|
Post by beesnbears on Sept 22, 2009 19:12:16 GMT -5
I have to say that this episode still cracks me up! And it really has everything we love about Moonlighting. I found though that watching this while keeping "Witness For the Execution" in mind made me think of a couple of things:
1. David has definitely not forgotten about the kiss in the garage. 2. Maddie had managed to ignore it and any thought of its meaning...sigh!!
Anyway, hope we have a few tonight and that no one minds if I kick off the discussion. I may be in and out through the evening, so here are a few questions.
1. What parallels, if any, are there between Maddie and David and the Clements case?
2. Why do you suppose Maddie doesn’t want David to be “delighted” to take her to a family wedding in Chicago?
3. What is really the root of David’s anger when Maddie insists on returning their fee?
|
|
graycav56
3rd Level
I can't imagine not rewatching with you next week.
Posts: 948
|
Post by graycav56 on Sept 22, 2009 19:41:01 GMT -5
Just got in. Rewatching now. Smart alec replies to come!
|
|
graycav56
3rd Level
I can't imagine not rewatching with you next week.
Posts: 948
|
Post by graycav56 on Sept 22, 2009 19:58:48 GMT -5
2. Why do you suppose Maddie doesn’t want David to be “delighted” to take her to a family wedding in Chicago?
Well of course she feels that if he is "delighted" then he will be up to no good! Like trying to use this as an opportunity to try and get "horizontal"! For the record, me AND my avatar would have gone for well less than $1200. Just saying.
|
|
|
Post by jpen on Sept 22, 2009 20:04:15 GMT -5
1. What parallels, if any, are there between Maddie and David and the Clements case?
I was thinking about this too, gray. Nothing obvious comes to mind...except that it's yet another example of a relationship gone really, really wrong. I think it's more a vehicle for some fun scenes (D&M in booth #3...classic), as well as giving David an opportunity to get angry with Maddie (since it's so often the other way around).
Oh--just thought of this--also it's a variation on the theme of People Are Not What They Seem, which is underlined by Maddie's planned pretence at the wedding.
|
|
|
Post by jpen on Sept 22, 2009 20:16:32 GMT -5
2. Why do you suppose Maddie doesn’t want David to be “delighted” to take her to a family wedding in Chicago?This scene is so interesting! It is, as you reminded us, gray, only 2 eps after "Witness", and I think the kiss is still on both their minds. David obviously jumps at the chance to correct his boneheaded apres-shaving speech ("Just a little goodbye kiss"), while Maddie...well, she's gonna be much more protective of her heart. So, she doesn't even look to David as the first option, instead enlisting the Almond Dentist. Then, when David says he'll be delighted (and it's the look in his eyes, rather than the words, that is troubling to her, I think), she gets a little freaked. Putting their arrangement in a little box marked "business" makes her feel better--as if David won't take the first opportunity to jump right out of that box!!
|
|
|
Post by jpen on Sept 22, 2009 20:17:24 GMT -5
2. Why do you suppose Maddie doesn’t want David to be “delighted” to take her to a family wedding in Chicago?Well of course she feels that if he is "delighted" then he will be up to no good! Like trying to use this as an opportunity to try and get "horizontal"! For the record, me AND my avatar would have gone for well less than $1200. Just saying. Gray, she would've snatched you right up. Seriously.
|
|
graycav56
3rd Level
I can't imagine not rewatching with you next week.
Posts: 948
|
Post by graycav56 on Sept 22, 2009 20:19:23 GMT -5
Dear jpen...it was Bees who mentioned the smooch in the garage....I only imagined it was me!
|
|
|
Post by jpen on Sept 22, 2009 20:24:57 GMT -5
Dear jpen...it was Bees who mentioned the smooch in the garage....I only imagined it was me! O jeez...time to get the ol' peepers checked!!
|
|
graycav56
3rd Level
I can't imagine not rewatching with you next week.
Posts: 948
|
Post by graycav56 on Sept 22, 2009 20:40:45 GMT -5
1. What parallels, if any, are there between Maddie and David and the Clements case?
Hmm Bees, you have me there. I see a number of differences, rather than parallels. Clements treats his wife as a possession to be revered, where I think Dave would prefer Maddie to be just an equal, a sparring partner. Clements chases away her friends...Dave encourages Maddie to open up and get some. Celia allows herself to be controlled to the point where she snaps; Maddie is quite the opposite.
|
|
graycav56
3rd Level
I can't imagine not rewatching with you next week.
Posts: 948
|
Post by graycav56 on Sept 22, 2009 20:44:12 GMT -5
3. What is really the root of David’s anger when Maddie insists on returning their fee?
Old fashioned work ethic. David thinks that they performed a service and was due payment. Returning the fee is a breach of contract and a violation of the free enterprise system! Maddie of course, disagrees.
He has tried for two seasons to show that old City of Angels, that money pit, could function as a profitable Blue Moon, but at almost every turn, Maddie gets on a moral high ground and negates these gains, ill-begotten or not.
The dude is just frustrated.
|
|
graycav56
3rd Level
I can't imagine not rewatching with you next week.
Posts: 948
|
Post by graycav56 on Sept 22, 2009 20:52:05 GMT -5
I just jumped over to read some of the other posts on this episode and find it interesting that some mentioned that the Cousin in Chicago could be....Annie??
Another is how the lady that played Celia also was the love interest in one of the Golden Wine Cooler ads that can be seen on the main web site. I used to drink that stuff by the case. I remember being stuck in a traffic jam on I-95 heading to a Genesis Concert at Veteran's stadium. My lovely date and I were cooking in the sun with the Corvette's roof off, so I reached back, pulled out two Coolers and enjoyed while we sat there, motor off. (Yes, that is probably illegal now...but back then we didn't consider it a "real" drink....silly boy.)
|
|
|
Post by beesnbears on Sept 22, 2009 20:55:34 GMT -5
1. What parallels, if any, are there between Maddie and David and the Clements case?Hmm Bees, you have me there. I see a number of differences, rather than parallels. Clements treats his wife as a possession to be revered, where I think Dave would prefer Maddie to be just an equal, a sparring partner. Clements chases away her friends...Dave encourages Maddie to open up and get some. Celia allows herself to be controlled to the point where she snaps; Maddie is quite the opposite. Wow!! Never thought of all that!! I thought it was a trick question... LOL! I'm glad I asked it now! You get bonus points, gray!
|
|
|
Post by lin212 on Sept 22, 2009 20:59:11 GMT -5
Evening, everyone...
2. Why do you suppose Maddie doesn’t want David to be “delighted” to take her to a family wedding in Chicago?
Fear - I think Maddie is scared to death when David tells her that he would be delighted. She is afraid that something might happen that would cause her to deal with her feelings. She would much prefer an NSM, a purely business relationship.
|
|
|
Post by beesnbears on Sept 22, 2009 21:01:33 GMT -5
1. What parallels, if any, are there between Maddie and David and the Clements case?Oh--just thought of this--also it's a variation on the theme of People Are Not What They Seem, which is underlined by Maddie's planned pretence at the wedding. You're right about that one, jpen.
|
|
graycav56
3rd Level
I can't imagine not rewatching with you next week.
Posts: 948
|
Post by graycav56 on Sept 22, 2009 21:01:44 GMT -5
For the record, I am not, nor have I ever been accused of being......an NSM.
Court adjourned.
|
|