TVSquad

All Agree? well I dont

I thought tonight's episode was sentimentalist crap. These people are prisoners...criminals. We are all adult enough to deal with that.

We dont need them to make them all out to really be sweet guys who got a raw deal. Hell they even made TBag out to be a nice guy trying to get reformed.

This is absurd and treats the audience like saps. They think we cant watch a show unless they make all the characters (even the villians) likable? Are we to believe there are no career criminals in Fox River...they were all first time offenders who were just their for one mistake trying to do something nice for their loving family. Come ON

btw the VP's brother is played by John Billingsly (Star Trek Enterprise's Dr. Phlox). He is very much alive. In fact he is already signed on to a pilot for ABC next year, but I believe he will be in all the remaining Prison Break episodes for this season.

Reply

I loved the episode. I was really shocked by doc sara! T-bag creeped me out when he was watching those two kids just before he got made by his 'girlfriend'. I can't wait for next week.

BTW, I think Terrence was played by Dr. Phlox from Enterprise, John Billingsley.

Reply

hey, number 1, nobody's perfect, and most NORMAL people would agree this was a good episode. It would be a sweeping generalization to think that all people in jail are cold, mindless, killers/thieves etc. etc. many people come upon rough times and have to take desperate measures. i dunno, but most people, unlike you, have shame when they take welfare and other assistance things, the one person i dont feel bad for is the child molesting guy. hes f***ed up

Reply

"Here's what confused me about T-Bag's story. Here he was, supposedly trying to get in good with this woman and her family, which seemed to be for at least a little while. So, didn't T-Bag have a little, er, male companion he desperately cared about on the outside? Where'd he come from? And where did he go to? It seemed totally inconsistent."

I just checked my DVR. In "Odd Man Out", the man on the outside that gets killed is James Bagwell, T-Bag's cousin. (Pedophile towards male children does NOT equal always homosexual.)


I think that showing the boys' softer side was rather a nice touch. They aren't saying that they're not criminals, but some criminals have hearts.


I didn't record this episode, but I wish I could have. I want to look over the tatoo again, and what was with the shovel?

Reply

The shovel (you mean him digging up the grave?) was something to do with abruzzi (sp) I think...

Reply

C-Note was probably out on bond, or bail or whatever. It's not unusual for a person to not be in custody before their hearing. That's why we have bail bondsmen.

Reply

To respond to #1's posting, what's wrong with showing other sides of the same characters? What's wrong with showing a good side of a pedophile? That's how you make your characters deeper, and not the dribble you see in most TV shows nowadays. By, showing other sides to these characters you give the audience more of a history to base their judgements on. If you read a novel you don't just want a normal detective, he's got to have some quirks and abnormalities. That's what makes you love, or hate characters. T-bag's story showed just how WARPED he really is. He thought he was changing from a murderer, he thought he'd fooled himself into thinking he was actually a good guy, and that murder was something you could leave in the past, but you can't, and it shows the audience how crazy he really is. It wasn't at all trying to make him out to be a good guy. Also, with C-note he wasn't a criminal, and we found that out. He got a raw deal. How can you just say, ALL these guys are criminals? We know for sure Licoln didn't do the thing that he's in prison for. We know that Michael,even though he held up a bank, didn't actually ever mean to harm anyone.
In my opinion this show has moved into a realm it desperatly needed to. The whole show was basically based around Michael's tattoo, though it is cool, it isn't enough to carry a show through a whole season. Now we know these characters had lives, and what they are going to do when they get out. Don't think for a second that the writers are short-changing us.

Reply

i have no problem with showing other sides

my point is that I have no need to be shown how likable and redeemable these guys are. I am perfectly comfortable watching a show like Oz with real criminals who arent neccessarily kind to their mothers and furry creatures. you can add dimension without turning them into the 'good guy who got a bad break' stereotype.

Reply

Nope, this episode sucked. I have no problem showing "the other side" of the story. Fine, make T-Bag out to be more human (although I think it was kind of awkward) - BUT.... pretty much everyone else was put to jail on fluke crimes? Oh you see he was robbing somoene to get money for his girlfriend --- NOW I can like him. Please.... sentimentalist crap is right.

Reply

Taking an episode away from the storylines to focus on the characters only shows how flimsy they really are. Stick to the action and plot. That's why we're all watching. Well, that and the performances, but even those can't help if the writing is as hackneyed as it was tonight. Implausible I can handle, but implausible and sappy is one step too far.

Reply

The episode was horrible. I like prison break, and I
hoped this episode would bring some insight into the
characters, and it instead made the storylines sappier
and more impossible. C-note's story is by far the most
unbelievable, and plain stupid. Michael and Linc's
story ties everything together the wrong way. and the
doctor, PLEEEEAAASE, I've never seen anything more
preachy and stupid on TV lately. I was expecting
something a lot darker from T-bag. I love that
character, but this season I'm liking him less and
less.

I wish they would have brought Peter Stormare's
Abruzzi back in at least in flash backs.

Sucre's story was really cool, the only higlight into
an otherwise bland episode. I loved the musical lead
in for the robberies, brilliant!

Reply

It was disappointing to see an attempt at something LOST has raised the bar so high on. The back stories were seriously flawed.

1. Dr. Sarah would have lost the ability to practice medicine. The woman saw her name. It would have been reported.
2. Sucre would not have robbed the the same store...especially without a lookout. He's street smart...right?
3. T-Bag's a pedophile...an issue I'm sure the censors didn't want to touch. His scenes had 're-shoot' written all over them.
4. Lincoln's set up...huh? I know nothing more about his setup than I did this time yesterday. Why, because it was poorly written to begin with. The brushed with Sucre just seemed contrived.
5. C-Note. As the poster pointed out, you don't get to go home after being convicted. Being a Vet...don't get me started on the military scenes...as if.
6. Michael really didn't seem that devoted in this episode. The whole 'I'm gonna save my peeps' thing just seemed contrived. Not believable at all. I think it was written well enough, but the acting was bad.

In the end, I like the show still, but it lost a few point with this episode.

Reply

s

Reply

I thought it was good to see the other sides of some of the characters; although Abruzzi should have been in it. (I hope we get a clue soon as to whether he's alive or not!)

I agree that it was stupid that Sucre robbed the same store twice(everyone KNOWS you don't do that!), and that it was wrong to make T-Bag more "likable".

About Dr. Sara, a prison is probably the only place that she could be hired after coming out of rehab. (Little-known-fact: You don't need a medical license to be a prison doctor.)

I don't think that the episode was a totally useless to the current plot. We learned a little more about the VP's brother; and we know that part of the escape plan has something to do with a grave in Mexico. But I agree that Prison Break should stick to the present.

Reply

I guess none of you actually watch Lost either. Kate is a hardcore criminal in that, and we still like her. Sawyer is a bad person, but his flashbacks make you feel sorry for him.
What's wrong with making these guys not hardened criminals? I don't get it. All they are doing is telling a story, and trying to move away from stereotypes, which hurt characters. At the beginning this whole show was stereotypes, and now you have more ground to love them or hate them. And I really don't understand how T-bags flashback could even be construed as the writers wanting us to like him. If this is what you got from that you're totally wrong! The way he looked at the little girl when he was teaching her, her 9 times tables, was extremely creepy. He's like any other pshycopathic pedophile that lies to himself thinking he's changed, but he hasn't and never will.
I guess everyone has just got used to a show based on the "tattoo", and that's what they want. Well, what are you going to do with the show when they all break out? The tattoo won't really matter then. It will be a lot more about the characters themselves, what are you going to do then? What are you going to do when you see the tearful reunion of C-note and his wife and daughter, "Oh he shouldn't act like that he's a criminal." Or maybe for all your sakes part of Michael's tattoo is going to be used to guide him through the rest of his life.
PS--Some criminals get caught doing STUPID stuff. A guy here in Utah robbed the same bank 3 times before he got caught. Why is Sucre's story so unbelievable?

Reply

Can someone tell me two things that I am missing?
Who is Abruzzi?
What was writen on the note paper handed to Michael in the bar by this man, and what did it mean?

Overall, I like the show and it added a lot more dimension to the show, for me.

Reply

RE: the show is trying to make them less of a stereotype

actually the show is making them more of a stereotype. They are turning them into that Hollywood fantasy of the 'good guy who got one tough break' BS. I have no problem with protagonists who are criminals. I dont need the sap. Hell TV now has two new shows (Heist and Theif) about career criminals. DId we really need to see that these guys just got one tough break...no. It makes them less believable and more one dimensional.

it is insulting to the audience that they felt we needed them to be softened up for us to accept them as our 'heroes'

Reply

OK who got "One Tough Break"? Only C-note did. Many, many people are caught because of America's Most Wanted, so it was only a matter of time for T-bag. We all know why Michael is there. Sucre was poor and as his last resort he had to steal to get money for his girl. His bad break came because his cousin turned him in because of his jealousy. His cousin was the one that led him to do what he was doing. Licoln, was always a bad dude, but had a good heart putting Michael through school and everything.
Next thing you'll be saying is the agent that turned and realized that he was doing something wrong, was wrong to do that, because he's a souless secret service agent and he shouldn't have done something so stupid, because everyone knows YOU DON'T GO UP AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT.
The fact is that the writers can tell whatever story they want to, these are THEIR chracters not YOURS. But, I'm sure that most criminals in prison are crazy idiots that are beating each other up all the time. I'm sure there's not a handful of them that got a bad break, I mean come on.
Also, I want to know what your basis of the "Hollywood Bad Guy Who Got One Tough Break" Stereotype comes from. Give examples.
Everyone knows in fiction all the plots have been done over and over. The only new things you can come up with are characters. Characters drive the story, not tattoos.

Reply

I agree with Keith and some of the other comments about this episode being a great one.Before this episode, I had my own opinions about each character's history,stemming from how each character was originally presented to us. Boy, was I wrong! I thought Michael's strong sacrificing desire to get his brother out of prison,came from his love he had for his brother since childhood. But we find in the flashback, that Michael seemingly had a great disdain for Lincoln, until he found out that the money which paid for his college education,came from Lincoln, not from their mom's insurance,as he once believed. As for Dr. Sara, I thought her to be & have always been a "priviledge & stuck-up" governor's daughter....definitely not a junkie! And as for T-Bag...I was surprised to see that he was in a relationship with a woman. At first, his character attempts to show love & tenderness towards the woman & her children. T-bag showing affection to anyone took me by surprise for a moment. But then, the real T-bag, the one we all know, comes back to the surface. We see that he is on America's Most wanted for murdering six people. Then when his "lady love" visits him in prison,he threatenly reminds her that he remembers where she lives.... He no longer had a loving face. Yeah, T-Bag was T-bag all the way.Also,through the flashbacks,we get a better understanding as to why C-Note is so bitter to everyone.IMO, the flashback episode gave more depth to the central characters, and hence, more depth to the story. And to me, this episode was just more icing on the cake!

Reply

BOLSHOI BOOZE says 32 0 09 104 57 09 upside down."

but what does that mean?
what was he doing at the grave?

Reply