MovieChat Forums > Mavican > Replies
Mavican's Replies
Just finished S02.
Yeah they definitely seem to be going with the Trish is flawed angle. I don't know if i like her anymore, and maybe the writers are trying to bring her 'down' to Jessica's level.
Trish should understand the nuances of family and left that she alone. She went in half cocked thinking Jessica had been kidnapped, but then seemed to realise she hadn't and that she was making the choice for he greater good.
When in part, she was just fulfilling her hero complex. I wonder is she'll go power crazy now since she seems to have crazy reflexes and decide, like Malcolm, that she doesn't need Jessica anymore.
Eh, i think were trying to apply to much logic to this movie, let's just say it's somewhere between the two haha.
I like your answer better! Haha. I also think maybe the author, who is obviously taking the piss of all the cliched characters, just made her a princess because in fairytales it's always a princess.
>male mercenaries in hand-to-hand combat.
Did she over power them so much? I mostly recall defensive movies to quickly move and disorient that are pretty common (at least in films?)(like moving a gun out the way)
I actually found the crying somewhat endearing. She doesn't have to be presented as Madame Butch to be tough.
It can also be seen as that was her relative title.
She's a farm girl from nowhere thrust into the spotlight because she's the bride of the prince - or soon to be - so what will she be referred to when people gossip (because you can't refer her by her name, they probably don't know it) - the princess bride. Or maybe it's a cheeky reference to classic fairytale's where the woman is always some imperilled princess and/or destined to be a bride.
Well damn i'll rewatch that scene.
"Why not tell Mildred that he thought the billboards were a good idea? Why not tell her the investigation was tearing him up? Why allow her to think he didn't care for so long?
"
Because he was a cop who probably hadn't decided to commit suicide yet, so had the keep with the professional i'm a cop angle.
I like that it ended, seemingly on a high note, everything got rounded up nice enough with still some questions as the indications of the future in Salem (Anne's take over) were hinted.
I, personally, wouldn't say Eliott's father/Mr Robot is his hurt/pain personified. It's his anger and hate at a system that ruined his father and took his life away, so you get Mr. Robot, and what does Mr Robot want? To ruin E-corp and bring the world to it's knees.
But then again....we don't know what, if anything, in this show is 'real' ;-)
I think he's a version of Elliot's father, if let's pretend and excuse the pun, Evil Corp killed him, but his consciousness and knowledge was dumped into a robot after. So now he's a being that is pissed at evil corp, and society in general, and wants to take down evil corp and 'reset' the world. But instead of being a robot he's a consciousness residing in Elliot.
yeah, but, i was just responding as to what the OP asked?
Yes, exactly. But Buffy and the gang don't recall that. There's no place that they can point to to unravel their jumbled memories. Those memories - the ones including Dawn - are just their reality now.
It's like if someone told me that a year ago a didn't have a cat. I'd be like wtf, of course i did, i've had him for five years, and i love my cat. Even if they showed a log book and they said hey, here's the date we screwed with your memory and reality. I'd be like ok, whatever, i guess i believe you, but i still love my cat. The analogies overkill, but you get it.
Edit: So yes, you are correct, as i think i am correct, as what they know as reality was changed. I don't think we ever had a 'hey i can't remember things clearly before this date (date Dawn was inserted). I remember Xander once referencing Dawn and the diaries she's kept since she was 7 or something (does that mean reality was altered so that Buffy and her family moved their earlier in everyone's memories i wonder?). See like those guys who made Dawn out of the key were very thorough.
I...don't think they do, iirc? They're might have been a date mentioned in the log/diary that Spike and Dawn read about the key. But Buffy and the gang have memories of Dawn for her entire life (Buffy realising mommies having another baby, Dawn as a baby onwards etc, Buffy and Dawn move to Sunnydale). Hope that helps.
I don't know. Didn't she meet White Rose briefly in Season 2? I don't know if she met White Rose previously to what's on screen though.
IIRC my main takeaway was that Elliot wanted to stop Tyrell Wellick(?) from completing his part in blowing up the ECorp buildings housing the recovery documents (detailing everyone's debt etc) and killing alot of people. 'Elliot' had instructed him to stop anyone from dtopping his plan, so Tyrell shoots Elliot. Tyrell then goes and calls(iirc?) (shock) Angela, wanting to know what to do, he breaks down in a bubling mess about how he loves Elliot. Angela say she'll take care of it. So the big take is Angela is in on it, not just with wha Darlene got her into, but with the actual 'planners' to some degree.
Oh and Darlene's boyfriend Cisco gets killed by the Dark Army and Darlene get's hauled in by the FBI that reveal that they've basically got everyone in f-society tagged and named and on their watch list, with Elliot at the centre.
Yes! I just watched it and this was such a peeve for me also, they're talking to him like he knows English! I'll give you the 'can't find a translator' plot convenience.
But they say
'i understand you speak a little English'
Viktor: 'Uh yes' '
bowaefoodoewjkefhkjbpresidentiehfkhfpassportlknfksndf
That said, i like the movie. It's a plot convenience filled ~feel good~ movie.
Realistically, wouldn't the first thing the US do is grant temporary 'can't go home' visas, with placement in accommodation.
Also, because i'm writing this after my previous long post:
Popcorn, i mean no offence, AT ALL, but i get the feeling maybe you're coming at this from a male perspective, and how 'virgin' women are typically portrayed and boxed into characters in the media. Not all women are the same when it comes to sexuality. Many women might be sexual textbooks in their knowledge, despite not having sex. Plus i'm not sure it we're to presume that Diana is some young 16 (thus you might be expecting the young virgin stereotype). I view Diana more as a late 20's woman as opposed to a girl. I'll say again, despite the protagonist being a hot young female, this film is not a love story (unless you count humanity), it's a war story (with some faith above all chucked in). I think directorial choosing not to include a sex scene really helps reinforce this, and given how easy and expected it tends to be that women protagonist stories are always somehow a love story across most genres, i really think the female directors did a fantastic job making WW about WW and her faith in the world and he courage in fighting for it, as opposed to some sappy 'my first love died back in the war back way back when'.
>it would have been a bigger deal to someone like Diana
And again to pop in, it isn't necessarily a big deal to anyone, or everyone, women or men. You just think, i think, because the media makes such a big deal about the 'first time' (which is often really crappy - and short - for first timers) for the virgin ingenue and her first/true love (because that's how media/stereotypes/archetypes work) that to not have that hammed up for emotional relevance on screen is...not the norm and somehow wrong??
>Diana who didn't even know what sex was
Didn't they cover this on the boat where Diane was like:
D: Steve sleep with me
S: Uhhh unmarried unfamiliar people don't do that
D: they don't sleep next to each other
S: No, they don't...
D: Oh have sex, we're just sleeping closely together Steve
S: How do you know about that if there are no males on your island
D: I read ALL 12 volumes on sexuality by some author, that unfortunately came to the conclusion that men were usuful for procreation, no ideal for pleasure.
S: Oh, all...12 volumes 0.o
But yeah, she probably grew up reading some 12 volumed version on the karma Sutra. So yeah, she knew what sex and sex adjacent things where, extensively it would appear, it just wasn't her driving focus (she was off the fight Ares after all).
I think the media likes to spread this idea of the young trembling virgin female that needs to be lead and is completely sexually incompetent which i don't think we've been given the impression of Diana being as a person. Sure there would probably be the normal weirdness if it was on screen. It's either that or that viewers would find her to be an outrageously competent virgin and complain about it, despite the fact sex is notoriously misrepresented in media (AllSexisGreatSexOnCamera trope and no get's up to pee after etc).
But to get back to it:
Tl;Dr Better to not show an unnecessary sex scene that would probably do nothing but add controversy given WW is not a 'love story'. Diana and Steve weren't necessarily in love, doesn't mean they couldn't have sex, or that they weren't friends. Plus it's war, things happen. Not being a love story or about sexuality makes it better as a film.
Edit: Given the scene on the boat, and the time period, unless Steve frequented brothels, he probably knew less about sex that Diana, excluding having had had it (theoretically, he may have been a virgin himself being unmarried). Then again an island full of women....
I like overall like that we didn't get some raunchy in your face sex scene in WW, I think it's implied though that they did. I like that i wasn't made into some big changing her as a person/they're so in love thing, fighting the war/Ares came first. They both remained strong characters in their own right, not second to some greater love story.