A couple of weeks ago during a sleepless period of the night, I thought about the series finale of The Leftovers. Something about that episode, specifically Nora’s story, bugged me in the back of my mind. As was stated numerous times after the show ended, Nora’s story was purposefully told via monologue with no visual depictions of the alternate reality so that viewers could decide for themselves if Nora Durst was telling the truth or not.
Her story, even if true, left a whole lot of unanswered questions and enormous plot holes. That’s why I said my initial reaction to the finale was “mildly disappointing.” But there was something else about her story that simply didn’t add up. I put hardly any thought to it at all, but about a week after the episode, it came to me that the time in her story simply doesn’t add up. And when I say time, I mean the actual time of day in her story.
I ended my subscription to HBO Now so I couldn’t revisit the episodes to determine the actual time the departure took place on October 14, 2011. But, the timestamp on Laura Garvey’s ultrasound says 2:23pm. This can be seen in the video here and is also verified by the Leftovers Wiki. In Nora Durst’s story, she says she met a man who was in the local grocery store when every person in it suddenly disappeared. The problem is that this was in Australia and during the middle of the night if it occurred on the same time across the world, which I assume it did. It doesn’t matter what part of Australia she was in when she was departed or teleported over to the alternate reality because it would have been the 4:00am hour over towards Melbourne and Sydney on the east coast (the most likely spot she was at) or the 2:00 hour over towards Perth on the west coast.
The man stating he was at the grocery store and everyone disappearing is rather suspect given that the local grocery store was likely not open at that time and if it was, very few people would have been in it. Of course, the man could have been lying, but frankly, I would have thought better care would have been taken with the writers to take this discrepancy into account.
Maybe my logic is off here and I initially thought it may have been because Nora departs or teleports during the middle of the afternoon and she would indeed be teleported to the same spot in Australia in the alternate reality at the same time in the afternoon, but as I recall, she stated she walked a long time until she found the only inhabited house and that man told her about the grocery store on the day of the departure seven years earlier. Brief research of severalarticles seem to corroborate my memory. Another article mentions that Grace, the woman Kevin Sr. meets in Australia, said that she was in the grocery store when the departure happened. So maybe I’m forgetting or not getting a key aspect of the departure? Like I said, I can’t re-watch it and I don’t feel like looking up any of the transcripts online. I guess I have to let the mystery be.
I got around to seeing Wonder Woman today on Father’s Day and it’s as good as the majority of the reviews stated it is. I found it to be the best DC Comics movie since The Dark Knight, and that’s very good company.
The story is good, the characters are fleshed out enough and it’s an entertaining summer movie. Gal Gadot makes Wonder Woman her own in this film and her quality performance is not surprising. I had first seen her in the Fifth Fast and Furious movie and knew then that she was one to watch. When she was cast as Wonder Woman in Batman V Superman, I was not concerned whereas some others were. Her performance proved me right.
Chris Pine is good, as usual, as is the supporting cast (both in the beginning on Themyscira and in the last half of the movie in the WWI fighting. There’s some great actors and actresses in the bunch, so that was not surprising as well.
The film is also apolitical, something that is very refreshing in this day and age. Men and women are treated as equals in the film and that must drive modern (third wave) feminists nuts. Articles that try to inject politics into the film are simply there to get clicks from their respective audiences and an article I read complaining that the USA is nowhere to be found in the movie when Wonder Woman is an American character, while true, is stupid in its complaint and there to get clicks too.
The actual majority of the complaints about the film I saw was that the villains are not that great. I think these reviewers (and there seemed to be a bunch of them) missed the obvious point (IMO) that the actual villain in the movie is war itself (or “Ares” to Wonder Woman). The horrors of war are adequately depicted in this movie so I found it to be a good villain.
I was concerned about the color palette of the film going into it, as the muted tones in the previous recent DC Comics movies from Zach Snyder is still in use in this movie by Patty Jenkins. The muted tones work well in London and the WWI fighting and provided a nice contrast to the brightness of Princess Diana’s home shown at the beginning of the film.
At 141 minutes, the length reminds me of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, but unlike GGV2, the movie does not feel that long and did not feel as though sections should have been cut. The extra length is due to the Themyscira origins story, a necessary and great section of the film, and that was tightly edited as well.
My only real complaint about the film is the CGI-heavy ending, but it’s a minor complaint and all superhero movies and virtually all action movies do that anyway.
A couple of additional notes:
Wonder Woman raises the bar for Justice League coming out in later November. I previously had lower expectations for the movie, but hopefully Snyder has learned from his two previous DC Comics outings as well as from Jenkins in Wonder Woman because now I assume the expectations are high from most everyone.
Wonder Woman is also responsible for the internet giving us one of the better memes of the past year. Whoever made this after the first trailer came out is quite the funnyman:
I always liked the rainbow flag, also known as the gay pride flag. I don’t know how the rainbow flag was supposed to be interpreted, but to me, the rainbow colors represented inclusiveness for all people, regardless of race, in a nation where identity politics around race often takes a center stage. It seemed like a straightforward flag with virtually no political message at face value. Now we have this abomination from the city of Philadelphia:
The purpose of the black and brown stripes are to “promote inclusivity,” something that I honestly thought the rainbow flag already did. It comes after a year of racial tensions inside a Philly “gayborhood” because one of the gay nightclub owners was recorded saying the n-word repeatedly. So I don’t need my thinking cap on to determine that the black and brown stripes are there to represent black and brown people, even though I’ve never actually seen a person really, truly colored black. Given that red and yellow stripes were already there, that gives one stripe of the major “color” groups unrepresented for those who view everything through a racial lens: white. A friend in archaeology once described himself as so white he was actually translucent, so I would argue that both a white and translucent stripe are needed given the brown and black stripes.
But we all know hell will freeze over before that happens. In fact, people on the left who read this blog post now have their pitchforks out to stab my obviously racist ass, even though I consider myself to be far from it. That’s what the left’s identity politics has done – anyone who disagrees with anyone on the left in any way for any reason is automatically a racist worse than Hitler. Plus, I’m inherently racist, by definition, regardless of what I say or do just by being white according to the left. In my mind, the rejection of the left’s bullshit identity politics are high up on the list of reasons why a clown like Trump won the Presidential election, not far behind the number 1 reason of the DNC nominating an even bigger clown like Hillary Clinton as the competition.
This identity politics has caused quite the expansion of the LGB acronym over the past several years. At some point it became LGBT and I assume the T stands for transgender. Then it became LGBTQ, then LGBTQIA and at that point some people started shortening it to LGB+ or LGBT+. I even see LGBTQIAPK as an acronym and I readily admit I have no clue what the letters stand for starting with Q, nor that I will take the five seconds to look it up. There’s even “cis” or “CIS” (I have no idea if it’s an acronym or not), which contextual clues lead me to believe is an insult to be hurled at straight white males like me. But, really, I have no clue. Whatever happened to unity? Why are Democrats purposely dividing everyone? This division by Democrats is the reason why that predominantly gay neighborhood in Philadelphia is referred to as a “gayborhood.” Why can’t it simply be called a neighborhood like any other neighborhood?
Looks Great! Now overlay black and brown or else you’re a RACIST like HItler!
Every once in a while, I read a comment from someone on the right stating something to the effect of “Reminder: Trump is the first POTUS to be pro-gay rights prior to holding office.” I laugh because it’s funny and it’s funny because it’s true and it’s true because no prior Democratic (or Republican) president was pro-gay rights when entering office. They hypocrisy of Democrats has always been on full display when it comes to gay rights, just as it is with many other politically hot items. That’s why a member of the oh-so-inclusive gay community got himself recorded saying the n-word repeatedly. (And yea, I’m making an assumption that the club owner who said the n-word multiple times is a democrat. I believe there are republicans who are gay, but the mainstream media has really, really wanted me to believe otherwise for nearly the past decade.)
The hypocrisy is so bad that it would almost be like LGBTQIAPKMNOHJCDEFHJRSUVWXYZ rights champion Steny Hoyer from right here in massively liberal Maryland (with a lesbian daughter), who chanted “Shame! Shame! Shame!” on Republican voters who switched their vote on a pro-LGBTQIAPKMNOHJCDEFHJRSUVWXYZ amendment in 2016 and thereby not allowing it to pass, turning out to have voted “yea” in 1996’s DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act), an act that defined marriage as being only legitimate between a man and a woman.
Anyway, I’m not seeing any information on whether or not the Philadelphia version of the rainbow flag will become the official flag of the gay rights movement, but if there’s one thing that America has been consistent with the past thirty years, it’s dividing and compartmentalizing things more and more. So I suspect it will happen. And don’t get me started on the left’s unimaginable defense of sharia law; that’s a topic for another day.
If you have not seen The Leftovers, I don’t believe that I spoil much, but I suggest not reading this review if you absolutely have to watch something not knowing anything about it beyond the general plot synopsis.
Too often, The Leftovers has contrived sequences and the characters do frustrating things. Some of this can be chalked up to events and actions occurring in a post-rapture world, although it’s never specifically stated it was a rapture that took place in the years prior, suddenly vanishing 2% of the world’s population, until season 3 and only then it was conjecture from an overly religious character. And that was part of my issue with The Leftovers from the beginning – it just assumes that you think the sudden vanishing was the rapture and not something else. But even though the show assumes rapture, it tries to explore it from a scientific standpoint briefly at times (and nothing ever comes of that). As for me if 2% of the world’s population suddenly disappeared, I would first think that we’re living in a virtual reality and the 2% were deleted, either accidentally or intentionally, and if accidentally then we’re living in a dead-end timeline before everything gets restored. If intentionally,well, shit.
As I mentioned before, season 1 of the Leftovers was just good enough to continue watching. A cult known as the Guilty Remnant (GR) played a prominent role in season 1 and this was probably its weakest subplot in the whole series. Why these people act the way they do and how they are able to recruit so many members is never adequately explained. The show simply assumes that the viewer is to understand that people would act this way in a post-rapture world. But is that the way some people would act? It’s a take it or leave it scenario and taking it is a large stretch. They all dress in white, they all chain smoke, and all have taken a vow of silence and do not speak. So, they communicate by writing things down on notepads all the time and this gets pretty tedious at times given that they’re always communicating by writing when they’re not supposed to be communicating. As to why they do all this, it’s not explained. They are able to recruit a few new members by standing outside their houses silently stalking them. And that’s all it takes to recruit new members. Lame. They also do things like break into everybody’s houses and take their family photos and nobody bats an eye, then later when they do something equally lame, everybody in town completely and totally loses their shit.
Also, subplots are brought up, then dead-ended. A couple from season 1 included characters I mentioned in a previous post. The dog-killer states that the leftover dogs are a danger and Kevin helps kill them in his sleep walking, then Kevin later adopts one. That’s it. So are the leftover dogs a danger, or what? How do they figure into the rapture? The other subplot included Aimee, who was living with Kevin and Jill. The reason she was living with them was never explained and at one point there was an odd sexual tension in one scene between Aimee and Kevin. Nothing was ever done with this tension except to have Jill accuse Aimee of fucking her dad (which wasn’t true) to have a fallout occur between the two and get rid of Aimee from the series. The whole thing was pointless and odder still because Aimee is presumably an underage character (she’s in high school) even though the actress is obviously in her 20s. The scene with the odd sexual tension occurs because Aimee appears in the kitchen wearing a see-through shirt. I don’t know current laws with television, but this could be considered child pornography even though the actress is in her 20s because it’s a portrayal of a bare-breasted female child in a semi-sexual manner. But again, the whole thing was pointless, so I don’t know why they did any of it.
But for all of my problems with The Leftovers, the performances from the actors and actresses are top-notch. Justin Theroux (playing Kevin Garvey) and Carrie Coon (playing Nora Durst) carry the show. Other supporting actors are great as well – Christopher Eccleston playing Matt Jamison, Kevin Carroll as John Murphy, and Regina King as Erika Murphy, to name a few. The fantastic Scott Glenn plays a supporting role too and one of my favorite episodes, Season 3’s Crazy Whitefella Thinking, featured him prominently (as the crazy whitefella). It’s these performances and stellar episodes every once in a while that kept me coming back. Season 2’s International Assassin episode is another example of great storytelling from all involved and Season 1’s Guest is the episode that really got me into the show. These three episodes all had something in common – they focused on a singular character and his or her journey. This is where The Leftovers is at its strongest and it’s engrossing.
Then, just like that, Crazy Whitefella Thinking gets followed by an episode that is one big contrived and cliched mess. Going into the last four episodes of the series, I gave The Leftovers a C+ in my mind with the final episodes being capable of raising it up to a B or B- level or dropping it down to a C. Would the final episodes be strong ones focused on a Garvey or would they go the more likely route of jumping back and forth through different characters to tie up the character arcs? But why bother doing that when so many other things haven’t been tied up? Will I be really upset by the ending like so many were who took Lost seriously?
I’m happy to say that season 3 episodes 5, 6, and 7 all largely focused on a singular character and each was successively better than the previous. Episode 5’s It’s a Matt, Matt, Matt, Matt World seemed odd with the lion sex party (you would have to watch it), then Episode 6’s Certified allowed Amy Brenneman (who plays Laurie) to shine brightly despite an episode nearly devoid of plot. I felt her acting talent was largely wasted until this episode. Then came The Most Powerful Man in the World (and his Twin Brother), a brilliant episode and largely a sequel to Season 2’s International Assassin, also from the same director (Craig Zobel, who also co-founded Homestar Runner!). This penultimate episode is every bit as good as International Assassin and has one of the funniest scenes I’ve seen on the small or big screen in quite some time.
Before I get to the series finale, I have to say that I read up a bit on the many theories online about the show. While some seem like they could be legit and others are pretty far out there, I came across one written during the first season stating they felt the series was largely a study in depression. In fact, I got the feeling that’s what the show was about before I even saw that article. That’s probably why I don’t like it quite as much as others – as a largely depressed person, I crave a little more escapist entertainment than what The Leftovers has to offer. My understanding is that the first season was loosely based on the book (which I have not read), then season 2 and 3 was not. Season 2 is where The Leftovers got significantly better, probably because the creators and writers were able to take the characters and ideas and write their own material directly for a visual format. But they still kept the depression theme at times, especially given what takes place in Certified during the third season.
As for the series finale, it was mildly disappointing and again, reminded me of Lost. There’s even a reference to Lost early in the episode. I’m not going to say anything else about it.
The strength of the latter half of season 3 earns it an increase in grade from C+, but the series finale prevents it from getting a full B and results in a B-.