From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V2 #98 Reply-To: loud-fans@smoe.org Sender: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk loud-fans-digest Tuesday, March 12 2002 Volume 02 : Number 098 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [loud-fans] Ashcroft & Thomas make with the oil [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Je] Re: [loud-fans] 24 [Michael Mitton ] Re: [loud-fans] Ashcroft & Thomas make with the oil [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Je] Re: [loud-fans] Ashcroft & Thomas make with the oil [] Re: [loud-fans] 24 ["CJ" ] Re: [loud-fans] Ashcroft & Thomas make with the oil [JRT456@aol.com] [loud-fans] Alias, 24, and other new shows [Richard Gagnon ] Re: [loud-fans] Ashcroft & Thomas make with the oil [] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 21:43:46 -0600 (CST) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Ashcroft & Thomas make with the oil On Mon, 11 Mar 2002 jsharple@bls.brooklaw.edu wrote: > < White? Okay, there was the Missouri Federation of Police Chiefs, the > National Sheriffs Association, and The Missouri Sheriffs Association. That > may not be a complete list, though.>> > > Yes, and two police groups, the Missouri Fraternal Order of Police and the > Missouri Police Chiefs Association, did not oppose White's nomination, > even after Ashcroft intensely lobbied them. So when Ashcroft testified > that Missouri law enforcement was against him, that was *not true*. > Progress! No - you mean the Judean People's Front. Or was it the People's Front of Judea? Splinter! - --Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::Sting, where is thy death?:: __Alan Gray_ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 22:44:05 -0500 (EST) From: Michael Mitton Subject: Re: [loud-fans] 24 On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: > No...but I highly doubt it's simply that there are lots of Macs sitting > around. Things must be paid for - it wouldn't be an accident that Macs > show up. My guess is that (a) Apple's done a great job buying product > placement; (b) Hollywood's more receptive to Macs than Windows machines, > because (b-1) they're more visually interesting and (b-2) there's no such > thing as a Windows machine...it's an OS. Macs are instantly recognizable > as such; Windows machines read simply as "computer" (even if it might be > "cool-looking black computer," say). So there really isn't that much > competition, I guess. In an off-list message, someone noted that you typically see "Windows" machines (that is, non-Mac) when the characters are doing something that's supposed to be dull and uninteresting--like drone work in an office or something. I think this is probably right, and goes a long way to suggest that the prevalence of Macs is due to the fact that they're more visually interesting. > Has there been another TV show that had no title theme? "Frasier" doesn't really have a title theme--maybe just a little flourish, but sometimes not even then. Although, it does have a regular closing theme that plays over the traditional sigh-gag sequence. And finally, I'm sure I'm going to hate it, but I think I'm going to watch "The American Embassy" tonight anyway, just to be sure. This got me wondering whether there has ever before been a network TV show that wasn't war-related that was based in another country. In fact, I think "American Embassy" is even filmed in London, and surely that must be the first time any show has been taped outside the U.S.? - --Michael ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 21:46:09 -0600 (CST) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Ashcroft & Thomas make with the oil On Mon, 11 Mar 2002 jsharple@bls.brooklaw.edu wrote: > But you KNEW that. Why? Because you're a BOT, invented by JEFF, designed > to make conservative Christians look like IDIOTS! But... ...that must be the world's goddam easiest job... Jeff Ceci n'est pas une .sig ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 22:46:34 -0500 (EST) From: Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Ashcroft & Thomas make with the oil As surely as night follows day, when JR is out of comebacks he turns his hurt, frustration and embarrassment into ad hominem attacks: > John Sharples mindlessly perpetuates made-up quotes to make his points > (although he never acknowledges when those quotes are proven wrong). The quote I gave was virtually identical to the one you produced, and certainly did not betray the spirit of Ashcroft approval of that white supremecist magazine. > John Sharples makes broad statements about local elections that he doesn't > actually know anything about (although he never acknowledges when he's proven > wrong). Go to the archives now and find one thing I said wrong about the election. I actually know quite a bit about it. > John Sharples likes to challenge people on their facts...but when the facts > are easily backed up, he decides that those facts don't really matter anyway. Go to the archives and SHOW where I did that, please. Actually, I answered *every single one* of your lately-produced facts. > But here's my favorite part, this being Sharples' response to a mention of > his weird habit of always asking me out at the end of these little > bitchfests... You *really* still don't get that you're the butt of one one of my favorite running jokes on the list, huh? inCREDible... > that being > about five months ago, when Sharples went on this list and actually used the > World Trade Center Massacre as an excuse to ask me to join him for some > drinks. Go to the archives and produce that quote. Can't find it, can you? It's because I actually suggested you join the relief effort instead of exploiting the tragedy to spew petty little political points. It's OK. It's not the first time you've lied to this list. Hell, it's about your fourth in this post, alone... Oh! *Speaking* of inventing quotes, folks, it turns out JR completely fabricated that Michael Moore quote! A lister pointed me to the chached quote, which was "Why did so many Democrats die? Nobody should have died!" which of course is dumb but nothing like "More Republicans should have died" as JR quite erroneously and I think maliciously reported here. I would have mentioned something but I had already unsubbed. Nice work, Taylor. JS ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 22:05:15 -0600 (CST) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] 24 On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Michael Mitton wrote: > And finally, I'm sure I'm going to hate it, but I think I'm going to watch > "The American Embassy" tonight anyway, just to be sure. This got me > wondering whether there has ever before been a network TV show that wasn't > war-related that was based in another country. In fact, I think > "American Embassy" is even filmed in London, and surely that must be the > first time any show has been taped outside the U.S.? Oh hey, that reminds me: I've seen the ads for this (although never with the sound on), and there's one scene where the (main?) character apparently attempts to prevent a gang of British hellions from burning an American flag... My question is this: was that a stunt flag? Perhaps it had only 11 bars, or some weird number of stars...or is it okay to burn a flag if doing so doesn't really mean anything and besides it's intended to make money? Or am I missing it, and the right really is all up in arms about that ad? Some months ago (okay, six), many newspapers printed up full-page color flags that cheapskates who couldn't be arsed to buy their own flag could put up in their windows so the Angel of Anthrax would pass over their doorways (or something). And I'm wondering: if that anti- flag-burning amendment proposed some years back *had* passed, there'd be some interesting philosophical debates about exactly what constituted an American flag. Theoretically, if the newspaper flag counted as a genuine flag, one couldn't toss that page away, recycle it, line one's litterbox with it (note well, Dana: kitty content!), etc. etc. One would have to either treat it in accordance with standard flag etiquette, or perhaps ceremoniously burn it at such point as it became soiled and worn (like, say, if Miles cut out the picture of Rebecca Lieberman on the other side for unclean purposes). And what about flags and flag-like things in ads, etc.? Hell - what about Iron Chef Japanese III's jacket, with the flag-like design on the back? I think we should pass the amendment, just so we can have all kinds of interesting Talmudic disputation on the quintessence of flagness (if a film contains an image of a flag, is it against the law to project the film against the side of a burning building? If the film jams, and burns the flag on the film, may legal action under the flag-burning amendment be pursued, and against whom? The A/V geek running the camera? the film manufacturer? the camera company? And what if it was sabotage? What if a swarthy, demonic, godless Middle Easterner(*) intentionally put little bits of the sand of his evil-axising desert country into the projector, knowing that the flag on the film would burn? (Note: burning images of Bert the Muppet may be illegal as well. Or perhaps strongly encouraged: I'm not sure) (*) Has anyone else ever noticed that Sharples has a sort of Middle Eastern look to him? I think his band's even *played* at the Middle East - I'll bet his real name is "Abdullah ibn Shar'pula" or something... - --Jeff: just a few more months of beard-growing, and I can pretend to be in ZZ Top and pick up chicks! J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::SCENE 2: ::Aunt Fritzi applies lipstick in the mirror. In the next room, Sluggo ::removes his ever-present cap and blows his nose in a red handkerchief. ::Nancy enters the room and accuses Sluggo of stealing the donuts that ::Aunt Fritzi made for her. Sluggo looks at the clock, which reads 8:54, ::and says he'd better hurry or he'll be late for his trombone lesson. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 22:23:57 -0600 From: "CJ" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] 24 From: "Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey" > Has there been another TV show that had no title theme? 60 Minutes ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 23:40:42 EST From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Ashcroft & Thomas make with the oil In a message dated 3/11/02 7:46:51 PM, jsharple@bls.brooklaw.edu writes, of that weird moment when he used the WTC Massacre to invite me to hang out with him: << Go to the archives and produce that quote. Can't find it, can you? It's because I actually suggested you join the relief effort instead of exploiting the tragedy to spew petty little political points. >> It just gets creepier and creepier, doesn't it, folks? It's certainly awkward for me. Still, let's not pretend that John's posts to me are motivated by simple political beliefs...and now he isn't even content to be embarrassed in little ways. Nope, he needs to relive the moment where he had to apologize to the entire List for exploiting tragedy in inviting me to hang out with him. No need to view the creepy original post, but here's the URL for his subsequent apology to the entire List. http://www.escribe.com/music/loudfans/m23011.html At this point, John's pattern was established enough that I (as well as several other Listers) was comfortable in assuming John was using the WTC tragedy as an excuse to hang out with me. Note his necessary assurance of sincerity at the end of his post. And for those who are wondering: Yes, John sent me an off-list post today. In fact, he's sent me two off-list posts. There's usually about four or five more of these before he gives up. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 23:45:23 -0500 From: Richard Gagnon Subject: [loud-fans] Alias, 24, and other new shows >Miles writes: >Speaking of FELICITY creator J.J. Abrams and THE X-FILES, I'm *extremely* >wary about the recent detour that ALIAS' storyline has taken into X-FILES >territory. I know that some of the plots and gizmos certainly stretch >credulity, but IMO until now everything's been squarely within the >parameters of ALIAS' kicky spy vs. spy universe. I'm with you on that one. This plotline is ridiculous. >It's especially galling when every episode is a testimony to >how much milage you can get out of superb veteran character actors like Ron >Rifkin, Carl Lumbly, and the totally kick-ass Victor Garber. It's not as >though the cast needs gratuitous celebrity help. Sheesh. That's also what keeps me around. At least they're compensating for Jennifer Garner's model-type blandness (two expressions available: stunned and miserable). I never warmed to her character (though I still find a mite disturbing how the writers just keep piling up the misery and the anguish on her skinny shoulders). . Guess it's the Starship Troopers casting syndrome: interesting character actors like Michael Ironside to make up for the Denise Richards of the "acting" world. Hoping to see more of Angus Scrimm on Alias, dammit! >Don't get me wrong, it's still my favorite new TV show To my surprise, because a) it didn't grab me at first and b) it's on CBS, my own favorite new show is The Agency, and not just because Shaun Cassidy is one of the producers and writers. Great cast, especially, for my money, David Clennon, Paige Turco, Will Patton an Gil Bellows. I'm fascinated by the show's approach to the inner workings of the CIA: they focus quite a bit on the graphics/artifacts departments, and their having to construct or reconstruct props and facsimiles from often slender information. The characters who inhabit the perfumery and the locksmithing department are fascinating to me, because they're ultra specialists who are allowed to really wallow in their disciplines. Lots of small details, and very snappy writing to go with the quality, understated acting. And it's not at all full of jingoistic flagwaving one would expect from such a show from such a network. I guess it won't last much longer than American Gothic or EZ Streets, the last shows I cared about on CBS... Micheal ponders: >I've wondered about this for quite some time. I've always assumed this >was the result of a product placement deal. But, in advertisements for >the new Imac, Apple was saying that Macs dominate in Hollywood (I guess because Hollywood is graphics-intensive). Really, Macs are the computers virtually all film editing is done on. Hollywood uses Firewire connections, for instance, which is still rare in the PC world. And the design snappiness of the machines doesn't hurt either. And yeah, they still have to pay for the product placement, all the same. Rick, also a 24 aficionado - -- ****** "Zodiac Killer needs that crack" ******* Scott Walker, "Man from Reno" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 23:48:22 -0500 (EST) From: Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Ashcroft & Thomas make with the oil On Mon, 11 Mar 2002 JRT456@aol.com wrote: > Nope, he needs to relive the moment where he had to apologize to > the entire List for exploiting tragedy in inviting me to hang out with him. > No need to view the creepy original post, but here's the URL for his > subsequent apology to the entire List. > > http://www.escribe.com/music/loudfans/m23011.html Well, I looked and looked, and nothing about hanging out for drinks. Aw, shit, you haven't been caught inventing quotes on the list *again* have you? Maybe you should call it a night. You're obviously pretty emotionally wounded about all this, huh? JS ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 00:41:03 EST From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: [loud-fans] Oh, and that actual Michael Moore quote Looks like I'll be sleeping on the plane tomorrow. Fortunately, it never takes much time to correct Sharples again. (Did somebody say something about the world's easiest job?) John gets very excitable when he's posting about me, so a lot of people were probably baffled by this recent outburst from him: <<*Speaking* of inventing quotes, folks, it turns out JR completely fabricated that Michael Moore quote! A lister pointed me to the chached quote, which was "Why did so many Democrats die? Nobody should have died!" which of course is dumb but nothing like "More Republicans should have died" as JR quite erroneously and I think maliciously reported here.>> It's kind of a long story as to what Sharples was imagining here. However, in his rush to invent something new to bitch about, Sharples once again couldn't bother to get his facts straight. Here, as I've always known, is what Moore actually printed on his website: <> There's no reason to bring up this topic again, I guess--although I think my main comment was that Moore was deluding himself about financiers being Democrats (of course, Moore probably deludes himself a lot about finances). Still, Sharples should consider that Moore pulled that comment from his website soon after posting it. He must have realized there was something incriminating about it. Moore probably wishes he *had* written, ""Why did so many Democrats die? Nobody should have died!" Instead, that quote is just some idiot's pipe dream. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 00:28:57 -0600 From: steve Subject: [loud-fans] Miyazaki in SF (NS) Those close enough to SF have the chance to see Hayao Miyazaki's Spirited Away some months before Disney gets the English version finished. > Saturday, April 20, 6:30pm, Castro Theatre > MIYAZAKI Hayao's latest and greatest masterpiece will be shown in the > States as part of the SF Int'l Film Fest. > > Also Sunday, April 21, 11:00am, Castro Theatre > Tickets go on sale to the general public April 2nd > SPIRITED AWAY > (SEN TO CHIHIRO NO KAMIKAKUSHI) > A fabulous ghost-infested adventure full of action, > suspense and a swarm of unusual creatures and compelling > human characters, Spirited Away is the pinnacle of > imaginative animated fantasy by Japanimation master > Hayao Miyazaki. The highest grossing film of all time in > Japan. In Japanese with English subtitles. > Japan (2001) 125m. North American Premiere - - Steve __________ The United States is exploring the development of a 'space-bomber' which could destroy targets on the other side of the world within 30 minutes. - Ed Vulliamy, The Observer ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V2 #98 ******************************