# 24 Day 5 (Season 5 - OAD 2/6/06) 1:00pm - 2:00pm *spoilers*



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

After gripes and complaints in last week's 24 thread, here's a new spoiler disclaimer for all to follow.



Before anyone gets their self all in a bunch, please read this disclaimer carefully. 

By reading any item in this thread you are hereby forfeiting your right to complain about any spoiler about any show, past, present, or future, that may or may not be discussed in this thread -- i.e., any darned thing goes. The entire thread will be assumed to possibly include a spoiler on any and every show ever made or that ever could be made, meaning preview spoilers don't need tags, spoilers of info on past shows don't need tags, etc.

Don't like it? Then stop whining and complaining when people do occassionally slip up and mention what you consider possibly spoilers. If you read a thread about a current show, then assume it discusses that show and possible future events on that show. It would also be wise to assume that discussion about a show may include discussion of similar shows or similar events in other shows. Discussions about an episode may well include discussion of future events that may revolve around material that was in preview information.

Again, try to remember the old internet adage: don't be easily annoyed, and don't be annoying. Let a few things slide and worry over bigger issues.


==


With this all said, please be respectful of other readers and forum members. Just because the thread title says "*spoilers*" doesn't mean you should be openly discussing preview information. (D'uh! I know that the words above should be saying that it's ok, but please assume it's not and also assume that someone will get p.o.'d because they read the spoiler information that came from previews or other outside sources).

Try to consider that others may not be watching the previews, and while they may be excited about coming episodes, they would rather have those events unfold next week, rather than in the discussion this week.


Thanks and hopefully we can all avoid seeing WW3 break out over the weekly 24 thread.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

Well, well, well.... (will update a bit as I go here)

The President tells the first lady that he needs her, and then leads her on when Mike Novick tells him that he needs time to construct a story and cover-up Cummings involvement with the terrorists. What a friggin' worm Logan is.

Jack talks to Audrey and introduces the opening that brings Ms. almost married to a mountain lion, or almost kidnapped by the crazed individual that could have helped her wind up in a shotgun (or some other sort of gun  ) wedding (Kevin Dillon, later to become 'Drama' on Entourage) back to CTU. Thanks for nothing writers (or is it writer? Manny Coto solo or no?)

Meanwhile, we finally learn where the penthouse is, and find out who was behind the bed -- the object of so much speculation last week. Is it just a throw-away player, or is it someone that will be a key for future events. Jack seems awfully suspicious of Mr. computer genius' female friend.

Meanwhile Mr. computer genius' is about to find out just what drastic measures Jack is willing to go to. He tells Jack to go to hell, and Jack promises to send him there unless he cooperates. Can someone remind me again why we don't have Jack Bauer in charge of interrogating the scum at Gitmo and/or at the bases in the mid-east? Ooops, sorry, don't mean to interject politics here.


Ok, another great frustration moment - just what the hell does the hobbit think he is doing accepting a deal with the scum? Not enough time. B.S. Let jack work him over darn it.


Argh, Walt Cummings takes the coward's way out, or is given the coward's way out as his reward by someone else in the admin. Is it possible that Novick helped him take that path or no?


Oh, we also get to see the Hobbit taking time off from CTU to run off and help his female friend/ sister/ former spouse/ whatever only to get himself jumped. As if he couldn't send someone else to meet her, and/or as if we're so stupid that we've never seen civilians brought into CTU as if nothing is going on.

Jack now gets to explain to the poor young lady that she is headed off with the bad guy and there is nothing he can do about it. Promises her that he'll help her, but she knows he can't. Ain't life fun when your boss makes you make a deal with the devil?


Oh what fun, great product placement for Blackberry. I wonder if NTP will sue them for the breach of the patents that had to be involved in this show? 


Damn, you could see that coming from about 6 miles away. Nice cliff-hanger to set up next week's show. Gee, I wonder who they get to do the programming now? Oh, wait, perhaps the chip was already done?


I'll pass on the preview spoilers, but will say yet again they are quite predictable... and confirm yet again what we have come to expect from a few different characters.


----------



## cheerdude (Feb 27, 2001)

Saw both killings coming a mile away...

Still a good episode - I was half-expecting Kim to show up (maybe next episode with her pet cougar?)


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

Rudy go down!

Where was Frodo or the Notre Dame guys to back him up?


----------



## rlc1 (Sep 15, 2003)

This has got to stand as the best line of the season: 

"By the time I'm finished with you, you're gonna wish you felt this good again".


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

rlc1 said:


> This has got to stand as the best line of the season:
> 
> "By the time I'm finished with you, you're gonna wish you felt this good again".


My roommates line "Where is the lamp?"


----------



## crowfan (Dec 27, 2003)

OK, was I the only one who saw John McCain? When they were coming back from the commercial, the time on the "24 clock" was 1:32. It was in the upper left panel. If that wasn't him, it looked a *lot* like him.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Is it a requirement that to work in the upper levels of CTU you must have an immediate family member who's involved with scum?


----------



## johnnyappleseed4 (Feb 7, 2006)

Hello, forgive me if this is out of place for this thread, but I was wondering if anyone else's TiVo cut off at the 55 minute mark tonight? 

'24' is #1 in my Season Pass priority, there was a lower priority recording starting on another channel at 9 (central time). It stopped recording after 55 minutes. System clock is correct and now looking at the recording for '24' it says "Duration: 055 (Partial)".

Thankfully I was watching it live so I was able to watch the last 5 minutes. 

This is a TiVo branded 40-hour Series 2 unit.. 

Thanks for any insight..


----------



## cheerdude (Feb 27, 2001)

Did anyone else say "Shut Up Edgar" the same time that Chloe did? <g>

Also... what's with the smile on Edgar's face?


----------



## JRoss (Apr 1, 2004)

yeah my Tivo cut out 54 minutes into it, it says partial, i'm in CT. anyone have any clue why??????????????


----------



## Kamakzie (Jan 8, 2004)

I thought either the girl was going to kill herself which would mean no deal, or that she would kill the old guy. I was expecting her to slit his throat or something. Wasn't expecting her to have a gun.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

Yep I caught John McCain, I had to back it up and play it slowly just to be sure.

I know the first lady has something up her sleeve, I just can peg it yet.

They have been hinting about Jack being exposed more than once. I am pretty sure they are going to bring the Chinese probably in the last 6 hour segment. 

I assume you all noticed the druggies took the hobbits card key to the building. Think we will have a temporary hostage situation just as Kim arrives at CTU


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

JRoss said:


> yeah my Tivo cut out 54 minutes into it, it says partial, i'm in CT. anyone have any clue why??????????????


AHH....yes. You were recording something before or after with a higher priority. Shame on you for having something above 24 in the season pass manager.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

I had to rewind (re... tivo? I'm not winding anything) to catch John McCain again. Good to see he's a paper filer at CTU now. Political careers are harder and harder to come by these days.

It totally looked like Mike Novic did in ole' Walt. Mike's the kind of guy who would do it, too.

With the girl behind the couch... you can't blame the producers. That was entirely FOX's doing, making you think someone else is back there in the promo. Like JMS of B5 said, previews exist in their own universe.

AHA! I figured out who the President looks like. It's like looking in a mirror, only... not.

















Greg


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Even Stevie Wonder saw that ending coming from a mile away. So.... where'd she get the gun? If she had access to a gun, why didn't she shoot the old pervert before. And don't tell me it's the one that the old dude was shooting at Jack with. Somebody from CTU should have secured that one.

That was one sturdy light fixture Cummings was swinging from.

The hobbit's sister has the skinniest legs I've ever seen on tv. What did the casting call say? "Wanted. Girls who naturally look like a crack ho."


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

Finally logan gets *****slapped as he deserves. I still dont think he will go along with revealing everything. I expect him to have is wife locked up right before the supposed press conference. Not putting walt on suicide watch is pretty stupid given what he knows. But oh well, saved us the $ in jail. 

Love edgars smile...he still has a chance with chloe! The whole jack/kim thing should be pretty good when/if it happens. Christmas will never be the same again. I guess guys in machine shops never watch 24 or they would know not to cooperate with bad guys because they die anyway.


----------



## cheerdude (Feb 27, 2001)

Cummings was swinging from a sprinkler


----------



## danplaysbass (Jul 19, 2004)

I can't wait for Buchanon to remove the Hobbit from his duties...


----------



## NoThru22 (May 6, 2005)

I think I found a continuity error. In the end of the last episode, didn't Jack tell Logan he wanted to stay on until the cannisters were recovered? And in the beginning of this episode, he acted like he was going straight back into hiding and Logan had to beg him to stay on to find the cannisters?

I also had a problem with the girl suddenly having a gun. If she had access to it, she would've shot Rossler's privates off a long time ago. I also have a feeling they won't feel the need to explain this.

IMDB still has fake credits for this episode. Was Lynn's crackhead sister the "Not like this" girl from the Matrix?


----------



## daperlman (Jan 25, 2002)

cheerdude said:


> Also... what's with the smile on Edgar's face?


He was crapping his pants.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Not only was the girl a pretty good shot, she was a lefty.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

Exactly how is Audrey supposed to convince Kim to show up at CTU?

Jack: Audrey, call Kim and tell her to come to CTU. But don't tell her I'm alive - I want to tell her myself.
Audrey: OK

Audrey: Hi, Kim this is Audrey Raines. Remember me? I was dating your father before he died, but you didn't know about me until after he died. We met at the funeral, where nobody bothered to look at the body. Anyway, I need you to come to CTU.
Kim: WTF for? My dad is dead.
Audrey: Uh, just because, OK? 
Kim: OK. 

Also, how does McGill's sister know where CTU is? McGill has only been working there for about three hours.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

Audrey should tell Kim to come down because there is a national need for Kim to be in peril today and will she do that for her country.


----------



## cancermatt (May 21, 2002)

I guess my big problem with this episode was at the very end, as soon as Jack finds out who the computer genius' Russian contact is, right before dude is shot by the little girl, Jack almost immediately (I believe) speaks to Buchanan or someone at CTU, but neglects to give the Russian contact's name for background checking information. When exactly will he, if ever, try to find out who this guy is? I'm guessing it's an error, and next ep will begin and they magically already have it.

*sigh*


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

I'm old and half senile, but didn't they do that on a previous season? I mean have an innocent-looking victim kill the evil-but-important bad guy while CTU still needed him? If so, Jack should have been ready for such a move. OTOH, CTU never seems to learn about moles either.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I guess the Jack/Kim soap opera will unfold soon.

Jack: Kim, it's your father. I'm alive.
Kim: You're alive? You let me believe you were dead for all this time? I hate you! I hope you die!


----------



## Kamakzie (Jan 8, 2004)

zalusky said:


> Audrey should tell Kim to come down because there is a national need for Kim to be in peril today and will she do that for her country.


"Hi Kim, someone today is going to be held hostage at CTU. We all voted and you have been elected to be that person.." Audrey


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

Kamakzie said:


> "Hi Kim, someone today is going to be held hostage at CTU. We all voted and you have been elected to be that person.." Audrey


Kim - "Okay"


----------



## jubrand (May 11, 2002)

Anyone else hear Lynn's crackhead sister and her buddy drive off on a motorcycle? Anyone want to lay odds that they're going to the motorcycle shop where the Russians are sitting with the nerve gas canisters?


----------



## jeff92k7 (Jan 18, 2006)

You know, for a federal agent, even McGill should have been able to put up a fight against a simple street thug. Even pencil pushers have to get some basic self-defense training.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

jubrand, good prediction there.

This episode was markedly better than last week's despite a few flaws. I think it's apparent that Cotto is a better writer than whoever wrote last week's, or that they give him the better plots to write.

Man, I thought I had job security, but that spencer must be some kind of crazy genius. Took him seemingly 1.3 seconds to break into that proprietary network and get the vectors so that jack could datamine the protocols and open a socket in the terrorist's skull.

Was that a credit card that the sister stole from lynn? I thought for a moment it might be some sort of important security thingamajig.

Glad to see Patrick Bauchau. I always seem to enjoy his presence. I like the whole child slavery seedy plotline. Too bad there's not much to it.


----------



## kdelande (Dec 17, 2001)

Ok, they obviously focused just enough extra time on the keycard from Lynn's pocket that seems like a hint that it will come into play later to get into CTU.

But, if they even go down that road, I'll be pissed. Lynn should walk straight back to CTU, notify security his card was stolen, and it be deactivated. End of story. 

Yes, I know, if they go down that road, that won't happen and Lynn will not report it so that he doesn't have to say he was robbed or something b/c it was his sister but c'mon, please don't do that 24 writers...

KD


----------



## scheckeNYK (Apr 28, 2004)

dswallow said:


> Is it a requirement that to work in the upper levels of CTU you must have an immediate family member who's involved with scum?


It's more likely that the neglect these workaholics show for their familiy is what leads them down the scummy paths to begin with.


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

If it's not in the previews, then can anyone guess on who in CTU can fake a French accent? Spenser, maybe? He's probably got the technical background to fake being a hacker.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

He'd have to be able to fake the tone of voice too.


----------



## jeff92k7 (Jan 18, 2006)

scheckeNYK said:


> It's more likely that the neglect these workaholics show for their familiy is what leads them down the scummy paths to begin with.


So you are saying that everything that someone does that is wrong is always somebody else's fault?

Everyone makes their own choices. It was the sister's choice to become an addict/thief.


----------



## tivotvaddict (Aug 11, 2005)

cheesesteak said:


> Even Stevie Wonder saw that ending coming from a mile away. So.... where'd she get the gun? If she had access to a gun, why didn't she shoot the old pervert before. And don't tell me it's the one that the old dude was shooting at Jack with. Somebody from CTU should have secured that one.


I thought she grabbed it from Jack's holster as he was leading her out. The 'ole "letting his guard down for the innocent victim" thing.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

jeff92k7 said:


> You know, for a federal agent, even McGill should have been able to put up a fight against a simple street thug. Even pencil pushers have to get some basic self-defense training.


even political hires?  Just a good thing he didn't carry a gun. Wouldn't he have the power to just say i lost my card can we deactivate it? or do it on his own with only maybe division knowing?

I liked seeing Sydney back on Tv too...now all we need is Jarod and Ms Parker


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Didn't Michelle Dessler have a crazed sister in the 2nd season?

Greg


----------



## jeff92k7 (Jan 18, 2006)

gchance said:


> Didn't Michelle Dessler have a crazed sister in the 2nd season?
> 
> Greg


Yes, she did. I don't recall what happened to her though.


----------



## Frank_M (Sep 9, 2001)

I think it would be hilarious if the reason Audrey can't reach Kim is that she has already been kidnapped, on a completely unrelated matter.

Oh, and remember ... in the world of 24 there are two kinds of bad guys:

1. Bad, evil people (usually speaking in foreign accents)

2. Good people who have to do bad things for personal reasons just to keep the plot going. (Terrorists are cornered? Uh...oh, Tony will let them out to free Michelle. That works!)

I think our hobbit friend will have to fall into category #2 very soon.


----------



## loubol (Apr 16, 2003)

The best line of the show was when Jack is trying to get the info from the Rusky and he's not giving it up. Jack says:

"You dont want to go down that road with me."

The girl that killed the Rusky is in on it. She killed him to stop him from setting up the other guy.

First rule of 24 is that everybody is a terrorist, even Jack (at least for a couple hours a season)

How did Rudy(hobbit) get back into the building without his access key?


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

loubol said:


> How did Rudy(hobbit) get back into the building without his access key?


He didn't yet, you spoiler-posting SOB.


----------



## jeff92k7 (Jan 18, 2006)

There has to be more to that 15-yr old girl than we have been shown. If she was nothing but a $ex toy, than why did the guy make such a big deal about keeping her. He could always just get another one. There has to be some reason that he was making such a big deal out of keeping her with him.

My first thought was that he might have hidden the chip on/in her and that's why he needed to keep her.

She has to be related to the overall story somehow.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

jeff92k7 said:


> There has to be more to that 15-yr old girl than we have been shown. If she was nothing but a $ex toy, than why did the guy make such a big deal about keeping her. He could always just get another one. There has to be some reason that he was making such a big deal out of keeping her with him.
> 
> My first thought was that he might have hidden the chip on/in her and that's why he needed to keep her.
> 
> She has to be related to the overall story somehow.


Agreed. First thing I said to my wife when she popped up from behind the bed was "She's in on this somehow; I don't care how innocent a victim they're trying to portray her."


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

loubol said:


> How did Rudy(hobbit) get back into the building without his access key?


isn't there the unguarded side entrance everyone uses to get in/out in less than 2 minutes?


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

I really didn't see how the girl got the gun. I'll have to watch it again for that. Nice to see Sydney out of "The Center" for once, and without Ms. Parker in tow too. Anybody think the whole sex-slave plotline was too contrived? Her first line was, "Can I call my parents, they'll be worried." and his was, "Without her, no deal. Nothing else means anything to me." If he just wanted a sex-slave, then he could always get another easily enough. I really doubt that she is just an innocent victim. If she really is just fifteen though, it makes the theory of her being the boss and mastermind more than a little far-fetched.

The president's "closest advisor" did NOT hang himself without help. There is someone else involved who really killed this guy.

Edgar thinks he has a chance with Chloe.

Cuthbert's movie career stalls, and we get her back. How special.

A couple of years ago, a member of Palmer's staff had a close intimate relationship with someone who was discovered to be a terrorist. When she found out, she said she'd help, but she killed him. It seemed a little too familiar.

Lynn's sister seems just a little familiar too. The perfect man has a skeleton in his closet. Unless I really underestimate just how corrupt people in the government at that level can be, there is no way I will believe that anyone would give a fifteen year old to a sexually abusive old man.

Logan is the weakest, most pathetic president ever portrayed on television that I can remember. No one with such a flaccid personality could possibly achieve such a high political position. Those waters are filled with sharks and barracuda, and he's just a fat, slow goldfish. He's piranha bait, and wouldn't last a minute.

Is Tony ever going to wake up?

The Tivo text info about next week's episode says Jack is reinstated. Since that happened THIS week, I think something has gone bad with their synchronization.


----------



## dsmoot (Oct 15, 2003)

eric_mcgovern said:


> So who was the programmer guy with the 15 year old? He looked and sounded so familar, but I just can't place him. Anyone know?


As far as other shows he was on The Pretender. But when I saw him I thought he looked familiar from another season of 24 also.


----------



## jubrand (May 11, 2002)

newsposter said:


> isn't there the unguarded side entrance everyone uses to get in/out in less than 2 minutes?


Yes, I believe there's a "hard perimeter" set up around it.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

I hate hate hate hate the introduction of Lynn's loser sister and boyfriend. What an enormous disappointment. This reminds me of the stupid "depressed daughter of CTU Director Driscoll" from last season. LAME :down:

Loved the little cameo by John McCain...that was cool.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

Its amazing how people get security clearances in the 24 world with all these nutso/druggies for siblings. In the real world, its one of the first questions the FBI checks on.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

eric_mcgovern said:


> So who was the programmer guy with the 15 year old? He looked and sounded so familar, but I just can't place him. Anyone know?


He played the blind dude on Carnivale.


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

The French programmer guy is also Renee's "father" on the current season of Alias.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Anybody else starting to get a creepy "sherri" vibe off of the First Lady?



Spoiler



I'm buying a new car this week!


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

So was the President seriously thinking about releasing the statement that he and his wife were working on? Is he that much of a hack that he has no independent thought of his own and has to be led around like a pet on a leash? Or was he just using her to buy time for Mike to come up with something?

I have a huge problem with the Hobbit's sister storyline. First, she would have no idea that he's at the LA Field Office. Second, why would she expect that he's carrying $500 on him at work? Third, I'm almost positive that he's going to try and cover up the fact that he went outside during that time so he's not going to tell anyone about the missing keycard. The whole thing was really lame and just reeks of the typical 24 filler-plot. Can't they come up with some better way to fill the time than introducing these types of things? It's not like the period when Lynn went out to meet her was a down time for Jack where they needed to fill the time while he travelled or something. It was right at an intense part of the interrogation of a key suspect. Lame, lame, lame.


----------



## bighurt1b (Feb 23, 2005)

Does anybody have a screen shot of John Mccain?


----------



## jradford (Dec 28, 2004)

I'm in 100% agreement with the predictions thus far: Hobbit's sister heading straight to car shop. 15-year old girl killed old man bc she's in on the scheme somehow, not because of the duuurty things he did. Maybe she's dating Behrooz, who has turned evil and picked up his father's terrorist lifestyle? Somehow, Behrooz will play into it.

I was liking the 1st lady up until this episode. Now she just seems to be another Sherry that wants to control the country through her husband.


----------



## Granny (Mar 29, 2005)

rlc1 said:


> This has got to stand as the best line of the season:
> 
> "By the time I'm finished with you, you're gonna wish you felt this good again".


Absotively!



aindik said:


> Exactly how is Audrey supposed to convince Kim to show up at CTU?
> 
> Jack: Audrey, call Kim and tell her to come to CTU. But don't tell her I'm alive - I want to tell her myself.
> Audrey: OK
> ...


My thoughts as well. I can only conclude that the crack-head sister and boyfriend will break into CTU and take Kim hostage. Spencer will save the day - so to speak - and redeem himself in Chloe's eyes, much to Edgar's chagrin. As if _he_ had a chance.

I kept thinking the fifteen-year-old was really his daughter - an extra "ewww!" factor, with the implied abuse. But we only have her word for it that he was the abuser. Or maybe she is the Terrorist's daughter, sent to spy on the Russian until he programmed the chip.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Couldn't audrey just say that they are worried she will be targetted because of some vendetta against Jack's family?


----------



## jeff92k7 (Jan 18, 2006)

Audrey: Hi, Kim. We need you to come in to CTU as soon as you can.

Kim: Why? I'm still pissed at you people for letting my Dad get killed last season.

Audrey: I understand that Kim, but we really need your help. We have identified a terrorist plot involving the cougars in L.A. county and want you to pretend to be a cougar while we kidnap the suspected terrorist cougar and interrogate him.

Kim: Oh, okay. But I'll have to wait until I can get a babysitter over here. Chase's little brat has been screaming up a storm and he won't do anything about her because of the diminished use of his hand thanks to you idiots back in season 3.

Audrey: Oh, I can help with that. My brother can babysit for you. He's only a little psycho and has stayed off the drugs for a whole two days now. I'm sure he wouldn't sell your baby to buy more crack or anything like that.

Kim: Oh that would be awesome. Thanks so much. Oh, but i still have to wait. My Mercedes that I bought with Daddy's life insurance money is getting detailed. I'll come in as soon as it is done.

Audrey: Ummm, Kim. If you really like that Mercedes, maybe you shouldn't bring it. We wouldn't want it to be taken away...er, i mean scratched in the parking lot or anything.

Kim: Oh, good thinking. I'll walk then. But what if i run into "crazy-nuclear-explosion guy"? I don't have a gun to run away and rob a convenience store with?

Audrey: Just take the gun from the IRS agent that is parked across the street from your house that wants to take your money.

Kim: WHAT?!?! Why does the IRS want my money?

Audrey: Because your Dad isn't really dead. Oops. I guess there isn't any reason for you to come in now.

Click


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

Granny said:


> I kept thinking the fifteen-year-old was really his daughter - an extra "ewww!" factor, with the implied abuse. But we only have her word for it that he was the abuser. Or maybe she is the Terrorist's daughter, sent to spy on the Russian until he programmed the chip.


There's something fishy about the girl. Her English is just too good for a 15-year-old Russian. Remember how eloquent she laid that guilt-trip on Jack?

Can her bruises be self-inflicted?


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

dtle said:


> Can her bruises be self-inflicted?


Was there bruising, or was it all just scratching -- unhealed scratching?

If there's no bruising, then I'd say she's in on it. If there's cruising, then either she's legit or the guy didn't know she really was in on it.


----------



## Ladd Morse (Feb 21, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> Not only was the girl a pretty good shot, she was a lefty.


For a brief moment, when I was seeing her only from behind, I thought it might be "Naked Mandy".


----------



## waynehazle (Jan 18, 2006)

Most have been said already

A good episode, but I think after the pulse pounding of last season and the gut wrenching of the first 15 minutes of this season, this episode seems almost cerebral and quiet... for 24 anyway.

Gotta start with this: New glasses for anyone who DIDN'Tsee what that girl was going to do. Jack once again earns the Behrooz Award for turning his back on a potential danger. {Or should this be the Lee Harvey Oswald/Jack Ruby Award for Not Guarding A Critical Witness/Suspect ?}

Hasn't this been done every season? Behrooz, Gael's wife, ... can anyone name what happened in the other seasons... hmmmm... I know in S2, Sayed Ali got bumped off during a transfer, anything in S1? I hate to say sloppy writing but...

Gotta say YEAH for Mrs. Logan. It was nice to see her worm... I mean make her way back into power as the President's right hand. By the way that smack was so good it hurt ME!

I cringed when Curtis got shot. Don't you kill him!

Did anyone else LOVE Edgar's evil little smile? He's probably thinking, Chloe's vulnerable, here's my chance.

Did anyone else know Cummings was toast once Jack said "He can't help us anymore?". More excellent guarding of suspects. Really shouldn't the Secret Service know to always take a guy's belt and tie?

OK Audrey you just heard Jack torturing another guy, are you going to stop loving him again?

I am actually looking forward to the moment when Kim sees Jack again.


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

> Also, how does McGill's sister know where CTU is? McGill has only been working there for about three hours.





> My thoughts as well. I can only conclude that the crack-head sister and boyfriend will break into CTU and take Kim hostage. Spencer will save the day - so to speak - and redeem himself in Chloe's eyes, much to Edgar's chagrin. As if he had a chance.


Didn't she call him on his cell phone? It doesn't care where he is. He should have anticipated her attack, however. I mean really, he is in charge of CTU, so there has to be the complication thrown in for no valid story reason except plot-noise. We don't really care about Lynn, except to dislike him. "Filthy little Hobbitses..."


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

waynehazle said:


> OK Audrey you just heard Jack torturing another guy, are you going to stop loving him again?


The look on her face was like, "Eh... I've seen him do better."


----------



## johnnyappleseed4 (Feb 7, 2006)

aadam101 said:


> AHH....yes. You were recording something before or after with a higher priority. Shame on you for having something above 24 in the season pass manager.


I posted above the post that you quoted with the same problem. '24' is #1 on my priority list. The program that was after it is #11 on the list, yet it stopped recording '24' after 55 minutes. It didn't change channels, it just stopped recording.

Any ideas?


----------



## Zevida (Nov 8, 2003)

Good episode.

I'm just sad I can't read the thread due to the ominous original post.  But, his thread, his rules I guess. For those of us that don't like spoilers for future episodes, it's a bummer we can't participate in a thread about this episode.


----------



## Mr. Belboz (Dec 3, 1999)

bighurt1b said:


> Does anybody have a screen shot of John Mccain?


----------



## justapixel (Sep 27, 2001)

This is completely off the discussion, but I freaking love that mid-century modern house that the President is in. Did they ever say where it was? Great decor.


----------



## justapixel (Sep 27, 2001)

Zevida said:


> Good episode.
> 
> I'm just sad I can't read the thread due to the ominous original post.  But, his thread, his rules I guess. For those of us that don't like spoilers for future episodes, it's a bummer we can't participate in a thread about this episode.


No, it's not his thread, his rules. Our forum, OUR rules. 

These are the official rules.

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=3750833&&#post3750833

If anybody violates them, please report them.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

justapixel said:


> Did they ever say where it was?


It's within 15 minutes of CTU Los Angeles, by car.


----------



## justapixel (Sep 27, 2001)

aindik said:


> It's within 15 minutes of CTU Los Angeles, by car.


D'oh!


----------



## goony (Nov 20, 2003)

McGill is totally unbelieveable if he doesn't call in and get his card cancelled ASAP.

Also... a good keycard will have no identifying marks on it suggesting where it could be used, but of course it will get delivered to the bad guys that (of course) know where CTU is.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

zevida said:


> Good episode.
> 
> I'm just sad I can't read the thread due to the ominous original post. But, his thread, his rules I guess. For those of us that don't like spoilers for future episodes, it's a bummer we can't participate in a thread about this episode.





justapixel said:


> No, it's not his thread, his rules. Our forum, OUR rules.
> 
> These are the official rules.
> 
> ...


Despite that *ominous* warning, I don't believe anyone that has been participating in the 24 threads has violated the official rules, and I don't believe anyone had in the past, but last week's complete and total IRS thread hi-jack should show just how quickly people were distracted into YET ANOTHER spoiler whining fest...

Some people continue to be way too touchy about potential spoilers that slip through in discussion about this show. That was the point of the ominous warning and the polite request (that seems to have been followed) that was also included.

The world (or at least a small piece of it here) would be a heckuva lot better place if people would remember a few simple rules: #1 it's just TV. #2 don't be easily annoyed. #3 don't be annoying (including whining about others occasionally slipping)


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

justapixel said:


> No, it's not his thread, his rules. Our forum, OUR rules.
> 
> These are the official rules.
> 
> ...


It's spelled out in the first post what this particular thread's rules are. Absent such detail, the default forum rules would apply.

Though technically I'd have preferred to see a clearer indication in the title that it's not just a typical "spoiler" warning (which if it were is redundant anyway).


----------



## NoThru22 (May 6, 2005)

Discussing next weeks preview untagged is against forum rules. And really annoying. No one's done that yet, but it bothered me when the first poster said it was okay in here, which it's not.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

NoThru22 said:


> Discussing next weeks preview untagged is against forum rules. And really annoying. No one's done that yet, but it bothered me when the first poster said it was okay in here, which it's not.


And grousing about someone slipping up and discussing potential spoiler information is also damned annoying, ok?

If there are gonna be complaints, then I surrender any and all claim to the official thread status for 24. I don't care about that label, status, tag, whatever, and never have. What I care about is being able to talk about 24 without having people be annoying because they are griping about some tiny little piece of information that slips through from information that may have been provided in a preview, a TV guide article, or some other source.

Most of the time people are good about using the spoiler tags. Most folks know the forum rules, but they also know that "unofficial' threads may use different rules.

If people want 30 different threads about 24 because the non-preview spoilers camp can't tolerate even one potential slip, then that will be the result. Seems damned stupid to me, but it's not up to me to decide.

What I can do is try to ask (as I tried to do politely in the first post for this thread) that EVERYONE try to remember to be respectful of others, and everyone try to keep themselves from getting annoyed over spoiler information that slipped through.

It seems that no matter what I do someone will be complaining and bugging our over-worked and under-paid moderators to complain about the spoilers, the disclaimer I used, or something else.

Some people obviously have too much time on their hands and not enough self control to avoid letting themselves get annoyed OVER A STUPID FRACKIN' TV SHOW.

It's just TV. Say it people. It's just TV.

If someone tells you what will happen in the future of the show don't blow a gasket. Consider that the information they provided could be a complete red herring or white elephant. As long as there is more than one hour remaining in the show, you know the show will take twists and turns to keep us all guessing and deliver a payoff that makes us all glad we watched.

Enough said. We now return you to your normal complaints about someone that forgot how to use a [ spoiler ] tag.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

bdowell said:


> #2 don't be easily annoyed.





bdowell said:


> And grousing about someone slipping up and discussing potential spoiler information is also damned annoying, ok?





bdowell said:


> It's just TV. Say it people. It's just TV.


It's just a forum. Say it. It's just a forum.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

NoThru22 said:


> Discussing next weeks preview untagged is against forum rules. And really annoying. No one's done that yet, but it bothered me when the first poster said it was okay in here, which it's not.


If the thread is specifically identified as allowing that, then it is OK.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

dswallow said:


> If the thread is specifically identified as allowing that, then it is OK.


Though it should be noted that JuxaPixel has requested that the official 24 threads please use 'official forum rules' and I am more than willing to accept that, even for this thread which was started with the disclaimer/reminder that seems now to be the weekly thread-jack subject for the 24 thread.

Again, the reason that disclaimer existed this week is because of people grousing in the thread for last week's episode which led to the whole "IRS" side discussion.

Some people are just unwilling to let spoiler info slide ever. It starts an *I'm gonna tattle* stream of events, along with a stream of _thread crapping_ because someone just ruined the entire rest of the series just because of a small piece of spoiler info. If we could ever get through a week's thread without those complaints I'd be amazed. Heck, I'd make a sizable wager at Vegas that we never will. The over-under is probably consistently at 3 for number of complaints about spoiler information in any given 24 thread. It's the nature of the show, and the nature of the speculation that goes on about the show.

Determining when information is coming from previews versus just educated guessing isn't easy, and again some people are just so touchy about the show they can't tolerate any discussion of future events, whether based on preview information or just based on guesses of where the show must or will go.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

aindik said:


> It's within 15 minutes of CTU Los Angeles, by car.


That could be *anywhere*!


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

I would suggest this as the next thread title:

*24 2/13/2006 (S05E08) "Day 5: 2:00 PM - 3:00 PM" ALL SPOILERS PERMITTED*

If others want a thread where spoilers must be hidden, they can start a thread entitled:

*24 2/13/2006 (S05E08) "Day 5: 2:00 PM - 3:00 PM"*

It's been done before many times; the world doesn't end when there's 2 threads for one episode. If there's any complaint about this thread, it'd be that the title doesn't quite go far enough to indicate there's anything different about it -- you have to read the first post to know it was meant to be different, and not everyone will do that.


----------



## oski87 (Dec 12, 2003)

Church AV Guy said:


> Logan is the weakest, most pathetic president ever portrayed on television that I can remember


What about the debates last election?


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

can anyone really even remember from one week previews to the next? If you told me ctu would be bombed and everyone died in a preview, sure, i may remember that. But if you told me that there was someone behind the bed next week....heck i wouldn't even remember that if i didn't read it in a thread. Either you all have too good of memories or not enough going on in real life to push this TV stuff out of your memories. I'm not advocating going against std forum rules, just can't understand the pissiness of this all. wahhh

JAP is there a reward if we find out where that house is?


----------



## NoThru22 (May 6, 2005)

I am especially sensitive about 24 preview spoilers because of a situation I decribed in this post.


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

Ladd Morse said:


> For a brief moment, when I was seeing her only from behind, I thought it might be "Naked Mandy".


I thought of her too... then again I think about her a lot. Seriously, the scene did sort of remind me of the one in which we first saw her last season.

They could have easily planned all along not to honor the portion of the agreement allowing him to keep the girl as his sex slave. They would have been bound to the terms of the deal regarding his immunity from prosecution, although, I thought it was a bit of a stretch that no one in the hobbit's chain of command would have overruled his decision to negotiate with a terrorist, and that it would actually be faster to get those papers drawn up with the A.G.'s signature than for Jack to torture it out of him - hey, wait, maybe it had something to do with John McCain? Anyway, I can easily overlook all that, but I don't know how it couldn't be glaringly obvious that they could never be bound to an agreement allowing someone to continue engaging in virtually any illegal activity, least of all keeping a child sex slave. They could have reneged on that as soon as they got what they needed from him and he wouldn't have had a legal leg to stand on, and Jack should have known that. Yes, he planned to rescue her later, but they never had to let her go in the first place.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

jeff125va said:


> I thought it was a bit of a stretch that no one in the hobbit's chain of command would have overruled his decision to negotiate with a terrorist, and that it would actually be faster to get those papers drawn up with the A.G.'s signature than for Jack to torture it out of him - hey, wait, maybe it had something to do with John McCain?


Hey! Something just occurred to me.

While it's cool and all that McCain did a cameo, he *is* a very strident opponent of torture (he himself being on the recieving end of it in the Hanoi Hilton for 5(?) years), so why would he agree to be on a show that is so casual (arguably even eager) about engaging in torture by the "good guys"?

Even if McCain doesn't watch the show, surely _someone_ amongst his inner circle has... right?


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

busyba said:


> Hey! Something just occurred to me.
> 
> While it's cool and all that McCain did a cameo, he *is* a very strident opponent of torture (he himself being on the recieving end of it in the Hanoi Hilton for 5(?) years), so why would he agree to be on a show that is so casual (arguably even eager) about engaging in torture by the "good guys"?
> 
> Even if McCain doesn't watch the show, surely _someone_ amongst his inner circle has... right?


Maybe that's why he was there, to keep Jack Bauer in line.


----------



## kdelande (Dec 17, 2001)

According to EW, McCain is a fan of the show himself so he should be aware of such conflicts of interest. Interesting point.

KD


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

kdelande said:


> According to EW, McCain is a fan of the show himself so he should be aware of such conflicts of interest. Interesting point.
> 
> KD


It could be something as simple as he enjoys it and is aware that it is fiction.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Maybe he's able to separate fiction from reality.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

PJO1966 said:


> It could be something as simple as he enjoys it and is aware that it is fiction.


That would be my guess.


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

Wasn't Walt handcuffed when the redhead agent escorted him out of the room?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

PJO1966 said:


> It could be something as simple as he enjoys it and is aware that it is fiction.


Well, sure... you know that, and I know that, and he might even know that.

As a politician, however, he has to answer to people who aren't nearly as enlightened as you or I.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Not really. People in arizona are all retired and don't stay up late enough to watch 24. Now i must go into hiding while everyone flames me.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

JAP retired? Since when?


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

here's one article about the logan retreat...still trying to win the prize and find out where it is but obviously they just shoot the inside stuff on a stage somewhere, which makes it harder.

http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/tv/article.adp?id=20060109070109990004


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

newsposter said:


> JAP retired? Since when?


Since when is Sacramento in Arizona?


----------



## justapixel (Sep 27, 2001)

TAsunder said:


> Not really. People in arizona are all retired and don't stay up late enough to watch 24. Now i must go into hiding while everyone flames me.


I'm confused.

Is this some sort of attack on me? If so, it's too subtle. Or, I'm too old to understand it. 

I record all my shows anyway so I can watch 24 at 4:30 when I have my dinner.

Anyway, the official thread needs to follow the official forum rules. If you want to have a thread with untagged spoilers in it, start one and title it appropriately. It's really pretty easy and that way, everybody gets what they want.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

devdogaz said:


> Since when is Sacramento in Arizona?


dunno, her tagline says Arizona dreaming...


----------



## justapixel (Sep 27, 2001)

newsposter said:


> dunno, her tagline says Arizona dreaming...


That's because I want to move there.

When I'm OLD. 

I like hot weather.


----------



## efilippi (Jul 24, 2001)

johnnyappleseed4 said:


> Hello, forgive me if this is out of place for this thread, but I was wondering if anyone else's TiVo cut off at the 55 minute mark tonight?
> 
> '24' is #1 in my Season Pass priority, there was a lower priority recording starting on another channel at 9 (central time). It stopped recording after 55 minutes. System clock is correct and now looking at the recording for '24' it says "Duration: 055 (Partial)".
> 
> ...


Sounds like a fairly common bug that is discussed in a number of threads in the Tivo Help section of the forum. See Tivo response here http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/printthread.php?t=283908&p=377683


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

justapixel said:


> That's because I want to move there.
> 
> When I'm OLD.
> 
> I like hot weather.


See i'm sorta with ya there. But thing is, yesterday in the car it was 60 outside here and i was almost too hot and had to turn on the air. While the cold sucks, I just dont think i could get used to the southern heat as much as ive gotten used to the northern winters.

Plus i'm betting we have more warm winters than the south has cooler summers....


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

kdelande said:


> Ok, they obviously focused just enough extra time on the keycard from Lynn's pocket that seems like a hint that it will come into play later to get into CTU.
> 
> But, if they even go down that road, I'll be pissed. Lynn should walk straight back to CTU, notify security his card was stolen, and it be deactivated. End of story.
> 
> ...


Not sure I follow you on this.. You act like it is some kind of trick that he would do that.

The reality is he should not have left in the mdidle of a crisis to go give some money to his crack ho sister, who had her pimp boyfriend bash him over the head and take the card and his cash, and is going to give the card to the terrorists!

Seriously though, if he went back and told them that, he would be terminated.

He could never go report that happened.

Now if you are saying he should have told them he was in the bathroom and the card flushed down the toilet, then I guess he could have done that.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

marksman said:


> Not sure I follow you on this.. You act like it is some kind of trick that he would do that.
> 
> The reality is he should not have left in the mdidle of a crisis to go give some money to his crack ho sister, who had her pimp boyfriend bash him over the head and take the card and his cash, and is going to give the card to the terrorists!
> 
> .


maybe the guy has a heart?


----------



## Zen98031 (Sep 29, 2005)

busyba said:


> Hey! Something just occurred to me.
> 
> While it's cool and all that McCain did a cameo, he *is* a very strident opponent of torture (he himself being on the recieving end of it in the Hanoi Hilton for 5(?) years), so why would he agree to be on a show that is so casual (arguably even eager) about engaging in torture by the "good guys"?
> 
> Even if McCain doesn't watch the show, surely _someone_ amongst his inner circle has... right?


I suppose it all depends on what you need to know and when you need to know it.

If a family member or somebody I care for was in immediate danger, and I knew that somebody had information that could help save them I would not hesitate to use whatever means were necessary to secure the the information I needed to ensure their safety. Take it up a notch and now your country is in danger and the justification rises with it. Handing out torture like McCain received just because they want to find out what he knows or just because they are being (expletive) is not justifiable. Now if you are just coercing them to talk,by simply making things difficult if they don't talk, that is a whole different animal.

Mitch


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Zen98031 said:


> I suppose it all depends on what you need to know and when you need to know it.
> 
> If a family member or somebody I care for was in immediate danger, and I knew that somebody had information that could help save them I would not hesitate to use whatever means were necessary to secure the the information I needed to ensure their safety. Take it up a notch and now your country is in danger and the justification rises with it. Handing out torture like McCain received just because they want to find out what he knows or just because they are being (expletive) is not justifiable. Now if you are just coercing them to talk,by simply making things difficult if they don't talk, that is a whole different animal.
> 
> Mitch


I wasn't debating the relative merits of torture.

I was pointing out that John McCain has been a very outspoken critic of the practice and he's pretty much said that there isn't a scenario in which he would approve of it. As such, it struck me as odd that he'd make a cameo on a show that routinely deals out torture like they had a surplus of it in a warehouse about to spoil.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

justapixel said:


> This is completely off the discussion, but I freaking love that mid-century modern house that the President is in. Did they ever say where it was? Great decor.


more detail on 'where it is" (pics on site)

http://www.purecontemporary.com/FeatureArticle/article/104

A PURE CONTEMPORARY reader asked us if President Charles Logans retreat on Foxs hit show 24 was modeled after the mid-century modern designs of architect John Lautner. 24 is one of our favorite shows, and we couldnt help but notice the gorgeous wood trim on doors, windows and walls, along with Lautners trademark merging of vista and architecture. So we called 24 set decorator Cloudia Rebar and asked her about the inspiration for this seasons set.

Not Lautner specifically, said Rebar. It is a compilation of many of the elements of mid-century architecture. Dont look for any deep meaning between the surroundings and Logans rather timid character. Mid-century is very chic right now and a timeless design concept. This was meant to be a long-time family home.

Rebar shrugged off suggestions that Logan doesnt seem the type to have a lipstick red sofa in his house. That would be the First Ladys influence, she said, referring to the character played by actress Jean Smart. Without the First Lady, the Presidents taste would definitely be more to the neutrals, along with his equestrian interests.

The retreat is actually a football field-sized soundstage that features nine venues. Meticulous attention to period detail was given to everything from the wall coverings to the horizontal pane windows. There are no hardwood floors though, for sound considerations. We try to use the real mid-century pieces  since even the reproductions dont have the same feel. Rebar, whose film set credits include Vanilla Sky, noted that reproduction wood is slightly thicker  and doesnt have the 40-year-old hue of aged-coloration. Still, when originals cant be found, Rebar turns to Modernica, manufacturers of mid-century reproductions, which allows her the luxury of picking her own palette.

The First Ladys suite is entered through wood doors with frosted glass cutouts, notable from either direction, and designed by Set Designer Joseph Hodges. Warm and soothing earth tones are energized with the lipstick red couch while an Eames chair and ottoman provide understated, tony elegance. In the living room, Barcelona chairs in dark caramel, and George Nelson lighting are scattered throughout. The pool and patio, featuring Smith & Hawkens teak furniture and Hodges-designed verdigris metal Arabian horses, are visible from the Presidents office and living room.

From concept to shoot, Rebar may only have hours to find and assemble the necessary items. And, with only little more than a quarter of the series shot, chances are "24"-watchers will continue on our tour of mid-century modern classics.
-----
my only question is..how much does all this cost????


----------

