Rewatching for the third time and it really is rather creepy. The advances made on Pam from Jim were way to forward and frequent. Friends don't do that, people who are attracted to one other do.
I get the plan for the show was to have them ultimately be together, but I felt bad for Roy, especially in the beginning. Roy was a scum bag himself but for different reasons, but when he snapped he had good reason.
Hello Turk.
http://www.imdb.com/help/boards/markup
You haven't answered to me yet.
Why?
Also it's annoying that this site doesn't give any separation whatsoever from signatures.
You know how scummy it was when you see Jimmy's reaction every time Roy shows up. He would not be that terrified if he knew he wasn't doing something disgusting. He was trying to compete for a woman but he did it in an underhanded sneaky, weasel way because he was a cowardly scumbag. He could never try it in front of Roy.
Secondly you're ignoring the whore Pam's faults in this too, seemingly blaming it on Roy. She was the scumbag, not Roy. If she didn't want to be with him break up with him instead of cheating with that cuck boy with the captain kangaroo haircut.
Jim should have done the following:
-Never flirted with her in the first place. She was being nice to him, as most girls will do when they're moderately attracted to a guy.
-Told her WAAAAY earlier exactly how he felt. When he did, she initially lied and said the feelings were one-sided. But when push came to shove, she said it was wrong, even though she wanted it too, and he bolted.
Pam should have told him to either back off when she noticed the flirting, or laid ground rules and stuck by them.
Roy was a bad fiance for a couple of reasons - he didn't pull the trigger on the marriage until 3 years later, and he seemed to be completely disinterested in anything Pam did. I'm willing to bet that if we followed Pam and Roy outside of the office a few times, we'd understand that she is looking for a way out, but in not telling Jim, makes Jim look bad for what he's doing.
Bottom line is that Pam secretly wanted out of the engagement, but she never let anyone else know that, not even Jim.
I don't disagree with it being less than honorable/ideal as far as how Jim and Pam behaved, but I think to go so far as to call them scumbags and to view it as truly "creepy" is a bit much.
I get the whole "break up with Roy and go with Jim if that's what you want" thought process and yes, ideally that would have been the right thing to do but life and relationships are not always that simple. It's not as if they slept together or something.
Unfortunately I can relate to Pam's situation way too much as far as being all but completely unhappy with someone but being too attached and too scared to change anything for many years (although I didn't have a "Jim" in the picture). I am not saying it's right--it's not and I have beat myself up over how long I let things go in my life but I am just saying, right or wrong, things like this sometimes happen.
"Your petty vengeance fetish will have to do withOUT Mr. Groin!"
Maybe what they did wasn't exactly creepy, but the fact that the writers completely dismissed they "hey, this is wrong" thing, made it creepy.
I have been in Jim's shoes, in an office, but I never went as far as he did.
but the fact that the writers completely dismissed they "hey, this is wrong" thing, made it creepy.
Yea, the writers portrayed it as if one of the people weren't engaged for years and had an established relationship.
Oh well.
It boils down to the old story of a woman being too nice/friendly/touchy-feely with a man, and he acts on it, only to be shot down. But in this case the woman was lying when she shot him down.
Oh by the way, Pam did start this whole thing by kissing Jim at the Dundees.
I get the whole "break up with Roy and go with Jim if that's what you want" thought process and yes, ideally that would have been the right thing to do but life and relationships are not always that simple.
I am not saying it's right
It's not as if they slept together or something.
Remember, she kiss him first. They may have flirted and been a bit too close, but she pulled the trigger at the Dundees.
The "she was drunk" excuse doesn't work. Being drunk just brings out your true feelings whether good or bad.
I am not a JAM lover, actually. Especially as the show progressed I liked them less and less. And I said multiple times that their behavior was not right...not sure how that equates to me saying it IS right.
People's emotions, feelings, personal issues and fears most certainly are complications. Removing all of that is the situation complicated? Not at all, but unfortunately all of those elements affect people's minds and decisions and make simple situations complicated. I am not sure how anyone who is human can not understand that at least a little. Understanding and acknowledging this does not mean you agree with it or think it's acceptable. It may not seem complex to you or even to Jim but to Pam it was.
She was just another scummy coward who preferred to cheat on her spouse.
It is hard to break something off with a person you're living with. But then again, they had no ties together, like kids, so the break would have been clean.
Then when she actually did leave Roy, it was smooth. Made me wonder why she didn't do it already.
People's emotions, feelings, personal issues and fears most certainly are complications.
Scummy coward--fine, if that is your opinion. I DO agree she was a coward, absolutely (unfortunately, like I said, I have been there before, minus the Jim and in that situation "spineless" is the way I described myself). But she didn't cheat on her spouse--she wasn't married. And she was not actually cheating on him. WTF.
I guess when you say she "was cheating on him" it sounds like she is having an affair or something. Clearly kissing someone other than your boyfriend/fiancé is wrong--I did not intend to imply that it's not--but it is hardly the same thing as having sex with someone. On a related note, I don't remember the third incident. I remember the drunk peck during the Dundees and the casino night kiss...I don't recall the third one. Although ONCE is enough.
All it takes is some morality and courage, of which Pam has none.
I guess when you say she "was cheating on him" it sounds like she is having an affair or something. Clearly kissing someone other than your boyfriend/fiancé is wrong--I did not intend to imply that it's not--but it is hardly the same thing as having sex with someone.
im crying laughing at this. Thank you
sharePeople are free to do whatever choices they make. Pam wasn't manipulated by Jim (or vice versa) and nobody even cheated anyone. Sure, Jim kissing Pam when he knows she's engaged might be "a scummy move" but then again I don't believe in "dibs" in love. He put all the cards out there and then finally makes Pam make a decision. She's capable of making that decision and she's entitled to it - just because you're engaged doesn't mean you can't break it off if you don't feel like it's the right thing to do.
I guess some people might consider flirting to be a scummy move but I'm not that judgmental. If they hadn't flirted and explored their friendship, Pam wouldn't been stuck with Roy and they both would've been worse off. If Pam had clearly indicated their friendship was too much like flirting and was inappropriate and Jim would've still continued, yeah that's a douchebag move. But two adults consenting to have a relationship like that is fine in my book. Maybe it was "emotional cheating" but that's a fine line and Roy wasn't exactly emotionally generous anyway.
I didn't really look at it this way. Sometimes you really like someone that wouldn't expect too and you can't help it. I don't think he wanted to like her but ended up doing so.
Same with her, she really thought they were friends until people started pointing it out, then realized maybe there's more to this.
You can have a connection with someone you never thought you would, that's kind of what happened with them. I know I've been there, and it's not a good feeling but it's not something that can be controlled.
Jim said they were friends because he knew it was wrong to like her, and thought it would go away. But the feelings got stronger and eventually he just needed to be honest with her.
It sucks for Roy but if they really loved each other than it wouldn't have happened.
I don't think he wanted to like her????? Don't friends like each other? Yes, he said they were friends, but he knew they were more that. Well from his standpoint anyway. He didn't admit how he felt at first, because he thought it would scare her off, the end of their friendship. The main reason for why he finally did admit his feelings, was because in Booze Cruise Roy set the wedding date without consulting Pam, and realised he still loved her. I don't think Jim he ever felt guilty about his feelings. It was also quite obvious how Pam really felt in Casino Night when she admitted it to her mother over the phone.
What I meant was liking her more than friends.
Yes I agree he didn't want to say anything because he knew it was crazy and it would scare her away. But then once Roy announced the wedding date, he knew his window was closing and wanted to take a shot and see if she felt the same way. We are all selfish sometimes, and I understand why he did it.
Uh...the writers aren't trying to make a moral statement here...they're writing a story, and in real life things like what was going on between Pam and Jim really happen.
Ideally, they should have done the right thing the right way. Realistically, they did not do things the way they were supposed to as like probably 50 to 75% of people in the real world.
Jim and Pam ARE scumbags, but for me their earning that title has nothing to do with Roy.
Nope, for me it's:
a.) they're mean-spirited little sh*ts whose smugness/overwhelming condescension/complete sense of superiority to everyone else makes them the show's least appealing component and...
b.) their "Ain't we adorable?" smirks into the camera every fifteen seconds. I totally appreciate that looking into the camera is part of this show...but with them it's overdone to the point of goodgodenoughalready. This is actually what takes me from "dislike" to "downright hatred" for both of them.
That said, worst of all is that (from a writing standpoint) I think what kills Jim's and/or Pam's likability 100% dead for me is the complete lack of anything even closely resembling one of the many "You know what? Sometimes this person can be a complete a$$hole, and this is us acknowledging that," scenes the show used time & again to flesh-out Michael & Dwight to such great effect.
Jim and Pam are jerks. The show rules, though.
OH WE All know that couple,
They are on Facebook right now telling everyone how wonderful their life is.....!
. Ephemeron.
I'm re-watching now, I hate when Pam looks down and smirks when they are playing 'who would you do' in the fire episode, Like Jim was going to say her name. Really?? ugh.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I just want to eat in a quiet corner away from these bozos.
I have a few things to say about this stuff..
1) It's your typical injected romance that no story seems to be able to be told without, for SOME reason. There are a handful, and even women have loved those, so I don't see a problem with at least sometimes telling a story that has NO ROMANCE, but this world, especially its females (and males are always forced to agree with females) force every movie and TV show to have romance.
As someone once mentioned, it's like adding square dancing to every story, whether the story organically supports it or not. It makes no sense, it's really weird and ruins many stories that could be way more interesting without it. I can only think of a few movies that don't have injected romance - Stand By Me (ironically romantic name!), Bad Taste (no female characters, though female actors), First Blood (they had to ruin this in the sequel), ... I think there are about five I know, but can't remember the rest right now.
2) It's supposed to be YET another 'modern interpretation' of your stupid Romeo and Juliet-theme, even if watered down considerably in many ways.
3) It's obviously trying to recreate the injected romance in the original The Office, where it's more awkward, the characters are not as obnoxious, but also, the hag in the original represents your.. let's say, 'typical british interpretation of beauty', and leave it at that (I am in a kind mood today)
4) I never found either actor good-looking, they're average at best (look at young Brad Pitt or some asian idols or air hostesses)
5) Pam is a manipulative B, and Jim is a simping moron, so in a way, they deserve each other (realistically, Pam will cheat with someone more alpha at some point, that's what she chose to begin with, although Roy's actor doesn't quite have the required charisma or thug-confidence)
6) This 'couple' and their 'will they or will they not'-stuff might be super exciting to female brain, but they are VERY boring characters compared to many others.
I mean, consider someone like Creed or even Dwight, which have weird quirks that make them partially unpredictable and thus more interesting, but especially if we consider someone like Michael Scott, which has LAYERS of interest, why would anyone want to watch YET ANOTHER run-of-the-mill 'romance of a simp and a princess, which never happens in real life' (Pam would never have fallen for someone that simpy and awkward)?
If you can watch Michael do his unpredictable thing, point out the flaws in our social behaviour, the so-called 'society', the world, the corporate world, the system and so on, in his innocent, charming way you forgive, because you know he never does anything out of malice, no matter how shocking the thing he says or does ends up being, and so on..
If you can watch Michael break all the taboos and maim the sacred cows of human interaction in the superficial american social culture, while still retaining some sort of coherence and hilarious, childlike reactions and responses.. I mean, who didn't laugh when they realized Michael is trying to solve his financial crisis by running into the train tracks and becoming a boxcar hobo, then proceeding to carefully jump onto a boxcar that was actually not going anywhere?
Why would you watch this awkward 'romance' instead of that, unless you are hungry for that sort of stuff (and how CAN you be in a world where even ever gosh-darned comedy has some injected romance, from Spaceballs to Liar, Liar to Top Secret!.. you can't find movies that don't, no matter what the theme)?
7) The Ricky version of The Office at least had some kind of relatability to that stuff, and the alpha there actually looks and feels like a real alpha. We have all seen that type of alpha as the boyfriend of some girl nerds pine for. Jim isn't relatable, Roy isn't alpha enough and Pam.. well, she just looks weird to me, not anyone I have ever seen in real life, whereas the UK version's receptionist at least looks like someone.
He was a friend who was attracted to her.. What's so wrong about that?? 🤔
share