Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: Misleading the audience

  1. #21
    Scooby Gang Double Dutchess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    518
    Thanks
    1,125
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 588 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HardlyThere View Post
    It wasn't ridiculous that no one touched him. It plays on the idea that it happens so often, you don't remember it. There is a technical name for it that is escaping me as I type this.
    But it's not just about touching or being touched by people, is it? Would also no one have ever seen Giles (or remember having seen him) eating, drinking, picking things up, opening doors, etc.? To me that seems unlikely. And even if people didn't actively remember him doing these things, surely they would have quickly noticed if he never did any of these things. (It's like with people going uh-huh, nodding etc. when they listen to you talk. You don't really notice that they do it, but you notice almost immediately when they don't...)

  2. #22
    Slayer
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,548
    Thanks
    68
    Thanked 1,824 Times in 867 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Dutchess View Post
    But it's not just about touching or being touched by people, is it? Would also no one have ever seen Giles (or remember having seen him) eating, drinking, picking things up, opening doors, etc.? To me that seems unlikely. And even if people didn't actively remember him doing these things, surely they would have quickly noticed if he never did any of these things. (It's like with people going uh-huh, nodding etc. when they listen to you talk. You don't really notice that they do it, but you notice almost immediately when they don't...)
    That's the point. They don't remember him doing them, but it's obvious he must have though it's not something that immediately jumps to mind. It's not as though it's a normal situation.

    It's a mislead, of course, but not something you'd notice until the ep it's in, which was resolved quickly with a C-plot.

  3. #23
    Scooby Gang Double Dutchess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    518
    Thanks
    1,125
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 588 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HardlyThere View Post
    That's the point. They don't remember him doing them, but it's obvious he must have though it's not something that immediately jumps to mind. It's not as though it's a normal situation.
    Exactly -- he must have, otherwise they would have noticed something was wrong really soon. So I agree it's not ridiculous that they didn't remember him touching anything (even though they DID see him doing it). What I think is ridiculous, is that they wouldn't have noticed it if he had NOT been touching anything/anyone. That's why in my opinion the mislead didn't work.

    It's a mislead, of course, but not something you'd notice until the ep it's in, which was resolved quickly with a C-plot.
    Ah, that's probably why we differ in opinion on this one. I thought it was noticeable much sooner than that. When Giles walked in the door in Bring On The Night, without a single hug for Buffy or the other Scoobies (in other words, very obviously not touching anyone), followed by him pointing out that The First only impersonates dead people and is not corporeal ("It can't touch or fight on it's own") combined with the fact that he was possibly killed at the end of the previous episode, made it immediately clear that they wanted the viewers to wonder if he was The First or not. For me it did work for a little while, at least for that episode and maybe the next (I don't remember exactly at which point I started not buying it anymore). But four episodes of Giles supposedly being non-corporeal without anyone noticing it? No way. By the time The Killer In Me came along, it had become painfully obvious to me that it couldn't be anything else than a mislead. So the "reveal" was a huge meh for me.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Double Dutchess For This Useful Post:

    punch_kicker15 (19-06-19)

  5. #24
    Slayer
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,548
    Thanks
    68
    Thanked 1,824 Times in 867 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Dutchess View Post
    Exactly -- he must have, otherwise they would have noticed something was wrong really soon. So I agree it's not ridiculous that they didn't remember him touching anything (even though they DID see him doing it). What I think is ridiculous, is that they wouldn't have noticed it if he had NOT been touching anything/anyone. That's why in my opinion the mislead didn't work.
    They wouldn't notice because he was. The audience isn't really mislead. After all, he suspects Buffy had internal bleeding, so he must have inspected her. Of course Buffy isn't in the scene where they talk about it.

    Ah, that's probably why we differ in opinion on this one. I thought it was noticeable much sooner than that. When Giles walked in the door in Bring On The Night, without a single hug for Buffy or the other Scoobies (in other words, very obviously not touching anyone), followed by him pointing out that The First only impersonates dead people and is not corporeal ("It can't touch or fight on it's own") combined with the fact that he was possibly killed at the end of the previous episode, made it immediately clear that they wanted the viewers to wonder if he was The First or not. For me it did work for a little while, at least for that episode and maybe the next (I don't remember exactly at which point I started not buying it anymore). But four episodes of Giles supposedly being non-corporeal without anyone noticing it? No way. By the time The Killer In Me came along, it had become painfully obvious to me that it couldn't be anything else than a mislead. So the "reveal" was a huge meh for me.
    He shows up with a half dozen young women and news of an apocalypse. It's not a normal situation. He's there for approximately 2 eps, an ep and a half, really, then he's off. Then it's resolved in TKIM. It's more of a sight gag than a mislead. There are no mysterious statements from him or cryptic smiles or him secretly undermining anyone.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Dutchess View Post
    Exactly -- he must have, otherwise they would have noticed something was wrong really soon. So I agree it's not ridiculous that they didn't remember him touching anything (even though they DID see him doing it). What I think is ridiculous, is that they wouldn't have noticed it if he had NOT been touching anything/anyone. That's why in my opinion the mislead didn't work.
    They wouldn't notice because he was. The audience isn't really mislead. After all, he suspects Buffy had internal bleeding, so he must have inspected her. Of course Buffy isn't in the scene where they talk about it.

    Ah, that's probably why we differ in opinion on this one. I thought it was noticeable much sooner than that. When Giles walked in the door in Bring On The Night, without a single hug for Buffy or the other Scoobies (in other words, very obviously not touching anyone), followed by him pointing out that The First only impersonates dead people and is not corporeal ("It can't touch or fight on it's own") combined with the fact that he was possibly killed at the end of the previous episode, made it immediately clear that they wanted the viewers to wonder if he was The First or not. For me it did work for a little while, at least for that episode and maybe the next (I don't remember exactly at which point I started not buying it anymore). But four episodes of Giles supposedly being non-corporeal without anyone noticing it? No way. By the time The Killer In Me came along, it had become painfully obvious to me that it couldn't be anything else than a mislead. So the "reveal" was a huge meh for me.
    He shows up with a half dozen young women and news of an apocalypse. It's not a normal situation. He's there for approximately 2 eps, an ep and a half, really, then he's off. Then it's resolved in TKIM. It's more of a sight gag than a mislead. There are no mysterious statements from him or cryptic smiles or him secretly undermining anyone.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to HardlyThere For This Useful Post:

    Double Dutchess (20-06-19)

  7. #25
    Scooby Gang Double Dutchess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    518
    Thanks
    1,125
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 588 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HardlyThere View Post
    They wouldn't notice because he was. The audience isn't really mislead.
    Exactly! Giles actually being The First and getting away with it is so unbelievable that as a mislead, it just doesn't work. That's why I put it forward as an example of a bad mislead. It seems to me that the only part where we disagree is that you just don't regard it as a mislead at all, for basically the same reasons.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •