From: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org (chakram-refugees-digest) To: chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Subject: chakram-refugees-digest V5 #174 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 Saturday, July 9 2005 Volume 05 : Number 174 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [chakram-refugees] Mouth To Mouth on XWP [IfeRae@aol.com] Re: [chakram-refugees] Mouth To Mouth on XWP [IfeRae@aol.com] Re: LM: [chakram-refugees] LL Casting News!! ["Jackie M. Young" ] Re: [chakram-refugees] OT: Surnames [was: OT - More On Liz Friedman] [cr ] [chakram-refugees] Destiny [cr ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 01:36:28 EDT From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Mouth To Mouth on XWP In a message dated 7/7/2005 1:33:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time, cr@orcon.net.nz writes: > Gabs dream worked okay for me, but didn't for you. The dagger > >works for you but is stupid to me. I chalk it up to personal taste and > >leave it at that. Okay? > > > >-- Ife > > Well, no. I'll concede that our differences over Fishsticks are influenced > > by our personal taste. > > But I can't accept the implication that, because we tolerate a certain > degree > of departure from literal reality, then 'anything goes'. That way madness > lies. >> LOL! So you're saying I've gone off the deep end? Assuming, of course, that you'd be the one to determine that. A series like Xena builds up its own unwritten rules of logic. >> Much of which is imposed by the viewer. Otherwise we wouldn't have heated debates about what behavior/feeling is "logical" for Xena and what is "uncharacteristic." For me, the beauty of XWP was how so many thoughtful people could have such wide ranging views about the "unwritten rules." Oh, remember that long discussion about the chakram -- whether it had a "life" or "mind" or "spirit"? And, if so, was it connected to or independent of Xena? Each of us cited "evidence" to support our "logical" conclusions -- which was skewed suspiciously toward our values, beliefs, experiences, and interests. - -- 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: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 01:36:21 EDT From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Mouth To Mouth on XWP In a message dated 7/7/2005 8:56:30 AM Pacific Daylight Time, mab961@satx.rr.com writes: > OK, since things are pretty slow, I'll jump on in... >> About time. Ife sayeth to cr: > >only that it was more tolerable to me as representative of XWP than the > more > >superficially "obvious" Lifeblood. > > > > > > > OK, I'll admit it... I'm on of those * 10 * people who actually liked > the ep! >> About time! I'm usually hanging out there by myself on this one. > > I found the kids more tolerable than the characters Aphrodite and > Discord played. >. Same here. Nothing like being hit over the head with a catty women. > >Ever heard children referred to as "little monsters?" Like I said above, > >this was Gabs' nightmare (so to speak), so I wasn't surprised that the kids > > >resembled her fears. > > > > > > Ohhhhh..... since it was Gab's nightmare, is that why Joxer was in it? >> > LOL! I hadn't thought of that, but probably. > I thought it was great how she straighted both the kids *and* Joxer's > character out. >. Ditto. > >worked okay for me, but didn't for you. The dagger works for you but is > stupid > >to me. I chalk it up to personal taste and leave it at that. Okay? > > > > > > The term, "...your mileage may vary.", comes to mind here. >> Exactly. Cr? You listening? - -- 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: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 20:32:59 -1000 (HST) From: "Jackie M. Young" Subject: Re: LM: [chakram-refugees] LL Casting News!! I've just been catching up on *600+* e-mails from this past semester, and happened to see this: On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 10:23:53 -0500, "S. Wilson" wrote: >I think she's only going to be on an ep or two, so there may not be that >much to talk about anyhoo. I mean... I guess if she jogs up or down a >flight of stairs, or has her hair a certain way, we could analyze that to >tiny little bits and pieces for a couple of months. :P *ducking* - --*Excuse me*?!? You talkin' to *ME*?? You talkin' to **ME**?!? LOL *heehee!* The way a character runs up or down a flight of stairs is *very* important to the way their character is portrayed. ;P LOL And the way they dress, and the way they pronounce their words and the way they use their hands....;P Which is why we have professional costumers, professional dialect coaches, professional movement coaches, etc. Please note in XT's review of GPB, she mentioned "Lucy moments" and "Dorothy moments", which to me, meant LL might've "broken character" in some way (probably not to XT, but to me, anyway, since I've felt that in many ways when LL would play Meg). But I guess if LL "walks funny" on BattlestarG, we'll be the first to talk about it.....;=) - --Jackie ****************************************************** * Proud to have the same birthday as Lucy Lawless! * * * * 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: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 20:41:16 -1000 (HST) From: "Jackie M. Young" Subject: [chakram-refugees] OT: Surnames [was: OT - More On Liz Friedman] On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:16:00 +1200, cr wrote: >Ummm... that'd be a bit unusual. Generally people who acquire >double-barreled names are women who don't want to lose their identity in >their husband's surname. (The other way is just to keep their original >surname regardless of the marriage). It would be a most unusual thing >for a man to change his name on marriage. Not saying it's bad, just >I've never heard of it before. I suppose both he and his wife could >have the same surname then. - --Actually, I've seen it all the ways possible. But I believe it's becoming more common to hyphenate last names. I used to work with a guy who had the last name Harada-Stone, to incorporate his wife's name with his. In this case, they both took the same last name, you're correct. I currently work with a lady who has the last name Kojima-Itagaki for the reason you mention, but I'm not sure if her hubby does the same thing. And I also work with a lady who retained her maiden name for professional reasons. So, "different strokes for different folks". ;P - --Jackie ****************************************************** * Proud to have the same birthday as Lucy Lawless! * * * * 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: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 08:51:06 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Mouth To Mouth on XWP On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 17:36, IfeRae@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 7/7/2005 1:33:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > cr@orcon.net.nz > > writes: > > Gabs dream worked okay for me, but didn't for you. The dagger > > > > >works for you but is stupid to me. I chalk it up to personal taste and > > >leave it at that. Okay? > > > > > >-- Ife > > > > Well, no. I'll concede that our differences over Fishsticks are > > influenced > > by our personal taste. > > > > But I can't accept the implication that, because we tolerate a certain > > degree > > of departure from literal reality, then 'anything goes'. That way > > madness lies. >> > > LOL! So you're saying I've gone off the deep end? Assuming, of course, > that you'd be the one to determine that. > > > A series like Xena builds up its own unwritten rules of logic. >> > > Much of which is imposed by the viewer. Otherwise we wouldn't have heated > debates about what behavior/feeling is "logical" for Xena and what is > "uncharacteristic." For me, the beauty of XWP was how so many thoughtful > people could have such wide ranging views about the "unwritten rules." Oh, > remember that long discussion about the chakram -- whether it had a "life" > or "mind" or "spirit"? And, if so, was it connected to or independent of > Xena? Each of us cited "evidence" to support our "logical" conclusions -- > which was skewed suspiciously toward our values, beliefs, experiences, and > interests. > > -- Ife I'd say the rules of logic are _not_ 'imposed' by the viewer, so much as _deduced_ by the viewer from the evidence in the episodes. To take the chacky, for example, since you mentioned it - these deduced rules meant that we (the viewers) knew what the chacky was useful for and what it could do. Admittedly, its abilities gradually increased throughout the series, but at no time did it suddenly start doing something completely untypical. We knew, for example, that only Xena could catch the chacky. That was why, when Callisto caught it, it was a shock. TPTB _depended_ on our knowledge of the chacky's properties to get that element of surprise. The chacky's quite a good example simply because it is only seen in XWP so its operating rules are unique to the series. *How* the chacky did it was indeed debatable, but *what* it did was fairly consistent. To take another example, the powers of gods (Greek sub-species). They're immortal, they can appear and disappear at will, they can also (and this is an interesting property) make themselves visible to one person but not another. We got used to this so it didn't need to be spelled out to us. But they weren't prescient (couldn't predict the future, at least not with accuracy), and time travel was apparently difficult for them. I'm sure there is a host of such unwritten rules, which just pass by us unnoticed because we're so used to them - but we'd notice if they were broken. 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, 9 Jul 2005 09:08:39 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] OT: Surnames [was: OT - More On Liz Friedman] On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 18:41, Jackie M. Young wrote: (re double-barreled names) > --Actually, I've seen it all the ways possible. But I believe it's > becoming more common to hyphenate last names. > > I used to work with a guy who had the last name Harada-Stone, to > incorporate his wife's name with his. In this case, they both took the > same last name, you're correct. The only problem arises when their kid, Freddy Harada-Stone, marries Jill Bywater-Smith - what do they do with their last names? But I guess one could say, that's a problem that can be worried about if and when it crops up. > I currently work with a lady who has the last name Kojima-Itagaki for the > reason you mention, but I'm not sure if her hubby does the same thing. > > And I also work with a lady who retained her maiden name for professional > reasons. > > So, "different strokes for different folks". ;P > > --Jackie And of course there was the opposite case, Tina Turner, who had to fight a legal battle to keep her *married* name when she divorced from Ike - again, for professional reasons. 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: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 01:57:47 +1200 From: cr Subject: [chakram-refugees] Destiny Just watching 'Destiny' again. (HOW did this ever get left off the 'Best of' DVD?) And listening to RT's interesting commentary. He mentions the sand spread on the ground to hide the mats for the stunties to fall on - now I think of it, there was a lot of sand around in XWP, which isn't the normal ground surface in the New Zealand countryside (except at Bethells Beach...) M'Lila is absolutely gorgeous. I'm in love.... And the way she deals with those Roman guards when rescuing Xena.... the girl's a one-woman commando squad. If only she hadn't been murdered by Caesar's thugs..... I think my hatred of Caesar and Romans originates from this, never mind that he crucified Xena, HE KILLED M'LILA! That is unforgivable. M'Lila was (other than Callisto) the first female fighter in the series who could match Xena's abilities. Though a slave, she was the equal of Xena, in ability and courage - she could look Xena in the eye as an equal. I loved that. (Actually, she was smarter than Xena. She knew Caesar was up to no good, which is why she disappeared. Full marks to Xena, though, for realising this when Caesar asked where she was, and covering for her.) M'Lila teaching Xena the pinch - top marks to both actresses. M'Lila tantalising Xena with whether she'll take the pinch off again - and then Xena doing the same back to M'Lila - a nice bit of character acting by both. A YAXI in the sailing interlude - the boat (actually a model) has a ram bow - except in one shot where we can see a normal back-curving bow. Another small one - the beach at Bethells where they crucify Xena - there are wheel tracks all over it. But it appears as if that line of crosses is actually all genuine - I'd assumed most of them were CGI'd in, but now I think they really were all 'practical'. Top marks to TPTB for that. A glorious irony - Caesar got his funds for his first successful campaign, from the plunder he took off Xena. So, while Caesar created EvilXena, Xena created Caesar. Gotta love the irony. Nathaniel Lees (Nicklio) looks a warm and sympathetic person - such a contrast to the aggressive villains he usually plays. The fight in the hut - brilliant backflip by M'Lila the instant the Romans burst in - that girl really is as good as Xena. (Just think - if that Roman had been a bit quicker with his crossbow, it would have been Xena who died in that hut and we would be watching 'M'Lila, Warrior Princess'. No disrespect to Xena, but I could watch that :) 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 #174 **************************************