Annoying Iason arguement

L

Ladiesman^

Spaceman
AAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH

This one again. I'm really confused about the Iason, since the movie came along and fudged things up. We've had this debate before, but i've finally read the movie novel and have gotten more information which just blows my mind.

So we established in previous debates that there were two Iason's, both with a Captain Andropolos and both meeting pretty much the same fate at different times.

Ok. But the information in the movie novel messes with BOTH the "Claw Marks" description AND the Confed Handbook, by fusing the two.

We had previously established that Paladin was on the second Iason, which met three B'hruk (?) class ships, and also was not the first contact with the Kilrathi. But in the WCMN, it describes the Iason that Paladin was on as being attacked by "an unidentified ship", which to me means ONE ship, like the FIRST Iason attack. And it is also said that it was the first contact with the Kilrathi. So did Paladin somehow manage to get on the first Iason, live, get sent to a Kilrathi Prison camp, escape, get assigned the another Iason, and survive , and get sent to another Kilrathi prison camp, and escape that? No.

So how is this explained? The movie coming along and fudging things up, or "That was a different Paladin on a different Iason", or some other weird thing someone will try to explain it with (probably LOAF).
 
I believe the most sane thing we decided on was that there was one Iason that was rebuilt after the 2629 attack (something that is, in fact, mentioned in the Confed Handbook).

As for the scene in the novel -- the book exists from the perspective of Blair... thus, when Blair is told that Paladin is a survivor of the Iason, he thinks of the famous first contact and not a routine raid on Confed shipping. :)
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF

As for the scene in the novel -- the book exists from the perspective of Blair... thus, when Blair is told that Paladin is a survivor of the Iason, he thinks of the famous first contact and not a routine raid on Confed shipping. :)
Click to expand...
So what we're told in the novel is incorrect, yet put there on purpose because we're seeing it through Blair's point of view? Yes or no.
 
Hmm..that's intresting. That actually makes pretty decent sense, but it's still a bit suspicious.

What i'm perhaps even more perplexed by is the fact that the second Iason sat there and tried to communicate with the Kilrathi ships, and then everyone was suprised when the ships opened fire.
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
As for the scene in the novel -- the book exists from the perspective of Blair... thus, when Blair is told that Paladin is a survivor of the Iason, he thinks of the famous first contact and not a routine raid on Confed shipping. :)
Click to expand...

Wow, I had never analyzed things from that point of view... it does make sense to me now, finally :)

--Eder
 
Originally posted by Ladiesman^
AAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH

This one again. I'm really confused about the Iason, since the movie came along and fudged things up.

So we established in previous debates that there were two Iason's, both with a Captain Andropolos and both meeting pretty much the same fate at different times.

Ok. But the information in the movie novel messes with BOTH the "Claw Marks" description AND the Confed Handbook, by fusing the two.

We had previously established that Paladin was on the second Iason, which met three B'hruk (?) class ships, and also was not the first contact with the Kilrathi. But in the WCMN, it describes the Iason that Paladin was on as being attacked by "an unidentified ship", which to me means ONE ship, like the FIRST Iason attack. And it is also said that it was the first contact with the Kilrathi. So did Paladin somehow manage to get on the first Iason, live, get sent to a Kilrathi Prison camp, escape, get assigned the another Iason, and survive , and get sent to another Kilrathi prison camp, and escape that? No.

So how is this explained? The movie coming along and fudging things up, or "That was a different Paladin on a different Iason", or some other weird thing someone will try to explain it with (probably LOAF).
Click to expand...


People,people,people......ARRRRGHHHHHHH! YES, the WCM movie munged things up... Consequently, the WCMN propagated this state of mungitude.

There was only one "first" contact w/ the Kilrathi, and one "Andropolis" skippering a ship named Iason, and only ONE Paladin.

I believe the most sane thing we decided on was that there was one Iason that was rebuilt after the 2629 attack (something that is, in fact, mentioned in the Confed Handbook).
[/QUOTE]

Yes, there mighta been another ship called Iason (look how many Concordias there were, after all...), but NOT captained by a guy w/ the same NAME, meeting virtually the same FATE. Can't be, no matter what Loaf sez...

Originally posted by mpanty

So what we're told in the novel is incorrect, yet put there on purpose because we're seeing it through Blair's point of view? Yes or no.
Click to expand...

YES, cuz the whole shebang (WCM/WCMN) were created solely for marketing & profit, with no regard for continuity of already established timelines & storylines!

Hmm..that's intresting. That actually makes pretty decent sense, but it's still a bit suspicious.

What i'm perhaps even more perplexed by is the fact that the second Iason sat there and tried to communicate with the Kilrathi ships, and then everyone was suprised when the ships opened fire. [/QUOTE]

It's a LOT suspicious. That was the scenario from the FIRST (and ONLY such) meeting, since there couldn't credibly have been another such contact.

"He who doesn't learn from history is doomed to repeat it" does NOT mean that history will repeat itself EXACTLY, down to the smallest detail. Just cuz some weaselly exec decided to hire some hack writer to slap something together for profit doesn't mean we automatically have to (or SHOULD) accept it as gospel.

WC books (and the *&%$@'ing WCM) be damned: Use your heads, people!!... Sheesh...
:rolleyes:
 
People,people,people......ARRRRGHHHHHHH! YES, the WCM movie munged things up... Consequently, the WCMN propagated this state of mungitude.
Click to expand...

Actually, this is a case of *just* the opposite -- the 'real world' reason the Iason incident is referred to as the first contact with the Kilrathi in the movie novel is because Mr. Telep had no knowledge of the Confed handbook... and he bothered to do his homework and check a copy of Claw Marks.

There was only one "first" contact w/ the Kilrathi, and one "Andropolis" skippering a ship named Iason, and only ONE Paladin.
Click to expand...

Right, wrong, right -- two for three isn't bad.

Yes, there mighta been another ship called Iason (look how many Concordias there were, after all...), but NOT captained by a guy w/ the same NAME, meeting virtually the same FATE. Can't be, no matter what Loaf sez...
Click to expand...

I said just the opposite -- there was *one* ship, with two Captains of the same name... we already examined this in depth, and that's *not* what this thread is about. Regardless of that fact, I'd happily concede the point if you would explain to me why it's utterly impossible for there not to be two captains with the same name. (Okay, you're right, it's completely silly! It's like there being two *Presidents* with the same name!)

YES, cuz the whole shebang (WCM/WCMN) were created solely for marketing & profit, with no regard for continuity of already established timelines & storylines!
Click to expand...

I hate to call you naive, because that's usually just an insult to get someone riled up: but if you honestly think that *any* piece of the Wing Commander canon was created for any reason besides profit then you are exceedingly naive. Such intentions do not matter to fans, as such intentions are behind *everything*

It's a LOT suspicious. That was the scenario from the FIRST (and ONLY such) meeting, since there couldn't credibly have been another such contact.
"He who doesn't learn from history is doomed to repeat it" does NOT mean that history will repeat itself EXACTLY, down to the smallest detail. Just cuz some weaselly exec decided to hire some hack writer to slap something together for profit doesn't mean we automatically have to (or SHOULD) accept it as gospel.
Click to expand...

Apparently you haven't read the Confed Handbook -- the *reason* this situation has come about is because the situations *are* very different... and only *one* (the original) claims to be the first contact.

Incidentally, the "hack writer" who "slapped something together for profit" was the same man who wrote all the documentations for the Wing Commander games. And the official guides.

WC books (and the *&%$@'ing WCM) be damned: Use your heads, people!!... Sheesh...
Click to expand...

Don't be an asshole.
 
heh... I still manage to think that the movie should not be tied into the games... after all, if the movie can be tied into the games, isn't it cool how Maniac and Blair were buds at the academy, but introduce themselves for the first time on the Tiger's Claw in WC1? Now THAT'S talent!
 
That has also been discussed before. I think that it was either an inside joke between Maniac and Maverick or it was put there to introduce the user to the characters. Either way, it still makes sense.
 
But... the games say they went to the Acad together too...

The first mention I found was in the ICIS booklet from Prophecy...

P29

"Waypoint! You and Comm. Blair graduated together and served your first tour of duty together, correct?"

There are all kinds of other, better pieces that state this out there... That's just the book on top of my pile.

TC
 
Ok, so Blair is (or at least used to be) the main character in the series, and the Claw is probably the most stylish carrier ever, but come on... did they really have to cram a game, two expansion packs, a TV series, and a movie into such a small period of time? ;)

Personally, I think part of this "Maverick, Maniac, Academy..." mess could be explained a lot more clearly if the Claw had just lasted for another 5 years or so... and if they had an extra Todd Marshall on board... geez, now that's a scary idea. *g*

Not that there's anything wrong with the first WC1 conversation with Maniac being a joke between him and Maverick... except for those people who tend to find "inconsistencies" throughout the whole damn series :rolleyes:

--Eder
 
I know this sounds silly, but is it possible that we could explain the Iason confusion that there was an error in Confed records?
 
not really, 'CAUSE THE WC MOVIE WASN'T IN THE SAME HISTORY AS THE GAMES! and don't even start LOAF ;)
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF

I said just the opposite -- there was *one* ship, with two Captains of the same name... I'd happily concede the point if you would explain to me why it's utterly impossible for there not to be two captains with the same name. (Okay, you're right, it's completely silly! It's like there being two *Presidents* with the same name!)

I hate to call you naive, because that's usually just an insult to get someone riled up: but if you honestly think that *any* piece of the Wing Commander canon was created for any reason besides profit then you are exceedingly naive. Such intentions do not matter to fans, as such intentions are behind *everything*

Incidentally, the "hack writer" who "slapped something together for profit" was the same man who wrote all the documentations for the Wing Commander games. And the official guides.
Click to expand...

1) To further your own analogy, both presidents would also have to have WIVES with the same name (as one another), and both would have face the same CRISIS, with the same rogue NATION, and have the conflict end in BOTH of their untimely demises, in exactly the SAME way, etc. etc.... As I said before, "what're the odds on that?...". (BTW, the first president's name wasn't "G. Dubbs", so THERE!... :p )

2) I hardly think "naive" is a name to get riled up over...Nice try, though--heheh.... Yes, "everything" is for profit when you're selling a product to customers. That's a given. However, some things are more "only" for profit (I believe it's referred to as being "gratuitous") than others, and both WCM-based books are prime examples...

Think of the diff 'twixt the NFL, which we all (americans) love, and the odious "XFL" of last year. THAT's the difference: One is old, storied, revered, and is still here after all these years, for the love of the game (even though they do make a tidy profit). The other is (WAS, thank God!) there ONLY in a bald-faced bid to make a lotta $$, and it showed; they had no love of the game, and people knew it, which is why it tanked (and went broke doing it--Muhahahaha)...

3) If it IS the same guy, then he should've known better (or at least drank more black coffee); shame on him...

4) As to your (ahem), "signoff" in this post, it says more about YOU than it does about the person yer speakin' ABOUT... (Nice language, BTW...)
:rolleyes:
 
There are ways to get your point across to us without making a fool of yourself. But you obviously don't know that, do you?
 
Originally posted by WildWeasel
There are ways to get your point across to us without making a fool of yourself. But you obviously don't know that, do you?
Click to expand...

...You talkin' to me?.. Are YOU talkin' to ME?...:D

Seriously (if you are), I know that. I just get a little tired of hearing people accept unquestioningly that which is self-contradictory...

If people still accept like a bunch of lemmings, whatever is spoon fed to them (which apparently they do), though, it shows that the point hasn't been gotten across YET, don't it?... If being "a fool" somehow causes 1 or 2 people to wake up & smell the coffee, well, then, I'm cool with it. ;)
 
Nobody here is a lemming. In fact, it's almost natural to question things. The Chat Zone is full of examples of people questioning every little detail of the Wing Commander universe. That's a good thing. That's how people learn. But it's foolish to continue to question issues that have repeatedly been explained to you. A lot of people feel the same way you do, but you don't see them broadcasting it in every post. If you don't accept it, then keep it to yourself. We don't want to hear your bitching.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top