One Tree Hill (4.5): Lets Do the Time Warp.

I have moved from vaguely annoyed to irate. Last night’s episode was a continuous flash back taking place three years before the present action; those college years between Season Four and Season Five. We learned many interesting things, but it was difficult for me to pay attention to any of it for one reason. THE I-PHONE DID NOT EXIST THREE YEARS AGO! If it did, it was a proto-type in a test-center somewhere in California, not available for retail sale to assistant basketball coaches.

This show has always been flexible with time, so now I have to go through a chronological comparison. Seasons One and Two equaled one year of time (their junior year of high school), and Seasons Three and Four were one more year (their senior year). Therefore, the year on the show would actually be two years behind real time. The graduation episode aired in May 2007, but according to their internal timeline they would have been the class of 2005. Skipping over four years would make it 2009 for them. A flash back from 2009 to three years before would make it 2006. Therefore, NO I-PHONE! If someone wants to claim that their graduation date should be counted in real time (2007), then skipping ahead four years would make it 2011, and a three year flashback would take place in 2008. If this were true, then it would be conceivable that Lucas would own an i-Phone. But for this to be true, the premier of OTH would have to be set two years ahead of its real time air-date, which I don’t believe happened. I want someone fired over this. It is more than sloppy; it is an unbelievably unnecessary error. I understand that shows receive funding from companies, but when they use a product that has a very definite (and well publicized) release date, they destroy the suspension of disbelief. There will always be a viewer cranky enough to go through all the logistics I have to figure out what year it should be on the show in comparison to what year it is in reality-land. I could have spent this time dissecting the actual episode, I could have enjoyed the episode, but I was, and am, so irritated that I have been propelled down this thought path in the first place because someone is not paying enough attention to their job.

Okay, I’ve taken a few deep breaths, and can move on. I got the answer to my question from last week. We know what happened between Peyton and Lucas, and I have to wonder if she isn’t better off without him. First of all, you don’t propose because everyone around you is married. Second, you don’t propose because you feel like you are drifting away from each other. Third, and most importantly, if the one you propose to have perfectly legitimate reasons for saying “not now” (which is not the same as “no”), reasons like age, lack of defined careers or finished education, and conflicting opinions on where to live, then you listen to that person and respect their position, but you stick it out and fight for them. How is it possible that Lucas thought he wanted to be engaged immediately when at the first sign of difficulty he completely bailed on Peyton? Of course there is a male-ego thing involved here, but what a pansy! Who gives up like that? Why would she say yes to someone who behaves that way? Throwing your hands up like a total bitch means that your proposal wasn’t genuine in the first place, so you get no sympathy. (Side-note: now that we know Lucas was the one who gave Lindsay the bamboo in the first place, Lindsay giving it to Peyton is passive-aggressive BS.)

Apparently I’m mad about more than the chronology, but there is always next week. I am hopeful that Brooke gets a new love-interest soon, because I would hate to see her reduced to the meta-narrator. And I am eagerly awaiting the reveal that the nanny is bonkers.

The TV Girl