Far-flung and Ryan was a tertiary character we had no real investment in. Even if his deed could be felt through his parents (especially Lori) it simply wasn't enough for the revelation to have real impact.
After Kevin said he found it hard to believe John killed Erin because of his demeanor that night it was clear he didn't. At that point I figured Lori did it which would've been a much better twist imo.
Iโm with you. We werenโt interested in Ryan...his character was on the fringe of all that was happening. Really good series but I was hoping for a better twist. Poor Lori got really dumped on from different directions so I guess she was a cathartic person to help Mare with her grief.
shareAnd Mare with Lori's. If anyone can understand grief involving one's son it's Mare.
shareI don't like the "RYAN DID IT" ending either, but up until the last episode the rest of the SHOW was EXCELLENT.
What's also WEIRD is how this is the 2ND TIME now HBO has aired a show where the 13 YEAR OLD turns out to be the KILLER.
Because in "SHARP OBJECTS" it also turns out that the KILLER was the 13 YEAR OLD SISTER of the REPORTER who arrives in town to cover the story.
So WHY would they chose to do 2 SHOWS about Two 13 YEAR OLD KILLERS???
One show is UNIQUE, but doing a 2ND SHOW about still another 13 YEAR OLD makes it seem as if the situation is NOT suppose to be that UNUSUAL (which is also what makes it seem so ODD that they've chosen to do still another SERIES about another 13 YEAR OLD KILLER).
Maybe they could also have that girl from "SHARP OBJECTS" sent to stay at the same place as RYAN is being kept???
That is IF she didn't also KILL her SISTER before she could report her to the COPS (after she finds the TEETH of the MURDERED GIRLS had been used to DECORATE the bathroom floor of that DOLL HOUSE)???
๐ก
I watch very little serial TV but did see "Sharp Objects" recently. I figured the younger sister to be the murderer immediately as she was clearly a psychopath. Good show but I felt it lost gas as it went on.
shareThe ending where their mother poisons them was a bit over the top and was very MELODRAMTIC, but the other ISSUE where she had SCARS all over her body as a way to try to COPE with the kind of TRAMA that she'd been through, imo, was FIRST RATE.
And it still also doesn't explain the reason why HBO would chose to do 2 SHOWS that both have 13 year old KILLERS in them.
Choosing to use a 2nd story with a 13 YEAR OLD as the KILLER seems to be a situation that's a bit of an "OVER KILL" (so to speak).
Because the situation would probably also be EXTREMELY RARE to begin with, yet we've also got 2 of them now in HBO LAND???
FOUND THIS which indicates the situation isn't as RARE as one assumed that it might be:
United States: Thousands of Children Sentenced to Life ...
https://www.hrw.org/news/2005/10/11/united-states...
>>While many of the child offenders are now adults, 16 percent were between 13 and 15 years old at the time they committed their crimes. An estimated 59 percent were sentenced to life without parole ...
So there must also be more Teenaged PSYCHOPATHS among us than one had assumed there would be???
๐ง
A couple of mysteries where the killer turns out to be a child isn't much of an issue I don't think, especially given the stories and culprits are so distinct.
shareThat's the problem is the way it's not really that clear how DISTINCT the 2 characters are or are not. Because we've got Lori saying it was AN ACCIDENT, whereas we also know that it was NOT ( due to the way Ryan deliberately STOLE that GUN and pointed it at her).
So it's sort of as if I tried to run you over with my car and then said that it was an ACCIDENT when I killed you with it.
The problem is I would have deliberately ATTACKED you with a LOADED WEAPON that I knew could KILL YOU. And I also know there's NO EXCUSE for trying to RUN you over to SCARE YOU into doing what I want you to do.
And there's also the possibility that the boy could have been COACHED by his PSYCHOPATHIC FATHER to say he's sorry when he's not. Because his father was also going to KILL his own brother, and his mother also LIES for him.
So how sure can we be that RYAN's not like the other KILLER in SHARP OBJECTS???
I don't believe that's the case, but we still didn't see enough of him to know that. Because the other major scene that we saw with him was his BRUTALLY BEATING the BULLY over the head with that CAFITERIA TRAY.
In other words, we also didn't spend enough time on SCREEN with RYAN like we did with the other girl from SO to really know him one way or the other, or to know how DISTINCT he would be from the other 13 year old KILLER.
Amma's a serially killing sociopath, Ryan is not.
shareTry to keep in mind how he KILLS ERIN to protect his family from her.
And we also saw him BRUTALLY BEATING the BULLY over the head with the TRAY which was also done as a way to protect his sister.
So just because he's LOCKED UP now that doesn't mean he couldn't FREAK OUT and kill someone else again later on for the same reason (because he thinks he's protecting his family.
I get what you're saying but the two characters are distinct.
shareYes they are DISTINCT, but they've also got something in COMMON -- such as parents who are KILLERS (or would be if JOHN had KILLED his own brother -- as a way to keep his son from being LOCKED UP for KILLING his LOVER).
In other words, in addition to both characters being AGE 13, they also come from EXTREMELY DYSFUNCTIONAL HOMES or FAMILY BACKGROUNDS.
Yes, while of a different kind and scope, both suffered parental abuse.
shareWhat's CREEPY is the way the ABUSE suffered by RYAN was much more SUBTLE than what the other girl endures.
Because having a FATHER that's WILLING to MURDER his own brother as a way to PROTECT you, because you've KILLED his former MISTRESS (who is also an UNDERAGED RELATIVE who gives birth to your father's child) is also just as NUTTY as what happens in SHARP OBJECTS.
But instead of having the VIEWER aware of that FACT what we get instead is the impression the ROSS FAMILY was a NORMAL FAMILY (whereas we also knew from the START of that other show that Amma and her mother were NUT JOBS).
It's kinda crappy that you threw the reveal for "SHARPER OBJECTS" out there like that. Not a smart move.
shareWhat do you mean by saying it was thrown out there?
FYI, SHARP OBJECTS aired a VERY LONG TIME AGO, which means it's PERFECTLY NORMAL at this time to discuss whatever happened in it.
It's only when something has NOT already AIRED yet that discussing what WILL HAPPEN is a problem.
And IF you don't want to read messages where others discuss OLD SHOWS that were ALREADY AIRED SEVERAL MONTHS or even several YEARS ago (SO was aired 3 YEARS ago way back in 2018), then you should stay away from message boards where people tend to have discussions about them.
๐
I actually agree. Stay away from message boards if you don't wanna take a chance on getting spoiled. If you visit any given board, you take that chance. But you threw in a spoiler from a show not related to this board.
shareCORRECTION:
SINCE SHARP OBJECTS was aired 3 YEARS AGO, NO ONE "THREW a SPOILER" at anyone by talking about that show or about what happened on it.
Because SPOILERS only involve situations where someone -- (who KNOWS something that's going to happen -- "BEFORE an episode AIRS)"-- comes to a message board and "TELLS you what's going to happen -- BEFORE the show AIRS."
Since NO ONE has said anything here about WHAT'S GOING to HAPPEN "BEFORE it HAPPENS," NOTHING has been said here that involves SPOILERS.
OK???
In other words, it's PERFECTLY OK to TALK ABOUT something that happened on a SHOW 3 YEARS AGO.
And IF you are bothered by reading about something that happened 3 YEARS AGO on a show, then SIMPLY STAY AWAY and DON'T go to message board where others also tend to quite frequently COMPARE what happens on ONE SHOW with what happens on another one.
And since these were also both HBO SHOWS that involve having 13 YEAR OLDS turn out to be the KILLERS, that FACT makes it that much more likely people are going to compare THIS SHOW with SHARP OBJECTS.
Because CHILDREN usually don't turn out to be the KILLER in story that involves a MURDER MYSTERY.
You sure sound angry. lol......
shareSorry you have that impression ...
the use of CAPS is just a POSTING STYLE that's used and isn't a form of SHOUTING (if that's the kind of impression you've gotten).
Anyhow, since SPOILERS involve someone TALKING about something that HAPPENS BEFORE it HAPPENS, and SHARP OBJECTS aired 3 YEARS ago, that also means NO ONE here has THROWN any kind of SPOILER INFO at you.
Therefore the reason why it's INCORRECT to suggest that's what's happened.
๐โฎ
Geez, dude...โฆ..
shareIt's kinda crappy that you threw the reveal for "SHARPER OBJECTS" out there like that
you threw in a spoiler from a show
Well, I didn't falsely accuse anyone. Like I said, it wasn't very cool or smart of you to reveal such a major spoiler of a show on a different board. If you had posted it on THAT particular board, I'd agree with you. But you spoiled it for someone who may have been trying to avoid that board cause they were watching it. I know that's a extremely small outside chance, but you never know. I don't care if it had aired 3yrs ago. But whatever.
shareI didn't falsely accuse anyone.
Yeah. You're a spoiler. Not a good move.
shareAGAIN,
NO SPOILER INFORMATION has been POSTED HERE and to keep insisting that it has been when it HAS NOT is RIDICULOUS.
SPOILER INFORMATION is about something that "WILL HAPPEN BEFORE an EPISODE AIRS. "
AFTER the END of that SHOW or an EPISODE that's ALREADY AIRED, then it's PERFECTLY FINE to DISCUSS ANYTHING that HAPPENED IN IT.
Otherwise, we'd also have to still REFRAIN from having a discussion about what took place in GONE w/t WIND or about THE WIZARD of OZ or about what happened in some other film or TV SHOW 50 to 100 YEARS ago.
๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
Yeah, you don't get it.
shareNah, fuck you. I hadn't seen SO and planned to watch it next.
Yes, you shouldn't visit msg boards related to specific films/tv if you don't want it to be spoiled, but as the replier stated, this is a whole different show and discussion.
You could at least put a bolded SPOILER tag considering your random overuse of capitalized words...
[deleted]
[deleted]
I thought the ending was quite good and unexpected.
People who thought the ending was weak or bad, what would they have preferred? The killer to be any of the 3 or 4 adult male characters? Would have been quite platonic and unoriginal, no?
Trying to put it on the kid is the writer trying to really blow you away by assuming you would never think the kid would do it. I sorta felt "yeah, whatever" when the reveal came out. But I really felt sorry for Lori. Your husband is out there making kids, and your son is a accidental killer. Damn.
shareIf LORI had DUMPED her CHEATING HUBBY the first time that he had an affair with that other woman, Erin would probably still be alive. But forgiving him and taking him back again gave him the impression she'd FORGIVE him again for screwing ERIN.
That's a MAJOR problem with the TOWN. Too many people who were too willing to FORGIVE others they knew. The guy who said he knew how to find the KIDNAPPED girl and got her mother to agree to paying him $5,000 is another example. After what he did to her she also forgave him and then he ends up DEAD from a DRUG OVERDOSE (which wouldn't have happened if he'd gone to jail). Same situation with his sister who also didn't press charges against him when he kept STEALING stuff from her.
In other words, LORI was also partly responsible for the way that her life turned out the same way that other sister was also partly responsible for the way her brother behaved. Lori's husband was a SEX ADDICT. The other character was a DRUG ADDICT. And both LORI and the sister ENABLED the behavior of the husband and the brother by being willing to put up with it.
At least that's the way I see it.
Kind of like the situation where if you lay down with DOGS you can get FLEAS.
And her CHEATING hubby was also INFESTED with PLENTY of them (so to speak).
And MARE also lectured LORI about LEAVING her hubby because he was CHEATING on her again, but LORI BLEW her OFF and refused to listen saying she LOVED HIM.
But TINA TURNER also sang a song asking "WHAT'S LOVE GOT to do with," that also says it's just a 2ND HAND EMOTION.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGpFcHTxjZs&t=2s
Tina Turner - What's Love Got to Do with It [HD REMASTERED]
Maybe MARE should also have HUMMED a very bars of it or sang a part of it to LORI after she claimed she LOVED him.
๐
You have an interesting take but the end of the show is literally advocating forgiveness, when Mare finally forgives herself and enters the attic for the first time.
While your theory about wrongs being forgiven too easily is interesting, I don't think that's what the writers were going for.
What you say MAKES SENSE and you're probably right about how FORGIVENESS is what the writers were going for.
But sometimes whatever the INTENTION of the WRITER(S) is and WHAT the VIEWER PERCEIVES can also be completely different.
And that FACT was also made EVIDENT about HALF WAY through the show -- when one also expressed being FED UP with the way there were almost NO CONSEQUENCES seen for the actions that should have been addresses -- which included MARE not doing anything about the STALKING or the MILK being thrown through her window -- and nothing being done about the $5,000 the drug addict tried to STEAL from the CANCER PATIENT -- (when he told her he knew where her missing daughter was located) -- and NOTHING was done to the other girl who BEAT UP ERIN (until much later on when we're told that she now had a BAD record that would prevent her from going to college so she had to go to BEAUTY SCHOOL instead). ๐
In other words, in the first half of the show we keep meeting characters who do things that should have resulted in their ARREST, but doesn't. And Mare also DELETES the VIDEO from the SECURITY CAMERA to protect that other DELIQUENT, and then her BOSS also lets her get away with FALSELY accusing her daughter in law of STEALING DRUGS that MARE herself had STOLEN.
[b]And LAURIE also FORGIVES her husband for his FIRST AFFAIR, which leads to his having the 2ND one with ERIN, and then to the DEATH of ERIN by LAURIE's young son.
So if she'd LEFT the CHEATER in the first place, ERIN would still be alive, and NONE of what happened would have happened (including her HUSBAND ATTEMPTING to KILL his own brother!!!)
And when you look at it that way, and realize how the FORGIVENESS part of it is what caused the DEATH of ERIN (and almost caused the death of the BROTHER as well who was also ready to take the BLAME for KILLING ERIN), then the WHOLE PREMISE of FORGIVENESS pretty much also GETS FLUSHED right DOWN THE DRAIN.
At least that's the way I'm seeing it.
Thought the final twist was unnecessary and too much a nod to the murder-mystery part. The story was good enough without it. It should be more about the people and the community in the end, not about whodunit.
shareI loved the twist about Ryan. There were so many clues leading up to it!
shareI suppose. I knew it was going to be something completely out of the box. Personally I thought it was going to be Guy Pearce's character. When it turned out to be the little boy I thought "Well, yeah, that's out of the box". I wasn't disappointed or anything, though.
share