last resort 10/4/12

Discussion in 'Now Playing - TV Show Talk' started by newsposter, Oct 5, 2012.

  1. Oct 6, 2012 #21 of 113
    busyba

    busyba The Funcooker

    34,759
    302
    Feb 5, 2003
    NYC

    Advertisements

    I don't think that the sub's supposed destruction was the Govt's excuse for nuking Pakistan.

    I believe that we're not supposed to know their excuse/reason yet, but it has something to do with what the SEAL team was doing in Pakistan before their exfil at the beginning of the first episode.
     
  2. Oct 6, 2012 #22 of 113
    Rob Helmerichs

    Rob Helmerichs I am Groot! TCF Club

    58,427
    14,982
    Oct 17, 2000
    Minneapolis
    It couldn't have been, because the reason the sub was "destroyed" in the first place was that it questioned the authenticity of the order to nuke Pakistan. So whatever the justification for nuking Pakistan was, it was in place before the sub was attacked. Which brings us to...
     
  3. Oct 6, 2012 #23 of 113
    squint

    squint Member

    846
    1
    Jun 15, 2008
    I found it interesting that the Russians were carrying American rifles. I guess this was for deniability and/or it was a joint operation or they were changed from Delta to Spetsnaz after filming.
     
  4. Oct 6, 2012 #24 of 113
    trnsfrguy

    trnsfrguy Advanced !

    5,994
    46
    Apr 28, 2005
    Bronx, NY
    I thought it was a good episode.
    During the firefight with the Spetnaz, the XO's earpiece kept alternating between hanging off his shoulder and in his ear. That really bothered me. There was no way he could have heard everything coming from his team or captain.
    One question... When the captain and xo were talking about the captain's son, did the xo suggest that the friendly fire was intentional ?
     
  5. Oct 6, 2012 #25 of 113
    Rob Helmerichs

    Rob Helmerichs I am Groot! TCF Club

    58,427
    14,982
    Oct 17, 2000
    Minneapolis

    Advertisements

    No, he was just suggesting that the reason the captain turned traitor is because he blames the government for his son's death.

    It was an argument that really didn't make much sense, but the captain didn't do much to refute it. I think the writers believe that a career military commander could plausibly turn on his country because of a friendly fire incident, but that expecting orders to come through the regular chain of command can be considered treason.
     
  6. Oct 6, 2012 #26 of 113
    RGM1138

    RGM1138 I wanna Rock

    9,027
    836
    Oct 6, 1999
    Gulfport, MS
    Well, they do seem to believe that a sub Captain will detonate a nuke 200 miles off of DC.

    And make the East coast glow in the dark for 50 years.
     
  7. Oct 6, 2012 #27 of 113
    Donbadabon

    Donbadabon Bored TCF Club

    4,080
    545
    Mar 5, 2002
    Nashville, TN
    When the two subs passed by each other under water, did anyone else think of The Wrath of Khan?

    [​IMG]
     
  8. Oct 7, 2012 #28 of 113
    Ereth

    Ereth Unemployed Bum

    45,979
    4,188
    Jun 16, 2000
    Jacksonville...
    What's funny about that is that I saw "Wrath of Khan" in it's initial release with a friend of mine who had been a submariner. When Spock points out that Khan is "very smart, but his pattern indicates 2-dimensional thinking", my submariner friend leaned over and said "I was just thinking that..."

    The sequence in Khan is intended to mirror sub hide-and-seek games, so it's fun to see it cycle back in an actual sub context.
     
  9. Oct 7, 2012 #29 of 113
    Idearat

    Idearat Active Member

    3,214
    4
    Nov 26, 2000
    Gilroy
    I've been thinking of that. While time tends to be accelerated, the attack on the Colorado came pretty quick after they refused the order to launch. The Illinois could have been queued up to fire on them after they launched to try to hide evidence. When the Colorado refused, the Illinois was told to go ahead and attack it then fire the missiles at Pakistan themselves, plan B.

    Conspirators killing the assassin isn't unprecedented ;)
     
  10. Oct 7, 2012 #30 of 113
    cheesesteak

    cheesesteak Meh. TCF Club

    39,058
    6,153
    Jul 24, 2003
    15 mins...
    I thought this episode was like a bad novel and was disappointing compared to the pilot. I don't know if the tech lady is a terribly written character or is being portrayed by a poor actress. Either way, it's a terrible character.
     
  11. Oct 7, 2012 #31 of 113
    danterner

    danterner Not it!

    10,629
    20
    Mar 4, 2005
    Greenacres, FL
    She reminds me of Lauren Ambrose's character from the last season of Torchwood. Which is not a good thing.
     
  12. Oct 7, 2012 #32 of 113
    laria

    laria Librocubicularist

    22,728
    3,522
    Sep 7, 2000
    Seacoast, NH
    That wasn't the XO, that was the COB who suggested that the captain blames the government.
     
  13. Oct 7, 2012 #33 of 113
    Rob Helmerichs

    Rob Helmerichs I am Groot! TCF Club

    58,427
    14,982
    Oct 17, 2000
    Minneapolis
    Oh, then I don't know what conversation he's referring to...
     
  14. Oct 7, 2012 #34 of 113
    laria

    laria Librocubicularist

    22,728
    3,522
    Sep 7, 2000
    Seacoast, NH
    I assume the conversation at the very end when they were in the CO's room, but I didn't get any vibe that the XO was suggesting intentional friendly fire.
     
  15. Oct 7, 2012 #35 of 113
    cheesesteak

    cheesesteak Meh. TCF Club

    39,058
    6,153
    Jul 24, 2003
    15 mins...
    I couldn't find anything in my 10 second internet search so I'll ask. What does the COB do? Is he in charge of the regular sailors? Why doesn't Chaplin just kick his insubordinate ass or something? Just kidding on that one.
     
  16. Oct 7, 2012 #36 of 113
    laria

    laria Librocubicularist

    22,728
    3,522
    Sep 7, 2000
    Seacoast, NH
    The COB (Chief of the Boat) is the senior enlisted advisor to the CO and XO.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_of_the_Boat
     
  17. Oct 7, 2012 #37 of 113
    Cainebj

    Cainebj Well-Known Member

    4,763
    358
    Nov 10, 2006
    New York
    I thought this was a fine follow-up to the action packed suspense filled pilot.

    Said it last week say it again - this is probably the best new show of the season so far.

    I am digging Scott Speedman in this.
    He's growing up nicely.



    Reality? I thought this was a TV show?
    Ya know - TV? Entertainment? Suspension of disbelief and dramatic license and all that?
     
  18. Oct 7, 2012 #38 of 113
    DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give 'em Hell, Devils

    59,026
    4,492
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    What people were taken hostage in the pilot episode? And by who?

    I thought in the thread for the previous episode, we discussed that the Illinois is a fast-attack sub, not a boomer, so it wouldn't be carrying nukes to shoot at Pakistan.
     
  19. Oct 7, 2012 #39 of 113
    RGM1138

    RGM1138 I wanna Rock

    9,027
    836
    Oct 6, 1999
    Gulfport, MS
    Two SF personnel, a male and a female, were in the back of a van, taken by the little dictator wannabe who had that confrontation with the SEAL in the bar earlier.

    This was shown during the Captain's monologue at the end.

    (Or, how Miranda puts it more eloquently below). :eek:
     
  20. Oct 8, 2012 #40 of 113
    laria

    laria Librocubicularist

    22,728
    3,522
    Sep 7, 2000
    Seacoast, NH
    By the guy who "runs" the island. I think his name was Julian? The pilot ended with them (Cortez and Brennan) lying in the back of a van all beat up and tied up and the guy looking down at them.

    The officers kept mentioning it in both episodes that Cortez and Brennan were AWOL, but then the guy from Felicity said that it was Cortez's third tour (I think it was the woman who was mouthy with him during their sexual harrassment interview in the pilot) and that she would not go AWOL.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements