#was thinking kind of like a sitcom where everything goes back to status quo at the start of a new episode maybe with the characters

[pikachu-deluxe]

got an idea, any of y'all writers? if you'd want to write something stupid (could end up being good but i don't wnna set the bar too high) together, as in multiple people writing the same story kinda thing then reach out in the comments or something

would like to try this as an experiment maybe

[david-box]

This isn't intended to be like baity or whatever but I really don't see Guillermo's line about nothing ever changing or even how that relates to this being a line in a sitcom on a meta level making the finale an example of the type of meta/existential horror where the characters are trapped in a narative. I'm not sure how to word this but first off, those kind of stories kind of need the characters to be at least partially aware of a sort of magical or cosmic futility about their situation. Like, yes, literally speaking, characters being forced to fail because they were written that way is horrifying in a certain light, absolutely. But it's not really horror for you to not pass a test if you don't know it's because you're written that way. Devoid of consequences or framing that's just... Not getting a C grade. Stressful, important, life altering maybe, any other adjective you could use about yourself (as characters presumably would do about their own life within the text) or from a writing perspective yeah. It's not just not automatically cosmic horror to write a story.

Also, a horror story where the characters are forced to return to status quo every episode or season or so on requires a lot more force against the characters from the narrative to really make it a part of the genre. Characters need to fail because they can't succeed even if it'd realistically work, not because they were written to fuck up. WWDITS returned to it's status quo because most of the character's attempts to change fundamentally revolved around flawed wants and needs, and some of those attempts were more or less stumbled in and out of without the characters even entering their arcs on purpose. Nandor absolutely did try to change and fail, but he didn't change his sense of grandeur or his selfishness (he's not shitty with Guillermo anymore because Guillermo set a boundary. Also he should have checked on Guillermo but on that note wtf did Guillermo do after he landed in England? Like he couldn't find Nandor?) or really analyze why he's lonely and disconnected beyond "Vampirism makes me feel bad." He failed at becoming more human because he's a cunt. Lazlos successful arc of his relationship to Colin Robinson (successful because things changed in this case) shows his vampirism has nothing to do with his bullshit. Guillermo stumbled into becoming more confident by accidently tapping into literally genetically coded abilities to do stunts and shit and actively used that to his advantage but ended up just an ignored familiar again because his solution to the proble.s with his codependency was getting more respect and stealing money, not disengaging with this nightmare of a household. Nadja only got into trying to get more power because the Baron showed up and her ventures failed because she doesn't like acknowledging her deficits in the kind of skills you need to run a nightclub. Remember how boss she was in s1? Yeah, maybe she could still run a nightclub. That could be a good idea, if done right. The nightclub when it was running properly was fun as fuck. But if she wanted to run one she can't just bully it into working - if she just wanted to terrorize people she could fix the house by hypnotizing a bank into wiring a couple thousand. Or, like, find the bank account. Maybe consider the fact no one else knew that damn pin number to the bank account. Or why she didn't know. Etc. Etc.

Tl:Dr I don't think Guillermo's line about nothing ever changing isn't a clever build up, reference to, or attempt at existential horror tbqh. Also idk if it's really "everything goes back to normal and nothing changes" horror if one of the characters gets his own supernatural kill count and another one raises a whole ass child like Lazlo's not the same! Guillermo's not the same! Lol

[britesparc]

Weekend Top Ten #469

Top Ten Crazy WandaVision Theories

So all the while I was watching The Mandalorian I kept thinking, blimey, they’ve nailed this. There’s an oft-repeated problem with modern serial dramas, which is that they tend to tread water a little bit; despite being shorn of the network requirement of episodes being a certain length, or having a certain number of episodes in a season, there’s this in-built compulsion to make about a dozen 45-minute episodes. This is what scuppered the Marvel Netflix series in particular; there simply wasn’t enough story to cover the seasons, and as a result there was a lot of treading of water. This has also affected the recent Star Trek shows, although Discovery does show signs of pulling out of this “twelve-hour movie” mindset. Mando totally transcends this in a superlative way: each episode is basically an “adventure of the week” type thing (Mando versus spiders, Mando goes to the fish planet, Mando meets a Jedi, etc). But each episode also builds on the arc; he’s always on the same quest, and everything he does week by week furthers this quest. As much as I was looking forward to WandaVision, I kept reminding myself, there’s no way they can do this; no way these two shows – my most-anticipated shows from two of my most-beloved franchises – can hit the bar so successfully, back-to-back.

Well.

I’m not sure if WandaVision is quite the overall triumph The Mandalorian is, but they’re both pretty tremendous achievements in slightly different ways. Wanda manages to tell a rather unsettling story in the MCU whilst also doing a terrific job of parodying sitcom tropes; it works on a meta level as well as a practical one. Also, as far as puzzle-box type programmes go, this one has been doing an excellent job; week by week, you’re further intrigued by what’s going on in Westview; what’s real? Who’s behind it? is Vision still dead? Will Darcy get her own show? It’s a fantastic exercise in drip-feeding information, maintaining a degree of unease and suspense, and offering a compelling mystery. Will they keep it up until the end? I’ve no idea; the reveal at the end of episode seven wasn’t quite a jaw-on-the-floor moment but it was exquisitely done, with a theme song and everything. Even if the most obvious predictions end up being true and the finale becomes a relatively straightforward goodies-versus-baddies barney, I’ve got faith in everyone involved to at least give us something utterly compelling and thoroughly entertaining.

But what if there really is at least one huge surprise left up the show’s vibranium sleeve? Certainly, the reveal of Evan Peters as Pietro Maximoff – being, visually if not in character at least, the Fox/X-Men universe version of Wanda’s brother, rather than the Adam Taylor-Johnson version we knew from Age of Ultron – was a hell of a moment, seemingly bridging the gap between the MCU as we knew it and the previously Fox-controlled properties. Since then, there’s been this bubbling rumour (which I’ve tried not to read too much into by literally not reading too much; this is something I’ve divined from headlines or stray tweets, because I want to keep forging my way through WandaVision without a map) that there is another epic cameo approaching, on the level of Luke Skywalker popping up in the finale of The Mandalorian. That moment was something of a surprise, even though I had it rather spoiled by Twitter; despite muting as many words as possible to do with the show, “Luke Skywalker” still popped up in trending topics. I’ve learned my lesson, and I essentially forgo any social media (and a lot of other sites too) until I’ve seen the most recent episode. Anyway, what if this is true; what if there’s another character or moment that will rock the Marvel world to an even greater extent than The Other Pietro? If we’d be as surprised and delighted by something as much as we were by Luke making short work of those Dark Troopers? With this in mind, and being aware of the encroaching WandaVision finale, here are some predictions. What could happen? Who could we see? Which long-dormant plot thread will get resurrected? Read on to find out! And – spoiler warning – this has been revisited following the most recent episode; we are officially in the endgame now.

And I’m sure all of these are realistic and serious suggestions.

I Am Your Father: We have actually met Wanda’s parents at last; ordinary decent Sarkovian folk, it seems. But from where did her nascent witchy powers appear? What if, in a shocking last-minute twist, we discover her real father, and he’s played by… Ian McKellen! It was Eric all along!

SWORD versus Skrulls: a post-credit sting will reveal that – shock! – Tyler Hayward is, in fact, a SKRULL! Yes, finally, the shape-shifting buggers will get to be the baddies from the comics, as an up-to-no-good splinter faction of the beleaguered race makes its presence felt on the MCU, having successfully infiltrated world governments over the past thirty years. This will set up Samuel L. Jackson’s Secret Invasion series.

The Ultron of it All: there have been more mentions of Ultron in WandaVision than in any MCU property since, well, Age of Ultron. And now we have a custom-built all-white model of Vision, big as life and twice as creepy. What if – what if – shorn of his own psyche (his own soul?) and without an Infinity Stone to keep him upright, there remains in the hardware some remnant of everyone’s favourite sarky, genocidal mechanoid? Ultron returns! Screw you, planet Earth!

The Sorcerer Supreme is Not Happy: we know magic exists in the MCU because of Doctor Strange, so seeing Agatha and her family get their Hocus Pocus on in old Salem wasn’t too much of a surprise. But isn’t the Sorcerer Supreme supposed to keep an eye on magic use in the multiverse? I was half expecting Tilda Swinton to pop up in the flashback and bind Agatha with the Crimson Bands of Cyttorak. But now, with all the chaos magic Wanda is using in Westview, coupled with Agatha’s own spelling bee? Surely this has drawn the attention of somebody? Anybody? I mean, New York isn’t that far from Jersey, especially if you’ve got a sling ring, y’know?

No More Avengers: so Benedict Cumberbatch popping up wouldn’t be that much of a surprise (especially as Wanda is in the next Doctor Strange movie) but even if he’s not on Magic Police duty, wouldn’t an enhanced situation of this size draw the attention of one of the Avengers? Except – shock horror! – there are no Avengers! In a revelation that will set up the status quo of Falcon and the Winter Soldier, since the events of Endgame the Avengers literally don’t exist. So who will unite to save the world, not just from Wanda or Agatha, but also from the likes of SWORD? Well, right now, no one; but maybe that’ll change when the real villains appear…

No More Mutants: in the “House of M” storyline, Wanda very famously said “no more mutants” and it was so (more or less). Mutants don’t (seem to) exist in the MCU. But what if, at one point, they did? I don’t think this could have been Wanda’s doing, but what if in the past someone else had used magic to de-power/de-mutify the existing mutant population of Earth, and – basically – made everyone forget about it? And in the climax of WandaVision, well, “no more” is undone and – boom! – X-genes abound. This could even maybe set up some events in The Eternals, who I believe have some history with mutants in the comics (I’m really not very well-versed in Eternals lore)

Soul Stealer: so Wanda’s the Scarlet Witch, and a chaos magician, and super-enhanced courtesy of an Infinity Stone, but still: how did she create not one but three super-powered lifeforms? Where did they come from? Did she steal their souls? Is she leeching her own life-force to maintain them? I think we’ll discover a bit more about her powers and reveal that she’s drawing energy mutliversally, maybe from the Dark Dimension – maybe from Mephisto? I’d actually put money on Mephisto not showing up at all, despite his comic book connections to Agatha and Wanda.

Multiversal Madness: why that Pietro? He’s just a fake, just an automaton – right? But he’s still out and about spooking Monica whilst Agatha’s dealing with Wanda… yeah? And he looks like another Pietro from another universe (even if he doesn’t act like that). So… why? And who? I really, really think there’s some kind of multiversal craziness going on here, some force beyond Wanda (and Agatha!). Maybe it’s to do with Wanda pulling power from across the multiverse, maybe it’s… something else. Maybe we’ll get cameos from Lou Ferringo, Bruce Campbell, Spider-Ham and ROM the Space Knight. Hey, don’t forget: Transformers was a Marvel comic once! And they do have a Chaos-Bringer…

Wanda Did It: one of the prevailing theories/queries about WandaVision has been who’s behind it all. Wanda’s not powerful enough (or villainous enough), so who exactly did create TV Westview? Who brought Vision back, gave Wanda her sons? Well, the latest ep sure seemed to show that it really was Wanda All Along. The explanation being that she’s “the Scarlet Witch”, a presumably hella-powerful sorcerer and also (let’s not forget) imbued with Infinity Stoniness. But is she on her own really that strong, and would she – even in her despair – alter so many minds? What if there’s another Wanda, a Wanda prepared to go all-out, a Wanda who – after losing everything on her Earth is trying to recreate it by pooling her powers will another Wanda? An alternate universe, more damaged, more villainous Wanda – a Wanda who’s already said “no more mutants”, maybe; maybe even the Wanda from the Fox X-Men films (who AFAIK we’ve only seen as a little girl in her brother’s arms). That’s why Pietro looks like that, because she’s trying to rebuild her own life using the powers of this other Wanda. Two Wandas; two Witches. Dukin’ it out. And who can come to save the day, but the X-Men?

We’re All Doomed: giving credit to my brother for pointing me in this direction when he said “if there’s a big bad in WandaVision it either has to be someone very good at magic or very good at science”. Or… both? Think about it. Which character, if they cameoed in an MCU property, could possibly generate as much excitement as Luke Skywalker in The Mandalorian? No actor from the MCU; not even Downey. From another Marvel property? We’ve had a Fox actor already and with the rumours about Spider-Man: No Way Home, whether we saw Hugh Jackman or Tobey Maguire, I think that would be exciting but not as exciting. So I think it’s a character, not an actor. A character big and exciting enough to make us all squee. And which character from Marvel has never been seen in the MCU, is not necessarily expected any time soon, is very good at magic and very good at science? One. I’d say only one. Bring it on.

This actually became a lot more sensible than I’d intended! I was gonna go all-out, rolling in Muppet Babies, MODOK, HERBIE, the Phoenix Force, and basically the entire Patton Oswalt speech from Parks and Recreation. And whilst I think virtually none of these will (or should?!) happen, just imagine… man, I can’t believe we have to wait a week!

[c-is-for-circinate]

I wrote so much thoughtspew about the first two seasons of Farscape and serialization vs episodic plot in late-90′s TV and character progression, and then I put a cut there because I’m not an animal.

An interesting thing that happens in Farscape (and I’m a couple of episodes into season 3, and have not been particularly good about any sort of liveblogging, as expected): we don’t actually see the first time John Crichton, intentionally and in his right mind, specifically chooses to and succeeds in killing someone he’d consider a person.

I was keeping an eye out for it--I knew it would happen sooner or later, and early Season 1 Crichton, who thinks he can talk Crais out of his vendetta by explaining it was a car accident; who brokers a deal with the Genesis and then sends a Marauder crew of Peacekeepers off of Moya alive; who spends the entire first episode confused and captured and shot at by various people and then insists, when he’s finally the one with the gun and the handcuff keys, that the Moya crew rescue Aeryn right along with him--that Crichton is so deliberately and fundamentally not a killer.  It’s one of his firmament truths about the world.  You don’t kill people.  That’s not how the world works.

And it was so clearly one of the things that was going to get stripped away in the breaking-down of John Crichton (which I remembered enough about Farscape to know would happen, but could not have described the trajectory of).  So I was keeping an eye out for it, and I realized, we never quite get it.

There’s a moment in Maldus’s trap, with Crais, where he decides to hell with it and tries to kill Crais--but fails.

There’s the virus that takes him over, uses John’s own two hands to beat a Peacekeeper scientist to death--but John doesn’t remember that, wasn’t in control, isn’t really to blame.

And then there’s the Peacekeeper ship that leaves Moya at the end of the episode, that John figures out how to blow up by its trail of cesium fuel--but the only person on board the ship is possessed by the virus, is a zombie, could never be saved, and everyone knows killing a zombie isn’t the same as killing a real person, right?

There’s the firefight as he escapes the Gammak base, and maybe he hits someone lethally and maybe not, but who knows?  There is, of course, the plan several days later that destroys the base completely--ignites an entire moon, and surely dozens, hundreds (thousands?) die with that.  So maybe that’s it.  Maybe that’s the moment.  Or maybe by that point the moment’s already passed.

By the fourth episode of season 2, John stabs T’raltixx straight through the chest with a quolta blade, stone dead, up close, at a range to see his face and his blood, but of course he’s half-crazed from light emissions at that point, so that’s not quite right either.  But by that point it doesn’t feel new or horrifying any more anyway.  By that point John carries a pulse-pistol as a matter of course, and has probably used it off-camera and we haven’t even seen it.  By the time his caveman and superbrain doubles show up he’s ready to shoot first and ask questions later.  By the time he’s kidnapped by the Scarran on the commerce planet, he thinks of himself as a person who’s killed, who’s grown callous to the suffering of others, who his mother would be ashamed of.

John spends a lot more time threatening to shoot people than actually shooting them, but his aversion to pitched battle in the timeslip episode near the beginning of season 3 has a lot more to do with timeline integrity than avoiding death.  He goes into a firefight of pitched battle at the end, and shoots to kill, and succeeds again and again and again, and the only people whose deaths he regrets at the end of it are the ones he tried to save.

The thing is, I’m really into how these gradual character shifts happen.  I’m intrigued by the lack of a clear-cut start/stop point.  Because I think that’s how it happens for the characters, too.

John Crichton never wakes up and thinks, I’m a different person today than I was yesterday.  He doesn’t notice the first tilot me he really kills someone, on purpose--it’s a thing that happens in the middle of ten thousand other things, and by the time he has time to sit down and process the fact that it happened, it has happened, and has been happened, and there’s something else new to worry about now anyway.  

John stops wearing his IASA flight suit and it’s just sort of a thing that happens, and maybe it’s laundry day or maybe it’s the day he dressed up to pretend to be a Peacekeeper and everything went to shit, and in retrospect it matters but at the moment it’s nothing.  You can point to the end of S1 as a major turning point for him, but plenty of things turned around before that point happened.  And of course, you can point to the chip as the explanation for so much of the rage and the violent impulses John’s throwing around in season 2--but it’s not like one of the (many, many) one-off mindfrells that dissipate at the end of an episode and leave whoever-it-is alone to be themselves again.  Season 3 John may be ‘himself again’, but whoever his self is, it’s a pretty far cry from who he was when the chip first went in.

I’ve been thinking a lot about this gradual style of character development, where the Big Meaningful Things just sort of happen in the background and you don’t notice until they’re over.  And I wonder how much of it is about the way episodic TV happened in the late 90′s vs today.

In the late 90′s, nobody made TV shows for people to marathon.  I remember 1999.  We had a VCR, which nobody in the house knew how to program, and no cable which meant that any episodes of Farscape I watched were on tape at my best friend’s house and usually out of order.  Any shows I did watch as they aired were often out of order: some weeks it’s a new episode, some weeks it’s a rerun, some weeks you go to your sister’s play and miss it entirely, some weeks it’s preempted by The Sports.  Serialization was a thing, but there was absolutely less continuity from one episode to the next than you might get from, say, Sens8, or Steven Universe, or even something like The Good Place--which is an episodic sitcom, but still builds each episode off of events in the episode before.  I remember watching The Wire for the first time, on DVD, in 2010, and saying to my friends, “this is a different kind of tv show”.  Every single episode acted as a chapter in a story, rather than a stand-alone piece that could be shuffled into a different order within the guidelines of a couple of specific signpost events.  And the kind of character development you do in a show like that, a show made for the internet generation, a show whose creators expect it to be binged, is different.

Farscape has a lot of continuity, but it also uses the status quo as a tool.  Half the episodes start of in media res.  We don’t need to know the specifics of how we got to wherever we are today, and it doesn’t have anything to do with the last episode.  We know the generalities: we’re on Moya, we’re generally in trouble of some kind, and now we’re going to find out what new difficulties today has brought.  Along with that, we know the status quo of characters.  In Season 1, we know John Crichton is desperate to go home to Earth, is confused and out of place, would rather talk than hurt anybody, or let anybody hurt anyone else.  That’s who he is.  Episodes where he doesn’t act that way--trying to kill Crais and then very nearly killing Maldus--they’re anomolies.  One really bad day.  That’s why it’s so easy to shrug off the time he explodes the Peacekeeper shuttle with the virus-infected captain in it.  That can’t really be Crichton committing murder, because that’s not who he is.  That’s not who the status quo says he is.  If that’s who he is, it changes the status quo.

And the thing is, using status quo as a tool like that allows the show to do a lot of very gradual character development without the audience or the characters themselves actually noticing.  Season 2 Crichton is so angry all the time, but--well, it’s just bad days, because we know Crichton, and he’s a good guy who doesn’t like violence.  Or, once it’s been going on long enough--okay, I guess this is the new status quo, he’s just an angry guy.  Was he always like this?  Guess he changed while we weren’t looking.  The show doesn’t start to reveal what’s up with the chip until the back half of the season.  And then suddenly there’s a reason Crichton’s been acting like this, and that makes sense, but also by that point it’s become part of the status quo.  Crichton knows how to do violence and is so frustrated all the time.  That’s part of who he is now.

And I think the show really benefits from being watched with that mindset, because it feels like the characters are just as used to thinking of themselves and their friends in terms of status quo as we are.  I’m thinking about the episode where Zahn and D’Argo and Rygel rip off Pilot’s arm and then turn on each other.  By that point they’ve stood by each other through all sorts of problems, risked their lives for each other, and for Pilot and Moya, no question.  But the opportunity to go home comes up, and they each think about who they are, who they think they are, and they think, ‘I am a person for whom going home is the Number One Priority’.  Never mind how little time they’ve spent seeking out a way home compared to how much time they’ve spent taking care of each other.  By season 3, John loves Aeryn, loves Moya and her crew, would die for them and has actively tried to do so on multiple occasions, but he puts them all in danger for a chance at a wormhole and a way home.  Not because going home is actually more important to him than their safety--if you set out the choices in front of him, if you said ‘You go home but Moya and everyone on her will suffer or die’, he’d give up the chance to go home without question.  But the option comes up, and the little self-identification flag in his head goes, ‘Astronaut John Crichton, US of A, wants to go back to Earth more than anything in the world’, like a one-note character description blurb.

Farscape works really well when viewed as a show about a bunch of people who spend very little time actually thinking about where they’re going and why.  They drive around in circles getting into and out of trouble, trying to keep safe and keep fed, reacting to one problem after another, and not one of them has any kind of plan for getting the things they say they want.  Ask anybody on Moya if they intend to spend the rest of their lives there, they’d say no (or, ‘probably, and it looks like that’ll be about half an arn, now shut up and let us figure out how not to die’).  But not one of them have an actual plan for leaving her.

[orrtala]

Peepers: my darling precious evil frustrated ambitious little eyeball man

Post S1 analysis

Also it would be nice if you’d read the thing. I like the thing.

A good while ago I wrote how much I liked Peepers willing to put his foot down, when he's not afraid of Hater, when he's done with his boss and it shows. And some of you told me "Oh man, you're going to like Peepers in S2!" And I was like "Ok, fine, we'll see."

"The Greater Hater" started with Peepers clearly annoyed with Hater, not caring if he get blasted or not. Okay, good. Then he's clearly in awe of Dominator's ship and I go "oooooooh I suspected he'd leave Hater in S2 looks like I was right!" Then he goes off on Hater again and as we all know frustrated Peepers is the best Peepers. So here I was, thinking that Dom was going to be Peepers' new boss, happy about Commander letting his frustrations out, maybe he'd get some character arc thanks to the switch? …But at the same time I enjoyed that dynamic between Peepers and Hater and I was also kind of sad it was going to end right when it started to get really good? The episode continued; Dominator managed to trap Wander and Sylvia, enrage Hater and fight him back with ease, while Peepers gets a good look at bot factory. "This is it," I thought. "He's going to leave Hater for the new guy for galactic domination."

And then Peepers saved everyone by wrecking the console and, though I didn't really know it at the time, became my favorite character.

Peepers got A LOT of character development this season. And, strangely, his character arc wasn't even that big or prominent. He wasn't the one who was supposed to face Dominator in one way or another (though he tried, oh boy he tried and ended up with disastrous results). He was a guy who wanted to have universe at his feet, knew he lacked the abilites to do so and had to rely on someone powerful. But now with Hater being distracted by Wander all the time he had to work even more and even harder to fullfil his ambitions.

Aside from the very first episode it didn't start with much. In "The Big Day" he tried hard to get Hater out of Wander-frenzy, and failed miserably not noticing the whole skullship planned a wedding destruction ceremony. He broke down in tears and that was that. In "The Breakfast" he just served the titular meal multiple times only to get roped into cleaning the mess Hater left in his morning tantrum.

But then "The Axe" happened. Peepers is fired by his boss, keeps on hoping Hater would rethink the matter, but it seems like skeleton man gets on his own just fine. Peepers suffers through his inner "Grop I'm so sad about life and stuff" song (and I still didn't got to hear Tom Kenny's version, come on, when is it going to be released?) gets into taxi and… tries to find a new job in newspaper? What the heck, there are so many villains around, why can't he just work for one of them? It's because he truly believed Hater is the greatest, the most powerful villain in the galaxy. And that they could be great again working together if Hater would just let him. And, well, eventually he does, almost to the point of begging. They get back together, Peepers gets a statue, and everything is right in the world.

We also got to see his room in that episode. It's small, it has a bed, a toilet, a locker and a giant Hater poster. That's it. And then he can fit all his belongings in cardboard box (along with a plant that I'm sure he stole from the cafeteria to have something to put into box). It just shows how much time and effort he put into his work. No wonder he was depressed about the prospect of losing it all.

"The It". Oh my grop I absolutely adore this episode. Aside from being hilarious it was great Peepers episode. Commander is fed up with Hater's shenanigans and decides to work with what he can. Hater causes a chaos with the game of tag (and also wants to tag Peepers himself, and, well, we can't have that… cause… reasons… nobody would like to be it anway…) – time to freeze him in coldbrrnte! Nobody wants to be it? Time to use it against other villains! And we get this nifty montage of evil, ambitious Peepers. "A true villain turns weakness into a strength!" Thanks, Peepers, that was subtle. While writers just can't keep Commander happy for too long and episode ends up with him crying, at this point Peepers understands that while he needs Hater for the empire to work, he ensures watchdogs are working with him anytime skeleton man gets distracted by Wander.

…Though then again does he actually need Hater that much?

Enter "The Cool Guy". Peepers and Hater's relationship is actually pretty decent at this point. They seem to have an actual fun playing with toys strategic figurines and planning an invasion at the same time, but Emperor Awesome's arrival puts a wrench into the whole thing. On Peepers side he worries that his boss won't get to the invasion on time but eventually gets fed up with waiting – it's invasion time! Commander goes on how he knows very well what Hater truly wants, mocking his dreams of being popular and tries to lead the invasion on his own. While putting his eye-face on the flags. Though he definitely used Hater's popularity as a villain to do this.

When he goes off to the aliens about bowing down to their new master and ruler he gets interrupted. And no one, no one will ever convince that he wasn't talking about himself. He wanted to conquer in his name for once, just to try, maybe he had capabilites, maybe he was enough, maybe he didn't need Hater after all? But Awesome makes fun of him, of his cuteness, his height, and him being a nerd. And Peepers, despite the initial failure, responds in truly great manner, making fun of him instead, pointing out what pathetic person he is. However he does that without mentioning the jab at his height. It's clearly a thing he doesn't want to talk about.

There's not much to talk about when it comes to "The Rager" and "The Good Bad Guy". Peepers continues on being Peepers to who Hater actually listens to, but also gets smacked around by his boss (more about that in relationships analysis). He's just kind of there. Getting punched by Sylvia who wasn't even there.

Oh yeah, time to mention his relationship with Syl, huh. Since their moment in "The Battle Royale" they started to get along, somewhat. It's continued in "The Show Stopper", "My Fair Hatey" and "The End of the Galaxy". They found a similriaties in each other, common goals, and at some point even had fun together. Their frenemy thing going on is important to both of them, but especially Peepers, who, so far, didn't have anyone who he saw on a same level as him.

Before "The Battle Royale" Commander managed to get his boss to the #2 spot on the leaderboard, learned to work with childish Hater and the only real obstacle was Dominator on the first place, destroying planets left and right. After this episode Dom rmeained as obstacle, but in an entirly different way: previously Hater was willing to fight the guy back. But since he developed a crush on her things started to be… complicated.

Peepers, after the fluke of attack in "The New Toy", where Hater sabotaged every attempt at fighting Dom back using the frostonium, is done. He just wants to get rid of Dominator, wants his boss back on track; he doesn't even dream of getting S1 Hater, he just wants the things to be what the status quo from the S2 first arc back, when childish, distracted Hater was a person he could work with.

So when Commander gets Hat into his hands he snaps. "The universe will be mine!" He's entirely willing to leave Hater and conquer the universe – yes, he said universe, not galaxy – by himself. Dude's definitely ambitious. Of course after everything blows up and Wander gets his Hat back things get back to normal. Well, relatively normal. As normal as WoY with Hater having a crush on a bigger villain can get, I guess. But it was there, Peepers and his ambitions resurfaced yet again.

By the time "My Fair Hatey" rolls Commander decides to take matter into his hands. I feel like fighting Dominator was pretty personal for him at this point; she was the person who messed up his plans, who made Hater into total fool. He explains his plan to Sylvia in a glorious singing manner, roping her into bringing frostonium onboard Dom's ship and… well, he successed. Sort of. It's unclear what has actually happened, but Dom gets ice powers thanks to that and the galaxy is even more doomed. But nobody can accuse the little guy for lack of trying.

In "The Bad Neighbors" Peepers clearly feels guilty and tries to reach to Hater for help. He doesn't sleep, overworking himself even more than normally, and comes up with nothing. There is a bright spot at the end of a tunnel though – his confidence is back by the end of episode and everyone is free from sitcom shenanigans.

When I finished the series my Screener asked me which arc from S2 was my favorite and which one I liked the least. Without thinking I responded that I the third arc was definitely my least favorite. Before I could mull over my response she said: "oh yeah, it didn't have enough Peepers in it, right."

Yeah, Commander kind of disappeared in a last act and took backseat to Wander and Sylvia trying to find ways to beat Dominator. He finally got to appear in "The Robomechabotatron", where he pretty much laid out his opinion about Hater to Wander (which also meant some Peepers&Wander interactions, yay!) And while I love "The End of the Galaxy" he didn't do much there. At the beginning he lost all hope, though was later shown to be looking for Hater, probably trying to plan what to do next, if that galaxy was lost. He was extremely happy about getting his compentent boss back, saved Sylvia's life, got a serious case of heart eyes and it ultimately got back to chasing Wander across the galaxy.

So, Peepers. Ambitious, evil, workaholic Peepers. I love this guy.

While it's obvious he's evil, more evil than Hater, I was thinking: how evil is he? Can we assume he's as evil or even more evil than Dom? (Or Screwball, but let's stick to evil guys who know they're evil kay.) People seem not to think so, if only because he exclaimed: "Man, that's evil!" upon learning her plan of destroying the whole galaxy. First of all he's fine with destroying few planets. He was planning a tour to do it back in "The Big Day" for flarp's sake! It's not about all the people who would lose their homes and lifes in that, no. It's about his lack of comprehension about this plan. See, Peepers is ambitious, he wants to conquer, he wants to rule, even if it has to be in someone else's name (though we all know he would gladly do it alone if he could). Sure when he sees her plan on a giant screen he's shocked, but then…

…he has this look. It's not 'it's so evil why would she do that to these people' look, it's: 'what the flarp, why would anyone do that, what are the benefits, is that her plan, is that why she destroyed everything on her path, better stop her quickly or I won't have anything to conquer.' He wants to save the galaxy only to conquer it, he says it himself later in musical episode, and Hater remembers it in the finale, causing the heart eyes. So, yeah, personally I don't think Peepers is less evil than Dominator, he's just more cautious, needs to work with others, and doesn't see sense in destroying everything; what is there left to rule after all?

So what would happen to Commander in S3? A lot of things, I imagine, I wrote the whole post about my suspcions regarding his future. Also there's a matter of his and watchdogs' home planet, that aaparently was destroyed by Dom. We would learn about his background, maybe finally get his first name. More interactions with Hater and Sylvia. Please, please, more interactions with Wander and Dominator. And…

…I'm… just gonna go cry in the corner, okay?

TL;DR: I love this character so much. He's ambitious, evil, and was supposed to get an arc in S3. Still got a lots of development in S2 and what we got was glorious.

[reactingtosomething]

Reacting to The Good Place: 201-202, “Everything Is Great!”

Long-Term Shenanigans Potential

The Setup: Just in time for Chapter 16 tonight, here’s our reaction to the second season premiere of The Good Place. Trying something new, format-wise. Our timezone scattering has always been one of our big logistical hurdles, and one of this week’s Reactors is actually moving through multiple timezones this week, so we went with a more traditional roundtable format that gave us a lot more timing flexibility. Welcome back, after a long absence, RtS founding member Liz! And Guest Reactor Adam!

A quick explanation of the show is just below, but so are massive SPOILERS for the season 1 finale.

ADAM: A quick recap for those that are not familiar with The Good Place. In Season One, ELEANOR (Kristen Bell), CHIDI (William Jackson Harper), JASON (Manny Jacinto), and TAHANI (Jameela Jamil) are all dead and spending eternity in the utopia known as "The Good Place." They are guided by the architect of the Good Place MICHAEL (Ted Danson) and JANET (D'Arcy Carden), a living version of Siri and Google. Turns out Eleanor and Jason don't belong in The Good Place because they are not good people. The big twist, however, is that none of them belong in The Good Place that they are in fact in The Bad Place (check the reaction when the cast finds out the twist here). They are in a faux Good Place designed to torture Eleanor, Chidi, Jason, and Tahani. Since Eleanor figured it out Michael has to do a complete reset and wipe their minds to start fresh. The season ends with everything starting over and Eleanor finding a note from herself that says, "Find Chidi." 

My biggest question going into this season was, "How long can the writers play this out before Eleanor and Co. figure everything out again?" The premiere, titled “Everything Is Great!”, just gets straight to the point. I like how Eleanor figures everything out at the end of the episode, causing Michael to wipe everyone's memory and start over again. Because of this unforeseen development, I feel that I will be constantly asking that question for the season. Now it feels that the writers have two options with where the season goes. 

Option A: It turns into a case of the week a la Law and Order with How will Eleanor figure it out this week?

Option B: We are all in on the joke while Eleanor and Co. slowly figure things out. This then causes a more Michael centered series and character arc. 

Even so, the more things change the more they stay the same. Even with Michael trying to micromanage, everything plays out like before, even the possible budding romance between Jason and Janet. 

Mike Schur is smart and brilliant that the comedic value will come from us the audience being in on the joke. Which, I might add, I am going to call my shot on a twist for this season. Michael has a breakdown after Eleanor figures it out again which will cause Eleanor to take pity on him. What that means is Michael, Eleanor, and Co. will join forces to fool Shawn into thinking that Michael's experiment is working. This then brings in the idea that even though someone is bad can eventually learn to be good. Anyone else have a prediction? While the writing is great what stands out is how this episode gave the characters to flex their comedic muscles. Last season Ted Danson was in nearly every scene and part of every A plot in the season. It's a smart move to lean on him in the beginning because Ted Danson belongs in the all-time great television actor category. He always seems to know his characters better than the writers.  Last season the show leaned heavily on both Kristen Bell and Ted Danson. As the show progressed you could see Chidi, Jason, Tahani, and Janet routinely steal scenes. By showing everyone's perspective and giving them each their own moments in the premiere, the show has pivoted to become a true ensemble show.

Click through for thoughts from Miri, Liz, and Kris:

MIRI: I love the prediction of them working together to create this kind of secret decent place—humanized demons and lowkey shitty humans working together to live happyish lives sounds very The Good Place and has long term shenanigans potential. 

I know the big reset is the most obvious thing to discuss about the second season premiere of The Good Place, but I really do want to dive a little deeper into it. One of the generally accepted rules of sitcoms is that “status quo is king.” Big changes are joked about, flirted with, whatever, but at the end of the episode, things go back to normal. Theoretically, you could tune in to any episode more or less cold and know what’s happening because the major factors of the universe are static.

This is changing, somewhat. There are sitcoms with serialized storylines nowadays, although it would perhaps be more accurate to call them serialized half-hour comedies (or even dramedies). The Good Place falls kind of in that middle space. It has the weekly hijinks that we can all tune into—we know to expect some funny not-cursing from Eleanor, Chidi being earnest and outraged, Michael messing up human terms, and Janet being a goddamn delight—but we also know that each episode will advance the plot. The show both is and is not a traditional sitcom. The situational comedy is baked in: Eleanor is in the Good Place and she doesn’t belong. Her quest to hide her dirtbag nature will inevitably lead to funny situations. But this is not a Three’s Company world where the big secret can be hidden forever. (I have never seen a single episode of Three’s Company and I’m sorry.) Eleanor was always going to get found out, or more accurately find out what’s happening to them. The pace of The Good Place has been set to maximum from the beginning.

So, how do you mix the old and the new, the gags of the week with the plot and character development? A freaking reset button. It’s the most The Good Place thing ever and I 100% did not call it. I love that this show can take the best of traditional sitcoms and marry it with changes that keep the show going and fresh. On his other shows (such as Brooklyn Nine-Nine and Parks and Recreation) Mike Schur is more willing than most to let his characters grow, but not in the world-shaking way The Good Place gleefully barrels towards. Possibly because The Good Place is the only one that allows for actual world shaking as part of the plot.

I love the reset, and I really love that they undercut it with the double reset. But how long can that continue? It seems possible to have a reset every season, but that seems predictable in a way The Good Place is not. I think Adam's point is a good one. What do you guys think comes next? Also, I have a feeling there is no true Good Place in the show’s universe. I think they're on their own. There might be a neutral place. Anyone else?

LIZ: Third time’s a charm and third reactor is trying to be one too (ha)! The Good Place season 2 has started up with a bang, in my opinion, by finding its stride as far as the strengths of the ensemble and by having FUN with such a wild concept. 

I agree with both Adam and Miri. Adam is right to question the longevity of such a high-concept based sitcom and Miri is totally right in her assessment of the sitcom’s reliance on the status-quo. She is also right about the fact that things are changing and half hour comedies are starting to stretch their bounds and challenge their characters into (dare I say?) changing! The most fun thing about this show is probably the most daunting thing about it: it takes place in a totally made up after-life where nearly anything is possible and the writers can make up the rules as they go. I’m optimistically confident that Mike Schur has some kind of series arch in mind that will structure the lives of Eleanor, Chidi, Jason and Tahani (or afterlives I guess), but the question of Michael being the co-protagonist or antagonist- turned- anti-hero in future episodes remains. 

As far as this episode, I have some concerns and I have some actual laugh-out-loud moments to discuss. In general, the strength of the cast, the writing, and the characters being used appropriately to maximize their comedic effect seem to be things that are worked out and working for us in this episode. For instance, we have the luxury of having a “fresh start” kind of episode where we already know the faults, personalities, and strengths of the cast. The entire first season served us some incredibly interesting characters and now we get to see them sweat, surprise us and really upset Michael. The little details of the Good Place actually being the bad place are so entertaining by the way. I love that the “actors” want to just burn, twist, and bite like the good old fashioned torture technicians they are. 

I can’t wait to read what Kris has to say about the philosophy of it all, but I have some very non-expert opinions on the morality themes of this show. It seems that Eleanor has technically re-set and is a blank slate, but without having gone through the first attempt at Michael’s trickery in season one, I don’t think the note would have helped her figure out the truth as fast as she did. It seems that she has changed and that her soul or her core being is still improved from her previous lessons with Chidi. That personal growth might be gone from the characters’ memories, but they seem to be operating as slightly more evolved people instinctually than when they were first introduced. To me, this brings up the idea of the soul versus the body, which are at play in the good versus evil argument. It seems like the body can be mechanically re-set in this reality, but the soul seems to retain knowledge and growth from past lives, whether they are on earth or in the after-life.  I know Miri touched on that point, but that’s my take on it.

I am also assuming that the huge twist at the end of the last season means that we could face another huge twist again. Perhaps one of our beloved characters is actually someone sent to oversee Michael for his boss? Maybe Janet is an actual angel or perhaps Eleanor is? Maybe it is Michael that is actually in the bad place and he is being tortured by thinking he has the power to reinvent the bad place? I like the idea of Eleanor going along with Michael out of pity, but trying to protect the others as well for as long as she can keep it up.  I also wander if they will bump themselves out of the bad place (if that is possible) for continuing to grow and surprise us with their character evolution? I’m excited to find out and I never want to see the “enormous butthole spiders.” I’m definitely here for those kind of jokes as well as Jason really letting his strange personality fly (and watching him maybe fall in love with Janet again and again?). Eleanor feels like a reformed bad girl in the episode, but I’m sure we will see her naughty side again this season.

KRIS: Adam’s prediction makes a lot of sense to me, too, and although I admit I’m instinctively skeptical that a reset button is sustainable, I’m also a True Believer in Michael Schur.

I think the best evidence that there is a real Good Place in the universe of The Good Place is Janet. I guess it’s entirely possible that Michael was an unreliable narrator of his own flashbacks when Eleanor figured out the truth in last season’s finale, but he does say that “we even stole a Good Place Janet.” And of course she helps accelerate the discoveries in this premiere, by bringing Jason to meet the other saddest-sack she’s seen recently. GQ has a good interview with D’Arcy Carden, touching on how hard it is to play a character with no real agenda and certainly no capacity for subtext, but I think we’re seeing the show move toward making Janet a secondary protagonist and no longer “just” an environmental feature. I don’t mean that to sound disparaging; as you all know, Janet was my very favorite new character of the 2016-17 TV season. This is even taking into account the Sweet/Vicious gang. And as I mentioned in our cohort Marco Polo (LEMON YOU NEED TO GET MARCO POLO BACK), I would love to see at an episode this season primarily follow Janet as a POV character.

(My own lingering question about the cosmology is whether Mindy St. Claire and the “Medium Place” in last season’s episode 12 were the real deal. I lean a little toward Yes, since Janet is the only one who can operate the trains and the existence of the Medium Place seemed to be part of her core memory, and that was very shortly after her reset. But who knows if Michael was able to tamper with her?)

Liz touched on what I thought was the most interesting element: the suggestion that Eleanor, at least, hasn’t lost all of her growth from last season. One of my big worries, or at least questions, coming out of that finale was whether seeing Michael as a POV character be enough to make up for having to watch Eleanor revert back to her dirtbag self. Some of this concern was allayed by the sheer fun of Kristen Bell getting to deliver lines like “Why don’t I ever listen to people when I talk about themselves? No, it’s annoying, and I’m right not to.” But you come to a Fremulon show for the earnest humanity as much as for the jokes, so I was relieved to ultimately see a more thoughtful, more worried Eleanor than the Eleanor we met in the pilot. Depending on how much overthinking you want to do, the implied body-soul dualism Lemon mentions does pose questions about both how powerful and how ~EVIL~ the Bad Place crew really is, but if I have a lingering concern about the big world-building twists, it’s just that delving deeper into the (admittedly delightful) workplace comedy premise of “Michael the Demon Architect and his Petty Boss and Underlings” will inevitably mean losing some emphasis on last season’s central theme — how can/will Eleanor (read: any of us) become a better person?

Much as I hate to lose that thread, though, it’s an acceptable price for what Adam observed: as the show reconfigures itself around a true ensemble setup — an all but inevitable move for sitcoms moving past a first season — we’ll get to see a lot more of everyone else. Beyond Janet it’s impossible for me to pick a favorite. I of course identify very strongly with Chidi, not only for his former profession but because I too can be an indecisive wreck. (I also loved the callback to Chidi’s crushing guilt over almond milk, as it is a guilt I share. I don’t drink almond milk, partly for the very reason Chidi cites, but I do sometimes still buy almonds. I think I’m okay sometimes doing so because I don’t often eat beef, BUT STILL GUYS ALMONDS ARE A HUGE WATER DRAIN and they’re pretty expensive anyway.) But god, I really really love Tahani, too, and not just in a “sexy skyscraper” way.

MIRI: I have a few more thoughts, mostly stemming from Kris’s point that I absolutely love: "you come to a Fremulon show for the earnest humanity as much as for the jokes.” It’s so true. (I watched the B99 premiere this morning and I am Made of Feelings right now.) Eleanor is partially reformed. Seems like a reset can put a surface level veneer of dirtbaggery over that, but can’t undo the progress. So my prediction is that as the slow redemption becomes less of a constant thread (I don’t think it’ll ever die out completely) and as we see more workplace Michael shenanigans, we will eventually get to a plotline about the Temptation of Eleanor Shelstrop. Michael will realize that she’s the one who keeps figuring things out and offer her an out—IF she leaves the others behind. Although, is that too similar to the train dilemma of season one? Perhaps if it happened pretty soon after a reset, and then we could have a story about her rediscovering her goodness and trying to get back to the neighborhood to save the others after she’s accepted the deal.

Kris is totally right about the Good Place Janet theft. I had forgotten about that, and it definitely suggests that there is a Good Place, and maybe even a Medium Place. If there is, I’m shocked there aren’t more people in it. There has to have been more than one exactly medium person in all of history. I don’t know if I think this is something that would actually be explored, but what if there are many medium people in their own individual medium places? That feels on brand for this kind of world, though I’m not sure it would add much to the narrative.

I’m most interested to see how long the current reset lasts. I definitely don’t think it’ll be either extreme (one ep again or the entire season) but I could see a few in between options, particularly the end of episode 3/4 or at the midpoint of the season (episode 7). What do you guys think? And what comes after? I don’t think it’ll be another reset immediately. (Though if they did it I do have faith in Schur’s ability to pull it off—I am a devotee.)

I’m super excited to see more of people’s backstories and more POV moments for the others. I’m also looking forward to learning some more about the torture techs! The artist formerly known as Real Eleanor and the biter are an interesting start and while I don’t want them to overshadow the core 4, Janet, and Michael I am excited for them to be the evil/quirky townspeople.

A few housekeeping points:

Re: Tahani’s sexy skyskraperness—Eleanor is clearly bi and I love it. I will love it even more if they ever actually say it, but either way I love it. Also, this reminds me of another question: how important do we think the love story will be? I really like the Eleanor/Chidi dynamic and I can see it continuing to be important, or I can see it going down a more platonic route. Or do we think it goes away now that they’re not being told they’re soul mates? I hope not. I don’t need a love story in general, but I really did like them.

I drink cashew milk instead mostly, but I have a secret fear that cashews are just as big an environmental drain as almonds, it’s just talked about less. Afraid to do research on this point. 

Definitely second the desire for a Janet POV episode! I love her and I think that would be a really cool chance for further envelope pushing in their storytelling. Plus more D’Arcy Carden just in general.

KRIS: I am always a proponent of not sticking your lead in an Obligatory Romance, but I’ve also grudgingly accepted that this is kind of a theoretical position as TV goes. I think it might have even been you, Miri, who told me that Schur said somewhere that he likes romances because they’re what anchor a potentially large, diverse audience to characters who may have jobs or circumstances (like being dead) that most people might otherwise have difficulty latching onto. (Possibly I just saw it in an interview?) Which is a long way around to saying that I do think Eleanor and Chidi are (this term annoys me more than it should, for no good reason I can think of) “endgame.” Part of me would definitely enjoy the (slight, admittedly established) swerve of Chidi and Tahani ending up together, which made a decent amount of sense to me back in the first half of season one, but at this point Chidi and Eleanor do seem more compatible.

As for philosophy, I think it’s a safe bet that we’ll be leaving behind the heavy hitters of introductory ethics, if maybe not the field as a whole. I doubt there’s much story mileage in re-hashing Chidi’s lessons on Aristotle, Kant, utilitarianism, or contractualism (which I actually did not at any point study formally, but kind of want to now just because that one book’s title — What We Owe to Each Other — hits me right in my heart of hearts), at least not for writers who don’t have time to become PhD-level experts in the material. It might be interesting if Chidi tries to brush up on his metaphysics as the gang tries to figure out their new world, but there’s not a clear character hook in that field the way there is with ethics. Existentialism could be a fruitful place to go, and isn’t a massive leap in specialization for an ethicist, especially one who’s established as liking French philosophy. But most people too quickly and too easily conflate existentialism with nihilism, and that is definitely not Schur territory.

Liz mentioned the likelihood of another major twist at some point. I am generally not someone who likes to try predicting or out-thinking a show, and many critics and some showrunners have observed that twist-driven storytelling (as opposed to, you know, CHARACTER-DRIVEN STORYTELLING) is increasingly misguided when thousands or millions of viewers can crowdsource theories and predict finale twists by episode 3 or 4 (hi Westworld). All that said, after thinking about it for 30 seconds, I would put at least a small amount of money on us meeting someone from the real Good Place by the season’s “end of act 2,” if not at its midpoint. And the more interesting questions that might follow from this are,

How close is the real Good Place’s vibe to the show Michael has put on (we did see a Good Place representative in “Mindy St. Claire,” but that VHS was recorded 30 or 40 years ago)?, and 

WHO WILL THAT SPECIAL GUEST STAR BE?

Readers, we don’t have a long-term plan here. I don’t hate the idea of us doing this every week, but every three or four weeks seems more likely, as Miri and I did with Wynonna Earp. I could also see us having Good Place thoughts every week and just not from all four of us; maybe something will inspire Lemon next week, and maybe Adam will develop a new theory the week after, who knows. We’re also out of the summer TV season, which at least in theory means a lot more shows worth reacting to, and as we don’t do this for money (though WE WOULD LOVE TO, universe), we have the luxury of picking up and dropping shows at random, without worrying about clicks and ad dollars.

In the meantime, you can now find us on Facebook, and as always on Twitter.