MovieChat Forums > daveyh > Replies
daveyh's Replies
ha ha ha ha
Swedes would have been neutral, surely?
doesn't dance along to Summer Nights and doesn't dance the drinks over to Tommy's table
could have done with a spoiler alert ahead of the o/p! Short answer - Yes, she does, but it doesn't matter.
Long answer - As her science teacher said, there's always going to be jerks, that doesn't change after high school, and you can either waste your time and your physical and mental energy trying to get revenge or trying to prove them wrong or trying to "beat" them, or you can focus on what you want to do with your life.
Nice case in point that in the end, the a-hole principal is still the principal and will continue to lord it over said science teacher. It makes a refreshing change that they played it this way - I was expecting some cliched scene near the end in which the science teacher gets one over on the principal or finally stands up to him, or better still there'd be some big reveal that the principal was having an affair with Whitney (which would make sense as he seemed to worship her and do everything she commanded) and so is fired and arrested, and the science teacher takes over. It would go against the message he gave earlier though.
And kudos to the writers for an ending in which the bullies "win".
Also gotta love the irony that Jodi and Mindy were "winning" for so long and then got greedy for more and that's when it fell apart and Whitney capitalised. There's a lesson there too.
I also think it would have been better if she'd died in season one, not to troll or because I "hate" her character, but because it would make the shooting, the effect it has on McNulty and also the stakes at the end of season one so much more serious.
It's not very well handled in season 2, the way she breaks her promise to her partner and goes back to the action of major crimes first chance she gets (although it's nowhere near as ridiculous as Daniels going back when he's on his way out with a law degree after being buried in evidence control).
While she had her moments up until the end of season 3, I think a lot of her story arc after that, especially her moving to homicide, would have been better served on Sydnor, especially since it's implied that he becomes the new McNulty by the end of it.
That said, one of my favourite lines in the entire show is when she's in hospital after surviving the shooting and Bunk's pressuring her to lie that she got a good look at both shooters, saying that it'll play a lot easier in court.
"Sometimes, things just gotta play hard"
I've just watched it with this theory in mind -
To answer your points, they could have put the piles of stones or those stick objects there themselves while Heather was asleep.
The walking south all day - IWasn't that also the same day Mike was a bit too gleeful when he admitted he threw the map away? Leaving her with no tangible way of knowing how to get back to the car/main road and so relying on them and their wits - a further addition to the o/p theory. If it was that same day, then I'm not sure at what point Heather seized sole control of the compass. Josh may have deliberately led them north for a while before she took over, or him and Mike could have picked arguments and wandered off in different directionsenough to disorientate her. Plus it's not 100% if it was the same log.
Only thing that I can't explain are the fairly distant noises at night when all 3 of them are shown to be in the tent. And the noises are picked up on camera so it's not as if they're only in Heather's imagination, egged on by Mike and Josh claiming to hear them.
Damn
I don't think Tony's age is ever specified. Maybe he was only 10 years or so older than Gina. Even 15 years is reasonably possible. So he could be in his early to mid 30s. Sure, he may look older, but that's caused by hard time in Cuba, eating octopus 3 times a day
I thought Andy only came into it in Season 3? When Jim goes to Stamford (Karen and the all too brief Toby also only appear then)?
Can't remember if the whole anger management thing happened in 3 or 4 - probably was 3, which means a lot happened to him during that season.
Sorry if this is a petty sounding response - it might just be a typo in the o/p
i've wondered about this too. All the evidence and testimonies wouldn't matter - Wee Bey's confessed to it and is happy to do the time for it, so the bosses wouldn't care, so it wouldn't even get as far as going to trial.
You saw in Season 4 the flak that Bunk got for "unsolving" the murder in Andre's store. Why would this be any different
Absolutely. There's nothing like hearing Norman singing "we won't go until we get some" to put you in the Christmas mood
he also plays a not dissimilar character in Starlet, which would be about 10 years later so when he's well in his 30s. He plays it well though
I think at times they tried to portray him from Michael's perspective - and on 2nd viewing, when you know why Michael has this attitude, you can see how it can come across as creepy. The bit when he sort of leans on his shoulder while talking to him when watching the sparring, and Michael literally shrugs him off in disgust. And the bit when he's talking to him at the mirror, and he says something like "yes, I do love the ladies" - such a weird thing to say, as if trying to overcompensate.
We've already seen enough of Cutty throughout Season 3 and at other times in Season 4 to know that he's a stand up guy and certainly not a predator. Michael hasn't though, and whenever Michael's at the gym, it'll show Cutty saying and doing things that could be misinterpreted. And like I say, especially on repeat viewings, when you know more about Michael's story, it's like "no wonder Michael's creeped out".
That's the genius of the show that I hadn't even noticed before until I read this thread.
thank you, glad someone else has mentioned the same sayings being spoken by different characters, often in the same episode.
The most talked about one is that Clay Davis and Naymond both say "I'll take any mf'er's money, if he giving it away". This, followed by Naymond's more prosperous circumstances at the end of Season 4, and his ability to debate shown during his cameo in Season 5, has led many to read in to it that Naymond was to become the next Clay Davis.
I personally just viewed it as an example of them showing that the streets and high end politics weren't so different.
There's another episode shortly after this, on election day, when Randy's friends stop helping him with his leafletting gig after they learn that he's already been paid - one of them (think it's Donut) tells him that his employer for the day only has himself to blame for paying him upfront.
That same episode, Carcetti agrees to bribe Clay Davis to not endorse Royce. He does so anyway, to which his advisor, Norman, says that it was foolish to give him the money in advance!
My favourite of the characters saying the same words, though, is when both Stringer Bell AND Bunny Colvin start saying "get on with it mf'er" when they're meeting their demise
just to go back to my initial response to the OP, I remember even as far back as season 2, when I first watched the booze cruise episode, that moment when Jim looks at the camera that's following him and quietly says to it "I'd save the receptionist!" - I remember thinking then, 'as if you'd say that knowing that what you've said could be broadcast at any minute.'
I think the longer the show ran for, though, the more of a joke it became - when Michael leaves mid-way through Season 7, one of the last things he says to the camera is "let me know if this ever gets shown" or words to that effect
sorry cv1cv, I might be "feeding the troll" here ha ha!
I'd expand on the OP though and say that it goes beyond any individual character - it's the problem with the whole documentary style, given how long the show ran for.
It's hard to believe that cameras would focus on an individual office for nearly 10 years, unless they were trying to make some bizarre version of Boydhood. Even if they did, they'd certainly condense the coverage into one series or maybe even a movie (sort of like a dull version of Hoop Dreams). They wouldn't release so many stand-alone series of it. They'd probably not even run it chronologically, instead maybe focusing on one individual each episode and contrasting their appearance, habits, social lifestyle etc over the course of the filming.
That's possibly one place where I'd say the Engish version has the advantage - because there were only 12 episodes of the original spoof-documentary run, and all supposedly taking place within a 3 month time frame, it makes the fly-on-the-wall documentary idea plausible. (the Christmas specials were treated as a follow-up show after the original had aired)
Also at the time the English version was conceived, in 1998, fly-on-the-wall documentaries (also known as "docusoaps") were all the rage in the UK. Even by the time the show is supposed to be set though, in early 2001, they had become tired and were fast being replaced by reality shows.
By 2005 in America, when the filming starts, this kind of documentary making would be very outdated.
think it was a reference to Cruel Intentions - not seen it for about 10 years, but if I remember right, Ryan Philippe's character's step-sister would flirt and tease as a way of getting him to do what she wanted.
in the original (Infernal Affairs), the cop in Trooper Brown's position (the one who confronts them on the roof) turns out to be the other mole and shoots their equivalent of Costigan as they're getting into the elevator before it goes down.
So anyone who watched the original BEFORE watching this one will be expecting the same, and so when the elevator door closes and begins its descent, they'd think "oh, i guess he's not gonna get shot then, they're gonna go with the hollywood ending of the good guy getting his man and being the hero" and then BAM when the elevator gets to the bottom! If Scorsese was going for this, it's quite brilliant because it lulls anyone who'd already watched Infernal Affairs in to such a false sense of security, it means Costigan still getting shot is also a shock to them!
That said, Trooper Brown being the Costello's second undercover would have made for a much better twist, given that he was in the academy with Costigan - Costello could even have pulled some strings or recommended him to Sullivan when he was picking his team.
nicely summarised. In the Work category, I'd also say that Jimmy, with all his energy/hyperactiveness and intolerance for the "c**ts" (his words) he had to deal with in the office, would have been better suited to the manual labour jobs that his male friends are seen doing, but wearing a suit all day and being in an advertising agency was again the "cool" decision - the job was a good status symbol even if it wasn't right for him.
"traitorous" as in he acted like he didn't know Kevin when the other mods came in to the cafe - even going as far as to abandon his pie and mash and leave his towel behind. Then he does nothing while his friends are giving Kevin a kicking as "revenge" for Chalking being messed with by a couple of more thuggish rockers (think one of them was Auf Weidersein Pet's Gary Holton?) earlier in the evening, Jimmy knowing Kevin well enough to know that he wouldn't have been involved
to add a few more into the mix
Kelly - using Darryl to make Ryan jealous (although I'd forgotten about the fake performance reports - wasn't that "revenge" for forgetting her birthday? Yeah, that was kinda sh***y too)
Ryan - hard to single out one moment for such a sketchy character. Abandoning his baby in the show's finale takes the cake though. Also generally committing fraud on the company's behalf during his short time as a NY bigwig
Dwight - abusing his powers as a volunteer sheriff's deputy (there's a brilliant deleted scene in which he goes to the station to "hand back his badge" which shows just how far he'd gone)
Angela - making utterly unreasonable demands on Andy re their wedding, all the while with no intention of going through with it as she was having relations with Dwight throughout
Roy - being a d**k about Pam wanting to go to art school. Also abandoning Pam at the Dundies - ironically this only brought her and Jim closer.
Jim - planning to propose to Pam during Toby's leaving party (especially if he knew about Toby's crush on Pam, which is very likely given the hand on her knee incident mentioned in the OP)
Andy - proposing to Angela during Toby's leaving party
Also to defend Karen, I don't think she was trying to poach Stanley to get back at Jim - I don't think Jim would have cared if he'd gone. I think she was trying to hire Stanley because he was their top sales-person and, from the time she worked with him, she perhaps suspected that he was as disillusioned with the Scranton office environment as she was and would welcome the chance to transfer somewhere with a more professional approach. So I'd say it was a purely business reason. Michael and Dwight are the ones who made it awkward and a lot more personal by going there to confront her about it and bringing Jim along. Actually I'm struggling to think of anything bad involving Karen.
Also in Holly's defence, Dwight told her that about Kevin. Being as senior in the office as he was (Michael's "assistant"/"assistant to"!), chosen to show her around, and given Kevin's behaviour around her that day, she had no reason not to believe it. I just find it hard to believe that it took until early in season 5, which would have been months later, for her to realise that she'd been pranked.