Severance Season 1 Episode 3 Review: In Perpetuity
Mary Littlejohn
at
.
This show just keeps getting weirder.
On Severance Season 1 Episode 3, we get some serious Lumon lore but still have no idea what actually goes on on the "severed" floor.
Let us go onward down the halls to the Perpetuity Wing, where we will know ourselves -- maybe.
That whole Perpetuity sequence was chilling.
How much of the Eagan lore is propaganda? Is it easier to buy into it when you think you are dedicating your life to making the world better? Is it better to live in ignorance if there is nothing you can do to change your circumstance, as Irving does?
I walked into the cave of my own mind, and there I tamed them. Should you tame the tempers as I did mine, then the world shall become but your appendage. It is this great and consecrated power that I hope to pass on to all of you, my children.
Kier Eagan
The Eagan philosophy, with the tempers, is all very unsettling, and it's difficult to pinpoint precisely why. Maybe it's the antiquated turns of phrase or the insistence that they can save the world. There is something profound and terrifying there, a force transcending generations that have evolved into this mega-corporation.
John Turturro is brilliant as Irving. He is the perfect model employee, assured in the righteousness of the company and what they are doing - - despite not understanding or knowing what it is they do. He is reverent and eloquent. Does every long-term employee end up like Irving?
Does he truly trust Lumon, or has he convinced himself it's the right thing to do because the other options are far too disturbing to consider.
I can't help thinking of Carol D. and whether she will play any part as Severance continues She's the only other former employee we've heard referenced.
Will she turn up at some point to offer some insight, or is she gone forever, safe, simply because she no longer has access to that part of her brain? What would happen if Carol D. returned to the severed floor years later? Would this part of her have been dormant and able to return?
The ethical ramifications are so disturbing to consider. Can a part of someone be effectively dead if it's never really killed?
It’s like having two different lives suddenly stitched together, but the relativity’s fucked.
Petey
Severance is solidly a drama, a psychological, dystopian drama, but despite that, a few comedic moments broke the tension.
The morning announcements, the way Milchick is so keen, taking pictures (which contrasts with his quietly menacing persona when things get tough). Tramell Tillman has that middle-management vibe down -- the friendly, almost parental authority that turns dark when disappointed.
There was also the Ricken/Devon drop-off scene, which is the most we've seen of this couple since Severance Season 1 Episode 1. Their presence brings a lightness to the proceedings that is missing everywhere else.
Ricken being a self-help author makes sense -- the irony being that his brother-in-law has taken this radical approach to block his grief rather than work on healing himself.
At work, you’d come in sometimes with red eyes. We had a joke that you had an elevator allergy.
Petey
The discussion of the potential coup and why they remain so isolated is telling. With more employees effectively imprisoned, there would be more chance of revolution. Is the idea of expansion merely a tease to keep the current employees in line?
After all, Sartre established that Hell is simply being stuck with the same few people forever.
It was funny how Dylan described the departments basically by their qualities, not what they do. We still don't know what anyone really does at Lumon. Turning people on the same level against each other keeps the focus from questioning the megalith that controls them.
Helly tried three different ways to escape -- the writing on her arms, the Sharpie lid, and her break for the stairwell, hearkening back to the initial orientation in the premiere.
It was part of the handbook that she could leave if she asked three times. Does she have to submit her resignation three times? Does it even matter? What is going on with Outie Helly?
The utter hopelessness in the break room as conveyed by her one word -- "Really?" -- was devastating. If the scene was meant to evoke 1984, then well done.
Britt Lower is great as Helly, serving as an effective stand-in for the audience, forcing us to imagine ourselves in this terrifying situation in which she finds herself. What will Helly's Outie think -- or be told -- about her arm injury? Surely that will be a sign that something is off at Lumon.
The rapport between Mark and Helly is evolving. He wants to help her, find ways to make her feel happy at Lumon, and maintain professionalism as her boss. She offers him no respect or deference.
It will be interesting if and when we see Helly's actual home life, or for that matter, that of Irving and Dylan.
It's looking like Helly and Mark may develop something together; the mention on the news piece (with Natalie) that mentioned a severed woman getting pregnant wasn't put in there for nothing.
Natalie is a fascinating character and played so perfectly by Sydney Cole Alexander. She's a perfect face for Lumon -- professional, approachable, authoritative, and sympathetic, but not apologetic.
She's a higher-up, so much that she calls Ms. Cobel by her first name (Harmony, how apropos!). I'll admit it was satisfying to see Natalie give Ms. Cobel a dressing-down.
I'm not a fan of Cobel at all. I can't tell if this means Patricia Arquette is doing a great job in the role or not. I don't understand what her role is as Mrs. Selvig. Ms. Cobel is needlessly cruel to Mark, while as Selvig, she is kind. Why did she go into Mark's house, steal his package and Gemma's candle? It's all just so odd.
Mark: Open or closed?
Ms. Cobel: Both.
Yul Vasquez as Petey does well with his admittedly terrifying storyline. Will Mark abandon him now? What will happen to him? Petey could have told Mark about Ms. Cobel, but now that chance has been squandered.
But someone has left their phone in Mark's basement. Is it Ms. Cobel's or Petey's?
Cinematically, Severance continues to be perfectly crafted. Every camera angle gives the audience insight into the dynamics and relationships.
One thing to note is that Ben Stiller inverts the usual typical power shot (in the scene with Mark and Ms. Cobel), which was an interesting choice that could mean any number of things.
Because Stiller is so specific as a director, these choices have to mean something, even if it's just the feeling they are trying to evoke.
The aesthetic is jarring and evocative, too. The technology feels very 1980s with its cassette tapes and projectors. Is this in the interest of protecting secrets from data breaches? By keeping the software and equipment outmoded, Lumon tech may only be compatible with its own products, not with the outside world.
We have been living in Orwell's future for decades, so much so that we have become complacent. Severance is here to shake us up, as 1984 no doubt did when first published in 1949.
What remains is to be seen is what kind of statement Severance will make, what kind of conclusion it will draw about identity, about the mega-corporations who are cult-like in their ideology.
Will it conclude with the futility of assimilation, or will there be a way out, even if it's just for these characters and not for us here in the real world?
This show continues to exude a sense of unease and low-grade terror. In that way, it does its job well.
It's just difficult to shake the fact that Apple, a large corporation, makes it and how that influences or dilutes the message Severance is trying to convey.
What do you think could be the meaning behind it all?
Share your thoughts in the comments.
Mary Littlejohn Mary Littlejohn was a staff writer and critic for TV Fanatic.
