Agreed. I'd given up with the paradox, duplicates, and the fact that their interference in the past should produce more changes angles for some time now. However, it appears like there was even less thought put into it than expected though.
Mr Awe
Spoilers Timeless: Season 1 on NBC
- Thread starter Aragorn
- Start date
Mr Awe
I thought the entire episode failed. Wyatt's and Rufus' story was dull, although I enjoyed seeing the 80s as it was the first time in this series that they visited a time period that I personally remembered. The revelations about Rittnehouse were also underwhelming.
I entirely agree with revealing Rittenhouse's plans if they are more than just tinkering in time. I suspect that those plans aren't well defined in the writers' minds though. The series is just an excuse to show different time periods. The rest is window dressing. Although, I have to say, this series does bring to life the different time periods better than any other TV time travel show that I've seen. Some of it has been gorgeous with great recreations. History porn is probably an apt word for it!
But, I do feel that with the aftermath of the Benedict Arnold story (the return to Flynn's more mundane trips involving individuals) and the lameness of the 80s episode, I think the series is in decline. It doesn't appear like there's much substance beneath the surface. Not much thought given to the conspiracy, time travel, etc.
Also, the Benedict Arnold episode and the 80s episode had the potential to really shake things up on the series and make the statement that anything could happen in this series. However, in both instances they returned to the status quo. They hit the big red Reset button. Sure, Wyatt is in some trouble but guessing he'll be back in the team as normal soon enough.
These things all represent a decision the series has made to be conservative and not change it's format. The showrunners want to adhere strictly to the history porn at all costs format. They want to keep travelling to the most well-known time periods and interact with (usually) well-known historical figures (Bass was a nice exception). History won't be going off the rails or anything like that. No deep paradoxes explored.
Mr Awe
Seeing the 80s was nice. But I can't help but think that the writers fudged the numbers a bit. 1983 is 34 years back from today and the prisoner that Wyatt talked to seemed older than 34 years meaning he would have already been born in 1983. Maybe the prisoner was meant to be 34 years old and just looked older but I think it is more likely that the writers wanted to do the 80s and did not really care if the date made sense.
It occurs to me that this really was the "reverse Back to the Future" -- not only were they trying to prevent a guy's parents from meeting, but they went back from the mid-2010s to the mid-1980s, so it was a reverse of BTTF2 in that sense.
Watched the latest episode with Charles Lindbergh. The episode sure name dropped a lot of famous people! Interesting that Lindbergh was portrayed as someone who was going along with Rittenhouse because he was born into it and felt he had no choice. It contrasts nicely with Lucy's dilemma that she too is born into Rittenhouse but chooses not to follow it. It was neat to see the origin of Lucy's diary.
I guess it was predictable that his replacement died on the first mission. I do think the point about bringing a 20's era gun rather than a modern gun made sense if you are trying not to contaminate the future. It always irked me that our team seems rather cavalier about details like that. They wear period clothes but then Wyatt carries a modern gun which if seen will definitely draw attention.
I guess it was predictable that his replacement died on the first mission. I do think the point about bringing a 20's era gun rather than a modern gun made sense if you are trying not to contaminate the future. It always irked me that our team seems rather cavalier about details like that. They wear period clothes but then Wyatt carries a modern gun which if seen will definitely draw attention.
^ I think they're foreshadowing a decision that Lucy is going to have to make about whether to help Rittenhouse or not. The point both of her talking to her dad and the Lindbergh storyline is that while, right now the choice seems clear that she won't help Rittenhouse, in reality it will be a much tougher choice for reasons unknown to us. There was some reason why Lucy's Dad and Lindbergh both chose to help Rittenhouse despite initially being terrified. There is also her diary, which she apparently completed while helping Rittenhouse. So, some future version of her chose to go that route.
I'm guessing the season finale goes deeper into this decision and why it is so difficult.
I thought it was an enjoyable episode. They seem content to just leave Rittenhouse as a generic shadow organization. They manipulate events throughout history but not much info on why, their goals, etc. I wonder if the series will leave that as a mystery or delve into their motivations and methods? Right now it's a little frustrating because we don't know much about them other than their strong arm tactics in the present.
Basically, right now the show seems content to focus on both the history porn and a generic shadow conspiracy group. They've also shown that they're conservative in terms of sticking with the show's original format rather than willing to shake things up. So, I'm wondering if the show is content with remaining as it is or willing to take it to the next step and digger deeper, change things up?
Mr Awe
I'm guessing the season finale goes deeper into this decision and why it is so difficult.
I thought it was an enjoyable episode. They seem content to just leave Rittenhouse as a generic shadow organization. They manipulate events throughout history but not much info on why, their goals, etc. I wonder if the series will leave that as a mystery or delve into their motivations and methods? Right now it's a little frustrating because we don't know much about them other than their strong arm tactics in the present.
Basically, right now the show seems content to focus on both the history porn and a generic shadow conspiracy group. They've also shown that they're conservative in terms of sticking with the show's original format rather than willing to shake things up. So, I'm wondering if the show is content with remaining as it is or willing to take it to the next step and digger deeper, change things up?
Mr Awe
You are probably right. Lucy's dad seemed quite insistent that Lucy would come around. And then we also got the dialogue where he says that the organization has evolved since its founding. The show seems to want us to think that things are not quite as black and white. Of course, it is also very possible that Lucy's dad was lying just to make Rittenhouse seem more palatable to Lucy.
Agreed. I too would like to know more about Rittenhouse. If we learned of something positive about Rittenhouse, it would make things more interesting.
Having Wyatt sidelined and the NSA take over the program seems to hint at changes in the show. But it will be interesting if the show hits the reset button or really does change up the format a bit.
They really did go all-out with the historical name-dropping here -- maybe because they're heading into the 2-part season finale and will have less time for that sort of thing, so they wanted to have one last big fling before then.
I wasn't comfortable with attempting to redeem Charles Lindbergh by painting his white-supremacist and pro-fascist leanings as things he was pressured into saying without really believing them. I guess the fact that he ended up going back and saying and doing those things anyway is still somewhat damning to this version of him, but not in the same way.
The episode was also probably a bit too generous regarding Ernest Hemingway's racial attitudes -- which were not actively hateful, indeed superficially tolerant, but fairly unquestioning of societal presumptions of racial status and character. I doubt he would've so easily treated Rufus as an equal. Honestly, the actor they had playing Hemingway was rather dull. I would've rather seen them devote more time to Josephine Baker. And Picasso, while they were at it.
I think that's a premature assumption. After all, this is only a 16-episode first season, and we're 14 episodes in. The way that TV these days is defined by seasonal arcs, with each season telling a distinct story that comes to a climax in the finale, I would assume that any major "shaking up" of the current formula would come at the end of the season. After all, things are clearly coming to a head now, with Rittenhouse and Cahill openly taking over the project and the core cast now operating as a resistance cell from within. That in itself is a pretty major change to the formula, and it's the sort of thing you'd expect in the last three episodes of a season arc. Whatever happens over the remaining two episodes, it'll probably end in a way that changes the status quo significantly and sets up a new phase of the storyline for season 2 to tell.
I wasn't comfortable with attempting to redeem Charles Lindbergh by painting his white-supremacist and pro-fascist leanings as things he was pressured into saying without really believing them. I guess the fact that he ended up going back and saying and doing those things anyway is still somewhat damning to this version of him, but not in the same way.
The episode was also probably a bit too generous regarding Ernest Hemingway's racial attitudes -- which were not actively hateful, indeed superficially tolerant, but fairly unquestioning of societal presumptions of racial status and character. I doubt he would've so easily treated Rufus as an equal. Honestly, the actor they had playing Hemingway was rather dull. I would've rather seen them devote more time to Josephine Baker. And Picasso, while they were at it.
I think that's a premature assumption. After all, this is only a 16-episode first season, and we're 14 episodes in. The way that TV these days is defined by seasonal arcs, with each season telling a distinct story that comes to a climax in the finale, I would assume that any major "shaking up" of the current formula would come at the end of the season. After all, things are clearly coming to a head now, with Rittenhouse and Cahill openly taking over the project and the core cast now operating as a resistance cell from within. That in itself is a pretty major change to the formula, and it's the sort of thing you'd expect in the last three episodes of a season arc. Whatever happens over the remaining two episodes, it'll probably end in a way that changes the status quo significantly and sets up a new phase of the storyline for season 2 to tell.
I'm comparing it to shows like Game of Thrones and Expanse where shit can really change from episode to episode and you seem to dig in deeper with everything. In my view, those types of shows have really raised the bar. Timeless is not in that category. The showrunners probably don't intend it to be either, but it feels like it moves at a snail pace in terms of changes and there isn't a deeper exploration of how things work in the show. This more breezy format allows them to not dig deeper into the various aspects of the show: time travel and Rittenhouse.
It's true they may change things at the end of the season a bit but that's what I think of more as the old TV format. Plug away throughout the season and then have some big finale where things *might* change next season. Any arcs in this series are really minor. We haven't really learned all that much. Rufus has changed the most. Haven't learned a lot about Rittenhouse or Flynn for that matter beyond the most general aspects.
I'm guessing the finale (and cliffhanger if there is one) has more to do with Lucy's choice. The outcome might just keep the status quo (i.e., she makes the correct choice). We'll see. It could change things up a bit though but I don't think the series will be hugely different in the 2nd season. Our good guys will still travel back in time to stop Flynn and perhaps place more of a focus on how they deal with Rittenhouse.
Mr Awe
I think that's more a factor of having a story to tell (and moving it along) versus having a neat idea, and then changing it up with a big shocker finale when you find out you're renewed and have to come up with something to keep it moving.
Your examples are clearly trying to tell a bigger story; I think Timeless just wants to tell stories about shadow conspiracies and time travel, and will keep things pretty vanilla until they find out they're done and have to wrap it up somehow.
I'm not convinced there's much of a plan here, or a story to tell, just a neat idea.
Your examples are clearly trying to tell a bigger story; I think Timeless just wants to tell stories about shadow conspiracies and time travel, and will keep things pretty vanilla until they find out they're done and have to wrap it up somehow.
I'm not convinced there's much of a plan here, or a story to tell, just a neat idea.
It dawned on me where the conspiracy theory could be going.
DC Comics has a 1990 min-series called Time Masters. In it, Rip and his team move through time trying to thwart Vandal Savage and the Illuminati. Adventure after adventure they can't quite seem to win. But in the end. one of the team ends up in the near future, and after an apocolyptic event, the only chance the world has to come out of it, is through the assistance and resources of the Illuminati.
Would it be worth all the believed misery that Rittenhouse has inflicted, if they were the eventual saviours of a ruined Earth? Sounds like a fun question to me. And maybe a great way to end the series.
DC Comics has a 1990 min-series called Time Masters. In it, Rip and his team move through time trying to thwart Vandal Savage and the Illuminati. Adventure after adventure they can't quite seem to win. But in the end. one of the team ends up in the near future, and after an apocolyptic event, the only chance the world has to come out of it, is through the assistance and resources of the Illuminati.
Would it be worth all the believed misery that Rittenhouse has inflicted, if they were the eventual saviours of a ruined Earth? Sounds like a fun question to me. And maybe a great way to end the series.
That would be interesting. Maybe Rittenhouse just believes that they are Earth's only saviors from a future apocalypse or maybe the the future threat is real?
Yeah, that was my point--so I agree. I really get the sense the showrunners haven't really thought about a bigger story to tell, all the implications of time-travel, etc. It's pretty much history porn, generic conspiracy, and generic bad guys who want to shoot up history.
Mr Awe
Except that DC's Legends of Tomorrow did something based on that Rip Hunter plot last season -- the Time Masters turned out to be supporting Vandal Savage's conquest of Earth in the 22nd century because it was necessary to stave off a later Thanagarian invasion. So it'd be pretty repetitive for Timeless to do the same plot a year or two later.
Let's assume that we haven't seen the original, unaltered timeline yet. In that unaltered timeline, Lucy helps Rittenhouse and writes about it in her diary and Flynn doesn't have the information to use the time machine to fight against Rittenhouse. In the future of the unaltered timeline, that diary is completed.
Somehow. present day Flynn obtains that completed diary from the future. Perhaps a future Flynn or other individual brings it back in time? He also seems to obtain some knowledge about the program and knows Anthony.
At any rate, the diary and familiarity with the time machine affects how Flynn reacts to Rittenhouse killing his wife and daughter. He goes on rampages in the past. In this altered timeline, Lucy now sees this behavior first hand whereas she didn't in the original timeline. She's repulsed by it. This causes her to choose not to help Rittenhouse. unlike the original timeline.
Mr Awe
Somehow. present day Flynn obtains that completed diary from the future. Perhaps a future Flynn or other individual brings it back in time? He also seems to obtain some knowledge about the program and knows Anthony.
At any rate, the diary and familiarity with the time machine affects how Flynn reacts to Rittenhouse killing his wife and daughter. He goes on rampages in the past. In this altered timeline, Lucy now sees this behavior first hand whereas she didn't in the original timeline. She's repulsed by it. This causes her to choose not to help Rittenhouse. unlike the original timeline.
Mr Awe
They really DO need to address that at some point. Our entire POV is off, because we've never seen the 'original' timeline at all. They've name-dropped the journal that implies that this isn't the first go-around, but spent an entire season avoiding what that means. If they were serious about their story, seems like they should be getting to that at some point soon, as it's sort of an important point.
I agree on both points. It was kind of nice to get out of the US a bit, even if they didn't do a lot with the fact that they were in France.
The stuff with Hemingway and Josephine Baker was pretty fun.
I wasn't to surprised that the new soldier died so quickly.
The stuff with Rittenhouse and the NSA was an interesting set up for the finale. It will be interesting to see if anything dramatic happens now that the heroes seem to ready to start fighting Rittenhouse a bit more actively.
I've been wondering lately if the time ships can go to the future too, or just the past?
I hope if the show continues on past this season that they open things up a bit more in terms of how far back into history they go. It could be fun to see the characters go back to the middle ages or even all the way back to Ancient Rome or Egypt.
It would be neat to see the future. They could do an episode where the team travels to the future and sees what America would become if Rittenhouse succeeds in their plans. It could give the team an added incentive to fight Rittenhouse.
I would love that. I am not sure if the show will do it because it seems like the premise is very much centered around Rittenhouse and their plans for America, hence why the team is traveling to various moments in American history. Maybe something for season 2?
Was Lindberg an allegory for Trump.
A great man who is a public asshole, to distract the world from the men behind the curtain who are really controlling the planet.
A great man who is a public asshole, to distract the world from the men behind the curtain who are really controlling the planet.
