{"id":17267,"date":"2019-12-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2019-12-13T05:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/shatontv.com\/why-it%c2%92s-time-travel-and-why-it-sucks\/"},"modified":"2022-07-06T00:52:26","modified_gmt":"2022-07-06T04:52:26","slug":"why-it%c2%92s-time-travel-and-why-it-sucks","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/shatpod.com\/tv\/why-it%c2%92s-time-travel-and-why-it-sucks\/","title":{"rendered":"Why It’s Time Travel And Why It Sucks"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Watchmen\"<\/a>

Have a Theory? Share It Now!<\/a><\/strong><\/p><\/div>Hey guys. I’m a long time listener and big promoter of all things Shat. But, sorry, it’s time travel. Sure, it’s taking the form of a blue guy calling it “experiencing” time differently but bc the show has used that element as a plot driver in a linear story of people who experience time normally, it makes it time travel. It doesn’t have to occur in a Delorean. I completely understand the “all time is the present” thing. I’m not one of the folks who thinks DM is actually traveling; my understanding of this is why I have the opinion I do. It was time traveling in Interstellar, in Lost, and in GOT; just painted with a different brush to hopefully paint over the laziness and illogic of the mechanism. I’ll back all of this up and I hope you can at least air some of it bc it will give some vindication to those who hate this plot device as much as I do. <\/p>\n

Roger was wrong. This story wasn’t the first to do this. Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse Five introduced this concept with Billy Pilgrim who can visit any time within his own life; back to his birth and up to his death. Supposedly like DM, he also can’t change events. It’s very clever and a great story. The difference is that Pilgrim is not a conscientious actor; he is only a spectator. He may be “experiencing” the bombing of Dresden but he cannot interact with the moments of his experience whereas that’s all DM does. Example: “I know we’ll have a fight on this day.” That’s consciously acting on omnipotent knowledge within time. Prompting Angela with “I know what you’ll say next” and saying it’ll cause a fight knowing that your prompt is the reason she says it and the reason for the fight is NOT the same as experiencing what happens. It is literally CAUSING what happens. Me telling Rog that I’m omniscient and I can’t prevent the fact that on Tuesday he’ll get a nosebleed and then flying to Arizona and punching him in the nose either makes me an omnipotent observer which gives me no reason to not give him ALL the facts or mention it at all or it makes me a half-character that can’t make up its mind on what it is, manipulating events as I see fit. A character cannot be an omniscient observer AND a conscientious actor at the same time. It creates a paradox that can’t work and when you ultimately hinge the entire story on that concept it makes a story that can’t work. <\/p>\n

DM can only be one of those things. IF he is an omniscient observer this clearly means that, from his perspective, he has no choice. He is experiencing, at once, all of his choices which equates to him being a Billy Pilgrim. Billy’s choices were made, they always are, and he is present in them. He has no ability to alter them. This is also the Christian view of God and time. How can God be outside of time, be at all times at once, and we still have free choice? Bc WE are in time. Just bc an entity knows what that choice will be doesn’t make it any less of a choice to us. The rub is that God is not also a man inside of time where DM is. He could be inside of time and an omnipotent observer only but this is not the case according to DM HIMSELF! When he is talking to Will he outright says “My ability to influence events is limited and I’m here so I can plan for an optimal outcome.” He knew he would lose the ability manipulate events for 10 years, didn’t like it, and wanted to put things in motion to his liking. So from the man himself, he CAN influence events, he DOES have choice, an agenda, and a conscious plan on how to carry it out BASED ON HIS OMNISCIENT KNOWLEDGE. And you guys didn’t touch that at all in the deep dive bc it proves that he CAN alter events which reduces the story to a cheap trick. He can’t be both! Which brings us to the second option that he is a conscientious actor. IF he is that, which he admits he is, he can and does have choice in any given moment. This means when he says he can’t change an event, either he is lying or we are seeing the inevitable bullshit inconsistency that this plot device creates. Or both. If he has choice he is a liar and a manipulator and a poorly written character. If he doesn’t have choice then he is only a poorly written character by a writer who can’t write a story without it being explained by a closed time loop. <\/p>\n

But, if this was all, I still wouldn’t be writing this. It’s when this plot device descends into time travel that I got off the train. When an event, participated by someone in time (Angela), in the future causes an event in the past which then causes the event in the future that caused the past…that is a closed time loop and it’s effing time travel. Dress that shit up alllll you want. It’s time travel. No, it doesn’t happen by way of a hot tub or magic phone booth with George Carlin; it happens by way of a blue guy in a much subtler fashion. Angela is not outside of time. DM is. Fine. But when she, via him, influences reality through time which sets the entire story in motion THEN SHE IS TIME TRAVELING. Gene, you say this didn’t influence events much other than her giving him a name… without which this story wouldn’t have ever happened. Nice try. She only gave him a name and mentioned the robe? How exactly? The only reason she knew was from Will. The only reason Will knew was from her communicating THROUGH TIME to set the entire story up making this nothing more than another lazy, closed time loop story. <\/p>\n

Finally, this plot device completely makes the story about DM bc it can’t not. This is probably not even the intention bc I’ve listened to the official podcast too but it’s an unavoidable consequence of the device. Once we find out that this omniscient super man, who supposedly can’t change events, is actually manipulating and responsible for EVERYTHING, it is only about him. The whole pool scene. He is not “experiencing” that moment. He is actively manipulating that moment…giving literal hints for her to figure out later bc he has “experienced” her future. He’s intentionally acting based on events that haven’t occurred yet to all other actors to influence those actors in their future. You know, sort of like time travel. It doesn’t matter that it’s not time travel to him. What matters is that it’s time travel to everyone else that’s not him, including us. But the hints are not really for her are they? The hints are for viewers who have been duped into thinking this tired story telling mechanism is something brilliant. <\/p>\n

HBO did it with Bran but thank goodness they didn’t take it much further than Hodor. I even listened as you guys tore that side of the story down. Bran could experience the future and was also an actor in time. He actively allowed and directed the course of events to play out to his liking just as DM is doing. But this should be no surprise and that’s bc Damon Lindelof is not a trustworthy narrator. This is the guy behind Lost. The guy who SWORE he knew what was going on in his own story. Turns out he didn’t and they were making it up as they went along and he had no way to coherently fit his story together. Also, turns out everything that happened in Lost…caused by the future which caused the past which caused the future. I haven’t seen the Leftovers but it’s seems like this guy only knows one way to tell a story and that’s by not actually telling it at all. “Here is a wonderful, complex, story with gripping characters and explores all sorts of societal issues…how can we wrap it up?…OH I KNOW… no matter what has happened or does happen, it’s all explained by what will happen so there is no real cause and effect! We don’t even have to worry about it making sense! I mean that’s the only way things can be explained right? Brilliant!” No. Boring, lazy, trash. <\/p>\n

This email is not bc I don’t like Watchmen. I’ve LOVED Watchmen. And you guys have been great as usual. But I’m coming off of GOT’s colossal failure to end with as much greatness as it built up to. And now I’m finding out that this new, great show I’ve invested in has resorted to cheap time manipulation for its ultimate exposition. If I want that kind of cheap thrill I’ll watch Terminator. <\/p>\n

All the best,<\/p>\n

Matthew M. Colson

Subscribe Now<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n