by FJ Rocca 7/27/15
My wife and I watched the whole series. She is much more forgiving than I, willing and able to suspend her belief beyond my limits. But I have my standards. In fiction, stories don’t have to be realistic, but they must always be plausible. To accomplish this, the writer must present premises that set the conditions for plausibility. The only exception to this is farce, and I assume Wayward Pines was not meant to be a farce.
I was forced by the story’s circumstance, to believe that Wayward Pines was a complete fraud set up by a government agency and led by David Pilcher. I was betrayed by the ending of the story which made zero sense. Why did I reach that conclusion? Because the authors of the series set it up that way. Has anyone bothered to ask the following questions?
1. If it’s really 4028 and people have been put into suspended animation for 2000 years, how did David Pilcher oversee the operation for that time?
2. Did the cars, trucks and vans also get put into suspended animation?
3. If there are at most only a few thousand people in the town, where is all the produce, the meat, the milk, etc. coming from? At best, a few thousand people would hardly be able to produce enough edible goods to feed themselves. It’s nearly impossible in Amish communities, where they all cooperate, but have to “go to town” to buy other supplies they don’t or can’t make. Clothing for example.
4. If it is really 2000 years later, how come everyone is wearing the same style of clothing from 2000 years ago? Where did the clothing come from? It can’t have been preserved for 2000 years any more than the metal in the cars would have lasted that long.
5. ho built the underground facility with its extensive electronics? If it was built in the 21st Century, why?
6. The world existed without apocalypse while that black security guard was planning accidents and delivering suspects to David Pilcher for his experiment.
7. Where did the gasoline come from that powered the cars? Please do not tell me the town was so self-sustaining that it refined oil. And if it did, where did the oil come from?
8. Who or what produces the energy to provide the electricity they all use so easily?
9. Who built all those buildings and when? If it was 2000 years before, why on earth did they build them of timber as many were?
10. Where did all the light bulbs, buttons, shoe leather, cloth, and other materials they use so casually.
11. What about the guns, ammunition, helicopter, body armor (worn by guards) metallurgy for all those badges people wear, not to mention plates, cups, forks, knives, etc?
12. I like Scotch as much as the next guy, and I’ve had some old and mellow whiskey, but 2000 years old? I don’t think so. And if it wasn’t in suspended animation like the people and the (ulp!) cars, car tires, eyeglasses… Well, you get the idea.
But there are one or two other things.
13. If the rest of the world was destroyed 2000 years before, when was it destroyed? The supposed proof of this was in the video they watched of the guy who escaped and was crouching within site of the Golden Gate Bridge, how come he’s reporting back via video and how come, if it’s 2000 years later, the bridge hasn’t disintegrated to a rusty pile of mineral dust? I mean, the red paint on the structure looks like it just collapsed that afternoon. And what was that guy doing there, anyway?
14. The whole thing seems fishy to me. The woman FBI agent was sent there to look for her missing partner. He’d been sent in to investigate a CIA project that was taking place in secret in the town. This means that the town existed in its entirety, with all the people in it, at the time she entered, which was 2014.
There are too many other inconsistencies to continue and I’m tired.
I only want to say that I was disappointed because it seemed as though there was a message in the series. David Pilcher is the arch Liberal Democrat who is really (as they all are) a megalomaniac who believes everyone should do as he says. Sound familiar? And I thought—foolishly I’m afraid—that the Matt Dillon Sheriff character was a lover of freedom who would destroy the “utopian” prison Liberals always avow. Did the Sheriff not tell David Pilcher that he had not right to decide who would live and who would not? All of a sudden, this man turns into an imbecile who buys the cool aid? No, really, it’s too much for me.
Tell me to go to Hell if I’ve destroyed anyone’s suspension of disbelief, but I think there were two perimeters, one that held the town, and one that was roamed by the Abbies, who were manufactured by David Pilcher to keep the people from wanting to escape. I think the Sheriff should have shot David Pilcher the first time he encountered him when he descended in the helicopter. He should have held the guards at gunpoint and forced them to fly to Boise, which obviously still existed and he should have come back and led all the people out. The ending could have made sense in only on way. They are planning a sequel. The Sheriff is going to be released from suspension and a new series will be shown. Or am I nuts?
Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (474 views)