Review: 'The Americans' - 'In Control': The Center will hold
Both sides scramble when President Reagan is shot
Matthew Rhys and Keri Rusell in "The Americans."
I'm on vacation this week, but I got to see tonight's "The Americans" in advance, and I have a few quick thoughts coming up just as soon as I dig up a buried weapons cache...
Given when the series started, a Reagan assassination attempt episode was inevitable. What made "In Control" so impressive was the way it took an event where we know all the details — that Hinckley was trying to impress Jodie Foster, that Al Haig was speaking imprecisely, that both Reagan and James Brady would survive — and instead was able to put us in the mindset of the troops on the ground on both sides at this moment. If you're the FBI, of course, you're going to assume that Hinckley had Soviet connections. And if you're Claudia (formerly Granny), of course you're going to take Haig's remarks as warning signs of a coup.
This was a case of the show plausibly setting up Phillip and Elizabeth as the fulcrum for this moment in history. If they send too alarmist a message back to Moscow, then missiles could start flying, but they kept their heads, and so did we all.
Another really strong outing, and one that managed to still examine the state of the Jennings marriage — and the Beeman marriage, for that matter — in the midst of all the chaos.
What did everybody else think?
News From Our Partners
-
'The Voice' Recap: Top 8 Revealed, Blake Shelton + Miranda Lambert Perform 'Over You'
T-ara Member Hyomin Shows Off Her Sexy Side in Korean InStyle [Pics]
Listen to David Guetta's Remix of Empire of the Sun's 'Alive
-
HomeVideo Review: My Neighbor Totoro / Howl’s Moving Castle
TV Club 10: What made The Middle one of the best family comedies in years
For Our Consideration: Will indie-rock reunions become just part of the plan?
-
'Grimm' Season Finale Review: "Goodnight, Sweet Grimm"
'The Killing' Season 3′s Latest Trailer: The Beginning of a New Spree!
'Man of Steel' Trailer: Zod Will Make Us Suffer
-
What to Watch Tonight: The Season Finales of SVU, The Middle, Modern Family, Chicago Fire, Nashville, and Criminal Minds
What to Watch Tonight: SYTYCD, Awkward., and the Finales of Grimm, The Game, and DWTS
7 Lessons We Learned from the 2012-2013 TV Season
-
The Telefile - TV on DVD: Tuesday, May 21, 2013
The Telefile - Veep: The Episode's Best Insults
The Telefile - Saturday Night Live: Straight Outta 8H
-
Is 'Jurassic Park 4' a Reboot? Yes, According to Sam Neill
'Return of the Jedi': 25 Things You Didn't Know About the Original 'Star Wars' Trilogy Finale
Melissa McCarthy Fires a 'Tammy' Extra for Mistreating Her Child
-
Seth MacFarlane's Next Film: 'Every Line Is Hilarious,' Amanda Seyfried Swears
'The Wolverine' Trailer: Five Questions It Answered
'Star Trek Into Darkness' Takes Box-Office Crown With $84 Million
-
Who Won 'DWTS'?
Backstage Drama Leads To 'Nashville' Changes
Who Went Home On 'The Voice'?
Get Instant Alerts on What's Alan Watching
Latest Posts
-
A Showtime leftover doesn't really fit at NBCWednesday, May 22, 2013
-
Will's gift takes an increasing toll; can the bad Dr. Lecter help him?Tuesday, May 21, 2013
-
Cathy and her family prepare for the end as the Showtime dramedy concludes on a strong noteTuesday, May 21, 2013
-
Daniel ponders a trip out of town as the terrific first season comes to a closeMonday, May 20, 2013
Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login SignupMark
February 21, 2013 at 12:25AM EST Reply to CommentI enjoyed this one tonight, hoping we get more Granny as the weeks go on. Anyone think with the FBI agent having marital problems it's only a matter of time before he is having an affair with the woman from the Russian Embassy?
Darden OMG You said it Mark. I've been thinking that.
February 21, 2013 at 2:13PM ESTHISLOCAL How crazy would it be if he came onto Elizabeth instead, and she had to go along with it in order to either not arouse (bada bing!!) suspicion, or in order to get intel from him.
February 22, 2013 at 11:48AM ESTEd
February 21, 2013 at 12:37AM EST Reply to CommentI was hoping your slug line would be:
"… just as soon as I initiate Operation Christopher."
Lainiejay
February 21, 2013 at 1:50AM EST Reply to CommentIt's been interesting watching the KGB interpreting events in the US through the prism of their fears and belief system. It helps one understand why the Cold War lasted so long, since our side doesn't seem to have a much better understanding of the Soviets. This episode really drives that point home. Also interesting is that tonight's events were sandwiched between the further healing of the Jennings' marital schism and the first sign of chinks in the Beeman's marriage.
Jonas.Left
February 21, 2013 at 3:01AM EST Reply to CommentWell for those who wondered if this show was afraid to let Elizabeth and Phillip get their hands dirty, we have the answer. It was definitely hard to see a character I've come to like do something so harsh. Obviously she didn't revel in it, and she did her best to avoid it, but once she made the choice she didn't hesitate or even seem to regret it. Phillip is firmly established as the conscience of the show, questioning his and Elizabeth's actions and their responsibility to the greater good. Its interesting that for all the global ramifications of the story, the real stakes turned out to be personal. Phillip takes a stand for something he believes in, and Elizabeth realizes that blind obedience is an abdication of moral responsibility. On top of that, she has truly accepted Phillip as her partner.
The attention to detail with the spycraft on this show has been really impressive. The dynamite rigged crates, the surveillance, and counter-surveillance, it all feels very real. It makes a show like Burn Notice look pretty silly by comparison (though I do enjoy it).
With a lot of great shows you can look back at early episodes and see growing pains. The writers and actors not quite getting to where they ended up as the series hit its stride. I get the feeling that won't be the case with The Americans. This show just feels right.
Darkdoug Afraid to get their hands dirty? When would that idea have ever come up? When they murdered the defector who meant no harm to them? When they pretty much acted to kill an innocent student to coerce his mother into betraying the people who helped save his life in order to spare him?
February 21, 2013 at 8:54AM ESTTheir complicity in the murder of Joyce? Even if they did not directly do it, people have been executed for thinner associations with war crimes, and to suggest they were completely ignorant of the possibility is absurdly naive. Philip and Elizabeth have gotten their hands dirty in every episode, and to suggest that the elimination of some anonymous "red shirt" security guard who was about to cause their arrest is somehow shocking, unprecedented on the show, or any sort of escalation is kind of a stretch.
Jonas.Left The defector was a player in the spy game and a rapist. His death was morally justified by my standards and I think most people who watch the show would agree with me. The maid, her son, and her brother were allowed to live. What was done to them was terrible, but they weren't murdered. Joyce was killed without there fore-knowledge. Phillip threatened Gregory to ensure her safety, and neither Elizabeth or Phillip gave any indication that they thought Claudia was lying to them. Killing an innocent civilian who wandered into the middle of an operation and threatened their cover is on a different level than what we've previously seen them do. After nearly killing the maid's son, both of the Jennings were clearly sickened by what they had done. Here, Elizabeth just shrugs it off as a part of the job. To me, that was something new for this show. A man who did nothing wrong is dead, literally by the hand of one of our heroes.
February 21, 2013 at 5:15PM ESTJonas.Left It also occurred to me that the "red shirt" is not only an innocent victim, but in his interaction with Elizabeth he's established as a nice guy. A lesser show would have had the security guard act like a total prick so the audience wouldn't mind or might even approve when he was killed.
February 21, 2013 at 6:48PM ESTadamjmil "Joyce was killed without there fore-knowledge."
February 21, 2013 at 8:28PM ESTSorry, but they very well knew what was likely to happen to Joyce. Whether they fooled themselves into pretending it wouldn't happen is another issue. I agree with DarkDoug that it was fairly clear they would get their hands dirty, although the quick and decisive murder of the security guard certainly reinforced that. Good point about him being a nice guy (the poisoned student and his mom were portrayed as good people also). This show is great about showing how everyone believes they are on the "good" side and are thus acting rationally from their perspective.
Jonas.Left ADAMJMIL I respect your opinion, and its entirely valid to theorize about what characters are thinking, but I don't see any indication that they knew Joyce would die.
February 21, 2013 at 8:44PM ESTAfter reading DARKDOUG's response I read a lot of diiferent reviews, and I found sevedal critics who noted the killing of the guard as a notable development in the show. One in particular wrote that he thought he knew how the show worked, that the Jennings would be brought to the brink of killing an innocent and then they would find a way around it. He specifically referred to the scene where Phillip smothers the maid's son with a pillow until she finally relents. Now we know better.
Darkdoug The maid and her family were allowed to live out of pragmatism. Covering up a murder is a bit tricky, and even the most intimidated family member might crack under interrogation, not to mention being a lot less willing to cooperate in the future. The maid is a future asset - she is someone with access to the private residence of the Secretary of Defense! Do you really think that was the end of her working relationship with Philip & Elizabeth? Maybe the show won't bring her back, but in reality, that's what they do. She is nowhere near done with the Jennings in real life, because now they have leverage and can blackmail her the exact same way the FBI is using the Soviet Embassy staffer.
February 21, 2013 at 9:41PM ESTThe simplistic mindsets of other critics are hardly evidence of the show breaking new ground. This is, after all, on FX, where the majority of their non-comic original programming features anti-hero protagonists with murders against their consciences.
As far as the security guard goes, his death is not even all that extraordinary! By his very occupation he is the spy's equivalent of an enemy soldier. What they did might actually, depending on the reasoning, be more morally justified than most of their other actions. He was, after all, a threat to their mission, which was not a selfish caper, like FX's other heroes like Vic Mackey or Jax Teller might be attempting, it was a mission being carried out by trained and authorized operatives of a sovereign nation against a hostile power!
The fact that circumstances conspired to spare the lives of the maid's family does not remotely alleviate the moral burden on Philip and Elizabeth, and if they were not intending to follow through on their threats, they are laughably incompetent.
Darkdoug As for the defector, your moral code might find it acceptable, but in general, society, the law and morality all disapprove of murder, even to avenge a rape, and especially a rape more than two decades earlier.
February 21, 2013 at 9:53PM ESTAs for the defector being "a rapist" that is only true in the most technical sense of the word, and not remotely true in any legal sense. If Philip and Elizabeth's general profession and infiltration mission is justified on the grounds of patriotism and loyalty, then the defector was not a rapist. His sexual imposition on Elizabeth might have been against her preferences, but it WAS legally sanctioned. You cannot argue the "government-sanctioned" character defense position one week and then proclaim a higher standard of morality in the next. If you do that, you are not analyzing, you are simply taking the knee-jerk position of supporting the protagonist, regardless of the circumstances.
Elizabeth joined the KGB probably of her own free will and surrendered her conscience to the rodina. While she might not have wanted to have sex with her superior officer, she forfeited the right to refuse by her acquiescence to being trained as an agent. She has no more moral right to complain about that than a soldier has to complain about being physically stressed during basic training, or tortured during SERE training. What is more, there was almost certainly an element of training in her experience, both teaching her to endure such things, motivating her to achieve a level of hand to hand combat proficiency that will allow her to escape such occurrences in the future, and also accustom her to the use of her sexuality as a tool of the trade.
I honestly do not see how you can claim that people who have signed over their genitalia to the service of a tyrannical dictatorship have any room to complain or commit murder in revenge for someone else doing the same thing, merely in a manner to which their emotional reactions are negative.
Taking dicks for Mother Russia is Elizabeth's JOB! If you don't like or can't accept that aspect, maybe you should reconsider your defense of her loyalty to the powers that be who create such circumstances.
Jonas.Left DARKDOUG Every show has a moral spectrum it paints its protagonists with. Some are black and white, others have varying shades of grey. I'm talking about how grey this show will allow its depiction of the Jennings to be. Neither I nor the critic I alluded to suggested that a show's lead characters committing an outright murder is unprecedented throughout television history, just that it was something this show hadn't done. Perhaps its a subtlety you don't appreciate, but killing enemy combatants, traitors, and rapists is diiferent from killing innocent civilians. In the pilot, when Phillip goes after that perv asshole from the mall, he doesn't murder him. Clearly these characters have a moral code. The death of the security guard futher defined that code for viewers. My observation was about the show's willingness to portray the harsher aspects of the world its depicting.
February 21, 2013 at 10:05PM ESTadamjmil "I don't see any indication that they knew Joyce would die."
February 21, 2013 at 10:17PM ESTThe characters have to know how the Soviet system works, otherwise they would be incredibly naive, and they have not been portrayed that way. And as this episode shows, they are fully aware of what would happen if their bosses ever find out that they sat on some intelligence.
"My observation was about the show's willingness to portray the harsher aspects of the world its depicting."
Are we talking about the show or the characters? The show was already willing to kill Joyce, so the guard is not new.
Jonas.Left DARKDOUG Yes, my moral code is that a person who would rape someone for any reason is not fit to live. The law is a code of conduct not a philosophy. I don't know how many people agree with mine.
February 21, 2013 at 10:18PM ESTWe have only the word of Elozabeth's rapist that he was given the order to rape female recruits.
Was Elizabeth joining the KGB voluntary? The flashbacks indicate she came from poverty. She probably didn't haveany options.
Having consensual sex with Phillip and assets during her mission is vastly different from being held down and violated against her will.
Jonas.Left ADAMJMIL I was talking about the show allowing its main characters to go as far as they did.
February 21, 2013 at 10:28PM ESTJonas.Left DARKDOUG SERE training is something soldiers agree to do. Theywknow its going to happen. The military doesn't torture its personnel without warning and then tell them afterward it was educational.
February 21, 2013 at 10:44PM ESTYour comments are sickening. You think this is funny? That rape is amusing? The basis of storytelling is that an audience can empathize with a fictional character. By that principle, I care about Elizabeth. In her, I see a humanity that is entirely lacking from your last post.
adamjmil "His sexual imposition on Elizabeth might have been against her preferences, but it WAS legally sanctioned."
February 21, 2013 at 11:02PM ESTI don't see how the rape was legally sanctioned.
Jonas.Left ADAMJMIL In the pilot Elizabeth and Phillip took a KGB agent who defected to the U.S. prisoner. That agent was a martial arts instructor who raped Elizabeth during her training as a recruit. The defector tried to convince Elizabeth that he was not responsible for his actions because he was told by his superiors to rape female recruits. According to DARKDOUG this means it was not wrong because it was legally sanctioned by the KGB.
February 21, 2013 at 11:17PM ESTadamjmil Yes, I saw the pilot. The instructor's words (in '81) were that they were allowed to take liberties with the recruits and that it was a job perq. I interpreted that as everyone up the chain looking the other way on rape (our own military has been alleged at times to be not that different).
February 21, 2013 at 11:54PM ESTLooking the other way vs legally sanctioned are two very different things. Note that it being illegal wouldn't mean much in those circumstances - I'm sure the Soviet government broke their own laws all the time.
Jonas.Left ADAMJMIL Okay. Does that mean you agree with me?
February 22, 2013 at 12:08AM ESTadamjmil I don't see why you care, but I agree with you that EJ's rape was illegal, and that consenting to have sex with Phillip and assets does not equate to consenting to be violated by anyone up the Soviet hierarchy.
February 22, 2013 at 12:21AM ESTI disagree with your personal criticism of DarkDoug and strongly disagree with your assessment that the Jennings' did not know what would happen to Joyce.
I agree that the show was wise to make the security guard likeable before killing him.
Jonas.Left ADAMJMIL I was asking about the issue of the rape, since the Joyce and the security guard were several posts ago. I don't continue with topics unless I have something new to contribute to the discussion and you were quite unambiguous in your opinions on those. As far as D.D., I personally find "taking dicks for Mother Russia is Elizabeth's job" offensive, especially in regard to a rape.
February 22, 2013 at 12:36AM ESTHISLOCAL @JONAS.LEFT - In most cases I'd agree w/ you, but this show has absolutely portrayed Elizabeth as someone who's icy-steel conviction to Mother Russia would lead her to view her rape as something that was intended to make her stronger. The only emotional moment that I haven't believed on this show is that she was going to kill him 15-20 years later for raping her (they did earn Philip's rage though - he's been protrayed as much more emotional). I wouldn't expect her to like him, but she's so committed to duty, at the expense of her humanity, that she wouldn't ever kill a superior officer for something that she would think of as a way to prepare her for going to evil America.
February 22, 2013 at 11:59AM ESTSlackerInc I absolutely agree the show took us across a new threshold when she killed the rent-a-cop. I was literally like "whoa" when it happened. Dark stuff!
February 23, 2013 at 3:36AM ESTDarkdoug Jonas, one thing only, since you seem too emotional on the rape issue to discuss it clinically (Hislocal comes close to recapitulating my position). I would put the security guard in with all those other people you seem to think it's okay to kill, because he IS a security guard! He is a member of the security apparatus threatening Philip & Elizabeth in their mission. He is an enemy soldier and not remotely an innocent civilian like the maid & her family, or Joyce, all of whom Philip & Elizabeth have either proven willing to kill or a party to their murders. That circumstances conspired to spare the lives of the maid & her family does not absolve Philip & Elizabeth, nor does it change that they WOULD have let their poison finish its job on the kid. If they are willing to do that much, the security guard is small potatoes, and much further inside the category of acceptable deaths.
February 25, 2013 at 5:57PM ESTAna
February 21, 2013 at 4:16AM EST Reply to CommentI rewound but I still couldn't make out what he said in the final scene "if Moscow finds out we sent them (couldn't make out), we are finished." What was that?
Some Guy "...we sat on the Haig intelligence..."
February 21, 2013 at 4:35AM ESTMr. Brevity
February 21, 2013 at 4:29AM EST Reply to CommentSo far so good.
Some Guy
February 21, 2013 at 4:56AM EST Reply to CommentIs it just me or does Matthew Rhys look like the love child of Julian McMahon and Zach Braff.
Anyways, really enjoying this show so far, hasn't had a dud episode yet.
KobraCola I always think of Zach Braff when I look at Rhys (to the point where I've joked that Zach was screwed out of getting this part), but, having googled what Julian McMahon looks like, you're definitely right.
February 21, 2013 at 3:34PM ESTvelocityknown I thought he looks like James McAvoy, just with different hair.
February 21, 2013 at 8:07PM ESTDarkdoug
February 21, 2013 at 8:43AM EST Reply to CommentI wonder if there will be any ramifications of the assassination attempt on Pope John Paul II, which WAS Soviet-backed. Though that event might not have hit as hard with mainstream Americans and would be far less likely to have had an effect on the "Jennings'" work, it might still serve as some sort of hook for an examination of the morals and comparison of the work being done by operatives of the same organization. Even if the Jennings are not posing as Christians (I don't recall if that has been addressed either way on the show), they might still be aware of the ramifications, and of course, their kids' take on such an event might affect their own outlook.
I wonder what would be the appropriate course of action regarding religion? Presuming them to be good communists, they are almost certainly atheists in practice. Even to the extent that religion was tolerated in the USSR, they would certainly not assign someone as unreliable as a practicing religious individual to an important deep-cover assignment. While non-religious people were hardly uncommon in the USA in the 1970s and 80s, it might have been decided that pro forma church attendance made the Jennings fit in better, so it is possible that their children could be nominally Christian.
In short, I think that might be another interesting historical hook to explore the ramifications of their lives and covers.
SlackerInc Good point.
February 23, 2013 at 3:38AM ESTberkowit28
February 21, 2013 at 11:18AM EST Reply to CommentI was wondering whether younger people, who weren't around at the time, have any idea who Alexander Haig was. There wasn't any explanation, even in passing, that he was just White House Chief of Staff, was there? Would this be generally known to people who didn't live through that time? (I'm curious, I'm not American.) It's very easy to see how the Russians would see the presence of a (retired) senior army general running things as possible evidence of a coup - I never thought about that before. I wonder how it played to people watching the show who know an attempt was made on Reagan's life and probably the Jodie Foster pseudo-"connection", but not about Haig.
Kenneth
February 21, 2013 at 11:33AM ESTI knew about it, and I wasn't born until 87, but I am something of a history student. (Haig was Secretary of State, for example, not Chief of Staff.)
ddben There is no "pseudo" in the Jodie Foster connection. John Hinckley expressly stated that he attempted the assassination in order to impress the then-young movie star.
February 21, 2013 at 11:41AM ESTAlso, Haig was well known as chief of staff for Reagan, and took a whole ton of heat for that "I'm in charge" statement. However, while there was confusion, nobody ever really thought that there was a coup in progress. It was more an attempt to reassure the nation since VP Bush was flying at the time and communications weren't what they are now.
Another problem was the obvious use of a New York City taxi when the show is set in DC! I'm not so sure about the meticulous details here as opposed to, say, "Mad Men".
garyinfh The first and third commenters in this thread are under the misapprehension that Alexander Haig was President Reagan's chief of staff. They're just about half right: Haig served briefly as Reagan's Secretary of State, from the beginning of the first term (when The Americans is set, in 1981) through June 1982, at which point he resigned, and was succeeded by George Shultz.
February 21, 2013 at 12:46PM ESTHowever, Haig had previously served both Presidents Nixon and Ford as chief of staff, so perhaps that's why the commenters were confused about Haig's position in the Reagan Administration. All those Republican presidents are alike, don't you know...
berkowit28 Right - I was confusing administrations. Haig was Chief of Staff under Nixon (when Haldeman resigned) and Ford, Secretary of State for Reagan. I found the latter hard to accept at the time, and I seem to have erased it from my mind. And the show did have someone explaining the chain of command that gave Haig his claim, which makes sense now.
February 21, 2013 at 1:03PM ESTJodie Foster "pseudo" connection only in that she herself was not involved in anything; it was all in Hinckley's fevered mind. That's all I meant.
banone78 Re: the above comment about the NYC taxi. Another car gaffe; the car the doomed security guard was driving had not yet been built in 1981. I had one of those - it's a mid-80s K-Car. Who cares, I know.
February 21, 2013 at 3:16PM ESTHISLOCAL I'm pretty sure I saw a modern Dodge Ram pickup truck parked down the street from where they were surveilling the wife & baby in the last episode. I think finding that stuff is like an "easter egg" - you know the show is filmed in 2013, so there's bound to be little anachronistic stuff from time to time, and it's fun to find it, not get upset that they didn't catch it.
February 22, 2013 at 1:14PM ESTAllyson I was born in 85, and I had no idea who Haig was. (I'm no history buff, but I did graduate from a good college.) I assumed he was someone involved with the military since Russians were so concerned about the coup. I also didn't remember the Jodi Foster connection, but after hearing it, it did sound familiar. I think you're right, they could have explained Haig's situation a little better, but to me, it didn't necessarily detract from the story.
February 22, 2013 at 1:49PM ESTSlackerInc HISLOCAL, I saw that modern looking truck too (I will take your word on the make). I love the show, but I do wish they would be more careful when shooting, or maybe use some computer wizardry to clear that stuff out in post-production.
February 23, 2013 at 3:42AM ESTjlrepka Haig wasn't Secretary of State for long, as he couldn't get along with other members of the administration (particularly Weinberger). As SoS he was 5th in line, after the VP, House Speaker O'Neill, and President pro tempore of the Senate (Strom Thurmond at the time). Though people have tried to excuse his gaffe, it did create unnecessary confusion at the time -- though Bush was in transit, he wasn't incommunicado, so it was no more necessary for someone to "be in charge" at the White House at that point than it would have been had President Reagan _not_ been shot, but was incommunicado for the few minutes in the car between the hotel and the WH.
February 24, 2013 at 12:44AM ESTEllen M.
February 21, 2013 at 11:19AM EST Reply to CommentAnother impressive episode. So far, the gamble that we would want to see Soviet spies in the '80's US seems to be a sure bet. I am wondering how the shooting of the security guard will come back to haunt them in future episodes. Also, such an interesting dynamic between Philip and Elizabeth. She's so hard core pro-Soviet and he's seeing more sides to a bigger picture. Great area for conflict between them. And Claudia - so sweet until she's leaving the car after talking paranoid Soviet strategy with Elizabeth and gives those furtive looks. Great seeing Margo M. playing a bad-ish guy again. Who knows what she will be doing in future. I'm not as enthralled by the FBI stuff - it seems less nuanced. But seeing the Feds get almost as paranoid as the Russians was very insightful and watching them think that Soviets might really be behind the assassination attempt was very believable. So who was in Control? I think Phillip was.
Non-LeCarre
February 21, 2013 at 12:26PM EST Reply to CommentMy favorite part of tonight's episode was the dichotomy between Philip's understanding of the U.S., and Elizabeth's- the scene where he explains that in the Soviet Union the last time leaders died in office it was hidden, and that's not how things work here. Meanwhile, Elizabeth, who's lived in the U.S., as long as Phillip, buys into Haig, former general + I'm in charge + President shot = military coup to soon be followed by nuclear attack on Soviet bloc.
I'm a little curious to have a little more filled in about their social and community involvement whereby Elizabeth might learn a little more about the U.S. They seem friendly with the FBI agent neighbor, but that's complicated. Has Elizabeth ever been to a PTA meeting at her kids' schools? Obviously, she's a busy KGB spy, but that's part of fitting in, right?
adamjmil I loved that dichotomy as well. As for Elizabeth not understanding how strong the line of succession is - obviously she would not have taken an American civics class growing up. Of course that should be part of her training, but maybe knowing it in an academic sense is different than really knowing how it would work in practice.
February 21, 2013 at 8:22PM ESTInterestingly they would have seen it work at least once, when Nixon resigned. When did they get to the U.S, 1964? Not long after LBJ took over, so there's that reference also.
I found myself wondering how they answer the question "Where were you when you found out about JFK?" in casual conversation.
dean
February 21, 2013 at 12:53PM EST Reply to CommentI think Mathew Rhys looks more like Lindsey Buckingham which is ironic with Tusk being such a seminal song in the Pilot.
hampshi
February 21, 2013 at 1:26PM EST Reply to CommentWhere the come out of the hotel and find out about the assassination attempt only after their afternoon hook-up reminded me of Peggy and the JFK assassination on Mad Men.
JerseyRudy This show is comparable to Mad Men in taking richly developed characters and putting them into momentous historical events as they happened. I don't make that comparison lightly. Mad Men is my favorite show ever.
February 21, 2013 at 10:42PM ESTGeorgeFricke
February 21, 2013 at 5:30PM EST Reply to CommentI liked this review.I generally like Alan's reviews, so am not surprised. This is a surprisingly good show.
GeorgeFricke
February 21, 2013 at 5:30PM EST Reply to CommentGood review good show.
Oaktown Girl
February 21, 2013 at 8:06PM EST Reply to CommentI remember very well the Alexander Hiag brouhaha and all the jokes about it that started up almost immediately. So I found this episode from a Soviet perspective very interesting and well done.
I also liked that it was addressed what kind of toll Beeman's undercover work has taken on his marriage.
adamjmil
February 21, 2013 at 8:17PM EST Reply to CommentTerrific episode. I loved the Soviet perspective on the Haig thing. Us Americans know what he meant, but if you're from a less stable country and the leader dies and someone else says "I'm in charge", *of course* you're going to think it's a coup.
Only thing I didn't like was the part about the FBI agent's marital issues. It felt like exposition - he found out about it the same way we did
(unless it was alluded to earlier? If so I don't recall...his wife has not been on screen much).
Jonas.Left In the pilot episode, Beeman tells his wife that there's something "off" about Phillip, and his wife tells him that he's letting his job color the way he sees the world to their detriment. She leavened the criticism with humor, but there was an undercurrent of tension.
February 21, 2013 at 8:55PM ESTLee
February 21, 2013 at 8:27PM EST Reply to CommentThe only thing I really enjoyed was the misinterpretation of that fool Haig's declaration of being in control. I remember when that happened and we all knew exactly what it was - the idea that there may have been an entire swath of people thinking there was a coup in the works, is just very funny.
She (RR's character) is so one-note that I have a hard time with the portrayal; I'd like more dimension. She just spouts everything without any really meaningful thought - she seems like the perfect patsy.
Maybe she will get more layers over time but right now, I don't see any though I do think KR's acting is excellent; for me, it's just (still) the less than compelling writing - for me anyway.
Jonas.Left After living through eight years of the Bush administration, seeing people accept the word of their government when they should know better is not a novelty. K.R.'s character at least has being raised in a totalitarian dictatorship as an excuse.
February 21, 2013 at 9:12PM ESTDarkdoug But she's alluded more than once to being in tune with the left wing of American political activity, from wanting to raise their children as American socialists to her relationship with a leftist-fringe activist to her knee-jerk reaction to hearing a teacher disabused his students of the fiction of Communist Poland's independence. The Soviets might draw lines on a map to gain extra numbers in international institutions like the Olympics or the UN, but for all intents and purposes, Moscow had more say over the governance of Poland than Washington has over that over New Jersey. And in foreign policy, of course, there was barely even the pretense of sovereignty among the states behind the Iron Curtain. Her indignation at hearing that a teacher frankly spoke of the realities of the situation is just one more indication of how her mind is attuned to the official party line of Moscow and the left-wing extremists in her current country.
February 21, 2013 at 10:05PM ESTWith that kind of established background, it is entirely credible that she would have uncritically accepted the Democratic & left-wing editorial position that Haig sought a coup. Even if they did not truly believe it, there would have been a lot of Democrats and media supporters who would have called it as such, just to score political points and undermine the administration. Can you really believe that Limbaugh and Boehner and company would do any different if the Obama cabinet appeared to suffer a similarly divided understanding of a crisis?
FictionIsntReal "Russia" was a republic within the larger Soviet Union, though it was certainly the dominant one. It would seem odd to call Poland "part" of Russia, since Ukraine is in between. Calling Poland "part" of the Soviet Union, by contrast, would not be officially correct but would sound more sensible that putting it in Russia.
February 23, 2013 at 1:43AM ESTDarkdoug Of course, but for all intents and purposes, people (including the Soviet government) have used Russia & USSR, or "Russian" & "Soviet" interchangably. The relationship between Poland and Russia even predates the Soviet Union, and there were no doubt many people who recall a world before an independant Poland OR the USSR existed. Independant Poland first showed up in the 20th century as territory the German Empire carved out of the Russian Empire in World War One. The Poland of 1981 stands on considerable territory carved out of Germany, while much of Poland's historic territory was given to Belarus (aka White Russia, a nation that had NEVER been independant as of '81) following WW2.
February 25, 2013 at 6:05PM ESTFor conversational purposes, the teacher is generally right.
FictionIsntReal Finland also gained its independence after WW1 (and fought a "Winter War" with the Soviets subsequently). Before it belonged to the Tsarist empire, it was controlled by Sweden. Yes, Sweden was an imperial power before Peter the Great took them on.
February 25, 2013 at 10:09PM ESTJerseyRudy
February 21, 2013 at 11:05PM EST Reply to CommentI loved the parallels to the 9/11 attack and the Kennedy assassination in this episode. The intelligence agency desperately trying to find a connection between Hinckley and the KGB just as they tried to find a connection between the 9/11 attack and Saddam Hussein and the Kennedy assassination and the KGB (starting off with the conclusion and working your way back, rather than letting the facts take you to the correct conclusion).
And the constant images of the shooting being replayed on television over and over again, with the children having the same debate that so many had on 9/11 about whether it was necessary to watch it over and over or had crossed the line into ghoulishness. And the same thing happened when the Zapruder film was released.
And the incorrect initial reports about Brady dying and the uncertainty over Reagan's condition, just as the initial reports on 9/11 reported that it was a small plane accidentally flying into the tower, and then later reports that day had many more than 3,000 casualties. and the initial reports from Dallas in 1963 had shots fired from the grassy knoll.
I am sure the KGB was in more of a panic in 1963, given the actual connection between Oswald and the USSR and the slower means of communication back then. I thought this episode did a great job of showing the many ways that history does repeat.
Curly hair I saw Elizabeth's actions with Philip as very calculated, especially near the end of the episode. I think she may have genuinely wanted to connect with him romantically but the reality of their job and her fierce loyalty to the KGB and their work will prevent her from ever truly loving him. She recalls what her mother told her about relying on herself and then uses sex to soothe the tension between them. I think she would turn on him if the situation merited it.
February 22, 2013 at 10:06AM ESTFictionIsntReal Oswald actually was a communist who had defected to the USSR (where he found his wife) and attempted to continue communicating with Moscow back in the west. LBJ endeavored to avoid the Soviets being associated with the assassination in the public mind. http://crookedtimber.org/2009/12/22/i-dont-mind-who-writes-the-laws-of-the-future-if-i-can-write-and-sing-the-theme-tune/
February 23, 2013 at 1:47AM ESTSlackerInc FYI, the House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded that there *were* shots fired from the grassy knoll.
February 23, 2013 at 3:50AM ESTCurly, I disagree: I think we've been given multiple indications that Elizabeth was genuine in finally "falling" for Philip in the pilot.
MeisterNJ
February 22, 2013 at 10:32AM EST Reply to CommentAnyone notice the same cars are in a lot of the different scenes? In particular, there's a late '70s early '80's gray mercedes turbodiesel that is parked on the street in most shots. I'm digging the show. It's pretty good and a nice bit of nostalgia from my childhood.
HISLOCAL I was actually thinking while I watched that it must be tougher and tougher to get their hands on new-looking cars from that era.
February 22, 2013 at 1:19PM ESTHISLOCAL
February 22, 2013 at 1:22PM EST Reply to CommentDid anyone else notice that a recurring thing on this show is the bald-headed hispanic FBI agent continuously getting yelled at and/or embarrassed at work? Is that heading somewhere? Is he going to snap, or get turned to KGB because he's frustrated w/ the FBI? It would be a cheesy stretch, but if it's not headed somewhere, why have a scene of him getting dressed down by the boss in every episode?
JerseyRudy They went even beyond that this week by having the scene in which he fails to warn Beeman over the radio about the car following the girl. Beeman had the instinct to make the failure moot this time, but there is obviously something deeper going on with the agent. At this point it could just be that he is incompetent or ambivalent, or it could be something more. We also saw this week that the KGB supervisor is suspicious enough of the girl to have her followed, so it is possible someone is giving them info about her.
February 22, 2013 at 2:25PM ESTChesterfield ...and he was kind of overlooked as Agent Beeman got all the credit for the mole in the Russian consulate. I remember noticing that, but they didn't make anything out of it then, it was just something I thought about when I saw it.
February 25, 2013 at 5:56AM ESTMentoch
February 23, 2013 at 3:56AM EST Reply to CommentIf anyone is interested in the time frame this show is taking place in...
In the pilot they reference, the Capitals being in Los Angeles, with Dennis Maruk scoring 2 goals. That game took place February 7, 1984
This episode clearly took place on March 30th (the day of Reagan's assassination). Meaning its been a little over six weeks over the first 4 episodes.
I'm a nerd for looking up that hockey game, but thought others might be interested.
Jaxemer11
February 23, 2013 at 11:50AM EST Reply to CommentLoved this episode. Surprised that they brought out the Reagan shooting so early though. That seems like something most shows would save for a finale.
jlrepka The show is set during the Reagan administration, and the assassination attempt occurred only 10 weeks after the inauguration. Tough to fit a dozen plots within that framework...
February 23, 2013 at 11:21PM ESTChesterfield
February 25, 2013 at 6:00AM EST Reply to CommentI must say, I am really, really loving this show so far. Maybe it's because I was brought up in the 80s (in Sweden, but still, the Cold War was something "we" were very aware of even as we stayed out of it as much as possible), but the sense of paranoia, the cool spy tradecraft and the typically "cable TV" moral greys are there.