MovieChat Forums > Fleabag (2016) Discussion > Awful awful awful priest sex story

Awful awful awful priest sex story

posted 5 years ago by Heisenberg (6266)
18 replies | jump to latest

I liked the series but this whole deal was badly conceived and executed.
I can sense this brilliant idea starting with her need to be naughty (which drives most of the humor and drama in this show). So, low level shock value was the inspiration.
Ok, so in this season she's gonna fuck a priest!
I don't think by 2019 anybody is even interested anymore, so that already fell flat.
Plus she's an atheist, so it's even less of a risk.
But ok, I sympathize with her character so let's see what happens.

Well, the execution was the worse part, because it happens in a moment in the story where it's not even HER decision anymore, but it's the priest's: she's confessing her "sins", opening up with her real problems to him, reaching for some insight.
His reply to her, awful as a man and a human being and even more so as a priest, is that he takes advantage of her.
By that point in the story it's clear that he managed to fight off his and her pulsions, so why the decision to do it all of a sudden, and in her weakest and most vulnerable state of all possible moments? It wasn't even painted as a pity fuck, or that he was doing it for her or something of that sort. No explanations given. He just was uncontrollably aroused by her misery.

Now everybody is gonna say he was drunk, or whatever other excuse for this bad writing.
It seems to me that the show had an agenda, wanted to go through with it, without even realizing how weak it was from every possible pov: it's not shocking; it's not interesting; did not fit the story anymore; it pointlessly ruined the whole dynamic that was built up to that point.
That's bad writing in its purest form: the writer wanted something to happen so she crammed it in the script no matter where the story and characters were by that point.

I was way more interested in a honest answer from him to her pleas in the confessional, and also I was intrigued by his ability to catch her "disappear" to the fourth wall. That was such better material than "is she gonna fuck the priest or not".
Who cares about that anyway?

[–] exatera (3942) 5 years ago

Gosh, what a perverted understanding of the story. He didn't take advantage - they had an immediate connection and, after a bit of time, an uncontrollable attraction to each other.

Season 2 of Fleabag became such a phenomenon, you must be the only one who has such a miserable take on it. I don't even want to respond point by point because I know it will be wasted effort.

And I think it's safe to say that we all cared.

[–] Heisenberg (6266) 5 years ago

No, I'm just looking at the facts and the story that was presented to me.
They already discussed it, and he clearly stated that they will not have sex. It has already been outed, and she was fine with being friends. He knew that it was a mistake to do otherwise. He also talked about not wanting to fall in love with her. And another ton of good reasons for them not to do it.

I have nothing against them having sex, as long as it's coming from what's been established. In this case it went against the moment, the flow of that subplot and it completely ruined the trajectory the characters treaded so far.
YOU had a perverted understanding of the story, probably projecting in it what you wanted to see. They DID have a connection, and an attraction to each other. Wasn't that already talked about and dealt with in the plot?
Didn't we all already move on to more interesting pastures?
Clearly you had such low expectations from this show that are happy with a cheap telenovela.

By that point in the story, and from what we see in that scene (which is, she was confessing a mislaid life of misery to a priest, looking for some guidance, NOT a fuck; and he was supposedly there with all the best intentions to help her, NOT just to fuck her) I was expecting an evolution to their characters and relationship, not a stupid, phoned in since episode 1, "forbidden sex" scene.
What the hell is this, the thorn birds? exatera, check that out if you must appease your need for "uncontrollable love". Meanwhile on planet Earth, it's 2019, if you missed the last 30 years...

[–] exatera (3942) 5 years ago

Okay, frankly, your reasoning sounds like you are on the spectrum, so never mind.

I did say that I knew it would be wasted effort.

[–] Heisenberg (6266) 5 years ago

Yeah? What a passiveaggressive cunt you are!

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

So embarrassing.. Do more!

[–] [email protected] (1288) 5 years ago

I had a different take on it. She finally found someone she instantly clicked with. The priest struggled with his love for God and for her. I never thought he took advantage of her. I always felt he was in an inner struggle that felt authentic to me.
Anyway, my only complaint was they overdid the looking at the camera and the side bar discussions. They didnt go that frequent in the first season.
I think this was a wrap up..It seemed pretty final to me. I dont think there will be another season.

[–] Heisenberg (6266) 4 years ago

By that moment in the story, he already had discussed it with her, and explained his position, and she could see his point and how inappropriate it was.
So I think the inner struggle was already over for him.
And in that scene, she went to him for help, so her interest was also absent.
That's why I think that scene was completely out of place, like I said it smelt of bad writing, of fulfilling the author's agenda of some "shock" value and nothing much more.
Certainly it didn't serve the story and the characters by that point.

[–] sslssg (27279) 4 years ago

Even though she could never be with him, she'd finally found someone who loved her. That was the point.

[–] Heisenberg (6266) 4 years ago

What??? Wrong on both points:
1-she IS with him, they get together pretty clearly in the series. "she could never be with him" means they don't.
2-he would be more loving by NOT being with her, since he's a priest and they would never have a happy ending. Loving her doesn't mean fucking her, in this case, it's quite the opposite.

[–] sslssg (27279) 4 years ago

I think you missed part of the story.

First of all, I am very much aware that they had sex. When I say she could never be with him I mean that they cannot have a future together.

I totally disagree with you on the scene not serving the story. First of all, when watching the show, we are Fleabag's secret camera friend. She confesses to us and we are the ones who witness all the horrible decisions she makes. We essentially are in a relationship with her. The priest changed that relationship. They had a connection, similar to ours. This is shown by the priest noticing when she talks to us. This shows the priest taking our place in this intimate relationship. In the confession scene she confesses to him. I don't know if you noticed, but she spoke to us less and less during season 2, and cut us completely out of the sex with the priest. This is important. She has spoken to us in the middle of sex scenes before, but this is between her and the priest.

Now I know you are talking about the need of a sex scene with a priest. Think of the end of the series. This trainwreck of a woman admits to how much she loves the priest as they are ending things. We know that he has chosen God over her, but he tells her that he loves her. Now, if there hadn't been sex it would have been, okay, he loves her. But he broke his vow of celibacy for her. So his telling her that he loves her means something. It means enough for her that she is ready to move on without him, and without us as she breaks up with us as well.

[–] Towelie_Towel (1697) 4 years ago

Nice post.

[–] Ace_Spade (9334) 2 years ago

Yeah, I hated that, too.

At first, I thought the story was going to be that she has sex with the priest, big consequences for everybody. Okay, a bit cliche, but it's a well-written show, so I'll see what they'll do with it.

Then, the story moves different. The scuzzy priest is superficially scuzzy. He struggles with his language and his drinking, but he's committed to the priesthood. He really wants to be spiritual. He has challenging conversations with Fleabag about faith. She's learning...this is really interesting.

Oh, nevermind, it's the first story.

I was watching this clever, challenging narrative that I almost never see (at least these days) on TV/film, and they just 180'd the whole thing. Disappointing. That's actually the last episode I watched, because it was such a let-down for me that I stopped being interested in the show.

[–] Heisenberg (6266) 2 years ago

We totally reacted the same way.
I wish she could have seen it too, she must have been blinded by her absolute power.

[–] Ace_Spade (9334) 2 years ago

Yeah, I don't know why she did it that way. Enough people love the show, though, so I think we're in the minority here. Waller-Bridge is a really good writer, though, even with that hiccough. Not my favourite, but she's really good.

[–] Heisenberg (6266) 2 years ago

I think she is good. But only in her element. And she's a one trick pony.

When she is involved in big budget productions, she is forced and out of place and she does more damages than improvements, all with her "clever" and "feminist" angles.

[–] Ace_Spade (9334) 2 years ago

I've only seen Fleabag and Crashing, of the things she's written, and I enjoy both. I could see where her style might not work with certain other things, but that's true of most writers.

[–] Icecutter (363) 2 years ago

Satanic show tbh.

Still good though

[–] Heisenberg (6266) a year ago

It is a great show and this second season is satanic somehow, by wanting to have the priest fall from grace at all costs (even if it ruined the writing at that point).
I wonder when will she work on a third season, I love the characters there is a lot of potential here.