# Anyone watching Manhattan?



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

I am very interested and it is getting great reviews so far. It is on WGN America and I think this is their first original series.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I tried to tivo it but it looks like it only airs once a week and I have too many conflicts. My Sunday night tivo schedule is ridiculous.


----------



## Alfer (Aug 7, 2003)

No


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Was recording last night when storms took out my satellite reception 
Hope it reruns.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I saw a commercial for it and thought it looked interesting. Said it was on DirecTV 307, but I did not see that channel in my guide. So, I'm guessing I'm not in the tier that gets that channel. I'm sure it will be on Amazon Prime, Netflix or Hulu some day. I'll wait to see it there.


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> I tried to tivo it but it looks like it only airs once a week and I have too many conflicts. My Sunday night tivo schedule is ridiculous.


Really? I had conflicts as well and just assumed it would pick up a rerun. Well time for alternate plan.


----------



## lambertman (Dec 21, 2002)

WGN America's website says it reruns tonight, Wednesday, and Thursday.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Hmm. I don't see it in my tivo's guide at all now, just the Woody Allen movie on the MGM channel. I swear there were two entries in the guide yesterday, one for this show and one for the movie. I don't get WGN, at least I don't think so but it looked like it was broadcasting on another channel. Either that or I mistook it for another show/movie named Manhattan.


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

I recorded it, but haven't yet watched it.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

It aired several times last night, just like most of the Sunday night cable dramas do. I watched it and it was pretty good. Amazingly well done from a production and cinematography standpoint, but that's to be expected with Tommy Schlamme directing. It was well written and established several interesting characters in the first episode. I'm definitely on board to see how it goes.

Oh, and to the OP, this is WGN's second original series. Their first is Salem, which recently completed its first season.


----------



## Zephyr (Sep 16, 2005)

I will be. I watched the intro program they produced also. When I was a very young kid, I'd visit my grandma in the Catskills. She lived on an estate managed by a very interesting guy who would take me driving through the fields in a Willys jeep and swimming in the pool suspended at the end of the bug screen. During the war, he was a recruiter working for the project recruiting college scientists. Needless to say, he had to be very deceptive about the overall project.


----------



## lambertman (Dec 21, 2002)

just announced: it will be on Hulu Plus.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Here--Cleveland--the regular fox station played it at 10 or 11 pm. Don't know why. I haven't watched yet. Hopefully it recorded, since Big Brother ended up being 45 minutes of storm coverage.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

lambertman said:


> just announced: it will be on Hulu Plus.


A few days after the original airing? I forgot to create a SP for this.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

According to my guide data, the Pilot is reairing twice tonight, twice on Wednesday night, and twice on Thursday night. The second episode is scheduled to air four times next Sunday night for those with conflicts.


----------



## lambertman (Dec 21, 2002)

aaronwt said:


> A few days after the original airing? I forgot to create a SP for this.


Next day on Hulu Plus, three days later on Hulu.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

Cool, I'm in a 3 month trial of Hulu Plus right now. I'll have to check it out.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> According to my guide data, the Pilot is reairing twice tonight, twice on Wednesday night, and twice on Thursday night. The second episode is scheduled to air four times next Sunday night for those with conflicts.


I always forget about this TiVo app on my phone. Much easier to use than the TiVo mobile site used to be. I added the SP from the app while here at work. It shows up right away in my to do list.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

+1 on the Hulu Plus goodness. My lineup doesn't have WGN america in HD (I'm surprised I get it at all but that's a different thread) and even in the first minute or two as it was recording last night I could see some content being cut off the sides.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

cheesesteak said:


> I tried to tivo it but it looks like it only airs once a week and I have too many conflicts. My Sunday night tivo schedule is ridiculous.


So's mine, but I use a HTPC with more tuners than any Tivo so conflicts are a non-issue for me.  Some nights I have six or seven shows recording simultaneously, mostly due to overlap.


----------



## tgmii (Feb 21, 2002)

I knew we didn't get WGN, but I did a "find programs" and found it was on WPIX 11 (NY), so TiVo doing what it does best!

Looks like it could be pretty good, first episode was slow, but most are since they have a lot to establish.

I liked west wing, and shows like Mad Men, Boardwalk Empire, and Halt & Catch fire, and this seems to be well done. 

Daniel Stern (wonder years narrator) got old!


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

I don't get WGN America, but my local FOX channel is airing it at 11 pm on Sunday evenings.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Man.. I just had to watch the first episode that was aired again Monday night. I really enjoyed it. Now Manhattan adds yet another show to my already over crowded Sunday nights this Summer. I'll be watching the Sunday shows into Tuesday since I have so many to watch now.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

lambertman said:


> WGN America's website says it reruns tonight, Wednesday, and Thursday.


Interestingly it also aired on our local CW channel (I believe it's owned by the same company that owns WGN).


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I thought it was a bit boring, but it's the pilot and they have to establish the characters. I'm still kind of confused about each character, but I'm sure I'll get there. I'm in for now.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

For people who got it on their local, non-WGN channel, is it airing more than once a week and is there an episode scheduled for this upcoming Sunday (Aug 3)?


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I searched my DirecTV guide and I only saw WGN showing it. I didn't see it on any Fox or CW or whatever channel. 

I did watch it last night on Hulu Plus. I liked it enough that I'll keep watching it. I was also a little confused by the characters. Like a couple of them looked similar to me and I couldn't remember which one was which.


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

cheesesteak said:


> For people who got it on their local, non-WGN channel, is it airing more than once a week and is there an episode scheduled for this upcoming Sunday (Aug 3)?


It was on Fox for me, and no more shows scheduled.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I wonder if for those of us who saw it on our local channels, if it's because our local channel is owned by the same parent company. Think think WPIX in NY is owned by the Tribune Company which at least USED to own WGN, and may still do.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

It's common for affiliated networks to show pilots of new shows just to increase reach and saturation. But I would be very surprised if that continued after the pilot episode. WGN is trying to build a name for itself, and that is undermined if people can watch every episode on their local FOX or CW affiliate.


----------



## Fl_Gulfer (May 27, 2005)

It was interesting and a little nudity never hurts. I hope we get to see old pictures of the tests of the bomb.


----------



## Jolt (Jan 9, 2006)

I liked it but like others have said it was a bit slow. Ill keep it for now. I need a new show lol


----------



## Jolt (Jan 9, 2006)

One thing that helps is I love the look of people of that era. Women and their make up and hair make them so beautiful.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> It's common for affiliated networks to show pilots of new shows just to increase reach and saturation. But I would be very surprised if that continued after the pilot episode. WGN is trying to build a name for itself, and that is undermined if people can watch every episode on their local FOX or CW affiliate.


I hope they're not holding their breath waiting for me to call Comcast to tell them to add WGN to the list of South Jersey Comcast cable channels based on a single pilot episode that I never got to see because it aired on my busiest tivo recording night.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I feel sorry for shows on FXX, IFC, WGN, etc... On DirecTV, I would need to pay $15 more a month to get the tier with those channels. Problem is each channel only has like one show I'm interested. Actually, maybe there is other stuff, but I don't know about it. I'm not looking to pay that much a month for one show.


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

I've had the top tier forever, so I get all of those. I really wasn't even aware that I was paying extra for them. I probably should cut back to a cheaper tier, because I record lots of stuff that I never even get around to watching.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Hoffer said:


> I feel sorry for shows on FXX, IFC, WGN, etc... On DirecTV, I would need to pay $15 more a month to get the tier with those channels. Problem is each channel only has like one show I'm interested. Actually, maybe there is other stuff, but I don't know about it. I'm not looking to pay that much a month for one show.


Since The League moved to FXX that show alone is worth $15  I suppose I could wait until it hits Netflix though.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Howie said:


> I've had the top tier forever, so I get all of those. I really wasn't even aware that I was paying extra for them. I probably should cut back to a cheaper tier, because I record lots of stuff that I never even get around to watching.


I think DIY is on that tier and if I got rid of that tier, my wife would divorce me  She loves that channel (and HGTV)!!


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

I LOVE LOVE LOVE Jon Benjamin Hickey and this role is perfect for him-super intense and driven...so I am giving the show a chance.
We'll see how it goes...


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

I watched the pilot last night. It was the bomb. I'll keep watching.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Since when is WGN a semi-premium cable channel? As long as I can remember, going back to the Superstation days, WGN was one of the mainstay channels of a basic cable subscription, along with TBS, CNN, MTV, etc.


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> Since when is WGN a semi-premium cable channel? As long as I can remember, going back to the Superstation days, WGN was one of the mainstay channels of a basic cable subscription, along with TBS, CNN, MTV, etc.


When they changed their name to WGN America. LOL


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

I don't even think I've ever watched anything on this channel. At least not in the seven yeras I've had FiOS. But I will now be watching it for Manhattan.


----------



## RickyL (Sep 13, 2004)

They really need the characters to start using each others names.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I find it interesting how many of you are saying that it was hard to distinguish the characters. I didn't find that to be a problem at all. So far, the characters we're supposed to be familiar with are:

Frank Winter (John Benjamin Hickey): He's the main character and is the scientist in charge of the team seeking an alternate/more efficient way to make the bomb. We know he used to be a professor at Princeton. Tortured, having nightmares about the bomb, having trouble sleeping.

Liza Winter (Olivia Williams): Frank's wife, PhD in botany, very smart, not much of a traditional housewife. She's the one that threw the July 4th party. 

Charlie Isaacs (Ashley Zukerman): Hotshot recent college graduate. Submitted paper to Frank Winter to be published while Frank was at Princeton, but the paper was rejected. Paper was published elsewhere and is what earned Charlie this new job offer. He and his wife arrive at Los Alamos as the episode begins. He's conflicted about his job because he likes the fact that he'll be working on the cutting edge of science, but he's bothered by the fact that he's helping to build such a powerful weapon, which is why he had to run outside and puke in the garbage can. 

Abby Isaacs (Rachel Brosnahan): Charlie's wife. Daughter of a successful businessman in the Boston area. She wants Charlie to quit this job and go work for her dad, because so far she hates New Mexico and misses the East Coast. 

Glen Babbit (Daniel Stern): He was Frank's mentor and is now working on Frank's team as some sort of advisor. 

Reed Akley (David Harbour): He is the scientist in charge of the primary team developing the bomb. He's got 600 people on his team. He's the one who hired Charlie because he thought Charlie's paper was brilliant.

Robert Oppenheimer: The real life scientist who defected from Nazi Germany and was in charge of the Manhattan Project. He's Winter's and Akley's boss. We saw him briefly when Winter rode with him in the car to the airport and Oppenheimer told Winter that his team was being disbanded and that Winter would now be under Akley. (I found it strange that they didn't portray him with a German accent.)

Winter's Team: I didn't catch any names of these characters, but they're the ones trying to do the calculations to prove their method of making the bomb would be faster. They're the ones who offered nylons to the secretarial pool to help with the calculations. There's the Asian guy who took the classified X-Ray documents to sell the patents after the war. At the party, we hear a couple of them mention that they've already been reassigned to other locations. 

Was that helpful to those who had trouble following? What did I miss? Any questions?


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Since when is WGN a semi-premium cable channel? As long as I can remember, going back to the Superstation days, WGN was one of the mainstay channels of a basic cable subscription, along with TBS, CNN, MTV, etc.


Yeah, I remember the channel from when I was a kid. I feel like I watched some shows on it. I probably hadn't thought of the channel in decades until I heard about this Manhatten show.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Good character summary but Oppenheimer was born in the US. His parents (father, anyway) emigrated from Germany in the late 1800s.



DevdogAZ said:


> secretarial pool


They weren't secretaries, they were calculators (literally).


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

pdhenry said:


> They weren't secretaries, they were calculators (literally).


Yeah, I think they were referred to as their computer early in the episode. They were getting some actual IBM computers to replace them I think?


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

pdhenry said:


> Good character summary but Oppenheimer was born in the US. His parents (father, anyway) emigrated from Germany in the late 1800s.


I was going to say this. I've seen interviews with Oppenheimer and he didn't have a German accent, since he was born in NYC.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> Was that helpful to those who had trouble following? What did I miss? Any questions?


Thanks--very helpful.

I liked the part where Abby told the other wives what her husband had told her about the project. I expected them to drag her out any minute.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

pdhenry said:


> Good character summary but Oppenheimer was born in the US. His parents (father, anyway) emigrated from Germany in the late 1800s.





Steveknj said:


> I was going to say this. I've seen interviews with Oppenheimer and he didn't have a German accent, since he was born in NYC.


Thanks. I stand corrected. I was getting Oppenheimer confused with Werner von Braun. So it was correct that Oppenheimer was not portrayed with an accent.



pdhenry said:


> They weren't secretaries, they were calculators (literally).





Hoffer said:


> Yeah, I think they were referred to as their computer early in the episode. They were getting some actual IBM computers to replace them I think?


Yes, they were referred to as their "computer" early in the episode when Charlie was being shown around. I was typing on my iPhone when I typed up the summary and didn't really feel like getting into that detail. I figured anyone who watched would know what I meant with "secretarial pool."


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

stellie93 said:


> Thanks--very helpful.
> 
> I liked the part where Abby told the other wives what her husband had told her about the project. I expected them to drag her out any minute.


I wondered about that scene. Had Charlie told her the fake cover story and Abby believed it? And all the wives hadn't ever been told anything so they thought they now had some neat info? Or was it that Abby believed the fake cover story, passed it on to the other wives, and they all exchanged knowing smiles because they've heard that fake cover before and they know it's not true? Or was it that Charlie told Abby the truth, but then also told her the fake cover so that if she ever got in that situation, she would have something to cover with.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Thanks. I stand corrected. I was getting Oppenheimer confused with *Werner von Braun*. So it was correct that Oppenheimer was not portrayed with an accent.


And just to be a picky SOB, Von Braun didn't escape Nazi Germany, he was a card carrying member of the Nazis (and arguably an honorary member of the SS). Because he was a rocket scientist this was pretty much overlooked as the US wanted him to help develop our rocket program (and obviously, he was one of the key people in launching our Space program).


----------



## andrewket (Jan 27, 2002)

Watched it last night and so far I like it.


----------



## andrewket (Jan 27, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> I wondered about that scene. Had Charlie told her the fake cover story and Abby believed it? And all the wives hadn't ever been told anything so they thought they now had some neat info? Or was it that Abby believed the fake cover story, passed it on to the other wives, and they all exchanged knowing smiles because they've heard that fake cover before and they know it's not true? Or was it that Charlie told Abby the truth, but then also told her the fake cover so that if she ever got in that situation, she would have something to cover with.


My guess is #2. They had all heard the cover story before and felt bad that Abby believed it.


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

andrewket said:


> My guess is #2. They had all heard the cover story before and felt bad that Abby believed it.


That was my thought, too.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

#2 seems the most plausible, given the circumstances. But at the same time, when Abby slipped that she might know something, the other wives seemed very eager to hear what she had been told, leading me to think their husbands had been more tight-lipped and they really had no idea. 

I think a more modern show would have the wives acting like Abby's friend and pumping her for info in an effort to find out how committed her husband is to the security of the project. But I think this show takes place in a simpler time, when many women were perfectly content to be housewives and accepted the fact that their husbands couldn't tell them anything about what they did at work. So the fact that Abby actually found out something (even though we know it's fake), is actually a big deal to them.


----------



## Jim_TV (Mar 4, 2006)

I have never watched anything on WGN America but I do have this channel in HD on DirecTV so I gave the pilot a shot. I thought it was pretty entertaining.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 1, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> Thanks. I stand corrected. I was getting Oppenheimer confused with Werner von Braun. So it was correct that Oppenheimer was not portrayed with an accent.
> 
> Yes, they were referred to as their "computer" early in the episode when Charlie was being shown around. I was typing on my iPhone when I typed up the summary and didn't really feel like getting into that detail. I figured anyone who watched would know what I meant with "secretarial pool."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_computer

The term "computer", in use from the early 17th century (the first known written reference dates from 1613),[1] meant "one who computes": a person performing mathematical calculations, before electronic computers became commercially available. "The human computer is supposed to be following fixed rules; he has no authority to deviate from them in any detail." (Turing, 1950) Teams of people were frequently used to undertake long and often tedious calculations; the work was divided so that this could be done in parallel.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 1, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> I find it interesting how many of you are saying that it was hard to distinguish the characters. I didn't find that to be a problem at all. So far, the characters we're supposed to be familiar with are:
> 
> Glen Babbit (Daniel Stern): He was Frank's mentor and is now working on Frank's team as some sort of advisor.


Stern only appears in the first episode, so that's as familiar as we'll get with him. 

What I find interesting is that there are 6 fairly major characters who appear in at least 11 episodes but are not identified by name in the show.

Steve Larese	... Scientist (13 episodes, 2014)
Jaron White	... Military Policeman (13 episodes, 2014)
Rodney Nagel	... Scientist (theoretical physicist) (12 episodes, 2014)
Rafael Torrez	... Scientist (12 episodes, 2014)
Chadwick Johnson	... Scientist (11 episodes, 2014)
Barry R. White	... Military Policeman (11 episodes, 2014)


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Bob Coxner said:


> What I find interesting is that there are 6 fairly major characters who appear in at least 11 episodes but are not identified by name in the show.


Well, not necessarily major...reminds me of Colm Meaney on ST:TNG, playing Transporter Chief on a recurring basis. One day, he saw a script with Transporter Chief O'Brien, and assumed he'd been replaced. 

These characters could just be regular background characters.


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

Howie said:


> I watched the pilot last night. *It was the bomb.* I'll keep watching.


Nice one.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Didn't realize it was about the Manhattan project until Wil Wheaton mentioned it on his show.. set SP..


----------



## TiVo'Brien (Feb 8, 2002)

Liking it. Pretty well written, interesting topic. Hopefully we learn something more than a sub-kindergarten level of the science involved. SP safe.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

mattack said:


> Didn't realize it was about the Manhattan project until Wil Wheaton mentioned it on his show.. set SP..


That's the reason the middle A is in parentheses.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

TiVo'Brien said:


> Hopefully we learn something more than a sub-kindergarten level of the science involved.


IMO they've already met that benchmark.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Just watched the first episode last night with the wife. Looks like a keeper (both the show and the wife  ).


----------



## TiVo'Brien (Feb 8, 2002)

Decent episode last night. You knew that pipe implosion thing was going to fail. It looked so thrown together. Poor Asian guy  He never had a chance once the secret police got hold of him.

I guess Liza has a pet name for Frank: 'Mark' - or maybe that's his middle name. I wish writers wouldn't do that because it's confusing, but it makes me wonder if these are actual people from history or fictional characters. Obviously, Oppenheimer was real. I know that much.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I never heard Liza call him Mark. Are you sure it wasn't just Olivia Williams accent making Frank sound like Mark? I watched with closed captioning on and I think I would have noticed if someone was being called Mark.

And as far as I know, Oppenheimer is the only real-life historical character.

So in the pilot, Winter's team was disbanded, but he saved the team at the last minute by turning in Liao.

In the second episode, Winter makes a deal that he'll prove the implosion theory in 24 hours, or they can disband his team. The experiment is a failure. So doesn't that mean Winter's team is again on the chopping block? Are they going to do this every episode? I think we know from the fact that the series is focused on Winter, and that implosion is the ultimate method used in the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that his design will win out. So it's already getting kind of tiresome to have them constantly jerking the viewers around making us wonder what will happen to Winter's team.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

What happened in the last few minutes? My recording cut out with Liao at the camp gate and the phone ringing.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

eddyj said:


> What happened in the last few minutes? My recording cut out with Liao at the camp gate and the phone ringing.


Remember earlier in the episode, Winter had overheard an MP asking to be transferred to where the real action is? That MP was on the other side of Liao's car, and when the main MP wasn't going to let Liao through, Liao reached for his gun, and the MP that wanted more action saw the gun and shot Liao in the head.

Don't remember if anything really happened after that.


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> I never heard Liza call him Mark. Are you sure it wasn't just Olivia Williams accent making Frank sound like Mark? I watched with closed captioning on and I think I would have noticed if someone was being called Mark.
> 
> And as far as I know, Oppenheimer is the only real-life historical character.
> 
> ...


Actually only the Nagasaki bomb a plutonium implosion design (Fat Man); well that and the Trinity test bomb. The Hiroshima bomb was the uranium gun design (Little Boy). (And it was called Little Boy in comparison with the size the original calculations seemed to show was needed for a uranium bomb, aka Big Boy)

In actuality the Manhattan project, when presented with two or more ways to proceed, simply choose to take all the routes. That's why the ended up with a uranium and a plutonium designs, and why Oak Ridge had several uranium enrichment plants of wildly different design. (Now in practice some of them ended up combined with one plant acting as a first stage for another; but the original plan was to set up completely independent enrichment plants along wildly different approaches, so they didn't risk taking an approach that didn't pan out). And then Hanford built reactors to breed plutonium in case uranium proved impractical to enrich or the bomb design unexpectedly failed to pan out (though the plutonium design was higher risk)

So the drama about picking one design over another probably didn't play out much because they decided fairly early to try both. (And allowed a few of the scientists to work on Super, the hydrogen bomb design, in parallel as well)


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

pdhenry said:


> That's the reason the middle A is in parentheses.


I don't mean I actually watched it. I had seen the *title* of this thread, and maybe heard the name somewhere else.. I had suspected it was some soap opera!


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

I'm caught up.


Spoiler



So at first I thought Liao shot himself. OOPs, can we say that here? I'll spoiler it. Who was the guy that shot him? All I could come up with was some overzealous guard.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

I wouldn't call him overzealous. What happened is what I would expect in a highly secure area. For being a physicist the guy was very stupid for doing that at the gate.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

mattack said:


> I don't mean I actually watched it. I had seen the *title* of this thread, and maybe heard the name somewhere else.. I had suspected it was some soap opera!


Well, it is some soap opera. Only with physics.

The SP's probably going to hit the bit bucket here. Too much soap opera, not enough physics.

If we want Manhattan Project angst, we can just pull out our DVD of _Doctor Atomic_ and watch that again.


----------



## TiVo'Brien (Feb 8, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> I never heard Liza call him Mark. Are you sure it wasn't just Olivia Williams accent making Frank sound like Mark? I watched with closed captioning on and I think I would have noticed if someone was being called Mark.


I swore she said Mark, but turns out it was "Don't go and work" not "Don't go, Mark." You're right - it was the accent.


----------



## TiVo'Brien (Feb 8, 2002)

murgatroyd said:


> Well, it is some soap opera. Only with physics.
> 
> The SP's probably going to hit the bit bucket here. Too much soap opera, not enough physics.


Starting to feel the same way, but hope not!


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

I enjoyed the second episode. Manhattan is now the second show I watch from Sunday nights. I watch it after watching The Strain. And before I watch The Leftovers.


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

I thought the babysitting daugher first getting high on booze then on payote was an interesting touch.


----------



## SullyND (Dec 30, 2004)

We don't get WGN America (I think because we are in Chicago, home to WGN) and they're not airing it on WGN, but fortunately I can watch it on VOD. I'm really liking it so far.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

How many episodes is the season supposed to have?

EDIT: Nevermind. I just found this.



> Manhattan is an American television series that premiered on July 27, 2014, on WGN America, and currently contracted for 13 episodes.[2] It is the second original series, after Salem, for the network. While historical figures are referenced, the show is not intended to maintain historical accuracy.[3]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_(TV_series)


----------



## Inundated (Sep 10, 2003)

WGN America is indeed separately programmed from WGN/9 in Chicago. There are some remnants of the connection, like local news and sports, but even that's been going away...they pulled the WGN Noon News from WGNA and some of the sports won't be coming back.

Tribune still owns WGN America. But it's more like the relationship between cable's TBS and its former over-air home, WTBS/17 Atlanta (now WPCH "Peachtree TV", entirely separate from the cable side.)

This show aired on the Tribune-owned over-air stations, including Fox affiliate WJW/8 here, just once as a teaser. (I think the over-air WGN/9 aired it that one week under this plan.)

On cable here, WGN America is still on an expanded basic/analog channel.


----------



## SullyND (Dec 30, 2004)

Inundated said:


> Tribune still owns WGN America. But it's more like the relationship between cable's TBS and its former over-air home, WTBS/17 Atlanta (now WPCH "Peachtree TV", entirely separate from the cable side.)


And Tribune recently split in two - the newspaper and media (TV/Radio) are now two separate companies.


----------



## Inundated (Sep 10, 2003)

SullyND said:


> And Tribune recently split in two - the newspaper and media (TV/Radio) are now two separate companies.


Yep, basically I'm talking about the broadcast/digital side of the house, anyway.

Tribune just bought our Fox affiliate. If "Manhattan" started six months ago, that premiere "teaser" wouldn't have aired on it...


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I don't know why the guy who stole the papers from a "secure" facility was so upset that he got in trouble for it. He should have just taken his way out.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

stellie93 said:


> I don't know why the guy who stole the papers from a "secure" facility was so upset that he got in trouble for it. He should have just taken his way out.


Well it was certainly his own stupiditity for getting shot. For being a physicist he was very stupid. Why someone that just escaped would go to an exit gate of a highly secure facility with a gun lying on the seat is beyond stupid.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Inundated said:


> WGN America is indeed separately programmed from WGN/9 in Chicago. There are some remnants of the connection, like local news and sports, but even that's been going away...they pulled the WGN Noon News from WGNA and some of the sports won't be coming back.
> 
> Tribune still owns WGN America. But it's more like the relationship between cable's TBS and its former over-air home, WTBS/17 Atlanta (now WPCH "Peachtree TV", entirely separate from the cable side.)
> 
> ...


Since they essentially split, I wonder why they still show the local Chicago news at all, AND, why they are still allowed to show Cubs/White Sox games out of market? I know that TBS gave up showing Braves games after awhile (perhaps as part of it's deal to get a national TV package?)


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

This past episode annoyed me. WAY too much "mourning" for Charlie. I don't know why, but I am much more interested in the wives' stories than the men. The men ALL seem like a bunch of jerks and are totally unlikable. I get that they are trying to show that they all have these huge egos and are willing to stab each other in the back at the drop of a hat. But there's not a likable one in the bunch.


----------



## Inundated (Sep 10, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> Since they essentially split, I wonder why they still show the local Chicago news at all, AND, why they are still allowed to show Cubs/White Sox games out of market? I know that TBS gave up showing Braves games after awhile (perhaps as part of it's deal to get a national TV package?)


WGN as a SuperStation was very popular in the Midwest, and that's presumably why they keep at least a couple of newscasts around. Ditto for the sports.

The former seems almost silly anymore, with WGN America's efforts at original programming...and the fact that you can stream any WGN newscast live now.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Inundated said:


> WGN as a SuperStation was very popular in the Midwest, and that's presumably why they keep at least a couple of newscasts around. Ditto for the sports.
> 
> The former seems almost silly anymore, with WGN America's efforts at original programming...and the fact that you can stream any WGN newscast live now.


The Superstation format is pretty much dead. When I first got cable (in Arizona) I think we had 5 different ones (WOR from NY, WGN in Chicago, WTBS in Atlanta, An L.A. station (I think it was Channel 5) and I think also WPIX in NY. I think there were a few others at an additional charge. I really am surprised MLB lets WGN show those baseball games nationally. You'd think they could sell more subscriptions to their EI or MLB.TV services if they got rid of those games. It also shouldn't be fair to other teams in the midwest that the Cubs and Sox can gain a fan base like that. I'd think teams like the Cards and Royals and Tigers would cry foul.


----------



## Inundated (Sep 10, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> I really am surprised MLB lets WGN show those baseball games nationally. You'd think they could sell more subscriptions to their EI or MLB.TV services if they got rid of those games. It also shouldn't be fair to other teams in the midwest that the Cubs and Sox can gain a fan base like that. I'd think teams like the Cards and Royals and Tigers would cry foul.


Starting in January, WGN America converts to a basic cable channel a la TBS, so it will indeed lose the Chicago sports.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20140530/NEWS01/140539978/wgn-america-to-drop-chicago-sports



> (Tribune CEO Peter Liguori is) in the process of converting the company's national broadcast channel, WGN America, from a superstation into a basic cable channel, which is mainly a technical transition, except that it will require dumping Cubs, Bulls, Blackhawks and White Sox game broadcasts. He doesn't mind, because that programming hasn't been paying off anyway, and besides - he's a New York Mets fan.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Inundated said:


> Starting in January, WGN America converts to a basic cable channel a la TBS, so it will indeed lose the Chicago sports.
> 
> http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20140530/NEWS01/140539978/wgn-america-to-drop-chicago-sports


It's not a basic cable station now? That is a surprise.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> It's not a basic cable station now? That is a surprise.


That's what I said early in this thread. I've always considered WGN as one of the few channels that you'd get even if you only had limited basic. At least that's how it's been where I've lived. But apparently that's not the case everywhere as I learned from how many in this thread have never even heard of the channel and don't have it on their cable subscriptions, or have to have a special tier to get it.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> That's what I said early in this thread. I've always considered WGN as one of the few channels that you'd get even if you only had limited basic. At least that's how it's been where I've lived. But apparently that's not the case everywhere as I learned from how many in this thread have never even heard of the channel and don't have it on their cable subscriptions, or have to have a special tier to get it.


Is this just a case of semantics? I've always considered TBS, WGN and the other superstations also basic cable channels, simply because they generally are offered with other basic cable channels in the non premium channel tiers. My definition of a basic cable channel has always been a channel that you don't have to pay a premium to get that channel (or a series of related channels). A&E, Discover, CNN, Fox News, TBS, Comedy Central are all "basic cable" The HBO, Cinemax, Showtime family of channels aren't.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Mentioned upthread; I have limited basic (locals only, plus things like CSPAN, no "basic cable" stations) and for some reason WGN America is included in my lineup. It's only in SD so I watch Manhattan via Hulu+.


----------



## TiVo'Brien (Feb 8, 2002)

Ahem, getting the discussion about _*Manhattan *_back on track..........



Steveknj said:


> This past episode annoyed me. WAY too much "mourning" for Charlie. I don't know why, but I am much more interested in the wives' stories than the men. The men ALL seem like a bunch of jerks and are totally unlikable. I get that they are trying to show that they all have these huge egos and are willing to stab each other in the back at the drop of a hat. But there's not a likable one in the bunch.


Agree on the too much mourning for Charlie. It seemed like 2/3 of the show was about him, which sort of tells me the pacing we can expect from the show - slooow.

And yeah, the women's story lines are more interesting. Maybe even a little lesbian action coming soon?  It makes sense now that I think of it, but having the operators listening in on every phone conversation was pretty shocking.

Gotta give props to Frank for his clever way of getting a meeting with the base commander guy, aka Duck Phillips.


----------



## Archangel00 (Aug 25, 2006)

mwhip said:


> I think this is their first original series.


No, that would be Salem. Both are solid shows though. WGN is off to a great start in providing original programming. :up::up:


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

TiVo'Brien said:


> Ahem, getting the discussion about _*Manhattan *_back on track..........
> 
> Agree on the too much mourning for Charlie. It seemed like 2/3 of the show was about him, which sort of tells me the pacing we can expect from the show - slooow.
> 
> ...


How else could they know what was being said on the phone in a secure area?


----------



## stinkbomb1020 (Jul 18, 2004)

I liked Salem, my wife more than me. Manhattan, so far, is a "must see" for me. I like the show.


----------



## SullyND (Dec 30, 2004)

I really like the show, though I keep waiting for someone from Eureka to show up.


----------



## WheatDude (Aug 18, 2014)

I like the show, but last night had a HUGE continuity error.

There was a swastika on an imperial German soldier's Stahlhelm. While the swastika did appear on various military items from other nations, the swastika wasn't used on German military items until several years *after* the end of WW1.


----------



## Fl_Gulfer (May 27, 2005)

I really enjoy the show but the wife just falls asleep so I watch alone. I wonder where he got the extra detonators.


----------



## ADG (Aug 20, 2003)

WheatDude said:


> I like the show, but last night had a HUGE continuity error.
> 
> There was a swastika on an imperial German soldier's Stahlhelm. While the swastika did appear on various military items from other nations, the swastika wasn't used on German military items until several years *after* the end of WW1.


Not to be the grammar police, but that would be a chronological error, not a continuity (editing) error.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

It was a very tiny swastika...


----------



## DUSlider (Apr 29, 2005)

Ok, so I was excited to watch this show. Set a SP up. Now getting around to watch it and apparently only the Pilot recorded and there were no conflicts AFAIK. My TiVo shows no future episodes. I'm on Comcast near Philly. it was on WPHL. I don't think I get WGN otherwise. Doing a search shows that WPHL was going to air the premiere but I can't find anything for after.


----------



## SullyND (Dec 30, 2004)

If you are on Comcast and can get OnDemand, you should be able to watch all episodes on there. We do not get WGN America in Chicago, but that is how I am watching it.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DUSlider said:


> Ok, so I was excited to watch this show. Set a SP up. Now getting around to watch it and apparently only the Pilot recorded and there were no conflicts AFAIK. My TiVo shows no future episodes. I'm on Comcast near Philly. it was on WPHL. I don't think I get WGN otherwise. Doing a search shows that WPHL was going to air the premiere but I can't find anything for after.


All but the first episode is exclusively WGN America. In NY it was on WPIX as well as WGN America for the first episode, after that, just WGN


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

DUSlider said:


> Ok, so I was excited to watch this show. Set a SP up. Now getting around to watch it and apparently only the Pilot recorded and there were no conflicts AFAIK. My TiVo shows no future episodes. I'm on Comcast near Philly. it was on WPHL. I don't think I get WGN otherwise. Doing a search shows that WPHL was going to air the premiere but I can't find anything for after.


I don't think it comes on this holiday weekend. So the next episode might not show up if you checked the guide this past Monday or Tuesday. Since the guide is only good for around 12 days.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

It's on Hulu Plus.


----------



## Inundated (Sep 10, 2003)

It's also on free Hulu after a delay (a week, I think). 

And yes, it was only on the Tribune over-air local stations the first week. WGN America only after that...


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

SullyND said:


> If you are on Comcast and can get OnDemand, you should be able to watch all episodes on there. We do not get WGN America in Chicago, but that is how I am watching it.


I meant to mention this. The On Demand airings of Manhattan apparently turn into COMPLETELY COMMERCIAL FREE versions after a while.. and even when there are commercials, they are FFable.. (obviously there's more latency than with a local recording.)

I watched the first ep on On Demand, it had the 'car movie commercial' thing, but it was FFable.. I don't remember how soon after it aired that I watched it.. But then I watched at least the next 2, I think 3 episodes with NO commercials except for a very short WGNA bumper at the beginning.. NO commercials otherwise.

I got impatient and watched the last episode the next day, and it still had commercials, but again FFable.

So I'm still Tivoing it, but the commercial free On Demand is better than Tivoed!


----------



## DavidJL (Feb 21, 2006)

DUSlider said:


> Ok, so I was excited to watch this show. Set a SP up. Now getting around to watch it and apparently only the Pilot recorded and there were no conflicts AFAIK. My TiVo shows no future episodes. I'm on Comcast near Philly. it was on WPHL. I don't think I get WGN otherwise. Doing a search shows that WPHL was going to air the premiere but I can't find anything for after.


First five episodes are available on free hulu.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

...and as I said COMMERCIAL FREE or at least FFable on On Demand.. You have ads on Hulu.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

On Demand has its downsides. I don't use it if I can stream.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

mattack said:


> ...and as I said COMMERCIAL FREE or at least FFable on On Demand...




pdhenry said:


> On Demand has its downsides. I don't use it if I can stream.


i hate to add my post for fear someone at wgn america will read this thread and ruin the experience, but here it goes...

sunday nights tend to be crowded with series i like to watch, so i caught on to manhattan late (never gave it a chance, i loathed salem on wgna). it's turned out to be my favorite new summer series, and when i was catching up, i discovered that with comcast vod there are no commercials, which means no ffwd. even with an sp set on my tivo, i still usually watch new eps with vod because of the seamless, uninterrupted viewing.


----------



## andyw715 (Jul 31, 2007)

Any one notice some top and bottom screen crop going on? 

I'm watching the pilot and noticed that the opening scene (sandstorm) had some text that was half there. Also noticed the credits chopped off. Not to mention tall people with half their heads cropped out.

And no, the TV isn't on Zoom or any other weird aspect setting.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Are you watching recorded, streamed or other?

The only thing I've noticed is they like to equalize toward ultra-bass. The "boom" in the opening is one place but elsewhere in the soundtrack as well. My 32-year-old bookshelf speakers can't quite handle it.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I enjoyed this last episode. It's definitely getting better now that the characters are much more fleshed out. I was on the fence about continuing watching.


----------



## andyw715 (Jul 31, 2007)

pdhenry said:


> Are you watching recorded, streamed or other?
> 
> The only thing I've noticed is they like to equalize toward ultra-bass. The "boom" in the opening is one place but elsewhere in the soundtrack as well. My 32-year-old bookshelf speakers can't quite handle it.


User error.

My TV wasn't zoomed, but TiVo was. Apparently the zoom feature on TiVo affects SD recordings and not HD


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

andyw715 said:


> User error.
> 
> My TV wasn't zoomed, but TiVo was. Apparently the zoom feature on TiVo affects SD recordings and not HD


If using an output HD resolution then SD can be zoomed. If using an SD output resolution then HD can be zoomed.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I really liked this week's episode and the fact that nobody really has any clue about the effects of radiation. The doctor in charge of the Army's whole medical testing process is an OB/GYN who had one week of radiation training. Army folks at Oak Ridge are more interested in meeting deadlines than safety.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> I really liked this week's episode and the fact that nobody really has any clue about the effects of radiation. The doctor in charge of the Army's whole medical testing process is an OB/GYN who had one week of radiation training. Army folks at Oak Ridge are more interested in meeting deadlines than safety.


I also liked that once Frank realized that the Nazi's were ahead of them, that he cared a bit less about those same effects. Still what a Cluster F with both the org chart leading right back to the same doctor at base and the guys in Tennessee not caring as long as they met the deadline. I wonder how much of that was true. I'm sure some of it was.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Does it say something about 1940s culture that Isaac's wife got bent out of shape when she found out Isaac's was going to Tennessee with a female scientist? Did she not trust him.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> I really liked this week's episode and the fact that nobody really has any clue about the effects of radiation. The doctor in charge of the Army's whole medical testing process is an OB/GYN who had one week of radiation training. Army folks at Oak Ridge are more interested in meeting deadlines than safety.


I also liked the scene where they were spraying DDT all over the kids. Which apparently is something they actually did in real life back when they were saying DDT was so safe.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> Does it say something about 1940s culture that Isaac's wife got bent out of shape when she found out Isaac's was going to Tennessee with a female scientist? Did she not trust him.


I think when you combine the stuff Frank put into Abby's mind last week about Charlie plagiarizing parts of his paper, and then now her learning that he went on this trip with a woman yet failed to mention that, she probably has reason to wonder.

From his point of view, he didn't know anything about Helen going until after he last saw Abby, and since he has no inappropriate intentions with regard to Helen, he probably doesn't even consider it something noteworthy enough to tell Abby about.

Typical miscommunication between spouses that is the bedrock of TV drama.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> I think when you combine the stuff Frank put into Abby's mind last week about Charlie plagiarizing parts of his paper, and then now her learning that he went on this trip with a woman yet failed to mention that, she probably has reason to wonder.
> 
> From his point of view, he didn't know anything about Helen going until after he last saw Abby, and since he has no inappropriate intentions with regard to Helen, he probably doesn't even consider it something noteworthy enough to tell Abby about.
> 
> Typical miscommunication between spouses that is the bedrock of TV drama.


And real life too.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Besides Oppenheimer & one other (brain fart at the moment), are any of the other people in this show real people?

While I admit I've already got way too many books I haven't read, does anybody know of any "readable" books about the Manhattan project and/or comparison with other countries' progress on creating a bomb?


----------



## Martha (Oct 6, 2002)

mattack said:


> Besides Oppenheimer & one other (brain fart at the moment), are any of the other people in this show real people?
> 
> While I admit I've already got way too many books I haven't read, does anybody know of any "readable" books about the Manhattan project and/or comparison with other countries' progress on creating a bomb?


My husband loved The Making of the Atomic Bomb by Richard Rhodes. I haven't read it yet, but am thinking about it - love this TV show.


----------



## Zephyr (Sep 16, 2005)

mattack said:


> Besides Oppenheimer & one other (brain fart at the moment), are any of the other people in this show real people?
> 
> While I admit I've already got way too many books I haven't read, does anybody know of any "readable" books about the Manhattan project and/or comparison with other countries' progress on creating a bomb?


Edward Teller perhaps.

I have a book signed by a family friend in 1949 who worked for the Manhattan project called "Atomic Energy for Military Purposes" by Henry Smyth, Princeton University Press 1945. It was written at the request of Major General L. R. Groves. Our friend, as mentioned earlier, was a recruiter for the Manhattan Project (he signed his name pending "M. P.")

Some info on Smyth:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_DeWolf_Smyth


----------



## Zephyr (Sep 16, 2005)

"Helen Prins" perhaps:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leona_Woods

And perhaps the guy who swallowed all the hot stuff, loosely:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willard_Libby


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Who played the mother on the train in last night's episode? I forgot to check the credits, and epguides.com didn't have guest info when I checked earlier. Was it the same woman who was the main character on AMC's "Remember WENN"? (AFAIK, their first original show, but they nowadays seem to list some newer show as their "first" original.)


----------



## DavidJL (Feb 21, 2006)

mattack said:


> Who played the mother on the train in last night's episode? I forgot to check the credits, and epguides.com didn't have guest info when I checked earlier. Was it the same woman who was the main character on AMC's "Remember WENN"? (AFAIK, their first original show, but they nowadays seem to list some newer show as their "first" original.)


She was familiar to me, I thought Susan from Friends but older.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 1, 2004)

Steveknj said:


> I also liked that once Frank realized that the Nazi's were ahead of them, that he cared a bit less about those same effects. Still what a Cluster F with both the org chart leading right back to the same doctor at base and the guys in Tennessee not caring as long as they met the deadline. I wonder how much of that was true. I'm sure some of it was.


None of that was true about Germany and it really took me out of the episode. We knew that the Germans were interested in making a bomb but that was about all we knew at the time. There was no secret report. They weren't two months ahead, they were about 10 years behind. Hitler barely acknowledged the possibility of building one and never gave any real resources towards it. I'll give the writers a pass if it later turns out that Grove was simply trying to light a fire under Frank, with a fake report, and divert him from anything else.

We did know that heavy water was a key item in the process and there was a plant in Norway that produced it, which the Germans had taken. It's one of the great stories of the war how the Brits and Norwegian resistance prevented Germany from getting much heavy water from it. There's a really good movie made about it - The Heroes of Telemark.

The Making of the Atomic Bomb by Richard Rhodes is considered the best book about it. It won the Pulitzer Prize. Another good one is The First War of Physics by Jim Baggott.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/16884.The_Making_of_the_Atomic_Bomb?from_search=true 4.29 on Goodreads.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7842404-the-first-war-of-physics?from_search=true 4.11 on Goodreads.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Heroes_of_Telemark

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_heavy_water_sabotage


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

This show is pure fiction and should not be thought of as anything else. I do enjoy it though.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Bob Coxner said:


> None of that was true about Germany and it really took me out of the episode. We knew that the Germans were interested in making a bomb but that was about all we knew at the time. There was no secret report. They weren't two months ahead, they were about 10 years behind. Hitler barely acknowledged the possibility of building one and never gave any real resources towards it. I'll give the writers a pass if it later turns out that Grove was simply trying to light a fire under Frank, with a fake report, and divert him from anything else.
> 
> We did know that heavy water was a key item in the process and there was a plant in Norway that produced it, which the Germans had taken. It's one of the great stories of the war how the Brits and Norwegian resistance prevented Germany from getting much heavy water from it. There's a really good movie made about it - The Heroes of Telemark.
> 
> ...





aaronwt said:


> This show is pure fiction and should not be thought of as anything else. I do enjoy it though.


This. It's a TV show, and I'm sure 70 years later, we still don't know all of what went on and what we did or did not know or what was said and so forth. Whether it was true or not, I'm sure part of the motivation for Groves was to get them to back on mark. And it worked.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

aaronwt said:


> This show is pure fiction and should not be thought of as anything else. I do enjoy it though.


This is why I stopped watching. I had hoped it was going to be essentially the truth, spiced up for TV. But it was total fiction instead.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Do you avoid "Halt and Catch Fire" for the same reasons?

I don't think it's realistic either, but think of it as a fictional coverage of a competing team to the ones that made the bomb.. (notice how their team has a similar name to Fat Man & Little Boy...)


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

http://www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/manhattan/


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

mattack said:


> Do you avoid "Halt and Catch Fire" for the same reasons?
> 
> I don't think it's realistic either, but think of it as a fictional coverage of a competing team to the ones that made the bomb.. (notice how their team has a similar name to Fat Man & Little Boy...)


Actually it's quasi close to the real thing, I'm afraid I can't tell you more without probably spoiling the TV series 

Lets just sat that, Fat Man, Little Boy, and Thin Man were all real bomb devices.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

mattack said:


> Do you avoid "Halt and Catch Fire" for the same reasons? I don't think it's realistic either, but think of it as a fictional coverage of a competing team to the ones that made the bomb.. (notice how their team has a similar name to Fat Man & Little Boy...)


I never thought that was supposed to be factual. But I also stopped watching it.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

This show was always supposed to be a fictionalized version of what happened, in the same way as Halt and Catch fire (and this is a much better show than HACF). I think they've done a good job showing us what life was like there, but I know that the events are not exactly what happened. Hence, fictionalized


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

vertigo235 said:


> Lets just sat that, Fat Man, Little Boy, and Thin Man were all real bomb devices.


Umm, you do realize I already KNOW that Fat Man & Little Boy were real...? That's why I referred to them.

But I do have questions about the most recent episode.. and both are me probably forgetting info from previous episodes.

What was the burned letter to Oppenheimer about and who was it from?

Also, what exactly was the discussion about when the woman was assaulted? It was sort of explained later when she talked with her husband, but not 100%.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

mattack said:


> Umm, you do realize I already KNOW that Fat Man & Little Boy were real...? That's why I referred to them.
> 
> But I do have questions about the most recent episode.. and both are me probably forgetting info from previous episodes.
> 
> ...


But you don't know about thin man


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

I'm also curious about the burnt letter. Should we know?


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

Thin Man

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thin_Man_(nuclear_bomb)


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

vertigo235 said:


> But you don't know about thin man


Yes, I know -- I thought that they simply picked another "similar kind of name". I guess I had assumed this was MORE fictional than it really is.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

I admittedly haven't read this, but it looks intriguing...
http://www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/manhattan/


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I was confused in the last episode--why did her Geiger counter not click after her husband came home? Did he mess with it somehow and I missed it? It's funny--she's the most sane person in the whole camp, and she's the one who's crazy.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

stellie93 said:


> I was confused in the last episode--why did her Geiger counter not click after her husband came home? Did he mess with it somehow and I missed it? It's funny--she's the most sane person in the whole camp, and she's the one who's crazy.


I don't think they clearly implied any answer, but I would suspect everything gave a reading because something that was contaminated had been on her when she'd been taking readings. Then she went on a burning spree and likely changed, too. So now nothing shows a reading since whatever was contaminated is no longer near the Geiger counter wand as she takes readings.

Presumably at some point she'll make the connection between the colored flower and radioactive contamination.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

There is also the possibly that she really is crazy. I guess.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

No idea why the Geiger counter was going crazy at first and then not after Frank came home.

Also wonder why it was going crazy on that one baby but not on the others.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

dswallow said:


> ...I would suspect everything gave a reading because something that was contaminated had been on her when she'd been taking readings. Then she went on a burning spree and likely changed, too. So now nothing shows a reading since whatever was contaminated is no longer near the Geiger counter wand as she takes readings.


this is where my thoughts finally landed.


vertigo235 said:


> There is also the possibly that she really is crazy.


this was my first conclusion, but i changed my mind. they've been building the case for her mental instability, combined with her realization of subtle effects from the radiation. either one could be the answer, even something else we haven't mentioned.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

I figured the Geiger counter was unreliable. Too prone to false positves or false negatives.


----------



## teknikel (Jan 27, 2002)

Why don't they use the Geiger counter on the known contaminated men?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Manhattan was renewed for a second season. Good news for the show just before the season finale airs this Sunday.

And given what happened in the most recent episode, I'm very much looking forward to the finale to see how this all shakes out and how they leave things open for a second season.


----------



## SullyND (Dec 30, 2004)

I'm conflicted on Season 2. I enjoy the show, but hope it doesn't go Prison Break on season 2.


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

Come on. We know how this is going to end, don't we?

Unless maybe... There have been quantum mechanical hints about the "Many Worlds" interpretation in-story and plenty of comic book references. Perhaps this is actually set in an alternate universe in which Werner Heisenberg gets his heavy water from Norway and this is actually a prequel to _The Man in the High Castle_?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

SullyND said:


> I'm conflicted on Season 2. I enjoy the show, but hope it doesn't go Prison Break on season 2.


What do you mean about going Prison Break? I don't see how that analogy applies here. In Prison Break, they broke out of prison at the end of S1, so S2 was a cluster because they had no idea what the escapees should be doing.

That would be like if at the end of S1 of Manhattan they had finished designing the bomb and then they had nothing for the characters to do in S2. But as of the most recent episode, they're nowhere close to having the bomb designed.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

Yeah there is still plenty of story and manufactured drama to tell here. I've really enjoyed season 1 and I welcome many more seasons. Especially if they stick to 13 episodes or so.


----------



## tgmii (Feb 21, 2002)

I was very happy to hear its renewed, well deserved.

I just wish it was carried on cablevision. THey had the first episode on WPIX 11 in NY, but then not the whole rest of the series. Luckily its on Hulu. I'd have to think the ratings would be much better without leaving out much of NY/NJ. Hopefully cablevision picks WGN up for next year.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

It's renewed? That is great news!


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

count me in, it's surprised me how much i've enjoyed season one, looking forward to next season! :up:


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I'm surprised no comments on the finale yet? I'm glad it's renewed as well. After a slow start (mostly trying to learn who everyone is), I thought the story picked up and the last three or so episodes were really excellent.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

Steveknj said:


> I'm surprised no comments on the finale yet? I'm glad it's renewed as well.


since this isn't an official season thread, i'm spoilerizing:



Spoiler



great cliffhanger. i should have seen frank's confession (and redemption) coming when he first noticed the bug in the closet, but didn't, which made for a enjoyable finale. as soon as it happened, it made sense as the best solution for the team.

the big blindside was jim, we'll have to wait until next season see where his spying leads.


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

I really enjoyed this season, and I'm looking forward to the next...



Spoiler



But just like we knew from history that implosion was the only way to build a plutonium bomb, we also know that the Soviets successfully spied on the Manhattan Project, not getting caught until after the war was over. The dramatic tension is at the personal level where they are making things up.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Really enjoyed the season finale and am eager to see how they move forward. I can't imagine that John Benjamin Hickey will be written out of the show, so it will be interesting to see how they resolve this storyline.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

I noticed the actor playing Oppenheimer was on Gotham this past week.

Definitely looking forward to the second season after watching the season one finale.


----------



## jerrymc (Sep 17, 2001)

They're on the verge of losing my interest. It's really not much more than a soap opera: full of excessively flawed characters, struggling with a completely outrageous number of social problems, with about 5 minutes or less of science thrown in per episode.

Seriously, there aren't too many characters to like here...


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

I'd call it a drama more than a soap opera, but what did you expect? It wasn't meant as a documentary.


----------



## jerrymc (Sep 17, 2001)

I didn't have any expectations. My wife was interested because it was promoted in such a way to as to make you think it was the story of the Manhattan Project. And sorry, but it really is no better than a soap opera masquerading as a drama. It has all the ingredients: cheating husbands and wives, betrayal, dirty tricks, hooker with a heart of gold, naive nerd in love, mental illness, office politics, suicide, and deep dark secrets (commies and "old bachelors").

All that's missing is for Sid Lau's evil twin brother to show up, or for Isaacs to reveal in a camera aside, with a sardonic laugh while rubbing his hands together, that he really is the antichrist that OSI thought he was.

It strains credulity.

And yes, I saw the disclaimer that said this was not meant to portray historical events. Which, by the time the second episode was finished, was a great big "Duh!"


----------



## gpejsa (Jan 27, 2002)

I enjoyed Season 1 and am looking forward to Season 2. Does anyone have a link to how closely this portrays the actual manhattan project?


----------



## teknikel (Jan 27, 2002)

jerrymc said:


> It has all the ingredients: cheating husbands and wives, betrayal, dirty tricks, hooker with a heart of gold, naive nerd in love, mental illness, office politics, suicide, and deep dark secrets (commies and "old bachelors").


Sound like a lot of plays by William Shakespeare also.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

Manhattan marathon today on WGN beginning 11 AM EDT, I just noticed.

Edited to change 10AM to 11AM.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 1, 2004)

gpejsa said:


> I enjoyed Season 1 and am looking forward to Season 2. Does anyone have a link to how closely this portrays the actual manhattan project?


For the TL;DR crowd: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Project

For a more expansive view:

The First War of Physics. http://www.amazon.com/First-War-Phy...14331362&sr=1-1&keywords=first+war+of+physics 584 pages. Very good and I can recommend it.

The Making of the Atomic Bomb. This is the definitive work. Won the Pulitzer Prize and National Book Award. http://www.amazon.com/Making-Atomic...sr=1-1&keywords=the+making+of+the+atomic+bomb 896 pages.

I would say the show is moderately good history, although some of the key plot points are total fiction. We didn't have a spy in Heisenberg's lab. We had almost no knowledge at all of what the Germans were doing. In reality they were doing almost nothing.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Wait, wasn't one of the Nova episodes about blowing up Germany's heavy water plants.. heavy water being used for nuclear bombs?


----------



## stinkbomb1020 (Jul 18, 2004)

I liked the show but would have enjoyed more of the scientific aspect; project/models, test/trails,FX effects,etc. and less of the soap opera stage. Or even a 50/50 split of the two would have been nice. Maybe their budget didn't allow for any more FX than what the show had. Maybe season 2 will bring more of what I would like to see.


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

mattack said:


> Wait, wasn't one of the Nova episodes about blowing up Germany's heavy water plants.. heavy water being used for nuclear bombs?


Probably. There are several movies that have attempts to sabotage the Norwegian heavy water plants as the major plot point. Both the Germans and Japanese had atomic bomb projects during WWII, it would be incorrect to say the Germans did nothing in that regard. Some have suggested that Heisenberg more or less sabotaged the German effort, but there's no real proof of that one way or the other. Allied efforts certainly kept the Axis from having enough heavy water to build industrial scale reactors to produce plutonium, and as the war in Russia consumed more resources the A-bomb project in Germany was starved. The Japanese project never got very far; Japan's scientific base was greatly inferior to Germany's, and resources were diverted from project even earlier in the war than in Germany. Most good histories of the Manhattan project will also compare and contrast what was going on in the other countries at the time.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

I might have been thinking about bombing the dams, actually.. but here's a relevant page from the Nova pages..

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/military/nazis-and-the-bomb.html


----------



## Cainebj (Nov 11, 2006)

I somehow missed the premiere of this earlier in the fall and by the time I started recording it I was 4 or 5 episodes behind - then thanks to the marathon go the entire first season.

I just binge watched it and really enjoyed it.

One of the best performances I have seen Hickey give - usually he's the crazy over the top character to see him showing more restraint was nice.

I realize it is not factual but still enjoyable characters, acting and storytelling all around.


----------



## Craigbob (Dec 2, 2006)

Finally got through the series. I really liked it. I was taken aback by


Spoiler



Meeks being the mole


. I never saw that coming.

What happened to the storyline with Fritz having ingested some of the plutonium early on? Shouldn't he be dead from radiation poisoning?

I can't wait for next season, it got real good fast.


----------

