Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
UNRULY_HOUSEGUEST
Jul 19, 2006

mea culpa


Jared's main gig is getting totally shut the gently caress out of what is going on with his family at any given time so I think the idea is that his unhealthy curiosity about Daniel's murder case is a reaction to being so coddled (even in season 1 he had a whole book of press clippings)

I doubt it's going anywhere too extreme but he has to blow up sometime. I guess at least Teddy is spending time with him even if it's not going to help his issues around privacy

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

UNRULY_HOUSEGUEST
Jul 19, 2006

mea culpa


life is killing me posted:

I don't think it's so much that the Senator has been pursuing the wrong man the entire time, although that is a big part of it--it's that he seems to have a chip on his shoulder for Daniel and seems to KNOW that Daniel is innocent because he's started to be pretty overtly slimy in the vein of Trey. He knows Daniel is innocent but for some reason hates him, or at least it's a huge inconvenience to him that he helped put a man behind bars 20 years ago and now he might have been wrong, and we can't have that because he's a senator goddammit and he's up for reelection. He is almost sort of boasting while trying to hide something, which, as wrong an analogy as it probably is, reminds me of Danny Glover in Shooter, whose I'm-Obviously-Guilty-As-gently caress-Of-Everything-But-I-Know-You-Can't-Prove-poo poo attitude toward the end was really telling. I could cut and paste that attitude and it'd fit perfectly on the senator, so I also saw the stroke scene as a kind of comeuppance, and it fits well as a plot device to make us feel even more like Daniel is innocent and the senator knows it. The show is nudging us along to come to that conclusion without ever really intending to directly give it to us, and that's the beauty of Rectify.

Also, it also could have served a dual purpose of letting Michael O'Neill end his run on the show and move on, while also taking his character out of play in a way that works organically with the plot and makes sense.

See, as much as he's a highly unethical human being, I'm increasingly sure that Foulkes genuinely thinks Daniel is guilty. I mean he gave a whole speech to Ted Sr. towards the end of the last season that as much as it's politically damaging for him for Daniel to walk free, he truly believes Daniel is responsible for Hanna's murder. That would be a bit late in the series for Foulkes to simply state the opposite of how he really feels, and I don't think he's ever even been seen to so much as countenance the idea that Daniel's not guilty, regardless of who he's dealing with. If anything he really needs other people to see things with the same prejudice he does, which is what started to drive away his mistress at the diner. I do fully agree that he's covering for some sort of compromising personal investment in the case that we still haven't heard about, but it's an emotional one, not a cynical one.

Partly he's just blinded by how alien Daniel's personality and actions are to him: he seems sincerely to have taken stuff like his placing wildflowers on the body as a perversion and even decided that the near-death beating he took constituted "letting a man piss on him". Beyond that, at the risk of it sounding hackneyed I'd presume he's either the father of Hanna or was sexually involved with Hanna (or both, if the show wants to dive deep into Faulkner territory, although I doubt it). Or of course he could have a reason to deny the possibility of guilt of one of the other suspects, like Trey or Chris.

UNRULY_HOUSEGUEST
Jul 19, 2006

mea culpa


Brodeurs Nanny posted:

Right, he's trying to frame Daniel and throw everyone off his scent.
'
Another weird detail is Hannah's "I won't tell you if you don't tell." I think maybe a hosed-up detail of the case could be that Hannah's gang-rape was actually consensual, and she knew Daniel had feelings for her so she didn't want him to know.

Maybe Daniel figured it out and killed her in a rage? Maybe Trey did kill her to try to frame Daniel for some reason? Maybe the Senator had a big grudge to hold against Daniel and orchestrated things/paid off Trey to set him up/I don't know this is really hosed up to think about.

Chris seemed pretty confident that he was guilty of rape. According to Trey, Hanna lost her virginity to an uncle of hers when she was 13, so I suspect her muted reaction was more to do with being so inured to sexual abuse that she lost her sense of victimhood. Which is plenty hosed up. My take is Hanna liked Daniel because he didn't know about / judge her by her sexual history and wanted to keep it from him; if Daniel actually did kill her, it was probably misinterpreting what actually went on that night as consensual, because he wouldn't understand why she'd be more embarrassed and evasive than upset. Although obviously as a viewer I hope he's not responsible.

UNRULY_HOUSEGUEST
Jul 19, 2006

mea culpa


Bobby letting Jared go really seemed like the natural end of his arc. It repaid Daniel's act of forgiveness and it was clear he was done with living under the shadow of Hanna's murder. I suppose he might get reinvolved if a new suspect publicly emerges, but I don't think he'll be out for blood again.

  • Locked thread