+- Spooks Forum (http://www.spooksforum.co.uk)
+-- Forum: MI5 Operations (/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: Character & Actor Discussion (/forum-23.html)
+--- Thread: [spoilers] Sir Harry Pearce 2.0 (/thread-684.html)
RE: [spoilers] Sir Harry Pearce 2.0 - Silktie - 07-03-2010 05:43 PM
Sorry Nitrus, my fault. But it does link in to the question of whether Harry finds it hard to deal with women in general that challenge him directly, or whether it depends on who the woman is. For instance, he didn't seem to have a problem putting Tessa in her place when she challenged him?
RE: [spoilers] Sir Harry Pearce 2.0 - Silktie - 14-03-2010 06:01 PM
So, Harry in 2.9:
I thought he was slightly off his game in this episode. It's not often he sits around criticising everyone else's plans and doesn't come up with some suggestions of his own. He seemed to be pre-occupied with a number of things. Firstly, he seemed aware right from the start that Tom was dangerously close emotionally to this operation, and secondly, there was the whole Tessa/Sam thing.
Maybe it was because he was somewhat under the weather - he definitely seemed to be suffering from flu. Hope he wasn't mixing that whiskey with medication at the end...
RE: [spoilers] Sir Harry Pearce 2.0 - lwhite53 - 22-03-2010 03:20 AM
I found Harry very interesting in 2.10 -- trying to keep Danny and Zoe from talking about what appears to be Tom on a rogue mission while, at the same time, trying to rein Tom in himself. It almost seemed as if Harry was being pulled in two directions, trying to protect Tom and trying to protect the country from Tom. Did H's personnal feelings for Tom interfere with his judgment early on? What do you all think?
RE: [spoilers] Sir Harry Pearce 2.0 - Tea Lady - 22-03-2010 10:14 AM
Yes Harry did seem to try and protect Tom first. Surely he would have been justified in sending in the heavy mob as soon as he found out about the Irish passport, but he turned up on his door step, obviously to talk to him, to offer his help. He did seem to blinkered in his view though that Tom was guilty from the start.
I found it interesting that Harry ordered Zoe and Danny not to discuss the matter with anyone else but then Harry promptly went off and told Ruth all about it. Considering Harry has known Zoe and Danny a lot longer, I thought that was telling. Harry seems to constantly treat Zoe and Danny as children who need looking after and directing.
RE: [spoilers] Sir Harry Pearce 2.0 - Silktie - 22-03-2010 11:32 AM
I thought Harry's reaction towards Zoe and Danny came from his own ambivalence about what Tom was up to. He knew that if Tom was actually innocent, the accusations of Zoe and Danny would harm not only Tom's career, but also those of the younger two, and would destroy the working relationship between Tom and them. Harry, at this stage, is still giving Tom the benefit of the doubt, which I think is proper, as Tom has always been loyal up till then. He knows Tom is becoming emotionally unstable and is worrying what direction this will take, but probably wants more proof that Tom is actually busy with something that presents a danger to the country. However, when Ruth tells him that the hit-man is already dead, this to Harry is final proof that Tom is playing them all for fools and is betraying them. He then becomes decisive in his actions against Tom.
RE: [spoilers] Sir Harry Pearce 2.0 - lwhite53 - 22-03-2010 03:32 PM
I also think H didn't yet know how far embroiled into Tom's scheme Danny and Zoe had become -- as it was, they didn't volunteer the info about Tom, Harry had to pull it out of them. So he might want to keep them far away from whatever it is he has in mind for Tom.
But, you're absolutely correct Silktie -- guilt by association could certainly have ruined Danny and Zoe's careers.
RE: [spoilers] Sir Harry Pearce 2.0 - Skully - 23-03-2010 12:35 AM
I just want to say that this a a cruel poll!!! Harry is integral to spooks, but to me Lucas is the more fascinating character. So I can't choose an answer!
RE: [spoilers] Sir Harry Pearce 2.0 - Silktie - 23-03-2010 09:35 AM
I also found it interesting that Harry blames Christine for ruining Tom. Maybe it's an indication that he just couldn't bring himself to believe that Tom would turn traitor out of his own volition, and the only way he could rationalise Tom's actions was to ascribe it to Tom being blinded by love and misled by a treacherous woman.
Come to think of it, this experience with Tom probably also influenced Harry's own approach towards love. Heading over to HR thread to discuss further.
RE: [spoilers] Sir Harry Pearce 2.0 - Nitrus - 23-03-2010 03:00 PM
No doubt Harry is very fond of Tom and I certainly think you have a point about him blaming Christine. But I also think he blames himself too, I think he thinks he should've taken better control over the situation.
RE: [spoilers] Sir Harry Pearce 2.0 - lwhite53 - 23-03-2010 10:38 PM
(23-03-2010 03:00 PM)Nitrus Wrote: No doubt Harry is very fond of Tom and I certainly think you have a point about him blaming Christine. But I also think he blames himself too, I think he thinks he should've taken better control over the situation.
Yeah, I agree Nitrus. H blames himself and, imo, he should. Tom's been coming unglued for a couple of eps already. Harry should have immediately jumped on any problematic behavior from Tom. After all, H did threaten (in the last ep) that anyone who put one toe out of line would be done! But in this ep, he ignores his own pronouncement. H is much more at fault than Christine. She thought she was doing the right thing. He was just ignoring the situation until it got so out of hand he had to act.