Quarles never had good. But i think up until they added the back story I believed him. Now I still believe he will kill in the blink of an eye. But I don't see him as real the way I see Limehouse who has tons of crazy. Or Dickey who is totally lacking in redeeming qualities but still who I see as human. The lack of depth is not in the good/evil mixture. Quarles seems more plot-point evil and less human evil.
Buffy ,'Lessons'
Cable Drama: Still Waiting for the Cable Guy to Show Up with the Thread Name...
To be determined... (but it's definitely [NAFDA])
I agree with most of what was said re Quarles(Including that a less-talented actor would not be able to make that even slightly convincing...it's only thanks to NM that I bought that.) Is Raylan bad at testifying or is he "bad at testifying"? Was there a plan, or did his hormones get in the way? "Next time you say you're bad at something, I'm gonna believe you." Love Art's delivery, as always.
I got the sense that Raylan didn't want to be there and never did. I'm not sure how much more to read into it.
Yeah, it's not that I didn't get that.
of course, I meant that I wasn't sure if I was supposed to see more to it. I didn't, but I miss shit all the time.
I probably wouldn't wonder if everybody on that show didn't seem to operate on multiple levels...however, just because Raylan's larger-than-life doesn't mean he can't half-ass something, even though he usually doesn't.
I don't think he had a plan so much as he realized more or less while he was testifying that keeping Dickie in jail was not necessarily what he most wanted. And testifying as a victim rather than as a lawman was really sticking in his craw.
Art and Vasquez tried so hard, though. Poor guys.
Writeup of last night's ep: [link]
I also think Raylan was going off of what Loretta said about wedding testimonies and saying exactly what you're thinking.
Yes. Is that her name?