Jump to content
saoirse

S01.E08: Milk

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, carrps said:

Sharp Objects does not need a second season, either. Why?

Ratings?

Finale supposedly had the highest ratings so HBO might be willing to throw money at Adams to do another season.

Since she gets a lot of movie roles, even if she agrees, it might be over a year later.

The controversial finale and ending probably feeds into it.  Look at all the articles and discussions about it.

Controversy will probably trump good storytelling and if they can entice Adams with enough money, they will probably do another season.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, scrb said:

Ratings?

Finale supposedly had the highest ratings so HBO might be willing to throw money at Adams to do another season.

Since she gets a lot of movie roles, even if she agrees, it might be over a year later.

The controversial finale and ending probably feeds into it.  Look at all the articles and discussions about it.

Controversy will probably trump good storytelling and if they can entice Adams with enough money, they will probably do another season.

Theoretically, you could time jump it to when Amma is getting out of prison and make her the focus so Amy Adams would have less of a time commitment.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, peach said:

According to her interview, she didn't understand it either!  It would be less annoying if they didn't spend so much time on Camille driving around.

They filmed a linear story and then he edited it in this nonlinear dreamlike way.  She says the story was wrapped up in shooting, he just didn't include it.


 

 

The director seemed to have a lot of control on the final cut.  I think Elizabeth Perkins was disappointed (aka furious) in that seemingly, a lot of her scenes were cut.  I think her visit to Adora in prison would have been good TV.  They did waste Elizabeth Perkins as a actress/character.  She never made sense to me; she knows everything but just sits around smoking and drinking and gossiping.  She is the one who requested Marian's records though, isn't she?  

Perkins just said they all signed multiseason contracts.  I guess that means that HBO has X amount of time to tell them about a filming schedule and they'd be under contract to film.  It doesn't mean it will happen.  I think all shows take this precaution (Ruth Wilson and Dominic West mentioned signing for six seasons).  I understood that Amy Adams said the character was too heavy and she couldn't do again.  But based on Perkins story, Adora got out of prison so she could be the centerpiece going forward.   Amma probably got a juvie sentence.  Possibilities abound, but I would not be interested.  

Edited by weaver
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, peach said:

The Elizabeth Perkins interview is pretty good in general, but I always have to laugh when actors express any hint of not liking how it turned out, they always follow up with how BRILLIANT those choices turned out.  They do this all the time with The Walking Dead.  Sure this makes NO SENSE and destroys the entire fabric of the show...but it's so brilliant and necessary.

Well they want to work again, and don't want to be seen as criticizing the BRILLIANT director.   You can tell she was annoyed.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/27/2018 at 2:41 PM, TattleTeeny said:

Maybe? But I thought there were people out and about pretty nearby that alley (right? I don't even know), which made me wonder why it hadn't been noticed until all of a sudden.

We never, ever see people out and about in this town, not even cars driving around.  The streets are always a ghost town, except for the roller skaters, Camille driving, and the cops.  I am surprised she was ever found.

I hated the ending.  It ruined the show for me entirely and turned it into a pretentious piece of unsatisfying crap.  A big thank you to everyone here who helped fill in the blanks with screen caps, links to relevant explanatory articles, information from the book, and perceptive connecting of dots.

As for the writers, editors and producers, FUCK YOU, ASSHOLES.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, carrps said:

I was really disappointed to see them do a season 2 of Big Little Lies. I loved the show, but doing another season seems unnecessary and, as someone said, greedy. Also, self-congratulatory. I'm not even sure if I'll watch it. Sequels are nearly always inferior.

Sharp Objects does not need a second season, either. Why?

My partner and I were just talking about this as we have just started Season 2 of The Handmaid's Tale. What he very smartly pointed out about shows based on books was, how long did it take the author to conceive/research/write/edit that book? How many drafts did it take? How many years did it take those half-formed ideas to really coalesce into a tight and compelling story? With really good books, the ones worth adapting, the author wasn't just writing for the sake of having a product to sell. They had a message, a point, an idea to explore that was meaningful to them and motivated the process. With the first season of a show like this, the entire season is already laid out for you through months and maybe years of dedicated, passionate labour by the author of the book (and betas and editors), plus the amount of pre-planning required to even pitch the idea of adapting it in the first place. But when you leave the book and try to do a season 2, you have a much more limited amount of time to write a new story from scratch that gives all the contracted actors something major to do, plan the visual style and presentation of the season, settle internal creative disagreements, make inevitable changes mandated by the network, and get filming so it can air by the next awards deadline. When you consider the amount of work required in the time given, there's basically no way a second season of a book-based show can ever live up to the first.

I'm working my way through Season 2 of The Handmaid's Tale, and I'll give S2 of Big Little Lies and Sharp Objects a chance, but my expectations are not particularly high.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

We never, ever see people out and about in this town, not even cars driving around.  The streets are always a ghost town, except for the roller skaters, Camille driving, and the cops.  I am surprised she was ever found.

Oh. Maybe I'm nuts. I feel like I remember the body being spotted by whomever while the roller girls and maybe some other people were hanging around across the street or something. Carry on.

Edited by TattleTeeny · Reason: I'm not nuts, haha! There were people around. A lady saw the body and screamed.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I have been a fan of Amy Adams since she was in Junebug. I think that she was brilliant in this series. Brilliant. I always enjoy Flynn's novels because the women are so complex and fascinating. I had read the book several years ago and was at the edge of my seat watching the series. I thought that Clarkson's performance was compelling - I've spent some time with the actress and she is so considerate, gentle and kind that watching her nail a monster was fascinating. 

I wish that they would remake Gone Girl. Affleck was such a poor choice for the role of Nick. Affleck was too old, too fat and his character was SO whitewashed. Nick was the manipulative, gold digging narcissist who deserved exactly what he got.

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Slovenly Muse said:

My partner and I were just talking about this as we have just started Season 2 of The Handmaid's Tale. What he very smartly pointed out about shows based on books was, how long did it take the author to conceive/research/write/edit that book? How many drafts did it take? How many years did it take those half-formed ideas to really coalesce into a tight and compelling story? With really good books, the ones worth adapting, the author wasn't just writing for the sake of having a product to sell. They had a message, a point, an idea to explore that was meaningful to them and motivated the process. With the first season of a show like this, the entire season is already laid out for you through months and maybe years of dedicated, passionate labour by the author of the book (and betas and editors), plus the amount of pre-planning required to even pitch the idea of adapting it in the first place. But when you leave the book and try to do a season 2, you have a much more limited amount of time to write a new story from scratch that gives all the contracted actors something major to do, plan the visual style and presentation of the season, settle internal creative disagreements, make inevitable changes mandated by the network, and get filming so it can air by the next awards deadline. When you consider the amount of work required in the time given, there's basically no way a second season of a book-based show can ever live up to the first.

I'm working my way through Season 2 of The Handmaid's Tale, and I'll give S2 of Big Little Lies and Sharp Objects a chance, but my expectations are not particularly high.

If you have all this talent under contract, even if Amy Adams doesn’t want to do it or just wants a limited commitment, I think you wring something else out of this.

If I was an HBO executive and I had a major talent like Scanlon under contract for probably pretty cheap, you’re damn right she’s getting an Amma spin off. She has superstar potential. It’s like having a star quarterback on a rookie scale contract.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

Didn't one of the murdered girls bite Ashley's ear? wouldn't that make Ashley an accomplice/murderer too? Was this addressed at all? 

Who was Camille's father? She's a Preaker, does that mean that Adora married into the rich Preaker family? was she poor before that? was Marian aslo a Preaker?

What about the maid? she knew EVERYTHING, right?

Too many questions, I wish I never watched.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, weaver said:

Well they want to work again, and don't want to be seen as criticizing the BRILLIANT director.   You can tell she was annoyed.  

Maybe "brilliant" is a code word among actors.  wink wink.  Bless Jean-Marc's heart.

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post

The floor in that doll house freaked me out. I have toothaphobia of whatever the medical term is. That boy in Channel Zero gave me nightmares. 

Edited by spankydoll · Reason: Edited to remove photo of teeth.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, spankydoll said:

 

I wish that they would remake Gone Girl. Affleck was such a poor choice for the role of Nick. Affleck was too old, too fat and his character was SO whitewashed. Nick was the manipulative, gold digging narcissist who deserved exactly what he got.

Surprisingly I thought Affleck pulled it off (maybe just cuz I loved him as Holden in Chasing Amy)  but the whole time I was reading GG I saw John Cusack or Patrick Dempsey

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, iPad said:

Who was Camille's father? She's a Preaker, does that mean that Adora married into the rich Preaker family? was she poor before that? was Marian aslo a Preaker?

Camille's father was an unnamed kid Adora met at church camp. Preaker was Adora's maiden name, and Marian was a Crellin. She was Alan's and born during his and Adora's marriage. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Slovenly Muse said:

 

I'm working my way through Season 2 of The Handmaid's Tale, and I'll give S2 of Big Little Lies and Sharp Objects a chance, but my expectations are not particularly high.

I was one of those last year, who was saying that I thought it was important to watch The Handmaid's Tale, but season two was mostly torture porn to me. If it weren't for the amazing actresses in it, like Ann Dowd, I wouldn't have kept watching - and I skipped one episode after reading spoilers. I think that was episode nine or ten.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, carrps said:

I was really disappointed to see them do a season 2 of Big Little Lies. I loved the show, but doing another season seems unnecessary and, as someone said, greedy. Also, self-congratulatory. I'm not even sure if I'll watch it. Sequels are nearly always inferior.

Sharp Objects does not need a second season, either. Why?

Self-congratulatory is a good way to out it!  I'll pop in on them and see what they are up to. I mean what tension build up will they have?  

Coincidentally I started watching UnReal this week and I kept thinking to myself "where do I know that name Marti Noxon".  

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/28/2018 at 12:53 AM, Buttless said:

Amma's a bottomless pit of need. 

Amma is a serial killer.  Some criminologists believe many, if not most (some believe *all*) serial killers suffered childhood abuse, especially by their mothers.  Amma certainly fits this pattern.  It has only slowly dawned on me how intertwined Amma's and Adora's crimes are, even setting aside the possble causation.  Adora was as involved with the doll house as Amma was; she had to have known where the dollhouse's "ivory" floor came from.  And Amma knew what Adora was trying to do to her, and accepted it--she liked it, in fact, when her mother "took care" of her--to the point where there was no way Adora had to worry that Amma would squeal.  Like a pig being slaughtered.  Maybe there was an unspoken bargain:  "I won't tell about the teeth if you don't tell about the "medicine."

And what about old Alan, wandering around that house in his "Connecticut casual," with a sweater forever tied over his shoulders in that heat?  He was aware, it seems, of what Adora was doing to Amma, and I would be surprised--since he was always *there*--if he didn't know about the teeth, too.

I want to know who was the father of Camille, not his name or anything, but what kind of person was it?  A townie?  Did Adora go away to school?  Was there concealment of her pregnancy?  How did her family explain Camille's existence?  Where I'm from, Camille would have been Adora's "little sister," what they call a "menopause baby," and might never have known Adora was really her mother.  This wasn't the case here.  Someone says of Adora, "she married [Alan] out of her maiden name," presumably Preaker, which is Camille's name.  This seems like a biggie to not explain.

ETA  Never mind.  Bijoux explained it.

Edited by Mothra · Reason: read before you post
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, Mothra said:

 It has only slowly dawned on me how intertwined Amma's and Adora's crimes are, even setting aside the possble causation.  Adora was as involved with the doll house as Amma was; she had to have known where the dollhouse's "ivory" floor came from. 

It has slowly dawned on me that Adora's house is every bit a "dollhouse" as Amma's dollhouse.  Other human beings are just dolls, objects to play with and manipulate, to control and kill if necessary.  Adora's children, and even Alan, (even the sheriff!) are her dolls.  Amma's victims are hers, which is why she posed Natalie's body like she did. 

  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Mothra said:

And what about old Alan, wandering around that house in his "Connecticut casual," with a sweater forever tied over his shoulders in that heat? 

Heh, he never did anything strenuous enough to break a sweat!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Mothra said:

The teeth mightve been stashed by Amma, and  laid in the doll house when she was living at Camille's.  There was a perfectly clean loose tooth that Camille picked up. She just killed Mae earlier that day.

Both Adora and Camille saw the dollhouse floor. That is the prized possession in the house, the ivory floor. So it would have been looked at in the house. That floor looked exactly like teeth; it didnt look like the ivory tiles. So I find it hard to believe that Camille wouldnt have made the connection, while working on a story about murdered girls who's teeth were missing. Butr whoknow what the makers intended; so much of the story requires huge leaps of logic.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On August 30, 2018 at 2:00 AM, bijoux said:

Camille's father was an unnamed kid Adora met at church camp. Preaker was Adora's maiden name, and Marian was a Crellin. She was Alan's and born during his and Adora's marriage. 

This is a perfect example of a book detail that should have been made clear. Cut, Idk, a half hour of Camille driving around and add some relevant details. I personally didn't even realize until episode 3 or 4 that the family's wealth was tied to the pig farm.

And even reading that, I'm wondering: did Alan marry a "ruined" girl? Surely there was a story with that in a small town. How soon afterwards? It always seemed to me that Camille and Marian were only a few years apart, so what made Alan marry a woman with a baby? Her money? There's just so much there that could have been explained.

Excellent reason upthread for why a season 2 is not a good idea, unless Flynn has always had some sequel idea that she never wrote. And even then, this adaptation was so poorly executed, IMO, that I'm not sure that's a selling point.

Gone Girl is fascinating because you can take both sides, feel sympathy for Nick, Amy, or even both at times. I just don't get the depth of that in this adaptation, but I have a suspicion the book was better.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, Moxie Cat said:

And even reading that, I'm wondering: did Alan marry a "ruined" girl? Surely there was a story with that in a small town. How soon afterwards? It always seemed to me that Camille and Marian were only a few years apart, so what made Alan marry a woman with a baby? Her money? There's just so much there that could have been explained.

I thought that we would definitely find out who Camille's father was and that it would be someone we knew.  I even toyed with the idea that it was the police chief, and that he didn't even know.

So much driving, so many missing details...

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, AEMom said:

So much driving, so many missing details...

And so many things that don't add up.  How did the rollerskating murderers escape any and all suspicion?  Were their parents completely oblivious that their kids were out all night during the murders?  How did Alan evade all suspicion when Adora's poisoning was happening under his nose?  What was the point of making the power go out so the sheriff oversleeps and is late to John's interrogation?  Why was Natalie such a nasty, biting, pencil-in-the-eye stabbing tween?  Is everyone in this town just a breath away from being sociopaths and psychopaths?  Who put the bike in the pond that Adora's pig farm employee supposedly saw?  If he didn't see anything, then again, how did the bike end up in the pond and who made the employee lie?   With all those doctors that Marian went to, none of them did a blood test ever and found antifreeze, rat poison, and other drugs in her toxicology results?  Same for baby Amma with the feeding tube?  Camille laid on the bed staring at the fan while she was being "cared for" by Adora, and remembered doing the same thing back when she had short hair and, apparently, stuck her finger in the fan and cut it, spraying blood all over the floor...was that her first cutting experience?  Did she start cutting because of Marian's death, the rape in the woods, or being poisoned by Adora that time short-haired Camille was lying in bed and staring at the fan?...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, AEMom said:

I thought that we would definitely find out who Camille's father was and that it would be someone we knew.  I even toyed with the idea that it was the police chief, and that he didn't even know.

So much driving, so many missing details...

I thought they might go there,but I'm glad they didnt. The mystery wasnt really about Camille's paternity, and it just would have opened up a bunch more worms, that werent going to add anything good to the mix.  I think that's a mainstay of a sappy Lifetime type of movie: the fatherless heroine finds her long lost daddy, and he's a glimmer of hope; this savior daddy.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/27/2018 at 1:35 AM, MBayGal said:

I would not have known about them if I hadn't read it here.

Me too! I just went back and watched on slow play 3x's to see what was happening. 

I liked the series, though i agree it should have been only 4-6 epis. Amy Adams and Patricia Clarkson were outstanding. Glad I came here to find out about the scenes during the credits - they provided (mostly) the ending that was needed - and the shots were horrifying.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 2018-08-29 at 3:39 PM, peach said:

The Elizabeth Perkins interview is pretty good in general, but I always have to laugh when actors express any hint of not liking how it turned out, they always follow up with how BRILLIANT those choices turned out.  They do this all the time with The Walking Dead.  Sure this makes NO SENSE and destroys the entire fabric of the show...but it's so brilliant and necessary.

That drives me batshit nuts! It’s such an Emporer’s New Clothes phenomen, especially with The Walking Dead. I’m glad you brought it up, lol.

On 2018-08-29 at 6:16 PM, spankydoll said:

I have been a fan of Amy Adams since she was in Junebug. I think that she was brilliant in this series. Brilliant. I always enjoy Flynn's novels because the women are so complex and fascinating. I had read the book several years ago and was at the edge of my seat watching the series. I thought that Clarkson's performance was compelling - I've spent some time with the actress and she is so considerate, gentle and kind that watching her nail a monster was fascinating. 

I wish that they would remake Gone Girl. Affleck was such a poor choice for the role of Nick. Affleck was too old, too fat and his character was SO whitewashed. Nick was the manipulative, gold digging narcissist who deserved exactly what he got.

I, too, loved Junebug and Amy Adam’s performance in it. I should give it a rewatch because I’ve forgotten a lot; I do remember the characters ended up being quite different than who they seemed to be initially.

For me, Gone Girl the movie didn’t work, but I often don’t like film adaptations because I get too caught up in the minutia of book details, and a movie can never match what’s in my head. I didn’t like Affleck in that role, nor Rosamund Pike—even though I like them fine in other stuff.

For me, Gillian Flynn’s books are perfect summertime reading. And I think she’s great at creating compelling, completely fucked up female characters. I do think she has trouble wrapping up stories, though, at least to my satisfaction.

About Milk—I’ve been reading that people think Camille will cover for Amma or that the ending was somehow lighthearted with the whole “Don’t tell mama” dialogue. Now, while I thInk those words were a mistake, I never got the idea that Camille wouldn’t want to do what’s right; we saw simply saw her at the point of her discovery, and naturally she’d be in a shocked fog of incomprehensible horror for a minute or two, before the cut to black. I, too, missed the murders that happened after the credits rolled, so while that annoyed me (what if I hadn’t read this forum? I might never have known!), I actually did like the method of the quick-cut scenes that explained the how.

Thanks everyone for the intelligent comments throughout the series’ run!

(Oh, and spankydoll? I am scarred forever. That  needed to be buried under a spoiler tag or something—eek!)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Rockfish said:

That drives me batshit nuts! It’s such an Emporer’s New Clothes phenomen, especially with The Walking Dead. I’m glad you brought it up, lol.

I, too, loved Junebug and Amy Adam’s performance in it. I should give it a rewatch because I’ve forgotten a lot; I do remember the characters ended up being quite different than who they seemed to be initially.

For me, Gone Girl the movie didn’t work, but I often don’t like film adaptations because I get too caught up in the minutia of book details, and a movie can never match what’s in my head. I didn’t like Affleck in that role, nor Rosamund Pike—even though I like them fine in other stuff.

For me, Gillian Flynn’s books are perfect summertime reading. And I think she’s great at creating compelling, completely fucked up female characters. I do think she has trouble wrapping up stories, though, at least to my satisfaction.

About Milk—I’ve been reading that people think Camille will cover for Amma or that the ending was somehow lighthearted with the whole “Don’t tell mama” dialogue. Now, while I thInk those words were a mistake, I never got the idea that Camille wouldn’t want to do what’s right; we saw simply saw her at the point of her discovery, and naturally she’d be in a shocked fog of incomprehensible horror for a minute or two, before the cut to black. I, too, missed the murders that happened after the credits rolled, so while that annoyed me (what if I hadn’t read this forum? I might never have known!), I actually did like the method of the quick-cut scenes that explained the how.

Thanks everyone for the intelligent comments throughout the series’ run!

(Oh, and spankydoll? I am scarred forever. That  needed to be buried under a spoiler tag or something—eek!)

Sorry! I'll try to edit it out. Channel Zero is too much of a freak show for me now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, spankydoll said:

Sorry! I'll try to edit it out. Channel Zero is too much of a freak show for me now.

No worries—I was being bossy in a jokey way :)

Share this post


Link to post

I loved it. I thought the book was a potboiler, but the show was a work of art -- poignant, brutal, bruising and absolutely tuned in to feminine rage and powerlessness. Amy Adams, Patricia Clarkson and Eliza Scanlen were fantastic. Kudos to all the actresses. And I thought the men -- Messina, Craven and Czerny were great as well, in lesser roles.

Watching poor Camille thank her mother for the poison and then say "More, Mama?" Broke my fucking heart. "More, Mama." It's the entire story, right there. Poor Camille, desperately wanting that love and attention and softness from her mother. So much so that in spite of herself (in reporter/evidence-gathering mode) she says yes to more poison. Anything for her mother to love her. I mean, I cried so much there I had to pause the show.

On 8/26/2018 at 7:16 PM, Penman61 said:

Hi, I'm Camille. I just confirmed my Mom poisoned my sister to death and is poisoning my other sister now. SO WHY THE FUCK AM I DRINKING HER MILK AND EATING HER FOOD?!?

To sacrifice herself, save her sister and convict her Mom. It's pretty blatant, honestly. Camille's entire MO is cutting HERSELF in reaction to others. Her allowing her mother to poison her makes perfect sense when you factor in her self-hate, her willingness to save her sister, her love and need for her mother's approval, and her ability to suffer. It broke my heart.

On 8/26/2018 at 8:20 PM, Schmolioot said:

And speaking of them, what is their motive? Amma is manipulative but was she really able to manipulate two otherwise seemingly not al girls into killers? I mean, I really can’t get over how silly this is

They want power and approval. Just like Amma. Amma talks through the entire SHOW about how they will do anything she asks. And when Camille references the victims at one point, one of the girls even makes a cruel joke like "not the cool ones." They know they are in no danger. To me it's not out of left field at all. I always thought it was them. 

To me the entire show is about female rage. I thought the book was a minor diversion, but that the show managed to externalize female abuse in a way that was electrifying and important. Amma is a killer BECAUSE she is a victim.

On 8/27/2018 at 12:59 AM, Buttless said:

One of the themes of this , by way of a criticism, was how everyone is attracted to murdered little girls. So instead of taking the high road, they shoved in this superviolent montage that was sure to be screencapped and discussed by the fraction of the second. over and over.

They chose to do an ending that could make a profit for them in the future, over making something good, and being respectful of their audience. (snip)

So how does it feel, to invest in the character Camille after 8 episodes, only to have her potentially killed off? 

Huh? How does Camille die? She's fine and implied to be in full control of the situation at the end. And, well, horribly, everyone IS attracted to stories of "murdered girls." It's practically how Nancy Grace and 1000x others made their careers. What Gillian Flynn and the show tried to do was to return focus to the women (and girls) themselves. Even if empowering them meant also saying "yes they can kill too" not just look pretty and die.

I read the book before the finale (and the show is way better) so am mystified by your take. Everything on the final pages is there in the first three chapters. HBO didn't add something for money, it's not being considered for an ongoing series, it was always a "long-format" movie. Vallee and Adams have both said they don't want to move forward with this story. I get not being thrilled with the ending (which I thought was both true to the book and even more electrifying) but HBO et al did nothing here to change things for a dollar outcome. I don't get why you assume everything in the end is about dollars (did you read the book?). The book ending is out there for everyone. If anything, they were pressured to CHANGE the book ending but didn't (thankfully), to be fair to the original outcome.

On 8/27/2018 at 11:01 AM, Schmolioot said:

I know this really doesn’t matter for a fictional drama, but as someone who likes a little realism, is there any explanation for how, legally, Camille is allowed to remove Amma from her home and take her to a brand new city hours away? As far as I know, Alan has not been charged with anything. 

It's pretty easy to headcanon that Alan is shown to be fatally supportive in Adora's trial, even if he's not convicted himself (which I wish he would be). He's absolutely accessory to murder to me (the thing that chilled me most was when he RAISED THE MUSIC when the cop showed up so poor Camille couldn't cry out for help—AGHH just fricking fry that piece of crap). The show skipped those other steps (deservedly so) for dramatic purposes. It's entirely believable that Amma's guardianship would be passed to Camille (and Amma would have almost certainly supported that). Just because we don't see Amma in therapy, meanwhile, doesn't mean Camille isn't trying to make her get it.

Meanwhile, maybe Camille doesn't care about the kind of car she drives. And does so actually because she DOESN'T want a fancy car or fancy life. 

To echo @zobot81 I thought the entire horrifying point of the show was the flip side of motherhood—of the potential toxicity of maternal love; of the potential aftermath of female rage (turned inward: Camille. Turned outward: Amma). 

On 8/26/2018 at 7:32 PM, jeansheridan said:

I am impressed you all aren't furious. I did read the book and this ending was wretched. It was a horror movie ending and not a character study ending or a mystery ending. And I think the writer and producers should be punished and not get any awards.  And I kind of hope Amy Adams doesn't now either. I find this sort of ending completely insulting. 

I just don't get this at all. (Especially actively wishing bad things for women taking real risks as artists. I mean, seriously?) I found the finale devastating, beautiful, terrifying, memorable and totally believable. By the end I knew it was Amma and I knew why absolutely. And watching Camille protect her broke my heart because I knew she was trying to salvage a lost cause -- even to giving her own life. I read the book before the finale but I prefer the finale approach -- we don't need another whole episode on Amma's rage or damage; we know it already (if we've been paying attention). It's all right there. Every word Camille etched on her own body was a precursor to Amma's murders, in a way. The entire show was about female abuse, rage, disempowerment, and revenge. 

I found the ending horrifying, breathtakingly tragic, and... perfect. It was all right in front of us all along. 

Edited by paramitch
  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post

A few posts were moved to the Book Talk topic; this is the last reminder to not discuss the book in this topic, as this is to discuss the show; if you feel you must mention the book, you need to spoiler tag the relevant post, or go to Book Talk. Warnings will be next.

Share this post


Link to post

I really enjoyed this show and I did not see the ending coming (maybe because I am stupid because the hints were there).  I loved the ending, it was shot in a very horror movie style.

The one thing I hated about the show/did not get, is why did they have the teenagers roller skating everywhere?  I could not even tell you the last time I saw anyone roller skating, let alone in public.  Then to top it off they had "cool" teenagers doing it.  It just seemed very odd to me.  I mean I am thirty-nine and roller skating was considered lame by the time I was like eleven years old.  So here we are almost thirty years later and it is what all of the cool kids are doing.  Nah, I am not buying it.  That was the one thing that took me out of the story.  Yes I know it is a very odd thing to harp on but still, it was just odd to me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/4/2018 at 6:13 AM, paramitch said:

I just don't get this at all. (Especially actively wishing bad things for women taking real risks as artists. I mean, seriously?) I found the finale devastating, beautiful, terrifying, memorable and totally believable.

After cooling down a bit, I will admit it won't make me angry if Adams and Clarkson and even that younger actress win awards. I will be angry if the director does. It's not their fault he landed on his ass with that ending.

Female rage is one thing, but I already knew little girls were violent. I was a little girl. So what did I learn from this tale of rage and victims and violence? Violence begets violence? I need some hope in my endings and the book gave me that without it being unrealistically upbeat. This ending was just a horror beat to satisfy the director's desire for a flashy last line.

I double checked too. There were 17 executive producers and 7 of them were women (a better ratio than most shows). Most of the eps were written by women (three by men). But given there was one director and he was also an executive producer and an editor, to me the power structure on this show falls more to him. He controlled the filming and the pacing, the two things I think most of us complained about. I think he went for the "cute" ending and not the mature one that fully respected Camille's character arc. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/26/2018 at 11:47 PM, peach said:

I thought the first half was legitimately terrifying, the scene at the dinner table with Camille staring down Adora was epic.  Then I thought she might really die.  I assumed she was sacrificing herself to prove Adora was poisoning them, but she has a bit of a death wish, and since I haven't read the book, I didn't know if she was going to survive.  That was nightmare territory, hearing someone at the door and not being able to scream for help.  And Amma just withdrawing into lala land and not helping her.  I felt so much relief when Richard and her boss saved her.  I'm not crazy about the abrupt ending but I thought the "don't tell mama" part was great, lol.  So psycho!  That actress makes my skin crawl. 

But, yes, questions abound.  Especially as to why Natalie got killed in Ashley's house.   Ashley didn't seem to be an accomplice, like the roller girls.  I guess when she found blood, she thought John really did it?  But wtf were they doing in Ashley's bedroom then?

I thought the biggest clues as to Amma and roller girls doing it was they were never afraid to skate all over the place when there was a serial killer on the loose, and the sly little comment they made about it, when they said "cool kids like us" didn't need to be afraid.  Because they did it.

Unfortunately, they didn't explain why Amma had naked rage either. 

 

So I'm probably in the minority that I actually liked the ending, or at least didn't mind it, though I totally get why it ticked people off.  I haven't read the book either though I might now (I didn't read Gone Girl but that's because I really didn't want to be in the head of Amy Dunne, but I did like Dark Places).  But I liked that the end scene was such a punch to the gut.  I would have liked to have seen what happened next, but I'm ok with not.  I do think that the flashes of what happened should have occurred before the credits because I had switched it off and actually had to go back and watch after I read there was stuff interspersed with the credits.  I think, "Don't tell Mama," crash to black and then the flashes start would have worked better.  I also think the flashbacks could have been bit clearer and not so short and fragmented.

Ashley's little sister was one of Amma's rollerskate friends so I assume they killed Natalie in that room prior to John even staying there.  I doubt Ashley knew anything about it.  I also don't think that it was technically Ashely's bedroom, it was the carriage house, more like a guest house, and the family was just letting John stay there.  I doubt that anyone in Wind Gap would let a boy actually stay in his girlfriend's room.

I think Amma had the "naked rage" anytime she was jealous.  Anytime Adora paid attention to Camille she acted out-heck anytime she wasn't the center of attention she acted out.  From the rather minor incident of the lollipop in Camille's hair because she wasn't paying attention to her, to running out in the woods because of the fight at Calhoun Day.  What better way to have everyone focus on you but by running away?  I'd even bet that she pulled Camille's clothes away in the store so she would have to come out either in her underwear or a skimpy dress.  I don't know if she knew about the scars or not, but even if she didn't Camille obviously didn't want to put on those dresses for a reason, and I'd bet Amma wanted to force her to do just because for a moment Mama was paying more attention to Camille.  I think they could have made it clearer in the story that Adora was getting close with both Natalie and Ann (I think a couple flashbacks with the girls still alive would have gone a long way), but I think Amma killed them because she was jealous.  As I look back at the series what seemed on the surface just the actions of a messed up possibly abused girl (I called the MPD thing early) slowly becomes darker.  She was even willing to let Adora kill Camille.  She could have got out of the house, but she was jealous again and she knew Mama would kill Camille sooner or later and she'd have her all to herself.  You also see her get angry at her "friend" in St. Louis when the girl says she wants to be a writer and Amma thinks it's to impress Camille.

*Edited to Add*  I see lots of discussion on whether Amma is a psychopath and I fall firmly on the side of she is one.  That being said, psychopath doesn't necessarily equal murderer.   Most estimates I've seen say that about one percent of the population is a psychopath or has psychopathic tendencies.  If you've ever had a boss you thought was a psychopath, well they might have been.  About 3-4% of those working in the business world are psychopaths or have psychopathic tendencies.  The majority of those people don't commit crimes, though this isn't generally because they think crime is wrong (amorality is a hallmark of psychopathy) but because they don't want to be punished.  I even read an article about a researcher who was studying the brains of psychopaths using a fMRI and also did a scan on himself, thinking he could be part of the control group only to find that his brain was eerily similar to those who had scored high on psychopathic checklists.  After examining his actions over the course of his life and interviewing friends and family about how they felt about him, he came to realize he was pretty much the textbook definition of a psychopath.  He was married with kids and had never committed a serious crime.

My point is that Amma was probably born or at least predisposed to psychopathy, but that Adore's abuse of her probably made her violent.  It's also possible that whatever Adora was doing to her may have damaged her brain (traumatic brain injury patients can sometimes develop psychopathic behavior).  If Amma had grown up in a stable home with a loving mother who wasn't abusing her, Amma might just have turned out to be amoral and narcissistic, but not necessarily a murderer.  That being said, I'm not sure that after three premeditated murders where she took trophies that there's really any hope of rehabilitation for Amma.

Edited by Proclone · Reason: To add a thought
  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post

Really disappointed with the whole series, although I do like reading why some people liked it, including the ending.  This was the one Gillian Flynn adaptation I was looking forward to the most, and was so happy to see that it was going to be fleshed out over 8 episodes, because I thought that would mean that everything would be covered, but nope.  More disappointing than Dark Places (which I didn't think was so bad, just dreadfully miscast).  Gillian Flynn's 'explanation' about the ending pissed me off even more than having to watch the ending.  After all that bloody time wasted on watching people driving around that shitty town, they don't even finish it properly and didn't explain why Amma is the way she is.  Also hate how they cheapened the interactions between John and Camille.  WTF.

 

I have some friends who worked as house keepers and nannies for wealthy families after university and they said the young kids of those families aren't always close to their parents.  They are definitely closer to the people who work around their homes.  If they get hurt or get upset, they call for their nannies or other people instead of their parents.  Gayla is certainly a lot warmer and kinder than Adora, so I can see why Camille would feel affection for her.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I just binged this entire series over the last couple of days.  I was spoiled with the ending by a book reader in like the 1st or 2nd episode thread (real bummer!!!).  At first I was peeved, but then I took it as an opportunity to watch for the clues.  I don't really think it was necessary, because I thought they did a good job with the underlying seething rage of Amma.  It was very easy to see how she could be the murderer.  Especially after Calhoun Day (or, whatever it was called) where she ran off just because everyone's attention wasn't SOLELY on her. 

 

On 8/27/2018 at 12:28 PM, 100Proof said:

I thought maybe it was about the focus on Mae's painted fingernails in the murder 'scene', but Mae's nails weren't painted at dinner.

 

That's the point.  The same with Natalie, Mae's finger's weren't usually painted.  Then, at the time of her murder, they were.  We obviously didn't see when, but Amma must've talked them into painting their nails "just this once".  I thought, when John said it, that Amma painted her nails after she killed Natalie, but seeing how Mae died with her nails already painted, it must've been during her dressing them like dolls session that she painted their nails. 

On 8/27/2018 at 2:01 PM, Schmolioot said:

I know this really doesn’t matter for a fictional drama, but as someone who likes a little realism, is there any explanation for how, legally, Camille is allowed to remove Amma from her home and take her to a brand new city hours away?

As far as I know, Alan has not been charged with anything. Did he allow this? Give up guardianship? Presuming he gets cleared of criminality and that his only crime is being oblivious, he should probably get his kid back. 

But, the thing is we DON'T know.  Sure, they didn't show us Alan behind bars, only Adora, but the story wasn't really about him so it didn't matter where he was. The story was always about Adora, Camille and Amma (and Marian). 

 

On 8/27/2018 at 10:47 PM, Schmolioot said:

I just still can’t believe that we’re expected to swallow that Amma (and Kelsey/Jodes for that matter) who showed absolutely zero predilection for violence the entire series suddenly turned into the Incredible Hulk

As I mentioned above, I always saw an undercurrent of rage and just... coldness in Amma.  It was very obvious to me (even before I was spoiled) that she was pretending to be nice in the instances she was, but honestly those were rare.  She was almost always saying cruel things and just being nasty.  She also exhibited some bully-like behavior while clearly enjoying it.  

On 8/28/2018 at 5:24 AM, IDreamofJoaquin said:

However, I don't think we should have to rely on a messageboard, book epilogue reference and articles online to explain the how's and what's of everything and we did need to with the last episode. There was no explanation to anything and it's not a movie like Inception or Martha, Marcy, May, Marlene that has an ambiguous ending, they just shoved too much of it in at the end and didn't give good insight to anything else.  

I agree.  I didn't realize at all that there were scenes after the credit until I came here.  I still enjoyed the series.  I don't even really feel the end credit scenes were necessary.  Amma stressed on at least one occasion that her friends would do anything she asked.  To me, she was basically stating they helped her kill those girls.  I also didn't think it was necessary to see Amma killing Mae because it was quite clear to me from the episode.  I also fully expected Natalie to have been killed in Ashley's pool house for all of the reasons mentioned above (Ashley's sister, them hanging out there, etc) that I really didn't think that needed to be spelled out for me either.  I was also ok with not being told that the woman in white was in fact Amma because I also was ok with accepting that the boy didn't actually see anyone.  So, to me, the end credits weren't even really necessary.  The only bit I appreciated was clarifying that the Skate Sisters were in on it too, since they were always giving sly little looks to each other, but again I feel that WAS clearly stated in the episodes. 

On 8/28/2018 at 11:00 AM, Dakisela said:

Seriously.   With a medical file that size and scars from FEEDING tubes for cripes sake, how did she function or have any strength at all? See seemed too "normal" for someone that sick!

I am wondering if Adora had stopped for awhile.  I don't know.  This one I can't explain away, so I won't try. 

On 8/28/2018 at 11:12 AM, Butless said:

The rape could have had something more to do with the plot, rather than be continuously brought up an then not dealt wiith. 

I actually think this whole story line could've and should've been cut. It literally didn't propel the story at all.  Sure, the rape happened near the cabin, but there was another way to get Camille and Richard there without the rape.  Unless, maybe it was just to make us understand why she cuts herself since it's just trauma after trauma after trauma building up? 

 

On 8/28/2018 at 8:46 PM, Moxie Cat said:

What was the point of the shed? 

I have a suspicion that this show would have been much better served with an external screenwriter, who could have approached the project with the view of "how can this best be communicated to non readers" rather than Flynn and co., who seemed to be preoccupied with "how can we make this an artsy award-winning movie with themes and plot points that elude most viewers (and eff them anyway!)"

This was actually a vital clue that Camille missed the true meaning of.  For some reason (reasons completely unknown to me- the place was creepy AF) that was their hangout.  It came out in bits and pieces, but it was revealed that Anne & Natalie hung out there and then eventually that Amma hung out there, too.  That should've tied Amma to the murders, but obviously Camille was too close to it to see her sister as the murderer at that time.  Instead, she was worried FOR Amma, not ABOUT Amma.

And- I completely agree with your statement that an external screenwriter should've been involved.  I get that writers don't want their books made into something completely unrecognizable, but they should be at somewhat arm's length with the screenplay as some things just don't translate to the screen and there are always things that can be cut without harming the story (such as the rape and below- Ashley's ear). 

On 8/28/2018 at 9:59 PM, bannana said:

I think when Alan said she was out with her friends, that must have made Richard suspicious.  Camille has no friends, and Richard knows this.  Because of how she dreaded going to the reunion of the cheerleading girls.

 

On 8/29/2018 at 12:15 AM, peach said:

I think that was all kind of unclear.  Richard was last seen driving down the road, calling Camille's cell over and over.  Then they all came back together.  In the hospital, he made it sound like he was witness to Curry arriving and "busting down the door" with Vickery.  But he could have just been told that.  But they did burst in Adora's together, kind of a big coincidence Richard came back at the same moment.  I thought it was a little confusing.

I think maybe they converged at the house at the same time.  Richard realized, when he couldn't get a hold of Camille, etc, that something was wrong so he headed back and Curry was probably on his way there with the rest of the police. 

On 8/29/2018 at 8:57 PM, iPad said:

Didn't one of the murdered girls bite Ashley's ear? wouldn't that make Ashley an accomplice/murderer too? Was this addressed at all? 

There was no point in leaving this in the story, as it was told in the series, at all.  I don't know how pertinent it was in the book (if it even happened there).  Maybe to make us all second guess the blood in John's room?  I don't know.  At first, I was thinking that adding the stories of Natalie's biting, etc, gave her a voice as a victim, but this is another thing that really didn't propel the story at all and could've/should've been cut.  This ties in again to the comment above about having an outside screenwriter involved.  They can be a bit more critical and realize what isn't needed to the overall story. 

On 9/1/2018 at 6:22 PM, izabella said:

And so many things that don't add up.  1. How did the rollerskating murderers escape any and all suspicion?  Were their parents completely oblivious that their kids were out all night during the murders?  2. How did Alan evade all suspicion when Adora's poisoning was happening under his nose?  3. What was the point of making the power go out so the sheriff oversleeps and is late to John's interrogation?  Why was Natalie such a nasty, biting, pencil-in-the-eye stabbing tween?  Is everyone in this town just a breath away from being sociopaths and psychopaths?  4. Who put the bike in the pond that Adora's pig farm employee supposedly saw?  If he didn't see anything, then again, how did the bike end up in the pond and who made the employee lie?   5. With all those doctors that Marian went to, none of them did a blood test ever and found antifreeze, rat poison, and other drugs in her toxicology results?  Same for baby Amma with the feeding tube?  Camille laid on the bed staring at the fan while she was being "cared for" by Adora, and remembered doing the same thing back when she had short hair and, apparently, stuck her finger in the fan and cut it, spraying blood all over the floor...6. was that her first cutting experience?  7. Did she start cutting because of Marian's death, the rape in the woods, or being poisoned by Adora that time short-haired Camille was lying in bed and staring at the fan?...

Numbered for ease: 

1. Yes, I fully suspect those parents were clueless and thought their sweet angels were tucked away in bed.

2. Do we know he did?  Did I miss a scene where he was shown walking free?  Serious question because a lot happened and I binged the whole series in a couple of days so I easily could've missed it. 

3. I actually thought it was to have the quick visual of the awkward silence between Richard and John.  I actually was really interested to see that because Richard wasn't exhibiting the usual "macho" response to John and Camille having sex.  Yes, what he did and said to Camille in the hotel room was unacceptable, but I thought this showed that he calmed down and was a professional.  He wasn't shooting daggers at John with his eyes.  He wasn't making his displeasure known or "staking claim" on Camille.  He was just sitting there, quietly, waiting for the Sheriff to come.  Which, is another sign of professionalism as he could've started the interrogation without him.  

4. This wasn't explained at all, so it's obviously head cannon, but I figured it was Adora to try to get the finger pointed at someone else before it could be pointed at Amma.  I am sure she strong-armed her employee to say he saw John putting it there.  It's literally the only thing that makes sense.  Especially when she said, when John was arrested, that now her little girl was safe. 

5. I don't feel this is unusual at all.  First, it's already been stated how rare MBP actually IS (despite all of the Lifetime movies) that the doctor's were looking for other reasons.  Plus, those chemicals are hard to test for, aren't they?  Not a toxicologist, but I have a vague recollection of something along those lines while watching one of those murder shows on ID or something.  That's why people try to murder their spouses by spiking their gatorade and some get away with it!

6. I bet it was, and whatever sensation she got from it made her realize that it gave her what it was she needed.  

7. Yes.  She had a lot of messed up stuff happen to her that probably all of it added up to the cutting. 

On 9/10/2018 at 12:43 AM, BK1978 said:

The one thing I hated about the show/did not get, is why did they have the teenagers roller skating everywhere?  

In retrospect, I think it was to keep reminding the audience how young these girls were supposed to be even though, IMO, they looked at least 15/16.  You would not expect to see girls roller skating once they get their license or have friends to drive.  Also, roller skates make it much easier to go longer distances (ie, the woods to the center of town) faster to pull off all of their nefarious deeds. 

All of this to say, I liked it.  I liked the ending.  To me, at least, it made sense and I didn't feel I needed to be spoon-fed everything.  Like someone else said, it was less of a murder mystery and more of a character study.  I think binge watching it helped a lot as I didn't have a week in between each episode to dwell on it and consider alternate possibilities, etc.  (but, again, inadvertently spoiled).  I sincerely hope they don't try to do another season.  This would only work as an anthology, and even then...

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Whimsy said:

This was actually a vital clue that Camille missed the true meaning of.  For some reason (reasons completely unknown to me- the place was creepy AF) that was their hangout.  It came out in bits and pieces, but it was revealed that Anne & Natalie hung out there and then eventually that Amma hung out there, too. 

That's the first I heard of that, so Camille and me both. Was that in the book? That's a perfect example of one of the many points in this show that is completely confusing and pointless for non-book readers. If they weren't going to explain the disturbing S&M cabin that they made a point of showing to young Camille in the first episode, why include it at all? Amma could have been "found" in any cabin, because no significance was attached to it. All I was left wondering is, whose cabin was that? And why did Amma run there? And neither question was answered on the show.

I usually think the book is better than the show, or at least a more detailed experience (Game of Thrones, Harry Potter). But it's rare that I think the TV/movie version is so badly constructed that I just wish I'd read the book instead.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, Moxie Cat said:

That's the first I heard of that, so Camille and me both. Was that in the book? That's a perfect example of one of the many points in this show that is completely confusing and pointless for non-book readers. If they weren't going to explain the disturbing S&M cabin that they made a point of showing to young Camille in the first episode, why include it at all? Amma could have been "found" in any cabin, because no significance was attached to it. All I was left wondering is, whose cabin was that? And why did Amma run there? And neither question was answered on the show.

I usually think the book is better than the show, or at least a more detailed experience (Game of Thrones, Harry Potter). But it's rare that I think the TV/movie version is so badly constructed that I just wish I'd read the book instead.

I don’t know. I didnt read the book. Maybe I just projected them hanging out at the cabin specifically, but at the bar John had said that Amma hung out with Natalie and Anne but it’s not too far fetched since that’s where Amma ran when she had her fit for attention. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I really wish that there could have been more flashbacks with Camille and Marion.  That scene where the photographer was in the ivory-floored room and Camille took his camera and started taking pictures of Marion and she was making faces and pulling out her tongue really made me smile.  They had a genuine, sisterly bond.

 

This may be a UO, but I didn't find Amma as callous and cruel in the tv series.  I thought she would be a lot meaner. 

Share this post


Link to post

I'm late to the party, as I don't have HBO, so I watched the whole thing on iTunes. I didn't binge, as it was much too dark to watch more than one episode at a time - I needed short breaks here and there before diving in again, so I spread my viewing over a week or so.

I personally enjoyed the whole show - the atmosphere, the creepy slow burn, the superb performances, and even the ending. As someone who also just finished watching "Castle Rock", which genuinely DID have a lousy unsatisfying ending full of cannon-ball sized plot holes, I didn't have many complaints about the way this show wrapped up. I agree with those who were annoyed by the quick cuts shown during the credits - that was an unfair cheat. I almost shut it off before I caught a glimpse of one and continued watching. I'm sure there were many people who don't read show forums who missed that completely.

And as others have mentioned, I would have cut back on the arty shots of Camille driving around town - probably at least 30 minutes could have been devoted to adding a bit more coherent narrative, and a less rushed conclusion. The series as a whole could have been tightened up to 6 episodes. Detective man-candy didn't really do anything for me either, but I get that his character was supposed to be kind of a jerk. 

But apart from that, I thought the ending worked. Even though this was probably meant to be a psychological horror story more than a mystery, the clues were absolutely there all along. There was clearly something seriously wrong with Amma from the get go. I think because she lacked familial connection, and because Amma was so young, Camille really wanted to believe Amma's strange behaviour was due to Adora's warped ministrations, and general teenage brattiness, rather than a psychiatric problem. But there are several scenes where Amma reveals a cruel sadistic streak that is genuinely chilling. The young actress did a phenomenal job with that part - she was able to keep the audience guessing (is she just a really messed up kid, or is she a psychopath?). I figured Amma had to be involved somehow, but thought it would be in connection with Adora. Instead there were two separate crimes originating in the same household. When we saw Camille and Amma settling contentedly into their new city life, and there was still a full 10 minutes left in the show, I KNEW something really bad was about to happen/be revealed. 

Patricia Clarkson has been one of my favourite actresses for a long time, and this was bravura performance - I can tell she must have had a great time playing a monster like Adora. Clarkson was raised in New Orleans, so I'm sure she's well acquainted with fluttery attention-seeking Southern Belles, and probably had great material to draw upon. I also really enjoyed Elizabeth Perkins as Adora's blowsy frenemy - I wish we saw her more in film & TV roles - hopefully this will get her some attention and more work. I've always been a fan of Amy Adams - she gives consistently good performances in everything, and this was no exception.

As creepy and disturbing as this show was (many people have mentioned it reminded them of Shirley Jackson, and I agree), I'm going to miss it. I am baffled that they're talking about doing a 2nd season, and can't imagine how they will pull it off. It should probably end where it did.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎8‎/‎26‎/‎2018 at 10:44 PM, thesupremediva1 said:

One more thing: Alan is the shittiest human being. He's not worthy of being called a man. He knew those two girls were about to die. He knew enough. He chose to do nothing. He deserves some kind of accessory charge. He takes "willfully ignorant" to a new level.

I thought there was plenty of wasted opportunity letting Alan's particular brand of psychopathy pass unremarked.  I spent the whole series thinking he was a basic inconsequential emasculated shitty human being, so I was dumbfounded when he told the cop that Camille wasn't home.  Boing!  Okay, so he was just so obsessed by his great love for Adorra that he was willing to watch her knock off their children?  And then she'll be mine, all mine alone!  Bwaah haw haw. 

 

**************

Like everyone else, I would have appreciated a little more exposition wrapping up this mystery suspense thriller we've followed for eight weeks.  Thank goodness I'm the type to stick around while the credits roll.

But mainly I have a serious complaint for the editors:  did anyone EVER take a look at this thing on something less than a ten-foot screen?!?  I have a fairly large television--60"--and I had to go through the last ten minutes frame-by-frame SQUINTING at the screen.  What's that?  Who's that?  Where are they?  What's happening? 

Camille notices . . . something in the wastebasket, which leads her to the dollhouse.  Finally I figure out it's a bedspread, even though the camera never once focuses on it.  Why the hell would Amma throw away the bedspread?

When Camille started taking apart the dollhouse, though, is the moment I finally figured out that Amma was replicating the ivory floor with teeth, so maybe I shouldn't be grinching about the bedspread.  (But it was a sloppy trail of breadcrumbs anyway.)

 

Thanks to the poster who suggested finding the book at the library and reading the epilogue.  That's exactly what I plan to do.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, candall said:

Camille notices . . . something in the wastebasket, which leads her to the dollhouse.  Finally I figure out it's a bedspread, even though the camera never once focuses on it.  Why the hell would Amma throw away the bedspread?

The black girl that Amma murdered had given Amma the bedspread as a present after they became friends. There was a scene where the girl gave Amma the bedspread in Camille's presence.

That's why Camille noticed it and fished it from the garbage to put it back. At first she probably thought it ended up in the bin by accident.

After discovering the teeth of her r she realized that Amma was "done" with the girl and so she also threw away the present.

Edited by WearyTraveler
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I read spoilers. I love spoilers. I love them so much I read spoilers for shows and movies I don't even watch. But I went into this series cold—deciding that maybe I'll just give a series a chance to unfold without knowing anything about what's to come. 

I will never, ever make that mistake again because this series was a big old pile of dog crap presented in a Louis Vuitton handbag. I get that a series on HBO is automatically conferred with some "prestige" tag by its creators and the entertainment press, but MOTHER OF GOD this last episode was wretched. 

I should have read this forum before binge watching this over the weekend. God, I want those eight hours back to do something more worthy—like cleaning out the lint filter in the dryer or washing the cat's litter pan.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I really didn't like this show. Like so many others I enjoyed Amy Adams performance and was engaged to see how her character worked through this story. The final episode reveals that the writers and director wasted her performance. I didn't find any of the other characters believable, likable, or even consistent. 

It was a hard show to watch for such a bunch of crap. There will not and should not be any second season. Also I would like HBO to know that the post-credits trend, not just the acted scenes, but the interview with the director/writer where they explain stuff, is a horrible thing. They do this on Westworld now also, and it is just a sign of bad storytelling to have a producer tell you what happened.

Edited by ladders · Reason: Oh, one more thing.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/18/2018 at 8:23 PM, candall said:

I thought there was plenty of wasted opportunity letting Alan's particular brand of psychopathy pass unremarked.  I spent the whole series thinking he was a basic inconsequential emasculated shitty human being, so I was dumbfounded when he told the cop that Camille wasn't home.  Boing!  Okay, so he was just so obsessed by his great love for Adorra that he was willing to watch her knock off their children?  And then she'll be mine, all mine alone!  Bwaah haw haw. 

 

**************

Like everyone else, I would have appreciated a little more exposition wrapping up this mystery suspense thriller we've followed for eight weeks.  Thank goodness I'm the type to stick around while the credits roll.

But mainly I have a serious complaint for the editors:  did anyone EVER take a look at this thing on something less than a ten-foot screen?!?  I have a fairly large television--60"--and I had to go through the last ten minutes frame-by-frame SQUINTING at the screen.  What's that?  Who's that?  Where are they?  What's happening? 

Camille notices . . . something in the wastebasket, which leads her to the dollhouse.  Finally I figure out it's a bedspread, even though the camera never once focuses on it.  Why the hell would Amma throw away the bedspread?

When Camille started taking apart the dollhouse, though, is the moment I finally figured out that Amma was replicating the ivory floor with teeth, so maybe I shouldn't be grinching about the bedspread.  (But it was a sloppy trail of breadcrumbs anyway.)

 

Thanks to the poster who suggested finding the book at the library and reading the epilogue.  That's exactly what I plan to do.

Its not even worth it to go to tge librsry and read the epilogue. Srsly; its a couple sentences and it only explains where Amma ends up right after the last murder. Its unremarkable. A dud. Go to the other book sections  on here and just find out that way.

And it seems pretty obvious that the makers of this are high off  their own fart fumes and dont have an ounce of care for the audience. That shows in how they chose to edit, the crap they threw in there that cannot be picked up by the average tv, and the shitty writing they left the show.

Adams acting was spotty.  I rewatched some of the series and was underwhelmed with it. She chose this project as  vanitys piece that would win her an award for playing such a physically 'ugly' character, which i find distasteful.  But in 95% of the shows, she does the same kind of arrogant strutting around that she does in her other flims. I think she does it to convey confidence but what it comes across as, is her looking like she thinks that every guy in the room wants to do her.  Its laid bare here how unappealing she really is, with minimal makeup and lighting thats not staged to flatter; and that makes her usual routine flat and gross, unappealing. If nothing else, the director knew and exploited this, which was smart if him, but she looks the fool.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'm chiming in long after everyone else has left, but I finished this last night and have some thoughts.

I haven't read this entire thread, but most people seemed to have the same reaction as me: patiently waiting through the dense, stifled, "something is rotten in the town of Wind Gap" atmosphere and grim portrayal of a broken woman by Amy Adams (which for the record, were excellent) only for the slow-burning psychological drama to end with a rather lame GOTCHA! line, with no sense of closure at all. 

And hilariously, I was so tired that I didn't stop to watch the ending credits, which I usually ALWAYS do, and which in this case would have added just a little more clarity to the murders. I wouldn't have even known about them had I not read this board.

So last night I decided that I would simply pretend the story ended with the relatively upbeat montage of Amma and Camille rebuilding their lives together: the scene in which they see Jackie come to visit Adora would have been a perfect final scene. I had Adora pegged as the killer of Anna/Natalie because she was projecting her hatred of Camille onto other "wild, unruly girls" that reminded her of "the daughter that got away", who needed to be punished. There was that odd moment in one of the early episodes in which Adora describes the story about Natalie (how she cut off her own hair in order to avoid hair curlers, as told to Camille by her father) only she switched out Natalie for Camille. Camille reacted to it with confusion, but didn't follow up, something that seemed like a clue as to Adora's motivation. 

That it was Amma all along came the heck out of nowhere, though I concede there were some clues along the way and I have warmed a little to the idea of Amma as the killer. That said, it was NOT okay that I had to read a linked Vanity Fair article in order to understand some of the finer details. I was baffled at the fact that Natalie had been killed in Ashley's carriage house. The heck? How on earth did Amma and Natalie have access to that? I was equally weirded out by the fact Amma's conversation with Natalie's brother happened at the pool of Ashley's house: she clearly wasn't friends with Ashley, so what was she doing there? 

It was VF that pointed out that (in the book) Ashley was the older sister of one of Amma's friends that helped with the killing - something that was definitely not spelt out in the show, and was a HUGE detail that needed clarification. 

Also, a part of me wishes that if they were going to go this route, they would at  least have had Camille figure it out BEFORE another innocent girl was killed. How much trauma (dead sister, gang rape, body cutting, psychotic mother/sister) can you heap on one person?

Ah well. I probably won't watch it again, but it was appropriately creepy and atmospheric while it lasted. 

Quote

She chose this project as  vanitys piece that would win her an award for playing such a physically 'ugly' character, which i find distasteful.  But in 95% of the shows, she does the same kind of arrogant strutting around that she does in her other flims. I think she does it to convey confidence but what it comes across as, is her looking like she thinks that every guy in the room wants to do her.  Its laid bare here how unappealing she really is, with minimal makeup and lighting thats not staged to flatter; and that makes her usual routine flat and gross, unappealing. If nothing else, the director knew and exploited this, which was smart if him, but she looks the fool.

Yeesh. This reads like something Adora would write in her prison journal.

Edited by Ravenya003
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
×