(On some browsers you'll need to refresh this page in order to see the comment you just left.)
Greg - 2006-04-12 13:00:03
You're now a step away from the lovely and talented Mrs. Renfro
http://www.renfrofoods.com/ I've worked my way through most of their salsa and yet to find a dud--The raspberry chipotle salsa is great on broiled chicken. Curious George's nuke threat puts me into apoplectic fits. Can't even address that so I'll just sit and dip.
-------------------------------
Alan - 2006-04-12 13:44:07
Six Feet Under is great, and I'm actually jealous that you get to see the last episode for the first time.
-------------------------------
Paula - 2006-04-12 13:46:50
Alan: what did you think of Maggie?
-------------------------------
2fs - 2006-04-12 22:26:14
Whoa! I'm only a few eps into S2 of 6FU! Quiet please! (I'm also abbrev-krz 2nite!)
-------------------------------
Flasshe - 2006-04-13 01:01:00
After a lifetime of total indifference to dips of any sort
Unfathomable. That statement is just so beyond the realm of human experience, I'm not sure how to react to it.
I liked Maggie.
-------------------------------
Baby Party - 2006-04-13 09:20:37
Rarely have I disliked a TV character as much as I disliked Nate during the last season of SFU. Smug, condescending, sanctimonious, cruel to Brenda. It didn't help that my pregnancy almost exactly paralleled the pregnancy of So-and-So (trying not to spoil it for 2fs). Maggie I liked til, uh, the last few eps, when I started to find her behavior quite annoying and almost passive-aggresssive. I had a theory at one point that the writers wanted me to keep liking Nate, but that Peter Krause's inferior acting was getting in the way. I really do think that after the fellow who played Keith, he was the weakest actor on a show of truly exceptional talents.
-------------------------------
Paula - 2006-04-13 10:16:57
I really do think that after the fellow who played Keith, he was the weakest actor on a show of truly exceptional talents.
Yes! And if you think PK is mediocre on 6FU, try watching him on the big screen (We Don't Live here Anymore)--painful!
-------------------------------
Alan - 2006-04-13 10:45:27
Re: Maggie. If she were a real person, I'd say I liked her on casual acquaintance, but wouldn't go out of my way to try to get her know really well based on her affect. As a character, I thought she was kind of two-dimensional, she was more useful as a device for Mate's healing than as an interesting character in her own right. If the writer's intention was to portray a sweet person with apparent low self-esteem who falls for the wrong guy, I think they succeeded, but considering how strong the other character's personalities are I think she gets lost in the shuffle. I also think she was maybe given short shrift when it came to characterization. I don't recall getting much of her backstory. Even though she probably has more screen time than Ted, I have a better picture of his personality, and I think he's a more realized character, even though he's intended to serve the same role for Claire as Maggie is for Nate.
I agree PK is kind of mediocre, he was definitely the weakest link on Sports Night, too, though the rest of the cast was incredible, and the writing is some some of Sorkin's best.
-------------------------------
Paula - 2006-04-13 10:52:19
If the writer's intention was to portray a sweet person with apparent low self-esteem who falls for the wrong guy
Wow, that was not my take on Maggie at all--I saw her as a fairly strong person who offered Nate an alternative to the low-self-esteemy Lisa and the "strong" but impossibly neurotic Brenda. I really bought the whole Quaker thing--she had her finger on the earthy/practical and the transcendently spiritual, which is what Nate has always been trying to do.
-------------------------------
Flasshe - 2006-04-13 11:38:47
Gotta agree with Paula - Maggie had some issues she was working through, but she had solace through her church and I didn't see low self-esteem there.
-------------------------------
Alan - 2006-04-13 11:54:45
Full Disclosure, I rarely give 100% of my attention to the tv, so I'm more than willing to admit there may be nuances I missed. That's honestly the impression I got of her. I felt like she allowed Nate to manipulate her into a relationship against her better judgement, which suggests either low self-esteem, or an overwhelming attraction that I didn't see on screen.
-------------------------------
Bob - 2006-04-13 14:04:01
I admire this laser-like focus, but, having just returned from a trip to Lack-of-internet-ville, I have to go and ruin it, by criticizing Paula for not using "pathos" correctly two days ago... when going ahead and using it WOULD have been correct. (Sorry, but she appointed me as someone who appointed himself her pathos coach, and I don't wanna flake out on that sacred duty.)
-------------------------------
Paula - 2006-04-13 14:33:12
Damn! But I felt like "melodrama" was pretty accurate, and to use both words woulda been overkill, no? And why no I-net, were you in the hoosegow?
-------------------------------
Baby Party - 2006-04-13 14:41:47
2fS DON'T READ THIS! Okay, Maggie slept with a pregnant woman's husband. And Nate dumped his pregnant wife, and treated her like shit through the whole pregnancy, even though he was the one who said, "let's have a baby" in the first place. These actions did not, to me, signal "spiritually grounded characters." I saw them both as self-deluding, and Nate as an self-absorbed asshole to the bitter end. They were "do as I say, not as I do" type folks. And I love Quakers! Hooray for Quakers! But Quakers fuck up, too.
-------------------------------
Paula - 2006-04-13 15:47:30
Okay, Maggie slept with a pregnant woman's husband.
True, she succumbed to temptation. It wasn't enough to make me dislike her, somehow, possibly because Brenda is my least favorite character on the show.
If these were real people, mind you, I'm sure I'd feel differently, but they are characters, so it's a little easier for me to have stark and unnuanced and perhaps obnoxiously side-taking opinions.
Nate and Brenda just never seemed like a good match. I'm not saying I'm 100% for what he did, but something about it felt neat and tidy and simple--for once, a character on that show made a decision that made them happy. (Well, made me happy, anyway).
Also, I do wonder, and ths is a more generalized theoretical question: when is it ever the right time to pull the plug on a r'ship that doesn't work? Presumably after the baby is born, in a situation like this, but it's a tough call.
These actions did not, to me, signal "spiritually grounded characters."
Grounded--no, definitely not. I would characterize Nate and Maggie more as "seekers," with all the flakiness and sincerity that such a label implies.
-------------------------------
Alan - 2006-04-13 17:28:25
It's interesting to me that Brenda is your least favorite character, because my opinions of her are almost the reverse of how I feel about Maggie. The Brenda character is very powerful, and very fully realized, with a lot of character growth and backstory. I think she may be the best and most consistently written character on the show. However, if she were a real person I knew I think I'd want to change my phone number.
-------------------------------
Flasshe - 2006-04-13 17:34:56
2fs, you should just avoid this comment thread altogether...
I liked Brenda in the beginning, but really ended up hating her by the end. I wonder how much Rachel Griffith's real life pregnancy dictated the storylines in the last season. I can't help wondering what the writers would've done had she not been pregnant, and if it would've made me feel differently (better or worse) towards her.
-------------------------------
add your comment:
back to the entry - Diaryland
