Am I missing something about White Lotus Season 2?

Submitted by ChiefWatchesYouPee t3_10l6sv5 in television

I started season 2 because I heard it was better than season 1 and not connected.

Heard great things about it, but it just felt slow and a little boring at times. Not terrible by any means, but not as great as all the praise it was getting.

SPOILERS

The story and the twists were nothing special. Felt like you could see them coming. Didn’t like that they basically spelled everything out for the audience on the phone conversation in the yacht. Didn’t like how Porsche seemed so dumb at the end. Getting in a car with someone she knew was bad made 0 sense.

I wasn’t a fan of the Affair story line and all those characters flip flopping every other scene.

It’s not a terrible show but maybe I didn’t grasp the point or concept. I sometimes miss the deeper meanings of movies and shows.

I wasn’t as entertained as much as I’d hoped.

Maybe it was the folly of high expectations.

Would love to know why others really love the show.

0

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Good_old_Marshmallow t1_j5uydjq wrote

The White Lotus is a show about power dynamics and exploitation. The identity and feelings and actions of characters inside those dynamics are what make the show interesting.

Season one was about money, season two was about sex.

Similar to season one no really breaks out of their hierarchy or undoes the cycle. It’s more about what everyone learns about themselves

49

WordsAreSomething t1_j5uyf9f wrote

>Didn’t like how Porsche seemed so dumb at the end. Getting in a car with someone she knew was bad made 0 sense.

Was she supposed to just stay in a random town in Italy alone with no phone or money?

29

shogi_x t1_j5v7e08 wrote

> Was she supposed to just stay in a random town in Italy alone with no phone or money?

As opposed to getting into a car with a guy who might murder her?

Yes.

6

ChiefWatchesYouPee OP t1_j5visf2 wrote

Thank you, feel like im taking crazy pills reading some of these responses and getting downvoted.

Id rather be stranded than dead

0

shogi_x t1_j5vkamc wrote

Seriously. She suspected the guy was involved in a plot to kill or rob her boss and she got into the car with him anyway.

3

diivoshin t1_j5wrq58 wrote

What do you think people did in a sticky situation pre-cell phones?

5

WordsAreSomething t1_j5wtufz wrote

Figured it out I guess? At best she could have tried to find someone to talk to but that would be both bad television and not exactly a solid plan.

1

ChiefWatchesYouPee OP t1_j5uzhgn wrote

Could go to the police and say someone stranded you.

You think something bad is going to happen, so you decide to get in a car with the guy who stole your phone and you think will do something bad? That’s not a good decision either.

She also confronts him in the car where he could easily lock her in or do harm to her, instead of in a public place where others might help. Then decides to just ride with him after he said he’s just doing his job.

−7

WordsAreSomething t1_j5v0ny1 wrote

There is a lot that could go wrong if she did your idea too.

Staying with the person you had been with for days doesn't seem like a bad decision to me especially considering the situation she was in. It doesn't seem like she was in actual danger asuch as he was just being used to keep her away. She was afraid for her boss, not for herself as much.

6

ChiefWatchesYouPee OP t1_j5v17ya wrote

The guy literally stole her phone and called her a job and she found out was fucking his uncle.

You’d rather take your chances with him, than with local authorities or local help?

I wouldn’t.

She had also seen all their faces and knew who they were, she was a liability at that point.

−2

WordsAreSomething t1_j5v1pcy wrote

And she's supposed to just run away from him to the police, where she doesn't know the location of or have any means of finding them?

Or stick with the person you've been with for a few days, sleeping with, that doesn't seem to putting you in any danger even if they are not trustworthy?

5

longdustyroad t1_j5vjxjz wrote

Sometimes you just don’t like things. Things aren’t going to appeal to everyone equally. Not really much more to say about it

16

shogi_x t1_j5v7yob wrote

I just finished both seasons and I gotta say I much preferred Season 1, mostly because of Armond.

6

jogoso2014 t1_j5v0daw wrote

I liked season 2 just fine but I think the class dynamics were weaker this time. It was just a well done drama about rich people.

5

the_tendril_zone t1_j5vv1ig wrote

I think maybe the class dynamic was stronger but more subtle. The local sex workers trying to scam/get a piano gig, Portia at the beck and call of Jennifer Coolidge, the 'nephew' of the conman choosing being a gay gigolo over his unimaginably bad life in England , the power imbalance of the manager and the girl at the front desk, the Sicilian 'family' F. Murray Abraham visits telling him to piss off, the newly very rich couple travelling with the just regular rich couple highlighting the jealousy between upper and upper upper class. Jennifer Coolidge's arc is that she is very rich and is essentially murdered by people who were historically rich but can no longer afford the upkeep. There's new money, old money and no money. It's all about class

11

dasheeshblahzen t1_j5v2ha3 wrote

Season 2 was entertaining but maybe an episode too long. I liked Season 1 better I feel like the writing was tighter.

2

macnels t1_j5zqwph wrote

My own opinion: the show is structured as a “whodunit”, but in reality it’s a character study. Viewers infer different themes based on the characters, but I actually think it’s simpler than that. I think it starts with the kernel of these eccentric characters, then the characters are pushed through escalating scenarios which reveal their true natures. Sure there are themes that develop, because out-of-touch rich people interact with the people who serve them. And the scenarios they go through do knit together into a sort of plot. But in reality, we’re just watching a snapshot of these characters’ journey.

I can see where the structure would lead you to think that you should be looking for something to happen. For me, I looked at it as simply a way to get into the character journey.

2

RealJohnGillman t1_j5vskjx wrote

I kind of got the impression that the third season may reveal that Portia and Tanya were wrong in their deductions (given none of those they were accusing seemed to know what it was she was talking about before / while being shot), even if only in a short scene showing Greg again, say with Tanya’s ashes.

1

DougieJackpots t1_j646dpz wrote

Wrong? lol how could you come to that conclusion? the nephew basically admits something fucked up was going on. nicolo had fucking rope and duct tape in his bag.

1

RealJohnGillman t1_j648yp4 wrote

That something was; yes, and that would be the most obvious thing it could have been. I was just thinking that with how Tanya had misinterpreted people’s intentions in the first series is, and how those she thought were trying to kill her made no open attempts to do so or admitted to doing so while being killed by Tanya, introduced a flicker of doubt there — that it would be fitting with the themes of The White Lotus if we later found out Tanya and Portia were mistaken, that the ‘something’ was something else (say like they too expected to benefit from Mia’s and Alessio’s scam, given that they briefly crossed paths) and that like Armond in the first season, Tanya (and those she killed) died for nothing — that she (like Shane) had made the wrong assumption.

As in if there were not meant to be a flicker of doubt, why not have them admit to it. When Tanya had shot the others and was about to shoot Quentin, she herself a look indicating she may have been wondering the same thing.

0

DougieJackpots t1_j649gl6 wrote

It just fits the theme too perfectly to be a misinterpretation. I'd be shocked if Tonya is referenced again.

1

RealJohnGillman t1_j64kmug wrote

Oh, I know it fits — it was just that genuine look of uncertainty at the end the actress portrayed which would form the inkling of this interpretation (one which I am not the only person to have had).

To say that Tanya did not know when she died as to whether or not she had been right, that her distraction and aelf-doubt were partially (if not entirely) responsible for her own death.

1

SnooDingos316 t1_j63tkls wrote

Actually I feel the first season was overrated hence I like second season better. Maybe the nicer setting (who does not love Italy) and nicer cast ( love Meghann Fahy, Aubrey Plaza, Theo James, Michael Imperioli and F Murray Abraham even before I watched the show) and after watching I like the 3 Italian actress too. Also I prefer a "sex" theme more than "class" theme.

I heard S3 will be "death" theme which might be very interesting.

I think a show like White Lotus is very dependant of the setting and cast.

1

Chataboutgames t1_j5v1ezw wrote

I do wonder if this show is going to look a lot different in retrospect. It's one of those shows that everyone has convinced themselves is very smart but there's actually little evidence of that in the show, and even the creator is largely flippant about the themes. What's funny is on every post the upvoted top level comment will have a wildly different take on the themes of the show, they're all contradictory and everyone agrees to them.

Ultimately it's just sort of a fun show that humanizes bad behavior and doesn't have a whole ton to say.

−1

ScipioAfricanvs t1_j5vjpts wrote

It's pretty on the nose. I don't think it's pretending to be smarter than it is.

4

Chataboutgames t1_j5vjz62 wrote

Oh I don't think the show is, that's my point. I feel that particularly if you read Mike White interviews he's pretty straightforward about how he just kinda likes subverting expectations with these funny situations. I think the conversation/social media tries to frame it as smarter and deeper than it is.

3

Radiant-Anteater1404 t1_j5v9ho2 wrote

You have a good point. I wonder if it's just on the smarter end of viral/hit shows, so the "smartness" gets overhyped. I'm comparing it to Stranger Things, Riverdale, maybe Wednesday or Eurphoria. I can see it being smarter than those. I love the show personally, but mostly because it's fun to watch.

−1

Chataboutgames t1_j5vagq5 wrote

It's that exactly. And honestly it didn't even go all that viral until S2. The conversation/fandom surrounding it got wildly different for S2.

Ultimately pretty much every question the show ever asks get answered with a muddy "people are people" sort of answer. S2 didn't say anything deep or profound about sexuality. Probably the closest it came was Imperioli yelling at his father for his inherited womanizing. It doesn't even really say much about the nature of tourism. Hell the most well meaning of the "rich set" in the first season ends up being the most destructive by far. In interviews mike White comes across damn near trolling people who want a really left leaning "rich people bad" message because they end up all being garden variety jerks rather than embodiments of evil wealth.

Then in S2 the very TikTok-y pathologizing came out. Every character was either a "sociopath" or an "incel" or an "abuser" or "closeted gay" or a secret rapist or something. Surprise surprise, aside from the outrageous murder gays plotline, every other character was aggressively vanilla in their sins.

−2

Lonerist2021 t1_j5v0i10 wrote

I didnt like it either. Enjoyed the first season and with the cast and the reviews of season 2 I was looking forward to it but i didn't enjoy it all. Only lasted 4 or 5 episodes

−2