Here frank underwood can blunder through being the worst bad guy ever and his poor decisions never come home to roost.
I think that's what bores me most about the series: Underwood's opponents never feel like they'll genuinely give him a run for his money. However, I think that's largely because the series' plotting (at least in the first two seasons, since I haven't watched any of S3) is poor, and in House of Cards the plot determines what characters do, by and large (with Frank being an exception most of the time - but his character is fairly one-note), not the other way around, which also means that I find it very difficult to become invested in these characters. It rarely feels like they do things because of who they are - they do things because the series needs to position its chess pieces so Frank can knock them over.
I dunno, Tusk was pretty damn competent and came close on a couple occasions to completely ruining Franks machinations. But Frank was able to think on his feet and recover, often stronger, each time. A trait that was sorely lacking from S3.
I mean, yeah, Frank always 'won', but I don't agree that his opponents never gave him a run for his money. He just wanted it more. S1's opponent was not any individual really; the people in his way were more window dressing to the actual enemy...the system itself. Which worked really well, from my perspective.
S3 had pretty much no opposition, not that mattered anyway, yet Frank and Claire still fumbled and pissed away everything they did. Sentimentality was the villain of S3 and that made for a boring as hell season where virtually nothing happened...and the things that did were enough out of character from S1/2 to make them feel incredibly false.
Yeah, this sums it up pretty well. They could have done something cool with Putin but really didn't.
I don't know, Petrov had some seriously epic burns.
Like when he invited the Underwoods to Russia and mentioned that there were a lot of artists in his town, so Claire would definitely find something she liked. Or when he put out his cigar on the wall of the White House.
Petrov had some super dickbaggery skills, and pretty much singlehandedly thwarted Frank's international plans.
Petrov was probably the best part of S3. I really wish they had gone with a Soviet-era style match up, instead of the more modern attempt to pretend that to pretty vastly different governments and cultures are besties. Given modern Russias actions in Ukraine and even internally they could have easily done that too. Petrov could have been the perfect counter to Frank, another impossibly capable power player, who doesn't have to play by the same rules a US president does. It would have been great to watch Frank try to counter his moves while, in public, staying 'true' to American ideas, but in practice stamping on the Constitution with glee. The otherwise unnecessary scene in the church (were they going for a West Wing thing there? Because Bartlet did it way wayWAY better) could have been replaced with a more appropriate scene in the National Archives.
Viktor Petrov is a a weird character...
...because, while it might be lost on the audience (and even some of the writers, it feels like), he's clearly an amalgamation of the three men who've served as president of the Russian Federation since it became independent: his background, demagoguery, failed marriage and antagonism with Pussy Riot resemble that of, of course, V. Putin, even some important differences (Petrov's claim to fame is Afghanistan, Putin was never in that war and served as a KGB in Dresden for something that resembles an East German version of The Americans). The party-animal/charm monster face that is hugely important when he first appears, however, is obviously a copy of a younger B. Yeltsin, with the hard-drinking jubilation and inappropriate forthrightness (by contrast, Putin's almost uniformly described as dour and reserved at foreign parties, and Russians consider him close to a teetotaler). The two pretty different personalities are rounded out by some aspects of D. Medvedev (in terms of his interest in various aspects of Americana, his mannerisms during the episode in Moscow and how Underwood refers to him publicly by and large).
Of the three, he resembles Putin the most (which isn't surprising, since many in the audience don't know the other two), with the exception of the whole state dinner and subsequent antics, which are extremely Yeltsin-like (and perhaps reflect the aspects of Yeltsin most liked by Americans while simultaneously disliked by American leaders).
So you have that curious hybrid to stand in as the President of Russia...
...who after being fooled repeatedly by his American counterpart ("I don't want to be in Palestine, and I definitely don't want you to be in Palestine either, fuck, now we're both here." "I don't want to accept your apology for that American I arrested, I want him to apologize, fine, I'll accept your apology and give you what you want, fuck now he's killed himself." etc.) finally turns it around by exploiting a subtle weakness in the current American system ("Haha, now YOU are the one who has to do something you really, really don't like to! Not so fun, is it?"). Which, besides taking some of the wind out of Frank's sails (it's hard to imagine much--obviously, this is a fictional universe where an American garrison in the Jordan Valley is somehow a miracle solution to centuries-old problems in the region if it just had a chance to work, but in reality, it's a fuck-awful idea and anyone who agreed to it, even unwillingly, is to blame) more important highlights the growing rift between Claire, who's gone to the extremes as much as she can, and Frank, who presumably never will. Doug's possession of the abortion files is coincidental to that, but just aggravates everything more.
A pretty clear reversal of the BBC series with Frank and Elizabeth Urquhart, though Elizabeth in that was never a "near-equal" partner as Claire was, but purely a benefactor--thus, she didn't really have that far to go compared to an increasingly-regret-filled Frank beyond having one person killed in the end of the day.
Ultimately, this is a show about a brilliantly cunning and ruthless American leader--in light of the current political climate, a similarly cunning Russian president is a neat device, but you run into the trap of leaving the American story (I was shocked how much time was actually spent on camera, in Russia--well, at least the sets looks pretty convincing). Maybe it's just the price of having seen the BBC series first, which is much more focused on London, and than the UK, in general (and never goes beyond alluding to the USSR and Russia, and never visits them), and expecting it to play out like that.
Having a Cold War-style showdown, rather than an interpersonal one, might have worked a lot better for those reasons, but then I think you fall into the trap of the reality of the Cold War Soviet leadership, unlike modern Russian leadership, being at its heart a collective system (by design), and that there was rarely just one face you had to negotiate with. And that takes a lot more effort to explain--mash it into just one anti-Frank, and then basically you go back to the interpersonal conflict the show did have. That's just my two cents as a non-American viewer, in any case.
This season feels like a cash in, where the decision was made to stretch the series into 4 seasons instead of 3
and
Full season spoiler
Winning Iowa kinda happened off screen. Which was stupid since it was the major battle of the season outside of Russia. It was like, Frank was losing, but he could totally win if he got the support he was counting on! But wait he doesn't get it? oh no! Instead that support goes to his opponent! There is no way for him to win now!
No wait Clare smiled pretty and he won. The end.
What? How is that possible?
This season feels like a cash in, where the decision was made to stretch the series into 4 seasons instead of 3
and
Full season spoiler
Winning Iowa kinda happened off screen. Which was stupid since it was the major battle of the season outside of Russia. It was like, Frank was losing, but he could totally win if he got the support he was counting on! But wait he doesn't get it? oh no! Instead that support goes to his opponent! There is no way for him to win now!
No wait Clare smiled pretty and he won. The end.
What? How is that possible?
American political media is stupid and wrong all the damn time. Remember when Hillary Clinton was definitely going to win Iowa in 2008? The conventional wisdom of the day was that she was an unstoppable juggernaut.
This season feels like a cash in, where the decision was made to stretch the series into 4 seasons instead of 3
and
Full season spoiler
Winning Iowa kinda happened off screen. Which was stupid since it was the major battle of the season outside of Russia. It was like, Frank was losing, but he could totally win if he got the support he was counting on! But wait he doesn't get it? oh no! Instead that support goes to his opponent! There is no way for him to win now!
No wait Clare smiled pretty and he won. The end.
What? How is that possible?
American political media is stupid and wrong all the damn time. Remember when Hillary Clinton was definitely going to win Iowa in 2008? The conventional wisdom of the day was that she was an unstoppable juggernaut.
I thought it was a little abrupt too, but as with the Jordan Valley "solution"...
...I guess this is a universe where the momentum between rival campaigns still puts them close enough that it alone can push him over. What's that American cliche about the love of a good woman?
I still would have preferred they show it, rather than spending so much time in Moscow, if you could make that switch.
This season feels like a cash in, where the decision was made to stretch the series into 4 seasons instead of 3
and
Full season spoiler
Winning Iowa kinda happened off screen. Which was stupid since it was the major battle of the season outside of Russia. It was like, Frank was losing, but he could totally win if he got the support he was counting on! But wait he doesn't get it? oh no! Instead that support goes to his opponent! There is no way for him to win now!
No wait Clare smiled pretty and he won. The end.
What? How is that possible?
American political media is stupid and wrong all the damn time. Remember when Hillary Clinton was definitely going to win Iowa in 2008? The conventional wisdom of the day was that she was an unstoppable juggernaut.
It wasn't "American political media", it was
Underwood's grand plan taking a 100% reversal which didn't turn out to matter?
How does that make sense?
I think it's been amply demonstrated that this show doesn't make any sense, except thematically. If it's time to win, Frank wins. If it's Frank's time to fail, he fails. So many of his problems are completely arbitrary bad luck that his good luck/arbitrary successes doesn't bother me.
The things that bother me are the pointlessly cruel storylines that don't go anywhere and only exist to make the protagonists more monstrous.
I think it's been amply demonstrated that this show doesn't make any sense, except thematically. If it's time to win, Frank wins. If it's Frank's time to fail, he fails. So many of his problems are completely arbitrary bad luck that his good luck/arbitrary successes doesn't bother me.
The things that bother me are the pointlessly cruel storylines that don't go anywhere and only exist to make the protagonists more monstrous.
Fuck you, Doug.
I dunno, I know this bugged a lot of people, but I thought it worked and felt appropriate in a bizzare and twisted way that the show usually does well.
Stamper had spent all season fighting his demons, and one of his demons was letting sentimentality weaken him and put himself, and more importantly to him, Frank, in danger. Him pulling it together at the end and taking her out was necessary to prove to himself that he was his own master.
Yes, it's fucked up, and yes, from a not totally fucked up perspective, she was no danger and probably could have been left to go. But killing her was necessary for Stamper to be able to move forward.
Again, yeah, twisted, and I recall right after watching it feeling dirty because the logic of the show made it make sense to me, but I still think it worked.
I think it's been amply demonstrated that this show doesn't make any sense, except thematically. If it's time to win, Frank wins. If it's Frank's time to fail, he fails. So many of his problems are completely arbitrary bad luck that his good luck/arbitrary successes doesn't bother me.
The things that bother me are the pointlessly cruel storylines that don't go anywhere and only exist to make the protagonists more monstrous.
Fuck you, Doug.
I dunno, I know this bugged a lot of people, but I thought it worked and felt appropriate in a bizzare and twisted way that the show usually does well.
Stamper had spent all season fighting his demons, and one of his demons was letting sentimentality weaken him and put himself, and more importantly to him, Frank, in danger. Him pulling it together at the end and taking her out was necessary to prove to himself that he was his own master.
Yes, it's fucked up, and yes, from a not totally fucked up perspective, she was no danger and probably could have been left to go. But killing her was necessary for Stamper to be able to move forward.
Again, yeah, twisted, and I recall right after watching it feeling dirty because the logic of the show made it make sense to me, but I still think it worked.
it totally worked
but now I am back to hating him. there was some sort of growth happening with his brother around but really he didn't change a whit.
I think it's been amply demonstrated that this show doesn't make any sense, except thematically. If it's time to win, Frank wins. If it's Frank's time to fail, he fails. So many of his problems are completely arbitrary bad luck that his good luck/arbitrary successes doesn't bother me.
The things that bother me are the pointlessly cruel storylines that don't go anywhere and only exist to make the protagonists more monstrous.
Fuck you, Doug.
I dunno, I know this bugged a lot of people, but I thought it worked and felt appropriate in a bizzare and twisted way that the show usually does well.
Stamper had spent all season fighting his demons, and one of his demons was letting sentimentality weaken him and put himself, and more importantly to him, Frank, in danger. Him pulling it together at the end and taking her out was necessary to prove to himself that he was his own master.
Yes, it's fucked up, and yes, from a not totally fucked up perspective, she was no danger and probably could have been left to go. But killing her was necessary for Stamper to be able to move forward.
Again, yeah, twisted, and I recall right after watching it feeling dirty because the logic of the show made it make sense to me, but I still think it worked.
Sure, it worked, but it wasn't necessary. It was plot necromancy; Doug's job the whole season was to resolve that issue (which had to do with nothing else on the show, and hadn't for like two seasons), and then it was resolved, and Doug got into an actually relevant plotline.
(the Dunbar stuff)
But then, a wild fakeout appears!
Hacker reveals that he lied, that Rachel is still alive. And we have this whole THING to deal with again, when I'd rather have Doug continuing to infiltrate Dunbar's campaign.
Honestly Doug letting the hacker live is a far greater danger to Underwood than Rachel/Cassie ever was.
I think it's been amply demonstrated that this show doesn't make any sense, except thematically. If it's time to win, Frank wins. If it's Frank's time to fail, he fails. So many of his problems are completely arbitrary bad luck that his good luck/arbitrary successes doesn't bother me.
The things that bother me are the pointlessly cruel storylines that don't go anywhere and only exist to make the protagonists more monstrous.
Fuck you, Doug.
I dunno, I know this bugged a lot of people, but I thought it worked and felt appropriate in a bizzare and twisted way that the show usually does well.
Stamper had spent all season fighting his demons, and one of his demons was letting sentimentality weaken him and put himself, and more importantly to him, Frank, in danger. Him pulling it together at the end and taking her out was necessary to prove to himself that he was his own master.
Yes, it's fucked up, and yes, from a not totally fucked up perspective, she was no danger and probably could have been left to go. But killing her was necessary for Stamper to be able to move forward.
Again, yeah, twisted, and I recall right after watching it feeling dirty because the logic of the show made it make sense to me, but I still think it worked.
Sure, it worked, but it wasn't necessary. It was plot necromancy; Doug's job the whole season was to resolve that issue (which had to do with nothing else on the show, and hadn't for like two seasons), and then it was resolved, and Doug got into an actually relevant plotline.
(the Dunbar stuff)
But then, a wild fakeout appears!
Hacker reveals that he lied, that Rachel is still alive. And we have this whole THING to deal with again, when I'd rather have Doug continuing to infiltrate Dunbar's campaign.
Honestly Doug letting the hacker live is a far greater danger to Underwood than Rachel/Cassie ever was.
yeah I did not understand that.
maybe he thought an american being murdered in a foreign country would draw too much attention? why not just off the guy then and there once he got the info. maybe he thinks he might need him again in the future.
S3 Ep 7 made it really easy for me to hate Corrigan.
3DS Friendcode 5413-1311-3767
0
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
I felt the season fell apart the last two episodes, and had started off goofy to begin with.
Frank manages to win Iowa, even though his big foreign policy project (which was wrangled by his wife) went totally tits up and his fake candidate threw her support to his opponent. I guess it could happen, but it's a pretty huge reversal given the crap approval ratings he had at the beginning of the season combined with pretty much bad news on every other front. Plus the only reason he seems to have won is that Claire personally visited every caucus goer in the state. What's also interesting is that there was zero coverage of who the Republicans candidates were. I know the focus is on Frank trying to win the nomination, but a little something something would have been interesting there.
The America Works program is just pants-on-head. You know who votes? Old people. Old people on social security and medicare. Old people are not going to vote for someone who is looking to slice and dice entitlement programs in order to pay companies to hire workers. Not to mention that they're that's strongly identified with Democrats and here's a Democratic president looking to cut them. You can do that, but it's not exactly a great plan to win the election, and it's definitely not a great way to win in Iowa, which has an older electorate.
And finally we have Claire looking for a divorce, or an arrangement close to that that won't be in the papers. Which seems to be setting up a season four that I won't have much interest in, because I don't particularly care about their personal lives. I can watch Downton Abbey if I feel the need to watch annoying people get all tied up in matters of personal romance.
Also, screw Doug. His character arc was gingerly dipping a toe into the waters of being human followed by killing a woman whose 'death' had caused him to hit rock bottom just a few episodes ago. So I guess we learned that Doug had only been crying because he hadn't been able to kill her himself? Whatever.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
I felt the season fell apart the last two episodes, and had started off goofy to begin with.
Frank manages to win Iowa, even though his big foreign policy project (which was wrangled by his wife) went totally tits up and his fake candidate threw her support to his opponent. I guess it could happen, but it's a pretty huge reversal given the crap approval ratings he had at the beginning of the season combined with pretty much bad news on every other front. Plus the only reason he seems to have won is that Claire personally visited every caucus goer in the state. What's also interesting is that there was zero coverage of who the Republicans candidates were. I know the focus is on Frank trying to win the nomination, but a little something something would have been interesting there.
The America Works program is just pants-on-head. You know who votes? Old people. Old people on social security and medicare. Old people are not going to vote for someone who is looking to slice and dice entitlement programs in order to pay companies to hire workers. Not to mention that they're that's strongly identified with Democrats and here's a Democratic president looking to cut them. You can do that, but it's not exactly a great plan to win the election, and it's definitely not a great way to win in Iowa, which has an older electorate.
And finally we have Claire looking for a divorce, or an arrangement close to that that won't be in the papers. Which seems to be setting up a season four that I won't have much interest in, because I don't particularly care about their personal lives. I can watch Downton Abbey if I feel the need to watch annoying people get all tied up in matters of personal romance.
Also, screw Doug. His character arc was gingerly dipping a toe into the waters of being human followed by killing a woman whose 'death' had caused him to hit rock bottom just a few episodes ago. So I guess we learned that Doug had only been crying because he hadn't been able to kill her himself? Whatever.
The Doug plot pissed me off. Rachel changed her fucking name, even if she desperately wanted to rat out Frank her credibility is gone at this point. There was logically no way she could pose a threat. Doug was in love with her and killed her because she'd never love him.
This season feels like a cash in, where the decision was made to stretch the series into 4 seasons instead of 3
and
Full season spoiler
Winning Iowa kinda happened off screen. Which was stupid since it was the major battle of the season outside of Russia. It was like, Frank was losing, but he could totally win if he got the support he was counting on! But wait he doesn't get it? oh no! Instead that support goes to his opponent! There is no way for him to win now!
No wait Clare smiled pretty and he won. The end.
What? How is that possible?
If I were truly undecided and didn't care that America Works was batshit crazy, I wouldn't have voted for Dunbar. She was like the anti-Obama in terms of charisma. One thing they showed really well was how great Frank and Claire were at pandering for the camera and crowds.
I'm not done with Season 3 just yet but I feel like each season is specifically for a certain character.
In Season 1: We focus primarily on Zoe.
In Season 2: We focus primarily on Frank.
In Season 3: We focus primarily on Claire.
I think each season is a pretty good arc when you accept that this show isn't just about Frank Underwood. I enjoy watching each character inhabit the space that they have created for themselves.
I like that Doug and Remy and Dunbar and everyone else get a nice arc as well.
I don't really consider the phrase "nice arc" when I think of Doug. He is consistently unpleasant, and I started liking him less and less after season 1.
Beginning of Season 3
I thought that him dying would've been an acceptable resolution for his creepy obsession with Rachel. That they walked that back (slowly, he was in PT) and had him stick with that worn-out plotline made me dread any time he was on the screen.
+6
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Season 3:
I would've been happy with a Doug arc where he actually does get ensorceled by whatshergeneral or coming back to work for Frank and moving beyond his weirdo obsession with Rachel.
Or if he tracked her down and took her out in the beginning of hte season rather than the end.
Finished S3 today and thought I'd come here for a nosey. Really interesting to read other people's opinions and to see quite a general negative vibe.
While I'd agree that S3 didn't quite reach the heights of S1 and 2 for me, I still thoroughly enjoyed watching it. I find the characters utterly compelling. Even Doug. I'm so torn on him.
I have a lot of sympathy for such a tragic, messed-up character. I was quietly cheering when he'd shaped himself an opportunity to get back in. Super-competent and terrifying Doug is back in the game! Then covering my face and thinking "Oh, Doug, no" when he turned the van around.
Is the show flawless? No, of course not. But I still find the characters fascinating to watch, and Kevin Spacey still nails it every time. Some of his aggressive, dominating speeches this season gave me chills.
Well, yeah. I have no problem with any of the actors. I was even amused by Pussy Riot (they were smart enough to use them as a plot device instead of real characters). The guy who plays Doug is very convincing.
I just hate the character so much now. I suppose that's an achievement.
Before watching Season 3, I commented to a friend that the writers seem to know when I disliked a character intensely because they'd kill them off/send them to jail.
It wasn't long until I realised how wrong I was. I hate Doug so much.
Doug is despicable, but I dont like Season 3's implication that if you dont get married and pump out babies that you become an empty shell who can't feel alive without a belly full of booze and your dick in a whore's mouth.
Doug is despicable, but I dont like Season 3's implication that if you dont get married and pump out babies that you become an empty shell who can't feel alive without a belly full of booze and your dick in a whore's mouth.
um another main character with husband babies certainly isn't doing super awesome by the end of the season! instead she's back to cheatin'
I think that's a pretty bad read on what they were trying to do with Doug. it felt more like he was connecting with actual people, family, people that really cared about him. and then he goes back to what frankly stands for an abusive family in the Underwoods.
While I don't have the issue that many do with him this season...yeah. It doesn't really even make sense that
he lived. He was clearly dead at the end of S2. He served a useful purpose in S3, twisting and ultimately tanking Dunbar, and giving Frank someone (and the only one) he could completely trust in the end. As I've said before, in its twisted way, I actually found his resolution with Rachel in the end fine. I know I'm in the minority there; but even despite that I'm not sure that the role he played this season couldn't have been done by someone else (Meecham), that also would have had the side effect of making the Rachel storyline completely disappear as it also concluded with Dougs obvious death at the end of S2.
Still, of all the massive issues and disappointments I had with S3, this contradiction was pretty low on the list.
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Doug's
survivial was pretty dubious. He'd been clunked good and hard in the head by a rock and was left outside in some random woods. I don't even remember if they detailed how they found him, since realistically, he just wouldn't have been found and would eventually have ended up being eaten by raccoons or something.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
survivial was pretty dubious. He'd been clunked good and hard in the head by a rock and was left outside in some random woods. I don't even remember if they detailed how they found him, since realistically, he just wouldn't have been found and would eventually have ended up being eaten by raccoons or something.
I think they tracked the GPS on his car.
0
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Could be. Light googling doesn't get me the answer, and I don't really want to re-watch to find out for sure. I had thought that Rachel would have used the car as a get away vehicle, at least to get to someplace with a bus station.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
Could be. Light googling doesn't get me the answer, and I don't really want to re-watch to find out for sure. I had thought that Rachel would have used the car as a get away vehicle, at least to get to someplace with a bus station.
She did,
and they never found the car; the police tell Doug as much in ep 1. They didn't use GPS to find him either, as far as it is shown just some random dude found him. They don't elaborate on it any more than that.
The whole season really just felt like... "Oh, we're renewed for season 3? You need it when? Shit, uh.., yeah no problem!"
The whole thing with S1/S2 was the quest for power. Elaborate schemes, short game, long game, mid-scheme adaptations, and showing the dark side of humanity - just what some people are willing to do to gain power. In S3, power has been achieved. And we get fairly straightforward White House show, and worry about passing a bill. It was an enormous let-down.
It was still... good... just by virtue of having terrific actors and high quality production. But it was faaaar from great, and it didn't feel at all important or necessary.
Posts
Viktor Petrov is a a weird character...
Of the three, he resembles Putin the most (which isn't surprising, since many in the audience don't know the other two), with the exception of the whole state dinner and subsequent antics, which are extremely Yeltsin-like (and perhaps reflect the aspects of Yeltsin most liked by Americans while simultaneously disliked by American leaders).
So you have that curious hybrid to stand in as the President of Russia...
A pretty clear reversal of the BBC series with Frank and Elizabeth Urquhart, though Elizabeth in that was never a "near-equal" partner as Claire was, but purely a benefactor--thus, she didn't really have that far to go compared to an increasingly-regret-filled Frank beyond having one person killed in the end of the day.
Ultimately, this is a show about a brilliantly cunning and ruthless American leader--in light of the current political climate, a similarly cunning Russian president is a neat device, but you run into the trap of leaving the American story (I was shocked how much time was actually spent on camera, in Russia--well, at least the sets looks pretty convincing). Maybe it's just the price of having seen the BBC series first, which is much more focused on London, and than the UK, in general (and never goes beyond alluding to the USSR and Russia, and never visits them), and expecting it to play out like that.
Having a Cold War-style showdown, rather than an interpersonal one, might have worked a lot better for those reasons, but then I think you fall into the trap of the reality of the Cold War Soviet leadership, unlike modern Russian leadership, being at its heart a collective system (by design), and that there was rarely just one face you had to negotiate with. And that takes a lot more effort to explain--mash it into just one anti-Frank, and then basically you go back to the interpersonal conflict the show did have. That's just my two cents as a non-American viewer, in any case.
(Spoilered for safety sake.)
and
Full season spoiler
No wait Clare smiled pretty and he won. The end.
What? How is that possible?
American political media is stupid and wrong all the damn time. Remember when Hillary Clinton was definitely going to win Iowa in 2008? The conventional wisdom of the day was that she was an unstoppable juggernaut.
I thought it was a little abrupt too, but as with the Jordan Valley "solution"...
I still would have preferred they show it, rather than spending so much time in Moscow, if you could make that switch.
How does that make sense?
The things that bother me are the pointlessly cruel storylines that don't go anywhere and only exist to make the protagonists more monstrous.
I dunno, I know this bugged a lot of people, but I thought it worked and felt appropriate in a bizzare and twisted way that the show usually does well.
Yes, it's fucked up, and yes, from a not totally fucked up perspective, she was no danger and probably could have been left to go. But killing her was necessary for Stamper to be able to move forward.
Again, yeah, twisted, and I recall right after watching it feeling dirty because the logic of the show made it make sense to me, but I still think it worked.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
ew, dude
I think she actually did a good job with the, y'know, acting part of her job, which is why she will get more work
it totally worked
Sure, it worked, but it wasn't necessary. It was plot necromancy; Doug's job the whole season was to resolve that issue (which had to do with nothing else on the show, and hadn't for like two seasons), and then it was resolved, and Doug got into an actually relevant plotline.
But then, a wild fakeout appears!
Honestly Doug letting the hacker live is a far greater danger to Underwood than Rachel/Cassie ever was.
yeah I did not understand that.
The America Works program is just pants-on-head. You know who votes? Old people. Old people on social security and medicare. Old people are not going to vote for someone who is looking to slice and dice entitlement programs in order to pay companies to hire workers. Not to mention that they're that's strongly identified with Democrats and here's a Democratic president looking to cut them. You can do that, but it's not exactly a great plan to win the election, and it's definitely not a great way to win in Iowa, which has an older electorate.
And finally we have Claire looking for a divorce, or an arrangement close to that that won't be in the papers. Which seems to be setting up a season four that I won't have much interest in, because I don't particularly care about their personal lives. I can watch Downton Abbey if I feel the need to watch annoying people get all tied up in matters of personal romance.
Also, screw Doug. His character arc was gingerly dipping a toe into the waters of being human followed by killing a woman whose 'death' had caused him to hit rock bottom just a few episodes ago. So I guess we learned that Doug had only been crying because he hadn't been able to kill her himself? Whatever.
I would love to hear why
If I were truly undecided and didn't care that America Works was batshit crazy, I wouldn't have voted for Dunbar. She was like the anti-Obama in terms of charisma. One thing they showed really well was how great Frank and Claire were at pandering for the camera and crowds.
In Season 1: We focus primarily on Zoe.
In Season 2: We focus primarily on Frank.
In Season 3: We focus primarily on Claire.
I think each season is a pretty good arc when you accept that this show isn't just about Frank Underwood. I enjoy watching each character inhabit the space that they have created for themselves.
I like that Doug and Remy and Dunbar and everyone else get a nice arc as well.
Beginning of Season 3
Or if he tracked her down and took her out in the beginning of hte season rather than the end.
idk
doug bugs me
While I'd agree that S3 didn't quite reach the heights of S1 and 2 for me, I still thoroughly enjoyed watching it. I find the characters utterly compelling. Even Doug. I'm so torn on him.
Is the show flawless? No, of course not. But I still find the characters fascinating to watch, and Kevin Spacey still nails it every time. Some of his aggressive, dominating speeches this season gave me chills.
I just hate the character so much now. I suppose that's an achievement.
It wasn't long until I realised how wrong I was. I hate Doug so much.
um another main character with husband babies certainly isn't doing super awesome by the end of the season! instead she's back to cheatin'
I think that's a pretty bad read on what they were trying to do with Doug. it felt more like he was connecting with actual people, family, people that really cared about him. and then he goes back to what frankly stands for an abusive family in the Underwoods.
It's just that the growth was in to a terrible, terrible person.
I am okay with characters who do evil things. I think fiction needs bad guys.
Doug's season 3 arc did not add up to Doug becoming an even worse person, to me.
Well, to be fair, Doug was already an awful person.
I'm not sure what the correct character development is for a bad person to evolve into
Yeah, I went there. I really hate Doug now.
While I don't have the issue that many do with him this season...yeah. It doesn't really even make sense that
Still, of all the massive issues and disappointments I had with S3, this contradiction was pretty low on the list.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
She did,
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
The whole thing with S1/S2 was the quest for power. Elaborate schemes, short game, long game, mid-scheme adaptations, and showing the dark side of humanity - just what some people are willing to do to gain power. In S3, power has been achieved. And we get fairly straightforward White House show, and worry about passing a bill. It was an enormous let-down.
It was still... good... just by virtue of having terrific actors and high quality production. But it was faaaar from great, and it didn't feel at all important or necessary.