This is a long one. I doubt anyone, maybe Shag, will finish reading it, but I'm bored. Eesh - just did word count - over 2,800! Enjoy! I, overall, enjoyed COE. I prefer arc shows to episodic ones, and it helped that they were shown all together rather than having to wait a week in-between. I also liked that they, BBC America, showed each entire 75 minute episode, rather than trying to cut them down to an hour. It was an interesting story and it was told well. It also did what a lot of sci-fi does - asks a lot of hard moral questions and makes you think about what is 'right' and 'wrong'. Sure, the ending was generally predictable. Basically, by sending the recursive wave, they merely reversed the polarity and bounced a graviton particle beam off the main deflector dish, a dish named Steven. I'm still not a fan of Gwen, but she wasn't too annoying. I totally fell for the thing where they made it look like they were going to recuit that Dr. I liked Lois. I could see her in the next version of Torchwood. I read that, initially that part was going to be Martha Jones, but the actress got hired on for Law and Order: London (seriously); so, they had to change the story/role. I get that Jack has made some hard/bad choices in the past, but was it really established that his character would have ever not cared about 12 kids enough to have turned them over to aliens? Keep in mind that, for him, all that happened after his time with Rose and Dr #9. Sure, he had been 'stranded' on Earth for over 100 years at that time, but was he really that jaded by that time? I need to re-watch the episodes that showed him getting captured and recruited by Torchwood. I'm not saying it is out of character that he would sacrifice, i.e. MURDER, his grandson. Since he was 'his', somehow it makes it 'better' (more heroic?) than sacrificing some random kid. Yes, human logic can be messed up. His killing his grandson was a little surprising - I won't say unpredictable, but it did fit the archetype of the story. It's the difference between sacrificing an anonymous person verses your own. This is different than the heroic thing. This is the 'How could you do it to someone else's kid if you wouldn't do it to your own?" thing. That was to point shown by the gov't excluding their kids from the selection. As to when he and Ionto told the 456, "No deal" - did he really think just his rep would scare them off? Ok, that hubris isn't out of character for him, still - that was dumb. That was after they knew that the 456 were a bunch of junkies. Even in humans, junkies aren't know for standard logic. A better threat would have been the Doctor's rep. It still wouldn’t have worked, but it would have been funny had they mentioned him and the 456 saying "But he's not here now, is he?" >From a professional contract negotiator POV, once the PM decided to negotiate, >he should have give (sp) Forbisher a better negotiating position! Going from >35M to 65K? Yeah, I'd be insulted, too. They may have gone for 65K - per >year in perpetuity. I'm not saying it would have been the 'right' thing to >do, but, hey, if you are going to do it, do it right. And, since the 456 were >ok in 1965 to take just 11 kids rather than the agreed upon 12 (they didn't >say 'hey, one got lost in shipping'), it showed they were open to >negotiating. At the end, they didn't accept 80% only b/c they knew we'd cave >and agree to 100%. Is a junkie really going to burn down the greenhouse and >get 0% of the heroin rather than accept 80%? Yeah, junkies might not have >standard logic, but they do have junkie logic. Even the initial 12. The >gov't should have asked more questions. No, not "what are you going to do >with them." They didn't want to know. They should have asked, "how about ones in a coma? Can we give you those?" Or, once, we knew their plan, why did we bogart our stash? Too bad they didn't initiate contact with Jamaica. We could have offered them some /serious/ alternative. Who knows, maybe the 456 have a "medical condition". I do question the logistics. Sure, in small, yet modern countries, like the UK and Japan, you could get 10% of the kids in 1 day, but does Kenya really have that much infrastructure that organized? You also have to look over the fact that a lot of countries leaders would have said no, either through stubbornness, hubris, or doubt of the aliens claims. I'm guessing things didn't go as smoothly in say, Texas, where people have guns. That's also why the 2nd Amendment is important. For when the gov't comes to take your kids . . . to give them to the aliens. Hey, it could happen. Meh. Minor things. I do question the PMs blame plan. Had they just told people they had to take the kids to the center, I think it would have been easier, after the plan, to say, "Oh, no! The aliens double crossed us!" As it turned out, they wouldn't even have to blame the US. They could give the kids B12 shots and say that was the inoculation. I'm not seeing how there plan got 'messed up'. I think the writers could have handled that a little better. So, #1 was Jack right in 1965? Let's assume the aliens actually gave good proof ahead of time that the virus would mutate. Back then, it wasn't a threat, right? Just a "Hey, we happened to notice that there is a virus on your planet, that will, by our computer projections, mutate and kill millions of people in the next few years, and thought we'd make up a batch of anti-virus. You can have it if you want - BTW, do you happen to have a dozen kids we can borrow?" (We agree that the 456 made the virus in the first place, right?) #2 Was the gov't right? Is sacrificing millions - without their consent, not to death . . .just a little slavery being a bong, worth, potentially, saving billions? Granted, part of the reason the story required it to be done in a few days time was to take away the option of consulting with the people. But had they had time, would they have chosen differently? Chosen to put it before the people? Maybe not - and not just for selfish reasons. Maybe because they knew people would say 'no'. Even if it was going to be truly random, I honestly think people would say 'no'. Even most people, like me, who have no immediate family under the age 18, would say 'no'. Which, I think, is good, humanity-wise - not for 'humanity' in the 'people' sense, but 'humanity' in the 'soul' sense. Well, maybe people would say no /because/ it was random. If people knew it was the 'bottom 10%', a lot of people might be ok with that. There would be discussion as to what constitutes bottom 10%, sure. But, yeah, I'd agree that more people would go for the bottom 10%, whatever that means. Ok, NOT so good for humanity. Had the govt' asked the people about the 10% plan, would I have supported it? Hmm. I'd go with 'no'. I'd think about it, and I'd feel bad about thinking about it, but, in the end, I'd got with no. More people would also go for it if it wasn't 10% of each country. See, that's where the aliens messed up. They would have gotten less resistance if they had told the UK that they could pick any 35M kids in the world. Yeah, it would have taken longer to organize, but I, sadly, think that would have been a lot easier to swallow (insert Kanye West reference here). That's what they get for being equitable. Anyway, my 'humanity' says there are some things worth dying for - even if that thing gets killed in the process - just as long as it doesn't get 'destroyed'. There is a difference. However . . . however, I say, were I in the gov't, would I have made the same decision? Ffffffff . . . possibly. And not for selfish reasons. After making that decision, pulling a Forbisher would then be the easy way to deal with it. For me, at least, living with the knowledge of what I did would be worse than death - but that doesn't mean I wouldn't necessarily make that decision. Making the hard decisions is what leadership is all about. Legally, should/would I have done it? Hells, no. Would I have done it? Maybe. Should we torture to get info? nnnnoooo. Would I torture someone under the right circumstances? . . . yeeeees. Is that hypocrisy? Sure, but, meh, I'm human. But then, if I got caught (no, I wouldn't initially announce it!), I'd own up to it. In the Torchwood case, would I have been guilty of treason? Sure. I still think they should have negotiated more, especially before they did the virus in the building. Even after, 80% probably would have been good enough. Yes, they them may have killed all of Ireland, but I still think they should have risked it. I still maintain they wouldn't have killed /everyone/. In some ways, even if they had the time, not consulting with the people may have been for the peoples benefit. Follow me here, assuming it's not done randomly, which people would never go for, if it were the 'bottom 10%', would the majority of people rather support that and feel guilty for it or just have it done by the gov't? The latter, definitely. No guilt, there. Blame is easier than guilt. Believe it or not, this is why I DON'T trust the government and don't support a 'strong' central government - because the gov't is made up of people, and I don't trust (or generally like) people. Thoughts? #3 If you, in general agree with the gov'ts' plan, or even if you didn't, but hey they are going to do it anyway, was their plan of taking 'the bottom 10%' the way to go? Sure, their expressly exempting their kids was weasely, but had they come up with the bottom 10% plan in the first place, I'm guessing none of their kids would have been at risk. I'm guessing, even given that the US agreed with the 10%, it wasn't the 'bottom 10%' as that would have had a 'disproportionate impact on minorities". Never would have passed, here. Hey, I'm just sayin'. Did you also notice how even the bottom 10% were still in school uniforms? I initially thought those kids, especially the ones doing multiplication tables, would be safe - and the Asians. How'd any of them get in the bottom 10%? What? I'm just sayin'. #4 I guess if you think the gov'ts' general plan was ok, you’d be ok with Gwen and Jack's decision to not tell the populous, regardless if it was random or bottom 10%. But what if you didn't agree with the gov't, could you still agree with G&J? Did anyone else see the similarities between Gwen and Jack's decision to keep the cover-up secret and Dan and Laurie's in Watchmen? But G and J was worse. With D&L, it had already happened, but with G&L, it hadn't, yet. By not exposing the gov't's plan prior t it occurring, they were totally complicit in it. Oh, "they tried to save the 19 kids at Iontos' sister" - oooo, whooptidy do. They chose for everyone. I guess that "an injury to one is an injury to all" thing is out the window. More like "The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the one - even if the one doesn't agree." Oh, "But there wasn't time for Jack to ask Steven if he wanted to save 35M people!" Ptttthhhhh, I say. When Gwen said the Doctor must sometimes turn away from the Earth in shame - SHE is part of the cause of that shame. Were I Gwen, would I have told her husband (can't remember his name) to release the tapes? Hmmm... I think . . . probably. Is that inconstant with the probability that I would have, in the gov'ts' position, supported the general culling? A bit, but, Gwen, even though she is part of Torchwood, which is sort of a gov't agency, she still isn't /really/ part of the gov't in the way that an elected official is. Somehow, that makes a difference. #5 Was Jack right to sacrifice, again MURDER, his grandson, to save the 35M kids? That's like, if you ask "should he have done it?" Well, to paraphrase, Bill Clinton, that depends on what the word 'should' is? 'Humanity'-wise, no. But, again, like with the gov't, the 'right' decision that you 'should' do isn't always the one you 'have' to do. Would I have done it? Well, if it was someone I didn't know, it'd be easier. But, had it been my bro or sis when they were young? Again, hells no. But by the 'math/logic' of it, he/I should. See, that's why if Vulcans went by pure logic, they'd be some serious SOBs. That's an interesting exercise - what if the same thing happened on Vulcan when they were at the same level of tech as us in COE? 12 kids to save millions from flu? Going by pure logic? Easy - yes. No need to even cover it up. The only reason Vulcan wouldn't have already been littered with 'undesirables' would be if they had already been exterminated. But, even Vulcan would have still needed to have someone clean up poop; so, probably still lots of dummies around. Even if they did cover it up (maybe they didn't tell people because, meh, not a big enough deal to even tell people about), the second time they show up, I could see Vulcans not telling the masses just b/c it would be an inefficient hassle to tell people that could distract them from their regular work. Once the demand for the 10% came, first I think the Vulcans would negotiate the crap out of the 456. I but they'd even ask for some 'carrot' to go along with the 'stick'. But once it came down to 5% to be provided in two weeks (the 456 wouldn't even have to release the small amount of virus as the Vulcans would logically determine that any species capable of intergalactic travel can easily kill everything on a given planet that only has limited non-manned interstellar travel, even if not by virus. Heck /we/ could kill everything on a mirror Earth if we could get there with the 10,000 nukes we have), the High Council would select, based on the extensive test scores they would already have, the bottom 5%. They would then tell the families of those kids to deliver them at a certain time, and the families would do it. Would they tell the people ahead of time, why? Perhaps, in order to let people wrap up lose ends, you know, cancel dentist appoints and such. "No, T'pek, you won't be getting braces tomorrow as you won't need them once we deliver you to the 456 next week." Hmm, that might be why the High Council wouldn't tell people why they are being rounded up. Because then, when the children ask, some parents might logically tell them, though, not having completed their training, the kids could have emotional responses, which could have caused inefficiencies. Would the families ask why? Sure, but they'd be told. It's a matter of planetary security. We can't tell you. By pure logic, that would be enough. Even afterwards, the people would understand that the gov't did the logical thing. Man, Vulcans are some serious SOBs. Final thoughts: - Even as bad as that PM was, still better than Saxon ;) Though it's not like the new chick will be any better- she was the one who first brought up excluding her kids. - At my work, you can access my e-mail with just my password. For encrypted docs, my badge has to be physically in my machine with a separate password. If you were doing a 'blank page' don't you think it'd be encrypted or at least you have some code words? "See to it that the following people get . . . a 'haircut'." - That's why you don't have secretaries in the room WHILST DISCUSSING SACRIFICING MILLIONS OF PEOPLE!!! - So, I assume the super bomb closed the rift in Cardiff. It also sucks for all those people in stasis that were at Torchwood 3, not to mention the pterodactyl. - People suck. ~Ron
________________________________ From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 1:03:03 AM Subject: [The Unique Geek] Re: Torchwood tonight! I really enjoyed the whole thing. I've always liked Gwen, so I was fine with her in this one. Believe it or not, I didn't like Jack in this one very much. First, he was more of a jerk than normal (i.e. wanted to test his grandson, let the kids go to the aliens in 1960s, eventually sacrificed his grandson, etc). Second, John Barrowman looked like he's had more plastic surgery. When he's not smiling (just sitting there expressionless), his face looks plastic and sculpted. I was bummed about Ianto. I always liked his characters. A first, I hated Lois. I couldn't stand her, but by the end I really liked her. She's a definite when they get the team back together. The Macra ... errr... I mean 456 were interesting, but sort of hard to take serious as a world threat when they couldn't leave their tank. I'm just sayin... The Irredeemable Shag http://firestormfan.com http://onceuponageek.com http://twitter.com/onceuponageek -------- Original Message -------- >Subject: [The Unique Geek] Re: Torchwood tonight! >From: Jennifer Walker <[email protected]> >Date: Sat, July 25, 2009 1:34 pm >To: [email protected] > >The think I was most impressed with (having just watched all 5 parts last >night) that after 5 hours I really didn't want to murder Gwen (I've always >disliked her character). The point was made that by having fewer main >characters to concentrate on, perhaps more thought was given to individual >development and motivations. > >Either way, it was an enjoyable 5 hours with some truly downer moments but >with some genuinely funny parts, as well. It's sad that this is it for the >show. > > >On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Edward Crosby <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>**SPOILERS** >>Just finished watching day five. What an amazing mini-series. I've been a >>fan of Torchwood since the beginning but I have to say that this was the >>best story written for the show. To be honest, seeing some of the season >>finales that Russell T. Davies has written for Dr. Who, I've not been a >>big fan of Davies writing. He has his hits and misses; those season >>finales have definitely been misses. But I can say that he did a fantastic >>job on this story. Some state that the series could have been cut so that >>it didn't have five episodes, but I say that everything written was vital >>to the story. The only main issue I can think of was the plot device to >>eliminate the 456. I thought it kind of weak of how it tied with Clem, >>however still touching how it tied with Capt. Jack. >>It looks like Torchwood is at an end after this series but I think that >>now Capt. Jack is off planet there is so much more for that character, but >>you can't really call it Torchwood unless he establishes the unit on >>another planet. However, for Earth, I don't believe it would be a show >>without Capt. Jack. I love this character and I hope to God that we see >>more of him. If not on a Torchwood series at least on Dr. Who. >> >> >>-- >>Have a Better One, >>Edward Crosby >>http://www.edwardcrosby.com >>----- >>"There are no atheists in foxholes or firmware updates." >>Merlin Mann >> >> >>> Yes, it is awesome. I'd be interested in having some discussions about >>> it after you watch it. >>> >>> The Irredeemable Shag >>> http://firestormfan.com >>> http://onceuponageek.com >>> http://twitter.com/onceuponageek >>> >>> >>> -------- Original Message -------- >>> Subject: [The Unique Geek] Re: Torchwood tonight! >>> From: dug b >> >>> Date: Mon, July 20, 2009 4:09 pm >>> To: [email protected] >>> >> >>> #wmMessage DIV {margin:0px;} It is well and truly great. Very >>> surprising ending that leaves LOTS of questions for the future. >>> >>> From: Edward Crosby >>> To: TUG TUG >> >>> Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 4:05:34 PM >>> Subject: [The Unique Geek] Torchwood tonight! >>> >>> >>> Don't forget. Torchwood mini-series airs tonight on BBC America. And, >>> apparently, it's awesome. I can't wait. >>> >>> http://popwatch.ew.com/popwatch/2009/07/torchwood-children-of-the-earth-in-a-word-awesome.html >>> >>> I noticed in my cable guide that there are also some specials surrounding >>> the debut. A special about John Barrowman and a couple centered around >>> Torchwood. >>> >>> -- >>> Have a Better One, >>> Edward Crosby >>> http://www.edwardcrosby.com >>> ----- >>> "There are no atheists in foxholes or firmware updates." >>> Merlin Mann >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Unique Geek" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
