# The handmaid's' tale



## 8den (Apr 26, 2017)

Surprised it's not mentioned yet, first three episodes are dodgily available and I have watched the 1st one It's almost too literal to the novella's plot, so curious as to how they'll sustain it with expanding on the world.

The Handmaid’s Tale: Elisabeth Moss stars in disturbing first full trailer – video

Cast got blowback at a Tribeca screening when they claimed it's not a "feminist" story. 

Why Won’t the Handmaid’s Tale Cast Call It Feminist?

Also worth remembering that the lovely Elizabeth Moss is a ghastly scientoligist...(I know)


----------



## Vintage Paw (Apr 26, 2017)

I was following the "it's not a feminist story" fallout as it happened on twitter. I have so many thoughts about that I can't articulate them because I wipe enough cat drool off my monitor as it is and I don't want to be wiping my own rage-induced spittle off it as well.


----------



## 8den (Apr 26, 2017)

Vintage Paw said:


> I was following the "it's not a feminist story" fallout as it happened on twitter. I have so many thoughts about that I can't articulate them because I wipe enough cat drool off my monitor as it is and I don't want to be wiping my own rage-induced spittle off it as well.


I can't remember where but I think it was late at night on ITV when 1st saw the Martin Sheen TV adaption. I may have been 11-12. Right then there utterly Pro Choice since and for the rest of my life.


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 26, 2017)

I wasn't aware there was a series.
Will try and catch it.


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 26, 2017)

8den said:


> ...Also worth remembering that the lovely Elizabeth Moss is a ghastly scientoligist...(I know)


Battlefield Earth scientologist or Tropic Thunder one?


----------



## Crispy (May 16, 2017)

This is really *really* good and you can watch 5 episodes right now if you steal them online, or you could wait till later this month when it starts on Channel 4

The Handmaid's Tale is finally airing in the UK - here's how to watch it


----------



## sojourner (May 16, 2017)

Crispy said:


> This is really *really* good and you can watch 5 episodes right now if you steal them online, or you could wait till later this month when it starts on Channel 4
> 
> The Handmaid's Tale is finally airing in the UK - here's how to watch it


Am i being thick Crispy ? I can't see where it says where to get it?


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (May 16, 2017)

Do you know how many there will be Crispy?


----------



## Crispy (May 16, 2017)

sojourner said:


> Am i being thick Crispy ? I can't see where it says where to get it?


On Channel 4, later this month (time and date tbc)


UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Do you know how many there will be Crispy?


Ten in all, and they won't finish the book with those ten.
edit: Apparently they will, and will expand the story beyond the book in future seasons

It really is fantastic. The acting, production design, cinematography, editing, all top notch. Totally gripping.


----------



## bimble (May 16, 2017)

How do you mean they won't finish the book, you think there'll be a second season ?


----------



## sojourner (May 16, 2017)

Crispy said:


> On Channel 4, later this month (time and date tbc)
> 
> Ten in all, and they won't finish the book with those ten.
> 
> It really is fantastic. The acting, production design, cinematography, editing, all top notch. Totally gripping.


Oh - I thought you said we could have it earlier? Steal it?


----------



## Crispy (May 16, 2017)

bimble said:


> How do you mean they won't finish the book, you think there'll be a second season ?


Already confirmed


sojourner said:


> Oh - I thought you said we could have it earlier? Steal it?


Download – Deluge
Handmaids Tale Torrent Magnet Download (67 Results) - TorrentQuest


----------



## Orang Utan (May 16, 2017)

Thought the first episode was great - i can see why they've opened up the world of the book a lot, so there's more to explore if it goes into multiple seasons..


----------



## sojourner (May 16, 2017)

Cheers


----------



## Crispy (May 16, 2017)

Actually I think you can also watch it on Amazon Prime if you've got that.

Don't steal. Stealing is wrong.


----------



## sojourner (May 16, 2017)

Crispy said:


> Actually I think you can also watch it on Amazon Prime if you've got that.
> 
> Don't steal. Stealing is wrong.


I think I'll just wait for it to come on the telly tbh


----------



## mrsfran (May 17, 2017)

It is really good. Elizabeth Moss's acting is tremendous.


----------



## Crispy (May 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> How do you mean they won't finish the book, you think there'll be a second season ?


I was mistaken - this season _will _complete the book, with future seasons expanding the story beyond it


----------



## bimble (May 17, 2017)

I don't want to watch this on my own, that's how good and scarily relevant I expect it to be, have asked the mr bimble to procure it from the internets and watch with me.


----------



## sim667 (May 17, 2017)

People keep talking about this, and I keep getting it confused with the new Chan-wook Park film.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 17, 2017)

The review for ep one I read was negative and said it stuck almost too closely to the book, leading me to think 'well I read the book twice and saw the old tv movie- why bother'

but I've got eps 1&2 on download as I keep seeing people bigging it up


----------



## Orang Utan (May 17, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> The review for ep one I read was negative and said it stuck almost too closely to the book, leading me to think 'well I read the book twice and saw the old tv movie- why bother'


There's no TV movie, but they did make a film of it in 1990 from a Harold Pinter screenplay. Wish I could remember more about it apart from rather lavish costumery and a lush score from Ryuchi Sakamoto


----------



## Santino (May 17, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> The review for ep one I read was negative and said it stuck almost too closely to the book, leading me to think 'well I read the book twice and saw the old tv movie- why bother'
> 
> but I've got eps 1&2 on download as I keep seeing people bigging it up


It's really very good.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 17, 2017)

Santino said:


> It's really very good.


you're not wrong. 1st ep sold me on it.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 18, 2017)

was still thinking on this this morning, thats a sign of quality. Main thought was how the actor who plays ofred is able to convey a lot of emotion from a carefully closed face. You get anger, hatred, despair even sly amusement all from that controlled mask. Couldn't do ep 2 on the same night, its a little intense.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (May 18, 2017)

It's been years since I read the book, so I'm going to download it and read it whilst I wait for all of season 1 to be out.


----------



## bimble (May 21, 2017)

I've got some really mixed feelings about it. Am not as impressed as i expected to be. (I've watched 4 and don't want to do any spoilers).
Loved the Philip Glass meets Blondie mashup playing over the flashback scene of the regime's violent crushing of the demonstration though that was superb.


----------



## spanglechick (May 21, 2017)

I've been watching it from the start.  Read the book as an undergrad, and found it compelling - forgotten much of it, but didn't think it would hold much interest for me 25 years on.  How wrong I was.  It's brilliant.  The updating, so powerful. The violence in the system (and the light it shines on our own system) so chilling.


----------



## bimble (May 21, 2017)

What do you think about the way in which, in this TV series, the crypto-fascist Christian regime is apparently completely race-blind. I find that cowardly and a missed opportunity.


----------



## spanglechick (May 21, 2017)

bimble said:


> What do you think about the way in which, in this TV series, the crypto-fascist Christian regime is apparently completely race-blind. I find that cowardly and a missed opportunity.


The commanders and their wives are all white, aren't they? Or have i missed something?  It's supposed to be New England, which is pretty whitewashed anyway.


----------



## bimble (May 21, 2017)

In the book, all the "children of ham" have been banished by the Gilead regime, which is a white supremacist world informed by American history, making the dystopia believable.
Casting black people as handmaids is a sort of erasure of the whole issue which I find glib and think is a mistake.


----------



## spanglechick (May 21, 2017)

bimble said:


> In the book, all the "children of ham" have been banished by the Gilead regime, which is a white supremacist world informed by American history, making the dystopia believable.
> Casting black people as handmaids is a sort of erasure of the whole issue which I find glib and think is a mistake.


Ahh, gotcha - like i say i's been a very long time since i read the book...


----------



## Orang Utan (May 21, 2017)

bimble said:


> In the book, all the "children of ham" have been banished by the Gilead regime, which is a white supremacist world informed by American history, making the dystopia believable.
> Casting black people as handmaids is a sort of erasure of the whole issue which I find glib and think is a mistake.


I think it would have had problems with an all white cast, and a smaller audience.


----------



## Santino (May 21, 2017)

bimble said:


> What do you think about the way in which, in this TV series, the crypto-fascist Christian regime is apparently completely race-blind. I find that cowardly and a missed opportunity.


They did think hard about it. I agree with their decision: Handmaid's Tale Series EP Explains Removal of White Supremacy Element


----------



## bimble (May 21, 2017)

That's interesting, how he says this particular thing was '“a huge discussion with Margaret Atwood". Personally i disagree with the choice they made. i don't see any evidence of them thinking hard about it tbh either, seems they just decided it would look better if they made the Gilead regime a sort of post-racial fascism. (?)


----------



## Orang Utan (May 21, 2017)

bimble said:


> That's interesting, how he says this particular thing was '“a huge discussion with Margaret Atwood". Personally i disagree with the choice they made.


I think it's a good decision. If you're going to present a nightmarish dystopian vision on television in America (and it's very clearly a critique of Trump's America), it needs to be a nightmare for everyone - ie all of its viewers, so you need to have a diverse cast.


----------



## bimble (May 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> I think it's a good decision. If you're going to present a nightmarish dystopian vision on television in America (and it's very clearly a critique of Trump's America), it needs to be a nightmare for everyone - ie all of its viewers, so you need to have a diverse cast.


I think that's nonsense.  Like your previous comment, you're basically saying, there has to be black skinned handmaids else black people wouldn't watch the show or wouldn't feel it relevant to them. That's just silly, isn't it, especially as the way they made it, race is nothing at all apart from the skin colour of a couple of the actors.
If you think its a critique of Trumps America, even more reason to not ignore race.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 21, 2017)

bimble said:


> I think that's nonsense.  Like your previous comment, you're basically saying, there has to be black skinned handmaids else black people wouldn't watch the show or wouldn't feel it relevant to them. That's just silly, isn't it, especially as the way they made it, race is nothing at all apart from the skin colour of a couple of the actors.


I don't think it's silly at all, it's a very sensible thing to do.


----------



## spanglechick (May 21, 2017)

Is it to make it more strongly about the gender fascism?


----------



## Santino (May 21, 2017)

You need a very good reason to actively decide to make a programme in which no significant characters can be played by non-white actors.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 21, 2017)

I can buy the 'fertility trumps everything' logic but the add on line 'evanglists more mixed now' doesn'tchime with what a fella from church told me, and this was noo yoik he had been to visit, he said there still seemed to be self-segregating churches. Anecdote is not fatcz I know but as a reason for the change its certainly not going to be your A game argument.


----------



## Santino (May 21, 2017)

The main reason is not to discriminate against black actors working now. Everything else is rationalisation.


----------



## Espresso (May 29, 2017)

I haven't read the book and I am watching it on the ordinary telly, so I have only seen the first one.
The Aunt Lydia article said on her presentation to the women that the plague of infertility was a judgement from God on the heinous sluttery of the women, with thier wicked contraceptives and morning after pill and abortion, so why was this affliction visited on the wife of the head honcho dudes?
Seems they are held in high regard, while that handmaids are little more than incubators on legs with no standing.


----------



## spanglechick (May 29, 2017)

Espresso said:


> I haven't read the book and I am watching it on the ordinary telly, so I have only seen the first one.
> The Aunt Lydia article said on her presentation to the women that the plague of infertility was a judgement from God on the heinous sluttery of the women, with thier wicked contraceptives and morning after pill and abortion, so why was this affliction visited on the wife of the head honcho dudes?
> Seems they are held in high regard, while that handmaids are little more than incubators on legs with no standing.


Religion is big on cursing innocents, especially women. Children are brought forth in women's pain - punishment for the crimes of eve in Eden.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 4, 2017)

Why did June spit out the 'cookie'? (though it looked more like a macaron to me)


----------



## mrsfran (Jun 5, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Why did June spit out the 'cookie'? (though it looked more like a macaron to me)


She was rejecting the power the cookie represented. She is not a dog to be given treats by her masters.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Why did June spit out the 'cookie'? (though it looked more like a macaron to me)


I thought she spat it out cos it wasn't nice, that tho the green women had the upper hand they were enjoying stuff that was shit and they were too stupid to know


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Jun 5, 2017)

I found Ep2 compelling and at the end I realised that next to nothing had really _happened_, except character development and a sense of the society and dozens of other things of course. I liked that. 

Of course, one person's 'stately, lyrical and paced' might be another's 'slow-moving, turgid and boring'.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 5, 2017)

JuanTwoThree said:


> I found Ep2 compelling and at the end I realised that next to nothing had really _happened_, except character development and a sense of the society and dozens of other things of course. I liked that.
> 
> Of course, one person's 'stately, lyrical and paced' might be another's 'slow-moving, turgid and boring'.


Quite a lot of stuff happened though


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> I thought she spat it out cos it wasn't nice, that tho the green women had the upper hand they were enjoying stuff that was shit and they were too stupid to know


the attitude with which it was handed to ofred was done in a calculatedly demeaning manner- as spangles said. As soon as her backs turned they start not-quietly talking about what sluts the handmaidens are etc. All deliberate


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> the attitude with which it was handed to ofred was done in a calculatedly demeaning manner- as spangles said. As soon as her backs turned they start not-quietly talking about what sluts the handmaidens are etc. All deliberate


Yeh, I got that, how well behaved she is and that. But while I saw the possibility she spat it out cos not a dog etc seemed to me more likely it was unpleasant as I've said, fake biscuits to go with fake sex and fake birth.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Jun 5, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Quite a lot of stuff happened though



Well of course. But can you see what I mean? She made some kind of contact with the underground, and lost it. Nothing dire happened when she was alone with the bloke. What did happen was very interesting. But no zombies.

It's surprisingly subtle. I suppose I've got used to plenty of gun-play and so on; I have just binge-watched all of "Colony" and finished "The 100" so the pace is somewhat different!


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 5, 2017)

JuanTwoThree said:


> Well of course. But can you see what I mean? She made some kind of contact with the underground, and lost it. Nothing dire happened when she was alone with the bloke. What did happen was very interesting. But no zombies.
> 
> It's surprisingly subtle. I suppose I've got used to plenty of gun-play and so on; I have just binge-watched all of "Colony" and finished "The 100" so the pace is somewhat different!


No zombies or gun fights doesn't mean nothing happens. In fact you can have a show where there's loads of that yet nothing happens ie the plot doesn't move on or no one's character is further developed.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Jun 5, 2017)

Don't make the mistake of thinking I'm disagreeing with you:


JuanTwoThree said:


> I found Ep2 compelling and at the end I realised that next to nothing had really _happened_, except character development and a sense of the society and dozens of other things of course. I liked that.


----------



## trashpony (Jun 5, 2017)

I found ep 2 less gruelling but more chilling. I didn't have nightmares after watching it which I did after ep 1


----------



## InfoBurner (Jun 5, 2017)

Got to episode seven and had to stop. I was finding the desire for someone to tear that green gowned horror's face off, overwhelming any engagement with the plot, characters and nuances. ( Which were all very good)


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 5, 2017)

JuanTwoThree said:


> Don't make the mistake of thinking I'm disagreeing with you:


sure, it was more of a general gripe when people criticise tv shows/films as being slow or for nothing happening, when there is plenty going on. There was a thread on here moaning about the film Arrival, which is full of big ideas, but people moaned that it was slow cos the aliens didn't blow up any national monuments.


----------



## spanglechick (Jun 5, 2017)

Oh I think it is really tightly paced!


----------



## D'wards (Jun 8, 2017)

I'm enjoying this, and great swearing at end of ep 2


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> I think it's a good decision. If you're going to present a nightmarish dystopian vision on television in America (and it's very clearly a critique of Trump's America), it needs to be a nightmare for everyone - ie all of its viewers, so you need to have a diverse cast.


Yeh. Not sure about critique of Trump's America as series announced April last year and I expect much of it finished before 20/11/16.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. Please show your working re critique of Trump's America


Again, don't see why I need to just to please you. I said it was clearly a critique, so if you can't/won't understand that, I can't help you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Again, don't see why I need to just to please you. I said it was clearly a critique, so if you can't/won't understand that, I can't help you.


I understand what you said, I don't understand why you said it and so would appreciate clarification on that why point. Of course you don't need to if you don't want to. Seems to me it's a critique of mad xians so valid under Reagan, Bush Jr, Trump... Hard to see how something announced in April last year could be so presciently written as to critique something not then existing. No biggie, just curious.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 11, 2017)

I don't need to explain myself just to indulge one person's obtuseness


----------



## no-no (Jun 12, 2017)

where is everyone in gilead? when they walk the streets there are plenty of security guys about, handmaids, wives and marthas but literally no one else.

What happened to all the non fertile women and men that aren't commanders? where is the general public? Was there a huge purge? Did that many people escape to mexico and canada? I'd like to see more of the coup.

Given that the population seems to be so low why are there armed security men everywhere? they don't seem to be in a guerilla war situation, there seems to be no resistance other than the group helping smuggle handmaids out.


----------



## spanglechick (Jun 12, 2017)

no-no said:


> where is everyone in gilead? when they walk the streets there are plenty of security guys about, handmaids, wives and marthas but literally no one else.
> 
> What happened to all the non fertile women and men that aren't commanders? where is the general public? Was there a huge purge? Did that many people escape to mexico and canada? I'd like to see more of the coup.
> 
> Given that the population seems to be so low why are there armed security men everywhere? they don't seem to be in a guerilla war situation, there seems to be no resistance other than the group helping smuggle handmaids out.


My reasoning is that they must be marthas in women only factories or whatever.   Guarded over by men in black with big guns.   

I don't think it's been explained, though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 12, 2017)

spanglechick said:


> My reasoning is that they must be marthas in women only factories or whatever.   Guarded over by men in black with big guns.
> 
> I don't think it's been explained, though.


yeh it's strangely quiet


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 12, 2017)

most people will have fled, got out before they froze the womens bank accnts and all that. there arefields to be worked, factories and the colonies. As for the militarization of public life I assumed that was due to the form their xtian fascist state had taken, they go that way don't they, fash states? especially when at war


----------



## spanglechick (Jun 12, 2017)

What I find most questionable in terms of the internal logic, is that the men, empowered by the gileadean morality, and by access to guns, are ok with the whole "only commanders can have wives/sex" aspect of things.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 12, 2017)

spanglechick said:


> What I find most questionable in terms of the internal logic, is that the men, empowered by the gileadean morality, and by access to guns, are ok with the whole "only commanders can have wives/sex" aspect of things.


Men who transgress sex rules get beaten to death by the handmaids


----------



## spanglechick (Jun 12, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Men who transgress sex rules get beaten to death by the handmaids


Well yes. That would happen now.	But the transition from USA to Gilead happened in stages.   We've the number of commanders is tiny compared to the number of armed men.   At what point did they say to those men, "oh, btw you're never having sex again. But we are. And we're going to forcibly remove your wives and girlfriends, some of whom we will pass between ourselves to repeatedly rape and father children by."  Because the men with guns would have had to agree to that.  Instead of shooting the comparatively small number of commanders.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 12, 2017)

iirc from the book they were forbiden to wank either, sin of onan. So yeah, how long could you put up with that? I can only assume the armed men serving Gilead are the fanatics, true believers. Possibly some sort of horrific underground semi-sanctioned brothel situation...


----------



## no-no (Jun 12, 2017)

I suppose once your population has dropped to that extent you'd need to run the place like a prison to prevent anyone else from leaving. I'd been expecting some sort of ressistance/terrorist attacks to be going on even if only in the background but so far all seems quiet.

I thought the guards were free to marry non fertile women just like the commanders but they're not deemed repectable or pious enough to be assigned a handmaid to breed with. 

Gilead can't last long in it's war, their population seems tiny and they need half their troops to secure their own country.


----------



## hash tag (Jun 12, 2017)

Is this what life could be like under the DUP?


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 13, 2017)

hash tag said:


> Is this what life could be like under the DUP?


Yes, but with bonfires.

DotCommunist, in the book the underground brothels are for the elite, aren't they?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 13, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> Yes, but with bonfires.
> 
> DotCommunist, in the book the underground brothels are for the elite, aren't they?


yeah, years since I read it mind. The 'Jezeebels' are supposed to feature in the show as well, I'm on ep 3 tho so...


----------



## The Boy (Jun 13, 2017)

.


----------



## The Fornicator (Jun 13, 2017)

no-no said:


> where is everyone in gilead? when they walk the streets there are plenty of security guys about, handmaids, wives and marthas but literally no one else.
> 
> What happened to all the non fertile women and men that aren't commanders? where is the general public? Was there a huge purge? Did that many people escape to mexico and canada? I'd like to see more of the coup.
> 
> Given that the population seems to be so low why are there armed security men everywhere? they don't seem to be in a guerilla war situation, there seems to be no resistance other than the group helping smuggle handmaids out.


I'm a little further into the series and while not giving anything away will say the questions grow.

It caused me to think; these dystopian worlds seem to work better if you stay narrow like, perhaps, The Road. The further you broaden from the central theme/characters, the more conceits you ask the public to accept. It's a shame if the implausibilities mount to the extent they distract.


----------



## trashpony (Jun 13, 2017)

Attwood said that everything that happens in the book has already happened somewhere in the world at some time. So not so far-fetched. 

A lot of people got shot


----------



## no-no (Jun 13, 2017)

The Fornicator said:


> I'm a little further into the series and while not giving anything away will say the questions grow.
> 
> It caused me to think; these dystopian worlds seem to work better if you stay narrow like, perhaps, The Road. The further you broaden from the central theme/characters, the more conceits you ask the public to accept. It's a shame if the implausibilities mount to the extent they distract.



Yep, the thing with dystopian stuff is that it's the descent that's as interesting as the narrative itself. Every one has an implied prequel, i'm hoping they flesh it out in flashbacks.


----------



## no-no (Jun 13, 2017)

spanglechick said:


> What I find most questionable in terms of the internal logic, is that the men, empowered by the gileadean morality, and by access to guns, are ok with the whole "only commanders can have wives/sex" aspect of things.



Was thinking about this, then i remembered places like jonestown. people are weird.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 13, 2017)

spanglechick said:


> What I find most questionable in terms of the internal logic, is that the men, empowered by the gileadean morality, and by access to guns, are ok with the whole "only commanders can have wives/sex" aspect of things.



My vague memories from the book are that the middle ranking men have wives, just no access to Handmaids maybe. Only on episode 3 of the TV series though.


----------



## RubyToogood (Jun 14, 2017)

Santino said:


> They did think hard about it. I agree with their decision: Handmaid's Tale Series EP Explains Removal of White Supremacy Element


This link had one of those browser hijack popups on.


----------



## FiFi (Jun 14, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> My vague memories from the book are that the middle ranking men have wives, just no access to Handmaids maybe. Only on episode 3 of the TV series though.


Some time since I read the book, but yes. The wives of "poor men" wore a different colour cloak from the Handmaids


----------



## The Fornicator (Jun 14, 2017)

I've seen the end of the series now. I guess on balance I'm glad I stuck with it - uplifting in the end - although it got very sticky around  e7 and e8. 

Kind of interesting that this drama is being shown as, if we believe the media, the end for Raqqa draws near. There will be stories that make Sinjar pale.


----------



## Mattym (Jun 14, 2017)

hash tag said:


> Is this what life could be like under the DUP?



That was almost word for word the quote we came out with on Sun when watching it.


----------



## no-no (Jun 15, 2017)

Mattym said:


> That was almost word for word the quote we came out with on Sun when watching it.



Northern Ireland is like Gilead?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 15, 2017)

im really impressed with this. brilliantly acted and shot, gripping, unbearably tense and totally nails the fear and invasive horror of a totalitarian state. It also pulls no punches with its politics - this is the end point of oppressive patriarchy, this is how the different  pieces of religion, sex shaming, disempowerment, the reduction of women to property, the denial of  control of their own bodies, the protection of male privilege and hierarchy fit together into an all encompassing misogynistic tyranny.


----------



## Mattym (Jun 15, 2017)

no-no said:


> Northern Ireland is like Gilead?



Yes- that's what we said.


----------



## no-no (Jun 15, 2017)

Mattym said:


> Yes- that's what we said.



But what about the craic?


----------



## Hellsbells (Jun 19, 2017)

Was that the last episode yesterday?! The multiple flashbacks confused me.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 19, 2017)

Hellsbells said:


> Was that the last episode yesterday?! The multiple flashbacks confused me.


6 more! it would be weird to end like that


----------



## 8den (Jun 19, 2017)

no-no said:


> But what about the craic?



Arlene Foster's idea of a good time is going through her bible with a bottle of tippex to get rid of the stuff she doesn't like.


----------



## chilango (Jun 19, 2017)

Just watched the first episode. It's pretty good isn't it? Can't really binge it though....


----------



## spanglechick (Jun 19, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> 6 more! it would be weird to end like that


Umm.  This gets confusing... those watching online had the last episode this week.   I think.


----------



## bimble (Jun 19, 2017)

How many in this series ? (I just watched episode ten, is that the lot?)


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 19, 2017)

bimble said:


> How many in this series ? (I just watched episode ten, is that the lot?)


yes! (don't people ever look at imdb?)


----------



## chilango (Jun 21, 2017)

Just finished Episode 3. Its very good. But relentlessly bleak. Need some sort of resistance.


----------



## The Fornicator (Jun 22, 2017)

Ya think.


----------



## RubyToogood (Jun 23, 2017)

When does each episode go up on the c4 website? I can see no info at all.


----------



## ringo (Jun 23, 2017)

Half way through, completely hooked. Must read the book at some point, had always thought it was probably just another dystopia novel, but this is on the next level. So much to say about our 'civilisation'. 

Great bit of casting with Elisabeth Moss, more expression with a look than most actors manage with a full script.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 23, 2017)

ringo said:


> Half way through, completely hooked. Must read the book at some point, had always thought it was probably just another dystopia novel, but this is on the next level. So much to say about our 'civilisation'.
> 
> Great bit of casting with Elisabeth Moss, more expression with a look than most actors manage with a full script.


Atwood is never 'just another' anything, you heathen 

e2a and yes, perfect casting. And given the book is so intently focused on Ofreds internal life as well as the realities of Gilead, its necessary. Even with that, we still need the v/o monolouges. I'd not thought it could be adapted well. I was wrong


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 23, 2017)

RubyToogood said:


> When does each episode go up on the c4 website? I can see no info at all.


They normally go up the day after transmission


----------



## RubyToogood (Jun 23, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> They normally go up the day after transmission


Which is?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 23, 2017)

RubyToogood said:


> Which is?


It's transmitted on Sunday evenings


----------



## spanglechick (Jun 23, 2017)

Moss produced it. She cast herself, essentially.


----------



## Santino (Jun 23, 2017)

Is it true that Elisabeth Moss can only be found on the north side of trees?


----------



## ringo (Jun 23, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> Atwood is never 'just another' anything, you heathen
> 
> e2a and yes, perfect casting. And given the book is so intently focused on Ofreds internal life as well as the realities of Gilead, its necessary. Even with that, we still need the v/o monolouges. I'd not thought it could be adapted well. I was wrong


I've just realised I've never read anything by her, except maybe a short story. I have this and The Blind Assassin at home but never got round to either. Must sort that out.


----------



## girasol (Jun 23, 2017)

Reminds me a bit of Lars von Triar, so many of his films depict extreme bad treatment of women   Last episode on C4 I nearly turned it off.

(that is not to say I hated his movies.  I cried for an hour after Dance in the dark ffs.  It was so harsh!)


----------



## tommers (Jun 23, 2017)

We cracked, downloaded it all and watched it in 3 nights. 

It's superb. Really good.  

You all should do that so that we can talk about it properly.


----------



## spanglechick (Jun 23, 2017)

I watched it at American pace, so still only once a week.  Usually that would put me off these days, but it felt right for this.  Like savouring a small square of quality bitter chocolate.  

It really is the most remarkable achievement in tv.  Not least in that I think it is equal to the book in quality.


----------



## FiFi (Jun 23, 2017)

ringo said:


> I've just realised I've never read anything by her, except maybe a short story. I have this and The Blind Assassin at home but never got round to either. Must sort that out.


You must. Blind Assassin is very good, you're in for a treat


----------



## The Fornicator (Jun 25, 2017)

It is clever - and obv. prescient - extrapolating a mirrored ISIS from fragments of ongoing US zeitgeist, though the greatest success of it might be its capacity for emotional investment in several characters. I've spoken to a few women who have been on a powerful and consuming roller-coaster with this.

If it's art, I'm just not clear what it adds to what we already know, or in our understandings. Really strong across the board; but is it more than *entertainment* .. I guess it doesn't need to be.


----------



## nuffsaid (Jun 29, 2017)

Gave it a try due to the good reviews and my general liking of all things dystopian - but I only got to the first half of ep1 and thought.

If they can force women to be sex slaves just to keep the birth rate going then surely it would be easier to force them to attend a clinic to be artificially inseminated and never have to meet the men donating the sperm. They can then be forced to go through the pregnancy and deliver the child.

Sorry, but it was just going so slowly and I have a lot of other shows on the go. Might pick it back up after finishing something else.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 29, 2017)

nuffsaid said:


> Gave it a try due to the good reviews and my general liking of all things dystopian - but I only got to the first half of ep1 and thought.
> 
> If they can force women to be sex slaves just to keep the birth rate going then surely it would be easier to force them to attend a clinic to be artificially inseminated and never have to meet the men donating the sperm. They can then be forced to go through the pregnancy and deliver the child.


Insemination clinics aren't in the Bible. The state of Gilead relies on a fundamentalist reading of the Bible and the ritualising of the surrogacy with ceremonies and special clothing helps reinforce the state.


----------



## Santino (Jun 29, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Insemination clinics aren't in the Bible. The state of Gilead relies on a fundamentalist reading of the Bible and the ritualising of the surrogacy with ceremonies and special clothing helps reinforce the state.


Also they want to fuck more women.


----------



## nuffsaid (Jun 29, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Insemination clinics aren't in the Bible. The state of Gilead relies on a fundamentalist reading of the Bible and the ritualising of the surrogacy with ceremonies and special clothing helps reinforce the state.



Cars and assault rifles aren't in the Bible but I saw those in ep1. If they've got that technology then they'd be able to create syringes.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 29, 2017)

nuffsaid said:


> Cars and assault rifles aren't in the Bible but I saw those in ep1. If they've got that technology then they'd be able to create syringes.


You're missing the point.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 29, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Insemination clinics aren't in the Bible. The state of Gilead relies on a fundamentalist reading of the Bible and the ritualising of the surrogacy with ceremonies and special clothing helps reinforce the state.


corridors aren't in the bible but i've seen them in the show.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 29, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Insemination clinics aren't in the Bible. The state of Gilead relies on a fundamentalist reading of the Bible and the ritualising of the surrogacy with ceremonies and special clothing helps reinforce the state.


no mention of kitchen tables in the bible but they've been in the show

not to mention the only hanging in the bible's that of absalom, who rides into a tree. yet there's lots of hanging people in the show.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 29, 2017)

pretty sure artificial would be considered against god- it is not a man lying with a woman, so as gilead is run on extreme theocratic lines its out. Probably as reviled as abortion. Spend half hour on BibleGateway.com searching yer old testaments (and the multiple versions) and you could no doubt back that view scripturaly


----------



## bimble (Jun 29, 2017)

Of all the things you could get irritated by in this adaptation..


----------



## belboid (Jun 29, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> corridors aren't in the bible but i've seen them in the show.


they are described at various points in the bible - see Ezekiel in particular.  It does also describe food preparation, strongly inferring a table in the food preparation area, and tables generally are mentioned several times. So they're probably on safe grounds there, even if you weren't missing the point entirely


----------



## nuffsaid (Jun 29, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> pretty sure artificial would be considered against god- it is not a man lying with a woman, so as gilead is run on extreme theocratic lines its out. Probably as reviled as abortion. Spend half hour on BibleGateway.com searching yer old testaments (and the multiple versions) and you could no doubt back that view scripturaly



Ah - now that makes more sense. I bit like Northern Ireland and abortions. We can do it, technically, but it's against God's will (God's will as decided by Man's interpretation). That's fair enough.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 29, 2017)

belboid said:


> they are described at various points in the bible - see Ezekiel in particular.  It does also describe food preparation, strongly inferring a table in the food preparation area, and tables generally are mentioned several times. So they're probably on safe grounds there, even if you weren't missing the point entirely


i think you'll find there was no such thing as a corridor in the ancient world. see e.g. http://web.mit.edu/mmj4/www/downloads/criticalinq36_4.pdf or drops 054.02 tipologia: História do corredor | vitruvius

in any case, as i've said, corridors not mentioned in the bible.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 29, 2017)

cue pointless and tedious argument about what a corridor is. zzzzz


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 29, 2017)

nuffsaid said:


> Ah - now that makes more sense. I bit like Northern Ireland and abortions. We can do it, technically, but it's against God's will (God's will as decided by Man's interpretation). That's fair enough.



I had a brief look at opinions, and a (even handed non denominational) little Q&A recconed that some objections to it come down to trespassing on gods sovereignty over life. I.E if the Lord decided you were not to bear fruit from your union then you should not. But the writing said you should pray on the matter together and with your pastor and see what you think god thinks is right for you as part of his plan

I'm 99% sure that wishy washy stuff like that would see you hanging from the wall in the Republic of Gilead.


----------



## chilango (Jun 29, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> i think you'll find there was no such thing as a corridor in the ancient world. see e.g. http://web.mit.edu/mmj4/www/downloads/criticalinq36_4.pdf or drops 054.02 tipologia: História do corredor | vitruvius
> 
> in any case, as i've said, corridors not mentioned in the bible.



If there a mention it'll be around here somewhere....



Spoiler: 1 Kings Ch.6



*1 Kings 6New International Version (NIV)*
*Solomon Builds the Temple year after the Israelites came out of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv, the second month, 3 The portico and projected ten cubits from the front of the temple. 4 He made narrow windows wide, the middle floor six cubitsand the third floor seven. He made offset ledges around the outside of the temple so that nothing would be inserted into the temple walls.*

*7 In building the temple, only blocks dressed floor was on the south side of the temple; a stairway led up to the middle level and from there to the third. 9 So he built the temple and completed it, roofing it with beams and cedar long. 18 The inside of the temple was cedar,Hebrew; Septuagint four hundred and fortieth*

*1 Kings 6:2 That is, about 90 feet long, 30 feet wide and 45 feet high or about 27 meters long, 9 meters wide and 14 meters high*

*1 Kings 6:3 That is, about 30 feet or about 9 meters; also in verses 16 and 20*

*1 Kings 6:3 That is, about 15 feet or about 4.5 meters; also in verses 23-26*

*1 Kings 6:6 That is, about 7 1/2 feet or about 2.3 meters; also in verses 10 and 24*

*1 Kings 6:6 That is, about 9 feet or about 2.7 meters*

*1 Kings 6:6 That is, about 11 feet or about 3.2 meters*

*1 Kings 6:8 Septuagint; Hebrew middle*

*1 Kings 6:17 That is, about 60 feet or about 18 meters*
*New International Version (NIV)*
*Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV® Copyright ©1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.*



I'd have thought...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 29, 2017)

chilango said:


> If there a mention it'll be around here somewhere....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


if there was going to be a mention that's where i would have expected to find it too


----------



## D'wards (Jul 4, 2017)

When Offred says every month she has a cock shoved up her arse was she being literal? 
Like Fred doesn't want to get her pregnant?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 4, 2017)

D'wards said:


> When Offred says every month she has a cock shoved up her arse was she being literal?
> Like Fred doesn't want to get her pregnant?


she was talking to Nick and saying the Commander doesn't rape him, like he does her. Nick doesn't have a vagina.


----------



## RubyToogood (Jul 18, 2017)

Well episode 7 added nothing and seemed to have been transplanted from some dull action sci fi thing. Back on form with 8 though.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Jul 27, 2017)

I've just watched 4 episodes of this and think it's really good. I was blown away by the book when I read it years ago and feel it's very close to at least how I imagined it. I had to stop after 4 eps as I was so angry and disturbed. Really powerful stuff.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 27, 2017)

fucking brilliant TV drama - brutal, powerful, fantastic writing and performances. Even the more background characters stick in the mind (like nick's  friend at Jezebels - and the martha at the waterfords ). 

Amazing that such subject matter is on mainstream TV and done so well.

And go Moira!


----------



## bimble (Jul 27, 2017)

Why did they cast the commander as a sort of foppish pretty hipster ? Those scrabble scenes were like some sub 50 shades weirdness imo.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 28, 2017)

A colleague at work who has neither read the book or seen the series asked me if it was Sci-fi as it was described twice as such in a S** article about Elisabeth Moss and her leading role in the latest Sci-fi series on C4!
Or have I missed something ?


----------



## bimble (Jul 28, 2017)

Yeah it is, unless you're using a really prejudiced and restricted definition of the term Sci-Fi.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 28, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> A colleague at work who has neither read the book or seen the series asked me if it was Sci-fi as it was described twice as such in a S** article about Elisabeth Moss and her leading role in the latest Sci-fi series on C4!
> Or have I missed something ?


it's set in a future dystopian state, so it is Sci Fi - no aliens, lasers or spaceships though


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 28, 2017)

I read that Atwood argues against it being Science Fiction and refers to it as Speculative Fiction.
I think of it as a tale of a dystopian future that would appear to some as a fantasy future. Where the subjugation and oppression of fellow humans is pursued in yet another man made utopia based on twisting alleged holy scripture. There seems a lot of it about these days in our current timeline.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 28, 2017)

She's made a rod for her own back, shying away from the sci-fi label. 'speculative fiction' is a cop out label imo


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 28, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> She's made a rod for her own back, shying away from the sci-fi label. 'speculative fiction' is a cop out label imo



I can see the reasoning for Atwood's reticence to label The Handmaid's Tale, Sci-Fi. Oryx and Crake to me are Sci-Fi, yet I read here again her using the form of 'Speculative Fiction'.
Thanks for pointing out the argument that it seems has been ongoing regarding THT since it was first published and I was unaware of.
I will know have to do a bit more in depth study of my own into these genres.


----------



## fucthest8 (Jul 28, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> She's made a rod for her own back, shying away from the sci-fi label.



How so?



Orang Utan said:


> 'speculative fiction' is a cop out label imo



Why?

Speculative just indicates that's it's more based on theory, rather than facts, no? I would have though sci-fi was more of a cop out really, since a lot of it isn't based on any science at all and is, more correctly speculative.

Not looking for an argument, just wondering why you think it's such a bad term.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 28, 2017)

Speculative fiction is too broad an umbrella term to be that useful IMO, and it often comes from a place of snobbery.


----------



## fucthest8 (Jul 28, 2017)

OK.

FYI, here's the article from the Guardian where she says the two terms are "fluid"

And a quote

"If you're writing about the future and you aren't doing forecast journalism, you'll probably be writing something people will call either science fiction or speculative fiction. I like to make a distinction between science fiction proper and speculative fiction. For me, the science fiction label belongs on books with things in them that we can't yet do, such as going through a wormhole in space to another universe; and speculative fiction means a work that employs the means already to hand, such as DNA identification and credit cards, and that takes place on Planet Earth. But the terms are fluid. Some use speculative fiction as an umbrella covering science fiction and all its hyphenated forms–science fiction fantasy, and so forth–and others choose the reverse... I have written two works of science fiction or, if you prefer, speculative fiction: The Handmaid's Tale and Oryx and Crake."

Seems like she's not really wedded to either.

Edited to remove a bit from the end of the quote that I put in by mistake.
Also to say: from 2005


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 28, 2017)

fucthest8 said:


> OK.
> 
> FYI, here's the article from the Guardian where she says the two terms are "fluid"
> 
> ...


She's written more sci-fi/speculative fiction since.
I can see why she's made a distinction, but if we were to apply this universally, it would mean the relabelling of many sci-fi classics.
Her definition of speculative fiction is also different from what I have understood it to be - an umbrella term incorporating fantasy and some horror, as well as sci-fi. 
Also, she contradicts herself as she seems to be claiming that her work doesn't use technology that doesn't already exist, but as far as I'm aware, the bio-engineered apocalypse she writes about (in the trilogy that includes Oryx & Crake) is all very plausible but not yet actual science.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 28, 2017)

Is it ironic that this discussion on the thread regarding Speculative Fiction was ignited by an article in the S**?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 28, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> Is it ironic that this discussion on the thread regarding Speculative Fiction was ignited by an article in the S**?


the Sun? what's ironic about it?


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 28, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> the Sun? what's ironic about it?


Speculative fiction!


----------



## fucthest8 (Jul 28, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> She's written more sci-fi/speculative fiction since.
> I can see why she's made a distinction, but if we were to apply this universally, it would mean the relabelling of many sci-fi classics.
> Her definition of speculative fiction is also different from what I have understood it to be - an umbrella term incorporating fantasy and some horror, as well as sci-fi.
> Also, she contradicts herself as she seems to be claiming that her work doesn't use technology that doesn't already exist, but as far as I'm aware, the bio-engineered apocalypse she writes about (in the trilogy that includes Oryx & Crake) is all very plausible but not yet actual science.



Indeed. Seems to me Oryx and Crake is definitely sci-fi

Anyway, genres. Who cares?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 28, 2017)

fucthest8 said:


> Indeed. Seems to me Oryx and Crake is definitely sci-fi
> 
> Anyway, genres. Who cares?


well, certainly in this case - Sprocket. 's workmate should watch the show, whether it is deemed to be sci-fi or not, as it is a gripping and thought-provoking show


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 28, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> well, certainly in this case - Sprocket. 's workmate should watch the show, whether it is deemed to be sci-fi or not, as it is a gripping and thought-provoking show



I concur wholeheartedly, really looking forward to the final episode of this series. The Handmaid's Tale being a book I have not read yet.
Sadly he thinks tattoo fixers is the height of human creativity.
I tend to read a lot of books at work during breaks, he is proud of the fact that he hasn't read a book since he left school over twenty years ago.


----------



## fucthest8 (Jul 28, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> I concur wholeheartedly, really looking forward to the final episode of this series. The Handmaid's Tale being a book I have not read yet.
> Sadly he thinks tattoo fixers is the height of human creativity.
> I tend to read a lot of books at work during breaks, he is proud of the fact that he hasn't read a book since he left school over twenty years ago.



In which case, I suggest you recommend that he does not watch it. Battlestar Galactica, it ain't.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 28, 2017)

fucthest8 said:


> In which case, I suggest you recommend that he does not watch it. Battlestar Galactica, it ain't.



I have tried to enlighten them, it gets very tiring after a while!


----------



## FiFi (Jul 30, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> I read that Atwood argues against it being Science Fiction and refers to it as Speculative Fiction.
> I think of it as a tale of a dystopian future that would appear to some as a fantasy future. Where the subjugation and oppression of fellow humans is pursued in yet another man made utopia based on twisting alleged holy scripture. There seems a lot of it about these days in our current timeline.


This argument has been going since the mid-eighties and, to be honest, is the LEAST interesting thing to be said about Atwoods work!


----------



## PursuedByBears (Jul 30, 2017)

I read the handmaid's tale at school but never read any of her other books mainly because of her snobby dismissal of sci-fi as a genre.


----------



## belboid (Jul 30, 2017)

PursuedByBears said:


> I read the handmaid's tale at school but never read any of her other books mainly because of her snobby dismissal of sci-fi as a genre.


Except there was no such dismissal. It's a fallacy.


----------



## Clair De Lune (Jul 30, 2017)

PursuedByBears said:


> I read the handmaid's tale at school but never read any of her other books mainly because of her snobby dismissal of sci-fi as a genre.


Bollocks is it snobby. She's the author, she can define her own work any way she sees fit. She's not asking anyone to reclassify their work.


----------



## Santino (Jul 30, 2017)

Clair De Lune said:


> Bollocks is it snobby. She's the author, she can define her own work any way she sees fit. She's not asking anyone to reclassify their work.


I think it is potentially snobby. You can try to define anything any way you please, but genres aren't determined by the author's fiat.


----------



## belboid (Jul 30, 2017)

Santino said:


> I think it is potentially snobby. You can try to define anything any way you please, but genres aren't determined by the author's fiat.


Where do you actually disagree with what she has said (rather than what various others have claimed she said)?


----------



## Clair De Lune (Jul 30, 2017)

Santino said:


> I think it is potentially snobby. You can try to define anything any way you please, but genres aren't determined by the author's fiat.


I can't see it. Other people can disagree with her *clearly. But her definition of the distinction between sf and sci fi was a good one imo.


----------



## belboid (Jul 30, 2017)

What she actually says about the distinction between speculative and science fiction:

Margaret Atwood: the road to Ustopia


----------



## The Fornicator (Jul 30, 2017)

I thought the baddies in this were taking the science out of fiction.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 30, 2017)

FiFi said:


> This argument has been going since the mid-eighties and, to be honest, is the LEAST interesting thing to be said about Atwoods work!



Sorry I mentioned it, if you saw my original post on the subject it was raised due to a work colleague.
Obviously I am too thick to be on here!


----------



## FiFi (Jul 30, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> Sorry I mentioned it, if you saw my original post on the subject it was raised due to a work colleague.
> Obviously I am too thick to be on here!


Sorry if I sounded a bit sharp. I just remember sitting through long discussions about what constitutes which genre years ago. I forget that others may not have the same experiences.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Jul 30, 2017)

Anyone who says they're not a feminist should be forced to watch this. Preferably whilst being threatened with a cattle prod.


----------



## RubyToogood (Jul 31, 2017)

During the next series, remind me not to watch it last thing at night before attempting to sleep


----------



## Libertad (Jul 31, 2017)

RubyToogood said:


> During the next series, remind me not to watch it last thing at night before attempting to sleep



Can June trust Nick? I think not.


----------



## RubyToogood (Jul 31, 2017)

Libertad said:


> Can June trust Nick? I think not.


I could see him just becoming the next generation of fascist leader after the purges... "The problem is not the system, the problem is abuses of the system" kinda thing.


----------



## RubyToogood (Aug 2, 2017)

I've just re-read the book, which I didn't particularly like when I read it in the 80s but have been quite obsessive about the series. In some ways the series has been able to unpack things a lot more and the book feels quite compressed. 

Anyway, I note that in the book our heroine didn't actually tell Nick she was married...


----------



## belboid (Aug 2, 2017)

We never actually learn her name in the book, either.


----------



## RubyToogood (Aug 2, 2017)

belboid said:


> We never actually learn her name in the book, either.


Lots of things are different, subtly or significantly. It's a version, not a faithful rendering, and the better for it I think.


----------



## keithy (Aug 3, 2017)

Was that the last ep of season 1 then?


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 3, 2017)

keithy said:


> Was that the last ep of season 1 then?


yep


----------



## keithy (Aug 3, 2017)

Fucks sake


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Aug 8, 2017)

Jeez that last episode. The bit at the children's home. Fuck me I found that disturbing.


----------



## The Fornicator (Aug 24, 2017)

I thought The State - which concluded on C4 last night - was a good companion piece for this. I probably preferred The State for it's uncompromising depiction of emotional and physical brutality under ISIS - really not an easy watch. There is a lot they have in common, though.

The State is a good reminder of what has been happening in this world this year and still - no 'dystopian future' here, no 'potential for ten seasons'.

Tbh, it also caused me to see The Handmaid's Tale as very ... American. A product, even. A worthy project but also a vehicle for the undoubted talents of producer Elizabeth Moss.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 2, 2017)

FiFi said:


> Sorry if I sounded a bit sharp. I just remember sitting through long discussions about what constitutes which genre years ago. I forget that others may not have the same experiences.



Don't worry about it. I sat through long discussions regarding cutting internal trapezoidal two start threads.
That would make me a bit sharp if the topic arose. 
Just revisited this topic.


----------



## 8den (Sep 2, 2017)




----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2018)

Season 2 trailer:


----------



## The Fornicator (Jan 15, 2018)

Ugh.


----------



## Mab (May 2, 2018)

I saw the film from the eighties--but this this was brilliant. I just got to see episode two and really lost it, big time boohoo when the handmaids forced down the tunnel into that stadium type thing (so reminiscent of holocaust atrocities) with all the nooses whilst Kate Bush sang. I was a mess.


----------



## spanglechick (May 2, 2018)

The new series is obviously quality, but  for me part of the horror of the book and s1 was the ascetic atmosphere of Offred's painfully small world. The claustrophobia and the sick pretence of domestic mundanity.  A very female hell.   

Chases and journeys feel completely different.  Less oppressive.


----------



## Hellsbells (May 2, 2018)

Is it on UK TV now?


----------



## Orang Utan (May 2, 2018)

Hellsbells said:


> Is it on UK TV now?


Not on 'terrestrial'. C4 have it but haven't announced when they're txing it


----------



## danny la rouge (May 2, 2018)

Orang Utan said:


> Not on 'terrestrial'. C4 have it but haven't announced when they're txing it


They're running trailers, but just saying "coming soon".


----------



## Mrs Miggins (May 2, 2018)

spanglechick said:


> The new series is obviously quality, but  for me part of the horror of the book and s1 was the ascetic atmosphere of Offred's painfully small world. The claustrophobia and the sick pretence of domestic mundanity.  A very female hell.
> 
> Chases and journeys feel completely different.  Less oppressive.


I'd agree with that. I'm sure it will be good but I loved the atmosphere of the first one - and the book.
I've seen 2 episodes of the new one.


Spoiler



I've got to say that the mass hanging at the beginning of episode 1 whilst horrible, was disappointing as it was obvious they were not going to kill them all. Why would they? They are the few precious fertile women


----------



## spanglechick (May 3, 2018)

Mrs Miggins said:


> I'd agree with that. I'm sure it will be good but I loved the atmosphere of the first one - and the book.
> I've seen 2 episodes of the new one.
> 
> 
> ...


Exactly.  I thought that too.


----------



## Epona (May 3, 2018)

spanglechick said:


> The new series is obviously quality, but  for me part of the horror of the book and s1 was the ascetic atmosphere of Offred's painfully small world. The claustrophobia and the sick pretence of domestic mundanity.  A very female hell.
> 
> Chases and journeys feel completely different.  Less oppressive.



I completely agree, there was very much a feel of "there is no out, this is how life is now" - that was pushed a bit in S1 when they continued Luke's story - in the book it is not known whether he lived beyond the failed attempt to flee - it's assumed that he didn't, but we don't know for sure, and the fact that Offred doesn't and will never know adds to the claustrophobia of the book- the isolation.

I like S2 so far, but it is telling a different and more rebellious and free story so far.  Not a bad story, but a different one.  It is referenced in the monologue right at at the end of S2 episode 1 though.

Also can I just say I think Elisabeth Moss is great in this role, and Alexis Bledel is fantastic too - wasn't expecting her character to crop up again, but she's really good in it.


----------



## Mab (May 3, 2018)

Mrs Miggins said:


> I'd agree with that. I'm sure it will be good but I loved the atmosphere of the first one - and the book.
> I've seen 2 episodes of the new one.
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Mab (May 3, 2018)

So true and we knew they were not going to be killed but they didn't and it made me cry.


----------



## RubyToogood (May 28, 2018)

That was a good episode.



Spoiler



I'm struggling with Nick a bit at the moment though. For a start, surely he'd come massively under suspicion when June disappears. Serena and (I think?) the Commander know the baby is his. So what the hell is going on back at the ranch?

And then his whole relationship to the regime has suddenly changed as he's made this massive decision, having previously basically gone along with it all partly because he needed a job but partly because he was kind of into the whole thing. But he just goes on being a cipher, a plot mechanism, but with too many lines for that to work.


----------



## Epona (May 30, 2018)

Mab said:


> So true and we knew they were not going to be killed but they didn't and it made me cry.



It was one of the most moving and horrific fictional things I've ever seen tbh, and I was crying my eyes out.  Top marks to them for provoking that sort of reaction in people really.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 30, 2018)

I had trouble seeing anything in the last couple of episodes as it was all in the dark with no contrast. What did she do to her ear? (Towards the end of the previous episode, then not referred to in the last episode).


----------



## Epona (May 30, 2018)

RubyToogood said:


> That was a good episode.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Spoiler



I mean I guess the thing is, it was unclear in the novel whether he was wedded to the regime, or part of Mayday and acting as an infiltrator - or vice versa - the ending is ambiguous and we never know for sure.  That is difficult to work into season 2 I reckon   But then a lot of things that I thought were difficult have been worked into season 2.

I may have already mentioned this before, but since the epilogue for the novel basically states that the story is from cassette tapes hidden some distance away from where she was probably held, so it was assumed in the novel epilogue that she escaped to a safe house then maybe to England (not to Canada) and had lived in seclusion - that is no longer relevant - the TV series has at this point divorced from the novel and she could have left her story while she was on her escape attempt - which keeps the original story intact, but means she could now die


----------



## Orang Utan (May 30, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I had trouble seeing anything in the last couple of episodes as it was all in the dark with no contrast. What did she do to her ear? (Towards the end of the previous episode, then not referred to in the last episode).


Pulled the chip out so she couldn't be tracked


----------



## yardbird (May 30, 2018)

I'm watching online and up to episode 4.
I hadn't read the book and found the first series very powerful.
As for series 2 I reserve judgement, probably best (for me) to wait until the end and consider the whole.


----------



## Epona (May 30, 2018)

yardbird said:


> I'm watching online and up to episode 4.
> I hadn't read the book and found the first series very powerful.
> As for series 2 I reserve judgement, probably best (for me) to wait until the end and consider the whole.



Please read the book if you can (it's fairly easy to find online).  One of the most disturbing things about it is the quiet everydayness of it all.  That is something that I think is difficult to portray in a hard-hitting drama series - and the series IS really good.  But the book...



Spoiler



A chair, a table, a lamp. Above, on the white ceiling, a relief ornament in the shape of a wreath, and in the centre of it a blank space, plastered over, like the place in a face where the eye has been taken out. There must have been a chandelier, once. They’ve removed anything you could tie a rope to.


----------



## RubyToogood (May 30, 2018)

Orang Utan said:


> Pulled the chip out so she couldn't be tracked





Spoiler



cut it out with scissors I think, including a bit of ear.



I too found it literally very dark and had to switch computers. Apparently a lot of people complained.


----------



## RubyToogood (May 30, 2018)

Epona said:


> Please read the book if you can (it's fairly easy to find online).  One of the most disturbing things about it is the quiet everydayness of it all.  That is something that I think is difficult to portray in a hard-hitting drama series - and the series IS really good.  But the book...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I actually prefer the series. I found the book a bit suburban and stuffy somehow, never liked it that much.


----------



## LDC (May 30, 2018)

Orang Utan said:


> Pulled the chip out so she couldn't be tracked



Don't think it was a tracking chip, she left it in until she got to the safe house which was mistake if so. It was a number/owner marker like they put in the ear of cows I thought.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (May 30, 2018)

I'm finding it disturbing, yet compelling.


----------



## Epona (May 31, 2018)

RubyToogood said:


> I actually prefer the series. I found the book a bit suburban and stuffy somehow, never liked it that much.



Isn't that what is so horrifying about it though?  I mean I find it utterly horrifying.


----------



## yardbird (May 31, 2018)

Just watched episode seven of series two.
I'm saying nothing.


----------



## yardbird (May 31, 2018)

Epona said:


> Please read the book if you can (it's fairly easy to find online).  One of the most disturbing things about it is the quiet everydayness of it all.  That is something that I think is difficult to portray in a hard-hitting drama series - and the series IS really good.  But the book...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'd like to read the book as I would also like to read the many interesting books on my shelves. What my MS has done to me is make it very difficult to read a book. Too complicated to explain. I find my kindle easier because I can keep track better and cope  with my word blindness. I used to like turning the new pages of the book I bought at lunchtime. Sometimes even turning the pages is difficult.


----------



## Epona (May 31, 2018)

yardbird said:


> I'd like to read the book as I would also like to read the many interesting books on my shelves. What my MS has done to me is make it very difficult to read a book. Too complicated to explain. I find my kindle easier because I can keep track better and cope  with my word blindness. I used to like turning the new pages of the book I bought at lunchtime. Sometimes even turning the pages is difficult.



I do understand to an extent, my arthritis makes it difficult to hold a book for any length of time.  I tend to read a lot of stuff either on my kindle or PC monitor these days


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2018)

I've stopped watching season 2, agree with this article here.
Why I’ve stopped watching the Handmaid’s Tale


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 16, 2018)

I've stopped too. But because of the lighting.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 16, 2018)

bimble said:


> I've stopped watching season 2, agree with this article here.
> Why I’ve stopped watching the Handmaid’s Tale


Me too. After episode 3 of this season it felt a little too like emotional torture, so I've stopped at least for a while.


----------



## RubyToogood (Jun 16, 2018)

I'm still waiting to see where it's going. I'm hoping they've got a point. I may be disappointed. I know what the article means and have thought this. Like they decided "People liked dark. Let's give them more dark."


----------



## The Fornicator (Jun 16, 2018)

RubyToogood said:


> I'm hoping they've got a point. I may be disappointed."


You won't, as long as you hope they get the Golden Globes and Emmy's Elizabeth Moss has been chasing since the beginning.

This has nothing you won't find in Germaine Greer circa 1970. And if you want real-life dystopia watch The State or read first-hand accounts of the ISIS Caliphate. This has got as much credibility as flashing your tits at a #MeToo awareness night.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2018)

RubyToogood said:


> I'm still waiting to see where it's going. I'm hoping they've got a point. I may be disappointed. I know what the article means and have thought this. Like they decided "People liked dark. Let's give them more dark."


dark sells.


----------



## killer b (Jun 16, 2018)

I didn't see the last series, but started watching this one cause Mrs b loved it so much. We've stopped now, cause it's just boring.


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2018)

Yes, its boring, which makes it even worse - gratuitous torture of women's bodies for the sake of.. entertainment? It doesn't even try any more to engage with the why of it how this happened etc. It made me feel the same as when i tried to watch Kill Bill years ago and turned it off.


----------



## killer b (Jun 16, 2018)

bimble said:


> Yes, its boring, which makes it even worse - gratuitous torture of women's bodies for the sake of.. entertainment? It doesn't even try any more to engage with the why of it how this happened etc. It made me feel the same as when i tried to watch Kill Bill years ago and turned it off.


Did you hear that documentary doon mckitchen made for r4 a year or so ago about violence against women as entertainment? Worth seeking out if you haven't - it really opened my eyes to how shit it is.


----------



## killer b (Jun 16, 2018)

This one I think:

BBC Radio 4 - Body Count Rising


----------



## The Fornicator (Jun 16, 2018)

Indeed. It feels like a lazy dramatic device. I'd be far more intrigued by the emotional violence that usually precedes and frames later physical violence, often in the offenders childhood development.

Don't often see childhood emotional violence or neglect as a formative factor, just the adult male seemingly acting in a vacuum.


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2018)

^ Will finish listening later. Has it ever been otherwise though i don't know, maybe its just that there is a hell of a lot more entertainment and women's bodies being tortured is still what gets commissioned.

Found this interview with the (male) writer & producer of series 2. Think his answer to the below question quite telling, how feeble it is and how it seems to miss the larger point entirely:

Q:"Margaret Atwood said that her one rule for Season 2..was that everything had to have actually happened somewhere, sometime. *Can you reveal any specific examples from Season 2 that you drew from history or current events?*

he answers
"I am a very strict adherent to her philosophy. It was something she used for the book. *It’s what keeps [the show] from turning into torture pornography, *and we’re not interested in making something that’s torturous for the sake of being torturous. I would be sick to my stomach if that’s what we ended up doing. We definitely try to show as little as possible when we do those things. Just enough to tell the story and make the emotions hit."
(then he goes on about how there's historical precedent for women being drowned.)


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Indeed. It feels like a lazy dramatic device. I'd be far more intrigued by the emotional violence that usually precedes and frames later physical violence, often in the offenders childhood development.
> 
> Don't often see childhood emotional violence or neglect as a formative factor, just the adult male seemingly acting in a vacuum.



Almost none of the violence i saw in first 2 episodes of season 2 is actually done by men btw, its women doing it to each other, men are almost invisible.


----------



## RubyToogood (Jun 16, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Indeed. It feels like a lazy dramatic device. I'd be far more intrigued by the emotional violence that usually precedes and frames later physical violence, often in the offenders childhood development.
> 
> Don't often see childhood emotional violence or neglect as a formative factor, just the adult male seemingly acting in a vacuum.


I'm not sure I agree with that. There was a phase some years ago when people started talking about child abuse that the punchline of literally every murder mystery and detective series was *tada* child abuse! Usually that the murderer /perp was an abuse survivor. It became a tiresome cliché and insulting to the vast majority of abuse survivors who aren't violent criminals.


----------



## The Fornicator (Jun 17, 2018)

You're probably right. Sometimes frustration at US culture causes me to go cross-eyed.


----------



## sojourner (Jun 20, 2018)

Glad it's not just me thinking all of this then.  I almost feel insulted by this season's gratuitous violence. Like the oppression and complete loss of rights etc in the book/first season wasn't bad enough for ya?! Here, have this! 



spanglechick said:


> The new series is obviously quality, but  for me part of the horror of the book and s1 was the ascetic atmosphere of Offred's painfully small world. The claustrophobia and the sick pretence of domestic mundanity.  A very female hell.
> 
> Chases and journeys feel completely different.  Less oppressive.





Epona said:


> Please read the book if you can (it's fairly easy to find online).  One of the most disturbing things about it is the quiet everydayness of it all.  That is something that I think is difficult to portray in a hard-hitting drama series - and the series IS really good.  But the book...
> 
> 
> 
> ...





RubyToogood said:


> I'm still waiting to see where it's going. I'm hoping they've got a point. I may be disappointed. I know what the article means and have thought this. Like they decided "People liked dark. Let's give them more dark."


----------



## ringo (Jun 22, 2018)

Given up for now too. Great TV but so relentlessly depressing we never feel like sitting down to watch the next episode.


----------



## keithy (Jun 22, 2018)

I binge watched 5 eps last weekend and after reading stuff about it was expecting it to be too much etc. Actually I didn't understand how it was any more depressing and gratuitous etc than the first season. 

Am still hooked, still feeling like it is close to home.


----------



## tommers (Jun 22, 2018)

It really is relentless.


----------



## keithy (Jun 22, 2018)

It always was tho


----------



## Crispy (Jul 12, 2018)

S2 is over. This is the best acted (god the acting is incredible), directed, lit and filmed show on TV right now. The moment-to-moment writing is also superb. The overaching plot, however, is lurching about all over the place. The events of the final episode come with fast pace and little warning, and some characters make some really rather stupid decisions, given what we already know about how Gilead operates. I withold final judgement until I see where they take it in Season 3. It might all be worth it. But I really really hope they have a concrete plan for the story. They can't carry on with more of the same any more, not while maintaining belief in a coherent setting.


----------



## RubyToogood (Jul 12, 2018)

I'm still failing to see the point (I'm on Channel 4 time). Did we really need to see 



Spoiler



Serena Joy


 in her underwear examining her bruises? No we did not.

Series 1 made its point beautifully: here is a misogynist dystopia that is actually not that far from reality. Series 2's point is what exactly?

E2a actually having posted this I suppose it is saying some things about how oppression affects people and about complicity.


----------



## belboid (Jul 12, 2018)

I hadn't realised there was so much of series 2 - 13 episodes! At least it makes sense of the story arc now tho, the women-on-women violence of the first quarter slowly being replaced, and leading to the shocking plot development at the midway point, which,  in turn, leads to a smidge of sisters are doing it for themselves. And then the whole shit show reasserts itself. I guess we'll be rounding off with something extravagantly silly when June gives birth. (I'm watching on C4 too, so not finished yet)

As Crispy says, the acting, direction etc etc are all top, maybe a little too much. But the characterisation has dropped right off, and it is way too plot driven now. Hopefully they can rebalance it in futures series'


----------



## spanglechick (Jul 12, 2018)

I've had a changeable relationship with s2, though I was never close to giving up.   

The final episode was, I agree, rather fast on big plot developments, which felt a bit odd, but ultimately sets the scene for an interesting s3.  Potentially, there is a big redemptive arc for humanity on the way, and grassroots female empowerment will be the key.


----------



## keithy (Jul 12, 2018)

I'm confused, where is it up to on channel 4? Surely last Sunday wasn't the final episode?


----------



## belboid (Jul 12, 2018)

keithy said:


> I'm confused, where is it up to on channel 4? Surely last Sunday wasn't the final episode?


That was eight of thirteen


----------



## Crispy (Jul 12, 2018)

keithy said:


> I'm confused, where is it up to on channel 4? Surely last Sunday wasn't the final episode?


Channel 4 is 5 episodes behind the US (from where I've been nicking it)


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 12, 2018)

I missed two episodes whilst on holiday and haven't caught up so in effect I gave up on the show. At the end of last season it was basically the beginning of civil disobedience. This season I wanted to see heads roll. I wanted to see the commanders, the aunts, the soldiers, the wives - basically all of Gilead state and their supporters - either slaughtered or imprisoned. And yet all we got was episode after episode of handmaids being imprisoned, tortured, raped and worked to death. How many hours of this are we meant to endure for the future pay off of revolution? This series is vastly worse than the last one. Like many serialised dramas they are really stretching this out, there were some episodes that barley even had any dialogue.


----------



## spanglechick (Jul 12, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I missed two episodes whilst on holiday and haven't caught up so in effect I gave up on the show. At the end of last season it was basically the beginning of civil disobedience. This season I wanted to see heads roll. I wanted to see the commanders, the aunts, the soldiers, the wives - basically all of Gilead state and their supporters - either slaughtered or imprisoned. And yet all we got was episode after episode of handmaids being imprisoned, tortured, raped and worked to death. How many hours of this are we meant to endure for the future pay off of revolution? This series is vastly worse than the last one. Like many serialised dramas they are really stretching this out, there were some episodes that barley even had any dialogue.


I think (hope) that that is the overall arc, but that we needed to see the seeds of unrest grow in a wider range of the population.


----------



## RubyToogood (Jul 12, 2018)

spanglechick said:


> I think (hope) that that is the overall arc, but that we needed to see the seeds of unrest grow in a wider range of the population.


Yebbut that would go against Atwood. In the book this was just the beginning of Gilead.


----------



## belboid (Jul 12, 2018)

RubyToogood said:


> Yebbut that would go against Atwood. In the book this was just the beginning of Gilead.


Would it? The postscript in the book strongly implies Gilead doesn't actually last that long, iirr


----------



## keithy (Jul 12, 2018)

Also Atwood has been clear that the second series isn't (and doesn't need to be) close to the book. She isn't involved and doesn't mind.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Jul 12, 2018)

I started watching this series, but I can't finish it. It upsets me too much.


----------



## RubyToogood (Jul 12, 2018)

belboid said:


> Would it? The postscript in the book strongly implies Gilead doesn't actually last that long, iirr


Oh, hm. I can't look it up because I lent my copy out.


----------



## belboid (Jul 13, 2018)

RubyToogood said:


> Oh, hm. I can't look it up because I lent my copy out.


Looking at it, Gilead could well have survived at least a few decades (its vague, some of the characters from book, which is set in Early Giled, are said to still be significant in 'Middle Gilead', which implies there must be a 'Late Gilead.') It could all take place over ten-twenty years, but was probably longer. Either way, easy enough to get a eight seasons of TV out of it.


----------



## mystic pyjamas (Jul 13, 2018)

Any chance of THMT becoming a musical?


----------



## keithy (Aug 5, 2018)

What are we all thinking about it now?


----------



## Reno (Aug 5, 2018)

I still like it, but then I like bleak and grim. There are a few things which didn’t add up, especially how much June/Offred gets away with and how all the handmaids come back from the colonies because the colonies are a bit of a dramatic dead end. I’m also still not buying that race isn’t much of an issue in this society, in which fascist regime wasn’t race an issue ? On the plus side, Serena becomes the most interesting character in season 2 as it finally sinks in that she’s just as fucked as any woman in the regime she helped to build. I liked the flashbacks which showed how things went to shit fast. On the whole it still was gripping.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 6, 2018)

I didn't know it was still airing.  I really liked series one, and was looking forward to series two.  We gave up due to not being able to physically see anything for much of the episode.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Aug 6, 2018)

Seems to me the episodes are all written by different people who have only read a summary of the action so far. Still watching though.


----------



## tommers (Aug 6, 2018)

Has the series finished yet on C4?


----------



## keithy (Aug 6, 2018)

Reno said:


> I still like it, but then I like bleak and grim. There are a few things which didn’t add up, especially how much June/Offred gets away with and how all the handmaids come back from the colonies because the colonies are a bit of a dramatic dead end. I’m also still not buying that race isn’t much of an issue in this society, in which fascist regime wasn’t race an issue ? On the plus side, Serena becomes the most interesting character in season 2 as it finally sinks in that she’s just as fucked as any woman in the regime she helped to build. I liked the flashbacks which showed how things went to shit fast. On the whole it still was gripping.



June was pregnant so they needed her, couldn't just execute her. I'm interested to know which bit of being pinned down and raped as punishment was 'getting away with it though?

I think they brought them back from the colonies after lots of them died in that explosion


----------



## keithy (Aug 6, 2018)

tommers said:


> Has the series finished yet on C4?



No it is still going.

I'm loving it, can't wait for each episode, love watching it.


----------



## Reno (Aug 6, 2018)

keithy said:


> June was pregnant so they needed her, couldn't just execute her. I'm interested to know which bit of being pinned down and raped as punishment was 'getting away with it though?
> 
> I think they brought them back from the colonies after lots of them died in that explosion


I get that this was the rationalisation in both cases, but it felt more like they needed to keep the characters than this being consistent with the cruelty of that society. As to the rape, the whole point is that this dystopia has completely normalised rape, so that isn’t even considered unusually cruel punishment within the context. They would have executed her after she gave birth or finished nursing and I just didn’t buy they would reintegrate all the handmaids from the colonies and we soon see why that was a bad idea.


----------



## girasol (Aug 6, 2018)

I finished episode 11 (Holly) - which I thought was so tense, heartbreaking (yep I cried - edit: no, I was thinking of the previous episode and the 'unexpected reunion'  ) and visually amazing although


Spoiler



it really didn't need THAT much screaming and birthing IMO - it was too much

Question that's been bugging me A LOT, how the heck is Ofglen back being a handmaid after being mutilated and exposed to shitloads of radiation???

edit: although reading about the mutilation just now, it was FGM - so she could still have children, but what about all the radiation?  Isn't a handmaid's main function to have babies?


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Aug 6, 2018)

I've been watching again and enjoying it again - if enjoying is the right word as it is pretty bloody grim.

I liked the episode where the commander and Serena went to Canada. I liked Serena's series of realizations of what she'd had to accept as part of this state she'd had such a big hand in creating and had believed in so wholeheartedly.

Personally, I think the mother/child stuff is being hammered home almost to the point of overdoing it. I think it's been written to hit people who are parents really hard - I am not so I can't relate to it in quite the same depth. I thought the reunion was very well done though.

I am hoping that Aunt Lydia's sudden understanding and almost kindness is indicative of people within this society starting to realize that maybe it is all brutal and wrong rather than just lazy writing. She has been one of the maddest zealots throughout.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Aug 6, 2018)

I think June/Offred "gets away" with things because there have been many little things that she's "got away with" throughout the series and if they tried to dob her in now and it all came out, Serena and the comander would be for it as well and they know that.

Her rape to "make the baby come" was definitely a punishment from Serena but the comander did not realise it was a punishment as he doesn't think of that as rape. Serena knows though. As does Offred.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 10, 2018)

mystic pyjamas said:


> Any chance of THMT becoming a musical?


It's already been an opera, I think.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 10, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I missed two episodes whilst on holiday and haven't caught up so in effect I gave up on the show. At the end of last season it was basically the beginning of civil disobedience. This season I wanted to see heads roll. I wanted to see the commanders, the aunts, the soldiers, the wives - basically all of Gilead state and their supporters - either slaughtered or imprisoned. And yet all we got was episode after episode of handmaids being imprisoned, tortured, raped and worked to death. How many hours of this are we meant to endure for the future pay off of revolution? This series is vastly worse than the last one. Like many serialised dramas they are really stretching this out, there were some episodes that barley even had any dialogue.


I haven't watched it, and given that it lacks what Jeff's looking for here, I won't. Everything written about it suggests to me that it gratuitously exploits the exact same things it claims to be against. Rather than trying to raise awareness of the threat of fascism in America, I suspect that its makers are "sneaking regarders" of that sort of thing.


----------



## Reno (Aug 10, 2018)

I don’t see what a cathartic narrative about a fascist regime easily overthrown is supposed to achieve. Fictional catharsis is just escapism, so go watch The Matrix sequels or Logan’s Run or any number of dystopian movies that end with "Ding dong, the witch is dead". What I found far more valuable are the parallels the second season draws to the current political situation in the US and how that led to a totalitarian regime. If you don’t like watching anything as bleak as The Handmaids Tale, there are plenty of alternatives on the telly, but a narrative which extrapolates on the constant sexual thread women feel in our society and how governments legislate over their bodies shouldn’t be reassuring.


----------



## girasol (Aug 10, 2018)

Being as there are spoilers everywhere I'll ask again without spoiler tags. How is Ofglenm/Emily a handmaid again, after all the radiation? Isn't the primary function of a handmaid to procreate?


----------



## keithy (Aug 10, 2018)

girasol said:


> Being as there are spoilers everywhere I'll ask again without spoiler tags. How is Ofglenm/Emily a handmaid again, after all the radiation? Isn't the primary function of a handmaid to procreate?



They haven't covered it. I assume they did the fertility tests they have mentioned before. Would she necessarily be infertile? I don't know much about radiation!


----------



## RubyToogood (Aug 10, 2018)

I don't think they've specifically said the colonies are radioactive. Just toxic in some way.


----------



## girasol (Aug 11, 2018)

keithy said:


> They haven't covered it. I assume they did the fertility tests they have mentioned before. Would she necessarily be infertile? I don't know much about radiation!



Yeah maybe. I remember her tooth falling out, people dying from exposure to whatever was there. Might be wrong but I thought it was radiation. Maybe it's only extremely dangerous to foetus but she wasn't pregnant. Dunno, just seemed strange.


----------



## keithy (Aug 12, 2018)

Good finale! Loved it.



Spoiler: Spoiler about finale



if June ends up back at the Waterford's in season 3 I don't think I'll have the patience to keep watching though


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Aug 14, 2018)

They can fuck off with that ending.

Good series otherwise though. A bunch of people I know stopped watching it because it was so unrelentingly grim.


----------



## tommers (Aug 14, 2018)

Has it finished now?  Can we talk about it?



Spoiler: ending



she can't go back.  The commander guy knows it was her who nicked the baby.  Serena knows it was.  She cant just waltz back in there.  Which means that she is either going to be hidden by the "good" commander or live as some sort of guerrilla warfare / behind enemy lines type of thing - which would seem doomed to failure considering that everybody ends up on the wall who tries that



I liked the bombing.  I liked the bit where they all started to work together as soon as the men fucked off (apart from Lydia briefly being nice ).


----------



## spanglechick (Aug 14, 2018)

What I love is Serena's gradual awakening.


----------



## keithy (Aug 15, 2018)

There needs to be a lot of change in the third series really or it will get boring.


----------



## Santino (Aug 15, 2018)

Narratively, I thought the whole season was slightly ruined by the decision to keep June in the Waterford household no matter what, as if that were the premise of a sitcom or something.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Aug 15, 2018)

Santino said:


> as if that were the premise of a sitcom or something.



It's a sit-trag with her ending up in that dreary room, again. I'm willing to bet that another season starts with her there. I watch it but think 'FFS, back to square one'.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 15, 2018)

I haven't read the book, but presume we are now beyond the original text?


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Aug 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I haven't read the book, but presume we are now beyond the original text?



I believe series 1 was based on the original text, and the rest is new material.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 15, 2018)

By the by, an entirely random point: the bloke who assisted the handmaid escaping and will presumably cover up the killing of [X], sounded like some kind of neo-liberal economist from the stuff he was muttering? Was that significant?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 15, 2018)

ElizabethofYork said:


> I believe series 1 was based on the original text, and the rest is new material.


Ta.


----------



## tommers (Aug 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> By the by, an entirely random point: the bloke who assisted the handmaid escaping and will presumably cover up the killing of [X], sounded like some kind of neo-liberal economist from the stuff he was muttering? Was that significant?



I don't think she's dead.


----------



## belboid (Aug 15, 2018)

The new series has included some parts of the book that didn't make it into S1, but is mostly new.

I'll watch S3, no doubt, but there really were a vast number of problems with S2. Too much happened without any real consequence. What actually came out of the bombing? A couple of episodes of activity, but fiennes didn't even seem to be limping a couple of weeks later. Bradley Whitford's character is too unbelievable (and the idea that 'the colonies' took a brilliant economist to work out is just silly, unless they bother to go into some detail about the place and why it isn't just economically unproductive members of society doing the shit work), and the ending was just pants.

But Moss is great and it looks really good, so I'll carry on.


----------



## tommers (Aug 15, 2018)

Hang on.  This has finished on 4 now so surely we can do away with all the cryptic references and spoiler tags?


----------



## belboid (Aug 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> By the by, an entirely random point: the bloke who assisted the handmaid escaping and will presumably cover up the killing of [X], sounded like some kind of neo-liberal economist from the stuff he was muttering? Was that significant?


Undoubtedly meant to be, but, as stated above, his economics are absolutely bog standard, i suspect it was just to mark him out as a big bad who did something really really evil.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 15, 2018)

tommers said:


> I don't think she's dead.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 15, 2018)

belboid said:


> Undoubtedly meant to be, but, as stated above, his economics are absolutely bog standard, i suspect it was just to mark him out as a big bad who did something really really evil.


Wasn't sure if it was an attempt to draw a distinction between the free market right and the religious extremist right who are running gilead.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 15, 2018)

tommers said:


> Hang on.  This has finished on 4 now so surely we can do away with all the cryptic references and spoiler tags?


Yeah, but not everybody might have watched it yet.


----------



## belboid (Aug 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Wasn't sure if it was an attempt to draw a distinction between the free market right and the religious extremist right who are running gilead.


I don't think the scriptwriters are that subtle. Similarly unsure whether the religious grouping is actually that coherent, and the extent to which they just use religion as a cover.


----------



## tommers (Aug 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, but not everybody might have watched it yet.


That might still be true in 2020. I imagine there will be people that never watch it. It's available on All4. I think it's fair game once its been shown on terrestrial telly.



Spoiler



Kevin Spacey makes up Kyser Soze [\spoiler]


----------



## Reno (Aug 15, 2018)

tommers said:


> That might still be true in 2020. I imagine there will be people that never watch it. It's available on All4. I think it's fair game once its been shown on terrestrial telly.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There are so many shows to watch these days. Most I catch up with later on Netflix, Amazon, torrent, etc.


----------



## spanglechick (Aug 15, 2018)

belboid said:


> The new series has included some parts of the book that didn't make it into S1, but is mostly new.
> 
> I'll watch S3, no doubt, but there really were a vast number of problems with S2. Too much happened without any real consequence. What actually came out of the bombing? A couple of episodes of activity, but fiennes didn't even seem to be limping a couple of weeks later. Bradley Whitford's character is too unbelievable (and the idea that 'the colonies' took a brilliant economist to work out is just silly, unless they bother to go into some detail about the place and why it isn't just economically unproductive members of society doing the shit work), and the ending was just pants.
> 
> But Moss is great and it looks really good, so I'll carry on.


I think the point of the bombing was to show the broader resistance picture.  The long view of S2 is all about the fortunes and slow growth of the opposition.  The endgame for this story (after 5 seasons?) is surely the female revolution and overthrow of Gilead.  June's personal story is just our anchoring point.


----------



## RubyToogood (Aug 15, 2018)

I cannot think that casually chucking your baby to a homicidal maniac to rear is likely to end well. Nor is staying on to fight for a resistance you're not really in touch with.


----------



## KeeperofDragons (Aug 17, 2018)

RubyToogood said:


> I cannot think that casually chucking your baby to a homicidal maniac to rear is likely to end well. Nor is staying on to fight for a resistance you're not really in touch with.


I think she's going to try and get Hannah out


----------



## keithy (Aug 17, 2018)

Yeah you would not leave your daughter to suffer under that regime. She knows where her daughter is now so has a chance to save her. 

I would die to save women and girls from that, never mind my actual daughter!


----------



## InfoBurner (Sep 21, 2018)




----------



## D'wards (Sep 22, 2018)

I watched s1 and enjoyed it. I have s2 on my freeview box, but I have so many series on the go. Is it worth watching?


----------



## Reno (Sep 22, 2018)

D'wards said:


> I watched s1 and enjoyed it. I have s2 on my freeview box, but I have so many series on the go. Is it worth watching?


I think it is. More uneven than the first season and there are a few duff episodes after the first three, but then it picks up again in the second half.


----------



## D'wards (Sep 22, 2018)

Reno said:


> I think it is. More uneven than the first season and there are a few duff episodes after the first three, but then it picks up again in the second half.


Thanks!


----------



## Epona (Sep 22, 2018)

InfoBurner said:


> View attachment 147605



Am I the only one who thinks that is kind of disgusting?  I know it's only fictional, but making a version of that outfit that is more sexualised (tighter around the body and short skirt) just leaves a very bad taste in my mouth tbh.


----------



## InfoBurner (Sep 22, 2018)

No, you're not the only one. Outcry and withdrawn from sale.


----------



## Epona (Sep 22, 2018)

InfoBurner said:


> No, you're not the only one. Outcry and withdrawn from sale.



Oh, good - I must have completely missed the story about the outfit, but just seeing it filled me with horror.  It was kind of "let's make your ritualised rape outfit more sexy" - er, no...


----------



## Reno (Sep 22, 2018)

Have seen the costume all over social media because almost everybody thinks it’s a staggeringly bad idea, so didn’t respond with the obligatory outrage/facepalm/incredulous laughter.


----------



## Epona (Sep 22, 2018)

Reno said:


> Have seen the costume all over social media because almost everybody thinks it’s a staggeringly bad idea, so didn’t responded with the obligatory outrage/facepalm/incredulous laughter.



Oh I don't do social media, the entire thing had completely passed me by until I saw it here tonight!


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 5, 2018)

I think they were filming near me yesterday...


----------



## RubyToogood (Jul 17, 2019)

Has anybody watched any of season 3? I can't quite bring myself to give it a chance as I thought season 2 was milking it a bit really and am expecting a pot boiler. But I'm willing to be told I'm wrong.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jul 17, 2019)

Waiting for the last 11th episode to air then will binge it! Can’t wait. It’s the Revolution Season, right?


----------



## Santino (Jul 17, 2019)

Not yet it's not.


----------



## greenfield (Jul 17, 2019)

Potboiler is right. I don't think they have any idea where they're going with this


----------



## Petcha (May 11, 2021)

I didn't even realise they were doing a 4th season, but there's 6 episodes up there online - they must have released the whole season at once... anyone watched any of it yet? 






						The Handmaid's Tale season 4 | news, release date, cast, spoilers, trailer | Radio Times
					

Hulu's The Handmaid's Tale is due back on screens in 2021 - here's our guide to the release date, cast, spoilers and more for the Margaret Atwood adaptation



					www.radiotimes.com


----------



## cybershot (May 11, 2021)

THe first 3 episodes were released on the same day by Hulu and then it's weekly. As far as I'm aware only up to episode 4 has been made available unless there's been a leak.

Only watched the first episode of season 4 so far.


----------



## Petcha (May 11, 2021)

Ah yes, you're right. Was it any good?

I feel like it might have been beginning the slow leap over the shark by the end of the last series.


----------



## cybershot (May 11, 2021)

It was good. I’ve not read the book though so not sure how accurate it is to that. It’s certainly at a point where a lot of things need to happen.


----------



## Epona (May 12, 2021)

cybershot said:


> It was good. I’ve not read the book though so not sure how accurate it is to that. It’s certainly at a point where a lot of things need to happen.



Basically, season 1 is a pretty close adaptation of the book, but the book ends there (which is perfect), the subsequent TV series are not from the book.  It is well worth reading btw, much more claustrophobic atmosphere than anything that could be portrayed on screen IMO, it feels very different.


----------



## Petcha (May 12, 2021)

I watched the first one and a half episodes of season 4 last night. Very good. I won't spoil it. Quite satisfying though.


----------



## Sue (Jun 13, 2021)

Watched all three seasons on All4 over the last few weeks. Thought it was excellent. Season 4 starts on Channel 4 next Sunday (20th of June) at 9pm!


----------



## Epona (Jun 13, 2021)

I decided to watch from the start again as I missed part of S3 and couldn't remember where I had got to.

I am still halfway through a rewatch of S1 and it is done so well - there isn't a single performance that brings it down really, Moss and Bledel are particularly good, but it is such a good production all round.

I had forgotton some of the bits in S1 that aren't in the book (the book is so chilling and I think stays with you a long time, however good the TV production is it can't quite provide that, although the 1st episode strikes the perfect tone in terms of the inner monologue and isolation/claustophobia - there is also one moment in the book that upset me particularly (as in that is just the fucking cherry on top, as if everything else wasn't horrible enough) that isn't in the series, I think people who remember the book and know me can probably guess what it was

For those who haven't read the book - the protagonist never has a name of her own, she is Offred throughout and although she mentions that she had another name once, it is forbidden now, and her own name is never revealed.  The name June was a fan favourite for her name because early on, a trainee handmaid at the red centre who we never hear from again is identified by the name June, but it was never confirmed to be the protagonist.  I believe Atwood said that it wasn't intended to be her, but she was happy with that for the TV series.  Offred never finds out what happened to Luke and Hannah and we never get any of their POV - they are simply gone and there isn't a separate narrative for their story.  It is much more bleak and there is much less hope in the book.

The bit that particularly upset me in the book - as in ok that is the final thing that is going to break me on top of all the other horribleness-  was in the form of memories about when her and Luke decided that because they were going to try to make a run for it they needed to kill their pet cat because if they just left it would wander up and down looking for food and would either starve or alert neighbours - who may report them - that they had left and abandoned the cat.  There is a passage about how they started referring to the cat as "it" to depersonalise it before it was killed, and the protagonist's guilt that she let Luke take it out to the garage and do it and never asked how.  "I should at least have asked him about it afterwards, so he didn't have to carry it alone; because that little sacrifice, that snuffing out of love, was done for my sake as well." - and it turned out to be a worthless sacrifice anyway


----------



## cybershot (Jun 13, 2021)

Just got fully up to date with all episodes of season 4 that have aired in the US so far. Won’t spoil it, but it’s still really good.


----------



## spanglechick (Jun 13, 2021)

Epona said:


> I decided to watch from the start again as I missed part of S3 and couldn't remember where I had got to.
> 
> I am still halfway through a rewatch of S1 and it is done so well - there isn't a single performance that brings it down really, Moss and Bledel are particularly good, but it is such a good production all round.
> 
> ...


Have you read The Testements?


----------



## Epona (Jun 13, 2021)

spanglechick said:


> Have you read The Testements?



No, I haven't! Is some of the series is based on that?  Am only familiar with The Handmaid's Tale from way before that. Ty for the heads-up


----------



## spanglechick (Jun 13, 2021)

Epona said:


> No, I haven't! Is some of the series is based on that?  Am only familiar with The Handmaid's Tale from way before that. Ty for the heads-up


Not yet.  I reckon it takes place about  10-15 years beyond series 3.  So, the tv series is presumably taking place in a world that will end up there.  

It’s very good.  Not the perfect pressure chamber of the first book, but it’s clever.


----------



## killer b (Jun 13, 2021)

I just finished reading John Wyndham's The Crysalids, which was apparently a huge influence on The Handmaids Tale, if anyone's needing more reading in that direction (it's a great book too)


----------



## Epona (Jun 14, 2021)

If we are recommending reading along the same lines (and I do enjoy a bit of dystopian literature) I enjoyed Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro, which has also been adapted into a quite fine film - it is very quiet, and how we deal with awful situations - there aren't any heroics or anything here.


----------



## Cloo (Jun 14, 2021)

'The Testaments' is amazing, one of the most exciting stories I've read in ages I think. 

I watched series 1 very slowly and belatedly,  but I'm not sure I can find it in me too watch the others!


----------



## Reno (Jun 24, 2021)

I finished season 4 last night and thought it was the best since the first season. In the beginning I was afraid it was about June still being stuck in Gilead, but then it moves he plot into a most satisfying direction. Elisabeth Moss is spectacular and 



Spoiler



her anger and need for revenge are cathartic.


----------



## Epona (Jun 24, 2021)

Still working my way through season 3, should get to season 4 within the next few days!


----------



## Epona (Jun 25, 2021)

Damn, are they releasing S4 one episode a week on the streaming service?  Might wait until later in the year to watch it if that is the case.


----------



## Sue (Jul 4, 2021)

Can I just say I fucking love June?


----------



## nottsgirl (Aug 4, 2021)

Spoiler: Series 2



if they found Nick in the aeroplane fleeing Gilead with June, how come they just put them back in the same house, no questions asked? How come they didn’t just kill Nick?


----------



## Sue (Aug 4, 2021)

nottsgirl, know you spoilered that but might be worth making it clear it's a spoiler for something that hasn't been on Channel 4 yet. (I just looked and now wish I hadn't.)


----------



## nottsgirl (Aug 4, 2021)

Oh sorry, I am watching on All4. Sorry again.


----------



## Elpenor (Nov 30, 2022)

I’ve just noticed that series 5 has begun on Channel 4 so I’ve been catching up over the last few nights


----------



## Reno (Nov 30, 2022)

Elpenor said:


> I’ve just noticed that series 5 has begun on Channel 4 so I’ve been catching up over the last few nights


I wondered whether anybody apart from me is still watching this. I finished season 5 a couple of weeks ago and wasn't that keen on it for the first few episodes but then it becomes quite good again. Though understandable due to her PTSD, June becomes a little one-note. I think Serena is now the most interesting character and the show is at its best when it focuses on her, which it does as the season goes on.


----------



## Sue (Nov 30, 2022)

Reno said:


> I wondered whether anybody apart from me is still watching this. I finished season 5 a couple of weeks ago and wasn't that keen on it for the first few episodes but then it becomes quite good again. Though understandable due to her PTSD, June becomes a little one-note. I think Serena is now the most interesting character and the show is at its best when it focuses on her, which it does as the season goes on.


I'm planning on watching it. Waiting for all the episodes to be available (haven't actually checked yet though).


----------



## Looby (Nov 30, 2022)

Reno said:


> I wondered whether anybody apart from me is still watching this. I finished season 5 a couple of weeks ago and wasn't that keen on it for the first few episodes but then it becomes quite good again. Though understandable due to her PTSD, June becomes a little one-note. I think Serena is now the most interesting character and the show is at its best when it focuses on her, which it does as the season goes on.


Yeah I’m enjoying Serena’s twists and turns. 

June was pissing me off a bit which I feel bad about but I quite liked her again in the last two episodes I watched (up to date for UK episodes). 

I’d only seen the first two seasons and caught up last month during my annual leave. Jolly! 😄


----------



## belboid (Nov 30, 2022)

We're still watching, pretty much 'live' with the C4 showings. It's nothing like as good as the first two seasons, but still has more than enough ideas and plot twists to keep me engaged.  

Gilead is way more interesting than Canada, tho that is, in a way, testament to how well they've one June's PTSD. PTSD doesn't make for as much of a well-rounded and nuanced character, because you're fucked up ni oh so many ways.   So she's annoying and far less sympathetic.  But she's realistic.

I'm finding I can guess what is going to happen to Serena too obvious, but then I suppose anyone would who doesn't go along with Giladean beliefs.  "_you_ _think you can get away with this, don't be fucking stupid."_

Lydia (if only to see how she ends up as the character from The Testaments) and Janine are the best characters, imo.


----------



## Elpenor (Nov 30, 2022)

Sue said:


> I'm planning on watching it. Waiting for all the episodes to be available (haven't actually checked yet though).


The first six episodes are available at present. 



Reno said:


> I wondered whether anybody apart from me is still watching this. I finished season 5 a couple of weeks ago and wasn't that keen on it for the first few episodes but then it becomes quite good again. Though understandable due to her PTSD, June becomes a little one-note. I think Serena is now the most interesting character and the show is at its best when it focuses on her, which it does as the season goes on.


I agree that Serena has the best of the storylines so far (I’m at episode 5). Lydia is also interesting, a lot of conflict given they try to influence things as women in Gilead. 

I am finding the story a bit slow now, I don’t know how many more seasons are planned but I wouldn’t be too upset if they wrap it up next season.


----------



## belboid (Nov 30, 2022)

Elpenor said:


> I am finding the story a bit slow now, I don’t know how many more seasons are planned but I wouldn’t be too upset if they wrap it up next season.


renewed for a sixth and final season a month or two back


----------



## cybershot (Dec 3, 2022)

We were watching Season 5 as it aired in the States. Some interesting developments. Lots of filler, but still worth watching.


----------



## Elpenor (Dec 3, 2022)

I’ve got one episode to go and have to say the second half of the season is much better IMO


----------



## belboid (Dec 19, 2022)

I am sorry, but anyone who walks down the middle of the road, despite there being a perfectly sidewalk (the clue is in the name) available a yard away, has absolutely no right to complain about being run over.


----------

