Or maybe he's just jealous and doesn't want her to see that side of him.
Agents of SHIELD: Season 3 - Discussion (SPOILERS LIKELY)
- Thread starter Trekker4747
- Start date
Or maybe he's just jealous and doesn't want her to see that side of him.
I think it's possible Fitz just didn't want Simmons to know he was back checking her story to make sure she's not a loon who spent 5 months seducing a volleyball...or there may be something else going on.
Indeed, in those photos he didn't look 14 years younger, but then it's really hard to judge. Some people really do age well.
Yeah I didn't buy that theory either. Shows what I know.
Honestly though, my main objection still stands: why? I mean, I get the whole "he took off suddenly because he got fish-oiled thing" but I don't get what appears to be such a drastic shift in personality.
At first I thought maybe it was a Hulk type of thing where Lash is a separate personality, but he set that fire after turning back and was blatantly fishing for Lincoln's whereabouts, so that idea is out.
Was he always a psychopath and nobody noticed? I know shrinks can be a little screwy (hazard of the job) but still, flat out murdering people (including innocent humans who get in his way) seems a bit out there. And then there was that whole thing where he could have killed Daisy (almost typed Skye!) in the van and chose not too. So why them and not her?
I hope there's a very valid explanation for all this.
And all of them are ours...except the one on Europa. Attempt no landing there.
Indeed, in those photos he didn't look 14 years younger, but then it's really hard to judge. Some people really do age well.
Yeah I didn't buy that theory either. Shows what I know.
Honestly though, my main objection still stands: why? I mean, I get the whole "he took off suddenly because he got fish-oiled thing" but I don't get what appears to be such a drastic shift in personality.
At first I thought maybe it was a Hulk type of thing where Lash is a separate personality, but he set that fire after turning back and was blatantly fishing for Lincoln's whereabouts, so that idea is out.
Was he always a psychopath and nobody noticed? I know shrinks can be a little screwy (hazard of the job) but still, flat out murdering people (including innocent humans who get in his way) seems a bit out there. And then there was that whole thing where he could have killed Daisy (almost typed Skye!) in the van and chose not too. So why them and not her?
I hope there's a very valid explanation for all this.
And all of them are ours...except the one on Europa. Attempt no landing there.
I am getting the feeling that he,Gideon Malick, will let Ward build an organization then the plan is to step up as the figurehead leader while Ward does the operational stuff.
Mybtheory on Lash, he was with SHIELD as they indexed the enhanced humans and is now hunting those who refused to be indexed. That accounts for letting Daisy live along with his hound dog Inhuman sifter before he killed him to keep his secret. And it explains Andrew looking at Alicia who he wounded because unknown to him she was working with SHIELD and presumably on their index.
Coulson put Skye in "Banner's cabin" last season. He would not be able to refer to it that way, if the person he was talking to didn't know who Dr Banner was...
I liked the episode, especially the Coulson/Rosalind part. I'm hoping she really likes him not just fooling him, there is definitely potential there, but at the same time I'm sad that they appear to move past Audrey Nathan.
I'm not gonna comment on the Andrew thing, there has to be a good explanation coming. At least I hope so, because its a really big personality/behavior jump and going with the "Oh, he went crazy with the change" would be so cheap. He deserves better than that and so are we.
Now, about Hunter. I kinda liked him in season two, but now he is starting to get on my nerves. I understand that the show needs the additional drama (well, not really), but they could do so much better. Look at Trip's death.
I'm not gonna comment on the Andrew thing, there has to be a good explanation coming. At least I hope so, because its a really big personality/behavior jump and going with the "Oh, he went crazy with the change" would be so cheap. He deserves better than that and so are we.
Now, about Hunter. I kinda liked him in season two, but now he is starting to get on my nerves. I understand that the show needs the additional drama (well, not really), but they could do so much better. Look at Trip's death.
That was a pretty good episode. I actually didn't expect the reveal of Lash's identity, I figured it would be too obvious and hard to explain when it comes to motivation. Still, its a good twist, and it will be interesting to see it play out.
Coulson and the ATCU wasn't great, and I think the woman is just tricking him and is probably dissecting inhumans or other evil stuff in secret. If nothing else though, it looks like Daisy is about done cooperating with the ATCU, which should be interesting. The May stuff was tainted by Mockingbird being there, and I found it the least interesting parts of the episode, although it wasn't horrible. I liked Hunter in this episode, it was kind of funny seeing him react to being taken off the Ward hunt. Overall, I liked this episode, and I really want to see where some of these plots go.
Coulson and the ATCU wasn't great, and I think the woman is just tricking him and is probably dissecting inhumans or other evil stuff in secret. If nothing else though, it looks like Daisy is about done cooperating with the ATCU, which should be interesting. The May stuff was tainted by Mockingbird being there, and I found it the least interesting parts of the episode, although it wasn't horrible. I liked Hunter in this episode, it was kind of funny seeing him react to being taken off the Ward hunt. Overall, I liked this episode, and I really want to see where some of these plots go.
I am really impressed by the last two episodes... you had a wonderful hour focused on just two people - a tour de force for Elizabeth Henstridge - and then a massive multiple-plot hour with some fantastic action and a killer twist.
I love this show.
Theory about Will:
What if he is the embodiment of the mystery planet's malevolent force?
I love this show.
Theory about Will:
What if he is the embodiment of the mystery planet's malevolent force?
Wow, I was very wrong here.
It will be very interesting to see where they go with all of this now. I'm curious if he was changed by the fish oil, or has been Lash all along.
I loved May and Bobbi together, they are an awesome team. It was a little annoyed that they had Hunter being so impulsive, but I don't know it was necessarily totally out of character.
I'm starting to hope that Rosalind isn't playing Coulson, he seems to be starting to trust, and like, her and I'd hate to see him be wrong.
I finally watched last week's episode yesterday, and I loved it. It takes a lot of talent to pull off an episode like that, and they did it spectacularly.
Maybe. A couple of little clues made me start thinking that way: for example he worked VERY hard to keep Simmons out of a certain area of the planet, yet he could zip there and back to get a bottle of vinegar for a special date with his special lady, "It" never appeared when they were together, he never explained how his gun only had one bullet left, he had a spectacular knowledge of what could be eaten on the planet, and he knew what was beneath the surface - calling it "Hell", which coincidentally was the same thing that other dude (the one slipping in and out of phase) called it in Season 1.
Although on the other hand, that isn't too implausible. Once you got down to your last bullet in that situation, you'd want to save it for a last-ditch emergency no matter what. (Or, in his case, to save it to kill himself with.)
He's been there 14 years, so that makes perfect sense.
Not much of a coincidence, given that Westerners tend to use "Hell" as a metaphor for any place that's unpleasant to be. Given that Will was referring to a fiery-hot underground domain, it was pretty much inevitable that he'd call it Hell.
Granted, it's not out of the question that he could be "It," but it'd take better evidence than this to prove it.
There's the age discrepancy that a lot of us noticed. I had been willing to chalk it up as a brain fart in casting, but then there's this....
Do you think they'd waste that beat on something so benign that isn't likely to make a difference to the story? It's a spy show, Fitz was investigating...which would seem to indicate that there's something worth investigating about this guy that might contradict Jemma's story.
If Will is really "It", that would explain the age, as "It" would either be assuming Will's appearance as he was when he died, or has been keeping his body from aging.
There's also the exposition about how "It" played mind tricks on people...potential setup for "It" messing with Jemma's head.
The situation reminds me of that line of Boyce's from "The Cage" about the illusionary survivors..."They had us seeing exactly what we wanted to see" (quoted from memory).
Do you think they'd waste that beat on something so benign that isn't likely to make a difference to the story? It's a spy show, Fitz was investigating...which would seem to indicate that there's something worth investigating about this guy that might contradict Jemma's story.
If Will is really "It", that would explain the age, as "It" would either be assuming Will's appearance as he was when he died, or has been keeping his body from aging.
There's also the exposition about how "It" played mind tricks on people...potential setup for "It" messing with Jemma's head.
The situation reminds me of that line of Boyce's from "The Cage" about the illusionary survivors..."They had us seeing exactly what we wanted to see" (quoted from memory).
What?? The whole Fitz-Simmons-Will dynamic is a love triangle. How could one character's jealousy conflicting with his desire for his beloved friend's happiness not make a difference to a love-triangle narrative?
This is the problem with the modern fixation on story arcs and continuity and plot twists -- we've become so obsessed with trying to predict the next twist or secret or startling revelation in the arc that we've forgotten that stories are supposed to be about characters and emotions and relationships. We're so busy trying to outsmart the writers that we're no longer letting ourselves feel things along with the characters.
Yeah, but how does his looking up info play into that angle in a meaningful way that would be worth a follow-up reference? He found out that Will was a deadbeat dad with overdue parking tickets? They needn't even have bothered showing Fitz looking at the screen to make such an ordinary reference.
This is a spy show in a world with metahumans and interplanetary travel. I think there's something a bit more going on here than "but Fitz is still jealous".
And imagine the angsty-angst they could get out of Fitz having to reveal the truth to Jemma.
This is a spy show in a world with metahumans and interplanetary travel. I think there's something a bit more going on here than "but Fitz is still jealous".
And imagine the angsty-angst they could get out of Fitz having to reveal the truth to Jemma.
I don't know, because I didn't write the scripts. Maybe we'll find out in future episodes.
Stories about larger-than-life and fanciful events only have impact if they're grounded in plausible human emotions and relationships. Look at Cal's storyline last season. Sure, there were Inhumans and superstrength potions and all sorts of fanciful stuff going on, but at its core it was a story about a father who loved and missed his daughter, and it was the simple, relatable emotion between Cal and Skye/Daisy that gave meaning to all the wild comic-book fantasy plotting.
So your fundamental mistake is in assuming that gimmicky, complicated plot twists are "more" than an exploration of the complex emotions between Fitz and Simmons. It's the other way around. It's the emotions that make a story "more" than just a bunch of gimmicks and surprises.
Fitz is a god-damned super-hero. You know how various creators will say stuff like, "Steve Rogers was Captain America before the serum. The serum just gave him muscles."? That's how I see Fitz. Against all odds, he's become the bravest, noblest, most loyal and heroic character on the show. I'd like to see Fitz try and lift Mjolnir.
Count me among those who were dead wrong about the Andrew/Lash theory. But it's going to be interesting watching them answer the questions posed above.
Andrew didn't just discover he was an Inhuman (if that's what Lash is), he also managed to become evil as well. This is the part that gets me. Seems they can't say he was always evil because May was with him for so long. Even if Andrw has some "noble" reason for his actions as Lash, how why would this character set aside his obvious common sense, sense of decency, and level headedness to decide that murder is okay. Guess I'm repeating the post above.
Incidently, loved the look on May's face when Strucker told her that the man she loved was a literal monster and a killer. Nice acting by Ming Na.
I also loved Hunter/Daisy/Mack together. They were hilarious. Love that Hunter, who is a relatively little guy, is the hammer of the group and a hothead, while the physically imposing Mack, is a reluctant fighter and very level headed. The seemingly "dumb" stuff Hunter did sure did get the job done.
Can't wait to see the confrontation between May and Andrew.
It's a fan (me) theory, I don't have much more than little hints to go on. To me the biggest key is that they are never see "It" while together, and how Will rescues her from "It" in the final scene is very, very fuzzy. On a side note, I do like how they showed that both Fitz' and Simmons' side of the rescue were chaotic and rushed. Some good points. If there is a malevolent force on that planet, it might want to "escape" and what better way than to manipulate a brilliant scientist's emotions and get her to find a way to open a stable portal?
Like the friction of Jemma thinking that Fitz is just jealous when he tries to share his findings. We can have that and still have something more going on with Will.
You're assuming that it's a mistake. That's yet to be proven. If my theory is right, then your assumption will have been the mistake.
