red snow Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 6 hours ago, Astromech said: I'm wondering if his wife's book will be a key to solving or uncovering the mystery of this season's crime. Some detail to jog his memory? Having finally finished episode 2 i do appreciate how they were sprinkling lots of conspiracies as in season 1 to allow viewers to entertain themselves. One that stuck out for me was his wife saying she decided to be pretend to be a different person a couple of times a year. Could just be establishing she's a frustrated writer or it could be suggesting she is capable of writing fiction so that her book isn't reliable. She us a character I'm looking forward to finding out more about. Same with his daughter. Hopefully his son doesn't get turned into cyborg during the show. Lastly, Disney need to look ali up for playing a sith in a future star wars film - he has the light sabre sound and jedi stance down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astromech Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 6 hours ago, red snow said: Having finally finished episode 2 i do appreciate how they were sprinkling lots of conspiracies as in season 1 to allow viewers to entertain themselves. One that stuck out for me was his wife saying she decided to be pretend to be a different person a couple of times a year. Could just be establishing she's a frustrated writer or it could be suggesting she is capable of writing fiction so that her book isn't reliable. She us a character I'm looking forward to finding out more about. Same with his daughter. Hopefully his son doesn't get turned into cyborg during the show. Lastly, Disney need to look ali up for playing a sith in a future star wars film - he has the light sabre sound and jedi stance down He would have been a much better Mace Windu than Samuel L. Jackson. I'm wondering what exactly happened in her past when she was in the Anti-War movement during the Vietnam War. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nictarion Posted January 18, 2019 Author Share Posted January 18, 2019 30 minutes ago, Astromech said: He would have been a much better Mace Windu than Samuel L. Jackson. Too young at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Nictarion said: Too young at the time. Plus i think he'd make a better villain. 1 hour ago, Astromech said: He would have been a much better Mace Windu than Samuel L. Jackson. I'm wondering what exactly happened in her past when she was in the Anti-War movement during the Vietnam War. She did say something about the panthers at one point. So i think she was pretty active. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dooog Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 10 hours ago, red snow said: Lastly, Disney need to look ali up for playing a sith in a future star wars film - he has the light sabre sound and jedi stance down I like it. Will never happen though, Disney "baddies" have to be white Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astromech Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 8 hours ago, Nictarion said: Too young at the time. Sure, but what if? We would've been spared SLJ and his lame purple lightsaber. 7 hours ago, red snow said: Plus i think he'd make a better villain. She did say something about the panthers at one point. So i think she was pretty active. Possibly. He was great as Cottonmouth. Then again, Anakin thought the Jedis were villains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyrazer Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 We've only seen Roland in the 1980 timeline so far haven't we? I hope he comes into the other timelines as well. I expect he will come into 1990 atleast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted January 20, 2019 Share Posted January 20, 2019 17 hours ago, Skyrazer said: We've only seen Roland in the 1980 timeline so far haven't we? I hope he comes into the other timelines as well. I expect he will come into 1990 atleast. Its just following the same narrative trick as season 1 with woody harrelson. Until we see him in the 90s or present tbey expect us to assume something has happened to him. As it is I'm not biting as I'm a bit tired of that trick. I'll give them bonus points if he has just died of lung cancer in a non dramatic way that adds to the plot. At first i was thinking Stephen dorff has really aged but then i realised i haven't seen him in anything since Blade so I'm judging him against his 20+ year younger self. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted January 20, 2019 Share Posted January 20, 2019 I don't know if we will see him in later timelines. Everything said about the show so far is that it's more of a one-man show, not a two-hander the way S1 was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astromech Posted January 20, 2019 Share Posted January 20, 2019 They'll go full season 1 and Roland will have had an affair with Amelia and is the real father of Becca. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unJon Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 Roland in later timelines: Read an interview with Dorff where he mentioned being a more successful person than his partner in the 1990s timeline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 That's not really a spoiler, they mentioned it in one of the first two eps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Antony Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 Enjoyed Roland a lot this week. Seems like a good dude. Not gonna bother theorizing about the crime just yet but I’m loving the atmposphere. So far so good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astromech Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 Waiting to discover what happened between Hays and Roland and the police force. I enjoyed the tension of their 1990 reunion scene at the bar. How did Roland get shot? Roland's comment about Hays's big mouth was spot on with some things Hays said this episode: his conversation with Amelia after she returned from her dinner with the cops and his comment to her about the war protests ending once the draft ended. I feel for Woodard and was hoping he would get in a few more shots, but then didn't feel as bad after the scene where he seemed to be hiding his bag. What was in the bag in Woodard's garage? It was shaped oddly like a body. Looks like Elisa is trying to get a reaction out of Hays for her documentary. I'm thinking the mom knows something. She seemed to know exactly which photo Hays was interested in in that album. So D&D, dolls, a secret friend, a secret meeting place, a mysterious expensive brown sedan? What else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slurktan Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 22 minutes ago, Astromech said: I feel for Woodard and was hoping he would get in a few more shots, but then didn't feel as bad after the scene where he seemed to be hiding his bag. What was in the bag in Woodard's garage? It was shaped oddly like a body. I thought it was a rifle. My guess is he is going to get blamed for the kids murder/abduction after he kills/tries to kill some of the local hicks. Hence the case reopening in '90 as he clearly didn't do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.H. Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 4 hours ago, Astromech said: So D&D, dolls, a secret friend, a secret meeting place, a mysterious expensive brown sedan? What else? I thought Hayes' 2015 (that's the right year?) imagined Amelia's comment about something "he left in the woods" is likely important, but I don't think we can really know what that is supposed to mean. Also, I think the implication was that he ended up somehow being complicit? Not sure. What if part of his memory issues isn't actually dementia, but rather repression of what he found out? Kind of jives a bit with what Hayes implies to the doctor, how they don't know what the problem with his memory is, as I thought the implication was not so much that he has actual dementia (or the like) but rather that he is getting old. Might be misreading that though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.H. Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 3 minutes ago, Triskele said: While I did think the encounter with the doctor seemed to draw some attention to "we don't know what's up exactly with the the disease" it seems unlikely that there's no memory issue given other scenes with the family where there's concern about his recollection with basic stuff. Right, I should have had a "just" in there, as in, "not just dementia." Otherwise, what is with "her" saying that to him? In other words, why is he saying that to himself there? Unless we suppose that there is something supernatural at hand. In either case, there is something up with what he doesn't want to remember, in my estimation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iskaral Pust Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 I watched the first three eps over the weekend, which helped to get that early immersion. I like the return of the southern gothic noir, the ominous tone, experiencing and reminiscing in the same narrative, etc. It has not managed to capture the landscape so powerfully as in S1, but that was a singular accomplishment. Overall it is much, much better than S2 and a welcome return to form. I was slightly bothered by how heavily it relies on repeating S1, but I've decided to accept that. Ali is very good as Hays but several times his enunciation was just unintelligible. The deep-voiced muttering is an important part of maintaining the ominous tone but I need to understand what he is saying. Every other actor enunciates clearly while keeping within the mood and tone. We've had lots of red herrings (?) thrown at us already: the three teenagers (one of whom was riding Will's bike at the park that night), Woodard, the mother's cousin, Julie's biological father, the expensive brown sedan, the assistant attorney general acting contrary to the detectives requests, the documentary interviewer suggesting that the case was blocked from unveiling a protected pedophile ring. The third timeline is a bit awkward so far. They do the time slips well but it's still distracting to the narrative. I know NP said there is no unreliable narrator but I think this season may test the definition of unreliable narrator. Hays has obvious memory problems in 2015, possibly 1990 too, and Amelia's ghost/Hay's subconscious alluded to things he knows & did but has hidden from the authorities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 It still is a bit too slow and a bit too clear what has happened. In 1980 the junk vet almost certainly had the crime pinned on him. He was probably killed in a shootout with the cops. Roland probably got shot. Case was closed as they didn't find Julie and assumed he killed them both. Junk vets children in 1990 wanted the case reopened after julie was reported alive. Julie was still not found officially in 1990. Clearly in 2015 the case is still not finished. It seems likely Hays knows what happened and why, and decided to hide it. It seems less likely that he doesn't know, and more likely that he chose. Better question is whether Amelia knew the truth and decided to stay quiet because of her book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 Well, looks like Dorff has a bigger role than I was expecting based on earlier stories about the season. Not sure if that was misdirection or people misunderstanding what was being said; because while Ali does have a bigger role (I wouldn't be surprised if he's the only one in all three timelines) Dorff isn't quite a second-fiddle. As far as the season is overall, my opinion hasn't changed yet; it's competent enough, but I'm not being drawn in the way I was in the S1. I am suspicious that Amelia knows the truth, or at least a big piece of it. I also suspect that the charity/chicken company is involved in some way and isn't just a red herring. Based on both S1 and S2, Pizalatto likes having big corrupt institutions that are failing and/or actively preying on regular folks, and so far that charity seems like the best bet to play the part this season. And I agree that the junk man seems like the most likely candidate to have the crimes initially pined on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.