|
Post by ryantrimble457 on Apr 7, 2018 16:23:30 GMT -5
Not knowing what is in the sugarbowl fits into the theme of the series so well--the unknown, and how we deal with it. I think it's perfectly plausible that certain characters have wrong info about the bowl; since the narrator is a character in the story itself, it makes sense he may have gotten some wrong info at some point.
|
|
|
Post by Liam R. Findlay on Apr 7, 2018 16:59:51 GMT -5
I wonder if it contains sugar.
|
|
|
Post by gliquey on Apr 7, 2018 17:16:51 GMT -5
I wonder if it contains sugar. However I look at the situation, I always come to the conclusion that either the sugar bowl is empty or it contains sugar (both have the same effect). I don't see why this couldn't have been the intention throughout the entirety of the books, and the Netflix show; every scene mentioning the sugar bowl is dramatic irony, as the characters have been sorely misinformed about the importance of its contents. But this still leaves us with the question of what people think is in the sugar bowl. We could assume most people are like the Baudelaires, only valuing the sugar bowl because they've taken the word of another volunteer at face value, but I think (for instance) Esme must believe she knows what's in it.
|
|
|
Post by zinthaniel on Apr 7, 2018 20:48:57 GMT -5
It was a joke, but someone on reddit postulated that perhaps it contains cocaine - and honestly, considering how crazy desperate Esme is for it... it almost makes too much sense.
|
|
|
Post by Uncle Algernon on Apr 8, 2018 7:07:20 GMT -5
I wonder if it contains sugar. However I look at the situation, I always come to the conclusion that either the sugar bowl is empty or it contains sugar (both have the same effect). I don't see why this couldn't have been the intention throughout the entirety of the books, and the Netflix show; every scene mentioning the sugar bowl is dramatic irony, as the characters have been sorely misinformed about the importance of its contents. But this still leaves us with the question of what people think is in the sugar bowl. We could assume most people are like the Baudelaires, only valuing the sugar bowl because they've taken the word of another volunteer at face value, but I think (for instance) Esme must believe she knows what's in it. I grant a nonzero possibility that it indeed contains sugar, Beatrice and Lemony stole it under false priors, Esmé blew her top off at anything being stolen from her because she's Esmé, and everyone else just assumed Esmé had a reason to be so angry. All that being said, the fact that the shot of Esmé's tea set contains the sugar cubes outside of a bowl to emphasize the bowl's being missing implies that, no, the sugar ain't in it no more.
|
|
|
Post by Liam R. Findlay on Apr 8, 2018 7:29:24 GMT -5
It's interesting that you mention the shot of the sugar because I thought about that before and the presence of sugar would suggest that the bowl may have contained it the last time it was in Esmé's possession and it may well still have sugar in it. This could mean any number of things or not mean anything at all but it's something to consider. Maybe it is just a vessel for sugar and Esmé's just darned annoyed that Beatrice had the audacity to take it. I don't blame her for chucking kids down an elevator, whipping out her stiletto heels and joining a murderous troupe when such a nice tea set is incomplete.
|
|
curt
Catastrophic Captain
Wait until the readers of The Daily Punctilio read about THIS!
Posts: 64
Likes: 47
|
Post by curt on Apr 8, 2018 9:14:32 GMT -5
Mess mess mess. Do u guys think Netflix would do the red herring parents thing again? Because we know who the survivor of the fire is and they brought that "Parents" element in season one, what if they flipped the switch and this time they actually mean it to be a Baudelaire and not a Quagmire like we are thinking, what if, what if...
|
|
|
Post by A comet crashing into Earth on Apr 8, 2018 9:56:38 GMT -5
Mess mess mess. Do u guys think Netflix would do the red herring parents thing again? Because we know who the survivor of the fire is and they brought that "Parents" element in season one, what if they flipped the switch and this time they actually mean it to be a Baudelaire and not a Quagmire like we are thinking, what if, what if... I don't think they will. In S1, the twist was that they were actually following the books, even if it didn't seem like it. If they were to do the same plotline again, but with the twist being that they weren't following the books, that would not only make the first twist feel kind of moot, but also just generally be a much more drastic thing to do, as they would have to change most aspects of the story around quite a lot for that to work. I feel fairly confident that the survivor will still be Quigley, and that's also what I hope.
|
|
curt
Catastrophic Captain
Wait until the readers of The Daily Punctilio read about THIS!
Posts: 64
Likes: 47
|
Post by curt on Apr 8, 2018 10:25:07 GMT -5
I'm such a mess today, keep chasing your schemes, at the end when he hits that high note and the Baudelaire orphans descend on the Quagmire's, it kinda was ingenious and an awesome moment that I felt, and I'm actually digging the score this season!
|
|
|
Post by Uncle Algernon on Apr 8, 2018 10:35:32 GMT -5
Mess mess mess. Do u guys think Netflix would do the red herring parents thing again? Because we know who the survivor of the fire is and they brought that "Parents" element in season one, what if they flipped the switch and this time they actually mean it to be a Baudelaire and not a Quagmire like we are thinking, what if, what if... I don't think they will. In S1, the twist was that they were actually following the books, even if it didn't seem like it. If they were to do the same plotline again, but with the twist being that they weren't following the books, that would not only make the first twist feel kind of moot, but also just generally be a much more drastic thing to do, as they would have to change most aspects of the story around quite a lot for that to work. I feel fairly confident that the survivor will still be Quigley, and that's also what I hope. They could have the Snicket File refer to Quigley, but still have Beatrice survive as the book theory already postulates she did.
|
|
curt
Catastrophic Captain
Wait until the readers of The Daily Punctilio read about THIS!
Posts: 64
Likes: 47
|
Post by curt on Apr 8, 2018 11:03:26 GMT -5
"to the bitter end", has anyone mentioned this foreshadowing? Haha
|
|
|
Post by Groge on Apr 9, 2018 8:33:25 GMT -5
Finished the season last night. Fantastic! I especially loved the horror take on THH and the Volunteers Fighting Disease were just spot on. I did expect the exterior of the hospital to be more like the illustration where 1 sixe was complete and the other wasn't at all. This seemed a bit more subtle. Seemed more like 3 quaters finished with just a little construction work going on at the side.
TCC was done perfectly too. Once it was revealed that the librian was Olivia then like most of us, I knew it would all just play out the same way. Having been given a backstory to the character it made you feel far more when she died. It also meant the Baudelaires cared more not only when she died but when they found out it was her in disguise all along.
I found this season more serious and less funny than season 1 but I'm not complaining. It is inkeeping with the books and there were still plenty of moments I thought were hilarious.
I loved the inclusion of the VFD flashbacks to their HQ. Finding out exciting information of past events, mysteries and secrets from previous generations is something I love in storytelling. To see all their guardians together, Lemony and Jacques was great. Then of course the message "Olaf knows" being passed around, Olaf moving towards Beatrice and Lemony screaming out to her. What does the message mean?
..and of course Kit! For those that haven't read the books it certainly implies that this is Beatrice. The whole fire survivor theory going around and then Lemony saying that he knows her very well. This tricks the audience but we all know who she really is!
|
|
|
Post by gothicarchiesfan on Apr 9, 2018 14:22:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gothicarchiesfan on Apr 10, 2018 0:16:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Liam R. Findlay on Apr 10, 2018 3:59:27 GMT -5
The social media team deserve a lot of praise for their ideas! Carmelita replied to people's tweets (some months old) with videos made especially to address them. There were only a few times when the same video was re-used to reply to different tweets. My favourite was her reply to an animal rescue account who reported on a chihuahua called Carmelita Spats being adopted
|
|