u/Specialist_Dig2613

▲ 0 r/Dexter

Sarah Walker Look Part 3 (The Assasin),

This is Yvonne Strahovski when asked to portray a character who has killed remorselessly. This preceded her casting as Hannah McKay and with the definition of "serial killer" employed by many Dexter viewers, Sarah Walker was a more prolific "serial killer" than Hannah McKay. And this Sarah Walker look is very similar to Dexter's look at the moment of many of his planned kills.

So why were the Dexter writers so committed to portraying Hannah McKay as a passionless killer and a loving partner to Dexter, when they cast an actress who could easily portray a female version of Season 1 through 4 Dexter. The answer is pretty clearly that they're telling the audience that "serial killer" is sloppy and meaningless language and that "the Code's" license for Dexter to kill "other serial killers" has corroded Dexter to the point of self-hatred and needs a radical cure.

Hannah is the cure and Harrision in New Blood and Resurrection is her legacy, fully embraced by Clyde Phillips and the creative team.

reddit.com
u/Specialist_Dig2613 — 3 days ago
▲ 113 r/chuck

Sarah Walker Look Part 3 (The Assasin),

No guessing game about this one. It's Sarah/Yvonne executing the Fulcrum agent, Mauser, in Santa Claus (Season 2, episode 11). But what's interesting about this scene is the emotional tightrope Yvonne was asked to walk in this particular scene.

At very beginning of 1.2, Chuck flashes on Sarah's ring and the intersect plays back a scene of Sarah gunning down a bunch of people (even though the Intersect was supposedly scrubbed of Sarah and Casey references). That frames Chuck's fears of what he has fallen into, where this delightful woman that he's drawn to may actually be an asassin for hire. That's not going to pass Chuck's moral code, regardless of Sarah's plea for trust.

Bookend that with her later-revealed misery about her red test, so deep that she cannot stomach Chuck's sanctioned shooting of the mole, to the point that she believes that she has lost "her Chuck" and bears all of the responsibility. All of that has to be built into the Mauser scene and because Chuck is watching, it's going to create a tailspin.

The creative choice to set all of that up and use Yvonne's face to deliver the complexity without a word of dialogue is a bridge they had already crossed, but this one was really tough. Sarah moves from doubt to resignation to remorseless determination in the space of 30 seconds, Mauser presupposes the outcome, because he knows her orders. She even admits that Mauser is right and he can't kill him within the framework of CIA rules and her handler/protector rules. But he takes the fatal step of proclaiming that "Fulcrum wins" and Chuck may survive as a person, but not in the same way.

The final look it one of full defiance and acceptance of moral duty. But the duty that triumphs is her duty to "her Chuck" and her own hopeful vision of the future.

Sarah sees the "red test" and shooting Mauser on separate moral plains. And so do the "Chuck" creators. It's a flip of the conventional framework, where sanctioned killing is acceptable in narrow circumstances, where personal agency is removed. In Chuck-world, the sanctioners are untrustworthy and the characters with a adequately inforned and developed personal moral code are infused with their own agency. And Chuck will come to understand Sarah's decision as a reflection of true love.

u/Specialist_Dig2613 — 3 days ago
▲ 122 r/chuck

Place this Sarah Walker look and tell me what it means.

Yvonne was a virtuoso in showing the multiple dimensions of Sarah Walker and every expression had a purpose. I had to deconstruct a key scene, because this look (beyond her obvious beauty) was literally on screne for less than a second and later assumed huge importance.

I think it was intended to plant a subliminal message to viewers, much like an intersect flash. It"s not a classic Sarah expression. It's entirely pure.

u/Specialist_Dig2613 — 14 days ago

In ‘For All Mankind,’ America Wins by Losing - The New York Times

Good perspective on the FAM messaging relating to the paths of technology developments and the impact of a fully realized space program in the last 60 years. I agree with the bottom line. Chasing the Soviets through space would have required investments in technology that would have changed the substance of life on Earth.

Enabling space travel requires new rechnology on every front--food sourcing, energy sourcing, basic medicine, housing and shelter, etc. FAM lays out the sude effects in a credible way and shows a path where brainpower and resources would have lead to less Earth conflict, more collaboration and earlier competition between the public and private sectors.

FAM is as much of a real history commentary piece as an alternative history fiction. If you lived through that history, you know that JFK and others pitched their vision in those terms--we know that landing on the Moon will challenge us, but we also know that the response will have important side effects relative to life on Earth.

Humanity lost so much when we paused for three generations.

nytimes.com
u/Specialist_Dig2613 — 16 days ago
▲ 14 r/orioles

Latest Baseball America Prospect Hot Sheet--Dzierwa No. 2, Aloy No. 4, German No. 8

But all three have teammates that have better numbers. Figueroa at Frederick, Cartaya at Frederick and Levi Wells at Norfolk (pretty close).

Farm system looking pretty good. If they need a RH bat and CF (Beavers fill-in), I'd go with Jud Fabian or give Trimble a shot. 61 SBs with no CS sounds like a good guy to have on the bench. Maybe give Cowser an every day shot at Norfolk with Kjerstad back and promote both Fabian and Trimble.

With Irish, George and Bradfield still coming, why not test Trimble and Fabian? Thoughts. They are at the R5 exposure level and Cowser has options.

reddit.com
u/Specialist_Dig2613 — 29 days ago