FLM films - My Webpage

2003-01-28 19:42:02+00:00 - Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (Shanna <shannamarie@earthlink.net>)


Spoilers for "Long Day's Journey" This Wednesday thing is really messing with my schedule, so apologies on the lateness of this (if anyone's reading it, anyway). I rewatched the episode yesterday, and I still don't have a lot to say. I don't know if that's because my focus has been elsewhere lately (being in the finishing stages of a book does that to me) or if I'm still so much in the "can't wait to see what happens next" mode that I don't give a lot of thought to what has happened. We're still pretty plot-light at the moment, though that's about to change. The plot of this episode could be summed up easily: Angel and company try to stop the Beast from blotting out the sun by protecting the Ra-Tet totems from him. It's the "how" that's more important than the "what" in an episode like this, and the "how" was often amusing. I'm still not crazy about that absolute focus on all the interpersonal relationships along the way. I think the various worries and snits over the Angel/Cordelia/Connor triangle (with a side order of Gwen) got more screen time than the actual blotting out the sun plot. We do now have a big bad with some potentially seriously scary consequences, but I'm not sure how I feel about that. With the rain of fire and the sun being blotted out, we're now seriously in the realm of fantasy. I always thought the Buffyverse worked best with the pretense that this was all taking place in our world, that all these things were going on and nobody knew or noticed. They often had great fun with giving something ordinary a supernatural explanation or with the lengths that people went to in order to give something supernatural an ordinary explanation. Part of the fun and the scare was the idea that the world kept coming to the brink of ending, and nobody knew. But with the chaos and disaster that are going on in LA, they've moved firmly into alternate universe territory. If things of that scale were going on, we'd notice, even if we didn't give it a supernatural explanation. They've been moving the supernatural more and more out of the closet on Angel (such as the tentacles appearing from a portal in the middle of a scientific conference), to the point it's starting to feel more like a superhero universe where people don't think it's at all strange that a guy wearing brightly colored tights would have a showdown in public with a guy wearing an equally outlandish costume. They seem to be throwing red herrings at us left and right, and I'm not convinced we've seen the final one. First, it was set up for us to believe Connor was the main connection, then we got the switch and found it was Angel/Angelus. I suspect there will be yet another twist. I'm going with Cordelia. After all, the place the Beast came to when he needed to do his ritual was also Cordy's home, and Cordy has also had multiple encounters with the Beast with no real harm done. She was very quick to jump to the Angelus explanation. Besides, she's just plain evil lately. Characters Angel -- I'm still liking him, and he's never been my favorite character. But his snarkiness with Cordy was refreshing and I think he has great chemistry with Gwen (notice how I avoided using the "sparks" cliche. I think I'm growing as a person). I'm intrigued to see how he deals with this Angelus issue. Cordelia -- They seem to be working overtime to destroy this character. I notice that our most rabid Cordy-defenders have been conspicuously absent lately. Either they've developed lives or they're cowering before their altars in deep denial. We did have some Classic Cordy moments, but her behavior toward Angel was incredibly inconsistent. It's like she's deliberately trying to drive him crazy. She does the one thing she has to know would hurt him the most, then tells him to get over it, then says the last thing she wanted to do was hurt him, then gets bitched off about the idea that he kissed someone else during a time when neither of them had expressed their feelings toward each other and she wasn't even on the planet at the time (because she'd chosen to become a higher being rather than be with him). Her lack of any kind of interaction with Wesley is getting to be creepy. Up until this episode you could take that as just not having screen time to deal with it and an encounter between them not really fitting into the story. But here we got that rather obvious moment where she pointedly looks at him in the hotel lobby, says nothing to him, then runs off to look for Angel. It's getting to be on the weird side that she hasn't spoken to him at all, and she doesn't even really respond directly to anything he says, other than to treat it as a general comment that could have come from anyone. Now, we know she tends to give the silent treatment when she's pissed off, but she usually makes it pretty clear that she's giving the silent treatment and throws in a few pointed barbs along the way. Her silent treatment is very seldom actually silent. All very strange. Wesley -- He's sort of back in the group, but not really. They seem to be going to great lengths to show him always distant, off on his own in a corner, or as in the final scene, still standing above the others. I suspect he's being set up for yet another fall because you know his Angelus plan is going to go horribly wrong, but at least this time he's told the group and seems to have their buy-in. They won't be able to blame him entirely. I guess it's time to start thinking about a pool to choose Wesley's annual February sweeps life-threatening injury. We've had shooting and a slit throat. What puts him in the ICU this year (or will it wait for later in the season?)? Gunn -- Seriously, dude, get over it. If she wants to be with you, she'll be with you. If she wants to be with someone else, she has every right to make that choice and the only thing you can do is make every effort to show her you're the better choice. And I don't mean by cutting the competition down, because that certainly doesn't make you look better. Fred -- She's still just there, serving as an object for romantic rivalry. She needs a real storyline that doesn't involve the big dilemma of which guy she loves, stat. Connor -- I'm liking him more and more, especially when he's not with Cordelia. That probably means he's marked for death. Lorne -- He got to say what we've all been thinking when it comes to Angel, with his little dig on it being all about him. Also a classic line about evil and lame (there should be an accent in that word or it just looks lame, but those characters don't often translate well to Usenet). Otherwise, he remains scenery, for the most part. Coast Guard Report (Watching the 'Ships) I just don't have the energy for this right now. It's the same old thing it's been for a while. Cordy says she loves Angel, but sleeps with Connor, who does love her (or thinks he does), while Angel loves Cordy but is now hurt and depressed because she slept with Connor. And now there's Gwen, and Cordy is pissed that he kissed Gwen. I guess it's okay for her to sleep with someone else, but he's supposed to be a monk. Whatever. Then there's Gunn loves Fred but fears she really loves Wesley who seems to be making an intellectual connection with Fred (or maybe just pulling Gunn's chain because we all know about Lilah, who is way sexier than the Texas Twig). ARRRRGGGHHHHHH!!!! Sorry. I feel better now. Random comments I wonder how deliberately Angel's funny "rally the troops" speech that's immediately shot down by the troops was meant as a joke on all of Buffy's recent speechifying. There were so many elements in his speech that were straight out of some of Buffy's speeches, and those were the elements that were shot down. Was there actually a big fight between Connor and the Beast? I've seen it referenced, but all I saw after the commercial break was Connor hitting the pavement. I didn't even see the fall before he hit the ground. I suspect my local affiliate threw in an extra commercial, and it was a lame home-movie looking commercial so I wonder if it was a station employee just sneaking it in. With Manny, they continue the tradition of giving us mystical beings who aren't quite what you'd expect. There are interesting implications to W&H being cut off from their higher powers. Will they still be around as an annoyance? Does Lilah have to find a new job? What about Charlie? Gee, new episode tomorrow, unless you live in Canada and get it tonight. But it's cold up there, so I guess I'll wait. Shanna

2003-01-28 20:26:11+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (Terry McNeal <tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com>)


On Tue, 28 Jan 2003 19:42:02 GMT, Shanna <shannamarie@earthlink.net> wrote: :I notice that our most rabid Cordy-defenders have been conspicuously absent :lately. Either they've developed lives or they're cowering before their :altars in deep denial. Like Stephen said, we're all waiting until Cordelia gets back from "up there". Meanwhile, Charisma Carpenter is doing a great job playing Cordy's evil doppleganger. Shame the story surrounding it is so ... what's the word I'm looking for? (No, really, what is it, 'cause absurd isn't quite enough.) Terry

2003-01-28 21:53:22+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (sweick@aol.com)


Terry McNeal tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com wrote: > >On Tue, 28 Jan 2003 19:42:02 GMT, Shanna <shannamarie@earthlink.net> >wrote: > >:I notice that our most rabid Cordy-defenders have been conspicuously absent >:lately. Either they've developed lives or they're cowering before their >:altars in deep denial. > >Like Stephen said, we're all waiting until Cordelia gets back from "up >there". Meanwhile, Charisma Carpenter is doing a great job playing >Cordy's evil doppleganger. Yeah, it's a shame that we don't get much Cordy, but hey, we still get to watch Charisma do her thing. BTW, I can accept PossessedCordy as well as PodCordy for her actions. Hell, I'm still accepting of "the demon made her do it", just as long as they bring back our Cordy to us. Shame the story surrounding it is so ... >what's the word I'm looking for? Crap seems to cover it. :-) (No, really, what is it, 'cause >absurd isn't quite enough.) It's like someone trying too hard to be clever. (See some of my worst postings as examples.) Stephen Weick | Founder DOMFDD. Ohio State University, most wins in a season, Big 10 title, and National Champions. Amazing, a team I followed actually won!

2003-01-28 22:47:25+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (Shanna <shannamarie@earthlink.net>)


On 1/28/03 3:53 PM, in article 20030128165322.11691.00000008@mb-fl.aol.com, "SWeick" <sweick@aol.com> wrote: > BTW, I can accept PossessedCordy as well as PodCordy for > her actions. Hell, I'm still accepting of "the demon made her do > it", just as long as they bring back our Cordy to us. I actually agree with you. I don't think that's really Cordy. But then, I've been saying that ever since after the post "Couplet" vacation. Shanna

2003-01-30 12:42:09-05:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net>)


In article <rgii3v4untd7r2eqad7dedmb8odma8vpbj@4ax.com>, Terry McNeal <tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com> wrote: > On 30 Jan 2003 04:10:58 GMT, sweick@aol.com (SWeick) wrote: > > :In article <28je3vkfqpeo4u5qe5i6ahp4jmobc2u8kk@4ax.com>, Terry McNeal > :<tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com> writes: > : > :>Gettin' spoilery for the future here. > :> > :>. > :>. > :>. > :>. > :>. > :>. > :>. > :>. > :>. > :>. > :>. > :>. > :> > > :But I guess no price is too much to get to do some real evil > :acting. The villains always have the best parts. > > Yep. Two steps ahead of everyone else. Even if they shouldn't be. > "What is it about being evil that ramps up the IQ points?" indeed. Except everything we've seen to date seems to indicate that becoming evil makes them all dumber. -- Don Sample, dsample@synapse.net Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/ Quando omni flunkus moritati

2003-01-30 13:22:39-08:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (wallyrosenberg@hotmail.com)


Shanna <shannamarie@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<BA5C3B86.152EF%shannamarie@earthlink.net>... > I rewatched the episode yesterday, and I still don't have a lot to say. [40,000 words snipped...]

2003-01-30 14:57:59-05:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net>)


In article <20030130135227.10015.00000917@mb-md.aol.com>, ANIM8Rfsk <anim8rfsk@aol.comNOSPAM> wrote: > << From: Don Sample dsample@synapse.net >> > > > << Except everything we've seen to date seems to indicate that becoming > evil makes them all dumber. >> > > Hmm. Do think that's true of Spike, Dru, and Angel? Never really saw enough of them before they became vamps to gauge their intelligence, but going by how dumb the average vamp is, I've always figured that getting turned shaved at least 10 points off their IQs. (Or maybe it's mostly just the dumb ones who get turned.) -- Don Sample, dsample@synapse.net Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/ Quando omni flunkus moritati

2003-01-30 16:02:14+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (Terry McNeal <tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com>)


On 30 Jan 2003 04:10:58 GMT, sweick@aol.com (SWeick) wrote: :In article <28je3vkfqpeo4u5qe5i6ahp4jmobc2u8kk@4ax.com>, Terry McNeal :<tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com> writes: : :>Gettin' spoilery for the future here. :> :>. :>. :>. :>. :>. :>. :>. :>. :>. :>. :>. :>. :> :>:Yeah, it's a shame that we don't get much Cordy, but hey, we still :>:get to watch Charisma do her thing. :> :>And she is doing it well. EvilCordy almost has RealCordelia down pat. : :Yeah, and think of the sacrifices Charisma has to do for :her art. Not just the sex scene with Vincente, but having :to have one with DB too? (And if she has one with the Beast, :I'll know they had it in for Charisma this season. :-) Eh, it's just some spit-swapping from what I hear. It does make me wonder if getting to make out with Charisma is a contractual perk though. And Kartheiser has to be thinking this is the best job ever. :But I guess no price is too much to get to do some real evil :acting. The villains always have the best parts. Yep. Two steps ahead of everyone else. Even if they shouldn't be. "What is it about being evil that ramps up the IQ points?" indeed. :>:BTW, I can accept PossessedCordy as well as PodCordy for :>:her actions. Hell, I'm still accepting of "the demon made her do :>:it", just as long as they bring back our Cordy to us. :> :>Yeah. Trouble is, I've read all the theories and postulated a few of :>my own, and none of them account for *all* the anomalies. : :What, and you think a few little plot holes are gonna stop :them from doing something? No, I'm sure they wouldn't. Even the one that leaves the fewest plot holes still requires some outright lying on ME's part. Also, it would require that everything's been wonky since Darla showed up in "Offspring," but like Micky said, it's way too late for ME to try to pull that rabbit out of their hat. :>Even "crap" seems too pedestrian for the swill we're being served. : :7th Heaven level of writing? Or is that too harsh? I've actually never seen _7th Heaven_, but I can say it's around the _Dawson's Creek_ level. I saw part of one of those a few months ago. :>Pretty much. I can't tell if they're trying for "The Sixth Sense" or :>GoodKirk/BadKirk. Without the emphatic gesturing, of course. Either :>way, they're not doing as well as the originals. : :And they can't cover it up with Cordy in a bikini, like :the Pylean arc, cause, well... I know. Cordy's finally got a love life and we get no skin. Life is just unfair, I tell you! Darn it! Darn it all to heck! Terry

2003-01-30 18:52:27+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (anim8rfsk@aol.comNOSPAM)


<< From: Don Sample dsample@synapse.net >> << Except everything we've seen to date seems to indicate that becoming evil makes them all dumber. >> Hmm. Do think that's true of Spike, Dru, and Angel?

2003-01-30 21:16:59+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (anim8rfsk@aol.comNOSPAM)


<< From: Don Sample dsample@synapse.net >> << > Hmm. Do think that's true of Spike, Dru, and Angel? Never really saw enough of them before they became vamps to gauge their intelligence, but going by how dumb the average vamp is, I've always figured that getting turned shaved at least 10 points off their IQs. (Or maybe it's mostly just the dumb ones who get turned.) >> Fair points. I'll certainly grant you your cannon fodder vamps aren't too bright. But Spike and Dru seem pretty worthless in flashbacks.

2003-01-31 04:19:56+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (sweick@aol.com)


In article <a6dd0bff.0301301322.4cc3a8fb@posting.google.com>, wallyrosenberg@hotmail.com (Wally Rosenberg) writes: >Shanna <shannamarie@earthlink.net> wrote in message >news:<BA5C3B86.152EF%shannamarie@earthlink.net>... > >> I rewatched the episode yesterday, and I still don't have a lot to say. > >[40,000 words snipped...] She's a novelist. What did you expect? Concise? :-) Stephen Weick | Founder DOMFDD. Ohio State University, most wins in a season, Big 10 title, and National Champions. Amazing, a team I followed actually won!

2003-01-31 04:19:59+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (sweick@aol.com)


In article <rgii3v4untd7r2eqad7dedmb8odma8vpbj@4ax.com>, Terry McNeal <tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com> writes: >On 30 Jan 2003 04:10:58 GMT, sweick@aol.com (SWeick) wrote: > >:In article <28je3vkfqpeo4u5qe5i6ahp4jmobc2u8kk@4ax.com>, Terry McNeal >:<tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com> writes: >: >:>Gettin' spoilery for the future here. >:> >:>. >:>. >:>. >:>. >:>. >:>. >:>. >:>. >:>. >:>. >:>. >:>. >:> >:Yeah, and think of the sacrifices Charisma has to do for >:her art. Not just the sex scene with Vincente, but having >:to have one with DB too? (And if she has one with the Beast, >:I'll know they had it in for Charisma this season. :-) > >Eh, it's just some spit-swapping from what I hear. Well, duh! I don't expect it to be scenes from a porno film. No matter how much I request it. Cause, do you really want to see Chuckles erupt? It does make me >wonder if getting to make out with Charisma is a contractual perk >though. And Kartheiser has to be thinking this is the best job ever. So is Lorne gonna get it on with Cordy next? I mean Andy's made it to the credits. >:But I guess no price is too much to get to do some real evil >:acting. The villains always have the best parts. > >Yep. Two steps ahead of everyone else. Even if they shouldn't be. >"What is it about being evil that ramps up the IQ points?" indeed. Well, when evil's written intelligently. As I said, the Beast has a plan, whosever it is, and is doing it. The FE on BtVS has an idiotic plan from the beginning and seems incompetent in executing it. Hopefully, evil will continue to be written smart on Angel. >:>Yeah. Trouble is, I've read all the theories and postulated a few of >:>my own, and none of them account for *all* the anomalies. >: >:What, and you think a few little plot holes are gonna stop >:them from doing something? > >No, I'm sure they wouldn't. Even the one that leaves the fewest plot >holes still requires some outright lying on ME's part. Also, it would >require that everything's been wonky since Darla showed up in >"Offspring," but like Micky said, it's way too late for ME to try to >pull that rabbit out of their hat. Then do the best thing, consider it an asset (it's a feature, not a bug), and ignore it. Done, go from there. Don't do it again. (The problem is the last sentence.) >:>Even "crap" seems too pedestrian for the swill we're being served. >: >:7th Heaven level of writing? Or is that too harsh? > >I've actually never seen _7th Heaven_, but I can say it's around the >_Dawson's Creek_ level. I saw part of one of those a few months ago. Ewww. Got stuck watching one waiting for Angel. It actually has seem to decline in writing from its beginning. Did the original staff leave or something? >:>Pretty much. I can't tell if they're trying for "The Sixth Sense" or >:>GoodKirk/BadKirk. Without the emphatic gesturing, of course. Either >:>way, they're not doing as well as the originals. >: >:And they can't cover it up with Cordy in a bikini, like >:the Pylean arc, cause, well... > >I know. Cordy's finally got a love life and we get no skin. Life is >just unfair, I tell you! Darn it! Darn it all to heck! Really. It's a good reason to root for Angel's renewal. But at least this season's evil is pretty here, unlike that other show. Stephen Weick | Founder DOMFDD. Ohio State University, most wins in a season, Big 10 title, and National Champions. Amazing, a team I followed actually won!

2003-01-31 07:52:57+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (SDM <smeyer@mac.com>)


In article <20030130231959.06242.00000433@mb-fh.aol.com>, sweick@aol.com (SWeick) wrote: > In article <rgii3v4untd7r2eqad7dedmb8odma8vpbj@4ax.com>, Terry McNeal > <tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com> writes: > > >On 30 Jan 2003 04:10:58 GMT, sweick@aol.com (SWeick) wrote: > > > >:In article <28je3vkfqpeo4u5qe5i6ahp4jmobc2u8kk@4ax.com>, Terry McNeal > >:<tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com> writes: > >: > >:>Gettin' spoilery for the future here. > >:> > >:>. > >:>. > >:>. > >:>. > >:>. > >:>. > >:>. > >:>. > >:>. > >:>. > >:>. > >:>. > >:> > >:Yeah, and think of the sacrifices Charisma has to do for > >:her art. Not just the sex scene with Vincente, but having > >:to have one with DB too? (And if she has one with the Beast, > >:I'll know they had it in for Charisma this season. :-) > > > >Eh, it's just some spit-swapping from what I hear. > > > Well, duh! I don't expect it to be scenes from a porno film. > > No matter how much I request it. > > Cause, do you really want to see Chuckles erupt? > Oh, great. -------- He doesn't choke her - he pulls her to him, kisses her hard. And now they're falling onto the bed, tearing at each other's clothing. Going at it, two animals. Biting, tearing, clawing. They are doing it, folks. And we know this because of both of their expressions. And because we've heard tell of this sex thing. And there's not a fireplace in sight to cut away to. Chuckle's face creases^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcracks with release. ------ Can't wait. Steve

2003-01-31 14:05:29+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (Terry McNeal <tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com>)


On 31 Jan 2003 04:19:59 GMT, sweick@aol.com (SWeick) wrote: :In article <rgii3v4untd7r2eqad7dedmb8odma8vpbj@4ax.com>, Terry McNeal :<tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com> writes: : :>On 30 Jan 2003 04:10:58 GMT, sweick@aol.com (SWeick) wrote: :> :>:In article <28je3vkfqpeo4u5qe5i6ahp4jmobc2u8kk@4ax.com>, Terry McNeal :>:<tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com> writes: Spoilery for the future here. :>:>. :>:>. :>:>. :>:>. :>:>. :>:>. :>:>. :>:>. :>:>. :>:>. :>:>. :>:>. :>:> :>Eh, it's just some spit-swapping from what I hear. : :Well, duh! I don't expect it to be scenes from a porno film. : :No matter how much I request it. But Chuckles is naked. I want equal time, damn it. :Cause, do you really want to see Chuckles erupt? Well, I thought they did a fine job of having the Beast erupt when Angel shoved the sword into its head, but the homoerotic overtones dulled the moment. Plus there'd just end up being an argument over whether Chuckles really loves Cordy or someone else anyway. Best it be forgotten. : It does make me :>wonder if getting to make out with Charisma is a contractual perk :>though. And Kartheiser has to be thinking this is the best job ever. : :So is Lorne gonna get it on with Cordy next? I mean Andy's made :it to the credits. Why not? I hear random couplings just for the sake of it is the hallmark of a soap. :>Yep. Two steps ahead of everyone else. Even if they shouldn't be. :>"What is it about being evil that ramps up the IQ points?" indeed. : :Well, when evil's written intelligently. As I said, the Beast has a :plan, whosever it is, and is doing it. The FE on BtVS has an :idiotic plan from the beginning and seems incompetent in executing :it. : :Hopefully, evil will continue to be written smart on Angel. Minear has said he considers Cordy the smartest person in the room at any given time. Of course, the way he writes Cordy, he must think everyone else is stupid beyond belief. But the way Cordy "supported" Angel's decision to not go the Angelus route... Man, you gotta admire someone who can play people like that. Okay, it's Angel and he's not a real challenge, but still. :>No, I'm sure they wouldn't. Even the one that leaves the fewest plot :>holes still requires some outright lying on ME's part. Also, it would :>require that everything's been wonky since Darla showed up in :>"Offspring," but like Micky said, it's way too late for ME to try to :>pull that rabbit out of their hat. : :Then do the best thing, consider it an asset (it's a feature, not a :bug), and ignore it. Done, go from there. Don't do it again. : :(The problem is the last sentence.) Yeah, plus ME would first need to realize there's a bug. They seem to think they're doing a swell job. :>I've actually never seen _7th Heaven_, but I can say it's around the :>_Dawson's Creek_ level. I saw part of one of those a few months ago. : :Ewww. Got stuck watching one waiting for Angel. It actually :has seem to decline in writing from its beginning. Did the original :staff leave or something? Um, I understand the guy who created it left the show a couple of years ago. I don't know any more about it than that. :>I know. Cordy's finally got a love life and we get no skin. Life is :>just unfair, I tell you! Darn it! Darn it all to heck! : :Really. It's a good reason to root for Angel's renewal. : :But at least this season's evil is pretty here, unlike :that other show. Meow. Terry

2003-01-31 17:22:26+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (Shanna <shannamarie@earthlink.net>)


On 1/30/03 10:19 PM, in article 20030130231956.06242.00000432@mb-fh.aol.com, "SWeick" <sweick@aol.com> wrote: > In article <a6dd0bff.0301301322.4cc3a8fb@posting.google.com>, > wallyrosenberg@hotmail.com (Wally Rosenberg) writes: > >> Shanna <shannamarie@earthlink.net> wrote in message >> news:<BA5C3B86.152EF%shannamarie@earthlink.net>... >> >>> I rewatched the episode yesterday, and I still don't have a lot to say. >> >> [40,000 words snipped...] > > > She's a novelist. > > What did you expect? Concise? :-) For me, 40,000 words IS concise. I generally hit about 110,000 or so. But after hearing the word count on the next Harry Potter book, I have a new goal to shoot for. Besides, I don't think this one went over two pages in Word. I've been known to go up to five. This was short. Shanna

2003-01-31 18:45:49+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (Brent McKee <bSmckee@shaw.caN>)


"Shanna" <shannamarie@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:BA600D88.15876%shannamarie@earthlink.net... > On 1/30/03 10:19 PM, in article 20030130231956.06242.00000432@mb-fh.aol.com, > "SWeick" <sweick@aol.com> wrote: > > > In article <a6dd0bff.0301301322.4cc3a8fb@posting.google.com>, > > wallyrosenberg@hotmail.com (Wally Rosenberg) writes: > > > >> Shanna <shannamarie@earthlink.net> wrote in message > >> news:<BA5C3B86.152EF%shannamarie@earthlink.net>... > >> > >>> I rewatched the episode yesterday, and I still don't have a lot to say. > >> > >> [40,000 words snipped...] > > > > > > She's a novelist. > > > > What did you expect? Concise? :-) > > For me, 40,000 words IS concise. I generally hit about 110,000 or so. But > after hearing the word count on the next Harry Potter book, I have a new > goal to shoot for. > > Besides, I don't think this one went over two pages in Word. I've been known > to go up to five. This was short. Doesn't that depend on how big the pages are? I mean if I set the pages up correctly this note could take 26 pages (not counting the sig). Words count not pages (30). -- Brent McKee To reply by email, please remove the capital letters (S and N) from the email address "If we cease to judge this world, we may find ourselves, very quickly, in one which is infinitely worse." - Margaret Atwood "Nothing is more dangerous than a dogmatic worldview - nothing more constraining, more blinding to innovation, more destructive of openness to novelty. " - Stephen Jay Gould (1941-2002)

2003-02-01 04:13:03+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (James Craine <JamesCraine@Hotmail.com>)


Terry McNeal wrote: > :But I guess no price is too much to get to do some real evil > :acting. The villains always have the best parts. > > Yep. Two steps ahead of everyone else. Even if they shouldn't be. > "What is it about being evil that ramps up the IQ points?" indeed. My thought when she said that was "well you should know, think about all of your prescient evil comments to Xander et. al. before you crashed and decided to be decent to people". I do think that she was both evil and smart when she lived in Sunnydale. She always knew the meanest thing to say.

2003-02-01 05:11:13+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (sweick@aol.com)


In article <smeyer-A58315.02525931012003@news.east.cox.net>, SDM <smeyer@mac.com> writes: >> Well, duh! I don't expect it to be scenes from a porno film. >> >> No matter how much I request it. >> >> Cause, do you really want to see Chuckles erupt? >> >Oh, great. Ain't I sum-thin'. >-------- >He doesn't choke her - he pulls her to him, kisses her hard. And now >they're falling onto the bed, tearing at each other's clothing. Going at >it, two animals. > >Biting, tearing, clawing. They are doing it, folks. And we know this >because of both of their expressions. And because we've heard tell of >this sex thing. And there's not a fireplace in sight to cut away to. > >Chuckle's face creases^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcracks with release. Oh, so Tim Minear's gonna write it! OK. >------ > >Can't wait. Said I was going to root for evil this season. Stephen Weick The LeBron "Clay Feet" James Card: Hummer: $50 grand Retro Uniforms: $850 Team/School loyalty: Worthless. The LeBron card, don't shaft your friends without it. Selfish, all about the money, he'll fit right in the NBA.

2003-02-01 05:11:14+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (sweick@aol.com)


In article <4j0l3v866s5cqvptd3i8vrs6bhq61uc9pl@4ax.com>, Terry McNeal <tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com> writes: >On 31 Jan 2003 04:19:59 GMT, sweick@aol.com (SWeick) wrote: > >:In article <rgii3v4untd7r2eqad7dedmb8odma8vpbj@4ax.com>, Terry McNeal >:<tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com> writes: >: >:>On 30 Jan 2003 04:10:58 GMT, sweick@aol.com (SWeick) wrote: >:> >:>:In article <28je3vkfqpeo4u5qe5i6ahp4jmobc2u8kk@4ax.com>, Terry McNeal >:>:<tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com> writes: > >Spoilery for the future here. > >:>:>. >:>:>. >:>:>. >:>:>. >:>:>. >:>:>. >:>:>. >:>:>. >:>:>. >:>:>. >:>:>. >:>:>. >:>:> > >:>Eh, it's just some spit-swapping from what I hear. >: >:Well, duh! I don't expect it to be scenes from a porno film. >: >:No matter how much I request it. > >But Chuckles is naked. I want equal time, damn it. I think I can do without Angel naked. Again. (Cause you know with these guys, you ain't getting nothing else.) >:Cause, do you really want to see Chuckles erupt? > >Well, I thought they did a fine job of having the Beast erupt when >Angel shoved the sword into its head, but the homoerotic overtones >dulled the moment. Pure accidental writing, I'm sure. >Plus there'd just end up being an argument over whether Chuckles >really loves Cordy or someone else anyway. Best it be forgotten. Yeah, but it's so much fun to watch chains pulled. >: It does make me >:>wonder if getting to make out with Charisma is a contractual perk >:>though. And Kartheiser has to be thinking this is the best job ever. >: >:So is Lorne gonna get it on with Cordy next? I mean Andy's made >:it to the credits. > >Why not? I hear random couplings just for the sake of it is the >hallmark of a soap. So Cordy/Faith then? :-) >:>Yep. Two steps ahead of everyone else. Even if they shouldn't be. >:>"What is it about being evil that ramps up the IQ points?" indeed. >: >:Well, when evil's written intelligently. As I said, the Beast has a >:plan, whosever it is, and is doing it. The FE on BtVS has an >:idiotic plan from the beginning and seems incompetent in executing >:it. >: >:Hopefully, evil will continue to be written smart on Angel. > >Minear has said he considers Cordy the smartest person in the room at >any given time. Of course, the way he writes Cordy, he must think >everyone else is stupid beyond belief. I think there's textual support for that. Gunn's plan in Thin Dead Line, Fred's actions in Supersymmetry, Wes' plans for kidnapping Connor, and Angel's, well, actually from dating Buffy on. But the way Cordy "supported" >Angel's decision to not go the Angelus route... Man, you gotta admire >someone who can play people like that. Yeah, but as you said, Angel's a fairly well played fiddle when it comes to women playing him. Okay, it's Angel and he's not a >real challenge, but still. Points for effort. So wanna join me in rooting for evil this season? Stephen Weick The LeBron "Clay Feet" James Card: Hummer: $50 grand Retro Uniforms: $850 Team/School loyalty: Worthless. The LeBron card, don't shaft your friends without it. Selfish, all about the money, he'll fit right in the NBA.

2003-02-01 20:14:53+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (Terry McNeal <tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com>)


Spoilers for the future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On 01 Feb 2003 05:11:14 GMT, sweick@aol.com (SWeick) wrote: :In article <4j0l3v866s5cqvptd3i8vrs6bhq61uc9pl@4ax.com>, Terry McNeal :<tymcneal@remove.this.hotmail.com> writes: :>Why not? I hear random couplings just for the sake of it is the :>hallmark of a soap. : :So Cordy/Faith then? :-) It'd be better then the rumored upcoming Willow/Fred subtext. :>Minear has said he considers Cordy the smartest person in the room at :>any given time. Of course, the way he writes Cordy, he must think :>everyone else is stupid beyond belief. : :I think there's textual support for that. Gunn's plan in Thin Dead Line, :Fred's actions in Supersymmetry, Wes' plans for kidnapping Connor, :and Angel's, well, actually from dating Buffy on. Okay, so he has a point. :So wanna join me in rooting for evil this season? Already there, at least until it kills off all the annoying characters. So I guess that'd mean the spin off is going to be called _Phantom Dennis_. Terry

2003-02-01 20:57:00+00:00 - Re: Commentary on "Long Day's Journey" - (Shanna <shannamarie@earthlink.net>)


On 1/31/03 12:45 PM, in article xvz_9.152562$H7.6274052@news2.calgary.shaw.ca, "Brent McKee" <bSmckee@shaw.caN> wrote: > > "Shanna" <shannamarie@earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:BA600D88.15876%shannamarie@earthlink.net... >> On 1/30/03 10:19 PM, in article > 20030130231956.06242.00000432@mb-fh.aol.com, >> "SWeick" <sweick@aol.com> wrote: >> >>> In article <a6dd0bff.0301301322.4cc3a8fb@posting.google.com>, >>> wallyrosenberg@hotmail.com (Wally Rosenberg) writes: >>> >>>> Shanna <shannamarie@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>> news:<BA5C3B86.152EF%shannamarie@earthlink.net>... >>>> >>>>> I rewatched the episode yesterday, and I still don't have a lot > to say. >>>> >>>> [40,000 words snipped...] >>> >>> >>> She's a novelist. >>> >>> What did you expect? Concise? :-) >> >> For me, 40,000 words IS concise. I generally hit about 110,000 or > so. But >> after hearing the word count on the next Harry Potter book, I have a > new >> goal to shoot for. >> >> Besides, I don't think this one went over two pages in Word. I've > been known >> to go up to five. This was short. > > Doesn't that depend on how big the pages are? I mean if I set the > pages up correctly this note could take 26 pages (not counting the > sig). Words count not pages (30). Well, if I set the pages up the same way, then it doesn't matter how they're set up if I'm doing a comparison between page counts in various commentaries. Oh, and for the record, this one was about 1500 words. Shanna