Apple TV+ For All Mankind (2019) - Season 4 (1 Viewer)

[Sean Bryan]

For All Mankind Bosses Talk Finale Time Jump, Who Will and Won’t Be Back in Potential Season 5 — Plus, Grade It!

Warning: The following contains spoilers for For All Mankind’s Season 4 finale. Proceed at your own risk! Per tradition, For All Mankind wrapped up Season 4 by jumping forward in time fr…

tvline.com

 

[jayembee]

The Expanse is fundamentally hopeful. But it’s also realistic about human nature. And that’s a dark and nihilistic reality. But that makes for a great backdrop for people’s capacity for growth and change to be revealed.

Quite. I was just re-watching The Expanse's final season on disc, and at the end of the final episode there's a wonderful speech by Naomi to Holden that speaks to the ultimate humanity of it all. And to why Holden is such a great character.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I found it a bit confounding, to be honest.

I agree. For all of the reasons you stated and maybe a couple more, I found it an uneven ending to a somewhat disappointing season.

Most of the stories being told this year could have been easily adapted for a non-science fiction, earth-set story about labor relations, and without wanting to call into question the validity of that storytelling choice, I think For All Mankind is a stronger show when it focuses on stories that can only be told in the context of space exploration, and more pedestrian when it tells stories that aren’t particularly beholden to science.

The showrunners have not ruled out bringing Ed back as a main character for a fifth season. I think that would be a mistake.

I wholeheartedly agree. It’s time for this show to move on from Ed, Dani and some of the other legacy characters. For several reasons. It really strains credulity that these people would still be major players after all this time. It also creates a false sense that these people are so special that only they can do the job. And it really confines/shrinks the world building that the showrunners keep finding new roles for the actors they’ve already hired instead of exploring new characters and situations.

I continue to like this show despite my frustrations with some of the behind the scenes decision making. I’d like to see it dream bigger.

 

[Yee-Ming]

My working assumption at this point is that Irina Morozova had him killed to keep Margo from having divided loyalties. But if so, it's certain to backfire, as it will only validate Sergei's warning to Margo about the threat posed by Irina.

My assumption was simply that the USSR would not let a traitorous defector live. Up till then, Sergei had quietly lived as a schoolteacher in Iowa, and probably escaped KGB detection. But once he started 'hanging around' Houston, he was probably spotted, and orders would have come down to execute him. Making it look like a suicide being a necessity as well, to avoid blowback or reprisals from the USA, who in turn would know who he really was.

 

[Yee-Ming]

I was and reminded that For All Mankind is also a hopeful positive show at its core.

The past three episodes I’ve been waiting for the tug of war over Goldilocks to result in the asteroid being pushed into a collision with Earth or Mars. But that’s not what FAM is about. So it results in the best outcome of a perfectly stable orbit about Mars, to be mined. Now vast riches of Iridium will flow back to Earth, and we’ll all have free iPhone-powered flying electric cars by 2012.

Call me a dumdum, but is iridium that supremely useful, such as to change the world economy that radically? It's probably relatively expensive today because of its relatively scarcity, but if it becomes plentiful then its cost will fall; in turn, the question then is are there uses for it, that today aren't viable because of its cost/scarcity, but if it is readily available, these uses really are such radical advances?

 

[Yee-Ming]

Heh, should've read Wikipedia before posting: iridium is used in OLEDs, something we on
HTF can fully appreciate

But seriously, super-hard, corrosion resistant, although brittle and hard to work. I suppose I can see how that could be quite useful.

 

[jayembee]

I found it a bit confounding, to be honest. We're basically being asked to root for the people committing international sabotage, because keeping the asteroid at Mars would keep the space program alive.

In a way, that's part of what was making me excited in watching it all play out. At some point, I said to me wife, "I realize that I'm still not sure if I want to see the asteroid heist succeed or not." It's like watching a really good heist movie, like say, The Asphalt Jungle or The Killing, where the characters you're following are criminals, and you shouldn't be rooting for them, but because they are the characters you're following, you kind of get pulled into the excitement of seeing if they manage to get away with it.

But the flash forward to 2012, other than confirming that the saboteurs' gambit had the intended outcome, doesn't tell us anything about where humanity's ventures out into space are headed next.

I found it curious that the time jump wasn't longer (in presentation, I mean, not in the amount of time it jumps), as it was in previous season finales, but I'm wondering if that had to do with a renewal not being announced yet. I'm not sure, but I think in the two seasons, they knew ahead of the finale if another season was coming.

I found the resolution of Margo's story moving and effective. She finally took responsibility for her actions, while ensuring that her life's work would continue after her. Seeing herself in Wernher von Braun, and recognizing the parallels between her choices and his moral and ethical lapses, was a nice way to bring things full circle.

Exactly. This was the best outcome possible, given the circumstances. If she'd be taken back to Moscow, her dead body would likely be dumped from the plane on the way back. Before the ultimate subterfuge became clear, once she was told about Sergei's death, I was expecting that she'd offer up herself to the FBI instead of returning to Russia.

I was glad that Dani survived the gunshot wound and made it home to Earth and her new grandbaby. She was too good for the quagmire she inherited.

I was expecting that Ed would be the one getting shot. If nothing else, it would've made the decision to drop him from the cast for next season easier. But it actually made sense for Dani to be the one to get shot instead of Ed. Ed getting shot probably wouldn't have stopped the riot. The "lower decks" may not have liked Dani when push comes to shove, but I think they had some measure of respect for her. Certainly more than the other side would have had for Ed.

 

[jayembee]

Dev and Ed undermined America's strategy to most efficiently utilize a resource of supreme economic importance. I don't support the use of torture under any circumstance, but nor do I find the actions of the US and Soviet governments especially over-the-top given what was at stake.

It occurs to me to wonder if the ease to which America (apparently) was OK with using torture in this circumstance is related to 9/11 not taking place in the FAM timeline. Seems to me that 9/11 and its aftermath in the real world had a lot to do with our current attitudes -- in both directions -- about torture. (NB: Not intending to start a political argument about the subject.)

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Call me a dumdum, but is iridium that supremely useful, such as to change the world economy that radically? It's probably relatively expensive today because of its relatively scarcity, but if it becomes plentiful then its cost will fall; in turn, the question then is are there uses for it, that today aren't viable because of its cost/scarcity, but if it is readily available, these uses really are such radical advances?

It's one of the densest metals, and it's also extremely resistant to corrosion. It's good for making crucibles that in turn allow the production of lasers, computer memory, and semiconductors. One of its isotopes is also really useful for medical imaging.

It occurs to me to wonder if the ease to which America (apparently) was OK with using torture in this circumstance is related to 9/11 not taking place in the FAM timeline. Seems to me that 9/11 and its aftermath in the real world had a lot to do with our current attitudes -- in both directions -- about torture. (NB: Not intending to start a political argument about the subject.)

The torture on Mars was clearly meant to parallel Abu Ghraib in our timeline, but it's worth noting that the CIA's use of torture did not originate with 9/11. CIA officials trained both the South Vietnamese army and various right wing South American governments in the use of torture throughout the Cold War. The School of the Americas, established in the Panama Canal Zone after World War II, developed a bad reputation for being associated with human rights abuses.

So it seems reasonable that "enhanced interrogation" technique would be within Mike Bishop's skill set. And torture was certainly within the KGB's skill set.

 

[jayembee]

The torture on Mars was clearly meant to parallel Abu Ghraib in our timeline, but it's worth noting that the CIA's use of torture did not originate with 9/11. CIA officials trained both the South Vietnamese army and various right wing South American governments in the use of torture throughout the Cold War. The School of the Americas, established in the Panama Canal Zone after World War II, developed a bad reputation for being associated with human rights abuses.

So it seems reasonable that "enhanced interrogation" technique would be within Mike Bishop's skill set. And torture was certainly within the KGB's skill set.

Oh, no doubt. My point was that we (the American public) started seriously questioning the use of "enhanced interrogation" due to the stories coming out of the "War on Terror": Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, and extraordinary rendition to black sites. If there was no "War on Terror" in the early 00s, would we have made that sea change?

 

[jayembee]

I was expecting that Ed would be the one getting shot. If nothing else, it would've made the decision to drop him from the cast for next season easier. But it actually made sense for Dani to be the one to get shot instead of Ed. Ed getting shot probably wouldn't have stopped the riot. The "lower decks" may not have liked Dani when push comes to shove, but I think they had some measure of respect for her. Certainly more than the other side would have had for Ed.

Oddly enough, the TV Line article linked to by some here makes the same argument.