Fleabag is coming back! series 2

[HoraceCope]

And with Andrew Scott,
he is great
as is Olivia Colman

I think it's more that Martin has such a general air of malevolence about him it's hard to imagine him being a positve role model. And Jake seems pretty detached and troubled but how much of that is down to his dad is anyone's guess. Did his mum die or is she still around?

There aren't many series that make me want to watch the episode again as soon as I've finished it, in fact hardly any do.

Re-watched Episode 5 and its even better on a second viewing. Its the scenes with Clare I really love - perfect timing, brilliant dialogue.
The relationship between the sisters is far more interesting than the priest 'will they/won't they' storyline.

It was Jake getting in the bath with Claire that made me wonder if he's been abused.

Pockets "I think we also aren’t used to seeing romantic or erotic storylines through a female gaze. I am pondering on."

there was also a point between Priest and PB where she had to stand back, so to speak, because she had all the power, so the "decent" thing to do was to wait to see if he came forward to kiss her, give him a second to change his mind etc. For me, it's not about him being a priest, it was that clearly he had an emotional decision to make on a human level. It's hard to think of times where you see actors convey that in a few seconds of body language - and of course all the other work that goes into it from directors etc.

The Affair is another example of that I think. And also Elementary, which has a lot of these wonderful subtleties. However, both those shows are much longer - FleaBag is getting all this done in a shorter time frame and with a lot of comedy.

Of course, we are talking about here, so one way in which TV has made leaps and bounds is due to social media developing and carrying the story for them. Before this, things were probably much harder to gauge. Big only returned to Sex and the City because some fans turned up outside the office with balloons or something! Gosh, they really made an effort there

"The relationship between the sisters is far more interesting than the priest 'will they/won't they' storyline."

I must admit, I have just totally assumed they will end up being happy to be sisters. I am probably naive!!

“Bertrand, you seem to be quite unhappy about the storyline I think?”
I’m unhappy because it was so predictable and I was hoping it wasn’t going to be. I loved the series up to that point but it seemed such a cop out . So much more interesting if he’d held out. And I think all the swooning over a character I see as clearly abusive is deeply depressing. Monday’s episode seemed to me to be a significant change of tone. I didn’t like Clare being made to look ridiculous either.I know it’s really just Miranda with a PhD but I loved that it teetered on the edge but never fell. I hate the “women are only funny when they are fat, ugly or ridiculous” trope and PB managed to avoid it until then.

Bertrand you think the priest is abusive?

re the haircut, she'll just be rocking it next week. If you'd walked into Clare's office and seen that haircut, you'd think nothing of it. It was made into an issue in a clever comic way. But there are lots of women rocking that haircut and so will she.

I agree with all your points Bertrand

HP chooses to have sex with FB after he's acknowledged that he'll fall in love her and his life (as it is now) will be fucked. FB is in love with him. She's coming to terms with her losses and is finally able to start pushing us (Boo?) away, so unless something terrible happens I can't see them not being together (don't do that to me!).

The wedding however will be a complete shit show.

Andrew Scott may not be the most handsome (I need to bleach the Ant AND Dec human chimera from my brain) but he's got charisma and talent in spades and that's what a lot of us find so attractive. I'd rather watch him than a Brad Pitt type any day.

I don't even think claire looked ridiculous, she could rock that look with the right makeup and attitude but obviously it doesn't fit her character at all that's what made it funny, it was really heartwarming when klare was so excited about it.

It was made into an issue in a clever comic way

A complete non-issue (woman gets beautifully cut hair which suits her abd looks exactly like the magazine picture) was turned into a cheap laugh by making the woman turn into a hysterical idiot.

Duoscoo I wondered too if that scene where FB told Claire about the priest was unscripted as it felt really spontaneous-seeming to watch. or maybe the woman who plays Claire is just really bloody good. Was great either way!

I think this series 2 is amazing and much better than series 1 which I felt was a bit simplistic in how it portrayed both sisters- all of FB’s shagging about without any much obvious downside or emotion for her, FB being with Harry who has no redeeming features, Claire being so ‘uptight’ about everything as a running joke etc.

Everyone has more interesting complexity now in this series. Except for the stepmum who is just one dimensionally awful, but gloriously so... I think Olivia Coleman is amazing.

Rosa - it was me who said about wanting someone to tell me what to do and although I am a long term single woman (and happy about it) I think, on reflection, it's not just about being single but having to negotiate adult life. It's just exhausting sometimes.

Lass I didn't think Clare seemed hysterical. Just thought it was a demonstration of how issues get muddled.

“Bertrand you think the priest is abusive?”

Yes I do. He knows that FB is vulnerable in all sorts of ways. His priesthood gives him “access” that he wouldn’t have otherwise. And his automatically priesthood gives him more responsibility than an ordinary person.

Well I found the haircut hilarious. I can relate to the 'hair is everything' speech.

Whether you like it or not, for a lot of women hair is tied to our identity and you're very lucky if you've never had a disastrous haircut and flipped out.

One time I was in floods over a trim that went wrong (similar to the flashback of Anthony talking to FB while taking chunks out of her hair).

But Bertrand, FB is an atheist, and not in awe of his collar or the church. They are equals, friends, and both are vulnerable. Would you say the same if HP was a school teacher or a doctor?

I would say the hot misogynist lawyer is taking advantage of his position but he's a bit of a dick so we kind of expect it of him on the show.

I sort of agree to some extent Bertrand. A couple of years ago i had a male 'friend' worm his way in and get me to see him as a confidant. Of course really wanted something else entirely but when i made it clear i wasn't interested in that he basically disappeared, taking all my secrets with him. I see a lot of Fleabag in myself.

I completely disagree that Claire's haircut was just a cheap trope.

Claire's marriage is over and she's quite possibly in love with another man. She knows that she needs to turn her whole life upside down, leave her husband, and possibly move to Finland, all of which are terrifying. Rather than do all of this, however she goes to the hairdresser and gets a drastic haircut - perhaps to make her feel like a person who can do those things. Anthony was very astute when he recognised that she had changed her hair instead of changing her life. Her hysterics weren't really over the haircut. I can think of many times when I and when other people I know have fixated on really trivial things as a way of deflecting from deeply serious issues and I found that plot very relatable.

Would you say the same if HP was a school teacher or a doctor?”
Not sure. But I think that if you have any role that gives you automatic credibility, so to speak, you have a duty to be careful of other people.
And being an atheist makes no difference. You still have expectations, conscious or otherwise, of the office of priest.

I should add that like the priest he was careful not to divulge anything that personal about himself.

Yes, meant to add that. It’s very controlling to manipulate FB to tell him so much about herself, but to reveal absolutely nothing about himself. That’s not how equal relationships work.

agree, it's the lawyer who is abusing his position. he said he wouldn't give advice unless she went for a drink with him.

Also I wouldn't see the collar just as Fleabag doesn't see it.

HP chooses to have sex with FB after he's acknowledged that he'll fall in love her and his life (as it is now) will be fucked.

Following the rules that have been set up by the show, (priests can only love God) if he loves FB he has to stop being a priest.

I wonder how the show will handle a character called 'The Priest' once they are no longer a priest? How are they going to answer all the questions and include all the necessary wedding/Olivia Coleman scenes in 25 minutes?

But what has Fleabag actually revealed about herself to the priest? We know her secrets, but he still doesn't, I don't think?

She told him about wanting to be told what to do, and about having had a lot of sex. He already told her pretty much exactly the same things about himself in episode three, so they're equal there. Priest doesn't know anything at all about the existence or death of Boo, about how FB's mother died, why she runs the cafe, why she fell out with Claire, anything. All he actually knows is that FB doesn't appear to get along with her family, that she's sad and has had a lot of sex, and is an atheist. And that she didn't have a miscarriage. He's not psychic.

In the confession booth, he asked her to tell him her secrets "because it'll make you feel better, and because I want to know". That's pretty open, not manipulative. And she didn't actually tell him all her secrets. She was more honest with the therapist than she has been with the priest.

Meanwhile, she actually knows a lot about his personal life - his parents were alcoholics, his mother a lesbian, his brother a paedophile, he was having a lot of meaningless sex before finding the priesthood and now he feels he has found peace with God, though he doubts it every day and drinks heavily. That's quite a lot really.

Basically I think we can agree he's quite a rubbish, careless priest but I don't think you can call him an abuser without robbing that term of meaning.

(P.S. let's start a new rock band called Careless Priest)