Inside Television with Alan Sepinwall

Review: 'The Office' - 'Moving On': Be like Mike

Andy's reign of terror continues, while Pam meets a potential new boss who reminds her of the old one

By Alan Sepinwall Friday, Feb 15, 2013 7:21 AM

John Krasinski and Jenna Fischer in "The Office."

Credit: NBC

Are you a fan of The Office?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

A review of last night's "The Office" coming up just as soon as I hose you down...

That's two largely unpleasant episodes in a row since Andy returned. And what was strange about "Moving On" was the way it presented us both Andy as a far more malevolent version of Michael Scott at the same time it was giving us Bob Odenkirk as a much more accurate approximation of the real thing.(*) Until now, it's felt as if Andy was being written as Michael Scott by people who have forgotten how to write for Michael Scott, but the Odenkirk scenes were a pretty spot-on recreation of the early years.

(*) Was Odenkirk ever considered to play Michael, or was it Steve Carell all the way? I don't remember much about the development of the show, but in 2004-05, Carell would have had a higher recent profile thanks to "The Daily Show."

Michael Scott could be a genuinely hurtful character, but the episodes where he was (the pilot, "Scott's Tots") tend to be among my least favorite of the Carell era. Yet other than his irrational hatred of Toby, his worst behavior tended to come from a naive place — he thinks he and Pam are going to laugh and laugh about the fake firing, and he thinks he's going to become successful enough to put all these kids through college — where Andy was just being petty and mean. There's nothing funny in his self-justifying behavior, and I was very disappointed that the episode didn't open with David firing him. But we have to be heading that way, right? I can't imagine sustaining this for the remainder of the season.

That said, I did enjoy Pam's time in Philly, whether it was her reaction to being in Odenkirk's presence, or the romantic dinner gone awry at the Athlead offices. Again, tension in the Halpert/Beasley marriage is fine, but much more interesting when it comes from within like this — with Pam finally articulating the real reason she's not happy with this plan — than when it's via last-minute outside obstacles.

And I was, of course, intrigued by the very last frame of the episode, when Oscar's computer screen presents an ad for "The Office: An American Workplace" (which was originally going to be the title of this show, to differentiate it from the Gervais/Merchant version, and which I believe has been used in some international markets), debuting in May. I'm far more interested in seeing the documentary actually air, and in seeing the characters' reactions to it, than I am in the idea that the boom mic guy has a crush on Pam.

But if Andy continues to dominate the action and crush all the goodwill generated earlier in the season, it's going to be a very, very long wait to get to May.

What did everybody else think?

Alan Sepinwall
Sr. Editor, What's Alan Watching

Alan Sepinwall has been reviewing television since the mid-'90s, first for Tony Soprano's hometown paper, The Star-Ledger, and now for HitFix. His new book, "The Revolution Was Televised," about the last 15 years of TV drama, is for sale at Amazon. He can be reached at sepinwall@hitfix.com

Related Searches: The Office, John Krasinski, Jenna Fischer, Rainn Wilson, Ed Helms, Alan Sepinwall

Next 131 Comments

Trey Mattingly

"That's what Mose said about that girl scarecrow of his and look what he did to her..."
February 15, 2013 at 8:41AM EST Reply to Comment
- Shawn Funniest line of the episode!
  February 15, 2013 at 10:28AM EST
- Shawn That, and Pam saying, "Not going on a three month boat trip."
  February 15, 2013 at 10:29AM EST
- Col Bat Guano The delivery of the boat trip line was perfect.
  February 15, 2013 at 11:39AM EST
Greg

See, I thought the Andy/Erin/Pete dynamic was very funny. Andy the character was it's funniest when he was a boarish mean guy from Stamford who it was fun to root against. Remember the things he did to Dwight and his attempts to suck up to Michael? This gets back more to the character's roots imo, and that's why it has worked better for me.

Andy the character was at its worst when they tried to force us to like him and root for him.
February 15, 2013 at 8:48AM EST Reply to Comment
- Gabriele Reply to comment...
  February 15, 2013 at 9:25AM EST
- lomilaw that's fine, but Andy at his worst should not dominate the action be the main focus of an episode. Its too much.
  February 15, 2013 at 9:38AM EST
- Kmarko Andy with anger issues from the early days was a supporting player, though. His scenes then were funny, and he was easily swatted down. In this boss role, he's just this massive sucking black hole of unpleasantness. His scenes just sort of vaguely depress me now.
  February 15, 2013 at 9:41AM EST
- Col Bat Guano I agree with the fact that there was too much Andy and that a lot of it was pretty funny. Unfortunately, elevating Ed Helms to manager last year has boxed them in. Now if Wallace could just fire him, we'd be getting somewhere.
  February 15, 2013 at 11:41AM EST
- Guest The Andy parts were unwatchable
  February 15, 2013 at 12:33PM EST
- Dezbot I couldn't stand Andy last night. Nothing he did made me laugh. I hope Wallace fires him for the stunt he pulled hiring the exes, too. If Toby wasn't off being strangled, he'd have shut that whole thing down.
  February 15, 2013 at 2:11PM EST
- Jon, The Earl of Hamm Sandwich I'm with you Greg. "Andy's Revenge" was about the funniest thing this show has done in a LONG time. it was smart, no one was expecting it...I mean I don't get the reaction, other than that maybe most of you commenting are really "nice" people and just don't appreciate mean humor or revenge fantasy humor. I'd be curious how many of you like Always Sunny but somehow hated this, because you might just hate Andy and be missing a great scene
  February 15, 2013 at 4:51PM EST
- youngjt80 I agree. This was one of the funniest episodes in years. The stuff with Andy might have gone on a bit too long but I wasn't offended by it like Alan seems to be. I mean, they brought Gabe back and that's awesome. The Pam/Odenkirk stuff was great and brought me back to the old days when this was still an amazing show.
  February 16, 2013 at 4:26PM EST
John

I don't mind them making Andy the villian. The about-face for the character is jarring, but its a damn sight more interesting than anything else they've done with the character. I also thought the David Wallace scene worked.

On the other hand, am I the only one happy "The Farm" didn't make it to series? That subplot was unpleasant!
February 15, 2013 at 8:58AM EST Reply to Comment
- Nancy Spot on. Last night's dinner scene rendered boom ex machina even more ridiculous. Pam's scared to move on but is just now getting around to plainly articulating it. Was she counting on Jim not succeeding & hoping she'd not have to come out and say it?
  
  Too bad Andy's boat wasn't a Carnival cruise ship in the Gulf.
  February 15, 2013 at 9:17AM EST
- Robin I don't think Pam wants Jim to fail, but now that has has not failed, she is forced to confront a reality that she simply wasn't mentally prepared for.
  February 15, 2013 at 11:01AM EST
- Col Bat Guano @John Yeah, that was plenty of the Schrute family for me. Watching repeated full half hours of that would have gotten old very fast. The beet farm B&B was one thing, but this was completely unconnected to reality.
  February 15, 2013 at 11:44AM EST
- Jon, The Earl of Hamm Sandwich ditto and ditto John (great name by the way)...evil Andy was great last night and the Dwight stuff was SO bad they could renamed that show "Do No Farm" and just immediately cancelled it after 2 minutes
  February 15, 2013 at 5:00PM EST
- basilfawlty No. I'm delighted the Farm was cancelled.
  February 19, 2013 at 12:40PM EST
Bahahaha

....as soon as I can take a breath deep enough to blow a whistle.
February 15, 2013 at 8:59AM EST Reply to Comment
- Scott I think the biggest thing is that Jim never asked Pam what she thought about Athlead. He just told his partners he was in spontaneously and then told Pam later. And Pam is definitely the kind of passive, non confrontational person to go along with Athlead if Jim told her he was involved after already committing to it. Remember at the beginning of the season Pam said she was happy with her life in Scranton (when she was talking Dwight down off the roof). I don't blame Pam at all, this is Jim's fault for jumping into Athlead without having talking everything out with his wife first.
  February 15, 2013 at 12:34PM EST
jason_grasso

They keep building towards ridiculous "tensions" between Jim and Pam that is presented in a realistic way, but when you dig down are being so overblown. Pam wants to stay in Scranton and Jim set up shop in Philadelphia. Now granted the laws of travel vary when entering a city but they are TWO HOURS APART! You compromise and find a house halfway. They are reacting to this drama like it's 8 hours apart or across multiple states. Buy a house in Allentown and STFU.

Now i'll give them this: That is exactly the kind of irrational argument people would have in the Northeast...so in some ways it is realistic. But i just find it absurd that Jim, who has slacked his way through their entire relationship, finally finds a career that he loves and one that could provide immensely for his family (including a suffering artist wife) and he's made to feel guilty for it. Pam would prefer he stay in sales for a dying company in a dying industry in a dying town?

(Yes, Pam may be the first person to say she loves Scranton.)
February 15, 2013 at 9:10AM EST Reply to Comment
- Ken Right. And it's not like there've been episodes (that I can recall) highlighting Pam's connection to the community: she works there, and that's about it. The Parks & Rec people, obviously, are so connected to one another and to their community that a move would be devastating. The people on The Office barely tolerate each other. Pam's only real Scranton connection seems to be Jim.
  February 15, 2013 at 9:16AM EST
- Faith I get what you're both saying, but remember how much fun Jim and Pam had working literally feet from each other every day? They pulled pranks on Dwight could look up and see each other. I can see how Pam would really miss that... she did that for like, 10 years.
  Moving to Philly would mean she no longer gets to work next to her husband, but with strangers and a huge new city. And if they move to Allentown or Palmerton or whatever then there would be an hour commute most days making them both tired all the time. It just isn't as cozy as living in the same small town as always and working side by side. (Even if the small town is Scranton. haha)
  
  But I do think that Pam should be more sensitive towards Jim here... he's finally the Philly Jim from season four's Local Ad episode that Jim had dreamed of being.
  So I guess in short I'm glad I'm not a writer in this episode haha.
  February 15, 2013 at 9:42AM EST
- Illin One of the biggest problems I have (that they seem to gloss over) is that Jim is a father of two young kids. Yet he was in Philly, told Pam to come for dinner at 8:00pm, and he was just going to be staying in Philly. I can't imagine not being home with my own kids for even one night, yet no one really seems to mention that Pam might not just be unhappy about the distance right now but also the fact that their kids father is not at home.
  
  Also...I know in reality the distance is two hours, but is that a consideration in this story or do they just want those of us unfamiliar with PA to think that it is much farther away?
  February 15, 2013 at 9:52AM EST
- Kevin The other issue is, there is some degree of a lazy complication here. These two have always been very open with each other, and now it's the common TV trope of someone not telling the other person something that the audience knows. Both Jim and Pam have been guilty of this during the course of the season, and I don't feel like it rings true to the characters.
  February 15, 2013 at 10:16AM EST
- Sharon In fairness, I believe Pam's parents, while divorced, still live in Scranton, and I'm assuming the children were with her mother while she spent the evening in Philly. However, I'm of the same mind when it comes to her reluctance to move. I wouldn't advocate the "move halfway between and both commute" (Allentown? Really? I wouldn't wish that on Andy, let alone Jim and Pam) but there are many lovely suburban neighborhoods outside of Philadelphia, and Pam could still make frequent visits to Scranton because, as it has been noted, it is only two hours away. I can't believe she wants Jim to remain a paper salesman for the rest of his life, and this business opportunity has the potential to improve their lives immensely. I get Jim was completely wrong in how he handled his involvement in Athlead at the beginning - Pam had every right to be upset, but not wanting to go forward at this point makes no sense.
  
  February 15, 2013 at 10:23AM EST
- sepinwall Yeah, Pam has family and friends in Scranton — and, therefore, a support system to help with the kids. Philly isn't *that* far away (nor is Allentown), but in terms of easy, unplanned get-togethers, requests for last-minute childcare, etc., it's a world away. My best friend lives as far from me as Allentown is from Scranton, and it's an enormous hassle to see each other, whereas we hung out all the time when we were in the same town.
  
  I'm not saying there's no reason to move the family to Philly, but she also has legitimate reasons for preferring her current life.
  February 15, 2013 at 10:44AM EST
- ChampSkins This is something that dawned on my last night too... Jim of all people has sacrificed his entire youthful career to chase after Pam. He has done it time and again. He didn't take the corporate job in NYC so he could stay with her, he allowed her to move to NYC to go to art school and through all of that he has always been miserable. Now he has one thing that might make him happy in a way he never has been and Pam is crapping all over it. All the while, she just wants to paint murals and can do that ANYWHERE.
  
  This domestic dispute is infuriating because it really is making Pam look so smug even though they are trying so hard to make Jim the one that looks like an Ass.
  
  February 15, 2013 at 11:08AM EST
- Robin I think Pam's reaction is very true to who we know Pam is. She's a small-town girl who is very afraid of change. Why else would she have stuck with Roy so long? Why else would she stay a receptionist for TEN years?
  
  She wants a happy, comfortable, "normal" life -- the whole American Dream and I don't think her definition of that includes moving 2 hours away from the place she grew up and having a husband who works 18 hours a day. If she moves to Philly the only person she knows is Jim, and face it, Jim isn't going to be around that much. I can't blame her for romanticizing Scranton in light of what her life has been like for the last few months.
  February 15, 2013 at 11:10AM EST
- velocityknown It's something I can see being much more difficult when there are two very young kids involved. If they were older, I'd say it's not a big deal for Jim to work two hours away, but in this case, I can understand the conflict.
  
  But how about Brian, right? That guy, he's....someone.
  February 15, 2013 at 11:21AM EST
- Col Bat Guano I can buy Pam's reluctance, but if they elevate this into outright refusal, then they will have lost me. If they had actually given her a real job rather than the made up position she's occupied for the last two years then it might make sense, but by spending S7 and 8 concentrating on ridiculous relationship stories or Andy, there is no sense the their Dunder Mifflin jobs mean anything.
  
  So, what the heck did they argue about last week if Pam is just now admitting she's not fully on board with the move? How stupid the whole Brian subplot was and how they couldn't believe Greg Daniels would try that tired trope? They basically wasted three episodes burning through that crap and for absolutely zero purpose.
  February 15, 2013 at 11:53AM EST
- Robin I might be looking at this differently because I didn't see most of S7 or S8.
  
  That said, I don't think this has anything to do with Pam thinking DM is so awesome. She might enjoy her co-workers but it's more that she loved her home life before Jim went to Philly. She lives like 15 minutes from her house, she's home every night by 5:30, she has a house and 2.5 kids and a white picket fence and she HAD a husband who was home every night. Now, not so much.
  
  I think Pam would be fine with Jim leaving DM. But every time he has either left or been tempted to leave DM, he's also moved or would've moved out of Scranton. Why has every job change also involved leaving Scranton? Are there NO other jobs in Scranton itself?
  
  Just because they argued last week doesn't mean that Pam would've had the nerve to express what is ultimately wrong. And to give her some credit, an argument like the one they probably might not have been the best time to do it anyway. It's one thing to argue and say that you're tired of the long distance, the separation, the burden of being a single parent. It's another to say that you've realized that you never want to move to Philly, especially since Jim's "solution" to all of Pam's concerns was probably: go ahead and move to Philly.
  February 15, 2013 at 12:29PM EST
- Not that Andy Although Jim has obviously handled the situation poorly, this scene it totally unrealistic and makes Pam into a self-absorbed brat.
  
  Did she expect her life to never change? For Jim to continue forever as a middling paper salesman? For them to always work within arms length of each other, with slacker jobs that allowed them to be home by 5:15 every day?
  
  This fight is silly, unrealistic, and the ultimate nail in the coffin for the show. What a sad way for a once great series to end.
  February 15, 2013 at 4:54PM EST
- Amanda This has been bothering me for awhile now. They are making a huge deal over a 2 hr move and it seems uncharacteristically selfish of Pam to not be totally into this. I know things are more complicated for them now, but Jim supported Pam's move to NYC for art school. This is something Jim deserves and I'm sad to see the show painting it this way.
  February 15, 2013 at 4:55PM EST
- Garlon
  This is a combination of legitimate issues and bad writing.
  
  The legitimate issue is that Jim started this Philly thing without even consulting Pam. This is a ridiculous dick move. Pam is 100% in the right to be angry.
  
  The bad writing thing is...Jim would NEVER have actually done that! The Jim we have known for 8 prior seasons would never have not told Pam about that. Never. That is not Jim.
  
  As for Pam, the writers have messed her up a bit to because from an early season we know that Pam has no great love for Scranton. She even cries about it in an interview, the notion of being stuck there forever. The Pam we know should be into the idea of moving to Philly.
  
  February 15, 2013 at 5:18PM EST
- Meghan I really like what Illin said. When Pam says she liked their life in Scranton, I think she is talking about more than just the town itself or their jobs at DM. She is talking about a lifestyle where they both had jobs with set hours, and the consistency and stability of being home every night with their kids. I think Pam is freaking out at the idea of Jim's current schedule--long, uneven, and unpredictable hours--becoming the norm for their marriage and family, and rightfully so.
  February 15, 2013 at 10:16PM EST
- basilfawlty In the past JIm has been appalled with the idea that he may spend all his working life at DM and Pam has agreed with him. In the past Pam has given no indication that she enjoys her current job, whatever that is. I can tell you from experience, that if you and your partner are both in jobs you hate because the hours are regular, this will lead to problems, particularly when the kids grow older and are out a lot of the time leaving the two of you alone. Pam should look to the future and not be scared of moving, particularly as the paper industry is a dying industry and she and Jim could soon both be out of a job. Pam gives reasons for not wanting to move but really she is just scared.
  Having said this, I have hated the whole JAM marriage in crisis story line since it began. Why, having spent 8 seasons with the JAM relationship, are the writers fucking with what they have achieved over the years in the final season. The Office is a comedy not the daytime soap it has become with certain story lines.
  Garlon is absolutely right when he says the Jim we know would never have done what he has done and that the writers have meddled with the real Pam. Bad writing has plagued the latter part of the series particularly the shit storm that was season 8 and now this season. Some parts of the season have been good but the melodramatic aspects have spoilt it.
  February 16, 2013 at 12:23PM EST
- Selena I have always loved Jim, but I can understand where Pam is coming from with this argument. Of course Pam wants Jim to be happy, but I don't think she likes the person that Jim has become in Philly. I mean, he got her an interview for a receptionist position, clearly not bothering to find out what the job entailed. That sent alarm bells off in my head right away.
  February 18, 2013 at 11:15AM EST
- Col Bat Guano Well, the position was listed as Office Manager because they didn't want to scare anyone away by calling it receptionist. Of course Pam could take some agency in all this and actually articulate her fears or proactively look for something in Philly, but mainly she seems content to just complain. This isn't all Jim's fault. The man isn't a saint or mindreader.
  February 18, 2013 at 4:09PM EST
- basilfawlty Selena, as I and other people have said, this not the real Jim and Pam, this is another Jim and Pam that the " writers" have invented just for this season, so there is no point obsessing about it.
  February 19, 2013 at 9:59PM EST
Ken

This Andy thing is very weird. I don't think he was ever really someone you rooted for, but he's sort of made the leap from well-intentioned idiot to massive jackass this season, and it's very uncomfortable to watch. It's one thing to bring in a new character from outside that we can all unite against, which I vaguely remember happening when Idris Elba came to Scranton; it's entirely another to jerkify an existing character.
February 15, 2013 at 9:20AM EST Reply to Comment
- John Like some of the commenters above, I almost see this as more a restoration of the original character from seasons 3 and 4 than a sudden change.
  
  He is a little hard to take as a lead, though.
  February 15, 2013 at 12:51PM EST
- Hank Scorpio United against Stringer Bell? I loved him as a boss. He called out Jim on all his BS and made him write that notorious "rundown".
  
  Plus he loved soccer, just like the real Idris.
  February 15, 2013 at 4:47PM EST
- basilfawlty I liked Stringer Bell because he liked soccer, and, coming from the UK, I like anybody who likes soccer.
  February 16, 2013 at 12:28PM EST
Chris

I actually cringe when Andy comes onscreen now. It makes me sad, because there was a time when he was one of my favorite "Office" characters (I wasted many a work day Youtubing montages of Andy singing). He's mean, petty and obnoxious and, during the first scene, I was hoping David Wallace would can him.

I enjoyed Odenkirk as Michael Scott 2.0, although it also made me remember how much I enjoyed Carrell. But the final scenes with Jim and Pam were what the show should have been doing all along -- realistically creating tension and having them work through it, not creating contrivances to pull them apart. I hope we've seen the end of Brian the boom mic guy. If his only purpose was to give Jim and Pam the clarity about how wrong things are in their marriage last week (leading to their willingness to go home and fight at the end), then that's fine. If Pam and Jim are going to disagree on Philly and Pam's going to call Brian for emotional support...ugh, I don't know that I have the strength.

I hope that they do an arc in May near the end where they release the documentary and we can see how the characters react to it...I'd always hoped that there would be an episode where Michael saw it and realized how he really came across; but having the characters deal with fame or having their dirty laundry aired would be an interesting way to end the series and bring it full circle with the British one.

Last question: was this the episode that was going to serve as the back door pilot to "The Farm"? If so, I'm glad they didn't pick it up--I laughed a bit, but it seems it would have been unpleasant to spend too much time there.
February 15, 2013 at 9:42AM EST Reply to Comment
- sepinwall I don't believe this was "The Farm," which had a much larger cast. Like "Junior Salesman" (which featured Matt Jones as Cousin Zeke, a role he had already played in "The Farm" pilot), I think it was just setting things up so when that episode airs, it won't feel quite so out of nowhere. (And also it was setting up whatever's happening next with Dwight and Angela.)
  February 15, 2013 at 9:49AM EST
- youngjt80 I think it would be funnier for Michael to watch it and be totally clueless like "Man wasn't I great?"
  February 16, 2013 at 4:39PM EST
sepinwall

Forgot to ask: for those of you who were very invested in the Scranton Strangler running gag, how did you feel about this as the long-awaited payoff?
February 15, 2013 at 9:54AM EST Reply to Comment
- Brendan I thought it was perfect. The only part of the episode that I got a kick out of.
  February 15, 2013 at 9:59AM EST
- Bgklein Meh. I can't really stand Toby anymore since he's such a creeper. I enjoyed him trying to save his original copy of Erin and Pete's agreement but then one the Nellie things started I was just rolling my eyes.
  February 15, 2013 at 11:15AM EST
- Col Bat Guano I always hated the Strangler story and found the speculation that it was a cast member ridiculous. I'm hoping that scene was the final payoff and we never hear about again. Of course, I am still wary they will somehow drag it out again. Much like I'm convinced Brian is going to reappear like a slasher movie villian.
  February 15, 2013 at 11:57AM EST
- David Was still holding out hope it was Gabe.
  February 15, 2013 at 12:45PM EST
- Jim Me, too. I so wanted Gabe. It fits Toby that he was wrong, but after so much build up, man, it's a let down that it didn't go anywhere.
  February 15, 2013 at 1:51PM EST
- basilfawlty I was hoping it was Gabe, never liked him. At one point I thought it might be Brian. The episode was originally going to be normal length, but when The Farm was cancelled (thank God) the episode became an hour long. That's why certain parts felt tacked on eg Scranton Strangler. The episode sucked big time by the way.
  February 16, 2013 at 12:41PM EST
- Gigi The Scranton Strangler plot was always just sort of amusing, and this was an amusing way to wrap it up. I was entertained by speculating about who it could be, but never really seriously thought any of the characters would work as a seriously violent serial killer. That's a really dark turn and the other characters would have some sort of reaction to working alongside a murderer for so many years. That's not particularly funny. This was a great resolution to a fairly innocuous side-plot.
  February 18, 2013 at 12:09AM EST
- ed w It wasn't much of a payoff. I thought for this episode, it was fine, it worked well. But as the culmination of a long running arc that heavily implied the wrong guy got convinced it was a bit pointless.
  February 18, 2013 at 1:48AM EST
Brendan

Atrocious.

I am not at all sure what the writers are thinking regarding Andy Bernard. What a hateful character. I let out a groan when David Wallace said, "I'm not going to fire you." And he didn't even demote him!

Unless the writers are planning on having Andy die a horrible death, I think they have misread the viewers opinion of Andy big time.
February 15, 2013 at 9:57AM EST Reply to Comment
- Russ The part I didn't get about the Jim and Pam thing was didn't they have a blowout fight about this last week? Pam crying was about the stress of Jim being away and them fighting, so shouldn't this latest admission have been part of that big blowout fight she wanted to have?
  February 15, 2013 at 10:07AM EST
- basilfawlty David Wallace should have fired Andy,so let down by that. Though David Wallace did allow Michael to re-hire Ryan, even though he had been sacked once from DM for fraud in S4.
  Yes, where was the big fight between JAM, I was really looking forward to that. There was no indication in the episode that they're had been a fight. Fucking writers.
  February 16, 2013 at 12:49PM EST
SecretHandshake

I remember when this show used to be about an office building...
February 15, 2013 at 10:23AM EST Reply to Comment
- basilfawlty Ah happy days, happy days.
  February 16, 2013 at 12:50PM EST
- Annie Hall Is that you, Abed?
  February 19, 2013 at 1:00AM EST
sajid anwar

It's pretty clear that someone in writing staff has it out for Ed Helms. Not exactly sure how else you can explain why he has turned into such a despicable character. Here I am sitting thinking I'm about to watch a comedy. What exactly am I supposed to be laughing about as he goes around the office being a dickhead?
February 15, 2013 at 10:36AM EST Reply to Comment
- Rcade The same kinds of things you laugh about when Dwight does them. New Andy isn't the first office denizen to do unpleasant things to other people intentionally. Dwight was often been malicious. Just because Michael Scott was the master of unintentional unpleasantness doesn't mean that's the only way a boss can be mined for laughs.
  
  I enjoy evil Andy. Nice Andy was far more of a beating than this guy.
  February 15, 2013 at 10:51AM EST
- sajid anwar As Sepinwall explained, Michael Scott's meanness stemmed from his naivety. There were moments where that wasn't the case. Him force feeding Kevin that broccoli, telling that high school student that Pam slept with a bunch of guys at the office, etc. I didn't like him in those scenarios either. But there were enough other funny moments so when Michael was being a dick, I was able to roll my eyes and just bear with it before he became the lovable goof again. Same with Dwight. He is an idiot. Yeah, he's had his mean moments but largely his good moments covered up for when he was truly being awful. Evil Andy is just evil without the funny.
  February 15, 2013 at 11:01AM EST
- Brendan For me, it has nothing to do with being evil or nice. Most of the folks at Dunder Mifflin have shown a dark side, but at least there was some entertainment value. Dwight plotting against Jim was funny. Andy Bernard was tedious in Stamford and is just beyond tedious now.
  February 15, 2013 at 11:11AM EST
- Sharon Dwight has never - except for a brief period - been in a position of authority in the office. As it has been noted in other comments, it's one thing for co-workers to be mean and play pranks on each other, because they are on equal footing. It's another matter when the branch manager - who has the ability to fire and/or just generally make the workplace miserable - has become the small-minded, petty tyrant that is Andy Bernard.
  February 15, 2013 at 11:51AM EST
- Col Bat Guano I'm pretty sure evil Andy will serve a couple of purposes as the show winds down. One, it gives us someone to root against. The pettiness used to be spread around a bit with Michael, Dwight and early Andy all serving that purpose. Now they are just concentrating it in one character. Second, by making the manager a true dick, they can provide people a reason to move on as the series ends. For too long the show has portrayed the office as a sort of genial adult day care facility: no real work takes place while the kids have a party or go on bus trip. There is no sense that this is a place to avoid as it was the first few seasons. Why would Pam want to leave when she apparently does nothing except work on her mural all day?
  February 15, 2013 at 12:04PM EST
- Mahmoud Fayed I'm with you Anwar. People keep saying that it's a return to character and Andy was always a bit of an ass. It's true, but I found him hilarious to watch back them; now, he's just... I found his scenes distressing rather than at all humorous. It was funny at first when you see what he did (and I did miss Gabe's creepiness) but when he kept going at it and when it was actually working with the broken up couples arguing it was just a little rough to bear. I like prick Andy but he needs to tone it down at least a little...
  
  on an unrelated note is Pete's ex the chick from Observe & Report? Man, she was so freaking adorable in it! And blonde's a good look for her too.
  February 16, 2013 at 8:07PM EST
John R.

I really got a kick out of Bob Odenkirk's appearance. But it seemed to me that they sapped some of the fun out of it by then having Pam TELL us he's just like Michael Scott, like they weren't giving the people who wrote Michael or the brilliant Steve Carell who performed him any credit for how perfectly identifiable that character is. And they weren't giving ME credit for recognizing it. I was having a lot more fun identifying "Michael" before they went and hit me over the head with it. I think there was a time when The Office probably wouldn't have done this. If Pam had to say anything at all (and I don't think she did), how much better might it have been if she'd had been more opaque, like, "Ugh, this guy is such an obnoxious jerk! And yet...."
February 15, 2013 at 12:38PM EST Reply to Comment
- Alex H. Over the years, they've slowly started catering to what seems like a less intelligent audience. In the first few seasons, the writing was brilliant. But as it went on, it just became lazier and much more...well...dumb. And we've now reached the peak of that dumb-ness and laziness.
  
  Her saying, "Oh my god. He's Michael Scott!" was to force the audience into realizing what the writers are doing, so that you can go "Yay! They made a reference to Michael!", instead of letting us figure it out. Because if they left it to the audience to figure it out, there's a good chance a lot of people wouldn't realize that's what they were doing, and they probably didn't want to take a chance on that.
  
  Sure, those of us that have been here from [almost] the beginning would notice immediately (as soon as he made the Django reference, I was like "MICHAEL?!"). But there are plenty who -- not only think the show is still just as good without him -- but prefer it without him, and therefore might have forgotten his character.
  February 15, 2013 at 1:13PM EST
- John R. Alex H., I don't disagree with your assessment (and my guess is that you've hit upon their reason for doing it), but it seems to me that those who either don't know the character or like the show better without him aren't benefiting from the "He's like Michael!" statement anyway. Those who know the character could've been more delighted by figuring it out, and those who don't know (or don't care) didn't even need to know Odenkirk was just like Michael for the scene to work. He could've just been some amusingly obnoxious boss she wasn't going to work for. In other words, I think not mentioning it still would've worked for both segments of the audience.
  
  For a show that once was able to score a punchline just by a quick glance at the camera, this was unusually clunky.
  
  On the other hand, the Pam/Jim dinner was beautifully understated--the furthest thing from clunky. I guess the show has been very hit-or-miss like this for ahwile now.
  February 15, 2013 at 1:22PM EST
- Col Bat Guano The only time Pam should have mentioned Michael Scott was at the dinner with Jim as she related the story of her interview. Their conversation was a great callback to their interactions in S1-2 when we came to understand why they should end up together.
  February 15, 2013 at 2:02PM EST
- Hank Scorpio I think the format itself calls for too much telling rather than showing. Agree that the show used to avoid such obvious tells, but that was many years ago.
  February 15, 2013 at 4:54PM EST
- Hank Scorpio The comments by Andy about how the table had turned were also a bit much. They slammed that joke in our face for a solid ten minutes.
  February 15, 2013 at 4:56PM EST
- Not that Andy Agreed. The show has gotten less subtle and sarcastic and more obvious, thus less funny. I wonder if that's due to a desire for broader appeal or just crappier writers
  February 15, 2013 at 5:02PM EST
- basilfawlty Absolutely right, the Pam to camera sequence was a bad idea.
  The writers must know that those few people still watching have been watching from S1, so that sequence was an insult. Crappier writers Not That Andy. Since S6 John R.
  February 16, 2013 at 1:00PM EST
- PatRob Odenkirk reminded me of the Ricky Gervais character than the Steve Carrel character. Good stuff.
  February 20, 2013 at 12:36PM EST
Twisted Sittler

Can anyone tell me whether or not that was the first indication, vocalized or no, that Michael Scott ever existed since he left almost 2 years ago? I honestly thought they'd go the rest of the series without acknowledging him, especially when they didn't mention him in the recent Jan-centric episode.
February 15, 2013 at 1:23PM EST Reply to Comment
- Glenn They've acknowledged him a few times in passing since Michael left. Pam joked about naming their son after him, and there were one or two other mentions. Check The Office fan wiki.
  February 15, 2013 at 2:15PM EST
- Twisted Sittler Will do. Thanks, Glenn.
  February 15, 2013 at 4:38PM EST
- ed w Yeah I had the same reaction as Twisted, it seemed like the first time whether or not it was. They have been so rare in mentioning Michael that it can be forgiven if someone reads into it bad blood between the show and Carell. It's truly strange.
  
  Michael would be calling Dwight and emailing Pam every week with his exploits and there's no reason the should shouldn't have been mentioning that periodically.
  February 18, 2013 at 1:53AM EST
Jim

I didn't mind elements of the Andy storyline last night, every time he comes onscreen I do find myself wishing he were still gone. I think because only a complete ass treats his girlfriend as badly as he did. And the show has done so well without him.
February 15, 2013 at 1:50PM EST Reply to Comment
danimal245

I thought the Andy/Pete/Erin arch of the episode was contrived and insulting. They've built up Pete to be a "take charge" kinda guy, and he actually played right into Andy's extremely transparent trap, even after admitting he knew what Andy was doing. The fact that one call to David Wallace about hiring an employees ex for a non existent position and hiring back Gabe as well would have put an end to Andy's ridiculousness. It made Pete look helpless and unable to resolve an easily resolvable situation. The directing was good, aside from Andy being annoying, but the writing was terrible. Bob Odenkirk was the only highlight.. and if Jim stays in Philly, away from his wife AND KIDS, then the persona of Jim that they've built up since the pilot episode will be ruined. The Jim they've created would put his family above anything, and it doesn't fit his personality to be a selfish prick.
February 15, 2013 at 1:53PM EST Reply to Comment
- Col Bat Guano Not wanting to spend your life in a dead end job you've always hated doesn't exactly make Jim a selfish prick any more than Pam wanting to stay in Scranton does. Both sides here have a point.
  February 15, 2013 at 2:05PM EST
- danimal245 Jim leaving Pam at home with two babies to take care of and a job to work is pretty selfish, not like the Jim they've crafted, nothing to do with working the same job forever, changing jobs is fine, but the whole season has been all about Jim, with Pam being obviously frustrated on several occasions. It is a good conflict to have between them, but I think Jim is acting much differently then how he's been developed since the beginning.
  February 15, 2013 at 2:11PM EST
- rcade I don't think it's selfish for Jim to ask Pam to do more while he builds a more lucrative and satisfying career for himself. He never wanted to be a paper salesman. He was becoming increasingly uncomfortable about never pursuing a better career. Pam knows this about him.
  February 15, 2013 at 7:04PM EST
- danimal245 I totally respect and understand where yall are coming from, but I'm sticking with my thoughts. I just can't see Jim NOT sacrificing EVERYTHING for his two kids, regardless of the new job. His decisions are now all about the kids. I don't think Jim has purposely been acting selfish and they've used that as a great writing tool, but from all the years of developing his character, I guess I wish they'd have him sacrifice something he personally wants for the happiness and solidarity of his family... but I do understand where ya'll are coming from. If anything, intimate, has happened between Pam and the "Boom" guy, then they just ruined the show.. just my opinion.. no need to castrate me..
  February 15, 2013 at 7:11PM EST
- Meghan I agree with danimal245. I don't think the Jim we've seen over the past 8 years would act this way. First accepting the job without telling Pam didn't make sense; they had always seemed to communicate well. Then spending so much time in Philly, to the point where he isn't coming home at night, and kind of assuming (again, without consulting Pam) that they would all move there. We have seen Jim give up better positions before for Pam's sake--before they were married or even dating--so I can't believe he would willingly spend several days and nights every week away from his kids for the sake of a job. Not only that, I don't see him sticking Pam with working-single-mom parenting duties while he chases his dream and plays video games in his Philly bachelor pad.
  February 15, 2013 at 9:56PM EST
- Col Bat Guano Asking Pam to take care of the kids on her own with help from her mom for a few months while he pursues a better, more rewarding job isn't exactly abandoning his family. Children can survive a few months of dad being away a few nights a week. The idea that Jim is such a saint he would never try for anything better than Dunder Mifflin because his family might be mildly inconvenienced for for awhile is asking too much.
  February 16, 2013 at 4:37AM EST
- GiGI I'm with CBG: This isn't so far afield from what Jim might do. One could argue that pursing this job opportunity is setting his kids up for a much happier, healthier future. Having a father who is pretty much miserable professionally isn't ideal either. He'd also be working at a company that will perpetually be at the verge of failure, just because it's a small firm in a dying industry. And it's a company that provides the sole source of income for his family. That's asking for trouble. I know it's fictional, but would anybody really expect Dunder Mifflin paper company to exist in 2030, with Jim and Pam working there into their mid-50s? Realistically, they only seem to sell office paper. They would have been out of business years ago.
  February 18, 2013 at 12:26AM EST
- danimal245 I see that my opinion is not a favorite and that's understandable, but I guess I see this show as ONLY a comedy, but I do acknowledge the occasional sentimental moments that are set ups for character development. Maybe we're all right in a way, and the writers are conning us (the viewers) by making Jim appear to have some flaws or be in the wrong, which over the last 8 seasons, he's hardly done anything wrong; he's pretty much been perfect... right? I think the writers did that on purpose and now they're making us think differently about Jim, by his actions at his new job, not being as involved with his family as we would expect him to be.. 2 seasons ago, he couldn't stand being away from his daughters and skipped 3 days of work, against the rules, to be with his family... and the "boom" operator.. which I think they should drop altogether... i didn't like the fact that they brought a crew member in so early.. i guessed they might, but thought it would be much later, like the finale, but with all this drama developing on the Jim/Pam front, I think they are trying to make us doubt Jim's actions, which worked on me...obviously and make us choose sides with either Pam or Jim.... but I think Jim will follow the writing protocol of his character and be the hero in the end and do whatever he realizes to be best for his family, not just him. Marriage is about sacrifices, and I think Jim is going to demonstrate that towards the end, but maybe not... they could divorce because Pam slept with the boom guy wayyy back in season one but nobody knew and that'll be the big secret to end the show and their marriage... soo much could happen, that's the brilliance of the show, but they've done away with several dynamics that worked... Jim pranking Dwight to cold start every episode was awesome, and putting characters in awkward and uncomfortable positions (Scott's Tots) and the one where Michael has to give a speech to Ryan class, and bringing back Gabe is always going to devalue the episode. His presence is disturbing, and Andy is acting too childish and obnoxious that he would of been punched in the face by any rational coworker... I wanted too.. And honestly, a company like this, would have bombed long ago in the real world with employees acting as they do on the show.. Again, I respect all your opinions and reading them makes the anticipatory factor of the show more exciting. Oh ya, the fact that Pam never felt comfortable enough, or "didn't want to stress out Jim any further" and didn't tell Jim about her mural being defaced with.....things.. by.. haha (Coover from Justified) knew he was gunna be a dick' don't think he can be comedic... but that seems like a big deal to me that she didn't tell Jim about it initially because you know that that had to upset Pam big time..
  February 18, 2013 at 8:22AM EST
- AlyssaJ I agree with Danimal245 about everything that he has said. His analysis of the characters and the paradigms that have shifted is pretty insightful and brilliant. But ya, Jim is being selfish and Pam is being too non-confrontational with discussing her feelings, but they will work everything out......or get divorced... it's 50/50....just like the real world.. Andy sucks.. Gabe is gross... new guy Pete is just a young Jim and represents normalcy in the office with Jim gone.... my GOD, Gabe is gross. "I was gunna be a soccer coach but I don't have the lung capacity to blow a whistle" - Gabe ewwwww, so gross...
  February 18, 2013 at 8:29AM EST
- Col Bat Guano I think the problem with Jim is that they have basically given the character nothing to do since S6 and the co-manager arc. Continually pranking Dwight for nine years doesn't exactly show character growth. Unfortunately, the show wasn't brave enough to have people leave as they would in a real office and so for about three seasons now, they have just been hitting the same note over and over again. Now, they bring back ambitious Jim or the one who hated Dunder Mifflin and it looks like something unheard of before. He should have done this back at the Sabre merger.
  February 18, 2013 at 4:17PM EST
Andy (no, not that Andy)

Last night should have had elements that would make it a strong episode, yet it all felt off.
The Office used to be my favorite show on TV, maybe my favorite show ever. But it's become so unpleasant to watch of late that I've either skipped episodes entirely or I've had to talk myself into watching them.
This is a comedy, not a serious drama. I just want to enjoy myself for a half hour, not to figure out at the end of each episode the level of peril at which the Halpert marriage is left at this week.
I want to enjoy the limited time we have left with these characters we've invested 9 years in, yet I find myself unsure I can make it to the finale. I hated the finale arc of Chuck last year because they would not let me just enjoy the last few hours with characters I had invested in, they had to create unnecessary and unwelcome angst. Angst for angst's sake. It's the same here. Sigh ... I just hope they can get this train back on the rails before the final stop.
February 15, 2013 at 2:02PM EST Reply to Comment
- Not that Andy Sorry, didn't realize I had stolen your name until I got this far down.
  February 15, 2013 at 5:04PM EST
Glenn

If I recall correctly, both Bob Odenkirk and Martin Short were considered for the part of Michael Scott when the show was originally being developed.

Based on this episode, Odenkirk definitely would have been a bit more like David Brent.
February 15, 2013 at 2:06PM EST Reply to Comment
- Kenny Yes, Odenkirk was in consideration for Michael Scott. I'm not sure how widely known that is, but it made this episode an exciting glimpse into what might have been. Odenkirk and Fischer actually worked together on preparing their auditions, so it was fitting that they got to play off each other here.
  February 15, 2013 at 3:21PM EST
- Jaxemer11 In no way do I think they should have chosen Odenkirk over Carrell (we wouldn't have Saul, if that happened), but I do think he would have been just as good as Carrell in the role if he got it. It would have been interesting to see if his career would have taken off like Carrell's did.
  
  Martin Short would have been too obvious. Good decision to go with someone relatively unknown.
  February 15, 2013 at 10:56PM EST
Jeff

I still have no clue what Jim's company actually does, and I find it hard to believe that an internet startup company like that would have people wearing suits to work every day, but the one thing I do know is that if Trent Edwards is their big client right now they are in serious trouble.
February 15, 2013 at 2:43PM EST Reply to Comment
- Hank Scorpio Athlead is an emerging sports marketing enterprise that is currently building up a base of star athletes who are willing to make cameo appearances in sitcoms that are out of ideas. So far, only Dr. J has signed on, but in the future expect former Philadelphia star athletes like Mike Schmidt, Randall Cunningham, the Philly Phanatic, and Rocky Balboa appear.
  
  Another thing Athlead has perfected is creating a well-designed space that really looks like an authentic startup. Most of their capital has gone into the purchase of loft space and Apple computers.
  
  Athlead is currently hiring for the position of "guy who will make Jim stay late so he can piss off his wife." If you are interested, please send your resume to Jim's douche-bag friend...
  February 15, 2013 at 5:05PM EST
Printin' Mike

I admire Greg Daniels’ attempt to right the ship – he’s been largely successful at doing so. The exception (and, it’s a huge steaming shit pile of an exception) is Andy Bernard. I do think Daniels has attempted to (rightly) bring Andy back to the traits that actually made that character funny in his initial seasons: an angry, insecure, blue-blooded incompetent of indeterminate sexuality, and frequent song. I think everyone can now acknowledge the huge mistake the show made in promoting Andy to manager and morphing his character into a simpering nice guy who everyone in the office was mandated to root for. Huge mistake. He made the show largely unwatchable.

Daniels’ problems:

1) Spraying Febreze over a steaming pile of shit doesn’t work – better to remove the shit and be done with it; and
2) Ed Helms absence for most of the season (while filming movies) made it crystal clear to viewers that The Office is a much, much better show without Andy Bernard.

Daniels’ lesson: you can’t hide shit. It’s going to make its presence known, no matter how hard you try to hide it.

February 15, 2013 at 3:01PM EST Reply to Comment
- Jaxemer11 It's always been better without Andy. I couldn't stand him from the moment he was introduced as a character. There are a few exceptional moments where he has made me laugh, but for the most part I dread anything with Andy in it. And I do think Ed Helms is as much to blame as anyone (if not more). I think he has been pretty bad in just about everything he has done. His career is inexplicable.
  February 15, 2013 at 11:00PM EST
Hank Scorpio

Does this all end with the firing of Andy and Jim finally assuming the role he was born to play: Regional Manager?
February 15, 2013 at 5:07PM EST Reply to Comment
- rcade Only if you want the show to end with Jim's suicide.
  February 15, 2013 at 7:06PM EST
- Jaxemer11 Gosh ... i hope not.
  February 15, 2013 at 11:01PM EST
Brian

Quick, silly question: when Odenkirk was showing Pam around the office, one of the employees was Michael Weston (the actor, not the guy from Burn Notice). The end credits confirmed it was him, but he was only in a very brief (less than a minute, I'd say) scene, although he did have dialogue. Any idea why he was there? He seems like too recognizable an actor to use for such a brief scene, but not well-known enough for it to qualify as a cameo. Just seemed a little odd to me...
February 15, 2013 at 8:39PM EST Reply to Comment
- Foster It's possible that he had more scenes/dialogue but it was later scrapped in the editing room.
  February 15, 2013 at 10:01PM EST
- Darkdoug I felt like for a while there, the Gods of TV had selected him to be the next big thing on TV, what with him guest-starring everywhere for a couple of years, but now it's looking like he missed that window. When I saw him, I thought that was a sign that Pam was going to be getting the job and there would be more episodes set in that office.
  February 16, 2013 at 9:54AM EST
- Gigi I noticed that, too. However, it's possible the guy just needs work. He's a character actor at this point. However, I did expect that there would be more to that office given the cast of employees. But, I guess not.
  February 18, 2013 at 12:30AM EST
- basilfawlty Foster is right, Michael Weston did have more dialogue, which was removed in editing. Perhaps it will turn up later on the DVD as a deleted scene.
  February 18, 2013 at 1:01PM EST
Jaxemer11

Andy is awful. There is no question he has been the problem with this show. I will be pissed if they split Jim and Pam up. I have been willing to give them some benefit of the doubt, but this episode was a nightmare. It seems more likely than not that they are going to screw things up.

Frankly, it is a little absurd for Pam to be doing this. Did she expect Jim to be a paper salesman his entire life? People have to mive for their spouses careers ALL THE TIME. That is part of life. That is part of marriage. If she leaves him to stay at Dunder Mifflin, ... I just can't imagine they would do anything so absurd.
February 15, 2013 at 10:38PM EST Reply to Comment
Jaxemer11

Saul was the only thing good about this crappy episode.
February 15, 2013 at 10:39PM EST Reply to Comment
- basilfawlty Absolutely right, Saul rocked.
  February 17, 2013 at 12:12PM EST
Dr. Gross

I was enjoying this season and will stick with it to the end, but the last two episodes have been borderline unwatchable. How many are left before it's all over?
February 15, 2013 at 11:28PM EST Reply to Comment
- basilfawlty Too damn many.
  February 17, 2013 at 12:12PM EST
The Noble Robot

Alan, I think you're being waaay too hard on the show, and particularly Ed Helms' character. I don't disagree that the show did fine without Andy, I don't know if it was a direct result of the character's absence.

And the storyline where he brought in the ex-lovers was exactly the kind of thing that the Office does all the time, and I liked the twist where Andy wasn't remorseful about it when it descended into chaos (the way Micheal Scott totally would have been).

I also don't disagree that the boom mic guy was a stupid diversion (I insisted that he wasn't going to be a love interest, boy was I wrong), but I think we've all settled into a mindset where we understand that this show is not brilliant like Parks & Rec, and not clever like Community (was). That said, it's still funny and it's still smart enough to sustain us all to the end, so I think you're really trying to justify last week's criticisms about Andy's return when this episode actually used him well enough.

And in all of that, no complaints about how quickly and artificially the show is working to reunite Dwight and Angela?
February 16, 2013 at 12:29AM EST Reply to Comment
- basilfawlty I agree, I didn't think the Dwight/Angela sequence worked at all. Trying to reunite them is another example of the "writers" throwing everything into the pot for the final season.
  February 19, 2013 at 1:01PM EST
Darkdoug

I'm beginning to think that the practice this season of reminding the audience about the documentary crew may have been a mistake in some regards. It's probably best if that serves as merely a framing device, rather than the subject of the show.

Because of the constant reminders of the documentary crew, you find yourself questioning a lot of what we see. It's one thing if the documentary aspect was merely a handwave to explain the characters' self-revealing monologues and soliloquies, but when they keep bringing it up, we have take that aspect more seriously and wonder why the crew would follow Pam to an interview at another job, or how the real estate office can act as blase as the Dunder-Mifflin people who have been used to the cameras for years. Why was the camera watching Pam veging out on the couch when Jim called? Why didn't Dwight's aunt or Alice react to the presence of the cameras?
February 16, 2013 at 10:05AM EST Reply to Comment
- basilfawlty I agree with your comments about the documentary crew. I dismissed the whole documentary idea back in S1. It worked perfectly in the UK series as 80% of the series was set in the office. They're would be occasional reminders, such as when the documentary was being shown and on what channel. In the US version there are cameras everywhere, which means that for everything that has happened in the series there has been a camera present, even for the intimate moments. Having been involved in the making of documentary series in the UK, I can say, that to achieve this, the camera crew would have to be huge and it would enormously expensive. When you watch The Office you are watching comedy about people who work in an office, not a comedy about a documentary about people who work in an office.
  According to the end of the episode the documentary hasn't be shown once on TV over the 10 years it has been filmed. Ridiculous !!!
  February 16, 2013 at 1:20PM EST
Diggedy

I, like many folks, am just staying on at this point to see how it all ends. Watching re-runs of the first couple of seasons makes watching the current ones all the more worse. But there were a lot of little things that made me laugh here - which there haven't been for me in a while - and it made me wonder if it had anything to do with Jon Favreau directing it. Felt somewhat like a "throwback" episode.
February 16, 2013 at 1:28PM EST Reply to Comment
- basilfawlty Having watched the series since S1, I am also staying on to the finish. How it will end does make me feel uneasy. Watching the early seasons-particularly S3-does make me feel sad to see how far the series has fallen over the years.
  Jon Favreau would have had no influence on the content. Greg Daniels has said in interviews that the script writer is the most important person in the series not the director. This is a common factor in most TV series, unlike in films where the director is the most important person. The Bob Odenkirk sequence certainly made it feel like a throwback episode, though it did go on far too long.
  February 17, 2013 at 12:34PM EST
Ed

Does nobody remembered how Andy was before this underdog status? He was a stuck-up Ivy Leaguer who felt he was number one so this latest incarnation of Andy seems to fit that.
February 17, 2013 at 9:59AM EST Reply to Comment
- basilfawlty Changing Andy's character in S8 was one of many many mistakes made in that season. Thank you Paul Lieberstein.
  The Andy in this season differs from the early Andy in that now he is nearly psychotic.
  February 17, 2013 at 12:40PM EST
Lee

Seeinng Saul Goodman on this episode and Gus Fring on the COMMUNITY episode that preceded it reminded me how much I miss BREAKING BAD.
February 17, 2013 at 2:15PM EST Reply to Comment
- B If only they had found a way to put Ben's dad in the Parks episode, then it would have been perfect
  February 21, 2013 at 2:59PM EST
Frank

Started to really enjoy the show without Andy ... now that he's back not enjoying the show at all especially the scenes with him, they feel very uncomfortable like he's not part of the show.
February 18, 2013 at 9:42PM EST Reply to Comment

Next 131 Comments

News From Our Partners

Follow HitFix:

Follow @HitFix

Get Instant Alerts on What's Alan Watching

Latest Posts

Review: Michael Douglas and Matt Damon dazzle in HBO's 'Behind the Candelabra'

Steven Soderbergh biopic about Liberace is HBO's best movie in years

Friday, May 24, 2013
Review: 'Hannibal' - 'Trou Normand'

Will gets lost in a case, and Lecter tries to protect Abigail Hobbs

Thursday, May 23, 2013
Are you ready for the summer? (2013 edition)

Announcing this summer's blog rewatch series

Thursday, May 23, 2013
Season finale review: 'Modern Family' - 'Goodnight, Gracie'

The Dunphys and Pritchetts head to Florida for the funeral of Phil's mom

Thursday, May 23, 2013

Cannes Film Festival 2013

Inside Television with Alan Sepinwall

Review: 'The Office' - 'Moving On': Be like Mike

Are you a fan of The Office?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

Never miss a post - sign up now to get an e-mail alert whenever The Office is updated

Send to your friends

Direct link: http://tinyurl.com/ajeus4z

Review: 'The Office' - 'Moving On'

Share this Post on ...

Direct link: http://tinyurl.com/ajeus4z

Review: 'The Office' - 'Moving On'

Comments

Option 1

Option 2

Option 3

Trey Mattingly "That's what Mose said about that girl scarecrow of his and look what he did to her..."

Shawn Funniest line of the episode!

Shawn That, and Pam saying, "Not going on a three month boat trip."

Col Bat Guano The delivery of the boat trip line was perfect.

Gabriele Reply to comment...

lomilaw that's fine, but Andy at his worst should not dominate the action be the main focus of an episode. Its too much.

Kmarko Andy with anger issues from the early days was a supporting player, though. His scenes then were funny, and he was easily swatted down. In this boss role, he's just this massive sucking black hole of unpleasantness. His scenes just sort of vaguely depress me now.

Col Bat Guano I agree with the fact that there was too much Andy and that a lot of it was pretty funny. Unfortunately, elevating Ed Helms to manager last year has boxed them in. Now if Wallace could just fire him, we'd be getting somewhere.

Guest The Andy parts were unwatchable

Dezbot I couldn't stand Andy last night. Nothing he did made me laugh. I hope Wallace fires him for the stunt he pulled hiring the exes, too. If Toby wasn't off being strangled, he'd have shut that whole thing down.

Robin I don't think Pam wants Jim to fail, but now that has has not failed, she is forced to confront a reality that she simply wasn't mentally prepared for.

Col Bat Guano @John Yeah, that was plenty of the Schrute family for me. Watching repeated full half hours of that would have gotten old very fast. The beet farm B&B was one thing, but this was completely unconnected to reality.

Jon, The Earl of Hamm Sandwich ditto and ditto John (great name by the way)...evil Andy was great last night and the Dwight stuff was SO bad they could renamed that show "Do No Farm" and just immediately cancelled it after 2 minutes

basilfawlty No. I'm delighted the Farm was cancelled.

Bahahaha ....as soon as I can take a breath deep enough to blow a whistle.

velocityknown It's something I can see being much more difficult when there are two very young kids involved. If they were older, I'd say it's not a big deal for Jim to work two hours away, but in this case, I can understand the conflict. But how about Brian, right? That guy, he's....someone.

basilfawlty Selena, as I and other people have said, this not the real Jim and Pam, this is another Jim and Pam that the " writers" have invented just for this season, so there is no point obsessing about it.

John Like some of the commenters above, I almost see this as more a restoration of the original character from seasons 3 and 4 than a sudden change.He is a little hard to take as a lead, though.

Hank Scorpio United against Stringer Bell? I loved him as a boss. He called out Jim on all his BS and made him write that notorious "rundown".Plus he loved soccer, just like the real Idris.

basilfawlty I liked Stringer Bell because he liked soccer, and, coming from the UK, I like anybody who likes soccer.

youngjt80 I think it would be funnier for Michael to watch it and be totally clueless like "Man wasn't I great?"

sepinwall Forgot to ask: for those of you who were very invested in the Scranton Strangler running gag, how did you feel about this as the long-awaited payoff?

Brendan I thought it was perfect. The only part of the episode that I got a kick out of.

Bgklein Meh. I can't really stand Toby anymore since he's such a creeper. I enjoyed him trying to save his original copy of Erin and Pete's agreement but then one the Nellie things started I was just rolling my eyes.

David Was still holding out hope it was Gabe.

Jim Me, too. I so wanted Gabe. It fits Toby that he was wrong, but after so much build up, man, it's a let down that it didn't go anywhere.

ed w It wasn't much of a payoff. I thought for this episode, it was fine, it worked well. But as the culmination of a long running arc that heavily implied the wrong guy got convinced it was a bit pointless.

Russ The part I didn't get about the Jim and Pam thing was didn't they have a blowout fight about this last week? Pam crying was about the stress of Jim being away and them fighting, so shouldn't this latest admission have been part of that big blowout fight she wanted to have?

SecretHandshake I remember when this show used to be about an office building...

basilfawlty Ah happy days, happy days.

Annie Hall Is that you, Abed?

Brendan For me, it has nothing to do with being evil or nice. Most of the folks at Dunder Mifflin have shown a dark side, but at least there was some entertainment value. Dwight plotting against Jim was funny. Andy Bernard was tedious in Stamford and is just beyond tedious now.

Col Bat Guano The only time Pam should have mentioned Michael Scott was at the dinner with Jim as she related the story of her interview. Their conversation was a great callback to their interactions in S1-2 when we came to understand why they should end up together.

Hank Scorpio I think the format itself calls for too much telling rather than showing. Agree that the show used to avoid such obvious tells, but that was many years ago.

Hank Scorpio The comments by Andy about how the table had turned were also a bit much. They slammed that joke in our face for a solid ten minutes.

Not that Andy Agreed. The show has gotten less subtle and sarcastic and more obvious, thus less funny. I wonder if that's due to a desire for broader appeal or just crappier writers

basilfawlty Absolutely right, the Pam to camera sequence was a bad idea.The writers must know that those few people still watching have been watching from S1, so that sequence was an insult. Crappier writers Not That Andy. Since S6 John R.

PatRob Odenkirk reminded me of the Ricky Gervais character than the Steve Carrel character. Good stuff.

Glenn They've acknowledged him a few times in passing since Michael left. Pam joked about naming their son after him, and there were one or two other mentions. Check The Office fan wiki.

Twisted Sittler Will do. Thanks, Glenn.

Jim I didn't mind elements of the Andy storyline last night, every time he comes onscreen I do find myself wishing he were still gone. I think because only a complete ass treats his girlfriend as badly as he did. And the show has done so well without him.

Col Bat Guano Not wanting to spend your life in a dead end job you've always hated doesn't exactly make Jim a selfish prick any more than Pam wanting to stay in Scranton does. Both sides here have a point.

rcade I don't think it's selfish for Jim to ask Pam to do more while he builds a more lucrative and satisfying career for himself. He never wanted to be a paper salesman. He was becoming increasingly uncomfortable about never pursuing a better career. Pam knows this about him.

Not that Andy Sorry, didn't realize I had stolen your name until I got this far down.

Glenn If I recall correctly, both Bob Odenkirk and Martin Short were considered for the part of Michael Scott when the show was originally being developed.Based on this episode, Odenkirk definitely would have been a bit more like David Brent.

Jeff I still have no clue what Jim's company actually does, and I find it hard to believe that an internet startup company like that would have people wearing suits to work every day, but the one thing I do know is that if Trent Edwards is their big client right now they are in serious trouble.

Hank Scorpio Does this all end with the firing of Andy and Jim finally assuming the role he was born to play: Regional Manager?

rcade Only if you want the show to end with Jim's suicide.

Jaxemer11 Gosh ... i hope not.

Foster It's possible that he had more scenes/dialogue but it was later scrapped in the editing room.

Gigi I noticed that, too. However, it's possible the guy just needs work. He's a character actor at this point. However, I did expect that there would be more to that office given the cast of employees. But, I guess not.

basilfawlty Foster is right, Michael Weston did have more dialogue, which was removed in editing. Perhaps it will turn up later on the DVD as a deleted scene.

Jaxemer11 Saul was the only thing good about this crappy episode.

basilfawlty Absolutely right, Saul rocked.

Dr. Gross I was enjoying this season and will stick with it to the end, but the last two episodes have been borderline unwatchable. How many are left before it's all over?

basilfawlty Too damn many.

basilfawlty I agree, I didn't think the Dwight/Angela sequence worked at all. Trying to reunite them is another example of the "writers" throwing everything into the pot for the final season.

Never miss a post - sign up now to get an e-mail alert whenever
The Office is updated

Trey Mattingly

"That's what Mose said about that girl scarecrow of his and look what he did to her..."

Bahahaha

....as soon as I can take a breath deep enough to blow a whistle.

velocityknown It's something I can see being much more difficult when there are two very young kids involved. If they were older, I'd say it's not a big deal for Jim to work two hours away, but in this case, I can understand the conflict.

But how about Brian, right? That guy, he's....someone.

John Like some of the commenters above, I almost see this as more a restoration of the original character from seasons 3 and 4 than a sudden change.

He is a little hard to take as a lead, though.

Hank Scorpio United against Stringer Bell? I loved him as a boss. He called out Jim on all his BS and made him write that notorious "rundown".

Plus he loved soccer, just like the real Idris.

sepinwall

Forgot to ask: for those of you who were very invested in the Scranton Strangler running gag, how did you feel about this as the long-awaited payoff?

SecretHandshake

I remember when this show used to be about an office building...

basilfawlty Absolutely right, the Pam to camera sequence was a bad idea.
The writers must know that those few people still watching have been watching from S1, so that sequence was an insult. Crappier writers Not That Andy. Since S6 John R.

Jim

I didn't mind elements of the Andy storyline last night, every time he comes onscreen I do find myself wishing he were still gone. I think because only a complete ass treats his girlfriend as badly as he did. And the show has done so well without him.

Glenn

If I recall correctly, both Bob Odenkirk and Martin Short were considered for the part of Michael Scott when the show was originally being developed.

Based on this episode, Odenkirk definitely would have been a bit more like David Brent.

Jeff

I still have no clue what Jim's company actually does, and I find it hard to believe that an internet startup company like that would have people wearing suits to work every day, but the one thing I do know is that if Trent Edwards is their big client right now they are in serious trouble.

Hank Scorpio

Does this all end with the firing of Andy and Jim finally assuming the role he was born to play: Regional Manager?

Jaxemer11

Saul was the only thing good about this crappy episode.

Dr. Gross

I was enjoying this season and will stick with it to the end, but the last two episodes have been borderline unwatchable. How many are left before it's all over?