Skip Episode 3? - Horace and Pete (2016) Discussion

[–] DonGately 8 years ago

You learn a lot of backstory on Louis CK's character in this episode. It's too bad you aren't digging it. I love that episode and was really impressed with the performances.

It won't completely mess things up for you but there is significant backstory in that episode which comes back in future episodes. I think you could skip that episode and not miss a beat but I recommend watching episode 3.

You don't get hard this quick unless its real.

reply

[–] Typhoon859 8 years ago

Sigh.. well ok. I'm rather sure from almost every conceivable point of view that I won't like it but I guess I'll have to power through it with a friend or something.

Thanks for responding, and respectfully at that! Maybe I'll be surprised, though, 4 minutes of patience with a still camera on some random old lady's face with her telling some out of context story, somewhat incoherently, is rather a long time for non-thinking or otherwise philosophical talking points... Hard to keep faith that it'd lead somewhere especially when that's essentially what seems to be the whole episode. Comes across not bold, dashing, or otherwise challenging to the audience, but rather just overly self-indulgent and pretentious instead of meaningful. But again, maybe I'll be surprised...

reply

[–] DonGately 8 years ago

It is the whole episode. It's basically her telling a story for about 45 minutes, but you learn who she is and why she's telling that story to Horace and why it's significant that she's telling that story to that person.

You don't get hard this quick unless its real.

reply

[–] Typhoon859 8 years ago

Yeah, I gotcha. Obviously I figured that would be the case. I just doubted that past the 4 min mark it would possibly be good enough for me to care, lol. Anyway, like I said, I'll give it a shot. I'll just wait till my friend is available to watch it with him in case it's torture for me. At least then we would have suffered together.

reply

[–] YesYesNo 8 years ago

This episode is a masterful acting clinic from both Laurie Metcalf and Louis CK if you ask me. I sat there slack jawed, in complete amazement, and before I knew it the 40 minutes was over. I was thoroughly drawn into her story, convinced of the genuineness and intensity of her pain, and enthralled by the way Horace is made an accomplice in her own failure as a spouse - and in doing so affects a reconciliation of sorts between them. It's not philosophical or political, but it is thoroughly illuminating of something that is so often considered abject and unworthy of such a sensitive treatment.

Best episode of the first 3, IMO

reply

[–] DonGately 8 years ago

I agree.

You don't get hard this quick unless its real.

reply

[–] Typhoon859 8 years ago

Oh, well I didn't see THIS response coming. I should've went further in my initial response and sarcastically made this comment myself.

Look, while I can accept your opinion, you realize that even upon watching it I wouldn't possibly be able to agree at this point. Therefore, the wording of your opinion can only suggest that I am an insatiable buffoon that's incapable of understanding the higher merits and standards of acting when it comes to the most basic of human problems and interaction.

One of my favorite shows ever is In Treatment. That's basically all it is. My point in asking my question was already that the setup was horrible. The original response by DonGately was sufficient in order to address my concern. Thanks.

reply

[–] hdervic 8 years ago

I'm on the fence about episode 3. I love Laurie Metcalfe's acting generally speaking. And she is consistent here as well. I just wasn't blown away by the episode overall.

But the real point of this reply is I too love In Treatment. I was glued to every episode. Thanks for reminding me.

Stanislacker

reply

[–] djjoshuad 8 years ago

My sentiments exactly, although you were more eloquent than I would have been. I was blown away by Metcalf. I see her abilities as an actor in a whole new light now.

I'll add that while the content of her story could be considered less relevant to the over-arching storyline than some, this entire show is the telling of one family's story. This character is a part of that family. The events she describes in her own life, and the detail that scene provides around her marriage to Horace are both a big part of telling that story. The writing, the acting, the directing... this is a seriously impressive show, IMO. No parts should be skipped.

reply

[–] ColinInLa 8 years ago

Laurie Metcalf's performance here is Emmy worthy.

--------------------
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

reply

[–] hedi124 8 years ago

i agree. it was magic. How story telling by a character is sometimes just enough on screen rather than shooting the story. And i love it when that happens in a movie, how a window, our own window opens up in our brain and shoots the story for us as we listen to two people talking to each other, one telling the other a story.
I'm really glad there're smart people like Louis c.k. in the world that assumes there are smart people(viewers/listeners/ spectators) in the world that don't really need that much to be entertained other than a bit mystery. the order of presenting things, by intriguing, genuine characters who convey interesting stories or ask interesting questions, or have weird honest conversations.
it was great.

reply

[–] kay_rock 8 years ago

I agree with yesyesno. After watching that I felt as if I had seen something transcendent. That was some of the most powerful and moving writing/acting/filming I've seen in a very long time.

I don't care if that typhoon person hated it or somehow feels personally insulted if other people were blown away by something he/she disliked (although I sense there was more embarrassment than indignation in that odd response, especially when In Treatment got bafflingly tossed in as some sort of weird proof that he/she has good taste since they liked another brilliant show. Who cares?). It was brilliant, and those who appreciate that type of filmmaking should be allowed to express their appreciation without some insecure person crying that their feelers are hurt by a dissenting opinion.

Movies are IQ tests; the IMDB boards are how people broadcast their score.

reply

[–] TrentnQuarantino (9160) 2 years ago

Yes ... never thought Laurie Metcalfe had the chops to act so amazingly well. Wow.

reply

[–] peteyandjia 8 years ago

You can totally skip it. It's the weakest episode of the series in my opinion, and it isn't essential to enjoying any of the later episodes.

Some people loved it and appreciate the performance and the monologue nature of it, personally I found it tedious and boring. If you aren't digging the beginning, you probably won't like the rest, because that's pretty much how it goes for the rest of it.

reply

[–] Typhoon859 8 years ago

Interesting to see some differentiating opinions. Thank you.

and it isn't essential to enjoying any of the later episodes.

That kind of addresses the biggest part of my question and would seem to kind of be less something that's actually an opinion. You're probably right that I wouldn't enjoy it but I'm kind of conflicted by the fact that there are different viewpoints on its relevance.

I'll probably end up watching it anyway, just with a friend as I mentioned. It might be some time before that happens though so if by then a compelling argument is made for how in fact it is irrelevant, I'd gladly actually just skip it. Thanks!

reply

[–] choch_masta_yay 8 years ago

episode 3 was terrible and unwatchable and has no bearing on future episodes so dont bother watching it, skip it like I did.

reply

[–] Typhoon859 8 years ago

Lol, if you skipped it, how would you know? But anyway, yeah, I continued watching it today and I skipped it, continued with episode 4. Kind of upset they made the "eyebrow" guy kinda stupid in this one for whatever reason...

reply

[–] rod-davies 8 years ago

I can definitely see why someone wouldn't like this episode but I thought it was great.

Anyway, if you did skip it here is the relevant backstory that you should take from this episode:

Laurie Metcalfe is Sarah, Horace's ex-wife.
They married when he was young, 21, and she was 32.
They have 2 kids, Alice (Aidy Bryant) and a son (no name given so far).
Horace had an affair with Sarah's sister Rosemary. It destroyed the marriage and the family and is why Horace is estranged from his son and barely has a realtionship with his daughter.

reply

[–] Typhoon859 8 years ago

Thanks for that! That's all I was actually going to look for. I figured that was about the gist of it.

reply

[–] roundthetwist (121) 4 years ago

I'm with Typhoon here, generally.

I get why people would love it. For me, I started to tune out after a few minutes as well.

Yes, there's a bit of backstory on Horace's storyline but the episode could have been missed out and the understanding of her sister / Horace explained in less than 5 minutes elsewhere.

The Rhonda episode did a far better job of explaining all the info about his kids anyway.

I had wondered, despite having watched the entire of ep3 (albeit with minimal attention paid) whether I'd missed the information on whose kid belonged to whom but that wasn't the case.

Loved the entire series but I wouldn't revisit this episode.

reply

[–] entropyjx 8 years ago

I felt ripped off, I *beep* hated it. I thought it was boring as *beep* why would anyone pay money or time to listen to someone monologue their *beep* problems? There is no drama, it's just boring.

I didn't watch past 3 min, I skipped forwarded, wanting to see Alan Alda and Steve Buschemi, but no it's just this lady monologuing, with Louis cut in every once in a while.

I felt ripped off because I thought i was paying for a show, not a fake 40 minute interview.

reply

[–] cumberpanda 8 years ago

lmao the episode costs $3. I'm sure you'll recover.

reply

[–] GarryMMM 8 years ago

Yeah I skipped it, went back to try and watch it again but gave up. Respect to those that stayed through it without falling asleep.

reply

[–] johnm-dalton 8 years ago

Episode three is one of the best episodes in a brilliant series.

There is INFORMATION in the episode about what happened between Horace and his ex-wife and his children that is essential to understanding who Horace is, there therefore the entire series.

reply

[–] Typhoon859 8 years ago

Eh... And the information can be easily read.

reply

[–] johnm-dalton 8 years ago

Sounds like you're just trying to get a rise out of people, and that's whatever.

But you're also missing out on an amazing performance from Laurie Metcalf.

reply

[–] Typhoon859 8 years ago

Yeah well, people like you interpret everything that way. I don't know why you're even watching this show when they're essentially making fun of these kinds of brainless stupid responses to things like you apparently have.

reply

[–] ColinInLa 8 years ago

Eh... And the information can be easily read.

Okay then, Rosebud was a sled. Now you don't have to waste your time slogging through another one.

--------------------
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

reply

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] information_police 8 years ago

I thought Episode 3 was absolutely riveting!

"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules. "
-Walter Sobchak

reply

[–] yusomad 8 years ago

Episode 3 is a fantastic episode and a crucial step for finding out about Horace, his past and what kind of person he is. Their conversation ended up getting my heart rate up.

Shame on you who skipped it or quit watching. You have a maturity and patience of 9 year olds.

reply

[–] johnm-dalton 8 years ago

Agree 100%. If you "skip" episode three, you might as well skip the entire series.

reply

[–] peteyandjia 8 years ago

I did not like the 3rd episode at all, but I absolutely adore the rest of the series. I recommend it to everybody.

I also respect what Louis was going for here in episode 3, and if anyone else enjoyed it, more power to ya.

reply

[–] zbanca-daniel 8 years ago

if you are the cerebral type i imagine you wouldn't like it.
the episode is meant to touch your emotional self, to feel something (even if it's sadness).
the informational argument, i find it irrelevant.

reply

[–] johnm-dalton 8 years ago

This is an idiotic comment. It's the information that give the show its depth, its emotion, its resonance.

Information about the past of the characters is slowly doled out though the course of the series. Until finally we see a flashback of the pivotal night when Horace the 8th's mother flees. We see Young Pete get seriously abused by Horace the 7th. All of this is INFORmATION about the family that deepens our understand of why they behave the way they behave and why they're so damaged.

Episode 3 contains important pieces of the puzzle in the series. If one skips it, one misses out on some of the important themes of the series.

And I happen to think cerebral types will love it most of all.

reply

[–] zbanca-daniel 8 years ago

yes sir

reply