Stupid Hoe
12 years ago
Monday, June 27, 2011
Monday, June 20, 2011
Short Blog Monday
What type of person looks at a public toilet and thinks, I need to destroy this thing?
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Excuse me while I nerd out for a moment.
There have been talks for a Doctor Who feature film recently but nothing has happened yet. Speculation about the next season puts the future of the franchise in doubt. Not that we won't get new episodes but more that we'll get less episodes. Some are predicting we get a short season consisting of a few long specials like what was done during David Tennant's last season. 2013 will mark the 50th anniversary of Doctor Who which means we could have an awesome season. I don't think that will happen.
I think we'll get a full season next year which will lead into a 50th extravaganza in the form of several long specials or a feature film. You can't have an extravaganza without including all 11 doctors. The only problem there is you have either dead or very old and fat actors that are no longer up to the task appearance wise. The real trick is finding suitable actors to fill the roles that can't be filled by the original actors which is a shame but also an opportunity to do something incredible.
This is my fantasy cast.
1st Doctor
William Hartnell died in 1975. He was the oldest looking Doctor and I think Patrick Stewart would lend the gravitas needed to play numero uno.
2nd Doctor
This one was a tad tougher. Patrick Troughton is also dead having left this world in 1987. I had a tough time with the "intergalactic hobo" until I spotted Gary Oldman. He's a great villain but he's also shown to work well at the other end of the spectrum.
3rd Doctor
Jon Pertwee is the last of the dead doctors. He passed in 1996. The "Dandy Doctor" wasn't one of my favorites but you can't have an 11 Doctor reunion without all of them. After a lot of deliberating I came to the conclusion that Bill Nighy would knock it out of the park.
4th Doctor
Tom Baker is still alive but there's a lot more of him and it's all really old. He still has his stellar voice but having him at the other end of a phone call would be dumb. Alan Rickman would own this part. He's got the voice and could pull off the look as well.
5th Doctor
This is where it starts to get tricky Peter Davison is very much alive and recently showed the world he can still play the Doctor. I'm a little hesitant to recast him. If I had to I'd go with Cary Elwes for no reason other than looks and accent.
6th Doctor
Colin Baker has also swelled up considerably. Unless we are to believe his Doctor hit the Jelly Babies a little too hard he'd have to be recast. Being that he's regarded as one of the worst Doctors I think it would a good place to give number 6 another shot at being awesome. Colin Firth has the chops to keep it serious and I think he could pull off the look. I'm not sure if the technicolor dream coat is a keeper.
7th Doctor
Sylvester McCoy puts me in a tight spot. After some careful thought I came to the conclusion a little hair dye should do the trick. He's the perfect actor to play himself. He's old but I think it fits with his Doctor.
8th Doctor
From here on out it's easy. Paul McGann has been playing the Doctor since his TV movie in 1996 via audio plays. They recently spent some money on a makeover for him which could signal a potential return.
9th Doctor
Christopher Eccleston didn't leave happy but I think he'd be willing to give us an encore. I know most people wanted to see more of his Doctor. He'd have to do it without Rose though.
10th Doctor
David Tennant would do it in a heartbeat I'm sure. The ladies would appreciate this one.
11th Doctor
Matt Smith's Doctor would of course be at the center of it all since he's the current Doctor. He could very well use a project like this to make his departure.
12th Doctor?
The problem with giving it everything you've got is that you're not left with anything for the ride back. Doctor Who isn't too big to fail as we've seen in the past. Is it better to burn out or fade away? Try this on for size. (You purists are going to hate this one.)
Smith's Doctor is mortally wounded as most Doctors are prior to regeneration. There is a tearful goodbye from Rory and Amy then we get the flash of light followed by another TARDIS fire. Amy and Rory flee looking back just in time to see the TARDIS vanish. Smith finishes his transformation into Hugh Laurie who has just enough of his marbles to hit the brakes and land the burning TARDIS. "3900 YEARS LATER" flashes on the screen with an exterior shot of a large building. A soda machine materializes in front of River Song's prison cell. River rises to see door open. Doctor 12 steps out, says a confident, "Hello sweetie." He then points his new sonic screwdriver at the prison lock, immediately opening it. The Doctor dips River Song for a passionate kiss then they run back into the TARDIS. Her guards arrive at her cell just in time to see the soda machine change into a blue, police box before it disappears. Roll credits.
I think we'll get a full season next year which will lead into a 50th extravaganza in the form of several long specials or a feature film. You can't have an extravaganza without including all 11 doctors. The only problem there is you have either dead or very old and fat actors that are no longer up to the task appearance wise. The real trick is finding suitable actors to fill the roles that can't be filled by the original actors which is a shame but also an opportunity to do something incredible.
This is my fantasy cast.
1st Doctor
William Hartnell died in 1975. He was the oldest looking Doctor and I think Patrick Stewart would lend the gravitas needed to play numero uno.
2nd Doctor
This one was a tad tougher. Patrick Troughton is also dead having left this world in 1987. I had a tough time with the "intergalactic hobo" until I spotted Gary Oldman. He's a great villain but he's also shown to work well at the other end of the spectrum.
3rd Doctor
Jon Pertwee is the last of the dead doctors. He passed in 1996. The "Dandy Doctor" wasn't one of my favorites but you can't have an 11 Doctor reunion without all of them. After a lot of deliberating I came to the conclusion that Bill Nighy would knock it out of the park.
4th Doctor
Tom Baker is still alive but there's a lot more of him and it's all really old. He still has his stellar voice but having him at the other end of a phone call would be dumb. Alan Rickman would own this part. He's got the voice and could pull off the look as well.
5th Doctor
This is where it starts to get tricky Peter Davison is very much alive and recently showed the world he can still play the Doctor. I'm a little hesitant to recast him. If I had to I'd go with Cary Elwes for no reason other than looks and accent.
6th Doctor
Colin Baker has also swelled up considerably. Unless we are to believe his Doctor hit the Jelly Babies a little too hard he'd have to be recast. Being that he's regarded as one of the worst Doctors I think it would a good place to give number 6 another shot at being awesome. Colin Firth has the chops to keep it serious and I think he could pull off the look. I'm not sure if the technicolor dream coat is a keeper.
7th Doctor
Sylvester McCoy puts me in a tight spot. After some careful thought I came to the conclusion a little hair dye should do the trick. He's the perfect actor to play himself. He's old but I think it fits with his Doctor.
8th Doctor
From here on out it's easy. Paul McGann has been playing the Doctor since his TV movie in 1996 via audio plays. They recently spent some money on a makeover for him which could signal a potential return.
9th Doctor
Christopher Eccleston didn't leave happy but I think he'd be willing to give us an encore. I know most people wanted to see more of his Doctor. He'd have to do it without Rose though.
10th Doctor
David Tennant would do it in a heartbeat I'm sure. The ladies would appreciate this one.
11th Doctor
Matt Smith's Doctor would of course be at the center of it all since he's the current Doctor. He could very well use a project like this to make his departure.
12th Doctor?
The problem with giving it everything you've got is that you're not left with anything for the ride back. Doctor Who isn't too big to fail as we've seen in the past. Is it better to burn out or fade away? Try this on for size. (You purists are going to hate this one.)
Smith's Doctor is mortally wounded as most Doctors are prior to regeneration. There is a tearful goodbye from Rory and Amy then we get the flash of light followed by another TARDIS fire. Amy and Rory flee looking back just in time to see the TARDIS vanish. Smith finishes his transformation into Hugh Laurie who has just enough of his marbles to hit the brakes and land the burning TARDIS. "3900 YEARS LATER" flashes on the screen with an exterior shot of a large building. A soda machine materializes in front of River Song's prison cell. River rises to see door open. Doctor 12 steps out, says a confident, "Hello sweetie." He then points his new sonic screwdriver at the prison lock, immediately opening it. The Doctor dips River Song for a passionate kiss then they run back into the TARDIS. Her guards arrive at her cell just in time to see the soda machine change into a blue, police box before it disappears. Roll credits.
Monday, June 13, 2011
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Deep thoughts
I had a typical discussion with my mother recently and it ended about as abruptly as it usually does. She fancies herself as a religious person and there's no faulting her for that. She has a good heart and means well but generally she does what so many Christians do with regards to selective beliefs. Most things are okay since humanity has an inclination towards sin but apparentlty homosexuality isn't among those things.
Putting aside well explained sciences like genetics, DNA, and all that "rubbish" mankind has created to rationalize why we are the way we are, my mother has chosen to adhere to the bible for her information and warns against trusting the science of man.
She's had trouble with this in the past since she's not sure how to interpret things that aren't there. I've said before that the bible isn't a book about dinosaurs but they should still be regarded as beasts which we know (per the bible) were on this planet first. She once regarded them as "freaks of nature" and questioned why there aren't fossils popping up all over the place to which a young Graham suggested that not every dead creature has the good fortune of being preserved. I was advised to pray.
It's not that my mom is a hateful person since she doesn't subscribe to the biblical notion that men who lie in the beds of women should be put to death but honestly I don't think she read past the part about it being an abomination. She also doesn't understand what abomination means. She thinks abomination is defined as "unnatural" but it really just means disliked. To her the bible is really just a platform for her self esteem since it makes her feel good to be able to judge people that are not as righteous as she is.
In case you were wondering, she's "quoting" Leviticus which says quite a few things about how "one" should live their life. Those ones in particular are the "Children of Israel" or the Jewish as we've come to know them. There are two parts to Leviticus. The first portion is for the priests. It describes how to conduct rituals properly and all that kosher stuff. The second half is for the people and centers around cleanliness of body, mind, and soul. "Abomination" is used frequently throughout but it doesn't really translate back to Hebrew. It just happened to be the closest English word they could find when putting together the King James translation. The only problem with using that word is that it's not what was said in the Torah. They could have translated it to, "Men shouldn't use women's beds because it's not what we do in Isreal." but that isn't very eloquent now is it?
But Graham, you keep referring to the "filthy act of homosexuality" as laying in a woman's bed. That's what it says. It's all about context. Think of it as a recipe. You have to mix ALL the ingredients for it to taste right. If you just dump baking powder in a bowl it's not going to magically become chocolate chip cookies. The same goes with the bible.
In the days of old women didn't have the same rights they have today. They fit into the social hierarchy somewhere between paterfamilias and the family cow. The latter of which also had a bed that was not to be used by men. A woman's bed was a sacred place that men could only use for making babies with said woman as long as they were married.
In summary Leviticus is really about properly observing all of the Jewish rituals to remain clean in the good lord's eyes.
I know you're thinking of the Sodomites so let's take a look at those pervs for a moment. There we have a bunch of people that liked having a good time. They had a good time all over the place with each other. It was a lot like spring break. I'm sure there were a lot of body shots and plenty of oral sex. Things weren't very well lit back then so when you get a pile of people fornicating I'm sure a couple of dudes hooked up as well. Again it's a lot like spring break. It's not that men were getting together but rather the manner in which they were getting together. I don't think God is a proponent of anal sex regardless of who's on top and who's on bottom. It's unclean and I can dig that. He's probably not too fond of oral sex either. I'm married now so that's okay too.
From there the whole biblical anti-gay argument falls apart. The remaining argument in the militant Christian's arsenal is that homosexuality is a choice. They argue that we don't choose to be heterosexual since man requires a woman to properly mate instinctively which ironically brings us back to science. Go figure. That same science has proven that homosexuals have a propensity towards the same sex. Some regard it as a crossed wire but at the heart of it all we begin our lives as female but at some point in our development we end up at one side or the other. Or do we? Sometimes we end up in the middle. What is a hermaphrodite? Which way should they go. Does the wrong choice doom them to eternal hellfire? It's been discovered that homosexual males process many thoughts as women do. Does that make them women? Not really. All it really shows is that there are a lot of variables that determine the sexual orientation of human beings so who's to say what is natural and what isn't? It's kind of like saying Bud Light is the only true beer because it tastes like ass which is how beer is supposed to taste. Guinness is an abomination and loving it makes God angry.
Personally, I believe we're born the way we're born and whatever that may be is natural. God knows our hearts and his love for us is unconditional. There is no way for a being capable of such affection to abhor the outcome of beings built in their own image. I'd say the biggest part of our humanity comes from that capability to love and we compromise that humanity by denying another human being the happiness we enjoy be it with a man or a woman. Even though people like my mom don't understand they don't need to because it's not their place to judge. They are our neighbors and we should love them regardless. I wish I could remember where I read about that whole "love your neighbor" thing.
Putting aside well explained sciences like genetics, DNA, and all that "rubbish" mankind has created to rationalize why we are the way we are, my mother has chosen to adhere to the bible for her information and warns against trusting the science of man.
She's had trouble with this in the past since she's not sure how to interpret things that aren't there. I've said before that the bible isn't a book about dinosaurs but they should still be regarded as beasts which we know (per the bible) were on this planet first. She once regarded them as "freaks of nature" and questioned why there aren't fossils popping up all over the place to which a young Graham suggested that not every dead creature has the good fortune of being preserved. I was advised to pray.
It's not that my mom is a hateful person since she doesn't subscribe to the biblical notion that men who lie in the beds of women should be put to death but honestly I don't think she read past the part about it being an abomination. She also doesn't understand what abomination means. She thinks abomination is defined as "unnatural" but it really just means disliked. To her the bible is really just a platform for her self esteem since it makes her feel good to be able to judge people that are not as righteous as she is.
In case you were wondering, she's "quoting" Leviticus which says quite a few things about how "one" should live their life. Those ones in particular are the "Children of Israel" or the Jewish as we've come to know them. There are two parts to Leviticus. The first portion is for the priests. It describes how to conduct rituals properly and all that kosher stuff. The second half is for the people and centers around cleanliness of body, mind, and soul. "Abomination" is used frequently throughout but it doesn't really translate back to Hebrew. It just happened to be the closest English word they could find when putting together the King James translation. The only problem with using that word is that it's not what was said in the Torah. They could have translated it to, "Men shouldn't use women's beds because it's not what we do in Isreal." but that isn't very eloquent now is it?
But Graham, you keep referring to the "filthy act of homosexuality" as laying in a woman's bed. That's what it says. It's all about context. Think of it as a recipe. You have to mix ALL the ingredients for it to taste right. If you just dump baking powder in a bowl it's not going to magically become chocolate chip cookies. The same goes with the bible.
In the days of old women didn't have the same rights they have today. They fit into the social hierarchy somewhere between paterfamilias and the family cow. The latter of which also had a bed that was not to be used by men. A woman's bed was a sacred place that men could only use for making babies with said woman as long as they were married.
In summary Leviticus is really about properly observing all of the Jewish rituals to remain clean in the good lord's eyes.
I know you're thinking of the Sodomites so let's take a look at those pervs for a moment. There we have a bunch of people that liked having a good time. They had a good time all over the place with each other. It was a lot like spring break. I'm sure there were a lot of body shots and plenty of oral sex. Things weren't very well lit back then so when you get a pile of people fornicating I'm sure a couple of dudes hooked up as well. Again it's a lot like spring break. It's not that men were getting together but rather the manner in which they were getting together. I don't think God is a proponent of anal sex regardless of who's on top and who's on bottom. It's unclean and I can dig that. He's probably not too fond of oral sex either. I'm married now so that's okay too.
From there the whole biblical anti-gay argument falls apart. The remaining argument in the militant Christian's arsenal is that homosexuality is a choice. They argue that we don't choose to be heterosexual since man requires a woman to properly mate instinctively which ironically brings us back to science. Go figure. That same science has proven that homosexuals have a propensity towards the same sex. Some regard it as a crossed wire but at the heart of it all we begin our lives as female but at some point in our development we end up at one side or the other. Or do we? Sometimes we end up in the middle. What is a hermaphrodite? Which way should they go. Does the wrong choice doom them to eternal hellfire? It's been discovered that homosexual males process many thoughts as women do. Does that make them women? Not really. All it really shows is that there are a lot of variables that determine the sexual orientation of human beings so who's to say what is natural and what isn't? It's kind of like saying Bud Light is the only true beer because it tastes like ass which is how beer is supposed to taste. Guinness is an abomination and loving it makes God angry.
Personally, I believe we're born the way we're born and whatever that may be is natural. God knows our hearts and his love for us is unconditional. There is no way for a being capable of such affection to abhor the outcome of beings built in their own image. I'd say the biggest part of our humanity comes from that capability to love and we compromise that humanity by denying another human being the happiness we enjoy be it with a man or a woman. Even though people like my mom don't understand they don't need to because it's not their place to judge. They are our neighbors and we should love them regardless. I wish I could remember where I read about that whole "love your neighbor" thing.
Monday, June 6, 2011
Friday, June 3, 2011
Music makes a difference
When I'm working it's nice to have a soundtrack to accompany my work. It's fitting that I occasionally use an actual soundtrack. This week I've been listening to Murray Gold's compositions for season five of Doctor Who which is pretty much my favorite show.
I started watching it some time ago when they showed Tom Baker episodes on PBS. I continued watching through Peter Davison. It scared the bajeesus out of me when I was young because the monsters and such were quite scary. It was still a good program for a young mind. The show took a break after two more actors played the Doctor then we got a decent made for TV movie followed by another break for almost a decade. When the program returned in 2005 I almost missed it because I wasn't much of a TV watcher at the time. Jill was also in my life at this time and didn't know that she liked science fiction so I kept it to myself and watched every now and then until it was available on Netflix streaming which I watched on my laptop. Jill eventually took notice and started watching with me. She's now hooked and we celebrate almost every episode.
Let me steer back towards where I started going with this blog. One of the things that has made Doctor Who so appealing is the exceptional soundtrack that accompanies every episode. Murray Gold (and the BBC Orchestra) lends a score worthy of a feature film every week.
The old Doctor Who episodes featured electronic music compliments of the BBC Radiophonic Workshop. It did a good job of covering up the sound ambient sounds you got running around a BBC sound stage in the 60's and 70's. It was otherworldly and rather pleasant so it got the job done.
During the 2005 "reboot" we got what was a modernization of the classic BBC Radiophonic Workshop music from the old series. Very techno and sounded good when the Doctor was running around with his companion as they tend to do.
Shortly thereafter somebody got the idea to let Murray Gold use the BBC orchestra to compose dedicated themes for the tenth doctor (David Tennant) to run around to as well as very specific themes for the regular characters and monsters. This changed the whole feel of the show.
Since the 2010 season they've gone for even more depth with a much heavier score featuring the same orchestral arrangements but adding in electric guitars and contemporary drums to accompany the younger Matt Smith (11th doctor) and his companion in a new decade.
All that being said, the iconic theme has managed to evolve and change just as the Doctor has.
Then...
Now...
I started watching it some time ago when they showed Tom Baker episodes on PBS. I continued watching through Peter Davison. It scared the bajeesus out of me when I was young because the monsters and such were quite scary. It was still a good program for a young mind. The show took a break after two more actors played the Doctor then we got a decent made for TV movie followed by another break for almost a decade. When the program returned in 2005 I almost missed it because I wasn't much of a TV watcher at the time. Jill was also in my life at this time and didn't know that she liked science fiction so I kept it to myself and watched every now and then until it was available on Netflix streaming which I watched on my laptop. Jill eventually took notice and started watching with me. She's now hooked and we celebrate almost every episode.
Let me steer back towards where I started going with this blog. One of the things that has made Doctor Who so appealing is the exceptional soundtrack that accompanies every episode. Murray Gold (and the BBC Orchestra) lends a score worthy of a feature film every week.
The old Doctor Who episodes featured electronic music compliments of the BBC Radiophonic Workshop. It did a good job of covering up the sound ambient sounds you got running around a BBC sound stage in the 60's and 70's. It was otherworldly and rather pleasant so it got the job done.
During the 2005 "reboot" we got what was a modernization of the classic BBC Radiophonic Workshop music from the old series. Very techno and sounded good when the Doctor was running around with his companion as they tend to do.
Shortly thereafter somebody got the idea to let Murray Gold use the BBC orchestra to compose dedicated themes for the tenth doctor (David Tennant) to run around to as well as very specific themes for the regular characters and monsters. This changed the whole feel of the show.
Since the 2010 season they've gone for even more depth with a much heavier score featuring the same orchestral arrangements but adding in electric guitars and contemporary drums to accompany the younger Matt Smith (11th doctor) and his companion in a new decade.
All that being said, the iconic theme has managed to evolve and change just as the Doctor has.
Then...
Now...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
