# Sleepy Hollow - Entire Season 1 - Spoilers



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

Hoo-boy.

Revelations? Covens? Horsemen of the Apocalypse? And apparently Old Beezlebub himself?

Also, the Village of Sleepy Hollow has a population of 140,000? That would make it the fifth-biggest city in New York State!

The line "seven years of tribulations" is a dead giveaway -- they want this show to run seven seasons. I don't think they can sustain this level of inventive insanity for more than 13 episodes, let alone 154...

I'll keeps the Season Pass on my TiVo, but I'm going to remain emotionally detached because I can't see this ever coming to a satisfactory conclusion.


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

I just finished watching it. 

As for the status of the season pass? 

I just finished watching it.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

I enjoyed it. Set a season pass. 

I mean, sure, it's got a supernatural premise and I sincerely doubt they can sustain that, but what we saw wasn't half bad.

Better than many shows I've watched of late, anyway.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

Not awful, but not particularly good either.
I'll keep the SP for now, but this will definitely be on the list of new SPs that can be deleted simply because I'm already recording more than I'll watch.


----------



## jamesl (Jul 12, 2012)

as a big fan of Grim and the early "monster of the week" episodes of X-Files and Supernatural I really like this show 

its totally my genre


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

I'm being really picky this year. I don't want to add more than I can reasonably watch in a week.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

It is the best thing on Monday nights right now. (Oh yeah, forgot about "Under the Dome"  ) Seriously, I enjoyed it but sorry to see 2 actors I like losing their heads in the first episode! 

SP set.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

I can think of a Queen song that would be a better theme to this episode (or the series?) than was Sympathy for the Devil.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcG5HQnCBU4[/media]

The sheriff and the priest really needed to think harder about ducking.


----------



## Flop (Dec 2, 2005)

I liked it well enough to keep the SP. It's not the best show I've ever seen, but it's far from the worst. I like that they dumped a whole bunch of background info on us instead of trickling it out over the course of the season. Many shows get caught up in the mystery of it all, and trickle out details/revelations every so often that it feels more like they just make up something convenient to fit the story of the week. Here they dumped a lot of background story info on us from the start so we already have a broad idea of the general direction of the story. 

I also like that, while they don't all believe a headless horseman is responsible, enough reliable people saw it so everyone agrees some f'd up **** is going down. Too many shows like this try to make it so only the main character(s) ever see the "big bad", and can never tell anyone because who would believe them? Then the secret becomes some big deal for the main character to brood over and causes tension with his spouse/partner/girlfriend/dog/whatever. Think season 1 of Grimm.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Flop said:


> I like that they dumped a whole bunch of background info on us instead of trickling it out over the course of the season. Many shows get caught up in the mystery of it all, and trickle out details/revelations every so often that it feels more like they just make up something convenient to fit the story of the week. Here they dumped a lot of background story info on us from the start so we already have a broad idea of the general direction of the story.
> 
> I also like that, while they don't all believe a headless horseman is responsible, enough reliable people saw it so everyone agrees some f'd up **** is going down. Too many shows like this try to make it so only the main character(s) ever see the "big bad", and can never tell anyone because who would believe them? Then the secret becomes some big deal for the main character to brood over and causes tension with his spouse/partner/girlfriend/dog/whatever. Think season 1 of Grimm.


Excellent points. I agree with both.

On the negative side, the overbearing commanding officer who kept telling her to leave it alone and "go home and get some rest" was a huge cliche, and very annoying.

Also, sending Ichabod to an asylum when they had no charges for arresting him and no immediate reason to believe he was a danger to himself or others, was absurd. A person cannot be committed against his will just because he believes things that are ridiculous. And even worse, they had two orderlies restraining him and a doctor about to drug him for no good reason. I'm really tired of seeing that sort of thing in movies and TV.


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

I think I was a little turned off when the Headless Horseman became Headless Rambo.


----------



## jamesl (Jul 12, 2012)

john4200 said:


> On the negative side, the overbearing commanding officer who kept telling her to leave it alone and "go home and get some rest" was a huge cliche, and very annoying.


you didn't think that he was part of the cover up and was just trying to keep her from discovering more info ?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

jamesl said:


> you didn't think that he was part of the cover up and was just trying to keep her from discovering more info ?


Could be. But it is still an annoying cliche.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Maui said:


> I think I was a little turned off when the Headless Horseman became Headless Rambo.


Ha! Yes, that was strange. But I guess the Horsemen must adapt to the times like everyone else.

I could not tell which Horseman he was supposed to be. None of the Horsemen carry an axe like he had (what did Ichabod call his weapon?). He was riding a white horse, which would make him Conquest/Pestilence, but I am not sure he had a good selection of horses to choose from in that barn. He acted more like War, since he first showed up on the Revolutionary War battlefield, and he adapted to the guns quite quickly in the present which made me think he was a warrior. Maybe there just was not a red horse available in the barn? But War should have a long sword, not an axe.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Ha! Yes, that was strange. But I guess the Horsemen must adapt to the times like everyone else.
> 
> I could not tell which Horseman he was supposed to be. None of the Horsemen carry an axe like he had (what did Ichabod call his weapon?). He was riding a white horse, which would make him Conquest/Pestilence, but I am not sure he had a good selection of horses to choose from in that barn. He acted more like War, since he first showed up on the Revolutionary War battlefield, and he adapted to the guns quite quickly in the present which made me think he was a warrior. Maybe there just was not a red horse available in the barn? But War should have a long sword, not an axe.


They stated a number of times the horseman was Death.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

morac said:


> They stated a number of times the horseman was Death.


I don't remember anyone saying "Death" was the name of that specific Horseman. I vaguely remember some references to death in general -- all the Horsemen are harbingers of mass death and suffering.

Besides, Death rides a pale horse and carries a scythe. Does not really fit the Horseman we saw.

I just remembered, he had a white horse back in the Revolutionary War, too. So I guess he is supposed to be Conquest/Pestilence.


----------



## Kablemodem (May 26, 2001)

john4200 said:


> Excellent points. I agree with both.
> 
> On the negative side, the overbearing commanding officer who kept telling her to leave it alone and "go home and get some rest" was a huge cliche, and very annoying.
> 
> Also, sending Ichabod to an asylum when they had no charges for arresting him and no immediate reason to believe he was a danger to himself or others, was absurd. A person cannot be committed against his will just because he believes things that are ridiculous. And even worse, they had two orderlies restraining him and a doctor about to drug him for no good reason. I'm really tired of seeing that sort of thing in movies and TV.


I don't think this is the show for you if you are looking for realism.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Kablemodem said:


> I don't think this is the show for you if you are looking for realism.


I don't think you need to worry about what is "the show for me". I suggest you comment on the show rather than on people discussing it.


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

john4200 said:


> I don't remember anyone saying "Death" was the name of that specific Horseman. I vaguely remember some references to death in general -- all the Horsemen are harbingers of mass death and suffering.
> 
> Besides, Death rides a pale horse and carries a scythe. Does not really fit the Horseman we saw.
> 
> I just remembered, he had a white horse back in the Revolutionary War, too. So I guess he is supposed to be Conquest/Pestilence.


I also heard them say the horseman was DEATH, more than once. Even if he doesn't fit the "description" it's what they called him.

I thought the commanding officer trying to keep her out of the investigation, and the three in the asylum trying to drug Crane were part of the evil conspiracy.


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

Ichabod seemed to adjust pretty quickly to a life 250 years into the future, with horseless carriages, electric lights, flying machines, tv, voices coming from a box, Netflix etc.

That's pretty handy.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

john4200 said:


> Also, sending Ichabod to an asylum when they had no charges for arresting him and no immediate reason to believe he was a danger to himself or others, was absurd. A person cannot be committed against his will just because he believes things that are ridiculous. And even worse, they had two orderlies restraining him and a doctor about to drug him for no good reason. I'm really tired of seeing that sort of thing in movies and TV.


They sent him for a psych eval because he was a suspect in a beheading who believed things that were insane...

I suspect we'll find that the doctor who was drugging him was in on the conspiracy (along with Ensign Sulu and, I'm guessing, the captain, although I hope this doesn't become a The Following type conspiracy where everybody but the lead is in on it).


----------



## jasrub (May 9, 2008)

I kept the SP. This is far and away better than a lot of other things on TV right now.


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

john4200 said:


> And even worse, they had two orderlies restraining him and a doctor about to drug him for no good reason.


My first thought was that the doctor is one of the demon's thralls, like John Cho's character was, and that was not a sedative in her syringe but something far more lethal.

In this type of series, none of the major characters (the ones with more than a single line of dialogue) are truly clueless bystanders.


----------



## SugarBowl (Jan 5, 2007)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> They sent him for a psych eval because he was a suspect in a beheading who believed things that were insane...
> 
> I suspect we'll find that the doctor who was drugging him was in on the conspiracy (along with Ensign Sulu and, I'm guessing, the captain, although I hope this doesn't become a The Following type conspiracy where everybody but the lead is in on it).


Was he a suspect because he was standing in the street ?


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I liked it enough to keep the SP. I might like it enough in the future to create an episode thread or two. We'll see. I could pick nits. There were many of them but I'll give it a few episodes. This show could go in two directions. It can be a show in which the pilot episode was the best episode and it quickly runs out of creative gas or the writing gets better and the story more interesting as the season progresses.

I'm thinking the horseman was Arn Anderson.


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

john4200 said:


> I don't remember anyone saying "Death" was the name of that specific Horseman.


Ichabod quoted from his bible at one point: "I looked, and there before me was a pale horse! Its rider was named Death, and Hades was following close behind him." (Revelation 6:8)

It took me a while to grasp the concept - it wasn't taking place in "our universe", but the one where Washington Irving's story took place (speaking of which, there were numerous mentions to George Washington, and a character named Irving). I was waiting for somebody to respond to "Ichabod Crane" with, "You mean, like in the story?"


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

SugarBowl said:


> Was he a suspect because he was standing in the street ?


That, plus maybe the fact that he knew a lot more about what was going on than anybody else did or could...


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

I have it recorded but haven't watched it yet - but why doom it to a season thread after the 1st episode? Is it that mediocre? Should I not bother watching it?


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

Wasn't bad. I'll keep the S.P. for now, but I think it's going to pile up on my TiVo before I get back to it.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Graymalkin said:


> ...Also, the Village of Sleepy Hollow has a population of 140,000?...


144,000....there's significance to that number.

I enjoyed it for the most part, but, as some have mentioned, we'll see how it lasts. Definitely need to see more of Ichabod's witch/wife Katrina...


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

Bierboy said:


> 144,000....there's significance to that number.
> 
> I enjoyed it for the most part, but, as some have mentioned, we'll see how it lasts. Definitely need to see more of Ichabod's witch/wife Katrina...


Ah, I misread the sign. Yes, 144,000 would have a good deal more significance.


----------



## ihatecable (Apr 16, 2003)

RGM1138 said:


> Ichabod seemed to adjust pretty quickly to a life 250 years into the future, with horseless carriages, electric lights, flying machines, tv, voices coming from a box, Netflix etc.That's pretty handy.


I had more of a problem with this than Headless Rambo. It would have been a little nice to see him do a little Johnny Depp from Dark Shadows Reveal yourself, tiny songstress!


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

I recorded it but haven't watched yet. I only skimmed through this thread to avoid spoilers. Would it be helpful to read Sleepy Hollow before watching this?


----------



## tigercat74 (Aug 7, 2004)

cheesesteak said:


> I liked it enough to keep the SP. I might like it enough in the future to create an episode thread or two. We'll see. I could pick nits. There were many of them but I'll give it a few episodes. This show could go in two directions. It can be a show in which the pilot episode was the best episode and it quickly runs out of creative gas or the writing gets better and the story more interesting as the season progresses.
> 
> I'm thinking the horseman was Arn Anderson.


I was thinking Tully Blanchard.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Lori (Feb 20, 2000)

It was OK. The lead has a crap ton of charisma, and that can carry a series farther than it would otherwise go.

But it was also a little goofy.

I'm keeping the SP for now.


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

cheesesteak said:


> I'm thinking the horseman was Arn Anderson.


I had to wonder how many would actually get this reference (it took me a second)



tigercat74 said:


> I was thinking Tully Blanchard.


AH, someone got it. :up:


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Lori said:


> It was OK. The lead has a crap ton of charisma, and that can carry a series farther than it would otherwise go.
> 
> But it was also a little goofy.
> 
> I'm keeping the SP for now.


This truly sums up my feelings..."goofy" was the word I was looking for, but it's not goofy in a horrible way. It's tolerable and the lead actor, as you say, might have to carry this. Hopefully the secondary actors can build into their roles a bit better...


----------



## trnsfrguy (Apr 28, 2005)

cheesesteak said:


> I liked it enough to keep the SP. I might like it enough in the future to create an episode thread or two. We'll see. I could pick nits. There were many of them but I'll give it a few episodes. This show could go in two directions. It can be a show in which the pilot episode was the best episode and it quickly runs out of creative gas or the writing gets better and the story more interesting as the season progresses.
> 
> I'm thinking the horseman was Arn Anderson.





tigercat74 said:


> I was thinking Tully Blanchard.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD





Maui said:


> I had to wonder how many would actually get this reference (it took me a second)
> 
> AH, someone got it. :up:


Come on guys.... If you're thinking horseman, you gotta be thinking Ric Flair. Wooooo !!


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

That Don Guy said:


> Ichabod quoted from his bible at one point: "I looked, and there before me was a pale horse! Its rider was named Death, and Hades was following close behind him." (Revelation 6:8)


Sure, but the Horseman we saw favored a white horse, not a pale one. In this context, pale can mean yellowish-green, ashen, or pale like a dead body.


----------



## Doh (May 18, 2001)

Lori said:


> It was OK. The lead has a crap ton of charisma, and that can carry a series farther than it would otherwise go.
> 
> But it was also a little goofy.
> 
> I'm keeping the SP for now.


+2. I don't mind that it's goofy-- sort of like Arrow.


----------



## sieglinde (Aug 11, 2002)

Ooh, I hadn't noticed the population number. Getting spooky


----------



## jamesl (Jul 12, 2012)

Bob_Newhart said:


> ... Would it be helpful to read Sleepy Hollow before watching this?


no

I've never read the story, but I can be 100% sure it is NOTHING like the tv series

the episode was very easy to follow


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

The ratings were better than I think Fox was expecting. It got a 3.4 rating which made it Fox's highest scoring debut drama in the last six years. They have to be happy with that. Scratch it from the contenders list for the first show canceled contest.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

It is free on Amazon Prime too and available the next day -- unlike "Under the Dome" (which they really can't pay me to watch with commercials).


----------



## dwit (May 5, 2004)

I like it but don't even expect it to run a full season.


----------



## Doh (May 18, 2001)

john4200 said:


> In this context, pale can mean yellowish-green, ashen, or pale like a dead body.


You mean, in the context of a tv show which is using the Book of Revelations as a plot device?


----------



## Kablemodem (May 26, 2001)

john4200 said:


> I don't think you need to worry about what is "the show for me". I suggest you comment on the show rather than on people discussing it.


Sorry, but I am very worried about you. Let me know if you would like to discuss it over coffee.


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

dwit said:


> I like it but don't even expect it to run a full season.


It's only scheduled for the fall (_The Following_ returns in January). I think they can get 13 episodes out of it with a "kinda sorta" ending, the way _Alcatraz_ did.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

Flop said:


> ...I also like that, while they don't all believe a headless horseman is responsible, enough reliable people saw it so everyone agrees some f'd up **** is going down. Too many shows like this try to make it so only the main character(s) ever see the "big bad", and can never tell anyone because who would believe them? Then the secret becomes some big deal for the main character to brood over and causes tension with his spouse/partner/girlfriend/dog/whatever. Think season 1 of Grimm.


I totally agree with this and is the main reason I setup a season pass. I like that its not just the 2 main characters that "see" everything....unlike X-files.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

That Don Guy said:


> It's only scheduled for the fall (_The Following_ returns in January). I think they can get 13 episodes out of it with a "kinda sorta" ending, the way _Alcatraz_ did.


It debuted to great ratings. Unless it drops substantially in subsequent weeks, it's going to be around for more than 13 episodes.


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

If you want to compare Sleepy Hollow the series to Sleepy Hollow the 1820 short story by Washington Irving, Time Magazine already did the research for you.


----------



## tigercat74 (Aug 7, 2004)

Maui said:


> I had to wonder how many would actually get this reference (it took me a second)
> 
> AH, someone got it. :up:


I was thinking of going with Ric Flair but went with someone a little more obscure.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Graymalkin said:


> If you want to compare Sleepy Hollow the series to Sleepy Hollow the 1820 short story by Washington Irving, Time Magazine already did the research for you.


Interesting take on the choice of the lead character. I recalled how he looked in the story but I don't think anyone looking like this guy would hold an audience of women for very long.


----------



## Fahtrim (Apr 12, 2004)

john4200 said:


> Sure, but the Horseman we saw favored a white horse, not a pale one. In this context, pale can mean yellowish-green, ashen, or pale like a dead body.


White is pale


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Fahtrim said:


> White is pale


No, not in the context of the Four Horsemen. White, Red, Black, Pale.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

john4200 said:


> No, not in the context of the Four Horsemen. White, Red, Black, Pale.


Since they told us at least 2 times that he was Death, I think this argument is rather silly. Go argue with the show writers about their horse colors. He's Death. They said so. Arguing about the color of the horse seems like a pointless effort.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Ereth said:


> Since they told us at least 2 times that he was Death, I think this argument is rather silly. Go argue with the show writers about their horse colors. He's Death. They said so.


Who is "they", and what is the exact quote?


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

john4200 said:


> Who is "they", and what is the exact quote?


Go rewatch the episode for yourself. You are the only one who didn't get it.

I'm not saying you are wrong, but rather I think you possibly are more versed in the mythology than the writers, who clearly thought "white" was equivalent to "pale" (as did I).

Here's the Wikipedia entry, for example:


> The Headless Horseman is believed by Crane to be The Horseman of the Apocalypse: DEATH.


Or here: http://www.buddytv.com/articles/sleepy-hollow/sleepy-hollow-premiere-recap-h-51209.aspx


> Ichabod states that the reason the horseman didn't die is because he is death itself, and he has returned to Sleepy Hollow to finish what he started.


----------



## hairyblue (Feb 25, 2002)

I enjoyed it. I did like the actor who played the sheriff. The sheriff character was fun too. I guess he my show up in flash backs.

I didn't like the horseman using guns. It doesn't really fit this type of show. I look forward to see what they do with this show.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

I want to add that I understand your point. The 4 Horsemen are supposed to come in an order, and the first rides a white horse and is Conquest. That would certainly fit.

Perhaps, in this case, Ichabod is simply wrong. If that's what you are arguing I misunderstood you. But he did tell us it was Death in at least 2 passages in the episode, so we have to accept that, at the very least, Ichabod believes it to be Death.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Graymalkin said:


> The line "seven years of tribulations" is a dead giveaway -- they want this show to run seven seasons.


Note that there are seven seals mentioned in Revelations. The first seal is opened and the White Horseman is seen: Conquest. Although some interpretations name him Pestilence.

I wonder if the showrunners are planning for each season to be one seal being opened.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

hairyblue said:


> I enjoyed it. I did like the actor who played the sheriff. The sheriff character was fun too. I guess he my show up in flash backs.


He's Clancy Brown, aka Mr. Krabs from Spongebob Squarepants (yes really).


----------



## The Spud (Aug 28, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> I'm thinking the horseman was Arn Anderson.





tigercat74 said:


> I was thinking Tully Blanchard.





tigercat74 said:


> I was thinking of going with Ric Flair but went with someone a little more obscure.


Diamonds are forever. . .and so are the Four Horsemen.

If you wanted obscure you could have gone with Paul Roma. 

I enjoyed the show a lot more than I thought I would. One minor nit. It is the Book of Revelation, not Revelations. There was another show that got it correct later in the evening.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

The Spud said:


> I enjoyed the show a lot more than I thought I would. One minor nit. It is the Book of Revelation, not Revelations. There was another show that got it correct later in the evening.


Sometimes I wonder if they get it wrong on purpose, because if they got it right most people would think they got it wrong.

Kind of like how "literally" has come to mean the opposite of "literally" because too many people literally don't know the meaning of the word.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Beryl said:


> It is free on Amazon Prime too and available the next day -- unlike "Under the Dome" (which they really can't pay me to watch with commercials).


Only the premiere, not every week, right?

BTW, I thought it was pretty entertaining.. But for some reason it does make me laugh that the officer called in "officer down" when the officer had their head cut off. I know, that's just standard cop talk (at least in TV/movies). But *usually* it seems to be used when an officer is wounded or possibly savable with CPR... not when they're most sincerely dead.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Although it goes both ways, I think I hear it more often referring to dead than injured cops...

You there, RonDawg?


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

I give it the Diane seal-o-approval, it was properly batsh*t off the wall, they pretty much threw things at the wall and most of them actually stuck.

Nothing will top Zero Hour for me for a while however, they truly knew how to get their freak on and were proud of it.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

john4200 said:


> Who is "they", and what is the exact quote?


Sigh. I'll help out. Minute 54, after Abby bites Sulu's thumb and she cuffs him to the police car door:

Sulu: "You can't kill him, Abby. He is Death."

Good enough?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

danterner said:


> Sigh. I'll help out. Minute 54, after Abby bites Sulu's thumb and she cuffs him to the police car door:
> 
> Sulu: "You can't kill him, Abby. He is Death."
> 
> Good enough?


No, not good enough to convince me that this is specifically the Fourth Horseman, named Death. You could say the above (without the capital letter), about any of the Horsemen. I doubt any of them can be killed, and they are all harbingers of death.

Thanks for the quote, though.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

john4200 said:


> No, not good enough to convince me that this is specifically the Fourth Horseman, named Death. You could say the above (without the capital letter), about any of the Horsemen. I doubt any of them can be killed, and they are all harbingers of death. Thanks for the quote, though.


Okay, then, how about the Reverend, at minute 23, when he is trying to chain the horseman:

Reverend: "It is you, Horseman -- Death. By which, to be clear, I specifically mean the surname Death, and not a more generic appellation or general descriptor. I call you this, thereby distinguishing you from the other horsemen: War, Famine, Pestilence, and Shemp."


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

danterner said:


> Okay, then, how about the Reverend, at minute 23, when he is trying to chain the horseman:
> 
> Reverend: "It is you, Horseman -- Death. By which, to be clear, I specifically mean the surname Death, and not a more generic appellation or general descriptor. I call you this, thereby distinguishing you from the other horsemen: War, Famine, Pestilence, and Shemp."


Okay, you got me!


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

RGM1138 said:


> Ichabod seemed to adjust pretty quickly to a life 250 years into the future, with horseless carriages, electric lights, flying machines, tv, voices coming from a box, Netflix etc.
> 
> That's pretty handy.


I thought the same ting at the time, but later decided that the necessary explanations to the time traveler were a trope best left to the imagination, and it made for a change. When he was fiddling with the flashlight, I expected him to say something like, "how do you get light without heat?" I was surprised that they didn't have him do it, but pleased.

How did those frogs stay alive in the glass jars for 250 years?

The slavery comments were whimsical. 

The pilot makes the show sound like it might contain a bunch of buried Easter Eggs, like Lost.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Church AV Guy said:


> How did those frogs stay alive in the glass jars for 250 years?


I think the idea was that the frog and snake were also resurrected, though that doesn't match up with the horseman Chrane blood link.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

mattack said:


> Only the premiere, not every week, right?


I'm thinking it is the entire series. Unlike Under the Dome which is available for Prime Streaming, I purchased the entire series for $0.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

This series is not listed as a Prime offering. It was just free to purchase -- just like Ironsides.


----------



## aepman (Oct 3, 2000)

I very much enjoyed the show. Of course, that may have had something to do with my expectations going in. I had been thinking there was no way the could sustain this story beyond a few episodes. I like how they have brought a boat load of possibilities to the table. We'll have to see how they handle the show on a regular basis instead of on a one hour pilot. Sill...better than I expected, so surprisingly the season pass stays.


----------



## jamesl (Jul 12, 2012)

Church AV Guy said:


> I thought the same ting at the time, but later decided that the necessary explanations to the time traveler were a trope best left to the imagination, and it made for a change. When he was fiddling with the flashlight, I expected him to say something like, "how do you get light without heat?" I was surprised that they didn't have him do it, but pleased..


in the preview for next week's episode there was one item he had a question about

I won't mention it, but I thought it was funny


----------



## Edmund (Nov 8, 2002)

Was it the 3 seashells?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Church AV Guy said:


> I thought the same ting at the time, but later decided that the necessary explanations to the time traveler were a trope best left to the imagination, and it made for a change. When he was fiddling with the flashlight, I expected him to say something like, "how do you get light without heat?" I was surprised that they didn't have him do it, but pleased.


Yeah, I figured by that time he had already experienced life in the (modern) (not-so-) big city, and would just assume that maybe things were going to be different. I think he showed the appropriate level of surprise over the flashlight.

And not having him freak out over every little thing he encounters serves to A) save time; B) save them from remembering to have him freak out over every little thing, including things that they take for granted so much it would never occur to them (and us) that he would freak out over; and C) not make him look like a complete moron.

One thing that people tend to forget about 18th-century people (or medieval people, or ancient Romans, etc.) is that they aren't dumber than us; they just haven't been exposed to the same things. Another thing that people tend to forget about people is that they tend to be amazingly adaptable.

I have a time travel story in my head (which might make it out some day) that involves, among other things, a modern guy trying to explain cell phones to medieval Vikings. And while he's talking about magic rays flying through the air, they're huddled over it all excited playing with the apps.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

morac said:


> He's Clancy Brown, aka Mr. Krabs from Spongebob Squarepants (yes really).


A.k.a. Kelvin Inman (Lost). My kids know him as both. I've trained them well.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

What is it with these new shows where they get a pretty good character actor -- a Lost alumna, to boot -- to play the role of a sheriff, and then promptly kill him off. Is this trend going to continue in other shows? Who will be next?


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

wprager said:


> What is it with these new shows where they get a pretty good character actor -- a Lost alumna, to boot -- to play the role of a sheriff, and then promptly kill him off. Is this trend going to continue in other shows? Who will be next?


Don't pilots tend to get guest stars like that? This show's pilot also had Harold/Sulu.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

wprager said:


> A.k.a. Kelvin Inman (Lost). My kids know him as both. I've trained them well.


To me, he is and always will be Rawhide (Buckaroo Banzai).


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

dianebrat said:


> I give it the Diane seal-o-approval, it was properly batsh*t off the wall, they pretty much threw things at the wall and most of them actually stuck.....


You sure you didn't mean bratsh*t?...


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

morac said:


> Don't pilots tend to get guest stars like that? This show's pilot also had *Harold*/Sulu.


All I could keep thinking was "WHITE CASTLE!!"


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

wprager said:


> A.k.a. Kelvin Inman (Lost). My kids know him as both. I've trained them well.





Rob Helmerichs said:


> To me, he is and always will be Rawhide (Buckaroo Banzai).


I would think to many of us he is guard Hadley from Shawshank. Though my younger self still knows him as the Kurgan from Highlander.

And don't forget Lex Luthor from Superman: TAS!


----------



## ehusen (Jan 7, 2002)

billypritchard said:


> I would think to many of us he is guard Hadley from Shawshank. Though my younger self still knows him as the Kurgan from Highlander.
> 
> And don't forget Lex Luthor from Superman: TAS!


And of course what appears to be his very first acting credit on IMDB as 'Viking' in "Bad Boys". (That's the 1983 movie with Sean Penn, not the one with Will Smith).

Sigh, I feel old. That movie is 30 years old, it came out my Senior year of High School.


----------



## whitson77 (Nov 10, 2002)

We liked the first episode. We will stick with it. Hopefully it doesn't go stale soon.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Couldn't make it through the first episode. It just did not appeal to me. Too much of a mash-up of various concepts without being good at any of them.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I watched the show last night and really enjoyed it.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Historically, Kurtzman and Orci can be all over the place quality wise.
(From Hawaii Five O to Fringe)

But this is interesting so far so I'll tune in next week.


----------



## TBDigital (Mar 14, 2002)

It's light years better than 'Under the Dumb', so I'll watch it for no other reason than that...of course, I watched UtD, so that doesn't say much about my viewing habits...


----------



## Fl_Gulfer (May 27, 2005)

I'm sure glad I have 2 DVR's in the living room, I have a feeling that it's going to be a busy Fall season.
I really liked the show but the wife wasn't to excited.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

So far, I like it much more than I liked "Legend of the Seeker."


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

danterner said:


> So far, I like it much more than I liked "Legend of the Seeker."


Ah, but Sleepy Hollow has no one to match Bridget Regan running around in a low cut dress. Well, I suppose they have Katia Winter, but I'm not sure if she is going to be in every episode.


----------



## jcondon (Jul 9, 2003)

Beryl said:


> This series is not listed as a Prime offering. It was just free to purchase -- just like Ironsides.
> 
> View attachment 19572


Nice. I bought the season (for Free). :up:

If they end up charging for Episodes I will just cancel just want to mess around with the streaming.


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

billypritchard said:


> I would think to many of us he is guard Hadley from Shawshank. Though my younger self still knows him as the Kurgan from Highlander.
> 
> And don't forget Lex Luthor from Superman: TAS!


Not to mention: Sgt. Zim from Starship Troopers.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

Maui said:


> I think I was a little turned off when the Headless Horseman became Headless Rambo.


Me too. Makes him seem so much more mundane. An unkillable headless monstrosity with a impossibly self-heated axe, that's scary. With a machine gun, he's just a guy with a machine gun. I don't mean I wouldn't be scared to have a guy with a machine gun pointing it at me, but it's a kind of scary I don't particularly want for a TV show.



billypritchard said:


> Though my younger self still knows him as the Kurgan from Highlander.


Of all the roles mentioned in this thread, this one is the only one that matters, when you consider the manner of his demise in this show.



Lori said:


> It was OK. The lead has a crap ton of charisma, and that can carry a series farther than it would otherwise go.
> 
> But it was also a little goofy.
> 
> I'm keeping the SP for now.


Exactly how I feel. I'm dubious about the "let's be creepy!" trying too hard (though I'll admit, that breaking mirror bit at the end was actually creepy), the "good and evil covens through all of time" bit (yawn), that it's all going to be filmed at night, the Revelation (no s) connections, the "small town of 144,000" nonsense, etc. But the two leads, I am absolutely sold on them. I'll give it a while longer just based on them. (I assume you mean Ichabod, but I'm just as sold on Abby.)

I really doubt this show is a good candidate for an "entire season" thread. This will likely turn out to have been a mistake.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

john4200 said:


> Ah, but Sleepy Hollow has no one to match Bridget Regan running around in a low cut dress. Well, I suppose they have Katia Winter, but I'm not sure if she is going to be in every episode.


I doubt you'll see Nicole Beharie as she was in the movie "Shame" but she has potential if that is what floats your boat:










jcondon said:


> Nice. I bought the season (for Free). :up:
> 
> If they end up charging for Episodes I will just cancel just want to mess around with the streaming.


That is what I'm thinking. I'll likely complain because unlike other TV shows, it didn't say that episodes will be $1.99/2.99 minus the discount.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Beryl said:


> I doubt you'll see Nicole Beharie as she was in the movie "Shame" but she has potential if that is what floats your boat


I think you misunderstood me. If Beharie were running around in low-cut dresses every episode, she would certainly be able to match Regan in LotS! But I expect she will continue to dress like a police officer most of the time.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

john4200 said:


> I think you misunderstood me. If Beharie were running around in low-cut dresses every episode, she would certainly be able to match Regan in LotS! But I expect she will continue to dress like a police officer most of the time.


I totally understood you -- a police officer won't be running around like that. I just wanted y'all to see what you are going to miss. 

She'll be kinda like the female cop in "Under the Dome" but hopefully not as annoying.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Regarding Crane's culture shock: just wait until he sees a Victoria's Secret commercial or billboard!


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

wprager said:


> A.k.a. Kelvin Inman (Lost). My kids know him as both. I've trained them well.





Rob Helmerichs said:


> To me, he is and always will be Rawhide (Buckaroo Banzai).





billypritchard said:


> I would think to many of us he is guard Hadley from Shawshank. Though *my younger self still knows him as the Kurgan from Highlander.*
> 
> And don't forget Lex Luthor from Superman: TAS!


Ding! Ding! Ding! Kurgan! We have a winner. The only thing is, when his head was chopped off, there was no quickening.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

madscientist said:


> Regarding Crane's culture shock: just wait until he sees a Victoria's Secret commercial or billboard!


I think they've played the culture shock just about perfectly, myself. Every time a movie or book or show plays the "man out of time" thing, they have to use constant culture shock as a way to paint for us the image of him being out of time. I think it gets very, very overdone, and that people would get the idea that "we're not in Kansas anymore" and very quickly stop saying "but wait, why aren't you a slave?" and instead just be filled with curiosity and wonder -- just like Ichabod was with the flashlight.

Admittedly, I am from a time where the idea of a man sent into the future is more established than in Ichabod's, and where futurism and speculation is more common, so I know I would be more prepared than he is. But even so, I think it would take me minutes, not days, after finding myself awake in 2813, to stop saying "but why is that dog driving the car instead of drooling on the sofa?" And Ichabod's a fairly literate and educated fellow; it makes sense that he's accepted "things are different 250 years later".

(He may have been a little bit blasé about how the wife he had yesterday, from his perspective, has been dead 250 years. But we did get some mention of him feeling that, and he's been on the run too fast to process it, and then she's "not entirely dead" anyway, so I guess maybe not.)


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

ehusen said:


> And of course what appears to be his very first acting credit on IMDB as 'Viking' in "Bad Boys". (That's the 1983 movie with Sean Penn, not the one with Will Smith).


That will always be the movie I most associate him with. Such a great film. I just watched it again earlier this year.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> To me, he is and always will be Rawhide (Buckaroo Banzai).


Crap, I didn't know that was him. I'll have to re-watch it now. With the Jamie Lee Curtis introductory backstory scenes and voice over


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

wprager said:


> Crap, I didn't know that was him. I'll have to re-watch it now. With the Jamie Lee Curtis introductory backstory scenes and voice over


For some reason, that movie was profoundly formative for me (I was in my early 20s).

Some might say that explains a lot...


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

jcondon said:


> Nice. I bought the season (for Free). :up:
> 
> If they end up charging for Episodes I will just cancel just want to mess around with the streaming.


HIGHLY doubtful. That is very confusing wording there, but I really really don't think you'll get it for free, nor do I really think you *should*. I wouldn't call it false advertising, just very poorly worded. Note, the 'info' window about the season pass says approx "you will be charged individually as each episode appears".


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Hunter Green said:


> Admittedly, I am from a time where the idea of a man sent into the future is more established than in Ichabod's, and where futurism and speculation is more common, so I know I would be more prepared than he is. But even so, I think it would take me minutes, not days, after finding myself awake in 2813, to stop saying "but why is that dog driving the car instead of drooling on the sofa?" And Ichabod's a fairly literate and educated fellow; it makes sense that he's accepted "things are different 250 years later".


Yes, sure, I understand... but... I'm saying, Victoria's Secret ads. The guy's from the 1770's. And we have Victoria's Secret ads. On billboards.

That's what I'm saying.

Seriously though: I think it's not the same thing at all to go from the 1770's to now, vs. from now to 250+ years in the future. I'm sure in the 2260's there will be many amazing things, but to go from no telephone, not even electricity, to today is completely unimaginable. I think cars and flashlights would be pretty easy to get used to, since they're just improvements over known things. But television? Cell phones? Airplanes? Insane.


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

madscientist said:


> Yes, sure, I understand... but... I'm saying, Victoria's Secret ads. The guy's from the 1770's. And we have Victoria's Secret ads. On billboards.
> 
> That's what I'm saying.
> 
> Seriously though: I think it's not the same thing at all to go from the 1770's to now, vs. from now to 250+ years in the future. I'm sure in the 2260's there will be many amazing things, but to go from no telephone, not even electricity, to today is completely unimaginable. I think cars and flashlights would be pretty easy to get used to, since they're just improvements over known things. But television? Cell phones? Airplanes? Insane.


That was my contention.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

madscientist said:


> Yes, sure, I understand... but... I'm saying, Victoria's Secret ads. The guy's from the 1770's. And we have Victoria's Secret ads. On billboards.
> 
> That's what I'm saying.


never seen one.. sure I've seen billboards, but a lot less than 30 years ago, and certainly nothing more than G rated in a long time.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> For some reason, that movie was profoundly formative for me (I was in my early 20s).
> 
> Some might say that explains a lot...


I loved that movie. Also "Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins", from around the same time.

"In and out, like ducks mating."

Two movies that most people don't even know existed, but I've been waiting nearly thirty years for sequels. I mean, "The Adventure Begins ..." well that's a title screaming for a sequel.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

wprager said:


> ...but I've been waiting nearly thirty years for sequels....


 I'm afraid you are going to have to keep waiting!

I liked those movies, too, but I'm not expecting sequels.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

wprager said:


> Two movies that most people don't even know existed, but I've been waiting nearly thirty years for sequels. I mean, "The Adventure Begins ..." well that's a title screaming for a sequel.


There have been several sequels to Bucakaroo, all in the form of comics written by the writer/creator of the movie...ranging from mediocre to terrible. I suspect he was a one-trick pony, and we should be grateful his one trick was so good and he only got to do it once.

I saw a distributor screening, by the way, which was subsequently edited before release. The opening crawl was fantastic...just ENDLESS, giving an overwhelming (deliberately-so) amount of back-story in parody of Star Wars and its imitators. Apparently the old men in suits were bored by it and talked the studio into cutting it down to a manageable (and thus meaningless and not terribly funny) size. I guess in retrospect that was a sign. I also guess for a low-budget film of that era, there is zero chance that the elements survive to recreate the original cut for Blu-ray...


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

I don't know if it was endless, but it was pretty long on the copy I have (got it maybe 3-4 years ago). As far as I *knew* JLC wasn't even in the movie, but she was featured prominently in the "archive footage" and old family films. There are quite a few extras.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

Bob_Newhart said:


> I recorded it but haven't watched yet. I only skimmed through this thread to avoid spoilers. Would it be helpful to read Sleepy Hollow before watching this?


Perhaps in the way that reading the original Arthur Conan Doyle stories would be of use to someone getting ready to sit down with Season 1 of CBS's "Elementary".


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

Beryl said:


> It is free on Amazon Prime too and available the next day -- unlike "Under the Dome" (which they really can't pay me to watch with commercials).


Don't think of those places where UTD stops for a little while and something else shows instead as commercials.

Think of them as sanity breaks.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

madscientist said:


> Seriously though: I think it's not the same thing at all to go from the 1770's to now, vs. from now to 250+ years in the future. I'm sure in the 2260's there will be many amazing things, but to go from no telephone, not even electricity, to today is completely unimaginable. I think cars and flashlights would be pretty easy to get used to, since they're just improvements over known things. But television? Cell phones? Airplanes? Insane.


If you think that the pace of change is about to *decrease*, maybe if you got to 250 years in the future you'd be doing exactly what you'd like to see Ichabod doing.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

This changes the landscape:

Michael Ausiello ‏@MichaelAusiello 49m

SLEEPY HOLLOW Books FRINGE's John Noble For Power(s)ful Recurring Role 
http://tvline.com/2013/09/20/sleepy-hollow-john-noble-fox-season-1/

I don't think the announcement itself is a spoiler, but there might be spoilers in the linked article, so proceed with care.


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

John Noble's participation ensures five seasons for the show.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Ichabod's reaction to the future is realistic, IMO. There is too much going on with the horseman and wifey visions for "Captain America" to gawk at changes. I'll be disappointed if they spend too much time with that.


----------



## jehma (Jan 22, 2003)

wprager said:


> This changes the landscape:
> 
> Michael Ausiello ‏@MichaelAusiello 49m
> 
> ...


Yay :up:


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Hunter Green said:


> If you think that the pace of change is about to *decrease*, maybe if you got to 250 years in the future you'd be doing exactly what you'd like to see Ichabod doing.


I was thinking along the same lines.

If you (madscientist) want to see how strange the future might be, read some Greg Egan. I recommend Diaspora.


----------



## dwit (May 5, 2004)

I wonder what the headless horseman's face looks like? 

(I crack myself up).


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

dwit said:


> I wonder what the headless horseman's face looks like?  (I crack myself up).


 Didn't we see it, in the jar that was buried in the grave? Or was that still a mask?

And... Hooray for John Noble! My interest in this show just ratcheted up a few notches.


----------



## dwit (May 5, 2004)

danterner said:


> Didn't we see it, in the jar that was buried in the grave? Or was that still a mask?


Yeah. Just kidding though. Was really wondering about the actor, before I looked it up.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I think it's an appalling but sadly typical act of discrimination on the part of Hollywood to hire a headed actor and remove the head through special effects.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I think it's an appalling but sadly typical act of discrimination on the part of Hollywood to hire a headed actor and remove the head through special effects.


Heads will roll for this....


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I think it's an appalling but sadly typical act of discrimination on the part of Hollywood to hire a headed actor and remove the head through special effects.


So should Hollywood instead use some sort of capitated system for actors? That would never work.


----------



## jcondon (Jul 9, 2003)

mattack said:


> HIGHLY doubtful. That is very confusing wording there, but I really really don't think you'll get it for free, nor do I really think you *should*. I wouldn't call it false advertising, just very poorly worded. Note, the 'info' window about the season pass says approx "you will be charged individually as each episode appears".


It would be nice if they mentioned how much. I will probably cancel it Sunday though just to be sure. I just wanted to try and stream something from Amazon. I already get Fox so there is no reason for me to pay for it anyway.

Actually I just deleted / unsubscribed. I would end up forgetting over the weekend.

When asked why I selected other and said it wasn't clear what the per episode cost would be.


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

danterner said:


> So should Hollywood instead use some sort of capitated system for actors? That would never work.


Silly union rules.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

dwit said:


> I wonder what the headless horseman's face looks like?
> 
> (I crack myself up).


A bit gaunt -- all skin and bones. Well, mostly bones.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

I thought he looked goth.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

wprager said:


> I loved that movie. Also "Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins", from around the same time.
> 
> "In and out, like ducks mating."
> 
> Two movies that most people don't even know existed, but I've been waiting nearly thirty years for sequels. I mean, "The Adventure Begins ..." well that's a title screaming for a sequel.


Having Joel Grey play an Asian guy probably wouldn't go down as well nowadays.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

wprager said:


> I loved that movie. Also "Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins", from around the same time.
> 
> "In and out, like ducks mating."
> 
> Two movies that most people don't even know existed, but I've been waiting nearly thirty years for sequels. I mean, "The Adventure Begins ..." well that's a title screaming for a sequel.


And I've been waiting 40 some years for the second season of Coronet Blue.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Although I got the joke, I really wanted there to be a "History of the World, Part 2"


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

dianebrat said:


> never seen one.. sure I've seen billboards, but a lot less than 30 years ago, and certainly nothing more than G rated in a long time.


Well, probably outdoor billboards are less common. But definitely you can't walk through a mall, for example, without seeing larger-than-life supermodels wearing not very much.

(not sure what "30 years" has to do with anything though...?)


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I think it's an appalling but sadly typical act of discrimination on the part of Hollywood to hire a headed actor and remove the head through special effects.


The "head shots" of the others were considered unacceptable.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

madscientist said:


> Well, probably outdoor billboards are less common. But definitely you can't walk through a mall, for example, without seeing larger-than-life supermodels wearing not very much.
> 
> (not sure what "30 years" has to do with anything though...?)


We've not seen him in a mall, outdoor advertising has been dramatically reduced and regulated since 1965 and the Highway Beautification Act, with most of the reduction happening in the 1980's as extensions to leases on billboards aged out, thus my comment on "30 years"


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Hunter Green said:


> If you think that the pace of change is about to *decrease*, maybe if you got to 250 years in the future you'd be doing exactly what you'd like to see Ichabod doing.


I didn't really mean that the pace of change was about to decrease. I mean that the 1770's is the tail end of a very long period of essentially static innovation: not much new under the sun had been seen, at that time, in a very long time. People living in that time would not be used to thinking about change. There was no such thing as "science fiction"; Jules Verne wouldn't even be born for 60 years.

On the other hand someone of today's generation would be completely comfortable with, and take in stride, incredible inventions that seemed impossible only a few decades ago. Science fiction is common and generating ideas that are so far out there it's unlikely anything that amazing will ever really happen. Of course the real 250 years from now will be very different from what anyone expects or imagines today... but we _expect_ and _imagine_ it will be different. So (it seems to me) someone from today going to 2260 will be much better off than someone from 1770 come to 2013.



dianebrat said:


> We've not seen him in a mall, outdoor advertising has been dramatically reduced and regulated since 1965 and the Highway Beautification Act, with most of the reduction happening in the 1980's as extensions to leases on billboards aged out, thus my comment on "30 years"


Well, my original comment was "just wait until..." I wasn't aware of the reduction. Here in the Boston area there are still quite a few billboards around, especially on I-90 going into the city.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

madscientist said:


> I mean that the 1770's is the tail end of a very long period of essentially static innovation: not much new under the sun had been seen, at that time, in a very long time. People living in that time would not be used to thinking about change.


But once he's standing on that hilltop looking down on the modern city, that ship has sailed.

There have always been people who adapt and people who don't. There are people today who haven't adapted to VCRs. Ichabod is obviously one of those who adapts.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But once he's standing on that hilltop looking down on the modern city, that ship has sailed.
> 
> There have always been people who adapt and people who don't. There are people today who haven't adapted to VCRs. Ichabod is obviously one of those who adapts.


Technology-wise I think it'd be easy to adapt. Social mores-wise, much more difficult. That's why I brought up Victoria's Secret.

For example consider _The Forever War_. That novel throws the protagonist forward many hundreds of years (due to relativistic effects, not classic time travel) and one change he encounters is that the entire civilization has become homosexual. Babies are created artificially and the very idea of heterosexual sex is considered deviant.

I would imagine that most of the 2013 population of heterosexuals would have a very difficult time adapting after jumping forward into a world like that. I know I would


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

madscientist said:


> Technology-wise I think it'd be easy to adapt. Social mores-wise, much more difficult. That's why I brought up Victoria's Secret...


I don't know....a lot of those VS outfits seem to harken back to medieval times....so I'm told...


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

mattack said:


> Having Joel Grey play an Asian guy probably wouldn't go down as well nowadays.


It really didn't go down that well back then, either. Not too many people watched that movie.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

danterner said:


> Although I got the joke, I really wanted there to be a "History of the World, Part 2"


Or The Travelling Wilburys Volume 2.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

After Crane's flashback on seeing the preacher/priest/clergycritter to what seemed to be the same guy some two centuries and change earlier, I really wasn't expecting him to have all the life expectancy going forward of a red shirt on the Enterprise away team.


----------



## Fl_Gulfer (May 27, 2005)

mattack said:


> Having Joel Grey play an Asian guy probably wouldn't go down as well nowadays.


One of my all time fav. movies.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Fl_Gulfer said:


> One of my all time fav. movies.


Featuring a young "Janeway, to boot. I don't know why every one slams her for Voyager.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 1, 2004)

Fahtrim said:


> White is pale


Or a whiter shade of pale.

This one is far outside my normal genre tastes but I really enjoyed it. It had a Highlander vibe to me and that's a good thing.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Bob Coxner said:


> Or a whiter shade of pale.
> 
> This one is far outside my normal genre tastes but I really enjoyed it. It had a Highlander vibe to me and that's a good thing.


Right down to the "can't show the severed head" rule! 

Greg


----------



## phox_mulder (Feb 23, 2006)

Finally watched this last night, and I enjoyed it.

Highlander vibe, Supernatural vibe, Grimm vibe, so many good vibes it is sure to get cancelled mid season.


phox


----------



## loubob57 (Mar 19, 2001)

I missed the premiere but luckily there was a repeat that I recorded.

I immediately noticed the population being 144,000 and said "ooohhh!"


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

The big question now is do I bother recording episode 2?

Tonight starts the week I put the TiVo through a stress test recording so much.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Graymalkin said:


> Hoo-boy.
> 
> Revelations? Covens? Horsemen of the Apocalypse? And apparently Old Beezlebub himself?
> 
> ...


Is it a city? I live in the suburbs and just the sub section that I live in has more than 140,000 people. But it is not a city.

I liked the first epsiode. I had no idea what to expect. I'll watch the next few episodes and see if it keeps my interest.


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

I just watched this episode so last night and thought it was pretty good. I'm not sure if I'll continue watching based on the previews of future episodes. All the supernatural witchcraft stuff doesn't really interest me.

On a side note, Rolling Stone's "Sympathy for the Devil" has got to be in the top 5 of greatest songs to start any movie or TV show.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

aaronwt said:


> Is it a city? I live in the suburbs and just the sub section that I live in has more than 140,000 people. But it is not a city.
> 
> I liked the first epsiode. I had no idea what to expect. I'll watch the next few episodes and see if it keeps my interest.


Most villages I'm familiar with (here in Illinois) are much smaller in population than 144K...


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Bob_Newhart said:


> I just watched this episode so last night and thought it was pretty good. I'm not sure if I'll continue watching based on the previews of future episodes. All the supernatural witchcraft stuff doesn't really interest me.
> 
> On a side note, Rolling Stone's "Sympathy for the Devil" has got to be in the top 5 of greatest songs to start any movie or TV show.


I wasn't into the Stones back when I was young stupid, so the first time I heard SFTD was The Jericho Mile (tv movie of the week in the late 70s I think). Loved it ever since.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Bierboy said:


> Most villages I'm familiar with (here in Illinois) are much smaller in population than 144K...


And no multiple Starbucks.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

wprager said:


> Featuring a young "Janeway, to boot. I don't know why every one slams her for Voyager.


Most people slam her for Mrs. Columbo (yeah, it had a couple of other names too), but I liked that show (I only ever saw it in reruns), even though I too thought it was slightly sacrilegious to Columbo.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

Bob_Newhart said:


> ...
> 
> On a side note, Rolling Stone's "Sympathy for the Devil" has got to be in the top 5 of greatest songs to start any movie or TV show.


Which is why not to use it.

It's been done.

They needed something just as spooky sounding but more obscure.


----------



## loubob57 (Mar 19, 2001)

wprager said:


> And no multiple Starbucks.


"Is there a law?"


----------



## jamesbobo (Jun 18, 2000)

loubob57 said:


> I immediately noticed the population being 144,000 and said "ooohhh!"


Doesn't mean anything to me.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

Week 1 ratings spiked up to 5.0 when DVR viewers were added:

http://variety.com/2013/tv/ratings/foxs-sleepy-hollow-bolsters-big-bow-with-dvr-playback-1200660325/


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 1, 2004)

Originally Posted by loubob57 
I immediately noticed the population being 144,000 and said "ooohhh!"



jamesbobo said:


> Doesn't mean anything to me.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/144000_(number)


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

unitron said:


> Which is why not to use it.
> 
> It's been done.
> 
> They needed something just as spooky sounding but more obscure.


2000 Light Years from Home.


----------



## ADG (Aug 20, 2003)

Maui said:


> The big question now is do I bother recording episode 2?
> 
> Tonight starts the week I put the TiVo through a stress test recording so much.


I did and I'm sorry I did. Deleted from Season Passes 15 minutes into the episode.


----------



## dwit (May 5, 2004)

Getting to be too "X File-ish" already.

Oh well. What else could they do.


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

I was afraid this would turn into a long continuous never-ending story with a quick cliffhanger each week and never really go anywhere. There needs to be more self-contained anthology shows with a beast-of-the-week, solve and be done, Monk-style programs.


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

I recorded the second episode but probably won't watch it. 

I'm trying to watch at least one episode of all the new shows and am already falling behind after one day so new shows are going to get very short leashes.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Maui said:


> I'm trying to watch at least one episode of all the new shows and am already falling behind after one day so new shows are going to get very short leashes.


I agree, and haven't watched this 2nd ep yet. In fact, I'm hanging around this thread, looking to see if SH has become must-watch TV, or took a turn for the worse.

I already warned my wife this was going to be a busy week, and no time for the usual chit-chat and social interactions. She actually understood what I meant.

I'm married to a saint.


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

ADG said:


> I did (record episode 1) and I'm sorry I did. Deleted from Season Passes 15 minutes into the episode.


Same here.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

I enjoyed it since it did wrap up with the demise of a monster. Also, I like that John Cho and Clancy Brown continue to show up. My SP will remain and I'll continue to watch.

However, the "free" Amazon SP wasn't so free so I called to cancel that and get a refund for it and other TV seasons that were erroneously advertised. The rep understood, thought it unusual, and did right by me:



> I have also refunded the 1 episode of Blood Moon for $2.84 which will be refunded back to the same credit card used for the purchase. Refunds generally take 2-3 business days to post.
> 
> I have also issued a $10.00 promotional credit toward your account due to the way the new series were listed on our website. Your promotional credit will be automatically applied to your next eligible purchase shipped and sold by Amazon.com, including Amazon Instant Videos, Amazon Appstore apps, Amazon MP3s, and Kindle books sold by Amazon.com.


----------



## SoBelle0 (Jun 25, 2002)

Beryl said:


> I enjoyed it since it did wrap up with the demise of a monster. Also, I like that John Cho and Clancy Brown continue to show up. My SP will remain and I'll continue to watch.


Me, too. :up: I was glad to see them both in this latest - even though John Cho gave me the jeepers! I just have to stop watching this show late at night. I do love creepy shows - even moreso during the daytime or with a friend.


----------



## dwit (May 5, 2004)

Beryl said:


> I enjoyed it since it did wrap up with the demise of a monster. Also, I like that John Cho and Clancy Brown continue to show up. My SP will remain and I'll continue to watch.
> 
> However, the "free" Amazon SP wasn't so free so I called to cancel that and get a refund for it and other TV seasons that were erroneously advertised. The rep understood, thought it unusual, and did right by me:


Hey, thanks for the heads up there. Were we somehow fooled(small print, etc), or is it truely Amazon's mistake in charging.

What number to call to cancel/refund? Long hold time?

Hope anyone will chime in here. Thanks.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

dwit said:


> Hey, thanks for the heads up there. Were we somehow fooled(small print, etc), or is it truely Amazon's mistake in charging.
> 
> What number to call to cancel/refund? Long hold time?
> 
> Hope anyone will chime in here. Thanks.


It was a bad way they listed it and a few other seasons on the website. Some seasons clearly state that you have purchased the pilot for free and subsequent episodes will have a 1.99 or 2.99 cost minus the season pass discount. They all say you can cancel at any time but they don't say you MUST CALL to cancel. You can't do it on the website. 


> You can click the "Contact Us" button on any Help page (www.amazon.com/help) and choose
> the "Phone" option to call us.
> 
> Or you can call us directly at 877 442-1958. We are available 24 hours a day 7 days a week to assist you.


My phone call went through quickly and it was done in about 15 minutes It would have been done in 5 minutes if I didn't spend time complaining. However, that extra 10 minute "***** session" earned me the $10 credit.


----------



## dwit (May 5, 2004)

Beryl said:


> It was a bad way they listed it and a few other seasons on the website. Some seasons clearly state that you have purchased the pilot for free and subsequent episodes will have a 1.99 or 2.99 cost minus the season pass discount. They all say you can cancel at any time but they don't say you MUST CALL to cancel. You can't do it on the website.
> 
> My phone call went through quickly and it was done in about 15 minutes It would have been done in 5 minutes if I didn't spend time complaining. However, that extra 10 minute "***** session" earned me the $10 credit.


Thanks a lot.


----------



## Kablemodem (May 26, 2001)

SoBelle0 said:


> Me, too. :up: I was glad to see them both in this latest - even though John Cho gave me the jeepers! I just have to stop watching this show late at night. I do love creepy shows - even moreso during the daytime or with a friend.


This show is too scary for me. I had to turn a light on. Let me know if you want to come over to watch with me next week.


----------



## whitson77 (Nov 10, 2002)

I am still liking it. My wife agrees with Kablemodem and would like it more if it were less scary. She was turned sideways facing me a lot and grabbing my hand. I don't scared much in movies or TV anymore. I've gone numb!


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

Not sure what ep I watched last night but enjoyed it.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

The second ep wasn't all that bad. My only concern is that Ichabod is still too comfortable with being in the 21st century. I don't think this show will be as good as Supernatural but I can see it being ok.


----------



## scooterboy (Mar 27, 2001)

loubob57 said:


> I immediately noticed the population being 144,000 and said "ooohhh!"





jamesbobo said:


> Doesn't mean anything to me.


It means that this show is 1000 times more gross than other shows.


----------



## nyny523 (Oct 31, 2003)

I am still somewhat on the fence but my SP stands.

We'll see how it stacks up against all my other shows...I am going to eventually start shedding and that is when I will decide if it makes the final cut...


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

The SP stays for now. Pleasantly surprised to see John Cho and Clancy Brown sticking around for a second episode. And I got a very strong Sarah Connor vibe from the institutionalized sister. I'm sure that was entirely intentional.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

The first two eps have been ok, I'm just not sure I want to watch another supernatural monster of the week show. It's going to have to depend on how many other new shows I want to keep watching.


----------



## aepman (Oct 3, 2000)

Well, I did not find the second episode to be nearly as good as the first one. Still, it wasn't so bad that I won't continue to watch. It's a new show. I expect it to have good and bad episodes. If the episodes continue to be like this one, I will eventually drop it. For now, I'm still on board.


----------



## SoBelle0 (Jun 25, 2002)

Kablemodem said:


> This show is too scary for me. I had to turn a light on. Let me know if you want to come over to watch with me next week.


Sounds perfect! I'll make popcorn.


----------



## Kablemodem (May 26, 2001)

OK, I'll PM my address to you.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

So far I'm liking this show better than any of the other new shows I've watched. So it's at the top of my list right now for new shows.


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

RGM1138 said:


> Ichabod seemed to adjust pretty quickly to a life 250 years into the future, with horseless carriages, electric lights, flying machines, tv, voices coming from a box, Netflix etc.
> 
> That's pretty handy.


I expected a scene where he expressed dissatisfaction with the capabilities of his ChromeCaster.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

Best moments in the second episode for me: Ichabod's flip comment about remembering how to use a firearm, then the bit where he's surprised that it had another shot in it.

Worst moments for me: Well, most of it. I mean, more power to you if you like the gothic horror stuff. I have no excuse for thinking this might have ended up anything but that. But this episode really cemented for me that that's what it really is, and the man-out-of-time stuff is just in service to it.

Guess I'll be in the room while my wife watches it, doing something else, so I can catch the fun bits and then tune out for the "dimly lit things shuffling around" scenes.


----------



## tlc (May 30, 2002)

I'm surprised at the love here for this. This thread is the only reason I watched a second episode. I like SF (although not all TV SF), but this show is just silly.


----------



## jehma (Jan 22, 2003)

I like the silliness. 

I think the interaction between the two leads is well written and acted. I hope the storyline can maintain the same quality.


----------



## Crobinzine (Dec 29, 2005)

The Spud said:


> Diamonds are forever. . .and so are the Four Horsemen.
> 
> If you wanted obscure you could have gone with Paul Roma.
> 
> :up:


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

After watching three episodes I think I'll be sticking with this show for it's entire run.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Tonight was good and I see what some others meant by its fear factor. It is a bit scary at times.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

I watched E01 and started on E02 when I decided to set it free. I don't think it was, over all, that bad but it just didn't grab me in a way that I enjoyed watching. I kept wanting to go do dishes or something.

I think the lead actor was pretty good and I, too, enjoyed seeing Cho. But it was just a bridge too far for me. For those who are enjoying it, I hope it continues to do well.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

sharkster said:


> I watched E01 and started on E02 when I decided to set it free. I don't think it was, over all, that bad but it just didn't grab me in a way that I enjoyed watching. I kept wanting to go do dishes or something.


I'm sorry, but you're just plain wrong.

It was one of your favorite shows of the new season.


----------



## dwit (May 5, 2004)

Definitely a "one(season) and done".

However long that lasts. Probably not more than 15 or so episodes, if that.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I'm sorry, but you're just plain wrong.
> 
> It was one of your favorite shows of the new season.


Oh Rob! (she says in her best Laura Petrie voice)


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

dwit said:


> Definitely a "one(season) and done".
> 
> However long that lasts. Probably not more than 15 or so episodes, if that.


Ratings are holding well



> Sleepy Hollow built on that with 8 mil/3.0, ticking down just 8 percent and a tenth from Week 2.


----------



## tivogurl (Dec 16, 2004)

Did i miss the explanation for why and how Cho's character seems to have been involved with the Big Bad even before the beginning of the story?


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

tivogurl said:


> Did i miss the explanation for why and how Cho's character seems to have been involved with the Big Bad even before the beginning of the story?


No, there was no explanation.
The beginning of the story starts long before what happens in the first episode.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

tivogurl said:


> Did i miss the explanation for why and how Cho's character seems to have been involved with the Big Bad even before the beginning of the story?


We'll need a Flash Forward to explain this


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

Fox just renewed it for season 2.

They will not be doing a back 9 in season 1. Just 13 episodes in season 1, and then 13 more episodes for season 2. Like a cable series.

http://insidetv.ew.com/2013/10/03/sleepy-hollow-gets-surprise-renewal-for-second-season/


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

aindik said:


> Fox just renewed it for season 2.
> 
> They will not be doing a back 9 in season 1. Just 13 episodes in season 1, and then 13 more episodes for season 2. Like a cable series.
> 
> http://insidetv.ew.com/2013/10/03/sleepy-hollow-gets-surprise-renewal-for-second-season/


Crap!!! i didn't realize it would only be 13 episodes.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

aaronwt said:


> Crap!!! i didn't realize it would only be 13 episodes.


Neither did anyone until today.


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

Just 13 episodes in the first season? That might not be a bad thing -- unless they've already filmed the first 13 episodes with the expectation of doing nine more this year.


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

aindik said:


> Neither did anyone until today.


Well since The Following was to take Sleepy Hollow's slot after the winter break, I'm sure some had an inkling.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

WhiskeyTango said:


> Well since The Following was to take Sleepy Hollow's slot after the winter break, I'm sure some had an inkling.


I didn't realize that. I guess it works out well for me then since I watch both shows.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I wonder how long Ichabod will be wearing his one set of 18th century duds before he gets more modern clothes.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

I did like how they told us Ichabod has a photographic memory, with him not using the word "photographic" because photography hadn't been invented yet.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

aindik said:


> I did like how they told us Ichabod has a photographic memory, with him not using the word "photographic" because photography hadn't been invented yet.


Me too. They are nicely handling the "fish out of water" aspect -- energy drink scene, remote control, electric lights. They aren't overdoing it, IMO.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

aindik said:


> I did like how they told us Ichabod has a photographic memory, with him not using the word "photographic" because photography hadn't been invented yet.


He did use the proper term didn't he? An Eidetic memory is the proper term to use for it. A photgraphic memory is the laymans word for it.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Is Ichabod like an official police consultant now? Never mind, I'll just go with it.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

aaronwt said:


> He did use the proper term didn't he? An Eidetic memory is the proper term to use for it. A photgraphic memory is the laymans word for it.


Yep. I think in proper parlance "photographic memory" is a specific kind of eidetic memory limited to visual recollection, but the term is lost.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Good news for fans: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/05/b...w-on-fox-is-first-new-show-to-be-renewed.html


> The show's ratings earned it a vote of confidence: the premiere, on Sept. 16, one week before the formal start of the fall season, attracted 13.6 million viewers and scored a 5.0 rating among 18- to 49-year-olds, enough for Fox to call it, in a news release, the network's "most successful fall drama premiere since the debut of '24' in November 2001."


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

Someone has probably already mentioned this. Watching the most recent episode now. Why is Ichabod still wearing his old clothes?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Hoffer said:


> Someone has probably already mentioned this. Watching the most recent episode now. Why is Ichabod still wearing his old clothes?


That cracks me up. I assume it's so we won't forget that he's from the past.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> That cracks me up. I assume it's so we won't forget that he's from the past.


That is what I assume too. That it is part of his character.

Considering he seems to be doing police work, I'd think he'd want to change clothes. People would take him a lot more serious if he didn't look so odd. Every time I see him, all I think about is why he's wearing those clothes.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Sherlock, on Elementary, does a great job with that. He wears contemporary clothing that has just a subtle hint of Edwardian style. Nobody would comment on it (unless they'd seen Sherlock Holmes movies, which of course nobody on the show would have), but I think it's there.

Then again, what about Sleepy Hollow is subtle?


----------



## nyny523 (Oct 31, 2003)

I liked the last episode.

I think this show is improving.

SP remaining.


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

You just know that they're going to have a Halloween episode where Ichabod will show up in his usual clothes and someone at the party will look at him and say, "Hey, that's a great Prince look," and he'll refer disparagingly to George, Prince of Wales, who was born in 1761 and already causing scandal at age 18. (He becomes Prince Regent in 1811 and King George IV in 1820.) 

And of course only a handful of viewers would know what he's talking about, so it'll never happen.


----------



## andyw715 (Jul 31, 2007)

Filming tonight in ILM from 5pm-2am at Bellevue Cemetery (corner of 17th stand Princess Place)



Spoiler



Headless horseman chases character on horseback. Four horses on site.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

Still liking this show. Like "Supernatural" type shows. Also it's renewed for 2nd season, so that makes it a real keeper.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Another entertaining episode tonight, IMO. The writing is excellent in that they include just enough comic relief to balance out an otherwise very creepy show -- like how Ichy gave advice to the "Northstar" lady.

Also, I'm digging the police boss's "don't sweat the small stuff" attitude.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Six months to get sis out of the loony bin?

I'd be surprised if it takes much more than six weeks! 

I really enjoy this show. It's goofy, sure. But it's a good goofy. Not a dumb goofy. A FUN goofy.


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

aindik said:


> I did like how they told us Ichabod has a photographic memory, with him not using the word "photographic" because photography hadn't been invented yet.


Yet he seemed to know exactly what it meant!


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> I wonder how long Ichabod will be wearing his one set of 18th century duds before he gets more modern clothes.


I think they will probably start smelling pretty bad after 13 episodes, especially after having been buried in that cellar for more than two centuries. I suspect we'll see a wardrobe adjustment in season #2.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

andyw715 said:


> Filming tonight in ILM from 5pm-2am at Bellevue Cemetery (corner of 17th stand Princess Place)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Keep your head down!


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Beryl said:


> -- like how Ichy gave advice to the "Northstar" lady...


That, alone, was worth watching the entire episode. I'm enjoying this, too.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Hoffer said:


> Someone has probably already mentioned this. Watching the most recent episode now. Why is Ichabod still wearing his old clothes?


Based on the previews for next week it looks like that might be addressed.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

aaronwt said:


> Based on the previews for next week it looks like that might be addressed.


*SPOILERS!!!!!*


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

Might be starting to lose my patience with this show. Seems like a lot of not-very-well-explained mysticism combined with too much procedural monster of the week stuff. I'll stick with it for now.

It's almost like they don't explain enough, but also bang you over the head with exposition, if those are both possible.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

I enjoyed this weeks episode, I liked that they brought some real-life mysteries into the mix (Roanoke).


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Solidly entertaining episode. Looks like Ichy's cover is intact. Too bad we don't get another episode for *3 weeks* and nothing for Halloween.


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

Do we really need nazis in it? I was enjoying the series until then.


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

zordude said:


> I enjoyed this weeks episode, I liked that they brought some real-life mysteries into the mix (Roanoke).


Was there an explanation of why the Roanoke settlers (late 1580s?) were speaking a then archaic form of English? And what about that reference to Middle Ages? I felt a little confused through the whole episode about the timeline, why these contemporaries of Shakespeare seemed so foreign and ancient, so I probably missed something.


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

Beryl said:


> Too bad we don't get another episode for *3 weeks* and nothing for Halloween.


I wonder why, considering that there is no baseball scheduled for next Monday. It's not as if Fox has anything important to air in its place (it is being replaced by a Bones repeat on Monday, and repeats of the two latest Simpsons Halloween episodes on Friday). 10/28, I understand, as that's when World Series Game 5 is scheduled.

*CORRECTION:* Fox is airing a repeat of the pilot on Monday, which leads me to believe that they're just padding out the 13 episodes until mid-January. (If there are repeats on December 23 and 30, then the 13th episode is on January 13 - or January 6 if Fox decides to have a two-hour season finale.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Wil said:


> Was there an explanation of why the Roanoke settlers (late 1580s?) were speaking a then archaic form of English? And what about that reference to Middle Ages? I felt a little confused through the whole episode about the timeline, why these contemporaries of Shakespeare seemed so foreign and ancient, so I probably missed something.


Probably just writers who don't understand the timeline of European history?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Probably just writers who don't understand the timeline of European history?


Or just sloppiness. Certainly whatever dialect of Early Modern English that they spoke would sound distinctive to our ears and could likely be identified as being circa-late-1500s. It was probably easier for the writers to just pick phrases out of original Chaucer than it was to try to get the dialect of Early Modern English to sound right.

At least we finally got confirmation that Ichabod really considers the Headless Horseman to be specifically the Death Horseman, as opposed to the Conquest/Pestilence Horseman that they mentioned this episode (who did not appear to be riding a white horse). Too bad they did not try to match the horse colors to the Book of Revelation description of the Horsemen.


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Probably just writers who don't understand the timeline of European history?


I think every series has a bible now, going in, and given that this is a series based on British/American history I think some basics would be covered even if the writers themselves are illiterate.

It just seemed more deliberate to me, like the settlers were supposed to be more ancient and that in Roanoke they were ALREADY in the future somehow. That's what I kept expecting to develop as a plot point. Then all of a sudden it was over. What?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

john4200 said:


> Or just sloppiness. Certainly whatever dialect of Early Modern English that they spoke would sound distinctive to our ears and could likely be identified as being circa-late-1500s. It was probably easier for the writers to just pick phrases out of original Chaucer than it was to try to get the dialect of Early Modern English to sound right.


OK, but Chaucer and Shakespeare are almost literally different languages...Chaucer wrote in Middle English, and Shakespeare in Modern English. Shakespeare we can more or less understand; Chaucer, not so much. And they were definitely speaking Middle English, which hadn't been spoken for centuries when Roanoke was founded. People in Shakespeare's time (and Roanoke's time) would have been about as confused by Chaucer as we are.

It is odd that they went to the trouble of getting Middle English right (or maybe the actor was an English major who studied Chaucer?). As Wil suggested, it seemed as if they were going somewhere with it, but in the end it seems they just think Middle English was spoken at the turn of the 16th century.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Seems like Ichabod's language skillz and photographic memory take the place of this show having a computer hacker who can get information that nobody else knows.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Beryl said:


> Solidly entertaining episode. Looks like Ichy's cover is intact. Too bad we don't get another episode for *3 weeks* and nothing for Halloween.


I was pissed when I saw that. And then I remembered I always get pissed at Fox this time of year when they pre-empt the shows for Baseball. I won't be watching much on Fox for a while.

Sleepy Hollow is my favorite new show this season. Followed by The Blacklist, which I just starting watching this past weekend.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Beryl said:


> Solidly entertaining episode. Looks like Ichy's cover is intact. Too bad we don't get another episode for *3 weeks* and nothing for Halloween.


I don't remember, did someone set up his cover? I like the one guy saying hey, the boss just knows something we don't. Shrug.

It is true that someone of Icabod's time would sound a lot more weird to us than he does. He seems to just have a normal British accent without some newly minted words. I'm not sure why go to all the trouble to bring up the language difference and then not bother to get it right. Unless it means something....


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

According to the article below, Ichabod will be wearing his old clothes forever.

http://insidetv.ew.com/2013/10/15/tv-clothes/?hpt=hp_t3



> He awoke from a 200-year nap and his colonial threads still fit great. But fans are already asking if Ichabod is ever going to change into something a bit more 21st century - or even 19th century. Ichabod is impressed by donuts and hair dryers, why not blow his mind with a pair of comfy Lucky Brand jeans? Executive producer Alex Kurtzman tells us Crane will indeed keep his outfit as a reminder to the audience that he's a man displaced in time. "It's like his security blanket," Kurtzman says. "He can never feel comfortable in our world. The minute he gets comfortable, the show is over."


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

One thing I didn't quite understand; when somebody (I can't remember who) called whatever university (Oxford or Cambridge) to check on Ichabod's cover story, whoever answered said that he was a professor there and was on loan to the police. How did they arrange that?

Another thing: if the Roanokers were "all dead all along," then what caused them to appear in the first place? Did they need Ichabod "baptized" to rid them of their own plague?


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

That Don Guy said:


> whoever answered said that he was a professor there and was on loan to the police. How did they arrange that?


Why do we need to be told, specifically? I'd love to believe a producer just said, let's give the viewers some credit, and deleted a boring exposition scene from the script.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Hoffer said:


> According to the article below, Ichabod will be wearing his old clothes forever.
> 
> http://insidetv.ew.com/2013/10/15/tv-clothes/?hpt=hp_t3


Yes because putting on some jeans makes the pressure of battling demons and trying to avert the apocalypse just go away.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

That Don Guy said:


> One thing I didn't quite understand; when somebody (I can't remember who) called whatever university (Oxford or Cambridge) to check on Ichabod's cover story, whoever answered said that he was a professor there and was on loan to the police. How did they arrange that?
> 
> Another thing: if the Roanokers were "all dead all along," then what caused them to appear in the first place? Did they need Ichabod "baptized" to rid them of their own plague?


I think what caused them to appear was the boy crossing over.

My question was, why didn't Abby tell Crane that she saw the horseman?


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Hoffer said:


> According to the article below, Ichabod will be wearing his old clothes forever. http://insidetv.ew.com/2013/10/15/tv-clothes/?hpt=hp_t3


Much like the Torchwood guy, it seems.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Wil said:


> Why do we need to be told, specifically? I'd love to believe a producer just said, let's give the viewers some credit, and deleted a boring exposition scene from the script.


Credit for what? It shouldn't have happened. The fact that it _did _happen is highly significant. We really deserve to know why.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

That Don Guy said:


> One thing I didn't quite understand; when somebody (I can't remember who) called whatever university (Oxford or Cambridge) to check on Ichabod's cover story, whoever answered said that he was a professor there and was on loan to the police. How did they arrange that?


I thought the person on the phone said he wasn't a professor and they didn't have anyone on loan to the police.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

zordude said:


> I thought the person on the phone said he wasn't a professor and they didn't have anyone on loan to the police.


Wow, do you have difficulty with British accents? That is the exact opposite of what the woman on the phone said.


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

john4200 said:


> Wow, do you have difficulty with British accents? That is the exact opposite of what the woman on the phone said.


Of course she was speaking Middle English.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> OK, but Chaucer and Shakespeare are almost literally different languages...Chaucer wrote in Middle English, and Shakespeare in Modern English. Shakespeare we can more or less understand; Chaucer, not so much. And they were definitely speaking Middle English, which hadn't been spoken for centuries when Roanoke was founded. People in Shakespeare's time (and Roanoke's time) would have been about as confused by Chaucer as we are.


Actually, wikipedia puts the end of Middle English at the mid-to-late-1400s. So, one century, not "centuries".

But I think you misunderstood my point.

It would be rather difficult to write realistic-sounding dialog in some dialect of Early Modern English. But if you had some original Chaucer (preferably with a Modern English translation, line-by-line), you could easily pick Middle English phrases out and string them together, and very few people would know if you did a good job or not.

That is why I said it could just be sloppiness. Or laziness, almost the same thing.

Of course, if there are any Middle English experts who saw the show and care to comment on whether the writers did a good job on the dialog, then the above theory would be disproved (if the writers did a good job).


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

john4200 said:


> It would be rather difficult to write realistic-sounding dialog in some dialect of Early Modern English.


It would be very easy...you have all of Shakespeare to draw from.

The Middle English they used was Chaucer at the latest, and probably somewhat earlier (to be honest, it almost sounded like Old English to me, but that might have just been the way the actor pronounced it). So two centuries, at the least.


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

john4200 said:


> if there are any Middle English experts who saw the show and care to comment on whether the writers did a good job on the dialog, then the above theory would be disproved (if the writers did a good job).


I had two semesters, several centuries ago. I was an A student overall but struggled to B's in both courses. Very subjectively I'd say the writing seemed OK, no specific errors jumped out at me. But the actors' pronunciation seemed way off. Though German-like and Scots-like elements are legitimate, Middle English has a smooth Gaelic-like lilt that was totally absent in the harsh readings. Most of my experience was with poetry so I may have an unrealistic impression.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

john4200 said:


> Wow, do you have difficulty with British accents? That is the exact opposite of what the woman on the phone said.


Whew! I was about to rewatch the episode to verify what I heard. Someone ensured a solid cover for Ichy.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> It would be very easy...you have all of Shakespeare to draw from.


Sure, have them all speak in iambic pentameter!


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> two centuries, at the least


Oh, very much the least. This wasn't transition, this was hard core 12-14th century stuff and maybe even earlier.


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

> Why do we need to be told, specifically? I'd love to believe a producer just said, let's give the viewers some credit, and deleted a boring exposition scene from the script.





> Credit for what? It shouldn't have happened. The fact that it did happen is highly significant. We really deserve to know why.


At this point in the story, Ichabod doesn't know why, so how could he give us an explanation?


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Church AV Guy said:


> At this point in the story, Ichabod doesn't know why, so how could he give us an explanation?


My bet is that Ichabod doesn't know that he has an "official" Oxford cover and we'll find out what's going on eventually.

The fact that Ichabod is going to wear the same one set of clothes forever is silly. Maybe there's a supernatural spell to keep people from noticing and the clothes from getting filthy, stinky and ratty.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

I was definitely liking this episode more than the last few -- more mystery and less gothic horror, I suppose -- but boy, was the ending rushed. Wham bam, the colony vanishes for no particular reason. Wham bam, they were all dead all along, with no particular reason to think so. Wham bam, the disease mysteriously vanishes from existing patients, again, nothing established beforehand that would make that expected. I even found the captain's colluding with Abby to sneak them out seemed to need something we missed. I wonder if half the episode is on the cutting room floor. Even so, I still liked it better on the whole, and I can live without all that, but it feels missing.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

cheesesteak said:


> The fact that Ichabod is going to wear the same one set of clothes forever is silly. Maybe there's a supernatural spell to keep people from noticing and the clothes from getting filthy, stinky and ratty.


I suspect the reason is, as I theorized earlier, network/producer fear that stupid audiences will forget that he's from the past.

Whether that fear is justified is another matter.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I suspect the reason is, as I theorized earlier, network/producer fear that stupid audiences will forget that he's from the past.
> 
> Whether that fear is justified is another matter.


The fact that he doesn't have a Facebook or Twitter account makes it easier for audiences to remember he's from the Colonial days. 

I'm wondering when somebody on the show will ask what kind of f'd up name is Ichabod.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

My take on the Oxford "cover" is that the police captain anticipated it becoming an issue and arranged it before hand.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

steve614 said:


> My take on the Oxford "cover" is that the police captain anticipated it becoming an issue and arranged it before hand.


That is what I was thinking too. But you never know.


----------



## Vendikarr (Feb 24, 2004)

steve614 said:


> My take on the Oxford "cover" is that the police captain anticipated it becoming an issue and arranged it before hand.


The pilot mentioned two coven of witches in Sleepy Hollow. Perhaps a member of the good coven, who have a contact in the police department, set up a cover for him.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

steve614 said:


> My take on the Oxford "cover" is that the police captain anticipated it becoming an issue and arranged it before hand.


Yeah, it could be Oxford called the police station directly first. Got forwarded to the captain and then he arranged to have someone call the other dude and tell him Ichabod is legit.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Wow, do you have difficulty with British accents? That is the exact opposite of what the woman on the phone said.


I don't, but I may or may not have been doing something on my ipad at the time


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

steve614 said:


> My take on the Oxford "cover" is that the police captain anticipated it becoming an issue and arranged it before hand.


Why would Oxford go along with that?


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Hunter Green said:


> I was definitely liking this episode more than the last few -- more mystery and less gothic horror, I suppose -- but boy, was the ending rushed. Wham bam, the colony vanishes for no particular reason. Wham bam, they were all dead all along, with no particular reason to think so. Wham bam, the disease mysteriously vanishes from existing patients, again, nothing established beforehand that would make that expected. I even found the captain's colluding with Abby to sneak them out seemed to need something we missed. I wonder if half the episode is on the cutting room floor. Even so, I still liked it better on the whole, and I can live without all that, but it feels missing.


Yes, it felt that way to me, too. So much so that it reminded me of the exposition scene in episode 4 of Garth Marenghi's Dark Place:






NSFW: language (the s word)


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> The fact that Ichabod is going to wear the same one set of clothes forever is silly. Maybe there's a supernatural spell to keep people from noticing and the clothes from getting filthy, stinky and ratty.


Considering that he was "dead" and buried in them for about 250 years, I'm going to speculate that the clothes themselves have a spell on them to keep them from getting filthy, stinky and ratty.


----------



## Edmund (Nov 8, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> My bet is that Ichabod doesn't know that he has an "official" Oxford cover and we'll find out what's going on eventually.
> 
> The fact that Ichabod is going to wear the same one set of clothes forever is silly. Maybe there's a supernatural spell to keep people from noticing and the clothes from getting filthy, stinky and ratty.


The Cartwrights on Bonanza wore the same clothes for 14 seasons.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

Honestly while I think it's hard to make it make sense that he never buys new clothes, I'm glad they're not changing them. They just look cool. For all the ways they're going to deviate from reality that don't, I'm glad they're keeping one that does.

Plus, last night, I got someone convinced to try the show based on nothing more than a single picture:








I don't think she'd've been quite so quick to decide if he was wearing a Green Day T-shirt.


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

Edmund said:


> The Cartwrights on Bonanza were the same clothes for 14 seasons.


You beat me to it.


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

cheesesteak said:


> My bet is that Ichabod doesn't know that he has an "official" Oxford cover and we'll find out what's going on eventually.
> 
> The fact that Ichabod is going to wear the same one set of clothes forever is silly. Maybe there's a supernatural spell to keep people from noticing and the clothes from getting filthy, stinky and ratty.





Edmund said:


> The Cartwrights on Bonanza wore the same clothes for 14 seasons.


http://www.gocomics.com/drabble/2013/10/14#.Ul-PNa_n_Dc


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Church AV Guy said:


> http://www.gocomics.com/drabble/2013/10/14#.Ul-PNa_n_Dc


Since when are tattoos permanent? I thought that comic was decades old at first after reading that comment about tattoos.


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

aaronwt said:


> Since when are tattoos permanent? I thought that comic was decades old at first after reading that comment about tattoos.


I didn't draw the comic. The joke was wearing the same clothing every day, like Ichabod.


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

I'm loving this show. I just got caught up on eps to date. Fun to see John Noble! Hope he's around for more shows.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Yes. It is one of my favorite shows.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

hummingbird_206 said:


> I'm loving this show. I just got caught up on eps to date. Fun to see John Noble! Hope he's around for more shows.


In case casting news is considered a spoiler, I'll mark it so:


Spoiler



He's scheduled for several more episodes this season and is expected to have a larger part next season, assuming there is a next season.



I was glad to see Ichabod making the sensible argument that the blood connection was an opportunity not to be wasted. I felt that the refutation, though, was a bit rushed -- the sin-eater made a point that there's four horsemen, not just one, and they can't afford to lose Ichabod only taking out one of them, but it wasn't said quite that clearly.

It felt a bit silly to have all the "but what's a sin-eater?" stuff at the start. Even if Abby's never heard of sin-eaters, she's heard of Google, right? (Not that that would have helped her find one, but she should at least have known what one was.)

So Katrina turns out to be not just a witch, but a Dutch Quaker Witch. Now that's a pretty specialized character class. The backstory bits were nicely done in general, though. I have to wonder how much budget they blew on that.

Amused that they come back from a baseball-induced break to a baseball scene.


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

I think that often shows (not just this one) explain things to a character more to educate the audience than the character. I didn't know what they meant by a sin-eater, so I was glad it got explained to Abbie.

I just caught up on 4 eps, so didn't realize the show had been on break for baseball. Thanks for pointing out that tie-in. That is pretty funny!


----------



## loubob57 (Mar 19, 2001)

hummingbird_206 said:


> I'm loving this show. I just got caught up on eps to date. Fun to see John Noble! Hope he's around for more shows.


Walter Bishop is on Sleepy Hollow!


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

I have increasingly liked this show with each episode, until now. I know I'm very much in the minority, but John Noble is the biggest reason I didn't like Fringe and his presence on this show will reduce it's watchability.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

scandia101 said:


> I have increasingly liked this show with each episode, until now. _*I know I'm very much in the minority, *_but John Noble is the biggest reason I didn't like Fringe and his presence on this show will reduce it's watchability.


Yes, you definitely are...


----------



## loubob57 (Mar 19, 2001)

Bierboy said:


> Yes, you definitely are...


I'll have to agree. Most fans of Fringe really liked John Noble.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

I didn't care for Fringe, though what little I watched, he seemed the best part of. But that doesn't matter, because I'm always happy to see Denethor in Sleepy Hollow, whatever else you guys think.


----------



## Gerryex (Apr 24, 2004)

scandia101 said:


> I have increasingly liked this show with each episode, until now. I know I'm very much in the minority, but John Noble is the biggest reason I didn't like Fringe and his presence on this show will reduce it's watchability.


Not that much of a minority as I agree 100% with you!!!

Gerry


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Well, that was intense. 

The way this series blends witchcraft, historical references, and Christianity to fight demons is so interesting. 

I near fell on the floor laughing during the Jefferson/Hemings and Midnight Ride discussions.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

Hunter Green said:


> ...assuming there is a next season.


Above bit was in his spoiler. This show was already picked up for next season, right??


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

Hoffer said:


> Above bit was in his spoiler. This show was already picked up for next season, right??


I hope so. I'm really enjoying it.

Irving seemed pretty freaked out when he finally saw the HH. And they trapped death, cool!


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

It has been picked up...


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

Beryl said:


> I near fell on the floor laughing during the Jefferson/Hemings and Midnight Ride discussions.


Remember, this is a "parallel universe" - what happens there does not necessarily have to match what happened in reality.

Trivia: no wonder the Headless Horseman is so hard to kill - according to the closing credits, there are three of them! (One for "normal" shots, one for when he is riding a horse, and one when he is using weapons. I am a little surprised he gets credited at all, since he never says anything - or at least, that's the excuse _Glee_ gives for never crediting the character Jordan Stern, aka "Neckbrace Cheerio.")


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

The latest episode (The Midnight Ride [11/11/2013]) was the best of them all so far. I was disappointed it ended.

Abby looks good in jeans.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

That Don Guy said:


> Remember, this is a "parallel universe" - what happens there does not necessarily have to match what happened in reality.


Is that why there was no mention of Israel Bissell?


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

Beryl said:


> Well, that was intense.
> 
> The way this series blends witchcraft, historical references, and Christianity to fight demons is so interesting.
> 
> I near fell on the floor laughing during the Jefferson/Hemings and Midnight Ride discussions.


They played a little loose with the facts on the Jefferson/Hemings story. Still love the show.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

cheesesteak said:


> The latest episode (The Midnight Ride [11/11/2013]) was the best of them all so far. I was disappointed it ended. Abby looks good in jeans.


I've liked all the episodes so far, but I think each one had been getting successively better. I feel like the show is really finding its footing, now. I loved the whole bit with the "innanet" and the laptop, even though it was predictable how it played out.

I was a little confused by the Captain in this episode. I had had the sense (from the pilot episode, maybe?) that he was "in the know" and somehow tied to the larger backstory. But in this episode it seemed like he hadn't really believed them before and was just humoring them, but now he sees and believes. So before he didn't?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

danterner said:


> But in this episode it seemed like he hadn't really believed them before and was just humoring them, but now he sees and believes. So before he didn't?


The applicable phrase is "seeing is believing". He did not truly believe before, but he also did not think Abbie was lying to him. He was conflicted. It took actually seeing the headless horseman for him to truly believe.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

danterner said:


> I've liked all the episodes so far, but I think each one had been getting successively better. I feel like the show is really finding its footing, now. I loved the whole bit with the "innanet" and the laptop, even though it was predictable how it played out.


I don't think he's smart enough to be dumb enough to accidentally get porn that easily. 


danterner said:


> I was a little confused by the Captain in this episode. I had had the sense (from the pilot episode, maybe?) that he was "in the know" and somehow tied to the larger backstory. But in this episode it seemed like he hadn't really believed them before and was just humoring them, but now he sees and believes. So before he didn't?


Perhaps he's involved, but not in a way in which the inner (magical) workings of the organization are revealed?


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I keep wondering where the Headless Horseman gets his AK-47 bullets from. It's not like he's buying them from the guns and ammo aisle at Walmart.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

The HH has help with ammo and such per the dead cop "protecting" Abbie.


----------



## Carlucci (Jan 10, 2001)

I totally lost it when Abby listened to the voicemail that Ichabod had left it in the same format as a formal letter. Then later, when he was outraged that we actually purchase our drinking water. Funny stuff!


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

Carlucci said:


> I totally lost it when Abby listened to the voicemail that Ichabod had left it in the same format as a formal letter. Then later, when he was outraged that we actually purchase our drinking water. Funny stuff!


How about his reaction to the adult web page? Closes computer, reopens it, "Still here." Slams the lid back down. "That's very inappropriate!"


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> I keep wondering where the Headless Horseman gets his AK-47 bullets from. It's not like he's buying them from the guns and ammo aisle at Walmart.


Are you saying Walmart discriminates against the headless?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

JYoung said:


> Are you saying Walmart discriminates against the headless?


I guess it depends on how closely they check his ID.

"Hmmm, this really doesn't look very much like you..."


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Another good episode last night. Ichabod learns the fist bump.

I would have thought that the Horseman seemed a lot bigger than Ichabod's friend Abraham.

Abby's sister's eyebrows distract me.

I noticed for the first time that the Captain's last name is Irving.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

At first I thought this show was crazy.

Then I realized it's crazier than that...it's too crazy.

Then I realized it's crazier then that...it's just crazy enough.

Call me crazy, but I love this crazy %@$!


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Abbie is quite the underachiever at killing demons. She said they tried everything. I beg to differ.

1) Burning with fire

2) Burning with thermite (which besides hellishly hot, emits a lot of UV light)

3) Burning or cutting to bits with an industrial UV laser

4) Chopping to little bits with a chainsaw

5) Freezing with liquid nitrogen and then shattering into tiny pieces

6) Putting in a steel box which is dropped in a big hole and filled with concrete

7) Dissolving in acid

8) Squishing into a pancake with a hydraulic press or car crusher

9) Slicing off of arms and legs, and have each body part (and torso, and head) separately launched into the sun

10) Putting in a steel box with thousands of flesh eating beetles

I could probably go on, but I'll stop there for now.

We could always go with Abbie's (and Ichabod's) solution -- make every stupid move possible so that he can get away.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Abbie is quite the underachiever at killing demons. She said they tried everything. I beg to differ...


It's another take on what we see in so many tv shows, a very small group of people face a potential world changing evil and decide not to seek help from the rest of the planet's very smart and very resourceful inhabitants.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> At first I thought this show was crazy.
> 
> Then I realized it's crazier than that...it's too crazy.
> 
> ...


I'm just getting caught up with the season and we agree.
Once you accept the premise it is well written with _very_ charismatic leads ((cough Icabod is smokin' cough)). We love all the tie ins.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> It's another take on what we see in so many tv shows, a very small group of people face a potential world changing evil and decide not to seek help from the rest of the planet's very smart and very resourceful inhabitants.


They do have a point in the whole "we don't know who we can trust" aspect, though. They've got plenty of evidence that there's folks out there working against them, hidden amongst them.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

cheesesteak said:


> It's another take on what we see in so many tv shows, a very small group of people face a potential world changing evil and decide not to seek help from the rest of the planet's very smart and very resourceful inhabitants.


Yes, a common trope.

I was just remembering that I think they may have tried a few of the ten I listed on the head, but certainly not on the body, and definitely not all ten of the ones I listed.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

cheesesteak said:


> It's another take on what we see in so many tv shows, a very small group of people face a potential world changing evil and decide not to seek help from the rest of the planet's very smart and very resourceful inhabitants.


Besides potential traitors, there's the problem of getting anyone to believe you. Of course once they had the horseman chained up, that would be a little easier. Still, it's possible they would just lock you in the nearest asylum and the world would be doomed.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

stellie93 said:


> Besides potential traitors, there's the problem of getting anyone to believe you. Of course once they had the horseman chained up, that would be a little easier.


A little???

I'd say it would be a lot easier. If you show any sane person a headless body that is "alive", and allow them to examine it, certainly they would "believe you".

Alternatively, show them a severed head that cannot be crushed by hitting with a hammer. Let them try to destroy the head in any way they like. Either they succeed in destroying it, or they will soon "believe you". Win-Win.


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

Good Grief. The first thing I did after acquiring the UV lights would have been to stop by home depot and buy a backup generator.

The second thing I would have done would be to chop off his limbs. While he appears to be unkillable, it's obvious from his name ("The Headless Horseman"), that he is susceptible to having body parts severed. "The Armless Legless Headless Horseman" would not be nearly as much trouble.

The third thing I would do is if we have an undead police officer, who explicitly tells us he has sold his soul to a demon, must do whatever the demon tells him to, and that he is not to be trusted ... is never, ever, put that person unsupervised in a room with something I want not to escape. 

Altogether I'm still liking this show. Perhaps even liking it more each week. Making the horseman be Ichabod's long lost buddy we've never heard of who is upset over a love triangle gone wrong was a bit silly, but it can be forgiven.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

smbaker said:


> Good Grief. The first thing I did after acquiring the UV lights would have been to stop by home depot and buy a backup generator.


I thought the SAME thing. 


smbaker said:


> The second thing I would have done would be to chop off his limbs. While he appears to be unkillable, it's obvious from his name ("The Headless Horseman"), that he is susceptible to having body parts severed. "The Armless Legless Headless Horseman" would not be nearly as much trouble.


Not so sure that would work. His bones may be as indestructible as his head. Bullets seems to slow him down though.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Beryl said:


> Not so sure that would work. His bones may be as indestructible as his head.


Not his neck bones. Or at least the cartilage and muscle holding the vertebrae together was parted. So I assume the same thing could be done at arm joints and leg joints. At least, it would be worth a try.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

smbaker said:


> "The Armless Legless Headless Horseman" would not be nearly as much trouble.


The Armless Legless Headless....doorstop? If the body is not crushable, you could use it to stop those heavy blast-proof doors that come down when you don't want them to!


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

So, Headley turns out to be Icky's former best mate. And Katrina's former betrothed. Truly, an eternal triangle. 

Interesting how that Jenny, only a couple days removed from an asylum, is a butt-kickin' ninja, all trained up in weapons proficiency.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

smbaker said:


> The second thing I would have done would be to chop off his limbs. While he appears to be unkillable, it's obvious from his name ("The Headless Horseman"), that he is susceptible to having body parts severed. "The Armless Legless Headless Horseman" would not be nearly as much trouble.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

There's got to be an active volcano somewhere that they can drop the Horseman's head in. Of course, this is a tv show and the Horseman would probably climb down into the volcano and back out with little problem.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Beryl said:


> Not so sure that would work. His bones may be as indestructible as his head. Bullets seems to slow him down though.


Plus, I'm pretty sure his head was chopped off BEFORE he became, well, the Headless Horseman.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Plus, I'm pretty sure his head was chopped off BEFORE he became, well, the Headless Horseman.


 Technically true, but he was Molochified while he still had his head. They caught him, shaved off his hair, branded his hand and gave him the tattoo on his head, put on the leather mask, etc, while he was still headed - and his eyes opened all cloudy with Moloch standing over him at that point. So I'd say he went all supernatural and became the Horseman while he still had his head. The headless part came later, in battle with Ichabod while he was ready the Horseman, and so I agree that if you can cut off the Horseman's head it stands to reason that his limbs should be fair game, too.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> Another good episode last night. Ichabod learns the fist bump.


Bones doesn't even know the fist bump. On this week's episode she high-fived Booth's attempt at a fist bump.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Also it would be a good idea to keep the legs and arms and stuff all in different locations.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

The show has been getting a bit buzzy so I decided to jump in. Glad I did (and good show, Fox, for putting the entire season on your website). Ready for my first first-run episode tonight. Quick-hit thoughts from me:

1. I thought the first couple of episodes were really fun, and then the show sagged a bit for the next few, before picking back up and really building over these last couple. It's probably good/bad that they're willing to move the plot along so fast: good in that they're not (so far) stretching anything out to where there can't possibly be a payoff to it; bad in that how long can they keep this up?

2. I'm glad that they brought Captain Irving into the plot. This just wouldn't have worked if they had kept him outside of it, always standing in the way.

3. I don't much like the character of Abbie's sister. (And as someone else posted upthread, her eyebrows are distracting.) I hate the idea that she's been secretly bouncing around the world getting all Sarah Connor trained and has the answers to everything at her fingertips. It was hard enough to buy that the sheriff was on to all of this to begin with; him somehow funding her to be his mercenary, while she had a mental institution as her home base, and her just happening to be super-competent enough to fit the part, is a bit of an eye-roller. And that's even considering what else is going on in the plot!

4. Crane conveniently having an eidetic memory, and otherwise being a know-it-all who happens also to have seen it all, doesn't bother me. It's a good character. But the show only needs one such person, another reason the sister Jenny bugs me a bit.

5. Upthread, people were wondering about his clothes. In the first or second ep, they showed him in his motel room washing them out and drying them with the hair dryer.

6. As is commonly observed, the best parts of the show are the interplay between Crane and Abbie as he learns about the modern world. Some of that is really clever, such as Crane leaving her a voicemail that he composed as though it were a letter. And the two actors have a good natural chemistry and are appealing together. Good casting.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

So does anyone else here _not_ trust Katrina?

She seems very tight with information- it seems like Ichabod has to drag it out of her each time she appears. She didn't tell him she was a witch, she didn't tell him she was pregnant, and she seems to wear a lot of different hats- witch, Quaker, nurse, betrothed to that arrogant Abraham guy.

And Moloch is keeping her in purgatory- why?
What did she do to tick him off?
Why won't he allow the Horseman to kill Ichabod?

Interestingly- according to Wiki, Moloch had associations with propitiatory child sacrifice by parents. 
They said on the show that he is known as the God of Child Sacrifice. 
Why would Moloch send a minion after Ichabods son the minute he was born? 
Why did the protection spell on the sanctuary fail the moment the child was born?

I'm not going anywhere specific with all of this- I just think Katrina is hinky and Moloch is angry with her for a reason. 
I think Ichabod is going to be a very sad man when he finds out the truth about her. Sadder than when he found out that he had a son.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Cearbhaill said:


> So does anyone else here _not_ trust Katrina?
> 
> She seems very tight with information- it seems like Ichabod has to drag it out of her each time she appears. She didn't tell him she was a witch, she didn't tell him she was pregnant, and she seems to wear a lot of different hats- witch, Quaker, nurse, betrothed to that arrogant Abraham guy.


I think you are reading too much into a show that is just not that sophisticated. For the first one or two episodes I thought the show might be quite clever, but I soon realized it is not. I think the issues you bring up are just plot devices -- the writers wanted to withhold information from the viewers and/or the writers did not think of what they wanted to happen until later. So Ichabod did not know, but he had to find out, so, aha, we'll just make Katrina withhold the information.

As for why the demon wants Ichabod and Katrina's son, I assume it is the usual sort of fantasy thing. Two special parents have a son destined to be powerful and/or useful and/or a hostage. And the protection spell obviously failed because the demon arranged for it to fail so he could try to get the child.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Finally realized where I recognized Abbie's sister Ms. Eyebrows from - Nikita.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

john4200 said:


> I think you are reading too much into a show that is just not that sophisticated.


You may be right, but I am going on the record here in predicting that Katrina will betray Ichabod somehow that involves the child and Moloch.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Cearbhaill said:


> You may be right, but I am going on the record here in predicting that Katrina will betray Ichabod somehow that involves the child and Moloch.


I'm wondering the the takeaway from the latest revelation isn't the child, but the child's current descendent(s)?

My immediate thought was, who do we know who is descended from Ichabod?


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I'm wondering the the takeaway from the latest revelation isn't the child, but the child's current descendent(s)?
> My immediate thought was, who do we know who is descended from Ichabod?


I went the same place however I really had wanted Abbie and Ichabod to wind up related for so many reasons, so I was disappointed they didn't go there. Clearly they're setting it up for us to have someone in plain sight related to Ichabod.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Was John Noble just a one-episode guest star, or will he be back? If he'll be back, maybe that could be the tie they use to bring him aboard.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

danterner said:


> Was John Noble just a one-episode guest star, or will he be back? If he'll be back, maybe that could be the tie they use to bring him aboard.


Not sure if answering needs a spoiler tag, but:



Spoiler



Yes, he'll be back. He's in the next episode, and I think is planned for more next season.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

And based on this most recent ep, it appears Walter Henry will be helping Icky and Abby willingly...


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Bierboy said:


> And based on this most recent ep, it appears Walter Henry will be helping Icky and Abby willingly...


They just need to get him better transportation than that damn train.

Greg


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

gchance said:


> They just need to get him better transportation than that damn train.
> 
> Greg


Perhaps....but I'm a train geek and love traveling by rail


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Bierboy said:


> Perhaps....but I'm a train geek and love traveling by rail


Moi aussi.


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

gchance said:


> They just need to get him better transportation than that damn train.


Maybe they're waiting for a product placement deal with a car company?

Ford tends to be Fox's company of choice, given the placements on Alcatraz and New Girl.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

That Don Guy said:


> Maybe they're waiting for a product placement deal with a car company?
> 
> Ford tends to be Fox's company of choice, given the placements on Alcatraz and New Girl.


Well, we know that next season


Spoiler



Crane is going to learn how to drive (as is Mison!) so it could be quite entertaining.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Well THAT's how you do a season finale!
Zombie George Washington!
New clothes!
And it's so perfect that Ichabod disdains hipsters with their artisan marmalade! 
Yolanda beats Siri every time 

I yelled "Don't eat it!" and "Don't drink it!"

There's not a single solitary character on this show that isn't in a dire cliff hanging situation- to the point where we have no idea who will manage to extricate themselves first to be able to save the rest of them.

Although the idea of Crane in that coffin until next fall is horrible.

I am in another forum where it had been speculated that Jeremy would return as War, but no one managed to link Henry Parrish to Jeremy. But now duh! of course- I doubt John Noble would have signed on to play a quiet old man who only wanted to sit and do his crossword puzzles. Now he has a role worthy of his talents.

I loved that side eye Katrina gave Crane and Abbie as they said their goodbyes- even she can see their chemistry. 
I really think Abbie insisted on staying behind to spare Crane having to deliver her soul/betray her as prophesied and the attendant guilt he would suffer. 

Gotta rewatch! There's a lot to keep up with.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Yeah, this show quietly turned into one of my favorites, without me even noticing.

I loved Ichy giving perhaps the worst assault on capitalism ever ("The upgrade cycle is evil. I want a new phone.").


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I got caught up on the show over the weekend. Still have to watch last night's 2 episodes.

I can't believe we finally saw him in some modern clothes and then he immediately put his rags back on.

I really enjoyed the episodes with the headless horseman. So, it turns out he is really Crane's buddy who he "stole" his wife from. Does this mean the horseman was not Death or was Death within him?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Hoffer said:


> I really enjoyed the episodes with the headless horseman. So, it turns out he is really Crane's buddy who he "stole" his wife from. Does this mean the horseman was not Death or was Death within him?


He's Death in the same way Walter is War. They haven't explained the mechanism (as far as I can recall), but they've never even hinted that these people aren't the actual literal Horsemen of the Apocalypse. So presumably, the spirit of the horseman uses the body of the human to express itself on Earth.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> He's Death in the same way Walter Henry is War.


Haha.
Don't catch you making mistakes _ever_, so had to do it.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Cearbhaill said:


> Haha.
> Don't catch you making mistakes _ever_, so had to do it.


Hardly a mistake...he'll ALWAYS be Walter!


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

This was an excellent season finale. I did not see that coming. Now I wish the season was longer.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

Is season 2 also going to be 13 episodes?


----------



## jamesl (Jul 12, 2012)

Cearbhaill said:


> ...
> 
> There's not a single solitary character on this show that isn't in a dire cliff hanging situation- to the point where we have no idea who will manage to extricate themselves first to be able to save the rest of them.
> ..


Sleepy Hollow - Supernatural crossover 
Sam and Dean and Castiel to the rescue


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

Now I have to wait until Sept/Oct for the next ep?

What kind of crack dealing/cliff hanging deal are you running here FOX?

Not to mention that the local affil screwed up a break and blacked out over 4 minutes of program.


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

Hoffer said:


> Is season 2 also going to be 13 episodes?


Presumably, Fox will announce this at their Up Fronts in May. I am expecting 13, but wouldn't be surprised if they make it 22 for next season.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Hardly a mistake...he'll ALWAYS be Walter!


Even though I know that John Noble can shift characterization in a blink of an eye, I still was totally caught off guard when he shifted from "Henry" to Jeremy/War.

Great actor, that man.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

That Don Guy said:


> Presumably, Fox will announce this at their Up Fronts in May. I am expecting 13, but wouldn't be surprised if they make it 22 for next season.


I hope they don't (22). This is a show that seems capable of sustaining itself for a while with shorter seasons, and a break in between to generate more story. I think it would fall apart at normal full-season length.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Cearbhaill said:


> Although the idea of Crane in that coffin until next fall is horrible.


So this.


cmontyburns said:


> I hope they don't (22). This is a show that seems capable of sustaining itself for a while with shorter seasons, and a break in between to generate more story. I think it would fall apart at normal full-season length.


Agreed. SH is one of the few shows I purchased this season -- Amazon. I've gone back and watched a couple of episodes and there were definitely signs that lead to the twist.


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

JYoung said:


> Even though I know that John Noble can shift characterization in a blink of an eye, I still was totally caught off guard when he shifted from "Henry" to Jeremy/War.
> 
> Great actor, that man.


That gave me a bit of a head snap. I had to rewind to grasp what had actually just happened.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Beryl said:


> Agreed. SH is one of the few shows I purchased this season -- Amazon. I've gone back and watched a couple of episodes and there were definitely signs that lead to the twist.


Me too. I have rewatched a ridiculous amount of times. I have them in my DVR too, but the picture quality from Amazon is _astoundingly_ good.
However it's mostly because I have a hilariously preteen level crush on Ichabod 
Not Tom Mison. _Ichabod Crane_. 
It would be embarrassing if it wasn't so absurd.



RGM1138 said:


> That gave me a bit of a head snap. I had to rewind to grasp what had actually just happened.


I swear I missed the next minute of his rant as I sat there with my hand over my mouth. Gobsmacked describes it well.


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

Cearbhaill said:


> Me too. I have rewatched a ridiculous amount of times. I have them in my DVR too, but the picture quality from Amazon is _astoundingly_ good.
> However it's mostly because I have a hilariously preteen level crush on Ichabod
> Not Tom Mison. _Ichabod Crane_.
> It would be embarrassing if it wasn't so absurd.
> ...


Indeed.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Hardly a mistake...he'll ALWAYS be Walter!


...no, he'll always be Denethor. 

I love what they did to us. That the signs are all there. The way they played with us with his last name. The way "the sign" was the sign. And yet it was all a true surprise.

My only concern, and it's a mild one, is about Ichabod. Early into the season he had a nice balance of being impressed by the good in the present day (e.g., Abbie isn't just emancipated but considered a fully competent person on equal footing with white males in her job) as being irked by the bad (e.g., how poorly a certain Scottish restaurant makes pomme frites). But just like how sitcom characters gradually have their one easy-joke factor get slowly, insidiously increased as time passes until it loses its charm, I think the writers are finding the easy laugh of Ichabod being cranky about something in the modern age is too tempting, and they're not balancing it as much with him being impressed with the good. Right now, the balance isn't too far off; we still see him liking a new phone even as he criticizes it, for instance. But this kind of change is always slow and insidious so it's easy to have it happen before you realize it, and I'm worried that's what's going to happen with Ichabod, if they don't notice themselves doing it, see the subtle trend.


----------



## jehma (Jan 22, 2003)

Fantastic episode! I love this show. Cearbhaill - Ichabod is incredibly cute 

I missed something, though. Why did WarHenryJeremyWalter wait all those years to become War? Did he need his parents there and together to do so?


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

jehma said:


> I missed something, though. Why did WarHenryJeremyWalter wait all those years to become War? Did he need his parents there and together to do so?


My guess is, he needed Ichabod to get Katrina out of Purgatory (otherwise, why would he bother telling him not to eat or drink anything offered to him while he was there?).


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

jehma said:


> Fantastic episode! I love this show. Cearbhaill - Ichabod is incredibly cute
> 
> I missed something, though. Why did WarHenryJeremyWalter wait all those years to become War? Did he need his parents there and together to do so?


He only got out 13 years ago when Moloch raised him up in front of Abbie and Jenny.
Since then he has been a sin-eater, for what purpose we know not.
Speculation is that he was gaining strength and evil by eating those sins.

In other words it remains to be seen


----------



## jehma (Jan 22, 2003)

Cearbhaill said:


> He only got out 13 years ago when Moloch raised him up in front of Abbie and Jenny.
> Since then he has been a sin-eater, for what purpose we know not.
> Speculation is that he was gaining strength and evil by eating those sins.
> 
> In other words it remains to be seen


Yes, I was asking why he waited 13 years. That's a reasonable theory and I'm glad to see it's only speculation at this point (and that I didn't miss a major plot point).


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

The world is lucky that I'm not Abby. When Katrina said that somebody would have to replace her in Purgatory, I'd have been walking back to the door. "See, ya!"

I'll miss this show. It got better as it went along.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Cearbhaill said:


> I am in another forum where it had been speculated that Jeremy would return as War, but no one managed to link Henry Parrish to Jeremy. But now duh! of course- I doubt John Noble would have signed on to play a quiet old man who only wanted to sit and do his crossword puzzles. Now he has a role worthy of his talents.


Well, maybe not on that other forum, but here we were on to it...



Rob Helmerichs said:


> I'm wondering the the takeaway from the latest revelation isn't the child, but the child's current descendent(s)?
> 
> My immediate thought was, who do we know who is descended from Ichabod?





danterner said:


> Was John Noble just a one-episode guest star, or will he be back? If he'll be back, maybe that could be the tie they use to bring him aboard.


Great finale.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

cheesesteak said:


> The world is lucky that I'm not Abby. When Katrina said that somebody would have to replace her in Purgatory, I'd have been walking back to the door. "See, ya!"




I was thinking that it would be a good place for Andy. (Poor sod.)


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

danterner said:


> Well, maybe not on that other forum, but here we were on to it...


I certainly wouldn't say "we were on to it..." based on those two vague comments (no offense to Rob and you)...


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Every Time Ichabod Is Confused By Modern Life on Sleepy Hollow

Not quite. It doesn't cover the final two episodes of season 1.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

I just started watching the two hour season ender, so I haven't actually read this thread yet, but just wanted to say that I wish someone could get the demons to improve their diction and enunciation.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

unitron said:


> I just started watching the two hour season ender, so I haven't actually read this thread yet, but just wanted to say that I wish someone could get the demons to improve their diction and enunciation.


Would YOU want to be the one to tell them that?

Greg


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

It is hard to enunciate when you have no head.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

Finally watched this. GREAT season finale. Really cranked up the story and had me leaning forward in my chair even!


----------

