|
ToastyPotato posted:You mentioned being short and Jon Snow so I felt compelled to post this. To be fair, those two are both basically giants (in the acting world).
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 18:06 |
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:You mentioned being short and Jon Snow so I felt compelled to post this. And hey, his mouth is closed in the picture! Yea, but both of those women are 6ft + Kit Harrington is about my height which is only slightly shorter than average, at 5'7" http://i.imgur.com/LJEXJGz.jpg I wish I had not decided to ham it up in that image.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:http://i.imgur.com/LJEXJGz.jpg You guys should start a club for tiny men.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
AshB posted:And also, why does the bus have an entire room it can drop out of the sky with the press of a button? It's a cargo container, they can switch them out. The medical room Skye was in was slotted into the side of the bus the same way the cargo box left.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
This dog argument will just be another one we point to later. "Whether or not Ward and May slept together is a valid argument, unlike that time they thought Shannon got stabbed." "Whether or not Ward shot the dog is a valid argument, unlike that time they thought Ward and May didn't sleep together." "Whether or not [] happened is a valid argument, unlike that time they thought Ward didn't kill the dog."
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
Someone tweet the actor who plays Ward or whoever that works on the show and ask, please.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
Well this is my stance on it, if two profesional reviewers can have intepreted it both ways then nobody in this thread is 'crazy' and maybe we'll find out for sure later.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
hamsystem posted:So did the story about Skye's parents reveal anything about any possible comic book characters she could end up being? Current "closest fit in Marvel universe" is that she and Raina are Inhumans. Kree test subjects who formed a secret colony on Earth after the experiments ended. Look human until exposed to a specific mutagen, which gives superpowers and also deformities (think a combination of comic-book gamma radiation and real life gamma radiation). It would fit with Raina recognizing Skye's DNA, and saying that her family were "monsters".
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 02:34
|
|
|
mikeraskol posted:Unless the writers are doing a fake-out (of which there is no evidence, and we can't really predict)  Cinema has been pulling this kind of predictable poo poo trope for over a century and people still fall for it.If they were going to kill two major characters like Fitz and Simmons, they'd show them die onscreen and make a bigger deal about it than a distant shot of their box dropping into a body of water. This isn't some edgy Coen brothers feature. It's a cheesy TV show.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
Barack HUSSEIN posted:
I'm pretty sure you didn't understand my post at all. I would try reading again, and this time don't cut off the fake out portion and ignore the rest of the sentence, which puts it into context. mikeraskol fucked around with this message at 04:01 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
When watching, I thought for sure Ward spared the dog and it was Garrett seeing the dog through the sniper scope. Only the internet told me otherwise, and I see it is a compelling case of course - did Ward have his rifle with him with the pistol when he fired up into the air? And this is nothing like Ward and May - that had the merest hint of doubt (which was completely removed in the next episode). The dog scene was filmed to be intentionally ambiguous.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 04:04
|
|
|
I'm holding out for the chance that either Fitz or Simmons bites it in the box during the next episode before they are rescued. Not because I actually want either one of them to die, but because I want to writers to show me they are actually awake and not just phoning most of the series in.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
The ceiling in Cybertech had the strongest drat ceiling tiles I've ever seen. New tech?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
R-Type posted:The ceiling in Cybertech had the strongest drat ceiling tiles I've ever seen. New tech? The spear dug through to the real ceiling.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:I'm holding out for the chance that either Fitz or Simmons bites it in the box during the next episode before they are rescued. Not because I actually want either one of them to die, but because I want to writers to show me they are actually awake and not just phoning most of the series in. It would be kind of great if they open the box and one of them is cradling the body of the other, dead from massive head trauma due to getting tossed from a moving aircraft into the ocean inside a big metal box with no restraints or safety measures. That would make sense to me and it would serve the point perfectly. Either way, Ward did that with the intention of killing them one way or another. The fact that he's too chickenshit to pull the trigger on people he cares about face-to-face actually makes him interesting. "Mooks, cops, Victoria Hand? Mozambique Drill those fuckers. Someone I actually know? Eeeeeeehhhh deathtrap or distraction so I don't have to look them in the eye, yeah, let's do that."
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:No they really didn't. 90% of the argument was me trying to explain to people that cliches and narrative devices exist in television, kind of like how Deadpool is doing right now, and then people arguing against the existence of possibilities because I guess it physically pains some people to consider that a TV show might actually try to fake them out once in a while. I remember a lot less theoretical discussion of narrative techniques, and a lot more you trying to say there's a real chance they didn't have sex. ToastyPotato posted:If they literally wanted no confusion as to them having sex, they would have shown them starting to undress or something. ToastyPotato posted:Cool post a screen cap of the love scene to end the debate. ToastyPotato posted:Right now its 50/50 which is exactly the point of writing that kind of closing scene. Saying "it's just as likely that they screwed as it is that they didn't" is just as tonedeaf as saying you think they didn't screw. Also there were a ton of people who straight-out said they didn't think they had sex, and just had a long discussion instead. This show isn't going to show people loving or dogs getting their heads blown off. Saying "they didn't actually show it happening in gory detail!" is not a good argument. R-Type posted:The ceiling in Cybertech had the strongest drat ceiling tiles I've ever seen. New tech? I forgot about this scene but it was pretty hilarious. It would have been made about a thousand times more believable if they had just not shown what the grappling gun anchored into. XboxPants fucked around with this message at 05:31 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
In this comic book show, I have no expectations Fitz or Simmons will even be harmed by what Ward did to them.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
Think of it this way: that flashback with the scope is Chekov's Sniper Rifle. It must be fired. What reason do they have to even show us that scene, if not to let us know that it was fired? To let us know that Ward cared about the dog? To let us know that he let it go? We already know both of those things. So it can't be that. If they wanted to show us that information to trick us, or to show how he has changed from when he let the dog get away, they could have just not included the second flashback at all and it would have had the same effect. But instead, they chose to include a second flashback, and they did it to tell us something. So, what new information does that flashback impart to us? It tells us that after the he let the dog go, then he picked up the rifle and aimed it at the dog. If he didn't kill the dog, that scene is meaningless and they just wouldn't have shown it. That scene is only included if they have something new to tell us. They want to show us that he didn't let the dog go, even though he cared about it. He only killed it from a distance so he didn't have to look it in the eye. It serves as an exact mirror to the scene with Fitz and Simmons, in order to let you know that Ward will, in fact, kill even those he cares about. So that you have actual tension in that scene. redshirt posted:In this comic book show, I have no expectations Fitz or Simmons will even be harmed by what Ward did to them. In the preview with them in the underwater container, Fitz's arm was in a sling. XboxPants fucked around with this message at 05:47 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
Excellent episode. Coulson's best line yet ("Large file transfer incoming"). I really like psychopath Ward. At this point, he could do just about anything because he's a hosed up kid. Scared "daddy"'s going to die 20 minutes after resenting "daddy" for not caring enough. He's just a highly trained, very deadly kid.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 06:42
|
|
|
The biggest reveal to me is that HYDRA agents use the Dr. Evil Nemesis Eradication Protocol.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 07:26
|
|
|
XboxPants posted:I remember a lot less theoretical discussion of narrative techniques, and a lot more you trying to say there's a real chance they didn't have sex. You're completely right, TV shows have never ever unambiguously dealt with love scenes or handled deaths (animal or otherwise) before! How could I have been so blind?! I mean, there's never ever been a time where a character seemingly died, but then there was no body, and even though in real life no one could have possibly survived, they end up coming back later complete with a explanation for how they survived! TV shows never imply something happened toward the end of an episode without actually showing it only to have the next episode reveal that it didn't actually happen! You should write a book on screenwriting because I am pretty sure no one has this information and it would be a pretty good tool for people to have if anyone is to manage to navigate this newfangled tee vee medium.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 07:29
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:I mean, there's never ever been a time where a character seemingly died, but then there was no body, and even though in real life no one could have possibly survived, they end up coming back later complete with a explanation for how they survived! TV shows never imply something happened toward the end of an episode without actually showing it only to have the next episode reveal that it didn't actually happen! Yes, you're correct that there is such a thing as a scene that implies something to the viewer just to mislead them. It's called a "red herring", and it is only used when the actual truth is more interesting than the one that's implied. You don't write a story where you imply that something interesting is happening, only to later go "just kidding, there's nothing happening here". You seem to be hung up on what's "possible" in any given story, but that's irrelevant. There are a million possible things in any story, but the only ones that matter are the ones that are supported by the text. XboxPants fucked around with this message at 08:29 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 08:27
|
|
|
If we hadn't seen Ward murder at least five people, then I could perhaps see it as being a red herring. But even if he didn't kill the dog or intent to kill Fitz and Simmons, he would still be beyond redemption for the team, because of those other killings, so why weaken him as a villain?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 08:55
|
|
|
XboxPants posted:There are a million possible things in any story, but the only ones that matter are the ones that are supported by the text. Let me tell you about a little thing called Death Of The Author 
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 09:01
|
|
|
Oasx posted:If we hadn't seen Ward murder at least five people, then I could perhaps see it as being a red herring. But even if he didn't kill the dog or intent to kill Fitz and Simmons, he would still be beyond redemption for the team, because of those other killings, so why weaken him as a villain? Well, the idea goes that it's meant as character growth. He couldn't get over his "weakness" and kill Buddy in the past, but this time he does overcome it and tries to kill Fitz/Simmons. It almost works as a reading, but it makes the sniper-scope buddy flashback redundant. If that's what they were doing you wouldn't need both the Buddy flashbacks, only the one where he lets buddy go. You'd either not have a flashback during the Fitz/Simmons scene, or you would move the original flashback where Ward lets Buddy go up to that spot.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 09:11
|
|
|
I must be even more broken than Ward...as soon as Garrett said he was going to leave him alone in the woods for months, I immediately assumed he'd end up eating Buddy to survive.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 12:38
|
|
|
Wormy posted:I immediately assumed he'd end up eating Buddy to survive. Then I was surprised to see Buddy still alive when they jumped to six months later.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 13:47
|
|
|
Tezzeract posted:There's a pretty big theme on Garrett following through Ward messes up and lets his compassion get through to him. There's even the sense that the tough guy thing is a big act also from Ward. Raina sees right through him. And why exactly would Garrett kill the dog? It is a dog, it isn't going to rat them out to Fury, it isn't going to hunt them down, it's a dog. The only point of the dog was a final test for Ward, if Ward kills them he passes the test and proves his loyalty, if Ward fails the test he can't be counted on and is eliminated. Garrett has no motivation to kill Buddy. He doesn't have to follow through anymore than a teacher is required to correct a failed exam for a student. If Ward didn't kill the dog, Garrett shoots Ward, not Buddy. We are talking about a guy who murdered an innocent paraplegic here, along with helpless prisoners, Hand, and Patton Oswalt. And let's not forget trying to kill his own brother by burning him alive. Brutal.roadrunner fucked around with this message at 14:36 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 13:56
|
|
|
It was Garret's dog, right? Maybe Buddy was a super dog and was actually shot, but easily survived.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 13:58
|
|
|
On the "Was it Ward or Garrett who killed Buddy" thing, it never crossed my mind that it was anyone but Ward; as someone else said nothing between Ward scaring Buddy off with the first shot through the sight of Buddy in the crosshairs of the scope would have led me to believe differently. But my boyfriend thinks it was Garrett, who could then use Ward's failure to kill what he loved to taunt him into doing horrible things later ("It's not a weakness, is it?"). Sort of makes sense, but seems like an unnecessary thing for Garrett to do since he already had control of Ward.quote:Garrett has no motivation to kill Buddy. Exactly. Garrett isn't the type to waste precious time and energy killing a dog for shits and giggles. Ward's the psychopath, Garrett's just an immoral opportunist. Wormy fucked around with this message at 14:15 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:I'm holding out for the chance that either Fitz or Simmons bites it in the box during the next episode before they are rescued. Not because I actually want either one of them to die, but because I want to writers to show me they are actually awake and not just phoning most of the series in. I'm guessing the who thing is a set-up so they can have a heart to heart while the container fills with water. Hopefully one or both die but I doubt it (since fall should have killed them in the first place).
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:30
|
|
|
They were low to the ground when they were dropped, so the fall itself wouldn't have been fatal (at least in TV/comic logic). Even then, Fitz now has a broken arm according to the cover art.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:02
|
|
|
XboxPants posted:Yes, you're correct that there is such a thing as a scene that implies something to the viewer just to mislead them. It's called a "red herring", and it is only used when the actual truth is more interesting than the one that's implied. You don't write a story where you imply that something interesting is happening, only to later go "just kidding, there's nothing happening here". It is 100% relevant. You can't read a TV show's "text" like a movie when it is still on going. That is and was my point. That is like pausing Return of the King when Frodo gets stabbed and injected by Shelob and going "Well he's dead. There is no way he can survive that. Look at that poo poo coming out his mouth. Look how dead he looks! DEAD DEAD DEAD!" In TV, especially in action/spy serial story telling, and honestly even in movies, there is no point in being absolutist about anything that you haven't seen actually occurring on screen or that hasn't been confirmed as having happened by someone within the story. And even then that sometimes doesn't even matter. Remember when Coulson was confirmed dead on screen in Avengers after getting impaled through the chest? It is not just about possibilities, it is about common TV writing techniques that are used to engage the audience and make them want to see the next episode. Having two team mates or colleagues have casual sex is a "trope" that usually leads to drama within the team. Having two characters who are about to have sex be interrupted before they can have sex is a trope, and if those two characters are not "supposed to be together" it adds drama when people find out they were together. Having a character kill an animal to prove their evilness is a trope. Having a character pretend to do something evil on someone's orders but not follow through to show they are not completely evil is a trope. Recognize these four scenarios? When you placed a scene at the end of an episode, that does not, on screen, resolve which of these events has actually occurred, instead only implying that one has occurred, that is a technique used to build drama and suspense. You want people to tune in next week to confirm what they just saw. Sometimes, this might simply be done before a commercial break instead. Ambiguity is a useful tool for building suspense and causing drama. It keeps an audience engaged, especially between episode or commercial breaks. TV shows do not often shy away from showing deaths or "sex" so when a show purposefully avoids on screen confirmation of something, coincidentally before a break of some kind, it is meant to be ambiguous. That is why 100% of the time confirmation eventually follows (sometimes rather immediately, upon the show returning.) Of course there is always the chance that this show is being written by someone who has never read or been taught anything about screenwriting, but so far the show has been cliched enough that I highly doubt that is the case. And the Ward/May thing played out in textbook fashion.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
Can I just say, I loved all the 60's Howling Commando gadgets. All of them. And then it turned out they were infiltrating a company using 60's record-keeping!
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
Wormy posted:Exactly. Garrett isn't the type to waste precious time and energy killing a dog for shits and giggles. Ward's the psychopath, Garrett's just an immoral opportunist. Garrett sees Ward's weaknesses and tolerates it because because he's such a promising agent and most importantly, loyal. Shooting the dog is basically a threat from Garrett - if you make friends or get attached to anyone other than me, know that I can kill them at any time. Garrett killing the dog is a teachable moment. Also there are many scenes that show how Ward isn't a psychopath and is doing it for the mission, helping Garrett in any way possible. He goes around blowing SHIELD agent's brains out because they're a threat for the Hydra takeover. He's always seen SHIELD as the enemy and is ruthless in taking them out. Note how in last weeks episode, he doesn't kill the police officers and shoots them in the shoulders. Ward is a villain by association and gives up his own sense of morality for Garrett's sociopathic personality.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
FAT BATMAN posted:Can I just say, I loved all the 60's Howling Commando gadgets. All of them. And then it turned out they were infiltrating a company using 60's record-keeping! I hope we see more of them next episode. Though I guess if Agent Carter ever gets made we'd see more of that stuff then.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:I hope we see more of them next episode. Though I guess if Agent Carter ever gets made we'd see more of that stuff then. Definitely wanna see the collector's edition Hypno-Beam. Also I kinda wanna see the team use that bag as their new arsenal, and watch Fitz & Simmons slowly upgrade them and re-purpose them into a totally crazy & awesome Macgyver'd mish-mash of old & new.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
Heres the promo art for the finale. Tripplet is missing, maybe hell die?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Tezzeract posted:Garrett sees Ward's weaknesses and tolerates it because because he's such a promising agent and most importantly, loyal. Shooting the dog is basically a threat from Garrett - if you make friends or get attached to anyone other than me, know that I can kill them at any time. Garrett killing the dog is a teachable moment. Garrett doesn't need to though. He wins either way. If Ward shoots the dog then Ward's path with Garrett and nobody else is solidified. If he doesn't then it serves as an eternal reminder that he's weak and he will always be a disappointment to his father figure and he will never quite deserve his respect. Garrett wins either way. And it was Garrett's dog in the first place which he specifically left with these intentions. You wonder if Garrett just has kids stashed all over the country for the same purpose each time. I mean where exactly did this ultra loyal centipede army come from? halwain posted:Heres the promo art for the finale. They just redrew the cast picture. It doesn't mean anything.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 18:06 |
|
|
halwain posted:Heres the promo art for the finale. UGH. These posters have all been so quality. I'd die happy if I could get them as actual posters.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 18:01
|
|
