From: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org (chakram-refugees-digest) To: chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Subject: chakram-refugees-digest V3 #134 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 Sunday, May 18 2003 Volume 03 : Number 134 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [chakram-refugees] 'There are thousands more like me' [cr > [cr ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 18:27:03 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] 'There are thousands more like me' On Saturday 17 May 2003 05:34, KTL wrote: > Very good points. You know now that I've thought about it, I think we're > attributing false characteristics to the Chakram. What I think is that > only Callisto and Livia had the guts to TRY to snatch and use it as a > weapon. Because actually, anybody who got a hold of it was able to use > it. It didn't hurt anybody who grabbed it. (Not Princess Diana when she > swishes it around that courtyard and not Gabrielle when she used it to cut > up fish.) > > It only hurts people when it's used as a weapon--hell, it even hurt Xena > when Callisto used it against her. Xena even hurt herself with it. She cut > her palm in Valkryrie when she forgot who she was and was handling the > chakram without realizing what it was either. It's not a common weapon and > she didn't know it had a razor's edge. > > Sooooooooo I think that while it is a signature weapon for Xena, it's just > a piece of metal, fashioned by the gods yes, but usable by any who dare. > I think we've been barking up the wrong yonic symbol here guys. > > The only "magic" about it seems to be shown in FIN when the Chakram is the > ONLY thing that Xena can't pick up. She can pick up ghosts and living > people, she can wear clothes, she can pick up and use weapons like the > katana. The ONLY things she can't pick up is the chakram. Sorry, KT, I can't agree with you. The chakram *definitely* has super-normal powers. I'll list just a few of them: 1. Its ability to change its edge sharpness - it bounces off some surfaces and, on other occasions, cuts into them. I could give dozens of examples. 2. Its super-normal 'aim-ability'. There's no way a normal weapon could have been thrown accurately enough to perform the 29 bounces in Been There Done That, for example. 3. As an extension of this, there's its ability to cruise around in 'stand-off' mode until required - most notably when it took out the Furies in Coming Home. 4. There was the way it broke when it hit Xena in Ides, when previously it had survived regular repeated contact with stone and metal. Okay, it *may* have been harbouring a slowly-spreading fatigue crack and just happened to break at that moment quite by chance - but it hardly seems likely. In fact it would have to be already broken right through on side of the 'ring' and cracked through most of the other side - this would have been very obvious to anyone handling it. It would even sound wrong. 5. And what about the joining-the-chakram thing in 'Chakram'? The other chakram certainly had the ability to fry any number of people - except Xena. > And this is obviously symbolic--her job as a warrior is finally over and > she can at last rest in peace. So not only can she leave the chakram > behind, she HAS to--she's not able to carry and use it anymore. > > And the next thing ya know, she's reborn as the Mother of Peace. > > KT Well now, that doesn't contradict the theory that the chaky's 'special'. cr ========================================================= 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: Sat, 17 May 2003 19:12:41 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: chakram-refugees-digest V3 #129 On Saturday 17 May 2003 06:12, KTL wrote: > On Fri, 16 May 2003, cr wrote: > > On Friday 16 May 2003 19:28, KTL wrote: > > > Speaking of nudity, I'm watching movies that MIGHT have offered role > > > models for Lucy for her role as Xena. I dont usually watch movies in > > > the action/adventure genre. So last night I was watching Terminator > > > because people always talk about what a toughie the Linda Hamilton > > > character is. And she sure wasn't REAL tough in Terminator 1. Must be > > > the sequel she runs around in the tank top with the guns in, eh? > > > > Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton) isn't tough in the sense of beating people > > up, like Xena. She's tough in the sense of being resilient, determined > > and resourceful. She isn't a superhero, she's an ordinary person up > > against it (and the Terminator's one purpose is to kill her), who doesn't > > give up. > > > > More like Ripley than like Xena. > > > > cr > > Or like Gabrielle. Actually, Alien is on my list to check out also. BUT I > know I've seen clips of Sarah in a little tank top carring a mongo weapon. > And this wasn't part of Terminator 1. Probably part of T2. You mean you *haven't seen Alien*? [gasp!] Okay, prepare to be very, very frightened. I'm not normally an enthusiast for sci-fi / horror flicks, but Alien is so superbly well done - it's *the* classic of the genre. And (until Xena came along) Ripley was, I think, the number one female movie hero of all time. > This actually has to do with XWP because I'm trying to figure just how > uterine (heh) Xena was for the portrayal of female heroes. Nowadays, we > have lots of tough female heroes--I see the coming attractions for the > Matrix and for X-Men and see women who are absolutely as good as any boy > fighting out there. > > Alternately, I've been able to catch Farscape while Outside too. And what > I see in Farscape are male heroes with a sensitive side. Male heroes for > whom love both sexually and in terms of friendship is as important to them > as it is to any traditional female character. And I also wonder if XWP > had anything to do with this? If the presentation of Xena being the best > warrior in the world but also absolutely loving her partner (which IS a > big part of the male buddy movies, but they usually show the love through > noble acts, the gods forgive they would TALK about it), working to restore > her relationship with her mother, making atonement to those she hurt, etc. > etc. has made it more acceptable to show the softer side of male warriors. > If Xena being a successful warrior with a soft heart makes any warrior > with a soft heart more acceptable. OR if they just figure that people who > show their emotions will also bring in more fans than a straight up > shoot-em-up will. > > Crichten loves Aeryn and MOONS over her for crying out loud. Dargo loves > and misses his son and is betrayed in love and shows that it HURTS! When > one of the main characters dies, everybody shows their grief. (I'm about to go way OT - I crave forgiveness in advance) Well, Farscape is the only show I've bothered to watch since Xena. For many of the same qualities I watched Xena. First, it's often visually gorgeous. Second, like Xena, the characters are very mixed in their qualities and motivations. They're not above double-crossing each other. This is one of the things that makes them very interesting - you can *not* always predict what they'll do. Also, like Xena, there's some delightfully sharp dialogue. In fact, almost every line is a delight to listen to. There's hardly ever a 'hack' or nondescript line of dialogue. And, like Renaissance with XWP, the producers of Farscape were intent on pushing the limits. Xena had an evil past (which was really an innovation as far as movie heroes went). Farscape was not above having its 'heroes' (or anti-heroes?) screw up totally. (In that respect, they're very different from Xena). But primarily, it *is* character-driven, rather than effects-driven, and this was a decision made by the producers at the start. The special effects are beautiful - but without a keen interest to see what happens to the *characters*, the FX would be wasted. Differences? Well, FS is an ensemble show, unlike XWP. I guess one could say that the ostensible hero, (or 'co-hero'?), Crichton, is more like Gabs than Xena - he starts off innocent and bewildered in a universe he knows nothing about, and by Season 3 he's like Season 5 Gabby - a pretty tough guy. Still, in many ways he's an anti-hero, an ordinary guy struggling to survive. Aeryn is more like Xena - starts as a 'Peacekeeper' (think: Storm Troopers) and as the seasons progress she finds she has a 'human' side to her nature. But being an ensemble show, the other characters play a far larger part in the story than any secondary character did in Xena. I would say that their continuity is way better than XWP. Little bits of 'business' that pass almost unnoticed in one episode will suddenly surface with dramatic effect several episodes later. I started watching Farscape because of Claudia Black (aka Karina in Amazon High), then got hooked on Zhaan, then Chiana. Now I'm even rather fond of the arch-villain Scorpius! (And believe me anyone who hasn't seen FS, he does *not*, unlike Ares, have any nice side to his character whatever). > > Picard of course was a sensitive male. But he didn't wear his emotions on > his sleeve like the Farscape boys do. Hmm, I wouldn't say that. It's not so much that they wear their emotions on their sleeves - they often try to hide them, it's just excellent acting that lets us see through the 'front' to what they're feeling underneath. > It's just intriguing to me to try to pinpoint the "XWP Effect" on shows > and movies produced after Xena. I'm sure it will be impossible to ever > absolutely define. > > KT Interestingly, a lot of Farscape fans are also XWP fans. And there are similarities in the on-line fandom - they love to debate the 'logic' of the show. A couple of comments from Ben Browder (Crichton) and Brian Henson (producer) in their audio commentaries to Season 1 come to mind - they were commenting on how they couldn't decide how their 'communicators' should work, whether one should tap them or talk into them - but they figured the on-line fans would work it out for them. And Ben commented how curious it was that nobody questioned the ability of Moya (their ship) to 'starburst', but there was much discussion about how it was biochemically impossible for Rygel to fart helium. Shades of our discussions about the magic chakram and Xenaleaps. cr ========================================================= 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: Sat, 17 May 2003 20:32:02 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] <> On Saturday 17 May 2003 10:17, IfeRae@aol.com wrote: > > Hmm, yes, but without a reasonably well-defined main sequence of events to > start with, what would they have to rearrange? What would they even > have to disagree with? These attempts all implicitly accept that there > exists a 'correct' linear storyline, even though they may have their own > variant version of what that is.>> > > Okay, I'll accept that we have our view of XWP and construct a timeline of > what "really" happened that would support such a view. Yes! That's what I mean. > I thought you were > saying there was some "main storyline" we all agreed on beyond the basics > -- e.g., birth, childhood, terrible teens, etc. Well, I think that 99% of us would agree on maybe 95% of the 'main storyline'. The bits where we would disagree are probably a relatively small minority of episodes. > << Better leave Plato out of it. The arguments would never end. ;) >> > > I doubt he'd be the main reason for that. Very likely! :) cr ========================================================= 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 V3 #134 **************************************