From: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org (chakram-refugees-digest) To: chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Subject: chakram-refugees-digest V5 #35 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 Wednesday, February 9 2005 Volume 05 : Number 035 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [chakram-refugees] The end of Season Four... [IfeRae@aol.com] Re: [chakram-refugees] TONIGHT SHOW response [IfeRae@aol.com] Re: [chakram-refugees] Xena above all the imitators [IfeRae@aol.com] Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: S1 [was: Xena, Herc in Kids' Movies book] [Ife] Re: [chakram-refugees] TONIGHT SHOW response [cr ] Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: S1 [was: Xena, Herc in Kids' Movies book] [cr] Re: [chakram-refugees] Xena above all the imitators [cr ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 02:19:47 EST From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] The end of Season Four... In a message dated 2/6/2005 9:37:54 PM Pacific Standard Time, cr@orcon.net.nz writes: > >Like I said before, TPTB probably said, "We won't worry about what happens > >when Xena actually experiences those moments. That's the fans' job." > >That's why I'm not arguing the scenes were necessarily intended to go > >beyond "build up." I willingly give you that it could be quite accidental > >-- and very personal on my part -- that the scenes contributed more than > >that for me. > > > >-- Ife > > Well, I think you're probably right about TPTB's approach (and bearing in > mind that continuity was not always TPTB's strong point either ;) I can > quite see that it might make it more interesting for you if the other scenes > > were part of an overall plan. For me, personally, The Vision (and I mean > the crucifixion bit) is so arresting and striking that the other scenes > would > only be a distraction or a dilution. We obviously react differently. :) > Yep, part of TPTB's "brilliance" is that we'll probably never know. I did read an excerpt from an interview (Raimi I think) where the Ghost House folks are talking about how much they admired this Japanese director's confidence in the audience -- not feeling the need to show everything. He said something about the more people sitting together watching, the more they would add to what was seen. Certainly that happened with XWP. The discussion lists were like all of us sitting together pointing out different things. I'm glad for that, as the experience was much richer for me hearing how others saw something that was left ambiguous. - -- Ife ========================================================= 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: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 02:19:45 EST From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] TONIGHT SHOW response In a message dated 2/6/2005 9:37:55 PM Pacific Standard Time, cr@orcon.net.nz writes: > Further to lfe's query, although the lake is privately owned, it (like all > bodies of water) will be quite closely controlled by environmental > legislation - that is, the owners wouldn't be able to fill in parts of it > for > example without Regional Council consent, or pollute it etc. > Whew! Thanks! Amazing how possessive I feel about this country I have nothing to do with, except I visited because I fell in love with it on my favorite show. When you wrote that part about the lake on private land, it hit me that the scenery didn't belong to the TV world. LOL! Yeah, I know, quite presumptuous and silly. Still, I feel better now. - -- Ife ========================================================= 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: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 02:19:49 EST From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Xena above all the imitators In a message dated 2/6/2005 9:36:01 PM Pacific Standard Time, cr@orcon.net.nz writes: > On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 18:05, IfeRae@aol.com wrote: > >In a message dated 2/5/2005 12:33:56 AM Pacific Standard Time, > > > >cr@orcon.net.nz writes: > >>But really, what with Xena and Najara arguing, the fight started before > >>Gabs > >>had had time to make a clear-cut decision - it's one people need to watch > >>for themselves, I think. > > > >So ... am I to believe you believe Gabs capable of making a "clear-cut" > >(fill in "sensible") decision even if she had six years? That whatever > >Xena decided wasn't inherently "best," so she didn't need to consult Gabs > >anyway? Riiiight. Nice try, though. Your friend The Camera is quite the > >"spin doctor." > > > >-- Ife > > Leaving all the sarcasm aside..... >> Hey, I'm merely basing that on your many complimentary remarks about Ms. Gabs. Oh, more sarcasm? Sorry, it's just that you caught me off guard with the above argument. > > you could see that Gabs was visibly upset by the suggestion (which Najara > virtually admitted) that she executed people who didn't agree to 'reform'. > > It's highly likely (IMO!) that Gabs would have decided fairly smartly to go > with Xena who was a known quantity - not that I would care if she didn't, > you > know how much I would miss the subtext > > Watch the thing on screen, I can't be bothered arguing it any further. > Well, I wasn't sure what we were arguing about anymore anyway. Certainly not whether Gabs would have the smarts to pick the WP over Najara. - -- Ife ========================================================= 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: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 02:19:50 EST From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: S1 [was: Xena, Herc in Kids' Movies book] In a message dated 2/6/2005 9:21:10 PM Pacific Standard Time, jyoung@lava.net writes: > --Sorry to burst your bubble, Thel, and I may not be a "group", but I do > only have S1 on DVD and probably won't be getting the rest. ;P > > Like Ife said, S1 was the beginning, the seeds of creation, a simpler time > and a clearer vision. I like that. And I like that better than what came > after. > You know, I don't think I'll ever tire of SINS. Okay, I admit, I still want to breeze through the Gabby parts, but as the season progresses, I realize how much I learned about Xena from her little bits of advice, or her looks of "what now?" or watching her watch Gabs with that wry expression. I guess I still feel the freshness, the anticipation of what was to come. Maybe it's mostly nostalgia. I wouldn't say I prefer S1 over others, but I can't imagine having to eliminate it. Goodness! I just realized that if A DAY IN THE LIFE was in S1, and I could only have one season, I might actually pick S1! Must be nostaltia. - -- Ife ========================================================= 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: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 12:56:30 +1300 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] TONIGHT SHOW response On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 20:19, IfeRae@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 2/6/2005 9:37:55 PM Pacific Standard Time, > cr@orcon.net.nz > > writes: > > Further to lfe's query, although the lake is privately owned, it (like > > all bodies of water) will be quite closely controlled by environmental > > legislation - that is, the owners wouldn't be able to fill in parts of it > > for > > example without Regional Council consent, or pollute it etc. > > Whew! Thanks! Amazing how possessive I feel about this country I have > nothing to do with, except I visited because I fell in love with it on my > favorite show. When you wrote that part about the lake on private land, it > hit me that the scenery didn't belong to the TV world. LOL! Yeah, I know, > quite presumptuous and silly. Still, I feel better now. > > -- Ife I know exactly how you feel, it seems that somehow a location should be "ours" (the fans') property because we've seen so much of it. In fact, the Renpics sets at Sturges Road are long since gone and the land may be swamped in a tide of subdivision - and Lion Park may be not far behind. And the huge studios at 550 Rosebank Road are now used for something completely different (I forget just what). So, ironically enough, the part of XWP 'scenery' that survives longest in recognisable form may well be the 'outside' locations. 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: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 13:05:10 +1300 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: S1 [was: Xena, Herc in Kids' Movies book] On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 20:19, IfeRae@aol.com wrote: (big snips to pacify the listmistress :) > I wouldn't say I prefer S1 over > others, but I can't imagine having to eliminate it. Goodness! I just > realized that if A DAY IN THE LIFE was in S1, and I could only have one > season, I might actually pick S1! Must be nostaltia. > > -- Ife Just as well for my argument that ADITL's in S2, then, isn't it? 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: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 13:02:05 +1300 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Xena above all the imitators On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 20:19, IfeRae@aol.com wrote: > > > > Leaving all the sarcasm aside..... >> > > Hey, I'm merely basing that on your many complimentary remarks about Ms. > Gabs. Oh, more sarcasm? Sorry, it's just that you caught me off guard > with the above argument. That's the advantage of my reputation - when I say something that does give Gabs credit, nobody will believe me (snips) > Well, I wasn't sure what we were arguing about anymore anyway. Certainly > not whether Gabs would have the smarts to pick the WP over Najara. > > -- Ife No, we weren't. But since you've raised the point - I think she'd pick Xena. Both from force of habit and because Xena was, as I said, a known quantity - and Najara all of a sudden was starting to look distinctly risky. But I'll concede straight off that which way Gabs would jump is entirely a matter of conjecture. ;) 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 V5 #35 *************************************