GWC Podcast #209

Managed to listen to the rest of the cast and a few more thoughts.

Quick note for Shaun. You said that by the time he did Last Crusade Connery was too old to play Bond. But he was 59 then, and Roger Moore was 58 when he did View to a Kill. This may disprove or support your statement depending on your point of view :slight_smile:

Re the whole Mal Bully conversation. I can see where you guys are coming from, but I can also see why people don’t agree quite vehemently.

For me, while he exhibits some dubious behaviour, Mal is not at his heart a bully. A through and through Bully is someone like Biff from BTTF, who is a git, enjoys being a git and doesn’t care how it impacts other people. A true bully wouldn’t have given the medicine back in Train Job.

Mal isn’t like that. At heart he is a good and courageous person, but at times he does stuff which upsets others. I don’t think he in any way revels in this, and for the most part I think he either regrets or doesn’t realise what he’s doing. I think he’s also broken, thanks to Serenity Valley, and I suspect that is a large part of it. Possibly this would have been explored more if the series had continued. I think what I’m trying to say is that he acts as a bully sometimes but isn’t inherantly one. (if you’ll pardon the split hair).

To go into some specifics. I see three places where he really shows this stuff off.

  1. When he orders people around as if he and they were in the millitary.

I totally get what Chuck was saying about leadership, and in the opening scene in the episode Serenity Mal very clearly has that. However, one of the key ways the millitary differs from civilian life is that whlie great leadership is desirable, absolute discipline is a fundamental concept and must be upheld at all costs. This harks back to when men were lined up and ordered to march into fire in formation and operate in a coordinated way following orders (e.g. Zulu). Or to Naval combat in the age of sail. The millitary cannot afford for individual soldiers to start questioning orders, even if they are right, or the whole thing falls appart. This isn’t fun if you are at the receiving end of the orders, but that’s probably why Shaun should never be a soldier :slight_smile: The way Mal behaves would be completely appropriate and legal within the confines of a millitary campaign, especially a desperate losing campaign such as he fought in. Incidentaly, Mal’s unswerving loyalty to his people is another aspect of this.

Where Mal falls down (and I’ve seen this with real ex-millitary people) is that he can’t get his head round civilian life, especially having been on the losing side. The way he behaves is appropriate in the millitary, but not outside it. Something that the show is clearly aware of and lampshades via Wash and his frequent comments to Zoe.

I think the reason for this, which harks back to Chuck’s comments on leadership, is that Mal has lost his faith.

[i]“A man does not have himself killed for a half-pence a day or for a petty distinction. You must speak to the soul in order to electrify him.”

  • Napoleon Bonaparte [/i]

Mal believed in independence and had his faith crushed when they abandoned him and ultimately lost. He has been left adrift in a verse he struggles to deal with and not beleiving in anything beyond himself. So he falls back on what he knows and is good at, the millitary way of life. This is a failing of his, a weakness. You can call it bullying, but to be honest I think it over-simplifies what is going on. I think the way the other characters put up with this behaviour indicates that they see this as well. He isn’t at heart a bully, he’s just broken and adrift and getting by the only way he knows how.

  1. The way he speaks to Inaria.

This is a lot easier to explain. He loves her and cares for her, but struggles to put his faith in anything after what happened last time, especially given what she does (which he likely privately sees as a snub to him). It’s hardly an uncommon reaction for people to react the way he does to something they desire but are afraid of. It’s not particularly nice, but it’s very human. Again, to me this doesn’t show him as a to the core bully.

  1. The way he speaks to Kayleigh (especially in Shindig)

To me, this is the least excusable, but also the most obvious. He’s just being a boorish bloke who shoots off his mouth before he thinks. You could probably also make some argument that he sees Kayleigh as ‘one of the guys’ and assumes she’ll be cool about this sort of thing in the knock about way small units can be. I think that’s a bit of a reach though. TBH, I struggle most with this as there is no obvious backstory explanation for it. If you contrast how he reacts to Jayne being rude about Kayleigh to how he talks to her in Shindig, it makes him a hypocrite. (I know the way he speaks to Inaria already does that, but there’s a reason there). Mal is lots of things, but he’s genrally true to himself. I’m inclined to put it down to poor writing and not build a larger story out of it.

So, in summary I think Mal displays some behaviour which can be classed as bullying, but I can’t see him as a bully himself. To give another example, I can’t picture a bully behaving as he did with his ‘bride’.

Anyway, thanks for bearing with me through this long wibble. Hope it makes sense. I also hope I’m recalling things properly as I’ve only watched the first six episodes recently.

Thanks to both of you, done!

Alice Review (not really any spoilers)

Wow, for the first time in months I can comment on the 'cast in the week before the next one. For me, that’s a personal achievement :slight_smile:

Setting that aside, I have to thank Audra publicly for her comments regarding Beowulf. And I am totally by you there, no matter the fact that it is Angelina Jolie, there is no room for a character of that sort in Beowulf. Grendel’s mother is more of a murdering monster than he is, and Beowulf kills her in a suitably epic fashion. No gold-coloured seduction.

I was bored, so after pausing CSI I popped in The Last Crusade to see what it said about the Cross of Coronado

Indy: It’s the Cross of Coronado. Cortez gave it to him in 1520. That cross is an important artifact, it belongs in a museum.

Doing some googling, Coronado was a conquistador who, curiously was born in 1510 (which calls the movie fact into question, why would Cortez have given the cross to a 10 year old?) He apparently was slumming around the American Southwest between 1540 and 42 looking for the lost seven cities of gold. Wikipedia failed to turn up any information on a Cross of Coronado.

They call the man with the hat Garth at some point in the movie. After Cross checking, Marion’s father was named Abner, so no go there.

Also, Jones Sr. was a professor of Medieval Literature.

Related, but side note, isn’t it funny how subtitles quite often don’t match the original language? Try watching a movie with the English Subs turned on. Most times they don’t match the dialogue (sometimes hilariously)

Finally, you guys talked a lot about how Indy doesn’t act like a ‘real archaeologist’ in the movies. A while back, right before the fourth film came out, the History Chanel did a special on Indiana Jones and compared him to real archaeologists. According to archaeologists on the show, at the time archaeology was much more like grave-robbing. All of the archaeologists of the day grabbed what they could and hauled it home. Very few of the obelisks from Egypt (if any) were removed with permission. The more modern view of Archaeology was definitely post WWII.

Okay, so that’s enough of me for one week. Loved the cast as always. oh, sometimes I wonder if there’s any way for those of us who might not be able to call in to submit entries and such. I’m in China for a few more months yet, and international phone calls are something I’ve yet to figure out.

TPO, DITTO ALL THAT.
With Irina: Irina and Mal both bully each other. They both take as good as the get, and it’s kind of a weird flirting thing for them.
With Kaylee: Yes, and we even see Mal feeling bad that he went too far with his joshing with friends talk to Kaylee. He certainly didn’t do it because he wanted to hurt Kaylee.
With the Alliance/other bad guys: They’re trying to KILL him most of the time! He’s just fighting back with the little he’s got.

I think the biggest reason why Mal isn’t a bully to me is that he never bullies for his own pleasure/entertainment.

A derivative work I think is basically based/derived from one or more already existing works of the same nature. The problem I had with Avatar is that other than the 3D stuff, everything else - from the story to the characters to the Navi world he created to certain camera angles etc - were all basically a hodgepodge of a slew of a dozen other (arguably better) movies - and even while watching the movie, I was already forming a list of movies in my head that Avatar - story or otherwise - reminded me of. I liked Avatar, it’s a great holiday blockbuster to watch, and the effects were amazing and will no doubt be influential to later films - but I doubt the story would be influential to anything. Ultimately the story didn’t engage me, and I wish they wrote something original (or heck, base it on a book with a great story and great characters like LotR, and bring life and visuals to well written words.).

Citizen Kane, on the other hand was not only revolutionary in its cinematography, but also had a unique at the time storytelling technique (with the flashbacks and the different narrators for a huge chunk of the movie), both of which influenced so many films afterwards to this day. So my mind never strayed to ‘oh, that scene is from that movie’, or ‘oh, that storyline is basically that movie’ or ‘hey, Kane sure reminds me of Hearst’ while I watched it. But anyway, I don’t know. It’s like comparing apples to oranges - I just can’t see Citizen Kane and Avatar as movies I’d compare. They’re not the same beast.

And hee, this is kind of just for me, but not only can I not remember the names of the characters, there’s not one quote I can remember from Avatar. So, for me, it WAS purely a visual eyefest.

Not only that…Indy throws the dirt across it so that others could see it…Wouldn’t there be a century’s worth of dust and dirt already on the thing? Or does the Knight have his own swiffer?

//youtu.be/YTxGOi9coWQ

//youtu.be/sSZEBhKUXTU

oooh…here’s one that everyone always wanted to see :

Mal kissing Inara … and while we’re on the the subject of kissing…

//youtu.be/HcTlAluw8XE

//youtu.be/fJo8MgmfzAo

Meanwhile,… in another innocent looking convention

Even NPH says Nathan Fillion is Capt. Hammer

//youtu.be/dgu4VWNNz4g

//youtu.be/ru2HxIZtd3o

Thought crossed my mind about Avatar being derivative. When I can describe it as Dances With Wolves/The Last Samurai crossed with Fern Gully, I guess you can call it derivative.

But then again, as it gets pointed out all the time, in some way every work is derivative of something else. Nothing exists in vacuum, and, if you buy the theory, every story in the world can get boiled down into like a dozen archetypes. Most common: Boy meets girl, Boy likes girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl back (which you can see in Avatar) or A stranger comes to town, or a young man leaves town. You get the idea.

that’s where i got that scoop too. Of course everyone is “dying”, so take that as you will.

There’s another more detailed spoiler on that. But others on the forum has mentioned it i think… Clue is in Heart of Gold.

Cortés giving a fancy cross to anyone in 1520 is kind of amusing… I mean, Cortés and his people (and the Tlaxaltecas, etc) didn’t even arrive in Tenochtitlan until November of 1519… to be honest, between the problems he had with the Mexica, the rival conquistador force of Pánfilo de Narváez, and the Noche Triste (which I think was July 1520?), I doubt he had much time to be giving fancy crosses to 10 year old boys :stuck_out_tongue:

agreed - he doesn’t get joy out of what people here have identified as “bullying” behavior. I’ve always thought that a component of being a bully was intention, as well.

I agree with you on the whole distracted enough from engaging with the story that I found myself listing off references/sources. I’m another one who enjoyed the movie, but that didn’t get much more out of it than the effects. I mean, I didn’t tear up at all during the movie! I’m the queen of crying in movies! That’s what really shocked me, if anything, about Avatar - that the story took me out of the “world” so much that I didn’t have the normal empathy with characters that I have (perhaps excessively) in most other film and TV.

This reminded me of Neil deGrasse Tyson’s tweets (@neiltyson) on Avatar:

Just saw Avatar. Recipe for an Avatar Cocktail: 2 parts The Matrix. 2 parts Aliens. Four parts Pocahontas. Shaken, not stirred.

Okay, you asked for it, an Avatar Chaser: 2 parts Smurffs, 2 parts Tarzan, 4 parts Dances With Wolves. In a Disney sippy cup.

I’m ok with Avatar’s 10ft tall 3-fingered blue people. But if vortex could float mountains, why did water roll off their sides?

Speaking derivative, Raiders just strip-mines an entire pulp tradition, and a couple adventure movies in particular. I forget the names.

But as testament to how much skill is required to make something derivative take off and soar, see also Tales of the Golden Monkey, a short-lived TV series that wasn’t exactly a blatant knock-off of Raiders, but sure as hell tried to cash in on it.

the audience reaction to Morena admission was…intense. Gives yet another layer to the show…

Is there a difference between derivative and an homage?

That’s like finding the line between plagiarism and parody… :stuck_out_tongue:

Well, Chuck, if you want to start watching Stargate Atlantis, we are doing a frak party rewatch :stuck_out_tongue:

As for Ronon episodes, they were usually filmed third in the season, but one got swapped to being shown fourth.

Season 2: Runner
Season 3: Sateda (Completely bad-SorryBarb episode)
Season 4: Reunion
Season 5: Broken Ties

He has some others, but these are the ones that are very Ronon focused.

Hmm, on second thought I guess it’s a lot like the fine line between plagiarism and parody…

Ha! I got that.

stealing the work of one person is plagiarism. Stealing the work of many is research…

I have three problems here. The first Fallen Crusader pretty much dealt with. At some point, all fiction is derivative. Almost every fantasy hero is T.H. White’s King Arthur. Almost every dystopian hero is Winston Smith. Almost every hard-boiled detective is Phillip Marlowe or Sam Spade, dressed in slightly different clothing. Does that make those bad genres? The problem is I have yet to see a time when the word derivative isn’t just used as a code word for “I don’t like it.” (Sorry it’s a pet peeve of mine.)

My second problem is neither of the two story elements you mentioned (multiple narrators or flashbacks) were particularly new to storytelling. I know Dickens used multiple POV a lot. Faulkner also used multiple narrators. Now they may have been new to the medium, so is that all it takes to be not derivative?

My third problem is Citizen Kane is based on William Randolph Hearst. To the point where Hearst tried to prevent it from coming out in theaters. So is it derivative now?

It’s just that I have a hard time understanding how fiction avoids being derivative? Unless the only stories you enjoy come out of ancient Greece, Rome, India or China?

All of that said, I do think the comparison is a little dubious. Citizen Kane tries to be an intelligent movie (whether it suceeds or not is up to the individual viewer.) Avatar on the other hand tries to be an entertaining movie (whether or not again is up to the individual viewer.)

Either way, Casablanca, Inherit the Wind and 12 Angry Men still rock.

With the tanks and cavalry yes there is definitely some similarities and quite a bit of decent connections in the Royal Armoured Corps with Hussars, Lancers, Dragoons and Yeomanry all over the place in the regiments names. A obvious example also in the Household Cavalry being an Armoured Regiment.

When you were talking about Firefly I had this moment when some amusing thoughts just clicked together so Book was a scary operative that could do pretty much whatever he wants to get the mission done and people are scared of him hummm sounds a bit like a mass effect SPECTER… Hang on! Book and the SPECTER is called Shepherd!

Clearly the history of Book is he has been off saving the galaxy from the evil Reapers/Reavers and then went into the Abby to find his peace. Now we can all look forward to mass effect 4 seeker of enlightenment. :smiley:

I am so going to name my next mass effect guy Book.

Similar thing in the U.S., with the cavalry being folded into the armored units (and one lone calvary division remaining.)