Lonelygirl15

There are two (other, lol) things that I've been wondering about in "Alex Is...".

The first one is, when Daniel says he is going to go back into the house to "interview" Alex. It seems strange to me that he didn't say 'talk with Alex'. Interview sounds way too formal and friendly for the situation and the kind of relationship D&A had.

Am I only one who feels this way?

Also, Alex says she couldn't have killed Jonas's parents. Very odd, because I don't remember Jonas ever accusing her of killing his parents? Wha??????

I went and checked these two things out in LGPedia, and what I have here is accurate, according to the Pedia (as far as this last vid).

Thoughts, anyone?

Also, Alex says she couldn't have killed Jonas's parents. Very odd, because I don't remember Jonas ever accusing her of killing his parents? Wha??????

I agree, very odd.
Maybe it's some sort of guilt paranoia thing.

But still... very odd

That is pretty darn odd. I thought Daniel was acting weird through out the whole video (if you couldn't already tell from my other posts)

That's weird that Alex would mention that.

Although all these things seem off, I'm not so sure what they could mean??

Or maybe she has been watching their videos all along, and saw where Jonas broke into her office and implied that the order "got rid" of everybody associated with the document.

Both of those things stood out as odd to me also.

I don't have any good explanation for either!

Honestly... I am not surprised that Daniel said "interview"... I would have been surprised if Jonas or Bree said it... but it honestly seems to fit with the way Daniel talks anyway.

Maybe Daniel is so into his filming... So a conversation is a interview to him.
Like when Jonas was tied up

joygasm wrote:Honestly... I am not surprised that Daniel said "interview"... I would have been surprised if Jonas or Bree said it... but it honestly seems to fit with the way Daniel talks anyway.

I agree.

longlostposter wrote:Also, Alex says she couldn't have killed Jonas's parents. Very odd, because I don't remember Jonas ever accusing her of killing his parents? Wha??????

Well, remember that all the people in that scrapbook are supposed to be dead. So if Jonas suggests that it's to keep a sort of trophy of people she's screwed over, it would indicate that he thought she was responsible for them dying.

joygasm wrote:Honestly... I am not surprised that Daniel said "interview"... I would have been surprised if Jonas or Bree said it... but it honestly seems to fit with the way Daniel talks anyway.

Yes. I guess people forget that once upon a time Daniel wanted to be film maker. Him with the camera = an interview, at least that's how I see it.

Lurker wrote: Well, remember that all the people in that scrapbook are supposed to be dead. So if Jonas suggests that it's to keep a sort of trophy of people she's screwed over, it would indicate that he thought she was responsible for them dying.

Yes. Also, if she has been watching the videos all along like many of us suspect, then she would have known that Tachyon believes that she turned on Jonas' parents at some point. Turning on them means that she would be involved in their "deaths".

Lurker wrote:Well, remember that all the people in that scrapbook are supposed to be dead. So if Jonas suggests that it's to keep a sort of trophy of people she's screwed over, it would indicate that he thought she was responsible for them dying.

So what you are saying, in essence, is that Alex assumes that Jonas equates "screwing over" people with killing his parents, whom he never mentions seeing in that scrapbook?

That scrapbook had photographs in it, I seriously doubt it was the document that Jonas found. In fact, it couldn't be. She wouldn't be showing that document to Daniel; and if she were, Daniel wouldn't be so cozy with her (he'd know who she was).

Jonas didn't say that the scrapbook was full of people she'd killed.

I really think this is stretching, and I mean REALLY stretching.

No offense intended, but what you've said here just plain does not make sense to me, Lurker.

longlostposter wrote:So what you are saying, in essence, is that Alex assumes that Jonas equates "screwing over" people with killing his parents, whom he never mentions seeing in that scrapbook?

That scrapbook had photographs in it, I seriously doubt it was the document that Jonas found. In fact, it couldn't be. She wouldn't be showing that document to Daniel; and if she were, Daniel wouldn't be so cozy with her (he'd know who she was).

Jonas didn't say that the scrapbook was full of people she'd killed.

I really think this is stretching, and I mean REALLY stretching.

No offense intended, but what you've said here just plain does not make sense to me, Lurker.

No no no, you are getting the two scrap books confused. There was one in his aunts office, and it had newspaper clippings and all sorts of information about the people that were against the Order.

Libra wrote:

longlostposter wrote:So what you are saying, in essence, is that Alex assumes that Jonas equates "screwing over" people with killing his parents, whom he never mentions seeing in that scrapbook?

That scrapbook had photographs in it, I seriously doubt it was the document that Jonas found. In fact, it couldn't be. She wouldn't be showing that document to Daniel; and if she were, Daniel wouldn't be so cozy with her (he'd know who she was).

Jonas didn't say that the scrapbook was full of people she'd killed.

I really think this is stretching, and I mean REALLY stretching.

No offense intended, but what you've said here just plain does not make sense to me, Lurker.

No no no, you are getting the two scrap books confused. There was one in his aunts office, and it had newspaper clippings and all sorts of information about the people that were against the Order.

Oh, right, Libra, how did I forget that?

But it still doesn't make sense to me, because for her to assume that Jonas thought she killed his parents from his statement that the scrapbook was full of people she'd screwed over, is a huge leap on her part, practically non-sensical (but then she is an Orderite).

LOL Yeah I can see how it wouldn't make sense. Heres how I see it:

1. She could say "I" but she means the Order as a whole. Silly I know, she could have said we. But its a possibility.

2. Her betrayal lead to their "deaths". (I'll put this in quotes until we know for sure.) She is responsible because if she did not betray then they might have slipped past the Orders radar with their manuscript unharmed.