Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon POLL : What did you think of Alcatraz - Clarence Montgomery?
Sign Up


    Enable Dark Mode!

  • What's HOT
  • Premiere Calendar
  • Ratings News
  • Movies
  • YouTube Channel
  • Submit Scoop
  • Contact Us
  • Search
  • Privacy Policy
Get In Touch
 Join SpoilerTV
Support SpoilerTV
SpoilerTV.com is now available ad-free to for all premium subscribers. Thank you for considering becoming a SpoilerTV premium member!

SpoilerTV - TV Spoilers

POLL : What did you think of Alcatraz - Clarence Montgomery?

Mar 13, 2012

Share on Reddit

-
Sign Up for the SpoilerTV Newsletter where we talk all things TV!

10 comments:

  1. DarqueModeMarch 13, 2012 at 2:05 AM

    Was there any changes from the iTunes version from 2 weeks ago?
    My DVR decided not to record this episode for some reason....

    ReplyDelete
  2. DarqueModeMarch 13, 2012 at 9:43 AM

    Here's Clarence's mugshot:

    ReplyDelete
  3. prpleightMarch 13, 2012 at 9:57 AM

    In many respects I thought this was a great episode.  I thought they missed something after the riot started.  One of the other black prisoners would have gone to Clarence.  He wouldn't have been left standing alone when that fight broke out.  Someone would have guarded him.  Minor in the realm of things but it stuck out to me.  I thought the ending, his buddy putting him out of misery was totally the right ending and I was glad that he was officially cleared of the 1958 murder.

    Well, Dr. Beauregard isn't a total fraud...really, I've figured through most of this series that he didn't really know what he was doing.  Like he'd paid someone to take his board exams (or whatever they are for being a doctor)  he got the Alcatraz job because if his incompetence killed someone it wouldn't matter to anyone.  But he was on the ball enough to modify Sengupta treatment.

    On the other hand something about the ep kept me from really getting into it.  I connected with Clarence more in the past than the present.  I think what would have made it better was if, maybe, instead of spending so much time watching them chase Clarence if I got another scene between him and the guy in the wheel chair.  OH!  I know what I needed....something horrible was done to this guy and piece that was missing was the sense of his reaction to it all.  We got it in one scene but the rest of the time he was just fa la la going about his life.

    At some point during the episode I got majorly frustrated and began thinking about not watching anymore.  Why the bl**dy f**king h**l are they sending these guys back?  Two or three guys, apparently had a task to complete.  But the rest of them...  Too much of the series has become standard procedural criminal of the weeks stuff.  None of the regular characters are interesting or compelling enough to pull me in.

    Sigh.  

    ReplyDelete
  4. prpleightMarch 13, 2012 at 10:05 AM

    "Pretty sad that Mongeomery's desire to live with his memories (the memories that were not his past as it turns out) caused him to become the man he never was. Had he let Dr. Sengupta erase those memories he may not have been a killer when he returned. Sad....."
    Interesting.  I didin't interpret the scene that way.  I thought Clarence was saying that she *couldn't* take them possibly because of the *way* they were implanted.

    Did I miss something?  Must re-watch that scene...I don't remember Beauregard saying he put the blood back in.  I thought it was just Doc that said that about a different prison.

    ReplyDelete
  5. DarqueModeMarch 13, 2012 at 10:41 AM

    I'm not sure he would know enough about memories or the human brain to tell Sengupta her business. If she said she could help him I trusted her on it I guess.

    I guess my thought on the memories was that Montgomery was saying even if Dr. Sengupta removed them, Yapper would still be dead. He was seeing it in the short term and never expected he could be sent to the future etc....

    So I took it as Montgomery's guilt and frustration over being in prison for something he did not do leading him to do what he was accused of in the first place. That feeling of inevitability and lack of control, and the desire to not try to forget what he had done meant keeping his memories. Those memories in the future caused him to kill again and again....I watched it 2 weeks ago so I'm not sure.... I thought Beauregard said something to Warden James like "So what do you do with the blood between the time I take it and put it back in?" Maybe it was more vague and he said or meant  I take it and the blood is eventually put back in by someone? Could be.....

    ReplyDelete
  6. DarqueModeMarch 13, 2012 at 10:51 AM

    I wish there was more myth arc every episode too.

    The repetitive nature of chasing an "escapee" every week is starting to get old to me like the repetitive nature of EVERY procedural does....

    It might be different if the myth arc development in each episode was more linear in nature. Right now it feels like a bunch of facts are given and those facts mean nothing until they are combined. The issue I have is that the modern day team is not really putting anything together or investigating the root cause of the "disappearances". 

    They happen to accidentally uncover a few bits here and there as they try to apprehend the case of the week, but they have yet to actually delve into the mystery of the past directly and it makes no sense. In the pilot Doc said something to Hauser like "You want us to capture these 63s?" Hauser's reply was along the lines of "And the people responsible" or "and figure out why".... I forget exactly what he said now. 

    TPTB's deliberate avoidance of the serial element in the modern day side of the show makes it half as good as the show could be. Worse yet, every week I wonder, WHY THE F$%^# are the continuing to be "reactive" chasing down 3s and not starting to be "proactive" and investigate the disappearances more directly.

    ReplyDelete
  7. CliffMarch 13, 2012 at 5:31 PM

    yippie!

    ReplyDelete
  8. prpleightMarch 13, 2012 at 9:54 PM

    No, your memory about what Beauregard said is accurate.  I re-watched it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. prpleightMarch 13, 2012 at 10:55 PM

    As my thoughts coalesced today I realized that what you mention, (Doc and the cop never ask why this person is back) is one of the symptoms of my growing problem with the show.  The net result of that is that I've stopped believing the writers have an answer to that question.  That's where my frustration lies.   I don't trust that the writers have the answers they're asking me to hang around to get.   I've lost faith with the writers and consequently, they're close to losing me as a viewer.

    X-Files had that problem...Chris Carter was writing conspiracy eps for a conspiracy he publicly stated he hadn't put together and he didn't care about it; he just liked crafting the hour.  When he was forced to pull it together it made no sense.

    Buffy...occasionally had eps at the beginning of their seasons that where I couldn't see the sense in the big picture.  But I trusted Joss Whedon to have a big picture that came together and I was never disappointed. 

    Fringe...same thing.  I may have issues with one or more of the first eps of a season, but the big picture has always been there...so I'll happily sit there and let the story build.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Stupot815March 14, 2012 at 2:24 PM

    I don't think the writers have gone into this show totally blind as to what is causing the 63s to come back.  I just think they have so little material, myth-arc-wise, that they're padding it out with increasingly boring cases of the week to make it last longer.

    ReplyDelete

NOTE: Name-calling, personal attacks, spamming, excessive self-promotion, condescending pomposity, general assiness, racism, sexism, any-other-ism, homophobia, acrophobia, and destructive (versus constructive) criticism will get you BANNED from the party.