Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
ElectricBoogaloo

S03.E11: The Book of Dougs

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, RevmodDon said:

It occurred to me this morning that, if Micheal's current theory is correct, every time Chidi blamed almond milk on his failure to make it to the Good Place, he's been a little bit right.

Mind. Blown. And, now I'm wondering if my antipathy towards almond milk actually gets me good points. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Loandbehold said:

Mind. Blown. And, now I'm wondering if my antipathy towards almond milk actually gets me good points. 

How many negative points is participating in the industrial dairy industry? Or the modern plumbing system? Or bottled water?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/10/2019 at 11:04 PM, BoogieBurns said:

Wow, must rewatch now that I realize that political subtlety.

It wasn't exactly subtle. "What kind of place doesn't take regugees?" Aparently the Good Place, as if they had know who the group was, they would have sent them directly to the Bad Place. I don't think they were making the political point they thought they were.

Overall, it was pretty good. I wonder if we ever are going to see the actual Good Place?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/10/2019 at 11:44 PM, tennisgurl said:

Brooklyn 99 AND The Good Place in one night! This is my Good Place!

AND the Orville! I've only caught up now.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, marinw said:

AND the Orville! I've only caught up now.

I keep trying to decide whether or not to check out The Orville. I dont like Seth McFarland, but I love Star Trek. Should I give it a try?!

Michael's theory seems to bring down to both unintended consequences, and lacking context before judgement. Like, for example, a woman buys cheap crappy cheeseburgers from a fast food chain for her and her sons. That chain doesent treat its animals humanely (does eating any meat land you Bad Place points?), has a high carbon footprint, and its CEO is a jerk who wont let his workers unionize and he has cheated on his wife with hookers at company business trips for twenty years. That would land her automatic points deducted. However, WITH context, you would find out that the woman is a single mother whos husband just died, she works two jobs at make ends meet for her two kids, including one that has high medical bills, and when she had to choose between rent and groceries for the night, she choose to pay the rent, and went with the cheap crappy fast food because its what she could afford, and it was near her lower income housing, where most of her food options are crappy fast food places. So its perfectly understandable that she made that choice, and presumably she had no idea about the poor animal conditions and the hooks and the what not. 

Thats also been consistent throughout the show with our cockroaches, who we have seen have made bad choices (or made no choices), but were also products of their messed up environments and the crappy examples their parents set for them. So without context, they're all pretty insufferable, but with context? Personal responsibility is important and all, but they clearly have reasons for why they are the way the are, and are capable of doing better. The whole system is so black and white, and so impossible to operate within, its no wonder no one has been able to get into the good place in hundreds of years! 

Edited by tennisgurl
  • Like 17

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, tennisgurl said:

I keep trying to decide whether or not to check out The Orville. I dont like Seth McFarland, but I love Star Trek. Should I give it a try?!

Watch a few episodes and see if it's for you. I didn't think TGP was for me. I have seldom been so happy to be wrong.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, tennisgurl said:

I keep trying to decide whether or not to check out The Orville. I dont like Seth McFarland, but I love Star Trek. Should I give it a try?!

I would give this a huge MAYBE.  There is a lot of potty humor.  And the show does take  half a season to find itself so it depends on if you mind wasting a few hours on waiting for a show to figure out what it wants to be.  But when it finds its stride it is actually a good fun show. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I'm doing a re-watch from season one due to the show finally airing on free-to-air tv here in the UK, and in the episode I watched this week Eleanor replaced one of her creepy clown pictures with a sexy mailman poster. Callbacks are forking great.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Gulftastic said:

I'm doing a re-watch from season one due to the show finally airing on free-to-air tv here in the UK, and in the episode I watched this week Eleanor replaced one of her creepy clown pictures with a sexy mailman poster. Callbacks are forking great.

Eleanor’s obsession with mailmen is a long running joke.  Which is why I thought it was sweet that Chidi tried to cheer her up/get her horny by wearing a mailman costume.  I also found it funny that he picked the one time it wouldn’t work because she was so freaked out.  

Edited by Chaos Theory · Reason: Seriously my auto correct makes me sound crazy
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

"It smells like frogs."

I love that Chidi was able to identify the (abstract) smell so precisely. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/11/2019 at 1:14 PM, Catfi9ht said:

Why wouldn't The Good Place embrace diversity? Isn't that supposed to be a good thing? I'm not sure how that's a dig against democrats.

Not a dig at all. It's exactly what I expect from this show and The Good Place. Not sure how my wording made it seem out of place. I adore the diversity of this show and of my political party.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I love this show so much. The flaw in the system is exactly what I expected and I love that they found such a simple way to explain it quickly. I can’t wait to see what is going to happen next week. 

On 1/11/2019 at 5:40 AM, Samsnee said:

 

I don't think you not considering repercussions is what is sending you to the bad place. I think the system attaching indirect negatives to your action is.

The logic didn't really work for me. In Michael's example, modern Doug went to the bad place because by picking flowers, he was indirectly contributing to child labor and other bad things. But what about the indirect positive results of his actions? The person receiving the flowers feels better, so then pays it forward to someone else, etc?

Modern Doug only lost 4 points for the flowers so he did get credit for the good. The unintended bad repercussions essentially nullified the good.  The complexity of life combined with the high point total needed to make it into the good place is the problem. 

It reminds of the tests for a geography class I took in college. We were given around 30 terms that were to be matched up with the correct question. Each answer could be used more than once or not at all and each question could have multiple correct answers. The problem was that you lost a point for every correct answer not given and for every incorrect answer given. So it was possible to lose more points then a question was worth. Those tests were so demoralizing because it felt like we were being set up to fail. That’s the same way I feel when I try and judge my actions using the Good Place point system. 

On 1/12/2019 at 10:55 AM, RevmodDon said:

It occurred to me this morning that, if Micheal's current theory is correct, every time Chidi blamed almond milk on his failure to make it to the Good Place, he's been a little bit right.

I love this. The moral of the story so far is that Chidi was right all along.

ETA - If current Chidi is more likely to act decisively does that mean he is actually a worse person now than he was before he met Eleanor? Michael did say that Chidi originally was the closest of the four to actually getting in to the good place. 

It just realized that in order for the Chidi to pass the judges test he needed to act decisively because it was just a hat. But using the point system a hat isn’t just a hat and there is a right choice. It is interesting that the judges standard of what makes a good person is not in alignment with the point system standard. 

I love the depth of this show and the fact that I have complete faith that all of this will be addressed on the show. 

Edited by Dani
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, BoogieBurns said:

Not a dig at all. It's exactly what I expect from this show and The Good Place. Not sure how my wording made it seem out of place. I adore the diversity of this show and of my political party.

Thanks for the clarification. My apologies for misinterpreting your post.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Dani said:

If current Chidi is more likely to act decisively does that mean he is actually a worse person now than he was before he met Eleanor? Michael did say that Chidi originally was the closest of the four to actually getting in to the good place. 

Possible, but I'll still go with his indecisiveness caused problems for friends starting in grade school. He shouldn't be a dictator, but being able to make a moral or even neutral decision in a reasonable amount of time is a good thing worthy of good points. As for Chidi being closest of the four, we have no idea how far away he was. And, being the most goodest of the four before they died in the original time line isn't setting the bar too high. Elinor was pretty much a horrible person, Tahani was incredibly self-absorbed and jealous, and Jason was a criminal, and not even a petty one at that (throwing molotov cocktails [Bortles!], attempting to rob a store, and a 60-member dance combo being just some of the reasons). Granted, parental units did none of the three any favors (we don't know about Chidi's parents).

10 hours ago, Dani said:

It just realized that in order for the Chidi to pass the judges test he needed to act decisively because it was just a hat. But using the point system a hat isn’t just a hat and there is a right choice. It is interesting that the judges standard of what makes a good person is not in alignment with the point system standard. 

I would posit that the hats were exactly the same, except for the color. But, even the dyes used were the exact equivalents in terms of damage to the environment and the ill health caused the workers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/12/2019 at 7:30 PM, tennisgurl said:

Like, for example, a woman buys cheap crappy cheeseburgers from a fast food chain for her and her sons. That chain doesent treat its animals humanely (does eating any meat land you Bad Place points?), has a high carbon footprint, and its CEO is a jerk who wont let his workers unionize and he has cheated on his wife with hookers at company business trips for twenty years.

That seems like an oddly ... specific example?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Loandbehold said:

Possible, but I'll still go with his indecisiveness caused problems for friends starting in grade school. He shouldn't be a dictator, but being able to make a moral or even neutral decision in a reasonable amount of time is a good thing worthy of good points. As for Chidi being closest of the four, we have no idea how far away he was. And, being the most goodest of the four before they died in the original time line isn't setting the bar too high. Elinor was pretty much a horrible person, Tahani was incredibly self-absorbed and jealous, and Jason was a criminal, and not even a petty one at that (throwing molotov cocktails [Bortles!], attempting to rob a store, and a 60-member dance combo being just some of the reasons). Granted, parental units did none of the three any favors (we don't know about Chidi's parents).

I would posit that the hats were exactly the same, except for the color. But, even the dyes used were the exact equivalents in terms of damage to the environment and the ill health caused the workers.

I agree there was no way Chidi was close to getting in to the Good Place either way. I was just thinking that it is interesting that the complexity of the system almost favors Chidi levels of thought before making a decision.

Although Chidi was probably right when he advocated nihilism to his students. 

Ok, I am probably putting way too much thought into a fictional system of judging morality that will probably upended next week anyway. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

Eleanor’s obsession with mailmen is a long running joke.  Which is why I thought it was sweet that Chidi tried to cheer her up/get her horny by wearing a mailman costume. 

See, I totally missed that and don't recall any previous mentions of it before. That really speaks to the pace and content of this show - there's an awful lot to absorb and retain. It's probably the most ambitious sitcom I've ever seen on network TV, that I can think of.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/14/2019 at 1:38 PM, Jack Kerouac said:

That seems like an oddly ... specific example?

That was the level of detail Michael was detailing in the show when he contrasted the flower gifts by the two Dougs.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/11/2019 at 12:14 PM, Catfi9ht said:

Why wouldn't The Good Place embrace diversity? Isn't that supposed to be a good thing? I'm not sure how that's a dig against democrats. I see that more akin to embracing humanity which fits with the NATO/UN analogy about the committee's actions.

 

I didn't take that as a dig -- I did take the white people still being in charge and sending the black guy to run errands as one, though. 

And one that hasn't been mentioned -- the way the GP committee member talked about the demons of the Bad Place. It wasn't a philosophical condemnation, it was a personal attack about them just being awful. Or maybe deplorable. There was an Eagletonian smugness to the way she talked and thought of them, and I see that as analogous to the way a lot of people on the left talk about those on the right. I thought that was him taking a shot at the moral superiority that has been a hallmark of the Democratic party and the aligned "resistence." Not saying they are wrong, but that kind of disdain and condescension has been a large part of the dialogue since 2016, and I think Schurr was getting at least a partial statement in.   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, whiporee said:

I did take the white people still being in charge and sending the black guy to run errands as one, though.

I respectfully disagree. There's nothing in any of the characters' actions or commentaries that would point toward that behavior was a conscious choice by writers.

8 hours ago, whiporee said:

And one that hasn't been mentioned -- the way the GP committee member talked about the demons of the Bad Place. It wasn't a philosophical condemnation, it was a personal attack about them just being awful. Or maybe deplorable. There was an Eagletonian smugness to the way she talked and thought of them, and I see that as analogous to the way a lot of people on the left talk about those on the right. I thought that was him taking a shot at the moral superiority that has been a hallmark of the Democratic party and the aligned "resistence." Not saying they are wrong, but that kind of disdain and condescension has been a large part of the dialogue since 2016, and I think Schurr was getting at least a partial statement in.   

I didn't take the committee's actions or attitudes as smug. If anything, the demons and angels, for lack of better terms, in this show are completely one dimensional. They're "good for the sake of being good" or "bad for the sake of being bad". Michael is the sole exception, which is what makes his journey so extraordinary. Their one dimensional characteristics are emphasized by the fact that they don't espouse any type of morality or philosophy.

One final thought that I'm sure has been pointed out before. The inhabitants of The Bad Place refer to themselves as demons on multiple occasions, but so far, I don't recall the word "angels" being used to describe the folks of The Good Place (or a similar descriptor).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, whiporee said:

There was an Eagletonian smugness to the way she talked

I don't have a dog in this debate but I just loved the Parks and Rec call back!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

In fairness, is it really prejudice if Michael is the SOLE exception to the goodness of demons? And remember, he was NOT that way originally. He's been on a journey.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, whiporee said:

I didn't take that as a dig -- I did take the white people still being in charge and sending the black guy to run errands as one, though. 

And one that hasn't been mentioned -- the way the GP committee member talked about the demons of the Bad Place. It wasn't a philosophical condemnation, it was a personal attack about them just being awful. Or maybe deplorable. There was an Eagletonian smugness to the way she talked and thought of them, and I see that as analogous to the way a lot of people on the left talk about those on the right. I thought that was him taking a shot at the moral superiority that has been a hallmark of the Democratic party and the aligned "resistence." Not saying they are wrong, but that kind of disdain and condescension has been a large part of the dialogue since 2016, and I think Schurr was getting at least a partial statement in.   

The actor who played Kellan is also one of the writers on Brooklyn 99. The running of errands and resigning could have been an inside joke.

The demons talked about the Good Place in the same way. I saw it as a broader statement about the tendency to villainize the opposition. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, Catfi9ht said:

One final thought that I'm sure has been pointed out before. The inhabitants of The Bad Place refer to themselves as demons on multiple occasions, but so far, I don't recall the word "angels" being used to describe the folks of The Good Place (or a similar descriptor).

Why did Gwendolyn notice that the group were all so good-looking?  Should Good Place residents care about such details that don't define a person's value?  Do they care about how they look?  Are those their actual bodies?  Isn't Michael's body not really his body?

Edited by ItCouldBeWorse

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

Why did Gwendolyn notice that the group were all so good-looking?  Should Good Place residents care about such details that don't define a person's value? Do they care about how they look? Are those their actual bodies?  Isn't Michael's body not really his body?

It is possibly she would have considered any group of humans good-looking. In this case, it just so happens that her cheerful evaluation corresponds to conventional standards of beauty.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/16/2019 at 1:56 PM, ItCouldBeWorse said:

Why did Gwendolyn notice that the group were all so good-looking?  Should Good Place residents care about such details that don't define a person's value?  Do they care about how they look?  Are those their actual bodies?  Isn't Michael's body not really his body?

I think she probably thinks everybody everywhere is good looking.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Since they had to go and change the schedule I completely missed this last week and now I can't get the video on NBC's website to work on my computer. :-(

Share this post


Link to post

I have an aversion to pay for free tv. Yeah, they've got a 'free trial' but you'd still need to give them personal info. :-)

Share this post


Link to post

I struggled a little bit with this one. I rarely watch "my" shows with my boyfriend in the room, and this one was definitely the wrong one to watch with someone who doesn't know/get it. Jason was exceptionally dumb. Gwendolyn was a cartoon character. Everything was turned up to 11. I was cringing half the time. I'm so glad Michael finally figured out that the system could be the problem, not intentional rigging by the Bad Place. Now we can move forward.

 

On 1/14/2019 at 11:20 AM, Dani said:

I agree there was no way Chidi was close to getting in to the Good Place either way. I was just thinking that it is interesting that the complexity of the system almost favors Chidi levels of thought before making a decision.

 

The unfairness here is that weighing decisions as thoroughly as Chidi ALSO causes negative unintended consequences! You can't win. (And, literally, no one has in hundreds of years.)

If the Good Place doesn't make decisions for hundreds or even thousands of years, then how do we even have rules about vanity license plates? (Assuming Michael's point system from Ep 1 was real.) Or even sweatshop labor, or greedy CEOs. Who writes / updates the rules? Even if the accountants make the rules, you'd think the GP/BP would have to sign off on new ones. And it's impossible to imagine a system from 200000 years ago could even include some of the things they're being dinged for today. I don't get that.

Edited by snarktini

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, snarktini said:

I struggled a little bit with this one. I rarely watch "my" shows with my boyfriend in the room, and this one was definitely the wrong one to watch with someone who doesn't know/get it. Jason was exceptionally dumb. Gwendolyn was a cartoon character. Everything was turned up to 11. I was cringing half the time. I'm so glad Michael finally figured out that the system could be the problem, not intentional rigging by the Bad Place. Now we can move forward.

 

The unfairness here is that weighing decisions as thoroughly as Chidi ALSO causes negative unintended consequences! You can't win. (And, literally, no one has in hundreds of years.)

If the Good Place doesn't make decisions for hundreds or even thousands of years, then how do we even have rules about vanity license plates? (Assuming Michael's point system from Ep 1 was real.) Or even sweatshop labor, or greedy CEOs. Who writes / updates the rules? Even if the accountants make the rules, you'd think the GP/BP would have to sign off on new ones. And it's impossible to imagine a system from 200000 years ago could even include some of the things they're being dinged for today. I don't get that.

The system spits out the rules to the accountants, like they showed - then the initial person decides a point total, which is reviewed by like a million other accountants.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, bros402 said:

The system spits out the rules to the accountants, like they showed - then the initial person decides a point total, which is reviewed by like a million other accountants.

We saw this? I must have spaced! (Assuming it was this season, I have been watching with more distractions.)

Thanks :)

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, snarktini said:

We saw this? I must have spaced! (Assuming it was this season, I have been watching with more distractions.)

Thanks :)

I believe they said that in the episode before this one? Since there was the guy who was at the weird sex things desk.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×