Continuity Problem by Hessian

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Continuity Problem

POSTED BY: HESSIAN
UPDATED: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 16:02
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3905
PAGE 1 of 1

Sunday, February 12, 2006 4:29 PM

I don't know if anyone has discussed this yet, but in the orignal pilot Serenity, Simon implies that he hired people to rescue River from the alliance. However, In the movie Serenity he is actually the main rescuer. What's up with that?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2006 5:19 PM

EMBERS

in the movie 'Serenity' you noticed the people who pulled up with the spaceship and lowered the platform? THEY were they people he hired.
They were the ones (probably) who told Simon the 'safe' word to put River to sleep if she went lethal, AND they were probably the ones who had the cryo box to put River in for further transport...

so personally I don't see any continuity problem,
in the first (pilot) episode of 'Firefly' Simon had to tell the story as convincingly and quickly as possible so he left out all the self-engrandizing details ... makes sense to me anyway.

Of course the difference is that I expect it all to fit, so I look for the things that make it work....

**********************************************
watch the R. Tam Session vids: http://www.hittarivertam.nu/
and buy the 'Serenity' comics published by Dark Horse
have you checked out this thread?:
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=15816

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2006 5:21 PM

THEONETRUEBIX

Joss has stated outright that he simply contradicted the series in order to write a dramatic opening.

However, he later said that he's adopted the popuular fanwank that in the series, Simon simply lied to the crew about how much he was involved in the rescue personally.

The basics of that fanwank are summarized here:

http://www.riverismadeofchocolate.com/spoilers/2005/Jul/21/no_contradi
ctions

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2006 5:28 PM

ROCKETJOCK

This subject's been discussed at length in more than one other thread, but I'm sure people will log in again to give you their two cents worth. Here's mine:

I see no real contradiction; Simon didn't give Mal & Company the whole story because he had no logical reason to; after all, he barely knew them at the time. And besides, Jayne would have taken the truth as bragging. He wasn't exactly overflowing with patience as it was...

For those who feel that the "James Bond" style of the escape was out of character for Simon, I tend to point to "Ariel", where Simon shows that he is both an excellent planner & a capable actor, at least within the society he was raised in. It's only out on the rim that he has a hard time. I call it the "Green Acres" effect.

I think, given time to adjust to the outsystem, and with watching out for River less of a full-time job, he will eventually develop a new persona -- something perhaps along the lines of the old TV version of Bat Masterson, a frontier gentleman, urbane and civilized, but able to cope with life on the raggedy edge. With style!

"Nothing gives life more zest, than running for your life." --Robert A. Heinlein

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2006 6:50 PM

SIGMANUNKI

Contradiction, yes there is.

Simon said that he paid people to get her out and get her to Persephone. That's where he picked her up and got on Serenity.

Thus contradiction.

The only way one doesn't see it is if one puts blinders on so that they don't see it. It is not a question of if a contradiction exists or not, it's a question of whether you allow yourself to see it, or stick with denial.

Also, see comment above about Joss saying that he was contradicting canon to make a better story.

If you doubt Serenity not being Firefly, watch the entire series, then the movie. Although things are similar, they are most definitely different. I just did it, so I know. Pissed me off it did. To stray so far from canon.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2006 7:16 PM

THEONETRUEBIX

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Pissed me off it did. To stray so far from canon.

The Simon bit is really the only place he strayed from canon, and that bit is addressed after the fact by the fanwank, which even Joss has adopted.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2006 8:07 PM

SIGMANUNKI

@theonetruebix:

Actually, Mal was off. People say that he was "darker". No he wasn't, he has was angier; an asshole.

Book had strayed as well. He was more harsh towards Mal, and let him know that he wasn't going to tell him about his past. But, in the show Book mentioned that he wanted to some day.

Kaylee was off too, though she was the least so. Her character had just become somewhat more vulgar (though only slightly so). Her dialog was also off for that character.

Jayne was purely a dumbass. Whereas on the show, he as made to be someone that could have been smart, but was just brought up to not be, nor what to be smart.

Wash was turned into a red-shirt, having no real part at all.

Zoe again different. Turned on the Captain way too harshly, showed that way too much emotion, etc.

Simon was way too aggessive for his character.

There was no indication that River was ever going to become some super weapon. Quite frankly, I find it more than lame that Joss did this; pathetic actually.

All in all, these are not the characters of the series. Also, this is not the universe that the series was set it. Even Serenity herself, was different, espeically archetecually.

This is not my Firefly.

If you doubt, then do what I've outlined above; watch the series, back to back in a short period, then watch the movie. They are different.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2006 8:18 PM

THEONETRUEBIX

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Actually, Mal was off. People say that he was "darker". No he wasn't, he has was angier; an asshole.

I didn't see anger. I saw distance and detachment -- fully explainable by the fact that two members of his makeshift family were off the ship, so why bother feeling connected to people any more?

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Book had strayed as well. He was more harsh towards Mal, and let him know that he wasn't going to tell him about his past. But, in the show Book mentioned that he wanted to some day.

I saw no harshness whatsoever from Book. On that one particular point, what he says to Mal (in response to "You'll have to tell me about that someday"), simply, is, "No I don't." That doesn't mean he wouldn't, someday. Doesn't even mean he didn't want to. Just meant what it said: He doesn't HAVE to tell Mal anything.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Kaylee was off too, though she was the least so. Her character had just become somewhat more vulgar (though only slightly so). Her dialog was also off for that character.

Off?

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Jayne was purely a dumbass. Whereas on the show, he as made to be someone that could have been smart, but was just brought up to not be, nor what to be smart.

He wasn't just a dumbass. In fact, he showed some degree of growth. Given what River accomplished in Objects In Space, for example, you don't see Jayne whinging about River being brought along for the trading station heist. He even complimented Simon on having done what he'd done for his sister (not the act of someone who is just a dumbass). Nor is his reaction to Miranda (e.g. his willingly signing onto Mal's crazy mission to get the signal out) the sign of purely a dumbass.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Wash was turned into a red-shirt, having no real part at all.

Except for being a bad-ass pilot who saves the entire crew, sure.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Zoe again different. Turned on the Captain way too harshly, showed that way too much emotion, etc.

She never "turns on" the Captain. She challenges him to justify what he did on Lilac. Perfectly in character with what Mal tells Wash in War Stories: That she absolutely questions his orders and his actions, just not usually in front of other people.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Simon was way too aggessive for his character.

Well, for one thing, Mal had just almost gotten his sister eaten by Reavers. And since you're the one who keeps sayig "go watch the series" as if no one but you has ever done so, go back and notice that almost everytime we see Simon get "aggressive" or go into man-of-action mode, it's because he's protecting River. It's entirely consistent.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
There was no indication that River was ever going to become some super weapon. Quite frankly, I find it more than lame that Joss did this; pathetic actually.

There was no indication of a lot of things in the series, given that it was cut short. But that said, the idea that there was "no indication" is laughable. Again returning to War Stories, did you forget she shot three people she barely even looked at, handling the gun without a second thought about it?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2006 9:39 PM

SIGMANUNKI

@theonetruebix:
I have no time to debate things that are obvious if you'd just watch the

show then the movie straight afterward. Do that, then come back and we'll talk.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2006 10:24 PM

GWEK

I have watched the series and the movie directly afterward, and while I'll agree that there are some continuity errors (most notably the rescue of River), most of the characterization we see is spot on.

Consider that "Serenity" is essentially 2 or 3 "episodes" in length. During that time, Whedon wouldn't necessarily showcase every one of the 9 member ensemble cast, and that's what we see here with characters like Zoe, Wash, Jayne, and Kaylee. They are perfectly in character, just not getting as much "screen time" as they did in the series AS A WHOLE.

Other characters (Book, Simon, River, Inara and Mal) have undergone evolution to get them to the point where they are. Yes, we may not have seen that evolution, but it's quite clear that much of Mal's darker side that we see is because he's lost the moral compass of Book and Inara.

It's also important to keep in mind that a movie is a different animal from a TV show, and, by it's nature, is generally going to be more intense. A lot of the characterization "issues" you see stem from that fact.

As for your so-called continuity errors, some are intentional (and admitted by Mister Whedon) as necessary for the change from TV show to movie, or because Fox owned the rights to certain ideas or characters.

I completely agree with you re: River's rescue, but you say that there's nothing in the series to set-up River as a living weapon. Clearly, you must not have watched the ENTIRE series, because I'm assuming you've skipped at least "War Stories" and "Objects in Space" to reach that conclusion.

Oh, and one last thing, if you're going to pose a question to folks, you might not want to be so rude when they answer.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2006 10:26 PM

GWEK

For the record, it should also be stated that the "darker" Mal in the movie is much closer to the guy we see in the pilot, which is what Whedon intended him to be. Fox told him to tone down Mal's anger and darkness for the series. When he did the movie, he was able to do things the way he wanted.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 12, 2006 11:37 PM

ASARIAN

Good post, THEONETRUEBIX! And I don't disagree on any particular point.

Your observations about River were spot-on. In War Stories she shot 3 guys with her eyes closed even! She just quickly made their position; then, 3 shots; then 3 dead guys, and River ... STILL with eyes closed! The cutie doesn't even bother to check the result! :)

Also, very early on in the series, in The Train Job, River suddenly blurs out (in sickbay): "Mid-bulk transport, Standard Radion Accelerator Core. Class code 03-k64, Firefly." This girl's got military training alright. :)

In Serenity, there are many short moments where you can tell the crew has become closer to one another. Like in Mal's "They won't see this coming!" speech, where Jayne slides his (beer?) bottle over to Simon. A significant "tell".

--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2006 12:08 AM

RCAT

I think the BDM was a condensed version of a few episodes (the completion of season 1?). To me, all the characters acted consistantly w/ the way they were (or were moving toward in the series). In some ep. of the BDS some of them got very little screen time according to their part in the story. Zoe is a good soldier (second in command), she never has a problem disagreeing w/ Mal but also wouldn't ever demean him in front of others. Wash in the pilot even defends his role in a heist (tho he's not the one grabbing the 'loot' directly). Jayne in the BDS is constantly surprising in his insight at one moment and stupity at the next. I think the movie just didn't have enough time for the story to unfold to show the characters properly (one of my arguments for a new series rather than movie sequels, tho' either would be welcome...sooner would be better :) ).

I hope she does the soup thing. It's always a hoot, and we don't all die from it.
-Wash

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2006 1:59 AM

DONCOAT

Sigmanunki, I wonder whether you've read the comic trilogy (now out as a combined trade paperback) that describes some events that occur between the series and the movie. It's rather helpful in bridging the emotional gap between the two formats.

It makes clear what is hinted at early in the movie: that things haven't been going too well for Mal & Co. in the interim. There have been costly failed jobs, Book and Inara have left the ship, and in general Mal is getting increasingly desperate.

That explains a lot of things, even some you didn't mention -- such as the fact that by the end of the series, Simon and River were becoming accepted as members of the crew, but at the start of the BDM that's no longer true.

In any case, I'm sorry that you seem so unhappy with the movie. Some fans do have a problem with it, and I think that's their loss -- and ours.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I don't disagree on any particular point.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2006 3:56 AM

CHRISTHECYNIC

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Contradiction, yes there is.

Simon said that he paid people to get her out and get her to Persephone. That's where he picked her up and got on Serenity.

No he didn't, watch it again and listen to EXACTLY what he says.

Whether or not it is a contradiction is another matter entirely, but he does not say he picked her up at Persephone. Never even implies it.

He does however imply other things that, if taken at face value, create a glaring contradiction.

Now if you want to say it is a contradiction that you only miss if you have blinders on I've got no problem. But don't reference stuff that never happened.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2006 1:32 PM

SIGMANUNKI

@all:
I have watch the entire series multiple times along with the movie. I see a startling number of contradictions, from history to character. They are there, period. Joss has admitted it. Hell my parents which have the attention span of a cronically depressed lemming noticed a good chunk of them.

The only arguments that I have seen that have come up reference things that have happened, but are removed from context, or are making large leaps where such leaps are not justified. The River being a weapon thing is a perfect example of the latter.

Yes, throughout the series she has displayed the abilities, crack shot, good at tactics and highly intuitive.

BUT these things, although lead somewhere, are no indication of the level that we saw in that movie. None what-so-ever.

If anything they lead to her being an assasin (which was mentioned in the show by the way). For those without a clue, an assasin goes in unnoticed (at least not noticed as an assasin)‚ does the job quietly, then leaves. If everything goes even remotely well, none is the wiser until the assasin is long gone.

Stealth, quickness, the ability to remove oneself from seemingly impossible situations, or get to (or into) a place that is seemingly impossible to do so. This is the assasin. This is the traits that she displayed.

Not some perfect warrior chick.

Now, this is the last that I will be saying on this topic. I participated in a number of threads just after the movie hit the theaters and have not the time nor the patience to deal with any more sophistry.

----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2006 1:42 PM

AGENTROUKA

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Now, this is the last that I will be saying on this topic. I participated in a number of threads just after the movie hit the theaters and have not the time nor the patience to deal with any more sophistry.

Whoa. Beware of anyone who doesn't see things your way, geez.

Personally, I felt the movie was a perfect, almost seamless continuation of the series. Perfectly fits with the emotional changes everyone would have gone through on the six months between show and movie.

Especially the tension between Mal and Simon is completely predictable.

And seriously, the continued shots of River in the series taking in unusually acrobatic positions, her dancing, her flexibility, everything... that sort of stuff is easy to unlearn if you don't do it for two years. River is in excellent physical condition and it's implied again and again on the show.

So, what you're doing is not take the "cold hard facts" as face value, you're seeing what you want to see and not seeing what you don't want to see and that's your "evidence". Which is... oh, did you use the word blinders before?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2006 2:05 PM

RHYIANAN

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:

Yes, throughout the series she has displayed the abilities, crack shot, good at tactics and highly intuitive.

BUT these things, although lead somewhere, are no indication of the level that we saw in that movie. None what-so-ever.

If anything they lead to her being an assasin (which was mentioned in the show by the way). For those without a clue, an assasin goes in unnoticed (at least not noticed as an assasin)‚ does the job quietly, then leaves. If everything goes even remotely well, none is the wiser until the assasin is long gone.

Stealth, quickness, the ability to remove oneself from seemingly impossible situations, or get to (or into) a place that is seemingly impossible to do so. This is the assasin. These are the traits that she displayed.

Yes, I'll agree she was trained as an assassin. However, she was conditioned to it, meaning that she'd be given a command and then she'd automatically do what the command said without ever thinking about it. The command that was given in the fruity oaty bar commercial was meant for her to get herself noticed so that she could be found.

Later when she escapes the pantry (or wherever they have her locked up) she displays all the qualities of an assassin to achieve her objective.

The only other scene I can think of that you might say she acted like a "warrior chick" is where she was fighting with the reavers. However, that seems to me that she's using her "ability to remove herself from a seemingly impossible situation"

Quote:

Now, this is the last that I will be saying on this topic. I participated in a number of threads just after the movie hit the theaters and have not the time nor the patience to deal with any more sophistry.

I truly don't care if you respond or not. I'm not trying to argue with you. Arguing with someone that is closed minded is like banging your head against a wall: useless and painful. I'm just posting my thoughts in case it might help someone else reading this and to see if I'm alone in my view or not.

Wash: Yeah, but psychic? That sounds like science fiction.
Zoe: You live on a spaceship, dear.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 13, 2006 2:18 PM

HERA

Quote:
Originally posted by GWEK:
. . . some are intentional (and admitted by Mister Whedon) as necessary for the change from TV show to movie, or because Fox owned the rights to certain ideas or characters.

Please tell me that this is not the case? That there is no way FOX could own Joss's characters or ideas? It's bad enough they own the rights to the series on DVD.

Please God, make me a stone.

"Wanna?" – Mal to Kaylee, Out of Gas

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 14, 2006 5:00 AM

ASARIAN

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:

Contradiction, yes there is.

Simon said that he paid people to get her out and get her to Persephone. That's where he picked her up and got on Serenity.

Thus contradiction.

Persephone? Nah. In a shooting script there is a bit of extra dialogue, not actually in the Serenity pilot on the DVD:

-----------------------------------------

SIMON
... I was
contacted by some men, some
underground movement. They said she
was in danger, that the government
was playing with her brain. If I
funded them they could sneak her out
in cryo. Get her to Boros and from
there, I could take her... wherever.

MAL
How did you know it wasn't a scam?

SIMON
I didn't. Until you opened that box.

INARA
Will she be all right?

SIMON
She was supposed to reacclimate
before I brought her out, she's in
physical shock, but not serious. I
don't know if she'll be all right.
I don't know what they did to her, or
why. I just have to keep her safe.
(to Mal)
You asked me what a man like me would
kill for. And she's it.
-----------------------------------------

This entire convo (with the exception of a few lines) does not really appear in the actual Serenity pilot. So, Boros? Maybe. But Persephone? No.

The script we finally got, btw, is better, IMHO.

--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 14, 2006 5:12 AM

ASARIAN

Quote:
Originally posted by Rhyianan:

The command that was given in the fruity oaty bar commercial was meant for her to get herself noticed so that she could be found.

Now this is probably the most sensible thing I've heard in this thread! :) It starts with the Operative:

"Young miss, I'll need all the logs on behavioral modification triggers. We'll have to reach out to River Tam, and help her to come back to us."

And then, of course, is repeated and confirmed by Mr. Universe:

"It's a subliminal message, broadwaved to trigger her. I've been seeing this code pop up all over, the last few weeks. It's Alliance and it's high military. They have gone to enormous trouble to find your little friend."

Thank you for your post, Rhyianan. :)

--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 14, 2006 6:11 AM

AMITON

I wouldn't get too worked up about SigmaNuki =) Generally people with the close-minded, hardline opinion ended up there exactly because they apply the same close-minded editorialism (eg. blinders is another common term) to what they see as to what they hear and read.

Most of us are able to descern the depth of character and attention to detail that Joss Whedon wrote into Firefly. It's his way, and he didn't abandon it for Serenity.

I do get a chuckle out of the vitriolic passion attacking Joss Whedon for diverging from his own story and admitting as much. The only admission that Joss made was that he had to make some changes for the movie medium to work - for purposes of exposition. He never said he changed characters, and the only blatant divergence from canon he said existed was the way he intended Simon's story to play out. But wait -- JOSS now accepts it as canon, and why? Because it works in the 'verse.

The complaints about what Joss changed about the story? Well...the characters are still the characters he wrote, the script is still the script that he wrote, and, oh, the story; there's another quote from Joss that deals with how all of this is all out of character for everyone, and to paraphrase, it states "Serenity is pretty much the course that I had plotted for the almost the entirety of season two from the beginning, just compacted into a two hour format."

Wow...if you're pissed off about how rediculous things are in the movie and how they never would have happened in the series were it to continue, then I can only imagine how you would have reacted when it *did* happen with the series still running.

*sigh*
Amiton.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 14, 2006 7:30 AM

PRACCHIA

I knew about this show when it aired and heard it was going to get cancelled and did not want to watch it for that reason. I recently watched Serenity, and thought it was a good movie, not great but good. So with Arrested Development off (FOX!) and still waiting for the 2nd season of Dr Who to start, I decided to check out Firefly. I have not noticed anything drastically off about anything so far. And I have watched in order, Serenity, and the first 5 episodes of Firefly. I think this is/was a great show, and I am already regretting starting the series knowing it will be ending quickly in only 9 more episodes. But perhaps it can come back again sometime, Battlestar Galactica did. Farscape gave us Peacekeeper Wars. Lexx, well that show I think ended nicely.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 14, 2006 7:39 AM

STORYMARK

A lot of the complaining I have seen/heard about the changes to the characters come from people who don't think characters or relationships should ever develop (which is unrealistic). They also seem to be people unfamilliar with Joss' other work, where he constantly evolves, or kills, his characters.

If you want characters who never, ever change, who remain exactly the same week to week, go watch Star Trek (which I enjoy, but on a far different level).

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 14, 2006 4:02 PM

MISBEHAVIN

Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
...Personally, I felt the movie was a perfect, almost seamless continuation of the series. Perfectly fits with the emotional changes everyone would have gone through on the six months between show and movie...

Exactly. I saw the movie first and loved the characters and story. Then I watched the series in the proper order and -already knowing the end- was interested to see Joss laying the foundation for future developments in the story and River as the episodes progressed. It's very clear to me that the series was constantly moving us toward the ultimate destination that became the movie. Joss wanted the series to last for years, but he instead had to fast-forward us and squeeze the culmination into 2 hours.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 14, 2006 4:02 PM

MISBEHAVIN

Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
...Personally, I felt the movie was a perfect, almost seamless continuation of the series. Perfectly fits with the emotional changes everyone would have gone through on the six months between show and movie...

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE