Editing Talk:Season two timeline discontinuity/Archive 1
Discussion page of Season two timeline discontinuity/Archive 1
More actions
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
:*Lee nags Tyrol about Viper 289, leading him to come up with the idea for the Blackbird. | :*Lee nags Tyrol about Viper 289, leading him to come up with the idea for the Blackbird. | ||
:*Tyrol starts the Blackbird project | :*Tyrol starts the Blackbird project | ||
:Still, all the construction work on the blackbird takes place after Roslin's diagnosis. I can see fudging a week here at the outside, but nothing more than that. Anyone else have thoughts? --[[User: | :Still, all the construction work on the blackbird takes place after Roslin's diagnosis. I can see fudging a week here at the outside, but nothing more than that. Anyone else have thoughts? --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 21:44, 4 March 2006 (CST) | ||
::There's always the "different scenes do not take place concurrently" explanation. --[[User:Redwall|Redwall]] 22:27, 4 March 2006 (CST) | ::There's always the "different scenes do not take place concurrently" explanation. --[[User:Redwall|Redwall]] 22:27, 4 March 2006 (CST) | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
:In either case, this page and the timeline need to be re-edited as several of the statements made are based on the faulty premise that Roslins final diagnosis was before Cally's release. Given that this is not the case I think that the discussion on these pages needs to be changed. I would suggest that the timeline is kept fairly clear of discussion and this page state the facts and discussion for or against and then let the reader decide --[[User:Rexpop|Rexpop]] 12:51, 5 March 2006 (CST) | :In either case, this page and the timeline need to be re-edited as several of the statements made are based on the faulty premise that Roslins final diagnosis was before Cally's release. Given that this is not the case I think that the discussion on these pages needs to be changed. I would suggest that the timeline is kept fairly clear of discussion and this page state the facts and discussion for or against and then let the reader decide --[[User:Rexpop|Rexpop]] 12:51, 5 March 2006 (CST) | ||
::I think Tyrol's work on [[Viper 289]] argues against this very strongly. We first see him inspect the craft and label it defunct prior to Cally's release. Apollo speaks to him about it, and he starts work on the Blackbird that night. I really don't think the amount of work accomplished on the Blackbird between that event (which was a few days after day 84 at most) and the airframe we see after Roslin's diagnosis can be stretched over two months. --[[User: | ::I think Tyrol's work on [[Viper 289]] argues against this very strongly. We first see him inspect the craft and label it defunct prior to Cally's release. Apollo speaks to him about it, and he starts work on the Blackbird that night. I really don't think the amount of work accomplished on the Blackbird between that event (which was a few days after day 84 at most) and the airframe we see after Roslin's diagnosis can be stretched over two months. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 13:13, 5 March 2006 (CST) | ||
:::I don't know how long it would take to build a spacecraft so don't have an accurate estimate. I suspect that it would be the same as building a modern fighter aircraft. Looking at Google I have one [http://www.iiss.org/confPress-more.php?confID=731 article] (last paragraph) claiming it takes 2 years to build one F-15. Keep in mind that Tyrol is working on the Blackbird in his spare time so probably can only spend a few hours of a day working on it. Given these two facts I don't see 2 months being too outlandish. --[[User:Rexpop|Rexpop]] 13:42, 5 March 2006 (CST) | :::I don't know how long it would take to build a spacecraft so don't have an accurate estimate. I suspect that it would be the same as building a modern fighter aircraft. Looking at Google I have one [http://www.iiss.org/confPress-more.php?confID=731 article] (last paragraph) claiming it takes 2 years to build one F-15. Keep in mind that Tyrol is working on the Blackbird in his spare time so probably can only spend a few hours of a day working on it. Given these two facts I don't see 2 months being too outlandish. --[[User:Rexpop|Rexpop]] 13:42, 5 March 2006 (CST) | ||
::::It's not outlandish at all, but what I'm trying to say is that it just doesn't fit with what we've been shown. The majority of the Blackbird's construction takes place after Roslin's diagnosis, thus, within the span of about three weeks. It seems implausible to argue that the earlier stages of construction took over twice that long. --[[User: | ::::It's not outlandish at all, but what I'm trying to say is that it just doesn't fit with what we've been shown. The majority of the Blackbird's construction takes place after Roslin's diagnosis, thus, within the span of about three weeks. It seems implausible to argue that the earlier stages of construction took over twice that long. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 13:47, 5 March 2006 (CST) | ||
:::::Remember that after Roslin's diagnosis several people started helping Tyrol with the work, the key scene being when one of the engineers helped Tyrol with fitting the wing (which he was having trouble doing by himself). At this point the shot shows the airframe being complete, with cabling and electronics fitted to it some places. After this point the remainder of the deck crew start working on the ship with Tyrol, so its likely that work after the diagnosis moved far quicker than before because more people were working on the project. So I don't think its implausible to argue that with more hands and more time spent, the quicker the project would be completed. --[[User:Rexpop|Rexpop]] 14:07, 5 March 2006 (CST) | :::::Remember that after Roslin's diagnosis several people started helping Tyrol with the work, the key scene being when one of the engineers helped Tyrol with fitting the wing (which he was having trouble doing by himself). At this point the shot shows the airframe being complete, with cabling and electronics fitted to it some places. After this point the remainder of the deck crew start working on the ship with Tyrol, so its likely that work after the diagnosis moved far quicker than before because more people were working on the project. So I don't think its implausible to argue that with more hands and more time spent, the quicker the project would be completed. --[[User:Rexpop|Rexpop]] 14:07, 5 March 2006 (CST) | ||
::Also, note that if we do "delay" "Flight of the Phoenix" to match up with "Epiphanies", we have to explain Boomer's pregnancy advancing by about two months within the span of a week. --[[User: | ::Also, note that if we do "delay" "Flight of the Phoenix" to match up with "Epiphanies", we have to explain Boomer's pregnancy advancing by about two months within the span of a week. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 13:21, 5 March 2006 (CST) | ||
:::I'm willing to write this one off as one of the side effects of working with an actress who isn't really pregnant and the production staff trying to keep costs down by not wanting to invest money into more than one prosthetic. Many shows get this wrong so its not an uncommon mistake. --[[User:Rexpop|Rexpop]] 13:42, 5 March 2006 (CST) | :::I'm willing to write this one off as one of the side effects of working with an actress who isn't really pregnant and the production staff trying to keep costs down by not wanting to invest money into more than one prosthetic. Many shows get this wrong so its not an uncommon mistake. --[[User:Rexpop|Rexpop]] 13:42, 5 March 2006 (CST) | ||
::::I'm not. There's plenty of other evidence to indicate that they simply lost track. Sharon is still doing ''sit-ups'' in "Pegasus". By "Epiphanies", she's quite... heavy with child. --[[User: | ::::I'm not. There's plenty of other evidence to indicate that they simply lost track. Sharon is still doing ''sit-ups'' in "Pegasus". By "Epiphanies", she's quite... heavy with child. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 13:46, 5 March 2006 (CST) | ||
:::::I'm not arguing that there haven't been production screw ups with the timeline. It happens all the time on TV shows. What I am arguing is that the discontinuity isn't as great as is being made out and in some cases can be accounted for (to a certain degree). --[[User:Rexpop|Rexpop]] 14:07, 5 March 2006 (CST) | :::::I'm not arguing that there haven't been production screw ups with the timeline. It happens all the time on TV shows. What I am arguing is that the discontinuity isn't as great as is being made out and in some cases can be accounted for (to a certain degree). --[[User:Rexpop|Rexpop]] 14:07, 5 March 2006 (CST) | ||
| Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
:*Elections delayed by two months (consistantly predicted to be around month 7 in season 1, actually depicted around month 9) | :*Elections delayed by two months (consistantly predicted to be around month 7 in season 1, actually depicted around month 9) | ||
:*In ''Pegasus'', when Sharon is raped, she is not visibly pregnant (consistant with the first half of the season). In "Resurrection Ship", we learn that it is six months post-holocaust and that she should be five months pregnant. | :*In ''Pegasus'', when Sharon is raped, she is not visibly pregnant (consistant with the first half of the season). In "Resurrection Ship", we learn that it is six months post-holocaust and that she should be five months pregnant. | ||
:Lastly, to simply suppose that Cottle was somehow "wrong" in the diagnosis he gave in "Flight of the Phoenix" is outright fanwankery. The show takes itself seriously and invites a close reading. If it can't stand up to that level of scrutiny, we shouldn't invent explanations in an attempt to let it off the hook. --[[User: | :Lastly, to simply suppose that Cottle was somehow "wrong" in the diagnosis he gave in "Flight of the Phoenix" is outright fanwankery. The show takes itself seriously and invites a close reading. If it can't stand up to that level of scrutiny, we shouldn't invent explanations in an attempt to let it off the hook. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 15:41, 27 December 2006 (CST) | ||
:: I believe that with a little thought these problems are not so big. As to the election and the diagnosis, I don't think it is that big and issue. As I said, given the the reasons I gave, the near civil war the influx of new people, I don't think it is that so out ragious that the election was postponed for two months. As for Doctor Cottle's diagnosis of Roslin's cancer, I didn't say that Cottle was so much wrong as that Roslin beat the odds a little. Again, this sort of thing happens in real life. It is no reflection on Dr. Cottle's competancy that Roslin got a bonus one or two months to live. It does happen in real life. It happens the other way too and you kick sooner than the doctor thought you would. I just don't think it is that big an issue that she didn't drop dead on schedule. | :: I believe that with a little thought these problems are not so big. As to the election and the diagnosis, I don't think it is that big and issue. As I said, given the the reasons I gave, the near civil war the influx of new people, I don't think it is that so out ragious that the election was postponed for two months. As for Doctor Cottle's diagnosis of Roslin's cancer, I didn't say that Cottle was so much wrong as that Roslin beat the odds a little. Again, this sort of thing happens in real life. It is no reflection on Dr. Cottle's competancy that Roslin got a bonus one or two months to live. It does happen in real life. It happens the other way too and you kick sooner than the doctor thought you would. I just don't think it is that big an issue that she didn't drop dead on schedule. | ||
| Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
:While I think that the issue isn't nearly as big as its made out to be, it's nonetheless there. Sure, the missing time can be accounted for, but contradictions are is still there. Sharon's pregnancy progression is a more practical error, but the election and Roslin's diagnosis could have been adressed in dialogue. | :While I think that the issue isn't nearly as big as its made out to be, it's nonetheless there. Sure, the missing time can be accounted for, but contradictions are is still there. Sharon's pregnancy progression is a more practical error, but the election and Roslin's diagnosis could have been adressed in dialogue. | ||
::Could had been address in dialogue, but there was no real need. As to Athena's prenancy, see my response to | ::Could had been address in dialogue, but there was no real need. As to Athena's prenancy, see my response to Peter Farago. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST) | ||
:Personally, it doesn't affect my ejoyment of the show, but when I think about it, it's a bit weird that stuff like this happens --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 15:52, 27 December 2006 (CST) | :Personally, it doesn't affect my ejoyment of the show, but when I think about it, it's a bit weird that stuff like this happens --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 15:52, 27 December 2006 (CST) | ||
::I don't think it is weird at all. There is nothing to contradict. Even Athena's quirky pregnancy has a very viable explaination given what we have seen. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST) | ::I don't think it is weird at all. There is nothing to contradict. Even Athena's quirky pregnancy has a very viable explaination given what we have seen. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST) | ||
| Line 91: | Line 91: | ||
::To note maybe, but not so important, except that in the case of Hera, it is an insight on Cylon/Human admixture. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST) | ::To note maybe, but not so important, except that in the case of Hera, it is an insight on Cylon/Human admixture. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST) | ||
:::Hunter, just because you ''can'' fanwank doesn't mean you should. If you want to indulge the showrunner's sloppiness by inventing ridiculous explanations, you can feel free to do so privately, but do not attempt to propagate it as fact, or use it to supplant the meaningful analysis we have painstakingly assembled here. --[[User: | :::Hunter, just because you ''can'' fanwank doesn't mean you should. If you want to indulge the showrunner's sloppiness by inventing ridiculous explanations, you can feel free to do so privately, but do not attempt to propagate it as fact, or use it to supplant the meaningful analysis we have painstakingly assembled here. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 05:49, 28 December 2006 (CST) | ||
::::First of all, point to any time in my arguments that I present my explanations as fact. Just once. What I did was use plausible in show and real life arguments as to what could had happened and why these discontinuities are not as serious as they are made out to be or even necessarily discontinuities, especially when it comes to Roslin's dire diagnosis and the postponements of the elections. As to the issue of the pregnancy, I used a real life argument but I used mostly in show explanations. Do you deny the visual record of Hera's constant under development? It has been consistent hasn't it? Many people have complained about it. I just point out that it has been too consistent to be chalked up to sloppiness or laziness on the part of the production staff and it is deliberate on their part for a reason. I merely extended that phenomena pre-nataly as well as post-nataly. Anyway, it seems that some don't want to discuss the merits of my arguments. RDM has said that he will not explain every thing explicitly and will rely on the intelligence of the audience to deduce things. I just made the attempt. And here I thought this was a discussion board. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 10:07, 28 December 2006 (CST) | ::::First of all, point to any time in my arguments that I present my explanations as fact. Just once. What I did was use plausible in show and real life arguments as to what could had happened and why these discontinuities are not as serious as they are made out to be or even necessarily discontinuities, especially when it comes to Roslin's dire diagnosis and the postponements of the elections. As to the issue of the pregnancy, I used a real life argument but I used mostly in show explanations. Do you deny the visual record of Hera's constant under development? It has been consistent hasn't it? Many people have complained about it. I just point out that it has been too consistent to be chalked up to sloppiness or laziness on the part of the production staff and it is deliberate on their part for a reason. I merely extended that phenomena pre-nataly as well as post-nataly. Anyway, it seems that some don't want to discuss the merits of my arguments. RDM has said that he will not explain every thing explicitly and will rely on the intelligence of the audience to deduce things. I just made the attempt. And here I thought this was a discussion board. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 10:07, 28 December 2006 (CST) | ||