Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:01 pm
Can't say I do.Renegade wrote:Don't you watch NCIS? "Never apologize. It's sign of weakness."Lurker wrote:I offer my apology from both of us.
I wonder if he actually had any extras, though, since it was an old gun laying around his house. I certainly hope it had more than one magazine.Renegade wrote:Apparently, it was under the passenger seat. So he could fill the whole glove compartment with bulletsLurker wrote:Well, he got the gun out of the glove compartment. Whatever he couldn't store in there ... I guess it might be a big glove compartment, though.
Kill, though. I mean, if you had to choose between beating someone to death or just shooting them ...Renegade wrote:Well, remember how the Watcher "reacted" to Jonas trying to hit him...didn't look like he'd actually have needed a gun to take him out.Lurker wrote:In any case, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that if you're sending people to kill someone in that kind of scenario, you probably would give them guns.
Whoa, I never said that. Obviously I don't think they wanted to kill these guys to begin with, but if that's what they wanted and they felt like they had to do it gangland style, I'd just expect there to be the sense that they could lose someone and not be heartbroken.Renegade wrote:How is it acceptable to lose up to 6 Men in Black to kill one shooter, if you could just strangle him in sleep?Lurker wrote:I can't see this as being "just because." I mean, if you feel you've got to get rid of these people, then there's probably some consideration of acceptable losses.
I'm confused by this. If the attack had happened on the beach, unless Bree's father were suddenly revealed to be Poseidon and he just walked up out of the sea like this were an episode of "Xena" ... they'd be okay, right?Renegade wrote:Or, if you insist on shooting them at the beach, how is it acceptable to lose 6 MiB if you have support and they don't?
Oh. That. Yeah. Still having trouble swallowing that in terms of plot construction myself.Renegade wrote:Didn't you hear? OpAphid disappeared! </sarcasm>
I was referring to how all the stuff above about sending people to death for no reason was referring to OpAphid, while the people "visiting" them at the beach were most likely "just" The Order.
Wouldn't the same be true, though, of the people there who probably are trained?Renegade wrote:Well, Jonas may not be a trained shooter, but he'd have to be blind to not hit a target only a few meters in front of him.Lurker wrote:"Certain death"? Now that comment probably would bruise Lucy's ego. It was one guy with one gun. Not something to take lightly, no, but it's hardly certain death.
The sloping land was pretty far from where they were parked. Without the posts in the way, I think running anyone down would have been easy.Renegade wrote:I was actually thinking more about driving down the rock wall and dying a horrible crash death - I hadn't noticed the posts until I watched the video again after I posted.Lurker wrote:I guess it all depends on how tough the wooden posts are (and whether they screwed up the car if you hit one). They do look pretty sturdy, I admit.
I'd call that one a retcon. He never thought about keeping the gun close by? Even after they were chased in Vegas? Kidnapped?Renegade wrote:Current video says Jonas got the gun right after the Watcher appeared at his front door.
That still leaves them doing absolutely nothing, though, after Bree's dad died. So if they didn't do it even when they knew that had happened, I'd say if they had no idea what became of Bree, they probably wouldn't have take any of those extreme measures then either.Renegade wrote:And they probably didn't leave Jonas's house because they considered it safe - after all Daniel was kidnapped down in town, not from the house itself. It was only apparent that the actual house had been located when they got their visitor - after which Jonas immediately armed up and they left.
Yes, they are definitely feeling betrayed, and the pscyhological harm is certainly there. I'm still hoping to find out that she's prevented some worse harm that we don't yet know about, though, but it could go either way.Renegade wrote:They're definitely feeling betrayed ("What she did was inexcusable and unforgivable."), and there's definitely psychological harm (turning Daniel into a full-blown alcoholic).
I thought it made sense. She was sad and trying to explain herself with Daniel, then transitioned into a bit of anger because of Jonas and his bout with insanity (he was making it obvious that trying to explain anything was going to be useless, because he wouldn't stop screaming or waving the gun long enough), and then - if she did have any bitterness toward Bree - it could have come out as she was leaving.Renegade wrote:True that. But the fact that her behavior didn't make sense in that situation anyway, was what started this whole discussion - so it's not really a surprise.Lurker wrote:And if it was just about intimidating them, Alex's behavior wouldn't fit that either, so I think we can rule that out for now.
At the moment I think it's as easy to believe that they were followed. Heck, if Alex was expecting their arrival right then, why did she even get in the SUV before they pulled up?Renegade wrote:Yes. But they were not at home asleep in the videoLurker wrote:This is quite different. Knowing where you put your head down every night? That's a litle more than general knowledge of existence. That's knowing where you are at your most vulnerable.
My mistake.Renegade wrote:And you assume she'd get the idea to actually research?
I doubt they've never seen business suits before. And in any case, they can still go by way of different roads if they have to actually go through the town itself.Renegade wrote:Well, we don't have spring break as a binge drinking event over here, so I've never attended such a mega party...but from what I gathered from certain videos on the internet, the attendees don't quite look like military commandos or men in black...
Bullets.Renegade wrote:Why are you assuming she'd have to constantly move?
Are we assuming they've arranged a plan for this that differs from their previous attempts at flight?Renegade wrote:They never faced an assassination commando before, either.
The top of the slope isn't kilometers away. Even living in a country that uses the emperical system, I'd guess from the slope to the rock wall isn't more than a kilometer (if that).Renegade wrote:And those two people with a gun are of no help when they're seen from kilometers away.
Well, if they run toward the rock wall and the steep hill as you've suggested they might, the solution would certainly present itself, no? That said, though, assuming the three of them all ran out into the open stretch and thought about zig-zagging as they ran (probably wouldn't), they might get away.Renegade wrote:This isn't Counter-Strike. Hitting a stationary target from a calm position isn't that easy already...and they're supposed to hit three seperate, moving targets over several hundred meters distance, most probably with simple handguns?
I still like the snipers you mentioned before, though. That would be infinitely more simple.
Okay, sure, it's not impossible.Renegade wrote:Just because they probably wouldn't survive it doesn't change the fact that, theoretically, they'd have the possibility to do it.Lurker wrote:I think the analogy matches fine when you're dealing with a small time limit. The guys there to deal out death aren't going to give you a sporting chance to climb slopes.
Well, the beach is only altogether open on one side. To make use of any of the other three, you'd have to put out more effort than the situation would comfortably allow for.Renegade wrote:While your room doesn't give 'em that chance. (Not to mention that your room isn't open on the other three sides either, but hey - who's fussy?)
I think you're still missing my meaning when I make reference to what they would be inspired to do. I mean that I think you're overestimating the will of unarmed persons to allow for them to fight armed persons and win.Renegade wrote:If they were in an armed robbery, and they knew they'd only have to hand over the camera to survive, I don't think they'd do anything else, either. But when they know they can either do nothing, and die for sure, or fight, and have at least a minimal chance to survive, they'd have to be totally, blindingly retarded not to fight with everything they've got.
I see. Yes, I misread that.Renegade wrote:No, no...you read the "and"s wrong. It's either (scream "how could you?!" and raise the fists) or (go insane and use the gun). The point being that the first one would be a rather weak attempt at fighting back, and would not have lead to aborting the plan to kill/take them, had such a plan existed.
But, remember, that wouldn't make sense because of all the 99% flawless methods (poison, bomb, snipers, etc.).Renegade wrote:I obviously do not agree that anything else wouldn't have made sense (I did explain how they could have just aborted their killing plan, after all) ...
Well, as I said above, I think you can explain Alex's mood transition fairly easily. As for whether she endangered them, we're still waiting to hear what the circumstances were, aren't we?Renegade wrote:... but, what's more important is, that, even assuming that just taking Alex was the original and executed plan, that doesn't explain her weird mood-change mid situation, whether or not she's forced to do that or acts out of free will, just pretending to be forced, and why Alex endangered BD&J instead of just quietly leaving?
Are you kidding? They'd probably delete the page for eating up too much of the server if we were let loose to expand it to its full extent. There's even narrative inconsistencies to be found in the YT comments (I mention several in the second post of that thread; and, yes, I was "slightly" more optimistic about consistency at the time).Renegade wrote:Maybe the plot hole page isn't big enough yet.Lurker wrote:That never made sense either since she had his car.
Although I'm kind of afraid of how big it'd grow if we two re-watched all episodes...
Order doesn't watch Bree's videos. Need I say more? You can't open plot holes any bigger than that.Renegade wrote:This is not an issue, right, because once the Creators say the Order had bugged them all along, they're gonna open plot holes as large as Russia. I don't think it's a good idea to explain their sudden appearance with a tracking device, simply because it'd lead to dozens of "Why didn't they do this when..." questions.longlostposter wrote:First of all, there was no need for Alex to tell the Order where the beach was. They have used tracking devices before, and there could be one on the car, or even possibly implanted in Bree. This is not an issue at all.
Actually, she was saying "I don't have a choice." I think that's a potentially significant difference. "Had" would imply she called them. "Have" would imply some future event, in which case she may have only meant that she knew they could come for her.Renegade wrote:Not to mention Alex's "I had no choice" doesn't fit this theory.
Well, I think - and this will probably come as a relief to everyone else, especially Languorous Lass - we've probably discussed this as far as currently known information will allow. I think we can agree that if they absolutely, positively wanted to kill the kids, then - realistically speaking (yes, I'm inserting real world logic into this; I know that's not the safest path to tread, but it's the only one I can walk) - they would have (again, going back to snipers at the beach or them living in Alex's house and the possibility for poison, arson, etc.).Renegade wrote:P.S.: Lurker and me:
Personally, if there's a standard less than "realistically speaking" or "most logically" that we should be approaching this by (some of your comments seem to suggest you feel this might be the case), then I'm ready to let it end anyway. I can't discuss things in terms of "Well, yeah, that would have made the most sense, but then the show would have ended."
I also remain naively optimistic that an explanation for what happened with Alex will come along that makes perfect sense and establishes that she meant no betrayal whatsoever. But only time will tell. Should you prove correct about her being a traitor (in the way I've been saying it), I'll be sure to declare that you were right at that time (but I'm hoping to be able to say you were wrong).
. Kudos to the Creators for the great camerawork. And I'm glad the Order has finally stopped chasing Bree. However, Bree and her friends can't forget about the Order, because they're after a new girl.