Continuum - News/Discussion/SPOILERS

[Gollumpus]

Spoiler:

She was enveloped in the explosion as they jumped and she grabbed her neck. If the fire burnt the clothes enough they would have fallen off, or possibly she removed the remnants.

That's kind of the point, chum.

Spoiler:

If the fire burned Kiera's clothes, why didn't it also burn Alec's clothes, and for that matter, their hair? I find it hard to believe that she was able to shield Alec from the blast just enough so that he was unscathed but her clothes were all burned off.

I know it looks more dramatic this way, and she gets to "blink out" in front of the CSIS guy (and what the heck was she thinking there?). It just seems a bit weird how it was handled just so they can give the CSIS guy a new angle to snoop. Maybe it was just a time consideration and they had to wrap the episode up.

regards,
G.

[Dr Lee]

it also creates a new story arc if/when the show gets renewed...

[escyos]

Here.

Spoiler:

vlcsnap-2012-08-09-11h18m22s236.jpg

[Ian-S]

regarding the clothes, in the very first episode didn't she "flick a switch" to change the suits appearance to blend in with domestic clothing because people were giving her funny looks?

I might be wrong on this, but iirc whenever she wears the suit, she also has on that gold looking blouse, it's one and the same thing according to episode 1.

But as I say I could be wrong, I can't remember what she was wearing pre-explosion....

[Gollumpus]

Here.

Spoiler:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]35160[/ATTACH]

Yup. But it wouldn't have been just the actual flames with which they would have to contend, it would also be the heat wave which preceded them. Still don't get how her hair wasn't burnt off, or for that matter why her head is included in the invisibility field of the suit.

Meh, it's the summer. I'm up for some brainstorming.

regards,
G.

[Gollumpus]

regarding the clothes, in the very first episode didn't she "flick a switch" to change the suits appearance to blend in with domestic clothing because people were giving her funny looks?

I might be wrong on this, but iirc whenever she wears the suit, she also has on that gold looking blouse, it's one and the same thing according to episode 1.

But as I say I could be wrong, I can't remember what she was wearing pre-explosion....

Could be. Asking me to remember as far back as this morning is sometimes a pointless request.

BTW: has Kiera's suit always been a two piece? My recollection of it was that it was a once piece.

Before:

Spoiler:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-uIxv-XK79w...+Cameron+3.jpg

(or you'll have to search the web on your own here. For some reason, every pic I have found is "too big" to be included, even the really small stuff).

After:

Spoiler:

kiera1.jpg

regards,
G.

[Brother Freyr]

Still don't get how her hair wasn't burnt off

You're right. Fire/heat/explosion just isn't a credible explanation, considering the protected state of their hair and skin (and Alec's clothes).

or for that matter why her head is included in the invisibility field of the suit.

It's preposterous.

Don't misundersand me, I like the show, but the creators became a little careless with these details.

[Gollumpus]

You're right. Fire/heat/explosion just isn't a credible explanation, considering the protected state of their hair and skin (and Alec's clothes).


It's preposterous.

Don't misunderstand me, I like the show, but the creators became a little careless with these details.

Yep. I used to love nitpicking ST:NG with various friends. It was fun, and in some ways it increased our appreciation of the good aspects of the show.

To continue with our nitpicking here, I believe that the show has already established that the suit doesn't cover the head. In the first couple of episodes (I have a recollection of it being the episode where Michael Dopud's character got killed off), during a gunfight in a construction area(?), one of the Liber8 mention that Kiera is wearing a suit (Ingram?), to which another member says, "aim for her head" (Garza?).

Unless there's some kind of hood which is missing from Kiera's suit, I guess that the helmet was supposed to provide protection to the head, and should have also allowed for total coverage for the invisibility feature. It does indeed look like the lack of any kind of head/face covering is merely for convenience sake, which is understandable I suppose.

If nothing else, having all of her clothes burned off is one way to make sure that Kiera gets a new wardrobe for season two.

And why would she pull her disappearing act while she was in plain sight, not just by the CSIS guy but potentially by a large number of other people. It would have been easy for her to walk behind a bit of wreckage, or even just duck down. I understand why the writers had Kiera do this, but it makes no sense why the character would do this. I think they should have fallen back on the cliche

regards,
G.

[SaberBlade]

And why would she pull her disappearing act while she was in plain sight, not just by the CSIS guy but potentially by a large number of other people. It would have been easy for her to walk behind a bit of wreckage, or even just duck down. I understand why the writers had Kiera do this, but it makes no sense why the character would do this. I think they should have fallen back on the cliche .

They wanted him to see her doing those kind of things. I'd bet good money it will play a bigger part of season two with him trying to learn more about her.

[Gollumpus]

They wanted him to see her doing those kind of things. I'd bet good money it will play a bigger part of season two with him trying to learn more about her.

Yup, I agree.

However, as I'd noted, just because the writers want a character to do something does not mean that it makes sense for the character to do that thing.

All through the first season, the writers have shown Kiera being very careful about revealing the various properties of the suit. Why would she go invisible while in plain view when she could take a couple of steps to the side and reduce her chances of being observed? Why would she stand when she could duck down, reducing her chances of being observed, and then go invisible.

Yes, the only reason she did not do these things is so that the writers could use the CSIS guy for next year, but it was an action which doesn't make sense (to me) based on the previously established behavior of the character.

regards,
G.

[mi_guard]

maybe she did it because she was sure to be going back to her time with that 'time machine' and just did not care anymore

[Gollumpus]

maybe she did it because she was sure to be going back to her time with that 'time machine' and just did not care anymore

Good point!

I'll have to see if I can pick it apart.

regards,
G.

[Falcon Horus]

Just watched episode 10 and I must say that I really want this show renewed cause it might have gotten off to a slow start, it looks promising now.

[Ukko]

To continue with our nitpicking here, I believe that the show has already established that the suit doesn't cover the head. In the first couple of episodes (I have a recollection of it being the episode where Michael Dopud's character got killed off), during a gunfight in a construction area(?), one of the Liber8 mention that Kiera is wearing a suit (Ingram?), to which another member says, "aim for her head" (Garza?).

The suit is bullet proof. We've seen her get shot.

[Gollumpus]

The suit is bullet proof. We've seen her get shot.

Which was the point being addressed here, chum.

What we're establishing are the properties of the suit. In that scene, the writers are saying that the head is vulnerable to gun shots, which makes sense in that the suit is stopping ballistic energy, so it would only protect the area which it covers.

What we have learned from this is that there was apparently no kind of "invisible" energy shield or field which protects the head from damage (or at least there wasn't in that episode). So, in the apparent absence of such a field, how can the energy generated by the suit to make Kiera's body invisible also make her head invisible?

In this latest episode, while the suit may have protected Kiera's body from the explosion, why wouldn't the heat/flames have scorched her head and burned off her hair, as it apparently did with her 2012 clothes? Further, why wasn't Alec injured or his clothes burned? Kiera pushing him a couple of feet in front of her wouldn't have made that much of a difference, would it? I am curious about this. Would a couple of feet of separation have made that much of a difference?

Was there a field generated by the suit to protect Kiera and Alec from the explosion? It looked like it. If the suit could generate a field to protect them both from the force of the explosion and the heat, why were Kiera's 2012 clothes burned off while Alec's remained undamaged? And from where did this field come? I don't recall it being used in previous episodes. And if the suit can generate such a field, might that have been what destroyed Kiera's 2012 clothes?

Obviously allowing Kiera to be observed was a deliberate move on the part of the creators of the show to develop the story arc for next year. My point/opinion is, her being observed in the nanner that she was, and how the suit was used in that scene was sloppy writing/directing on their part and the sequence was not properly thought out. And my fear is that the show could become "suit" driven with the writers upping the ante every season and giving the suit more and stronger properties so as to resolve ever increasing difficulties.

Superman started out being a guy who was very strong, very fast and was some-what bullet proof. Look where he is today.

regards,
G.