please like or reblog this if you would be sad if i deleted this blog.
i am strongly considering deleting it and i want to know what you think.
366 notes
·
View notes
petition to rename the usa ‘south canada’
2M notes
·
View notes
Sometimes I think the show missing these details really messes it up.
While rewatching episode 3x07, I noticed a few details that I didn’t pay attention to the first time. In this scene, Jane and Lester are watching old footage from the study, from the time - I assumed the first time - they were in Washington University.
But Jane actually says Memorial, the hospital Bill went to after being fired from WashU. Neither Jane nor Lester worked at Memorial Hospital, they both were in California at the time. In fact, not even Virginia worked there, only Bill did.
Okay, it is entirely possible that a secretary from Memorial volunteered for the study at WashU. But then, would Jane know about the stapler thing, which pressumably took place at work? Is that common knowledge among the staff of all of St. Louis’ hospitals?
I realize I’m being extremely picky with this (this whole post is about me being extremely picky, be warned), but it got me thinking… How is it possible that they are watching footage from the WashU days at all? As far as we know, Jane and Virginia were the only ones that got filmed at the time (until years later, when they opened the clinic and started filming the volunteers regularly).
It is also possible that they filmed more people in the time between episodes 1x09 and 1x12. But then that would mean that by the time Bill gave his presentation in 1x12, he had more footage to show to the audience, but chose to show Virginia’s (without telling her beforehand). I don’t know how I feel about that.
[Bill does tell Libby in that same episode that he has footage from a lot of subjects. At the time I thought he was just plain lying to her, but I guess I was wrong.]
One thing that is definitely wrong is this:
Lester is referring to Jane, although we know from episode 1x08 that F-12-22 is not her patient number:
In fact, the coded names for the participants in the study had the structure F/M - (participant’s age) - (participant’s number), so F-12-22 doesn’t even make sense.
But the thing that bugs me the most about this scene (and only noticed now) is this:
Okay, Virginia. If you say so.
23 notes
·
View notes