• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Agents of SHIELD. Season 1 Discussion Thread

I've been quite patient and understanding with this show, but this ep flat-out sucked; the worst yet by far.

No Dr. Selvig cameo? No discussion of the big convergence event? Lame and lame. The actual plot? Even lamer. The generic baddies are getting old, Skye is getting more annoying by the ep, and Ward's constant flips from quip-happy fighter to darkness-haunted warrior are a chore to sit through. I don't care what happened to him as a kid. Or about Skye's parents. Peter MacNicol was the only good thing about this ep, but instead of really exploring his personality and experiences, we're all in a rush to punch some random person again, and rip off John Carter's big battle scene.

I'm totally fine with this show not having too many superpowered people, let alone costumed heroes. But there's gotta be something else to hold our interest, and the writing needs to get a lot better.
 
I've been quite patient and understanding with this show, but this ep flat-out sucked; the worst yet by far.

No Dr. Selvig cameo? No discussion of the big convergence event? Lame and lame.

We've already discussed why it was unrealistic to expect the episode to go into any detail about the events of a movie that a great many people in its audience would not have seen yet. If it had tied into the movie as much as some people seem to have expected, then right now we'd be hearing a ton of other people screaming about having the movie spoiled for them.

As for an actor cameo, sure, it would've been nice, but they've already gotten Cobie Smulders and Samuel L. Jackson to appear, so their guest-star budget might be getting a little strained. Again, it's a question of realistic expectations.
 
You mean the episode?

No. Coulson's team was part of the clean-up operation at Greenwich.

Sorry, I completely screwed up what I meant. I edited my post for clarity. Is it possible the events in the episode occurred before Thor returned in the post-credits scene? It's more a question of the timeline of Thor than a SHIELD episode, though.
 
We could certainly have had some discussion about how helpless cosmic events like Asgardian battles and alien attacks can make people feel, like we did in IM3, without giving anything about T:TDW that wasn't already revealed in its trailers. Here, it's all just a flimsy excuse for a bland baddie gang of the week.
 
We could certainly have had some discussion about how helpless cosmic events like Asgardian battles and alien attacks can make people feel, like we did in IM3, without giving anything about T:TDW that wasn't already revealed in its trailers. Here, it's all just a flimsy excuse for a bland baddie gang of the week.

Didn't they do that already regarding the battle at New York?
Do we need to rehash that every time a movie comes out?

"Still feeling helpless. Just like last time. And the time before. And probably will for Avengers 3."
 
If a S.H.I.E.L.D. episode significantly crosses over with a movie... In a later edition/release that episode could be a DVD extra, which would see money change hands internally between departments which might register as a profit
 
We could certainly have had some discussion about how helpless cosmic events like Asgardian battles and alien attacks can make people feel, like we did in IM3, without giving anything about T:TDW that wasn't already revealed in its trailers. Here, it's all just a flimsy excuse for a bland baddie gang of the week.

There was also the bit with Simmons' parents calling her wanting answers for "all this", which indicates that there is a bit of a "WTF?" vibe amongst those who aren't in the know.
 
If a S.H.I.E.L.D. episode significantly crosses over with a movie... In a later edition/release that episode could be a DVD extra, which would see money change hands internally between departments which might register as a profit

But if it ties in too specifically then it becomes dated on repeated viewings.
 
Is it possible the events in the episode occurred before Thor returned in the post-credits scene? It's more a question of the timeline of Thor than a SHIELD episode, though.

Coulson's line about Thor being "off the grid" suggested to me that SHIELD was aware that Thor was back on Earth but wasn't reachable. (He was probably off somewhere very private with Jane...) And my impression of the movie's timeline was that Thor returned to Earth pretty promptly after his final scene in the throne room.
 
But if it ties in too specifically then it becomes dated on repeated viewings.

What does this even mean?
Crossovers are dated because they tie into other shows of that time? Doesn't that make what it's tying into equally dated? Since they were both made at the same time? Or are you misusing the term "dated"?
 
But if it ties in too specifically then it becomes dated on repeated viewings.

What does this even mean?
Crossovers are dated because they tie into other shows of that time? Doesn't that make what it's tying into equally dated? Since they were both made at the same time? Or are you misusing the term "dated"?

Yeah, I did. I was thinking that the producers would feel that grounding the plot of an episode too closely to a movie has the potential to hurt viewings of the series later on, either in re-runs or in DVDs.

Star Trek never directly connected the events of their series or movies together, for example. Think about how TNG, DS9, or Voyager never directly connected their Maquis stories so one can watch any of the shows independently from one another. In this case, connecting the series too closely with Thor has the potential to make a viewer feel like one cannot watch just Agents on its own. It is the same thing that comics do with their major comic events that leaves many of us who don't buy all the issues feeling a little alienated.
 
But if you didn't watch either of those movies you would never know. And I always thought Spock's reference was a little corny anyway (but that's just my opinion.)
 
And "Unification" came out about a month before TUC, so its references to the film's events were kept fairly vague, just a teaser. ("Perhaps you are aware of the small role I played in the overture to peace with the Klingons." "History is aware of the role you played, Ambassador." "Not entirely. It was I who committed Captain Kirk to that peace mission, and I who had to bear the responsibility for the consequences to him and his crew.")
 
But if you didn't watch either of those movies you would never know. And I always thought Spock's reference was a little corny anyway (but that's just my opinion.)

What about DS9's "Q-Less"? That was tied VERY heavily to "Q-Pid" with Q and Vash.

Or "Defiant", which was very heavily tied to TNG's "Second Chances".

These aren't movies crossing with TV show, true, but there's no real difference from a story perspective. One is directly linked to another that's not in the series and profits aren't hurt by being connected. It's just a different version of "This story is important to that story", medium being irrelevant.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top