Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Revolution 1.19 "Children of Men" Review: Just Another Monday


    Enable Dark Mode!

  • What's HOT
  • Premiere Calendar
  • Ratings News
  • Movies
  • YouTube Channel
  • Submit Scoop
  • Contact Us
  • Search
  • Privacy Policy
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

Revolution 1.19 "Children of Men" Review: Just Another Monday

28 May 2013

Share on Reddit
    This week’s episode of Revolution, “Children of Men,” was written by David Rambo and Jim Barnes and directed by Frederick E. O. Toye. This is the second last episode of the season and things are starting to build to a climax. This episode featured some great lines and action sequences. We also see the world of Revolution expand a bit more through the introduction of some new characters.
    This episode felt a bit stronger than some of the recent episodes and had a few really great moments for me. Miles’ (Billy Burke) declaration that it was “Just another Monday” is a typical Kripke shout out to the fact that the show airs on Mondays. My favorite exchange of dialogue was Neville (Giancarlo Esposito) calling Aaron (Zak Orth) “Chubs” and Aaron responding by calling Neville a “Dick.” The blood explosions in the fight in the Tower are a Kripke signature. I also loved the Star Wars: Return of the Jedi shout out as Aaron and company are trying to break into the Tower under a hail of enemy fire. Watching Dr Warren’s book burn, which is also reflected in Aaron’s glasses is a wonderful visual echo of Grace’s (Maria Howell) revelation that turning the power on could result in setting the world on fire and a powerful image to end the episode wit.
    Rachel (Elizabeth Mitchell) once again fails to kill Monroe (David Lyons). The scene with her pulling the pin on the grenade and then letting the soldier wrestle it away from her was bordering on the ridiculous. The show redeemed itself somewhat through Monroe’s insight that she didn’t really want to commit suicide even if she did want him dead. This does make sense. Rachel is a fighter – she’s been fighting for her kids since Danny was born after all. I’ll admit to rolling my eyes when Monroe started confessing to Rachel that he’d just learned he had a son, so now he understood her anger over Danny’s death. Mitchell does a credible job conveying Rachel’s reluctant sympathy for him. In fact, both Mitchell and Lyons deliver powerful performances in the scene. The flashback to Rachel and Ben (Tim Guinee) after the blackout and the parallel of Monroe’s and Rachel’s comments on needing redemption for the blood on their hands – especially from their children is very effective. We see Rachel at her weakest in the flashback and Ben using the children to give her strength – the very thing she is continuing to draw strength from. It’s hard to believe, however, that after years of ruthlessness, Monroe is suddenly going to have a change of heart and overcome his paranoia for a son he’s never seen. Rachel puts Charlie (Tracy Spiridakos) ahead of Miles (Billy Burke) when she gives Monroe the gun and trusts him to help save Charlie. He does save Charlie even if Rachel immediately gets Charlie and Aaron captured.
    Giancarlo Epsosito delivers yet another great performance. Neville keeps his cool even through getting captured and manipulates the dynamic of fear and suspicion that is festering in the Monroe militia. It’s surprising when Jason (J.D. Pardo) jumps in to support Neville’s bid to win Riley’s (Omid Abtahi) trust. I’d be surprised if Jason is really interested in taking over the Monroe militia, but I’d also be surprised if Neville isn’t going to make a legitimate bid to become the head of the Militia and usurp Monroe’s power if he can. It’s likely that Franklin’s (Ramon Fernandez) grasp on command is weak due to his quick promotion and general distrust of Monroe’s irratic behavior. The question is whether either of them still feels any loyalty to Miles and the Rebels.
    The other great villain, Randall Flynn’s (Colm Feore) fate is uncertain. I’ll be really disappointed if they’ve killed off Feore. Feore is a delight to watch as he reacts to Rachel’s gaining access to the Tower when he couldn’t. Randall, of course, knew Rachel before the blackout, which is telling as he says to her, “You never had much self-preservation.” The flashback with Ben and the discussion with Monroe demonstrate that her self-preservation is all about protecting her children – something Randall doesn’t understand. Randall did know about a stairwell at the end of the hall on Level 11, so I’m hoping he made it to the stairwell.
    Miles and Nora (Daniella Alonso) have relatively little to do in this episode. We do get to see Nora bring out her mad knife skills again, and once more save Miles’ life. I was once more rolling my eyes as we are left with yet another standoff between Miles and Monroe, however. Upcoming promotional photos would suggest that neither of them is about to pay the price but will leave collateral damage in their wake yet again. With both Miles and Monroe having major plot lines revolving around them, it’s hard to feel a sense of impending doom for either of them which serves to lessen the tension for me.
    The last scene of the episode is one of the most powerful. We finally discover who has been using those electromagnetic coil guns to essentially explode people. It was great to see Glenn Morshower join the cast as Dan. His screen credits are too numerous to list, but my favorite roles of his include runs on 24 and The West Wing. Rachel recognizes him immediately, and it quickly becomes clear that the only reason they are still alive is because of Rachel. The flashbacks tell us that Randall had planned a “launch” of some kind and there was some kind of resistance planned for it as Ben and Rachel fight about the pendant. We also see in the flashbacks that Rachel and Ben had been having some difficulties in their relationship. Randall tells Monroe that the Tower is the crown jewel of the US military. In the fifteen years since the blackout, the people in the Tower have dedicated their lives to protecting the Tower from anyone trying to use it because it is too powerful to be in anyone’s hands. Being sequestered and giving up just being able to enjoy the sun would have to make them zealots if they hadn’t started out that way. I suspect their very sacrifice is going to make it difficult for anyone to gain control over the power, even if all they want to do, like Aaron, is some good. The flashbacks and comments by both Dan and Grace indicate that shutting down the power actually saved lives.
    Next week marks the season finale. I’m anticipating a fairly major cliffhanger – or two – as Kripke is known for them. He’s put a lot of balls in the air so far this season, but he’s also answered a lot of the questions that were asked at the beginning of the season. It will be interesting to see what Neville does once he has Monroe’s militia at his disposal – and how Monroe responds. Will Monroe join back up with Miles? Will he go looking for his son? What’s the likelihood of Miles and company abandoning their quest to turn the power back on? How likely is it that Dan and company will let them? Lots to look forward to in the upcoming episode. What do you think will happen in the season finale? Let me know in the comments below.

45 comments:

  1. One little statement sums up this episode: Bad Science, Bad Writing, Bad Concept and 43 minutes of pure unintentional comedy will surly ensue. Not to mention the fact this episode had far more in common with "Beneath the Planet of The Apes" then "The Children of Men". It probably should have been called something very different. The only thing really missing from the action: " Tower is people. People are the Tower"! I would have loved that nod to Solyent Green.

    ReplyDelete
  2. wow you are harsh. This show is not bad it is really good, also i've had it with people stating it is "bad-science". This is not a FICTIONAL television show therefore the science doesn't have to be possible, for example in Fringe with the shapeshifters, are they real? I think not.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I pretty much agree with your assessment in this review (good title, by the way). Better than some of the recent episodes but still plenty of eyerolling moments. I'd say this episode was "okay." The most eyerolling aspect was the number of times it now gets us up to in which Monroe has narrowly escaped death (heck two in this episode alone, let alone all the ones in previous pisodes). Rachel: roll the frikcin' grenade under the edge of the tent; it will almost certainly not be noticed! Miles: FIRE THE FRICKIN' GUN!!!!!! Seriously, what's with these people? I get that the plot requires that Monroe continue to be around as the big bad (though aren't they supposed to be killing a major character?), but it doesn't require that his survival be handled so ham-fistedly.
    And I really really hope we don't get another son quest. Maybe it's just that a few other shows I've been watching have dealt with parents who just can't keep hold of their kids, or that the "son I never knew" device is just so shopworn, or that this show's already exhausted that particular dynamic in my opinion (over half a season wasted on Danny to no good end, the whole Tom/Jason dynamic--even Aaron's lost wife is a kind of version of it, and Randall's lunacy seems directly linked to his loss of his son, plus others forded to do stuff because their family is being held hostage), so yet another missing/alienated family member as a plot driver would be too much. Yes, faminly is important to everybody, but really, does nobody ever do anything except when motivated by it?
    When they burned the book, I wasn't sure whether to be pissed off at yet another red herring plot coupon being rendered worthless or reluctantly impressed that they're not going to provide the obvious fix. I am somewhat disappointed that the level twelve inhabitants seem not to be nano-zombies, but I guess I can live with that (though I hope we get some more explanation of how they've been able to live underground for fifteen years in an underground military bunker; it's hard to imagine such a facility being equipped with the supplies (e.g. seeds) or equipment (e.g. extensive hydroponics) that would be necessary to provide the food these folk would need.
    I agree that the acting in this show is for the most part very good. Lyons and Esposito, especially, continue to impress me, and even Rachel, despite being almost intolerably inconsistent and idiotic, is rendered almost bearable by Mitchell. But that guy who plays Jason really needs to find some other way to play his relationship with daddy than by glaring at him like a pouty mongoose.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Read some of his other posts, if you really want to see him at his "best." Or, probably better not....

    ReplyDelete
  5. Good review! :)

    One nitpick though: ''The flashbacks tell us that Randall had planned a “launch” of some kind and there was some kind of resistance planned for it as Ben and Rachel fight about the pendant.''



    Said launch was revealed early in the show in a flashback. They were going to unleash the nanites on a terrorist base in the middle-east. Ben and Rachel warned Flynn back then that the containment may not hold.


    Also, did I see someone who looked a damn lot like Ben in one of the shootouts?

    ReplyDelete
  6. I can't tell how bad I hope we have dopplegangers! -But I def missed that. I wish I knew a good place to get screencaps for Revolution, but I have not found a good up to date source yet.

    If anyone does, please let me know! Thanks. :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. I agree this show is fiction & solely for entertainment. It has lots of action, love story & an interesting plot - what more could you ask for. Relax & enjoy relatively interesting storytelling & good acting.

    ReplyDelete
  8. *then


    And gtfo

    ReplyDelete
  9. what is GTFO and 'then????

    ReplyDelete
  10. On second viewing I'm doubting it a bit, I included a screenshot perhaps I am seeing things that aren't there? :)

    ReplyDelete
  11. I am honest. Kripke said he did his homework on the so-called premise of this show. That is clearly not true. His rebels are only practiced in the art of tomfoolery. His villains are cartoonish. His use of Science DEPLORABLE! But Kripke has mastered one thing-- the art of unintentional comedy! One the things that really helps is over use of 1970's B Movies for plot ideas.

    ReplyDelete
  12. How is it an astute person such as yourself missed the biggest problems with the entire episode:


    1) Who makes a weapon you cannot turn off? What good is a weapon that will infest the world turn off all electricity indiscriminately ??? Even a nuclear weapon is more controllable then this weapon would be.



    2) Why is the Tower in the control of scientists and not the military? When was the last time you saw a military installation that is super-secret get taken over by the scientists that work in it?



    3) Coil Guns that you can hold in your own hand-- How Eraser of them! Problem electromagnetic guns need so much power to operate they would need a pull along generator to make them work! And by pull along I mean one on the back of flatbed trailer behind an Peterbilt. So I'm not buying the electromagnetic weapons smaller then what you would mount on a Destroyer or Aircraft carrier. I really love how they are sight less weapons. They must thought targeted?



    4) Why is it that the Jason and Tom are not just simply shot on sight! Two major characters dead! Thank God!





    5) Why didn't Dan just kill Randal when he first showed up in the tower? You know send up a team of people take out Randal and his buddies-- most of the problems solved! So why now is it that Dan is playing games with Randal??? (oh that would be the new mystery-- not a very good one!) I have theory that the elevators are not the only way up and down in the tower...





    I'm just curious why these incredibly glaring errors you didn't mention? Instead you talk about the food supply. If this location is used to support the government in the event of war-- it could probably keep 2500 people or more alive for 20 years or more. So food isn't the issue. The bigger issue is would they be sane after spending 15 years underground.


    Which might explain the cult of the nanobots!

    ReplyDelete
  13. What part of "this conversation is over" didn't sink in with you?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Agree totally!!! Rudolf is a known troll - ignore him, the rest of us do!

    ReplyDelete
  15. That would be a go away - with which I concur. We all know you hate the show. You are simply repeating yourself, and we don't agree, and we don't care.

    ReplyDelete
  16. In the show's defense, I think that the kind of apocalypse fiction that it is almost demands lost connection plot threads. I'll concede that they could be handled better. Really having Danny killed after half the season looking for him was annoying - like John getting killed in the first ep of season 2 in Supernatural after the whole first season of looking for him - only, in that case the reason for season 2 grew out of that. I'm not seeing that logical progression here...


    I would agree that we haven't seen Pardo impress in the acting department yet. He seems to have one 90-yard death glare that he pulls out for every tense moment - from staring at Charlie through the closing door to the tower to staring at his captures to staring at his dad... At least Mitchell changes her stares up to suit what she thinks her character is doing (regardless of whether that seems consistent - but I'm blaming that on the somewhat inconsistent portrayal of her to keep the audience guessing)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Fair enough on the nitpick! But my point was that we have it re-emphasized and we get to see Ben actively working on it and that there was a lot of tension between Rachel and Ben over it. Perhaps, I should have said we got yet more perspective on what was happening before the blackout...

    ReplyDelete
  18. I have to say he doesn't look much like Ben to me... it would have been an interesting twist. I hope at some point we at least get flashbacks of Miles and Ben together...

    ReplyDelete
  19. Thanks! I agree with Lisa that he doesn't look like Ben in the face, but I can see in motion with his hair and eye-settings how one could make the comparison. (I probably would have too!!)

    I'm still hoping for a double sometime though!

    ReplyDelete
  20. I'll give you more time then.

    ReplyDelete
  21. That's Her, Rudolf Diesel to you!

    ReplyDelete
  22. I would prefer not to.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Does anyone know why this episode is focused on the Atmosphere Igniting??? It is a historical point of interest actually. And I'll give a Clue Enrico Fermi July 16th, 1945. If you understand this historical bit of information the plot makes a little more sense, but, not much more.

    ReplyDelete
  24. This show is so good. I wanted it to be the new Lost but it's turning out more like Heroes and that's okay.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Does anyone know why they picked out the Nanobots would ignite the atmosphere???? I'll give a clue Enrico Fermi, July 16,1945.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I'd rather have bad science in work of FICTION, then a have man (i'm assuming you are) with bad manners in actual reality continuously come to harass other viewers about something the generally enjoy.

    It's not that I don't think your not entitled to your opinion, but clearly, because of the amount of hate and/or criticism you produce, goes beyond that opinion as you are now taking it out on it's viewers making it very personal.

    The point of most fiction is not to be perfectly accurate, but create unique situations to explore humanity within, as those conditions are ripe for extreme behaviors and/or personalities and/or for a writer to convey some kind of philosophy. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out!


    One suggestion I can make is to start your own blog and right your own critiques.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Happy to see someone else enjoying it too!

    ReplyDelete
  28. I agree with DarthLock4 that I can totally see how you would have thought it could be Ben in motion!

    ReplyDelete
  29. Thanks for this... I concur 100%

    ReplyDelete
  30. I just tell the truth on people they only think it is hell...

    ReplyDelete
  31. This just in... we can't actually "turn the lights off." So why in the WORLD are you watching this show based on a "faulty" premise?! Seriously, peeps like you are just trying to be smart and nothing else when in actuality you are a close-minded and bigot many times.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I knew that was you on that site, but thanks for confirming it. It's nice that you hide your real identity behind usernames everywhere. Why is that? Your diatribes that are supposed to pass as reviews are easy to spot. I would request that you remove the libelous statements you make about me on that site.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Technically, I've not done anything libelous-- reviews are opinions and you can have an opinion out fellow reviewers. But I'll be nice and remove it. Call it good will on my part. Next time you see one drop a line!

    ReplyDelete
  34. You can post this in other places where you'll hear people voicing similar opinions to yours. IGN for example gave 6.5 ratings for this episode and at TWOP the popular opinion is to hate this show.
    I got to ask though why you're still watching. The bad sciense and writing were enough for me to drop this show and spend my time on shows I enjoy more, and I recommend you do the same if it bothers you this much.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I hope so too! I was disappointed when I paused the episode! Clearly wasn't Ben at all. xD

    ReplyDelete
  36. The combination of him being in motion and the adrenaline rush I had while watching this episode unfold both contributed to my seeing Ben where he wasn't.


    But the feeling I got from ''Clue'' when they showed the people in the tower watching the monitor was that they had to be clones! Boy, was I wrong on that one. xD

    ReplyDelete
  37. A pivotal moment in history-- it brought about two famous quotes Now, I am Become Death. The Destroyer of Worlds and the one I'm alluding too above!

    ReplyDelete
  38. How about "the tower that ate people"? Fave Gabriel song, man.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Yeah, I get what YOU were talking about ...

    ReplyDelete
  40. Could you please elaborate to this poor soul? I'd like to know your sources to prove your point - even why the Science is Deplorable. It is a stretch, I can give you that, but it is a Science Fiction show after all... So, yes, I am quite interested in knowing your full opinion on the matter.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Bad Robot and Eric Kripke in particular reference and use pop culture in their works as part of the anthology and beliefs expressed in their works, as these are works many people around the world enjoy and relate to. It unites fans across the board and points out a universal "human" factor, as at least for Bad Robot I can vouch for pro humanism outcomes.


    Again you are aloud to enjoy or not enjoy any work or anything that you like or dislike, but you have missed the fact that this isn't about what people like, this is how YOU TREAT PEOPLE, because of what they like or don't like, and you're being beyond rude.


    I'm glad you spend your time so wisely. Just think how much time you could be spending here, if you hadn't spent it elsewhere.


    Anyways I do not plan on responding to you again, as you're wasting everybody's time by being so critical in arguments, instead of being kind or helpful and leading people to that interesting reference you're talking about. Even if you have a issues with the lack of realism, you don't have to behave this way.

    ReplyDelete
  42. It's not a Peter Gabriel song reference. During the Trinity Test Physicist Enrico Fermi started to ask the people in the safe zone how much of the Atmosphere did they think the implosion bomb design would ignite when detonated. He even went has far as to say how much of the state or planet would the explosion effect if the atmosphere were to ignite. That was on July 16th, 1945 in New Mexico.

    The second betting pool was about the kiloton yield of the bomb itself. It ranged from 0(dud) to 45kt-- the winner was I.I Rabi with a guess of 18kt-- actual yield of the weapon about 18.6kt.


    The point is that at the end of the episode we are supposed to get the idea that Rachel is like an Oppenheimer character. She has released onto the world a new weapon of terrible destructive power--one that like the Nuclear Weapons of WWII could not be put back into their boxes so easily. She is having her moment with: "I am become death, the destroyer of worlds." which is one of the quotes that Oppenheimer has claimed to have had rumbling around his head during the Trinity test.



    Also just like the first nuclear weapons designers she is also vehemently opposed to using the weapon.



    It helps to know this history only because it makes Rachel a slightly more believable character. However, it would have been better to develop Rachel's character more in the pre-blackout period to explain this.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Sure! And great review again by the way! I really enjoyed this episode. I wish more of them could be like this one!!


    (I'm still working on my recap, but wanted to stop by and lend a hand to fellow Spoiler TV writer!! Especially since we both write for Revolution!!)

    ReplyDelete
  44. Not true. It is libelous if you criticize the reviewer's opinions and not the show. Again it's not your disagreements that are problematic, it's the way in which you go about your disagreements, as you make it an attack on the reviewer's acceptances, instead of just being critical towards the show. (Prime example: My recap from last week) Additionally it floors me that you seek to continue to watch a show and have these discussions with other people, when you have so many problems with it. It points out that you don't watch the show, because you want to like it and connect to others in a positive way, but because you want to denounce it's viewers in the name of your beliefs.


    Not once have I seen a comment from you that suggest you're enjoying anything you're viewing. "What's Your Angle?"

    ReplyDelete
  45. I'm not the one who cannot accept the fact that recalcitrant world views may exist. However, you seem to be having some issues with this reality. Why is that? Why do you think that positing an opposing view is harassment? Is your position so weak that you feel that you can only surround yourself with the platitudes of acolytes? Do you want to have an honest conversation about the subject matter? I think you don't? I think you want to have a nice little review-then have a bunch of parrots repeat how much they love this or that aspect of the series. That way you can maintain the veneer of substantive discussion without the messiness of actually having a true opposition point of view discussed.

    As for hate/criticism? Where is the hate... If I say Kripke is inept that has little bearing on the fans. Do you feel personally attacked Darthlocke4 when some says that a writer or producer of mass consumable entertainment products is poor at his or her job? If so you might want to get that looked at. I mean that is a serious case of transference. Most people can see that finding the work produced by the producer doesn't reflect any disdain towards the viewers themselves. Unless of course the fans begin to totally associate themselves with the producer or creator of such and such mass entertainment product.

    I'll give you a great a example of realism working in fictional film accounts: The Bicycle Thieves, The Battle of Algiers, Rome the Open City, and The Kid with a Bike to name a few. This show would do work a lot better if took a page from The Battle of Algiers instead of raiding Star Wars for ideas.

    Oh, I do write other places. In fact these statements are not as strong as I would state in other places:http://revolutiontvshow.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=833#.UaUeR-v9tT8

    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.