Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Torchwood- Owen Harper & his actions (spoilers)

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    You want to disagree, fine, but next time try and keep the insults out of it.

    And just because there are no ill side-effects to the alien drug/perfume (as far as we know) doesn't make it okay and I don't see how it makes the comparison to a roofie invalid. Making someone sick is a side effect of a roofie (so you say) but the purpose is to make them more pliable. Same as the perfume.

    Comment


      #17
      Let's remember guys to debate the topic, not each other.

      Every person has his/her own opinion and it's not 'wrong' or 'stupid', it's just thier opinion. YOu may not agree. That's your right. But don't diss anyone's opinion.

      The topic of this thread is Owen and his actions on Torchwood, so let's keep it at that please
      Where in the World is George Hammond?


      sigpic

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by rich44 View Post
        I think you're all taking it far too seriously tbh. How many men buy that pheromone X crap advertised in the back of tabloid papers and dodgy mens magazines (so i'm reliably informed lol) it's the same premise. As for it being akin to giving someone Rhohipnol or a "roofie" I find that remark pretty stupid.

        Rhohipnol and other DR drugs apart from the abhorrent nature of their use they can also leave the person theyre used on seriously ill if not worse.
        Why is it stupid to compare it to Roophinol? One is a drug that enables rape, the other is a drug that enables rape. One can have dangerous side effects, the other has probably not been tested under clinical conditions to establish if there are side effects. Seem pretty similarly vile to me.


        I think we need to keep in mind it's sci-fi and as to that drug it was a drug that made the person on the receiving end totally attractive to the person near them so hardly DR at all
        No, it wasn't 'DR' cos there was no date. It was just rape or an attempt at it.

        If a flirty woman had been eyeing him, and then his spray tipped the balance, or if a non-responsive woman had started chatting friendly-like and ended up liking him enough to go with him, there might be ambiguity. Then, we wouldn't know if the spray had made sex inevitable from the start, or if it had just made him more attractive and upped his chances, like the makers of certain deororants would have us believe we can do with one of their aerosols.

        It wasn't like that though. No amount of lipstick, perfume, smart clothes or hormonal scent can turn Sod Off Creep into Take Me Now. Do you think that woman had a choice? I don't. His spray clearly made her agree to something that was anathema seconds before when in her right mind. It was an attempt to rape her.

        Madeleine

        Comment


          #19
          I'm sorry, but to me it was obvious that he was using the couples fighting as a chance to escape quickly...


          "Five Rounds Rapid"

          sigpic

          Comment


            #20
            Besides, the guy wasn't exactly Brad Pitt either was he?


            "Five Rounds Rapid"

            sigpic

            Comment


              #21
              If a flirty woman had been eyeing him, and then his spray tipped the balance, or if a non-responsive woman had started chatting friendly-like and ended up liking him enough to go with him, there might be ambiguity. Then, we wouldn't know if the spray had made sex inevitable from the start, or if it had just made him more attractive and upped his chances, like the makers of certain deororants would have us believe we can do with one of their aerosols.
              I just took the scene as a scene. I admit I took nothing about date rape out of it and I think I'm a bit more in tune with that than most men might be, but after reading this thread, I do think there was some ambiguity based on your criteria above. The woman scoped him when he sat at the bar and when he turned and saw her, she made obvious eye contact letting him know the game was afoot. She then did not make any overt gestures of rejection, maintaining eye contact and not pulling away when he sat beside her. So, I look at that and say, she thought the usual evening flirting was going to happen...the verbal games and whatnot. Was she committed as soon as she saw him to sleeping with him? who knows. Did the spray tip the balance in his favor despite what she might have been thinking? who knows.

              Why would a Taxi be a way of wanting more? If you're having fun with whatever you're doing, a Taxi doesn't tend to increase your fun, it removes you from the place of fun. If you're stressed and wanting out however, a Taxi achieves that.
              I agree with this. To my mind, Taxi! is usually associated with trying to get away from somewhere, be it for dramatic or comic reasons. The verbal queue that usually denotes something to progress is more of a restaurant scene where one of the characters shouts 'Cheque!' indicating they want the current event to end so they can get on with something more appealing.
              Thanks!
              Jordan

              my page
              My LJ
              From now on, our name will be 'Tenac'.

              Comment


                #22
                Ok guys, i will preface this by saying that i know nothing about the show. Haven't seen it, likely won't unless a us station picks it up

                that being said, 'obvious' is a relative term. Y'all remember a trek eps way back when and they went to a commercial with kirk snogging chick of the week, came back to him sitting on the edge of the bed putting on his boots

                what happened during that 90 second commercial break????

                well, it was supposed to be OBVIOUS that he and chick of the week 'did the nasty', yet it also couldn't be too obvious or the censors woulda snipped it.

                Obvious is in the eye of the beholder.

                To some, the implication is enough, to others, it needs to be seen, not implied.

                Neither way is right or wrong.

                The topic is 'what owen did', and the debate is whether his actions are right or wrong.

                Thus, to debate, a person would have to conceed that owen did something. (did that something stop at snogging or did it go all the way to shagging???? your pov may vary) If you don't beleive that he did anything, then you have no need to debate here cause what they're debating didn't happen as far as you're concerned.

                Now if folks can't keep it on topic, which means to debate owen's actions and the correctness or wrongness of them, then maybe y'all might want to move onto another thread and leave this one alone.

                Perhaps those of you that feel it didn't go beyond a snog will leave those that think it made it to shagging have their debate and those of you that feel that it went to a shag will just leave the snoggers alone.

                agree to disagree and concentrate on this....snogging or shagging, was he wrong?

                If you can't keep this dispassionate, then give this thread a miss and move on down the forum please
                Where in the World is George Hammond?


                sigpic

                Comment


                  #23
                  keep your private issues private and personal disputes out of this - or any - thread

                  No one person's interpretation of events on the show are empirically right or wrong. they are just that person's personal interpretatino of things, which is colored by each person's own predjudices, emotions, feelings and experiences
                  Where in the World is George Hammond?


                  sigpic

                  Comment


                    #24
                    The post I originally quoted has been removed by the author, so I have removed its recurrance here
                    I do disagree that people may hold these opinions because they're 'not aware' of another purpose. Personally, I feel that portraying the use of the drug to get someone into bed was offensive - even while knowing that it could possibly be a device to show the opposite. My reason for that is, the use of drugs to get women into bed is reaching epidemic proportions, and I don't think we're at the point where you can make a scene like that with the intention that it actually means the opposite.

                    If that is what Russel Davis meant by that scene, then I think he got it wrong. It wasn't obvious enough at all, and any guy watching that who might be inclined to use drugs to get a woman into bed certainly won't go 'oh I see! It is wrong for me to do that, so I won't'. And to any woman who's about to be affected by a drug induced rape, that scene won't say 'that's wrong' instead it says 'well as long as you consent, even if you're manipulated into doing something you wouldn't have done at all if you weren't under the influence of drugs' it is OK really so you can't complain.

                    What those three scenes said to me - the dead flies, the picking up women, the absorbing books - was a very succinct, very powerful and excellent way to build up these characters. The fly imagery was quite powerful - there were parallels with the psycho pulling off the wings of flies, except here they were being brought back to life. But it was no less a sign that there was something seriously wrong with her. Bringing dead creatures back to life? And the book absorbing - here's a character who was probably a book worm as a child, who most likely eschewed real life friends for those in her books and imagination. And Owen? Well it summarised him most of all, and made us want to despise the character. There's a lot to be redeemed for Owen now, and that makes for great drama. The scene under the bridge in the third episode was all the more powerful because of what happened in the pilot.
                    Last edited by GateGipsy; 06 November 2006, 03:51 AM.
                    sigpic

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by GateGipsy View Post
                      There's a lot to be redeemed for Owen now, and that makes for great drama. The scene under the bridge in the third episode was all the more powerful because of what happened in the pilot.
                      yes, I totally agree.

                      Since we have experts here, perhaps they'd like to consider that sometimes the scriptwriters actuall know a wee bit more about a character and what is to come than we give them credit for?

                      Could it be possible that RTD wanted to give us a reason not to like Owen (or, in any case to have a strong reaction to him: women - ergh, what a creep that is very wrong, men - lucky bugger, wish I had some of that)?

                      FWIW: I thought that his spraying of the boyfriend and subsequent hailing of the taxi came not only because he realised that he had a problem on his hands, but could it also be that actually... alien tech aside... he actually has a moral core and he shocked himself by overstepping the boundary?

                      He seemed quite relieved to me when he left - it could be because he had got himself out of something he was going to hate himself for in the morning.

                      and now...

                      I don't mind discussion. I love it. That's why I come to discussion boards. But I have not survived n years of The Great Sam and Jack Ship Debate (TM) in order to start having people tell me (and other board members) what is or is not on my screen. Because, believe me, that way lies not only madness but a great big bloody fandom hoo-hah. And frankly I don't have the patience for it.

                      And if I get put off a Torchwood discussion because some people can't accept that (despite what a programme synopsis, DVD commentary, Author interview etc etc say) we all see things differently - it's going to get very messy.

                      And we don't want that. Do we?
                      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king

                      sigpic

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Multi-Quote Power... Activate!

                        Originally posted by smurf View Post
                        I didn't like the drug cocktail thing either. A Men in Black doodad is one thing since it is obviously sci-fi and a little way away from reality, but this was very close to the bone and is all too easily replicated in the here and now.
                        That could very well be intentional. If it's some scifi-looking device, it's easy to compartmentalize and not be shaken by it. However, slipping her chemicals is something that could easily happen in reality (though probably not with the effect portrayed on the show) and it sticks with you a bit, giving you things to think about.

                        Originally posted by Madeleine_W
                        I've more often seen it used as shorthand for "Get me out of here".
                        Same for me. It's really situationally dependent as to what it could mean. Unfortunately, there wasn't much time to establish if he was trying to make distance from them or get a taxi so they could go somewhere else. It's too vague for an "obvious" interpretation one way or the other. However, I really don't think it can be a too simple "he's a scummy rapist, period" interpretation. What we got of the scene suggested, at least to me, that he might not have been fully committed to his actions. Therein lies a whole new discussion about the various facets of his character and his apparently conflicting morality. Especially in the light of the events of episode 3.



                        That's not baggage, that's my way of saying that the possibility exists that he was up for a bloke, and the possibility also exists that he wasn't, but we've no way to know, so it's time to move on to some actual evidence.
                        Evidence like his freaked-out unsmiling face, when he shouted Taxi.
                        I wouldn't call it "freaked-out unsmiling." He moved for the taxi and was calling for it so quickly that there wasn't a chance to really see a clear expression. The scene was simply vague, and personal "baggage" causes people to see a particular path after the end of the scene.

                        Is it Baggage if I assume that people about to have fun frolicky sex have smiles?
                        Fun frolicky sex always brings a smile to my face.

                        Originally posted by GateGipsy View Post
                        There's a lot to be redeemed for Owen now, and that makes for great drama. The scene under the bridge in the third episode was all the more powerful because of what happened in the pilot.
                        Indeed. These aren't flat characters. They have incredible depth and are even a bit contradictory from time to time, but so are humans in real life. This kind of character depth has been missing from my scifi for a while.
                        Cogito ergo dubito.

                        "How happy are the astrologers if they tell one truth to a hundred lies, while other people lose all credibility if they tell one lie to a hundred truths." - Francesco Guicciardini

                        An escalator can never be broken, it can only become stairs. You never see "Escalator temporarily out of service." It's "Escalator temporarily stairs. Sorry for the convenience." - Mitch Hedberg

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by rich44 View Post
                          I think you're all taking it far too seriously tbh. How many men buy that pheromone X crap advertised in the back of tabloid papers and dodgy mens magazines (so i'm reliably informed lol) it's the same premise.
                          That just shows that these "reprehensible" acts aren't nearly as foreign to the populace as people would like to think.

                          As for it being akin to giving someone Rhohipnol or a "roofie" I find that remark pretty stupid.

                          Rhohipnol and other DR drugs apart from the abhorrent nature of their use they can also leave the person theyre used on seriously ill if not worse.
                          This is the logical fallacy known as a "red herring". Side effects are irrelevant in this comparison. No one gives a "roofie" to a person intending to give them the side effects. They're shooting for the main effect, making them pliable for sexual activity.

                          Originally posted by rich44 View Post
                          you will see what I think to drinks being spiked and DR and I didnt intimate at any point that I don't think that these crimes should be taken seriously at all just what Owen was up to was underhand and morally indefenisable but it WASNT DR nor would it ever be if anything because of the pheromones she was jumping him
                          The show never said the spray was a pheromone. Besides, sex pheromones are gender-dependent. They can't force one's orientation or cause total loss of sexual choice. There are a multitude of factors involved in sexual selection, and no one factor can override the failings of the others. The spray was a form of mind control, forcing one into actions against his/her will.

                          Personally, I'm wondering if the spray consisted of nanites similar to those in Doctor Who when Jack was introduced (I forget the episode title). The effects used for the spray showed it move in a way that seemed to me a bit "unnatural" for a mist. Of course, it could just be the way they animated it, and there wasn't that much thought put into the contents of the spray.
                          Cogito ergo dubito.

                          "How happy are the astrologers if they tell one truth to a hundred lies, while other people lose all credibility if they tell one lie to a hundred truths." - Francesco Guicciardini

                          An escalator can never be broken, it can only become stairs. You never see "Escalator temporarily out of service." It's "Escalator temporarily stairs. Sorry for the convenience." - Mitch Hedberg

                          Comment


                            #28
                            LOL a messy Clanger - now that is scary.

                            Nanites in the spray is an interesting idea. And a very scary one too. I really hate the idea of nanites at all. I just don't want to think about very tiny invisible things that can run around our bodies at will.

                            MC I do hope that there is a deeper meaning to all this, that there is some intention there. The writer is Russel Davies, so there is a higher chance that is the case. However, British writing is often too predictable - it is almost too easy to believe that they were sitting around thinking, what would Owen do with alien technology? Ah I know use it to pick up girls! If that is the case, then it does a disservice to men and women! I just hope this develops further down the line - I really want to have a much higher opinion of Russel Davies than that. I don't want to find out he has feet of clay!
                            sigpic

                            Comment


                              #29
                              [SNIPPED: off topic]

                              I don't recall anyone saying that the reason they think Owen ran away is because he couldn't have been intending to shag the boyfriend,
                              I wouldn't expect you to, because I don't remember you being there I've only encountered two people who said so, and they have a particular view of what constitutes the generic portrayal of a gay/bi guy on TV. Personally, I didn't think Owen showed the slightest interest in the bloke (just imo!) and only saw the possibility of having him along as the price to pay for having the woman (just imo!) but ymmv.

                              [SNIPPED: off topic]

                              Originally posted by uknesvuinng View Post
                              Multi-Quote Power... Activate!
                              It's great, isn't it?

                              Originally posted by uknesvuinng View Post
                              The show never said the spray was a pheromone.
                              Good point!

                              Besides, sex pheromones are gender-dependent. They can't force one's orientation or cause total loss of sexual choice. There are a multitude of factors involved in sexual selection, and no one factor can override the failings of the others. The spray was a form of mind control, forcing one into actions against his/her will.
                              In that sense, just using it on them was an act of violation: a rapid form of brain-washing?

                              Originally posted by GateGipsy View Post
                              MC I do hope that there is a deeper meaning to all this, that there is some intention there. The writer is Russel Davies, so there is a higher chance that is the case. However, British writing is often too predictable - it is almost too easy to believe that they were sitting around thinking, what would Owen do with alien technology? Ah I know use it to pick up girls! If that is the case, then it does a disservice to men and women! I just hope this develops further down the line - I really want to have a much higher opinion of Russel Davies than that. I don't want to find out he has feet of clay!
                              Me too. I'm optimistic after last night's episode (which is the best so far imo) because I'm seeing more shades of grey than ever.
                              Last edited by GateGipsy; 06 November 2006, 03:49 AM.
                              scarimor

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Stepping in with my moderator's hat on here.

                                Let's keep this thread on topic please. Any further postings that are more about how a person has posted in this thread rather than the topic itself will get snipped. Please feel free to PM me or another mod if you'd like to discuss this.

                                Also just a reminder - if you have a problem/dispute/issue with another poster then please take it off forum to email or PM.
                                sigpic

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X