Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > TV
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-26-2016, 02:55 PM
 
Location: Florida
7,233 posts, read 7,027,251 times
Reputation: 17781

Advertisements

I rewatched them all on amazon, skipping the bates murder/prison stuff - dull, dull dull.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-26-2016, 03:09 PM
 
Location: Cushing OK
14,539 posts, read 21,207,511 times
Reputation: 16939
My thoughts on Marigold not talking is we mostly see her as a little kid in a sea of adults or with the nanny. Children were taught to be quiet with adults. Children with Nanny's were polite to their parents since they didn't see them much. If we expect to see children act like modern kids, we won't. I don't see her as someone who doesn't talk, but who knows when adults don't expect it. She's also been handed around a bit, and this will leave its mark.

Likely the reason we don't see the kids talk much is that it puts them on a different pay scale and unless there is a reason for them to, they are silent standins.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2016, 03:10 PM
 
7,577 posts, read 5,304,781 times
Reputation: 9443
Quote:
Originally Posted by brava4 View Post
I do declare... Someone is a bit too sensitive.
My counter declaration would be that some folks are just plain devoid of any sensitivity whatsoever. I also would suggest that such people slink back to intragram or twitter where such insensitivity is all the rage, stop trying to deflect their insensitivity or just drop the subject all together and move on to something that might be befitting of a mature adult conversation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2016, 03:23 PM
 
Location: Steele Creek, Charlotte, NC
1,890 posts, read 2,252,787 times
Reputation: 3309
In the final episode, we'll discover that Edith actually had twins. She'll realize that she can't live without both her daughters and goes back to Switzerland to retrieve Marigold's sister Orchid. It turns out that Orchid has been raised as a snob and rejects Marigold because of her inferior name. But Mary decides that Orchid is just what she wants in a daughter. Edit relents, deciding that after living with a snobbish sister she can do without a snobbish daughter.

Meanwhile, Henry says "Whoa, I only agreed to one kid."

Julian Fellowes arrives and announces that he's run out of episodes and tells Henry that there can't be a resolution to his problem and he just has to accept snobby Orchid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2016, 03:28 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh
29,700 posts, read 34,240,753 times
Reputation: 76911
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCDave View Post

Meanwhile, Henry says "Whoa, I only agreed to one kid."
That brings up an interesting point: has Henry met George? There was never any talk that I remember about him being a stepfather and how he felt about that, just that he was hot for Mary.

Last edited by fleetiebelle; 02-26-2016 at 03:39 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2016, 03:38 PM
 
5,097 posts, read 6,333,694 times
Reputation: 11750
I wonder how the ending will be for Isobel.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2016, 05:29 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
48,564 posts, read 24,032,368 times
Reputation: 21238
Quote:
Originally Posted by brava4 View Post
I wonder how the ending will be for Isobel.
Charles Grigg, Carson's old music hall performing partner, turns up in the final episode. Isobel falls madly in love with him and joins him in a vagabond road existence.

Isobel slipped my mind when I was contemplating happy endings for all. I hadn't given Violet much thought either. I suppose I was thinking of those two already at the end of their stories.

Isobel's last solo storyline was her romance being frustrated by the opposition of the nasty kids. It seems too late to start anything new for her, so if she has any sort of resolution in the final, it would have to involve her triumphing over that prevailing opposition. I don't know, I'm not really figuring on her needing an ending, her victory in the hospital matter seems a nice stopping place for her story.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2016, 05:37 PM
 
888 posts, read 452,458 times
Reputation: 468
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
Isobel's last solo storyline was her romance being frustrated by the opposition of the nasty kids. It seems too late to start anything new for her, so if she has any sort of resolution in the final, it would have to involve her triumphing over that prevailing opposition. I don't know, I'm not really figuring on her needing an ending, her victory in the hospital matter seems a nice stopping place for her story.
Isobel seems content to be on her own. The fact that she won't marry unless it is on her terms indicates that she would rather be alone than in a situation not to her liking or standards.

I thought it was nice she gave Mary her approval when Mary was ready to remarry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2016, 06:26 PM
 
888 posts, read 452,458 times
Reputation: 468
The last thing I wanted was to start a conversation that turned into name calling when I mentioned a disability as a possible plot option were the series to have continued. I am choosing to respond with some general though instead of replying to individual posts, in hopes we can move on from the subject.

First, I think it is okay to talk about disabilities, even if it is a sensitive subject, especially if we are talking about a character. In real life when dealing with children, there is a fine line between sharing observations about a child who shows characteristics that might be part of a disability and ignoring them to be polite. People who are close to a child with behavior consistent with a disability sometimes see things the parents or others don't. Sometimes parents are grateful to have something pointed out because that is what causes them to realize their child needs help. Others don't want to hear it. I have seen this personally because I work with children who have special needs and with children who don't.

Disabilities are out in the open in a way they haven't been before, although there is still a lot of ignorance and prejudice towards people with disabilities. It is an area people need to discuss to increase their knowledge and to learn how they are being insensitive. They need to be able to discuss them in forums like this and on the internet since they may not have opportunities elsewhere. Of course there should be parameters without crossing a line, but sometimes when people do cross a line that's when the most learning occurs. The learning tends to occur when the conversation that follows the insensitive remarks remains civil. (I'm talking in general terms, not about any posters here.)

I gather that some feel a line was crossed because the conversation was about a child. I can understand this. At the same time, I don't think people were trying to be cruel to the child actresses or to Marigold as a character. We certainly have not had this level of reservation when discussing the adults. I do think, generally speaking, that the standard should be higher towards children. While the internet does allow people to say things they wouldn't say elsewhere and to make awful comments, I don't think this was the intended spirit of comments made about the Marigold character or actresses. Certain comments directed towards other posters appear mean spirited and I hope they are over.

The subject of demeaning women was brought up as having parallels. I think women are singled out on parts of the internet for sexist and demeaning comments as a form of sport, especially when it comes to our appearance and sexuality, yet I haven't felt that to be a part of this thread. We have most definitely discussed the kinds of subjects that can easily turn to ridicule and name calling, including topics like looks, weight, clothing, gender roles, children, relationships, abortion, birth control, work, division of labor, and the list goes on.... (We've done it with men too, including assorted comments about Bates' disability.)

One of the great things about this thread is our ability to discuss issues about women that can be/are controversial. We've done a great job discussing gender and gender roles. There have been differences of opinion, which has added to the richness of the thread.

I hope we can move on from the tension that flared.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2016, 06:47 PM
 
5,198 posts, read 5,263,657 times
Reputation: 13249
Quote:
Originally Posted by TransplantedPeach View Post
The last thing I wanted was to start a conversation that turned into name calling when I mentioned a disability as a possible plot option were the series to have continued. I am choosing to respond with some general though instead of replying to individual posts, in hopes we can move on from the subject.

First, I think it is okay to talk about disabilities, even if it is a sensitive subject, especially if we are talking about a character. In real life when dealing with children, there is a fine line between sharing observations about a child who shows characteristics that might be part of a disability and ignoring them to be polite. People who are close to a child with behavior consistent with a disability sometimes see things the parents or others don't. Sometimes parents are grateful to have something pointed out because that is what causes them to realize their child needs help. Others don't want to hear it. I have seen this personally because I work with children who have special needs and with children who don't.

Disabilities are out in the open in a way they haven't been before, although there is still a lot of ignorance and prejudice towards people with disabilities. It is an area people need to discuss to increase their knowledge and to learn how they are being insensitive. They need to be able to discuss them in forums like this and on the internet since they may not have opportunities elsewhere. Of course there should be parameters without crossing a line, but sometimes when people do cross a line that's when the most learning occurs. The learning tends to occur when the conversation that follows the insensitive remarks remains civil. (I'm talking in general terms, not about any posters here.)

I gather that some feel a line was crossed because the conversation was about a child. I can understand this. At the same time, I don't think people were trying to be cruel to the child actresses or to Marigold as a character. We certainly have not had this level of reservation when discussing the adults. I do think, generally speaking, that the standard should be higher towards children. While the internet does allow people to say things they wouldn't say elsewhere and to make awful comments, I don't think this was the intended spirit of comments made about the Marigold character or actresses. Certain comments directed towards other posters appear mean spirited and I hope they are over.

The subject of demeaning women was brought up as having parallels. I think women are singled out on parts of the internet for sexist and demeaning comments as a form of sport, especially when it comes to our appearance and sexuality, yet I haven't felt that to be a part of this thread. We have most definitely discussed the kinds of subjects that can easily turn to ridicule and name calling, including topics like looks, weight, clothing, gender roles, children, relationships, abortion, birth control, work, division of labor, and the list goes on.... (We've done it with men too, including assorted comments about Bates' disability.)

One of the great things about this thread is our ability to discuss issues about women that can be/are controversial. We've done a great job discussing gender and gender roles. There have been differences of opinion, which has added to the richness of the thread.

I hope we can move on from the tension that flared.
We had moved on until this post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > TV

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:58 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top