a question about the Tams by SpacemanSpiff76

FIREFLY EPISODE DISCUSSIONS

a question about the Tams

POSTED BY: SPACEMANSPIFF76
UPDATED: Friday, March 2, 2007 17:57
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 6968
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, January 18, 2007 11:00 AM

in the episode "serenity", simon bring his crate on board and says he was contacted by some underground people and they freed river. in the movie "serenity", the opening sequence is of simon himself sneaking in and freeing river. whats the story behind the discrepency?

Wash> but thats like science fiction
Zoe> you live on a spaceship, dear

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

Thursday, January 18, 2007 3:33 PM

DONCOAT

It was a continuity problem that Joss introduced reluctantly but deliberately. It was too difficult to write those mysterious underground people into the BDM, and too confusing to people unfamiliar with the series.

But it's easy enough to justify. Simon simply lied to the crew about the level of his own involvement. After all, he'd only known them for a few hours and had already forced a major confrontation with Mal. He only told them as much as he had to.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm pointin' right at it!

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

Thursday, January 18, 2007 3:44 PM

TRAVELER

The confusion lies in the fact that Simon did get help, but was, as DonCoat points out, involved in the rescue.

Traveler

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

Thursday, January 18, 2007 4:09 PM

SIGMANUNKI

But this "resolution" is not accepted by all of us. Some of us (myself included) find it a trite and pathetic (perhaps too strong?) attempt at a work around.

The fact is that Joss had to simplify the story, and this is one of the ways that he did it. Yes, it introduced an inconsistency. But, it was a price he was willing to pay to pack everything into a feature film.

On another note, I'm always confused by people that HAVE TO resolve every inconsistency no matter how small, no matter how large. Why can't it just be one of those, "Oh, I guess this wasn't thought totally through for consistency. Oh well."? Why do people have to be so obsessive?

----
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

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

Thursday, January 18, 2007 5:12 PM

REGINAROADIE

I know exactly what you mean.

I'm a fan, but I've never really gotten into obsessive detail about every minor thing, because if you spend all your time criticizing the window dressing, you miss out on the big picture. So what if in STAR TREK 6 when Valeris shot the pot with the phaser and it disintegrated both the pot and the water and it was supposed to leave the water behind to splash all over. I'm more interested in the political allegories that made it the kick-ass final film in the series. I can give you a few more examples of stuff in sci-fi fantasy that I think are molehills turned into mountains, but don't want to get into it right now.

**************************************************
"Have you ever fired two guns whilst jumping through the air?"
"No."
"Have you ever fired ONE gun whilst jumping through the air?"

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

Thursday, January 18, 2007 8:43 PM

SPACEMANSPIFF76

Quote:
Originally posted by DonCoat:
(cut by SS76)

But it's easy enough to justify. Simon simply lied to the crew about the level of his own involvement. After all, he'd only known them for a few hours and had already forced a major confrontation with Mal. He only told them as much as he had to.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm pointin' right at it!

that went though my head too. i was just wondering what the story was and what you gus thought about it. answered my question, thanks.

Wash> but thats like science fiction
Zoe> you live on a spaceship, dear

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

Sunday, February 25, 2007 6:59 PM

BAGHEERA

Quote:
Originally posted by DonCoat:

But it's easy enough to justify. Simon simply lied to the crew about the level of his own involvement. After all, he'd only known them for a few hours and had already forced a major confrontation with Mal. He only told them as much as he had to.

While I understand how this explanation 'technically works', and kinda use it to justify to myself why the BDM shows what it does... it just doesnt ring true on several levels.

First, the explanation of the escape isnt the only lie he told the crew, he also routinely lied about River's psychic abilities. Before the BDM, Simon was merely downplaying River's intuitive abilities, and didnt appear to really suspect psychic reading himself. But after the BDM, we are shown that not only did he KNOW, but that he routinely lied and denied to the crew and captain, even after he had long reached the point where he "trusted" them at the end of the season.

Sure, we can assume that Simon would lie, cheat, steal, murder, and move the stars and moons to rescue and protect River... which brings me to the second issue.

Simon is a !@#$ing lousy liar.

He may be able to downplay his suspicions to others, but if he truly believed what he was saying was false, he'd clam up and choke like he did on mudder central.

which brings me to the only obvious explanation.
River doesn't exist, and Simon is completely !@#$ing crazy, hallucinatory, a reader, as well as a writer, and projects his hallucinations on anyone or anything around him.

but all in all, i just gotta take it with a lump of salt that it was typical Hollywood License to change whatever they felt in order to squeeze the necessary backstory into as short a time period without creating more confusion then it cured.

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

Sunday, February 25, 2007 7:41 PM

THEONETRUEBIX

The difference, when it comes to Simon's poor lying in Canton, was that the situation didn't involve River's safety. Simon consistently showed his ability to be calmer, cooler, and tougher when it came to his sister's safety.

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

And while not everyone HAS to accept the "Simon lied to the crew" explanation, it nonetheless is the one eventually pronounced publicly by Joss, and so "Simon lied" is official canon.

http://www.serenitymovie.com.au/viewtopic.php?t=766

-----

CSTS - SN/EN - PDX - 2007
http://serenitynow.pdxbrowncoats.com/

Can't Stop The Serenity 2007
http://www.cantstoptheserenity.com/

Unofficial Browncoat Cruise Newsline
http://browncoatcruisenews.blogspot.com/

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

Sunday, February 25, 2007 9:44 PM

SUPERFLUOUS

Quote:
Originally posted by DonCoat:
But it's easy enough to justify. Simon simply lied to the crew about the level of his own involvement.

I agree. To my reckoning, Simon lied to the crew originally: to perhaps deviate from the crimes he may have done rescuing River (he may be wanted for more things, besides River (e.g. the criminal world, etc). The possibilities are endless.
I don’t see it as a cheap, leap of faith for viewers. I see it as a chance to get to know Simon on a much deeper level.

And it kinda reminds me of ‘The Lord of The Rings’ and ‘The Hobbit’. The ‘Lord of the Rings’ book’s (not the movie), are based upon a chapter in ‘The Hobbit’.
In ‘The Hobbit’, Bilbo tricks Golem into giving him the ring. But in the sequel ‘Lord of the Ring’s’ book (specifically ‘Fellowship of the Rings’), Gandaf explains that when Bilbo really stole the ring (as mentioned in the sequel), he decided to erase the parts of the book that made him look bad. Because Bilbo (supposing) wrote the book, he made changes to that part, thus making him seem more the victor. Tolken, didn’t just re-write the original book to explain the discrepancy. He made it a strong plot device for his new books which added another dimension to them. Like they say: History is written by the victors.
If that made any sense, please let me know… but nonetheless, it’s all in the way you look at it.

__________________________________________________________________

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

Monday, February 26, 2007 9:50 AM

BAGHEERA

Quote:
Originally posted by theonetruebix:
Simon consistently showed his ability to be calmer, cooler, and tougher when it came to his sister's safety.

actually, he consistently showed the exact opposite, that although he was able to bend his morality when it came to protecting his sister, he only did so with discomfort, and WOULD endanger himself and his sister if the alternative was crossing his morals.

Quote:
it nonetheless is the one eventually pronounced publicly by Joss, and so "Simon lied" is official canon.

blahblahblah... what do you expect him to say "Yeah, I had to sell out the integrity of the storyline and !@#$ over the fans so that the people that have never heard of Firefly would be able to enjoy the movie a little more."

personally, i find the "Joss lied" explanation a lot more viable then the "Simon lied" excuse.

and there's a big difference between a minor bending of the truth or white lie... such as Simon's "turn this ship around or kaylee will die" which he was inwardly sweating bullets that they'd call his bluff and the supposed "he knew River was a danger to himself and the crew, but said !@#$ you Mal, she's my sister, she can do whatever she !@#$ well pleases, and you don't deserve my trust and honesty."

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

Monday, February 26, 2007 10:26 AM

THEONETRUEBIX

Quote:
Originally posted by Bagheera:
actually, he consistently showed the exact opposite

We must be watching different shows. He jumped Dobson because River was in danger. He tried to beat back the townspeople who were going to burn River at the stake. He planned an elaborate scheme on Ariel (showing, not so incidentally, exactly the sort of cleverness required to break River out in the first place) in order to get medical data for River. He even tried to take on Jubal Early to protect his sister.

Every time it was his sister's life or safety on the line, Simon stepped up in ways beyond what he was willing to do or show in other circumstances.

As for Joss, you're not paying attention. In the beginning, Joss was completely up front about it. He simply stated that yes he just outright contradicted the series, and did so because the opening of the film was boring and made little sense if we were watching random people we'd never see again break River out.

It was later that he came to the same fanwank many of the rest of us did. One that, ultimately, made Simon a more complex character, and that ultimately never contradicted anything we SAW in Firefly, only something Simon SAID in Firefly.

-----

CSTS - SN/EN - PDX - 2007
http://serenitynow.pdxbrowncoats.com/

Can't Stop The Serenity 2007
http://www.cantstoptheserenity.com/

Unofficial Browncoat Cruise Newsline
http://browncoatcruisenews.blogspot.com/

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

Monday, February 26, 2007 10:30 AM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
On another note, I'm always confused by people that HAVE TO resolve every inconsistency no matter how small, no matter how large. Why can't it just be one of those, "Oh, I guess this wasn't thought totally through for consistency. Oh well."? Why do people have to be so obsessive?

I don't know. But, what did they ever do to you? If they require an acceptable explanation to suspend their disbelief and enjoy the show/movie, then what's the harm?

I don't really care either way, although the explanation I prefer is that Simon's was a lie by omission.

::shrugs::

Rules and voting: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=22892

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

Monday, February 26, 2007 12:48 PM

SIGMANUNKI

Quote:
Originally posted by yinyang:

I don't know. But, what did they ever do to you? If they require an acceptable explanation to suspend their disbelief and enjoy the show/movie, then what's the harm?

I don't really care either way, although the explanation I prefer is that Simon's was a lie by omission.

::shrugs::

When someone attacks you because you point out gapping holes in there logic that mean that what they've thought up is false, then that's something that they've done to me. When they attack anyone that does this, that is the harm to the community in general. The community /is/ somewhat in schism because of this issue.

Quite frankly, I don't talk about this (along with many others) anymore because as soon as one points out that this lie is inconsistent with the series (both "historically" and inconsistent with Simon's character), not to mention the time it took Joss to come up with it (it was some time *after* the movie came out before this showed up), we catch *a lot* of flak.

In other words, I no longer care if people choose to ignore "reality" in this matter. I just pop up from time to time when I notice that some else has recognized it to let them know that they aren't alone. Which is pretty much what I've done here.

Oh, and it wasn't a lie by omission (if you choose to believe that he lied). It just was a lie, plain and simple as he said that he paid them and they got her out in the series. But, if we accept the lie, then he did it, which is a completely different story.

At any rate, I've answered your question and I hope we can leave it at that. I have no inclination to continue this discussion as I doubt it will bear any fruit.

----
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

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

Monday, February 26, 2007 12:48 PM

SIGMANUNKI

Damn double post.

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

Monday, February 26, 2007 1:53 PM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

Just gonna post Simon's speech to justify my view (copied from the transcript which is linked below)*:

"River was more than gifted. She...
she was a gift. Everything she did,
music, math, theoretical physics --
even-even dance -- there was nothing
that didn't come as naturally to her
as breathing does to us.
(smiles, remembering)
She could be a real... brat about it,
too. I mean, she used to –

"There was a... a school... a, uh, a
government-sponsored academy, we had
never even heard of it but it had the
most exciting program, the most
challenging. We could have sent her
anywhere, we had the money, but she
wanted to go. She wanted to learn.
She was fourteen.
(long beat)
I...

"I got a few letters at first, and then I
didn't hear for months. Finally I
got a letter that made no sense. She-she
talked about things that never
happened, jokes we never... it was
code. It just said...
(beat)
"They're hurting us. Get me out."

"Money. And, and luck. For two years,
I couldn't get near her. Then I was
contacted by some men, some underground
movement. They-they said she was
in danger, that-that the government was...
playing with her brain. If I funded
them they could sneak her out in cryo.
Get her to Persephone, and from there,
I could take her... wherever."

Note that Simon does not explicitly say, "They snuck her out in cryo and took her to Persephone."

*SigmaNunki - I replied to your post, but this is not a reply to you. I understand if you don't want to talk about it anymore, and didn't realize how vicious (?) this subject has been.

Edit: Forgot to actually post the link. Oops.

http://firefly.shriftweb.org/scripts/111.shtml

Rules and voting: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=22892

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

Tuesday, February 27, 2007 12:28 AM

BAGHEERA

Quote:
Originally posted by theonetruebix:
We must be watching different shows. He jumped Dobson because River was in danger.

we MUST be watching different shows, because I certainly dont remember him shooting Dobson. It took Mal and Jayne to do what needed to be done.

Quote:
He tried to beat back the townspeople who were going to burn River at the stake.

He tried to convince them with words, and when that failed, he threw in his fate with River, and was prepared to die... but as always... it took Mal and the others to be willing to pull out the guns and do what needed to be done... not Simon.

Quote:
He planned an elaborate scheme on Ariel (showing, not so incidentally, exactly the sort of cleverness required to break River out in the first place) in order to get medical data for River.

and when push came to shove, and he needed to protect River... it was only Jayne that lead the way in pushing and shoving.

Quote:
He even tried to take on Jubal Early to protect his sister.

Which was actually pretty cool, because it showed a little bit of character growth that Mal's morality was starting to rub off on him, and he was able to get a little further then he otherwise would earlier in the series... and he knowingly risked Kaylee's safety for the safety of River, and slightly the crew.

Quote:
Every time it was his sister's life or safety on the line, Simon stepped up in ways beyond what he was willing to do or show in other circumstances.

If anything, he showed that while he would step up and toe the line when River's safety was in question, he would NOT EVER cross the line.

As you mentioned Ariel... why would he risk River's safety, to save the life of a patient that wasnt even his, when he was under no obligation, doctor's or otherwise, to treat a patient that wasnt his ?

Because while River's safety may be more important to Simon then his own, there are things more important to him then even River's safety.

Quote:
As for Joss, you're not paying attention.

no, obviously you arent paying attention.

i dont give a damn what joss said, and even as you just stated, he has apparently admitted that it was all bull anyways and necessary for the movie. but thats all moot. most of the comments made about the series are just that, comments... shadowpuppets...

Quote:
that ultimately never contradicted anything we SAW in Firefly, only something Simon SAID in Firefly.

Actually, it does contradict what he DOES in Firefly, as well as what River does (or fails to do).

As far as Simon's role in the escape, I really dont see what the problem was. It never occurred to me that he WASN'T part of the escape attempt, and that the people who placed River and helped them get away WEREN'T the people he paid.

Its because I understand that Simon WOULD go to great lengths to protect River that I question any explanation that requires you to believe that he would knowingly endanger her for no reason at all other then his ACTUAL ignorance of the situation.

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

Tuesday, February 27, 2007 1:21 AM

SUPERFLUOUS

Like I said before; although it is likely Joss did take some liberty with the original story with this part (I think he mentions it in the movies commentary); the concept that Simon did indeed take matters into his own hands seems 'quite' a possibility.

In retrospect, we knew allot of things that was said on the show that turned out likely to be untrue (for example, Book's clouded history, etc). Just because it was said on the show - doesn’t make it concrete. Joss believed in the power of people, and people tend to lie and deceive if needs be (even act upon things they would not normally do). Just remember, if you didn’t see it for yourself, it didn’t happen. Heresy is a terrible thing after all. My guess is that the real truth about Simon would have been found out, in season 2 (wishful thinking).

Once again, look at the similarities this has with 'The Lord of the Rings' (the book) and 'The Hobbit'. The Lord of the Rings is entirely based upon an altered version (of events) in a chapter of The Hobbit. Like in the book the viewers (or readers) they had to take it on faith.

And as for his ability to kill someone (or take it to the next step), he done something quite immoral (for River) in the unaired episode of ‘Dead or Alive'. (SPOILER)
Although he didn’t end up shooting the Lawman, he did jump of a balcony to stop him… And he was prepared to burn alive for her… And he did punch Mal… (that took guts)

BTW, if I were Simon (not saying that I am), but if I somehow found out that my sister was being systematically tortured by the very people his family put their trust in.. I would have some major trust issues. Yet along trusting anyone (paid or not) with the escape. After two years, my rationale would be not to leave it for others to screw up; I would take up the 'Do it yourself' policy.

Well that’s my two cents.

__________________________________________________________________

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

Tuesday, February 27, 2007 5:08 AM

JERAXUS

easy as stated in my season 2 fan fic series obviously the movie occurs in another dimension - its based on the tv series so there are only very slight differences - Rivers attitude in the movie has been remarked upon as been more adult while in the tv series she is more child like also it explains Books drastic change in appearance and Kaylee losing weight

Play with the best die like the rest

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

Tuesday, February 27, 2007 8:48 AM

DONCOAT

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
The community /is/ somewhat in schism because of this issue.

Schism? Schism? That's a bit of hyperbole, surely. Sunni-Shia, now that's a schism.

This whole issue strikes me as being about one-tenth of one percent as significant as, say, the issue debated by the conclave in The Name of the Rose. For those who've forgotten or never knew, that issue was whether or not Jesus owned the clothes he wore. Okay, maybe that was important to medieval clerics... but who really cares in the long run?

For me, there's no real problem fitting Simon's actions in the BDM in with his behavior and statements in the series. I never could understand those who found the BDM to be some sort of betrayal of the spirit of the series.

To me, it's exactly like the fanatical element who condemned Jackson's films of The Lord of the Rings for every little change from the sacred originals. Sure, I was disappointed with some of the changes -- and delighted with others. I would have made different choices, no doubt, but nobody asked me to direct the movies (thank goodness!)

But overall, you're trying to compare two very different things. And in the case of FF/S, the same creative mind was responsible for both. Really, would you carpers rather not have had the movie at all?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm pointin' right at it!

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

Tuesday, February 27, 2007 10:24 AM

SIGMANUNKI

Quote:
Originally posted by DonCoat:

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:

The community /is/ somewhat in schism because of this issue.

Schism? Schism? That's a bit of hyperbole, surely. Sunni-Shia, now that's a schism.

That why I used the word "somewhat". Thus, it is not hyperbole.

Quote:
Originally posted by DonCoat:

For me, there's no real problem fitting Simon's actions in the BDM in with his behavior and statements in the series. I never could understand those who found the BDM to be some sort of betrayal of the spirit of the series.

To me, it's exactly like the fanatical element who condemned Jackson's films of The Lord of the Rings for every little change from the sacred originals. Sure, I was disappointed with some of the changes -- and delighted with others. I would have made different choices, no doubt, but nobody asked me to direct the movies (thank goodness!)

But overall, you're trying to compare two very different things. And in the case of FF/S, the same creative mind was responsible for both. Really, would you carpers rather not have had the movie at all?

Care to be any more offensive?

Btw, I'm just replying to point out the offensive nature of this post. Not only that, but this is mild compared to some that I (and others) have had to deal with. All it is is ridiculing attacks that don't bring anything to an actual discussion. Not to mention the straw man arguments.

Not only that, but whenever I've participated in discussing these issues, I've always pointed out example after example for the inconsistencies position. The minority here have replied in kind, but the majority reply such as the above and worse.

So, here's me sitting with an opinion that is not the main stream on these forums. And here's me getting attacked and ridiculed because of that. And here's me pointing it out.

Good day sir.

----
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

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

Wednesday, February 28, 2007 8:24 AM

DONCOAT

Brother SigmaNunki, you must be a pretty tender flower if you find that post offensive.

Good day to you as well.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm pointin' right at it!

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

Wednesday, February 28, 2007 9:09 AM

MSG

I'm going to have to go with a MST3K moment and say
"If you're wondering how he eats and breathes and another science facts, then repeat to yourself it's just a show I should really just relax"

"I'm not all that interested in the mental health of people who want to kill me. "- Leroy Jethro Gibbs

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

Friday, March 2, 2007 5:57 PM

XELROHIRX

Well technically Simon said that he would get help to sneak her out, not that the "underground movement" would solely do it on their own. Thus it would make sense that Simon would have to do more than just pay people, which would only strengthen his bond with his sister. :) Don't over complicate things with over-analysis. Great things are supposed to be a little flawed.

Hmm... Well done young one!

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

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE