Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 44 (click to see context) from:
to:
** She picked it up, heard the click...very CAREFULLY moved to see it...and turned on her phone VEERY carefully.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Deleted line(s) 74 (click to see context) :
Changed line(s) 76,78 (click to see context) from:
** Keep in mind that Aldis , the actor who plays Hardison, really ''was'' 24 when "The San Lorenzo Job" first aired.
to:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
***Hardison is not lacking for stylistic flair. It’s not unreasonable to believe he might have adopted the aesthetic of 90’s teen hacker movies. We’re never shown him having a mentor in his craft, or even any peers. If he was completely self-taught, he could easily have wanted to emulate media portrayals.
Changed line(s) 75 (click to see context) from:
** Plus, Harrison is not lacking for stylistic flair. It’s not unreasonable to believe he might have adopted the aesthetic of 90’s teen hacker movies. We’re never shown him having a mentor in his craft, or even any peers. If he was completely self-taught, he could easily have wanted to emulate media portrayals.
to:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 74 (click to see context) from:
** Keep in mind that Aldis Hodge, the actor who plays Hardison, really ''was'' 24 when "The San Lorenzo Job" first aired.
to:
** Keep in mind that Aldis Hodge, , the actor who plays Hardison, really ''was'' 24 when "The San Lorenzo Job" first aired.aired.
**Plus, Harrison is not lacking for stylistic flair. It’s not unreasonable to believe he might have adopted the aesthetic of 90’s teen hacker movies. We’re never shown him having a mentor in his craft, or even any peers. If he was completely self-taught, he could easily have wanted to emulate media portrayals.
**Plus, Harrison is not lacking for stylistic flair. It’s not unreasonable to believe he might have adopted the aesthetic of 90’s teen hacker movies. We’re never shown him having a mentor in his craft, or even any peers. If he was completely self-taught, he could easily have wanted to emulate media portrayals.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Deleted line(s) 25 (click to see context) :
* Won't they need to build up their team again? The ending implies it'll just be the three of them, but way too many of their cons require 4 or 5 people.
Added DiffLines:
* Won't they need to build up their team again? The ending implies it'll just be the three of them, but way too many of their cons require 4 or 5 people.
** Moved this here, but...Hardison also points out that people will be THROWING themselves at the team to get a job, with the info they now have...it'll be easy to have enough people to fill it out.
** Moved this here, but...Hardison also points out that people will be THROWING themselves at the team to get a job, with the info they now have...it'll be easy to have enough people to fill it out.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** From what I gathered they were way too slippery for that, the mother implied at the end it wasn’t the first time she and her sons had to move. If they caught a whiff that the cops were coming they would’ve been in the wind before the police could do anything.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* In "The Long Goodbye Job": was Parker's gunshot wound meant to be fatal? In the shot in the back of the van, it's clear that the boys are dead, but Parker could just as easily have still been alive there. She got hit in the right shoulder (and as we all know the right shoulder is infinitely safer than the left shoulder), there wasn't nearly enough blood for her to have bled out, and when Sterling learns that there were three bodies in the van he immediately concludes that Parker was the one that survived (whether she got out of the van pre- or post-crash or was never in the van at all). So was Parker supposed to be dead in that brief shot of the back of the van, or was she supposed to be alive?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** In "The Experimental Job," Sophie's shown coaching Hardison through a wine tasting, using many of the same skills. It's very likely that Sophie has learned chocolate and wine tasting to better pull off grifts in the past, and it came in handy here.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** In the shot where Nate's injury is revealed to the audience, when he takes his hand away from the wound and it's full of blood, he's clearly shaking and in a lot of pain. But he was pulling it together so that he could complete his plan, and so the team wouldn't know he was injured--presumably they wouldn't have left him behind if he was hurt, no matter what the plan was. He gave up the facade when the team was safely gone and he could collapse without them seeing.
Added DiffLines:
** "The clothes on our backs" is a fairly metaphorical expression as well, and I doubt it was meant to literally refer to whatever the team happened to be wearing, but rather to whatever they had on them more generally, meaning that they had no equipment or supplies with which to run a con or effectively lay low.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
* In "The First David Job", why was Sophie upset with Nate for [[spoiler:having planned to use the team to exact his revenge on Blackpool?]] It's not like their entire operation is built on taking revenge on people or anything. She herself had set up a plan to take down Blackpool specifically because of what he had done to Nate [[spoiler:(although her motives there are somewhat debatable, she intended at least in part to help Nate resolve some emotional turmoil)]]. So why was it so wrong [[spoiler:when Nate had planned to do it himself?]]
** In her TheReasonYouSuck speech, Sophie [[spoiler:points out that deep down, Nate thinks of the team as disposable criminals and himself as morally superior to them because he doesn't circumvent the law to get what he wants, only to help other people. But it turns out that all along Nate had intended to point his justice-machine at IYS and Blackpool to get his own personal revenge--an appropriate goal, but ultimately a selfish one--while hypocritically judging the team for having operated outside the law for selfish reasons. Sophie was angry that Nate continued to think of himself as better than the team even though he was engaging in the exact same behaviors that he felt made them morally inferior to him, and not accepting that that's what was going on]].
** In her TheReasonYouSuck speech, Sophie [[spoiler:points out that deep down, Nate thinks of the team as disposable criminals and himself as morally superior to them because he doesn't circumvent the law to get what he wants, only to help other people. But it turns out that all along Nate had intended to point his justice-machine at IYS and Blackpool to get his own personal revenge--an appropriate goal, but ultimately a selfish one--while hypocritically judging the team for having operated outside the law for selfish reasons. Sophie was angry that Nate continued to think of himself as better than the team even though he was engaging in the exact same behaviors that he felt made them morally inferior to him, and not accepting that that's what was going on]].
Changed line(s) 30 (click to see context) from:
** It's very possibly to hide the severity of an injury for a good length of time before it becomes too much and overwhelms you, especially with something like a [[spoiler: non-lethal gunshot where the main threat is of blood loss]]. Even if you're not as willful a person as [[spoiler: Nathan Ford]].
to:
** It's very possibly possible to hide the severity of an injury for a good length of time before it becomes too much and overwhelms you, especially with something like a [[spoiler: non-lethal gunshot where the main threat is of blood loss]]. Even if you're not as willful a person as [[spoiler: Nathan Ford]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Hardison could easily have been 20 during the Rashomon flashbacks and not have turned 25 yet by San Lorenzo.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* In 'The Two Live Crew Job': How did Sophie end up HOLDING the bomb? I get that the scene wouldn't be anywhere near as high-stakes if it was just sitting nicely on a table. But Hardison had to check security footage to see who delivered it--meaning that Sophie didn't know who'd delivered it, meaning that no one handed it to her or forced her to pick it up. If she picked up the vase without knowing there was a bomb in it, based on where it was positioned in the vase and with the flowers in the way, she wouldn't have been able to see it was there without displacing the water and setting it off. So why was she holding it when the team arrived?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* In "The Grave Danger Job", why didn't the siblings go to the police? It's one of the times the team faces actual run of the mill conmen. Not someone who has pocketed the police or can hide behind their money/company. They're legit conmen who beat up a civilian.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 108 (click to see context) from:
** At that point, they were worrying about [[spoiler:a bomb that was about to release a weaponized version of the Spanish flu and infect '''at least''' the entire D.C. area.]] Anyways, at the end of the episode, Hardison comments "I told you, he takes getting shot very lightly."
to:
** At that point, they were worrying about [[spoiler:a bomb that was about to release a weaponized version of the Spanish flu UsefulNotes/TheSpanishFlu and infect '''at least''' the entire D.C. area.]] Anyways, at the end of the episode, Hardison comments "I told you, he takes getting shot very lightly."
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* Won't they need to build up their team again? The ending implies it'll just be the three of them, but way too many of their cons require 4 or 5 people.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 123,124 (click to see context) from:
to:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 122,124 (click to see context) from:
[[/folder]]
to:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** The indication from Nate's lines earlier was that this was an honest skill she had, although it's implied she may have picked it up for an earlier grift.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** She's trying to sell the offer, so you always go presumptuous. She's not going to convince Eliot by saying "we could be a relatively successful band." This is like a rock band saying "We could be bigger than the Beatles." Even if you don't actually believe it, you still say it, because you need confidence to sell the dream to other people. The fact that they were married is probably attempting to sweeten the pot with the idea that she and Eliot could pursue a relationship rather than saying they should get married.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** The simplest answer is that there was some sort of bad blood between the two of them. Nate picked it up and fleshed it out with cold reading, then grifted to bring it up and got the two mad at each other, probably while "trying to defuse" the situation while actually egging them on/making it worse.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** The Mayor is way too scared at this point to think that straight. Even once he's "safe" in FBI custody, he's still so rattled that he's self-medicating with alcohol. By the time he's calm enough to think about the inconsistency, he's probably forgotten all about it, and it's definitely too late anyway.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
**** I don't recall them ever mentioning Nate going broke, but he pours a lot of his money into the finances of the group and gives most of the rest to charity.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* When Nate figures out the Mayor is wired he literally tries to take his head off for the attempt on Bonano. Just minutes later Nate passes himself off as someone just as bad as Kadjic who chops up and disposes of witnesses. The Mayor never asks why a man like that cares about a cop?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Given that statement and the camera showing them receiving something like $30 million each, why is Nate described a couple times as going broke?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Sophie can’t be a chocolate connoisseur in her own right? People can be multifaceted and multitalented just because she never had the opportunity to show that talent before or since on the show doesn’t mean it isn’t real.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Five Bad Band was cut
Changed line(s) 131 (click to see context) from:
* WordOfGod always went out of its way to mention that our protagonists are [[FiveBadBand the bad guys]]---but we surely wouldn't realize that from watching the show. Eliot is a hitter whose main job is knocking people out - some of which are just doing their jobs. We never see any of them suffering injuries, although every single one of them has [[HardHead at least a concussion and is at risk of serious brain damage]]. Hardison never screws up and deletes data which will set half the company back several years, or causes sensitive data to leak out and destroy the entire company's business. Not to mention the collateral damage (also mentioned in YMMV) caused by taking down these huge companies. Innocent workers being thrown into unemployment, pension funds being flushed down the drain, investors, any other company who relies on this one, be it as huge part of their supply chain or as their main customer... Never explored. Sure, we get a lot of info on how being criminals affected THEM (Eliot's life changed completely by killing people, Parker never got a chance to develop normally, Sophie's grifting leads to an identity crisis...), but for a show that's so proud of its BlackAndGrayMorality, the heroes appear as exactly that - heroes.
to:
* WordOfGod always went out of its way to mention that our protagonists are [[FiveBadBand the bad guys]]---but guys--but we surely wouldn't realize that from watching the show. Eliot is a hitter whose main job is knocking people out - some of which are just doing their jobs. We never see any of them suffering injuries, although every single one of them has [[HardHead at least a concussion and is at risk of serious brain damage]]. Hardison never screws up and deletes data which will set half the company back several years, or causes sensitive data to leak out and destroy the entire company's business. Not to mention the collateral damage (also mentioned in YMMV) caused by taking down these huge companies. Innocent workers being thrown into unemployment, pension funds being flushed down the drain, investors, any other company who relies on this one, be it as huge part of their supply chain or as their main customer... Never explored. Sure, we get a lot of info on how being criminals affected THEM (Eliot's life changed completely by killing people, Parker never got a chance to develop normally, Sophie's grifting leads to an identity crisis...), but for a show that's so proud of its BlackAndGrayMorality, the heroes appear as exactly that - heroes.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 36 (click to see context) from:
* In the 'Two Live Crew Job' the name Sophie Devereaux was on the grave stone at the end. Both the funeral was for Catherine (Eliot corrects himself, and the others all clearly use that name during the scene). It's entirely likely that Sophie's apartment was in the name Catherine and they held a funeral for the Catherine identity because that was the one that publicly died. But why isn't that the name on the headstone?
to:
* In the 'Two Live Crew Job' the name Sophie Devereaux was on the grave stone at the end. Both But the funeral was for Catherine (Eliot corrects himself, and the others all clearly use that name during the scene). It's entirely likely that Sophie's apartment was in the name Catherine and they held a funeral for the Catherine identity because that was the one that publicly died. But why isn't that the name on the headstone?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 36,37 (click to see context) from:
[[/folder]]
to:
[[/folder]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* They're usually pretty good at explaining the cons, but there's one I don't get. In "The Boiler Room Job," Sophie poses as "the Chocolate Whisperer" and wins the tasting competition. But how? The things she says are too specific to be something like cold reading, so it's not that. Hardison offers to rig it with her earpiece, but she does fine without him. So how does she know where the bean is from, what its characteristics are, and what kind of bean it is?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Sophie was probably part of the 'morgue van driver' team, and got clearance that way. She went off and conned a van from the transportation pool (Or just stole it if 'everyone' really went upstairs.) while the rest of the team went upstairs.
