Anya ,'Showtime'
[NAFDA] Spoiler Policy: Seasons 1-3 and the movie are fair game. Spoiler font two weeks for new content presented all at once (e.g. Season 4 on Hulu is fair game as of Aug. 9, 2019). New content presented as weekly episodes may be discussed with no restrictions as it is released.
Yes. I typed this over on TWoP last week, in fact:
Aaron's cellmate got Daphne to steal Cliff's briefcase in order to get the key to the Echolls storage locker, which housed the Oscar that Kendall decorated with Lilly's blood and Duncan's hair in order to frame Duncan for Lilly's murder.
Whew.
Zero. Rob's explained that although they didn't plan on revealing it onscreen, they believed Sally to be a pet of Dick's that Beaver had disappeared (i.e., killed), basically just a sign that there was a darker side to the kid
Huh. I think my eyeroll sprained something. That's... lame.
Super lame.
(I also dislike the trend for the creator/writer to have to tell the audience something through a venue that isn't the actual broadcast show. If you can't tell it/convey it in an episode, if it requires that you explain it in an article or on the internet, etc., then it doesn't belong in the show. A season -- or an arc, or even an episode -- ought to be a self-contained thing. If the creator has to break the fourth wall to tell us that Sally was a pet, then it shouldn't have been in the episode to begin with.)
(I should note that I'm not harshing only on RT; Joss did the let-me-explain-this-to-you thing in S7, I'm pretty sure, and don't EVEN get me started on DC Comics' bullshit of having to explain things that happen in the comics. The word is "self-contained," people. Learn it. Know it. Live it.)
Aha, OK then. Thanks!
If the creator has to break the fourth wall to tell us that Sally was a pet, then it shouldn't have been in the episode to begin with.
Amen.
But the creator did not have to break the fourth wall to show us what he wanted to show us--that Cassidy had the ability to frighten Dick on occasion, even though you'd expect Dick to pay no mind to Cassidy's threats. I mean, Dick generally took on the familial role of bullying-boorish big brother, yet a couple of words from Cassidy, and he backed way the hell off. Granted, I never latched onto the 'Sally' line in the first place. I forgot all about it, and only remembered that Cassidy was able to scare Dick off, until fans kept wondering, and including Sally in their speculation.
Anyhow, RT's explanation only came after fans kept demanding to know who Sally was.
But the creator did not have to break the fourth wall to show us what he wanted to show us--that Cassidy had the ability to frighten Dick on occasion, even though you'd expect Dick to pay no mind to Cassidy's threats.
Right, I think that was his point. Unlike the dreaded spy pen, they'd never even intended to explain who Sally was, but like Cindy said, the mention did exactly what it was supposed to. Even the spy pen, really, didn't need to be explained because it served its purpose as a Red Herring of Suspicion. That one got under my skin because it was a deliberately awesome cliffhanger that was basically never mentioned again.
But the creator did not have to break the fourth wall to show us what he wanted to show us--that Cassidy had the ability to frighten Dick on occasion, even though you'd expect Dick to pay no mind to Cassidy's threats.
Right, I think that was his point. Unlike the dreaded spy pen, they'd never even intended to explain who Sally was, but like Cindy said, the mention did exactly what it was supposed to.
But if it left viewers saying "Who the hell is Sally?", then I don't think it was the best plot device to use. And it also left me more baffled at Beaver's sudden ability to intimidate Dick.
Eh. Totally a YMMV thing. I just don't like my fiction aided by explanations from the creator, outside the fiction. Work it into the story or don't use it.
If there's a gun in the first act, it has to go off in the third.
If Cassidy had said, "Remember that goldfish!" that would have been, kind of, different. By using a specific name, you're arousing viewer interest, viewers who will expect to, eventually, find out who Sally is.
And RT didn't pay it off.
But if it left viewers saying "Who the hell is Sally?", then I don't think it was the best plot device to use. And it also left me more baffled at Beaver's sudden ability to intimidate Dick.
What. Steph. Said.
I just don't like my fiction aided by explanations from the creator, outside the fiction. Work it into the story or don't use it.
A-freakin'-men.
I think my M just does V, only because P-C's post above is the first I've heard of Rob's Sally explanation (at least, as far as I can remember), and I was always fine with it. I never got why people thought Sally was going to pay off.
If Cassidy had said, "Remember that goldfish!" that would have been, kind of, different. By using a specific name, you're arousing viewer interest, viewers who will expect to, eventually, find out who Sally is.I don't know. I mean I understand your point as pertains to fiction, in the general sense, but this was a two second scene, wasn't it? What episode was Cassidy's Sally reminder from, anyhow?