Balboa Observer-Picayune: Arrested Development Episode Guide: Out on a Limb

#165 i need to post wrote on March 10, 2006:

Yes BUT they don’t find out George is in Mexico until Amigos. Also while George is missing for the first 4 episodes of season 2, neither 201 or 202 really have anything to do with him (with the exception being what I consider one of the best scenes of the series at the end of 201 where George Sr takes off on the getaway staircar with the briefcase and Uncle Sam wig), where as 203 and 204 almost completely center around George’s storyline.

the main storylines of Amigos and Good Grief don’t continue on directly from eachother

I can’t agree with this. Just because the exact same storyline isn’t happening from Amigos to Good Grief (i.e. instead of having a wake they’re still chasing him down), what happend in Good Grief was determined by what happend in Amigos.

Thus making Amigos and Good Grief a 2 parter. Still disagree?

#166 Beamer wrote on March 11, 2006:

i need to post wrote:Yes BUT they don’t find out George is in Mexico until Amigos. Also while George is missing for the first 4 episodes of season 2, neither 201 or 202 really have anything to do with him (with the exception being what I consider one of the best scenes of the series at the end of 201 where George Sr takes off on the getaway staircar with the briefcase and Uncle Sam wig), where as 203 and 204 almost completely center around George’s storyline.

the main storylines of Amigos and Good Grief don’t continue on directly from eachother

I can’t agree with this. Just because the exact same storyline isn’t happening from Amigos to Good Grief (i.e. instead of having a wake they’re still chasing him down), what happend in Good Grief was determined by what happend in Amigos.

Thus making Amigos and Good Grief a 2 parter. Still disagree?

Yes.

#167 i need to post wrote on March 11, 2006:

Beamer wrote:
i need to post wrote:Yes BUT they don’t find out George is in Mexico until Amigos. Also while George is missing for the first 4 episodes of season 2, neither 201 or 202 really have anything to do with him (with the exception being what I consider one of the best scenes of the series at the end of 201 where George Sr takes off on the getaway staircar with the briefcase and Uncle Sam wig), where as 203 and 204 almost completely center around George’s storyline.

the main storylines of Amigos and Good Grief don’t continue on directly from eachother

I can’t agree with this. Just because the exact same storyline isn’t happening from Amigos to Good Grief (i.e. instead of having a wake they’re still chasing him down), what happend in Good Grief was determined by what happend in Amigos.

Thus making Amigos and Good Grief a 2 parter. Still disagree?

Yes.

Well too f’in bad man because I happen to feel very strongly about this and I’m gonna go "Out On A Limb" and say that you DON’T still disagree. :wink:

Now I want you to go to Wikipedia and include in both "Amigos" and "Good Grief" that they ARE an official "two-part" episode somewhere in the "Episode Notes" and I want you to thank jerkstore for the enlightenment.

THANK YOU.

#168 vcalzone wrote on March 11, 2006:

There’s that sarcasm again. No WAY are "Amigos" and "Good Grief" supposed to be two-part episodes, though. I didn’t even realize this was up for discussion. The thing that the other two-parters have that these lack is a cliffhanger. And one on which the entire next episode hinges on. In Marta Complex, there’s the Hermano revelation. In Alter Egos, there’s both Michael getting the evidence and finding out Maggie isn’t blind. In Out on a Limb, there’s Michael learning that Maggie really was pregnant (Narrator: She wasn’t.) and Buster having his hand bitten off. To this extent, I suppose you could call the season ender/next season’s premiere two-part episodes (though I think that is almost by necessity), but there’s too much resolution in something like Amigos. By the end of that episode, things are resolved, however temporarily. If Buster was still living with Lupe in Good Grief, or if G.O.B. was still focused on making a friend, I’d say you had a case. But too many of the storylines in Amigos are self-contained.

Plus, I’m pretty sure we’re led to believe that some time has passed between these episodes, even if only about a week. And though Michael is supportive about Ann at the end of Amigos, in Good Grief, Ann sees him as nothing but a problem. That’s the other thing about cliffhangers. They pick up almost immediately where they left off. Many times not even a minute after.

#169 Richie's Bananas wrote on March 11, 2006:

thats some bull**** right there

#170 i need to post wrote on March 11, 2006:

I’m grown tired of this post. Ok - It’s not a "two-parter", but it still has a different feel than most other episodes back to back. That is my point. Nothing else to say about it. I’ve already explained why.

VC, was the edited-in stupid looking "wink" smiley really necessary? Yes I was being sarcastic, but was that particular sentence you put it after really going to hurt anybody’s feelings? Especially Beamer, who has followed me around the board on more than one occasion just to contradict my opinion. No offense to Beamer either, who in my opinion is the most knowledgeable poster here in terms of anything AD, but come on. I’m a big boy (19), and I know Beamer can’t be any younger. Let’s take what we say with a grain of salt and not sugarcoat things that don’t need sugarcoating.

And that guy above me "Richie’s Bananas" is my friend that likes to lurk all of my internet doings and he’s just trying to cause trouble. Don’t hesitate to delete him, he doesn’t care.

#171 vcalzone wrote on March 11, 2006:

i need to post wrote:VC, was the edited-in stupid looking "wink" smiley really necessary?

Short answer? Yes.

Long answer? Whether it DOES hurt anyone’s feelings or rub anyone the wrong way is irrelevant. The questions are A) COULD it rub someone the wrong way if taken in context, and B) Is it easily apparent that you’re just joking? The idea is to make sure that whether something DOES hurt someone’s feelings doesn’t often come up. Winks might look stupid, but if you have a problem with them, then please add in something like *kidding* or something else that makes it clear that you aren’t serious. Not everyone has had the pleasure of getting to know you yet, ok?

[spoiler]See what I did there? I didn’t include a wink, and now it seems like I’m being mean. I’m not, your obnoxiousness is part of your strange charm. But if someone didn’t know me, they’d say I was just being a jerk.[/spoiler]

#172 i need to post wrote on March 11, 2006:

I understand everything you said I just often forget how sensitive people can be to what I think are the most insignificant things. Even that little jab you threw at me at the end of your post I didn’t take as such until I read your blacked out text. Things said to me on a message board, whether intentionally offensive or not just doesn’t phase me. I guess I just have to remember that everybody isn’t as fortunate enough to be like me (WINK WINK JUST KIDDING).

You see? I’m getting the hang of it already.

And for the record, I just like saying things a certain way, and if I’m not able to do that, in certain cases I’d just assume not say anything at all. Including a smiley in my post to me is like putting words in my mouth, because I’d never use it otherwise, although I am glad you choose to "PC" up my posts rather than just delete them all together. It just gets frustrating when I’m already making a conscience effort to be civil and it’s still not good enough.

And that’s that. I gotta admit I really enjoy these tough talks we have every now and then. They keep me in line, don’t they? Let’s do this again, I don’t know, sometime mid-May, early-June. Until then, problem hereby resolved.

#173 I ate all your bees wrote on March 11, 2006:

*almost strangles self with belt, but decides against it*

I’m done now. Please continue.

#174 byron wrote on March 13, 2006: