OK, I could not hear what that tattoo on that man´s behind is. Can anyone tell me what it is and why it is so awful? Shallow, silly question I know.
Yosemite sam
1
Great column, and this show is quite fascinating even without the added pleasure of the Monday inside baseball. And IMO, Jay Farrar is better than Tweedy-Bennett, who are very good indeed.
2
Should be Axe and Wendy. More depth, more believable, better feud. They're the match.
4
This episode was packed with advice on how to get your way in the midst of a tough negotiation and ought to be required viewing for MBA candidates . The bit when Rhodes cons the target of his investigation by asking him for a favour could be the best free advice ever offered on any television show.
3
And the award winner for lamest, most unrealistic deposition scene is . . .
It is a TV show, there has to be drama. Most depositions are very boring.
Am I the only one who felt the tension in the room between Wendy and Craig Heidecker ("Elon Musk-type")? I think he's a love interest in a future episode....
10
Yes. I just kept wondering how he could be sweet on Wendy when he wanted to be a dad to Joan baby.
4
No, you are not the only one. But Wendy will hopefully go back to chuck and her invisible children
1
It was exhausting sitting through the contrived Wendy Rhoades scenes in episode 4. Her character was interesting when working with Axe and the others at Axe Capital, out-dueling Chuck in various ways, and so on. Forcing viewers to believe that she's suddenly being asked to psychoanalyze an astronaut (who, by the way, we don't care about), though, is a stretch and was a bore to sit through. Lest anyone claim I'm coming at this from some kind of male pig perspective since I'm daring to be anything less than happy with screen time for a powerful female character, as seems likely given the other comments, (i) I always have liked Wendy's character with the right doses and (ii) my wife, decidedly not a male pig or one to meekly say things I'll agree with, was more bored than I was with the Wendy scenes in this episode.
2
Most shows have a very attractive female. Wendy certainly is the ticket for that part.
I not only like her as an actress her life coaching job or or her being House psychologist is a nine add on. She is grossly over paid. Not boring at all
I not only like her as an actress her life coaching job or or her being House psychologist is a nine add on. She is grossly over paid. Not boring at all
The Wilco dis was enough reason
to kick her off the Mars trip.
to kick her off the Mars trip.
Wendy bits are boring. I fast forward to the real action. I will admit Wendy was interesting last year when all was new. Great episode with great closing. I like the ambiguous gender person last episode and this one. David Costabile's character is another one to pay attention to.
1
Leave it to a male plot summarizer to denigrate the powerful character of Wendy Rhodes now that she's moved beyond being an appendage of two histrionic alpha-males whose self-aggrandizing mugging for the camera far outstrips the beautifully rendered facial tics of cool-and-stealth Maggie Siff! Alpha women watching this show are thrilled Wendy is coming into her own!
There's a lot more to Axe's implicit protection of her by not speaking so publicly of the bonus money. And, you totally missed the frisson of attraction between her and the Elon Musk-like character - who's certainly more of a genius than Bobby or Chuck - and could be a recurring role that could render Wendy even more powerful and influential.
Wendy has always had more testicular fortitude than Axe or Chuck and for sure, Wags - who's really coming unraveled from his own self-destructive lifestyle as well as the probing and loathing eye of the new additions to the Axe team, the young Taylor and the mysterious chief of staff (female! Black!) whose powerful presence rightfully dominates every scene she's in - even when she doesn't speak!
Lastly, Malin Ackerman plays Lara Axelrod as a thug, a poorly written one-dimensional stereotype, someone who beat up her classmates in grade school. In her case, the show's writers think brawn = brain. Sorkin et al are smarter than that. I can't stand this character and every true businesswoman I know feels the same way.
There's a lot more to Axe's implicit protection of her by not speaking so publicly of the bonus money. And, you totally missed the frisson of attraction between her and the Elon Musk-like character - who's certainly more of a genius than Bobby or Chuck - and could be a recurring role that could render Wendy even more powerful and influential.
Wendy has always had more testicular fortitude than Axe or Chuck and for sure, Wags - who's really coming unraveled from his own self-destructive lifestyle as well as the probing and loathing eye of the new additions to the Axe team, the young Taylor and the mysterious chief of staff (female! Black!) whose powerful presence rightfully dominates every scene she's in - even when she doesn't speak!
Lastly, Malin Ackerman plays Lara Axelrod as a thug, a poorly written one-dimensional stereotype, someone who beat up her classmates in grade school. In her case, the show's writers think brawn = brain. Sorkin et al are smarter than that. I can't stand this character and every true businesswoman I know feels the same way.
11
Lara is by far the show's weakest, least interesting character.
1
I liked it last season when Chuck and Wendy weren't at a break in their marriage. Wendy working with Ace seem to work better for the show. One thing that the Rhosdd family have are invisible kids. Except there was a boy laying on chucks lap. But I think it's a clever tactic.
John boy is back, considering he was killed on the Americans. The show i good brain candy
John boy is back, considering he was killed on the Americans. The show i good brain candy
2
Tweedy's never been as good ( or really even good) without the late great Jay Bennett.
1
I did enjoy the line from Axe that "Monte Carlo is the Santa Con of the French Riviera"
3
Axe is NOT bidding on the NY Giants. The franchise is unnamed. You'll remmeber when Axe is looking around MetLife Stadium for where his seats will be, the owner reminded him that they would not be here as HIS team is not for sale.
5
I couldn't disagree more about Wendy. Her character and her portrayal have always been my least favorite part of this show. I find her prancing and facial expressions ridiculous. Only reason I want to see her next week is to see the interaction with Wags. The less of her the better, IMHO.
11
Agree with you 100%!
As a woman and a physician I find Wendy to be smug, bland, a remote parent and a complete sell out as a doctor. She was so happy to take that $5 mill from Axe. Lack of a moral compass.
As a woman and a physician I find Wendy to be smug, bland, a remote parent and a complete sell out as a doctor. She was so happy to take that $5 mill from Axe. Lack of a moral compass.
4
I couldnt disagree with you more about Wendy being independent this season- the fact that she was married to her boss' enemy in Season 1 was preposterous, especially for a character like Wendy who has such high intelligence and self-esteem. It was such a stupid gimmick on such a quality show...Season 2 is absolutely on a roll, with Wendy being independent and the addition of the new characters...and the Sanford Bensinger monologue to Axe last night about the beauty of giving was impeccable writing
9
I believe she was working at Axe Capital before she got married.
1
good grief, wilco and jeff tweedy are overrated crap.
5
Wilco did peak with YHF.
4
Why those awkward Blade Runner references?
1
Bobby Axelrod could finish Chuck by testifying Wendy's 5 million salary was a bribe to stop the investigation. Bobby is supposedly a ruthless investor, but he let this opportunity to kill Chuck's career go by. Why? Sudden ethical grounds? Quite unbelievable. If he followed his true nature and uses this tool to destroy his opponent the terrific tv-series will come to a sudden end: game over. In reality he certainly would have used it and loved it. In the fictional tv-series the two men, Bobby and Chuck, are needed to battle on a couple of seasons, but by doing this the conflict becomes an artificial battle, because both men are needed to stretch the fictional conflict and story many more episodes to come.
3
He'd be destroying Wendy's career, that's his qualm.
5
because as they said in the episode in which Bobby discussed doing so, taking down Chuck with that would likewise take down Wendy and he's not prepared to take her down as well.
4
Bobby's decision to protect Wendy is really 'out of character'. She left him and his firm, while accepting his huge reward. He shouldn't show any mercy. He should take Chuck out for good if the opportunity arises and therefore Wendy must also go. That's how Bobby's character is established. He must stay loyal to his character. After that 'Billions' the tv-show must find a new antagonist. Now, one way or the other they are going to repeat the conflict of the first excellent season: Chuck versus Bobby and vice-versa. It's a complete static repeating conflict if the outcome is going to be for season 2, that they both stay on the show.
Axe showed some serious vulnerabilities this week:
1. Mark Cuban and Sanford Bensinger offer him some very wise words of experience about things outside of money he needs to be concerned with. And he ignores them, showing his blind side.
2. At the deposition he couldn't bring himself to admit Chuck caused him mental and emotional damage (nice job Ira).
3. His pretending to giving away his whole fortune away spectacularly backfires. Sanford Bensinger lectures him like a schoolboy caught cheating, and basically tells him he's never going to be good enough for the establishment. That look of vulnerability and uncertainty of one's place in this world on his face when he hung up the phone, just priceless.
4. Against better judgement, Axe charges back to the deposition accusing Chuck of costing him an NFL franchise. That's a pretty laughable legal position, I can just picture Ira calmly pointing to his unconvincing charity stunt, his 9/11 notoriety, the gigantic legal battles he initiated with high ranking government official ... as more plausible reasons.
Makes you wonder if even Wendy can fix him.
1. Mark Cuban and Sanford Bensinger offer him some very wise words of experience about things outside of money he needs to be concerned with. And he ignores them, showing his blind side.
2. At the deposition he couldn't bring himself to admit Chuck caused him mental and emotional damage (nice job Ira).
3. His pretending to giving away his whole fortune away spectacularly backfires. Sanford Bensinger lectures him like a schoolboy caught cheating, and basically tells him he's never going to be good enough for the establishment. That look of vulnerability and uncertainty of one's place in this world on his face when he hung up the phone, just priceless.
4. Against better judgement, Axe charges back to the deposition accusing Chuck of costing him an NFL franchise. That's a pretty laughable legal position, I can just picture Ira calmly pointing to his unconvincing charity stunt, his 9/11 notoriety, the gigantic legal battles he initiated with high ranking government official ... as more plausible reasons.
Makes you wonder if even Wendy can fix him.
4
I liked the way the deposition played out. It doesn't matter whether losing the NFL franchise has any legal value. It would make for a terrific headline. Axe already had Mark Cuban telling him to drop his vendetta against Chuck, so that could have planted the thought in the back of his mind if his bid were rejected. Or, maybe, he didn't want a NFL team as much as he professed. I liked the Sanford Bensinger lecture he received, but from Bensinger's perspective, it also backfired. Now, he's not going to get Axe's wealth. So what Axe played him? Would he rather be played or get billions for his non-profit? In fact, at some point Axe should make a point that he's decided to leave his wealth to some other group, maybe his own, because he doesn't think Bensinger meets his standards for managing billions of dollars to do good.
6
Makes me wonder whether the writers thought through what a legal claim is and how you support it.
I mean the stupid deposition was 5 questions. How is the plaintiff surprised by "What are your damages?"
I mean the stupid deposition was 5 questions. How is the plaintiff surprised by "What are your damages?"