From: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org (chakram-refugees-digest) To: chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Subject: chakram-refugees-digest V3 #315 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 Tuesday, October 21 2003 Volume 03 : Number 315 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [chakram-refugees] OS: Tarzan [was: OS: Charmed and Tarzan] ["mirrord] Re: [chakram-refugees] OS: Tarzan [was: OS: Charmed and Tarzan] [Lee Dale] Re: [chakram-refugees] WEEK 3 Tarzan [cjlnh@webtv.net (Cheryl LaScola)] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 01:03:47 -0400 From: "mirrordrum" Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] OS: Tarzan [was: OS: Charmed and Tarzan] the x-character was also created by chris for lucy, iirc--or at least he knows her and wanted her to work on x-files. also, x-files, however horrid it was in the last 2 seasons was still light years ahead of tarzan which, as far as i can tell, has only lucy and the other young woman going for it. period. i can't get through an ep b/c i'm watching lucy, who i know is capable, trying to work something that so far isn't workable. the show has practically nothing interesting about it except lucy and the female co-star. what's someone supposed to do with 5 minutes of screen time in a totally unmemorable show with horrid dialogue, non-existent character development, and a lead who lopes, hunches and rages? i just can't watch it. my partner and i tried again tonight and my one moment of pleasure in the part i got through (aside from lucy's cool cossies) was that for once, somebody else had to do the wet shoot. hah! ;) bless the woman, you can't go very far with nothing to go on, no screen time, no dark side and no apparent direction. if they dropped the guys and focused on lucy and the other woman, moved to en zed, got some new writers, some kiwi actors, an actual plot, and some point to the thing, we might have a show here. lucy could play the part of a businesswoman with, let's see, perhaps a dark past. she's done Bad Things to get where she is. i realize this is, among other things, richard gere's role in "pretty woman." but the young cop could help her realize her fantastic potential for doing good with this tremendous news empire. she could go rogue, refuse to buy the party line (pick your party), thumb her nose at clear channel, tell richard (is that his name?) to go sit on a stick, send tarzie back to the jung-jung, and GET ON WITH IT. there's something about this idea that sounds vaguely familiar. of course, i'm not very good at this sort of thing. i'm just dreaming. but watching lucy do schlock hurts. i ain't watchin' no more. this isn't cause i disrespect lucy but because i think, i hope, she's just marking time. i'd rather see her doing shakespeare by the sea. *sigh* and i do agree, Ife. she's doing the best she can with what she's got. it's what she's got that's a killer. it feels like watching a lioness in a very confining cage. i hope she's cool with it and using it to get a feeling for the different conditions (no camera smack in her face), different kind of role and so forth. maybe it will serve the same kind of function that shakespeare did for ren. . .getting her back in the swim, and in a very different swim from the family atmosphere and intense labour of love that was xena. i certainly wish her the best, bless her. md ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 11:51 PM Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] OS: Tarzan [was: OS: Charmed and Tarzan] > In a message dated 10/18/2003 4:41:15 AM Central Daylight Time, > jyoung@lava.net writes: > > > > > On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:36:01 EDT, IfeRae@aol.com wrote: > > > But she started XWP very restrained, very dour. (Same with the X-Files > > >character.) > > > > --Stoic is one thing. Lifeless is another. ;P > > > > And I was deliberately _not_ bringing up the X-F character because I > > wanted to review Tarzan on its own terms. But since you mentioned > > it.....;) I was more riveted by the X-F character than I was by Kathleen > > Clayton. The X-F person had more mystery, more spunk, more in-your-face > > danger than Kathleen will ever have. >> > > The X-F character was a bionic killer, created to be dangerous. Lucy played > her "down" as well, but we got to see how coldly ruthless she could be through > her actions. She didn't have to scream it. > > > >I think Lucy'll show more "spark" as she becomes more comfortable with > > >the character, though I still doubt it'll captivate us in the same way as > > >with Xena. > > > > --Well, I hope so, because her character is supposed to be the > > counterpoint to Richard. Without it, the story will have even less depth > > than it does now. ;P >> > > > I believe she's trying to give it "depth" by not being a carbon copy of > Richard. By its nature, depth requires more time to notice. Part of our > nervousness may be in believing Lucy may not have that much time to develop that depth. ========================================================= 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, 20 Oct 2003 22:22:11 -0400 From: Lee Daley Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] OS: Tarzan [was: OS: Charmed and Tarzan] At 01:03 AM 10/20/2003 -0400, md wrote in part: > >what's someone supposed to do with 5 minutes of screen time in a totally >unmemorable show with horrid dialogue, non-existent character development, >and a lead who lopes, hunches and rages? What an apt description! >i just can't watch it. my partner and i tried again tonight and my one >moment of pleasure in the part i got through (aside from lucy's cool >cossies) was that for once, somebody else had to do the wet shoot. hah! ;) > >bless the woman, you can't go very far with nothing to go on, no screen >time, no dark side and no apparent direction. >and i do agree, Ife. she's doing the best she can with what she's got. it's >what she's got that's a killer. I have to agree in part with this estimation. But I was struck with a feeling that this was two dissimilar episodes inexpertly glued together. You gave up right at the end of the first "episode". I reacted to the first half with "What in Hades is this, "Tarzan, The Music Video?". The second half seemed to have a different direction and filming technique, and less music. It also actually had a small glimmer of hope. I'll be giving this puppy a few more episodes before I write it off (which I was willing to do after the second episode). LeeD ========================================================= 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, 20 Oct 2003 22:45:01 -0400 (EDT) From: cjlnh@webtv.net (Cheryl LaScola) Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] WEEK 3 Tarzan Seeing recent posts by lfe and md, I couldn't agree more that it is painful to watch Lucy, "the real caged lioness", try to make something out of her character and this series. That said, I tend to be an eternal optimist and I am hoping STILL that by the time they signed LL, a number of eps had been filmed already.....leading to the assumption that Lucy's part is being added to the early episodes, after the fact, thus making for a very choppy plot line. The other part that makes it difficult is Travis' elementary dialogue. He speaks rarely and somehow that makes the flow even harder to take. I am in for a few more eps, mostly because after all the refusals, I gotta believe Lucy saw something in this part... she certainly doesn't need the money. Hopeful.... CJ ========================================================= 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 #315 **************************************