Author Topic: For All Mankind  (Read 227808 times)

Online Orbiter

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3001
  • Florida
  • Liked: 1556
  • Likes Given: 1390
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #520 on: 04/26/2021 04:48 pm »
Thomas Paine was going to South Korea to talk about forming an "East Asian Space Alliance." I get that this is an excuse for the writers to put him on KAL 007, but Korea didn't have a space agency (KARI) until 1989 and no orbital rockets until 2009 (in our timeline). While NASDA already had rockets (based on licensed Deltas) and astronauts being trained in the 80s, but Japan's space program wasn't even mentioned. Maybe they will be part of the future Mars mission?

I think it's more likely in this timeline Korea significantly accelerated their space program. We're talking about a timeline where Space Shuttle Columbia is orbiting the Moon after all.
« Last Edit: 04/26/2021 04:48 pm by Orbiter »
KSC Engineer, astronomer, rocket photographer.

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15716
  • Liked: 8348
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #521 on: 04/26/2021 04:54 pm »
Someone Has to Die

Yeah, but...

The flip side of this is Plot Armor, where characters become immune to getting killed off, either because they are popular with the fans, or the writers love them. As TV shows ramp up the stakes season-to-season, the characters then have increasingly implausible escapes from certain death. So just about everything is a trope--characters live, and it's a trope, characters die, and it's also a trope.

The only show that really blew that all off the table was Game of Thrones, where they followed the great Joe Bob Briggs' famous saying "Anybody can die at any time."

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15716
  • Liked: 8348
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #522 on: 04/26/2021 10:48 pm »
http://www.collectspace.com//news/news-042621a-for-all-mankind-space-shuttle-moon.html

"But there was also a practical reason to use the space shuttle.

"If we didn't use the shuttle and we had to create a whole new vehicle for travel, it was going to cost me a lot more," said Moore. "There would be no clips that I could use. There is an existing set that replicates the interior cockpit of the space shuttle. The spacesuits are available."

"So, in just a dollars and cents, producer part of me, it was like, if I give that up, I'm going to have to cut back on a lot of other things. Suddenly I won't have as much money to build a moon base. Suddenly I won't have as much money for a lot of other things. But if I can figure out a way to justify the use of the shuttle, it's going to help me a lot. It's not free, but it's a significant savings in terms of the production budget."

Offline Skylon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #523 on: 04/27/2021 01:35 am »


"If we didn't use the shuttle and we had to create a whole new vehicle for travel, it was going to cost me a lot more," said Moore. "There would be no clips that I could use. There is an existing set that replicates the interior cockpit of the space shuttle. The spacesuits are available.""

I get the clips part - but I think the cockpit could have been hand-waved as a "convenient" similarity relatively easily. Especially the pressure suits.

Online mme

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1510
  • Santa Barbara, CA, USA, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy, Virgo Supercluster
  • Liked: 2034
  • Likes Given: 5383
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #524 on: 04/27/2021 03:02 am »
Back to the idea of a rogue Russian attack on the base: When you go rogue in the Soviet Union, You end up in a gulag, or dead... So it should be very improbable if they want to be 'historically accurate'
[SPOILERS]
Who said it was rouge? The US shot two unarmed cosmonauts, killing one and was supporting the defection of the other.
[/SPOILERS]
And it's an alternate timeline. One thing about alternate timelines is they are not historically accurate.
Space is not Highlander.  There can, and will, be more than one.

Offline libra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1818
  • Liked: 1230
  • Likes Given: 2357
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #525 on: 04/27/2021 06:20 am »
Someone Has to Die

Yeah, but...

The flip side of this is Plot Armor, where characters become immune to getting killed off, either because they are popular with the fans, or the writers love them. As TV shows ramp up the stakes season-to-season, the characters then have increasingly implausible escapes from certain death. So just about everything is a trope--characters live, and it's a trope, characters die, and it's also a trope.

The only show that really blew that all off the table was Game of Thrones, where they followed the great Joe Bob Briggs' famous saying "Anybody can die at any time."

The old show E.R also loved to kill tons of characters but it was mostly because their cast / casting went south after season 7 - and it lasted until season 15, dear god. So there were people maimed and crushed by falling helicopters, the hospital turned into an annex of Syria civil war, and on, and on.

24 was different. Basically, Jack Bauer character stole every single bit of ultra-heavy plot armor, the unfortunate consequence being that every single other remotely important secondary character, liked or not by viewers  ended pretty vulnerable to whacky terrorists and their evil plots... and it was a carnage.

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15716
  • Liked: 8348
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #526 on: 04/27/2021 02:48 pm »
The old show E.R also loved to kill tons of characters but it was mostly because their cast / casting went south after season 7 - and it lasted until season 15, dear god. So there were people maimed and crushed by falling helicopters, the hospital turned into an annex of Syria civil war, and on, and on.

24 was different. Basically, Jack Bauer character stole every single bit of ultra-heavy plot armor, the unfortunate consequence being that every single other remotely important secondary character, liked or not by viewers  ended pretty vulnerable to whacky terrorists and their evil plots... and it was a carnage.

I think in the case of E.R., they reached a point where most of their original actors wanted to leave (they were already rich and wanted to do other things). After that, it was probably a combination of needing to increase the stakes as well as to not let any of the new actors get too comfortable (and ask for more money). It's actually a tactic in Hollywood to kill off characters to keep actors from asking for too much money when their contracts come up for renewal--"Just remember, we can kill you off too." As for 24, you're right it was different. Jack Bauer was the star, so he could not die.

In For All Mankind, they killed off a major leading character in season 1, as well as a lesser character and then a minor character who only showed up so he could get killed. We should not be surprised if they kill off a major character or two in season 3. And because they are doing big time jumps for each season, it's not that unusual.

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15716
  • Liked: 8348
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #527 on: 04/27/2021 02:49 pm »
I get the clips part - but I think the cockpit could have been hand-waved as a "convenient" similarity relatively easily. Especially the pressure suits.

Yes. But then somebody on here would be complaining about that too, right?

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15716
  • Liked: 8348
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #528 on: 04/27/2021 03:02 pm »
That's Ronald Moore's style, as shown numerous times in BSG. Sometimes it does seem like he wants to make an episode of Dallas. I'll predict that the Karen-Danny fling will lead to a falling out between Ed and Gordo. This presumes that Gordo doesn't get killed in some military showdown on the Moon.

One of the things that bugged me most this season was the Karen-Danny thing. Keep in mind that he's 19 and she is in her 50s, probably 52 or 53 based upon her meeting and marrying Ed while he was flying during the Korean War. I won't say it was completely implausible, but if you think it out at all, it implies that Karen is really messed up. After all, she slept with a young man who was friends with her dead son. Oedipus ain't got nothing on her.

But there was really nothing indicating that Karen was that messed up. She was mad at Ed for going back to spaceflight and clearly she was acting out. But that anger does not match up to her actions unless she has some kind of undiagnosed mental illness.

Offline LM13

  • Member
  • Posts: 90
  • Where the skies are so blue...
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 73
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #529 on: 04/27/2021 03:49 pm »

One of the things that bugged me most this season was the Karen-Danny thing. Keep in mind that he's 19 and she is in her 50s, probably 52 or 53 based upon her meeting and marrying Ed while he was flying during the Korean War. I won't say it was completely implausible, but if you think it out at all, it implies that Karen is really messed up. After all, she slept with a young man who was friends with her dead son. Oedipus ain't got nothing on her.

But there was really nothing indicating that Karen was that messed up. She was mad at Ed for going back to spaceflight and clearly she was acting out. But that anger does not match up to her actions unless she has some kind of undiagnosed mental illness.

The age gap isn't that shocking, IMO.  It's, in a sense, natural (though not necessarily ethical) to be attracted to youth and vigor.  Though the casting makes it a touch hard to recall how old Karen is supposed to be--48 would be the bare minimum age she can be, and the actress is only 37. 

Going after her son's childhood friend, and the current friend of her adopted daughter, however, is very concerning. 

On the other hand, it might be something as simple as "he's available, interested, has a plausible excuse to spend time with her, and can plausibly be blackmailed because her husband is an Admiral." 

Offline rmencos

  • Member
  • Posts: 82
  • Alexandria, VA
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #530 on: 04/27/2021 04:41 pm »

One of the things that bugged me most this season was the Karen-Danny thing. Keep in mind that he's 19 and she is in her 50s, probably 52 or 53 based upon her meeting and marrying Ed while he was flying during the Korean War. I won't say it was completely implausible, but if you think it out at all, it implies that Karen is really messed up. After all, she slept with a young man who was friends with her dead son. Oedipus ain't got nothing on her.

But there was really nothing indicating that Karen was that messed up. She was mad at Ed for going back to spaceflight and clearly she was acting out. But that anger does not match up to her actions unless she has some kind of undiagnosed mental illness.

The age gap isn't that shocking, IMO.  It's, in a sense, natural (though not necessarily ethical) to be attracted to youth and vigor.  Though the casting makes it a touch hard to recall how old Karen is supposed to be--48 would be the bare minimum age she can be, and the actress is only 37. 

Going after her son's childhood friend, and the current friend of her adopted daughter, however, is very concerning. 

On the other hand, it might be something as simple as "he's available, interested, has a plausible excuse to spend time with her, and can plausibly be blackmailed because her husband is an Admiral." 

I hope they don't continue the story line with Karen-Danny.  There is nothing positive about it.  Karen is needy and trying to hold on to the past, but it really makes her shallow that she can't move on.  If in season 3 they have her working for the Clinton administration helping with intern hires it would be comical - she'll use her experience to prevent a scandal.

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15716
  • Liked: 8348
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #531 on: 04/27/2021 07:35 pm »
I hope they don't continue the story line with Karen-Danny. 

Season 3 jumps ahead 10 years. Karen will be in her 60s.

Offline sanman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6088
  • Liked: 1369
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #532 on: 04/27/2021 10:00 pm »
I think that it'll be Ellen who'll be working in a more senior position in the next season -- perhaps as an astronaut politician -- as was hinted at with the Lee Atwater scene. Maybe Ellen will be a congresswoman, or even Vice President of the United States.

I was even thinking that the President of the United States in Season 3 might be Hillary Clinton, as per the show's desire to give women an upsized role in history.

But it's going to be intriguing to see how the show contrives a Soviet Union and a Cold War that survives into the 1990s and beyond. The alternate timeline is going to diverge even more strongly than before.

Offline hektor

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2755
  • Liked: 1234
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #533 on: 04/27/2021 10:12 pm »
Our president has a 25 yr. age gap with his wife.

Online DaveS

  • Shuttle program observer
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8548
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 1240
  • Likes Given: 65
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #534 on: 04/27/2021 10:17 pm »
I think that it'll be Ellen who'll be working in a more senior position in the next season -- perhaps as an astronaut politician -- as was hinted at with the Lee Atwater scene. Maybe Ellen will be a congresswoman, or even Vice President of the United States.

I was even thinking that the President of the United States in Season 3 might be Hillary Clinton, as per the show's desire to give women an upsized role in history.

But it's going to be intriguing to see how the show contrives a Soviet Union and a Cold War that survives into the 1990s and beyond. The alternate timeline is going to diverge even more strongly than before.
What if Clinton loses the 1992 election against Bush Sr? That would give him a second term and be the one in office for the Mars landing in 95, which would be a fit as he announced the Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) in 1989.
"For Sardines, space is no problem!"
-1996 Astronaut class slogan

"We're rolling in the wrong direction but for the right reasons"
-USA engineer about the rollback of Discovery prior to the STS-114 Return To Flight mission

Offline hektor

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2755
  • Liked: 1234
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #535 on: 04/27/2021 10:36 pm »
Is it established that the boot was the one of a NASA astronaut?

Offline sanman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6088
  • Liked: 1369
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #536 on: 04/27/2021 11:08 pm »
What if Clinton loses the 1992 election against Bush Sr? That would give him a second term and be the one in office for the Mars landing in 95, which would be a fit as he announced the Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) in 1989.

The events of Season 2 that we watched were taking place in ~ circa 1983, as part of President Reagan's 2nd term in office. He gets elected to the presidency in 1976 in the alternate timeline, so he's there 4 years ahead of schedule and also finishing 4 years ahead of real life timeline. That would mean Reagan's successor (whoever that may be) is elected to office in 1984. Note that Reagan's VP in the alternate timeline is not George Bush Sr, but is US Senator Richard Schweiker of Pennsylvania. This may mean that there is no subsequent President George Bush Sr, nor even a later President George Bush Jr.




Is it established that the boot was the one of a NASA astronaut?

I think they've tried to deliberately make it as unidentifiable as possible, in order to leave open the fullest spectrum of possibilities, and leave people wondering.

They've also left open the possibility that this scene from 1995 is happening in the middle of Season 3 rather than at the beginning (just like how the conversation between Karen & Ed about Sea Dragon in the Season 1 epilogue was inserted into the middle of Season 2)

« Last Edit: 04/28/2021 02:17 am by sanman »

Online Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15716
  • Liked: 8348
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #537 on: 04/28/2021 12:41 am »
The events of Season 2 that we watched were talking place in ~ circa 1983, as part of President Reagan's 2nd term in office. He gets elected to the presidency in 1976 in the alternate timeline, so he's there 4 years ahead of schedule and also finishing 4 years ahead of real life timeline. That would mean Reagan's successor (whoever that may be) is elected to office in 1984. Note that Reagan's VP in the alternate timeline is not George Bush Sr, but is US Senator Richard Schweiker of Pennsylvania. This may mean that there is no subsequent President George Bush Sr, nor even a later President George Bush Jr.

I'm guessing we're going to see President Gary Hart. My reasoning is that Hart was a front-running candidate in the 1980s on the Democratic side, and he had a lot of buzz before he self-destructed. That's the kind of story that the FAM writers would just love.

Online Thorny

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 905
  • San Angelo, Texas
  • Liked: 311
  • Likes Given: 462
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #538 on: 04/28/2021 12:57 am »
They showed us Senator Jimmy Carter on the news. I bet he wins the Presidency in '84.

Offline Skylon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: For All Mankind
« Reply #539 on: 04/28/2021 12:26 pm »


"If we didn't use the shuttle and we had to create a whole new vehicle for travel, it was going to cost me a lot more," said Moore. "There would be no clips that I could use. There is an existing set that replicates the interior cockpit of the space shuttle. The spacesuits are available.""

I get the clips part - but I think the cockpit could have been hand-waved as a "convenient" similarity relatively easily. Especially the pressure suits.
I get the clips part - but I think the cockpit could have been hand-waved as a "convenient" similarity relatively easily. Especially the pressure suits.

Yes. But then somebody on here would be complaining about that too, right?

Probably. But it would be less of a leg to stand on. The Shuttle era LES and ACES are a pretty straight-forward concept that I see no reason it should look different. They have common design roots that pre-date the show's divergence point (Gemini, X-15 and the SR-71) and serve the same function.

The cockpit is easier to criticize since eagle eyed viewers would spot things, but that is then hitting a level like trying to explain the controls on the Starship Enterprise. It's a TV show spaceship cockpit.

Ultimately I think the producers missed a chance to fully embrace the playground of alternate history by sticking to an identical shuttle design. I get if it was a decision based on production budget concerns. I don't accept that it was included due to it being an "icon." Alternate history exists to show trade-offs made in actual historical decisions.

But as I pointed out on the forum you linked the article from, it doesn't break the show for me. 
« Last Edit: 04/28/2021 12:27 pm by Skylon »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0