Michael Schur puts a lot more thought into the logic of this show than you might think. I am fairly confident there are internally consistent explanations for everything.
Michael and Janet have the key, the one marked “Do Not Duplicate”, maybe there isn’t another one? That doesn’t make much sense, but there you go. Also Gen didn’t snap her fingers and bring them back to life, she authorised Michael to do it. Presumably if she wants to reverse that decision she needs to send an agent, one that won’t have any powers whilst on Earth. I’d also guess she’d have to avoid paradoxes so can’t interfere with things we’ve already seen Michael or Trevor do.
She’s judge. She does not … execute … her verdicts: she authorizes others to act.
Yes, big deal made the one and only key, (it was clearly Chekov’s key), made from the original atoms of the universe. If true then no other agents can follow them.
Seems to me like Michael and Janet are being set up for some fallen angels jokes.
One observation from early on … when Tahani was at the monastery and the filmmaker mentioned how Kamilla had saved her life … Tahani didn’t correct him. While they all (all though not sure about Jason) fell back some, they all had already made real changes to who they were.
Once they go through the door, they can’t be brought back: they’ve taken the only key.
Didn’t they have the key when they were in the bathroom at the club? But the Doorman came to get them. Or did he unlock the door so they could pass through?
The doorman was very protective of it when Michael wanted to touch it. It remained in the doorman’s possession until the end of this episode.
The Judge was listing timeline changes, and Bortles came up as something like “experts don’t know what he is exactly” - today he was back to the bad Bortles that helped cement Jason’s reputation as an idiot.
I watched this show alone every week as they came out but over the past week I introduced my 13 year old and we ended up binging on two seasons plus the latest two episodes. I just walked in to her room and saw she was watching a video on philosophy. I just thought that was so cool. She said she didn’t realize the whole thing about “moral desserts” and being good for it’s own sake. Do you guys know of any other shows or movies like this (she’s read Sophie’s World too and loved it but honestly she’s not a big book reader during the school year so I’d rather stick with shows) that we might check out next?
One suggestion; the 2015 film Eye in the Sky. It’s a thriller about a British-American-Kenyan military team that is watching a terrorist cell planning a suicide attack. The events in the film end up posing a version of the trolley problem.
Another idea; Michael Schur’s previous series Parks and Recreation has at its heart a lighthearted philosophical conflict between Parks Department Director Ron Swanson, who is strongly libertarian and Assistant Director Leslie Knope, who is a believer in the possibility of government doing good things for the public.
So much of episodic scifi is grounded in basic philosophy that just going through episode recaps for Star Trek, Twilight Zone and Outer Limits would turn up plenty.
But they generally don’t identify the basic philosophy question they are dealing with. This show entertainingly refers to the sources, inspiring reading up on that source material.
I got nothing.
There really isn’t anything else like this show, at least not among popular entertainment.
The restaurant was hilarious; especially that bit about the Manifest Destiny package (granted the Aussies are guilty of the same sins). When Gen was listing all the weird timeline changes kept waiting for her to scream “Donald Trump was is President of the United States”, but I guess that was a bit too much.
I love the gigantic portions with absurdly cheap prices.
That’s been consistent; even with all the memory wipes they’re still demonstrating positive character development.
OK so now that the gang are normal humans living normal lives subject to the point system, which means they could live decades, but wasn’t exactly what the goal of sending them back to Earth in the first place was supposed to be (albeit with Michael & Janet monitoring their progress)? :dubious: Or were they being judged by some ad hoc system? Also I get why Gen would send Michael back to the Bad Place, but why Janet? She was never from the Bad Place and would seem to still technically belong to the Good Place.
Is there an episode tonight (11OCT2018)? – it doesn’t look that way from nbc.com (locally there is a congressional debate)
Just making sure
Thanks,
Brian
I’m starting to think that this season isn’t really on Earth at all, It’s a fake created by the Judge to test Michael and Janet’s moral growth. Regardless, It’s great so far.
The one thing about the show that really bothers me is so stupid… knowing that Ted Danson is bald makes me focus on his hair way more than I should. They do an amazing job with his hairpiece.
Is he bald? I thought maybe he had a hair transplant as his hair is very thin. For the show they would use cosmetics to make it look fuller. I don’t see any images of him completely bald on google.
My teens have loved this show and we recently binged Pushing Daisies (available on CW’s app on Amazon devices and maybe elsewhere). Although not nearly as philosophical, it does have some very clear philosophical concepts like the trolley problem, lying to protect someone, white lies, and most importantly “Should I?” It is a fun show and it sparks a lot of discussion about implications and what could go wrong even if someone means well.
There’s probably a substantial overlap between fans of The Good Place and fans of Pushing Daisies.
(A lot of us still feel a strong twinge of regret that PD was never given a chance to wrap up that amazing world-and-plot.)
Man, I loved that show for the brief time we had it. Pushing Daisies had a brilliant and all too short run.
Just like Kristin Chenoweth.