Handmaid’s Tale season 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Samira Wiley’s performance was so strong that I wish they’d gone deeper into her story with her girlfriend in Canada and the aide organization rather than reverse engineering old drama between Luke, June, and Moira.

I don’t care about the GF but agree SW was wonderful. The old drama was dumb and unnecessarily dilated the storyline. Could have been compressed to 1/2 the allotted screen time so we could have seen more action elsewhere. I think this may have been the single worst written episode of the series.

I loved Moira always, but this episode was exceptional. Also, Samira Wiley and her wife just had a baby!

I was so mad that June stole that pitcher. I think that it shows her pettiness at times.

I thought that the pitcher stealing scene actually showed that she really valued her times with Moira.

I really hated the flashbacks in this episode. Dumb, petty, who cares. The convo on the steps with Luke and the baby Hannah flashback would have sufficed perfectly well. Give Moira something better to do.

I think the flashbacks were important to show why June was vehemently against going to Canada. Luke was the one who wanted a baby desperately, and Moira had put the idea in June’s head that she alone wasn’t enough for him, without a baby. Luke and Moira had both complained about June remaining in Gilead, but the truth is they both played a part in that decision.

This is all a new plant because a) there is zero inherent conflict with Luke and b) they need conflict to make it interesting

June sent that tape telling Luke that Nicole's father was Nick and that she loved both Luke and Nick.

Yes, and yet Luke was totally chill and started raising the child of June and Nick. So....zerio conflictio

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought this episode was drawn out too, and it seemed like June was a bit psychotic.

I thought the behavior of the CERA humanitarian people (Canadians) was spot on. You know, we are devoting our lives to helping "you" but when one of "you" are actually in front of us needing your life saved, we would sooner throw you overboard than actually get off our butts to try to do something to help you. This is like so many "humanitarians" I've met in real life. No no, let us coldly calculate the cost-benefits of helping you.

What they said was true though, they could help one person or thousands. BTDT.

As it seemed, with very minimal effort, they did both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Samira Wiley’s performance was so strong that I wish they’d gone deeper into her story with her girlfriend in Canada and the aide organization rather than reverse engineering old drama between Luke, June, and Moira.

I don’t care about the GF but agree SW was wonderful. The old drama was dumb and unnecessarily dilated the storyline. Could have been compressed to 1/2 the allotted screen time so we could have seen more action elsewhere. I think this may have been the single worst written episode of the series.

I loved Moira always, but this episode was exceptional. Also, Samira Wiley and her wife just had a baby!

I was so mad that June stole that pitcher. I think that it shows her pettiness at times.

I thought that the pitcher stealing scene actually showed that she really valued her times with Moira.

I really hated the flashbacks in this episode. Dumb, petty, who cares. The convo on the steps with Luke and the baby Hannah flashback would have sufficed perfectly well. Give Moira something better to do.

I think the flashbacks were important to show why June was vehemently against going to Canada. Luke was the one who wanted a baby desperately, and Moira had put the idea in June’s head that she alone wasn’t enough for him, without a baby. Luke and Moira had both complained about June remaining in Gilead, but the truth is they both played a part in that decision.

This is all a new plant because a) there is zero inherent conflict with Luke and b) they need conflict to make it interesting

June sent that tape telling Luke that Nicole's father was Nick and that she loved both Luke and Nick.

Yes, and yet Luke was totally chill and started raising the child of June and Nick. So....zerio conflictio

Every significant relationship in HT features conflict. It’s one of the central themes of the show.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought this episode was drawn out too, and it seemed like June was a bit psychotic.

I thought the behavior of the CERA humanitarian people (Canadians) was spot on. You know, we are devoting our lives to helping "you" but when one of "you" are actually in front of us needing your life saved, we would sooner throw you overboard than actually get off our butts to try to do something to help you. This is like so many "humanitarians" I've met in real life. No no, let us coldly calculate the cost-benefits of helping you.

What they said was true though, they could help one person or thousands. BTDT.

As it seemed, with very minimal effort, they did both.

Well we don’t know because the argument they were making is that once it was discovered that they snuck someone in, they wouldn’t be allowed back for humanitarian work. I guess that assumes that Canada wouldn’t conceal how she got there. I mean I guess the Canadians had a manifest list? I can’t believe they weren’t fooled by the printed out ID.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has this already been covered?

Was Janine really with June during the blast? Or was June just imagining her there because they had been through so much together.

I think she was there. And as bummed as I was to lose Alma, this was a good move on the writers/showrunner's part. Tightens up the story and adds a new angle.

But speaking of hallucinations, I listened to a podcast where one of the commentators thought the Nick/June scene on the bridge was a hallucination - the light was all dreamy, it seemed out of sequence, etc. I don't know if I buy that, BUT I really need an explanation of who Nick really is in Gilead. He was supposedly Waterford's driver, but was clearly much more than that. Now he's a pretty high-ranking commander. Like, I need some backstory on that.

Kinda hoping to see Agent Truello (or whatever his name is) debriefing June in the next episode. You're going down Waterfords.

I think Nick is a double agent working for the Americans.

Oh, I hope this is right. I really, really want Nick to turn out to be a good guy.

I actually presumed this all along. It never occurred to me that he was loyal to Gilead. I always thought he was a resistance spy.

I always thought he was pretty apolitical. He was kind of wayward when younger, wasn't he, and then taken in and mentored by that older guy? It seemed more like survival or just taking the only path open, but a fundamentally decent guy so didn't buy into the Gilead ideology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has this already been covered?

Was Janine really with June during the blast? Or was June just imagining her there because they had been through so much together.

I think she was there. And as bummed as I was to lose Alma, this was a good move on the writers/showrunner's part. Tightens up the story and adds a new angle.

But speaking of hallucinations, I listened to a podcast where one of the commentators thought the Nick/June scene on the bridge was a hallucination - the light was all dreamy, it seemed out of sequence, etc. I don't know if I buy that, BUT I really need an explanation of who Nick really is in Gilead. He was supposedly Waterford's driver, but was clearly much more than that. Now he's a pretty high-ranking commander. Like, I need some backstory on that.

Kinda hoping to see Agent Truello (or whatever his name is) debriefing June in the next episode. You're going down Waterfords.

I think Nick is a double agent working for the Americans.

Oh, I hope this is right. I really, really want Nick to turn out to be a good guy.

I actually presumed this all along. It never occurred to me that he was loyal to Gilead. I always thought he was a resistance spy.

I always thought he was pretty apolitical. He was kind of wayward when younger, wasn't he, and then taken in and mentored by that older guy? It seemed more like survival or just taking the only path open, but a fundamentally decent guy so didn't buy into the Gilead ideology.


This was my take as well.

[Anonymous]

Nick just proves the concept that not all bad men appear to be monsters. He’s just as bad as all the other Gillead supporters. He’s done some terrible things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nick just proves the concept that not all bad men appear to be monsters. He’s just as bad as all the other Gillead supporters. He’s done some terrible things.

But he could be playing the long game. Staying in it and moving up as high as possible to blow Gilead apart. He couldn’t do that if he just fled to Canada.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nick just proves the concept that not all bad men appear to be monsters. He’s just as bad as all the other Gillead supporters. He’s done some terrible things.

But he could be playing the long game. Staying in it and moving up as high as possible to blow Gilead apart. He couldn’t do that if he just fled to Canada.

I agree. Sometimes the game is dirty. Collateral damage, so to speak. But I really like this theory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nick just proves the concept that not all bad men appear to be monsters. He’s just as bad as all the other Gillead supporters. He’s done some terrible things.

But he could be playing the long game. Staying in it and moving up as high as possible to blow Gilead apart. He couldn’t do that if he just fled to Canada.

Sure he could he but nothing on screen or in his back story point to that

[Anonymous]

Nick being a good guy is wishful thinking. At what point do you imagine he turned spy — before or after he killed Americans and overthrew his own government? I think it’s clear he loves June and regrets his role in creating and maintaining Gilead, but let’s not forget that he was a Gilead soldier long before there was a Gilead. If this show suddenly decides to say “Oh, he was a plant from even before the rebellion,” I will lose it because it’s so very unrealistic and just pandering to viewers who want to think the cute enemy soldier really is a good guy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nick being a good guy is wishful thinking. At what point do you imagine he turned spy — before or after he killed Americans and overthrew his own government? I think it’s clear he loves June and regrets his role in creating and maintaining Gilead, but let’s not forget that he was a Gilead soldier long before there was a Gilead. If this show suddenly decides to say “Oh, he was a plant from even before the rebellion,” I will lose it because it’s so very unrealistic and just pandering to viewers who want to think the cute enemy soldier really is a good guy.

I think that Nick was very malleable and apathetic when he was younger. He wanted money to take care of his family, and joined the “cause” in order to do that- a soldier for hire. Once he was in there was no getting out. I hope that his relationship with June changed him. Obviously she sees something more than a moral void in him. I don’t think the show in general presents people as just good or bad, though; most of the characters are morally complicated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nick being a good guy is wishful thinking. At what point do you imagine he turned spy — before or after he killed Americans and overthrew his own government? I think it’s clear he loves June and regrets his role in creating and maintaining Gilead, but let’s not forget that he was a Gilead soldier long before there was a Gilead. If this show suddenly decides to say “Oh, he was a plant from even before the rebellion,” I will lose it because it’s so very unrealistic and just pandering to viewers who want to think the cute enemy soldier really is a good guy.

I think that Nick was very malleable and apathetic when he was younger. He wanted money to take care of his family, and joined the “cause” in order to do that- a soldier for hire. Once he was in there was no getting out. I hope that his relationship with June changed him. Obviously she sees something more than a moral void in him. I don’t think the show in general presents people as just good or bad, though; most of the characters are morally complicated.

I think there are a lot of identity issues in play as well. Everyone has been brainwashed and manipulated, stripped down to nothing but what Gilead had made them.

Lydia stands out. I don’t think she particularly enjoys her role, but she’s good at it and it’s her identity. What other choice does she have? There is so much psychologically at play, too (Stockholm Syndrome, etc.) What would she do if she left? How difficult would reintegration be, especially considering her past. This sort of forced moral complexity is so interesting to watch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Samira Wiley’s performance was so strong that I wish they’d gone deeper into her story with her girlfriend in Canada and the aide organization rather than reverse engineering old drama between Luke, June, and Moira.

I don’t care about the GF but agree SW was wonderful. The old drama was dumb and unnecessarily dilated the storyline. Could have been compressed to 1/2 the allotted screen time so we could have seen more action elsewhere. I think this may have been the single worst written episode of the series.

I loved Moira always, but this episode was exceptional. Also, Samira Wiley and her wife just had a baby!

I was so mad that June stole that pitcher. I think that it shows her pettiness at times.

I thought that the pitcher stealing scene actually showed that she really valued her times with Moira.

I really hated the flashbacks in this episode. Dumb, petty, who cares. The convo on the steps with Luke and the baby Hannah flashback would have sufficed perfectly well. Give Moira something better to do.

I think the flashbacks were important to show why June was vehemently against going to Canada. Luke was the one who wanted a baby desperately, and Moira had put the idea in June’s head that she alone wasn’t enough for him, without a baby. Luke and Moira had both complained about June remaining in Gilead, but the truth is they both played a part in that decision.

This is all a new plant because a) there is zero inherent conflict with Luke and b) they need conflict to make it interesting

Eh, I don't know about that entirely. Someone else will remember it better, but Luke's first wife not being able to have a child has definitely been brought up before. And there were a couple of other things that kind of made you go "hm" about Luke. When they cut off women's bank accounts he kind of blew it off. And there was definitely the sense that they waited until much too late to leave the US with Hannah. I think there's a lot of potential for conflict and conflicting feelings. There's been a lot of trauma and a lot of time gone by.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nick being a good guy is wishful thinking. At what point do you imagine he turned spy — before or after he killed Americans and overthrew his own government? I think it’s clear he loves June and regrets his role in creating and maintaining Gilead, but let’s not forget that he was a Gilead soldier long before there was a Gilead. If this show suddenly decides to say “Oh, he was a plant from even before the rebellion,” I will lose it because it’s so very unrealistic and just pandering to viewers who want to think the cute enemy soldier really is a good guy.

I think that Nick was very malleable and apathetic when he was younger. He wanted money to take care of his family, and joined the “cause” in order to do that- a soldier for hire. Once he was in there was no getting out. I hope that his relationship with June changed him. Obviously she sees something more than a moral void in him. I don’t think the show in general presents people as just good or bad, though; most of the characters are morally complicated.

I think there are a lot of identity issues in play as well. Everyone has been brainwashed and manipulated, stripped down to nothing but what Gilead had made them.

Lydia stands out. I don’t think she particularly enjoys her role, but she’s good at it and it’s her identity. What other choice does she have? There is so much psychologically at play, too (Stockholm Syndrome, etc.) What would she do if she left? How difficult would reintegration be, especially considering her past. This sort of forced moral complexity is so interesting to watch.

I feel like we are all going to be disappointed in Nick's end story unless a lot more is revealed during the rest of this season. They started out strong with implying Nick had some contact with Mayday (he was hiding June at the Boston Globe), but it's really dropped off since then.

I don't think he's a bad guy, but perhaps like Luke, is a passive guy. I don't know.

Lydia is an interesting one. I don't think she is at all motivated by a sense of purpose around Gilead. Maybe initially. She wants power. And no spoilers, but her origin story in the show is very different from her origin story in the Testaments. So her fate could be anything.