I think that the reactions of the character called Pam to the character called Michael are way out of proprtion to any perceived provocation.
I also think that Michael’s dumping of Pam’s mom was exactly what Pam wanted, so it was hypocritical of her to get upset about it.
And yes, of course it’s just a dumb TV sitcom, not worth getting worked up about. I just think the humor is getting a little meaner lately.
Actually, I think if there was some sort of a Time Warp and either Gandhi or Hitler were transported to the parking lot of Dunder Mifflin, I’d find Pam slapping them to be equally funny, if not more so.
I didn’t read the thread yet, I wanted to state everything without influence, (however I can change my mind about an episode through hearing different POV’s so, I’ll get to reading after I post). The one thing I DID read was **Dio **saying Pam was giving her mother a hard time about age to make Michael reconsider. I doubt that… I didn’t read your whole post Dio, but when I scrolled down to write this, I caught your first post, and I’m always curious about your take, even if I don’t always agree with you. I think she was just nudging her mother in kind, and her mother responded in kind; (that she was, “once again 49 years old”).
What was funny about the episode for me was Michael got everything right with his last speech, except for the timing. He was honest, but sensitive; “I envy your life”.
But doing it on that day, (birthdays), in public, (well, with Jim and Pam there… as I learned on Dope that dumping someone in a public place may not be a bad idea, when Angela broke it with Dwight), was totally not cool. I wish the episode stretched out the Lunch into a full episode. I don’t think the; “I want to hit you” resolve should have come from the same episode. For one, it seemed like Pam and Jim’s reactions to Michael’s romantic side seemed a little TOO premature for me, (after two weeks ago), and their approval of the situation should have been a little more subtle over time. It just seemed to be written so they totally embrace Michael just so Mike could mess it up after getting acceptance.
As far as “the Big Picture’s” concerned, I’m glad this little thread didn’t last. Although I’m wondering if Pam’s mom wont be baby-sitting at some point. I really got what I wanted out of this arc two weeks ago. I could definitely be ok with them letting it go at this point. Pam got her shot in.
Michael’s final speech at the end was silly but you know he loves Jim and Pam very much.
I don’t think he’s “evil”, just thoughtless and selfish. This week’s episode was really enlightening, because we saw what Michael that can be caring and thoughtful when it works to his advantage. He gussied up the table at the restaurant and prepared a loving gift for Helene. Then he threw her under the bus. If he knows the right things to do, he should be able to see the wrong things, but he just doesn’t care because his feelings will always be more important than anyone else’s.
He said she liked lame things because his scrapbook was “lame”, which at that point could have read as; “you deserve more, what a lame gift I got you”, more than, “You’re lame”.
I hold the show up to a different standard often. There are a lot of books written about TV Shows, (I think), that talk about sociological and philosophical topics. I have one for The Simpsons.
If Michael had broken up with Helena when Pam first asked him to, then Helena would have been spared the experienced of being dumped for being too old on her birthday by a man who’d just given her several thoughtful gifts and seemed interested in a long-term relationship with her.
From Pam’s perspective, this was especially bad timing not just because of the insensitivity to her mother but because it came moments after Pam had finally changed her mind about Michael and Helena’s relationship. She’d decided that Michael really cared about her mother, that he made her mother happy, and that this was more important than Pam’s personal dislike of Michael. But right after she starts thinking “I was wrong about Michael. He really is a good guy at heart, and he cares about my mom”, Michael proves that Pam had been right about him from the beginning. He’s selfish, petty, and insensitive. He was in such a hurry to ditch Helena that he couldn’t even wait while she finished her cake (her birthday cake!) at a normal pace.
Michael did exactly what Pam wanted him to do. She’s the one who ruined Michael’s attempt to make a nice birthday lunch by making catty remarks about Helene’s age which she knew would bother Michael.
It wasn’t just the age, by the way, Helene was telling Michael that she wasn’t interested in expriencing life with him.
Are you kidding? Have you seen any past seasons? Look at how awful and mean Michael has been to some people in the office, such as Phyllis (mocking her weight ruthlesslsy), Toby, and for Og’s sake, even Meredith. How about when he was disturbingly insensitive to the blind date Pam set him up with? He’s even been heartless to Jan more than once.
…
Why are you still watching this show? Is it just so you can be a wet blanket in these threads week after week?
I don’t think it ever entered Pam’s head that Michael didn’t realize how old Helene was. If she thought Helene’s age would be an issue with Michael, why didn’t she bring it up when she first found out they were dating? She didn’t, because as far as Pam’s concerned, her mother’s age was irrelevant.
Pam’s remarks weren’t catty. It was good-natured ribbing, and not very much ribbing at that. I think Pam was coming to terms with Michael and Helene, when she saw what a good boyfriend he could be.
Pam wanted him to humiliate her mother in public. She wanted him to roll right over his mother’s feelings in the most insensitive way possible. Gotcha.
I can tell my friend to put my car in the garage when he’s done borrowing it. But if he puts it in the garage without opening the garage door first, to say the subsequent damage and destruction is “exactly what I wanted” is the height of intellectual dishonesty.
They weren’t catty–they were obviously an inside joke they had about her mom repeating birthdays. Playful needling is not the same as cruel insensitivity. To lay Michael’s callousness at Pam’s feet is absolutely addled.
Oh, well then that’s all the excuse in the world to cut things off ASAP–every second wasted being tethered to the crone were seconds he was obviously going to use to full advantage. :rolleyes:
FYI: “what” and “when” are different words with different meanings.
If you’re going to harp on this, please don’t exclude how Pam tried to salvage the meal by getting Michael to give her the present, and explain how much thought went into it. We don’t want to accuse you of cherry-picking this argument.
Yeah, I agree and that’s why I think that bit should have come from the next episode.
Michael ASKED to get hit. Dio does make a good point about Pam getting hit though. No one would think that to be funny. I mean, the writers would really have to work something like that in for it not be too dramatic for the viewer to watch.
I may have to agree with **Dio **that physical violence maybe wasn’t the best place to go with this. Even if he offered it, if Pam were to offer Michael to hit her, it still wouldn’t be funny. I’m the type of person that thinks no one, (male or female), should hit anyone unless it self-defense. Maybe it was all the times people called her “Pammy”.
I’m very curious, Dio, what did you think was going to happen in Michael and Helene’s relationship?
I didn’t think Pam slapping Michael was funny. The lead up was funny because it was pretty clear that she wasn’t actually going to punch him. But he had to have the last word and she reacted. Doesn’t make it right, but he pushed her to do it.
I never gave it any thought at all.
Ahh, I like Dio. I don’t agree with him(/her?) a lot, but I always hated why people would complain about someone who’s got a negitive oppinion about something and then resorting to; “Why watch? Why go into a “fan forum”? You just want to be a downer for the *TRUE *fans.” I think **Dio’s **got a legit point about the hitting, I *didn’t *innitially, but I do now. I don’t subscribe to most of his(/her? – Because for a while I thought you were a “She”, can you settle this for me if you don’t feel it’s a private issue?), complaints over the last few episodes, but so what?
Shit, even after people ragged on the **Michael Scott Paper Company **arc here, (and made a lot of scense), I didn’t let that bother my. Maybe **Dio **loves the show, and that’s why he(/she?) is being honest with his/her concernes as to where the show is headed. I just hope (he/she’s) not doing so to be *‘different’ *and can sometime concede to the points that other people bring up.
Isn’t this what art’s meant for? I think it’s cool the show’s consistently been the subject to such varied oppininions. Like I said last time, I’m as addicted to read what people say about it as I am the show itself.
I also still think **Dio’s **argument on Pam punching Michael was relevent. Turning the tables is a good way to figure out wether you truely “back” something.
Yes, both the ladies, and Jim seemed to take the light nudging in good fun. Pam didn’t want to go, but I don’t believe she handled it immaturely once they arrived. I think the table gesture solidified her being more open, or at least not be as upset. The “Grandmother” talk would be natural.
The vast majority of my posts in these Office threads have been positive. I’m a fan of the show. I just haven’t liked this one particular arc.
I understand; But you *ARE *a guy?
edit:
You’re lawyer: “You don’t have to answer that”.
(Sorry, it’s non of my business. I kinda forgot it wasn’t)
Well, he is a cynic, after all. It’s right in his name and everything.