Originally posted by Royal_Marine:
Well it seems impossible to say a bad word about the movie here as you'll get pictures of trolls hurled at you.
Not true. It’s fine if you don’t like the movie in whole or in part. In fact (and if this shocks you, you simply haven’t been reading through many of the other threads) most if not all of us on this site can respectively point to “something” about the story line in the given game or novel, and the movie too, that we don’t much like. For example, in my own case, I don’t like that Banbridge gets killed in Fleet Action. (Not how I would have written that story.)
Now I suppose that “disgruntlement” on my part is not too different from preferring to believe that Banbridge was killed only in some “parallel” universe. But in the end, my opinion is just my opinion. I really shouldn’t repeat it ad nauseam and effectively transform it (certainly not on a site I do not own anyway) into a “Banbridge Lives” campaign.
I think trying to itegrate the movie into the games just makes it all seem very bad 'cos it doesn't match up.
You’re only repeating what’s gone before to no good end. And I think you may be confused. You seem to be saying one of two things, or both–(1) that you just can’t stand that certain parts of the WC story line as officially written seem to conflict (and maybe you don’t like those parts besides), and so you don’t want anyone trying to harmonize those “conflicts”, and/or (2) you just don’t believe those “inconsistencies” can be effectively explained anyway.
As to the first point, you need to understand that it’s entirely possible for someone to come onto this site who thinks the WC story is horrible, nonsensical fiction, yet takes great joy in the challenge of trying to iron out the alleged inconsistencies. (It’s a form of puzzle-solving. You don’t have to “like” the subject of a crossword puzzle, for example, to enjoy doing the puzzle.) I think it’s safe to say that none here who pursue issues of canon have such a negative view of WC, but even those “things” we each respectively don’t like about its story line (such as Banbridge’s death in my case) we gladly accept as “written in stone”.
In other words, we’re not at all interested in “editing” Origin, and when somebody comes along to suggest we should be because there are “unacceptable inconsistencies” in the games, novels, or movie, that (apart from coming across as trashing our enjoyment of “puzzle-solving”) only eggs us on to try to prove there really aren’t any inconsistencies after all.
As to the second point, merely saying it doesn’t make it so. LOAF and others have shown time and again that many claimed inconsistencies (including the specific ones you cite) can be explained. (And again, this is what many of us revel in trying to do.) Your choosing to ignore those explanations is no way to carry on and advance your viewpoint. (The “search” function is again active on the board–and improved. It can be a valuable research tool.)
(Hey, I’m a Captain. Always wanted to be a “captain” of something. Ambition achieved.)