|
Post by zimshan on Oct 22, 2005 23:23:26 GMT -5
Aside from the blue shirt: Where was Logan's necklace? Have we seen other eps where he wasn't wearing it? I don't recall any, but that means diddly squat. But on catching the last few minutes of tonight's rerun (gotta remember that) I took note of the blue shirt, but all I could see was his naked throat. Goodness! You're right! No necklace. Hmm. That is really strange. Why would they put him in a Duncan shirt AND no necklace. Half of the reason why they both have distinct colors and Logan wears the necklace is so that people wouldn' t get confused who was who. Why strip Logan completely of his identity? It's times like these when I really want to just sit those wardrobe people down and find out exactly what their thought process was. ETA: There was points in the premiere where he didn't have any necklace on. In the Xterra shooting flashback, I know it was missing and his neck really did look incredible bare without it. I don't know if there have been any other scenes where he's been completely lacking in necklace. It is interesting to me that last year both Veronica and Logan had a necklace each that they consistantly wore and this year, they are both wearing random necklaces, switching in each scene. See. Just alittle obsessed with wardrobe. Hehe...
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Oct 23, 2005 12:32:12 GMT -5
Wonderful analysis, Spring!
Loved your list of the instances of possessive feelings - the emotion at the heart of jealousy. I definitely see the COTW having repercussions through all the relationships in this episode, but also it fits in with another element of this season - the enmity between the '09'ers and the non-rich-n-famous.
After all, as you mention later in your review, possessiveness can be related to wanting to have something that is your own, which goes hand in hand with wanting to belong - to have a group that is yours. Groups (especially in high school) are based on who's in and often, who's not. You belong to our group - you have to stay out! This is my group of friends, they belong to me - you find your own group. Things we've certainly see play out with Veronica and others last year and this.
I am very intrigued and impressed with idea that Meg may be or may have been pregnant. Once you laid out all the clues, I can really see the logic of this. It would definitely explain the odd behavior of a lot of folks this season.
Completely loved your "booty, booty everywhere, yet nary any booty to be had" line! Too too funny! But it also really drew my attention to the way that everyone in this ep really wasn't . . . well, getting any. I hadn't really picked up on that similarity. Everyone was getting turned down, turned away, put off or sidetracked.
Finally, loved your final thoughts - linking Veronica's statement about wanting to be loved for ourselves to the larger theme of the season. Like our COTW girl Julie, virtually no one this season has really been themselves. Which leads us to the logical conclusion that they could all face the possibility of being "too late" unless they start being more honest.
Brava again, Spring!
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 23, 2005 13:35:54 GMT -5
Wonderful analysis, Spring! Thank you! Yes, good point - this ep continues that theme, which has been really strong this season . . . the emnity between the haves and the have-nots. One "series-long theme" I suspect (however long this series lasts) will be about growing up and establishing a firm identity, and when you're young, so much of that is about external connections - as you mature, it becomes more about what's inside. I'll be pretty disappointed if Meg & Duncan's behavior has nothing to do with pregnancy - I can imagine other reasons that Meg's parents might have a fit - just finding out that Meg had sex and was using birth control or some such thing . . . but "pulling the plug" is a very strong thing for Liz to say. Plus, all the "Kane legacy" and "genealogy" and "paternity" mentions, and that deliberate look at Catholicism . . . with Liz's uniform, and the mention of Irish Catholics, which is coupled with the reminder that Catholics don't believe in birth control (as Weevil says that "they're Irish Catholic - for everyone you take out, there's five more waiting" or something like that) . . . anyhow, it really seems to be pointing in that direction to me. Grazie tanto!!
|
|
|
Post by Michelle on Oct 24, 2005 9:08:37 GMT -5
Thank you Spring, for a really excellent review. You made me appreciate the episode much more than before. Truthfully, I was in the "meh" camp prior to reading it. Oh, I tried to give it a chance, even watched it twice, but I just didn't like it as well as the previous three eps. Your review, however, opened my eyes to the themes of jealousy and possessiveness. Well, the jealousy part I figured out on my own. As someone pointed out earlier, that was kind of "anvil-y." But seriously, as a reviewer -- you the man. ;D One thing I noticed about the ep was Veronica's comment about failing to seduce two men in one day. Then she merely walks up to Logan, and with no (conscious) thoughts of seduction, Logan nicely offers to have sex with her. No cuddling, though--too bad! On the negative side, I don't think the episode was directed very well. Both Kristen Dunn and Jason Dohring are better actors than was demonstrated in GEM. I didn't care for the dopey way KB acted when she did her "Lolita" act on Colin, and I thought Dohring could have taken it down a notch with his mustache-twirling and so forth. It was, again very anvil-y. My heart breaks for Keith because I'm really afraid he's going to get hurt by Alicia's lies. He doesn't deserve that.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 24, 2005 10:01:34 GMT -5
Thank you Spring, for a really excellent review. You made me appreciate the episode much more than before. Thanks! Really good to here from you, Fotada. Interesting catch about how . . . ready-Freddie Logan appears, compared to the two guys she "failed to seduce." I think we are getting the strong "under the surface" vibes that despite all the idealization Veronica has constructed around her relationship with Duncan, and despite all the barriers Logan now has up, it's Veronica & Logan who are the "real thing." Yes, it's a legit criticism - both scenes were over-the-top. Though personally, I was OK with Veronica's "extra sexy" c'mon to Colin, because Veronica is hardly "Miss Experience" with this kind of thing, and was trying to do a "temptation scenario" without any real experience or training in it . . . I felt the same way about Logan's "extra snarky" attitude with Veronica. I mean, I can buy Logan being that tense and acting that over-the-top, as a way to cover up, and cover up, and cover up some more, the way he really feels (devastated, and still in love with Veronica). I agree about Keith & Alicia! I really want those two to work out and I'm hoping the "lies" aren't too extensive or devastating.
|
|
|
Post by Michelle on Oct 24, 2005 12:13:01 GMT -5
On the negative side, I don't think the episode was directed very well. Both Kristen Dunn and Jason Dohring are better actors than was demonstrated in GEM. I didn't care for the dopey way KB acted when she did her "Lolita" act on Colin, and I thought Dohring could have taken it down a notch with his mustache-twirling and so forth. It was, again very anvil-y. Er...I meant Kristen Bell. I don't think she and Teddy have gotten married recently! I felt the same way about Logan's "extra snarky" attitude with Veronica. I mean, I can buy Logan being that tense and acting that over-the-top, as a way to cover up, and cover up, and cover up some more, the way he really feels (devastated, and still in love with Veronica). That's very true. He is in love, and can't show it, so he covers with over-the-top sneering attitude. I agree about Keith & Alicia! I really want those two to work out and I'm hoping the "lies" aren't too extensive or devastating. I'm not even sure the word "lies" should be in quotes. She lied initially in the Chicago hotel when she told Keith she didn't know the guy calling her Cher. She then said she dated him 20 years ago, but if he's really Wallace's father, it would have to have been a *little* more recent than that. (I'm assuming Wallace is 18 or younger). And she must have lied about her ex's past and name to lead Keith to only discover his (faux) criminal background. I know there is a lot more to be explored, but for the time being, this doesn't show Alicia in a positive light.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 24, 2005 12:44:51 GMT -5
On the negative side, I don't think the episode was directed very well. Both Kristen Dunn and Jason Dohring are better actors than was demonstrated in GEM. I didn't care for the dopey way KB acted when she did her "Lolita" act on Colin, and I thought Dohring could have taken it down a notch with his mustache-twirling and so forth. It was, again very anvil-y. Er...I meant Kristen Bell. I don't think she and Teddy have gotten married recently! That's very true. He is in love, and can't show it, so he covers with over-the-top sneering attitude. I agree about Keith & Alicia! I really want those two to work out and I'm hoping the "lies" aren't too extensive or devastating. I'm not even sure the word "lies" should be in quotes. She lied initially in the Chicago hotel when she told Keith she didn't know the guy calling her Cher. She then said she dated him 20 years ago, but if he's really Wallace's father, it would have to have been a *little* more recent than that. (I'm assuming Wallace is 18 or younger). And she must have lied about her ex's past and name to lead Keith to only discover his (faux) criminal background. I know there is a lot more to be explored, but for the time being, this doesn't show Alicia in a positive light. Oh I agree! There were definite lies. I used the quotes to show I was quoting you. Sorry for the confusion. I'm hoping that her lies will all be around something fairly understandable and forgivable. They are so cute together! But if she really is a truly deceitful type, then Keith deserves better than that.
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Oct 24, 2005 18:14:02 GMT -5
Spring,
Chock full of goodness, as usual!
I like this point. Without that sense of possession to begin with, what the other person is doing (or whom) is irrelevant.
I don't know about the genealogy site, but I think the pregnancy deduction is pure genius! I wasn't clear on what was going on there at all. (Okay, I only watched it once and that with a 101 degree fever, but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have clicked even with repeated viewings.)
And speaking of watching carefully, I so love your finely-honed observational skills:
And just Wow. You found so many recurring themes. It's overwhelming.
I saved the intro from your review for last:
Only because I'm not sure I completely agree with you about Veronica's blind faith in Duncan. I think she's trying to convince herself that she trusts him, but....
And he sure isn't helping with the non-communication. If you are right about the pregnancy thing? Not telling your current partner that your ex is pregnant. Bad choice.
Musing......if Meg is pregnant, I would bet that her very Catholic parents actually would NOT pull the plug. They'd keep her alive in order to save the baby. But I don't see that being an ongoing plot point. ===========
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 24, 2005 18:42:01 GMT -5
Spring, Chock full of goodness, as usual! I like this point. Without that sense of possession to begin with, what the other person is doing (or whom) is irrelevant. I don't know about the genealogy site, but I think the pregnancy deduction is pure genius! I wasn't clear on what was going on there at all. (Okay, I only watched it once and that with a 101 degree fever, but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have clicked even with repeated viewings.) And speaking of watching carefully, I so love your finely-honed observational skills: And just Wow. You found so many recurring themes. It's overwhelming. Thanks for the great feedback, Sue. Veronica's blindness is willful blindness - I mean, she realizes Duncan is acting oddly, but she looks away, deliberately. She doesn't want to know; she is consciously avoiding looking. But to me, that is still blindness - a different kind of blindness than being totally clueless, but it still means you don't see what is there. I think it's more likely that she had an abortion than that she's still pregnant, because . . . wouldn't the doctors have noticed that, and told her parents? Though I suppose it is possible that the docs wouldn't notice, if they weren't looking for it. Still, if I had to bet, I'd bet on "abortion" rather than "currently pregnant." But we got so many mentions of paternity, and that deliberate reference to the lack of a belief in birth control among Catholics . . . it sure seems that way to me - that Meg was, or is, pregnant. Agree that Wallace is just aces all around though. He's such an honest kid, it is hard for him to imagine real treachery in his loved ones.
|
|
|
Post by LadyDi on Oct 24, 2005 22:04:00 GMT -5
Nothing too exciting to add. No strong feelings about this ep either way (after one viewing) except for Logan's mustache twirling. I love Logan. Thank goodness for him (and Sawyer). I gotta get my bad boy with a good heart fix somehow.
|
|
|
Post by leftylady on Oct 25, 2005 18:55:13 GMT -5
Spring, Chock full of goodness, as usual! I like this point. Without that sense of possession to begin with, what the other person is doing (or whom) is irrelevant. I don't know about the genealogy site, but I think the pregnancy deduction is pure genius! I wasn't clear on what was going on there at all. (Okay, I only watched it once and that with a 101 degree fever, but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have clicked even with repeated viewings.) And speaking of watching carefully, I so love your finely-honed observational skills: And just Wow. You found so many recurring themes. It's overwhelming. Thanks for the great feedback, Sue. Veronica's blindness is willful blindness - I mean, she realizes Duncan is acting oddly, but she looks away, deliberately. She doesn't want to know; she is consciously avoiding looking. But to me, that is still blindness - a different kind of blindness than being totally clueless, but it still means you don't see what is there. I think it's more likely that she had an abortion than that she's still pregnant, because . . . wouldn't the doctors have noticed that, and told her parents? Though I suppose it is possible that the docs wouldn't notice, if they weren't looking for it. Still, if I had to bet, I'd bet on "abortion" rather than "currently pregnant." But we got so many mentions of paternity, and that deliberate reference to the lack of a belief in birth control among Catholics . . . it sure seems that way to me - that Meg was, or is, pregnant. When did Wallace go straight to his mom to ask about his Dad? Agree that Wallace is just aces all around though. He's such an honest kid, it is hard for him to imagine real treachery in his loved ones. Great review, Spring, as usual. I only have time for a few quick comments before I have to leave. I'm with you on the probability of abortion over currently pregnant. Doing the math, she would have to be over 3 mos. preggers now if Meg & Duncan broke up shortly after end of classes. It would be very unrealistic to expect that the hospital could overlook this for the length of time she's been there. If not an abortion, a good "late" scare that got into her and Duncan's emails but good. (to quote you, Spring, "there is a lot of talk about time, of people being late and such ...") Meg being "late" would fit right in. I can't figure out the "pulling the plug". "Pull the plug" on what? Neither pulling the plug on Meg or a pregnancy fits with the portrayal of her ultra-rigid Catholic parents. I've known Catholics of every range of observance -this end of the Buckeye State has plenty to go around, and while birth control bans are generally overlooked by even the most old school, neither abortion nor euthanasia would fit as an acceptable reaction to a "fallen" daughter. So what else could that be? By the way, why would anyone as strict in their religious beliefs as Meg's parents have been written this year and in "Like a Virgin", have sent their daughter to anything but a parochial school in the first place? It's not like these 09er parents could not have afforded the tuition.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 25, 2005 19:24:12 GMT -5
Thanks for the great feedback, Sue. Veronica's blindness is willful blindness - I mean, she realizes Duncan is acting oddly, but she looks away, deliberately. She doesn't want to know; she is consciously avoiding looking. But to me, that is still blindness - a different kind of blindness than being totally clueless, but it still means you don't see what is there. I think it's more likely that she had an abortion than that she's still pregnant, because . . . wouldn't the doctors have noticed that, and told her parents? Though I suppose it is possible that the docs wouldn't notice, if they weren't looking for it. Still, if I had to bet, I'd bet on "abortion" rather than "currently pregnant." But we got so many mentions of paternity, and that deliberate reference to the lack of a belief in birth control among Catholics . . . it sure seems that way to me - that Meg was, or is, pregnant. When did Wallace go straight to his mom to ask about his Dad? Agree that Wallace is just aces all around though. He's such an honest kid, it is hard for him to imagine real treachery in his loved ones. Great review, Spring, as usual. Thanks, lefty! Yes - agree. I think it's just Liz using dramatic phrasing to say "my parents will KILL Meg if they find out what's in here!" I don't think she literally means, or that she really thinks, her parents would actually kill Meg. Who knows? Maybe Meg really wanted to go to the public school, and she was a "good girl" otherwise, going to church and such, so they let her. I think it's possible to work out a believable reason.
|
|
|
Post by Pixi on Oct 26, 2005 13:25:28 GMT -5
Thank you Spring, for a really excellent review. You made me appreciate the episode much more than before. Truthfully, I was in the "meh" camp prior to reading it. Oh, I tried to give it a chance, even watched it twice, but I just didn't like it as well as the previous three eps. Your review, however, opened my eyes to the themes of jealousy and possessiveness. Well, the jealousy part I figured out on my own. As someone pointed out earlier, that was kind of "anvil-y." But seriously, as a reviewer -- you the man. ;D One thing I noticed about the ep was Veronica's comment about failing to seduce two men in one day. Then she merely walks up to Logan, and with no (conscious) thoughts of seduction, Logan nicely offers to have sex with her. No cuddling, though--too bad! Ohhh - excellent segue Fotada. I didn't notice that. Nice!
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Oct 30, 2005 9:17:16 GMT -5
Spring!
Excellent review!
Nice catch on the 'pregnancy' angle. It did look to me that Duncan was there visiting Meg, not out of concern, as much as wanting to be there first when she woke up because of something they were keeping secret. Never would've thought it might me be because she was pregnant.
But with what we found out about Wallace and his real father later in the episode, it does seem to fit.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 30, 2005 17:15:16 GMT -5
Spring!Excellent review! Nice catch on the 'pregnancy' angle. It did look to me that Duncan was there visiting Meg, not out of concern, as much as wanting to be there first when she woke up because of something they were keeping secret. Never would've thought it might me be because she was pregnant. But with what we found out about Wallace and his real father later in the episode, it does seem to fit. Thanks, Karen. I do think that the "secret" is likely to have something to do with pregnancy. It just seems to be something more than "they had sex" (probably Meg's first time).
|
|