This Is Us

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I adore Randall, but I don't like his wife. She seems a little cold and way too serious. That was rude and bitchy how she asked Kevin to leave after a few days.

You don't think she is completely stressed with an almost, new pregnancy and dying long-lost FIL? Why would she have to be flexible with a millionaire, semi-babied, BIL who while charming, sucks up a lot of air?

I had to pause the show because I was laughing too hard to hear anything during the breakfast scene -- Randall made the shake, Kevin was a completely oblivious ass, and then after Randall and his wife obsessively cleaned everything up, Kevin walks over and put his bowl on the counter for the cleaning fairy to wash. I have a relative who does that, and it drives me absolutely nuts. Could not stop laughing at that touch of reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was interesting seeing the glimpses of Rebecca and jack's childhoods. And the scene of jack's father immigrating was so unexpected for this show. It fits though. Tied in so beautifully with the painting and his theory that the time is no matter. That it's all the same time, or that differences in time are so much closer than we think.

I think that was Jack's grandfather

I liked that a lot and liked the idea that they left themselves open to branch way up and out for some story arcs.

I know its beating a dead horse but they totally confirmed they got the challenger timing wrong unless they skipped grades. Because they were conceived at the steeler's 4th superbowl win- 1980.

Didn't they also win in 1979, though?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was interesting seeing the glimpses of Rebecca and jack's childhoods. And the scene of jack's father immigrating was so unexpected for this show. It fits though. Tied in so beautifully with the painting and his theory that the time is no matter. That it's all the same time, or that differences in time are so much closer than we think.

I think that was Jack's grandfather

I liked that a lot and liked the idea that they left themselves open to branch way up and out for some story arcs.

I know its beating a dead horse but they totally confirmed they got the challenger timing wrong unless they skipped grades. Because they were conceived at the steeler's 4th superbowl win- 1980.

Didn't they also win in 1979, though?

They did but the game shown at the bar was Steelers v. Rams that was 1980, not Steelers v. Cowboys in 1979.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was interesting seeing the glimpses of Rebecca and jack's childhoods. And the scene of jack's father immigrating was so unexpected for this show. It fits though. Tied in so beautifully with the painting and his theory that the time is no matter. That it's all the same time, or that differences in time are so much closer than we think.

I think that was Jack's grandfather

I liked that a lot and liked the idea that they left themselves open to branch way up and out for some story arcs.

I know its beating a dead horse but they totally confirmed they got the challenger timing wrong unless they skipped grades. Because they were conceived at the steeler's 4th superbowl win- 1980.

Didn't they also win in 1979, though?

They did but the game shown at the bar was Steelers v. Rams that was 1980, not Steelers v. Cowboys in 1979.

There was also a reference during the show about it being 1980 in the flashback, but now I can't recall what the reference was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was interesting seeing the glimpses of Rebecca and jack's childhoods. And the scene of jack's father immigrating was so unexpected for this show. It fits though. Tied in so beautifully with the painting and his theory that the time is no matter. That it's all the same time, or that differences in time are so much closer than we think.

I think that was Jack's grandfather

I liked that a lot and liked the idea that they left themselves open to branch way up and out for some story arcs.

I know its beating a dead horse but they totally confirmed they got the challenger timing wrong unless they skipped grades. Because they were conceived at the steeler's 4th superbowl win- 1980.

Didn't they also win in 1979, though?

They did but the game shown at the bar was Steelers v. Rams that was 1980, not Steelers v. Cowboys in 1979.

There was also a reference during the show about it being 1980 in the flashback, but now I can't recall what the reference was.

But have we had confirmation yet that the series is taking place right now, in 2016?

[Anonymous]

On the Challenger thing, if the kids were conceived in January 1980, then they were born in late Sept. 1980. So they are 36 in 2016.

The kids likely would have entered kindergarten at age 4 (bc back then the deadline was a calendar year), in 1985. Which would put them in K in January 1986. So yeah, the writers totally messed up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was interesting seeing the glimpses of Rebecca and jack's childhoods. And the scene of jack's father immigrating was so unexpected for this show. It fits though. Tied in so beautifully with the painting and his theory that the time is no matter. That it's all the same time, or that differences in time are so much closer than we think.

I think that was Jack's grandfather

I liked that a lot and liked the idea that they left themselves open to branch way up and out for some story arcs.

I know its beating a dead horse but they totally confirmed they got the challenger timing wrong unless they skipped grades. Because they were conceived at the steeler's 4th superbowl win- 1980.

Didn't they also win in 1979, though?

They did but the game shown at the bar was Steelers v. Rams that was 1980, not Steelers v. Cowboys in 1979.

There was also a reference during the show about it being 1980 in the flashback, but now I can't recall what the reference was.

But have we had confirmation yet that the series is taking place right now, in 2016?

There have been references to Hamilton and Deadpool so it has to be 2016.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was interesting seeing the glimpses of Rebecca and jack's childhoods. And the scene of jack's father immigrating was so unexpected for this show. It fits though. Tied in so beautifully with the painting and his theory that the time is no matter. That it's all the same time, or that differences in time are so much closer than we think.

I think that was Jack's grandfather

I liked that a lot and liked the idea that they left themselves open to branch way up and out for some story arcs.

I know its beating a dead horse but they totally confirmed they got the challenger timing wrong unless they skipped grades. Because they were conceived at the steeler's 4th superbowl win- 1980.

Didn't they also win in 1979, though?

They did but the game shown at the bar was Steelers v. Rams that was 1980, not Steelers v. Cowboys in 1979.

There was also a reference during the show about it being 1980 in the flashback, but now I can't recall what the reference was.

But have we had confirmation yet that the series is taking place right now, in 2016?

Don't believe so, but I think it's implicit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On the Challenger thing, if the kids were conceived in January 1980, then they were born in late Sept. 1980. So they are 36 in 2016.

The kids likely would have entered kindergarten at age 4 (bc back then the deadline was a calendar year), in 1985. Which would put them in K in January 1986. So yeah, the writers totally messed up.

I really like the show but the writing does seem a bit sloppy. There was one line from this week''s episode that bothered me. During the flashback scene when Miguel and Jack are sitting at the bar and Miguel asks Jack if Rebecca not wanting kids is a "deal breaker." To me, that sounds like how people talk in 2016, not 1980. Of course, I was a toddler back then so I don't know exactly how people spoke in 1980 but that phrase doesn't seem like something people said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On the Challenger thing, if the kids were conceived in January 1980, then they were born in late Sept. 1980. So they are 36 in 2016.

The kids likely would have entered kindergarten at age 4 (bc back then the deadline was a calendar year), in 1985. Which would put them in K in January 1986. So yeah, the writers totally messed up.

I really like the show but the writing does seem a bit sloppy. There was one line from this week''s episode that bothered me. During the flashback scene when Miguel and Jack are sitting at the bar and Miguel asks Jack if Rebecca not wanting kids is a "deal breaker." To me, that sounds like how people talk in 2016, not 1980. Of course, I was a toddler back then so I don't know exactly how people spoke in 1980 but that phrase doesn't seem like something people said.

yeah i thought the same thing re:dealbreaker but thought am i just looking for them to mess up historical references. i am spoiled by mad men over analysis. i remember once joan, i think used the phrase "it is what it is".

[Anonymous]

I agree with the older dialogue being too modern. AND the biggest anachronism for me was 1) Miguel & wife's talking about their kids. I just feel like that is more typical of modern parenting. My impression of my parents and friends' parents is that they were so much more relaxed. 2) leads me into this idea for me that it was a little unbelievable/exaggerated for Rebecca to not want kids. I mean, maybe her childhood was way more messed up than we know yet. But I just think for a lot of people back then it was more a given, and it wasn't so life altering because the expectation/parenting standard wasn't set so high, as we set for ourselves now.

I'm willing to let it go a little bc it's just her character and part of the story. And maybe I just have to think of her like Sally Draper grown up. The one thing I just can't let go is that she is already married. I don't imagine Sally married at 30 and fighting over having kids or not.

Anyone else catch on to what I'm trying to say?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On the Challenger thing, if the kids were conceived in January 1980, then they were born in late Sept. 1980. So they are 36 in 2016.

The kids likely would have entered kindergarten at age 4 (bc back then the deadline was a calendar year), in 1985. Which would put them in K in January 1986. So yeah, the writers totally messed up.

I really like the show but the writing does seem a bit sloppy. There was one line from this week''s episode that bothered me. During the flashback scene when Miguel and Jack are sitting at the bar and Miguel asks Jack if Rebecca not wanting kids is a "deal breaker." To me, that sounds like how people talk in 2016, not 1980. Of course, I was a toddler back then so I don't know exactly how people spoke in 1980 but that phrase doesn't seem like something people said.

I was a teenager in 1980 and definitely heard the term "deal breaker" then. It was a couple of years later, but there was some early episode of Cheers where I remember Sam and Diane arguing about something being a "deal breaker."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was interesting seeing the glimpses of Rebecca and jack's childhoods. And the scene of jack's father immigrating was so unexpected for this show. It fits though. Tied in so beautifully with the painting and his theory that the time is no matter. That it's all the same time, or that differences in time are so much closer than we think.

I think that was Jack's grandfather

I liked that a lot and liked the idea that they left themselves open to branch way up and out for some story arcs.

I know its beating a dead horse but they totally confirmed they got the challenger timing wrong unless they skipped grades. Because they were conceived at the steeler's 4th superbowl win- 1980.

Didn't they also win in 1979, though?

They did but the game shown at the bar was Steelers v. Rams that was 1980, not Steelers v. Cowboys in 1979.

There was also a reference during the show about it being 1980 in the flashback, but now I can't recall what the reference was.

They reference that Bradshaw "has 3 rings" when she was getting into football and calling him a bum. So it was the 79-80 season. Again, this is SO not a big deal and I would gladly suspend belief on it because I don;t need every single thing to be accurate in a show, but its still true.

But have we had confirmation yet that the series is taking place right now, in 2016?

There have been references to Hamilton and Deadpool so it has to be 2016.

[Anonymous]

Binge-watched this show today while WFH. Can't get it off my mind!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree with the older dialogue being too modern. AND the biggest anachronism for me was 1) Miguel & wife's talking about their kids. I just feel like that is more typical of modern parenting. My impression of my parents and friends' parents is that they were so much more relaxed. 2) leads me into this idea for me that it was a little unbelievable/exaggerated for Rebecca to not want kids. I mean, maybe her childhood was way more messed up than we know yet. But I just think for a lot of people back then it was more a given, and it wasn't so life altering because the expectation/parenting standard wasn't set so high, as we set for ourselves now.

I'm willing to let it go a little bc it's just her character and part of the story. And maybe I just have to think of her like Sally Draper grown up. The one thing I just can't let go is that she is already married. I don't imagine Sally married at 30 and fighting over having kids or not.

Anyone else catch on to what I'm trying to say?

Yes I get it. Some of the storyline conflicts feel more contrived than other ones. This is one of the more contrived. Its also difficult to sustain audience interest in flash backs, so they are ramping up the conflict to lay the foundation for the modern story as we see it unfold. Its a little clumsy.