Handmaid's Tale Season 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:21:49, I think that’s the point: they aren’t a halfway decent surveillance state. Gilead isn’t very competent. They rely on terror rather than actual loyalty or skill to achieve control of the populace.

Plus, these guardians didn't know they were looking for 50+kids and marthas in the woods. They thought they were looking for one kid, maybe alone, and probably not in the woods at all (more likely held in a house or smuggled into a vehicle).

And no doubt those kids have been subject to very strict discipline since Gilead’s beginning. Spare the rod and all that. It’s no surprise to me they were able to be close to silent.

Especially since they were all girls.

I don’t think they were all girls and it looked like they were mostly a smidge older? So maybe would remember? I guess realistically if Gilead is 5 that would mean 10 or older. Not sure but I definitely didn’t see toddlers.

There were boys and girls and kids of all ages. I think I saw toddler looking kids too. And of course the baby.

[Anonymous]

In June’s flashback, what was happening to the girls with Down syndrome?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In June’s flashback, what was happening to the girls with Down syndrome?

I am guessing nothing good. I kind of assumed they were eliminated.

[Anonymous]

Where was Hannah? I thought she was supposed to be part of this escape plan. Also wondering what happened to all the special needs people in the flashback. Were they killed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where was Hannah? I thought she was supposed to be part of this escape plan. Also wondering what happened to all the special needs people in the flashback. Were they killed?

I suspect they were sent to the colonies, which was the same as eliminating them.

[Anonymous]

June couldn't get Hannah out mostly because Hannah's new Gilead 'family' had moved and June did not know to where.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where was Hannah? I thought she was supposed to be part of this escape plan. Also wondering what happened to all the special needs people in the flashback. Were they killed?

I suspect they were sent to the colonies, which was the same as eliminating them.

Yes, there were being "sorted" into a separate truck and treated in an even more dehumanizing way. Not hard to guess the rest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I liked when she walked in, and Josh Lyman was reading a book to all of the kids. Even curmudgeons have their moments.

He was reading from "Treasure Island." I wonder what the Gilead policy is on children's fiction. I bet they are only supposed to read approved bible stories.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where was Hannah? I thought she was supposed to be part of this escape plan. Also wondering what happened to all the special needs people in the flashback. Were they killed?

I suspect they were sent to the colonies, which was the same as eliminating them.

Yes, there were being "sorted" into a separate truck and treated in an even more dehumanizing way. Not hard to guess the rest.

When June and the rest of the women were herded into the truck, the woman with the brown curly hair who was yelling at the guards was Janine, before they broke her at the Red Center.

And yes, I assume that flashback was to show us why June and the others were justified in killing whoever was necessary to get the kids out (be ruthless). As if we didn't already know already. Showing the Gileadeans killing "innocent" people -- not just unwomen and sinners like June and Emily -- is an additional justification.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where was Hannah? I thought she was supposed to be part of this escape plan. Also wondering what happened to all the special needs people in the flashback. Were they killed?

I suspect they were sent to the colonies, which was the same as eliminating them.

Yes, there were being "sorted" into a separate truck and treated in an even more dehumanizing way. Not hard to guess the rest.

When June and the rest of the women were herded into the truck, the woman with the brown curly hair who was yelling at the guards was Janine, before they broke her at the Red Center.

And yes, I assume that flashback was to show us why June and the others were justified in killing whoever was necessary to get the kids out (be ruthless). As if we didn't already know already. Showing the Gileadeans killing "innocent" people -- not just unwomen and sinners like June and Emily -- is an additional justification.

sorry -- I meant, of course, "unwomen" and "sinners"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I liked when she walked in, and Josh Lyman was reading a book to all of the kids. Even curmudgeons have their moments.

He was reading from "Treasure Island." I wonder what the Gilead policy is on children's fiction. I bet they are only supposed to read approved bible stories.

Great point, I bet that's one reason they were so enthralled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was a good finale but I don’t know why prestige television seems hellbent on making these very dark episodes. It was like listening to a radio show.

I cried at the hanger scenes obviously.

Its a dark show.

No no I meant dark like black. Battle of Winterfell (really GoT in general), this episode. I can’t see what’s happening. I think they get into “movie quality” mode and bleieve everyone will be watching on a giant screen in a perfectly dark room.

Yes, Hulu shows are very dark. I can’t see what’s going on. If I watch on an iPad, I turn the brightness all the way up.

The real problem with the dark shows is that there is so much compression with the signal from Hulu and also HBO, that all of the dark colors sort of blend into one and the picture looks very muddy and has lots of artifacts even on a good TV with the brightness set properly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:21:49, I think that’s the point: they aren’t a halfway decent surveillance state. Gilead isn’t very competent. They rely on terror rather than actual loyalty or skill to achieve control of the populace.

Plus, these guardians didn't know they were looking for 50+kids and marthas in the woods. They thought they were looking for one kid, maybe alone, and probably not in the woods at all (more likely held in a house or smuggled into a vehicle).

And no doubt those kids have been subject to very strict discipline since Gilead’s beginning. Spare the rod and all that. It’s no surprise to me they were able to be close to silent.

Especially since they were all girls.

I don’t think they were all girls and it looked like they were mostly a smidge older? So maybe would remember? I guess realistically if Gilead is 5 that would mean 10 or older. Not sure but I definitely didn’t see toddlers.

The Marthas may have felt more compelled to get the stolen children out vs. the ones who were born in Gilead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:21:49, I think that’s the point: they aren’t a halfway decent surveillance state. Gilead isn’t very competent. They rely on terror rather than actual loyalty or skill to achieve control of the populace.

Plus, these guardians didn't know they were looking for 50+kids and marthas in the woods. They thought they were looking for one kid, maybe alone, and probably not in the woods at all (more likely held in a house or smuggled into a vehicle).

And no doubt those kids have been subject to very strict discipline since Gilead’s beginning. Spare the rod and all that. It’s no surprise to me they were able to be close to silent.

Especially since they were all girls.

I don’t think they were all girls and it looked like they were mostly a smidge older? So maybe would remember? I guess realistically if Gilead is 5 that would mean 10 or older. Not sure but I definitely didn’t see toddlers.

The Marthas may have felt more compelled to get the stolen children out vs. the ones who were born in Gilead.

Also because the stolen children will have stronger grounds for asylum, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:21:49, I think that’s the point: they aren’t a halfway decent surveillance state. Gilead isn’t very competent. They rely on terror rather than actual loyalty or skill to achieve control of the populace.

Plus, these guardians didn't know they were looking for 50+kids and marthas in the woods. They thought they were looking for one kid, maybe alone, and probably not in the woods at all (more likely held in a house or smuggled into a vehicle).

And no doubt those kids have been subject to very strict discipline since Gilead’s beginning. Spare the rod and all that. It’s no surprise to me they were able to be close to silent.

Especially since they were all girls.

I don’t think they were all girls and it looked like they were mostly a smidge older? So maybe would remember? I guess realistically if Gilead is 5 that would mean 10 or older. Not sure but I definitely didn’t see toddlers.

The Marthas may have felt more compelled to get the stolen children out vs. the ones who were born in Gilead.

Also because the stolen children will have stronger grounds for asylum, right?

Children born in Gilead are stolen from their mothers and subject to gender-based oppression, but true that it could help that no bio parents involved to contest. Presumably the baby's bio dad was murdered by the Martha--it will be interesting to see if that comes up again next season.