The Blacklist Refugees » Season 5 Fall/Winter Hiatus Discussions

lara1 · 12/11/2017 5:19 pm

hmmm, in the Krilov episode, didn't they mention a timeframe? Have to double check. Its when Liz speaks to him about it and he says, oh no, not "x" number of years ago, 2 years. Liz is 34 now, right, so if its 30 years ago, she would have been 4 and her birthday is in March, isn't it (I could be totally mis-remembering this). Anyway if it is 30 years, it would be sometime after the fire but before March (or whenever her 5th birthday occurred).

Or have I got that all wrong? LOL

One thing that always confuses me, is whether its only the fire memory that was re-inserted, or more than that. Liz said she had no memory of her mother yet she remembers her at the summer palace. Maybe she didn't remember simply because she was so young when they were separated? I'm not sure how many people have clear memories of their parents, what they looked like or said/did etc from that young an age.

Just some random thoughts......

Last edited by lara1 (12/11/2017 5:20 pm)

12/11/2017 5:27 pm

They have messed up her birthday quite a bit. She was 31 in season 2/3 which would make her born in 1984 but then her headstone says 1985 which would make her almost 33 now. She said 25 years about Krilov but I didn’t necessarily know if that was actually 25 years or just an approximation. 25 years exactly would have been 1992. But they approximate sometimes so it may not be exact.

lara1 · 12/11/2017 5:32 pm

Brittany, yes, thanks, it was 25. I go by her age at the time of the fire, she was 4, the fire was in Dec 1989, so I just go with 1985. Then again there is no official paperwork that confirms her birthdate. At one time, I thought maybe Sam/Red/Others gave her a fake birthdate, and that she was actually maybe 2 years older. So that if anyone tried to trace her/track her down, it would be more difficult if she was of a slightly different age. But there is nothing to say that in the series, only that she has no official birth certificate LOL

Sounds like even if it isn't exactly 25 years, its probably not 30 either, so a few years after the fire.

Tuxie400 · 12/11/2017 5:32 pm

Yes, both Liz and Krilov talked about the first memory wipe being 25 years ago. But Liz was 31 for three of our Earth years in the Blacklist Universe, so I have no idea how old she is now. LOL Maybe the 10 month jump will make it match Earth time. Like Brittany said, there's no way of knowing whether the 25 years is an approximation or not.

Last edited by Tuxie400 (12/11/2017 5:43 pm)

12/11/2017 6:11 pm

lara1 wrote:
One thing that always confuses me, is whether its only the fire memory that was re-inserted, or more than that. Liz said she had no memory of her mother yet she remembers her at the summer palace. Maybe she didn't remember simply because she was so young when they were separated? I'm not sure how many people have clear memories of their parents, what they looked like or said/did etc from that young an age. ..

In regards to Liz's memories, even without the memory tampering, the ability to recall the memories of the fire and her life before it in accurate detail would be up for debate. There is a condition called childhood amnesia in which we as adults have little to no ability to recall memories from early childhood because of how our brains develop in those early years. There is some debate about when we start developing memories that are able to be retrieved. Generally most psychologists agree that prior to the age of 5, our ability to recall memories with accuracy as an adult is limited, though some argue that this can stop at early as 2 or last even up to the age of 7 or 8, especially if there is trauma. There are also cultural and personality components that impact this. Those early memories are susceptible to tampering (by others or our own perceptions), thus leading to inaccuracy (remember all the false memories of ritualized sexual abuse that was rampant in the 80s?) The addition of an trauma can further alter our abilities to recall the memories at all and the accuracy. Some people can remember traumatic events in vivid details while others will completely block them out. There can possibly be some lingering effects up to the age of 10, but the general consensus is that our memories are easier to recall after the age of 5 or 6.

Back to Liz, I've figured Krilov modified her memories of the night of the fire because I think it would have been too involved to go through and adjust her memories of her mother, Kate, and Red because he couldn't possibly determine every single memory she had. He likely relied on her young age, the multiple traumas she experienced, and intervention from Sam to help outside of Krilov's work in forgetting her old name, her mother, etc. We don't know how long she was with Red prior to the fire, but even if she had some familiarity with him, being taken away from everyone else and everything she knew would be traumatic, the fire would have been traumatic, and then being left with a stranger and never seeing anyone else you knew from your old life would be traumatic as well. These could have compounded her inability to remember her family prior to the fire. Sam was a grifter and used to conning people, so he was probably a good person to have around when you want to pull the wool over someone's eyes, especially someone as susceptible as a traumatized 4/5 year old.

Last edited by Brittany (12/11/2017 6:15 pm)

lara1 · 12/11/2017 6:31 pm

Brittany #105. Interesting post. I did wonder about all of that. The first memory I have of my mother is around 4/5 years of age, but its not voice or face or even words, just overall actions and me being in the "scenario" with her.

A lot of it makes sense, especially when you combine Liz's age, traumatic events, and influence of Sam. Nicely knitted together. Thanks for that.

Tuxie400 · 12/11/2017 7:34 pm

All the memories I have of my parents before age 5 involve getting pets or toys. I can remember my parents both interacting with the puppies we got when I was almost 3, and then I can remember my mom interacting with a litter of kittens that were born in the bushes in front of our house when I had just turned 4. I also remember my dad winning a large stuffed dalmation for me at a fair when I was 3 or 4.

Last edited by Tuxie400 (12/11/2017 8:40 pm)

12/11/2017 7:46 pm

The memories I have prior to 5 involved moving houses. We moved when I was about 3 to a house briefly while we were waiting for our next house to be ready. I can remember the day we moved into that house vaguely (I was about 3 1/2). I have a memory of my mom leaving for work and I was staying home with my dad at our first house when I was probably 2 1/2 and a vague memory of an uncle's viewing when I was about 4. We tend to remember events that held some significance to us, though we lose accuracy of what happened as we age or components (like Lara said, not remembering a voice or a face, but perhaps a smell, the environment, a situation,etc.)

Eastcoast · 12/12/2017 2:42 am

lara1, I think they are going to say they were rounding it up or down because it is a huge error on their part to not even be able to keep someone's age straight. On the other hand Liz did say she didn't even know if that was her birthday? So was that a hint? But ...Red was going through her pictures on that very date. So I think the date is correct. The year might be off.
Ya think? lol

lara1 · 12/12/2017 2:00 pm

Hi Eastcoast! I tend to agree with you, that the day/month are correct, because Red is looking at those photos in private, although one could still say he is reminiscing about the "agreed and celebrated" day and month I suppose. But I'm not sure anything would be to gain by changing that aspect of her birth date.

I still just go by what we've been told by the fire, which was in 1989, when Liz was 4, and we've heard that a few times.. And because Red told her that KR killed herself/disappeared two months later. And he said that was in 1990.

Ultimately though I think the year could be a year or two later as we are purposely told that there is no existing birth certificate for her. IN a series where "official" documentation is routinely faked. So she only knows her age by what she has been told.

Last edited by lara1 (12/12/2017 2:01 pm)

12/12/2017 6:13 pm

I found the synopsis and title for the January 3rd episode. I posted it in the spoiler section...I wasn't sure if anyone would object to it being in the hiatus thread. I'm excited.

12/12/2017 8:09 pm

I follow Lotte Verbeek on Instagram and saw she was at a gala in NYC yesterday... I wonder if she’s in the area to film for Blacklist or just escaping the inferno that is Los Angeles.

lara1 · 12/12/2017 10:08 pm

Brittany - thanks for the info, as I don't follow anyone on Twitter (or Instagram). it looks like Lotte was maybe at the HW ABT Holiday Benefit last night? It was for ABT but apparently the gala was held in LA (Beverly Hills?) . I wonder if she has a formal affiliation with ABT through her dance training or just supports the ballet company in a general way.

Last edited by lara1 (12/12/2017 10:10 pm)

12/12/2017 10:17 pm

It’s a terrible time for a gala in Beverly Hills. I imagine she is definitely supportive of it given her dance background.

12/13/2017 12:49 pm

Does anyone have a good reference to stream line the information surrounding the Victor Fokin murder from season 1? I don't remember a lot of details about it and what appeared legitimate and what could have been faked. I just know it feels unresolved (to me at least). I keep wondering if it could have anything to do with the suitcase and/or the circumstances surrounding Red entering Liz's life (beyond just Berlin).

Eastcoast · 12/13/2017 1:35 pm

Gina Z. confessed to the murder in S1. I do not know if that is what you are referring to or not?

Tuxie400 · 12/13/2017 2:15 pm

Brittany - I've thought about the Viktor Fokin murder in connection with the suitcase - that the bones might be someone similar to him - a potential defector from Katarina's past circling around Liz.

Liz learns about the connection of Tom's gun to the murder early in Season 1. In Wujing, she fires his gun into a phone book and has the FBI run a ballistics test run, but the results are redacted. In the Stewmaker she sneaks into the records section, and discovers the report links the gun to Fokin's murder at Angel Station the weekend she and Tom were there in Boston.

We get the most info about Fokin In the Gina Zanetakos episode.
When Liz is questioning Tom about the box and its contents before Tom goes into the Post Office for interrogation, she tells Tom:
Liz: There was a murder there that matches this gun. An (FSB) agent named Viktor Fokin, a Russian agent who was in the process of defecting when he was killed before he could say anything.

Later in the episode, when Liz and Ressler search Gina's room. Liz finds photos of Fokin in Gina's go box, and supposes Gina was following Fokin because she was the assassin. Gina's prints are found on the gun that was in Tom's go box.

After Gina is arrested, she admits to killing Fokin and says someone didn't want him to talk.
Gina: Fokin had information about the route Chechen guerrillas were using to move their supplies to their soldiers on the Russian border. They guy who hired me was making millions providing those supplies. His name is Raymond Reddington.

Who knows if Gina is telling the truth? It sounds plausible, or at least what Red told her.

Liz barges in on Red at the end of the episode, mad and ready to end their relationship.
Red: I heard about Tom.
Liz: Yeah. Zanetakos confessed.
Red: Or took the fall.
Liz: The passports. Forged. The money - traced to an offshore account of yours.
Red: I can only lead you to the truth. I can't make you believe it.
Liz: The truth is that you're a sick, twisted man. This - your obsession with me. You put Tom's picture in Zanetakos' apartment.
Red: No
Liz: You hired her to kill Viktor Fokin You set my husband up by having your errand boy lure him to Boston.
Red: Is that what Tom says?

Notice - the only thing Red actually denies is placing the photo on Gina's apartment. We do find out later Red was right about Gina and Tom's relationship. And he did lure Tom to Boston with the fake job interview. But why Red wanted Fokin silenced and what his secrets were, we never found out for sure.

I got most of this info by doing word searches on the scripts at Blacklist Declassified.

lara1 · 12/13/2017 5:56 pm

Yes, the Fokin episode never really fully added up for me. Either I wasn't paying enough attention or missed something, or there's a piece missing.

How did the gun get in Tom's go box if it wasn't him and had Gina's prints on it? And seems too easy for them to pin it on Gina. And who was the guy Tom met in Boston who he said was from the college, but wasn't?

So was Gina taking the fall for someone. If so, who? WAs the Red thing true? And who ultimately sprang her from jail?

And it never made sense to me that as a "defector" he was killed because he knew of Chechen supply routes. Made absolutely no sense to me. Then again maybe I missed something

The other thing I never understood was the passports. There were forged passports in the box. But doesn't Red say later on that Tom bought real passports, not forged ones? As in new identities? And which ones did Tom end up burning vs the ones he served up to Liz sometime in Season 4.

Questions questions.

Last edited by lara1 (12/13/2017 5:57 pm)

Tuxie400 · 12/13/2017 6:45 pm

lara1 - I don't know how the gun got in Tom's go-box. I would assume either he or Red hid it there.

Tom met with Newton Phillips, Red's right-hand man, for the bogus job interview. The job in Season 1 was for an elementary school teacher.

Red was implying Gina was taking the fall for Tom. Gina escaped from jail later. Liz found that out in the Berlin episode when she was being interviewed by police about Tom and Lucy Brooks.

I believe Gina was telling the truth that Red was behind the Fokin hit, but Gina probably didn't know the real reason for it. The Chechen supply routes don't seem a big enough reason for Red to have him snuffed out. Red had all sorts of supply routes and business enterprises at that point. I think it was something personal about Red, Katarina, or even Dom that Fokin was going to spill.

12/13/2017 7:12 pm

Thank, Tuxie! The whole situation with how Red handled it, the fake interview between Tom and Newton Phillips and Gina's confession had always seemed shady and never fully explained. Because like you pointed out, Red only denies the placement of the photo, but he says she could be taking the fall for someone else, etc. I saw a gif panel on a tumblr yesterday that was from the pilot and it got me to thinking about all the circumstances we see in those first few episodes (at first I thought the General's daughter storyline may have paralleled theirs) and what it all could have meant for Red coming back into her life and I went back to the Fokin murder.

Tying it into my theory that Red is keeping Katarina prisoner, I'm wondering if Fokin could have discovered that KR was alive and Red had to have him eliminated before he could reveal this. I think it could have precipitated the need for the bones to be moved (or for a body to be secured in case of need to prove her death later on) and the quiet entry of DNA to match KR into CODIS as proof if there was any question. It may have even required KR to be moved, which could be the island he talks about in the season 4 finale. I'm not sure if luring Tom to Boston was to set him up for the kill in case he needed to get rid of him (if he didn't actually do it) or to get a look at whether he was working for the same person as Gina (having them in the same place at the same time to see if there was recognition or assistance, thus the earliest work to suss out Berlin.

Something that crossed my mind today was "What if the DNA from the bones came back with more than one result?" I've been suspicious that Red could have had DNA entered from an unclaimed body into CODIS to make it look like KR is dead if anyone ever got too close to the truth and he needed to put an end to that by providing a body for comparison, but what if the unclaimed person was later reported missing and their DNA was entered under their real name (or familial DNA) and thus running these results through the system would produce two results? It could explain why Tom seemed somewhat confused or like he had to take a minute to process the information. It could also be why Garvey finds the information so powerful (especially if Garvey had significant reason to believe that Red killed KR). I doubt this would occur, but think it could be interesting if that were the case. It could be something that neither Red nor Kaplan might have expected.

Last edited by Brittany (12/13/2017 7:27 pm)