What do you think the significance of Bergstrom (Elliott Gould) returning at the end is? And do you think the producers/creators meant it to have multiple meanings? I for one found it pretty deep in the context of what he tells Dupre when he comforts him about the irregularities at the firm.
share*** Spoiler ***
The Bergstrom character was a mischief-maker who used his employees to create a drama he could watch. Dupree was telling the truth when he explained this the Flannagan. He secretly established the whole Mid-East Reform Group and used it to launder money to a terrorist-supporting charity just to watch the fireworks ensue.
He returned to D.C. as M. Pierce (a reference to Mildred Pierce, his favorite movie) at the end to establish to the audience that he was not, in fact, an agoraphobic recluse, but a sociopath who was in total control all along. A Kaiser Sose-like puppetmaster.
Great show that felt more like a great 5-hour movie. Too smart for most Americans, though.
Having just finished seeing "K Street" on DVD I spent 5 hours ... or however
long it being interested in what was a stupid joke. Going with your hyupothesis
Bergstrom used to go into work and screw with people. He would have fake lottery
tickets made up and left in the workplace and watch how people behaved when they
scratched them off. Then at the end he comes out of his hiding place as mentioned.
I really hated thinking that this was much ado about nothing. I rented this from
my local video store which had misfiled it under the documentary section. With
Matalin and Carville I had no idea that I was in for pseudo "West Wing" sort of
phenomena.
I guess with Soderberg's direction and Clooney's involvement along with all these
politicos I was hoping for a bit more or something more informative.
I was interested in the characters who were very well thought out and protrayed.
Felt sorry for the girl who got dumped hard by the lesbian Gail, and Flannagan
and his nightly exploited. There was a lot of surface drama here without any
resolution or explanation. Kind of like the movie Syrianna.
I feel cheated from watching this. It is like ... well, where did this come
from. Is this based on someone's personal experience, or just a faked and
thoughtless "West Wing" ripoff to exploit any possible money to be made there.
In short this movie was like a very well sanded and polished turd.
Turd-like?
"Where did this come from?" ?
Where does anything come from.
OK:
Why did the real life politicians / talking heads agree to say what they said?
...
Why did they all fight over trying to get some screen time on the show, week after week? (fact)
...
The show harped on U.S. / Saudi connections
...
It was a cerebral fix for those who wish a David Lynch-kind of person did more TV.
Well, I can see why you might have liked this show and why you might
be defending it; your writing style and substance is a lot like how I
see "K Street", a big production, jumpy, choppy, saying nothing but
looking like there is something said.
Honestly, what is your problem with what I said, and what are you
trying to ask me or challenge me on?
Really liked the way you put Bergstrom into perspective simonhere. I tried to explain it to a friend once who was puzzled about the ending, but you worded it a lot better than I did.
shareIn addition to simonhere's excellent post Bergstrom's wife had recently died in "a very horrible way" as fransisco put it in a conversation with him.
Perhaps this had twisted him even further & therefore one of the reasons why the plot against his staff was particuarly viscious with the result being possible jail time for Mary,James etc.