Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 28, 2024 16:35:48 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2011 11:16:17 GMT -4
I am so used to seeing Michelle Forbes as a HBIC cylon-killing crazy or, you know, a power-mad maenad that having her be so vulnerable and sad is throwing me for a loop. huntergrayson, you must, MUST watch Durham County Season Two. Come for the Forbes but stay for the INSANELY awesome Hugh Dillon. During filming, when I used to bump into Billy Campbell regularly, within a block of my apartment (and ate two stools away from him at my fave sushi bar), I thought "it's about time Vancouver stood in for a weather-appropriate American city." |
|
|
|
Post by kostgard on May 23, 2011 21:36:34 GMT -4
I've been enjoying this show, but really? Two girls (Rosie and the girl Bennett and Mohamed were hiding) both were at Bennett's house at the same night? And they both just happened to own the same shirt from the Grand Canyon? Really, show?
If it had been a t-shirt from some sort of Seattle-based event that everyone and their brother in that city owned, I could maybe buy it. But this really feels like a stretch.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 28, 2024 16:35:48 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2011 13:24:28 GMT -4
Those last minutes were intense. Poor stupid Bennet. I guess they did kill him, right? Or at least made sure (in a really horrible way) that he won't be able to tell anyone who did it?
I'm really hoping the whole murder mystery has something to do with this silly campaign stuff because after sitting through all those boring scenes that feel like a complete different show, there's GOT to be a connection. When Linden showed up at Richmond's office I was all "Oh I forgot that these two know each other!"
My guess is that rich basketball guy has something to do with the murder.
|
|
|
|
Post by kostgard on May 30, 2011 2:02:34 GMT -4
Okay, now there's a casino? Are they sure this isn't Twin Peaks?
I feel sorry for poor Bilko. He's weird, but harmless, and his mother sucks.
I still think the rich dude who funded Richmond is the killer.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 28, 2024 16:35:48 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2011 11:08:43 GMT -4
Wow, so poor Bennet had to be almost killed before Linden and Holder finally start, you know, asking questions? It was weird seeing Linden actually go through with some deeper questioning. Usually she just stands there, asks one question, gets an answer that makes her chew her gum a little harder before she storms off doing...nothing. Her behavior during the Belko interrogation seemed OOC; I wish they'd had Holder do the entire thing. He was awesome.
Oh and Linden went to Richmond and apologized for suspecting Bennet? Wouldn't going to Bennet's wife be more appropriate?
Gah, I sound like a hater when I really want to like this show and did so when it started. But now I feel I'm just waiting for the killer to finally be revealed. And it's GOT to do something with Richmond and his campaign so yes, rich dude is also still my prime suspect.
Also, I think I might be a tiny little bit in love with Joel Kinnaman. *runs off*
|
|
|
|
Post by kostgard on May 30, 2011 12:41:58 GMT -4
I can understand apologizing to Richmond because naming Bennett a suspect kinda effed up his campaign (and hey, if somehow he wins, you want to stay on the mayor's good side), but I think an apology to his wife was necessary too.
Yeah, at this point I'm hanging on to find out who the killer is. This was a strong episode and it started out strong (and thank god we don't have to go through the "Will she go to Sonoma?" thing every week anymore), but it feels like they don't have enough to fill an entire season. If they get a second season, they need to tighten things up.
I mean, the way they approached the Bennett thing was all wrong. They spent episodes focusing on him and only him when it was obvious that he wasn't the killer (because it was way too early in the season). Now that they've already cleared Belko, they are back to square one with no suspects. There should always been more than one suspect at all times, even if they are pursuing one a bit more than the other at any point in the season.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spinderella on May 30, 2011 13:41:09 GMT -4
I agree. Keeping the suspect ring in constant motion is totally crucial.
Watching the video of Rosie meeting Richmond at a rally was interesting. It felt like Clinton/Lewinsky all over again, which makes me wonder if something else is going on. I mean, his campaign car was involved -- so I can't help but wonder if the current Mayor plays a part and maybe there is another person, too. Not just one killer, but two or maybe three?
|
|
|
|
Post by kostgard on May 30, 2011 13:45:54 GMT -4
Watching the video of Rosie meeting Richmond at a rally was interesting. It felt like Clinton/Lewinsky all over again, which makes me wonder if something else is going on. I mean, his campaign car was involved -- so I can't help but wonder if the current Mayor plays a part and maybe there is another person, too. Not just one killer, but two or maybe three? I wouldn't be surprised if Rosie didn't stumble into something that had a number of the characters involved in it, and they all agreed to kill her, but only one threw her in the trunk and rolled the car into the lake (in the premiere I think when Rosie was running through the woods there was only one figure with a flashlight chasing her). I could see it being a cadre of rich/powerful dudes - my favorite suspect (the douchebag who funds Richmond's campaign), Jasper's dad, maybe Gwen/Gwen's dad, maybe the current mayor -- I could see them all wrapped up in something and Rosie found out their secrets so they killed her. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 28, 2024 16:35:48 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2011 17:56:34 GMT -4
I thought Stan having lost all the Larson's money had something to do with the casino since it was said that he had a gambling problem. I was thinking Rosie knew about her father's debt and was trying to settle it through her connections to the Richmond political campaign and ended up dead in the process. Could Richmond's loyal campaign manager have something to do with it? He's been portrayed as intensely loyal to Richmond and also somewhat amoral and willing to do anything to win. I'm so confused.  |
|
|
|
Post by Spinderella on May 30, 2011 20:17:22 GMT -4
That's an excellent suggestion! I don't know why I didn't start putting together the casino and Stan's gambling past/Larson money 'missing'.
I know that this is a series and all, but we won't be any closer to knowing who killed her (maybe the why instead of the who?) by the end of the season, right? This still has to be dragged on and on I would assume. Is that how it was in the original series?
|
|
