As evidence continues to mount against Jonathan in Elena’s murder, The Undoing takes some time to ask the important question: Just how much of an asshole was this guy? For that particular crime, the evidence is pretty overwhelming. He was a narcissist at work, and a neglectful, cheating husband. He went into a specific field of medicine most people would consider heroic, and then he took advantage of people’s affection for him.
It’s all quite a lot, but it’s hard to extrapolate from what we’re given that being arrogant and emotionally manipulative would be enough to make him a murderer. And that’s the question Grace struggles to answer throughout the episode. After her initial shock about what he’s accused of leads her to believe he’s guilty, she takes a slow but steady journey towards believing he didn’t do it. She hires a fancy lawyer for him, and begins to push back against the people around her who don’t believe him. In the process, of course, she starts to behave in ways that make her a lot less sympathetic. Threatening the grieving husband of the woman she can’t know for sure her husband didn’t kill is one of the early signs that Grace is willing to go to some nasty lengths to prove Jonathan’s innocence. And trying to throw the police at him despite their ongoing hostility to her is a bold if rather ineffective move. What leads her to believe they’d be inclined to take her side? They’ve already cleared him.
The episode also abruptly remembers that Grace is a therapist, but her insights are heavy-handed at best. What therapist would say “Crazy people do crazy things,” especially one as polished as her? It’s a gross comment, but it’s also incredibly simplistic. Wouldn’t someone like Grace have some more elegant way of suggesting Elena might have done some unsettling things if she was unwell? She’s oddly disinclined to look for specifics in the narrative Jonathan presents, even after his former colleague lays out in no uncertain terms that Jonathan cultivated unhealthy relationships with the families of his patients. It’s an unexpectedly sharp swing away from the beginning of the episode, where she summons the police (by helicopter? Sorry, taxpayers) to arrest him, and tells them he threatened her. But it also comes after she meets with Jonathan where he’s incarcerated, and he gives her the full force of his denial. Grace has so far been a bit of a cipher on the show—we spend an awful lot of time in her company, but she’s so often reactive. Is she the type of wife, and specifically the type of wealthy, white, privileged wife, who would be this quick to disregard ample evidence that her husband is a truly reprehensible person?
It’s a narrow line the show is currently treading, especially since we haven’t yet been offered any signs that Jonathan may be innocent, and so our perspective on Grace’s change of heart is that she simply decides to believe him despite abundant evidence from other people that he was hiding a dark side.
We also get glimpses of Jonathan’s life behind bars. The show feints at sympathy for incarcerated people—Grace and Henry are clearly experiencing empathy for the other families in the visitation room—but the only other person we spend time with is a stereotype of nasty prison behavior. The brevity of the scenes also makes it hard to tell what it is that suddenly pushes Jonathan to violence. We’ve seen that he can be physically forceful, which Grace recounts immediately to the police. The prison fight suggests that he can be viciously violent when he wants to be, but without a more in depth look at what’s happening to him there, it’s unclear whether we’re supposed to think he’s really been pushed that far, or if this is who he is in some meaningful way. It does seem quite notable that the point where he bites the other prisoner’s finger is not a moment where he’s actually in danger. He may be in the midst of a fight, but he’s not cornered alone somewhere, and the guards have already started to break up the fight. Did he intentionally choose a moment where he could hurt the man without getting further injured himself?
The short, opaque prison sequences are representative of the episode as a whole. After an episode where we spent all of our time with Grace, we’re given one where we hopscotch around so frequently that it’s somewhat hard to predict when scenes are going to end. While it’s occasionally confusing, it can also be quite effective. The collection of scenes where Fernando can be seen near Grace pushing a pink stroller without ever actually speaking to her all end without a confrontation we know must be coming, so that when it finally does happen, we’re primed to think something frightening will take place. But it turns out the most frightening person in that scene is Grace, who turns around his accusation that her husband has abused his position by suggesting that there’s something evenly remotely equitable in a traumatized mother having an affair with the man who saved her son’s life. It’s one of a couple of moments sprinkled throughout the episode that lead the viewer to be a little bit more ready to believe Grace may have been up to something nefarious when the police reveal she was filmed near Elena’s studio. Just how well do we know our unreliable narrator?
Stray observations
- I kept thinking the theme song sounded like Nicole Kidman singing and I finally looked it up and it is! I had started to wonder if we would eventually get a scene of her portentously performing the song at karaoke or something.
- OK, what was the $500,000 for? That’s the other nugget we get that seems likely to be revisited down the line.
- So much of the time on this show, it’s hard for me to tell if I’m actually supposed to experience empathy for its characters. Jonathan expresses regret, kind of, but I’m also not sure if he ever uses the word “sorry.” And the sentiment “wanting to help overwhelmed me” is one of the seedier things he offers. It’s a particularly arrogant and self-aggrandizing way to excuse his affair.
- Still not sure where they’re going with Donald Sutherland’s character but it sure was racist when he called Detective Mendoza “dear boy.”
- Apropos of nothing, I can’t remember if I’d ever seen Hugh Grant in short sleeves before this.
- Occasionally I find the directing of this show a little heavy-handed, but mostly I enjoy how conscious I am of the choices they make—who’s in frame, what colors are visible, how close we are to them, etc. The colors of Grace’s hair and clothes are always very noticeable against the drab grays around her.
117 Comments
but it sure was racist when he called Detective Mendoza “dear boy. No. No it’s not. Sutherland (and his eyebrows) are a senior, likely English educated, art and humanities expert and “dear boy” is not in anyway an ethnic slur and commonly used. My very senior boss uses it all the time when giving me a slight, friendly chiding over a difference of opinion. Yeesh.Moving on, this show is delivering surprises and with every shoe that drops that we see through Kidman’s eyes intrigues only because of how damn great her performance is in reacting to them. That meeting with the detectives where she is trying to take charge with reporting the widower’s appearance and then insist he is hiding something based on her education/experience was expected. But holding her own by that glare Mendoza’s after his somewhat snarky response was something we all wanted to see.But damn that was quite the rug pull with the reveal of the camera footage.. It now fully explains why the detectives have been so aggressive with her. And in no way feels like a cheat. So far this is a great, extremely enjoyable mystery.
Lisa has evidently never seen The Langoliers, where Dean Stockwell calls a younger character, who’s white, “Dear boy” about every five minutes.Mendoza’s behavior with Grace since the first episode now makes more sense: he was treating her like a suspect because he had the camera footage. I was thinking throughout the episode that if Jonathan was innocent, it’s not a coincidence that he had an affair with Elena and that she was murdered. It may be in real life, but not in murder mystery fiction. Someone was setting him up. Since Grace is acting very much like an innocent woman, I do hope the show doesn’t go down the very hacky split personality path as someone here mentioned last week.
Yeah, no racism here. Just a super confident rich dude who’s not even a tiny bit afraid of the police. Must be nice…
That was me. But someone else suggested that she killed Elena in a blind rage after following them to the studio, that it’s very likely she knows what she did, and that she’s playing everyone, including the viewers. She could throw Jonathan under the bus both because he’s an asshole, as well as the fact that it serves as a convincing distraction. This seems quite likely. I’m just waiting to see if she knows she did it or not.
Grace seems way too obvious if she was presented as a suspect at the end of episode 3?
I think this interpretation sounds right. She killed Elena in a rage, possibly after catching her with Jonathan, and is happy to frame him for the murder, and possibly having second thoughts about that, if there’s someone else she can point the police to. I’m also wondering if maybe she was also having an affair with Elena- Jonathan has said Elena was becoming obsessed with Grace, and there was an intense vibe between them both at the gym and at the school gala. But all of this seems kind of hamfisted to me. Have I watched too many thrillers? I hope something about this will surprise me.
Right, maybe Elena had brought both of them, at different times, back to the studio to shack up, so that’s how Grace knew to look there.
I know, calling Sutherland’s “my dear boy” as being racist is a huge reach.
Agree. The writer is totally misconstruing that line and the stance of the character.
“Moving on, this show is delivering surprises and with every shoe that
drops that we see through Kidman’s eyes intrigues only because of how
damn great her performance is in reacting to them.”I feel the same way. I actually rewound three times the scene where an emotional Kidman said “You have a daughter” to her incarcerated husband. Mostly because of the subtlety of her brows and how her eyes conveyed so much sadness, then pulls herself together instantly after. That moment of emotional shift was done so quickly but with such great acting that I had to see it again.
The second they mentioned security video I knew it was going to be Grace on it. This show needs to be ahead of me/it’s audience. I hope there are unexpected surprises yet to be unveiled but that reveal was too easy and predictable. I’m going to be very disappointed if it turns out to be some split-personality nonsense or other blackout type of shenanigans for the perpetrator.
The episode also abruptly remembers that Grace is a therapist, but her insights are heavy-handed at best. What therapist would say “Crazy people do crazy things,” especially one as polished as her? It’s a gross comment, but it’s also incredibly simplistic. Wouldn’t someone like Grace have some more elegant way of suggesting Elena might have done some unsettling things if she was unwell?
She was looking to see if there’s other men in Elena’s life in which could be involved in her murder instead of her husband. She was pulling on that thread and see if she can unravel toward other possibilities.That was before the rug being pulled at the end of episode with her revealed to be actually close to the location at the time of murder. Like you perfectly stated, Grace might very well be unreliable narrator and that she’s not showing what we want to see.Intriguing…
I think Grace killed Elena in a jealous rage that she was being two timed by her husband. There was a lot in episode one that they haven’t explained yet.I thought the money went to have the baby/ or an abortion, but that’s an awful lot of money.
Maybe he was being blackmailed about the baby.
I was thinking that it could have been a way to hide from Grace that he’s lost his job. If he wasn’t working, he wasn’t collecting a paycheck, and eventually she would notice that the only deposits in their bank accounts was from her own income. Maybe he asked for enough to be able to keep the lie going until he could figure out what to do next. (Glassdoor puts the average pediatric oncologist salary in the bigger hospitals at mid $200K but that’s average and it’s likely he was earning more.)
The episode also abruptly remembers that Grace is a therapist, but her insights are heavy-handed at best. What therapist would say “Crazy people do crazy things,” especially one as polished as her? It’s a gross comment, but it’s also incredibly simplistic. Wouldn’t someone like Grace have some more elegant way of suggesting Elena might have done some unsettling things if she was unwell?
She was looking to see if there’s other men in Elena’s life in which could be involved in her murder instead of her husband. She was pulling on that thread and see if she can unravel toward other possibilities.That was before the rug being pulled at the end of episode with her revealed to be actually close to the location at the time of murder. Like you perfectly stated, Grace might very well be unreliable narrator and that she’s not showing what we want to see.Intriguing…
That was a gut punch when she learned that the baby is his daughter. Nicole is so good but I am LOVING Hugh Grant in this. It’s so interesting to see him playing a cheating scumbag and it feels a little meta for him? Although bygones and am I the only person who still thinks of Liz Hurley? This is a great role for him and he is killing it! The fight was so butch compared to Bridget Jones- well done! I am always so glad to see him working because it seemed for a while there he was sick of acting and was always bitching about retiring. He is really good! I am also enjoying Edgar Ramirez because WHO WOULDN’T?? I like to think that Nicole hand-picked him because she likes to look at pretty things (see also: Skarsgard, Alexander), but probably wasn’t her decision. And again I loved her coats this week. Loving this show!
How many coats does one woman need?!?!?
When you look like that- as many as she wants. This show should be billed:-Nicole Kidman, then her hair, then her coats-HUGH GRANT IS FINALLY ACTING and he’s GREAT-Edgar Ramirez is HOT-young lady’s boobs-Kiefer’s Dad
Edgar Ramirez …. yes please.
Her hair gets wilder and wilder as the story progresses. It’s almost too much. I know no women with curly hair ( have curly hair) that it looks that perfect ALL THE TIME. And those are curling iron spirals so is she spending two hours every day doing her hair?
I may be biased as a #coatperson, but the limit does not exist.
Come see my closets. You buy a new coat every year or so and then you end up with WAY too many coats. I have 5-6 I need to give to Goodwill. I do not care for that green velvet coat, at all.
so glad I’m not the only person that hates that green coat.
Who wears a full length almost to the ground coat like that? In green velvet? I said in an earlier episode review forum, she looks like she’s doing Stevie Nicks cosplay.
Hugh Grant flipping out and holding his own in a PRISON FIGHT was a weirdly “FUCK YEAH!” moment for me; maybe just because I like Hugh a lot and seeing him kick ass was oddly satisfying.
Interesting character work here. The first episode, we see Jonathan and he appears to be a fine husband, loving and funny. Now other characters tell us that he was a major narcissist whose ego was so big that he didn’t care about others or was capable of physically hurting them. But so far, we haven’t actually seen that with his scenes. Deliberately, I think.
Even his father-in-law (who has a big interest in knowing the character of his daughter’s husband, but apparently didn’t have any problems with the marriage before) too quickly thinks he did it, though that is part guilt about lending him money, thinking that if he hadn’t, Elena would still be alive. There’s more to that guilt and quick judgement. The prison fight scene shows Jonathan overreacting to a prisoner, but understandably so when he tries to get away from him at first and then in the fight biting his finger, even if that is excessive. The writing is creating a cognitive dissonance, on purpose, of who Jonathan is and why his friends and family would all assume so readily that he’s guilty. By which I mean maybe we’re meant to be suspicious of the testimony that he’s a narcissist. Maybe even his doctor friend is a suspect.
2020 is the year of “Behold all white women are stupid treacherous c*nts. They have accepted this judgement for thousands of years. They will bow their heads and continue because WTF else do we expect them to do? If in doubt, just beat the shit out of them.” Check Genesis if you have any doubts.Of course her husband did it. And ALL men are liars. We don’t know why they Lie; they just DO.
Stepping outside of the narrative production for a moment; I think Kidman’s facial work has officially become a distraction. One of the too-many close up scenes this episode has her furrowing her brow and her face now looks like a rubber mask snapping in out of tension a slight batch of weird folds. It folds a bit in one spot, then BOING, it snaps back to inflated perfection. When they film her and counter her against another actor’s natural face it is making her look more and more like an alien. She needs to figure out a way to age back to some level of reality because it’s starting to break the suspension of belief in the story. If I was a director I would not be happy watching my edits come back. She’s a good enough actress to do it, but there comes a point where you can’t counter that other-worldy appearance. It would be like Tom Hanks suddenly turning up juiced on roids. Dwight Johnson might pull it off for awhile because of the rolls he plays, but in most circumstances it becomes a distraction.
damned if you do, damned if you don’t. I think she looks stunning, she still looks like Nicole Kidman, it’s not that distracting.
I think the directors choice to film people’s eyeballs is a poor one. Eyes are kinda gross and ookey, and I really don’t need a close-up shot of anyone’s eyeballs. A face close-up, okay I get it. But the eyeball shots are distracting and take me out of the show. I keep thinking of how close the camera had to get in those shots. Blech.
I agree. I’m not sure what they think they’re conveying with those. An eyeball shot so close that you cannot see expression is just a biology filmstrip. On that note I think it’s interesting how there is such a contrast between HBO fare going overboard with artistic license, often scuttling narratives and drawing out shows several weeks beyond necessary or being effective for the material (looking at you Sharp Objects and The Outsider,) – as if there is no one in the room saying “no, that makes absolutely no sense”. Then there is commercial network fare that has NO artistic license and seems to film their dreck by check box as if there is someone in the room constantly saying “No, just film it like we’ve always done. Don’t upset Aunt betty.” I like a happy medium somewhere in the middle where they don’t destroy effective narrative devices for ego, but aren’t boring and derivative.
I agree. HBO and even Netflix have this idea that if it’s not 12 episodes, it’s not good. But good lord is the Vow the best example of wasted time. And The Keepers on Netflix could have been 2 episodes but instead it was 8.
I bailed on Keepers and I’m from Baltimore and knew about that story growing up. Still couldn’t stay interested for THAT long.
The paradox of the middle-brow: most people prefer middlebrow products, but it’s increasingly difficult to make it economically viable. The pressure is always to either get the most viewers possible by being completely unchallenging, or else to inspire a devoted cult following by being unique… just telling a good story in a capable but unspectacular way risks your story getting overlooked.
HBO can give writers a ton of freedom, eg. season 3 of Westworld.
…which was awful on many levels except CGI.
I’m starting to wonder if Kelley wrote himself into a corner with some of these recent turns of events, there are quite a few holes in the plot. She doesn’t have any idea her husband hasn’t worked for three months. Where is he going all day? She has no idea he’s having an affair for 12-15 months minimum, depending on the age of the daughter, 9 months plus 3-6? Doesn’t know Elena, but she just “happens” to walk by her studio? Which is nowhere near her home? Most people don’t go walking that far from where they live do they? Esp women late at night? It’s not like she was out hiking, she was dressed in her fancy coat wandering around NYC at midnight ish? I don’t think Kelley has the writing chops of Vince Gilligan and Peter Gould, who were known to come up with insane plots for Walter White and then have to devise backwards a way out of it. And this isn’t fantastical like Breaking Bad. This is a straight up old fashioned murder mystery. So we can’t have crazy Nazis and machine guns in the trunks of cars.
If it’s her and she is setting up her husband for revenge, it makes no sense to show her acting shocked or afraid or confused, when she is alone and making phone calls or wandering through her own house, except to be a bogus misdirection device by the writer. She also visually imagined the rather specific murder weapon of a sculptor’s hammer, which she would not know of unless she was there in some capacity. Given the casting of the talented and in-demand Noah Jupe as the son, I am banking on him having done it, fearing his family would be split up by her affair and child with his father. Remember they alluded to him knowing his father’s password and his interest and nervousness at the cops coming by- AND, remember, apparently being able to access his dad’s phone when she couldn’t. He didn’t do it successfully, but the fact he would even be inclined to try was a tell and foreshadowing IMO. Now, exactly how they develop that angle will probably be ridiculous crapfest of writing and plot armor, but it can’t be as banal as the husband. She doesn’t make any sense as the scenes have currently been written and that’s too predictable. Her father might make some sense but they are being really slow to develop that too.
Oh I didn’t think she is framing Johnathon, I just remembered that movie where the guy really seemed guilty, he got off because of a great defense attorney, and then we find out after who really did it and nothing can be done about it. Kids know how to get into phones etc without it being something sinister, tho.
True, but why write that exchange about getting in to his dad’s phone? I just think it’s some foreshadowing going on – Chekov’s Gun and all that.
Man you must love The Handmaid’s Tale
Close ups of June are a drinking game at this point. And she’s illogically gone all Bruce Willis, bad ass, smart mouth with no repercussions or worries. It’s totally screwed the dramatic tension of that show from the first two seasons and original novel material. It’s kind of meta, but now she is written and acting as though she KNOWS she’s a plot armor-wearing character in a TV show.
Oh I actually HATE the Handmaid’s tale for all there face shots of Elizabeth Moss. She’s great but not that great. I love the story but I wish Moss wouldn’t be the main character for a season.
I would totally watch a season that’s mostly about Emily or Moira
It has become a “star vehicle” as they say.
Agree! I noticed that last night watching this episode. WTF is up with that??
The last time I saw such ultra close-ups was in the Kelsey Grammer show Boss. It worked in that show; not so much here.Kidman is killing it. She’s really good in this show.
I was trying to explain this to my wife without getting in trouble. I said something like, ‘Clearly she’s gorgeous, but if she has much more work done on her face she’s gonna look like……someone who’s had too much work done on her face.’ Which is a shame, cuz I’ve been a fan since BMX Bandits.
And because she is a public figure / actress you generally know how old she really is, so it again becomes this weird distraction that she keeps playing the mother of elementary -to-middle school age children when she could realistically be their grandmother now. I know you can figure “Well, she could have had that child at 44,..” but that reasoning becomes a distraction and it has an expiration date on it at some point. And she’s a good enough actress to not rely on it, but it’s getting hard to back away from all that baggage when she’s being cast.
oh come on, stop scrutinizing this woman’s appearance this much, jesus. this isn’t what the average viewer is thinking, this is just you being extra critical of how she chooses to present herself. if it’s bothering you this much towards her character as Grace, then just reconsider that she’s playing a rich New Yorker who would most likely also be getting injectables.
And I acknowledged people get work done – but we don’t have cameras 6 inches from their face projected on big screen.
Your description of her facial “wrinkles” is spot on. I caught one shot where her forehead starts to furrow slightly, which confused me, and then it just popped back smooth again. And the cheek fillers are also distracting. I find myself looking at her face analyzing the surgery instead of watching the character. She looks very beautiful but also not quite human.
There was something about that shot that was just strikingly off. I can’t even remember what the scene was about necessarily, but you know it when you see it. And by cutting back and forth to her normal looking scene mate, it really makes her look strange by comparison. You can kind of get by the generality and beauty of her luminous latex-i-ness if they weren’t doing so many close ups and back and forths, but that shot was kind of jarring. Lots of woman (and men) get a lot of work done, so that look isn’t unheard of these days, but we’re not 6 inches from their face on a big screen. I think that’s where the director is erring here. She looks good, but to a point, you know?
That description is perfect. She’s beautiful but not quite human.
agreed, for about 10 years now she has been WAY too “procedured” with the Botox and filler injection. At the beginning it seemed like maybe she had finally “aged” into her face, that she didn’t look nearly as artificial as she used to, but now it’s all I see when she’s trying to emote. (Arguably you could also say that she looks like many wealthy New York women who have had too much work but none of her friends look like this.)
she is a great actress, but her face has been distorted to the point of almost looking alien. human faces move, human face have lines and wrinkles!
I’ve been thinking the same thing. Nicole is 50 ish, correct? No woman of that age doesn’t have a single line on her face. I also notice something she does, and she did it in Big Little Lies, when her characters are frustrated, she does this quick exhale, it’s gotten a little distracting. I was wondering if this would end up like that Harrison Ford movie where his lover is killed and it ends up his wife killed her and framed him. Why did Donald Sutherland go to Elena’s apartment? And didn’t Elena live in Harlem? I thought I heard that mentioned in a previous episode. I don’t know NYC at all, but is it practical for someone who lives in Manhattan to walk all the way up to Harlem late at night? Why does the media hound her when she gets in a car, but then she’s able to freely walk around the city? Wouldn’t she have the ability to sneak out of that building thru a back door or something to a waiting car so she doesn’t have to deal with the press?
There was a period several years ago when she had almost no expressive ability, her forehead and face had a lax, immovable quality. I think she is doing a good job and is clearly not indulging in “the needle” nearly as often or it is being done in a much less obvious manner. In this role I believe she is meant to keep her thoughts and emotions close to the vest, as opposed to a physical lack of facial expression.
Her hair is like another character and should have it’s own credit.
I felt this episode felt disjointed compared to the tight first two episodes that only spanned a few days. But maybe that’s intentional, showing just how disoriented Grace must feel even when the days turn into weeks. I suspected Grace, and I’m sure she’ll psychoanalyze herself to also believe she did it, but I doubt it’s her since it’s only episode 3. Lily Rabe is looking suspicious.
I was thinking Henry (the son) might have done it, I mean those two sons are the same age and they go to the same school, wouldn’t they know each other?
I can see that too actually, and might be why Donald Sutherland is being so protective. good theory!
If I remember, the sons are different of age. I recall it was mentioned a couple of time in the first episode they are on different class and level.
I must have missed that, thank you!
They are of different age, and Grace used that as a reason for why Henry doesn’t know Miguel, but someone else pointed out that it’s a very small school and everybody basically knows everybody. It’s possible Henry knows Miguel more than we think he does at this point.
That’s your assumption, unfortunately a bit late. A couple of episodes ago, Henry bumped into Miguel, and apologize. But quite obviously they don’t know each other well by their expression. Also Henry stated he doesn’t know Miguel up until the event unfold, since they are on different level of classrooms.
I think Henry’s behavior during the prison visit suggest he didn’t do it, unless he’s as aspiring sociopath, which he might be. His questions to Jonathan would’ve kept Grace from catching on.
There are also the intermittent visions that Grace has, which can be interpreted as what she imagines happened or what she actually witnessed. Did she see him comforting his patients, or does she envision it in order to continue to view him as a devoted physician? Did she see the dead woman on the floor or does she imagine what it must have been like for the boy to find her like that? I feel like they have been frustratingly vague, but if it turns out that she is guilty and they are all real memories, I think I’ll feel manipulated.
Yes, I’d be surprised if they went that route, it just feels a bit outdated and there were a lot of variations of this in the early 2000’s. It worked then, but it does just feel overly manipulative at this point since there weren’t many clues (The Others with Kidman worked because there were enough crumbs to guess the twist).But I do wonder the purpose of the intro? is it some indication Grace has had a long history of violence since she was a little girl?
“Sarah Lund”!
Those 2 mins with her were the best thing of this rather boring episode. Although her american accent was kind of weird..
Is Hugh Grant becoming typecast as a jailbird? First he goes to jail for his shenanigans with Paddington, and now this! In both cases, he’s got a very captive audience. 😁
“especially since we haven’t yet been offered any signs that Jonathan may be innocent”Except that Kidman “sees” things in her memories/flashbacks that she can’t possibly have seen unless she was at the crime scene. That alone, even before the big security camera reveal at the end of this episode, suggests that this is not as simple as “bad husband kills mistress/baby momma”.Also, I assumed the $500k was a combination of the family needing money after he lost his job and him giving $$ to the mistress during/after pregnancy.
Spanier’s conviction restored! Thought you would want to know. https://apnews.com/article/college-football-courts-pennsylvania-football-graham-spanier-3e7cdec3685b0f02da3fd450dbf41df3
Trust me, I already knew about this ruling which is very clearly un-Constitutional (and the judge who wrote the opinion is buddy buddy with the same corrupt folks in PA). It will get over turned at the the next appeal – don’t worry.More importantly, moderators, can we please throw this guy out with the trash. He is injecting a six month(?) old argument into a threat that has nothing to do this. He’s clearly a loser who is e-stalking me via this comments section.
Jail time for Spanky? ROFL This is it. No further appeal. SCOTUS won’t take it and they won’t hear it en banc either. Just wanted to make sure you knew! Butthead
If they don’t hear it en banc, then it is a travesty of justice. But that happens all the time in this country; most people are enlightened enough not to celebrate it. Enjoy being an ignorant prick.
No, it will be justice and en banc hearings are rare and not normally granted. What is an injustice is that this criminal (Spanky) has not served his jail sentence yet but that will be remedied. The judge that threw out his conviction was a PSU fan like you. The THREE judges that voted unanimously to reinstate Spanks conviction are not part of the cult. You are a horrible person but at least your pal will face his justice soon. Glad you have no kids or influence. I truly pity such a soulless person as yourself.
You remain painfully ignorant about almost every single aspect of this case (the judge being a PSU fan is the funniest thing I’ve heard all week). Wallow in your ignorance, piggy.
You remain painfully wrong about this case in every way. Saying that the Appeals Court went unanimously against Spanier because they were buddies with others in PA is hysterical. However, the judge went to PSU and was a fan like you. Look it up. You represent the banality of evil which is PSU fandom. Wallow in that.
I’m not going to re-explain the facts of this case to you. I wasted too much time filling in the gaps in your knowledge months (over a year?) ago. You can believe whatever you like, but it is not supported by the facts (either of the case or of the law). I hope the rest of your apparently empty (otherwise, why bring this up a year later) and miserable life are going better for you than this argument is.
I’ve refuted all your ignorance before and you’ve really had no answer other than juvenile insults. What I believe is what the jury and most of the rest of us non JoeBots believe, that is the Paterno three covered up Jerry Sandusky’s molestation of children to protect the image of Penn State. They are now ALL convicted criminals and Penn State has paid almost a billion dollars out for these fool’s crimes. As the fan you are, you should be angry at them when a simple phone call could have avoided it all. I bring it up to watch you dance about. It’s entertaining and I like keeping you up to date! And you always rise to the bait don’t you? LMFAO Speaking of miserable, how is it for you who has no morals or soul. THAT must be miserable!
Your refutations are based on incorrect facts. Most of what you just wrote is incorrect, so I’m not even going to waste my time on you. My final comment will be twofold: 1) There is no such thing as a soul, and if you believe there is then you are a bigger ignoramus than I thought 2) My morals are based around truth and justice (neither of which have been reached in this case); apparently your are based on grandstanding. I hope some day you educate yourself and find happiness that doesn’t involve stalking people on the internet because they disagree with you.
My refutations are based on proven and legal facts while your beliefs are based on a cultist love of a dead immoral football coach. That’s the second time you’ve said you’re not going to waste your time so I think you’ll be back. You can’t help yourself ROFL. There is such a thing as a soul but since you don’t have one then you don’t understand. Your morals are based on a cult and a false one at that. You are a sad angry person who picks fights with folks all over the internet. Not just here either. You are some nothing lowlife who has invented a false persona of some type of great scientist when you are just some government bureaucrat handing out welfare checks. Your ego is based on social media and I like to pop those types of bubbles from time to time. Maybe your true happiness will be found when you leave social media? But I think you’re addicted. LMFAO. I’ll await your angry response.
My response isn’t angry. I’m sad for you and hope you learn how to critically think some day. Also, please stop stalking people on the internet. I’ll be off enjoying my life. Grow up.
ROFL. I knew you would be back. You don’t feel sorry for anyone and you aren’t enjoying life posting on stupid social media. You are a sad fellow who just likes to insult and fight with others on the internet. I just come on here every now and then to keep JoeBots stirred up. When Spanier goes to jail I’ll send you his mugshot LMFAO. Your life is sad and defined by fighting on social media. Who needs to grow up?
You are the one who re-started this argument (after what a year??), not me. You just admitted you come back from time to time to pick fights (on the internet). Sounds like you are the sad, joyless person who is divorced from reality. Hope you find some peace.
Back for more? LMFAO!! I thought you were done? I only fight with JoeBots because they are sick evil people who worship a dead Football Coach who let little children be molested. Spaniers conviction being restored brought this back up. I wanted to watch you dance about with that one and damn if I didn’t get some entertainment. You fight with everyone about damn near everything. These are the actions of a sick unfulfilled person who never did much in life and find significance being an internet troll. Once Spanier does his time in jail and the JoeBots fade away I will not be on these platforms. But you will and be willing to fight with anyone about everything from stupid tv shows to wrestling. I have peace now but you’ll never know it. The fact you can’t stand to not get the last word is ample proof of your insecurity. I am living in your head rent free and I’ll be there a bit longer.
Headline “Sad Internet Stalker is Sad and Stalks Intelligent Man”. No film at 11 because it would make everyone sad. Please get help. Or go fuck yourself. I don’t really care which.
On the News at ten: “Immoral and unhappy member of Cult Paterno is outed as mommy basement living government worker who claims to be 6’5″ (LMFAO) and a great scientist by truth seeker” Please get deprogrammed or maybe just commit yourself. In the meantime I’ll continue your therapy. Let the healing begin! Will he be back? I think so! ROFL.
Update: “Sad internet man remains sad because he cannot harm intelligent man he has become obsessed with”. LOL. Get help.
Follow Up story: Paterno Cultist seeks help from truth teller while living in mommy’s basement working a drab government job. I am here for you buddy and we’ll start your therapy by your admission that Joe knew about Sandusky and failed morally to protect the children. I feel good about this for you. Help is here for you.
You are more detached from reality than Trump and his QAnon buddies. Literally none of what you just said is true. Very sad. Perhaps if therapy isn’t working for you, you should consider pharmacological alternatives to be able to deal with the sadness that is your life.
Part of your therapy will involve some repetition. Let’s assemble your mantra for you to repeat as often daily as you can:1. Joe Paterno is not my god2. Joe Paterno admitted under oath that he knew McQueary told him he had seen Sandusky molesting a boy in the shower at PSU.3. Joe failed morally by not notifying the police and indeed participated in the decision not to report Sandusky.4. I will be out of mommy’s basement by the end of the year and will quit lying about being a scientist on the internet.Play spa music and use rosary while doing this. Let the healing begin.
1. Correct. Never said he was. That would be weird (also, there is no god)2. Incorrect.3. Incorrect.4. I’m sitting in my own house while typing this and I am absolutely a (well known) scientist and have been for 20 years. So this is nonsensical.I do not require healing. The sad man who is stalking me via avclub is the one who needs therapy.
1. As Pascal once said: There is a god sized hole in all of us. You fill that hole with a pants pooping football coach. You have a god and it is false.2. Correct and legally proven in court3. Correct and legally proven in court4. You are sitting in your mom’s basement typing and playing video games online. I found your profile remember? You’ve created a false persona on the internet to give yourself credibility. A well known scientist wouldn’t waste time arguing about Penn State online. He wouldn’t care as you do. You are a liar. Prove what you say.You probably should actually be committed as sociopaths tend to harm others. Oh, one final update, the Third Judicial Court of Appeals refused to hear Spanier’s appeal en banc and now the OAG is petitioning to have him AT LAST, serve his deserved sentence as the criminal he is.https://www.pennlive.com/news/2021/01/ex-penn-state-president-graham-spanier-loses-latest-appeal-of-conviction-attorney-general-moves-for-enforcement-of-prison-term.html.Now repeat the mantra I gave you. I can see this will take some time.PS I’m glad to see they let you out of jail in DC after you raided the Capitol! ROFL
1. I fill any holes I have in my life with science and friends. You apparently fill your holes (LOL) with internet stalking.2. Disproven, despite incorrect court verdict.3. Disproven, despite incorrect court verdict.4. Spanier won’t serve any time in jail. This is because of covid (and his failing health) but is a tiny, tiny sliver of justice because he is innocent.Remind me what “profile” you found of mine? I rarely play video games (I did break out my old PS2 during the pandemic, but that’s the most modern system I have) and I certainly don’t play any games online which would necessitate a profile. If you believe that is me, I STRONGLY encourage you to stalk that person. Show up at their door, call them a pedophile and see what happens…..LOL.“A well known scientist wouldn’t waste time arguing about Penn State online. He wouldn’t care as you do. You are a liar. Prove what you say.”My google scholar profile tells me that I have 77 peer reviewed publications to my name. I’m not saying that’s a lot (narrator: that’s a lot), but it’s enough to rightfully claim I’m “well known”. It’s good they keep track I have, because I lose count. As for proving this, I’m not going to doxx myself because there are crazy people out there like you who cannot stand it when someone points out how wrong they are and will seek juvenile (and possibly illegal) retribution. On a more holistic note, this statement suggests that you don’t know many scientists. We are, in fact, people, with hobbies and significant others and lives outside of work. I like a variety of hobbies, including college football, as does my partner (although she likes the SEC…bleh).“PS I’m glad to see they let you out of jail in DC after you raided the Capitol! ROFL”This sounds like something you did since you are the one who refuses to acknowledge the truth (I’ve been anti-Trump since day one and have never been a registered republican).Please seek mental help. I don’t want your internet stalking to get out of control and eventually see that they made a Lifetime TV movie about your sad criminal case.
1. You call it stalking yet you engage gleefully with the conversation. LMFAO. But *I* have the problem. ROFL You are all over the internet picking fights with people and doing online games (not I) so I think *you* have the problem.2. Proven in a court of law3. STILL proven in a court of law. That is a fact. I thought you were a scientist (ROFL).4. We’ll see, maybe he’ll die first. But you also said he would never be convicted either. He deserves jail. Just give him the vaccine and send him on to the pokey.I know several REAL scientists and they don’t do online gaming or post on Kinja arguing with folks about TV shows or immoral coaches. Losers in Mom’s basement do that. 77 articles? Tell me their titles and where published then. You are just a sad loser liar. You love places like Kinja on the internet because you can make up anything you want. One day your a brilliant scientist, the next day a champion athlete, the next day a former Prime Minister. You may in your sick mind think that it gives you some cred but it doesn’t. It’s just make believe. You are a coward too, hiding behind a fake persona. You hide because you are none of the things you claim. That is sad.Face it, you’re just a sick troll and cult worshipper of an immoral group of guys who looked the other way while children (whom you hate) were abused. Have you said your mantra today? We’re getting behind on your therapy! Let’s try harder shall we? Healing is living.PS Did the Koch brothers bail you out of jail?
Gleeful? Hardly. Please notice the time lag discrepancies
between when I post and when you post. I
usually respond weeks after you write something profane about me. You respond
to me within a day. I picture you eating
Cheetos and constantly hitting refresh, hoping I will validate your pathetic
existence by taking time out of my busy day to answer you. LOL. Today is your lucky day, super chieftan. Open a up a new bag of Flaming
Hots and try to contain your excitement.Regarding the court proceedings, in previous threads I have
explained to you how the legal basis on which the convictions were based is
flawed. The court agreed and was then
overturned by a higher court (which was “stacked” with friends of the PA OAG).
If you don’t appreciate why convicting someone ex post facto is a huge problem,
I suggest you study the law in your spare time instead of stalking me. That proves my point even before you get into
the factual issues of the case (again, see federal investigation into Spanier
by J. Snedden, which completely disproves the prosecution’s case). There was no cover up. The only people who think there was are
people who got their only info from the USA Today or people who hate Penn State
(or college sports in general).Regarding my career, I have no idea why this interests
you. First, I am not going to tell you
the names of my papers or where they were published because that would be doxing
myself. I will say that most of them are
in middle of the road journals (if I was lying, I think I’d claim they were all
in Science or Nature….LOL) with impact factors between 2 and 10, which is good,
but not amazing. I will not be winning the Nobel Prize, but I am very well
known within my field.It’s odd to me that your scientist “friends” don’t have
hobbies. They just “science” all day,
then sleep and repeat? I find that unlikely. I’m sure they have hobbies too. The only thing I can figure about why you insist on doubting
my career is that you just hate that someone has “normal person” hobbies and
also a successful STEM career. I bet you
were also the guy who hated it when the captain of the football team was valedictorian….LOL.
I better not mention my athletic achievements or you might have an aneurysm. As stated before, I don’t online game (I maybe played Words
with Friends 5 years ago??) and I don’t know what Kinja is. If you think this online gaming person is me,
I strongly suggest that you engage them. That would be good for a laugh. In terms of politics,
I’d be willing to bet I’m more liberal than you, but it isn’t really a contest.You make a big deal about me “hiding behind a fake persona”
when you also have an anonymous screen name. In fact, I’ve divulged way more about myself here than you have.How about this? Tell
me your address and I’ll come meet you for coffee. Or tell me your real name. Or tell me your job title and who your work
for? No? Then shut the fuck up about hiding behind a fake persona. Not a single thing that I’ve said here is
untrue and it is asinine that you think “comment section anonymity” casts doubt
on everything I say, when you enjoy exactly the same anonymity.
ROFL, you dumbass, I am notified when your sad posts appear, and I thought you were some genius scientist. LMFAO BTW, Kinja is what you are posting on doofus. As I am someone who is so unimportant to you it seems hilarious that you keep wanting to engage me. A REAL scientist with a life and all the accolades you’ve made up about yourself it would be stupid that you would waste your valuable time with little old me. But since I live in your head rent free then I understand your obsession. In previous threads you have failed miserably to explain much of anything about this scandal except your lack of knowledge about it. Please read the Court of Appeals opinion and it will explain to you clearly why Spanier had his conviction restored. Your conspiracy theory about the 3rd District Court of Appeals is hilarious, the District Judge Mehalchick, who threw out Spanky’s conviction wrongly is a PSU grad and a Paterno fan, you may look it up. However, the only way you crazy JoeBot cultists can explain the moral failures of your gods is to attach some conspiracy to it which is insane. Spanier was not convicted ex post facto and the final court has spoken. He is a righteously convicted criminal.Snedden is a laughable hack. Also, a PSU grad who wanted to drum up business in State College as a PI when he wrote that inane background investigation and just believed everything the Paterno Three told him so he could get in with the JoeBot industrial complex along with other braying crackpots Blehar and Ziegler. Since you know nothing about what Snedden actually did as a gubmint BACKGROUND investigator and I do just trust me that those fools are the bottom of the barrel of investigators the government uses. He had less access than Freeh by a whole lot and his speculations are ridiculous. I put him and the other conspiracy loons in the same boat. You should be embarrassed quoting him but then you are ignorant of things outside of fake resumes and gaming.I found your online gaming persona on something called League of Legends and you were in blackface. ROFL. You look like just what I imagined too. Weird as crap. I don’t need to reach out to anyone as I have you on the string now. LolAs to your “career” (God I’m laughing) YOU are the one who keeps bringing it up over and over as you think it gives you credibility. Do you really think anyone believes what you claim to be? If so, this is really sad sad sad. Why would I be jealous of your “athletic” accomplishments as I am sure mine are far beyond your gaming experience. Academics? I think I’ve already proven in my retorts that I have you beat bad there. I call you out (and you cowardly hide) because you are a brave brave keyboard commando with a made up life. Nobody is going to bother you beefy, you aren’t worth the time but you won’t reveal who you are because you are a liar. Notice I beat you with facts and argument not fictional resumes. I don’t need to invent a phony persona to refute your ignorance. Why don’t you STFU about your made up background which I don’t believe anyway? I say you are a liar. Show me otherwise. You won’t because you are a coward.PS you assert there is no God? Prove it? ROFLPPS BOTH jurors who were interviewed after Spanier’s trial said there WAS a coverup. Not to endanger children but to protect PSU’s precious image which is tarnished rightfully now.
“that
you would waste your valuable time with little old me”Doesn’t
the fact that I don’t know what the commenting platform is call and don’t have
it set up to email me when my arch nemesis responds to a threat suggest that I
am quite busy? Or is that logic too complicated for your little brain to
follow? LOL“Spanier
was not convicted ex post facto “This
is erroneous. He was convicted of a crime that was not yet on the books when it
supposedly occurred. That is, by
definition, ex post facto. The court
system HATES to admit that it made a mistake.“you
know nothing about what Snedden actually did as a gubmint BACKGROUND
investigator “I
know EXACTLY what NCIS investigators do. If you think they only do background
checks, you are sadly mistaken.“I
found your online gaming persona on something called League of Legends”I
have never played League of Legends nor do I know what that is. So whoever’s
profile you think you have “discovered” is not me. “Do
you really think anyone believes what you claim to be? “Believe
it or not, it is true. It only keeps coming up because you keep harping on
it. I’m not sure why. I guess it’s because if an educated,
successful, liberal can be on the opposite side of something from you…(gasp)…maybe
this issue isn’t as cut and dry as you think it is.“Why
would I be jealous of your “athletic” accomplishments as I am sure mine are far
beyond your gaming experience. “This
was only brought up in the context of you not understanding that even accomplished
scientists have normal hobbies (college football, or reading avclub, or playing
sports or drinking beer). I’m not
bragging and I am also not a gamer.“Academics?
I think I’ve already proven in my retorts that I have you beat bad there. Why
don’t you STFU about your made up background which I don’t believe anyway?”You’ve
beaten me in nothing. I’ll stop
defending myself (with the truth) when you stop bringing it up.“I
say you are a liar. Show me otherwise. You won’t because you are a coward.”I’ve
offered to prove it and you did not respond to my offer. So maybe you should STFU on this one.“PS
you assert there is no God? Prove it? ROFL”You
cannot prove a negative. I would think someone of your extreme intelligence
(LOL) would know that.“PPS BOTH jurors who were interviewed after Spanier’s trial”The jury foreman admitted
they made a mistake in convicting him and only voted to convict because “most
of the jurors wanted to go home early for the weekend on Friday after”. Justice at work! (SMFH)
“that I don’t know what the commenting platform is call and don’t have it set up to email me”A genius scientist like yourself would know how to set up a simple platform to notify him of postings. A computer gamer might not know however.“This is erroneous. He was convicted of a crime that was not yet on the books when it supposedly occurred. That is, by definition, ex post facto.”Read the opinion muddlehead. But I can understand why you can’t understand law, it requires critical thinking skills. The Federal Courts did not convict Spanier so they have nothing to fear about admitting any wrong. Unless of course you believe there is a conspiracy. (ominous music)“So whoever’s profile you think you have “discovered” is not me.”Guess you didn’t cover your tracks well. BTW, Blackface is racist. I thought you were liberal? LMFAO“I know EXACTLY what NCIS investigators do. If you think they only do background checks, you are sadly mistaken.”Your ignorance is astounding. Snedden wasn’t in NCIS when he did the BACKGROUND investigation of Spanier. You need to do some more digging. However, not surprising you are loose with your thinking. This is tougher to do than winning the next round of League of Legends. I’ll keep you straight. Hint, look up what NCIS stands for. Maybe I’ll inform you more later on. Do your homework!BTW, you neglect the REAL Federal investigation that Penn State had on the Paterno/Sandusky scandal that levied a historic fine for their crimes.https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-levies-historic-fine-against-penn-state-over-handling-sexual-misconduct-incidents.“I’ve offered to prove it and you did not respond to my offer.” You continue to lie. Cite your work that you claim as requested. Easy to do. You won’t because it’s a lie and you are a coward. I won’t hold my breath on this one.“You cannot prove a negative.”Then why do you assert it genius? ROFL“The jury foreman admitted they made a mistake” Here’s the precise quote from Richard Black:“They did that,” Black said of Spanier, Curley and Schultz. “They were more interested in protecting the brand than in protecting the children.”He said nothing about going home for the weekend, that was from Al Lord, a reprehensible “Trustee” Board Member who thinks all the victims are liars. Like you. Finally, here’s what the only other juror, Victoria Navazio, to comment said: “It didn’t feel like they were conspiring to endanger children,” Navazio said. “They were conspiring to protect Penn State.” And so they were and so they now ALL stand as convicted criminals.
If you actually care about this, please listen:https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5rbml0LmF1ZGlvL3Jzcy93b3JraG91c2Vjb25uZWN0L3dpdGgtdGhlLWJlbmVmaXQtb2YtaGluZHNpZ2h0L2FsbC8zNjAvNTAv?sa=X&ved=0CAMQ4aUDahcKEwjomZTjjbPwAhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQAgIt is impossible to listen to this and continue to think the way you do.
Actually, I have listened to as much of it as I can stand. It is total and complete hogwash. As I mentioned before, John Zeigler is a braying crackpot and the folks he “interviews” are just part of the JoeBot conspiracy looney bin. Even the Paterno’s will have nothing to do with him. The theory of the date that McQueary saw Sandusky molesting the child in the shower makes no sense and even PSU loyalists have debunked that. Gary Schultz is a convicted liar and his word is nothing. Most all of what Ziegler proposes is just made up out of whole cloth and conspiracy madness. The record is quite clear. McQueary told Paterno that he saw Sandusky molesting a child in the shower (Joe confirms this TWICE, once under oath to the GJ and then again to an OAG Investigator) and Joe participated in the decision to not report Sandusky to the PROPER authorities (as the emails show). This was a moral failure on his behalf and forever tarnished his reputation. He won a lot of football games but in the end he failed morally to live up to the ideals he preached and is justly condemned for it. Whether fair or not, you are often remembered by the last bad thing you do. This effort by Ziegler is exactly akin to the Area 51 nuttiness that a guy named Bob Lazar or the JFK stuff by a guy named Mark Lane did. Those looney theories do provide economic potential as John Snedden (a hack) was able to open an office in State College for his PI business. Here is something else to consider. Look how Zeigler is at odds with so many others (Clemente, Paternos, etc.) who should be on his side but dismiss him entirely. Franco (with his CTE) remains true but that makes sense. Finally, do you REALLY believe that Sandusky is innocent and all those victims are liars? If so, I wonder if you are one of those “scientists” that believe the moon landings were faked. You’ll have to do better than this Mr. Gamer.
Spanier in jail as I write this. Justice is served. Here is something about your hero: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2005/04/host/303812/
1) When Franklin got all weepy in that loan confession scene, I was immediately reminded of the way Grace tearfully called the cops on her husband earlier in the episode. She didn’t seem particularly moved by her father’s tears, either.2) I was thinking the whole episode that Grace should be wearing a hat or least scarves (and less conspicuous coats), if she doesn’t want to be recognized all over town. And then it really came back to bite her in that security footage.3) Douglas Hodge’s accent as the public defender was all over the place (and terrible wherever it landed).
I was thinking the whole episode that Grace should be wearing a hat or least scarvesOMG, yes! It reminds me of a movie with Julianne Moore (I believe “The Forgotten”) where she’s trying to escape her evil pursuers and is running from them with her beautiful red hair flying behind her – like a red flag.
Episode 1: GoodEpisode 2: Melodramatically meh.Here’s hoping it gets better.
There are a few things I’m confused about – either I missed them or the show didn’t address them. Thoughts?:-Why was Jonathan going to the non-existent conference in Cleveland in the first place? One doesn’t spontaneously go to an academic conference. Why was it planned in advance that he’d be out of town after the murder?-Why did he skip town without his phone and go on the run *before* Elena’s body had been discovered if he is innocent?-Why is Grace not telling the police about her weird interactions with Elena?-What was the look exchanged between Sylvia and Jonathan in the courtroom?-On what grounds are the police actually charging Jonathan? Yes, he was with her that night in her studio and that’s suspicious, but that doesn’t seem like enough to charge someone with murder. I mean, it’s a lot, but are the only reasons he is being held is that he was there and they previously had an affair? Remember, the media was already speculating about him *before* we knew he’d gone AWOL. Did I miss something?Also, I’m wondering about all of the dog stuff. When is that Checkov’s gun going to go off?
Yes, the fake business trip bothers me too. Let’s assume he had been using this ruse before in order to spend time away from Grace and his son, and with his mistress. But according to him, he wasn’t seeing Elena any more by the time the fundraiser rolls around, so where was he going to go that next day? Is there another mistress? Another secret life he’s hiding that hasn’t been revealed? Is it just some ongoing game he’s playing to keep up the pretense that he still has a job, since out of town trips were frequent back then, even if he has no mistress to sneak off with? I’m also still not buying that a person hides his phone in the back of a drawer but LEAVES THE RINGER ON. Until the show comes up with an explanation (he wanted to be caught! he’s covering for Grace! this is all a carefully constructed scheme to deflect the blame from Grace and point it at him, knowing he can’t be convicted with no clear evidence!) I’m assuming it was a dramatic choice at the expense of logical, good mystery writing.
Yes, the ringer! Also, it said “14 missed calls” – was that the first time she heard it?
The ringer wasn’t on, it was on silent but vibrating. She probably hadn’t been calling from that room prior to that moment, so that was the first time she heard the vibrating in the drawer.
The colors of Grace’s hair and clothes are always very noticeable against the drab grays around her. I keep noticing she flips between her very dramatic red coat and an equally dramatic green coat and it reminds me of Angel Heart when my friend noticed that Mickey Rourke’s “other personality” came out whenever they showed a fan flipping from clockwise to counterclockwise, and now I hope that’s the big “tell” about Nicole Kidman–it would be hacky if this turns out to be that she has a psychological disorder but it would offset somewhat if this was the way they conveyed it.
thinking donald sutherland gave him 500k to get the hell away from his daughter — it would not surprise me of a uber wealthy new yorker who seems to be an overbearing force in his daughters lift to have his son in law followed/investigated. so i’m guessing that he found out about the affair and figured paying him to leave would be the least messy option from a publicity standpoint… only to have Elena killed (and pin it on him) when he didn’t actually leave nicole kidman.
Perhaps Elena was having an affair with both Jonathan and Grace? Maybe she was the third in the relationship and that is why she kept saying, “you were always the kindest to me” and “you were always so kind to me” – she was comparing Grace to Jonathan, not the other Reardon mothers? That would go some ways towards explaining Elena’s overt sexuality in the locker room and the kiss in the elevator.
Too bad Elena’s gone. That is one of the hottest chicks I’ve seen on TV in awhile.