Investigating the Death of 'Agent Dubson' by TheSomnambulist

Quote:
JK- it all comes down to the individual. I hate that Wash died, but I still love Serenity. I can see why those that wanted Wash to live, for emotional, or storytelling reasons have their opinions. And mostly, I respect them. But it's Joss' 'Verse.

Yeah, I know.

In the very least, there seems to be a Someone To Remember Him By plot development coming out of this, but I'd really have liked to see the baby question have a longer run, and for something surprising to come out of Wash's backstory before he was killed. Alliance pilot who flew a few missions in the war, maybe? Oh well.

I'm almost wondering if Float Out was suggesting Wash once flew as a pilot for the Blue Sun Corporation! Now that could have some posthumous ramifications.

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 7:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:

Blah. Just bothers me, you see.

Yeah,
I used to call it "The Shakespeare Syndrome."
If you need to give meaning to your story, kill off people.
And in lesser works, I still find it annoying.
But Joss doesn't just go, "Let's kill ___!"
He feels the pain. I hear tell he actually cried as he wrote Wash's death.

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 8:00 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I see people are going to continue trying to mischaracterize me as "trying to tell Joss what to do" rather than me just trying to have a discussion about the effectiveness of Wash's death.

Uh, there have been plenty of points made as to why people think it works, and very few have anything to do with telling Joss what to do.

You seem a wee bit disingenuous there.

Quote:
Also that the battlelines are being drawn with the true Joss fans amassing to attack the evil heretic. I suppose it is definitely time to agree to disagree.

Um.... okay. I'd say you are imagining things, but whatever.

"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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 8:04 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:

It's just kind of a pet peeve trope of mine, you know, "Anyone Can Die! - under a series of conspired circumstances where they could in fact either live or die and which one or two of them dying probably won't have any effect on the outcome."

How is that different than "Everyone lives, even though they're being pursued by ruthless, virtually unstoppable killers on two sides, where logically, they'd be lucky if ANY of them lived, and not dying has no effect on the greater storyline".

I still don't see how it's any more than emotional. You didn't want him to die, cool.

but his dying did serve a story purpose, even if you didn't care for it. His living, would have served no direct story purpose, other than to not make some folks sad.

"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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 8:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
logically, they'd be lucky if ANY of them lived,

Well, Jayne might have...

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 8:20 AM

ZEEK

Quote:
Originally posted by two:
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
We are not discussing Joss Whedon's skill, he clearly has it, and I, at least, am not arguing that Joss Whedon should compromise his artistic vision and principles by being less angsty. I am discussing specifically whether Wash's death at this point was useful in terms of the storyline. Seeing as Joss Whedon has indirectly indicated he would like to keep writing stories where Wash is still around... *shrug* It doesn't seem like it to me.
I've got to be rude about Joss' skill in setting a scene.

Nobody noticed since we've never been shot by a firing squad, but Wash's death was random bullshit because Wash was looking straight out the window at the Reaver ship. He could see the projectile coming! The Reaver ship was big as a house and in his face! How could Wash not see!? Because Joss wouldn't let him look.

In the mechanics of Wash's death, it's obvious Joss just did not think it through. Quick fix: turn Serenity sideways to the Reavers then Wash couldn't see death coming straight at his head. Serenity was computer graphics - Joss could do it, if he had planned ahead. I guess that Joss thinks it is sufficient to place the movie camera where only the audience can't see the Reavers.

The Reavers were aiming at him and firing a projectile with no course correcting capabilities. It pretty much had to be a straight shot. If Wash couldn't see them then they couldn't see Wash and it would have been a random shot that just happened to hit the pilot dead in the chest. That seems much worse than just having Wash strapped in and unable to react in time.

Basically I think by the time the shot was fired it was too late. I think he turned his head anyway IIRC. He probably didn't even see the shot.

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 8:29 AM

And he was distracted. Having just performed the most difficult landing ever, he likely wasn't instantly looking for the next threat - and was indeed patting himself on the back when the shot happened.

"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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 8:34 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
The Reavers were aiming at him and firing a projectile with no course correcting capabilities. It pretty much had to be a straight shot. If Wash couldn't see them then they couldn't see Wash and it would have been a random shot that just happened to hit the pilot dead in the chest. That seems much worse than just having Wash strapped in and unable to react in time.

Basically I think by the time the shot was fired it was too late. I think he turned his head anyway IIRC. He probably didn't even see the shot.

There was 3 pairs of eyes in the cockpit, all facing the Reavers. Wash not seeing? Okay, have it your way. Mal or Zoe could have seen the Reavers if only Joss hadn't made them blind to what was happening outside the window. If the Reaver's wooden projectile can get into the window then Zoe or Mal can see it coming. Unless you assume the projectile made a 90 degree turn in mid-air and seemed to come out of nowhere.

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 8:53 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:
Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
The Reavers were aiming at him and firing a projectile with no course correcting capabilities. It pretty much had to be a straight shot. If Wash couldn't see them then they couldn't see Wash and it would have been a random shot that just happened to hit the pilot dead in the chest. That seems much worse than just having Wash strapped in and unable to react in time.

Basically I think by the time the shot was fired it was too late. I think he turned his head anyway IIRC. He probably didn't even see the shot.
There was 3 pairs of eyes in the cockpit, all facing the Reavers. Wash not seeing? Okay, have it your way. Mal or Zoe could have seen the Reavers if only Joss hadn't made them blind to what was happening outside the window. If the Reaver's wooden projectile can get into the window then Zoe or Mal can see it coming. Unless you assume the projectile made a 90 degree turn in mid-air and seemed to come out of nowhere.

Just rewatched the scene to check, not only are none of them facing the window/Reavers as you say (Wash looking downward, then behind, Mal and Zoe looking at each other and Wash - none of them looking out the window), they are IN THE DARK. They were inside that larger hanger, with no lights on. So, not only was no one paying attention, it was hard to see. And the log comes in, a wee bit fast.

And the log/spike/whatever comes in from a distinctly UPWARD angle, thus indicating that the Reaver ship was above, and not directly in front as some want to claim.

So sure, they could have maybe seen it, if they hadn't been slightly distracted by almost crashing to death, had better lighting, knew exactly when to look, where to look, and had the Reaver ship had running lights (because as we know, they're all about safety).

"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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 8:55 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

Uh, there have been plenty of points made as to why people think it works, and very few have anything to do with telling Joss what to do.

You seem a wee bit disingenuous there.

Actually, twice now people have reminded me that "it's Joss' story." I don't need the reminder, and I'm fine with Joss doing what he wants to. It's possible on a public forum to have a conversation with more than one person, meaning, that wasn't directed at you, or I would have quoted you.

Thanks for the disingenuous comment, though.

Quote:

Um.... okay. I'd say you are imagining things, but whatever.

Yeah, because calling me disingenuous over a conversation about the use of death in literature and film is entirely deserved.

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 8:59 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:

Actually, twice now people have reminded me that "it's Joss' story." Really. I don't need the reminder, and I'm fine with Joss doing what he wants to.

Thanks for the disingenuous comment, though. It's remarkably illustrative.

I didn't say NO ONE made that point, just that there had been plenty of others made, which you want to ignore and attribute it all to one, simply dismissed point.

That's the disingenuous part. Saying it's all about one thing, when that is quite obviously not the case. And now "correcting" me that people did say it, when I never disputed that notion. Dong ma?

Quote:

Yeah, because calling me disingenuous over a conversation about the use of death in literature and film is entirely deserved.

It is, when you pretend that it is the only point that's been made, and dismiss the others.

Actually discussing those other points would be that discussion you claim to want.

"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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:01 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
logically, they'd be lucky if ANY of them lived,

Well, Jayne might have...

*SNORT*

Nice one Chris! I chuckled at that

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:09 AM

Quote:
I still don't see how it's any more than emotional. You didn't want him to die, cool.

but his dying did serve a story purpose, even if you didn't care for it.

His living, would have served no direct story purpose, other than to not make some folks sad.

Again with the strawmanning. No. It's not emotional, it's not because I wanted a happy ending with no sadness, because hey, BOOK DIED, and I defended that. I just told you I don't particularly care about Wash as a character, which you ignored.

My dislike of the use of the Anyone Can Die trope is broader than this one case, but in this case I have two specific objections.

1) It seems like Joss Whedon is having trouble writing more Firefly because he now regrets killing Wash off.

Wash living has a direct storytelling result in that Joss Whedon still has an Author Avatar character and would want to keep writing Firefly.

2) Wash dying did not have a story purpose, it did not further the story line in any way, as it wasn't part of any sort of plot development. It did potentially have an effect on the MOOD OF THE SCENE, but at the possible detriment of the further storyline (see #1 above).

The effect on the mood for some people (myself) however, was minimal, which made the sacrifice of further storylines not worth it. Arguably, even if the mood had been sufficiently affected, the sacrifice would STILL not be worth it.

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:10 AM

ZEEK

Quote:
Originally posted by two:
Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
The Reavers were aiming at him and firing a projectile with no course correcting capabilities. It pretty much had to be a straight shot. If Wash couldn't see them then they couldn't see Wash and it would have been a random shot that just happened to hit the pilot dead in the chest. That seems much worse than just having Wash strapped in and unable to react in time.

Basically I think by the time the shot was fired it was too late. I think he turned his head anyway IIRC. He probably didn't even see the shot.
There was 3 pairs of eyes in the cockpit, all facing the Reavers. Wash not seeing? Okay, have it your way. Mal or Zoe could have seen the Reavers if only Joss hadn't made them blind to what was happening outside the window. If the Reaver's wooden projectile can get into the window then Zoe or Mal can see it coming. Unless you assume the projectile made a 90 degree turn in mid-air and seemed to come out of nowhere.

No I'm talking about having the Reaver ship off to the side. That wouldn't make sense because then the Reavers wouldn't be able to see Wash. They have to be able to see each other or there wouldn't be an attack. The Reavers are aiming at Wash. Not just a lucky pot shot.

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:13 AM

Hey it's interesting the way this debate has gone, but I wish folk wouldn't become so aggrivated at each other. Fact is we're all here for a little jibber-jabber and a healthy dose of Firefly re-living and that's what's been going on. Pats on
the back all round for having some nifty thoughts on the subject.
I love the fact we all see this wonderful show called FIREFLY from different points of view. Means it's a great deal broader than I ever thought and possibly broader than some of you thought... So that has to be good... Right?

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:14 AM

Quote:
I didn't say NO ONE made that point, just that there had been plenty of others made, which you want to ignore and attribute it all to one, simply dismissed point.

I never made it about that one point! YOU DID!

I've been responding to everyone's arguments here, responses which you've been ignoring, all while dismissing MY points with repeated accusations of me being childish and immature. Don't you think I realize what you're really saying when you suggest that I just don't appreciate an in-story death because I want a happy ending? I do get the implication.

Quote:
It is, when you pretend that it is the only point that's been made, and dismiss the others.

I DIDN'T. :( You write a short post snarking at me, in response to a post that WASN'T directed at you (but was also snark - Sorry Chris), and then when I address the points in that post (while I've been addressing other points elsewhere) you accuse me of this?

Bad form.

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:28 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Wash dying did not have a story purpose, it did not further the story line in any way,

Byte, I just don't agree. It served the story in that it reminded us that our BDH's aren't impervious. It was unexpected, like a roadside bomb in Iraq. It was a little bit of reality in a fantasy environment. Like Story said, logically, NO ONE should have survived. I'm just glad that as many that DID, did.

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Quote:
I didn't say NO ONE made that point, just that there had been plenty of others made, which you want to ignore and attribute it all to one, simply dismissed point.

I never made it about that one point! YOU DID!

I made it all about one point.... by pointing out there were others.

Ooooh......kay.

Quote:
I've been responding to everyone's arguments here, responses which you've been ignoring, all while dismissing MY points with repeated accusations of me being childish and immature. Don't you think I realize what you're really saying when you suggest that I just don't appreciate an in-story death because I want a happy ending? I do get the gorramn implication.

As I've said, I see nothing that doesn't boil down to "I didn't want him to die". I've explained my rationale, and asked for yours. Grr, mean old me.

Quote:

I DIDN'T. :( You write a short post snarking at me, in response to a post that WASN'T directed at you (but was also snark - Sorry Chris), and then when I address the points in that post (while I've been addressing other points elsewhere) you accuse me of this?

Bad form.

Gee, sorry for joining a conversation.

But I don't see how you've really addressed the points, other than to say, over and over, that the death of a character serves no purpose, and there was no heightened tension. Which may be true for you, but is not universal, and thus doesn't address how it bad storytelling - it just speaks to how it's not the story YOU wanted to see. Sorry is my drawing such distinctions is so upsetting.

You keep saying it didn't further the story, that it was unnecessary, etc - but you don't get into the WHY, as the rest of us have. Which is why your arguments come off as grounded in emotion. And that's cool. If you just hate the scene because you're pissed he killed Wash - FINE. But own it.

Or, if you have stronger reasoning, share it. But don't act like you're getting beat up on because your say-so isn't compelling for the rest of us.

"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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:31 AM

Originally posted by Bytemite:

Quote:
Agreed, however, I don't think the movie Serenity was the story he wanted to tell. He wanted to tell a 7-year series, where secrets about Wash and Book would have come out before they died (and they would have, I have enough faith in Joss to acknowledge he probably did plan to kill them).

Compressed into the time frame of the movie, Joss didn't get to tell us things about the characters he wanted to. He was trying to wrap things up, and in the end he did something that it now seems like he regrets, but can't admit he regrets because of artistic integrity.

I'm not sure where I saw it but I do recall an interview with Joss where he comments that he basically put everything into Serenity because artistically you have to. You can't design it with a follow up in mind because it will tarnish the product. That said the world of art is full of artists who are constantly at odds with what they have produced. I think's it's just the rub of being creative. I'm sure he does have regrets about Serenity, but he has made the product and it would have been with him for some time, and it was obviously the tale he wanted to tell at the time, and I'm inclined to respect that.

I personally am unaffected by the death of Wash and Book (in the longterm) because for me it made the last act that much more tense, and there by design helped the film. I went in seeing SERENITY with a sense that Joss was probably not going to get a chance to do the seven season arc he wanted with Firefly and therefore what I was watching there and then with the film was Joss giving it everything - At one point I honestly thought they might all die! Except River because she was the reason for the endeavour. But that last act... Well it had me. It had me all the way to the credits and Wash and Books death allowed that. Otherwise I think I would have thought a great deal less of the film.

Quote:
The movie was just not the most optimal setting to tell the story Joss wanted to tell.

Possibly not. Difficult to contest that, to a certian extent as the characters were designed around a TV show, but I felt it flowed very well cinematically, and the two hour format was filled with plenty of content and only a little contrivance.

Bytemite - you and I have had a fair few healthy exchanges regarding Firefly in the past and I'd like to think we'll go on having many more and always with a healthy dose of mutual respcect. I hope you're not sore at my points. I direct none of them with hostility.

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
(but was also snark - Sorry Chris)

No, I'M sorry, my post was a little full of itself.
I apologize.

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:35 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
At one point I honestly thought they might all die!

I'm not ashamed to say I had a couple of tears running down my face feeling like it was the end for all of them...*sniff*
Except, y'know, Jayne.

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:36 AM

Quote:
I made it all about one point.... by pointing out there were others.

You made the accusation I was dismissing all other valid viewpoints and not addressing the arguments so I could claim some sort of I Win button.

You've called me disingenuous, and childish, and immature. I'm going to defend myself. That's how a forum works.

Quote:
As I've said, I see nothing that doesn't boil down to "I didn't want him to die".

Quote:
My dislike of the use of the Anyone Can Die trope is broader than this one case, but in this case I have two specific objections.

1) It seems like Joss Whedon is having trouble writing more Firefly because he now regrets killing Wash off.

Wash living has a direct storytelling result in that Joss Whedon still has an Author Avatar character and would want to keep writing Firefly.

2) Wash dying did not have a story purpose, it did not further the story line in any way, as it wasn't part of any sort of plot development. It did potentially have an effect on the MOOD OF THE SCENE, but at the possible detriment of the further storyline (see #1 above).

The effect on the mood for some people (myself) however, was minimal, which made the sacrifice of further storylines not worth it. Arguably, even if the mood had been sufficiently affected, the sacrifice would STILL not be worth it.

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:38 AM

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:
I wasn't a fan of bringing him back myself. In my mind, Mal ended him with that shot.

That's how I feel, and that episode and MAL as a character work better for me if he did go and shoot the agent dead!

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:39 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Just rewatched the scene to check, not only are none of them facing the window/Reavers as you say (Wash looking downward, then behind, Mal and Zoe looking at each other and Wash - none of them looking out the window), they are IN THE DARK. They were inside that larger hanger, with no lights on. So, not only was no one paying attention, it was hard to see. And the log comes in, a wee bit fast.

And the log/spike/whatever comes in from a distinctly UPWARD angle, thus indicating that the Reaver ship was above, and not directly in front as some want to claim.

So sure, they could have maybe seen it, if they hadn't been slightly distracted by almost crashing to death, had better lighting, knew exactly when to look, where to look, and had the Reaver ship had running lights (because as we know, they're all about safety).

After the crash, Mal and Zoe are acting like they have been in a fender bender on Hollywood Blvd. Keep your seat belt on, check your hair, adjust your clothes. Real soldiers would be yelling, “Where are the Reavers!!! Where are they!!!” Real soldiers would be hyper-alert to what is going on around them. Who knows? They might even look out the window because Reavers are trying to kill them NOW. And then the Reavers do kill Wash.

But making Zoe and Mal act like real soldiers would make it impossible to hear Wash say, "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch . . ." Maybe Joss wanted to show that Zoe and Mal had lost their alertness/edge and got fat and placid like Oklahomans who have a traffic accident while gawking at Grauman's Chinese Theatre on Hollywood Blve.

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:41 AM

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:
I'm not ashamed to say I had a couple of tears running down my face feeling like it was the end for all of them...*sniff*
Except, y'know, Jayne.

I had a flashback of when I was a kid and I saw the last ever episode of BLAKES 7 (you ever see that?) I thought Joss was going to draw from that... Very glad he didn't. I just was never the same after Blakes 7!!!

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:45 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
(but was also snark - Sorry Chris)
No, I'M sorry, my post was a little full of itself.
I apologize.

No, mine was too. The snark about the true fans and heretic was uncalled for.

I did expect to catch a lot of flak for saying what I've been saying. I do know that I'm playing the heretic/devil's advocate here. I know what I think is unpopular.

I was trying to make it in the sense of you guys are truer fans for being more supportive of Joss' vision on this point, because I know I'm not being very supportive on this topic. I was aware of that when I wrote that, I know I'm being (overly) critical. But by saying "true fans," that takes it somewhere that the argument isn't just us all discussing, there's a zealotry I implied that wasn't fair.

Also, Storymark is right in that if I'm playing devil's advocate, I need to buck up. I expected getting piled on from the start here. And if I wanted to get out of the argument with a agree to disagree, I could have been less inflammatory about doing so. Frustration of the moment.

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 10:11 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I expected getting piled on from the start here. And if I wanted to get out of the argument with a agree to disagree, I could have been less inflammatory about doing so. Frustration of the moment.

I don't know about anyone else here, but Serenity is my favourite movie of ALL TIME. That can make some folks a little twitchy when that view is put in question. Me- I try to realize that when in a discussion... lest I'm trying to get a firey rise out of peeps, which I do admit to attempting now & then...

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 10:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:
After the crash, Mal and Zoe are acting like they have been in a fender bender on Hollywood Blvd. Keep your seat belt on, check your hair, adjust your clothes. Real soldiers would be yelling, “Where are the Reavers!!! Where are they!!!” Real soldiers would be hyper-alert to what is going on around them. Who knows? They might even look out the window because Reavers are trying to kill them NOW. And then the Reavers do kill Wash.

But making Zoe and Mal act like real soldiers would make it impossible to hear Wash say, "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch . . ." Maybe Joss wanted to show that Zoe and Mal had lost their alertness/edge and got fat and placid like Oklahomans who have a traffic accident while gawking at Grauman's Chinese Theatre on Hollywood Blve.

Or... maybe they were just in a huge spaceship crash....

But far be it from me to question your expertise when it comes to the behavior of space soldiers after sucha common crash.

"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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 10:18 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

But far be it from me to question your expertise when it comes to the behavior of space soldiers after sucha common crash.

Last time MY spaceship crashed on a distant moon, my first thought was "Crap- I hope there's oxygen here..."

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 10:25 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
As I've said, I see nothing that doesn't boil down to "I didn't want him to die".

You know, I'm just going to keep quoting my points that distinctly aren't OH NO WHY DID HE HAVE TO DIE until you actually read them. Until you're actually willing to treat me like a human being, and not a brick wall, this conversation isn't going anywhere.

Quote:
My dislike of the use of the Anyone Can Die trope is broader than this one case, but in this case I have two specific objections.

1) It seems like Joss Whedon is having trouble writing more Firefly because he now regrets killing Wash off.

Wash living has a direct storytelling result in that Joss Whedon still has an Author Avatar character and would want to keep writing Firefly.

2) Wash dying did not have a story purpose, it did not further the story line in any way, as it wasn't part of any sort of plot development. It did potentially have an effect on the MOOD OF THE SCENE, but at the possible detriment of the further storyline (see #1 above).

The effect on the mood for some people (myself) however, was minimal, which made the sacrifice of further storylines not worth it. Arguably, even if the mood had been sufficiently affected, the sacrifice would STILL not be worth it.

Just to clarify - I'm not trying to be a jerk, though realize I can come off as overly aggressive in these discussions. But I take story and storytelling seriously.

Okay, to address those points:

1) That is, at best, an assumption, which is as easily debunked as supported by the same evidence. Yes, he has published stories in which Wash was still alive, and you could take that as an indication of regret. However, he can publish what stories he likes, and the fact is that he has not chosen to do any post-Serenity stories showing him alive, and has indeed published one that re-enforces his not being alive. Which to me seems a clear indication that he really is dead.

2) I don't think anyone said it advanced the plot. Everyone keeps saying it was a device to enhance the mood. Now, this may not have been the case for yu, but I think it's fair to say you are in the minority. And the fact that you are so vehemently opposed to the event, I even question if the impact was as insignifigant as you claim.

But either way, it was done in an attempt to build tension and maintain a specific tone - both of which are tools of storytelling - the "telling" half of the equation, which includes far more than just plot points.

And you keep saying it's not worth it. Even when conceding that it does massively efect the mood for others, you maintain this. So, once again, it seems to come down to a personal, emotional response.

"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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 10:27 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I expected getting piled on from the start here. And if I wanted to get out of the argument with a agree to disagree, I could have been less inflammatory about doing so. Frustration of the moment.
I don't know about anyone else here, but Serenity is my favourite movie of ALL TIME. That can make some folks a little twitchy when that view is put in question. Me- I try to realize that when in a discussion... lest I'm trying to get a firey rise out of peeps, which I do admit to attempting now & then...

The laughing Chrisisall

Yeah. Sorry... I probably should be more careful about dissing on the Anyone Can Die trope, especially because it's so applicable around here. People can and do take offense.

Just a pet peeve. I can learn to hold my tongue.

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 10:30 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I can learn to hold my tongue.

Oh, don't do THAT!!!!

How else is interesting discussion generated?

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 10:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
it was done in an attempt to build tension and maintain a specific tone - both of which are tools of storytelling - the "telling" half of the equation, which includes far more than just plot points.

Agreement here.

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 10:33 AM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Or... maybe they were just in a huge spaceship crash....

But far be it from me to question your expertise when it comes to the behavior of space soldiers after sucha common crash.

I got facts. You got opinions.

The real problem is that when Joss Whedon condensed a 190 pages screenplay into a 126 pages, he got sloppy and his producer didn't give enough constructive criticism. I spent time with both screenplays and I can see what went wrong in the rush to cut the page count. Killing Wash was one of those rushed pages. Joss should have hired Zack Whedon to help him rewrite. That last sentence is only an opinion. The rest is fact.

Screenplays if you want:
www.fileden.com/files/2008/8/13/2048723/Serenity-190pages.pdf
www.fileden.com/files/2008/8/13/2048723/Serenity-126pages.pdf

In the 190 pages version:
1) Serenity is facing the direction of the Reavers when the crash ends.
2) “I'm a leaf on the Wind.”
3) Crew see the Reavers arrive.
4) Crew run away in terror.
In the 126 pages version, everything is same except:
3) Crew see nothing. Nothing at all.
It is not believable that Mal and Zoe are oblivious to the arrival of Reavers. Is Mal's memory so short that he has forgotten the Reavers?

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 10:38 AM

Quote:
Just to clarify - I'm not trying to be a jerk, though realize I can come off as overly aggressive in these discussions.

Yeah, I know.

Quote:
But I take story and storytelling seriously.

Heh. As do I.

Quote:
However, he can publish what stories he likes, and the fact is that he has not chosen to do any post-Serenity stories showing him alive, and has indeed published one that re-enforces his not being alive. Which to me seems a clear indication that he really is dead.

True. But that story was also still very Wash centric, when there's a bunch of other storylines to be exploring in this verse. I take that as he's still grieving for the character.

The fact that Book ALSO died, and the next comic book is a pre-series look at his life tells me something very similar there, as well. Though as I've said, in Book's case, there was an applicable storytelling reason, and I give it a pass.

Quote:
2) I don't think anyone said it advanced the plot. Everyone keeps saying it was a device to enhance the mood. Now, this may not have been the case for yu, but I think it's fair to say you are in the minority. And the fact that you are so vehemently opposed to the event, I even question if the impact was as insignifigant as you claim.

I didn't see Firefly first so, yeah. It really wasn't that significant. I actually forgot about the movie for about three years there, even though one of my friends gave me his edition of the Serenity RPG manual and kept wanting to run a game, dropping hints that I should watch Firefly. It took seeing Dr. Horrible for me to find Serenity again, and Firefly. Yeah, I'm a little thick. In my defense, at the time, before I forgot, I thought it was better than Star Wars. If you know me, you'd know that's pretty high praise. And, the reason I thought it was better than Star Wars was the gritty realism, which is pretty funny because Wash dying is arguably an attempt to inject more realism into the story. Hypocrisy!

Quote:
And you keep saying it's not worth it. Even when conceding that it does massively efect the mood for others, you maintain this. So, once again, it seems to come down to a personal, emotional response.

Uh... Wait. When did I say it wasn't worth it? I hate this trope and feel very strongly it needs to start going discredited. In places not Serenity, Anyone Can Die causes all sorts of ridiculous plot holes to kill off characters for shock and angst. I used to think it created a plot hole in Serenity, with River, but then I realized that River is the Cassandra, her precognitive abilities are the Can't Fight Fate kind.

And then you come back with that old accusation, validation for proof You Win? Come on. We just had a nice moment there. Let's not go spoiling it.

I'll quit, though, Chris and you made a point there about it upsetting people. After all, Wash doesn't die. Wash doesn't exist. The series and the movie are just Mal's dying dream sometime during the war.

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 11:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
True. But that story was also still very Wash centric, when there's a bunch of other storylines to be exploring in this verse. I take that as he's still grieving for the character.

The fact that Book ALSO died, and the next comic book is a pre-series look at his life tells me something very similar there, as well. Though as I've said, in Book's case, there was an applicable storytelling reason, and I give it a pass.

No one said he doesn't mourn for them, I believe that was directly addressed.

the fact remains, he has a venue for bringing Wash back if he so chose. And instead, he has chosen to not do so, and even go so far as publish a comic dedicated to eulogizing him.

Now, if you choose to see that as proof that he wishes he hadn't killed the characters, that's your call I guess. But it doesn't really stand up logically.

Quote:
Uh... Wait. When did I say it wasn't worth it?

Right here:

Quote:
Arguably, even if the mood had been sufficiently affected, the sacrifice would STILL not be worth it.

I included that section in my post....

Quote:
I hate this trope and feel very strongly it needs to start going discredited. In places not Serenity, Anyone Can Die causes all sorts of ridiculous plot holes to kill off characters for shock and angst. I used to think it created a plot hole in Serenity, with River, but then I realized that River is the Morrigan, her precognitive abilities are the Can't Fight Fate kind.

Sorry, but I don't care about your crusade to kill the trope - I am discussing how it was utilized in Serenity - period.

Quote:
And then you come back with that old accusation, validation for proof You Win? Come on. We just had a nice moment there. Let's not go spoiling it.

It wasn't an "I win" moment. I thought I was pretty clear - I see nothing in your argument that steps outside of an emotional response, not an analytic one. And now that you've made it clear that this is part of a greater campaign to eradicate the notion of "anyone can die" in storytelling (an idea I disagree with, but that's not really pertinent to this discussion) I'm even less swayed by your insistence that it's not.

Quote:
I'll quit, though, Chris and you made a point there about it upsetting people.

No need on my account. I'm not upset at all.

"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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 11:49 AM

Quote:
Now, if you choose to see that as proof that he wishes he hadn't killed the characters, that's your call I guess. But it doesn't really stand up logically.

Well, it's an assumption, I grant you, but assumptions aren't necessarily illogical. Not if there's reasons to back them up. You even agree that Joss seems to be mourning his characters still.

This could be a perfectly valid inference of how mourning is affecting Joss and writing after the movie. It might not be RIGHT, but that's not necessarily a domain of logic. In any case, it seems like a reasonable assessment to me.

Quote:
Right here:

"Arguably, even if the mood had been sufficiently affected, the sacrifice would STILL not be worth it."

...That wasn't remotely the context of that comment. The sacrifice I was referring to was the possibility of no more Firefly.

Wash didn't really sacrifice himself, per se, as his death didn't accomplish anything besides dramatic tension.

Quote:
Sorry, but I don't care about your crusade to kill the trope - I am discussing how it was utilized in Serenity - period.

Fair enough.

Quote:
And now that you've made it clear that this is part of a greater campaign to eradicate the notion of "anyone can die" in storytelling (an idea I disagree with, but that's not really pertinent to this discussion)

See, and that's the thing. I'm totally okay with stories that kill off a lot of characters, like a war film. Even the important, named characters. What I'm specifically looking at is the trope where a character death is used seemingly ONLY to ramp up dramatic tension. As a storytelling method, it seems like a waste, and not as effective as it could be. It almost feels like resorting to a trick when the situation should be scary enough as it is. It feels... untrue or unfaithful, somehow, in a storytelling sense. It's almost better to have a death scene that's thoroughly apathetic about it, than it is to just shock people. Real life doesn't go "Surprise! Now one of you dies so the audience is more worried" for most people.

Though that may not be possible, because some dumb shit is always going to try to say it's all "shock value."

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SelfDeprecation

Quote:
the fact remains, he has a venue for bringing Wash back if he so chose. And instead, he has chosen to not do so, and even go so far as publish a comic dedicated to eulogizing him.

So that brings up a new topic, and probably just in time! Do you think Joss is going to have psychic River seeing and talking to Ghost Wash and Book? Maybe they can still stick around!

After all, there might be something implied in Bushwhacked ("Ghosts.") and on Miranda ("I can hear them and they're all saying NOTHING!") that River might be able to do something like this. And we'll never know if it's her powers or if she's just crazy. I think that would be great.

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 12:03 PM

ZEEK

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
So that brings up a new topic, and probably just in time! Do you think Joss is going to have psychic River seeing and talking to Ghost Wash and Book? Maybe they can still stick around!

After all, there might be something implied in Bushwhacked ("Ghosts.") and on Miranda ("I can hear them and they're all saying NOTHING!") that River might be able to do something like this. And we'll never know if it's her powers or if she's just crazy. I think that would be great.

Personally I really hope not. I think that would basically only be fan service. It's also a plot hole nightmare because you can't have every actor who ever played a fan favorite character live on in River's head. I mean when does it stop?

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 12:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
I'm not upset at all.

Well I am, gorramit!!! Every time I see Wash buy it, I think of the little Bruce Campbell in Army Of Darkness getting pinned to the wall with a fork!!
There! Now can you get THAT image out of YOUR head??

I can't!!!

Love the flick anyways....

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 12:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
So that brings up a new topic, and probably just in time! Do you think Joss is going to have psychic River seeing and talking to Ghost Wash and Book? Maybe they can still stick around!

After all, there might be something implied in Bushwhacked ("Ghosts.") and on Miranda ("I can hear them and they're all saying NOTHING!") that River might be able to do something like this. And we'll never know if it's her powers or if she's just crazy. I think that would be great.

Personally I really hope not. I think that would basically only be fan service. It's also a plot hole nightmare because you can't have every actor who ever played a fan favorite character live on in River's head. I mean when does it stop?

Absolutely agree on all points. Would be a terrible idea just to placate a certain set of the fanbase.

"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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 12:31 PM

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

For the record, because nobody will download the screenplay.

This is the version where Wash lives from the 190 pages screenplay. www.fileden.com/files/2008/8/13/2048723/Serenity-190pages.pdf

Quote:
EXT. LANDING STRIP - CONTINUING
And Serenity HITS the ground, moving forward in what would be a perfect 747 landing if, like a 747, this ship had wheels. As it is, it's insanely jolting -- the landing gear folds and snaps under the weight -- the ship keeps going, now inside the hanger, heading towards the entrance to the facility, slowing, sparks shooting out behind it, slowing, fishtailing and coming about a full one eighty as it stops a very few feet from the wall.
INT. BRIDGE - CONTINUING
There is a moment of quiet.
WASH: I am a leaf in the wind. Watch --
And the ROAR and light of the Hunter setting down at the entrance shuts him up.
EXT. LANDING STRIP - CONTINUING
We see the ship about to touch down, engines folding in like an egret's wings. A second Reaver vessel enters frame from above, about to land next to it.
EXT. INT. SERENITY - MOMENTS LATER
The inner doors open and the entire crew piles out, all heavily bedecked with weapons.

This is where Wash dies from the 126 pages screenplay. www.fileden.com/files/2008/8/13/2048723/Serenity-126pages.pdf

Quote:
EXT./INT. LANDING STRIP/HANGER - CONTINUING
And Serenity HITS the ground -- the landing gear folds and snaps under the weight -- the ship keeps going, now inside the hanger, heading towards the entrance to the facility, slowing, fishtailing and coming about a full one eighty -- it goes beyond the strip and crashes down into the pedestrian area, so that the nose is sticking back out at the runway but the body of the ship is hidden from it.
INT. BRIDGE - CONTINUING
There is a moment of quiet.
WASH: I am a leaf on the wind. Watch --
A massive harpoon CRASHES through the windshield and impales him to his chair. It's as thick around as a telephone pole. Wash has time to open his mouth in surprise before he is dead.
ZOE: WASH! (She moves to him) –Wash baby baby no, come on, you gotta move you gotta move baby please --
Mal rips her away and to the floor as another projectile slams through the window into the wall above them.
EXT. LANDING STRIP - CONTINUING
We see the ship that has fired the harpoons as Reavers start out of it. A second Reaver vessel enters frame from above, about to land next to it.
EXT. SERENITY - MOMENTS LATER
The cargo bay door opens -- just the little door housed inside the ramp -- and Jayne comes out with his biggest gun. He looks up, toward the edge of the runway, but no Reavers have arrived yet.
JAYNE: Go!
The entire crew piles out, all heavily bedecked with weapons.

In the first version:
1) Serenity is facing the direction of the Reavers when the crash ends.
2) “I'm a leaf on the Wind.”
3) Crew see the Reavers arrive.
4) Crew runs away in terror.
In the second version, everything is same except:
3) Crew see nothing. Nothing at all.
It is not believable that Mal and Zoe are oblivious to the arrival of Reavers. Is Mal's memory so short that he has forgotten the Reavers?

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 12:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:

Well, it's an assumption, I grant you, but assumptions aren't necessarily illogical. Not if there's reasons to back them up. You even agree that Joss seems to be mourning his characters still.

This could be a perfectly valid inference of how mourning is affecting Joss and writing after the movie. It might not be RIGHT, but that's not necessarily a domain of logic. In any case, it seems like a reasonable assessment to me.

It strikes me as what you want to be true, I'll grant.

Quote:

...That wasn't remotely the context of that comment. The sacrifice I was referring to was the possibility of no more Firefly.

Wash didn't really sacrifice himself, per se, as his death didn't accomplish anything besides dramatic tension.

And that dramatic tension served the purpose of making the film better - which to me, is a pretty important accomplishment.

Again, I'll reiterate - the "telling" part of storytelling isn't JUST about what happens. Increasing the tension is what a writer is supposed to do in the climax.

Quote:

See, and that's the thing. I'm totally okay with stories that kill off a lot of characters, like a war film. Even the important, named characters. What I'm specifically looking at is the trope where a character death is used seemingly ONLY to ramp up dramatic tension. As a storytelling method, it seems like a waste, and not as effective as it could be. It almost feels like resorting to a trick when the situation should be scary enough as it is. It feels... untrue or unfaithful, somehow, in a storytelling sense.

And I feel the exact opposite. The idea that characters can get into so many tight situations without ever having do face death strikes me as total BS, and removes me from the story. I'm not interested in a static status quo.

Quote:
It's almost better to have a death scene that's thoroughly apathetic about it, than it is to just shock people. Real life doesn't go "Surprise! Now one of you dies so the audience is more worried" for most people.

A) Life sure as hell does pull surprises once in a while, often deadly ones.

B) "Most" people don't deal with hordes of Reavers, and angry alliance troops on their tail, amongst other things. Our crew doesn't live a "normal" life.

But for those who do live lives with that level of danger - yeah, sometimes they do die unexpectedly. And I'd wager that those around them, feel a wee bit more tension for it.

Quote:
So that brings up a new topic, and probably just in time! Do you think Joss is going to have psychic River seeing and talking to Ghost Wash and Book? Maybe they can still stick around!

After all, there might be something implied in Bushwhacked ("Ghosts.") and on Miranda ("I can hear them and they're all saying NOTHING!") that River might be able to do something like this. And we'll never know if it's her powers or if she's just crazy. I think that would be great.

See, it's stuff like this that makes it hard to believe you're looking at this as objectively as you claim. Its not about being upset that he killed beloved character.... but golly gee, wouldn't it be nice if he could bring them back? It stuff like that that makes it seem like you're really arguing from a purely emotional perspective.

"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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 12:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:
For the record, because nobody will download the screenplay.

You seem to think that not agreeing with you means we didn't read it.

This is incorrect.

In the longer draft, yes, Wash lived. But he really served no purpose from there. His death did serves a purpose, as has been discussed.

"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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 12:48 PM

Quote:
See, it's stuff like this that makes it hard to believe you're looking at this as objectively as you claim. Its not about being upset that he killed beloved character.... but golly gee, wouldn't it be nice if he could bring them back? It stuff like that that makes it seem like you're really arguing from a purely emotional perspective.

You ever think there might be people who WERE affected by Wash dying, and maybe I'm trying to be nice to them? What I suggested I thought maybe could be the best of both worlds. Wash is still dead, who even knows if it's real, but Alan Tudyk fans are appeased. It's a possible way for Joss to write Wash, if that's something he still wants to do. Maybe it's not. Maybe he's tired of this whole damn thing and cheering up us nerds with false hope.

Christ. And maybe I'm NOT lying my ass off and disingenuous about my feelings, okay? It's really insulting that you keep going here. What have I done to warrant so much freaking mistrust?

Do I have to tap dance on Wash's grave? Distribute sharpened pencils or something? Seriously. You don't see me questioning your intentions, do you? Yeah, make me feel bad about offending people, but you don't care about the other side.

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 12:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
The idea that characters can get into so many tight situations without ever having do face death strikes me as total BS, and removes me from the story. I'm not interested in a static status quo.

"So, you never have faced death."
"No. Not like this."

Only in Joss' 'Verse, it's permanent.

Bringing Spock back would have felt like a cheat, if it had happened suddenly or had no lasting effects upon his character in the future.

"I've been dead before."

I cried when Spock died, but I REALLY cried when Wash died. Like when my Mom died. There ain't no commin' back. In the really real 'Verse, anyway.

Just sayin'.

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 12:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:

Christ. Maybe I'm NOT lying my ass off and disingenuous about my feelings, okay? It's really insulting that you keep going here.

Okay, maybe I watch Star Trek too much, but I feel like I'm witnessing an argument between McCoy & Spock here...

"You green-blooded, inhuman..."

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 1:03 PM

*Raise hands in frustration*

Fine. Whatever. I don't know my own feelings. Clearly my fanfiction I've been writing for two years where Wash was very certainly most absolutely dead and I wasn't even going to have Zoe be pregnant because I thought it was "too happy" and "Joss would never go for that" and had to throw it in last minute when Float Out came out is all a big fucking lie.

I'm going to go suck a lolipop now, and then maybe someone can change my diapers.

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 1:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:

Fine. Whatever. I don't know my own feelings.

Byte, seriously, no one is saying that.
No one besides Jayne is saying that.
(sorry, couldn't resist- I'm a bad man)

I *think* you're being too sensitive- we all love you as a fellow Browncoat, Storymark as well. Hell, we're all in Serenity Valley here, right?

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 2:16 PM