Category: Floyd Gerhardt

Have you ever watched season 1 of Fargo and ju…

Like think about it like this, maybe every Christmas he takes a break as a hitman and decides to rob mall’s disguised as Santa Clause, and he pretends to be an alcoholic and drunk as part of the act, he never actually was drunk or drinking alcohol, it was non-alcoholic and all part of a play to trick people into thinking he’s someone else, he even acts like Malvo with the way he talks to kids and other people, and he even pretends to be interested in sex when Malvo himself clearly isn’t, before you insult me, think about it! it’s genius! Who’s gonna believe “Oh there’s this Hitman guy Loren Malvo, I think he might be the same guy as the alcoholic santa that robs malls with his midget elf friend.”, see? it’s genius, that’s why the cops in Fargo never belief anything the other cops say! Boom, I just cracked the case, we all know who Malvo actually is now.

This is what you want

Season 2 no longer on Netflix?

Maybe a NZ Netflix thing but was half way through just the other day and now only season 1 is on there.

Do seasons get removed from Netflix for some reason?

This is what you want

Would Varga have kept his word?

When he offers Nikki Swango a job after she successfully outmaneuvers him in the hotel lobby. Would he have actually put her to work or would he have killed her?

This is what you want

Fargo Season 1 plothole?

If not a plothole I dont know what to call it. Oversight works too.

In Episode 6, Lester sets up Chaz.

What I dont get is how its so easily accepted that it was him, when it would be so easy to disprove.

First Chaz would surely have an alibi for the night of the murders. They occured at night, he was most likely in bed with his wife. Where else would he possibly be? And if he wasnt home he’d have an alibi for wherever he was regardless. His wife could also corroborate the story. Now lets say for some reason he has no alibi for that night, the evidence plant is so obvious its almost insulting to the intelligence of everyone involved. If Chaz had committed the murders why would he ever take the murder weapon from the scene, place it with the pair of panties and a picture of Pearl, and put them all together in his GUN RACK?!

Could’ve also just checked the Hospital security cameras..

Disregarding the case Molly already had constructed sure, shoddy police work.

“Lets just assure that if they find the hammer that I make sure to incriminate myself to the fullest extent I possibly can! Who needs to bury evidence in this day & age? Ha!”

Granted I havent finished the season yet but its just out of the realm of possibility that everyone involved would be so incompetent. Irked me.

This is what you want

Ending sceen season 3 (spoiler)

Hi I just saw the last episode of season three. I know that the sceen with David Thewlis (VM Varga) is a reference to another movie or show. He talks about a higher ranked officer will come into the room and release him without the police woman beeing able to do anything about it. I know this is a reference to some tv show or movie, but I simply can remeber or find it on Google. Can anyone help me?

This is what you want

Is There Any Way to Watch Season 3?

So I own the first two seasons on Blu-ray and love them, but sadly missed season 3 while it was on. For some reason, they won’t release season 3 on Blu-ray and it doesn’t seem to be on any streaming service. I don’t get how Hulu has the first two seasons, but not the third, especially since it’s been a year now since it’s aired. Is there any way to even watch season 3 at this point because I can’t find it anywhere?

This is what you want

A neat thing about the ‘True Story’ disclaimer…

So I just finished rewatching the 3rd season finale and something struck me in Nikki’s last stand against Emmet and the highway patrol officer. I strongly suspect this was not their intention whilst making it but it struck me as a neat little thing since, compositionally, the layout of the three vehicles and the layout of the words in the ‘This is a True Story’ disclaimer are one and the same.

During the intro, the way the words in ‘This is True Story’ fade out divides the sentence into three: ‘This is a’/’True’/’Story’, with the middle ‘True’ always being the first to fade out, now leaving behind ‘This is a Story.’ Everyone’s acknowledged this before, how this relates to the themes of truth/untruth and the unreliability of fact etc etc.

However, the three cars on the highway are also laid out in a three going horizontally across the centre of the screen, like the disclaimer, with Emmet’s car in the middle. When Emmet drives off, instead of just driving off the screen, his car fades out, like the ‘true’ from the disclaimer. With his car no longer there and nothing to tie him to the scene, the crime scene will tell a completely different story, one that will go on to be accepted as fact despite not actually being true. A narrative will be invented around the crime scene, and the true nature of it will never be known because Emmet- the only survivor- took the truth of it away with him, just like the ‘True’ disappears from the disclaimer. Hence, ‘This a Story.’

This is what you want

What I Think Fargo Season 4 Could Be About

I know the title isn’t the greatest, but with the news of Fargo Season 4 being a period piece, and Noah Hawley expressing that he wants to explore new avenues for Fargo stories, it got me pondering about what the 4th season could about. Which ultimately lead me to one possibility that I think would be cool for Fargo to explore: The Great Depression. The reason being the source of many of its criminals. A pattern the movie, 1st Season, 2nd Season, and 3rd Season, follow is while the criminals in them are sympathetic, you can’t necessarily justify or agree with their actions. The criminals I’m referring to aren’t Gaear, Carl, Malvo, or Varga. I’m referring to people like Jerry, Lester, Peggy, Hanzee, and either one of the Stussy brothers. While the actions of these people are understandable, and by the end of the story, you come to an understanding of why they did what they did, you can justify their actions. This pattern has been repeated for one movie, and three season. However, with Season 4 being a period piece, by having the Great Depression be the time period, it would fundamentally shake this formula. The characters I’ve mentioned, are very much normal people that let things like greed (Jerry), anger (Lester, Hanzee), health issues (Peggy), or just plain family problems (Stussy Brothers), fuel their actions. However, normal people in the Great Depression were desperate, and any criminal action they would commit would be out of survival, a necessity. As a result, Fargo would be forced to show criminals who have to do it for survival, which is justifiable. Because of this, characters of the law would inevitably be grayed to a degreed that has never been seen before, because how could you arrest someone who’s in that much of need. As such, The Great Depression would add new flavor to Fargo and change its preexisting formula.

Side-note: If Fargo took place in the Great Depression, it could open up the opportunity for Hank to return as a main character and explore his character more, which would be awesome.

This is what you want

Who would win in a protaganist antagonist situ…

Say if Lorne Malvo was one of Dexter’s targets for example, just say these two shows take place in the same universe, who do you think would win?

This is what you want

In Fargo season 4 something I’d love is a prot…

For example, in Heat Robert De Niro and Al Capone’s characters are both enemies by the fact that ones a criminal and ones a cop, but they both like each other, and (SPOILER)…………………………….. When Al Capone shoots Robet De Niro they hold hands, something like that for example because it wouldn’t just be “the protagonist” fighting the villain or trying to stop the villain, it would be a situation where they would have their own problems with it.

This is what you want