Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- From: Cart to <notreally@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 03:29:19 +0100
In article <s879q41bfta202rmm65v4e32e7tb7uo8lr@xxxxxxx>, david@xxxxxxxxx
says...
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 01:48:57 +0100, Cart to <notreally@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
In article <h3s6q4512pkr8baub582b6qmhtce4bnmv0@xxxxxxx>, david@xxxxxxxxx
says...
On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 04:47:20 +0100, Cart to <notreally@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
In article <6356q4ll79jjms96rsvvt5kfu8eaabl39a@xxxxxxx>, david@xxxxxxxxx
says...
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:06:38 +0100, Cart to <notreally@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
In article <r6u3q45mtg53ric88oq7gu3ttggtj9ngj2@xxxxxxx>, david@xxxxxxxxx
says...
On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 23:21:28 +0100, Cart to <notreally@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
In article <ljb0q452g19frko8155cl0nhj1l4gsovti@xxxxxxx>, david@xxxxxxxxx
says...
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 07:32:29 -0800 (PST), WQ <WQieue@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Same way I did. Noticing that she was doing things that show she's
still remembering stuff.
At what point did it
register to him that this was the case?
Before the start of the series of course.
--- Then how are we supposed to make the connection between his
knowing that and us knowing his knowing that if there's no basis for
knowing that other than he noticed those things "before the start of
the series" when no one was around to see him noticing it? You just
can't "assume" that he has noticed those things about her,
I'm not assuming it. I'm concluding it.
Actually, you are speculating.
But it's based on the evidence.
I think there are some leaps in your speculation, it could be someone
else than alpha.
Yes but the foreshadowing in the episode all says "Alpha". It was
Alpha who went on a rampage and spared Echo while killing all the
other Actives in the room. It was Alpha who sadistically killed
Echo's previous keeper with amazing speed. The ex-cop said the method
of killing the mercenary matched Alpha's M.O. in the rampage. And of
course, there's nobody else for it to be. It's like in a murder
mystery. If a character has no other reason to be there, then he's
the murderer.
Ah, easy cliches then.
Chekhov's gun is so much a cliche as a basic principle of
storytelling.
I disagree, it's what ruins so much "storytellling" these days, because
all these dweebs think they have to place a gun in plain view so you
understand what's going to happen way to early in the story *yawwwwn*
They can of course just pull stuff out of their ass. For example, on
Chuck last night, they could have failed to put the remote control
into the story until after the car explodes. But that would have
sucked.
Haven't seen it yet.
Paying huge amounts of attention to things that don't
matter is just plain bad writing.
Paying attention to them makes them matter - if you are a good writer.
Nobody is a good enough writer to make things that mean nothing
matter.
Paying attention to them makes them matter.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- From: David Johnston
- Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- References:
- Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- From: WQ
- Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- From: David Johnston
- Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- From: Cart to
- Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- From: David Johnston
- Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- From: Cart to
- Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- From: David Johnston
- Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- From: Cart to
- Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- From: David Johnston
- Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- From: Cart to
- Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- From: David Johnston
- Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- Prev by Date: Re: Fred! - There's No New KNIGHT RIDER on Tonite!
- Next by Date: Re: If Chad Michael Murray leaves Tree Hill show should end!
- Previous by thread: Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- Next by thread: Re: "Dollhouse" = Duh-house
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|