|
|
Post by Dr Livingstone on Sept 21, 2017 1:03:02 GMT -5
The Good Place! Let's talk about it! What do you guys think of season 2 so far?
I love it, but it's also kind of making me anxious. (I'm empathizing with Chidi so much here). I really enjoyed the premiere while I was watching it, although I'm a little frustrated at bringing it all to a head and resetting again. At least the note was a bit of a tie to where the characters ended last season... i liked seeing them evolve, so I was unsure about the original reset, but was intrigued when just the note caused them to act so differently. That felt much more like a continuation of where we last saw them.
But the show has definitely earned some credit, so I guess I'll just see how it plays out from here!
|
|
|
|
Post by haysoos on Sept 21, 2017 9:19:56 GMT -5
I kind of feel sorry for Michael. All he wants to do is torture four people in a new, more interesting way than just burning them, biting them or putting things in their bum. Is that so wrong? Why is it so difficult? Why does it all go so spectacularly wrong every time? From cluelessly rebellious Janets to prima donna demon actresses, to that damned forking Eleanor, it's almost like the whole place has it in for him.
Motherforking shirtballs. This whole place isn't actually Michael's Bad Place is it? I'm going to be both highly disappointed and a little smug if it turns out to be true.
Also: My biggest laugh so far this month was Jason's reaction to a refreshing glass of yak's milk
|
|
Invisible Goat
Shoutbox Elitist 
Grab your mother's keys, we're leaving
Posts: 2,644 
Member is Online
|
Post by Invisible Goat on Sept 21, 2017 11:31:27 GMT -5
I liked last night's episode(s) a lot, seemed like it was able to be more outrightly funny than most of s1 since the characters are so familiar but starting over from scratch. Tahani drunk and in denim and cargo shorts was hilarious. Also enjoyed the increased role of "Fake Eleanor."
Surprising that they so quickly discarded what seemed to be the whole premise of the season.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ben Grimm on Sept 21, 2017 19:49:40 GMT -5
I loved it, though I've loved every episode to date. I suspect that the season at some point is going to be Michael, Janet, and the four functionally forming a team to hide what's going on from Sean, and that that will be the new status quo. Until something else happens.
|
|
|
|
Post by William T. Goat, Esq. on Sept 22, 2017 5:50:01 GMT -5
Wouldn't it be cool if every episode this season is a reboot, with the four humans figuring it out every time?
|
|
|
|
Post by MarkInTexas on Sept 22, 2017 12:45:44 GMT -5
Motherforking shirtballs. This whole place isn't actually Michael's Bad Place is it? I'm going to be both highly disappointed and a little smug if it turns out to be true. That's my working theory. Given that The Bad Place seems to be a Better Off Ted-style bureaucracy, I also wouldn't be surprised if at some point, someone from The Head Office shows up to announce that the entire Bad Place division is being shut down and everyone, humans and demons alike, is being reassigned to The Good Place. As for the premiere, I liked the approach of replaying the same scene from different perspectives. I'm pretty OK with Eleanor catching on so quickly, as the note tipped her off that something wasn't right, which allowed her to notice everything that was going very very wrong (though her "soulmate" running off to the gym every 5 minutes might have led Eleanor 1.0 to realize that things weren't quite what they seemed). I've read that the next two episodes are even better, so I'm excited. I agree with Ben Grimm that at some point, Michael will have to level with the quartet about what's going on to throw Sean off. Anyway, let's start the Emmy campaigns for Danson (I'm still flabbergasted that they couldn't figure out how to nominate Ted Danson for this show) and D'Arcy Carden. |
|
|
|
Post by forever1267 on Sept 25, 2017 20:00:34 GMT -5
I'm really curious as to how far they can stretch this, but I'm definitely in for the ride. That first season was just fantastic.
|
|
|
|
Post by sarapen on Sept 26, 2017 8:51:58 GMT -5
Err, I have a question about season 1 which has just been added on Netflix. I've been reading the comments on the AV Club episode reviews (Oh, for it so falls out that what we have we prize not to the worth whiles we enjoy it) and they keep mentioning stuff that I don't remember from the episode at all, such as the afterlife not having hangovers or Eleanor's file just being pictures of cacti.
Does anyone know if the Netflix episodes are shorter or am I having early-onset dementia? Or maybe my streaming is hiccupping past certain scenes? |
|
|
|
Post by Ben Grimm on Sept 26, 2017 9:04:08 GMT -5
Err, I have a question about season 1 which has just been added on Netflix. I've been reading the comments on the AV Club episode reviews (Oh, for it so falls out that what we have we prize not to the worth whiles we enjoy it) and they keep mentioning stuff that I don't remember from the episode at all, such as the afterlife not having hangovers or Eleanor's file just being pictures of cacti.
Does anyone know if the Netflix episodes are shorter or am I having early-onset dementia? Or maybe my streaming is hiccupping past certain scenes? I think there are extended versions of all but one episode (just scenes cut for time). Those extended versions were available on demand, but I'm not sure what Netflix has. |
|
|
|
Post by Ben Grimm on Sept 27, 2017 8:44:54 GMT -5
I love this show and am thrilled that it's back, but something's been gnawing at me--the rules for getting into the Bad Place seem a little bit inconsistent? Specifically with regard to Chidi and Tahani. I kind of hope they either explain this a whole lot more, or else drop it entirely so I can stop overthinking it and just enjoy the jokes. It's probably safe to say that the "rules" system Michael mentions early on is either a straight-up lie, or at least not the whole story. Eleanor and Jason probably belong there regardless, in any system that isn't super-forgiving, so they don't provide useful data points, but both Chidi and Tahani were super-self-absorbed; Chidi hyper-focusing on his own actions to the lengths that they hurt other people, and Tahani doing good things entirely for selfish reasons, and medium place lady (who is a very useful data point) doing good things for the right reasons but being genuinely horrible prior to that and thus confusing things. The rules are probably something like "if you do good things for good reasons (generally speaking), you go to the Good Place; if you don't, you won't." The point system may be part of that, but the points require both intent and follow-through to count. The presentation they got was because they had to convince the two people who believed that they were there on their own merits that they belong there. Intent is also probably more important than follow-through, assuming Michael was telling the truth about Chidi being the closest, both because his intent was much purer than Tahani's (he was just too focused on "I don't want to actively cause harm" rather than "I don't want to allow harm to happen") and because medium place lady pretty much only (directly) had intent, without much follow-up on her own. |
|
|
|
Post by Ben Grimm on Sept 27, 2017 9:18:26 GMT -5
Also, my wild-ass guess for the big twist this season:
We're not witnessing really the four's Bad Place, exactly. I mean, we are - they are actual people being actually punished - but where we "really" are is Michael's Bad Place, and he's being punished for his failure to get his "Good Place" idea to work. The other demons are probably in on it (though it's reasonably possible many of them are getting punished as well), but Sean is the real architect, here.
|
|
|
|
Post by William T. Goat, Esq. on Sept 27, 2017 21:06:33 GMT -5
Maybe there are no rules, and there is no Good Place. Maybe the show's final message, when the series ends, is that it's up to good people to make anyplace they are into a Good Place.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ben Grimm on Sept 28, 2017 19:39:41 GMT -5
Yeah, the "we're in Michael's bad place" thing is looking pretty likely right now.
|
|
|
|
Post by MrsLangdonAlger on Sept 28, 2017 20:52:09 GMT -5
I LOLed so hard at the background gag of "Chicken Soup for the Mouth".
|
|
|
|
Post by Ben Grimm on Sept 28, 2017 20:58:02 GMT -5
I LOLed so hard at the background gag of "Chicken Soup for the Mouth". There were so many good background gags in this episode - I need to rewatch it just for that. |
|
|
|
Post by MarkInTexas on Sept 28, 2017 22:46:33 GMT -5
I agree with Ben Grimm that at some point, Michael will have to level with the quartet about what's going on to throw Sean off. I didn't think that point would be reached by the end of the second (technically third) episode. |
|
|
|
Post by Roy Batty's Pet Dove on Sept 29, 2017 0:09:20 GMT -5
It's probably safe to say that the "rules" system Michael mentions early on is either a straight-up lie, or at least not the whole story. Eleanor and Jason probably belong there regardless, in any system that isn't super-forgiving, so they don't provide useful data points, but both Chidi and Tahani were super-self-absorbed; Chidi hyper-focusing on his own actions to the lengths that they hurt other people, and Tahani doing good things entirely for selfish reasons, and medium place lady (who is a very useful data point) doing good things for the right reasons but being genuinely horrible prior to that and thus confusing things. The rules are probably something like "if you do good things for good reasons (generally speaking), you go to the Good Place; if you don't, you won't." The point system may be part of that, but the points require both intent and follow-through to count. The presentation they got was because they had to convince the two people who believed that they were there on their own merits that they belong there. Intent is also probably more important than follow-through, assuming Michael was telling the truth about Chidi being the closest, both because his intent was much purer than Tahani's (he was just too focused on "I don't want to actively cause harm" rather than "I don't want to allow harm to happen") and because medium place lady pretty much only (directly) had intent, without much follow-up on her own. That actually works for me, a little moreso for Tahani's case than Chidi's. Chidi, to me at least, reads less as self-absorbed and more as "uncontrolled anxiety disorder." Him being sent to the Bad Place for essentially having a mental illness seems unfair in a way that jars with (what I have perceived to be) the tone of the show. I'm hoping that it's as you say and that Michael was simply lying. Of course, thinking about the "actual" rules that so many people believe send people to "actual" Hell, maybe the rules being capricious and essentially unfair is part of the point. I just finished Season 1 (and watched the Season 2 premiere) tonight, and honestly, the idea of merit-based entry into The Good Place, or whatever The Good Place actually is (if it exists at all), at least as depicted on the show so far, is deeply fucked up. I think the show is probably going to acknowledge this (for instance, remember when Eleanor was about to go to The Adam Scott Bad Place in season 1 and as Chidi was defending her he questioned the very system of determining which place people end up), but if the rules being unfair doesn't end up being part of the point of the show, or worse, if something along the lines of "the main four humans ultimately redeem themselves and become worthy of The (real) Good Place" happens, then it would not only ruin the show, but the moral bankruptcy of whole thing would be sickening. As things stand at the end of the season 2 premiere (I haven't seen tonight's episode yet), it would appear that most denizens of The Bad Place are literally physically tortured a la Dante's Inferno, and it would also appear that The Bad Place is the destination of most humans after death, which is super fucked up. Chidi definitely doesn't deserve to be tortured for eternity in The Bad Place for literally just having an anxiety disorder and having written an unreadable philosophical treatise. Tahani is very self-absorbed, but her self-absorption was certainly not so extreme as to deserve physical torture for all eternity. Jason is an idiot with shitty taste, who blew up a rich asshole's unoccupied boat and then died trying to commit a nonviolent robbery, but again, these aren't things which warrant an eternity of physical torture. Pre-death Eleanor was probably the worst of the four, but even so, I don't think her behavior quite lives up to "deserves to be tortured eternally". The fact that we still can't be sure whether "the rules being capricious and essentially unfair is part of the point" over a season into the show is part of the peril of making this kind of show, because it leaves it open to completely legitimate criticism. There's still a lot of ambiguity as to whether the showrunners find the rather odious technocratic points system by which entry into The Good Place is determined to be as odious as it is or not. You'd think Schur would find it odious, but that would seem to challenge the structure of a society in a way that his other shows up to now have failed to do. Remember that, ultimately, the moral to Parks and Rec embraced some of the most odious elements of real-world American society. The moral was literally "The three most important measures of happiness in life are 1) How far you advance in your career, 2) Women giving the fuck in to society's and their husbands' demands that they have children even if they don't really want kids because of course they actually do want kids and they just don't know it, and 3) becoming immensely wealthy", after all. Schur just doesn't strike me as the sort of guy for to whom the idea of imagining a society in need of massive structural change would occur. And until the show unambiguously demonstrates otherwise, Schur can't expect us to just sit around for another five years or whatever wondering what it's fucking angle is wrt the legitimacy of the system by which entry into The Good Place is determined. |
|
|
|
Post by Angry Raisins on Sept 29, 2017 7:17:49 GMT -5
I know this is stating the blatantly obvious, but the level of plot energy on this show is really something. The original premise (or, you know, what it appeared to be) was... eh, fine, adequate enough for a comedy. But the willingness to constantly push forward rather than slowing down and spinning minor plots out of the status quo (and I don't just mean the S1 big twist, but the whole thing) is what's really got my attention. No idea if they can keep it up, but it's pretty exhilarating for now.
Given the big twist, Adam Scott's actual role in the whole charade looks a little hazy (is he actually in charge of some other Bad Place neighbourhood, or just one of Michael's more infrequent actors?), but I hope we get more of his character regardless.
Really liked the big glowing obelisk in the latest episode, has a nice implication that Michael gets a certain amount of glee from putting the 4 through pointless weird theatricality. Sean's cocoon is now even funnier in hindsight.
(Edit: And, I guess, probably also reflects that Michael now has to use things other than Sean for his little performances, given how much he's hiding from him.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Douay-Rheims-Challoner on Sept 29, 2017 8:06:42 GMT -5
Given the big twist, Adam Scott's actual role in the whole charade looks a little hazy (is he actually in charge of some other Bad Place neighbourhood, or just one of Michael's more infrequent actors?), but I hope we get more of his character regardless. Given we haven't seen him since (and Adam Scott is currently busy with Fox's Ghosted, and thus less likely to reappear this season) he probably is a guy from another Bad Place. Certainly the most recent episode establishes that the Neutral Place House was not part of Michael's charade, which I assumed, and neither is the train. |
|
|
|
Post by Angry Raisins on Sept 29, 2017 10:04:55 GMT -5
Given the big twist, Adam Scott's actual role in the whole charade looks a little hazy (is he actually in charge of some other Bad Place neighbourhood, or just one of Michael's more infrequent actors?), but I hope we get more of his character regardless. Given we haven't seen him since (and Adam Scott is currently busy with Fox's Ghosted, and thus less likely to reappear this season) he probably is a guy from another Bad Place. Certainly the most recent episode establishes that the Neutral Place House was not part of Michael's charade, which I assumed, and neither is the train. It does seem like the Middle Place is "real", which is actually quite a big deal if so, given that the introductory video there confirms that there is a Good Place (not otherwise clear) and that people are sorted in more or less the way S1 described. Although it wouldn't be too hard to explain that one away if they wanted to do something different. |
|
|
|
Post by Angry Raisins on Sept 29, 2017 10:19:10 GMT -5
That actually works for me, a little moreso for Tahani's case than Chidi's. Chidi, to me at least, reads less as self-absorbed and more as "uncontrolled anxiety disorder." Him being sent to the Bad Place for essentially having a mental illness seems unfair in a way that jars with (what I have perceived to be) the tone of the show. I'm hoping that it's as you say and that Michael was simply lying. Of course, thinking about the "actual" rules that so many people believe send people to "actual" Hell, maybe the rules being capricious and essentially unfair is part of the point. I just finished Season 1 (and watched the Season 2 premiere) tonight, and honestly, the idea of merit-based entry into The Good Place, or whatever The Good Place actually is (if it exists at all), at least as depicted on the show so far, is deeply fucked up. I think the show is probably going to acknowledge this (for instance, remember when Eleanor was about to go to The Adam Scott Bad Place in season 1 and as Chidi was defending her he questioned the very system of determining which place people end up), but if the rules being unfair doesn't end up being part of the point of the show, or worse, if something along the lines of "the main four humans ultimately redeem themselves and become worthy of The (real) Good Place" happens, then it would not only ruin the show, but the moral bankruptcy of whole thing would be sickening. As things stand at the end of the season 2 premiere (I haven't seen tonight's episode yet), it would appear that most denizens of The Bad Place are literally physically tortured a la Dante's Inferno, and it would also appear that The Bad Place is the destination of most humans after death, which is super fucked up. Chidi definitely doesn't deserve to be tortured for eternity in The Bad Place for literally just having an anxiety disorder and having written an unreadable philosophical treatise. Tahani is very self-absorbed, but her self-absorption was certainly not so extreme as to deserve physical torture for all eternity. Jason is an idiot with shitty taste, who blew up a rich asshole's unoccupied boat and then died trying to commit a nonviolent robbery, but again, these aren't things which warrant an eternity of physical torture. Pre-death Eleanor was probably the worst of the four, but even so, I don't think her behavior quite lives up to "deserves to be tortured eternally". The fact that we still can't be sure whether "the rules being capricious and essentially unfair is part of the point" over a season into the show is part of the peril of making this kind of show, because it leaves it open to completely legitimate criticism. There's still a lot of ambiguity as to whether the showrunners find the rather odious technocratic points system by which entry into The Good Place is determined to be as odious as it is or not. You'd think Schur would find it odious, but that would seem to challenge the structure of a society in a way that his other shows up to now have failed to do. Remember that, ultimately, the moral to Parks and Rec embraced some of the most odious elements of real-world American society. The moral was literally "The three most important measures of happiness in life are 1) How far you advance in your career, 2) Women giving the fuck in to society's and their husbands' demands that they have children even if they don't really want kids because of course they actually do want kids and they just don't know it, and 3) becoming immensely wealthy", after all. Schur just doesn't strike me as the sort of guy for to whom the idea of imagining a society in need of massive structural change would occur. And until the show unambiguously demonstrates otherwise, Schur can't expect us to just sit around for another five years or whatever wondering what it's fucking angle is wrt the legitimacy of the system by which entry into The Good Place is determined. Personally, while I agree about the system being messed up, I wouldn't really blame the show if they didn't dig too hard into that. The whole show is based around the premise of a heaven/hell afterlife which, while it obviously has religious roots, is firmly wedged into the popular zeitgeist just as its own thing. Digging into the morality of it feels a bit like a show about Santa digging into the practicalities of how he gets around the world in time: sure, you can go that way, but you can also get away with saying that's just how it works, everyone knows this, and talking about something else. I mean, they're already kind of ignoring the fact that, by the standards of pretty much anyone in the Bad Place, the characters here are incredibly lucky in their "torment": a bunch of stress and arguments really doesn't seem comparable to being constantly burned alive and the like. But that's probably for the best, because the more you actually start focusing on all the implied torture, the less the thing can ever work as a comedy. |
|
|
|
Post by Ben Grimm on Sept 29, 2017 10:25:20 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2017 16:35:33 GMT -5
That actually works for me, a little moreso for Tahani's case than Chidi's. Chidi, to me at least, reads less as self-absorbed and more as "uncontrolled anxiety disorder." Him being sent to the Bad Place for essentially having a mental illness seems unfair in a way that jars with (what I have perceived to be) the tone of the show. I'm hoping that it's as you say and that Michael was simply lying. Of course, thinking about the "actual" rules that so many people believe send people to "actual" Hell, maybe the rules being capricious and essentially unfair is part of the point. I just finished Season 1 (and watched the Season 2 premiere) tonight, and honestly, the idea of merit-based entry into The Good Place, or whatever The Good Place actually is (if it exists at all), at least as depicted on the show so far, is deeply fucked up. I think the show is probably going to acknowledge this (for instance, remember when Eleanor was about to go to The Adam Scott Bad Place in season 1 and as Chidi was defending her he questioned the very system of determining which place people end up), but if the rules being unfair doesn't end up being part of the point of the show, or worse, if something along the lines of "the main four humans ultimately redeem themselves and become worthy of The (real) Good Place" happens, then it would not only ruin the show, but the moral bankruptcy of whole thing would be sickening. As things stand at the end of the season 2 premiere (I haven't seen tonight's episode yet), it would appear that most denizens of The Bad Place are literally physically tortured a la Dante's Inferno, and it would also appear that The Bad Place is the destination of most humans after death, which is super fucked up. Chidi definitely doesn't deserve to be tortured for eternity in The Bad Place for literally just having an anxiety disorder and having written an unreadable philosophical treatise. Tahani is very self-absorbed, but her self-absorption was certainly not so extreme as to deserve physical torture for all eternity. Jason is an idiot with shitty taste, who blew up a rich asshole's unoccupied boat and then died trying to commit a nonviolent robbery, but again, these aren't things which warrant an eternity of physical torture. Pre-death Eleanor was probably the worst of the four, but even so, I don't think her behavior quite lives up to "deserves to be tortured eternally". The fact that we still can't be sure whether "the rules being capricious and essentially unfair is part of the point" over a season into the show is part of the peril of making this kind of show, because it leaves it open to completely legitimate criticism. There's still a lot of ambiguity as to whether the showrunners find the rather odious technocratic points system by which entry into The Good Place is determined to be as odious as it is or not. You'd think Schur would find it odious, but that would seem to challenge the structure of a society in a way that his other shows up to now have failed to do. Remember that, ultimately, the moral to Parks and Rec embraced some of the most odious elements of real-world American society. The moral was literally "The three most important measures of happiness in life are 1) How far you advance in your career, 2) Women giving the fuck in to society's and their husbands' demands that they have children even if they don't really want kids because of course they actually do want kids and they just don't know it, and 3) becoming immensely wealthy", after all. Schur just doesn't strike me as the sort of guy for to whom the idea of imagining a society in need of massive structural change would occur. And until the show unambiguously demonstrates otherwise, Schur can't expect us to just sit around for another five years or whatever wondering what it's fucking angle is wrt the legitimacy of the system by which entry into The Good Place is determined. Just found this article on Vox that addresses these concerns by way of the newest episode. www.vox.com/culture/2017/10/1/16387064/the-good-place-episode-3-recap-dance-dance-resolutionPersonally I've loved these last few eps. |
|
|
|
Post by Dr Livingstone on Oct 2, 2017 18:59:01 GMT -5
Err, I have a question about season 1 which has just been added on Netflix. I've been reading the comments on the AV Club episode reviews (Oh, for it so falls out that what we have we prize not to the worth whiles we enjoy it) and they keep mentioning stuff that I don't remember from the episode at all, such as the afterlife not having hangovers or Eleanor's file just being pictures of cacti.
Does anyone know if the Netflix episodes are shorter or am I having early-onset dementia? Or maybe my streaming is hiccupping past certain scenes? Those things are mentioned! The cactus thing is after Janet is reset. |
|
|
|
Post by The Stuffingtacular She-Hulk on Oct 5, 2017 13:16:04 GMT -5
I just finished 2x03 today on my lunch break here at home and I can watch tonight's episode in real time AND I AM SO EXCITED.
This show is tied with Brooklyn 99 for my favorite right now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2017 14:49:51 GMT -5
I just finished 2x03 today on my lunch break here at home and I can watch tonight's episode in real time AND I AM SO EXCITED. This show is tied with Brooklyn 99 for my favorite right now. Thursday classes end on 9:00 for me; can't watch it on TV.  ...at least I can watch Nathan for You live. |
|
|
|
Post by songstarliner on Oct 10, 2017 21:59:35 GMT -5
I'm caught up! Binged the first season on Netflix over the last week or so, and just watched episode 2.3. It's delightful. Ted Danson is such a treasure: anyone who likes him in this role should immediately look into Bored To Death.
|
|
|
|
Post by Angry Raisins on Oct 15, 2017 13:54:19 GMT -5
Just watched S2E4 - was anyone else kind of expecting mid-life-crisis Michael at the party to blurt out something that gave the whole game away to Vicky and Co.? Almost feels a bit weird when a Good Place episode doesn't blow up the status quo.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roy Batty's Pet Dove on Oct 18, 2017 2:37:04 GMT -5
Just watched S2E4 - was anyone else kind of expecting mid-life-crisis Michael at the party to blurt out something that gave the whole game away to Vicky and Co.? Almost feels a bit weird when a Good Place episode doesn't blow up the status quo. I had to remind myself midway through the episode that I shouldn't get too used to the current status quo, but they've spent the last few episodes so rapidly blowing up the status quo and wiping the main four's memories over and over again that the pacing would've been too unrelentingly fast if Michael had given everything away. Plus, the current state of things, with Michael and the humans allied against Vickie and the other demons, has a lot of potential that can't really be explored in one episode. Also, Michael experiencing real emotional turmoil is something we haven't really seen before, so it's not like the episode is exactly treading water, in terms of plot and character development. |
|
|
|
Post by Ben Grimm on Oct 18, 2017 7:30:23 GMT -5
Just watched S2E4 - was anyone else kind of expecting mid-life-crisis Michael at the party to blurt out something that gave the whole game away to Vicky and Co.? Almost feels a bit weird when a Good Place episode doesn't blow up the status quo. I had to remind myself midway through the episode that I shouldn't get too used to the current status quo, but they've spent the last few episodes so rapidly blowing up the status quo and wiping the main four's memories over and over again that the pacing would've been too unrelentingly fast if Michael had given everything away. Plus, the current state of things, with Michael and the humans allied against Vickie and the other demons, has a lot of potential that can't really be explored in one episode. Also, Michael experiencing real emotional turmoil is something we haven't really seen before, so it's not like the episode is exactly treading water, in terms of plot and character development. If I had to guess, it would be that this is the status quo for a while at least until it gets blown up at the end of the season, and that the rest of this season is having fun with this set-up. At the same time, I would be more surprised if I was right than if I was wrong. |
|
