Mladen Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 1 minute ago, felice said: Agent Carter is only 8-10 episodes per year; it shouldn't be an insurmountable problem. Yeah, I agree but between ratings and that little fact, things don't look too promising. But, I truly hope I am wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martini Sigil Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 I have been sticking up for this show for a while.... but holy Toledo that was atrocious.... Really?.... the President of the United states flies to Russia to help Coulson spring Hunter & Bobbie?.... Who wrote that episode?.... a ten-year old?... And the way the whole shoot-out, inhuman fight scene went down was asinine... Nothing makes sense on this show anymore... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastard of Boston Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 I was initially puzzled by the resolution to this episode, myself. But, after I let it marinate, I kind of get it. The idea is, everyone knows SHIELD exists, but everyone also wants to pretend it doesn't. Everyone knows what's going on, but nobody wants to put it on the table -- it'll become something which needs to be addressed. Bobbi and Hunter ultimately ended up being the sacrificial lambs. They were apprehended. If they go back to SHEILD and end up being seen in the field again, Russia can't pretend they're not SHIELD anymore -- like they did here -- as a solid for the fact that Bobbi saved the day. Russia allows them to walk, but ya know, "Don't let us see you around these here parts again, ya hear?" It's flimsy, but it works. C'mon guys, we've seen a lot worse on the CW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 How does that work? Either they're officially guilty of something, in which case they need to remain in custody, or the official story is that they did nothing wrong, which means there's no reason for them to leave SHIELD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastard of Boston Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 29 minutes ago, Jon AS said: How does that work? Either they're officially guilty of something, in which case they need to remain in custody, or the official story is that they did nothing wrong, which means there's no reason for them to leave SHIELD. You're operating under the assumption that their biggest crime was killing the Inhuman. Their biggest crime was being caught working for SHEILD, when BOTH governments want to pretend SHEILD doesn't exist. It's Cold War stuff. That's why they were disavowed. You can't operate in the shadows when Russia catches you with your pants down. You can't turn a blind eye if Russia catches Bobbi, Hunter, and Coulson all in the same place again. Again, it's flimsy -- not saying it isn't -- but if you can believe in Inhumans, you can believe Bobbi and Hunter consider themselves tainted as a result of being caught out there. You see your girlfriend in the same place with her ex one day, you're willing to give her the benefit of the doubt. You catch them in the same place again next week, you can't pretend it's a coincidence, anymore. Russia knows Bobbi and Hunter are lying, but I interpreted it as there being a price to Russia letting it go. Make no mistake, Bobbi saved the prime minister's life and eliminated his opposition. He also got SHIELD to cut loose two of its agents. He won, and he threw Bobbi and Hunter a bone by letting them walk free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 11 minutes ago, Bastard of Boston said: You're operating under the assumption that their biggest crime was killing the Inhuman. Their biggest crime was being caught working for SHEILD, when BOTH governments want to pretend SHEILD doesn't exist. But everyone who knows that Bobbie and Hunter were there also knows that SHIELD still exists. Either their involvement is widely known enough that it can't be covered up, then they need to be held for an official investigation, or the situation is contained enough that they can be let go. Whether they're with SHIELD doesn't even become a factor until the incident becomes public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastard of Boston Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 2 minutes ago, Jon AS said: But everyone who knows that Bobbie and Hunter were there also knows that SHIELD still exists. Either their involvement is widely known enough that it can't be covered up, then they need to be held for an official investigation, or the situation is contained enough that they can be let go. Whether they're with SHIELD doesn't even become a factor until the incident becomes public. It was a coup. That is the story Russia is going with. It's the story Russia is going to use to cover for SHIELD. Two former SHIELD agents "on vacation" get involved in a plan to assassinate the prime minister, saving his life. Prime minister pretends SHIELD doesn't exist as a solid, allowing them to continue to operate in "secret." Bobbi and Hunter get to be hailed as heroes vs. being hailed as members of a rogue secret government agency, but in return, they can't be SHIELD anymore. Remember, even the US government isn't supposed to know about SHEILD -- it's the president's project. I dunno, my intention isn't to be difficult. I just don't think it's that ridiculous. It's weak, but it's not implausible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 But how does that translate into the two of them having to leave? If SHIELD is not going to be mentioned as actively involved, where does this need to send them away come from? Really, SHIELD shouldn't be SHIELD any more. In reality, organisations like Blackwater at least change their name when they get implicated in criminal activities and SHIELD was caught in an attempt to take over the world. I guess Coulson is simply too nostalgic to even consider that, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastard of Boston Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 19 minutes ago, Jon AS said: But how does that translate into the two of them having to leave? If SHIELD is not going to be mentioned as actively involved, where does this need to send them away come from? It's mentioned in the episode, when Bobbi says if she goes back to SHIELD, they won't let her do field work anymore -- she'll be given a desk job, so as not to have her caught in another International incident further implicating the existence of SHIELD. It isn't so much that Bobbi and Hunter can't be seen with Coulson and his crew, it's that Russia won't allow them to be seen with Coulson and his crew. Russia -- and the president, to some extent -- are forcing SHIELD to make Bobbi and Hunter sacrificial lambs. Russia won't implicate SHIELD if SHIELD cuts ties with Bobbi and Hunter. Russia creates the narrative. Russia wins across the board. Like Bobbi said, someone had to lose -- Bobbi and Hunter took the bullet. Coulson can't change their name...because it's the show title and stuff. All about branding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 But why does Russia insist on that narrative? Why do they care whether two lower ranking field agents remain in SHIELD's employ or not? And what power do they have to enforce compliance once Bobbie and Hunter are released? A more logical approach would have been for Russia to cut a similar deal with Coulson as the US president did. SHIELD used to be an international organisation, after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastard of Boston Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 1 minute ago, Jon AS said: But why does Russia insist on that narrative? Why do they care whether two lower ranking field agents remain in SHIELD's employ or not? And what power do they have to enforce compliance once Bobbie and Hunter are released? Why wouldn't Russia insist on that narrative, even if it's only to be petty? Besides SHIELD is, what, 8 people? You get rid of two agents, you cripple them. And Mockingbird is Mockingbird. She's a West Coast Avenger. I'm sure the Russian prime minister would prefer getting Captain America kicked off the Avengers, but you take what you can get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 I didn't realise the prime minister was into comic books. I also was unaware that he has insight into SHIELD's inner structure. Some reasons not to insist on that narrative: - gratitude - avoiding to antagonise a powerful organisation operating internationally with virtually no oversight; an organisation which has the ability to infiltrate highly secure Russian facilities and assassinate high ranking government officials - the possibility of turning a potential enemy into useful ally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felice Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 1 hour ago, Bastard of Boston said: It was a coup. That is the story Russia is going with. It's the story Russia is going to use to cover for SHIELD. Two former SHIELD agents "on vacation" get involved in a plan to assassinate the prime minister, saving his life. Prime minister pretends SHIELD doesn't exist as a solid, allowing them to continue to operate in "secret." Bobbi and Hunter get to be hailed as heroes vs. being hailed as members of a rogue secret government agency, but in return, they can't be SHIELD anymore. I thought they didn't want to publicly admit there was an attempted coup, so they were blaming Bobbi and Hunter for the deaths (which do need a public explanation)? It was the PM's personal guard who caught them; the only reason they were handed over to Interpol was to be scapegoats, otherwise their involvement could have been hushed up. If the PM wanted to hurt Shield, surely exposing it would be the most effective option, and if he didn't want to, why remove their agents? And since they were let go, who were the deaths publicly blamed on in the end? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastard of Boston Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 7 minutes ago, felice said: I thought they didn't want to publicly admit there was an attempted coup, so they were blaming Bobbi and Hunter for the deaths (which do need a public explanation)? It was the PM's personal guard who caught them; the only reason they were handed over to Interpol was to be scapegoats, otherwise their involvement could have been hushed up. If the PM wanted to hurt Shield, surely exposing it would be the most effective option, and if he didn't want to, why remove their agents? And since they were let go, who were the deaths publicly blamed on in the end? That was the initial course of action, when the PM was arguing with Coulson over how the situation had to be handled. When the episode closed, the PM agreed to the terms Coulson laid out...i.e., PM didn't know how he could sell the situation. Coulson underlined the fact that his life was saved, and his opposition was eliminated. Bygones. That's why Bobbi and Hunter were free to have drinks at the end of the episode. If they were supposed to be held accountable in a criminal sense, they wouldn't have been able to walk. Russia didn't necessarily want to expose SHIELD. We are talking about two countries, with a strained relationship, politicking enough to foster "goodwill." They still show the passive aggressive behavior of two countries who don't like like one another, but maintain a relationship to avoid all-out war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 The funny thing is that Bobbie and Hunter are almost certainly going to be having crazy international spy adventures on their new show. Yeah, they won't be working for the government but the appearance would be the same to the Russians or anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrimTuesday Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Man, I really liked this week's episode. I like the introduction of the Watch Dogs as an antagonist group, though wasn't wild about the ending. Does Hydra really need to be behind or are part of every nefarious plot? I mean come on, there are so many villious organizations within the Marvel universe, why couldn't this have been AIM? Why not link it with Agent Carter and the Netflix shows and use Roxxon (I really liked that they used Roxxon in the new season of Daredevil)? Shit, I don't even care if this was HAMMER with someone subbing in for the characters they can't use (Norman Osborn, Venom, Victoria Hand since they killed her off for some reason, ect.). That aside, that was a good episode as far as I'm concerned. I liked that this was an episode where we got to focus on Mac, and I actually kind of liked his brother (took me forever to realize the actor also played Smash in Friday Night Lights, must of spent half the episode trying to figure out where I knew him from) and hope we get to see more of him. Mac doesn't seem to be getting a ton of screen time as of late, so it was a nice change of pace. I actually have always really like Mac, they easily could have made him the bruiser type character with how big he is, but I like the direction they have taken with him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Looks like Daisy's transition from online activist to torturing thug is complete. Good thing the antagonists are backed by Hydra, else we might be tempted to question Team Coulson's methods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrimTuesday Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 11 minutes ago, Jon AS said: Looks like Daisy's transition from online activist to torturing thug is complete. Good thing the antagonists are backed by Hydra, else we might be tempted to question Team Coulson's methods. Still not as ethically questionable as The Flash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felice Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 21 minutes ago, Jon AS said: Looks like Daisy's transition from online activist to torturing thug is complete. Good thing the antagonists are backed by Hydra, else we might be tempted to question Team Coulson's methods. I got the impression we're actually supposed to be questioning their methods this time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon AS Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 1 minute ago, felice said: I got the impression we're actually supposed to be questioning their methods this time... Probably, yes. The show just has a lousy track record when it comes to this. Plus the bad guys are still way too bigoted to make counter arguments that come across as truly compelling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.