"another person? No, not just “another person”- the despicable Tillman who deserves at least some of it. He deserves a good beating- or several.
If you do bad things to someone who richly deserves it- is that evil?
In many cases, yes! That’s why she had Indira leave before telling Tillman exactly what she had planned for him. She had too many principles for Lorraine in that instance
That’s the point of having laws in the first place! We have laws and courts and judges and juries so that we can collectively, as a society, determine what justice looks like. Taking matters into your own hands is generally frowned upon.
Besides which, it’s not just the prison stuff that makes Lorraine evil. That stuff was illegal - which was the original point. She was not following the law, as claimed. But beyond that, she traffics in human misery and revels in buying off judges and politicians. And has a mercenary squad at her beck and call. Some of that may not be illegal but it’s certainly evil.
Just because a lot of people would not see something wrong with ONE thing she did does not really excuse all the other stuff. Even Hitler loved dogs, after all. Evil people have pets and family and friends. It’s not like they’re microwaving babies 24/7 or anything like that.
Exactly! Microwaving dries things out too much. Sometimes I use a crockpot.
Sometimes was is just is what is evil. Sometimes what is unjust is good.
Does Tillman deserve it? Of course. Should it be done? No. Is Lorraine a good person? No, she is a horrible person. Are her feelings and actions towards Tillman understandable? One hundred percent.
At the end, an evil person hurts an evil person who hurt her. Meanwhile, a happy, joyous, wonderful family offers forgiveness and joy to a broken man. You see in one ending forgiveness, and in the other hatred, but is either JUST? Technically what Tillman faces is justice. An eye for an eye. In the case of Dot and Old Munch, there is no justice, no settling of accounts - just forgiveness and, then, peace. So is justice better? Maybe not. Maybe we’re wrong about what justice is. Maybe that is what the show was asking us to consider.
The show is about debt, per se, the repayment of which is a limited form of justice. But, a form of justice it is.
Ah Dot pointed out, that was a consequence of his actions. She was defending herself. I don’t see the debt she owed in that case. Didn’t munch’s partner die in a trap while trying to re-kidnap Dot to bring to someone who’d torture and kill her? His choice. His fault. Munch killed a policeman just about then. Debt? He doesn’t owe?
Also, for an immortal blood-soaked soldier, Much was pretty whiny about a boo-boo on his ear.
I agree. Not a debt, per se, but something about Munch’s twisted code of ethics, like Anton Chigurh. Right and wrong don’t matter. What matters is either a thing was promised or a thing was done and there must be follow-through or retribution irrespective of what is “just.” Or rather, following through on what was promised or demanding what is owed is justice according to certain moral systems.
This idea of “Oh, things change, we mere mortals sometimes make mistakes and should be more forgiving that we may be forgiven ourselves” is right out. Especially if you’re maybe not a mortal being (or maybe even if you just imaging yourself as something more than a mere mortal, perhaps because you are a truly supernatural entity, or maybe you just have a few billion dollars or some militiamen insulating you from normal human consequences—being a sociopath can help). And as for the law, well, the law is a human institution.
Yes. Always. Getting them out of the population to a place where they can’t hurt anybody - good. Putting them into a US prison with minimal supervision where they can choose from a whole new set of victims - evil. Turning the prison around into a place that victimizes them - also evil.
There is no good answer for the Tillmans of the world in US society. We are not set up to heal anybody, in any way, from anything.
Not every turd can be polished.
It doesn’t matter. Munch felt she did. A debt existed that he intended to collect. She showed him forgiveness and peace was better.
Don’t I know it.
(Deleted comment, since it doesn’t matter.)
Very Coen-esque. Well done.
Very late (just watched the series). But I don’t think Dot owed the debt (although he is pissed about his ear). She was the job he was hired to do, and he completes his jobs.
This isn’t solid since he renegotiated the payment (and ended up stiffed), but it mostly hangs together for me.
Got me to LOL.
I guess I’m one of the few people that doesn’t like this season. We left it quite some time ago to wait for all eps to drop, then re-watched the first few to freshen our memories. It struck me as marginally better the second time around. We just finished ep seven and I have to say that I can’t wait for it to be over. It’s just too over-the-top, and the constant references to previous seasons and to the movie smack of laziness on the part of the writers. The dream sequence was totally unnecessary, as we already knew that her husband was/is abusive to women and is why she escaped. There are certainly glimmers of what made the first three (yes three) episodes great, but it’s mostly boring for long stretches.
There’s… a bit more to it than that. Like, how she has processed (or not) certain aspects of her trauma. Do you understand what happened to the first wife? If you don’t, no worries. You’re still watching, after all.
And references to the movies is kind of a running thing with all of the seasons? As are references to earlier seasons?
Yeah, but it just seems very heavy-handed this time around. Maybe I’m just a snowflake.
There were definitely more references in the last season than in all of the previous seasons combined and it annoyed me but not that much. I loved the season overall.
yeah - like how season 1 talked about the incident 30 years ago and season 2 was 30 years ago?
I guess I missed the references this season -