S03.E05: If You Have Ghosts

[shapeshifter]

36 minutes ago, Gobi said:

2 HOURS AGO, SHAPESHIFTER SAID:

This all fits, but the Vietnam vet-shared experience seems like an additional factor--even if just that Woodard could predict Hays' actions a little more closely.

Could be that Woodard wanted his death to mean something to the man that killed him. He knew that the other officers probably would not be bothered by having killed him. Although, in real life, there are very few people who are not bothered by killing someone.

Care to elaborate on the meaning?

Now I'm thinking that Nic Pizzolatto initially made Hays a Vietnam vet to explore that effect on Hays' personality, and then, later on, when Hays was cast as a black person it added more layers to explore.
So then, making Woodard another Vietnam vet and another minority at least acknowledges within the show the high percentage of non-white 18 and 19 year-old young men (teenagers, really) who were drafted to be cast in the roles of fuel for the meat grinder that was that war.
So, I think maybe Hays and Woodard both being veterans of that war is just a footnote, and, yes, you're right, the real significance in Woodard choosing Hays as his executioner is their shared minority status.

[Milburn Stone]

On 2/3/2019 at 9:51 PM, SHD said:

But she did eventually say "That man pretending to be my father," didn't she?

But maybe she thinks of the DA as "that man pretending to be my father"? (For reasons we don't know yet.)

[SHD]

5 minutes ago, Milburn Stone said:

But maybe she thinks of the DA as "that man pretending to be my father"? (For reasons we don't know yet.)

I thought of that, but the DA was mostly speaking about the case while the man we know as her father was the one making the pleas directly to her on TV. But I agree there's some kind of misdirect here, as there has been with a lot of things already. 

[tennisgurl]

I thought that the scene between Wayne and Roland in the car in the 90s after they talked with the grown up teen was really interesting. Wayne was clearly pissed off and smarting over the grown up teen he messed with in the 80s yelling about he messed him up with his prison rape threats and almost railroading him into confessing to a murder, and throwing in a quick racist comment in there too, but Roland was just not engaging at all, and was just desperately trying to change the subject. Wayne just kept going on and on about what a loser the guy was, and how could this white guy act like HE did something to him that would impact his whole life, and what a little bitch and kids these days etc. and Roland was just so not into it. He didnt tell him lay off or anything, he was just not engaging.

[catsitter]

The record of the fingerprints taken from the toys is missing from the evidence room, but have they still got the actual toys in there?

As for the supposed clue Hays found in Amelia's book, isn't there supposed to be an online discussion group who are obsessed with the case? So wouldn't they have spotted this clue already, or was the note kept secret from the public all this time?

[Milburn Stone]

8 hours ago, SHD said:

I thought of that, but the DA was mostly speaking about the case while the man we know as her father was the one making the pleas directly to her on TV. But I agree there's some kind of misdirect here, as there has been with a lot of things already. 

The following is pure speculation--I know nothing--but I'm going to spoiler-tag it anyway:

Spoiler

The DA is her real father; he raped Lucy while she was in custody on a drunk charge or something (or perhaps it was consensual after they met in a bar). At some point he revealed himself to the girl as her real father--or perhaps he only believes he is! At any rate, Lucy was tired of keeping the secret all these years, since she knew he had something to do with the abduction of the girl and murder of the boy, and so she, Lucy, threatened to reveal the truth. At which point the DA murdered her and made it look like an OD.

[LoveLeigh]

On 2/4/2019 at 9:45 AM, Ottis said:

Wondered the same thing. BTW. I actually find these time lines indulgent. The story would have been tighter real time, IMO.

Did Wayne accidentally shoot his partner in the leg during that shoot out? 

The acting in this series in phenomenal, but the story is very convoluted with too many suspects. Vanity Fair posted an article with much "down the rabbit hole" speculation and it was so over the top with preposterous conclusions I said to myself that if there is truth to any of the article's narrative, this show will go down as the dopiest series ever. 

[Razzberry]

15 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

I thought that the scene between Wayne and Roland in the car in the 90s after they talked with the grown up teen was really interesting. Wayne was clearly pissed off and smarting over the grown up teen he messed with in the 80s yelling about he messed him up with his prison rape threats and almost railroading him into confessing to a murder, and throwing in a quick racist comment in there too, but Roland was just not engaging at all, and was just desperately trying to change the subject. Wayne just kept going on and on about what a loser the guy was, and how could this white guy act like HE did something to him that would impact his whole life, and what a little bitch and kids these days etc. and Roland was just so not into it. He didnt tell him lay off or anything, he was just not engaging.

That was another great but disturbing scene.  I got the feeling Roland was biting his tongue too hard to say anything on that subject.

[scrb]

4 hours ago, DakotaLavender said:

Did Wayne accidentally shoot his partner in the leg during that shoot out? 

No but other cops and then those vigilantes all got killed.

It was probably national or international news because of the level of carnage.

The attorney general, DA and others were probably under intense pressure to "solve" and wrap it up quickly so they pinned it all on Woodard.

[Bannon]

On 2/2/2019 at 8:58 PM, scrb said:

I think Dorff’s big voice from a little man works more effectively with the wig.

The older Roland seems frail but still has the big voice and bravado.  It just seems incongruous.

And man Wayne has a huge chip on his shoulder doesn’t he, in the 90s time line?  A lot of it is having his career derailed for most of the 10 years since the original investigation.  

But he’s rough on Amelia.  Just a very unpleasant person to be around.  He didn’t provide a happier home for his kids than the Purcells did for their kids.

Oh, gosh, to me it is obvious that Wayne is in the bottomless depths of decades long depression, which frequently manifests itself as anger. It started with his awful experience in Vietnam, and just exploded via the Purcell child murder/disappearance, culminating in being forced to kill a fellow Vietnam vet. His untreated  PTSD is so bad it is a wonder that he can function at all by the early 90s. This portrayal, writing and directing, is simply masterful, and Dorff's character matches it.

That last scene, the examination of grief, regret, anger, and loving friendship, is as good as television gets, period. I am stunned at the improvement in the dialogue from the previous two seasons. There are no false notes, no affectations or pretension, from actors or writers. This is really how human beings engage a tragic world. Magnificent.

 

I really hope the writers don't get too caught up in plot convolutions. Yes, there is a mystery to be resolved, but this story is really about something much deeper than that. The more mundane or banal the evil is which lies at heart of the story of the Purcell siblings, the better the more interesting story can be told.

Edited February 6, 2019 by Bannon

[sd dude]

Quote

Also, Woodward was obviously a Native American but it is never inferred or referenced as such

I had the same inference and thought it surprising that it was never referenced in the script, especially when the rednecks were initially accosting him and later when confronting him at his home, it would have seemed natural and unsurprising (though not justifiable) if epithets of one sort or another were tossed around in that context.

What further confused me on the issue (and I could have heard or be remembering wrong), was later after the shooting (at the hospital maybe), I thought Hays referred to Woodard as a "cracker" which I would not think would be an epithet an African American person would target toward someone else who is recognized and understood to be Native American.

[Gobi]

31 minutes ago, sd dude said:

I had the same inference and thought it surprising that it was never referenced in the script, especially when the rednecks were initially accosting him and later when confronting him at his home, it would have seemed natural and unsurprising (though not justifiable) if epithets of one sort or another were tossed around in that context.

What further confused me on the issue (and I could have heard or be remembering wrong), was later after the shooting (at the hospital maybe), I thought Hays referred to Woodard as a "cracker" which I would not think would be an epithet an African American person would target toward someone else who is recognized and understood to be Native American.

Could just be that the part was written for a white (as was Hays), and they didn't feel like altering the script after the actor was hired.

[shapeshifter]

8 hours ago, sd dude said:

Quote

Also, Woodward was obviously a Native American but it is never inferred or referenced as such

I had the same inference and thought it surprising that it was never referenced in the script, especially when the rednecks were initially accosting him and later when confronting him at his home, it would have seemed natural and unsurprising (though not justifiable) if epithets of one sort or another were tossed around in that context.

What further confused me on the issue (and I could have heard or be remembering wrong), was later after the shooting (at the hospital maybe), I thought Hays referred to Woodard as a "cracker" which I would not think would be an epithet an African American person would target toward someone else who is recognized and understood to be Native American.

8 hours ago, Gobi said:

Could just be that the part was written for a white (as was Hays), and they didn't feel like altering the script after the actor was hired.

If there is zero reference to his being Native American, I agree that most likely they didn't retool the script after he was hired.
However, "cracker" is reserved for whites, so I thought maybe Roland was shot by friendly fire--or even not so friendly fire if the cops who arrived were part of a conspiracy to set up Woodard, and they didn't want Roland taking him alive.