#inconsistencies

[arrowheadedbitch]

Me anytime there's an inconsistency in Psych bc the writers forget that they established something and then establish the opposite: Oh, well that's easy! Shawn is lying.

And when the inconsistency has nothing to do with Shawn? Still Shawn.

He's girlbossed too close to the sun. His lies have become too powerful.

[postsforposting]

there are inconsistencies inside s1 too

in s1e2 we are first shown anathema drawing in the prophecy book, like so

This is not the same picture we see later in the same episode, when Aziraphale opens the book

It's not the same size, first of all, compare where the edges of the picture are. Second, the hair is different: the first one, the hair blends into the red aura around the figure, and in the second one the figure and its hair is completely separate from the aura.

I also don't think this is Anathema herself, I think it's Madam Tracey. That's who Aziraphale goes to find, and she's dressed in green, with the red hair. Technically orange, but eh, both are called ginger. I think this drawing is telling Aziraphale to look for Tracey. Maybe Aziraphale can see auras when he's in ghost mode, or can just generally.

Later in the show, when Anathema is telling Newt about Agnes, she says in quick succession that Agnes is "a witch from 300 years ago" and they've been trying to figure out her prophecies for 400 years. That math does not work. She was dead and they got the book at the same time. Anathema says "yes, no, yes" when Newt asks if Agnes knew he was going to crash his car.

Hell changes its description of when they began the antichrist plan too, but I don't remember when those lines happened. I think the difference was first "since the earth was made" and the second was "since we rebelled". The earth was made long after the rebellion.

IIRC there are also other inconsistencies but I didn't write them down as I was watching.

[angrychicagoan24]

i’m doing some research about guns for the next chapter of the demon priest and i’ve realized. how does gerard from asotm still have functioning ears. like (spoiler alert) he literally fired a gun probably at least 20 times inside a building when he most definitely had no ear protection. he should be deaf as fuck right now. that’s my new headcanon that he was half fucking deaf

[unofskylanderspages]

Did you know? In the console version of Spyro's Adventure, Kaos is shorter than all of the other characters, but in subsequent games and books, he is taller than some Core Skylanders.

[fuck-i-like-too-much-stuff]

Small technicality i noticed recently while rewatching ViceVersa-

If Enchante is set in the universe that Pluen and Talay jump to, then Phupha and Wayo from Enchante should also be there... making Aou and Fuse from ViceVersa their duplicates/doppelgangers...

Ik this probably is an inconsistency, but its just something i thought there should be a tumblr post about

Also recently noticed that Aou was Akk's senior (the ex school president/head boy) in The Eclipse

[poligraf]

Faith makes the discords of the present, the harmonies of the future.

— Robert Collyer

[user-without-a-cool-acronym]

something I'm a little confused by is that a few of the new things that are part of "return to the wyldness" either directly or in the description refer to Kai's last words as being "Ninja never quit", when those were the last words he said in the episode, but only after already being trapped in nether space with bonzle, while they are here referred to directly as having been heard by Wyldfyre

[straightyuri]

Something really weird is happening to how i write rn. Sorrt

[nalyra-dreaming]

Hello! I hope I won't sound like hater but I want to point out inconsistency in Anne's narrative. So Claudia was burned by the sun and left behind yellow dress she was in, right? But if she was Frankensteined prior to this, than body would be from another vampire, so dress wasn't hers. I think Anne retconed it but didn't think about it too hard. I mean they can make both Claudia's parts being burned by the sun of course...

Also, do you think body for Claudia was from some random theater member vampire? Or Madeleine. I can see Armand not even mentioning Madeleine by name because she's irrelevant to him. I can also see them doing this on their own (Robin&co I mean)

I think the only way to do this so that'll look organic is to have Madeleine and Claudia swap heads and them both being burned by the sun. Maybe add scene Louis buying Claudia yellow dress when they just arrived in Paris "for special occasion" or something to add emotional involvement in dress. At first I thought they can make dress old gift from lestat (we know from clues in ep4 that lestat used to buy her clothes even if Louis have better fashion sense) but than I thought "no way Claudia's wearing something that lestat got her"

What do you think?

There are LOTS of inconsistencies.

Anne made a lot up while she went and at some point she fired her editor. And the books are written over 40+, almost 50 years, and the first one was written from a massive place of grief.

However, I don't think that... matters.

Was it the same yellow dress? Was it another? Does Lestat misremember? Did Armand use Madeleine's body for the experiment? (I think he might have, yes.) Did he even care? Did he choose another yellow dress after to hide his botched experiment? Did Louis and Lestat want to see the dress as yellow? Has their memory mixed things together?

I'm not sure that matters in the narrative, because... Memory is a Monster.

The show latched onto those inconsistencies in the books, has latched onto the discussions and remarks about memory and the different viewpoints, and has already, imho, elevated it all to art.

I mean, I have seen at least three different versions of the "Shrieks in the darkness" posters... do we really think that is an oversight??

No. It's most definitely not.

They're playing with this aspect, and us, and the characters. Because of the inconsistencies.

As per the yellow dress itself, I agree she might not wear something Lestat got her... but then the show established already that she bought (organized) her own things years ago... I absolutely think the clothes Claudia wears will bear significance. But if that will be a yellow dress... we'll see.

[macabremachinery]

I feel like there was a bit of a communication breakdown between Harlan Ellison and the IHNMAIMS game developers. There are some slight…inconsistencies between the game guide Ellison wrote and what actually happens in-game.

[jhsharman]

summer fun

Accidentally had an "Archie 2" there.

The recoloring --darkening -- redenning -- of the sands is interesting. Like, the cacti lead to a decision to place it in the Southwest.

"Gay" is out. "Groovy" remains.

Maybe losing sight of the color here.

[mappinglasirena]

Upper Deck Under Construction

I have spent the last few weeks amassing a new set of screenshots for season one of Star Trek: Picard, to replace the lower quality ones I had somehow managed to pry off of Amazon Prime back in the day. And as I'm staring lovingly at images of anything and everything La Sirena, occasionally, I notice things I've never noticed before. Usually those are very small things, but every now and again, I discover something absolutely delightful.

So, I thought I'd drop in to share one of my latest observations!

I've probably mentioned before, and many others have, too, that when Admiral Picard (retired) first arrives on La Sirena, the ship is undergoing a bit of a refit or possibly some repairs.

For one, the transporter console is nowhere to be found:

The console is clearly mobile, we see it move around the deck on other occasions.

But apparently, when Picard arrived, it had been taken somewhere else entirely for a while.

Similarly, the chairs on the bridge undergo a lot of transformations throughout season 1 (so many, in fact, they deserve their own post), but one of the most stark ones is from episode 3, "The End is the Beginning" to episode 4, "Absolute Candor":

Clearly, while in orbit over earth, someone on Sirena decided it was a good time to reupholster all the bridge chairs.

Now, if you wanted to, you could find explanations that fit the canon for all of these changes -- the removed transporter console, the reupholstered bridge chairs, the amount of cargo that increases drastically between eps 3 and 4, all of it could have a perfectly logical reason.

However, as I was looking through my screenshots today, trying to find an image of one particular section of the port wall for my 3D model, I noticed another refit, one that had never caught my attention before. And this change, I think, even the most dedicated canon-wrangler will have a hard time explaining (not that we won't try).

Let's go back to Picard's very first arrival on the ship for a second.

I have, on occasion, wondered how they managed to film this shot. I've never thought about it too deeply, but it has always seemed vaguely off in my mind. The thing is: this shot should be impossible, because this is the port side of the upper deck, and there are quarters where the camera man is standing right now.

Of course, this is a film set, so many of the walls are wild and can be moved around to allow for all kinds of equipment and setup. Maybe that's what I subconsciously assumed happened with the shot of Picard's dramatic entrance.

Today, however, I realized the walls had not just been moved aside temporarily to allow access for the camera crew. Rather, when they were filming the ep 3 scenes taking place on the open upper deck, the quarters on the port side of the ship weren't actually there yet!

It's subtle and a little difficult to see, which is probably why I never noticed it until today, even though I've been staring at every inch of this ship for the better part of three years now. But if you look closely at the middle section of the port wall and zoom in (especially on the second image, right next to Agnes's right arm), you can tell that there is open space where the quarters would be built in later.

(Especially compared to the same section of the deck in later episodes.)

(See how much of the beams and the space in between them is blocked here?)

Now, I'm as happy to wrangle the canon into submission as the next detail-obsessed nerd, but I in this case, I have yet to come up with a fitting, canon-compliant explanation for the discrepancy between episodes. I think, in the end, I'll probably file it under: "these things can happen on a tv set" and move on. (Although if one of you wants to try their hand at a headcanon, I would be thrilled to read all about it!)

For now, let's pour one out for the production team, who must have been stressed out of their minds, getting this monumental set ready for shooting while significant parts of it were still under construction.

[frogbehindthewaterfall]

When planning my Golden Flames AU of course i had to think about rewriting episodes, and I thought, hey, I can write Red into s2, and I still haven't decided how that particular thing is gonna be handled, if I'll even do it in the first place but that got me thinking.

What the hell is going on with Red Son's backstory in canon?

Like the whole samadhi fire situation is different than in jttw, but in dumpling destruction, the Red Boy storyline was, like, canon, so what the actual hell is up with that? Did all the Red Boy things happen after the fire was sealed and swk got beat up by someone much much weaker than before without the samadhi fire, which was the reason for Red Boy's success in jttw, or did he get his shit handed to him by a baby?

(Also the added fucked upness of all the punishments he received, which is something I'm already pretty loud about in the first place, I will never shut up about how wrong it was(actually made a post on it too, but it irrelevant now) and also another question about canon regarding Red's time with guanyin)

And yeah, it was Dumpling Destruction that started me on this.

It would have been really difficult to try and figure things out for this au given this confusion, because if all the Red Boy stuff happened after the sealing then it wouldn't have happened here, therefore the vase wouldn't be available, but if it happened when Red was a baby then it makes it really funny that swk got beat up by a baby, helped seal world ending fire that the kid used to beat him up inside the baby, then protested against killing him, sealed the kid's dad and went on to raise the baby

So because of that, dumpling destruction does not exist in the au regardless of whether ill rewrite the rest of s2 or not.

[brf-rumortrackinganon]

I’m still pulling together all the notes from Bower and there are some inconsistencies between what Bower says happened and what Harry says happened. Just wanted to throw these out there in case anyone else is interested in some plot holes.

Plot hole #1: When did Harry and Meghan really get engaged?

Bower says that they became engaged much earlier than they said / announced. Bower’s sources / research says that Harry proposed while the Queen was at Balmoral and that the proposal happened before the Vanity Fair interview:

Jane Sarkin pitched to Graydon Carter, the magazine’s famous editor-in-chief, that Meghan should be offered not only an interview in the illustrious magazine but also a guarantee to feature on the front cover. Carter, famed as a man ahead of the curve, had never heard of Meghan or Suits. Nevertheless, he was persuaded that Harry’s latest girlfriend was destined to change the royal family. When the call came, Meghan was ecstatic.

[stuff about Sunshine Sachs]

Living with Harry had already transformed her life. The feature could even prompt Harry to announce their engagement - delayed, according to Harry, until the Queen’s formal approval on her return from Balmoral in the autumn.

[details about the proposal, the ring, and telling Thomas Markle]

The engagement was unknown to Keleigh Thomas Morgan as she gave a carefully measured response to Vanity Fair. Of course, Meghan would be delighted... 

[stuff about Suits and drama about commercial endorsement contracts, Harry’s instructions about what Meghan could/couldn’t talk about in the VF interview, and the VF author’s observations about Meghan’s house]

Meghan spoke, he [Sam Kashner, the VF author] realized, knowing that she had the winning ticket but avoiding giving an impression of triumphalism.

I don’t know a whole lot about magazine publishing, but the little I do know is that Vanity Fair would’ve needed at least 2 months’ lead time before publication to conduct the interview, source quotes from friends/family, do research and checks to verify claims about charity work, write the article, edit and fact-check the article, design the article and layout, send the issue for printing, and then publication and distribution. Then tack on another month for negotiations about the offer. Meaning that since Meghan was the September 2017 VF cover, she would have done the interview no later than July, with negotiations probably around May/June. Meaning that the proposal had to have been no later than June 2017. At least.

Now compare that to what Harry says in Spare:

One night, not long after Meg’s arrival in Britain, we were at home, making dinner, playing with Guy, and the kitchen of Nott Cott was as full of love as any room I’d ever been in.

[details about the proposal]

Oh, wait. Don’t you want to see the ring, my love?

She hadn’t even thought about it.

We hurried inside, finished our celebration in the warmth of the kitchen.

It was November 4. 

We managed to keep it secret for about two weeks.

So which is it? Were they engaged in June 2017? Or were they engaged on November 4, 2017?

I trust Bower’s research more than I trust Harry’s faulty memory. Not to mention...there’s been no lawsuits about Revenge. Clearly if Bower was wrong on any of his facts, we would’ve heard about it by now. And, well... *crickets*

Plot hole #2: Guy and his broken legs

In Spare, Harry says:

Days before Meg left Canada, Guy had run away from his minder. (Meg was at work.) He’d been found miles from Meg’s house, unable to walk. His legs were now in casts.

(then he goes into the proposal story and how he carried Guy in/out to be part of the proposal.)

Contrast that to the Daily Mail’s story about Guy. The Daily Mail article was published 23 December 2017 and says “Last night, sources close to the couple said Meghan was ‘distraught’ and ‘very upset’ about Guy’s condition,” suggesting that the accident happened on 22 December 2017, or around 22 Dec, and the level of medical detail in the article - specifically the vet specialist and the palace’s help - is too specific to be a lie. (And I feel like there was a palace communique about Guy’s accident, but I’m having trouble finding it.)

So which is it? Did Guy get injured in Canada in October? Or did he get injured in London in December?

My theory: Guy’s accident was in London, November / December timeframe. Harry and Meghan “recreated” their engagement some time later to have footage for the Netflix docuseries, but they did it when Guy had his casts on and then later changed the story about Guy’s accident to fit their “real” engagement story. (I do think Meghan wanted to change their engagement story because getting proposed to in the kitchen while making dinner wasn’t the candlelit romantic production she wanted.)

[longlivelindanny]

I wish Blue Bloods had been consistent with Danny’s high school personality. Some times he was a rebel and didn’t do well in school, other times he was a good student. Pick a side and go with it

[sergaz]

My current 3.

Audio off recommended.

Worm on a string (Leggy Worm base) by Javenchi