Kim was never ok with what Jimmy did for her and is only becoming less so.

I really hope not. This character needs some shade (lighter shade). We know Jimmy turns into Saul so it makes sense that he ends up as the bad guy here.

Definitely. And whenever he's called out for his wrongdoings he gets pissed off and attacks, he completely believes that the rules don't apply to him. Other times he's just astounded that breaking the rules might have consequences (using his phone during community service; having to pay insurance despite being…

Let's hope so. Disappointed with Chuck as caricature. I want to see something more, as all the elements are there for a truly great character.

The character of Chuck does not come across as realistic to me. But even if we agree that many people are like that, he's still less of an interesting character for that flatness.

Partially. But they've never shown us Chuck being anything but a prick to Jimmy in the near to medium term. They've shown a few instances where Jimmy's behaviour could have caused this but not near enough. And even if explained by Jimmy's past behaviour Chuck as a character is very flat.

Gotta say that the Jimmy/Chuck relationship is a missed opportunity. There's not a lot of nuance in it. Chuck is never appreciative of Jimmy and always out to get or at least stymie him. To consider it well written we need to make assumptions from outside the script so that we can see reason in Chuck's behaviour. For…

Good point about Kim, but we do also have Hamlin supporting Chuck and he's seen as mostly a decent guy.

Nancy was angry that they didn't know the details this girl mentioned though and assumed she was just using her imagination. That's why I think point 2) is much more likely and that this encounter is not an indication that OA's story is not true.

The read I see as least satisfying but definitely plausible is that nothing we saw in this season actually happened, it is all imagined. OA is either locked in a psych ward or in a coma (after being DOA?). The main evidence for this are 1) the sheer implausibility of her story; 2) Homer's NDE (more below); 3) the…

Answering my own question: here's a plausible utility for the Books in OA's house:

There's a lot in this series that can be nitpicked. From the beginning though it was completely engaging and I really like that it was not shot in the plastic way of so many American dramas and movies (almost all of commercial TV and I'd include Stranger Things as well).

I see two options:

I think the show's twists (well, mostly MiB=William) hurt it in just one way: it caused people to overfocus on what was a side character. The withholding and lack of emotional engagement were not flaws here, as we're not supposed to engage with the human characters. Why would we, when the end result is robot rebellion…

Yes, plus reintroducing the reveries. I think we can take him at his word: he decided Arnold was right.

Well, from the beginning of this series then.

Yep. The real story was about the hosts struggle to, not only consciousness, but the realisation of how they can break out of their narratives. We knew the invented stories meant nothing, but so did William's other than what it meant for Dolores. Could that, as the reviewer suggests, have been done in less than 10…

Personally I thought this season came together very well. Some lack of emotional engagement? Sure. But, unlike some it seems, I don't find this an essential part of good storytelling. In the end, I think, the nature of the show kinda necessitated it. We're being brought to the point of rooting for robots to kill…

Yes, of course. Too many timelines!

Another thing I've been wondering: did William take responsibility for killing Arnold? He says he is the reason the park remained open and Ford kept his job. Hard to see that happening if a host killed a human. Even harder to believe that Dolores would not have been permanently retired, which is why William would have…