09
Jan
16

🔴 Scribblings Jan-Mar 2016

 

🔴 Scribblings and Scuttlebutt Jan-Mar 2016

 
Link: http://bit.ly/20lDG09
This is where I post my thoughts and reblog stuff from other sites I find interesting or topical, mostly topics from Twitter, Tumblr and blogs. Most discussion in Scribblings in the past has tended to be about the story, characters, their relationships, the timeline plus various controversies in the fandom. This is probably the closest thing on this blog to a “blog” – Lightly edited. Reverse chronological. WSJ sourcing: http://on.wsj.com/1sMrXMo ✛ date/timestamp.
LizzieB90

Permalink for this page: http://wp.me/pDKwi-1Hz Comments on this page are open. It’s set up so you have to provide a name and email, but you don’t have to register. No “anonymous”es, please. It’s set for nesting comments three levels deep. ( Hope it works. ) OR just email me at LizzieB90@yahoo.com or tag me on Twitter @BlacklistDCd.

 

༺ ✿⊰ ♤ ⊱✿༻
 
▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

Various clipping from the WSJ blog, now defunct, below. R.I.P.

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

Comments by Jerry on this blog: thought-provoking

Jerry
03/15/2016 at 7:38 pm
Here’s an angle that may further illuminate the Blacklist Mystery: the hat that “Red” wears may indicate his status and suggest a motive in his perambulations. I have seen his head-gear described as a Fedora, but it definitely is NOT a Fedora. In the galaxy of sartorial taxonomy, his hat is correctly termed a “Trilby” which also is the name of a young woman who was under the hypnotic spell of a mystical man named Svengali in a long-standing and troubling (and misunderstood) relationship. Suddenly I’m thinking of the scene in Chinatown where Jack Nicholson is trying to pierce the apparent prevarication of Faye Dunnaway about her relationship with “my sister, my daughter…”. Maybe things are a bit more lurid than we expected. More on this to come….

Jerry
02/26/2016 at 2:30 am
Here are the incidents in The Caretaker: Germans angered by potent Secrets held among the dead from decades before. Prisoner imposters holding hostages. Lawyers and hostages. Terrorists and hostages. (JFK correctly claimed children hold us hostage to the future.). Governments and hostages. All cemented together by secrets. A man who lives in a cemetery, fed through tubes as he holds the keys to the kingdom as if he were a Gnome of Zurich, the king of Swiss Bank Accounts, and the thing that holds him hostage is his misperceived memories. (So it is for all?). And all this is a metaphor describing Tom and Liz, with their faulty perceptions about who they are, and the tantalizing mystery that creates the irrational attraction they have for each other… Their secrets protected by a bodyguard of lies. The episode began with an incident pulled from the headlines keeping it topical. What does it all mean? Only from the end episode looking backward will this episode fully make sense. Otherwise it is as ineluctable as a dream, or a Republican Debate.

Jerry
02/19/2016 at 7:40 am
Drexel episode is social commentary on the neutralization and commodification of privacy in a world where video feeds (unknown and known to us) hold us hostage, often facilitated by our need to belong to “networks” via privacy-absorbing security cameras and mobile devices. The plotline is ominous, lurid and paranoid, reminescent of the the troubling psycho-sexual issues faced by Deborah Harry and James Woods in Videodrome, where a complex underworld of digital predators, scavangers and parasites created a black market trading on the manipulation of the ever dwindling and freely-willed human mind. In both Drexel and Videodrome, the threats of state voyuerism are “constants”, omnipresent and inextinguishable. Drexel is apprehended but nothing is solved and future intrusions (by private or public sector agents) are inevitable…because inquiring minds want to know. We are trapped by our own gossip… As we are mocked in our fixations, watching Tom escape prosecution because Liz’ doctor friend snitched to Reddington and ” Red” inscrutably provided angelic intervention so Liz could choose to keep her baby. I feel so used.

Jerry
02/16/2016 at 10:32 pm
I was refreshing myself with Aristotle’s Poetics today. He seems to think “episodes” were too pedestrian to be considered worthy of “truth” that humans can reveal through their “imitations” of life… Yet, here we are with Red Reddington. I think I know why I like the show, to modify a Margaret Thatcher quote: “in all relationships, eventually you run out of other people’s oxytocin.”. We are trying to find out what catastrophe bonded Red to Liz. My oxytocin would have worn out years ago, if otherwise unkindled. I think I like Poetics….

Jerry
02/12/2016 at 12:09 am
Red gets to be a genuine hero in “Lady Ambrosia” which is a darker retelling of the Greek Elysium Mystery Religion. The overmanagememt of childbearing depicted foreshadows the next era, when government hatcheries will be the only authorized method of reproduction, to reclaim genetic health of humanity, offsetting many pollutants including gene altering viruses worse than thalidomide. I am glad the episode ended with an upbeat tone, even Tom returning from the dead.

jerry
02/06/2016 at 10:01 am
I’ m reading this (Alistair Pitt) episode as a deep political metaphor. On its crude surface, it is a profane marriage, impossible to conceive (!) Yet, universally contemplated as reasonable, so bereft of scruples are these belligerents it is apparent these two families know nothing about love and life but everything about the Potemkin Village of their craven desires. At the “deep level” this is the 21st Century narrative of how a civilization distributes drugs to its citizens for purposes of 1) control, 2) stigmatization, 3) stratification, and 4) Darwinian (eugenic) Selection. As these four goals are achieved in incremental levels of efficiency, certain consolidation is required. Hence, this “marriage” of two drug distribution families that turns into a bloodbath. I would expect the number one Blacklister is the cloistered “Medical Information Bureau” which controls all our medical data, ergo, it is in the unique position of “managing” your “health.”… with the latest covert plasmid or endocrine inhalant. I loved this episode at its more fertile substrate.

Jerry
01/29/2016 at 12:26 am
Vehm episode is macabre, but meaningful. Red meets each pathological challenge in kind. Mixing Vatican P2 scandal with Red’s criminal overreach (asking an interrogatee to song a campfire song!), makes a weird blend. Aram’s fixation on Navabi is getting spooky. And the pro-life stance is refreshing, although I doubt Liz will ultimately follow through on her wish to offer her child up for adoption, given those buckets of oxytocin washing through her system. What kind of Neilson ratings does this show get in Moscow, home of the Zhukov’s and Rostova’s? I still expect that wizard, Leonard Caul, to protect Liz with electrified nanobeads, Deus-Ex-Machina -style, out of nowhere. Oh well.

jerry
02/06/2016 at 10:38 am
After modest internet searching I discovered that Mockba enjoys the mirror that America hold up to Moscow and through reductive extrapolation, Russians are amused by the implications of this camera obscura. Since it explains more about the self image of America (insofar as this image is a function of our intelligence agency apparatus). Russians are romantic and enjoy a good mystery, even if it is at their expense. The same can be said about anyone (or any country) who is passionate about the game of chess: they hate their fathers (Lenin, Stalin, Putin).

jerry
01/22/2016 at 8:42 pm
Loved “Gregory DeVry” episode. Reminded me of Richard Burton upstaging Nazis in “Where Eagles Dare” with criminal charades, double identities and triple agents. I approve of Red’s disdain for Tom. Red should undermine Tom’s influence on Liz pulling from the CIA’s pharmacologia with an application of surreptitious “negative vitamins” to degrade Tom’s cognitive powers, pushing him over the edge emotionally for a cul-de-sac of tail chasing, circling the drain, and self destruction.

Jerry
01/19/2016 at 10:16 pm
Truncate the narrative. Abbreviate the plot. Why not, as we bathe in postmodermism? Jumping to conclusions is a fine art among reality television’s Social Media gurus ensuring many future Trump/Palin victories grazing on stunted facts and skimpy ideas marinated by Marshall McLuhann posthumous approval (plus Bryan O’blivion’s from Videodrome). Obama makes imperial law without the letter or intent of the Constitution. We face the Eschaton.
The (Blacklist’s) clockwork plots tick away, finely detailed and textured as an antidote to this breezy world of vague insinuations and catty gossip. Red Reddington (as Jefferson, or Paine) could not be less idealst or revolutionary has designed his Blacklist at no better time (based as it is on the 1963 expose of the mafia by Joseph Valachi that allowed the FBI to subsume its rival and use the mob against itself. This betrayal by Valachi siding as he did with USAtty Gen RFK may have been the motive behind JFKs assassination by the mob, et al.) So what’s next? I like tangled plot points and twisted multistage denouement. Can we expect a Dopplegangar Reddington Spawned to undermine Stock Markets, and “New World Odors?” Does Reddington have a twin from Mengele’s Patagonian Lab prepared to attack in a flanking maneuver? Using Napoleon’s DNA? Or Rasputin’s? (the man the Romanov’s couldn’t kill?).

jerry
11/26/2015 at 1:05 am
I reviewed the data you have collected on oxytocin. This is impressive. You imply here and their that oxytocin and related brain chemicals are the source of human dramaturgy (rising action, irony, mirth, tragedy, denouement, etc) It is the center stage and our skull the proscenium arch. I will check particulars noted with my 23&Me account SNPs. As the chemical that binds humans together at varying levels of intensity, lest we not forget that our interaction with each other provokes oxytocin production and concurrent manifestations. So the wellspring of interactions could be (almost) inexhaustible. I see the full moon is out again. Thanks again for this resource.

jerry
11/22/2015 at 12:07 am
I liked this installment immensely, since it placed in concrete what had been merely drifting past our eyeballs these past few weeks. It is now certain that the CIA Director and Cabal stooge will try to neutralize Liz with prejudice. (So that in the next episode…) When escape seems impossible, Red will bring Leonard Caul into the picture with some exfiltration, MKULTRA peptide to erase enough brain cells to allow LIz to find sanctuary. I should hope it to be… This was the “Deliverance” narrative, as Red endures the indulgence of his inferiors, mere rascals and underfed highwaymen….11-19-2015 episode (Kings of the Road) …Dembe’s devotion is a noble highlight, as well as the homage to “LA Confidential” (the whispered name of an interloper as the FBI honcho lay dying) and the homage to Pulp Fiction as the audience is unable to see the mesmerizing contents of the briefcase containing the so-called billion dollar “Care Package.” Then the capture of Liz by Ressler, an anticlimax, as I see it. They are painting the Persian IT Wiz as an Aspberger’s since he is seemingly unable to contain his jealousy when he discovers his “girl” Navabi may have timeshared with Ressler. How long has he been away from Teheran?

jerry
10/27/2015 at 7:52 am
Leonard Caul should showcase tetrahertz penetrating radar to see through walls, SQUID devices that act as fMRI (functional MRI) to detect brain activity to gauge prevarication or sincerity, identifier nano-beads to track who touched what, and pheromones (ala MKULTRA) to make people become irrational, fixated, OCD, monomania, or (conversely) nebulous, scattered, amnesic; miniature laboratory telemetric raman spectroscopy to analyze (in real time) smoke, breath, dust, fingerprints for exudate that indicates toxicology levels…Fake cell-tower (STINGRAY) for data collection;

jerry
11/07/2015 at 12:47 pm
This was a proudly feasible “Transhumanist” episode (11-5-15 – Sir Crispin) and was great with its legal/ethical ruminations. Please, CONSIDER for spin-off episode: Reddington needs to “fake his death” as an element in as future episode… As an exploitable innovation on the cryogenic theme, behold, the human “diving reflex” that we share with other mammals (dolphins, otters, whales) triggered when we are plunged into 30 degree water. Our brain shuts down into suspended animation and we can last for 90 minutes without normal respiration, as cardiac (metabolic) function slows to near zero. Many cases of children (under 8 years old) who after near freezing are brought “back to life without harm.” Previously believed to be evidenced only in children, an example of a 15-year old who stowed away in the wheel well of a jet from San Jose to Hawaii proves it can be triggered in older humans, perhaps stimulated by an endocrine stimulating drug, or hyper-oxygenated fluid.

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

Review for Amazon (5-stars)

March 18, 2016

Best season yet

The rapid pace, complex story-telling, excellent direction and acting, and captivating mythic arc make this the best serialized tv drama I have ever watched. Each episode merits watching several times. Clues to the show’s mysteries are scattered throughout but it is much more than a detective or mystery show. Each episode features a “Blacklister” who evokes current issues dealing with politics, medicine, technology and international relations making the show highly relevant and thought-provoking. In the first season, James Spader’s nuanced acting held but show together but by this season the other actors have improved as their fascinating back stories have been developed. The guest stars are also excellent with Peter Stormare as Berlin, Alan Alada as Fitch, David Strathairn as The Director and Edi Gathegi as Mr Solomon deserving special mention.

The show has a large international following and a huge fan base active on social media. The show’s producers, writers and actors engage with fans on Twitter and provide other features that enhance viewers understanding of the story and the story-telling craft. These include comics (Nicole Phillips, Titan), an exposition on how an episode is shaped from concept through production (by Dave Metzger), and coming on March 29, 2016, a book (“Elizabeth Keen’s Dossier” by Paul Terry and Tara Bennett). The Blacklist features music from a Russian lullaby to hip hop. A second collection of featured songs will be released this summer and playlists for each character and the show as a whole are available on Spotify. Numerous blogs follow and elucidate the show. It has inspired more than 1500 works of fan fiction on archiveofourown.org and fanfiction.net – so far.

The showrunners made a decision this season to feature actress Megan Boone’s real life pregnancy rather than try to hide it or write the actress out for several months, a brave decision that hopefully will be adopted more regularly by the industry.

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

Variety, Maureen Ryan: ‘The 100’ Lexa Mess: What TV, Jason Rothenberg Can Learn http://bit.ly/1pwBsjy
// 3/14/2016

Note: This article discusses the pluses and minuses of social media involvement in television dramas. The problem The Blacklist has harkens back to the pilot, in which a sleezy Red invokes a mysterious relationship with newly-minted FBI profiler, Elizabeth Keen. Red has intimate knowledge about Liz’s past. The obvious reason would seems to be that Red is her lost father, but the creepiness of his behavior suggests a quirky sexual attraction. Unlike some shows, The Blacklist has never abandoned its pilot. Quite the opposite: the mystery has been extended and, as a result, warring factions have arisen between viewers who view Red as a father or father-figure (father/daughter or FDers or “daddygaters” versus those who view Red and Liz as a potential couple or Lizzington shippers. Both sides seem to be encouraged by the show, with storms of anger erupting each time one or the other faction is delivered more “bait.” The article below discusses the relationship between social media and the creative staff of the CW series “The 100.” In comparison, however, to the flame wars the Blacklist has engendered, the case of “The 100” may be simplistic.
 

⊰ ♤ ⊱
 
“If you wanted to come up with a playbook for how to handle TV promotion and publicity in the age of social media, a few of the major rules might look like this:

● Don’t mislead fans or raise their hopes unrealistically.
● Don’t promote your show as an ideal proponent of a certain kind of storytelling, and then drop the ball in a major way with that very element of your show.
● When things go south, don’t pretend nothing happened.
● Understand that in this day and age, promotion is a two-way street: The fans that flock to your show and help raise its profile can just as easily walk away if they are disappointed or feel they’ve been manipulated.

“It all sounds like common sense, right? Except that ‘The 100’ managed to break all those rules and more in the last ten days or so. And the tumult surrounding the show contain lessons that other shows and showrunners could learn from. …

“What has occurred since March 3 is not just a problem for ‘The 100’ and the CW, it’s a cautionary tale for all of television, which increasingly depends on fans to bang the drum for shows and increase their profiles.

“As it happens, the resurgent CW just made a big bet on fan-driven entertainment as the future of TV. The network just renewed all of its shows, in part because it measures engagement in a host of ways; overnight ratings are no longer the be-all and end-all. Social media engagement counts for a lot, and word-of-mouth promotion is often what makes or breaks a marginal show. …

“But intense fan engagement is a double-edged sword. The fans who know how to help raise a show’s profile and make noise on social media are also whipsmart in any number of other ways. Today’s TV viewers won’t stand for being used as pawns, nor will they help promote a show when they feel it has let them down. With the events that occurred in the March 3 episode of the show, many think ‘The 100’ did just that. …

“It would seem that the attitude of the showrunner and others associated with the show is that if they just ignore everything for long enough, it’ll all go away. Meanwhile, fans are passing around lists of ideas for how to lower the show’s social media profile (Rothenberg himself has already lost thousands of Twitter followers), and the March 10 episode got the series’ worst-ever ratings. To understand how the balance of power has shifted in the fan-driven age, a subset of viewers got #LGBTfansdeservebetter to trend for hours during the show’s time slot on March 10, demonstrating that they can use their collective might to very different uses than a network might like.

“This is not a call for showrunners to pander to their audiences — far from it. It’s a reminder that every story turn and promotional effort should be thoroughly thought through. Sloppy, dismissive and tin-eared moves by a show or its personnel aren’t easy to bury or ignore these days, and fan engagement is a collaboration, not a spigot to be turned off whenever things get inconvenient. …

“As I said in a March 4 post on the fracas, I could understand why [fans] were upset — but in dozens of posts, tweets and emails, they helped me understand why they felt betrayed. … These fans were smart, eloquent and impressively well-versed in promotional strategies, media conventions and tropes. They’re also right. …

“[I]t is baffling that the show all but ensured that its most hardcore fans knew that Lexa would appear in the season finale. The trumpeting of her appearance at the end of the season prompted many viewers, especially fans of the Lexa and Clarke pairing, to keep hope alive, but in reality, there was no hope to be found. … [T]he way “The 100” shamelessly toyed with LGBTQ viewers — who are among the show’s most active promotional allies — constitutes inexplicable and deeply unwise misdirection. …

“Critic Nicola Choi wrote that when they spot a lesbian or bisexual woman on TV, many LGBTQ fans simply resign themselves to the fact that the character will die. … Lexa’s cliched death was especially galling given that recently, the show had leaned into the idea that it was a beacon of enlightened representation for LGBTQ characters. Rothenberg gave multiple interviews on the topic — Variety included — and retweeted stories from an array of publications that praised the show’s representation of gay, lesbian and bisexual characters.

“Aided by the enthusiasm of the show’s many LGBTQ viewers, the outreach campaign worked. ‘Until last week, you had numerous marginalized teens and young adults who were feeling engaged, feeling represented, and feeling (dare I say it?) hopeful,’ a writer named Kylie noted in an eloquent deconstruction of tropes and how they operate on TV. ‘Which inherently put you in a position of power over them.’

“To writer and professor Elizabeth Bridges, ‘The 100’ used that power in an irresponsible and harmful way.

“‘We knew [Lexa] could possibly be killed, and we knew that [Debnam-Carey’s] fate for any potential future seasons was questionable,’ Bridges wrote. ‘But we also had constant reassurance from the writers and showrunner that we could trust them not to screw up these characters, that they were aware of the [dead lesbian] trope and would avoid it even if’ the actress left the show. …

“Perhaps Rothenberg thought killing off Lexa in that manner was shocking [[ “surprising”? ]], but her death ended up feeling rushed, off-kilter and poorly handled. … ”
 

༺ ♤ ༻
 
NYT, David Brooks: The Shame Culture http://nyti.ms/1S5KHQC
// 3/15/2016

Note: I rarely agree with David Brooks, but in this opinion piece, he cites Andy Crouch on the topic of social media. Crouch describes some of the cultural characteristics of groups in this domain that sheds some light on the antagonism that has emerged between the “shipper” groups and the father/daughter group(s) (aka “F/Ders” or, more derisively, the “daddygaters”) that has arisen around the show “The Blacklist.” I felt this most acutely when I was active on the WSJ Speakeasy “blog” (actually, just a comment section) about The Blacklist. I think parts of this piece are quite accurate. Brooks has a larger purpose, which is to argue that the “shame” culture of social media is morally inferior to the traditional “guilt” culture which he sees as being eclipsed – at least on social media. His argument is actually against post-modernism, I think, in favor of the security of being able to declare what is “good” and what is “evil” across all cultural contexts. This argument I reject (except for a basic norm of “human rights,” eg girls should be able to go to school, etc). Still, Brooks’/Crouch’s insights as to the workings of the ‘voluntary associations’ of people on social media are instructive.

“The world of Facebook, Instagram and the rest is a world of constant display and observation. The desire to be embraced and praised by the community is intense. People dread being exiled and condemned. Moral life is not built on the continuum of right and wrong; it’s built on the continuum of inclusion and exclusion.

“This creates a set of common behavior patterns. First, members of a group lavish one another with praise so that they themselves might be accepted and praised in turn.

“Second, there are nonetheless enforcers within the group who build their personal power and reputation by policing the group and condemning those who break the group code. Social media can be vicious to those who don’t fit in. Twitter can erupt in instant ridicule for anyone who stumbles.

“Third, people are extremely anxious that their group might be condemned or denigrated. They demand instant respect and recognition for their group. They feel some moral wrong has been perpetrated when their group has been disrespected, and react with the most violent intensity. …

“He notes that this shame culture is different from the traditional shame cultures, the ones in Asia, for example. In traditional shame cultures the opposite of shame was honor or “face” — being known as a dignified and upstanding citizen. In the new shame culture, the opposite of shame is celebrity — to be attention-grabbing and aggressively unique on some media platform.

“On the positive side, this new shame culture might rebind the social and communal fabric. It might reverse, a bit, the individualistic, atomizing thrust of the past 50 years.

“On the other hand, everybody is perpetually insecure in a moral system based on inclusion and exclusion. There are no permanent standards, just the shifting judgment of the crowd. It is a culture of oversensitivity, overreaction and frequent moral panics, during which everybody feels compelled to go along.”

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

Twitter etc

🔴 Poll: Who do you ‘ship? #TheBlacklist @ 607 votes; results wp.me/pDKwi-2wu @JonBokenkamp @johneisendrath http://pic.twitter.com/3tFQz2WHC3
⇈ ⇊
30/70% US/Intl mix – 57 countries; US Only (186 votes) 66% Liz+Red (vs 74% for All countries combined) #TheBlacklist

Shape of Liz’s scar v the Baltic Sea pointed out by Tracy Downey @msgoddessrises click to expand #TheBlacklist http://pic.twitter.com/169iKv5Dav
⇈ ⇊
@alyb1223 ➔ alyblacklist.tumblr: Liz’s scar and related symbols http://bit.ly/1UPJdN3

Charlize Theron w James Spader in 2 Days in the Valley (1996) and at the 2016 Academy Awards http://pic.twitter.com/QecHhUqONy

Variety: Andie MacDowell to Star in ABC’s Ford Models Pilot ‘Model Woman’ bit.ly/1QAeG2O 1989 sex, lies http://pic.twitter.com/HcbPuoVRJj
// 3/7/2016

TVbyNumbers (2/29): Broadcast Live +7 ratings http://bit.ly/1pt0ik7 #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist

Well who could have predicted that? Gif http://kissthefuture.tumblr.com/post/140505266835/anextrapart-a-large-majority-of-the-blacklist

🔴 Writers Room http://wp.me/PDKwi-1vf updated – interviews, Making of “Drexel”, Twitter talk and one cool fan letter @NBCBlacklist #TheBlacklist

Buzzfeed: Which Blacklist character are you? http://rtag.co/jJrq (I always end up Red on these things … ) #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist
// 3/3/2016

🔴 The Blacklist Songs ♫ http://wp.me/pDKwi-1C0 YouTube playlists plus favorites embedded #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist ❓Did I miss your favorite❓

🐣 Brandon Sonnier w children including 3-wk old baby girl (photo from a couple weeks ago) http://pic.twitter.com/BdtFBpJuLy

🐣 @djmm1962 I made a decision to focus on what they show us – watch each episode 5 or 6 times & work the scripts til I almost know by heart!

🐣 James Spader in “sex, lies and videotape” http://pic.twitter.com/6UaqzaxTqA
// most nude

🐣 James Spader in “sex, lies and videotape” http://pic.twitter.com/GHLDSBZMuH
// on the floor

🐣 James Spader in “sex, lies and videotape” http://pic.twitter.com/2UQj7K2UlM
// leaning back

🐣 James Spader in “sex, lies and videotape” http://pic.twitter.com/e0Hsm5shi5
// laughing

🐣 James Spader in “sex, lies and videotape” pic.twitter.com/B1aJ0gYqKf
// the Rose picture 
🐣 James Spader in “sex, lies and videotape” http://pic.twitter.com/B1aJ0gYqKf my favorite 

🐣 James Spader in “sex, lies and videotape” http://pic.twitter.com/ZoCXHGOjL5
// profile, hands

🐣 James Spader in “sex, lies and videotape” http://pic.twitter.com/LBnFbZWBou
// looking down, intentionally grainy

🐣 VanityFair: Pretty in Pink Turns 30, and James Spader Remains the Only Reason to Watch It http://bit.ly/1LM5xzW

🐣 @Sheilasisu @LoveReddington @TheBlacklistGSM James Spader has a style of acting which almost addictive to certain people; it’s biochemical

🐣 @Sheilasisu @LoveReddington @TheBlacklistGSM real fans do invest a lot emotionally in the show; those who don’t I call casual viewers

🐣 @Sheilasisu @NBCBlacklist @LoveReddington helps to realize the questions form a mythic arc; not simply plot points

🐣 Added some MORE photos to 🔴 Red Hot🔥 James Spader Pics 🔥 wp.me/pDKwi-21L Be forewarned – these ARE X-rated #TheBlacklist

About 300 people checked the poll without voting. (Total 801)
http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2016/02/19/the-blacklist-recap-season-3-episode-15-drexel/
http://www.ew.com/recap/the-blacklist-season-3-episode-15
http://www.ew.com/recap/the-blacklist-season-3-episode-16

🔴 What is “The Cabal”? wp.me/pDKwi-T6 15,000 ppl have checked out this article. It’s a Zeitgeist piece #TheBlacklist @JonBokenkamp

I love it when Russia shows up in the top countries that check my blog #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist (who are they?) http://pic.twitter.com/3lHAPnYZ6m

3:15 Drexel got the most interest on my site since the post-hiatus premiere #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist @DaveMetzger http://pic.twitter.com/wc9iTjFzZ4

Tumbler, Stark-and-Lightman: “Nobody will disagree that he is easily one of the top 3 eccentrics on planet earth” http://bit.ly/1XLk3yS

TorontoSun (2002): Spader prefers the extremes http://wp.me/PDKwi-3t#tsun2002 “When you’re in love, you can’t control it. … powerless”

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

Shape of Liz’s scar v the Baltic Sea pointed out by Tracy Downey @msgoddessrises click to expand #TheBlacklist http://pic.twitter.com/169iKv5Dav

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
 
Twitter From.@BlacklistDCd
A year ago I made some suggestions for improving WSJ “blog” (actually a comment section) #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist http://pic.twitter.com/cu7iZ1JM7x

Suggestions to Jason Evans on technical improvements to WSJ Speakeasy blog on The Blacklist

BlacklistDclassified @BlacklistDCd 17 Mar 2015
@TVFilmTalk Jason – You should ask WSJ to improve comment/blog capability. Only a few things are needed: 1. Ability to link to a comment …

BlacklistDclassified @BlacklistDCd 17 Mar 2015
@TVFilmTalk 2. Reg/ID users to link their entries together, 3. Nesting under a topic, 4. Ability 2 rate comments. Lots of talent wasted now.

Jason Evans @TVFilmTalk 17 Mar 2015
@BlacklistDCd I’ll mention it to them. I agree that the format needs some work to be up to the standards of other comment systems.

BlacklistDclassified @BlacklistDCd 17 Mar 2015
@TVFilmTalk Daily Kos and Free Republic are good

 
▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
 

End of the WSJ Speakeasy Blog, as we have known it

⋙ by KellyKeybored on (Fri Mar 4 2016 13:14:09)
from IMDb http://imdb.to/1QXlch8

I wanted to post an open letter to those that find themselves locked out of Wall Street Journal today for the first time in 3 years.

Today is a sad day for those of us that post at Wall Street Journal’s Blacklist Speakeasy site. At some point between 8 AM and noon today, Friday March 4, they finally pulled the plug on the Blacklist commentary for those who are not subscribers, or who are not willing to provide their real name.

As some of you may know, Wall Street Journal has welcomed commentary about the Blacklist and offered recaps of Blacklist episodes since October 2013, (after the third episode). Every creative and imaginative comment, every theory and speculation was there in the archives for all to read, to research, to remember. The site soon grew to be a place where fans of the show could come to freely share their ideas and theories, where people watched the show two or three times and analyzed every line of dialogue, every screencap, every plot detail. Those of us that participated knew that at one time, Wall Street Journal had become a site of Blacklist experts, those who immersed themselves into the show (perhaps to a fault). (It was hard to keep up!) The best part of the WSJ “Speakeasy” Blog, was that posting did not require registration, or using your real name, cell phone number, charge card account or email address. It was blissfully easy to come online after every single episode and join the discussion at the ever growing Blacklist community.

The saddest part of this day is that the archives are no longer there. Jason Evan’s recaps are posted, but each article after every episode has 0 comments. All comments have been wiped clean, as if they never existed. What a terrible loss for those that may be new to the Blacklist, those that may have a question about an episode that could have been easily answered. And as a theorist, I am very disappointed that theories, speculations and interpretations so carefully written and crafted have been forever lost.

I have participated at WSJ since 2013, so this is a sad day for me, although it is not totally unexpected. With the freedom and ease of access and anonymity came the eventual trolls, with no moderation or attempt to foster civil, polite discussion. For the last several months (perhaps even the entire last year), many of the thoughtful on topic discussions about the show have been missing. If anyone visited the blog recently, you may have noticed the rude and unwelcome commentary offered by an army of Anonymous posters. Perhaps this was the last straw, an attempt by WSJ to gain control of their comment section, which routinely had hundreds of comments after every episode.

So from this day forward, to the best of my knowledge, if you wish to post at WSJ, you must provide your complete real name, and either log on as a subscriber to the publication, or use Facebook or Google+, utilizing your real name.

I have met many people that I considered friends at the speakeasy blog, some have come and gone, some I still keep in contact with and some I’m sorry to say I have forgotten their names. To me, going online and discussing the episodes was just as pleasurable as watching the show, and I will miss Wall Street Journal’s unique and thoughtful family of true Blacklist fanatics.

Wherever you are, my friends, I’m thinking of you. I guess the Blacklist is not the same show we all fell in love with in 2013, and the fandom has evolved due to DVR viewing and binge watching (and unfavorable writing). But I will never forget how for a very long time, there were those of us so addicted that we could not wait to come online in the morning to read Jason’s recap, and to post our comments. I always looked forward to what you all thought, and was humbled to share my own theories with those I trusted to listen. In many ways, this was the best part of the show, sharing my thoughts with other like minded fans. to be a part of a respectful, thoughtful community of people that actually loved this show.

If by any chance, you may happen to read this, please know I am smiling, remembering our conversations and good natured arguments and speculations, the humor and friendship, how it did not matter if we were right or wrong. It was instead the challenge we shared to try to figure it all out, and the fact that we all had somewhere to go, somewhere we considered “home,” that provided the most satisfaction.

Goodbye Wall Street Journal.

B.C.
A.M.
CES2
Fergie
Charmed
Hank
BlacklistFan
BigBlacklistFan
Mrs.C
Emily
Emily Thorne
fangirl
ciji
Logan (and members of her blog)
Lace
Chopstick
Fluffy
SpaderLover
RedRavenous
TheoryDuJour
Richard
LizLover
BarbJ
Red’sGrandchild
Kelly
Tessa
Nan
Jim1
Carolina Girl
A.B.
J.
Marcel.
Hoodly
and so many more that perhaps didn’t post as often as others, but whose posts were still valued and enjoyed. I’m sorry if I have left some of you out. I will miss you all.

So terribly sad to see it all come to an end.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
by Auriandra » about 1:30pm 3/5/2016
IMDb member since December 2014
As someone who was personally trolled off the wsj “blog” I couldn’t be happier. I doubt anyone realized the hurt this caused me and others. Anyone who innocently stumbled onto the site could expect to be attacked for the most trivial of infringements. It was dominated by a small group of fantasists whose elaborate concoctions rarely panned out. Lizzingtons were especially reviled and shooed away by one of the “enforcers.” I’ve never seen such a situation before. Apparently someone took the time to see the monstrosity it had become and decided to finally do what was needed.

See also Appendices to “For the Love of Lizzington,” Appendices for examples of abuse on WSJ TBL comment section: http://wp.me/pDKwi-KE
▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

WSJDN Commenting Rules & FAQs

1. Commenting Rules

Thank you for sharing your views with WSJ. Please observe the following simple rules:

● Real names are required, including full first and last name.
● Please be civil in addressing and referencing other WSJ commenters and stay focused on the subject at hand.
● Objectionable content is forbidden. Such comments can be reported by clicking on the exclamation symbol found on every comment.
● WSJ reserves the right to remove any comment for any reason. WSJ may also bar individuals who break our commenting rules.
● You must follow the WSJ.com Subscriber Agreement and Terms of Use.

2. Who can comment on WSJ.com?

Anyone who is logged into their WSJ.com account can comment, or those who have signed in through supported social networks such as Facebook. All commenters must have a public profile. They must use their real name and be respectful of other commenters and mindful of our site commenting rules.

3. Can I edit or delete my comment once it’s posted?

You have 5 minutes to edit it. You can also choose to delete it entirely at any time.

4. How can I report a comment as abusive?

Look for the exclamation mark on every comment. Select the reason for your report such as spam, offensive content or other criteria.

5. Why are real names required?

We value thoughtful discussion and have found that the accountability associated with the use of real names contributes to this goal. We’re proud of our highly accomplished readership, and recognize the potential for WSJ comments to enhance the online and professional reputations of our readers. If we suspect you of using a fake name, your participation will be suspended until we can resolve the question.

6. My name is not correct on my profile. How can I fix this?

Please contact us, and we’ll update your name.

7. Why are some of my comments missing?

We encourage free expression, regardless of viewpoint, but require that such expressions be respectful of other commenters and relevant to the stories on which they are posted. We reserve the right to remove, hide from public view, or edit any comment for any reason.

In particular, you may not submit a comment that is abusive, defamatory, disrespectful, illegal, offensive or disparaging (whether on the basis of disability, ethnicity, gender, nationality, race, religion, sexual orientation, traits with which people are born, or otherwise).

You also may not submit a comment that attacks or threatens another person, threatens or promotes violence, wishes for harm to befall another person, invades another person’s privacy or proprietary rights, or uses expletives (including veiled profanity).

You may not stalk or harass another person, dominate the conversation, discourage participation by others, or mock, bait, bicker, taunt, or belittle others.
Emphasis added

Comments with spam or self-promotional links are not allowed. Self-promotional links are permitted on your profile page. Your comments and profile may not imply any connection to any person or organization to which you are not, in fact, connected.

Comments in all-capital letters, all-bold, or all-italic postings, excessive blank space and objectionable profile photos are not permitted.

We will also hide from view any comments made by a reader suspected of using a fake name.

8. Who will see my WSJ profile and comments?

If you choose to comment on WSJ, your profile and comments will be visible to all logged-in WSJ readers. You can choose to make your profile and comments private but will not be able to post new comments. You can review your profile and choose between public and private status here.

9. What happened to my commenting history?

At launch, your profile may display only your most recent comments. Over time, all previous comments will reappear on your profile. The total number of recommendations you’ve accrued will be added to your profile.

10. What happened to my groups and the topics, questions, and answers I created?

Journal Community groups, topics, and answers are no longer available.

11. What happened to my messages, tracked comments and connections?

Journal Community messages, comment tracking, and connections are no longer available. Visit our Email Sign-Up Center to continue receiving notifications related to your comments and conversations of interest.

12. How do I manage the email that WSJ is sending me about my commenting activity?

You can control the number and frequency of email notifications through our Email Sign-Up Center. We can notify you if someone recommends or responds to your comments or enters a conversation you’re following. You can choose whether to be notified immediately, every hour, or not at all.

13. Who can I contact with additional questions or concerns about commenting and profile?

All commenting feedback should be sent to moderator@wsj.com

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
 

⭕ “Listen to me: You’re great – A fan letter

March 3, 2016

I saw this letter on the Cast and Crew Twitter list and liked it so much I am reposting it here. Skip down for larger print.

Cross-posted under “Writers Room”
 

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

Twitter convo on next direction
2/24/2016

Tracy Downey @msgoddessrises
@BlacklistDCd I mentioned this: A baby monitor, a nanny, NSA spyware-who’s watching whom? 😉
¤
BlacklistDclassified
@msgoddessrises interesting placement of 3:15 Drexel themes; read a great fanfic where Liz does give up baby for adoption …
[ lost tweet: about how adoptive parents were sponsored by Red! who places baby with a couple he knows ]
¤
Tracy Downey @msgoddessrises
@BlacklistDCd I don’t see that happening-The writers are DEFINITELY going to break some rules you won’t see coming.
¤
BlacklistDclassified
@msgoddessrises as long as I’m not miserable for 6 months, like after Decembrist; I like to rant about diff betwn “surprise” & “catharsis”
¤
BlacklistDclassified
@msgoddessrises uh huh Zap2It: ‘Big reveals coming up’ on ‘The Blacklist’ http://bit.ly/1Kgl5Ri according to NBC entertainment pres
¤
Tracy Downey
@BlacklistDCd @Zap2it yep. I figured out three just by the dialogue
¤
BlacklistDclassified
@msgoddessrises hope so! I’d hate to get bored!
¤
Tracy Downey
@BlacklistDCd yeah you won’t get bored be prepared to be thrown for a loop tho!
¤
BlacklistDclassified @BlacklistDCd
@msgoddessrises as long as I’m not miserable for 6 months, like after Decembrist; I like to rant about diff betwn “surprise” & “catharsis”
¤
Tracy Downey
@BlacklistDCd expect a Holy War and a child shall lead them. 😉
¤
BlacklistDclassifiedto
@msgoddessrises getting all biblical like Harry Potter; well that’s where the grand themes are ➔ I hope they go as grand as they can …
¤
BlacklistDclassified
@msgoddessrises I have caveats, but I love where they’ve taken it so far; a few continuity problems from time to time, otherwise perfect

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
 
🔴 Poll: Who do you “ship”? #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist 300 votes in 3 days; 45 countries, non-US 62% @DaveMetzger http://pic.twitter.com/h3phu6z7hO

🔴 Poll: Who do you “ship”? #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist List of countries participating (62% non-US) @DaveMetzger http://pic.twitter.com/j9O9QXS3R9
▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

 

“It’s just money – it’s made up. Pieces of paper with pictures on it – so we don’t have to kill each other to get something to eat.” – Margin Call

“People say youth is wasted on the young. I disagree. I believe wisdom is wasted on the old. All you can do is part with it, but very few will take it. Least of all, the people closest to you. They want no part of it.” – Red Reddington, The Blacklist, 3:15 Dexter

Bernie defines “political revolution” as “bringing more people into the political process.” Calm down, Chris Mstthews. @msnbc @Hardball

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” – Gandhi

“In the midst of World War II, a great federal judge, Learned Hand, said that the spirit of liberty is ‘that spirit which is not too sure that it is right.’ Users of the social media are certainly exercising their liberty. But there is a real risk that when they fall prey to confirmation bias, they end up compromising liberty’s spirit — and dead wrong to boot.” – Cass Sunstein http://bv.ms/1WkpvrI

“Vulgarity is no substitute for wit” – Downton Abbey

Angelfire: Early Spader Interviews, Collected (1985-2004): http://bit.ly/1LcgeAj

🔴 New⚡️Poll‼️➔ Who do you “ship”? http://wp.me/pDKwi-2wu (“Other” and “None” are options”) #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist

━━━━━━━ v
Books about Spies

A Spy among Friends w audible
Billion-Dollar Spy

Thomas Allen & Norman Polmar, “Merchants of Treason”, Ladislav Bittman, “The Deception Game”, Vladimir Sakharov, “High Treason”, Victor Sheymov, “Tower of Secrets,” and Oleg Kalugin, “The First Directorate.” There are many more but these are my favorites.
━━━━━━━ ^
━━━━━━━ v
WSJ Comment 2/10/2016 10:20p
I love the attention paid to Liz’s pregnancy this season. I loved the shots of he baby kicking in Liz’s tummy. The look on Tom’s face when he felt that was so authentic. I wonder if it interests anyone that this week, one of my favorite writers, Brandon Sonnier, brought his new 3 week old daughter into work…

That sweetness, of course, can only be contrasted to the sickening final scene, some phantasm of family relationships gone utterly wrong. I remember the awful look on Red’s face when Liz asked him if her mother was a terrible person. Looks like we’ll be finding out soon.
━━━━━━━ ^

“I’m a very romantic person and I think we’ve been taught to believe that love is something ordinary – that everyone can find it, but I think real love is the rarest thing in the world. I have fallen in love, and I’m lucky for it,” says Spader, looking somewhat more earnest behind his designer specs.
“When you’re in love, you can’t control it. It’s when you can’t take charge of what you feel, when you are completely powerless in the face of the emotion. When it happens, it happens in spite of you.”
James Spader interview, © The Vancouver Sun (Canada), Sept 20, 2002
© The Vancouver Sun (British Columbia, Canada), September 20, 2002 Friday Final Edition (Thank you, Susan!)
(Via Angelfire http://bit.ly/1LwTiqU ⇇ more excerpts under “Interrogations” )

WSJ Comment 2/19/2016
Thinking of the preview of the next episode in the “What’s Liz upset about now?” category. Maybe Red squirreled Liz away from Katarina to protect her, perhaps from his & her enemies, perhaps from Katarina herself.

@DaveMetzger I just watched Drexel again on Amazon Prime & saw you had written it. I love it – the juxtaposition of art & tech, the pacing,

@DaveMetzger how the larger themes were worked in. The “wisdom” piece was so true. You did a fantastic job and should be very proud.

@BlacklistRoom I hope it’s okay if I repost the feature about how an episode develops to my blog. I have a writers room section @davemetzger

SkyLiving: James Spader answers fans questions https://twitter.com/SkyLivingHD/status/699649662232301568

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

NBC Interrogation Room: “We have never altered a story due to opinion on social media. I don’t think we would ever do that. Like I said, social media is just a really fun experience and a good way to gauge fans.”

WSJ Comment: “Jon Bokenkamp: “We have never altered a story due to opinion on social media. I don’t think we would ever do that. Like I said, social media is just a really fun experience and a good way to gauge fans.” http://bit.ly/1PUGa0w
⇈ ⇊
There’s a bizarre idea on this blog that the BL writers look here for story ideas. They don’t. In fact, for legal reasons they can’t. Intellectual property laws forbid it. They don’t want fans suing them for using ideas. The regular writers are instructed not to even read the blogs (per Dave Metzger).

RadioTimes, Stephen Armstrong (Nov): Is James Spader the oddest man in showbusiness? http://bit.ly/1VqEsYu #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist
// 11/6/2015

🐣 This fanfic is so funny & well-versed in #TheBlacklist lore I have to rec it: “A Blacklist Midsummer Night’s Dreamhttp://bit.ly/1mY5jju

Billboard: ​NBC’s #TheBlacklist Sends 4 Songs Onto THR’s Top TV Songs Chart http://bit.ly/1SyzYRy latest Andra Day’s Rise Up @NBCBlacklist

🐣 Today’s guest star just spit all over Spader after he complimented her sweater, so we had words.… instagram.com/p/BAkwGX2Q0GV/
// Llama in pajamas

🐣 Opening King Tut’s tomb. Guy on right was real lord of Downton Abbey castle http://pic.twitter.com/cD1Dv6ebMl

🐣 The much under-appreciated Baz. (This guy’s real-life bio is amazing) #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist http://pic.twitter.com/k7rJTDSVUM

🐣 By @TheBlacklister23 Very clever #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist http://pic.twitter.com/MbCJbh0uXh
// Liz Dorothy, Tom Scarecrow, Aram Lion, Ressler Tin Man

🐣 By @TheBlacklister23 #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist http://pic.twitter.com/M9wmUcqvge
// Spader as Ox

🐣 One of my favorite episodes [2:11 Ruslan Denisov] #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist http://pic.twitter.com/hKeuw9VF10

🔴 What is the Cabal? http://wp.me/pDKwi-T6 >12,000 people have checked out this article from June 2015 #TheBlacklist

BlacklistDclassified @BlacklistDCd 2/15/2016
🐣 But that’s speculation. I’ll write up where I think things stand at this moment & will post on my site. #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist
🐾
🐣 If I had to guess, it has to do w Liz’s Mom being a major figure in the Cabal ➔ the huge labyrinth on the map #TheBlacklist
🐾
🐣 I’m expecting maybe a more detailed explication of where we are. Meanwhile, a new trajectory is promised Into 4th season. #TheBlacklist
🐾
🐣 As @JonBokenkamp said, reveals would come as one puzzle piece reveals the gestalt ➔ this happened in 3:14 #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist
🐾
🐣 Red: “As much as it pains me to say it, he was probably… the only man she ever really loved.” ➔ major admission, isn’t it? #TheBlacklist

🐣 @DaveMetzger srsly, more more comments on her inconsistensies than any other topic relating to craftsmanship; just fyi; I see a lot …

🐣 @DaveMetzger the Liz character needs an advocate who coordinates for her between episodes – or maybe have her diagnosed as bipolar lol

Zap2It: ‘Big reveals coming up’ on ‘The Blacklist’ http://bit.ly/1Kgl5Ri according to NBC entertainment president: S4 trajectory
// 2/13/2016

Entertainment [NZ ]: The Blacklist’s Megan Boone talks pregnancy and future possibilities http://bit.ly/1Kgjv1Q
// 2/2/2016, “When asked what she thinks is the ongoing appeal of the show, Boone says she’s often wondered if many viewers find it a cathartic experience. “This idea of some network of nefarious characters that affect our daily lives seems to strike a chord with people. Yes, the world of The Blacklist might be so heightened and fictitious that it’s almost a monster story, but people love the idea of a criminal network underbelly that’s terrorizing our society being uncovered and brought to justice”

“Boone also knows that a big part of the show’s appeal is the chemistry between Liz Keen and the machiavellian Raymond Reddington, played by James Spader.”

“We really work at it, but it helps that we’re both really genuine and mutually respectful people, as well as both kind of strange and a little bit weird. I think people like the fact that we’re like a couple of weirdos on a playdate.

“I think for any relationship to grow, it has to overcome obstacles and that’s pretty much what you see happening – Lizzie and Raymond always come back together stronger. They have a really strong bond that is inexplicable and ineffable – Liz certainly doesn’t understand it and Reddington doesn’t know how to express it.”

“One of the strengths of the show is the premise is so strong and lends itself to so many possibilities. I think it’s future will depend entirely on our multitude of creative minds and how they all fare in the long haul and if the audience maintains the way it has. I think, as an actor, the healthiest mindset to have is ‘I don’t know what the future holds and I’m okay with that’.

7:35 am February 12, 2016
WSJ Anonymous wrote:
There is no reason a man who is not the father of a child cannot have a romantic relationship with her when she is a grown woman in her 30s. Daddygaters lose. Lizzingtons should be allowed to ship to their hearts content unashamed and unassailed. And leave the “he’s like her father” out of it. It’s not illegal. The rest is personal preference or misapplied religiosity.

The big question however is will their banishment from this this blog finally end, now that you all have been proven wrong? Who decides? How about taking a vote?

🐣 So “JoRay” is a thing (Josephine/Raymond)? I’m happy she’s still alive. Would like to know more of extent of disabilities. @nicoledphillips

Embed for Eisendrath: 16 writers & 6 assistants

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

TheGuardian [EK]: Make your own memories: one day you’ll be able to replace the bad ones with good ones http://bit.ly/1Xf5sLR
// 10/12/2014

TheGuardian [UK]: James Spader (2/3/2016): ‘I prefer to have nothing to do with the actual business of being an actor’ http://bit.ly/1nUqTFD
// 2/3/2016, “As far as honesty goes, it’s not clear Spader especially needs a refill. A smart and punctilious man, he is someone who came to fame in the 1980s but has survived beyond that decade very much by being himself. This isn’t someone neurotic about his appearance or his lifestyle. He smokes, likes a beer, likes pizza and jazz piano. He evidently hasn’t tried to halt the passage of time on his hairline, or fought particularly hard against middle age in the gym. He is strangely old world, a bit F Scott Fitzgerald: tweedy, but passionate. He exclaims that things are ‘lovely’ or ‘divine’.”

“The Blacklist is a pace-driven series that clearly has an episode formula, but which also leans heavily on Red’s idiosyncrasies to elevate it above a genre piece. Spader makes Red wisecracking, but also dark and deadly. Spader says he is often – ‘daily’ – in contact with the writers about the character.”

“‘If I’m choosing a project on content,’ he says, thoughtfully sucking a boiled sweet, ‘it’s through a prism of sexuality, in the oddest corners of someone’s life. I’m not someone so much interested in exploring a slice of life unless that is down the corridor, around the corner, up the alley and down the rabbit hole. That I like.’”

“‘“I wanted to find something which was going to mix irreverence with drama,” says Spader, “and a character who would continue to surprise me. On a series where you do 22 episodes, that’s such an important thing.'”

“[W]hen he is cast in a part, you perceive it’s with an understanding of, and a nod to, his entire career, and all the baggage that an actor brings with them.”

“‘They’re going to get that,’ he says, welling up with enthusiasm. ‘I bring as much as I possibly can. Everywhere I go, I bring a lot of luggage. I think that’s what one should do. I’m paid well, and am demanding of the people I work with and therefore I feel I should bring a lot.’ He smiles: ‘And I do.'”

EW, Natalie Abrams: The Blacklist boss on Liz Keen’s big news http://bit.ly/1nZjd5F
// 1/21/2016

Tumblr, MsMookie: James Spader Q&A, London (fan interview) http://bit.ly/1Jm4qvb
// 11/24/2015

3:11 Mr Gregory Devry
🔴 3:12 Storybook for The Vehm http://wp.me/PDKwi-1f3 #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist

Post fan interview, 2x Spader interviews

Note: Changes to Blog Updates

February 4, 2016

Duty calls and I’ve decided I need to split my time between this website and Twitter account @BlacklistDCd and my political Twitter account @Auriandra. The main difference will be that I will no longer do screenshots of all scenes for an episode and Tweet these out on Thursdsys and included them at the end of the scripts. This won’t affect the editing and posting of the scripts, just the Tweets I have used to illustrate them.

I may ignore this plan for really great episodes. This should allow me to carve out about 25% of my time for political micro-blogging. The main difference will be that I will no longer do screenshots of all scenes for an episode and Tweet these out on Thursdsys. This won’t affect the scripts, just the Tweets I have used to illustrate them. I may ignore this plan for really great episodes. This should allow me to carve out about 25% of my time for political micro-blogging.

http://m.notey.com/blogs/the-blacklist articles on #TheBlacklist ✛ app

☒ LateShow: James Spader with Stephen Colbert [ video ] http://bit.ly/1OJmf4d on peculiarity, fear, Twitter http://pic.twitter.com/PXndQzv2zg
// 1/20/2016, https://youtu.be/ZfZhi8nnnLI

☒ Have you seen this? NBCLateNight: James Spader with Seth Meyers [ video ] http://bit.ly/1Pi87V9 http://pic.twitter.com/P2rn1VLZzQ on Leslie Jones
// 1/19/2016

GoldenSpiralMedia (1/11): The Blacklist Podcast Fan Day Event and Video Chat http://bit.ly/1KoIquz audio w Jon Bokenkamp #TheBlacklist

🔴 Script 3:10 The Director, Part 2 http://wp.me/pDKwi-2k0 FYI links to photos I’m posting are at the end of each script

“Rise Up” by Andra Day http://bit.ly/1ZrdlNB just beautiful with closing sequence

I use Tweet addresses as an inexpensive way to store images online. I adjust pics later if too dark (hard to predict in advance). Almost every pic is altered a la David Ferrie.

After all the Tweets are posted, Twitter provides a collage feature, which I also add to script, though it does not give the captions.

🔴 Script: 3:9 The Director, Part 1 http://wp.me/pDKwi-2ho Status: FINAL #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist

WSJ Anonymous
1/11/2016
“Deep throat” does not refer to the movie or the Watergate scandal as Red refers to it. The G-spot is undeniably a sexual reference. It has been the topic of medical research. Some women are more sensitive than others to stimulation of this area of the vagina (on top, just lbeyond the public bone). Red couples this sexual reference with the reference to “deep throat,” which is a sexual maneuver. Deep throat refers to the throat of a woman who, during oral sex, can take in the full length of the male organ without gagging. Long thought to be a myth, this is a technique is now taught in brothels. “Deep throat” is real and undeniably sexual.

Liz: He’s a myth.
Red: That’s what they said about Deep Throat … and the G-Spot. I assure you Wujing is quite real, and he’s hired me.

Both references are sexual. Red is obnoxiously trying to shock Liz. He is not talking about Watergate. Why would he refer to Watergate’s “Deep Throat,” a source used by Woodward and Bernstein who wanted to stay anonymous? The existence of this source was never in question, only his specific identity. No one questioned his existence. Ben Bradlee would have canned the whole project.

From: @RedsBlacklist (The Blacklist Fansite)
🐣 @BlacklistDCd those particular sites are our partners, but I do offer advertising opportunities if your interested.
8:00am – 6 Jan 16

RedandLizzie: James on “desired outcomes” for Red and Liz, and why I see it as a HUGE red flag against the daddy theorists http://bit.ly/1ZNiZzd
// reblogged by R&L 4/3/2015

NBCLateNight: James Spader on Blacklist Superfan Leslie Jones [ video ] http://bit.ly/1Pi87V9
// 1/19/201

🔴 Script (Rough): 3:9 The Director http://wp.me/pDKwi-2ho Status: Preliminary

🔴 Script (Rough): 3:9 The Director http://wp.me/pDKwi-2ho Springfield just posted this, still in roughest form #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist

🐣 It’s 1:20 CT & Springfield still hasn’t posted screen caps from Ep 309. Loved episode. Can’t wait to get it ‼️ #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist

🔴 Blacklist Declassified Index & Search Assistance http://wp.me/pDKwi-1Jr since this is a resource site, it now has an illustrated index
🔴 Script 3:8 Kings of the Highway http://wp.me/PDKwi-18c  Storybook Eps 1-8 http://wp.me/PDKwi-1f3
🔴 On to Season 3://➔ Episode 3:1″The Troll Farmer.” A week from tomorrow, Season 3 begins w new episodes.
🔴 “Clues” section: Many updates ‼️ go to link and scroll down http://wp.me/PDKwi-i
#TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist

🔴 http://bit.ly/1FJ2mXP

🔴 The Blacklist: [2:22 Tom Connolly] Photoshow #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist http://pic.twitter.com/LrJNbRW0S5

🔴 Liz Pregnancy Poll http://wp.me/pDKwi-27k Total votes for ‘Have baby as part of show’ are 33. Poll remains Open

[ Taken Down : Suspect Source ] MasterHerald (12/21): ‘#TheBlacklist’ Season 3 Second Half to Feature Liz Keen Pregnant with Former Husband’s Baby! http://bit.ly/1OumnJX
// 12/21/2015

TheAtlantic: Why Are So Few Film Critics Female? http://theatln.tc/1YHJoxZ #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist @MeganBoone

NYT, James Poniewozik : Streaming TV Isn’t Just a New Way to Watch. It’s a New Genre nyti.ms/1NZYR5y
// 12/16/2015

🔴 BlacklistDCd: “Beyond the Tango Milonga” – sexual imagery in 2:11 Ruslan Denisov
http://wp.me/PDKwi-1vf#milonga #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist

🔴 Poll: “Red should hook up with –?” 🔴 #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist can you help 💋💋 Red 💋💋 get to 200? http://wp.me/pDKwi-1VX

💞 Poll: Megan is Pregnant! “Liz” should – ? #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist Please don’t forget to vote http://wp.me/pDKwi-27k

🎅 Writers Room  New youtu.be/deyC6h0tuKQ video by “AANF” plus poll: “Red should hook up with – “ poll http://wp.me/PDKwi-1vf#redneeds

🔴 🔥 Red Hot 🔥 Interviews: James Spader 2014 wp.me/PDKwi-i#interv… #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist http://pic.twitter.com/PjYHPWGYhr
// older

🔴 🔥 Red Hot 🔥 Interviews: James Spader 2014 wp.me/PDKwi-i#interv… #TheBlacklist @NBCBlacklist http://pic.twitter.com/4AgPfAeUES
// younger

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
By LizzieB90 5:00am 16 Feb 2016

This is pretty much my view, too:

From an interview w Megan Boone on Feb 2 http://bit.ly/1Kgjv1Q

“I think for any relationship to grow, it has to overcome obstacles and that’s pretty much what you see happening – Lizzie and Raymond always come back together stronger. They have a really strong bond that is inexplicable and ineffable – Liz certainly doesn’t understand it and Reddington doesn’t know how to express it.”

“One of the strengths of the show is the premise is so strong and lends itself to so many possibilities. I think it’s future will depend entirely on our multitude of creative minds and how they all fare in the long haul and if the audience maintains the way it has. I think, as an actor, the healthiest mindset to have is ‘I don’t know what the future holds and I’m okay with that’.”

Funny that two featured songs in the series are titled “Just Breathe.” I think that’s pretty good advice.

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
I like this very much – LizzieB90

From TessaBLTheorist’s Tumblr (undated)

What is The Blacklist about?
The Blacklist to me is first and foremost a tale of love. A family love story. And what happens to families and love when placed in the morally ambiguous world of spies and operatives.

Second, The Blacklist is a story about sin eaters. The people who keep the general public safe and in high moral positions and in doing so they face each day morally daunting choices. Choices that affect their lives, their families and their mental and emotional health. In Red’s words: “George Orwell wrote, “Those who abjure violence can do so “only because others are committing violence on their behalf.” What a visionary, but, Good Lord, his books are a downer.“. We all live in a somehow safe world because the people in intelligence, military, and law enforcement make us safe by themselves choosing to walk a moral tightrope every day.

Third, The Blacklist is a story about the real meaning of morals. Is the Law moral, or is it moral to have one’s own moral code and live by it. What happens when the ones in power, making and enforcing the laws are themselves corrupt and in service of third parties. What happens when the ones in power are willing to kill and steal for what they consider to be the “universal good”. All characters are killers. They all kill for different and somewhat justifiable reasons. There are no good and bad characters, only good and bad in the context where they place their own north, their own Polaris.

And lastly, The Blacklist has shades of The Tempest. A story of a father and a daughter and the magic books (the fulcrum) that gave power to Prospero . A story about revenge, justice, righting wrongs, about love and greed. The value of loyalty above all else. There is no way to keep oneself in the “absolute good”, there is only doing the least evil and the more good in the circumstances one faces.

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

Note: I do not ship Lizzington or any other couple. I have been just as happy at the thought that Red could be Lizzie’s father. I am cursed with the ability to see things from different points of view. What irks me is unfairness, injustice. I will basically enter any fight on the side of the preyed-upon or “little guy.” Please don’t label or objectivize me. You can not possibly know how complicated I am or what my story is. LB90

1:11 am February 7, 2016
WSJ Nan wrote:
Final parting comment – Just for the record, I use LizzieB90’s season transcripts for most of my research. She’s done a great job at recording the speaker for most comments, making the scripts easier to follow. I do not agree with her insistence that the endgame is Red and Liz as a couple, nor do I agree with Blond Anon’s wish that Ressler and Liz become a couple, nor do I agree that Tom was abusive to Liz in their marriage. I do agree Tom hit Liz ONCE in his workshop, when both were there, working in their respective roles as agents, to investigate the other. If Liz hadn’t broken into Tom’s workshop (as an FBI agent, that was an illegal act), he wouldn’t have had to knock her down or hit her to get away. Cause and effect! I don’t agree with Curious1’s diatribe that Tom is a wasted part and badly acted, but I read her comments to see if she offers some insight. I often take exception to Tessa insisting that some clue means one thing when that is only her interpretation, and not even based on the actual clue that was given. She likes to bend and twist to clues. I believe this story is far too complicated to have what clues are given bent and twisted to fit some preconceived narrative.

However, we all come here to read what others think and take away from each episode, trying to find links and connections that we couldn’t find ourselves. I’ve gained so much insight from so many people that I can’t begin to thank them all. Certainly Belle, Kelly, RiRi, Tessa, Jim1, Carolina Girl, Jblitz, RedHot, LizzieB90 and so many more have added to my evolving understanding of what this story is all about. I reserve my right to change my mind as clues continue to appear and connections bring to light that which was confusing.

The Blacklist is a great tool to use in an upper school Ethics class to discuss moral relativism and to debate whether the ends can ever justify the means. These are the bigger questions that one needs to ask oneself to get the most out of this show. Red’s sermon to the Judge in S1E15 was perhaps the best well reasoned argument why no individual – even Red – should ever claim the right to be judge, jury and executioner.

Is Red a “good” man, a sin-eater who takes on the wrongs of others, who does “bad” things but has a moral code and is only looking to right the ship – and only wants to love and protect Liz from all harm in the world?

Or is Red a “bad” man, a sinner who judges the wrongs of others and kills without remorse when he finds the other culpable, who does “good” things by taking down criminals but is only looking out for his own interests – and is only using Liz as his tool of destruction.

PRO/CON – List all the good things Red has done for Liz versus all the bad things Red has done to Liz. What does Liz want? What has Liz always wanted? What are Liz’s dreams? When was Liz happiest?
———————
Comment: I am not a Lizzington shipper. lb90

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

FYI: Changes to Updates

2/4/2016

Duty calls and I’ve decided I need to split my time between this website and Twitter account @BlacklistDCd and my political Twitter account @Auriandra. The main difference will be that I will no longer do screenshots of all scenes for an episode and Tweet these out on Thursdsys and included them at the end of the scripts. This won’t affect the editing and posting of the scripts, just the Tweets I have used to illustrate them.

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
9:41 pm January 28, 2016
WSJ Nan wrote:
@Tessa – I think I’ve already said this a few times. I did not make the transcript by listening to the audio track with only my ears or earbuds or headphones. I got the top audio professional from Toronto’s film industry to use state-of-the-art audio equipment to reduce ‘white’ noise and distortions from the track, and to accentuate verbal exchanges between the speakers. He then transcribed word-for-word what was said and by whom, noting the decibel ranges to gauge the distance between the person speaking and the listener (Liz). Is that professional enough for you? Just because you believe you hear something on that track doesn’t make it so.

The human ear often does not pick up the range of frequencies or eliminate the ‘white’ noise that allows one to hear what is actually being said. In at least two places, what I thought I had heard with my naked ear was not what was said on TV geek’s sound track.

I have not had this process completed for his second sound track yet. I will wait to comment until I can have the sound track professionally transcribed. Earbuds will never allow you to correctly hear what is being said. My transcript of the first sound track stands. If you’re going to use other lines, please inform readers it is not from the professionally transcribed sound track, only your ‘earbud’ version.

@RiRi – interesting take on the meaning of father when Liz tells Beth that her father gave her the scar. Could Liz’s scar be a burn caused by her “father” giving her an Orthodox cross to hold to keep her safe, which was or became burning hot because of the fire?

@Belle – Tom and Gina’s boxes couldn’t have come from Berlin unless it was Berlin who also gave Tom the photo of Reddington leaving the hospital after killing Sam. Tom hadn’t spoken or communicated with Berlin in two years. The same mark as on the boxes was on the envelope in Tom’s safety deposit box. Tom may have received the photo from someone, or collected it when he revisited the hospital upon returning to Nebraska, supposedly for a job interview, in S2E12. I’m betting a third party told him about Reddington!

I’ll join you all after streaming tonight’s episode later in the evening. Cheers

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
1/18/2016 11:41pm
LizzieB90 wrote

This discussion (below, between dark lines) from WSJ relates to paper I hope to write at the end of the series. The “issue” is discussed Under “About” “Why this blog?” Though I’d rephrase it now. After all, why should a series like this need to be compared to a novel? Possibly it’s a whole different creature, with a different structure and aesthetic. Examples like Rodin’s Balzac or French films. After all, reality doesn’t come to us as “stories” – that is what we add. “There is always another way to tell the story.” – N.O. Brown

As for Red and Liz, I loved the enigma proposed by Solomon – ‘perhaps it’s a little bit of both.’ (DG & Lizzington). I have no idea what that might be, but it is mind-blowing.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
5:44 pm January 18, 2016
A.B. wrote:
So I finally listened to that part of the podcast on Red and Lizzy. For now I tend to agree with Belle. BUT…it’s quite a confusing answer.

His answers on the endgame don’t bother me at all, as long as they follow the main lines of the story and only twich small details here and there. From what he is saying this is how the writers room’s is working. It’s one thing to change a character’s fate last minute of series finale and very different to change the leads storyline and history the fan witnessed. No confusion.

With Red’s story they can afford to add and cut (but not what has been well established) becuse it’s still an unfinished story. There’s still very much we discover with each episode but not in the detriment of what we saw. He is who he is to Lizzy, but there’s so much more about his whole past. There’s flexibility.

Now with Red and Liz is totally different because they are a fixed point. They are who they are to each other and the story needs buildup. NO CHANGING. In this case the clues need to be there to make sense in the end.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
5:07 pm January 18, 2016
Tessa wrote:
AlyB1223, thanks for the transcript. It is nice to see you here too.

the Q/A it is at best confusing, at worst baffling and demeaning to those who like making theories. Not sure what he meant by anything. I feel certainly less angry, but not out of the proverbial woods and back into happy fandom. weary of the whole the mythology makes sense. as I said, might continue the blog, might delete it, might continue to post here, or might go to a record and watch a day later. It takes a great show for me to watch live and suffer the toenail fungus ad, or the bladder incontinence “solution”. (although I confess to loving the subaru dog ads and the Tom Keen Mustang ads, or the hump day ads.)
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
4:43 pm January 18, 2016
Tessa wrote:
Belle,
I have listened to the messerview. to the question of “What is the true connection between Red and Liz” the answer is “There are a lot of versions of what that could be,” , about the endgame is completely baffling what he is saying, for one he does say he knows where he is going, then that it can change. That is consistent to what he has said before. But the question of the relationship? if the relationship is a parental one, or a romantic one, or he needs Liz for his final revenge or final game movement and the relationship is central to the endgame, then how does that work? I am less angry, but still confused. Not sure if it is worth my time in making theories. Might leave my blog up for a while or take it down, might still work on it or not. Not sure. not sure if it is worth my time.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
4:35 pm January 18, 2016
AlyB1223 wrote:
@A.B. @Belle @ Tessa. This is pretty much exactly what was said in that point in the transcript:

Host 1: Of course, everybody wants to know, when are we going to find out about Red and Liz? Jon’s not going to answer that one.

Host 2: So stop asking it!

JB: Yeah. That may be a little while from now.

Host 2: You should just make stuff up. Like give people about 12 different options and really the answer isn’t in there.

JB: Uh, yeah. There are a lot of versions of what that could be. But I think we’re a little ways away from that.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
3:38 pm January 18, 2016
Belle wrote:
After listening to the podcast when Bokenkamp drops in for a few minutes, I think things are being blown out of proportion. One of the questions from a fan was “What is the true connection between Red and Liz”, and the host joked with JB, and said “of course Jon isn’t going to answer that,” laughed and then the host said that Jon should have a list of 12 answers and just choose a different one to give every time the question is asked, but none of them is the right one. That is when Jon Bokenkamp said something about he’s seen lots of “different versions” of that. I took that to mean that he’s heard all the fan guesses about what they think the true connection is. He was NOT talking about his own endgame.

This was not an important topic of conversation, only a joke in passing about not being able to answer the question, because as always, the show runners protect the endgame.

Much ado about nothing. But listen to it for yourself A.B. It’s at about the 40 min mark.
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
3:27 pm January 18, 2016
CES2 wrote:
@A.B wrote
“No wonder all we get are different signals and clues and nothing fits together. It’s mocking the fans in the end. Ok, fine the viewers are kept in the dark until the end, but YOU should know by now for SURE.

Kinda pissed me off big time, tbh. What is the point then”.

You said it better than me – indeed they have been mocking fans for a long time time now. That’s why I stopped analysing in the middle of season 2

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
3:08 pm January 18, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Agree with the other Anon(s). The show is not a mystery to be solved – it is a serial with some mysteries that will be resolved along the way.

If you pause and think about it, it is virtually impossible (and would be unprecedented in television history) to have a true Sherlock Holmes/Agatha Christie type mystery that extended for an indeterminate number of episodes ranging from 20 or so up to more than 100. A true mystery has to be tightly written to avoid too many loose threads that could be accused of being misleading. The Blacklist is not a mystery to be solved, it is a drama with some mysterious elements to be enjoyed.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
1:45 pm January 18, 2016
AlyB1223 wrote:
@Belle I agree with you completely. I’ve never commented here before but I felt the need to jump in when I saw what a flurry my Tumblr summary was causing. I re-listened to the key parts this morning and I’m comfortable with what I posted but, in context, there was banter with the hosts, etc. that does not come across in any written summary. I don’t think this is anything different than what we’ve heard before. He has an end game in mind, but both he and Spader have said repeatedly that a lot depends on how long the show runs. And let’s also note, this was a video chat – not an official interview – with JB dropping in for 10 minutes before heading into the house to have dinner with his family. He’s literally standing in the street outside his house chatting on his phone.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
1:34 pm January 18, 2016
Belle wrote:
I would recommend that people listen to what Jon Bokenkamp said and come to their own conclusions instead of reading other people’s interpretation.

He has always said he had a certain endgame in mind. I don’t think he wants to change that. I believe
“May be a little while” means it’s going to be a while, a long time. Just as he has always said, when they reveal the connection between Red and Liz, the show will be over, and that reveal will come in the very last episode of the very last season. Nothing he has ever said has changed that.

“There are a lot of versions of what that could be,” (if that’s what he really said, I haven’t verified that yet), may simply mean that there are many versions of the path the writers take to get from point A to point B. The route may be very complicated and layered, depending on the life of the series. There may be different versions of how Red attains his goals, how Liz and Red deal with the obstacles in their path on the way to getting “answers” they seek, or how the story unfolds… NOT different versions of the endgame. That’s how I interpret those words.

This is what Bokenkamp has always said, (James Spader also), that even though the solution may at it’s core be the most predictable, that the journey getting there would be circuitous, (the scenic route) filled with complications or tangents. But still, heading for the same destination.

I believe they have all tried to warn viewers that answers would be provided in time, and to be patient. To enjoy the ride. And we have. But I can understand how you might be upset thinking we are all wasting our time and effort. In my opinion, Jon Bokenkamp sometimes says strange things that may be misconstrued, or may simply be misdirection. Most of the time I believe he is trying to keep all segments of the fandom happy without alienating anyone, and trying to keep everyone’s interest and loyalty.

Just this season Bokenkamp gave an interview using the “complicated layers” phrase that lie atop the true connection between Red and Liz. How many layers depends on the life of the show. This is nothing new.

I don’t hear anything in Jon Bokenkamp’s words that imply that anything has changed. To me, it does not imply that he has changed his end game, or that the clues presented will not flow to the same ultimate solution or “truth.” . James Spader has always said that things that seem confusing or out of place now will all make sense when the story comes to an end.

The show runners have always promoted the show as a mystery, asking viewers to fill in the blanks about Liz and Red, about their past, about Red’s motives. Dialogue and scenes may sometimes be ambiguous, but that is the satisfying (and entertaining) challenge. The mythology invites us all to look for clues and speculate about the “truth.” They intentionally left out details, to draw us in, to think about the possibilities. That is the most compelling aspect of the Blacklist, the mysteries that swirl around each and every character. They are not spoon feeding us, they ask us to think.

I doubt very strongly that the writers want to offer false clues that go nowhere, or change direction after creating a template of success. I would hope after all this time, that they would respect viewer dedication to show canon, and to the clues presented. I want to trust them, I’m not willing to give up so easily.

Tessa and A.B., I hope you don’t don’t become disillusioned with the show, just because of one interview.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
12:22 pm January 18, 2016
AlyB1223 wrote:
I encourage anyone who’s interested to watch the video chat themselves instead of just reading my notes. The link (which is also in the original Tumblr post) is here: http://www.goldenspiralmedia.com/the-blacklist-podcast-fan-day-video-chat (bottom of the page). I don’t think it’s different than what has been stated in previous interviews.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
11:30 am January 18, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Tessa

The writers of a TV show don’t owe you anything. Sorry.

It’s a fun, entertaining show, despite what you think they should do for you.

And now, despite all the reasoning by many theorists about why Liz needed be be pregnant on the show, it looks very unlikely.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
10:30 am January 18, 2016
Tessa wrote:
with that I am off to my busy week. I am not sure at all if I will keep posting. if not while it lasted it was fun. But like Red I value loyalty, and those words, if true are a big betrayal.
If i do not post again, it had been a pleasure, sharing theories with you and doing some mild sparring.

If I do post again, then I guess I might interact again with all of you.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
10:49 am January 18, 2016
Kelly wrote:
Tess, it has always been apparent that in Season 1 and into s2 they have been playing it both ways, romantic and paternal. I’ll talk to you elsewhere, later about a particular scene between Liz and Red.
Don’t let a few words from one show guy turn you off. We don’t know what pressures he may be subject to. Everybody has to answer to someone.
Think instead of all the actors on The Blacklist you like, and how they have kept you entertained.I don’t think you want to ditch them?

Just saw, on YouTube, Megan Boone, who is carrying a girl. She looks lovely. She didn’t say if they were going to write her pregnancy in, but she mentioned Elaine was pregnant on a whole season of Seinfeld. That pretty much answered the question for me. She was on Kelly and Michael this am.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
10:28 am January 18, 2016
Tessa wrote:
9:39 Anonymous wrote:
Tessa, after reading your post @ 8:06, it appears that you are changeable as the wind and now if things don’t go the way you think they should, you are going to stop watching the show and cease theorizing as well?

I am not changeable. With a endgame in mind, with a set relationship (parental or romantic, or none of the above) the show has a direction. It does not matter if it does not follow my theories. So far my going theory fits every single aspect of the show. I do not mind changing my theory if I find it does not fit the facts. But if the fundamentals of the show are not set, then JS has been lying or has been lied to. what is changing as the wind is the direction of the show.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
10:20 am January 18, 2016
Tessa wrote:
anon 9:42. the sound portion of the interview has not been released yet. It has not been officially transcribed. So I have not read it for a reliable source nor have I heard it. I am going by the notes published in tumblr. So far this user has done a good job in other interviews. it was in the podcast appreciation day of The Blacklist Exposed.

Until this interview is released I considered myself pretty disappointed. So far not by the show itself, not by the cast, not by the writers. but if these notes hold true, then the creator has no idea where it is going, and while I might watch it, I certainly will not watch it in real time, and I will not mind not seeing each episode, because it does not matter. I might even wait for the DVD, or watch in in netfilx, a season at a time.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
9:44 am January 18, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Tessa

Isn’t that the whole point here, JB knows the endgame and where he wants to go. It’s up to the viewers to decide if they want to go along for the ride and watch the show? It’s his series, his creation, his baby and he can do whatever he feels like, regardless if the fan base agrees or not.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

9:48 am January 18, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
I take it Red/Liz relationship won’t matter much in the end.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
10:20 am January 18, 2016
Tessa wrote:
anon 9:42. the sound portion of the interview has not been released yet. It has not been officially transcribed. So I have not read it for a reliable source nor have I heard it. I am going by the notes published in tumblr. So far this user has done a good job in other interviews. it was in the podcast appreciation day of The Blacklist Exposed.

Until this interview is released I considered myself pretty disappointed. So far not by the show itself, not by the cast, not by the writers. but if these notes hold true, then the creator has no idea where it is going, and while I might watch it, I certainly will not watch it in real time, and I will not mind not seeing each episode, because it does not matter. I might even wait for the DVD, or watch in in netfilx, a season at a time.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

9:42 am January 18, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Tessa, then you haven’t read all the interviews. “Endgame in mind” was that he said, which is different from decided. Many times words like “flexible”, “fluid” have been used, or phrases aling the lines of “dependent on the length of the series or current events, and other current shows will affect.”

People that haven’t seen this are ignoring reality to suit there own wants.

What if their end game is Putin at the center and he dies before the series ends? There has to be flexibility.

One of the best-loved shows on TV now, Game of Thrones, isn’t even written yet, either. It doesn’t matter.

The relationship will most likely be father/daughter, but some of that stuff you all are making up in between just isn’t there.

I never saw this show as a mystery to be solved, and I don’t think it was marketed as such.

It’s entertainment in a sometimes cruddy world. No time waster for me. The show is a lot of fun.

Bye! Enjoy whatever you end up doing.

I do agree it goes too soapy at times, but the last 2 episodes have been without that.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
9:39 am January 18, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Tessa, after reading your post @ 8:06, it appears that you are changeable as the wind and now if things don’t go the way you think they should, you are going to stop watching the show and cease theorizing as well? We have been bombarded with every theory and speculation possible at least a dozen times over, have heard you praise the actors, writers, producers and creators of this show as the greatest thing since sliced bread. And now because TPTB might want to take the show in another direction or have different ideas, you get all indignant and annoyed and threaten to leave?

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
9:40 am January 18, 2016
Deer Anon wrote:
The have the an outline of the future plot and how to end the show but haven’t decided on what Red-Liz connection should be? A bit disappointing to hear since Red-Liz backstory seemed to be important plot point, but eh. Whatever they will decide on I hope their decision will be driven by logic of the plot rather than desire to shock audience or fulfill demands of one small but vocal group of fans.
Personally I always was more interested in Red’s past and why he committed treason, and hope at least this part of plot will remain unchanged.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
9:27 am January 18, 2016
Tessa wrote:
anon, no JB said before that he had an endgame and that he knew the pieces. That he knew he started in A and wanted to go to B, he made a roadmap, and then threw it out, and took the scenic route. As I said, I am fine with me not knowing, but if the creator of the show has no idea…. then is all crap. I will consider The Director the end of the Series. I might watch on recorded, so I do not have to suffer commercials, but it is not worth my time if they were lying the entire time about knowing what the story is. A mystery is only worth watching when the endgame is seen from the beginning if you follow the clues. For a season or 2 you might get away with it, but if not it degenerates into the mess than the last few seasons of the X-files were. They took a great show and made it into a unbelivable mess of a mix between a cheap soap opera of relationship and non-sense plot. If So I will not watch The Blacklist degenerate into it. I watched it for the mystery. I was willing to be taken by red-herrings. to be mystified with detours. So long as I felt there was fairness there, and that JB knew THE endgame. details are one thing to change, for example, Liz is an adopted child or a biological child. That is unimportant to the big arc. Or that the relation is romantic at the end, but when things are mixed to keep people guessing and because they have no idea of where they are going… then I am out. Plenty of other crap out there to watch, or is back to books. A great mystery is ALWAYS plotted to the end. The end is NOT changing, because the major clues are pointless then. One thing to make a little detour, back-engineer a little something here and there, but that level. That feels like the writers have wasted all my time. Time I do not get back.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
9:09 am January 18, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Good.morning, Tessa!

You have finally arrived at the conclusion the Anonymous Nation has been trying to explain to you for quite some time. Welcome to reality!

This is nothing that has not been said in different pieces or places by Mr. Bokenkamp before.

Now you can join the rest.of us, sit back, and enjoy the show. I will miss being told how we are all missing the clues and have no idea what we’re talking about.

It’s just as interesting to watch and comment on Jason’s recap and on what actually happened on the show as aired. One can still speculate on what may be, but it is far from certain.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
8:06 am January 18, 2016
Tessa wrote:
A.B. I read the same notes.
If true, I am done theorizing, and might be even done watching. because it just mean that JB has been pulling our leg when he said he had a storyline, a relationship and a point of origin and of arrival. I was willing to go with different routes and detours, as long as I thought there was fairness, that the clues are there to point to a general direction. But if now it can be that the end game might be one of:
– Red is an undercover agent working to get the cabal down
– Red is a big time criminal who wanted to control the cabal
– Red might want to have a sexual relationship with Liz
– Red might be Liz father or a paternal figure
I am fine too with me not knowing. I am fine with red herrings. But if the stuff is just there for fun, without a clear plan…. Then it is not a mystery that can be unraveled by watching the clues. It is just another one of the long winded crap that TV networks put out there, and I retract all my previous statements about the greatness of the writers.

I might as well stick with watching the candidates debates both republican and democrat. They also have no clue what they will be doing in the long run and their only objective is to keep the viewers watching until the next commercial break. I can watch re-runs of Boston legal if I want to see the great craft of James Spader.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
7:55 am January 18, 2016
WSJ A.B. wrote:
Was reading on tumblr a recap of the video blog with Bokenkamp and a few things stood out to me:

1. ” JB thinks the “sweet number” for seasons is between 6 and 7 but it’s not his decision. They will have to know when they are getting close to the end because there are answers they will need to resolve. ”
This makes me very happy since I know NBC will give them a fair warning to wrap the story/ies in time.

2. “When asked, is the endgame subject to change? He says yes, it’s always an evolution. But he hopes it doesn’t. They are working around with an idea and an origin story and an end game all the time. And there are certain rules they’ve agreed they can’t break. He doesn’t know how you would be able to do a show without having some strong sense of what the direction is and how it’s supposed to end.”
Good. I do hope they will continue like this. I’m very aware about how early end games on tv show are subject to chage very often so i’s natural for him to take a few precautions.

3. “When asked (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) “When are we going to find out about Red and Liz? He says it “may be a little while,” we are “a little while away from that” and “there are a lot of versions of what that could be.”
WOW, dude, never mention again this late in the game “lot of versions of what that could be.” Are you serious? It’s one thing the end game to go on any number of ways, but this particular relationship should have been established in the writers room long ago and fly with it. NO MORE CHANGES.
No wonder all we get are different signals and clues and nothing fits together. It’s mocking the fans in the end. Ok, fine the viewers are kept in the dark until the end, but YOU should know by now for SURE.

Kinda pissed me off big time, tbh. What is the point then.
▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
undated, but after 3:1 The Troll Farmer 10/8/2015
Tumblr: A Real Gothic Heroine
WTF Is Wrong With The Writers Of The Blacklist Part 5: Electric Boogaloo
….lol. here we fucking go. I honestly never wanted to talk about this problem again but barely anyone has broken this mess down to my satisfaction so her you go, fandom. The resurrection of the conversation you never wanted to have again.
I can’t believe Bokencamp brought us back to square one on Daddygate. Why? Like, if that’s genuinely where they wanted to go why would Bokencamp talk about “romantic Lizzington moments” In that previous interview?
Remember the “If anyone asks, you’re my girlfriend from Ann Arbor.” “Absolutely not!” “Fine, you can be my daughter.” dialogue? Why did that happen the way it did? Why would a man who supposedly has parental feelings for a woman first think to flirtatiously recommend she pretend to be his girlfriend in a scene that plays blatantly as a dinner date? And then why would the scene zoom in and emphasize the “fine, you can be my daughter” statement? And then have him blatantly flirt with her? That was episode fucking 2, so it’s not like this was contrived after fandom speculation.
Why would they have Red react to Lizzie’s dyed blonde hair with blatant, open sexual interest that she caught onto in canon, a scene NBC stuck in the S3 promos, and then turn around and give us a frankly alarming “was he secretly in love with her blonde mother and that’s why he was turned on?” red herring? If they wanted us to think of it as romantic, they would have stopped with the above scene and never randomly made us wonder about her mom, and if they wanted us to think of it as paternal, they would have never given us the scene to begin with.
Remember Solomon saying “Some say it’s a daddy/daughter thing, others swear it’s May/September…I think it’s a little of both.” ? Why did they bring the contrasting audience opinions into canon, if not to encourage rampant speculation of that very conflict?
Remember Eisendrath’s infamous “he has twisted parental feelings” statement that James Spader had to shut the fuck down immediately at ComicCon? Why did Eisendrath think to say such a thing and why did Spader feel the need to cut him off tactfully, but rather rudely, in the way you would do if someone on your own creative team said something you found stupid and offensive?
Why do Megan and Spader speak of their characters in a way that emphasizes the romantic angle and dismisses the parental idea? With Megan calling it a “love story,” and later expressing frustration with the parental idea closing in all options for the narrative (something which Spader echoes in another interview), and Spader explained very recently that his character has “Intense, complicated and developing” feelings for Lizzie?
Before, I was begrudgingly willing to overlook a lot of the confusion because I thought it was a rather garbage red herring for the pseudo-mystery surrounding the night of the fire and Lizzie’s bio parents/the Fulcrum. I thought these character’s traumas surrounding family was an important element of their character growth and that it showed in their relationship via mutual care/nurturing as is normal of any potential romantic couple dealing with loss/abandonment issues. The mystery is mostly over now. We had a very nice, very fitting explanation for the platonic care currently between them. But apparently, we’re flip-flopping in interviews again.
Which fucking is it, Bokencamp? You have a starkly contrasting dichotomy that seems entirely unnecessary and controversial and instead of nipping the problem in the bud you drag the dead horse into the third season. You canon-bait audiences on both sides of the argument incessantly, and give starkly contrasting statements in interviews, one where you say it’s parental, another where you openly tease “romantic scenes” are to come. How are we supposed to perceive the most important relationship in the show if apparently nobody on either side can decipher whether or not their own interpretation would be discomforting? Professional reviewers don’t know which path to follow. One week we get a gushing shippy review asking readers if love is in the air, the next some dude reviewer who barely cares is half-heartedly talking about parental elements. And every one of them is furious and confused about how baffling Tom Keen’s continued existence is.
So Bokencamp, was all of this on purpose? I don’t think a person can just accidentally stumble their way into this conflict multiple times. Did you legitimately want your audience to argue over whether it was romantic or familial? Did you intentionally walk into interviews thinking to yourself, “oh, today I’m gonna tease romantic scenes between the leads!” and then go into the next like “time to assert father/daughter feelings between the leads!” Did you hit your head one day and now have two conflicting concepts rattling around in your brain, fighting for dominance? Is there an evil clone of you who sometimes shows up to work with the opposite concept to yours in mind, and the rest of the team doesn’t know yet?
image
Originally posted by bricesander
So I’m gonna go out on a limb here and guess that this dichotomy was intentional from day fucking one, was meant to be some kind of dramatic marketing tool, Eisendrath’s infamous statements that so infuriated us were a gross interpretation of a canon concept, and perhaps the cast were not actually informed properly. I’m not sure how else to interpret this mess at this point.
Quite frankly, it would not make sense for a writer to assert what he did if he intended a romantic end-game. It’s shooting himself in the foot. Which means the shippers must have the “incorrect” interpretation, despite the blatant in-canon ship baiting. Despite the entire narrative being framed like a romance, despite the romantic cliches being used over and over again. Tbqh, if Bokencamp’s most recent statements are the correct interpretation, then that would mean that Lizzie is literally a grown 30 something career woman and her heroic journey is about finding the perfect patriarchal figure to parent her and protect her from herself, and fulfilling her lifelong dream of wifehood and motherhood with her abuser Tom Keen. Thanks, Jon Bokencamp. That’s the kind of story women really need.
What burns me up the most about it is that Lizzie was so obviously modeled after SOTL’s Clarice Starling, who’s entire story was about struggling under the misogynistic, patriarchal force of the FBI. Quite an homage you’ve constructed here, Bokencamp.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
8:02 pm December 17, 2015
WSJ Tessa wrote:
I am pretty sure that Liz resembling Carla is a very important clue. The wall of clues of Tom contains more than a few great clues. important connexions Tom found about the task force connexions to one another. JB said too that all task force members had secrets. Red’s master plan will connect many of the dangling ends.
And Liz is probably the one character keeping the most secrets

1:49 pm December 10, 2015
WSJ Tessa wrote:
From the JB interview – great podcast

“People who watch and the more closely they watch… I am really proud of how the room and the staff here have kept the mythology straight and ultimately less far everything add to a really satisfying endgame both within the run of episodes and within the endgame of the series. I am very fortunate to be doing it.”
“It is a sheer joy to be able to do it. We come here and I am here far too late , far too many days of the week, and so many ofher writers and the people who work in NY and the crew. It is a grind, it is very difficult to do so many episodes and we are trying our best and to be able to know that fans are interacting with the show and engaging with it, to know sometimes we hit’s a bullseye and sometimes are are way off , but it’s really it is satisfying because I spent so many times being the unemployed writer who is sitting in the room and writing scripts that either no one will read or that are sitting on a shelf,
and I thought those were great and nobody was able to see them, and I work on this and I am very proud of the way
and it’s a real joy to be able to have people be able to see it and interact with them and enjoy.”

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
3:44 pm January 12, 2016
WSJ Anonymous wrote:
I will see if I can find my “the your ample brain cells.” Nice job!

Funny what you think you know. I didn’t post anything else today.

My theory is..watch the Blacklist and talk about what happened.

Tom has no handler or person to report to.

This has not occurred on the show, nor has been hinted at.

It’s Crazy Theorists gone wild. Again.

File it with

Red is Liz’s mother
Red is Ressler’s father
Red is Tom’s father
Mr. Kaplan is Liz’s mother
Red is over 70
Tom Connolly is alive
On and on……

Ressler just called Tom “Keen” this week. It’s not even important. Could not care less about “shipping tags.”

Anyone over 12 doesn’t care.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Once again, I bathe in the luxurious warmth of Schadenfreude upon reading this. I confess it is my worst sin. Hopefully, I’ll delete this entry after a day or so. Tessa is actually the Last (Wo)Man Standing of the holy trinity of Belle, Nan and Tessa, so Kudos for lasting. She goes out with the Most Toys. For those who care, I heartily do Not Recommend WSJ’s Blacklist blog. If you do not take this gospel as Gospel, you WILL be trolled. On the other hand, Jason Evans’ episode summaries are great.
⇊ ⇊
7:22 am January 9, 2016
WSJ Tessa wrote:
Blue Blazer,
I respect the right of any person watching the show to have the theories they feel right, and compose GIFs and tittle them as they want,and as long as people remain respectful of other fans, the actors, directors, writers and production teams, I am fine with them. When some fans start being disrespectful and attacking the actors, or writers…. then I have a problem. The crew works very hard to give us a quality show for that.
I, however, find that my reading of the characters, so far has corresponded with what JB has said. I never saw anything other than paternal in the Liz & Red’s relationship.
I have found that while some see it in looks (puzzling) some stems for 3 major points early on in the story:
– the G-spot and Deep Throat line in Wujing, when Red is trying to tell Liz that Wujing is real, like the G-spot and Deep Throat. Due to some monumental ignorance of history, some have read Deep Throat as a reference to the Linda Lovelace film, instead of the famous anonymous informant during the Watergate scandal. And as far as referencing the G-spot, Red is not doing in a personal way, but in a general way, as in referring any body part, to a grown woman.
– the tango scene: in their view is a seduction. Tango has been used countless times as a metaphor to negotiations, relationships, etc. To further reference this, Liz has been keeping Tom prisoner, and I suspect Red knows this. I suspect a tango milonga would also have described his relationship with KR.
– the girlfriend/daughter line in The Freelancer. Most people have not realized a fundamental fact about Liz. The things she knows, she suspects and she is hiding from everybody. The reason why people think Liz has mercurial changes about Red, and seems to have a personality problem. Some criticize Megan’s acting. They forget too that Liz and Red have been under surveillance all the time in the Post Office and the restaurant.
Unless one sees IT, that scene might seem to some as a flirting because he is suggesting to her she can pass as his girlfriend and no man would say that to his daughter. They do not see that the point of saying that is so that when she denies it, he can just say it outloud: You can be my daughter, and they miss or misinterpret the glances Liz gives him. Basically they have the point of view as the FBI, instead or realizing that Liz and Red know they are being listened to, and that both have a penchant for dangerous situations. But Liz has a lot to lose if the FBI would know or think she is related to Red.
There is another time Red says it outlaud: That’s my girl, when Liz solves the Zanetakos’s case by surmising the port of Houston is the target.
I thin it is all related to anchoring or localism, a cognitive bias that describes the common human tendency to rely too heavily on the first piece of information offered (the “anchor”) when making decisions.
And finally, in Tom Connolly, even though with a good quality audio it is very plain the woman in the argument Liz recalls says: “Raymond…Let go”, and Liz is talking about shooting that man, her father, that the woman calls Raymond, because of the strange speech construction based on the doctrine of mental reservation, most people do not realize Liz is truly saying she recalled everything. I think until there is a scene of a conversation during the first half of season 3 when Red tell Liz she must never call him father or dad, people are not going to accept it. But I think that will not happen for a few seasons, because JB thinks that once the audience knows this the interest is over. I think that is not the case. There are so many other questions, the mother, the fire, the biological father, the cabal, the framing, the uber so far unseen enemy.
Then there is the acting. To me James Spader is a very precise actor, and I have never seen him play anything but a paternal interest (by paternal I mean a parental like relationship, irrelevant of biological paternity) in Liz.
But of course, this being The Blacklist, everything is possible, and I might be wrong.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
LizzieB says: Excellent list of Unanswered Questions
⇊ ⇊
4:53 pm January 6, 2016
WSJ Tessawrote:
Status Quo of the dangling threads in anticipation of tomorrow’s episode:
– Jennifer. Is she Red’s daughter? Where is she? What is her name?
– Ballerina Girl – who is/was she?
– Bubble Girl (home movie, memory in the Tacoma Park house & photo in the cabin), who is/was she?
– Peter Kotsiopulus relationship to Katarina Rostova
– Katarina Rostova real identity & allegiance
– real identity of Sam Milhoan and his relationship to Red or Katarina
– real identity of Carla Reddignton/ Naomi Hyland
– more on Alan & Margaret Fitch. He is referred to as a father. To someone we know?
– Cooper background and relationship to Red – Kuwait incident
– Kate Kaplan background story
– Gina Zanetakos escape. Who did she really worked for when she killed Victor Fokin, if she really did kill him.
– The Major , Bill McCready wanting Jacob dead
– Who does Agent Martin really works for. He seems to have contact with Peter and he seemed to obey orders from Fitch.
– The Milton Bobbitt client list (someone who got killed by a Milton Bobbitt recruit.)
– the Kungur 6 spies. (not the nuclear warheads) Do they really exist? A very promising thread.
– the murder of Victor Fokin . I bet this will come to play a big role, a KGB would-be defector
– Liz’s scar in connection the symbols on the two go-boxes, envelope and blood by fake death picture
– why the file on Reddington has a sticky note that reads ‘Ordered June 27″ Red surrendered on September. Liz was in Quantico then. Who had advanced notice of Red’s surrendering plan?
– Did Liz really graduated 2 weeks earlier so that she would start on the day Red surrendered or was indeed a clerical error , as cooper said later. (I sincerely doubt the coincidence)
-Why the file on Reddington have items that are way too old to relate to Red? (The Cheri Jo Bates murder, suspected to be a Zodiac killer from 1966 and the Kameny Papers, Mattachino Society of Washington DC circa 1961-1964). Could this be Red’s father?
– Real events of the night of the fire
– Events in the Christmas tree lot memory. Liz playing hide and seek with someone, a man appears and call Liz she runs over to him.
– what happened in the blue Tacoma Park house. Did Red really blew it up to forget what happened or to eliminate something in there? or to avoid Liz ever going in there and retrieving her memory?
– Red’s relationship to the FBI (from the comic and from first line and imagery of Ranko Zamani)
– Samar real end game
– why did the cabin brought so many bad feelings for Carla?
– who put the fulcrum in the bunny?
– who stole the fulcrum and from whom?
– why Gina Zanetakos had a picture of Tom (Note it is Tom, not Jacob, Jacob has no glasses). who wanted to kill Tom? Or follow Tom? Or is it unrelated to the Tom character. Was she hired to murder Liz or Tom, and is this why Tom was lured to Boston? Is she really related to Tom, or involved with him? Is she the mysterious Niki Craig mentioned before defenestrating himself?
– how did Red learned of Leonard Caul’s name?
– the Flora Segunda book in the cabin (published 2007) – relation to Jennifer leaving her home in 2007?
– Is the staging of the March 22 Swan Lake the only connection between Christina at the Ballet Company and Red? What is the story there?
– where the fulcrum components distributed among different people in the beginning? who where the people that made the fulcrum. we know Pepper had the key, the interface was in Kenyon’s compound, and Caul had written the cypher for Fitch. But who had the bubble module?
– the murder of Sarah Hastings that Tom was investigating in Germany. And the relationship of Die Entrechteten with cabal or with Bonn.
– Was the Kingmaker a relation of Sebastian Royce, the gambler. His last name seems to have been Royce as well.
– Why did the Kingmaker try to kill Liz. He could have instead escaped but she chose to try to strangle her.
– the bloody Christmas house story. Real or not. all of it or part?
– what is going on now with Isabella, Dembe’s daughter and her daughter Ella? Hope Red and Dembe are keeping them safe.
– HUDSON (may I suggest he was a foster dog to TPTB?)
– the page Red took from the Djinn diary. Red said two cabal members were clients
– the care package that was taken by the FBI
– plan for Karakurt
– plan for Hal bin Hasaan
– the “all kinds of wrong” plan with Marvin Gerard
the use of the director’s stash

⬆ go to top

 
 

༺ ✿⊰ ♤ ⊱✿༻

 
 
Note: Never got a chance to experience the WSJ blog in it’s heyday? Well, here’s your chance! Just a couple of day’s worth – all taken offline now … LB90 3/17/2016

Go to end

8:34 am February 12, 2016
Tessa wrote:
I do not think its general viewership. it is the buzz created by actual canon revelations. people are so tired (not me) that they are just giving up.

8:27 am February 12, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Tessa 816

The ratings are the same as they have been for awhile. So seems unlikely. They will probably not grow dramatically anymore, but the idea they are losing viewers is mythical.

8:16 am February 12, 2016
Tessa wrote:
this looks like it might a week I do not comment here.

I do wonder if the show runners delayed giving answers to the point where they have lost viewership.

8:01 am February 12, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Anon 7:35

You cannot take the show as moments and decide the one moment defines the show and fits your fantasy. I guess your fantasy of screwing your dad or psuedo-dad. Do they have psychiatrists where you live?

You have to look at the entire show. It’s not happening. Last week, we found out who Red’s true love is. This week, we found out he’s a different father-type than the bio-dad.

That’s where most of you, including those stuck on the bio-father-only idea, make your mistakes. You look at moments instead of the entire show.

7:57 am February 12, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Nan

“@ some of us work in the real world. We don’t have time to lurk around a blog all day. I’m quite stable thanks.”

Except when I’m not.

7:53 am February 12, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Tessa

Yes, and you also brought us such gems as Reven Wright being in the Cabal, Asher Sutton’s girlfriend Gwen being aligned with the Russians, and this show being cinematic grandeur and a work of art.
How did all those outstanding examples work out?

7:52 am February 12, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Lizzington intruder: “I should have raised you myself” are the words of a lover? only if you are into raise a child from 4 years old into a lover at 30. even creepier.

7:47 am February 12, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Anon 739

Nan is currently the screwy throne holder. Unseatable if you read her recent rantings.

7:45 am February 12, 2016
Stormy wrote:
No, “Anon” 735, it;s not illegal. But it is gross and neither character displays any interest in this. He is like her father, and Woody Allen is considered a creep by most. It’s not the subject of an NBC primetime show. It would not be daring. It would be gutless.

You are the one applying personal preference to the scenes. The show creators themselves are the ones who have used “father-daughter” relationship exclusively. Listen to them.

There are plenty of fetish-oriented places on Twitter and Tumlbr to discuss your disturbed obsession. No need to bring it here.

7:44 am February 12, 2016
Tessa wrote:
anon @7:39 but I preface them as I believe. I am not insisting on my theories being THE TRUTH

7:39 am February 12, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Tessa

“I believe that Red was among the architects of the cabal. Which probably started as the intelligence officers around the world trying to keep a balance as the cold war was ending. sort of UN of intelligence officers, and was taken over by other interests.”

Your speculations and assumptions are even screwier than Nan’s.

7:35 am February 12, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
There is no reason a man who is not the father of a child cannot have a romantic relationship with her when she is a grown woman in her 30s. Daddygaters lose. Lizzingtons should be allowed to ship to their hearts content unashamed and unassailed. And leave the “he’s like her father” out of it. It’s not illegal. The rest is personal preference or misapplied religiosity.

The big question however is will their banishment from this this blog finally end, now that you all have been proven wrong? Who decides? How about taking a vote?

7:33 am February 12, 2016
Tessa wrote:
@ anon 7:21. I am misquoting until the transcript comes up and I can check it against the episode

7:25 am February 12, 2016
Stormy wrote:
No. I don’t cling to an idea just because I like it though. No one’s mother walks into an ocean over an accidental.wounding.

I used to be sure a year ago.Red was her father. I think I was wrong before now and he is closely connected in some other way. No romantic, as if that needs to be said, but it always does around this place.

7:21 am February 12, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Tessa, youre.misquoting. He told.Liz life he didn’t have his child with him. That could be dead or alive.

7:19 am February 12, 2016
Tessa wrote:
I have a question for you stormy. Has Red ever said this words:

“you killed your father that night”

7:17 am February 12, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Great episode! All of Red’s scenes were amazing and Brimley and Glen both. Concrete info. The story moved. More info about Lizs mom. The fact that Liz can’t make a waffle without a major incident was sad in the fact it made her look more idiotic.

I didn’t get where Tom is coming from. I was sure he was playing Gina.

7:08 am February 12, 2016
Stormy wrote:
I should have raised you myself.

Not something a man says to his girlfriend. True.

Also not something a father says to his daughter after the real father already made the decision to raise her himself, by taking her from her mother.

He’s not her lover. Never will be. Not her father, either.

Those both died in 1 night. I’m sure I’ll be attacked but those are the facts.

6:48 am February 12, 2016
Mary wrote:
What is the significance of the file labeled Poctoba – Rostova.”?

6:47 am February 12, 2016
A.B. wrote:
Tessa, please post again your thoughts when this episode recap is up, as I would like to discuss it.

I’m sorry but I’m still LMAO. You have no idea how much. OUT LOUD!!!

6:30 am February 12, 2016
Tessa wrote:
Oh and he tells Liz that he does not want her to look at giving up her child with regret, he knows what is to have a life without his child in it. And the child he told the KGB//teacher is not dead or gone where he does not know where she is, therefore if Jennifer is his child, he knows where she is, and he has not have a dead child.

6:27 am February 12, 2016
Tessa wrote:
@CEs2 thanks.

It was a very good one. I loved the blacklister of the week, loved the scene with Glen and the woman who mistakes him for the spin class mate.

we also got a huge nugget: he tells the former KGB spy that has the glasnost files he wants on Katarina, who had lost a child, that he could not have endured what she did. so we know Red has not lost a daughter at all.

6:23 am February 12, 2016
Tessa wrote:
My take:
Evidence is he acts like a father: scolds her like a father, watches after her like a father, takes her temper tantrums as a father, is ready to give up his life and work for her life. talks like a father and warns off the husband he does not like like a father. He looks at her with love.

We now know some of what happened to Katarina: when the cold war was ending, which was hard on Liz’ parents, which were both in foreign intelligence, her father took Liz and brought her to America. Katarina followed. She wanted them to be a family. But the little obstacle on their way was the cabal and the fulcrum the father had, as he mentions the only thing keeping him alive. They argue and Liz shoots her father. the people searching for the fulcrum somehow set the fire, or Katarina does to cover their tracks. She thinks he is dead, leaves with Liz, eventually leaving her with Sam, and making believe she drowned. intent now on revenge.
but Red is not dead and he is taken prisoner to several prisons.: 2 in the soviet Union, 7 months in ohontong and a dark deep hole. By the time he comes out, she is gone.

I believe that Red was among the architects of the cabal. Which probably started as the intelligence officers around the world trying to keep a balance as the cold war was ending. sort of UN of intelligence officers, and was taken over by other interests. that is why he keeps saying men as a species is untrustworthy and polite everything.

5:00 am February 12, 2016
A.B. wrote:
Looks like I was wrong and missed a somehow “good” one. Only interested in the mythology. Lurking on tumblr and reading some quotes and LMAO… Ok I will watch, only because the whole mythology part is beyond lauphable.

2:04 am February 12, 2016
Karina wrote:
well, I’m getting tired of the story line. its not going forward. we are still with the same questions that we had in the first season and intend of getting answers, we get more stories, more questions. one take down after another, more black listers, but the same story. liz character and story is vague, a little boring and I’m trying to focus my attention to red, because truth to be told spader is as amazing actor. i used to pay attention because in the first season because all blacklisters were attached to the storyline, i don’t pay attention any more.

1:22 am February 12, 2016
Tucker wrote:
This episode was better than I expected.

12:58 am February 12, 2016
CES2 wrote:
@Tessa the file has Rostova written in both Russian and western letters

11:54 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
“Looking back, I’m not sure I shouldn’t have raised you myself.”

Yeah, that’s not something you say to a woman you secretly want to bang.

11:08 pm February 11, 2016
Carolina Girl wrote:
Can’t wait to hear your take on this Tessa.

10:48 pm February 11, 2016
Tessa wrote:
DO I still think he is her father? absolutely yes! In fact I now understand much better what happened the night of the fire.

10:37 pm February 11, 2016
Tessa wrote:
I loved the episode. Very provocative reveals. it will need some re-watch. I think I was wrong about Tom,it seems he really was doing it for the money.

What does the file says at the end. does someone speak Russian?

10:29 pm February 11, 2016
Tessa wrote:
Nan, I apologize. I cannot follow your logic. You write as if you are the only one who has the truth.
No need to offend me and others, what you do on a regular basis, without as much as an apology. no matter.

You ignore performances, and that characters lie. not everything they say is true. there are red herrings, clues, and words matter. Your logic is flawed because you are analyzing a performance transcript as a literary work, A transcript is not all the story. The performance is part of the story and you ignore it.

10:27 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Give it up, Tessa.

10:26 pm February 11, 2016
Carolina Girl wrote:
I couldn’t stay away. In all, not a bad episode, although a tad gruesome. Can’t wait to hear what y’all think!!
After Red told Liz about her parents … I am getting the feeling he could be her grandfather. Is he Katerina’s father? Is Katerina the child he is morning. Is the file he was holding with the last name Rustova on him??

10:26 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
The Titanic has Leonardo DiCaprico on it. I’ll get on that.

10:18 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Oh, an episode in which Tom lays in coma while Red verbally abuses him in front of his ex-wife.
This looks exciting as hell.

10:15 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
you must be a stowaway

its daddy gaters not daddy gamers

Hey by the way, I just noticed this on my way out of the boat,
The name of the boat is written on the side and its
Titanic.

10:14 pm February 11, 2016
tessa wrote:
not so fast anon 9:58 words matter

9:58 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Bye Daddy gamers
Bye Lizzingtons

Both get out of the boat.

9:07 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
It’s fine for another Anon to personally malign Democrats. Not fine for a second Anon to say something about a Republican because you don’t agree.

Hypocrites. Typical.

8:42 pm February 11, 2016
Carolina Girl wrote:
Thanks RiRi …Pay no attention to the troll behind the curtain.

8:42 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Carolina Girl, obviously you care. You remarked on it.

He said the pyramids stored grain and he saw a man choose to turn gay in front of him. Again, these are claims from him.

It’s out of line to quote someone?

8:30 pm February 11, 2016
RiRi wrote:
@ Carolina Girl. Agreed. . There’s no reason here to denigrate someone like Ben Carson. It doesn’t offend my politics , but my sense of fair play.

8:25 pm February 11, 2016
Carolina Girl wrote:
Who cares, Anonymous 8:22

8:24 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
And it’s I couldn’t HAVE said it better.

Not I couldn’t OF.

Jesus. No wonder Teddy C is so popular down there.

8:22 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Carolina Girl

That is a direct story from him Google it. And pay attention.

8:21 pm February 11, 2016
It’s Close But wrote:
In the “Which Analysis is Worse” debate, Nan vs. Tessa, Nan is winning all the delegates so far.

8:19 pm February 11, 2016
Carolina Girl wrote:
Anonymous 6:21 …I couldn’t of said it better myself.

Anonymous 7:06 … Really? Dr.Ben Carson is an accomplished and good man. Your comments were totally uncalled for.

8:15 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Hard to believe that a teacher spends so much time composing lengthy posts about a tv show.

8:02 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@A7:51
Yes. That’s why Dem Debates are the biggest threat to The Blacklist ratings. They target the same audience.

8:01 pm February 11, 2016
Nan wrote:
@Anonymous 5:59 – Good analysis of Eggold’s performance. He hinted on a recent interview that he’d love to headline a spin-off series. What a great loss that would be for TBL though.

@Tessa – some of us work in the real world. We don’t have time to lurk around a blog all day. I’m quite stable thanks. My students are exploring some of the ethical challenges presented in The Blacklist, heavy-duty intellectual lifting requiring introspection of ethical principles, moral judgements, and self-reflection to define:

Does the end justify the means?
If we suspend our moral beliefs or practices (means) to achieve a desired objective (end), how does this demonstrate the slippery slope argument?
Which is more important: the means or the ends?
Has the slippery slope argument been debunked by the Nizkor Project?
What is the difference between what is right, what is just, and what is legal?
Who defines “what is right”? for the individual? for the family? for a group? for a culture? for society? for a religion? for a country?
What if my ‘right’ is different from your ‘right’?
Can we both be ‘right’ if our ‘right’ differs?

We’re delving into the ways Red has purposely manipulated and deconstructed Liz’s self-actualized world. It starts in S1E1 and continues to today. It’s only when you can see the wrath he has wrought upon her life that it becomes clear his purpose is not to save Liz, but to hurt her by using her as a tool to exact his revenge.

S1E1: Red to Liz: “I’m a criminal. Criminals are notorious liars. Everything about me is a lie.”

S1E19: Tom to Liz: “My job was never to hurt you. I’m one of the good guys. Reddington, he’s not who you think.”

S2E4: Naomi to Liz: “He wants something from you. It’s a game. It’s a manipulation. He’s made you feel a connection that makes you feel like you matter somehow, and there’s no one on earth who can make a woman feel like the center of his universe more than Raymond Reddington. I’ll tell you this, though. He’s not who you think he is.”

Also, no reason is given or discussion ensues for why Red had murdered the four men whom we see in the opening scene of S3E11, Gregory DeVry – just another of Red’s house-cleaning escapades, I guess.

8:00 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Tom = The Fonz????

That is not quite accurate. Tom is a little cooler than that.

7:53 pm February 11, 2016
Patrick wrote:
Tessa, did you know that Kiefer Sutherland was considered for the role of Red? Did you know that Tessa?

7:51 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
The Blacklist is, so far, pro-gay, pro-transgender, pro-environment, anti big business and contains lines about most guns at home being used to harm owners more than criminals. To start.

The runners have much more in common with Dems than a bunch of failed, dropped out candidates, a lesser brother of a dunce, paranoid racist homophobes, and a fake success who swindled his way to real estate money.

7:06 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous 6:21

Dr. Ben Carson operate on you? Must have been after he saw the unicorn walking through the hospital lunch line.

He said it, not I.

7:00 pm February 11, 2016
Tessa wrote:
not that I am saying JS is a twisted mad man, but Red is, and his portrayal of Red is delightful

6:38 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Anon 5:59
“The show runners didn’t appreciate what they had early on, but they do now.”

You know, I like Eggold and I love Tom, but the writing for his character was pretty bad for the last two seasons. I believe they always planned to make him an antihero, but rushed his character arc and it wasn’t good for him and for the overall story.

6:21 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
“Tonight is the Democratic debate. Everyone should watch. Most of these people are actually qualified.”

“Most of these people are actually qualified “ – Absolutely, a very accomplished (and diverse) group indeed. One the great business success stories in modern American history, the leading pediatric neurosurgeon in the world, the architect of the last balanced budget, governors with a track record of success . . . what? you mean the DEMOCRATIC debate??? Two old white politicians screaming at each other? One a Democratic Socialist who defines success by what he opposes in lieu of accomplishment and the other the architect of the present foreign policy mess whose greatest accomplishments to date has been staying out prison and make an ungodly fortune from “public service” and cattle futures.

6:15 pm February 11, 2016
Tessa wrote:
@anon 5:47 pm that is what I am saying. for twisted mad men, instead of the political debates, I prefer to watch James Spader.

6:12 pm February 11, 2016
Tessa wrote:
@Nan, you are taking one thing: realizing that Red always have a second or third objective in anything he does (I think we all knew this always), and extrapolating a tale of revenge. Red, who did not even harm Berlin’s daughter. Red has never harmed an innocent. The closest he did was the paramedic, but then one can argued she had already accepted to do something unethical and illegal. she was no longer an innocent. But the tale is getting to be quite the telenovela, complete with a man siring children as rabbits, abandoning them, Katarina being a weak and ashamed woman who could not protect her child, and Red and Sam kidnapping Liz and lovingly bringing her up for 26 years, just to slowly destroyed her life as a revenge to exactly who? Her father who obviously does not care? And/Or is dead? Katarina who disappeared, apparently not caring much what happened to Liz? All for one supposedly dead beloved ballerina daughter, that has never conclusively been proved is dead or his daughter? You tend to accuse me rather often of bending clues, and ignoring clues… But you are seeing clues that do not exist, making giant logic leaps and following warped logic paths. You ignore the performances altogether. You sometimes remind me of some of my most twisted logic exams in college. Hard to even figure out the truth and logical inferences from the composition fallacies, confusion of correlation and causation and non sequiturs. I used to be at least able to follow your reasonings, but I must admit I cannot any longer. To be honest, I have been concerned about you. About the pressure you are under living where you are. Your posts used to be logical, sometimes provocative. Just take care of yourself, stress is an insidious monster.

I already said something of the sort about the case of the week on 7:44 pm February 10, 2016. Not just The Cyprus Agency, but Tom Keen as well, as an example of what happens to kids in the system. particularly kids with high intelligence and certain characteristics…. just as Liz and Tom baby would likely be.

I have realized that in each one of the cases (except a few brought on by the task Force) Red has got something for himself. In many cases is not really about the named blacklister. But this does not make his intentions sinister: it makes him a good player. He is constantly giving and getting. Constantly adjusting his plans to the occasion. Findings things and information of value and storing them.

6:12 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous 6:06

Just have a good laugh. That’s what most of the writers are doing. Most are sorry that they ever heard the name Lizzington.

6:06 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Anon 5:05 wrote: “You are all jealous of lizzington fans..”

Seriously? Lizzington people make me want to hurl, I’m not jealous of delusional old women living in an alternate universe.

5:59 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Like every show that has a decent run, the cream eventually rises to the top. In the classic series “Happy Days,” the Fonz was a minor character who became the epicenter of the show because Henry Winkler’s talent was allowed to bloom. In “Breaking Bad” the Saul Goodman bit part became a separate series due to the talent of Bob Odenkirk. In “The Practice” none other than James Spader himself stole the show and became the focus in “Boston Legal.” Spader is clearly the top of the heap among TBL cast, but there is no doubt that Ryan Eggold is the breakthrough cast member. The show runners didn’t appreciate what they had early on, but they do now. This is Eggold’s break through role

5:47 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Tessa – if you object to watching twisted obsessed mad men, why would you watch the Democratic debate? Say what you want about Red, he does tell the truth sometime and when he discloses NOFORN correspondence it is intentional, not through gross negligence.

5:30 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
I can think of many small but very organized groups and funny… equally crazy. Most of them ended up in a blaze of gunfire and smoke. or in vials of poison…communally taken.

5:26 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
And the rest of this comment section and anyone with a brain laughs at them.

5:11 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Yes, Lizzingtons are very active on social media. But, the producers laugh at them.

5:05 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
You are all jealous of lizzington fans because they are so active on social media and producers recognize them.

5:03 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Nan, your conclusions are downright wacky. I can only imagine you’re here to poke fun at theories at this point and others don’t catch on.

4:56 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Anon 421

Weirdo

4:51 pm February 11, 2016
Nan wrote:
@Belle – I’m sorry that you think my posts are “outlandish”. I will add IMHO in future when referring to Liz’s father having died. Of course, I have not closed my mind to the possibility that I originally broached a year ago that Red may have played a part in helping Katarina raise Masha until she was taken by the man who purported to be her father. That would explain him bond to her. That was also one of the reasons I tracked the timeline from the season 3 fall episodes to show that Liz’s birthday is actually in early September, not mid-March as we assumed from the progression of episodes during season 2. This would allow the growth chart on the wall in the Tacoma Park house to be for Masha – a child who had attained the age of 3 but was under 3 1/2 by the time she disappeared on Christmas Eve 1987. I would also add that my comments are far from outlandish. They are a result of analyzing all the clues given to find the connections. My turning point in realizing that Red’s motives were sinister was when I realized at the end of the Gregory DeVry episode that Red had orchestrated the whole scenario. After reviewing most Blacklisters Red has given to Liz, I can now see that in each case Red had orchestrated and manipulated the events to get something for himself IMHO.

@Mary – The DEA agent appears to be shot in the front of his throat as he grabs his neck with his left hand. If he had been shot on the right side of the neck from the direction of the hall, he would have grabbed his neck with his right hand. As it is, he wraps his fingers around his neck appearing to compress the front of his throat. This would suggest that he was shot from the front as he faced Liz and Red. If the writers or director now say that the bullet was supposed to be a stray from the hall, so be it, but the DEA agent’s actions after being shot certainly suggest he was shot in the throat, not in the side of his neck IMHO.

@Hideous Fish – Well said! I’m with you. Too bad others can’t see Liz in that light.

@Kelly – Liz seems to affect each of the people in her life in a positive way. Remember how she talked Aram down so he didn’t get shot trying to protect her in The Director 2? Liz obviously had a positive effect on Sam. She is Samar’s closest confidante. Cooper even confides in her. Is Liz meant to be one of the “good guys”? I do believe this story is a study in psychological persuasion, ethical considerations and moral relativism. Will Liz’s (formerly) upbeat and forgiving personality rub off on Red to bring him into the light? That’s the story we get to watch unfold each week.

@Tessa @Kelly – Tonight’s episode mirrors S1E13, Cyprus Adoption Agency; and S2E12, Kenyon Family. Each episode is mirrored in each season to portray the same message. It’s a matter of playing “connect the connections.” These episodes tell the story of children who were abandoned by the father who created them while loved by their mothers who were not able to protect them. Liz was “abandoned by a father who was a career criminal, a mother who died of weakness and shame”. IMHO, these episodes are meant to mirror the details of that statement, made to Liz by Red and Sam. I take from this that Liz’s biological father had sired many children, whom he abandoned without a second thought. Thus Katarina was not married to Liz’s father. I highly doubt that he was the man who wore the red signet ring and had taken Masha from Katarina after he wasn’t allowed to see her, had changed her name to Elizabeth, and had hidden her in the closet. That is why I call this man the purported father. He does not fit the description or actions of Masha/Liz’s biological father.

@Red Pyewacket – Great catch on the oryx – specifically the Scimitar Oryx. I missed that connection.

4:21 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
I grew to respect lizzington shippers. They are small but well organized group. Anti-lizzington people do nothing but fight with each other.

4:05 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
It’s so obvious the “don’t watch tonight” posts are all the same poster. How sad.

3:57 pm February 11, 2016
Kelly wrote:
@Red Pyewacket, 10 Feb……Thank you re Scimitar.

3:40 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Yes, 325.

Everything in the entire holy universe has to do with Lizzington weirdos. That’s all it’s about. Good work.

Idiot.

3:35 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Not very successfully.

3:25 pm February 11, 2016
Don’t Fall For It wrote:
Funny thing..Lizzingtons are trying to promote fans not watching TBL. They hope people not watching will make the ratings go down, and then they’ll blame the low ratings on fans not liking Tom/Liz/Baby.

3:06 pm February 11, 2016
I’m Building A Big Wall wrote:
Tonight is the Democratic debate. Everyone should watch. Most of these people are actually qualified.

I am passing on The Blacklist, also. I have no need for another kidnapped child story, or an adoption saga. Snore.

3:06 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:

“Issue #7 of #theblacklist comic book out next Wednesday, Feb 17th. Someone makes a surprise appearance in it… ”

Guess we all know who it will be?

2:26 pm February 11, 2016
Tessa wrote:
@It’s Blacklist Thursday wrote:As muxch as I love this show, I think I’ll pass and watch the debate instead.
Red has turned into a twisted obsessed mad man. Liz is still a question mark with a blank expression.

honestly It’s Blacklist Thursday, to watch twisted obsessed mad men, and characters with blank expressions, I still go for watching James Spader instead of a bunch of Presidential (un) hopeless

2:01 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Tom is a cool character. Not enough for me to invest the hour.

Who even cares who Kateraina is now? What’s it been, like a year almost since her name came up? Is test smother one I have to wait until the show is over for? She should have shown up by now. Stupid.

1:35 pm February 11, 2016
Times Square wrote:
@It’s Blacklist Thursday

Do what many of us are doing: Watch to see what Tom Keen is up to. NBC is promoting the Tom character like mad. I think it’s because of Feb.Sweeps–ratings–.

1:04 pm February 11, 2016
It’s Blacklist Thursday wrote:
As muxch as I love this show, I think I’ll pass and watch the debate instead.

Red has turned into a twisted obsessed mad man. Liz is still a question mark with a blank expression. Time to go back to the basics guys. Back to what made the show such a hit in the first season.

This used to be a show to look forward to. Now it’s a wth show.

12:17 pm February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
It’s impossible anymore to tell what on this show is bad writing, what is a mistake, or what is intentional.

9:20 am February 11, 2016
Tessa wrote:
I would make a huge difference. Because it would mean either he was married to Katarina, or that Liz grew up with him and Carla.And Jennifer.

9:17 am February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Anon 8:52

Let’s just say that she was. So what? And if she isn’t, then it doesn’t matter anyway.
Either way it’s not going to make much difference, now is it?

8:52 am February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
why can’t bubble girl be Jennifer? he said he raised his family in that house and we know Jennifer was his daughter (biological or otherwise).

8:34 am February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@my life is lonely….8:06

Highly unlikely that your self professed childhood issue will be resolved by watching Red & Liz kiss.
Seek professional help for such inner conflicts.

8:34 am February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Perhaps you should go clean your overflowing litter boxes ??

8:06 am February 11, 2016
my life is lonely and I have too many cats wrote:
i do not care if Reddington was there when she was born. Or he changed her diapers. I have an unresolved childhood issue and I want to see Reddington and Lizzie kiss. And do not call me Lizzington.

6:57 am February 11, 2016
Rusty Shackleford wrote:
I stopped taking the shipping phenomenon seriously when I learned that there were people shipping the brothers on Supernatural. And yes, by brothers, I mean actual biological siblings.

It’s kind of a shame that people think two adults can’t care for one another without wanting to get in each other’s pants.

6:15 am February 11, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Lizzingtons are trying to rig a poll again https://goo.gl/hpVrzQ
Then I bet they are going to tweet it to the showrunner and claim they are the biggest ship in fandom.
The poll in question http://cartermatt.com/194809/tv-romances-liz-red-dean-castiel-swan-queen-dream-couples/

6:00 am February 11, 2016
Mary wrote:
Oh no is there a spring break too? When?

10:33 pm February 10, 2016
Red Pyewacket wrote:
Kelly –

A couple of days ago you asked if the glass figurine Red gave Josephine at the end of the episode had any particular meaning. It’s meant to be taken as an oryx — also known as a SCIMITAR. The writers are directing you back to S2 E7 (The Scimitar). They’ve been doing this since Season 3 began. Every episode of Season 3 has contained references to Season 1 and 2.

10:13 pm February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Curious1

You are not able to lecture us on the difference between a real person and a TV character. You have already posted Ryan Eggold was a Nazi.

10:01 pm February 10, 2016
Tessa wrote:
a few threads that have been picked up (note some are my interpretation)
– the painting Storm at the sea of Galilee . it was stolen in 1990 from Boston. not explained in its entirety, but he found who stole it and brokered the sale
– Who Gina works for and did she have a relationship with Tom: She works for the Major and she was Tom’s lover. I suspect she will get us to The Major
– Bubble girl might be Liz for me. The hair was my clue. there was no reason to make her hair be wavy than to show how she is bubble girl, she just straighten her hair. Possibly dyed it in her childhood until it became darker.
– if Liz is bubble girl the we know Red was cutting off al images of Katarina. Then Liz is connected to the cabin and the apartment.
– She might be ballerina girl, if we are to go for the ballerina comment from the Director. it might take some explaining, and I am aware most will not agree with me

9:56 pm February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Curious, you are really funny. Or messed up.

9:23 pm February 10, 2016
Curious1 wrote:
@anonymous I have never seen a M. Night Shymalan movie? I have no clue what you are talking about. Yes Spader makes everyone who is in a scene with him look better. This meands he is carrying the show.

@Redhot I have always said the character of Liz keen was not written well. The CHARACTER is not a likeable person. The Liz Keen character is not a strong woman. Her decision making is horrendous. Now she is having a baby out of wedlock with Tom.
Megan Boone is NOT Liz Keen. Her acting skills are just as good as any on TV.

9:14 pm February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Anon 847

Are you Curious1’s interpreter?

9:04 pm February 10, 2016
CES2 wrote:
sorry 9:02 pm post was mine.

9:02 pm February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@J 8:09 pm February 9,
There is an interview I find interesting, because I see a great discrepancy between what she says she wants people to see and how a lot of fans feel about Liz.
Have trouble posting this. Do the search on “Well I hope that she gives people sort of an aspirational feeling” and read the paragraph starting with
“What is the biggest thing you think or hope audience and fans can take away from Liz?
Well I hope that she gives people sort of an aspirational feeling. I want her to be someone they can relate to (..)
And you hope that you spend that hour (of running time) making them feel that their struggles are not the only struggles out there and here’s a character that I can watch that I relate to that I understand..

Btw she mentioned in several interviews that she knew the truth about R_L relationship.

8:54 pm February 10, 2016
RedHot wrote:
Anonymous….agreed!

8:48 pm February 10, 2016
Tessa wrote:
The fulcrum pieces: all we know is that different people had each a piece. which makes sense otherwise why have different pieces?

Jennifer and Carla. That is not coming up for a while. The way they introduce the arcs, it will be a while for her t be dealt with.
Alan Fitch was introduced in Anslo Garrick (1.08) and killed in 2.08) 30 episodes later and he did not appear in all of them.
we finished The director, which was first seen in Luther Braxton (2.09), and stayed for 22 episodes until the Director Part 2. 2.10 and also appeared intermittently
Laurel Hitchins was introduced in Arioch Cain 3.0 5, so expect her to be here at least until the end of this season or early next season. Expect her to be shown in a few of them.
We have started talking about Liz’s mother in Leonard Caul (2.19) so I would not expect her to show up this season. her presence will be felt, though operatives, etc.

8:47 pm February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
RedHot Better does not mean good, it mean better than it would have been without him

8:44 pm February 10, 2016
RedHot wrote:
Sorry for the double post!!!

8:43 pm February 10, 2016
RedHot wrote:
@Curious1
I agree with Anonymous….
Feb. 7 around 4:28 pm…..you said Soader is carring the show….he makes everyone in a scene with him look better. That would include??? You guessed it……boring….clueless Lizzie!

8:39 pm February 10, 2016
RedHot wrote:
@Curious1
I agree with Anonymous…
Yep…Feb. 7 …..around 4:28 pm…..Curious1……”James Spader is carrying the show….makes everyone in a scene with him look better”…. That would include?? You guessed it…….boring…clueless Lizzie!

8:36 pm February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
“Not every moment can continue every other.”

Huh?

8:19 pm February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Tessa

I don’t find that particularly jarring either. Belle, it is a long-term story. That is very typical for any show to have long-term threads weave in and out. There’s nothing wrong with it. The show goes moment to moment. Not every moment can continue every other.

8:15 pm February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Curious1

Aren’t you one of the big yellers of how bad she is?

She can act….boring. Or confused. She looks like she just walked out of an M. Night Shymalan movie most of the time, or like someone farted near her

8:13 pm February 10, 2016
Carolina Girl wrote:
Not sure I feel like watching this one either. Just another week of the creep factor with no answers. Before we know it, spring break then summer break and we wait and we wait and guess what …no answers. And then …well, NO ANSWERS again, no answers, no back stories, no connective tissue and ultimately. Hmmmmm? And you know what …NO EMMYS. What is really amazing is how this blog continues to have something to talk about. I think it is better reading what everyone thinks then the actual show …lol

8:12 pm February 10, 2016
Tessa wrote:
boy, bad autocorrect day:eliminating the competition; open adoption would lead directly from her to the baby

8:09 pm February 10, 2016
Tessa wrote:
@Mary @ kelly, I do not find jarring that they left dangling ends for a few episodes. What Red achieved with the Director’s removal and the seat at the table is a temporary detente to gather his army, his money, supplies, and allies. You cannot go from a battle into another battle. So he takes the time to tie a few odd ends.

We tend to see Red as omniscient, omnipotent. But he said to Liz he is frequently exhausted. the life he took takes energy, cunning and the patience to do things in the best moment possible. He had spent years collecting the blacklisters, assessing the relationship, finding the weakness in his opponents. He is a big proponents of letting things play out (like Jolene).

Gregory Devry was about restoring his reputation, essential for his plan. The Vehm was about filling the coffers for the next round, eliminating the one who was eliminating the completion in the money laundering. (the Cardinal). Alistair Pitt was an opportunity that arose to settle an old score and kill the man responsible for Josephine’s attack. Now he has an immediate problem: Liz’s baby, and her nonsense about adopting the baby to keep her/him safe, which makes no sense whatsoever, as a open adoption would eat directly from her to the baby and a closed one would not be difficult to locate.

7:46 pm February 10, 2016
RedHot wrote:
I have resolved back at the beginning of season 2 that we are not the writers …. and NOTHING may go the way of those posting here. Enough said! But that doesn’t negate the fact that MB is not the best actress on the show….. or that her character is clueless. Enough said!

7:44 pm February 10, 2016
Tessa wrote:
AlyB1223, I do not know the coming episode would be only about the blacklister. When Liz and Tom were thinking to adopt he brought the case of the Cyprus Agency to highlight the dubious origins of adoption agencies babies. The origin of that story is what headed to a troubled boy adopted to a couple who were not really equipped for a child. In Season 2 we had the story of Jacob Phelps Aka Tom Keen, a troubled child who fell into the social services system, possibly from a bad home or from being orphan, or a bad situation to his parent(s) and ended in bad foster homes, until finally he was picked up by the major who exploited his bad tendencies. Abuse of a minor. Liz however has never heard from Jacob’s experiences and neither have we. So I suspect the episode will highlight what happened to children when they are troubled, have some violent tendencies or are unwanted and they do not have parents to care for them.

7:34 pm February 10, 2016
AlyB1223 wrote:
@A.B. Tomorrow night’s episode is written by Taylor Martin, who has one episode of Bones as her only writing credit so far. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm5982142/ I’m keeping my expectations low with the hope of being pleasantly surprised. But I’m afraid the episode will be all about the creepy Blacklister and Leslie Jones and not much about anything else.

6:57 pm February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Here we go again. Curious1 is posting about posters, not about the show. smdh

6:46 pm February 10, 2016
Mary wrote:
I like Megan Boone and enjoy her acting on the show.

6:38 pm February 10, 2016
Curious1 wrote:
Oh here we go again. Whenever the show doesn’t go their way the “Megan Boone cannot act” crowd comes out in full force.

6:15 pm February 10, 2016
Mary wrote:
@ Belle. You made some great points. I agree. “The show runners are playing a dangerous game by making viewers wait for even the simplest resolutions to the stories introduced a few episodes ago (like Solomon and Hitchens).” The show jumps from idea to idea with no closure on anything. So frustrating to watch lately.

6:11 pm February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Anyone see today’s Washington Post? A three year old picked up a gun and accidentally shot and killed his sister.

This is not meant to be a politically charged statement, but for those who feel that those incidents are always intentional or there needs to be intent to harm the victim. That is not always true. Tragic accidents happen, and/or toddlers don’t understand the full meaning of their actions.

5:56 pm February 10, 2016
Kelly wrote:
@Belle…” …..we just may not care anymore”…. Good point. I’m rapidly approaching that point, even with James Spader starring.
Think I saw somewhere one of the upcoming episodes is called”Mr. Solomon.”
@Nan: If you are right about the premise of the show, and I believe you are, do you think there is any hope of Red changing, through character growth, his plan to “use the girl” for revenge?And have you come up with an explaination for the discrepancy in Red’s age?
PS. There is a pic of Campo in Sudan in 2009. Same Tumblr source I mentioned before.

5:54 pm February 10, 2016
A.B. wrote:
Hey Belle, first thank you so much for your recap on last week episode. Second, I have no idea who wrote tomorrow’s night episode. I would have loved to love 3.12 and 3.13 because both were directed by XF alums. Michael Watkins and Bill Roe…I still remember, even now, fans screaming “Bill turn on the damn lights” haha– inside joke. Especially Kim Manners words on the last XF episode about how beautiful the lights were during the cell kissing scene. What light??? All was dark…damn you again Bill…so many fun times….so yeah is killing me that it was them directing two crappy (IMO) episodes. I would have loved nothing more than these two to ROCK!!!!!

I am not watching tomorrow night either, exactly for the reasons you numbered. So much discontinuity, the chraracterization all over the place. For now next episode will again not be worth it. It will be a bit better, but not by much and honestly after reaching bottom, now is time to go up again. It will be better starting next week 3.15 until the end of the season.

Solomon will soon be back, don’t worry.

5:11 pm February 10, 2016
Belle wrote:
A.B., why won’t you watch tomorrow night? Is it another written by the comic writer Nicole Phillips?

I don’t blame you. These last several episodes have been really weird, as if the show has lost it’s direction, or it is trying to take on too many stories (or perhaps tangents would be a better word) without giving due respect to the ones they already established. Red was so worried about the Cabal and now… we haven’t even heard about Lauren Hitchen (I thought Ressler was going to go after her?) And Solomon was such a great character, still sitting in a cell somewhere, forgotten. We’re waiting for Dembe to take care of him. Still waiting.

Red has a plan in the works for Hitchen, I’m sure. But it seems he has taken yet another detour in which his motives seem to have changed. Not only that, he is inexplicably unhinged, after appearing so confident. It would just be so satisfying to see some connection between the episodes. Not one word about Cooper and his wife? Liz says she can’t make the decision to put her baby up for adoption without Tom, but then goes right ahead and does it anyway?

Perhaps these episodes wouldn’t feel so much like filler, and the characters wouldn’t seem so out of character if someone, somewhere, would show some respect to continuity.

The show runners are playing a dangerous game by making viewers wait for even the simplest resolutions to the stories introduced a few episodes ago (like Solomon and Hitchens). If they keep us waiting too long, we may just not care anymore.

4:09 pm February 10, 2016
A.B. wrote:
I would love for Dembe to show up at Liz’s door and ask her to talk. There’s mutual respect there. No need for big revelations, but maybe a simple talk where Dembe could explain to her a few things without giving anything big away (I know that the big revelation is not in the cards for now, so I won’t even ask the writers to go there). Just chat.

Btw, I’m out tomorrow night too. Is not going to worth my while. I will start to watch again next week, from 3.15 on.

3:42 pm February 10, 2016
RedHot wrote:
We didn’t write Red in to take over Liz’s life….the writers did that. Just saying…..he has helped her greatly for her 32 years…….as she has helped Red too as an adult……but be grateful……..
Come to think of it…..her life hasn’t been her own since she was born.

3:41 pm February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
And that, James, is the true mystery of the Blacklist.

3:32 pm February 10, 2016
Hideous Fish wrote:
How dare Liz be rude to the creepy sociopath who ruined her life and thinks he’s entitled to run it.

3:23 pm February 10, 2016
James wrote:
The biggest mystery of the show is why all the men, especially Red and Tom, so uncritically love Liz. She’s spoiled, inconsistent, violent, dumb and generally useless – redeemed now and again by doing something useful. The synopses for Tom the next three episodes are “shocking consequences” when his plans to help Liz goes awry, followed by “life threatening situation,” and then “risky decision.” Why in the world would any rational person go through such lengths for a person who can’t even decide if she cares about him on a day-to-day basis, and that’s all in addition to nearly getting killed multiple times earlier this season while helping to clear Liz. Red for his part moves heaven and earth to help Liz, only to be given the cold shoulder. Even Cooper, Aram, and Ressler, at different times, have been willing to sacrifice his career to help Liz. Nothing about her character has been portrayed thus far as being worthy of such commitment.

3:11 pm February 10, 2016
RedHot wrote:
I said sometime ago….leave Liz in the glass box for a few episodes or….since revealing the pregnancy…..leave her in bed….maturninty issues for a few episodes. This would have worked for her character and provided Red some rest and less 32 year old adult tantrums. But no……the writers let her out of the box and no hospital time. Gheezzzz
I like MB as a person…..I just do not like spoiled….doing what Red tells her not to do…….get out of my apartment……rude talking ……ungrateful for being out of jail….. Liz!

3:07 pm February 10, 2016
Patrick wrote:
Do you think The Blacklist has become too commercial?

2:21 pm February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
No wonder Red is exhausted . On top of everything else he has to put up with tantrums of a 32 year old supposedly adult Liz.

1:48 pm February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
who cares if Lizzy is shoved into a corner?

1:36 pm February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Anon 10:55

I like the idea of less Liz. She is just too annoying. Even the guys that work for Red are interesting. But you forgot Tom.

1:26 pm February 10, 2016
Hoodly wrote:
As some of the thread is talking about good parings/combinations of characters – I would love to see more Tom/Cooper and maybe toss some Aram into that mix.

1:18 pm February 10, 2016
Hoodly wrote:
maybe annoying, now dead DEA agents only purpose was to remind us that the general world doesn’t know that Red is working with the FBI. We see him in that role all the time and the previous episode was based on the Shell Island crew knowing about it – so maybe we viewers needed to be reminded that Red is officially still on the most wanted list?
maybe Tom / Gena was only for the one line ‘the Major is still looking for you’; the kill em all Tom I like doesn’t go playing emotional with a fomer ‘child of major’

1:00 pm February 10, 2016
Legitimately Anonymous wrote:
I have seen Boone act in other shows and it’s the same performance she gives in the Blacklist. Anon 11:17 expressed it well.

11:21 am February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Finally.

11:17 am February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
I think the writers simply just don’t care about the main character they created. They treat her more like a walking plot device meant to motivate the actions of the characters they are interested in, namely Red and Tom.

The fugitive arc was ultimately a bust for her character. She didn’t really grow or change as a character. Hell, she barely contributed to the efforts outside of following Red around, and the whole ended with her sitting in a jail cell doing nothing others solved her problems for her.

I imagine the pregnancy will provide of opportunities for Liz to be shoved into a corner while all the cool, interesting characters get to have fun.

10:55 am February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Congrats, Wally.

After three years we should already know what Liz is playing. We know Tom. We know Red. We even know where Aram is coming from.

But Liz is a cardboard cut out. She doesn’t need to open her mouth. In fact, in a few episodes this season, she did just that. She stood there with very few lines.

No loss if MB takes time off for her pregnancy. It will be great for the rest of the cast. Looking forward to more Red, Cooper, Aram, Samar, Ressler and Dembe. Even Mr. Kaplan is more exciting than Liz.

10:43 am February 10, 2016
I’m Building A Big Wall wrote:
Liz is somewhat uninteresting. That’s on the show runners and writers, not the viewer. Unless their intent is to have her be boring.

Fake TV characters need to be interesting. I should know.

9:29 am February 10, 2016
Tessa wrote:
May I suggest that until the whole arc of what Liz really knows is played, demeaning comments about Megan Boone are withheld. Since we have no idea what is that Liz knows for sure, we have no idea what is she playing.

What I believe to be the truth at this point, she is doing a rather good job.

9:21 am February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Anon 855

Boring sums it up. Boring x 5.

9:05 am February 10, 2016
Tessa wrote:
@anon 8:44. I do not mean they have different identities. I mean it as having agendas of their own.

8:55 am February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
“Here’s the question for you people: describe Liz’s character with five characteristics (or less if you can’t come up with five).”

1. Boring, Bland
2. Annoying
3. Makes Stupid Mistakes
4. Inconsistent
5. Unlikable

8:48 am February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Megan Boone is a terrible actress. Her performance is wooden, stiff and she has a flat affect with dead eyes. It does not matter what dialogue or direction is given to her, she does not have the ability or range to emote effectively. Most of the characterization given on this page describing her could have been written in a book, but has not been visualized on The Blacklist. We are forced to imagine Elizabeth Keen in our imagination because this actress has portrayed her so poorly.

8:44 am February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Tessa

Yes, I would imagine Red chose to go in how he did for a reason, and who was in charge. I agree. I do think saying they are not who they say they are is taking it a little far. Cooper is in a position of authority in the FBI with a wife. Ressler is an agent. I don’t think it’s a case of those being fake ID’s or anything like that. There is no evidence of that and it does not fit the story at all.

8:27 am February 10, 2016
J. wrote:
@BlondeAnon You’re right about DK (i liked him too in Homeland). But I was really talking about MB as the lead actor on the show. I think the treatment of the rest of the cast – supporting actors as well as guest stars – is another problem. They managed to create terrific charismatic characters and they’re underusing them (Mr Kaplan? Glen? I’d love to hear Dembe too).

8:23 am February 10, 2016
Tessa wrote:
I am not saying they are there to do red’s bidding, but their being there is not random

8:12 am February 10, 2016
Tessa wrote:
anon 7:29, I am referring to JB or Dan Knauff interview in which one of them said that all of the post office team have connexions to Red. All are not all they say they are.

7:29 am February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Tessa

Red and Ressler’s link is just that. He was assigned to him. They do not share “no link.” That is their link and that is all it is. The entire talk force is not and never has been in secret alignment with Red. Each person has a separate and interesting motivation for doing this job. It’s part of the theme of the show. It takes away from the complexity tremendously to continue to insist they are there only at Red’s bidding and doesn’t really make sense.

7:24 am February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Why not just let the character of Liz develop? Maybe she will have good reasons for choosing a changed Tom (people can change) or a changed Ressler for that matter. Maybe she will choose someone else me don’t even know yet, We have no idea how her character is going to change to upcoming pressures and how the people around her will change to theirs.

She may continue to act in a rebellious way to her father/father figure or she may end and begin to agree with him. And then change again. Who knows?

7:03 am February 10, 2016
Tessa wrote:
@Blonde Anon, note the construction Red uses is “what you feel ABOUT her “, not the usual construction to indicate romantic feelings which is: what you feel FOR her. If you were to add, however, the “Agent Ressler. How’s our girl?” It could be still in play, I do not think it can be totally discounted.

You know I feel that as things stand now, their personalities are too dissimilar for a romantic relationship. Not without the acrimonious breakup to follow. She is firmly in the greys, he is B/W.

However, the way I am seeing the character written lately (like a perfect jerk one day, ok another day), I think the buildup is to take Ressler’s rage and get him to kill an unarmed suspect, such as Hitchins, especially without Tom or Liz to talk him out of doing it. That will bring the character to a totally different level. He would have to face the same choices Liz did. With that character development direction, he gets more possibilities, half a season with him on the run, and a plan to exonerate him.

I would not discount either, that instead of a romantic relationship with Liz, he and Red are distantly related. All the people in the task force were handpicked. We know of Samar and Liz. Cooper himself chose Aram from the NSA. I suspect Cooper knows a lot more than he lets show, and we know he and Red have shared history.
Just take a look in the pilot after Red says: “I speak only with Elizabeth Keen”. There are moments like those all over the series. fleeting moments, but powerful.
That leaves Ressler. I suspect Red of having someone else on the inside. Ressler, who had been in the FBI for 7-8 years, and assigned to the “catch Reddington” task force, is, as it stands now the only one without a link to Red…..

@Mary, no it was NOT Red. it did come from the reception hallway, it could even have been friendly fire, as the mobsters and the DEA were exchanging bullets with glee.

6:55 am February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Mary

It has been addressed to Nan in several posts previous to yours that she is wrong on that. One can clearly see the bullet was a stray from the other room and Red kind of gets some amusement from that fact.

It is one of about 25 or so errors she makes in her far-out theory post of the day.

None of them ever come to pass or make sense, so why she sticks to them is beyond me.

6:00 am February 10, 2016
Mary wrote:
@ Nan Do we know that Red shot the DEA agent in the throat? It looked like the bullet came from the side

4:54 am February 10, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Blondie, you aren’t hated for you keenlers view, you are hated for your nonsensical posts.

2:19 am February 10, 2016
Lace wrote:
@Tessa. Thank you for the link to the fake smile test. The information at the end was educational.

11:05 pm February 9, 2016
BlondeAnon wrote:
@Tessa

I understood that part (what you outlined,) but it’s the other part “What you feel for her” that I felt was open to many possibilities. But, I got the what you know about her part just wasn’t sure if my Keenleritis was twisting the second part. I so still think there’s a lot of places that last part can go. (I will not allow myself to respond to the Anonymous flaming that will undoubtedly come after they finish their schoolwork since I mentioned my Keenler views, but you don’t ever hold that against me.)

11:02 pm February 9, 2016
Tessa wrote:
All I want is your word as a man of honor.
My word.
You know Elizabeth. You know she’s not a Russian spy or a traitor or a terrorist. You know that’s not who she is.
Doesn’t matter what I know.
If you catch her, it will. It will matter a great deal. What you know about her, what you feel about her could make all the difference. So, my offer. One blacklister in exchange for your word that you will give her the benefit of every doubt.

10:59 pm February 9, 2016
Tessa wrote:
I think Red was asking Ressler to consider what he had learned about Liz, did he feel she was a Russian spy, a terrorist?
Was she not unable to make the tough call to allow Barnes to shoot the cop instead of surrendering her weapon to save the cop life?
Was she not feeling remorseful over then shooting Barnes and think that she may have prevented his child to survive his terminal disease?
Had she not feel remorse over the death of the harbormaster?
Had she not expressed on repeated occasions the importance of saving innocent lives?
Did he feel she was a bad person?
Had she not helped, support and try to counsel him on his addiction with humanity and tenderness?
Had she not prevented him from becoming a cold blooded killer with Jonica?

If Ressler felt Liz was a good person, not a terrorist, that she had been framed, that she had done good work, then when he caught her, he would be included to believe her, to protect her, and not merely to take her and arrest her and be done with it. He knew the cabal would try to kill her.

10:52 pm February 9, 2016
Tessa wrote:
I suggest this great website:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/?sm=IP3TXB16%2BFxZupI1n0jCEScHwUamvmdenuj%2F0kpvxWY%3D
spot the fake smile.

How many each gets right!

10:51 pm February 9, 2016
BlondeAnon wrote:
Ooops, damnit, see it did post twice…ugh…….

10:50 pm February 9, 2016
BlondeAnon wrote:
Hi @ Tessa, I just tried to post a question for you but it hasn’t shown up, so, perhaps I hit clear accidentally. I’ve always wondered what Red was getting at when he was speaking on the phone with Ressler and said “Use what you know about her. What you feel about her and give her every benefit of the doubt” or something like that. Do you have any theories on what that was all about. I see it as having many, many possibilities. And, I see what you mean about Crazy-Tom being not really a full on Sociopath/Psychopath so I’ll just lump it into the generic creepy category.

10:45 pm February 9, 2016
BlondeAnon wrote:
HI @Tessa, Do you have any thoughts on what exactly Red meant when he told Ressler on the phone “Use what you know about her and what you feel about her.” That hasn’t quite been explained yet. Do you have any theory on that. To me it’s loaded with possibilities and, I see what you mean about Tom having tendancies but not easily being classified as one or the other.

10:41 pm February 9, 2016
Tessa wrote:
And most of Ressler behaviors can be traced and explained. As are Li’sz if one bothers to follow what they learn, what they think they know.

10:33 pm February 9, 2016
Tessa wrote:
@BlondeAnon
>BlondeAnon wrote: @Keith, I agree with you about Tom. He is a sociopath.

No. Tom has sociopathic or psychopathic tendencies. a very different thing. We all do to an extent. There are a spectrum. Usually highly successful individuals, most entrepreneurs, most elite military unit personnel, most surgeon, most spies, most undercover cops, most politicians, CEO score rather higher on the scale. Successful investors in the stock market. On the low end of the scale are: accountants.
Psychopaths have personality traits that, in moderation, can offer significant benefits: ruthlessness, charm, focus, mental toughness, fearlessness, mindfulness and action.
In our civilization we tend to reward those scoring high on them.
Having psychopathic tendencies is not being a deranged killer with no emotions. Your elite military unit hero, must have the ability to think clearly under stress, be able to focus and fiction under extreme stress, be rather fearless, etc. Your CEO must be able to clearly think ahead and be ready to exert whatever measures are necessary for the company. I would rather have a surgeon with psychopathic tendencies, than one that will not be able to think clearly in an emergency. All qualities higher on the psychopatic scale. Most of the characters on the blacklist score rather high. Most spies do. Even Ressler does: he can perfectly understand that if a agent surrender his/her weapon, instead of one dead there would be many dead. he is fine with this. A person scoring low on the scale would not be able to make that decision. He could put aside his feelings and hunt Liz, his former partner.

10:07 pm February 9, 2016
BlondeAnon wrote:
@J

In regards to the characters being essentially kept out of the loop and being empy shells, DK is in the same situation to some extent. We don’t know much about Ressler either and he is written all over the place as well, kind and warm with Liz one moment, cool/dismissive the next. Supportive of Red when they’re working a case then he says something OOC like “I beat you!” Soft with Audrey (the tiny, tiny bit we saw…and wasn’t that a shame) then kind of a douche with Samar. He’s an experienced Agent who is on his game in S1 then all of the sudden, Samar is explaining things to him and telling him what to do. He should have more scenes with Red as those are so few but so very good.

DK does a wonderful job and has been accused of being wooden etc. But, when he gets an episode that is well written (Mako Tanida) he shines and you see a gifted actor (ala Homeland and even comedy in Mean Girls) IMO he’s being completely wasted and under-used all to sell Ford Mustangs and promote Crazy-Tom the sociopath Teacher, Ninja, Nazi, Loser Ex of Liz’s.

9:44 pm February 9, 2016
BlondeAnon wrote:
@j My five are in caps and contained in text:

A TALENTED AND GIFTED PROFILER (graduated top in her class) who was BUBBLY AND EXCITED to start her career. She got sidetracked with Reddington and the taskforce but was GROWING AND LEARNING under Cooper (and Resslers) tutelage. The Tom drama DETOURED her to some extent and made her see that things weren’t as rosy as she’d hoped. As she sees more horrible things and experiences both good and hideous outcomes of cases with Reddington she grows and doesn’t regress, but she BEGINS TO SLOWLY HARDEN AND LOSE HER INITIAL ZEAL. If she was left to continue her work, she WOULD HAVE GROWN TO BE AN EXCELLENT AGENT and possible Instructor, but everything ABRUBPTLY CRASHED TO A HALT with Connelly, being on the run, becoming a convicted felon and having a baby with a creep.

9:36 pm February 9, 2016
Tessa wrote:
she has criminal tendencies
she is an accomplished liar
she has a very sweet side
she has a very violent side
she often acts from emotions

9:09 pm February 9, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@J.

I think you nailed it, J. The main problem of Liz’s character is not in Megan Boone or Liz’s relationship with Red or Tom, but in her character being so fickle and inconsistent.
In attempt to make her deep and mysterious I think the writers lost track of what her character is supposed to be.

Here’s the question for you people: describe Liz’s character with five characteristics (or less if you can’t come up with five).

8:27 pm February 9, 2016
Tessa wrote:
@J I believe that Liz is scared of knowing. She knows Red is a monster capable of horrible things. She is afraid she is Red’s daughter.
She herself has done some pretty bad ones. She suspect Katarina was terrible person as well. And she is still in love with Tom who also has done terrible things. She is afraid of what she is. in the words of Dr. Creel:
Perhaps if you did (remember your parents), it would be easier for you to accept who you are..
The more time you spend with your parents, the more of yourself you see in them.
For better or for worse, they’re a glimpse into your future.

I think Liz is terrified of that glimpse and of what her child might be. She is keeping a lot of secrets, things she has found out and is not telling anyone.

8:09 pm February 9, 2016
J. wrote:
@VerbalAbuse I meant to say that I agreed with your observation on MB’s “treatment” (for lack of a better word) on the show. I really think it’s not in their best interests to keep her out of the loop like this. How frustrating that must be (but it would explain her strong words in interviews about the way some high ranking people were treating her on set).
@Hoodly I believe there is a middle ground between knowing everything and knowing next to nothing. We don’t know if she knows, IMO i think she doesn’t. I think it goes with the fact that she is a young actor and mostly an unknown one. Maybe that’s why they chose her? They counted on her inexperience as a lead actor to go away with it.
But really she’s a professional, if they don’t trust their actors with their own characters backgrounds that’s a real shame. I would believe her not knowing anything in the interest of the show if there was actual revelations to come but 3 years in and Liz is not as invested in the search of her background as she should be (her being pregnant will change that I hope).
If MB knows as much as we do, I feel for her, that must be tiring to play a character writers refuse you to know.
IMO it’s a mistake to play this game because we, viewers, we have a hard time getting attached to Liz. She is not a lovable character, she’s just a blank slate where some things are written down on during the ep and wiped off at the end of it. Each week we never know which Liz we will be up against, the lack of regularity in a character’s personality is the worst thing that can happen especially in a lead character.
How can we care for a character that is, in all honesty, a simple empty shell?
I don’t know what’s happening and I know I’m on the negativity’s side recently but WTH are they doing with this show.

7:39 pm February 9, 2016
Tessa wrote:
@J. I agree with you. The bullet came from the reception hall. As for deserving to die, I did not say that, I said that he would have got one either way, because he antagonized everyone on purpose. For a man working with dangerous criminals and depending on colleagues…. it does not spell a long life.

@Hoodly, I think people judge Megan very unfairly. Very few people realize what she is playing because it will be a twist to come. she is playing what is written

7:33 pm February 9, 2016
Patrick wrote:
Hoodly, how thought provoking.

7:32 pm February 9, 2016
J. wrote:
@VerbalAbuse They could simply tell MB everything. She is a professional after all, It would do great to her character I believe. But again one reason could explain why they don’t tell MB anything : because they don’t know yet where they want to go with her.
I never thought MB deserved the blacklash, I think it’s not fair to put her in this position altogether.

@Tessa While watching the ep I thought the bullet was coming for the hall, concerning the way it touched the agent it couldn’t come from Red’s. The bullet coming from Red’s doesn’t add up to the scene anyway. And Liz would have said something. The man was a jerk but he didn’t deserve to die. Red would have wounded him maybe but a shot in the neck is much more “luck” (bad luck in his case) than actual aim. It’s a stray bullet more likely.

7:30 pm February 9, 2016
Hoodly wrote:
oops on the ‘curios’ not ‘curious’ mistype.

7:29 pm February 9, 2016
Hoodly wrote:
@Verbal Abuse – just a different thought on your last paragragh
“I think if we are to see the complexities of emotion from her that Red does, she needs to be in the loop on her character. And until the decision is made to include her in that info, she will not be able to fully explore the character. In other words, the secrecy onset is affecting the ability of one its key stars to play her character to its fullest. I blame the producer/writers and Spader for this, not MB.”

Is it possible that by her not being in the loop (and I have no idea if she is or isn’t) that it keeps her character more true to the character’s life. Elizabeth Keen basically has amnesia about the early years of her life; then she thought she was on track married to a teacher, going to have a kid, good career path and that was all wiped out from under her; and now everyone in her life causes her to have to play True/False whenever they speak – each time they speak. IE, if TPTB wont tell her where she came from or where she is going, seems they are treating MB as if she is EK?
(this really is a curios question for you, not something snarky; please don’t take offense.)

7:11 pm February 9, 2016
Belle wrote:
@BarbJ and @J, Thank you so much for your kind words!

@Tessa, about your post to me, that’s alright. As always, your posts are informative and convincing and I tend to agree with most of your conclusions.

@Nan wrote: “Liz’s father is dead.”

Nan, I tend to disagree with most of your outlandish conclusions. It might be best for you to preface your posts with “in my humble opinion.” Many people do not believe that Liz’s father is dead. When Red said “Your father is dead, he died in that fire.’ (paraphrased) The show runners themselves said it was what RED believed, but the writers in the writer’s room may believe differently. Just because Red may believe that Liz’s father is dead, does not make it the truth.

And in my humble opinion, anything Liz offers in her dialogue should be considered misdirection or a big red flag.

6:24 pm February 9, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
CES2 wrote: “@ Nan I like reading your observations even if I do not always agree with the conclusions. Keep up your work.”

I could not disagree more. Please discontinue your work.

4:54 pm February 9, 2016
Tessa wrote:
it was a stray bullet that hit that as$%$ from the DEA, it was easy to see it hit him in the neck, to the side. only a bullet coming from the hall where the shooting was could have hit him there. I personally felt the winning personality of the man would have earned him one sooner or later. he seemed to antagonize everyone, Resselr, Liz, etc.

Liz been on the other side. Liz knows what Red is trying to do, taking down the real criminals.

4:49 pm February 9, 2016
Tessa wrote:
Nan, not sure how to respond to your post. Some things are beyond any logic I can follow:

your logic for assuming beyond any doubt that Red had a ballerina daughter that was killed on Christmas Eve is too faulty for me to even begin to dispute it. You are taking the story he told Madeline, the performance of Swan Lake and assuming things not in evidence. They could be, but there are so many other explanations….

Liz shooting her father. On the surface it would appear so, until you examine the evidence. For example, listen to the words. If one needs “proper audio equipment” and a professional audio analysis to understand a TV show…..
I hear “Raymond let go”. Raymond is the man she shoots. The man she calls her father.

I do not hear Floriana Campo’s words about 2 years ago, because the camera and the audio is brought to Red and Lizzie. Again, if to understand a tv show one must have a professional audio analysis…. enough said. Look at the scene. It. is. not. there.

About Sam, nobody said Sam was perverted, as in sexually abusing Liz. Pervert or distort (distort: give a misleading or false account or impression) (Pervert: alter (something) from its original course, meaning, or state to a distortion or corruption of what was first intended) as in making Sam (not Sam and Red) do something wrong or for the wrong reasons. or betray someone thinking he was doing the right thing, as in helping Katarina search the house because he thought Red was wrong or endangering Liz. Nor take Liz from Katerina to force him to give up the fulcrum. Or something of the sort

StatDoc said that if the man was face down in the snow with something protecting his head and neck there would be consistent. he was outside face down in the snow right next to a window so if burning debris fell in him it would have burned his back and back of the arms, as we have seen.

Yes. Sam was there. It is the only logical explanation for the comment as she knew her “real” father was there already. Yes Sam could be the man calling her in the Christmas tree lot, but it could be anyone. Red, a third man.

About Red and Zamani: I do believe Red had the chemist not fit the “bomb” with chemicals, which is the reason it was important that the Ukranian take it. And yes, I do believe he used Zamani, while making him believe he was helping in the plan while using it to get the FBI to listen to him.

Your current theory I cannot see. I tried, but the performances deny it.. Red looks at Liz with love. He shakes with fear if he thinks he might be harmed. Red looked at Zoe with cunning, not love. there is a difference. Red has never used an innocent person to harm them, to deliver vengeance.

It is easy to see what Red feels about people: He lusts and has fun with Madeline Pratt. Had a good time with Dr. Sanders. Loved Carla. Loves Liz. Loves Dr. Kaplan. Loves Dembe. Distrusts Tom. Knows things about Cooper. Uses Ressler, although he cared for him. Has respect for Aram and Samar. Loved Josephine. Had a conflicted relationship with Fitch. is using Hitchins.

I do not think Katarina had been searching for Liz. She knows where she is.

4:05 pm February 9, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Legit

Nan has numerous incidents of fantasy sightings while watching The Blacklist. Don’t tell her, though. People will say you’re mean.

3:17 pm February 9, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Tatiana, it is a very confusing scene.
Apparently lot of people were tweeting to the writer asking who shot Tucker. She confirmed that it was a stray bullet.

3:10 pm February 9, 2016
Legitimately Anonymous wrote:
@Nan wrote “Red believes that Liz’s eidetic memory, keen powers of observation, uncanny ability to connect minute bits of information, and perfectly recall sights, sounds, smells or tastes after minute exposure”

What episode were all these superhero traits of LIzzy’s shown? Obviously, I missed that episode and need to go back and watch it. It may change my opinion of Lizzy.

2:57 pm February 9, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Nan, see Anon 234 for another of your million misreads. Too many in your mega post to list. I think you have finally consciously uncoupled from reality.

Tatiana, that’s Naomi. Not Red’s apartment.

2:56 pm February 9, 2016
Tatiana wrote:
Anon 234 – that bothered me too. It was confusing because initially I thought Liz shot him, but it didn’t make sense with the angles. Very cold. Is she thinking more and more like a criminal?

2:34 pm February 9, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Nan, Red did not shoot the DEA guy, he was hit by a stray bullet. Liz’s nonchalant reaction to it was pretty off-putting to me. Even if the guy was mighty annoying, he’s still a human being.
Would be funny if he survived a bullet and told everyone that Liz and Reddington left him to die.

2:21 pm February 9, 2016
Tatiana wrote:
“art, music, architecture, travel and medical textbooks” in the apartment.

Plus, the location has a subscription to WSJ (?) or some other financial/business periodical and Cat Fancy.

I still think it’s Mr. Kaplan’s apartment. Just… well, just because. She can do autopsies, right?

1:25 pm February 9, 2016
Nan wrote:
@Verbal Abuse – Touche on your assessment of MB’s constraints with playing this part to its fullest! I concur.
Dembe is Red’s bodyguard. If Liz was going to shot Red, Dembe was warning her off. Tom didn’t have a gun, because the Major had taken his so Tom wasn’t a threat to Red. Liz was. I don’t think the quaint apartment was Red’s. The last book published in the bookcase was 2006. The furnishings are from the 1950/60s or earlier. The focus is the Russian Orthodox icon above the desk; photos of several generations of one family; St. George Slays the Dragon above the mantel; General Georgy Zhukov in a place of prominence on the mantel; several photos of a dark-haired young woman, the oldest of three children, placed around the room; and the emphasis on art, music, architecture, travel and medical textbooks on the shelves. From this, I took that the last occupant of the apartment died in 2006, loved art and music, was Russian Orthodox and a direct descendent of Zhukov. As three of Zhukov’s known daughters are accounted for in real life, the only one for whom there is little or no information past childhood is Margarita, born 1929. All Zhukov’s daughters were born illegitimately. He later married the mother of his two older daughters, and divorced her in the 1960s to marry the mother of his youngest daughter. He also kept a ‘war-bride’ during his years as a Russian General.

1:08 pm February 9, 2016
Nan wrote:
@CES2 – Good analysis of Red’s comments about Katarina’s pregnancy not having anything to do with him being her father. I enjoy your comments too. Keep them coming.

@Tessa – Liz’s father is dead. Either she or someone else shot him the night of the fire. Red told Liz that her father had died in the fire. I still believe Liz’s father was the real reason Red took Liz to exact his revenge.

@Lace – Good that you continue to tune in for the actors, quirky episodes and crisp script dialogue. TBL really is an intriguing show even without knowing the endgame. Could it be that the reason TPTB can’t release the true relationship between Red and Liz or the reason he appears to be so enamoured with Liz is because the end will turn everything you thought about the show on end? If Liz is really just bait or is being activated as a final revenge mechanism by Red, then you can’t know that now or it will colour how you feel about Red and his supposedly loving feelings toward Liz. It might be that he’s becoming attached to her but I believe viewers are supposed to fully buy-in to their father-daughter relationship before it is finally revealed that Red set this whole thing up to get back at the people who killed his ballerina daughter.

@Tessa – Why do I know Red’s ballerina daughter was killed on Christmas Eve, most likely in 1987? Each year on the exact date of perhaps the last performance Red watched his beloved 10 to 14 year old daughter dance the lead role of Swan Lake, Red lavishes money to recreate the ballet, while he holds the treasured program from that day in his hand, just so he can momentarily recover the feelings he experienced that day as he watched his daughter’s performance. If his daughter were still alive (which was why I suggested it may have been Josephine), Red would be with her, not recreating a moment in her life. Possibly he was not able to stand over her grave if there was no body – only blood, so he commemorates her in this way. This is only something a bereaved parent would do to immortalize a murdered child. Red’s ballerina daughter is dead!

@Tessa – again, with proper audio equipment, not earbuds, you can clearly hear Floriano say in her speech: “I remember two years ago my late husband was in South Sudan…” It’s amazing transcribers picked this up. You can’t just omit script lines, because they don’t validate your narrative. If something doesn’t fit, it’s time to discard or change your narrative.

@Tessa – some thoughts on your multiple points for consideration, not rebuttal:
A) Red’s comment to Liz “Sam’s involvement was as your father, and no one can pervert or distort that.” suggests that whatever she is going to learn about Sam in future will seem perverted or distorted. What would we consider to be perverted? If Sam sexually abused Liz as a child? I don’t believe he did this, but if viewers learn that Sam took Lizzie from her mother without her knowledge or consent, and raised her while teaching her criminal and covert operative skills in preparation for Red one day activating Liz, then viewers would consider that to be perverted and distorted – even if Lizzie loved Sam and Sam came to love Lizzie. Kidnapping a child to keep her from her parents is never deemed a loving or healthy relationship – even if the kidnapped child was loved and cared for, and has formed a bond with their hostage taker. Red’s comment to Liz was meant to tell viewers the relationship between Sam and Liz was perverted and distorted, but that Liz should consider to think of Sam’s ‘involvement’ as ‘your father’. When you think of it, it’s really sinister!

B) For Red to want to restore Liz’s “distant memory quite literally taken… when she was a little girl; erased” tells me that Red believes that Liz’s eidetic memory, keen powers of observation, uncanny ability to connect minute bits of information, and perfectly recall sights, sounds, smells or tastes after minute exposure, may harbour a key memory from the time before Masha was taken from her mother by the man we presumed to be her father. I’m leaning toward the theory that Liz was in Red’s house the night that Red’s family was killed, and Red wants to know what she saw that night. Liz does have latent memories from before she was taken from Katarina of a happier time with her mother, father and kitty, as seen in her drawings on the wall of her bedroom from the night of the fire. Liz may even have latent memories that her mother was a prima ballerina who travelled the world – or these could just be the dreams of an abandoned child.

C) I doubt very much that the burns on Red’s back were from the night of the fire. As @StatDoc pointed out, burns received in a raging house fire would not have been localized to the back. More likely, the burns came from the Kursk bombing in August 1991. Red never denies being at the Kursk bombing. In fact, he carefully avoids admitting his culpability when he blames Fitch was planning the attack. As Berlin tells Red and Zoe, “Rumors began that the Americans were involved. One name emerge -.yours.” to which Red only refutes his involvement with Zoe’s disappearance. When Red later meets with Fitch, he says, “You ordered the bombing in Kursk, then you pinned it on me. You blamed me for killing his daughter.” Red doesn’t deny being involved in the bombing, only in being responsible for ordering the bombing. I believe Red was still working with Fitch in 1991 on covert ops in Russia and the Middle East.

D) Liz exclaiming, “My father. My father was there.” is her realization that Sam was also there. She had already accused Red of being there, which he admitted. Liz earlier admitted that, “The only memory I have of my real father is from the night of the fire. I remember him pulling me out of the flames – saving me.” This was a true memory that had not been deleted. Her real father did pull her out of the flames, but let go of her hand as they walked past Red who was lying face-down on the floor (could be cement). This certainly fits with Sam recurring in Liz’s tangent memory, calling out to her in the Christmas tree lot. It also fits with Red and Sam kidnapping little Lizzie that night from Katarina. Red has admitted that Katarina was still alive when Liz was “placed with Sam”. Liz’s story mirrors Beth’s story from the Pilot. It’s all there. Just follow the arc. Red manipulates the FBI and Liz by telling them that Beth will be kidnapped, without giving details. Red knows that this will enact FBI protocols to secure the General’s daughter. Red also knows that Beth will be at her ballerina class and the most direct route to FBI headquarters will cross the bridge, where the Pavlovich Brothers are waiting to kidnap little Beth. By S1E2, Red told Floriano Campo, “The FBI works for me now.” Little Lizzie was safe until it was claimed she was in danger, at which point she was moved to a safe house, where she could be easily kidnapped. Little Lizzie wasn’t the target though; she is only the key. “He’s gonna use Beth to settle the score; deliver the bomb.” as Liz notes. I wonder when she will see herself as being used as the means to deliver Red’s ultimate revenge.

E) This has nothing to do with erasing Liz’s memory to make her forget her father or mother. Her memory was erased both before and after the fire because of the minute details that Liz has the eidetic ability to store in her memory, and her heightened powers of observation and uncanny ability to make connections. It’s very possible that Liz is supposed to be the granddaughter of General Georgy Zhukov, who is also said to have demonstrated these traits and abilities. Georgy Zhukov was known to have many lovers and at least four daughters. Where else have we seen the story of multitudes of children who are turned away by their father? As Zhukov died in 1974, he can’t be Lizzie’s ‘real’ father, but it could be he was her grandfather. I don’t know if the network would allow this.

F) “Had Liz been kidnapped before the fire. Had Katarina placed her for adoption?” NO. We know from Red that Katarina thought Liz was a blessing from the second she was born. She raised Liz to at least age two (photo of them on the swing), and wouldn’t let the man who is presumed to be Liz’s father see her (which is supposedly why he took Masha from Katarina, erased her memory, and changed her name to Elizabeth.) In one photo from the fire AFTER Lizzie has been rescued from the closet by her father, but let go of her hand, Katrina is seen holding Lizzie protectively to her chest, as a gloved hand reaches over her shoulder. Katrina loved her daughter deeply and raised her until she was kidnapped by the man we presume to be her father. If she is still alive, Katarina has been searching for Masha/Liz all these years. If Katarina isn’t alive, I have no idea who Tom’s third handler is – the one who hired him to get closer to Liz in July 2010 against Red’s orders, knowing that he would be fired – and perhaps killed – for disobeying Red’s instructions.

I now believe that Red’s ballerina daughter’s name was Elizabeth and Red called her “Lizzie”. Our Liz is but a substitute for what was taken from Red.

@CES2 @Rusty – Megan has complained that the episode Directors care more about Spader than giving her the direction she needs. Megan needs to work on her facial expressions to offer the range that we first way in the Pilot. She’s supposed to be playing a much darker morose character who has been drawn into the violence, anger, hatred and death that is Red’s world. We’re being shown Liz with the life sucked out of her. It is often noted that Liz plays well against most of the other characters, but is out-shone by Spader. It could be that any actress might be out-shone by Spader – especially one that appears in almost every scene with him for years. I find Liz’s story compelling and evolving. Red’s slowly pulling her down into purgatory with him. Notice Liz doesn’t protest when Red shoots the DEA agent in the throat?

12:30 pm February 9, 2016
Verbal Abuse wrote:
Yeah and one more thing to Tessa, Nan and other regulars. I made a post in a comment section on a previous recap about Red’s quaint little apartment. Yet he always is staying in very opulent, extravagant places that are not his. I think their is some reason for this. Just curious what yall think about it. Thanks

12:23 pm February 9, 2016
Verbal Abuse wrote:
On another note, someone please look at the scene from season 2 where the door opens and Red is on the porch pointing a gun at Tom in the doorway. Liz pulls her gun on Red then Dembe pulls his gun and points it at Liz. To me this is an important scene. That Dembe would point his gun at Liz and Red would not freak out about it. Or was it just a bad camera angle and Dembe was pointing it at Tom.

Thanks

12:20 pm February 9, 2016
Verbal Abuse wrote:
This is not to make excuses for anyone on TBL especially MB’s acting, but it will sound like it….lol.

The only person/actor who knoes the characters past and future is Red. He has the advantage during scenes of knowing how to bring the emotions and demeanor to a scene and dialogue because he knows what it is based on. With the exception of Liz no other character constantly has this dilemma. Sure Cooper has a past secret but it is not a crucial part in every scene like it is with Liz’s character.

Every scene involving Liz with Red or Liz with Tom has to be extremely difficult for MB to act out. Other than the dialogue, all she has is input from the onset producers/writers and Spader as to how she should be carrying the scene. She doesn’t have the advantage of knowing what things she did in her past that even her character would know and does know according to the dialogue, but MB does not know it. Plus part of her role is that her character develops/changes/ matures over time, but it is others telling her how and when to do it.

I cannot imagine how frustrating and difficult that might be for a headliner in a show, to not have a clue about details of her past and where the story is going but yet is expected by the viewers to somehow come into work everyday knowing how you play a scene.

That is why I cut her some slack. I don’t think it has to do with her ability to act. I think it is because she is out of the loop. And yes I think it is hurting her performace, but it is not her fault IMHO.

I think if we are to see the complexities of emotion from her that Red does, she needs to be in the loop on her character. And until the decision is made to include her in that info, she will not be able to fully explore the character. In other words, the secrecy onset is affecting the ability of one its key stars to play her character to its fullest. I blame the producer/writers and Spader for this, not MB.

8:43 pm February 8, 2016
CES2 wrote:
Last anonymous was me, sorry

8:25 pm February 8, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Rusty Shackleford wrote

“As far as MB, I think she’s been doing some of her best work this season”

I agree, but I think her best is limited.

8:16 pm February 8, 2016
Rusty Shackleford wrote:
CES2

It went down one point, not exactly catastrophic. Besides the highest rated show on NBC, SVU, scored a 1.8 on a less competitive night. So I doubt the show is in any trouble in that regard.

As far as MB, I think she’s been doing some of her best work this season. A step-up from those awkward wig days.

7:58 pm February 8, 2016
CES2 wrote:
@RedHot 1:32 pm wrote
[Liz is still a bad actor and Red is still carrying the show]

This elephant in the room needs to be address if the ratings are to improve. ( assuming this can still be turned around)
The ratings went down again (1.5 in the most important – same day, 18-49 demographics),
http://www.spoilertv.com/2016/02/final-adjusted-tv-ratings-for-thursday.html.

Writers made Liz quite unlikable, Megan Boone made her boring and uninteresting.
She mentioned in few of her interviews that she wanted Liz to be someone viewers can relate to. I do not thing she is very successful with that -she only does two expression well – cold stare and anger. A lot of fans do not care about her story anymore.

JB said not to be complacent about Blacklist characters. After all as he reminded the viewers , they killed Meera, they would be capable of killing Liz Keen as well.

6:23 pm February 8, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Tessa

No.

@Kelly

Thank you for the Muppets compliment. They’re the best part of the dhow.

5:42 pm February 8, 2016
Tessa wrote:
anon, sure, but even the robbery against brutal guys like that for a take of only 3.6 million each? that is a lot of risk for the take.

I think he is working with Red. Remember the monologue when Red explained why he hired Tom?
at the end:
Liz:is that all of it?
Red: Some of it.
Liz: Why couldn’t you just have said yes? It wouldn’t kill you to lie just once to make someone feel good.

So even Liz knows there is more to the story. Then She gets to Tom and asks him to tell her what he knows about Red. I think there is more to that story.

5:28 pm February 8, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Tessa

Maybe he needs more money that he has?

4:53 pm February 8, 2016
Tessa wrote:
Could Tom be working with Red instead of Cooper? Or with both?
Because he must have money: he work for Red for 2 years, then Berlin offered The Major double. Another 2 years. he has been working for the major for 22 years at top dollar: “You got class. You’re the boyfriend. You’re the hip, young executive. That’s where the top dollar is.”
Tom worked at very difficult mission for Liz, under Cooper suggestion. Then managed to keep them safe. with the help of Cooper and with and in spite of Ressler. Cooper heard him willing to get killed to save Liz. Saw him talk down Ressler from killing Solomon.
Last time we see Tom, he is going to Red’s place. he gets there. Red tells him he is not going to marry Liz. We are to assume that was the conversation… but was it?
He goes to Boston, the job falls through. did it? but he has another plan.

Could it be that Tom is working with Red or with Cooper or with both? That they need the Major again?or the Major eliminated?

1:32 pm February 8, 2016
RedHot wrote:
@Nan……..thanks for the honorable mention.
This blog is very entertaining……….. This is a TV show that the writer’s take whatever liberties they want without any apology. Yes, I read though the blogs and some of the long ones…….sorry, but I skim through. I cannot wait to hear your posts after Thurs. evenings! All-in-all, I am not losing any sleep over this show. And I doubt that all the story arcs will be revealed. Liz is still a bad actor and Red is still carrying the show; if not for Red, I am not too sure any of us would watch……….now this the writer’s do know well! I cannot imagine watching this show and minus Red………..oh just turn off the TV for good!
Anyway…….looking forward to watching ruthless Red with his morals …… and him getting away with his plans!

1:14 pm February 8, 2016
Tessa wrote:
Nan,

In the scripts there is a mistake. In the Freelancer they have it as:
FC: You, I, Anya stand here in solidarity with the people who cannot be here with us Yet.
Red: It’s him.
Liz: What?
Red: The waiter. The freelancer.
FC: I remember two years ago – my late husband was in South Sudan.
Red: Clear the area. Now.
FC: We saw a boy
Liz:Stop! FBI! –

But it is not correct. watch the episode: this is what you hear:
FC: You, I, Anya stand here in solidarity with the people who cannot be here with us. Yet.
The camera goes to Liz and Red. We only hear what they say:
Red:It’s him.
Liz: What?
Red: The waiter. The freelancer.. Clear the area. Now.
Liz:Stop! FBI! –

Whatever Floriana is saying is not heard, so it must have been ad-libbed to keep the scene running in the background, as the camera goes to Red and Liz and the FBI clearing the room. And if you see the action and the performances, Red catches the eye of The Freelancer, they pass a nod, after he gives the glass of champagne to Floriana, he watches her drink. Then The Freelancer gives a signal by lifting a hand behind Dembe. As soon as Red sees it, Red tells Liz the waiter is the Freelancer.

The problem with reliance on the script without noticing performances or actions is that transcripts from a TV show are not scripts, are not meant to be read alone. They contain mistakes, they sometimes capture things not part of the script. I have no experience in TV but I know theatre, if someone is supposed to be carrying a conversation on the background, you do want the actors still having a conversation, even if the actual lines in the play were just said and the actors are just supposed to be talking in the background without really being heard. Otherwise the audience will perceive the gibberish or unrelated things being said. So the director usually ask the actors to ad-lib and continue the conversation.
You go making a connection: “Watch The Freelancer and see the connection with Floriano Campo’s supposedly dead husband. That was how Red knew so much about Floriano’s business.”
based on those 2 lines:”I remember two years ago – my late husband was in South Sudan. We saw a boy” that are in the scripts as presented, but not in the the performance and what we are supposed to hear, you made assumptions that are not currently supported. That the husband had not been killed, that Dembe had something to do with Red knowing about the Eberhart.

12:31 pm February 8, 2016
Cleveland’s Armory wrote:
Excuse me. . . I am a structure!

12:29 pm February 8, 2016
Johnny Manziel wrote:
@Cleveland’s Armory, no. I’m a person, you’re a building. No comparison.

12:26 pm February 8, 2016
I’m Building A Big Wall wrote:
@Nan
Thanks for mentioning me. I live for that. But I don’t think anything you’re saying follows too well. For starters, no said “Gamblers” and it goes from there. You do mention 2 ideas you are stuck on, so maybe that is your trouble.

@Legit Anon
These are very good points. The “single interpreattion and others are missing it” plan is a poor one.

Red is not entirely good or entirely bad….that’s the truth.

12:20 pm February 8, 2016
Cleveland’s Armory wrote:
@ Johnny Manziel, are you always this dense?

12:07 pm February 8, 2016
Johnny Manziel wrote:
@Cleveland’s Armory, if you have to put that much explanation into your joke, it probably wasn’t funny.

11:43 am February 8, 2016
Legitimately Anonymous wrote:
@Tessa: you’re too kind. Perhaps I’ll feel differently when my Zoloft kicks in.

10:52 am February 8, 2016
Tessa wrote:
@Legitimately Anonymous, I feel sad that there aren’t things in your life you feel passionately about. To live life without feeling passionately about things must be an unbearable burden unless you are a Buddha and have attained nirvana already.
I personally feel about most things far more passionately than I do about the Blacklist. From enjoying nature, my husband, my friendships, family, my pets, some of my work, to music, art, books, a quiet walk admiring the beauty of the world around. Even a silly blog with e-friends and acquaintances. We are here for a short time, might was well make the best of it.
“My mission in life is not merely to survive, but to thrive; and to do so with some passion, some compassion, some humor, and some style.” Maya Angelou”

10:03 am February 8, 2016
Legitimately Anonymous wrote:
I wish you all could admit this show doesn’t make any sense and just enjoy it for what it is, a way to waste 50 minutes on a Thursday night. People are looking for some great mystery in the clues and they hunt them out like there’s a freaking reward for them. There are some things this show cares about on a high level and are consistent in their portrayal of (think the Liz and Red relationship) and some details they don’t give two figs about (think Hudson). I read everyone’s posts, the detailed research and analysis that goes into some of these theories, and first I wonder if we’re watching the same show and second, I wish to god I could feel half as passionately about anything as some of you seem to be about The Blacklist. I can’t think of a single “clue” on this show that couldn’t be interpreted multiple ways or wasn’t left open-ended enough that the writers can’t come back and make up the story down the road, so that all the theorizing that’s gone before will be useless. If they say two episodes from now that Katarina Rostova disappeared to join the circus I won’t be surprised. But for some of you I’m afraid your world would collapse. I had to get that off my chest. Thank you for reading and have a nice day.

10:02 am February 8, 2016
Cleveland’s Armory wrote:
“I don’t think making fun of people who live in trailer parks is funny at all”

No one was making fun of people who live in trailer parks. I was pointing out how incongruous Ressler and crew always looked when they were supposed to inconspicuous.

I’ll explain. You see, Mr. Trump is a very wealthy man and, unlike most people of great wealth, not at all shy about flaunting his wealth oftentimes with very questionable taste. People who live in trailer parks are, generally speaking, not wealthy people. In fact, the usual stereotype is that trailer parks are populated with either A.) people of very modest means or B.) tornado aficionados. (It’s a horrible stereotype I know but I didn’t create it, honest.)

So, if the very conspicuously wealthy Mr. Trump were to somehow show up at a trailer park it would be very obvious to ascertain his presence in those surroundings. And that is the opposite profile one wishes to adopt when following bad guys. And thus was the premise of my little analogy.

I hope this puts your mind at rest so you can take offense at some other trivial matter.

8:17 am February 8, 2016
Tessa wrote:
Nan, some things are very good in your theory. Let me propose this:
– Liz does not go out of the closet upon hearing Katarina’s voice. She does not call her my mother, but “the woman”. This would suggest Liz’s memories regarding her mother had been erased by then. Or Liz never knew her mother.
– Sam’s role is in question. Did he really only took Liz and raised her? Was he at the fire? At what age did Liz arrive at Sam’s? Who took her there and why? “Sam’s involvement was as your father. And no one can pervert or distort that.”
– Red is looking for a way to restore the memories: “A young woman I know and care for had a distant memory quite literally taken away from her when she was a little girl– erased”
– Red back’s burns. His acceptance of being there the night of the fire. someone with those back burns, if sustained that night would render anyone incapable of driving.
– Liz wild eye discovery: My father. My father was there. (She knew her father was there, saving her from the flames. why the surprise then? was that “father” Sam and she tried to keep this information from the doctor or Luther Braxton?”
One possibility is the one you sponsor: Red and Sam kidnapped her.
another is Sam had kidnapped her with Katarina or alone. Red took her back.
Had Liz had 2 bouts of memory erasure? one to make her forget her mother, her father, or both?
had Liz been kidnapped before the fire. Had Katarina placed her for adoption?

7:02 am February 8, 2016
Tessa wrote:
I also think that Liz is seriously conflicted about getting answers to her questions.

If she is Red’s daughter, and she thinks Red is a monster, and she herself has become a criminal by her own right, does she really want to find out if her mother was also a monster?
Because what does it say about her then? About her baby?
She might be afraid that her mother did something horrible. Or did not love her? or left her to die? Or abandoned her and Red?
There are the words of Dr. Linus Creel: “What do you remember about them? (your parents)”
Liz: “Nothing, really.”
Creel: “Perhaps if you did, it would be easier for you to accept who you are.”
Liz: “Like the Sins of the father. That it? ”
Creel: “Absolutely. The more time you spend with your parents, the more of yourself you see in them. For better or for worse, they’re a glimpse into your future”

Coupled with Red’s words at the end of Tom Connolly: “I never wanted you to be….like me”
and how much of Katarina is in Liz: “But that doesn’t mean your mother is gone. I see her in you every day. She’s as much a part of you as the air you breathe.”

I think Liz is terrified of that glimpse. She is terrified of learning the answer to her question: “Everyone talks as if she was a terrible person. Was she?”

6:47 am February 8, 2016
Tessa wrote:
I do not feel that TBL has gone downhill at all. But sometimes continuity issues have cropped up:
Hudson 1, Hudson 2, Hudson 3.
Liz forgetting she had been told that KR had disappeared,
Liz not even looking at Dembe

6:38 am February 8, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
@Curious1
No one said that James Spader is not a good actor. Just that the show has gone downhill since he became a producer.
Maybe these two facts aren’t connected. Maybe all Spader’s ideas are brilliant and it’s other producers fault that S2 was such mess. No one can tell for sure.

6:34 am February 8, 2016
Tessa wrote:
last night the husband was watching Alistair Pitt again, so I ended up watching it a third time. I must admit that on a third viewing it is actually a rather good episode. But it does have a lot crammed in, and would have seriously benefited from being a 2 parter. Then more time could have been devoted to the Tom + Gina storyline, including more information about their relationship, as to the Red + Josephine relationship. Why did she married the guy? Did Red try to dissuade her at all? Was Red tempted to give up his lifelong endgame to just go away with this woman? Did he showed up at her wedding to try to talk her out of going through with it?
And to give more time to the lat scene with Tony Shaloub and James Spader at the end.

Still feel that the esthetics of the episode was different, less cinematic. More Law and Order than Blacklist

6:01 am February 8, 2016
Tessa wrote:
This is simply my take on the blacklist as I see it:

the reason why they can only sprinkle the clues is twofold:
– the road to be taken to take the endgame only has a few of the stops set. the others have not been written.
– because the endgame is a very simple yet complicated situation like a tangled web of Christmas lights, but one that if you manage to grab one end and a couple of key places… it all comes unraveled . Which is why I often describe it as a house of mirrors.

2:47 am February 8, 2016
Kelly wrote:
@Mary: Don’t mind those two anonymouses. Just think of them as the two old codgers on the balcony in The Muppet Show, only without the humour. Personally, I think of them as “Thing1” and “Thing2.” Mostly because they insist on treating people like objects. That is the kind of attitude which allows tyrants to rule.. What seems to work best here is to ignore their negative, rude attacks. If they insist on depersonalizing people, I find it fitting to think of them as things.

@ Nan. Yes, lulu is mentioned by the same Tumblr poster known as blacklistevidencewall. I would really like to thank you for clarifying which Port Red controls, and it would be great if we could discuss it in a less disruptive environment. There is Tumblr, if you are still home, or you could message me on Facebook. I have a different idea re those ports.

Did anyone happen to notice exactly what kind of animal Red gifted Josephine when he wentt to see her in her wheelchair? BTW, her facial scar did not appear to be very old. I’m wondering if that miniature glass animal holds mythological significance.

11:02 pm February 7, 2016
CES2 wrote:
@Curious
Bad guy -yes, but according to Eisendrath (Sept 2013)

Red has morals – “Red does not think of himself as an evil man,” Eisendrath says. “He’s a very complicated man who has come by being the Concierge of Crime in a way that he can justify, based on things that happened in his life. I think he does have a moral compass that you and I might not share, but he’s not Hannibal Lecter. He’s not a psychopath by any means.”

10:47 pm February 7, 2016
Lace wrote:
@Tessa. I am glad that your sensitivity in reading people has saved you from harm.

10:28 pm February 7, 2016
Curious1 wrote:
People still upset their Lizzington fantasies and crackpot theories are being trashed.
I cannot read all of the nonsense written. All redundant ramblings the same person posts every week. Why I don’t know because they have a website where they post the same ramblings. It makse no sense.
However, someone wrote the show has gone down hill since Spader gained more influence(paraphrase).
UMMMM NO! Spader is the only reason the show is on today.He is carrying the show with his acting alone. I am not saying the others are horrible but he makes anyone who is in a scene with him better.
The second season was disjointed and a hot mess. This season the show is on fire. There have been lapses but overall this season may be the best of the 3.
@CES2 thanks for the article. Most of the interviews with Spader, Bokenkampt etc have all stated the same thing. People are having nervous breakdowns because they took one thing someone with little power on the show says and runs with it.
Spader has stated Reddington is a bad guy and he is portraying him that way. Some want this show to be a soap opera. Spader will not let it.

10:09 pm February 7, 2016
Tessa wrote:
@Lace, thanks for the comment. I could imagine how hard it must have been. So much of human interactions is in body language voice tone and cadence. And yes in a TV show is nothing, in real life it can be lethal. misreading the intentions of a stranger walking towards you, or the stranger in a bar. I suspect some of the cases one sees about people coming to harm derive from this inability. Misreading if a person is interested in sexually assaulting or robbing you etc. Not that always is apparent or can be prevented, but reading the signs has certainly saved me from many a mishap.
To me it has been a mystery when I would see a wife or husband be amazed that the spouse was unfaithful. 9 out of 10 I saw the subtle signs.
But in the Blacklist, with so many excellent actors is a shame to miss those clues. It adds enormously to the enjoyment of the show.

9:59 pm February 7, 2016
Lace wrote:
@Rusty Shackleford. Thank you very much for the names. I think that Kevin Spacey also could have played Red very well.

@CES2. Thank you very much for the link. I had not seen that article.

8:47 pm February 7, 2016
Lace wrote:
@Tessa. I appreciated your comment about reading people. Before retiring, I worked as a trial lawyer. For the last 20 years, all of my cases started out in an administrative setting, which meant that there was no jury, just the judge. One judge in particular never looked at the witness. With her head down, looking at her pad, she would take notes during the entire testimony. I had no doubt that she did not even notice the tone of the voice. It would make me crazy! As an example, I would be cross examining a man who would not look at me. I knew why. He was lying! She was clueless. All that she got out of it were his words. I never suspected aspergers. I believed that she totally lacked insight regarding the meaning of body language. In her position, there were real life consequences that could be significant. Missing the clues in a TV series is less consequential. If you have a friend who is not adept at reading people, you deal with it or move on.

8:42 pm February 7, 2016
CES2 wrote:
@Lace
have you seen this article? http://collider.com/the-blacklist-john-eisendrath-interview/
they talk a bit about the casting

8:36 pm February 7, 2016
Rusty Shackleford wrote:
@Lace

I’ve heard a few names thrown around around: Frank Grillo, Kevin Spacey, Gary Oldman, and Kiefer Sutherland.

@notaclue114

The actor’s name was Ronald Guttman.

8:29 pm February 7, 2016
CES2 wrote:
I think we all are tempted to jump to conclusions from time to time , particularly when presented with snippets that seemingly fit with whatever theory one is supporting.
Let’s take Red’s words to Liz “When your mother was pregnant with you (…)she dreaded having a child. Almost aborted it. Not one day of her pregnancy did she ever think of you as anything but a curse. And then, from the second you were born there was never a day when she thought you were anything but a blessing”.
Some people believe that this is a definite proof that Red was involved as a father because he knew how Katarina felt about her baby. Maybe he was, maybe he wasn’t but as far as this quote being a proof ? I disagree.
Red could simply be repeating what Katarina told him, particularly since the phrasing “from the second you were born there was never a day..”
Maybe Red and Katarina had a conversation about Liz and Katarina was simply expressing how much she loved the child that originally she thought of as an inconvenience?

@Tessa, @ Nan I like reading your observations even if I do not always agree with the conclusions. Keep up your work

8:00 pm February 7, 2016
notaclue114 wrote:
Speaking of actors you can’t place, can someone please tell me who played Mrs. Erikson? I’ve searched from one end of the internet to the other but I can’t find the name. She doesn’t seem to be listed in the cast.
Thank you.

7:46 pm February 7, 2016
Lace wrote:
@J., 2:52 pm, 2/7. Who was/were the previous choice/s to play Red? Were these people just considered or actually offered the role and turned it down? Regarding all of the unanswered questions, to which more questions are piled on week after week that go unanswered, I share your frustration. Just wanting to know answers will not be sufficient to keep me tuning in. For this alone, I can read summaries. I continue to watch because I love/like certain actors and characters, and the dialogue can be outstanding and outstandingly delivered. I have watched “How To Get Away With Murder.” At the end of season 1, a major question was answered, yet I tuned in for season 2 because I liked the actors and what the show was about. In other words, I reject the idea that revealing some secrets would be the death knell of The Blacklist.

7:28 pm February 7, 2016
Blklster wrote:
Okay, another wild idea here, forgive me if already mentioned but do we think that Liz may be from the Russian royal family that was murdered in Russia? Would that be a reason that Red, or whoever he really is, would be so focused on protecting her? If so, now that she will have a baby, another royal descendent to protect? It was never really proven what happened to all the Romanoff’s? I know they say it was confirmed that all we killed, but if there was a survivor, would they really have revealed that? Interested in what folks think about this.

6:48 pm February 7, 2016
Tessa wrote:
the titled blacklister is Solomon. Harper seems to be something else. So… Ressler, Aram or Cooper, since it would seem Samar is straight

6:37 pm February 7, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
You both could be right Anons. Each of those storylines could be presented in Episode 17.

6:35 pm February 7, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Apparently one of us has our episodes mixed up Anon @ 6:23

Red, Liz, Dembe and the rest of the Post Office team spent the first half of the season squirming under Mr. Solomon’s thumb. Even now that the sadistic henchman is locked away, he will still find a way to worm is way back into the story during episode 17.

The upcoming hour will fittingly be titled “Mr. Solomon,” according to Spoiler TV.

6:23 pm February 7, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
Episode 17 will introduce us to the recurring character of Harper, a smart, no-nonsense 30-something who works as a mercenary for an unknown employer — and she just might become a love interest for someone on the FBI task force. Per the official casting notice: “Military-trained with an unshakable moral code, she’s a natural leader who prides herself on her work. Attractive but guarded due to a troubled past, beneath her tough tomboy exterior is a huge heart — if she’d ever let anyone see it.”

6:12 pm February 7, 2016
Tessa wrote:
@Nan
– according to Alistair Pitt, if the families he brokered peace will fail to maintain it the other clients would be responsible for liquidation of those not maintaining the peace. There has been no evidence whatsoever of a connection between the Stockwell/Molieri fiasco, van der Merwe, and the Pater Dei group. In the map of the cabal it is very clear that there are thousands of criminal cartels, syndicates, crime families. We have no idea what happened to the Stockwell and Molieri familes. Were they killed by Red? Did Red engineered a killing to trigger the mass killings their entire families? did he made the murder of Stockwell appeared to be the work of a Molieri? we have no idea, and no clue has been offered. He did not know the identity of Pitt.

– Red and Sam: ” You gave her an incredible gift, Sam. Taking her in and loving her as your own.” Do those words, and the performance by Spader in which they happen do by any stretch suggest he was preparing her to
“activate Liz to do his bidding to get revenge for his ballerina daughter’s murder.”

– I know where are you coming from about the revenge. I see where you see it. But you are not paying attention to performances. If he wanted Liz for a elaborate revenge plan, we are running into a few problems:
a) the looks on his face when he thinks Liz might be dead. the shaking in horror in the hangar with Solomon
b) if she has been identified now openly as Katarina Rostova’s daughter, whoever her father is might know who is she. And judging by what I would feel, imagining anyone being filleted alive ranks pretty high up in my mind as a revenge. He could have let her die there, and try to save his life.

– as for bending clues….. You speak of paying attention to words, but there is not a single proof of his ballerina daughter that was murdered. I simply pointed out that just because you see a program that reads 1987, the program refers to a Ballet school performance of Swan Lake. and Red sees an image of a girl aged 6-9 dancing, while he watches a yearly personal performance of a professional Ballet company of Swan Lake, and some musicians and ballerinas are gossiping his daughter was in the show, it cannot be automatically assumed the girl was a) Reds daughter b) she is dead c) she was 9 in 1987. d) she was murdered e) that she is dead f) we do not know if he is remembering or imagining g) he could have lost her by not being able to see her, or because the mother would not allow it.

5:46 pm February 7, 2016
Anonymous wrote:
“I have to admit that since Spader began to have input into the show, it’s gone downhill.”

Someone finally said it.

5:00 pm February 7, 2016
Nan wrote:
@I’m Building a Big Wall – The only narrative that I’m firmly fixed on right now is that Red is really a bad guy who kidnapped Liz, and had Sam hold her hostage all those years, until she was manipulated into becoming an FBI special agent, so that Red could make his deal with the FBI and activate Liz to do his bidding to get revenge for his ballerina daughter’s murder.

I do still believe Raymond Reddington was born no later than 1950, given all the clues that have been given so far. When I reconsidered the $40 Red got as a bonus from Albert Kodagolian, I realized that $40 in 1963 and $40 in 1979 amounted to two very different values. In 1963, average annual income was $4,400 and minimum wage was $1/hour. $40 would have equalled a week’s salary for Red and half a week’s salary for the average breadwinner. By 1979, due to inflation, the average annual income was $11,700 and minimum wage was $3/hour. $40 would have equalled a day and a half pay for Red and a mere drop in the bucket. Add this to the release of the 8-track in 1963 and the release of the Gambler instrumental on 8-track or the release of The Gamblers 1960 songs on 8-track, and it explains Red’s story of being a 15-year-old hired to lay flooring for the summer in Lake Charlevoix, Michigan. This was perhaps a nod to Megan Boone who was born a few miles away from there in Petrosky Michigan on Little Traverse Bay, near where the B52C bomber crashed in 1971, with no known cause, while on a training flight.

@Anonymous 11:22am – I concur with Tessa on this one. If the Matchmaker is anything like Red, he creates a problem, then plays the long game to offer the solution, and take part of the action from the merger. Good call Tessa.

@J – Sorry I wasn’t clear about the connections I was making between the various arms/weapons dealers mentioned in past episodes throughout the world. “Espen van der Merwe who is to assume leadership of the Pater Dei Group, the oldest and largest weapons dealer”, would have taken control of the Moliere and Stockwell arms dealers’ network. Red decided all members of both families were culpable in what happened to Josephine, so he would have taken them down, then followed up by tracking Alistair Pitt to kill him as well. Red would have no trouble allowing the Vacarro and Eriksson families to be wiped out as well, except for the bride and groom. My point is that when one cartel or weapons dealer is taken out, another moves in to take control of the business. There is no way to cease all illegal weapons sales until the world chooses peace. By supporting Espen to wipe out the Moliere and Stockwell families, according to the pact they made with Pitt, Red gained an associate who would back him in a time of need.

I know the rumour continues that Ryan Eggold was only supposed to be in Season 1, but I know he signed a 3-year contract with TBL. I’m sure TPTB never had any intention of knocking him off and paying his salary for the second and third years of his contract. Spader’s input from season 2 has been in producing episodes, not to the storyline or endgame. I have to admit that since Spader began to have input into the show, it’s gone downhill. It might be best if he went back to acting and left writing and directing to the writers and directors.

Another misconception is about what the doctor told Liz about her memories. Remember the doctor owed Red a favour for saving her son. She would have told Liz anything Red wanted. What the doctor said was that the people and events may have happened, but in different roles. Here is the actual exchange:

Orchard: You may not remember; you may have been very young, but I think someone may have tried to block your memory of that fire.
Liz: I didn’t make it up.
Orchard: The people and the events may have been there, but in different roles.I know this is difficult to comprehend.
Liz: Are you telling me I may never know what really happened that night?
Orchard: I’m telling you that the only people who could tell you what really happened are the people who want you to forget.

So we can accept the fire scene as Liz recalls it. The doctor was warning that the people may be in different roles from what she remembers – or Red could have convinced the doctor to tell Liz this because he doesn’t want her to remember what really happened that night and who was responsible for what.

@Tessa – to be clear, according to Red the Major owed him for allowing Tom to flip to Berlin. The Major didn’t take it upon himself to kill Tom, his prized operative. He was pretending he was going to kill Tom when the Germans rammed his car (all pre-planned). Then they tried to force Tom into telling them what they wanted to know, but backed off killing him because he “used to be” married to an FBI agent. I don’t think so. They threaten Tom but let him go. Then the Germans release the Major. It was a joint set-up, orchestrated by Red. At the end, the Major didn’t threaten to kill Tom. He put out a bounty. His exact words were, “”I don’t care how long it takes or what expense you have to go to. I want Jacob Phelps found.” No mention of dead or alive.

The wording is important. We can assume one thing, but often it’s a lexical ambiguity or feint, like with Red’s description of watching the life drain out of Josephine. What we think is said is not actually what is said.

If you still think Red is a good guy, you may not be able to wrap your head around this. It’s only when you realize Red is a bad guy that you can see the full force of his master planning, manipulations, lack of care for the welfare of others he deems unworthy, and complete disdain for those he works with. Ergo, his remark to Liz: “I forgot how much it sickens me to come here.”

3:33 pm February 7, 2016
Stable Anon wrote:
Dear Blog Destroyer,

You should at least give the Anon community some credit for failing to take the bait you are throwing out there under the feeble guise of destroying this comment section. I mean seriously. No one here, including
prolific theorists, in the background anons, part time lurkers, infrequent contributors or mild mannered passers by give a rip about any silly, inconsequential, negligible or unimportant Lizzington viewpoints at all.

2:52 pm February 7, 2016
J. wrote:
@Mary Many Anon here are trolls trying to hjiack this thread since it became a successful place for TBL enthusiasts. There are a few exceptions though. But for the rest the best medicine is to ignore them.

I thank you for the info @Nan. At first, I thought your post concerning @Tessa was not written by you (it happened and your critic was suspiciously the same than some anon trolls). I waited to see if you would manifest yourself again, you didn’t so I guess it was really you. I personally like @Tessa’s views of the show (I’ve visited her blog many times too). This thread is used to share what we think about the storylines, starting with clues gave to us by the writers. It’s all hypthesis and we all are well aware of that. You yourself are playing this game because you do not have the answers to your questions. You assume like we do. I enjoy your posts as well even though I don’t share your trust with the writing or your view about the show. What you criticize @Tessa for is true for any posters here.
Like @Wally i’ll quote you directly :
“I often take exception to Tessa insisting that some clue means one thing when that is only her interpretation, and not even based on the actual clue that was given. She likes to bend and twist to clues. I believe this story is far too complicated to have what clues are given bent and twisted to fit some preconceived narrative.”
This is exactly what we are all doing here, this is the point of this thread. @Tessa is simply defending her view, which I respect, you should too. She doesn’t need defending but I think it needed to be said. Respect goes both ways.
Concerning the last part of your quote, this is so condescending for the rest of us.. Your theories are just that, they don’t hold much more than ours.
Your preconceived narrative is that it all makes sense, which can only be true if the story is already written (the big reveals at least). We know it’s not true, essentially because of JS change of status since season2. He got a say in the writing process which couldn’t be anticipated by the team because JS wasn’t the first choice to play Red. He changed things, he made demands to improve the show. MB’s pregnancy couldn’t be anticipated either, at least that it would happen this soon.
I’ll accept the fact that season 1 was thought through but I don’t believe it true for what came next. It feels like the show is built as they go. One clue will stick to one of your theories maybe but it certainly is not for all. And here i’ll repeat myself but it’s not smart writing to make a clue from 1×05 stick to one little sentence from 3×12, it’s just pretending to stick to some consistency. For the big things it’s a mess, they’re milking “Red/liz” and “Liz’s Childhood” without shame because they realized that it was the main reason for the ratings. The result is that it’s a mess of non-revelation, false-truths and nonsense encounters.
What about Liz’s scar which disappeared along the way, related to Tom’s box. How did they get the presidential limo and why?
For a while now I think that the writers have not even decided yet who is Red for Liz. Season 1 they had a framework, they followed it and we got hooked by the mystery. This season was a success in term of ratings and critics (Here you can see why they kept Tom which was not planned at first). Then season 2, we had even more mysteries and that was great, they were giving us a lot of clues and great characters. Then I remember a scene where they supposedly implied that Red wasn’t Liz’s father, I remember that MB went on talk shows to say just that, to explain to us this revelation (I could find the ep, I posted my frustation here at the time. I’m faily sure it was the end of s02). Then season 3, the destruction of the Cabal which wasn’t that in fact (I guess they’re unable to go all the way no matter the subject) so the Cabal will finally stay in the background just in case. Added to that was Katarina Rostova, the mysterious mother of Liz (which conveniently has many identities and faces). We have a pile of questions/facts/false facts/false memory/half truths. We have a reveal (Liz’s memories of a fire) which is systematically shot down by a counter measure (the doc saying some of her memories may be false memories. Does someone bothered to tell that to Liz?) for the sake of not make any reveal. A show is good not because it’s complicated but because it makes sense.
Now, to end this, one last thing. The writers couldn’t have anticipated what a pointless character Elizabeth Keen would be. Her character is badly written and that’s the case since season 1. I can’t trust a team of writers that can’t even write properly their main character.m’,

Finis

⬆ go to top

 
 

༺ ♤ ⊰ 🔴 ⊱ ♤ ༻
 
 



Member of The Internet Defense League

Blog Stats

  • 340,081 hits

Google Translate

Thank you, everyone ♡♤♡

🇦🇫🇦🇽🇦🇱🇩🇿🇦🇴🇦🇮🇦🇬🇦🇷🇦🇲🇦🇼🇦🇺🇦🇹🇦🇿🇧🇸🇧🇭 🇧🇩🇧🇧🇧🇾🇧🇪🇧🇿🇧🇯🇧🇲🇧🇹🇧🇴🇧🇦🇧🇼🇧🇷🇧🇳🇰🇭🇨🇲 🇨🇦🇧🇶🇰🇾🇨🇱🇨🇳🇨🇴🇨🇷🇭🇷🇨🇺🇨🇼🇨🇾🇨🇿🇩🇰🇩🇯🇩🇴 🇪🇨🇪🇬🇸🇻🇪🇪🇪🇹🇪🇺🇫🇴🇫🇯🇫🇮🇫🇷🇬🇫🇵🇫🇬🇪🇩🇪🇬🇭 🇬🇮🇬🇷🇬🇩🇬🇵🇬🇺🇬🇹🇬🇾🇭🇹🇭🇳🇭🇰🇭🇺🇮🇸🇮🇳🇮🇩🇮🇷 🇮🇶🇮🇪🇮🇲🇮🇱🇮🇹🇯🇲🇯🇵🇯🇪🇯🇴🇰🇿🇰🇪🇰🇼🇱🇦🇱🇻🇱🇧 🇱🇾🇱🇮🇱🇹🇱🇺🇲🇴🇲🇰🇲🇼🇲🇾🇲🇻🇲🇱🇲🇹🇲🇶🇲🇺🇲🇽🇫🇲 🇲🇩🇲🇨🇲🇳🇲🇪🇲🇦🇲🇿🇳🇦🇳🇵🇳🇱🇳🇨🇳🇿🇳🇮🇳🇬🇲🇵🇳🇴 🇴🇲🇵🇰🇵🇸🇵🇦🇵🇬🇵🇾🇵🇪🇵🇭🇵🇱🇵🇹🇵🇷🇶🇦🇷🇪🇷🇴🇷🇺 🇷🇼🇼🇸🇸🇦🇸🇳🇷🇸🇸🇨🇸🇬🇸🇽🇸🇰🇸🇮🇸🇴🇿🇦🇰🇷🇸🇸🇪🇸 🇱🇰🇰🇳🇱🇨🇻🇨🇸🇩🇸🇷🇸🇪🇨🇭🇸🇾🇹🇼🇹🇿🇹🇭🇹🇹🇹🇳🇹🇷 🇹🇲🇻🇮🇺🇬🇦🇪🇺🇦🇬🇧🇺🇸🇺🇾🇺🇿🇻🇪🇻🇳🇾🇪🇿🇲🇿🇼