"Some obligations can't be passed on": Watching A Place To Call Home

[Mel O'Drama]

They never do, do they? But the male lead's gullibility allows the minx to stick around and torment the beloved heroine - which is good for us.
I wonder what she's plotting for the next episodes.

Oh - probably more skulking and eavesdropping. And hissing anti-Semitic nothings into Sarah's ear the moment they're alone.

 

[Willie Oleson]

The child that I gave away to be raised by others. It was you.

I did not see that one coming.

It was a nice way of saying to the audience that it was understood it was something of a cliche, but we’re all in it together so let’s have no cheating.

I like that.

You were seen in the Walkers’ barn. Grandmother has confirmed what you are. And Bert Ford is blackmailing us. Well?! What have you got to say for yourself? James? Is this why you tried to kill yourself? Might be best if you had.You disgust me.

Addressing the blackmail issue slightly diminishes the cruelty of his comment, because it's not just specifically about the homosexuality, but also what it means to the family.
Not only is James gay, he has created a situation.
I guess George needs this benefit of the doubt - and for Sarah (or Carolyn) to change his point of view, eventually. Or put James' life in peril or something like that.

To be honest, I don't think the writer had much choice in this matter. The alternative is a cookie-cutter hero type who stands up for all the underdogs, which would make him predictable for every future storyline. Or totally uncharacteristic when he doesn't.

You know what Hitler got wrong? He ran out of steam before he’d finished you all off. Sorry. Gas.

I think I also prefer the less-is-more, quasi-dignified attitude. There's no need to tattoo "villain" on her forehead.

So, the manipulative matriarch and the scheming Jewess have managed a civilised dinner. And, dare I say it, even enjoyed each other’s company

Dee Morell to Patricia: As one schemer to the other, "welcome to the family".

there was a prominently-(albeit subtly)-placed item in the background. An item associated with an iconic prime-time death.

Oooh...what could it be?

 

[Mel O'Drama]

I did not see that one coming.

Funny thing is, I did. But only in the scenes immediately preceding it. By the time the disclosure was made it wasn't a shock. I think this is by design, so that it feels organic and character-driven. The way the path was cleared allowed me to be in the moment with the two characters rather than processing all the new information and missing the subtleties and emotion of their conversation.

A similar thing was done with the reveal of Anna's father, which was foreshadowed in the final episode's opening montage before being confirmed towards the end of the episode.

Addressing the blackmail issue slightly diminishes the cruelty of his comment, because it's not just specifically about the homosexuality, but also what it means to the family.
Not only is James gay, he has created a situation.

Yes, and this is exactly what Elizabeth was trying to prevent in marrying James off to Olivia. All of them know the rules so there's a degree of them understanding the other's actions, even when they hate them.

I guess George needs this benefit of the doubt - and for Sarah (or Carolyn) to change his point of view, eventually. Or put James' life in peril or something like that.

To be honest, I don't think the writer had much choice in this matter. The alternative is a cookie-cutter hero type who stands up for all the underdogs, which would make him predictable for every future storyline. Or totally uncharacteristic when he doesn't.

I'm pleased George wasn't immediately accepting of the situation. It would have felt all wrong given the culture, time and place, along with the Blighs' status. There are another five seasons yet, and I would hope there'll be a journey towards some kind of acceptance in some way. Or at least some exploration. Bevan Lee is a gay man who grew up in 1950s Australia, so I feel confident he knows exactly where it's going to head.

George has had his big heroic moments when he publicly chastised a wife-beater, and when he responded to Elizabeth's threat to cut him out of her will by doing exactly what she told him not to do. His angry rant towards his son adds shades to George's character. And all three examples have been great moments for Brett Climo.

I think I also prefer the less-is-more, quasi-dignified attitude. There's no need to tattoo "villain" on her forehead.

Agreed. That first flash of Regina's darker side, when she coldly addressed Sarah as "the Jew" after an episode of being charming and sweet was a terrific moment. One of my favourites of the season. And her bigotry has been partly explained by her friends being killed in the King David Hotel bombing (the references to real events and pop culture in this series help create more of a sense of the time).

But, I think that in each episode they've tried to top that by having Regina say something uglier and uglier. It's partly effective: the fact that she's saying these things to deliberately get under Sarah's skin has increased my empathy for her. But after two or three episodes it became almost cartoony. Even knowing what we know about her background, the way she acts doesn't feel justifiable, short of her having a mental illness. It feels surprisingly one-note for a series in which all the other characters feel layered and complex.

Dee Morell to Patricia: As one schemer to the other, "welcome to the family".

Ha - yes. That relationship had crossed my mind, but thanks for reminding me of that line.

Elizabeth's line to Sarah was made more enjoyable by George's reaction. Just like Stephen Morrell he was caught in the middle. As Elizabeth was talking he interjected a couple of times with lines of the "Oh, mother, really" variety, but Elizabeth just gave a cheeky smile and continued, and Sarah was also smiling. You could see that these two women understood each other and could read between the lines.

Oooh...what could it be?

Well, I could post my theories here before commencing Season Two. But they would only be theories...

 

[Willie Oleson]

I'm please George wasn't accepting of the situation. It would have felt all wrong given the culture of time and place, along with the Blighs' status

Yes, like Fallon blaming Steven for Ted's death because he brought "it" into their father's house, as if it were some kind of holy place.

As Elizabeth was talking he interjected a couple of times with lines of the "Oh, mother, really" variety

Oh, men. They just don't understand these situations.

Funny thing is, I did. But only in the scenes immediately preceding it.

Despite your reviews being very detailed, there is of course still a lot that I don't see.
To be honest, APTCH has never been on top of my to-watch list - I could have bought the DVDs myself - but that doesn't mean I don't want to know.
So this is very nice opportunity for me to explore the goings-on of the Bligh dynasty without having to watch the episodes.
I wonder how they're going to handle the whodunnit. The body in the lake suggests a bit of physical action, but does that mean that Amy Polson is not a suspect? Hmm….

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Yes, like Fallon blaming Steven for Ted's death because he brought "it" into their father's house, as if it were some kind of holy place.

These rich soap families do have a set of clearly defined rules. It's always fun to see the responses when one of those is broken.

Despite your reviews being very detailed, there is of course still a lot that I don't see.

Absolutely. And I do skim over certain things and probably forget others.

To be honest, APTCH has never been on top of my to-watch list - I could have bought the DVDs myself - but that doesn't mean I don't want to know.
So this is very nice opportunity for me to explore the goings-on of the Bligh dynasty without having to watch the episodes.

You make watching sound like a chore, Willie.

I'm glad you're enjoying chatting about the show regardless - and I know I am. But if you ever feel tempted, I think it might be right up your street. And some episodes are on Amazon Prime. In the UK at least. Though, annoyingly only seasons 1, 2, 5 and 6 are free, which was why I just bought the DVD.

I wonder how they're going to handle the whodunnit.

I'm looking forward to finding out.

The body in the lake suggests a bit of physical action, but does that mean that Amy Polson is not a suspect? Hmm….

Well, my current prime suspect for the killer is even less physically strong than Amy. Bert being in the water is a bit of a spanner in the works, but I'm sure there's a way round that little problem.

 

[Willie Oleson]

You make watching sound like a chore, Willie.

I'm sure I would enjoy the episodes, but with so many other to-watch series in the pipeline I'm happy to skip this one and get the "nutshell" version from a soapchatter tellyaddict.

But if you ever feel tempted

Thankfully I can trust myself to be untrustworthy - I never thought I'd watch Breaking Bad again - so I may buy the DVD set anyway.

I also remember starting my S&D rewatch by saying that I wasn't going to rewatch the YouTube videos for this-or-that reason. Well, the rest is history.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

I'm sure I would enjoy the episodes, but with so many other to-watch series in the pipeline I'm happy to skip this one and get the "nutshell" version from a soapchatter tellyaddict.

So many series. So little time. It's certainly a problem, so I'm happy to be part of your solution for one of them.

I also remember starting my S&D rewatch by saying that I wasn't going to rewatch the YouTube videos for this-or-that reason. Well, the rest is history.

Ah yes. We've all been there. I think everyone who entered the S&D thread started out with the same mindset. Until.... something happened.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Season Two





Episodes One to Three


The extended recap at the beginning felt exciting to watch. The First Season still resonating in my head, I was reminded of how near-perfect a series I was rejoining.

Five minutes into Season Two, I found myself squirming in my chair. Irritated. Disconnected from the events onscreen. And I had to resist the urge to simply hit “Stop” on the remote control and turn it off, intent on remembering the series that had charmed me with each of its first thirteen episodes.

The reason for my sudden change of heart? This shark-jumping moment?

Several minutes into Episode One, a car was seen coming along the drive and pulling up outside Ash Park. Now, my first observation about the car had to do with the badge. A Renault Mégane - even a CC model - seems quite an ordinary car to be at Ash Park. Nice as it is, it doesn’t have the brand appeal of the Jaguar or the MG driven by the Blighs. I wondered who could driving this previously unseen car. And then there was the pop music blasting out from the car hi fi, which didn’t seem very appropriate. Then it hit me: A Renault Mégane?! A 2010s car? Pop music? And then a young blonde woman leapt out and up the steps to enter… in contemporary (that is, 2010s) dress. What the hell…?!

Jarring as this was, it got worse. The young blonde woman was Arianwen Parkes-Lockwood, who plays Olivia. Except, it transpires as the scene goes on, she’s Samantha: Olivia’s granddaughter. And she’s here to interview the elderly Sarah (still apparently played by Marta Dusseldorp, though it’s hard to tell with the abundance of prosthetic wrinkles) sixty years after the events we’ve been watching.

Samantha is apparently writing a book about Sarah’s life. And their chronological walk down memory lane conveniently picks up at exactly the point we rejoin the series.

So, is everything we’ve watched up until now supposed to be part of some woman’s memoirs. Have we been taking a detached, nostalgic look back at someone’s life? Because I might not have got so invested in events in the 1950s if I’d known that to be the case.

In the space of one short scene, Samantha comments on ALL the storylines (“You mentioned a body in the river. I couldn’t find any record of it”; “James had just started his treatment… How did Gran take it?”; “[Anna] was moving out to be with Gino. When did she find out [her father] was Jack Duncan?”; “You didn’t say what Roy felt about you leaving the farm”...). This causes old Sarah to flash “back” to the 1950s to see these events (not least, Sarah and Roy, having evidently discovered Bert’s body, now weighing it down with chains and sending it back out to the watery depths). But every once in a while we return to 2014. To elderly Sarah and Olivia’s blonde granddaughter. On one occasion, the ringing of granddaughter’s mobile phone interrupts a 1950s scene. And various 2010s niceties such as granddaughter’s laptop can be seen.

There are a few nice touches. Sarah’s maid at Ash Park is named Leah, and I assume is meant to be little Leah Goldberg who in the Fifties had just recovered from her TB.

But for me the bad outweighs the good. Significantly. I go out of my way to avoid spoilers. And I now know that Sarah is at Ash Park in the twenty first century. This suggests she’s Mrs Bligh, even if it’s not explicitly said. So I can probably assume that there’s no need to worry too much about any threat to Sarah and George’s relationship. And there can never be any question of Sarah dying in the Fifties. So there are more doors closed. I’m sure the powers that be can still weave an interesting story with these limitations, but when I invest in a series, it adds to the magic to think that anything could happen to any of the characters. Now there are certain things that will never be able to happen to 1950s Sarah.

It’s also threatened to change the way I view the series. From the first episode of Season One, I accepted 1953 as that series’ present. But is 1950s Sarah present day Sarah, and 2010s Sarah a future version? Or is 2010s Sarah the present day version, with 1950s Sarah as the flashback? The fact that I now even need to consider such things takes me out of the story, diluting the whole experience

If the First Season had employed this method, I could have accepted it a little more easily. But now they’re changing the way the story is told. Fixing something that isn’t broken. And this flash-forward serves no purpose at all, other than novelty. What we see and are told doesn’t enhance the story we’re invested in. Nothing on-screen in the Mégane scenes is real for the characters in 1953/4, because it hasn’t happened. So why should I care? It’s entering the realm of science fiction. The only new information is stuff that I don’t need to know and would prefer not to know. We’re not even given information about 1953 that we couldn’t have worked out ourselves from throwaway dialogue in the present. Damn it. I mean the past. Or do I?!

The “flash forward” has muddied the water and shaken my investment in the series. All for the sake of being “clever”. If I was watching this when it first aired on TV, this is something that might have prompted me to write my first TV-related “Disgusted of Milton Keynes” letter since I wrote to the BBC in the Eighties demanding they return Knots Landing to prime time.

The good news: this silly 21st Century stuff seems to be a one-off. Although I say this tentatively, since I’m only three episodes in. Episodes Two and Three haven’t used it, and I really hope that will be that. Though I’m not sure I’ll be able to fully enjoy this series for a while, knowing I could be taken out of the story at any moment.

continued...​

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Episodes One to Three... continued​

Now, on to the story proper:

With the reveal of Bert’s killer at the end of 2.01 (so soon?!), I can at least say that I’d correctly guessed whodunnit, and (partially) why. However I fell down on how and where.

My four suspects were all members of the Polsen family, and while there could be a case for Harry, Eve or Amy, a few shots of young Colin looking upset or despondent had made me think it was him. And I’d assumed if that were the case he would probably have attacked Bert to stop his mother being beaten or killed. What better motive?

As for the method: Bert was last seen in the stables, returning to blackmail George. In the shot behind George during their conversation was a pitchfork, business end up. It looked a bit dangerous, and I had visions of Chip Roberts. It made me wonder if it was a clue. But I suppose it was a red herring. The intent, presumably, was to raise questions with the audience about George being the killer. Though I’d assumed that (for whatever reason) there was some kind of altercation between Eve and Bert, and the most likely scenario was that Colin had ran at him from behind with the pitchfork.

Then, since Colin couldn’t get Bert to the water it would be down to some combination of the adult Polsens (Eve, Amy and/or Harry) to cover up by getting rid of the body. Harry was the most likely for this part since he’d ostensibly left town. Him confessing to protect Colin and then perhaps being imprisoned or even hanged for murder would clear the way for William (who is certain to arrive at some point) to be with James later down the line.

Turns out it was far simpler than that. Bert was indeed killed while beating Eve, but Colin had simply whacked him with a cricket bat. And since they were having a picnic near the river, Bert had handily fallen in. This was partly witnessed by Roy. He and Sarah had then weighted Bert’s body and pushed it into the water. As future Sarah comments to a confused old Leah:

We had no choice. It was him or them.

Now Eve and Colin have left town.

Roy is now having trouble living with himself. Sarah, more practiced at such things explains to him how she’s rationalised it. And it ties in with the flashback she had after killing Mercury back in Episode Two:

I was in the resistance. I shot a wounded friend. It was that or leave her to be tortured by the Gestapo before they killed her anyway. If the right outweighs the wrong - no matter how wrong - you’ll face your God again.

It’s a lovely scene in which Sarah and Roy both talk at the edge of the water. Sarah begins praying in Hebrew. Roy then simultaneously says The Lord’s Prayer.

Faiths collide, too, when Elizabeth invites Sarah to matins on her first Sunday at Ash Park. Her motives are clear to all, and the newly-returned Carolyn isn’t slow to speak out:

Stop making mischief. She’s a Jew. And religion is a weapon that you can use against her.

Differences exist, Carolyn. They cannot be ignored.

George and Sarah, too, know what it’s about. Sarah smilingly agrees to go along. And George has a winning counter-move:

Well, if we’re mixing faiths, I shall go with Sarah to the Goldbergs tomorrow.

You’re more than welcome. It’s for Shabbat. It’s Chanukah, which makes it particularly special.

Think father just did another spin in his coffin.

There’s no need for poor taste, George.

Check and mate, I think. And it gives a nice scene where George bonds with the Goldbergs while Elizabeth is seen to dine alone, though still as regally as ever. But not before the rules of battle were drawn:

I come in peace. We both know that you’ll try to stop this marriage. And we also know I’m not about to let you… Whatever blows we land, we leave George out of it. We both love him. We don’t want him hurt.

Agreed. Although we did make an agreement once before. James. Break this one at your peril. Sherry?

Now Elizabeth’s left town and is conspiring to make life difficult for Sarah:

Let me guess. You want my support in bringing down the Jewess?

If George is to see her as a fish out of water we must construct a suitable pond.

I think these names will constitute a formidable gathering. At the very least, George will witness her discomfort. At best, she may be provoked to some form of outburst.

Elizabeth’s departure means she misses the engagement party. No doubt deliberately, as Carolyn comments when she sees the arriving guests:

Roy Briggs, Doris Collins and now the Jewish community. Mother would expire.

It’s nice to see the wider cast coming together this way: the Polettis, the Goldbergs, Roy, Doris, Aunt Peg. It’s always wonderful to see Peg, and she is quite overcome on arrival:

It’s like I’ve stepped into fairyland. Cinderella!

With everything that’s happened recently dredging up memories for Sarah, Aunt Peg’s presence gives her the opportunity to talk over something that’s on her mind:

My husband René and I were arrested in Paris for distributing anti-Nazi material. He convinced them he’d been acting alone. They let me go. I got as far as the Spanish border… but I turned back to fight. I did what I could. Killed who I had to to shorten the war. When I was caught, I was sent to a camp: Ravensbrück… All that mattered was to remain alive. To see him again.

I used my body. They used it. The women who resisted were shot. The rest of us were taken to a special barracks. Every day. For over a year… How can I marry without telling him?

Aunt Peg does her gentle WASP thing of suggesting he doesn’t need to know and it’s not going to do any good and she deserves happiness.

I’m sure he’s a lovely man. But he’s a man. Don’t risk destroying this.

Sarah relents, which means more secrets are kept. And it doesn’t feel the least bit contrived, because the actresses sell the scene and I can genuinely feel that Peg has Sarah’s best interests at heart.

I’m underselling Peg’s role in this, but she is just wonderful. Once again, she’s possibly the best thing about the episode.

continued...​

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Episodes One to Three... continued​

I love that as we enter Season Two, Carolyn’s arrival means new energy. We’d only seen her interact with George, Anna and James. Now there’s her new future sister-in-law, her hostile mother and the father of her child.

The new energy can be felt during her first encounter with Sarah. They meet when Carolyn (fashionably late) sits next to her on the pew at matins:

A Jew. Where’s the lightning bolt?

On the face of it, Carolyn’s remark isn’t that different to a couple made by Regina. And yet Carolyn’s endears her to Sarah and audience both. Which shows it’s not what you say, but how you say it. Right motives go a long way. It’s clear she’s there to support rather than add pressure.

And they bond further over their shared enmity with Elizabeth.

She invites you in then scarpers. She’s definitely up to something. Trust me.

Carolyn had hidden out at the cottage to avoid Elizabeth. But her cover was blown when Elizabeth invited Doris Collins to afternoon tea in a (reasonably successful) bid to manage the way information about the new domestic set-ups for Anna/Gino and George/Sarah were distributed. After omniscient Doris mentioned Carolyn being in town, Carolyn got an unexpected visit:

Do you skulk into town often?

Their relationship is proving fun, though I suspect we’ve barely scratched the surface.

It’s nice seeing some proper George/Carolyn scenes as well, as they talk over recently revealed secrets that still have a subtext since there’s plenty they still aren’t telling one another:

I’m assuming it’s Anna you’re here for. Shoulda guessed with all the trips to the city. She’s been talking to you about Gino.

You know about him?

I do now.

She needed someone.

I’m glad it was you. Have you been to the farm?

There's another scene where they discuss Anna. Once again it's fraught with intimacy... and more secrets.

Her bombshell to Jack has shown promise as well. When Carolyn refused to tell Jack who his daughter was, Jack spent a great deal of time actively avoiding her. He’s also shooting up some kind of drug. I’m not sure what, but it’s unlikely to be good news.

They eventually catch up at a railway station (not the Inverness one, but a smaller station):

I did love you. Truly.

I loved you. I’d have stood by you.

And lost mother’s support? You were a brilliant student. You relied on her. I wasn’t going to risk that… I did it all for you. But you have every right to be angry.

What if our daughter hadn’t found out about you?

We wouldn’t be here.

I need more. I deserve more. It’s my right to know her. Please. Tell me… If you ever loved me.

Anna. My Anna. Our Anna.

After his discovery, Jack reminded me of something that took place in the First Season that I’d forgotten:

I’ve only had one conversation alone with her. Ever. Recently. On a railway station platform of all places.

This was back when Sarah was leaving town. It’s also jogged my memory to a line of Anna's back when Sarah suggested approaching Jack for birth control. Something along the lines of “he’s known me all my life”.

Now Jack’s spending half his time shooting up and the other half staring at Anna. He has an excuse to be around her, since Gino’s younger sister has mumps and requires regular house calls. But Gino is finding Jack gazing at his fiancé quite creepy. Which is understandable. And that’s not Gino’s only problem.

Andrew Swanson has returned to town having invited himself along to George and Sarah’s engagement party. And he’s arrived determined to propose to Anna, even though he suspects she has another suitor, having assumed she was previously in the city to meet a man. It’s so enjoyably Andrew: not only has he technically gatecrashed a private party, but he has no qualms about upstaging the host by proposing to his daughter who he suspects is already happily in a relationship with someone else. Naturally, Anna rejects the proposal leaving him to lick his wounds and drunkenly drive off, later vowing to Elizabeth that he’s not going to let some rural boy get one over on him.

Meanwhile, George has seen how happy Anna is and how determined she is to be a good farmer’s wife (in addition to plucking a chicken freshly decapitated by Carla, she is learning Italian, taking lessons in Catholicism and insists on making pasta for everyone for the pre-party luncheon). And so he gives his blessing. And they don’t have to wait three months. So George and Sarah’s party turned out to be a double celebration after all.

continued...​

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Episodes One to Three... continued​

Before leaving town, Eve told Sarah about the money she’d found from George to Bert, and explained the reasons behind it. This has allowed her to discuss it openly with George:

I’ve known many men like James.

This turns my stomach.

He’s your son… The only offensive thing I know about men like James: they were murdered in the camps for who they were. Along with the Jews.

Elizabeth gives George a similar pep talk as she leaves to visit James:

Shall I give him your…

Encouragement? Naturally.

And your love? Whatever abhorrence we share for James’ nature we must never lose sight of that.

James’s arc so far is just the darkest thing this series has yet produced. It’s the stuff of horror. More so through the prism of 21st Century hindsight. And yet more so because the motives of the people involved in his care are unclear. The cold Dr Stewart has been replaced by the sub-zero Dr Milson (“I specialise in this particular form of deviancy”). Like his colleague (who, he says, supports all his decisions) his bedside manner is one of cool detachment and apparent lack of empathy. And this means there’s a degree that’s open to interpretation.

Is the cold, dismissive way he speaks to both James and Olivia simply a sign of the times? Or is this who Dr Milson is through and through? Is his overseeing the cruel, barbaric treatments without batting an eyelid professional detachment? Or is there something else underneath it? Is he sadistically enjoying it? Is he himself a homophobe? I’ve seen nothing to convince me otherwise. Let’s look at the evidence:

Olivia tells James that he can leave if he’s had enough, and expresses concern that his ECT has been increased to twice daily, even though the confusion caused by less frequent treatment was unbearable to both Olivia and James:

Mrs Bligh. I’m afraid I’m going to have to ask you to stay away or a while. Any progress we make with James you undo with your displays of distress. You fret over him. Aggravating his fears. Making treatment nigh on impossible. You are counterproductive to his health… Do you want James cured of this perversion or not?

The befogged James later tells Milson he wishes to leave and reminds him that he’s there voluntarily:

I’m afraid you’re wrong. Your father and your wife signed you in. You cannot leave without their consent.

I wanna see them.

That is not possible. Your kind lacks moral fibre, James. And I’m here to provide it for you.

And when James tries to sneak out he is strapped to the bed and sedated.

The few degrees of separation from James being a willing patient, seeking help voluntarily, to an object, tortured at will is quite terrifying. And the fact that the medical staff are willing to allow him to be objectified this way, regardless of his status as a patient ostensibly free to leave at any time make me ask if they know that what they’re involved in is wrong. Is it a case of the end justifying the means? Or are they just enjoying torturing “deviants”?

Their adjustments when visitors appear strongly suggests they understand the way they operate is unacceptable.

George deterred from seeing James when he visits hoping to make peace and offer his support. And Milson avoids questions about what James’s treatment involves. When Elizabeth is more forceful about visiting, Milson sweeps in ahead of time with instructions for the nurse:

Get him cleaned up. Tidy up the room. Bowl of fruit and some fresh flowers. And heavier sedation.

Reinforcing his sinister agenda, when James tries to ask Elizabeth for help during her visit, she doesn’t understand and asks Milson what James has said. As he ushers her out of the room, Milson tells her James had said he loved her.

After ECT, the next stage is aversion therapy.

An emetic administered while he’s shown images conducive to arousal.

Basically, James pukes his bowels up while images of men in swimwear are shown on a screen.

And when after this treatment James feels nausea on seeing a fit orderly, it’s just what the doctor ordered:

It proves what you have been unwilling to accept. You lust for the male form in general rather than desire one or two individuals. Perhaps now you’ll accept the severity of your case. There are other treatments. More extreme, but more effective, which we may need to consider.

There’s hope when Carolyn and Olivia chat:

How did it go with Dr Stewart? James asked me for his number. Did you see him? I’m told he’s the best for women with nervous disorders.

And when made aware of the facts, Carolyn comes to George with panic in her eyes, seemingly knowing…something about Dr Stewart and his colleagues. Perhaps George will get to rescue and play hero after all. Just as Willie thought. He’s certainly tried to make amends to Olivia. But it may well be too late...

At the hospital, the ultimate cover up has just been proposed. The good doctor shows James a rather gruesome diagram of what they plan to do:

The procedure is called a trans-orbital lobotomy. It’s proven 100% effective in cases such as yours. We insert an instrument up behind the eye, through the thin layer of bone into the frontal lobe. There’s no pain. By making adjustments to the lobe we can ensure a change of behaviour. And I stress: ensure. A word to take comfort in.

Dr Stewart’s disappearance deepens the uneasiness of the situation. It adds mystery onscreen (is Milson acting without Stewart’s consent or knowledge, despite saying otherwise?). But beyond that it raises technical questions about production. Is it by design? Or was the actor unavailable when Series Two commenced? Did they opt to go for a bigger guest name (Andrew McFarlane is well-known to me from The Sullivans and The Flying Doctors). Or was it felt important that a gay actor should be part of such a storyline? Who knows. Whatever the case, I’m loving this story.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Samantha is apparently writing a book about Sarah’s life

And I sat here, shouting at the screen: Stop! Stop! You're probably watching the wrong disc!

In the shot behind George during their conversation was a pitchfork

I wondered what that iconic soap murder weapon could be, and somehow I couldn't stop thinking about this:

Carolyn said:
Stop making mischief. She’s a Jew

Is "Jew" also a word from that period? I mean, nowadays we usually make everthing "-ish". She's Jewish. It sounds a bit softer.

The rest of us were taken to a special barracks. Every day. For over a year… How can I marry without telling him?

Perfect soap timing. Things were going too smoothly, so there has to be another barrier. And with Sarah's past, there's plenty to choose from.

Just as Willie thought

Hey, that's me!

Andrew McFarlane

He's the evil doctor?

Or was it felt important that a gay actor played in such a storyline?

And gay? (I didn't know that).

 

[Mel O'Drama]

And I sat here, shouting at the screen: Stop! Stop! You're probably watching the wrong disc!

My feeling exactly. It's the kind of gimmick that might work fine for a behind-the-scenes featurette or something. But it should definitely be non-canon.

I wondered what that iconic soap murder weapon could be, and somehow I couldn't stop thinking about this

I can't see your image. And now I can't stop thinking about what you couldn't stop thinking about.

Is "Jew" also a word from that period? I mean, nowadays we usually make everthing "-ish". She's Jewish. It sounds a bit softer.

I don't like it used as a noun this way. It's like saying "a black" or "a gay". It homogenises and "others" people based on one aspect of who they are.
Carolyn is the most liberal character on the show and she was using it in a supportive way, so I think it must be of its time.

He's the evil doctor?

Yep. And he's wonderfully intense.

And gay? (I didn't know that).

I hadn't realised myself until yesterday when I did a search. I knew he was familiar, but I'd never have realised he was that nice Flying Doctor. It's hard to reconcile that with the sinister Dr Milson.

I also discovered he's besties with Alison Carr, and they used to live together:

This is hot, sweaty, grunting sex.

 

[Willie Oleson]

I also discovered he's besties with Alison Carr, and they used to live together:

That's lovely. Thanks for posting the video.

On another note, I have been browsing a bit before logging in and I stumbled upon the other APTCH thread by member Alexis, and it appears that there's some bonus feature (disc?) that has the reworked season 2 finale. It shows or describes something you need to know in order to understand the season 3 premiere.
(at least, that's how I interpreted it).

 

[Mel O'Drama]

That's lovely. Thanks for posting the video.

My pleasure, Willie. I'm always happy to share the joy.

You can see they're really good friends. I love the relationships that actors in the Aussie soaps/serials seem to develop and maintain. They seem so genuine and relaxed. Belinda must know everyone in the industry, I think!!

On another note, I have been browsing a bit before logging in and I stumbled upon the other APTCH thread by member Alexis, and it appears that there's some bonus feature (disc?) that has the reworked season 2 finale. It shows or describes something you need to know in order to understand the season 3 premiere.
(at least, that's how I interpreted it).

Thanks for the heads-up. I haven't dared venture into Alexis's thread as I'm paranoid about spoilers, but I did read a while back that the series was thought not to have been renewed after Season Two, so they wrapped it up and then shot a new version when they got the green light.

The DVD set doesn't mention any bonus features, and the Season Two set only appears to have the ten episodes. Hopefully it's a surprise bonus feature/episode on the S2 or S3 discs. I'll have to seek it out before finishing the season, but if you find out any more details of where it can be found I'd love to know.

 

[Willie Oleson]

They seem so genuine and relaxed

I get that impression too.

Hopefully it's a surprise bonus feature/episode on the S2 or S3 discs.

Now I'm not sure if it's actually a complete episode or just an additional scene like they did with Models Inc and Return To Eden, but @Alexis assumed it was just a random bonus featurette.

I think this is from a region 4 DVD (not the UK boxset):

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Now I'm not sure if it's actually a complete episode or just an additional scene like they did with Models Inc and Return To Eden, but @Alexis assumed it was just a random bonus featurette.

Ha. Those were the two series I thought of with this. Except (if I've understood) Place did it in reverse by shooting a cliffhanger or open ending to replace the one that wrapped things up. Unless the "new" ending is one they'd actually shot before it was "axed" .

I think this is from a region 4 DVD (not the UK boxset):

Ah - it's on the Season Three set! I hadn't checked that as the S3 episodes are in a different case within the box-set. But I've just looked and.... it's there!!! Thanks for this, Willie.

 

[JamesF]

Unless the "new" ending is one they'd actually shot before it was "axed" .

From memory, that is the case - I think we're probably talking the last five minutes of the episode which is revised back to the original intended cliffhanger as opposed to the wrap up.

I shared your absolute revulsion towards the modern scenes btw and I think many viewers felt similarly. Having researched after the fact, there was very little explanation as to what the purpose was supposed to be except Bevan wanting to be briefly experimental. But I agree it stripped out a lot of "jeopardy" for Sarah and took me some time to just forget about it and stay in the story.

 

[Willie Oleson]

But I agree it stripped out a lot of "jeopardy" for Sarah

I have no big issue with the spoiler that Sarah "survives" the story, but since APTCH appears to be so much about the journey (what is going to be their place to call home?) I would have preferred not to know that she'd end up there.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

From memory, that is the case - I think we're probably talking the last five minutes of the episode which is revised back to the original intended cliffhanger as opposed to the wrap up.

Thanks for that. I wonder which one is on the Season Two set. I've assumed it was the "wrapped up" version rather than the cliffhanger. If the cliffhanger is an entire episode somewhere, I'd prefer to just watch that one for now and perhaps come back to the one with the resolution later on. But I'll probably end up watching them both, back-to-back. Just in case.

I shared your absolute revulsion towards the modern scenes btw and I think many viewers felt similarly.

That's good. Hopefully that means the experiment wasn't repeated.

Having researched after the fact, there was very little explanation as to what the purpose was supposed to be except Bevan wanting to be briefly experimental.

I can imagine it as an idea bounced around when Bevan and the creative team were trying to think of a way to make an impact as they kicked off the second season. It's hard to get my head round it making it into the completed episode, but I guess Bevan is pretty well respected and trusted. From what I've seen he usually gets it right. This was obviously the exception that proves the rule.

But I agree it stripped out a lot of "jeopardy" for Sarah and took me some time to just forget about it and stay in the story.

but since APTCH appears to be so much about the journey (what is going to be their place to call home?) I would have preferred not to know that she'd end up there.

Both were frustrating for me.