Good Girls Revolt is revolting. Not in a good way. It has its moments. Women are sexually assaulted. One time a man shows his penis and balls. Another comes onto his researcher in a threatening way. Offers her chocolate. What is she to do? And for women like she, it’s been part of American life for which she has no voice. No rights. Not yet. For all the women, but especially her.
Most of the men are hitting on women. The men don’t think anything of it. The women are shocked. Ok, that’s a slice of reality.
Shall I count the couplings? One HUGE premise of the show and lawsuit: the women must have NO personal relationships with the men they work with. One is sleeping with TWO men. The other is married. Plus there’s other couplings offscreen but in the office. Plus I can’t remember cos really, it’s a bit of a blur.
IF the show spent MORE time on the women, and less FANTASY stories (not based on reality, as they say as end of each show), it would be more compelling. Do we REALLY need to see nude ppl coupling when ya can see that anywhere anytime online or TV or movies?
We REALLY DO need to see MORE about the women and their struggles. We see that with the main three, plus a top secretary, but want more more more!
Powerful scenes and/or character: the Vietnam vet, a ringer for Charlie Manson, lunged outta nowhere, his hands firmly clasped around a man’s neck. That man was assailing his wife at a party. The vet saw danger and went into action. All his scenes were sadly too real. PTSD. Although we didn’t call it that then. “Shell shock,” a term coined during WWI I think.
The scenes around the mother who lost her son in Vietnam. Why it’s wrong to interview her while in such grief. Something our press and public forget in present times.
Some powerful scenes. I like the lawyer.* She talks too much. More sound bites. I’d like to hear the women repeat what she says. More voices reiterating and embodying the core issues which drove the lawsuit which changed our society would be more impactful.
*Eleanor Holmes Norton is the ACLU attorney. She still serves the American people as a US Congresswoman!! She represents our capital, in the capital. Is that cool or what!!
I grew up reading Newsweek. I started was 8 or 9 or 10. Probably earlier studying their photos. By 14, in high school, I paid for my own Time subscription. I also read LA Free Press aka Freep. LA Times, Daily News, and Herald Examiner. More.
1970: This show wants us to believe that ALL the researchers (women) and writers/editorial staff (men) were oblivious to the horrors of the Vietnam War? Were all hawks? Hadn’t a clue what was going down? Really? 1970!!
Plus, the owner has a notebook full of cultural and societal changes she wants covered in the mag. The top editor-in-chief dude is pushing for younger readers. Yet he has no little notebook? No research? No stats?
ARE YOU SHITTING ME? You telling me Newsweek and Time didn’t cover youth topics by 1970?? Didn’t do their research? That is a load of crock! Sure, it was from a rather conservative establishment POV. But they, along with LIFE and LOOK, covered all that!
I GREW UP on Newsweek! The REAL Newsweek was sued. Then others later. IF you can find online or wherever PHOTOS and stories from mainstream media in the 60’s and early 70’s, you’ll see ADS and articles about the youth.
THAT is why I HATED Mad Men. It never left the 50’s! It treated the youth culture as a fly in the ointment in the 60’s/. Whereas the youth Influenced EVERYTHING. Youth were not an afterthought. THIS show doing the SAME thing.
Fine, if Millennials and others wanna drink the Kool-Aid, bottom’s up. BUT that ain’t the truth. Anyone wanna talk about TV TALK SHOWS? You can see Mike Douglas and Dick Cavett on youtube. (Plus others, but those two were THE coolest.)
RADICAL stuff. Coming at us after school til we went to bed. I dunno about Johnny Carson. He was never hip enough for me. Strictly midwest cornball schtick.
SO if the TV talk shows covered all this political, rock ‘n’ roll, youthful stuff which influenced YOUR culture in ways to make your heads spin, yet is totally MIA on both Mad Men and Good Girls Revolt, YOUR loss. SMH.
Patti finds pills left after a male pickup leaves. She hands out the pills at a party. Seems like it’s acid, maybe? Not real specific. But Patti whirls around as if on acid or downers. The girl who falls, well, that’s not speed, so downer or ? But let’s see: if it were downers, Patti wouldn’t be dancing like that. If it were speed, she’d be twirling around a lot faster. ‘Shrooms look like mushrooms.
Acid is ON PAPER BLOTTERS or little Pink PYRAMIDS. Never tablets.
So these STRAIGHT (square), conservative, educated at best colleges, taught how to behave and state safe girls who don’t know nothin’ about no drugs, are eager to take something Patti found left by a one night stand? REALLY????
Who wrote this tripe?
In between heavy panting, nude and illicit sex, sturm und rang or some shitstorm, ah … a moment of reality. REAL issues. Now and then. But it took TEN episodes at a snail’s pace. La de da.
I want one of those acid pills. Please and thanks.
OK, what are you thoughts?
PS I looked at it objectively. I watched it as I read reviews of it. Once in awhile, something really hit home. That’s what I wanted to share.
I love sharing reflections based on studied real world experience vs someone who wasn’t alive, hasn’t read up, hasn’t interviewed many from that era. but purports to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but. OR better yet, as “Good Girls Revolt” makes clear, the complaint/lawsuit happened. But EVERYTHING else on the show is fictionalized in some way. Oy.
Most of the time, same ol’ drivel. IF they carved away some of the boring, “been there, do we need that again” crap, we’d have a great hour or two of really cool evocative characters and events. Instead of nearly TEN hours. I could not sit and do nothing while watching this slightly-above average drivel.** It’s good for multi-tasking. For me.
**Drivel is spending too much time on meh sex and relationship scenes WHICH NEVER HAPPENED. Worse, at the expense of the REAL story. The REAL history. The REAL emotions which connect YOUR viewers to YOUR art or message, product or service.
Tip the scale to the REAL stuff. Ya know, the workplace stuff. The family and friend expectation stuff which led to this historic lawsuit. Nah, just casually mention it in 1/5 of yr 55 minute show. A short scene here, a look there, a line or two other there.
Better than what we usually see, but that’s setting the bar so low. We’ve done that w/POTUS and long ago with TV.
I honestly don’t know if I’ll watch the next season. Depends. ONLY would do at one sitting. Cos otherwise, not compelling enough to remember all the deets. So many names. People people in and out. Hard to connect. Should we bother? Oh who is that? What’s that actress’ name. I know that man’s face. I get bored easily with drivel and silly fluffy shit when there’s so much good REAL stuff right under their noses. Which happened.
Real stuff is often beyond what writers can imagine. Plus the fact it’s REAL. Adds gravitas and many dimensions. But I know with punk, people ALWAYS wanna distort our words to serve their fantasies. Ok. Whatev. You do your thing, I do mine. I’m reviewing this from MY POV.
Trivial word soup instead of compelling inspiring drama.
I’m open to positive reviews or comments cos I wanna find more good in this show. Took my mind off FBI James Comey aka treasonous traitor s**t. There’s a LOT of beyond pissed off angry women on behalf of not only Hillary Clinton, but the United States of America and OUR laws. That’s the POV I’m bringing to Good Girls Revolt. It’s still an uphill, dirty battle for women to get anywhere. We’ve NOT come a long way, baby.