From: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org (chakram-refugees-digest) To: chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Subject: chakram-refugees-digest V2 #113 Reply-To: chakram-refugees@smoe.org Sender: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk chakram-refugees-digest Monday, April 29 2002 Volume 02 : Number 113 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [chakram-refugees] Con 2002 Day 3 Part 4 ["Jackie M. Young" ] Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: <> [cr ] Re: [chakram-refugees] Gabrielle irritating [cr ] Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: <> [cr ] Re: [chakram-refugees] [ot] 100 greatest TV characters -UK viewers [cr > [cr > [cr ] Re: [chakram-refugees] Con 2002 Day 3 Part 4 [cr ] Re: [chakram-refugees] OT: Arch News: the chemistry of mummies [Richan@a] Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: <> [Sojourner > [Meredith Tarr > ["Ann Reddecliffe" > ["Kym Masera Taborn" ] [chakram-refugees] What *was* that foamy stuff they drank? [Mirrordrum Subject: [chakram-refugees] Con 2002 Day 3 Part 4 KTL wrote: >brought up the death of Iolus. And Michael talked about how upset the >fans got when Iolus died in the Hercules show. I didn't watch that show, >but I do remember a blow-up at one of the cons-the one which was the >goodbye to Sorbo and Hurst one. A big number of fans came up to the mike - --As far as I remember, it wasn't at the goodbye to Herc & Iolaus con (1st Pasadena), but at the Santa Monica con (3rd H/X con) where fans confronted the writers like Paul Robert Coyle, etc. (*ummm*... and it's "Iolaus" ;P [ya know, I love ya, KT! ;) ] ) And yes, they _were_ mad. ;P >OH-I just read the program and realized that Michael was >signing autographs. Hmmm. I wonder if he ever did before? I know he >didn't at any of the cons I've seen him at. - --Yeah, Michael signed before at the last Pasadena con he was at before this one (1st Pasadena, 4th H/X con). I got one from him, and talked to him briefly. ;) IIRC, ;) - --Jackie ****************************************************** * Proud to have the same birthday as Lucy Lawless! * * * * "I think New Zealand geographically comes from * * ... Hawai'i." --Lucy Lawless, Late Show, 4/9/96 * * * * JACKIE YOUNG, JYOUNG@LAVA.NET * * * ****************************************************** ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 19:33:05 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Gabrielle irritating On Monday 29 April 2002 05:39, Sojourner wrote: > > > > > My long held theory is the Xena just looooooves young women who through > > > themselves at her. To paraphrase your comment ... > > > > > > Xena apparently just couldn't resist any girl who asks "take me!" > > > >Take ME!!!! Me Me Me!!!! > > OK, sorry, any young nubile woman alive c. 600-1BC (go figure Caesar and > Boadicea) whomk she happened to run across and not kill immediately. > > I, of course, am ruled out straight away, as I am no longer young. Or > nubile, or ... oh f*** it. > > THAT'S why it's called fantasy? > > Sojourner Yer also 2000 years too late, dearie. :) T ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 19:39:41 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: <> On Monday 29 April 2002 07:02, Mirrordrum wrote: > At 07:38 PM 4/28/2002 +1200, cr wrote: > > > oh *so* not! noooooo. for one thing, she's dark-haired and of dark > > > complexion. never do. i know both herc and iolaus were blonde, but that > > > wouldn't work w/ xena. sidekick's got to be blonde. > > > >So she can be dumb? ;-) > > hmmmm. now that's an idea. my SO's blonde and she agrees with you > completely abt the improbability of the early xena-gab relationship. she > also said, when i asked her if she had any questions for renee for me to > send sharon, "yeah, what was it like working with lucy." so maybe it's not > that she's obnoxious & has no taste, just that she's blonde and therefore > dumb. btw, i assume you're blonde? Nah, I'm dark. Wiv grey bits. Wot's left of it, that is. > md--who must away as the tornado warnings are up, a storm is approaching, > and i must off this machine before we're nuked. i'll get back to you, > smartass. ;-) Just regard the tornado as a sign of my displeasure ;) I'll send floods next. Thelonius ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 19:26:44 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Gabrielle irritating On Sunday 28 April 2002 23:34, Sojourner wrote: (snip) > > My long held theory is the Xena just looooooves young women who through > themselves at her. To paraphrase your comment ... > > Xena apparently just couldn't resist any girl who asks "take me!" > > Gabby must have been one hot tamale in the sack, that's all I can think > > > Sojourner And here we all were arguing the finer points of Gabrielle's character. Wasting out time, weren't we? ;-) Thelonius ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 19:43:47 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: <> On Monday 29 April 2002 08:29, Mirrordrum wrote: > > >Renee may have been just as saintly as you describe, > (snip) > > > but Gabrielle whined > >about "not getting enough credit" all the time. ;-) > > oh but xena always *did* knuckle under to that one so beautifully. and > she's so irredeemable about it. they're very like many couples i know. i > loved it that xena made gabrielle the fairy godsister of dishes *totally* > without thinking about it. and of course got ragged at. very familiar. very > familiar indeed. Heck, Xena even made Herc do the cooking. Xena *does not do housework*. Just one of the things I like about her. Thelonius ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 20:07:42 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] [ot] 100 greatest TV characters -UK viewers On Monday 29 April 2002 11:33, KLOSSNER9@aol.com wrote: > Internet Movie Database lists a 2001 TV special, 100 Greatest TV > Characters, from British TV. A note says the favorite characters > were "voted for by the British public." No one from Xena or Hercules > made the cut. I have not heard of several of the actors and characters > listed. They were in UK TV shows not seen in the U.S. Those I know > of are -- > Rowan Atkinson -- Edmund Blackadder > Tom Baker, Peter Davidson, William Hartnell, Sylvester McCoy, Jon > Pertwee -- The Doctor no. 4, 5, 1, 7, 3 in Doctor Who > Wilfrid Brambell -- Albert Steptoe (Steptoe and Son, model for Sanford and > Son) > John Cleese -- Basil Fawly (Fawlty Towers) > Robbie Coltrane -- Fitz > Peter Falk - Columbo > Calista Flockhart -- Ally McBeal > Sarah Michelle Geller -- Buffy > John Hurt -- Quentin Crisp > Gordon Jackson -- Mr. Hudson, in Upstairs, Downstairs > Derek Jacobi -- Claudius, in I, Claudius > Joanna Lumley -- Patsy in Absolutely Fabulous > Patrick McGoohan -- The Prisoner > Hele Mirren -- Jane Tennison (Prime Suspect) > Roger Moore -- The Saint > Leonard Nimoy -- Mr. Spock > Ian Richarsoan -- Francis Urquhart > Diana Rigg -- Emma Peel (The Avengers) > Telly Savalas -- Kojak > John Thaw -- Inspector Morse > Henry Winkler -- Fonz > > There is no indication on IMDB of the ranking of the charcters. They are > giving in alphabetic order by the actor's name. Besides Lucy Lawless, > Renee O'Connor and Hundson Leick, the people I am most disappointed > at not seeing are Jeremy Brett as Sherlock Holmes and Leo McKern as > Rumpole of the Bailey. > > Boeotian Yay! 'The Prisoner' still lives! And Emma Peel. But how on earth could they let Henry Winkler in and Ally McBeal and not Xena, Callisto or Ares? These polls are always baffling..... Thelonius ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 20:21:04 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] <> On Monday 29 April 2002 12:00, Cheryl Ande wrote: > # > # > # > ## > # > # > # > # > > > King of Assassins isn't awful but it ain't good either. The good parts > are: Xena discovering Joxer with Fingers bitten by a chicken, Gabrielle > conking herself on the head with the flying wooden bowl and trying to put > the pinch on the guard (no wonder she was upset when she learned Xena had > taught Akemi the pinch), Gina Torres, and Cleopatra's invite to Xena to > come up see her sometime. Ooooooh yes, Gina Torres. Oooooooh. :) Pity she couldn't do Cleopatra in A&C, though the replacement Cleo they found was pretty good in the role. > What's bad: Ted Raimi's Jett, the fact that this became an Autolycus > episode ( I watch Xena to see Xena or Xena and Gabrielle, or Gabrielle > if Xena's not around but not guest stars - though I have to assume this was > done to give ROC a bit of a break), and finally Gabrielle becoming > incredibly incompetent. Aww, I like Autolycus. Better 'n Joxer, anyway. Though I think he was best in Royal Couple of Thieves and The Quest. Still, getting to chat up Cleo in her bath sure beats interacting with Velasca. ;) > > Anyway next week is Warrior...Priestess...Tramp and The Quill is Mightier > much better comedies and couple of my favorites. Looking forward to your review. > I finally saw FIN with the commentary. That was the first time I ever saw > anything like that. Everyone seemed very honest about what they thought > worked and didn't work especially RT. I noticed that particularly. RT was quite critical of himself when something - usually visual - didn't turn out quite the way he visualised it. *Very* interesting commentary, though. I'd love to see (hear) them do one for Sin Trade. > One the interesting things that > came up was that all the guest stars got hurt - Akemi dislocated her elbow, > Hedoishi broke his ankle, and the Samurai general broke his ribs. Rob was > funny about dangling a pregnant ROC off a cliff and then realizing latter > he could have done the whole scene in the studio. As Ares would say, "Where's the fun in that?" Thelonius ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 20:31:08 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: <> On Monday 29 April 2002 14:47, Xwpacolyte@aol.com wrote: > On Thu, 25 Apr 2002 20:09:00 +1200 > > cr wrote: > >> OK - while she was chucking fireballs, I agree, she was focussed but > 'without atachment' (gotta be a better phrase for that!). > When Ming somehow survived, I think she was prepared to let him live. But > then Ming quite clearly demonstrated that he was quite uncowed by his > defeat and - IMO - that he was likely to get up to his old tricks again the > first chance he got. So she decided - and here I think she was thinking > of the Greater Good of his subjects/victims - to kill him as originally > planned. > > I don't think, though, that Xena would have needed the same mental coolness > or focus to stick that brooch in his head - that's the sort of thing the > Warrior Princess could do without even needing to concentrate - it would > have required no more skill than 'putting the pinch' on someone. IMO. > > Thelonius >> > > I haven't watched <> in quite a while. Do we actually know, or > at least have a strong clue, whether Xena was acting with detachment (for > the Greater Good) when she killed Ming Tien or whether his bragging got to > her and she acted out of anger? > > XWPacolyte > Cupid and Psyche... Antony and Cleopatra... Xena and Gabrielle. No, we don't. That's one of my favourite scenes, and I've watched it many times. While Xena was appalled at Ming's attitude, there's nothing to indicate that she 'lost it'. Equally, though I personally think she decided rationally that the original mission should be completed and Ming was better dead, I can't see any clue that supports that either. (Of course, some may take the view that Xena's more 'human' if she did act out of anger, and I wouldn't disagree with that. Ming certainly did give her every provocation and every reason he possibly could). Thelonius ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 22:19:22 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Con 2002 Day 3 Part 4 Oooh goody, another KT con report to chew on. Nice. ;) Oops better have some spoiler space.. *** Spoilers for Farscape Season One *** (That'll baffle you lot ;-) On Sunday 28 April 2002 06:32, KTL wrote: > First, I never finished Lucy's comment on wondering "since some women are > so competitive", what kind of a reception she would get from Gillian > Anderson when she guest starred on the X-Files. Lucy said that Gillian > was totally friendly and welcoming and couldn't have been nicer to her. > That Gillina (TCH! I KEEP making that typo! I've had to fix it three > times now, dammit! It's like I'm talking about some Italian ice cream or > something...) Not a closet Farscape fan, are ya? ... Gilina was a guest character in Farscape season 1. Developed a romantic attachment to Crichton, one of the leads. Got dead shortly after. Why does this sound familiar? ;-) > that GilliAN had enough confidence in herself to not worry > about other actors being on the show and was very gracious and kind to > Lucy during her time there. > _____________________________ > > SPOILERS FOR FIN, HELICON, HOOVES AND HARLOTS > > > > He told another story of how Kevin had offered time after time to take > Michael out drinking and how he had finally taken Kevin up on his offer > one night. And Kevin had just totally drunk him under the table but by > the end of the night, both of them were some sheets to the wind. And > Kevin made sure Michael got driven home, but Michael demanded that he be > left off a couple of doors from his house so that he wouldn't wake up his > partner Jennifer with the sound of the car at the front door. (rest snipped for bandwidth) ROTFL!!! Very wise. I'd have reservations about waking up Boadicea in the early hours of the morning too. Specially if I were as - umm, un-Herculean in stature as Iolaus is. ;-) > > Michael said that in Helicon, "Gabrielle had to wear the hat (be the > commander) because she was the Amazon, not Xena." For that story, it was > written that the Amazons would not follow Xena, though they have in the > past. (And though they actually DO in the story.) So that's what THAT note > was all about. (I'm beginning to question how successful my note taking > experiment was...) > > At any rate, that question would have been more appropriately asked of the > writer of the ep. Hertz just directed what he found on the page. (I > remember at a very early con, someone asking Danielle about Ephiny's > history with Xena. And Danielle looked blank. And the fan said, "You two > were walking along and you looked at Xena with this nasty expression on > your face and Xena told you to keep your eyes to yourself or she'd rip > them out of your head. Why did you look at her like that and why did she > say that?" And Danielle thought for a second, then shrugged and smiled > and essentially said, "Beats me." I remember getting a big kick out of > that. We fans are just so more obsessive about details and possible > relationships and prior histories than any of the actors ever were. > That's why we be called fan, short for "fanatic". Answer: Danielle did it because the director asked her to. It's an interesting point that I've been debating (on another list) whether the actor needs to know *why* they're doing something. Specifically, in that case, with regard to Gabrielle _not_ cutting of Morimoto's head in Friend in Need - in the 'commentary' DVD, ROC says it's because she wouldn't do him the honour, RT says it's because she can't kill a defenceless man. And one fan on that list is dismayed by this, the idea that the director and the actor may not know what each other's thinking. My feeling is, so long as the actor produces exactly the performance the director is looking for, it doesn't matter how or 'why' they do it. Though of course sometimes it may help the actor to know why, but it isn't essential. IMO. > > They showed the world premiere of "The Making of Friend in Need" which is > in Fan Kit 5 or 6, whichever was the last one. I came back to watch this. > And I thought it was excellent. One of the really cool things about it > was that it showed just how totally visual a movie is. Now this sounds > dumb because it's so basic, but whenever people first start to write for > film, they almost never intuitively "get" that the main way a script > differs from a story or novel is in the requirement to fully describe on > the page what the person is doing, what the background is, what the props > s/he's working with are, etc. etc. etc. > > You can't just tell what they are thinking (thinking don't film) and you > can't just explain what they are feeling. You have to write action that > conveys the emotions, the motives, the fight to get what you want, and the > setting in which these actions occur. You have to describe physical > events and props far more than you do in a novel. Because a novel is > read, and when we read novels, we are literally put in the position of > being "mind readers". But a film is meant to be seen, not read. This is why, I think, the director of a film / TV has such a huge input into the finished product. Because, whatever the writer puts down on the page, how it is interpreted on screen is almost entirely up to the actors and the director. For example, whether an actor says a line apologetically or defiantly can change their whole character and the whole feeling of the scene. (This is quite aside from occasions, like Kindred Spirits, where the director and actors actually invent an entire scene on the set. That may have been an unusual circumstance because it was a rush job). In fact, if you read the draft script of an earlier version of Friend In Need that's in circulation (or I imagine any other episode), the detail isn't nearly as comprehensive as you suggest above. (Sorry, KT ;) Now this could of course be because RT was filming it, so could be presumed to know the writers' intentions (as he co-wrote it); or it could be because it's customarily left up to the director. It's interesting to mentally compare the 'look and feel' of The Debt and Sin Trade for example - both Xena - flashback stories set in Asia, yet very different in visual tone. And this I think is almost entirely down to the style of the directors - Oley Sassone and T J Scott. I think if T J had directed The Debt it would have looked like Sin Trade, and if Oley had directed Sin Trade it would have looked like The Debt - and both would still have been magnificent episodes. > > And in "The Making of FIN", there is a long sequence that shows Rob and > Lucy working out part of her final-battle-as-a-live-person scene. They > are working on the part where Xena is using a wagon as a shelter until she > (and we) realize that the arrows are coming from all directions, from > everywhere around her. Yes - that was really an 'ouch' moment when you want to find a hole to disappear into.... (snip of fascinating description) > > I loved this sequence in the tape-it was fascinating to watch how that > scene was envisioned, then talked over between Rob, Lucy and the crew, > reworked on set, then blocked out for Lucy and the dozen or so crew people > who among other things slid arrows on wires towards Lucy, and then got > filmed in take after take after take. Which of course later get edited > into one flowing sequence. That does illustrate that, whatever the writer originally had in mind, it can get dramatically changed on the set. (On this occasion of course, the director was one of the writers so presumably it stayed close to the original vision, but that often isn't the case). > AND, this is a very cool thing about watching a DVD on fast forward > --rather than a faster "flow" of the scene which you get when you fast > forward a tape, when you fast forward a DVD you actually get to see the > cuts that make up the scene. It's just a different perception--it's > almost like there's a slight stutter so each time the new image comes up, > one is able to notice it as a discrete moment on the film. > > This is very different from the way our eyes accept the "persistence of > vision", that subconscious filling in of the gaps in filmed motion which > makes movies comprehensible to us by "animating" a series of still > photgraphs. Watching the DVD on fast forward is so neat because you can > see the edit points, very distinctly. This sequence is just a great > lesson in all the steps to a finished product, starting from an idea in > the writer/director's mind to the way it gets changed and shot on set to > the editing booth where the cuts are put together to creat the scene for > our screen. Excellent. Damn. Now I'll *have* to buy a DVD player..... > You know, Saturday night we had dinner with a friend of one of my buds. > And during dinner, she suddenly declared that Lucy had just had too much > input into the show. "I mean, being the executive producer's wife, ya > know? It was unavoidable that she would have too much input. It just > wasn't right." (snip) > But boy, watching this snippet of her working out this scene, I sure think > her input was very valuable, worthwhile and damn sure made the show > better, even though she WAS the executive producer's partner. It shows > just how hard she works and just how important doing the best job she can > is to her. They didn't take a lot of short cuts on that show. Well, I believe, ROC used to have quite a lot of input too. As I recall, she used to keep track of continuity more than Lucy did. But both of them I think were conscious of keeping their characters 'in character'. And much credit to them both for their input. Nice con report, KT, and even your digressions are thought-provoking. Thanks! Thelonius ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 09:55:35 EDT From: Richan@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] OT: Arch News: the chemistry of mummies In a message dated 4/24/2002 11:48:45 AM Pacific Daylight Time, mcornwell@hotmail.com writes: > << Given that beeswax was a primary material used in mummification, Buckley > says, the real origin of "mummy" may lie much closer to home: In Egyptian > Coptic, the word for wax is mum. --------------- Corrie >> Here's irony for you. Seems to me that Salmoneus in the Hercules episode MUMMY DEAREST had it right after all. Wax is a great presentation technique but the Egyptions actually beat him to it. And the title of the episode takes on an entirely new meaning. Wax on. Wax off. Waxing poetically--er, scientifically--no wait culturally. Mum's the word, Richan ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 19:06:49 +0100 From: Sojourner Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: <> At 22:29 28/04/2002 -0400, Sekhmet209@aol.com wrote: >[snip] > >i kind of > >liked the "i'm sorry i never read your scrolls" line from but i > >think a better reply would have been "it's just as well, you'd have hated > >them" (said with a brave yet wry smile). > >That would have been _much_ better. > > >xena would, too--have hated them, > >i mean. i love gabrielle, but i certainly hate her writing. that was always > >a burr under my saddlecloth. > >Yeah-- offhand I can't think of a quoted sample that _wasn't_ painful. > >--Sekhmet Not only did her written work suck - but also the times she actually performed as a bard - she sucked. I just LOVE the fanfic which portrays her as some super-bard. That's why it's fantasy.... (recurring theme this week) Sojourner ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 11:39:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Meredith Tarr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: <> Hi, Sojourner responded: > Not only did her written work suck - but also the > times she actually performed as a bard - she sucked. I'm not going to disagree with you about the performance part ... but as for her written work I have to say she wasn't that bad, on a relative basis. As someone who was subjected to having to translate reams upon reams of overflowery prose from the likes of Ovid and Virgil in Latin class (I swear, by the sixth page in I didn't give a damn if Aeneas ever got it on with Dido or not :P), and who read more Greek epics in translation in various other Classics courses than she would care to recall (if I read about one more of Homer's "rosy-fingered dawns" I was going to lose my mind), I gotta say, Gabrielle's skills were about par for the course. And let's not forget good Caesar, Julius Caesar. There's a reason why second-year Latin students are given his drivel about the conquest of Gaul to read. The man was an illiterate. If such a thing had existed in his day, he would have been a top columnist for USA TODAY. Meredith meth@smoe.org ... who really should have gotten more sleep this weekend, though _Xena Live: The Musical_ was more than worth it (more on that to follow when I have time) Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 21:01:42 +0100 From: "Ann Reddecliffe" Subject: RE: [chakram-refugees] <> On Monday 29 April 2002 12:00, Cheryl Ande wrote: > # > # > # > ## > # > # > # > # > > > King of Assassins isn't awful but it ain't good either. The good parts > are: Xena discovering Joxer with Fingers bitten by a chicken, Gabrielle > conking herself on the head with the flying wooden bowl and trying to put > the pinch on the guard (no wonder she was upset when she learned Xena had > taught Akemi the pinch), Gina Torres, and Cleopatra's invite to Xena to > come up see her sometime. Ooooooh yes, Gina Torres. Oooooooh. :)>> I was thinking of the flying wooden bowl - that was funny. It was a completely silly thing to do, but ROC sold it with her reaction to it. What was the woman thinking??! > What's bad: Ted Raimi's Jett, the fact that this became an Autolycus > episode At some points it felt like a HTLJ ep. Somehow the Joxer/ Jett/ Autolycus male bonding stuff is just wrong for this audience and the style of the show. The eps should focus on one or (preferably) both of X & G, but some guests pulled things off better than most. Something like the Callisto - Ares guest interaction in eps like Sacrifice worked much better. >> and finally Gabrielle becoming > incredibly incompetent. This is poor comedy. The best shows worked when the characters were being intelligently themselves and the delivery of good dialogue made it funnier. Warrior, Priestess Tramp definitely fits into that clever comedy role, where the dialogue was the clever part. Acting dumb is just not good comedy. >>I noticed that particularly. RT was quite critical of himself when something - usually visual - didn't turn out quite the way he visualised it. *Very* interesting commentary, though. I'd love to see (hear) them do one for Sin Trade.>> Interestingly, the script for Sin Trade hasn't been released either. Another thing on my want list. Ann ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 16:09:22 -0400 From: "Cheryl Ande" Subject: [chakram-refugees] Xena and her sidekick I've been following the lively discussion about Xena and the various effects of Gabrielle being her sidekick. It is interesting to contemplate what the show would have been without Gabrielle.. If Xena would have been a lone warrior what would have happened? Well first off I think Lucy would have had a physical breakdown somewhere in the first season. You need some one who can help the lead carry the show. As far as I can remember very few action shows were about loners. Paladin was one but it was only a half hour show. Maverick shared leads, Gunsmoke had an ensemble and towards the end became almost an anthology with very prominent guest stars, Bonanza had all those single brothers and Hop Sing (ummmm maybe our first subtext show). It would be hard to come up with a new cast of characters every week for the hero to play off so I don't know if you could have sustained that for 6 years. As for some else being Xena's sidekick, that's hard. So much of film partnerships comes down to chemistry. LL and ROC had that chemistry - I doubt that Ebonie Smith and Lucy would have had it. It's hard to pinpoint what that chemistry is. In the X-Files Mulder and Scully had it and Dogget and his partner don't. It has nothing to do with how good the actors are but if they click. It doesn't have to even be romantic chemistry - Lucy had Ethel - would I Love Lucy still be running if there would have been no Vivian Vance to be that Ethel. I don't think so after all when Lucille Ball came back to TV she brought Viviane Vance with her. She knew the power of chemistry LL and ROC made the relationship much more than just a hero and sidekick. So much so that the relationship itself became a kind character in the show. It was the relationship that drove much of the third season and almost all of the fourth. The complaint that a lot of people had about the 5th season was that the relationship between the character was missing. In fact the 5th season treated Xena and Gabby very much like a traditional hero and sidekick. Xena was off having her life and Gabby was off having her's and the two simply got together to fight off the bad guys. It didn't please a lot of the audience and it didn't please Tapert or Lucy. The 6th season once again concentrated on the relationship putting that foremost and it was a better season for it. Xena was an action show but at it's heart it became a show about a two people and how they changed each other. It is interesting that you have people who saw the show as primarily about Xena - her struggle for redemption. Others saw the show as being about Gabrielle coming of age and learning from Xena. Yet others saw it as a story about a couple - coming together, learning to live together, and then facing the final irony that just as you get it right fate separates you from your partner. In the end Xena became about show about three characters Xena, Gabrielle, and their partnership. CherylA ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 13:07:22 -0700 From: "Kym Masera Taborn" Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] <> From: "Ann Reddecliffe" > > # > > # > > # > > ## > > # > > # > > # > > # > > > > > > King of Assassins isn't awful but it ain't good either. The good parts > > are: Xena discovering Joxer with Fingers bitten by a chicken, Gabrielle > > conking herself on the head with the flying wooden bowl and trying to put > > the pinch on the guard (no wonder she was upset when she learned Xena had > > taught Akemi the pinch), Gina Torres, and Cleopatra's invite to Xena to > > come up see her sometime. > > Ooooooh yes, Gina Torres. Oooooooh. :)>> Isn't it a CRIME that Nebula never got to meet the Warrior Princess? > At some points it felt like a HTLJ ep. Somehow the Joxer/ Jett/ Autolycus > male bonding stuff is just wrong for this audience and the style of the > show. Also, this was the first episode that really explored it's inner low humor. We had wedgie jokes, ogling/leering men jokes, etc. It was like an hour long homage to Porkies... I do remember the first time I watched this show and saying to myself that I had not watched a Xena episode. That was for sure. Kym ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 16:29:36 -0400 From: Cousin Liz Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Xena and her sidekick Cheryl Ande wrote: > It is interesting to contemplate what the > show would have been without Gabrielle.. It's also interesting to contemplate what the show would have been like if TPTB had decided to stay the path of what I found written on a 1995 MCA TV advertiser sales sheet that I have in my collection. The front reads: "Now comes a heroic figure like you've never seen before..." The back reads: "The mythic world's forces of evil have a new enemy who's as brave as she is beautiful - Xena. Once a provacative and militant villianess bent on destruction, Xena is now a heroine on a mission committed to fighting for good and helping mankind. An agile master of combat and weaponry, she is a true warrior. Pursued by the wicked warlord Khan the Great, Xena travels from town to town -- and battle to battle - with her band of self-invited comrades. Her companions include Gabrielle, antiquity's version of a teenage runaway who recklessly follows Xena in search of excitement, and Pan, a ruggedly handsome acrobat of the forest who knows the ways of communicating with nature while remaining forever mute. Together, they work to create a land that is free from tyranny and injustice." Thank the gods they dropped Pan -- though unfortunately I think he turned into Joxer -- and they gave him a voice. - -- Cousin Liz eas01@fast.net Soulmates: http://cousinliz.com Xena Dinosaur Bards http://cousinliz.com/fanfic/fanfic.html ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 17:08:02 -0400 From: Mirrordrum Subject: [chakram-refugees] What *was* that foamy stuff they drank? i've always been bemused by that foamy stuff with the vast head they began drinking in taverns especially in season 6--looked like a rootbeer float. ares and beowulf come particularly to mind. i have found the answer, thanks to explorator. this also links to midas who, although he only appears in xena as a reference does appear, i believe, in HTLJ. Chemistry Used to Unlock Secrets in Archeological Remains Written by Laszlo Dosa High-tech chemistry is unlocking ancient secrets. "Archeological chemistry is taking archeological remains - it could be pottery, metals, also ancient organic remains and applying our chemical techniques that we have available, such as infrared, liquid chromatography, to figure out what was the original material, how it was made, what implications it has culturally," explains Patrick McGovern, one of the leading practitioners of this new field. The senior research scientist with the University of Pennsylvania's Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology has paid many visits to the site where King Midas is believed to have been buried, around 700 B.C. It is near the town called Gordion, right in the center of Turkey, where some three centuries later, Alexander the Great used his sword to cut the "Gordian knot" that was tying down a royal chariot. "The site is very rich archeologically, has been excavated for the last 50 years by the University of Pennsylvania Museum. It has a large palace area with rooms, some of which are thought to have been kitchens for making the food for the palace, with jars of barley and other goods. Also, it has a whole series of tombs in which the burial was done in a special wooden chamber beneath a very large mound. It's almost as if you cut it yesterday and put the structure together. It is the earliest intact human building made of wood in the world. The tomb had the body of the king laid out on a layer of textiles. And then, what is thought to be the largest Iron Age drinking set of 157 bronze vessels, including means to serve the beverage, to drink it," Mr. McGovern said. The funerary feast was held before the burial of the king. After they had finished their meal, the people who wanted to pay respects to Midas gathered all the leftovers, the dishes, and the drinking vessels, and placed them in the tomb chamber, along with the body of the king. Chemical analysis of the residue of the meal determined that it was a hearty lamb or goat and lentil stew, spiced with anise and some pepper substances a meal that Professor McGovern said one might find today in an English pub. except for the drink. "The drink that was used to wash down the stew was a very unusual mixture of wine made from grapes, beer made from barley, and what we call mead, made from honey. We thought if it was good for Midas, it would be interesting for the modern drinker to try. We had to make some assumptions of how it was processed, whether you do each beverage separately and mix them together, or do it in one fermentation, which is what we finally selected. The professional tasters, who have tried it, said it is extremely aromatic and delicious, unlike anything they had before," the professor said. As remarkable as the tomb itself is the fact that the stew and brew residues have survived 27 centuries. Professor McGovern credited the atmosphere within the tomb chamber, which has two separate wooden walls, one of cedar, the other of pine, with stone between them. Covered with a mound of dirt, the chamber was essentially an air-tight vault. "Once the oxygen and water vapor that would nourish micro-organisms had been used up, basically it was left intact for the last 2,700 years. So the organic materials just could not come under attack," he explains. "The drinking vessels were made of bronze, there was no absorption of liquid into that material. Pottery would have had absorption. There was residue left after the liquid had evaporated, a very intense, yellowish residue on the inside of some of the drinking vessels. That's what we sampled." For chemistry Professor Joseph Piatt of Wisconsin's Carroll College, using archeological chemistry to reconstruct King Midas's funerary feast is more than a scientific curiosity. "Specifically, it was interesting with the focus on food and beer, reconstructing what they ate and drank back then. Knowledge of history, of what societies were like, might help us as we move into the future. We don't want to forget what happened in the past, or history will repeat itself," Professor Piatt said. He said the research on King Midas' Tomb demonstrates the power of forensic chemistry to open new windows on ancient cultures and societies and to draw new lessons from the human experience." well, i thought it was just madly fascinating. md--for whom no trivia are too trivial and no arcana to arcane Meg: BELCH! ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ End of chakram-refugees-digest V2 #113 **************************************