Yes I know I’m super late with this episode, but ya know Celebrity Big Brother seems like it’s on like 5x a week, there are two Drag Race franchises on and ya know, life. But I persist. I know this comment won’t be seen by anyone but thought I’d bring some London geography observations.
The first scene, with the two being ferried in the van, they’re being driven around the Excel/City Airport/Royal Docks area of East London (where very coincidentally I now live.) There’s a shot with the imposing Millennium Mills building in one of the backgrounds. Probably had no relevance. On the way to the detention centre (they said Essex, so this might make sense they’d go this way).
One of the last scenes, where poor Laurie gets thrown from a moving van, returns to the same area. That white building with a D on it is an old part of the docks (Silo D - also a Grade II listed building) right in front of Millennium Mills.
I definitely didn't find this episode thrilling. I don't feel super invested in the show at its mid-point and I wonder if it's possible to change my mind at this point. I do wonder why the hell Sandrine was hired for this kill and by whom, but to be honest I could probably drop the show and not think about it ever again.
That said, I was quite disturbed by what felt to me like a rape. I could tell right away when her abusive boss saw her put away the burner phone that he was gonna blackmail her into sex, but somehow even though it technically was "coerced sex" it actually felt like rape. Because she literally did not have another choice. Her life would be over.
I need the show to really pull together all these disparate strands in ep 3.
The gender stuff really is the central thematic concern here, though it seems with a distinctive British "class" edge. Visually the use of framing objects (doors, windows) and reflections is pretty over the top. I think it's kind of wasted in that it's relentless and obvious while not being remotely aesthetically appealing. Compared to "Utopia" (which I just binged on this community's recommendation) it doesn't aspire to ironic beauty but just takes the viewer away from the character's journey and into a cerebral space. Assume that's the intent but combined with the sprawl of characters and "mystery" of it all, it can be hard to decide who to invest in. Lot's of characters to loathe, few to like. Compared to other mystery series like Happy Valley, Broadchurch, 1st season of US The Killing, this show doesn't spend time exploring the emotional space of characters with any depth. Having seen this before I still don't remember exactly what the twist is. It feels like with characters as bad as the MI5 guy (House Slytherin, right?!) and the commanding officer it is a commentary on British Patriarchy more that story of people facing painful challenges.
The general challenge for me (not a statement on Collateral) is that I tend to probably not watch as actively as Tim talks about and am impressed with some of the thoughts here. Which is not to say, of course, that I don't have feelings about what I am watching. In a show like this, it is more about whether the story is keeping me engaged and interested, and this episode of Collateral definitely did that. I like what The Box Set is trying to do and I think it will make watching these and other shows a more interesting experience. I'm looking forward to more.
Oh and the (imo?) over the top ugliness and complete disdain for the female counterparts of most of the male characters (detective, army, MI5) definitely stands out.
I am enjoying the series. It's my first time through. Others have commented on aspects of the camera placement. It may just be me but I found myself feeling queasy several times with the rotation when characters were on the move. Especially in the scenes with Laurie.
This was definitely a mid-game, see-the-chess-pieces moving episode. But for that, it was not at all bad.
Several people have already commented on the camera work in Sandrine's therapy sessions. I had noticed that a few other scenes had shot dialogue between two characters with the camera over the shoulder of the listener. It gave me the feel of listening in on the conversation. In the therapy session, that gets ramped up as the conversation intensifies. I think it is when Sandrine is talking about watching her friend blown up. To me, it looks like half of the camera frame is now shooting the neck of the listener, and half the screen left for the face of the speaker, ramping up the feeling of claustrophobia and an overheard conversation. Sandrine and the other female soldier echo the theme in a different way when they talk about always being watched.
I'm surprised there was not more from David, the politician. He seemed to be connected to everyone in Episode 1, and I assumed he would be more in the middle of things.
The MI5 officer was interesting. On one hand, he clearly knows his stuff, and was able to call out Fatima's obfuscations. On the other hand, his dismissal of the idea that English cannot be behind the immigrant smuggling operation is of course a giant blind spot.
The harassment story is the one thing that is really not working. There's not much subtlety to the commanding officer character. I hope this going somewhere.
Good perspective, William and this is yet more proof, your willingness to like it but still be skeptical, that understanding the viewer is a learning curve for me. What I mean is, all these answers are good to read because it seems most people are still all in, even with what I would consider a weaker episode. I think that's earned faith from the first episode, partly, too.
I watched "Collateral" when it debuted on Netflix. I don't remember feeling so repulsed by the Commanding Officer character as I do on this rewatch. I wonder if this hits differently now after #metoo?
A minor thing, but I'm fixated on how one could be running some sort of illicit operation out of one's travel agency, but yet have one's voicemail passcode set to 0000.
Definitely continuing to enjoy this show. I must say I am doing the slow binge (of 1 a week) and I completely forgot about what was going on from last week (not sure what that says about me or the show). I will say it was interesting in a 4 episode series that there was very little plot movement in this one and a lot more character development. After the very past paced first episode this was an interesting change. Definitely think this show may work better as a binge, but i'm enjoying the challenge of watching it slowly.
So far I am LOVING this series, I had no issues with episode 2 so I can only assume the last two are gonna be awesome!!!
Random observations from episode 2:
- The Golf Clubs in the psychiatrist's seemed somehow REALLY ominous and creepy. Also his choice of words "perhaps we should play a round together" was a particularly odd choice of words...
- The books behind the shots of Sandrine were forming a frame around her head but were completely scattered and disordered. I have to imagine that is an indication of her head space...
- They gave Officer Glaspie some AWESOME quips in this episode:
"My dad said 'to never let in the police', they bring bad luck"
"Your Dad was right, WE DO"
"At last I've met someone with problems worse than my own"
- It seems like every time two people are discussing the case or making progress with the investigation the characters are in some type of hallway, walkway, or tunnel that has the shot narrowing on to and focusing on the characters...
- My prediction is that that MI5 a$$hole giving the partner his business card is going have some sort of narrative significance later on...
- Apparently Sandrine REALLY needs that phone (YUCK!!!) If that P.O.S. doesn't get the karmic justice he deserves I'll be really disappointed...
Thought the word choice was normal, but struck me as strange that a therapist would suggest this to a patient.... unless they have some other unestablished connection.
I wanted to see the flash I missed in episode one, honest. It still felt mostly straightforward, though. It's so good it barely matters ... Carey Mulligan does wonders with a rather minimalist acting style. As for the Box Set concept, I must be hooked, because I've only got two more episodes of Yellowjackets (a pretty flashy show) but I put them off until I'd seen Ep. 2 of Collateral.
1. It’s one of those amazing coincidences that this of all weeks, we start the episode with “Big Yellow Taxi” by Joni Mitchell. Great song and a great artist!
2. I am continuing to notice where the camera is. A standout scene is our army lady/assassin meeting with a shrink (I think that’s who he is). The camera is dead set in front of her. You’re looking at her like she is in your living room. No escape. There’s definitely something off about her!
3. Boy that MI5 guy is a jerk! He’s almost a cartoon villain except face it, his point of view is very common.
4. I think I am going to try to stop theorizing too much. It’s almost more enjoyable to sit back and watch the story unfold. Take in the information but just enjoy the artistry of this show.
Looking forward to reading everyone else’s thoughts!
Yeah, sometimes when *I* find a particular bad character too over the top bad, not everybody else does. I think both the MI5 guy and Sandrine's commanding officer are of that sort. But, as you said, there really are people that blunt. And as I said, I need to tolerate some shortcuts in a 4 episode piece.
The lowered expectations I had going in might have really set this episode up for success for me - ha. Totally satisfied by the end and still challenging to not hit NEXT EPISODE. Noticeable details for me -
- the narrowing focus of the lens in the Sandrine/shrink scene. Golf clubs prominently (annoyingly) in the background for the first few exchanges. Our view became increasingly narrowed, dark/shadowy around their faces, as he increased his probing and she obviously feeling ____ (PTSD / pending doom / anger / frustration / etc) until POOF - she takes control of the narrative, asks about his golf game, and we're able to see the entire background again.
- I'm terrible at picking up on foreshadowing or clues, but could tell in E1 that Fatima's English was good. Her use of the word 'guard' solidified this guess and I felt really great when MI5 agreed :D
- Can't recall why I thought in E1 that the priest was MP Mars' sister? Maybe she is?
- Gender dynamics (to put it mildly) - a very strong theme woven throughout for me. Female cops, soldiers, athletes, pizza shop managers, killers, refugees. The male characters - threatened, suspicious, dismissive and more.
Gender dynamics stuff is spot on, Miche. And yeah, the golf clubs were...very evident. Seems like we all saw that and thought, well, OK, I see you.I don't think the MP is the brother of the priest, but it's also possible I totally missed that.
I find that I have more to say about shows that I’m seeing for the first time, although I am enjoying seeing Collateral for the second time.
I’m so happy to see you back. I like Metacritic, but I find that I see eye-to-eye with you (and Jason Snell, an excellent co-host) on tv all of the time. I compare you to my all-time favorite movie reviewer, Roger Ebert, not just because I agree with both of you, but, like Ebert, you are a real writer and you appreciate tv done well for the story and for the esthestics.
Thanks for the kind words, Michael and if you didn't listen to the song "Roger Ebert" that's at the bottom of the Resounding post I did ("Tim," Yeah. "Tim") then you should. It's so great.
This interests me. I rely on Metacritic for movies, and my biggest influences are critics ... when I was in grad school in English, my people weren't Derrida and Butler but Pauline Kael and Greil Marcus. It wasn't until the era of Prestige TV that I found television critics to follow: Tim, of course, the great Maureen Ryan, Alan Sepinwall. (And for people in the Bay Area, I am old enough to remember Terrence O'Flaherty.) Now, with Tim having been on something of a hiatus and Mo doing more long-form work, only Alan resembles the good old days. And so I find I'm using anonymous re-cappers more than I used to. Oh, for the days of Television Without Pity.
Steven, thank you as well for the kind words. When I started at the SF Examiner, Terrence invited me over to dinner (and to meet him for the first time) and one of the things he said was that he hoped I'd eventually go over to the Chronicle and supplant John Carman, who followed him, and who he didn't like. Ha. (And I did, of course.)
I remember being annoyed at some of the other storylines and not seeing how they matter to the police investigation. This is my second viewing and I know the broad strokes but even on a second viewing, the army story line and especially the harassment story didn't seem to fit - I think I even thought on the first viewing how that story would matter to the back half or how that would tie into any motivation for army lady. The glimpses into her backstory made a bit more sense.
Maybe it's because it's a second viewing of this ep but I was getting easily distracted by other things (laundry, at one point) until we got back to the police investigation.
Slow pacing is fine (Rectify!) but this is different somehow.
I am watching for the first time. To me the harassment situation I felt put this guy into a potential witness position. Maybe not what he signed up for!
That's interesting -- I didn't get distracted but I felt some of the shortcut nature of it; things that were overtly forced. I know it gets better, just interesting that this time around it struck me that way. And, oh, believe me, the whole industry worries about people folding their laundry while watching! It's a thing!
Yes I know I’m super late with this episode, but ya know Celebrity Big Brother seems like it’s on like 5x a week, there are two Drag Race franchises on and ya know, life. But I persist. I know this comment won’t be seen by anyone but thought I’d bring some London geography observations.
The first scene, with the two being ferried in the van, they’re being driven around the Excel/City Airport/Royal Docks area of East London (where very coincidentally I now live.) There’s a shot with the imposing Millennium Mills building in one of the backgrounds. Probably had no relevance. On the way to the detention centre (they said Essex, so this might make sense they’d go this way).
One of the last scenes, where poor Laurie gets thrown from a moving van, returns to the same area. That white building with a D on it is an old part of the docks (Silo D - also a Grade II listed building) right in front of Millennium Mills.
I definitely didn't find this episode thrilling. I don't feel super invested in the show at its mid-point and I wonder if it's possible to change my mind at this point. I do wonder why the hell Sandrine was hired for this kill and by whom, but to be honest I could probably drop the show and not think about it ever again.
That said, I was quite disturbed by what felt to me like a rape. I could tell right away when her abusive boss saw her put away the burner phone that he was gonna blackmail her into sex, but somehow even though it technically was "coerced sex" it actually felt like rape. Because she literally did not have another choice. Her life would be over.
I need the show to really pull together all these disparate strands in ep 3.
The gender stuff really is the central thematic concern here, though it seems with a distinctive British "class" edge. Visually the use of framing objects (doors, windows) and reflections is pretty over the top. I think it's kind of wasted in that it's relentless and obvious while not being remotely aesthetically appealing. Compared to "Utopia" (which I just binged on this community's recommendation) it doesn't aspire to ironic beauty but just takes the viewer away from the character's journey and into a cerebral space. Assume that's the intent but combined with the sprawl of characters and "mystery" of it all, it can be hard to decide who to invest in. Lot's of characters to loathe, few to like. Compared to other mystery series like Happy Valley, Broadchurch, 1st season of US The Killing, this show doesn't spend time exploring the emotional space of characters with any depth. Having seen this before I still don't remember exactly what the twist is. It feels like with characters as bad as the MI5 guy (House Slytherin, right?!) and the commanding officer it is a commentary on British Patriarchy more that story of people facing painful challenges.
The general challenge for me (not a statement on Collateral) is that I tend to probably not watch as actively as Tim talks about and am impressed with some of the thoughts here. Which is not to say, of course, that I don't have feelings about what I am watching. In a show like this, it is more about whether the story is keeping me engaged and interested, and this episode of Collateral definitely did that. I like what The Box Set is trying to do and I think it will make watching these and other shows a more interesting experience. I'm looking forward to more.
Oh and the (imo?) over the top ugliness and complete disdain for the female counterparts of most of the male characters (detective, army, MI5) definitely stands out.
I am enjoying the series. It's my first time through. Others have commented on aspects of the camera placement. It may just be me but I found myself feeling queasy several times with the rotation when characters were on the move. Especially in the scenes with Laurie.
This was definitely a mid-game, see-the-chess-pieces moving episode. But for that, it was not at all bad.
Several people have already commented on the camera work in Sandrine's therapy sessions. I had noticed that a few other scenes had shot dialogue between two characters with the camera over the shoulder of the listener. It gave me the feel of listening in on the conversation. In the therapy session, that gets ramped up as the conversation intensifies. I think it is when Sandrine is talking about watching her friend blown up. To me, it looks like half of the camera frame is now shooting the neck of the listener, and half the screen left for the face of the speaker, ramping up the feeling of claustrophobia and an overheard conversation. Sandrine and the other female soldier echo the theme in a different way when they talk about always being watched.
I'm surprised there was not more from David, the politician. He seemed to be connected to everyone in Episode 1, and I assumed he would be more in the middle of things.
The MI5 officer was interesting. On one hand, he clearly knows his stuff, and was able to call out Fatima's obfuscations. On the other hand, his dismissal of the idea that English cannot be behind the immigrant smuggling operation is of course a giant blind spot.
The harassment story is the one thing that is really not working. There's not much subtlety to the commanding officer character. I hope this going somewhere.
Good perspective, William and this is yet more proof, your willingness to like it but still be skeptical, that understanding the viewer is a learning curve for me. What I mean is, all these answers are good to read because it seems most people are still all in, even with what I would consider a weaker episode. I think that's earned faith from the first episode, partly, too.
I watched "Collateral" when it debuted on Netflix. I don't remember feeling so repulsed by the Commanding Officer character as I do on this rewatch. I wonder if this hits differently now after #metoo?
As vile as his character is, I find myself more appalled by Karen's verbal abuse of her daughter in this viewing.
A minor thing, but I'm fixated on how one could be running some sort of illicit operation out of one's travel agency, but yet have one's voicemail passcode set to 0000.
Ah, the counterintuitive 4 code of simplicity trick!
Definitely continuing to enjoy this show. I must say I am doing the slow binge (of 1 a week) and I completely forgot about what was going on from last week (not sure what that says about me or the show). I will say it was interesting in a 4 episode series that there was very little plot movement in this one and a lot more character development. After the very past paced first episode this was an interesting change. Definitely think this show may work better as a binge, but i'm enjoying the challenge of watching it slowly.
(My first time watching this series)
So far I am LOVING this series, I had no issues with episode 2 so I can only assume the last two are gonna be awesome!!!
Random observations from episode 2:
- The Golf Clubs in the psychiatrist's seemed somehow REALLY ominous and creepy. Also his choice of words "perhaps we should play a round together" was a particularly odd choice of words...
- The books behind the shots of Sandrine were forming a frame around her head but were completely scattered and disordered. I have to imagine that is an indication of her head space...
- They gave Officer Glaspie some AWESOME quips in this episode:
"My dad said 'to never let in the police', they bring bad luck"
"Your Dad was right, WE DO"
"At last I've met someone with problems worse than my own"
- It seems like every time two people are discussing the case or making progress with the investigation the characters are in some type of hallway, walkway, or tunnel that has the shot narrowing on to and focusing on the characters...
- My prediction is that that MI5 a$$hole giving the partner his business card is going have some sort of narrative significance later on...
- Apparently Sandrine REALLY needs that phone (YUCK!!!) If that P.O.S. doesn't get the karmic justice he deserves I'll be really disappointed...
The therapist’s office had incredible framing and camera angles! The golf clubs caught my eye immediately!
I think there was some innuendo in the golf comment for sure but technically it is a "round of golf" so you "play a round." But yeah.
Thought the word choice was normal, but struck me as strange that a therapist would suggest this to a patient.... unless they have some other unestablished connection.
I wanted to see the flash I missed in episode one, honest. It still felt mostly straightforward, though. It's so good it barely matters ... Carey Mulligan does wonders with a rather minimalist acting style. As for the Box Set concept, I must be hooked, because I've only got two more episodes of Yellowjackets (a pretty flashy show) but I put them off until I'd seen Ep. 2 of Collateral.
God is this show good! A few thoughts:
1. It’s one of those amazing coincidences that this of all weeks, we start the episode with “Big Yellow Taxi” by Joni Mitchell. Great song and a great artist!
2. I am continuing to notice where the camera is. A standout scene is our army lady/assassin meeting with a shrink (I think that’s who he is). The camera is dead set in front of her. You’re looking at her like she is in your living room. No escape. There’s definitely something off about her!
3. Boy that MI5 guy is a jerk! He’s almost a cartoon villain except face it, his point of view is very common.
4. I think I am going to try to stop theorizing too much. It’s almost more enjoyable to sit back and watch the story unfold. Take in the information but just enjoy the artistry of this show.
Looking forward to reading everyone else’s thoughts!
Yeah, sometimes when *I* find a particular bad character too over the top bad, not everybody else does. I think both the MI5 guy and Sandrine's commanding officer are of that sort. But, as you said, there really are people that blunt. And as I said, I need to tolerate some shortcuts in a 4 episode piece.
The lowered expectations I had going in might have really set this episode up for success for me - ha. Totally satisfied by the end and still challenging to not hit NEXT EPISODE. Noticeable details for me -
- the narrowing focus of the lens in the Sandrine/shrink scene. Golf clubs prominently (annoyingly) in the background for the first few exchanges. Our view became increasingly narrowed, dark/shadowy around their faces, as he increased his probing and she obviously feeling ____ (PTSD / pending doom / anger / frustration / etc) until POOF - she takes control of the narrative, asks about his golf game, and we're able to see the entire background again.
- I'm terrible at picking up on foreshadowing or clues, but could tell in E1 that Fatima's English was good. Her use of the word 'guard' solidified this guess and I felt really great when MI5 agreed :D
- Can't recall why I thought in E1 that the priest was MP Mars' sister? Maybe she is?
- Gender dynamics (to put it mildly) - a very strong theme woven throughout for me. Female cops, soldiers, athletes, pizza shop managers, killers, refugees. The male characters - threatened, suspicious, dismissive and more.
Gender dynamics stuff is spot on, Miche. And yeah, the golf clubs were...very evident. Seems like we all saw that and thought, well, OK, I see you.I don't think the MP is the brother of the priest, but it's also possible I totally missed that.
Yes that same scene hit me in a similar way. It creeped me out. I also thought the priest was his sister!
There's a part of me thinking, "OK, the Collateral fans are busy and they'll catch up later..." Ha.
I find that I have more to say about shows that I’m seeing for the first time, although I am enjoying seeing Collateral for the second time.
I’m so happy to see you back. I like Metacritic, but I find that I see eye-to-eye with you (and Jason Snell, an excellent co-host) on tv all of the time. I compare you to my all-time favorite movie reviewer, Roger Ebert, not just because I agree with both of you, but, like Ebert, you are a real writer and you appreciate tv done well for the story and for the esthestics.
Thanks for the kind words, Michael and if you didn't listen to the song "Roger Ebert" that's at the bottom of the Resounding post I did ("Tim," Yeah. "Tim") then you should. It's so great.
This interests me. I rely on Metacritic for movies, and my biggest influences are critics ... when I was in grad school in English, my people weren't Derrida and Butler but Pauline Kael and Greil Marcus. It wasn't until the era of Prestige TV that I found television critics to follow: Tim, of course, the great Maureen Ryan, Alan Sepinwall. (And for people in the Bay Area, I am old enough to remember Terrence O'Flaherty.) Now, with Tim having been on something of a hiatus and Mo doing more long-form work, only Alan resembles the good old days. And so I find I'm using anonymous re-cappers more than I used to. Oh, for the days of Television Without Pity.
TWoP FTW! Miss that site and all the snark! There was a magic in that forum that I never really found anywhere else.
Steven, thank you as well for the kind words. When I started at the SF Examiner, Terrence invited me over to dinner (and to meet him for the first time) and one of the things he said was that he hoped I'd eventually go over to the Chronicle and supplant John Carman, who followed him, and who he didn't like. Ha. (And I did, of course.)
I remember being annoyed at some of the other storylines and not seeing how they matter to the police investigation. This is my second viewing and I know the broad strokes but even on a second viewing, the army story line and especially the harassment story didn't seem to fit - I think I even thought on the first viewing how that story would matter to the back half or how that would tie into any motivation for army lady. The glimpses into her backstory made a bit more sense.
Maybe it's because it's a second viewing of this ep but I was getting easily distracted by other things (laundry, at one point) until we got back to the police investigation.
Slow pacing is fine (Rectify!) but this is different somehow.
I am watching for the first time. To me the harassment situation I felt put this guy into a potential witness position. Maybe not what he signed up for!
That's interesting -- I didn't get distracted but I felt some of the shortcut nature of it; things that were overtly forced. I know it gets better, just interesting that this time around it struck me that way. And, oh, believe me, the whole industry worries about people folding their laundry while watching! It's a thing!