'Revolution' on NBC - Page 9

Honestly, are you really thinking this thru .. ?? What will they do .. ?? March to the battle .. ?? Horses are not exactly in abundant supply these days and don't propagate overnight .. even with steam trains, the Feudal States could easliy disrupt tracks with very little effort ..

I'm hoping you are not posting this silliness in an effort to be simply controversial ..

Heh.

I work with current and former military in an law enforcement environment they will go home and handle their business as needed.

Exactly, I think people will try to help one another and enforce some kind of general laws. He seems to think we're going to fall into barbarism and/or some kind of communistic utopia...

If that's what they have to do, then...yeah. If soldiers are told to get somewhere and they have to triple-time it on foot to get there, that's exactly what they'll do and they'll get there faster than they were told to do it. Don't forget, soldiers marched to get all up and down the East Coast during wars before we had cars - and none of them had horses, either. Those were for leadership only.

If you tell a group of soldiers you need a bridge built for a convoy looking to cross a river in an hour using only materials on hand, they'll have it built in 50 minutes and be wondering what took the convoy so long.

That doesn't even account for local groups like the National Guard and various state, county and local police.

Also, you need to take into account that the government would have a huge lead time over the general population as to the severity of the issue. That would give them a chance to get into place before the largest amount of chaos among the population could take place.

.. I know full well how the military works, my Honorable Discharge and awards hang 3 feet from the desk I'm sitting at .. you folks rely on the Government to help you out .. for those of us in the real world, self reliance will be what saves us .. I've studied these scenarios for many years, and reversion to a pre-electric society has so many implications that it's impossible to even touch the surface ..

As well, comparison to History has no bearing .. those people were born into it .. that's all they had .. it was the way of life .. they knew nothing else ..

I'm not saying there won't be good intentions .. and people will try to pull it together .. what I said was these things don't happen over night .. imagine ..

No Commumication available
No Transport for any goods
Roving bands of lawless foragers

and that's just hitting a few points ..

remember Katrina .. ?? And that took place with all modern tools fully in place ..

There will be pockets of that without a doubt. I can't suggest One Second After enough regarding this subject. The first couple of years will be very rough for many.

Which is exactly why the military would be able to quell those that choose anarchy over self-reliance. They wouldn't be the majority.

Here in the Northeast, it's not unusual to lose power for weeks at a time during storm season. The world doesn't end. Sure, with everything failing to function, we'd be a bit suspicious as to what is really going on, but we wouldn't be revolting in the short amount of time it would take for guys with guns and government orders to get there and secure things.
I was wondering who would post that first.

I'm pretty sure Katrina would be the exact excuse to stomp on anyone's head who causes trouble. "Remember Katrina" would be all the justification for Marshal Law to be put into place that would be needed.

The counterpoint to "remember Katrina" would be "remember 9/11" when the city of New York rose out of chaos to come together and help each other. It wasn't just police and firefighters, either. It was guys with boats and other watercraft joining the efforts of the water ferries to transport people to New Jersey. It was people who volunteered to help in any way they could with search and rescue efforts.

I'm sorry you apparently live an a place where people turn into animals at the first sign of trouble, but that's not how we function up in this part of the union.

I would submit that not only would we pull it together, but we (along with the European Union, despite current troubles) would still be rendering aid to other nations - even if we had to row there.

Never underestimate the effect of a catch phrase like "Stand Together" or something along those lines. We've never had an issue drumming up national pride during the worst of times. Add in a song like "God Bless America" and most people will fall in line.

Heck, some people might actually learn their neighbor's names...
Edited by NetworkTV - 9/7/12 at 8:48am

mgkdrgn, I think you and a few other people are thinking of the anarchy and issues that would arise for the first few years. The reason why I and others are talking about the government being organized, military being utilized effectively, and probably some kind of communication being available (be it via horseback messenger, flag's, carrier pigeon, or some other method) is because this is supposed to take place fully 15 years after "the incident". That's a lot of time for things to get organized.

Bingo.

Agree. Lot of time to get back to the bow.

As they should...
Rule #1: Take care of your own
Rule #2: See rule #1

If all electricity suddenly stopped (for a prolonged period)- chaos would ensue, mass starvation would be next followed by battles for provisions/shelter then once the population stabilizes some order may resume.

Anyone ever see the 1936 sci-fi classic version of H.G. Wells "Things to Come"? It may come in handy for comparison to "Revolution".
It dramatically illustrates the effects of a decades long war (that starts in 1940 and ends in the 1970's) and the aftermath including the breakdown of government and society finally reverting to a feudal state. A plague starts in 1966 and by 1971 it wipes out most of the world population. "Nothing is being manufactured at all any more and society has broken down into primitive localized communities" After the plague ceases only slowly does order and social vitality return. It takes almost 100 years for society to get back on track. All in all- H.G. Wells was a pretty smart fellow- I believe his "vision" of the aftermath of a global catastrophe/war, etc... could happen. It will be interesting to see where "Revolution" goes with it...

Except that doesn't compare at all to this story.

There's no plague.
There's no war.

You may as well compare it to Soylent Green and say we'll be eating people on Tuesdays.

I enjoyed the show also.

It's nice to see David Lyons get another shot at a lead role. I always thought he got the short end when he was on ER.

Yet!
....and they handily skipped over 15yrs of history- so there's plenty we don't know yet....

Do we know for sure that electricity is the only form of energy that is affected? Is it possible that the event disabled all but the most basic of mechanical devices? Maybe many more forms of kinetic energy are shot. For instance, perhaps steam power or chemical energy would not work either. This is sci-fi after all.

Chemical energy works- they successfully fired guns.

I could not agree less .. you are forgetting the simple fact that the theory is we've reverted to pre-electric times .. that's the whole premise of the discussion .. although I won't dispute efforts by isolated bands of folks, my whole point is the time it takes to pull anything together on any scale at all .. given the long list of obstacles which would take a book to list .. and how often do you actually lose power for weeks on end .. ?? Have you ever lost power permanently .. ?? And, if you do lose power for weeks on end, I'm sure many have prepared then for that .. not so in most other areas ..

Regardless of your obvious faith in your fellow man, which I applaud, there is a faction of the population at large that will be happy to resort to whatever it takes .. no matter what region of the country you live in .. food and drinkable water will be the primary motivation ..

In the first few years of any event of this type, things will get bad .. then, they will get worse .. then, those that survive will adapt and things will begin to improve .. those that make it that far will be the ones that relied on themselves .. and a song or two is not going to make a difference ..

Whew, this show is sparking a lot of debate. Just a couple of comments to try to explain why I like it so far...

First, as I said earlier, it can be a wild ride IF you accept the premise...thats true of all fiction of course but especially in the realm of scifi/fantasy. As long as they stay true to their own rules I can go along without worrying too much at the plausibility. Star Trek or BSG doesn't work without faster than light speed being possible. Do we really need that explained before we can suspend disbelief and enjoy the drama?

During the Great Depression someone said America was one week from revolution. Thats about how long after the flow of food was stopped for people to use up was available and get hungry..and then all the rules of society fly out the window. Over simplified of course, but I can accept there would be chaos and open revolt if what the show describes happened. Its a plausible possibility that a feudal society would evolve with everyone looking out for themselves and their own.

As far as a simpler lifestyle leading to longer healthy life, what was the average lifespan in the 1700's? During the middle ages? In fifteen years the population would shrink. Not only would "older" people die off more quickly but the infant mortality rate would sky rocket. Add on a greater mortality rate for childhood diseases and the population would shrink from both ends. Factor in the increased violence as society breaks down, the decreased population becomes a possibility. I'm not saying it would happen the way it does on the show, only that it could, and thats good enough for me to enjoy watching. To me at least Revolution is merely asking "what if" and going from there. I find the idea intriging enough to keep watching. Others might not, which is fine by me. I'm not trying to convince anyone to watch, only offerring why I will be.

It looks like the show will gives a number of flashbacks and we will see what happened in the time right after the blackout. To endlessly debate what would happen is not needed to enjoy a story base on a premise that this is what happened and this was the fallout from it. Relax and enjoy the ride.

I like the debate .. and I also plan to enjoy the ride ..

Yep....
There have been enough people complaining about the human nervous system working despite "no electricity". Could you imagine the complaints if chemical reactions didn't work? Your body wouldn't be able to digest food...Oh...and stuff would never decompose.....You wouldn't be able to breath.....

I won't be wasting my time on this series, sorry if my opinion is in the minority. I found I wouldn't be able to watch the premiere when it airs so I decided to stream it today from NBC's website.
They aren't completely ripping off S.M. Stirling's "Dies the Fire" because firearms still work, it looks more like they copied "The Postman."
I watched it all the way through the final scene (the lady in the attic)... then I lost interest. Sorry, this isn't even science fiction any more, it's just bad writing.
I predict it'll be as bad as Terra Nova, and I will be extremely surprised if it goes into a second season. If you want swords and crossbows, you'll enjoy it, but I really think there may be better things to watch.

That requires electricity.

Correct, no electricity, period. OK, we know that electricity is allowed to happen, as seen in the final scene of the pilot, using a very special device that gets around the problem. Over time we will learn how and why that works.

What about them? Useless without electricity.

Didn't see anything in the pilot. That might get explained this season.

Yes.

Even jet engines run on petroleum. What did you think was used to fuel them? Gasoline engines require electricity to create the spark to ignite the fuel.

See above.

Uh...not all oil based machines use a spark. Also, are we going to consider "spark" as electricity that is prevented? If so, kindly explain why the flintlock muskets functioned.

What oil based machines don't use sparks? As previously mentioned (not by me), there are glow-plug diesel engines that could go back to the old way of doing the glow plug.

Friction spark that produces heat, vs. electrical spark to produce the heat. Try doing a friction spark for an engine and see how far you get.

Diesel engines only require the glow plug in cold weather, for starting; some other way of temporarily heating could be worked out. They are compression ignited, by definition. A turbine, once ignited, will keep running; however, most jet turbines have a sparking system to relight in case of flame-out. Stirling engines use external heat to run, which could be a fire (or even solar mirrors). I hope all the engineers weren't killed as they appear to really need some.

It sounds preposterous, but I suppose you could build some kind of striker mechanism into the piston and cylinder head to create a spark at the right point for a spark-ignited engine.

If there is no electricity, do protons and electrons still have charge? If not, what holds matter together? If yes, why isn't there electricity? And how do the electrical functions in our nervous system still work? Warp drive seems so much more plausible. It only requires some techno-babble to change laws of physics at relativistic speeds none of us encounter. This requires changing the laws of physics that drive our daily lives, and any techno-babble explanation is full of holes and frankly ridiculous.

I know, shup up and suspend disbelief. Sometimes, suspending disbelief simply boggles the mind.

I could not agree more with you not agreeing less(?!?).

IOW - I agree with this assessment.

Once starvation comes into play, all bets are off. You won't see the cities (even in the Northeast) "standing together" when people on the left and right of themselves start dropping from starvation - or when they realize that the military is not only charged with keeping supply lines open, but also to keep groups of citizens from leaving the city to forage on their own. They will quickly become viewed as an occupying force. You can't use 9/11 as the template for citizen response - and Katrina as the motivation for an improved government response. First, because it's not realistic on a national scale and second, because this hypothetical situation is much more similar to Katrina than it is to 9/11. Idaho may have sent volunteer first responders to NYC for 9/11, but they aren't going happily load their entire potato crop onto eastcoast-bound military convoys then wait for their fair rations to be returned. The first thing that will happen is the individual states will moderate their compliance with Federal mandates based on their individual needs. We'll see barter of resources almost immediately state to state and state to federal government.

As far as the national military, relying on them to maintain order in a situation like this show proposes is pure fantasy. On it's best day, with all equipment in full working order, they do not have the resources or manpower to keep order in the entire US (assuming widespread resistance). In fact, they would be hard pressed trying to secure all the locations required just to maintain their own food, ammo, fuel, and other supply lines required to keep them functioning - much less to proactively maintain order and redistribute food supplies. Our federal military consists of approx. 1.5 million active duty (1/2 of which are Air Force, Navy and Coast Guard), then you have about 500,000 National Guard troops that are under the control of the 50 state governors. Contrast that with 40% - 50% of all homes having enough guns to arm just about every citizen old enough to pull a trigger. Being extremely conservative, you can assume 200 million armed (current or newly armed by neighbors) citizens. Or focus only on the 4.5 million licensed deer hunters in just the top 5 deer hunting states (1.3 million in Pennsylvania alone). For comparison: We have approx. 100,000 active duty military, with uninterrupted supply lines, in Afghanistan - with a (somewhat) cooperative military of its own - to maintain order where there are only an estimated 1.3 million gun owners. Our military would be out-manned and out-gunned on US soil - and that's today without what is proposed in 'Revolution'.

When you look at what this show proposes, you'd see mass defections from the military, their technological advantage would be lost, and any attempt at a draft would be completely ignored. Even a .50 Cal machine gun being toted on a wagon behind a horse would be less effective than a single deer hunter hiding along the tree line. Any advantage they have in equipment is also assuming that none of the comparable equipment available in National Guard or local police storage makes its way into the hands of the local citizenry. They would be relegated to holding a small portion of the US for a select number of citizens and be no different than the many other pockets around the US where areas are held by their own military force. Federal currency would be worthless because there would be no way to back it, and they would lose the last remaining clout they had. Priority 1 will be to get food, water, fuel and ammo and then protect their supplies. Priority 2 would be to send representatives to VA and NC and open trade negotiations, because much like prison, cigarettes will become an extremely valuable currency.

LIke zarg7883, I caught the first ep early (via Comcast OnDemand). And like him, I think I'll pass as well. I see it becoming NBC's Terra Nova (in terms of being a "major SciFi network show" that will flop), just without the crappy CG dinos. I will say that I find the back & forth here in his thread far more entertaining. And I seem to prefer my apocalyptic TV shows to have zombies anyway. Or pasty bald fedora-wearing dudes from the distant future who come back in time to take over our world.

I think the discussions in this thread are more interesting and entertaining than the series

Does the show by any chance feature two ruggedly handsome men with opposing world views vying for the affection of a comely lass?

If so, I guess I'll watch it based on how comely the lass is and whether she's a decently written character of her own or just an annoying plot device who exists mainly to cause complications for the men.