Expectations a mile a minute, one of the things I wanted to know from the beginning of the series was obr Sarah's past, its secrets she garda seven key until the person she most loves Chuck. I think this episode will reveal only the tip of its secrets s guess "THE SECRETS OF SARAH WALKER" will not end here, after all waited until now to learn more about it and they will not give it all in one go. I apologize for the mistakes of English is that I'm terrible at English. Kisses from Brazil Chucksters.
Your English is somehow better than that of many people who are born in America. ;)
Expectations are dangerous if you take that seriously because they can cause you to be disappointed.But, I have this feeling that a lot of the "baby" speculation this week has missed the mark and has missed something important.
I haven't been checking out what people are saying about the "baby" on other sites, but from what I have gathered here, very few seem to have asked the most important question of all:Why is this baby so important?
I know. The baby is actually Sarah herself, which makes her her own mom. Clearly in that picture above, Sarah is wearing her characteristic high heels while Emma is wearing flats, because they are the same person! I will be bitterly disappointed if that's wrong.Also, in that picture, Sarah's hair is short. So it's not a flashback. Wonder if Chuck finally gets to meet his mother-in-law tonight.Jim
Attack of the Sarah Clones!
My guess. The baby belongs to a family that Sarah was sent to kill by the CIA and her first handler, Ryker (played by Tim Dekay.) But, she couldn't bring herself to kill the baby, of course, so she took it to her mom and hid it with her. For the safety of her mom and the baby, that's why Sarah told her mother they can't see each other any more. That also explains why Sarah told Chuck that she and her mother were estranged.The baby is an heir to some sort of fortune that Ryker wants. That's why it's important. What I still don't understand is why Sarah feels that she can't tell Chuck the truth. She has always told Chuck to trust her, but in this case, she isn't trusting him.Gambs
I don't think of it as a trust issue. I see it more as Sarah a safety/protection issue. She hasn't told Chuck and has cut off her relationship with her mother to protect someone. (the baby, her mom, etc.) But what do I know. Also, is is completely wrong of me to be just as excited to see people freaking out over the episode as much as the episode itself. The reactions from last weeks episode are still entertaining me. Jennifer
Didn't the teaser last week say something like "everyone who knows the secret is in danger". So she doesn't want to put the others in danger.But clearly the plot requires Sarah to go alone so any debate over whether she should tell or not is kind of pointless.
the baby is important because it is chucks/stephens genetically engineered DNA implanted in a female host to produce the perfect intersect host in the future. simple.
I think the baby just a distraction I think he will not be as important as they are thinking.
I'm kind of hoping they would tie in that Sarah-flash from the pilot into this episode. Btw has Chuck ever flashed on Sarah after the second episode?
I don't think it's her child. But she took her under her wing. It should be interesting.Any way, Santa Suit proved to me that the showrunners aren't afraid to tell the story they want to tell, and I support that. I have enjoyed most of what they have done. The only season I didn't enjoy overall was S4 because it had no tension and real stakes. They just played it too safe, IMO. I prefer it when they take more risks.S.
" Probes deep inside Sarah's most private places". Excellent use of double meaning. A lot of people would love to do that :))
I jokingly made the predicition that the Baby was Chuck and Jills and was summarily set upon by the shippers.I do like the clone idea as well.
Sigh... Jill was Chuck's true love.
http://www.tv.com/news/tv-coms-top-100-everything-of-2011-vol-7-items-40-31-27366/Chuck did not make it in the 2010 top 100 but made it in the 2011...season 4 was not all bad :) They were right about the morgan intersect thing too.
I think the baby is related to her some how, maybe a sister. i just don't get why she would give a random baby to her mother then say have fun i can't see you again.
Just checked in the last list it was in before 2011 was 2008! and that was all the way down to 91...go season 4! We were up to 37! Maybe next year the series finale will have some moments that put it in the top 100 again.
Chuck and Jill had no chemistry...sorry I cannot stop laughing.
I wonder if anyone is ever going to call Chuck...Charles. I know it is not important in the slightest but it would be pretty awesome if someone like Sarah or Casey just called him that. It would definately catch me of guard. I mean Charles is actually quite a sexy name.
Gina, you like diving into the extremes, so I will take your "Chuck and Jill had no chemistry" as just another in a line of times you have gone for one extreme or the other. But those two definitely had chemistry. Maybe not Chuck and Sarah chemistry, but you sound like a crazy shipper if you think there was no chemistry there.
"But those two definitely had chemistry."Not as much as Jill and Sarah...Oh my god, that's it! The baby is Jill's and Sarah's. I'm not sure how that makes sense, but when has that ever stopped anyone.Speaking only for myself, I never much liked Jill because I've always found Jordana Brewster annoying for some reason. By way of comparison, I liked Rachel Bilson's (sp?) Lou quite a bit as well as Hannah, at least in small doses. To be fair, both Chuck and Sarah have pretty good chemistry with just about anyone, and that I'm putting down to the actors who play them.Jim
I tend to be able to disconnect my like/dislike for an actor from their character. Otherwise, I'd be stupid and not be able to reason the differences between reality and fiction.
JILL: Thank you. Come with me. We can still be together.CHUCK: How?JILL: Just you and me. No secrets. No spies. Come with me, Chuck.CHUCK: No, I can’t, I can’t. I… Look obviously there’s the whole opposite-attracts-chemistry thing that we have and I… It’s just that there’s one small problem.JILL: What are you doing, Chuck? What’s going on? Don’t do this to me, Chuck.CHUCK: You should know that I wanted to help. I was gonna let you go.JILL: Chuck, no.CHUCK: You should know I wanted to help you. I was going to let you get away. But you were about to kill Sarah and that made the decision for me. You're under arrest, Jill. And I'm breaking up with you.If I need to pick up a top 5 Chuck moment, I mean Chuck's moment, this would be one of them the whole scene, the background music, I love it :)
I have no personal dislike for Jordana Brewster since I don't know the woman. She's probably great in real life. However, I have not found any character she's played in the past at all appealing (starting with that movie where the high school gets invaded by aliens), and that carried through to Chuck. I don't think she's a very good actress. My opinion only. I also didn't think Kristin Kreuk was very good based solely on a couple of episodes of Smallville and was pleased to be proved wrong by her portrayal of Hannah. Jim
Love that Jill trilogy. Hell, all four Jill episodes. Chuck and Jill... totally meant to go up that hill, but Jill turned evil and Chuck fell for a blond.
"I don't think she's a very good actress. My opinion only. "So now we know another thing you aren't good at. Qualifying acting talent.
nbc posted some pictures of a little blonde girl about 5 years old on the chuck site hopefully its not sarah's but it sure looks that way
OMG IT'S BRYCE'S BABY!
Jill was great. Jordana was great. I am a shipper (not crazy) and LOOOOVED Jill/Chuck.
"So now we know another thing you aren't good at. Qualifying acting talent."Well, it's no lifetime ban, but it's not nothing."OMG IT'S BRYCE'S BABY!"With Sarah's mom! That's why she broke up with him and won't speak to her. It's all so clear now.Jim
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
When I said "Chuck and Jill had no Chemistry", I left a "....." meaning that I was going to say something funny to have a dig at the crazy shippers but I could not finish it because I was laughing so hard at the potential reaction I knew it was going to get. I was going to say something else but then I thought there is no point, the crazies cannot help themselves.Yes Chuck and Jill had chemistry, as did Chuck and Lou and Chuck and Hannah ( Chuck and Hannah had insane chemistry in that I was a little upset the way he dumped her).
You should go work in politics.
:)Like any fandom I suppose they are the type that claim shows are total crap if certain criterias are not met. They have the endurance and perserverance also to go on and on and on and on....it is futile to engage with them I suppose. I have an image that these types of people are like Frank Burns from MASH (the tv series version). Larry Lindville (a kind and well spoken and highly educated man) said that he always thought Frank Burns brain was stipped of all its gears and his inability to ration or sympathise with other people was a mind that was limited and weak....in essence...crazy shippers or the nut jobs who post crap that is wholly unfair and unjust.
I am curious about why the baby is so important. But I'm hoping we also find out why Sarah's mom seems to have not played a big part in her daughters life when she was younger too. To me that's a more crucial part of the story so I'm hoping they don't just gloss over it.
I actually think most of those people are the type who need to feel like they are always edgy cool and have their finger on the pulse of what is hip and now and what isn't. So, they abandon the fun ship very quickly. But, they also love the show so they keep watching. Then, every week, they crap on it and talk about how awful it is, even though they LOOOOOOOOOVE IT.Sure, some people keep watching a show because they want to point out how bad it is so they can validate their dissatisfaction with it. But those people are insane and need serious help.
I suppose in a way cable has not helped. Some of the best shows are now on cable. I mean critics (whose opinions these crazies value) have their favourite shows and most of the time they are cable shows. So Network shows that attempt even a serialised show or mythology show...if they cannot keep consistency or logic then they get crapped on. In a small way, as much as I loved, loved, loved Lost...they did not help much either. I mean not getting a lot of answers in the end kind of set up other shows that followed that tread the same line to fail. I mean Fringe has already been called out....there is no way in the remaining 15 episodes they can answer all the questions they have opened up and people have already abandoned that show, they are not waiting to know the enivatable...that Fringe will fail its mythology. So yeah as Sepinwall said after Lost, we may never ever get a show quite like it on network tv. Fans have kind of learned their lesson and will not trust a network show that does not lay it on the line and they will crap on it as soon as they sense the slightest stall.
So it Larkins baby that been confirmed.
CALLED IT!The baby was part of a mission. Larkins baby....LMFAO! So here we go...I sometimes forget that Sarah used to be such a cold blooded killer before she was Chuckafied!
Wow... you called the most obvious thing ever. How could anyone think the baby was Sarah's?
Pretty sure Sarah's pregnant with Shaw's baby right now anyway. Last week had conjugal visit written all over it!
Nutjobs? lol. Man two episodes in a row of some major violence...color me impressed! The stakes this season have been really high...I mean a little higher than last season but this is a great season of tv! Loving every minute of it. I must admit though...in that room where they were eating in the beginning, I was hoping it was the flash from the second episode in season 1...where Sarah poisons all the assasins...that would have been a awesome callback. But great episode.
Dear god all this shipper jerking is making me vomit...
I knew it was BRYCE'S BABY CALLED IT!!!!!Hay all the shippers shaw knocked up sarah while she was tied up. UMAD?
Sarah getting beat on again while tied up? Anyway, outside of the interesting shippery/family stuff, which was mostly played well, I don't get the need to introduce the massive continuity issue with respect to Sarah getting the Chuck mission.
I don't understand why they put in that either.
That scene pretty much ruins the whole episode for me. Because it tells me the writers, or better yet the creators of the show, don't remember their first episode.
In regards to the continuity issue, besides the 'oh-ah' factor of this is where it all started, Sarah saving the baby could be seen as the beginning of the 'softening' of Sarah, becoming more emotional (less by the book/following spy rules), which leads in nicely to a lot of her actions early on with Chuck. Or, that could just be wishful thinking. Yeah, probably wishful thinking.
I get the impression this is an episode where any, or most, plot and continuity issues will be overlooked. The character/ emotional playoffs were way too overwhelming; and sadly I can't really argue with that.
Fun episode i enjoyed it very muchI noticed this season has lots of callbacks and parallels to good moments from previous seasons(like the charm bracelet scene from the last episode that no one noticed or commented about)for some of the fans those should be an extra delightOh and this episode had the first really good Chuck/Sarah moment in season5,them carving their names was pretty sweet and actually made me care if they get that houseHappy new year everyone see ya`ll in 2012 : )
Man, just think for five seconds about it and the emotional payoffs don't justify the stupidity of that final flashback. Sarah had a handler up to that point? I thought Bryce was her partner. And she took the mission to fix his betrayal not to go on her first solo mission... what a weird scene to toss in there.
I really didn't understand that whole last scene with Sarah and Graham. It made no sense to me either. Then, I got all crazy and was like, is this another twist to the story. However, I think that is me overanalyzing. I really enjoyed the rest of the episode though. And Sarah needs a spa day. She has gotten the crap kicked out of her two weeks in a row. :)Jennifer
It was cute. I think Cheryl and Yvonne worked very well opposite each other.The Awesomes gave me a case of second hand embarrassment during their spygames. I was glad Morgan and Alex broke that up.What is this continuity you people speak of in relation to Chuck? I wonder if they brought back Graham to shoehorn him into the conspiracy because with 5 episodes left I doubt they really tied that up given this shows love of stretching things out to the last possible second every season.
"I don't get the need to introduce the massive continuity issue with respect to Sarah getting the Chuck mission."So, so unnecessary. Seriously why? Loved the rest, though. Although I would have loved to get a reason for Sarah growing up mostly with her dad. The scene with Casey fully expecting Sarah to tell him everything, while being perfectly fine with her not telling Chuck was done so well. I love their partnership. And she called him John.
Loved the parallel universe between sarah walker and miranda lawson in this episode hahah
The ninja and me are going to disagree on this one. I will give points for the ending family stuff. Maybe the opening Sarah being badass. And the Awesome and Ellie stuff. But lots of other problems. It's like they dumb the show down many levels for shippers. Like they think shippers are too stupid for continuity or good writing.I'm not surprised, though, that the shippers love it. They hammered away at all the shipper beats. I was in between throwing up and awwwing.
yea i didn't understand the langston graham scene, i think we can come to the conclusion that the writers don't really care about what they've already written lol
"What is this continuity you people speak of in relation to Chuck? "Go back and watch any episode with Bryce in it. The way she gets the mission MAKES NO SENSE. She has a handler up until she takes on the Chuck mission? What? Is anyone awake in the writers room?
What is funny is I could swear I read an interview where they said they rewatched the pilot for some purpose. I can't remember why though. It certainly wasn't for this.
I didn't see the episode, so could someone clear something up for me? Am I to understand that Sarah ran at a bunch of armed enemies with a baby strapped to her chest? Not the best idea in the world, even if she was armed herself.
"What is this continuity you people speak of in relation to Chuck? "That was a joke, man. Didn't land I guess.
And the thing is, if they just LEAVE THAT SCENE OUT, they don't run into this problem. But they wrote it, then shot it, then edited it THREE TIMES, then sent it to the network for approval, and NO ONE pointed out that it violated the established show canon?
I do not know why Sarah was living with a grand mother or guardian if her real mom was alive and quite a responsible parent. Maybe that woman was a babysitter and Sarah did live with her mom. Also maybe Sarah just has that loner streak in her from a young age and prefered to live with her dad and a life of adventure than stay in a life that is normal but boring for her. That last scene maybe does make sense in a way...if only they talked about Bryce and him going rogue and all that other stuff. I just took it as one mission she did with Ryker while she was still with Bryce...you never know. It could be a mission that was only 3 days. Ryker did say he chose Sarah for that one mission because her file said she was a loner. So it did not seem like Sarah worked with him for any period of time. Those three days could have coincided with Bryce going rogue and doing his thing and then it would make sense. I just wish that Graham and Sarah had talked about Bryce and said something like...Ok Sarah now that you have done that one mission you have to now go back to your actual partner Bryce...but Bryce is in trouble and he has betrayed you and the agency and you need to fix that...or whatever. That is all they had to do to make it work for me...just mention Bryce.
I took note of the continuity issues but overall I really enjoyed this episode. Great characters moments and depth to them; Sarah kicking some ass; and the whole gang getting in on the story. I could gripe a bit about Sarah basically overlooking everything about her mother abandoning her but I won't, since it's obvious from the promos and previous episodes that they've got a certain direction they are pushing things toward and I think they sort of needed a tidy ending to all this for that. I'll definitely be reviewing the episode immediately.
"Am I to understand that Sarah ran at a bunch of armed enemies with a baby strapped to her chest?"I guess she was using it as bullet proofing.
Not to mention that the episode demands that everything Sarah ever suggested in her emotional talks with Chuck about her mother, or "family," during earlier seasons was just her super-spy-lies to hide this baby from some evil doer.
"I do not know why Sarah was living with a grand mother or guardian if her real mom was alive and quite a responsible parent. Maybe that woman was a babysitter and Sarah did live with her mom."Maybe this episode was a dream.
It was extremly sugary. I enjoyed it, but I would enjoy it more, if they would just put the sweet stuff in every episode, when it fits well. Instead of kinda concentrating it all in one.I wish I could take one tiny little beat of ubercaring sweet and understanding Chuck and insert it in the final Chuck and Sarah conversation last week. There was so much of it.I wonder if they play up how much Sarah is getting hurt during her fight scenes to make a stronger case for her wanting to get out of the spy game? It´s a little strange to have her take so much abuse and being tied up and carried out by Casey two weeks in a row.
From the episode I took that Sarah chose to live a life of adventure and selfishness instead of being normal. I think maybe she did not want to tell a man who she married, who is normal..that from a very young age all the way until she met him she did not want to be normal....I think we are now in season 3 mode right now...where we have to guess all the character motivations...lol.
I like that idea, Gina. There's nothing to say that just because two agents are partners, that they can't be assigned solo missions. Bryce's just happened to be a Fulcrum one. There's also nothing to say that fully-qualified agents can't still have handlers. Mama B claimed her's was Tuttle, for example, and for all we know Bryce's could have been Tommy.Yes, this is just rationalizing to make-up for an apparently glaring oversight, but if you pretend Graham went into detail about the Intersect mission and Bryce's rogue mission after the camera cuts away, well... it fits a little better.
Magnus screw continuity,screw story line! the biggest problem in season5 is Sarah not getting her eye candy scenes,no more wet t-shirt,no more crawling through air ducts NOTHING we got few seconds in the premiere with her in lingerie and that's it in 13 episodes? wtf? THE WRITERS NEED TO GET FIRED FOR NOT EXPOSING THAT TONED BODY! : )
Maybe I am being dumb...but all the ambiguity means that everything could fit or everything could be total bs. I mean they were so vague about how long Ryker was her handler that I assumed it was a one time deal. The way she said that she has had multiple handlers and Ryker chose her for one mission swings me to that line of thinking...but I do not know. This is Chuck...every story can be seen through a prism...look at it one way and you see how it can work, look at it at another angle and you end up confused. I am getting a very Lost feeling here, lol.
In regards to the continuity stuff, I'll have to go back to Season 1, but what was the state of the Sarah/Bryce partnership at the start of the series? I thought he had gone undercover as a double agent for Fulcrum and they hadn't been together for a while because he was thought to be a traitor.It looks like they tried a little bit to work in continuity but it didn't quite work. It was nighttime in DC, which I thought must have been right after Bryce sent the email to Chuck and the CIA had identified Chuck as the recipient. Sarah would have caught a plane to LA. She walked up to the Nerd Herd desk the next day.The "handler" stuff is weird. They should have just said Ryker was her new partner after Bryce had "turned".Feel free to correct my understanding of the backstory.Otherwise, this episode had a lot of heart and I sensed we are now at the beginning of the final chapter where Chuck and Sarah want to settle down, but circumstances delay them. I enjoyed it even if the reasons for Ryker thinking he could inherit the baby's money seemed really sketchy.
@awelle agree with your point about the high concentration of "sugary-ness". Towards the end I was going into a bit of sugar shock but this is one of the shows where I tolerate it more than others. The only other one is Parks and Rec.
To me this episode was not all that great. First of all, I thought before sarah got the chuck mission that she was off doing things with Byrce, which was why she was assigned to chuck. To me the continuity is all off. Like the writers forgot the first season. If this baby event took place 6 years earlier then it would've been more believable. Plus, what mother would give up her daughter to the criminal dad? That back story seemed off too.That's my 2 cents.
MediaSavantSarah said that she had more than one handler and ryker was not a partner I think...I think he was her handler. Based on his comments it came across that he chose her for that specific mission. Nevermind...the point is that Sarah is no longer a loner, she is in love and she wants to start a family with Chuck...good times, great growth.
"There's nothing to say that just because two agents are partners, that they can't be assigned solo missions."Why did she have a handler if she had a partner? IT MAKES NO SENSE.
Well said Gina!
"From the episode I took that Sarah chose to live a life of adventure and selfishness instead of being normal."Sarah was maybe 8 in the flashback when her dad came to see her at her grandmother. I have a hard time seeing an 8 year old choosing a life of selfishness, because she wanted to be with her father. And he didn´t really look to want to take her along. That makes it pretty hard to understand while her mother couldn´t raise her and give her that normal life she wanted for her.And Sarah seemed quite wistful when she made her mother promise to give that baby that normal life she never got."...even if the reasons for Ryker thinking he could inherit the baby's money seemed really sketchy."That was quite strange. Already sketchy right after Sarah retrieved the baby, but even harder to believe after Ryker´s motives seemed to have been clear to some authorities and the child missing for five years or possibly presumed dead.
Logic is always overrated in the Chuck universe- I say embrace the flaws and enjoy the sugary love!
help me out here. the flash backs in this episode took place in 2006 and she was told she would chuck's handler in 2006. yet she doesn't meet chuck until fall 2007. when she gets the call to check on chuck getting the intersect she has no idea who he is. did i miss something? when was she partnered with bryce for 2 years? do these people even care what they put out before or is or was sarah part of the big conspiracy from the beginning?tw0073
What Chuck fell into in this episode was what a lot of shows do is that they forget their own established continuity.If they would have made the flashbacks be from 2002 instead of 2007 the handler stuff would have made sense.You then make the child ten instead of five which solves the problem.Aside from that the episode was okay.We really didn't learn a whole lot about Sarah's relationship with her mother.The things she told Casey in season 4 about her parents weren't talked about.
I think the greatest thing about Chuck is that it is a spy show and stories like this one can be added all the time. Like in the CIA, I assume in real life, that there are thousands of black ops team that never interact with each other and so agents get assigned thousands of missions and it is all one big organisation that works in a thousand different directions. So Sarah could have been a partner with Bryce but she could also do side missions and he could also do side missions like missions with Fulcrum before the show started...etc. This shows mythology and plot is a giant puzzle that works in a thousand different ways...just like the CIA...maybe that is the leap of faith we have to take. Like the people in the Chuck world take it as read that the CIA is a cohesive unit that works to protect the country...lets believe that the Chuck writers work to make us happy in the end...even if a lot of what we see does not make sense, lol.
Also, as someone who tried firing guns in the last year and knows how loud they are, shooting two machine guns on either side of a baby's head is not a good idea. That kid could have some serious hearing problems.
Chuck's definition of "handler" has always been vague. Why can't every field agent have a senior agent who gives them missions, regardless of partner status? Is everyone supposed to get their missions directly from the Director?I know it doesn't appear to make sense, just playing devil's advocate. =)
Why can't partnered up agents have a handler or handlers? I'm no expert in CIA hierarchy and protocols, but even a team of agents needs a specified contact person in the HQ.If there's some logical error in the Graham scene it's the fact that CIA did not originally approach Chuck with the intention of turning him into an asset. Originally it was just a recovery mission for stolen data, the asset aspect didn't happen until they found out that Chuck had downloaded the intersect into his brain.
Maybe he was her handler when she first joined the CIA and then he requested her for this mission later on?! No idea really, just throwing it out there. However, you would think the writers would learn by now that the people who watch the show pick up all these inconsistencies.Jennifer
If the reason she had a handler was because Bryce, her former partner, had turned evil, and this was her test, or something, then why not just put that in a piece of dialogue? Most likely because they didn't think of it. None of the weight of that first season is evident in that scene. It's like "Ooooh, mission time!" We know why it was that way, as we saw last week. They want to end these episodes upbeat. But when you retcon it, you need to make it work.Should I even begin talking about how stupid Sarah had to be to think a five-year old cries like a 5-month old?
@MediaSavant as someone who has also fired guns in real life- that is the most legitimate criticism of this episode. I thought about it last week after seeing the promo too.
Sarah's mom was shown to be a loving normal person. So why did she prefer to be with her dad. This episode didn't explain much at all about her background and crapped all over the shows cannon.
I think we learnt a lot about her mother in this episode. Every time Chuck asked about her mom she said it is complicated. The thing is when people say things are complicated..it is not that it is complicated it is just that people do not want to talk about it because they are ashamed or embarrased about something. What we learnt in this episode is that Sarah chose to live a life of a loner and one who prefered to be a criminal who enjoyed conning people than one who lived a normal life. Does this go against the emotion of regret she showed Check in seasons 1 -5 when talking about her past? Well I think the answer is how do you tell a man who has really rocked your world and made you re-evaluate your life that at a certain time in your life you enjoyed doing the stuff you did? That you never imagined it any other way. Do you take the risk of losing something incredibly important to you by being honest? or do you bury it and hope he never asks?There is a lot of compelling material in there...I mean if she does open up, is she willing to hear the man say that he does not want to be with her or have a life or a family with a woman so deeply flawed? The answer is she is pretty and Chuck is kind and would accept anything she does, but she does not know that! she sees what we see...a kind, sweet, brilliant man who can do anything and attract all kinds of wonderful woman that have not done the crap she has done...like Hannah. There is a great review on the AV Club, it is the review of Critical Film Studies of the show community. The management of information is important in keeping relationships fresh, you do not want to give too much away or you risk not having the other person deem you valuable enough to be with. Read that and so much of this can make sense. I think.
"Should I even begin talking about how stupid Sarah had to be to think a five-year old cries like a 5-month old?"That is so stupid, that I didn´t even think of that as a possible intention. I thought they wanted her to think he had somehow found another baby for nefarious reasons or something like that. But that doesn´t make that much sense either. And it´s pretty strange that she fell for that trick, as she used the same on him in the cafe.And as for the Graham sceen, we can try to reason away the continuity problems, but they are there and can´t be completely explained away.Which would be okay, if there had been a strong reason why they needed to break the continuity like that for the episode to work. But they didn´t. Not at all. This scene wasn´t in the least necessary to make the episode work. They could have just left it out or changed it, so that Graham brings her bad experiences with her handler up when he truly did assign her as Chuck´s handler.And the year the flashbacks took place could have been at any other time before the show started, where there hadn´t been a clear history established. The child could have been any age. Especially because I highly doubt we will ever see it again.
Why did Sarah leave the baby with her unless she thought her mom would raise it well? Except nothing in the previous four seasons would suggest Sarah thought much of her mother. Hell, she spent time with her dad and then gramma because mom was so dysfunctional. But now we find out mom is totally awesome.Sure, maybe mom was a mess and then put her life back together, but all you need is one line to indicate that. The fact that it isn't in the episode tells me the writers don't care at all about four seasons of established character development. Last week some shippers were upset because we didn't get a scene or moment between Chuck and Sarah where he comforts her frail little emotions after getting beat on by her ex, but this week every problem is fine because it was stupid-sweet?Shippers.
Was it ever established that the woman she was staying with a grandmother? could it have been the grandmother living with the mother? Getting a nose bleed like the people from Lost, so much to take in.
Doesn't every single field agent have a some sort of handler, a contact point trought which they communicate with the agency?
"What we learnt in this episode is that Sarah chose to live a life of a loner and one who prefered to be a criminal who enjoyed conning people than one who lived a normal life."Again, she was a small child. That was not her choice to make. If her mother wanted a normal life for her, she could very well have made sure to give her that. Unless her dad kidnapped her. And then it really wouldn´t have been Sarah´s choice. She wanted to be with her dad. To blame her for choosing a life of crime when she was that young is ludicrous.
Skipping over four seasons like it was nothing, just to deliver a few cute moments, shows a real disregard for what you did before. It is the opposite of taking care of the characters. I'm actually kind of shocked they were so careless.
"Sure, maybe mom was a mess and then put her life back together, but all you need is one line to indicate that. The fact that it isn't in the episode tells me the writers don't care at all about four seasons of established character development."I had really hoped we would get some kind of explanation for that, but my hopes weren´t very high.
"Doesn't every single field agent have a some sort of handler, a contact point trought which they communicate with the agency?"So... Sarah, knowing she always has a handler because it is CIA protocol, makes it a point to demand no more handlers and her superior is cool with that because it makes no sense? What?
"Was it ever established that the woman she was staying with a grandmother? could it have been the grandmother living with the mother?"I literally laughed outloud reading that.
DR is so right. A few perfect emotional moments don't make up for terrible plotting. We finally meet Sarah's mom and it makes no sense. Why would she even call her daughter Sarah? Last season Sarah was excited about rediscovering Sam but later felt like she was Sarah. Did her mom watch those episodes? How does she know that?
You mean season 3.
"No offense Magnus but this show always had discontinuity and glitches like that"No, it really hasn't. Shaw keeping the Intersect makes sense. He says he turned Decker when he flashed on him upon first meeting him. Obviously, from that point on, Decker was his pawn. There is no plot hole there. You can't make Sarah's mom holes fit. No dialogue in the episode makes any of it fit. No dialogue in previous episodes makes any of it fit.
Hehehehe... I said "Sarah's mom holes fit."
"Last week some shippers were upset because we didn't get a scene or moment between Chuck and Sarah where he comforts her frail little emotions after getting beat on by her ex, but this week every problem is fine because it was stupid-sweet?Shippers. "I thought there were plotholes last week as well. Even if Shaw didn´t get the intersect removed, because he blackmailed Decker, there is still the question why they did even send anyone in to interrogate him before removing it. And with the amount of power and lack of scrupel to have even innocent civilians murdered Decker was shown to have, he couldn´t find a way to get rid of Shaw permanently while he was a sitting duck in a prison cell for two years? But I guess everything was fine, because this way Chuck got to beat up Shaw without the intersect?Geek Fanboys. ;)Seriously, it´s possible to enjoy an episode despite seeing huge problems in it. I thought the interaction between the characters was honest and moving, despite some admittedly glaring continuity issues, that could have been easily avoided.
Shaw was disoriented at first, then stunned by Chuck getting the initial hit in, which made it easier to beat him (and even then, Shaw did get the upper hand).Maybe it is more difficult to explain why Decker didn't just kill Shaw but that's not 85 episodes worth of character development. This was a crappy payoff to a long-standing arc for a character some of you claim to be your favorite.
"If only those were my only problems with the episode. Did a monkey direct and edit this one?"Is that a regulation? Like the one non-stuff writer per season? ;)I guess you will list all your problems in your GF review. I enjoyed it while watching, although I kept hoping for some sort of explanation as to why Sarah grew up with her dad and seemingly didn´t have her mother in her life and was very dissappointed by the lack of it. But knowing it was a going to be a retcon, my hopes weren´t that high.I did comment that I very much wished for an explanation regarding that in your latest podcast post. But then I kept thinking back to how they violated the backstory of Chuck´s parents with that Agent X stuff, and resigned myself to it probably being ignored or completely botched.Parents abandoning their kids for no good reason seems to be a thing with the show now. Morgan´s dad probably left to become a Hibachi chef. And I wonder, if Casey grew up with any parents present.
My biggest gripe with the episode after a quick review is the apparent ignorance of Sarah's relationship with her mother when she was younger and her mom's seeming acceptance of Sarah's decision to be with her dad regardless of the consequences. Obviously no sane (or normal) mother would let her 7-8 yr old daughter make that decision without anything to say about it, yet claim to want the best for her. That was something I had hoped would be addressed but was not. I'm attributing it though to the writers etc. wanting a particular overall ending for this season, so I can't say I didn't expect it. Maybe my foresight made it easier to overlook.
"Shaw was disoriented at first, then stunned by Chuck getting the initial hit in, which made it easier to beat him (and even then, Shaw did get the upper hand)."I didn´t mean that Chuck beating up Shaw was problematic at all. Just the circumstances that got Shaw there. You deleted, what I quoted, but I guess it´s still true?The resolution to Sarah´s relationship with her mother was dissappointing to say the least. Or maybe it was more that there wasn´t one at all. I just expected them to botch that even more. Like I expected them to have a completely ludicrous explanation for that conspiracy angle. The Shaw solution to that was by no means perfect, but it was much better than I expected. Decker seemed to revel in trying to take down Chuck and Sarah. In Cliffhanger he tried everything to make sure Sarah died, but later wants everyone but Chuck and Sarah killed. Who were those people he told that it is imparative that Chuck must fail and what reason did he give? It was obvious that they hadn´t planned this conspiracy from the beginning and I really feared how badly it would look when they tried to tie everything together.And then they used Shaw and it didn´t make complete sense, but it worked much better than any attempt to pretend this was planned from the beginning would have. So I loved what they did by comparison.Similarly, I was pretty sure, that they didn´t have Sarah´s backstory worked out since the beginning. They didn´t even do that for Chuck and his parents, which became obvious by the time Agent X aired at the latest. They definitely could have done a better job to make her backstory fit together, but I think they also could have easily made it much worse. And I feared that they would do more damage when Fedak said, we would know Sarah as a different character after this. I don´t think they completely destroyed her and that made me think they might.
I'm surprised people are surprised by the carelessness of the writing for Sarah's backstory considering how stupid Chuck's own mother and her "reasons" were written to be. If they can't flesh out the lead characters backstory well, supporting characters don't stand a chance. The writers are lazy and don't care to write the beats needed for a dramatic story.
I don't think it is unreasonable to ask that specific story lines related to the two main characters make sense. If you are going to retcon, at least make the con portion work.
I loved the episode:))) After last less emotional two episodes, this week was great!! That's the chuck I want to watch!! I liked sarah's mom and Sarah...I wonder we'll see the names on the wall in final episode????
I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make senseWhy would a Wookiee, an 8-foot-tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of 2-foot-tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! Look at me, this is a Chuck episode and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense.:)
"I'm surprised people are surprised by the carelessness of the writing for Sarah's backstory considering how stupid Chuck's own mother and her "reasons" were written to be"The show didn't establish that Mama B left because she was an unfit parent, then show her winning mother of the year awards.
"esozcanesk said... I loved the episode"And this, ladies and gentlemen, should automatically make it suck. ;)
While I agree that this episode did have plot holes, Sarah has never stated that her mother was incompetent or a terrible parent. All Sarah has ever stated was that her relationship with her mother was "complicated." The episode established that it was complicated.AB
Should we now point out that the second the CIA wiped the slate clean with Team B that their assets should automatically be unfrozen, providing them with more than enough money to buy the dream house Sarah just defaced?Or that she is such an egomaniac that she put her name above Chuck's?Should we even bother mentioning that next week Gertrude gets tied up to a chair and beaten by a man?
"I don't think it is unreasonable to ask that specific story lines related to the two main characters make sense. If you are going to retcon, at least make the con portion work."Not saying it´s unreasonable. I had very much hoped for that as well. But like several people have brought up now, after how much they didn´t make the con portion for Chuck´s parents work, it is not terribly surprising that Sarah´s parents didn´t fare much better.It´s still dissappointing, though. No argument there. And it was completely unecessary to weigh down the episode with the continuity issues regarding Sarah´s past as an agent. That could have been so easily avoided, that it somehow angers me more, even though it´s less important on the whole.But tacking on something like that, when it is not needed to make the plot work at all, just seems extra careless.
"Sarah has never stated that her mother was incompetent or a terrible parent."The story did that by having her stay with her criminal father and then her grandmother when he abandoned her. It's like Chewbacca. It doesn't make any sense.Though, it was really convenient that 2 minutes before Sarah found the baby, she got a message from her mom that she could stay with her. Thankfully, the CIA can't track back phone calls.
Its interesting that you are so worked up this week. The plot is something I've pretty much given up on so I just watch for character interaction at this point. That's why I was worked up last week when it didn't feel right to me. You still care at least a little about the plot and continuity so you're upset this week.
"Should we now point out that the second the CIA wiped the slate clean with Team B that their assets should automatically be unfrozen, providing them with more than enough money to buy the dream house Sarah just defaced?"That shouldn´t even be necessary. That house is hardly a mansion and they got about 2 million for capturing that Matt Zorn guy in Frosted Tips. But the money stuff didn´t make much sense from the beginning. Burning through that much that fast and not having anything in safe accounts or using all of they had left in that mission in Zoom was all incredibly stupid. I guess they all suck with money."The show didn't establish that Mama B left because she was an unfit parent, then show her winning mother of the year awards."No, but they did have Steven not finding her for decades, when she was trying to correct his mistake of creating Volkoff. And that did very much not fit with the way she behaved toward him before we learned he used to be a friend. Or with Orion being completely ignorant of his friend he had turned into such a threat.
"after how much they didn´t make the con portion for Chuck´s parents work"Mama B left to go deep undercover. Is it stupid? Yes. But it isn't a lack of continuity. Papa B ran away because he thought being around his kids would bring harm to them. None of that ignores flashback episodes. What they said happened, happened.Sarah having a handler before going on the Bryce mission, then demanding no more handlers and being granted that, and being told to take on an asset, and then directly going from there on the Chuck mission, before she had any idea Chuck was the Intersect, or would be turned into an asset... skips so much established history that WE SAW.
"Should we even bother mentioning that next week Gertrude gets tied up to a chair and beaten by a man?"You should bring that up. I've got some left over thoughts from Santa Suit snd this episode that I've been itching to get out regarding certain fandom issues with that aspect.
"No, but they did have Steven not finding her for decades, when she was trying to correct his mistake of creating Volkoff."Totally ancillary to the main plot. And at least we know why Mama B and Papa B left their kids. At the end of this episode, can you tell me why Sarah's mom didn't take care of her? Nope. But you can tell me why her dad didn't. He was a con man and not such a great dad.
"Its interesting that you are so worked up this week."It's not interesting. It's obvious. Because it sucked.
Has your super, secret ninja seen any of the remaining episodes? What do they have to say about next weeks?AB
"Has your super, secret ninja seen any of the remaining episodes? What do they have to say about next weeks?"The ninja is dead to me now.
"[Sarah and her handler]... skips so much established history that WE SAW."I am not denying that. That is the part I am the most dissappointed about, because it was completely and totally unecessary for the episode and easily fixable. So it was extra careless.But this continuity problem has little to do with Sarah´s mother or their relationship. It´s not really the:"... crappy payoff to a long-standing arc for a character some of you claim to be your favorite."The problem with the payoff for this arc is the lack of explanation for Sarah growing up with her dad. That is unrelated to Sarah´s history as an agent. They did describe the role of Sarah´s mother as a "walking hug" and "very maternal" prior to the episode. And I very much wondered how they would reconcile that with the way Sarah grew up. I couldn´t see that fit. And I guess they couldn´t either, because they didn´t really try to make it fit.And I am not saying that I liked that at all. I just expected even worse stuff. Like them ignoring the fact, that Sarah did grew up with her dad completely.
Hee, I'm sorry you hated the ep but you're pretty funny when you're rant-y.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I have to agree with DR, they really did a disservice to the show by completely ignoring it's history. The Sarah/Graham scene really irritated me. Not only was it a pointless scene, it made no sense given what we know from past events. This could have been fixed with a couple tweaks, but apparently they didn't care enough to change it.
I think that you're falling victim to the same thing that you have accused others of in the past and that is that we should never expect the show to do something that it has never done in the past and that ultimately the show is about the characters. I admit that even though I usually just go with the plot holes that the show has done in the past, I was a little bit upset with the final Graham scene, but I don't view the whole episode as a failure or disaster because the character moments were really good.AB
Lol @ "The ninja is dead to me now". I agree with Sue- you are at your best when you at antagonized!
Sue, I didn't say I hated the episode. But I think important elements of it suck. And that it failed miserably at two things. 1) Establishing why Sarah wasn't raised by her mom and 2) what the hell was with the plot hole in the Intersect mission assignment?"The problem with the payoff for this arc is the lack of explanation for Sarah growing up with her dad. That is unrelated to Sarah´s history as an agent. "Sarah's entire makeup as a person is related to how badly her dad messed her up. Why her mom didn't raise her is as important as ANYTHING related to her story. Her mom should either have been a total mess, or someone who was kept from Sarah. But they totally ignore it as if it has no meaning.
"I think that you're falling victim to the same thing that you have accused others of in the past and that is that we should never expect the show to do something that it has never done in the past and that ultimately the show is about the characters."No, you are falling victim to being easily impressed by bright shiny things. I am asking of this show exactly what I have always expected of it. To handle the most important character points with respect. If you establish that a character was not raised by their parent, EXPLAIN WHY. Even if it is dumb, explain it. Nothing is more important than establishing these character arcs. By not explaining, you rob the character of the most significant portion of her life. The primary socialization of her character.
"...But they totally ignore it as if it has no meaning."That´s true, but it is still unrelated to the Graham scene and the year the baby mission took place. Those parts could have easily been fixed by using a year without an established backstory for Sarah and not having Graham bring up Chuck.You listed the continuity problems created by these choices and those could have easily be fixed, but the mess with how Sarah grew up would still be there. Those two issues are both in the episode, but they are unrelated.Fixing this (what I meant by her history as an agent):"Sarah having a handler before going on the Bryce mission, then demanding no more handlers and being granted that, and being told to take on an asset, and then directly going from there on the Chuck mission, before she had any idea Chuck was the Intersect, or would be turned into an asset... skips so much established history that WE SAW."would have not helped to make sense of the way Sarah grew up.
"would have not helped to make sense of the way Sarah grew up."Two different problems with the episode. One is about Sarah's character, the other is about things we already have answers for that the writers violate. It shows a general lack of care by the writers. I think I quit the show now. Site shut down! Call of 21-days of CHUCK!
Was Sarah's ret-conned past why your ninja source thought the episode would split the fanbase?
If I didn't know any better, I'd think this was shot by a first time director, edited by a first time lead editor, and written by two hacks. Acted really well.
"Was Sarah's ret-conned past why your ninja source thought the episode would split the fanbase?"I didn't ask him to clarify it yet but I bet it he will say it is the crappy kiss between Chuck and Sarah after she murders her handler.No? Alright, I really don't know. Plus, he is dead to me now anyway.
"If I didn't know any better, I'd think this was shot by a first time director, edited by a first time lead editor, and written by two hacks. Acted really well."Oh snap...
RIP, ninja source #1
"RIP, ninja source #1 "Not like he has anything left to tell me anyway. ;)I USED HIM UP!Actually, now that he has gone to work on *********, I may need to undeadify him.
Lets be honest, they have played fast and loose with the shows mythology for years. This is no more apparent than the intersect mythology which has gone from Chuck is special and no one else can even handle it, to Morgan being able to handle it. Also, Sarah stated in 4x20 "vs the family Volkoff" that she was caught between her two parents. This makes me think that her parents separation was really messy and that she had to choose who to stay with. She may have just liked her dad better.AB
"Two different problems with the episode."Yep, that was my only point. They are not related and make them look doubly careless.The continuity violation felt worse to me, because I didn´t expect it and it was completely unecessary for the plot to work.The issue about Sarah´s character is more severe, but I kind of expected those to be there, ever since Sarah´s mother was described as a "walking hug" and "very maternal". Those description just don´t fit when we knew the woman let her child be brought up by a completely unresponsible conman. I thought Sarah´s mother was dead after they had established how she grew up with her dad. The only other choice, that would have made sense was to make her an even less able parent than Sarah´s father and it´s hard to reconcile that with someone, who can be described as a walking hug or maternal at all.And her dad didn´t even want to have her around and left her with her grandmother.What did you expect? Because I really expected even worse. After those descriptions of her mother, I thought they would state she was raised by her and that she had only occassionaly ended up with her dad. That would have had even worse implications, because all of Sarah´s issues would have lost their basis, if she hadn´t been brought up primarely by her father.
"This is no more apparent than the intersect mythology which has gone from Chuck is special and no one else can even handle it, to Morgan being able to handle it."Strawman argument. From DAY ONE it was established that the Intersect was made to go into lots of brains. Chuck was special in other ways, as we found out at the end of season 3.As for Sarah choosing to go with her father, it isn't a child's choice where to go. Plus, as the show already established, her dad dumped her off whenever it suited him. So, why not her mom? Seems like a simple thing to answer. But when you don't care, you don't write it.
"She may have just liked her dad better."Seriously she was 7 or 8 in the flashback in Wedding Planner. And by then her father was already an unfit parent, who didn´t even want to have her with him. How on earth would he have gotten custody over a mother, who apparently wanted to give her a normal and safe childhood? And from what we learned in this ep looked to have the means to do that? That makes no sense.They needed to at the very least give her mother a past, that made her unable to provide a stable home for her daughter at that time.
"What did you expect?"I try not to expect. I try to go along with the story... until an episode like this where I feel the writers care less than the most useless fan fic writer. If you are going to introduce the mother, you HAVE TO introduce a reason for her not being in her life. And it wouldn't even take much time. Just explain it. It's a character issue. I'm not asking them to explain how the Intersect works.
It is too bad this episode had these two massive holes in it, because the Chuck and Sarah interactions, plus the Ellie and Awesome stuff, was done really well.
Just trying to provide some thoughts Magnus. From what you know about future episodes, will we ever see Sarah's mom again?AB
You know whats funny Magnus? When you love an episode the crazy shippers hate they call you a fanboy even when you make good arguments why you loved it. And when you crap on an episode and give excellent arguments they say your just trying to be different. But I read what you said and I first loved the episode but what you say makes sense. I still like the ep but you make really good arguments. We should have found out why her mom didnt raise her and that Grahem scene should never been included.
So true, and unfortunately that's what always causes me to overlook other stuff.I could get angry, but why? Because the interactions and th characters are often what matters more to me.
"From what you know about future episodes, will we ever see Sarah's mom again?"Never asked. But if I were to guess, I wouldn't be shocked if we see her in the finale.
"I could get angry, but why?"Because it sucks. Sucky things make me angry.
"I try not to expect."I guess that´s usually the better approach. I just can´t help setting up expectations and this time, mine were even lower than what the episode delivered. Mostly because I couldn´t stop imagining that worst case scenario with them retconning that Sarah grew up with her dad.And I also thought most of the interactions between the regulars were done really well. Sarah´s interactions with her mother would also have been good, if not for that elephant in the room. It was quite baffling to have Sarah´s mother tell her, that she wanted that perfect childhood for her and not have Sarah asking, why she didn´t provide it. And I guess Chuck´s parents have been handled better there. Because Chuck telling his dad, that he doesn´t want to hear what he can´t do, because he has seen what he can´t do, was one of the best executed scenes in the series.It´s sad that Sarah didn´t get an equally well written scene, because the acting was great. Her emotional plea to give that child the experience she never got was so well done and would have packed quite the punch, if some reason for resentment had been established on Sarah´s side.
For some reason I was expecting flashbacks to when Sarah just started with the CIA and that we would see her being trained by Ryker.Since we didn't get that they could have written Tim Dekay as just one of Sarah's old partners.I also thought that we'd see more of Sarah and her mother in this episode.In season 4 the way Sarah talked it seemed like their was some personal issues between but that wasn't addressed at all.I thought they were setting something different up for Sarah's mother.on the plus side I thought the plot about Ryker wanting his hands on the childs fortune was a good one.It has some good comedic moments from Ellie and Awesome.I don't think this is a huge retcon for Sarah's character and it wouldn't surprise me if this is never mentioned again.
I like that they kind of gave an explanation as to why Devon is so over the top awesome to Ellie. He lost her once to being a douche, so he's choosing to go out of his way for her now.
Should I mention in my review that Sarah looks five-years older in the flashback than she did in episode 1.01? ;)
Think about it, in another 5 weeks you will never be having discussions like this again! Kinda makes you sad, doesn't it?AB
"Think about it, in another 5 weeks you will never be having discussions like this again! Kinda makes you sad, doesn't it?"It only makes me sad if in five weeks we have five episodes that have crappy moments like this one. ;)Plus, I go off and write 5,000 reviews of other shows at geekfurious.com.But I get your meaning. Will I miss CHUCK? Yes. Probably more than I realize now. But am I glad to see it end? Yes. 91 episodes is more than enough for any show with a mythology.
Oh, worst thing in the episode outside of the two big holes in the story... Alex and Morgan got back together and it was lame. Break them up before I hate them again!
Also, have you ever tried to talk to someone through the thick windows of a bus? Even if you scream they are like "WHAT?!" But Sarah speaks in her sexy like a meow meow voice and Chuck's like "Oh yeah, I hear that, 10-4 good buddy."
LOL, are you going rant frame-by-frame now?:)
Lol @ "Sucky things make me angry"- me too, but I guess this episode killed me with unwarranted character pay off. Ce la vie.
Didn't Devon meet Ellie at med school that one ep where the flashed bact and they were going at it in a supply closet ? He's like " I'm Devon " , she's like " I'm Ellie " . But all of a sudden now he was a model ?
"but I guess this episode killed me with unwarranted character pay off"There was no character pay-off. Just emotional pay-off."Didn't Devon meet Ellie at med school that one ep where the flashed bact and they were going at it in a supply closet"Yeah but they were talking about when they were dating, not banging. Plus, he was in med school. I took it to mean he was modeling while a student.
I think I will write this review tomorrow.Me getting tired.
Why did Sarah choose to live with her father, the criminal, rather than her mother, the walking hug? It is addressed satisfactorily for me when Sara talks to Casey about putting children in the middle. I work with children who make similar decisions. They choose to go with the weaker parent who "needs" them. The stronger parent doesn't seem so needy. The stronger parent can force the issue, but that leads to running away behavior, etc., so the stronger parent agrees to allow it and hopes the child will learn from the bad experiences and come back home.
"Should I mention in my review that Sarah looks five-years older in the flashback than she did in episode 1.01? ;)"Nah, don´t be that petty. And I actually thought she did a good job of acting younger.I mostly still enjoyed the episode very very much, despite the carelessness displayed with the two glaring holes. The one with Graham and the timeline, I can easily ignore, because it had no real influence on the plot.The second one needs some major fanwanking to not continue to bug and deprived us of more meaningful scenes between Sarah and her mother. So it´s harder to get over. But at least I can still insert an explanation of Sarah´s mother being unable to care for her. Maybe that she used to be an alcoholic or drug addict or had an abusive boyfriend after she and Sarah´s dad separated. Then she got her life together and they somehow resumed contact only to have that very tentative connection destroyed when Sarah had to give up any contact, because of that child. It would still be nice, if they had at least tried to insert such a reason in the episode. The character definitely deserved that.I guess they just imagined her as an enigma and never quite bothered to fill in a meaningful backstory. She only got a handful of unconnected episodes dealing with that anyway.
"But Sarah speaks in her sexy like a meow meow voice and Chuck's like "Oh yeah, I hear that, 10-4 good buddy."Hey, that was at least established in earlier episodes. Remember Sarah whispering "Lisa" and that showing up on Chuck´s Tron poster? Obviously he has superhuman hearing as far as Sarah´s voice is concerned."It is addressed satisfactorily for me when Sara talks to Casey about putting children in the middle. I work with children who make similar decisions."But why would a child as young as that be given that choice? If her mother was having the means to and the desire to raise her and her father had neither? The child´s wishes are usually considered, but not always adhered to, if other circumstances make that choice not viable.
"I work with children who make similar decisions."Really? Because children don't have any legal choice in the matter. I should know, I dated two lady persons who worked with children of troubled homes. And it makes no difference what the child wants. So, why would her mother allow her to spend all this time with a criminal? Nothing in this or any other episode gives a satisfactory answer. Especially when you consider that he wasn't around much anyway.Why introduce the mother if you have no intention of actually revealing something about her influence on Sarah's life, as opposed to her influence on Sarah's "sister" who she actually kidnapped....And wait a second, not only does Sarah have millions of dollars in assets the CIA should be releasing, but her "sister" is a BILLIONAIRE.
Maybe Sarah's dad greased a few palms to get custody once she was old enough to really help him run cons and she expressed a desire for that life. I don't see any other way a mom who is stable wouldn't get custody over a con man. Would a con man even trust the court system?
"And wait a second, not only does Sarah have millions of dollars in assets the CIA should be releasing, but her "sister" is a BILLIONAIRE."I'm thinking that 5 year old probably has better money management skills than Chuck and Sarah.
Awelle, if the relationship was so tentative why would she tell her mom she was a spy? her mom knew all about it. that screams good relationship to me. tw0073
Maybe that's the problem... the writers all live cushy lives and are treated like royalty, so in their minds children get to choose to stay with the criminal and the other parent just lets it happen, no problemo.Should I mention that Sarah and Team B are total idiots again, allowing a bug to be placed in her hair and not even checking for it before letting her go to sleep and confess all her secrets?P.S.You know why 99.9% of bugs in TV shows and movies are totally stupid? Because bugs need a power source. Your hair is not a good power source.
"Awelle, if the relationship was so tentative why would she tell her mom she was a spy? her mom knew all about it. that screams good relationship to me."Which begs the question again... why was she with her dad?
"Awelle, if the relationship was so tentative why would she tell her mom she was a spy? her mom knew all about it. that screams good relationship to me."Sarah could have used sharing as much as possible to force a connection, if there hadn´t been much of a relationship because of those fanwanking reasons I gave.I think that makes still more sense than to have Sarah´s mother being able and willing to provide a safe home for Sarah, but somehow deciding to rather let her unable and unwilling father raise her, with no explanation at all.That comment about how she wanted to give Sarah a sheltered and caring upbringing comes off very passive aggressive, if we are supposed to insert: "But your 7 year old self choose your irresponsible conman father, who didn´t want you around, so it´s on you, that you didn´t get to enjoy such a perfect upbringing. Too bad for you. There was certainly nothing I could do, to overcome the explicit choice of a little kid."
A lot of people on this blog are writing explainations as to why Sarah's mom wasn't around.The point is that the writers didn't give an explaination and the should have.That's the major thing wrong with the episode.It still didn't answer anything about Sarah and her mother.If Sarah's mom suffered from depression or alcoholism then write that.
"The point is that the writers didn't give an explaination and the should have."Yes, that is the point. Which is why I labeled my possible explanations as fanwanking. My point is, that this is at least still possible, because they gave no reason. They could have given a reason, that was in clear contradiction to what we have already seen. Like stating, that Sarah´s father was in fact a very responsible upstanding guy, who looked like a viable choice to raise a small child.And the worst case scenario, they could have stated that Sarah did actually grew up with her mother and only occasionally saw her father. That would fall in line with the way her mother was portrayed, but it would utterly destroy the established backstory and take away any basis for Sarah´s issues, that relate to the way her father raised her.
"If Sarah's mom suffered from depression or alcoholism then write that. "Exactly. The writers showed no care for the characters, or the fans who have followed them for five seasons. And I don't understand why. Especially these specific writers who have, at times, handled these characters better than most.I understand the emotional pay-offs being important, but in an episode like this, the character arc is just as important.
"I understand the emotional pay-offs being important, but in an episode like this, the character arc is just as important."They are also closely related. Any emotional payoff concerning Sarah and her mother was very much stifled by the fact, that we were not aware of Sarah having any explanation as to the reason her mother did not in fact provide that wonderful childhood for her, that she said she wanted her to have and that she was able to provide for Molly.The scene in which her mother tells her, that she wished that for her and the scene with Sarah looking at the pictures of her mother and Molly suffer greatly for that.
Sarah got hurt, was tied and tortured again...Casey got shot almost in every season... We'll see that chuck will be shot or really hurt Because anybody must care about him, worry about him...Chuck is in all scene but he isn't leading role he is the funny character of the show...
Awelle,They could have written it that Sarah's mother was a bad alcoholic that was neglectful to Sarah during her childhood.She was so bad that Sarah's dad Jack Burton was the more responsible one.However over time Sarah's mom stopped drinking and became more responsible and that's why she left the baby with her.That would not have messed up continuity or contradicted anything.The writers didn't try hard enough that's the problem.
I agree with everything DR said. This epi just rang hollow to me. I guess not being a shipper didn't help my case, he he.Last week's ep felt organic despite the minor plot holes. But VS the Baby just left me very confused.S.
Agree. And the thing is to fix these 2 big holes would have meant just inserting some lines for explaining the absent Mom situation and how they came back together after her father went to jail/at the time Sarah went to start with CIA. And then with the Graham scene they could have just said we have a situation with Bryce, your ex-partner that we need you to look at in Burbank.Sill enjoyed watching the episode but these things are so frustrating. The only reason I enjoyed it was just because the actors are so good...but really that is why I enjoy this show. The humor has never been funny enough for me and the spy stuff never works for me either. The Chuck producers should thank their lucky stars they cast across the board such fab actors.As for Chuck understanding her thru the bus, they established that she was talking to him via the magical ear communication devices that TV shows use while she was sitting at the table and he and Casey were up in the room. I assume that was still on and then she shut it down while in the bus. It was weird though how she didn't give us the touch ear signal that shows usually do.As for Morgan and Alex, I am with you on it, break them up, everybody doesn't have to have a happy ending.
One thing I really liked about the episode, was how clear they made it, that Sarah already had a big heart and the tendency to do the right thing before she met Chuck.I didn´t really doubt that. And it´s certainly true, that Chuck changed her and helped her reclaim the hold on her feelings.But I have often read people stating, that Sarah only became a good person or completely human because of Chuck. And her line about being nothing but a spy without him from Phase Three did nothing to discourage that image.And she may see herself that way. I am still glad, it´s not completely true. She may need Chuck to be happy and to fully embrace that part of herself, but she always has had a good heart and the ability to deeply care.
Yeah, my general trend of liking even numbered episodes less continues. 4, 6, and now 8 were all missing the mark for me. This one was merely OK up until the massively, MASSIVELY unforgivable idiocy with continuity. Look, I'll overlook some inconsistencies in the name of character stuff. But this one violated a major premise in s1 and 2 (Bryce and Sarah as former partners and former lovers) AND Sarah's characterization both.It's like they didn't even bother knowing their own show, or care, and it wasn't some trivial detail. And as it's been pointed out, that scene was so freakin' unnecessary too. So even the good moments from this one, and there were some, are pretty much wrecked by the giant elephant turd in the room.5x09 promo looks really good, though.Cor
"The writers didn't try hard enough that's the problem."I agree. I made those same fanwanking suggestions you did. :)I just happened to think they could also have botched it even worse by not only failing to give an explanation, but inserting one that clearly contradicts what has been shown before.Like they did with the handler thing and the start of Chuck as a mission. ;)
awelleAgree, that they are always saying that Chuck saved her etc., it would have been nice if when her Mom thanked Chuck for giving this to her, he could have replied that she helped give him a meaning and purpose in life. To me, Chuck showed her how love, family, friends, and she gave him strength and belief in himself. Instead, he just smiles at the Mom basically saying "yeah, I'm great like that" ;)
Cripes, this was a LeJudkins episode? Apparently they need to stick to focusing on Casey and just leave handling Sarah to others.Psh, Lev, Casey might not have a happy ending. If anyone is slated for it, he's totally gonna be the token "death in a blaze of glory" during the finale. ;)Cor
@LevI didn´t really mind that. I think Chuck appreciates what Sarah has done for him and expresses that often enough.If anything it took him quite some time to see what he could offer her. But the show always made that pretty clear and in doing so sometimes gave the impression, that Sarah wouldn´t be a good person without Chuck.And I liked that they made it clear here, that she probably wouldn´t have a happy or fulfilled life, but she always was a good person at the core.
"Cripes, this was a LeJudkins episode? Apparently they need to stick to focusing on Casey and just leave handling Sarah to others."All the writers contribute to a script, so they're pretty much all to blame. Any one of them could have tweaked the script to make sense.
Sue, that's certainly true and as DR has pointed out, it is the same head writer who keeps letting junk like this slip by.But I lay primary responsibility on the individual writers for each episode, because if they did their job to begin and didn't screw continuity and/or character, it wouldn't be something others should have fixed. I'm mostly just surprised because LeFranc and Judkins are usually much better than this.Cor
"All the writers contribute to a script, so they're pretty much all to blame. Any one of them could have tweaked the script to make sense."And presumably Chris Fedak still oversees everything. It´s his show. He obviously has been there from the beginning. He should remember the pilot. And be fully versed in his main characters backstory.
You pointed out that it was directed/edited/written by relative newbies, but at least on the "written" part, the storyline is always masterminded or approved by Fedak/Schwartz, right? They would have final say with things like the 2 big plot holes we speak of? Or at least the writers turn their draft in and then Fedak, etc. read it and say, "hey, this doesn't work" Anyway, I guess I am trying to say the buck has to stop there. Their error or their not caring enough to fix, or not feeling it important enough to bother.I found the zooms or whatever the director was doing in the Sarah scene when she goes back to the room with the baby in it very weird. The other little tricks (such as the spinning during the Life game), might be interesting in another project, but seem not to fit with the style that has been laid out over the entirety of the series. I get that directors want to show off a bit, but a TV show has an established look.
I don't think that was necessarily a retcon at the end with Bryce and the intersect.Tony Todd showed Sarah a picture of Chuck in the flashback and then they went back to present time before he was done explaining everything about the mission.That being said has anyone noticed how they have phased out the Bryce Larkin character from the show?He was an important character with the shows mythology during the first two seasons.He is mentioned a handful of times in season 3 but nothing in season 4 or in this episode.When Decker was telling Chuck that he was just a pawn and everything was planned Decker never mentions Bryce.Decker does mention Shaw, Fulcum, The Ring but not Bryce.In this episode when it would have made a lot of sense to make mention of him he's not.
Awelle,Just because the writers might have given a bad explaination is no excuse.They generally write the characters a lot better than those season long mythology arcs and so they should be held to a higher standard. Just last season Wedding planner was a good episode.
No flaming, baiting, trolling, expletives, or racism allowed. And NO DISCUSSIONS of the actor's personal lives ever.