Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

**Nitrus** · (This post was last modified: 11-01-2010 02:36 PM by Nitrus.)

Now you mention it, that does seem a bit odd. But I think their intention was to kill her that moment, the fryer was just a kick in the balls for Tom?

If I was in that position, Tom tried to trick me into thinking my own men were against me, so I kill his friend as a result of withholding information. I am a sadistic bastard so I fry her face to really drive my point home and then kill her because I said I would.

**JHyde** · 11-01-2010, 03:14 PM

Helen was only ever a pawn. They were doing it to prove how far they were prepared to go, before they got to Tom who had what they really wanted. They wouldn't have stuck his head in the fryer because then we wouldn't have been able to talk, but rest assured they would have done everything else.

HellsBells · 11-01-2010, 04:11 PM

How could they be sure it was Tom who had the information ? Okay, Tom did appear to be more senior but they couldn't be sure that Tom had the information rather than Helen. Killing Helen so quickly meant they could only get the information from Tom.
I agree with Nitrus, the guy was just evil, perhaps he didn't even want the names and details etc.

**JHyde** · 11-01-2010, 04:18 PM

I think it was pretty clear that Helen was the junior officer. If only because of how she handled Osborne trying to trip her. Don't get me wrong, she did great under the circumstances. But it was just too much all put together. And the classic method of torture with experienced officers is to put a colleague or loved one in danger or pain to get what the captors want. (Torture Girl, remember?)

**Silktie** · (This post was last modified: 11-01-2010 05:15 PM by Silktie.)

(11-01-2010 01:20 PM)Tea Lady Wrote: I agree. I would not watch this episode again by choice. Not just because of the Helen scene but because of the domestic violence and humiliation dished out by Osbourne to his wife. I have always hated bullies. I also liked the bit where Helen was told that if you create a legend, have the knowledge to back your story up i.e. if you say you are from Brighton, make sure you know a lot about Brighton.

Geez, you're right. I had forgotten about Osbourne forcing his wife to bare herself before his colleagues. That was a horrible moment as well, and actually very well acted by the actress playing the wife. When you put all the things together that happened in this episode - physical and emotional abuse, illegal refugees drowning in droves, Helen's death, the assassination of Osbourne - it is really a very dark episode. Definitely no light entertainment here.

lwhite53 · 11-01-2010, 05:17 PM

(11-01-2010 02:33 PM)HellsBells Wrote: Yes, a horrible detail. But why did they shot her so quickly ? They didn't seem the compassionate sort. Surely leaving her alive longer would have tortured Tom more, but I am very glad that the scene was over quickly.

I think this was done more for the audience's benefit than anything else. If they had played it true to the characters, as presented, they would have let her die slowly with Tom watching. But I think the writer and producers realized that would be stepping over the line (or more over the line than already had) and that they didn't need to draw it out to make the point.

I think they went for Helen first because she was a woman. I do agree with JHyde that Tom was clearly the senior officer -- he was older, his body language didn't show fear, he tried to talk them down -- but I really think gender was the defining factor. And since we already know how Osbourne treats his own wife, brutalizing someone else's metaphorical woman is right up his alley -- he was trying to emasculate and dominate Tom, not just get info from him.

femaleBertieWooster · (This post was last modified: 11-01-2010 08:15 PM by femaleBertieWooster.)

The shooting reminded me of a scene in a Bergman movie. I'm not sure if it was Silent Spring. I'll spoiler it in case anyone wants to torture themselves and watch it.

Spoiler: show

I think he shot Helen because he was repulsed by the scene, not out of compassion for anyone but himself.

I think a lot of domestic abuse is driven by anger. Although the person may be very sick, I'm guessing they go further than they plan and are even surprised at what they've done. A man like Osborne was too far gone to have regret but would never back down or show that he may have gone too far. He probably shot her to get things over with, tie up the loose ends so to speak for whatever remained of his withered conscience.

Kirayuki · 11-01-2010, 11:37 PM

I think another thing about this episode that is horrible is the fact that the government generally want to let Osbourne run riot for a while before stopping him. Come on! After all we saw Harry made the right choice.

**Silktie** · 12-01-2010, 05:31 AM

That's a very good point, I'd forgotten about that. I wonder if Harry was ever reprimanded for ignoring the order.

HellsBells · 12-01-2010, 02:24 PM

I had assumed that Osbourne was shot a little later, as the guy for the government wanted, once the government bill had been passed. The scene was intermixed with Helen's funeral so presumably it was at least a week later. I don't believe Harry could call the SAS in to kill someone without someone else okaying it.