Orphan Black - Season 2 Discussion

That would be risky, because they wouldn't know for sure what innocent people might be in the room when the device was set off. I'm more comfortable with the use of a weapon that Sarah can choose when and whether to fire.

Hmm, maybe. I can see how that could've worked, but I don't think it would've been dramatic enough for the climax of the season. So in that sense I can see your point about the writers contriving it for its impact, although I still think you were a little harsh in how you expressed it.

Well, I think it would've been a lot harder to get that past security than a fire extinguisher. As for getting it from Alison, the writers seemed to prefer to keep Alison off in her own storyline this year.

I just think that people who have no real-life experience with violence tend to overestimate how easy it is to engage in it, because a lifetime of fiction has given us the impression that anyone can turn into an action hero at a moment's notice. I've read articles and quotes from people who have real experience with violence, and they've talked about how much harder it is than you'd think from TV and movies.

It's a question of where the threshold of detectability is. Loosening one restraint enough that she can work her own wrist out of it is subtle enough that there's a good chance it could be overlooked. Completely releasing a restraint, or repeating the action on both arms, would be more likely to get noticed. Any action taken before the distraction kicked in had to be kept to a minimum.

Except it doesn't seem that Scott was supposed to be there, given that he was hiding behind a mask. And Rachel has met him, I'm pretty sure, so she might've recognized him and known that something was wrong, which is the last thing they wanted.

But the former is more loud, abrupt, and shocking. And again, I think TV conditions us to assume that everyone would react to violence calmly like a trained soldier or police officer would. Realistically, there'd be a lot more confusion and panic and shouting and "What the hell was that" and it would be a real mess.

A taser needs to be reloaded after each use, doesn't it? Well, I guess I have seen one (Alison's?) that was loaded with two cartridges with separate triggers.

And I still think a smoke or flash bomb would've impaired both sides equally and thus not been much of an advantage. Not much of an escape if you can't orient yourself to find the door.

Yes, and again, they wanted to make it difficult and dramatic, not smooth and easy.

I think we're both getting tired of this at this point. Of course there's always more than one way to put a scene or an episode together, and sometimes the reason for doing a scene a certain way is ineffable. Sometimes it's just that that's the way they happened to go instead of doing something else. I just don't think it's fair to assume there was a negative motivation behind anything you don't personally agree with.

 

Heh, well in a sense that might have been just the distraction they needed.

Hmm, I honestly don't know. For using it at a distance, yeah, you have to expend the cartridge, but just shocking someone at point blank range?

Yeah. But thanks for an interesting discussion!

I agree, I was probably too harsh at the start. But just so it doesn't seem like my assertions were completely unfounded (and because it has some interesting implications for Rachel's future) I found this response from the writers in the interview linked earlier interesting:

Perhaps that's more of the reason I didn't enjoy the scene. I totally understand it on a gut level and of course, TV is not real life - in fact, it's the opposite and is meant to enable you to experience what you couldn't or shouldn't in real life - but I find myself pretty uncomfortable with this sense of almost-glee at the villain (no matter how horrible, and I think Rachell is much more sympatethic than a lot of people give her credit for) being deliberately brutalized expressed by the writers and a lot of people commenting about the show on the Internet. Yeah, it's a trope, and what Helena did to Henrik was horrible too, but at least you know Helena is an unhinged murderer (a cute and redeemable one, but still). At least it wasn't expressed by the characters themselves. Maybe I'm just too squeamish.

But, disregarding that, it's interesting that they're apparently leaving it somewhat open as to whether Rachel will return at all. Of course, writers love to be secretive and non-committal, but might they be thinking about actually killing her off? It didn't seem lethal to me. (No eye-patch in that case!) Though it was deep; deep enough to cause brain damage?

 

Okay, maybe there was some shock value intent to it, then. Somehow it just didn't seem that way to me this time. Perhaps it would've seemed more so if we hadn't just had Leekie's head blown apart a few weeks ago. Maybe that numbed me to further shocks.

And it doesn't seem as violent on the characters' part as Helena's torture of Henrik, because I don't think either Cosima or Sarah intended it to play out that way. So it was more an awful fluke than an act of malice on the characters' part -- though I'm sure Sarah would've used any necessary force to get her daughter back.

 

From TVLine.com

 

By the way, the child actress who played Charlotte and the young Rachel did a YouTube parody of the clone dance party that's kind of adorable:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_bHQq13jvE

 

That was awesome, complete with Rachel at the end.

 

That is adorable!!!

Thanks for posting it!

 

And now I'm less impressed with Orphan Black's clone FX lol.

 

We have a July 15 release date for Season 2 DVD & blu-ray.

(and there was much rejoicing) Yay!

 

That seems quick. I'll rejoice when the show filly gets picked up (and for three seasons. )

 

Maybe it's taking a while because they are negotiating 3 seasons, yeah!

 

It's offical. BBC America has renewed Orphan Black for a third season.

Deadline:Hollywood

 

:fistpump:

Fuck yeah!

 

Hallejuia. I knew it would happen but I'm still really happy

 

All right! Finally!

 

To nobody's surprise and everybody's disappointment, the Emmys failed to nominate Tatiana Maslany again.

 

Screw the Emmys.

 

I stopped taking the Emmys (and awards in general) seriously a long time ago. They're not about quality, they're just about what the limited pool of voters is familiar with and fond of.

 

We already discussed this... The show "technically" doesn't qualify for an Emmy because it isn't received terrestrially by at least %50 of America, and it seems to be mostly Canadian.

However?

Is BBCAmerica's Original programming capable of getting a BAFTA?

 

"Luther" was nominated for an Emmy this year (for miniseries) but only appeared on BBCAmerica.