If you watch the scene that begins immediately after Trevor and Sybil "have sex" ("Was it as good for you as it was for me?"), you'll notice that from this point on until Sybil requests expatriation, she and Trevor carry on a conversation without ever looking at each other. In fact, they are looking in the same direction in every camera shot (watch and you'll see what I mean). In a way it reminds me the sequencing in "Tide", not sure why. It makes me wonder if Chung (who directed the episode) intended this; it seems to represent a lack of good communication between the two, like Trevor is not showing Sybil due attention.

-- Mat Rebholz (matrebholz@yahoo.com), August 20, 1998

Answers

I've just watched the scene too see for myself. The only ways they look at each other is through a side glance; no direct eye contact. I believe it is to simply show that they are preoccupied with there own thoughts and not with each other. The conversation's content is little more than small talk and they pay attention to each other accordingly. There using each other and the talk is simply a ritual. The scene does have pangs of "Tide" due to the sequencing, but its more like the way Peter Chung directs. I like to call it "fluid pacing". this is especialy evident in "Tide" because the pacing between scenes was exactly 2sec. It kept a perfect beat. Any more thoughts anyone?

-- Tak Loufer (Tak@loufer.bellona), August 21, 1998.

I think maybe Sybil was a little embarassed by having bizarre sex with her nation's leader, or maybe ashamed at herself for messing around on Onan...so ashamed/embarassed (or both) that she couldnt look at trevor in the eyes without feeling whatever she was feeling. You can tell because when Trevor says "Was it as good for you as it was for me?", he is attempting to look at Sybil but she doesn't even acknowledge that.

-- TGoodchild (LaTiNcAt16@aol.com), August 21, 1998.

Speaking of the bizarre and bordering on the disgusting - I had a thought... If ye would be offended by graphic sexual content turn back now...

Okay - my thought is this: Is Sybil having sex through that apeture in her back? You'll notice that when Sybil and Onan arrange to have sex through the border wall Sybil emerges fully clothed. Does anyone else think this is significant, or am I just some kind of perverted degenerate scumbag?

-- Charles Martin (cmmartin@princeton.edu), October 02, 1998.

they were definitely having sex. youre not perverted, its obvious.

HEY, CMMARTIN!! DO YOU KNOW JONATHAN BARACK? HE'S MY COUSIN AND GOES TO PRINCETON. ISNT THAT COOL?

Heres the cool part---he's taking these movie courses---hes the biggest movie buff i know----and hes said that he likes Aeon. If you get a chance, talk to him cmmartin---maybe you can watch some Aeon tapes and analyze. Believe me, Jon is really cool. Tell him Owen Black sent you. Write back to me, ok?

-- Owen Black (Ob200bpm@aol.com), October 02, 1998.

IF YOU WATCH ANY MOVIES AND THEY HAD SEX, AFTER THEY STOP THEY ASK IF IT WAS GOOD FOR THEM AS IT WAS FOR THEM......YEAH IT WAS

-- Bundy (bundy46@hotmail.com), March 22, 2001.

I can't believe I just realized the word play here... but when Aeon breaks into Sybil's house and throws her box of ampules out the window, Sybil shouts to Trevor, "My box, my box! You took it away!" It just occurred to me that she could just as well be referring to the fact that he's disabled her vagina... wow. Did anyone else get this?

-- Mat Rebholz (matrebholz@yahoo.com), March 25, 2002.

You got it, Mat, THANK YOU.

There's all sorts of oddball wordplay going on in this one. Peter had me read the complete works of Joe Orton and we blew the script back and forth for months.

You know, some of the lines we had . . .well, okay, ferget it.

(...holy sheep...)

-- dangerboy (artian@earthlink.net), March 25, 2002.

didn't they talk about this a few months ago?

-- mary (Marybrody@aol.com), March 25, 2002.

Yeah, I distinctly remember someone saying almost the exact same thing in regards the box double entendre; I think it was Barb e. I can't remember what thread it was from though, sorry. Anywho, I was just wondering dangerboy, how long it took to write a typical script. How long were they, and are there any scripts that were never used that could be posted here?

-- Logo (Vosepherus@aol.com), March 26, 2002.

Whoops, I must not have been paying attention. Anyway... I was pretty elated to, after seven years, finally pick that little bit up. Makes me wonder how much more is out there for me to discover in this series that I used to think I knew so well...

-- Mat Rebholz (matrebholz@yahoo.com), March 26, 2002.