I’ve been asking that question since the pilot. We’ve seen Elizabeth have a threesome with a male target & Leanne; presumably that wasn’t the first time (& they don’t always get interrupted). So far they’ve only targeted 1 gay man, and apparently it didn’t even occur to anyone for Phillip to try & seduce him. Maybe with gay targets they go straight to trapping them in a compromising situation with a rent boy and blackmailing them. For a variety of reasons I can imagine female agents being expected to feign homosexuality/bisexuality more than male agents.
I am amazed by the apparent ease with which these agents (by “these” I mean the Russian agents, but I guess that must apply equally to all agents) can maintain a loving familial relationship - especially as that applies to their spouses and yet - at the drop of a hat - can jump into a sexual relationship - for most any length of time with someone (of either gender) from whom they want something. That so-called “relationship” can last for just an hour or so up until several weeks or months.
I don’t understand how they can do that. After all, most prostitutes that I have read have explained that it was a mighty struggle for them - the first time they had sex for money and for many of them - it continues to be a struggle ever afterward.
In all seriousness, does anyone know if agents IRL receive special training that enables them to do that?
And regardless, do they find that easy to do? Or would they struggle mightily with it, as I would.
It honestly and absolutely boggles my mind how they do that. It leaves me flabbergasted every time I think about it.
Can anyone please explain to me how it is that the character played by Costa Ronin is currently referred to as “Oleg Burov” yet in the early episodes of Season 2, he is called “Oleg Igorevich”?
Did I miss him having a name change? I do not recall any reason why his name would have changed.
Do any of you know?
Russians are often referred to with two separate names, one of them ending in “evich” or “ovich”, which I believe means “son of”.
So a casual name for him would be Oleg-son-of-Igor, while his actual name is Oleg Burov.
Kind of. Russians generally have three names: A given name (Oleg), a patronymic (Igorevich), from their father’s given name, and a family name (Burov).
If you’re not fairly close friends with someone–i.e., not close enough to use the informal form of “you”–the normal way to refer to them is by the first name and patronymic (Oleg Igorevich). If you’re on friendly terms with someone, you’ll just use the given name, and if you’re really good friends, you’ll use some form of affectionate diminutive.
On a bit of a tangent, the “ev/ov” tends to get elided in actual speech, and you’ll hear that a lot on the show–Igorevich tends to come out more like “Igor’ich”.
This is not exactly “on topic” but I once met two Russian guys who were quite friendly with me.
They could not possibly have wanted anything from me. Nor could they have possibly ever gotten anything from me - except perhaps for some friendly conversation.
They told me that almost everyone in Russia could be called “Alex”. What they said was that most Russian men were named “Alex” - that it was the most popular name. Also, in the event that you forgot someone’s name, it was always acceptable to call a Russian man “Alex” - much like Americans can always call a stranger “Buddy” or you can always call a stranger “Jack” or “Mack” - as in “Hey Mack”, how’s it going?
Would you happen to know if there is any truth to that?
I would like to propose the following for your consideration.
In S2E03 we learn that Leanne wrote a letter to her children telling them the “truth” about who E&L really were and what they really did. Specifically, this letter told her children that E&L were KGB agents and were living in the USA secretly. Leanne asked Elizabeth to give that letter to her children in the event of E&L’s death and Elizabeth promised that she would do that.
I would now like to raise the point that it was always impossible for E to ever give that letter to anyone. E would know from the outset that she would have to destroy that letter.
The reason was that giving that letter to J&A would mean a death sentence for all four of them because J&A would then know the truth - not only about their parents, but also about P&E. The KGB could never take the chance that information could ever become known to anyone because it would effectively threaten one of their most secret and most valued operations - namely the Directorate “S” project and it would place all those agents under a direct threat of death.
The KGB would have to ensure that all four were silenced forever and in the past, they had clearly demonstrated they were fully prepared to kill anyone who could make that info known to any public person.
It doesn’t matter whether that information ever became known or not. The mere possibility that it could become known was reason enough for the KGB to kill them all. IMO, there was absolutely no doubt about this. There would be no other way for them to handle this. They would have to ensure that all four were killed in order to ensure their silence. It’s just my opinion, but if this were a “real life” situation, I believe the KGB would decide that P&E would have to be killed because after J&A were killed, P&E could no longer be trusted and I hope the reason for that doesn’t need any further explanation.
Finally, Leanne should have known this and should never have written that letter.
No offense taken (or meant). I do find them to fit the very definition you are talking about. I guess it’s hard to explain exactly why; but although the show is already somewhat unrealistic in certain ways, it just seems like all of those would go way further into Implausibility Land for my taste (much like the show Nashville, that I really liked a lot at one point, but which has now thrown in a number of really outlandish and “soapy” twists that seriously degrade its quality).
Oh, yes. I do coming across mention of that, somewhere. Guess I didn’t recall that he’s been an acting teacher. (Anyway, thanks for following through.)
eta–thanks for your reply, SlackerInc.
I was rewatching several episodes yesterday and the question occurred to me …
Why did P&E leave Amador’s body to be found when they could have instead made it disappear?
In the past, they have made other corpses disappear (like Timoshev from a very early episode). Seems to me that they had a whole lot of big problems because the FBI learned that Amador had been murdered. If he had instead just “disappeared”, I think the FBI would still be looking for him and the KGB would not have suffered anywhere near the kinds of problems it did.
I don’t remember exactly what Tony Soprano once said about this. But he said something along the lines that if you kill someone, it’s much, much better to have the world think they just disappeared instead of letting his body be found so that the world knows he was murdered.
So, why would P&E allow Amador’s body to be found when it would not seem to be a whole lot more trouble for them to just make it disappear instead?
It’s a fair question, but in the case of a missing FBI counterintel agent, that might have gotten them to continue to turn up every stone, wondering if he were being held captive and tortured. I thought Stan might give some consideration to the fact that, as Gaad revealed to him, they had tried to save his life–but no, he executed Vlad regardless.
I guess that must be a very difficult question.
Thanks SlackerInc.
I think the next episode will be the finale for Season 2. If I had to make a wager, I’d bet that Larrick will be killed. No matter what happens, however, it should be a very exciting episode regardless. Here’s hoping!
As far as P&E are concerned, Jared is long gone. They can’t save him from Larrick and Elizabeth will never be able to give him Leanne’s letter.
So what’s in the letter? Here’s my crazy theory. I think Jared has been raised as a KGB agent, with special schooling and no friends. I think the letter is an apology or an explanation for this.
Also, I think Jared asked Larrick to kill his parents so that he can get out of the spy business. When Larrick finds Jared, Jared will either kill Larrick or have Fred do it for him.
I love hearing people express different theories. Even if some people consider them outlandish.
But, did you miss seeing the scene were E burned the letter that L (presumably) wrote? I get the feeling from your post that you might have missed that? If so, I can certainly understand why. I have watched every episode several times. But, every time I watch an episode, I still see things I do not recall ever seeing before. This show is just so complex!
I do believe that E read the letter before burning it. But, IMHO, she should have burned it as soon as she realized that E&L were dead. That letter was just incredibly dangerous to several people including P&E.
Not just burned it, but stood it in a triangle so no trace would be left by incomplete combustion.
We know Jared was raised by the murdered couple, so it’s not like Jared could have been trained and then planted as their son in his teenage years.
They were essentially the same people as Philip and Elizabeth. Can you picture Philip and Elizabeth’s children being trained as KGB agents without Philip and Elizabeth being in on it or at least discovering it? I cannot.
Yeah, that’s another one that–if it turns out to be right–would be a shark jump, IMO.
If anyone missed this NPR interview with Matthew Rhys a week and a half ago, it’s pretty interesting (the bit about the CIA and FBI cracked me up):
Congratulations to Sherred for a brilliant conclusion.
It had to be very difficult to make that prediction in the first place and then to stand up to several negative reactions took a lot of fortitude.
I, for one, salute you.
Wow, I gotta admit I did not see that coming. :eek: It seemed like such a far out theory, but wow.
So now it’s a far out fact. Totally unbelievable, and not in a good way.
My only hope for this show now is that next season, we see plenty of Nina servicing the scientists in Siberia.