Succession - Season 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally saw this episode as a possible foreshadowing of 2024 and it made me sick. I was down all night.

I agree. I found it very sickening to watch.

I agree. It was disaster porn and lazy writing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR got it exactly right:

"The tension in Succession has always been that everybody knew these people were terrible, but they were also human. They could be, in some moments, kind or funny or even insightful. They could certainly be legitimately in pain. Still terrible people — but rounded-out human characters with stories and arcs. This episode is the one where I think the fundamental point of the entire enterprise is made: Their complicated humanity is genuine but so what? Sad, jealous, hurt, abused, mistreated, conflicted, they are all these things. But they operate upon the wider world as instruments of destruction in the lives of real people, and in this episode, the magnitude of that destruction is pushed right up to the front edge of the stage."

Yes to all of this -- I can tell it's Linda Holmes without checking and she nails it.

Waiting for the posters who want to tell us all that the show "isn't that deep!" and that it's still fun to pick one of these grotesque humans and root for them to win. Or the poster who though Roman would make a fun dinner guest.

It's all fun and games until the little billionaire sociopaths destroy democracy and get a bunch of people killed. And even then, it's still a game to them.

Why do you even watch if you hate the show and everybody in it so much?

I love the show. I'm not a simpleton who needs all the characters in a story to be likable or sympathetic in order to get something out of the story itself.

Who exactly do you LIKE on the show, and why? I don't mean who do you find funny (I think they can all be quite funny) or whose story you are interested in (I find the story fascinating), I mean who do you actually like as in "I think this is a cool person and I would be friends with them in real life"?

Since you're lecturing me now. You're either making this up or reading far more into peoples' posts here than they're actually saying. I don't think anybody here actually *likes* or "would be friends with" ANY of them, except for maybe Willa and Tom, and even Tom dropped off the "like" list when he revealed his bad side. Nobody, but nobody, here has said they want to "friends" with Shiv or Roman or Kendall or Collin. Sure, one poster thought Roman would be fun to have over to dinner, but even that was because he's amusing to listen to, not because "I want to be BFFs with Roman."

It's a lesser of multiple evils thing, can you see that?

You don't seem to understand the difference between rooting for a character vs. actually "liking" them or "wanting to be friends" with them.

Which makes it strange that you keep coming on to lecture us all about fangirling the characters. I think I'll ignore you from now on.

+100
You just know the PP sucks all the air out of any room.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tom seemed really surprised about the pregnancy, I think. But I agree an abortion won't happen. Sure, Shiv could probably pay somebody enough to do it, even as far a long as she is. She might even be thinking about an abortion and she told Tom just to be extra cruel to him. But now that he knows, he can stop it, maybe legally (I'm not sure), maybe by telling her family or by threatening to leak to the news that she's having a late-term abortion. And Shiv knows this. So I don't think she would have told Tom unless she was planning to have the baby.

I like Willa more and more. She was supportive of Collin, but she also expressed her reservations about Mencken. At least as much as the spouse-and-former-escort of the least important sibling has any leeway to express reservations.

She wasn't just supportive of him, she was using him as her puppet. She knew that Connor staying in the race would help get a Democrat in the White House and she told him not to drop out (he said she was the only one he was listening to). Even though it cost them over $100 million. How could any far left democrat marry into that family. Total gold digger. I have zero respect for her.

My impression of Willa is that she is simply not that political at all and doesn't care about any of it. She knows some semi-political people who hate Menken because he's a Nazi, but she's always speaking out of self interest (she didn't want to move to Oman, now that Connor for sure is 100% losing, she likes the idea of bouncing around Europe with all their money).

Honestly, I knew lots of young people like this back in 2016. Had never voted before, were maybe vaguely left-leaning based purely on peer group attitudes, but had so little interest in politics that is was really more of a cultural association than an actual political belief. Some of them woke up enough to vote against Trump (or succumbed to the urging of others) but some didn't. Especially if you are in an economically advantaged position, it's very easy to ignore politics, which are "a bummer" to people who are very shallow and self-interested.

Ooh, and don't forget "simple"! You know - anyone who doesn't vote the way you insist must be all of the above.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR got it exactly right:

"The tension in Succession has always been that everybody knew these people were terrible, but they were also human. They could be, in some moments, kind or funny or even insightful. They could certainly be legitimately in pain. Still terrible people — but rounded-out human characters with stories and arcs. This episode is the one where I think the fundamental point of the entire enterprise is made: Their complicated humanity is genuine but so what? Sad, jealous, hurt, abused, mistreated, conflicted, they are all these things. But they operate upon the wider world as instruments of destruction in the lives of real people, and in this episode, the magnitude of that destruction is pushed right up to the front edge of the stage."

Yes to all of this -- I can tell it's Linda Holmes without checking and she nails it.

Waiting for the posters who want to tell us all that the show "isn't that deep!" and that it's still fun to pick one of these grotesque humans and root for them to win. Or the poster who though Roman would make a fun dinner guest.

It's all fun and games until the little billionaire sociopaths destroy democracy and get a bunch of people killed. And even then, it's still a game to them.

Why do you even watch if you hate the show and everybody in it so much?

I love the show. I'm not a simpleton who needs all the characters in a story to be likable or sympathetic in order to get something out of the story itself.

Who exactly do you LIKE on the show, and why? I don't mean who do you find funny (I think they can all be quite funny) or whose story you are interested in (I find the story fascinating), I mean who do you actually like as in "I think this is a cool person and I would be friends with them in real life"?

Since you're lecturing me now. You're either making this up or reading far more into peoples' posts here than they're actually saying. I don't think anybody here actually *likes* or "would be friends with" ANY of them, except for maybe Willa and Tom, and even Tom dropped off the "like" list when he revealed his bad side. Nobody, but nobody, here has said they want to "friends" with Shiv or Roman or Kendall or Collin. Sure, one poster thought Roman would be fun to have over to dinner, but even that was because he's amusing to listen to, not because "I want to be BFFs with Roman."

It's a lesser of multiple evils thing, can you see that?

You don't seem to understand the difference between rooting for a character vs. actually "liking" them or "wanting to be friends" with them.

Which makes it strange that you keep coming on to lecture us all about fangirling the characters. I think I'll ignore you from now on.

The only person lecturing is you. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Roman would make a terrible dinner guest, FTR.

Agree that Roman would make an obnoxious dinner guest.

But you can't lob your "Waiting for the posters who want to tell us all that the show "isn't that deep!" and that it's still fun to pick one of these grotesque humans and root for them to win" and pretend you're not up on your high horse again. You seem to think you're the only one who understands the whole point of the show is that these billionaires are screwing the little people. But we all get it.

+ a million

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I personally saw this episode as a possible foreshadowing of 2024 and it made me sick. I was down all night.

+1000, it was horrible

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anybody else catch that there may be some sort of twist with Alaska? They mentioned that it was the last numbers to report (and still hadn't reported at the end of the episode) and it's there that Connor actually had some votes......

I found it absolutely hilarious that Connor actually gave a concession speech. Don't people at his (low) level usually just drop out? Or am I thinking about the primaries. Regardless, his sense of self-importance is a riot. He is so deluded. I loved the wheeling and dealing of the possible ambassadorial positions in the episode last week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR got it exactly right:

"The tension in Succession has always been that everybody knew these people were terrible, but they were also human. They could be, in some moments, kind or funny or even insightful. They could certainly be legitimately in pain. Still terrible people — but rounded-out human characters with stories and arcs. This episode is the one where I think the fundamental point of the entire enterprise is made: Their complicated humanity is genuine but so what? Sad, jealous, hurt, abused, mistreated, conflicted, they are all these things. But they operate upon the wider world as instruments of destruction in the lives of real people, and in this episode, the magnitude of that destruction is pushed right up to the front edge of the stage."

Yes to all of this -- I can tell it's Linda Holmes without checking and she nails it.

Waiting for the posters who want to tell us all that the show "isn't that deep!" and that it's still fun to pick one of these grotesque humans and root for them to win. Or the poster who though Roman would make a fun dinner guest.

It's all fun and games until the little billionaire sociopaths destroy democracy and get a bunch of people killed. And even then, it's still a game to them.

Why do you even watch if you hate the show and everybody in it so much?

I love the show. I'm not a simpleton who needs all the characters in a story to be likable or sympathetic in order to get something out of the story itself.

Who exactly do you LIKE on the show, and why? I don't mean who do you find funny (I think they can all be quite funny) or whose story you are interested in (I find the story fascinating), I mean who do you actually like as in "I think this is a cool person and I would be friends with them in real life"?

Since you're lecturing me now. You're either making this up or reading far more into peoples' posts here than they're actually saying. I don't think anybody here actually *likes* or "would be friends with" ANY of them, except for maybe Willa and Tom, and even Tom dropped off the "like" list when he revealed his bad side. Nobody, but nobody, here has said they want to "friends" with Shiv or Roman or Kendall or Collin. Sure, one poster thought Roman would be fun to have over to dinner, but even that was because he's amusing to listen to, not because "I want to be BFFs with Roman."

It's a lesser of multiple evils thing, can you see that?

You don't seem to understand the difference between rooting for a character vs. actually "liking" them or "wanting to be friends" with them.

Which makes it strange that you keep coming on to lecture us all about fangirling the characters. I think I'll ignore you from now on.

The only person lecturing is you. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Roman would make a terrible dinner guest, FTR.

Agree that Roman would make an obnoxious dinner guest.

But you can't lob your "Waiting for the posters who want to tell us all that the show "isn't that deep!" and that it's still fun to pick one of these grotesque humans and root for them to win" and pretend you're not up on your high horse again. You seem to think you're the only one who understands the whole point of the show is that these billionaires are screwing the little people. But we all get it.

I'm asserting a point of view, not lecturing. If you feel implicated, defend yourself. I'm not going to apologize for criticizing or looking down on people who, in my opinion, watch this show in a naive way. It's what I think.

DP. Ugh. You think you're the only one who truly gets it and the rest of us are naive.

You're deluded. You don't have a monopoly on interpretation and exegesis. You're not the only sophisticate here, even if you're the only one who repeatedly nominates herself for the honor. It's not rocket science to see the show is about the general suckiness of billionaires and politicians. Of course the rest of us get it. Only in your fevered imagination does anybody want to be "friends" with Roman or any of the others. We're just able to have a little fun on the way, even those of us who loathed the previous administration. True sophistication is the ability to see complexity and degrees of awfulness.

Here's a question for you. Do you think Hollywood ever, ever runs a show where the only goal is to lecture viewers? As you're doing?

Applause. Honestly, I love discussing this show, but the PP/ST just ruins it, every time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR got it exactly right:

"The tension in Succession has always been that everybody knew these people were terrible, but they were also human. They could be, in some moments, kind or funny or even insightful. They could certainly be legitimately in pain. Still terrible people — but rounded-out human characters with stories and arcs. This episode is the one where I think the fundamental point of the entire enterprise is made: Their complicated humanity is genuine but so what? Sad, jealous, hurt, abused, mistreated, conflicted, they are all these things. But they operate upon the wider world as instruments of destruction in the lives of real people, and in this episode, the magnitude of that destruction is pushed right up to the front edge of the stage."

Yes to all of this -- I can tell it's Linda Holmes without checking and she nails it.

Waiting for the posters who want to tell us all that the show "isn't that deep!" and that it's still fun to pick one of these grotesque humans and root for them to win. Or the poster who though Roman would make a fun dinner guest.

It's all fun and games until the little billionaire sociopaths destroy democracy and get a bunch of people killed. And even then, it's still a game to them.

Why do you even watch if you hate the show and everybody in it so much?

I love the show. I'm not a simpleton who needs all the characters in a story to be likable or sympathetic in order to get something out of the story itself.

Who exactly do you LIKE on the show, and why? I don't mean who do you find funny (I think they can all be quite funny) or whose story you are interested in (I find the story fascinating), I mean who do you actually like as in "I think this is a cool person and I would be friends with them in real life"?

Since you're lecturing me now. You're either making this up or reading far more into peoples' posts here than they're actually saying. I don't think anybody here actually *likes* or "would be friends with" ANY of them, except for maybe Willa and Tom, and even Tom dropped off the "like" list when he revealed his bad side. Nobody, but nobody, here has said they want to "friends" with Shiv or Roman or Kendall or Collin. Sure, one poster thought Roman would be fun to have over to dinner, but even that was because he's amusing to listen to, not because "I want to be BFFs with Roman."

It's a lesser of multiple evils thing, can you see that?

You don't seem to understand the difference between rooting for a character vs. actually "liking" them or "wanting to be friends" with them.

Which makes it strange that you keep coming on to lecture us all about fangirling the characters. I think I'll ignore you from now on.

Brand NP. You guys don't really sound like you're disagreeing with each other, but you, immediate pp, seem to be reading much more negativity and judgement into pp's posts than is actually there?

DP. If you're new here, then perhaps you haven't read the pages of posts by the bolded PP, lecturing others about how vapid and shallow they are, and how they just couldn't possibly *truly understand* what the show is actually about, blah blah blah. She returns after each episode to write verbose "analysis" of the episode, gives her thoughts about what might happen, and then shoots down anyone else who dares to offer their opinion. She's really... something, to put it generously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought this was a dumb episode. I think this season is bad. The writers are doing some sort of weird fantasy reenactment of 2020 but it pulled me out of the world of the show and they didn’t say anything worthwhile about it anyway.

I found it to be both boring and stressful at the same time. So wordy (as usual), so much back and forth - this episode was not one of my favorites. It was exhausting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I am very anti “shiv is going to abort!” because I think it’s a huge reach and there is like 1-2 posters obsessed with that idea who keep talking about it.
BUT!
Two episodes left and shiv has only told Tom so far (who didn’t even seem to believe her). And it seems each episode only lasts a day (or two). Which means the series will end way before Shivs due date.
I could totally see the end of her arc being that she either leaves Tom/ leaves her entire family (or is kicked out), aborts, and goes off somewhere alone.
Or, commits suicide. She took some big blows this season.

I don’t think it’s realistic to end the series with a main character being pregnant and not having the pregnancy be resolved either by a baby being born or by the pregnancy ending. It’s not a neat closure otherwise. I think the series will somehow need to complete her pregnancy arch- either by shiv having the baby, miscarrying, aborting, or committing suicide.

You criticize those of us who have suggested Shiv will abort, and then you suggest that it's quite possible she aborts.

[Anonymous]

I think the ending will be something like The Sopranos - we won't really find out what happens and it'll be left to our imaginations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the ending will be something like The Sopranos - we won't really find out what happens and it'll be left to our imaginations.

But people hated the Sopranos ending so much. I don’t think another showrunner would do that to the fans.

[Anonymous]

If Shiv doesn’t terminate, I think we’ll see a flash forward of a nanny taking care of her baby. Just like the Roy kids were raised by nannies.

It’s too bad Connor and Willa aren’t the ones having a child - I actually think they’d be doting parents, especially Connor who never received love or attention from his own parents.

[Anonymous]

This was the best written episode of the season so far.

[Anonymous]

I don’t really care what happens to Shiv’s baby, and I doubt they will spend much time on this plot point.