Wash and Book, resurrection wrongness
POSTED BY: Gilead
UPDATED: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 11:18
VIEWED: 17395
PAGE 3 of 5
True, but Tracey was no more dead then Simon and River in "Ariel" and Mal dieing under torture is like someone dieing on the operating table and being revived via defibrillator. i haven't watched much Buffy, but i understand that's a different kinda resurrection. you know, a kind that mite bring back a guy who a reaver spike shoved through their chest.
and speaking defibrillators
a@@hole DR: "... when your manager hears about the rude and disrespecAAAHHHHH"
Zoe: "clear"
"when you cant run, you crawl, and when you cant do that, you find a friend to carry you!"
-the browncoats
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wait, wait, wait... so your saying that Wash and Book dieing ISN'T just some terrible, reacurring nightmare that I'm having??
Awww, hell.... 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by BrownCoat2007:
Wait, wait, wait... so your saying that Wash and Book dieing ISN'T just some terrible, reacurring nightmare that I'm having??
Awww, hell....
Oops... no, it's just a bad dream, don't worry. la, la, la, la, laaaaa...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Dude, you never wanna f*ck with a Browncoat, man." - Kevin Smith
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by tyrantkiller:
True, but Tracey was no more dead then Simon and River in "Ariel" and Mal dieing under torture is like someone dieing on the operating table and being revived via defibrillator. i haven't watched much Buffy, but i understand that's a different kinda resurrection. you know, a kind that mite bring back a guy who a reaver spike shoved through their chest.
That's because there's friggin' MAGIC in Buffyland.
The only "believable" scenario would be if the Alliance found him at once and somehow fixed him with the magic of technology, but I neither see a reason nor any other indication for that, and there were a lot of Reavers around. Besides, you betcha the BDHs went back for his body after the job was done.
Now I love zombies as much as the next zombie-loving guy, but come on.
D.
E.
A.
D.
Ah, that defibrillator quote made me lol.
- hope-shattering Agatsu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Dude, you never wanna f*ck with a Browncoat, man." - Kevin Smith
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wash's death does have a certain solidity to it, especially if we get to see Gina Torres get to act out the aftermath.
Still, I can't help feeling like I sense a pattern, almost River-like, of breadcrumbs being left for us, of what Joss intended for after.
But, in the end, if it's cold death that Joss wants us to feel, and nothing more, I'll take that.
Gilead
Mal: Cattle on the ship three weeks, she don't go near 'em. Suddenly we're on Jianying, and she's got a driving need to commune with the beasts?
River: They weren't cows inside. They were waiting to be, but they forgot. Now they see sky, and they remember what they are.
Mal: Is it bad that what she said made perfect sense to me?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by micjwelch:
Here's what bugs me. We have so many people that say this ain't Buffy, and we can't just go resurrecting people. Uh, we already have. Two examples:
"You died Mr. Reynolds."
and
"What'd y'all order a dead guy for?"
"We may experience some slight turbulence, and then... explode."
Also, Dobson, clearly shot in the HEAD with a high-powered handgun was brought back in the comic, "Those Left Behind".
Dobson was such a nuthin' character compared to Wash; but I'm supposed to accept Wash's death as some dramatic necessity and then I'm force-fed Dobson's resurrection?
BULLSH!T
Bringing back Wash is important to the Firefly 'verse dynamic.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I am probably the most FANATIC "Wash Lives" proponent on the Browncoats Board. If I rehash all my discussion points, people will probably drive to my house, wrap me in my Alliance Fed armor, and beat me like a pinata!
OK, can't help myself.
You can just read this:
Re: Wash's death in "Serenity". I am simply not willing to accept that in a fictional 'verse. I look to fiction as entertainment. If I want unhappy endings, all I gotta do is wake up! In my mind, until a film or series continuation says different, the crew put Wash in River's cryo-box to take him home for burial. Along the way, they are informed by Simon that the same medical tech that produced Tracy's hopped up internal organs ("million credit meat" in Tracy's words) are accessible at Government research facilities. Using a bit of improvisation and Book's ident card, they sneak Wash in place of a politico who bumped a deserving recipient (ala PA's governor Casey who bumped everybody down the list for his transplant). Alliance bashing, witty dialog and some gunplay ensues. The Firefly 'verse returns to normal.
I will miss Book but his death was a more acceptable fit than Wash's.
One: Books death was important to the storyline and character development because Book was the catalyst to Mal regaining a little bit of his "rudder". Book's casual murder by the Operative and his dying wish, nay, DEMAND that Mall "believe" again made Mal and crew confront River's Miranda secret, rather than just run. Wash was sacrificed meaninglessly as a plot gimmick to create peril.
Two: Book was an individual who interacted with the crew but Wash was half of a married couple who as such made up an important ingredient of Firefly's unique-ness. To destroy that couple as a plot device is a cheap shot at all those who reveled in a mature, married couple as part of the cast ensemble. Which ties into,
Three: Book is a more easily replaced character. If another character with deep-seated religious beliefs were to join Serenity, (not a Sheperd but perhaps a person who wouldn't be stereotypically devout, say a blue-collar industrial worker who knows why he trusts in his Christian faith) the conscience-character would not replace Book but add to his legacy.
But if some "guy" just jumped into Zoe's heart and bed, it would be creepy and an insult to both Wash and Zoe.
Four: Also, Book's mysterious past could be explored in flashback, which would keep actor Ron Glass involved in the series without quite the level of sadness that showing widow Zoe's dead husband would cause. Wash is the "funny" character and there is little funny about being reminded of his death.
I have to admit that to many people, "undoing" Wash's death would cheapen it.
Since I feel the death was cheap and frivilous in the first place,
(and we are talking about "entertainment" and "fiction" here)
I want Wash back as a character more than I want to service a
manipulative, low blow.
Book's death had value and made sense.
But you can't "cheapen" a "Cheap Shot".
While some may think Wash's death was a good idea at the time,
I haven't heard ANYONE say,
"Boy I sure am glad Wash is dead!"
Joss went on at some length in the Australian Q&A about messing with characters internally vs externally to provide real drama vs contrived drama. I understood his point but I think he went too far. The dynamic has been needlessly shifted from all the things Firefly used to be about (do the job, keep flying, found family) to life without Wash. Mal has no pilot (and making River skilled at Wash's level is a farce of a fiction if ever there was one), Zoe has no husband, Simon has no friend and advocate, Jayne has no light-hearted counter-point and the ship has no smart-assed comic relief. Book's role is replaceable, Wash is NOT.
I understand the idea of killing characters for dramatic effect, but my whole point is that at no point is the show (or a Serenity sequel) made better by the loss of a main character as compared to what those characters bring to the table dramatically. If we "h
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Woah. Good...point.
I'm one of the the folks who work with the 'reality' that the BDM gave us, but I can't say I like it much. As Mal said of the chandelier, I can see the how, but I don't understand the why so much. I mean, I understand the need to underpin the fragility of existence and all, but frankly (and heretically) Kaylee would have been a better choice in some ways. (Not that I wanted any of them to die.) The point about the fact that the one stable, loving, healthy relationship had to be the one that got sporked deserves notice.
Though I can quite see that River could be a good pilot - if she reads minds and memories, she can remember how to fly as Wash (in my 'verse, anyhow.) Also, Jayne can do funny. (and yummy, but,er, back to thread...)
Mind you, I'm all for remiving religious conviction out of people's lives - I don't think it does any good.
SpaceAnJL, Happy Humanist and Annoyer of the Righteous.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wash will never be truly dead so long as there's a crappy town where HE's a hero.
As for Sheppherd Book. He was never quite who he said he was. Maybe that's the biggest misdirection of all. Lets wait and see what happens on the third day.
In all seriousness, Joss expected the verse to live on in movies from Serenity onwards. Nine characters are plenty enough to provide a diversity of stories for a TV series. But that's WAY too many for a film franchise. Wash was comic relief, and that's pretty much it. There was not much to him. His death was essential to psych us for the potential martyrdom ending. (In my opinion Kaylee destroyed that with her "I want to live" beat. It was an entertaining moment in itself, but in hindsight it would have worked better as a lament). Book had a fantastic character background to peal open but I guess that wasn't worth exploring in cinema. I mourn Book's demise for that particular reason.
Hurts to admit it but I don't believe they should be resurrected.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by pennausamike:
In my mind, until a film or series continuation says different, the crew put Wash in River's cryo-box to take him home for burial. Along the way, they are informed by Simon that the same medical tech that produced Tracy's hopped up internal organs ("million credit meat" in Tracy's words) are accessible at Government research facilities. Using a bit of improvisation and Book's ident card, they sneak Wash in place of a politico who bumped a deserving recipient (ala PA's governor Casey who bumped everybody down the list for his transplant). Alliance bashing, witty dialog and some gunplay ensues. The Firefly 'verse returns to normal.
Except that...
1) We SEE the burial. I know you're gonna say all we see is a memorial, but it would make no sense whatsoever to do a memorial service and THEN fly somewhere to actually bury Wash.
2) You can put as many healthy organs into a dead body as you want, it's still gonna be a dead body
3) A telephone pole through the chest and spine is really, really deadly, and I mean instantaneously (he's been sitting there with that thing in chest for at least half an hour, too).
I'm sorry that you personally don't like things like that to happen in entertainment, but that doesn't really mean anything. (<- Not meant to mock or bash you; just stating a fact.) I'd like to refer to the death of Buffy's mother as an example again.
That being said, I agree that Wash will be sadly missed and FF will never be the same without him.
Then again, it might never "be" again, so until there's new material and we know for sure, don't let me piss on your parade.
Btw, I always wondered why they cut the fireworks at the end of the burial scene, which would have made for a nice transition to the welding that starts the repair montage that follows.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Dude, you never wanna f*ck with a Browncoat, man." - Kevin Smith
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME