Must admit before this episode I was thinking "Blimey, the Alamo again - what is it about that which gets the yanks so het up?". But after watching I finally know why the Alamo does loom so large in the American psyche. So at least this Limey has learned something!:D
LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD!
Surprised by just how enjoyable I found this episode. Wyatts flashbacks were laid on a little thick but necessary for the story I suppose. Looking forward to seeing how it all plays out as I'm starting to like the characters.
Yeah. I'm a little "meh" about it right now too. Last night's story didn't move the main arc on at all and, while 'stand alone' episodes work for some shows, I'm not sure they do for this one. Especially not this early on in the show.
First of all, how could ANYONE not know that song. I mean I'm not that old and I'm not much into modern music, but I knew the whole song... Oh heck I AM that old.
OK, USTV has just predictable, that or I'm psychic I just knew who was going to be at the house, as soon as you realised she was going to knock.
Writers are getting so up themselves thinking up twists and big reveals they don't realise they even old thickos like me can work it out, well the obvious ones anyway.
I was a bit puzzled by Dr. Lucy's reaction to seeing her dad. Clearly she knows he's with Rittenhouse, but I can't remember how. "Dad" obviously knew who Lucy was (from the phone call he made to one of his honchos), but didn't acknowledge to Lucy that he knew her, so presumably they've not met at the time travel base. I'm thinking at the moment he doesn't know shes actually his daughter.
Anyway clearly now both Rufus and Dr. Lucy are beginning to doubt their mission - just now needs all American soldier Wyatt to get with the program!
If I'm guessing the big reveal, they're doing it wrong.
Rather obvious if you ask me.
I had to watch it again because I didn't recognise 'generic old guy' outside of the 'threatening' context as he was in disguise by wearing neither the requisite suit nor the right kind of expression and without any sinister lighting, plus on that first threat (the cars at night) he wasn't flanked by heavies, he was just some guy who got our of a car.
So the big shock* reveal was a bit lost on me
OTOH 'the doc' seemed a bit obvious to me that they were talking about a person rather than papery things but also obvious (once they did it) that everybody, geniuses included, would have to miss this possibility even after hearing a few examples of references to 'the doc'.
* +/- degrees of unexpectedability and shockingnessism
I was a bit puzzled by Dr. Lucy's reaction to seeing her dad.
I just took that as the usual chickening-out stage, which usually happens once or twice before the person answering the door twigs that it's not just a wrong address or mistaken delivery (etc).
I'm fairly sure she doesn't know who or what he is, though he definitely knows her because Rittenhouse (or 'writtenhaus', just because) knows everything, or possibly that one parentage detail is the single thing that they don't know?
There's going to have to be this big shock moment when Rufus points at the baddies and their leader, Lucy says omg that's my daddy and Wyatt says omg that's Darth Uncle Bob...
They should have pumped the Doc for all the information she had - she said she knew the names of every member of Rittenhouse since it was founded in 1778 (I think it was) - then if all else fails, they can go back to 1778 and stop it from ever getting started, or help to start it up but steer it in the direction they want. Or change anything in Rittenhouse's history really, at least up to the point where the Doc left.
It was reiterated in this episode that you can't go back to a time when you already exist, but surely they're not trying to pretend that Matt Frewer's character was born after 1972?!
Have Rittenhouse been searching for the Doc ever since 1972? And not found her?
Oh, and it should be easy for them to catch Garcia Flynn in the present day, if they just had someone watching his wife's grave!
It was reiterated in this episode that you can't go back to a time when you already exist, but surely they're not trying to pretend that Matt Frewer's character was born after 1972?!
That confused me a bit too - I had thought it was one of those 'never talk to yourself it would be really very very bad' things. Unless he's already from the future, or from some other period in the past, or there was a time travel accident and he aged dramatically so you would never guess he was only 35...?
The cast list* says Matt Frewer is 'Anthony Bruhl' though it doesn't say if he's a professor or a doctor of anything which makes it trickier to remember especially as he's not in a lot of episodes.
* which too late I realised I should have been careful when looking at the full version on imdb, because we are only half way through and character names are a bit of a giveaway and I should have been looking at the per-episode version and even that has its own dangers if the most recent is listed first and we haven't seen it yet - the internet is a perilous place :eek:
Well we didn't actually see "Anthony Bruhl" in 1972 did we? Maybe he has given Flynn a crash course in driving the timeship and sat this week's adventure out?:)
It was reiterated in this episode that you can't go back to a time when you already exist, but surely they're not trying to pretend that Matt Frewer's character was born after 1972?!
The writer's have indicated that there is only one rule which is that you can't revisit a time to which you have previously travelled. So neither team can revisit the Alamo to prevent the death which required Lucy to have to write the vital letter, for example. You can, therefore, visit a time in which you were alive though for obvious reasons it is a good idea to do nothing to change your personal history by meeting yourself, for example.
The writer's have indicated that there is only one rule which is that you can't revisit a time to which you have previously travelled. So neither team can revisit the Alamo to prevent the death which required Lucy to have to write the vital letter, for example. You can, therefore, visit a time in which you were alive though for obvious reasons it is a good idea to do nothing to change your personal history by meeting yourself, for example.
Sounds like the standard Doctor Who rules then - no popping back to save Adrick or other "redshirts" who died during the episode, and no meeting yourself and definitely no touching yourself as shown in the episode "Fathers' Day" - otherwise Bad Things will happen!
The writer's have indicated that there is only one rule which is that you can't revisit a time to which you have previously travelled. So neither team can revisit the Alamo to prevent the death which required Lucy to have to write the vital letter, for example. You can, therefore, visit a time in which you were alive though for obvious reasons it is a good idea to do nothing to change your personal history by meeting yourself, for example.
This is what was said in the first episode.
So why don't we just go back five minutes before Flynn stormed in and then shoot him in the face?
You can't go back to any time where you already exist, where you might meet a double of yourself. It is bad for the fabric of reality.
Define "bad."
We tried it once. The pilot came back, but not all of him.
So nothing about it being a time you have already traveled to, just one that you exist in.
Though it's possible problems only occur if you actually meet the younger version of yourself.
I had to watch it again because I didn't recognise 'generic old guy' outside of the 'threatening' context as he was in disguise by wearing neither the requisite suit nor the right kind of expression and without any sinister lighting, plus on that first threat (the cars at night) he wasn't flanked by heavies, he was just some guy who got our of a car.
So the big shock* reveal was a bit lost on me
The one at the end? If so I will have to undelete it from my Tivo and watch it again then as I didn't know we were supposed to know who it was and I didn't recognise him.
First of all, how could ANYONE not know that song. I mean I'm not that old and I'm not much into modern music, but I knew the whole song... Oh heck I AM that old.
OK, USTV has just predictable, that or I'm psychic I just knew who was going to be at the house, as soon as you realised she was going to knock.
Writers are getting so up themselves thinking up twists and big reveals they don't realise they even old thickos like me can work it out, well the obvious ones anyway.
I'm even thicker as I didn't spot it. Going to undelete it from my Tivo and and watch it again now >:(:p
I really don't understand that. I don't care what channel something is on. If I want to watch it, I will.
The one at the end? If so I will have to undelete it from my Tivo and watch it again then as I didn't know we were supposed to know who it was and I didn't recognise him.
He's the Rittenhouse bloke, though I wasn't sure at first either.
About the rule of not travelling to a time where you already exist, I think that at this point it doesn't make much difference whether it just means you shouldn't run into yourself, or there shouldn't be two versions of you at the same time even if miles apart, since none of the travellers can be sure where they were on any date in the new timeline, especially Lucy since her whole life must have been quite different with no stepfather and no sister. She could have gone on a lot of trips with her mother that never happened in her original timeline. So she could never be sure she wouldn't run into a young version of herself within her lifetime.
So nothing about it being a time you have already traveled to, just one that you exist in.
Though it's possible problems only occur if you actually meet the younger version of yourself.
Well yes. That dialogue proves that it isn't impossible per se. It is only meeting yourself or affecting your own personal history directly that is verboten. Returning to a time and place you have previously visited makes such a meeting inevitable and therefore in effect impossible. It is, however, possible to return to a time within your own lifetime provided that it is to a location which affords no possibility of meeting yourself.
He's the Rittenhouse bloke, though I wasn't sure at first either.
About the rule of not travelling to a time where you already exist, I think that at this point it doesn't make much difference whether it just means you shouldn't run into yourself, or there shouldn't be two versions of you at the same time even if miles apart, since none of the travellers can be sure where they were on any date in the new timeline, especially Lucy since her whole life must have been quite different with no stepfather and no sister. She could have gone on a lot of trips with her mother that never happened in her original timeline. So she could never be sure she wouldn't run into a young version of herself within her lifetime.
I suspect that you've given that a lot more thought than the writers have! They're just determined to avoid any story involving different versions of the same person!
The one at the end? If so I will have to undelete it from my Tivo and watch it again then as I didn't know we were supposed to know who it was and I didn't recognise him.
This is why infrequent or relatively briefly-appearing characters need props or context to help the viewer recognise or place them, especially if they don't have a moustache to twirl, sounds like a fair few people didn't spot who it was.
This is why infrequent or relatively briefly-appearing characters need props or context to help the viewer recognise or place them, especially if they don't have a moustache to twirl, sounds like a fair few people didn't spot who it was.
It's possibly not that important - maybe like a little gift to the very observant. It may well be made more explicitly clear for viewers who missed it before it is actually germane to the plot.
I must admit though that as soon as Dr. Lucy's mum gave her the name of her dad, I was sure it would be someone we'd already seen (a pretty standard trope). So when he came to the door I thought there's only 2 men that sort of age we've seen - Flynn's pilot and the Rittenhouse guy who was putting pressure on Rufus - plus that guy had been in the scene before - putting pressure on Rufus! So a quick re-wind was all that was needed. I agree though that he looks much less intimidating in mufti.
Comments
LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD!
Surprised by just how enjoyable I found this episode. Wyatts flashbacks were laid on a little thick but necessary for the story I suppose. Looking forward to seeing how it all plays out as I'm starting to like the characters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sound_of_Silence
Not sure of the version used. A recent one, obviously.
The good news is I've heard of Simon and Garfunkel just not aware of anything they have sang.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4oInT79CUk&feature=youtu.be
OK, USTV has just predictable, that or I'm psychic I just knew who was going to be at the house, as soon as you realised she was going to knock.
Writers are getting so up themselves thinking up twists and big reveals they don't realise they even old thickos like me can work it out, well the obvious ones anyway.
Rather obvious if you ask me.
Anyway clearly now both Rufus and Dr. Lucy are beginning to doubt their mission - just now needs all American soldier Wyatt to get with the program!
I had to watch it again because I didn't recognise 'generic old guy' outside of the 'threatening' context as he was in disguise by wearing neither the requisite suit nor the right kind of expression and without any sinister lighting, plus on that first threat (the cars at night) he wasn't flanked by heavies, he was just some guy who got our of a car.
So the big shock* reveal was a bit lost on me
OTOH 'the doc' seemed a bit obvious to me that they were talking about a person rather than papery things but also obvious (once they did it) that everybody, geniuses included, would have to miss this possibility even after hearing a few examples of references to 'the doc'.
* +/- degrees of unexpectedability and shockingnessism
I'm fairly sure she doesn't know who or what he is, though he definitely knows her because Rittenhouse (or 'writtenhaus', just because) knows everything, or possibly that one parentage detail is the single thing that they don't know?
There's going to have to be this big shock moment when Rufus points at the baddies and their leader, Lucy says omg that's my daddy and Wyatt says omg that's Darth Uncle Bob...
It was reiterated in this episode that you can't go back to a time when you already exist, but surely they're not trying to pretend that Matt Frewer's character was born after 1972?!
Have Rittenhouse been searching for the Doc ever since 1972? And not found her?
Oh, and it should be easy for them to catch Garcia Flynn in the present day, if they just had someone watching his wife's grave!
The cast list* says Matt Frewer is 'Anthony Bruhl' though it doesn't say if he's a professor or a doctor of anything which makes it trickier to remember especially as he's not in a lot of episodes.
* which too late I realised I should have been careful when looking at the full version on imdb, because we are only half way through and character names are a bit of a giveaway and I should have been looking at the per-episode version and even that has its own dangers if the most recent is listed first and we haven't seen it yet - the internet is a perilous place :eek:
The writer's have indicated that there is only one rule which is that you can't revisit a time to which you have previously travelled. So neither team can revisit the Alamo to prevent the death which required Lucy to have to write the vital letter, for example. You can, therefore, visit a time in which you were alive though for obvious reasons it is a good idea to do nothing to change your personal history by meeting yourself, for example.
Sounds like the standard Doctor Who rules then - no popping back to save Adrick or other "redshirts" who died during the episode, and no meeting yourself and definitely no touching yourself as shown in the episode "Fathers' Day" - otherwise Bad Things will happen!
This is what was said in the first episode.
So nothing about it being a time you have already traveled to, just one that you exist in.
Though it's possible problems only occur if you actually meet the younger version of yourself.
The one at the end? If so I will have to undelete it from my Tivo and watch it again then as I didn't know we were supposed to know who it was and I didn't recognise him.
I'm even thicker as I didn't spot it. Going to undelete it from my Tivo and and watch it again now
He's the Rittenhouse bloke, though I wasn't sure at first either.
About the rule of not travelling to a time where you already exist, I think that at this point it doesn't make much difference whether it just means you shouldn't run into yourself, or there shouldn't be two versions of you at the same time even if miles apart, since none of the travellers can be sure where they were on any date in the new timeline, especially Lucy since her whole life must have been quite different with no stepfather and no sister. She could have gone on a lot of trips with her mother that never happened in her original timeline. So she could never be sure she wouldn't run into a young version of herself within her lifetime.
Well yes. That dialogue proves that it isn't impossible per se. It is only meeting yourself or affecting your own personal history directly that is verboten. Returning to a time and place you have previously visited makes such a meeting inevitable and therefore in effect impossible. It is, however, possible to return to a time within your own lifetime provided that it is to a location which affords no possibility of meeting yourself.
I suspect that you've given that a lot more thought than the writers have! They're just determined to avoid any story involving different versions of the same person!
It's possibly not that important - maybe like a little gift to the very observant. It may well be made more explicitly clear for viewers who missed it before it is actually germane to the plot.
I must admit though that as soon as Dr. Lucy's mum gave her the name of her dad, I was sure it would be someone we'd already seen (a pretty standard trope). So when he came to the door I thought there's only 2 men that sort of age we've seen - Flynn's pilot and the Rittenhouse guy who was putting pressure on Rufus - plus that guy had been in the scene before - putting pressure on Rufus! So a quick re-wind was all that was needed. I agree though that he looks much less intimidating in mufti.