Hi. My name is Joe and I’m a Chuck addict.
“Hi, Joe.”
It’s been quite I while since I’ve posted anything here (Wow! WordPress has changed everything!). But the recent flurry of comments in an old thread (here) has been more than interesting and engaging.
So I was wondering – what would our ‘old’ friends like to discuss? A plot for a movie? How much we hate Shaw or Quinn? Sarah? My trigger is the idea that Bryce should have stayed at least through S3! Can you imagine if he had been intersected in “vs. The Ring”, been put in charge of the Intersect Project, and then, after a season of wooing Sarah and “going Volkoff”, was saved from Intersect Insanity by Stephen?
Not your idea of a great continuation? Please tell us yours! We’re guaranteed to forgive you your Chuck addiction!
~ joe
amyabn
atcDave
Ernie Davis
Faith
joe
thinkling
Chuck This 
An all-purpose Chuck post is a great idea.
I’ll get things going by asking who would prefer a time jump or a direct continuation for a Chuck revival?
I vote for the time jump, I just think it would better serve things.
I’m with you, Josh. A time jump works for me.
I vote for time jump, its been over 5 years and the age will show on the actors. But that’s with the big qualifier I expect Chuck and Sarah have been together that whole time. If they try to tell a story with them apart for five years I wouldn’t even watch; its been long enough I could do that now!
Yeah, I’m in the “time jump” camp too.
But Dave, although I never wanted it to continue with ChuckandSarah being apart for more than a week, I’ve since come to think that TPTB (remember that acronym?) would never be able to resist telling the story of how they came together again after 3, 5 or even 10 years. It would be a great story, but hard to take – at least at first.
… which is exactly what I’ve come to think about S3 and the finale.
Which may be exactly why I’ll have no part of it. I don’t really care about their “needs” on this, I care about mine. Fan fiction meets my needs now.
I like the plot line of the roles reversed from the pilot that starts with a mysterious individual entering the Buymore looking for Chuck. Go to the beach scene where we find Chuck consoling Sarah as she struggles to find her memory. A gang of thugs approach in the distance and its on. In the malee Sarah hits her head and starts having Intersect like flashbacks. Does Sarah get her full memory back? Does she still have feelings for Chuck? Who was the mysterious figure at the Buymore?
Hey thanks for putting this up Joe!
I like the idea of a time jump with Chuck and Sarah. Let’s see them 5 (or more!) years later, trying to live a normal life with their investigative/security firm and two (or more…) kids. Then enter some big bad. Maybe a baddie from the past (maybe a new version of the Volkoff program? Or someone who started with Fulcrum?). It may be someone with an ax to grind with the Bartowskis? Or maybe someone that Beckman feels they are uniquely qualified to deal with, so she comes begging?
At this point I really just envision a TV movie. Obviously a mini-series would be even better, then the threat/challenge level would need to be ramped up even higher.
Saving the world, before the kid’s big soccer game…
I also would say, let’s mostly ignore the memory loss for a movie. Fedak always said Sarah had caught up with Chuck at the beach. I think the best way to show that is just see the happy couple. Maybe a quick line about how Sarah came home that night from the beach and never regretted it. That and maybe a joke about Sarah not remembering something and a retort that she’s remembered everything for a long time.
With a mini-series, maybe a longer story about her recovery. But even so I wouldn’t what it to be too dramatic or consequential. It happened, its over.
Agree I don’t think there are many benefits to sticking around in the past. There is something appealing about Chuck and Sarah having to stop and save the world when they have kids; if they’re young, but old enough to know about the Intersect and its legacy which they would symbolically [or maybe literally] inherit. Did Chuck and Sarah tell them or decide against it to preserve their innocence? Or considering who their parents are, are they smart and resourceful enough to put things together on their own.
Dave, Fedak said that? I never heard! Please tell me that’s true.
Because of what Ellie says, about how Morgan’s and probably Sarah’s emotions were not affected by the bad intersect code, I’m certain that Sarah’s laughter and tears as Chuck retells their story, confirmed by her telling Chuck to kiss her at the end, are a clue that “the talking about her feelings thing”, the stuff Sarah was not comfortable with at the start, were back.
And that would be the most important part.
Josh, if enuf time passes, it’s possible that the real story could be primarily about C&S’s children, with Zac and Yvonne having cameo appearances. Or maybe the kids could be the ones to actually save C&S from some dastardly plot by the children of Shaw and Vivian. 😉
Josh I fixed your typo. And yeah, seeing the Intersect in the kid’s lives could be an interesting story. But maybe not for the “first” movie!
Yeah Joe CF said that in one of his finale interviews. It was THE key comment in helping find peace with the whole thing. Well, specifically he said “caught up emotionally”. But that was always the main issue to me.
The memories returning could conceivably be played for laughs, if we assume “caught up emotionally” means the drama of it has already played out. And I think that could work fine; like Chuck saying “well the week Liam was born I slept on the couch, because that was also the week when Sarah remembered Hannah…”
That way we get a glimpse into how things went without anymore melodrama.
No doubt the passing of time is a great enemy on this though; because if some writer decides “they have to” deal with the drama of Sarah’s recovery even though Zac and Yvonne are clearly in their 40s, well, that would really piss me off. Gee, “Chuck and Sarah rekindle their love at Sarah’s CIA retirement party” is just not my idea of fun.
A strange corollary of this though, is that I am MORE interested in CF writing it again. Because I think of all possible writers he would probably be the LEAST interested in revisiting the amnesia thing.
Thanks for the Liam reference, Dave.
Interesting thread. I’ve been skimming. I vote for a time delay. The age of the actors would pretty much ruin a continuation at this point. And, like you, Chuck and Sarah need to have been together the whole time. I have no interest in, nor would I watch, a movie or mini-series that’s just another round of getting them together. The idea of starting with a threat to their happy normal life, and taking off from there is perfect. I think I would resurrect the conspirators who have just figured out the Chuck still has the Intersect. There are so many possibilities, and so many people to choose from to save: GB, Casey, Ellie, one of their kids … To go back to the angst well of wt/wt would be a huge waste of story and a complete lack of creativity.
Speaking of entertainment setup. I ditched cable/satellite years ago. Now I record HD OTA TV with a Tablo and pay for other services (Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, even CBS sometimes) to stream on Roku. I sometimes cancel CBS or Hulu for a few months, if I don’t need their content or I don’t have time for them. (If Amazon didn’t have the free-shipping aspect and 5% off purchases, I wouldn’t subscribe. I don’t think their video selection is worth the subscription. You can always use it pay-per-view style.) My monthly entertainment bill is way less than it would be with cable/satellite, and I find pretty much anything I want to watch. I find far more variety and options with this setup than I would with traditional cable/satellite. I’ve also used Playon for years (since before there was Roku). It’s a media server that aggregates Internet content and streams it from your PC to your TV. It bookmarks any video on-line to stream later. It records any on-line content you have legal access to (including Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, any network on-line content, or whatever video you’re streaming). And it removes the commercials, if you so choose. They’ve launched a new Playon Cloud service, whereby they record the aforementioned content on their servers, for you to stream or download to any device, anywhere, anytime. The PC app is a paid app, but the cloud service is paid by the recording (.15 to .25 each, depending on how you buy the credits). I doubt I’ll ever go back to traditional cable/satellite, though I have subscribed to some of the TV streaming services (Directv now, Hulu TV, YouTube TV, etc) for special months (like the Olympics). The streaming TV services don’t have contracts. You can subscribe and cancel at will. So many possibilities and so much flexibility.
Yes, exactly we’ll put about the wt/wt!
I hadn’t heard of Playon. If not for sports that would be tempting. I usually say that DirecTV owns my soul as long as they have Sunday Ticket. Of course this last season sorely tested that, I’m a lot less keen on supporting the NFL anymore…
But DirecTV is an excellent source of pay-per-view, and it transfers easily between TV and mobile device.
It’s almost become a matter of principle with me. I’m not willing to pay high package rates for appointment TV … 90% of which I care nothing about. I know my subscription subsidizes the more expensive packages, so phloughghg. I figure I would still want at least Netflix for all their great stuff. (Have you watched any of Father Brown Dave? Or Foyle’s War? Or Doctor Blake?) Plus being gone 6 months out of the year makes a year round geographically linked contract utterly unappealing. But I do get the appeal for sports fans. (Some of the streaming services offer sports packages for less money than cable/satellite … and no contract). I’m happy with the cheap price tag, variety, and flexibility of my cafeteria plan. Then some people just like traditional TV, but I guess those numbers will continue to drop with a shrinking older population.
I’ve heard of those shows, and they are all on my someday list. For now we have no shortage of content!
I do keep my eyes open for what’s going on, and expect at some point to either add or change services. And I keep hoping that one of these days that Bears’ games will be available ala carte.
Still me, I’m trying to subscribe to this thread, the last few times I have done it on newer threads it has not worked.
Joe
I know Zac has said many times he believed they are or would be just fine, I would hope Fedak feels the same. But, I agree Sarah was not subjected to Quinn’s actions long enough to turn off her emotions. I get the sense that she is fueled by anger and duty through most of 5-12 caused by his miss information, and Sarah was never emotionless even early on.
Yay success!
You seem to be subscribed, Josh.
Yeah, We’re in agreement about Sarah’s emotional state. The way I see it, Morgan may have lost his memories when he was intersected, at least some of them. But he didn’t start to think Jar-Jar Binks was a great Star Wars character. In other words, he was the same ol’ Morgan.
At the beginning, Sarah only had trouble talking about her feelings – I assume that was a bit of shorthand for her being lousy at communicating them. That’s the one thing I noticed (like a brick to the head) the most in my last viewing. Sarah really did change from not revealing her feelings to communicating them quite well over those years. What didn’t change were the feelings themselves.
After re-seeing that last scene on the beach the last time, I’m absolutely sure she still loves Chuck in the end.
And I agree with that Joe!
Honestly, I don’t see how a thorough reading of the finale could produce any other opinion. There’s even a decent argument the kiss literally works: Sarah does the exact same thing to Chuck in Phase 3, after Chuck’s memories were wiped and the intersect was corrupted, Sarah kisses him and that restores his memories. Kelly Dean Jolley makes that case in his Chuck book (which I feel compelled to mention in every single conversation), and while I don’t agree with it, it’s at least plausible.
For that matter, the construction of the final scene is telling. To the finale end where the pilot ended (on the beach), looking at the sunset as opposed to the sunrise is a pretty clear metaphor for the permanence of their relationship. It also introduces the context of the original beach conversation that Chuck himself parallels. The first conversation ultimately ends in their love story; I don’t see why this one would end any different. And then the song basically states the conclusion outright.
Arthur I like that way of looking at it. I will always wish that had been my first reaction.
Fair enough, Dave. I do think that remains the best criticism of the finale – on the first watch, it’s not nearly as unambiguous as I would’ve liked. I probably would’ve preferred watching something like the ending of Parks and Recreation (which leans into the happy ending so hard it’s brave in its own way). There’s real pain and tragedy in the finale, and that pain is particularly hard for a show that tended to resolve things as neatly as Chuck usually did.
But, the finale is what really keeps Chuck in my head six years later. It’s the episode that forced me to read Chuck instead of just passively watching it, it’s why I searched this blog out – I had to know what it meant, which meant thinking more deeply about the pilot, about Phase 3, about its music choices, and Jeffster, and about “I fell in love with you after fixing my phone and before you started disabling bombs.” The finale fucking hurt, and I get not liking that in an ending – especially for somebody like you, who was passionate about the show already. But the finale, and all its many layers, is what transformed Chuck from a show I really liked into my favorite show ever. I think I shared your initial reaction, and I don’t rewatch it much for the same reason. In retrospect, though, it’s what really made me fall in love with everything else about the show.
I think its consistent with what you said to say that finale provided the motive behind A LOT of post finale fiction, and it certainly fueled a lot of my desire for it. I might be why I still actively read it six years later (or it might not, I already had the ff bug!)
But even so, I’ll always wish the ending had been more satisfying on initial viewing. And I’m sure that ending is why I finally cut off my own Chuck viewing several years ago. I’m still considering if I will actually try to watch most of the episodes in this next series I want to start in a couple weeks. I think I will, at least at first. I’ll have a new home theater and new TV; so the excuse will be I have to see Chuck on a bigger TV upconverted to 4K (hmmm, if they ever release the show in 4K might be another excuse…)
I agree with that Josh.
I remain more or less convinced that scrying the finale, and considering its internal relationships to other episodes, makes a compelling case for thinking the kiss works, but I don’t understand why they would have made such an emotional finale into a kind of cipher.
Yeah I think that’s a fair assessment.
To me the single biggest suggestion all is well is that Sarah said no to Beckman. Sarah “I’m only good at being a spy” said no to spying.
Then add in her emotional openness, even eagerness, in the last seen; and I think its clear all is well in the most important sense.
In my imagination I never think the “magic kiss” works in the “everything comes flooding back” sort of way. But I do imagine she remembers her love of her husband. It may be awkward for a period, but recovery is well underway.
I’ll say the obvious, “Sarah vs Finding Herself” by Thinkling is the closest match to what I imagine. But I have a wide range of epilogues and S6 stories that work well for me.
We have the same view about the kiss Dave. In fact, Ellie’s theory about emotions sparking memories was so sound to me that it drove the early chapters of my post-finale story. Of course, I had much more to accomplish than carrying on with her recovery so I eventually jumped things ahead, but the point is that Sarah’s emotional connection to Chuck is tied to her physical memories so she will be okay.
Lost years is the most Sara- like version of her recovery IMO, if only because personal hangups could at least initially get in her own way. Kind of like Season 1, which I always see as a baseline for every character.
Well you know I like to say “Finding Herself” is the normal end, that Chuck and Sarah SAID they wanted at the end of the show; while “Lost Years” is the superhero end we would have seen in an immediate post-series movie.
Agree with Dave on the Kiss. I understand Kelly’s point, and I think his phase 3 argument presents the strongest case for the kiss working literally. But Morgan’s path back from intersect brain damage is instructive. Fedak’s comments afterwards about wanting to see them find each other all over again are also telling.
Futhermore, I think from a storytelling perspective it’s better that the kiss doesn’t magically regenerate her memories. The events of the finale are a real tragedy, and a horrible consequence for a life lived as a spy. That’s as it should be – the moments of pure joy in the show are all the more meaningful for the threat of the gallows hanging imminently over their heads. If they never bear any real consequences from that life, then the show would feel false.
I’d rather think of the kiss not in the working/not working paradigm, but as a sign that Chuck and Sarah are working. My take of the beach, of Rivers and Roads, of the porn virus, is that Chuck and Sarah are inevitable, even destined. That their relationship, their bond with each other is so enduring it cannot be broken even by removing from Sarah the events that incited it in the first place.
Totally Agree! That Chuck and Sarah are a design of fate is the biggest takeaway from the finale. Quinn was right in the sense that without the Intersect they would not be, but the more you look at it, Chuck was destined for that too. Bryce told him as much when in some form or fashion whenever he showed up, and that was something Chuck, Sarah and Stephen all fought against. I am a big believer in fate, and that you can only delay it. Anything meant to happen will happen. A very helpful view of real life and its never-ending challenges too.
In line with what some have said here, I will add that I take the only two live options on the kiss to be that it works magically (and as I have said, I think that is far from an impossibility given the internal logic of the show) or it works non-magically, re-establishing the bond and the emotional momentum that will carry them back into their married life. Either way, it works.
Absolutely, either way works.
My biggest fear with the time jump is that they would keep Sarah and chuck apart for the last 6 years (6 years! I’m so old). I read the finale as putting them on the path of being together again. It’s so much easier to write a story of Sarah and Chuck establishing a romance rather than being in one that they’d probably contrive a reason to keep them apart the whole time, and I’d be really sad.
And it’s just been too long to start the day after the finale; the cast is visibly older. At this point, it’s probably for the best that there won’t be a movie.
I don’t think I would ever say “best that there won’t be”, but I do share those concerns!
A request for help!!!
I spent some time updating and enhancing my list of music from Chuck and I found a mystery!
There was a very nice song by Gomez (I’m not sure if that’s a person or a group) called See The World I listed many moons ago under S1E1. The lyrics certainly fit the episode and if you course down about a dozen comments in the youtube link, you’ll see someone else heard that song there too. But I can’t find where it was actually used in Chuck. I can’t find it in E1 or, as someone else there commented, in S1E3 either.
Does anyone remember that song being used? Was it only used in some long forgotten Youtube video?
If you know where that song was used, please let me know too.
Sorry to be unhelpful, but if you could share your list, I’d be grateful.
Hum… I’d like to, Arthur, but I’m not quite sure how.
You see, it’s in the form of nearly 100 xml files (one for each episode, complete with list of credits, story synopsis, some choice dialogue and the music complete with a short description of the scenes they’re in), and xml for the song lists by title and by artist, complete with title, artist and pointers to the over 400 music files I found, and the music files themselves, xsl files to translate the xml to html and the css to prettyfy all of it.
All of that is viewable, but only on my machine!
Yeah, it’s huge and not readily made into simple text. Worse, I’m worried that putting the music on line publicly would violate some Youtube rule or other.
I could easily strip out just the song titles and artists for the first few episodes, but I’m not sure that would help! But if you think it would, gimme about 30 minutes to put the list up.
WOW. That’s an impressive labor of love, but out of my league, I’m afraid. Thanks for the offer.
Hi Joe. I love this new thread. There’s been so much great Chuck fan fiction of late that it seems the time is right for new discussion of this form.
I seemed to remember that “see the world” (which has always been on my own personal Chuck playlist) was only included pre-production (if that’s the term). Looking on https://www.tunefind.com/show/chuck/season-1/2705#songs confirms that, as it describes See The World: “Sarah & Chuck discuss old relationships at dinner. (pre-air only)”.
And I think time jump would be the only way forward for any reappearance of Chuck.
Tunefind is a godsend, I use it anytime I hear music on tv and like it
Ah, thanks, Wilf. That’s consistent with what I found.
I used to run nearly daily with the Chuck playlist on my mp3 player, and that song was on it from the first. I’ve continually updated the list (even though my arthritic hip won’t let me run any more) as I identify tunes, but I was really, really surprised that I couldn’t locate See the World anywhere on my DVDs.
Yet, I could see the scene, at least in my mind’s eye, where it was used.
See? Good music will do that to ya!
Josh, thanks for the tip on Tunefind. I was not aware of it.
Dave, is there any way to get an RSS feed of the site’s comments? With the (totally justified) slowdown in posting, I’ve got no real way to keep up with the conversations that happen other than manually checking the site.
Brainstorming idea; feel free to totally ignore: it’s cool seeing a couple of new Chuck fans. one way to keep the site flowing might be to invite new fans to write guest posts or start discussion threads? Something like a “send us your post” button at the top?
One dynamic I’ve been interested to see is that the new viewers are able to watch the show while divorced from the experience of the show (waiting a week for each episode, wondering if it’ll be canceled, eating too much Subway, etc). It could be a nice way to allow the newer fans to be a part of the community and produce some new insights.
Arthur, when I add a comment, just below the comment box, I always see a “check-box” that says “Notify me of new comments via email.” WordPress sends me part of the comment and pointers to it and to the posting, but you won’t see anything new until you check that box once per posting.
Is that what you’re looking for? Hope it helps.
Nevermind on the rss; I found the button at the bottom.
Arthur, RSS feeds are:
https://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com/feed
and
https://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com/comments/feed/
We have made the request before, and this might be a good time to repeat it. If anyone has an idea for a guest post, let us know! You can contact Joe through the “Contact Us” tab at the top of this page, or atcDave from the similar “Contact Me” tab at planedave.net
And we mean it! We have posted guest columns before and would be happy to do so again.
Dave’s been mentioning a mini-series instead of a movie. That’s something I hadn’t considered. I suspect that since we’re in the 21st century (or so they say) something like a Hulu or Netflix series is probably more likely than a full movie or even a Rosanne-like re-do after 20 years.
Even though I now have a blu-ray player and an alleged smart-phone (I still yell at the kids to get off my lawn, Dave), I haven’t found a reason to subscribe to on-line stuff – yet. Are there vehicles besides Amazon, Hulu and Netflix that might show something created by Zac, maybe, for us Chuck fans? I don’t think I’m up on what’s possible.
I know, I know. If not today, maybe tomorrow. Should I look for a Chuck Channel on Youtube?
Mini-Series would be the best thing I think, longer than a movie but shorter than network TV, and would keep the writing more focused, preventing (hopefully) mistakes.
Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, and youtube are the big ones but you have crackle, sling etc. I also use Kodi which runs on other devices and is free, but to set that up app tech know-how is required. If you feel ambitious enough a quick youtube search can walk you through it. The available content is much bigger too
That would be awesome.
joe the technology is simple enough, even if you have an older TV you can get a Roku box or FireStick or something similar that provides a gateway to a large number of subscription or pay-per-view services (assuming you have wi-fi? Please tell me Joe that you don’t use a dial-up modem!) Personally, I mostly use Amazon because it offers pay-per-view (I don’t watch enough to justify a subscription to anything).
But the bottom line is, there are now dozens, if not hundreds of companies now making original content. It really is good news for video junkies of all sorts. We could get into a rather different “quality” discussion, but the pure quantity of content is staggering. THAT is good news for future Chuck content.
Naw. I use tin cans and a string, Dave.
I have Verizon (and yes, I have WiFi) but my sticking point is always the cost of subscriptions (so I’ll look into pay-per-view to see if it’s reasonable). I’m really unsure about how the tech will shake out – will they all become isolated behind their gateway boxes like Roku? Sometimes I’m convinced we’ll all have to subscribe to everything or be assigned by society to some virtual box of viewers labelled low, middle or high by the same PTB who insist that we’re either deplorables or desirables now. Bah to that!
Heh. The real thing is that nothing seems quite so entertaining as it used to. At first I thought it was just me, but I’m not so sure ’bout that. The medium changed from silents to talkies to radio in my grandfather’s day and then to television and cable to Hulu et. al. in my lifetime. I wonder what’s coming next. I wonder where the talent is going to appear next.
There I go getting all philosophical again.
Most modern TVs will have some sort of gateway built right in; so a smart TV, wi-fi and an Amazon account and that’s all you need.
I am cranky about some of it, like I can’t watch the newest Star Trek series because I’m not ready to subscribe to CBS’ streaming service. But I expect at some point I will take the leap, once something I can’t resist, like a Chuck movie, ends up that way.
AAAARRRRRGGGGG!!!!!
I just found a one-letter typo in my post this morning, in the very last word, and it changes the meaning. Fixed now, but it destroyed my running joke forevermore.
I beg pardons all around.
Has anyone else seen Ready Player One or its trailers and had nostalgia, not for the 80s, but for Chuck music?
Ready Player One trailers featured Rush’s Tom Sawyer and A-ha’s Take On Me, two songs that actually were featured in the show, not just a music for the audience.
The movie had Twisted Sister’s We’re Not Gonna Take It (Chuck vs the First Kill – office battle). and Oingo Boingo’s Dead Man’s Party (Chuck vs the Couch Lock – Casey’s funeral abduction). Dead Man’s Party is one of 32 songs mentioned in the Ready Player One book.
I was going to see it regardless now I definitely will.
Funny, just now home from the theater! Yes, entertaining movie with a lot of Chuck humor. I particularly like the probably non-intentional joke about the hot chick avatar probably belonging to a 300 lb guy in Detroit, living in his mom’s basement, named Chuck…
Joe
If cost is your sticking point I really suggest Terrarium TV. You can download and install it on your computer or streaming device and you can stream pretty much anything for free. The only reason I still pay for subscriptions is that I am not always in the mood to take the time that is sometimes required to find a quality stream.
Here’s the website where you can download/learn about it
https://terrariumtvappdownloads.com
and a friendly Youtube video to install it on a firestick
Dave your gripes will be reduced to trying to find a buffer free stream, which can be annoying but you won’t pay a cent and the content never leaves if it is on the app.
Forgot the youtube link
I just went to their site, Josh. Interesting. I’m a linux user (I don’t see a linux version there – yet). But I could immediately try the Android version on my phone (just don’t ask me if Google is still not doing evil). I’ll be looking into it, and thanks!!!
Sure thing Joe!
I also you:
https://www.what-song.com/
That’s where i got all the track listings for Chuck
Hey guys, long time no post. So nice to see some activity. Been a tough last 2 years and reading Chuck fic helped and liked this post. Now I just need to read all the comments. lol But to Joe’s idea about Bryce staying into season 3, there was a blog site a number of years ago called Completely Comfortable, long since taken down, but it posted what the plans originally were for season 3 with Bryce before Bomer got his show. I also think it was the plan if the season got renewed to start in September 2009.
From what I remember the WT/WT with Bryce as the triangle was supposed to end in sweeps around episode 8 and it never was as bad as they did with Shaw. The “stake date” was supposed to be a “real date” sort of. The blog gave a lot of great detail about their plans as Bryce was supposed to mentor Chuck and how his becoming a spy still bothered Sarah and it all created much more believable angst instead of the contrived mess they came up with once Bomer was unavailable.
The posting was so detailed I always thought it was done by a real insider and I really wish I kept a copy as I’ve never been able to find it once the blog was taken down.
Hope all is well with everyone and its so great that these characters are still alive in our hearts.
Bryce really would have been a lot more tolerable. I don’t think he would have come across as intentionally trying to split drive Chuck and Sarah apart… I would have understood her seeking refuge with Bryce, which is why I hate shaw so much…there is no precedent for their relationship; boy what was good for Matt Bomber was bad for CHUCK.
Hey Uplink great to see you drop in!
That definitely would have worked better with Bomer. It sounds similar to the speculation posted by NV way back. Between his history with Chuck and Sarah, and his better chemistry with the cast, the tension would have been strong even with nothing overt.
As I’ve observed before, I likely wouldn’t have enjoyed the tense season either way, but it’s a difference between character development and soul destroying silliness.
Thanks Dave. Well I see it a couple of ways. I would have been ok with tension/stress/angst for C&S in early season 3 because of the very reasons they tried to do it. Sarah worried about Chuck changing, the stress on him when confronted with the needs/duties of the job he chose. etc. But the failure for me at least was how they did it. The ridiculous necessity of horribly OOC Chuck at the train station, and then the relationship trapezoid and the horribly crafted and developed Shaw character. The terrible writing i.e. Mask etc, the total lack of chemistry between Yvonne and Routh and on and on as I’ve said many times here. But we knew from the beginning that Bryce was a threat to Charah and more importantly that he was shown many times to be a great spy which Shaw never was once. They told us he was but showed us an incompetent boob. Plus it was dragged out way too long.
You could have had Chuck actually talk to Sarah in Prague, her still be pissed and the whole can’t be together as she was still his handler, remember they showed us Sarah was a real agent but still had a handler, and have Bryce come in to train Chuck, him still recovering from his injuries or them being so bad he can’t go back in the field and Sarah feels sorry for him etc. But all of that possible relationship angst lasts just a couple of episodes and is done by early on in the season. Hell you could even have had Bryce turn as he get’s pissed they won’t let him back in the field.
But alas none of that could happen once White Collar got cast.
The only thing that truly matters to me is absolutely, categorically no triangles after Colonel. Period.
I would have accepted some tension, maybe even angst of Chuck’s own making from fears her can’t compete with Bryce. But no triangles.
I did not mean to push buttons Dave, everything you said makes a lot of sense.
I think Colonel is the big sticking point and the fuel to the backlash. It’s one thing if you haven’t crossed the sexual line with the characters, but when your one condom away from crossing that line (I would end my friendship with Morgan on the spot btw) there is NO EXCUSE for a reset!
Oh I meant buttons pushed in a good way!
But yeah, I agree Josh.
Uplink, good to see you back. Remember our discussions of the Sarah/Shaw nonsense fondly.
Your ideas here are good. Bring back Bryce to train Chuck. We know Sarah categorically turned Bryce down during the Ring. Maybe Bryce is the one to see both sides of the C&S dilemma. Maybe even have Bryce be the one to put Chuck “into the picture” with respect to Sarah’s feelings. Would have made for some great possibilities.
otherDave
I like the Bryce-as-a-mentor idea, Noblz. But I think the real reason Sarah rejected Bryce and they killed him off was because Bomer had another contract. Unfortunately, the triangle/trapezoid was probably their non-negotiable, and if Bryce had stayed he would have been one of the dots in the detested trapezoid. I’ll never get why the show runners are so glued to wt/wt, because I don’t think real people are all that wild about it.
For Chuck season 3 there was so much fertile soil to till without any more wt/wt. They could have developed GB’s idea of protecting the world from Chuck … had him do inner battle with the Intersect, with Sarah’s help … walk that fine line to help him become enough of an agent to not get bunkered (or worse), but not so much of an agent that he would lose himself. But, no, they had to go back to the well of tripe. At least they gave us seasons 4&5, which were truly great.
Hear, hear. So much fertile soil neglected to construct a ramshackle trapezoid.
(For what it’s worth, and although I don’t know if anyone caught it (it didn’t matter if anyone did), my *Cables to Aces* is at heart a S3 rewrite. It starts earlier, but if you think about major plot points, you can see how it goes. I even bring Bryce in to be the new team leader. Of course, things go very, very differently, but rewriting S3 was the generative idea.)
Yeah Thinkling ditto all!
It would be fun to see Bryce react to everything Chuck and Sarah have gone through in a revival of any sort…the scientist from tooth worked with tissue regeneration so Bryce could easily just be “on ice” again.
Kelly a big part of what worked for me in Cables was making Chuck the hacker and analyst early on, it was funny in canon how the Piranha was introduced so late! And I always thought analyst was a better fit than agent, even if sometimes the line was pretty fine.
Josh I particularly like the idea of Bryce being honestly happy for Chuck and Sarah. Whatever tension he might have brought to the the story, in the end I think he would have given his blessing.
Uplink2: Thank you very much for remembering my short-lived blog. If you send me an email to wilmagreenstreet(at)protonmail.com I will send you a copy of the post to which you referred.
Wouldn’t be the first time a plan got totally screwed up by hastily trying to make it fit into a changing landscape. If I had a dime for every time I’ve done that…
Uplink2
I’ve enjoyed over the last few weeks reading your comments you originally posted as i have everyone else’s.
Bomer being in s3 would have certainly had the chemistry, especially with Sarah which could have been more of a threat to Chuck than Shaw (would that have been a good or bad thing) unless the writers had a different approach to the story, you would still have had all the angst and the wt/wt.
For me the failings of s3, was yes Routh wasn’t good casting, OOC Sarah, poor writing, that goes for ep17 as well, no proper resolution hardly any screen time of C/S together and the the angst (yet again) during the misery arc.
It’s a season which is technically important for the rest of the series yet so easy to try and forget.
The fanfics i have been reading are so much better and some are even to the point how i would have liked the season to be written.
For a long time, I thought Routh was a bad actor. His role as Ray Palmer/The Atom in DCTV has changed my mind about that. He was simply bad casting and I’m pleased that I don’t see one ounce of Shaw in his current role.
Dave maybe you can explain why TV feels spooked by the couples curse and feels like relying on angst so often? I just don’t get it, if real life were like that, there would not be 7 billion people on earth because people would not work at being together!
I wish I could explain it with any certainty!
Romantic malfunctions and misadventures have been a part of drama since it’s origins in Ancient Greece. No doubt romance touches a deep seated chord for most of us.
The current story telling landscape is probably as vast as it’s ever been. Not only are books, television and movies being made in large numbers worldwide but with the internet we see an outlet for amateurs of every conceivable interest and niche.
But in relative terms I think serialized television type stories are still fairly new and immature. And they are subject to odd market forces that effect length and timing of story points and resolutions. A major issue has been finding the right audience, and I think there have been many shows that either misjudged their audience or had to grow with an audience over time (Original fans of the Simpsons are in a different stage of life than when the show started!).
Romance in particular will play differently depending on the sought after audience. Teens typically experience more instability and “drama”, while older adults may relate to different issues like raising a family, taking care of aging parents, mixing career and family. The things one group likes may completely disconnect for another. Obviously that’s never absolute and some younger viewers may crave stability while some older adults may miss a more “adventurous” past. And situational variations may be infinite; that is, a viewer may find themselves drawn to something outside of their “usual” preferences. No doubt those exceptions make any kind of audience pandering extremely problematic.
But I do think a couple of current issues have worked against showing stable and mature relationships. One is the drive for younger, more “moldable” viewers. Advertisers are well aware that younger viewers are more easily influenced by commercials, which makes them more appealing targets. So there will be a built in business interest for writing for younger viewers.
Then there’s the so-called “Moonlighting Curse”; which is essentially a horribly misunderstood mess. But many people, including many in the industry, “remember” how a successful comic/romantic pairing on a wildly successful show suffered a total ratings collapse right after the featured couple was “put together”. Similar things were observed on other shows about this time (early ‘80s). This is now regarded as an immutable truth by many.
But of course it’s ridiculous and flat out wrong. And I don’t even mean that in a subjective sense. I mean objectively the “Curse” is provable nonsense.
For starters, the pairing was immediately undone on the show. The couple went separate directions and rarely shared screen time for a full season, in part because the stars couldn’t stand each other. Second, so much of the show’s energy had come from bickering and competing between the “romantic” leads; you couldn’t put them together without loosing something of the show’s energy. (How different this is from Chuck! Chuck and Sarah were friendly and protected each other in every way imaginable. The show’s main romantic energy came from their warm and gooey sweet moments together!).
And a big thing, that effected almost every single one of these “proof” situations; the show was running out of fresh and interesting ideas BEFORE the pairing ever happened and ratings were often already in decline. So even if the “big event” bolstered ratings briefly, the show went back into its decline shortly thereafter.
This last point has been a continuing problem with television. I think of it as the “wt/wt Curse!” That part of the story gets dragged out too long, people get tired of it. They push it too far and make the protagonists look foolish and/or immoral. And the show runners put the older and dumber couple together after the rating decline has already begun. And no doubt, the misrepresented and misunderstood Moonlighting Curse is in large part responsible for this situation.
Sorry for the essay! You seem to have pushed some buttons…
Neil, thanks though sometimes I cringe when I read my past postings lol. I did have a tendency to get a little self righteous at times. I let my emotional attachment to these characters or at least how I viewed them to cloud my thoughts a bit. My dislike for early season 3 was pretty intense at times. Its funny I’ve found myself mellowing a bit about the ending of the series though I still think it as a lousy series finale but at least the performances were good and I get what they were trying to do but in many ways my dislike for season 3 has only grown with time because that dislike is rooted in so many things I written thousands of words on on this site alone lol.
The one small area I have mellowed a bit on is my dislike for Routh. At times I almost feel sorry for him. He was miscast, given an incredibly poorly crafted and introduced character and his limitations as an actor only made it worse. Lets face it, he will never be seen walking across any stage to get an acting award. And if you look at his career trajectory it hasn’t ascended but kind of declined in fact from a lead in a major iconic film reboot to now a role as an ensemble actor in a mediocre rated franchise show on the number 5 network. So I guess his skill as an actor has settled into a level he is better suited for. And he is working. But in Chuck he wasn’t given much to work with and his weaknesses made it even worse. So I can’t put all the blame on him.
uplink2
I think firstly it is sad that Chuck is the only show i have ever watched where i will not watch either a season or certain episodes, i watch a fair amount of US & British tv and admittedly i very re-watch but if i do i can pick any series or episode not a problem but not with Chuck, and that is a shame.
The concept is so original “He’s the secret, she’s the agent” great, the idea over the first two seasons with the wt/wt or angst ok, tollerable but starting to drag for me a little but then it should have stopped there.
I really didn’t mind parts of 3×01, 3×02 but they should have built on the misunderstanding and healing process, kept the two main characters on screen together and worked together to help him become a spy the right way, his way and her transition into real life, that was the dynamism of the show and it showed it worked in s4 & s5.
So many times we heard Chuck say things like “when i get this out of my head i want a real relationship” boring, how many times did we here it, but did we ever see Chuck asking what Sarah would like?
Hannah was really a nothing to me apart from she was used for Chuck to realise how difficult being a spy is in real life, i was glad when she left
Routh’s acting didn’t bother me so much as Sarah’s, she just flipped, was so annoying, i still believe Shaw was brought in to split the two up and buy FE mission accomplished, or so he thought, Chuck was a jerk at times but realised, to much air time with S/S, to much angst but it should never have got to that stage, fans obviously loved the underlying romance of C/S and they should have stuck with it, i know it was about the journey but don’t the creators want to please the fans instead of sticking a knife in and twisting it, you lose your fans, you lose the show, you lose your job.
In s3, i can only watch about 5 episodes again, i can’t even watch LD with the interrogation, yet it has such an important scene at the end with C/S and her spy will.
At the end of the day, great concept for a show, superb casting especially Yvonne (who always got the rough end of the deal from schwartz & Fedak imo) and four good seasons, not five, sad.
Unpopular opinion: Routh was excellent on Chuck. He plays the “stiff as a board” role perfectly: unpersonable, unknowable, and easily broken (as we find out). He plays the literal opposite of Chuck, which is why Sarah finds him appealing after the events of 3.01, and why he’s so unlikeable. His performance in Santa Claus remains the best of any Chuck villain except Volkoff. He’s exactly what the role requires. I despise Shaw in large part because of how effectively Routh makes me despise him.
Uplink2 is referencing Legends of Tomorrow, which Fedak also produces, and also features a blonde assassin named Sarah! Routh’s performance is pretty hammy; he’s much better off playing a stiff-as-a-board type. I’ll grant that Routh is the best of an abjectly terrible cast on a terrible (if amusing and creative) show.
This forum always amuses me on S3.0. I’ve always disliked it, but I’m probably its staunchest defender on the forum. All of its evil is part of why S4 is so rewarding, and it’s worth exploring how two people who love each other with the best of intentions can nonetheless be deeply cruel to each other. In a way, it’s part of why I’ve always been so optimistic on the finale: if they can get through S3, they can get through anything.
I’m always okay with a story of fighting to be together. But S3 was too much giving up and going different directions. Nothing I care to see.
Arthur
I had not considered that POV on Routh, it does not soften my stance on S3 because as Dave says the gem of the show was the awkward but genuine interactions between Chuck and Sarah. The idea they were going for could have been written in a far less extreme way, without so much character assassination. The old saying if it ain’t broke don’t fix it applies here.
Neil
The missed opportunities of CHUCK are sad and that is largely what drove my post-finale story-called Chuck and Sarah-it’s probably one of the larger scale stories that exist. Even small things like the list of excellent one-off villains and allies always bothered me with this show. Plot points that were introduced and never flushed out, or popped up too late, or things that never got dealt with on screen. I tend to think of my story as a fix all for everything the writers messed up on or did not get the chance to explore because of external issues. You can find it in one of Dave’s earlier fanfiction posts. It still floors me that I got a mention because It was my first fan-fic. (Thanks Dave!)
Better yet, here’s the URL for quicker access: https://www.fanfiction.net/s/10634971/1/Chuck-and-Sarah.
I have been sparingly updating bits and pieces even though it’s finished; you seemed a little bummed out so I thought it would help:)
Josh
Cheers, I see you have done three stories and as I’m on a roll at the moment reading one after the other, I will start with one of yours tonight.
I’m not bummed out, it’s easy for me to criticise the writers, they must have had there reasons why they wrote the stories, but it was the lack of follow up for us not to go uh! and although I really didn’t mind pink slip & three words, in places, they should have built the fall out and coming together from that not the drifting apart and for so long but spies have to do what Chuck learnt, so he had to learn the hard way and Sarah had to just watch and let him get on with it.
I always wondered that Routh acted that way was because he was the opposite to Chuck and that’s why Sarah chose second best ( you remember the restaurant scene in AH the she said “this is nice”, I wish she would have said “this is perfect” in the restaurant scene in Balcony) I was surprised that Hannah really was nothing other than to show another side of Chuck, I always thought she was brought in by Shaw to help keep C/S apart, it all stems back to the look Shaw has at the end of mask, the red test order and at the apartment at the end of FE, when Sarah says not any more.
Having said that there were a few good scenes during that arc and none other when Sarah leaves the restaurant in FE and looks back, great, great scene backed up with such a powerful and apt song and as I have already said, the spy will was a special moment and her hair was similar at the end of wookie.
Still, what’s done is done, we can’t change it, the fanfics are great to keep it going and although a lot are fluffy you could say that s4 & 5 had a lot of fluff in it as Sarah’s character development was amazing, all we needed was one more season.
I could go on and on but so much has already been said several years ago.
Arthur said “Unpopular opinion: Routh was excellent on Chuck.”
Well, yes, Arthur. It’s not a majority opinion, to say the least. But if it means anything to you, I share it, especially after reading (most of) The Chuck Book. I’m not an actor, so I wouldn’t presume to criticize a professional’s ability. But IMHO most of us “wanted” Bryce. Therefore, we didn’t not want Shaw, no matter who played the part. I’ll expand on this later, but I’ve come to think that the Shaw character offers something different than Bryce. Worse/Better is a matter of personal taste, perhaps, but it’s certainly something different.
What surprises me now is that TPTB still created something I enjoy out of that.
Joe, I agree on Shaw/Bryce. I think a S3 with Bryce in Shaw’s place would be even worse than what we got. With all that said, I think Dave’s point is definitive here: regardless of the plausibility of S3, it’s just not good to watch. Entertainment should be entertaining.
The Chuck book also helped me put it in a different perspective. While it remains unpleasant for me, I no longer want to remove it from cannon the way I did before. Still, I’d say Prague remains the original sin: everything that happens after Prague makes sense, but Prague itself doesn’t. There’s just no way that Chuck would leave the train station without having a full conversation with Sarah (like they did in honeymooners). I understand his decision, but his execution of that decision is the antithesis of everything else Chuck does in the show.
Josh, that’s totally valid. Routh being good at his role doesn’t change any criticisms you have for the role itself.
Joe your last sentence hits on the problem for many of us, we did NOT enjoy one significant part of the show.
So although I’ve long maintained Routh is not really the problem with S3, he becomes the face of something, well, contemptible. I have no personal animosity towards the man. Seriously, JS merits far more scorn for me. But I find it hard to stomach Routh in any capacity at this point. Enough to say he is the reason we never watched Legends of Tomorrow, even though we watch Flash, and have watched Supergirl (S1 anyway).
Arthur I agree pretty strongly with all of that. Even to mention (again!), of the three couples I know who quit watching Chuck during S3, they ALL quit at Pink Slip. Original sin indeed! Never mind coming off the rails, they never got on the track.
You all have much better knowledge of the show than I do, many of you have rewatched a lot more than I have, only a few for me, now I will admit that when I first watched the show i would miss a lot in regards of how to read it, on rewatches, these blogs (hope thats right) with the reviews and comments helped my out a lot, I am, getting to the point, s3, dare we talk about it, I believe it was either Lizjames or faith explained why Sarah was dating Shaw once she let go of Chuck, but if you were watching it for the first time, I would think he is a threat, a few episodes ended with S/S, so if I’m right, serious angst, until the next episode and this is with two actors as most people say, didn’t have a lot of chemistry, now if the story line stayed the same, if and Bryce was in charge instead, even though Sarah, had rejected him at least twice as I’m not sure if she picked Chuck in Nemesis but just stuck with her assignment, how would you feel watching it then and how would Chuck feel, just a thought.
The Chuck book I found fairly insightful, example: during Pink Slip she dances provocatively to show Chuck what he missed out on, otherwise she was covered up in scenes and theres a reason for that, however I have read it a couple of times and noticed a mistake, she actually uses the word Daniel twice, in the car at the end of AH and in castle during LD and the author didn’t mention whilst packing, again at the end of AH, the clock at 18:10, although that still could mean train or flight but the picture on view, would she have the photo on view if she was packing for good to go to D.C., maybe, this is Sarah we are talking about, who can bury her feelings and be cold but at the same time turns to mush when Chuck turns the charm on, would she really want a photo of them as a reminder what she could be giving up.
Dave, I know you mentioned to the author with regards to the photo as I read his article and it almost convinced me she had decided on D.C. until Casey arrived but then I saw at the foot of the article what you had seen.
Yes, I missed the other mention of Shaw and the picture beside Sarah while she is packing (and many other things I am sure). But I am unsure the first miss invalidates anything that I said about Sarah and Shaw. The second miss is more important, but by itself is still just another piece of evidence for where Sarah is going, since, unless you think she put it there as she was packing, it would have been there the whole time she’s been involved with Shaw and didn’t prevent that, or make Sarah believe Chuck about the Red Test.
Maybe this is old news… but during my internet wonderings, I found a shot of the actual picture in question.
Cool. Thanks. I may write about this decision again soon.
Just to give proper credit, it was embedded in this tweet:
No doubt we saw a very confused and damaged Sarah through much of S3. I think whether Bryce had remained, or Shaw as we saw, the point was meant to be a sort of anti-Chuck. Sort of Sarah settling for an all professional life, as opposed to an emotionally satisfying one. But I don’t think even damaged Sarah could have been so callous as to put the picture of Chuck BACK up in her room (it had pointedly been missing earlier in the season) to run off to Shaw.
But to me the biggest thing, even bigger than who she was packing for, is just that once she chose for Chuck she never even considered Shaw again. Never even bothered to break up with him as far as we know. She was with Chuck, end of story.
Now the very fact we’re still discussing it shows how horribly handled much of it was. It’s like no one, from staff writers, to directors, to actors really bought into the whole mess. It was just a matter of killing time until 3.13. Making an arc of disposable and sub-standard episodes on purpose. At least that’s how it is for me. And seriously, if you’ve watched these episodes twice you’re twice the expert I am! I just can’t do it again.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I have seen Chuck an unhealthy number of times from start to finish, easily more than 20. There was even a point 3 or 4 years ago where it was the only thing I watched and I would restart the series right after I finished it, I probably did that 10 times of the more than 20 that I have watched it. A severe depression is a big reason for this, for a big period watching it was the only thing that gave me any joy.
I have since come out the other side, but I feel like I know the show and it’s characters so well that I don’t need to watch it; yet whenever I do, no matter how small it always new in some way…I started writing fan fiction because I retained all that CHUCK information and wanted to put it to good use.
I think Chuck would have personal hang-ups with Bryce but more so professionally than anything else. I don’t think Bryce would train Chuck in the way Shaw did because he knows him personally and I would like to think he would tailor things so Chuck would be able to handle his transition easier. In other words, I don’t think he would have turned Chuck into an emotionless spy that Shaw did. I think Bryce would understand where Sarah’s head is at too because alma mater is a good indication that he feared the same thing Sarah does.
I do agree Bryce and Chuck could have felt very different from what we saw, I also think Sarah and Bryce would have felt different. The main point of similarity between Bryce and Shaw is that I think they both would have served a similar role for Chuck and between Chuck and Sarah. At least as far as THIS group of writers would have handled it.
Ideally, we would have had just a completely different story. But JS was determined to give us THIS one.
You’re right about her using Shaw, I think the only times she used Daniel was when she was nervous, if Sarah gets nervous, apart from on the balcony.
The photo could be a red herring or could be a production error unless someone knows differently, I can’t believe she would have it on view with Shaw in the room in red test but of course you can’t see with that camera angle, so I’m going with the tid bit of a clue, which surprises me with the creators, like to keep the angst going for a long as possible.
I think the picture was on purpose. Remember in Final Exam Sarah came within an inch of jumping Chuck during the stake-date and at the end Shaw asks “Do you still love him?” and she replies “Not any more.” During the Shaw/Sarah restaurant scene in AH they talk about “we should have done this along time ago” and other words indicating the start of a relationship that lasted half an episode.
Uplink did a good one shot story about the picture in that scene. You should give it a read.
Is that in the reviews or fanfic?
I found it in fanfic, cheers
I can’t believe Chuck messed up at the start of Suburbs, Sarah always looked so devine in the OO uniform, I really missed seeing it in s4&5 and the couch scene, man, how frustrating, what I wouldn’t give to be in his position, who needs gaming!!!
They are both so awkward it the start of that episode it hurts!
And remember the episode order was switched, so this should have been the follow on to Best Friend and that hand holding. Two people who clearly, desperately wanted to be together but thought it was hopeless.
It’s all part of why I like to jump from Ring to Honeymooners. It’s a much better flow from the slow burn of S2 into the prefect resolution.
I’m sure this was the first episode I watched in the UK and I’m sure the next episode the following week was beefcake, (2010 air date) which would be in the right order but the original date in the US, for you was changed for valentines day so if you watched the original air dates, Best Friend to Beefcake wouldn’t have made sense.
I’m sure I learnt about this on this website.
Dave, I think I read that you didn’t care much for beefcake, as I was new to the show at the time and had missed the first half of the season I had no idea of the chemistry and of course Cole was causing that good ole angst but out of interest Chuck broke up with Sarah at the start, was Cole getting captured also an excuse for Sarah to be back in Chuck’s life as girlfriend / sleep over as well as the legitimate reason for protecting him as he knew he was the intersect.
It’s good to hear the air order was fixed in the U.K. In the US, the episode order is even wrong on the disc sets! Crazy. The disconnect is jarring. But for those of us who were following what was going on through the NBC forums there was never a mystery about it, we knew exactly when and why these things happened. It was just annoying to be trapped by the wrong air dates.
Beefcake has its moments! It is my least favorite of S2, but not so much for the love triangle aspect. Apart from one stolen kiss that is a complete nothing. It’s seeing Chuck at his winey/neurotic worst, a really grotesque Jeffster story, and Chuck not being trusted to hack a data chip that all really irked me. It just isn’t a fun episode to me. But the end does make me laugh out loud. Easily the highlight of the episode!
The S4 opening of Masquerade is for me, the single funniest scene in the entire series! Between the weirdness of what Morgan and Alex are doing, Sarah in a Cupid/angel costume and Casey’s reaction I bust a gut every single time!
That is a very funny sequence!
And later in the episode is Sarah playing with action figures.
Yes, that opening scene is one of the funniest. Can’t watch it without laughing. One of the great thing about Chuck was its ability to pull off scenes like that as well as heart-warming and dramatic and spy stuff. They could turn on a dime and give you all of those things in one episode. Not many shows can do that.
Yeah really from the very start; the Pilot had several laugh out loud moments, with some legitimate drama too. So often it was perfect mix.
Another funny scene for me is from Suitcase. The extended scene where C&S break into Sofia’s hotel room. From Chuck’s eyes as Sofia undresses, Chuck asking “Can you see anything?” and Sarah’s “Are you serious?” , Sarah’s face as the guard explains that he loves her (Sofia) but the kicker was after the she-spy has Chuck at gunpoint and Sarah rushes in…
Forget smart bullets or the gun to Chucks head, Sarah’s first words-“Is she naked?”
Chuck plays dumb- “Who?”
Sarah doesn’t say anything but her eyes narrow micrometrically.
Chuck caves-“Yes, yes she is.” Sarah opens fire. That whole scene was a hoot to me.
I agree completely! I love that “who”? Very funny sequence.
Yvonne Strahovski is beautiful even when she is not trying to be, I am stunned particularly by her face so I was always mad when they put her on display with music in the background, it’s very rude so I was glad they more or less stopped doing that as time went on
Sorry, Neil, but I hated the OO uniform. Even commented about it at the time … how glad I was to see the end of Sarah’s cover outfits and how nice it was to see her in regular clothes. Just saying …
Agree here, the cover outfits were a bit ridiculous and do a disservice to what a beautiful woman Yvonne is, they take attention from her face.
Oh c’mon. Wienerlicious was beautiful and classy!
I agree. The Wienerlicious outfit was kind of parody material. I did like her S2 Nerd Herd outfit better than S5. Of course in S5 she was a married woman after all.
Gone quiet?
Can’t speak for others, but my semester is nearing finals so I have been really busy
Sorry to hear that. My condolences, but good luck!
Yeah funny, nice little burst of activity showed folks are still checking in.
But truly there isn’t much new to say!
All is quiet but I must have now read thirty five to forty ff stories and still going strong, some of them sooo good that may be they should have fired the JS and writers and brought the fans in to write the series or at least the naff episodes and they don’t have to be fluffy.
I recommend stories by WvonB – they have never disappointed me. Of course, there are many other wonderful Chuck fic writers.
Thanks for the recommendation, I’ve started reading there first attempt, quarter of the way through, very good so far, a lot more of this single chapter to read but I will finish it tonight (who needs sleep!!!)
I would second that on wvonb; and add Zettel, Anthropocene, Quistie64, Angus McNab, MyNameIsJeffNImLost …. and many, many others to that list!
All five seasons of Chuck are streaming on Amazon prime.
I just binged Chuck and it was confusing, if you ask me. So I came to this blog (thanks, Google) and started reading. To say I learned a lot is an understatement. And I am astonished how prescient some of your commenters were. This is from January 10, 2010, which I gather is the night Season 3 premiered. It called the entire season’s arc. I find that amazing…
“The entire two hours was cynical and manipulative. And, by the way, since this season is exactly what I predicted it would be–a flip of season 2 with Sarah wanting out of the spy world and Chuck wanting in and Sarah loving Chuck and Chuck not loving Sarah (enough)–watch for this: The Shaw character is either a rogue spy for The Ring or perhaps even its leader. It’s the logic of the flip. If Sarah has genuine feelings for Shaw, as she did for Bryce, then Shaw WILL be a rogue spy because Bryce was not. This is, sadly, writing by the numbers now. All you have to do is follow the dots…”
Many of us have gone over how much S3 failed this show. It was the exact wrong way to extend a wt/wt dynamic. Luckily it can be done right, look no Blue Bloods which finally wrapped theirs up last night after 4 years and the first thing I said was I wish CHUCK had done things this way. I don’t know if anyone here watches blue bloods but the difference in how the dynamic was handled form its creation and resolved yesterday was refreshing
I may have to check it out. I like Tom Selleck, but I ever got around to starting it.
Netflix will add season 8 soon, I highly recommend it, Dave, it is Tom Selleck’s best role and the show quickly became my favorite crime-solving drama with all due respect to Castle. The cast changes somewhat between the early and more recent years, but the show will be going into its 9th year and has spent the majority of that time on Fridays at 10
At the end of every TV season, there are always a few network decisions that puzzle me, renewing instinct and canceling scorpion at CBS tops this year’s surprises
Old time Chuck viewer here, watched all of seasons 1 and 2 as aired then lost touch somewhere in season 3. Had a child and life took precedence over watching TV.
Anyway, recently started thinking about Chuck, wondered what ever happened to the characters and started to catch up. Part of this catching up has been reading this site which I’ve enjoyed quite a bit. Thank you for all you have thought about and shared about this wonderful show.
To get to the point, a question for Dave about Pink Slip and the events of season 3, the idea of skipping from Colonel straight to Honeymooners – when Sarah asks Chuck to run with her and disappear from the spy life forever, Chuck would also be giving up his connections to his family and friends, everything He’s been fighting for to stay out of the bunker. Sure He’d asbe with Sarah, but wouldn’t it be uncharacteristicly selfish for him to leave Ellie (As his father had), particularly with no explanation?
The reasons he gives Sarah in Three Words, while probably true on some level, don’t seem as strong as the connection to his loved ones as developed in the first 2 seasons. The fact that Sarah even asks for Chuck to abandon his friends and family underscores a major disconnect between them that needs to be adressed in their relationship.
This has probably been discussed somewhere on the site but I’m curious to hear your thoughts on this issue as I haven’t seen it adressed.
Thanks,
Tom
Jumping straight from Colonel to Honeymooners is more a matter of avoiding a disliked arc than an honest attempt at story or character. That it works on any level (Chuck and Sarah doing exactly what had been discussed earlier) is mostly a source of amusement to me.
For a more serious attempt at telling a story we discussed many alternatives and looked at more developed fan fiction for that period in a series of “Alternatives” posts (available under the “Categories” header at right). To me, the bottom line will always be that a fun show with appealing characters became something wholly different and unpleasant for most of a season. That growth and development needed to happen is not the question, it’s that such ugly and cliche devices were used to get there that is the problem.
BTW, welcome to the site! It’s always good to hear from another fan.
And on a sad note, Scott Hutchinson, the creative for e behind Frightened Rabbit died the other day, suicide, seemingly after suffering serious depression.
His music added a lot to some very pivotal scenes in Chuck – The Twist, Keep Youself Warm and Backwards Walk…
Depression is a he’ll of a disease…
Just catching up now, weeks later. Thanks for posting this.
I have been thinking about this show again recently. Mainly wondering if the series would have been better served to make the wtwt stages of their relationship more fun, and less driven by angst. I just don’t think the writers ever attempted to create the sort of banter that exists on Castle between Rick and Beckett or Jamie and Eddie on Blue Bloods.
I think I can count on one hand the number of episodes where Chuck and Sarah had the kind of funny and subtle flirtation that exists in nearly every episode of both of those other shows. It would have been nice if Chuck and Sarah had similar banter. Maybe if they would not have included Jill and Bryce that would have happened but it seems like the writers were determined to make Chuck battle scared and pining…a shame really as the other shows I mentioned prove that wt/wt does not have to be written in an angst-filled fashion and both have a genuine back and forth that I rather enjoy watching. I can’t help but wonder if Chuck’s writers did not have the ability to present something like that. There is zero subtly in Chuck and Sarah’s attraction and I think the fact that it was all or nothing is yet another mistake in the writing. I like Chuck, but I don’t know if I would watch it if it were airing currently because the writers always let things fester until it bubbled over and there is nothing “fun” about their personal relationship before season 4.
Anyhow that is the end of my rant, I feel better.
Well, I think a lot of that type of banter is exactly what DID WORK so well on Chuck. That is, there was no taunting/teasing/rivalry. What we saw was more support, encouragement and warmth between the main characters. That made it easy to buy into how fast the relationship progressed. It made the main characters more likable, and easier to root for. On the occasion when they did tease or argue it was that much funnier and more interesting because it was uncommon.
Now all that said, presenting Chuck and Sarah in such a way DRAMATICALLY shortened the timer on how long wt/wt would work. Once the obvious barriers were settled, or seemed close to settled at the end of S2 the only way to extend the process was by suddenly introducing new issues. New issues that felt like extreme manipulation to much of the audience.
A show like Castle could, and did, draw things out further precisely because there was more teasing, taunting and tension between the characters from the very start. We all “got” that more growing was needed between the main characters and the timer ticked at a much slower pace.
I’m glad for how Chuck and Sarah related to each other over those first two seasons (for the most part). It’s only the middle season that remains an outlier for its clumsily added on “issues”.
Hey Josh, interesting read and some of my comments next might not go down to well with some, especially about SW, a few months ago I discovered via this website FF and for the past four months thats all I’ve done is read Chuck FF, thats a lot of stories, some of which are AU, which I love, some of which are takes on episodes and end of seasons, a few have been absolutely outstanding to the point they have been better than the show itself, sorry I’m ranting on, my point is that when I look back at the show, it’s not that good compared to what it could have been, your right, I’ve watched Castle but not Blue Bloods, so I can only speak about Castle, Castle is a great character, nice and funny, Chuck could be similar but was very immature at times (yes he’s younger), Beckett, very attractive like Walker but a nicer character generally, may be because she’s a cop and not a spy has something to do with it, may be she has a sense of humour and Walker doesn’t is a factor and I also found Walker at times a bit of a b****, where as I never found Beckett to be, I don’t really know how shows work but I guess it’s all down to JS / CF, certainly the angst is and it really didn’t need to be, I agree, your right the banter was limited and the angst was rammed down your throat till it got stupid, at least with Castle banter or not, the pair had a majority screen time together, Chuck on the other hand, especially season 3, misery arc, how much screen time together did C/S get, as we all know, not a lot and that really was a huge mistake, you could also say that the attraction from SW to CB was visual, ok, she wasn’t one for words but wouldn’t it have been nice if she would have told him how she felt every so often but because of the situation it wasn’t possible but she still liked being close to him and to be patient, you could have had s few scenes in her hotel room which was not under surveillance.
Or i wonder what the show would have been like if they had secretly been dating earlier in the series and having a few close calls with being found out.
Any how, it was what it was, a great concept and could have been so much more but there’s no going back, with regards to rewatches, I don’t mind a lot of season 2, a couple of season 3 but I tend to watch from season 4.
I do think the way Castle kept the on-screen focus on the main charcters, even when there was tension, was an excellent move. I wish Chuck had done more of that from the very beginning. But again, only in S3 did become VERY problematic.
Neil, I literally agree with everything you said. it really comes down to writing and in terms of showing an entertaining, fun and mature relationship Chuck failed at all three for far too long, I realize it is unfair and possibly pointless to compare other shows couple’s but I can’t say enough about Blue Bloods and the job its writers have done with Jamie and Eddie (made even more impressive because prior to season 4 the pair did not exist on the show) pretty much everything we complain about with both Chuck and Castle (lack of screen, time, angst, lack of friendly banter, downright imaturity in recognizing their feelings and dealing with problems wether professional or personal, lack of open and honest comunication) is a non isssue with them.
I picked Blue Bloods up late last year and was shocked that there are actually writers that can write a relationship so well, to the point that I’m sad to say that I just don’t like Chuck or Castle nearly as much as I used to because I simply stumbled upon a far better-written couple and recommend watching them, even if you jump right to season four because the difference really is shocking.
I think you’re getting too down and loosing track of what went well. There’s no doubt JS was not a good candidate for writing an adult relationship, but the friendship aspect was well handled from the start. Both characters encouraged and supported each other in the face of many difficulties. The obstacles facing Chuck and Sarah seemed real enough, adult enough; except for a ludicrous over use of love triangles, and I think that was the Achilles Heal of this show runner.
The issues may have been real but the handling of them was very poor at times and I realize the show was set in the world of secrets and lies but I wish that Chuck and Sarah would have been more honest with each other and themselves, even if scenes had to be set away from prying eyes of the government. The show would have lasted longer if the writers had been capable of that…love triangles did nothing more than make an already irritating lack of acceptance of how they felt even worse and it affected the friendship they built.
Absolutely they could have, should have given Chuck and Sarah even more down time together. That has a lot to do with the alternate title ides we have suggested (“Chuck and Sarah” or “Secret and Agent”).
But let’s remember what the show did well it did extraordinarily well. And there were always more good moments bad. And the conflict of interest Sarah was faced with through S2 was real and profound. “Compromise” isn’t just a code for illicit affection, it’s the whole idea that the government expects her to be THEIR agent and represent THEIR interests over and above Chuck’s interests. She could quite rightly be immediately replaced if her employers believed she could no longer represent their interests. If Sarah believes that threat is real, and also believes she is his best qualified and capable protector, she is in a no win situation.
And I thought the angst related to that conflict was perfectly played. Her hot/cold treatment of Chuck is a direct consequence of that conflict.
Now all of that never means I can’t imagine certain aspects of the story being more to my liking. Like MORE Chuck/Sarah time, or more active fighting to CHANGE their circumstance. But again, the only aspect I think was actually poorly handled was all the triangles, at least four too many!
Hit the nail on the head, Dave. There were legitimate external circumstances that kept CS apart. (With Castle what kept them apart was internal). They did play that well. Doesn’t mean lots of us don’t like the idea of trying a secret relationship on the side, like lots of ff. But they played it well within the boundaries established in the story. And the burden was on Sarah to hold the line or lose what she did have with him … and the ability to protect him, as no other agent would do (like the one time she got replaced). Yeah.
And then came S3, and while you can justify it (maybe), it was almost irreversibly destructive to both characters and their relationship. As we’ve discussed, there were much more appealing and engaging and intriguing ways to unfold the S3 storyline that would not have tarnished the characters. Sigh. But I don’t want to go there again. Where did I put that black box?
Dave
That all makes sense, my big complaint is not so much with seasons 1 and 2, but season 3 is awful, the writers missed a chance to make Chuck and Sarah partners and grow that organically into something great. They could have been on an equal footing (granted Sarah was always a more experienced spy) it just saddens me because JS did more than just destroy these characters…he threw away the chemistry between Zac and Yvonne and now that I’ve seen what can happen when writers don’t run from the challenge of embracing that chemistry or feel the need to stifle it with love triangles…it is hard not to feel sad for CHUCK all over again.
Yes I agree completely about S3. It seriously and permanently ruined something beautiful. The parts I enjoy are only a product of trying to ignore the other.
I’m going to jump the gun here, having skimmed the current, but commented on these arguments before. Point being, I am addressing this in a general sense without necessarily addressing specifics.
The banter is a tricky thing. Moonlighting, the most oft put forward example, was based on two very specific characters. One a for lack of a better phrase, control freak. Interested in order, the other, essentially a con-man who is oddly on the level. It made for a very specific interaction. The same was true of Castle and Beckett. They were both extremely worldly and cynical in their own way, and thus their interactions, and banter were chess games, battles for the upper hand.
I always use Firefly as an example, because it had two good WT/WT examples. Mal/Inara and Kaylee/Simon. The contrast could not have been more striking, and thus their interactions, their “banter” was unique to each couple. In their own way, each of Kaylee and Simon was an innocent. She was taken aback by his sophistication, he by her … realness? Lack of pretense? Connection to the real world.
Mal and Inara were the exact opposite. While Simon and Kaylee had the ability to instantly disarm each other through their sincerity, with Mal and Inara every interaction brought shields up. Hence, the banter, the chess game as opposed to the stepping back when it gets too real.
Chuck and Sarah were more Simon and Kaylee, each sincere at their core, inexperienced and frightened by the connection they felt and the other’s ability to disarm them, yet their situation demanded that there be some shields up on occasion, hence the occasional line or so extolling the other’s virtues, but frequent retreats based on their formal relationship.
Extremely well put Ernie, thank you!
I think I’m also partial to the “greenness” and outward simplicity of the Sarah and Chuck relationship and banter. As I’ve grown older I kinda tire of the prolonged teasing stuff since it feels more manufactured specifically to prolong a show. Perhaps it seems to me that way because I was never one for beating around the bush.
I didn’t watch Firefly but I agree with the essence of your post, Ernie! Chuck and Sarah wear their hearts on their sleeves and if not for the asset/handler wrinkle they would have bypassed probably 2 seasons worth of wt/wt haha.
Also, partial thanks to the show’s tumultous history? If they had more seasons in the long I’m guessing the wt/wt would have been wrung out for longer and perhaps Chuck and Sarah would have been written to be more witty-banter-one-upmanship (ugh).
Either JS or CF (its been a while, I don’t remember which!) actually said wt/wt would have continued longer if they’d known they still had so much show left.
So two thoughts…
1) professional writers really can be staggeringly dense
2) I am very pleased they didn’t know how much show was left!
Ooof! WordPress just mangled my comment!
Ernie, you put your finger on it. Those two relationships (two in the same show!) was one of the bigger reasons Firefly’s cancellation was such a crime against humanity!
Dave, you said earlier…
“And the conflict of interest Sarah was faced with through S2 was real and profound. “Compromise” isn’t just a code for illicit affection, it’s the whole idea that the government expects her to be THEIR agent and represent THEIR interests over and above Chuck’s interests.”
Oh yeah. The last scene of “Alma Mater”, when Chuck and Sarah discover Bryce was not a nemesis but a hero really underscores that idea. Both Chuck and Sarah face difficult decisions, most often deciding who to hurt and who to avoid hurting. Each season the stakes get higher, though and we, the fans, get caught up in the price they pay.
Even in S3, Nacho Sampler for instance, Chuck resorts to Johnny Walker, Black, because of that very same conflict.
…but you said it much better, Dave.
Thanks Joe!
I thought more about this topic after I went to bed for the night and have more objective, less harsh thoughts on it at least generally speaking.
I think how to present wt/wt and how long to present it depends on several things. Is the couple in question the driving force of the show? if the answer is yes, then you need to look at how the pair is set up within the context of the show itself and decide whether witty banter or heart on your sleeve is best to favor most often. Because of the kind of people, Chuck and Sarah were and their preset history heart on your sleeve is more favorable. If you have wackier or opposite leads like Castle and Beckett banter is the way to go. If the answer to the question is no and the couple is just one of multiple elements every week than the banter is more beneficial by default.
Now for the how long should it last part, a difficult thing to decide, I generally think that if both characters are aware of an attraction but don’t cross the line (I consider the crossed line anything that raises the stakes from attraction to love) it can be a longer endeavor, but once you step over the line you can’t pull a CHUCK [did I just coin a new pun?] and backtrack.
In the end, the ability to execute w/wt to a satisfying degree comes down to writing so Dave is right some writers are incredibly dense and that is why of the shows we have discussed Chuck was least successful with the dynamic.
I agree with much of that Josh, until your last line!
Every serial romance will have its own rhythm. Timing of milestones is undoubtedly tricky for a writer, because I think there is not only more than one right answer, but more than one wrong answer too! Ultimately the most common serial television error seems to be drawing things out too long. So many of us are most sensitive to that particular failing on Chuck because our investment was so sky high after two seasons. The particular failing was no worse than on dozens of other shows (including Castle) it just affects us here more because we were so massively invested in this particular story.
I think that’s often true with story telling, any misstep is more pronounced on a show (or in a book) we care more about. I never mean to excuse the massive screw up we saw, I just want to keep it in proper context. We were outraged by one season because what came before was SO GOOD. Intoxicating even. And it was a mistake made by many writers, on many shows before. I’ve already seen it happen on other shows since too; Castle, the season after Chuck ended, had its own “season too far”. But it didn’t hurt as much because Rick and Kate were never Chuck and Sarah.
Dave
Maybe I should have stopped short of saying they failed with the dynamic and say instead that they failed to know when to stop using it. I think my perspective on this aspect of TV is always getting, for lack of a better phrase, “one-uped” anytime I find the next couple that I find as engaging as Chuck and Sarah based on acting. They were so palpable and wrecked in such a way that had no believability at all, I can’t help but have a mental measuring stick for other shows…will they pull a CHUCK or can they play things out organically and recognize when it is time to end the cat and mouse game and stick to it. I think the other thing is a lot the other shows I have watched since Chuck, writers have not been so dense as to blatantly cross the line to the level that Chuck did and then take it back just as extremely after the fact, so I find other couples more enjoyable because I haven’t had to suffer through love triangles or a misery arc to see them together. I may look for some FF where Bryce, Jill, and others don’t function to compound things beyond what Chuck and Sarah already deal with. Alternatives posts here I come!
Yeah no doubt there’s a lot of fan fiction that handles things in a more appealing way.
Hey, guys. I love your blog, I’ve been reading it for about a year now and I wanted to chime in. I actually saw the first two seasons while they were airing, but I assumed the show was over when there were no episodes that fall and I only got around to watching the whole thing last year.
Regarding couples banter, I think if it’s a staple of the couple then it just takes away from the depth of the relationship. I’m not very familiar with the other shows mentioned (I’ve seen Moonlighting when I was a kid, and just a couple of scenes from Castle while skipping channels), but I’m more familiar with Cheers and other sitcoms. Sam and Diane were fun, but their relationship didn’t have enough dramatic punch for me to be invested.
Josh says above that the attraction between Chuck and Sarah is not subtle, but I see that as a good thing. A couple is not worth it (at least not for me) to root for if there is no real love there
and that’s also why they have to have legitimate reasons for not being together. People that really like each other come up with excuses to be together, but what we get in most movies and tv shows are people that come up with excuses to not be together when there’s nothing there to stop them. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen in real life, but that’s not love and if there is no love then I don’t care that much about them as a couple.
As for the length of the wt/wt, I do think it took too long, but only by one episode. I saw the first two seasons as Sarah coming to a choice, so I was more than fine with Chuck having the opportunity to make the same choice in season 3. I don’t subscribe to the thinking that they weren’t ready for a relationship because that’s just rom-com nonsense, but I do think that Chuck needed to realize if he loves the real girl or if he is just infatuated with every nerd’s dream girl. By becoming a spy he gets closer to her level and also sees how the sausage is made which in turn brings her down a bit from that pedestal. I’m not saying that this was the only way, just that it works for me and I probably even prefer it.
I know it’s not a popular opinion at all around theses parts, but Pink Slip and Three Words are my favorites of the season after Honeymooners. I quite like the next five and while I enjoy 8, 9 and 10, I can also feel Shaw’s stench. The big problems for me start with the train station in Final Exam. Chuck was supposed to choose Sarah in Beckman’s office when he realizes that he doesn’t want to be in Rome without her, but his first words after Sarah says “then you won’t be a spy” are about them being together which makes it seem like he had already made his decision. There goes down the drain the flow of the romantic arc and Sarah’s character along with it, who is either a “mean girl” turned CIA assassin or a dumb bimbo who doesn’t understand the meaning of his words. Honestly, I adore Sarah, but my thoughts during her scene with Shaw at the end, were “please go to DC, lets bring in a new girl for Chuck, this time a red head, and get on with the stupid show.” The thing is, after she hooked up with Shaw, the writers had no business of touching the issue of Chuck and Sarah again until they were ready to put them together, but they did it in this episode and judging from comments on here and on Sepinwall’s old blog a lot of people lost their patience with this episode. Anecdote: I was watching a few months ago with a friend that likes rom-coms and after Sarah told Chuck that he’s not the same guy anymore in AH, she said “I’m bored.”
There’s also Shaw. Not a problem because he dates or sleeps with Sarah (she had a three year dry spell and I don’t want her to be a saint anyway), but because the writers made a big deal out their relationship with that kiss that Chuck had to witness so he can prove himself the biggest hero ever. That connection had to be explained in some way in which it doesn’t make Sarah look flakey, so, I guess that’s how we got the name reveal. It’s not a pleasant moment, I understand why people hate it, I let out a “b**” when I first saw it (I was kind of drunk, I started drinking after Nacho Sampler when I got strong vibes that these two won’t end up together eventually), but it is strangely what saves the Chuck and Sarah relationship for me and with it the rest of the show, because there’s not much else there in the last two seasons.
Thanks for chiming in. It sounds like you have a lot of thoughts on Chuck. I have to agree that it was more Shaw I had tired of by American Hero (I liked Final Exam for the most part, even though Shaw was the ultimate wet blanket and Sarah’s character suffered as a consequence). Then I’ve always found Shaw a problematic character in general, and poorly executed at that.
Hey, thanks for the reply. I tried to reply a couple of days ago, but somehow it didn’t go through. Does WP have a problem with vpns?
I liked Final Exam too, but only for the first 30 minutes. Not having to wait between episodes probably helped a bit, but I had almost no complaints for the first ten episodes and even loved a few of them (I refute any notion that Pink Slip had any big or important contrivances). But, what we got from that exchange on (“then we would never…. no, probably not”) until the elevator shaft scene in Other Guy is my least favorite stretch of the show because the romantic plot is going in multiple circles while putting Sarah on the breaking wheel. Thank God for Morgan, Jeff and Lester, they were the only enjoyable parts of those episodes.
As for Shaw I didn’t mind him until American Hero, because I had always assumed he was irrelevant. Eventually he was, but it was obvious only on rewatch because he was deemed irrelevant in a backward way by how his relationship with Sarah started. Which is why, given the time constraints and the end game for him (the guy that Sarah kisses in front of Chuck and then is desperate to save so that Chuck can have his hero moment), I don’t think he was executed that bad.
Another interesting conversation derailed by Chuckwin’s law! I think Josh makes some interesting points, especially about banter. It’s fair to Sarah’s script, in particular, is not particularly witty. However, a lack of banter isn’t the same thing as unsubtle, and I want to push back on that account, because Chuck and Sarah’s interactions are almost invariably more subtle and layered than the romantic interactions on, say, Firefly (which admittedly, I like less than most).
A good example of the extraordinary subtlety is in Chuck vs the Truth, wherein Sarah and Chuck must pretend to have sex. Chuck and Sarah in Season 1 are already caught in a triple lie: they are a couple actually in love with each other, who must pretend that they are pretending to be in love with each other, both to other people and to each other (what a weird sentence!). Now Lou has entered the picture, and Sarah has to accomplish a staggering number of simultaneous goals:
Sarah goal 1: Convince Chuck’s family she is both in love and having sex with Chuck.
Sarah goal 2: Convince Chuck, herself, and the CIA that she is not in love.
Sarah goal 3: Flirt with Chuck. (There is MUCH subtle flirtation in this show.)
Sarah goal 4: Maintain plausible deniability that she is not flirting with Chuck.
Sarah goal 5: Keep Chuck from dating Lou
Sarah goal 6: Keep Chuck happy and cooperative
Sarah goal 7: Have a genuinely intimate (non-sexual) moment with the man she loves.
Chuck’s goals are no less complicated:
Chuck goal 1: Seduce Sarah
Chuck goal 2: Have an intimate moment with the woman he loves.
Chuck goal 3: Maintain plausible deniability that he is not seducing Sarah, in case he is rejected.
Chuck goal 4: Maintain his cover with Sarah
Chuck goal 5: Find out if Sarah is actually in love with him.
Chuck goal 6: Make a decision between the dream of Sarah and the reality of Lou
And in the midst of this, they are both purposely exposed: Sarah literally, in her nightgown. She chose to wear a seductive outfit, not just for their cover, and not even just for Chuck. She wants Chuck to want her, and will consistently push the boundaries of her professional limitations throughout the first two seasons. Chuck is figuratively exposed, showing his room, his music, and ultimately, his true self to her. They are both, beneath all of the pretending, trying to achieve real intimacy, a form of nakedness, with each other. And because of their many facades, they not only find it impossible, cannot help but hurt each other in the process. It’s a testament to the depth of their mutual affection that the hurt lasts for but a moment.
Moments like these are the rule of their courtship, not the exception. The language itself is littered with these little subtleties: the shows use of “handler” for example, is returned to again and again. Sarah literally has her hands on him, in ways personal and professional, throughout the show. The show begins with Chuck offering to be Sarah’s handler, and it is both a true and false foreshadowing. While Sarah will be Chuck’s CIA handler, Chuck will indeed help her with her baggage: her relationship with her parents, her adopted sister, Bryce, her high school life, etc. And, of course, Chuck literally handles her baggage in vs the Cat Squad, as a punishment for helping her sort through the figuative baggage that is her relationship with her maids of honor.
Wow, that was all very well put Arthur! Thanks for defining all those conflicts!
I should never think I understood everything that went on in the show! Arthur, you just showed me stuff I missed.
Well, really, I think I sort of felt it. But I could never put all that to words.
Good stuff!
That is fantastic stuff…I think again I picked the wrong choice of words when trying to dissect the specifics of Chuck and Sarah’s relationship. It is not that it suffers from a lack of subtly, but there is always some form of romantic tension hanging over them. Let me explain further, their date in the pilot and even the brief moment before Chuck flashes during their “second first date” is lighthearted and natural, other scenes like that are when Sarah gives Chuck his degree, when she locates and takes him to his dad the first time and then meets him…their conversation in Delorean is probably my favorite example of the kind of authenticity that is too scarce before they actually get together. Even the end of best friend qualifies because it is just Chuck and Sarah being their authentic self? I think too often we were kind of hit over the head with the passion/tension and not enough of Chuck and Sarah discovering each other through the kind of conversations a real couple would have as they grew closer and come season 3 they kind of threw the baby out with the bathwater and then something was missing in the last two seasons of the show. Though I can’t quite put my finger on what…does that makes sense? All that being said it could just be that the passion and tension happen so often that it naturally makes the smaller moments less noticeable.
You know I completely agree that more low-key friendship/relationship building moments would have been much appreciated. What we got, really from beginning to (almost) end of the show was beautiful and special…. just never enough.
If I can add a couple more moments of friendship: Sarah telling Chuck what are Lou’s favorite flowers the day after she sabotaged their date. Chuck supporting her in Cougars, Sarah warning Jill at the end of Fat Lady. Sarah actually helping him become a spy in S4 after her anger passes away, Sarah preparing dinner for him and Hannah.
Josh, you say that the sexual tension was there too often. I say it was always there because that’s how it should be. Until two people get together or until one of them moves on there will always be sexual tension in their interactions. I find it very off-putting when a couple breaks up, then for several episodes or seasons they are dating other people while also being just friends and eventually get back together. Ross and Rachel, JD and Elliot come in mind
Thanks all, I meant for a sentence in the last paragraph “The show begins with Chuck offering to be Sarah’s handler…” should read “*baggage handler,” apologies for my late-night stupidity.
Josh, I think everything you say here is correct, and I think you put your finger on exactly what is “missing” in the final two seasons: “some form of romantic tension hanging over them.” In S4-5, this is gone completely, and instead, they are allowed to be, as you put it, “lighthearted and natural” with each other.
Where you and I seem to part ways is in thinking this is a weakness – I believe quite strongly that this is the single greatest aspect of the show! S4-5 are, to me, the absolute strongest of the show, and are indebted to the “romantic tension” of S1-2 for this.
You are correct in noting that the moments of raw, honest “getting to know you” moments are far less frequent in S1-2 (though I think you overstate the infrequency – they’re in almost every episode). Instead, they tease them in short scenes – the ones in 1.01 and 2.01 that you mention are among my favorites. This is tragic, and it puts a form of pressure on the show – both we and Chuck and Sarah deeply want to see the burden of their asset/handler position removed so that they can have more of these moments.
This tension builds until the end of S2, when we think it is finally released. Here, I think your (and Dave’s) point about the failure of S3.0 to pay off that release is insightful and correct.
What makes S3.5-5 great is that they fully pay off the implied promise of S1-2 (and are indebted to them for it). That short scene in S2.01, which was so fleeting and tempting, becomes the entire last two seasons of the show. When Sarah emphatically tells Chuck in that episode that “anything you wanted, you can have,” that’s not just a cute moment, it’s a prophecy that Chuck will fulfill in 4.13, when he finally and completely joins his personal and spy life.
The entirety of S4 is dedicated to finally providing those moments of raw honesty with each other: Sarah’s vows to Chuck at the end of Phase Three, “101 Ways to Say ‘I Do,'” their pre-wedding vows, their angst at Morgan moving out, Chuck’s Paris proposal… literally every episode of the season dedicates time to Chuck and Sarah finally enjoying the learning and discovery of each other.
This payoff is exactly what makes Chuck so different from most other shows. Most shows either delay the getting-together until the final episode (e.g. How I Met Your Mother) or de-emphasize the couple entirely (Parks and Recreation). Chuck leans into their relationship, and uses every episode of S4-5 as a metaphor for different obstacles they face in becoming lifelong partners. Those obstacles range from trivial (First Fight) to enormous (Goodbye), but in every single episode, Chuck and Sarah overcome those obstacles by returning to the fundamental strength that is their mutual respect and trust in each other.
This is why “I fell for you […] after you fixed my phone and before you starting diffusing bombs” is so profound, and, I think, why you cite the pilot date as one of your favorite moments – that date echoes throughout the show. It is lighthearted and natural, as you say, but it’s much more and much better than just that.
In their first date (and in S2.01; you have great taste!) Chuck and Sarah both take the risk of confessing their greatest flaws to each other – Chuck’s lack of professional success, and Sarah’s lack of interpersonal connection. Immediately, each of them sees the worst of each other. And upon seeing it, they both smile. What each of them hates in themselves, the other fully accepts.
That’s why Chuck often “lacks” banter and getting-to-know-you moments. They know and love each other immediately. The rest of the show is not about strengthening their bond – it’s about showing its strength.
Arthur, wasn’t there a time when you and I argued over almost everything?
Seriously, I agree 100%with everything you just said! Thank you.
Well, once I realized you were right about everything, things got easier! 😉
Gee I wish everyone knew that!
I agree with all of that. that being said Blue Bloods “path to prosperity” has been much less messy, than Castle, Chuck and How I Met Your Mother combined. In other words, it has everything these three each did exceptionally well without making their disastrous mistakes, which circles back to how much consistently good writing matters.
I would also point out shows have different objectives with different sorts of pairings.
I absolutely loved Grimm. There was one couple (Monroe and Rosalee) that met, dated, Married, had kids with little drama between them. Sure their world and life was nuts, but they were always fine. Of course they were also secondary characters. The main character started in a committed relationship, but that ended after she killed his mom (!). The last two seasons he was happily involved with the villain of the first four seasons…
And it all worked just fine. The world was crazy, but the characters were mostly likable even with a variety of odd twists and turns. And really, never a triangle!
On Chuck, we had Ellie and Devon who were (mostly) happy and together from beginning to end. They were “normal” (in that uncommon, perfect sort of way). Chuck and Sarah were meant for more drama from the very start. Some that was appropriate to the characters and circumstance. There was no way a down on his luck computer nerd and glamorous international Assassin were going to be happy together without some sort of growth and drama from both parties. So much of that, apart from one arc, was well crafted and entertaining. Really a joy to watch. You all know I have a variety of objections to how many different details were handled; but really this show just clicked. Many of the little gripes stood out because this show was always just on the cusp of being perfect. Obviously, I’m on record as being pretty annoyed with the one MAJOR exception to that.
But I do always want to keep that in perspective. The writing was mostly, but never completely, wonderful.
Dave, you said what I was thinking last night when I skimmed this thread. On one level you can’t compare Castle and Chuck and Blue Bloods. It’s apples and oranges and pears.
Castle: Beckett and Castle were the main characters, but there was nothing in their circumstances that would have prevented them from pursuing a relationship from day one. But there a million internal obstacles to a relationship: Rick’s immaturity (and Kate’s perception of it) and Kate’s baggage, for starters. So, the characters had to grow — a lot — before a relationship was even possible.
Blue Bloods (and I’m a big fan, BTW): It’s such a different set up from Chuck. First, Eddie and Jaime aren’t THE main characters, and their relationship is not THE central relationship of the show. In fact, there isn’t A central relationship. It’s a procedural about a family of cops. That makes it less necessary for all the drama to be focused on them. They are also equals. Neither is the other’s handler, so, in theory, that’s one less obstacle. The similarity, of course, is that it’s the constraints of the job that keeps them apart (until they finally do their homework and discover that said constraints are perceived rather than actual). The most distinctive difference is that they were honest about their feelings and made a consensual choice to remain partners rather than pursue a romantic relationship, because they didn’t want to be reassigned to other partners. So, for a time, they willfully chose their partnership over a romance. It was well played throughout, never heavy handed, and the interloping relationships weren’t in your face. But the show isn’t about them.
Chuck: While having a few similarities with Blue Bloods, Chuck is very different. Where Blue Bloods is a game of checkers, Chuck is game of chess. CS are the main characters (or became such shortly after Yvonne stole the hearts of viewers, which was pretty much from the beginning). Theirs is the central relationship, in every way. There is a complex mix of obstacles that keep them apart. There are internal things going on. Both are damaged. Both have baggage. There are also external obstacles — the constraints of the job. But here’s where it gets vastly more complex. If the CIA gets so much as a whiff of Sarah’s true feelings, she will be reassigned, and it won’t be across town. It will be around the world with a new cover for Sarah, a non-disclosure agreement (for Chuck), the breach of which would be a sudden and mysterious death, and no hope of contact … ever. It will also, in all likely hood, be the end of one or all of the following: Chuck’s normal life, his safety, or his actual life. So, the setup is much more complex, and the stakes are immensely higher.
Sure there are areas it could have been maybe, as you say, Dave, a little more perfect, but overall it was really fantastic, with that one major exception where I think they totally missed the train.
Just to add a general observation about wt/wt. When the couple in question are the main characters and the central relationship, the whole thing is trickier to write.
First, it’s a little harder to transition to the consummated phase of the relationship, especially the longer you wait. It seems easy for writers to write the romance and the wt/wt. But there seems to be a lack of skill to write a growing relationship. What does it look like and how do you make it interesting. Chuck did a good job of this, I thought, and I loved the together CS, but not as much as the married CS. So, kudos to that.
We are conditioned by the romcom model, where the end game is getting the main characters together. The director’s notes must always say, “throw rice … role credits.” The longer a relationship continues, the more it plays into the conditioning that getting the couple together is the end game.
So, several things work against a show that drags out the wt/wt:
1. They almost always resort to tactics that damage the character of the main characters.
2. If they do that and drag it out too long, I lose interest. I no longer care about the couple.
3. Then the shelf-life of television comes into play. Often by the time they get the couple together, the show is approaching its natural shelf-life. So, the whole end-game conditioning plus the natural decline in interest in the show combine to bring the show to a premature end.
The solution: know what the mature relationship will look like before you begin and avoid 1, 2, and 3. Don’t sully the characters. Don’t drag it out too long. Don’t play into the end-game conditioning. Get them together earlier in the show … and never at the end of the season. Get them together before a season ends and throw them into a new adventure that lets everyone know that the show is far from over.
Chuck did okay, considering their egregious violation of #1. But I’m convince that had they played it a little differently, they could have gone on longer.
Really interesting thought about knowing what the couple should look like before the wt/wt (or the show!) even starts. If that were a part of Screenwriting 101 I think we’d see a lot more satisfying romances on television.
I would mention that on Chuck, I suspect the pairing wasn’t supposed to happen until the end game. CF has even admitted they were quite surprised by the sort of screen chemistry they got from Zac and Yvonne. But of course it was obvious to the audience from quite early on (certainly by early S2) it was nuclear. Ideally, this sort of thing would be adapted to by the show runner MUCH more quickly than seems typical.
Back to my Grimm comparison; the original main pairing simply did not work well on screen (lack of energy and chemistry, plus an S2 character arc that likely turned much of the audience against the female character). While the main recurring villian(ess?) brought a sort of loopy, manic fun to her role and quickly became a fan favorite. So the show runner flipped the characters (obviously can’t really know how much of this was “grand design” vs “adapting on the fly”. I suspect the latter). It worked surprisingly well. But it still took four seasons to figure it out. Perhaps this isn’t such a great example, it’s the sort of large scale reinvention that could have ruined the show if it hadn’t worked.
We clearly saw the hazards of ill-conceived reinvention on Chuck!
Some interesting observations all. One thing I will note is that Arthur’s use of Chuck vs. the Truth to characterize the complications in Chuck and Sarah’s relationship and their conflicting and conflicted agendas. I’ve always pointed to this period of the show as when Yvonne and the writers landed on the same page about who Sarah was and what she wanted.
Dave’s point about different WT/WT can serve a different purpose. Going back to Moonlighting Dave and Maddy were meant to be eternally at each other because of their basic natures. Getting them together so early was probably a mistake, but then that show had production problems as well as ratings dips that were driving a lot of story decisions they normally shouldn’t have.
Back to Mal and Inara. Had Firefly run 6 seasons (and a movie) Mal and Inara should never get together as a happy couple. It wasn’t within either character to be able to do so. Kaylee and Simon pretty much had to get together by the end of the second season, which they essentially did in the movie.
With Chuck and Sarah they had the timing about right IMAO. I don’t, as many do, read Barstow as the beginning of an actual relationship, just the first dawning on them that absent their current situation (the spy life and the different worlds they inhabit, not Barstow) they both want to, and likely would be together. Barstow was Honeymooners before Honeymooners, a brief break in their oppressive world before they have to go back and figure it all out. Since in Rom-Com it is a rule that the couple’s first attempt has to result in disaster until one of the couple, usually the woman (i.e. Chuck in this case) has to become more fully self-actualized and stand on her own so as not to just become an appendage to the man’s life, and the man has to come to appreciate the woman’t uniqueness and stop trying to force her to be who he wants as opposed to who she wants.
But I digress. I figured about mid to end third season of 3 was the right timing. Unfortunately once again production considerations that shouldn’t have dictated story as it just became too tempting to finally get them together on the last shot of the last episode, employing that most ubiquitous of the rom-com tropes.
There was also a bit of Thinkling’s #1, but that comes with the nature of TV.
Just to extend the couples analysis a bit, look at Friday Night Lights. Mr&Mrs Coach are the living proof that it is definitely possible to write a mature and stable couple, and yet instill drama in to the relationship. It never goes stale, and yet you never entertain the thought that they will split up. But there are also some less well written couples on that show to be fair. They still hadn’t really figured out how to go from the WT/WT to the later. Chuck never really figured that out till early season 4 when they explicitly and successfully re-visited a lot of the season 3.1 issues in a more sympathetic and clearly understandable way. Without a Shaw or Hannah to complicate matters.
So the question remains, has anyone ever really got this transition right on the first shot? Yes. Parks and Rec got it right three times. April and Andy, Leslie and Ben, Ron and Dianne. I’d also say that Brooklyn 99 pretty much nailed Jake and Amy.
They did it in a few ways. The romance was never the primary, or even dominant story of the show. It was fit in to the existing dynamics of the show, quirky co-workers interacting quirkily. And both were complete comedies with ensemble casts to fill episodes with interactions that were not the primary couple. I don’t know if that is possible in a show with as much drama and occasional darkness as Chuck, but I appreciate Ellie and Awesome, Jeff and Lester, Big Mike and Morgan, and even Harry, Emmitt, Anna and all the other herders all the more for their efforts.
Interesting comment on Firefly Ernie. I suspect you are right, and that I would have gotten thoroughly tired of the show before S6! Or not, stability of other couples (like Zoe and Wash) may have made up for Mal/Inara frustrations. And I don’t *think* they provided enough of the show’s emotional energy to matter that much.
There are a number of other good television couples out there (like the McCords on Madam Secretary), but that transition from wt/wt to stable is always a tricky target.
I also should reiterate for the record; I never required a stable coupling for Charah after Barstow, but fighting to be together and for each other WAS required. Giving up and pursuing other partners is what broke it for me.
Ernie: The romance was never the primary, or even dominant story of the show.
Bingo. That’s when the transition seems to be the hardest,because when you change the relationship, you change the whole story.
I also thought of Madame Secretary, Dave. I really like the Elizabeth/Henry dynamic. There has been tension, because of the nature of their jobs, but I’ve never feared for their marriage. Add to that the family dynamic, and it adds multidimensional depth to the main story of the state dept. I’ve enjoyed the show a lot.
Another show that did a good job was The Closer and then Major Crimes in its wake. Both had believable romances that became marriages without all the wt/wt folly. But again, the relationships were by no means the main story line.
I guess ideally the relationship would be central to the show without being the primary focus of the story. Then it’s easier to grow the relationship (even transition it) and enrich the story without changing it entirely. I would say the McCords in Madam Secretary would be an example of that kind of dynamic. There’s no question as to the importance of Henry’s character and the whole marriage (and family) dynamic. It is central to the main character and the show. It occasionally surges into prominence in the story. But it’s not THE story.
Dave I agree, and implied, that a major problem was Shaw and Sarah, but then as you recall I was very skeptical about Shaw before 3.1 even started and wrote as much. I don’t totally agree that they had to be actively working together to be together after Barstow. I think a brief retrenchment after the devastating fallout of an emotionally immature Sarah tried to jump the gun and a native Chuck had to just say no, because he couldn’t say yes to that particular plan.
That said, I think you are right that another PLI for Sarah was a poor choice, even though I think I understand they were trying to demonstrate that a post Chuck Sarah now needed someone in her life. I do think however Chuck needs one more PLI, and Hannah filled that role well.
A lot of 3.1 was Chuck learning to walk in Sarah’s shoes, and learning what that must have cost her in their previous arrangement. Hannah was an integral part of that. Chuck had to wrestle with the fact that there was someone falling in love with him, and he could never have a future with her, or tell her why, or let her get to know who he really was. It covers an aspect of the S2 relationship that is under appreciated in my opinion. Sarah ALWAYS saw their relationship as temporary. She always assumed she would be leaving or he’d eventually get the bunker. And in fact, when ordered to, she did leave (until she realized there was something seriously wrong). Chuck actually let it get far worse than Sarah ever did, as far as letting the civilian believe they had a future, and the devastation he had to deliver Hannah was probably far worse than any of Sarah’s pushback or distancing.
Thinkling, I guess my take is that Charah (can we still use that?) was never the sine qua non of the show for me. There had to be a Chuck and Sarah relationship, and interaction between them, but the romance was the little bonus bubbling under the surface. Until it wasn’t. What had been one aspect of a relationship and the show was suddenly foregrounded. Like the Beefcake/Lethal Weapon arc was so popular they needed to do a whole season of it. But take out all the Chuck and Sarah interactions.
I just have to add that this is the most civil and interesting Chuckwin’s Law thread ever.
Not trying to be uncivil (?), but I do know it’s been mentioned before that both loved it and hated it crowds for S3 often agreed on specific did/didn’t work details. It’s largely the matter of how we rate the importance of Charah to our enjoyment of the show that effects how we weight the importance of those details. Even enough to say I found Hannah decent/likable on her own merits; had she been in place of Lou it would have likely worked fine for me. As for Shaw, well, to the best of my knowledge we’ve had exactly one commenter here who claimed to *like* what that character brought to the show.
And with the greatest of civility I’ll just say that once Shaw just became a villain I was fine with his place in the Chuck-verse. I was more confused by him than alienated before that, but found him problematic from conception. Shaw as a villain was fine, it was just the introduction and transition to villain that troubled me.
Was he maybe supposed to be Sarah’s Jill? I still don’t know
I’ll agree with all of that Ernie!
Ernie dropping references to Firefly, Friday Night Lights, Community, Parks and Rec, and Brooklyn 99 in one post!!!
I do think that S4-5 of Chuck handled the post-relationship better than any of those couples, other than maybe April/Andy. The other relationships (thankfully) did less wt/wt, but the shows lost a lot of momentum once the relationships were consummated (so to speak).
Anecdotally, I remember finding out that my father watched Chuck. His words: “I watched it until the guy got the girl, and then I didn’t care about it anymore.” I’ve never quite forgiven him 😀
Dave
Your last line pretty much sums up exactly how I feel…even six years later.
Hey there’s always hope for more!
Thinkilng
Nice to hear you are a big fan of Blue Bloods! You pretty much said perfectly everything I have been trying to say for the last several days in discussing it compared to Chuck. If not having “main characters” means I get to see any potential relationships on screen for longer, especially when actors that bring them to life have just as much natural chemistry as Zac and Yvonne then I will gladly take the implicit less in your face tactics, for the rest of my TV watching days. No misery arc is worth wasting that kind of chemistry.
Great stuff Ernie and Dave
Ernie, I actually agree with your view on Barstow now. It is the moment they both fully accept that there is something between them more than just attraction. I am comfortable calling it love, but just because you love someone does not mean you are ready to take the jump to fully committed relationship. In TV (and life) there is always something holding us back. With Chuck and Castle, it was fear and personal insecurities, on Blue Bloods it was complacency and on The Office, it was some combination of all of these. Most of the time, on TV and in life a major event allows us to overcome the thing holding us back from making that commitment and the same thing is usually the catalyst, the realization that the rest of our lives with that person is worth future challenges. Cue near-death experience, at least in most TV dramas anyway.
Dave
A quick additional point about actor chemistry and on-screen relationships; it is not the ability to “act” as if your falling in love, but simply when two people can fully connect to their characters together. That was said by Jenna Fischer while discussing her chemistry with John Krasinski in an interview sometime after the office ended and I think it fits perfectly. Jim and Pam were never the most heated or passionate but they are still IMO the most palpable from start to finish in recent memory.
No doubt heat and passion are only a part of the issue. We’ve observed before that after Honeymooners we actually saw little of it on Chuck. Things still worked quite well because Chuck and Sarah came across as two people who liked and trusted each other in a pretty natural and believable sort of way. Not that a little more heat on occasion would have been a bad thing…
Dave
I think the fallout from the misery arc had Zac and Yvonne thinking too much when they came back for season 4. Almost like they became a bit disconnected, trying to force being a couple or at least the PDA and smaller intimacies that come with that. They got very good at talking like a couple though and the high stakes and perilous moments always had the same pop as we got in the first 3 years.
Luke
Agree with you about both the other couples you mentioned. I am a bit specific about the kind of sexual tension that I can tolerate, love triangles are the most overused source of sexual tension in TV, Jill, and Bryce was acceptable because they felt like they served other purposes than just getting in the way. Everyone else just felt forced and made to…drag out angst. Chuck and Sarah had enough to deal with without throwing gas on the fire and it was about three love triangles too many. Shaw, in particular, was a mess because Routh could not properly convey his originally complex design, much of his writing would have benefited greatly from someone who was more skilled at conveying those layers, but like many here have said by the time we learn Sarah killed his wife and he wants revenge we were glad Chuck shot him. I do echo Ernie that once he went “full villain” Routh and by extension Shaw was extremely fun and second only to Volkoff in Chuck Villainy.
I said somewhere above or below that CHUCK pretty much destroyed my tolerance for love triangles, so that might be why I have been so fond of Jamie and Eddie on Blue Bloods. The only guessing game the writers played with that couple is when they would officially pull the trigger (ironic pun because its a cop show and both characters have had close calls thanks to bullets) sure that is less explosive than CHUCK and other shows but I can’t state enough how nice a change of pace that is…ironically they are similar in personality (stubborn) and in Eddie’s case background-wise (her father is a less extreme Bernie Madoff) to Chuck and Sarah which may play another factor in why they currently top on my list of TV couples.
Different shows obviously but if I’m going to strip it down to which group of writers executed wt/wt better (as in there was never a moment where I felt like as a viewer I was being toyed with) my answer is Blue Bloods, The beauty of TV is ever-changing tastes,heck there was a time when I felt Smallville and One Tree Hill were the peak of well-executed TV relationships and wt/wt, which these days seems utterly laughable, but I digress, thankful that I now know better.
What I meant to say is that I can perceive sexual tension even in those moments of “just friendship” and I think it’s something natural. Love triangles are a more obvious tension, and I can understand why for some people are uncomfortable, but their angsty nature doesn’t bother me, I would go as far as to say that they are kind of necessary for character authenticity. But they do have to meet a few criteria: don’t damage the main relationship by becoming too serious, don’t take too much screen time and almost no screen time, unless the triangle has a purpose. And be entertaining.
The first four, Lou, Bryce, Jill and Cole checked every box. Hannah too, but if there was a problem with her, it was that she came up late in the stages of the wt/wt, after things and feelings had become very serious, so her entertainment value was hindered a bit by the hurt she had caused to Sarah. But apparently, Sarah’s problem was more with how Chuck behaved, so I don’t think there was too much harm there.
Shaw’s portrayal in Fake Name made him unlikable, so the entertaining part was gone. He was setup very well in Mask and Fake Name and the follow-up in the next two episodes was ok too, he barely had any screen time. The problems started when he became too important in this triangle and by that time it was already the longest one in duration.
I wanted to write about why Cole had a purpose too, the most important one actually, and why it’s my favorite triangle, but I have to run, so I’ll probably do it next time
Yeah, I have to agree with you Dave I would much rather the couple stay unified and deal with any issues through communication then run into the arms of someone else, especially if the way they interact is a source of joy in watching the show. I don’t even mind when they bicker between themselves and it gets resolved near the end of an episode, but I never think triangles are good sources of entertainment…they are lazy writing, an excuse to manufacture drama and angst and JS seems incapable of not smothering his viewers with them.
Yeah Josh, my absolute least favorite plot cliche ever.
Chuck would have been vastly better if they’d never gone there.
I will concede Bryce and Jill were hard-coded in to the DNA; it would have taken a VERY daring writer to avoid THAT low hanging fruit. But oh would I have loved to see it. The show would have skipped strait from a 9 to an 11…
Exactly the opposite worlds Chuck and Sarah were from created enough drama, I really wish they would have just ran entirely with that thread WITHOUT sprinkling in other people, but if we get a Movie Matt Bomber is welcome back because it would be interesting for him to see how much Chuck has changed
Yes,exactly.
Although a return of Jill could work just as well for that. And you know, she’s not dead (!).
True, There is a lot of guest characters that fit into a movie. Sadly, Mr Colt is no longer possible to bring back; RIP MCD he was fantastic “do you find me imposing? I was going for imposing.” Just a great line and a fun character!
Hi all!
First time poster here (but long time lurker!) Since this is an open thread I thought I’d mention that Yvonne just got an Emmy nod for Handmaids Tale. For the record, its about damn time !
I completely agree! Her role is a stark contrast to what we are used to, but it really shows her depth and versatility as an actor and as a huge fan of the show I am thrilled she is getting the recognition that is 12 years overdue!
Glad to hear it. We can also post that in the Yvonne News thread.
Maybe everybody’s seen this, but Zach Levi is in Shazam, which appears to be a mix of Superman and Big. One of the more delightful trailers I’ve ever seen:
That looks like a ton of fun!
Maybe if Shazam is a hit, Zach’s may become more visible in the industry…and…maybe, just maybe there will be better odds for a Chuck reunion movie/episode/miniseries!
A lot of maybes!
A lot of maybes but we can always hope!
I already know I am going to get a lot of hate for this but can I just ask why does everyone hate Shaw so much? For me he was a very well done character because he wasn’t just some psycho, he was a good guy first whose wife was killed and he became motivated by revenge. There are definitely moments where I understood where he was coming from even after he found out.
It never mattered to me if I “understood” Shaw; it’s that he was a smug, condescending jerk.
But the biggest thing by far is just it was too late for his involvement with Sarah. For too many of us, Season Two was the end of the plausible will they/won’t they game. There was no way to separate Chuck and Sarah without making both of them look like idiots. So gee, in most of Season Three Chuck and Sarah both looked like total idiots.
So the main thing many viewers hold against Shaw is just that he helps make Sarah look like an idiot. Not just the too late for that story part, but the falling for a smug condescending jerk part.
You’re always welcome to like the characters and stories if you want! But to many of us they totally messed up the one major arc. And that’s just part of the legacy of the show.
I don’t really see the smug condescending part, but maybe that’s just me. At least he wasn’t as condescending as Bryce was to Chuck. I will give you that I hate that Sarah fell for him so quickly and even shared intimate details with him that she never shared with Chuck (stuff like her real name and the fact that she talked to him about Chuck changing instead of actually saying something to Chuck’s face). And yes I always hated that the writers made Chuck look like a total idiot for not going with Sarah on the run. It doesn’t matter if it would have worked (it very likely wouldn’t) but he didn’t know that. They could have had Chuck said yes, they go on a run and Casey brings them back, much like the plot of s3e14 and the show would be fine, it was fine for the entire 4th and 5th season with them together. But ok let’s accept that Chuck wanted to help people because as he said she taught him to put needs of others above his own, even though it’s hard for me to buy that he would change his tune like that after pining for her and talking about wanting normal life with her for the first two seasons. So what was Sarah to do when Chuck said no? She has every right to feel hurt, to have trust issues after having the childhood and life that she had. The one guy who she thought cared for her this entire time said no to the thing they both secretly wanted all this time. And then Shaw came along, the real American hero and won her over. Why do people have such a problem with that? He was helping Chuck with the spy stuff as much as he could even though he saw how much Chuck was pining for Sarah and he never did a thing or got jealous. So no I don’t think Sarah was an idiot at all nor that Shaw was helping her be one. When it comes to first half of season 3 the only idiot was Chuck and a cocky one at that. That is probably the only time in the whole show that i didn’t like him and I certainly understand why Sarah had a problem with him too.
Sorry for long comment and no paragraphs, I am not much of a writer or know much about writing structure, I just plop my thoughts how they come to me.
For me personally, I think the Shaw issue stemmed from two problems, the acting side the 2×4, fans calling him a plank of wood or cardboard cut out and the relationship side with Sarah, So Chuck refuses to run, hurts Sarah, they become friends only (although they’ll never be just friends) Chuck meets Hannah, Sarah dates Shaw, it’s the way it was all written, Sarah with Shaw came out of nowhere and that covered quite a few episodes and potentially the end of C/S, Chuck dating Hannah was very short in comparison.
So I see more Sarah being ooc for many episodes plus dating Shaw, getting serious, leaving Burbank together, so my disappointment was more directed at Sarah than Shaw.
Shaw and Hannah did not need to be in this series, I felt they were just extras and if season 3 had been written better they probably didn’t need to be in it.
You could say apart from the train station, there is one scene where Chuck was a complete jerk, when he comes down into castle with doughnuts and Casey mentions him getting laid in front of Sarah, after what happened at the start, talk about rubbing it in, Sarah never rubbed it in nor did Shaw.
So the way I see it is Shaw gets all the flak but the writers really screwed up Sarah’s and Chuck’s characters in s3, especially Sarah but because Sarah is getting serious with Shaw and a threat to C/S relationship the fans direct the anger at Shaw, it was all a Sham in the end, it’s all simply down to the writers, i mean who in there right mind would where earrings still, purchased from someone who tried to kill them, diamond or not.
That’s my take, Shaw did make a good baddie at the end though.
Yeah ultimately it’s the writers who screwed up. The characters were so wildly OOC I find hard to take any of it seriously.
As I’ve Mentioned before, I know three families who quit watching the show in S3; and they ALL did so during or immediately after Pink Slip. None of them even saw Shaw. It truly wasn’t him at all. It was an ugly story choice for Chuck and Sarah that ruined things. “What was Sarah supposed to do” is completely beside the point. It’s ALL on the ugly story choices made for that main arc.
Shaw is merely a symbol of the misbegotten season.
Loki, I actually agree with your take on Shaw. I’d just distinguish between Shaw the character and the story arc he represents. After his villain turn, I actually think he’s a very good character. The problem with Shaw is that the 3.0 arc where he’s introduced is just thoroughly unentertaining. It’s not that the characters are acting out of character, it’s just that Chuck and Sarah have a range of plausible decisions they could’ve made after season 2. In 3.0, they consistently choose poorly for themselves and each other, and in ways that are fairly miserable to watch. Even if those decisions are understandable, there are better-written directions the show could’ve taken while still staying true to each other.
Throughout the entire rest of the show, when Chuck and Sarah are faced with difficult situations, they fight their hardest to make decisions that will benefit each other. In season 3.0, they are faced with an easy situation, and consistently make decisions that hurt each other. Those who love us most are often those who hurt us most, because we are imprefect, but Shaw’s introduction denigrates and overextends a will they/won’t they dynamic that had already been pushed as far as it should’ve gone.
Very well put.
Arthur, I think you hit the nail on the head there. Chuck and Sarah kept making wrong decisions, especially Chuck who annoyed me the most with the big wrong decision at the train station. And people took it out on Shaw who I actually thought was a decent character all the way through.
I don’t think the show would have lost anything if Chuck ran away with Sarah, in fact it would have been much better. Like I said before, I think Casey would have brought them back probably like he did in 3:14 and they would have been together as spies.
Loki I agree completely that the running away together in 3.01 could have worked very well. I’ve often laughed at how the full impact of the front arc seems to be they choose to run away together from Paris instead of Prague…
Obviously for many story reasons that isn’t literally true; but partly for Chuck, and almost wholly for Sarah, it is true.
It makes the front arc an epic circle.
Wow! I haven’t gotten to the end, yet. But this had become one heck of a great discussion. I agree with many things said here, but I’m just vain enough to think I can add something of value here.
Arthur, I like your take on the S3 arc(s) and the idea that Chuck and Sarah kept making bad decisions (maybe too many!). But I can’t shake the idea that C&S have essentially switched places.
I mean, in S3, Chuck’s determined to be “the spy” and Sarah wants to be the “normal” girl. The Chuck of S1 told Morgan that he didn’t ask her on a date because “Have you SEEN that girl?” And Sarah was the spy who essentially (and sometimes easily) lied to spare Chuck’s feelings every time he got close to asking her if they had a chance at a real relationship. Those are not the same people we saw at the train station in Prague. Sarah is frustrated in her attempt to be “normal” (and run away with Chuck) and Chuck is frustrated as a spy, and we’re frustrated as an audience! If that is S3’s mission, Mission Accomplished, I think.
It’s like C&S are circling each other, but never getting any closer – at least, not until Paris and vs. The Honeymooners. I’m so glad we get to Paris much quicker on re-watches.
And SHAAAAAWWWWWW!!!!!! As much as I wanted to hate him from the beginning (something to do with flicking that &$*^ cigarette lighter) he’s the reason they stopped circling each other. I’ll credit TPTB with that, and maybe ever good acting because I reacted as intended to those characters at the time.
Its funny Joe, even after all these years we still get traffic on these threads!
Joe, I don’t see Shaw as the reason for Sarah and Chuck stopping the circling around each other. In fact, out of all the PLI’s, he’s the most irrelevant. You can take him completely out of the story (as a PLI) and nothing changes: Chuck still realizes when Beckman sends him to Rome, that spying without Sarah is not worth it, Sarah still moves to DC because she doesn’t believe him. In American Hero, you can skip from the Buy More Scene, when Chuck tells Casey and Morgan that he’s quitting, to the scene where Casey confesses to Sarah and the story is the same. I even made a cut of the episode exactly like that (and a few others) and nothing relevant is miised. Most useless episode ever.
Exactly! Shaw was irrelevant and nothing changes even without him as far as Chuck and Sarah are concerned. Well said Luke
And yet I see some people saying season 3 is their favorite season which is just weird. I guess everyone likes the Chuck+Sarah payoff in the 2nd half of the season. For me though 4th season is much better, the show starts to take itself less serious and becomes more fun(Volkoff alone beats anything season 3 ever did).
My single favorite episode is from S3 (Honeymooners!) but it sort of stands as a lone beacon. Overall the back arc works okay for me (a few nits well recorded back in the day!).
But I agree completely with saying S4 is my favorite; and yes absolutely, Volkoff was my favorite villain. And I think more fun, less serious sums it up nicely.
But there clearly are a number of fans who just loved S3. I believe they are a pretty small group (I would guess not much over 30%). And no doubt we have got pretty heated here a few times when discussing the issue. it Is sometimes tough to remember that someone having a very contrary view is not necessarily (!) mentally or morally defective. I loved some of those arguments! I still go back and reread on occasion. It just makes me laugh how passionate all were (are?) about this show.
It is interesting to me that those who most loved S3 were often less pleased with S4 and S5. But it may be they disliked the (mostly) lighter mood.
It’s funny cause my favorite episode of the entire series is also from s3, Chuck vs the beard. Also it’s important to say I didn’t mean to offend people who loved season 3, I think it’s great that we all have different seasons we love best, it would be pretty boring if we all agreed on the best parts.
Although sadly I think everyone still likes the 5th season the least. Some things never change..
Oh I vastly prefer s5 to S3! Defective ending included.
One of our featured writers here (Thinkling) has never been shy about calling S5 her favorite season. So no doubt every season has its defenders.
Ha. I was reading through and about to jump to S5’s defense, but Dave beat me to it. Yes, S5 is my favorite, underwhelming ending and all. S4 was my favorite until S5. But I’m a big fan of character growth, mature relationships, and marriage. So, S5 hit all those notes for me.
Yes, Dave, my favorite villain by far is Volkoff, but I still smile when I remember Von Hayes crammed into his Lamborghini.
Just piling on the S5 love-fest. I don’t want to get into the finale (I love it, other’s don’t), but all the things Thinkling said. I’ll always appreciate Chuck being brave enough to keep explore a successful relationship rather than throwing arbitrary roadblocks in their way.
Von Hayes may be the funniest villain. The Lamborghini and the whole money/thumb drive handoff. And just everything about his birthday party for himself. Very funny character.
Wow I never thought so many of you would come to defend season 5. I always thought it was the weakest season because of a couple things:
Morgan getting faulty version of Intersect is almost unwatchable for me. It just hurts to see one of my favorite characters in the show go “dark side” and be a giant douche and ruin his relationship not only with Alex who was great for him but also with Casey. They were just starting to become friends with Morgan finally breaking through that tough exterior and then he breaks up with Alex in a text. It was hilarious though when Casey told him Phantom menace was the best Star Wars movie to start with.
And the whole conspiracy against Chuck thing was confusing for me, Decker was a villain I never cared for too much; the whole thing felt too serious almost which didn’t fit with the tone of the show.
And lastly, with multiple rewatches now under my belt I am fine with the finale and optimistic about them being together and Sarah falling in love with Chuck again. But I am still finding it hard to forgive them stripping Sarah’s character of all development she went through last 5 seasons. Chuck taught her to be a real person, to allow herself to be happy with him and dream about normal life(the house, the kids, the safer life for them). And they took all of that away to set up the open ending which could have frankly been done better and given us more hope.
Rant over, maybe I went too hard but those things are too much to handle for me sometimes, even if season 5 had some truly awesome moments (best example that comes to mind is Chuck as a hacker drinking Chardonnay and Verbanski/Casey love affair).
Well some of those I feel exactly opposite about. My only complaint with Morgansect was it meant too much Morgan in the front arc. Especially Bearded Bandit. And I thought Decker was an excellent villain. I only really object to Shaw coming back again (they should have said Quinn was the mastermind of the grand conspiracy, he was more adequate than Shaw).
Business Trip, Hack Off and Baby are three of my all time favorite episodes. Especially Baby, I put it right up there with Honeymooners and Phase Three.
Curse and Kept Man are both weak, but not terrible.
The finale arc brings more complex feelings. Some really excellent stuff (I love Bullet Train until the end). But I agree entirely about the end. I have come to accept it as “happy”; that is, Chuck and Sarah will be fine. But I hate what they did to her and the ambiguity they left her with. Just a thoroughly unsatisfying end.
I agree about Business trip and Baby. I did thoroughly enjoy those episodes, especially Business trip cause one of my problems with the later seasons of Chuck was always that Buy more was less and less a part of the show. One of the reasons I fell in love with this show was the Buy More, all the characters who work there and their crazy shenanigans and how Chuck was navigating through that craziness while having to be a spy. That is why I always liked early seasons more than the later ones cause they have more of that. And that is also why I always loved Business trip and it’s my favorite s5 episode.
I noticed how much you like Morgan too.
No doubt Morgan and the Buy More have their moments. But for myself, and I think most commenters we see here, both were way overdone in the later seasons.
I would have preferred more episodes with no Buy More at all. The only exception being IF they made a bigger thing of Chuck and Sarah owning the store in S5. That COULD have been a lot of fun; especially if they both found themselves trying to keep the thing running there while saving the world. Could have been so much fun for the Buy Morons to find out who their real bosses were…
I was really disappointed when Morgan didn’t just stay in Hawaii. But even so I don’t “hate” the character. He had several fun moments, and his scenes with Sarah in the last two and a half seasons were often terrific. But the “bromance” did little for me; Chuck and Morgan was one of the least interesting dynamics on the show. His involvement with Alex and Casey was generally well played, even having to win her back.
I was okay with Morgan as a moron, less enthused when Chuck took on that roll (like in Curse).
I guess it depends on what you like best about the show. Chuck hacking and drinking Chardonnay was cute, but nothing memorable to me. And I agree with Dave that Morgansect just meant too much Morgan. (As for the Buymore, I wouldn’t have been too bothered if it had remained in the rubble after S3.)
I loved S5 not only for the things that I most enjoyed (the aforementioned growth, mature relationships, marriage), but I also liked the foreboding tone of S5. For me the tension was where it belonged … around Chuck and Sarah, but not between them. The threat was darker, the danger more personal. The stakes were higher, because they had more to lose. The happiness of their relationship, which was strong throughout, was set against the dangers of the spy world that threatened to destroy them. That, to my mind, is a much better use of conflict/tension than the S3 story line. The scene that sort of encapsulates S5 to me is the inter-cut scene at the end of Business Trip, showing the love and laughter, warmth and safety of the Bartowski home inter-cut with the cold reality of the spy world, as Casey, in order to protect the safety of that family, battles the Jane the Viper.
Would I have done some things differently? Yes. The conspiracy plot was poorly developed, very disappointing. And of course the finale was less than satisfying (so much so that it compelled me to write and extended ending). But despite its shortcomings, it’s still my favorite season.
Ditto all that Dave.
I had forgotten how much I enjoyed Sarah and Morgan’s scenes in the last 2 seasons. That was a more enjoyable dynamic to me than the bromance, which wore a bit thin over time.
Yeah Dave I agree with you that I liked Morgan more when he was a moron. I am not sure the show would have been better if Morgan stayed in Hawaii though, Chuck needed “normal” people who weren’t involved with spying for the show to work. I don’t think it works with just spy stuff all the time, the show needs Morgan, Ellie, Awesome and some Buy more shenanigans.
I love the episodes when they tie all that together, that’s when I think the show pops like when Big Mike stops the Leader and says I hate thieves or when they throw a revolution in Chuck vs the beard and Chuck tells Morgan everything and immediately feels relief. Or Generalissimo and Woodcomb episodes. Or the Jeffster performances, there are so many and I don’t think this show would be as good without all of that. I just love the idea of Chuck having to navigate normal life with spy life so much and if it was all spy life I don’t think I would have liked the show as much. But that’s just me, let’s just agree to disagree.
I do agree stakes were higher in s5 and that moment when Casey kills all those killers and Viper in order to protect them all while they are all celebrating is amazing and beautiful. I also love Sarah’s commitment to protect the baby in the baby episode, even before Chuck when she was Langston Graham’s wild card enforcer, she still did the right thing and the whole relationship with her Mom was just touching. Season 5 definitely has its moments I will give you that.
I never saw Morgan or the Buy More as remotely “normal”. More about comic weirdness but sometimes they worked, sometimes they didn’t. Especially Jeffster, way too creepy weird for my taste.
But I loved Ellie and Devon as “normal”. Well mostly, Ellie’s S4 arc was poorly conceived (not knowing what she already knew). But I have long felt the show would have been better if Ellie and Sarah got more of the Morgan and Buy More time.
Or as our pipe dream always went back in the day; two new shows, “Buy Morons” as a half hour comedy and “Chuck and Sarah” as an hour long spy action comedy. The best of all worlds…
I loved Jeffster a lot to be honest. Couldn’t imagine a show without them in the background serving as comic relief, but that’s just me. I don’t really think Ellie needed more time, not sure what more you could do with her and Devon.
Ellie is easy, I NEEDED to see more of her friendship with Sarah. I also would have liked Ellie as the team Intersect specialist in S4. Devon was my favorite minor character. Would have loved more of him.
Jeffster I never would have missed. A few good moments, but I’m not really into the creepy thing.
I agree with all of that, Dave. Buymore and Jeffster had their moments, but they were very few and far between. Ellie as the Intersect specialist would have been awesome, and moments with Sarah would have benefited both of them.
The main reason why most people think Shaw sucks is because he comes off as an obstacle that Chuck has to overcome in order to be with Sarah.
The relationship between Chuck and Sarah was so fascinating and endearing because, like Sarah likes to say, they sold it to the viewer. First, it was the acting and their chemistry, those are obvious.
Second, it was in your face all the time. A lot of people, including Alan Sepinwall iirc, complained about the wt/wt not advancing and saying that the writers should put it on ice until they’re ready to put Chuck and Sarah together. From what I understand, he wasn’t bothered by the romantic scenes, he even liked them and he didn’t think they distracted from the episodes. His point of contention seems to have been that the wt/wt was a plot that kept repeating itself without advancing. but he looked at it the wrong way. That plot couldn’t advance until Sarah made a decision and those kind of scenes were not plot points, they were characterization points that were meant to sell and grow the romance in a realistic way. If the writers had done what Alan said, then Sarah and Chuck would have been “just friends” following Break-Up, with very few meaningful scenes between them and then hooked up at the end of S2. The problem would have been that not showing them in love for a long stretch would have induced the sensation that they aren’t that much in love and that’s a problem with almost every wt/wt shown on tv. Sure, you can buy it since it happens on the screen, but will you care? Not very much, I know I never do. This is also one of the problems of the finale, but that’s another discussion.
And third, they didn’t use OLI’s as obstacles for Chuck and Sarah’s romance. My biggest problem with your run of the mill wt/wt is that they always use another love interest to get a reaction from the other half of the wt/wt when they want to advance it. I find that insulting for one of the parties and frankly, unrealistic or at least juvenile. We love people for who they are, not because they’re better than someone else and we don’t need to date other people to realize how important they are to us. The only one that came closest to being an obstacle was Bryce, but he was an ex, he appeared early in the story and only a couple of months after he was presumed dead. It was normal for Sarah to be ambivalent here. Lou, Jill and Hannah, all happened very soon after Chuck had come to believe that things were over between him and Sarah and it was always made clear that they were second choices. Cole was the same, he came at a moment when Chuck forced Sarah to question the viability of their future. She always had that question in the back of her head, but like a true introvert, she pretended that it didn’t exist. The obstacle was always only one: Sarah’s job.
So, you have this conflict that keeps building up between a palpable romance that keeps growing and a very believable obstacle. And when that conflict starts to resolve itself, it becomes epic. It was epic when Sarah said no to Cole, because she was subconsciously saying no to the spy life. It was even more epic when she ran away with Chuck because she was doing the same thing, but consciously. And it was epic again on the beach because it was not an impulsive decision, it was something she knew that she wanted.
And then we come to season 3. I didn’t have any problems with the wt/wt continuing as long as it made sense, I even wanted it. And it made sense to me, I think Chuck choosing the spy life was the only way to make it believable. I love the first two episodes and I don’t find anything contrived about them. But, the writers were faced with two problems created by their own doing: first, Chuck and Sarah couldn’t get back together until Chuck chose her over spying; and second, it had to be at least as epic as the ending of season 2. But, Chuck giving up spying for her couldn’t be as epic because for him, it was more like a dream, for her it was her life. Also, his conflict would have been building up for only 13 episodes, while Sarah’s lasted 35 episodes. So, Chuck had to give up something more than just spying, he had to give her up. They decided to do it by Chuck rescuing Sarah’s boyfriend while believing she prefers Shaw to him. Unfortunately, the execution was not up to par, Sarah seems to have real romantic feelings for Shaw (she doesn’t, but you have to dig through the rabble to see it), which makes her look like a superficial flake that falls in love at the drop of a hat, and in turn, that makes her feelings for Chuck not that “epic” anymore. On a related note: thanks, Mr Fedak for making her exactly that when you told us that she fell for a possible enemy two days after her boyfriend had died. On top of that, Shaw was not a well written character: he was interesting for the first two episodes, but then became stiff, creepy and incompetent. For me, he sucked as a villain too, he had only one good scene, the one in Paris.
So, anybody has any ideas about what something else Chuck could have given up, so we would have been spared of Shaw?
I’m no fan of any of this who has to give up what talk. Its more like an engineering problem or a court brief than a romance.
The reasonable external obstacles were resolved by 2.22 (Sarah had chosen Chuck over career). I think the most natural thing is to end the wt/wt at that point. Chuck is a part of a dangerous world he never wanted is sacrifice enough. Sarah getting into a real relationship is her new adventure. Growth proceeds from there. We could have had the silly/funny relationship steps we saw late S3/early S4 play out against the backdrop of Chuck’s agent training. I always liked the idea of paralleling his growth into Sarah’s world with her growth into Chuck’s world.
I think that would have played better for far more viewers than any further made-for-television sort of delays. It would have had the bonus of preserving the really special romance we’d seen unfold in late S2 without making it all irrelevant as canon did.
Dave, my reply wasn’t meant to make you or anybody else a fan, it was just a long winded explanation about why Shaw is hated and how it got to that point. It sounds like an engineering problem because it is one.
I understand that you and many others reject the season 3 story from the start, but not paying off on the resolution of the first two seasons’ conflict was the writers’ prerogative and others, including me bought into it. Once they headed down that path, they couldn’t end it until Chuck became a spy. If he had decided a couple weeks into the season to go back to Sarah, he would have looked like a flake. If he had quit and went back to Sarah when things got tougher, he would have been a loser and Sarah would have been his second choice. For me, that kind of character damage would have been a lot bigger than Chuck and Sarah dating other people while believing they were done.
The writers also knew that they had to conclude it in a way that matched that level of intensity, otherwise it would have felt like it wasn’t worth it. Chuck believing that Sarah prefers Shaw and then risking his life to save him, probably looked great on the story board, but it failed because they didn’t make it clear enough that Shaw was never a romantic option for Sarah. Eventually, he wasn’t, so I’m not too bothered by it now, but I shouldn’t have had to spend an enormous amount of time to analyze every detail so that I can come up to that conclusion.
Luke I do think as simple a thing as removing the “love polygon” would have made a huge difference in the reception of the season. Even if we started with the big misunderstanding and had them estranged until 3.13, simply removing that element would have made a difference between “loathed” and “not a favorite”. Which sounds like a pretty big improvement to me.
But the only way to make the season “liked” would be to fully honor the epic season two finale arc and have the young awkward couple actually trying to figure out how to be together right from 3.01. (Basically make the season premier look more like Honeymooners).
The polls we ran right after the season look like 70% rejected it to one degree or another which is a staggering collapse after the enthusiasm with the end of S2.
First, why do people act like Sarah was a flake as you say because she fell for Shaw? I am frankly bothered by all the Sarah hate here. When I was watching the first half of season 3 I don’t think I ever had a problem with Sarah’s choices. So let’s dissect this and why I think Sarah is getting too much hate:
For 2 seasons Chuck wanted to be with Sarah but she couldn’t because they needed the wt/wt and it made sense cause she was a cold spy, all her life she had trust issues because of her father and she was taught to ignore her own emotions to serve duty like a spy. I mean she was with Bryce early but not really, he was kind of a safe relationship for her I believe cause she knew he would never want all the real things(marriage, kids, house etc.) It was more of a spies with benefits relationship I believe.
But back to the real point: After all of her life of having trust issues and being told to ignore emotions and act like a spy, comes Chuck and she develops real feelings for him but because she is a spy they can’t really be together. To bring it back to Bryce, maybe she didn’t want to be with Chuck and also be spies cause that’s what she had with Bryce, she wanted more meaningful relationship and to differentiate Bryce from Chuck. But she never stopped caring for him and helping him with everything he needed (not just on missions but emotionally: talking, being there for him with his family). Another big thing people don’t talk about enough is when she chose to risk being committed of treason and losing everything she worked for to help Chuck find his father. Do you realize what kind of sacrifice she was making for him?
Which brings me to Pink slip and the choice that will live in infamy for all Chuck fans everywhere. She was finally done hiding her feelings, she was done wearing a spy mask and she let it all out: she told him how she felt, that they could run and finally be together. She did that partly because she knew they would change him and that thought was more than she could handle. And you’re right, it was epic because she was giving up her life, it was beautiful. So after all the wt/wt she is finally ready to stop being a spy and be with him and he says no. This is where I was so mad at the writers because they almost ruined Chuck for me (the character, not the show). Yeah they explained it but it still didn’t make sense for me and it wasn’t in line with his character and everything we expected from him. They created a problem they couldn’t fix and like you said they tried to make Chuck’s sacrifice be equally as epic as Sarah’s but they couldn’t because it’s impossible.
So my question is why in the name of all that is holy did they not have them run together? But more importantly why did people hate Sarah for it? Everyone hates Sarah for what she does with Shaw but it was completely understandable in my book. For the first time in her life she allowed herself to be vulnerable, to have real feelings and Chuck basically said: Nah, i got to go save the world. Do you realize the impact that had to have on her? People are underselling her being hurt and betrayed by him so much, especially when we now know everything about her father and their strained relationship. Sarah was just doing with Shaw what she was doing with bryce, something that would never really go anywhere serious because she needed something safe, something not serious and someone to talk to about Chuck and how much he is changing. And it’s not like Sarah had actual feelings for Shaw, people bring up her moving to DC. But it wasn’t about Shaw, it was about her HAVING TO WORK WITH THE PERSON WHO HURT HER SO DEEPLY. I need people to understand that it was too much to her to keep working with Chuck especially when he changed so much and her being constantly reminded of him saying no to her at the train station.
So please for the love of God, stop hating Sarah Walker so much because she really doesn’t deserve it. The writers do for shooting themselves in the foot with the whole Chuck saying no arc they created.
I absolutely hate how Sarah was written in S3. Its not the character, its the show runner. And she does look like an idiot.
But why? Everyone always says how much they hate s3 Sarah but I don’t get it. I don’t think she was an idiot at all and I think my previous post covered her reasons for doing the things she does, even if I did go on too much, I apologize for the long post. But I will always defend s3 Sarah, she gets way too much hate. s3 Chuck is way way worse than s3 Sarah in my book.
I do agree with you about the idea of having their relationship set against the backdrop of his agent training in season 3. That sounds so much better than what they did.
Well for starters she knew as early as 3.02 EXACTLY why Chuck had stood her up in Prague; so the continued estrangement was itself false. I would say her fault, but it’s too stupid for that, it’s the writers’ fault.
So she’s anguished over Chuck changing, and has plenty of opportunities to help him cope, but instead chooses to buddy up to the guy trying to force him to change.
She apparently wants a real relationship now, but because she’s Too stubborn to talk to Chuck, again she turns to the guy who’s trying to change him. A guy who consistently behaves in ways she objects to from Chuck (like punching a cuffed prisoner over a dumb insult).
Later, when Shaw tries to blow up Chuck she begs for his patience (what happened to our woman of action? Take the phone and break it! Or knee him where it hurts. Or shoot him).
When Chuck does almost kill a villain in Tic Tac only Sarah can talk him down, yet she concludes Chuck no longer needs her.
And the final insult; after Shaw manipulates her into manipulating Chuck into his Red Test, she turns to Shaw for consolation. That is beyond messed up. And it’s the nail in the coffin of S3.
They took the most popular character on the show and showed her as a stubborn and stupid woman for 12 episodes. Zombie Sarah. Absolutely heartbreaking.
Let’s go over this point by point:
Just because she knew why he stood her up doesn’t make it ok, she can’t get over it in a second, it takes time. You have to remember this is a woman with some deep seated trust issues that stem from her childhood.
Yeah ok I’ll give you this one, she could have helped him cope with the changes.
Why do you say she wants a real relationship? I covered all this in previous post: she doesn’t want to actually be with Shaw, she was hurt by Chuck and she needed something safe. Shaw to her was like Bryce, yes they were together but it was casual and it wasn’t going to lead anywhere like it eventually did with Chuck (marriage, babies etc.)
When did Shaw want to blow up Chuck? You mean when he wanted to blow up Buy more I am kinda confused, which scene are you referencing?
Ok you’re right, he still needed her. But she thought he was turning into a super spy that could handle things on his own and I think she couldn’t handle it, that is why she eventually said to Beckman I need to leave.
Ok that last point I will agree is messed up. To be fair she was put in a difficult position: if he passes, he’s not the man she fell for. If he doesn’t, they can’t be together cause he is not a spy. But turning to Shaw, the guy who set up that situation is horrible from her.
In conclusion yeah some of your points make a lot of sense. But you are acting like she was a total idiot and you kinda expect her to be perfect all the time, but she was deeply hurt by Chuck. Like I said this is a woman with trust issues who is bad at communicating and all her life all she knew was the spy life and never getting close to people. Chuck changed all that and put her into totally new territory of being vulnerable. I think you should cut her some slack. Chuck was way worse, acting super cocky about being a spy and almost totally ignoring Sarah. And then she is magically going to come flying into his arms after he becomes this arrogant spy, which Sarah never really wanted him to be? He could have said something too, he was always the guy that initiated the conversation between them before.
No please stop with points!
We’ve been over this a million times since the nights S3 first ran. This is not something you can “prove” to me or anyone else. This is how we each saw things. Apparently your affection for Sarah was undamaged by that arc. Mine was crushed. There are so many better ways the story and characters could have been served. I really do not need or want to get into this again.
For the fully developed arguments on this look at the “Season Three Alternatives” category form the “category search tab” on the right side of the page.
Hi. I have to say that although I utterly hated the first half of Season 3, it did not damage my view of Sarah or Chuck at all. I just thought, what an unendurable and, seemingly, at the time, unending, set of 12 miserable and pointless episodes, but it never went further than that for me. Now, on the other hand, the Series finale … well the less said about that, the better!
For what it’s worth, Loki, I think you’re totally right about Sarah. I wouldn’t even grant the concessions you did. Furthermore, I actually think S3.0 was quite valuable in their relationship. By the end of S2, Sarah was finally ready to take a leap of faith. But she’d been a spy for years at that point, and she’d had two years to take stock of the costs and benefits of spy life vs a normal life.
Chuck at that point had nothing of the sort – his choice wasn’t between being an elite spy or having a normal life. Until intersect 2.0, his choice was between a normal life and being a permanent hostage. Of course he ached for a more normal life – it wasn’t a sacrifice for him. It was an enormous sacrifice for Sarah.
When Chuck gets intersect 2.0, he becomes Sarah’s peer in ability, and is finally faced with the same temptation she has – a life of thrills, excitement, and (lest we forget) the ability to literally save the world. These simultaneous selfish and selfless impulses are real, and it’s not until Chuck goes through them that he can actually see, understand, and make the true sacrifice Sarah was ready to make for him.
This all makes 3.02 hurt even more. At first, Sarah thought she was just rejected by Chuck. But the truth was, when Chuck was faced with a life that offered him a complete fulfillment of his potential – when he was finally confronted with the same sacrifice that she was finally brave enough to make – he makes the exact opposite choice that she did. Sarah is no fool. She knows exactly what Chuck’s decision means. And it crushes her. It would crush me.
Worse, she can completely empathize with that choice! I actually think you’re too hard on Chuck here – he is beset by enormous demands throughout the show, and suddenly granted with immense power. Where most people obtain that power gradually through training, it just flips on for him.
After having zero agency over his life for years, he finally has a real measure of power. He has been a slave to the CIA, even to Sarah, and his moral compass is briefly uncalibrated for his new situation. Chuck loses his footing in season 3. Who wouldn’t in his situation? The burden he is faced with (and has been faced with) is enormous.
I still find S3.0 brutal and unwatchable. I also wish they hadn’t brought Shaw into it – his insertion into their personal drama makes the whole thing uglier than it needed to be. But I also think S3.0 is completely valid and consistent with their characters, and I think something like it was necessary for them to really be on equal footing with each other. More importantly, they both learn from these mistakes. When they are again faced with this dilemna (honeymooners), they are both prone to old habits (aren’t we all). But they’ve learned to trust in each other first. They will continue to do so for the rest of the show.
(waits for Dave to yell at me)
No, no yelling Arthur.
It was funny back when we were doing the “Alternatives” posts how passionately we could argue on just how and why S3 was broken. I do think ultimately it’s an entertainment failure. That I find Chuck and Sarah to be total jerks through it all is a reflection of not liking the product.
I’d Also mention that all of us have a bit of inner jerk, I never mean to say “Chuck and Sarah should never be jerks like normal people sometimes are”. But when a show’s primary strength was likable characters that were fun to root for, that then proceeds to show the worst in those characters for most of 12 episodes; I can only call it a failure.
I can’t believe how quickly I get sucked back into all of this again. Dang…
I didn’t have a problem with Sarah dating someone else, but she comes off as having real feelings for Shaw when she loses her head over him killing himself to avenge another woman. I know it’s a trope, but in reality, a woman who gave up an important part of her life to be with someone, doesn’t just fall in love with another dude a couple of months later. And if by some miracle it does happen, then there’s zero chance she will ever go back to the previous guy. None. Unless she’s an emotional flake or she has mental issues that she should take care of through therapy.
As for hating her, it only happened once, when she told Chuck that they can’t be together unless he kills the mole (worst dialog exchange in the entire show). I make sure I don’t know in how many episodes actors are, because I’m spoiler phobic. At the end of Tic Tac, the way the story unfolded made me wonder if Yvonne was leaving the show. At the end of Final Exam, I was hoping she’ll be gone.
Luke a lot of the more casual viewers I know (those who were also spoiler free!) thought exactly the same thing, that Yvonne was done with the show. That’s really the only way that story could have been told. If Charah was real people they never would have made it as a couple. Which goes back to why I just reject that arc…
Luke I think you summed up what I think the problem is. To some Sarah comes off as having real feelings for Shaw, but I said multiple times I don’t think that is the case. But I don’t want to argue this anymore, it doesn’t seem to be going anywhere, we all have different opinions about this that probably won’t change.
I still 100% agree that those 12 episodes were bad and unnecessary and something much better could have been written instead of that.
Most of us agree with that Loki!
Always interesting to see the site come alive again for some lively season 3 discussion. I’m not even going to pretend to have read everything, but here’s my brief take.
From the beginning Shaw was a flawed character executed poorly exacerbated by the fact that the entire season was written with all storylines closing in on their climax for the last episode. This created several problems, not the least of which was that stories were stalled or padded out beyond their natural timelines or conclusions to achieve that goal. Shaw as a villain, his primary purpose in season 3 as the final “Big Bad”, meant that he couldn’t be used in the part of the role he was good at until episode 12. Until then we were left with a pretty weak character whose execution was problematic to begin with. The only real purpose he filled before that was as someone Sarah could say “I’m worried about Chuck” to, leading to a pretty contrived romance. Shaw wasn’t really necessary as, but also had the function of pushing Chuck out of Sarah’s comfort zone, which makes the character and the romance once again problematic. Beckman was the already established character whose purpose was an authority figure to push Chuck and frustrate Sarah’s desires. And I think she was better at it.
Now in a minor defense of season 3, I get what they were going for as a show. Chuck and Sarah came of as juvenile and immature in early season 3 because that was the story. They were both still kind of juvenile and immature and they had no idea what they were getting themselves in to. If they tried to be together with each having their own issues to overcome the spy world would eat them alive. A story that was done much better in both season 4 and 5, but one that I’ll argue season 3 laid the foundation for.
You know I actually agree with most of that Ernie. As before, I think so much of the difference in like/dislike is more in how we weight the things we see than in the things themselves.
It is funny how even after all this time Chuckwin’s Law holds true. Except I seem to have less patience than ever…
I actually took the time to read most of the discussion in this thread, I went through pretty much all of it. And I never realized how much ground you covered, especially on season 3, wt/wt dynamics and love triangles. I was never skipping episodes though, I always took good with the bad and I agree with your point Ernie, it did kinda lay the foundation for s4 and s5. Over time they got better at working as a couple and they grew as characters.
I still concede that Chuck and Sarah should have ran away, and then Casey brings them back. GB feels like something has to be done so she benches Sarah and sends Shaw to help turn Chuck into a better spy. Chuck would then have to navigate being tested as a spy by a guy he doesn’t really know and trusts and Sarah would be there to help him as a girlfriend and a fellow spy. I am even thinking if Eve Shaw being alive would have worked. Both Eve and Daniel would be working for the Ring and he would be double agent in CIA and season 3 finale would be set up as Chuck and Sarah having to become perfect spy couple to defeat the baddie Shaw couple. It would also make the Turner’s episode more relevant which I always thought was a very underrated episode.
And another funny subplot would be Morgan hires Hannah outright for Buy More, is in love with her, but she only has eyes for Chuck who is now with Sarah. Could have been a nice bit of a comic relief and it wouldn’t be annoying as actual love triangles we got.
Forgive me if this is a bad idea but I was pretty sleep deprived and in full Chuck mode from reading all the comments in this whole thread.
I actually think that’s an excellent idea Loki and it would have worked very well for me.
Also just one more thing that I find weird: Why are people so bothered by Sarah leaving for DC in s3 (which does bother me too even though I kinda get her reasoning), but nobody ever mentions how she was totally fine leaving in s2 with the whole 49-B situation.
I mean I know she had to leave because of orders, but she was going to walk away from him without telling him how she felt. The only reason everything ended well was because the search for his father she was running got a result which she wasn’t even expecting and then he needed to be kidnapped for her to come back and help them find him. But the point is she was going to leave without fighting for them, she was already in the car on the way to the airport before other stuff happened.
I gotta say that always bothered me as much as leaving for DC in s3 did.
I admit I never liked that moment; but she was never going to leave. She started the search and clearly meant to get the results to Chuck. She told herself she was obeying orders, just after one last thing…
Like I said, never leaving.
Just like delivering Chuck for the bunker at the end of First Kill. Her resolve to obey orders collapsed the moment Chuck opened his mouth.
I don’t agree with that. I went back and rewatched and couple of important things I want to mention:
1. Sarah was going to leave and when the results came, she turned her car around and went back. The only reason she went back was to leave a letter on his pillow. Then she discovered that his phone was on his bed and found it suspicious thus prompting her to go to Castle and check if everything is ok and then had to save him. I think you can draw a pretty definite conclusion that she was going to leave even after getting the results and only coincidence stopped her. If you’re a true romantic you can argue it was all fate but still seems like sloppy writing that kinda lessened her character and how strong their connection was.
2. The bunker thing was much more in tune of what I expected from her. She was conflicted but still disobeyed orders for him as soon as he opened his mouth like you said. I liked that, but it clashed with what they did before. You got to remember this was pretty close. In s2e18 she was going to leave without fighting for them and s2e20 she committed treason and risked her whole life just to help him find his father. What changed?
The reason why her actions is season 3 don’t bother me as much is because she thought he changed. Her leaving was never because of Shaw, he was just a guy, if she left Chuck, she was always going to settle for a guy she didn’t love. Shaw is irrelevant. No, she left because she thought he changed, she couldn’t see him like this and she was still hurt he rejected her for a chance at being a spy. I was recently reading Kelly Dean Jolley’s thoughts on this and I loved his thoughts that Chuck had a plan that he didn’t fully formulate or even understand and didn’t share with Sarah and that is why her actions were kinda understandable. She had no idea Chuck’s plan was for him to become a spy on his own terms, without the guns and deception. She genuinely thought he was changing and that just reminded her of a guy on the train station who said no to her.
But her actions in season 2 on the other hand bother me a bit more cause he was “her” Chuck. He was that guy, unchanged, the clumsy but loveable guy she fell for. She had already turned down Bryce couple of times and said no to Cole Barker countless times a few episodes earlier. Chuck was her choice and she knew it. That is why I don’t understand her not fighting for him in s2e18, the broken heart episode.
I think you’re putting too much emphasis on actions that didn’t lead to anything.
It’s like if I tell you I won’t eat any more chocolate cake, and I put away my fork it creates an appearance of eating no more cake. But if you put some in front of me you’ll see where my resolve truly stands.
Chuck is Sarah’s chocolate cake. No matter what she says or starts to do, she’s not really going to say no. Except for the one arc where she and Chuck were written as jerks to each other.
Maybe that misery arc equates to my I’ll-fated attempt at a diet; we know it’s doomed, because truly no one can come between me and that chocolate cake…
But the stakes were so much higher. If she said she didn’t want chocolate cake, in her case Chuck, she was going to lose him forever. She didn’t know things were going to magically work out, making those choices meant a big risk of losing him forever.
No of course, she’s wrestling with what many young people wrestle with, career vs love.
I’m just saying the preliminaries and preparations mean little, it’s the follow through that matters. And when it mattered, Sarah chose Chuck over career several times. Covertly sometimes, so no one knew her choices except the audience. But she never almost left, she came through for him every time.
Except for the misery arc. And this has more to do with your comment below.
But we truly don’t have to regard her S3 at all if we don’t want; because she’s a fictional character created by a number of different writers. Sarah Walker on the show is no more real than Sarah Walker of 4000 different fan fiction stories. We can accept or reject whatever mash of stories and fictional universes we wish. For myself I have no interest and see no value in the misery arc. I’d rather look at the latest by David Carner.
The only difference is show had visual aids.
Chuck and Sarah of S3 bother me a lot because they did the one thing I could never accept from the first two seasons, they gave up on each other. They got over it, and the remainder of the show was handled in a more satisfactory way.
But I really can never see this as anything other than a production decision. Bitterly dissapointing because I had credited the show with being something fresh and original and ready to take chances. Right until they gave us a season of following television cliche and orthodoxy. My bitterest disappointment was with the show runners. The characters are not real people, they dance as directed. The writers delivered a dreadful product. What the characters were thinking doesn’t really even enter into it for me.
I think Dave is right, but even if she were leaving, I see a huge difference in the two. DC was Sarah’s choice, perhaps even her request. 49-B was under orders at a time when she really had no other option, except to be fired. But like Dave said, she came back, in defiance of orders. In the 49-B situation, she showed loyalty to Chuck; in the DC situation, she showed no loyalty to him.
So you’re saying in season 2 basically she chose a job over a guy she was clearly in love with. Granted, the job that was huge part of her life but still. I will give you that she showed no loyalty to Chuck in season 3, she could have said something and stayed and try to figure it out. Even if I did kinda understand where she’s coming from, it was still the wrong thing to do and she should have done better.
All I am saying is if you are going to judge her for s3, you have to do it for s2 as well. I realize I am about to kill the argument I was building earlier against her being emotional flake, but she was the more I think about it. Both those situations in season 2 when she was faced with dilemma, her first instinct was to choose job over love. And then something would happen conveniently and she would quickly change her mind.
I blame all of that on poor writing, I think in both seasons there were moments where they should have made her less of a flake and more of a stronger character.
No. You completely ignore the established context of the story (her duties as a CIA agent and the danger in both doing her duty and failing to do it). She was ordered to leave. She would have been fired if she didn’t. (Most people, even in normal jobs, don’t consider showing up for work optional.) You’re placing far too little weight in the job and following orders. Her leaving in S2 was not her choice. She was under orders from the United States government. It wasn’t a sales job at Penney’s. When you sign up for the military or the CIA, orders are orders. Let’s say she refused. She would have been fired. Her knowledge of all things CIA, especially the Intersect would have made her dangerous in the eyes of the CIA. She would have been ordered to stay away from Chuck. (Had she refused that, she would have gone to jail.) Furthermore, Chuck was never going to be released from the CIA. Remember First Date. They would have killed him, rather than let him go to live a normal life. Sarah had to weigh what would happen to Chuck. Her staying would have made things very complicated, if not outright dangerous, for him. Encouraging any form of rebellion in him would have brought him grave consequences. So what kind of options did Sarah have (rhetorical question)? Anything she did would have put both of them in CIA cross-hairs. Contrast that with First Kill, when she did defy orders. The consequences were that they were on the run for treason. That time she did disobey orders, because Chuck was going to be bunkered, so in both cases she did what was best for Chuck, at personal cost to herself.
Part of Sarah’s conflict, which Yvonne showed brilliantly, was that she was constantly doing a balancing act between orders and her feelings for Chuck. The CIA saw him as property — the asset. She saw him as a person, one she cared about, so she shielded him from the harsh reality. In the 49-B she was busted … viewed as compromised in the sight of the CIA. That’s a huge consequence. She didn’t choose to go. She did not leave of her own free will. To think she did is to deny the established context of Sarah’s reality, where as a CIA agent, you can’t disobey orders, and you can’t just quit, without severe consequences (court martial, jail, bunker, black site). I cannot fathom how you say she left of her own free will. She simply did not.
The 49-B is in diametric contrast with the DC decision, which was 100% a choice of her own free will. It was an option, not an order. So, no. I don’t have to judge her for the B-49 like I do for the DC debacle.
And ultimately it’s those choices she made that make the arc so unpalatable. It’s the one time she gave up on Chuck and the one time she made such selfish choices.
Right, Dave. The misery arc is just totally messed up. To me the writers betrayed their own story and beloved characters for the sake of middle school TV trope. I should have been Chuck and Sarah against the world and the CIA and the Intersect… not Chuck and Sarah against each other. Such a waste of drama, when there was a rich and dangerous story to be told.
Yes, bullseye.
One more thing, I just saw your comment Thinkling. I concede some of the points you made make a lot of sense and to be fair though, I didn’t even mean to spend that much time on season 2 Sarah, for the most part I respect the decisions she made even if execution could have been little better. The part that bothered me most I guess was her leaving in broken heart episode without saying anything. The only reason she came back was coincidence but I might just choose to believe it was fate rewarding them. The post I made about season 3 Chuck was more important and it better proves the point I wanted to make about me not understanding why s3 Sarah gets so much hate.
S3 is just fruit of the poisonous tree and should, therefore, be thrown out. I blame the writers for very poor story decisions. (IMHO, of course, because some people were okay with the story as told, but I considered it a great waste of potential.) Somebody should write a S3 AU where Chuck and Sarah rebel against the writers, jump off the page, and take their lives back …
There is one out there called “Chuck vs The Producers” but that is more about a certain amnesia arc. CF is plenty terrified of a POed Sarah Bartowski…
But there certainly have been a lot of better treatments of this period. Like Crumby’s “Rogue Spy” for a complete rewrite; or Kate McK’s “Chuck vs the Fight” for an episode to episode rework.
Oh I agree wholeheartedly about the writers delivering a bad product, the cliches and Chuck and Sarah giving up on each other and not acting in tune with their characters. It just bothers me that most of the discussion I saw is attacking s3 Sarah and only her.
There are some decisions in season 2 from Sarah that are questionable, but to be honest the thing that bothers me most is Chuck in season 3. I can’t believe I am just getting to that now but here we are.
In my opinion he was written much worse than Sarah, his choices were much more uncharacteristic. Even if Kelly Dean Jolley’s thoughts on this helped me understand his big choice a little bit, there is still his execution which was horrifying, he told her nothing on that train station except: “I can’t, I am sorry”. He made no effort to communicate to her in any way why he was doing it. And one of the worst parts is he knew making that choice risked losing her forever. He was going to stay in Prague for 6 months training and let’s face it there was a huge chance of Sarah being reassigned god knows where and she had no reason to wait for him because he didn’t give her one.
And also the cause effect of all her poor choices in season 3 was his actions (the horrible decision and execution in Prague and his changing in many bad ways while training to be a spy) that help me understand why she acted the way she did. But he made that stupid choice after all those times in season 2 where she put herself on the line to help him and proving him over and over again how much she loved him.
And another point that people are skipping over which is very important: She literally said she knew what was going to happen to him if he chose the spy life. She knew from her experience it would change him and how it was going to negatively affect him and his life, she wanted to shield and protect him for that. And he still made the bonehead decision.
And of course who can forget his lying to her two times about being fine when doctor warned him about his mental deterioration and how he should talk about it with his partner. Oh and lying about Shaw being alive just kills me. He was such horrible communicator in s3.
In conclusion I think s3 ruined Chuck’s character more than Sarah’s.
Okay I do have some specific thoughts on why Sarah gets trashed on more, it’s simple, it took her longer to figure it out.
We had a lot of these discussions and debates all the way back to real time when it first ran. Chuck absolutely and completely got a lot of hate in the early part of the season. I’ve always said Chuck made the worse decisions and was the bigger jerk. But bigger jerk is a weak defense for Sarah’s qualities. But Chuck figured things out, more or less, by the end of Fake Name. While Sarah was stubborn until the end of American Hero.
So if Chuck wins the jerk quality award Sarah gets the jerk quantity award. Even worse, she basically does nothing until Chuck wins her back. It would have been nice to see them fight for each other instead of Sarah being reduced to trophy for the arc. But that all goes back to the horrible writing argument.
Yeah, Dave, I agree with that. I’ve always said that, throughout, Sarah was more faithful to Chuck than the other way around. As to fighting for each other, that was one of the biggest rubs of S3. They had always fought for each other, and then … poof … they weren’t fighting for each other any more. Then what happened? Well, then we didn’t have anybody to root for any more, and it just wasn’t fun any more.
Loki, I’m having a hard time swallowing the idea that the writers delivered a bad product (but I certainly respect your opinion on the subject). Maybe I missed it (I’ve only had 2 glasses of wine tonight), but how are you measuring that? I know Dave’s criteria – he asks himself if he was entertained. It’s a bit subjective, but it’s a valid criteria to measure their quality. If I may ask, what’s yours? You’ve mentioned character consistency. But does that allow for growth and change? – or am I misreading?
I sort of agree with the idea that certain segments, episodes and even arcs can be done away with and the ending (or maybe even the audience experience) doesn’t change one wit. But that doesn’t mean they were badly conceived, does it? And I’ve always thought that Shaw could have been replaced with Bryce with little change to the story (but we might have enjoyed it more).
Huh. There’s a scene at the end of vs. The Couch Lock (whoooo-boy. I always want to think it’s called “vs.The A-Team”, but it’s not) where Casey enters the cave in Afghanistan to rescue Chuck and Sarah from his former team mates. Going in, he knocks his hat off at the entrance to the cave. I don’t think that was intentional, serves no purpose and I think the scene should have been re-done. Not doing so was a little unprofessional, so I assume someone was under a severe time (or budget?) constraints. THAT was, to me, a thing that tends to create a bad product (but I’ll give ’em one for free).
I can’t say your wrong about the fans dumping on Sarah in S3 either. But you know, at one point a lot of fans were wondering why the show wasn’t called “Chuck and Sarah” instead of Chuck. Overall, she was definitely the more popular character. Maybe the opposite of love isn’t hate after all. It’s indifference. The fans were never indifferent about Sarah Walker.
One short, personal story, then I’m sleep-bound. I rewatched every episode this past winter-to-spring, and then listened to all the music from every episode that I had collected as I drove home from work. I was done by April. But you know, by June I wanted to do it all over again starting with the Pilot. I guess that means that I was really, really entertained with the story and presentation just the way it was (and yes, I’m addicted too). I went in almost dreading the so-called misery arc, but after seeing it, I realized it wasn’t so bad and even had some good points. Some necessary points.
Thanks for starting this great discussion and for your amazing contributions!
I agree with Dave and thinkling about Sarah leaving in Broken Heart. Her alternatives were to run with Chuck like in First Kill, but he wasn’t in any danger, or to quit CIA and be his girlfriend. The problems were that she wasn’t ready to quit yet, even if she had started on that path in Lethal Weapon, and the CIA wouldn’t have let her nowhere near Chuck. She would have been a trained operative that doesn’t work for them, basically an enemy from their pov.
But I don’t agree with them on her decision to leave for DC. Unlike Chuck, she knows how to do a break up. If you really believe that things are over, then you should break contact completely. There’s no such thing as staying just friends. She stayed and helped him become a spy, but once that was done there would have been no reason for her to stay. And she didn’t say “I’m moving here,” she said “I’m thinking of moving here.” That’s because she wasn’t sure yet if it was over between them, but she became sure at the end of the next episode and only then she decided to move. I have no problems with it.
It looks like I’m the only one that wasn’t bothered by any of those moments.
I think my disagreement of Sarah leaving for DC goes back farther than that moment. It’s the final domino in a lengthy chain of dominoes caused by … well a poor decision in the writers room. (See fruit of the poisonous tree comment above.)
Yeah Thinkling, it was the last act of them giving up on each other.
Remember my S3 mantra “fatally flawed at conception”.
When you’re right you’re right. 😉
Joe, my criteria for whether or not a season or part of a season is a bad product is also enjoyment. While I can’t in good conscience say I have enjoyed first 12 episodes of season 3, i have never skipped them because I think they have some good parts and I am just not a fan of skipping anything, I always take good with the bad.
Dave, my apologies. I didn’t know Chuck got a lot of criticism as a character on this blog, must have missed that. To tell you the truth I only read this thread and couple of others and saw that only s3 Sarah got so much hate and that bothered me.
Let me just take one more shot at trying to explain Sarah and Chuck and why what Chuck did bothered me so much than Sarah and why Sarah’s choices can be partly excused.
Chuck was always the best communicator between the two, he was the guy who wore his heart on his sleeve and almost never left anything unsaid. For two seasons I loved his character and identified with him in a lot of ways. And then in season 3 they totally murdered him and he took so many steps back as character.
The big part of that is the decision. Look I think at this point we can all agree Chuck should have ran away with Sarah. But for the sake of argument let’s say him saying no to Sarah made sense. His execution was atrocious, he didn’t give her any explanation and he risked losing her forever, he didn’t give her any reason to wait for him. Then after he failed his training, he just gave up, didn’t even try to find her and found her by accident in the Buy More when he was buying cheese puffs. Yikes.
To his credit he did give her explanation which Carina eventually forwarded to Sarah. Then for the rest of the season he never fought for her, he was so focused on being a spy that he completely ignored her. His plan was I am going to become a spy and then she is magically going to fall into my arms.
And to Sarah’s defense once more: you are ignoring the emotional toll this took on her. Why would she fight for him when he clearly didn’t want to fight for her first? He made a bunch of bad decisions, he violated her trust after saying he will run away with her and then changing his mind. I will repeat one more time: this is a woman with severe trust issues because of her father and her childhood. He broke all that first and then still acted like being a spy is more important than her for the rest of the season. That is why she wanted to leave, she was sick of a guy who would treat her like this, she thought he changed and she couldn’t handle it anymore. Shaw was irrelevant, she was leaving because of Chuck.
I mean maybe she could have handled it better but I certainly understand most of her thought process. His thought process? I have no clue what he was thinking.
Loki, we can’t all agree that Chuck should have run with her, because I and many others don’t. First, a meta reason: there would have been no show with Chuck and Sarah on the run or it would have been a very different show, with Casey hunting them and no reason for the Buy More’s or the Awesomes’ existence in the show.
Second, his decision was in line with his character and similar previous decisions: the end of Break-Up and the end of Ring. It happened again in Goodbye. In Ring, because Sarah didn’t manage to tell him that she was going to quit the CIA, he believes that they will never be together, she is going to either be his handler or be reassigned. Also, when he re-intersected, he didn’t know that he was going to get super-powers and have a chance to be a spy and therefore be with her. He was sacrificing his chance at a normal life because he believed that it was the right thing to do. There’s a montage of flashbacks right before he re-intersects, of him doubting himself and others telling him that he is a hero. That’s the classic moment when the hero embraces his calling, the one that he had previously rejected.
In the first flashback from Pink Slip, when Casey tells him that he will go to training, he asks “Training for what?” He had just kicked the asses of a bunch of spies, but he was still not seeing himself as a spy, he still had no confidence in himself to become one. That’s why, when Sarah tells him to run away together, he accepts, albeit with hesitation, because he would have liked to be a spy for more reasons than just to be with her. Fast forward three weeks, his training gave him confidence, some probable propaganda strengthened his resolve, so of course he said no.
You say he didn’t give her any explanation, he actually tried, but he was probably taken aback by her reaction and, most importantly, there was no time. The train was leaving and Sarah had to be on that train, with or without Chuck, because it was part of the escape route and she had no business being there. I don’t know if that was realistic, but the logistics were never realistic in the show and I never had a problem with that, so I wasn’t going to start now. And he did try to find her after that. I can think of only two situations when you would repeat “pick up, pick up” while calling someone: it’s either something urgent or they have ignored your calls. So, he probably tried to call her during those months and explain himself, but she ghosted him.
As for not fighting for her, he did for the first two episodes, to the point of harassing her, until he understood why she didn’t want to be with him anymore. There are a few instances of betrayal in the first two seasons: Bryce and Sarah had feelings for each other, but they didn’t trust each other completely; Jill loved Chuck and she still betrayed him for the job; Casey said in Sensei that people will let you down eventually, in this business; Sarah almost betrayed Chuck at the end of First Kill. Then, you have Carina using Karl’s feelings against him. When Chuck talks down Karl, he starts speaking fast, but as soon as he says “in your line of work, it’s a liability,” he stops, looks towards Sarah and then continues, but slower. That’s when he understands that she doesn’t want to have real feelings for a spy and he probably thinks he shouldn’t either, because she was already giving him reasons to believe that she will move on. So, he decides to stop pressuring her and move on, and when Sarah offers him the chance to explain himself, he doesn’t take it.
Looking at Sarah, she stopped being angry and hurt when she heard his confession, but she also became conflicted: she understood him and she realized that she had a part in it, but she was still afraid of letting him get close, she was stuck. You can say that she should have known that Chuck would never betray her, but… she’s the most distrusting character in the entire show and he had already made his first priority clear: spying. Their different levels of emotional involvement are visible during the two parallel conversations at the Generalissimo’s gala: Chuck looks resigned, while Sarah looks conflicted, she can’t even tell a lie to Ellie anymore. (“All right, ladies. Yeah, I’m talking to you too, Bartowski” :)) Chuck made a last attempt when he asked about their cover, but she didn’t budge and from then on, he was gone. His actions in that episode and the next one, and his pledge that friends and family will be the most important things for him, actually gave Sarah hope that he won’t change and eventually things will work out. She looked nervously excited and she turned and looked at him during dinner, but Chuck looked relaxed and he wasn’t even looking directly at her, he was looking around the table. Sarah was hopeful, but Chuck had moved on.
That’s when Shaw came in. People believe that he seduced Sarah, but the person that he did seduce was Chuck, in First Class. That’s when Chuck started to become a a douche, to Morgan, to Sarah, to Hannah, a little to Ellie too. I don’t have a problem with that phase, because it was by design. Still, I wanted to punch him in the face when he threw a jealousy fit at Sarah, in the museum, two minutes after making out with Hannah. While Sarah did nothing.
Okay, this comment was meant to be a defense of Chuck, it got a bit long there.
You could have still had a show even if they ran, it could be resolved quickly like it was in Chuck vs the honeymooners. You would have one episode of conflicted Chuck and Sarah wondering if they really want to keep running and quit the spy life and then Casey brings them back. The show after that would continue normally with them in Burbank trying to figure out how to be spies and a couple all the while he has to train to be a spy with 2.0. It would eliminate the love triangle thing we got and you would still have Buy more and Ellie and Awesome from the 2nd episode onward.
About his decision being in line with his character, I am not sure I 100% agree because one of the recurring themes in season 2 was Chuck’s unhappiness with the spy life, he only really got through it because of her. She was always the one who got the best of him and who made all the spy dangers worth it. It seems unlikely he would easily accept being a spy without her, he must have known he needed her. But I will give you that sacrificing his normal life in order to help others and save the world is something Chuck would do. And about him believing he and Sarah wouldn’t be together if he leads a normal life away from the spy business, again not true. She was explicitly picking him over spy life in Prague, that was the moment she went all in and didn’t care if they were spies or not, she just wanted to be with him.
But everything considered I can make my peace with him uploading 2.0. and choosing not to run away with her. The problem was the execution and him not explaining. You say he couldn’t explain cause train was leaving. So why didn’t he bother trying to find her after to explain? The explanation was crucial, the risk of not explaining was that he risked losing her forever and she could be reassigned far away from him. If your plan is to become a spy so that you could help people but also more importantly so that you could be with the person you love because she is also a spy and also to make yourself equal to Sarah, which I believe he believed he needed to do to really have a chance to be with her, then you have to communicate that to her. You can’t just keep her in the dark and expect everything to magically fall into place.
You also say he fought for her to the point of harassing her and then he stopped because he understood why she didn’t want to be with him anymore. So you are essentially saying he gave up even though she was the woman he loved. She just needed time and I believe she would have forgiven him but the thing that messed that up was him changing (burning Manoosh, lying easily to his sister etc.) Changing the person he was when Sarah fell in love with him is probably not the best idea to win her back. I am not saying he needs to be perfect but he was so clueless about what he needed to do in season 3. He stopped fighting so quickly for her and become so obsessed by being the perfect spy that he completely changed his person and become arrogant. You said it at the end of your post, he was kind of a douche to everyone around him.
I didn’t need them to run in Prague. In fact, my ideal would have been for them to have an honest conversation, with Chuck giving his Three Words speech early on and Sarah expressing her fears for him. Then they would have decided to stay and get through it together. It would have been Sarah Chuck against many threats. They could have gotten together as a couple about the same time. That wasn’t the main thing to me. The main thing was to have them together as best friends and partners to take on Chuck’s challenge to master the Intersect, without losing himself or getting bunkered or “disappeared.” I really don’t see running as the answer in episode 1, but what happened was horrendous. After watching, I thought, “people don’t come back from that.” They made the ultimate coupling, if not impossible, implausible and less satisfying.
*Not that I wasn’t happy they got together. It’s just that after you drag the couple through the muck of cruelty and bed-hopping, it’s just not as celebratory.
Yes Thinkling I agree exactly. Prague is the sort of moment real couples can’t come back from, it broke the implausibility meter. I continue to like the show and pairing only by ignoring the incident.
I think running away together (Honeymooners one arc early) would have worked well. But what you describe would have worked well too. Many things could have worked. Except what they did.
Running away and coming back would have been too similar to Colonel and with only two episodes in between too repetitive. If you want to change something so that they are together from the start, then Sarah not being afraid of a real relationship would have been more plausible. I wouldn’t have had a problem with that direction for her character, just like I don’t have a problem with the one the writers took. It’s one of those cases where both ways work for me.
“And about him believing he and Sarah wouldn’t be together if he leads a normal life away from the spy business, again not true. She was explicitly picking him over spy life in Prague” – I was talking about when he re-intersected, he found out about Sarah’s intentions only later, in Castle, when she asked him to run away. As far as he was concerned, she was about to leave, so when he re-intersected he probably assumed she was going to be his handler again. I doubt he did it for that purpose, in fact I think that was also a sacrifice, because, as he said at the end of Lethal Weapon, it was tough being around her everyday.
“So why didn’t he bother trying to find her after to explain?” – He did, I already said that he probably called her multiple times and she ignored him. And he assumed she was gone from Castle, there was no need for them to still use that base without the Intersect. Plus, from the moment he decided to not run away with her, Sarah was always going to be a second choice, until he was to become a spy.
“So you are essentially saying he gave up even though she was the woman he loved.” No, I’m saying he understood the situation and his priorities, instead of becoming a creep that was also screwing up missions because he couldn’t get over her. Sarah had given him every reason to believe that she was moving on: she ignored him for months, she cut him off at the end of Pink Slip and told him to keep his feelings to himself, she acted cold at the club and during the mission at Karl’s mansion; she asked for a transfer after he explained himself (he didn’t know that she didn’t hear his confession) and then, when he tried to talk to her, she was still having none of it and told him to bury his feelings. Eventually, he understands her reasons and , just for good measure, he gets a demo from Carina, of what happens in this business to suckers that fall in love. And a verbal confirmation from Sarah: “Spies don’t fall in love” At this point, he realized that he couldn’t have both, so he stuck with his initial decision. I don’t know what you want him to have done. Tell her that he understands her and that he won’t change or ever betray her? Her answer would have been “Sure, Chuck, I believe that you believe that, but if I ask you to choose again, what will you choose?” Again, his number one priority was spying.
Here’s a scene that shows what his priorities were: initially, when Sarah begged him not to go to Paris, I thought he was clueless as usual, but he knew what he was doing. He looked long at her, he realized that she was scared and that he was rejecting her advice, but he still went, because he believed that he had to in order to become a spy. He was breaking some eggs, like they say.
Yes Thinkling what you said would have worked well, in the scenario of not running, explaining each other’s thoughts and trying to get through it together sounds like a great solution.
Luke all I am saying is I think the situation was fixable if he was just more communicative. Basically the whole 12 episode thing they wrote was always flawed, but I still maintain it was fixable. I think she was hurt by his decision but she was even more hurt that he completely gave up on that train station and didn’t explain.
Even if you don’t go for the perfect scenario like Thinkling suggested where she totally understands and they communicate all thoughts and fears and decide to work through it and be together, you could still have the beginning of the season like this:
He says no at the train station and explains why, they have a great conversation about him needing to be a spy and help people and how he is going to do it his own way, and not change. But she still needs time to forgive him, she’s unsure if it’s going to work. He keeps working at being a spy but he makes her know he is doing it for them and keeps proving that he won’t change. You could have the Manoosh episode where Chuck can’t burn him and Casey ends up doing it. The big moment would then come in the fake name episode where he needs to assume alias but he can’t do it because it’s not him, makes mistake and almost gets himself killed and she has to save him. She realizes at that moment that he will never be a cruel type of spy, he will always be her Chuck and she forgives him, thus ending up together. And then maybe you bring Shaw from 3.08 to 3.13 because GB is disappointed at Chuck for failing and you would have the same storyline of Shaw pushing Chuck to be a perfect spy, but this time Sarah is helping him through it. Shaw still ends up having the same role as far as Chuck’s training is concerned, minus the love triangle thing.
I mean I understand that would make him look kinda inadequate as a spy, that he wouldn’t grow much as a spy even after all that training. And it makes sense cause intersect 2.0. only helps with kung fu and othe specific skills, when it’s time to burn an asset or assume an alias, he still wouldn’t do it cause he is too much a of a good guy. I would have liked him not changing and still remaining the guy who was bad at lying and deception instead of the douche they gave us.
Yeah, it’s like Dave said above: there are a lot of things (almost anything, in fact) that would have worked better than what they did. For these things fan fiction heals all. Check out some of Dave’s fan fiction posts for a dose of SAD (Season3 Affective Disorder) antidote.
I will say one thing that’s kinda positive about early season 3, it’s a source of a lot of discussion and it’s been really great to hear some new points of view. Kinda nice to see people didn’t forget this show and still care about it a lot.
Yeah Loki I agree with your comment what a jerk Chuck became with the lying. To me, that was the second major malfunction that only gets overlooked sometimes because of how grievous the Charah malfunction was.
I hated seeing it continue in the back half of S3, but was pleased at how Sarah confronted him, and it ended at the very start of S4.
It’s actually funny, going through some old discussions on this blog I think I saw that some people found Chuck lying to Sarah about his mental deterioration was considerate.
And about it stopping at the start of season 4, I assume you mean her saying how they agreed no more lies and secrets when in Volkoff base when she found out he was searching for his mom. But it actually continued, she kept a big secret about how she was going to go undercover to save his mom from Volkoff. And he didn’t tell her anything about his plan to help her with that and take down Volkoff, remember how surprised she was on the Contessa?
But you’re probably right, it gets overlooked because it wasn’t nearly as bad as first half of season 3.
The best I can say about Chuck lying about his mental condition would be that at the end of “Tooth” I can imagine he decided it wasn’t the right time to come clean. But clearly it dragged on too long after that to Chuck’s discredit.
The rest of it is mostly little stuff, mission stuff. The only more questionable action is Sarah never coming clean about Ryker and Molly; but even then, innocent lives are at stake and I can easily see Sarah deciding to keep that story under wraps. Even if she completely trusts Chuck (and I believe she does) the simple act of telling the story, anywhere, brings a certain risk of expose. After all, look at what actually happened; Ryker DID hear her coming clean and DID track down her mom. Of course the team fixed the problem; but telling the story DID add risk.
“I think she was hurt by his decision but she was even more hurt that he completely gave up on that train station and didn’t explain.”
Loki, you’re going back and misinterpreting the Prague scene again. He didn’t give up, he didn’t get a chance to explain himself because he didn’t have the time. Did you not see the conductor giving the ready signal to the mechanic? That meant the train was leaving in a matter of seconds. Sarah waiting for the next train was not an option. Chuck getting on the train, getting off two stops later and taking another one back was not an option.
The Prague scene in itself had no bearing on Sarah’s actions following Three Words. She didn’t need time to forgive him, she did it on the spot, when she saw the tape that Carina gave her. What she did afterwards had nothing to do with being hurt, but with Chuck’s behavior from then on. That conversation that everyone wanted them to have? They basically had it in Three Words. He got her side of the story when he talked down Karl, she got his side when she saw the tape. From there, he took his own path and she took hers. Hers was more like following him from a distance to observe and she eventually, veered left when she didn’t like what she was seeing from First Class through Fake Name.
I don’t have problems with him in those episodes either, because that was the intended story, it didn’t drag on for too long and my standards for awful behavior are much lower than what he did. But I understand that his behavior wasn’t many people’s cup of tea, so I won’t object if they want to complain about him in those four episodes.
And I don’t agree that it was a bad product for 12 episodes. I actually like the first 10 and two thirds, though I would like 8, 9 and 10 more if Shaw wasn’t such a wet rag.
Luke you are always allowed to like S3 if you want, l believe nearly a third of viewers agree with you.
But experience here always looks like about 2/3s would disagree. Good/bad is such a subjective matter on these things!
Luke, so the whole reason he couldn’t explain is because the train was leaving and she wasn’t supposed to be there? They could have easily written that scene as Sarah being able to stay and talk with him about it. I mean this show got away with much bigger plot holes and logical inconsistencies. I think everyone would be fine with a minor spy plot hole to give us more satisfying relationship path from Chuck and Sarah.
And also if you like season 3, good for you. It’s nice that somebody got to enjoy those early episodes. And honestly some of them are really good and I enjoyed some of them a lot. If you take away the misery of Chuck and Sarah not being able to be together and love triangles and so on, they’re actually quite fun, especially the ones that don’t focus on the bad relationship stuff and provide a break from that, sort of a spy comic relief if you will. I mean the whole Angel de la Muerte episode was just fantastic, Awesome freaking out about being a spy, Chuck baring his soul to Morgan while Buy morons organize revolution, Chuck having to hilariously handle his mission on a plane. I still bust a gut when Zach perfectly delivers that line after getting punched by Hugo: “Isn’t poisoning me enough?” or “Is this your first mission? Maybe.”
Please excuse my jumping in here…..
Chuck is a recent discovery for me. It popped on my Roku as a recommendation on my Amazon Prime Video profile. I vaguely remember hearing of it when it was originally broadcast, and thinking that the premise sounded dumb. When I saw it show up on Amazon, I still thought it sounded dumb. Apparently, it was recently available on Netflix. I did not even notice it? And then to give it a go?
Having been through the complete series once and having gone through it all again, only pausing now on the cusp of S05 again. I would really like to share this with my wife of 30 years. How should I do it? How have y’all done it? She already thinks I’ve lost my marbles; so there’s that complication to overcome as well.
Now some background….
I decided to start watching because I figured it might be something to enjoy without demanding strict attention. And it fulfilled this role quite nicely until S03. The characters felt right and true.. They are liked each other. The whole family aspect of it was what kept it on my play list. As far as my limited attention revealed, Eilie was clearly the emotional center; and somehow, Devon, the throwaway character was, em…. awesome! This is probably when it started to dawn that there was more going on here than I had managed to absorb.
It is interesting to me that, at least in this thread, there is not much discussion of Ellie and Awesome. Likely as a late comer, I have missed countless discussions along these lines. But in my mind, it is they who anchor much of S01, S02, and even S03. They are the couple who are the ultimate model to Chuck and Sarah. They are the one with the warm hearth and welcoming home. They are the ones providing a welcome counterpoint (thanks Professor Jolley) to the anxiety and tension boiling off from Sarah and Chuck. I hereby nominate them as the best supporting characters ever!
So the first time through, I continued on watching and made it to the end, The Goodbye. Out of nowhere, or as it seemed to me, I was devastated. I could not understand how casually streaming a show, like dozens previously, could trigger such emotional turmoil. My wife truly does think I’m completely bonkers at this point!
Now I’ve watched it again up to S05 (tread lightly here my friends). And I still don’t understand my vulnerability to these characters. There is something epic happening just out of reach. It’s like Greek tragedy, mixed it with some Kabuki. This show (how shallow a term!) has forms and a grammar. It has epicycles instead of episodes. There is music to drive it home. And it operates with a subliminal rhythm. Even with the generous guidance of Professor Jolley. It exceeds my grasp, while rewarding my reach.
Clearly, others have differing experiences, but I’m here to say that any other ending would not have awoken these emotions inside me. Think how this high wire act played out. A small misstep to either side and the whole thing falls to cliche. Somehow, the needle has been threaded, and a profound tapestry has woven. The Finale is perfect and I am content.
Now, about that S03… I reckon it remains controversial and somewhat scorned. Not to me! This is when it started to seep into my mind that something serious was happening here. S03 is what first started hooking me. Something like S03 had to happen for Chuck and Sarah — arising inexorably from their flaws.
Chuck’s self disgust is much commented. No one seems to have noticed (again sorry for the late coming) that Sarah suffers her own brand of self disgust. Shaw is the manifestation of that in human form.
She opens herself to Chuck — not yet completely it must be noted — and Chuck seemingly rejects her in Prague. In her mind, Chuck has rejected her intimacy, just like her father rejects her intimacy.
Prague is the trigger, but events conspire that set them both on this spiral of self disgust. Chuck washes out of spy school and lands in a pile cheese puffs. Sarah already down, due to Chuck’s rejection is then forced to make Chuck into something that she now hates in herself, and never, never wanted for him. Shaw is a surrender, not a reversal to form. Sarah, now awakened to the prospect of real love and real life, has given it all up. She has surrendered.
Chuck does not sublimate his self loathing. He wallows in it. Chuck does have a built in support system that Sarah lacks. He has Morgan. He has Ellie. He has Awesome. Sarah is alone. She doesn’t wallow in the self disgust. She sublimates it once more. Buries it deep as deep as she can. Yet, it is there.
Chuck understands this at some level. He finally rouses himself with Morgan’s help, and starts breaking through to the shrouded Sarah once more. Casey’s puts the ball over the goal line by telling Sarah that he was the one who killed the mole. This give’s Sarah the strength to set aside her self loathing once and for all. She is not the agent of Chuck’s corruption after all. The mental shackles are broken. Her mind is free to follow where her heart has always led. To Chuck!
Was there ever a more joyous scene in a broadcast TV show? The struggle makes a victory worth something. Without struggle, a victory is no prize. S03 Is why S04 is good. Sarah and Chuck did not fall into to love. They had to suffer for it. And they have to keep fighting for it. Even the beloved S04 was not just a vacation at the beach.
This is not a romantic comedy or a screwball comedy. True, there are some elements of those. It is more like a greek epic poem. It is rhythmic. Fate. Destiny. Love. Hubris. Nemesis. Catharsis. ALL THERE! The comedy pieces are bolted onto this, not the other way around.
A few general thoughts; I would start by saying action/comedy is generally my favorite genre, so it was a given I would enjoy this.
In more specific terms; it worked immediately because Chuck was someone I could relate to and even hope to be (at least in terms of dealing with such a massive upheaval in life). It also worked immediately because I adored Sarah as a perfect hero suddenly dealing her own upheaval (very unprofessionally falling for her asset).
And it worked because Ellie and Devon were such a strong emotional center and source of strength.
Add in goofy friends and insane over-the-top villains and it was just fun and enjoyable all the way through.
Obviously S3 struck many of us very differently. We’ve observed before that a big source of that difference is watching in real time vs power watching through the whole series (in real time it was a whole year for the 13 episodes from Ring to Other Guy). I think most of us liked the idea they had to fight for it, to be together; its just that to many of us that fight seemed completely fulfilled by the end of S2. But chances are good if you do a power watch with your wife she’ll see it more as you do. Just don’t be completely shocked if Shaw tics her off beyond all reason!
As far as introducing a new viewer goes, I’ve done it several times. The most enthusiastic response I ever got was from running First Date (2.01) as the introductory episode. But a number of episodes could work. If any speak directly to your wife’s specific interests you might want to try it.
But if you watch television regularly together just start at the beginning and watch several episodes a week. She will probably be hooked pretty quickly!
If you need to sell it at all to get her started I’d say “spy themed action/comedy, very appealing main characters, good cast, heavy on ’80s pop culture”. Modify as need for your particular partner! Only go for Jolley or fan fiction if she’s really smitten.
Thanks for such a lengthy first comment, it was fun to read!
I can see how having only S03 for a whole year would kill the feels. This makes me more thankful that they created it.
Welcome, Stevie! It’s great to see a new Chuck fan, six years later. This is a really astute take on the strengths of the show. For further reading along these lines, I’d recommend The Chuck Book: https://kellydeanjolley.com/the-chuck-book/
I asked my (now) wife to watch the show when we first started dating, so maybe my experience can help. I told her that I wanted to do an “art exchange,” where I read/listed/watched five of her favorite works of art, and she did the same for me. I let her pick the first thing we watched (Amelie), and I tried to give it my full attention and let her talk to me about what it meant to her. When it came time to watch Chuck, I had modeled the way I wanted her to watch the show, and she ended up both understanding the strengths of the show and getting to know me a bit better.
She’s not at all an action comedy fan, but my reaching out had made her feel more generous and open-minded when doing the same. We’re currently meandering through a dual re-watch of Chuck and Sex and the City, and quite enjoying both.
Yes. Yes. I had found Professor Jolley’s book before I found this blog. I’d read it through twice and parts many times more than that. Just like I’ve probably watched key scenes on YouTube dozens of times.
I think I understand is take and I truly appreciate his efforts but something was ringing completely true with my thoughts.
If I can everyone’s indulgence, I will try to limit any deeper replies to the main thread, so as not taking on the job of keeping a dozen thread going.
Hi, Steve. Even years later, we’re glad to see you aboard this train.
Yeah, I could regale you with metric tonnes of stories about getting involved with the characters, the stories and the music of Chuck. I use to spend hours doing my “lunch-time walkies” with my mp3 player filled with Band of Horses and Arcade Fire music, thinking over the previous Monday night’s episode. Good times! Put me in a good mood. Made the work day tolerable (and who could ask for more?)
Getting Mrs. Joe to understand my addiction was a bit more difficult. The strategy was to not be annoying about it (of course!), buy the DVDs/Blu-Rays and watch them occasionally. Mrs. Joe will never catch up (in this lifetime, anyway) to all my re-watches, but she’s seen every episode a few times, loves the character and would watch anything with Zac or Yvonne in it. We’ve both seen Dexter (and the season of 24 with her in it) a couple of times because of Yvonne too.
You’re right about Chuck’s self-disgust at the beginning of S3. But I’ll admit right away that I didn’t notice it! I sorta took it as his “reverting to form”, the way we first met him at the birthday party in the pilot – directionless, Loser (with a capital L). It was Sarah who recognized him before he did.
And that’s what I found most devastating about the finale, too. This time around, we see (in my case, I see despite myself) that Sarah was a pretty despicable character before Chuck too. She wasn’t directionless or untalented, but she was emotionless. Graham’s cold-school, wild card assassin. It’s Sarah who’s (forcibly) reverted to form and it became obvious she had become a much better person because of Chuck. Funny – I spent the better part of five seasons thinking she was ALWAYS that better person.
It took me a couple of viewings to realize that Sarah’s going to make that trip again because Chuck is there, at the beach, with her. That movie we all hope to see may not start with that premise, but I’d bet dollars to donuts it’ll end there.
I like your thoughts on S3 preparing us for S4. I really enjoy the build-up to vs. The Honeymooners, myself.
Hum… I may have to start another re-watch now. 😉
Apologies ahead of time for another long post…
For Sarah and Chuck, their strengths aren’t enough to alloy their iron and carbon into an even stronger steel. First, their character flaws, the impurities, have to be burned away and purified. Both can see past the other’s flaws, but each can’t feel worthy of love. To love, they must find themselves worthy of love. Each must overmaster their self loathing.
Honestly, I didn’t really understand my thoughts about this until I started writing that first comment. But it’s is still ringing truer to me than Prof. Jolley’s thoughts about Sarah’s opaqueness. Maybe, I extend his thesis by suggesting that self loathing is her motivation? E.g. she isn’t shielding and protecting herself, she believes that she isn’t worth knowing.
It’s clear to me that both her’s and chuck’s ‘Red Tests’, along with the relationship Shaw, are all manifestations of Sarah’s self loathing in S03. There’s also a hint of it in S02E10 DeLorean. When Sarah believes that it is her fault how things are with her Dad. Then we finally see some of her past.
We have a little girl, now women, who was raised to be a tool her whole life. Then straight from the arms of her manipulative father and into the arms of the CIA. She has never had a chance to grow up. She has never had a chance to develop her own mind. It is a tragedy! The only reason she can pass as human in S01E01 is that she is faking it, just like the CIA taught her.. She is a monster. We don’t know that then, but in the fullness of time we do. This, to me, is the saddest part of Chuck. Heartrending.
So, S01E01. Let’s reorient a the pivotal scene. Monster/spygirl stalks her next asset. She flirts with him. He responds. He is a man after all. Clearly she’s deployed this weapon before, and she is good at it. She has acquired the target and is bringing him in. She has done this a 100 times in a 100 places to 100 different men. Then something unexpected happens. The target disappears from the radarscope.
Chuck has turned to help a little girl! He drops everything to help an innocent in need. He doesn’t see an interruption . He sees a fully formed person who needs encouragement and he provides it to her. Joyously! Everything is put aside to help this complete stranger, even this hot women coming on to him. This is Chuck’s superpower. Does anyone think Sarah has ever had someone drop everything to comfort her in her whole, entire life? To put her first?
Sarah is watching this. How does this effect the monster/spygirl programming? How does this effect a women who has never felt unconditional love her entire life? Why does Sarah leave the store when Chuck is distracted making his way back to her? Jolley’s I/it and I/thou duality is useful here. Chuck cannot stay an asset in her mind and she had not game planned a scenario like this. So, retreat, regroup, and prepare plan B.
Another one not so much commented about: S01E08 The Truth. Sarah is already starting to change, so a complete recasting isn’t called for. But think to when Chuck took the only vial of antidote, and ran to give it to Ellie. No hesitation. No consideration for himself. None. Zero. Has Sarah ever seen such self sacrifice before? Maybe as an intellectual concept, exploiting various assets on missions. What was it like to see that real love up close an in person?
It is important to understand her self loathing. She has just gotten a few glimpses that there is another way to exist in the world. But, he own self loathing is blocking her. She has to believe she is worthy of love, before she can truly partake of it. The self loathing will have to be burned away.
Of course, this is also true for Chuck. This is another one of those ‘symmetries’ hiding in plain sight.
We can see what happens when Sarah’s and Chuck’s self loathing come into contact. We get Prague. They are not opposites, they are identical in this key aspect. Sarah, the self loathing emotional cripple meet Chuck, the self loathing self doubter. How can this mobius strip of loathing be cut?
Everything crystallizes in S03. That is where Chuck the show is transmogrified from a RomCom into… something else. Our Sarah and Chuck begin the coupling dance strength on strength. As the wise man says, Awesome!
“Self-loathing” is an accurate description of them both, but I don’t quite agree that its “burning away” is what allows them to come together. Here, I’d offer Phase 3 as a counter-example. When Chuck is captured in Phase 3, Sarah reverts back to her old self, and still hates it. After losing the intersect, Chuck again doubts that he is worthy of Sarah without it. Both make the same mistake again in season 5. Our demons are not so easily banished.
I’d rather say that they realize they recognize in each other the solution to their respective dilemmas. In Season 3.0, Chuck’s rejection of Sarah in Prague forces them each to attempt to overcome their weaknesses individually – Chuck attempts to become a fully-fledged spy, and Sarah attempts to have a functional relationship with Shaw. They both find achieving their goals independently a hollow solace. Ther are two reasons for this:
First, as with addiction, overcoming our deepest flaws is a consistent struggle that never truly ends. We “overcome” our flaws in some moments better than others, and sometimes we slip back into old ingrained behaviors. Chuck will never shake all of the dilemmas that come with being a spy, and Sarah’s default is not to trust others (as seen in The Baby). But in each other, they’ve each found a person who accepts and loves them, not in spite of their flaws, but inclusive of them. This makes those moments of backsliding easier to accept and recover from, see Sarah’s pep talk to Chuck at the end of 5.02, or Chuck’s refusal to leave Sarah alone in The Baby.
Second, they each idolize the other’s fundamental strengths in the areas where they are weak. Sarah’s competence isn’t just a contradiction to Chuck’s incompetence, it’s a goal to which he aspires. Chuck’s ability to trust and be vulnerable with his loved ones is a beacon for Sarah to follow in her own journey. They are each other’s north star, and while that doesn’t burn away self-loathing, they provide each other with the hope that they can surpass their own doubts.
Joe, introverts are not despicable or monsters because they show no emotion. They are just very selective about the stuff they get invested in and are even more selective about the people they share their emotions to.
You are bringing some truth. Chuck the show, is a fractal. The closer you look, the more that is seen.
Shaw plays at multiple levels. But he is also our way to see Sarah’s self loathing. She buries it so deep and for so long, you can’t tell that it’s there. Chuck can see it by now, I think. We can’t see it except through Shaw. Chuck has is cheese puffs. Sarah has Shaw. I think it is surrender to her self loathing. You think she is grasping for a relationship and he think it is grasping for something. Prof. Jolley feels that it’s a retreat to form. When thinking about the best analogy/metaphore here, consider this: No woman with self regard could be wooed by this Shaw. Prof. Jolley gets this exactly right. Shaw is a broken and empty vessel, he offers nothing. Unless nothing is what is being sought.
And you are 100% correct. I was further thinking about that burning away metaphor, and you see it’s flaw as I do. But with these issues out of the way, even temporarily, it allows Sarah and Chuck to finally meet for the first time strength to strength, with no reservations.
Let’s extend the Shaw as a metaphor for Sarah’s self loathing a bit further…
Casey leaves Sarah’s room, and she knows for the first time that Chuck was telling her the truth when he said that he was still the same Chuck. He has not completed his Red Test, thus mirroring the ‘worst day of my life’. She has not corrupted Chuck. This releases a huge burden from her. And she resolves to redeem her Champion, to whom she gave her colors in Prague.
Then who shows up? Shaw! He gives some pretense to get her to go with him on a ‘mission’. And what does Sarah find out? That during her Red Test, that ‘Worst day in my life’, she has killed Shaw’s wife! Her buried self loathing has returned in a new hideous form!
Now we get to S03E13 drunken Guitar Band scene. She has just learned that her worst day was even worse than she could imagine. She reaches out to Chuck, and finds him wallowing once more. Somehow, she sets all that aside and accepts chuck, fully and completely. Like all the key scenes, this one resonates at multiple frequencies. Chuck is redeemed. But Sarah has yet to be…
Shaw creates another pretext to kidnap Sarah and kill her. But he doesn’t just want to kill her, does he? He forces her to relive that worst day again. He wants to torment her. He wants her to suffer visibly, the way she already loathes herself. He has drugged her so she is immobile. The visible manifestation of being pressed down by self loathing. (Is it really possible that I’m first to catch on that Shaw is a metaphor for her self loathing? I credit Videodrome!)
Then Sarah’s champion has arrived. Chuck fights Shaw and is disarmed. Shaw states that he doesn’t want to hurt Chuck. (how can he hurt Chuck when he is a manifestation of Sarah?) And warns him to stay away. (Sarah is not worthy of love) Chuck recovers his weapon. And shoots Shaw before he can dump Sarah into the river (drowned in a sea of self loathing) by being quicker to shoot (he will gladly sacrifice his innocence for Sarah, who is now a worthy and whole person).
So, Sarah’s self loathing is burned away and now she is finally redeemed.
We know later that this isn’t permanent. But be sure that when/if Shaw reappears, there is something unwholesome going on in Sarah’s head.
I do wish there were an ‘edit’ feature. Alas.
The problem with so much of this is it’s dehumanizing. You reduce people to the level of symbols and archetypes. Chuck works for precisely the opposite reason, the characters felt all too real. Chuck and Sarah learned and grew, but they remained fully themselves; with the same strengths and weaknesses from beginning to end. Chuck was never a complete incompetent and Sarah was never emotionless. Just the opposite, we are told from the start that both have strengths on both counts; Chuck is good at his job, even if it’s well below what he’ll ultimately achieve. And Sarah not only is immediately drawn to Chuck but we learn she was conscientious in her work through Carina, she always considered herself one of the good guys, and even went against rules to follow her own conscience with Molly.
Again, both characters had to grow, and did. But we so often make far to much of supposed failings and weaknesses. Even to say, both were very admirable characters from the pilot. THAT is why it worked. ALL major deconstruction is a product purely of S3 and deserves to stay there. Then they did indeed reduce the characters to characature. And for so many of us, the grotesque manipulation of that season diminished both show and characters.
Obviously you are always allowed to like it and make more of it; but I think for most of us S3 is a failure and an anomaly.
Dave, I think you hit the nail on the head. I would say, however, that they can, and should be, both. Stories should work both literally and as allegory. S3.0 works as allegory (I know, most disagree), but the literal story about these two people fell short. The rest of the show works tremendously on both levels.
On strengths and weaknesses, I think you’re both right. Sarah and Chuck perceive themselves as weak in their personal and professional lives, respectively. And relative to the other, they are much weaker in those areas. That’s different from them being actually weak in those areas – they’re both actually above average in those areas. The best people are often hardest on themselves, and C&S are no exception.
Finally, Sarah’s (perceived/relative) weakness isn’t in emotion or morals, it’s in trust, vulnerability, and self-expression.
Stevie’s Shaw-as-metaphor argument is really thought-provoking, and it’s an interesting way to think about Shaw’s shift from aiming to destroy Sarah, to aiming to destroy her by destroying Chuck. I think it’s probably correct, more or less. But it’s not exhaustive (nor does it have to be). Shaw may be a stand-in for Sarah’s self-doubt (which I prefer to self-loathing), but he’s also a deeply broken man, a flawed love interest for Sarah, the perfect expression of the downside to Chuck becoming a spy, etc, etc.
Considering the literary purpose of a character doesn’t mean you have to ignore everything else about it, and pointing out that the character has positive aspects isn’t the same as saying he has no negatives.
I hope this reply is acceptable. I will try to limit my use of those format, as it can get out of control….
atcDave: “The problem with so much of this is it’s dehumanizing. You reduce people to the level of symbols and archetypes.”
I don’t think so. I’m just mostly following my muse with respect to S03 that given their character flaws some form of conflict is inevitable. It is up to them how they choose to respond. FWIW, I agree with most, and maybe all, of your and Prof. Jolley’s assessments of Sarah’s and Chuck’s strengths.
I’m really just disagreeing in the margins, of how their weaknesses lead inevitability to something like S03. Too me, S03 is what make the characters all too real.
atcDave: “Chuck works for precisely the opposite reason, the characters felt all too real. Chuck and Sarah learned and grew, but they remained fully themselves; with the same strengths and weaknesses from beginning to end.”
Except that you want to ignore the parts of the story that you do not like! Or which doesn’t match your conception/archetypes of the characters you have in mind. You are free to disagree about S03. But before your do, remember Sarah’s dead eyes from the ‘Chuck, I’m cold” scene in SO5E12. Those who wish to excise the S03 ‘arc of despond’ really do have problems when describing what’s going on here.
atcDave: “Chuck was never a complete incompetent and Sarah was never emotionless. Just the opposite, we are told from the start that both have strengths on both counts; Chuck is good at his job, even if i’s well below what he’ll ultimately achieve. And Sarah not only is immediately drawn to Chuck but we learn she was conscientious in her work through Carina, she always considered herself one of the good guys, and even went against rules to follow her own conscience with Molly.”
I agree with much of this. It is obvious that both Sarah and Chuck have many admirable qualities. Where have I disputed that? I refer you to Prof. Jolley’s book for an excellent discussion of those. Please don’t read my silence on their positive qualities as rejecting that they exist. There are many!
atcDave: “Again, both characters had to grow, and did. But we so often make far to much of supposed failings and weaknesses. Even to say, both were very admirable characters from the pilot. THAT is why it worked.”
Well, I might say “Appearances can be deceiving!” But I will insist that S03 cannot be understood without understanding Sarah’s and Chuck’s flaws. It’s a complete impossibility.
atcDave: “ALL major deconstruction is a product purely of S3 and deserves to stay there. Then they did indeed reduce the characters to characature. And for so many of us, the grotesque manipulation of that season diminished both show and characters. Obviously you are always allowed to like it and make more of it; but I think for most of us S3 is a failure and an anomaly.”
I understand why folks don’t like it. I really do! But in my mind, throwing out S03, makes the risk of caricature more likely, not less. It is S03 that breaks the mold! If understanding S03 requires me to reinterpret S01 and S02, then that’s what I must do. I don’t think this will diminish Sarah’s and Chuck’s story at all.
And please help me! Since I did watch S03 and absorbed it. How will ignoring it now help me understand my strong reaction to the finale?
Yeah I agree with most of that Arthur. Although I do think the allegory argument is a little dangerous in television; first simply because the show has to work on a weekly basis or it looses its audience and gets canceled. And we actually saw this with Chuck; ratings slipped badly throughout S3 and I think that season took a year or two off the total life of the show.
Secondly, I seriously do not believe it was ever the intent. Looking back to real time, when Colonel first aired, Chris Fedak (co-show runner) called it a complete game changer. He later said “he misused the term” but I don’t quite buy it. I STRONGLY suspect he thought it was a complete game changer and was eager to move on to the next phase of the show (something like S3.5). But Josh Schwartz (the boss show runner through S3) had other ideas and planned a reset to draw out wt/wt longer. Because as a guy who writes teen soaps that is how he’s always written television. The grand design was nothing more than JS signature style. That it works for many viewers is a testament to his quality as a writer; but that it fails so many more says something about not understanding the audience.
This may all be a major case of working better in overview than it did in real time. But even so, I think there’s about a million ways this story could have been better told. I think almost as bad as the cliched love triangles, the whole idea of the protagonists giving up on each for such a long period of the story robbed the show of its single greatest asset.
Stevie don’t worry so much about your tone! We have a long tradition of disagreements and arguments here, its all part of the fun. Even when we strongly disagree we can treat each other with respect and it all usually works well. Arthur will know we’ve butted heads pretty hard on occasion!
As far as what S3 adds; to me that’s the key problem, it adds problems and angst that simply aren’t there in the other 4 and 1/3 seasons of the show. So its pretty easy for me to just dismiss it as an aberration. I don’t know those S3 characters.
Sarah trying to be a fake wife in 5.12 kind of affirms my view of Sarah; because she was REALLY BAD at it. She even resisted letting Chuck see her change or touch her. She wanted nothing to do with the whole scenario. I can only image she never allowed a seduction to go so far and was off balance to find things had spiraled way past her ability to control. I’ll further say I’m quite sure if Quinn hadn’t been chattering in her ear all night she would have figured out things with Chuck were not at all what Quinn was trying to convince her of.
As far as what to do with what’s on screen now that we’ve seen it? Well it will always be at least a little problematic since it is canon, it is a part of the Chuck experience we all shared.
But it is fiction. Its not actually Canon (in the important sense of the word!). And I’ve seen SO MANY better treatments of this part of the show in fan fiction. There are a huge number of variations on how to make Chuck a spy, and how to make Sarah a normal girl. And most of them are so much more satisfying to me that what was on the show.
I wrote “Alternatives” posts for ever part of the show dealing with all the “might have beens” we can think of. Much isn’t “necessary”; that is, even when the show was strong we can kick around different ways things might have gone. But obviously those areas that caused viewers grief are more likely to be revisited. As it is, S3 rewrights and epilogues seem to be the most dominant things written about.
Go over to the “topic search” header at right and pull down the “Alternatives” tab to see what I”m talking about.
Dave, you’re blaming Schwartz for the misery arc because he has a bad rap for The O.C., but that was a drama about rich white kids, there weren’t a lot of stories to tell there and the first season burned through two or three seasons worth of plot lines. Chuck, the show, was Fedak’s baby, my guess is that Schwartz let him take the story where he wanted.
We got the misery arc because they wanted to end the show with Chuck getting the girl, but that wasn’t the only time that they did that. It also happened in Ring and in Goodbye, the other two episodes that were expected to be the series finale.
The arc’s biggest problems come from Shaw and he was probably Fedak’s creation. He was the only one calling Shaw awesome and Sarah’s ideal romantic partner in every interview, while Schwartz wasn’t saying anything about him and while the other writers were portraying the opposite of that. One of them even called him “stiff as a board.” On Chuck vs the Podcast, right before season 4, Mo Ryan jokingly mentioned that Fedak was cringing when seeing her at parties and he was still believing that the arc worked well.
Chuck having to “steal” the girl from a super spy happened before, even if it didn’t make sense. Bryce didn’t do anything for the plot in Ring (came, got caught with the others at the wedding, died) and he was already done as a romantic rival since Break-Up, but he was still brought back just for a bit of angst and to have Sarah saying no to him.
The first half of Other Guy is a hot mess because Fedak wanted a little more angst, even though, just like in Ring, it made no sense, the romantic conflict was clearly solved at the end of AH. He didn’t seem to be too adverse to angst. He stayed away from it after that, but maybe that’s because he didn’t want to lose viewers, he had no problems turning it back on and to the max at the end.
Fedak really wasn’t the primary until late S3 early S4. Immediately after S2 he was quoted as calling Colonel a “complete game changer”, and when pushed about details he quickly said “well this is still Josh’s [Schwartz] show”.
So no. I completely blame JS for the worst of the misery arc. Fedak may indeed have conceived of Shaw, but JS concocted the multiple love triangles. And seriously, without the triangles Shaw might have worked just fine. And yes, Fedak was convinced to the end that Shaw worked fine.
As far as endings, well of course. The complaints with the misery arc have NEVER been how it ended, just everything else about it. Had they spent 12 episodes of Chuck and Sarah fighting for each other, possibly including Chuck trying to convince Sarah that he can do it while Sarah is cautioning Chuck about the pitfalls and moral compromises, it all likely would have been just fine.
Shaw may be the symbol of the failure; but really it was Chuck and Sarah giving up on each other that doomed the season.
I would also say I had no problem with most of the angst written by Fedak. Certainly through S4 and S5 it all struck me as pretty legitimate. I’m no big fan of the finale, but even so the story feels more true than the S3 silliness.
Dave, are you referring to the interview he did with Sepinwall after Ring? The no details part was a joke and this is still a JS show was in response to a music related question. JS was developing Gossip Girl at the same time, with the same partner he had on The OC. He didn’t need Chuck, he was helping his college buddy. I find it hard to believe that he insisted on having final say on a show that was one of his friends’ idea. I could see it in the first two seasons when the ratings still mattered, but not when they were writing the final season.
Maybe I’m wrong, but I think you misunderstood why I brought up the endings. While my biggest problems with the misery arc do come from how its final act, my actual point was that everything that happened during that arc had to happen because of the ending and Shaw was part of that ending. When I said he was Fedak’s creation, I didn’t mean he came up with the character and that was it, he created him with the purpose of Sarah choosing Chuck over him. Maybe that wasn’t the idea from the start and it was changed because it wouldn’t have been dramatic enough otherwise, but it was Fedak’s idea. It’s exactly like in Ring: Sarah is leaving with Bryce/Shaw, Chuck does something that shows her how great he is, Sarah stays.
If you want the story between Chuck and Sarah to still feel honest, then you can’t just go from the beach in Ring to Sarah seemingly incapable of choosing between Chuck and another guy without a lot of story in between. Maybe Prague, Hannah, The Mask, the name reveal, even the idiotic red test were all JS ideas, but they had to happen. Blaming Schwartz for the misery arc is like blaming the doctor for amputating the leg while giving a pass to the guy that drove over it.
I think it was well established through S3 that JS was really the boss, and that changed when he had other commitments. In all interviews CF was very deferential towards JS. But ultimately that’s beside the point.
Absolutely none of those things “had” to happen. It’s fiction. Nothing is set. And Sarah was not choosing between two men in Ring, Bryce already lost that battle several times over. Sarah was choosing between love and career/duty. S3 could have been written hundreds of different ways, most would have been vastly more satisfying than what was delivered.
Absolutely ANY story element could have been written differently. And to me, those variations are FAR more interesting than canon at this point.
Joss Schwartz was under contract with WB for the first three years of Chuck because while Chris Fedak was a known talent as a writer he had never run a show before. The first three years were basically his apprenticeship under Schwartz with him taking on the role as show runner in season 4. Since then he’s acted as show runner (or a show runner since he has an executive producer credit) on 3 shows. Legends of Tomorrow, Forever, and Deception. That’s enough for me to distinguish between a Josh Schwartz show and a Chris Fedak show. Season 3 was a Josh Schwartz show primarily. Angst is his go to emotion. Besides you can look at the Comic Con panel where he describes the beginning of season 3 inducing groans throughout the audience, then tries to recover with “but it’s really great”.
Yes, thank you Ernie. Sums up perfectly.
The end of an era officially became official very recently today, tbbt will end after it completes season 12, comedy won’t ever be the same…
“I think it was well established through S3 that JS was really the boss, and that changed when he had other commitments.” – Established by whom, exactly? I read interviews and listened to podcasts and the only places that suggested that JS was the one calling the shots were the comment sections on different blogs, including this one. At the time, it was a good guess, given his track record, but it was just opinion and people didn’t care or forgot to try to change it after they got a bigger picture.
“In all interviews CF was very deferential towards JS.” – In that interview after The Mask, JS was trying to explain that Sarah can date Shaw, but not Chuck because they still had a handler-asset kind of relationship, when Fedak jumped in with his “Shaw is ideal for Sarah” non-sense. And he liked to repeat that in other interviews too, it doesn’t seem that deferential to me. Off the top of my head, I can’t think of any important interview given by Schwartz in which he was alone, it was always Fedak or Fedak with Schwartz. If he was the boss, then he didn’t seem too interested in defending or explaining his own creative decisions, he was content to let Fedak do it. Doesn’t make sense to me.
“And Sarah was not choosing between two men in Ring” – Of course she wasn’t, we had context and, like you said, she had already done it in Nemesis, which was another Fedak episode. But she was leaving with another man, which made Chuck jealous, and decided to stay only after another feat of greatness from Chuck. If you show that episode to a newbie, he will think that Sarah was choosing between Bryce and Chuck and that’s the main reason why Bryce was brought back, to add more dramatic oomph, even if it didn’t make sense. Same things apply to Shaw and American Hero. And guess what? Sarah was still not choosing between two men, she was choosing between trusting or not trusting Chuck, but that was only because of the previous episodes. You say it’s fiction and none of that had to happen. Well, if you have or know a better story that ends with Sarah “choosing” between Chuck and Shaw, I’d like to know it. You had to have a break-up (Prague and basically the first two episodes), you had to have a reason for Sarah hooking up with Shaw (Chuck being a jerk outside of the job, so Hannah) and you had to give Sarah a non-romantic connection to Shaw (Mask and the name reveal). You probably found it too long and unnecessary, but a lot of complaints were actually about how Shaw and Sarah felt rushed.
In summary, just in case that I’m failing to make myself clear: what happened in the misery arc was a setup for the final act of the show, where Sarah chooses Chuck over a super spy, and the final act was Fedak’s idea. If it was too painful, that’s because break-ups are painful irl too and, like you said, Dave, they appealed to viewers because they behaved like real people.
Ernie, why you are saying that Fedak was a known talent, IMDb doesn’t list any writing or producing credits prior to Chuck. Anyway, it doesn’t matter, but he was only an e.p. on LoT and Forever, I doubt he had the power to make important creative decisions. I saw both The O.C. and Deception. In fact I saw The OC because of the comments on this blog and, while my memory may be a bit fuzzy, I’m still comfortable in saying that S3 was mostly Fedak’s own doing.
The main arguments are that Schwartz likes angst and triangles, while Fedak doesn’t. Well, Deception had two triangles. One is secondary and starts very early between the assistant chick, the brother and the FBI dude (Sucre from Prison Break) The other one involves the two leads and starts later, when the FBI chick’s ex (the bad guy from Ag of SHIELD) comes into town, they reconnect and the main guy gets jealous. What’s the argument for Fedak here, that he spent very little time on the triangles? Ok, but they served no point and I didn’t care about them because I didn’t care about the main relationship, it was also barely developed.
As for angst, in S3 we had two people that were never actually together or even had sex, going on different paths. In S5 we had two people that were married and planning on starting a family, being broken apart in a brutal way and one of them didn’t even remember their relationship. Chuck vs Sarah and Goodbye make the misery arc look like child’s play. Even Fedak said somewhere (S5 disc?) that they were going for something even more tragic than both or one of them dying.
And I see even more similarities between S3 and the next two, which make me believe that Fedak had a lot of saying in what was going on.
The female characters were written pretty well in the first two seasons, considering that only Sarah was a lead, but the third season started to treat them like second class citizens, mostly for the benefit of the male characters. Sarah was a plot device in the misery arc, Ellie was clueless (her best scene in S3 was probably written by Schwartz), Anna was brought back for an episode just to be dissed by the idiot because he wasn’t an idiot anymore, Ellie was clueless again in S4, just to justify Chuck talking to Morgan instead of her, Alex was treated horribly by Morgan in S5, but she eventually took him back because why not, Sarah ended as the plot device of the entire show. Fedak not caring too much about Sarah is evident from him writing eight or nine episodes in which Chuck saved her. He wrote about four in which she saved him, but they were all before he knew kung-fu.
Another similarity of style: up until Sarah kissed Shaw in Fake Name, it was clear that she was still in love with Chuck and, in fact, everything she had done was because she felt distanced from him. But from that moment, her feelings became ambiguous: we don’t know who she was looking at when Rafe held a gun to her head, we don’t know what she did after, we don’t know if she was going to let Shaw blow up Castle, we don’t know her reaction after Chuck saved Shaw, we don’t know if she was going to the airport or to Union Station. All of that was done on purpose, to build up the suspense about her final decision, but the problem is that, if the viewers are not sure about her feelings, then they will start to subconsciously question if those feelings still exist. I don’t remember ever wondering about someone’s feelings on The OC, but this technique was used again in Goodbye: Sarah completely indifferent towards Chuck the whole episode and at the end… ta-da (sorry, Deception pun), I’m in love or something. It’s no wonder that many hated it and were depressed or felt that it lacked at the end. It actually didn’t need anything after the kiss, it needed more before the final scene and less words before the kiss. Actually, no words.
Speaking of which, when I first finished the show, I texted a friend: “Awful. Worst ending that I’ve seen.” His serious answer: “Why? He got the girl.” WTF do I care about Chuck getting the girl once again, I was invested in the relationship, not in its eventual outcome. I can accept tragedy in endings as long as it feels earned, but this one came after a self contained four episodes arc and managed to ruin the journey, just for the purpose of an ending that was a choice between cheesy or tragic. Fedak basically told me that what had happened before didn’t matter anymore and he almost said something similar with Shaw: the first two seasons didn’t matter anymore, she was in love or kind of in love with Shaw, but Chuck will get her eventually. Thankfully, it didn’t play out like that because of episodes like Pink Slip, Three Words, Mask and Fake Name. Sure, the last one was very unpleasant, but it was a necessary evil.
“tbbt will end after it completes season 12, comedy won’t ever be the same…”
So, it will be better?!!! Sorry, couldn’t resist:)
I think I started watching TBBT when season 3 started, because there was no Chuck on TV anymore (I actually thought that Chuck was over because of that). I liked it a the time, but it eventually became stupid, the humor comes from laughing at how socially awkward they are. Chuck very rarely did this with its leads, it made fun mostly of the secondary characters. As for Penny and Leonard, I lost interest when they broke up. I always do when that happens and I almost did with Chuck and Sarah too.
Luke we just aren’t on the same wavelength at all, and that’s fine. For 4+ seasons Chuck was the best thing on television. For the misery arc it became the sort of thing I don’t want to watch. That’s the tragedy of it. No explanation or understanding can ever make that better.
I was about to write the same comment about comedy being better with TBBT ending. That show got so horrible it’s unrecognizable to me. I used to enjoy the early seasons so it makes me very sad to see where they took it.
IMO TBBT worst episodes are still better than 90% of comedy these days. It is shocking how much the genre is hurting at the moment, a completely fresh comedy has not premiered in ages and the sitcom is on life support right now. The only successes seem to spawn from an already established show i.e revival or spinoff…it makes me sad
Luke, it is fairly well known in Hollywood that there are numerous writers who contribute to projects that never make the credits just like a politician’s or celebrity’s ghost writer contributes the bulk of the writing but doesn’t always get credited. People in the industry know who they are though.
Dave, it wasn’t meant to make you like it, I was just pointing out that you were blaming JS because of triangles, when Fedak was the one that created the show’s worst triangle.
As for wavelength, I don’t think we’re that far off actually. I don’t care for triangles either, because they are usually obstacles and that makes me lose interest in the couple. Which is fine, I’m never super invested in a couple, this was the exception. I liked the triangles in the first two seasons of Chuck because they weren’t used as obstacles between Chuck and Sarah, Bryce in Nemesis being the exception, sometimes they even moved the plot and they were also a source of humor. But I didn’t like them in S3, mostly Shaw because, on the surface, he was an obstacle for Chuck, he was the opposite of fun and he took the most screen time. Fake Name, Tic Tac and Beard are not as good as they should be because of hm and the next three episodes are mostly awful.
The difference between us is that I can’t ignore parts of the story. I don’t have to enjoy them, but they have to make sense to me, otherwise I quit that story and if the show doens’t have anything else, then I quit the show.
Ernie, I don’t understand what you were trying to say with your last comment.
Well I remain convinced you are wrong about who the true villain of S3 is Luke.
More agreement than I expected on some of the details, but we do have a big disconnect on how we view the product. I don’t hold any writer or show in high enough regard to care about what they’re trying to do once they fail me as entertainers. Especially not when I’ve seen so many others handle the period better.
But of course, you are clearly allowed to try to make sense of it all!
We agree here Dave, if a show forgets to entertain me I will ditch it without a second thought. Many of those shows I currently watch are far from perfect but I find them highly entertaining. Legends of Tomorrow is a prime example of this. Season 1 was inconsistent but since then the show has turned into something consistently fun and enjoyable while still managing to raise the stakes, I particular like that characters rotate in and out regularly keeps things fresh. The heavy time travel is somewhat convoluted but I really love how much fun the show is each week
Luke, it is relatively simple. In Hollywood, both the TV but mostly the movie industry, there are professional writers paid to work on scripts who are not credited as a writer on the movie or TV show. They are often called Script doctors. Conversely some writers get a credit even though their original script has been extensively re-written. Some of this is obscure Writer’s Guild rules, some is about power or reputation. This has been covered in numerous blogs, podcasts and articles about Hollywood.
There are also writers who sell screenplays and pilot scripts for hundreds of thousands of dollars that are never produced, or never aired, or never picked up. Those don’t show up in IMDB. Josh Schwartz has several, including one he sold for $550,000 as a sophomore at USC. Some people in Hollywood can make very comfortable livings as a writer for a long time without ever getting a show in theaters or on the air. Chris Fedak was one such writer before getting Chuck. Nobody gets Executive Producer as their first job in Hollywood. First credit, perhaps, but not first job.
Fun fact, Josh Schwartz told a story in an interview once that Chris Fedak, while in school, predicted there would be a hit gladiator movie and a bunch of people playing off that. This was in the late ’90’s. Gladiator was released in 2000.
Ernie a very high profile example of what you’re talking about is Carrie Fisher. We saw several stories in the months after her death about all the scripts she co-wrote or re-wrote to make things work better on screen. She was well known and well regarded In Hollywood; but never credited as such, and certainly not how the vast majority of us will remember her!
Ernie, I’m sorry, I had forgotten about the “known talent” part, so I kept wondering what the script doctors had to do with the rest of my comment. I kind of knew about them because of Carrie Fisher, like Dave mentioned, but I didn’t know details. More so than Fedak, it explains how Schwartz managed to be a show runner at 26 with almost no writing credits. 500k sounds like a lot, but all you have to do is watch The OC pilot and you know that he was good.
Thanks for the Grace Dave! I really wanted to start that first post as an introduction, and well, the muse took over. A lot of things bothering about other explanations gelled for me while I was writing.
For example, I had never consciously thought about that Shaw metaphor before that moment. And I share your concerns about ‘ruining’ S01 and S02, but I think there is nothing in S03 that forces that. There is more than enough room for Sarah and Chuck to be themselves. And there is evidence, as you know, that Sarah has started to change before stepping into that Buy More. A unified theory of S03 will have to accommodate that as well!
Finding the finale to be ultimately satisfying, I really don’t feel the interest in pursuing the fan fiction, at least not yet. And I might eventually find the meta information about how S03 was produced interesting as when. But for now, I reckon my focus will be on the ‘cannon’ as it stands.
Arthur,
I’m not sure that the Shaw metaphor works past his ‘death’. Your thoughts would be most welcome on this!
I also disagree with your preference for the term ‘self doubt’. It just isn’t visceral enough when trying to understand her through the Shaw metaphor. The two terms aren’t describing the same thing.
FWIW, and you may know this, but Kelly Dean Jolley writes fan fiction under the name “Zettel”.
I would also add, even if you never are interested in fan fiction, maybe read the “Complete Alternatives” post from under the “Alternatives” tab. I said a lot about the role of such variations both in terms of Chuck and the broader context.
Another bit of an epiphany about S03E13…
Sara sublimates all her emotions, all the time. So, how do we get to see her feelings without resorting to some inner dialog narrative? The introduction of Shaw! After Prague, Sarah is definitely angry. That is the one emotion she can easily access.
However, from the moment she learns that she has inadvertently convinced Chuck to be a spy, knowing full well what that means, her self loathing builds. We can see this in Shaw. The closer Chuck gets to being a spy, the more unhinged he becomes. Showing us Sarah’s inner turmoil and loathing.
Later in Paris, Sarah is forced to relive her Red Test, ‘the worst day in her life’. The revulsion she feels is directed at herself. But Sarah hides her feelings, how do we know? The Shaw Metaphor becomes explicit! When he has drugged Sarah and she is paralyzed, she can’t speak but it doesn’t matter. Sarah’s feelings about herself have merged with Shaw’s! When he is speaking to Chuck, Sarah is also speaking. Shaw has become the Greek Chorus, relating Sarah’s feelings, her self loathing.
Let me show you by revising something I previously wrote here…
Then Sarah’s champion has arrived. Chuck fights Shaw and is disarmed. Shaw states that he doesn’t want to hurt Chuck. (Sarah: Loving me harms you.) And warns him to stay away. (Sarah: I am not worthy of your love) Chuck recovers his weapon. Shaw is preparing to dump Sarah into the river (Sarah: I deserve to die). Chuck ‘kills’ Shaw by being quicker to shoot. (Chuck: I know *you*, Sarah. You are worth any sacrifice.)
Now watch this scene:
Sarah: “You saved me!”
Is this the reaction of a spy whose life has been endangered and saved many times? NO! Her champion has redeemed her! Not just her life. He has saved HER!
I think it was clear what Chuck would deliver Sarah from long before Shaw came along!
Interesting idea. How do you account for Sarah’s being with Shaw for the better part of 5-6 episodes? What does that mean or symbolize? If Shaw is the sublimation of Sarah’s emotions, how do we account for the great time Shaw and Sarah are having at the restaurant (S3E12) before Shaw receives Morgan’s phone call? The two are having a great time. No signs of self-loathing or guilt.
Yes Dave, but Sarah sill walls herself from love. She has not yet accepted that she is worthy of it.
S03 is not about Chuck loving Sarah, or Sarah loving Chuck. This is well established. It is about Chuck and Sarah each believing they are worthy of that love. Until they do, then neither can trust being loved. It feels ephemeral and fake, because they can’t love themselves.
S03 is about how they redeem each other from their worst secrets and failings. It’s not really about the truth of their love, it is about them feeling that they deserve it. When we reach the end of S03E13, their love now encompasses their whole beings, all the good and all the bad. They are fully known to each other, and their love has transcended.
Just live the catharsis with Sarah: “You saved me?” Then live her joy as she realises that YES! she has been saved, not just bodily but spiritually. Then live that joy with her in S03E14 The Honeymooners. This is a spiritual awakening. She can finally accept the grace of Chuck’s unconditional love.
You, and perhaps others here, talk about the wt/wt, teen romance aspect of S03. Well, to be blunt, I reject that completely. This is a profound story line with a very mature perspective of love and redemption. It is an ancient story, powerfully reimagined. S01 and S02 deal a lot with the wt/wt question at the teenage level. S03 transcends that by raising those stakes to an epic level.
I would have never believed this was possible in an episodic TV show, especially one billed as a romantic comedy. But there it is. Looking ahead, this is why S05E12 and S05E13 are so completely jarring. Sarah, has seemingly lost grace. We all fear she once again walls herself from love, losing everything for which she has yearned and strived these previous 5 years.
Is it possible, that the rejection of S03 is driven by admiration for Sarah, a rejection that she has some pretty awful ‘baggage’? It’s hard for me to understand this in any other way. Any thoughts about this?
I think it’s a rejection of how both Chuck and Sarah are written. I will not accept these grotesque characters. They are no one one I can admire or root for them. Not to say real people can’t come through the flames and be better for it; but I have zero interest in seeing the down and out part of it. S3 fails not for believability or realism; but as entertainment. I will not watch something so dark for so long.
Going back to when 2.22 first ran I remember a co-worker making the comment “time for new writers, this bunch is obviously just going to do the same thing all over”. At the time I credited it as pessimism, but I came to see it as prescient. They essentially just repeated what they’d been doing while dialing stupidity derived angst up to 11. I was beyond ready for something NEW. But what was delivered looked like an attempt at taking a fresh, original show and making it look like everything else on television.
Now for all that, 3.13 itself is a fine episode. It is the step back out of the cesspool (just as Ring is that step down into it). I would be a much more enthusiastic Chuck fan today if 3.01 had looked more like Honeymooners. Obviously not to say that would have been a perfect drop fit; I mean they wound up running away together from Paris not Prague. So clearly important things had happened…
For many years now I have found the fan fiction experience to be far more satisfying than the show itself. And so much of it is better written too…
Well, I think S03 transforms the Chuck and Sarah to be more believably human. I can see having a continuation from S02E22 straight to S03E14 as an attractive story though. It’s is just not epic. It is the romantic comedy version.
In this reality, your life would be better, because I wouldn’t be here!
:-p
But there was some ominous foreshadowing all the way back at the end of S01E01. What are your thoughts on this?
Well I’d say they did indeed have challenges ahead, and they would have to fight for it. But S3 was more about giving up than fighting for anything.
As I said, a complete entertainment failure.
The real and believable part actually strikes me opposite to how it seems to strike you. It all came across as so ludicrously manipulated it felt more fake to me, not more real. Episode 3.01 was sort of an “oh shoot, I didn’t mean to watch Smallville again” than anything related to reality. In short it broke, shattered my immersion in the world and it became a failed product, not anything real. I can really only consider what was happening in the writer’s room at that point, the characters themselves have too many puppet strings showing.
As far as Chuck flashing on Sarah’s ring in the Pilot, it certainly provided insight into how tough and fearsome she could be. But it was not very illuminating about greater character issues. And Chuck would do well to remember his lioness protector has very sharp claws. But she also proved worthy of his trust pretty quickly. As soon as Helicopter he should know what side she is on; and by the end of First Kill (2.20) it should obvious to Chuck she now has greater loyalty to Chuck than her employer (the viewers should have known this by Marlin (1.13)).
I understand exactly how you feel. It would have been the more expected way for a modern episodic TV story to play out. And that is a good story! I too felt the attraction of that before hitting S03. I can see rejecting S03 for those reasons.
But do that, and that final arc in S05 would lose impact and resonance with the rest of the story… at least for me. It’s the difference between a good story vs. an exceptional story, a idealized Sarah vs. a flawed yet admirable Sarah.. Of course many do not appreciate that final arc either. While here I am, trying to decipher the unexpected emotional turmoil it wrought in me.
I think Chuck and Sarah both were plenty flawed before S3 hit! Chuck was a slacker and underachiever, Sarah was emotionally repressed and scared of relationships. Both were admirable yet flawed, and made the other greater by being together. S3 crossed the line from flawed to not really likable any more.
As far as an S3 impact on the finale goes I really see little or none. The burning issue in the end is not really “what does Sarah remember” to me. But rather will the relationship and marriage survive. That I have a resounding YES comes largely from earlier information. Starting with Sarah in Crown Victoria claiming she’s nothing but a spy, its all she’s good at; then jump to 5.13 Sarah telling General Beckman she doesn’t want her job back but rather wants to “find herself”. Well, I think that can only mean finding Chuck.
But the biggest thing is just what happy, open, relaxed version of herself she is in that last scene on the beach. Open to the point of tears and joyous laughter. That’s all later Sarah; not remotely the cautious, guarded woman of the first two seasons. That’s Sarah Bartowski not Agent Walker.
Then add in the Morgansect arc; and consider how Morgan of 5.03 had regained his priorities and maturity (and yes, its always a little odd to mention “Morgan” and “maturity” in the same sentence!) even without all the detailed memories.
It just all leads me to think Sarah and Charah are fine when the final credits roll. Even if it takes a few days to get completely back to normal. I think Morgan and Alex were more damaged by the Intersect than Chuck and Sarah were.
S3 basically forms no part of that whole wrap up for me.
If I could split the difference, I halfway agree with you both. Stevie, I think you’re right that something like S3 was necessary for them both. Until S3, Chuck didn’t really understand what he was asking Sarah to give up for him. It’s only after vs the Other Guy that they’re truly on equal footing.
Furthermore, I find it utterly believable that C&S behave so poorly to each other. Perhaps Dave is more perfect than me, but I’ve hurt the people I love, escalated fights that should’ve have been escalated, been in relationships I haven’t been, and fallen short of my own ideals. That C&S also do so and make it through is exactly what makes this show so powerful.
However, in real time, we’d spent 2 years watching this show tease their eventual relationship, set it up, and then yank the rug under us AGAIN. And worse, they did by having C&S hurt each other, the one thing they’d steadily refused to do throughout the show. And at that time, we had no way of knowing that S4 and S5 were coming – even the show-writers didn’t, which is why every mid-season finale seems like it could be a series finale.
Looking back, I can rationalize the points your making (even though I don’t completely agree with them still), but it doesn’t change the fact that it was – and still is – hard and painful to watch. Even if you could convince me that S3 had to happen exactly as it did (and I am not convinced of that), I care enough about the show that it still hurts 8 years after the fact. Heck, I love the show so much that I’m still commenting 6 years after the finale, and even I stopped watching the show during that period.
One of the primary goals of a show is to make you want to watch it. In real time, S3.0 failed miserably at that task for me and most of the comments here.
Arthur I do always stop just short of saying skip from 2.22 straight to 3.14; and hedge just a little with “almost” a drop fit or something similar. And its precisely because of what you said. Something did change in there for Chuck. I’m not 100% sold that it “had to”; but Chuck did enter the S3.5 episodes with just a bit more accomplishment, a bit more poise to his credit. I think there were other options aside from just Chuck getting through training; but IF they had gone from Ring to Charah on the run together for an arc it would have been different in many details from Honeymooners. I don’t buy that they couldn’t have been a couple already as it happened; in fact I think it would have played BETTER if they’d grown more alike and good for each other while they were together. Like real adults in a real relationship do (something I fear Hollywood does not know how to write). I sort of dislike that Chuck essentially had to prove himself BEFORE he could be with Sarah (like the poor man who doesn’t find his mate until AFTER he strikes it rich… there is always a bit of uncertainty there that would not have been if they’d joined BEFORE the wealth).
Its funny since I’m the one usually accused of being painfully old-fashioned around here, yet I’m not sold on the idea Chuck had to prove anything to anyone, including Sarah or himself. Why do we care that HE needs to be professionally successful (or “on even footing) first? Let Chuck be the sensitive nurturer and Sarah be the no-nonsense professional. Works for me.
But for all that, you are completely right about the real time aspect of it being the most problematic. In the big picture, now, its maybe easy to say “one harder arc middle of the series, sounds fair…”
But at the time, we had been told we had thirteen S3 episodes then show over. It was only NBC’s rather desperate lack of quality programming (Rockford Files and Wonder Woman reboots both getting the ax unaired) at the time that led to a back order and beyond. So a dark and difficult S3 arc really felt like wasting borrowed time. I doubt I ever would have LIKED said episodes; but that context made me furious.
I agree with all of that, Dave. To clarify my point before, I don’t think it’s that Chuck has to prove himself – even if he did, he spent the last two years proving himself. This is one reason why S3.0 was so infuriating! And as we find out in 3×13, he gave Sarah got all the proof she needed shortly after he fixed her phone.
Instead, I’d say that Chuck needed to completely understand the sacrifice Sarah was willing to make for him. For Chuck in 2×21, quitting the spy life is great! He gets to quit being in danger all the time, stop being a hostage, get his freedom, and get the girl. For Sarah, she has to give up not just a career, but a passion that she has mastered in a way that few people master anything. And more, she has to stop ‘saving the world.’ From a utilitarian perspective, Sarah’s choice to give up spying to be with Chuck could even be considered immoral, depending on your stance on the CIA’s activities.
Chuck cannot completely understand what that means – he has no real context for it. And then, when he receives the Intersect 2.0, the entire weight of that context – what took Sarah two years to untangle – is dropped on his head in an instant. And he makes the wrong choice. This hurts himself and Sarah deeply, and they both make poor and damaging choices in the aftermath. In retrospect, I appreciate that it makes them both a little more human, but man, did it suck when it happened.
I can see some sense in that, except I never quite saw it as being about what Sarah was giving up. It was more about a “good spy” realizing she was working for a corrupt and unworthy employer. And by running, Chuck giving up all his friends and family is almost directly parallel to Sarah giving up career. It still could have been a wonky power dynamic, and I never envisioned running off together as a permanent part of the story. Although it might have been more fun than the misery arc.
But ultimately “did it suck” is the most pertinent part. Surely something less sucky could have been crafted? At the very least the love triangles were gratuitous.
Sorry again. Time mark link did not work. Please jump ahead to 3:36, where Chuck flashes on Sarah.
Dave, I don’t know why my ‘Reply’ links disappear in the thread sometimes….
I really can’t argue with you about the outcome of the finale arc. I’m as optimistic has anyone about that.
But here’s a question for you, how did it hit you? A week later, I couldn’t sleep thinking about it and actually woke my wife by crying in our bed. And dude, I’m on the spectrum.
Hah!
Yeah it hit me pretty hard. It was not remotely the ending I would have wanted, I’m very much an epilogue-happily ever after sort. And such things are dreadfully out of style these days. My first reaction was beyond POed, I really felt the end was a slap at fans (S3 so damaged my respect for these show runners I was willing to give them zero benefit of the doubt). So reference your previous comment S3 actually damaged my initial reaction to the end pretty severely.
I mellowed pretty fast, partly after sifting through what we’d seen and partly from post-series interviews from CF. But then the next day I was confronted by an irate co-worker who was basically where I was at first. So I had to articulate why I though all was well, while sharing his frustration with what WASN’T shown on screen. And that quickly became SOP for this website for the next six months. Seemed like a one or more bitter and disappointed fans popped up every day and the five us who didn’t just walk away disgusted were consoling and explaining constantly.
I know that isn’t quite what you were asking, but seriously this site dominated a lot of my post series experience. For myself, I was mostly disappointed it was all over. From fighting for renewal at the end of S2 to launching this website that summer Chuck became my dominant hobby for three years. Then suddenly there was nothing new to look forward to and it left a bit of a void.
Emotionally I remain less than thrilled with the end, but in time it became less of a burden. Even, by the time the extended cut came out, I found myself liking that final beach scene quite a bit. I’ll always wish there had been more, but so much of the show has become just a happy memory now. Both the show and the community.
And of course for me, the characters continue to live and grow in a multitude of different ways thanks to fan fiction. Whether its Chuck and Sarah taking their seven children on an adventure across Europe or a completely different Chuck and Sarah meeting when Chuck pulls the badly injured agent out of the ocean…
Oh about the reply button, this site isn’t really set up to be a forum so it is a little goofy sometimes. But replies only go two levels deep. If there is no “Reply” under the comment you want to respond to just scroll up until you see one. We’ve had many monster threads that entail A LOT of scrolling! But there’s no real harm in just starting it like a new thread either. We can all follow along.
I suppose I should add about the finale; my wife and I watched it together that night and she thought it was great. We are often of similar taste (well,except I enjoy a lot more explosions), and her reaction to S3 was even stronger than mine (she would have simply quit the show if I hadn’t convinced her to give them some time). But that meant I figured pretty quickly it was MY malfunction that missed what they wanted me to see. My verdict now is somewhere in the middle, I’m not quite sure why it angered me that first night. But so many viewers were upset and unhappy with it, I still believe it needed just. a. little. bit. more. (last line as screen fades “take me home Chuck” and a million disgruntled Chuck fans would have been much happier).
But I’ve mostly made my peace with it. The end is okay if not a favorite.
Thanks for the background Dave!
I was struggling to put things into any kind of context as well. So, had I been watching the original run, I could have been one of those lost souls. 🙂
Thankfully, I did come across Prof. Jolley’s book where is has constructed an awesome framework as a basis for discussion, even if I disagree with 10% of it. Major kudos for that!
I am playing a normie around the house now, so my wife can simmer down. She seriously thought I could be having a breakdown. And she is correct to believe that it is totally out of character, hence my curiosity about my own reaction. Something resonated. Still unexplained.
Chuck fans all got pretty crazy excited about stuff. Still not sure why it became a virtual “addiction” for so long. But congrats, you just caught the bug a little late!
Just wanted to add that it’s been that way for me too when I first watched the show. This is probably the only show that totally took me over and turned me into an emotional mess. To this day, I watched the whole series like 10 times and I cried like a baby every time at the beach scene in the final episode. It’s just something I don’t think I can fully explain to myself
You’re definitely one of us Loki!
My best theory is that the repetition, rhythms, symmetry reversals and shorter story arcs somehow resonate with our innate storytelling as cultural absorption instinct. Seriously, it looks modern, but it’s forms are ancient. It can bypass our defenses because we have evolved over millennia to absorb the stories of our tribe.
I’ve never really been much interested in literary analysis, but this is another place that makes me wish I had a more classically liberal education in the Great Books. As it is, I do not have the framework and the tools to analyze this properly.
The thing is, I’m suspicious that Chuck is actually operating at a ‘pre-literary’ level.
Oh believe me we’ve spent a lot of time comparing modern and classic stories and motifs. Ultimately such comparisons are of small value, since really, everything compares to everything else. Human nature hasn’t particularly changed. So story telling hasn’t changed all that much either. All such “Heroes’ Journey” discussions ultimately come back to “nothing under the sun is new”.
Perhaps the only really new thing is a 43 minute format that ebbs and flows with front and back orders…
Or it could be that the finale arc was just exceptional well crafted.
I am so lost now! 😀
Well I would agree with well crafted with just my four required extra words (take me home Chuck)! As it stands, I can only call it a near miss.
I just want to add that since the finale aired, I have come to appreciate it more and more as time passes by. And I am not even sure if I would change anything even if I could. It’s just so beautifully crafted, and I have started to consider it as a test of sorts: If you are a true Charah believer or not. It’s something so beautiful but also painful, something that will stand the test of time and we will never stop thinking about. If we got the more cheesier happy ending, maybe it would have been more forgettable.
Totally disagree. The end was out of step with most of the rest of the show and played more like an attempt at padding the resume than an honest story. “Gee I’m so artsy and clever…”
I am not sure I agree with it not being in line with the rest of the show. Every season had an obstacle Chuck and Sarah had to overcome, season 5 being no different. They just raised the stakes this time, and this time it was on Chuck to save Sarah even though she could have killed him or his sister. I thought it was quite moving what he had to go through to save his wife. My big gripe with it is they could have given us more, for example that thing you said about “take me home Chuck”. Just some extra comfort that Sarah Bartowski is back would have been nice. But like I said before, I am 100% certain they end up together. It just might take a little time.
Every other season, even S3, had a very nice resolution. There was a resolution to the current story and a hook for what came next. So we get to the series’ finale and there’s only a vague resolution.
In essence they failed to deliver. I’m also satisfied Chuck and Sarah went home together and have been happy ever since. But I wasn’t sure that first night it aired, I was disappointed and angry. And far too many fans came away upset. I just can’t call that good story telling. It’s a betrayal of their duty to their audience. And that’s now the legacy of the show; I can’t in good conscience recommend it to anyone without a lot of reservations (S3 reservations are far bigger than finale reservations, but still, they are there and I can’t call it a good thing.
I’m completely with Loki on this one. I never would’ve sought out this forum if the end of the show had been the formulaic comedy ending. I certainly wouldn’t be pondering it six years after the fact if Sarah had said “Take me home, Chuck.” The finale is what transforms Chuck from a great show to my absolute favorite.
I forgot about shows like New Girl and 30 Rock the moment they ending, because their endings were easy, comforting, and lazy. Chuck’s ending made me seriously ponder the nature of the show, scan for every little detail in it, to understand what it all meant.
I never understand why it’s one extreme or the other? Why can’t a happy end be an awesome end? Seriously, in modern television the artsy/angsty/incomplete ending has become the cliche, the complete ending is the oddity.
But really I watch a show for the show, not the ending. The ending only matters because it can uniquely ruin all that came before, as the Chuck ending nearly did for me.
I’ve currently been re-watching Grimm, which certainly had a good ending; but it’s the meat of the show, the stories, characters and setting that keep me coming back.
I actually haven’t watched Chuck now in four years. Mainly because I wore it out (!), but my tepid feelings for the end hardly help.
I’m a complete misfit. It was S03 that transformed the show for me. The ending is the perfect icing on the cake.
A lot of the artsy ambiguous endings, don’t really fit their show. So they are jarring, just to be jarring. Or so inartfully grafted on that it doesn’t fit the show. These are the ones that make you angry, but then doesn’t really matter because it’s gone in 15 minutes. If you want to see a bad/pat/happy ending, just watch Falling Skies. It’s like. “That’s a wrap. Let’s go home.”
Chuck’s ending is perfect. Chuck’s ending made me FEEL, a gamut of emotions starting with anger and then finally ending on serenity and wonder. Serenity and wonder, simultaneously. I am still amazed how perfect it is.
I feel sorry that everyone didn’t share this experience.
My strongest negative reaction was to the Morgan Intersect arc at the start of S05. None of it hit me as authentic. And there was even no redemption by at least being funny.
I know a lot fans felt that way. It was no favorite of mine, but don’t hate it either.
This is interesting to me, Stevie. You’re willing to overlook the pain of S3 because of what it implies for the ending, but isn’t the Morgansect a more clear analog to what happens to Sarah? He receives a memory-loss inducing intersect, loses his memories, and manages to find himself again through Chuck’s unwavering faith in him.
As an aside, Morgan texting Alex “dumpd” to break up with her might be the hardest I’ve ever laughed at the show.
Your analogy is not apt. I have no reason to overlook S03, because that is the 1st time I had the sense that something deeper was happening and started paying closer attention.
Your points about the Morgansect arc have merit. Maybe it just hit me the wrong way. I’m still holding off on watching S05 again. So, I can see how it looks the 2nd time.
Arthur has it exactly right. The Morgansect was a deliberate and required bit of exposition. When Sarah was lost we had to know she could, and would come back. Morgan losing himself was never as severe as Sarah, he still knew who he and Chuck were, even as he was treating his lifelong best friend and others in the most douchy manner imaginable. At the Hilo pad he was ready to go down in flames rather than lose, but all Chuck needed to do was reconnect as a friend to remind him who he was, and he was back almost immediately. Now granted he spent a few episodes working to repair relationships, but ultimately Morgan came back and pretty quickly.
This gives the context for Sarah, and the rest of the team’s actions toward her. Even as she threatens Ellie, they will not give up on her. They know she can come back. We start to see that process in the dream home as Sarah “flashes” on her life with Chuck, without context, angering and frustrating her with emotions she doesn’t understand and can’t control, until the one memory if them carving their initials. She sees it clearly in full context of what it meant and how she felt about it, otherwise Chuck is dead, so I will suffer no argument on that point. Sarah is clearly on her way back, and is shown to be coming back. That’s why the ending was a lot more clearly hopeful to me than many. And we owe it all to the Morgansect.
Granted it was a lot of Morgan for some, but I have a relatively high tolerance for the bearded ewok.
Love me some Morgan. Excellent post! I withdraw my objection to the Morgansect arc until further notice.
Yeah that’s exactly why I’ve come to appreciate the arc now more than ever. It is very informative!
So, I watched the Morgansec episodes last night for my 2nd time. They were fun episodes! And way better than I had remembered.
I also realized why I had the negative reaction the first time through. In the first Morgansect episode, S05E01, Sarah and Morgan have to go undercover as GF/BF. They dance and and Sarah is her usual sexy self. And then afterwards, they have little moment where they bond over the mission success so far. The dance and is what brought me negative emotions. Sarah belongs to Chuck, dammit! Another interesting unexpected emotion.
And this raises another thought for me. I enjoy watching and seeing Sarah. What man wouldn’t? Her dancing and fights scenes I could watch over and over. There is the one scene (an outtake maybe?) where Lester shows up at the Winerlicious to ask her out, and she hops straight onto the counter and starts teasing him. wOw! But here is the kicker, I feel negligible desire to be with her!
It’s like she has colonized the daughter or sister zone in my brain. Or maybe, Chuck is in there permanently established as my friend, and so she’s his mate, and that’s that. It is a weird unexpected revelation.
Oh, the best scene in Morgansec arc? It’s where Sarah is Casey’s wingman in a mission to arrange a ‘random’ meeting with Gertrude Verbanski in the street! Awesome!
Worst parts:
1) lame Sarah vs. Verbanski fight. What? No money left for fight choreography?
2) no other Sarah fights. I mean, come on!
Budget was seriously an issue in the later seasons, huge cuts after S2. Sometimes it shows. I’m pretty sure some of the visual effects made a point of being campy; hey, if you got no money, make it look intentional!
I find Bearded Bandit the least appealing of the bunch, just WAY too much Morgan for me. But overall there’s some good stuff, I mostly like Sarah and Morgan bonding. And I love Sarah becoming his defender in 5.03; she’s a natural in that role and I really like that it doesn’t just stop with Chuck.
Of course the biggie is just how informative it is for post-series Sarah.
Random Morgan thoughts.
Bingo on the need for Morgansect. It was absolutely necessary, as Ernie explained. Just like the carving scene in Baby with Sarah saying I would like to always remember this moment, so what’s the first thing she remembers? The carving scene. S5 was brilliant that way. The whole season became the denouement alluded to in the kiss on the beach. Morgansect had its moments to be sure, so I didn’t hate it.
My tolerance for early Morgan was pretty low, but they gave him some substantial growth later in the series, and my tolerance grew a bit. Devin taught him to tuck and tame the mane, and leadership at the Buymore helped bring him along, but what really helped Morgan’s character was Casey mentoring him. He grew up and I didn’t have to merely tolerate him. I started to like him. Even so, I often wanted a smaller dose than they gave us, and I still wanted more Ellie. I think her character was underused, and Morgan was over used.
I didn’t like the Sarah/Morgan dance scene, but otherwise, I really, really liked the friendship that developed between Sarah and Morgan: Phase 3, the proposal sub-mission, the collectibles talk, letting him move in after Frosted Tips. It was all good … except the dance, which was a ridiculous and disturbing image.
Ah gee; I liked that Morgan flashed so he would know to just stand there while Sarah danced around him. Best use of the Intersect ever…
thinkling,
I know what you mean about the low tolerance for early Morgan. After he was in on the ‘secret’ his development was no longer locked in amber. That is another positive for S03, BTW.
My lack of tolerance also extends to much of the ‘Buy More’ stuff also. Like Jeffster stealing the ‘Push mix’? Come on man! And basically planning to steal the G7 phones! Again, Come on!
That is probably an emergent property of the show’s chimeric structure. Some parts fit better than others..
Here’s the scene I was talking about. “What about that movie ?!?!” LOL
In my experience Morgan and the Buy Morons are most popular with casual viewers. So many discussions I had with friends and co-workers started with what antics were going on at the Buy More.
I think those of us who got really bit by the show where drawn to the weightier parts of it; especially Charah, but also the mythology, characters and larger universe.
I did feel like the Buy More and Morgan (mostly Buy More, but partly Morgan) got too much screen time in later seasons and I would have preferred more for Sarah, Ellie and Devon (especially the Sarah/Ellie friendship). But all things considered the show was hugely entertaining and this criticism is fairly minor.
Big Mike is an admirable person in many ways. He is one Buy More guy that I always liked to see more of. His open heartedness fit with the show very well.
And Anna Wu was great. Too bad she left. There are a lot of unexplored possibilities with that character.
Anna was very funny, especially in S1. But Morgan got a better girl. Not as funny but better. Anna could have been funny as a stalker ex; but all things considered I’m glad they didn’t spend time there.
Big Mike was a man of a very few outstanding qualities. I think he was well used as a comic relief. Especially as the Subway pitchman. Best product placement ever.
I guess I just have to accept I am probably the only person here who loved Morgan and Buy More.
Let me just explain quickly why: Dave I think you want this show to be a little too perfect. I can hardly blame you for that, but decent part why this show is so liked and clicked for some of us is the real life feel to the characters. Devon and Ellie always felt too perfect for me, and while it’s true characters like that exist in real life, to me they were kinda boring.
Early seasons Morgan and Buy morons were there to be a break from that. They had many flaws and that’s why I liked them, there was never a dull moment with them, they provided a nice comedic backdrop for all the serious spy stuff and they were a needed contrast to Chuck’s spy friends and Ellie and Devon. If the whole show had been perfect well adjusted grown ups like Ellie and Devon, it would have been so boring. Like Ellie once said: “If everything is so awesome, and there is no un-awesome, then awesome by definition is mediocre.”
I’m not really anti- Buy More or anti-Morgan. At least not compared to many fans. I just think, ideally, they both represent things Chuck grew out of. But Morgan was a good friend to Chuck, and I thought he mostly served that role well throughout the show. But from the very start I would have been happy with a little less Morgan.
In terms of Ellie and Devon, well of course they were pretty idealized. But that was the point, they were the ideal Chuck and Sarah were compared to. I think expanding their part; especially later in the show as Sarah works through what it means to be normal would have been terrific. But that all plays to the fact I wanted more Sarah even more than more Ellie. I just think that was the obvious vehicle for it. Especially since I think the bromance, Chuck and Morgan was the least interesting screen time of the show. If it had been contrasted with Sarah and Ellie it might have worked very well. And this all plays into something many of us have mentioned before; we would have preferred a slightly different show called “Chuck and Sarah” to just making Chuck the focus (or “The Secret and the Agent”, my favorite alt-title). So let’s just say this comment is aimed square at the foundation of the show.
If Morgan time had been reduced 30%, and it had been given to the grown ups (like double date nights or just Sarah/Ellie time) I think it would have worked out VERY well.
The show did a good job pivoting from Chuck and Morgan to Casey and Morgan, especially in S4. I was always tickled that Morgan and Casey were a bizarro version of Chuck and Sarah: a normal, clueless guy tutored by a hardened, skilled agent in the ways of spying, while the normal guy teaches the spy how to lead a normal life. That’s the best bromance of the show, as much as I do like Chuck and Morgan together.
Yes! Morgan and Casey were excellent together!
I can certainly agree with that, loved Morgan and Casey in season 4
Loki said: “I guess I just have to accept I am probably the only person here who loved Morgan and Buy More. ”
Naw. First, let me apologize for being so quiet on this amazing thread. Been busy. You know – life.
Just last night I was thinking that one of my favorite scenes occurs in S2, at the end of vs. Best Friend. It’s all Buy-More, Morgan, Anna, Jeffster (playing the great Toto song “Africa”) and Chuck and Sarah holding hands for the first time.
It’s odd. I don’t relate to Chuck like most. I never saw myself as part nerd, part genius, all hero. Besides, I’m older. Some will remember that I relate more to Stephen.
But Chuck and Sarah holding hands – now that I relate to. Hearing a great song in a way that leaves memories – that’s something I REALLY relate to. It’s those moments that I can only think of as “less intense” that I enjoy. Sarah adjusting Chuck’s tie, Casey drinking Johnny Walker (black) whilst listening to Neil Diamond, Morgan interrupting a barely dressed Sarah at the ‘fridge in the middle of the night… And Chuck desperately holding on to Sarah’s wrist as Shaw threatens to drag her down with him. Those are moments in the show that set it apart for me.
Oops. File this under “random thoughts.”
I love this scene. This is S01E14 where Sarah and Casey had thought Chuck was blown up driving away with a bomb. It’s one of the clips I keep handy.
If the time mark in the link doesn’t work, go to 1:33
That is a terrific scene!
Agree
Ha. I actually find the Morgansect arc somewhat funny, but that’s the only good thing I have to say about it. It was a three episode arc centered around the show’s fourth lead and it made Chuck and Sarah supporting characters. It gave me the sensation that their story was done, so, by the time it was finished, I had lost a lot of interest. That’s probably why I liked S5 better on my second watch. Still my least favorite though.
In retrospect, that wasn’t even the biggest problem with the arc. I’ll disagree with most and say that not only it wasn’t necessary, but it actually ruined the final arc. The only thing that it managed to establish was that Sarah probably never gets her memories back. Drop that arc and those three or four memories would probably be enough to convince me. Keep the kiss and drop the dumb magic kiss talk and I’m actually certain that she had regained important parts of her memories.
I loved Morgan in the first three seasons, but the S4 and S5 version is the show’s worst character, even worse than Shaw.
While it’s clear that the writers wanted to have chuck play the role of handler now that he was a veteran spy, I could have done without him in jerk mode. Disagree about season 4 he and 5, its not about how you start but finish and Morgan finishes in a great place
I’m assuming “jerk mode” is about Morgan? I have a very high tolerance for how I judge, if not real people, then at least fictional characters, so, with the exception of “DMPD’d,” I wasn’t bothered by Morgan’s behavior. In fact, I was amused, even by that text message.
Morgan finishing the seasons in great places did nothing for me. IN sitcoms, dramatic or emotional moments and character arcs fall flat because the characters are unrealistic caricatures that I feel no connection with. The great thing about Chuck was that it had both dramatic characters and sitcom characters and, for the most part, the writers managed to keep them like that and separate from each other, so I was able to care about the leads while laughing my ass off at the secondary characters. Morgan was a clown, a sitcom character with zero development during the first two seasons and, all of a sudden, I was supposed to care about his arc?
The only thing I want from these clownish characters is to make me laugh. Everything on top of that is gravy, but if I don’t laugh, then they fail. Morgan in the last two seasons was the opposite of funny. The direction for the character was a big part of this, but the new writers that came during the fourth season were awful, too, Wootton being the only exception and it’s not like he’s one of my favorites.
As a spy, Morgan was annoying, his only shtick was “oh, I can’t handle a gun.” It was funny at first, also because he sounded expert like, but then it got old fast, the only thing missing was the Benny Hill music. He went from a funny sitcom character to a crappy sitcom character, while dragging Casey down with him and his boring relationship with Alex made it even worse.
A common complain that came from both shippers and non-shippers for S3 was that Shaw kept the team apart. Well, Morgan did the same, he kept Casey away from Chuck and Sarah, but he did it for two seasons, not six or eight episodes like Shaw. For me, Chuck with Sarah and Casey with Morgan were the most boring spy pairs. He was also the reason why Ellie was kept in the dark again, to justify Chuck talking with him instead of her. The more serious characters were affected by the increased role of a clown.
The Buy More was great in the first two seasons because it had enough characters to write some stories: a lazy and cranky boss, an evil ass man, three morons, a girl. It was good in the third season too, but in the last two seasons it fell off a cliff because the writers were bad and there were only two characters to write stories for, Jeff and Lester. The boss was boring and gone to play spy for a lot of the time and the ass man was the former boss, but on quaaludes and spouting off fortune cookie and hallmark cards nonsense. I understand that the budget was tight, but that’s why Morgan should have been made a Buy Moron again, with only some spy consulting here and there. Also, keep Alex as Casey’s daughter, but drop her as Morgan’s LI and give that screen time to a new ass man, preferably Anna Wu, determined to torture Morgan.
And the final reason why he was a terrible character is because he was imposing on intimate Chuck and Sarah moments. I hated him the most when he told Sarah to be a girlfriend, not a spy. First, it was bullshit, her actions were those of a girlfriend since Lethal Weapon, that’s just one of the idiotic things that Kristin Newman invented. But, most importantly, Sarah could and should have realized alone what she needed to do without the advice of an imbecile who, at some point, had written up a ridiculous prenup just to discourage his gf from moving in together. I wanted to blame KN for this, but I remembered that there’s a similar deleted scene in Tooth and Morgan being all-wise happens again in Goodbye, so the answer was obvious.
I agree with your opinion about the Buy More in season 4 but disagree on almost everything else. The Morgan/Casey dynamic was always funny. I personally hated Morgan in the early seasons he wasn’t his own person at all, more like a nat who’s comic relief is so forced it makes me cringe. The gun bit is nothing more than a running gag, I love this particular comedic element. Alex was great, though I don’t get why they wasted time breaking them up but I digress. As far as how Morgan affected Chuck and Sarah, I think you’re being overly harsh in that regard. Heck I have a friend that is my age and already married with three kids so trust me taking a back seat to your best friends wife and family is a very difficult adjustment… I emphasized in those moments. I agree Ellie should have been read in completely after she saw chuck punch a person lol but I don’t think Morgan is the reason she wasn’t, besides I rather like that she more or less discovered the Intersect on her own, before finally finding out it was in Chuck’s head. I think many of your gripes expose the time constraints that make TV a hard medium to create at times especially for Chuck which was essentially three genres in a 42 minute show
I think Morgan was a “least favorite” among many more serious fans. But he was a clear favorite with most of the more casual fans I’ve known. Presumably it has something to do with just wanting to have fun vs looking for something a little more.
But I would dispute the idea he didn’t grow at all in the first two seasons, he grew A LOT in S2. To me, he went from purely annoying to merely being eccentric (!). But I know show runners were bragging about significant changes made with the longer than expected break between S1 and S2, and Morgan was among the chief beneficiaries. They all felt he was better developed and more relatable, and I mostly agree.
As far as Morgansect and it’s impact for Sarah; I would say first he clearly was remembering stuff. That’s how Chuck reconnected with him at the end of Frosted Tips, the memories were there and were accessible.
But For Morgan and Sarah booth, at least to me, recalling specific memories was only a secondary issue. It was really about Morgan (and Sarah) regaining essential parts of their character and life. So Morgan was back to being best friends with Chuck, and wanting to repair things with Alex even before he remembered all the details.
Likewise Sarah, was back to her later, more open and honest self on the beach. That happy, tearful, laughing, loving Sarah we saw on the beach was her S4/S5 self; not Graham’s enforcer.
And no, it wasn’t as well or clearly shown as it could have been. But it was there.
Well, Dave, I don’t think I’m a casual fan and I loved Morgan in the first three seasons, with the S1 version being my favorite. His immaturity, his lack of inhibition, of boundaries and of self awareness made me crack up. Those “qualities” were toned down in S2, but they were still there, which is why I don’t see any development until the final episodes. He picked up the new ass man by recreating the fight from Mad Max 3; he, twice, instigated his coworkers to not work; he bought a barely functioning car; he stalked and confronted Anna, then he tried to repulse her, so that she wouldn’t move in with him; he tried to kidnap Chuck, just to get invited to the bachelor party; he ratted Chuck out for “going all corporate” because he was upset. The only things that changed were his haircut, his harassment of Ellie and his weird competition with Sarah for Chuck’s affection. They were amusing in the first season, but it made sense that they were gone from S2, Ellie was engaged and Sarah and Chuck were together for a year already, he got used to it.
I’m very much a journey before destination type of viewer, so the memories were my main concern. Maybe the only concern, I can’t tell if I cared too much about Chuck and Sarah staying together. Morgan was remembering things, but there were also things that he didn’t remember and Ellie had already mentioned that was how it was going to be. Chuck brought him back, but he did it by helping him remember and it happened quickly. Sarah was subjected to long stories three times and went to familiar places and through familiar situations with him, but she still didn’t remember him, she only had three foggy memories that she didn’t even knew what they were exactly: the carving, the virus and the beach. I don’t see Sarah in the final scene as S4 or S5 Sarah. She was laughing and crying in the first few episodes too, the only thing that it means here is that she doesn’t feel awkward around him anymore, most likely because he promised to not pressure her anymore. Her body language is still closed off: she doesn’t touch him, her arms are crossed, her body is never turned towards him, only towards the ocean.
One thing that makes no sense about the Morgansect: Sarah forgot everything and everybody, so she naturally didn’t trust them. Morgan lost some memories and he became a douche to his friends, even though he still knew them? What was the logic of this, that he wasn’t a douche because of some experiences from his childhood that he had with Chuck? Let’s say I go with it, even if it sounds dumb, but then, he goes back to being good when he remembers something awful that he did as a kid.
Luke, I think you’re missing the point of the beach completely. It’s not about Sarah’s memories coming back that is the hope but not the point, not really. What makes it perfect wether you see it or not is that Sarah has accepted Chuck into her corner again, she asked him to kiss her and their was need and want in her inflection so the memories and if they come back are irrelevant because she accepted Chuck all over again, it doesn’t mean it’s sunshine and roses but that is the method to the writers madness
Josh, Casey and Chuck had a great dynamic in the first seasons because Casey was forced to work with him, but he came to appreciate his value while still being annoyed by his personality and finding ways to tease him about it. They tried to do that again with Casey and Morgan and it worked to some degree in the last third of S3, but that went out the window in S4. Nobody was forcing Casey to work with Morgan anymore, Morgan had almost no value as a spy, except courage (lame), and he knew it. In S3, he at least still fancied himself some type of James Bond. Constantly being annoyed by a moron that you don’t have to work with and constantly calling him a moron is not funny. Put a laugh track over it and you’re in, pardon me, TBBT territory.
Alex was great as Casey’s daughter, as Morgan’s gf she was boring and their relationship made Casey even more lame.
You misunderstood my problems with how Morgan affected Chuck and Sarah. It’s not about him not giving them privacy (that would have been funny, actually), it’s about him being part of important moments that should be only between them. That’s why I hated him in that scene in Phase Three. There was a scene from Tooth, in which Morgan told Sarah to not let Chuck rot in the psych ward. It was supposed to happen before she went to the shrink’s house, but luckily it was cut, so Sarah went without needing to be convinced to not give up on Chuck, she figured it by herself.
And I was never on board with Morgan dishing out advice left and right like he, all of a sudden, had the answers to everything. Him, the imbecile clown that did all the things that I have mentioned above in my reply to Dave.
Eh, journey matters, its why we watch; but its meaningless without a good end. Both matter; a lousy journey and I’ll quit before the end, the end can uniquely ruin the entire experience.
But I just read the end completely different. Sarah was ready and eager to reclaim her life, the whole story hangs on her doing that in the end, memories or not.
Morgan grew more in S3 than in any other, but he was already starting in S2, he became significantly less annoying! But he was truly never “wise”. A fool to the end, who’s greatest strength was in loyalty to his friends. Ultimately, I thought he always got too much screen time; but never quite to the level of hating him.
And I never meant to suggest ONLY casual fans liked him, such judgements are always doomed! But it seems obvious he got a whole lot less love on the various fan sites, and in fan fiction, than he did among the more casual viewers I knew.
I think you’re exactly right about the end Josh. Whatever Sarah did or did not remember; the intensely private and closed off woman had let Chuck back into her life.
Josh,
It’s not about me missing the point of the beach, but you are missing my point: I don’t care for it. Saying that the memories are not important is just a narrow opinion, no different than saying that Lost was about the characters, not about the mysteries. It’s nobody’s place to determine what is important for a viewer, not even the author’s. If he thinks something is not important (like Sarah’s development) then he shouldn’t spend a lot of time on it. And If he really wanted to do it, then he should have paid attention to how Sopranos and Inception did it. SPOILERS for those two: the point of Sopranos’ ending was that it didn’t matter if Tony died because he put his business in order and he was with his family, but it was only implied (albeit strongly) that he might die; in Inception, Cobb doesn’t care if it’s a dream or reality, but the possibility of being only a dream is only vaguely implied and the last couple of frames suggest that it actually may be real. In Chuck, Sarah’s memories are taken away and then only implied that they might come back and very poorly done.
No memories equals garbage ending for me, for more reasons than one:
1. It’s personal. No, I don’t have a family history of amnesia, but I have happy memories of all my relationships and I would like to still have them when I’m about to kick the bucket. And I also have good memory.
2. In general, shitting on one of the main characters of a show to prop up another one is awful writing. This is one of the reasons why Final Exam is the worst episode, it did exactly that, but not even for the benefit of a character or of an important plot point. It took a dump on Sarah for the sake of a “cool” idea that didn’t even make sense.
3. In this particular case, Sarah stops being a character, she just becomes the plot device of the entire show, she’s nothing more than a trophy wife/girlfriend. If your favorite character was Chuck and you only cared about his adventures, then congrats, you got three fantastic first seasons and an awesome finale. If it was Sarah and the writer’s intentions were good enough for you, then I guess you’re in the clear.
4. Chuck and Sarah finishing the series together was of a low priority for me, I cared more about the relationship itself than about its eventual outcome. I don’t care about them starting a new relationship from scratch, its’ a story that I have no investment in.
5. For me, the show was about the characters and their development, not about the dumb spy stories. A major part of that journey leads nowhere eventually. Right after finishing, one of my first thoughts was “Great. This means Thailand never happened.” (it was my favorite episode at the time, now it’s out of my top 20. It’s still good, but poorly written.) Likewise, during rewatch, there were too many moments that I couldn’t fully enjoy because my brain kept whispering “she won’t remember this.”
Dave,
Bad ending can be very subjective. If we disregard taste or personal preferences, Chuck and Sarah or one of them dying while saving the world from the big baddie behind the conspiracy is a good ending, at least in theory. But if they are killed randomly, let’s say by a drunk driver like it happened in the middle of S2 of Designated Survivor, then that’s just lazy writing. Or like the original finale of Prison Break. What we got in Chuck was closer to the latter, but that’s not what ruins the rest of the show for me.
Like you said, journey matters, but my point was that the ending of a series is not that important for me, at least not anymore. All I need from it is to not ruin the rest of the show, everything on top of that is just gravy. I think that a bad ending can ruin a plot driven show more easily, but it’s difficult to do it with a character driven one. The only way I can think of is with a “it didn’t actually happen” type of ending like what we got here.
Just because Morgan became less annoying doesn’t mean that he was developing. He stopped imposing on Chuck’s private moments and he stopped acting like there was something between him and Ellie. Those were natural developments after Chuck having a gf for a year and after Ellie being engaged, otherwise he would have been really creepy and that’s negative development. The character had no progress until he betrayed BIg Mike in First Kill and he was cartoonish, which is why I didn’t care about any arc of him. It was similar with S4 of The OC, which everyone says it was good because it went back to basics, but I think it was the worst because they replaced one of the two girls with a girl that had only had a few appearances in S3 in which she was a cartoonish character that people were making fun of. Didn’t care about her story at all.
Clowns will always be clowns, and if the heroes are put together with them, then they will become clowns. Chuck, Sarah and Casey were heroes, Morgan and the rest were clowns. Occasionally they would collide and those were great moments of humor, but in the last two seasons, Morgan was constantly put together with the heroes and that made Casey somewhat of a clown.
I don’t know if he was all-wise, but he was giving advice to everyone and it was taken seriously most of the time, unlike in the first two seasons when his advises were stupid (also funny) and mostly ignored. And if they weren’t ignored they led to bad consequences. “Does the eight grade lunchroom ring any bells?… What would you do for a Klondike bar?”
Luke there are so many fans who shared those sentiments exactly. I’m comfortable with saying the end was poorly conceived, at least to say it ended a beat too soon. I’ve often said my own fix is four last words, “take me home Chuck” as the screen fades to black. I’m quite sure all my grief would have been fixed by that.
But no doubt there are many thousands of viewers who needed more yet. I certainly would have preferred more; ideally like a whole epilogue episode of Chuck and Sarah healing and moving on with their life and family together. I can’t imagine what brain cramp led to the show runner thinking that end was enough.
I miss epilogues so much; show me why the fight, why the growth, why the whole show mattered. Show me the protagonists living in this new world they made. And geez, show Sarah remembering her journey!
I’ve found some peace with it all by seeing that Sarah was certainly fine; but it was just sloppy and rude not to show it. Style over substance, and shallow banal style at that…
Dave,
I, too, really wanted something like that for a while. My version was “I love you” because that would have indicated where she was mentally and probably some memory recovery. But it would have been cheesy and I realized that it ended exactly like it should have. The problem was that there was almost nothing or not enough before it. All we got were irrelevant or too foggy memories and an ice queen with a blank stare from start almost to the end. And the reason for this was because “Chris really wanted to find a way, even until the last moments of the last episode, to keep that sense of will they, won’t they.”
Speaking of epilogues, your boy, Schwartz threw a big, long and totally unnecessary flash forward at the end of The O.C. that was as happy as they can get.
I don’t understand why show creators feel the need to leave important questions unanswered until the last minute. Movies have epilogues after climaxes, why do tv shows have to end abruptly? Breaking Bad did it right, it had the big climax, then two more episodes which kept answering somewhat minor questions to keep the viewer interested.
Stevie, I had the exact same reaction to the finale! I’m not on the spectrum (that I know of), but many people think I am, and I never cry about anything. The finale of Chuck had me bawling, haha.
That said, I thought and think it was beautiful, and the best episode of Chuck. I’ll never forget them fade to black on the line “rivers ’till I reach you.” To me, that was exactly the “take me home, Chuck” that I needed. I don’t really see how anybody could be anything less than certain about the optimistic intent of the ending.
Le sigh, that was supposed to be a reply to a Stevie post. Sorry for the clutter.
I’m self diagnosed with a concurring opinion from my sweetie. LOL Maybe Chuck should be required viewing for aspies?
You reached the truth about the finale quicker than I. It took me some reflection to realize it was perfect.
A separate thought that Stevie inspired – I’ve noticed that a lot of the people in this forum seem to be of a fairly analytical bent (more thinkers than feelers in Myers-Briggs parlance). I don’t mean this as a judgement of either category, just that I notice a lot of people here saying things like “I never cried except for Chuck.” Analytical personalities tend to be inclusive of, but not limited to people on the spectrum – or computer programs like Ernie (a joke meant with love).
I wonder if this is in part because of how consistently (and wonderfully) symmetrical Chuck is. It’s so much more focused on symmetry than I realized when first watching it, and the way previous actions echo through future consequences is what still gives it emotional weight for me. A non-comprehensive list, I’d love it if people replied with their own examples!
The pilot ends at the beach at sunrise, the finale ends on the beach at sunset (with C&S switching sides).
In the pilot, Sarah begins to see his merit when he puts his desire for her aside to help somebody else (the ballet dancer: “after fixing my phone,” the camera pans to Sarah tilting her head as Chuck moves under a literal new light). In the finale, she begins to see his merit when he puts his desire for her aside to help somebody else (the bomb at the orchestra). This triggers her “flash” of the Irene Demova virus.
Chuck asks Sarah four times is she loves him, and in 3×13, she answers “Yes, yes, yes, yes.”
Chuck is unfilled professionally with strong personal relationships, Sarah has weak personal relationships, and is professionally fulfilled.
Related: Sarah and Casey mentor Chuck in his spy life, while he mentors both of them in the normal life.
Sarah is Chuck’s handler, and finds excuses to literally put her hands on him (fixing his tie, straightening his shirt, even slapping him) in most episodes. Their first meeting isn’t by sight, it’s by their hands touching.
Chuck offers to be Sarah’s “baggage handler” in the pilot and fulfills that promise both literally and figuratively in 4×15 (figuratively in many other episodes).
Chuck loses his memories in 4×09, and Sarah brings him back with a kiss, a clue to the finale?
Morgan loses his memories via intersect and is brought back by Chuck, a foreshadowing of the finale’s conclusion.
The Grettas and Shaw are determined, but lack the moral grounding to properly use the intersect. Steven Bartowski has the moral grounding, but not the determination to use the intersect. Chuck intersects the two traits that allow one to use the intersect successfully.
Chuck is based on a gender reversal of the damsel-in-distress story. In all of the episodes that the writers thought may be series finales (3×13, 4×13, 5×13), the show reverses it’s own reversal, having Chuck finally save Sarah.
Sarah asks Chuck to meet her at a train station and Chuck rejects her. Their relationship is only repaired after Chuck asks her to meet him at a train station, and she doesn’t arrive.
Chuck and Sarah’s relationship begins in a train (Honeymooners) and ends in a train (Bullet Train).
Chuck and Sarah’s relationship begins in 3×13 when she says “Shut up and kiss me.” It begins anew in the finale when she says the same.
The intersect is modeled after the One Ring, and it behaves similarly. When others receive the ring/intersect, they are corrupted by its influence (he calls Morgan Gollum in S5).
The pilot and the finale begin with Chuck trying to escape a dilemma, Ellie giving him a pep talk, and him meeting Sarah.
In his quest to save the world, Steven Bartowski turns the harmless Hartley into the villain Volkoff. In his own quest, Chuck does the same to Vivian.
Throughout the show, Chuck will fail to achieve his dreams without Sarah, and only succeed after he meets/reconciles with/begins dating/marries her. Examples:
In S01, Chuck has failed to become Charles Carmichael, the rich, successful entrepreneur. After marrying Sarah, he immediately becomes just that and established Carmichael Industries.
He fails to graduate from Stanford and only succeeds after meeting and thanks to Sarah.
In 3×01, Chuck fails to control the intersect and only succeeds when Sarah re-enters his life.
Also in 3×01, he fails to become a spy, only succeeding after he and Sarah reconcile.
In First Class, he fails to see the Eiffel Tower until he and Sarah reconcile
In 3×09, he fails to complete his red test and succeeds by killing Shaw after he and Sarah reconcile.
In 3×16, he fails his psych exam until Sarah comes to rescue him. The same pattern occurs with the Intersect in 3×19, as Sarah gives him the watch.
Similar patterns occur in 5×02, 5×06, and 1×02.
I do think a lot of the analyzing and list making is normal for a Chuck fan! As Stevie mentions, they aimed the show right at us. Of course it came back to bite them when we weren’t so happy.
Some of these I never noticed, very nice post, great job
Oh my god, Bryce / Oh my god, Daniel – Meh
My first comment here as a 2019 chuck addicted 🙂
Hey, welcome to the club!
Thank you, David!
I really appreciate what you guys have done here all these years. I’ve never seen so much passion about a TV show like here. This blog was like a therapy for me last months (i started to watch in january this year – 3 times until now). Especially for S3 wich was hard to watch.
I really hated vs. beefcake. It was so useless for me. Entire beefcake could be solved with a tranq gun in 5 minutes. S3 was a worse beefcake on a much larger scale.
I love AH second part and OG but the journey in circle was so useless and cynical. So many lost opportunities to be the best TV serie from chuck. I still love the rest of the show, S4.0 the most.
Ok, sorry for my english and I hope the blog will go on with more comments, maybe after a movie. You think is to late for a movie?
You know Ovi I agree exactly about the show’s ups and downs.
I don’t think it’s too late for a movie, these things often happen years or even decades after the fact. Zac recently (during Shazam! promotional interviews) said he still really wants to do a Chuck movie. And I’m sure this place would be a hive of activity again if anything happened. Maybe never quite like during S3 when we were all moaning and complaining every day; but I bet a lot of fans would want talk about stuff again.
Hi, Ovi. I’m glad to see new fans here too. I may not reply much these days, but believe it or not, I’m still paying attention! 😉
Oh – This blog was a bit like therapy for all of us! I recall S3, the first time around. It wasn’t that my feelings were mixed. It was more like my reactions to every episode were very strong. I wasn’t indifferent at all! The only thing to do was to spend hours thinking and writing about it all.
And I rewatched every episode (again) just this spring, and still found things I missed the first 10 times around.
Thanks for adding to these comments!
Ovi, if you mean that the spy stuff in Beefcake was useless, then sure, but that was true for a lot of episodes. Otherwise, Beefcake was the middle of a three episode arc that put Sarah on the path to leaving the CIA.
Beefcake always polls as a very weak episode. It’s between Beefcake and Third Dimension for worst of S2.
Uhoo, more comments. Hi Joe, I like your work here over the years. In fact, if i type ch in my browser the first sugggestion is Sarah Walker vs. Her Type.
Luke, you’re certainly right but i still have fresh feelings about this and probably that’s why I use strong words like “hate”. At first watching Beefcake was right after Best Friends so, 30 minutes after those sweet moments i have puerile spy stuff, Chuck dump Sarah, whiny and ridiculous Chuck and Sarah kissing james bond and lying about that. Is a little too much for me. I guess, i don’t like triangles and OLI stuff also.
With S3 is pretty simple. After Mask it was like watching my wife having an affair … with shaw. 🙂
I think after vicky-vicky-vicky-vale this show was all about Charah for me. I like humor and action but romance first, on Chuck at least. Idk why, i’m not even an romantic type.
It’s funny Ovi, I think a lot of us were unexpectedly drawn to the romance in this show. Chuck and Sarah together were awesome. Disruptions and triangles were not appreciated! Especially when they were severely overdone in those first seasons!
All that said though, I do think Chuck being whiney, and nobody (especially Sarah) believing in him is what really breaks Beefcake. If Sarah had endorsed the idea of Chuck hacking the chip it would have helped the whole episode. And of course no stupid kiss…
Yes Dave, they are awesome toghether. Except when they aren’t 🙂 Like in Beefcake.
I tried to ff watch the episode today and i stoped when Sarah was all a smile in torture room when James Bond Cole claimed is the Intersect. No smiles for Chuck today.
It’s funny he managed to hack the chip in few minutes in Buy More.
Ironically, now, in case of a movie, Zachary Levi in this great shazamic shape could be the best James Bond ever. Nerdy Chuck/Bryce/Cole (maybe Shaw but i still don’t know why) all toghether, infinite possibilities and fun.
Its funny (or maybe sad is more appropriate word here) but if Chuck was airing today I don’t think I would have gotten through season 1 because zero tolerance for triangles and interference of the relationship from recurring guest characters like Bryce and later Shaw (did not mind Cole as much because I thought he was more likeable than the aforementioned characters) or how Chuck and Sarah bicker like children. There seems to be very few shows that get a couple together and keep them together creating drama by having an issue or obstacles they can face and work through TOGETHER! Heck on some shows even the union itself is marred by an often ridiculous event (disappearance, a continually kept secret, near death experience etc) I just wish more shows operated closer to say, Monica and Chandler (friends) or Jim and Pam from The Office or Rick and Kate on Castle (minus the first wedding and first part of the last season). Don’t create Drama by changing the core of the relationship itself or making the audience feel like the pair in question will never be together or could split up after the fact.
Josh you know it’s long been television SOP to create that sort of drama. Normally, unless “stable” is meant to be a couple’s defining trait (think Ellie and Devon) some sort of relationship drama will be employed.
But no doubt, it’s a huge disconnect between Hollywood writers and me. I begrudgingly accept some such drama. On Chuck, I think the conflict of interest for two seasons was beautifully played. That may in fact be central to why Chuck and Sarah are so compelling. The idea Sarah fell completely for Chuck (as perhaps the most decent and honest man she ever knew), while having to keep it to herself or risk reassignment (and trust someone else to the job she was uniquely best qualified for); is just awesome. So perfectly shown.
I see some merit bringing Jill and Bryce into the equation. They were used to sort of symbolize Chuck’s desire for “safe and normal” and Sarah’s for “competent and exciting”. But then of course they overdid it, by threefold. What initially read as an imaginative and creative show was nearly undone by repetitive and unimaginative story-telling. Ironic.
No doubt, looking things as closely and deeply as we did with Chuck has shaped my view of all television. But I can’t quite be as absolute in my conclusions as you! I may never “like” any show using love triangles or other cliches that make the featured couple look bad and/or unstable, but honestly I don’t always care so much. Even shows I do care more about I may cut more slack in some situations than others (especially where “exes” are concerned).
But in the end; yeah, I really prefer when the featured couple plays nice together and I get no enjoyment from spats or misunderstandings.
Josh, i don’t know about Cole. After four or five attempts to convince Sarah, the strange bed arrangement and several inappropriate comments seems more like sexual harassment.
At least Bryce showed some respect for Sara’s feelings and choices.
And with that line “well, who’d have thought it. Cole Barker loses the girl to Chuck Bartowski” was so arrogant. Well, the girl thought that
Yeah Ovi, Cole was pretty insufferably sure of himself. And ultimately, that’s a part of why he DID loose to Chuck Bartowski. Nice symmetry.
Ovi, the correct order is Third Dimension, Best Friend, Suburbs. Suburbs, Beefcake and Lethal Weapon form a mini arc, I didn’t know it nor see it the first time either, it took me a rewatch to realize that the episodes were in the wrong order and a bit of online research confirmed it.
What Cole did wasn’t sexual harassment because Sarah actually liked him and his attitude was a big part of why he was hot. It’s a bit of a chicken and egg situation because, if a more regular guy would try to act like that, he would come off as lame, sometimes even creepy. See Lester asking Sarah out in Hard Salami. Yes, Cole is insufferable, but only from Chuck’s pov, Casey and Sarah liked him and, eventually, so did Chuck. Also, when did Sarah lie about kissing Cole? From what I remember, she never mentioned it and I don’t think she should have.
Dave, I already mentioned it, bu my opinion is that the majority of the site’s readers were/are of the shipper kind, so it’s no surprise that an episode in which Sarah fawned over another guy was lowly rated. You have a problem with Sarah not trusting Chuck to hack the chip, Well, Sepinwall’s problem was with nobody scolding Chuck for doing that and getting caught in the process. I liked the episode for different reasons. Once upon a time, I put myself in a similar situation to Chuck’s, so this gave me a chance to basically laugh at myself. Also, because I can’t separate it from Lethal Weapon, for me they are one long episode, more so than any other of the show’s pairs of episodes. And finally, because it forced both Chuck and Sarah to see their situation from the other’s pov and that put them on the same path… until he got superpowers that allowed him to be a spy, but that’s a story for S3.
Cole never lost Sarah to Chuck because he never had a chance. He had a tiny opening due to Chuck being a dolt at the wrong time. but it go anywhere.
I’m usually not interested in and ignore (or roll my eyes at) what passes off for romance in tv shows, so triangles don’t bother me, but I’m curios what shows you guys are watching, because they all, dark or funny, have love triangles. HIMYM’s last two seasons were nothing but a triangle between three main characters. Dexter, a show about an emotionless serial killer, had one in S2. At least it gave us a funny inner monologue line: “I’m a part of a love triangle. Yep, I’m that guy.” At least in Chuck, they led to some funny moments and lines and they were short lived, harmless and they even furthered the plot. Except Shaw, that one is indefensible Somehow, the one that was irrelevant and devoid of fun managed to have the most screen time when it should have had the least.
Josh, from what I remember, Monica and Chandler hooked up off screen, in between seasons and with no setup. It was a completely different situation and Pam and Jim also dated other people before getting together, so I don’t understand how they were handled better. At lest, Chuck and Sarah had good reasons for staying apart.
Luke there’s no doubt television romance is a broken model. It is often adolescent and follows the same tired tropes time and time again. Which means for me, in most cases, the show needs to work for some other reason because I’m unlikely to find such a thing very interesting.
Chuck did stand out in the first two seasons for *mostly* handling things very well. Every triangle earned an eye roll from me but most passed quickly and did little harm to the characters or show. Yes, S3 they did serious damage to their product.
I suppose Castle, apart from the last season, remains the best done show all around for that sort of thing. Even when they did the silly triangle thing it was mostly off-screen, and the focus of the show remained the lead characters.
Grimm was another favorite, but it truly was not a romance. Two secondary characters met, dated, married, had kids through secondary story arcs over the course of the series. That was extremely well managed. For the main character, I never liked his first girlfriend. So when she went bonkers and destroyed their relationship at the end of S4 I was all on board. He switched to someone much more fun for the last two seasons. Now of course, IF I had been invested in the Nick/Juliette pairing I would have been profoundly unhappy at that point. But as I understand it, very few fans did like the character and that’s why she became an “ex”.
Current shows, I really can’t think of one with a romance I care much about. But not caring much isn’t the same as not caring at all. General rule of thumb, if a character behaves like a slimeball it undermines the whole show. And triangles increase the risk dramatically. I have quit many shows, even shows I wasn’t terribly invested in any romance at all, because of how a main character misbehaved.
Perhaps its best for me say that the characters behaving honorably is often more important to me than any particular romance. But I have to like and respect the main characters enough to CARE that they find someone. On occasion, like with Chuck, a show will have two very appealing characters get involved and then the whole thing becomes special. But I think that is very hard to engineer, it requires a certain serendipity.
And I think its the inclination of writers to both not understand, and try to destroy that very specialness when it happens. It typically doesn’t follow a show runner’s schedule or agenda, and most are too foolish to know how to work with what they have. The only way this ever works “right” is when the whole concept is based on “stable” from the start (Thin Man; Hart to Hart).
Which all means, even though I like television and watch a fair amount of it, its uncommon for me to be *completely* satisfied.
Okay after some thinking and reflecting on TBBT which just ended a few days ago (I so wish CHUCK had ended in a similarly “safe” manner as this) I now revise my earlier comment regarding love triangles…I don’t mind them as long as they, 1. don’t affect the core relationship of the characters in question. 2. at a minimum are only an episode or two, at max a season. 3. Are compelling. I can tolerate one of these conditions being broken as long as it does not affect the other two. This was CHUCK in season 1 & 2 but season 3 broke all three and did so in a spectacularly bad fashion.
Let’s look at some other shows and see what makes them better execution-wise…
Castle: Kate and Rick’s working relationship stays exactly the same and they remain friends.
The Office: Jim and Pam remain, friends, and even in season 3 when their friendship suffers a bit, we the viewer know what is going on, both characters are running from their feelings, at no time did I ever feel it was hopeless that they would reunite or be together.
TBBT: Penny breaks up with Leonard around the halfway point of season 3 out of a fear of commitment and Leonard moves on (Penny also dates other guys occasionally) at the start of season 4 until that relationship ends early in season 5 because the other girl slept with her ex-boyfriend. During this span, their friendship does not suffer.
HIMIYM: This one is a bit more complicated but what ultimately makes it tolerable is we the audience know that Robin is not who Ted builds a life with.
What really makes season 3.0 an utter failure for me is that Chuck and Sarah are not even friends, I could have handled them not being together if I didn’t have to feel as a viewer like they were so far apart. Chuck was part comedy and it forgot that in season 3.0 it’s just inexcusable that the show stopped being fun for almost an entire season! So of all of these shows, it gets an F for love triangle management here and no amount of spin can convince me otherwise!
Luke, the lie was at the beginning of the vs. Lethal Weapon
It’s just, you know, you guys had this connection.
I mean, he saved your life and you shared a bit of torture.
Uh, our connection was purely professional.
The first kisses (in the hotel room) were purely professional … almost, the last one not so much.
The problem with Beffcake was not only Cole but Cole, Chuck and Sarah as i said before. For me, as a shipper, was the lowest point for their “fake romance”.
Still, lethal weapon was ok and S2 as a whole was one of the best season.
For me (again) problem with all this PLI/LI and triangles things consist of their short-term nature. Fast hookup with OLI / fast and dramatic break up. If writing is sloppy shippers like me can be led to the wrong conclusions like for Sarah seems to be very easy to start a romance with any guy except Chuck. For drama the same thing – good writing – otherwise we have ridiculous story with Chuck forced to save a guy’s life only to kill him later to save/win the big prize/girl.
Fortunately, in other TV shows triangles didn’t bothered me too much. In Dexter the romance start to interested me only in seson 7 with Yvonne.
Okay, I saw the “purely professional” thing as Sarah being in denial, as per usual, and I also didn’t think that it was still Chuck’s business who she was cavorting with.
For me, the short nature of the PLI’s was a plus and, in retrospect, a breath of fresh air compared to other shows. A longer duration suggests that there are actual feelings in play and, once those happen, then for me it’s inconceivable that someone could go back to their original love interest. People love only one person at a time and they love them only once. Once it’s over, it’s over for good. HIMYM was the worst in this regard.
I also don’t agree that they were rushed or sloppily written. Bryce was supposedly dead and he came back very soon after that and very early into their relationship. It’s not like he came back a couple of years later and Sarah went into limbo about who she loved more.
With Cole, not only she never really started anything, but her attraction towards him was understandable given her situation. First, Chuck had been putting her through an emotional roller coaster up to that point: he broke up with her because he wanted something normal; tried to get something real with his ex; told her (Sarah) that she was his real girlfriend, even if they couldn’t actually be together (“You should give this to a real girlfriend – I know”); broke up with her again because he got too close in the Suburbs and it became unbearable for him. How about her, it wasn’t unbearable for her, too? Second, when he asked her “that’s just another lie, We will never be together” she didn’t answer because she knew the answer was yes, even if she wanted it to be no. If he was still an asset they weren’t allowed to be together and, if he weren’t an asset, she couldn’t offer him something real because of her career. She was an emotionally frustrated woman with physical needs and who was forced to face the reality that her love would never be fulfilled. Being attracted to a super hot and relentless guy seemed natural.
With Shaw, the setup was done well, too, and, because it was leading to an actual relationship, it was also slower and longer, but it was unpleasant because it happened at a very late stage of the Charah relationship and it also had to justify what Sarah was feeling for him in the final episodes, so certain unpleasant things, like the name reveal, were necessary. I don’t think that Chuck killing Shaw after he had saved him was ridiculous, but the part with Sarah losing her shit because of Shaw and then, Chuck saving him for her and that somehow making her choose him was generic garbage. It almost went to what I was talking about above, loving two persons at the same times, and that would have killed their relationship for me. Luckily, It didn’t play exactly like this, but that was the initial impression and I still hate it. The train track dinner from Final Exam through the hook up scene in Other Guy is a stretch in which almost nothing makes sense and the one that I hate the most from the entire show, even more than the finale.
Speaking of Dexter, it had great character drama, but the romance, at least for the normal people, was just thrown in to be there. Every season, Deb was dating someone and after one or two episodes she was in love, with Lundy being the only one that was well done. For Dexter, it was probably better, but it was also difficult to relate to, since he was mostly emotionless. I didn’t buy his romance with Hannah in S7, it was too sudden and they didn’t have much chemistry, certainly not like Chuck and Sarah. I liked it better in S8. Btw, I was expecting a different character for Yvonne since I knew she was going to be a serial killer and I couldn’t quite get her initially, but she turned out to be like Sarah: femme fatale with and edgy and dangerous exterior, but sweet and vulnerable on the inside.
Okay I completely reject that last Luke. People aren’t animals, that sort of “need” is nonsense. You choose to behave honorably… or not. No need.
But for the rest, this is mostly arguing taste and preference. I hate such stories. Doesn’t even matter if it can be explained or justified or whatever. I reject it as entertainment. Doesn’t matter what defense there ever is for it, its nothing I want to see. I’d rather see more admirable behavior every time.
Such things draw a reaction on Chuck for two main reasons; first, many of us concluded from early S1 that Chuck would be different, better than most of what’s on television. Then they regurgitated the same idiocy six times in three seasons. It was the worst sort of bait and switch.
The second thing I see is closely related. The show drew an audience that didn’t WANT to see such things. We saw admirable lead characters and a story of unrequited love; the sort of thing that’s uncommon on television, and appealing to a particular, more grown up sort of audience. Then it turned into a teen soap…
The fact the show still appealed to many of us is remarkable. And that it finally morphed into the sort of show many of us hoped for is extraordinary. But it struggled at times and wallowed badly in S3.
Luke, i have nothing with Bryce and Jill as PLI (i just forgot to add this). They were part of the story from Pilot. Both C&S had baggages, i’m ok with this. After this, no PLI for me.
Still, i understand your point with Cole. Maybe “hot” guys who shoot helicopters and talk about Botticelli are not my type for Sarah. 🙂 … and i don’t see how kissing a hot guy could satisfy her needs. As Dave said, you always can choose to behave honorably. When Sarah (or Chuck) chose to not i don’t like it.
With Shaw, was anything else than a good setup. At the end of First Class we have some sort of bonding about losing someone who they both cared about/loved but also a resolution
We both made the same mistake, Sarah.
We fell in love with spies.
In Mask we have boss Shaw hitting on his subordinate in a mission. We have a first time so honest Sarah about her feelings – “it was kind of nice”. She even apologized (for the first time too) for how she reacted when he was hitting on her. Sarah changed from almost despising him at the beggining of Mask to a submissive bimbo at the end of Fake Name after a pecs show (hot?) and name reveal for the first time again. Three-four days? I stop here but there are more OOC Sarah.
What is this garbage, to quote Lester? Not a good setup for me.
About the part with Sarah losing her shit because of Shaw, now, finally now … i know, i want to be a s… sorry, i think this is exactly what they want to tell us, Sarah’s chosing between Chuck and Shaw, between two types of relationships.
I didn’t mean it like that, like she was on the prowl. Just that it was one of the factors that put her in a vulnerable state in which she could become attracted to other guys. Usually, happy girls don’t care about other guys. If Chuck had not broken up with her, she probably wouldn’t have even batted an eyelash at Cole and, if he had continued with his advances, she would have given him the riot act just like she did with Shaw in Mask.
Speaking of acting honorable, was she not honorable here? She shared a kiss that she didn’t even initiate and, even though a vacation with him sounded fun, she told him no because she didn’t want to hurt Chuck. I’ll go even further and say that for me they always acted honorably. They never cheated on each other and when they started something with other people they did it believing that they won’t get together.
With Shaw, it was a good setup because of what it was trying to setup. They wanted to end the show with Chuck getting the girl, and for some reason he had to win her over from some super spy. Why? I don’t know, Fedak just likes these corny endings. The problem was that their relationship was so advanced and well developed that it would have made no sense for Sarah to just be with another guy. In effect, they had to explain her being ready to die less than a year after giving up her career to be with Chuck for some dude that she had been dating for only a couple of months. They would have had to be: a) close, obviously; b) in a romantic relationship, otherwise Chuck’s sacrifice wouldn’t have been so selfless; c) they couldn’t actually be in love, because that would have made Sarah a flake and that would have undermined her feelings for Chuck.
Sarah’s 180 on Shaw wasn’t ooc and wasn’t too rushed either. It was done on purpose, to show you how deep her despair was: she started a relationship with a guy that, initially she wasn’t even attracted to because he was the only person who was listening to her. Telling him her real name was an attempt to find closeness to someone in a moment of profound loneliness. Did it feel like a slap in the face for Chuck? Yeah, but it was supposed to in order to shake him out from his douche trance. I have written about this before so here it is and I think there is more, a couple of comments below it: https://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com/2018/04/01/open-comment-thread/#comment-200649
Luke I’m pretty sure we’ll never see eye to eye on most of that. Especially things related to S3; which you know was all Schwartz not Fedak (when discussing S3 prior to production Fedak always deferred with “its Josh’s show”). Fedak took over as show runner for S4.
But no, S3 behavior was not honorable on either count. Getting involved with someone new while still pining for someone else is not fair to anyone. And you can get into an endless stream of justifications if you want; but it all comes back to my key point “not the sort of thing I want to watch…”
This is the territory of teen soaps, which is Josh Schwartz’ turf; and of no interest to me.
I agree Dave especially with your point of pining. I have two exceptions however, Big Bang and HIMYM, the former more than the latter. Big Bang really nailed the whole “nerd pining after a beautiful woman who is so clearly out of his league. That played out for the first couple seasons.” Better writing by far from a comedy perspective. On Chuck that element felt annoying to me, but on Big Bang it genuinely funny. Big Bangs pilot is actually the funniest sitcom pilots ever. It’s wild that the show was almost so else entirely. I’ve seen the unaired pilot and thank god they rewrote and recast because Sheldon and Leonard were the only thing that they had right from the beginning. I don’t know why I tolerate HIMYM maybe it’s because I relate to Ted and his efforts to find love. Sadly I like Chuck less and less as time goes by, there’s a diamond in there but I think it ultimately could not handle the pressure and came out very flawed, I would see a movie but only for nostalgia and true closure, and if I don’t like the presentation I would not make it through the whole thing.
Dave,
I’ve read this old comment
Do you know more about all this damage control stuff, especially after Mask? I think the sham thing and S3 could’ve been much worse than was? I mean, did any public informations appeared about what kind of scenes they cut when the show aired?
Josh I kind of understand about “liking Chuck less” over time, I feel a tendency to exaggerate the shortcomings and forget the strengths. But those strengths truly are huge. The blend of comedy and action was about as well done as we’ve ever seen on television. And the characters, especially Chuck and Sarah were beautiful, perfect.
That certain elements of the writing veered into trite television cliche is disappointing, but doesn’t need to undercut those things that DID work well.
Dave, I don’t know at all that it was all Schwartz. Yes, a lot of what happened in S3 had his hand prints all over it, Shaw and Sarah was a lite version of Marissa and Volchek from The OC and frankly, I wish it wouldn’t have been the lite version, then maybe people would have understood that relationship better. But all of this happened because they tried to accommodate the ending that Fedak had in mind and there’s no way that someone could convince me otherwise.
IIRC, the approximate quote was “This is a Josh Schwartz show, so it has to go through him,” but it was an answer to a music related question, not about who has final say on creative decisions. In fact, I don’t think that was ever addressed by either one of them and I find it hard to believe that Schwartz decided how the show would end since it was Fedak’s baby and he came on only to help him.
But the best indicators are the other two series finales that Fedak wrote: Ring and Goodbye. Same story, Chuck gets the girl. There was no reason for Bryce to be in Ring, he was brought back just so that Sarah could reject him even though he was done as a love interest after Nemesis. These are the endings that Fedak likes, it doesn’t matter if they make sense, if they do damage to characters or if the show has evolved past them. Somehow, he always found a way to put Chuck in a position to win Sarah over. Say what you will about Schwartz, but I don’t remember him being so corny with The OC.
As for the honorable behavior, it wasn’t fair to Hannah, but that was on purpose, they wanted to make Chuck a jerk. I understand that many didn’t like it, but it’s not like he became Walter White or Tony Soprano, he was more a goofier James Bond lite. I guess you could say that Chuck should have payed more attention to Sarah’s feelings, so he wasn’t completely fair to her, but I don’t think that Sarah was unfair to Shaw and Chuck. Chuck had made his choice and was going down on a different path and Shaw knew that she was still in love with Chuck, he even asked her in Final Exam
Yes Luke I understand all the “trying to dos” and whatever; and they certainly could have spent more time developing the characters, relationships and whatnot. But my point is about entertainment, and they came perilously close to me deciding I had better things to do on a Monday night. I would have absolutely dumped a show that spent more time on non-Charah relationships. A clear case of more being less. I THOUGHT when I found the show in 2007 that I had found something fresh and different, through much of S3 I learned that I had not.
But no, the quotes I was thinking of had nothing to do with music. It had to do with story direction immediately after Ring ran. It may have been Fedak trying to dodge the questions, but most of us read it as he wasn’t calling the shots yet. He remained second fiddle until late S3/early S4.
Luke this is really a pointless discussion. You might as well try to convince me I should like sushi or hip hop. Ernie gave it his best shot back in real time and my taste won’t be changing now.
I know what I like, and favorite characters hurting each other will never be on that list. It doesn’t matter one iota if we can understand it or not. I’ve got other shows to watch, books to read, models to build, games to play…
Ditto Dave, the bottom line is the ship was already sinking when Fedak took over, and all you have to do is look at OC/Gossip Girl to know that Schwartz steered Chuck into the iceberg. Looking back on it, I don’t really blame Fedak for trying to bring Chuck full circle in the finale, it was about him after all, otherwise the show would have been called something else. I mostly just have an a sense that it’s better if nothing further happens with it because I really don’t trust that anything we get will be handled properly. Besides so many of us have written/read our or others versions of what could have been, I don’t see the point anymore.
I actually make a bet we will get a true Big Bang Spin off (young Sheldon is a prequel) before we ever return to the Chuckverse. Especially if CBS can’t fix the mess that is the rest of their comedy programming these days, reminds me of when NBC collapsed post 2004, to be honest comedy seems to be dying across network TV, or at least new comedy seems to be dying across Network TV…say what you will about Big Bang, but even its worst episodes are better than 95% of the genre as a whole these days. Man I love to laugh and it’s really sad that I can’t find anything new…nothing holds my interest and I would just as soon watch something I’ve seen endless times before
I have never watched O.C and never will. I found this for Marissa
https://oc.fandom.com/wiki/Marissa_Cooper/_Relationships
She started 9 relationships cu 5 different guys, 4 times with one. This show must have been the heaven for triangles lovers.
I saw on YT some hot scenes between them (Marissa -Voltchek). I believe that’s why sham is lite version. Do we know certainly that they have never shot some hot S/S scenes and do not use them after a damage control? With Chuck and Hannah they went this way and knowing their obsession for symmetry could have been.
Probably would never have had an S4 in this case.
Dave, I wasn’t trying to convince you to like it because you made that clear well before I have found this site. I was having a discussion with Ovi because he said that Beefcake was useless and that he didn’t like the PLI’s because, go figure, they were too short. The rest was me responding to your comments.
If you guys like to blame Schwartz for pulling the trigger that’s your prerogative, but I blame Fedak for giving the order and, so far, while not conclusive, the evidence points towards him being.
Ovi I’m pretty sure the only damage control they did was in interviews and promotional material (the Chuckpocalypse in February of 2010). No changes or re-edits to the show itself were ever done. If they’d been paying attention, the writing was on the wall from Comic Con 2009. They should have known better than to pursue the S3 story that they did, it could never fly for this audience.
Yeah, Josh, he did really well by nuking the show’s second lead and the only interesting character of the last two seasons. Even Dexter’s sister got a better treatment.
Ovi, that’s not what I meant by Marissa and Volchek. She started the show as a pretty happy and normal girl, but then her parents divorced, her mom slept with her ex, she was friends with some guy that turned out to be a psycho, she started drinking and doing drugs and almost OD’ed. Anyway there was more, but by season 3 she was a really messed up girl while Volchek was a mega douche bag who wasn’t even pretending otherwise. She hooked up with him but it was obvious that it was out of desperation. Sarah wasn’t that messed up and Shaw wasn’t such a jerk, so it wasn’t obvious why did she hook up with him and when she told him her real name everybody, me included, assumed that she liked him more than Chuck, when in fact she was just trying to connect with someone
As for The OC,, the pilot is regarded as one of best ever and the first season and about a half are also really good. After that, it’s just going in circles.
Your wasting time trying to Defend JS to me, I don’t care for the way he overuses angst in his stories so like Dave, I will be getting off this particular train.
Really funny Zach’s view on S3 romances. Sweet irony
… love parallelogram, trapezoid … love trapezoid … wich by the way never been done on network television”
@1:45 https://youtu.be/4pR8bwhLqmI?t=105
*Which
I wasn’t, Josh, and I don’t think I was even talking to you. Thanks for the heads up, though.
Great list.
I’m an electrical/electronics engineer by training, doing embedded software these days. So analytic seems to fit me, except that my thinking and process is more associative then linearly structured. This is a blessing and a curse in my field. These kinds of lists are very helpful to me.
As to your question as to why there are more ‘analytic’ types visiting, well, start with the series description. Nerd gets computer in his brain and meets a spy. This is very specific market targeting. You are seeing the tail end results. Heck, even I almost didn’t watch it because it sounded dumb.
Even excepting all that, what were the odds that the subject matter would be examined respectfully, instead of an endless run of nerd jokes? Post breakout of ‘Big Bang Theory’, this may be different now.
Has anyone seen Limitless (tv show from 2015-2016) and what do you think about it? I saw it a while back and thought about it recently about how similar it is to Chuck. Basically the story is about a guy who becomes asset because of something he can do and he has a female agent handling him who as a person reminds me a lot of Sarah. The guy is also kind of an underachiever like Chuck. There is also a serious type of character like Casey. And now that I think about it there is a strong Ellie parallel with a member of his family. Don’t worry I haven’t spoiled much if you are planning to see it, we learn all this pretty quickly in the show.
It’s more of a drama and less of a comedy then Chuck, though by not much.
I did watch that. It was derived from the Limitless movie. Instead of an Intersect, there are these pills that raise IQ.
This was before Chuck for me. But now that you mention it, there are some parallels! I liked the show ok, and was sorry to see it cancelled. It is worth checking out, but there was no strong spark for me.
We discussed it quite regularly back when it was running. It was a very entertaining show, but lacked the strong hook of Chuck. Mainly because Brian was no Chuck; vaguely a “good guy” but not as strong or as principled as Chuck.
But also the romance was odd. The male/female leads were mostly buddies, and the age difference was enough I don’t think it would have changed much if the show ran longer. Brian was in love with a recurring character which was intriguing in its own way, but that relationship was too tertiary to the plot to get much traction.
The other show from that time got a lot of “Chuck” related buzz was Forever. It was produced by Chris Fedak and show runner was Matt Miller, so no doubt it had a familiar vibe. It also only ran one season, but it ended quite well for a one-season show. It’s the only other show that ever hooked me enough to lead to some fan fiction. Highly recommended.
Yeah I was very surprised that they never went for the romance between Brian and the detective. To me that was always missing from the show, I kept waiting for something to happen. I did like Brian though, he wasn’t principled as Chuck but he was really likeable and I loved his relationship with his father.
I have never heard about Forever but I am going to check it out, the premise sounds interesting.
But to be honest the show that is mostly filling my Chuck void these days is Lucifer. The police procedural part is kinda meh, but the relationships between characters (not just the main ones) are really great to watch.
I think the casting on Limitless was wrong for a romance with the leads. I don’t know, maybe it could work; but that never struck me as a need. The show was very entertaining, but I needed Brian to grow up.
Yeah, Dave. I never really wanted a romance on limitless. Like you, I didn’t see it. And sometimes its nice to watch a show with a strong male/female friendship and partnership without the romance drama — especially the way TV tends to write romance these days. I find myself relieved when I watch a show that avoids all that tension, but still has healthy friendships. It’s like when a romance starts up, I go Oh no, another relationship for them to screw up. And I immediately begin to detach myself from that aspect of the show. It’s like you can’t whole-heartedly invest in a relationship.
I liked Forever way more than Limitless, mostly, I think, because of the actors (superior casting imo) and character interaction/development. I was really sorry it was canceled. It was very similar (in story line) to a show a few years back called New Amsterdam, but Forever was much better on all levels.
Yes, I agree with all of that!
Although I was a little worried where things would go if they had gotten another season of Forever. Again, due to not fully trusting how television romance is written. As it stands, it ended with a very intriguing moment (“that’s a long story”) and I love imagining how that went! But you know, if the show had been renewed we probably we have had a whole season of putting it off…
Exactly!! I would have been filled with excitement for a new season and dread for what they would probably do to a really wonderful relationship. It’s maddening.
I agree with Dave that Forever was the better show. Limitless lost the plot, IIRC.
What about Deception? I just came across that, is that any good
Well I know it was a Chris Fedak show and it only ran 13 episodes before being canceled. I never saw it, but it may be fun to watch.
There was another that was even closer to Chuck and it was “Intelligence”, also canceled after 13 episodes probably because I liked it.
It had a guy with unique capabilities (essentially wi-fi in his head through a chip). Guy gets assigned attractive Secret Service bodyguard and it even has a redhead boss lady (Marge Helgenberger). In total construct this was closer to Chuck than some of the others IMO.
Oh I vaguely remember that one. Did it have any sort of full story in 13 episodes?
Seriously why are all these intriguing shows getting canceled after 1 season, while CSI keeps producing million useless and boring spinoffs that go on forever. I don’t understand this
Popularity is hard to figure. How does a thing like Scorpian survive for four seasons?
I few things I can see. Too much of television tries to be dark and “sophisticated”. But I think cable and streaming services own that market. CBS pulls in large audiences by respecting its older and more conservative audience. NBC wants to be HBO but is spectacularly ill equipped to do that. They need to look more realistically at their viewers. In particular, more stuff that is light hearted, fun and edifying.
I am certain the reason all these simple singing/dancing things work is because they are fun and don’t take themselves too seriously. That is a recurring theme I hear from family/friends who watch them. They want to laugh and have fun after a day of work, not wonder who’s getting eaten by zombies.
Also, for many of us, we may like a more involved plot and story, but Hollywood moralizing is offensive and clueless. So any television show has to be approached carefully.
It seems funny to me how with more sources (networks, cable channels, streaming services) we less quality programming. I think in part it’s because they all think they don’t need to reach the mainstream, just find their own little niche. Then they all fight over the same little niche.
And the mainstream has given up on even paying attention. They’ll just watch singing shows, HGTV and Hallmark Channel.
I liked Intelligence, and you’re right, it was very Chuck like.
As for popularity, I don’t get why some of these really good shows get canceled, but there are some long running procedurals that I really enjoy, like NCIS (original and LA, but not NO). Sometimes it’s nice to watch a show that’s not serialized. Give me a nice weekly story, but the main thing for me is the casting and characters. If the cast has chemistry and the characters are interesting and likable and noble (people I can root for), and if they grow, then I’m in. NCIS has that cast chemistry thing in spades.
I agree with Dave. I don’t like the bent toward dark drama. I also find Hollywood moralizing to be offensive and clueless. If a show has an agenda to push, particularly if it’s in my face, I’m gone. Just give me good characters and an interesting story without a PC agenda.
Yeah cast chemistry is huge. Really, I think, more important even than story. Chuck was a rare thing that got so much of that right.
Yeah, and cast depth, too. It’s nice to have a full cast of fully developed characters. I hate it when half the characters feel more like props than characters.
And again, how did Scorpion last four seasons?!
When we watched we were laughing at them not with them; but I guess that’s all ratings!
So follow up question, what really horrible shows do we watch and not quite know why? And I’m not looking for shameful confessions…
The show I am most embarrassed about is Arrow. I loved season 1, season 2 was good, and then it became pointless and repetitive. And yet I kept watching for way too long, even watched until season 5 until I couldn’t take it anymore. I don’t think I have ever seen a show that had so much potential turn into something so horrible and boring.
I also watched Flash, Supergirl, and LoT. I know I am going to be judged for that, but they are my guilty pleasures
atcDave
Intelligence was definitely ended as if they expected to be picked up for a second season at least. It was a second half of the season (Feb-May) so they clearly finished filming before the decisions were made. The final scene was an evil agent meeting with the surprise evil guy to be told “there was a lot more to do”.
Good point, Dave. I watched Scorpion for a while, but you’re right it was an eye-roller most of the time. I quit at the end of S4. There are a few shows I stay up to date with, but the others build up, and I watch when I’ve run out of better shows to watch. So, I confess, in any show with a central relationship, like Scorpion, I read ahead before I commit to watch another season. If I see that they are going to take the relationship or the plot somewhere I don’t like, I bail. I put up with S4, because they were finally going to let Walter and Paige get together. But when I read where S5 was headed, there wasn’t any chance at all I would continue. Same with Castle, I never finished, because I just couldn’t stomach the final season’s messing with the marriage. So, I’ve taken to “cheating” to decide if I’ll continue a show or not.
I’ve also watched the superhero shows and wonder why. When I’ve run out of more engaging content, I peruse my recorded shows to see which one might fill the gap until something better comes along. Most of the hero shows start out fine, but then they have to go darker and darker. That’s when I stop watching. Blindspot is another I have picked up again. We’ll see how it goes. I know where it’s headed for S3, so forewarned, I’ll watch a while longer.
It’s funny how we’re all pretty similar on this! Even the things that embarrass us! Flash is the last of my CW shows, and that may be about done.
Thinkling you know Scorpion was finally cancelled, so no S5 will be made. I almost wonder if that season ending twist forced the network decision. For which I would thank them.
Dave you didn’t really motivate me to check out Intelligence!
I started Blindspot, then dumped it. But it’s one I’ve been thinking about getting back to.
Castle did finish okay. It’s just the first few episodes of the last season that went off the rails. It’s one of those dumb “Beckett leaves Castle to protect him from something very bad coming her way” until they decide they can face it better together. So, moronic set up. But it doesn’t play out bad. Even so, I wish they’d never made the last season. The behind the scenes stuff almost did more damage than on screen.
Ah, I guess it was S3 of Scorpion that I watched and dumped it from reading ahead in S4. Maybe I’ll give castle a try. I think the Castle writers were the worst for season finales, and they don’t deserve to be forgiven for the wedding debacle. It was a bent to the writing staff that really irked me when it came to the relationship. I mean you can practically hear them laughing with diabolical glee as we watch Kate look over the edge at Rick’s crashed car on the rocks below, or the interrupted engagement, or Kate standing at his door wanting back into his life, not to mention the king eye-roller of Kate getting shot. Well, they get the trophy for awful season finales and wasted opportunities.
Yeah, I watch an occasional Flash or Supergirl, but nothing consistent.
I really enjoy a number of British shows: Foyle’s War (one of my all-time favorites), Father Brown, Endeavor, The Coroner, DCI Banks, Bletchley Circle (original and San Francisco), and The Doctor Blake Mysteries (Australian).
Castle was the best show with the worst finales! Comically bad.
I watch a couple of the WB hero shows, LoT and Arrow. Legends has actually gotten pretty good and done some clever stuff with the current cast. As far as network stuff I watch it’s mostly comedies like Brooklyn 99 or TBBT. I was still watching Timeless and Blindspot and This Is Us though, so maybe not all comedies.
The behind the scenes stuff on Castle almost ruined it for me. I really didn’t want to believe what I heard about that set and the main cast. I can still watch the earlier seasons and enjoy them, but I can’t watch the last few without thinking that like Moonlighting, there was a real world reason the two leads were kept apart by the writers.
Lately I’ve been binging on Burn Notice. It has a nice balance between silly and serious. Just finished Person of Interest a few weeks ago.
There is a lot of good TV out there now, I just can’t seem to get excited about anything lately.
Yeah I really enjoyed Timeless, fun show. Strangely none of the angst ever bothered much. I’m torn on if I want a follow up movie or not? I know its been discussed, but I sort of like how things ended.
I do agree about Castle, at least to say they should have ended a season earlier.
Burn Notice was interesting. I loved the first few seasons (three or four?). But it got progressively darker and I hated the last season. I think that’s when USA ended their “Blue Skies” philosophy and its like the show runner was eager to race for the bottom. I think it would have worked better if Michael had figured out much sooner he no longer wanted the spy’s life and was happy with what he was doing around Miami.
I do keep thinking of trying Blindspot again, I like most of what I’ve heard about it.
NBC actually greelighted (greenlit?) a two hour finale for Timeless to air around Christmas.
Interesting about Burn Notice. I’m presently in season 4.
I never did finish this season of Blindspot, but I heard the finale was a “game changer” which makes me nervous.
I loved timeless. The relationship stuff never really bothered me. The ending was kind of bizarre, since they broke all their own rules,but I would like a movie to finish the story.
I watched burn notice until it veered dark. Then I quit.
I read ahead on blindspot. I’m glad I’m forewarned. Being forewarned, I’ll keep watching
Ohhhh, so Thinkling likes the Blindspot game changer? This sounds intriguing.
Ernie it’s good to hear that the Timeless movie is happening. No matter what I ever say about “ending in a good spot” I almost always decide more is better! And then sometimes regret it…
and I know your take on “darkness” is quite different from mine; Burn Notice may work fine for you. But I’ve rarely seen a show go from SO GOOD to SO BAD!
I won’t say I like the game changer, but knowing what’s coming I will watch with a certain emotional detachment, which is possible because I wasn’t all that emotionally invested to begin with.
SPOILER :
From what I understand, they take a page out of the chuck book.
Thinkling, on Blindspot, I kinda heard it was something like that. I’ll probably catch up before next season.
With Timeless it almost seems they left too much to wrap up in two hours, but I look forward to it.
Timeless finale was a nice setup for another season. They were pretty fearless. So, yeah, a two hour wrap-up will be a challenge
Ooof maybe I’ll still pass on Blindspot.
I thought Timeless was a lot better this year than last and they were clearly getting bolder. The finale did set up some great possibilities for a new season, so I am looking forward to it. Just too bad it’s only going to be two hours.
I’m a little surprised with its ratings that we’re even getting the movie!
But yeah fun show. I would maybe prefer more history and less grand conspiracy; but they did a really nice job weaving things together and keeping it interesting.
Yes, Dave, with Timeless, the history was by far my favorite part. (That’s why I think you’d like Foyle’s War) And the actress did such a great job as the historian in complete awe of seeing history as it was being made. So fun. After the first season, I told my sister-in-law (a history teacher) she had to check it out. A couple of weeks later, I asked if she’d had time to watch any of Timeless, and she said yep she had watched all of them. It’s a must-see for history buffs.
With Blindspot, I’ll keep watching a) because I’m not as invested in the relationship, and b) because memory loss has been part of the show all along. I’m not keen on it, but bracing myself, I’ll see what they do with it.
The lead actress on Timeless, Abigail Spencer, is a favorite of mine. She had a run on Mad Men and on a little known show called Rectify. She plays the sister of a death row inmate who is released largely due to her decades of work on his behalf. It is one of the best dramas I have ever seen, and her work is incomparable. But it can be a tough show to watch.
I noticed Rectify several times, Ernie, and thought it looked interesting. In what way is it tough to watch?
It is not a happy show. Just about everyone is suffering in some way for the decisions they made when Daniel was sentenced to death row and after.
Daniel has no ability to define himself and has no idea how to fit in or what is expected of him. His sister (played by Abagail Spencer) put her life on hold, moving back from a promising job in Atlanta to work for 19 years to exonerate him, and is now paying the price of a dead-end job and no future prospects as a result of her 19 year crusade.
I never did finish it, though I probably will some day. Let’s just say, amazing as the drama is and the performances are, not many of the characters have many good days. You never get to see more than that glimmer of hope for very long.
Sup. A lot of comments to sip through. I’m not replying directly to a comment right now, because it’s a more general response.
Stevie, I agree with you that season 3 made Sarah look more human by making her more flawed, but I’m not sure it did so with Chuck. Putting the greater good ahead of his personal desires made him look more like a superhero than a flawed human being. Yes, he did have the douche arc from First Class through Fake Name, but that was more of a teaching experience than a lasting trait of the character.
Like Dave said, Chuck and Sarah appealed to viewers because they behaved like real people, your analysis is too rooted in symbolism and literature and tv tropes, which is why I disagree with, I think, the rest of it.
Not only I don’t agree with the idea that they had to go through something like this to be ready for their relationship, but I despise it. This is just a TV trope that has no basis in reality and its sole purpose is to artificially prolong the wt/wt. You love each other, you don’t have mental issues, you’re not much younger than 25 and both have a stable material situation, then congrats, you’re ready for an adult relationship. Ideally, you would also have the experience of one or two long term relationships under your belt , but in lieu of that, you don’t start dating other people, you learn the ropes together. I for one, am thankful that the writers didn’t resort to this trope and came up with more palpable reasons for this conflict. The simple reason why it happened was because the producers wanted to and they felt they could do it. At the start of the third season, they had two options: put them together or break them apart. A return to the status quo of “we love each other and we will make googly eyes at each other until our situation changes” would have meant stalling and the story needed to progress, in one direction or the other.
I also don’t agree with the theory that self-loathing and believing that they were not worthy of each other were the reasons that they stayed apart. Something like this wasn’t explored throughout the season, there was only one line that would hint at it. Yes, they both have a degree of it, but that’s the result of their situations. Self-loathing is not the cause of self-destructive behavior, it’s just an effect of it. When people are distressed, they seek comfort. That’s why trauma victims are given blankets, kids are actually given toys. Chuck didn’t start working at Buy More because he hated himself and thought that he didn’t deserve more. Getting expelled and dumped at the same time was traumatic and he found comfort in living with his protective sister and in being the king of Buy More. It was a comfort zone that he wasn’t ready to leave until he got over Jill and Stanford and he hated himself for it, but when he was ready and had the opportunity to do something great with his life (remember, he had dreams of being a billionaire), he took it. It may have been a selfish motive, but he also didn’t want to run from the responsibility that his new power gave him, so he had that going for him.
I don’t buy that Chuck didn’t feel worthy of Sarah or that he felt she didn’t love him enough because he wasn’t a spy and that’s why he decided to become one. His words at the end of Lethal Weapon are those of a man who is confident in himself, in her feelings for him and who understands what are the obstacles between them and what he needs to do to remove them. They could also be the words of a delusional man, but he’s not Jeff. Now, he underestimated how much the job meant to Sarah and finding that out gave him doubts, but those were dispelled when she asked him to run away. I concede that there is a possibility that he may have thought that if he had run with her, she would have seen him as weak and stopped loving him, but it seemed to be of a low priority for him. His explanations never start with it and his further actions don’t agree with it: When he understood that Sarah basically went all Ron Burgundy on him and gave him a me or the job ultimatum, he chose the job. He also started dating other chick, which would have made no sense, if he wanted to be spy so he could be with Sarah.
As for Sarah, she was never a monster. A monster wouldn’t have saved Molly, wouldn’t have fought to keep Chuck out of a bunker and wouldn’t have hesitated to kill him in that house. Those are things that someone like early Casey or the 49-B would have done. She also doesn’t blame herself for the failed relationship with her father, she actually blames him because she knows he is a criminal. My guess is that’s the reason why she’s attracted to guys like Bryce, Cole or Chuck. They have her father’s good parts (fun, charming) and the opposite of his bad parts (they try to help people). If she needed redeeming was for the scams she did with him and that’s why her career is important to her, it gave her a purpose. It also gave her the opportunity for adventures, which was also the good part of her criminal career. This is what drives the conflict of the second season. Sarah understands that Chuck needs a real life, but she also knows that she can’t give it to him as long as she’s a spy. You can trace this by going from “I’m just his cover girlfriend. Chuck is entitled to a real one” to “I wanna be a real person again. With you. This is what you want, right?” I don’t see how a person that makes that kind of sacrifice for someone else would feel unworthy of their love. It just doesn’t compute for me.
Shaw… Maybe I’m wrong, but my understanding is that you believe that she got into a relationship with him because she thought that she didn’t deserve more. So, the guy she was in love with, begged her to take him back, but she didn’t like him anymore because he had become just like her and then she decided to punish herself by going for a cardboard cut-out of Superman? Normal people do this? I say she didn’t want to be with Chuck anymore because she didn’t trust him anymore. Killing the mole was the equivalent of going to the dark side, he had become a spy like every other, someone that would have chosen the job over her, just like Bryce had done before. As for why she was with Shaw? Talking about a difficult loss and being understood is comforting and he was a guy that also lost someone and wasn’t afraid to admit it. Shaw was to Sarah a comfort object, her attraction to him was only sexual and it was driven by the fact that she didn’t get lucky in about three years. If she did something with Giles, it was for work, so I guess it didn’t count. Just like Chuck was ready to leave the Buy More only when he got over Jill, she would have dumped Shaw when she would have gotten over Chuck.
You say that without this arc, it would have been just a romantic comedy. The third season is definitely heavier, but that’s because of the second season. Without it, it’s just another story of a geek stealing a hot girl from a jock, ending with the lovely rom-com trope of “I don’t know who to choose.” One thing that the misery arc accomplished was to ruin the Chuck and Sarah relationship for a part of the viewers (it almost did it for me too) and if you don’t care about them, then there’s no reason to watch the last two seasons, because everything else blows. I would say that the fourth season is good because of the second season and in spite of the third one. And I actually prefer S3 to S4, because everything else is so much better (except Shaw compared to Volkoff) and my displeasure with Charah runs only from Final Exam through Other Guy.
I agree with you, I don’t believe self-loathing played a big part in them staying away from each other. And the part about Chuck not feeling worthy of Sarah and that is why he choose to become a spy so he could be her equal is not really why he made the choice he did. He did because as he later explained: she taught him to put other people’s needs above his own.
That was the moment that it took me out of it. Chuck from the first two seasons was the guy who constantly complained about the spy life and how one day he is going to get rid of Intersect and they can live a normal life, the guy who always expressed his feelings to Sarah and talked about their future together. That guy would have chosen Sarah, it’s as simple as that. He wouldn’t choose some sense of duty as a spy, a life that he always rejected, the life that he was thrown into and he didn’t even get a say in. He would have chosen her, the person who was always there for him and got him through it all, sacrificed so much to help him because she loves him. He would have taken the leap, despite the doubts, like he did in Honeymooners.
The character of Chuck who always felt real, didn’t feel that way anymore. It felt like the writers didn’t want to stay true to the characters, but they wanted to create some conflict and angst between them for the sake of drama.
I actually liked how Chuck chose the greater good at the end of Ring. But we were already at the point where Chuck and Sarah’s poor communication skills were even annoying the professional critics; if Sarah leaving the spy life to be with Chuck, while Chuck became a spy (partly) for Sarah had been played for laughs, it might have worked. But squeezing more angst from that rock, no way.
sorry about the typos… now continuing a thought.
What were Sarah’s objections to Chuck becoming a spy? Lying, killing, and other dastardly deeds? Why such a strong reaction against something which she already is?
Aren’t the self-loathing aspect of that obvious?
I think self-loathing is way too strong. It is possible to want better, expect better, without hating oneself.
I think protecting another’s innocence is also common and admirable, just like any parent who worries about their kids growing up too fast.
I think for Sarah we see such a balancing act; admiring Chuck and wanting to protect him to the extent she both puts him on a pedestal and sees him as a child. People are often complex like that, we’re not simple binary problems.
I’d say it’s also common in many adult relationships that It takes time and wisdom to see another person in all their complexity. And all too many of our Sarah analysis discusses over simplify her even worse than she ever over simplified Chuck.
Sarah was an admirable heroic character who had done many great and terrible things in her career. She seemed to take great pride in her own good and great shame in her own bad. So she sees Chuck as someone with great strengths that are very different from hers, and by her own admission, falls for him immediately. She maybe takes an unrealistic view about preserving some of Chuck’s traits, but I don’t believe we need to say she hated herself for it.
Just like any burgoining relationship she needs time see Chuck in his full humanity and needs to love him for his strengths, weaknesses and quirks. It takes time to take it all in, and Sarah is particularly inexperienced with such relationships so she may over-react to some ups and downs. No problem, by S3.5 we see her taking a pretty healthy approach to learning and growing.
The real S3 objection is not that Chuck or Sarah made unrealistic or out-of-character decisions, although I have played that game on occasion. But really that such a key period of growth was handled in such a profoundly unentertaning way. Key growth that could have been so satisfying to see happen for a couple instead happened to two individuals. Even worse, show runners were never very interested in Sarah’s growth that meant much of her process seemed to spring up out of nowhere. Hence we end up in all these silly arguments..
I agree with some of that Dave. But I’m dealing with the story as it is laid down. I don’t think she went straight to self-loathing it was a process.
Here’s one possible evolution Sarah’s emotions in S03…
1. Chuck seemingly rejects her after opening herself to him.
2. She’s angry and hurt. We see this.
3. Then she finds out that Chuck waits to be a spy because of her unintentional encouragement. This is where her anger leaves her, and is starting to be replaced by a seed of self-loathing for setting Chuck on the one path that she never wanted him to take,
4. This grows the whole time that Chuck is getting closer to be a spy. And she is forced to train him thus making it worse.
5. Sarah gives up on Chuck because it is too painful to contemplate, so she tries to bury all those emotions and seeks a transfer to DC with Shaw.
6. Chuck is giving outward signs of becoming more like her, lying, burning an asset, Fake Name, etc.
7. Sarah observes all this, and it is worse and worse for her seeing Chuck going down this path, and apparently succeeding. Becoming more like her, or at least who she was.
8. Chuck and Sarah meet for the Final Examine. Chuck finally, finally commits to her again. He kisses her and she responds despite herself. Appearances aside, she is NOT Shaw’s.
9. Chuck passes the Final Exam, and thinks he’s done.
10. Shaw decides this is time for Chuck’s Red Test. Now this sets Sarah on a tailspin. Her Red Test is the “worst day of her life”. And now it is Chuck’s turn, and she is proctoring him. No chance of self-loathing here, right?
11. Chuck passes the Red Test, with, unbeknownst to her, Casey’s help.
12. This is the worst possible outcome for her. She loves Chuck, and basically turned him into the killer that she never wanted. But still, no self-loathing, right?
13. Chuck tells her the Red Test really didn’t happen the way she thinks, and to let him have this one secret. But can she trust him still, since he has learned to lie so well? Is it possible that he is still Chuck?
14. Chuck commits to her again with the famous “I love you” X4 speech. Kisses her again and she responds again. Still, not Shaw’s.
15. Chuck asks her to run away with her. Don’t answer now, meet me at the station.
16. She’s packing in her room. Who is she gonna meet Chuck or Shaw? (Hint: it’s never about Shaw.)
17. Casey shows up and tells her that he killed the mole! At least this quilt is lifted from her. Chuck is still Chuck. She throws her gun on the bed, clearly now running away with Chuck.
18. Then Shaw takes her away, and shows her that she killed his wife for her Red Test. But still, no self-loathing, right?
( I know I have said no meta, but I think they took it too far with this last bit. Probably to make it clear that Sarah was suffering, especially to those who still weren’t catching on. So, turn the knob to 11!)
19. Chuck knows all this, and still saves her, body and soul, in Paris.
20 Sarah asks in wonder: “You saved me?” Then catharsis and joy. This is not the response of a spy whose life is saved by a colleague. It is the response of someone whose worst is known and is loved. That is the wonder. This is Chuck’s gift to her.
100% agree Dave. She wanted to protect Chuck and shield him from that life as much as she could, which was a little naive, but admirable nonetheless. Don’t think she hated herself for that
The only thing I can’t quite figure out is what was Chuck waiting for? His depth of self loathing, and maybe despair, was the weeks in cheese ball hell. He roused himself from that upon hearing that Sarah was back in Burbank. Way to go Chuck!
After Carina shared his taped spy school explanation and expression of love with Sarah, he did not attempt a rapprochement until the Final Exam. Clearly, Sarah was still open to him, had he kept trying..
Is this back to his self confidence issues? It took being about to reconnect with Morgan to snap him out of it.
Once again the fault was not in their love, it was within themselves.
Fault was in the screenplay.
meta
Commercial television is always meta first.
Likely the truth. But understanding the meta info around Chuck is not my goal.
And if that makes me a poor fit for this forum, so be it. I do not wish to intrude.
No hey carry on. But for S3 I only do meta.
And BTW, meta is completely appropriate because it was what was on screen that broke me of any interest in what was on screen.
Luke,
I understand why people don’t like S03. Really, I do. I’m not trying to reverse engineer Sarah and Chuck into something they are not.
I’m trying to understand why the series as a whole resonated so stronger with me, in ways I did not realize until the finale. So, all these meta discussions, about the writers, the show runners, the fanfic, are not helpful to me. I want to be absorbed into their story as it stands. My bond is with the story, not the production. I have less than zero interest in the business of making the show.
From my POV, it never felt like a wt/wt situation to me. It was always gonna be Sarah with Chuck. It was fated. And in classic literature, fate and character drive everything. It’s another tool to bring to our analysis. You are free to grapple with Chuck using any tools you like. But Chuck, has the feel of an epic, in the classical sense, to me. Otherwise, the resonance would not be there. And I think, in my clearly unskilled hands, that the series can reward us when looking at it from a classical epic framework.
Chuck is a story of redemption and grace at it’s heart. Let’s recall Sarah’s wedding vows. Chuck is the gift, she wants to deserve. She doesn’t yet understand that she doesn’t have to deserve it. That is the grace Sarah and Chuck grant to each other. The love is not what is separating them. It is believing in it and trusting it, despite all the obstacles. The flaws aren’t in the love. The flaws are in themselves. S03 is how that redemption in grace is resolved.
So, about Sarah. You object my recasting her as monster/spygirl. Well, I object to the notion that Sarah first walks into the Buy More as a well adjusted adult who just happens to be a spy, but maybe a bit introverted. The question is, how are these various natures weighted within her?
It is useful to watch that first episode and understand that Sarah could be that same stone cold assassin as Casey, and likely something even worse. Casey actually had a loving relationship and a fiance in his past! This is not an insult to Sarah. She has been damaged by the people she trusted most.
I want to watch those first episodes again with this one question in mind, is it NOW when Sarah would refuse an order to kill Chuck. Consider this. Chuck arrives to pick up Sarah for their ‘first date’. Sarah answer’s the door while receiving the order to kill him if he runs. Would she have done it? The answer isn’t obvious. Clearly, Langston Graham expects that she would. Is this the so called ‘protector’ that walks toward Chuck that first time in the Buy More?
Part of Sarah’s journey is a moral awakening. This burden is one of Chuck’s gifts to her. She she no longer sees spying as completely moral. She can now see her moral moral lapses, maybe for the 1st time. This explains her strong reaction about Chuck becoming a spy. S03 about her grappling with this and her guilt over leading Chuck into the ‘Spy Like’, even if inadvertently at first, and then explicitly by training him.
I am quite sympathetic to almost all of this, Stevie B.
Thank you Professor.
My views are still evolving, but the one thing I’d clarify in this particullar post is that Sarah accepts the grace of Chuck’s love at the time of her vows. She affirms that she still strives to be worthy of it.
This is cutting close to the bone of Christian thought, but there it is.
I missed this, I guess better late than never.
“Chuck is a story of redemption and grace at it’s heart.” – Seeking love is seeking acceptance, so I guess every love story is a redemption story, but I don’t see anything different with this one.
“It is useful to watch that first episode and understand that Sarah could be that same stone cold assassin as Casey, and likely something even worse.” – But she’s not. Just like Casey and Chuck, she decided to become a spy so that she could serve the greater good and, I’m assuming, to right the wrongs that she had done with her father. That’s why she saved the baby and why she saved Chuck. She reads people, she realized that he was a good guy and she decided to defend him. You think a monster would say “And what about his family? His friends?” That’s why she hesitated at her red test, why she hesitated to kill Mauser in Santa Claus and why she hesitated to kill Chuck in the house, in the penultimate episode.
Casey was a monster because he was in this business a lot longer than her and he had become a burnout. Unlike Sarah, both he and Chuck sacrificed something important in order to become spies. Once you make a hard choice, your investment in your new choice increases exponentially and you’re more open to compromises and then you become comfortable with them. This is illustrated with Chuck starting with First Class, when he does a lot of things that he doesn’t want to do because he believes he has to do them in order to become a spy: he doesn’t want to upset Sarah, but he still goes to Paris; he doesn’t want to lie to Ellie, he still does it; he doesn’t like Sarah seducing Manoosh, but gets over it quickly; he doesn’t want to burn Manoosh, but he does it because he has to; he doesn’t like the scotch, but he still downs the glass alone, instead of reaching out to Sarah; he pulls out Casey’s tooth. These seemed fine because he had good reasons, but he eventually became too comfortable and started acting like a jerk even when the job didn’t really require it: he ignored or didn’t realize that Morgan had the hots for Hannah; he had no problems with Hannah helping with the mission; he threw a jealousy tantrum a couple of minutes after making out with Hannah, even if Sarah didn’t do anything; he invited Hannah to family dinner, just to get Ellie out of his hair and then, accepted to meet her parents, even if he wasn’t really in love with her. The next steps would have been full-on jerk, burnout and eventually killer.
Sarah’s objections were to Chuck becoming someone like that, someone that she could never trust and that she could never have a real relationship with.
As an aside…
If you subscribe to the comments with an RSS reader like Feedly, then it’s easier to keep track if there’s something to which you wish to reply.
When you approach Chuck as just another love story, my thoughts concerning ‘grace and redemption’ will be lost to you, If you can’t see that Sarah has a dark side, then these puzzle pieces will just not fit together for you.
You assert that Sarah chose to be a spy. Maybe your eyes are better than mine. Don’t just say it. Convince me. Where did you see this? I saw a feral young woman running through the woods, who when cornered, took the only way out Langston Graham offered.
It’s also not clear to me how you think Sarah developed into this well adjusted adult. Was it while her dad taught her that people were either grifters or marks to be exploited? Or was it while he trained and exploited her as a tool to help him run his scams? Or maybe while she sat abandoned by him for months at a time? I don’t see a well adjusted adult coming out of that. Explain it to me.
Maybe it’s standard CIA procedure to civilize feral young women before training them to be spies? Like enrolling them in Mrs. Garrett’s CIA School for Wayward Girls perhaps? Hopefully with a large staff of psychologists and therapists. Or do they train them to be spies and then civilize them? How do you visualize Sarah’s development in the CIA?
Maybe it’s more likely that Langston Graham saw an intelligent, feral girl as something he could mold into his own tool? I don’t know… into something like a ‘wildcard enforcer’?
I really am at a loss as to how you see Sarah progressing from the feral girl in the woods to CIA super spy and swell gal. You seemingly believe that this is who shows up that first time at the Buy More. I can see why we might believe that is possible until “The Cougars” and “The DeLorean”. But after those episodes? No way.
I agree here, Luke’s interpretation seems to be over looking or completely missing very human details concerning Sarah’s backstory, it’s false to assume becoming a CIA agent made her a fully fledged adult, the most it did was give her something to strive for. A fan fic of mine that is in progress plays with the idea that Sarah has chosen to separate her what Graham molded her into from everything she is with Chuck. I came up with the idea because I was intrIgued by a Sarah that is more self aware and emotionally affected by her past from the start than what we saw in canon. I’m having fun writing it honestly because I always got the sense that she was made in other people’s image and I wanted to explore something where she is a lot more savvy with Chuck’s predicament and I make Chuck a lot more capable too. If only school was done and I could write anytime I wanted, but I digress…
Stevie you’re making way to much of the extremes. We don’t know where Sarah’s “moral center” came from exactly. We know she did have a mother and at least one grandmother who had some role in her upbringing; we know that as early as 1.04 Carina acknowledged Sarah was “different” from most spies (she would go against orders and good sense to return for a trapped partner) and we know in Baby she would go against a superior’s orders to protect an innocent child. Further, we know she considered herself one of the good guys and was horrified when first ordered to kill.
None of this means she was a sweet litttle angel. But somehow, against the odds, she was ready, willing and able to fight for the right things.
That always makes her an appealing, heroic character in my book.
Excellent points Dave! The way they flushed out Sarah as a person was one of the strongest aspects of the show which is why it is a shame that they flushed it down the toilet in the end…
Dave,
I don’t assert that Sarah is all bad. I think she is very admirable based on the upbringing she had to overcome.
But you will have to explain to me the feminine parental influence that you see in ‘The Cougars’ and ‘The DeLotean’.
She was a daddy’s girl and always chased after his adventures.
But at the start of the show she clearly had a moral center — from somewhere.
this doesn’t normally occur in vacuum. It wasn’t from her dad. It was unlikely from Graham.
Guessing her mom or grandmother as a source is a pure SWAG. It was that or some other undisclosed source.
And for the record, it seems unlikely Jack Burton had anything like “legal custody”. We know she chased after him. We saw two incidents and more were implied. This doesn’t remotely account for the vast majority of her childhood or say anything about who her other influences were.
I stand by my pure guess of other family.
Dave, personally I tend to believe she gained much of her moral center when she rescued Mollly and Chuck evolved it. Besides even in early seasons she is almost always conflicted about his situation and I tend to think she is always irritated by the way he gets treated. It’s not to the same level of danger as Molly but as we see she eventually has her breaking point which creates several episodes where she uses her moral center and puts Chuck’s needs first…
Christmas in the Burton household was running a Salvation Army scam.
You brought it up. So tell me where is the feminine parental influence that you see in “The Cougars” or “The DeLorean”, or in any other reference to her past. You can wave your hands all you want, but it’s a wishful tinking that Sarah has no dark aide.
No one ever said she had no dark side!
But like most humans she was far more complex than just that. And she took pride in her good side, she claimed in “Other Guy” to always wanting to be one of the good guys.
We know from “Wedding Planner” that she was living with a grandmother and running scams with her father to her grandmother’s displeasure. We also know that before rescuing Molly she had been in enough contact with her mom that Emma knew her professional name when her father did not. We also know Emma tried to give her a normal childhood that Sarah kept running away from.
We can’t dismiss that with a hand wave either.
Ultimately we don’t have enough information to know all the influences on Sarah’s life. The show was never mostly about her. But most of us have dozens or hundreds of people who shape us to one degree or another. And in Sarah’s case there’s about 25 years of her life that’s MOSTLY unaccounted for. They only gave us enough to guess at what all shaped her. Somehow; between a roguish father, a loving mother and a dutiful grandmother she became the person we saw.
I don’t even know how to process this. How is it an improvement for Sarah’s moral development that she sought out her father’s influence? Do you remember the string of aliases that Langston Graham recounted? Seems like a lot of paternal influence and zero maternal.
And if now agree that Sarah has a dark side? Is this something that Langston Graham could use? Or is it something like not paying parking tickets?
She was dark enough to be turned into a killer, and light enough to feel remorse for it.
That part is tragic, and that’s part of what Chuck rescues her from.
And yes, she outwardly rejected her female role models. At least as a child she did. Yet again, she seemed to have developed enough sense of right and wrong to feel shame for those Salvation Army con jobs and was sickened by her first kill.
That strikes me as a fairly normal, functioning psyche. She was probably at great danger of becoming a burn out, like Casey was at the start.
I’m not approaching it as just another love story. I only said that the redemption part is not that different than the redemption that you can find in any other love story.
I assert that Sarah chose to be a spy because I believe that everything is a choice. Playing Fornite for 12 hours a day instead of going to class and eventually flunking out is a choice. Chuck living with his sister and working in the Buy More for five years because it was comfy was his choice. Sarah not being able to leave with Bryce at the end of Nemesis was a choice. If she really wanted to be with him, she would have left. She may have been coerced to join the CIA, but not quitting after that long was also a choice. A choice that was giving her a purpose, something that she mentioned several times. Beyond that, I think I said that she didn’t have to choose between CIA and something important, like Casey and Chuck had to.
Feral is a bit much, it’s not like she was living in a crack house or dumpster diving for food. All I saw was a scared girl, low on confidence and with deep trust issues. I don’t know and I don’t think I would be that interested in how the CIA transformed her, but I would guess it was something like in Nikita. Whatever they did, they only took care of her confidence because those trust issues were still there. Which is why I don’t consider her a well adjusted adult, but I guess it’s a subjective term, so my well adjusted adults may be different than yours. It’s those issues that made her a loner and why she rejected Chuck after he wanted to become a spy.
What I did say was that she wasn’t a monster like Casey. Casey’s first scene was shooting a guy in the chest and then saying “don’t move.” Then he bragged about it, ordered his guys to kill another CIA agent, wanted to kill Chuck when he found out that he had secrets in his head, and eventually decided to put him in a bunker when he realized he was valuable. Maybe Sarah was a wild card enforcer, but the evidence points to that being more of a myth. She didn’t have any qualms about killing bad guys in self defense and, judging by her eyes, she probably even enjoyed it, but she always had problems with doing it when it didn’t feel like the right thing to do.
I am unwilling to discount Sarah’s backstory as shown in favor of that which is not shown. What would be the point of showing irrelevant backstory?
I am still waiting for you to show me any maternal influence in her backstory. It looks like all her high school years were with her father. Which means she was raised to be a grifter. And if you are right, she actively sought out her father to be raised as grifter.
So, no. I don’t think your narrative fits what we’ve been shown.
This is another case where you wish to replace canon with your preferred story. Why not throw ‘The Cougars’, ‘The DeLorean’, ‘The Wedding Planner’ and maybe even ‘Santa Claus’ on the same compost heap with S0301 thru S03E13. Sarah will be the protector that you always wanted. And I’m okay with that.
Stevie I think you’re being very unreasonable on this. Again, you ARE ignoring her backstory to fit YOUR version of the character. I just explained the maternal influence, and then you say it isn’t there.
The difference being I know when I’m doing it! I can keep track of the stories I’ve read and how they align with canon. They are ALL fiction, and it is beyond silly to be this worked up over it. Not only was every season written by about nine different people, they did it in far less time than we’ve spent arguing about it. So you are free to pick and choose which versions of Sarah Walker you want to “believe in”; just don’t be so adamant about claiming “no maternal influence” then deny what we actually saw in canon!
Most fan fiction has MUCH tighter continuity than any weekly TV show ever has!
Luke: “I’m not approaching it as just another love story. I only said that the redemption part is not that different than the redemption that you can find in any other love story.”
Except that it is very different. It’s probably my poor writing skills that prevents my point being clearer.
Luke: “Feral is a bit much”
I remember seeing Sarah running through the woods with clearly unkempt hair and ratty clothes, digging up a stash of money, and throwing a knife at Langston Graham. I would think that the analogy would be obvious. Visualize the feral kid in Mad Max: The Road Warrior. Is that the same hairstyle? LOL
As hyperbole “feral” works!
But I think its only one scene…
Dave,
I am not worked up. Maybe you could simmer down?
Of course Sarah has a mother and grandmother. We never see her living with her mother. We see a morning and a night where she is staying with her grandmother.
So now, high school Sarah. Show me the feminine influences on Sarah. Is it the clothes? Is it the hair? What is it? Surely a strong motherly or grand motherly influence would still show in high school, right? Where is it?
It’s not there! The long list of aliases tells us Sarah has been on the run with her father for years. Why? I’m not sure of any answer that would indicate an improvement to her moral development. But go ahead take a shot at it.
Dave,
Maybe I seem worked up because my perspective is different than yours. See the top my post that Luke responded to. You just stepped out into meta. I care nothing of the meta.
Dave: As hyperbole “feral” works!
But I think its only one scene…
Sorry. Fat fingered my tablet.
Which is one more scene than any showing a loving maternal relationship. I think feral is an accurate representation of my thoughts about Sarah’s moral development in high school.
Luke, Before turning in, I want to say that I appreciate your last post. It’s very possible that I originally misunderstood your points.
At some point, I’ll want talk about Casey some more.
Good night all!
Dave, I agree with your take on Sarah.
My very brief 2c: Since it was obvious from the Pilot that she had a moral center, means it was nurtured by someone. Obviously not Graham. Obviously not her dad. We know she lived with her grandmother for a time. We saw the room set up, so obviously she actually lived there. We know she had a mother and trusted her enough to go to her to protect Molly. We know enough about Emma’s moral character from her conversation with Sarah and her subsequent raising of Molly. There had been some relationship there, at some point in time. We saw the pictures. We know she went to school. So right there you have several spheres of influence: school, mom, grandma. It’s all right there on screen.
Then, I think there’s a good bit of inconsistency with Sarah’s back story. They obviously didn’t have it set before the show,because Sarah didn’t start out in their minds as the larger than life character she became. As Sarah took on greater weight, they added back story for her, but they weren’t always consistent with what they made up. They made it up to suit their current narrative, and the things they made up weren’t consistent with each other. However, the female pieces are in play. They were on screen, and they’re fair game when citing influence on Sarah’s character. People in real life cite childhood experiences, even from a very young age, as having a lasting influence on them. So, we can’t dismiss Emma as a potential influence.
It’s quite possible that Sarah lived with her mom and grandma, while she was young and began living with her dad during high school. She could easily have spent the early school years with mom and grandma and just the summers on (con) adventures with dad. (This would be a fairly typical scenario for a broken family situation.) When she snuck out of the house with her piggy bank to go with her dad, we saw him return her to her grandma’s and tuck her safely into her bed, and then take off. We know that he disappeared from her life for long periods. Remember: leaving is what he was good at.
Stevie, you do seem worked up and adamantly selective. BTW, we never saw her spend a night and morning with her dad, either, but we can all assume that she did, just as we can also legitimately assume she spent some nights and mornings with her mom and grandma. I mean presumably when her dad tucked her back into bed, she woke up there the next morning. These are all logical assumptions from what was on screen.
Feral? Oh puh-lease! You make Sarah out to be sub-human, in contradiction to all we see about her on screen. Bad hair and braces do not equal feral. Feral girls don’t carry musical instruments. Neither would a feral girl be tame enough to even go to school or to teach cons, for that matter. Feral is the last thing I saw in the Cougar flash back. I saw a somewhat awkward adolescent, shy because of frequent moves, and very frightened at having lost the person who gave her security (no matter how dubious his character). She was running through the woods to get to her getaway box and prepare to run away. None of that adds up to feral. She pulled a knife on a stranger … a really big, menacing stranger. Who wouldn’t have? Did Graham take advantage of her situation? Yeah, probably. Did he kidnap her and keep her chained to a bed in the Langley basement and force her to become an agent? I highly doubt it. Of course she ultimately chose to become and agent.
Thank you Thinkling! That was all very well put.
And yes Stevie, I went meta because it’s always appropriate when dealing with fiction. What an artist meant to show vs how things come across is a key part of understanding the show and characters. Just like when looking at history we consider politics and culture; or when looking at a manufactured thing we consider concept, execution and physical limitations. It gives a very limited view to exclude a key component.
I agree Chuck is very meta. Honestly, I think thought is the point behind all human life, we experience because we think to do so, thought is more than what it seems at face value… I always appreciated chuck because it keeps my mind engaged.
Josh I do agree with saying Sarah’s experience with Molly rocked her world, and made her more ready to be Chuck’s protector.
But I would also say there was already a conscious morality about her that led to events with Molly falling out the way they did.
thinking: “Since it was obvious from the Pilot that she had a moral center, means it was nurtured by someone.”
This is not obvious at all. What this shows is that you see what you want to see and then you are arguing backwards from your conclusion and looking for things to justify it. And I can perfectly understand this! When Sarah’s backstort started appearing, it ‘flipped the script’ of what was going on.
Isn’t it plausible, that Sarah and Chuck shared some cosmic spark in “The Intersect” which stirred something in her. This I think is closer to the truth than it is to say she came into the Buy More as an actively moral being. This is the view that I’m evolving toward. And as Josh Z has mentioned, there’s something about rescuing and caring for baby Molly that may have been that first spark.
I never said that Sarah was completely devoid of a moral center. It’s more likely that she was separated from it, not connected to it. Or it was simply dormant, leading the unexamined life, as it were.
You, Dave, and Luke assume that Sarah saved Molly and protected Chuck because she was already operating under a fully realized morality. A better argument is that Chuck, and likely Molly too, facilitated an evolution in Sarah’s morality… maybe the beginning of Sarah’s reconnection with her moral center. This is a scenario that fits all the available facts.
I accept that Sarah was the wild card enforcer. I accept that she was unfriendly, unforgiving and unquestioning about her orders. I accept that Sarah would have followed Graham’s order and killed Chuck had he ran. This is info that is given to us explicitly. Why do you reject it?
And why is a fully moral Sarah walking into the Buy More more noble than one who is lost through no fault of her own, while not even realizing it? Chuck is the gift that she never though she wanted or needed.
Stevie you are drawing conclusions none of us ever said. Sarah was clearly not as fully mature and wise in her morality as she became. She was the enforcer and a fearsome individual.
But this is all becoming circular now. I’ll never buy into the worst interpretations of her, and it’s obvious you won’t accept anything else.
“It’s probably my poor writing skills that prevents my point being clearer.” – I think I understand you, but let’s see if I got it right: Sarah hates herself because of her failed relationship with her dad and because she thinks she’s an awful person; the love of someone pure is redeeming her and that’s why she doesn’t want Chuck to become a spy, because then she wouldn’t be loved by someone pure.
About the feral image. She was running through the woods because that’s where the emergency stash was buried. In fact she was living in a house with her dad, driving a car and listening to freaking Chumbawamba. She threw a knife because someone was sneaking in behind her, she even surrendered after that.
If we consider only the Pilot, then there’s only a hint of a moral center, but I don’t understand why the rest doesn’t matter? It’s in the very next episode that she told Chuck to not accuse her of betraying everything that she believes in.
“I accept that Sarah was the wild card enforcer. I accept that she was unfriendly, unforgiving and unquestioning about her orders. I accept that Sarah would have followed Graham’s order and killed Chuck had he ran.” – That’s her reputation, but it looks like it’s only that, a reputation. She actually questions her orders and she becomes unforgiving only after assessing the target as a bad actor. When Ryker told her to kill those Hungarians, she hesitated until he told her that they killed the owners of the house. Then she went into a killing frenzy. She didn’t return the baby. She didn’t want to kill Shaw’s wife. She didn’t want to blow up the Intersect room like Quinn ordered her to do it, but after she realized that Chuck betrayed her, she went full psycho.
“A better argument is that Chuck, and likely Molly too, facilitated an evolution in Sarah’s morality” – The problem is that she’s a little too old for this. The argument was where she got her moral center from. Well, I don’t know, but the moral center is pretty much developed by the age of 14, so whatever she got from Graham, CIA and Chuck, it was just a better perspective.
“And why is a fully moral Sarah walking into the Buy More more noble than one who is lost through no fault of her own, while not even realizing it?” – I don’t think she’s more noble, but I just don’t see her that way.
Luke I think we agree on most significant details here, your interpretations seem pretty solid to me.
The version of Sarah that I’m perceiving is quite remarkable, the most compelling character in popular entertainment, I’ve said in another forum. I want to understand all her textures. It is her that draws me into this story, more so than the other characters, including Chuck.
I don’t understand what gives you the impression that I advocate for the darkest possible interpretation. It’s probably my fault for thinking in public.
Sarah Walker is definitely an intriguing character. On the old NBC forums she always polled as the popular character on the show, by a wide margin (usually around 60% of fans tagged her as most interesting on the show, twice as good as Chuck himself).
And there’s no doubt she is the most discussed and analyzed character here; really, for going on ten years.
thinking: “I think I understand you, but let’s see if I got it right: Sarah hates herself because of her failed relationship with her dad and because she thinks she’s an awful person; the love of someone pure is redeeming her and that’s why she doesn’t want Chuck to become a spy, because then she wouldn’t be loved by someone pure.”
No. This is way too simplistic
.
For whatever reason — I think it might be how Chuck helps the little ballerina — Sarah has a shift in perspective, and becomes aligned with Chuck, drawn to him. This could be how she relates to the little girl somewhat, and the obvious selflessness of Chuck and the selfishness of her father.
I don’t think it would change the story much if this perspective shift had happened at any point between the cell phone fixing and the bomb diffusing. It’s just important to see that Sarah now has some loyalty to Chuck that she didn’t before. As we all know, this is when Sarah herself has said she has fallen for Chuck.
So, now even if she is the wildcard enforcer, or an assassin, it doesn’t change her protective behavior very much. She manages to keep her interest in Chuck aligned with the interests of the CIA, with the big downside that they can’t actually explore a ‘real’ relationship.
So at this point, we are not arguing about what Sarah does. We are arguing about her mental landscape while she does it. I think this argument is important because, if Sarah already has a well functioning moral philosophy, then this is just a love story. But if Sarah still has a damaged morality, only improved for the purposes of the CIA for example, then if changes this story into something more.
Her attachment or love of Chuck opens her to him, in ways that she can start seeing a morality beyond that of the CIA. She sees his love, loyalty, and self sacrifice for his family and friends. Over time, she comes to see that not everything that spies do is completely moral, and likely somethings are straight up immoral. Only when she starts perceiving this, does some self-doubt start creeping in.
So, maybe they can run away and leave the spy life behind. Sounds like a great idea!
But then Chuck has changed somewhat, and bought into some of the CIA higher morality business that Sarah herself taught Chuck. So, he decides not to run away. Now, to Sarah this is taken as betrayal. Do you remember her pummeling the punching bag during ‘The DeLorean’ after she that her father had betrayed her? That’s how she felt with Chuck at this time. She even uses him as something of a punching bag.
So, even given all the progress within her, she is again alone. Her anger has caused it. Then Carina shows her Chuck’s confession tape, and she realizes that she is the cause of Chuck deciding to be a spy. When she had felt like running away from the spy life was the best option!
This is where the self loathing starts coming in. And this really cements her isolation. And the closer Chuck gets to being a spy, the worse it gets. I believe we can see this in her relationship with Shaw, metaphor or not. There is no way that a Sarah free of self loathing would ever agree to be with him. And the further Chuck gets toward becoming a spy, the closer she gets to Shaw.
So, now during this ‘Slough of Despond’ (thanks Professor!), it is Casey (of all people) who delivers the news that maybe Chuck really hasn’t become a CIA type spy! So, this relives some of her guilt, but she is still a spy. But then chuck, now in full knowledge of red tests and all the other spy immorality that Sarah feels guilty of, still loves her (grace) and risks his life (and her rejection for using a gun) to save her (redemption).
I have just now typed this off the cuff, but that’s the rough cut of it.
Please note that I misattributed a quote in my previous post to thinking when it really was Luke who said it. Apologies.
Now, here’s a clip we can all enjoy:
@Stevie,
“I don’t understand what gives you the impression that I advocate for the darkest possible interpretation.” – probably because you use extreme terms like monster and feral. If your view is moderate, then moderate words could be more appropriate. Remember, “In space, no one can hear you scream.” Sorry for the bad reference, what I meant was that, on the interwebz, people can’t see gestures and hear voice inflections.
“For whatever reason — I think it might be how Chuck helps the little ballerina — Sarah has a shift in perspective, and becomes aligned with Chuck, drawn to him.” – But how do you know this? Don’t you think It’s a big shift in someone’s values, for it to happen in one minute or one day?
“As we all know, this is when Sarah herself has said she has fallen for Chuck.” – Yeah, well, it was a cheesy line written by someone who’s writing mantra seems to be “Carpe diem.” Sarah was grieving for her boyfriend of at least two years, dead for less than 48 hours, she had no emotional capacity to actually fall in love. I’ll just take it as the moment that Chuck caught her attention. I had those moments too. Still, I didn’t start doing cartwheels, or incessantly thinking about the girl, or changed my political or moral opinions to align with hers.
“She manages to keep her interest in Chuck aligned with the interests of the CIA, with the big downside that they can’t actually explore a ‘real’ relationship.” – I don’t agree with this. Her interest in Chuck (boyfriend) was in direct opposition with the CIA’s interests (asset). She didn’t pursue a real relationship, one without the CIA’s knowledge, because that would have meant putting their own personal interests above those of the CIA’s. For example, if they were together for real in Suburbs, she couldn’t have asked Chuck to “exploit” Sylvia’s romantic interest in him. He wasn’t ok with the request even without anything between them, imagine his reaction if they were actually together. Also, without that barrier between them, she, herself, would have probably been opposed to it.
“then this is just a love story” – And I have no problem with that because there aren’t many good ones shown on tv. Every story has a conflict at its core, most of romances that are on tv have are built around some ridiculous conflicts.
“This is where the self loathing starts coming in. ” – I thought that your view was that she was always a self-loathing person. If not, I agree, but that self-loathing is only a consequence and not the driver of her actions, therefore irrelevant. What are you trying to say with Shaw, that she was punishing herself by dating a jerk like him? People don’t date other people as punishment, they do it to feel good. After a big break-up there’s a big void left by the feelings of love and closeness. The second one is very difficult to deal with for an introvert because they don’t experience them very often and they don’t just latch onto anyone, not even in despair. Shaw fills that void. Sarah can relate to him because he has also lost someone and he is not afraid to admit it and It is because of his display of vulnerability, that Sarah trusts him with her intimate thoughts. At its core, their relationship is just a platonic one, the reason why it’s not only platonic is because, if you put a boyfriend/girlfriend label on it, it makes it feel even closer. And hormones, let’s not forget about them.
“But then chuck, now in full knowledge of red tests and all the other spy immorality that Sarah feels guilty of, still loves her” – But he already knew about her killing ways, he even saw her killing Mauser in cold blood and he still loved her. This wasn’t a new development. In fact, I would say that he should have loved her even more because he came to realize how she had treated him with kids gloves in the first two years.
Luke:
Thanks for your thoughtful response…..
“probably because you use extreme terms like monster and feral. If your view is moderate, then moderate words could be more appropriate. ” — I recall proposing ‘monster’ as something to consider within Sarah, never something that describes her totality. I still think someone who is Langston Graham’s tool can be a monster in some circumstances. The tool doesn’t get to decide its use, after all.
And with ‘feral’, that was more my visceral reaction to the imagery in that scene juxtaposed with the ‘Medium Rare with extra pickles” conversation with Chuck.. I suggest you watch that again. And I still think that Sarah’s morality in that period is pretty ‘feral’ or retrograde. Consider. She apparently chose a life with her father, grifting and stealing, while staying one step ahead of the law. And ultimately, throwing a knife (did she miss on purpose?), at what is apparently a law enforcement officer. But you are correct that ‘feral’ doesn’t describe her whole being.
I thought the resulting conversations were helpful, at least to me. Thanks to you, Dave, thinking, and Josh.
“But how do you know this? Don’t you think It’s a big shift in someone’s values, for it to happen in one minute or one day?” — There is an thread over time on little girls — the ballerina, Sarah as a child, the eggnog yogurt poster in Orange Orange, Clara, baby Molly. And though we don’t see her as a child, we find out that Casey has daughter, Alex. This leads me to think that young girls are important to the story — to Sarah. And if I were to guess, Sarah’s first child will be a girl.
“Sarah was grieving for her boyfriend of at least two years, dead for less than 48 hours, she had no emotional capacity to actually fall in love. I’ll just take it as the moment that Chuck caught her attention.” — That assumes quite a bit about Sarah’s relationship with Bryce and frankly, her capacity for attachment at that point. I’m not saying you’re wrong, outright. I’d like to see other’s thoughts about that.
I would not go all the way and say it was ‘love at first sight’. But, I’m sticking to the almost instant connection concept. You can apparently accept the idea of a human Intersect, but the idea of ‘love at first sight’ gives you pause? That’s your line in the sand?
“I don’t agree with this. Her interest in Chuck (boyfriend) was in direct opposition with the CIA’s interests (asset). ” — I’m wasn’t thinking of it this way. I meant common interests in the sense of not killing Chuck, or sending him underground to a detention facility. Sarah’s immediate interests in Chuck are keeping him alive and accessible. But you are also correct, that eventually, the CIA’s interests and Sarah’s interests diverge by a large margin.
“And I have no problem with that because there aren’t many good ones shown on tv. Every story has a conflict at its core, most of romances that are on tv have are built around some ridiculous conflicts” — I amend my statement: “Then this is just another dumb love story”.
“I thought that your view was that she was always a self-loathing person. If not, I agree, but that self-loathing is only a consequence and not the driver of her actions, therefore irrelevant” — I think it’s obvious to deduce that Sarah has some portion of her character defined by self doubt and self loathing, just based on the glimpses that we are shown of her relationship with her father. We could go a step further and note that she seeks approval from her superiors by pursuing hyper competence. She lacks ang strong interval validation of her worth. It’s similar to Chuck. She just sublimates it differently.
It’s Chuck’s seeming rejection and then his spy training, that emphasizes this aspect within her.
“What are you trying to say with Shaw” — My thoughts about Shaw — are complicated. I’m just gonna share something from a conversation with Professor Jolley that comes the closest (but not congruent!) so far to how I’m feeling: (apologies if my sharing this is out of order!)
KellyDeanJolley:
“Yes, Shaw is utterly unappealing. In the book I term him ‘retrograde’ but he’s worse than that. It’s not just that he’s not Chuck; he is so deeply disturbed. Initially, in S3, Sarah seems to be the first to pick up on that, or at least the one who picks up on it most clearly, and yet by mid-season, she’s with him in DC. At some level, the choice is clearly self-destructive, part of a deeper pattern of self-loathing that Sarah is enacting. Or so it seems to me. (Your metaphor idea is a good one, I think.) She chooses him, not because (as Chuck thinks) he’s a superspy. She chooses him because she divines that he will take her down with him. That’s never her clear, conscious thought, but it is there, bubbling away deep inside her, I think.)”
“But he already knew about her killing ways, he even saw her killing Mauser in cold blood and he still loved her. ” — Here’s this difference. Chuck experienced has now experienced his red test first hand. He had the gun ready and aimed at the mole, with his finger on the trigger — life and death in his hands. He thinks his failed. Does he think he is more moral for having done so?
Here is the feral vs. medium rare with extra pickles scene:
Please note the thread of recent comments is quite lengthy so this reply in response to all of the recent participants, I’ve actually got two tabs open, one for scrolling through comments and the other is my reply, which for simplicity is threaded to the most recent comment…I’ll do my best to cover all my bases
Arthur
I love your comparison of Chuck, Sarah, and Casey through a moral lens, it really puts into focus the effect they all have on each other. In Sarah’s case, the end of best friend is perhaps my favorite character moment for her. She assumed to have lost Chuck earlier in the episode after his monologue about what it means to truly care about someone fell on deaf ears [given her background this is understandable, no one in her past has cared about her on the level Chuck cares about everyone] because she has a different definition of the action itself, which gives her the perception that she is a tool to be used by others and she doesn’t entertain the idea that it is perfectly within her right to be more than that, even as she voices the source of her frustration. Her reaction to Chuck’s confirmation that he cares about her is so perfect. It is validation that she is more than a name, rank serial number or bait for a con and something she needed to hear, because it is the beginning of her defining her own sense of morality something more typically than what the government or her father taught her. Casey experiences a moral shift that grows in a positive way throughout the first three seasons, fast-tracked by Alex. Both backslide at times but the point is they learn to define morality for themselves and not by government filters.
Luke
I will tackle the Morgan bit first because we’re at opposite ends on this and it’s not even close. I cannot stand the notion surrounding comedy that neglecting character development to tell more jokes is somehow preferred. Fraiser is a champion for how to do comedy and still develop everyone. Morgan was established first and foremost as Chuck’s immature best friend who needed to grow up and that is the path he followed. Saying aspects of his development were supposed to happen is about as relevant as saying the sun is “supposed” to shine or something else redundant. The details of Morgan’s evolution are irrelevant because he learns to grow when all is said and done. Chuck is a character-driven show, and Morgan is one of the characters so he needs development, if it were a half-hour sitcom you might have a better argument for expecting him to remain clownish butt I just can’t get on board with that. That way of thinking is from viewers who expect clowns to always be clowns…if it helps I have the same issue with TBBT fans that complain “their not acting like nerds anymore” how do you think it stayed on air for 12 seasons when all is said and done DEVELOPMENT…if I want to watch laugh at something funny every other line of dialogue Friends or The office will do, or TBBT first five or so years.
I’m nowhere near as stubborn about the finale which I have said was done very well when you look strictly at what the writers intended with it which was, nostalgia culminating in the nerd winning the girl all over again, but I’ve never denied it wasn’t popular and anybody who needs closure will see it as poorly written and a slap in the face. That being said, I don’t necessarily like when people disregard its inspirational or philosophical value or suggest TPTB wrote the finale to crap on the show or its fans as though they grew to hate both. As a highly intelligent but also physically disabled person who hopes but does not expect to fall in love because of the baggage that comes with my condition, it is not in my compacity to hate the finale, I want more but I don’t need more because what I take from it is bigger than that,,,I believe in trying to create my own epic because of this show when before I felt unworthy of trying to get the girl, if that sheds any light for you. It appears we have different but no less personal reasons for our position on the finale.
Dave and Stevie
I was mostly a streaming viewer [I did not see the series start to finish until its Netflix stint] but I don’t think my opinion the first time through was more than “she is the best-looking spy I have ever seen” future run-throughs i thought very highly of her character that never changed, though I always scold TPTB for S3.0…yvonne certainly did a fantastic job making me feel Sarah’s misery!
Now if you’ll excuse me I need to get back to my schoolwork…
Stevie,
All I saw was a socially awkward girl who didn’t know how to take care of herself, which was normal since she was raised by her father. We know that she is good with knives, so I think the correct assumption is that it was a shot across the bow.
“She apparently chose a life with her father, grifting and stealing, while staying one step ahead of the law” – I don’t see it that way, she chose a life of adventure when she was a child that didn’t know any better. By the time she realized what she was actually doing, it was too late, she was a wanted criminal. The happy child that we saw in Delorean and Wedding Planner had become a closed off teenager in Cougars. By contrast, her dad was always upbeat, it didn’t seem that being a criminal had gotten to him.
“That assumes quite a bit about Sarah’s relationship with Bryce” – Well, I saw her look at their photos at the end of the pilot, cry at his funeral, admit to Carina that it was hard since he died, cry after seeing his convo with the Stanford professor, not deny when Bryce said that she was still in love with him, and being torn between Chuck and him in Nemesis. She always kept some kind of barrier between them because of her nature and their jobs. It probably wasn’t true love, but, to paraphrase Roan Montgomery, it was spy love. They weren’t just friends and partners with benefits, that’s what she was with Shaw.
“You can apparently accept the idea of a human Intersect, but the idea of ‘love at first sight’ gives you pause? That’s your line in the sand?” The first one is a sci-fi concept, it’s like a superpower, I can wrap my mind around it. But, in drama, feelings have to be realistic, you can’t invent something weird that I can’t relate to and still expect me to care. With that said, I’m not opposed to the idea of love at first sight, I just find it very rare in real life and, given Sarah’s situation, I find it impossible here. I’m not denying that there was a connection, that is obvious, but not something enough to transform Sarah from bad to good and to dictate her actions during this early period.
“I amend my statement: “Then this is just another dumb love story”.” – When I said that there aren’t many love stories, I meant that they are all dumb. The conflict of a love story is that the two protagonists can’t be together and what we get in the large majority of stories are bullshit reasons for keeping them apart. Reasons that, if it were real life, they would be the end of that story.
“she seeks approval from her superiors by pursuing hyper competence” – You don’t know that for sure. She mentioned several times that her job is important to her, it seems normal that she would like to be competent at something important to her.
I think I was right about your thoughts on Shaw and I don’t agree. He’s a rebound and the point of a rebound relationship is to help you feel better while getting over someone. When that pain is gone, that’s when the rebound will also be over. Something very similar is actually said in The OC, another Josh Schwartz show.
“Does he think he is more moral for having done so?” – I can’t say for sure, but it looks like he’s more preoccupied with being a failure: “But all that means that I’m still not a real spy.”
Josh,
I would point to you that the best and most popular sitcom stayed on the air for nine seasons and went out on top while having zero character development and, like they said, it was about nothing. I also saw a season and something of IASIP, I didn’t like it, but it’s popular and, supposedly, consistently funny and that one also doesn’t have character development.
“Chuck is a character-driven show, and Morgan is one of the characters so he needs development” – No, he needed no development because he was a secondary character with no development for two seasons. The show had three leads, do the development there. Even so, I wasn’t opposed to his development, I was just indifferent to it. My problem with him was that he was interacting too much with the heroes, while still being a clown, an unfunny one, and that made the others, mostly Casey, clowns. And I don’t care about drama around clowns, I can count on one hand the number of times that sitcoms made me emotional. You want to develop him in the spy universe? Fine, just stop making him a clown and don’t give him cliche story lines like “I’m scared of your father.” You want to keep him a clown? Then develop him in the Buy More, and bring him only occasionally in the spy world. like it was done in S3.
As for the finale, I don’t think that TPTB did it on purpose, I think it was negligence or maybe incompetence. I have my reservations about the finale being well done, because that notion is very dependent on the writer’s intention and I’m still not sure what it was. I actually like the idea of the nerd getting the girl, but we already got that, I didn’t need a rehash of it at the cost of everything that happened before. If the message was that they were fated, well, I’m too pragmatic to be inspired by it. And even if I was, I don’t see them staying together, so it still wouldn’t have done anything for me. The finale didn’t give me anything of value, it just took a lot away. Actually, I loved the Jeffster part, so it wasn’t a complete waste.
I hate to completely debunk your “Morgan is a secondary character” argument but Joshua Gomez is in the opening title sequence from the Pilot so he is a main character, and honestly I find it hilarious that he has no skills to offer as a team member…the climax of Couch Lock is extremely funny because it literally calls attention to that very fact as he jumps in to save the day. As for his development you clearly have a different criteria for what/who warrents it which is fine.
The only thing I ever found funny about Sienfield is “no soup for you”, come to think of it that is the only thing that’s gotten a laugh from me concerning that show, it’s also ironic that for a show about nothing the finale is entirely plot driven.
My rule with finales is as long as it makes sense I don’t care how it ends and Chuck’s finale makes sense, the big sticking point is that “is that it doesn’t actually end it just stops, I would actually compare Chuck’s fade out to the Gilmore girls reboot, in fact they’re are strikingly similar. Spoiler alert, it ends with rori telling her Lorelei that she is pregnant and the viewer is left to interpret the future without seeing it, the obvious difference here is no amnesia lol but it’s the same type of moment.
Josh I think Morgan definitely has one very useful superpower; he’s brave beyond the bounds of all reason. Its consistent, and well played for laughs several times.
Now if everyone else could just figure out how to use a weak moron with no skills or knowledge they’d be good.
And yes, that’s an extreme exaggeration!
Sarah Lancaster was in the main title sequence of the Pilot and she was a secondary character. The other three Buy Morons were in the title sequence of the second season, didn’t mean they were main characters. Morgan wasn’t even in all the episodes.
This wasn’t Friends, Seinfeld, HIMYM where all the characters had about the same weight. I’m not saying that Howard and Raj were secondary characters, but TBBT revolved around Sheldon, Leonard and Penny. Morgan had less weight than those two. He had a bigger part in the Pilot, he was Chuck’s sidekick, but he was replaced as the third lead by Casey from the next episode. For the first two seasons, he was written totally inconsequential to the story. His level of importance was closer to that of the Buy Morons than to that of the three leads.
His lack of skills may be funny, but it is a sitcom type of humor, it’s stupid and unrealistic and that’s fine. I just don’t want it constantly near the three leads where most of the drama was. I’m repeating myself, but: clowns in the Buy More, heroes in the Castle, otherwise the whole show is a sitcom. And not a good one.
The finale of Seinfeld wasn’t plot driven at all, it was just a recap of how awful and self-centered they were. It wasn’t the best of the episodes, it was a glorified clip show, but I liked the idea that they ended up in prison just for being jerks. I know why people hate other finales, but I still don’t understand why some hate that one.
My only rule with the finales is to not ruin what happened to that point. I’ve never seen Gilmore Girls, so I didn’t get your point.
The characters might not have the same weight but again that is irrelevant to how the show was presented for all five seasons. It is almost like you are penalizing the show for being three genres [action, comedy-drama] I can’t think of many shows that attempt it but being a multi-genre show is what makes Chuck unique. To me, Morgan joining the spy world was meant to lighten up the extremely heavy drama Chuck Sarah and Casey create…I think Dave’s assessment of Morgan as part of the team is much fairer and accurate than yours. Your position on this reminds me quite a bit of flash fans who loathe that iris is part of the team despite having no power or skill to offer. The other thing I disagree with is the assumption that he became just some idiot giving advice left and right. He was observant of the issues between characters in the show and became a sounding board for them all at various points. I never thought it was over the top more like see something say something, it isn’t like he was shouting advice everywhere. Most of the time he was just reminding people of things they were in denial about and I don’t see anything wrong with that. If this were Jeff and Lester then you’d be making a better argument. The first season Morgan was an annoyance, second season he was funny, but I prefer his later years, minus the Bo episode,
Dave is there an easier way to keep track of new comments on a thread after I subscribe scrolling through my mail is a bit annoying…especially because not every new comment comes through all the time
Luke,
Again an interesting response. I learned some things!
“I don’t see it that way, she chose a life of adventure when she was a child that didn’t know any better. By the time she realized what she was actually doing, it was too late, she was a wanted criminal. The happy child that we saw in Delorean and Wedding Planner had become a closed off teenager in Cougars. ” — I think you’re right about originally seeking adventure. That’s pretty explicitly shown. But the result of that was leaving her father with a huge role in her emotional and moral development… as a criminal ..by a lousy father.
” By contrast, her dad was always upbeat, it didn’t seem that being a criminal had gotten to him.” — And that’s because he doesn’t see anything morally wrong with being a criminal. And that is what he has taught and modeled for Sarah.
I’ll even stipulate that there could be other more benign explanations for some of what we see in Sarah’s past. But given what we have seen, it’s difficult to believe Sarah was a well adjusted and morally centered person that day in the woods. The day she was recruited into the CIA. And I think that is enough for my point to stand.
“Well, I saw her look at their photos at the end of the pilot, cry at his funeral, admit to Carina that it was hard since he died, cry after seeing his convo with the Stanford professor… etc.” — Your points about Sarah and Bryce are well made, and I concede that I gave it a short shrift. After considering it, I don’t think it changes my thoughts too much…
“But, in drama, feelings have to be realistic, you can’t invent something weird that I can’t relate to and still expect me to care. With that said, I’m not opposed to the idea of love at first sight, I just find it very rare in real life and, given Sarah’s situation, I find it impossible here.” — This is a very reasonable argument. And I’m just gonna agree that Sarah had a stronger connection to Bryce than I acknowledged before. I don’t think this has to preclude an almost instant connection to Chuck though.
You bring up Carina. She tells Chuck that Sarah wants him in “The Wookie”. That would be around Day 28 of Project Bartowski. And by Day 56, Sarah is stealing a kiss from Chuck. I take this as evidence of the plausibility that something very significant happened between them that first day. Realistic or not, it fits into the Chuck universe.
“When I said that there aren’t many love stories, I meant that they are all dumb. The conflict of a love story is that the two protagonists can’t be together and what we get in the large majority of stories are bullshit reasons for keeping them apart. Reasons that, if it were real life, they would be the end of that story.” — I agree that most of these reasons to keep the lover’s apart are BS. I think that you’ll agree that Chuck was set up from the beginning and through S1 and S2 to keep them apart for very plausible reasons. That’s one thing I think that we both like about the show.
Our disagreement on this subject starts with S3. And we disagree (please correct me if I’m wrong!) because you see it as just the advent of some BS reasons to keep Sarah and Chuck apart. You see this as return to form as dumb love story.
And I diverge from that because I see deeper things going on than that, which I’ve been trying to explain.
“He’s a rebound and the point of a rebound relationship is to help you feel better while getting over someone. When that pain is gone, that’s when the rebound will also be over. ” If Shaw were in any way a sympathetic character, then I’d have some sympathy for this argument. Except that Shaw is unhinged form the beginning. Seeking comfort in his arms would like snuggling with something reptilian. There is nothing comforting there. Just coldness.
Therefore, I take it as obvious that Sarah is seeking something other than comfort with Shaw. I do not believe that I can be dissuaded from this opinion, hence the fulcrum (ahem) of our differences. Folks who see Shaw as a viable romantic interest or rebound fling, will never see it the way that I see it. It’s seems unlikely that this chasm is bridgeable.
Stevie, I both agree and disagree with your position on S3. While I agree that there are deeper issues going on for Sarah where Shaw is concerned and even though I can totally understand the intent the fact remains the whole thing is the worst writing I have ever seen in perhaps any compactly one can actually write something, it took a fun show and made it miserable which is I think Lukes point, far too long and filled with chaos
Yeah Josh ultimately that is exactly the bottom line. It doesn’t matter if there was something important or deep going on; it was lousy entertainment, which is sort of critical for a commercial product…
Josh,
I use feedly. Joe posted the feed links for articles and comments. Just go to feedly.com and setup an account and add the feeds. It will take you directly to the comment when you select it. Then I just search backwards for the most recent Reply link.
Feedly only seems to poll Chuck This every 2 to 3 hours, so it has a lag. There may be better RSS readers to try, but I’ve used Feedly for years.
@ Stevie
“But the result of that was leaving her father with a huge role in her emotional and moral development… as a criminal … he doesn’t see anything morally wrong with being a criminal. And that is what he has taught and modeled for Sarah.” – But you’re only assuming that his “teachings” have stuck with her. I already said that she wasn’t a happy teenager and we know from Delorean that she didn’t approve of his “career.” What if her career was important to her because she was seeking redemption for all the bad stuff that she had done with him? Why is she attracted to men that offer adventure like him, but they do it for the opposite reasons, to help people? Isn’t that some kind of rebellion against her father?
“And by Day 56, Sarah is stealing a kiss from Chuck” – Yes, but she wouldn’t have done it if she wasn’t jealous. This is why I liked Lou, kiss before dying is a cliche, most recently in the S2 finale of Superstore. But here, it felt natural because we saw her jealousy, otherwise it would have been cliche and, as a result, forced. And still, about 50 minutes of screen time later, she was ready to leave with Bryce, I don’t see it plausible if she was already in love for eight weeks. It’s in this arc when her erratic behavior starts, not in the Pilot, and that’s why I see things becoming serious around this time.
“you see it as just the advent of some BS reasons to keep Sarah and Chuck apart. You see this as return to form as dumb love story.” – No, that one is Dave! 🙂 I already said it, it still made sense to me, otherwise I would have quit Charah and eventually the show, because that’s the only part of the show that I liked in the last two seasons. That one and Volkoff.
I just see the reason for keeping them apart differently: it’s her trust issues. She wasn’t going to leave the CIA because Chuck wanted her to, she was doing it because she wanted a real relationship and she understood that they couldn’t have one as long as she was a spy. Then, Chuck went and did the exact opposite. There’s a lot of betrayal going on in this show: Casey said that eventually people will let you down, Bryce and Jill betrayed the people that they loved because of the job, Sarah was about to betray Chuck at the end of Firs Kill. That scene at the end of Three Words, where Chuck talked down Karl, showed exactly that, both to the viewers and to Chuck: the big tough guy turned to butter because of his feelings. You can see that Chuck understands the dangers of being in love by how his speech stops when he gets to “feelings are a liability” and then continues much slower while mostly looking at Sarah. And it’s after that moment that he stopped trying to get her forgiveness so that they can be together. You can say that she should have trusted him, but you’re forgetting who you’re talking about and that Chuck had already chosen the job over her. And, as we saw from First Class through Fake Name, he kept doing things he didn’t like just because the job required it. When he “killed” the mole, she lost complete hope in him.
“Seeking comfort in his arms would like snuggling with something reptilian. There is nothing comforting there. Just coldness.” – Well, that’s the thing, she wasn’t attracted to him because he wasn’t her type. The comfort was in talking with someone who understood her and in feeling close to someone. Look, she’s an introvert, they don’t just spout their problems to anyone, like say, to a stranger that you’re stuck with in the back of a truck full of sheep, but that doesn’t mean they don’t need to talk. She tried to talk about Bryce with Carina, but she dismissed her; she tried to talk about family with Casey, but he dismissed her; when Casey told her to stop being mean to Chuck, he also told her that he didn’t want to know what happened between them; she tried to talk to Carina about Chuck, but she dismissed her. Shaw did the exact opposite. She told him intimate stuff because she needed to feel close to him, to paraphrase Morgan, she was oversharing in order to connect. The progress of their relationship mirrored the deterioration of her relationship with Chuck: she ignores Shaw because she has no interest in him and she’s waiting on Chuck; Chuck gets jealous, she scolds Shaw; Chuck tells her that he’s hooking up with Hannah, she accepts a shoulder rub from Shaw, but she stops the relationship because she’s still not interested; Chuck is a jerk without the job requiring it, she confides in Shaw and she hooks up with him; Chuck kills someone, she confides some more and decides to move away with Shaw.
I actually think that this was written pretty well, but people are used to dumb romances and it was a bit heavy for the type the show that Chuck had been up to that point and probably not the thing that most people wanted. Still, it wasn’t perfect. The big problem was that Shaw was slimy, so the entertainment was brought down a notch or two. I guess they did it to show that he wasn’t her type, so I don’t know how you can do him differently. What I would have changed: the shoulder rub, it was weird, just find another way tho show that she was opening up to him; before Sarah told him her name, he should have offered something personal about his wife and Sarah should have impulsively initiated the kiss; in the next episode, when they were doing surveillance at the hotel, Sarah should have expressed concerns about Chuck not flashing because he sacrificed a lot for this etc; show that she would have shot Shaw when he was trying to blow up Castle.
@Josh
If he didn’t have weight and if he was irrelevant to the story, then he wasn’t presented like a main character. Not for the first two seasons and a half. He was the sidekick, but he was never part of the adventure.
First, I would say that the genres were a little different: action-comedy, drama and sitcom. And I’m not penalizing the show for having three of them, I’m doing it for mucking up two of those genres. The last thing it needed was to be even lighter, the heavy drama was over, Chuck was a spy, he and Sarah were together.
“He was observant of the issues between characters in the show… Most of the time he was just reminding people of things they were in denial” – And that was Chuck’s role in the first seasons, or Ellie’s if Chuck was the recipient of advice, but they were replaced because we needed a clown to grow.
“it isn’t like he was shouting advice everywhere.” – Except when he told Sarah to be a gf not a spy (nonsense), or telling Chuck to go on the mission with her, or not to shoot anyone because that’s why she liked him (more nonsense), or with the magic kiss.
I already said that I don’t care about the development of characters in who’s growth I was never invested, but I’m fine if the writers want to do it. Just don’t do it at the expense of more important characters and of the story. I hate Shaw the most, he really drags down Fake Name, Beard and Tic Tac, but I can objectively say that S4 Morgan was the worst character of the show because his use did damage in multiple areas for a longer time.
For me, S1 Morgan was the funniest because he was an oblivious idiot. The few times that I liked him in S4 were when he was similar to the first seasons, like when he was in the bar with Chuck, in First Fight. His entrance in the bar was gold. I know people from other places were also annoyed by him in the first season and I’m curios why, cause no one ever said why?
Hmm, thinking about it, to me I think it comes down to Josh Gomez acting, especially in scenes where Morgan would just pop up…it felt forced and like a lazy way of cutting into what are supposed to be palpable moments between characters at a time when we were still getting to know them…though when the camera panned to the other side of Chuck’s bed in goodbye I loved it.
Sarah is the kind of person who needs to be cued in a moment like phase three, the whole A plot is about her emotional instability because Chuck is in peril. All Morgan did was remind her at a time when her grief and worries were holding back what was in her heart.
Quinn and Shaw were the worst Chuck characters by a wide margin
@Josh
Thank god that someone invented the scroll wheel… I almost forgot what I ws trying to say by the time I saw a reply button.
“it took a fun show and made it miserable which is I think Lukes point, far too long and filled with chaos”
Not really. Some episodes are better than others, but, as a block, I like the first 10 episodes a lot. My issues are that Fake Name, Beard and Tic Tac are not as entertaining as they should be, because Shaw is a shitbag and that Final Exam, American Hero and Other Guy just suck, with or without Shaw.
I like those Morgan pop-outs. One my favorites is when he came out from a dark corner of the courtyard, right after Sarah had left, and he said that Casey was creepy. Drax did something similar in Infinity War. I liked that Chuck didn’t even flinch, he was used to Morgan’s lack of boundaries. It was also hilarious that he was the opposite of Chuck when it came to girls: started immediately to hit on a girl that was way out of his league, Carina, and skipped all the steps of flirting, kissing Anna at the first sign of interest from her. I think I was able to like him because there are very few things on tv that make me uncomfortable and I didn’t take him too seriously.
Sarah didn’t need to be cued in at all, just like she didn’t need Morgan to tell her to not let Chuck rot in the psych ward. All she needed was to follow her heart, which she had been doing since Lethal Weapon. Ever since that episode, her actions were those of a girlfriend, so the advice didn’t even make sense and it kind of ruined the moment. Another stupid concept in that episode: Chuck was afraid that, without the Intersect, he was going to lose Sarah. I guess this is what happens when a new writer comes in, watches the previous seasons and misunderstands what was going on. In her defense, it’s easy to get confused after watching the shit show that was Final Exam + American Hero.
Eh, I liked Quinn, minus his convenient back story. He was certainly better than Vivian, but what they did have in common was being very easily allowed to get away. That was just lazy writing.
Luke, Sorry for the late reply. Somehow I lost this thread.
First of all, I’m sorry that I lumped you in with Dave. No one deserves that! 😀 In my defense,
Here’s my take on Sarah’s backstory…
That day in the woods, we agree that Sarah chose that. She chose to leave her mother and grandmother and take up her father’s life. She could have returned to live with her mother at any time. She actively chose to trust her father and take up a life of adventure, stealing, grifting, being very secretive to protect themselves, taking up aliases to avoid arrest, and running from the law. She chose that actively. Clearly, she saw nothing wrong with any it.
Also, she was used as a tool in his schemes. The world is divided between con men and marks. Right? And you don’t want to be the mark! This is the moral framework in which she was raised.
Clearly she has always loved her father. Along with the various ‘adventures’, he also abandons her from time to time. It seems her attachment to him was such that it withstood these abandonments, as she never went back to live with her mother. Later we find out that her mother is perfectly fine. So, why did she have such a weak attachment to her mother?
Now Langston Graham has caught up with her in the woods. He dodges the knife and says: “Nice toss! Your father has trained you well. The CIA can train you better.” I don’t think that was just relating to the knife. It takes in all those other skills she has learned from her father. She was a ready made spy!
She then goes straight into the CIA. She can use all her previous training and do all the things she was doing before, except that instead of con men and marks, we have something like civilians / teammates / enemies / allies / traitors. And just like before, when she trusted her father for guidance, she trusts her CIA handlers to tell her which is which.
So, her morality is improved. There are innocent people to protect. Loyalty and teammates to trust and work with. But when she is directed at enemies and traitors, the behaviors toward them are the same or worse. She is still a tool. It’s just someone else directing her actions. So, her trust and loyalty to her superiors can be abused, and we know absolutely that is has been.
A normal person entering the CIA would have a more solid moral grounding. Adding the CIA training on top of that, gives you a normal spy. Someone who can judge the CIAs orders and push back or even resign if they are too egregious. When Sarah joins up and gets the CIA training, you get Langston Graham’s wildcard enforcer.
And in the finale arc, we see this clearly when Sarah has reverted to being a tool. Quinn’s tool this time. Just convince her that you are a superior authority, point her at the enemy, and pull the trigger. It’s quite chilling to see that. There was still something special about Chuck, that she couldn’t quite finish the job. If it was anybody else, they would be dead.
Stevie
Your last point is something that I never noticed, I always wondered why Sarah did not raise more questions about Quinn’s version of things, he painted himself her handler, a authority figure, and slipped in Bryce and Graham’s deaths in such a matter of fact way…he painted Chuck unstable and errattic it is unfortunately brilliant manipulation of her condition, and she does not listen to her doubts because until he spills the beans she thinks her efforts are in service to the CIA, that’s so depressing:(
Luke,
Here are my thoughts on the Sarah and Shaw triangle.
“The progress of their relationship mirrored the deterioration of her relationship with Chuck” — This is exactly my perspective. The only difference that we have here is Sarah’s mental landscape while this is happening.
You say she is lonely and needs a rebound relationship. I say yes to that, but it is in the context of her increasing self-loathing due to her facilitation of Chuck becoming a spy. The closer he gets, the more estranged they appear. Shaw seems to be actively taking steps to make that worse.
It might be possible to convince me that self loathing is not a factor. But first, you’ll have to convince me that Shaw is something other than reptilian — no comfort, only coldness.
Josh I do have to point out a couple things in Sarah’s defense. First, Quinn likely knows she will figure him out if she has a moment to think, so he keeps chattering in her ear all night.
Secondly, the big thing; Chuck’s raid on DARPA is seriously illegal and immoral. No matter what claims you think you have on something, you cannot raid a federal installation and destroy it! At that moment Chuck has indeed become a terrorist and that gives Sarah reason to believe everything Quinn has told her. Really a terribly written moment, Chuck is NOT the good guy there.
Yep. I’m not sure what Chuck hoped to achieve with that. I count at lest twice that the CIA has reconstructed the Intersect and Fulcrum did once themselves.
Sarah does not come out of this smelling like a rose. After Chuck and the team succeed in non lethally getting to the Intersect to erase it, Sarah secretly downloads it. While Sarah is escaping, Quinn blows up the office over her objections, likely killing innocent people. Her response? Sarah doubles down on completing Quinn’s mission! Who’s idea was it to kidnap Ellie?
And any hesitation with dealing with Chuck? Well, it’s Chuck. Quinn has to override their connection and any retained emotions. Like I said. Anyone but Chuck would’ve been dead already.
Here’s an interesting question that I just thought about….
Chuck’s plan to destroy the intersect was illegal for sure. But was it immoral? That question is difficult to answer.
From Chuck’s perspective, it became a moral imperative to destroy it. It ruined his father’s life, it ruined the lives of three generations of Winterbottoms. It amplified the evil within Shaw. The various people trying to create one are constantly menacing his family. And he might have never found this out, but General Beckman was ready to kill him to protect it’s secrets. There’s some CIA (and NSA) morality for you!
I’m not so sure which way the balance of morality swings here. I do think trying to destroy is ultimately a futile gesture. That geni is well out of the bottle.
It is possible for both sides to be wrong. Regardless of the government actions, breaking and entry and destruction of government property is wrong. Not least because the breaking and entry leads directly to a high chance of someone getting hurt. And of course, regardless of Chuck’s view of ownership the courts will not agree with him ( a government scientist does not own his own work, just like most scientists working for any company will not own their own work unless they have a very special contract).
I would agree the morality was more complicated IF it had been some sort death camp or some other clearly evil thing was being done there. Then the breaking and entry, trespass on government property and felony burglary would be small stuff compared to the gross wrongs being perpetrated.
But that is not the case here. It’s a family vs government property dispute. This is for the courts to decide (and as I said, Chuck would loose; well, unless he can show ownership of specific changes made apart from government service), Chuck is clearly and completely in the wrong.
I’m sorry, I really don’t see this as complicated or confusing.
As a government cynic I’m not the right person to decide if Chuck’s actions are good or bad, I cannot overstate how much I think our freedom should have about five asterisks next to it. Seriously, by the people for the people if it ever was true hasn’t truly been the case in decades. If that were the case a certain someone would not be in office (not that his competition was much better) more like by the rich for the rich and the rest of us just have to make do…sorry if this offends but I’m part of a slice of the population (disabled) that has dealt with so much ridiculous red tape at the state and federal level that I have minimal faith that the citizens have much power, beyond maybe city issues, but I’m getting off topic…
Honestly my view on Chuck’s actions is “absolute power corrupts absolutely” basically he sought to destroy what was a major source of people’s lust for power. His father intended the thing as a teaching tool, the harsh truth is the wider government wants to control everything, including people. I mean they do it very subtlety. For example, nothing in our constitution says people have to pay taxes, but we do because those in power are constantly making promises that they won’t keep. That’s probably the least sinister method. Major world events, 9/11, the 2008 economy collapse, JFK, MLK, disease outbreaks, weather events, etc, are used (wether orchestrated or not) as a means for governments to say “don’t think for yourself keep trusting us and we will protect you.” The part they leave out is “all while serving our own interests”. for anyone who disagrees (which I fully expect) I will end with this: the best way to control people is tell them their free and give them a bunch of rules to follow. That is how we live everyday and while it is by no means awful there is a lot of unnecessary struggle for typical citizens, A certain level of denial prevents this way of thinking but the evidence is there to find if willing to look for it, but again I have skidded off topic…
Sorry for the rant everyone, but when morality and government are mentioned in the same vein it pushes a major button for me. I don’t mean to suggest people have become drones or anything of that nature but I do think there is a larger “mind problem” happening throughout the world.
Josh,
For some reason, whenever I see what Sarah is up to in “vs. Sarah”, I always flashback on the scenes with Sarah as a little girl riding her bike and selling girl scout cookies… helping her dad with his crimes.
It always breaks me up! Such a tragedy to be used like that.
Josh whether you *like* government or not is ultimately beside the point. Right and wrong exist apart from government. Every culture, society and government has standards of such (NO human gathering has ever existed as anarchy for more than the briefest of periods). And believe it or not, I know plenty of handicapped people who are not anti-American anarchists.
But western law is usually broken into two categories; “mala prohibitum” is things that are crimes because they are illegal, like speeding or failure to pay taxes. While “male in se” is things that are crimes in and of themselves, like stealing or killing. And that second is more the point here. It doesn’t really matter who one is stealing from; stealing is stealing. If you can make a case for ownership, take it to court. That’s what they’re there for, and they do work. I’m pretty sure in this case Chuck would loose, but that leads directly to the pertinent point. Sarah still believes herself to be a government agent. Even if we think Chuck could have won Sarah over again without Quinn confusing and distracting her all night long (as I do); Chuck raiding and robbing DARPA makes him a criminal and terrorist under the laws Sarah still believes she is bound to. He completely proves Quinn’s briefing to be largely correct (Sarah doesn’t witness any killing, but she does see a number of federal offenses).
Of course Quinn then proceeds to blow up the facility which makes him no better. The obvious, rational thing is Sarah should have immediately sought out a higher, legitimate authority. She already knows handlers can be as bad as anyone.
But no doubt, Chuck gave himself a very hard fight to win where Sarah is concerned.
Dave, right and wrong SHOULD exist apart from government…my big problem is that quite often it does not, and that’s not just here in the U.S but all over the world, albeit to varying degrees, and while I’m far from intending to imply that we should be allowed to do whatever we please, I do think that those in positions of power have ZERO right to affect the general populations ability to strive for more than middle or lower class living to the extent that they do, it might just be a new version of the same problem but it sure seems like its worse now than the early days of civilization. The rest is just opinion formed through research.
Back to Chuck, I agree that he is in the wrong, at the same time I think this is another moment where TPTB did not think things through and as such I always give the character a pass. Like when Chuck just says “I’m sorry I can’t” in Prague…really that is it? No, it just reeks of writing something without any thought as to what the established baseline for a character is…
Josh I certainly agree it was a half-baked idea on the part of the writers.
It was a silly manipulation in the worst S3 sort of way; that Chuck would conspire to play the villain so Sarah would be convinced Quinn was right… the whole thing is totally immersion breaking.
And I just think it would have been a vastly better story anyway to have Chuck actually be the good guy that won Sarah over in the first place. And then see Quinn’s plans fall apart when “his soldier” switches sides after falling for her husband all over again. Now THAT’s a finale I would have been enthused about!
Josh, sorry, but you tripped one of my triggers.
“For example, nothing in our constitution says people have to pay taxes”
When citing constitutional authority it is probably a good idea to know what is in the constitution.
Section 8. Clause 1. The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.
16th Amendment. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Sorry everyone, it couldn’t be helped…
Fair enough erine, doesn’t change my point though. Collecting a % of the money we make is just another form of exercising control over the people when the people are supposed to be control the government as a whole population. My point was more so that if enough people said I’m not paying taxes, that they would have to accept the will of the people. They won’t throw everyone in jail because then they would have to work as hard as we do.
For crying out loud, I cannot work more than a minimum number of hours without having my government assistance cut or taken away completely, so effectively I cannot have a full time job to earn money that would be of real financial help. Even the part time job I had two years ago was worth more money total than the monthly checks from the government! It’s that kind of thing that makes me seem more cynical than I intend to be…for a country founded on the notion of achieving dreams, they sure as heck don’t make it VERY HARD to fulfill larger dreams many of us have…
That last bit had a typo; do, not don’t. I should have said if people don’t want to pay taxes they should not be punished. Even so how has nobody cut out the jargon from this document in the last 30 years or so, makes my head hurt trying to understand it which is probably why I was incorrect.
Well guess I see Chuck’s actions here a little different.
It seems to me the team has skitted over the legal line several times during the ‘Project Bartowski’ period continuing through the ‘Carmichael Industries’ period. This originates, of course, in Chuck never accepting someone else’s vision of morality. Chuck is who he is.
So, this raid to eliminate the Intersect is on a spectrum of past behaviors. Maybe the scale is larger and the stakes are higher, but it’s essence isn’t any different than other times government and private facilities were raided without permission. or direct orders disobeyed, etc.
Dave’s other points are well taken:
— I too think that had Quinn not been in Sarah’s ear the whole time, that Chuck had a good chance of deprogramming her. Once she become more determined to complete Quinn’s mission after the DARPA raid, then he had a tougher task. But we could see her responding to him before that. Chuck is still Chuck.
— And the raid on the DARPA facility did play into Quinn’s plans. And with Sarah just back from being captured and tortured! How about a few weeks off Chuck!
Thank you Ernie!
And yeah Stevie, Chuck has played loose with the laws and rules before. But I do think this stands out as crossing serious lines; in particular, the sort of lines that will play very poorly with a Sarah who has lost her history with him.
I do agree some time off was in order! It’s all a situation that hasn’t gotten much play time here, but it is one of those eye-rolling, made-for-TV sort of manipulations.
If it’s not too late, I hereby withdraw this question: “Chuck’s plan to destroy the intersect was illegal for sure. But was it immoral?”.
Carry on with you normal Chuck programming. Same Chuck time! Same Chuck channel!
Dave,
“But I do think this stands out as crossing serious lines;” — Do you mean crossing a serious line like breaking into a CIA facility to break Casey out of jail? Or maybe crossing another serious line like breaking a Volkoff crony out of Federal prison?
“in particular, the sort of lines that will play very poorly with a Sarah who has lost her history with him.” — Well, yeah. But Chuck hadn’t found out about that yet. So it wasn’t a factor. The only real issue, is why the rush? Why now? 😀
I did really enjoy the Sarah spy routine, mirroring Bryce’s in E1, at DARPA though. And the parkcour routine to sneak into Ellie’s apartment was badass too! We could’ve used more of that from ‘good’ Sarah’ over the years!.
Okay, you’re right, Chuck the domestic terrorist was well established.
Of course Chuck didn’t know that Sarah didn’t know (!). It was no complaint about Chuck in character.
This is one of those meta complaints you love so much. It’s all part of why the finale arc doesn’t play so well for me. Surprisingly this time, it’s a LaJudkins episode that doesn’t really work for me (first and only time!). I rolled my eyes so much I got dizzy…
Geez Josh, next you’ll be complaining about death…
Just find a country without taxes and problem solved. We know how wonderful those workers’ paradises are.
Funny you should say that. I actually had this (bracing for more meta) next to the emoji. But I had used angle brackets, which I guess the WordPress comment system filtered out.
Word Press does get finicky sometimes! And only the principals have edit privileges. I would fix it for you if I was sure what you meant. You can contact me off board (PM at FanFiction.net or “Contact Me” at planedave.net) if you want to spell it out for a dense old-timer.
I don’t think an edit is necessary. I would not ask you to edit a post of mine only to add a poke at yourself. Seems uncharitable.
😀
Oh if I couldn’t handle the pokes I would have been long gone by now!
Josh, you won’t get any argument from me that we are overtaxed for the services we actually receive and that there are a lot of perverse incentives in many programs to keep people dependent so they will support the program. It is axiomatic that with time any organization will shift from primarily serving their customers interests to primarily serving their own. But they are doing so with a constitutional power we gave them.
Now I’ve broken the no politics rule twice so I’ll make this the end, and if more politics follows I’ll delete all political posts, mine included.
No worries erine I’m done too:)
@Stevie
First, a correction: I liked a lot only the first six episodes, not the first ten. From there on, after some analysis, I was ok with the direction, but still didn’t like it. I liked the next four episodes, minus the romantic plot, but that was the most important part.
“She chose that actively. Clearly, she saw nothing wrong with any it.” – She chose that when she was a child and didn’t know any better. By the time she understood what she was doing, she had become a wanted criminal, there was no going back to her mother. Also, in the woods, Graham said “your father scammed some dangerous people,” he didn’t say “you and your father,” so it’s possible that she was only living with her dad, without taking part in his schemes anymore. Another thing, she was a bit too submissive for someone with very few moral qualms about being a criminal, she surrendered to Graham without too much of a fight.
“So, her morality is improved.” – Here is my problem, from the start, before watching and analyzing any scenes, with this theory: she’s 17, she’s too old for this.
“Someone who can judge the CIAs orders and push back” – Well, that’s what she has done with Molly and Chuck, the wildcard enforcer was just a reputation. It’s just hearsay, I don’t understand why you are passing it off as fact.
As for Shaw:
“You say she is lonely and needs a rebound relationship. I say yes to that, but it is in the context of her increasing self-loathing due to her facilitation of Chuck becoming a spy.” – Self-loathing is only a side effect, no sane person dates someone else as a form of self-flagellation, they do it to feel better. This goes back to my “realistic feelings or I’m out” dogma.
In the first two seasons, more so in the second, they couldn’t be together because Chuck wanted a real relationship while she wanted to be a spy. Now, the roles are reversed and she thinks that Chuck is becoming a ruthless spy, someone that she can’t have a real relationship with. This time, she can’t ignore and deny her feelings behind rage, like she did after Prague, now, she is facing the fact that she is losing him. Most people, actually everybody, after they get past the denial of a big break-up, say that they have lost their best friend. That’s always an understatement, it actually feels like your life has been turned up side down, like you have suffered a loss of identity. She actually says something like that with “I wanna remember who I am. Who I was before all this.”
It’s only natural that people would like to feel that closeness again, but, initially, she’s not even seeking that. She needs to talk about it, so she goes to his hotel because he was the only that had listened to her and she tells him intimate thoughts. The trick is, because of her closed-off personality, the confession makes her feel close to him and she tells him more things, like her real name. Add in the fact that she was on a long dry spell and he was good looking, so the next steps were easy. People hate it, but I think that the name reveal saved the arc and the rest for me. The comfort was in feeling close to someone, not in loving and being loved by some prince charming. That’s why she doesn’t care that he wants to kill himself to avenge his wife, he was just like heroin for her and she wasn’t going to give it up right after she had decided that she and Chuck were done.
And I am not sure how bad Shaw is actually, I think a part of our dislike for him is just the subjective reaction to him being such a big deal between Chuck and Sarah. If I think about it more objectively, he’s sleazy only in Fake Name: punches a tied up prisoner (cheesy), hooks up with a chick when she is crying about her ex (no dignity), rubs Chuck’s nose in it (douche bag). I give him a pass for the sexual harassment in Mask, because I think he was supposed to perceive some connection with Sarah at the end of First Class, but the scene wasn’t well written and/or acted.
The show’s portrayal of the CIA and NSA and other branches was never realistic, so I wasn’t troubled by Chuck’s plan to destroy the Intersect, just like I wasn’t troubled by the idea of a Red Test. They were just some more silly plot points. And I don’t think that Sarah was bothered by that, either.
For me, this is pretty simple. When she woke up, Quinn fed her some story and she immediately didn’t trust him, but some of the parts were verifiable as facts: Graham and Bryce were dead, she did start to monitor Chuck at some point and she was now married to him. So, she was faced with two possibilities: Chuck was her mark or he was her real husband. She chose to believe the former and that says something about her, at the very least, she was considering herself capable of something like that.
She goes on with the mission, but, just like in the pilot, she sees that Chuck is not the bad guy that he was supposed to be. She also hears him talk to Ellie about destroying the Intersect, not stealing it. Eventually, that good opinion goes to hell when he betrays her by switching the glasses and she goes after him and his sister, who she assumes she’s in cahoots with him.
Luke,
You say this:
“She chose that when she was a child and didn’t know any better. By the time she understood what she was doing, she had become a wanted criminal, there was no going back to her mother.”
And then you say this in the very next sentence:
“Also, in the woods, Graham said “your father scammed some dangerous people,” he didn’t say “you and your father,” so it’s possible that she was only living with her dad, without taking part in his schemes anymore.”
So which is it?
I’m gonna apply your ‘realistic’ dogma to Sarah’s backstory here. I do not see how it’s realistic for a girl given that upbringing, to grow into a women without major moral and trust issues that have to be overcome. So, it’s okay if we disagree here, I just see it differently then you.
“Here is my problem, from the start, before watching and analyzing any scenes, with this theory: she’s 17, she’s too old for this.” — You have a very fatalistic view of humanity. If you deny the possibility of growth and redemption, then I can see why my POV doesn’t compute for you. I think you are wrong here. Why do you think basic training and indoctrination is used on military recruits? I don’t know anything about it, but I’m guessing that the CIA has similar processes. Are they useless?
“Well, that’s what she has done with Molly” — And that happened right after killing a room full of people with hardly any issues at all! Here’s the thing, as it is shown to us, Molly was likely the first time she pushed back against her orders. I think I’ve made it clear that Sarah would have to be convinced, and it doesn’t really seem to take much, that someone she is ordered to kill has to be an enemy or a traitor. Can you explain how a baby could be either of those?
“Well, that’s what she has done with… Chuck” — I think Sarah would’ve put him down if she ultimately thought he was a traitor with Bryce. Ultimately, it became clear that he was actually a civilian caught up in something that he didn’t understand. So, I don’t think there’s a contradiction here.
“the wildcard enforcer was just a reputation. It’s just hearsay, I don’t understand why you are passing it off as fact.” — I don’t have any reason to doubt Casey’s assessment of her. It seems to me like their reputations are mutually known to each other. What tasks do you think a ‘wildcard enforcer” might perform? Is there something in the bylaws that says they have to dispose of babies and kill CIA intelligence assets?
“Self-loathing is only a side effect, no sane person dates someone else as a form of self-flagellation, they do it to feel better. This goes back to my “realistic feelings or I’m out” dogma.” — I don’t think this raises to the level of sanity issue. But I think your assumption that this is only a ‘breakup’ is flawed. There is more going on.
Sarah is starting to take steps to reconcile with Chuck in “Angel de la Muerte” and “Operation Awesome”. She even defends Chuck in a team meeting. Shaw says something like a good spy knows how to bury their feelings. And says that Sarah will agree. But instead, she reminds Shaw that “Sometimes it helps if you have something you care about”. She and Chuck then exchange one of their ‘looks’.
Later that evening, while Sarah has joined a Bartowski family dinner, Reptilian Shaw is shown spying on them while, very Golum like, manipulating his wedding ring. (Maybe he lost his lighter?) But there’s nothing creepy about this guy, right?
So what happens at the beginning of the very next episode, “First Class”? That’s when Shaw starts ramping up Chuck’s spy training!
Sarah hates the idea of Chuck becoming a spy like her. She loathes it. And yet she was it’s inspiration. And Shaw orders her to continue the spy training towards it’s ultimate fulfillment. And why would she hate that Chuck wants to be more like here? So, there’s at least 3 vectors contributing to Sarah’s increasing self loathing.
Shaw is unnerving. He’s bad android implementation stuck in the ‘Uncanny Valley’. He seems human on the surface, but his behavior is just ‘off’ enough to trigger revulsion. That is Shaw for me. And the idea that Sarah would seek comfort from something like that, says self destructive things about her state of mind
By the time he arrives on the scene ,the pain of Prague and had mostly dissipated. And I’ve examined my feelings around this, and no, it’s not because he’s an obstacle between Chuck and Sarah. It’s more like the idea that he could come between them ludicrous.The idea is crazy. Beyond consideration.
You weave a good explanation though! I find your idea compelling, that Sarah is so lonely for someone to just listen. I have to say that it rings true, except, that it’s still Shaw! He doesn’t reciprocate any warmth and can’t really even fake any interest. Sarah could have gotten the same benefit from talking to herself.
So to me, if Sarah is considering him, it has to be something other than warmth or attraction. It’s like buying a pet snake because you’re lonely! No body does that! I guess he’s supposed to be the perfect spy, with all his emotions buried. Maybe the perfect spy is reptilian? But whatever is going on, it’s clear that it’s not working for him. Dude is wound tighter than a two dollar watch.
And the carnal part. I’m pretty sure she had that taken care of after Prague. Remember the guy by the pool. We only saw him once, and he was more authentically human then Shaw ever was.
In my latest rewatch, I’m at the beginning of “First Class”, so, I’ll have your scenario in mind as I continue forward. Thanks for the interesting discussion!
Here’s something I just picked up from rewatching “the Role Models”:
Sarah:
I’m sorry I freaked out when you asked me to move in with you. It’s just… You know how I grew up. I spent my life living in hotel rooms under fake names. I’ve been trained to survive a thousand different situations in the field. But, nobody ever taught me how to have a normal life.
And now from “the Suitcase”.
Sarah: I do feel comfortable here. It’s just… It doesn’t come naturally to me, putting roots down.
Chuck: I know. You were always on the run with your dad; and being a spy, doesn’t make it easy to make a home anywhere. I understand. It’s just what you’re used to. But I love you, because we’re different.
===Later===
Chuck: Ah you didn’t have to do…
Sarah: I wanted to. I’ve never had a real home, and I wanted this to feel like one.
Chuck: Let me help you… What’s this?
(Looking at Sarah and Chuck picture from the suitcase, the same one in Sarah’s room when Casey told her that Chuck didn’t kill the mole)
Sarah:
That’s just something that I like to keep in my suitcase at all times, Whether I’m in Portugal, Russia, or Burbank. This makes me feel comfortable. Safe.
Look. I know it’s probably taken me longer than a normal girl. But you should know that you’re my home, Chuck. You always have been.
Stevie we all get that Sarah self-identified as a nomad. And there’s no doubt her dad played THE major part in molding/corrupting the young girl.
But we also know she lived with for a period with a grandmother. And her mom stated “you were always running off with your father…” which suggests she was also returning to mom. I think the reasonable assumption is that her father never had legal custody, so her flights with him were just that, adventures. Like most of us, she was the product of multiple influences, and carries a significant burden of guilt for the ones she is less proud of. And since we are talking about 18 years of minority, there is plenty of time for every influence to play its role.
Dave,
“But we also know she lived with for a period with a grandmother. And her mom stated “you were always running off with your father…” which suggests she was also returning to mom.”
It’s starting to feel like we are only disagreeing in the margins now. But, the only things that I remember Sarah’s mother saying about Sarah’s father were in “the Baby”:
To Sarah:
When You were a little girl, all I ever wanted for you was a normal life. Then you went off with your father, and he was never one….
And then later to Chuck:
Growing up mostly with her father, she always kept to herself.
Perhaps it is margins, but it’s and attempt to moderate your initial extreme statements. And an attempt to explain a complicated character with multiple facets; adrenaline junkie who craved something normal…
Extreme statements?
I can only think of 2 things that might be categorized that way.
1. Monster/Spy Girl – Which I introduced as something of a thought experiment.
2. feral – Which really was my reaction to that scene. And I think that was the intended reaction to that scene, with the way it was juxtaposed with Sarah and Chuck’s “medium rare, extra pickles” conversation. It’s really quite jarring, to me anyway. YMMV.
Am I forgetting any others?
You are the one that says to keep the pieces that we like and discard the pieces that we don’t like. I’m just still sorting this out in my mind. And I don’t know how to do this without discussing it.
Could this be arising out of the fact someone like me, who has just recently discovered these characters, is interacting with someone like you, who has had a firm opinion of these characters for several years?
Yes to both, those are the statements and that’s likely a big part of our different perspectives. And no doubt the first couple seasons I cared far more about what was on screen, S3 was sort of a canon divorce for me. Even though I loved the last two seasons, for a long time now I’ve mostly regarded the show as just a visual aid for the stories I like better. And seriously, having seen some of my favorite episodes 30+ times, I’m just far more interested now in the new stories coming out. I haven’t watched an episode in two or three years now, yet there’s still one or two new chapters of some fan fiction or another every day. And that may form a very big part of my current attitude towards the show.
Wow, monster thread. Scrolling, scrolling, scrolling …
Stevie B, you are nothing if not relentless and immovable. I gotta go with Dave on this. Compared with views expressed over the years, yours are sort of … outliers.
You said feral – Which really was my reaction to that scene. And I think that was the intended reaction to that scene. … If that was the intended reaction, congrats — you’re the first Chuck This commenter (that I know of) to ever get it. Like I said days ago, “feral” never crossed my mind. I can’t say what kind of reaction the writers wanted to elicit, but if I made a list of guesses, “feral” probably wouldn’t make my top … I dunno … 50.
Fe-ral
adjective
(especially of an animal) in a wild state, especially after escape from captivity or domestication. “a feral cat”
synonyms: wild, untamed, untamable, undomesticated, untrained
resembling a wild animal.
synonyms: fierce, ferocious, vicious, savage, predatory, menacing, bloodthirsty
“a feral snarl”
Nope, definitely not feral. A panicked high school girl whose, in some aspects, relatively normal life has just fallen apart. She used to go to school and had a car and she and her dad were apparently living in a house, so that hints at a measure of stability, and that is all gone.
Sure, her dad runs cons for a living. We don’t know if she still helps. She apparently didn’t on the one that got her dad arrested, so not a normal life for sure.
But definitely not in any sense feral.
I agree with the consensus here, feral is the wrong word to associate with Sarah. Now Kratos from the god of war series fits the term perfectly, pardon the reference but I have been playing the newest game frequently and couldn’t help making the comparison.
I would call Sarah unfulfilled more than anything else. That’s why the exchange between Chuck and her mother in baby is so fantastic, she knows that her daughter has found fulfillment with Chuck
thinking,
“you are nothing if not relentless and immovable.”
—- A couple of things about this… is there a requirement for consensus here? I was worried early on that I might disrupt your pleasant community. I am ready to cease posting here at any moment, if the view is that I’m less a contributor than a disruptor. It is never my intention to troll, disrupt, or even perturb the orbits here.
Immovable? I’ve already quit referring to Sarah is feral. I saw that as a step to far. I even liked Dave’s comment about it working as hyperbole. And I’m currently considering Luke’s points about Sarah’s motivations with respect to the Shaw relationship in S3. Granted, it is hard for me to get past his repulsiveness and coldness.
Relentless? Dave seems plenty relentless to me! And given the facts that here he is engaged 5 years after the end of the show and 10 years in total, while I’ve only been engaged for 2 months… well, I’ll let you do the math. And the same point applies to a lesser degree to the resident Chuck This tag team, who apparently stand always ready to defend Sarah’s honor. Seems I’ve had no lack of sparring partners. But, I’m the relentless one?
“If that was the intended reaction, congrats — you’re the first Chuck This commenter (that I know of) to ever get it. Like I said days ago, “feral” never crossed my mind. I can’t say what kind of reaction the writers wanted to elicit, but if I made a list of guesses, “feral” probably wouldn’t make my top … I dunno … 50.”
—- Kudos to at least getting the fact that I was only talking about my reaction to that particular scene, and not Sarah. Are you sure that 50 is the right ratio? Maybe 100? Or even higher?
But yeah, you are not the first to notice that I’m often out somewhere on a lonely limb of the Bell Curve. IRL, this often allows me to find and solve tricky system/hardware/software problems. Here at Chuck This, it seems to trigger an immunity response. 🙂
Arthur has mentioned twice that something I’ve said has made him think of something new to consider about Chuck. Josh has mentioned one time where this happened. Now, I don’t know that the signal to noise ratio of revelation to aggravation is worth it to this community but is seems like it is more than nothing.
Ernie and Josh,
My apologies if I have not been clear.
My most recent use of ‘feral’ was only to describe that scene and my reaction to it, especially with how it is juxtaposed with the “Medium rare, extra pickles’ conversation.
I believe that my last statement on how it may still apply to Sarah, is only in the sense that her morality at that point could be described as ‘feral’ or ‘retrograde’. I’m open to discussions around this, especially any suggestions on a better description for a morality that accepts grifting, stealing, use of fake names to evade law enforcement, running from law enforcement, throwing knifes at law enforcement, etc.
Ernie,
“adjective
(especially of an animal) in a wild state, especially after escape from captivity or domestication. “a feral cat”
synonyms: wild, untamed, untamable, undomesticated, untrained”
—- This is the definition closest to what I had been meaning. And what I’m still on the fence about concerning her morality at that time.
Josh,
“That’s why the exchange between Chuck and her mother in baby is so fantastic, she knows that her daughter has found fulfillment with Chuck”
—- I actually refer to that scene as “Peak Bartowski”. It is a great, no, an awesome scene! Alas, things can only go down hill from there. 😦
And apropos of nothing,
I like scanning the Buy More sales floor. I can often pick out several appliances for which I was responsible for firmware development, integration, and testing from back when I worked in the appliance industry to bring electronic controls in wider usage.
Stevie go ahead and be relentless. Call it an observation not a gag order. But yeah, I’ll defend my views too. We all will. Inflexibility isn’t a crime around here.
Thanks Dave.
But I’m taking a break. I never intended my comments to come across as an invitation to fight. I’m sorry that my enthusiasm led us to this point. This stuff should be fun!
Stevie B, my apologies for overreacting. The whole “feral” thing hit me wrong. And I really don’t agree with the negative take on Sarah. But you make some good points and I think people are getting a lot out of the discussion. You are a contributor not a disruptor.
I think it bothers me even more when I compare Chuck’s choices in season 3: the one in Pink slip and the one in Honeymooners. Both times he had to choose to run away with Sarah or be a spy Both times she wanted to run away with him and lead a normal life together (at least that is what he thought the second time). Both times it meant giving up his life in Burbank, his family and his friends. Both times it meant pissing off the CIA despite having gotten rid of a big threat (Fulcrum in the former, Shaw and the Director in the latter). Both times it would mean ignoring Intersect and the help he can provide to protect his country.
But here’s where it’s different: the first time he didn’t know he could be a successful spy and use 2.0 to protect his country. For all he knew, he could be bad with it. The second time there was no doubt, he was a successful agent, very skilled with 2.0 by that time and he was sure that running away meant leaving the country at risk, knowing he could be there to successfully protect it as a spy.
Also even more importantly, the second time he didn’t risk losing Sarah, they could have been spies in Burbank and be in a relationship. The first time he would have to go through 6 months of training that he wasn’t sure would even work without her there and he risked losing her forever in doing so.
So I have come to the conclusion that his choices made no sense. All things considered it was essentially the same choice and he made a different choice each of those times. The differences above made it even more important that he chooses Sarah first time. He didn’t. The second time he didn’t even need to choose her, he could have had it all in Burbank and he still chose to run away from his life, friends and family.
It’s television, nonsense choices go with the territory. To a certain extent we need to cut them slack and just play along. But it does become problematic when it stops being fun. It all plays into what Ernie called the rule of cool. It’s easier when it’s fun.
Loki, this is a wonderful description of the logic behind Chuck’s choices. That you find it irrational astounds me. What you’re describing is called learning.
You can even describe this process in completely rational terms. Chuck experiences a shift in his utility function between two “goods” – Sarah, and becoming a spy. He views these two as exclusive. He’s wrong to do so, as he is acting under incomplete information. But evaluation the rationality of a given decision is contingent upon its assumptions, so let’s do so – using math!
In 3×01, he values keeping Sarah and becoming a successful spy about equally. So give Sarah and spying a utility of 5 each.
Neither choice presents certainty – he could run away and still lose Sarah at some point (people who were in love sometimes break up). He could choose to become a spy and fail (and he does).
Let’s give a rough estimate of that decision in 3×01. If he runs away, he thinks he has an 80% chance of staying with Sarah and a 0% chance of being a spy. If he stays, he thinks he has a 20% of getting Sarah back and an 80% chance of becoming a spy. The expected value of the utility equation in 3×01:
Run away with Sarah: (0.8 * 5) + (0 * 5). Expected utility: 4
Stay in Burbank: (0.2*5) + (0.8 * 5). Expected utility: 5
Your claim that in 3×14, he’s got a higher chance of staying with Sarah by staying in Burbank than he did in 3×01, and no reduction in his likelyhood of beocming a spy. The CIA is still a threat to break them up, but Sarah won’t feel jilted this time. Let’s say that chance has risen from 20% to 60%. And yet, he switches his choice. Illogical, right?
No. What happens between these two episodes? He learns! He discovers that he can’t be a spy without Sarah. Not only is he rendered incompetent without her (he fails every single time she’s not around), he’s emotionally incapable of proceeding without her. He cancels the entire venture. In other words, the utility of spying without Sarah has now fallen to zero.
At zero, the probabilties in 3×14 no longer matter. Ceteris peribus:
Run away with Sarah: (0.8 * 5) + (0 * 0). Expected utility: 4
Stay in Burbank: (0.6 * 5) + (0.8 * 0). Expected utility: 3
Under these assumptions, a rational actor chooses to stay in Burbank in 3×01, and run away with Sarah in 3×14. QED.
There are good criticisms of S3.0. You could get around all of this by saying that Chuck didn’t have to choose, he could’ve just talked to Sarah. You could point out that most of Chuck’s assumptions are wrong. You could, as Dave does, point out that it sucked. And you’d be right! But you presented an argument about Chuck’s marginal decision (marginal in the technical sense), and that can be easily described in rational terms.
Furthermore, even if my argument is wrong, that only matters if you think people are always completely rational decisionmakers. We’re not. Neither is Chuck. Saying that Chuck made irrational decisions is no different from saying Chuck is human.
The real explanation is even simpler: in 3×01, Chuck made a mistake – a bad choice. In 3×14, he learned form that and made a better one. I’ll let he who is without sin throw that stone.
You did a great job breaking that down, but my problem is with the start of that. You’re saying both Sarah and spying get equal utility. That was my problem with his decision making in Prague, he valued becoming an actual spy too much and it wasn’t in line with his character.
Also I am saying he should have known that without Sarah it would be much harder to become a spy in the first place, it’s not like he hasn’t experienced Intersect related problems before when he and Sarah were having problems (Chuck vs the Crown Vic).
And also the utility of spying wouldn’t fall to 0 in the second decision, there would be a better than not chance of them staying together so assuming that they would he would have valued saving the world with her at his side more than running away, not to mention staying with his family rather than running from them which is another crucial factor.
And of course the communication criticisms always stand. If they just talked about it most of the problems could have been solved.
But you’re right about people not always being rational decision makers. That is why I wanted him to think with his heart not with his mind, and just choose Sarah in Prague. The Chuck we met in first 2 seasons would have done that. But the writers betrayed the spirit of his character to create drama.
Those last couple sentences sure hit the nail on the head!
Sorry for the late reply
Arthur, your breakdown was funny, but it, eventually, lost me, even if I’m a math guy. People don’t think like this, unless they’re Sheldon Cooper. You can’t quantify desires and feelings.
The two choices were actually different. In 3×14, Chuck chose between Sarah and something real. In 3×01, he chose between Sarah and an ideal, a dream. And in Prague, he wasn’t even making that choice, he expected her to understand him and be with him, that’s why he kept trying to explain it to her. He made the actual choice at the end of Three Words when he understood why they can’t be together.
wow, stricken with health issues for 18 days and this comment thread explodes. I skimmed over everything so I will just add my thoughts.
Great Writing will always matter, when Chuck was great it was great but the messy parts are some of the most disconnected and incoherent writing in TV history where creators showed zero ability to give the fans what they wanted when the series reached its fork in the road or when they knew they were out of road to travel…
Communication is the key element of a tv couple that makes wt/wt bearable I would not tolerate Chuck if it was running today and will ditch any show if a potential couple is not talking to each other, especially if they are the engine. I have actually been careful to stick to ensemble shows since Chuck ended where several characters get equal weight…
Sarah is an imperfect human but how she was written in season 3 had very little payoff, it was like she was reduced to a plot device and when that happens to a tv character it feels like a sin from a writing standpoint. What is worse is they repeated the mistake in the finale arc.
I always believed the Chuck of the first two seasons is vintage Chuck and 4 and 5 are the proper evolution of the character, the same can be said for Sarah. Drama without rhyme or reason is madness and this show has its own scale of best and worst moments, but fanfiction proves its biggest flaw was terrible writing when it mattered most to be consistently great.
I’m still very physically ill but hope to be better come the new tv season as there are many shows I am looking forward to: DCTV, Bluebloods and Big Bang top my list, as well as the timeless gem that is Supernatural (I believe Eric Kripke still serves as an executive consultant) I know he is probably bummed lightning did not strike twice with timeless but he will be forever linked to something that has stuck around by sticking to a basic formula. I guess TV success or failure comes down to talent, luck, and timing. Chuck was not sustainable but there are far worse shows that come around every year especially these days.
Hey Josh its always great to see you drop by.
Sorry to hear about your illness. Get better!
It has been pretty active around here the last few days.
You know I agree with so much of that. I completely agree about how much excellent fan fiction really highlights the failings of the show, especially through the S3 period. What should have been a key period for character and relationship growth felt like TV paint by numbers. Bitterly disappointing after two seasons that felt like something fresh and new was happening.
I’ve seen a lot of complaints about this lack of communication, but I will go against the grain and say that, given Sarah’s personality and that they weren’t really a couple, they communicated pretty well. Most of the issues that arose from this lack of communication, were resolved in one or two episodes.
The only time that it had a long term effect was in Ring, when Chuck reintersected without knowing that she would have left the CIA. But it still made sense because she didn’t take that decision until the beach wedding. She isn’t the type to externalize a conflict unless they need advice and you can’t ask for it from an involved party.
I think that lack of communication was mostly between Sarah, the character, and the viewers, who got frustrated because they didn’t quite get what was going on in her head. Well, try having a relationship with someone like that, they will frustrate the shit out you. Just look at that scene from Nemesis, when Chuck tries to ask her about the future of their cover relationship: “You’re really not making this easy.”
So I had an interesting discussion with some friends this weekend. Specifically with a father and his two sons. They had started watching Chuck several years ago after I had shown the father a couple episodes on one of their visits.
Well I just learned they quit watching in Season 2! They made it to Chuck vs The Ex, and decided it was all way too much of a soap opera for them. Specifically, too many triangles!
One of those things that sort of verifies all my bias about what casual viewers are looking for! And goes back to saying JS had no idea how to write for adult (or even adolescent) males.
I suggested they might want to try it again from 3.13 to the end. The teens were pleased to hear there were no triangles from that point, so maybe.
We’ll see.
It is nice to know all the viewer bias is validated. Overplaying angst is the death of any TV relationship dynamic and in cases where the relationship is the driving force it is the death of said TV show, Scorpion is the most recent debacle that is now in TVs graveyard…it is also of course, important to distinguish between angst and legitimate conflict that is resolved with realistic communication. Honestly, that is what irks me about the majority of TV relationships, real couple conflicts don’t carry on for weeks (most of the time) so why do a lot of writers feel the need to manufacture extended drama…
Thankfully all of the successful shows I watch minimize or avoid this problem altogether.
Well I think a certain amount of angst can be legitimate and a part of a good story. I usually say Chuck through S2 qualifies, although honestly I would have been happiest with none of the triangular variety at all! It’s interesting to me to find others who agree.
As I often say, I think the trend in television is to push it PAST the point of making the characters look like idiots. And i’ll Always say that was S3 in a nutshell.
The topic of Sarah’s morality is certainly interesting to discuss…I think the innocence of children can affect even the most hardened adult, so I won’t say that her moral center was fully flushed out and that means I disagree with Luke and agree with Stevie that she was disconnected from it.
Molly is the most intriguing part of Sarah’s past because it is the first time she knows that the CIA’s agenda is completely unjust. Eve could have been treasonous (that was never really explicit one way or the other) but that baby was completely innocent and at the mercy of crime lords and a government agenda until Sarah stepped in to rescue and hide her in Emma’s care, in a lot of ways that is the ultimate apology for choosing her father and running off when she was young. Sarah fears that she has no compacity to be anything more than a spy when she drops Molly off, we as the audience know as early as the pilot that this is untrue, she is concerned for Chuck’s well-being, the difference is she cannot outright rescue him because what is morally right and what has to be done conflict with each other. This continues regularly throughout season 1&2 to various degrees. .
The ironic thing for me is I’m taking an ethics course right now which has me thinking about the show from and Sarah in a new perspective which I did not think was possible after so long.
There’s no doubt Sarah had a pretty fundamental conflict of nterest from the start. We usually discuss it in terms of how it effects the romance, but no doubt there’s some basic right/wrong issues involved. By the time things came to a head at the end of S2 she was able to plainly see which was which. But I do think earlier, she meant to do, wanted to do right; she was just under the delusion her employer shared that goal. Or at least hoped they did.
Part of the fun those first two seasons was wondering what it would take to get her take a stand. So much excellent fan fiction has played around with the timing and sequence of all that.
Interesting insight about the ultimate apology. And basically true that Sarah is the one who chose to be with her father. He may even have thought he was helping her. That’s the scenario that fits the known facts.
Chuck invites this analysis by misdirection, and with Sarah being such a cipher. It’s often that what is really going on is not what it seems on the surface. The whole cover life vs. spy life takes it to an even higher level.
If Chuck comes up in your ethics class discussions, keep us posted!
Those are some though customers. What kind of shows do they watch? I don’t think that there are many on network tv that don’t have some kind of love triangles.
Maybe, they’re some ultra shippers that can’t stand any kind of tension between Chuck and Sarah, but then, they won’t like the final arc at all. Or they are too macho for any kind of romance and then, they won’t like S4 either.
Of course that’s mostly why I just say television romance is pretty much a broken formula across the board. Although there might be some quality material written for more adult audiences like on CBS or even Hallmark channel. Certainly nothing on CW!
Ultimately I agree with saying that is VERY sensitive. But I would immediately follow it up by saying I honestly believe that no triangles, ever, would have made for my favorite version of the show. Seriously, Chuck and Sarah were interesting enough my vast preference would have been to see them deal with the hazards of Chuck’s double life, Sarah learning how to have real relationships with Chuck’s friends and family, Chuck and Sarah navigating Sarah’s well constructed conflict of interest, all while fighting international crime and learning about the Intersect. Spare me the juvenile dating games…
But I don’t honestly EXPECT the show I want to see. So I suffer through the various soap opera arcs knowing the writers and their industry likely consider this sophisticated writing. So I deal with it. Enjoy what’s good and look for silver linings in the rest. That is necessary to enjoy the state of current television. But it does seem my friends have a slightly higher standard about not settling.
I am being a bit facetious. But I don’t remotely believe only hard core ‘shippers object to the love triangles. The story and characters could have easily worked without them. They were not needed or appreciated for a variety of reasons. Of course ultimately nothing is needed, it’s fiction, they’re making it up. We all like or dislike the product for our own reasons. Chuck and Sarah are only as real as we make them in our own little minds.
I’m really not trying to be insulting, but we all HAVE TO realize everyone has a right to accept or reject the story for their own reasons whether they make sense to us or not.
I guess I was wondering what their actual problem with the triangles was. If they don’t they like them at all, then what shows are they watching, all network tv shows have them? If they do watch network tv, then I see two other possibilities: the romantic tension is too much for them, to the point of being uncomfortable, or they just think romance is beneath them, but then, they won’t like S4 either. And I was actually wrong about calling them shippers. Shippers bitch and moan, but they never quit, they suffer through all the angst just to see their couple finally getting together. And it’s not even as difficult as it seems, they’re used to it.
I don’t think that writers, in general, consider it sophisticated, they just do it because the networks demand it or because they think they should do it because network shows need to attract a large audience. That’s also why a lot of the shows have bad dialogue, to explain things to the less intelligent part of the audience. I refuse to believe that, in today’s day and age, the writers are that bad. Even Chuck had great dialogue for most of the time, but every now and then, it would throw a cheesy and unnecessary line, just to make sure that everybody understood what was going on. Like, in Truth, Sarah telling Casey that she could have been compromised if she wasn’t trained. In the end, If we like a show, we have to tolerate different aspects of it that are there for another part of the audience.
I don’t agree that the story didn’t need the triangles in the first two seasons, I actually think that it benefited from them, every progression and regression of the relationship felt more natural, not cliche. But an important detail was that they were never real triangles, the other guy/woman was never a threat to Chuck or Sarah, not even in S3, the only exception being Bryce in Nemesis. And they were always short lived, done in two episodes or less. Also, as a personal preference, Chuck and Sarah being jealous was a good source of comedy in the first two seasons, it gave Casey a lot of trash talk material.
I think for many of us triangles are just tedious, and they never reflect well on the involved parties. From a pure entertainment perspective, I have zero interest in a series regular getting involved with a guest star. That just screams “waste of time”. Some shows can play with cagey with cast comings and goings which may help on a meta level, but pointedly did not apply on Chuck. As I said before, my interest was in watching Chuck and Sarah grow close together, really right from the Pilot.
By way of comparison, Castle managed a similar sort of feel through much of its run. But the way they handled triangles they rarely interfered with Castle and Beckett working together. So even if there were backstory issues I didn’t care for (and for a variety of reasons, these weren’t as big a thing on Castle) we weren’t actually robbed of the screen time I wanted. That did help; but again, Castle and Beckett were not Chuck and Sarah.
And I do think a few of the triangles were significant events. Just for starters, anytime you sleep with someone it is a big deal. You don’t have to agree. But for a great many of us, if you sleep with someone you are not serious about it makes you a whore. Male or female is beside the point. I never mean to say such things are irredeemable, but they are never nothing. And that means at least three of those triangles are a big deal (but not really Bryce except in terms of history). I can make some concessions on Jill due to her history with Chuck; but everything with Hannah and Shaw is just grotesque to me.
And what makes it all worse to me is just that I categorically disagree about it adding ANYTHING to the show or characters. There is completely nothing with a triangle that can’t be dealt with in another way. Now, shocking but true, I can step back from that a little to say in appropriate ways it could be an effective story telling device. But dang they are over done! Like too much garlic on everything! Ugh.
In 1.02 Chuck comments it’s his first second date in five years. I could deal with this sweet awkward guy. Then he has three flings in two and a half years all while playing wt/wt with Sarah. It was excessive. Way too much garlic.
I could see the return of Jill making sense. If that, and Chuck’s protracted insecurities around Bryce were the extent of it I would be fine. But always, I dream of the show with none of this silliness.
Dave, we are talking about the first two seasons, not S3, I think I already said that I only tolerate those love triangles.
“I categorically disagree about it adding ANYTHING to the show” – And I disagree with this. It starts with the fact that the writers wanted to advance the romance without putting them together. So, without Lou and Bryce, Sarah kisses Chuck out of the blue, just because they were about to die. Super cliche. Then she decides that it was a mistake and let’s just be friends. Even more cliches. With Lou, she becomes jealous, her behavior is erratic, so the kiss comes off natural. Then, Bryce comes in and puts a distance between Chuck and Sarah before she could put the brakes on a relationship. Again, it feels more natural. Without them, these are just random events that the writers wanted to happen and the storytelling of that arc would have been run of the mill, too transparent for me to get invested.
Same with Cole. Before he came, the status quo of the relationship was that Sarah prefers to ignore what’s in her head (“who knows what the future holds for us”) and that Chuck whines and breaks up with her because he wants more. Cole (and Chuck with his “That’s just another lie. Will never be together” question) forced her to evaluate her feelings for Chuck by offering her an alternative. He also made Chuck understand that the situation was difficult for her too, so he stopped with the whining and decided to work towards them being together.
As for Chuck not having a second date in five years, I have two words: Jill and confidence. The best line from the pilot was “Fine. I’ll get over Jill tomorrow.” Sarah made him get over Jill and she helped him regain his confidence. From there, he was charming enough to have one fling per year.
Okay, fair enough, first two seasons only.
I think those are all false choices you’re giving. For starters, why do we even need any of that particular tension at such early dates? (we don’t). If they don’t want to rush things, fine, set a slower pace from the start. Every single bit of every single scenario is fiction, they can rewritten or deleted with abandon. There never needs to be a Lou or a Cole at all. For that matter, the nature of fiction, there never even needs to be a Sarah. Chuck and Casey as an awkward buddy show might have been entertaining in its own way…
But of course Sarah is a huge part of the appeal for so many of us, and the most popular character on the show from every survey I saw. I do believe the awkward buddy/spy comedy might have been fun, but never would have led to a fan site with ten years longevity.
But seriously, I love the idea of Lou flirting with Chuck until she meets Sarah. Then running off, never to be seen again. But this leads to some interesting stuff for Chuck as he’s feeling the tension. He’s close to Sarah whom he can’t have (or hey, its early, maybe he’s still just assuming she’d never really be interested), but he isn’t allowed a real relationship with a real girl. And I’m actually liking this scenario a lot, no cheesy make out session in the Herder. Just the honest drama of Chuck wanting something real; that he can’t have partly because he’s in love with a dream girl he can never have.
I could even see a nice Chuck/Sarah scene where she suggests that he is the nicest guy, best man she’s ever worked with. And Chuck deciding that’s good enough for now…
We can get to a little heat later, along with the angst of “I like you Chuck, but we can never be together. The kiss was a mistake…”
No third party required, wt/wt continues. And at least to me, having that talk would be vastly more satisfying than what was done.
And I’d point out; I’m not a writer and I cranked that out in three minutes. I sure a really creative writer could come up with something far more entertaining, with no third party involved…
In the end, I think the real point in all of this is just this is why so many people just don’t watch scripted television anymore. Too much angst and drama, not enough fun. Apparently some feel that way even about Chuck.
Dave,
Your version changes too much and I don’t want that because one big reason why I fell in love with the show and the characters was how the story was told. Sure, there are things that I would change, especially in S3 and finale, but those are small changes. Also, my engagement is as spectator, not as creator, rewriting the story would be a very different experience for me. That’s why I don’t read much fan-fiction and why I don’t like open endings, what’s on the screen matters the most for me. If I really need more answers, then I will imagine whatever makes the most sense, not what I would like to happen.
Maybe I’m reading it wrong, but you are taking out the kiss. That’s just blasphemy for Chuck fans 🙂 You also say that they could have used a slower pace. Well, that would have been just like any another show. I saw the first two seasons when they aired and, when I started to watch the entire series about one and a half year ago, I had forgotten almost everything, except that scene and the kung-fu scene. And I still remember how I felt back then, I was like “holy crap, they’re already putting them together?” Of course, Bryce came back and I was kinda bummed out. Also, Sarah having a talk with Chuck would change her as a character, so that’s a no go either.
I think that the other LI’s didn’t bother me because, with the exception of Bryce in Nemesis, I never saw them as threats, so I had no problems enjoying those arcs, especially the funny moments. I was fully expecting (Sarah was too, probably) that Chuck was going to kiss her, but he dumped her. My reaction was exactly like hers: what? I laughed when Sarah started to fake cry just to “sell it” to the Buy Morons and I laughed even more when I saw her super satisfied face after sabotaging Chuck’s club date with Lou. Ditto the trunk scene. One of my favorite parts about the Jill arc was Casey non-stop teasing Sarah: you’re awfully cool about your super-computer bf browsing someone else’s network; I can see what our boy sees in her; I love love (this one was so silly); are you sure you’re not just jealous that Bartowski’s found himself a new piece of ASSet? The Beefcake arc made me uncomfortable for the first couple of viewings because of a similar past experience, but that also made me laugh for most of the time. My favorite: I’m not into nice guys. Yes! It was about time that Sarah bit back, enough with Chuck’s complaining and breaking up.
Oh, a lady friend told me that the hand on the foggy window of the Nerd Herder was a reference to Titanic.
Luke what works for you works for you.
I was pleased with characters and the tone of the show. But often not the story, so I would have changed a great deal. And no I don’t care about any one specific kiss, I care about a relationship. And I can certainly imagine better than we got.
I second that, chuck and Sarah were interesting characters without adding Lou and cole,, that was about as unnecessary as the brother/sister weirdness between Barry and iris during season 1 of the flash which was the only negative to what is the best first season I have seen in the superhero category
Stevie,
Its the start of the course so we are dealing with the subject of mercy killing to start but, if we ever get into ethics where the government is concerned, I won’t hesitate to bring up CHUCK in any such discussion. It would be interesting to hear some of my professors opinions even if he hasn’t seen the series and its strictly from the perspective of ethics itself.
Man, you go away for a week, and you miss all the fun.
For the rest of this post, I’m going to use “moral” in its first Webster definition: “concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character.”
Stevie raises the question of whether Sarah, before Chuck’s influence, was a moral character, and answers it in the negative. Dave counters that she had moral characteristics before she ever met him. These positions are actually not fundamentally opposed to each other, they just answer different questions, which is why I think you’re both growing frustrated. The conflict appears to me to involve two different ways of measuring morality. I’d define it as such.
Gross positive morality (Dave’s position):
Another way to put this assertion is that Sarah had the fundamental qualities necessary for moral behavior before meeting Chuck. This position can be verified if Sarah, as the definition states, is EVER concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior. When does Sarah show this before meeting Chuck?
– Saving Molly
– Saving her piggy bank for her father
– When Ben Savage is shoved in a locker, she shows concern on her face.
– In 3.01, we see that she believes she can escape the CIA, albeit not without cost. Later, we see her and other agents leave of free will. Therefore, it’s possible (but not certain) that Sarah stays out of some form of morality or obligation.
– Sarah does not appear to abuse her power for personal gain. There is no incident where she behaves like her own handler did in vs. the Baby.
– Sarah is angry that Bryce was killed.
– She defied orders to save Carina
This is… not much. But it’s more than zero moral actions. Dave seems right on the merits here.
Net morality (Stevie’s position):
By this position, Sarah is only moral (pre-Chuck) if the good outweighs the bad. We know she followed her father for much, maybe most of her youth – that question is not answered in the canon. Her father seems outright immoral, outright hurting innocent people, and she aided him from childhood. We also see her murder Shaw’s wife, apparently without asking any questions about whether she deserved to die. Even after meeting Chuck, Sarah is willing to kill in cold blood.
I take these as serious moral infractions that outweigh all the positives I listed above, possibly by a lot. So Stevie’s position is well-taken and well-argued. It’s also a fascinating question, and I appreciate Stevie’s bringing it up. It’s not every day somebody brings up a Chuck idea I’d never considered. Kudos.
However, I don’t think it’s justified. The vast majority of Chuck is told in the present, and we’re given very little insight into Sarah’s thought process during her early years. This is especially true since Sarah, unlike Chuck, processes most of her inner conflict internally. Even in the present, she is reserved and non-verbal in many of her moral conflicts. Chuck has to draw it out of her, which, as Stevie implies, is what helps her grow morally.
This dual-asymmetry (she speaks less than Chuck, and her past is shown less than her present) leaves us with a great deal of uncertainty within the show’s canon regarding her past morality. We don’t know:
– How much time she spends with her mother and grandmother. Did she live alone when her father was in prison in high school? She was teased for it before joining the CIA.
– Whether she ever argued with her father about his lifestyle, or was i
– Whether she took a moral pride in her CIA work
– How much care she took to protect innocent civilians (other than Molly)
– Whether she felt the US government was a moral institution
The more appropriate position to take here is simple: we don’t know. Sarah is clearly capably of both moral and immoral actions. From a consequentialist perspective, it depends on one’s views on the morality of the CIA within in Chuck-world. (Chuckistan? The Chuckverse?). That appears to be a mixed bag, but all of the members involved seem to think the CIA presents a net positive, including Sarah. From a virtue perspective, we also don’t know her internal thoughts about the CIA’s actions at the time. So Sarah’s net morality at the beginning of the show isn’t negative or positive, it’s indeterminate.
Arthur I think that objectively you are correct in saying we don’t actually have enough data to form a concrete judgement on Sarah’s pre-Chuck character.
But I follow that up by saying I think their are two major camps on how we perceive her prior to meeting Chuck. And those perceptions are pretty firmly held, apparently by both sides.
The one, where I put myself, saw an admirable hero who always wanted to do right and considered herself one of the good guys. She was a tough woman, in a tough line of work and had often done hard things that I wouldn’t want to do. No doubt she has failings and is often very hard on herself; but ultimately, honestly, tries to do right. Perhaps to atone for her own childhood, hard to know her motives for the reasons you mention. I am likely over-simplifying it here. But there are clearly many viewers who held this view or something close to it.
The other, contrasting view; holds that she was a cold-hearted killer wholly devoted to her career regardless of moral complexities. Maybe some twinges of conscience, but essentially unredeemed until meeting Chuck. Again, I’m likely over-simplifying. I believe this to be a minority opinion (based on many years of these discussions!) but possibly not by a wide margin.
This split may have some statistical bearing on the whole loved/loathed perception of Season Three. Or it may have a more secondary correlation due to world-view, personality or current life circumstance. Not sure. But I would BET it ties pretty closely to those of us who saw the romance as the primary draw from quite early on.
Now though the funny thing to me is that the first, let’s call it “Good Sarah” view has been prevalent in fan fiction until just recently. I do want to stress the prevalent part; never totally, just mostly.
But in the last year or so the second view, I’ll call it the “Bad Sarah” view has become far more common. Again, its never 100% one way or the other. But there has certainly been a shift in how MOST stories depict pre-Chuck Sarah recently.
Its not necessarily a big deal in any given story; although, no surprise, it CAN be. But it mostly manifests in how back story is handled. I hope this shifts back again! To me, it undermines the whole appeal when the character is too dark.
Wow Arthur
As an analytical person to a sometimes annoying degree i think that this was fantastic!
Thanks!
Thanks for this Arthur. Gross vs. net morality. Sounds very utilitarian.! Awesome! I have to admit upfront, I’m not a big fan of utilitarianism. But that is a discussion for another day. Your post is definitely helpful as a framework for discussion though.
Dave,
I don’t think I ever said that Sarah was wholly bad or immoral. It’s just obvious to me anyway, that someone having the upbringing that we are shown, will have significant moral issues to overcome. And someone, with no issues, cannot grow. I believe we have seen Sarah’s moral growth over the full run of the show. What makes her soooo admirable in my mind, is at the beginning she can feel this deficit and takes concrete, painful, exhausting steps toward her own redemption. To me, not acknowledging that, is a disservice to the character and consequently, makes Chuck much less interesting.
When I comment here, my opinions are often not settled. Or my gut is telling me something that I can’t articulate. As I think I mentioned before, my thought process is associative, not linear. What this means to you I guess, is that I toss some ideas out there and engage in discussions or arguments, in the Socratic sense. to move closer to understanding. This may come across as me being upset, but truly, I am never upset! I’m sorry if I upset anyone here.
Now after that preamble, let me explain better what I think of the moral unversion in which Sarah was operating.
I think when Sarah shows up at the Buy More, her moral universe has been established by the CIA. It believe that this is more positive than the moral universe of her father. And I think those differences would be fun to discuss. But for now, I’d just want to note that when Sarah says “I always try to be a good guy”, it’s exactly, or with very little distinction, the same thought as when Casey says “We are the good guys”. So it seems to me that the best that can be said for Sarah at the beginning, is that she is in the same moral realm as Casey.
What this means in practice, is that if she gets orders to burn an asset, then the asset is burned. And if she gets orders to kill someone, that someone dies. Just like Casey. She is good at her job at being a spy. And spies follow orders.
Here’s the difference. Sarah has an almost immediate attachment to Chuck. So, right away, she may not be a ‘good’ agent anymore where he is concerned. At some point, she will not ‘burn’ him. And she most definitely will not kill him. Chuck has transcended being an CIA asset to her.
She also has a visceral attachment to little girls, and maybe all children. I don’t think this changes my overall point though.
And over the long arc of Chuck, more and more people cannot be categorized as CIA assets to her. She is no longer bound by the CIA categories of, civilian, ally, asset, enemy. She is in charge of her own morality.
I mostly agree with all of that Stevie, although I would emphasize neither my “Good Sarah” nor “Bad Sarah” devices were meant to be absolute. I know perfectly well Sarah’s morality and humanity were in a very incomplete form at the start of the show. That she needed to grow was obvious, that she did grow was satisfying.
I was particularly glad to see your thoughts on Chuck’s immediate impact on Sarah. Perhaps my defenses go up quick because I’ve encountered many fans with an even darker take than that. Like they didn’t see Sarah hesitate on the rooftop when Chuck DID start to run?
No doubt she has bought into the same system as Casey; but I think she’s in a very different place at the start. In particular, more idealistic about what she is doing and more likely to go against orders to do right. Casey is her cautionary tale; where Sarah would have been in ten years without Chuck.
So yes, I lean towards seeing a very admirable and heroic character from the very start. But also immature and undeveloped. Much better is to come.
At first I was trying to understand what I actually thought. But one thing that is clear now, is that Chuck and Sarah had an immediate connection. This is close to what I mean when I say their love was fated. They were a fire just waiting to start.
And it’s also one of the reasons why I approach as an epic. There are bigger forces at play here!
Oh yeah, the chemistry and connection were awesome from the start. Seriously one of the best I’ve ever seen on screen.
Stevie, this is my favorite of your posts on this topic so far, and I think it’s mostly correct. Do you think it would be useful to view this as a case of personal vs social morality? All thoughts below are provisional.
Chuck, before the person, is an extremely moral person to the people around him. We catch glimpses of this through his rescuing of Morgan and his devastation from Jill/Bryce’s betrayal. But there’s no evidence that he thinks much of a greater good before the show. His Charles Carmichael dream is almost completely amoral.
Casey, on the other hand, views morality almost entirely in terms of the greater good. He retreats from all personal entanglements, completely isolating himself so that he can be a completely uninhibited agent of the NSA’s will. Put another way, he views the government’s judgment to be so correct as to supersede any personal concerns. His morality, then, is the complete opposite of Chuck’s.
Sarah, as usual, is caught in between these two extremes. She appears to exhibit almost complete loyalty upon attachment – to her father, then the CIA, then Chuck. Unlike Casey, she’s not just a servant, she’s a defender. She’s extraordinarily protective of those she perceives as on her side, even Molly and Bryce. In this way, she’s similar to Chuck. But unlike Chuck, she seems to adopt the morals of the people/groups that she’s loyal to.
This is one of the rare ways in which Sarah is more naive and trusting than Chuck. While Chuck gives the benefit of the doubt to almost everybody he meets, he doesn’t trust that they’re acting correctly in a given situation. He tells Sarah, Morgan, Casey, and Beckman at different times that they’re wrong, and he does so after careful examination, when he’s certain of it. An example of this is how he follows Sarah for most of The Baby, until he’s certain that he’s wrong, and then he tells her and asks her to change her path.
Sarah, on the other hand, gives the benefit of the doubt to almost nobody, but once she does, she trusts almost completely. An example of this is in the Missle Command when Casey asks her whether she trusted the CIA or Jeff. She replies, “I trust Chuck.” She doesn’t have any real evidence that he’s right, but to Sarah, trust is a permanent, unshakeable value.
As an aside, this is why Sarah asking Chuck to trust her in the pilot is so important. She’s asking Chuck to trust in the way she does: completely. In 1.02, she says “I didn’t ask you to believe me, I asked you to trust me.” This is exactly how Sarah thinks about trust and loyalty – as unyielding despite the evidence. She’ll remain loyal to her father for decades, despite being conned by him over and over again. That relationship scars her deeply because it broke her relationship with her deepest value.
For Sarah, giving her loyalty to the CIA is a form of growth, even if it was initially coerced. She’s seen that giving her loyalty to a person (her father) ends in misery, so the CIA seems to represent something more steady and worthy. Furthermore, its moral judgement is superior to her father’s in every way. But the CIA is subject to the misadventures of people like Riker, who subvert her perception of its will. Riker’s betrayal shows Sarah that she’s made another error in trusting the CIA, and so she’s open to another path when she meets Chuck.
And this is why Chuck is so essential to her growth as a moral agent. Sarah again entrusts Chuck with her moral judgement, but Chuck is an agent of individual morality. He believes people should judge a given situation for themselves. And furthermore, Chuck trusts her.
For Sarah, trusting Chuck means trusting herself. That is hard for her, because nobody else in her life has really cared about her internal judgment or experience. It forces her to, for the first time, really consider what she wants, who she is, and what she believes. She was always oriented towards a sort of moral action, but it’s difficult to make moral judgements when nobody has ever treated you with moral regard.
I don’t really like the good/bad question, because I think it misses the point. We’re all victims and beneficiaries of our environments, and Sarah is no different. At every turn, Sarah is trying to do right by those around her. They all responded to her loyalty by treating her more like a tool than a person, and she acted like it. Chuck was the first person in her life to care, and fight for her as a person, as intrinsicly worthy. This transforms Sarah and her belief system – the same way Sarah transforms Chuck’s ability and belief in himself.
Dave: “Perhaps my defenses go up quick because I’ve encountered many fans with an even darker take than that. Like they didn’t see Sarah hesitate on the rooftop when Chuck DID start to run?”
Here’s how I’ve been thinking of the beginning in S01E01…
When it starts the only thing that Casey and Sarah ‘know’, is that Brice is a traitor and he sent the Intersect files to a possible co-conspirator, Chuck. And Casey is operating under the assumption that Sarah is also a traitor. She knows how this looks because she was close to Brice. So, at the very beginning all her efforts are towards salvaging her reputation.
On that rooftop, there is still ambiguity. She has just found out that Chuck’s brain contains all the secrets. So, is she not shooting to preserce the secrets? Is she not shooting because she realizes Chuck is not a traitor? Is she not shooting because she feels that electric connection with him?
My opinion NOW, is that answer for all three questions is YES.
For now with respect to Chuck, Sarah’s interests align with the CIA’s interests. This will change, as we all know.
OMG Arthur! Best. Post. Ever.
Seriously, it’s resonating with my thoughts and my gut very strongly. You thoughts mirror mine, as to Sarah’s growth toward owning her own moral agency.
Excellent, excellent post. Very insightful.Thank you!
Definitely some good stuff there Arthur. Although I see a few holes; like just that Chuck and Sarah pointedly do not always trust each other. Like in First Fight when Sarah distrusts Chuck’s judgment with his mom; admittedly Chuck had just confessed his own blind spot were his mom is concerned. But we can find several similar breakdowns of trust between them, usually more over conflicting loyalties than actual “good/bad” distinctions (which I do put much stock in, they just were rarely at issue between the show’s main characters). But in most cases those breakdowns lead to confusion and misunderstanding more than actual rifts.
Arthur, BTW your posts are definitely worthy of more consideration. But I don’t have the time do it now.
Thanks Stevie!
Dave, I agree with your description of events, but don’t see the inconsistency. Sarah by First Fight has pretty much accepted Chuck’s vision of personal morality. She should’ve talked to Chuck (hence the fight), but at that point of the show, she’s developed into a person more willing to consider her own feelings – just like Chuck has developed into a competent spy. Again, I’m not saying she was or wasn’t moral before Chuck, just that over the course of the show, she learns to think more introspectively about the morality of her actions and her responsibility for them.
Conflicting loyalties is an excellent way to put it. Her conflicting loyalties to Chuck and CIA (and to a lesser extent, her father) are one of the primary drivers of her internal conflict and growth throughout the show. Over the course of the show, her interactions with the CIA become less like Casey’s and more like Chuck’s. (Casey goes through the same process)
I also don’t mean to imply that the characters are perfectly consistent. They are not. Good characters, like people, often make mistakes, and decisions that are against their own moral code.
I’m talking more in terms of tendencies/probabilities than absolutes. Sarah probably asked herself sometimes whether a given action was moral before meeting Chuck; what I’m saying is that Chuck’s influence makes her more likely, in a given situation, to think introspectively about the morality, harm, and correctness of her actions. She still kills after meeting Chuck, for example. But she does so less and less as the show continues, even as she backslides in the S2 Christmas episode.
Okay, that’s all well put.
Arthur,
I’m kinda with Josh and Luke. But, somehow, you setup the framework of your analysis in very — interesting — ways.
Net Morality.
I’m really not thinking in terms like that. And I wanted to reject the concept completely, but then the “Scales of Justice” came to mind. So now, I think it could be a useful concept if deployed carefully and without over quantification. Think of it more like seeking justice than keeping a ledger.
And thanks again for that overall post, it brought out that Dave and I really weren’t as far apart is it seemed. And to me, that was very helpful!
Personal vs. Social Moraility
In the Chuck Universe, I think personal vs.social works very well. I don’t think there is ever any consideration beyond those two distinct categories.
It seems that Sarah’s ‘Social’ morality has been well developed by the CIA. That is an unqualified good. But, I don’t think it’s correct to say that Sarah just adopts the morality of her strongest attachment. In this case, I think her ‘personal’ morality has been so underdeveloped or even maldeveloped as a girl, that it just _seems_ that her total morality is that of the CIA’s.
From my perspective the most important thing that Chuck does for Sarah, is modeling what a fully developed self sacrificing ‘personal’ morality looks like. And for Chuck, Sarah model’s what a fully developed ‘Social’ morality looks like. They both grow as people because of their relationship, or ‘fake’ relationship.
This growth from the top down for Sarah and the bottom up for Chuck, is one aspect of the S03 tragedy. Chuck as incorporated much of Sarah’s ‘Social’ morality and is reflecting that back to her in his decision to be a a spy. She can’t see that at first, so thus is triggered the arc of misery.
I think you are correct that Sarah takes loyalty very seriously, both given and expected. At first, I think this is a result of her CIA indoctrination. But over time, I think she comes to realize that her loyalty has been abused, first by her father and then by the CIA. Her underdeveloped ‘Personal’ morality leaves her ill equipped to resist it. Eventually, her ‘personal’ morality growth allows her the perspective to see this and fight it. It is perceptive of you to see that she has a special kind of naivety to be abused by those with authority over her.
Also, over time, you see that her loyalty to her extended Bartowski family begins to displace some of the ‘higher’ loyalty to the CIA. And yes she is very protective of the people within that circle. A good example of this is how she is the first one to diagnose that the Intersect is damaging Morgan and the first to take proactive steps to help him. Her loyalty to the higher good is still there, it just has a stronger foundation in familial loyalty now. This is one of the most satisfying elements in the story.
Chuck is not the only trigger to her growth though. Ryker using her as a tool to get the baby is the first (chronologically) wake up call to her that she has some serious moral gaps, which she then struggles to repair. Her reversion as Quinn’s tool in the final arc is probably the lowest point in the show for me.
Arthur,
I don;t think your ideas about how Sarah extends trust fit what we have seen.
Sarah has two realms of trust, professional and personal. She appears to operate will in a team of other CIA or NSA agents. We have seen her trust her life in her spy partner’s and team’s hands repeatedly. This likely comes from her training, and she would not be capable of operating as a high level spy without this professional trust.
It is in the realm of personal trust where she is very selective. She doesn’t extend that type of trust to many people, and maybe just to one person. And it appears to have different ‘categories depending on the person. Chuck is likely in his own category, i.e. a very high level of trust, and even then Sarah’s personal details are on a need to know basis. Yet it’s clear that she trusts him with her life to a huge extent. It is telling that Sarah guards her personal information much more diligently than she guards her own life.
At the risk of going meta, I think streaming makes the more negative view of Sarah mre prevalent. Folks watching via streaming get to the backstory faster. They will not have had over year a of watching a show a week, where Sarah looked 99.44% a hero.
I was thinking this too, but glad to hear it verified by somebody who’s actually had the experience.
I think this is correct. In real time we had over two years to get to know the character. This also is likely why I just reject S3. I remember all the talk and interviews leading up to it; when the buzz word is “reinvention” and they talk about building a new show on the skeleton of the old one, well, they’re telling me it’s a different show and I feel no obligation to care about what they want to do anymore.
Bottom line is the same as the first; I knew these characters for two years then they changed them. Different show, different Chuck, different Sarah.
Arthur,
I just wanted to mention that I did not intend to downplay your post that started this thread. It was a brava performance.
Dave, I can’t argue with any of that, other than to say that it changed for the better.
:-p
Well there we disagree again…
I’ll always consider S3 a disaster of reinvention. But at least they got their mojo back for S4…
@Arthur
“Her father seems outright immoral, outright hurting innocent people, and she aided him from childhood. We also see her murder Shaw’s wife, apparently without asking any questions about whether she deserved to die. Even after meeting Chuck, Sarah is willing to kill in cold blood.” – I don’t agree with any of this.
As a child, she wasn’t looking to help her criminal father, she was looking for adventure. She didn’t murder Eve, technically it was government sanctioned. Regardless, she didn’t do it in cold blood, she said she couldn’t do it and eventually shot her when she thought she was reaching for a gun. In fact, I don’t think we have ever seen Sarah killing someone in cold blood. The closest she came to was with Mauser and you can say that it was a crime of passion. Apparently, the only time she murdered someone was because of Chuck. So much for Chuck making her a more moral person.
“We don’t know:
– Whether she ever argued with her father about his lifestyle, or was i
– Whether she took a moral pride in her CIA work
– How much care she took to protect innocent civilians (other than Molly)”
I don’t agree with those either. We don’t know for sure if she had ever confronted her father, but we know she disapproved of his career: she said “I’m not interested in your stolen money,” then ratted him out to Beckman and offered to arrest him. Of course we know she took moral pride in her career. She said it was everything she believed in, I’m pretty sure she wasn’t referring to being a skilled assassin and seductress She took care in protecting Chuck, even though Graham told her that she didn’t have to do anything.
Anyway, I don’t like this equation, morality, love, feelings can’t be quantified. Morality is also very subjective, Sarah sleeping with her marks is a problem for Dave, but it doesn’t mean anything to me. I think the easiest way to “judge” her morality is to check her empathy levels and they were always much higher than those of any other spy in the show. Unquestioning and unforgiving was only a reputation which was pretty easy to build for someone with her closed-off personality.
luke
I’m studying morality as it relates to ethics right now so I agree with everything you said! I borrow a line from HIMYM via Ted Mosby for two cents : “Love doesn’t make sense you can’t logic your way into or out of it”
Sarah’s belief system was very much moral and she never killed if she could help it…and when old enough rejected her dads liestyle
Ah, the Ted Mosby. Wasn’t “The Ted Mosby” a routine from Barney’s Playbook? I started a HIMYM rewatch a few months ago. It was hilarious, but Ted was so annoying, even more than how I remembered him. I almost never cringe during sitcoms, but, when he said I love you to Robin after the first date, I felt both the need to hide under the bed and to punch him in the face.
I stopped after about 10 episodes, but for other reasons, I think I got busy. I still haven’t seen the last season of the show, but I know the gist of what happens. I don’t see what was so bad, it sounds to me like it sucked only for Barney and Robin shippers.
Morality is not subjective. Maybe you or I don’t care about something, but that does not make it morality subjective.
Sarah sleeping with her marks (for information) while not sleeping with her asset (for information) or the man she loves (because he’s an asset) makes zero sense, no matter what Twilight moral universe one lives in. In S2E15, she’s not ready to sleep with Cole even though she thinks he’s a mark.
If these are the rules, the only morally coherent person in the show is Carina.
I think it’s safe to say Sarah is profoundly confused through the early seasons of the show.
Something that Luke said about ‘dumb love stories” reminded of an insight that I’d read a few weeks ago by Andrew Klavan:
——
But in a TV series, the hero’s character is never really transformed — because otherwise the series would end — and he is doomed to repeat the same actions over and over without surcease. In short, he is in Hell, like the sinners in Dante’s Inferno who must repeat the same actions forever
——
This feels true for most TV series. Looked at from this perspective, the characters are in hell, never allowed to grow, to change, or transcend… doomed to tread the same ground over, and over, and over again.
Our favorite show seems to avoid this particular brand of hell. As we really see the characters living and changing. Of course, the “Sarah” and “The Goodbye” episodes unleashes a whole new hell.
There is something in these thoughts that I feel the need to explore, but don’t really know where to begin. So, any thoughts about this are welcome!
I agree with this interpretation, damned if you do damned if don’t. There are exceptions, but for the most part, any show decision means sacrificing something else. Blue Bloods is the only show I currently watch that seems to avoid the pitfalls described here from a character POV, granted it is a procedural but I find it to be the most well-written show on TV currently.
Chuck does a fantastic job staying fresh regardless of its quality which is something rare!
The character development/growth in Chuck is my single favorite aspect of the show. Every single major character, with the possible exception of Lester, learns deep, life-changing lessons that tangibly change the way they behave in the show.
In the pilot, Chuck is trapped in the past and runs away from a new adventure (the party). By S2, Chuck is wholly focused on the future, refusing to abandon his responsibilities even when they bring him enormous pain (3×01). Sarah begins the show alone and without a home, and learns to both value and obtain a home and family. Casey follows her, establishing a real connection with the daughter he (unknowingly) abandoned. Morgan grows from a gross, lonely stalker to a healthy, productive member of society. Even Jeff learns to have a less toxic relationship with Lester by the end.
Dante’s Inferno is a good analogy, as most TV comedies see its hero stuck in purgatory, only to escape in the finale to a heaven we’ll never see.
Chuck actively subverts this in 3×13 by putting Chuck and Sarah together, keeping them there, and having them grow together. We see them break their worst habits and real time, and we see what their new behaviors look like in S4 – which is why that season is so fulfilling. For all the characters I mentioned above, these changes don’t come in the last few episodes, they happen over the course of the show, with the backsliding and fits and starts that come with real human growth.
The character development in Chuck is my single favorite aspect of the show. It’s why vs Sarah is its greatest tragedy, and why Goodbye is its best episode.
Love Arthur’s point concerning Chuck’s character development. Every single character learns and grows through the entirety of the show. I have never shared Luke’s conditional views on character development as though because a character starts out one dimensional they should stay that way. Morgan may have been inconsequential in the sense that Chuck, Sarah and Casey had the bulk of fan importance, but he was pertinent in Chuck’s life and regardless of wether some feel he took a role Ellie should have had, one must remember that it took 3 seasons for Ellie to stop being a mom and start being a sister. Morgan’s inclusion into the spy world showed Chuck, Sarah and Casey how to have a little bit fun with the job in between stopping the bad guys. It is reminiscent of get smart.
The finale arc does have a Shakespearian tragedy element to it, something that is maddening, sad, beautiful and hopeful all at once. Satisfaction swings far depending on personal taste, but because there was a method to their maddness and we still discuss the show I refuse to see the finale as bad, lacking in execution certainly but compared to something like Dexter which made no sense whatsoever chuck did just fine
I still think the smartest thing they did with Morgan was have him be to Casey what Chuck was to Sarah: an example of the value of the life he’d left behind, and a friend forcing him to re-establish his connections with the world. It’s just a delightfully zany idea, and the best source of humor over the final two seasons.
Morgan really grew on me over the course of the show.
Yes I agree Arthur. The best thing they did with Morgan was pair him with Casey. It was funny and bizarre.
True to a degree. Even in S4, Chuck and Sarah lie to Chuck’s family members, and Chuck still doubts Sarah’s love for him when the Intersect isn’t working.
I think the underlying problem with S3 and S4 is that the S1-2 theme of Chuck drawing Sarah toward a real life based on truth is gone since he joins her world of lies and deception.
I still enjoy S4 but it’s a different show than S1-2.
I think it’s a little more subtle than saying Chuck doubts Sarah’s love. It’s more a matter of doubting his own worth. He’s insecure about what his function is without an intersect. At the start of the season he and Sarah tried the long distance relationship thing for a few months; he didn’t loose Sarah (and presumably knows that) but he wasn’t a part of the team either.
As far as a different show; I think there are two distinct reinventions. The first is the start of Season Three, new intersect, new role for Chuck, broken relationship with Sarah…
Then they reinvented again (thankfully!) at the end of 3.13, start of 3.14; we get Chuck the agent and Chuck and Sarah as the power couple.
Perhaps the first reinvention can be thought of a transition period, while the second is the final form.
Obviously there were variations along the way, the status quo was rarely completely stable, but I think that sums it up fairly well.
I also immediately thought about ‘Goundhog Day’. Phil is actually stuck in hell, until he figures out that he can start his own journey of selflessness and self improvement. One take away is that we construct our own hell. It’s a seriously spiritual movie hidden inside a comedy.
I’m still noodling it, but our show could fit that category also.
*Stories have endings.* Call that a piece of Wittgensteinian ‘grammar’: it expresses a necessity of story-telling (an ending is just as much a necessity as a beginning: ‘The End’ matters as much as ‘Once upon a time…”). Klavan (in the 9/9 quotation from SB) is right about tv *series*, but not all shows, even those with a serial element, are really serials. Chuck wasn’t. The problem wasn’t that the show ended. In many ways, I am glad it did, even if I have specific reservations about the handling of the ending. In fact, it is the visceral recognition that the show was really telling a story that drives much dissatisfaction with the handling of the ending, since the ending places all of Sarah’s remarkable growth in the show under a question mark. It’s as though the story gets to the end and then begins to erase itself.
Always makes me laugh when we see the journey vs destination arguments. Seriously, how can one matter and the other not? They both do matter. The only question being if they both do proper service to each other.
I can’t disagree with that it’s a little bit like the TBTB, at the last minute, wanted to ovwrite the Sarah we met in the beginning with one that falls for a chuck closer to her equal…
A story is a journey-to-a-destination.
I think its actually a proof that CF did not have the respect for the character that many viewers did. To us, that growth and those memories were huge.
He has said several times he considered nothing “more romantic” than the idea of them falling in love all over again. And as far as that goes we can call it a “happy” ending. But to so many of us that sounded just painful, especially after the often torturous journey they’d already taken us on. And it seems to reduce Sarah to a prize again at the end (just as S3 did), not a character with her own growth.
Oh yes. Well said, Kellydeanjolley. I can hear the Mission Impossible music: this story will begin to self-destruct … Stories need endings, and undoing the story isn’t really an ending. And the part that people were angry about was, just as you said, erasing Sarah’s growth. Nobody would have been mad about erasing the Buymore or the spy-life or even the Intersect, but to damage a person for the sake of a twisted idea of a cool reset on the romance …. grrr.
Well, Dave, seems you and I are always on the same page. Hollywood’s notion of romantic and mine just don’t align. I find triangles uninteresting and painful to watch, even if I don’t care about the characters. Yanking people around for 95% of the show, then magically putting them together just isn’t realistic or satisfying. By then, who cares?
On CF and the ending and respecting Sarah and the fans who liked her best, so true. Again, not at all my idea of a romantic ending. I hate Hollywood’s rinse and repeat version of love. I want to see sustained growth and maturity, but they seem incapable of writing this or fail to see it’s dramatic value. Obviously there are bumps along the way, but must they always be triangles?
The other thing about the ending not respecting Sarah’s growth was that it diminished the actual reality of memory loss. Ask people who actually go through that. Ask people dealing with Alzheimer’s. I bet the last word they’d pick would be ‘romantic.’ It’s tragic. So the ending just made light of things that have actual weight, both in the story (Sarah and her growth) and in real life (people who actually battle memory loss). Just like the vehicle they chose (memory loss) the ending boiled down to a cruel sort of robbery.
Well, it is that ending that brought me here! It affected me deeply. Stories can have many purposes. If jolting the viewer/reader into a deep reflection is one of them, then Chuck and its ending have succeeded spectacularly with me! A trite or cliched ending would have spared the forum my various depredations. :-p
When we view the creation of the intersect as the beginning of a Bartowski family curse, like something Promethean, then like night follows day, something was gonna happen to Sarah. Many here don’t like when I apply an epic framework to Chuck. But this is another part that fits. And earlier in S5 we had Decker playing the role of oracle! How Greek is that?
A continuation of Chuck, if there ever is one, would center around how Ellie and Awesome were lured to Chicago by a CIA or a villainous front company, so she would continue working on the Intersect. It is so obvious. Of course in the process, she would find a way to restore memories….
I’m on record: the ending made a deep impression on me too. But that is consistent with it being flawed. (Dickens makes a great impression on me in every novel. But every novel is flawed.) I certainly don’t wish it trite or cliched (although, again for the record, the actual ending is *a cliche*. Memory loss, really? As I say in my book, the whole thing is way to close to “And then I awoke, and, behold, it had been a dream…”) How the ending should have gone is a good question. My point is just that there needed to be one, given the nature of the show.
I also have no reservations about going epic with the show. (Again, I’m on record comparing it to Emerson, Thoreau, Marcel). And I have no problem with something happening to Sarah–the devil, as always, in the details. (My cliche for today).
Kelly I think you hit the nail on the head with it being a cliche. Memory loss as a plot device seems so 1980s… it is funny how many times I’ve seen it on so many lesser shows.
But for all that, given the show’s mythology it does seem fitting to go there at some point. Just maybe not without fixing it a little better!
Where I really object is this idea that an angst-filled ambiguous ending is in some way original? I mean seriously, in the last decade it’s the more overtly “happy” ending that has become an endangered species. It has become passé to think we might actually see the protagonists live in the safer world their sacrifices helped create.
I don’t really mean to suggest “happy” endings are significantly more original (although in the current creative climate they do seem to be “braver”); I’m more of a “nothing under the sun is new” sort. The ancient Greeks loved a tragic end, while in mid-20th century America happy endings were more common. But I definitely see modern writing as closer to a tragedy.
Thinkling you know I agree completely about the tragedy of memory loss, having just lived through the story of my mom forgetting who I was (although there was some dark comedy in my wife becoming mom’s favorite kid).
Obviously what we saw on the show was somewhat different, there was a real hope Sarah would recover or at least be able to make new memories. But the situation was excruciating enough.
Stevie, as always, it’s great if you really liked the end. A few viewers did, you are not alone. But I think it’s completely wrong to suggest it was in any sense more original or “better” than a more overtly happy end. Every variation of happy, tragic and in between has been done countless times. None of it is truly original. In current trends twisty and ambiguous is clearly very common. If it worked for you, great. But it failed many of us to one degree or another (I would call it disappointing but not hopeless; many fans disliked it far more than me).
Dave,
Our view on what would have made the show better is pretty much identical, your earlier comment reflects the AU I started, which I have not been able to update very regularly (college is really not kind in that regard) I can’t stand triangles and wanted to write something that cuts them out entirely. The other key change is Sarah, I honestly thought if she learned how to con people why not make her job a role she plays in front of Graham and Beckmann. Part of the problem with cannon from my perspective is that the cover is forced and because is it forced people can see through it. So I chose not to have Sarah bury her pre Chuck history (I believe in using show details to make character choices more realistic) which has been very effective. I also make a major effort to have Chuck be more active in controlling his situation. It bugged me that he was just thrown into the fire for comedic purposes in cannon, and he was never trained to defend himself or anything, I’ve had one reader tell me my view is a bit skewed but like you I don’t care much for triangles or a Chuck that is unwilling to push back against his situation.
The finale has two perspectives, it is lousy as a complete ending, but successful in just about every other way. It is neither fantastic nor awful but it keeps the Chuckverse going and going and going, just like a certain bunny mascot we all know!
Understood, Dave. And you know I saw the hope in the ending. But in using memory-loss as trope the real life tragedy, is often trivialized, especially if you just leave it at that. If it is used, which many stories do, I prefer to see the road to victory as well. To end that way, even with a note of hope, is still unsatisfying, at least to me … as we’ve all discussed a lot. Hence my compulsion to write an epilogue that traveled that road.
Yes absolutely Thinkling. And your ending is still my “official” one!
All of these comments are very well made.
Dave,
I don’t think I ever said that I liked the ending. It afflicted me… with the most amazing combination of loss, despair, and hope. I hate it. Yet it is perfect. I would never change it.
Everyone,
The Intersect is foundational In the Chuck universe. I think the finale avoids cliche or troupe by how well it fits with our previous knowledge of how it works. This is not some bolt on plot device. It fits the bones of the Chuck universe. So, I’ll continue disagreeing about that.
The Intersect’s not bolt-on, surely. (Although I ‘m not sure I would term it ‘foundational’; that may be a merely verbal quibble.) But the memory loss, its specific form, and its resolution or lack thereof might still be bolt-on. Nothing about the Intersect’s presence in the universe *demanded* the devolution of Sarah. That her devolution is *consistent* with what we know is of the Intersect is insufficient to recommend that devolution, or the details of its handling, to me.
Yes I mentioned that in a comment to Kelly, memory loss does seem fitting given the whole subject of implanted memories. It’s all in the execution. And man, I would have changed A LOT.
Chuck is the first movie or show, that has ever affected me this deeply. And it was amazingly unexpected. It made me FEEL. Why would I want to change that?
I don’t know why you would. And I’m not advocating that–unless you think that any change in the ending would have resulted in your not feeling what you felt. How much could change and leave you with the feeling you have is an interesting and no doubt intricate question, but it seems…overstrong to claim that you would feel what you feel if and only if everything with the ending remained the same.
The ending affected me deeply–but that was largely because of how deeply the show *to that point had affected me*. It’s not as though (and I am not attributing this to you) I had gone along merely liking the show, and then the ending plunged me into sudden and new depths of feeling. It was because I felt so deeply about the show that the ending affected me as deeply as it did. (Let me add, for clarity, that I don’t mean that the ending added *nothing*, just that the ending did not do the lion’s share of the work. I can imaginatively vary the ending without having to imagine any serious concomitant change in my feelings for the show.)
Hey Josh bummer about the college thing. Perhaps you should consider dumping it for your hobbies? I’m only a year away from dumping work for hobbies! (Sorry, I like rubbing it in. Ask my co-workers…)
I do like the idea of a more poised Sarah who can stand for what’s right regardless of her bosses’ pressure. But also I don’t expect any show, or fan fiction to be 100% to my liking. And sometimes it’s those painful twists that lead to satisfying outcomes. I do think it’s especially fun to see the contrast of how things can play out in canon (remember it’s not artillery) and how fans twist and tweak it all around. Stories that put the focus on Chuck and Sarah getting to know each other and working through things will always be more satisfying to me than wasting time with secondary characters or silly flings. Your current story is off to a strong start.
And I completely agree about the one clearly great thing about the finale. It inspired SO MUCH fan fiction. Holy smokes there’s a lot of epilogues and re-writes out there! And I love it. Chuck epilogues are some of the very best stories.
Well Stevie obviously YOU wouldn’t want to change that! But for so many of us the thing we felt with that end was disappointment or even POed, so an awful lot of fans would change a great deal.
Kelly it is a funny thing about the Intersect and memory loss; a couple of fan fiction writers had played around with the idea of Chuck having to deal with it (Chuck vs the Missing Years by Malamoo is the real stand out) but Sarah was sort of a bolt from the blue. Wholly a creature of that finale arc.
And I think under any circumstance 5.12 would be no favorite episode of mine; but the most unsatisfying thing to me will just always be the vagueness of that end. I’m okay with the occasional cliche theme, especially since from the start I had thought of the show as refreshing and original (they did test that several times!). But geez, finish the story…
Yes–and as I say, I recognize the ‘fit’. But that memory loss ‘fits’ the story does not make it what the story *demands*. Not all natural continuations of an idea are required continuations of it. That’s all I am saying.
The closest I have ever come to a way of making the devolution of Sarah a *demand* of the story is this: You can argue that Chuck, even in S5, remains, in trace ways at least, co-dependent on Sarah. Her memory loss and her leaving him then become the final push he needs to move past that co-dependency to a fully mature romantic relationship with her. I hint at that argument in the final chapter of the book but don’t push hard on it. Still, even that way of arguing, if successful, does not require the vagueness of the ending. As you have said, one more sentence (sort of a reverse Gilmore Girls Finale-sentence) and everything shifts. We get a non-co-dependent Chuck and we get the restoration of the (improved) relationship.
Wow Kelly really well put about changes to the ending. I know so much of my very favorite fan fiction is from the first two seasons of the show, when I really wouldn’t have changed much. But it is so much fun to see writers pursue story choices that canon didn’t, or change around sequence of events, or just invent whole new directions to go!
Some of that is like studying Alternate History that is really all about looking at the importance of choices and events. You can sort out what matters, what are key issues, by exploring “what if’s”. Of course some of it is just ridiculous fun; what kind of Chuck fan couldn’t appreciate that?!
The ending is much the same. In fact I KNOW some of those epilogue stories were written by fans who actually liked the ending (gasp!).
Ultimately it’s a love of the characters and setting that lead to a passion for Alternatives; whether it’s a discussion here about what might have been or a fully developed fan fiction novel.
I’m with Stevie here. I always loved Chuck, but the ending transformed my relationship to it. The Goodbye demands a re-evaluation of the show, its language, and its meaning in a way that no other episode of the show does. Understanding Goodbye meant really digging into the pilot, the beach scene, “after you fixed my phone and before you starting disarming bombs,” the difference between Chuck and Bryce’s influence on Sarah, and her influence on him.
The rest of Chuck can be enjoyed passively. Goodbye requires an actively searching for meaning in a way that changed Chuck from a hobby to a passion, at least for me. It deconstructs the rest of the show: we always knew Sarah saved Chuck. Sarah/Goodbye puts into stark relief that Chuck also saved Sarah, and that fact alone throws aside any doubt that could be had about the ending itself.
Was that “demanded” by the show? I don’t think so, but that’s an odd way to think about it. A better question is whether the ending rises to the show’s challenge to itself.
At its core, Chuck was always a show about the power of love – a rejection of utilitarian morality’s ability to make correct judgments without considering the strength of personal connection. Goodbye responds to that idea by stripping Sarah of all she – and we – had learned in the previous five years, and she is in no uncertain terms made worse off. The tragedy of her memory loss is simultaneously the affirmation of the value of that memory – of the rest of the show.
The final scene (“rivers and roads ’till I’m with you”) is an emphatic and definite statement of the show’s faith in its own premise – both because and in spite of its tragedy.
The show’s basic structure demanded its reevaluation. That was clear early on, surely as early a few episodes in. It’s apparent in the way the show problematizes the appearance/reality distinction. I certainly wasn’t watching passively only to be goaded into activity by the ending.
I agree about the core of the show being abou the power of love. But it was not necessary to strip Sarah of her memory to affirm the value of her memory or of the show. That strikes me as an odd way of thinking about it.
Arthur are you really saying you didn’t see how Chuck saved Sarah until the finale?
I mean, as always you see it how you see it. But I would have identified that as a theme of the show from quite early on. Sarah was the physical hero, Chuck was the moral hero. Obviously that was never completely true, both felt human enough; but they both saved each other. I never saw his supposed imbalance except in some of the most obvious ways (Sarah hot, Chuck not…)
Surely S3 is where it dawned on me that something serious was going on. If I’d been more engaged earlier, I should have started noticing in “Cougars” and “The DeLorean”, with the various reveals of Sarah’s backstory.
But my experience of the finale arc mirrors Arthur’s. Absolutely, That’s when my view into Chuck’s world shattered. It still amazes me.
I feel like I’m one of the few (noteable exceptions excluded!) that fights for the ‘flawed Sarah’ model. It makes her transformation more remarkable, and her memory loss all the more tragic. She has not only lost her love, she has lost her remade self.
I woke up finally at vs. The Truth. I’m with you on the flawed Sarah, modulo a few details.
That’s interesting Professor. What was it about ‘The Truth’ ? Sarah’s confession about the training to resist the pentothal which kept her from compromising her relationship with the asset? Or is it that this is what piqued your interest in the hidden mind problem?
It’s when I realized that the show had thematized the appearance/reality distinction but in a much more complicated way than is normal in spy shows, in particular it is when I realized that Sarah was caught in the ‘reverse’ of the standard Other Minds problem: instead of just wondering about the mindedness of others, it became clear that she was worried about how to (and even about whether she could) communicate her own mindedness, she worried that she was so mired in her own history and training and proclivities that she despaired of ever being able making her own mind (thoughts, emotions) known to those she most wanted to know it. She was trapped in a kind of nightmare of inexpressiveness (a little like the plight of the Boy Who Cried Wolf, if we imagine the story sympathetically, from his side of it).
Oh, additional thought: Sarah’s plight is so dire that I think at times she despairs of even being able to make her mind known to herself, as paradoxical as that sounds.
I love your observations, especially because I strongly believe that thought and perception are in large part, the point of human life, If not reality itself. It is definitely plausible that Sarah is out of touch with her mind on a meta level, I would extend this by saying that she forms her thoughts and perceptions largely based on other sources than her own mind (eg she goes with her father because she precieves what he does as adventurous) but it’s very metaphysical and understandably not everyone thinks that way.
Well ultimately everyone is flawed. All things considered I never saw anything worrisome in Sarah’s character. I suppose I could mention that back when S1 ran her NBC “spy dossier” said she was recruited out of Harvard and not much else. I think the most common assumptions had to do with a wealthy or military background. My initial assessment was that she was a little stuffy, by the book, but ready and willing to be the hero. Chuck’s moral contribution started as early as Sizzling Shrimp when he instigated helping a foreign agent against orders. It became a favorite recurring theme of mine that Chuck would agitate to do right and Sarah would jump in with both feet to help.
Stuff about con artist father and assassin came more than a year later. And even then Sarah always had a very appropriate level of shame for her past and leveled plenty of indignation at her dad. Again, flawed in normal ways but nothing of major concern. Even In S3 it was again affirmed that she considered herself one of the good guys…
Obviously a number of fans have painted a darker picture. But I’ll just always see two great heroes from the very start. There were major external issues between them, not least was just coming from very different worlds. Add in Sarah’s professional barriers and Chuck’s social/personal ones and there was a lot going on even before we learned about some of the deeper issues.
But nonetheless, the loss at the finale was profound. So much had been overcome, especially those incompetent show runners. And yet so much was unclear at that end. I’ll always be a little jealous of those who saw things in an all positive light right away. I know my wife did, she was positive Sarah Bartowski was back on the beach. It took me some time to process just to reach a tentative positive take on it. Ina way that’s where I still am, cautiously positive. But I’m mostly sure she got it back, that was definitely not Agent Walker sitting next to Chuck in the end.
Yeah Kelly I think what you’re calling Sarah’s plight is what we so often refer to as her conflict of interest.
She immediately is drawn to Chuck but knows she can’t act on what she’s feeling or risk reassignment. And obviously no one else can protect Chuck like she can! So she stays and falls deeper. She laughs with Chuck, encourages his silliness and playfulness, listens to his concerns including his sensitivities and morality, can’t keep her hands to herself and generally gets sucked into his whole life. All while maintaining a pretense of not getting involved with him. And of course that conflict causes alternating closeness, affection, excitement, confusion and frustration for both parties. Through two seasons I think it was best conceived and best executed wt/wt on television.
And even though I was first drawn to an appealing action/comedy format; very quickly the hook became “what will it take to break Sarah out of this cycle”. That was the vast majority of discussion and excitement on line too. Man we discussed and analyzed every spoken line, every look, every reaction; dang it was nuts. But it all made the end of First Kill (“take off your watch”) one of the most powerful and epic moments I have ever seen on television. I think that moment made fanatics out of 2 million viewers. But then of course that’s also why S3 felt such a betrayal to so many fans; it effectively flushed the entire two season build up. Such a waste.
I think there are about a million ways (oh wait, a million and one…) the fall out from that could have been better handled. Right after the S2 finale Yvonne said in an interview that she looked forward to Chuck and Sarah figuring each other out in the next season, and I think that’s exactly what so many of us were thinking. Two people who were about as completely different as two good people could be; just seemed like it had to be both fun and dramatic. Oh well…
I suppose you could argue S3 had the drama and S4 had the fun. But seriously?!
Very interesting perspective Professor! And it’s not paradoxical at all that Sarah might not know her own mind. Working for the CIA as a spy had to have had the affect of increasing her tendency of secrecy and suppressing emotions, ultimately burying her true self.
I like the reverse hidden mind formulation. And the other thing she had to work around was, what would happen had the CIA learned about her feelings. Like how it almost blew up in “the Broken Heart”. Or Chuck could have been whisked away by the CIA.
This is also where we discover that Casey is something of a protector of the Sarah and Chuck bonding. Which maybe explains why he pretended not to hear Sarah in “the Break-Up”, when she tried to explain not taking the shot at Juliette when she was holding Chuck. It seems Casey had been learning the score for quite some time, and keeping such details out of his reports to Beckman.
Here is where binging may have hurt me. I was just looking for something fun and not too engaging. It was S3 where I thought the show deserved more from me. Dave would say that the speed bump was when it stopped being fun. 😀
Yeah more than a speed bump, it effectively ruined two seasons I had found extremely engaging.
Oddly enough, S3 is where I thought fans deserved more from the show.
Yeah Cap, but then you’re an old-timer like me! We went through this stuff in real time. The streaming/marathon experience seems to be very different.
Hilarious! Funny is funny, Cap!
Dave,
” I suppose I could mention that back when S1 ran her NBC “spy dossier” said she was recruited out of Harvard and not much else. I think the most common assumptions had to do with a wealthy or military background. My initial assessment was that she was a little stuffy, by the book, but ready and willing to be the hero.”
I just noticed that Harvard thing in the ‘Sarah Walker” article at Wikipedia. They referenced NBC and Wayback Machine links for these ‘spy dossiers’, neither of which have that content now.
You have my sympathy!
I can see why folks who bought into that backstory would feel like the Sarah character got hijacked! I wonder if the someone with that background was ultimately considered ‘too perfect’ for Chuck? It would’ve limited the story to one sided redemption (Sarah redeems Chuck) vs. mutual redemption (Sarah and Chuck redeem each other).
Now, maybe if they’d taken her backstory from canon and said the CIA provided her a scholarship to Harvard before inducting her into the agency? That would have been plausible, I think.
The same source also said Chuck’s parents were killed in a traffic accident when he was young, yet we knew that seemed unlikely by Sizzling Shrimp. So I think bottom line is, not a credible source. But it was there and passed as official in 9/2007.
But it is a part of me feeling like the whole redemption angle is way overplayed. Sarah was all business and shut people out of her life. Although we got hints in Crown Vic and Breakup that Sarah was not happy with that status quo. So Chuck ultimately helped her break out of it.
For Chuck’s part, his big failing was his shattered self confidence. Sarah believed in him, and built him up regularly and often, really from the Pilot on.
All of this matters to me because the draw of the show (for me) was always two likable, decent people, in extraordinary circumstances. They helped each other survive and made each other better. It was a story of two people I maybe knew, or believed I could.
So I never liked the more extreme interpretations of character at all. And that’s where I still am.
Dave,
I’m thinking I’m more in the moderate, flawed but not deranged, camp.
I was only trying to send some sympathy your way. Not because I think you’re wrong. It’s because they put that backstory out there, and then pulled the rug out from under you, more than a little. And I can see perfectly how this is worse when watched over two years via the traditional broadcast TV model. And Sarah, as a character, is almost a blank slate, even now. So there’s no surprise to me that there are multiple interpretations. Each of us focus on the bits we feel are significant.
For me, the touch stone for Sarah are the glimpses that we get of her as a little girl, and then later in high school. From the first reveal of those, these glimpses are juxtaposed in my mind with everything Sarah is and does. And this is retroactive when rewatching the earlier episodes. It’s involuntary for me. That’s another surprising response that I have to this show.
This is also why I often go meta so fast. Because I sought out information early on (I often do with shows I like) I knew things were being tweaked as they went. Like the original S1 outline was supposed to end with Devon exposed as a Russian or Fulcrum agent. Well that’s part of what was reimagined with the writer’s strike and truncated first season. So do we watch S1 “knowing” that Devon was really a villain? Of course not. But it does shape my thought that canon in fiction is sort of a silly concept. The characters follow the whims of their creators whether we understand and agree or not. And it really convinced me that what works for each of us can be quite different. Not that I won’t argue my opinion! But that is really all it is, our interpretations likely say as much about us as they do about any fictional character.
It’s also why I just don’t hold in very high regard any reinvention that I don’t want to. They’re making it up as the go, so I’ll accept/reject it as I go…
Agree Dave I also seek out show information. I don’t mind being spoiled because even if you know something I still have a reaction in real time. I really try to stick with any show that I liked from the very beginning no matter how much it backslides because nothing will ever be exactly like a given show I grew to like, I’m not a casual tv viewer and what I pick up has me no matter how long it is around
Josh I’m just the opposite now on sticking it out though! Not that I delete shows for every plot twist I dislike, but if the dud becomes the trend… well, I have better things to do with my time.
With this one recent, huge exception, I never engaged with a fan community for any show. I generally just watch movies or shows that look interesting to me, my sweetie, or hopefully both of us. As an entertainment consumer, I never felt the need to deep dive into meta. And I still don’t, really. There’s other things to do with my time, as a great man once said.
One thing I hate about some modern shows, is the way they seem to oppose narrative. They don’t even try to have a story. I understand Lost was like that, but I never watched it. The prime example for me was Once Upon a Time. I started losing interest in S3 and completely stopped watching by S4. It was almost like each season was a new version. They just took the basic characters, and did a remix, like some weird lab experiment in a new petri dish. And this kinda feels like what fanfic is too me. The characters really are n hell.
And Dave is correct. I’m sure much of the character development on Chuck was ad hoc and made up on the fly. And yet somehow, it speaks to me and here I am.
Stevie that’s a pretty broad statement on fan fiction! There is such a huge range of stuff; from 100% canon compatible to complete alternates with maybe only a couple characters in common with the show. Writers are everything from high school students to professional writers honing their skills, to slumming philosophy professors. So no surprise, quality is everything from barely readable to nearly ready to publish.
The Chuck fan fiction community is particularly blessed with some terrific writers.
Apologies Dave. I didn’t mean to denigrate fanfiction. The hell comment was just me reaching back to that post I had made earlier.
I guess you could recast my thoughts as the writers for ‘Once upon a Time’, were doing the same thing to their characters that a community of fanfic writers might do. The characters don’t have an arc of growth, then are tossed into various scenarios to see how they might respond.
I concede that there may be long arcs in fanfic. If so, then this analogy is further flawed.
There are a number of very well developed, novel length or even longer sagas out there. And as I said, quality range is huge but there is no shortage of extremely well developed stores and characters. Including a few original characters that take on a life of their own.
As one of the people who tend to write novelish stories, I would hope that they are well developed…I make it a point start from a base and expand upon it. It would be hypocritical of me to write without context as its something I complain about with the original show on various occasions. There is a lot of wiggle room thanks to many of the shows existing details and one-off characters, of course, everyone adds some of their personality. to the stories they write
Yes Professor Jolley, the journey laid the foundation. Absolutely. But as I was journeying with these characters, I had no idea that this depth of feeling was building. No until the final arc, and then finale, did understand this. Truly a catharsis for me. And it is strange to try to explain how this is possible because of a weird show like Chuck. Tis boggling.
I also understand your point that it didn’t *have* to happen that way. To me though, it’s like saying, that Renoir was a stunning revelation. Now, let me see how I can improve it!
🙂
Sorry for replying at the wrong level!
No problem, it might be a good time to start a new thread!
I really get both sides of this discussion , believe me I watched chuck 20+ times from start to finish while it was on Netflix, it saved me from a very severe depression too so I would not change it’s foundation or the ending.
However I have a natural ability to write and while I’m far from perfect, the shows poor execution in crucial moments leave me wondering how professional writers justifyed the decisions made, especially when TV largely comes down to two things, building and keeping an audience and consistency. Chuck lost both of these come season 3, there is no way to spin or sugarcoat this, it is fact. Then when mistakes finally caught up with the show they use a cliche and the last arc people would see (hopefully this is not actually true and we get a reboot) it just leads many of us to believe that we would have CHUCK ending at least 3 to 5 years later than it did by removing what turned so many away in the first place. Agnst. My ideas could have easily been applied to S3 in various ways had they kept Shaw as a teacher or had Chuck say exactly what was on his mind (like he always did prior to 3×01) at the train station.
It’s worth noting that I am a fan who wrote an epilogue even though I liked the finale, I don’t pretend to be better than the writers of the show but so many of the things that led to its early grave are easily fixable. I’m sure to some I sound ungrateful, but like Dave said, they had real enough issues to deal with without shattering the relationship that they built over the first two seasons, they did not even attempt to continue developing the characters from where they were at the end of season 2, it is the greatest disservice to a fan driven show I have ever seen. For me it’s like if Nintendo suddenly decided to take what makes Zelda so great and turned their next game into something unrecognizable. My point simply is that it would not happen because they know what they have in their fans and aren’t disconnected with them to the point that they would throw out key aspects that have sustained its longevity.
part of the top was supposed to say,*the last arc we would see is a memory loss cliche*
so much for my natural ability to write…! 🙂
I do think the S3 decisions were market driven in the backwards way from what you are talking about Josh.
Chuck was a bubble show, barely saved by a fan campaign at the end of S2. So I think S3 was a deliberate attempt to find viewers. They made the show less unique and more like everything else on television with conflicted protagonists and boatloads of new angst. And I think this failed spectacularly primarily because it infuriated 2/3s of the viewing audience that had just fought to save the show! We liked it BECAUSE it was different then They turned it into a typical made-for-tv angst-fest. And indeed the show hemoraged viewers that season. In a nutshell, they tried to find new viewers by alienating the ones they had. I think it would have worked far better to honor the characters and growth for two seasons and continue in the mostly upbeat tone.
I would say though, just like the finale, the contentious middle season sure generated some awesome fan fiction! Always the mixed blessing with a flawed masterpiece. So many fans are eager to take a stab at fixing or reinventing of their own.
Josh,
I think what I find most interesting how different my take is on the ‘Slough of Despond’ in S3. It was obvious to me that Shaw was not a romantic interest. Nor could he be any comfort to anyone whosoever. Reptilian is the word hat I’ve recently adopted.
I thought it was particularly interesting that the show didn’t mind showing us the lead characters suffering and struggling through some huge emotional and character issues. It all seemed so real to me. And it made their reunion much more emotionally satisfying.
Perhaps my desire to suffer is greater than the average fan’s?
Certainly different fans will have different types of preferences. Even back in real time S3 had its defenders. But I think so many of us we were tired of a particular SORT of suffering by the end of S2. Never to say Chuck and Sarah had to have things sorted out at the start of S3; but a third round of triangles was exactly the one thing all too many of us would not tolerate. The fact most of us would agree with calling Shaw reptilian actually made it all worse, not better.
I think if suffering had felt more organic to the story and less bolted on; like if it had tied directly into the spy world or had to do health and security concerns it would have struck many of us as more legitimate, more honest.
The show we got felt very manipulative, very cynical, very much like a failed product for a huge number of us.
Back after Other Guy first ran (when we still had a lot of visitors to this site and it was all still fresh!) we ran this poll on how the arc had been received. Clearly there were fans who liked what they saw! But it looks like a majority did not.
SB. Ha! LOL. But I am precisely *not* saying the analog of “That Renoir was a stunning revelation.” I’m saying something like “This painting was really good until the painter got to the final corner, where he made some odd decisions and decided to alter the nature of his brushstrokes, where he seemed to lose track of *what* he was painting.” 😉
That sounds about right!
Well Professor, , I’ll just say that to enjoy impressionism (and Chuck), you have to take a step back and let your focus soften.
That is perfect! (Errr, the quip not the Renoir)
Sevie
For me, the problem lies precisely in Chuck and Sarah and the fact that they share so little screen time and what little they do is marred by Chuck feeling like he has to prove shaw wrong and be Sarah’s equal now that he knew kung fu. Chuck wasn’t a superhero…I think I will ditch the 2.0 in my current story or maybe put it in Bryce and have Chuck surpass him on his own…Season 5 proved the Intersect can be matched in this regard…I used the majority of my Intersect ideas in my epilogue story.
For what its worth before I came to CHUCKTHIS! I liked S3, but I analyze first and once I noticed the terrible execution relative to where the show was before, well…its a lot like that episode of how I met your mother where everyone is unaware of each other’s bad habits until the glass shatters in their heads:)
I do think lack of Chuck/Sarah screen time is one of the biggest flaws with that season.
And hey, you know I think no 2.0 is an excellent idea! I much prefer Chuck the problem solver to Chuck the super hero.
Make it three. Intersect 2.0 was not needed.
Hey Stevie, it is amazing to suddenly agree on something!
Ahhhhh Dave. I’m sure if I wanted to do more meta, then we could agree on a lot of things. Absolutely. You are drawing me out you farging bastage!
👍
I think they could’ve made a good story without any Intersect. It could have been based on Chucks Pirana hacker persona. But then it loses some of the epic Bartowski curse undertones.
Yes absolutely. To me, the Intersect was purely a mechanism for sucking Chuck into a dangerous life. Later it added the family legacy issues, but I never found it extremely interesting in its own right.
The Piranha was obviously a much later invention, that I wish had been in play much earlier. But it could have worked quite well with Chuck as a white hat hacker, who only helps little old ladies recover their lost pensions… who is suddenly introduced to the shifting morality of espionage…
Could have worked very well.
Josh, I’ll start a new thread since we’re talking about other shows
On your standards for a love triangle
– a season is too much because that relationship becomes too serious.
– I’m not sure what you mean by not changing the core relationship, but if you mean “staying friends,” then that’s never an issue because they will always stay friends for the sake of the show, otherwise one character would have to be written out. But irl that rarely happens, there’s no going back to staying friends. If they were in the same circle, one of them would probably leave that circle, kind of like Robin did in the HIMYM finale and like Sarah was doing by moving to DC.
With that said, I don’t see how S3 broke your first two rules. Shaw was the longest and it was only 6 episodes and Chuck and Sarah still loved each other and, besides some petty jealousy, they didn’t have big issues with the others dating someone else and spent about as much time together as they should have given their situation.
I haven’t seen more than a few minutes of Castle, so I can’t speak about it, but as far as romance goes, Chuck wiped the floor with all the others that you have mentioned. Ted and Robin is the worst wt/wt that I have ever seen. First of all, it was DOA when Ted said “I think I love you”, then we had Ted falling in love with Victoria because Robin couldn’t get to that stupid wedding. Like seriously, how do you fall in love with someone else when you’re trying to get together with someone else who you’re supposedly already in love with? Then they broke up and after three years in which he was clearly over her (dated other women, he almost married one of them, he was ok with Robin dating one of his bros) he decides that he’s still in love with her. What? And again, he finally moves on one more time when he lets her float as a balloon, marries another girl, has kids with her, but after that one dies, he’s in love with Robin again. Ted was never in love with Robin, he either had an unhealthy obsession or she was his emotional booty call. And he was hers, that was obvious. Like Casey said “the worst romance of my life”
This running away from their feelings is an artificial construct used to prolong the wt/wt, because there are very few reasons for people to do that: he’s a Montague and she’s a Capulet; they both have their dream job, but the company forbids dating between employees; one of them is married with children and doesn’t want to break up the family; she’s a nice girl, but he’s a dangerous criminal, or vice versa. Being afraid to get hurt and fear of commitment are a bunch of baloney.
Off the top of my head, the only one that was somewhat believable was Superstore, but even that went on almost a season too long
Very random, but I just finished watching Hitchcock’s North by Northwest, and noticed that the plot bears a striking resemblance to Chuck’s: a hapless man with a past of failed relationships gets pulled unwittingly into the spy life. He’s then seduced by a female agent and recruited more formally into a mission by the CIA. Finally, he saves the girl from an enemy operative/ex-lover and they fall in love. They even have their post-nuptuals on a train.
Did the writers ever talk about North by Northwest being an influence on the show?
I don’t recall any discussion as such, but Chuck did have a North By Northwest poster up in his room in the Pilot.
So yeah, I’d say the similarities are self aware.
Hi, Erroneous. It’s probably true. It’s a coincidence, but I’ve been going over my old notes about the episodes (yeah – it’s a real nostalgia trip to me) and I’m really struck by the huge number of subtle and not-so-subtle movie references. I don’t think I ever saw “North By Northwest”, so I’m not completely sure. But a reference to it wouldn’t surprise me in the least.
I’d have to look up some of the old interviews, but Schwedak were famously frank about ripping off other movies and shows just for fun.
https://tv.homeofthenutty.com/displayimage.php?album=590&pid=15948#top_display_media
Thank you!
Shameless plug… the first part of the last chapter of my 29 chapter fanfic, “Chuck & Sarah vs Their Next Adventure.”
https://www.fanfiction.net/s/8406654/29/Chuck-Sarah-vs-Their-Next-Adventure
(Chuck and Sarah watch the movie, and the poster is mentioned.)
I’d also mention Zettel’s “Chuck Amok” has significant parallels, down to Chuck dressing like Cary Grant.
Haven’t been here in awhile, and not sure this has been discussed, but what does everyone think of the fact that Psych is now going to have a second movie? I came to Psych late, and just finished the series. It really grew on me, but what I find hard to swallow is that it’s ratings through all 8 seasons were consistently worse than Chucks, yet it made it to 8 seasons and Chuck had to limp to 5 seasons. I go as far as saying that even the 5th season of Chuck did better than the last 4 seasons of Psych. Is this the case of Chuck being on the wrong network? Where’s our Chuck movie? Pretty soon, it will be too late and the actors will be too old for the roles…I hope that’s not already the case.
I think “wrong network” is exactly right. Psych was on USA, which as a basic cable channel has far lower expectations. We often commented during the run of things that we likely would have been better off on USA.
I know less than a year ago, when Zac was doing Shazam promotional interviews he commented that he still wanted to get a Chuck movie made. So there’s hope, but no doubt, they aren’t getting younger…
Its funny I recently listen to Zac Levi’s appearances on Michal Rosenbalm’s podcast Inside of you and Zac mentioned how he believes CHUCK would be a smash hit if it aired in the streaming era. Very good personal conversations btw
I always thought the age thing could be sidestepped through a time jump, and I think the more time passes the greater possibility we won’t need to deal with the risk of more wt/wt drama so as long as we get one before their golden years I think it will be okay lol
BTW Zac was close to getting lex on smallive but was too emotional in his final callback…talk about What ifs..
No there’s no way wt/wt can continue in a movie. If they try, I’ll pass. Zero interest in such a beast.
I would agree, that’s why I don’t see it being an issue as time goes by Chuck and Sarah would be over 40 if we got a movie ten years after the finale, assuming a time jump. 3.0 was enough, I have no desire to watch more of that in a movie where the characters are now, age-wise, seasoned adults. If her memories don’t come back okay fine, but I should not go into a movie worried that Sarah couldn’t trust Chuck enough to rebuild their life together. the beach implied a willingness to start over if necessary and you can’t go back on that. Memories or not them being together is a must…
For the record, Zettel did write a short reasonably compelling story where Sarah leaves after the kiss and shows up three years later with her memories intact and quite a harrowing tale of survival but he can handle that sort of scenario. I would never trust JS and CF to do the same.
That’s all very well put. But even so, I wouldn’t sit still for the movie version of Zettel’s story either.
After the way the show ended I require pretty immediate gratification or I’m not buying it.
I wouldn’t either Dave it was, however, surprisingly compelling fan fiction for a scenario he does not believe would happen.
Me too. I would not even watch if it’s wt/wt. Been there done that … several times.
I would say I *think* they would know better; but I would have said that before the finale ever ran too…
Josh, your post got me thinking (yeah – it’s a rare occurrence these days I know…). As much as I’d like to see more of Chuck, I don’t think I *need* to see more of it. Heh! Lemme explain.
I’m in agreement with Dave and Aimee and everyone else who say they don’t want any more WT/WT between C&S. Been there. Do I need more humor and chuckles from the Buy-Morons or perhaps, thrilling, adventurous rescues from bigger and better baddies? Well, that would be okay, but I’ll probably wait for the DVD to come out…
So what was it I found so engrossing 10 years ago in this show? It was the growth I saw in all the characters. Chuck was an $11/hr. dead-ender with no ambition, Sarah was Graham’s “wild-card enforcer” (think, dead inside) with no hope for a normal life, and Casey was a stone-cold assassin. The Buy-Morons were – well, the Buy-Morons. That’s not the way we left them.
In fact, the hardest thing to take about the last 3 or 4 episodes was that Sarah lost all of that growth. It felt tragic. I’ve come to love the ending because of that beach scene. Sarah’s laughter and tears convinces me that she was no longer “dead inside” (“I don’t *feel* it.”, she said), but was very much the Sarah we had throughout S5, even her memories were mostly gone.
So what to do in a movie? Good fan-fic not withstanding, the story was about how they changed and grew, and that story is complete. We already saw Chuck lose it and regain it in the very first episode of S3 (think Prague), Morgan lose and regain it is S5 and Sarah too. I’m happy with that.
Oops. Looks like WordPress forgot my old ID there for a bit.
I would love a movie if only to see the cast play these characters again. Here is the thing about the finale, we are so focused on Sarah’s memory suppression that it gives the illusion that she lost all character growth. I don’t believe that in fact, I believe that what we see in goodbye is mostly role models, to phase three Sarah, why, she was at that time scared of being Chuck’s long term significant other. What is her refrain throughout the finale, pretty much the same thing…’I can’t be here, I don’t know how to be the woman you remember me as, all I know is being a spy, a good one.’ Early Sarah would not have been so distracted by Chuck’s words throughout 5×12 either, even the beatdown in the dream house is her desperately trying to deny the increasing feeling that he is telling the truth, and her reaction to the video logs drives this home completely. She is angry at what she has lost…there’s a great moment where YS seems to swallow hard [her acting is effortless I swear] does Sarah not feel anything no, I think that is a lie in that she feels too much loss to cope with it so she resists by running away. But as is the pattern, Sarah Walker can’t help but return to Chuck Bartowski
. There is an early 2000s song called Return To Me by Mathew Ryan that I think fits Sarah and Chuck’s state of mind at the end of 5×12 until the beach, a subdued song but quite appropriate to the fact that they are struggling within themselves. It’s honestly amazing how much music that wasn’t on the show makes me think of the show and its many ups and downs,
Honestly, the finale is great not because it is well executed but because YS acting elevates sub-par material…seriously her gift for nonverbal acting and body language is just astounding and she continues to excel at it, even if a particular project is a flop she is the best part of it. She just has a once in a generation talent.
I maintain that if we had gotten a cliche happily ever after ending we would not be discussing/reading/writing about CHUCK nearly seven years later, so if nothing else the finale keeps the universe alive even though the show has long since left the air.
I do agree with most of that Josh. Although not entirely about the impact of the end on on-going discussion. Although it clearly has a major impact on discussion HERE and on our thoughts for the future (as in, can ever discuss the future without discussing the finale!?); but I think fan fiction would have continued regardless. Chuck fan fiction was active, diverse and entertaining almost from the very start of the show, S2 spawned the first explosion of original material. I think the draw and the hook of the show was two likable and admirable characters trying to find their way in the world and to each other. As far as that goes, the hook was set before we ever got to that ending. Obviously, canon does impact the writing that comes out NOW; but I think it would have been an active output even with a more complete and happy ending.
As far as future content goes, my main interest is just seeing those two favorite characters again. I don’t specifically care one iota about further “growth” or anysuch, as long as we can assume Sarah recovered quickly and Charah has been together ever since.
But I would like to see my “friends” and their crazy world again…
What’s the deal with Casey exposing Sarah’s weekend with Shaw in S3E17? Why did the writers feel it was necessary to expose all that (which didn’t even cohere with what Shaw and Sarah said to each other in S3E12 or with what General Beckman said in S3E10 and E14)? Did they think it’d be funny?
Yes I’m sure they thought it would funny. Because of the weird production and airing schedule that year those episodes were in production long before the massive fan rejection of the front part of the season was understood by the show runners. I think they thought to have fun with things fans were completely POed about. Oops…
I’m rewatching S3 (covered S3E1-8 so far) and I’m not sure how to read Sarah’s relationship with Shaw in a coherent way.
If I understand correctly, Sarah starts confiding in Shaw because he’s the only one around who is willing to listen (Casey doesn’t in S3E1; Carina doesn’t in S3E2; Ellie can’t in S3E3 because she’s not privy to Chuck’s spy life; if she were, she and Devon would be the perfect sounding boards for Sarah’s fears and concerns).
Through Shaw, we viewers hear Sarah’s concerns about Chuck’s turning into a spy and how this troubles her (“lives are being affected here,” she says to Shaw).
This part would be almost ok if it weren’t for the coherence problem below.
First, she confides in someone who not only does not share her concerns (Shaw approves of Chuck’s changes).
Second, Shaw is the very one pushing Chuck’s changes (either directly or indirectly), up to and including his infamous red test.
Third, she sleeps with the man who embodies and pushes the changes she hates in Chuck.
Why would she do that? Is that something a human being would do? What would lead her to behave like that and not see there’s something wrong with it?
I also have a behavioral coherence problem on Sarah’s part over Chuck’s red test; she feels guilty over it at the end of S3E11 but exhibits guiltless and flirty behavior during her dinner date with Shaw in S3E12.
Am I missing something? Or are these examples of sacrificing character development for plot reasons? Or sloppy writing?
Bottom line is, it makes no sense. I might guess Sarah was just learning something (through seasons 1 & 2) about being real and having an honest relationship. After loosing Chuck she tried to apply her new understanding to a man who was simply unworthy; basically she tried to be real with a man who was false. She has some vague understanding it isn’t working (voiced a little in Final Exam), but seems to double down at the start of American Hero. But by the end of that episode she seems to have figured it out…
You’re a braver man than I watching all that stupidity again. I deeply resented sitting through it once, I won’t repeat the mistake. Remember too, television is written fast and simple. Less than a week writing an episode and continuity may be vague between writers. We all have spent FAR more time discussing and analyzing than the writers did.
Sloppy writing plain and simple, the one thing I always say to people who can’t get over the series finale is at least it was coherent. This was a total mess
I would add that in the bulk of scripted broadcast network TV. Writing, filming, and post-production happens rotationally and not one episode at a time. I would guess that two or three episodes are in various stages of production every week at any given time, but thats just an educated guess.
I kind of have to rewatch it. I’m watching the whole series (except S5) with my wife, who’s never seen it before.
The problem that I have with season 3 is that Sarah’s behavior is odd all around.
1. She’s upset at Chuck for not running away with her in Prague. She never stops to think it was a ridiculous and selfish idea since Chuck has just reconnected with his father and is all about family. That’s one of the things she likes about him, too. She never apologizes to Chuck about this.
2. She throws herself into Shaw’s arms because Chuck is changing (E8) but then admits Chuck has not changed (“I thought you’d changed” in E10).
3. She throws herself into the arms of the man Chuck is turning into, the man who’s pushing Chuck’s changes and considers such changes a good thing (“he’s becoming a spy,” Shaw in E8)
4. She feels guilt and remorse over Chuck’s red test for dragging him into the spy life (end of E11) but shows none of that guilt during her dinner date with Shaw in E12.
5. After she finds out the truth about Chuck’s red test, he’s still her Chuck. That means that all the other changes she was fretting about in E5-8 were not a big deal. Then why start a relationship with a guy she despised only a few days prior over non-issues?
Then, not content with Sarah’s character assassination in E1-12, the powers that be thought it would be a good idea to make sure it was really dead by humiliating her during Casey’s interrogation in E17 (full of discontinuity errors BTW), just to drive home the point that viewers were really supposed to despise Sarah by then.
Well again, I think the bottom line is they expected us all to just be having fun with all of it (character assassination is SOOOO funny).
Years ago I watched the whole series with a couple of co-workers, but we skipped most of S3. Just the Awesome arc (3.03 & 3.04), Tic Tac, then American Hero to the end. There were really no complaints. I gave a narration of what we were skipping (Chuck’s training to become an agent, Sarah’s mad at him… pretty much sums it up…
Oh I should add a funny thing about doing it that way. When we got to that much loved (!) interrogation scene there were surprised comments, none of the group thought Sarah and the block of wood had been together. There was so little chemistry or affection between them in what we watched it registered as a big fat zero!
I have been doing a rewatch of sorts of CHUCK since the summer. youtube reaction channel Blind Wave watching the show–one member who hasn’t seen it, and another who was but doesn’t remember everything. It’s been fun to watch them react to and discuss the series once a week
Honestly, that E17 interrogation scene is much more offensive to me than Sarah’s abrupt change towards Shaw in E7 (vs the Mask), which is offensive enough since it marks the point where a character-based show like Chuck sacrifices Sarah’s character at the altar of the plot just to prolong the will-they-won’t-they trope in the cheapest way possible (oh look, another love triangle) and to dramatize the final confrontation between Chuck and Shaw.
That was bad enough. But the E17 interrogation is offensive in a way that goes well beyond making a character act, well, out of character. That interrogation, which I assume, is meant to be perceived as funny by the audience, effectively kills Sarah’s character (particularly the earrings bit) and the fact that the writers, producers, powers that be do not even realize it tells me something is morally wrong with them.
Not to mention the fact that the E17 interrogation is incoherent with what we see previously on the show (both character and continuity issues).
Are we to believe that general Beckman, who’s opposed to personal entanglements between agents (her reaction to Chuck and Sarah’s dating in S3E14) would simply fly Sarah to Washington for a personal weekend with Shaw?
The D.C. restaurant receipts contradict what Shaw says to Sarah during their S3E12 dinner (“I’m sorry…we should have done this sooner”).
If the E17 earrings are a gift from Shaw, why is Sarah never wearing them while she is with Shaw (E11-12)? What woman does not wear Tiffany’s earrings while she’s with the man who bought them for her while wearing them while she’s with the man who shot the man who bought them for her because the latter tried to kill her after finding out she had killed his wife?
You see, the E17 earrings bit is not funny. It’s morbid.
The fact someone wrote the whole E17 interrogation scene is appalling. The fact it actually made it into the final product is simply mind-boggling.
It was written by the husband and wife team of Lafrank and Judkins who delivered most of the very best S4 and S5 episodes. Living Dead is, I believe, their first episode for Chuck. But I am sure they were told to just assume Sarah and Shaw were a real couple for three episodes (they were probably writing while those episodes were filming).
I can easily see how Sarah’s attitude towards the earrings works, especially thinking about her background as the Conman’s daughter. They’re just a pretty thing. The relationship was a bust, but it’s not the earrings fault. They’re just pretty. She never even cared for Shaw all that much anyway, he was just a distraction while her heart was broken.
To Sarah’s credit, she dumped them as soon as she found out it bothered Chuck.
It reminds me a lot of a scene in Chuck vs the Sound of Music II; when Carina scores a nice set earrings from her mark, they definitely DO NOT end up on the mission property report!
Anyway, no I don’t care for the scene. But I pretty much flush the whole season anyway. Honeymooners is the ONLY S3 episode I routinely re-watch. It’s just all broken and irredeemable.
That’s interesting (I have to check what S4 episodes they wrote) but considering Sarah’s negative attitude towards her dad’s con life, I would assume that she would have even fewer reasons to hold onto those earrings. Just the memories associated with them (Shaw -> Evelyn -> Sarah’s red test) would be enough to dump them well before they bothered Chuck.
And the thing I (we?) like about Sarah is that she’s not Carina (or agent Forrest from S2E18).
After rewatching the first half of S3, I don’t mind the first 6.5 episodes (till Sarah’s “I overreacted” to Shaw in vs the Mask) and even have no issues with E9-12 since there is pretty much no Shaw/Sarah interaction in them other than their good-bye kiss in Castle in E12. It’s only E7 (second half) and E8 I have a problem with because of Sarah’s jarring out-of-character and incoherent behavior.
I was just looking over our “blog episodes guide” (linked on the menu bar at top of this page) and noticed Honeymooners was actually their first episode! But add in Suitcase, Push Mix, Wedding Planner and Baby; and they were easily my favorite writers.
No doubt Sarah isn’t Carina and that’s a huge part of her appeal; but still, I think earrings are just a thing. They have no innate moral value, just metal and rock. Until they mean something to you or represent something to you (sentiment). So I have no problem with Sarah just seeing them as a pretty nothing, until she finds out they bother Chuck. Then they go. I think that’s rational and fair all around.
The most offensive thing about the earrings is just the whole stupid scene they appear in!
Oh, yes, I love all those episodes (not big on Wedding Planner but it was good). The Suitcase one was set in Milan, my hometown, which scores additional points.
No arguments from me on the earring scene. I’ll skip it when I get there with my wife.
I’m glad Milan works for you then. I’m sure the crew never actually left the studio, so if they were able to pass muster for home town guy they did good!
They did good enough 🙂
I provided a reason for the earrings. We don’t know what actually happened to them, so this works:
https://www.fanfiction.net/s/8406654/14/
Oh I’d forgotten that one, well done!
Hi everyone, if you have Netflix, I highly recommend the show Crash Landing on You.
It’s the story of wealthy South Korean businesswoman Se-ri (the Chuck of the story) who has a paragliding accident and lands in North Korea, where she experiences a very different life as she’s found by Captain Ri (Sarah) and his soldiers (loosely Morgan and the Buy Morons), who protect her and work on returning her safely to South Korea while the NK security department is after her.
The contrast between the different way of life in the two countries is fascinating in its own right, the forbidden (and extremely chaste) feelings that develop between Ri and Se-ri are like the ones between Sarah and Chuck, and the story also works at the symbolic level: stoic and strong captain Ri symbolizes North Korea while wealthy and bubbly Se-ri symbolizes South Korea, and their yearning symbolizes the two countries’ desire for re-unification.
It’s got an 8.7 rating on IMDB.com and is well worth watching. No Shaw.
Thought experiment: The second Shazam! movie, which opens Friday, is a gigantic hit. Warner says to Levi, “Hey, Zach, we want to be in the Levi business long-term. How about a development deal?”
Does Levi say: Geat! Let’s do a Chuck movie.
That would be awesome! There’s obviously plenty that could go wrong with that, like if someone decides they need to show us Sarah getting her memories back, 15 years later!
But I’m cautiously optimistic most of the players involved know that wouldn’t play well with most of their audience. I think a sort of couple/team/family adventure would be great fun.
Wilma, I’m not sure what Zac would say about doing another Chuck TV season/series (or a movie for that matter). But I know *I* would certainly want to see it. In these last 10 years, I’ve only seen Matt Bomer (in White Collar) and Vik Sahay on one episode of NCIS. IMDB shows he was in an episode each of Lucifer, Grimm and Bones too. Looks like Vik’s been busy! I’m a little surprised I haven’t seen Scott Krinsky since, but perhaps he’s just not doing acting or comedy on TV.
Don’t mean to repeat that clip I posted elsewhere recently. But Levi said a year ago he’d never stop trying to make a Chuck movie. So we know he’s interested. I think Strahovski and Baldwin would do it. The rest of the cast? Well, there’d be takers.
I do agree that they couldn’t revisit the Sarah memory thing. It’s 11 years later now and probably 14 or 15 years before a movie could get to theaters. It would have to be a contemporary take on the show.
The good news: I was right that Zac Levi would try to leverage Shazam! as a way to jumpstart a Chuck movie …
https://deadline.com/2023/03/zachary-levi-wants-to-make-chuck-movie-warner-brothers-nbc-series-1235303235/
The bad news: The second Shazam! movie got mostly poor reviews this weekend and the pros think it’s crashing at the box office and will do half (about $30 million) of expectations.
So probably no Chuck movie for us. Studios rarely sign off on passion projects for stars whose movies bomb.
I saw it tonight. Definitely not as good as the first one. My wife commented “too much action, needs more story”. That seems fair.
Still fun if you’re into the whole superhero thing. Or silly mash-ups with Greek Mythology.
But no, I don’t think it will give us any leverage for a Chuck movie, unless Zac chooses to produce it with his own money.
Just saw the movie. Not very good. Half hour too long. Too much plot (trees and apples and wizards and squabbling sisters and the Dome from the Simpsons). I didn’t think Zac was all that good, either. His kid-in-adult-body schtick was awfully cheesy this time. And that Wonder Woman cameo was cringe. I didn’t need Shazam hitting on her like a horny 16-year-old. I even disliked how they changed Shazam’s costume. Losing the hood on the cape made the suit seem cheap and run of the mill.
Hi people!
I’m a recent fan of the Chuck series, I discovered it at the end of last year. Since then I’ve been reading a lot about and your site has helped me to get over this series finale.
The main issue is that I identified myself a lot with Sarah Walker journay. To me she is the show’s ultimate heroine. Without her Chuck would still be working at the Buy More, lost in his live. And what the writers did to her in the last two episodes is unacceptable. It made me really, really sad and upset.
Here’s a text I posted on Reddit about Sarah and the serie finale:
I’ll summarize to you why – in my point of view – we don’t get a happy ending in the series finale:
* My heroine was brutalized and tortured (and who knows what else);
* My heroine had her memories and feelings for at least the last 5 years ripped away;
* My heroine was turned into a lost woman, an empty shell – she no longer knows who she is, what she has become and achieved;
* My heroine was turned into a person without any kind of instincts, intuition, compassion, and empathy;
* My heroine was turned into an unscrupulous woman, with no moral boundaries – prostitute, civilian kidnapper, a paid killer…
* My heroine was turned into a brainless (I could say stupid) woman – how to believe in this strange story of 5 years cover relationship when she is seeing so many indications that point to the exact opposite;
* My heroine was turned into an incompetent and inapt spy;
* My heroine was turned into an unreliable woman;
* My heroine was turned into a woman with serious psychological problems. She will never be the same after all this. The relationship with Chuck will never be the same. She tried to kill her husband, the man who loves her unconditionally several times! As she has always said, she is insecure about relationships and how is she going to allow herself to open up to Chuck again? She doesn’t trust herself anymore;
* My heroine was turned into a Sarah we had never seen before. She basically got turned into a monster.
* My heroine was not allowed by writers to redeem herself or at least for her to recover;
So… it’s impossible to it can be a happy ending after all this!!! Not for Sarah, not for Chuck and not for me. Since Chuck lost Sarah Bartowski, then it’s a very sad ending for Chuck as well.
I sympathize with the feeling! We’ve certainly heard this from plenty of viewers.
But I do think now, that it is unnecessarily bleak. She WAS there for Chuck in the end, and I don’t just mean on the beach. She partnered with him to right the wrongs she’d been complicit to, and together they saved thousands of lives and put the world back right.
Remember the last scenes. She told General Beckman she needed to “find herself”. This is the same woman who told us all through the show that without Chuck, she was nothing but a spy. So suddenly, this Sarah who remembers nothing, needs to find herself? We know, that can only mean finding Chuck. And we saw that on the beach. She said several times during the final episode (this is more clear in the extended cut if you can that) that she didn’t want to hear “their” story from Chuck, because it wasn’t her story. But in the end, she accepted it and claimed ownership of it when she told Chuck to tell her their story. Finally, it ended with 45 seconds of kissing. I’d say she found her way home.
No doubt, it wasn’t the sort of happy reunion we might have hoped for. I think there was a major fumble on execution there. But I think it did, just barely, show enough to conclude Sarah’s future was with Chuck and reclaiming what she’d lost.
I highly recommend reading “Sarah vs Finding Herself” as an ideal epilogue, that the show clearly SHOULD have had!
Thanks for answering!!! Your site is amazing.
“She said several times during the final episode (this is more clear in the extended cut if you can that) that she didn’t want to hear “their” story from Chuck, because it wasn’t her story. But in the end, she accepted it and claimed ownership of it when she told Chuck to tell her their story”.
It’s just that I can’t understand or see the reason for Sarah’s 180C turn. To say it was because they finished the mission to eliminate Quinn is not a satisfying answer for me. My heroine still insane and out-of-character here, like every minute in the last two episodes. And the final kiss scene with no reaction from Sarah doesn’t help either. Not a touch from her on Chuck, not a word. I still don’t see Sarah there.
Like I said, Sahra wasn’t allowed by writers to redeem herself or at least for her to recover.
Feelings are hard to explain, and unfortunately these are mine regarding the series finale. The writers stole Sarah Bartowski from Sarah, from Chuck, and from me.
I felt the same way at first, I really do understand.
But remember too, as soon as she knew Quinn was lying, she set about fixing things. I’d also add, when she said she didn’t “feel it” at the end of 5.12, she was lying. She was full of grief for what she’d lost and what she’d done. We just saw her sobbing her way through her logs. I think a lot of the detachment she seems to show comes from her own feelings of unworthiness. In the end, she accepted the love of her husband back.
In an interview the night this first ran, Fedak specifically said she’d “caught up” to Chuck emotionally. I’m not entirely sure what that means, but I think it’s all good.
No doubt, I wish the ending had been very different. I would have loved the “one year later” scene with Chuck, Sarah and a baby moving into their new house. I like cotton candy too. But it wasn’t what the writer wanted, so we loose.
I am glad you’ve liked the site so much! We sure had fun putting it all together for several years. A lot of lively discussions helped keep us all engaged for a long time too! If you read through some of those discussion in the various finale threads you’ll see many felt the same as you, and most have found some measure of peace with it.
Again I point back to fan fiction. I know it’s not quite the same. But much of it is excellent, and the finale is particularly well served with re-writes and epilogues of various sorts. The one linked above is particularly satisfying, there are others I could recommend if you are interested. Don’t let your Chuck experience end on a down note!
It’s that my feeling of being devastated was so strong that the final scenes failed to give me any hope. Reading your website and your words help me to better understand the ending, but I still not accept it. I still feel like I lost a heroine, a good example of a strong woman’s growth journey. For me it wasn’t fair what they did to Sarah in the final episodes. That was totally unnecessary. A diminished woman does not make a man bigger.
May I make a suggestion??? Opening a new post on your homepage for the new fans (and the old ones) to chat on the Chuck series.
There are a lot of new fans, who have just discovered the series. In my country it was made available on Prime Video a short time ago and it’s a big success. Lots of people talking about it on social media. And my country is a big one – Brazil.
Wow, I had no idea! I’m really glad that you enjoyed both show (until the end!) and this site.
One thing we commented on several times over the years was that when the show runners named the show “Chuck”, they always meant for Chuck to be the main character and hero of the show. I think that partly is why Sarah was so often incapacitated or otherwise occupied for the big finale episodes.
Not a choice I’m completely happy with, but it does explain some things. I would have preferred the show “Chuck and Sarah”, but that’s not quite what we got.
Really, fan fiction. It’s the only answer unless you can afford to buy the show and put it back in production.
It’s truth! It would be much better if starting in season 3 the writers had granted that Sarah was just as important and heroic as Chuck.
They fought against Sarah’s til the end, culminating in the complete and grotesque destruction of one of the main characters (hence all my indignation). So many times the writers made Chuck grow up on Sarah’s pain that it loses its fun. I remember all the episodes from S03E01-12 (which you wonderfully call “black box”), Sarah’s pre-wedding poisoning, Shaw torturing Sarah throughout the entire (!!!) Santa Suit episode (what a Christmas eve Sarah had!! what anger they had against Sarah at this moment – and soon ahead it would get much, much worse), Sarah still not trusting in Chuck in vs the Baby (total non sense)…
So odd that even with so many flaws, so many strange plots, so many stupid choices, the series is addictive. And for me it is addictive exactly for what they tried to destroy all the time in the show: the romantic journey between Chuck and Sarah, the absurdly strong chemistry between Zach L. and Yvonne S. (sorry, I can’t hold myself back – to me it’s impossible that at some point they were not a couple). In season 3 they almost managed to separate the couple, but in return, they almost lost the show too. Who knows.. maybe the last 3 episodes are a revange from the writers to the fans? That would not be an absurd statement at all.
I’ve reflected on CHUCK a lot over the years. I think that it is one of those shows that the writer’s vision is more important than audience satisfaction. Some writers are unflinching about following through on ideas, that’s just how it goes.
Dave raises a crucial point, the show at its core conceptual framework is about Chuck Bartowski, it is about his life, his heroes journey, his ups and downs along the way.
Quinn to Chuck just before he escapes the Buy More: “Take a look at your wife, you think you get that without the Intersect!”
.
He’s basically saying that Sarah only fell in love with Chuck because a computer fell into his brain and ultimately he tries to prove his point by capturing Sarah and taking her memory turning her against Chuck. As much as don’t like to admit it is a genius. From a writing standpoint, there is no better way to show Chuck’s growth. It also proves that Sarah wants to be with Chuck, not because she was protecting him and happened to fall in love with him, but because she trusts him and is willing to re-experience Chuck as a person all over again.
Writing a happy ending is easy, writing an ending that stays with your audience for over a decade after everything is said and done, takes commitment and courage from the person telling the story.
Indeed, atcDave, you hit the proverbial nail on the head. The showrunners created Chuck. It was the fans who loved and desired a show called Chuck and Sarah.
Josh I think I prefer obstinate over “courage”. As we’ve observed many times over the years, most of us needed just a little bit more. The four word fix (“take me home, Chuck”), could even have been dubbed over the fade with no content change to the episode. I think it would have left many viewers more satisfied than what they left with. I can’t answer how “memorable” it would have been, or its impact on fan fiction. But it actually would have emphasized your point about Chuck, yes indeed he can still get Sarah Walker without the Intersect. Instead it left too many viewers with a question.
Wilma its a little maddening since from S4 on, Fedak talks the talk. Like he understood what the fans wanted to see, but in the end he chose his own vision over the viewers. I can respect his right to do that, but not his actual wisdom or sense on the matter.
“I’ve reflected on CHUCK a lot over the years. I think that it is one of those shows that the writer’s vision is more important than audience satisfaction. Some writers are unflinching about following through on ideas, that’s just how it goes.
Dave raises a crucial point, the show at its core conceptual framework is about Chuck Bartowski, it is about his life, his heroes journey, his ups and downs along the way.”
I have to agree with you. But I have 2 points:
a) The creators lost control of their creation with Yvonne S’ performance. Sarah Walker became equal or more interesting than Chuck Bartowski.
b) Chuck did not reach his final goal, because in the end he “won” a new Sarah: empty, unreliable, without memories and with serious psychological problems (how to overcome her husband’s death attempt, Ellie’s kidnapping…).
I do think it’s often difficult for writers to accept when their vision doesn’t quite match the reality of what’s on screen. And they DID adapt, some. Clearly Sarah’s role became bigger from S3.5 to the end. I would say Yvonne’s performance, and her chemistry with Zach drove her character into a co-lead position.
But Karen I still think your view of the end is perhaps too harsh. Well, apart from agreeing they wrote Sarah sort of stupid in the end. But Sarah had already dealt with a complete change of her values from the start of the show, to the midpoint when she was ready for a full and honest relationship with a man she loved. That involved a lot of awareness and forgiveness of past deeds to get to that point. And post Series Sarah is still the same woman. Even better, she has the knowledge she was loved and forgiven before, she will be again. We spent a lot of time looking at how memory damaged people recover in the aftermath of the show (Gee, funny that!) and it would be consistent to say she may recover her emotional maturity and strength even before specific memories come back.
That’s never to say I liked where it ended, although honestly I’ve come to like 5.13 much better than 5.12! But I can accept the intent, that we were to see Sarah’s recovery had already started (“tell me our story”).
@atcDave You assume that Fedak was capable of acting on what he knew the fans wanted. At that stage of his writing career, he simply may have lacked the skill set to execute scripts with a realistic adult couple.
As for the finale, I am convinced he was leaving himself some wiggle room for a back 9 pickup or a season 6. If a renewal came, I think we would have seen several episodes of Sarah working to get her memories back. However, if he had known for sure that 5.13 was definitively the end, he might have offered a more complete approach to Sarah having recovered her memories. He was never cruel in the way Josh Schwartz was with his Wt/wt stuff. And I don’t think he meant to torture fans with the ending we saw. That’s my head canon anyway …
“Sarah had already dealt with a complete change of her values from the start of the show, to the midpoint when she was ready for a full and honest relationship with a man she loved”
In my understanding Sarah never changed her values and her real self through the show. She just rediscovered herself with Chuck. Chuck was her catalyst for all of this. Hence my shock with the new Sarah: evil, emotionless, without empathy, without moral boundaries.
@atcDave for me the point is… the ambiguity that the writers talked so much about does not allow us to know for sure the real status of Sarah Walker in any moment of the 5.12-13 (nor in the beach scene).
So it is an completely open ended we can choose which Sarah we’ll have:
A) with the magical kiss she was 100% back or at least she found her love for Chuck back
B) she fell in love with Chuck one more time without her feeling and memories came back
C) she became a useless spy and is no longer able to spying, as she has lost at least 5 years of situational awareness – she doesn’t know who is friend or foe, her last missions and the only person who can help her is Chuck. Casey walked away, not concerned for Sarah’s well being. Hence the only thing we know is that Sarah willingly or unwillingly is attached to Chuck in those scenarios
D) she chooses to wander the world alone. Which would also not be an impossibility to be considered for the wild, cold fish, lone wolf Sarah who was introduced to us at E12-13.
I believe the answer is B. Maybe my understanding is too bitter, but as a result Sarah Bartowski no longer exists. She will have to rebuild her life all over again. Will she be capable to do all this work?
Wilma I imagine you’re right about most of that. I really DO NOT think CF was trying to be a jerk. But I do think he got wrapped up in an idea, and lacked the ability to objectively think how it would be perceived.
And I do have to immediately follow that up with the observation many fans apparently saw the Finale how he wanted them to. That is, a hard won relationship that will continue in spite of the difficulties. For myself I see it clearly now, but it left too many questions on initial viewing.
Karen I don’t mean to say Sarah did a complete moral flip flop. She was always a hero, and always saw herself as one of the “good guys”. She was an admirable, strong character.
But, she was all about career, all about saving the world. The radical change Chuck brought her was a desire to make room for friends, love and family in that.
The “stupid” aspects of her finale arc, I think, just come down to sloppy writing. Remember, they crank out scripts in a week. We’ve all spent FAR more time hashing over these things than the writers ever did. I think we were meant to see a loss of all those relationships that had become so dear to her, and a return to the all business, all professional Sarah Walker as the main struggle. No stupid was intended (I think. Although many fan fiction writers have come with much more appealing, more intelligent Sarah Walker’s for the finale. Check out “Sarah vs Her Stolen Life“, very appealing example of a smarter Sarah).
And that means restoring Sarah’s revised life priorities is the real challenge at the end. I think we were meant to see that she’d made it back. “Tell me our story” is THE moment when she starts to set her world back right again. No doubt the damage and hurt were great. But Chuck and Sarah’s love was stronger than the hurt.
There is a perfectly good explanation for Sarah’s behavior throughout the five seasons. In season 3, she swaps roles with Chuck, as LizJames prophetically predicted on this very site before season 3 even unfolded. Sarah wants a real life while Chuck must balance love and duty.
And as Ernie Davis also mentioned on this site, Chuck has to go through his hero’s journey to become a spy worthy of Sarah. That’s why the first 12 episodes of season 3 are necessary. We may like them or not, but they are necessary. The Chuck we see in 3.12 is very different from the boy toy Chuck we see in the motel in Barstow in 2.21. It’s a Chuck who has overtaken Bryce, Cole, and Shaw, who has become James Bond while retaining his chuckness, who fights (Ring) revolutions with a fork, just like Sarah, and that’s why he has a very Bond-like ending scene with Sarah in Paris.
And Sarah has her own real-girl journey in season 3. Just because she doesn’t kick butt left and right, it does not mean she’s just furniture. She’s learning, she is becoming a real woman, she has an emotional journey. Even her story with Shaw is a mirror of Chuck’s real-relationship journey in the first two seasons. Shaw is Sarah’s Lou and Jill.
None of this has anything to do with Fedak and Co hating on Sarah. That’s an idea some of the fans came up with because they couldn’t understand what the writers were doing with the story.
Fedak and Co love Sarah. Fedak even said in an interview that he and CHUCK writer Lauren LeFranc went to a meeting with an NBC exec, and the exec was going on and on about Sarah’s character and how fascinating and mysterious it was, and Lauren LeFranc (the writer of episode 5.12) said, “Yes, she’s the best.”
Everything that happens in the show has a reason. Even episode 5.07 with Shaw is there for a very important reason: it’s the episode that shows Chuck’s tremendous growth as a spy even without the Intersect. In fact, in a way, this episode is the reversal of 4.09 Phase Three. Just as Chuck was mercilessly neutralized and almost lobotomized by the Belgian, Sarah is mercilessly neutralized and almost killed by Shaw. Just as Sarah went all out to save a helpless Chuck, Chuck goes all out to save a helpless Sarah, even though the odds are all against him. Shaw has all the advantages, yet Chuck outclasses Daniel Shaw on every level (tactical and psychological) and, after stripping him of the Intersect, he also defeats him in a physical fight.
All superspy Sarah can do at the end of 5.07 is thank Chuck for saving her life. Remember, this is the woman who in 4.08 publicly (although unwittingly) humiliated Chuck before the team by blurting out that he was not a spy without the Intersect. We can be sure that, after 5.07, Sarah will never again say something like that. By the end of this episode, Chuck has matched or outmatched Bryce, Cole, and Shaw, all while retaining his chuckness so loved by Sarah. He has fully become the man and hero that Sarah saw in him from the very beginning and in whom she had placed her faith. And all this while “nothing but a spy” Sarah has fully become a real woman who even coaches Casey and Gertrude on feelings in the spy life.
And, of course, the show is called CHUCK because it’s told from Chuck’s point of view. Sarah is the mysterious spy goddess who falls in love with him and turns into James Bond, but her character is fascinating precisely because she is mysterious. I mean, how many posts and comments on this very site are dedicated to understanding and analyzing Sarah’s behavior? Would the show be equally appealing if we knew everything about Sarah as we do about Chuck?
Not in the least.
“Remember, this is the woman who in 4.08 publicly (although unwittingly) humiliated Chuck before the team by blurting out that he was not a spy without the Intersect. We can be sure that, after 5.07, Sarah will never again say something like that. ”
Yes!! Sarah will never again say something like that because she doesn’t remember anything that happened to her in the last 5 years.
Sarah will remember. Her memories are coming back. We can see they are already coming back in the last two episodes. Ellie tells Chuck that emotions spark memories. We can see this take place in the last episode. Chuck sparks a mother lode of emotions in Sarah at the beach after she asks for “their” story, which she is now finally ready to hear, and then she asks for the kiss, which was teased throughout the final episode and is the third part of the key to Sarah in an episode where you are given a three-part key to the Intersect.
If we put 2 and 2 together, the result of the magical kiss is obvious.
For those who think it’s not obvious, Fedak makes it obvious.
“I would certainly say it’s not erased. It’s not all gone. It hasn’t been five seasons all for naught. It’s in there. And the fun will be remembering it and falling in love again. How could you imagine anything better?”
@karen Solbach Might I suggest the Sarah Walker you love exists only in Seasons 1 and 2, when the character was severely underwritten and got her agency due to Yvonne Strahovski’s (then surprising) great acting. In the original Season 3, she was a plot device. In Seasons 4 and 5, she was largely written as Church’s adoring junior partner. With very few exceptions (Honeymooners, Role Models, Phase Three, perhaps Business Trip) she’s just the generic sidekick. In fact, the only glimmer of the brilliant Sarah we saw in Seasons 1/2 was at the end of Suitcase, when Strahovski delivered the amazing “You’re my home. You always have been” speech.
If you want to feel better, consult the early months of this blog, when commentators like LizJames and Amyabn and Faith were championing and explaining the Sarah character of Seasons 1/2. And other commentators, notably Joe, Ernie Davis and atcDave, were passionately writing about how the show revolved around the Chuck and Sarah (then barely scrutable) relationship.
Pretty much I can appreciate Sarah Walker’s growth and journey from nothing but a spy to a complete and happy married woman, fully connected with her feelings, desires and herself. I can see this development in seasons 3B, 4 and 5 (till the memory things). If I couldn’t see that, I’d have stopped watching the series.
I agree with that Karen. I think Sarah’s growth through the show was amazing, and really made her the most interesting and appealing character in the Show. By comparison, much of Chuck’s “growth” was retrograde.
But much of that growth may have been as much performance as writing. And that was so badly treated by the ending.
Sarah is never a plot device. She is the dramatic anchor of the show and grows in every single season.
In season 1, she denies her feelings for Chuck, even to herself, until the end of the season.
In season 2, she is open about her feelings for Chuck from the very beginning but has to reel them back in because feelings are a liability for spies (2.03). So she must learn to balance love and duty until her feelings become an asset (2.18)
In season 3, she wants a real life and becomes a real woman in want of a real relationship. She also tries to protect Chuck from the dangers of the spy life and fears for his chuckness. This is the pivotal season of the series.
Season 4 is Sarah’s season. She learns to grow in her relationship with Chuck, settles in (4.02), faces her past fears (4.03), learns to balance Being and Change (4.04), opens up with Chuck (4.09), works with the team (4.13), sees things from Chuck’s perspective (4.14-15, 4.20), and gets married (4.24).
In season 5, she coaches other spies (Casey and Gertrude) on marrying feelings and the spy life, a lesson she and Chuck learned in season 3, then is ready to finally quit the spy life (which she wouldn’t do in season 4) and start a family with Chuck and open a new chapter in their life.
Might I add this bit of context to how the Sarah character acted in 5.12 and 5.13? The writers never created a scenario where she could organically fall in love with Chuck again. The post-memory-loss Sarah did not experience anything like the ballerina moment, which originally attracted her to Chuck in the pilot. Nor did she have anything like the “bomb” moment in 1.9, where Chuck stands by her in the face of what seemed like certain death. Fedak only showed post-memory-loss Sarah the external stuff: a facsimile of the first date restaurant, the helicopter bit, a replay of Weinerlicious and Chuck acting like a spy. None of that was what made her love Chuck.
You can logically postulate that had Sarah been shown the things that made her fall in love with Chuck initially, she would have organically been drawn to Chuck again.
You made a point here.
So in your opinion or Sarah A) with the magical kiss was 100% back or at least she found her love for Chuck back or b) chooses to wander the world alone.
Am I right with this assumption?
Anyway, in neither of the two scenarios do we have a pay off for everything we witness – torture, suppressed memories, the change in her personality, coldness, lack of empathy, Chuck’s kill attempted, Ellie’s kidnapping, her lack of affection for Chuck…
There are only two options after the kiss:
1. Sarah recovers her memories immediately.
2. Sarah recovers some of her memories (“everything is hazy” just like for Chuck after Sarah’s kiss at the end of 4.09) and will recover her memories over a few weeks while falling back in love with Chuck.
There is no scenario where she wanders the world alone. She wouldn’t ask for the kiss if that were the case.
The point of the memory suppression is not to make us doubt Chuck and Sarah’s relationship. It’s the opposite. It’s to show us that you could put them in the worst possible scenario (the Luke and Mara Jade Skywalker scenario), and she would still fall in love with him instead.
This is from the Fedak’s interview with Sepinwall after the CHUCK finale.
Sepinwall: Well, after last week’s episode, a few commenters were upset with the idea that Sarah’s memory had been erased and that all her character growth we had spent the last five seasons was for naught. What would you say to that?
Fedak: I would certainly say it’s not erased. It’s not all gone. It hasn’t been five seasons all for naught. It’s in there. And the fun will be remembering it and falling in love again. How could you imagine anything better?
___
Now, we can agree or disagree with Fedak on whether “we can immagine something better,” but the point is that Chuck and Sarah are together (that’s why she asks for the kiss) and she will recover her memories.
Karen, by focusing on torture (?), suppressed memories, Sarah’s behavior with Chuck and Ellie, we make the same mistake some viewers make when they think Bryce is a jerk because “he should have told Chuck the truth at Stanford, no matter what.”
This is the wrong way of looking at at a character or the story.
If Chuck doesn’t have a problem with Bryce after he finds out the truth about Stanford, why do viewers? If Chuck realizes that Bryce acted the way he did to save him and forgives Bryce on the spot, why don’t viewers? By focusing on what “Bryce woulda, coulda, shoulda,” they focus on what would be the subject of fan fiction instead of focusing on the story being told.
Chuck forgives Bryce. So should viewers.
It’s the same thing with the finale. Chuck and Ellie don’t have a problem with Sarah’s behavior once they understand her memories are suppressed. Chuck goes out of his way to save Sarah even after she tries to kill him and Ellie because he loves her and tries to get her back even though everyone keeps telling him “she’s gone.”
If Chuck and Ellie and Devon have no problems with memory-suppressed Sarah’s behavior, why do you? If Chuck forgives her, why don’t you? Sarah even apologizes to Chuck at the end of 5.12 for everything that she did that day, and Chuck forgives her. Why don’t you?
By doing so, you’ll be free to focus on the story being told, which clearly tells you at every level that all ends well for Chuck and Sarah, and that her memories are coming back.
“If Chuck and Ellie and Devon have no problems with memory-suppressed Sarah’s behavior, why do you? If Chuck forgives her, why don’t you? Sarah even apologizes to Chuck at the end of 5.12 for everything that she did that day, and Chuck forgives her. Why don’t you?”
Because even it being fiction, this would be very unrealistic. Sara doesn’t trust herself. Any woman in this situation can have a loving relationship with someone else. Even more the husband she doesn’t remember and tried to kill.
And you forgot to add a very important statement to all of this: “in my opinion”. My opinion is different from yours. To me Sarah & Chuck didn’t have a happy ending. Maybe in the future I will change my mind. But not now.
To me, the CHUCK finale has the same general problem as How I met your mother and that is audience/writer disconnect. The audience can’t easily see the intention behind the decisions because an ending that does not reward the audience for years of investment into the show is unacceptable. The writer meanwhile has their own personal reasons for writing the story and more often than not they want to pay off that vision even if it is controversial to the audience. The HIMYM finale had very similar controversy that CHUCK did. The biggest being arguments over wasted character growth and unfulfilled desire to see certain characters in a happy place.
Such arguments are entirety subjective, if you are watching a show for a specific relationship and that relationship and that does not pay off by the end, or is taken away completely, nothing about that finale will be enjoyable and that’s fine. It doesn’t mean that the finale is bad, it just means that you had a different perspective than the person who wrote the story, such is the nature of storytelling in TV and most media.
Karen I’ll agree the presentation was a failure if you didn’t get your happy ending. And all too many viewers agreed with you.
But know that was not the INTENT. The writer saw it as a happy ending. A young couple rediscovering their love for each other.
And I disagree about such forgiveness being unrealistic. I’ve seen a number of marriages survive hurt and betrayal. Forgiveness works great when both parties want it to. Now no doubt, Chuck and Sarah have enough stupid in their history to wonder if they have a chance. But in the end, it was an action/comedy. It might be wise not to fuss so much over details.
@atcDave… it could be a matter of my cultural expectations as well.
In my country – Brazil – we have really good soap operas. They are daily episodes with 30-40 minutes (except sundays) that last for 5-6 months.
In these soap operas we always have:
a) the end finishes in itself. There is never a new season;
b) all the baddies in the last episode are either killed, or arrested, or discredited, or left alone;
c) all the good guys end up happy, married or at least dating with a good partner. A soap opera without a beautiful wedding at the end is not a normal soap opera.
I think I would like your Brazilian Dramas a lot! There is often a sort of self-flagellating cynicism in American culture that I find utterly tiresome. And this bizarre notion that people won’t accept “happy”. Speaking as someone happily into their 26th year of marriage I don’t get it. I guess unhappiness and uncertainty is what younger Americans find mature.
Except for Hallmark Channel, they’ve made a business out of “happily ever after”. And by a wide margin its the most successful basic cable channel. But does anyone else get the hint?
I saw soap operas when I was a kid: Isaura: Slave Girl and The Rich Also Cry. Soap operas are fun to watch, they end with all the bad guys dead and with a beautiful wedding, and they are forgotten not 10 minutes after the end of the show.
There is nothing to talk about. The characters’ decisions are shown again and again and again. There is no mystery, no character depth, no growth. It’s like a dopamine rush.
With Chuck, people talk about the end, about the characters’ journeys, and about Sarah’s mysterious character over 10 years after the end of the show. She is complex and layered, and so is the show.
The writing of this spy show draws the viewers in as active participants by making them do “a little spy work to suss out the situation” with Chuck and Sarah (if you catch my reference).
This is genius.
You know it’s possible to find a middle ground. Something more ultimately satisfying and edifying for more people that is also exciting and challenging. Things like the Thin Man movies, where you have a good story, good mystery And a happy couple sorting through the whole thing. It’s truly not an either/or thing.
Yes, we can find a middle ground, but those are different stories. Some viewers wanted Chuck to be like The Thin Man or Hart to Hart (which is what we got from 3.15 to 5.11), but this is a different story.
The story was sold to WB/NBC as the story of Sydney Bristow from Alias walking into The Office and falling for Jim Halpert. Heck, Sarah kind of looks like Sydney, and Chuck kind of looks like Jim.
The story was always about the nerd getting the girl, about a couple that, on paper, does not belong together but they are perfect for each other, a couple that grows together in a world where feelings are a liability, a couple that at first accepts the Star Wars code of “duty vs love” and then rejects it, and they become the Role Models of a new code of “love and duty” from 3.15 on, which is the closest thing to The Thin Man we got in the show.
But ending the story with a traditional happy ending was never Fedak’s style. None of his season finales were like that. And so, the series finale explores the core theme of the show: would the nerd get the girl even under the worst possible scenario, where she is turned into his terminator? Yes, yes, he would.
And that is exciting.
Yes, I’ve read some fan fiction and always found it boring, always missing the Chuck feel, the perfect mix of comedy, action, drama, humor, charm that we find in the show.
@karen. What I guess I was saying is that Chuck talking about “our story” is really his version of their story. None of the things shown in the finale talk to what Sarah thought was crucial in their story. The writers were writing a show called Chuck and everything came from his angle.
If you want to know what mattered to Sarah, look to what was highlighted on the CD she got from Casey in Episode 5.12. She was shown looking at her reporting on Chuck getting her a pizza and the moment when she kissed him for the first (and she thought last) time. The things that mattered to Sarah about their story were different than Chuck’s version.
That said, of course I believe the magic kiss worked. Because Chuck wasn’t an angry, unhappy show. If there was a season 5.2 or 6, the kiss might not have fully worked because Fedak would have done a few episodes about Sarah’s memory. But since the 5.13 beach scene was all we get, I believe the kiss worked.
Sarah and Chuck are together. That’s the takeaway.
Francesco you completely miss the point. I’m not denying it may have been the “agreed upon” ending with the Network (Actually I doubt it, I don’t think NBC cared one iota about Chuck. It wasn’t their show, it just filled a slot until they could find something better. Long story, but I’m pretty sure), but that is beside the point. Fedak’s normal style is also beside the point (I think you misrepresent it, but that isn’t the issue).
In the Forward to his anthology book “Swords and Maidens” N.R. LaPoint writes “Modern pop culture has lost almost all appeal for me. Deconstruction after deconstruction has reduced it to a boring gray sludge. Comics, music, movies and literature all suffer from a lifelessness that goes back to Kant. The modernists and postmodernists have created a culture of anti-heroes and, ultimately, a culture of anti-fun as well. And there is no imagination.”
THAT is the point. Everything in modern television and movies is dreary, cynical and self important. It is dreadfully hard to find anything actually uplifting, aspirational. When Chuck first came along it looked like a rare exception. It was fun, funny, clever and sweet. All in a tense and exciting story. That made for a real gem. As a TV viewer who is most often disappointed with new shows, it was a pleasant surprise. No doubt it had its disappointments, like most of S3. They spent all season trying to make it fit into typical television mediocrity. But even then it shook it off, and ended well.
Season four was a breath of fresh air. Becoming something truly dynamic and unique. And they held that almost to the series’ end. Extraordinary.
But it always looks to me like in the end, Fedak decided to show he could fit in with the crowd rather than keep what was special. Establish some dark and dreary cred for the resume.
After five seasons of a show that often was willing to be different, sometimes very different in its mood and style. It ended in stereotypical “made for television” fashion. What an utterly bitter disappointment.
And I don’t even think the ending was an unhappy one! I see the hope, promise even. I have no doubt Chuck and Sarah are fine, in a home with three or four kids. And both of them are completely happy about it.
But I didn’t feel that special Chuck joy I did so often during the show. Many viewers weren’t at all sure what they saw. That’s while I’ll always be a little grumpy with that uninspired ending.
And I categorically disagree with your take on fan fiction. Different writers produce different quality work, and they all have their own voice and their own take on things. But the best of it is absolutely professional quality. Better than professional often, the writers aren’t quite so trapped by the dreary expectations of modern professionalism. Some are very funny. Some are very dramatic. Some write Chuck like Tom Clancey, some are thinking Hallmark Channel, and some are more like Monty Python. It is often a ton of fun. And the level of craftsmanship often far exceeds anything seen on television.
Dave,
Disagreement is fine. That’s what makes things fun and for conversations worth having.
As for the agreed-upon series finale, Fedak mentioned in interviews that he sold the idea to WB/NBC at the end of season 4. NBC cared about Chuck for different reasons (nothing was better rating-wise, some NBC execs loved the show, but the new CEO during season 5 didn’t care a bit and mocked the reporter who asked whether there was going to be a season 6).
I perfectly agree with LaPoint’s, well, point. Most modern pop culture has lost its appeal for me. I can barely count the number of shows and movies I start and don’t even finish precisely for the reason you mention.
But Chuck is different. Chuck has heart. Miles and miles of heart (yes, a quote from The Replacements), including in season 3 (which many viewers misunderstand) and the series finale (which some viewers also misunderstand).
There is nothing “stupid” in what Chuck and Sarah go through the show. Both of them need to get something out of their system before they can come together for good: the ghost from their past (Jill/Bryce), the temptation from their present (Lou/Cole), and the glimpse of their future with a mirror of their past self (Hannah/Shaw).
And this is perfectly realistic behavior; in fact, my wife mentioned that she wouldn’t have the constancy of heart that Chuck and Sarah have to hope for a relationship that seems doomed (a quote from 1.03 Tango) when there are “good enough” relationship options available. It’s human nature to wawer and doubt, to explore hope and despondency, as wonderfully highlighted by Kelly Dean Jolley in his Chuck book that Joe linked to on this very site. That’s what makes Chuck and Sarah’s complicated love story worth watching.
Also, the fact that, once they get together, they stay and grow together (unlike in many other shows) speaks volumes about the heart of this show. That’s why I think that LaPoint’s point does not apply to Chuck.
And the finale captures this spirit and cranks it up to 11. In one episode, it brings all the main characters back to the beginning of the series (they are even wearing the same clothes, including Casey) and time-warps their growth through the episode while taking us on a walk down memory lane with a double reference to the first episode and to the entire show while walking the mood tightrope between optimistic and melancholy (it’s a goodbye, after all), with a hauntingly beautiful beach ending that loops back into the pilot episode and has such staying power that people talk about it a decade after the end of the show and has even sparked books like the one by Jolley above.
It’s genius.
Chuck was mostly different. That’s exactly why many of us watched. But the end was emblematic of the spirit of the age. The show shed the last of its originality to conform.
“When Chuck first came along it looked like a rare exception. It was fun, funny, clever and sweet. All in a tense and exciting story. That made for a real gem. As a TV viewer who is most often disappointed with new shows, it was a pleasant surprise. No doubt it had its disappointments, like most of S3. They spent all season trying to make it fit into typical television mediocrity. But even then it shook it off, and ended well. Season four was a breath of fresh air. Becoming something truly dynamic and unique. And they held that almost to the series’ end. Extraordinary. But it always looks to me like in the end, Fedak decided to show he could fit in with the crowd rather than keep what was special. Establish some dark and dreary cred for the resume. After five seasons of a show that often was willing to be different, sometimes very different in its mood and style. It ended in stereotypical “made for television” fashion. What an utterly bitter disappointment.”
“But I didn’t feel that special Chuck joy I did so often during the show. Many viewers weren’t at all sure what they saw. That’s while I’ll always be a little grumpy with that uninspired ending.”
@atcDave you wonderfully caught the exact point of everything I’ve been thinking about the Chuck’s finale since my first watching:
*A drastic change in the show’s style, where the fun and joy has gone. We have only anguish and despair. Except Morgan, all the characters are out-of-character. Actually, it’s a hard horror-thriller movie instead of a lighthearted end-history, very difficult to be watched;
* It’s ok that the ending could be more complex, fantastic than the regular episodes. But not to the point where it needs to be debriefed in order to be understood. This is not a Sartre book! Watching the final episodes multiple times should be a plus for fans, not a necessity in order to understand it;
* Do you know the famous win-win? Here we have the opposite, a lose-lose: Chuck didn’t reach his goal which was to have Sarah Bartowski (from S05E10) with him, instead he won (???) a new woman who doesn’t know who she is. Sarah, the heroine of the series, was destroyed by the writers. A strong woman who had a wonderful journey throughout the entire show – A diminished woman does not make a man bigger. And finally the audience that with the “open ending” didn’t get a glimpse of the main couple’s future.
To appear cool, the writers made a serie finale disconnected from the show itself and its audience’s satisfaction. And memory loss??? What a silly thing, used a million times. It had already been used twice in the show. Like @Josh Z wrote: “an ending that does not reward the audience for years of investment into the show is unacceptable”
In my opinion, it’s very far from “being genius”.
Karen,
Are you saying that Fedak and Co are too stupid compared to Sartre that they should not even attempt to write a clever ending? Or that we viewers are too stupid to understand clever endings? The we are all so stupid that we are entertained by stories that could be written by ChatGPT instead of real human beings? Just the way that the peasants in Orwell’s 1984 novel are entertained by music written by machines?
The irony here is that Fedak and Co have managed to write a story that has emotionally gripped you in a way that Sartre’s books could never do, and it is precisely because of your emotional involvement with the story and its characters that you have such a strong reaction to the finale.
I have watched the same finale you have and, as many other viewers, appreciate it for what it is. It is not by accident that the last two episodes rank among the top 12 of the entire series on IMDb.com. Most viewers, including me, disagree with your assessment that the heroine is destroyed by the writers in the finale or that the finale is disconnected from the rest of the show.
On the contrary, the finale addresses the central theme of the show, a show that was initially sold to WB/NBC as the story of Sydney Bristow from Alias walking into The Office and falling in love with Jim Halpert. This is the concept of the show—the exploration of a most unlikely yet perfect relationship between a nerd and a spy goddess. And when Quinn tells Chuck at the end of 5.10 that he would never get a woman like Sarah without the Intersect, the final arc accepts the challenge head on and proves Quinn wrong in the most spectacular way possible—by turning Sarah into Chuck’s terminator and showing that she will fall in love with him instead. This is a nod to Luke and Mara Jade Skywalker’s own love story in a show that is a not-so-subtle reference to Star Wars.
Once the point is made, and it’s made beautifully on that Malibu beach, of course, Sarah will get her memories back after Prince Charming’s kiss.
And your Sarah Bartowski will be magically back.
Because this show has heart. Always did.
IMDB ratings are among the most useless things on the Internet. The number of viewers embittered by the end is staggering. I think a fundamental problem with it is the Show Runners expended every last bit of goodwill they had viewers during S3. So there was little willingness to see good in the end if it wasn’t explicitly shown. The simple fact we still get viewers 11 years later who are angered and frustrated by it shows that the problem is real, and the ending is badly flawed.
“Are you saying that Fedak and Co are too stupid compared to Sartre that they should not even attempt to write a clever ending? Or that we viewers are too stupid to understand clever endings? The we are all so stupid that we are entertained by stories that could be written by ChatGPT instead of real human beings? Just the way that the peasants in Orwell’s 1984 novel are entertained by music written by machines?”
No @Francesco Scinico … these words are yours, not mine.
What I wrote is that there was a drastic change in the style of the show in the last 3 episodes. From a lighthearted history to a hard horror-thriller movie with an open-ending, very difficult to be watched BY ME. Tense, harrowing, dark on a very high level. And TO ME, YES… it destroys (or deeply wounds) the two main characters without giving them a chance of redemption or healing on screen, using a silly writing trick (memory loss) that has already been used twice in the show.
About Sartre, I’m a fan of his work, just like I’m a fan of the Chuck series. But they are very different cultural products. My point is that a TV show shouldn’t be that complex to watch, that a good glimpse of the main couple’s future would have fit very well there. But you got that, I’m sure. As always stress, this is MY OPINION.
It’s not just IMDb.com that reports high ratings for the last two episodes. It’s also ChuckTV.net. They ran a poll when the show originally aired, and the vast majority of viewers either loved the finale to pieces or liked it a lot even though they had a quibble or two with it. I also ran my own poll on Reddit (which is more negatively biased than the average user), and the majority of users also liked the finale. Even critics like Mo Ryan, who were critical of season 3, loved the finale.
And as for season 3, it consistently ranks among the second-best season among fans, even on Reddit, which, again, is full of viewers biased against it.
Karen,
The show does not turn into a horror story in the final arc. Where would the horror be? It does turn into a thriller, but that’s nothing new. The show does that often throughout the seasons, switching from comedy to romance to action to thriller.
The fact you don’t like the finale is perfectly fine. It’s your emotional reaction and, as such, it’s inherently right. But we should never confuse the statement “I don’t like the finale” with the statement “Sarah will not recover her memories and will wander alone, away from Chuck.”
Those are two different statements. The first is right. The second is wrong. And that’s not my opinion. It’s a fact. And yes, we may have to put some thinking and some understanding of the rules and tropes of TV writing to understand this fact, but we can also intuitively grasp this fact because the show end with a kiss.
I don’t trust any such statistics. I would guess a majority of those who were dissatisfied with the finale simply disengaged and were gone. There is always such a tiny portion of an audience that provides any feedback its statistically very hard to draw firm conclusions.
We had dozens of unhappy and distraught viewers here, looking for some sort of solace or commiseration. And the only co-worker I had who was a regular Chuck fan was very upset. Plus I knew another 5 who had quit the show in frustration during S3.
Granted that is all anecdotal. I often say it only PROVES my friends are a lot like me. But I think its indicative of a much more widespread discontent than other polls and critics would indicate. Critics in particular are dense about such things (as actual entertainment). They often evaluate on criteria that real people couldn’t care less about. Like “structure”, or Hero’s Journey nonsense. I think that is strongly the case here. And sadly, I think a divided and disgruntled fandom is a big part of the reason why there’s been no serious effort at a reboot.
It could easily have been different, not only could a simple 4 word fix to the finale have helped the ending a great deal. But I think an honest interest by TPTB on why that ending failed so many viewers would have been greatly appreciated, instead we get a scolding for being too stupid to understand. And dismissal as being an irrelevant small subset. To their credit, Zach and Yvonne expressed sympathy and understanding to unhappy fans (which I think leads to a fandom that more broadly supports the leads than the writers). Of the six principals at this site; we had two who were unambiguously happy with the finale, one who was more unsure, but ultimately aligned with the happy crowd. Two who thought the end was badly flawed and needed something more. And one who was disgusted and left us with no further involvement at all. That’s a 50% dissatisfied score, and we were the hard core fans.
So the polls make me laugh. They hide some serious problems and discontent with the show. To the point I no longer even recommend it to friends. Now Grimm finished strong, there’s a show I happily and often re-watch…
Yeah, critics are the most useless judge of entertainment in the history of entertainment. Look at how they saw “the super Mario” movie as a terrible movie. Meanwhile, audience reception is overwhelmingly positive and the film is very close to becoming the 3rd highest-grossing animated film ever and will probably finish with $1.3 billion when its theatrical run is over.
That is funny Josh!
It is often funny to look at Rotten Tomatoes and see the difference between the critic score and audience score for any given movie. Audiences are generally much happier with the film that was made for them, than are critics who had see the film for work (and write a report on it). Say it ain’t so!
”The show does not turn into a horror story in the final arc. Where would the horror be?”
Could it be a horror movie if you are being hunted by a top killer CIA agent with an express order to terminate you? And this top killer CIA agent 3 episodes ago was your beloved spouse, drawing with you a life with kids, living in a picket fence house, wanting to quit the spy life with you? The “same person” who now has no memories and feelings on you and who refuses to hear anything about your past together? To me that’s the biggest nightmare a married person could have!!!!
Inferences in my world are not facts.
Sarah having lost her memory is a fact, it was shown to us. She said it on screen. Sarah got her memory back is an inference, because this was not shown to us – only minimum hints, nothing important. Sarah didn’t say “I remember everything!!!” or “Take me home, Chuck! I love you!” after the kiss.
Question: In a supposed season 5B or 6, could have the writers, without any break in the flow of the story, without a twist like the Prague event in S03E01, continued the story after the beach’s kiss with Sarah saying to Chuck “I’m so sorry. I still don’t remember anything. I’m going to see my father and spend some time with him to try to find myself”? In my point of view it wouldn’t be an out-of-storyline outcome. So…
You keep focusing on what the writers did not show/tell us and ignoring everything they did. While it is true that it is not FACT that Sarah remembers the events of the last five years, (the name carving the clear exception) it doesn’t mean that she is a blank woman without feelings or intuition.
Here is a list of factual behavior that happens in the last two episodes that prove Sarah’s Chuck still exists.
1. She hesitates in the Intersect room to shoot Chuck, and only flees because she believes that she is following CIA orders and its not her that blows up DARPA, Quinn does that remotely .
2 After Chuck is shot she shows that she is willing to stick around, it’s not until he insists that she runs that she leaves.
3. She apologizes, something that if we accept the ridiculous assumption that she has no feelings, she did not have to do. Her reaction to the video log proves that she does have feelings for Chuck but she cannot trust herself yet so she goes after Quinn.
.
4. After confronting Quinn she returns to the Buy More of all places, not Langley or her parents, she returns to the one place where she is guaranteed to find Chuck.
5. The chase for Quinn has several clues that the Sarah we know is there. At the restaurant she is amused as Chuck starts to tell their story but the pain of being disconnected from this particular memory is such that she refuses to hear anything else:
.6. Inside the Weinerlicious and then at the ballroom something very important happens. Human memory is largely defined as two things. Explicit, life event memories and implicit habit-forming memories. Sarah lost much of the former concerning those five years but she still has the latter. She stacks the cups properly because she formed the habit over a years worth of work there. Later at the ballroom she fixes Chuck’s and they banter about how to take out the goons because it’s a habit that her brain remembers
7 At the concert hall she remembers the porn virus and shows clear emotion at Chuck’s plan to restore her memory and his sacrifice of that to save everyone.
8. When all is said and done she returns to the beach which is both types of memory at play, if Sarah isn’t the Sarah we know then there is no reason for her to return to the beach or trust Chuck and by asking for both the story and a kiss she is letting him know that she trusts him and wants to fall in love all over again.
A fact is not just written information it is also using context to determine if something actually happened and everything I have pointed actually happens in the last two episodes. Our perception of these things is quite frankly irrelevant if trying to answer the question is Sarah still Sarah who wants Chuck? The answer is yes and that is a FACT
Yes, if we ignore all statistics that disagree with our assessment of the finale, if we ignore critics like Mo Ryan, who was unapologetically critical of season 3 to Fedak’s face but loved the series finale, if we only consider the opinions of our inner circle, then yes, we can say that everyone hated the series finale.
And that would even be fine because an emotional reaction is inherently ours and inherently right. Who is anyone to tell us whether we like the Shaw arc or the series finale? Who is anyone to tell us that we should find it entertaining?
But we are not just doing that here, are we? We are saying that the finale is broken, that we are not even sure Sarah recovers her memories. These are no longer just emotional reactions. They are claims that can be argued and refuted. And they can be argued and refuted by analyzing the narrative structure of the story being told, whether it’s Harry Potter or Chuck.
And this is my point. It’s not to make anyone like or dislike the series finale. You will never get an argument from me there. It’s to refute the claim that “we don’t know” that Sarah recovers her memories after the kiss because that’s an entire different claim that can be answered.
Karen,
Horror is an intense feeling of fear, shock, or disgust. These are feelings that Chuck does not feel toward Sarah, aside from shock. The feeling is also very short-lived since it only lasts a few hours since, by that evening, Sarah apologizes to Chuck for what she did. After that, and in the final episode, Chuck has feelings of sadness and hope, which are not associated with horror.
Yes, The conclusion that Sarah recovers her memories is an inference. What else is an inference? Evolutionary theory, most of science, and pretty much every decision we make in everyday life; it’s called abductive reasoning or inference to the best explanation, and the inference to the best explanation after the magical kiss and after looking at the purpose of the final arc and the structure of the final episode is that Sarah and Chuck are together (that’s why she’s asking for the kiss) and that she recovers her memories.
Why wouldn’t she?
Do we think it’s a coincidence that Quinn selectively suppresses Sarah’s memories of her last five years? That he brings her back to her pre-Chuck self? That he puts her in the worst possible scenario after taunting Chuck at the end of 5.10 that he would never get a woman like Sarah without the Intersect? Do we think it’s a coincidence that the Intersect is then used again and again to take Sarah away from Chuck? Do we think it’s a coincidence that the final episode is about the three parts to the Intersect key and that Ellie and Morgan (the Intersects on Chuck) give Chuck a three-part key to Sarah? Is it a coincidence that Chuck finds Sarah right after this is mentioned? That the magical kiss is teased throughout the final episode but it’s never the right time because Sarah is not ready to hear their story, but at the beach it’s the right time because she asks for their story? That Chuck unleashes a mother lode of emotions in her and then finally gives her the magical kiss?
And it’s fine that we don’t see all this the first time around. I sure didn’t. That’s why I came to this site, to find answers, to see what others thought about it. But how can we not see it after it’s been pointed out?
No, she would never say something like that. She does not ask for the kiss because she thinks it’s going to give her her memories back. The scene is clear about this. When Chuck mentions Morgan’s idea about the magical kiss, Sarah chuckles in disbelief at the silly idea. Chuck himself starts saying it’s a nutty idea (although he half-hopes it’s true), but watch Sarah. She interrupts him. She pointedly looks at Chuck and asks for the kiss. She knows what she is doing, what this means to Chuck. She is telling him that she wants to be with him. And look at Chuck. He looks at her with gratitude, love, and relief because he also understands what this means, that she is not asking for the kiss because she thinks she’s going to get her memories out of it (she just laughed at the idea), but because she wants to be with him.
That is the reason for the kiss.
The final arc put them in the worst possible scenario and proved Quinn wrong. Chuck will get a woman like Sarah, no matter what because he is awesome and loving and her soulmate. Once this point is made, there is no reason whatsoever for them not to be rewarded with Sarah’s memories since the memories were suppressed in the first place to make this very point.
This is how fiction works.
Karen I don’t believe the finale allows for such an extreme negative assumption. It is true we don’t KNOW that Sarah got her memories back. BUT, she set out to “find herself”. Not return to a life she was disgruntled with. We had been told many times through the show that Chuck changed her, made her more than she had been. So I think it’s only rational to conclude “finding herself” would absolutely and only mean finding Chuck.
And she already had. You keep diminishing the things we were told by the show itself. Sarah claimed, more than once, that without Chuck she was nothing but a spy. And yet when Beckman offered her a job she said no. She was NOT running back to DC or off with her dad. She was on a path that could only lead to Chuck.
And it did. This was not left to our assumption. She went someplace special, where only Chuck would find her. Did she know that? Maybe not consciously, but it’s what she did.
And when Chuck found her, she asked for the story she had so far rejected. She was ready for their story. And then we saw her react! This wasn’t some little thing! Tough and fearless Sarah was sitting on the beach, laughing and crying with her husband. Really openly too. Big laughter. Then she asked for a kiss. C’mon! That’s not subtle!
There is NO WAY Chuck and Sarah went different directions that night. Whatever she did or did not remember, she was ready to go home. She might have used the guest room for a few nights, but not for long. We already saw the biggest part of Sarah’s healing start.
The only ambiguity we are left with is how much and how fast she remembered details. Chuck and Sarah were fine.
I will always agree the finale failed to show enough, and failed to hit the right emotional tone. A failure to execute. Know that all too many viewers were left feeling uncertainty about what came next. But I really am positive all is well. It is a little more clear in the extended cut, the original version should be banished!
Agreed, it’s one thing to say that the finale did not give us the “white picket fence” ending we wanted, but I think it is severely disingenuous to suggest that it doesn’t end on a hopeful, optimistic way. Sarah, accepts Chuck on that beach, she asks for their story and wants him to kiss her. That is the only detail that matters, to ignore or diminish it is just us projecting what we wanted to see and the very end onto what is actually happening. I’m of the mind that if one doesn’t believe things are okay, or will be no matter how long it takes then, you don’t actually have faith in Chuck and Sarah as individuals or a couple.
Yes, Sarah lost visceral memories, but she did not lose her attraction to Chuck or her gut feeling concerning him, she is even shown to repeat various habits concerning her life over those five years. These clear indicators exist in both 5×12 and the finale.
I just want to point out that, by Karen’s logic that inferences are not facts, we don’t know that Roger and Eve make love at the end of North by Northwest because we don’t see it, even though the movie ends (and forgive the graphic image) with a train entering a tunnel.
And if Chuck had ended with 3.13 Other Guy, we wouldn’t know that Chuck and Sarah make love in the Paris hotel room because we don’t see it. We only see Chuck’s All Star Chuck shoe and the Eiffel tower.
In the series finale, we have two inferences: a very apparent one (like the two ones above) that Chuck and Sarah are together after the kiss (that’s why she asks for their story and for the kiss) and a less apparent one that Sarah will recover her memories.
But, as mentioned already, once we put together that the memories were suppressed in the first place to prove Quinn wrong, there is no reason they won’t come back once Quinn is proved wrong, and especially since the entire last episode is built around putting together the three parts to the two keys: the keys to the Intersect and the key to Sarah.
And I’m not even going into all the other symbolism in the last episode, from its optimistic tone to Berlin (where the wall fell) to the song “Take on Me” (both the lyrics and the video), to the fairy-tale ending of all other characters right before the fairy-tale magical kiss between Sarah (“Princess” in Hebrew) and her Prince Charming.
@Francesco Scinico, everything I’ve been writing here and the reason why I went to find confort and insights on sites like this, I can sum it up by the shock I had at the end of the series.
When I want something dense, I look for a book, a movie or a series with that theme. When I want a “cult thing” I watch Godard. On the other hand, I also appreciate light things, like Brazilian soap operas – it’s great to be playing on TV without paying attention – where the ending is always happy for all the good guys.
So it’s all about expectation. I was watching a fairy-tale spy-comedy history, which had at its core a wonderfully romance well played by Zach L. & Ivonne S., who were almost there in their dream place and then, abruptly, it was taken away from them and from all of us viewers through an old writing trick, memory loss stuff (that had already been used twice in the series!!).
I’m here always talking about my perspective watching the series. I was amazed with the series dynamics, with the romance… I was able to get through the “black box” (S03E01-13) with small wounds, but the ending was beyond my limits as a viewer. The sequence that starts with Sarah’s kidnapping and goes to her talking with Chuck at the fountain (the end of S05E12) is very, very heavy, dark. Sarah’s line text to Chuck ”
I just wanted to tell you that I believe you. I believe everything that you told about us. BUT, THE TRUTH IS Chuck, I DON’T FEEL IT. Eveything that you told me about us and our story I JUST… I DON’T FEEL IT”. This speech touched my feelings a lot – in a bad way. It was a hard shock, maybe because I’m a woman and more sentimental. I really think it was destructive and – to me – unnecessary. I strongly believe they didn’t need to have gone that far at this point. And they went so far with that line of speech that even with the beautiful final scene on the beach I can’t recover myself as a Chuck’s viewer and fan. This strongly dramatic scene wasn’t balanced at any point in S05E13, which, to make the things worse, finishes with an open-ending.
Reading a lot about it, now I know that Sarah might not be telling the truth in this scene, that when she’s lying to Chuck she throws her eyes away down and to the right.. But, again, I was watching a TV show. I wasn’t expecting a twist that led it to such a dark place, as it was done. I felt it was “different”, well development, but for a TV series where normally everything is clear at a first view, I really couldn’t understand what happened. In fact, I still don’t understand.
I completely agree Karen that going too dark for the finale was a major mistake. I think “Baby” is the last very good episode of the series, and in many ways it is an ideal place to end it.
But that said, Sarah was lying when she said she didn’t “feel it”. That’s not even a hard conclusion to draw, we just saw her watching her mission logs and bawling her eyes out. She felt it all the way through, and she knows exactly what she’s lost. That is a tragedy. But also, in the end the end she does something about it and decides to reclaim what was lost.
Karen, a question I’m curious about, if I may: had the ending been more typical – say, Sarah flashes and all her memories come back – would you be here, writing about it?
Karen,
I think your strong emotional reaction to the finale is great evidence that you love the show, you care about the characters, and that, for better or for worse, the final arc and the final scene pack a strong emotional punch.
We can all agree on this. Even Kelly Dean Jolley wrote his Chuck book because the final scene impacted him powerfully. He would never have written it if the finale had been more bland, more traditional, more soap opera-like.
I think your expectation of the show is good: it’s a light-hearted show a bit of drama to give it weight. The drama rests on Sarah’s shoulders. She is the dramatic anchor of the show. She is what gives it weight. Kudos to the writers for writing one of by absolute favorite female characters and kudos to Yvonne for making it come alive in such a beautiful and rich way.
But I also think in all love that there is a certain failure to read the emotional and narrative beats of the show on the part of many viewers, and we should debate whether this is due to the creators or to the viewers. This is very apparent in season 3a and in the final arc of the series.
In your case about the final arc, your emotional focus is on the dark aspects of it, the harrowing scene with Sarah being kidnapped by Quinn and two train cars being separated (powerful, powerful scene), Sarah’s memories being suppressed by Quinn, Sarah’s sobs and tears while watching her own video logs, the heart-breaking fountain scene at the end of 5.12 when Sarah tells Chuck she doesn’t feel it and says goodbye.
(By the way, Sarah is not lying to Chuck when she says she doesn’t feel it. At this point, she truly does not feel the feelings she sees in the video logs. What she does feel is the loss of them, the knowledge that she had those feelings and Quinn stole them from her, and that’s why she wants revenge.)
These are all powerful scenes. The fact that these scenes pack a punch is a credit to the writers and the actors. Emotions are good. A boring show is a bad show because other shows are just one remote click away.
But here is the thing. The scenes above are just half the story. There’s the other half that is equally important and equally powerful.
And here is the other thing. This show is layered. It always was. It’s not a season-3 or a series finale thing. This is a show by nerds for nerds about the nerd getting the goddess.
And nerds are not satisfied with insipid, one-dimensional stories and characters. Nerds figure things out, like Chuck with his diagrams on the back of Tron posters.
Nerds figure out that the point of the final arc is to prove Quinn wrong, that the nerd will get the goddess no matter what the scenario is because the nerd is, unironically speaking, awesome. Nerds figure out that 5.12 is about the goddess believing the nerd with her head while 5.13 is about the goddess trusting the nerd with her heart. The Head and the Heart, you see? That’s what love is all about. Nerds figure out that 5.12 ends at night, with a “goodbye” while 5.13 starts in the morning with the nerd fighting that goodbye with the encouragement of his team. Nerds figure out the three parts of the two keys: the key to the pristine copy of the Intersect and the key to the pristine version of Sarah (the Sarah Bartowski we see in 5.10 and 5.11), and the nerd gets rewarded with both once he puts together the three parts to both because he has shown again and again that he deserves both.
So, sure, the final kiss does not show us that the memories come back, but it does not need to because we nerds figure it out (or are supposed to) by watching the final arc and thinking about it.
This is a show by nerds for nerds about nerds. It’s a celebration of the nerd.
It was never meant to be a soap opera.
I agree, and personally I have always found it rather backwards that an audience quite often feels the need to force their perspective onto the author. The whole point of writing a story is that it is YOUR story to tell. Audiences certainly have right to their own opinions of said story, they do not however have any right to dictate how the author goes about telling the story. They did not create it, they did not spend years writing it just to be made to feel like they should tell it differently than they envisioned.
That’s why I have a great deal of respect for the Chuck finale because it’s almost as if Fedak, in writing the end the way he did, bequeathed CHUCK and everything that it is as a show to its fans. That’s pretty awesome (not on purpose I swear)
Josh, I want to pump the breaks on the How I Met Your Mother comparison. Ted refuses to marry Tracy until a decade after she bears him two children, after trying to marry like five other women, marries her in a bar, and then runs from her death bed to the woman he actually was in love with all along. Both characters are degraded by that ending.
Whatever your problems with the Chuck finale, the show doesn’t do anything to denigrate the characters themselves. You might say that it essentially kills Sarah, but her and Chuck’s fidelity is never put in doubt.
I’m going to disagree with you about HIMYM mostly because I watch that show constantly, more in fact than I ever rewatched Chuck (and I have rewatched Chuck a lot though not recently. Yes, for the audience Ted goes right back to Robin from Tracey’s death. However, the key thing you have to take into account is that this lack of time passing exists only for the audience. Within the context of the show it has been six years since Tracy’s death and Ted has to be assured by his children that it’s okay to pursue Robin. I think removed from the nine years spent watching live this is much easier to notice as is Barney and Robin’s divorce, because it is shown multiple times throughout the series that they don’t have what it takes to sustain a long term relationship. As soon as the passion and romance wear off, they self-destruct. You can literally see signs of it in season 9 before they even make it to the isle.
Anyway the main reason I brought up HIMYM is not because the last episodes compare to CHUCK at all, but people’s reaction, negative in most cases IS very similar. It is another finale that I often see misinterpreted as making no sense or betraying character growth when that just isn’t the case. Ted, finally learns to take life as it happens instead of trying to force things to happen. Barney commits to the only girl that truly matters, his daughter, and Robin finally realizes that a career won’t always make you happy AND how regrets can make us miserable.
It’s also worth noting that Ted and Robin don’t break up because they stopped loving each other, they break up because they different life goals and that oppositional timing means that staying together would only hurt them if they continue the romantic relationship
I watch the show literally every day so while I don’t often paint myself as an expert on a TV show I am definitely a total expert on HIMYM. I can agree that the finale and final season are not executed well enough to understand the things I have said especially on first viewing but it’s all there plane as day once your perspective is not clouded by the chemistry of the actors or nine years of anticipation
I never said the HIMYM finale made no sense, I said it denigrates the characters of Ted and Tracy. For Ted, that’s an acceptable choice, as the show spends nine years making it clear the extent to which he wants only the perfect, and the cruelty he is willing to passively exert on his partners while hiding behind a facade of niceness. For Tracy, it is sad that she commits to such a person, and a reversal of her decision to look for better.
I grant you that Chuck’s ending is also controversial (I find it wonderful), but there are two prominent distinctions. First, given Chuck’s content, it’s a departure in form. HIMYM had always presented a tragic bent, and spent a year thoroughly preparing its viewers for the events in its ending. Chuck establishes a clear pattern of protecting Chuck/Sarah from personal harm; its assault on Sarah can be seen as a violation of an implicit promise.
Second, HIMYM’s ending is awful (in the tragic sense), but it follows logically from show’s contents, and presents just desserts for its main characters (Tracy excepted). Chuck’s ending is cruel to people who could not possibly deserve it less, and in that sense, unjust.
That’s not a criticism of Chuck. Unjust things happen to good people, and Chuck and Sarah’s response to that injustice is heroic, brave, and memorable. I love it. But it’s valid for Karen and Dave to feel betrayed by it nonetheless.
I lot of ugly things did happen to Chuck and Sarah at different times. No doubt the finale arc was jarring for the extent of it. But I think the hitch for many of us is, it took some time and detective work after to decide if it was even an acceptable ending (which at the time I defined as “Chuck and Sarah are together, and happy about it”).
I reached my peace with it in about 30 minutes. But that initial reaction was bitter and disappointed. And that remains the major take away. Over the years, I have soften a lot about 5.13. Especially that last scene. But overall I remain somewhat dissatisfied with the arc.
Probably not.
But even then I would still not have enjoyed the ending, especially the S05E12 episode (each peace of it).
As @atcDave pointed out, maybe this is the reason we still don’t have a sequel. The worry about investing in a project that ended in a very controversial way.
@Francesco wrote: “But ending the story with a traditional happy ending was never Fedak’s style. None of his season finales were like that.”
That is absolutely not true. All of the season enders up to the finale have an unambiguous happy ending. While there was no official end to Season 1 due to the writer’s strike, Season 2 end with Sarah staying with Chuck and Chuck getting Intersect 2.0. Season 3.1 ends with Chuck and Sarah together in a Paris hotel room and consummating their relationship. Season 3,2 ends with Chuck and Sarah defeating Shaw and Sarah telling Chuck she fell in love with a regular guy, not a superspy. Season 4.1 ends with Chuck’s proposal of marriage. Season 4.2 ends with the wedding and Volkoff turning his fortune over to Chuck and Sarah. All of those are “traditional happy endings.”
What sets Fedak’s Chuck finales apart is that they usually also offer a theme for the next season. Ring ends with Chuck getting a superpower he’ll have to deal with in Season 3. Other Guy ends with Chuck and Sarah as a couple and what that brings in Season 3.2. Ring II ends with the start of the search for his mom in Season 4.1. Push Mix ends with Chuck and Sarah embarking on a marriage in Season 4.2. Cliffhanger gives us the team as indy spies and an intersected Morgan in Season 5. And, I personally believe Goodbye presaged a hoped-for renewal, which I think would have started with several episodes centering on Sarah’s memory issues.
Fedak said he likes endings that imply more story.
Season 2 ends with Chuck’s “Guys, I know kung fu.” A cliffhanger.
(Sarah is ready to quit the spy life, but Chuck doesn’t know it and re-intersects, thereby joining the spy life. They will be separated for another year.)
Season 3 ends with Chuck discovering Orion’s lair. A cliffhanger.
Season 4 ends with Morgan wearing the Intersect glasses and his “Guys, I know kung fu.” A cliffhanger.
Season 5 ends with a magical kiss at the beach. A cliffhanger.
(But after all the secondary characters also get their fairy-tale goodbye. Hint, hint.)
The mid-season finales in season 3 and 4 don’t count because, by then, Fedak knew he had additional episodes and was already filming them. In fact, Fedak said he scaled back the 3.13 mid-season finale.
Nothing sets the series finale apart from the other season finales. The series ending implies more story just like all the other ones before it—Chuck has the pristine copy of the Intersect (more adventures) and kisses Sarah (more adventure) by the beach at sunset in the same spot where they watched their first sunrise in the pilot. In fact, we are even told what some of those adventures are going to me: a house with a white picket fence, babies, a cybersecurity firm.
The only difference with the series finale is that Fedak knew there was not going to be a new season, and that was it. He planned that finale at the end of season 4 and mentioned it to WB/NBC at that time. It was all intentional. And that is why he mentioned those adventures in the episodes immediately before the final arc.
You’re comparing things that aren’t the same, and finished with a falsehood. None of those other “cliffhangers” had significant emotional impact. They were mere hooks for the story to come. S5 ends in a potentially devastating way, especially for those who missed the reasons for hope. Completely not the same.
And at the end, Fedak did not know it was the end. He suspected strongly, but knew plans had changed before and they could again. By the time it AIRED he knew it was over, but not while writing it.
Yeah I agree Dave. Actually there is something that REALLY bothers me about the perception of TV production in general nowadays. I’ve gotten into pretty heated arguments because people seem to think that those in charge of a show have control over budget, number of episodes, etc. The network controls all of that. In general network TV seasons are outlined ahead of time by the showrunner who usually divides episodes amongst the writer’s room and they write and produce episodes on a weekly basis for several months. This is a hectic endeavor and doesn’t leave time to pick apart the season.
It is easy for us to watch TV and pick apart mistakes we see, but that’s because we have TIME to do such a thing. Fedak had an idea for the end and followed through on it. It’s not like he can look at what he’s doing halfway through and suddenly pivot. That would halt production.
.
Sorry for the mini-rant I just feel like a lot of people think, writers set out to anger their audience and I don’t think that’s the case at all. Nobody concives and idea thinking it will be poorly received.
Emotional impact is good. That’s half the point of a story. It’s supposed to be emotional. It’s supposed to stay with you. Writing a hauntingly beautiful ending is not a vice. It’s a virtue.
Quick: do I remember the ending of the two soap operas I watched? Nope. Do I remember the ending of the Hallmark movies I watched? Nope. Do I even remember the ending scene of some of my favorite movies, from The Last of the Mohicans to Die Hard? Not really, no.
Do I remember the end of Chuck? You bet.
Fedak did say on Chuck Versus the Podcast that he knew season 5 would be the last season. Even if he only strongly suspected it, he wrote an ending that had to stand on its own, without a new season or a new movie that may never come (and never came). And he did.
If viewers don’t get the happy ending the first time, it’s fine. Not everybody gets things the first time around. Do we all get the depth of the great works of literature the first time around? Did we all get Inception or all the nuances of The Godfather the first time around? I doubt it. But artists should not dumb down a story merely to appease the audience. On the contrary, the audience should strive to understand the work.
Chuck is layered. We discover something new every time we watch it. And it’s not just the nuances in the acting. It’s the visual symbolism, it’s the music, it’s the internal counterpoint and the external references. That is why, unlike soap operas, it has a great rewatchability factor.
Josh and Dave make good points about the problems with TV production. That does not mean, however, that the problem affected Chuck that much. In other words if Chuck had been cancelled at the end of season 3a, we would have had a true ending (Chuck and Sarah together, with Shaw and the Ring defeated). If the show had ended with season 4:13, we would have had a true ending (Chuck and Sarah engaged after defeating Volkoff).
There was always a clear path and a clear progression in Chuck and Sarah’s story. In fact, paradoxically, the fact that the show was always on the verge of cancellation, helped speed up their story. One of the writers said on Chuck Versus the Podcast that, had the show been a success, they would have prolonged Chuck and Sarah’s will-they-won’t-they for a long time because, well, why would they mess with a winning formula, right?
So, yes, there are problems in TV productions, but they helped Chuck instead of harming it. We have a story, a 5-year plan in which Sarah turns a nerd into James Bond while Chuck turns “nothing but a spy” into a woman with a full life.
And the final arc is just an excuse to (a) bring us down memory lane and (b) show that Sarah would fall in love with Chuck even under the worst possible scenario—the nerd will get the goddess, no matter what.
With that point being made, the story is done. There is nothing to add to it.
I do think emotional impact is good. Really it’s needed for a show to be memorable and stand out. But too many writers take that to mean negative. The shows I remember best are the ones that left me with a happy buzz, that even includes a few Hallmark movies. And Francesco I really am sorry for whatever memory problems leave you unable to remember the end of Last of the Mohicans! That was dynamite!
But the writer’s comments in hindsight mostly serve to highlight how flawed their own understanding of what was happening on screen was. No doubt I would have quit the show if the S3 tedium had continued any longer. In fact, it’s only the already high level of investment I felt at the end of S2 that got me through as it was. I have quit so many shows for similar offenses, once they reach the point where they are diminishing the characters like that I usually tune out. Just not my thing at all. I hardly care about the destination if the journey is miserable. Of course the reverse is true too, an unworthy destination is uniquely able to destroy the best of journeys.
I don’t think i ever said that you said that the HiMYM finale doesn’t make sense, That is simply the criticism I most often see directed at the finale by fans who despise it. It’s much less valid than the criticisms directed at Chuck’s finale, at least that’s how I see things.
I will just agree to disagree on Ted and Tracy otherwise this conversation will stray too far away from my reason for bringing up HIMYM in the first place which is that both CHUCK and HIMYM both have in common that, those who hate the finale, for whatever reason is personal to them, can’t see the point the writers intended in writing the finale the way they did.
I’m not saying that they don’t have the right to feel however they feel about it either, just that they should keep in mind that it is unlikely that most TV writers intend to write a finale that is controversial or poorly received.
Apparently, I really need to do a better job of clarifying my point most of the time 😅
Above comment @Arthur
It also seems I type to slowly sometimes as it is the only explanation I can find for why my pervious comment ended up at the bottom of the page.
Oh well , I’ve enjoyed the conversation regardless
“just that they should keep in mind that it is unlikely that most TV writers intend to write a finale that is controversial or poorly received.”
Really? It seems to me that the Chuck writers really wanted to do something “different” for the series finale. And for it happens, to destroy the heroine wouldn’t be a problem. In my opinion, it was premeditated.
Premeditated in the sense that they intended to end the show the way he did, yes. But I don’t think Fedak thought that his decision would be received so poorly, not based on how excited he was at the prospect of having Chuck and Sarah fall in love again.
I don’t buy it! I’m not a professional in this area, nor even an expert. But they would have to be very naive to not imagine that all this “creativity” could result in something controversial. Controversial to not use a hard stronger term.
You would be surprised how many writers, especially in TV, don’t see beyond the scope of what they are writing😂
I do think Fedak was convinced he’d come up with a beautiful, perfect ending. And for many viewers he obviously was right. I think those of us who were unhappy with it are MOSTLY a subset of those who disliked S3. And that may be key. I feel like they expended every last bit of goodwill and I had no capacity left for “benefit of the doubt”. I know there are exceptions, we’ve heard from some here (who loved S3 but disliked the finale). But I do think that’s the majority case.
But Fedak will always be satisfied enough with his “genius” finale it will never be re-edited, no how simple a fix might be. So we have to live with it and find our satisfaction in fan fiction; epilogue stories are in abundance!
I do think, if we are ever fortunate enough to get a movie, that they will go to pains to show Chuck and Sarah as happy and together.
The point of the final arc is not to destroy the goddess but to give her glory and celebrate her handiwork. That is why the show ends at the beach where it essentially started.
Look at Chuck at the beach in the pilot. He is lost, scared, confused, far from the man he should be. Look at Chuck at the beach in the finale: he is manly, loving, selfless.
Look at Chuck in 1.10, who uses Sarah as a shield when Bryce points a gun at them in Casey’s apartment. Now, look at Chuck at the end of 5.12, who becomes Sarah’s shield when Quinn shoots at her.
Look at Chuck on that rooftop at the end of the pilot episode, who says, “Call Bryce, he’s the guy who can save the day.” Now, look at Chuck on that rooftop in the finale, who self-sacrificially says he can’t use the glasses to restore Sarah’s memories because he “must save” the people at the concert hall.
This Chuck was entirely built by Sarah through five years of love, encouragement, and example. He is put in these scenarios that reference the first season to show us Sarah’s handiwork. This Chuck is Sarah’s crowning achievement.
Conversely, Chuck’s crowning achievement is turning “nothing but a spy” into a woman in want of a full life. And guess what? The final arc beautifully time-warps this for us viewers as well—it brings Sarah back to her “nothing but a spy” status and lets us viewers see her catch up emotionally with Chuck by the time she asks for the kiss at the beach.
Guys, Chuck is like an iceberg. Don’t just look at the 10% above the surface that everyone else sees. Look under the surface.
That’s what nerds do. That’s what Chuck and Sarah always did for each other.
This show is a layered fairy tale. If we look at it with cynical yes, we have not grasped the heart of the show.
That’s why Fedak is perfectly right when he says that that, if we have to ask whether Sarah recovers her memories, we haven’t paid attention.
I think many people often forget that there is more than one method to celebrate character growth. Looking again, at HIMYM, I most often encounter people who insist that the finale ruined Barney’s character growth, yet they forget that Barney at the beginning of show would NEVER father a child if he got a girl pregnant. The Barney at the end of the show however has dealt with his abandonment issues and is more than happy being a single father. Just because he could not be in a permanent relationship does not mean that his character has been destroyed.
Chuck also ends by asking the audience to remember where things began and examine the ways the character’s experiences have changed them. That is still a valid type of ending, even if it doesn’t wrap the story up in a neat little bow.
I think it is fascinating how the discussion about the finale continues after all these years. This is not to say it is a bad thing. In a way, whatever interpretation of the ending or the evaluation as to whether it was satisfactory or not, the fact is that it was compelling and people felt it viscerally.
Perhaps the nature of the way the show ended has somewhat obscured the real thing that I believe a lot of people are reacting to: that regardless of how it ended, it came to an end. Even if it was unambiguously happy, Chuck was done. Folks were going to be sad even if the finale was joyous. I certainly was. I still am. 5.13 is actually a pretty good episode but the melancholy feeling is inescapable because it was the end of the road.
Personally, as endings go, I actually think it was pretty good, but it will always be bittersweet because something I valued, was not just entertained by but valued, was now in the past.
The end of something is never easy, because we grow attached to things and people that we value. Humans by our very nature want to connect with that which entertains us to find meaning in life through our experiences, good and bad. When something ends we can never get the experience, of having experienced a particular thing for the first time, again, ever. But as was said on supernatural “Nothing ever really ends, does it?”
No, not when it comes to stories they live forever in our imaginion
I think there is a lot of truth in that. I’m sure I would have been a bit down however it ended.
@actDave … if we’re going to go deep down into all the episodes and arcs, then to me even Chuck vs the Baby is not ok, not enjoyable. Despite the touching and really beautiful ending scene where the whole family is finally reunited (except Sarah’s father), we have here the beginning of the Sarah Walker’s character deconstruction, preparing the terrain for the last 2 episodes. A character who had been the heroine untill that point and who had already gone through the most difficult part of her journey, is now presented to us having a past as an insane and bipolar killer like “Matrix style” (the movie). For a second, when she told Graham that she had taken care of the baby, I thought she had really given her “the worst end” – death.
This is a personality that has nothing to do with the Sarah Walker that we were shown when she met Chuck in the pilot episode and I learned to love throughout the show. Also that she is a hypocrite person: she always demanded from Chuck that there were no lies and secrets between them, but then we learn that until that moment she had not opened up nothing about her mother to Chuck. And by consequence, that she doesn’t trust Chuck. Hence she wasn’t able to be vulnerable, that she didn’t give herself fully to Chuck and maybe she doesn’t love him as much as we’ve been led to believe. Perhaps Heather Chandler (vs. the Cubic Z) is right in saying that Sarah is exactly like her.
@Francesco Scinico About your statement that the show was designed specifically for a nerd audience, I don’t believe it. After all, the show was aired on an open TV channel (Is that how it is called? when it’s not a paid channel), so with the objective of reaching the highest possible number of viewers. And, of course, I’m not a typical American nerd, nor could I be because I wasn’t born in the United States. I apologize to you if I’m intruding on an American cultural product designed especially for a specific group of people. I’m going to ask Prime Video to remove the show from the Brazilian catalog and replace all American series with Brazilian soap operas.
This brings up something that bugs me about TV shows in general and I don’t think it is region specific. That is, people don’t generally allow for TV characters to be as flawed as real human beings truly. We expect them to start in one place, end in another and if a show has the audacity to have the characters go backwards or change their minds, or they are still flawed by the end then it is criticized as bad writing that never should have happened.
I think that this is a contradiction because we want characters who feel like real people but we don’t allow for them to make mistakes, to be flawed, to struggle trying to become better people. I am genuinely confused by that
@karen–
I rarely agree with Francesco, but he is right to say Chuck was a show aimed at a primarily male audience. That’s why you MUST temper your strong (albeit valid) feelings about Sarah. Much as we cherished her, the show was about Chuck. Not about her and Chuck. For your own sanity, you must accept that because that is the show the showrunners created and the show the writers put out there.
Sarah, like Casey and Morgan, was there to drive Chuck’s story.
Now as for Sarah’s character. Of course, she was a stone-cold killer before Chuck. Casey himself says it several times. You see it from the beginning, when Chuck flashes on her past in the early episodes. What makes Sarah interesting as a character is that she grows and wants more than that after meeting Chuck. But even that character growth revolves around Chuck because the show IS about Chuck.
It’s also why, in Baby, Sarah tells her mother about the changes she’s been through–but credits it to Chuck “taught me.” The show is always filtered through the lens of the Chuck character.
This is hard, I know. Many of us (including me) find the Sarah character more compelling than Chuck. But we have to realize the show, first and foremost, was about Chuck’s life. That’s how the writers did it.
No @WilmaGreenstreet , actually none of this is a hard thing to me. This is just TV, entertainment. And of course, I came here to talk about it because I was curious. Nothing serious. I like to discuss (not argue) about light things.
I think maybe you’re making up your own Sarah Walker. She was shown to be a top agent and accomplished killer from the start. She retained her humanity from the start, but I think Chuck’s influence helped her to hang on to that, expand on it. Baby clearly showed both aspects of this character in both her pre-Chuck form, and later more mature form.
Off topic here, but since people are talking about Chuck again thought I’d throw this out there…
Almost all of the discussion about the show, particularly since it ended is focused on the development of the Chuck / Sarah relationship and rightly so as that is really the underlying framework of the show. When viewed through this lens, it seems many people really enjoy the second half of S3 and all of S4 when they are together and maturing as a real couple. I completely get that.
However, at the same time, the other parts of the show, the spy stuff and the Buy More, really start to suffer from a lot of familiar TV workplace comedy situations where they have to change things as seasons pass and things get progressively more ridiculous (e.g. The Office post Michael Scott where all the main characters take turns as manager).
In Chuck, there are a bunch of things that water down the whole show for me:
– The way seemingly anyone can get the Intersect, even though no one can use it as
well or with as few side effects as Chuck. Just feels like TV writers kicking around
ideas after the well of original ideas has run dry.
– The stakes of the spy stuff seems to go WAY DOWN. Obviously in a TV show,
neither of the lead characters is going to die on a mission, but as the show goes on it
becomes a bit silly. Chuck Versus the First Bank of Evil, where they are working
though their pre-wedding issues while fighting off many, many gun toting guards is
so over the top it just spoils the whole spy side of the show for me.
– Similarly, the integration of the Buy More characters into the spy world just makes
the stakes of the spy world seem so small.
I’ve watched Seasons 1, 2 and 3 multiple times. The final arc of Season 2 is the peak for me. Seasons 4 and 5, I can only get through the major ‘plot point’ episodes but haven’t even seen all of the ‘filler’ episodes as they just seem like dumb TV and just turn them off. The delicate balance of the various parts of the show gets so out of whack that I just can’t do it.
Anyone else out there feel this way?
The show definitely took on a lighter tone with S4. Doesn’t bother me, I actually prefer it in some ways and I find this period the most re-watchable of the whole series.
I’m pretty sure at least part of the change ties into budget cuts. S2 was a high point for the show in terms of production quality, simply because they had the most money to spend on it.
There was also some behind the scenes shuffling, Fedak emerged as the primary show runner as Schwartz went off to other projects. I think this was expected from the start, the show was based on Fedak’s original idea. He was partnered with Schwartz because he had no show runner experience. By the end of S3 Fedak was ready to take over. I think from the start he gets the credit for the show’s blend of action and comedy, that is his thing entirely. But a lot of the tonal difference will come from his expanding role. To me, that’s all good.
Agree entirely about the budget cuts hurting the show. The drama of the ‘Paris’ scenes is seriously undercut by the cheapness of the sets.
The tonal difference as you call it just constantly pulls me out of suspension of disbelief. I think I’d watch a half hour show call Chuck and Sarah and skip the Buy More and most of the spy missions after S3ep13…
Yeah we’ve discussed a lot of this! Most of us, including me (!), would have been perfectly happy with a lot less Buy More in the later seasons. My only qualification on that is maybe more, IF they had made a bigger thing of Chuck and Sarah as owners in the last season. Sarah clashing with Buy Morons seems an obvious source of humor. And Chuck and Sarah being outed as the owners, and having to figure out how to run things while still doing their “real” job seems like it has some potential.
But the better path would likely have been total disengagement. Chuck moves on, the store goes its own way.
My main reason for thinking about the first option though is that every casual fan of the show I knew was far more invested in Buy More antics and just loved Jeffster and Morgan. That may be the most dramatic split I’ve seen between casual fans and more invested fans (and I define more invested as anyone who would seek out a fan site!)
Maybe a Happy Days / LaVerne & Shirley spinoff situation. Chuck & Sarah from 8:00 to 8:30. Buy More from 8:30 to 9:00. Characters show up in the other show several times a season. And let each be it’s own thing…
Once Chuck gained confidence in who he could be, his fit in the Buy More world just doesn’t work anymore…and making the Buy More characters step up to operate in Chuck’s new world takes away their essence AND cheapens the changes that Chuck has made since seemingly Jeff and Lester can too…
That could work! Although I think Ernie Davis Had the suggestion a half hour comedy “Buy More” and an hour long Spy Family caper “Chuck and Sarah” (or “The Secret and the Agent”). More is better…
Obviously all a pipe dream.
I have to admit as much as prefer S4 and S5, viewing the show objectively the only season where their is a single overarching plot from beginning to end is S3, talk about irony!
Ha, I don’t need it to be The Wire, but the mission of the week format just wears thin after a couple seasons…I suspect conceptually they were paying homage to shows they love from the 60s-80s that had that format, but at some point if you pay homage to a ‘dumb’ format you kind of become a ‘dumb’ show (with some good characters in this case)…
To be clear, my point is not that this is a show aimed at a male American audience. The show is loved by males and females from all over the world. My point is that the target audience is primarily nerds and people who have the same personality traits as nerds. I doubt that alpha males identify with Chuck or have the patience to put up with his nebbishy behavior during the first two seasons. I myself am a nerdy jock and felt occasionally exasperated with S1-2 Chuck the first time I watched the show. There is a reason the show was always a niche one. Not everyone will identify with Chuck.
That said, the people who are going to enjoy the show the most are the ones who can identify with Chuck AND can appreciate all the references to the American shows and movies AND the songs being used in the show. Fedak said they wanted to make “the best show of 1985.” He made the show he would have loved to watch when he was a kid.
And yes, the story is about Chuck. The story is told from his point of view, but that does not mean Fedak throws Sarah under the bus. This is not an “either or” scenario. Since the show is about Chuck, and since Chuck loves Sarah more than his own life, Chuck’s story is automatically also about Sarah.
And the final beach scene highlights the core theme of the show: Chuck’s and Sarah’s growth throughout the show. It’s not a coincidence that the final episode makes all the characters start back where they were in the pilot (they even wear the same clothes) and then time-warps them into the people they have grown to become thanks to one another’s influence. The final episode is a synopsis of the show, a walk down memory lane for the viewers. And this is one of the two points made by the episode, the other being that Sarah will fall in love with Chuck no matter what the scenario is because they are soulmates.
Once both points are made, of course Sarah will recover her memories. Fedak doesn’t need to show it to us because he gives all the clues in the final arc, and nerds, like good spies, follow the clues.
And this was always his style. He never told us why Sarah was cold toward Chuck in 1.11. We had to figure it out. He never told us why Sarah never ran into Chuck’s arms at the end of 3.02. We had to figure it out. He never told us why Sarah interrupted Chuck during their heart-to-heart conversation in 3.10. We had to figure it out. And so on in many other parts of the story.
There’s nothing different about the series finale. Fedak gives us plenty of clues that Chuck and Sarah will be fine and that Sarah will recover her memories. We just need to follow the clues.
Like good spies.
Unfortunately, I think entitlement plays a role in why the series finale, at least initially is met with such dislike. We feel entitled to not have to look for the clues. I’m in the minority of fans who completely understood Fedak’s intent the moment the show faded to black. I was emotional, not because I was angry but because I thought is the most adorable, heartwarming end to a TV show I have ever watched, and in fact, I immediately wanted to rewatch the show, which I did, constantly for several years. That and my vivid imagination led me to spend two years writing an epilogue I am still very proud of…my mother even turned it into an unpublished book and gave it to me for Christmas a few years ago!
Entitlement is too loaded a term, I would not go there. Viewers SHOULD invest, or the program serves no purpose to its masters. Viewers are what makes the money flow, so as far as that goes they ARE entitled to entertainment. Those making the show have a responsibility to entertain… that or they have a hobby, nothing more.
But anymore “entitlement” smacks of inappropriate claims of privilege or ownership. Viewers deserve to be entertained and have a right, even a responsibility to speak up when something they enjoyed turns into something they do not. Ultimately the business that gets things made will bog down or shrivel up as producers flail around not knowing why no-one wants their product anymore. Indeed we’ve seen some of this happen with the broadcast networks in the time since Chuck ended.
I think we have had, for several years now, a case where more and more product is getting made for an ever shrinking viewership. Some of that comes back to producers not making product that is wanted by much of anyone.
The show has a lot of elements, and people may like some of the elements and not others. For example, I didn’t care for the Buy More parts while my wife loved them. Some people cannot stand the angst of season 3 while others love the raised stakes of the season. Some people hate the finale while others tolerate it and still others love it to pieces.
Then other viewers change their mind about some aspects of the show upon rewatching it. Some people who at first hated the Buy More stuff now love it; others now like the finale when they first scoffed at it.
In the end, it was always going to be difficult for a show like Chuck that mixes different genres to always please everyone.
And this is fine. It was always an acceptable risk. In fact, it was a niche show to begin with, so lots of people were already left out at the gates.
What we viewers should not do, however, is criticize Fedak for staying true to his vision. He had a story to tell and told it coherently and powerfully, even if it wasn’t the story some of us expected or wanted to watch.
And the fact that he told it powerfully is evidenced by the fact that viewers still talk about it over 10 years after the story ended.
He must have done something right. the story turned out pretty good.
Well… if I have anything like a solidified understanding – in my opinion – it is that the writers really thrown Sarah Bartowski under the bus. And they did it to make Chuck bigger, which I think was totally unnecessary.
I assure you. If I start watching a new series or movie and I find out that the producers / writers / showrunners are Josh Schwartz and/or Chris Fedak, I drop it immediately.
@karen —
You’ve got it now. While Sarah was terribly important and some writers really did right by her, she was ultimately part of the supporting cast of the show called Chuck. It was first and always Chuck’s show and Chuck’s journey.
As for not watching anything by Schwartz, I agree. Never have and never will. He’s a one-note, teenaged angst machine. But cut Fedak a little break. This was his first experience as a showrunner. As we say in America, he swung for the fences with the final arc of Chuck and came up a bit short. Given the chance, I think he would do the final arc differently, especially if he knew definitively there were no extra episodes ahead.
I can’t speak for others, but I have often thought about how I would truly feel if we were given a more complete ending. I think, that while I would have been satisfied in the short term. The long term I would find myself asking a nagging question. Are these two soul mates, or did they fall in love and get married because Chuck was lucky enough to wind up with the Intersect in his head and would they still end up together if circumstances had been much less beneficial? I don’t think it’s an accident that Quinn raises this EXACT point just before trying to proof Chuck is just lucky, that the intersect is the reason Chuck and Sarah sustain and grow their relationship.
I can’t say I would believe that they are soulmates if everything was perfect in the end and the show certainly would feel different to rewatch and it would be just another show that came and went without staying with me.
I agree with Josh on the Quinn point. We cannot underestimate the importance of Quinn’s charge at the end of 5.10 that Sarah is out of Chuck’s league. This is the core theme of the show. It’s the same thing that Chuck himself mentioned to Sarah in his break-up speech at the end of 2.03. It’s the same thing Cole said to Sarah at the end of 2.16. It’s the same fear Chuck expressed in 4.08 and 4.09. It’s the same charge made by Shaw in 5.07 (“we all know Sarah is the superior spy”).
So, when Quinn makes the same point, the final arc sets out to shut everyone up by showing that Chuck will get a woman like Sarah even under the worst possible scenario.
Yeah Quinn isn’t just attacking Sarah or Chuck’s life both separately and together, he’s saying that Chuck is a loser who doesn’t deserve the life he’s created for himself. He’s saying that if Sarah is not there that Chuck will be nothing but a loser. He is attacking everything that makes Chuck, Chuck. Qualities he had before Sarah ever came along. That makes Quinn the series best villain in many ways. He is a nobody who doesn’t have a clue how much Chuck has worked to be his best self, he finds out the hard way and that’s extremely satisfying.
So we are converging on the understanding that there was no season 5B or 6 because the writers were stuck in their initial world and didn’t want to move on telling new adventures, such as a couple of equals being the main characters -Chuck and Sarah?
There was no season 5b or 6 because the show’s ratings very poor. Toward the end of the series, a reporter asked the new NBC CEO whether there was going another season, and the CEO laughed at him and mockingly asked, “Have you seen the ratings?” By season 5, the show was pulling an abysmal 0.9 rating in the Nielsen 18-49 demo. Any show below a 2.0 rating was usually not renewed.
A shocking number of fans I knew, didn’t even realize the show had a 5th season. I am a little baffled by this, the information was available from early on. But maybe the S4 finale looked enough like a finale, they were happy to just call it done? No doubt the change in night didn’t help, but I’ve not played the follow the schedule game since 2000 or so. I was baffled by the confusion.
At any rate, S5 was supposed to written as a “probable” series end coming at 5.13.
There was some hope the show would get traction on a new night. Indeed 5.01 Was followed the series premier of Grimm, which became a Friday night phenom and ran 6 full seasons.
But of course no luck. Ratings were miserable, new NBC brass were rude and boorish, and it quickly became apparent Chuck would end at 5.13.
I find it interesting that the very season where all the characters become their fully-realized selves and finally complete their journeys is the one that viewers understand and appreciate the least. Then viewers complain that they get endless “will they, won’t they” story tropes.
The interesting point raised by Karen in this conversation is whether the Sarah we see in 5.08 and 5.12-13 is the same Sarah we see in early season 1.
The real answer is that she is and she isn’t. She isn’t because there is a feminine sweetness to S1 Sarah (despite her bad-assery) that seems absent in 5.08 and 5.12-13. And that is explained by the fact that, in early S1, the show was still finding itself and its characters. In fact, YS even plays early S1 Sarah as if she was in love with Bryce, when later episodes and seasons show that she wasn’t (they were “spy” feelings to contrast them with her “real” feelings for Chuck).
Yet, she is the same Sarah because we can see an edge of “wildcard enforcer” Sarah in 1.02 and a colder, less likable Sarah in 1.11 when she tries to reign in her feelings for Chuck. We are also shown this colder Sarah in 4.09 and we are told in 4.03 that she was like that (and like Heather) before meeting Chuck.
What is definitely false is that this colder Sarah is a monster without morals. Adult Sarah always had morals. We can clearly see it in 5.08 when she is told by Ryker to kill the bad guys at the dining table and she hesitates; she only goes through with it after Ryker reminds her they killed the baby’s parents in cold blood and after she sees the parents’ lifeless bodies on the floor in the same room where the bad guys are celebrating. This scene, of course, ties in with Sarah’s red test, when she could not shoot Eve in cold blood and only shot her out of instincts and fear when she thought Eve was pulling a gun out of her purse. And, of course, we can see that she cares about the baby and saves her life, and we can see that she refuses to blow up Chuck and his team in the Intersect room in 5.12.
The only stretch we have to believe in 5.12 is that she “marries” her Bartowski mark in the course of a mission, but we can see that she instinctively recoils from being intimate with Chuck, and since we buy that Mary was never intimate with Volkoff in the course of her 20-year mission, we can see a scenario where Sarah has a sexless relationship with her traitor mark. Sexless marriages exist in real life, too.
And the fact that the point above is glossed over in 5.12 implies viewers should not focus on it but should focus instead on the central fact of the final arc that even this colder Sarah will fall in love with Chuck. It’s the Rule of Cool.
Quinn’s manipulation has EVERYTHING to do with Sarah’s coldness, he is literally the devil in her ear
Yes, Quinn has a lot to do with it. He steers her belief that Chuck is a traitor responsible for Bryce’s and Graham’s deaths, which clearly informs Sarah’s reaction to Chuck in 5.12, but I think Karen’s point is that Sarah is cold and aloof in 5.13 as well, which is after she knows the truth about Chuck and Quinn. Viewers find it difficult to reconcile 5.13 Sarah with 1.01 Sarah.
I don’t have a problem with it, as I clearly see the progression of Sarah’s character in 5.13 from “nothing but a spy” to a woman who feels and wants a real life.
I don’t think she is cold in 5×13, distance and blut yes but she clearly feels bad that she can’t identify with who she is to Chuck
Yes, and that bluntness and distance work perfectly in the final episode. It is precisely because 5.13 Sarah is blunt and honest that her final request to hear their story and to be kissed is so significant. Sarah knows the full implication of her request and what it means to Chuck. She would never make that request lightly and give Chuck any false hope since she was always brutally blunt with Chuck throughout the episode.
So, we know that that bluntness and distance are there for an excellent reason, but, still, it’s a demeanor that viewers don’t see in 1.01 Sarah, hence their feeling of disconnect between the two Sarahs in their eyes.
In my opinion, Sarah from S05E13 doesn’t even remotely looks like the Sarah of the Pilot Episode. Nothing at all. No empathy, almost any chemistry with Chuck. This is the main reason why it is so difficult for me to buy the 180 twist in the last 4 minutes.
I’ve been trying to make a point here that I think is absolutely important for the final arc. Actually it’s the most important point for me. Ok… Chuck was able to achieve his ultimate goal, “win” Sarah. But which Sarah did he get? The Sarah from S05E12-13, or the pre-kidnapping Sarah from S05E11? Definitely not the same woman. I don’t know if Chuck could keep his love for that Sarah from S05E12-13.
And of course, all of this lead to the question why there hasn’t been a season 5B – 6 or a sequel. Is it because of the worry of investors in investing in something damaged? I have worries about the path that writers could take for a sequel. As for not having a season 5B or 6 yet… well… a series made by nerds for nerds that didn’t want to reinvent itself when it was broadcast on TV. The writers were stuck with the Chuck as a unique main character, when clearly Chuck & Sarah as equals would work better. It helped to lose a lot of audience – as people always say here – for throwing Sarah under the bus in season three (S03E01-13) and at the end of season five (Vs the Baby included – showing a Sarah who doesn’t fully trust Chuck, hence not able to be vulnerable). Throwing Sarah under the bus means throwing Chuck under the bus. And if Chuck’s biggest goal was to “get” Sarah, a damaged Sarah means Chuck hadn’t achieved his goal.
In response I borrow from Shakespeare: Love is not love Which alters when it alteration finds…it is an ever-fixed mark That looks on tempests and is never shaken… Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks, But bears it out even to the edge of doom..
This I think highlights the message of the finale. Chuck, loves Sarah despite what has happened to her, wether or not she is “the same” does not matter to him, his love persists even though this situational doom
Again I think you overstate the “damage”. Sarah compartmentalized well. We saw plenty of that in the first two seasons, it drove Chuck bonkers at times. I agree it made for an ugly depiction in 5.12, but we started seeing more cracks in her mask. By the end of 5.13 she’d lowered her defenses and was ready to get back to her life. I think Chuck would be very happy with the outcome.
Mostly, Sarah of S5 was beautiful person. She was fully Chuck’s partner. And I see no reason to begrudge anything in Baby, she is well familiar that the only way to keep a secret is to never repeat it. So one detail, with her Mom’s life on the line, remains unspoken. That works for me. Even in a couple of least favorite episodes like Curse or Kept Man, Sarah comes across well. It’s Chuck who’s problematic.
More and more I’m fine with the end. I’ll never quite buy the “genius” of it some claim to see. I think the show is often sloppy, and the end was disappointing on several levels. But the characters ended in a good place, Chuck and Sarah are fine. Seriously, read some epilogues. Most of them are far better crafted than the show ever was.
Yeah Dave, i think that is part of the problem, the viewer sees Sarah as damaged and because of that they completely ignore or can’t see that Chuck doesn’t see her as damaged. His words at the beach are important, he is not asking for her love, he is asking for her trust and she grants it once she knows that he doesn’t expect anything more of her than that. It’s almost as if those critical of the finale are so because they can’t see her as anything more than a “damaged woman.”
I don’t understand the criticism of baby either, the more people who know a secret the harder the secret is to keep, and Sarah ultimately admits she should have told Chuck. I don’t blame her for not, because the secret affects other people first and foremost. A child who is sitting on a massive fortune and a mother that agreed to protect said child. It’s not a casual secret, in fact I wouldn’t mention it unless and until it becomes necessary.
And the thing is, anyone who works with such information knows the rules and risks. I worked most of my career with Sensitive (but not Secret) information. And I knew perfectly well that my wife did not need to know the protocols for a hijacked aircraft to notify Air Traffic of its status. Sort of a dumb example, but the way to keep information under wraps is to not repeat it.
And even at that, Sarah expressed regret that she hadn’t previously7 told Chuck about her Mom.
That’s precisely why the 180 twist in the last 4 minutes is so important and meaningful. Aside from the fact that we can see that Sarah’s connection with Chuck grows through the episode (not just in the final scene), the fact that she is so blunt and honest with him through the episode is why her request for their story and the kiss on that beach means so much.
He won the Sarah from 5.12-13 to prove Quinn wrong, and after the kiss, he was rewarded with the “pristine” version of Sarah (the one from 5.11), just as he was rewarded with the pristine version of the Intersect. It’s the two keys, remember?
Because it’s not needed. The finale loops into the pilot and is a synopsis of the show. There is no need for a movie or a new season. Beckman, “I understand this is the end.”
It is.
The purpose of S5 is to show how much both Chuck and Sarah have changed each other. In 5.06 Curse, Chuck hides something from Sarah, she gets upset and gives him a lesson in openness, and he accepts it right away; then the roles are reversed in 5.08 Baby when Sarah keeps a secret from Chuck, he gives her a lesson in openness, and she accepts it right away.
The purpose of these two episodes is precisely to show that Chuck and Sarah make themselves vulnerable and trust the other in something that is really personal to them. Season 5’s entire purpose is to show that Chuck and Sarah (and Casey and Morgan) have completed their journeys and have the become the people they were always meant to be.
It seems plausible that S5Ep13 Sarah isn’t the same as S1Ep1 because Chuck isn’t the same. In the pilot, Chuck is helpless and completely non-threatening to Sarah, making it much easier for her to be open with him. She’s clearly in control of the situation. Finale Chuck is an entirely different person for Sarah to deal with and she feels completely out of control which is profoundly uncomfortable for her.
On top of that, it would be incredibly strange to deal with someone deeply in love with you, who knows more about you than you know about yourself, especially for someone like Sarah who needed a long journey to be okay with her own feelings. Given all that, her openness to Chuck, laughing and crying in the Rivers and Roads montage shows that she is letting her guard down completely, which is incredibly fast for her. A few days compared to a few seasons…
As for S5B or S6, it feels like they told the story there was to tell. It wasn’t quite common then, but with The Good Place on braodcast TV and numerous ‘prestige’ shows, they tell a story and know when to end it on their own terms.
I fear for what any additional Chuck (S6 or movie) would be. Best to leave it alone…
That’s a great point, let’s say that this situation happened a year or so earlier, I don’t think that Chuck would be emotionally stable enough to handle it, he would prove Quinn right. So while the Sarah at the beach is objectively different from the Sarah Chuck is most familiar with. It works because Chuck is also different, he has a level of understanding and maturity that he did not have in the past.
It is so fast that I can’t buy it. Minutes before in the Castle, she was walking away from Chuck. Cold, inaccessible, unapproachable.
No, she was ready right there. I thought it was all over her face. She was ready for Chuck to track her down.
There is a crucial thing any viewer who wants to make peace about the finale must understand about Sarah as a character with respect to Chuck. Most often it is about everything that she IS NOT saying. Even post-memory suppressed Sarah this is her biggest personality trait. With the exception of a few key moments, we should never take anything Sarah says or does at face value because she operations in a world where it is natural to suppress emotions and to avoid dealing with feelings
I’m surprised that a woman would say something like this. Women pick up on body language better than men. Look at that scene in castle. First, we have Casey hugging Chuck who was going for a handshake. Big change for Casey. Then Casey shakes Sarah’s hand. Sarah looks to Chuck for validation, but Casey cups her hand with his other hand to call her attention back to himself, nods toward Chuck and winks at her. He’s silently telling her to put her trust in Chuck, that Chuck will do right by her just as he turned him (Casey) into a hugger. Then, there’s the scene you refer to. Sarah walks up the stairs, and when Chuck calls her, she turns around quickly with an expectant look on her face. She’s hoping for Chuck to say something that will keep her there. But he doesn’t because it’s not the right time yet. She’s definitely the opposite of cold and inaccessible in this scene.
On my rewatches of the show, I almost exclusively look for what Sarah is communicating non-verbally, facial expressions, body language, eye movement etc. It REALLY is the best way to understand the character. It helps tremendously that Yvonne has an inherent gift for nonverbal acting, and made the choice to use it because it is an essential part of every interaction she has with most of the cast
Yes, we need to read Sarah’s nonverbal communication to understand her, but I would not automatically discount her verbal communication. I have come across viewers who do and come up with some “interesting” interpretations of the show, where the characters are human robots, Chuck gets programmed through NLP, and Sarah changes allegiance based on who kisses her.
@Francesco – Although I’m Polish descent (both parents), like Yvonne S., I’m a girl born and raised in South America. Here we don’t usually hide our feelings. What we have to talk about, we just spit out. I don’t know if Sarah Walker would be a pattern for all American woman either, I don’t think so.
And in that scene you talked about, well… Sara Walker being Sarah Walker… why make things easier when she can make it difficult. That’s why I called her that ugly word in my previous post.
Going back to my previous post. I know it’s fiction, but in real life, couples super passionate as Chuck and Sarah were in S02 or even in some point of S01, nothing nor nobody could stop them. They would have consummated their love.
Well, S1-2 Chuck and Sarah are in love but do not consummate their love because they can’t. Yes, in another show or in some Chuck fan fiction, they would have a clandestine sexual relationship during the first two seasons, but that would be a different story.
There are a million ways one can tell a story, but I have very few problems with the way the writers chose to tell this story once I understood what they were doing with it.
In this story, Chuck and Sarah only start their sexual relationship once they become equal, and they become equal in season 3 when Chuck becomes James Bond and thus joins Sarah’s ontological plane of existence (spy god status). In this story, Charah could not consummate their relationship before because they were not equal—Sarah was a spy goddess while Chuck was her boy toy.
I’m perfectly fine with this choice by the writers.
I highly doubt that Sarah Walker is supposed to represent the standard for American women. She was raised by a con man and becomes a trained assassin and spy for the CIA. What Sarah Walker is supposed to be is a Jedi who trains Chuck to also become a Jedi. The show’s theme of love versus duty that we see from 1.01 to the end of 3.14 is as old as human literature, but in this show it’s lifted from Star Wars, where Jedis also had to struggle with this dichotomy.
Since the show is made by Star Wars fans and has a lot of Star Wars references, the story explores this theme of love versus duty from 1.01 to 3.14 and gives the creators’ answer to this age-old dilemma at the end of 3.14 Honeymooners : “It’s not love VERSUS duty, silly. It’s love AND duty.”
And that’s what the show becomes from 3.14 Role Models on. Chuck and Sarah become the role models of this new paradigm: how to balance love and duty and grow together while performing love and duty until you come to a point in 5.10 and 5.11 where you want kids, and this may be incompatible with your current line of duty, thus you must shift to a different line of duty (e.g. a cybersecurity firm).
You see, just because the show is light-hearted, it does not mean it must be silly. A story can be light-hearted and still be more than just a dopamine rush. It can make us think and ponder the big questions of life. It can be light-hearted and clever.
There is no dichotomy there, just as the series shows us there is no dichotomy between love and duty.
Chuck was also a little dense at that point.
I would say though, that next scene with Chuck he was so depressed I thought maybe I was making things up. The mood is so up and down it’s easy to loose score.
Agree with pretty much all of that. And then you ruined it with your S6 Comments…
I don’t quite buy “the story they meant to tell” thing. If Chuck and Sarah’s life went on after the finale, there’s still story to tell that I would want to see. But I would admit to having concerns about how it would be told. I am reasonably sure we would get a something satisfying. But “reasonably” isn’t “completely”!
Well, we discussed yesterday that for me the show peaked in the second half of Season 2 and slid downhill from there. Since you love S4 and S5, more Chuck could be a good thing (if done well)…
That is completely true!
Finale Chuck is an entirely different person from the pilot only as the final episode goes on. At the beginning of the episode, he’s the Chuck of the pilot. All characters are brought back to what they were in the pilot. They even wear the same clothes as they did in the pilot and behave as they did in the pilot. Chuck is alone in Burbank and needs a pep talk. Sarah is on a mission. Casey is urged by Beckman to be “old Casey.” Then, as the final episode progresses, the characters also grow as they did through the show.
Remember Quinn’s charge that Chuck would not get a woman like Sarah without the Intersect. It’s therefore important for Sarah to be exposed to the full range of Chuck’s character during the final episode because, in order for the final arc to prove Quinn wrong, she must fall in love with the whole Chuck package without the Intersect, not just the final beach version of Chuck. That’s why both Ellie and Morgan urge Chuck to be himself (the second part of the key to Sarah).
I don’t believe I’d ever say this on a blog where we delight in dissecting every word of Chuck, but … Everyone but atcDave is overthinking this. Sarah of 5.13 is pre-Chuck Sarah. Fedak even gives the Sarah character the relevant dialogue: All I remember is being a spy. A good one. The Sarah that Chuck gets after the magic kiss is the Sarah we saw up to Baby. That’s the takeaway. Chuck and Sarah are the Chuck and Sarah we know. Because this is how the Chuck show rolled.
That said, I dispute that Chuck “saves” Sarah in Goodbye. Sarah saves herself and, as usual, moves the relationship at her speed. It’s her willingness to change–‘Chuck, tell me our story” –that moves her redemption. Up until that moment, Chuck was unsuccessful. (As you recall, Chuck couldn’t even get the “magic kiss” idea out of his mouth back in Castle.) Sarah moves the relationship by asking for “our story” and requesting to be kissed at the beach.
It fact, it seems to be a unique chink in the showrunners’ plan. Whenever they try to make Chuck the romantic hero, they end up giving Sarah the power to make the coupling happen. Sarah makes the call in 5.13 by asking for “our” story and the magic kiss just as she moved the relationship in Other Guy. See this wonderful post and commentary here:
It’s funny because I think that it is the girls in this exchange who are overthinking the finale. The final episode has a very straightforward 5-act structure that explores Chuck’s and Sarah’s growth throughout the show.
Listen to Chuck’s and Sarah’s wedding vows and then watch the finale. They both are living their wedding vows in the last two episodes.
And it’s not really a matter of Chuck being successful or not. Of course, he’s less successful in the 2nd act (Berlin) and is more successful in the 4th act (the concert hall) after the turning point in the 3rd act in castle. This is standard 5-act story structure. And of course, this all leads to the denouement in the 5th and final act when Sarah is finally ready to hear their story (which she wasn’t in the first 4 acts) and this is now the perfect time for the kiss (the third part of the key) after the other two parts of the key to the “pristine” version of Sarah are put together (1. find her and 2. spark emotions), which is exactly what Chuck does on that beach.
And it’s not “Sarah” that makes it all happen. It’s Chuck and Sarah. They are reliving their wedding vows in the final scene as well when Chuck shows his love for Sarah through action (he lets her go) and she responds in faith and trust, which was always Sarah’s defining characteristic.
“If you love someone, set her free. If she comes back to you, she’s yours forever.”
That’s what’s happening in the finale.
Well its good to be praised, even if it is for not thinking so much.
I would add though that Sarah’s “empowerment” here is hardly unique. Any coupling takes two parties to make it work!
I said OVERthinking. 🙂 There’s no honor in pedantic screeds about hidden meanings. If you’ve ever seen the hilarious British movie Cruise of the Gods, there’s a scene where a bunch of fans are having a deep, philosophical discussion about the names of the characters in their favorite show. And the show’s creator bursts their bubble by explaining the names are just curry dishes spelled backwards!
As for needing two parties in a coupling, of course. but even as the the showrunners strove to make Chuck the hero of his own story, they always ended up making Sarah the character who drove the relationship. Over five seasons, I can only think of three times when Chuck unambiguously took the lead: when he asked for a date in First Date, when he asked Sarah to run away with him in American Hero. And when he finally asked Sarah if she loved him in Other Guy.
It’s why I never bought “the nerd gets the girl” description of the show. Basically, the girl got the nerd. In the end, it was the only thing they left the Sarah character. And it’s why, while I thought the ending fell short. I accepted it. But, boy, I wish Fedak had chosen a less drastic final arc.
Fedak’s style operates in parallels, symbolism and mirroring, at least when it comes to Chuck as a story, he was always less concerned with narrative finality, to him Chuck is complete because it puts Chuck situationally back at the pilot and demonstrates how Chuck has fully matured as a person, that he has Sarah’s trust when she could have easily followed through on disappearing from his life forever, it says everything about Chuck, and truthfully, quite a lot about Sarah too, even though she may not understand the gravity of such a choice.
And when he breaks up her at the end of 2.03.
And when he gives her his mother’s bracelet in 2.11.
And when he breaks up with her in 2.15.
And when he tells her at the end of 2.16 that he will be with the girl he loves.
And when he kisses her in Barstow’s motel room in 2.21.
And when he asks for a vacation together in 2.22.
And when he stands her up in Prague in 3.01.
And when he asks her to move in together in 3.15.
And when he pushes her to move forward with their relationship in 4.02 to 4.04 when she wants to maintain the status quo.
And in 5.13 by the beach when he finds her and tells her he will always be there for her and then with Morgan’s kiss idea.
Chuck is pretty much almost always the one pushing the relationship forward. Sarah is only in control the first two seasons because she is obviously his handler, but even then, he’s the one who actually pushes the relationship forward.
The nerd does get the girl.
I think the bottom line is that Sarah was (nearly) always in the drivers seat. So in one sense, even if the show was “Chuck” and was told from his perspective, Sarah was firmly in control of one critical dimension.
Finally on one thing you guys made me change my opinion. And it’s not about the series finale. It’s about Sarah. Sorry the word, but now I realize that she was a bitch towards Chuck in 90% of the time from the beginning to almost the end of Season 3.
All the time making Chuck insecure about her, saying she wasn’t interested. She didn’t open up her feelings to him and she didn’t let Chuck talk about his feelings to her, playing “cold & hot”, but like a fly in honey, she was always around Chuck marking her presence, throwing her charm on him.
Cole, a mature man, didn’t want to play this game and quickly moved on. So if Chuck was more mature, he wouldn’t have put up this Sarah and we wouldn’t have Chuck and Sarah. We’d probably Chuck and Lou.
Pre season 3 is explained by the muddy nature of the asset/handler dynamic it is her job to handle Chuck and keep him compliant with the joint operation that has been established. Season 3 I draw your attention to Beckman’s response when Sarah brings up that their relationship has become problematic. “I don’t know or care to what happened between you two, but this is your job and Chuck’s safety depends on you so get over it and teach him how to be a real spy.”
.
This informs much of Sarah’s behavior from that point forward, she is again told to ignore the emotional side of the relationship
That’s the wrong thing to change your mind about. Sarah is incredibly loving and selfless in season 3. She sacrifices her dream of a life with Chuck so that he can have his dream of becoming the perfect spy, without her standing in his way. She actually tells him (and is viewers) so not once but twice, at the end of 3.07 and again in 3.10.
And Cole did not move on. He was rejected by Sarah because of her love for Chuck. Cole lost his Bond girl to Chuck.
One could say that sacrifice is the perfect act of love.
I think that’s too harsh and extreme. Sarah truly had a hopeless conflict of interest at the start. She was assigned handler to a man she adored.
It is important to remember her professional role and responsibility here. In one sense she was Chuck’s bodyguard, that’s easy. She would never want anyone to hurt Chuck, so for many villains it became the last regret of their lives.
But handler is more than just that. As an agent of the CIA it is her JOB to represent the Agency’s interests to Chuck. In short, she must get him to do the things the government wants him to do, even if it is clearly NOT in his best interests to do so (namely, she most coerce him to do many dangerous things). That’s her job, it is literally what keeps her in Los Angeles.
Failure to get Chuck’s co-operation would get her reassigned. And given the security and high secrecy of the mission, that would probably mean getting re-assigned a long way away with a strict “No Contact” directive.
If she chose to quit her job to be with Chuck, she would suddenly be out of the loop and not know what was going on anymore. Not to mention the possibility (probability) he would be put in a secure facility and she would never see him again. And that’s IF she could make that choice; remember Sarah has plainly stated the spy life is all she is, all she’s good at. Whether we believe that or not, she does.
So the bottom line is; stay close to Chuck to protect him and all that incurs (putting the man she loves in harm’s way while maintaining enough distance to convince her superiors she’s not compromised) or request reassignment and trust someone else to do the job (while knowing she actually is the best, and a replacement might not even advocate to keep him out of secured lock down).
Sarah IS in an impossible situation. No surprise it will take her time to be willing to reveal any feelings to Chuck, and Chuck’s attempts to get her to open up are massively frustrating for her. I think this really was one the best such conflicts of interest we’ve seen on television.
Yes, Dave has expressed Sarah’s conundrum very well. Sarah is walking a tightrope for two seasons, and she does it incredibly well. That is one of the reasons the Chuck and Sarah “will they, won’t they” dynamic in the first two seasons is so compelling: they have legitimate reasons for not being able to be together even though they love each other.
The other thing that some viewers miss is that what makes Sarah’s character compelling is the fact that she is the dramatic anchor of the show. The writers cannot turn her into a female Chuck because that would turn the show into a sitcom, basically Get Smart.
I’m convinced that many people don’t actually watch TV trying to understand the stories being told, yes TV is there for entertainment purposes but I still think that we should use our brain when watching it and not just stare at the screen until the credits roll😂
Yes, and I think it’s a matter of expectations and gauging our expectations. When I watch Frasier or Everybody Loves Raymond, I have different expectations than when watching Chuck. I would also think than, when watching Breaking Bad or The Sopranos, I would also have different expectations. And yes, my favorite thing about Chuck is that it makes me think. It’s not just entertainment.
Poor Chuck, Sarah loves to play the ungettable girl, and it only with him. He had to work very very hard to won her. As a result, she almost lost him.
Like I said, it’s a good thing he wasn’t that mature, because I think mature men would move on. And Chuck had good options – Lou, Hannah… This is fiction, in real life…
For Shaw, Sarah made everything very, very easy. You guys may not agree, but that’s the impression the show gave to many viewers, include me – a girl.
Karen,
I think you are misreading the story. All Chuck has to do in season 3 is say the word and Sarah is his. Just look at the way she looks at him in all the season 3 episodes. It’s Chuck who is pulling away from her until 3.11 because his feelings for her are a liability in the spy world.
Sarah only tries a rebound with Shaw because Chuck shut her down. This is the reversal of the first two seasons, when Chuck wanted a relationship with Sarah, but she shut him down, and se he tried to have a real relationship with Lou and Jill.
Shaw is Sarah’s Lou/Jill and will betray her just as Jill betrayed Chuck. Chuck and Sarah walk in each other’s shoes in season 3, so they can see where the other was coming from in the first two seasons. It builds empathy.
Season 3’s sin is to give viewers the impression you write above, which is the impression I had the first time I had the show. It’s the wrong impression.
No S3’s sin is to be no fun at all, and show both characters in an ugly light.
Story issues are ultimately irrelevant for a show that lived on the likability of the main characters. If they had wanted to do the role reversal story for a short arc, like 3 episodes it might have worked better. But they were playing with borrowed time and betrayed the enthusiastic fans that had saved the show. Writers failed to understand their BUSINESS.
Dave and Karen,
These are wrong interpretations of season 3. Both Chuck and Sarah are loving and selfless. They can’t be together because they love each other in a world where love is a liability, so they sacrifice their love at the altar of duty. This is mentioned multiple times in the season and makes the characters noble, not ugly or stupid. This is the choice every superhero makes in every classic superhero movie because, again, the theme of love versus duty is as old as human storytelling.
Sarah is ready to go back to Chuck the minute he asks for her back in 3.11, after he says that he would like another shot after what he did in Prague. Again, all this is clearly stated by the characters. So, saying that Sarah makes Chuck’s life hard in S3 is definitely untrue. Chuck is the one who leads the relationship dance in S3.
As for season 3 not being fun, it’s only the Sarah/Shaw dynamic that is a dementor. The rest of season 3 is great and has two of the top episodes of the entire series: 3.09 Beard and 3.14 Honeymooners. Season 3 consistently ranks as the second most-beloved season among fans, right behind season 2 and many viewers love the raised stakes.
I’m a girl and I can say to you: Sarah didn’t make Chuck’s life any easier at all. I know, I know this is fiction, but….
On the other hand towards Shaw…
Well, see my previous comment about Sarah’s conflict of interest from the start. And to be fair, Chuck paid it no mind (or failed to understand it, even though Sarah tried to explain it a couple times) and caused Sarah much grief as a result.
But yeah, in S3 Sarah (and Chuck) behaved abominably towards each other.
I mean…Sarah was fully aware of Chuck’s love for her, but she didn’t verbalize her feelings to him and didn’t allow Chuck to act on it either. She did the same at S05E13.
On the other hand towards Shaw…
Yes, Sarah is fully aware of Chuck’s love for her and does not verbalize her feelings for Chuck or act on them because she cannot. They live in a world where feelings are a liability, and she is ordered by Beckman to train Chuck to become a spy.
That is why she cries after watching Carina’s video.
This is the reversal of 2.03 Break-Up when Chuck, fully knowing Sarah’s feelings for him, broke up with her to keep her safe in a world where feelings are a liability.
In season 3, Sarah does the same for Chuck. She sacrifices her dream of being with him so he can have his dream of becoming a spy for the greater good, to save the fictional versions of you and me. There is no greater love than self-sacrificial love, and that’s what Sarah is doing in season 3.
And mind you, we know all this because Sarah says it not once but twice to Chuck, first at the end of 3.07 and again in 3.10.
Listen to the characters. They tell you the story.
Wrong interpretation of Sarah. The writers are not going to make Sarah selfish and bitchy in the very season that puts her together with Chuck because she wouldn’t deserve him.
S3 Sarah loves Chuck unreservedly while Chuck must learn to balance love and duty (just as Sarah had to do in S1-2). This was even prophesied by LizJames on this very site before season 3 even unfolded, then season 3 unfolded, and no one on this site, not even LizJames, could see that everything was unfolding exactly as she had predicted.
Sarah’s relationship with Shaw is possible precisely because they don’t love each other. She tries to have a real relationship with Shaw since she can’t have it with Chuck, just as Chuck tried to have a real relationship with Lou and Jill since he couldn’t have it with Sarah.
Again, we know all this because the characters tell us.
Oh yeah, in season 3 Chuck and Sarah are the worst, most forced way to prolong wt/wt I have ever seen in the history of media. It doesn’t matter if one can explain away the decisions, they butcher the appeal of the show.
Jim/Pam
Leonard/Penny
Bones/Both
Castle/Beckett
Ron/Hermione
Those are just a handful of fictional couples I love equally as much as Chuck and Sarah and they were all handled infinitely better, perhaps because the writers understood that keeping them apart romantically does not mean sacrificing the chemistry and friendship. For some reason that is something that JS and CF were allergic to
“Chuck paid it no mind (or failed to understand it, even though Sarah tried to explain it a couple times) and caused Sarah much grief as a result”
No no. Sarah wasn’t the innocent one here, she wasn’t the victim. She madly loved Chuck and made everything harder for him and, of course, for both of them.
Conflict of interest… humm. She all the time playing “Cold & Hot” with Chuck, never being clear about what she felt, never having a heart to heart conversation with him.
So obviously you’re not even reading what I wrote. You know my big long comment about 10 comments up. Sarah has an impossible, professional conflict of interest. It is perfectly constructed and is guarantied to make both Chuck and Sarah miserable. By S3 the only excuse is utter stupidity (with Chuck training as an agent the asset restriction no longer exists), which forms much of the dissatisfaction with that season.
But for the first two seasons it is excruciatingly perfect.
Dave,
I disagree that in season 3, the only excuse to a Charah relationship is utter stupidity.
In S1-2, Sarah had three obstacles to a relationship with Chuck:
1. Professionalism – it was unprofessional for a handler to have a relationship with her asset.
2. The 49B – reassignment if found out to have feelings for her asset (see episode 2.18).
3. Feelings as a liability. This is explored in 2.03 Break-Up
You mention the first two in your comment about Sarah’s conflict of interest, and you are right, but the third one is there and is the big one. It’s the one that makes Chuck break-up with Sarah to keep her safe.
Listen to Bryce’s words in 2.03, “Sarah has feelings for you, Chuck. Feelings that will get her killed. People we deal with are cold-blooded assassins. They have no emotions, no feelings. The only chance we have against Fulcrum is to think and act like they do. Anything else gets us killed.”
Chuck doesn’t accept Bryce’s point right then but, by the end of the episode, when he sees Sarah hesitate to take out the Fulcrum lady, he will and will break-up for Sarah because her real feelings for him are a liability in the spy world.
Now, if we agree that Sarah’s feelings for Chuck are a liability at this point of S2, and that she will take a big chunk of S2 to turn them into an asset (per Beckman at the end of the 49B episode), shouldn’t we all the more agree that Chuck is the more emotional one of the two and that his feelings for Sarah are going to be a liability when he decides to become a spy in season 3? Well, yes, of course. This is the most logical conclusion we can draw.
It would be a huge oversight on the part of the writers not to address Chuck’s emotions for Sarah in the spy world now that he has decided to become a spy.
And in fact, they do address it. Big time. It’s the very theme of season 3a.
First, they dedicate an entire episode, 3.02 Three Words, to show that Chuck’s feelings for Sarah are a big liability. We see it in Karl’s mansion, during the vault mission, where Chuck is an emotional mess, and his feelings interfere with the mission. And at the end of the 4th act, Carina gives both Chuck and Sarah a demo on what happens to suckers in love like Karl in a world where feelings are a liability. If Bryce told Chuck in 2.03, now Carina shows him. And Chuck himself admits he got the memo because the very next day, by the fountain, he says to Sarah, “You’re right. I’m not a real spy. I’m emotional and that makes me a liability.”
And so, he tries from 3.03 to 3.09 to be a stone-cold spy like all others. That’s why he pulls back from Sarah. And that’s why Sarah cannot do anything after watching Carina’s video. She, of course, forgives Chuck on the spot but cannot run into his arms because she knows his feelings for her are a liability; she wants him to succeed as a spy because she now understands his noble reasons, and so she pulls back for his sake. Do you see the noble reasons behind both characters’ decisions?
Now, as for Shaw. Karen focuses on the fact that Shaw is Sarah’s boss and sees a conflict of interest in their relationship, but that’s inconsequential since Chuck will become a special agent just like Shaw and the titular member of Team Bartowski, thus also Sarah’s boss. Since we don’t see a conflict of interest in Sarah’s relationship with Chuck, why would we see it in her relationship with Shaw? Besides, if the show wanted us to focus on the fact of the conflict of interest, it would highlight it. It doesn’t.
The reason Shaw is introduced is, of course, to address and resolve the theme of season 3a, the them of feelings as a liability or an asset for spies. Shaw is a spy who was once married, lost his wife, and has learned the wrong lesson from that event—he buried his feelings without mastering them, and tries to teach Sarah to do the same. But that’s the wrong lesson. In fact, when the truth about his wife’s death emerges, he is unable to master his feelings and joins the dark side. He is Anakin Skywalker.
Chuck, on the other hand, after trying to become a spy like all others from 3.03 to 3.08, decides to become his own spy and learns to master his feelings from 3.09 to 3.13 and turn them into an asset. He is Luke Skywalker. Just as Luke Skywalker rejected the old Jedi code that forbade relationships and permits his padawans to marry and have families provided they master their feelings , Chuck rejects the traditional cardinal rule that forbids spies to fall in love, and he and Sarah become from 3.15 on the role models of a new cardinal rule: spies can fall in love provided they master their feelings.
And that’s why Chuck and Sarah’s giddiness and utter joy of being together in 3.14 Honeymooners is completely earned. They thought they had lost each other in order to save the fictional versions of you and me, but found out at the end of Honeymooners that they can actually “have it all,” both love and duty.
This is what season 3a is all about. We may not like it (and I don’t like the Sham relationship), but it’s definitely not stupid and is the most logical development from the theme of love versus duty introduced in S1 and the theme of feelings as a liability for spies introduced in 2.03 Break-Up.
Ok @atcDave. In S03 Sarah dated with her boss. That’s one of the biggest conflicts of interest you can have.
I can see my heroine’s flaws. For me, the whole mess of S03 was because of Prague. Sarah still wasn’t overcome it. I put Shaw on the Prague bill too, of course helped by Hanna.
And Sarah is guilty for much of this. She never made life easy for Chuck.
Oh yeah. S3 is just a mess, it ruins every beautiful thing built up by the first two seasons. Shaw and Hannah are exhibits A and B. I always say my enjoyment of the series is contingent on ignoring most of the middle season.
Which is never to say Chuck and Sarah were anywhere near being able to look like a mature couple at the end of S2, they were not. Things needed to happen. But the mechanisms chosen were about the most revolting nonsense they could have come up with. I remember when the coming storm was first hinted at in ComicCon 2009 a fan asked “how can this be accomplished without making Chuck and Sarah look like idiots?” There was no answer, and what we saw on screen affirmed that there was no answer.
Francesco has maybe outlined what the idea was, the intent was of that season. But the product as seen might as well have been written by 4 year olds.
@Francesco is apparently willing to die on the hill of “the showrunners had a master plan and the original Season 3 is integral to understanding the five-year run of Chuck.”
It’s the 2023 equivalent of what one of the posters here in 2010 kept claiming: Chuck and Sarah can’t be together otherwise the showrunners would have to kill off one of them. That claim was ludicrous then and Francesco’s defense of Season 3 is silly now.
We KNOW what happened that created the blunders of season 3. The showrunners were desperate to pitch a different kind of show to NBC to get the third Season. They had to admit they went too far in Colonel and had to ignore and negate where that episode had left the Chuck and Sarah characters. They lost Matt Bomer to reprise Bryce so they hastily had to create a character called Shaw. They had to write on the fly no matter what happened because Warners wanted the show taped as if it was going to run in September. Budgets and shooting schedules were slashed. Rewrites and recasting–especially for the god-awful Fake Name–were common. Even the talent admitted they didn’t know how to play their characters because the writers gave little guidance. Brandon Routh, saddled with the horse-by-committee Shaw character, was especially vocal about it,
And the proof on screen is there in how Fedak played Season 3.1. With Honeymooners, he metaphorically returned to the platform scene in Pink Slip and said, Ok, Chuck and Sarah DO run away and here’s what happened. And they never looked back at the original Season 3. The themes and recycled PLIs and other detritus was consigned to the dustbin.
Showrunners don’t always get it right. It’s crazy to insist everything they do fits an overarching narrative, That’s not how American network TV, especially on a bubble show like Chuck, works. The showrunners guessed wrong on Season 3 and they admitted as much starting with Honeymooners. No amount of fannish retrospection and revisionism can change that. I’m just amazed that some fans keep doggedly insisting it all makes sense.
I also hate the the songs they chose to play in Pink slip and the Other guy. The one in Pink slip is saying we’re going to drag this out and it’s gonna be hell. The one in Other guy…when Chuck and Sarah are in the hotel room, is saying…so we dragged you through hell, now forget about it, it never happened, and we won’t ever talk about it again. We won’t even let Chuck and Sarah have that conversation about her real name. It’s ridiculous.
And Sam was only mentioned one more time. I think when Fedak took more responsibility for the show he was embarrassed by what was done early in the season.
The songs are great. Sarah’s song in Pink Slip is “Wait It Out” because she will have to wait for Chuck to complete his hero’s journey. Chuck’s song in Pink Slip is “My Backwards Walk” because Chuck is walking away toward Sarah. The song in American Hero is “Down River,” which is about a couple that has overcome the storm and takes a leap of faith together. The song in Other Guy is “Bye Bye Bye,” which is about saying goodbye to the old life and starting a new one.
The music supervisor of Chuck was Alexandra Patsavas, one of the best in the business, and it shows. The song choices in these episodes are literally pitch-perfect in mood, tempo, and lyrics.
Pitch perfect songs for a mood most fans loathed. Faint praise.
Honeymooners should have been 3.01…
Although the S3.5 episodes were largely in the can by the time the Chuckpocalypse really happened.
Wilma,
There is clearly an overarching theme to each season. Your statement that the creators were flying by the seat of their pants is clearly proven false by the fact Gray Jones from Chuck Versus the Podcast posted a picture on Twitter showing the Chuck writing room during S2. The entire season was mapped out on the board, with each episode listing the A, B, C stories and themes.
Each summer, the writers would assemble in the writers’ room and map out the season. So, the idea that they were changing everything on the fly is clearly false.
Now, there is a little bit of truth in what you are saying. It’s true that budgets and shooting schedules were slashed, that the episodes of S3b were added and they had to change 3.11 to 3.13 to adjust for that, that they had to extend Routh’s episodes and changes things here and there, that they wanted to change the tone of S3, but none of that means the creators had no overarching theme for the season. That is your conclusion that you reach because you dislike the season and therefore you read into the truths above to reach a conclusion that does not follow from them.
Remember, to many viewers, season 3 is the best season of the show, and the season constantly ranks second as the best season of the whole series behind season 2. It always ranks above season 1, 4, and 5. So, the idea that the season is a disaster is plainly contradicted by the ratings.
It is true, however, that the season is written and edited in a way that leads many viewers (I would assume around 50% from what I have seen online) to reach the wrong interpretation that I reached when I first watched the show, the interpretation you guys still hold to this day. That much is true.
But the idea that Fedak rejected season 3a with Honeymooners is ridiculous. This is another example of you misreading what Fedak is doing in order to confirm your bias against the season.
What Fedak does with the Honeymooners episode is put Chuck and Sarah on that train to show that, even if they had left on that train in Prague, they would not have been able to run from themselves (their hero nature). Fedak puts these words in the mouth of the Basque terrorist Arnaldo to show you that they wouldn’t be able to quit the spy life. But the big difference between Prague and Honeymooners is that now Sarah does not have to worry about Chuck being corrupted by the spy life (he has passed the test) and Chuck is now a spy god worthy of the spy goddess, which he wasn’t in Prague.
The idea that Fedak buries S3a starting with Honeymooners is also ridiculous because Shaw comes back in season 3b and even reminds Sarah of her Sam name and uses it against her, and there is an episode (Living Dead) where Sarah’s relationship with Shaw is brought up to Chuck’s great discomfort. This conclusion is made even more ridiculous by the fact Shaw comes back a second time in 5.07 and again brings up his S3a relationship with Sarah.
That’s why, when you say that Fedak rejects season 3a, I scratch my head in disbelief. Sure, he may tell you at Comic-Con that “they have learned the lesson” of not separating Chuck and Sarah in later seasons, but that does not mean they regretted season 3a. He kept telling Mo Ryan that the season worked when she kept telling him it didn’t. You are merely reading that into what he is saying. In reality, by referencing the Sham relationship and Sam’s name in 3.17-19 and again in 5.07, he clearly shows your statement wrong again and again.
Shaw’s return is because he was Fedak’s idea. Schwartz added the Sarah tryst twist. But that may make Fedak uniquely unaffected by the baggage that character acquired. He wanted a “perfect spy” who became Chuck’s arch-nemesis. He didn’t really care about the love triangle. And of course, Brandon Route’s contract was extended 3 different times during the season. We heard all sorts of talk about a big showdown in Paris as early as 3.08. So those outlines were vague at best, and changing on the fly. Seriously, have you ever been involved in a theater or film production? Things change constantly and nothing is set until it’s in the can (or on stage).
Yes, but that does not change the fact that Shaw comes back twice, and both times he brings up his relationship with Sarah in season 3a, so the statement that Fedak regrets and rejects season 3a is clearly false.
Yes, things change a lot, but things also get mapped out in advance. Shuffling things around does not invalidate the fact they were planned in the first place because there would be nothing to shuffle around.
You know this is just not true! There was no grand plan. Anyone who lived through this in real time heard all the discussions, and changes that occurred during production! All the return of Shaw proves is that Fedak liked the character… that he created.
I disagree. There is obviously the master plan to turn Chuck into a James Bond even without the Intersect and Sarah into a woman with a full and real life. The Chuck we see in 5.07 Santa Suit is the man he was always meant to be, and the Sarah we see in 5.10 and 5.11 is the woman she was always meant to be.
That was the master plan.
That may be true, and is just as profound as saying the plan was to have lunch around noon. But have you ever heard them talk about all the changes made after S1? Or CF talking about the direction of the show after S2? Apart from some VERY big picture things like you mention they had no clue. Totally making it up as they went.
I’m not sure why we would ignore all statistics as bogus while listening to what Fedak and Schwartz say about the show. We should do the opposite since Fedak and Schwartz say provably silly and incoherent things in interviews. Why trust what they say about the show, then?
Empirical evidence below from Schwartz and Fedak on season 3.
Uhm, so which is which? Was she vulnerable or not?
Also, check out this gem.
Uhm, where exactly do we see on the screen that Sarah realizes Shaw is the guy she should have been with in the first place? Can anyone point to the episode and scene for me?
Why would anyone not trust statistics while trusting what JS and CF say about the show?
We KNOW what happened that created the blunders of season 3. The showrunners were desperate to pitch a different kind of show to NBC to get the third Season. They had to admit they went too far in Colonel and had to ignore and negate where that episode had left the Chuck and Sarah characters
The conclusion is silly because in 2.22 Ring, the episode right after Colonel, Chuck and Sarah are still not together. She is going to Zurich with Bryce, remember? And when she is ready to quit the spy life, Chuck decides to re-intersect and join the spy life, remember?
The separation between Chuck and Sarah in season 3a then becomes a natural extension of season 2. If Sarah’s feelings for Chuck were a liability in season 2, Chuck’s feelings for Sarah are most definitely going to be a liability in season 3 since everyone knows that Chuck is the more emotional of the two. It would be a big mistake for the writers not to explore this issue only to make us shippers happy.
WhereColonel left Chuck and Sarah was a spy goddess almost consummating a relationship with her boy toy. It was wrong, and even the location (a gross Barstow motel room) should give viewers a hint that it was wrong.
Now, compare that with the beautiful hotel room in Paris.
But, of course, to some viewers, none of this was planned. It all happened randomly.
Just a few posts up this thread you claimed the Barstow scene as proof that Chuck was in charge of the relationship. Now you claim it was Sarah grubbily sexing up her boy toy. It seems you’ll say anything to support your position of the moment.
Wilma,
There is no contradiction between the two statements. Chuck does start the intimate moment in Barstow, but it’s also true that he’s not on the same ontological plane as Sarah; she is a spy goddess while he is her boy toy. And the gross motel room is the symbolic hint that they are not ready for each other. They will be in Paris, where Chuck is a spy god worthy of Sarah. And the fancy hotel room is the symbolic hint of that.
It’s clear that Chuck is not ready for Sarah at the end of season 2. Another big hint is in 2.22 when he asks for a vacation with Sarah and looks like a whipped puppy when she replies with a commitment. He’s a boy toy.
In 3.12, in contrast, he asks Sarah for a life together and gently but manly pierces through her commitment objection. He’s a man.
To say that we can skip from 2.22 to 3.14 is to ignore Chuck’s growth in season 3a when the boy toy becomes a man and a warrior.
Chuck is entirely built on counterpoint and parallels. It’s extensively self-referential. You seem to imply the show runners don’t know what they are doing half the time and they give the talent little guidance.
Below are some examples of counterpoint and scene parallels in the show. In some of these parallel scenes, the main characters even react with the same facial expressions in the mirror events (e.g. see Chuck’s reaction to the Mauser incident in 2.11 and compare it to Sarah’s reaction to the Perry incident in 3.11).
Either these parallels were planned (there was a lot of guidance), or they happened by chance, which is the definition of a miracle. Which do you believe?
Scenes
1.04: Sarah throws a plate at a guy who’s about to shoot Chuck.
3.06: Chuck throws a plate at a guy who’s about to shoot Sarah.
1.01: Sarah first meets Chuck with a fake phone-related problem.
1.08: Lou first meets Chuck with a real phone-related problem.
1.01 Bryce uses fancy moves outside the Intersect room to escape guards.
5.12 Sarah uses the same exact moves to take out guards outside the DARPA Intersect room.
1.06: Sarah brings Chuck a fake gift (picture of them at Comic-Con).
1.08: Lou brings Chuck a real gift (a sandwich named after him).
1.08: Chuck and Sarah are shown facing away from each other in bed after an argument. Sarah is wearing sexy lingerie as a symbol of fake intimacy. They hide under the covers (it’s a cover).
3.14: Chuck and Sarah are shown from the same camera angle hugging and kissing in bed. Sarah is wearing Chuck’s boxers as a sign of true intimacy. There are lying above the covers (no longer a cover).
1.10: Bryce and Sarah are great while fighting the Fulcrum agents together.
3.14: Chuck and Sarah are great while fighting ETA terrorists while handcuffed together.
4.07: Chuck and Sarah are great while fighting Volkoff’s men during their own first fight as a couple (a verbal fight within a physical fight).
1.01: Chuck is on the phone at the Nerd Herd desk when Sarah walks in. Morgan is also there.
3.06: Chuck is on the phone at the Nerd Herd desk when Hannah walks in. Morgan is also there.
1.04: Sarah tells Chuck her relationship with Bryce was complicated.
3.07: Chuck tells Hannah his relationship with Sarah is complicated.
1.04: Casey is tied to a bed by Carina.
2.13: Chuck is tied to a bed by Sylvia.
4.14: Roan is tied to a bed by Fatima.
1.08: Chuck breaks up with Sarah because Sarah says they have no future together.
2.03: Chuck breaks up with Sarah because he says they have no future together.
1.10: Bryce leans towards Sarah in an SUV to kiss her.
3:11: Chuck leans towards Sarah during a stakeout to kiss her.
2.15: Cole drops his towel on Sarah’s desk and is naked.
3.11: Chuck drops his towel during a mission and is naked.
3.08: Shaw says to Sarah, “I’m going to kiss you now.”
3.12: Chuck says to Sarah, “I’m going to kiss you now.”
1.11: Chuck and Sarah have a heated discussion by a Christmas tree.
1.11: Chuck and Sarah resolve their conflict by a Christmas tree.
1.12: Chuck and Casey are tied up together and fight the bad guys.
3.14: Casey and Morgan are tied up together and fight the bad guys.
1.12: Casey tells Chuck he and Ilsa had what they had but it’s over.
3.09: Chuck tells Morgan he and Sarah are over.
1.12: Chuck and Casey walk together to Casey’s place, and Chuck says this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship.
3.09: Chuck and Morgan walk together out of Castle, and Morgan says it’s the two of them, the beginning of a beautiful new friendship.
2.01: Getting the cipher allows Chuck to decipher Sarah’s true feelings for him.
3.12: Getting the cipher allows Chuck to decipher Shaw’s true intentions with Sarah.
2.03: Chuck jealously watches Sarah and Bryce dance together.
2.07: Sarah jealously watches Chuck and Jill solve the music puzzle together.
2.03: Bryce and Sarah dance together. Sarah won’t let Brice lead.
3.03: Chuck and Sarah dance together. Sarah lets Chuck lead.
2.04: Chuck tells Sarah he doesn’t need to know who she was. He knows who she is.
3.10: Chuck tells Casey he doesn’t care who he was. He knows who he is.
2.11: Sarah does whatever it takes to save Chuck’s life by killing Mauser.
2.14: Chuck does whatever it takes to save Morgan’s life by killing his dignity.
3.06: Chuck burns his asset Manoosh.
4.24: Chuck redeems his (former) asset Vivian.
3.02: Chuck talks Karl down while also addressing Sarah.
4.04: Chuck talks Hortencia down while also addressing Sarah.
1.09: Chuck tries a real relationship with Lou.
2.15: Sarah is tempted by a spy relationship with Cole.
1.10: Sarah faces a past relationship.
2.06-07: Chuck faces a past relationship.
2.13: Chuck refers to his pretend-wife Sarah as his ball and chain.
4.14: Chuck is tied to a ball and chain.
2.16: Cole takes out 9 men (well, more like 12 but he doesn’t like to boast).
4.01: Chuck takes out 10 men.
3.01: Sarah meets Chuck at a train station to run away together.
3.12: Chuck waits for Sarah at a train station to run away together.
1.01: During their first dinner, Chuck tells Sarah he can be her very own baggage handler.
3.12: During their first dinner, Shaw toasts to a fresh start with Sarah, with no Burbank, no baggage.
1.13: Sarah watches Chuck celebrate Ellie’s engagement through the window with a look of sadness and longing, thinking it’s something she’ll probably never experience.
4.15: Chuck watches Ellie celebrate Sarah’s engagement through the window with a look of love and contentment, happy that Sarah can experience the love of family.
1.12: Casey is tied up to Chuck and uses him to kick a bad guy.
3.14: Casey is tied up to Morgan and uses him to kick a bad guy.
1.01: Chuck, Sarah, and Casey disarm a bomb using a computer virus.
4.18: Chuck, Sarah, and Casey disarm a (nuclear) bomb using apple juice.
5.13: Chuck, Sarah, and Casey disarm a bomb using the same virus as 1.01.
1.08: Despite being under the influence of truth serum, Sarah lies to Chuck about their future together.
2.08: Under a lie detector test, Jill lies to Chuck about their future together.
2.03: A female Fulcrum agent has a gun at Chuck’s head. Casey shoots her in the shoulder from behind to disarm her.
3.04: a female Ring agent is about to pull a knife and throw it at Chuck. Shaw shoots and kills her from behind.
2.07: Jill and Chuck drive into the sunset in a convertible car.
3.12: Shaw and Sarah drive into the sunset in a convertible car.
2.11: Sarah kills Mauser. Chuck is shocked and horrified.
3.11: Chuck allegedly kills Perry. The scene is shot from the same camera angle as the Mauser incident. Sarah has the same shocked and horrified look as Chuck in 2.11
2.12: Chuck angrily confronts Sarah about the Mauser incident.
3.12: Sarah angrily confront Chuck about the Perry incident.
2.12: After killing Mauser, Sarah says to Chuck, “I did what I had to do.”
3.13: After killing Shaw, Chuck says to Sarah, “I did what I had to do.”
2.21: Chuck and Sarah have committed treason and are on the run. Beckman orders Casey to bring them back dead or alive.
3.10: Casey commits treason and is on the run. Beckman orders Chuck and Sarah to bring him back dead or alive.
3.02: Chuck gets through a room full of moving lasers.
4.13: Morgan gets through a hallway full of still and then moving lasers.
3.08: Sarah is in great emotional turmoil because Chuck is at his lowest point. Shaw tells her he’s going to kiss her now.
3.12: Sarah is in great emotional turmoil because Chuck is at his highest point. Chuck tells her he’s going to kiss her now if that’s ok (always the gentleman).
2.21: Casey carries an unconscious Chuck over his shoulders away from a Fulcrum base under an airstrike.
3.12: Chuck carries an unconscious Shaw over his shoulders away from a Ring base under an airstrike.
2.07: Chuck is about to go out with Jill. Sarah subtly tries to put her hooks in him by asking him if everything is ok and showing disappointment when he leaves.
3.07: Chuck is about to go out with Hannah. Sarah subtly tries to put her hooks in him by asking him if everything is ok and showing disappointment when he leaves.
1.10: Sarah has to decide between Chuck and Bryce.
3.12: Sarah has to decide between Chuck and Shaw.
3.02: Sarah tells Chuck to focus on the mission instead of talking about his feelings for her.
3.16: Chuck tells Morgan to focus on the mission instead of talking about his feelings for Anna.
3.10: “Five against one” for Sarah. She kills them.
4.02: “Five on one” for Chuck. He knocks them out (including the Hulk).
3.04: Chuck is in trouble with Ring agents inside the Buy More. Shaw does not save him.
3.12: Shaw is in trouble inside a Ring compound. Chuck saves him.
3.08: Sarah asks Shaw to stop hitting Chuck. Shaw does not stop.
3.10: Sarah asks Chuck (who’s under the effect of Laudanol) to stop choking the Ring agent. Chuck stops.
3.04: Chuck tells Shaw nothing matters more to him than family and friends.
3.13: Chuck shows Shaw that nothing matters more to him than family and friends by shooting him.
3.05: Chuck cannot be in Paris with Hannah.
3.13: Chuck is in Paris with Sarah.
3.13: Sarah tells Chuck to (shut up and) kiss her.
5.13: Sarah tells Chuck to kiss her.
3.19: Sarah hits Shaw on the head from behind.
5.07: Ellie hits Shaw on the head from behind.
4.09: Sarah, who models competence for Chuck, uses ultimate competence to save Chuck from the Belgian.
4.24: Chuck, who models vulnerability for Sarah, uses ultimate vulnerability (no Intersect, all out of plans) to save Sarah from Vivian.
4.09: Sarah kisses Chuck to wake him up and restore his memories.
5.13: Chuck kisses Sarah in the hope of restoring her memories.
1.01: Ellie at the beginning of the first episode, “Aces, Charles. You’re aces.”
5.13: Ellie at the end of the last episode, “Aces, Charles. You’re aces.”
1.01: Sarah at a Malibu beach, “Trust me, Chuck.”
5.13: Chuck at the same beach, “Trust me, Sarah.”
Chuck’s Fall and Redemption
3.05: Chuck ignores Sarah’s plea to not go on a solo mission.
3.08: Chuck doesn’t ignore Sarah’s concerns about how the spy life is changing him and starts his journey of redemption.
3.06: Chuck lies to Ellie about Paris. 3.07: Chuck lies to Hannah about his life and Sarah.
3.08: Chuck is honest with Hannah about having to break up because there are things in his life he cannot tell her.
3.06: Chuck burns Manoosh and sends him underground.
3.09: Chuck saves Morgan from going underground.
3.07: Chuck is a jerk towards Sarah, Morgan, and Hannah.
3.10: Chuck is willing to commit treason to save Casey and Kathleen.
3.08: Chuck follows the mission by pulling Casey’s tooth.
3.11: Chuck does not follow the mission by not killing the mole.
3.07-08: Chuck is selfish in starting a relationship with Hannah even though Morgan likes her.
3.12: Chuck is selfless in saving Shaw even though Sarah is moving to D.C. with Shaw.
Running Away
3.01: (Sarah) Meet me at the Nadrazi train station in three weeks’ time at 7 o’clock.
3.12: (Chuck) Tonight at 7 o’clock, Union Station.
3.01: She’s determined. He’s in an emotional turmoil. She kisses him. He’s passive.
3.12: He’s determined. She’s in an emotional turmoil. He kisses her. She’s passive.
3.01: Chuck, “There is an entire facility here dedicated and designed to turning me into Intersect 2.0.” (aka commitments)
3.12; Sarah,”I’ve made a commitment, and not just to Shaw.”
3.01: (Chuck) Me, a real spy, living a life of adventure.
3.12: (Chuck) I want to spend the rest of my life with you, away from the spy life.
3.01: (Sarah) This is simple. This is a real life.
312: (Chuck) Don’t go. Don’t do it. Leave with me instead. We’ll go anywhere that you want.
3.01: (Sarah) We have to go, Chuck. This is it. Are you coming?
3.12: (Chuck) Don’t answer now. I don’t want to have to convince you. I just want you to show up.
Love
3.12: Chuck tells Sarah he loves her four times.
3.13: Sarah answers Chuck’s “do you love me?” question with a yes, four times.
3.12: Chuck tells Sarah he’s always loved her.
3.13: Sarah tells Chuck she’s always loved him.
3.12: Chuck gives Sarah a tender kiss.
3.13: Sarah gives Chuck a tender kiss.
Francesco, when you say the writers are not going to make Sarah selfish and bitchy in the very season that puts her together with Chuck because she wouldn’t deserve him.
Sarah still had every intention of leaving with Shaw, even after Chuck was selfless and Shaw was selfish. She only decided to stay after Chuck gave his speech. Doesn’t that make her a little bit bitchy? She even showed some stupidity by not seeing how Shaw was manipulating her by telling her that Chuck would kill the mole if she was the one who told him to do it. He’s the boss, he should should be the one telling Chuck. That was Shaw trying to drive the final nail into the Chuck/Sarah relationship coffin.
And that was the nail in the coffin of S3…
Why would the fact that Sarah is going to DC before Chuck’s love declaration make Sarah bitchy? At the end of season 2, she was going with Bryce because that was the mission she was assigned. Did that make her bitchy?
Remember what Sarah told Chuck during their second first date in 2.01. CIA agents do not get to choose. They go where they are assigned.
But the fact they go on missions does not mean they are bitchy or they cannot be in a relationship. In fact, we have internal evidence of this very fact in 4.01 Anniversary when Chuck and Sarah are in a relationship even though Sarah is a spy while Chuck isn’t, and they don’t see each other much because she is often on missions. Even Casey says in his own way that he misses Chuck.
With this being said, and going back to 3.12 American Hero, Sarah is still going to DC because that’s where she is assigned, just as in all the months between 3.19 and 4.01, she is going on all those missions because those are her assignments. And we need to add that, at that point, Chuck still hasn’t declared his love for her. His love declaration from the night before got interrupted.
However, in his love declaration, Chuck is not only asking Sarah to be together (which is what he did in 3.11 and during the interrupted dinner). He is also asking to quit the spy life altogether. He’s asking two things at once.
As for the red test, Sarah knows what Shaw is doing but she does it because she also knows Shaw is right. She is the only one who can convince Chuck to carry on the red test, which could save his life. She is facing a Kobayashi Maru, just like Chuck. She must choose between Chuck’s life and Chuck’s soul, just as Chuck must choose between his moral principles and his ambition to become a spy + Sarah (or so he thinks).
Those are all really bad examples! Chuck and Sarah can be together in 4.01 because Chuck is no longer even an asset. That, and once the relationship has been approved it probably wouldn’t be unapproved unless Chuck became a security leak.
And on the Red Test, just no. Sarah should have known better, period. That’s an order that is immoral, illegal, and flat out wrong. They all belonged in jail for that. And yes, the show played loose with those kind of issues. But when the entertainment value is negative, the burden of plausibility becomes greater. Seriously if I were with WB I would have fired the show runners, well actually several times during the season I would have.
You’re actually dealing with material where the meta data (abysmal entertainment value) is so poor you gain nothing by looking at what is actually on screen. The ONLY defense for the season becomes “it ended well”.
Chuck is not an asset in 2.22 and 3.12 either, so Sarah could be with him even if she is assigned to missions, just as she is between 3.19 and 4.01.
I will not discuss the morality of the red test. It’s the execution (capital punishment) of a bad guy who is responsible for the death of 9 CIA agents and hundreds of civilians. Some people will find it offensive, some others won’t, so I won’t enter a conversation about that point.
The point I am making is that, within the story being told, both Sarah and Chuck are facing a Kobayashi Maru. It’s a no-win situation, and both agree with your assessment that the red test is immoral. That’s why Chuck won’t do it and why Sarah is mad at him in the next episode for going through with it.
And again, the entertainment value is zero for a good percentage of the fanbase, but many others, probably the majority, love the season.
“The majority” is exactly what I disagree with. Apart from Internet, I know exactly zero people who like that season. Out of maybe 30 people I knew watching the show, 6 quit outright at 3.01. “The show is not my kind of thing anymore” or “spy Chuck isn’t any fun” were comments I heard, and that was from people who didn’t just quit immediately. One co-worker told me that when Sarah threw her phone in the pool in 3.01, his wife said “turn it off, I’m never watching this again”.
Internet polls are very flakey, its so easy for a small group to repeat vote or review. I just don’t believe any of them at all. But my experience showed zero real world enthusiasm for the story. Plummeting ratings would tend to re-enforce that. The fact a small number of zealots propped up some on-line polls convinces me of nothing. Especially when our own poll here showed not even close to a majority; at best 1/3, and it was a small 1/3!
Now, I don’t actually believe “no one” liked the season. But I’d be surprised if more than a third actually liked it. The best you can say is, the majority did not stop watching. And indeed, we held just enough viewership to get two more seasons.
I’ve stated on here plenty of times in the past that I liked season 3 before I found my way to this fan site but that was a result of being completely ignorant of how poor the writing actually is in the “misery arc.” To be clear the writing is not poor because nothing makes sense or because it’s impossible to understand why things happen the way they do. It’s that the show stopped being fun , they sucked every bit of charm and emotional gravity out of the show. Okay. maybe not the ENTIRE show, Casey, Morgan, Ellie and Devon are fantastic despite the colossal mess the lead characters are in but they could only do so much heavy lifting before the weight of bad writing caught up with the show. Mask is still to this day the single worst episode of television I have ever watched, period.
I hated Mask and Fake Name when I first watched the show, but now I don’t have a problem with them.
And really, the single worst episode of the show is Living Dead. Nothing in it make sense and damages Chuck’s and Sarah’s characters. Viewers who complain about Sarah’s hypocritical or nonsensical behavior should complain about that episode instead of the first 13 of the season.
But, really, the main point in this conversation is about the sin of season 3a. Many here argue that the sin of season 3a is that it destroys Chuck’s and Sarah’s characters by turning them into idiots who are either selfish or clueless or hypocritical.
That’s not the sin of season 3a. Its sin is to lead many viewers to reach this conclusion even though Chuck and Sarah are actually noble and self-sacrificial.
No primetime TV writer is going to sit in the writers’ room to map out the season and intentionally write a season where they intentionally write the main characters to be selfish and hypocritical in the very season that puts them together since their togetherness would be completely unearned.
But primetime TV writers can unintentionally write a season that leads many viewers to incorrectly conclude that the main characters are selfish and hypocritical in the very season that puts them together.
It’s not easy to fake Internet polls on Reddit or Facebook because you must have an account to vote. Same for IMBb. All seasons of Chuck lost viewers, except for season 5, which was stable for the first 10 episodes and gained 1 million with the last three.
I certainly understand the sentiment of quitting season 3 after watching Pink Slip because that’s what I almost did, too.
But I don’t make statistics. When I actually look at statistics, even on platforms like Reddit where many viewers are vocal in their criticism of season 3, it always turns out the majority of viewers actually like the season.
Morgan really had a good S3!
The majority of those accounts voting liked the season. After running a site for almost 15 years, well, you have no clue. Polls are utterly bogus.
Polls used to decide something are fine, polls used to say that opinions reflect consensus are stupid, as is most statistical data on the internet
Now that last, about unintentionally writing a bad season I can agree with. And that’s exactly why the season is so often described as horrible. The INTENT hardly matters if so many viewers see it “wrong”. The truth is on the screen, and it isn’t pretty.
And BTW, most would agree with you assessment of Living Dead. I think it’s the least popular episode of the back arc.
S03E01 Vs. The Pink Slip is the 3rd worst episode of the show in my opinion – 1st is S05E12 and 2nd is S05E13.
The storytelling about Sarah having sex with her mark is so ugly, so destructive. Out of her character.
Just as it is out of character Chuck dump Sarah without giving her clear explanations, without giving her his reasons.
It’s really hard to watch after all of this.
Karen,
Those three episodes are fine. The only episode you should have a problem with if you care about Sarah’s character is 3.17 Living Dead.
Chuck’s behavior in Prague is explained in Carina’s video at the end of 3.02, which ran back-to-back with 3.01.
As for Sarah’s behavior in the last two episodes, did you have problems with Lon Kirk lathering Sarah in 1.11 and with Sarah saying in 4.16 that she went to Eyes Wide Shut-like orgies?
If she would do stuff like that, why would she disbelieve in 5.12 that she married a mark like Chuck?
Mask is the worst and it is not even close, I will fight everyone on that!
Why is Mask the worst?
“did you have problems with Lon Kirk lathering Sarah in 1.11 and with Sarah saying in 4.16 that she went to Eyes Wide Shut-like orgies?”
If I have problems watching Sarah as a CIA prostitute? Of course I have!!! This was not her established character. She had strong moral boundaries until that moment!
In S01E11 she was on a boat surrounded by agents inside and outside of it. About S04E16 I remember her saying that she went to a party like that and it didn’t have anything like Chuck was suggesting.
Sarah being a CIA prostitute is so disgusting that @actDave said a few posts above:
“One co-worker told me that when Sarah threw her phone in the pool in 3.01, his wife said “turn it off, I’m never watching this again”.”
I also have problems with Sarah as a CIA prostitute. That is why I think she would not have done anything sexual with Lon Kirk in 1.11 or during the orgies she attended (she said she’d gone to those, and they didn’t look anything like the party they were attending in 4.16).
So, when it comes to Sarah believing that she married her mark Chuck in 5.12, I interpret that as I do the scenes above, especially because we can see her instinctively pull away from Chuck when he wants to be physically close to her.
Yeah I think Sarah truly avoided that kind of work. Carina maybe not! But Sarah did.
Just look at how she acts in 5.12, she’s clearly revolted by the whole idea of it. And she acts tense and cold around her “so called” husband. If she were at all proficient in this sort of work she’d know how to play the part.
I think the game is just tease and release! Disengage (tranque, subdue, or make an excuse to flee) once mission objectives (intel, or whatever) are attained.
So… the situations of S01E11 and S04E16 were very light, let’s say it. In the S04E16 I don’t remember her saying that she had gone to orgies. Now the situation of S03E01 is very clear, with virtually no space for ambiguity. Sarah is having sex with her mark. And that’s is totally out of character for her! Poor Sarah!
Actually, the situation in 1.11 is more insinuating than in 3.01. In 1.11, Sarah is being lathered by Lon Kirk, and they are supposed to go in a private room under the deck. In 3.01, she is simply swimming in the guy’s swimming pool, and the guy is a mark for a simple courier exchange, so I doubt Sarah has to be intimate with him.
In 4.16, she says she went to orgies, and they didn’t look anything like the party they are at, meaning they didn’t look this tame.
In 5.12, you have a Sarah who instinctively pulls away from her mark Chuck, which is more than what you see in 1.11 or 3.01.
All these are great examples of us viewers focusing on the wrong stuff, missing the forest for the trees.
If we were supposed to focus on these aspects (Sarah’s seductions of marks), they would be emphasized. They are not. This means they are not important. What we should instead focus on is the theme of the episode and the counterpoint.
For example, in 3.01, Sarah’s dance scene with her mark Gilles is the counterpoint to her dinner and dance scene with her mark Chuck in the pilot.
1. While Chuck was passively listening to mariachi players in the pilot, here he’s actively playing as one (symbolizes his active role this season. Charles in charge).
2. Whereas Sarah was aware of the threat to Chuck and her in the pilot while Chuck was clueless, she is now clueless about the threat while Chuck is aware.
3. Whereas in the pilot, Sarah danced seductively to protect Chuck, here she dances seductively to provoke Chuck.
4. Whereas in the pilot Sarah saved Chuck from the threat he could not see, here Chuck saves Sarah from the threat she cannot see.
This symbolic reversal of roles is what we should notice and focus on. By focusing on non-essential stuff, we miss the forest for the trees.
It is suggested, but not shown. It’s possible she;s stringing him along.
But no doubt an ugly scene from the forgettable season.
I’m not sure it’s even suggested. If Sarah wouldn’t use sex with Chuck in 1.08 to keep him docile and compliant, why would she use sex with a mark she despises for a simple courier exchange?
@Karen Solbach,
I think you have to accept that the writers and showrunners depict spying as a rather amoral job. People are shot, people are assassinated and, yes, people seduce and sleep with marks. We’re even introduced to Roan Montgomery, who ran classes at the CIA’s seduction school. Or as Sarah was so fond of saying about spying, “nothing is real.”
The world in which Sarah dwells before meeting Chuck is why she is attracted to him. He is real, honest, moral and loyal. She didn’t have that in the spy world world or even her broken family life. As we learn over the show’s development, Sarah wants what Chuck represents. That’s why she impulsively kisses him when he refuses to abandon her as the “bomb” is about to go off in Hard Salami. That’s why she is disgusted when she thinks he killed the mole. Hence the very multi-layered “you saved me” line she utters at the end of Other Guy.
We love Sarah partially because she find perfection in Chuck. And, of course, vice versa.
Yes, but just because “some people change,” as Sarah says to Chuck in 3.10, it does not mean “all spies” do. Sarah was always special, as Chuck tells Carina in 1.04. Otherwise, we viewers would not like her.
The whole point of season 3 is that Chuck becomes worthy of Sarah. He has to go through a whole hero’s journey to finally make love to her. If she has casual sex with every Tom, Dick, and Harry (marks) she is basically a prostitute, and what’s so special about “finally” making love to a prostitute, exactly?
If she were a CIA-sanctioned prostitute, she wouldn’t have any moral qualms about using sex to keep Chuck compliant in 1.08 to fend off Lou’s threat. But we can see that she does have moral qualms. We can also see in 5.12 that she recoils from physical intimacy with her mark Chuck, and this 5.12 Sarah is supposed to be the Sarah she was before meeting Chuck.
No. Sarah from the beginning is presented to us with a strong moral sense, very different from Carina. She is not ammoral. Sarah even says it, that she is different from Carina. Sarah didn’t use sex to soften Chuck, for example. Carina would.
The S03E01 scene is really ugly, because it destroys her character, starting the whole S03A mess.
@Francesco sees with eyes different from mine. For me, the S01E11 scene doesn’t lead to think that she is having intimacy with her mark – controlled event, a lot of agents, etc. S03E01, on the other hand, led me to think that yes, she was having sex with her mark. From the first time I watched it and every other time, my reaction is always that it’s a disgusting scene. Absolutely degrading to Sarah’s character. And consequently being a person without moral boundaries, who wouldn’t deserve Chuck. Although Chuck had dumped Sarah in S03E01, it’s very difficult to stay on the Sarah’s side in that “black box” period.
About S04E16 “that she went to Eyes Wide Shut-like orgies” , I need to review this scene. I don’t really remember it.
There is nothing that suggests that Sarah is having sex with Gilles in 3.01 any more than what is suggested in her orgy comment in 4.16 or in her willingness to be lathered by Lon Kirk in 1.11.
And again, if she is a CIA—sanctioned prostitute who has sex with just about anyone, there is nothing special in Chuck’s hero journey to become “worthy” of making love to Sarah in 3.13 since no one has to go through any special journey to “earn” sex with a prostitute.
You seem to be taking seduction, something that has many levels to it within the show, and looking at it with a level of alarming personal bias. By your logic Sarah was going to sleep with Chuck in the pilot to find out about the Intersect, obviously, this didn’t happen but, but I’m just pointing out how ridiculous your viewpoint on this is (I assume we’re referring to the scene where that mostly begins with Sarah slapping Chuck to maintain cover) is.
I’ll mostly agree with Francesco and Josh on this one. I dislike the scene Karen is referring to because of its suggested intimacy. But they didn’t show it, and I’m comfortable with things we know about Sarah to say she doesn’t operate that way.
And for all our frustrations with 5.12, it does confirm this. Sarah is TOLD she married a mark she doesn’t remember, and logically should be able to guess all that entails. Yet she can’t bring herself to be even a little “warm” towards him. She is spectacularly bad at it.
Yes, I think there are a lot of emotions on the viewers’ part on Sarah’s seduction missions, and this clouds people’s judgment.
If we step back and look at things logically, it’s fairly obvious that Sarah is the kind of spy who will do first-base seduction missions with marks and fellow spies really well—think about her seductive dance with Bryce in 2.03 while being very cool towards him in dialogue. Or think of her with Tyler in 2.12.
But she is never going beyond first base, let alone all the way to home base, for missions. She is not Carina. She can’t be as a matter of principle because, if she were, the whole series would make no sense since she would use sex to keep Chuck docile and compliant in the first two seasons and she would not be worthy of Chuck’s pursuit and hero’s journey. Even Quinn’s challenge at the end of 5.10 Bo that Chuck would never get a woman like Sarah without the Intersect would become completely ridiculous since she would essentially be a prostitute, and I’m pretty sure even Chuck in the pilot is more than worthy of a prostitute; in fact, Carina would be more than happy to oblige in 1.04.
The only way to go all the way to home base with Sarah is to be a spy god and be liked by her.
Guys… it’s about my perceptions, my viewpoint. Each of us reacts to stories in a different way.
I particularly saw this scene being absurdly disgusting, It is about what I saw, my feelings watching it. Somehow the writers led me to see it that way. This scene shouldn’t be there. It has no use in the story, other than to put doubt on Sarah’s moral integrity. I didn’t see the other scenes we talked about in the same way.
I’m sorry, Karen. What specific scene in Pink Slip are you talking about that you find disgusting and that shouldn’t be there?
@atcDave,
Sarah clearly has a superior moral code. In episode 5.12 that you referenced, for example, remember she tells Quinn there’s no need to blow up the DARPA facility because Chuck et. al. are trapped and will be arrested. Casey, on the other hand, would have blown the facility with glee a
nd a grunt. (As the totally corrupted Quinn did.)
But I think it’s naive and a bit prudish to suggest Sarah was virginal. in fact, Casey made several snide remarks about Sarah’s modus operandi in Seasons 1 and 2. Of course, all this is in the eye of the beholder. Some think Sarah being a trained assassin is okay, but a little physical contact is out of bounds. Others, including me, think it’s all part of the spy game as the showrunners outlined it. Sarah was no Carina, to be sure, but there would have been times …
BTW, this discussion is rather common in spy tales. In the Prisoner, for instance, Patrick McGoohan’s character never carried a gun. And he never even kissed a woman because McGoohan personally was against kissing another actor!
…times when she was like Carina?
If she was, seducing Chuck in 1.08 to fend off Lou would certainly have been one of those times, right? I mean, talk about the perfect situation.
Sarah was a trained assassin, but that does not mean immoral. She only killed bad guys in life-and-death situations. In fact, when she apparently doesn’t in 2,11, when she apparently kills Mauser in cold blood, Chuck is horrified.
And Casey’s teasing Sarah is Casey being Casey.
Again, Sarah cannot be a CIA-sanctioned prostitute, even occasionally, as a matter of principle because the show would become meaningless—there would be no reason for Chuck to become “worthy” of a prostitute.
So, killing people for the country is morally right, but sleeping around is not? I’m pretty sure that Schwartz and even Fedak are a bit more open minded than this. Sure, they made Sarah a prize in S3a,, but at least they didn’t go above and beyond to keep her “pure” enough for our hero
As for 1.08, she actually did try to seduce Chuck, it just didn’t go anywhere because he threw a fit. And since it was for her own personal interest, I don’t see how that would have made her a “prostitute.”
Executing people in cold blood and sleeping around with marks are both immoral acts. Sarah does neither. Chuck does not like either act. Why would the viewers? Would you like it for your wife or girlfriend to do that in her line of duty? I don’t think so.
Sarah kills people in life-and-death situations, and that is perfectly moral. Chuck has no problem with it. It’s only when he thinks that she executes Mauser in cold blood that he is horrified, as he should be.
1.08 Sarah has no intention to go to home base with Chuck. She makes it obvious in the episode that it’s just a cover to fool Ellie and Devon. The fact that she is pleased when she sees Chuck setting up the mood in the bedroom does not mean she’s going all the way. And if she did, it would be immoral because she would be using sex to keep Chuck docile and compliant.
“Sarah was a trained assassin, but that does not mean immoral” were your words, not mine. That is debatable, but the morality of sleeping around is not, because there’s nothing immoral about actions that don’t harm others.
“Sarah does neither” – not only she did both, but she did something even worse: she murdered Mauser for Chuck’s and, by extension, her own personal benefit
You don’t know that Sarah wasn’t going to go all the way with Chuck in 1.08, the only thing you know was that she was trying to seduce him. And you forget that the initial plan was to in fact have sex, so that Chuck could become more comfortable with her. She only backtracked after seeing him interested in the sandwich girl
I don’t know what you mean about “sleeping around.” If you mean having different boyfriends and girlfriends, some people will agree with you and some won’t, depending on their sexual morals. But that’s not what we are talking about here. Most viewers are okay with Sarah sleeping with Bryce or Chuck because she loves them (or has spy feelings for Bryce or whatever).
If you mean it’s okay for Sarah to sleep with marks and kill people and then it’s also okay for her to hold Chuck to a higher moral standard while he has to grovel to “deserve” the love of a CIA-sanctioned prostitute and assassin, you may want to talk relationships with a trained psychologist.
Sarah is supposed to be the best CIA agent. If she needs to sleep with Gilles in 3.01 for a simple courier exchange op, she’s a moron. And the irony would be that her sleeping with the mark was all for naught anyway since Chuck blows the whole op at El Bucho, so she must feel pretty stupid. That’s only one of the many reasons the idea that Sarah sleeps with Gilles in 3.01 is untenable—it destroys the heroine’s likability for the viewers (see Karen’s reaction in this very thread) and turns into a moron because her sleeping with the mark was all for naught.
As for Mauser, what Sarah commits is not murder but manslaughter or an execution. She was simply arresting him, but he essentially becomes the loaded gun pointed at Chuck, and she has to execute him to protect Chuck, which is her duty. Mauser and Sarah are not civilians in the show. They are soldiers fighting a war between the CIA and Fulcrum, so the rules of war apply. Sure, Sarah also does it because she loves Chuck, we can see that, but her execution is justified. Even Chuck accepts is as such.
All other killings performed by Sarah are in the course of duty, in life-and-death situations, so they are morally justified. In fact, even Chuck has no moral problems with that.
And no, in 1.08, there was no plan to go through with the seduction. Sarah specifically mentions while they go over the plan outside the Wienerlicious that they don’t have to do it, but have to fake it, and Chuck keeps saying, “I got it, I got it.”
A lot of us have issues with casual sex. Especially if you’re actually in love with someone else. The “doesn’t hurt anyone” dynamic is a little wonky there…
Likewise on the killing. I have absolutely no problem with the International standard for justified killing (to protect your life or the life of another) but obviously an ordered kill, an assassination crosses all sorts of lines.
In short, neither whore nor killer is an admirable label. I’m fine with someone having done such things in a past they are no longer proud of. Ultimately that last is key.
I’m all with Dave here.
And to add insult to injury, the idea of having casual sex with a mark for a blown op that is ultimately all for naught is a boomerang that hits a CIA-sanctioned prostitute in the butt.
If then, this moronic Get Smart-level prostitute demands that her pursuer adhere to a moral standard that she cannot even hope to uphold while she hooks up with another spy who need not adhere to said moral standard, I know excellent psychiatrists I can recommend to such couple right before I switch to a different channel.
I don’t believe Sarah has a “superior” moral code; if nothing else she’s an accomplished liar until about the mid-point of the show. Then she realizes its counter-productive with Chuck (or in an actual relationship) and ends it.
I also would never call her “virginal”. At the very least she had a relationship with Bryce that was presumably full service. But I think I’ll side with Francesco on this one, probably not much beyond “first base” for work.
AtcDave,
My use of the words “superior” and “virginal” are comparative, of course. Compared to Casey and Carina and other spies we see, Sarah has the superior sense of morality. It is why she immediately becomes Chuck’s protector and advocate rather than treat him as a mark
As for virginal, I meant in the sense of her spy duties. But again, this is all perception. We are told little and shown even less.
Sarah does have a superior moral code except for Chuck. She is not selfish and only kills when necessary. She does lie until Chuck makes her realize it’s wrong (not just counter-productive), and she learns to stop it. The moral point of the show is that Chuck’s virtue ethics is morally superior to the spy world’s Utilitarian (greater good) ethics. This is shown again and again in the series.
And yes, Sarah cannot go beyond first base in the line of duty because the core theme of the show would become meaningless: there’s no Hero’s Journey needed to earn the sexual favors of a CIA-sanctioned prostitute. Chuck could have had that with Carina in 1.04. Heck, Morgan does have that with Carina in 3.02.
She, of course, does have a full relationship with Bryce and Shaw, but that’s because they are spy gods who she has spy feelings for. It’s not by accident that both Bryce and Shaw are superman-y spies in the show. The casting of Routh alone should give us a spy clue.
Francesco, Sarah wasn’t assigned to go with Bryce. She had the option but her assignment was Chuck. When Chuck is giving his speech to Sarah in American Hero, she says she’s made a commitment, and not just to Shaw, but she had no problems braking that “other” commitment when she chose to be with Chuck.
And yes, she was a little bitchy (just a little) because Chuck moves mountains for her and all Shaw did was do something for himself without even talking to Sarah about it.
That’s how i see it anyway. I’m reminded by a line i heard in a movie a long time ago….”In matters of opinion, debate is useless. There’s no accounting for taste.
Ultimately opinion is most of what we’ve been arguing here. The problem can be when opinion and perception collide. How you SEE something may, or may not be a provable reality.
I also think an opinion can change once our understanding of the story changes. I know it did for me. I absolutely hated Pink Slip when I first watched it, and now I like it. Sure, it’s emotionally painful to watch certain scenes (cough, Prague, cough), but the rest of the episode is fine. I especially like Chuck’s guitar performance at El Bucho and Casey’s and Sarah’s shocked and impressed reactions.
Nope. I disliked the whole negative tone of the episode. And there’s a big problem your admitted initial dislike. The vast majority of viewers will only ever watch an episode once. If it fails that first test, it fails.
This isn’t some thesis project to pick apart, it’s entertainment. If you didn’t see it at first blush, neither did most other viewers. But for most of them it’s that first take away, that is also the last.
Yeah, you’re right about that.
Chuck is no longer the Intersect in 2.22. The Intersect is out of his head. Beckman asks him if he wants to work for the new Intersect project, and he laughs at her. Then he and Casey leave, and Beckman tells Sarah that she will be heading the new Intersect project with Bryce, and they were leaving for Zurich the day after Devon and Ellie’s wedding.
In American Hero, Chuck is asking Sarah two things: to be together and to quit the spy life. It’s when he talks about quitting the spy life that she balks and says she made a commitment. Notice that she says commitment, not say commitments. She made a work commitment to Shaw, Beckman, and the CIA to go work against the Ring in D.C.
This work commitment is clearly a double reference to her work commitment in 2.22 to go work on the new Intersect project with Bryce and to Chuck’s work commitment in Prague to be the new Intersect.
And we can see that Chuck finally pierces through Sarah’s work commitment objection in American Hero (unlike in 2.22, when he gave up), and you can actually see Sarah nod expectantly when Chuck says they will go to Mexico and everywhere else she wants.
And no, Sarah is not bitchy in the least. The scene is there to show her the difference between the two men (Shaw’s selfishness and Chuck’s selflessness). This is not even a matter of opinion; it’s the standard 5-act story structure. In fact, I have a 5-act story structure analysis of American Hero on my blog.
“I’m sorry, Karen. What specific scene in Pink Slip are you talking about that you find disgusting and that shouldn’t be there?”
The pool scene in S03E01, which implies that Sarah has been with her mark for a long time, which consequently implies shes was having sex with him.
I never saw it that way. First, I always saw Gilles as fairly asexual. He never has his hands on Sarah unless she forces him during the dance. Even in the pool scene, he’s sitting in a chair facing away from the pool. And during the couple of months she and Casey prepared the mission, Sarah would easily tell Gilles the same thing she told Chuck in 1.04, “we are taking it slow.”
It’s a non issue for me. The pool scene is just eye candy for Sarah/Yvonne fans and the ending scene of the teaser, which sets up the main conflict of the episode.
I thought you were talking about season 1, where Sarah had a choice to go with Bryce or honor her assignment with Chuck, my mistake.
You see, when Sarah says she made a commitment, and not just to Shaw, i always thought she mean’t a romantic commitment, not a work commitment.
I doubt Sarah would make a romantic commitment to someone who just chose a suicide mission for a dead woman over her and told her to her face. Besides, Shaw and Sarah do not have a romantic relationship by a spy partnership with benefits in which Sarah tried to find real and failed. Shaw is constantly reminding her to think and act like a spy and stop with the feelings nonsense, even in the very scene where he chooses his suicide mission over her. He wouldn’t accept any kind of romantic commitment anyway because he would consider it nonsense. Sarah’s commitment made to Shaw and Beckman is a work one and she mentions it because Chuck has just asked her not only to be with him but to quit the spy life altogether.
This show is entirely built on counterpoint and parallels. Her commitment comment is the mirror of her commitment comment in 2.22 and of Chuck’s commitment comment in Prague. In fact, Chuck’s love declaration scene itself is a mirror of the hallway conversation in 2.22 and the reversal of the Prague conversation.
“And yes, she was a little bitchy (just a little) because Chuck moves mountains for her and all Shaw did was do something for himself without even talking to Sarah about it.”
You got the point! That’s it!
But for me in S03E01-13, Sarah was a bitch, not a bitchy (according to my American friends there is a big difference).
Sarah is the opposite of a bitch in season 3. After she sees Carina’s video at the end of the second episode, she forgives Chuck on the spot and, as she tells him in 3.07 and 3.10, she pulls back because she doesn’t want to stand in his way of becoming the perfect spy. She sacrifices her dream of being with him so he can have his dream of becoming the perfect spy.
There is nothing more noble than self-sacrificial love, and that’s what Sarah is doing in season 3.
The moment Chuck is becoming a spy in 3.11 (she hasn’t stood in his way) and asks for her back, she wastes no time going back to him.
He doesn’t have to move a finger, just apologize for Prague and ask for another shot. And he gets it.
Look at the way Sarah looks at Chuck from 3.03 to 3.12. The girl is a goner. All S3 Chuck has to do is say the word, and she is his. It doesn’t hurt that Chuck becomes pretty awesome and cool in season 3, which, added to his charm, makes him pretty irresistible. Watch the way Sarah looks at him in 3.08 when he shows up dressed like Rafe. She would jump him right there and then if Shaw and Casey weren’t around.
Chuck was also a jerk. Literally get involved with the next cute girl to come along. Both characters behaved horribly. All part of why it’s called the Misery Arc, and all why I say S3 starts at Honeymooners.
Neither character was a jerk. That’s the point. The main characters wouldn’t intentionally be made to be jerks by the writers in the very season that puts them together because their togetherness and happiness would be unearned.
Chuck does go through a phase in 3.06-08 when he tries to act like a traditional spy by lying and burning assets, but we can see that he hates it. Those episodes are there to show us that he is acting against his nature and, of course, those are the episodes that lead to the darkest stages of the Hero’s Journey (Tests, Approach, and Ordeal) and are followed by the redemption stages (Reward, Road Back, Resurrection) in 3.09-12 when, after being saved by Sarah and Hannah in 3.08, Chuck becomes his own spy.
The next cute girl to come along is, quite literally, Chuckette. Hannah is a flawless female S1 Chuck (a charming computer genius who lost a great future, works as a nerd herder, wants a real relationship, and is attracted to a hot spy. Does she remind us of anyone?), just as Shaw is a flawed male S1 Sarah (a superman-y spy who denies emotions). The relationships are there to show Chuck and Sarah that they can no longer be satisfied with a partner who is a mirror of their past self—they have changed each other too much.
Hence why I said that Fedak likes to write in parallels, symbolism and mirroring, taking his writing at face value is to misunderstand it completely and thus misunderstand the entire show.
Nope. Chuck was a jerk.
I don’t disagree with you I’m just saying that it was done because Fedak operates in parallels, symbolism and mirroring, I don’t enjoy watching Chuck that way but neither does Sarah and that is the point
Again, the only time when Chuck can be said to be a jerk is between 3.06 and 3.08 when he lies to Ellie and Hannah and for burning Manoosh, but we can see he hates it, and jerks are not known for hating being jerks.
As for starting a relationship with Hannah, it’s also very understandable—Chuck cannot be with the woman he loves, is indeed trying to deny his very feelings for the woman he loves because love is a liability, and a nice Chuckette shows up on the horizon and is hot for him. It’s tempting. It feels good. It’s human nature.
Hannah is also there to show that what Chuck told to Lou in 1.09 (“You are everything I’m looking for. I just can’t look right now.”) is no longer true. Chuck has been sarahfied and even a perfect Chuckette is no longer everything he’s looking for.
There’s nothing bitchy or selfish in not wanting to be with someone. Chuck has to move mountains compared to Shaw because the expectations for him are higher. Similar to how you have higher expectations for someone you’re marrying than for someone with whom you’re having a one night stand
Chuck doesn’t even have to move mountains. All he has to do in season 3 is say the word, and Sarah is his. It takes him all of 30 seconds to win Sarah back during the 3.11 stakeout.
Even after his red test, Sarah is already responding to him during the interrupted dinner.
I agree with this assessment. We get so caught up in Chuck’s moral predicament and the Shaw of it all that we don’t realize that Sarah will accept Chuck as long as she knows that he hasn’t comprised who he is to become a spy. The red test is used as dramatic irony to push this relationship deal breaker to its absolute limit. Until Casey clears this up Sarah believes she has turned Chuck into “nothing but a spy” and out of self-loathing ALMOST settles for Shaw. Sarah always ALMOST leaves Chuck behind but darkness needs light it can’t exist otherwise. Sarah is drawn to Chuck always even when she doesn’t remember him in 5×13 too!
I’ll do you one better and say that Sarah will accept Chuck even when she thinks he has killed the mole. She is ready to accept him during the interrupted dinner, and she accepts him the next day during his love declaration, before finding out the truth about the mole.
It’s important that Sarah accept Chuck even in his fallen state, otherwise she only loves the idea of Chuck, not the real Chuck.
No, he did have to move mountains since Sarah frowned upon him lying, killing or manipulating others
Sarah doesn’t frown upon Chuck lying or manipulating others. Watch the scenes. She is saddened and heart-broken but she still loves him. See her jealousy of Hannah in 3.07 or the dejected look on her face when she sees Hannah at Chuck’s dinner table in 3.08. The only time she is upset is in 3.12, which is an obvious reversal of the Mauser incident in season 2, when Chuck was wad at her for doing essentially the same thing.
By that very evening at the restaurant, however, all Chuck has to do is ask for that one secret and lie, and she’s ready to accept him.
The idea that Chuck has to move mountains to win Sarah in season 3 has no basis. She’s hot for him through and through.
Bulldog,
In season 1, Sarah is going with Bryce because of the bomb kiss. The handler acted unprofessional by kissing her asset and showing her real feelings, so when Bryce offers her an easy way out to a familiar past and a relationship that she can handle, she almost takes it.
But the whole wordless scene at the end of 1.10 tells us she doesn’t like the idea. Bryce is her old world. Chuck is her new reality.
@atcDave said” Nope. Chuck was a jerk”
Ok… he is. But Sarah has a lot of guilty too. In S03E01-13, Sarah is a bitch.
Sarah never making Chuck’s life easy, never talking about her feelings for him, playing the difficult one, the distant one. She is a bitch because for Shaw she takes the initiative to offer herself to him after that ugly sexual harassment scenes and for Chuck – the man she really loves – she doesn’t lift a finger towards him.
Why make it easier, if she can make it difficult to Chuck? Already, towards Shaw, how many facilities, everything simple, clear and fast. Come on!
Human psychology, Sarah makes it easy for Shaw because wether she knows it or not she hates herself, and she hates herself because she is the catalyst for Chuck’s becoming a spy, Shaw is nothing more then an attempt to numb that pain. Sarah makes it harder for Chuck because, much the same it’s the only way she can cope with what he is turning into
Josh,
I’m not sure I would go all Sigmund Freud on Sarah’s relationship with Shaw when it can be explained through counterpoint and parallels.
In the first two seasons, Chuck and Sarah had to face the ghost from their past (Jill and Bryce) and the temptation from their present (Lou and Cole). Now, in season 3, they both get a glimpse of their future with a partner who is the mirror of their past self in order to realize it’s no longer enough.
Here’s Yvonne on the Sham relationship:
The same way Chuck has three one-week girlfriends, Sarah has one three-week boyfriend.
Remember when Chuck told Lou, “You are everything I’m looking for. I just can’t look right now.”? And when Sarah told Cole that she’s not the kind of girl who cheats on her cover boyfriend?
Well, what if Chuck were free to look and Sarah didn’t have a boyfriend? That’s exactly what season 3 does. It gives them the freedom from their cover and real relationship and lets them get a glimpse of their future with a flawless Chuckette and with a superman-y male Sarah so that they can actualize Devon’s prophecy at the end of 3.03 Angel de la Muerte, “If having a double life means having to give up half of your real life, it’s not worth it.”
Both Sham and Hack relationships are half of a real life. In Hack, there is no truth (Chuck’s words to Hannah in his break-up speech); in Sham, there is no love (Shaw loves Eve while Sarah loves Chuck). Both relationships are half of a real life. Only together can Charah “have it all” (Chuck’s words at the end of Honeymooners, a full double life.
The Shaw arc is also Chuck’s revenge on the Cole arc. In the Cole arc, Chuck felt he was not enough to keep his girl from James Bond Cole. In the Shaw arc, Chuck is more than man enough to first save James Bond Shaw and then win the girl from him.
I don’t think counter points and parallels are enough to justify the very poor way the wt/wt is dragged out excessively, nor do I think that heroes journey is a valid excuse either. TPTB could have accomplished the same goal without making it such a miserable experience for the viewer. That is why the psychology behind it is the only justifiable analysis to me. But I’m more analytical about human behavior by default so I digress.. It is poor execution regardless and no amount of explanations can change that.
Josh,
I think Sarah mentions after Chuck’s red test that she realizes at that point that it’s all her fault that Chuck has become an assassin. If she realizes her responsibility and guilt at the tail end of her relationship with Shaw, those feelings cannot be the reason for her relationship with Shaw in Fake Name.
Sarah’s season-3 journey is about wanting a real life. It was Chuck’s journey in the first two seasons, and it’s her journey this season. Her desire to find real in a loveless relationship with Shaw (who, according to Yvonne is a spy like Sarah, the male version of Sarah) now that Chuck is lost to her must be the driver for her relationship. If there were more than that, it would be mentioned in the show, but it isn’t.
I won’t argue whether the season was executed well or not. That’s a matter of opinion. I have a poll running on the Chuck SubReddit right now, and so far 95% of the 250 votes are in favor of the season, and only 5% are negative. But yes, of course, it could have been written differently. As for resolving the issue faster, I don’t know. They dedicated one episode of S3a to each stage of Chuck’s hero’s journey and resolve his journey in essentially 12 episodes, whereas they took 35 episodes to resolve it for Sarah in the first two seasons.
I’m usually the first to defend the writer(s) but I don’t think anyone or anything will successfully convince me that what we got was the best way to do this dance for a third time and for the record 3×01-3×07 is at least bearable for me and I can even tolerate fake name because I really do find Chuck as Rafe entertaing but I swear to Tron, mask is the worst bad episode of TV I have ever watched and it makes the good stuff in 3×11 and 312 and even 3×13 almost impossible to appreciate. By that point I just wanted Yvonne and Routh separated, the acting is clear that she is forcing herself through the scene and that’s NEVER good.
After the restaurant scene, where Sarah sees that pretty much everyone – Casey, Devon, Morgan – is helping Chuck to get her back, it was her obligation to act towards Chuck. The they will / they won’t had already crossed the limit of all reasonable limits. The show had become boring, almost insupportable to be watch. Sarah at this time was unresponsive towards Chuch ( a bitch), when she should step down from the pedestal that she puts herself for Chuck, not for Shaw, and take some action – given in – making things happen between her and Chuck, for everyone’s sake!
“Misery Arc”, isn’t it?
I don’t disagree with you I’m just giving you insight into why this doesn’t happen until Sarah has absolute proof. She lives in a world of constant lies and manipulation. The psychological damage that has caused to Sarah and how she responds (or doesn’t respond in this case) to Chuck’s efforts to become a spy is paramount and not something that should be dismissed just because her behavior angers the viewer. At that point you’re just projecting personal feelings about Sarah’s actions instead of trying to understand them.
I bring this up because you came to this site seeking answers, and many of us have given you objective factual evidence why S3 and the finale are the way they are. Dave, the others who regularly posted blogs on this site, as well as many other fans like myself have analyzed CHUCK to death for more than a decade. That experience means we can give you an overall objective view of the things you find bad about the characters or the story.
Your experience with the show is still fresh so your emotions absolutely makes sense but speaking for myself I am far enough removed from my emotions with the show that the conversation around S3 and the finale is starting to go in circles for me and so, even though it is hard to say goodbye, I must, at least for now:)
Karen,
I think you are missing the point. Sarah cannot be with Chuck. Chuck knows she likes him. It’s Chuck who pulls away from Sarah from the end of 3.02 until 3.11 because his feelings for her are a liability in the spy life.
He tells her so in his speech in Karl’s vault in 3.02 and again by the fountain the next day, “You are right. I’m not a real spy. I’m emotional, and that makes me a liability.”
So, from that moment on, until 3.11, he pulls away from Sarah and tries to become an unemotional spy like all others, until he gets emotionally constipated in 3.08-09 and Morgan has to help him accept his emotions instead of burying them.
It’s not like Sarah rejects Chuck for Shaw. Sarah starts a relationship with Shaw because Chuck is unavailable to her and she hopes to have find real in a loveless spy relationship. Shaw is a rebound. Shaw is her Lou/Jill.
The moment Chuck is becoming a spy in 3.11 and asks for her back, she wastes no time going back to him.
Karen,
Sarah has no time to act after the restaurant scene. They are all called in for questioning, Devon and the gang get arrested, and the next day she goes to work. She does not get a chance to see Chuck.
Also, the point of the 3.11 stakeout and 3.12 restaurant scenes is that Chuck’s requests to be with Sarah are interrupted even though they are well-received by Sarah.
Interruptions in Chuck always mean that the timing is not right. Think about the Barstow motel scene in 2.21 and Morgan’s condom IOU.
So, why do Chuck and Sarah get interrupted in 3.11 and at the restaurant in 3.12? Because Chuck is trying to have both Sarah and the spy life without making a clear choice about which comes first in his life.
You see, in Prague, Chuck made a clear choice. He chose the spy life over Sarah. Here in 3.11 and at the restaurant, he’s trying to have both without making a clear choice. Now, Sarah loves him and is ready to accept him regardless (she even tells him in 3.14 Honeymooners that she need not come first in his life) but fate (aka the writers) are not so forgiving. Hence, the interruptions.
Then, in the third act of 3.12 American Hero, Chuck gets a pep talk from Ellie. Why? Because the third act is the turning point of the script, and Ellie not coincidentally tells Chuck he needs to make a clear choice. If Sarah comes first in his life, he must show it.
And so, Chuck does exactly that in the fourth act: he shows Sarah that she comes first in his life by first saving Shaw for her sake and then offering to quit the spy life to be with her, thus quitting on his season-long ambition to become a spy.
And, of course, now that he does that, there are no more interruptions, and he can complete his love declaration.
Yeah, i understood that scene and everything that goes with it. I was just pointing out to you that this was what i thought you were talking about earlier, but you were talking about something from season 2.
Seems like i misrepresented myself a bit. I was only confused over the commitment comment Sarah made about Shaw. Even though i always knew she never had real feelings for him, saying she made a commitment to Shaw made my brain misfire. If she said that about anyone else, i would not have read anything into it.
Also, when i called Sarah a bitch, i was only doing so because i thought she was still choosing Shaw over Chuck even after everything Chuck did for her. That was wrong. Now i realize it was a work commitment she was making.
@Josh Z,
I fully understand your exhaustion at talking about Season 3, especially with Karen, who is now going through what we all experienced a dozen years ago.
But I have found value here. Karen’s comments led me to rewatch some Season 3 episodes, reread some contemporaneous reviews and revisit the contemporaneous posts here. And, surprisingly, I think I have gleaned a new insight or two.
1) The showrunners–and I suspect Schwartz more than Fedak–were incredibly unsubtle. They blatantly reran the Lou/Jill arcs for Chuck and the Cole arc for Sarah. There weren’t even any twists or jukes. In Season 3.0, they just reran the stuff from Seasons 1 and 2 and apparently expected us not to notice. In retrospect, I think it may have been the shameless recycling even more than the WT/WT aspect that offended viewers in the end.
2) Especially at this blog, the insightful posters whipped themselves into a frenzy of explanations and alternate scenarios attempting to make sense of what they were seeing. They all had such respect for the show that they couldn’t fathom that the showrunners were serving up another helping of the Season 1/2 scenarios. It was the farthest thing from their minds. Surely, there was a twist or a secret plan or a con being run. None of them could believe it was the same old, same old being dished up for the second or third time. That was the one scenario no one expected because, well, it was so blatantly ridiculous and so utterly lacking in imagination.
3) The distrust Season 3 sowed never disappated. From 3.14 on, Fedak was incredibly respectful of Chuck and Sarah and never seriously fiddled with the relationship until the final and regrettable arc. Yet we were always waiting for the showrunners to spring the trap door. Every episode after Honeymooners was like walking through a minefield. We were always expecting the explosion that never came.
There are probably truths in all of that most notably the repetitiveness without acceptable growth, that is often the greatest TV sin
Wilma,
Schwedak absolutely address the themes of season 2 in season 3, but don’t do that because of laziness. They do it because it makes perfect sense. They need to address the issues raised in season 2 and resolve because, otherwise, they cannot put Chuck and Sarah together as a couple of spies in love.
The moment they introduce the concept of feelings as a liability in 2.03 Break-Up, they need to resolve it. If they don’t, Chuck and Sarah cannot get together as spies with feelings.
The moment Chuck says to Lou, “You’re everything I’m looking for. I just can’t look right now,” they need to resolve this issue. The moment Sarah tells Cole that she’s not the kind of girl that cheats on her cover boyfriend, they need to show that the would choose Chuck even if she were free to choose.
The moment the writers diminish Chuck while exalting James Bond Cole for two episodes, they need to resolve that issue and exalt Chuck while diminishing James Bond Shaw in the Shaw arc.
The moment Sarah decides to want a real life in 2.22, she must understand what Chuck felt in the first two seasons when he wanted.
The moment Chuck decides to re-intersect in 2.22, he must understand where Sarah was coming from in the first two seasons, when she had to balance love and duty.
You make it sound like season 3 is weak for addressing and resolving the very issues it brought up in the first two seasons.
Maybe the execution of season 3 is weak here or there, but addressing and resolving the above issues is actually its strength, not its weakness.
Putting Chuck and Sarah together without resolving the above issues would be a cheap shortcut, like some of the fan fiction I have read, which puts Charah together without addressing any of the above issues.
The problem is what they do, it is how and more specifically for how long they do it, from 3×01 to 3×12 Chuck and Sarah are not friends, they hardly even have scenes together. What makes season 3 so bad is that most of the writing is forced. You know how I know that, because not even Zac and Yvonne great actors that they are, could save the material.
Josh,
It seems to me that Chuck and Sarah spends quite some time together in season 3a. Granted, once Shaw comes on the scene, there are a couple of episodes (3.05, 3.08, and 3.09) where Sarah spends more time with Shaw than with Chuck, but that’s pretty much it. It feels that Chuck and Sarah don’t spend a lot of time together in season 3, but they do.
Also, I think they are friends in season 3. That’s essentially what they are. They even shake hands on it at the end of 3.03.
“The moment they introduce the concept of feelings as a liability in 2.03 Break-Up, they need to resolve it.”
But they never solve it, because it can not be solved. The fear of hurting someone you love will always be there. Or it will pass with time, but it won’t just disappear as the result of some event
“The moment Sarah tells Cole that she’s not the kind of girl that cheats on her cover boyfriend, they need to show that the would choose Chuck even if she were free to choose.”
She told him five seconds later that it was hard to walk away, meaning she couldn’t go with him because she was in love with Chuck. She was literally choosing Chuck, an uncertainty, over Cole who was a sure thing
“The moment the writers diminish Chuck while exalting James Bond Cole for two episodes, they need to resolve that issue and exalt Chuck while diminishing James”
No, they don’t. Not only did Sarah fell in love with a regular spy, but she was even against him becoming a spy
“The moment Sarah decides to want a real life in 2.22, she must understand what Chuck felt in the first two seasons when he wanted.”
Why? To even the score? Did the score needed to be evened? “Hey, I suffered for two years, now it’s your turn.” It’s not like she didn’t suffer in those years either
“The moment Chuck decides to re-intersect in 2.22, he must understand where Sarah was coming from in the first two seasons, when she had to balance love and duty.”
But he didn’t. He just chose duty over love and dove head first
Yeah Wilma I did a whole series of “Shaw’s Evil Plan” posts to discuss the various conspiracy theories. Although I’m pretty sure we all knew it was wishful thinking long before the end!
@atcDave,
I read them again over the weekend. You and Ernie Davis and Liz James and the others all worked very hard in posts and in comments to try to spin what we were seeing in a creative new light. I was shocked as I read the contemporaneous stuff that no one believed the showrunners would simply rerun old scenarios. More fools us as it turned out. Not to mention the craziness of them never deciding if Chuck was being trained to work alone (Mask) or with a team (American Hero) or the mawkish name reveal or the dozens of other contradictory plot points.
@Josh Z,
It is truly bizarre, no matter what else they did, that the showrunners separated Levi and Strahovski for such long periods of screen time. Their on-screen chemistry was fabulous and it was a blunder to waste it so cavalierly while they were fighting for ratings.
Wilma,
The name reveal is needed to legitimize Sarah’s relationship with Shaw as her desire for a “real relationship” since Shaw was simply proposing a spy partnership with sexual benefits, to which Sarah said no at the beginning of Fake Name.
If by now you believe that Schwedak simply re-ran old scenarios in season 3, you should have no problem believing that Sarah’s real-name reveal is simply introvert Sarah saying she wants a real relationship, just as Chuck plainly told Sarah in the first two seasons that this was the reason behind his relationships with Lou and Jill. Since we know from Prague that Sarah now wants a real relationship in season 3, the reason behind the real name reveal should be obvious.
As for Chuck working alone or with a team, I believe they said the Intersect was supposed to work autonomously, which means that he was able to work independently and without direct control, not necessarily alone.
Wilma, I have to disagree with the repetitiveness of the love interests. Lou’s purpose in the story was to make Sarah jealous and, possibly, like someone mentioned on this site, to help Chuck not look like a complete loser when put up next to Bryce. Jill was there to make Sarah understand that she can’t offer Chuck what he wants and then to show to Chuck how treacherous the spy world can be. Finally, Hannah was there just to be treated badly by our hero, when he reaches his lowest point.
I’m someone who likes most of S3a, I find no fault with the characters and I have just a couple of quibbles with the overall story, but I vehemently disagree with the “apologists” when they say it needed to happen. Nope, you can write the same journey for Chuck while having him and Sarah together. The only difficulty would be to come up with a low point for Chuck in his journey since you can’t use Hannah anymore
As for Cole and Shaw, I really can’t see any repetition, they’re very different?
Also, I disagree with the term “respectful” from your third point. It wasn’t respect, it was fear caused by the reaction to 3a. Unfortunately, that fear led to the blandest season of the show, one that was devoid of any drama.
I also disagree with Wilma that all the love interests were repetitive, but also disagree with Luke on the reasons behind them.
The answer to the love interests lies in the concept of the show—this is an unlikable love story between a Sydney Bristow from Alias and a Jim Halpert from The Office. That’s not a couple that we would expect to get together in the first place let alone work out in the long term. And yet, there it is.
With this in mind, it’s clear that the reason for Jill and Bryce is introduced right in the pilot. When we see that Chuck and Sarah still have unresolved feelings for Jill and Bryce respectively, that prompts the question: would they still choose each other if Jill and Bryce were around? Well, let’s find out. And so, the ghost from their past resurfaces, and both Chuck and Sarah choose each other over their respective ghost.
As for Lou and Cole, they are Chuck’s and Sarah’s temptation from their present. Lou is clearly a real girl (a non-spy) who can offer Chuck a real relationship, which is what Chuck wants after all the blue balls (sorry) he’s getting with Sarah. Just notice the symbolic parallel between Sarah and Lou entering the Buy More for the first time—the camera angle is the same, both have a phone problem (Sarah has a fake problem, Lou has a real one) and both flirt with Chuck (Sarah’s flirting is fake while Lou’s is real). Then’s there is the scene at the Buy More where Chuck is caught holding a sandwich between Sarah and Lou, with Sarah (the fake relationship) towering like a black specter over Lou in a white dress (the prospect of a real relationship). The purpose of Lou is, of course, to make Sarah jealous and prompt the bomb kiss that will expose her true feelings. And when she does, Chuck chooses her over Lou.
Cole does the same for Sarah. He’s there to tempt her into a spy relationship at a time when her cover relationship with Chuck is in a crisis. Cole’s role is more nuanced than that, but in this respect, it shows that Sarah chooses Chuck at his childish worst over Cole at his James Bond best.
Hannah and Shaw are the glimpse of Chuck’s and Sarah’s future with partners who are the mirrors of of their past selves. Hannah is obviously a S1 Chuckette, a female computer genius who lost a promising career and now works as a nerd herder and wants a real relationship. And Shaw is a superman-y male S1 Sarah. Here’s Shaw as described by Yvonne:
And their purpose is also described by Yvonne:
Or, to use Devon’s words at the end of 3.03, “If having a double life means giving up half of your real life, it’s not worth it.” That’s what Chuck and Sarah have with Hannah and Shaw: half of a real life. Only together can they have a full double life.
So, three “love interests” each, three different purposes.
@Luke,
I wholeheartedly agree that there are differences with Lou/Jill/Hannah, but they all served the same basic storytelling purpose: To show the “normal” life, non-Sarah option. (Chuck didn’t know Jill was a spy, of, course.) In fact, the showrunners even built a “normal” option into the pilot: Kayla Hart, who got cut before airing. They were so ham-fisted with the repetition that they even made them all brunettes in case you didn’t see the choice otherwise.
As for Sarah’s choice, they were all functionally the same, too. Superspies like Bryce or Cole–or, they insisted–superspy Shaw. They were all handsome and presented as the suave anti-Chuck, They even give Sarah the dialogue in Mask as “having a type.” For Sarah, the choice was between the “real” Chuck or the superspy–albeit superficial–Bryce/Cole/Shaw type.
As for the “apologists,” well, they defend everything because they have no imagination and no ability to accept that US network television isn’t a pristine art form. They are also the ones who tell you that killing for the government is okay, but sleeping with someone is not. As you so perceptively noted up the thread, their values are out of whack.
As for respect versus fear in handling the post Season 3.0 relationship, you may be right. I always perceived that the angst and the wt/wt came from Schwartz because those have been the hallmarks of his other shows. Once he left the day-to-day showrunning duties, the angst disappeared. Make of that what you will.
If I am supposed to be one of the S3 apologists, I would have you note that S3 is my least favorite season. My only point is that it makes sense, not that it’s the best of all possible developments they could have done for the season.
Although, I question whether Wilma and Luke would be okay with their significant other having casual sex with other people (since there is nothing wrong with it) while not shooting at armed bad guys breaking into their homes because, you know, killing is bad.
To be perfectly clear, neither Chuck nor Sarah “kill for the government.” Sarah was not going through with her red test precisely because she did not think that “killing for the government” was good. She only shot Eve out of fear and instincts when she thought Even was pulling a gun out of her purse. And Chuck won’t shoot Perry “for the government” either.
On the other hand, if you both think that Sarah sleeping with Gilles all for naught in 3.01 for a failed op is morally okay, well, I’m glad that my moral spidey sense is “out of whack.”
“Karen, I think you are missing the point. Sarah cannot be with Chuck. Chuck knows she likes him. It’s Chuck who pulls away from Sarah from the end of 3.02 until 3.11 because his feelings for her are a liability in the spy life.”
“Karen, Sarah has no time to act after the restaurant scene. They are all called in for questioning, Devon and the gang get arrested, and the next day she goes to work. She does not get a chance to see Chuck.”
@Francesco Scinico. No, no! It’s you who is missing the main point here!
That you have no right to determine my perceptions or feelings. Your one-note, uncompromising defense of Chuck’s writers makes you meaningless for any kind of discussion, since according to your line of thinking we wouldn’t need to be here talking about the series. Everything the writers did was perfect, clear, and the best possible option. That to me also makes no difference what the writers’ intention was, since they like ambiguity.
Copying and pasting huge texts here will not change my perception that:
a) In S03E01 Sarah and Chuck are completely out of their character. That Chuck would never have dumped Sarah without explaining his motives in a full, complete details. That yes, to me Sarah appeared to be having sex with her mark – and this upset me because it went against my heroine’s moral bases.
b) That S03E01-13 episodes are a mess. That Sarah giving herself to Shaw, a sexual harasser (he was her boss!) doesn’t make any sense – even 12 years ago. That Hanna moved out from a town and taking a low-wage job to pursue a man she even doesn’t know, also doesn’t make any sense. Chuck (a spy) should have suspected it.
c) That spliting Zachary L. and Yvonne S. at the beginning of the S03 was not a smart choice, because of the absurd chemistry they had on screen. As a result, the show melted down. When they fixed it in S03E13, the damage was already done.
d) That using a writing trick – memory loss – that had already been used TWICE on the show to destroy the Sarah’s character, who had had such a beautiful growth path and became bigger than Chuck, was not the ending I wanted to watch. Even more so in two dark and harrowing episodes (need I remind you Sarah kidnaps Ellie and tries to kill Chuck several times? – If it is not throwing a character under a bus, I don’t know what would be). And to complete the disaster, finishes the series in an open ending where we have evidences, but not facts that Sarah has recovered herself.
That’s it. My perceptions NOT YOURS.
Karen:
You touch on two points that have always driven me crazy for how out of character they are and seem to be more about setting up certain plot conditions the writers need than actual believable behavior:
a) In S03E01 Sarah and Chuck are completely out of their character. That Chuck would never have dumped Sarah without explaining his motives in a full, complete details.
Chuck spent two entire seasons grossly oversharing…at times saying seemingly every thought that popped into his head. Then the moment that Sarah opens up to him, he suddenly clams up says almost nothing and walks away? I know there is much talk of parallels and symmetry, but c’mon…You can’t fundamentally change a character like that just for your writerly symmetry without raising a lot of questions.
b) That Hanna moved out from a town and taking a low-wage job to pursue a man she even doesn’t know, also doesn’t make any sense.
Seriously, who would do this? Only a spy or a psychopath behaves this way. Again, for the sake of the underlying structure of symmetry, the believability of the characters actions is essentially thrown out the window.
I actually appreciate the underlying mirrored structure of the journeys that both Chuck and Sarah went through, it really is well crafted conceptually. But in order to shoehorn the supposedly smart characters into the plot situations required of the structure, they make them do unbelievable things that just damage the whole enterprise…
There are good explanations for all those points.
Explanations the fit the structure or explanations that are believable?
Both, but believability is in the eye of the beholder.
Karen,
On the contrary, I am the best person to talk to about your perceptions because I felt exactly as you do when I first watched the show. In fact, you can scroll up in this very thread and read my comments from 2020, and they will sound exactly like yours on pretty much all the points you make.
But, just like yours, my perceptions were wrong. So I can give you a different perspective.
And the best conversations are the ones with people who disagree with you since they present a different perspective. If you came to this site to vent about season 3 and the finale and only read comments that agree with you, you will still feel like crap but won’t learn anything new.
We can agree that the writers wrote a season 3 that can be easily interpreted as you do and as I once did. But they did so unintentionally. No primetime TV writer is going to sit in the writers’ room before season 3 and intentionally write a season that systematically destroys the beloved heroine and turns her into a CIA-sanctioned prostitute affected by a borderline personality disorder.
I am simply telling you what I think the writers did instead with season 3 and with the finale. We may not like what they did, but it does make sense given the story they are telling us.
Now, if you want to have a conversation that challenges your perceptions, great. If you prefer instead to wallow in your current perceptions and just vent with people who already agree with you, I’m not your guy.
I’ll second that last bit, most of us did our wallowing about season 3 and the finale already (in my case that was 9 years ago) you can also find old posts on this same thread from me as well. I still can’t believe there was ever a time that I liked season 3, oh well…conceptually it makes sense but boy the execution is awful.
The finale I have no major problems with and I never did. I would raise the point that the show has several instances over the last two and a half seasons to suggest that the show is going to end in bittersweet way so I can’t say it blindsided me like it blindsided a lot of other people.
Perception is also tricky because that’s what reality is for any one person, but we can not really say with any certain what comes closest to the factual truth
“I would raise the point that the show has several instances over the last two and a half seasons to suggest that the show is going to end in bittersweet way”
@Josh Z… Could you talk more about this? I really had no idea the ending could go this way. After S03E13 the writers didn’t split Chuck and Sarah until the series finale.
Sure, off the top of my head, living dead, which I know is heated episode around here, puts a big focus on the perils the spy world catching up with those who choose it. It’s also where Sarah gives Chuck her spy will “if something ever happens to me I want you to have it
“Nothing gonna happen to you “
Then there are episodes like tooth, cliffhanger, curse. All of which have pretty notable foreshadowing towards a bittersweet end to the show.
Perhaps the biggest however is after the Morgansect is taken care of Beckman says “don’t make a mistake like this again.” I have seen enough American TV knowing that we don’t throw lines like that just for the sake of it. There are a lot more mostly indirect foreshadowing but I highly recommend watching the show again because you will notice a lot of theming and dialogue that suggests a bittersweet conclusion. Almost as if it was always in the back of the writer’s minds.
It is important to note that the foreshadowing I speak of is very difficult to spot the first time you watch the series but even as far back as season 2(or 1?) some seemingly throw-away lines the first time through seem more deliberate like when Chuck makes a frustrated joke to awesome about having to win over Sarah again and again and again and pretending they aren’t really dating.
As I said most American writers don’t do stuff like that for no reason. It’s usually subliminal messaging meant to tell an audience to keep things in the back of their mind.
Karen, you may want to read this post about the finale.
Morgan is particularly important. Morgan went through a period where he was totally corrupted by the Intersect, and he suffered serious memory loss for a period.
But in the end, with the friendship of Chuck (and Sarah!) he recovered what was important about himself. He may have still suffered the loss of some specific memories. But the people and things that were important to him, resumed their proper places!
I think all of that applies exactly for Sarah in the end too.
Yes, they are indeed out of character.
On purpose.
They have switched roles: Sarah wants a real life. Chuck wants to become a spy. It’s a new reality for them, and therefore they are acting out of character. We all do when we undertake a new job/role until we settle in.
In fact, Chuck will also act out of character between 3.06 and 3.08 because that’s what he thinks he must do to become a spy for the greater good. We can see that he hates lying and burning assets, but that’s what he thinks he must do to save the fictional versions of you and me. Sarah and Hannah will save him from that and send him off on the road of redemption (3.09 to 3.12).
You may have realized that the show has a lot of external references to movies and other TV shows. Some are just for fun but others are thematic and help us clue us in on what’s going on. For example, in Pink Slip, Chuck and Casey box at the end of the episode in an obvious reference to the friendly boxing match between Rocky and Apollo at the end of Rocky III with the famous song “Eye of the Tiger” in the background. This reference is thematic: Casey is training Chuck to become a hero, just as Apollo trained Rocky in Rocky III.
Now, there is another big thematic reference in Pink Slip that probably most have missed, and that is in Prague, the infamous scene where Chuck and Sarah act out of character and Chuck is strangely laconic. Why is Chuck acting like that? The clue is in the reference to Spiderman. Chuck is acting like Peter Parker with Mary Jane. And the lyrics of the background song “My Backwards Walk” also clue us in.
I’m working on my backwards walk
walking with no shoes or socks
and the time rewinds to the end of may
I wish we’d never met then met today
I’m working on my faults and cracks
filling in the blanks and gaps
and when I write them out they don’t make sense
I need you to pencil in the rest
Kelly Dean Jolley, who wrote the excellent Chuck book referenced on the home page of this site, has an excellent blog post on Prague, “Why Does Chuck Refuse to Run? Or, The Man Who Walked Backwards.” In it, he says:
And, of course, Prague is also an internal reference. It’s a reference to Stanford. Just as Chuck was “betrayed” by Bryce at Stanford and found out after five years through a video recording that Bryce had acted out of love to save Chuck, Sarah is “betrayed” by Chuck in Prague and finds out after eight months through a video recording (at the end of 3.02) that Chuck acted out of love (“I chose to become a spy because, Sarah, I love you.”).
In season 3, there are a lot of these scene reversals from the first two seasons, down to the camera angles and emotional reactions (facial expressions). They are there to let Chuck and Sarah experience things from each other’s perspective. Why? Because it builds empathy.
@joshZ,
Given the crazy nature of Chuck’s broadcast history, not so sure the writers had sn ending in mind on the earlier seasons. But certainly the Morgansect arc was foreshadowing since that was what Fedak cooked up for the final 13. If we got a back 9 renewal or a Season 6, I was looking forward to Jeff getting the intersect! 😆
I would consider most of it unintended foreshadowing but even if he did not have specifics planned until season five, I just don’t think that he ever had a perfect, white picket fence ending in mind for Chuck and Sarah.
I think if by some fluke we’d gotten an S5 back order, that’s exactly what we would have seen. It would have been the more conventional “happily ever after”.
I agree with that, Dave. All the other possible series enders had a happy ending. Chuck got the intersect in Ring, got Sarah in Other Guy, beat Shaw again in Ring Ii, proposed to Sarah in Push Mix and got married in Cliffhanger. Goodbye was the ambiguous exception.
That would certainly make a good movie or mini series.
There is nothing ambiguous about the series finale. Per Fedak, “If we have to ask whether Sarah recovers her memories, we haven’t been paying attention.”
And now I’m all ready for it again.
“If we got a back 9 renewal or a Season 6, I was looking forward to Jeff getting the intersect! 😆”
And Shaw for the umpteenth time kidnapping and punching Sarah!
The final episode is a proper series goodbye. They dedicate 10 minutes to the denouement (act 5) instead of the usual 5 in order to give all the characters a proper goodbye where all their dreams come true.
The very title of the episode is a clue.
I think “decisive “ is the better word since “proper” or not comes down to POV
Well, @Frenceso Scinico, I guess Chris Fedak himself wasn’t paying attention then. Because here are some of his quotes from his exit interview with Alan Sepinwall immediate after the finale aired:
“I think I’m going to leave that up to the audience.”
“I have my thought, and Josh [Schwartz] has his.”
“I think it’s up for everyone to judge that kiss at the very end.”
Like many Chuck fans, I see the ending as ambiguous and incomplete. And while I happen to believe the magic kiss worked, I respect those who believe otherwise or had trepidations about the ending. Yours is not the final word on the truth of the situation.
Fedak says a lot of stuff like that. As for “leaving it up to the audience,” he means whether Sarah recovers all her memories immediately after the kiss or over a few weeks after the kiss. The latter scenario is the one preferred by Fedak. But the memories are recovered.
Here’s Fedak again:
We don’t even need Fedak’s comments. Once we understand the purpose of the final arc and the narrative structure and all the not-so-subtle symbolism of the final episode, it’s obvious that Sarah’s memories are coming back.
The final arc is not about making us doubt Chuck and Sarah’s love. It’s the very opposite. It’s to show Sarah will fall in love with Chuck even under the worst possible scenario.
Oh, I’m sorry. I misunderstood. Not only do you decide how we should view the finale, you also are the arbiter of whick Fedak quotes we should consider. I didn’t realize you were the master of these things.
Tell me: I’m going to lunch at Chipotle tomorrow. What is the proper order? And while we are at it, will the Nuggets or the Heat win the NBA finals?
I do agree with Fedak in the sense that if the viewer needs to ask if Sarah got her memory back then they are missing the point of the finale. I was going back through older comments from some years ago and saw the thought that Sarah had “caught up emotionally” (I believe Dave said this?) to where Chuck is at the beach. I think it’s the healthiest way to think about the finale. We can debate whether Sarah has the life event memories until I am able to walk (just a little joke because I can’t and will never😂) but by doing that it only shows that the entire point of the scene goes over our head. Sarah is emotional at Chuck’s story and asks to be kissed by him with a smile on her face. The state of her memory is left ambiguous but the state of her emotions and her desire for Chuck is not up for debate
We use reason and the rules and tropes of fiction to reach the conclusion. Fedak’s comments are just confirmation of common sense.
There are only four possible scenarios after the kiss:
1. Sarah remembers everything immediately (but everything is a bit hazy, just like with Chuck after Sarah’s kiss at the end of 4.09 when he was lobotomized).
2. Sarah remembers in time as she rediscovers her love for Chuck.
3. Sarah does not remember but stays with Chuck.
4. Sarah does not remember and leaves Chuck.
Option 4 can be discarded immediately since it contradicts both the purpose of the final arc and the narrative structure of the final episode.
Option 3 makes little sense because half the 5-year journey (Sarah’s growth) will be all for naught, as Sepinwall pointedly asked Fedak in the quote above, and because it contradicts both the purpose of the final arc and the narrative structure of the final episode.
So, when Fedak says he’s going to leave it up to the audience, he’s giving you a choice between the first two options.
Remember, everyone is entitled to their own conclusions, but that does not mean all conclusions are equally valid.
Yeah I agree especially when your last sentence. In fact it is a pet peeve of mine when people try to discredit facts with personal opinions and then get mad when they are proven wrong, which as far as I can tell is your point. The facts present in the last episode prove that the most logical outcome is positive. Anything else is opinion based on negative attitude.
@Josh Z,
You are a keen observer of the show and I respect your commentary immensely. But I think you have got facts and personal opinions mixed up here.
THE FACTS are that Sarah was remembering some things before the final scene. On the beach, she asked for “our story” and requested what Morgan pitched as a magic kiss. That is the extent of the facts because that is all we are shown and told on the screen. There are no other facts in evidence.
PERSONAL OPINION is any conclusion viewers may draw from those facts. If you want to say the kiss worked, it’s your opinion. If you want to reach the negative opinion and say the kiss didn’t work–which I personally believe is a mistake given the show’s basic outlook–that is also a personal opinion.
Now you may say the showrunners subsequently claimed that the kiss worked. And they did. But they also were much more ambiguous about it immediately after the airing. And this is not uncommon. Consider the ending of The Sopranos and showrunner David Chase’s commentary. For years, he insisted the cut to black did not mean Tony has been killed. He was adamant in his denials. In recent years, however, he has “admitted” the scene meant Tony was shot. Bottom line: Showrunners are often unreliable and contradictory narrators of their own work.
And as I discussed up the thread with atcDave, there are other considerations: The ending we were shown is probably (in my opinion, in other words) deliberately ambiguous because Fedak was leaving himself wiggle room to explore the aftermath of the kiss in a few episodes if he got a surprise Season 5 back 9 or a Season 6.
Personally, I assume the kiss worked. It’s essentially a Chekhov’s gun thing. You don’t raise something like that without meaning to deploy it. Plus we have the functional equivalent of the magic kiss in 4.09, when Sarah’s kiss saves Chuck. But this is Personal OPINION, not fact. The fact is that Fedak did not show us what happened so there is no definitive answer. And people who believe otherwise, many of them who had lost trust in the showrunners, can be skeptical of the ending and their opinion should be heard, not dismissed out of hand.
Not all opinions are equally valid, and your opinion that the kiss worked is correct, and Chekhov’s gun is only one of the reasons behind it—The kiss is introduced by Morgan in the first act (the setup), teased multiple times throughout the episode, and finally “goes off” at the end of the final act (the payoff). Classic Chekhov’s Gun.
Then we have the parallel structures of the two keys: the three parts to assemble the Intersect key and the three parts to assemble the Sarah key (find her, be yourself, kiss her).
Then we have Berlin, a city originally united, then separated by a wall, which then fell, and the city was united again.
Then we have “Take on Me” (both lyrics and music video), which basically describes Chuck and Sarah’s relationship through the show and also in the final episode.
Then we have the narrative arc of the final arc, introduced by Quinn at the end of 5.10 Bo, when he tells Chuck he would never get a woman like Sarah without the Intersect. So, the Intersect is used to take Sarah away from Chuck again and again in the last three episodes (with “only” her memories of the last five years suppressed, coincidentally), and Chuck wins Sarah back by being Chuck, through the magic of love.
Then, we have the fact we can actually see in the last two episodes that, every time Chuck sparks emotions in Sarah, she remembers something, validating Ellie’s statement at the beginning of 5.13, “Spark emotions. She’ll remember.”
Then we have the symbolic mirror between the final episode and the pilot episode (Meet at the Buy More, have dinner, have a sexy dance, save a general from a bomb, meet at the beach, be in love).
Then we have the symbolic synopsis of the show in one episode, with all main characters brought back to what they were at the beginning of the show and progressing and growing through the episode as they did through the show (from working alone and being “nothing but a spy” to working with a team and finding love).
Then, they give all the characters a fairy-tale ending in which all their dreams come true, and this before Prince Charming gives the princess a magical kiss.
I mean, I could go on and on (Sarah coming out of a suitcase because she comes with baggage, Sarah falling from the sky as a comet that appears in Chuck’s life, Chuck being alone in Burbank, Ellie vigorously opening Chuck’s bedroom curtains on a new day when the previous episode ended at night, etc.)
Then, there’s the optimistic (yet melancholy) tone of the final episode and the optimistic tone of the show in general.
Then, there’s the nerdy Luke Skywalker and Mara Jade Star Wars reference. Just as Mara Jade was ordered by the disembodied voice of Palpatine to kill Luke but falls in love with him instead and marries him, so is Sarah ordered by the disembodied voice of Quinn to kill Chuck but falls in love with him instead.
What “evidence” do the viewers who hold that Sarah won’t remember or won’t even be with Chuck have, exactly?
Just the fact that we don’t see it?
Or the fact that Morgan doesn’t remember useless secondary details while the final episode shows us essentially the best possible Morgan, the man he was always meant to be, the man who even “stands up” to Casey in the third act, the turning point of the episode, while “sitting down” in a chair?
That’s why I keep saying, we can all have our opinions, but not all opinions are equally valid.
We don’t even need Fedak’s comments to confirm Sarah will remember. The moment we see Quinn’s challenge at the end of 5.10 (Chekhov’s gun setup) and Chuck and Sarah’s final kiss on that beach (the payoff), we know Sarah’s memories are coming back because the point of the final arc has been made, Quinn has been proven wrong, and Chuck will win Sarah’s love even under the worst possible scenario.
It’s difficult to gauge how many people see Sarah’s memory as the measure of whether the finale is good or bad and if that is the case then, how many people do or do not see a further distinction between Sarah’s memory and her feelings. This is important because while the former is ambiguous and largely based on personal opinion. The latter is fact because it is shown to us.
So my question is what are people actually debating about Sarah. If her memory came back or, if she and Chuck will be (as Dave once said) together and happy about it.
I understand negative feelings and I even understand the opinion that the final arc destroys Sarah’s memory, but I don’t think it is right to say that it destroys the character. It is fine to FEEL that way but it doesn’t mean that Chuck and Sarah aren’t perfectly fine.
I hope I made sense I tend to ramble a lot 😅
@Josh Z,
I think a lot of the “destroy her character” stuff may have actually come from comments Yvonne Strahovski made about how she responded to the scripts she was handed. She clearly was not enthused about having to play pre-Chuck Sarah after five years of building out a different character.
As for the general unhappiness, I do think it is understandable. A lot of folks wanted the definitive, on-screen confirmation that Chuck and Sarah ended together, complete and happy. And much of that goes back to the underlying mistrust of the showrunners dating back to Season 3 and even the walk back of the ending of Colonel. Remember, Sarah said
“It is real” there. Then the show runners reconned it and explained it wasn’t real after all. So those viewers weren’t prepared give the finale the benefit of the doubt. They may have wanted to believe, but, you know, they felt they were betrayed before by assuming a happy ending.
I wasn’t a part of the fandom until season 5, I always lost the battle to watch CHUCK to my sister’s Monday night programs so I knew nothing of the loyalty that was created and destroyed between season 2 and 3, and then destroyed again with the finale. The show moving to Friday finally let me watch it. I was just bummed that the show didn’t continue. I don’t really know how I would feel if I had watched the rest of the series first. But maybe coming in later is a good thing as it allows me to give a different perspective.
The viewers who were expecting Chuck and Sarah together after Sarah’s “It is real” comment should note that she is going to Zurich with Bryce in the next episode.
In truth, she was hoping Chuck would join the Intersect project as an analyst when Beckman made him the offer, so they could work and be together with Chuck safely “in the car,” and then she even plans to quit the spy life to be with him, but he decides to reintersect instead. If Chuck had accepted Beckman’s offer, it (their relationship) would have been “real.”
This all happens in season 2, not in season 3.
The moment Chuck decides to reintersect, the new season must address and resolve the issue of his feelings as a liability in the spy world, as season 2 did for Sarah.
And we viewer always got a happy ending in the previous seasons, so the idea that we should feel “betrayed” when the series literally ends with a kiss is on us viewers, not on the writers.
“So my question is what are people actually debating about Sarah. If her memory came back or, if she and Chuck will be (as Dave once said) together and happy about it.”
Both. Because Sarah without her memories is an incomplete woman, she is not functional and consequently she is a damaged person. And remaining a damaged woman, she can take any action after the final kiss, as she is still lost, incomplete, not knowing who she is. Have you ever heard of women who, during or after pregnancy, were repulsed towards their husbands? Well… it happens…
“I even understand the opinion that the final arc destroys Sarah’s memory, but I don’t think it is right to say that it destroys the character.”
I think that the showrunners’ idea could even be good on a paper, but they went too far in everything: in the dark and harrowing tone of the two last episodes, in the delay in the payoff (4.5 minutes to the end?!!!), in the open ending without answering the destiny of the main couple on screen. And for me there are fundamental execution errors that make everything more difficult to accept: Sarah in S05E12 goes to her house, with her things, her husband, her family, her all life inside there and has no insight, nothing generates any trigger to recover not even a piece of memory? The writers could have taken her to a hospital to make the situation more acceptable. The scene of Sarah punching Chuck and then cocking the gun to kill him…this scene just shouldn’t be there! If she really loves Chuck, her superego should have worked – (Freud – the superego is the ethical component of the personality and provides the moral standards and boudaries by which the ego operates. The superego’s criticisms, prohibitions, and inhibitions form a person’s conscience). So…yes. The the writers threw Sarah’s character under the bus!
Is it fair to say that it is the audience that may view her as damaged and not Chuck by the end? I think I’m just surprised that more people don’t think that his acceptance and support for her holds any value in their viewpoint.. That’s my underlying confusion I think
This is true. We are quite literally our memories. This is the reason her memories must come back (how quickly is up to our preference) or her journey has all been for naught.
This is false. Throughout the final episode, she never gives Chuck any false hope about their relationship. Thus, we she asks for the kiss, she knows exactly what it implies. She would never give Chuck any false hope. And Chuck knows this. You can see on his face after she asks for the kiss.
This is also false. The final episode is not dark. It’s optimistic.
Like in 3.12 and 3.13. The payoff is often in the 5th and final act.
We know the destiny if we understand the rules and tropes of storytelling. The final kiss is a classic example of the Chekhov’s Gun trope.
Too soon. Too boring. She does remember the carving of their names on the doorpost at the moment of maximum tension at the end of the 4th act. Thats’ good writing.
Soap opera boring.
Are we kidding? That’s the best scene in the episode. It’s the moment of maximum tension and shows Chuck’s absolute love for Sarah, being willing to die at her hand and to risk his life for his enemy when Quinn shoots at her. There’s no greater love than to die for one’s enemy. That selfless gesture (just like the one when Chuck saved Shaw for Sarah’s sake in 3.12) is who Chuck is and why he’s awesome.
That is, in fact, why she completely freezes when she see carving on the doorpost and flips completely after Chuck takes the bullet meant for her.
The writers wrote a supremely intense episode with maximum conflict. Without conflict, there is no story.
The story you would want to see is has less conflict and is frankly boring.
The purpose of the final arc is to put Chuck and Sarah in the worst possible scenario (The Luke Skywalker and Mara Jade scenario) and show that Sarah will fall in love with Chuck even under the worst possible circumstances.
I think TV troupes can’t be overlooked because the foundation of most American tv is built upon troupes, troupes are such because they cause an emotional reaction wether positive or negative. Tv logic should take priority over real-world logic, especially in a sci show. It’s the same reason nobody just shows Sarah her spy will to get her to believe that the life she can’t remember happened. It’s boring. Now I do think the logic of any show has to make in-universe sense, but I’m not going to waste time trying to apply real-world logic in a particular universe.
For example adults in Harry Potter are stupid and or illogical because if they weren’t the kids would have no mystery to solve.
“I think I’m just surprised that more people don’t think that his acceptance and support for her holds any value in their viewpoint”
@Josh Z – All Chuck support and acceptance would mean nothing to a cold, insane, unscrupulous woman shown to us in S05E12. A woman without a soul, without empathy. And only 4.5 minutes before the end of the show, it – apparently – returns to being a person and no longer a killer robot.
Is it serious that this does not generate doubts in anyone else? Casey says she’s gone and when he finds her in the hotel room, he doesn’t seem very comfortable with her holding a knife. She became an unpredictable being (a woman or an evil robot?), as she was literally thrown under the bus by the writers.
5.12 Sarah is not insane or unscrupulous. You keep saying this, but it’s false, and repeating it does not make it true. We can see that Sarah is cold, yes, but has morals in the last two episodes. She recoils at the idea of physical intimacy with Chuck, the refuses to blow him up in the DARPA Intersect room, and she only goes after him and Ellie after he cons her out of the glasses. She goes after them after she thinks they are traitors and want to destroy government intelligence. She also thinks Chuck is responsible for Bryce’s and Graham’s deaths.
The idea she has no soul or empathy is clearly, demonstrably false.
And we should understand by now why she was turned into her pre-Chuck terminator self.
I think your on your own with your view of Sarah in the last two episodes. Even the people who have big problems with the finale on this site, I’m willing to bet don’t view Sarah as a insane, unfeeling robot and as has been pointed out she hesitates to shoot Chuck at least twice, Quinn has to be the devil in her ear to sway Sarah at all. He is the one that blows up DARPA, and her treatment of Ellie is valid, even as harrowing as it is because CHUCK stole the glasses, which Sarah believes belong to the government which Quinn convinced her he was a part of, along with making Team B directly responsible for the death of Graham and Bryce..
@Francesco Scinico
Who are you to say if something is true or false here?
Are you by any chance a official representative of the showrunners? Are you their proxy? From the actors, too? Do you have the “absolute control” over the perceptions and feelings that this fiction generates in all viewers? Are you God? It’s insane…
I’m not a rocket scientist, but I would think that what is presented in the show, lends itself to what is true or false. Wether someone chooses to accept what the show presents (or TPTB say) as true or false is another matter entirely.
Because I saw the show three years ago, and with subsided emotions, I look at the story with more critical eyes and with the knowledge of TV writing and TV tropes.
When we say that “Sarah could have taken any decision on that beach,” It’s objectively wrong because we see throughout the entire episode that Sarah never gives Chuck any false hope about their relationship. She clearly tells him she will kill Quinn and disappear because she doesn’t know how to be the woman she remembers her as. She keeps telling him to focus on the mission when he starts talking about them, she is about to leave by herself in castle before Mary stops her. She leaves Chuck after defusing the bomb. She’s is constantly pulling away from him and is not shy about it.
All these scenes are there for a reason. They are there to show you that, when she finally asks for the kiss, she means it. She looks at him intently, knowing perfectly well what that request implies and what it means to Chuck. She would never make that request lightly. She would never give him false hope.
We also know she is not asking for the kiss because she hopes to get her memories back (which would already be a good sign) since she chuckles at the magical kiss suggestion.
Sarah asks for the kiss because she wants to be with Chuck, memories or not. She wants Chuck, she wants the life he has told her about, she finally wants to be in love.
And once she gets the kiss (the third part of the key), the spell by the evil wizard Quinn is undone, and she is rewarded with her memories, and Chuck is rewarded with the pristine version of Sarah, just as he was rewarded with the pristine version of the Intersect. Why? Because he has shown again and again that he deserves both.
It’s a fairy-tale ending, just like the ending of all the other characters in the show.
The conclusion that Sarah leaves after the kiss is cynical. But this is not a cynical story. No one writes an optimistic show only to conclude in a cynical way. No one writes a positive, lighthearted, and optimistic show where the hero takes a bullet for the heroine and sacrifices his happiness on the rooftop of the concert hall only to be abandoned by the heroine after a kiss, after telling her that he will always be there for her.
Disconnect often starts because of the differing lens through which we view a topic. Karen’s view is definitely the most cynical I’ve heard about Sarah, particularly about the finale. Why she is ignoring that both Quinn and Chuck (as Dave points ) out are the cause behind her behavior in the last two episodes, only she can answer that question.
Regardless, I am reminded of the phrase “agree to disagree” because I have kept an eye on this conversation for quite a few days and neither Karen, nor Fransesco have shown much, if any acknowledgment of each other’s POV and things have started devolving from a healthy debate to pointless right fighting. I think Dave would agree that when we start calling a person or their opinions insane, things are getting a bit out hand.
Hope you guys and gals don’t mind me playing peacemaker, I just felt obligated to step in
Karen’s emotional reaction to season 3 and the series finale is very understandable. Many of us have gone through that. Whatever faults S3 and the finale may have, they are certainly not boring. And that’s a win for the creators.
What I do find interesting is that, when she is given sensible explanations for the characters’ behavior and the purpose of season 3 and the finale, she still rejects them completely. It’s like she wants to stay mad at the show, as if her anger could magically remove from existence the scenes and episodes she hates.
For whatever it’s worth, my Reddit poll about season 3 has 250 votes or so and shows that about 95% of the voters like the season.
Not buying the insane killer robot stuff!
She’d been briefed that this man and his family were dangerous. So she was cautious. And then Chuck starts planning a raid on DARPA! Oh brother. That was the most problematic thing in the episode (whole series even) to me. That makes Chuck a domestic terrorist. Period. Very ugly scheme.
So I think Sarah was right not to trust him at that point. I have a bigger problem with Chuck.
Then I DID like when Sarah clocked Quinn after he blew up the office. Good for her! She is moral and solid throughout. Including trying to round up Chuck and Ellie afterwards.
But for all that she was stupid. First, she was laughably bad in her role as “wife” when she thought she wasn’t really married. Even before that, the briefing was terrible and should have raised all sorts of red flags. At the very least, she should have checked in at Langley. She would have eventually learned she was no longer even an agent, and the whole “briefing” was bogus.
The stupid bothered me a lot more than any moral issues.
The actual finale bothered me less, although I do have a few nits to pick there too.
Dave, I think the “stupid” comes down to my earlier point about TV logic and troupes
Dave focuses on real issues, namely the briefing, but many viewers will go along with it because of the Rule of Cool (another TV trope) and because we can clearly imagine a plausible scenario where Sarah calls Langley and Quinn has anticipated that and has one of his pals intercept the call and pretend to be Langley.
They don’t show any of that stuff because it slows the pace and can get boring. They have 42 minutes to tell a story in 5 acts plus a beginning teaser. It’s all packed, and every second counts.
The “Rule of Cool” often breaks down when things get too stupid. 5.12 is an excellent example of that.
I definitely agree with you on that
Yes, thank you Josh.
“It’s objectively wrong because we see throughout the entire episode that Sarah never gives Chuck any false hope about their relationship. She clearly tells him she will kill Quinn and disappear because she doesn’t know how to be the woman she remembers her as. She keeps telling him to focus on the mission when he starts talking about them, she is about to leave by herself in castle before Mary stops her. She leaves Chuck after defusing the bomb. She’s is constantly pulling away from him and is not shy about it.”
That’s the point! Pulling away from Chuck all the time is an unusual behavior for Sarah. They have been together for 2,5 years. Why does she do this all the time and in one second, change 180, lasting 4,5 minutes to the end? We don’t know and we will never know. Perhaps the answer is because the writers wanted it that way.
Using your way of expressing, you need to understand that Sarah’s attitude before the beach scene makes no sense. She lost her memory, she didn’t lose her essence – her ID, Ego and Superego. In other words, even without her memories she couldn’t have become Chuck’s Nemesis because she remains the same Sarah from episode E05E11, the same Sarah who had been defending Chuck from all dangers for 5 years, who fell in love with him, got married and planned to have children with him. Putting it in another way: a good person who loses his memory will not turn evil because of it, and vice versa. The Sarah of S05E12 was no longer the wild pre-Chuck Sarah, even without knowing who she was. In these 5 years she has become a mature woman, a woman in love, surrounded by family, friends…
And yes! The show is positive, lighthearted, and optimistic till the last tw0 episodes. These two are not happy, funny or optimistic at all.
They show Sarah’h heart is subconsciously drawn to Chuck even as her head pulls away. She goes to him at the Buy More at the beginning of the final episode. She didn’t have to. She just does. She goes to the beach where they watched their first sunrise together.
It’s not just the last few minutes. We can see she is mesmerized by Chuck in the DARPA room when he tells her he’s “her Chuck.” We can see that she responds to him as the last episode progresses because the last episode is a synopsis of the show. She looks at the glasses longingly on the concert hall rooftop when Chuck tells her he had a good plan. In castle, at the end, she turns around and looks at Chuck half-expectantly when he starts telling her about Morgan’s idea.
Sarah’s behavior makes perfect sense. We are our memories. You should watch the movie The Vow based on the true story of a married woman who has a car accident and forgets about her husband and marriage. She goes back to who she was before she got married, and as her story progresses, she “catches up emotionally” with the person she was when she got married and starts things over with the her husband after their post-memory loss estrangement. The story is in many ways similar to the one we see in 5.13 Goodbye (minus the trained assassin part).
No, Sarah is reverted to the person she was before Chuck. We are our memories. Watch the move The Vow above. Just like the lady in The Vow, Sarah catches up emotionally with she was before the memory loss, but in the movie, I think it takes the wife one year. Sarah takes less than three weeks. And Sarah doesn’t exactly catch up emotionally with S5 Sarah. It’s more like S3 Sarah, who wants a real life and wants to find herself.
That “pristine” version of Sarah will be back after the kiss, after the three parts of the key to Sarah have been put together.
She is not evil, as she was not evil in 4.09 when she went on a rampage through Thailand. You confuse cold wildcard enforcer with evil. In 5.12, as Dave mentioned, she thinks Chuck is evil and responsible for Bryce’s and Graham’s deaths. He also wants to commit an act of domestic terrorism by destroying the Intersect. In Sarah’s eyes, it’s Chuck who is evil in 5.12 until she finds out he isn’t.
The last episode is happy, optimistic, and melancholy (it’s a goodbye after all). There is nothing dark about the final episode. The extras get to the talk (fairy tale ending for them, too), Chuck and his team do all they can to help Sarah, every character gets a fairy tale ending where all their dreams come true, and the show literally ends with the main couple kissing on the beach where their hearts brought them. This is the opposite of dark. You think it’s dark because your negative emotional reaction is clouding your judgment. We who are emotionally removed from the episode can see it clearly for what it is.
Also, as Josh has mentioned in a comment above, 5.12 Sarah would respond to Chuck more quickly than she does, but she literally has Quinn as the devil in her ear.
We can say whatever we want about the final two episodes, but boring they are not. Fedak had a very clear point he wanted to make—Chuck would get a woman like Sarah no matter what the scenario, even the worst possible one where Sarah is literally turned into Chuck’s enemy and terminator. That is the point that, come hell or high water, Fedak wanted to make.
This scenario is a nerdy reference to the story of Luke and Mara Jade Skywalker.
We can argue all we want that Sarah is made stupid in 5.12, but that is beside the point. Even if Sarah were made smarter, so would Quinn because that’s the story Fedak wanted to tell and the point Fedak wanted to make, no matter what.
Karen,
I think it is important to assure you that nobody here is trying to make you like the finale, swaying opinions not what we mean to do here.
We are however, trying to move you past denial and anger in your stages of grief, to help you understand that Fedak isn’t some sadistic writer who enjoys inflicting pain on his characters or his audience. It’s just that everything he did is because he conceived Chuck Bartowski as the point of the show. That is to say, Chuck is the sun and everything else including the characters is the earth revolving around him.
I hope that eventually you will find acceptance with the finale at least, but it is perfectly okay that you are not there yet.
If we think it’s implausible for Sarah to think and act in the last two episodes as she did five years prior, watch the 2012 movie The Vow. Beside the year of release, It’s eerily similar to Sarah’s situation in many ways and it’s based on a true story.
Paige and her husband Leo get in a car accident, and Paige forgets the last 5 years of her life. Her persona reverts back to what she was 5 years before, and it will take her one year (I think) to emotionally catch up with who she was right before the accident.
Her husband fights to win her back, gives up as Chuck at the end of 5.12 and has to wait for Paige to find herself and want to reconnect with him.
After watching that movie, I doubt that anyone could say that Sarah’s behavior is implausible since something very similar to it happened to Paige in real life.
“If we think it’s implausible for Sarah to think and act in the last two episodes as she did five years prior, watch the 2012 movie The Vow. Beside the year of release, It’s eerily similar to Sarah’s situation in many ways and it’s based on a true story. ”
Your self-proclaimed authority and final-word-on-any-subject-in-the-Chuck-series does not allow you to see this are two different things:
Sarah had not any accident that physically damaged her brain, not even an AVC. She had her memories blocked and some damage from using the Intersect. Her maturity as a person couldn’t have been undone, as Morgan couldn’t. Her personality couldn’t have changed. The married Sarah, thinking about children, who had been protecting Chuck for 5 years from everything and everyone was no longer the wild and life purposeless Sarah from 5-6 years ago.
This invalidates the entire final arc. So yes, that was done to… to make Chuck bigger over Sarah’s destruction and to not give a happy ending for Chuck & Sarah because that’s what the 99% of viewers wanted, but it was not what the writers wanted… they wanted to be cool to their fellow writers.
Again you ignore a key point Sarah did changed but she changed because Quinn filled her head with falsehood and then Chuck validates the false truth by committing domestic terrisiom. Stop acting like the Sarah before Chuck takes that bullet is the same one for the rest of the last two episodes, she is not.
“ In psychology, implicit memory is one of the two main types of long-term human memory. It is acquired and used unconsciously, and can affect thoughts and behaviours. One of its most common forms is procedural memory, which allows people to perform certain tasks without conscious awareness of these previous experiences; for example, remembering how to tie one’s shoes or ride a bicycle without consciously thinking about those activities.”
Sarah in the last two episodes has her implicit Chuck related memory
Both Sarah in Chuck and Paige in The Vow and in real life had a brain that worked perfectly fine except both lost memories of their last five years. Both are brought back to the persona they were 5 years earlier. Paige forgot how to create modern art (which was her source of income) and got back to her college persona, flirted with her ex boyfriend Jeremy (because that’s who she was 5 years earlier), and was ashamed of being seen in her lingerie by her husband Leo because he was a stranger to her.
Again, watch The Vow. It’s eerily similar to Sarah’s situation. Paige’s maturity was undone. She literally went back to who she was 5 years before, and this is a true story, not just fiction. She takes one year to grow back into the woman she was right before the accident.
Watch Paige in The Vow and then let’s talk.
Paige’s true story in The Vow begs to differ.
That’s false. The writers loved Sarah’s characters. They quite literally ended the story with a kiss, which is a happy ending, and the majority of viewers do love the ending.
I’ll add that according to Ellie, Sarah’s brain was physically damaged, the excessive flashing caused cranial pressure on her brain, which aggravated her hypocampus—the part of the brain responsible for learning and memory.
In all these years I have never looked at the lead up to the final arc in that light, its true that we got a look at what their happily ever after would be, they just spread it across the first 11 episodes
Even if one disagrees with the finale, we have to admit that stories are based on conflict. If there is no conflict, there is no story. Even a sitcom like Everybody Loves Raymond ends with a finale where all of Raymond’s family members think he’s about to die and are all scared until the finale’s big reveal.
With Chuck and Sarah’s story, the conflict was always about losing each other, either through break-ups or Chuck being bunkered or terminated or because of feelings as a liability for spies or because of Chuck’s lobotomy by the Belgian in 4.09 or because of Sarah almost dying in 4.24. Without conflict, there is no story.
How were they going to end the series? With Chuck and Sarah choosing the decor of their new office space? With a family meal like at the end of 5.08? With them talking about raising kids like in 5.11? Can you hear the echo of Marco’s voice in 4.01, “That was a bit anticlimactic”? It’s boring because there is no conflict.
The core theme of the story was always Chuck and Sarah’s unlikely but perfect relationship. And so, they give us their ultimate conflict and their ultimate triumph in the finale after giving us a bunch of episodes before showing exactly the happy ending we wanted to see (great family time at the end of 5.08, Chuck and Sarah planning to leave the spy life to raise kids).
I have no doubt that that is how you feel, but I also have no doubt that it is not the intention of the finale for us to hold on to our anger. I truly believe that we are supposed to see it as the personification of true love, persisting when circumstances try to rip it apart.
The problem is that it does not account for those such as yourself who need the validation of a happy ever-after ending for the journey to be worth it.
It has been said already that CHUCK as much as we might think or feel otherwise is about the life and love of Chuck Bartaowski, Chuck’s love is unconditional for everyone he cares about. The finale is written the way it is to demonstrate that in his relationship with Sarah. We are in essence supposed to accept Sarah at the end because Chuck does. Chuck Bartowski does not care about Sarah’s memory on that beach, hell he does not even care if they rekindle a romantic relationship, he simply wants to be a part of her life and the only thing he asks for is her trust. A powerful ending to be sure, but objectively unsatisfying if one’s view of Sarah is conditional.
My answer to this is simple. I was ready for the show to end by the time the finale came around. I was ready for and I was OK with it. That being said I (me, moi, myself) wasn’t allowed to “say goodbye” to my favorite characters because of the ambiguity around the beach scene.
Listen, the Sarah Walker that we’d come to adore was nowhere to be seen in the finale. The last we saw of her she was looking out of the train window at Chuck.
I always thought one of the biggest failings of S3A was keeping Chuck and Sarah apart. They were the heart of the show and the show didn’t function / wasn’t fun when they weren’t sharing the screen. So in the finale although C&S may be sharing some screen time together at times, they couldn’t be further apart.
Also, the final scene on the beach has absolutely nothing to do with Sarah or Sarah’s memories. That scene is entirely about Chuck in order to show how much he’s “grown” since we first met him.
Honestly I am convinced that the casual CHUCK viewer does not see the S3A drama between Chuck and Sarah as the unforgivable sin a lot of us hardcore fans do. I’m following a first-time reaction channel right now, and they are really enjoying season 3 so maybe the audience for CHUCK has expanded since it originally aired.
All I know is that my PTSD from Chuck S3 is so bad that it has permanently made me paranoid that couples on shows I currently watch are going to break up even when the writing doesn’t support my paranoia at all.
@Josh
Yeah I’m with there. After watching Chuck I find my tolerance for shows with no likeable characters or show that jerk the audience around just because they can has decreased notably.
With regards to S3A, I think it’s a totally different show for today’s audience. You can be done the Misery Arc in 2 or 3 evenings and you weren’t waiting 8 months for your favorite show to return with essentially brand new characters you don’t recognize.
I think that hits the nail on the head about the Misery Arc. Its a different experience powering through something, compared to living with it for a year.
Completely agree with @JoshZ on the misery arc. I watched the whole of Chuck with my wife years after the show ended, and excused myself from S3.0. She didn’t really get what the big deal was – I had to explain how I’d waited months for them to finally be together, and then they’d ripped it all apart, causing me to stop watching the show until I knew they were back. She still didn’t quite get it.
At the same time, to give the devil his due, I’m not sure any of the show really hits the same in streaming. There’s something about living with Chuck and Sarah’s joint struggle over multiple years that makes it more impactful, and S3.0 is a part of that.
Ironically, S3 and the finale seem to have aged well given the binge model afforded by streaming while season 4 is the most disjointed from beginning to end. It’s just funny how time and means of consuming a show can drastically alter what people enjoy about it.
I completely agree that with streaming/binging its much easier to just power past a bad episode or two and not have it detract from the whole so much. Although I’m not sure it would have helped me like those episodes any better, but at least they wouldn’t hang like a dark cloud for a year.
My wife and I have been watching the BBC mystery series “Father Brown”, a fun show of its sort. But last night we thought the episode was sort of a dud. Shrug. We’ll watch another tonight…
I still think a whole sour arc would have sat poorly, but not to the degree. If nothing else it seems easier to just walk away from.
@Josh Z,
I think the overarching issue with the two-episode finale, regardless of how you feel about the magical-kiss ending, is that there was little joy between Chuck and Sarah.
Think about it: Sarah spends the first 40 minutes trying to beat the tar out of Chuck. Then she apologizes, but leaves because she doesn’t feel the love. Then Chuck spends the next 40 minutes hanging on by his fingernails, mostly unsuccessfully trying to get Sarah to remember him. Then she leaves again.
So everything about the last two episodes of the show rests on the tag at the beach. Do we get joy? No, we get the its-a-long-haul sentiment of the almost dirge-like Rivers and Roads and the end kiss, which we are not definitively told works.
Chuck was almost always fun in first 89 episodes. It was, save for a few Season 3 episodes, a joy to watch. But in the final two, the last time (probably) we’ll ever see Chuck and Sarah, we got fighting and insecurity and despair and our cherished couple maybe or maybe not getting back together.
So even if the end worked (as I know it did for you and me), we didn’t get the joy of Chuck and Sarah working together and the fun of them being together as a happy couple in the finale. That really does diminish the ending for a lot of fans.
I remember clapping with joy at the end of Colonel and Ring. I let out an audible sigh of relief at the end of Other Guy. I cheered when Sarah clobbered Shaw and reaffirmed her love for regular-guy Chuck in Ring II. I misted up at the proposal in Push Mix and was heart-warmed by the wedding in Cliffhanger. It was fun. It was joyful.
At the end of that two-hour Chuck finale, I said, “Hmm, interesting writing choices.” There wasn’t a lot of joy, though.
I actually agree with this, the finale for as much as I really do appreciate it, has very little concern with pleasing the audience that spent 5 years watching week after week and that more than the writing itself is the underlying issue.
Optimism without satisfaction pretty much sums it up
Yeah I think is exactly on the money.
Well that, and for the last two episodes we didn’t see any of Sarah Walker-Bartowski, the character we all knew and loved on screen. Seriously, she was the most popular character on the show. And practically speaking she was absent for the 2-part finale.
This is true. But that’s why we see plenty of Sarah Bartowski in the first 11 episodes of season 5. That’s why they show us a Sarah in 5.10 and 5.11 who wants out of the spy life and wants a new life with kids a “safer” job. That’s why we see the sweet and romantic scene with Chuck and Sarah in the bullet train compartment, drawing that picture. That’s why we see an almost pregnant Sarah and happy about becoming a mother. That’s why we see Sarah coaching Casey and Gertrude on the compatibility of feelings and the spy life, a lesson she and Chuck learned and role-modeled in season 3.
They give us one big serving of this Sarah because they want to make the most important point of all in the final arc—Sarah and Chuck are soulmates no matter what the initial scenario is. This ties into the core concept of the show—the unlikely put perfect relationship between two people who were very different and imperfect but were made perfect by their togetherness.
This is true, your comments about the vow are also important because that is a real person who lost her memory up to a certain point and rebuilt her life. I’m not sure if it came out before Chuck’s finale but regardless, it provides a blueprint for what Sarah likely goes through in trying to deal with her memory loss. As others have said I think that would have been the focus of a season 5 backorder but alas NBC was through with CHUCK and refused to give more episodes.
The story in The Vow is so eerily similar to Chuck and Sarah’s story in the finale (minus the terminator part) that we can almost say we did get the Chuck movie the same year the series ended. They even use a lot of the same language as the Chuck finale, stuff like, “We fell in love once. We can do it again.”
Last night I finally watched the movie The Vow. Wow… so heartbroken!!!! If this movie is a kind of pairing for Sarah & Chuck, then we definitely didn’t have a happy ending in the Chuck series.
In a true story, Rachel McAdams’ character has a serious car accident and loses 5 years of her memories, forgetting all about her husband. After some time in the hospital, she goes to their home, but feels totally uncomfortable. Son after, she accepts to go in a date with her husband, they have a great time, they kiss each other, have sex, but next day she just dumps her husband (here I feared a similar attitude from Sarah). They even officially separate, spending months without speaking to each other. During this whole period, she had no attachment towards her husband, no love, no feelings, nothing at all. Then… one day, from nowhere, a year after the accident, she returns to her husband, but still without any memory. And she will never remember those five years again.
Anything other than an immediately and fully recovered Sarah in the final kiss for me is a sad ending. And unfortunately that’s what I can’t see in this ending, exactly what is not shown to us. If the writers wanted me to see a happy ending there (which I very much doubt), they failed miserably.
After this post, I swear I’ll move on…. No more Chuck.
Karen,
The right connection between The Vow and Chuck is this:
* Both Paige and Sarah forget the last 5 years
* Both go back to their persona from 5 years before
* Both husbands try to win their wife back
* Both husbands say, “We fell in love once, we can do it again.”
* Both husbands lose hope to get their wife back
* Both Paige and Sarah catch up emotionally as time goes by
* Both husbands give their wives the freedom to leave them
* Both Paige and Sarah go back to their husbands at the end
The difference is that Paige does not recover her memories while Sarah does with or after the kiss.
I remember “The Vow” came out right when we were all dealing with the aftermath of the Chuck finale. It definitely lead to a lot of grief for a number of fans. And certainly, from the perspective of not regaining memories and leaving her husband it played to many viewers’ worst fears.
But I think I’ll completely agree with Francesco on this one. As rough as it got, the lead couple still wound up back together, because even without memories she loved her husband. It just took some time to sort out the idea of loving someone she didn’t remember.
The Chuck situation is significantly different because Sarah actually does start remembering. Now I will always wish they’d shown us something more concrete than remembering how to sort cups or finding her way back to a particular beach. But we absolutely did see the more mature Sarah Bartowski on that beach at the end. So I think we can rationally conclude Sarah went through some of the process as the movie, and she did leave her husband for about 3 weeks; but in the end, she was recovered enough to come home. Sarah left that beach WITH Chuck, and the marriage survived.
It’s also important to remember that there is a fundamental difference between someone who’s memories are indirectly suppressed versus someone whose brain has been physically damaged causing actual loss of memory. We can’t be certain but I don’t think there is anything physically wrong with Sarah’s hippocampus (the memory center of the brain ) it’s more like it was temporarily disrupted and took time to return to normal brain activity.
Excellent point Josh.
Correct. Some viewers forget that Sarah’s memories are merely suppressed, not erased, and we can see they are coming back.
Not to mention that the whole point of the final arc in Chuck is to answer Quinn’s challenge that Chuck would never get a woman like Sarah without the Intersect. Once Chuck shows on that beach that he would indeed get a woman like Sarah even under the worst possible scenario and despite the Intersect actively taking Sarah away from him, her memories will come back since the point has been conclusively made.
This same point was made in reverse in 4.09 Phase Three. Once the point that Sarah would go to the ends of the earth for Chuck despite Chuck’s fears while his brain was being lobotomized, of course, Chuck came back with his brain fully intact after Sarah’s magical kiss.
This show is massively self-referential. And the final beach scene is a multi-faceted reference to the pilot, to Phase Three, and to Other Guy.
The final act of the finale, the denouement, is also very Disney-esque; all characters get a “magical” fairy-tale goodbye, with all their dreams coming true. This is in line with the princess getting a magical kiss from Prince Charming.
Most of us would have liked to see “more” than this, but we should not confuse “wanting to see more” with “this is no happy ending” when everything in the episode shows us the opposite.
Well… for me it will always be a sad, almost hopeless ending. I really wanted something less subtle than what was done or portrayed. I just wanted to say that comparing Chuck’s finale to The Vow only made my feeling about it worse. The girl from The Vow wasn’t a CIA spy-killer nor a master of manipulation.
Changing the subject, I just noticed that Yvonne Strahovski is pregnant with her third child. The other two are little children, one of them is a baby yet. I think her priorities in the coming years will be them. So most likely we won’t get a new Chuck anytime soon, which pretty much means we’ll never get a sequel. What a pitty. I still had some hope till now. But of course, I wish much happiness for Yvonne and her beautiful children!
Toby, the genius shrink from Scorpion would have interesting things to say about our different reactions to the ending of Chuck and The Vow, considering both stories have a happy ending, with the wife catching up emotionally with who she was before the memory loss/suppression and going back to her husband.
Scorpion also has lots of references to Chuck, with Walter and Paige being their own version of Chuck and Sarah, and with the theme of the nerds saving the day and love as a liability on the job (even though it is far less believable in Scorpion, and even with a character referencing “the nerd herd.” They even have a Shaw/Sarah relationship going on that lasts an entire season and is handled far worse that the Shaw/Sarah thing in Chuck. I haven’t finished the series, though, because it gets pretty repetitive and boring.
I’d caution folks not to draw too many close parallels between Chuck and The Vow. The real-life couple who wrote the book on which the movie is based divorced several years ago after the supposedly devoted and doggedly persistent husband had an affair.
Do we really want to go down THAT road? Let’s keep Chuck and Sarah in the realm of happily (if slightly ambiguous) ever after and ignore The Vow, which has a real-life unhappy ending.
Real life is often uglier than fiction! In a way I prefer that; I like fiction to be inspirational and edifying. But of course, its a bummer that reality needs so much help!
I fully agree with Dave. My favorite fiction (or the only fiction I watch and enjoy) is inspirational.
Another shocking occurrence!
I’m not sure it’s that shocking. The first time I watched the show, my reaction was exactly like yours. We probably like a lot of the same stuff and for the same reasons.
@atcDave: real life is uglier than SOME fiction. After all, Chuck fans carry the burden of Mask, Fake Name and Final Exam.😌
But that’s only the last 10 minutes of those episodes.
No doubt!
Which is the take away. The ending always has the unique ability to make or break.
I understand those last 10 minutes are hard to watch (for me as well), but Mask, Fake Name, and Final Exam represent the darkest moments of the hero’s journey (Descent, Ordeal, and Death/Final Exam), so they are supposed to be darker—think of LOTR Frodo burdened by the ring in the dead marshes and his final exam/temptation to hold onto the ring instead of destroying it, or think of Harry despairing to destroy the horcruxes and then having to sacrifice his life in the forest in The Deathly Hallows.
That being said, I want to put in a word for the writers of Chuck because even the three darkest stages of Chuck’s S3 hero’s journey are a fantastic blend of humor, action, and good feelings for over 30 minutes before jumping into the darker last 10 minutes. Viewers always bash the writers for the dark moments in these episodes, so I’d like to point out the other 30 minutes are just as “better than real life” as the rest of Chuck.
We are drawing a parallel between Chuck and The Vow because Karen a month ago commented something about the idea of Sarah going back to the person she was before meeting Chuck was unrealistic, whereas the true story behind The Vow makes it clear that Paige reverted back to the person she was 5 years before after her car accident.
Guys! Any word on the strong possibility that we won’t get a Chuck sequel anymore??? I really think now is the “end of the dream”. : (
I would love a movie or one more season to see a more mature Chuck & Sarah, their family, children, how Sarah would be in her new life – I would love to see Sarah as mother, I wonder how she would protect her children and at the same time still having some spy action.
But this would be against the Hollywood way of thinking these days, where family is something to be fought, oldfashioned. Well, I think the whole concept of the Chucky series today would be considered inappropriate in their current way of thinking. Which obviously is not mine or that of many of the viewers. I consider this gap the biggest problem with Hollywood productions these days.
I’m not going to give up hope! I never thought I’d see Icarly come back, much less that they would actually successfully make Carly and Freddie a couple after 16 years (somehow this wait was still less painful than Chuck S3 lol) so you never really know!
As far as we know it’s a dead issue for now, there’s been no word of anyone working on a reunion movie or series.
But Zac has always said he wants to do it, and other cast members are apparently willing. So, never say never.
It’s something that could probably be done fairly fast and cheap. I still think there’s a chance at some point. But there’s no use loosing sleep over it, at least for now it’s a “maybe someday” sort of thing.
Just coming back to a point about watching the movie made me realize: the girl in The Vow doesn’t have a loving gaze, a tenderness towards her husband. She sees it is painful for him, that he is suffering too, but she is totally indifferent to it. Unfortunately this also happened with Sarah, which to me indicates something totally out-of-character for her, as never, in any time that Sarah and Chuck were side-by-side in 5 years, she acted like that with Chuck.
It bothers me and takes even more away my enjoyment of watch the Chuck finale, which was already negative. Even in the beach scene, she seems to be thinking only about herself. This is not the Sarah I knew, who, as she always said herself, is a different person when she is with Chuck – this Sarah has heart, feelings, has empathy. Not in the final two episodes. For me, Sarah’s lack of tenderness and care for Chuck, in my final reaction, drains down and ruins everything in the Chuck finale.
You are wrong, and not in an I don’t like your opinion kind of way. Sarah life literally apologizes to Chuck at least twice because she can’t remember them as knows her. When she learns the truth and he takes that bullet she runs to his side and is actually going to stay before he insists she runs away. If you think those are the actions of an unfeeling woman you have no empathy for what actually happens to Sarah in the last two episodes.
Again, Sarah’s indifference is presented for a good reason. They want to show that Sarah will fall for Chuck even under the worst possible scenario, starting with no feelings towards him and actively resisting the idea of being with him. They need to prove Quinn wrong once and for all, you see.
And it’s untrue that Sarah is indifferent to Chuck. Her attraction grows as the episode progresses. She is obviously attracted to Chuck during their dance at the Russian consulate, she has a hopeful look on the roof the concert hall when Chuck says he had a good plan to restore her memories, and she turns to Chuck expectantly in the final castle scene when he starts telling her about Morgan’s idea.
And in the final beach scene, she has the same expression that Chuck had on the beach in the pilot episode. Watch the two scenes back to back, they are a mirror of each other. Again, this show is massively self-referential.
And in the very final scene, when she asks for the kiss, we know she absolutely means it precisely because she was always brutally honest with Chuck during the last episode and would not give him any false hope. And we can see from the look on Chuck’s face that he understands the importance and the implications of her request before he leans to kiss her.
And once he does, Sarah Bartowski is back, just as lobotomized Chuck was back after Sarah kissed him at the end of Phase Three. Again, this show is self-referential.
Even at the end of The Vow, the wife goes back to her husband. She catches up emotionally over a year with the person she was when the accident happened. With Sarah, it happens in three weeks.
As Toby from Scorpion would say, our reaction to Chuck’s finale says more about our present ambiguity tolerance-intolerance psychological state than about Chuck and Sarah’s future.
Yeah, the negative reaction to the finale is almost entirely psychological and the viewer projecting personal wants on the story. From an objective viewpoint the finale is great writing that answers the question of would Chuck win Sarah’s affection even if circumstances were entirely stacked against him. The answer is absolutely yes.
@Francesco Scinico – Okay. So you agree with me that Sarah is out-of-character in the last two episodes. Good.
@Josh Z – As I recall, in the fountain scene – the saddest, the most emotionally negative scene of the entire series, which has no counterpoint in the final episode [positive, at the same measure], Sarah without any empathy for Chuck says she knows everything about them, but feels nothing. That she goes after Quinn and then she’ll disappear forever, wihtout him. So much empathy for the person who just saved her life, who just took a bullet for her, who proclaimed his unconditional love for her where having a gun pointed in his face by her. I’m a woman and I’m I feel bad about this. I would never act like that. To me this is nothing less than poor writing. Nothing makes sense, out of Sarah character.
I’m not sure what “out of character” means in this context.
Is the Sarah we see in 5.12-13 different than the Sarah we see in the pilot? Yes, but the Sarah in the pilot didn’t have 5 years of memories suppressed. Her experience with Chuck was also stacked in favor of Chuck.
Is the Sarah we see in 5.12-13 different from the Sarah we see in 4.09 Phase Three? Not that much. That Sarah was also pretty scary and ruthless. They make a point of even making her say that.
Is the Sarah we see in 5.12-13 different from the Sarah we see in 5.08 Baby? Not so much. Yet, even that Sarah had empathy and morals and risked her life to save an innocent baby and sacrificed a relationship with her mother to keep the baby safe.
Then, we have to say that people behave “out of character” when they face new situations. For example, Chuck and Sarah behave out of character in Prague, and that is perfectly intentional by the writers. Chuck has made the decision to become a spy, so he’s trying to behave like one, like non-talkative Sarah or Casey. He will occasionally act out of character until he decides to become his own spy in 3.09 Beard. And so is Sarah in S3.
With this in mind, arguing that a character is acting “out of character” is not the gotcha viewers think it is, especially when it’s entirely intentional by the writers in order to make a point.
Karen, when we say that we would never act like Sarah after Chuck’s show of love for her, we need to understand a couple of very important things:
1. We are NOT Sarah. Are you a woman raised by a con man and recruited into the CIA as a teenager, and taught the Jedi (pardon me, spy) code of never falling in love because feelings are a liability? I didn’t think so.
2. Even Paige in The Vow acts in a way similar to Sarah in regards to her feelings for her husband. A woman can’t make herself feel feelings that she doesn’t feel. Imagine I came to memory-impaired you and told you I’m your husband and even took a bullet for you. So what? You would feel moved, as Sarah is, but that would not make you love me. I’m a complete stranger to you. A nice stranger who took a bullet for you but still a stranger. Imagine how disconcerting it is to not remember 5 years of your life and have strangers come to you and act around you as if you know them. It’s overwhelming and scary. It’s a constant reminder of what you have lost.
Finally, since Chuck is pure fiction, the point of the final two episodes is to show that Chuck wins Sarah’s head in one day (5.12) and, after a two-week hiatus, Sarah’s heart in less than a week (5.13). In order to get Sarah back, he has to win both Sarah’s head and her heart, and that’s precisely what he does. That’s why Ellie and Morgan give him the key: find Sarah, be yourself, and kiss her.
The fact that you interpret the scene that way tells me you fundamentally misunderstand her character. It is very much consistent for her to run from Chuck and her emotions. That is why she shuts down in this scene, the loss is too much for her to process and we know that because of how she reacts to the video log. She is angry (just as we are) that the memories have been ripped from her.
But just like the rest of the series, no matter how hard she tries to run from her emotions, from Chuck, she always returns and the same is true here. The show is yet again trying to reinforce that about Sarah, even though she says she will leave and leave Chuck, ultimately she doesn’t, like always.
“since Chuck is pure fiction, the point of the final two episodes is to show that Chuck wins Sarah’s head in one day (5.12) and, after a two-week hiatus, Sarah’s heart in less than a week (5.13). In order to get Sarah back, he has to win both Sarah’s head and her heart, and that’s precisely what he does. That’s why Ellie and Morgan give him the key: find Sarah, be yourself, and kiss her.”
You mean bad fiction and a poorly written story, because the final two episodes went down a totally different path from what the show has been in its entire existence. A path of pain, suffering, joyless, without the main couple working happily together and loving each other all the time. To me, it’s like Chuck’s finale belongs on another show, one of those very dramatic horror/thriller shows. It’s just like it’s not Chuck.
If you have seen the show only once, you may not yet have realized what the show is really about. The show is about a most unlikely but perfect relationship between two people who belong in different worlds and who on paper don’t belong together.
The show’s concept was sold to WB/NBC as that of o a super spy like Sidney Bristow from Alias walking into The Office and falling for Jim Halpert and turning into James Bond.
Chuck himself mentions their ontological difference in his break-up speech at the end of 2.03 Break-Up when he says they are kidding themselves, that Sarah is a spy goddess who quells revolutions in Paraguay with a fork while he is a normal guy who plays video games with Morgan.
Chuck is reminded of his inadequacy for the first two seasons just by being around Bryce and Cole. It’s only in season 3 that he becomes Sarah’s equal (with the Intersect) and in season 5 without the Intersect.
Once we understand that this is the show’s very concept, we realize the final two episodes are the very opposite of “a totally different path” from what the show has been. On the contrary, they address the very concept of the show head on by having Quinn bring up this ontological difference between Chuck and Sarah and by charging Chuck that he would never get a woman like Sarah without the Intersect (I might have mentioned this point only 20 times already).
And the final arc accepts this challenges, uses the Intersect to take Sarah away from Chuck again and again, and shows that Chuck gets a woman like Sarah even without the Intersect even under the worst possible scenario.
This is not only not “a totally different path” from what shown before. It is the path. It’s what the show has always been—the nerd getting the girl, in Chuck’s own words, “Again and again. And again.”
@ Francesco – You can sustain your positions any way you want, including trying to force it on others.
But you’ll never be able to change my understanding that Chuck’s finale was wrong, that’s bad fiction and a poorly written story.
That the showrunners ruined Sarah’s character just so they could make Chuck grow in importance over Sarah. That with no respect for Sarah Walker’s character, they used her as a plot device, just Sarah who had the most beautiful growth journey in the show, much more than Chuck (she was the public’s favorite in last seasons). That the amnesia thing is a silly thing, that had been done 2 times before in the show. That the tone of the show in the last two episodes is a tone of pain, extreme anguish, without comic relief that doesn’t communicate wiht the show was presented to us for five years.
That Chuck and Sarah during the entire time in these two last episodes are in total despair and in absurd pain, and consequently we viewers are too. That the extreme emotionally painful and heavy scenes of episode 12 never found a counterpart of joy and happiness in episode 13, that with 4 minutes to end, Sarah was still repelling Chuck (What was the point of that anyway? Is it all just to fit in that ambiguous scene on the beach? Really?). That paying close attention, we can even see that the two main actors are uncomfortable in their roles (Zach and Ivonne have implied this in later interviews). That Chuck’s writers had to come out and explain the ending, because few fans understood or could see the so-called happy ending that the writers didn’t want to show.
Yes… that’s bad fiction and a poorly written story.
Bad fanfiction, sorry but Season 3.0 is bad fanfiction, bad acting, bad everything. The finale is doing something right to cause such strong emotions wether positive or negative and keep us talking for more than a decade afterward. Chuck might not have satisfied everyone with its finale but we all remember it and how we feel about it. That makes it well-written no matter where you fall on the spectrum.
Karen,
You’re having an emotional reaction to the finale, and that is fine because no one can tell you how to feel about something. If you hate the finale and always will, that is fine. It’s your emotional reaction, and as such, it’s inherently right.
But when you say that the finale is horrible (for everybody?), that Sarah is used as a plot device, that the amnesia thing is a silly thing, that the tone of the final two episodes is one of pain, these are all claims about the finale that go beyond your emotional reaction, and we have shown you why those claims are wrong.
In closing, I can’t help but notice one ironic aspect about Chuck’s finale. Ellie says at the beginning of the final episode that emotions are powerful things, and emotions will help Sarah remember.
Well, your emotions about Chuck’s finale are powerful things, and I’m pretty sure they will help you remember it.
And I’m pretty sure this goes for all of us viewers here, even the ones who saw it a long time ago.
Emotions are powerful things.
“The finale is doing something right to cause such strong emotions wether positive or negative and keep us talking for more than a decade afterward. Chuck might not have satisfied everyone with its finale but we all remember it and how we feel about it. That makes it well-written no matter where you fall on the spectrum.”
@Josh Z – Your cause-effect relation doesn’t make any sense. It’s not because we talk about WWII a lot until today, that means it was good.
We talk a lot and we talk badly about Chuck’s finale because it was unsatisfactory. Because it brought negative emotions to a huge portion of fans, because it didn’t have a payoff after so much pain and suffering in these 2 last episodes, because we DON’T SEE Chuck and Sarah happily ever after, because it didn’t bring a sense of closure for the serie.
Was I talking about WWII, no. But nice try comparing apples and oranges. Anyway, I recognize a pointless conversation when I see one.
S3A and the final 2 to 3 episodes of the series are exactly the same from a story telling POV. Yes they are both laden with hopelessness that the writers try to resolve with teaspoonful of hope. It doesn’t work in both cases.
But the main reason we still talk about S3A and the finale is not necessarily because they were great (S3A was a complete misread of the fandom by the showrunners and totally “not great”, the finale was the best 2 hours of TV I wish I’d never seen) but because they were vague and ambiguous leaving the fans to fill in the story or story ending in order for it make sense.
“Best 2 hours of TV I wish I’d never seen”! Awesome quip, and right on the nose.
@Josh: yes, Karen used a bad apples to oranges comparison. But here’s an apples to apples one: Years later, we also are still talking about Season 3 and that is no guarantee of quality as we know. So saying the finale is successful because it still generates comments, well … I give you Fake Name.
@Karen: I don’t agree with your view of Sarah in the final two episodes, but I see how you could feel that way. The one thing I think we need to remember is that we were never shown much of the pre-Chuck Sarah. We’re shown a Sarah who immediately meets a Chuck who effortlessly save a ballerina and her dad. That has a seismic impact on Sarah. The Sarah we see in the final two episodes did not have that experience. You can plausibly posit that she was that cold and unfeeling because she did not remember the ballerina moment. The character we see in the final two episodes is large unknown to us.
Generally, the thing to understand about Sarah, like all the other characters in the show, is that she is a plot device. The writers and showrunners never quite got the knack of giving the secondary characters a consistent story. They are all in service to the Chuck character. So Morgan is alternately a douche, a loyal friend, a jilted friend, a surprisingly capable spy or the magnet. Whatever the plot needs to drive Chuck’s tale. Ellie is alternately a supportive big sister, a nag, a cheerleader, anti-spy life or understanding of Chuck’s spying. Whatever the plot needs to drive Chuck’s tale. Sarah is the ultimate plot device in that manner. Her story and her growth is always defined by whatever the showrunners want for Chuck. In a way, it’s a miracle that the character fared so well over the five seasons. It could have been much, much worse.
“Sarah is the ultimate plot device in that manner. Her story and her growth is always defined by whatever the showrunners want for Chuck.”
Okay, I agree with you. So a happy Sarah means a happy Chuck, and consequently the happiness for most of us fans. On the other hand a cold, sad, anguished, detached Sarah towards Chuck, means everybody sad and anguished, including Chuck. And that’s what we have in the Chuck’s finale.
Yes, characters are frequently used as plot devices, and CHUCK had this in the DNA of the show from beginning to end. I’ve never been the type to criticize shows for doing this especially when it’s how the show functions at its conceptual level. The show is about Chuck first, last, always. So characters revolving around Chuck makes absolute sense.
@josh: yes, it’s true that the show, as the showrunners perceived it, was “first, last always” about Chuck. In a character-driven medium, Chuck was the one character they wrote for. The logistical problem was that fans latched on to the Sarah character and most believed that the show was as much about her as about Chuck. The deconstruction of the Sarah character in Season 3 and using her as a plot device at the end of Seasons 4 and 5 really sat wrong with a huge chunk of the fan base.
@karen: Your point about a sad Sarah and an imbalance in the Chuck-Sarah relationship making for unhappy and sour episodes of Chuck is something that atcDave has written about frequently over the years. He has persuasively made that case over the years.
Guys, I think you are on the wrong track here. The show is not just about Chuck. If it were, the story as told would not make sense. They write a parallel journey for Chuck and Sarah throughout the five seasons based on counterpoint. Liz James mentioned this many years ago.
Sarah models competence and duty for Chuck. Chuck models innocence and vulnerability for Sarah. By the end of the 5th season, they have influenced each other to the point where Chuck is as competent a spy as Sarah (shown especially in 5.07 Santa Suit when Shaw mocks Chuck that “Sarah is the superior spy”), and they make Sarah be as emotionally open and ready for a real life as Chuck (shown especially in 5.10 Bo and 5.11 Bullet Train when she is ready to quit the spy life and have kids).
The counterpoint is seen in their respective journeys. Wha Sarah goes through in the first two seasons (having to balance love and duty), Chuck goes through in the third season. What Chuck goes through in the first two seasons (wanting a real life), Sarah goes through in the third season. There is no deconstruction of Sarah in season 3; she is simply going through an inner heroine’s journey of self-discovery towards a real life.
Chuck’s and Sarah’s mirrored journeys are also shown in their relationships and temptations: both have to face the ghost from their past (Jill/Bryce), the temptation from their present (Lou/Cole), and a glimpse of their future with a partners who is the mirror of their past selves (Hannah/Shaw). The writers wouldn’t bother to do this for Sarah if she were just a plot device.
And at the end of season 4, Sarah is not a plot device because that would make Chuck in 4.09 Phase Three also a plot device since 4.24 and 4.09 mirror each other. In 4.09, Chuck is neutralized and Sarah moves heaven and earth to save him. The reverse of that happens in 4.24. This show is built on parallels and counterpoint. What happens to Chuck happens to Sarah and vice versa. This is true down to the scene level. Notice how Sarah throws a plate at a bad guy by the Wookiee’s pool in 1.04 to save Chuck’s life, and Chuck does the same for Sarah in 3.06 in Dubai. These parallel scenes are everywhere in the show.
And the finale doesn’t turn Sarah into a plot device either. On the contrary, as mentioned before, it makes the crucial point of the show by showing that Chuck and Sarah are soulmates beyond memories, that Sarah will fall in love with Chuck even under the worst possible scenario, the Luke Skywalker and Mara Jade scenario. It’s a reference to Star Wars.
This is a show by nerds for nerds about the nerd getting the girl, remember?
I am aware of all this, I was the one who originally mentioned parallels and counterpoints being the core of Fedak’s writing style for the show. What I mean when I say the show and the other characters are about Chuck is that everything that happens, and everything that the characters do revolves around Chuck Bartowski (with a few minor exceptions) not to say that they don’t have their own stories but those stories always service Chuck ahead of any other purpose. He is the sun that planets revolve around in other words.
@josh your comments about the parallel theme in Fedak’s stuff hits on a topic I would like to discuss more because each of the best Chuck writers offered unique recurring themes in their episodes.
However, I find it impossible to hold useful conversations now while one poster is relentlessly intent on jumping every thread and filling it with pedantic, repetitive, self-important and dismissive comments. And, sadly, the moderators don’t seem interested in making sure he doesn’t steamroll everyone else. (I submitted a complaint via the form but never heard from anyone.)
So I’ll just sign off after this post. It’s been edifying talking with you and so many other posters. I’m sorry I don’t feel comfortable continuing while this other poster has free rein to talk over all of us while making the same (usually irrelevant) points over and over and over again.
I feel that too, trying to have discussion with people who bring up the exact same points over and over again and don’t budge at all is pointless. I know a waste of time when I read it, which is why I have largely let go of CHUCK in recent years.
As for the rest of it, the site is not as active as it was even five years ago so I don’t think it is monitored nearly as much these days but I am sure Dave knows more about that than I do.
Passive aggressive, I see. You could have just asked. The site is all yours.
The reason people talk about season 3 may not be the same reason people talk about the finale, although some people share the same negative emotional reaction about both.
Many fans and TV critics do not, however. The TV critic Mo Ryan, who criticized the Shaw arc in season 3, loved the S5 finale, and so do many, many fans.
And I disagree that the characters are turned into plot devices to serve the needs of the plot or the Chuck character. This is a character-based show; the characters and their relationships are the only real thing about this show; they better get Chuck and Sarah (and Morgan and Ellie and Casey) right, or the whole thing falls apart.
And the writers know very well that Sarah’s character is very important to the story. In fact, they know she is the dramatic anchor of the show. They would not turn her into a plot device.
The idea that the finale is bad because it doesn’t have a happy ending is also silly since this is a show by nerds for nerds about the nerd getting the girl. If Chuck doesn’t get the girl at the end, the nerds writing the story are basically telling the nerds watching the story that the nerd fails to get the girl, which is not only prima facie ridiculous but also flies in the face of the very last scene of the show, where we see the nerd get the girl.
Isn’t it easier to conclude that some viewers just have a negative emotional reaction to the finale because they don’t understand it? Isn’t it plausible?
I mean, I have come across very bizarre interpretations of the show, in which Hannah is a Shaw plant trying to reprogram Chuck’s brain through NLP in First Class and Sarah is a human computer who changes allegiance based on who kisses her. Many are just casual viewers who will not make an effort to understand this show. Most have very clear expectations about the stories they want to see and will hate whatever deviates from that.
Chuck was always a niche show. It’s a story by nerds for nerds about nerds. The show runners got lucky to find talented writers and actors who brought the characters to life, especially Yvonne, and they knew it. And many viewers fell in love with the characters, but that does not mean they understand the story, who’s not just Chuck’s story but a love story. Thus, the finale is not just about Chuck. It’s about Chuck and Sarah. The story is about both of them. Maybe it wasn’t planned that way, but it became that way.
However, the Sarah we do see in the final episodes apparently has no issue with marrying her mark.
Of course she did. she was so comically bad at it, it was plain she was uncomfortable and unhappy.
But no doubt the whole scenario reflects poorly on her. How can she be convinced she’s fit for duty when she knows she can’t remember anything? It’s so dumb it’s not even good fiction.
“Josh Z says:
July 9, 2023 at 4:13 pm
Ironically, S3 and the finale seem to have aged well given the binge model afforded by streaming while season 4 is the most disjointed from beginning to end. It’s just funny how time and means of consuming a show can drastically alter what people enjoy about it.”
Look… I have my doubts. I just had a look on Reddit Chuck’s forum and there are new viewers outraged about the finale. There’s a guy who wants a Chuck sequel without Sarah, calling her a sadist towards Chuck, that Sarah doesn’t deserve Chuck and that he would be better with another girl…. I wonder about Chuck’s writers seeing this, were those emotions they wanted to create? I feel sorry for Yvonne S., and for us fans, of course.
Sarah was consistently the most popular character on the show. There is no show without her. At least, I guarantee the viewership would be abysmal if they tried.
Those of us who comment on line, whether it’s here or on Reddit, represent an extreme fringe of the fandom. Presumably such outlying attitudes do represent the feelings of others. But I think, no where near a majority.
Most Chuck viewers not only want to see Chuck and Sarah happy together, but quietly assume they’ve been fine all along. The show is over, they’ve recovered from the worst of their wounds, and they have a houseful of kids…
I’m also pretty sure Zac isn’t going to sign up for more Chuck without Yvonne. Sorry that dude was so unhappy.
Sure his perception is totally radical. But is it just me who was really bothered by the ending? I still haven’t been able to make peace with it.
And, of course, a sequel without Sarah would be absurd. It wouldn’t make any sense, I wouldn’t even watch it.
No it definitely wasn’t just you. Although I think a very small number who were as upset as that guy AT Sarah. Most were unhappy she’d been so badly harmed by the finale. And saved their anger for Fedak.
I have no particular issue with those that see optimism in the ending. I’m glad the show ended in a good way for you.
I however have not rewatched a single episode since the finale. I see no point since it’s all taken away in end. To me, the show ended one episode too early.
Or a two parter too early!
I have rewatched, I’ve even rewatched the finale itself and feel much better about it now than I did back in the day. But no doubt, Baby would have been a vastly better ending for the series.
Every fandom has its extremists and redit and Twitter are the last places I would go to for rational commentary about anything.
As one of the more critical and negative reactions posted on this site I really do find your perspective interesting, and maybe because I have a natural interest in human psychology I like to understand why people feel the way they do and I tend to analyze my favorite shows and characters as if they are real. My emotions come second to trying to understand the writing and that makes me more objective even on the first viewing.
Your thoughts on the beach scene make so much more sense now, so thank you! I would just say that while the kiss is not “passionate” it is “intimate” and in the context of everything Sarah is feeling and going through conveying the latter is more important than the former. It shows the trust that Sarah gives Chuck which as we know is the only thing he asks for from her.
“I however have not rewatched a single episode since the finale. I see no point since it’s all taken away in end. To me, the show ended one episode too early.”
After I finished watching for the first time a couple of months ago I re-watched the episodes after the miserable arc. It’s so nice, so delightful to see Chuck and Sarah finally happy and together with nothing else holding them back, growing their relationship episode after episode.
But, but… at the same time it’s so sad, you feel a bitter taste when you see all that joy and time after time remember that in the end everything is destroyed, that Sarah’s character was ruined, blew up in that ARPA room when she blew up Chuck, Morgan and Casey.
I’m with @actDave. I wish there was no final arc of Sarah’s destruction. I wanted a happy ending, with nothing getting in Chuck and Sarah way. I wanted to have seen Sarah pregnant and the Cyber security company starting up.
We all wanted that, just like we wanted Chuck and Sarah together at the beginning of S3 or at least building upon the friendship that they establish over the first two seasons. Unfortunately, the core of the show’s formula was based on Chuck winning Sarah’s affection over and over again. People think this stops at other guy and their romantic relationship. But even in season 4 and 5 Chuck must still win her over with the idea of living a normal life. The finale for better or worse is about Chuck winning over Sarah when he no longer has the crutches of the intersect and an asset handler relationship that demands her acting like his girlfriend. I don’t agree that he did this in previous seasons either. It clearly mattered a lot to the writers to show that Chuck win Sarah over without the benefit of being an unwitting government asset, without her knowing that he is a kind selfless person before she even gets to know him.
I’ve always said that the thing I love most about the finale is that Sarah wants to be with Chuck in the end. This time, they are not together because he has a supercomputer or because she has to protect him. They are together because they want to be, and because they spent the entirety of season 5 showing us what their future would look like. I don’t need to see it. Did I want to see it yes of course, but I don’t need to need to see. I respect anyone who needed to see it, but I’ve never hated anything just because it isn’t what I want. Maybe I’m just more emotionally mature than the average person, but I really do find holding onto anger and other negative emotions a pointless waste of energy, its just not worth it and that goes for life in general, not just TV that doesn’t turn out like I wanted.
“but I really do find holding onto anger and other negative emotions a pointless waste of energy, its just not worth it and that goes for life in general, not just TV that doesn’t turn out like I wanted.”
Well… @Josh Zdanowicz, Like I said I just finished watching for the first time a couple of months ago. From what I’ve seen here you first watched Chuck many years ago and yet you keep coming here to defend your point of view. Which is okay to me, no problem. It’s great to talk to someone who has already thought a lot about it.
However I believe we’lll never agree on our positions on the finale.
As a girl I can see that Chuck had won Sarah’s heart, love and affection already during the first episodes of the first season. What came next was the fortification of their love, the relationship maturation.
What I will totally disagree with you on is your assertion that “Sarah wants to be with Chuck in the end… They are together because they want to be, and because they spent the entirety of season 5 showing us what their future would look like”. I’d love to have seen this or at least to be addressed to think it. But not. I can’t see that anywhere in the two last episodes, and unfortunately not even in the beach scene. Sarah ran away from Chuck the entire time, with no affection for him. In the end Chuck found her on the beach – she wasn’t invited him to be there – and she “allow” him to kiss her. Sadly, that was all we saw.
All the beautiful relationship building that Chuck and Sarah had accomplished in 5 years was shattered by Sarah’s memory loss and by her terrible choices and actions after this occurred. She could have chosen to do it differently, but the writers wanted her to be mindless. Sarah full of love from the bullet train is gone. I didn’t see her on that beach. Her kiss had no love or passion towards Chuck.
Something I haven’t asked yet is why you insist that Sarah has no compassion for Chuck? Before she knows the truth I can completely agree with this, she is Quinn’s puppet. But after? It’s like your saying that she doesn’t have a right to be emotionally unavailable and indifferent to Chuck. What’s she supposed to do, lie? Sugarcoat how she is feeling. Her blunt honestly is actually the biggest reason that I believe Sarah Bartowski is still in there. Sarah Walker would lie, playcate or manipulate Chuck.
As for the beach scene. Your argument that she allows him to kiss her is the first factually incorrect thing you have said. For this to be true Chuck would have had to ask to kiss her. He does not. He floats the idea of the magic kiss and even dismisses as ridiculous and a crazy Morgan idea. It is Sarah that accepts the idea and says kiss me. The tone of her asking for the kiss is also full of longing or hope, which might not give an indication that her memory is back but it shows that she has become emotionally available to Chuck. The Sarah on the beach is not Sarah before her memory loss, but she is also not mindless either, she is very much aware of what Chuck represents both good and bad, and in accepting Morgan’s idea she is ready to face and rebuild what she has lost.
Oh and just so you know, I rarely if ever think that an opinion of the finale is incorrect, but I stand by that with the beach scene specifically.
But it was so much more than “allowing” a kiss! She asked for it, as she had previously asked for “their” story. These things are key, it shows Sarah is ready for her life back. Especially if you saw the extended cut, Sarah had firmly rejected the telling of their story multiple times, on the grounds it wasn’t “her story”. But in the end, she was completely, and happily, ready. I think we were really meant to see something beautiful.
I’ll always agree it was too little, too late. I wanted, needed, something more and resolute. But we can’t deny what it actually WAS. And when you say dismissive things like Sarah “allowed” Chuck to kiss her, you’re missing the whole story that WAS shown on screen.
Exactly Dave, so many people are so focused on what was lost, that they give no weight to what is still within Sarah who is Chuck’s wife.
The biggest being attraction, she is still attracted to Chuck, they make this SUPER obvious when they are going after Quinn and the key, multiple times. Even 5×12 which Karen insists is a heartless, cold Sarah has its key moments. Like the fact that she does not want to leave Chuck after he takes the bullet for her. Only when Chuck insists that she runs does she actually leave. She remembers the carving and has a very obvious reaction watching her entire video log and then apologizes to Chuck for everything she did.
The evidence is definitely in the last two episodes that Sarah is Sarah who cares about Chuck, not being able to see it doesn’t mean that these things are not there.
I hear what your saying but just can’t get there. At the end of C vs S, at the fountain, Sarah says she doesn’t feel it. To me, that’s the “hopeless” moment the finale didn’t show me it recovered from. Nowhere in Goodbye does Sarah begin to “feel” it. Yeah, OK she recovering some memories, but they’re not of Chuck.
I just needed more. The show is incomplete for me.
“Oh and just so you know, I rarely if ever think that an opinion of the finale is incorrect, but I stand by that with the beach scene specifically.”
@Josh Zdanowicz – Yes… No problem with that at all. Each of us has our own life experiences, we come from different places, different genders, we see the world differently.
About Sarah’s compassion for Chuck I see it in this way: Sarah, despite a trained CIA’s spy-assassin, is a very feminine woman who cares about others. We’ve seen this throughout the series, including call backs from before she met Chuck.
So after her spying on Chuck talking about her to Ellie, after Chuck’s declaration of love to her in their dream house, after Quinn told her it was all a lie and Chuck took a bullet for her, and finally after she watched the logs, there’s no reason in the world for her to keep being cold to Chuck, didn’t get softer with him. Because she had to finish a mission, kill Quinn? Come on… her life is more important than everything else! As a woman, I can’t see myself doing that. And I also can’t see Sarah from any point in the series doing that too.
Sarah doesn’t have a right to be emotionally unavailable and indifferent to Chuck after all she’s seen and heard.
What Sarah does to Chuck in the fountain at the end of E12 is an absurd lack of compassion. I repeat: That is not the Sarah I knew. And she keeps doing this all the way through untill the beach scene, not wanting to listen to him, or even trying to console him. Those would be a woman’s natural attitude. Even in the movie the Vow, the girl, even though she doesn’t remember anything, agrees to go to their house and go on a new first date. She had compassion. And her husband hadn’t done anything for her that Chuck had done for Sarah.
CaptM we just saw Sarah crying as she went through those logs! She was lying, old Sarah was good at lying. On the beach she laughed and cried, I think she was all back. I think she was never completely gone, and was well on her way back by the end of 5.12.
Yeah Dave, old Sarah was also prone to running away from Chuck, the Sarah in the last two episodes is very much the old Sarah but she has the baggage of losing the memories of being Chuck’s wife, luckily Chuck is her baggage handler. That wasn’t on purpose I swear:)
Its also worth pointing out that I believe that Sarah feels pressure to be Chuck’s wife, by the time we hit the beach she no longer feels that pressure, she can just be Sarah which by his own words is the spy he fell in love with
I’ll try to get the extended version of the last episode. I knew about it , but on Amazon Prime doesn’t have this, I believe only on DVD or BlueRay. On YT there are only fragments. I really hope I can change my mind.
I said she just “allows” the kiss because she didn’t bother to take her hands off her lap the whole time. If the kiss had been more passionate, with her putting her hands on Chuck’s face, as she always did in her passionate kisses (in her kisses with Shaw, for example), I’d have been more satisfied, I’d have accepted the ending better. But she didn’t do that! The kiss was… ambiguous!!!!!!!! Denying us a more loving kiss was the last straw in a finale that for me was all wrong. I remember that in Phase Three there were several passionate kisses, we saw Chuck remembering everything and above all he kiss her back. In the end, it’s almost a one-way kiss. I may be being silly here, but that’s what I felt.
Karen, don’t know if fan fiction is your thing, and I acknowledge this is a shameful plug, but Sarah vs Finding Herself was cathartic for me to write (and seemingly cathartic for others to read). It ticks all the boxes on your wish list …
I think this was one of the first fics I ever read and definitely helped inspire me to write my own.
No doubt it’s an excellent salve for these problems. It has helped many, many Chuck fans get some closure.
And it’s been mentioned and linked here like four times…
Oh… thanks @thinkling. I will read it!!
Because I still haven’t been able to make peace with this finale. For me it’s still a total disaster.
I think, I believe, my biggest problem is that the show runners tried to be “cool” with us in the last 4 minutes of the series after the massacre they made in S03A e and in S05E11-13. At least S03A had a beautful ending with Chuck and Sarah finally together in Paris and on the train. S05E11-13 didn’t, it ended without us knowing if Sarah from the bullet train came back. They have failed miserably, at least with me. They had no more credits. The final four minutes with that Sarah’s flat kiss can’t even remotely balance what happened before, what Sarah did… kidnapping, implosions, beatings, escapes, the speech at the fountain, disdain, ruthlessness. Sadly this is the last memory I have from my favorite heroine.
As others pointed out I believe that the finale arc was conceived and written under the assumption that season five would get a back order of episodes. It is not like there was not already a precedent for this, Seasons 3 and 4 definitely received back orders. Unfortunately, NBC underwent changes in ownership and leadership in 2010 or 11 that affected multiple shows fates. The office for example, because the new brass did not even consider negotiating with Steve Carell to keep him on the show., Now the office lasted two more seasons and got to end on its own terms but it was/is one of the most popular TV shows of all time and even at its worst had much higher ratings than Chuck.
I believe that Fedak did what he had done twice before writing a possible series finale with the hope of a backorder. Unfortunately, CHUCK’s luck ran out and anytime you are living as a TV production that does not know that you are renewed or canceled it is very hard to pivot at the last minute from what is already written.
Ouu… another point I think is important. I consider the final plot a LOSE-LOSE for Chuck, the character.
If Sarah has her memories restored… good. But the damage was done. No comparisons with Phase Three here. It would be artificial to bring Sarah’s memories back without her suffering over the actions she did. At least on Sarah’s side what happened will bring consequences, which of course will affect the relationship. And this time Sarah doesn’t have Casey to save the couple like he did with his admission of guilt for killing the mole or when he gave the logs to her. By Sarah’s mindset, there’s no easy way out here.
If Sarah doesn’t have her memories restored… well… this woman is no longer the Sarah we’ve seen develop over five years. It’s a damaged, broken Sarah. She would continue to be this ugly person that we saw doing barbarity.
In both cases, Chuck had as the prize of his journey a worse Sarah than he had before. Neither of these two Sarahs is ready to have a family, for example. Many,many steps backwards have been taken.
Yes… unfortunately I’m really very very critical of that finale.
Finally I think I see the root of your critical feelings on the finale. You (like many others consider anything less than happily ever after a failure, you expect Sarah to be Chuck’s wife, to maintain her growth, to react as Sarah Bartowski would to events in the finale. The problem with this expectation is that it prevents empathy for the reality of Sarah’s situation. You keep comparing this Sarah who mind you is manipulated, and lied to (by both Quinn and based on the information she knows, Chuck. He is the bad guy in her mind. Anyone who holds on to the fact that this is not the Sarah they knew will of course hate it and miss the intended point of the whole thing and especially the beach scene. Chuck does not care that this is a Sarah who doesn’t remember the five years. He is so unconditionally in love with Sarah that all he wants is to be the person that she turns to no matter what happens after they leave that beach, he wants her to trust that she can turn to him without expectation.
“Sarah I don’t want anything from you, I just need you to know that wherever you go I’ll always be there to help you. Someone you can call whenever…trust me, Sarah, I’m here for you always…”
It’s been said that truest expression of love is sacrifice. Sarah might not remember Chuck but she is clearly moved by his words, not as Chuck’s wife but as this “broken, damaged” Sarah who wants to begin again, began rebuilding her life, her relationship with Chuck and maybe she won’t be exactly the same as she was before but Chuck does not expect her to be.
There is something so beautiful about that but nobody who is so focused on what was taken from them as a viewer will ever be able to see it. I always hope that changes at some point for people who struggle with the last two episodes because I have seen much worse ends to shows than CHUCK with writing that is actually, legitimately terrible.
“As others pointed out I believe that the finale arc was conceived and written under the assumption that season five would get a back order of episodes.”
Sorry @Josh Z, I will disagree with you once again. There is absolutely no excuse for what was done. Any professional always has to have plan A, B, C… in their mind.
When the finale was filmed the show runners already knew that there would be no new episodes. It was their obligation to adjust the ending. And they just didn’t want to do it.
Minimal adjustments would have changed the situation completely. As @atcDave always says here – Sarah saying in off “Chuck, take me home”. Or the kiss being more emotional, more loving on Sarah’s side. The damage would have already been done, but the ending would be more acceptable, because we would watch on screen that Sarah came back.
Sorry, but if there is one thing I have learned following TV production on many of my favorite shows both before and after CHUCK is that they can only make decisions from moment to moment, especially in network TV which is very often at the mercy of people who are higher than the creators themselves., believe me, I wish things had been less ambiguous about Sarah’s memory I did not love it overnight, it took a willingness to understand and not dismiss what is presented by the writers. I fully acknowledge that because of perception and emotions this is at best difficult at worst impossible for some, especially when things are still very fresh
I think there were multiple problems with the finale arc far beyond how Chuck and Sarah were shown to interact:
1) Quinn was a terrible villain. Why did he even want the Intersect? just because he didn’t get it once upon a time? What was he even going to do with it? Be a good guy again? Live a life of crime? And he was terribly overplayed by Angus MacFayden. He did everything but twirl a handlebar mustache!
2) The idea that we as fans wanted to see old scenarios again–the helicopter, Weinerlicious, Los Compadres–seems misguided.
3) Why are we told in Goodbye that Sarah wanted to find Quinn and kill him? The Sarah character, even before she met Chuck, was never portrayed as that kind of person. She was never shown to kill for its own sake or act like a vigilante. Casey, maybe. But Sarah would not have had revenge killing as a reason for finding Quinn.
4) I think the showrunner pulled his punches on the final scene on the beach. he didn’t want to show the magic kiss working because he was holding out hope that there’d be extra episodes and he wanted to do a few episodes of Sarah struggling to get her life and memories back.
Some excellent points Joe. To each I’d say…
1) I enjoyed Quinn’s mustache twirling! But he was undone by the overall disappointing finale.
2) I agree very strongly with this. And in particular, they were determined to revisit “will they, won’t they”, which I think most fans were completely soured on by the end of S2. I’m also bothered by Casey’s “journey”. He had developed nicely over the course of the series, but then we saw a retrograde Casey at the start of the finale (perfectly willing to kill Sarah to protect Chuck! Seriously? Casey knew better than this).
3) Sort of agree. This does seem quite out of character for Sarah. But then, we’d never seen her with so much lost before.
4) I think this is exactly right. And it was sort of a miserably cold day when they filmed the scene, which may have led to a rather “chilly” performance from Yvonne.
Yeah Dave I will forever maintain that Chuck’s last round of will they won’t they is easily the worst, most unbearable thing about the entire show. If we ever get a CHUCK movie Zac and Yvonne should have meaningful control over what that looks like, it would be fun to watch a movie knowing they had creative input in what became of Chuck and Sarah.
Yeah I agree completely Josh.
my internet crashed, sorry if the post appears more than once.
“Oh and just so you know, I rarely if ever think that an opinion of the finale is incorrect, but I stand by that with the beach scene specifically.”
@Josh Zdanowicz – Yes… No problem with that at all. Each of us has our own life experiences, we come from different places, different genders, we see the world differently.
About Sarah’s compassion for Chuck I see it in this way: Sarah, despite a trained CIA’s spy-assassin, is a very feminine woman who cares about others. We’ve seen this throughout the series, including call backs from before she met Chuck.
So after her spying on Chuck talking about her to Ellie, after Chuck’s declaration of love to her in their dream house, after Quinn told her it was all a lie and Chuck took a bullet for her, and finally after she watched the logs, there’s no reason in the world for her to keep being cold to Chuck, didn’t get softer with him. Because she had to finish a mission, kill Quinn? Come on… her life is more important than everything else! As a woman, I can’t see myself doing that. And I also can’t see Sarah from any point in the series doing that too.
Sarah doesn’t have a right to be emotionally unavailable and indifferent to Chuck after all she’s seen and heard.
What Sarah does to Chuck in the fountain at the end of E12 is an absurd lack of compassion. I repeat: That is not the Sarah I knew. And she keeps doing this all the way through untill the beach scene, not wanting to listen to him, or even trying to console him. Those would be a woman’s natural attitude. Even in the movie the Vow, the girl, even though she doesn’t remember anything, agrees to go to their house and go on a new first date. She had compassion. And her husband hadn’t done anything for her that Chuck had done for Sarah.
I think it comes down to this Sarah in the last two episodes is afraid to be vulnerable, she says multiple times that all she remembers is being a spy. Spies in the world of Chuck are told to ignore emotions that vulnerability is a weakness. So as frustrating as it is for the viewer her behavior makes total sense. Is it unfortunate but I don’t think it’s fair to hold what she doesn’t remember against her and Sarah does not remember how to be vulnerable. I believe that she gets past this, or at least shows a willingness to get past it in asking for their story and the kiss.
You are correct that this is not the Sarah that we the audience know but what we do know is that this Sarah gives Chuck her trust and as insignificant as it might seem to you, the writers point is that this is all that is needed for them to be happy whether it happens right away or over some time may be relevant to the feelings of the viewer, but take your feelings out of it for just a moment and honestly ask yourself if you think the outcome of the kiss matters to Sarah, or Chuck. I see enough that I can comfortably say it doesn’t. The two of them will be together even if they have to work their way back to where they were in 5×11 first.
I’m not even talking about vulnerability, but about trust and compassion. Chuck repeatedly showed Sarah that he was worthy of this. And Sarah, out of character, denied Chuck both of those feelings until the beach scene.
I have already defended my point of view here on this. The outcome of the kiss is very important. Sarah without her memories is an incomplete, disabled person. Both Sarah and Chuck would suffer a lot from this. Taking the cold and selfish Sarah of the last two episodes as a parameter, the relationship would hardly survive.
Replying to @Josh Z
“Finally I think I see the root of your critical feelings on the finale. You (like many others consider anything less than happily ever after a failure, you expect Sarah to be Chuck’s wife, to maintain her growth, to react as Sarah Bartowski would to events in the finale”
Almost there. I actually think the finale plot is silly, cruel and unnecessary, as it does a lot of damage to Chuck and Sarah that is not fixed. This should not have happened. I know very well that the world is not beautiful and is full of difficulties that we go through every day. But Chuck was supposed to be a romantic comedy series, isn’t it?
Having this happened, happened in an unnatural way in this series, the minimum acceptable to me would be to see in the last moments a Sarah at least similar to Sarah from S03B on screen. Anything less than that brings me a sense of loss. Chuck, Sarah and us, leave the series with a loss.
“The problem with this expectation is that it prevents empathy for the reality of Sarah’s situation. You keep comparing this Sarah who mind you is manipulated, and lied to (by both Quinn and based on the information she knows, Chuck. He is the bad guy in her mind. Anyone who holds on to the fact that this is not the Sarah they knew will of course hate it and miss the intended point of the whole thing and especially the beach scene.”
Indeed. The writers did a bad job. So much that people like me, who had Sarah as a heroine, can’t empathize, connect with that Sarah from the finale. Really a poor job by the writers. As it had happened in S03A, Sarah was written as a woman with a lack of intelligence, for accepting a nonsense story from Quin. Who can sympathize with Sarah from S03A? I couldn’t. The same thing happens at the finale. For all that, the beach scene is empty, because everything that comes before is a bad joke, a senseless story that shows to us a Sarah totally out of character.
“It’s been said that truest expression of love is sacrifice. Sarah might not remember Chuck but she is clearly moved by his words, not as Chuck’s wife but as this “broken, damaged” Sarah who wants to begin again, began rebuilding her life, her relationship with Chuck and maybe she won’t be exactly the same as she was before but Chuck does not expect her to be.
There is something so beautiful about that but nobody who is so focused on what was taken from them as a viewer will ever be able to see it.”
Here some thoughts on your words.
a) “truest expression of love is sacrifice” – Unfortunately not in today’s relationships. Few marriages and relationships survive for long. Everything is more ephemeral these days. And Sarah is a modern woman. She’s extremely modern actually – a CIA spy-assassin. What will hold her to Chuck now if she still has no memory of him after the kiss? In the case of Sarah’s memories not returning, her love for Chuck has not returned either. What she feels now is attraction for him, not love. Attraction and love are two absolutely different feelings. Sad, very sad.
b) “began rebuilding her life”, “There is something so beautiful about that” and “maybe she won’t be exactly the same as she was before but Chuck does not expect her to be” – Do you really believe this? Let’s put it this way, you’re finishing your graduation paper and you lose all the material you have done. Can you see anything beautiful in that? In having to rebuilt everything again from scratch? Now imagine if what happened to Sarah happened to your (hypothetical) wife? I really can’t see anything beautiful in this, only sadness. Nothing will be the same as before. There is no guarantee that Sarah would have the same connection (love, understanding) with Chuck as what they had before, which lasted 5 years to build. What is past is past, it cannot be re-built, does not come back. Chuck in S05E13 is a totally different man than he was in S01E01. Sarah too.
If I cared about my hypothetical wife as much as Chuck cares about Sarah, I would do precisely as Chuck did, that is to say I would tell her that I will always be there for her and the only thing I would ask of her is to place her trust in me. Whether she chooses to or not is completely up to her and what happens as a result of that choice I would have to accept.
As for the show itself, I think you’ll agree that attraction + trust = the possibility of love. Sure in a real-world sense there is no guarantee that Chuck and Sarah fall in love again but the attraction is there and Sarah puts her trust in Chuck, that’s all that’s required for them to start from the kiss on the beach. Now I fully understand your fixation that they shouldn’t have had to but my point is that this was not a relevant thought to the writing of these episodes. They were to reinforce that no matter how bad things get Chuck and Sarah will always find their way back to each other whether it takes one magic kiss or another five years as Sarah takes her own pace back to being Chuck’s loving wife. In the extended cut I’m fairly certain Morgan tells Chuck when he doesn’t handle Sarah’s blunt refusal to hear their story well: “buck up, Sarah didn’t fall for some guy who never stops whining and can’t stop taking about the past.”
For the rest of episode until the beach scene, he focuses on the present. Only bringing up the past once she is ready to hear it.
I fully agree the writers could have done more but unfortunately they asked us to have a little faith and believe in who Chuck is at his core just older and much more mature. If one doesn’t believe in Chuck’s ability make Sarah fall in love with him as this “broken, damaged” woman. Then that’s not the writer’s fault It only means that your perspective is different than there’s, which is perfectly acceptable but there is a reason the last song is Rivers and Roads which starts melancholy and steadily becomes more hopeful.
The past is indeed the past, but the future is what we make of it, and for what it’s worth, Sarah has quite a bit of her habits both good and bad) intact in the last two episodes especially in relation to Chuck, these are implicit, memories closely tied to unconsciously recalled behaviors and information. So she is not a blank slate as you claim. If Chuck can recover from a near lobotomy with little more than a hazy brain. People should try to have a little more faith that the glimpses we see of Sarah’s returning memory mean she will be happy and in love with Chuck again no matter how long it takes her to get there.
@Josh Z, we are getting there: “attraction + trust = the possibility of love”.
This is one of the big problems I see at this finale. A possibility is just a possibility.
Chuck is no longer a naive boy who needs protecting, who could receive the Sarah’s maternal instinct that was emerged when she saved the baby’s life. Chuck is now a veteran spy.
Sarah now is back to being a ruthless agent who has no attachments with anyone in the world – no family, no friends, no loves (I’m not talking about spy loves). Perhaps on the beach she may have gotten a little softer. But it’s only a big maybe. She has returned to being a ruthless agent as we’ve never seen before. She no longer knows what real love is, what it’s to have a real partner, with real feelings, sharing everything. This new/old Sarah has never experienced that.
If we add to all this that there is nothing that obliges Sarah to stay together with Chuck all the time, the future scenario does not look very positive for them. The Chuck’s love alone will not can hold Sarah.
Putting it in another way, I was able to buy the idea of Sarah falling in love with Chuck at the beginning of the series. It made sense. They were synchronized in that window of time, in their needs and expectations.
Now, they are totally out of sync. We don’t even know what Sarah wants. To have attraction and trust for Chuck is just too little. I can’t buy the idea of Sarah falling in love with Chuck again, not with this Sarah we see at the finale.
And Chuck and Sarah being just friends… my gosh…. that to me is the perfect meaning of sad ending.
I’m very happy because in trying to solidify your criticism of the finale, you actually highlight the key point as to why I love it so much. Sarah’s obligation and the heavy influence those obligations had over her relationship with Chuck getting established, cultivated and ultimately became permanent. She was under a professional obligation to protect him, and later nurture him. She nearly runs from relationship several times, staying largely (though not solely) because it is her professional duty to stay. The beach scene is special and wonderful precisely because Sarah is under no such obligation to begin a relationship with Chuck again. She chooses to trust him, and hear about their past. Weather they succeed or fail at rekindling their relationship is based entirely on whether they want to. There is nothing that is acting as a crutch, helping them to fall in love. I think this is FANTASTIC way to flip the entire series on it’s head and prove that whatever happens after the kiss is ENTIRELY unbound by interescts, and professional obligations. The only question is which viewers believe that Chuck and Sarah could fall in love without being for lack of better phrase “helped along.” I choose to believe that they do. I hope it doesn’t come across like I don’t care about what was lost. It’s just I am optimistic it can be found again, and I’ll admit it does help that I am empathetic rather than excessively critical of Sarah’s behavior in these last two episodes, mostly because I know enough about what scientifically is the state of her memory. It was not irreversibly damaged just heavily suppressed. When I wrote my own post finale fic I made absolutely sure to research how memory is recorded in the brain and while obviously not an expert I feel comfortable in saying that Sarah is home she just needs time to get the lights back on. Lame analogy I know but it was the best I could do off the top of my head.
@Josh Z, I thank you for trying to understand how I feel about the finale of the series we love so much. I think our points of view are much clearer now.
It’s just that I really believe that this new/old Sarah from the last two episodes, unless she gets her memories back, being in her ruthless spy mode, will not be open enough, willing to have a relationship with Chuck. I just can’t see that. As you and I have talked about, nothing holds her to him. And still there’s the point that I consider that this new/old Sarah doesn’t deserve Chuck. I lost my empathy with her. Unfortunately she is no longer my heroine. Her lack of cleverness is inexcusable. Her attitudes towards Chuck after she learning the truth are unacceptable. Chuck can forgive her, I – as a girl – still can’t.
On the other hand, if Sarah gets her memories back, there will be a lot of work for Sarah to recover herself. Her mindset is complicated. She will feel guilt for what she did to Chuck. She would not feel comfortable with Chuck quickly. It will take time and patience from both of them.
As I’ve been talking here, I don’t see a happy ending because to me it was a lose-lose for Chuck.
Of course, I’m always happy when I am able to clearly understand someone else’s opinion of the finale and they understand mine. It’s the reason Chuck will always be special to me because discussion is always plentiful with this series and very few shows have I ever still talked about so far removed from the first time I watched them and engaging with new fans like yourself is something that I find fascinating 🙂
So, concluding what I’ve been writing here, I meant to say that the writers put Sarah from the last two episodes in a situation very similar to what they did to her in S03A: bad choices, attitudes and actions, to the point where we viewers don’t sympathize with her – Sarah refusing to talk and not letting Chuck talk to her about their feelings, her letting Shaw blow up the Castle with Chuck and Morgan inside, accepting Shaw’s order for her manipulate Chuck into taking the red test, revealing her real name to Shaw, “relaxing” with Shaw after Chuck’s red test, and even walking arm-in-arm with Shaw on the streets of Paris after Chuck saved Shaw and Sarah and declared his love for her once again.
But then there was one giant difference for Sarah: After all this, she could redeem herself, with Chuck and with us viewers.
At the series finale the writers did not want to allow Sarah to redeem herself. By not allowing her to do this, they fineshed the series on a strange note, giving us a feeling that something was missing (several things missing actually), we are left with the last memory of a cold, cruel, incomplete, highly imperfect Sarah. They threw Sarah’s character under the bus!
As a consequence, after Chuck’s entire 5-year journey, he won as a prize an incomplete and highly imperfect Sarah, while just days before he had by his side the best version that Sarah could be.
I’m convinced your last observation here is exactly the point the writers wanted to make with the series finale. That is that Chuck does not need Sarah to be perfect, or complete to love her, he doesn’t even need her to return his love to love her, or to care about her. This is why I’m also convinced that the finale while flawed is consistent with how the people writing the show saw it. For them it was a commentary on what unconditional love is, and for better or worse to them Chuck is the main character. The only way that they felt that it was possible to show the audience that Chuck loves Sarah unconditionally is to take her away from him, to make her someone that we don’t or can’t love because its not the Sarah we knew. Their point is that Chuck does not care and they successfully proved their point, at the cost of audience satisfaction and character development (for Sarah). They were not trying to complete a story, they were trying to prove undoubtedly that Chuck will always love Sarah, no matter what befalls them or her.
Why? I think the answer is pretty simple, because they conceived the show as being about Chuck and the show, for the people writing it, never stopped being about Chuck. Some writers, no matter the medium are like that. Their first and only concern is fulfilling their vision and ideas, audience wants and satisfaction don’t factor into how they write. As someone who loves writing but never lets audiences influence what I want to write and convey I can fully understand this mindset even in TV. Giving the audience what they want is a courtesy, not an obligation and this is a hill I will die on.
Sorry. So Chuck loves an object, an idealization of a woman like Sarah, a virtual being. Not the real Sarah, Sarah as a person.
It’s a childish, platonic love, not the love of a mature man. It’s not a loving relationship, a real couple.
From your of point of view, Chuck would still be a kid, not a man.
No quite the opposite, and I think you’re the one that is treating Sarah like an object, or not a real person. Dismissing what she goes through in the finale arc with zero empathy and using words like “ruthless” Ruthless people, don’t care about showing remorse for their actions, they have no guilt. I’m being blunt because I want to help you realize that your opinion of Sarah in the last two episodes is still clouded by the devastation and rage you feel over losing as you say “your heroine.” It is causing you to minimize, dismiss and ignore the factual evidence shown to us that even this damage and broken Sarah is still the person Chuck loves and the person that became his wife.
Wow, totally disagree with that take Karen. Chuck knows Sarah well, probably better than anyone ever has. He knows much of her history and all of her character. And he still loves her. Even knowing as much as he does about her, and that love may not end well for him (because her openness was a hard earned thing the first time around), he still loves her.
I’d call that the epitome of mature and adult love. That is to Chuck’s credit.
I agree Dave, the Chuck on that beach has every chance of getting Sarah back because he has no expectations of her other than her trust. Who Chuck was before Baby, and certainly not who he was in earlier seasons, would EVER be able to get a Sarah back that in Karen’s words is “damaged and broken” and emotionally unavailable until the beach. So I don’t think Karen’s view that because Chuck and Sarah’s experiences will be different the second time around they can’t fall in love again, that is a strange stance indeed. The Chuck on the beach is still a dorky, nerdy selfless person who doesn’t like guns and fixes computers. The whole point of season 3 is that Chuck doesn’t lose these things as he becomes a spy, so would love to understand why Karan erases these things from his personality just to fit her cynical narrative of the finale.
As you guys can see in my previous posts, my problem with the finale, aside from the memory loss plot, is entirely with Sarah.
Chuck is perfect in the last two episodes. Sarah’s character who was poorly written, being out of character, making terrible decisions, with bad attitudes and actions, to the point that I can’t believe she will allow herself to open up enough to have a relationship with Chuck again. Like I said, for everything she did in those last episodes, I lost my connection, empathy wiht her. She needed time to redeem herself on screen (like happend in S03B), which the writers didn’t want to give her.
I completely agree with @atcDave when he says “[Chuck] he still loves her. Even knowing as much as he does about her, and that love MAY NOT end well for him (because her openness was a hard earned thing the first time around), he still loves her.”. I’m fully convinced that if Sarah doesn’t recover her memories (her love) for Chuck, even partially, they won’t be a couple again. Even with all of Chuck’s love and the attraction that Sarah felt for him, they are totally out of sync and the time window of the situations that made them stick together, is permanently closed.
And it’s the exact point that @Josh Zdanowicz and I have different views. He says “Chuck on that beach has every chance of getting Sarah back because he has no expectations of her other than her trust.”. To me Chuck – with Sarah without her memories – has very little chance of getting Sarah back. And that’s on Sarah, not Chuck. Chuck will do anything to get her back, as he already had, but even “everything” – no expectations, triggering trust and attraction in Sarah – may not be enough for this new/old Sarah. Her mindset is always running away.
At the end of the day only you know how you feel and nothing anyone says will change that. I guess I’m just seeking your acknowledgment that Sarah with all her behaviors, traits and reactions, both positive and negative is still Sarah who fell in love with Chuck and that just because she doesn’t remember it doesn’t mean that she won’t. The show makes it clear that she is but you will only see it if you start objectively looking for it. The next time you can bring yourself to watch the finale, make it your goal to look for the signs that Sarah Walker is still there because I promise if you can get to that point then you will start believing that the Bartowski part of Sarah still exists too
Except Chuck and Sarah are both still the same people with or without Sarah’s memories. So it seems entirely likely that given the chance, Sarah will fall for Chuck exactly as she did the first time. And that’s exactly what the end shows, she was ready to give him that chance. Even more, I think there’s evidence she wants that life back. And Chuck is there giving her the opportunity.
Look, Karen, you claim Sarah was your heroine. So why do you resist seeing all the positive that is actually right in front of you. If anything, the finale arc shows us Sarah’s continued determination to BE THE HERO. She’s just lost all of her reference points. So at first, Chuck commits an act of domestic terrorism and confirms her briefing; she’s ready to act against him as the villain. In time (like 10 minutes of screen time, seriously), she recognizes the error of this assumption and wholly switches sides.
She’s still the hero.
Seriously. Read some fan fiction. So much of it is better written than the show ever was. Especially Thinkling’s epilogue. Or “Chuck vs the Lost Years” by Angus MacNab. Or Anthropocene’s hypothetical Season 6 that starts with “What Happens in Vegas“.
Our favorite characters continue on, and are now in the hands of talented writers who care deeply about their stories.
Yeah, Dave, the only real difference between Sarah in the last two episodes and Sarah when she carved a bloody path through Tiland is motivation and target. In both cases Sarah is triggered by a huge overflow of sudden emotions that come from massive realizations. The former is because her partner, and surrogate father figure are dead, and she is told that Chuck is responsible.
In phase three it is because she realized that she never told Chuck she wants him regardless of the intersect forever.
I’m all for opinion but Karen’s opinion of Sarah in the last two episodes being a completely different person just is not true at all. I have no problem with her feeling that way but the facts prove that is false, even if she ignores the evidence that clearly supports them
Okay guys. I know I’m getting annoying with my point of view. Maybe because I am a girl and I “demand” high standards of behavior and attitudes from Sarah, the heroine.
@actDave said ” If anything, the finale arc shows us Sarah’s continued determination to BE THE HERO. She’s just lost all of her reference points.”
The problem is, for lack of perspicacity, mandatory for a CIA super spy, she didn’t look for them – Carina, her father, her mother, the cat squad…
And after this, everything she does is a big disaster. The way she treats Chuck after she learns the truth, the messy chase after Quinn…
Well… anyway, I’m getting annoying with this… I’ll let it go.
Thanks guys!
I don’t know if this has been covered before, so if it has please disregard the question.
In what I have read of the discussions about the ending over the last several years, it seems there is an assumption that with the loss of Sarah’s memories, all her character development is lost as well. Is this really the case? How tied to memory is the innate nature of who we are? Even without her memories, she is still the same person. She is acting differently based on circumstances and (dis)information but who she is is still the same person.
Case in point: when Chuck dives in front of Quinn’s shot at her, she doesn’t go after Quinn or run away, she responds in dismay that Chuck has been shot and goes to his aid. That response seems significant but goes unmentioned in a lot of these discussions.
The anguish over the loss of the memories seems to really be anguish that Sarah is not the Sarah we have seen her to be over the course of the show. I think it is evident that she is still there, her character has not changed. I think that brings great optimism about the show’s end. Regardless of the outcome of the kiss, whether she gets all or some of her memories back, she is still the same person. The character development is not lost. She and Chuck will still end up together.
I do think that’s an excellent point. Apart from whatever physiological changes there may have been between 25 to 30 (I assume not much?), she should be the same person she was at the start of the series. The woman who fell in love with Chuck before the end of their first date.
Although their are two complications I can think of on that. The first is, they didn’t meet the same way. A lot of Chuck’s naïve openness is diminished, he’s less likely to come across as a completely open book which is presumably part of what Sarah first loved. Maybe this difference is trivial, or even beneficial? I mean a lot of Chuck’s trusting nature gave Sarah fits, so in many ways Chuck’s maturity was shaped by Sarah and he may be an even better fit for her.
But of course the first time around, circumstances forced them into close proximity that ultimately strengthened their ties and made them into a couple of sorts before they were even “official”. This time, Sarah could conceivably flee all these strange new feelings she has, and that shared intimacy would just never reform.
Remember that first time around was sort of a tortured path to finally achieve anything good. So with nothing *forcing* Sarah to stick around, she might not. At least I think that is a fear for many viewers.
I think those two things sum up many viewer’s problems. Now with many years of hindsight, I’m comfortable with saying we saw (barely) enough to know the healing has started. Sarah is indeed attracted to Chuck again, and she’s taken the first steps in reclaiming her life. So I believe all is well.
But I understand the doubts of many viewers, and I’ll always call it a fail that we didn’t get some little glimpse of a better future. The cheesy “one year later” flash with Chuck, Sarah and baby entering their house with a red door would have been the only “perfect” ending for me. And many viewers felt far more strongly about that than I did. Unless new content is made someday, I think that’s the tension we are left with too.
Your post gets at something I’ve been trying to articulate while reading Karen’s thread – I don’t think the Sarah we see in 5.12-13 is the same as the Sarah in the Pilot. She’s that person, but with the massive and recent trauma of being told five years of her life has disappeared, then fed a lie about those five years that she has to adapt to, and then told her new concept of reality is a lie as well. On top of that, she’s told (by herself) that she’s fallen in love with a man she’s just been trying to kill and doesn’t really know or understand. Finally, she’s also beset by out-of-context flashes of memory.
Put differently, Sarah is traumatized and disoriented, and traumatized and disoriented people have a hard time opening up to others. Karen’s criticism of Sarah’s behavior is unjust. Given her situation and state, her relative composure in 5.13 is astounding. She’s not the Sarah from the pilot because that version of herself was calm, collected, and open to a new adventure. Sarah in 5.13 is not only stressed and closed off, she’s just learned a painful lesson in 5.12 – that trusting her knowledge and instincts leads to disaster.
The fact that she’s still pulled to Chuck, still able to begin trusting him, is also what makes the beach scene so profound. It takes her less than a month to begin opening falling in love with Chuck (to “feel it”) again.
This is also why I’m unmoved by the magic kiss argument. What we see on the beach is the start of her/their recovery, not the finish. Chuck and Sarah both take a leap of faith in the final scene; Chuck by going to the beach, and Sarah’s implicit acceptance of his plea for her to trust him. This, Sarah’s recurring memories (always spurred by Chuck), and their history, are the seeds of their reunion, not the fruits. The fruits, as Dave loves to point out, we never quite get to harvest.
Exactly. this is what I have been trying to point out about Sarah in the last two episodes but I couldn’t get at the psychology of it. I standby the assessment that Karen’s criticism is not only unfair it disregards the situation Sarah is dealing with and the psychology of how trauma affects people and then Sarah gets additional emotional trauma dumped on her at the very start of the last two episodes in the form of Bryce and Graham’s death. Any notion of “checking with Langly/Beckman”is quite frankly a ridiculous ask in much the same way that asking Sarah not to be cold, closed off and untrusting is also ridiculous. It’s ridiculous because rational thought ends with emotional upheaval, that is the hardwired working of the human brain.
That Sarah is eventually on that beach trusting Chuck with putting herself back together mentally and emotionally is the beautiful flower in an otherwise trampled flowerbed, the miracle that makes the final two episodes while heartbreaking, ultimately uplifting and hopeful. Proof that no matter what, like a magnet Sarah will always be pulled to Chuck and because of that she will in time become herself again. I have always felt that to believe otherwise is to dismiss the entire series. One could argue the finale is the ultimate test of how much the viewer understands about Sarah (and Chuck) things that a faulty intersect and unreliable memory can never erase or change. No matter what Sarah of her own volition is still drawn back to Chuck and places that are meaningful to him and them, she still displays habits and behaviors that she always has concerning Chuck. It is her implicit memories, which is unaffected showing her the way back to a life she very much wants again by the end.
Josh, a quibble: I don’t think it’s a test of fans’ understanding, per se. Chuck is a deeply emotional show, both in terms of impact and in that it wears its heart on its sleeve, transparently. We watched it in that register. The finale is clear and profound in its intent, but it communicates that cognitively, through its text. We know Chuck and Sarah will be together because of how it parallels the pilot, because of Sarah’s memories, because it explicitly tells us with Rivers and Roads, etc. But we aren’t really made to “feel it”, as Sarah says. Most of 5.12-13 shows the two at tension.
If I could change one thing about the entire show, it would be to make their date scene in 5.13 *feel* more like the date scene in the Pilot – with Chuck and Sarah effortlessly getting along, and being amazed at each other. I think just one scene where their magic was still there would’ve gone a long way to make the finale land with people. Instead, they attempt to get that in the montage at the beach, but never in real time.
Sarah’s actual behavior is probably more justified, but less rewarding.
I do agree that Chuck is an emotional show that wears those emotions transparently, but presents those emotions cognitively and ultimately maybe that is the conteaversy of the finale. Analytical viewers like myself are generally fine with the finale because we can compartmentalize everything that happens, it exists separately from how I feel about it. The emotional viewer understandably does not care about anything other than how they feel as the screen fades to black and knowing something is indeed not the same as feeling it. The hazard of the series being written by nerds, for nerds I guess.
The extended cut of the finale does have a scene close to what you mention with some natural banter between Chuck and Sarah while they fight some of Quinn’s goons. It’s my favorite genuinely funny moment between them that should not have been cut from the broadcast version.
Yeah Arthur that would have been awesome to have the date scene more fun. I might quibble with the idea she’s not the same person; Sarah’s the same she was 5 years ago, but the circumstance is different.
I do disagree with one thing Josh brings up, Sarah absolutely categorically should have been checking in with Langley. She has no memories, a handler she doesn’t know and is given a complicated mission. Just, no way. There has to be check in protocols she would know when nothing Quinn tells her makes sense. This remains one of the big things I can’t stomach, it makes Sarah look stupid and unprofessional.
Dave, perhaps I was unclear, I do agree that she should have checked in. However I can also fully understand and accept the psychology behind why she doesn’t. She experiences a title wave of emotions in a few minutes, and that makes her, gullible and irrational. Humans have snapped for much less IRL than being told people that they worked for and with were murdered.
Hi everyone! Going against my last words, I had to come back here and write some words to defend my line of thought. I hope you guys don’t get mad at me. ; )
Mostly and firstly, I’d like to reinforce my understanding that the entire final plot was completely unnecessary and was insanely extreme – poorly conceived, poorly written, poorly directed and poorly edited – and this did serious damage to the entire series and its characters (Ellie and Casey too). It deadly wounded Sarah Walker’s character – Yvonne S. is certainly not to blame for this – and consequently it deadly wounded Chuck’s character as well, since they are Yin and Yang, two halves that complete each other. Damaging one, damages the other.
Another important point is that Chuck series was designed to be broadcast on a television channel, so it wasn’t a niche product. It was intended to have as many viewers as possible. Does this hold it from having complexity, layers, etc? No, but the vast majority of viewers will only watch it once, without thinking too much about it, it’s just light entertainment. So any development should be done and well clarified on screen, not implied or hidden with hints to be discovered.
From this, I continue with the question that was raised and which I consider very important: What was suppressed from Sarah Walker? Was it only her memories or was absolutely everything suppressed – her memories, loves, affections, all the learning she has had in 5 years, all her personal development, the maturity she has gained in her hard work journay?
Everything is so poorly written – and/or ambiguous – that we here cannot come to a consensus. I believe it’s the later: everything about her was suppressed. Because we see on screen a distasteful, even disgusting Sarah. And as I’ve already posted here, a Sarah who wouldn’t deserve to have Chuck by her side, not as a friend and certainly not as her husband (my opinion having a crush on Chuck).
Hence this new-old Sarah is a different person than the one we’ve seen throughout the series. Everything about her had changed. Now she is totally closed, trusts no one, does not know how to work as a team, has no feelings for anyone and no affection for Chuck (which is unthinkable for Sarah at any time in the series). She also has no instincts and no intelligence – she accepted Quinn’s story without checking with anyone else, had no second thoughts when she saw a house full of loving memories of a couple in love and even when she heard the conversation between Chuck and Ellie about her. Remember that Sarah from the Pilot right after meeting Chuck was already defending him, had already opened herself up to him enough to the point of proposing to be his fake girlfriend when she didn’t have to do that. She just couldn’t stop being around Chuck from the beginning.
Also is important that in the final two episodes there’s not a softening gradation from Sarah to Chuck. Inside the Castle, the Sarah and Chuck’s last scene before the beach, she was still walking away with no concern for the person Chuck and his feelings, no empathy. For 80 minutes we don’t have Chuck and Sarah as a couple, just a desperate man chasing a woman and a woman trying first to kill him and then running away from him. It becomes very difficult to accept that everything will be fine between them, as well as the 180C she would have done on the beach: It was not Sarah who rethinks and decides to go after Chuck. It was not Sarah who opened up to Chuck. Sarah does not appear at any time to claim her relationship with him, her love for him and her married life. Quite the contrary, it was Chuck who after managing to find her, after her umpteenth escape, who begged Sarah and got something back (those are exactly the words I wanted to use – got something from Sarah).
That’s why I can’t buy her crying, laughing and they kissing in the final scene, which still leaves open what would happen to them from there. Nothing came from her: I don’t see Sarah taking a leap of faith in the final scene. “Tell me about our history” and the “Kiss me” after Chuck brings up Morgan’s Disney theory don’t count, because this situation was not created by her. Sarah’s tears, laughter and kiss in the final scene seem to me to be just her reaction to Chuck’s begging and a beautiful love story that she can’t recognize as hers.
I saw this somewhere on internet and saved it: “She becomes cold Sarah. Calculating, heartless and cruel. There is always a war between her head and her heart and only when, at the end, that she losing her memories, clears her head and opens her heart does she fully realize that world is hers now and chuck is there to be her guide now in this new place”. I’m really very happy for this person, but my problem is that I can’t see Sarah’s heart has won out over her mind. Why not? Because this development wasn’t shown on screen and because her bad side shown in 80 minutes was so ugly, so extreme that I couldn’t reconnect with her again at the end. It simply didn’t have enough screen time and story for it, for her to redeem herself from everything she did.
The writers created a loss-loss situation: if Sarah regains her memory, even partially, they will have a lot of healing to do – the main issue being trust between them and in themselves regarding the relationship (will Sarah trust herself again? will she find her worth to Chuck? will Chuck, despite his uncoditional love for Sarah, not resent about what happened?). On the other hand, if Sarah does not recover her memories, only the attraction Sarah felt for Chuck would not be enough to keep them together, for them to be a couple again.
So… a badly conceived finale, an unhappy ending.
All of this is certainly valid, but it still does not change the fact that it is a subjective opinion based on the viewer’s personal inability (or ability) to connect with the Sarah in the last two episodes. If you can compartmentalize the fact that she only remembers being a spy and has been emotionally manipulated and lied to (even as far-fetched as is that she doesn’t validate the story ) and empathize with the fact that she does not remember that she was a softer, more complete person. Then I think that it is easier to accept the finale and believe that things work out okay.
If the viewer, is essentially going to hold the fact that Sarah does not remember against her, and live in the anger that who they are seeing is not the Sarah they grew emotionally attached to, then it only makes for the reaction to be “this is an awful person who does not deserve anything” Such is the nature of human emotions.
I and others are merely trying to point out that just because someone might not feel or see any of the things we have pointed out, that ARE on screen to indicate Sarah is still Sarah does not mean that they don’t exist. That’s really my big quibble is that there is factual evidence to refute your line of thinking. It’s just a question of if the viewer sees it and while no is a perfectly acceptable answer that does not mean that it is the truth.
You’ll never hear me say that the writing is great, and if the viewer is looking for a complete, satisfying ending CHUCK fails miserably but just as many accept the seeds of recovery that are planted and can leave the rest to our imagination.
As for the specifics of Sarah’s memory, I absolutely disagree with the notion that everything was suppressed. That is not correct, Sarah’s explicit memory was greatly affected yes, but even that is shown to be coming back, just not nearly as fast as her implicit memory, which is very much present. I believe that someone here (thinking?) did a write-up on this topic several years ago
Yes @Josh Z!! This time I agree 90% with what you’re saying.
Except about Sarah’s memory loss part. I stand firm by saying that everything in her memory was suppressed. If it wasn’t, first she would have had second thoughts about that poorly story told by Quinn, and then soon after knowing the truth she, as a loving woman and full of love for Chuck, would have treated him in a totally different way from the way she treated him all that time, with disdain. The only justification for her treating Chuck the way she did is that her maturation (more than 5 years) as a woman was taken away from her.
I want to be clear my comment about memory as it relates to Sarah is not opinion, fact based on the general science of how our brain stores and recalls memory. Emotion does not contribute to my thoughts on this at all. Sarah is cold and emotionally distant because she cannot access explicit, declarative memory (specific events of her past five years) to make sense of the semantic memories (names and facts) she is shown to remember like Irene Demova, and more importantly the implicit memory that are learned behaviors she cannot explain but knows have something to do with her past and are directly because of her relationship with Chuck. Though she does not know understand this because again she cannot access the explicit memories that form her past. That is Sarah’s dialogue when she is with Chuck must be paid attention to.
Take the beginning of the beach scene for example.
“I was hoping you would be here.”
“This place is important isn’t it ?” A question like this is an indication of implicit memory within Sarah.
Back in the castle after stopping the bomb.
“So Irene Demova?
“I’m not really sure what it means.” She knows that it means something related to her past, but does not know the significance. An explicit semantic memory.
Fixing Chucks tie, implicit, procedural memory. Stacking the cups properly, implicit procedural memory. Leaving Chuck and returning to him implicit, procedural memory.
Last but certainly not least. The carving on the door frame of their would-be home. Explicit declarative memory. Unfortunately, the only one that she is shown to consciously recall.
Do you see my point? Your assertion that everything in Sarah is suppressed is factually incorrect.
She is remembering and that matters even if these things are not good enough for the viewer it is there on the screen.
Quite frankly I could care less about the degree to which she is remembering, the facts and science prove that she is. So as long as she continues to trust Chuck, and gets therapy to sort through her returning memory and trauma. She will be okay.
One five minute google search is all it took for me to prove that her memory is coming back. Weather or not people accept the science that makes it true is completely out of my hands.
Also, all Chuck has to do is get in touch with Ellie and she would tell Chuck and Sarah everything I have just talked about regarding her memory, because it is the science behind what is actually happening to Sarah.
Look… I believe what your research say. But that’s fiction. In fact, the last two episodes are bad fiction as they don’t communicate with the rest of the show. There’s no romance or joy in them, only pain and sadness.
What I really don’t believe is what they did to Sarah and consequently to Chuck in this series finale. Everything was an unbelievable cruelty that culminated in the biggest cruelty – leaving the ending open, without a closure. We fans didn’t deserve that.
You said “So as long as she continues to trust Chuck, and gets therapy to sort through her returning memory and trauma. She will be okay.” – We’d have to take a leap of faith to believe in all of this. And as a fan I can’t do that. The writers no longer had credit with me and did not make the outcome of this insanity shown in 80 minutes clear enough. All ambiguous. I blame the writers who made that terrible choices and ruined our entire show.
Again all valid, I’m just presenting you with the factual, proven science and applying it to Sarah as we see her in the last two episode. I can do nothing to say your personal feelings on the state of her memory, or that she has at the bare minimum a gut feeling of what she is struggling to remember. But I do think that because she shows a willingness to trust Chuck, asked for him to kiss her and he will accept whatever pace she needs to heal at, that they will be happy, whether it happens in a few months or another five years. If that makes me a hopeless romantic so be it. No amount of cynicism will ruin what remains a favorite show for me.
“whether it happens in a few months or another five years.”
Another fiver years? Wow – We really think in a very different way.
I don’t think I’m cynical. I’m really very emotional, but at the same time I’m always very realistic. A relationship rebuilding lasting 5 years would be unthinkable for me. In fact I think it is for the vast majority of people. Or my husband doesn’t recognize me and I have to be just his friend. If we didn’t have children, the pain would be so big that I’d certainly move away.
Take a look about my criticizes – I always said that the Sarah of the last two episodes was written in a way where she has absolutely no love, affection and empathy for Chuck. Not a single step was taken by her of her own free will to him. All of her actions towards Chuck were reactions, provoked by Chuck, even after she knew the truth. I’d be furious if my husband did this to me. And if he showed the behavior that Sarah was showing I certainly wouldn’t have waited 5 years for him. In fact, not even few months.
Sure, you wouldn’t, most people wouldn’t, but Chuck Bartowski would. He tells her “Sarah I don’t want anything from you, I just need you to know that wherever you go, I’ll always be there to help you, someone you can call whenever. Trust me, Sarah, I’m here for you always.”
And what is her response after a brief silence? “Chuck, tell me our story.” Not, your or the story, but ours. After she insisted that it was not her story anymore. And then after he presents the kiss idea, she asks for it. She doesn’t say “Fine” or if you insist,” She says kiss me after they both agree that the idea of one magical kiss is ridiculous.
If you are going to be realistic then admit that you are projecting how YOU would handle this situation onto Chuck and Sarah. Your response makes it pretty clear how you feel and judge everything in the finale based on personal taste. You are allowed to feel that way but it is an emotional projection, and thus can not be relied on to predict what will happen to Chuck and Sarah after the kiss.
As I said I can’t sway your feelings on the matter but they are just that. YOUR FEELINGS. Not Chuck’s and not Sarah’s. Their feelings even if it is just on the surface I pulled directly from the scene.
If you think the finale is the worst thing in the history of TV fine but just know that you’re assessment of the finale is flawed, for very understandable reasons (mostly in your assessment of Chuck, Sarah, and their relationship before and after the last two episodes and this is coming from someone who thinks it could have been executed much better.
Okay @Josh Z, Here we go:
“If you are going to be realistic then admit that you are projecting how YOU would handle this situation onto Chuck and Sarah. Your response makes it pretty clear how you feel and judge everything in the finale based on personal taste. You are allowed to feel that way but it is an emotional projection, and thus can not be relied on to predict what will happen to Chuck and Sarah after the kiss.”
Sure it’s me reacting to the Chuck finale according to my personality, my experiences and my values! That’s what I’ve been saying in my posts here. The whole final plot is unnecessary and cruel to Sarah and Chuck’ characters and to us fans. Leaving the ending open as the writers did, each of us viewers projected the final according to our experiences, our way of thinking. If they had given a decent closure in the final scenes, we wouldn’t be having this kind of conversation here. We could just be talking about how wonderful the series was, because it really was, until before that finlae. But no! From my experiences and my way of thinking, having seen what I saw Sarah doing in the final two episodes, I just can’t project an IMMEDIATE happy ending for Chuck and Sarah at all, even with the magical kiss working. The writers took Sarah’s character to the dark side thousands of miles further than they should have. To the point where I lost my connection with her, who was my heroine. And in the last episode they didn’t want to do the full return path for her, in fact they stopped at the beginning of her return path. As a woman I cannot see myself as Sarah, she shows no compassion for Chuck, absurdly selfish … that woman who appears there, is not the Sarah of any moment in the series for who I loved, it is another person. Nothing justifies her behavior, not even memory loss, because in theory she would still be Sarah who was from season 5, Mrs. Sarah Bartowski. Even pre-Chuck Sarah saved a baby from bad people. She cared. This new one doesn’t care about anything, for 80 minutes she has an aversion to Chuck. Asking him for help at the Buy More, fixing his tie…. That means nothing compared to her unloving attitudes towards Chuck. A woman who loves a man doesn’t do that, unless she doesn’t love him enough!
“If you think the finale is the worst thing in the history of TV fine but just know that you’re assessment of the finale is flawed, for very understandable reasons “
I don’t think Chuck’s ending is the worst ending in TV history. Even because I don’t watch that many TV series. But it’s certainly the worst TV series finale of a series that I identified with, that I connected with the characters, that I cared a lot for. I really didn’t want to see a horror movie and the total deconstruction of my favorite character, Sarah Walker. I wanted to see a happy ending for my favorite couple. Would that be too much to ask?
I think it is clear that we have very different views on love and relationships, and I don’t think we are going to shift to each other’s POV about the show, the characters, or the finale, at this point it is enough for me that I understand your perspective, but mine could not be more opposite. So I think it is best to agree to disagree and end the conversation because it’s no longer interesting, we’re both just being sticks in the mud
Look what just surfaced on YouTube. Imperfect Union, the sitcom pilot Zachary Levi shot in 2007 for TBS. He was second billed after Ashley Williams and the rest of the cast included George Wendt and Beverly D’Angelo. I have no idea why this wasn’t picked up and I don’t think the pilot ever aired.
I think it was pleasant enough, but I can also see why TBS passed. Which is good for us because it left NBC free to pick up Chuck with Levi at the helm.
It looks like this would have been a WT/WT deal, too.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=At6WGGNNjZY
And here’s a 2006 story in The Hollywood Reporter explains the show
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/tbs-pilot-williams-levi-143800/