Castle Rock - HULU

Big John wrote:

sandi wrote:

Big John wrote:

I also suspect that there is no alternate universe.

Then how do you explain adHenry being a prisoner in a cage -- held there by Rev Deaver for 27 years?

It's entirely possible that absolutely none of that actually happened. The entirity of episode 9 is centered on monster boy. All of it, every single thing we saw in ep 9, may be just part of monster boy's ploy to confuse and trick Henry in order to get Henry to lead him to the schisma which is his doorway back home.

Except -- that story was not told to anyone but the viewer. nnHenry didn't relay any of it to anyone.

And where is home?

MrBill60 wrote:

I felt the ball was dropped in the finale.   Doctor Deaver, ALS specialist went into the Schisma (which I guess is supposed to be hell) and the devil came out? Really?  For me, it is a very unsatisfying resolution to the season.

I guess one question was answered - we did find out that young Henry did try to kill his father by pushing him over the cliff.  Molly knew this through her visions and finished the job by removing his tracheal tube after he was found.

And we found out why -- the Rev was planning on killing Ruth! I didn't see that coming.

Okay.

Here goes.

Did I hate this finale? Not entirely. Did I like this finale? Not very much at all.

So let's have at it.

First of all the minor spoiler I ran into on Wikipedia was in fact the episode/finale title: Romans. I had already looked a variety of biblical 9-13's (from Henry's cell phone in the woods) but gave up the whole process. Now however with Romans as the title, process returns. But we'll save Romans 9-13 for later. Meantime, there was the obvious exchange between young Henry and his father in the woods where Rev discloses that Ruth and Pangborn have been coveting each other a lot frequently and often. Rev says: The Wages of Sin is Death. Henry responds: Romans. And then Rev confides too much to Henry about what will happen to his mother; therefore, Henry takes off. He eventually reaches the chasm where adult Henry Deaver was standing in episode 9. But young Henry, using a bit of trickery himself, is able to push his demented dad off the cliff and to his eventual demise. Now that was a good scene. Well done. Answered a key question. But where I think the show chickened out is not showing what happened to young Henry afterwards. I think here the writers marinated the moment in way too much ambiguity. Pick a side, writers! You sort of do so later!

What I didn't like and it's a lot:

1) Molly. Seriously misused. She ends up being a messenger way more than an active player. She does stand firm with Ruth on the bridge, but even that was a little weak. Worse yet, what happened to her empathic telepathy or whatever? Oh inconvenient? Sorry but this is a major disappointment.

2) Wendell. So he returns to town and heads right to the woods where he ends up as a prop to Willie who sees him and then thinks of how he can implicate Henry. Lame. But Wendell ends up as a prop again. He's at the police station and Henry arrives to pick him up. But---the police have other ideas. And in a way Wendell is used as a prop one more time so that Molly has a way out of town. I guess. Whatever. It was dumb.


3) The Police. This was the worst part of the entire episode/finale. Remember some time ago where I said that the exchange between Henry and the female officer was the best scene in that episode. It was so great. This scene between them in contrast was instant oatmeal compared to filet mignon. It was bad. It was forced. It was so unconvincing. Andre Holland couldn't even save it.


4) Porter. What was the point of this? She receives a soap voodoo doll and then zombie-like strolls into the road and is nailed---oh the irony!---by a bus full of transferred prisoners? Really? So stupid. She says: He is the ---- devil. So what? Go get yourself run over and quit wasting my time.


5) The Jailbreak/Slaughter. How convenient that all these thugs end up in the same jail as Henry and No Name and Henry ends up being put in No Name's cell. But even more convenient that the inmates stage an assault which the officers fall right into and the inmate murder everyone and---the convenience award of the century---slide the keys into Henry and No Name's cell. What a miracle! Now you might say that No Name used his devilish powers to create all this turmoil, and here again I say so what if he did? I prefer to think he was a willful observer, watching all the evil of humanity in one place creating death and destruction while he just sort of grins and stands there and soaks it all in. Before all that some of the prisoners taunt him, which probably leads to No Name's magical response, but did we need this scene at all? No. The only point it served was to show Henry and No Name in the same predicament, in a cell together. How obviously symbolic! We didn't need this representation one little bit. We are all smart enough to know that they both are prisoners to some extent. That whole business was really pretty insulting.


6)No Name. The only thing that saved him from total disaster was Bill S's acting. There's that one lovely scene with Molly where No Name is standing in the window and his reflection is shining in the glass. So nicely done. They could have had a twenty minute conversation and I would have been riveted. But no. We get No Name floating around the town. We get him waiting at the cemetery. We get him surrendering without a fuss. Now you could interpret this as a bit of Castle Rock determinism so that No Name could get Henry right where he wanted him, but then the woods scene where No Name is so easily distracted by the helicopter and Henry overpowers him and then the great reveal: No Name is a monster! No. He's total bullshit. Yo Writers! If you're going to set up this intriguing mishmash of timelines, then follow through with it. Why not, for example, have the schisma appear and have No Name, before he walks through it or whatever, turn into his monster self because that's how he needs to do to pass through it to be home again and Henry feels as though he has to stop him, or try to drag Henry in with him because of whatever mythological outcome it fulfills? He needs a schisma guide? Or a sacrifice? Sustenance? Whatever. Something. Here's where Wendell was particularly wasted. Why not have him there? Why not have No Name turn his designs on Wendell because he is the schisma son of the schisma son? Any of this would be better than this poor decrepit little monster screaming his old lizard face at Henry because Henry thwarted him with two seconds of effort.

7)The First Very End. Here we have Henry and Wendell having a nice father and son time. It's a nice scene. But part of me wonders if it was real. Meantime, Henry goes to the cemetery and offers flowers to the Ruth and Pangborn grave. Also nice. But then the sequence collapses. We have Henry narrating some pretty obvious points. Then we have Henry climbing down in the Lacey pit and delivering some tasty Christmas burger and fries to No Name who is back in his cage? And just how in the hell did Henry get him there? Or even chose the location? I guess the prison is deserted. But really now. And then we have No Name meekly taunting Henry. Dumb. And then we have the second worst moment in the episode: that stupid lame ass It face smile. I hope Bill S said to the writers: you know this is stupid, right? Here is where the show absolutely settled. Here is where the show displayed an absolute lack of imagination---or at least a lack of narrative satisfaction. The whole episode should have been No Name going through the portal, and then something bad happening when he returned. He should have boasted to Henry of how his life was going to be restored. And then, when he returns, his life there is worse, in some way. Or if No Name wasn't ever going to return, have it mean something.

8)The Second Very End. Unnecessary.




Back to the positive. There were a couple of visuals I liked.

First there's a focus on a poster/picture of Iceland behind Henry. I think it's different from an Iceland picture a few episodes ago. I think this is meant to reinforce young Henry's plight in the ice and snow. Plus Iceland is very volcanic, which reminds me of the fires. Plus it's a island, which means isolation.

The other visual was a two lightbulb lamp, but with one bulb lit up and the other bulb burned out. I think this represents Henry and No Name. Henry with all his troubles has a future, has life, even in Castle Rock. No Name is powerless, without life. And this leads me to another point. Romans 9-13. The verse is (acc. to one of the translations): Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated. I think this is interesting. It may reinforce that, in this story at least, Henry is favored while No Name is not. Not by God, I suppose. But by circumstance. By the phenomenon in the woods of Castle Rock. This may or may not really be the intent of writers. But if it wasn't, they can steal it. And steal my ideas for a rewrite while they're at it. And maybe attend a writing workshop on closing out otherwise entertaining shows.

Ok. Somehow, this monster/demon stepped through a schisma and ended up in castle rock. A few of the Castle Rock residents see his true form and lock him away.

Many tragedies were happening at that time. One of them was the Henry Deaver story. 27 years later, enter Henry Deaver. He rescues the monster from his imprisonment.

The schisma is opening back up soon and the monster knows it. The monster wants to go back home, through the schisma. He cannot find the schisma on his own. He needs Henry's help.

Through cunning and guile and using Henry's memory loss, the monster creates an elaborate ruse to try and fool Henry to taking him there. It doesn't work and now the monster is back in a cage.

sandi wrote:

Big John wrote:

sandi wrote:

Big John wrote:

I also suspect that there is no alternate universe.

Then how do you explain adHenry being a prisoner in a cage -- held there by Rev Deaver for 27 years?

It's entirely possible that absolutely none of that actually happened. The entirity of episode 9 is centered on monster boy. All of it, every single thing we saw in ep 9, may be just part of monster boy's ploy to confuse and trick Henry in order to get Henry to lead him to the schisma which is his doorway back home.

Except -- that story was not told to anyone but the viewer.  nnHenry didn't relay any of it to anyone.

And where is home?

The story was told to Molly and Henry. In order for the viewer to have a frame of reference for it, episode 9 was necessary.

Where is home? We weren't told.

Whether it happened or not, the Episode 9 flash sideways turned out to be meaningless.

Well, I haven't slept -- so I need to bow out for a while.

I will say that I was let down by the finale, but I'm usually let down by SK endings.

I don't want the lack of a season finale cliffhanger to color my thoughts. I'll have more after I sleep and rewatch! Later guys.

MrBill60 wrote:

Whether it happened or not, the Episode 9 flash sideways turned out to be meaningless.

agreed. absolutely meaningless.

Wait -- I do want to leave you with something.

S01E01

Quote :

HENRY GOES INSIDE CHURCH/SEES FATHER'S PORTRAIT ON WALL

[b]MAN IN BACKGROUND WHEN HENRY IS INSIDE CHURCH: .. 9-12 says, "But two are better than one, "because they have a good return on their labor. If either of them falls down, one can help the other up. But pity anyone who falls."

I think this is the tale of two monsters. One can live a happy life as long as the other is contained. I have no doubt that if No Name had successfully taken adHenry with him back to his timeline, it would be adHenry in a cage and No Name living the good life.

More later.

sandi wrote:

Wait -- I do want to leave you with something.

S01E01

Quote :

HENRY GOES INSIDE CHURCH/SEES FATHER'S PORTRAIT ON WALL

MAN IN BACKGROUND WHEN HENRY IS INSIDE CHURCH:  ..  9-12 says, "But two are better than one, "because they have a good return on their labor.  If either of them falls down, one can help the other up.  But pity anyone who falls."

I think this is the tale of two monsters.  One can live a happy life as long as the other is contained.  I have no doubt that if No Name had successfully taken adHenry with him back to his timeline, it would be adHenry in a cage and No Name living the good life.  

More later.  

Interesting. I think this is possible. I wish the writers had the guts to try to return No Name to his world so that we might see or learn about what would happen to whoever No Name might have take with him: Henry. But no...


I wish No Name would have "revealed" that he had to return with Henry because he went through the portal with kid Henry in the first place. If this was the twist, then it wouldn't have bothered me if lawyer Henry or someone else (Molly, Wendell) defeated No Name in that ambition.

MrBill60 wrote:

Whether it happened or not, the Episode 9 flash sideways turned out to be meaningless.

I disagree.  Episode 9 painted a picture of something evil, as he appeared to others -- a good man, well adjusted, pursuing a worthy goal -- helping others with a medical breath through - in a happy relationship and maybe expecting his first child.  By appearances, No Name was the kind of guy parents hope their daughter marries, the king of guy you would want to call friend.

It also showed adopted Henry, in the short time he was free of the cage and before making it back into the woods -- there was a fire where he was staying -- people were injured -- people died.  We give him a pass as far as being an active participant.

There was a fire at Juniper Hills when No Name was there.  People were injured and people died.  At first, we give him, personally, a pass -- it's not his fault -- things just happen around him.  But then we come to realize he's more than just an observer in these things -- he's a participant.

Let's go back to young Henry when his father, the Reverend, tells him he's going to kill his mother.  I think it's a huge step for an 11 year old kid to plan and execute that plan to kill someone.  We know he did this -- he backtracked his steps to the cliff edge and waited for his father.   When the Rev steps into his trap -- he pushes him over the edge.

We also know of the great connection between young Molly and young Henry.  And we also know that Henry knows.  She's told him and demonstrated its truth.  We all think that Molly acted upon Henry's hatred for his father when she killed the Reverend in young Henry's timeline.  But what if she didn't?  What if young Henry, knowing the connection,  used her to kill his father?  Think about that.

Also think about the huge step for an 11 year old kid to plan a first degree murder.  I think most kids in young Henry's shoes, would have told his mother whose best friend was the sheriff.

And why were the town folk so ready to assume young Henry attempted to kill his father?  They lived within 20 miles of Shawshank.  My first thought would be an escaped prisoner or friends or family of a prisoner as the Reverend often visited and worked there.

adHenry asked Jackie Torrance what version of the story was she working on -- here's her response:
DIANE "JACKIE" TORRANCE:  Beloved local preacher opens his home and his heart to poor screw-up orphan.   Weirdo kid gets weirder.  Ninety-one, mega-snowstorm, Guinness Book shit, you lure him out to Castle Lake, push him off the rocks ... bye-bye, Pastor Deaver.  Wander out of the woods eleven days later and pretend you can't remember what happened.

Why was young Henry a "screw-up"?  What made him a "weirdo"?  Why do the townspeople believe his nickname, "black death".  I think there's more there that meets the eye.

From "The Howling" (posted above in one of my posts)
"Jerome arrives, realizes what has happened, and sadly explains that the inability to recognize the devil has always been Man's great weakness."

I'm not giving adopted Henry a pass.  I made that mistake with No Name and didn't see him for what he was until too late.

screw-up orphan -- I wonder what tragedy befell young Henry's real parents
Deaver's lost baby -- I wonder if their baby's death was a tragedy because young Henry was in town.
Rev. Deaver's tumor -- I wonder if the Reverend developed a tumor because young Henry was around.  Remember the inmate in No Name's cell whose dead body was riddled with cancer and who appeared in the pink of health the day before.
Rev. Deaver's abbrrant behavior -- I wonder if the tumor was back because young Henry was around.
Ruth's early onset Alzheimer's -- I wonder if this happened because young Henry was around.

Quote :

We also know of the great connection between young Molly and young Henry.  And we also know that Henry knows.  She's told him and demonstrated its truth.  We all think that Molly acted upon Henry's hatred for his father when she killed the Reverend in young Henry's timeline.  But what if she didn't?  What if young Henry, knowing the connection,  used her to kill his father?  Think about that.

My belief is that Molly killed the reverend to protect young Henry since she knew he pushed him over the cliff.

My problem with the alt universe is that Lawyer Henry seems to have a relatively good life.  His clients aren't keeling over and dying of cancer.  So I'm not making the connection between his supposed incarceration for 27 years in the alt world and his current situation and actions.  Maybe as NN said, those memories will come back one at a time, but the season ended with those loose threads.  

I think "Black Death" had to do with  Henry being a suspect in his father's murder.   I don't recall any indication that he was responsible for any other death's or destruction in town during his childhood, although Castle Rock itself has a very dark history and I think that's due to being in proximity to the Schisma.   Henry also didn't quite fit into the mostly-white social landscape of Castle Rock, and the townies referring to him as "black death" and  a "weirdo" was probably racially motivated,  and I'm sure that his upbringing by an insane father likely contributed to some odd behavior, but he seems to have overcome those hurdles for the most part.

I find it interesting that Deaver is jailed because of an alleged connection to the murders around town and Jackie Torrance is walking around free.  Did they assume that the axe job was in self defense?

No I think the main cause of trouble in either universe is the schisma itself. And doubly so when people pass through it and end up in the wrong place. They take part of the schisma with them. If the people themselves (older Henry, younger Henry) were inherently evil or even powerful for that matter, they wouldn't allow themselves to be stuck in cages for a millisecond and would instead become (unwilling perhaps) disciples of the schisma.

As for why episode 9 becomes meaningless, for me it's because of its build up towards episode 10 which proved to be a definite fail. The writers gave up on telling a cohesive and compelling story in their final episode. The bed and breakfast couple was a glitch in quality. Episode ten was content or almost proud to lock itself in a cage.

As for caged Henry now, the writers leave us with oh lord look another ambiguity. Did he smile because he's always been evil? Or did he smile because he's resigned himself to his fate as being the caged Henry who never retranscended the schisma? I think the latter. One problem with being an adult trapped for three decades is that you know too much; therefore, all the vital life simply drains from you. Young Henry, when found, and when escaping, seemed to have perpetual energy. I wonder if now Lawyer Henry, if he was forced to cross back with NNHenry or did so accidentally, wouldn't suffer the same fate as NNHenry. Or NNHenry himself for that matter. I don't know if he would have been any better back on his real side just because fate is kind of like that. But of course we never got a chance to experience anything that possible. We were caged up in bad quality.


I agree with Mr. Bill. Young Henry's bad act was killing his father (or at least starting the process with Molly finishing him off with Ruth's blessing) to save his mother. More Oedipal than schisma. But hardly Oedipal. More heroic in a sense. Then (again thank you writers) we get no idea what happened to Henry after that because the writers decided to wallow in ambiguity. I wanted to see whether Henry had blundered into the schisma and was indeed trapped on the other side for so many years, or if he just hid away to bury deep in his mind the murder he just committed. Young Henry and Lawyer Henry were called black death because the town believed but couldn't prove that he murdered his father (which he did) and therefore all subsequent town malaise and catastrophe could be pinned to him and not on the hidden schisma or on the possibility that some town folks themselves just carry evil in their hearts. If Henry had just hidden away somewhere, then I could accept the concept that NNHenry was in fact a manipulative fraud. But I got no truthful chance to arrive at any satisfying conclusion. The episode was that bad.

As for axe-wielding Jackie, I'm going to say that the police found evidence of the Bed and Breakfast murders. But more importantly how did they not search the house and not find all of those No Name Henry portraits? Now that would have been interesting for law enforcement to contemplate. No Name Henry doesn't age? What? The show backed itself deeply into a corner there. That's a main reason why the Bed and Breakfast couple ultimately proved unsuccessful.

Quote :

As for why episode 9 becomes meaningless, for me it's because of its build up towards episode 10 which proved to be a definite fail. The writers gave up on telling a cohesive and compelling story in their final episode.

Yep, I agree 100%.


Funny, I was briefly reminded of "Trashcan Man" in The Stand while I was contemplating Henry as a kid growing up in that environment.  The school kids jeering,  "Hey Trash, you gonna burn down the school again?" ,   "Hey Henry, who are you going to kill today?"

david wrote:

I agree with Mr. Bill. Young Henry's bad act was killing his father (or at least starting the process with Molly finishing him off with Ruth's blessing) to save his mother. More Oedipal than schisma. But hardly Oedipal. More heroic in a sense. Then (again thank you writers) we get no idea what happened to Henry after that because the writers decided to wallow in ambiguity. I wanted to see whether Henry had blundered into the schisma and was indeed trapped on the other side for so many years, or if he just hid away to bury deep in his mind the murder he just committed.

Right before Molly rescued Lawyer Henry from the acoustic "box", he was having images of himself in the cage in Rev. Deaver's basement.

sandi wrote:

david wrote:

I agree with Mr. Bill. Young Henry's bad act was killing his father (or at least starting the process with Molly finishing him off with Ruth's blessing) to save his mother. More Oedipal than schisma. But hardly Oedipal. More heroic in a sense. Then (again thank you writers) we get no idea what happened to Henry after that because the writers decided to wallow in ambiguity. I wanted to see whether Henry had blundered into the schisma and was indeed trapped on the other side for so many years, or if he just hid away to bury deep in his mind the murder he just committed.

Right before Molly rescued Lawyer Henry from the acoustic "box", he was having images of himself in the cage in Rev. Deaver's basement.

Okay. I seriously don't remember this. I wish Lawyer Henry had a memory of it in episode 10. That would have strengthened episode 10.

Episode 8 ends with the monster and Molly in Molly's bedroom. The scene ends with the monster telling Molly about where she died out in the woods.

Episode 9 spins a tale of an alternate universe Henry Deaver character starring none other than the monster himself as Henry Deaver. There are so many clever little parallels.  It fits quite nicely as a mirror image.

Episode 9 ends with the monster and Molly still in Molly's bedroom, the monster having just told this elaborate tale to Molly. Having powers of her own, Molly is easily susceptible to believing a story like this.

The reason the monster is telling Molly anything at all is because he wants her help. He needs her on his side to assist him with getting Henry to lead him back to the schisma. The schisma is the door to the monster's true home, which might be hell itself, and that door is closing soon.

That's it. Castle Rock is about a monster that manifests evil who just wants to go home.

---

I wrote that passage above and then I decided to do a little reading before posting it. Apparently, according to the showrunners, I nailed it. Or at least half of it. The ending of Castle Rock is intentionally ambiguous. It could be what I wrote above which was my initial unfiltered reaction, or the parallel universe is true and an Henry Deaver has locked up Henry Deaver.

It is a mystery which was intentionally left for us by the show iteself. We have to figure it out. The good news is, they've left us some clues.

Quote :

Castle Rock's Creators Guide Us Through That Big Twist Ending

Did Henry Deaver make the right decision? What was wrong with Sissy Spacek's Ruth?


BY MATT MILLER
SEP 12, 2018
RomansDana Starbard
Long after I had watched (and re-watched) in the finale of Castle Rock, I found myself sitting down to map out what the hell had just happened. I mean, I was literally drawing out graphs showing the parallel timelines, alternate realities, and doppelgängers that had crossed paths in this show.

Essentially, Castle Rock ends where it began. As we learned in the penultimate episode, The Young Man, played by Bill Skarsgard, says he came from a separate dimension where he is named Henry Deaver—the son of Ruth and Matthew—who got trapped in this alternate universe while trying to help a young version of Andre Holland's Henry Deaver. Unfortunately, instead of helping Skarsgard's Henry Deaver get back to his dimension, Holland's Henry Deaver briefly sees what appears to be a flash of some demonic creature and chooses to put Skarsgard's character back in the cage where he was first found.

If anyone found themselves unclear what happened when those credits rolled, don't worry. Castle Rock co-creators Sam Shaw and Dustin Thomason wanted to leave it open to audience interpretation. We caught up with the creators to unpack that big twist Castle Rock finale and discuss if Holland's Henry Deaver made the right decision, the wrong decision and what's going on with Season Two.


ESQ: I guess to start out, tell me what your goals were with this finale and what you wanted to leave the audience with.

Dustin Thompson: By the time we get to the final couple of episodes, we're starting to pull the strings together on the questions of who is The Kid and how he ended up under Shawshank. We are starting to hear an interpretation of that in Episode Nine, or a story that The Kid is telling about who he is, and how he got here, and what relationship he has to Andre's Henry. And that's a story that he dramatized and he tells very powerfully.

We come into the final episode, and Henry—Andre-Henry—starts to ask questions about that story, and is a rational guy who has been through a lot. And, in a way, it sort of brings us full circle back to the beginning of the story and to finding Henry arguing his case with Leanne and questions of doubt. And how certain can we be about someone's story? Henry's a death row attorney, so he's constantly dealing with people who are telling stories, and some of them are true and some of them aren't. I think that as we sort of head into our final moments and into when we see Andre's Henry has Bill locked in that tank again, and just sort of assumes that mantle. We come to understand what point of view Andre's Henry has about the story that he's been told, and I think that, at some level, we have our own point of view about what is true and who's right and who's wrong, both in the objective and in the moral sense in a story.

Sam Shaw: Naturally, the audience wants answers or explanations because it's uncomfortable to be confronted with events that seem to defy rational explanation. Part of the architecture of the season was to arrive at this, kind of a Rosetta Stone almost—this kind of grand unification theory that The Kid offers up. And to construct a final episode around the question of whether or not Henry accepts the story. Depending on what the audience's point of view is about that story and about Henry's choice, it may be a tragic ending, or it may be a complicated but heroic ending. As Dusty said, I think we have a point of view about that, but I think we'll probably, and maybe frustratingly so, be reluctant to explain too much or to give an exegesis.

I think about the ending of The Shining, and I know how it makes me feel. On the one hand, it seems to be just a story, and on the other hand, seems to rope in ideas that are as far flung as Native American genocide, and sexuality, and child abuse, demonic possession, and time travel.

It ends with a major question: If Holland's Henry made the right choice and imprisoned something evil, or if Holland's Henry made the wrong choice and trapped a man who has mistakenly wondered into the wrong reality.

DT: I think that's a very fair way of putting it. I do think that's the essential question on some level, which is: Is this Henry Deaver from another universe or timeline locked in that cage, and one Henry Deaver has the other Henry Deaver locked in the cage? Or is there some other explanation? In one, Andre's Henry chooses to believe that he has done the right thing even if doing the right thing comes at an enormous price of finding himself back in Castle Rock, and essentially becoming the jailer. He's become the thing that he thought he could never be as the guy who spent his entire career trying to get people out of prisons, and now finds himself a warden of one at the end of our story.

So in one of these options, everything we heard in Episode Nine was a lie?

SS: That's absolutely right. And then there's a world where, following that episode, the final episode of this season could have been to get ET home. Do you know what I mean? And that's really not the story that the finale tells.

DT: Another aspect of it that we always found interesting was this idea that, regardless of what the backstory of Bill's character is, he has obviously been held underneath a prison for a very long time. We see at the beginning of our story what that does to him. That opens up the question if he has become sort of monster along the way, even if he wasn't in the first place.

Another question I was left with was if Sissy Spacek's character Ruth was suffering from dementia, or if she was actually unstuck in time, so to say.

SS: I'm not really sure, functionally, what the distinction is for Ruth between those two scenarios that you just described. I'm not really sure there's a distinction between a story about a woman with Alzheimer's and a story about a woman who has become unstuck in time, kind of like Billy Pilgrim and for whom the past and the present and various time loops are forever coexisting with one another. The best Stephen King novels often blur the lines between paranormal and a more quotidian, real-life horror, and it felt like her story was an opportunity to do that. But it felt really important to us in the end not to adjudicate and answer that question explicitly for the audience.

What in Stephen King's canon would you point viewers to that could shed more light on this finale, or even the theory of the multiverse in general? Where were you looking, and where would you suggest that viewers read, or watch, or look for?

DT: Sam already started to allude to The Shining, and I think that the way it was handled both by King and Kubrick in different way—the ending to that story depended on whose point of view you were in. To us, with regards to this final act of our first season, The Shining is definitely the one that sticks out in terms of some of those questions of ambiguity.

King readers are certainly intimately familiar with the idea of there are other worlds than these whether it's the shared parallel world of Delores Claiborne and the eclipse, or whether it is the Dark Tower and the Finneys. Obviously, King has been engaging with the question of the multiverse, and that doesn't just mean all the characters are connected, but the fact that they're in his imagination exists. There are many different kinds of worlds, and so we, from the beginning, were really excited about the idea of engaging with that question, but engaging with it in a very different way.

How are you figuring out a second season and what stories would you like to explore in this town?

DT: One thing that Sam and I talked a lot about at the beginning of all this was this idea that you really feel that Stephen King knows the name and the backstory and the deep character obsession and weakness of every gas station attendant and every librarian in Castle Rock. Each season gives us the opportunity to present a new story—whether it's jumping around in time and presenting a story set in the 1970s, a more classical monster story, or a totally naturalistic Stephen King kind of story. Even in an anthology, where you are going to point the camera in a slightly different direction and not necessarily see your main characters as your main characters, I think that it was important to us to feel like there was a kind of grand story that was building over these seasons.

So, who wants to start a Shining study group?

davidalan wrote:

sandi wrote:

david wrote:

I agree with Mr. Bill. Young Henry's bad act was killing his father (or at least starting the process with Molly finishing him off with Ruth's blessing) to save his mother. More Oedipal than schisma. But hardly Oedipal. More heroic in a sense. Then (again thank you writers) we get no idea what happened to Henry after that because the writers decided to wallow in ambiguity. I wanted to see whether Henry had blundered into the schisma and was indeed trapped on the other side for so many years, or if he just hid away to bury deep in his mind the murder he just committed.

Right before Molly rescued Lawyer Henry from the acoustic "box", he was having images of himself in the cage in Rev. Deaver's basement.

Okay. I seriously don't remember this. I wish Lawyer Henry had a memory of it in episode 10. That would have strengthened episode 10.

Nowhere did the events in the box, or in Ep 9 fs come into play in the finale or really even effected this behavior. It's like they never happened.

1. Deaver drives off from the B&B scene to find his son
2. Deaver crashes because of the crows
3. He winds up at Ruth's after Molly brought her back from the bridge.
4. Molly tells Deaver about what  NN related to her about the alt world and that he wanted to meet him to take him to the woods
5.  He tells her that he's not going anywhere near the woods with him, too many people have died there including his father and her in the other world.  --(and this would have been a good point to insert, "and I was kept in a cage as a child in the other world that NN described for many, many years.)
6. Henry decides to turn NN into the police or contain him, and that remains his goal through the rest of the episode.    


He did seem spaced out at the Sheriff's office,  but I think he was in shock at all the evidence that was pointing toward him and also trying to work out what he was going to do about NN and resigning himself to stay in Castle Rock and get  Wendell and Molly out of town.

As far as what John quoted, from the writers/creators, I have a major problem with what they're saying.

Leaving outcomes to audience's interpretation is fine, if it's done skillfully. This wasn't. And if audience interpretation was the point, then have the entire episode lead directly to interpretive possibilities. The episode dallied and meandered and didn't get to the point. It needed the schisma. It needed the portal. It needed Lawyer Henry to make a decision based on the visual phenomenon, not on whether poor little monster Henry slipped by showing a monster face tell. The entire episode should have been the pros and cons of letting No Name Henry pass through the schisma portal. But you needed the schisma portal. Even with its existence and presentation, No Name still could have been lying. But about what? Basically the episode ended up far from being layered or intelligent or worthy of interpretation. Also, for a more successful episode, in terms of any outcomes, most of the town of Castle Rock should have been eliminated from the episode. Keep the two Henrys, Ruth, Molly, and Wendell. That's it.

The last episode was filmed before TPTB knew if the series was renewed. It could be they filmed it this way in case they didn't get a chance to add to the story but they left themselves room to do so if they did get renewed.

I know next season will be a different story but it will be the Castle Rock universe. I think, given enough time, TPTB will come full circle and maybe end the series with more on this story as the series will most likely tell one big story. By that I mean, each season will be self-contained but part of a larger story as well.

The evil that we connect with the monster throughout the show is real. The massacre, the fire, etc... The monster is doing it on purpose which I think is pretty clearly identified for us in episode 10. So, I'm staying with my gut on this one. There is no alt timeline and the monster is the evil that haunts Castle Rock when he roams free.

I wish I hadn't been influenced away from my original Pennywise theory. There is a lot here that might connect to it. As the creators say, Stephen King loves intertwining his characters.

As far as the monster slipping goes, David, my thought about it is that his proximity to the schisma is what caused it. The closer he gets to that portal, and to his own plane of existence, the more his true self manifests.

I'll give you this though, I'm not crazy about the season finale either. I thought it was clumsy and bumbling. I kept thinking, come on, get to the good part. Time is running out and we're not even close to any big reveal. Hurry up and get to it ya big stupid show! Those were my thoughts during the ep lol. Then the big reveal turns out to be that Henry has replaced warden Lacy as the monster's innkeeper? Really? That's it? That's all ya got for me? After nine episodes of terror and deep, studious anticipation, this is how you wrap up? A stupid lame walk through the woods and then back to the bottom of Shawshank? This is what I've been peeing my pants over for two and a half months now? Ya gotta be fkn kidding me!!!

Castle Rock could have left us with the same ending but shown it to us in a very different and exciting way. That last scene at the bottom of Shawshank should have been an incredible jaw dropping cap to a mind blowing finale. Instead, it was an anti climactic let down. So yeah, we definitely have common ground there.

Found this commentary while my sister and I (talking on the phone) were trolling on Reddit.

I think you hit on something that's bothering me about the ending. There was too much setup to provide evidence for conflicting outcomes to all be true. There's a lot of stuff to support, and even leave little doubt that TK was telling the truth. From how he acted genuinely like a son to Ruth when no one was around to witness it. How he knew things only Henry would know. Also Henry's visions which matched TK's story, and even what you pointed out about Henry genuinely disappearing for a while. All add up to the certainty TK was being sincere.
On the other hand, they also dropped all these little hints he was lying despite all of that. Like with the brief transfomation in the woods, Willy warning Henry not to take him to the woods, and the knowing little smile at the end.
That kind of stuff leaves me wondering if the writers actually had a true version in mind or if they were just making it vague and inconclusive on purpose which is annoying and leaves me feeling a little cheated. I don't mind ambiguous endings and having just a little doubt, but this was more like the writers contradicted their narrative at times which just made it confusing.


It was really hard to find thoughtful commentary on Reddit. But I liked this. Basically I'm in agreement that the narration ended up contradicting itself.

david wrote:

Basically I'm in agreement that the narration ended up contradicting itself.

Did it? Or did we miss clues? Or did we interpret something one way based upon what we thought we were seeing, when in reality it was something else? I'm not sure.

I thought that episode 9 "Henry Deaver" was presented as the other episodes were -- TPTB providing the narrative. But others are saying that No Name was the informer. I don't remember and will have to go back and review. If No Name is the narrator, then yes -- it all comes under suspect. But that wouldn't mean it's all a lie. The best lies stay as close to the truth as possible -- it's in that way that the lie seems genuine and true.



Putting everything aside for a moment -- This series has been a lot of fun for me and I've enjoyed our discussions tremendously. We've all been similarly entertained. I view that as a big win! Even though the finale isn't what we expected it to be, I'm looking forward to season 2 and hope that it's at least as good as this first season. I hope you all feel the same because part of my anticipation for next season is discussing it here with you and hopefully more fans as they discover it between now and then.

I plan on completing the transcripts and timeline between now and next season. I think the timeline will come in handy as the writers are establishing their own universe and as such may show us a bigger story being told.

I read It when I was around 20 y/o. Loved the story, engrossed by it. Yet, when Pennywise turned out to be a spider, I damn near swore off Stephen King. I was seething. Of all his many stories, I never thought It would become iconic.

That's Stephen King though. He dabbles with time/space concepts but he claims his own monsters. I'm glad Castle Rock is what it is: a typical Stephen King tale yet so crafty that you want to make it more than it is. I got just as caught up in it as everyone else, and yes Sandi, it was super fun!

What I liked about the finale was the cinematography - some beautiful scenes, the musical score, and Sissy's performance.  

I mentioned when I began my watch that I hoped we don't end up in a church with a white light.  Unfortunately this finale was Castle Rock's version of the church and white light meaning that TPTB backed themselves into a corner, threw up their hands and said the hell with it. I don't know if was due to time restraints in trying to cohesively integrate what came before into the finale or what, but I felt  cheated.

But I did enjoy the season overall, the SK characters and references were wonderful. I'll be watching next season and I think the anthology format will serve the series much better.

sandi wrote:

I thought that episode 9 "Henry Deaver" was presented as the other episodes were -- TPTB providing the narrative. But others are saying that No Name was the informer. I don't remember and will have to go back and review. If No Name is the narrator, then yes -- it all comes under suspect. But that wouldn't mean it's all a lie. The best lies stay as close to the truth as possible -- it's in that way that the lie seems genuine and true.

My apologies to all -- I've reviewed and yes it is, No Name's narrative.  And there's a couple of inconsistencies which jump out to me right away.  

This one I would like to look at a little closer regarding the sequence of events but still ...

young Lawyer Henry is in the woods with Rev. Deaver, who tells him his intention of murdering Ruth.  Young Henry runs away and sets a trap, backtracking his foot prints and when Rev Deaver follows his foot prints and is standing at the edge of the cliff, young Henry pushes him off and he falls but not quite to his death.  Henry then goes missing.

So, Ruth's decision to stay or go had to be prior to this event -- prior to Henry knowing his father's intention of killing her.

In the alternate timeline, she leaves with Henry.

Later, when Lawyer Henry is talking to No Name Henry, No Name confirms knowledge that his father told him he was going to kill his mother.  This certainly could be an indicator that NoName is lying as it's likely his mother would have taken him and left Rev. Deaver before Rev. Deaver told nnHenry his intentions.

Also ...

From alternate Rev Deaver's tapes: wrote:

REVEREND MATTHEW DEAVER:  There he stayed for years, so many years, and I grew old and even lonelier.  There were moments when I was weak.  We shared Christmases in that basement -- Red Sox victories.  I taught him to carve perfect figurines from soap as I once did with my own boy.  And yes, of course, I almost let him out.  Many times.  Almost surrendered to his story, his charms.  I suppose if someone is listening to this, maybe even Henry -- my Henry -- then you know I finally did ... surrender.  But you listen to me, son.  As long as that devil walks the streets of Castle Rock, tragedy after tragedy will pile up and men will turn on their own.  Blood will run in the streets until he is back ... in a cage.

Rev Deaver says he almost let young Henry out -- surrendering to his story  and then admits that he finally surrendered.  Now initially, I thought this meant that he killed himself -- but taken in context along with the his following lines about tragedy occurring "until he is back ... in a cage", almost certainly means that Rev. Deaver let young Henry out of the cage.  (After which he committed suicide.)

If this is so, then No Name lied about finding young Henry in the cage -- right?

Big John wrote:

I read It when I was around 20 y/o. Loved the story, engrossed by it. Yet, when Pennywise turned out to be a spider, I damn near swore off Stephen King. I was seething. Of all his many stories, I never thought It would become iconic.

That's Stephen King though. He dabbles with time/space concepts but he claims his own monsters. I'm glad Castle Rock is what it is: a typical Stephen King tale yet so crafty that you want to make it more than it is. I got just as caught up in it as everyone else, and yes Sandi, it was super fun!

You know, for a long time, you thought the antagonist in this narrative was Pennywise and I did as well in the beginning.  I don't think either of us think that anymore.  But, maybe there's a reason we drew that conclusion.

Maybe the big story revolves around the evil entity we've seen in this first season and maybe, "knowing" that, we'll be able to see the signs in future seasons?  I don't know.

I do know I want to talk more about this show.  (I have some additional material, I never posted.)  And then when we're "talked out", I think I would like to re-watch with certain "truths" in mind.  (For example:  Ruth isn't suffering from Alzheimer's -- she really is just "untethered" to her present and therefore sees "time" as it really exists -- meaning -- seeing the past, present and future all at once.  What will I find to substantiate or disprove that?)  (Maybe I'll also assume that the "No Name monster face" is what Ruth saw when she looked out the window and saw No Name in Rev Deaver's suit.  If that is so, then it's likely the monster was inhabiting Rev. Deaver for a while.  If that's so, was his mother (alternate timeline) right when she tried to kill him as a baby -- did the devil have him then?)

Let me take this monster idea just a bit further.  Let's suppose this evil entity can "jump" from one person to another.  Let's also suppose that the person is still present but the evil entity is dominant.

What if when young lawyer Henry saw the "monster face" when Rev. Deaver told him he was going to kill his mother?  

Now, Molly's comment -- "It wasn't his father" could mean -- she also saw what Henry was seeing -- "the monster face".

When young Henry pushes Monster Rev Deaver off the cliff, the monster (seeing his demise) jumps to young Henry who winds up in an alternate reality where he's in a cage for 27 years.  Set free, he wanders about and the authorities pick him up and places him in a youth detention home.  While there, another boy gets too close to him and the real young Henry, knowing what touching him would bring tries to stop him by setting a fire.  (The monster within is probably laughing.)  

The real alternate Henry Deaver (No Name) does connect with alternate Molly and they do get young Henry and wind up in the woods.  When the real alternate Henry goes to help young Henry, the monster jumps into the real alternate Henry who winds up in a cage for 27 years.  -- Plenty of time to construct a narrative that will ring true but isn't.  So, in the finale when Lawyer Henry sees No Name's monster face, does he recognize the evil entity for what it is?  In this scenario he does and cages him once again.

Who knows when it entered Rev Deaver.  Perhaps when he was doing Bible Study at Shawshank in the eighties and maybe heard the confession of a soon to die death row inmate?  Maybe that was when the fire took place?  Or maybe the entity left Rev. Deaver's mother and jumped into Rev Deaver as an infant?  I don't know.

But, I think the big story may be this evil entity's story from beginning going forward, but told out of chronological sequence.  Who knows, in the future we may look back at this season's finale and marvel at it.  Hey, it could happen.

sandi wrote:

Big John wrote:

I read It when I was around 20 y/o. Loved the story, engrossed by it. Yet, when Pennywise turned out to be a spider, I damn near swore off Stephen King. I was seething. Of all his many stories, I never thought It would become iconic.

That's Stephen King though. He dabbles with time/space concepts but he claims his own monsters. I'm glad Castle Rock is what it is: a typical Stephen King tale yet so crafty that you want to make it more than it is. I got just as caught up in it as everyone else, and yes Sandi, it was super fun!

You know, for a long time, you thought the antagonist in this narrative was Pennywise and I did as well in the beginning.  I don't think either of us think that anymore.  But, maybe there's a reason we drew that conclusion.

I'm no longer ruling it out. That could be Pennywise. Probably isn't though. More likely it's some monster of Pennywise's ilk, perhaps from the same place. Maybe they came through the schisma together. Who knows. The thing is, the Skaarsgard looks are back in play for me. Maybe monsters that crossover from whatever plane of existence these monsters come from appear like Bill Skaarsgard when in human/humanoid form.

Sandi wrote:

I do know I want to talk more about this show.  (I have some additional material, I never posted.)  And then when we're "talked out", I think I would like to re-watch with certain "truths" in mind.  (For example:  Ruth isn't suffering from Alzheimer's -- she really is just "untethered" to her present and therefore sees "time" as it really exists -- meaning -- seeing the past, present and future all at once.  What will I find to substantiate or disprove that?)  (Maybe I'll also assume that the "No Name monster face" is what Ruth saw when she looked out the window and saw No Name in Rev Deaver's suit.  If that is so, then it's likely the monster was inhabiting Rev. Deaver for a while.  If that's so, was his mother (alternate timeline) right when she tried to kill him as a baby -- did the devil have him then?)

Fun to speculate. I'd warn against getting caught up in thinking about the supernatural variables at play here. I believe it's all a rabbit hole. I am of the opinion that Ruth has Alzheimer's and that Molly has some sort of empathic ability, and everything else is the monster using his power to manipulate people.

Off to work!

.

sandi wrote:

sandi wrote:

I thought that episode 9 "Henry Deaver" was presented as the other episodes were -- TPTB providing the narrative. But others are saying that No Name was the informer. I don't remember and will have to go back and review. If No Name is the narrator, then yes -- it all comes under suspect. But that wouldn't mean it's all a lie. The best lies stay as close to the truth as possible -- it's in that way that the lie seems genuine and true.

My apologies to all -- I've reviewed and yes it is, No Name's narrative.  And there's a couple of inconsistencies which jump out to me right away.  

This one I would like to look at a little closer regarding the sequence of events but still ...

young Lawyer Henry is in the woods with Rev. Deaver, who tells him his intention of murdering Ruth.  Young Henry runs away and sets a trap, backtracking his foot prints and when Rev Deaver follows his foot prints and is standing at the edge of the cliff, young Henry pushes him off and he falls but not quite to his death.  Henry then goes missing.

So, Ruth's decision to stay or go had to be prior to this event -- prior to Henry knowing his father's intention of killing her.

In the alternate timeline, she leaves with Henry.

Later, when Lawyer Henry is talking to No Name Henry, No Name confirms knowledge that his father told him he was going to kill his mother.  This certainly could be an indicator that NoName is lying as it's likely his mother would have taken him and left Rev. Deaver before Rev. Deaver told nnHenry his intentions.

Also ...

From alternate Rev Deaver's tapes: wrote:

REVEREND MATTHEW DEAVER:  There he stayed for years, so many years, and I grew old and even lonelier.  There were moments when I was weak.  We shared Christmases in that basement -- Red Sox victories.  I taught him to carve perfect figurines from soap as I once did with my own boy.  And yes, of course, I almost let him out.  Many times.  Almost surrendered to his story, his charms.  I suppose if someone is listening to this, maybe even Henry -- my Henry -- then you know I finally did ... surrender.  But you listen to me, son.  As long as that devil walks the streets of Castle Rock, tragedy after tragedy will pile up and men will turn on their own.  Blood will run in the streets until he is back ... in a cage.

Rev Deaver says he almost let young Henry out -- surrendering to his story  and then admits that he finally surrendered.  Now initially, I thought this meant that he killed himself -- but taken in context along with the his following lines about tragedy occurring "until he is back ... in a cage", almost certainly means that Rev. Deaver let young Henry out of the cage.  (After which he committed suicide.)

If this is so, then No Name lied about finding young Henry in the cage -- right?


@Big John wrote:
I read It when I was around 20 y/o. Loved the story, engrossed by it. Yet, when Pennywise turned out to be a spider, I damn near swore off Stephen King. I was seething. Of all his many stories, I never thought It would become iconic.

That's Stephen King though. He dabbles with time/space concepts but he claims his own monsters. I'm glad Castle Rock is what it is: a typical Stephen King tale yet so crafty that you want to make it more than it is. I got just as caught up in it as everyone else, and yes Sandi, it was super fun!

You know, for a long time, you thought the antagonist in this narrative was Pennywise and I did as well in the beginning.  I don't think either of us think that anymore.  But, maybe there's a reason we drew that conclusion.

Maybe the big story revolves around the evil entity we've seen in this first season and maybe, "knowing" that, we'll be able to see the signs in future seasons?  I don't know.

I do know I want to talk more about this show.  (I have some additional material, I never posted.)  And then when we're "talked out", I think I would like to re-watch with certain "truths" in mind.  (For example:  Ruth isn't suffering from Alzheimer's -- she really is just "untethered" to her present and therefore sees "time" as it really exists -- meaning -- seeing the past, present and future all at once.  What will I find to substantiate or disprove that?)  (Maybe I'll also assume that the "No Name monster face" is what Ruth saw when she looked out the window and saw No Name in Rev Deaver's suit.  If that is so, then it's likely the monster was inhabiting Rev. Deaver for a while.  If that's so, was his mother (alternate timeline) right when she tried to kill him as a baby -- did the devil have him then?)

Interesting, sandi, I wondered too how  the Rev knew that tragedy would come if the boy was let out of his cage? I was just going to leave it as the ravings of a crackpot, but I also think there's more to it.

In fact, for NN's story to make sense to me,  I wonder if NN wasn't talking about himself who was caged in the alt universe?   And since this was all a story told to Molly, could he have changed the names and also influenced Lawyer Henry and his vision of being caged?  I post this because, young LHD being incarcerated for 27 years is largely inconsequential to the story and never quite fit in with what we've seen with Lawyer HD's experience.    

In one of the tapes in the Alt Universe,  Rev Deaver said that his own mother thought that he (the Rev) was the devil and a brief scene showed the mother strangling the newborn with a hangar.  He then came back to life and that's what started The Rev's calling as a preacher.  Why on earth did his mother think that he, as a newborn, was evil and how is this important to the story?    Is it just that the Rev was born into a family of crackpots, or is there some truth that the Rev was born evil and will eventually produce the demon (NN)?  I wonder if all the evil that befell Castle Rock began with the Deaver family line in the alt Universe?  In this scenario, NN was released from his cage in the Alt Universe and escaped into Lawyer Henry Deaver's universe, alone.

eta: sandi , I see that you already mentioned Rev Deaver's mother in your post. Yes, I think maybe Rev. Deaver was born evil, how the mother knew this, I have no idea.

I can see the alt timeline is going to continue to cause confusion. In order to better understand it, here's what you should do. Look at the story through Molly's eyes. The entire alt timeline story, real or make believe, is told with the sole purpose of manipulating Molly. So, think about how each aspect of the story might effect her given the person that she is. Then maybe you will have a better informed point of view to use to decide whether it is real or not.

Also consider the last line of that episode is the monster saying to Molly, "You believe me, don't you?" A suspicious statement itself. Mafia!

The timeline will cause confusion because you can't dismiss it in its entirety as manipulation of Molly.  The reason you can't dismiss it out of hand -- it's a reasonable explanation for No Name Henry not aging during 27 years in captivity. (And the best lies are those mixed with truth.)

Is there another explanation?  Yes -- he's a monster and the body that we see is a illusion projected by the monster.

Are there any other explanations for NN not aging while Lacy kept him in that cage?

Ah, but what im saying is that since both can't be true, let's use the information we have to figure out which one is most likely to be true. By asking ourselves,  what would Molly think, we we'll gain sone insight as to how this alt timeline is constructed for the purposes of manipulating her. For in the story itself, that IS the ONLY reason the story is being told.

Big John wrote:

For in the story itself, that IS the ONLY reason the story is being told.

In my own defense -- I've just recently (today) realized it is No Name's narrative.

Without thinking -- I would say the ultimate goal is to get her help in getting lawyer Henry to the schism (sp?). But I now have to think about this for a while.

Big John wrote:

Ah, but what im saying is that since both can't be true, let's use the information we have to figure out which one is most likely to be true. By asking ourselves,  what would Molly think, we we'll gain sone insight as to how this alt timeline is constructed for the purposes of manipulating her. For in the story itself, that IS the ONLY reason the story is being told.

What "both" can't be true?



As far as No Name telling Molly, his audience of one, about the alternative timeline and what is he trying to accomplish besides getting her to believe him ---

NN needs Molly's help in convincing Henry to go with him(NN) to the schisma.  Why? -- two reasons:

1. the schisma in some way is freedom for No Name
   
2. No Name can't hear the sounds and doesn't know where the schisma is exactly -- that's why he needs Henry.
   

So what was  the purpose of bringing Lawyer Henry into the schisma? So NN will become a Double Deaver Super Demon.

The alt timeline that the monster describes is either true or it isn't.

Yes Sandi! Wooohooo! You got it. Now, by stepping into Molly's shoes, let's review the details of the alt timeline and determine how they might impact her.

The reason to do this is simple. If we find that much or most of the alt timeline story contains things that would cause our friendly neighborhood empath to have an emotional reation, then the story was probably crafted for just that reason and therefore, false.

However, if the facts of the story are just details that are relatively benign through her eyes, then No Name is probably telling the truth about the alt timeline, because he would have no reason to make up details that don't matter.

Big John wrote:

The alt timeline that the monster describes is either true or it isn't.

Why does it have to be one or the other?

I do recognize the possibility that No Name did a complete "Keyser Söze" on Molly, but trying to prove it may make us throw away the truth that could be hidden among the lies.

sandi wrote:

I do recognize the possibility that No Name did a complete "Keyser Söze" on Molly, but trying to prove it may make us throw away the truth that could be hidden among the lies.

I think you're about to chase your tail in that regard.

For me, if NN is lying to Molly, then there is no alt timeline, he is not alt timeline Henry Deaver, and nothing he says should be trusted. He's a monster.

Therefore, the only question, the one factor that determines whart this show is about, is if NN is lying to Molly. Nothing else matters.

I've laid out a plan to help determine that, and as time permits I'll be executing that plan and presenting my results.

Just out of curiosity, do you know what truths within the lies you're looking to find?

MrBill60 wrote:

Interesting, sandi, I wondered too how  the Rev knew that tragedy would come if the boy was let out of his cage? I was just going to leave it as the ravings of a crackpot, but I also think there's more to it.

It's the clear parallel to Lacy and No Name. If No Name has been lying, then he's used that dynamic and applied to Henry's frame of reference. Henry has never responded (I think) to the concept that he might have been imprisoned in his own alt universe, or at least somewhere, or was just in shock after what he did and was just hiding, or was snatched up by the creepy neighbors and molested like people might have thought early in the series. What happened to Henry is still something we need to know.

MrBill60 wrote:

In fact, for NN's story to make sense to me,  I wonder if NN wasn't talking about himself who was caged in the alt universe?   And since this was all a story told to Molly, could he have changed the names and also influenced Lawyer Henry and his vision of being caged?  I post this because, young LHD being incarcerated for 27 years is largely inconsequential to the story and never quite fit in with what we've seen with Lawyer HD's experience.

I don't know. I think what happened to Henry is key to the whole business and this keeping what happened to Henry after he pushed his father off the cliff is nothing less than infuriating. No Name may or may not be lying. But that to me is almost inconsequential (or simply flimsy) without Henry's lost 11 days.    

MrBill60 wrote:

In one of the tapes in the Alt Universe,  Rev Deaver said that his own mother thought that he (the Rev) was the devil and a brief scene showed the mother strangling the newborn with a hangar.  He then came back to life and that's what started The Rev's calling as a preacher.  Why on earth did his mother think that he, as a newborn, was evil and how is this important to the story?    Is it just that the Rev was born into a family of crackpots, or is there some truth that the Rev was born evil and will eventually produce the demon (NN)?  I wonder if all the evil that befell Castle Rock began with the Deaver family line in the alt Universe?  In this scenario, NN was released from his cage in the Alt Universe and escaped into Lawyer Henry Deaver's universe, alone.

eta:   sandi , I see that you already mentioned Rev Deaver's mother in your post.  Yes, I think maybe Rev. Deaver was born evil, how the mother knew this, I have no idea.

I wonder if RD's mother wasn't suffering from post partem depression, or had other mental illness issues, and could while she was ill catch a glimpse of the past present and future just as Ruth could.

sandi wrote:

david wrote:

Basically I'm in agreement that the narration ended up contradicting itself.

Did it?  Or did we miss clues?  Or did we interpret something one way based upon what we thought we were seeing, when in reality it was something else?  I'm not sure.

I could have easily missed clues. The trouble is though I have no emotional incentive to find them. Because the pay off was unworthy of the build up. Deeply unworthy.

sandi wrote:

I thought that episode 9 "Henry Deaver" was presented as the other episodes were -- TPTB providing the narrative.  But others are saying that No Name was the informer.  I don't remember and will have to go back and review.  If No Name is the narrator, then yes -- it all comes under suspect.  But that wouldn't mean it's all a lie.  The best lies stay as close to the truth as possible -- it's in that way that the lie seems genuine and true.

I always thought it was a No Name point of view. I don't recall any moment where the narrative focus shifted. I think the better story is that it is true or that No Name believes that it's true. But without Henry's story to solidify any verification, it's all unimportant to me. Henry's story. That's what we need.

sandi wrote:

Putting everything aside for a moment -- This series has been a lot of fun for me and I've enjoyed our discussions tremendously.  We've all been similarly entertained.  I view that as a big win!  Even though the finale isn't what we expected it to be, I'm looking forward to season 2 and hope that it's at least as good as this first season.  I hope you all feel the same because part of my anticipation for next season is discussing it here with you and hopefully more fans as they discover it between now and then.

I plan on completing the transcripts and timeline between now and next season.  I think the timeline will come in handy as the writers are establishing their own universe and as such may show us a bigger story being told.  

I enjoyed the series too. I'd recommend to others. However some candidates had to endure my rant about the finale. So they may be out. But we discussed The Expanse and all was right with the world.

After watching ep 9, I was utterly captivated. I even wrote a Henry Deaver perspective as well as a potential ending for the show. That alt timeline really made things interesting.

Then along came episode 10. It was a let down. As much as I wanted to believe in the alt timeline, I knew it was false. A trick that the show played on us. A ruse which had me hook line and sinker. They got me.

They got you too. It's okay, but as much you want it to be true, might be best not to cling to it.

Big John wrote:

I read It when I was around 20 y/o. Loved the story, engrossed by it. Yet, when Pennywise turned out to be a spider, I damn near swore off Stephen King. I was seething. Of all his many stories, I never thought It would become iconic.

That's Stephen King though. He dabbles with time/space concepts but he claims his own monsters. I'm glad Castle Rock is what it is: a typical Stephen King tale yet so crafty that you want to make it more than it is. I got just as caught up in it as everyone else, and yes Sandi, it was super fun!

I hated that Pennywise turned out to be a spider too.

Big John wrote:

After watching ep 9, I was utterly captivated. I even wrote a Henry Deaver perspective as well as a potential ending for the show. That alt timeline really made things interesting.

Then along came episode 10. It was a let down. As much as I wanted to believe in the alt timeline, I knew it was false. A trick that the show played on us. A ruse which had me hook line and sinker. They got me.

They got you too. It's okay, but as much you want it to be true, might be best not to cling to it.

I'm not clinging to the alternate timeline as truth. I'm reluctant to take a monster's word for truth. But I am wondering if he included any truths in his tale. And that I think is a rabbit I'm not chasing at the moment.

I want to know where Henry went when he disappeared after pushing his father off the cliff. Any ideas about that? He was there and then he wasn't. *poof*

The only problem I have with , "it's No Name's story told to Molly" is that we got detailed tape recordings.   I feel more comfortable with Molly using her psychic abilities to visualize and experience the events.  I also understand that it was all for the viewers benefit, but I can't image No Name reciting verbatim what was on those tapes and the level of detail we were given.  But it also doesn't change that it all could be a lie and false visions implanted in Molly.

The Ricksters wrote:

Big John wrote:

I read It when I was around 20 y/o. Loved the story, engrossed by it. Yet, when Pennywise turned out to be a spider, I damn near swore off Stephen King. I was seething. Of all his many stories, I never thought It would become iconic.

That's Stephen King though. He dabbles with time/space concepts but he claims his own monsters. I'm glad Castle Rock is what it is: a typical Stephen King tale yet so crafty that you want to make it more than it is. I got just as caught up in it as everyone else, and yes Sandi, it was super fun!

I hated that Pennywise turned out to be a spider too.

Wasn't that just like WTF! I was like, did I just read a 50 million page novel about an evil clown whose big secret is that he's a giant spider? OMG tell me this isn't happening!

sandi wrote:

I want to know where Henry went when he disappeared after pushing his father off the cliff.   Any ideas about that?  He was there and then he wasn't.  *poof*

Oh Sandi, I love you for asking! I suppose, and this is just speculation, that Henry went through the schism and into the world of monsters (hell?). He surely must have felt like he was being punished for what he had just done. He was chased/followed back into the schism by the NN monster (and maybe other monsters).

I could write that whole story, but then I'd being putting Mr. King in the unemployment line, so I'll leave it to him to finish.

MrBill60 wrote:

The only problem I have with , "it's No Name's story told to Molly" is that we got detailed tape recordings.   I feel more comfortable with Molly using her psychic abilities to visualize and experience the events.  I also understand that it was all for the viewers benefit, but I can't image No Name reciting verbatim what was on those tapes and the level of detail we were given.  But it also doesn't change that it all could be a lie and false visions implanted in Molly.

I hear ya Bill. The thing is though, the monster got the idea for the tape recordings from the video tapes that Rev Deav made. Part of the monster's trickery was spinning the tale in such a way that it sounds like Rev Deav is narrating it, a character Molly can identify with.

The whole thing was very clever. Even though I think that ep 10 could and should have been better, I like what they did here overall. I was totally onto what was going on, except it was a different monster than Pennywise perhaps, from the beginning and for quite a while. TPTB were so adept at misdirection without betraying the core of the story that they had me completely scrap my idea.

I like that ep 9 is a false narrative from an unreliable narrator. I think it was a big risk for them to do such a thing. Unfortunately, because the finale was kinda sucky, it didn't payoff as much as it should have.

Big John wrote:

MrBill60 wrote:

The only problem I have with , "it's No Name's story told to Molly" is that we got detailed tape recordings.   I feel more comfortable with Molly using her psychic abilities to visualize and experience the events.  I also understand that it was all for the viewers benefit, but I can't image No Name reciting verbatim what was on those tapes and the level of detail we were given.  But it also doesn't change that it all could be a lie and false visions implanted in Molly.

I hear ya Bill. The thing is though, the monster got the idea for the tape recordings from the video tapes that Rev Deav made. Part of the monster's trickery was spinning the tale in such a way that it sounds like Rev Deav is narrating it, a character Molly can identify with.

The whole thing was very clever. Even though I think that ep 10 could and should have been better, I like what they did here overall. I was totally onto what was going on, except it was a different monster than Pennywise perhaps, from the beginning and for quite a while. TPTB were so adept at misdirection without betraying the core of the story that they had me completely scrap my idea.

I like that ep 9 is a false narrative from an unreliable narrator. I think it was a big risk for them to do such a thing. Unfortunately, because the finale was kinda sucky, it didn't payoff as much as it should have.

BJ, remind me of those video recordings, were those the one's that Prime Universe Rev Deaver recorded and also remind me of when and where No Name watched those.  Was it while he was in Ruth's house during her time jumps?

MrBill60 wrote:

Big John wrote:

MrBill60 wrote:

The only problem I have with , "it's No Name's story told to Molly" is that we got detailed tape recordings.   I feel more comfortable with Molly using her psychic abilities to visualize and experience the events.  I also understand that it was all for the viewers benefit, but I can't image No Name reciting verbatim what was on those tapes and the level of detail we were given.  But it also doesn't change that it all could be a lie and false visions implanted in Molly.

I hear ya Bill. The thing is though, the monster got the idea for the tape recordings from the video tapes that Rev Deav made. Part of the monster's trickery was spinning the tale in such a way that it sounds like Rev Deav is narrating it, a character Molly can identify with.

The whole thing was very clever. Even though I think that ep 10 could and should have been better, I like what they did here overall. I was totally onto what was going on, except it was a different monster than Pennywise perhaps, from the beginning and for quite a while. TPTB were so adept at misdirection without betraying the core of the story that they had me completely scrap my idea.

I like that ep 9 is a false narrative from an unreliable narrator. I think it was a big risk for them to do such a thing. Unfortunately, because the finale was kinda sucky, it didn't payoff as much as it should have.

BJ, remind me of those video recordings, were those the one's that Prime Universe Rev Deaver recorded and also remind me of when and where No Name watched those.  Was it while he was in Ruth's house during her time jumps?

Yes and yes.

The detail you heard on the tapes in ep 9 is merely the monster telling a story. The devil is in the details.