Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon POLL : What did you think of The Astronaut Wives Club - Protocol?
Sign Up


    Enable Dark Mode!

  • What's HOT
  • Premiere Calendar
  • Ratings News
  • Movies
  • YouTube Channel
  • Submit Scoop
  • Contact Us
  • Search
  • Privacy Policy
Get In Touch
 Join SpoilerTV
Support SpoilerTV
SpoilerTV.com is now available ad-free to for all premium subscribers. Thank you for considering becoming a SpoilerTV premium member!

SpoilerTV - TV Spoilers

POLL : What did you think of The Astronaut Wives Club - Protocol?

26 Jun 2015

Share on Reddit

-
Sign Up for the SpoilerTV Newsletter where we talk all things TV!

21 comments:

  1. Ian Purnell26 June 2015 at 02:01

    Very strong and good episode of Astro-Wives. I loved how the Wives stood up for Annie and how the Husbands stood up for John. And wow NASA can be cruel, well it is the government I suppose.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kate Sidwell26 June 2015 at 12:05

    I'm really surprised at how much I love this show! Another great episode!

    ReplyDelete
  3. jfmjr26 June 2015 at 23:34

    Love this show.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Folie-lex27 June 2015 at 09:20

    I liked it! Didn't love it though. I feel things are moving a bit too fast. I wish they'd taken their time more with certain developments and spaced out the events a bit more... Oh well. I'm quite enjoying it though, I won't deny that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. lsbloom28 June 2015 at 05:07

    What is happening? They've burned through half the Mercury Program in 2 episodes. All the while telling us nothing about the actual space program and including no character development for the wives or the astronauts. Grissom's freak out and the fallout could have been dramatic but it was just whining about her deserving to meet Kennedy. I'm starting to think this show has all the substance of one if Nene's jello molds.

    ReplyDelete
  6. lsbloom28 June 2015 at 05:11

    Maybe too fast? They've covered like 3 years in 2 episodes.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Folie-lex28 June 2015 at 15:38

    LOL! I was cutting them some slack...

    ReplyDelete
  8. Folie-lex28 June 2015 at 15:47

    I agree the character development is seriously lacking...
    I think they've focused too much on trying to fit x historical events per episode they've left the characters fall on the wayside a bit. And it shows.

    They have enough material to have spaced things out WAY more...


    Mind you I still think it's a fun show, but it's nowhere near as good as I was hoping it was going to be...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Doczz28 June 2015 at 16:18

    TAWC, as the name suggest, is not mainly about the space program, it's about the wives. Then again, the show even surpasses The Right Stuff on accuracy about the space program. For instance that Grisson was cleared from the hatch incident, so there's that.

    Also, all the launch dates, the delays, problems and successes, the news reports, the press conferences, and other details are all spot on here. Not to mention all the archivial NASA footage they have seamlessly added. They have pretty much included all the major events in the space program, so I really can't see what else they could have put in, with out taken even more screentime away from the wives. (that you claim you want to learn more about)

    That bring me over to the pacing. Yes it is fast, but remember that TAWC will include the Gemini and Apollo program too, so these ten episodes has to cover more than a year on average pr episode. As for learning about the wives and astronauts, we are only two episodes in. Hopefully we will see character development in all ten episodes. Since the show ends in the 70', we will see major development, not only in clothes and style, but development in politics and mindset as the whole nation changes.



    I can't comment on future episode, but when they have all aired, I think this show will be best evaluated as one, 10 hour event, and not ten, 1 hour episodes.

    ReplyDelete
  10. lsbloom30 June 2015 at 04:49

    We know NOTHING about the wives and showing what happened to 7 wives and 14 characters over the course of as you claim it needs to be a year is a terrible way to achieve that. It's not like all the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo astronauts were the same...why does it need to cover a decade a season? That makes no sense whatsoever. Why would they cover everything? There'd be nowhere to go,


    They have included the concept of all the launches and milestones, they have not told us the story of the wives or the astronauts. I barely know who is who still and some of them haven't uttered more than a few sentences about what dish they're carrying or what color they should wear. That is absurd. It is horribly paced, lacking in detail and character development and completely squandering their historical basis. I disagree with the accuracy, they may have included that Grissom was ultimately cleared, but the wives' behavior is absurd drama for drama's sake and not an accurate or believable portrayal of military wives, protocol, or common sense. Some of these women had been with their husbands military careers for a long time and part of the buildup to Mercury back at Edwards--they knew each other not strangers thrown together when the first episode aired, and certainly not strangers to their husband's careers. As far as the launches go, they've given no details beyond: who's on deck, did they launch, was it routine, wife is upset. The entire Grissom incident came down to a kid getting in a fight and Betsy not getting to meet Jackie Kennedy--it felt frivolous. If the wives have no stories of substance worth telling, why am I supposed to be watching them?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Doczz1 July 2015 at 00:29

    Don't blame the show for you not able to pay attention. On the other hand, when you already have decided not to like it, It's hard to pay attention, I get that.

    "why does it need to cover a decade a season?"

    It's not A season, it's THE season. This is a close ended event series, again, pay attention, they have said it in the promos. So no more seasons. And that's why I said this show will probably be best evaluated as one 10 hour event, and not ten, 1 hour episodes.

    You don't stop watching a 2 hour movie, 20 minutes in, and start complaining you know so little about the characters, now do you?

    As for the wives behaviour, from actual quotes to dress choices, so is most of that more or less word for word from the book. And the book is based on interviews with many of the actual wives or close friends. In addition to everything that already was documented in form of books, interviews, articles and pictures.

    ReplyDelete
  12. lsbloom3 July 2015 at 12:59

    What a rude reply. I'm sorry you are offended that I don't like a show based off a book you seem to love, but this is a place for opinions. Where we discussed what we like and don't like. Snide personal attacks are neither warranted nor appropriate.


    They created a TV show--not a miniseries, not a moive. Just because it got pushed and shortened didn't mean they wouldn't logically have planned and shopped around an idea for a show that would last multiple seasons. Covering a decade in 10 episodes is a terrible idea, no wonder they are only getting a shortened summer season.


    I will stop watching and complain if a movie wastes a 1/5 of its runtime trying to cover too much to the detriment of story and character. I've invested 2 hours into the TV show not 15 minutes, and what I've gotten for that investment is bad storytelling.


    As for the book's accuracy, most of the wives are dead. But thanks for making it abundantly clear that the show's faults are also continued on a flawed foundation source. It saves me reading a poorly done book as well as show.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Feekk5 July 2015 at 23:13

    You tell 'em. Some people are just too critical too early. I love the show and I think it's well-written.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Feekk5 July 2015 at 23:14

    "Nothing"?? Really? What are you watching? The opening credit only? You have been critical about every show since I remember meeting you here. It's really ruining everything.

    ReplyDelete
  15. lsbloom7 July 2015 at 04:04

    Well, I don't remember meeting you, so I really have no idea what you are talking about. Perhaps, we have radically different tastes in TV? And maybe you should consider having a stronger sense of self if you are allowing one stranger's opinion of something you like to "ruin everything" for you.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Feekk7 July 2015 at 04:14

    Eh, I prefer you gone...

    ReplyDelete
  17. lsbloom7 July 2015 at 04:24

    Sorry to disappoint, but not your call.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Feekk7 July 2015 at 04:37

    Then, I will keep saying that you have ruined everything since it's not your call.

    ReplyDelete
  19. lsbloom7 July 2015 at 04:48

    You've attacked me for expressing my opinion, just as you feel you have the right to. And now shame on me? How about you drop the hypocrisy and react to a conflicting viewpoint with rational discussion? If I "ruin everything" (what exactly is "everything" anyway besides episode 2 of a crappy summer TV show?) for you, maybe you stop paying attention to my posts, because I've been on this site for a long time and I'm happy to have conversations with all the people here--both those who agree and those who disagree with me.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Feekk7 July 2015 at 15:00

    No, I've seen respectful disagreement. It's definitely not you.

    ReplyDelete
  21. lsbloom7 July 2015 at 15:29

    What is your problem? ? I don't know you from Adam. And all you seem interested in is attacking me for saying I think covering 3 years in 2 episodes of a TV show is a crazy plan that has limited character developent of a huge ensemble cast. Please show me when I've been disrespectful--unlike you who are coming at me for no reason at all. Do you have me confused with someone else?

    ReplyDelete

NOTE: Name-calling, personal attacks, spamming, excessive self-promotion, condescending pomposity, general assiness, racism, sexism, any-other-ism, homophobia, acrophobia, and destructive (versus constructive) criticism will get you BANNED from the party.