Wash and Book, resurrection wrongness
POSTED BY: Gilead
UPDATED: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 11:18
VIEWED: 17395
PAGE 4 of 5
I have had a plot-device related idea involving the future of Wash and Book. So, if you'd care to play a mind-game with me, here's what I propose: 'If' you see where I'm going with this idea, try to communicate that you get it back to me in this thread, without actually giving away the idea (and thus dooming it to non-canon obscurity).
I'd be intrigued to see how that could be done in a non-AU verse setting. *grins* I am guilty of bringing them both back in one of my fics (which was more implied in Books case). The second, I brought Wash only back but somehow I doubt Spike's vampiric childe would ever be a plausible plot device ><
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by annuette:
I'd be intrigued to see how that could be done in a non-AU verse setting.
Joss alludes to the idea in Those Left Behind.
Gilead
---------
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 Agatsu:
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.
We don't SEE the burial, ONLY the memorial service.
Why would they bury Wash on some strange rock?
I think they'd fly him home or to a site of Zoe's and Wash's choosing.
Quote:
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 see Simon injecting Wash with the same chemical as used on himself, River and Tracy.
Something that mimics death could also logically stave off necrosis.
And a pole in the chest isn't as mortal as a bullet in the brainpan.
We saw Mal's pistol drop a horse.
That same bullet, introduced into a human skull, would penetrate and the hydrostatic shock would turn everything inside Dobson's skull to jelly.
But for CONVENIENCE sake, Joss wrote him back to life for "Those Left Behind".
If Joss can justify something as FRIVOLOUS as resurrecting Dobson,
he should have more compelling reasons to resurrect Wash.
Quote:
I'm sorry that you personally don't like things like that to happen in entertainment, but that doesn't really mean anything.
Yes it does. Entertainment is business combined with art.
If a piece of entertainment turns me off, I won't support it. If enough people share my opinion, it really starts to mean something.
Fortunately for "keep Wash dead" supporters, there seem to be lots of folks who like to see noble deeds rewarded with tragedy.
Jurrasic Park II, The Mist, 3:10 To Yuma, Gone,Baby,Gone; and many more; see noble characters commit noble deeds, only to be handed ignominious deaths or soul-crushing twists.
Humanity and life is filled with un-fairness.
I don't support it in the name of entertainment.
Quote:
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.
Only Joss can piss on my parade.
I keep hoping he doesn't.
I'll reassess my fandom if he does.
Quote:
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.
Because test audiences thought it was corny...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I apologize for replying to my own post but....
Quote:
Only Joss can piss on my parade.
I keep hoping he doesn't.
I'll reassess my fandom if he does.
....I don't mean this to say that I'll pout, take my toys, and go home.
I mean this like how many view the Terminator Series, including the creators of the new Sarah Conner Chronicles.
Which is to say, like T3 never happened.
T3 undercut the whole point of Cameron's Terminator movies, and was something of a character and narrative detour as well.
The Sarah Conner Chronicles creators chose to advance the story from T2 and ignore T3.
Much like the seamstress who sewed the Browncoat patch on upside down, just cuz' it's canon doesn't make it so...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilead:Quote:
Originally posted by annuette:
I'd be intrigued to see how that could be done in a non-AU verse setting.
Joss alludes to the idea in Those Left Behind.
Gilead
---------
Mal: Is it bad that what she said made perfect sense to me?
Does he? I haven't read the comics.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by pennausamike:Quote:
Originally posted by Agatsu:
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.
We don't SEE the burial, ONLY the memorial service.
Why would they bury Wash on some strange rock?
I think they'd fly him home or to a site of Zoe's and Wash's choosing.
Then why the memorial service on some strange rock? Ah, maybe I'm just nitpicking. I'd be willing to let THIS slide. I love Wash too, you know. Not in a Zoe-ish way, though.
Quote:
I see Simon injecting Wash with the same chemical as used on himself, River and Tracy.
Something that mimics death could also logically stave off necrosis.
Bodies have to be alive to be put into stasis.
With your logic, you could bring poisoned people back from the dead if you inject them the antidote an hour after they died.
Quote:
And a pole in the chest isn't as mortal as a bullet in the brainpan.
We saw Mal's pistol drop a horse.
That same bullet, introduced into a human skull, would penetrate and the hydrostatic shock would turn everything inside Dobson's skull to jelly.
But for CONVENIENCE sake, Joss wrote him back to life for "Those Left Behind".
And look at how well THAT was received, and he's just a minor character. Imho, it was cheap, and a HUGE mistake to do that, but then again, I don't really take the comic books for full, even though Joss wrote them. If Joss'd pull that shit with Wash, the FF universe would lose a lot of appeal to me. Now, again, don't get me wrong, I really ruttin' love Wash, but I like consistency more.
I used to watch Hercules and Xena way back when, and that lost a lot of appeal once I knew that if someone died, they could just walk into the underworld and bring them back. It's boring and makes sacrifice meaningless.
Quote:
If Joss can justify something as FRIVOLOUS as resurrecting Dobson, he should have more compelling reasons to resurrect Wash.
Reasons, yes. Ways, I dunno.
I'm looking for WAYS to, because the REASON is pretty obvious.
And because Dubson's resurrection IS frivolous and happens in the comic book is the only reason why I let it slide.
Joss DOES make creative mistakes from time to time, although they're mostly minor. Killer demon robots in Buffy, anyone?
Quote:
Yes it does. Entertainment is business combined with art.
If a piece of entertainment turns me off, I won't support it. If enough people share my opinion, it really starts to mean something.
Ever watched Buffy?
(Huge Buffy spoiler in the video! It's a montage of deaths of "good" people, tears likely: )
Stop supporting Joss already, Buffy fans!
This piece of entertainment called Firefly (although it's so much more) would turn ME off if it became inconsistent as to main character's deaths, but THAT doesn't mean a thing either, because it's my PERSONAL view on FF, just like yours is yours. Josh does it, we deal with it - or leave.
Quote:
Fortunately for "keep Wash dead" supporters, there seem to be lots of folks who like to see noble deeds rewarded with tragedy.
Jurrasic Park II, The Mist, 3:10 To Yuma, Gone,Baby,Gone; and many more; see noble characters commit noble deeds, only to be handed ignominious deaths or soul-crushing twists.
Humanity and life is filled with un-fairness.
I don't support it in the name of entertainment.
Giving your life for others, in life or in sacrifice, is the noblest thing there is, and therefore has a deep emotional impact. Death is also not a reward, but something that just happens and is inevitable. Karma - which is basically what you describe - is awesome, but non-existent.
It's not fair, but only bad things happening make a good story in the first place. There is no really good story without really bad things happenin
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Quote:
I see Simon injecting Wash with the same chemical as used on himself, River and Tracy.
Something that mimics death could also logically stave off necrosis.
Bodies have to be alive to be put into stasis.
With your logic, you could bring poisoned people back from the dead if you inject them the antidote an hour after they died.
I was thinking before they left the ship, while the crew was gathering weapons.
Quote:
SNIP I really ruttin' love Wash, but I like consistency more. SNIP
And I just don't. I'm willing to put up with authorial speed bumps to correct narrative mistakes. If it happened every week, yeah, it would wear pretty thin in a hurry. But there is no other Serenity crew member whose death will improve the storytelling opportunities.
But that is MY bias.
Quote:
It's not fair, but only bad things happening make a good story in the first place. There is no really good story without really bad things happening.
It's entertainment with unhappy endings that really STICKS as opposed to Hollywood's apparent rule that you can't let movies end on a downer.
The conditions the BDHs have to live in and are treated by almost everyone are not fair, the Independents losing the war isn't fair, what has been done to River wasn't fair, good people dying isn't fair, but it is what makes the story.
Bad things happening is what makes the story.
OVERCOMING bad things is what makes the story stick. Independents losing the war isn't fair, what has been done to River wasn't fair, etc; but how the crew deals and overcomes is what makes the fictional journey worth taking.
The tales that have meaning and STICK beyond their original viewing are the ones that are uplifting.
Quote:
I don't think you'd have prefered a 50's-sitcom-style Firefly where the BDHs live wealthy, happy lifes on a beautiful private moon in an independent and death-less 'Verse.
No, my model is more Star Trek episodic TV, esp. the original series.
I could enjoy the peril and still be comfortable knowing the main characters would return next week.
Uplifting franchises create active and energetic fan-bases that costume and raise money for charities and throw conventions; people don't wish to thrust themselves into fictional worlds that mimic the harshness of real-life.
If Serenity's crew just-died-one-tough-death-after-another, there would not be a fan Browncoat movement. No happy people thrilling to the next adventure, throwing Shindigs to celebrate the BDH's latest great escape.
People might say, "Wow, that story really hits ya where you live", but they would then move on to the next movie/TV series/book/whatever.
The power of the 'verse, as FOX execs mandated it, was to bring weekly joy and excitement into our homes.
That those same execs then turned around and extinguished it is perhaps the bigger tragedy.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
http://hijinksensue.com/2007/10/08/i-am-a-leaf-on-the-wind/
Sorry this debate reminds me a bit of the conversation in this comic.
Quote:
Josh: No one said Wash's wounds were fatal.
Eli: I'm going to bet his burial was.
Look, I liked Wash as a character too, but he is dead and there ain't nothing short of the Rapture that'll bring him back, and seeing as Joss don't believe in that, I'm willing to bet on him staying dead. Hell, even a clone won't really be Wash...so why bother?
-----------------------------------------------------------
There's a widow in sleepy Chester
Who weeps for her only son;
There's a grave on the Pabeng River,
A grave that the Burmans shun;
And there's Subadar Prag Tewarri
Who tells how the work was done.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Heres a question. Are we trying to keep them alive to continue the series or just for sake of a second movie?
I say this because the series can continue with them alove as there was not a direct timeline to which the series ended and the movie started. Meaning the movie can be 2 months or two years from the time the series ended. In which, we can sill have many series to go before reaching the end of the crew.
Go backwards to go fowards.
Two by Two, Hands are blue.....
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
