S01.E03: The Photo Shoot

[psychoticstate]

5 hours ago, Chewy101 said:

Agreed. She is just being selfish and acting like a cliche, dismissing her vows for some demographic storyline. She bores me.

I agree with this.  "Exploring her sexuality" to me is basically a hall pass.  She wants to have her cake and eat it too, so to speak.  If her husband was cool with her being with women and doesn't consider that cheating, fine -- but it sounds like he's not.  If he's not, then Gabby needs to make a choice to stay with him and be faithful or break up and explore all she wants. 

[Nonja]

On 8/21/2019 at 9:13 PM, Bringonthedrama said:

I'm disappointed that there was no acknowledgement of missing Luke during the therapy session, when Ian said he was happy to be at the bar with "my boys," or recreating the cast photo shoot. It seems like "ok, we touched on missing Luke in the first episode, check." Shannen was not in person with them for the first episode, so I would have liked to see a small gesture written in such as just before the cast photo shoot she touches Luke's face in either the original cast photo or the sketch of the cast photo and gets tears in her eyes. One small moment would have an impact. 

Wholeheartedly agree.

Christine: "I picked the wrong week to stop vaping."  Hahahahaha!

I find Tori Spelling TRYING to be funny supremely annoying. Her "Im rushing lines in a high-pitched voice to show how awkward and silly I am," routine is beyond irritating. They should either write her some real comedy lines or give it up.  

On 8/23/2019 at 8:00 AM, Ohmo said:

"We can't get Luke because he's busy on other projects, so Dylan will be away for some reason,,,maybe he'll be in France like in the original pilot."

Or they could have poked some fun at Riverdale here and there, which could have been great.

Edited August 29, 2019 by Nonja

[screamin]

8 hours ago, psychoticstate said:

I agree with this.  "Exploring her sexuality" to me is basically a hall pass.  She wants to have her cake and eat it too, so to speak.  If her husband was cool with her being with women and doesn't consider that cheating, fine -- but it sounds like he's not.  If he's not, then Gabby needs to make a choice to stay with him and be faithful or break up and explore all she wants. 

I'm not sure I understand. You say that the only way that Gabrielle can be in the right in thinking in theory about being with other women is:

a) Get her husband's verification that he is okay with the idea, or 

b) break up with him if he isn't.

It seems to me the conversation she had with her husband is absolutely necessary for her to have if she is to get to either point a OR point b. And it seems to me that her husband, upon being presented with the choice, definitely chose b. He left the conversation, said he wouldn't 'pine'. The door's open if he wants to leave the marriage. So how is she in the wrong here for having done exactly what you said she ought to be doing?

Is it because she is indulging in flirting before the divorce papers are in hand? Jennie indulged in a good deal more before she got her papers. I don't fault her for it - her marriage was over, regardless of formalities. Jason outright committed adultery and concealed it for some time after - that's worse. Tori is an interesting comparison - she, like Gabby, also is mentally exploring the idea of something extramarital, without necessarily any intention (let alone concrete plan) to go anywhere real with Brian. Do I fault her for that? Meh, not so much; she doesn't seem self-aware enough to admit to herself what she's doing.

So, different degrees of guilt in our protagonists. All of them are doing the coupling-uncoupling-backstabbing-and-betrayal mating dance that was always the plot of the original show. Which is why I don't understand the complaint that Gabby's plot is especially 'cliche' in comparison to the others. I mean, "cliche" means "an overworn, overused trope." Seems to me that the frequency of heterosexual coupling and uncoupling has ALWAYS been much higher than the LGBT equivalent on 90210 and other soaps. By that measure, it's the real cliche.

[nuraman00]

On 8/25/2019 at 2:03 PM, nuraman00 said:

I'm liking this series.  If these storylines are what it took to get the cast together again, it's fine.

They're doing a good job of keeping it funny, but also with some drama (Gabrielle's storyline; Tori trying to prove herself as a producer).

I'm confused about Shannen's location.  In episode 1, it showed her plane ticket was going from Jaipur to Los Angeles.  Jaipur is in India.  So she was saving tigers in India, when she did the stream from Instagram?  It was getting near dusk, when she was doing the live stream.

Here's a screen shot of the plane ticket:

However, Jaipur is 12.5 hours ahead of Nevada.  Unless the group interview in Nevada was at 8am, it would have been too dark in Jaipur to really see Shannen's face, which would have been at 8:30 PM in Jaipur.

In Episode 2, Shannen and Brian talked on the phone.  Shannen had been in Los Angeles a few days prior, but was now somewhere else saving sea lions.  But the time zone seemed closer to Los Angeles.

The in Episode 3, she's in Peru.  How did Tori even know which small mountain to climb?

So across 3 episodes, Shannen has gone from Jaipur, India, to Los Angeles, to somewhere else, then to Peru?

Any thoughts on Shannen live streaming from Jaipur, India, even though that's 12.5 hours ahead of Las Vegas?

And how she went from Jaipur, to Los Angeles, to Peru, so quickly, within 2 weeks of each other?

[Sakura12]

6 hours ago, nuraman00 said:

Any thoughts on Shannen live streaming from Jaipur, India, even though that's 12.5 hours ahead of Las Vegas?

And how she went from Jaipur, to Los Angeles, to Peru, so quickly, within 2 weeks of each other?

I really think it's the creators not thinking or caring about time zones. 

With the second thing, if she still has money than that's not much of an issue. She could also be part of an animal rescue group that does just travels around saving animals. Maybe she only stays in each place for a day or two. After LA she seemed to go to Peru to visit her Shaman. 

[CurlyATX]

I think that Gabby is trying to make her husband see that her exploration really has nothing to do with him and he isn't deficient (well, except for a few things).  Just like someone else mentioned, it is exactly like Frankie and Gracie where because the cheating/dumping are for a men vs say, younger women, it's more like a deep need she can't ignore anymore.  Not sure how less of a sting it is for Mr. Curly to go after a guy vs a younger woman.   Both would suck.

Speaking of which, Mr. Curly watched half the episode with me and LOVED it.  He hates all teen shows but did go to school with Jennie.  I think he liked seeing her play herself.  

Nate vs Brian.  It is gender biased but I think there is a sense that when a family is having financial problems, all members (especially the man) should try and fix that.  He didn't seem thrilled to watch the kids or work.   Brian seems to have a relationship where his contribution is child rearing and the home.

Is his wife on the same level of Beyoncé where everyone freaks out and would only want to ask questions about her? 

[Katy M]

1 hour ago, CurlyATX said:

I think that Gabby is trying to make her husband see that her exploration really has nothing to do with him and he isn't deficient

But, to me that's just silly.  If Jason had kissed her and she had felt it being electrifying, would she have had the same conversation about how she needs to explore her sexuality with scruffy guys. Or Jennie's farm guy from the pool, would she have said she needs to explore with younger men?  No, of course not.  If she's seeking elsewhere there's really no other way to take that than "you're not enough for me any more."

[CurlyATX]

1 hour ago, Katy M said:

But, to me that's just silly.  If Jason had kissed her and she had felt it being electrifying, would she have had the same conversation about how she needs to explore her sexuality with scruffy guys. Or Jennie's farm guy from the pool, would she have said she needs to explore with younger men?  No, of course not.  If she's seeking elsewhere there's really no other way to take that than "you're not enough for me any more."

That had me laughing at work.  I think the idea (not that I agree) is that the sexual orientation component is almost something that she can't control.  This is the part that makes me upset.  She should separate from this guy while exploring. 

[Bastet]

30 minutes ago, CurlyATX said:

She should separate from this guy while exploring. 

They are separated, aren't they?  He's not living there.  She was honest with him about being kissed by a woman, what she was feeling (and had long been denying), and what she wanted to happen (using Andrea's storyline to explore these long-suppressed feelings; actually dating herself came after), and he didn't want to be part of that.  We haven't seen him since, Jason is staying there, and in the next episode

Spoiler

Gabrielle didn't come home all night because she was with Christine. 

I highly doubt he's living there.  I don't begin to fault him for that, but I'm not jumping on her, either, because she did what she was supposed to do - be up front and thus give him the chance to make an informed decision, rather than fooling around behind his back.

1 hour ago, Katy M said:

If Jason had kissed her and she had felt it being electrifying, would she have had the same conversation about how she needs to explore her sexuality with scruffy guys. Or Jennie's farm guy from the pool, would she have said she needs to explore with younger men?  No, of course not.

Of course not, indeed, because feeling that way upon being kissed by a man she found attractive would have been perfectly normal to her.  Pretending as if the gender doesn't matter at all in this equation doesn't wash.

If this was a show about Gabby and her family, we'd be getting a lot more and a lot better stuff about the intricacies of all this, the ways in which it is the same as if she wanted to date other men and the many ways it isn't, and a lot more attention paid to her husband's feelings.  But this isn't Grace and Frankie, it's an ensemble soap about making a soap, with Gabby no longer being able to convince herself she's really a 1 or 2 on the Kinsey scale being just one storyline, so we get this surface treatment.  But the messiness of it got fairly decent acknowledgment under the circumstances in the episode when she told him, so I'm willing to go along for the six-episode ride.

Edited August 29, 2019 by Bastet

[Katy M]

2 minutes ago, Bastet said:

Of course not, indeed, because feeling that way upon being kissed by a man she found attractive would have been perfectly normal to her.  Pretending as if the gender doesn't matter at all in this equation doesn't wash.

My point was it doesn't matter to him.  A rejection is a rejection and wanting someone better/different is wanting someone different. It makes no difference to him at all who the other person, type of person is.  So, no, the gender doesn't matter.  the upshot is that she is not willing to "forsake all others" any more and he doesn't have to be OK with that because it's women instead of men.  And he's allowed to be hurt by her wanting someone else, whoever that someone else is.

Edited August 29, 2019 by Katy M

[Bastet]

1 minute ago, Katy M said:

My point was it doesn't matter to him.  A rejection is a rejection and wanting someone better/different is wanting someone different. It makes no difference to him at all who the other person, type of person is. So, no, the gender doesn't matter.

You didn't ask about him, you asked about her -- would she still come home and talk with her husband about how she wants to explore something different.  That it was a woman is the only reason she did that, so, yes, the gender very much matters.

[Katy M]

Just now, Bastet said:

You didn't ask about him, you asked about her -- would she still come home and talk with her husband about how she wants to explore something different.  That it was a woman is the only reason she did that, so, yes, the gender very much matters.

You're not getting my point.  She came home and said all that stuff because she thought he should be alright with that and not take it as a rejection (or at least that was what the other poster posited) and I can't wrap my head around why on earth she would think that, because she sure as heck wouldn't think that if it were another man.  And cheating, or "exploring your sexuality" with others, is cheating no matter how you look at it.  And, sure, honesty is great, but it doesn't make everything OK all the time.

[Ohmo]

4 hours ago, Katy M said:

She came home and said all that stuff because she thought he should be alright with that and not take it as a rejection (or at least that was what the other poster posited) and I can't wrap my head around why on earth she would think that, because she sure as heck wouldn't think that if it were another man.  And cheating, or "exploring your sexuality" with others, is cheating no matter how you look at it.  And, sure, honesty is great, but it doesn't make everything OK all the time.

Agreed.  The gender is being used as manipulation.  The writing is encouraging the audience to think of what Gabby is doing as positive. 

Spoiler

Even Jason's comment in this week's episode about them dating the same woman was supposed to be taken as cute. 

Gabby is married.  If she were a lesbian, had a wife, and were kissing a woman who was not her wife, I'd feel the same way I do about what she's doing.  She is married to someone.  Man or woman does not matter.  She is engaging in romance with someone other than the person she married.  If it's not great when Camille, Jason, and Ian's wife behaved that way, it's not some magical "exploration" when Gabby does it.

Edited August 30, 2019 by saoirse
Added spoiler tag to info from future episode

[Bastet]

9 minutes ago, Ohmo said:

She is engaging in romance with someone other than the person she married.  If it's not great when Camille, Jason, and Ian's wife behaved that way, it's not some magical "exploration" when Gabby does it.

After her husband left.  Camille, Jason, and Ian's wife all had sex with someone else behind their spouse's back, and then doubled down by not admitting to it until getting caught.  Gabby was kissed by someone else, and feeling all those fireworks from being kissed by a woman forced her to confront something she'd been suppressing her entire adult life.  So she told her husband everything, including her idea to have Andrea go through the same thing and to use that art as a means of exploring her life. 

She didn't cheat.  She didn't pretend the kiss never happened.  She talked to him.  It's what you're supposed to do -- if you develop feelings/an attraction you want to act on despite being married, you tell your spouse rather than going around behind their back.  They can then tell you to get stuffed, either honor the original deal or it's over.

And, indeed, he was not okay even with what she was proposing - for which no one, including Gabby - blamed him - and by all appearances has left.  After a bit, she gave up the "I'll just research" stance and

Spoiler

opted to actually pursue something with Christine.

Of course, to Gabby's husband, the sexual orientation issue and her honesty don't make much difference to how awful and angry he's feeling, certainly right now and possibly never.  That's his side of this equation, and I don't recall seeing it argued any other way.  What I have seen is it conflated with her side of the equation, which is that this only happened because it was a woman who kissed her, and her actions in response to those feelings did not sink to the same level as the other three being discussed.  There being a specific set of circumstances at play for her doesn't wipe out her poor husband's experience, but his experience doesn't transform her behavior into a false equivalency, either.

[screamin]

2 hours ago, Katy M said:

You're not getting my point.  She came home and said all that stuff because she thought he should be alright with that and not take it as a rejection (or at least that was what the other poster posited) and I can't wrap my head around why on earth she would think that, because she sure as heck wouldn't think that if it were another man. 

I don't see where the show implied that Gabby thought "he should be alright with that", OR that the show is saying the husband is wrong for feeling hurt about Gabby wanting to explore the idea of same-sex attraction, even if it's just in her acting (as she initially proposed to her husband). We see in her initial unease with her husband, her attempt to confess what happened in Vegas and then backing off, and her telling Jason outright that she knows her admitting to her husband her same-sex attraction would hurt him and that's why she hesitates to do it.

But she confesses it anyway, because these feelings are too strong for her to suppress. She assures him there's nothing she's faulting him for. She offers the compromise that she doesn't want to open their marriage to a third party, just explore the feelings through her acting a role. He rejects the compromise outright, as is his right to do so, and says he won't pine for her. Nowhere does Gabby - or the show - tell him he's wrong to do so. 

Quote

And cheating, or "exploring your sexuality" with others, is cheating no matter how you look at it.   

She was honest with him. He was honest with her - and he left. We don't see him again - not while Jason is staying with her, not when she wakes up from  her nightmare to an obviously empty bed. He's gone. They're separated. Why is it, then, 'cheating?'

Edited August 29, 2019 by screamin

[CandysWrapRoom]

On 8/27/2019 at 3:04 PM, Scout Finch said:

To get back on track, is Joe Tata still alive? He's one of the few characters I can think of that I'd like to see.

Orange kitties are the best kitties.

Nat is still alive and has shown up to promo events. Here's hoping he shows up this weekend!

[Ohmo]

3 hours ago, screamin said:

They're separated. Why is it, then, 'cheating?'

Leaving the house doesn't necessarily equal leaving the marriage (to me), and if that's what's happening, then I wish the writers would be more definitive that that's what happened.  Ian had a line about triggering a section in his pre-nup, so the audience knows that not only is Stacy gone, but Ian's marriage is also over.

Something like that for Gabby would be helpful.  She might receive notice of a legal separation, phone call from her husband saying that's what he wants to do, phone call to him saying that's what she wants to do, comment to Jason saying that he might not want to be around at a certain time because Gabby's husband is coming by to pick up more of his stuff.  Something like that.

I'd like there to be something more definitive than him just leaving the house to indicate that the marriage is in the process of being over.

[Katy M]

I watched the scene again where she talks to her husband.  Nowhere does she say that this is just something she wants to explore via acting.  I don't think that's what she meant at all.

[Bastet]

16 hours ago, Katy M said:

I watched the scene again where she talks to her husband.  Nowhere does she say that this is just something she wants to explore via acting.  I don't think that's what she meant at all.

We join their conversation in progress.  What exactly she wants "to explore" is not explicitly part of what we hear then, no, but she does specify in response to his "I don't know how I feel about this, but I don't want to have an open marriage" that it's not about having an open marriage (which, by definition, means she's ruling out the possibility of an additional partner) and what she talks about to others before and after that conversation-in-progress is always about Andrea's story.  After, she corrects Christine's "I'm very invested in your story" by saying it's Andrea's and she's just very close to the character and, as their conversation progresses, eventually admits it's also hers, but in doing so says "I thought that if I had Andrea do this I could see how it feels."  She further says she told her husband about this and he accused her of wanting to cheat, but that's not what this is. 

So at the time she talked to her husband, it was indeed about using art to dip a toe into this aspect of her life, not about actually pursuing something with a woman.  (Again, which shouldn't need to be said, but apparently does, this doesn't lessen his reaction or the validity thereof; it's about why and what she is doing as circumstances progress.)

And even when Christine tells her to think of this as method acting - live it to research the character - she says she's not ready for below the neck, and doesn't immediately back away from the "research" angle; she's still conflicted on what she's "allowed" to do.

Granted, that means when the husband said "then go explore, but I'm not going to sit around while you do it" he, too, was only talking about the as-Andrea scenario, but I'm not nettled by the subsequent trajectory of their relationship not being spelled out step by step to where we wind up in the next episode; like I said before, in a character drama based on this premise, I'd raise hell, but for one storyline in a seven-character ensemble, no.

Re-watching parts of this episode to confirm the dialogue, I saw for the first time something funny another poster had pointed out -- that Brian, the only one not wearing reading glasses, is holding the script out at his full arm extension.  So he needs them, too, he just won't admit it.  Terrific little touch I'm glad was pointed out since I missed it.

Edited August 30, 2019 by Bastet

[screamin]

13 hours ago, Ohmo said:

I'd like there to be something more definitive than him just leaving the house to indicate that the marriage is in the process of being over.

I expect we'll get more information about the current status of her separation soon, when her story with Christine gets messily imploded all over the tabloids...not a spoiler, just a speculation, given that one of the running themes of this reboot is that what you do in the secret chamber will be cried aloud from the rooftops within an episode or two (because we has only six).

[Scarlett45]

My interpretation of the Gabby situation is somewhere in the middle of the field-

When she had the conversation with her husband about her needing to explore this side of her sexuality she was explicitly stating that she was not okay with their marriage being monogamous any more because she needed to do this (for her own fulfillment). Her husband then explicitly told her that he didn’t WANT to have an open marriage and he wasn’t waiting around for her to explore. Once he said that (which of course was completely within his rights), they are now separated. He may or may not be there as her husband again once she’s done exploring this. 

Gabi did the right thing by coming to her husband first and talking to him about how she felt, but she made it clear that she was going to do this regardless of how he felt about it. Had her husband said “I don’t want an open marriage, and I’m your husband I am not leaving you”, and Gabi said “I’m pursing this anyway”- yup that would be cheating. But her husband said that given her feelings he was going to leave because he didn’t want that type of relationship, so he left. (Which was his right) As of now they aren’t together and they are both free to do whatever with anyone they want. 

I do wonder what will happen if Gabby decides that she does want her husband back and he’s moved on (a very real and possible thing). 

[screamin]

3 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

When she had the conversation with her husband about her needing to explore this side of her sexuality she was explicitly stating that she was not okay with their marriage being monogamous any more because she needed to do this (for her own fulfillment).  Her husband then explicitly told her that he didn’t WANT to have an open marriage and he wasn’t waiting around for her to explore.

When he says he didn't want an open marriage, she answers, "It's not about an open marriage." If she were really asking for his permission to fool around with women non-monogamously outside her marriage, that would be an open marriage. So she is NOT explicitly demanding to be non-monogamous. 

I agree with Bastet that what she said later to Christine: "It is about me, and I just I thought that if I I could have Andrea do this, I could see how it feels... You know, I told my husband about this, and he accused me of wanting to cheat. This isn't about that," is describing exactly what she told her husband in the parts of the conversation that we didn't see - that she wanted to feel how it would be to have a same-sex relationship by means of acting it out on the show, not by having a relationship IRL. I don't see why we should assume she's lying about not wanting an open marriage and what she told Christine when she's been honest about everything else.

Edited September 1, 2019 by screamin

[Scarlett45]

6 minutes ago, screamin said:

When he says he didn't want an open marriage, she answers, "It's not about an open marriage." If she were really asking for his permission to fool around with women non-monogamously outside her marriage, that would be an open marriage. So she is NOT explicitly demanding to be non-monogamous. 

I saw that part differently. There’s no way for Gabby to explore this part of her self AND be monogamous with her husband because she’s married to a man and she’s talking about exploring her sexuality with women. Any exploration would be outside of their marriage. I didn’t see it as an acting versus real life thing. (Acting would be acting, a job, Gabby was talking about herself not Andrea). 

When she told her husband “It’s not about an open marriage.” I took that to mean that she didn’t want to open up the marriage for shits and giggles or “variety”, it was for this specific reason. However there is NO WAY for her to sexually experiment with women without at least opening up the marriage on her end (which wouldn’t be equitable to her husband). 

It seems that regarding this issue they are at an standstill. She needs to do something that goes against the parameters of their long term marriage, he has every right to not move those parameters and walk away. 

[Bastet]

37 minutes ago, screamin said:

I don't see why we should assume she's lying about not wanting an open marriage and what she told Christine when she's been honest about everything else.

Yeah, the only way Gabby has been portrayed as a liar is with respect to deceiving herself all these years that she wasn't actually feeling what she was feeling or it didn't mean anything, so it makes sense that when the kiss forced her to be honest about those feelings, she'd still convince herself she could just "explore" via Andrea and not implode her marriage, only later - with her husband gone and her having had time in the aftermath of that departure and the conversation about sexual orientation with Christine - admitting "researching" for "method acting" is not going to cut it; she wants to do it in real life.  But it would not make sense for her to be knowingly lying to her husband in their conversation, or to Christine in recounting it.  She believes what she's saying when she's saying it; if there's any lying going on, it's again only to herself.

[princelina]

On 8/22/2019 at 12:17 AM, Steph J said:

I've never seen Lala Anthony in anything before this show.  Is she always so... not good?

I've only seen her host Flavor of Love reunions - she was okay in those 😄 

[punkypower]

3 hours ago, princelina said:

I've only seen her host Flavor of Love reunions - she was okay in those 😄 

THAT'S who that is?!

Thank you SO MUCH!!