a prettier look with the long hair etc. She's a romantic who wants to be a romantic heroine while the other women aren't trying half as hard. She's just unlucky in so many ways, but she fights so hard for herself she winds up being their equals as characters.

[Umbelina]

Yes, but the make up, hair, lighting, and costume people really did their job with making her look much frumpier and less attractive than she really is.   That belt right under her boobs, the ugly clothes, with bad cuts, just all of it.

Edited December 11, 2018 by Umbelina

[sistermagpie]

1 hour ago, Umbelina said:

Yes, but the make up, hair, lighting, and costume people really did their job with making her look much frumpier and less attractive than she really is.   That belt right under her boobs, the ugly clothes, with bad cuts, just all of it.

Oh, absolutely. The wardrobe was perfect. It showed something about Martha's personal style but also intentionally undermined her. But in ways that were unobtrusive so she didn't look like a glamorous actress being obviously dressed down to read frumpy. She looked frumpy but also believable and not cartoonish. 

And of course Clark made a perfect match with her with his style. I remember noticing too that in the scene where they first have sex Clark is wearing black briefs and I think Philip wears boxers usually? I totally believed that Philip would think Clark would wear different underwear and that that would help him being Clark. 

[Roseanna]

I find Nina much more interesting than Martha because Nina's motivations are never clear to see and because she refuses to be a victim and fights with those means she has.  Martha is by no means passive (f.ex. she is terrified when the pen is found in Gaad's Office but she acts although entierly on her own) but almost until the end she lets herself to be manipulated by "Clark".

I am interested to know why Martha and Stan are treated so differently. She isn't condemned for not informing on "Clark" although she gets more and more information that he has lied to her: firts when she meets Walter Taffet and realizes Clark isn't working for the FBI, second, when she learns that Gene is dead that suspects that Clark has killed him to protect her, and third in the safe house when she leans that Clark works for the FBI and she has therefore committed treason by helping him.

Instead of going to FBI to make a deal, she every time goes to Clark - and doing that basically decides to believe him and continue. Just like Stan makes the most  important decision when he goes to meet Philip, Elizabeth and Paige alone, more as a betrayed friend than a FBI agent.

In every situations Martha accepts that love is more important to her than anything else. Basically she is like Elizabeth to whom the Cause is most important, only Elizabeth kills herself whereas Martha accepts that Clark kills for her.

Edited December 12, 2018 by Roseanna
adding a word

[Umbelina]

11 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I find Nina much more interesting than Martha because Nina's motivations are never clear to see and because she refuses to be a victim and fights with those means she has.  Martha is by no means passive (f.ex. she is terrified when the pen is found in Gaad's Office but she acts although entierly on her own) but almost until the end she lets herself to be manipulated by "Clark".

Martha let us see into the FBI office in so many ways though, as I said, she was a connector to the various plot lines.  By the end, she had no choice, prison or do what Clark said, leave the country.  Remember she really believes them to be married and deeply in love all through that.   It's a story of attrition.  It's just one small thing at a time, each one building up to wading deeper into treason, until she is in over her head.  Philip manipulated her very skillfully.

I loved Nina too, and she let us in to see more of the relationships and happenings in the KGB office, which I loved.  Nina was a victim too though.  Stan blackmailed her.  Nina, up until the last story-line, manipulated men by using her body and extreme attractiveness to accomplish her goals.  I don't blame her for that at all, but it's an old story.  I preferred Tatiana's story as far as Residentura women, because Tatiana used her brain and worked hard to rise above poverty and into a position of power, almost becoming the first female head of station in the KGB.

Nina's end, while dramatic, both removed a wonderful actress/character from the show, and, to me, was a bit trite.  She, at the end, sacrifices herself for absolutely no logic reason.  She was almost free.  Once free, she could have much more easily let that guy's son know he was alive.  So, dying like that, and endangering her former husband as well?  No.  Nina was smart, she was clever and logical and a force.  That "redemption" was just stupid to me. 

If they wanted to do the quick bullet in the head scene, do it with the Danish girl, and keep Nina alive to meet up with Oleg in Moscow, so his story would have been less boring.

11 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I am interested to know why Martha and Stan are treated so differently. She isn't condemned for not informing on "Clark" although she gets more and more information that he has lied to her: firts when she meets Walter Taffet and realizes Clark isn't working for the FBI, second, when she learns that Gene is dead that suspects that Clark has killed him to protect her, and third in the safe house when she leans that Clark works for the FBI and she has therefore committed treason by helping him.

How are they treated differently?  Aside from the fact that Martha was caught, and Stan was not?  I fully believe Stan WILL be caught and imprisoned.  He will either confess or Paige will expose him under questioning, probably by accident.

11 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Instead of going to FBI to make a deal, she every time goes to Clark - and doing that basically decides to believe him and continue. Just like Stan makes the most  important decision when he goes to meet Philip, Elizabeth and Paige alone, more as a betrayed friend than a FBI agent.

In every situations Martha accepts that love is more important to her than anything else. Basically she is like Elizabeth to whom the Cause is most important, only Elizabeth kills herself whereas Martha accepts that Clark kills for her.

Yes, love and her marriage were more important to Martha, also, by the time she knew he was KGB, she was already in their custody and about to board a plane, assuming her husband was escaping with her when Elizabeth recaptured her.  It was only that very last night that she learned Clark wasn't coming with her.  Also, her alternative was both prison, and undoubtedly exposing her husband to prison or death.

[sistermagpie]

13 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I am interested to know why Martha and Stan are treated so differently. She isn't condemned for not informing on "Clark" although she gets more and more information that he has lied to her: firts when she meets Walter Taffet and realizes Clark isn't working for the FBI, second, when she learns that Gene is dead that suspects that Clark has killed him to protect her, and third in the safe house when she leans that Clark works for the FBI and she has therefore committed treason by helping him.

 

I don't think I do treat them differently. They're both manipulated by the same person, even. Stan makes one decision about Philip when he's fleeing the country--Martha actively works to get him information. If there's a difference between them for me it's just that Stan isn't punished that we see and Martha is. Martha's exile is earned. She makes her choice and lives with it. She even owns her reasons--she knows she's doing it for love.

In fact, I was just watching Safe House and Martha says flat-out to Clark in that early ep that she's in love with him and will do anything for him, she just needs to know that this is real. From the beginning she seems to get that something is off but is willing that early on to say she'll do anything for him.

Watching it now, of course, I realize she's echoing not only Elizabeth in Duty and Honor when she says she wants things to be real, but more chillingly Philip himself when he says he'll do anything for Elizabeth. (He says that same about Paige to Pastor Tim--Philip and Martha are similar in their focus being more on individuals than a cause.)

But of course, when Philip says he'll do anything for Elizabeth, and points out that "he just did" (in Harvest) he then says, "But no more." Philip isn't fully Martha. Of course it's a different situation, but where Martha always wound up simply accepting and submitting to Clark, Philip didn't give himself up so completely. His relationship ultimately was real while Martha's was not. (He has a similar stubborn attachment to Russia, imo, which is real in ways the Cause isn't.)

13 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I find Nina much more interesting than Martha because Nina's motivations are never clear to see and because she refuses to be a victim and fights with those means she has. 

I don't know that I find Martha more interesting than Nina, but maybe part of it is that Nina is from the first a mysterious figure. As you say, we never know her true motivations. She's up to something shady when we meet her, then she's just trying to survive. Nobody can really hold onto her. 

With Martha everyone thought they knew her ending early on. She was a sad sack who'd be killed by Clark like a sick dog in the end. Poor Martha. She kept surprising everyone by not just choosing Clark but surviving. In the end she's kind of the character most like the leads in her "we'll get used to it" attitude.

[Dev F]

On 12/12/2018 at 1:43 PM, Umbelina said:

Nina's end, while dramatic, both removed a wonderful actress/character from the show, and, to me, was a bit trite.  She, at the end, sacrifices herself for absolutely no logic reason.  She was almost free.

But that's exactly the point. Nina was always "almost free." She was always doing just one last job for Stan before the FBI exfiltrated her, or fighting her way out of a compromising position only to end up in another compromising position, or being released from prison only to end up in a slightly different prison. She had no reason to believe her next form of freedom would be any more genuine, so finally she chose to break the cycle of self-preservation and illusory redemption and simply do something decent and selfless for once.

And that echoes what the other characters in the episode are doing as well. "Pastor Tim" is all about people choosing to live with their burden rather than selfishly fighting to be free of it. Heck, the episode is named for the man who's the living embodiment of that choice. And much of the episode is about how attempting to unburden yourself is futile anyway -- Philip trying and failing to pass off the glanders sample to his pilot agent; Philip finally telling Elizabeth about the boy he beat to death as a kid, and realizing that the very act that was supposed to rid him of that threat forever has caused it to haunt him for decades. Which only affirms that Nina was probably right not to believe that she could keep on soldiering on selfishly for a little longer and end up free and clear.

[Roseanna]

On ‎12‎.‎12‎.‎2018 at 9:43 PM, Umbelina said:

I loved Nina too, and she let us in to see more of the relationships and happenings in the KGB office, which I loved.  Nina was a victim too though.  Stan blackmailed her.  Nina, up until the last story-line, manipulated men by using her body and extreme attractiveness to accomplish her goals.  I don't blame her for that at all, but it's an old story.  I preferred Tatiana's story as far as Residentura women, because Tatiana used her brain and worked hard to rise above poverty and into a position of power, almost becoming the first female head of station in the KGB.

Nina's end, while dramatic, both removed a wonderful actress/character from the show, and, to me, was a bit trite.  She, at the end, sacrifices herself for absolutely no logic reason.  She was almost free.  Once free, she could have much more easily let that guy's son know he was alive.  So, dying like that, and endangering her former husband as well?  No.  Nina was smart, she was clever and logical and a force.  That "redemption" was just stupid to me. 

If they wanted to do the quick bullet in the head scene, do it with the Danish girl, and keep Nina alive to meet up with Oleg in Moscow, so his story would have been less boring.

 

4 hours ago, Dev F said:

But that's exactly the point. Nina was always "almost free." She was always doing just one last job for Stan before the FBI exfiltrated her, or fighting her way out of a compromising position only to end up in another compromising position, or being released from prison only to end up in a slightly different prison. She had no reason to believe her next form of freedom would be any more genuine, so finally she chose to break the cycle of self-preservation and illusory redemption and simply do something decent and selfless for once.

And that echoes what the other characters in the episode are doing as well. "Pastor Tim" is all about people choosing to live with their burden rather than selfishly fighting to be free of it. Heck, the episode is named for the man who's the living embodiment of that choice. And much of the episode is about how attempting to unburden yourself is futile anyway -- Philip trying and failing to pass off the glanders sample to his pilot agent; Philip finally telling Elizabeth about the boy he beat to death as a kid, and realizing that the very act that was supposed to rid him of that threat forever has caused it to haunt him for decades. Which only affirms that Nina was probably right not to believe that she could keep on soldiering on selfishly for a little longer and end up free and clear.

I agree with Dev.

Nina could only become nominally free. KGB could always blackmail herm f.ex. by threatening to expose to those closest and dearest to her what she had done.  

Besides, Nina's final choice to suffer was very Russian - from early martyrs as Boris and Gleb and "fools for Christ" to Dostoyevsky and Solzhenitsyn.  

[Roseanna]

@Umbelina, rewatching I realized that there is a lot of truth in your earlier statement that "Oleg wants to be a hero".  

When Oleg is presented, he seems to be a carefree quy who has grown up with all priviledges of the Soviet nomenklatura and now fully enjoys the Ameican popular culture, also willing to use his father's connections to get classified information about Nina's operation for idle curiosity although he then uses the information to blackmail Stan. But then he confesses that he wants to do "something big" for his country on his own, without his father's connections, which wouldn't have been impossible if he had stayed at home. And in this first operation where his aim is to steal the American technology, he is by no means unwilling to use "dirty means", although Arkady and Philip actually arrange Anton's kidnapping to the USSR.

All remember how the fate of Nina changes Oleg's priorities, so I don't report that. Instead, I want to stress on the importat influence of Oleg's father. He regularly underestimates Oleg: he is no match for his younger brother who fights and dies in Afghanistan and he enjoys too much the American luxuries, instead of staying at home to comfort his devasted mother. And of course the father has fought in the war and therefore he for ever belongs to "the greatest generation" against whom the younger people in the Soviet Union can't rebel.

Oleg's first heroic deed is secret, but in S6 he had a personal motive: he wants to make a heroic deed that can make his father finally respect him, although in the end his father would have rather have his only living son safely at home.  

[Roseanna]

On ‎12‎.‎12‎.‎2018 at 9:43 PM, Umbelina said:

I preferred Tatiana's story as far as Residentura women, because Tatiana used her brain and worked hard to rise above poverty and into a position of power, almost becoming the first female head of station in the KGB.

To me, the problem with Tatiana as a character is that she has no conflicting values and therefore doesn't have to make any choices between them, unlike Oleg, Nina, Stan, Philip and even Elizabeth. Even Claudia and especially Gabriel have their doubts, although they don't tell them to P&E but only to themselves. But Tatiana is only "what you see is what what you get", just like Dennis A. - and  therefore both have only supporting roles, without any story of their own.    

[Umbelina]

7 hours ago, Roseanna said:

To me, the problem with Tatiana as a character is that she has no conflicting values and therefore doesn't have to make any choices between them, unlike Oleg, Nina, Stan, Philip and even Elizabeth. Even Claudia and especially Gabriel have their doubts, although they don't tell them to P&E but only to themselves. But Tatiana is only "what you see is what what you get", just like Dennis A. - and  therefore both have only supporting roles, without any story of their own.    

We had just begun to know Tatiana though, then the show dumped the entire Residentura story-line.  While Nina had many seasons to develop as a more complicated character.  What I was trying to say is that I would have enjoyed more of Tatitana's story, I wish we had known more about her, her death would have mattered more.  I think all the pieces were there for her to be very interesting, and what little we saw?  Was.

9 hours ago, Roseanna said:

On 12/12/2018 at 11:43 AM, Umbelina said:

Nina's end, while dramatic, both removed a wonderful actress/character from the show, and, to me, was a bit trite.  She, at the end, sacrifices herself for absolutely no logic reason.  She was almost free.  Once free, she could have much more easily let that guy's son know he was alive.  So, dying like that, and endangering her former husband as well?  No.  Nina was smart, she was clever and logical and a force.  That "redemption" was just stupid to me. 

If they wanted to do the quick bullet in the head scene, do it with the Danish girl, and keep Nina alive to meet up with Oleg in Moscow, so his story would have been less boring.

 

14 hours ago, Dev F said:

But that's exactly the point. Nina was always "almost free." She was always doing just one last job for Stan before the FBI exfiltrated her, or fighting her way out of a compromising position only to end up in another compromising position, or being released from prison only to end up in a slightly different prison. She had no reason to believe her next form of freedom would be any more genuine, so finally she chose to break the cycle of self-preservation and illusory redemption and simply do something decent and selfless for once.

And that echoes what the other characters in the episode are doing as well. "Pastor Tim" is all about people choosing to live with their burden rather than selfishly fighting to be free of it. Heck, the episode is named for the man who's the living embodiment of that choice. And much of the episode is about how attempting to unburden yourself is futile anyway -- Philip trying and failing to pass off the glanders sample to his pilot agent; Philip finally telling Elizabeth about the boy he beat to death as a kid, and realizing that the very act that was supposed to rid him of that threat forever has caused it to haunt him for decades. Which only affirms that Nina was probably right not to believe that she could keep on soldiering on selfishly for a little longer and end up free and clear.

Very good points @Dev F, and I don't disagree with you that much.

You did leave out the part I bolded up there though, and that, her wanting to selflessly let Anton know his son knew he wasn't dead, didn't voluntarily leave, etc?  Was blown by her actions.  His kid still doesn't know, and her ex husband was also put in jeopardy. 

Of course Nina would always be trapped, almost every citizen in the USSR would be trapped though, she would NOT be that different.  Sure, they might want her to do more jobs for them, but who in Russia chose their jobs?  No one. 

My point is, she would have been out of prison completely, and with her KGB skills, could have let Anton's son know, and it probably wouldn't take that long.  Also, she could have had a life, a family, the children she talked about with the Danish girl, she could have done and lived much as most of Russia lived. 

That's why I didn't buy it, it simply was a rash and completely illogical move, and Nina was many things, but not stupid.  She was about to be released, after that?  Very soon the whole world would have opened up, and though she did not know it, she could have left the (former) USSR and lived anywhere, chosen her life.  People live through much worse because they have hope, and Nina had certainly not lost hope, her final dreams were ridiculously hopeful. 

Also, I was trying to point out that most of the cast was jettisoned before season 5 began, and I still think/feel that was a huge mistake.  Of all of them?  Nina was the most logical to die, but not quite in such a stupid way.

[sistermagpie]

14 hours ago, Dev F said:

But that's exactly the point. Nina was always "almost free." She was always doing just one last job for Stan before the FBI exfiltrated her, or fighting her way out of a compromising position only to end up in another compromising position, or being released from prison only to end up in a slightly different prison. She had no reason to believe her next form of freedom would be any more genuine, so finally she chose to break the cycle of self-preservation and illusory redemption and simply do something decent and selfless for once.

 

That's exactly what I saw her doing. She stopped choosing her actions based on what would keep her alive a little longer and acted based on the person she wanted to be. She did something she felt proud of as a person. In a blackly comic way it *did* free her in that it got her killed, but I think part of the meaning of her dream is that she felt something like freedom beforehand.

This also makes me think how in a later episode we get some of the fallout to this when Elizabeth goes to EST herself and specifically hears the guy accuse her of "loving her cage." That seems even more resonant given the story in S6 where Elizabeth and Claudia appear to be potentially prolonging the Cold War in the name of fighting for peace for the USSR. They would always prefer the perfect peace that was always just out of reach to an imperfect agreement.

Now I also can't help but think of Philip and even Oleg in S6 as well. They both tried to just say "this has nothing to do with me" but really felt that it did. Trying to pass off the Glanders doesn't work and eventually you're sitting in quarantine watching Gabriel and Elizabeth (you think) potentially die.

I had never thought of that theme in Pastor Tim--that's awesome!

21 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

That's why I didn't buy it, it simply was a rash and completely illogical move, and Nina was many things, but not stupid.  She was about to be released, after that?  Very soon the whole world would have opened up, and though she did not know it, she could have left the (former) USSR and lived anywhere, chosen her life.  People live through much worse because they have hope, and Nina had certainly not lost hope, her final dreams were ridiculously hopeful. 

 

But doesn't her action kind of mirror her decision to confess to Arkady? I mean, when she did that she was "this close" to being free in the US. That is, she had good reason to think that Stan was honestly trying to get her out and confessing being a traitor didn't make her any safer. Had she kept her mouth shut about what Stan said in The Colonel he quite possibly would gotten her spirited away.

I didn't get the impression that her motivations came from thinking that Stan was a liar and therefore he was never really going to let her go (although that would be a perfectly logical idea--as Gaad says, the correct time to ex-filtrate a source is never). It felt to me like she was doing something similar, making a choice based on who she preferred to be--even though that choice ultimately led her to her death. 

I thought Anton was a similar situation. 

[Umbelina]

11 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

That's exactly what I saw her doing. She stopped choosing her actions based on what would keep her alive a little longer and acted based on the person she wanted to be. She did something she felt proud of as a person. In a blackly comic way it *did* free her in that it got her killed, but I think part of the meaning of her dream is that she felt something like freedom beforehand.

This also makes me think how in a later episode we get some of the fallout to this when Elizabeth goes to EST herself and specifically hears the guy accuse her of "loving her cage." That seems even more resonant given the story in S6 where Elizabeth and Claudia appear to be potentially prolonging the Cold War in the name of fighting for peace for the USSR. They would always prefer the perfect peace that was always just out of reach to an imperfect agreement.

Now I also can't help but think of Philip and even Oleg in S6 as well. They both tried to just say "this has nothing to do with me" but really felt that it did. Trying to pass off the Glanders doesn't work and eventually you're sitting in quarantine watching Gabriel and Elizabeth (you think) potentially die.

I had never thought of that theme in Pastor Tim--that's awesome!

But doesn't her action kind of mirror her decision to confess to Arkady? I mean, when she did that she was "this close" to being free in the US. That is, she had good reason to think that Stan was honestly trying to get her out and confessing being a traitor didn't make her any safer. Had she kept her mouth shut about what Stan said in The Colonel he quite possibly would gotten her spirited away.

I didn't get the impression that her motivations came from thinking that Stan was a liar and therefore he was never really going to let her go (although that would be a perfectly logical idea--as Gaad says, the correct time to ex-filtrate a source is never). It felt to me like she was doing something similar, making a choice based on who she preferred to be--even though that choice ultimately led her to her death. 

I thought Anton was a similar situation. 

Two things prompted Nina's confession to Arkady.

1.  Vlad, a pretty innocent boy, who wanted to be a doctor to save people and didn't want to be in the KGB but was forced to be, was brutally murdered by Stan, her blackmailer/lover, who then lied to her about it.  She was very close to Vlad, and thought of him as a baby brother, she cared about him.

2.  Arkady promoted her and gave her that medal.

That combination, along with Stan lying to her, and thus, no longer being trustworthy, as well as her obvious lack of trust in the FBI, and people above Stan's level who would actually make the call about her possible relocation prompted that decision to confess.  I'm sure a third reason was her loyalty to her country and coworkers.

My point is, she wanted to let Anton's son know he was alive, for Anton, and yes, a kind of redemption.  The part I question is that she not only endangered another innocent, her former husband who still loved her, her plan was stupid, and would not, and did not work.  OF COURSE that room was bugged, and OF COURSE she would have known that, she's a frickin' KGB agent with enough intelligence and obviously performance to be assigned to the USA, the prime assignment for any KGB officer. 

That's why I didn't buy it, and because of her pretty idiotic plan, she did nothing for Anton at all, which was, I believe the whole point? 

The fact that she was about to be released, and then, with a bit of time, could have easily arranged to notify that kid, one way or another?  Compounds it.  I never thought Nina was stupid.  So, I didn't buy it, dramatic as interesting as it was, in the end, it was just part of the "fire half the cast" plan.

[sistermagpie]

27 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

Vlad, a pretty innocent boy, who wanted to be a doctor to save people and didn't want to be in the KGB but was forced to be, was brutally murdered by Stan, her blackmailer/lover, who then lied to her about it.  She was very close to Vlad, and thought of him as a baby brother, she cared about him.

2.  Arkady promoted her and gave her that medal.

Right, but both of these things are emotional and about Nina putting her personal values above her safety, even though she was potentially making a suicidal move. Even if she has no good reason to trust the FBI, she had just as good a reason to think the KGB would punish her, which they did. She actually stood a better chance with the FBI in a lot of ways. But she really wanted to be a loyal Russian rather than a living turncoat.

But you do make a very good point about her gesture being futile in that she's not actually able to make the gesture she's making a show of making and in fact is probably dragging her ex-husband into trouble with her by doing it. I don't doubt Nina having this impulse at all, but the impulse isn't the same thing as the practical thing she's doing. It's one of those things where the emotions of it make sense to me rather than the technical details when I think about it, which is unfortunate because the stories that really work are the ones that fire on all the cylinders at once. 

Like with Martha, imo.

[Umbelina]

Yes, emotionally it worked.

I just have a hard time being emotional when absolutely no logic is included, and add risking her husbands life and liberty as well?  In the end, it did not ring true to me.

I don't disagree with either you or DevF, I'm perhaps being overly critical, because I am so very dissatisfied with the end of the show, and even more so with all of season 5, at least 6 was fun to watch...  I'm also thinking more about the series as a whole right now.  I don't understand, taking a really remarkable cast, and dumping so many of them at once.  I don't have a problem with Nina being shot either, she was the most logical to kill, her entire life was leading to that.  It's just the WAY they did it that did not ring true to me.  I don't think of Nina as suicidal, or illogical, or willing to risk her husband for a relative stranger, but most of all, if she really wanted to do this one last GOOD thing, even if it ended her life? 

Then let her be smart enough to at least do that one last good thing.  I get it's more melancholy that it failed, but I think that's a cheap trick, and more and more, I feel the writers used way too many cheap tricks as the show wound down.  Completely dark screen in the warehouse, just because, as they said, "no one else ever did that!"  The endless hole digging.  Adding so very many brutal murders in the final season, including Stan's agents and fellow FBI officers right before Stan lets them go.  Fucking Renee, oooooohhhh, isn't that edgy, never answer it, or a damn thing about what will become of the characters. 

I'm more critical because of all of that crap, and I am aware of that.\

If the show had ended beautifully or tragically or in any way that provided at least a few answers about what would become of all those characters we cared about for years?  Would Nina's illogical and pointless death have bothered me less?  If they hadn't killed off or removed half the cast by the end of season 4, and it all worked out very well for story/interest anyway, would Nina's ineffectual attempt at redeeming herself have been less annoying? 

Not really on that one, but certainly on everything else.  I was this bothered at the time that scene aired if I recall correctly.  Not only did I adore the whole show, season 4 was my favorite season, but yeah, I was bothered for the wrong reasons about Nina's end.

[Roseanna]

12 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Of course Nina would always be trapped, almost every citizen in the USSR would be trapped though, she would NOT be that different.  Sure, they might want her to do more jobs for them, but who in Russia chose their jobs?  No one. 

My point is, she would have been out of prison completely, and with her KGB skills, could have let Anton's son know, and it probably wouldn't take that long.  Also, she could have had a life, a family, the children she talked about with the Danish girl, she could have done and lived much as most of Russia lived. 

That's why I didn't buy it, it simply was a rash and completely illogical move, and Nina was many things, but not stupid.  She was about to be released, after that?  Very soon the whole world would have opened up, and though she did not know it, she could have left the (former) USSR and lived anywhere, chosen her life.  People live through much worse because they have hope, and Nina had certainly not lost hope, her final dreams were ridiculously hopeful. 

Also, I was trying to point out that most of the cast was jettisoned before season 5 began, and I still think/feel that was a huge mistake.  Of all of them?  Nina was the most logical to die, but not quite in such a stupid way.

Nina's situation was essentially different than most Soviet citizens. It was no more Stalin's time: people must conform in public but in private, with relatives and friends, they could spoke freely. That's why it's so frustrating to se Oleg just walking the dark streets and have no other contacts than his parents and collegues, when the Russians were famous for their long discussions around the kitchen table.   

But the KGB had a damning file on Nina. How could see ever have a family? Who would marry a woman, however beautiful, who had been condemned for treason even if she had got amnesty? And if some man would, the KGB could blackmail her: if you don't do as we order, we show your new husband what a slut you were in the US! 

10 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Yes, emotionally it worked.

I just have a hard time being emotional when absolutely no logic is included, and add risking her husbands life and liberty as well?  In the end, it did not ring true to me.

I agree with you that it wasn't logical, but such decions rarely are logical even irl. They aren't made in the head but in the heart.

Also, history shows that one can never know for sure beforehand if something is stupid or not. Almost nobody, even among the Bolsheviks, foretold that the October coup would succeed. According to the Marxist theory, the revolution that was supposed to be world-wide should have begin in some industrialized country, f.ex. Germany, not in the backward Russia. But Lenin said something like that: let's try - then we see, if it succeeds or not.    

 

[Roseanna]

Rewatching, I see the meeting with two muggers at the parking lot was shown to be as a turning point for Paige. Because of that, she began to fear for her safety and asked her mother to teach her self-defence. That gave Elizabeth a chance to become close to her daughter which she wouldn't otherwise had. In one of their discussions where Paige asks if she will ever feel safe and Elizabeth tells her about her rape and that when she learnt fighting well enough, she knew that nobody could ever harm her. That was of course a lie for emotionally Elizabeth was damaged and unable to trust men until Philip healed her somewhat, but evidently Paige believed it.

In S6, Paige insists that spying makes her feel superior compared with her fellow-students who she thinks are childish (when in fact she herself is, depending on her mother and Claudia).

I think that the motives, especially the second one the writers gave to Paige could be well enough to explain why some other teenager would want to become a spy - but Paige simply isn't believable.  

[Umbelina]

9 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Rewatching, I see the meeting with two muggers at the parking lot was shown to be as a turning point for Paige. Because of that, she began to fear for her safety and asked her mother to teach her self-defence. That gave Elizabeth a chance to become close to her daughter which she wouldn't otherwise had. In one of their discussions where Paige asks if she will ever feel safe and Elizabeth tells her about her rape and that when she learnt fighting well enough, she knew that nobody could ever harm her. That was of course a lie for emotionally Elizabeth was damaged and unable to trust men until Philip healed her somewhat, but evidently Paige believed it.

Honestly, I think it was Gregory that healed her from the rape.  She was with him for at least 12 years.  Her relationship with Philip was not loving or romantic, she had sex with him to have the child the KGB ordered her to have.  "I'm ready." was the least romantic sex I've ever seen.   Her attraction/interest romantically in Philip didn't begin until he killed Timochev in the first episode.

I'm sure it was traumatizing to see a man bleeding out from a slit throat in the street, not to mention seeing your mother go into killing machine mode.  The following scenes were OK, but I think they could have been outstanding.  I'm not blaming Holly Taylor for this one, I felt the writing of the aftermath was a bit weak, and as you say, it was all a ploy to compel Paige into being closer to Elizabeth and interested in fighting...all to lead to the KGB.

10 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I agree with you that it wasn't logical, but such decions rarely are logical even irl. They aren't made in the head but in the heart.

Also, history shows that one can never know for sure beforehand if something is stupid or not.

I understand what you are saying, but Nina was no innocent, she was well aware of the KGB, and what could happen to prisoners.  She wasn't the dutch girl.  She knew she would be (at least possibly) endangering her husband's life and liberty.  She knew this could get her killed, and void her plea agreement for imminent release. 

I think we are supposed to think the guilt of all of her sins compelled her to a redemption of the soul, but why would an atheist be interested in the soul or afterlife?  Aside from that?  Her "sins" were understandable and not really evil.  She was sending money home via contraband to HELP her family.  She was caught and blackmailed.  She was angry at her blackmailer for murdering innocent Vlad, someone she cared for, as a substitute little brother.  She changed course and chose loyalty to her government, who then placed an insurmountable challenge on her.  Get an FBI agent to betray his country in a way that would have severe and devastating consequences to his country.  When that failed, in spite of doing everything her country asked of her (another "redemption") she again did as her country ordered, got the dutch girl to confess, and got another assignment, not much different from normal KGB work, to get Anton to produce.

She was trapped no matter what she did, from the moment Stan saw her sending money home. 

She essentially committed suicide right before release, and didn't even accomplish her goal for taking such a risk.  Anton's kid still thinks he's dead or that he deserted him. 

It's impossible for me to believe that Nina didn't know that when she was released, which would be very soon, she could then arrange a smarter way to let Anton's kid know he was alive and had been abducted.   Nina "finding God" or whatever that was, caring about her soul, when she, above all others, knew that her intentions had not been evil when she broke the law and tried to help her family survive in the USSR, don't add up for me.  Perhaps if they had shown guilt for the Dutch girl's death/betrayal?  They didn't, and Anton was living relatively well, if apart from his family, he wasn't in mortal danger.

Hell, she could have just told Oleg, and he could pass the word along.

9 hours ago, Roseanna said:

In S6, Paige insists that spying makes her feel superior compared with her fellow-students who she thinks are childish (when in fact she herself is, depending on her mother and Claudia).

I think that the motives, especially the second one the writers gave to Paige could be well enough to explain why some other teenager would want to become a spy - but Paige simply isn't believable.

No, she isn't.  I agree.

The time jump was designed to cover all the illogical stuff in Paige's story, but it didn't work, partly because of all the murders she assisted as an accessory in season 6.  I'm supposed to believe that a college student in DC never opened a newspaper and noticed that so many had died when she was around?  The warehouse, the sailor, etc?  I'm supposed to believe that Paige did absolutely no independent research on the KGB or the current state of the USSR? 

Please...

Edited December 15, 2018 by Umbelina

[Roseanna]

1 hour ago, Umbelina said:

I understand what you are saying, but Nina was no innocent, she was well aware of the KGB, and what could happen to prisoners.  She wasn't the dutch girl.  She knew she would be (at least possibly) endangering her husband's life and liberty.  She knew this could get her killed, and void her plea agreement for imminent release. 

I think we are supposed to think the guilt of all of her sins compelled her to a redemption of the soul, but why would an atheist be interested in the soul or afterlife?  Aside from that?  Her "sins" were understandable and not really evil.  She was sending money home via contraband to HELP her family.  She was caught and blackmailed.  She was angry at her blackmailer for murdering innocent Vlad, someone she cared for, as a substitute little brother.  She changed course and chose loyalty to her government, who then placed an insurmountable challenge on her.  Get an FBI agent to betray his country in a way that would have severe and devastating consequences to his country.  When that failed, in spite of doing everything her country asked of her (another "redemption") she again did as her country ordered, got the dutch girl to confess, and got another assignment, not much different from normal KGB work, to get Anton to produce.

She was trapped no matter what she did, from the moment Stan saw her sending money home. 

She essentially committed suicide right before release, and didn't even accomplish her goal for taking such a risk.  Anton's kid still thinks he's dead or that he deserted him. 

It's impossible for me to believe that Nina didn't know that when she was released, which would be very soon, she could then arrange a smarter way to let Anton's kid know he was alive and had been abducted.   Nina "finding God" or whatever that was, caring about her soul, when she, above all others, knew that her intentions had not been evil when she broke the law and tried to help her family survive in the USSR, don't add up for me.  Perhaps if they had shown guilt for the Dutch girl's death/betrayal?  They didn't, and Anton was living relatively well, if apart from his family, he wasn't in mortal danger.

Hell, she could have just told Oleg, and he could pass the word along.

I agree that Nina did wrong to endanger her husband. 

Although informing on the Dutch girl was a normal KGB practice, from the prisoners' POV it was evil. To me, Nina's guilt feelings were obvious with the different manner she treated Anton. 

It's interesting that Nina dreamed of Stan, not Oleg, before her execution. Did she still have feelings towards Stan although she turned against him? Arkady told Oleg that Nina didn't report all meetings.   

[sistermagpie]

11 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Rewatching, I see the meeting with two muggers at the parking lot was shown to be as a turning point for Paige. Because of that, she began to fear for her safety and asked her mother to teach her self-defence. That gave Elizabeth a chance to become close to her daughter which she wouldn't otherwise had. In one of their discussions where Paige asks if she will ever feel safe and Elizabeth tells her about her rape and that when she learnt fighting well enough, she knew that nobody could ever harm her. That was of course a lie for emotionally Elizabeth was damaged and unable to trust men until Philip healed her somewhat, but evidently Paige believed it.

In S6, Paige insists that spying makes her feel superior compared with her fellow-students who she thinks are childish (when in fact she herself is, depending on her mother and Claudia).

I think that the motives, especially the second one the writers gave to Paige could be well enough to explain why some other teenager would want to become a spy - but Paige simply isn't believable.  

Totally agree. There's even the scene where her parents get rid of Pastor Tim and she feels better because they were powerful enough to make him disappear, basically. 

I'm also keeping a lookout on rewatch for some passive-aggression on her part too. I feel like on some level, among other things, she's making a show of saying that this is all there is for her. It's not the only thing because I agree that feeling "safe" through Elizabeth's lessons is part of it, but it's probably complicated. And it's not entirely working. Paige never actually faces a dangerous situation with someone really trying to hurt her. That's maybe why Philip's lesson is important, but we never see any fallout from that at all. 

 

1 hour ago, Umbelina said:

Honestly, I think it was Gregory that healed her from the rape.  She was with him for at least 12 years.  Her relationship with Philip was not loving or romantic, she had sex with him to have the child the KGB ordered her to have.  "I'm ready." was the least romantic sex I've ever seen.   Her attraction/interest romantically in Philip didn't begin until he killed Timochev in the first episode.

I think there's different levels to it. Gregory was the first person she had sex with just because she wanted to, probably, and he was obviously a big part of her being able to have sex as herself and be in love. That's a big thing. Though I think having Philip as a partner was probably helpful to that as well, because even if she wasn't interested in him romantically, she came to rely on him over the years too, to the point where she broke up with Gregory and switched to him. I think what he represented was a different level. She herself says to Brad that she had dealt with her rape by not feeling for a long time and while Gregory opens up feelings in her I don't think she's dealing with a lot of other feelings regarding not just the rape but everything else until later. Gregory and she bonded over the Cause being most important.

1 hour ago, Umbelina said:

I'm sure it was traumatizing to see a man bleeding out from a slit throat in the street, not to mention seeing your mother go into killing machine mode.  The following scenes were OK, but I think they could have been outstanding.  I'm not blaming Holly Taylor for this one, I felt the writing of the aftermath was a bit weak, and as you say, it was all a ploy to compel Paige into being closer to Elizabeth and interested in fighting...all to lead to the KGB.

Yup, and like I said, I think part of this is passive-aggression. Like showing her parents the diary about how she's so messed up. She rejected Philip's suggestion that she didn't have to be and decided to be "messed up" completely and also safe. Even though she herself admits she has trouble sleeping after a mission where she just sits in a car. Her illusions of not actually being strong or mature (in fact she was being manipulated like a child) were fake, but they were never challenged because she never left her little world. The first time she was actually faced with something like a headline was when she heard about Jackson.

1 hour ago, Umbelina said:

I think we are supposed to think the guilt of all of her sins compelled her to a redemption of the soul, but why would an atheist be interested in the soul or afterlife?  Aside from that?  Her "sins" were understandable and not really evil. 

Were we supposed to think that? I never saw Nina as being that motivated by redemption. I think she felt guilty for some things, but I saw her choice as more about rebellion than redemption. I think she felt bad for her fellow prisoner above all else. I mean, there was guilty but I didn't think she was sacrificing herself in a Christian-y sense.

Oh, and just as an aside, I never thought Nina was that close to Vlad. Not enough to think of him as a little brother. But she did have a soft spot for him as a vulnerable guy who liked her. Somebody's little brother, at least.

4 minutes ago, Roseanna said:

It's interesting that Nina dreamed of Stan, not Oleg, before her execution. Did she still have feelings towards Stan although she turned against him? Arkady told Oleg that Nina didn't report all meetings.   

I thought it represented Stan as a hope she would be free. She sees him and associates him with that and then, iirc, he says he's sorry. Because she's not really being freed and she knows it. He was a false dream of a white knight.

[Umbelina]

6 minutes ago, Roseanna said:

I agree that Nina did wrong to endanger her husband. 

Although informing on the Dutch girl was a normal KGB practice, from the prisoners' POV it was evil. To me, Nina's guilt feelings were obvious with the different manner she treated Anton. 

It's interesting that Nina dreamed of Stan, not Oleg, before her execution. Did she still have feelings towards Stan although she turned against him? Arkady told Oleg that Nina didn't report all meetings.   

I always thought she had some feelings for Stan, but at the same time, she told Oleg's dad to tell Oleg that she never "pretended" with Oleg.\

I think before Stan killed Vlad, "pretending" became relatively easy for her, Stan obviously adored her, and being loved is seductive, and he genuinely cared about her safety as well, and eventual escape from the KGB.

Maybe she "pretended" into almost believing she cared for Stan?  Method acting.

[Roseanna]

On ‎12‎.‎12‎.‎2018 at 9:43 PM, Umbelina said:

How are they treated differently?  Aside from the fact that Martha was caught, and Stan was not? 

I mean that Stan is criticized for letting P&E and Paige go, but nobody criticizes Martha for not turning "Clark" to the FBI although she thus let P&E continue spying whereas in the garage scene they were leaving for Russia. Is love a better defense than friendship or is more loyalty towards the organization and country demanded from a man than from a woman?

Martha had at least three chances to behave differently: when she noticed that Walter Taffet wasn't "Clark", when she learned that Gene had been killed to protect her, and when she fled from the safe house knowing "Clark" worked for the KGB. 

Of course Martha's story is perfect just as it is. Her character was her destiny.

[Umbelina]

4 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

Quote

I think we are supposed to think the guilt of all of her sins compelled her to a redemption of the soul, but why would an atheist be interested in the soul or afterlife?  Aside from that?  Her "sins" were understandable and not really evil. 

Were we supposed to think that? I never saw Nina as being that motivated by redemption. I think she felt guilty for some things, but I saw her choice as more about rebellion than redemption. I think she felt bad for her fellow prisoner above all else. I mean, there was guilty but I didn't think she was sacrificing herself in a Christian-y sense.

Oh, and just as an aside, I never thought Nina was that close to Vlad. Not enough to think of him as a little brother. But she did have a soft spot for him as a vulnerable guy who liked her. Somebody's little brother, at least.

1 minute ago, sistermagpie said:

That's maybe why Philip's lesson is important, but we never see any fallout from that at all. 

Format problems.  To the first quote:

No, I think it was redemption, she tells that old former residentura head that she's not that person anymore, or that she's changed.  She sees an all white God like future for her and for Anton in her dream.

Nina told somebody that Vlad was like her little brother, and that she cared for/about him, on screen. 

Second quote:

Fuck them for that, they stopped caring about Philip and about his relationship to Paige, dropping that is unforgivable. 

2 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

I think there's different levels to it. Gregory was the first person she had sex with just because she wanted to, probably, and he was obviously a big part of her being able to have sex as herself and be in love. That's a big thing. Though I think having Philip as a partner was probably helpful to that as well, because even if she wasn't interested in him romantically, she came to rely on him over the years too, to the point where she broke up with Gregory and switched to him. I think what he represented was a different level. She herself says to Brad that she had dealt with her rape by not feeling for a long time and while Gregory opens up feelings in her I don't think she's dealing with a lot of other feelings regarding not just the rape but everything else until later. Gregory and she bonded over the Cause being most important.

She FELL IN LOVE with Gregory, she didn't just have sex with him.  She laughed about her fake relationship with Philip with Gregory.  12 years is a LONG time.  Yes they shared devotion to a cause, but that enhanced their love, it certainly wasn't all there was to it.

After Philip murdered Timochev she saw Philip in a new way, obviously, I agree that she began to fall in love with Philip for all the logical, romantic reasons, including her experiences with him as partner and co-parent.

None of that means she didn't love Gregory first, or that it was less than real love.  People change, and when she saw Philip in a new light, she ended her love affair with Gregory and started one with Philip.

[Umbelina]

13 minutes ago, Roseanna said:

I mean that Stan is criticized for letting P&E and Paige go, but nobody criticizes Martha for not turning "Clark" to the FBI although she thus let P&E continue spying whereas in the garage scene they were leaving for Russia. Is love a better defense than friendship or is more loyalty towards the organization and country demanded from a man than from a woman?

Martha had at least three chances to behave differently: when she noticed that Walter Taffet wasn't "Clark", when she learned that Gene had been killed to protect her, and when she fled from the safe house knowing "Clark" worked for the KGB. 

Of course Martha's story is perfect just as it is. Her character was her destiny.

Martha was a secretary who honestly believed in her vows of marriage.  By the time she knew Philip was KGB and definitely working against her country, it was too late.  She nearly fled when she found out about Taffet, and hell yes, if she was going to betray her husband, it should have been when she found out Gene was murdered, I give her a pass at fleeing the safe house, turning him in was too late then, the FBI was already trying to arrest her.

Martha, unlike Stan, had no spy training, or FBI training really.  She was expertly manipulated by one of the very best KGB agents there was.

So, Martha, all along, faced jail, and possibly accessory to murder charges as well as treason charges, which, she could be executed for by the way.  Until the very last moments she believed she was leaving with her husband.  Is love a better excuse than Stan had?  At least it IS an excuse, vows, marriage, love.  What was Stan's?

Stan, on the other hand, was a full FBI AGENT.  He had seen up close and personal the "work" and the blood of the spies he let go.  He was better trained, and was a law enforcement officer.  Yes, I think he is more culpable than a stupid, besotted woman, for all of those reasons and more.

Edited December 15, 2018 by Umbelina

[Dev F]

2 hours ago, Umbelina said:

I understand what you are saying, but Nina was no innocent, she was well aware of the KGB, and what could happen to prisoners.  She wasn't the dutch girl.  She knew she would be (at least possibly) endangering her husband's life and liberty.  She knew this could get her killed, and void her plea agreement for imminent release. 

But the writers were careful to write the scenario so that the part that was necessitated by her imprisonment actually succeeded. You mentioned something about a bug earlier, but Nina didn't get caught because her conversation with her husband was bugged. He succeeded in smuggling out Anton's letter; they were only caught when the guy charged with getting the note to Anton's family ratted them out.

Thus, it's hard for me to think that the point was that Nina was stupid not to wait till she was released, since the only part of the plan that failed was the part that would've probably remained the same whether Nina was still in custody or not.

[Umbelina]

1 hour ago, Dev F said:

But the writers were careful to write the scenario so that the part that was necessitated by her imprisonment actually succeeded. You mentioned something about a bug earlier, but Nina didn't get caught because her conversation with her husband was bugged. He succeeded in smuggling out Anton's letter; they were only caught when the guy charged with getting the note to Anton's family ratted them out.

Thus, it's hard for me to think that the point was that Nina was stupid not to wait till she was released, since the only part of the plan that failed was the part that would've probably remained the same whether Nina was still in custody or not.

Well, except Nina was a trained spy, and would have a much better chance of accomplishing that goal, since she was trained to do that.  Oh, and her husband would have not been in danger.

Not having that room bugged is honestly, a bizarre thing, what they told her, and what was the truth could be very different things, the bug or even cameras could have been the reason they caught him, but they didn't want to tell her that.  It's a KGB prison for crying out loud, and they did not trust Nina at all.  Don't ask me to believe another unbelievable thing about it all as well.  Assuming the KGB was honest with her?  Assuming they didn't bug and film a room where someone who they absolutely did not trust asked for a bizarre meeting with an ex husband she left?  Ahem.  In reality there is approximately ZERO chance they weren't listening, and they would not tell her that, because they might want to do it again.

Either way, as I said, I get why the writers did it all, and your other points about the similarities were good and well reasoned and appropriate.  I can totally understand why it worked for you and others.  It simply did not work for me, and that was true at the time, when I loved almost everything about the show.

I remember many people hating season two by the way (change of subject here.)  I didn't hate it at all, Larrick was a wonderful foe, and the whole kid murdering his spy family did work for me, raging hormones and a hot KGB agent working her sexual magic on a teenager seemed believable to me.  Many disagreed though.  Looking back, that story was also simply to get Paige spying, and at the last minute, bailing and leaving her mother with no kids.  That SEEMED to be the least popular season up until the disastrous wheat growing and hole digging of season 5.  That Paige story-line is also entirely the reason for season two, for those who hated it.

Edited December 15, 2018 by Umbelina

[sistermagpie]

7 hours ago, Umbelina said:

She FELL IN LOVE with Gregory, she didn't just have sex with him.  She laughed about her fake relationship with Philip with Gregory.  12 years is a LONG time.  Yes they shared devotion to a cause, but that enhanced their love, it certainly wasn't all there was to it.

Yes, that's what I said--or was trying to say. Gregory was healing in that he was the person she could have sex with because she wanted to and the person she loved, which she had never done before. He was the person who taught her she could fall in love at all. I wasn't saying that the devotion to the cause was all there was to the relationship, but that she was in love with him within the structure of the cause. Laughing about her fake relationship with Philip wasn't just amusing, it was the Important Truth that Elizabeth is not a person who loves her husband or her family. That part of her life is simply her cover. None of it is really who she is. When she suggests she might love Philip she must be confused and wrong.

When Elizabeth opens herself to that part of her life--the family life--also being real, that's another stage of development where she's allowing herself to feel and think things she didn't before. Right out of the gate she's having to deal with a ton of shit and her instinct is to want to wish the whole thing away. None of this means that she wasn't in love with Gregory when she was in love with him. Gregory as a real love interest can exist within Philip/Elizabeth. Philip's Elizabeth could love Gregory. Gregory's Elizabeth could not love Philip.

7 hours ago, Dev F said:

But the writers were careful to write the scenario so that the part that was necessitated by her imprisonment actually succeeded. You mentioned something about a bug earlier, but Nina didn't get caught because her conversation with her husband was bugged. He succeeded in smuggling out Anton's letter; they were only caught when the guy charged with getting the note to Anton's family ratted them out.

Thus, it's hard for me to think that the point was that Nina was stupid not to wait till she was released, since the only part of the plan that failed was the part that would've probably remained the same whether Nina was still in custody or not.

Totally did not remember this bit.

 

6 hours ago, Umbelina said:

That SEEMED to be the least popular season up until the disastrous wheat growing and hole digging of season 5.  That Paige story-line is also entirely the reason for season two, for those who hated it.

That's so surprising to me because I loved season 2. Larrick was the only real foe they ever had and he was great, and I thought Jared's story was fantastic (although I think he was too good of an actor given the circumstances, and that ultimately seems to come down to the actual actor not being told what he was playing). The idea of this kid being told behind his parents' back who they are and having to deal with that on his own while he watches them lie to him--I'd almost be surprised if it didn't end in him getting radicalized and murdering everyone.

7 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Nina told somebody that Vlad was like her little brother, and that she cared for/about him, on screen. 

Totally did not remember that quote--but I'm sure I took it to mean the same way I saw it. Nina clearly did care about Vlad in a protective way. I think I just get over-sensitive to people being compared to family because there's always been such a push with some in the audience to try to argue the Jennings family out of existence. So I always want to make a distinction between saying "He's like a little brother to me" in the way Vlad was to Nina vs. "He's like a little brother to me" where you mean the person is actually your family.

7 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I mean that Stan is criticized for letting P&E and Paige go, but nobody criticizes Martha for not turning "Clark" to the FBI although she thus let P&E continue spying whereas in the garage scene they were leaving for Russia. Is love a better defense than friendship or is more loyalty towards the organization and country demanded from a man than from a woman?

Martha had at least three chances to behave differently: when she noticed that Walter Taffet wasn't "Clark", when she learned that Gene had been killed to protect her, and when she fled from the safe house knowing "Clark" worked for the KGB. 

Of course Martha's story is perfect just as it is. Her character was her destiny.

Martha had so so many chances. The moment Clark gave her the pen was also, imo, a moment where we saw where Martha's priorities lay.

I would actually add another thing with Stan, which is that I think in that moment he saw letting the Jennings go as just not needing them punished, which is a different situation than Martha. If she had told on Clark, for instance, when he gave her the pen the FBI might have captured 2 or more Illegals who were actively working against the US. When Stan let the Jennings go they were already burnt and on their way out--he gave up anything they might have squeezed out of them, but wasn't stopping their operations. Martha began actively spying for the KGB.

Although I guess we should also note that if Renee is also a spy then Stan actually did get to capture a working spy thanks to the garage scene.

[Umbelina]

1 hour ago, sistermagpie said:

9 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Nina told somebody that Vlad was like her little brother, and that she cared for/about him, on screen. 

Totally did not remember that quote--but I'm sure I took it to mean the same way I saw it. Nina clearly did care about Vlad in a protective way. I think I just get over-sensitive to people being compared to family because there's always been such a push with some in the audience to try to argue the Jennings family out of existence. So I always want to make a distinction between saying "He's like a little brother to me" in the way Vlad was to Nina vs. "He's like a little brother to me" where you mean the person is actually your family.

1 hour ago, sistermagpie said:

 

She said it's not like that, (meaning sexual) he's like a little brother to me, and I think she said like family.  WHO to though?  Maybe another woman at the Residentura, and then after his murder she was more emphatic about how she felt about him.  It was more than Stan losing Amador, whom he barely knew, that's for sure.

1 hour ago, sistermagpie said:

Martha had so so many chances. The moment Clark gave her the pen was also, imo, a moment where we saw where Martha's priorities lay.

She was being expertly handled by a superb KGB spy, and she thought she was married to him.  Hadn't Philip just played her the doctored tape since she actually was saying she didn't want to do any more snooping on her coworkers, she didn't feel right about it,  (even though she still believed Clark's job  was to protect them and the agency.)

1 hour ago, sistermagpie said:

I would actually add another thing with Stan, which is that I think in that moment he saw letting the Jennings go as just not needing them punished, which is a different situation than Martha. If she had told on Clark, for instance, when he gave her the pen the FBI might have captured 2 or more Illegals who were actively working against the US. When Stan let the Jennings go they were already burnt and on their way out--he gave up anything they might have squeezed out of them, but wasn't stopping their operations. Martha began actively spying for the KGB.

There is a ton more the FBI could learn from them, from the operations they were successful at, to cooperating Americans, to what the KGB had in mind next, to possibly trading them for one of their own.  Aside from everything else, in this country Stan purports to hold so dear?  Cops are not judges and juries.  It is not up to him to violate the constitution or his sworn duty and oaths.  He may not have been stopping those twos operations, but he could have stopped others, and future operations and capture people who were betraying their country as well.  He could have closed the books on several cases.  He could have given the families of the FBI officers and all the others Elizabeth and Philip killed justice.  He could have done his duty.

Honestly, Stan deserves to go to jail, which is probably his future anyway.

1 hour ago, sistermagpie said:

Although I guess we should also note that if Renee is also a spy then Stan actually did get to capture a working spy thanks to the garage scene.

Stan's days at the FBI, and possibly as a free man are over.  Either he wisely confesses, or Paige rats him out by mistake.

Edited December 16, 2018 by Umbelina