fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #6737 ]

[ SECRET POST #6737 ]

⌈ Secret Post #6737 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 32 secrets from Secret Submission Post #964.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

04. https://i.imgur.com/9YAAV0Q.png

you are me, i am you, i agree with you 100000% GOD i was so disappointed in s2

Yeah, sadly season 2 wasn't as good

Sometimes I look at the debates in the comments and wonder, what the hell is wrong with these people? And then I see a secret like this one, and it's like, "Oohhhh, right."

Care to elaborate? I'm confused about what you're trying to say.

nayrt but same. Haven't watched season 2, however.

I think I get it. The secrets and discussion here about this show have kind of made me, uh...doubt the collective intelligence and maturity of the comm. It's not an especially subtle story, and yet it goes right over the heads of a lot of people here, because all they can see is the ICKY SEX, which apparently the showrunners must support and want people to see as good, because why else would they write about it?

Just because someone doesn't like the season or a certain plot pint doesn't mean they don't understand it.

I mean, OP clearly doesn't understand it if they think it was a manifesto about open relationships.

Not OP, but season 2 wasn't as interesting to me because I disliked the pacing and resolutions. AND I didn't like "the icky sex" or more like I was really done with Mark/Helly story, it was just highly boring to me. I don't want to see them.
I liked some moments and episodes. But on the whole? I didn't like it as much as season 1.

I see why the secret comes across that way, but I don't think the show is "about" open relationships. It just started to FEEL that way because of the focus in the 2nd half of S2. It's true, I didn't like the ICKY SEX, but I don't think the showrunners meant it as a "good" thing . Except maybe as a hook to pull in viewers.

As AIRT said, the show is not subtle, and kept hammering the same point with each one of the Innies, at the expense of other plotlines that interested me more - Cobel's backstory in the abandoned company town, Milchick dealing with racism at Lumon, and Ricken tempted to sell out for a fat payday.

Like another anon said, I'm bored with Mark's love life.

(I am anon who is bored with Mark/Helly). I was so frustrated by abandoned plotlines! Maybe they will circle back to them in season 3 and I am wrong, but I am not holding my breath. Milchik storyline could have been so damn good! I kinda hated Cobel's episode but I still want to learn more about this part of world building. I wanted to learn about the whole Irving's deal.

I never finished season 2. It had such a different feel and pacing and I just completely lost interest.

I'm baffled by this take. I thought season 2 was fantastic.

I completely disagree. Season two was expanding on what the practice of severance really means: creating an entirely new person, with their own personality, and their desires and hopes and fears, who inhabits your body and that you expect to be able to use and extinguish at will. The point of having them form relationships, and of contrasting their relationships with those of the outies, was to highlight a different dimension of the cruelty inherent in it all. It's an expansion of a major theme from the first season, not a departure from it.

I don't think the second season was written as tightly as the first, but it had something more cogent to say than you're giving it credit for.

Yes, 100% agree with this.

Yes, I 100% agree with this. Even though I didn't enjoy the relationships, I could see why they were there, and the scene where outie Mark tries to persuade innie Mark to rescue Gemma was the peak of that, to me.

The thing I didn't like in S2 was that they decided to start wildly waving the camera around to indicate tension/stress and I had to have my partner narrate the action to me! I could barely watch the Gemma-centric episode, which was really disappointing to me as a huge Dichen Lachman fan.

IMO one of the main questions posed by S2 is, Are the Innies and Outies separate people? My takeaway is no, they're not. The Innie is a separate consciousness, but they're still aspects of the same person, just with different goals and priorities.

Did I understand the point of S2? Guess not! It wasn't to my taste. That's the secret.

DA

I don't know the show this secret is talking about, but this whole sidethread is making it sound more interesting. Trying to keep people watching media about office politics by branching out into relationship intrigue that some fans will like and other fans will hate has been done to death, IMO.

But now it sounds like they dug so far into people having multiple personalities that the main person fronting is at odds with what some of their own alters get them into, romantically? That sounds ... less explored, at least.

The show is about a technology that allows you to split off a part of your consciousness to do the things that you don't want to do (mainly work, but they show it being used for other things, such as for giving birth). Neither you nor your "innie" has any accessible memory of the other's life. The innie's birth, as far as they are concerned, was the moment they wake up in the office, or wherever it is that they serve their purpose.

Due to the total split, what happens is that people's innies develop totally separate lives from their outies. Their goals, aspirations, and personalities are determined by an environment that they are never allowed to leave, and that their outie never experiences. So, any relationships that the innie forms are without the knowledge of the outie (usually, anyway), which is a whole can of worms on top of the can of worms opened by "severing" in the first place (season one mentions a woman suing because her innie got her pregnant).

AYRT

Oh. Wow. Thanks for explaining.

Hm, on the one hand, that's reminding me a little of the kind of in-person character roleplay that involves voluntarily switching front with the character you mun for. And on the other hand, it's completely not, because you're describing people dissociating from unwanted parts of their life by foisting them on another person whose life consists entirely of that.

Intiguing premise, though.

As other anon explained it's a sci-fi technology making separate personalities. Second season features more romantic relationships than season 1. Not everyone is happy about it

I think if an aspect of a person's consciousness lives an entirely different life, with an entirely different set of memories, and different environmental pressures and influenced acting on them, then in effect they're a separate person, even if they aren't literally separate. That's the dilemma of integration, right? Is it okay to take away the life of the innie and make them instead live out the outie's life, with the understanding that the outie's life has always taken and will always take precedence?

oh no, the story that starts with a man splitting his brain into two consciousnesses so he doesn't have to spend all his time grieving his dead wife has romance?

god y'all are annoying

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #6737 ]

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

OP

Re: OP

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

OP

Re: OP

Re: OP

Re: OP

Re: OP

Re: OP

no subject