essed
1st Level
Posts: 100
|
Post by essed on Jan 28, 2021 20:30:19 GMT -5
Yay, the Wobblies are talking! Keep stirring the pot! I admit I logged in the other day, read the thread, had a panic attack, and promptly logged out. I can deal with undefined and extremely complicated relationships like Mulder/Scully or Buffy/Spike (sorry Sandra, but Angel belongs with Cordelia, ha!). I don’t need my shows to end in marriage and babies but I disagree with Marta that “There was never meant to be a happy ending.” No happy ending for David and Maddie?! Gasp! Then what was the point of the whole show? What was the story about? Surely it wasn’t about their amazing detective work. I agree with Moonlightingml’s point about GGC using ‘The Taming of the Shrew’ as inspiration. With TTotS as the framework for Maddie and David’s story, and with AS he showed us it is possible for opposites, forced together by circumstance, to grow into a legitimate loving relationship if there is mutual respect and compromise. In the final script he wrote, he again reminds us of the connection to TTotS with Jerome’s statement that The Creator (GGC) hopes their baby will help Maddie pay heed to her huge heart (tame the Shrew). We are even shown clips of AS followed by this exchange: Jerome: “They’re old souls, they’ve been around for centuries. I brought them into the world a dozen times myself and it’s always the same; they meet, they fall in love, they spend their lives doing this strange little tango together.” Baby Hayes: “But why does it have to be like that; always so complicated?” J: “No one’s sure. There are a lot of theories though. Perhaps it is because Maddie is afraid that she loves David more than he loves her and David’s afraid of the same thing. And since they are both afraid of being hurt by the other one they act like they don’t care. But deep down they really do care. Oh yes, a great deal.” We were also shown throughout the series that other love interests were not suitable for Maddie and David, no matter how much they had in common. Sam is handsome, stable, and successful. Walter is kind, understanding, and reserved. Teri is likeable, loyal, and easy going. Annie is cute, impulsive, and fun. But, there would be no challenge or growth if they chose the easy option. Loving someone different than yourself and choosing to make a life with them is difficult but also very rewarding. I have been happily married for 24 years and the only thing my husband and I have in common is our love of music, not even the same genre of music, just music in general. I can’t imagine what my life would be like if I married someone like myself, I’m boring as hell and my husband is literally a rockstar. I feel like the goal of S5 was to make Maddie more sympathetic. She had to experience pain and loss similar to what David endured during S4 in order to restore balance between them. Their stories, like their personalities, mirror each other. In S4 David loses Maddie and the baby. In S5 Maddie loses the baby and David. Since the previous season finales ended positively and always leaning slightly towards a future relationship, I will assume that is what GGC always intended for David and Maddie. I agree with Boink that the final scene is hopeful. LE was hot garbage but seeing them sitting side by side holding hands, a nice companion to the trunk scene, this time Maddie is not hiding her face and saying “I hate you.” Her body language is open and she is looking directly at David when she says she can’t imagine not seeing him everyday. I think she’s expressing her love for him in both of those scenes but now she’s not conflicted. We know David follows her lead. He won’t “force” himself on her but he will always “wait, wait, wait” for her and I think she’s finally ready. My happy ending starts with them re-building their relationship from that moment. Since the show lost its creator and was cancelled before the story reached a natural conclusion we can’t know for sure. Unless we hear otherwise from GGC (fingers crossed for the upcoming book) I believe they will be together again. Now give me more happy ending fanfics and videos, Sandra, Boink, and any other creative people hiding out there!
|
|
|
Ramblings
Jan 29, 2021 0:12:41 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by notjuanjones on Jan 29, 2021 0:12:41 GMT -5
Sometimes I think about the reasons why Maddie fought her attraction to David. I know she was afraid of him embarrassing her. Do you think she respected him? Respect is so important in a relationship. I know because, in my personal life, I often find it hard to respect my husband. He can be funny, makes me laugh, but the unnecessary temper tantrums are such a turn-off to me. Anyway, it just makes me wonder if Maddie respects David. Because if she doesn't, then he would never really make her happy. But the romantic part of me, who likes to escape the real world for the fantasy which is Moonlighting fanfic, wants to believe that Maddie does respect David. You know, I don’t know that I’ve ever heard anyone ask that, and it’s a good question-we go a dozen rounds on whether she really loves him or not, But does Maddie respect David? I think, in time, she does, at least on the business side. She makes him an actual partner at the end of Shirts and Skins. I think she comes to believe he’s a pretty solid detective. Does she respect him as a person? I don’t know. She cares about him, obviously. But does she respect him the way he respects her? I don’t know. That’s a really good question.
|
|
marta
1st Level
Posts: 244
|
Post by marta on Jan 29, 2021 1:06:14 GMT -5
Love In The Time of Covid Hello Essed! Welcome back!
You said many very valid things about relationships in general and about this particular one in ML. I am not convinced that their lasting union is inevitable for several reasons.
1. I have been thinking differently for a very long time and I got used to it!! I have come to my conclusion after a careful consideration and several sleepless nights. I write all this to overdose and help myself let go. I could let go easily if the show was not so ‘deep’ – didn’t ache that much and was ultimately about a romance. To me, the show is about love and love hurts.
2. M and D are too disparate to come to a goldilocks place.
They may in a comedy show under pressure from fans, as we know happened in other shows. It will not ring true for me because characters may be fictional but there are some psychological truths that cannot be breached. Jerome is talking about love, not compatibility for a long term relationship and playing house. 3. I will be very interested in what GGC has to say about it, but, as I said earlier, it is in many ways irrelevant to the show as it is left for posterity.
The show is done and finished. The analysis of its content makes sense if we stick to what is in it. If we constantly breach the fourth wall in analysis and say: well, this is what is in the show, but I am sure this is not what was intended because GGC said this or that at some stage, the writers didn’t know what they were doing, actors didn’t care anymore and so on, we will not let ourselves understand the show and its characters. There are endless possibilities of what could have been, but – it wasn’t. 4. Once somebody conceived an ending as we do have in ML it would be impossible not to use it.
It is just too perfect, it is so much in the style of the show, together with the ambiguity of the resolution.
Yes, TToTS was an inspiration for ML. The heroine in it had to be bound and gagged to get to know the hero better. The times they are a-changin’. In ML, the heroine met the hero because of modern circumstances and maybe, reluctantly, she decided not to put up with all the s… I agree with Boink that we cannot say what happens after the curtain closes. M says ‘I cannot imagine not seeing you tomorrow’, D says… nothing (again) and Ray Charles sings meaningful lyrics.
‘We'll be together again’ means to me that there will be other couples like M and D, as indeed there already were. In the future (now?) this relationship may play out differently again (hooking via Tinder, anybody?). These people, M and D, are fictional characters that do not have a life outside the show. This is what the ending says to me. The producers/writers are helping us to SNAP OUT of it. To everybody’s amazement (certainly mine) we cannot.
5. I will bet (may be not my life, but a lot) that you have much more in common with your husband than you say you do.
Personal examples are powerful at the first glance but cannot be verified. You must have a right mixture of opposites that do attract and commonalities – at least a compatible approach to resolving disagreements. You would not last 24 years otherwise.
I shall post about whether M is respecting David separately underneath. Hello Notjuanjones! I have prepared that before Essed posted (didn’ I say that cannot sleep?) and I didn’t change anything. I know that you know what I am going to say... M and D are still as incompatible as ever... oh, the fun of it, like you wouldn’t believe!!
|
|
marta
1st Level
Posts: 244
|
Post by marta on Jan 29, 2021 1:33:42 GMT -5
Maddie does not respect David, IMO.
To me, the main proof that she does not respect David is in BMOMS. She says ‘we do not have that kind of relationship’ admitting that she does not have a right to know more about him, but assumes that it is OK to force herself into his private life in NYC. He is a bargain basement ‘item’ to her, a person who thinks that culture is a dark beer. He is a bad boy without a trust fund (IACM). He gets sloshed when crushing her date with Sam and makes a fool of himself with the bill. It must have been really extremely hard for her to admit to Sam that she loves David (but was it even true, then, or just an ‘out device’? Ha! let’s leave it for another time). David says: ‘she thinks I am stupid’ in TSP, but what he really refers to is the difference in social class. Knowing about Gauguin and what being ‘ambivalent’ means.
This is why, to me, TSP is such an important episode. Social differences may still play a role in their differences after TSP, but this is diminishing. Maddie, however, is not given a chance to turn around her embarrassment and start respecting him because embarrassment continues, unabated.
It is not even David’s interest in sex itself, as it is the lack of an innate sense of decorum and discretion (which has nothing to do with class. The three ‘D’ approach: discretion and decorum for dignity). So it is not that he finds other women attractive (Maddie is well aware that this is natural – her conversation with Agnes in LE proves it), it is how he expresses that, without a thought of what is appropriate in a set of circumstances. Some of the proofs are: the search for a nanny, an attack of unbridled interest in a woman in the lift (of should I say THE woman in the lift – it was such a good joke! Classic ML) and also the A ‘fling’. He says that he knows he is not to embarrass her when they are out dancing and he is offended that she may mean that he will pick his nose. And then, forever an opportunist, he allows himself to be seduced and places Maddie in a very difficult situation emotionally and socially.
It's the way he attacks her with sexual innuendo, all the time. The way he introduces himself to Donnigan forces her to say: ‘you will learn to ignore him’. M describes David as a 'bad habit'. It is all very sad. There is hope earlier when they have a re-conciliation of sorts in ATFWMW and schedule private time on Tuesdays. It follows a scene about starting with a clean slate, when David sets boundaries on their relationship ‘I do not have to like it’, which is crucial for restoration of some respect for him in a relationship. The embarrassment, however, continues.
She loves him, most likely. She may have professional respect, yes... It is possible to love a person and know that you cannot have a future with them. Isn’t it?
|
|
|
Post by sandra on Jan 29, 2021 6:48:50 GMT -5
Oh, the joy of logging in and finding all this activity!
I remember, sometime last year, that the board was really quiet and the only ones posting were me, Essed and Notjuanjones. Notjuanjones mentioned that he read the board and felt that a lot of people had a different approach to the show than he did. Look what's happening now.. This is precisely what's keeping things interesting and why we are talking so much about it.
Marta certainly stirred things up with her difference of opinion and I love it. It forces you to re-evaluate things and look at it from a whole other perspective. We don't have to agree on it, but I can certainly understand her point of view.
About David and Maddie respecting each other: I think you would have to have some respect for each other in order to work together so closely. It wouldn't work out otherwise. I suppose there is a bit of disrespect when it comes to them making fun of each other's lifestyle.
I thought about the whole 'you need to have things in common in order to be compatible enough for a relationship.' Yes, there needs to be a foundation... a common ground that you can both walk on. However, it's the differences that keep things interesting. I have a lot of things in common with my husband, I'll admit to that, but I love how he can be the calm in the storm that is called 'Sandra.' Hahaha! He is just so relaxed and I am... well, not. I overthink, I over-analyze, I worry and I can be all over the place. I need someone like him to slow me down and that's what makes our marriage work. You learn from each other and you compliment each other. But I think that's what Marta meant when she said that you have to have the right mix of 'opposites attract' and commonalities.
Could David and Maddie be like that? Could Maddie slow David down and make him think before he acts? Could David help Maddie relax somewhat and be more present in the moment? To that affect, I think that they could work, but what is their common ground? Maybe, it's their love for Blue Moon and the detective work? I'm grasping at straws, I know.
Anyway, I tend to let my heart get into the mix of what I post. I think that's the problem. Marta is better at looking at things from an analytical point of view.
Just a side note: Cordelia, Anna?! Really?!
|
|
marta
1st Level
Posts: 244
|
Post by marta on Jan 29, 2021 7:47:36 GMT -5
My last-ditch effort (or is it a bridge too far?) In AWWAV, at the very end Maddie says: ‘It’s probably better this way…..you would have made… A LOUSY HUSBAND, but a great dad… I don’t think we’ll ever be the same… it’ll be hard to live, alone.’ David says: ‘You are not going to be alone. I will be right with you. I am not going anywhere’.
In the next episode (BAYAAHP) David is planning a lengthy trip out of town. They hug each other eventually because Agnes traps them in the lift, but there is only that much she can do. For crying out loud, they cannot communicate with each other without an outside intervention!
In the following episode (TCOM) M has changed her attitude and is accepting David with all his limitations. He comes to work wasted, very late, would have missed a meeting if she hadn’t rescheduled. Back to the future as PALS from this episode on…
If it was not meant to be it is not going to be. To be a couple people cannot be the same or polar opposites, they have to be compatible. These two are not.
Further episodes give more examples how incompatible they are, interspersed with many jokes both within and outside the fourth wall. Love them (the jokes). It is possible that M and D love each other still.
Then comes TLTL. They do not have sex (with each other that is, they are pals) and observe how poorly they dance. David says: ‘You cannot chew over the past and stay close to somebody, hell, look at me and you.’
Listen to how D talks about his attitude to his brother in TLTL. This is about M as well. He will be there if it is required and will do his best to protect her. Further, I think, he may carry a torch for a long time, she may be the love of his life. But he is a young man and is not going to wait, wait, wait for her much longer in a sexless business relationship.
They dance well in WGC but M does not want to do it more often. There is little afterwards that suggests she will change her mind.
I call it writing on the wall. Many contributors to the board call it a prelude to reconciliation. I suppose we have to call it a day and agree to disagree.
I shall try to resist and not respond to more post on the subject of what happens after the show ends, as I have written all I think about it (and probably more) already. Now, my next post is going to be about, as you have guessed, diPesto as a Greek chorus.
|
|
|
Post by sandra on Jan 29, 2021 9:16:03 GMT -5
I can almost hear the eye roll from all the way over here, Marta. Hahahahaha! We're lost causes, aren't we? But hey, you got me to change my mind about Maddie and season 4, so not all of your efforts went to waste... AND the board is active again. All in all, that's not a bad score
|
|
Boink
1st Level
Posts: 174
|
Post by Boink on Jan 29, 2021 12:39:38 GMT -5
Marta, Thank you, likewise, for the kind words. For me, "Boink to the Future" is Moonlighting's only acceptable on-screen conclusion, and it actually has it both ways in answering the "did they or didn't they (live happily ever after)?" question. In part, it agrees with your views on that matter far more than you may realize. "Lunar Eclipse" forces Maddie and David to pause in the series' "final" moment to reflect on what their relationship has become. BTTF has them make the conscious decision NOT to move forward from that point, and to instead pursue Maddie's thought that, "If we could just have these five years to do over again, maybe we could…" Only by having advice delivered to their past selves that would, if followed, erase their own existences as chronicled in THH and seasons 4-5 (which BTTF posits were imposed upon Maddie and David by writers who took them places they never would have gone – à la Cybill Shepherd confronting GGC with her belief that Maddie never would have married Walter) is the couple given a chance at true happiness on "their own" (or my own , within the confines of what was filmed) terms, from the point of IACM forward. With all evidence from THH and seasons 4-5 now hypothetically* inadmissable, would it still be your case that D&M as established in seasons 1-3 (minus THH) could not live happily ever after? I am Curious... Marta, Boink *Any attempt to convince me that BTTF isn't legit Moonlighting is futile. I've poured so much time, money, and heart into it that, even if I'm alone in this place, there's no turning back for me now.
|
|
marta
1st Level
Posts: 244
|
Post by marta on Jan 30, 2021 7:10:46 GMT -5
Hi Boink, no further comments on the subject from me. Kind regards Marta
Sandra, well, absolutely no eye rolling happened over here! I am grateful that all of you guys indulge me and let me prattle on and try to spoil your fun with my dour approach.
|
|
|
Post by sandra on Jan 30, 2021 17:38:48 GMT -5
Marta, to speak in the words of Maddie: "I had fun... tons of fun." I loved sparring with you!
|
|
|
Post by sandra on Feb 1, 2021 6:00:46 GMT -5
Since we mentioned my cat Maddie, a quick rambling about her from me. Here I was, talking about how she's fourteen and acts like a two-year-old, and this weekend, she suddenly took a turn for the worst. The vet just admitted her. They think it's her kidneys. I hope she can still be helped, but I suppose fourteen is a respectable age. Still, this is the part about having a pet that I don't like: that time when you lose them.
|
|
marta
1st Level
Posts: 244
|
Post by marta on Feb 1, 2021 6:19:16 GMT -5
Oh dear, I am so sorry to hear that. It is kidneys with cats more often than not, I am afraid. Hang on in there...
|
|
marta
1st Level
Posts: 244
|
Post by marta on Feb 2, 2021 0:45:14 GMT -5
On re-evaluating the premise of ML I liked the post by Essed as she backed her arguments with examples from the show. Evidence! It was, to me, carefully selected evidence, evidence nevertheless and the approach worthy of top legal minds.
So I started thinking and rethinking, what if I am biased and like my own line of reasoning about ML too much and cannot see what most of you do see (a romantic approach)? This is how it went.
As reported, when filmmakers were making The Big Sleep (1946) they realised that one murder could not have been committed as described and asked Raymond Chandler to sort it out. Chandler didn’t know either and the filmmakers said something to the following effect: Let’s not worry about it, let’s just have fun, nobody cares anyway.
This story had stuck with me and I have considered ML in that light, just to challenge my own conclusions. What if my approach - that there has to be believable psychology at the bottom of ML (a rational approach) – is not correct? What if the main aim is to just have fun with the episodes and the ML story is not layered and complex, just happened that way by chance? Hmmm... how improbable that sounds already.
But let’s persevere. If not a random-ish collection, it may at least be a romance. We shall say that all the usual tricks of a romance are there (because they are): they meet, they fight, they are attracted to each other, they fall in love, but she is not sure so they part. They have to meet again, because of business (let’s say) so they see each other and what? She was not sure to such extent that she married somebody else. That puts him off very seriously. However, she says that she loves him and her marriage is annulled. He does not rejoice (even quietly), he has been hurt by her initial rejection too much. Fair enough. She signals that she is available and interested and he thaws a bit at first and a lot eventually.
Then a tragedy strikes. Each recoils into their own cocoon. Life goes on, and as previously she is interested in running business properly, he is into life fleeting excitements. She relaxes her outlook on life and her view of him because he is still like a big child – should be allowed ‘to do whatever makes him happy’. He is disconcerted by this new attitude, does it mean that she does not care like she used to? (it probably does, pal…she does not try to change you anymore). He may be at first still a bit hopeful, then regretful and a bit bitter but it is all hidden behind the usual banter, random thoughts and sexual innuendo so we cannot be sure what he feels and when. For certain, neither makes a decent attempt to try mesh their lives together. She wants to talk but he will not, he wants to seduce her but she will not allow herself to be pulled in too deep again (in a way they do talk to each other but communicate in female and male way too much to be understood by the other). They are occasionally very nice to each other, occasionally horrible and there is a succession of prospective (beta) partners who are all eligible but no cigar.
They are both suffering and experiencing loss (whether it is ‘equal’ is in the eye of beholder). This goes on for a while and could probably go for quite a long time keeping us in a so-so suspense if the series lasted longer. So what is missing for a positive (a non-ambiguous) resolution of the relationship? There is a positive resolution! They ‘haven’t murdered each other’ (WGC)! OK, but this is not what you mean, you mean the Romance Writers of America definition of romance, which is that 'romance must have a central love story and an emotionally satisfying and optimistic ending'.
Well, this is where I get stuck. This is a positive ending: they are on speaking terms, equal partners in a business. They almost calmly accept each moving on to other relationships. It should happen soon for Maddie, if she wants family, as she is pushing forty. The business partnership would have to go, but it sounds (in Perfetc) like they will be ready to do that at the drop of the hat, business wise, if not quite in emotional terms. Ha! So it is a romantic story after all. Who would have thought?
I have set out to prove that ML is just a random collection of episodes that fortuitously aligned themselves into a masterpiece. Maybe I have not been serious about it enough so it did not come out well in that respect. It seems that this is a series of episodes well thought through, certainly enough for us to get sucked in big way and live through the pain of two people not being suited for each other despite the two of them and all of us wishing for it to be otherwise.
Could they have been better suited to each other? Since ML is a comedy (as well as 100 other things) they could not. The comedy depends on exaggeration of a character, on David being immature and full of amusing one liners and sexual transgressions and on Maddie being his foil and be a straight woman to his clown. No can do, cannot have it and eat it.
If we feel not emotionally satisfied than we have to work on ourselves, not on the show.
This was a good exercise for me. Kept my thoughts from other subjects, reminded me of one more thing that Essed said – growth in a relationship and illuminated the respect issue in a quite new way (hello Notjuanjones). These are going to be my next instalments (if you can bear it, but I suppose you do not have to read it if it is too much) and Agnes as a Greek chorus issue just after them.
|
|
essed
1st Level
Posts: 100
|
Post by essed on Feb 2, 2021 18:06:24 GMT -5
I finally find lovely thoughtful people discussing my favorite show at the exact moment I decide to finish my degree; while working full time and parenting two teenagers during a once in a lifetime pandemic. Moonlighting curse, indeed! I am allowing myself to indulge in the board as a reward when I complete my non-preferred tasks. I am saving Sandra’s newest fic until I finish my next assignment. So thanks for keeping this middle aged mama motivated, y’all! Sandra, I am sorry to read that Maddie the cat is not well. We never have enough time with our beloved pets. Also, I was just kidding about Angel and Cordy, I did enjoy their characters more on ‘Angel’ than ‘BTVS’ though. I can accept that nobody in the Buffyverse gets a happy ending because their stories were about fighting personal and literal demons. Marta, I promise I won’t continue to beat the dead horse of happy endings after this post. I only used anecdotal evidence from my marriage in response to “we may crush on David but we don’t commit to him” because I would, I did, I do’d! I look forward to your DiPesto post! Moonlightingml, great question about Maddie respecting David. I agree with NotJuan, I think by making him her partner we can assume she respects and trusts him with her business and her livelihood. Romantically, I will say she does not fully respect him until the clean slate speech in ATFWMW when he finally calls her out for projecting her character flaws onto him. She was guilty of doing all the things she feared David would do; she was ambivalent (barf) about her feelings, she was unreliable, she ditched him and the business, she jumped from relationship to relationship, she wouldn’t commit. Girlfriend had issues! Speaking of ATFWMW, I haven’t seen anyone mention this scene in the happiness debate. They both believed in this sentiment once before, and I hope they will again... youtu.be/fSSwun4fqAYBack to the books
|
|
marta
1st Level
Posts: 244
|
Post by marta on Feb 2, 2021 18:37:12 GMT -5
Oh, fantastic! I felt so lonely. Where is Sandra, we can really have a pie fight now.
P.S. Oops. I am changing it into 'custard pie fight' to remove any doubt that I mean slapstick comedy and TMITM episode. I checked 'a pie fight' in the Urban Dictionary and got taken aback, I should've known - nothing is safe anymore...
|
|