Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: ooooo! | |
| Posted By: scarab | Date: 1/28/08 1:31 a.m. |
In Response To: Re: ooooo! (Narcogen) : That is a very good explanation, actually. : However I still contend that the question of HOW Regret found Earth is
: He wanted to do it and he did. : It's just a detail webfans like to obsess over... like continuity errors in
Funny, I was thinking of Star Trek, Star Trek the Search for Spock in particular. The ST regulars all throw their careers away to go to the Genesis planet when all the available evidence suggests that Spocl's body burnt up in the atmosphere and that the solution to Bone's problem lay on Vulcan. What they didn't know was that going to Genesis was the correct thing to do. The audience knew it, the writers knew it. Its just that the characters didn't. Nevertheless they did the right thing to resolve the story. Lazy Star Trek writing. I'm of the opinion that if you shoot someone with a gun in the final scene/chapter/act then you establish the existence of the gun in the first scene. Cortana brought the subject up with her comments about the apparent surprise to find us on Earth. So we've been pointed in this direction. To me, how they found earth isn't just a detail. Its an important detail. My idea of good craftmanship is how well the story hangs together: what do characters know, how do they know, when do they know. Do they act on information that is avialable to them, do they act in ways that are consistent with who they are, or do they do things because the story needs them to? I don't believe that I am the only person who thinks like that. I'm probably acting in a way that is consistent with my nature :-) On the bright side. I'm glad I made the effort. I have found an answer to Cortana's question. Its nice that a comment made near the start of Halo 2 fits with what we know in Halo 3 and in a book that mentions events that happened immediately prior to the Covenant holy war. If its real then it shows a degree of craftmanship in the story telling. OK, we know that the entire story wasn't planned out from the start. Maybe this matchup was just a great recovery by the Bungie team. Was it always the intention? Who knows? But things like that interest me just as much as the actual story itself. How did the story telling evolve? Its not a question of did it evolve? We know it did. Its interesting to see if we can tell how it changed. <- though thats probably never totally possible to track.
| |
|
| Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |