Jump to content

Question about S1 in general


Guest massofspikes

Recommended Posts

Not to be argumentative, but I guess it all comes down to the company you keep, and the kind of people you happen to associate with. I, admittedly, know less than a dozen cops, but between about half a dozen cops I know, and the people they associate with, I have to say that theology is rarely, if ever, the topic of conversation, profound knowledge, or great contemplation. In fact, among the Christians I know, theology is rarely, if ever the topic of such. From my personal experience, people who call themselves Christian may go to church on Sunday, sometimes, but rarely get into deep discussion or understanding about it, and even more rarely conduct their lives in a manner that is consistent with the beliefs that are supposed to be living by. Therefore, when someone says that "The average law enforcement agent is not converse with theology", I find it to be an accurate and realistic assessment of the way things really are. I don't, for a second, dispute that you have been exposed to a completely different set of circumstances and people, but to me, personally, Eths view of reality rings true and is my own perception of reality. Like I said though, it probably boils down to the kind of people you associate with. I do agree, however, with you assessment that Frank never became a confirmed member.

Yes, that is probably true. In general people would rather talk about reality TV, sports, sex etc. You are correct in that it probably has more to do with the circles one runs around in....."all my life's a circle"

"What you do when you think no one is looking is who you are."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jim McLean
^ Agreeing with what Moriarty said.

In S1, everyone is equal, there are no ranks and there is no hierarchy, there is no initiation procedure. Look at "Gehenna" -- they all shake hands and get to work, unlike the stuff we see in "Luminary" et al. I think people are getting confused with the term "consulting". In S1, the idea is that the Millennium Group is a consulting firm, and that Frank calls himself a "consultant" in the sense that he's one of many that belong to this consulting firm, and together they all consult for law enforcement, not that Frank is a step removed and "a consultant" as a rank below the rest of the Group.

S2 retconned things by making Frank and outsider and making Peter his mentor and all that. Some people love that and think it was essential and needed and positive. That's great, absolutely fine. Not everyone feels that way, but that's not the point. Like laren said, it's a retcon that some people liked and some people didn't, but we don't need to get into all that again. We just have to acknowledge that it was a retcon, for better or worse.

Personally, I've never liked the term "retcon". It's a lazy fan derived term which is oozing with excess simplicity. As far as "retcon" goes, I'd say that season two created a "world" in the Group that didn't exist in season one. Some might call that evolution on a theme. I don't think it contradicted anything that was in season one though. Watching the seasons progress, I never felt there was a change whatsoever, merely that by season two, the interest the Group had in Frank brought him in closer to the truth behind the group; the truth behind the simple consultancy front which we see as onlookers in season one.

Quite honestly, I'm not really sure whether the relevance of ranks comes into this. I don't recall season two really getting two bound up in ranks. Clearly there are certain levels, but its all "inner sanctum" stuff. On the face of the Group as a consultancy agency, these "ranks" don't come into play; as an outsider, everyone is a member of a consultancy firm, and given that's very much what we and Frank see in season one; a consultancy firm with an expertise towards Millennium fixated killings, everyone is just a member. Just like if you are self employed, but contracted to work as a consultant or developer at a plant, to the outsider, you are simply a member of the company, even if your contract and inner hierarchy says otherwise.

This is why I don't like "retcon", it creates bad vibes. Its a tabloid and lazy fan term (that is not to suggest those who use it are lazy or base!), and I think debates would function better if we didn't have such a simple phrase for such a complex beast as fiction writing.

Yes, season two does "retcon" season one so far it does what we know was not intended with the Group. Yes, it evolves the Group, but beyond the original intent of the authors. But at the same time, the way its "retconned", isn't a simple revision of what we know, its an expansion which adapts how we see what we knew; the Group was a consultancy Group, we now know its not, but the evolution doesn't contradict the evidence from the previous season, it just informs us what we - and Frank saw (or CC :)), was not what the Millennium Group turned out to be.

And for the record, while I see season one as my favourite, I do love season two as well. No picking sides or looking to disprove the validity of one over the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MillenniumIsBliss
Bliss, you are taking this personal. I rest my case and do no want to discuss it further. I made my point.

That's fine, but these are the quotes turned this into the kind of thread it was turned into:

"I disagree with the laren's interpretation of the piece of dialogue he points to. It was always clear to me that in S1, Frank is a member of the Millennium Group, and the Millennium Group consult for law enforcement. Simple as that. There is no chain of command, no candidates, patrons, elders or "Old Men" in S1.

I agree with Zeus on this one. There were no ranks in the first season. Frank was a member of the MM group and they were consulting for law enforcement. Morgan and Wong came with the idea of an old man and of ranks in the second season. Chris Carter his view on the group was totally different. He saw them as the Academy Group, a real group of former FBI-agents who helped to solve crimes. They are interviewed on the dvd's of the first season."

That's fine, a post about Frank being a member in season two or not being a member was being discussed here objectively, and was turned into another debate about how Morgan and Wong ruined the show. I still had no problem with this, but to say "please don't turn this into a season 1/season 2 is better thread", when I was not and your were, is ridiculous and insulting. And then you tell me not to take your accusation personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

O.K. I've gotta say this.....and people who get American phrases that make no sense taken out of context if taken literally will get this....

My god.... those hairs are just SCREAMING in pain!!!!!!

I once had a boyfriend....in 2003...an Indian (not Native American. actually Indian) who worked for a Management Consulting company. He was sent all over the country to consult for different business that needed business management consulting. So, when he said he was "a consultant", that did not mean he did not work for the company he did. They were ALL consulting.

Now, as for Millennium, I do recall in the Pilot, Peter first coming to Frank's house, telling him about the case, and ending the conversation with "All our resources will be available to you." That, from the very first episode, gave me the impression that he might be a "Freelance consultant". Freelance consultants are like Freelance photographers or journalists. They may work for different companys at different times, and they are not "employed" by one certain company.

So, really, as so many things in life, this all comes down to our PERCEPTION of reality. Some people see that season 1 was about a criminal consulting firm, and that season 2 went off on a tangent, and that people who are seeing the flow between the two seasons are bloody crazy. Other people are reading between the lines....filling in the gaps...taking the series as it was actually filmed, not as others would have liked it to be filmed....and choosing to believe certain things in the hidden bones of the show that makes their theory work. It doesn't mean that one side is right or wrong. And, until Chris Carter joins the board and sets the record straight, I am personally not going to worry about it.

I regards to season 1 & 2, as with religion, life, the universe, and everything.... Choose to believe whatever you want to. As long as you aren't hurting anyone, what the hell difference does it make?

In a word..... chill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MillenniumIsBliss
There was no sense in S1 that Watts was acting as a mentor to Frank. No implication of it whatsoever. If anything, Frank took the lead in their investigations together. I can see where you're coming from in that there was nothing carved in stone in giant letters to outrightly state that Peter was NOT his mentor, but that's not something that happens in daily life. Nobody goes around stating what they're not, making a list of everything they're not to be categorised as. We have to take it from the tone and their behaviour, which, regardless of your personal views, is clearly quite different between Seasons 1 and 2.

Same point as above really. Frank is never even hinted to be a candidate trying to prove his worth for membership in S1, nor was that ever the intension. Again, I take your point that strictly speaking there is no legal document to make the changes in S2 contradictions, but they are retcons in the full sense of the term retroactive continuity -- defining that as something which implies it was always the case from the beginning, when it quite clearly was not.

As I said before, M&W were free to do this if they chose, and some fans liked it and some fans didn't. Absolutely fine, no problems there, and that isn't the issue. But these things clearly weren't part of the show from the beginning, hence the term retroactive continuity.

I'd like to also take this opportunity to level accusations of "misrepresenting facts" here. No one has done that in this thread, from any perspective. I understand that it can be frustrating to interact with people who don't share one's personal viewpoint, but it is not unreasonable to point out that ranks and hierarchies were only introduced in S2 (i.e. candidates, patrons, elders, etc.), which is all Moriarty did.

There was misrepresentation of facts here. The claim is that Frank is a group member in season 1, and then suddenly not a group member in season two and being considered as a member. Like it or not, it is established that there are members and non members in season 1 and season 2, and it is not made clear that he was a group member in season 1. It was made clear that he was not yet a member in season two, and that does not contradict anything we see in season 1. Therefore, there is no retcon. I don't think Peter's relationship with Watts changed that much between seasons. The term mentor isn't really a good term for either season, and actions that you are referring to as mentoring are different because they were strictly investigating in season 1, and it isn't until season two that we really see Peter starting to groom Frank more for acceptance into the group as a member.

Just because they didn't discuss Frank being a candidate and not a member in season one, doesn't mean they couldn't use that as a story line in season two. It isn't really discussed, and there is certainly not a scene in season one where Frank is established as a member of Millennium Group. These claims that Frank was made a member in season one are pure speculation, because the whole point of him being a candidate or member wasn't addressed until season 2. And yet, it is being presented as fact and said that Frank was a member in season one, that Mogan and Wong pulled a retcon, and that he became a non member in season two, and was changed into a candidate being considered for membership. If Frank can be compared to anyone in season one, it would be more to Jim Horn, who was said in season one to be under consideration for membership, so the "candidate" idea was presented to us early in season 1. Frank, being fairly new to the group, would seem to be closer to Jim Horn, who is also working for the group, but not yet a member, than he would be to people who have been with the group a while, such as Atkins and Peter. For a new idea to be introduced, or for the group to evolve into something more than we thought it was, does not break any continuity, and therefore is not a retcon. We see the group as one thing in sason 1, and it evolves in S2, but I don't see where anything in season 1 was made impossible or how the continuity has changed. The group simply evolves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MillenniumIsBliss
Personally, I've never liked the term "retcon". It's a lazy fan derived term which is oozing with excess simplicity. As far as "retcon" goes, I'd say that season two created a "world" in the Group that didn't exist in season one. Some might call that evolution on a theme. I don't think it contradicted anything that was in season one though. Watching the seasons progress, I never felt there was a change whatsoever, merely that by season two, the interest the Group had in Frank brought him in closer to the truth behind the group; the truth behind the simple consultancy front which we see as onlookers in season one.

Quite honestly, I'm not really sure whether the relevance of ranks comes into this. I don't recall season two really getting two bound up in ranks. Clearly there are certain levels, but its all "inner sanctum" stuff. On the face of the Group as a consultancy agency, these "ranks" don't come into play; as an outsider, everyone is a member of a consultancy firm, and given that's very much what we and Frank see in season one; a consultancy firm with an expertise towards Millennium fixated killings, everyone is just a member. Just like if you are self employed, but contracted to work as a consultant or developer at a plant, to the outsider, you are simply a member of the company, even if your contract and inner hierarchy says otherwise.

This is why I don't like "retcon", it creates bad vibes. Its a tabloid and lazy fan term (that is not to suggest those who use it are lazy or base!), and I think debates would function better if we didn't have such a simple phrase for such a complex beast as fiction writing.

Yes, season two does "retcon" season one so far it does what we know was not intended with the Group. Yes, it evolves the Group, but beyond the original intent of the authors. But at the same time, the way its "retconned", isn't a simple revision of what we know, its an expansion which adapts how we see what we knew; the Group was a consultancy Group, we now know its not, but the evolution doesn't contradict the evidence from the previous season, it just informs us what we - and Frank saw (or CC :)), was not what the Millennium Group turned out to be.

And for the record, while I see season one as my favourite, I do love season two as well. No picking sides or looking to disprove the validity of one over the other.

Once again, you pretty much have the same ideas as I do here, but express them more concisely and coherently. I should also mention that, while season two probably has a slight edge with me, I also loved season one and I think it's a close call. I think all the writers in all the seasons did an awesome job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Moriarty
That's fine, a post about Frank being a member in season two or not being a member was being discussed here objectively, and was turned into another debate about how Morgan and Wong ruined the show. I still had no problem with this, but to say "please don't turn this into a season 1/season 2 is better thread", when I was not and your were, is ridiculous and insulting. And then you tell me not to take your accusation personally.

It is not ridicoulous and certainly not insulting. All I did was saying my opinion. When I said that I do not want this thread to evolve in a season 1-season 2 thread it was because I was feeling that it went that way. I have the feeling that you think that I am against season two but this is not the case. You are taking things personally Bliss and I am sorry to say this but it is the truth. You are on a crusade against the season two bashers since a month or three now. Maybe you should let go and start seeing things objectively again. I have nothing against season two but you think I actually do. Fine with me but all I can say is that you are wrong. Can we stop this childish thing now please?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MillenniumIsBliss
It is not ridicoulous and certainly not insulting. All I did was saying my opinion. When I said that I do not want this thread to evolve in a season 1-season 2 thread it was because I was feeling that it went that way. I have the feeling that you think that I am against season two but this is not the case. You are taking things personally Bliss and I am sorry to say this but it is the truth. You are on a crusade against the season two bashers since a month or three now. Maybe you should let go and start seeing things objectively again. I have nothing against season two but you think I actually do. Fine with me but all I can say is that you are wrong. Can we stop this childish thing now please?

Nothing I can say about this except that it is out of line and a clear case of the pot calling the kettle black. I was discussing Frank's membership. If you read my early post or posts in this thread, it's clear that I don't bring up anything about favorite seasons, Morgan and Wong, etc. This thread was turned into another anti Morgan and Wong thread by yourself and one other poster, and then, as soon as anyone debates your points, you accuse them as starting what you have, in fact, started. I'm not saying you are against season two, and I didn't do anything but debate your points. It was only the accusation that I was turning this thread into something that I took offense to. The fact is that these season two bashers you speak of, make it a point to break into innocent posts and transform them into an admitted platform for their own crusades. All of your comments should be redirected back at yourself. I accept and love all three seasons, while a certain few here have a bitter resentment towards and can't come to grips with season 2 and grasp onto any kind of opportunity to bash the show. When this is done, and then I'm accused of taking the thread down that path, I do take it personally. All anyone has to do is start this thread over from the beginning to see how we got here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Friends,

As I am not a moderator you are not required to pay any heed to my opinion but I hope you afford me the licence to express it anyway.

May I champion the opinion expressed by 4th and ask that we all take some time to metaphorically breathe and return to this thread when opinions can be expressed in a less heated manner?

This is not an issue of censorship, all opinions are welcomed and respected but in the wider context TIWWA is superficially a vehicle of expression but largely a community of friends. It is easy to sense when our love of debate veers dangerously close to challenging the harmony we encourage here and whilst it is no-ones desire to leave the last word to someone else it is occasionally necessary to do so in order to maintain the air of respect and congeniality this board prides itself upon.

I am not asserting that anyone has crossed any line here simply that the direction this thread is taking is causing a little concern to those of us who hold the sense of friendship this board engenders in such high regard.

Like I said, enjoy this post with a pinch of salt, it is nothing more than an opinion expressed but let us not risk our sense of community for the sake of a few hasty words.

Best wishes to each and every one of you!

This is Who We Are

Eth

  • Like 1

josew.gif

style5,Little-spc-Roedecker.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Friends,

As I am not a moderator you are not required to pay any heed to my opinion but I hope you afford me the licence to express it anyway.

May I champion the opinion expressed by 4th and ask that we all take some time to metaphorically breathe and return to this thread when opinions can be expressed in a less heated manner?

This is not an issue of censorship, all opinions are welcomed and respected but in the wider context TIWWA is superficially a vehicle of expression but largely a community of friends. It is easy to sense when our love of debate veers dangerously close to challenging the harmony we encourage here and whilst it is no-ones desire to leave the last word to someone else it is occasionally necessary to do so in order to maintain the air of respect and congeniality this board prides itself upon.

I am not asserting that anyone has crossed any line here simply that the direction this thread is taking is causing a little concern to those of us who hold the sense of friendship this board engenders in such high regard.

Like I said, enjoy this post with a pinch of salt, it is nothing more than an opinion expressed but let us not risk our sense of community for the sake of a few hasty words.

Best wishes to each and every one of you!

This is Who We Are

Eth

Ditto Eth...and to Erin, thanks for coming aboard this thread at Eth's and my request...how could a simple question turn into such turmoil? In re-reading massofspikes origional post, there is NOTHING said about the comparision between S1/S2, only if Frank was a full-fledged member or just a consultant..

..lets regroup, focus on the question and try to answer it without the prejudices that each of us have in regards to which season we like best. In the end, does it really matter if i like S1 a little bit more than S2? Yes, i have been guilty in the past of pissing on M&W's work on S2, but i have come around recently to the realization that it is what it is, and there is nothing i can say that will change the minds of those who disagree with me, nor do i want to. We have the choice to allow this thread to continue on a downward spiral to the point where it most likely will be eliminated by the admins or we can overcome this together as a group and just stick to the issue...WAS FRANK A BONEFIDE MEMBER OF THE MILLENNIUM GROUP IN S1 OR S2????

we are open for posting now!!!!!

4th Horseman..

"And behold, a pale horse, and he who sat on it, his name was Death. Hades followed with him. Authority over one fourth of the earth, to kill with the sword, with famine, with death, and by the wild animals of the earth was given to him." REV 6:8

fourthhorsemananimatedsigna3rr.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines