Talk:River Tam

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Films, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to films and film characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B
This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Unknown
This article has not been rated on the importance assessment scale.


Image:Fireflyinchinese.gif This Firefly-related article is within the scope of WikiProject Firefly, a collaborative effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the TV series Firefly, its spin-offs, and all things related to the Firefly 'verse.
You can help! Visit the project page or discuss an article at the project talk-page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.)
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the Project's importance scale.

 

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the River Tam article.

What are the R. Tam sessions?---Mr. Tachyon

Some clips of River being interviewed by a psychologist-type person while at the Academy. Contains at least one movie reference (but not really a spoiler). --Pentasyllabic 05:54, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


This article should be expanded now that Serenity is out. --Phoenix Hacker 01:17, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Though there should be a spoiler warning, and spoiler consolidation, rather then give out what river ends up doing part way, and at the end of the movie.--x1987x 03:16, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
Spoiler warnings should note what's a spoiler for Firefly, and what's a spoiler for Serenity. Njál 01:48, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] What about when...

What about when River tells Jayne that "Also, I can kil you with my mind." I forgot which episode it happens in, but it's the one where Simon confronts Jayne about his betrayal. Doesn't that hint to something that's not mentioned in the article? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lamarcus (talkcontribs) 00:45, 7 January 2006.

I am quite confident that her comment was said just to put Janye on edge, and was not meant to be taken seriously. --Bacteria 03:05, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
I added a reference to the comment, and I'm glad that I'm not the only person to think that it was more an attack on Jayne's fears than a real threat. --Pentasyllabic 03:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] River as a pilot

There seems to be a bit of debate about whether or not River is the pilot of Serenity. While, yes, she did appear to be piloting the ship at the end of Serenity, she only got it airborne; Mal continued to be at the helm. I think her Occupation should remain none/Fugitive (until another Firefly movie/TV show/comic shows her definitively as the pilot), especially since her replacing Wash is a bit of a spoiler. EVula 23:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd say pilot in training or trainee pilot. --Joshtek 22:58, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Serenity Novelisation

The novelisatin by Keith R.A DeCandido seems to imply that River was 14 when she heard about the Academy (page 22). Also, the book seems to call The Academy, the "Alliance Academy". Furthermore, instead of "a coded message" it has her write a series of messages. Is the book considered canoical?--Joshtek 22:58, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

No. --Bacteria 00:02, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm fairly certain it isn't canon. EVula 00:15, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I guess so. I just read this interview with Joss Whedon: "I don't have much involvement. I just don't have time. If I started to read them I'd just get frustrated and have to write them myself. This would cause fewer movies and shows. I just whistle and look the other way. Hope ya like 'em!" --Joshtek 00:34, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted info

River's rescue from The Academy by her brother Simon is described in sixty words in the Firefly episode "Serenity" and several scenes in the movie Serenity. There is considerable debate over whether or not the two presentations represent a breach of continuity.

[edit] The two versions

In the episode "Serenity" Simon responds to the question of how he rescued River by saying:

Money. And, and luck. For two years, I couldn't get near her. Then I was contacted by some men, some underground movement. They-they said that she was in danger, that-that the government was... playing with her brain. If I funded them they could sneak her out in cryo. Get her to Persephone, and from there, I could take her... wherever.

From this it was assumed that he had no part in the physical rescue and indeed did not meet up with River until she was in a cryo box on Persephone.

However, when the movie came out audiences witnessed Simon breaking River out himself with the help of an unidentified ship. In the movie it is also stated that Simon "spent his entire fortune developing the contacts to infiltrate" The Academy and Simon refers to the others involved in the rescue as, "the people who helped me break River out."

[edit] The three interpretations

There are three different ways that this has been interpreted.

The first interpretation is that the two do not reconcile in any way, thus the series and the movie are in different continuities. This means that the River of the movie was broken out by Simon with the help of others, whereas the River of the series was broken out by "some men."

The second interpretation is that Simon, who at the time had only the vaguest notion of the crews loyalties and personalities, did not want to be honest with the crew of Serenity and therefore told them an altered version of the breakout, minimizing his own role so as to leave the crew ignorant of his actions.

The final interpretation is that both versions are correct; everything Simon told the crew of Serenity was true, but what he implied and what fans assumed (that he had no role in getting her out apart from financial support) was false. In this interpretation the "underground movement" broke River out by using not just Simon's money, but also Simon himself and then, once out of the facility, snuck her, in cryo, off of whatever world she was on, past customs and all other prying eyes, and finally to Persephone where Simon and River first appeared in the series.

Supporters of each interpretation have evidence that they claim backs up their way of looking at it, and thus far none of the interpretations have be universally accepted as correct, further the second and third interpretations are so similar it can be hard to tell them apart. Joss Whedon is reported to have said he supports the idea that Simon was lying, but whether he meant by falsehood (second interpretation alone) or omission (second and third interpretation) is unknown, this statement has not silenced those who claim there is a breach of continuity.

It is possible that this part of River's history will never be agreed upon.

I'm re-adding, because this is a point of contention that needs to be addressed, it's not "unnecessary info" JBK405 01:31, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't make any sense to describe her rescue if there's no agreement on what her rescue actually was, putting in one section describing her rescue as a certain way implies that there's some degree of certainty. JBK405 00:11, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

If it is based directly off what is seen in both the series and film, which are considered equally canonical. I'm restoring my edits for this reason. Although there may be a controversy, the series and film say otherwise. The Wookieepedian 00:16, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
And Joss Whedon says otherwise too. He gives his explanation, which we should treat as canon. Speculation and Original Research does not belong in Wikipedia plange 00:29, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
in fact that section being in there, and unsourced, is one of the main reasons I put the unsourced box at the top plange 00:32, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
An unsourced tag is not a license to include original research or fan speculation that is not likely to have any reliable source. Statements like "fans assumed" and "Joss Whedon is reported to have said" make it clear this material comes from fan discussions. If this issue is discussed in a major publication (say, Entertainment magazine) or in one of the published books about Firefly, it is fair game. Otherwise, it's exactly the kind of fancruft Wikipedia tries hard to weed out. Firefly is one of my favorite TV shows, but this is Wikipedia, not FireflyWiki.org. I've removed everything from that section that isn't directly attributable to what's on the screen. (And I'm still not happy with the way it's presented, as without published statements, it's hard to even call this a possible conflict, especially given the possibility of the "there is no error" interpretation.) ~ Jeff Q (talk) 05:42, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
I think we're saying the same thing Jeff, my reply to Wookie was in support of him - Since the speculation was unsourced I put the tag up there, NOT to give it a pass, but to alert a reader that there was POV stuff in the article and giving the writer a chance to source it since I didn't have time to edit it myself. If I had my druthers, I'd take out the controversy altogether, since we don't have a source and it's OR.-plange 05:46, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Utter fancruft - the section should go unless, as is said above we have a RS, source for the "controversy". Sophia 08:22, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Is there a "controversy" every time a character lies in a piece of fiction? Pure speculation, delete it. Barnas 11:09, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Yippee, will do! plange 16:57, 2 July 2006 (UTC)