#anti elwood reid

[whateverthedragonswant]

Omg I'm dying laughing rn though I'm really trying hard to stop. I'm rewatching certain Jenny scenes in 3x11 for writing purposes and what do I see?

Not only is Jenny more affectionate while Beau is giving her a hug like Poppernak just did but when Beau gets the call about Avery, he looks to Cassie first then Jenny, telling them an officer spotted him. Jenny tells him "Go", he nods then looks to Cassie who tells him "Yeah, we got this." THEN he leaves.

As he's leaving, he bumps into Poppernak literally and then he passes right by Jenny who moves out of his way but puts a hand on his shoulder, and tells him to call her later. He says yeah, never stopping to look at her, and walks out the door.

THEN when Jenny says she knows where they can start looking for the people who took Gigi, there is a shot of Cassie getting up and throwing a pen into a coffee cup.

Remind you of anything?

This episode is all about parallels while bringing back some good ol' Cassie and Jenny working together goodness (which is why it's such a great episode for writing fuel), it allows Katheryn to shine as well as Jensen in their performances among some of the other cast members, it allows Cassie back into the lead she's supposed to be for once, we get back to the roots a bit of what is really the heart of this show (the 2 ladies), and gives us more of a closer look into Beau's story as well.

So while Beau deals with Avery who is trying to steal 15 million that has put his daughter and her mother in danger, Jenny is dealing with the fallout of Gigi grifting the wrong people that she stole 30K from Jenny to try to fix that now has mother and daughter in danger. Parallels.

This episode has such potential and I actually would argue is one of the more decent ones we've seen all season. Maybe that's due to Ryan's involvement in writing the episode, I'm not sure, but it's fantastic all around.

But here's what cracks me up when I think just how badly they fudged this season up and how hard the actors had to work to try to offset some of these bad story decisions. Why the parallel between Beau and Cassie?

Would Cassie have become the new sheriff had the series continued and Beau actually stayed in character, following Carla and Emily back to Houston? Not likely, given Cassie has staunchly refused to go back into policing and still has her PI business. Not to mention that would be a huge disservice to her character as well as Jenny's.

Is it a romantic parallel? Nope. The show runner made it pretty clear that Beau supposedly only sees Jenny in that light.

To set up a romantic parallel between Beau and Jenny? While I wouldn't put it past them to actually do that and think they accomplished something there, that doesn't seem to be what's happening here either, especially since Jenny is not the one tossing the pen and given Beau's pilot mode responses to her physical contact.

So why the parallel? Why have Cassie sitting like Beau was, throwing the pen into a coffee mug as they got up? When Jenny and Poppernak were present in both scenes, with Jenny knowing where to go and leading the way? With a phone call happening to Beau both times?

Well, let's look at who wrote this episode: Ryan and Christine Roum. And let's look at the title of the episode "Super Foxes". Jenny leads Cassie to see Tanya and Donno in the next scene where Jenny has to ask beg for Tonya's help to find her mom, none of her disgust for Tonya present. Tonya eventually agrees to help.

Now let's go back to 3x02. Who wrote that episode? Kyle Long and Christine Roum. What's the title? "The Woods Are Lovely, Dark and Deep" Not a parallel to foxes at all, in fact it's a line from a popular Robert Frost poem.

But in this episode what do we have? Beau is trying a sandwich from Tonya and Donno's diner The Blue Fox when Beau calls Jenny over to try it. She flat out refuses (we saw the previous episode how much she can't stand that Tonya isn't in jail) and goes on a rant with Tonya appearing behind her. Beau dashes off to help Cassie while telling Jenny to help Tonya. Jenny begrudgingly does while taking Poppernak with her. This case leads to the pen scene later on, where they're leaving to head to Tonya's house to save Paul.

This is the parallel. They literally did this to not only set up the Jenny and Tonya scene after to show Jenny's change but also to call back to 3x02. The pen parallel was the best they could do rather than pour everything they had into the Jenny and Tonya scene (which Katheryn and Jamie-Lynn were the ones to make it work btw) to wrap it up and make it more meaningful for Jenny's character which was at the forefront of this episode. They used Cassie again in order to focus on Jenny, sidelining how important Cassie actually is to the story itself. (Let's not forget y'all, she's the main character from the books this show is based on)

And then they did it to her again with Beau in the same damn scene! Even in an episode that's not about the AA-led campaign for Beau/Jenny kiss kiss tag team for once (though they still keep it in your face in their separate stories by the whole Emily and Carla scenes). Beau looks to Cassie again before Jenny like he had in 3x02 and 3x01 because he "still isn't ready to let Jenny in yet". So they literally use Cassie yet again to further someone else's story, one who isn't even one of the main characters. (Listen, I love Beau but that's the cold hard truth, it's not a slight against the character or Jensen)

And they even continuously used Poppernak for the Beau and Jenny push as well. Granted, he's not a main character but he has become a pillar in Jenny's world so to speak. Plus, the way J. Anthony Pena played him, there was SO much potential there with his character.

Literally both POC characters were pushed aside for the White characters to set up a romance that they didn't even commit to in the end (that ending scene is not romantic, sorry not sorry - Beau still can't look at her or tell her what happened in Houston without imbibing more alcohol, she settled for handhold). Just cold hard facts. And again, crappy writing.

THIS is why this show failed. Because of ridiculous story decisions like this. No wonder the cast had to work so hard to try to make things make sense when it came to marrying their performances with the writing. Because when you strip this down and look at the whole thing, what on earth do you see? A gift of a great story (from the books) and a David E. Kelly production that put an exciting twist on the whole thing was given to Elwood Reid and his writers and they completely ruined it. They literally took it and smashed it into pieces in a trash compactor then presented it to us and were like "See this masterpiece I made?"

I won't lie, I'm a huge Katheryn Winnick fan and to me it was sad to read an interview she gave back when she was first on the show, doing press. She was supposed to take a sabbatical after Vikings but got this offer, saw it was a David E. Kelly production, and knew she couldn't pass it up. So she went in full steam ahead. Anyone who has read/heard Katheryn talk knows how incredibly creative she is, knows she puts her heart and soul into the stories she tells. Not to mention Jenny Hoyt was a great character they created and it was the perfect marriage between Jenny and Katheryn on the screen. Whatever David's reasons for stepping away after season 1, Elwood was clearly the wrong choice to take over and lead this team of writers. They made some good decisions here and there like Beau and his storyline, Reba's casting, the Cassie and Jenny moments that were the heart of season 2, etc, but they really took the polished gem of potential David gave them and collectively ran over it with their cars.

I love the story of the books and I love the overall story of the show between the two women (what a smart twist to switch Cody for Jenny, to flesh out Jenny's character more, and split it down the middle between Cassie and Jenny in the storyline - that's David E. Kelly for you). This show had so much potential had they changed up either the showrunner or some of the writers or even both, but sadly they chose to do...that.

And examples like this one are proof in the pudding of how badly they missed the mark. If only they had done things differently perhaps we would have a season that pulled together better and actually made sense for all characters involved, rather than showing the desperation to stay on the air and sucking up to a section of one actor's internet fan base. We still might not have gotten a season 4 due to what's happening in Hollywood right now, but the characters would have been in a much better position by the end of the season in their storylines, then the equivalent of an apathetic wrap job in old newspaper with Scotch tape to "close things up".

So sad.

Eli Jorne and his writers told a better story in 6 episodes than Elwood and his writers did in 2 seasons (31 episodes). And Elwood was handed the world from David E. Kelly. Eli was given access to the TWD universe but had to completely create his own corner of it.

Sad.

[whateverthedragonswant]

☝️ Just another thing fanboy Elwood is ruining this season in favor of the most ridiculous fanservice ever recorded.

this is such a small fandom that I don't wanna bring negativity to it but I am soooooooooooo frustrated with how little screentime Cassie and Jenny have on the show now. Their relationship has always been the heart of the story and I don't want to watch them work cases separately, I want to watch them TOGETHER. It feels like now we only get to see them interact for a couple minutes at a time. It just sucks. LET ME SEE EPISODES ALL ABOUT THEM AND THEIR OLD MARRIED COUPLE ENERGY THAT IS ALL I AM ASKING

[may064]

Oh that hologramcowboy person re-blogged me and blocked me! Good riddance! I can finally not see their shit!

I was tired of seeing them parading around as a Jensen fan and spouting absolute bullshit. This person is not-in-the-know or whatever. If they are, bring some proof, anything! Oh! even better! They’re in the know as much as Goob is! So, good for them, I guess ;).

But, if they were so in-the-know and so confident of themselves why couldn’t they bring any proof of literally anything they said? They have got a million theories and a tight philosophy about how good of an actor Jensen is NOT. But they couldn’t answer for Kylie and Katherine. Why their storyline ALSO sucks this season and not just Jensen’s. If Jensen changes the script so much and doesn’t understand his character (which is, bs honestly. No director or production team will give the actor so much control that he can change his character’s entire arc. (Also, Jensen has eidetic memory and can remember lines very well and can understand his characters very well. This is a known fact. He goes slowly through the script when he first gets it just to understand the character’s motivations and where they’re coming from. Therefore, another lie debunked.) So, rest assured that whatever’s happening it’s happening with the consent of the producers and the development team.) I’m sure the production team is there to point out any mistakes that don’t go with the character? Or does Jensen have them all tied up with ropes or has people holding guns to their head? And even after he’s said that he can accept any criticism? Elwood Reid is there, he’s not going to get starry eyed at Jensen. He can surely tell him when he’s going wrong and I’m sure does when it happens. Alos, there’s a thing such as fucking bad writing? And it has been going on since season 2, before Jensen came in? If the writing’s bad, even the best actor in the world can’t do anything?

So, this bullshit is just anti-behaviour. If not, then bring proof. Any proof. Also, super fun if anybody doesn’t agree with you or cheer you for hating Jensen or doesn’t want him to retire, they’re automatically an AA. Great, in that case, sure!

[zippycrowd-blog]

New Post has been published on ZippyCrowd Blog

New Post has been published on http://blog.zippycrowd.com/stuck-in-the-wrong-career-your-world-is-your-croissant/

Stuck in the wrong career? Your world is your... croissant!

Share with friends:

Not that long ago, the average career path looked much the same for most – choose your course, do the study, graduate, get a job, climb the ladder, pay your mortgage off, retire. Not anymore. No longer can you expect a job for life, or to be married to the same industry for the lifetime.

Digital transformation has not only dramatically changed industries and disrupted traditional careers, but has also created opportunities for the brave ones to reinvent themselves through following their passions and ditching unmotivating jobs.

It is truly inspirational to watch those who embrace the wide world of opportunities and career reinvention, breaking through and creating something that has not existed before through passion, guts and hard work.

Kate Reid is certainly one of those remarkable people who put everything on the line, making a U-turn on her career highway.

KATE THE ENGINEER

Kate’s career reads like every engineer’s dream.

‘Ever since I was a little girl, I loved watching the stars and the moon. I read everything about astronauts, and Yuri Gagarin was my hero,’ says Kate. ‘ All I ever wanted to do was aerodynamics engineering and work for F1.’

With a degree in Aerospace Engineering, Kate spent eight years working for companies such as Volkswagen in Germany, Formula One in the UK and Ford in Australia. From the outside, landing such jobs was something everyone would want to get into.

‘The reality of the sterile anti-social corporate engineering environment came as a complete shock,’ says Kate.

‘I had all these dreams, passions, and I studied so hard to get there. When I finally did, I was stuck in front of a computer day-in day-out, and I quickly realized that if I stay this would be my life at work. I felt so miserable, completely out of place, as if I was playing a dress up wearing my mum’s dress and doing her job. I wanted to be somewhere where I felt I owned my job.‘

JOB DEPRESSION

Making a life changing decision is extremely stressful and takes a toll on everyone. Kate was not the exception. ‘I was so depressed being stuck in my career that I got physically ill for a long time, ‘ says Kate.  ‘I felt guilty, scared, vulnerable. I quit, but then I felt like a failure, so I forced myself to try again, but nothing worked. I just couldn’t see myself doing that for the rest of my life. The problem was I had no idea how to change it.’

‘Every day I would take a short break escaping from the dull office grind into the next door cafe where I would watch the hustle of the crowd around, with the coffee aroma and smell of fresh pastry. I have always loved baking, especially pastry, yet I somehow couldn’t dare to even consider baking as a career choice after all the time and money invested in my engineering career. Yet sitting in that cafe made me feel happy.’

‘I knew I would rather serve coffees than go back to the office.’

THE WORLD IS HER … CROISSANT!

As it turns out, a croissant is the best medicine for depression. Among so many delicacies gifted to all of us by the French cuisine, le croissant or the crescent, holds a special place. Little known is the fact that global popularity of croissants occurred largely as a result of American fast food chains taking over the world. French got so deeply offended by the look and the taste of hot dogs and hamburgers, that they counteracted by launching the first Croissanterie chain.

The defining moment that triggered the whole chain of events in Kate’s life was when, during one of her coffee breaks, flipping through the pages of some magazine Kate saw a picture of an incredible cake from the French boulangerie Du Pain et Des Idèes.

‘When I saw that amazing place and the pastry they made, I knew I wanted to go to Paris,’ says Kate. ‘I went to the travel agent next door and 5 minutes later I had flights booked’.

A few weeks later Kate the Engineer walked into Du Pain et Des Idèes. Several months later Kate the Croissant Artisan Baker returned to Australia to open the new chapter.

LUNE CROISSANTERIE

From France, via America to … Australia! Yes, it is not a misprint. According to The New York Times, the world’s best croissant is made in Melbourne in Lune Croissanterie! Voila!

Lune started as a humble hole-in-the-wall Elwood bakery for all things flaky and buttery. It quickly developed a notoriety as aficionados started queuing up for daily dose of their croissant from 6 am on Fridays. By 11 am it would be all gone and tens of unsuccessful would-be-patrons were seen aimlessly wandering around desperately looking for crumbs.

Kate and Cam, her brother, best friend and business partner, realized that the world could be their … hm – croissant? – and moved to the larger premises in Fitzroy. What has not changed, though, is the sumptuous taste and air-light texture of their now world-famous croissant. According to Kate, one of the most important reasons for her success and for the wonderful taste of her croissants is that she, for the first time, loves what she does and enjoys every minute she spends in Lune!

  If you are miserable going to work, have all the ‘career depression’ symptoms, feel stuck in your job and have no idea what to do – a trip to Lune Croissanterie will get you sorted. Get yourself a cup of coffee with a golden Croissant de Lune, watch Kate’s happy face as she is rolling those ‘golden babies’, take in the vibe of the place full of warm smell of freshly baked pastry, savour the moment and imagine the unimaginable. Kate has done it. So can you!

Stand out with ZippyCrowd!

 Find top people. Do great jobs. Get best referrals.

Get jobs done with ZippyCrowd

Loved the story? Stay tuned – we have more great reads every week.

Have cool skills? Great ideas? Know someone awesome?  Get in touch and get involved!

And please don’t leave without hitting  ❤ button below and spreading some love on social!

[mavwrekmarketing]

Co-authored by Ira C. Lupu, F. Elwood and Eleanor Davis Professor of Law Emeritus, George Washington University Law School

Donald Trumps recent order, cruelly and arbitrarily barring refugees and Muslim immigrants from entering the United States, is just the latest despicable act by an illegitimate president. Orders of this sort are unfortunately unsurprising. They are an expected outgrowth of Trumps racist, misogynist, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, anti-LGBTQIA agenda.

Trumps illegitimate presidency and his anti-American agenda are why millions of people joined the Womens March the day after his inauguration. Marchers advocated human rights for all, social and economic justice for all. The marchers, and many millions of others, are determined to oppose and resist a President who lost the popular vote, and whose election came about through voter suppression, intervention by the FBI, and conspiracy with Russian operatives.

Since his Inauguration, Trump has taken numerous actions that reinforce the necessity for this resistance. In addition to his viciously inhumane and unlawful order to block refugees and Muslim immigrants from entering the United States, his anti-immigrant agenda has already taken the form of an order to build a hateful, wasteful, and ridiculously expensive wall on portions of our border with Mexico.

His outrageous lies, continuously repeated in a hopeless effort to legitimize his illegitimate presidency, about supposedly fraudulent voting in the 2016 election, provide additional cause to refuse to normalize. Like his absurd claim that more people attended his Inauguration than any other, his assertion about voter fraud would be laughable if it were not so subversive of our democracy.

But phony allegations of fraud are the only way for Trump to argue that he won more votes than Hillary Clinton. Trumps neurotic claims about the size of his electoral and popular support, his minions outlandish lies in support of his claims, and their clumsy attempts to intimidate the press, would all be laughable if they too werent so serious. Those actions are a threat to the Constitution and the norms of American democracy.

Trumps nominations of corrupt and incompetent nominees for high public office are dangerous and deplorable, and risk grave harm to the social fabric, economic well-being, and quality of justice in the United States. Trumps character failings, his illegitimacy, and his dangerous plans for the nation all require resistance. All demand a concerted and collective determination to never normalize.

The American people, including many who have never before engaged in politics, are galvanized, determined and strong. The admirable and energetic resistance has included public protests; phone calls to our elected representatives; financial contributions to the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, and other organizations committed to fight Trumps radical agenda; and a vast array of mobilizations and creative acts, large and small.

In a rapid response to the order banning refugees and Muslims, several federal judges quickly ordered the government not to return detainees, stranded in U.S. airports, back to their countries of nationality, but their status remains uncertain. Spontaneous protests erupted at JFK airport and elsewhere. The University of Michigan announced it would not provide the government information about its students immigration status, and New York cab drivers boycotted JFK airport during rush hour as a symbol of solidarity and protest.

CNN

Americans gathered in airports around the country to protest Trumps order barring refugees and Muslim immigrants.

The resistance has, so far, arisen organically. Millions of Americans have been encouraging, demanding, participating in, and even leading the resistance. Our Democratic Senators and representatives in Congress ideally should be at the point of this spear, at the front of this resistance. At the least, they should be following the lead of the American people, and joining the all-out resistance.

What they absolutely should not do is subtly undercut the resistance by acts of collaboration and normalization. Unfortunately, they have done so. Democratic leaders have publicly stated their plan is to not block everything, but rather to pick their fights. Even before Trump was nominated, they offered an olive branch, asserting that they would work with Trump on issues where they agreed. Those are commitments to normal behavior by members of the opposition party at the beginning of a normal presidency.

We admire the seventy members of the House of Representatives who boycotted the Inauguration, but it would have been far more powerful if every Democratic Senator and House member had similarly boycotted. That would not have undermined the peaceful transfer of power, but it would have signaled that this president does not deserve and should not receive any semblance of normal respect.

We admire the two New York Representatives who traveled to JFK airport to stand in solidarity with the refugees being held there. But it would have been far more powerful and an important act of leadership of the resistance if many more elected officials had joined them and had called for work stoppages, demonstrations, or other forms of protest.

Normalizing was acquiescing and participating in hearings and votes on cabinet nominees, even when Trump had not yet been sworn into office and thus lacked any authority to make those nominations. That, too, is normal behavior from every opposition party at the beginning of a presidency. And the business-as usual treatment of nominees has taken other forms, as well. Ben Carson is totally unqualified to be Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, yet even Senators Elizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown, two of the most progressive and thoughtful members, voted in his favor in Committee. That is an act of normalizing Trump.

In fairness, Warren, Brown and others have resisted. Schumer, for example, pledged to fight Trump and his fellow Republicans tooth and nail on most issues, but he added that Democrats wouldnt say no to a proposal just because the president-elect supports it. The qualification about selective opposition, presumably made in an effort to sound reasonable, is also a form of normalization.

What would it mean for Democratic leaders to stop normalizing? First, they must forcefully object to every nominee unless he or she offers persuasive evidence of integrity and competence. Second, every Executive Order the president signs should be met by legislation, sponsored by all Democrats, designed to overturn the order unless it is demonstrably good policy. None of the Executive Orders to date come close to meeting that standard. In order to slow down all action, Democratic Senators should refuse unanimous consent to everything. The Deputy Chief of Staff to now-retired Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid has provided an excellent justification for why this should be done, a blueprint for how to accomplish it, and an analysis of its beneficial impact.

Unanimous consent should only be granted if Democrats wrest concessions for doing so. If Democratic legislators determine it is in the national interest to support legislation, they can do so, but they should not announce they will do so ahead of time, and certainly not trade their legitimizing votes for crumbs.

They should not be restrained by normal rules of decorum at the State of the Union and other public addresses. While they should attend and let Trump speak, they should be quick to boo and to shout You lie! and Putins Puppet! when Trumps assertions call for those reactions. Perilous times call for disruptive measures.

When this illegitimate president and his GOP collaborators act outrageously, such as issuing a ban on refugees, and when resistors start to act, Democratic leaders should help shine a spotlight on those actions and join in them. Perilous times call for courage and solidarity.

In addition to resisting, Democratic leaders should offer positive alternatives to bad policy proposals. In response to the Republican calls for repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act, Democrats should demand Medicare for all. They should hold their own hearings outside the Senate, if the Republicans refuse them space on every issue where the American people are not being heard.

Democrats must offer a new, bold, and progressive agenda, on which the next election can be a referendum. In short, they should lead the resistance and offer hope to a dispirited, angry, and frightened nation.

We recognize that much of what we are calling for represents a radical inversion of the norms of our democracy. But a horrifying inversion of those norms by those in power demands a response in kind. Many may believe that the kind of behavior we are recommending will undermine our political institutions, and stimulate a race to the bottom in political decency. In normal times, we might agree, but the breadth and intensity of the resistance to Trumps presidency is a powerful signal that these are not normal times. Under current conditions, lawful resistance is essential to preserve our democracy.

These are dangerous moments for the Republic, and the rapidly exploding political crisis of early 2017 is what brings resisters to the street. We will be back in the streets on many occasions in the immediate future. The minority party must act like the loyal opposition loyal to the Constitution, not to the pretenders to the throne.

We recognize that it will take courage of many kinds political, economic, and even physical for the established institutions of political opposition to rise to this moment. But the Democratic Party, and a fiercely independent press, must not fail us. If they do, the consequences will be irreparable.

If Democratic legislators have doubts about what resistance looks like, they should simply remember Republican opposition to Barack Obama, who took office with full legal, political, and moral authority. With far fewer protestors in the street and with those protestors angry at both Wall Street and Washington Republican legislators refused to acknowledge Obamas legitimacy, and instead, sought to block him at every turn possible. An illegitimate, dangerous, egomaniacal, racist, xenophobic, misogynist, and narcissistic autocrat in the White House today deserves resistance proportional to the danger he presents.

Nancy J. Altman is the founding co-director of Social Security Works. Ira C. Lupu, a constitutional law scholar, is the F. Elwood & Eleanor Davis Professor of Law, Emeritus at George Washington University Law School

Read more: http://ift.tt/2kLodZP

The post Democratic Politicians Need To Stop Normalizing This Illegitimate President appeared first on MavWrek Marketing by Jason

http://ift.tt/2kKhaEL

[whateverthedragonswant]

Note to Elwood:

This is not how you talk about someone when they're not present when you have "feelings" for them:

What about that scene above is him being a gentleman?

And more importantly...

Beau has feelings for Jenny?

Girl, WHERE?

We've only ever seen Jenny's side of things.

Full disclosure, I haven't seen season 2, but Jenny is funny and very charismatic? That's what she and Beau have in common besides their confidence? I don't remember Jenny cracking any jokes in season 1 or season 3 thus far.

"But he doesn’t let Jenny in emotionally because he doesn’t want to be vulnerable to her." - what??? So him telling her in 2x18 that he followed his daughter and ex-wife to Montana wasn't him letting her in. Or him telling her and Cassie how he felt about missing out on Emily's life in 3x01 wasn't letting her in? Or even when he talks to her alone in 3x09 again about Emily?

LOL!!! Jenny isn't jealous of Cassie and Beau's friendship in a romantic way? Seriously? Then why the whole consistent teasing of Beau about Cassie, asking if he's jealous? Even in 3x09 when they're having their supposed big emotionally intimate convo without Cassie being there or having anything to do with it? Elwood, you lie like a rug.

"Beau’s been very, very guarded around Jenny about any emotional stuff in his life regarding his marriage." - yet again, I ask, how has he been guarded when in the very first episode he meets her, he talks about it? He may not have told her the reason why the marriage failed but he had no problem basically admitting that he was still in love with Carla in that first car ride. Not to mention Jenny is the first one to meet Carla and witness what happened there.

"When Jenny got to interview Carla, that was a real chess match, and what was being discussed was trying to figure out what makes Beau tick and what kind of woman would be with this guy Avery, who Jenny and Beau know is up to some dirt." - so you ADMIT that Jenny was doing that in this scene when just an episode later you have Jenny telling Cassie that she's going to respect his boundaries, give him some space, and let him tell her when he's ready? When she said the very same thing in 3x01 when Cassie tells her she can ask Beau? So she goes behind his back and gets the scoop from his ex-wife instead? Not a true romance does this make.

"Those are the cards we’ve been playing with in this relationship. I think it all goes towards earning those looks, earning any kind of physicality that may occur in the back half of the season, really earning it," - you may want to stick to playing checkers instead because your chess matches and card playing aren't working out; they're horrific. Because Beau suddenly doing a 180 in the mid-season finale doesn't feel earned, it feels extremely out of character, abrupt, and not making sense.

"and making the audience want to be there for it." - AH, his true goal, gotta get those numbers up and keep viewers for the ratings. My bad, I thought Elwood was a story teller, not a salesman.

So basically, he knows he fucked up, the show doesn't actually show this supposed build-up of a true romance of Beau and Jenny, so that's why we get:

A whole sales pitch in combination with a full explanation because it wasn't apparent how Beau felt during the entire season so far, and the interviewer even had to check that Jenny knew she was interested. Imagine, that had to be asked.

And once again, he's not doing this because it's right for the story or either character (it's not), he's doing it to give "the audience what they want". Fanservice, that's all it is. And while a lot of shows tend to swing this way in order to keep viewers (since streaming/COVID changed the game irrevocably), the writers do their best to try to make it make some sense in the story. We've seen both good and bad examples of both. This is definitely the latter.

Had they done some organic build-up between Beau and Jenny, and not had Jenny acting so out of character and being full on cocky to boot (I mean, "Jenny always gets her man"? Really?), then maybe I could see this making sense as far as the fanservice goes. But Jensen and Katheryn don't have romantic chemistry. This is what genuine chemistry looks like:

He has way more chemistry with Angelique, Kylie, and Dedee. And for Beau to get into a romantic relationship with either Carla or Cassie makes way more sense for his story as well as theirs. With Denise not so much, but again, chemistry and it's cute.

So for this sudden Beau-has-been-returning-Jenny's-feelings-the-whole-time-he's-just-been-guarded-around-her to come out of nowhere is just beyond bad writing. Especially considering that Jenny already dealt with this issue (guy who isn't truly over his ex and she has to deal with it in the relationship) last season. With Travis, the very same guy Beau helped her to deal with in the very same episode she met him and says goodbye to her boyfriend, and lets him go to find his ex. The very SAME episode. That's. BAD. WRITING. And not good at all for Jenny's character development, because there is NO development. Here she is again, dealing with this same bullshit. And to top it all off, she's been acting like a teenager in some weird one-sided high school romance, being jealous (yes, Elwood, that's right, ROMANTICALLY jealous) of her best friend, trying to call dibs on a man that has shown NO interest in her whatsoever, to the point where even his ex-wife is noticing, and basically waiting him out because she's so confident she's going to get her man. (Yes, you wrote that, Elwood. YOU) Something the Jenny from Season 1 (and the few flashes I've seen of season 2) Jenny wouldn't have done, especially after having gone through this SAME thing last season.

So you have both female leads (and one hell of a strong female side character aka Carla) being reduced to devices to tell the romance story for fanservice, all revolving around a man...great job, Elwood. Great job.

And here's the thing, Jensen is doing his best to make the story work. And that's not speaking through an AA-haze, that's just speaking truth. It's most apparent in that 3x10 scene. While that moment came out of nowhere and felt extremely awkward, especially with Jenny's reaction, it only worked slightly because of him. He and Katheryn don't have romantic chemistry, not in these roles and in this story. So I think it's hilarious that fanboy Elwood who is clinging to Jensen and Reba like a crab with its claws, texts Jensen from the editing room (by Jensen's own admission from this most recent con), asking Jensen if he meant to play a take a certain way, then telling him it's brilliant and they're going to use it, and yet we still get:

This scene (and ANOTHER Cassie mention) & this scene (where Beau is NOT jealous nor does he give a shit that Jenny is being hit on)

Where Beau very clearly isn't into Jenny or thinking of anything romantic happening between them. NO. ORGANIC. BUILD-UP.

Elwood had the opportunity to use different takes (for example, look at the 3x09 movie night scene again - Katheryn's coverage has Jensen looking at her; Jensen's coverage has him barely looking at her) to tell this story between them seamlessly and do a genuine build-up to have this payoff in 3x10. He didn't because his ego is telling him that he doesn't need to. And why? Because he believes his own hype and his goal isn't to tell a great story but to maintain ratings. That's it. So it's beyond hilarious to me that fanboy Elwood even texts Jensen from the editing room. Like dude, you have no excuse. This isn't on the editors or the writers or the actors; this is on you. Just you.

And the only time we get some genuine possibly romantic chemistry with Jensen and Katheryn? This scene - and why? Because they're not playing their roles. (which is a testament to their acting abilities btw)

Congratulations, Elwood. You sacrificed Cassie and Jenny, your two female leads, for ratings for this shit. Are you proud of yourself? (most likely you are but you shouldn't be)

I've seen some shitty showrunners in my time but wow, Elwood, you take the cake. I can see why there's talk about this season being this show's last. This is truly terrible writing. You may want to go back to just being on a writing team or to short novels, buddy. I feel like that's where your strength is, and leave the showrunning to the pros.

[whateverthedragonswant]

Personally, I think it's hilarious that Jensen mentioned this last con that Elwood texts him from the editing room, asking if he meant to do something in a take which he says maybe not sure, then Elwood says it's brilliant and they're going to use it. Considering that Elwood just gave us the whole sales pitch on how Beau has feelings for Jenny and they still used takes where Beau looks bored around her, isn't looking at her (especially when Cassie and Carla are around), and doesn't seem interested at all.

Elwood, do you know how to successfully craft a slow burn love story (since that's what you turned this show into, which is not why David E. Kelly worked to bring this show to the air btw, if it was we would have seen hints of that in season 1 and not this recycled nonsense from season 2)

The fact that in this interview Elwood has to explain how Beau is allegedly feeling should tell you all you need to know about how badly the writing is coming across. A lot of people hate on D&D for the GoT ending, on Andrew Dabb and his team for the SPN ending, but those are actually decent writers and much better showrunners compared to this guy. Holy crap.

[whateverthedragonswant]

Sometimes I just can't help but shake my head when I see the future direction of TV writing when I read interviews like I did after the finale with Elwood and Jensen.

In what world would Beau not follow Emily? Regardless of lingering feelings for Carla or not? He followed her up to Montana, he stayed for her, why wouldn't he go back to Houston? Especially after what she's just been through and how he almost lost her? After we saw his strong reactions (understandable) when she was taken and how hard he worked to get her back? To the point where Jenny had to insert herself between him and Sunny in one scene? But now all of a sudden he's staying for the cocky self-absorbed blonde he might be banging OVER his daughter? For real? (don't get me wrong, I love Katheryn and Jenny so it hurts to see what they reduced her character to this season over a guy and a romance the show was forcing down our throats rather than focus on the two strong female lead characters that had been the heart of the show this entire time, they could have still done that AND told Beau's story)

So even further evidence that Elwood (and his writing team apparently) aren't actually developing a story in the show; they're doing a version of "Write Your Own Adventure", allowing everyone from the actors to the fans on social media decide how his story is going to progress.

It's one thing to take feedback and especially listen to viewer feedback. It's another thing to collaborate with your actors. It's a whole other thing when you allow them to write your story and do your job for you. Seriously, this guy is no better than that random fanfiction writer who allows what people say in reviews at the end of the chapter to determine what happens in the next chapter even if it doesn't make sense for the story they're telling.

This crap is so frustrating sometimes. Glad I stopped watching, 3x10 was my last episode.

[whateverthedragonswant]

Ngl, these Big Sky finale interviews have me laughing my ass off. Glad I ducked out of the show when I did but man is this entertaining. As much as I love Cassie and Beau, separately and together, I'm actually quite relieved they didn't go that route.

It should be interesting to see where Elwood ends up once Big Sky is finished.