Pages

Wednesday, 15 July 2026

For All Mankind — Series 5 Episode 2 — “The Hard Six” — A Review

14th July, 2026.
“The Hard Six”.
The Introduction.

It’s officially the case that a man in search of a wife … is possibly some kind of weird stalker.

Or trying to paraphrase Jane Austin.

Or getting mental images of some of the odder characters in The League of Gentlemen.

Which is possibly a whole other post.

At any rate?

It’s Tuesday.

Which means I’ll be watching “The Hard Six”, the next episode of For All Mankind, tonight.

When writing the bulk of this review: and releasing it, and the parallel video version, by this coming Friday.

I’m starting this post early … as I’m expecting my nephew this afternoon.

Fun — and possibly pizza — will be had … before the main event … 

Let’s move on …

~≈🪐≈~


15th July, 2026.
Part One.
The Summary.

Episode 2 — “The Hard Six” — opens to show us a communal Area on sub-level 2 of Happy Valley: the area Martian Peacekeepers have to travel, to take Lee Jung-Gil (C. K. Lee) into custody.

A journey that sees many of Happy Valley’s residents on the point of protest … until Sheriff James (Myk Watford) reads the riot act.

Meanwhile … ?

Meanwhile, Walt and Shireen (Christopher Denham and Sara Boutine), the leaders of the Helios team at Happy Valley are monitoring the robot expedition to Titan: and are both excited.

The robots they’ve deployed have found life: something that Kelly Baldwin (Cynthy Woo) is keen to learn about.

But also angry about: as Walt’s determined to send another robot mission to Titan, rather than the crewed mission Kelly feels is the better choice.

That’s something Kelly’s father, Ed (Joel Kinnaman) agrees should be done.

Ed’s just very aware his daughter will need persuading, in order to take it further.

Meanwhile … ?

All is not well with Ed.

He, and the rest of the Sons and Daughter of Mars, are having a rare meeting: one Ed has called so the group can chew over one thing.

Lee Jung-Gil’s arrest.

The First Man on Mars is going to be sent back to Earth for trial.

And if that happens … ?

It would be a death sentence …

~≈🪐≈~

Part Two.
Observations.

Now …

What did I make of “The Hard Six” … ?

Let’s start with a picky point, shall we?

Dev Ayesha (Edi Gethegi) is back: refusing a request for help from Ed Baldwin.

Me being me … ?

My first thought was “That’s an iMac on his desk!”

My next thought … ?

Was “Is that a 2015 model?   Or a 2017 one?”

If it was the latter, it’s totally wrong for an alternative history story set … in 2012!

With the (minor) bit of nit-picking out of the way … ?

The other thing that hit me about “The Hard Six”?

Is that Ed advises Kelly to roll a hard six — take a big risk, in other words, a big gamble — to get a place on a proposed mission to Titan.

A gamble that pays off in Kelly’s favour.

We also see Ed making a similar gamble.

Risk his own life, in other words, to help Jung-Gil escape to neutral territory.

At, potentially, the cost of his own life.

Does Ed survive?

I won’t know until I watch the next episode.

But, given we know of Ed’s cancer diagnosis, from last week’s episode?

Things look bleak.

~≈🪐≈~

Part Three.
Thoughts.

With that said, what did I think of “The Hard Six”?

Of this second episode?

I have to say, I thoroughly enjoyed it.

We have the return of Dev Ayesha, the nearest the show has to a villain.

We have the seeds of future episodes: in the shape of the discovery of life on Titan.

And — in Ed’s potential death, and Jung-Gil’s escape — we have one heck of a pair of cliffhangers.

Frankly?

“The Hard Six” is as eminently watchable as other second episodes, and adds to the show’s background.

What more can we ask?

“The Hard Six”
★★★☆

~≈🪐≈~

Part Four.
Finally.

With all that said?

I shall leave things there: for now.

How ever?

I will be watching episode three next Tuesday: and hopefully have my written and video reviews up by next Thursday.

No comments:

Post a Comment

I love it when someone comments. But, having had anonymous comments I feel may be libellous, actionable or just plain offensive, over the years?

I’d appreciate you* leaving your name — with a link to your website or social-media profile†, for preference — before you post a comment.

Should you choose to use a pseudonym/name, I’d appreciate it if that name were to be polite and inoffensive. I’d rather you kept it clean, and relatively grown up. Comments left with a pseudonym will be posted at my discretion: I really prefer a link.

Contentious, actionable or abusive posts left anonymously will not be posted. Nor will comments using offensive pseudonyms or language, or that are abusive of other commenters.

Thank you.

*   I know many value their online privacy. I respect that. But hope you respect my wish to see who’s commenting on my blog: and my wish for you to introduce your self to me, and to your fellow commentors.

†   Your Facebook, X/Twitter, Blogger, Instagram, TikTok or LinkedIn profile are acceptable. I also like seeing folks webpages.