S01.E01: Pilot

[canter]

The baby stopped crying because it was gone, not because it saw something. The people who disappeared just vanished: poof. Gone before people's eyes.

It looked to me like the baby was crying in a normal, fussy, my idiot mother is ignoring me sort of way, then there was a shot of the baby, now quiet, seeming to notice and watch something out the window of the car, then they cut back to the mom in the front seat and we heard the baby give a different scared/hurt sort of cry, then silence, during which the mother noticed the baby was gone. I think people are analyzing the baby's brief silence during which the camera showed him seeming to look at something.

[maraleia]

The thing that stuck out for me is the lack of diversity on the show. Sure they have two African-Americans and one Asian-American but that's way too few for a show like this. I don't think I'll be watching anymore because my family members felt burned by Lost (I never watched it) and I see the same thing happening here.

[ganesh]

It looked to me like the baby was crying in a normal, fussy, my idiot mother is ignoring me sort of way, then there was a shot of the baby, now quiet, seeming to notice and watch something out the window of the car, then they cut back to the mom in the front seat and we heard the baby give a different scared/hurt sort of cry, then silence, during which the mother noticed the baby was gone.

 

That's how I recall the scene. If they baby just vanished then why would there be a second cry? If they didn't intend us to have this interpretation, then they should have removed the second cry in post. And again, to not notice this is an egregious oversight. My entire premise of why aren't people looking at video footage is based on the vanished people reacting to something just prior to the vanishing. 

[Shermie]

But again, if there was a few seconds that the Disappeared saw something, wouldn't many have said something? Like what the hell? or what is that? or who are you? or something? And that would have been heard/noticed by the people they were with when they vanished.

[ganesh]

I'm leaning towards TPTB not really thinking this through and the silence and second sound from the baby isn't meant to mean anything. What bothers me is that it's shoddy if it's not meant to mean something, since many viewers noticed this detail.

 

 

I would have thought that the news report would have contained some information because the use of news on tv is to provide exposition. But they said "after 3 years we don't know anything." Which is really TBTPs telling us that the show isn't about the vanishing itself, and that's fine, but in terms of world building, you [show] can't tell me that no one is curious about what happened at all. You're telling me literally no one in the entire world knows anything at all? After 3 years?

 

I actually don't really care what the event was, but the showrunners need to have some idea, or make one up in order to structure the show appropriately. They clearly gave it some thought because they had the Ninth Doctor handing out flyers saying that it "wasn't the rapture". Honestly, it's disrespecting the audience. If the show doesn't want us to talk about the event, then don't have the news blaring that "experts don't know anything" so you can show your cutesy joke that Gary Busey was taken. 

[shapeshifter]

I'm leaning towards TPTB not really thinking this through and the silence and second sound from the baby isn't meant to mean anything. What bothers me is that it's shoddy if it's not meant to mean something, since many viewers noticed this detail.

Yeah, either it's a tease without an answer, or it is something yet to be revealed. Crying babies do often stop momentarily when they start to fall asleep but don't quite get there, but if we were clearly shown that the baby paused to look at something, well, then there should be something to notice.

I actually don't really care what the event was, but...

Oh, ganesh, please don't use the "e" word. Heh. Wasn't it not until the second season of The Event that we learned what "the event" was?

At least with this show, the title references the people we meet in the first episode.

[bilgistic]

I'm thinking the Pope for J-Lo, Anthony Bourdain and Gary Busey isn't such a bad tradeoff. Can we make this happen?

Edited July 6, 2014 by bilgistic

[ganesh]

I didn't watch that show, but I heard it was pretty bad. But this is the problem with this show though, it's been 3 years and there's no slang for the event, the vanishing, the incident? We make up words for things all the time.

[bravelittletoaster]

I would have thought that the news report would have contained some information because the use of news on tv is to provide exposition. But they said "after 3 years we don't know anything." Which is really TBTPs telling us that the show isn't about the vanishing itself, and that's fine, but in terms of world building, you [show] can't tell me that no one is curious about what happened at all. You're telling me literally no one in the entire world knows anything at all? After 3 years?

 

The book is definitely not about the whys and wherefores of the vanishing, so either the show is taking a completely different tact, or the show creators are selling people a bill of goods by trying to make them think there's some solvable mystery here when there's not.  Given the precedent of Lost...I wouldn't hold my breath.

[ganesh]

I'm really try to go by what I see on the screen. TPTBs for any show don't necessarily have to follow the source material verbatim, cf. Game of Thrones.

 

Actually, I'd rather not know anything about the book, like how they do the discussions on the GOT thread because I want to be able to take the show in on its own merits and not, "well if it's like this in the book, then I expect this on the show." That's not fair to the show. I try to stay away from tweets, etc., by showrunners because they tend to shoot their own shows by yammering too much. 

 

It's clear from watching the first episode that the show isn't going to be a mystery about what actually happened to cause the people to disappear. That's fine. However, they've either made an error in the script or it's just sloppy writing that should have been cleaned up. I don't want to compare it to Lost either because again that's not fair to the show. 

[bravelittletoaster]

There probably do need to be completely different threads like GoT, because it's kind of crazy making if you've read the book to watch people speculate about details that you know are meaningless tbh.

Though personally I think the show's kind of weak, will be shocked if it takes off, and am skeptical it could actually support two threads.

(Though I guess Glee is the gold standard of shitty shows about which there is a lot to say and it's got a thriving forum, so quality does not necessarily correspond to forum health.)

[A Boston Gal]

Hey guys.

The very first scene totally took me out of this show. The woman who wouldn't stop talking on the phone made me almost irrationally angry. It's bad enough to have really long conversations in public places (IMO anyway) but to do it while ignoring your screaming baby makes it so much worse.

That, and her conversation while putting the baby in the car is asking a woman to squeeze her in for an appointment. Then a minute later, she's talking about something completely different and then says to whoever is on the phone (her spouse maybe?) that she'll be home soon and to start heating the baby's formula. There were NO breaks or jumps in time. It was very confusing.

From my one and only viewing, it seemed the woman in the opening was going through a hotwater heater leak/breakdown (ever live through one of those? If you haven't, count your blessings!) so she was frantic, at the Laundromat trying to do  laundry, trying to schedule a plumber to her house, and/or making an appointment with someone else in addition. All with a screaming baby in the back. In that circumstance, most people would be holding it together, but barely. So, I'm cutting her (the character) a break. But not the director, because, well...just because.

 

ETA: The official description for episode 2 is referring to the event as "The Departure." So...that's one question answered, I suppose?

Edited July 6, 2014 by A Boston Gal

[BooBear]

From my one and only viewing, it seemed the woman in the opening was going through a hotwater heater leak/breakdown (ever live through one of those? If you haven't, count your blessings!) so she was frantic, at the Laundromat trying to do  laundry, trying to schedule a plumber to her house,

 

I thought it was the washer that broke and spilled water all over but... I guess what I thought most was why did they choose to open it that way when the very fact of the situation did make the mom seem much less sympathetic. When I saw the ads for this I didn't the opening scene going this way.  Mom did annoy me.

[90PercentGravity]

I watched the opening of the show again and I think "October 14th" might be the name of the event.

[shapeshifter]

I watched the opening of the show again and I think "October 14th" might be the name of the event.

If so, good choice.

I've seen moms who have yelled at their crying kids, so I thought this mom, in contrast, was acting appropriately, even sympathetically. I was wondering at first if she was going to crack and express her frustration, but she never spoke unkindly about or to the baby.

Laws require that the baby be strapped into a car seat in the back seat, which visually does seem to give the impression of the mother distancing herself from the child.

Anyway, babies cry, often because they're tired, and there's nothing like a nice ride in the car to put them to sleep. Strap 'em in and take off.

Edited July 6, 2014 by shapeshifter

[A Boston Gal]

BooBear, maybe it was her washer that broke, and I was projecting my own memories of hotwater heater malfunction! :)

Edited July 6, 2014 by A Boston Gal

[Shermie]

Some people seem to think, based on some posts here, that the (first) dog disappeared along with the 2% and then reappeared. But the woman just said the dog was her husband's and it ran away three years ago, presumably after he disappeared.

I think the baby was just looking at the boom mike, which TV babies often do.

It doesn't bother me that the news program said that all the experts, after many meetings and discussions, still don't know what caused the mass disappearance. In fact, it's a brave move to admit "we don't know". Better that than a bunch of pointless conjecture; surely they've already done that in the first year after. Three years later, they know or they don't. They admitted that they don't. What are they supposed to do about it?

[ganesh]

Well, what did we do after nine eleven? Everyone was screaming to find out what happened. Wouldn't that be the same here? 

 

I think national governments would be assembling task forces left and right to study the problem. They could look at video footage. They can find eyewitnesses. They can do a statistical analysis to see if there's any real correlation among the people taken. They may not get you any closer to any concrete, final answer. But it's human nature to want to do something. 

 

After three years, ok, I buy 'we really don't know for sure.' But, there's no "here's what we found out so far. NORAD confirmed it wasn't aliens." Something like that. 

 

I fully understand that it was meant to be a throwaway line, but it was sloppy because it was so patently unrealistic imo.  

[bravelittletoaster]

They were there and then they weren't.  What is there to study, exactly?  There's no physical evidence.  I mean, I'm sure they would have tried because they had to, and would spin their wheels for 6 months, but it's a complete non-starter.  So 3 years on I would fully expect them to have completely given up.  

[ganesh]

I was hoping there'd be one or two people we come across during the season actually doing something like this. I can't imagine there aren't Kind of like the guy on TWD who was trying to experiment on the zombies. The show isn't about that, but if one person is doing it then the others are in the show universe elsewhere. It's grounds the show for me. 

[90PercentGravity]

What is there to study, exactly?  There's no physical evidence.

There are millions of hours worth of security camera footage and cellphone video to comb through. Millions of witnesses to interview. Millions of items, like the baby carrier, to be inspected and analyzed.

[bravelittletoaster]

And they all tell the same story: the people went *poof*.  I still don't know what there is to study, really, besides pouring over millions of identical eye witness accounts.  

[GaT]

And they all tell the same story: the people went *poof*.  I still don't know what there is to study, really, besides pouring over millions of identical eye witness accounts.  

I don't know where you live, but as someone who lives in the US, have you met our government? Creating a big, bulky, expensive department to pour over millions of identical eyewitness accounts is exactly what they would do.

[bravelittletoaster]

But do you want to watch that as a tv show?

 

Sorry, I guess I should just take my bitterness over what they did to this book and go.  I should have known the show would get all bogged down in some smoke monster esque speculation about an incident that is water under the bridge in the book.

[ganesh]

Creating a big, bulky, expensive department to pour over millions of identical eyewitness accounts is exactly what they would do.

 

This is the type of stuff that I was thinking of too. The DHS was created in response to nine eleven, so there's an actual analogue. Wouldn't anyone have been on their phone at the time of the disappearance? We have all this stuff in the news about the NSA compiling meta data, so I would think someone would be poring over that 24/7 at the least. I get that the show isn't about that, but to canonically state that no one is doing anything and there's no theories [besides religious, which I can buy would happen irl], no collection of any data, no big court cases, etc., is incredulous to me. 

 

Maybe they should have set the show more than 3 years ahead in time and said something like 'we've exhausted all possibilities.' Three years is barely enough time for one postdoc. 

[90PercentGravity]

This reminds me of the show Resurrection, which is also based on a book where the actual cause of something was (apparently) never really explored or explained. That's fine for a book that has a definitive end-point and where people's thoughts and feeling can be explored at great depth. In a tv show, it is problematic. People walking around feeling things isn't very interesting to watch. And when you have a week between each episode, viewers are going to analyze it and dissect it. That's something the showrunners want and even need. They need us to think about the show between episodes. If we aren't thinking about, we probably won't watch it again.

[bravelittletoaster]

Which is why they probably should have left the book alone and made the post apocalyptic rapture show they wanted to make without it, IMO. Because the book basically just uses it as a metaphor to explore loss in the modern world. 6 seasons and a movie! Probably not.

[tpplay]

I actually thought the woman who plays the Mayor was/is excellent.  She has a natural delivery that I like quite a lot.  And I like the character a lot.

[phillychick33]

Was it me, or did it look like the chief was sexing Aimee in that flashback in the bar. Speaking of Amy, her character made me want to punch her I the mouth. The fake orgasm scene, and then she goes and fucks that guy, with a lame apology, WTF? Great friend, and who talks to your friend's dad the way she did, no one I went to high school with. It felt contrived, creepy and over the top. Also sick of angsty teenagers, where are the decent ones, oh yeah, the twins.

Likes: the twins, their dynamic is cool, and seems genuine; Justin Theroux.

 

OMG I can't take the Amy (Aimee? Who cares!! lol) character either.  Hope she joins the GR with Laurie and never speaks again.  Her facial expressions are maddening.  UGH!!!  I'm liking the twins.. so far!  Yet.. sensing some underlying darkness from them at the same time... anyone else getting that feeling?  Hope I'm wrong on that. 

 

Also liking Tom, though wish he'd abandon what's-her-name and head on home.  She's annoying and not worth saving.  "Say it wasn't my fault.  SAY IT LIKE YOU MEAN IT!!!!"  OMG talk about someone needing a punch lol

[BigBlueMastiff]

Ha ha, wish I had something to add, but I gave up after episode 2.

[Milburn Stone]

I enjoyed this show more than I thought.  Justin Theroux did a great job.  I think the general reaction was realistic.  Losing those they loved was bad enough but having no answers is brutal.  The world it would create, an angry world with few people holding themselves back, works. 

 

This. We just started watching last night, which happened to be the evening of September 11--and that underlined for me that the show is a metaphor for the experience we all shared on that day, and its aftermath. I am certain this is the intention. The repetition in characters' conversation of "October 14"--it is impossible to hear that without associating to our own echoes of the other date. That day caused the beginning of a mass psychosis in America, one which was as inevitable as it has been regrettable. We still live in that nightmare, for there is no escape from it, just as there is no escape for the survivors of October 14. The psychosis takes many different forms in both cases. The first step is to realize that we are in it. That is not a cure, for there is no cure; but it is at least an engagement with reality.

 

Since I hadn't heard a peep about this show from any of my friends, I assumed it was not that great, but that is wrong. Based on this episode (and the one that followed, which we watched in succession), it is that great. It only seems like surrealism.

Edited September 12, 2014 by Milburn Stone

[Danny Franks]

This. We just started watching last night, which happened to be the evening of September 11--and that underlined for me that the show is a metaphor for the experience we all shared on that day, and its aftermath. I am certain this is the intention. The repetition in people's conversation of "October 14"--it is impossible to hear that without associating to our own echoes of the other date. That day caused the beginning of a mass psychosis in America, one which was as inevitable as it has been regrettable. We still live in that nightmare, for there is no escape from it, just as there is no escape for the survivors of October 14. The psychosis takes many different forms in both cases. The first step is to realize that we are in it.

 

The fact that I haven't heard a peep about this show from any of my friends made me think it was probably not that great, but that is wrong. Based on this episode (and the one that followed, which we watched in succession), it is that great. It only seems like surrealism.

 

This show is wonderful. I didn't watch it as it aired, which I suspect was the right choice, because I've been able to watch it all in a couple of big sessions, and it's helped me gain a perspective of what the show is trying to do that I think would have been more difficult to grasp, week to week.

 

Great point you've mentioned there, about the allegorical nature of the show. I hadn't really considered it in relation to something like 9/11, but it definitely makes sense. The sudden, brutal loss, the struggle to understand, to rebuild and go on. People get lost in their grief, and perhaps feel like it's okay to, because so many others are as well.

 

I've noticed a lot of viewers saying that the characters are hard to like, and some ared. But I found myself drawn to both Kevin and Jill, right from the start. Their pain is so palpable, and they seem so mired in loss and confusion that I just couldn't help but feel for them. Kevin burying himself in work and Jill just embracing the nihilism of youth, even though it clearly does nothing to make her happy.

 

I really liked the scene with Jill and the twins burying the dog. That grasping for some sense of normalcy, and the ability to say goodbye to something or someone, when they're gone.

[SlackerInc]

What I'm waiting for is the inevitable flip-side to that coin:  there's bound to be someone who had their personal world's biggest monster go *poof*.   Someone who views this as the very best thing that ever happened.  Some poor person who was fleeing down a path with would-be-rapist/murderer/Alcoholic Mark right on their trail only to have them gone that next second.   

 

Oh, good point!  They have talked about one person who disappeared being a "dipshit", another being someone who beat her kids, and another being, well, Gary Busey...but this would be a nice twist that has to have happened to someone.

 

The kids at the party playing "spin the bottle" with a cell phone and that horrific app made me so glad I am old enough to have played the game with an actual bottle and very tame "consequences" (kissing). Good lord, I'm happy I don't have kids.

 

I have kids (including one, the oldest, who is in high school) and I think that was just a ridiculous exaggeration.  I liked what the AV Club reviewer said: "I do not find Jill’s hypersexual best friend to be a particularly probable character, nor do I buy the nihilistic appeal of their 'spin the iPhone' game. Adults are fond of making teenagers into metaphors or monsters rather than young people, and there’s too much of that here."

 

They were there and then they weren't.  What is there to study, exactly?  There's no physical evidence.  I mean, I'm sure they would have tried because they had to, and would spin their wheels for 6 months, but it's a complete non-starter.  So 3 years on I would fully expect them to have completely given up.  

 

I agree with the first part of your comment, but what a lot of people discussing this in the thread (on both sides of the debate) seem to have missed is that in the pilot, the TV was reporting the results of a commission's report on "October 14", just under three years after it happened (for comparison, the 9/11 Commision's report was released in summer 2004).  So that massive undertaking did take place, and for a lot longer than six months.  But they were done studying it, they had no answers (because, as you say, everybody just went "poof" and there is no evidence), and the congressman or senator questioning the commission guy was frustrated with that fact.  So it wasn't that everyone's given up and no one cares why it happened, it's just that they can't really provide any answers.  

 

I assume the report had a lot of detail about the data they had come up with from studying surveillance video and so on, studying every possible statistical correlation, etc.  I also assume that all they could offer was "there is no pattern that is inconsistent with a random sample of 2% of the world's population disappearing without a sign or trace".  Maybe there's speculation from that point, but really there are only two possibilities: God (or some other very powerful deity), or aliens with extremely advanced technology (a third possibility, I guess, is that we have been in some sort of Matrix all along and this was a glitch or a test or whatever).

 

I may watch the second episode someday, but I'm in no rush.  I liked some things about the show, and several critics I trust love it; but the smoking cult really bugs me.  I loved the comment upthread (sorry, lost track of who said it) that they were like a ten-year-old's conception of a weird cult.

Edited May 14, 2015 by SlackerInc

[MyPeopleAreNordic]

Actually, Jennifer Aniston is very well-liked by most women and most guys think she's hot, so I'm not sure why Theroux is a "poor guy" for dating her. It actually would have been a funny and meta joke if she had been one of the disappeared celebrities, though. That the writers didn't think of that makes me lose hope for their writing skills.

When I saw the segment with the celebs who died on in the background, I actually thought it would have been a funny joke if Angelina Jolie and/or Brad Pitt would have been among the disppeared celebs, given that Jennifer Aniston's partner is playing the lead role.

[And I do like Angelina and Brad, as well as Jennifer Aniston. I gotta say that Jennifer's guy (Theroux) is smokin' hot in this series - even hotter than Brad Pitt currently looks.]

[editorgrrl]

There was some stuff scrawling under the TV about strange disappearances, but I am not sure If I should be watching this like Lost, or if I should not make myself crazy because it's really nothing.

For me, the show is more about tone and mood than whodunnit (or the significance of a certain sequence of numbers popping up all over the place). So I just went with the flow & let the weirdness wash over me.

That said, I'm hoping for a marathon before the season 2 premiere so I can rewatch.

[PamelaMaeSnap]

On July 26, 2015 at 6:25 AM, editorgrrl said:

For me, the show is more about tone and mood than whodunnit (or the significance of a certain sequence of numbers popping up all over the place). So I just went with the flow & let the weirdness wash over me.

That said, I'm hoping for a marathon before the season 2 premiere so I can rewatch.

So, to revive this (sorry) I watched S1 and then ... well, due to medical memory retention issues remembered ALMOST NOTHING about the series after that ... with S3 coming up and HBO GO showing S2 (which I never watched) and Mr. Snappy watching S2 now to be ready for S3, I am completely re-watching S1, then watching S2 for the first time and THEN S3. So reading this thread is really helpful and I suspect I'll chime in with a marathon post about the whole season soon ...