jae: (theamericansgecko)
Jae ([personal profile] jae) wrote in [community profile] theamericans2014-03-05 07:45 pm
Entry tags:

Episode discussion post: "Cardinal"

Aired:
5 March 2014 in the U.S. and Canada
9 March 2014 in Israel
22 March 2014 in the UK

This is a discussion post for episode 202 of The Americans, intended for viewers who are watching the show on the U.S./Canadian schedule. (Feel free to dive in to the discussion if you're reading this later and have already seen subsequent episodes, but please take care to keep comments spoiler-free of anything that comes after season two, episode two.)

Original promo trailers





Episode recaps

From Vulture
From Hitfix
From The AV Club
From The Huffington Post
From IGN
From Think Progress
From SpoilerTV
From Zap2it
From Television Without Pity
From TV Ate My Wardrobe
From Filmthrasher
From showratings.tv
From Newsmanone
From Screenrant
From the LA Times
From Geekbinge
From tvrage.com
From Unreality TV (UK)
soupytwist: Dude says NO to heterosexuality. (mmm... vice)

[personal profile] soupytwist 2014-03-07 10:42 pm (UTC)(link)
That's a good point about it being difficult to extricate the characters from that scenario. And I think you're right that Martha talking about wanting kids is by far more likely!

I am kind of amused by your last paragraph though, because I happen to have a family member who was told at 20 that she would never have kids, and then at nearly 40 ended up with an "oops" baby! (At nine months pregnant she apparently threatened to go round to the doctor who originally told her that and just stand outside his house with a big arrow pointing at her belly...)

[personal profile] katiac 2014-03-07 10:52 pm (UTC)(link)
I think I didn't word my response very well... it's not that you *can't* become pregnant at that age. It's just that for most women, it takes a LOT more effort than at 20. Like you can try and try and try, and it can still be very hard. So if Martha and "Clark" were actively trying, sure, but I would assume unless Philip is the biggest idiot on the planet who doesn't care about kids (which couldn't be less like him) that he is using protection every time, having figured out over the years that his targets would love to "trap" him too. And then there's the factor that he's not over there all that often. So with those two factors, it just seems that much more unlikely. (I would assume once your family member was told she couldn't have kids, she probably wasn't protecting against it as intensively, or at least I wouldn't have, in her shoes.)

Like people have mentioned what are the chances Stan moves across the street from the Jennings when he's THE branch of the FBI looking for THEM. And that is a stretch, although one that works for dramatic purposes. But I think they can only have so many of those before it starts to feel forced. Like I thought the way they magically found Amador's ring so quickly to be off the charts in terms of luck and coincidence. I think it's stronger when they don't have to hinge plots off something like that.
soupytwist: stephen fry peering round a wall (Default)

[personal profile] soupytwist 2014-03-07 10:59 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh no, you didn't say it could NEVER happen of course and I didn't think you meant that - I just thought it was funny because I have the exception in my own family! And I agree about it being better to minimise the number of unlikely things, because the more there are the more ridiculous it ends up seeming!