Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 10,11 (click to see context) from:
** It's an example of TechnologyMarchesOn: Because doing the investigative leg work in 1969 would have required hours if not days of intensively poring over paperwork, which is time the two didn't have, while in the futuristic world of 1999, John could just get his police friends to run it through a computer for a DNA search.
to:
** It's an example of TechnologyMarchesOn: Because doing the investigative leg work in 1969 would have required hours if not days of intensively poring over paperwork, which is time the two didn't have, while in the futuristic world of 1999, John could just get his police friends to run it through a computer for a DNA search.
search. Also because John, in 1999, is the cop, not Frank.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 10,11 (click to see context) from:
** Because doing the investigative leg work in 1969 would have required hours if not days of intensively poring over paperwork, which is time they didn't have, while in the futuristic world of 1999, John could just get his police friends to run it through a computer for a DNA search.
to:
** It's an example of TechnologyMarchesOn: Because doing the investigative leg work in 1969 would have required hours if not days of intensively poring over paperwork, which is time they the two didn't have, while in the futuristic world of 1999, John could just get his police friends to run it through a computer for a DNA search.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 10,11 (click to see context) from:
** Because doing the investigative leg work in 1969 would have required hours if not days of intensively poring over paperwork, while in the futuristic world of 1999, John could just get his police friends to run it through a computer for a DNA search.
to:
** Because doing the investigative leg work in 1969 would have required hours if not days of intensively poring over paperwork, which is time they didn't have, while in the futuristic world of 1999, John could just get his police friends to run it through a computer for a DNA search.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 10,11 (click to see context) from:
** Because doing the investigative leg work in 1969 would have required hours if not days of intensively poring over paperwork, while in the futuristic world of 1999, John could just get his police friends to run it through a computer.
to:
** Because doing the investigative leg work in 1969 would have required hours if not days of intensively poring over paperwork, while in the futuristic world of 1999, John could just get his police friends to run it through a computer.
computer for a DNA search.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 10,11 (click to see context) from:
* Because doing the investigative leg work in 1969 would have required hours if not days of intensively poring over paperwork, while in the futuristic world of 1999, John could just get his police friends to run it through a computer.
to:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 10 (click to see context) from:
to:
* Because doing the investigative leg work in 1969 would have required hours if not days of intensively poring over paperwork, while in the futuristic world of 1999, John could just get his police friends to run it through a computer.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
The question came up as part of Unintentional Period Piece.
Changed line(s) 7 (click to see context) from:
to:
* Why didn't John and Frank just use the fingerprints on the wallet as evidence in 1969, instead of leaving it for John in 1999?
** Because the night John and Frank came up with the plan, they didn't even know who Jack was, much less have any evidence to connect him to the Nightingale murders. Confirming his identity took priority.
** As evidence, all it would have shown was that Jack touched Frank's wallet at some point - and wouldn't have helped at all when Frank's ID was found under the victim and a witness saw him there. It also wouldn't have helped much after Jack attacked the Sullivans, as at most all it does is place him at the bar that night. But by that point the cops already have his mementos as evidence, and probably some eyewitness accounts as well. (The two hippies would serve as better evidence anyway, because they could actually place Jack and Frank at the bar.)
** Because the night John and Frank came up with the plan, they didn't even know who Jack was, much less have any evidence to connect him to the Nightingale murders. Confirming his identity took priority.
** As evidence, all it would have shown was that Jack touched Frank's wallet at some point - and wouldn't have helped at all when Frank's ID was found under the victim and a witness saw him there. It also wouldn't have helped much after Jack attacked the Sullivans, as at most all it does is place him at the bar that night. But by that point the cops already have his mementos as evidence, and probably some eyewitness accounts as well. (The two hippies would serve as better evidence anyway, because they could actually place Jack and Frank at the bar.)
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 5,6 (click to see context) from:
** Or he got caught, was sent to prison and either got paroled or escaped and stole a gun to take revenge on John.
to:
** Or he got caught, was sent to prison and either prison, got paroled or escaped and stole a gun to take revenge on John.
John. The only way for his faked death to work (it was blown the moment he attacked them in 1969) is if Frank, Julia and John didn't say a word and cleaned up the mess he made in their house.
** Or he really did go into hiding and got work through his criminal connections. His father had mentioned that he got caught up in the Knapp hearings. Maybe in his act of revenge, he decided to clean up and dress in a suit for the occasion.
** Or he really did go into hiding and got work through his criminal connections. His father had mentioned that he got caught up in the Knapp hearings. Maybe in his act of revenge, he decided to clean up and dress in a suit for the occasion.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 5 (click to see context) from:
to:
** Or he got caught, was sent to prison and either got paroled or escaped and stole a gun to take revenge on John.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
typo
Changed line(s) 3 (click to see context) from:
* Ok, even accepting the premise as a whole, why does Shepherd in the future look the same in the final scene as he did the first time John met him? They'd changed the timeline so that he had to fake his death and go on the lamb 30 years earlier. He shouldn't be clean-shaven, and wearing a nice suit. He probably just spent 30 years in the criminal underworld.
to:
* Ok, even accepting the premise as a whole, why does Shepherd in the future look the same in the final scene as he did the first time John met him? They'd changed the timeline so that he had to fake his death and go on the lamb lam 30 years earlier. He shouldn't be clean-shaven, and wearing a nice suit. He probably just spent 30 years in the criminal underworld.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1 (click to see context) from:
!!The Film
to:
Changed line(s) 5,11 (click to see context) from:
!!The Series
* In the pilot, the first call happens on October 21, and Raimy predicts a double homer for the third game of the 1996 World Series. Time is supposedly running in parallel. Frank cannot confirm this prediction until the night of the 22nd, when the game is played. He makes another call, with the burn mark happening, that night, and hangs up on the call with a threat not to call again. It isn't until the next day, after a coffee can test message, that Raimy calls back and tells him "You die tomorrow. October 23, 1996, game four of the Series." and Frank says, "Tomorrow night... tomorrow night where?" Somehow they added a whole extra day between October 22 and October 23.
** The pilot as released on Netflix makes an attempt to fix this, by captioning Raimy's birthday in 1996 as October 20, and the next day as October 21. However, the tie-in to the World Series makes this fail.
* Another big one: was Frank using his ham radio from his undercover location, or from the family garage? If the former, how did it get back to his garage in order for young Raimy to get a call from older Raimy, and take it to the hospital after he was shot? If the latter, wasn't that a huge risk to his cover?
* I get why they spent their efforts trying to find the Nightingale, to save Julia and the other victims. But couldn't Raimy take five minutes to tell Frank how to not get killed in his 2011 car crash? She mentions it, but no specific date, so he could call in sick or something.
** This is finally done in the 3-minute closure piece, and [[spoiler: it saves Frank's life again]].
* In the pilot, the first call happens on October 21, and Raimy predicts a double homer for the third game of the 1996 World Series. Time is supposedly running in parallel. Frank cannot confirm this prediction until the night of the 22nd, when the game is played. He makes another call, with the burn mark happening, that night, and hangs up on the call with a threat not to call again. It isn't until the next day, after a coffee can test message, that Raimy calls back and tells him "You die tomorrow. October 23, 1996, game four of the Series." and Frank says, "Tomorrow night... tomorrow night where?" Somehow they added a whole extra day between October 22 and October 23.
** The pilot as released on Netflix makes an attempt to fix this, by captioning Raimy's birthday in 1996 as October 20, and the next day as October 21. However, the tie-in to the World Series makes this fail.
* Another big one: was Frank using his ham radio from his undercover location, or from the family garage? If the former, how did it get back to his garage in order for young Raimy to get a call from older Raimy, and take it to the hospital after he was shot? If the latter, wasn't that a huge risk to his cover?
* I get why they spent their efforts trying to find the Nightingale, to save Julia and the other victims. But couldn't Raimy take five minutes to tell Frank how to not get killed in his 2011 car crash? She mentions it, but no specific date, so he could call in sick or something.
** This is finally done in the 3-minute closure piece, and [[spoiler: it saves Frank's life again]].
to:
* In the pilot, the first call happens on October 21, and Raimy predicts a double homer for the third game of the 1996 World Series. Time is supposedly running in parallel. Frank cannot confirm this prediction until the night of the 22nd, when the game is played. He makes another call, with the burn mark happening, that night, and hangs up on the call with a threat not to call again. It isn't until the next day, after a coffee can test message, that Raimy calls back and tells him "You die tomorrow. October 23, 1996, game four of the Series." and Frank says, "Tomorrow night... tomorrow night where?" Somehow they added a whole extra day between October 22 and October 23.
** The pilot as released on Netflix makes an attempt to fix this, by captioning Raimy's birthday in 1996 as October 20, and the next day as October 21. However, the tie-in to the World Series makes this fail.
* Another big one: was Frank using his ham radio from his undercover location, or from the family garage? If the former, how did it get back to his garage in order for young Raimy to get a call from older Raimy, and take it to the hospital after he was shot? If the latter, wasn't that a huge risk to his cover?
* I get why they spent their efforts trying to find the Nightingale, to save Julia and the other victims. But couldn't Raimy take five minutes to tell Frank how to not get killed in his 2011 car crash? She mentions it, but no specific date, so he could call in sick or something.
** This is finally done in the 3-minute closure piece, and [[spoiler: it saves Frank's life again]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Add detail
Changed line(s) 10 (click to see context) from:
* I get why they spent their efforts trying to find the Nightingale, to save Julia and the other victims. But couldn't Raimy take five minutes to tell Frank how to not get killed in his 2011 car crash? She mentions it, but no specific date, so he could call in sick or something.
to:
* I get why they spent their efforts trying to find the Nightingale, to save Julia and the other victims. But couldn't Raimy take five minutes to tell Frank how to not get killed in his 2011 car crash? She mentions it, but no specific date, so he could call in sick or something.something.
** This is finally done in the 3-minute closure piece, and [[spoiler: it saves Frank's life again]].
** This is finally done in the 3-minute closure piece, and [[spoiler: it saves Frank's life again]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 9 (click to see context) from:
* Another big one: was Frank using his ham radio from his undercover location, or from the family garage? If the former, how did it get back to his garage in order for young Raimy to get a call from older Raimy, and take it to the hospital after he was shot? If the latter, wasn't that a huge risk to his cover?
to:
* Another big one: was Frank using his ham radio from his undercover location, or from the family garage? If the former, how did it get back to his garage in order for young Raimy to get a call from older Raimy, and take it to the hospital after he was shot? If the latter, wasn't that a huge risk to his cover?cover?
* I get why they spent their efforts trying to find the Nightingale, to save Julia and the other victims. But couldn't Raimy take five minutes to tell Frank how to not get killed in his 2011 car crash? She mentions it, but no specific date, so he could call in sick or something.
* I get why they spent their efforts trying to find the Nightingale, to save Julia and the other victims. But couldn't Raimy take five minutes to tell Frank how to not get killed in his 2011 car crash? She mentions it, but no specific date, so he could call in sick or something.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
typo
Changed line(s) 7,8 (click to see context) from:
** The pilot as released on Netflix makes a attempt to fix this, by captioning Raimy's birthday in 1996 as October 20, and the next day as October 21. However, the tie-in to the World Series makes this fail.
to:
** The pilot as released on Netflix makes a an attempt to fix this, by captioning Raimy's birthday in 1996 as October 20, and the next day as October 21. However, the tie-in to the World Series makes this fail.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
add detail
Changed line(s) 7 (click to see context) from:
to:
** The pilot as released on Netflix makes a attempt to fix this, by captioning Raimy's birthday in 1996 as October 20, and the next day as October 21. However, the tie-in to the World Series makes this fail.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
add continuity error
Changed line(s) 6 (click to see context) from:
* In the pilot, the first call happens on October 21, and Raimy predicts a double homer for the third game of the 1996 World Series. Time is supposedly running in parallel. Frank cannot confirm this prediction until the night of the 22nd, when the game is played. He makes another call, with the burn mark happening, that night, and hangs up on the call with a threat not to call again. It isn't until the next day, after a coffee can test message, that Raimy calls back and tells him "You die tomorrow. October 23, 1996, game four of the Series." and Frank says, "Tomorrow night... tomorrow night where?" Somehow they added a whole extra day between October 22 and October 23.
to:
* In the pilot, the first call happens on October 21, and Raimy predicts a double homer for the third game of the 1996 World Series. Time is supposedly running in parallel. Frank cannot confirm this prediction until the night of the 22nd, when the game is played. He makes another call, with the burn mark happening, that night, and hangs up on the call with a threat not to call again. It isn't until the next day, after a coffee can test message, that Raimy calls back and tells him "You die tomorrow. October 23, 1996, game four of the Series." and Frank says, "Tomorrow night... tomorrow night where?" Somehow they added a whole extra day between October 22 and October 23.23.
* Another big one: was Frank using his ham radio from his undercover location, or from the family garage? If the former, how did it get back to his garage in order for young Raimy to get a call from older Raimy, and take it to the hospital after he was shot? If the latter, wasn't that a huge risk to his cover?
* Another big one: was Frank using his ham radio from his undercover location, or from the family garage? If the former, how did it get back to his garage in order for young Raimy to get a call from older Raimy, and take it to the hospital after he was shot? If the latter, wasn't that a huge risk to his cover?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Add a continuity issue for the series
Changed line(s) 1,2 (click to see context) from:
Ok, even accepting the premise as a whole, why does Shepherd in the future look the same in the final scene as he did the first time John met him? They'd changed the timeline so that he had to fake his death and go on the lamb 30 years earlier. He shouldn't be clean-shaven, and wearing a nice suit. He probably just spent 30 years in the criminal underworld.
* It's entirely possible for someone to hide in plain sight, with a respectable job which involves wearing a suit (they said he'd been a private detective after leaving the police force, so it could be that). Faking his death means the police wouldn't be looking anyway.
* It's entirely possible for someone to hide in plain sight, with a respectable job which involves wearing a suit (they said he'd been a private detective after leaving the police force, so it could be that). Faking his death means the police wouldn't be looking anyway.
to:
!!The Film
* Ok, even accepting the premise as a whole, why does Shepherd in the future look the same in the final scene as he did the first time John met him? They'd changed the timeline so that he had to fake his death and go on the lamb 30 years earlier. He shouldn't be clean-shaven, and wearing a nice suit. He probably just spent 30 years in the criminal underworld.
* ** It's entirely possible for someone to hide in plain sight, with a respectable job which involves wearing a suit (they said he'd been a private detective after leaving the police force, so it could be that). Faking his death means the police wouldn't be looking anyway.anyway.
!!The Series
* In the pilot, the first call happens on October 21, and Raimy predicts a double homer for the third game of the 1996 World Series. Time is supposedly running in parallel. Frank cannot confirm this prediction until the night of the 22nd, when the game is played. He makes another call, with the burn mark happening, that night, and hangs up on the call with a threat not to call again. It isn't until the next day, after a coffee can test message, that Raimy calls back and tells him "You die tomorrow. October 23, 1996, game four of the Series." and Frank says, "Tomorrow night... tomorrow night where?" Somehow they added a whole extra day between October 22 and October 23.
* Ok, even accepting the premise as a whole, why does Shepherd in the future look the same in the final scene as he did the first time John met him? They'd changed the timeline so that he had to fake his death and go on the lamb 30 years earlier. He shouldn't be clean-shaven, and wearing a nice suit. He probably just spent 30 years in the criminal underworld.
!!The Series
* In the pilot, the first call happens on October 21, and Raimy predicts a double homer for the third game of the 1996 World Series. Time is supposedly running in parallel. Frank cannot confirm this prediction until the night of the 22nd, when the game is played. He makes another call, with the burn mark happening, that night, and hangs up on the call with a threat not to call again. It isn't until the next day, after a coffee can test message, that Raimy calls back and tells him "You die tomorrow. October 23, 1996, game four of the Series." and Frank says, "Tomorrow night... tomorrow night where?" Somehow they added a whole extra day between October 22 and October 23.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Not a headscratcher, just being needlessly sarcastic and grossly oversimplifying the movie.
Deleted line(s) 1,2 (click to see context) :
Apparently predicting a baseball game provides a rock solid alibi, and is enough to clear Frank for murder. If the Mets get a hit you must acquit I guess.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
Apparently predicting a baseball game provides a rock solid alibi, and is enough to clear Frank for murder. If the Mets get a hit you must acquit I guess.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1 (click to see context) from:
Ok, even accepting the premise as a whole, why does Shepherd in the future look the same in the final scene as he did the first time John met him? They'd changed the timeline so that he had to fake his death and go on the lamb 30 years earlier. He shouldn't be clean-shaven, and wearing a nice suit. He probably just spent 30 years in the criminal underworld.
to:
Ok, even accepting the premise as a whole, why does Shepherd in the future look the same in the final scene as he did the first time John met him? They'd changed the timeline so that he had to fake his death and go on the lamb 30 years earlier. He shouldn't be clean-shaven, and wearing a nice suit. He probably just spent 30 years in the criminal underworld.underworld.
* It's entirely possible for someone to hide in plain sight, with a respectable job which involves wearing a suit (they said he'd been a private detective after leaving the police force, so it could be that). Faking his death means the police wouldn't be looking anyway.
* It's entirely possible for someone to hide in plain sight, with a respectable job which involves wearing a suit (they said he'd been a private detective after leaving the police force, so it could be that). Faking his death means the police wouldn't be looking anyway.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
Ok, even accepting the premise as a whole, why does Shepherd in the future look the same in the final scene as he did the first time John met him? They'd changed the timeline so that he had to fake his death and go on the lamb 30 years earlier. He shouldn't be clean-shaven, and wearing a nice suit. He probably just spent 30 years in the criminal underworld.
