Pardon My Past and Leo

[The Original P3]

colehellsangel said:

xcharmed1x said:

What is this big controversey about?

Past Leo dies sometime in 1923..he's conceived for his new life and is born in May 1924.

In Feb '24 during Pardon My Past..Past Leo was already dead but Past Piper didn't know that. Obviously she had been married to Dan for a bit and even if she had't..she still would have been dating him for some time. Hopefully more than 6 months before marrying so the fact that Past Leo and Past Piper were lovers means nothing when looking at the time frame in regards to present/future Leo.

And where did you get the information that Past Leo dies in '23? This is not an attack honestly, but I could swear nothing was said about him except that he was Past Piper's former lover.

I got this information from common sense and logic on the situation. Part of watching shows like this is filling in the blanks with inferences. They don't spell anything out. I come to my conclusions using the facts that we are presented with to make a logical arguement towards something that very well may be plausible. Lawyers do it all the time with evidence. Gathering facts to try to get to the whole story.

[colehellsangel]

xcharmed1x said:

colehellsangel said:

And where did you get the information that Past Leo dies in '23? This is not an attack honestly, but I could swear nothing was said about him except that he was Past Piper's former lover.

I got this information from common sense and logic on the situation. Part of watching shows like this is filling in the blanks with inferences. They don't spell anything out. I come to my conclusions using the facts that we are presented with to make a logical arguement towards something that very well may be plausible. Lawyers do it all the time with evidence. Gathering facts to try to get to the whole story.

OK I see. You are very good at that it seems, I have always loved your logic.

[ljones]

No, I wanted to know what age (or age range) you thought Leo would actually be when he was killed, given how Leo was in medical school at the time of his death?

Somewhere between 22 and 26.

[whitelightertony]

So then, by your estimate, the latest year Leo could have been born would have been 1920.

[colehellsangel]

ljones said:

No, I wanted to know what age (or age range) you thought Leo would actually be when he was killed, given how Leo was in medical school at the time of his death?

Somewhere between 22 and 26.

Thats logical but so is 18 which the show seems to imply he was.

[ljones]

colehellsangel said:

ljones said:

Somewhere between 22 and 26.

Thats logical but so is 18 which the show seems to imply he was.

Unless the show had hinted that Leo was some kind of genuis or Doogie Howser while he was a mortal . . . I disagree. Why?In S1's "Love Hurts", Leo made it clear that he was in medical school:

Leo: Human? Yes, it does. I was actually born right here in San Francisco. I had lived here all the way up till I went off to the war.

Piper: You mean, like Vietnam?

Leo: No. World War II. I left med school and enlisted as a medic. I wanted to help save people not shoot them. The last thing I remember, I was bandaging a soldier's head wound and I felt a sharp pain and the next thing I know I was floating surrounded by White Lighters. They offered me immortality and the chance to help special people like you. I never once ever doubted that I didn't make the right choice. Till I met you. Ever since all I can think is how I'd give it up and have a mortal life again to have a family, grow old... with you.

In S3's "Primrose Path", he told Piper that he was a doctor:

Piper: I know, but if I had introduced you as my fiancé, she would've asked how we met, when are we getting married, where the hell my ring is. Questions that I can't answer now can I?

Leo: I suppose that's how I became a doctor too.

Whether Leo was a med student or already a doctor, when he had joined the Army . . . I'm in the dark. But it is clear that he had at least earned a Bachelor's degree by December 1941/Spring 1942. If Leo had been 18 years old when he died, then Burge could have at least hired someone younger than Brian Krause for the role of Leo Wyatt.

[whitelightertony]

Is there anything that would preclude Past Leo having died in the year 1920?

[ljones]

whitelightertony said:

Is there anything that would preclude Past Leo having died in the year 1920?

No, whitelightertony, there isn't. Why? Because the idiotic writers forgot about Leo's revelations of being either a medical school student or a doctor . . . and rather stupidly listed his birth year as 1924.

It appears that the CHARMED writers have a contradiction on their hands in regard to Leo's age.

[colehellsangel]

whitelightertony said:

Is there anything that would preclude Past Leo having died in the year 1920?

To me Present Leo's being a med student when he enlisted or whatever still does not give any sense to there having been a Past Leo in the '20s.

World War II began in 1939 and ended in 1945. So it makes sense for Present Leo to have been born in '24 and enlisted at the age of 18 in '42 precisely when Guadalcanal began. He would not have been in the war for long but sometimes that happens, thats what War is about. Unless there is information of him being in other battles during World War II that I am forgetting about.

[ljones]

To me Present Leo's being a med student when he enlisted or whatever still does not give any sense to there having been a Past Leo in the '20s.

World War II began in 1939 and ended in 1945. So it makes sense for Present Leo to have been born in '24 and enlisted at the age of 18 in '42 precisely when Guadalcanal began. He would not have been in the war for long but sometimes that happens, thats what War is about. Unless there is information of him being in other battles during World War II that I am forgetting about.

I agree that Leo being a med student when the U.S. entered WWII in December 1941, does not jibe with there being a Past Leo in 1924. But since it was verified in two episodes - "Love Hurts" and "Primrose Path" - that Leo had earned a Bachelor's degree by Spring 1942, I find it equally improbable that Leo was born in 1924 and was 18 years old when he joined the Army.

I think that the writers screwed up.

[colehellsangel]

Yeah just like they did not bother to make "Witchstock" work tons better for Grams.

Going back to Leo they also messed up on where he is from. In Love Hurts he tells Piper that he grew up right there in San Francisco yet in Saving Private Leo he says he grew up in Burlingame with the Lang brothers and that they all enlisted in the war together so it makes no sense for him to have grown up in San Francisco.

I really think they messed up in Pardon My Past although its cute and an uncanny coincidence to think about.

[ljones]

I checked on Burlingame, California. It's a town located in San Mateo County, which is located on the San Francisco Peninsula. Well . . . they're close.

[colehellsangel]

ljones said:

I checked on Burlingame, California. It's a town located in San Mateo County, which is located on the San Francisco Peninsula. Well . . . they're close.

Oh its in California, really? Wow I did not know that. Well that does put a little more sense into it but its still not San Francisco.

[ljones]

colehellsangel said:

ljones said:

I checked on Burlingame, California. It's a town located in San Mateo County, which is located on the San Francisco Peninsula. Well . . . they're close.

Oh its in California, really? Wow I did not know that. Well that does put a little more sense into it but its still not San Francisco.

You've got a point. It's not even in San Francisco County.

[whitelightertony]

If Burlingame and San Francisco are both in Northern California, why couldn't Leo's family have moved at some point during his youth?

No, whitelightertony, there isn't. Why? Because the idiotic writers forgot about Leo's revelations of being either a medical school student or a doctor . . . and rather stupidly listed his birth year as 1924.

It appears that the CHARMED writers have a contradiction on their hands in regard to Leo's age.

I agree they failed to pay attention to continuity.

That's why I believe the best way to explain it is that Leo's actual birth year was 1920, and the "1924" was a misprint.

Past Leo courted Past Piper in the late-1910's, but was killed by Anton at some point in the year 1920...Anton (glamoured as Past Leo) doctored up a story where Past Leo had to "go away" for an extended period of time (minimizing the amount of physical contact Anton had with Past Piper), which also caused Past Piper to meet and fall in love with Past Dan.

[ljones]

That's why I believe the best way to explain it is that Leo's actual birth year was 1920, and the "1924" was a misprint.

I don't know if I would accept 1920 as Leo's actual birth year. But I can accept it as one of a few possibilities.

Or . . . the Leo was shown in 1924 could possibly be a relative of Leo's.

[vandergraafk]

So, let me get this straight. Anton kills past Leo offscreen. Why? Why would Anton worry about past Leo, whom Piper has rejected as a lover in order to be with Dan? Maybe Anton is worried about the future when future Leo and Piper are one. How would he know that. Even in Season 2's Pardon My Past, it is by no means certain that Leo and Piper will ever get back together. It makes no sense. "I'm so confused!"

Frankly, I have no definitive answer to pubesy's query. I can only state that many of us have tried to resolve contradictions in the time line. Some plainly have to be wrong. I don't see how a case can be made that the gravemarker in Centennial Charmed with respect to Paige's year of birth (1975) can be correct. There is too much other evidence to suggest that she was born on 1 August 1977.

In this instance, I am not even certain we can straighten out this contradiction. We might push up Leo's date of birth to, sometime, after 1924. But, that causes all kinds of problems. Indeed, ljones presents a convincing case that Leo's birth year should be something along the lines of 1920. If so, then we might consider pushing back the events of Pardon My Past to 1919. However, this too is problematic.

How could one credibly believe that a successful speakeasy had been flourishing at the manor when Prohibition had just been added to the Constitution that very same year! I don't know enough about Prohibition to say how long it took for the speakeasy system to get started; but, I might suggest that since San Francisco is not a border city, it might have taken longer to establish there than say in Chicago or Detroit, cities close enough to Canada to establish themselves faster. Maybe it took less time than to establish speakeasys in Denver because - unlike Denver - San Francisco is a major port city and maybe contraband could be smuggled in more easily.

I share in colehellsangel intense skepticisim regarding the death of past Leo in 1923 so that he might be reborn in 1924 - ignoring at our peril ljones' excellent point. Don't we see past Leo in Pardon My Past? And, isn't he present at the manor the same time as Anton. Okay, I admit I've never seen LaToya Jackson and Michael Jackson at the same time. And, I swear they are the same person, right? Seriously, what evidence is there to suggest that Anton would glam into Leo and why bother? Past Leo and past Piper were passe! If anyone should have died, shouldn't it have been past Dan?

Finally, perhaps coleshellangel is not bothered by two entities sharing the same soul occupying the same space at the same time, but I am of sorts. I just have thought this through thoroughly enough to wish this headache upon me. "I'm so confused!"

[colehellsangel]

ljones said:

That's why I believe the best way to explain it is that Leo's actual birth year was 1920, and the "1924" was a misprint.

I don't know if I would accept 1920 as Leo's actual birth year. But I can accept it as one of a few possibilities.

Or . . . the Leo was shown in 1924 could possibly be a relative of Leo's.

I have to agree. If you are talking about Present Leo being born in 1920 than that makes there having been a Past Leo make even worse sense. The latest past Leo would have had to die is 1919 and again I do not see Anton's motive if he was not involved with Past Piper at the time because his plot was revolved around the cousins so what does past Leo have to do with that is he is no longer with Past Piper? I suppose its slightly possible that he did die just not at Anton's hand. But the reason I added the word "slightly" before possible is because when we see Anton glamor him, he looks to be quite young for a non-murderous death, and who else would want to murder him? I suppose a car accident or something is also possible but I don't think the writers were considering any of this when they wrote it, I think all they were thinking about was an irony between past Piper choosing Dan while present Piper is still caught between both the present versions. Plus they could have found a place to mention it if they thought of having Past Leo dead, just give Past Piper a two second line saying that its tragic that he died, or Past Phoebe a snarky comment that she was only with Past Dan because Past Leo died. (Ohh I me likey the second one

[quote

vandergraafk said:

Don't we see past Leo in Pardon My Past? And, isn't he present at the manor the same time as Anton.

No actually I don't believe he is I don't believe we ever see real Past Leo only Anton in glamor form. Why would he still hang around there to be tortured by the slight of the love of his life with another man? Even Present Leo always felt uncomfortable being in the same room with Piper and Dan together even if they were just talking. I think it makes sense that Past Leo disappears when Past Piper chooses Past Dan.

vandergraafk said:

Finally, perhaps coleshellangel is not bothered by two entities sharing the same soul occupying the same space at the same time, but I am of sorts.

Oh I am, why do you think I started this topic.

Sorry but I still believe that there is inaccuracy with Pardon My Past information.

[vandergraafk]

Well, yes, I think several contributors have pointed out discrepancies in the timeline. But, there are other problematic sources as well. I suppose when establishing a time line for Charmed one has to look at the totality of information presented in Charmed and sort out the questionable from the sensible. One should also be aware that some really questionable episodes (Witchstock) may have been compromised by the unavailability of certain characters. As I understand it, that episode was supposed to feature Finola Hughes, who apparently was unavailable. So, the idea was re-worked to feature Grams as a hippie, a decidedly bad idea! Imagine a show where hippie Patty went up against straight-laced Grams. That would have led to some interesting conflicts!

As for Colehellsangel's concern about the whereabouts of Leo's birthplace... let's see. Burlingame is just north of San Mateo and just south of South San Francisco. Technically, it lies on the peninsula and that's how the area is generally referred to. But, anyone who is from that area is likely to say that a) they were from the Bay Area or b) San Francisco. They would NOT say they are from Oakland (the other side of the Bay) and would anyone really wish to admit they were from Oakland? Alameda, yes. Berkeley, okay. San Leandro, more obscure. Oakland Hills, okay! But Oakland, I'm not so sure! For Leo to say he was born in San Francisco is unsurprising, even if he might never have actually lived in the rather small city limits of San Francisco.

Were someone to ask where I am from, I might reply Philadelphia. If I found out that the person with whom I am conversing is from the Greater Philadelphia area, then I am more likely to say that I'm from Norristown or the Northwest suburbs. That distinguishes me from anyone hailing from South Jersey, the Greater Northeast, the Mainline or Delware County. I might still be from Montgomery or Bucks Country, but that's another matter. The point is: the Burlingame of the 1930s - Leo's youth - was more rural. Since the area is within 15 - 20 miles of San Francisco proper, San Francisco would have been the focal point. San Mateo is and probably was a bedroom community, even though it is home to the Bay Area's premier race track: Bay Meadows, now threatened by development. Neither South San Francisco nor Daly City would have offered much in the 30s, I imagine. What binds these cities, I guess, is that they are all located along El Camino Real, Kings Highway from Spanish days, and a highway that connects the various mission cities along the California coast from San Diego to San Francisco, roughly the route traversed by US Highway 101, though in the Bay Area US 101 hugs the bay and the old El Camino Real is state highway 82, formerly US 101 business route and US 101 in the 30s. In short, I am quite comfortable with Leo stating that he grew up in San Francisco. To me, this is a distinction without a difference.

P.S. I would not make too much about the fact that Burlingame is not located in San Francisco County. First: northern California counties in and around the Bay Area and the Delta (Sacramento) are much smaller than southern California counties. Second, one could offer up San Francisco County as some sort of criterion, I suppose. I would advise against it, however. Though populous, it is very, very small in land area! Even San Francisco Airport is not located in San Francisco County (it's in San Mateo County!), but is owned and operated by the city of San Francisco. At least, Los Angeles International Airport is located in Los Angeles County and is part of the city of Los Angeles, even though it abuts El Segundo, a separate city in LA County!

[colehellsangel]

Oh I don't really put too much importance on his birth place as I am his birth year in this thread. I just pointed out his birthplace because I thought it was an error, I did not realize Burlingame was in Cali.