# Chuck "Chuck vs. the Honeymooners" (4/26/10, Spoilers)



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Seriously? No thread? 

This was a fantastic episode. Loved Beckman's reaction at the end... "But off the record... it's about damned time!" And I agree. Sarah and Chuck made an amazing team tonight, and it's nice seeing that Chuck seems to be putting it all together, finally.

I loved Sarah's southern accent! I hope they figure out a way to work that in again!

Did my ears deceive me, or was Jeffster actually good tonight? 

I wonder if that was the last we'll see of Awesome/Ellie this season.

Man, I'm glad they extended the season... it would've sucked to have had to settle for just 13 episodes this season.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

Awesome episode, even if Ellie and Captain Awesome seem to be headed off to other lands.

Chuck + Sarah = very effective spy. Chuck by himself, bumbling idiot. Sarah with Chuck, not too shabby.

Best part, in my mind, was Morgan being effective as a spy despite Casey's concerns, and being very observant as well. :up:


And no, Jeffster was pretty good, so I don't think your ears decieved you.


----------



## pjenkins (Mar 8, 1999)

loved this episode, they may be able to find a balance with the romance yet. so far, so good


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

Some nice eye candy at the beginning. 

O_O


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

I still have to watch it!! I will be catching up tomorrow but I am glad it was good.


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

Biggest surprise was that Jeffster was good! 

Good episode. It was a nice twist that the baddie was under Interpol protection already.


----------



## Craigbob (Dec 2, 2006)

Excellent episode. Can we get more of Yvonne in those nighties? Damn she is hot.

+ 1 on Beckman's reaction and Morgan's observational skills.

Keep it at this level and I foresee a 4th season.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Fun episode.
I'm pretty sure that was Robert Duncan McNeill as the Porter.

So, Sarah moves in with Chuck, does that mean Morgan moves in with Casey?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

LoadStar said:


> I wonder if that was the last we'll see of Awesome/Ellie this season.


I bet they get kidnapped by some African tribal warlord or something and Chuck goes to rescue them.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

It's about damned time! 

Hopefully this can leave the "will they/won't they" behind us, and get us somewhere else. Very good episode, also nice to see a change of scenery, Burbank was getting a little stale...


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I like Morgan as part of the team.

I thought Sarah's Texas accent was pretty bad.

Gen. Beckman is da bomb.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I'm gonna miss Awesome, but MAN Ellie has gotten annoying!

Poor Sarah, having to flounce around in that nightie for half the episode. Dang shame, I say. Dang shame.

In all sincerity. Yes, sir. Dang shame.


----------



## pjenkins (Mar 8, 1999)

i liked this iPhone callerID with Beckman...


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 8, 2008)

The "Mr. & Mrs Charles" alias is a nod to the "Thin Man" series. Nice touch in a great episode. I hope to be seeing more of them.


----------



## daveak (Mar 23, 2009)

Nice, very nice.

Casey with Morgan, much better than Awesome with Ellie. Morgan really knows Chuck, and the agency can effectively use him to keep an eye on Chuck so they know what he is up to - As Sarah may no longer be a reliable handler (at least a handler who keeps Chuck in line with CIA objectives). She has obviously been compromised in this capacity due to her rather intimate relationship with Chuck. So will Casey handle Morgan handling Chuck? And does someone get to handle Sarah? 

It's about damn time. 

Though you know the Chuck/ Sarah relationship will have to hit some bumps. It can't be that easy after all we have seen (been through).

Go Jeffster! Keep it unplugged and they might have a chance.

I still keep thinking we will see Chuck's dad for at least one episode, but I am not so sure on this anymore - as they did not see fit to do it in the original 13 eps for this season, though maybe they have a little more money now.

:up::up:


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

daveak said:


> Go Jeffster! Keep it unplugged and they might have a chance.


It was funny how they dressed differently for their unplugged set.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

verdugan said:


> It was funny how they dressed differently for their unplugged set.


"Break out the turtlenecks!"


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

That was quite the bedroom suite on the train! Oo la la!
I thought trains had just basic bunk berths.


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

Everytime they have a satisfying "series finale" like last week's episode was originally intended to be, I always want a post-finale episode where viewers actually _see_ a little "happily ever after."

This was that episode. Thanks, producers of Chuck! :up:

The cuddling scene at the end was even more emotionally satisfying than the extended intimate scene at the beginning. I must be growing up. 

Now please please PLEASE do not end this season with a cliffhanger unless you're absolutely certain of a fourth season, 'mkay?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

verdugan said:


> It was funny how they dressed differently for their unplugged set.


That was from a Simon & Garfunkle album cover...


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

I loved the look on the conductor's face when he had to touch the ticket after Morgan produced it from his 'security pouch."

Exactly what rout did that train take? It is a few hours from Paris to Zurich, under normal conditions. Were they going via Cairo or something?

Morgan finding Chuck was excellent, and Casey grudgingly admiring him, even against his better judgement, was well played. His realizing the agents were really bad guys was pretty well done too, but they should have been able to something other than get tied up.

Rule for the day that I learned from this episode. Never trust a bad tempered Canadian!


----------



## MikeCC (Jun 19, 2004)

I found it amusing that several times thoroughout the episode we saw acknowledgements that the Chuck/Sarah relationship problems could have been solved with a little honest heart-to-heart conversation:

Sarah to Chuck: "I can't fake this with you anymore..." hilarious beginning to a conversation that she spotted some armed agents on the train.

Basque terrorist to both Chuck and Sarah: "Just make sure it is what you really want to do..." causing both Chuck and Sarah to discuss remaining active agents AND continuing their initmate relationship.

General Beckman: "It's about damned time." The General echos the sentiment of many formerly frustrated Chuck viewers, who now get to watch a couple enjoy being together.

I almost thought it was a winking acknowledgement that the folks at Chuck knew they stretched this out waaayyy too long. Almost a "please we know, and we're sorry. Just enjoy."


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

MikeCC said:


> I almost thought it was a winking acknowledgement that the folks at Chuck knew they stretched this out waaayyy too long. Almost a "please we know, and we're sorry. Just enjoy."


I guarantee that's what it was.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

Church AV Guy said:


> Exactly what rout did that train take? It is a few hours from Paris to Zurich, under normal conditions. Were they going via Cairo or something?


My train thunder has been stolen!



> Rule for the day that I learned from this episode. Never trust a bad tempered Canadian!


I loved Morgan starting to describe Chuck to his fellow non-Canadian: "He's aboot --"


----------



## tgmii (Feb 21, 2002)

The "Need a walker" comment cracked me up!

Tom


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

tgmii said:


> The "Need a walker" comment cracked me up!
> 
> Tom


That and the followup "They're having intercourse, idiot" explanation.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Having just recently traveled by plane, I cracked up at seeing Awesome's weights in his suitcase! My first thought....imagine what the frickin' airline is going to charge him for THAT bag!!!

I thought it was a fun episode and we got to see plenty of Sarah being hawt. Can't get enough of that (anyone else pause a few times to admire?) The show is just so well done and well written that even stuff like where the train was going is just not really important, and only noticeable to someone paying VERY close attention. Casey and Morgan together are great.

Regarding Chuck's dad making an appearance:



Spoiler



IRC in the coming attractions right before they took the latest break, they showed his dad...so I think it's gonna happen.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

cheesesteak said:


> I thought Sarah's Texas accent was pretty bad.


It was very exaggerated. For a action-comedy show, like this is, it didn't bug me too much. I wasn't paying attention to her accent anyway.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Craigbob said:


> Excellent episode. Can we get more of Yvonne in those nighties? Damn she is hot...


She just needs to get her teeth fixed.


----------



## jschuur (Nov 27, 2002)

I loved that they're together, but overly happy outcomes like this in TV shows always make me nervous. There's only one way for the story to go here.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

pjenkins said:


> i liked this iPhone callerID with Beckman...


That was pretty silly. If the Caller ID is encrypted, how did the phone know to put up General Beckman's picture?


verdugan said:


> It was funny how they dressed differently for their unplugged set.





GDG76 said:


> "Break out the turtlenecks!"





Rob Helmerichs said:


> That was from a Simon & Garfunkle album cover...


That's exactly what I thought. Jeff even had his hair afro'd out and had on little round glasses to look just like Art Garfunkel. Kind of strange that they then sang a John Denver song.


Church AV Guy said:


> Exactly what rout did that train take? It is a few hours from Paris to Zurich, under normal conditions. Were they going via Cairo or something?


Exactly my thought. They showed the train "Somewhere outside Paris" and then they show the montage of the porter bringing them several days worth of meals, and mentioning that the train has a dining car. Then they show that the train is now in Lyon, France.  It should only take a few hours by train to get from Paris to Lyon, not several days.


Bierboy said:


> She just needs to get her teeth fixed.


This.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> She just needs to get her teeth fixed.


She's got teeth? Sorry, I didn't notice


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

They just stayed on the train as it traveled back and forth...


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Steveknj said:


> She's got teeth? Sorry, I didn't notice


I know, for you folks in Jersey, teeth aren't always required in determining good looks....


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> I know, for you folks in Jersey, teeth aren't always required in determining good looks....


Not when there are other...ummm...assets exposed 

And....at least we HAVE teeth (yeah, low blow...lol)


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

Bierboy said:


> She just needs to get her teeth fixed.


If she was absolutely perfect, then I'd have NO shot at her! At least now that she has a flaw, I can hope!


----------



## moot (Apr 8, 2006)

jschuur said:


> I loved that they're together, but overly happy outcomes like this in TV shows always make me nervous. There's only one way for the story to go here.


Not necessarily true. If you look to The Office for an example, Jim & Pam spent a lot of episodes in the will they / won't they stage, but now that they're finally together, everything it still working out well. All of that romantic tension has been replaced with just showing how they are genuinely happy with each other and fit so well together. I'm hoping the Chuck writers have something similar in mind here.


----------



## Tangent (Feb 25, 2005)

DevdogAZ said:


> That was pretty silly. If the Caller ID is encrypted, how did the phone know to put up General Beckman's picture?


The call was encrypted, not the caller ID. I'm sure the CIA has an iPhone app for handling encrypted calls. 



> Exactly my thought. They showed the train "Somewhere outside Paris" and then they show the montage of the porter bringing them several days worth of meals, and mentioning that the train has a dining car. Then they show that the train is now in Lyon, France.  It should only take a few hours by train to get from Paris to Lyon, not several days.


2 theories: 1) It's a scenic train trip, not a commuter trip so it takes a long scenic route, not a straight shot. 2) They were ordering several meals throughout that one day - not just breakfast lunch and dinner - to keep energy levels up.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> She just needs to get her teeth fixed.


We didn't hear Chuck complaining.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> That's exactly what I thought. Jeff even had his hair afro'd out and had on little round glasses to look just like Art Garfunkel. Kind of strange that they then sang a John Denver *Peter Paul and Mary* song.


FYP.

(the song was 'Leaving on a Jet Plane' ,right?)


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

busyba said:


> FYP.
> 
> (the song was 'Leaving on a Jet Plane' ,right?)


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



> "Leaving on a Jet Plane" is a song *written by John Denver* in 1966 and most famously recorded by Peter, Paul and Mary.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> John Denver's version of his song, "Leaving on a Jet Plane", was included on his 1969 debut solo album, Rhymes and Reasons.


(Actually, I didn't know it was written by John Denver. It's just that his is the only version I've ever known about.)


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Interesting. I don't think I've ever heard the Denver-sung version.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

busyba said:


> Interesting. I don't think I've ever heard the Denver-sung version.


I can say the exact same thing about the PP&M version. I didn't even know it existed until reading it in this thread.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

DreadPirateRob said:


> I can say the exact same thing about the PP&M version. I didn't even know it existed until reading it in this thread.


And for about the 157,603rd time, I think DPR and I must have been separated at birth.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

YouTube links:

Peter, Paul and Mary version

John Denver version


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

trainman said:


> YouTube links:
> 
> Peter, Paul and Mary version


Thanks for the link. Yep, I'd definitely never heard that version before.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> Thanks for the link. Yep, I'd definitely never heard that version before.


Weird, that's the version that was a hit song.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Weird, that's the version that was a hit song.


But I wasn't alive in 1967.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> But I wasn't alive in 1967.


 Kids today. No sense of history.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Kids today. No sense of history.


By the time Dev was born, Peter Paul and Mary were cancelled.


----------



## TampaThunder (Apr 8, 2003)

busyba said:


> By the time Dev was born, Peter Paul and Mary were cancelled.


Burn in Hell, Fox!!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

busyba said:


> By the time Dev was born, Peter Paul and Mary were cancelled.


ARRRGH! THEY WEREN'T CANCELED, THEY JUST...

Wait a minute...

You tricked me. No fair.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Kids today. No sense of history.


It wasn't much later that I was born, but for some reason, the John Denver version is the only one I'm familiar with.


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

DevdogAZ said:


> But I wasn't alive in 1967.


Neither was I, but I've somehow heard it dozens of times. There is this thing called magnetic tape that they saved sounds on back then. It can still be played back today and transferred to things like CDs and MP3s. Amazingly enough, you didn't have to be alive in 1967 to hear the performance today.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> And for about the 157,603rd time, I think DPR and I must have been separated at birth.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Weird, that's the version that was a hit song.


Maybe it's just the familiarity factor, but the John Denver version is *way* better to me.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

And just to get this thread back on track:


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Can you say "derailed"?


----------



## David Platt (Dec 13, 2001)

DreadPirateRob said:


> And just to get this thread back on track:


Yeah, those teeth are really jacked up.


----------



## IJustLikeTivo (Oct 3, 2001)

Bierboy said:


> She just needs to get her teeth fixed.


Really? Not a big deal for me. Frankly, I'm a bit annoyed at TV people with perfect teeth. Most people have some odd things about them.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

That photo flatters her teeth...they're not that nice.


----------



## IJustLikeTivo (Oct 3, 2001)

Bierboy said:


> That photo flatters her teeth...they're not that nice.


I spend time studying other aspects of Yvonne....


----------



## MikeCC (Jun 19, 2004)

DreadPirateRob said:


> And just to get this thread back on track:


Just how many times did they have the train go into a tunnel?


----------



## Magister (Oct 17, 2004)

IJustLikeTivo said:


> Really? Not a big deal for me. Frankly, I'm a bit annoyed at TV people with perfect teeth. Most people have some odd things about them.


I think it is funny to see a TV/Movie set in an older time where all the stars have perfect teeth. Medievel Europe or heck, even 50's USA, they look silly, and sometimes glow.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

I know, I know....I'm a superficial, male chauvinist pig. What can I say?


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

David Platt said:


> Yeah, those teeth are really jacked up.


Again, teeth? Somehow, most of my attention in that picture was...ummm..elsewhere


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

What's wrong with her teeth???


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

I think we need more research into this teeth issue. Here's my contribution:
































































Yeah, I still don't get it.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Does this gal have a shy bone in her body? She may appear more in her undies more than any other actress I can think of on broadcast TV. Seems almost once an episode.

Not that I'm complaining...


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> Does this gal have a shy bone in her body? She may appear more in her undies more than any other actress I can think of on broadcast TV. Seems almost once an episode.


Thus emphasizing the importance of reading the contract _before _signing it.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Steveknj said:


> Does this gal have a shy bone in her body? She may appear more in her undies more than any other actress I can think of on broadcast TV. Seems almost once an episode.
> 
> Not that I'm complaining...


She's not American.


----------



## daveak (Mar 23, 2009)

MickeS said:


> She's not American.


At least she is legal.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Tangent said:


> The call was encrypted, not the caller ID. I'm sure the CIA has an iPhone app for handling encrypted calls.


And even if the caller id was encrypted as well, it's not like you hear pink noise when taking an encrypted call. The phone *decrypts* it. Same with the caller id -- it's not like it's re-transmitting the caller id or the image back unencrypted; it's just displayed locally.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> Thanks for the link. Yep, I'd definitely never heard that version before.


All I can say is "Wow". It's like saying "'Yesterday'? Never heard of it."


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> But I wasn't alive in 1967.


And I was six years old and living behind the Iron Curtain. No excuses. I know what Bye Bye Miss American Pie is all about and I wasn't even born when that plane went down.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

I wonder if it's something to do with where you grew up. Not sure if DevdogAZ was born in Arizona or not, but I was born (and raised) in CA, and the John Denver version is all I heard. Maybe it's an East Coast-West Thing? So John Denver=Tupac, and PPM=Biggie Smalls?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I was born and raised in Utah (Rocky Mountains) and John Denver was quite popular. 

Frankly I'm very familiar with music from before my time. The bulk of my CD collection is 60s and 70s classic rock. But for some reason, PP&M was never in my wheelhouse, and that version of the song doesn't sound familiar at all.


----------



## andyw715 (Jul 31, 2007)

I don't like either version.


----------



## ronsch (Sep 7, 2001)

DreadPirateRob said:


> I think we need more research into this teeth issue. Here's my contribution
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nothing wrong with those teeth!


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

andyw715 said:


> I don't like either version.


I never liked John Denver and still don't to this day...


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

Apropos to nothing, a glimpse of the Tron poster made me think that, if the show's still around, it'd be really cool if they tied in to the upcoming _Tron Legacy_. Since the poster has not only been present but became a plot point, it would make sense, and it could be a nice bit of cross-marketing.

For instance, imagine if dear old Dad sneaks an update to the Intersect into the 3D encoding for the movie. The movie's opening and Chuck's on a mission but Morgan lures him to drop it for a few hours to go see the premiere because, hey, how can you not? The update hidden in the movie gives him the skills he needs to finish the mission.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

Hunter Green said:


> Apropos to nothing, a glimpse of the Tron poster made me think that, if the show's still around, it'd be really cool if they tied in to the upcoming _Tron Legacy_. Since the poster has not only been present but became a plot point, it would make sense, and it could be a nice bit of cross-marketing.


Since it airs on NBC (Universal) and is produced by Warner Bros., and "Tron: Legacy" is a Disney movie, I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for a marketing tie-in. They're obviously okay with the poster for the old movie being on the TV show, but extensive promotion for another studio's new film would probably be a little too much for the executives in charge of "Chuck."


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

Yeah, pity. It would be so Chuck-like and so cool.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Hunter Green said:


> Yeah, pity. It would be so Chuck-like and so cool.


What we'll probably get is Chuck and Morgan complaining about what a pathetic shadow of the original the remake is.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

trainman said:


> Since it airs on NBC (Universal) and is produced by Warner Bros., and "Tron: Legacy" is a Disney movie, I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for a marketing tie-in. They're obviously okay with the poster for the old movie being on the TV show, but extensive promotion for another studio's new film would probably be a little too much for the executives in charge of "Chuck."


Unless Disney paid buckets of money for it.


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

Peter000 said:


> Unless Disney paid buckets of money for it.


It would have to be big buckets. Neither WB or Universal want to hurt their own movies' chances that weekend...


----------



## IndyJones1023 (Apr 1, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Fun episode.
> I'm pretty sure that was Robert Duncan McNeill as the Porter.


Whoa, really? I can't believe he's aged soooo much.


----------



## Tangent (Feb 25, 2005)

JYoung said:


> Fun episode.
> I'm pretty sure that was Robert Duncan McNeill as the Porter.
> ...


IMDB lists Ron Provencal in that role...


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

I'm finally catching up; I don't have a ton of comments on the episode, other than it was nice to see Chuck and Sarah really together, finally. I just hope they can take a break from having sex long enough for the stories in the rest of the episodes to go OK.


----------



## Jesda (Feb 12, 2005)

!!!


----------

