Sam: This will be somewhat interesting, given that we just watched this episode together a few hours ago. Perhaps it was because I was watching it at your place, but I actually didn’t think the episode was too bad. It was certainly confusing, and it took me a bit to piece things together (that’s perhaps what I get from hating on the show so much that I forget to keep track of who’s who). But, overall, it was an ehh episode. That, on my The Americans rating scale, is pretty good.
To the details: if the KGB director at the Soviet embassy couldn’t talk to his guy at the Defense Department, but Elizabeth could just walk right in and question him (and Elizabeth can connect with the KGB director, I assume), why doesn’t the director just pass a message to the guy through Elizabeth? I suppose, if they did that, we wouldn’t have this episode, would we?
I didn’t feel like that storyline was told or developed very well as far as the Defense Department guy’s wife dying and its impact on him. In hindsight, they did say it clearly, but it got so lost in the confusing details of who’s who that I was left wondering who his wife was and why that was important. This probably betrays my lack of paying close attention to previous episodes, but I was just lost for a few sequences in this episode.
One aspect I particularly enjoy, though, is the costumes Phil and Elizabeth change into when they go on their missions. They’re so clearly fake that it’s funny. Phil’s fake hair is the best. Oh, and as I mentioned when we watched the episode during Elizabeth’s little romp in the hotel room with the encryptor dude, how did her wig not just fall off?
Admittedly, given that this episode confused me a bit because of the details, I read up on it, and I really thought Karen Fratti’s recap was spot on, particularly her very last question (why does Beeman insist on studying Russian instead of going to bed with his wife??). What were your thoughts on this episode?
Jay: Spot on with all the confusion. Here’s another problem (and, again, one that is probably due solely to me not paying close enough attention): what actually happened to Elizabeth’s sex partner? I don’t remember him appearing for the rest of the episode, did he? Was his entire role simply to explain what his company does and then disappear from the show? I guess my point is that I don’t really like the way characters are ushered in and out of The Americans solely to play some part and then disappear again when they’re not needed.
On that note, I have the same problem you did with the backstory of the DoD guy whose wife died. There was just no explanation of that at all. Why create an entire sob story like that if the show’s not going to give it any time? It’s the small things like this that add up over time and make The Americans a pretty mediocre show at this point.
As I mentioned to you yesterday, I think there are a few clues about what might be coming up. Stan’s marriage looks like it’s falling apart, and he seems to be developing a dangerous relationship with Nina. This is coming at the worst possible moment for both of them: the KGB knows for certain it has a mole, and the FBI needs her help now more than ever (since they know she’s reliable and efficient). At some point (maybe the season finale? maybe before), I’m guessing this will put Stan in some incredibly unsavory situations.
What do you think is coming up?
Sam: For sure! I think you nailed it: too many minor characters were being shuffled in and out, and it was tough to follow along. I think Elizabeth’s sex partner was simply to show the progression of what Phil had found out from his lady friend. Once Nina told the FBI that the KGB knew about the encryptions, that dude’s job was probably to change the encryptions. But, yes, poor character development in this episode.
You and I both noted while watching that Nina and Stan seem to be on the verge of taking their relationship to the next level. He seemed genuinely surprised and concerned that she got the KGB director to talk through oral sex, so something in his earlier message to Nina (about the wall, etc.) definitely seemed to have gotten lost in translation.
Speaking of language, you mentioned this while we were watching, but I think it’s worth writing about because it’s funny, I think. As we saw during Nina’s chat with the KGB director, she didn’t know the word “jitters,” which he proceeded to put on a little audition for best Charades player in trying to define it for her. However, in her conversation with Stan, she understands the word “exfiltration”? Okay…
I think what we will see next as far as Nina goes will not be some clever plot twist that a show like Homeland could pull off. I’m guessing she’s going to get axed in the next few episodes. But I also wouldn’t be surprised to be completely wrong. I have no clue what’s going to happen next in the bigger picture, but I feel like one of our regulars is about to die. If not Nina, someone. Am I channeling too much Homeland right now? Oh wait, I forgot: this show’s mainly about their family relationships. Perhaps Stan’s wife leaves him?
We’re nearly halfway through the season though, so perhaps, in the next week or two, we can dish out our mid-season awards for the characters on the show?
Jay: One thing that I find hilarious about The Americans versus, say, Homeland is the way its lower quality affects not only the watching experience itself, but even our reviews of it. You mentioned this the other day when we were watching Episode 5, and I agree. The thing about reviewing Homeland was that there were so many interesting plot points, side stories, and character development that the show’s more improbable moments and stories were always only part of the experience — although an increasingly large part of it by the end of Season 2. We could spend a long time just examining our favorite nuances of each particular episode.
The Americans, by contrast, feels at times like one writing or directing mistake after another. I may have alluded to this in an earlier review, but I also feel something about the camera work is a little off in the show, in addition to all its other flaws. I can never quite pinpoint it, but it’s one of those things where you don’t notice good camerawork until someone doesn’t do it right. And that’s happened several times for me already with The Americans, where a weird camera cut or transition will temporarily jar me out of paying attention to what’s actually taking place onscreen.
Anyway, all of this perfectly demonstrates why it’s so hard — and so rare — to produce a damn good show that really draws in its audience. Homeland made it feel natural. Yet so far on The Americans, I’ve yet to really get invested in any of the characters’ lives or stories: I guess I root for Phil and Elizabeth, but just barely. And I don’t particularly care what happens to any character on the show at all, which is never a good sign.
Lastly, I like the idea of a midseason awards chat. Looking forward to it!
Related articles
Post Revisions:
- March 2, 2013 @ 15:24:08 [Current Revision] by Samson X. Lim
- March 2, 2013 @ 15:21:57 by Jay Pinho