I remember producing a first draft of an outline for SLIDERS REBORN and sending it to Transmodiar and knowing it was bad and not knowing how to shape the story (or any story) and telling Transmodiar that it was awful beyond awful and I dreaded his reaction. He told me -- and I will never forget this --

"I'm actually pretty busy right now and can't read it right away. Why don't you take a couple days and see if you can get it from 'awful' to 'adequate'?"

One of the nicest and most productive things anybody has ever said to me about anything ever.

2,282

(35 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I dunno. It seems odd to me that the BBC wouldn't comment on it -- so I think it's more likely that Whittaker's contract has come to an end and they're discussing whether she wants to stay or go. Matt Smith's contract came to an end with "The Name of the Doctor" and there was a very real possibility at the time that he wouldn't have been in "The Day of the Doctor" or "The Time of the Doctor" in which case the Doctor and Clara would have emerged from the timestream with the Doctor having shifted into an 'alternate' incarnation that he might have regenerated into previously and played by a different actor. Smith decided to sign on for two more specials.

Jenna Louise-Coleman was leaving with "Last Christmas" but during production elected to do one more season because she didn't feel Clara had spent enough time with the Capaldi Doctor.

David Tennant almost signed on for the first year of Steven Moffat's run and Moffat drafted a storyline where the Tenth Doctor would die in front of little Amy Pond's eyes; then the adult Amy would meet the Tenth Doctor before his death and Series Five would have moved towards Tennant's finale and regeneration. Tennant waited until the absolute last moment to decide that he wanted to leave with Russell T. Davies.

I feel pretty much the same way as TF does. It's unfortunate if Ms. Whittaker leaves, but it won't really matter unless Chibnall leaves too.

2,283

(35 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I'm told that the extra hands to help producers with scripts on HEROES, ANGEL, LOIS AND CLARK and FRINGE was largely due to all these shows having the budget to hire multiple full-time writer-producers -- and DOCTOR WHO simply doesn't have that kind of budget and has never had that kind of budget. During the 60s to 80s, a producer managed the show's budget, marketing, actors, resources, sets, locations and equipment and hired a script editor to lead the writing team and produce scripts that could be rendered by the resources. The script editor was never a glamourous job or a powerful position and most script editors would stay for a few seasons and then leave. But studio politics now demand that the executive producer handle both those roles. I think it's a bad system and it reflects Temporal Flux noting that Chris Chibnall was not the BBC's first choice to come in after Steven Moffat; he was the only person they could find who would accept this budget and this (lack of) division of labour.

2,284

(35 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Just watched the New Year's Eve special and... I really like Chris Chibnall as a person and as a producer, but his writing is just very witless, painfully so. The heroes (minus the Doctor) suspect a villain of a deadly plot, so they decide to... march up to him and demand that he explain his evil plans and he promptly declines to do so. What were they expecting?

Why does Chibnall have his characters behave so unimaginatively and predictably and have them engage in such futile actions -- aside from his inclination to have the heroes confront the villain for an early scene? The Doctor is trapped in a prison and... sits around making no effort to escape and she has to be rescued -- almost as though the writer simply couldn't come up with a neat way for his lead character to demonstrate the ingenuity needed to escape and also wanted to keep the Doctor contained until more of the plot had unfolded without her.

The Doctor finds her friends and she decides to... do pretty much what her friends did without her; confront the villain and demand an explanation as though people engaged in secret plots will naturally explain them in full if asked twice.

Chibnall simply doesn't have the wit or cleverness that these characters and this series demands; he doesn't know how to stage a confrontation, he doesn't have smart solutions to difficult problems, so the characters behave clumsily because their writer is clumsy. I really like Chibnall's work as a producer: gorgeous music, beautiful anamorphic lens filming, stunning location work, wonderful casting with the first Sikh woman aboard the TARDIS and the first woman to play the Doctor -- but he simply doesn't have the inventiveness, skill or innovative spirit needed to write a spacefaring time travelling heroine and her friends.

The frustrating thing is that the ideas aren't the problem as much as the presentation. Why not have the companions try to investigate the threat without the Doctor and be successful at infiltration but be unsure of what to do about whatever they discover? Why not have the Doctor not escape the prison because she wanted some time to think about the shocking revelations of the previous episode? And so on. The ideas are good; the presentation is shockingly poor.

I think Chibnall needs someone to write scripts for him from his story elements. Joss Whedon on ANGEL had David Greenwalt; Tim Kring on HEROES had Bryan Fuller; Robert Singer on LOIS AND CLARK had Tony Blake and Paul Jackson and Eugenie Ross Leming and Brad Buckner; JJ Abrams on FRINGE had Jeff Pinker and Joel Wyman -- Chibnall needs a partner.

I've never entirely understood why the BBC always has the DW executive producer be the story editor as well, maybe it's a budgeting issue, but every previous showrunner has been overstretched by the job. Russell T. Davies confessed in his autobiography that he was aware of how poor and clumsy his scripts were by the end, but it was often the best he could do when on his deadlines. Steven Moffat arranged to make fewer episodes over longer periods of time in order to cope with the workload. Maybe they could have hired some extra help.

2,285

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I got distracted again, this time by work and THE KARATE KID: REBORN (or COBRA KAI, as Netflix insists on calling it).

2,286

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Going to watch WW1984 later today.

As for Snyder -- I'm not really a fan of his stuff, but I certainly appreciate the physicality he gave Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman in contrast to the relative weightlessness of the Donner SUPERMAN films. A lot of Snyder's decisions are fundamentally at odds with why superhero fans enjoy superheroes. The first is collateral damage: very simply, superheroes SAVE people, so presenting Superman standing victorious around the shattered wreckage of the city of Metropolis is horrific and Snyder's blindness to how this would come off to his audience -- that's a serious failure as a director. A director has to be aware of how the audience will react to his content and the fact that he didn't think smashed skyscrapers full of people would be disturbing and his neglecting to have the MAN OF STEEL acknowledge it in any fashion is inept.

Snyder has a deeply disdainful attitude to superheroes, snarking that it's absurd that Superman and Batman don't kill. While I'm not a purist on the subject, Snyder's decision to have Superman kill Zod and Batman knife henchmen to death has a certain contempt for the source material behind it like he's embarrassed to be doing a superhero movie in the first place. This attitude is also present in his comments that he thought it was "fun" to kill off CIA agent Jimmy Olsen in BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE (actual title) and that it would be "fun" to do a prequel comic book where we get to see the Joker murder Dick Grayson.

I think that a creator who feels he has to show Superman and Batman killing should simply say that these are his versions of Superman and Batman, but Snyder actively attacking the non-lethal Superman and Batman presented elsewhere shows a marked disrespect for the characters and other creators. And creators who create based on contempt and trying to denigrate other creators are fundamentally cynical and defeatist and that's also not really why superheroes appeal, at least not to me.

The best I would say of Snyder is that he is technically brilliant and he clearly encouraged Patty Jenkins to do PATTY JENKINS' WONDER WOMAN and not worry about making it match ZACK SNYDER'S WONDER WOMAN.

It's a shame. I've read on Amazon that the blu-ray set has the same DVD quality as one of the previous releases, I'm not sure which, but they were all pretty awful.

I actually have a Universal set of Season 3 (Region 1). I wanted to show my niece "The Guardian" and my Mill Creek set wasn't playing that disc correctly although after I received the Universal set, I realized my Mill Creek disc just needed a good wipe. Season 3 is the season of grief and I would actually pay someone to take the Season 3 DVD set away from me, but no one has ever wanted to go within five feet of it.

I used to wander through Best Buys back when Best Buys sold DVDs and I would always take all the SLIDERS Season 3 DVD sets off the racks and put them in microwaves or fridges to stop anyone from buying them. Maybe some day, there will be an animated LEGO DVD set of SLIDERS sold in stores if DVDs are still sold by then.

2,288

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I ended up rewatching WONDER WOMAN and JUSTICE LEAGUE instead of WW1984 -- just to revisit what I feel is some very good work. Patty Jenkins has jumped aboard the anti-Whedon train, saying that Whedon's portrayal of Diana in JUSTICE LEAGUE contradicted her work in WW and WW1984.

I have to say, I don't know how fair that is. Whedon's behaviour is not defensible. But in terms of his work -- the primary contradiction for Diana actually started with BATMAN VERSUS SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE (actual title) in which Diana claims that after the first World War, she walked away from humanity forever.

This is blatantly at odds with what we see in WONDER WOMAN where Steve Trevor's sacrifice inspired Diana to remain involved with humanity and also at odds with JUSTICE LEAGUE where Bruce tells Diana that she walled her off from the human race after Steve's death.

The contradiction is not Whedon's fault; Snyder set up a cynical, defeatist Wonder Woman; Jenkins decided to go for an optimistic, inspired Wonder Woman -- and imply that Diana was just having a bad week when she said what she said in BATMAN VERSUS SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE (actual title). If anyone's responsible for the mismatch, it's Jenkins, although I don't think any viewers complained as the lively, societally naive but combat seasoned Diana of WONDER WOMAN was a vastly preferable depiction. Jenkins also portrays Snyder as helping her set up her version of WONDER WOMAN. If that's true, that's more Snyder being a supportive collaborator to his colleague rather than anything he produced in BATMAN VERSUS SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE (actual title).

That said -- there is one thing in JUSTICE LEAGUE that Whedon did that I actually do take issue with and Jenkins probably does too -- Diana Prince wears extremely low cut civilian clothes. Low cut tops that trace the bra line, jackets that are left open to show plenty of cleavage on those tops, jackets that end right at the waist to highlight the curve of her tight pants -- and this actually is wrong as Diana in WONDER WOMAN at one point is given the chance to wear whatever civilian she wants and she chooses what's effectively a female variant on men's business attire: a long coat with a skirt-like layering, a dress shirt -- and even her combat armour is arranged to show no bared cleavage despite wrapping around her chest. Diana Prince doesn't dress for the male gaze in WONDER WOMAN, but she does do so in JUSTICE LEAGUE and that strikes me as highly uncharacteristic.

Netflix shows are infamous for overstretching insufficient material to fill in time because more episodes means more revenue. Did you feel this happened on Disney+?

2,290

(724 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I personally won't watch shows with evil protagonists or even incompetent ones.

SMALLVILLE was a show I gave up on in Season 2 because Clark Kent was so fundamentally unheroic in his ineptitude, allowing what seemed like three-quarters of his student body to be killed at a rate of four or five murders a week with no effort to warn anyone about the meteor rock mutants and their psychosis. I only came back with Season 8 because Clark (and the writers) got their act together on that. TORCHWOOD (at least in its first season) was another show where the characters were completely incompetent in handling alien threats, attacking each other while civilians died.

It can be a delicate balance: you can't have a perfect protagonist who never screws up, but SMALLVILLE and TORCHWOOD went to the extreme the world would actually have been better off if the lead characters did nothing because their involvement only continued to cover up a crisis that they couldn't seem to manage.

I was slightly on the fence with SUPERNATURAL where Sam and Dean unleashed demonic forces on Earth at the end of Season 2 by accident, but Season 3 showed them urgently trying to set this right and accepting full responsibility.

Everyone loves the movie SPIDER-MAN 2 (Sam Raimi), but I really dislike it and my primary objection to it is that Peter Parker is incompetent. Despite his webslinging prowess, he can't deliver pizzas on time. Despite being a photographer, he can't remember to take the lens cap off his camera. Despite his powers repeatedly giving out on him, he keeps trying to websling with no effort to figure out what the problem is first. It's hard to cheer on a hero who makes obvious blunders and then repeats them and doesn't do anything to alleviate them.

But I have patience for other kinds of mistakes -- like Peter in THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN foolishly using a camera with his name on it in the field as Spider-Man. It's his first movie and he's a kid. Or pretty much every character's asinine choices in every episode of GIRL MEETS WORLD because they are children. And all the characters on THE ORVILLE where characters mess up because nobody can be all perfect all the time and will make mistakes because they are tired, unhappy, distracted, etc., but not because they are bad at their jobs.

2,291

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I hope it's not true that Reeves and Pattinson aren't getting along. Matt Reeves -- I don't really know his work, but Slider_Quinn21 seems to like his stuff.

Robert Pattinson is a cool guy. I think he's hilarious. His blunt assessment of TWILIGHT movies and novels as silly fantasy in which the vampires never do anything to even qualify as vampires is spot-on. His disdain for the abusive Edward Cullen character and his admission that he took the role to pay his rent is wonderful. He has a delightful story about how a female fan was stalking him, so he approached her and asked her out to dinner and spent half the dinner whining about his life and the other half of the dinner sitting alone because she had fled. He used to earn pocket money in school by shoplifting pornographic magazines and selling them to his classmates. When he got his first paycheque for TWILIGHT, he bought a $1,000 car off Craigslist. Most actors of his stature would try to play heartthrobs (like Jerry O'Connell did), but Pattinson has always gravitated to playing dysfunctional characters.

The Mill Creek release is Region 1.

What's the video quality like on that blu-ray set? The DVD video quality is ghastly on all releases due to overcompression to fit more episodes onto fewer discs.

I'm happy to contribute. A lot of people helped me with my SLIDERS magnum opus.

Out of appreciation and respect for your work, I’d like to raise the prize for you. I’d like to offer the winner of your contest the Sliders: The Complete Series DVD Mill Creek box set. I’ll have my copy sent to the winner. My email address is at the top of this message forum.

2,294

(724 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Ah, I see. I've never seen any of it. But I wondered what you would have made of trying to wrap up a show with the abrupt absence of the lead actor. A bit of a Quinn-in-Season-5 situation.

2,295

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I have to say, I don't really understand why so many trade magazines are claiming that DC movies will now have "Earth 1" and "Earth 2" established through THE FLASH featuring Affleck and Keaton to bridge the two Earths when, as far as we know, Robert Pattinson's Batman will not be in THE FLASH, so what Earths are being bridged? It's probably due to some trade journalists just not really grasping the multiverse concept and not being overly familiar with so much as the TV version of CRISIS.

**

I suspect that the reason DC has decided to no longer pursue a shared universe going forward: it builds the expectation of a crossover movie featuring all the individual characters together -- and that's proven highly expensive and not profitable.

It was very expensive to feature Henry Cavill AND Ben Affleck AND Gal Gadot AND Jason Momoa in one movie that also showcased the powers of Superman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, the Flash, Cyborg and the gadgets of Batman. AVENGERS had the benefit of having as many street level type heroes like Captain America and Hawkeye and Black Widow as it did more effects-demanding characters like Iron Man and the Hulk.

The Justice League is very costly to show on camera together with these specific actors unless it earns a billion dollars at box office and DC movies are more in the low to mid hundred million range. And since they're not aiming to do another very expensive, not terribly profitable JUSTICE LEAGUE movie featuring all the characters together, they've elected not to worry about keeping them all in the same continuity.

**

I've never understood why AGE OF ULTRON was so hated. Or why JUSTICE LEAGUE was so loathed either. But that's personal taste for you!

2,296

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I'm seeing it tonight. Admittedly, I've said that two nights in a row and gotten sidetracked by other things. Haha!

DC Films president Walter Hamada says that going forward, DC movies aren't going to be focusing on building ongoing continuity between their superhero movies. There will be multiple versions of Batman (with Affleck and Keaton in THE FLASH and Robert Pattinson in THE BATMAN) and it'll just be viewed as one big multiverse even as WONDER WOMAN, SHAZAM and AQUAMAN see sequels continuing from their DC Extended Universe origins. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/27/busi … ovies.html

News outlets paint this as Earth 1/Earth 2, but looking at the actual strategy, the goal seems to make sure that WONDER WOMAN  movies are consistent with WONDER WOMAN movies, AQUAMAN movies are consistent with AQUAMAN movies, SHAZAM movies are consistent with SHAZAM movies -- but with no particular concern for whether or not Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Shazam will be exist in the same reality or crossover with each other -- and THE FLASH will introduce multiple versions of Batman to indicate why Batman is played by different actors in theatres and on television and why the individual character/team movies will unfold separately going forward.

2,297

(3,573 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I said earlier that if Trump won the election, I would write Part 7 of SLIDERS REBORN. Just in case I had to (although it seemed unlikely), I wrote an outline. The title is "Redemption." The story:

Sliders Reborn: Redemption (7)
In the merged San Francisco, Quinn and Rembrandt are deeply alarmed by reports of four coma victims who have been drained of brain fluid. Quinn and Rembrandt and Laurel (Quinn's daughter) stake out a medical supply company that's been ordering a suspicious number of syringes for a safe injection site that doesn't seem to exist; they spot Colonel Rickman (with Neil Dickson's face) who recognizes Quinn and Rembrandt and runs. Laurel dives after Rickman while Quinn and Rembrandt placidly stay in the car, saying they are over forty and should no longer be chasing people.

Laurel pursues Rickman across a giant Tamagotchi parade, through an oxygen bar, past a Napster concert, a mapmaker's convention, a POG tournament but loses him in a macarena dance off. After a recharge at the oxygen bar, she staggers back to Quinn and apologizes for losing him. Quinn says it's fine; they tagged all the syringes and will track Rickman. Laurel demands to know why Quinn and Rembrandt let her chase Rickman then (QUINN: "We needed him to think he got away.") and where is Rembrandt anyway? 

Rickman enters his apartment only to find Rembrandt waiting for him. Rickman immediately overpowers Rembrandt, brags about how he drained the Professor nearly dry and then jabs Rembrandt with the syringe in his usual fashion. Rembrandt collapses. Rickman injects himself with Rembrandt's fluid -- only to scream as his face begins to morph between Dickson and Daltrey. Rickman falls over, shrieking as though his body is being stretched between two points.

Rembrandt stands, says that Rickman's a creature of habit, always aims his needle at the same place on a victim -- and Rembrandt's got a subcutaneous fluid sack implanted in him there courtesy of Dr. Diana Davis. It contains fluid with a special recipe just for Rickman. Rickman gasps out a demand to know if Rembrandt's poisoned him.

Rembrandt responds with questions of his own: where was Rickman born? Why was Rickman a Colonel in the US Army with an English accent? Why was an army officer performing medical experiments on himself and preying upon victims in a military base instead of checking into a hospital for his condition? How did he even come to self-medicate with brain fluid anyway? Why was Rickman always so inept at combat and strategy and so uncharacteristic of a military man? Rickman says his mind is beyond Rembrandt's dim comprehension: Rickman's past is irrelevant, Rickman's nature is what matters: he is the apex predator, he is death in human form, a massacre incarnate.

Rembrandt says that Rickman is a glitch in reality. There is no Colonel Angus Rickman; there is a British character-actor named Angus Rickman who was playing a slasher killer in a horror movie filmed on a military base. When the Geiger Combine experiment retroactively warped reality, it twisted Angus Rickman's timeline into a mixed and matched mess of his character and his real life, driving him and the world around him insane, leaving him this wretched madman.

Rembrandt says he hasn't poisoned Rickman; he has cured him. The fluid contains modified Glow nanites (from "New Gods For Old") that will stabilize Rickman's spacetime superposition, revert him to Roger Daltrey and reposition him within the merged San Francisco as whoever actor Angus Rickman would have been in this reality. He may be a madman again in which case the sliders will stop him; he may be a quiet civilian, a drama teacher at a school, perhaps a star of San Francisco theatre.

Rickman, feeling his identity and memory begin to shift, tries to hang on, snarls at Rembrandt that he would rather die than be reverted to whatever he might have been before. He says he killed the Professor, why won't Rembrandt just kill him? Rembrandt says that they are the same: they are sliders, they are the victims of a cosmic event, and this city of sliders is a chance for everyone to be reborn.

Rickman's face stabilizes into the visage of Roger Daltrey and then he loses consciousness. Around him and Rembrandt, the apartment reforms from a bare, stripped down space into a pleasant home with posters of Angus Rickman's plays and movies and TV shows and bookshelves full of volumes on acting and stageplays and scripts. Rembrandt examines what becomes a printed autobiography of Rickman's career as a musician, actor, writer and teacher filled with photos of a benign, smiling Rickman.

Rembrandt moves a sleeping Rickman to a sofa, puts a blanket over his resting form and quietly exits the apartment, leaving his former foe to reawaken to a new life and a new beginning.

2,298

(89 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

This is probably one of my quirks, but I generally don't subscribe to the idea of the good old days. There were no good old days, just days where the problems were different. To look at SLIDERS: even the sacred first season was a time of episodes being aired out of order, scripts being at odds with actors (like Quinn being written as Tobey Maguire but played by Jerry O'Connell), bizarre efforts at ongoing arcs that were never going to make it to air intact in the 90s when people didn't watch every episode, and the inability to decide whether Quinn and Wade were a couple or not from week to week is frustrating.

A much-enjoyed period of DOCTOR WHO and THE X-FILES for me: it was when the properties existed as media tie-ins: novels and audioplays for DW and comic books for THE X-FILES. There was some brilliant material that really redefined the series on paper -- but it'd be foolish to see those eras as the way forward for both franchises when the material was addressing devoted fans as opposed to a general audience and would have only ever served a steadily diminishing number of devotees as the years passed. Was it fun? Yeah! Was it really a good situation for DW and TXF? No, the spin-off media was just keeping the brand on life support.

I have the same feeling about the STAR TREK novels by William Shatner which resurrected Captain Kirk in the 24th century and recreated the original trio of Kirk, Spock and McCoy in the TNG era and had some wonderful stories: nine novels and a one book prequel -- but that really only played to diehard fans despite the merits of the writing, and it was best to get Kirk, Spock and McCoy back onscreen with Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto and Karl Urban in the roles.

Even my personal golden age of SLIDERS (REBORN, which was very personal, only 24 people really participated in it) was a time of intense stress: a nervous breakdown on a roadtrip that led to an eight month delay, a very painful developmental process of exhaustion, a desperate need for it all to be over at the 22 month mark, and then a fun final two months that left me missing it all emotionally but being intellectually aware that the end needed to be the end for my own sanity and well-being. I have a lot of fun listening to the podcast about SLIDERS and re-reading the delightful correspondence over the project and it never fails to cheer me up, but I have to be selective in not reliving the nervous collapse it induced and this was fan fiction.

Another minor issue with SLIDERS in its original conception: SLIDERS often took the view that mid-90s America was the 'correct' route for society and characters acted like any divergence from that was due to a moral or social failure -- at least in the Pilot and "Prince of Wails" and "Fever." There was a certain arrogance in that and to its credit, SLIDERS soon punctured that air of self-righteousness with "The Weaker Sex" and "Luck of the Draw" where those Earths have conquered famine and war even if their methods may be offputting and at odds with the sliders.

And this may or may not be why I am so awful at alternate history (all of my efforts just become alien planets) and social satire (all my efforts just become straight commentary), but that's okay. I'm a sitcom guy, not a sci-fi guy. We all have our strengths and weaknesses as creators.

2,299

(3,573 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Trump signed the package. *sigh* He tries to do one decent thing (for the wrong reasons) and has no backbone or follow through. That said, I have to ask pilight and Temporal Flux: was it worth it to get the package through to maintain unemployment benefits? Or are the benefits so scant that continuing them or severing them would have made no difference at all while pushing through useless financial support to seafaring vessels and academic research that has no bearing on the recession at all? I simply don't have the perspective to venture an opinion on this, so I would defer to yours for this one too.

That’s okay. A wise man once told me that he wasn’t the final arbiter of taste and I will say the same for myself.

On loopholes:

I find that most fantasy fiction involving battles between good and evil involve loopholes. By this, I mean a story will generally establish that the heroes are underpowered against an overwhelming force with no way to victory -- but then, it turns out the enemy's supposed invincibility had some caveat. The unstoppable Death Star has a weakness where one well-aimed shot can blow up the entire space station. Captain Kirk regularly encountered godlike entities whose power were dependent on some machine that could be exploded.

The most pleasing example of loophole victory I enjoyed recently was in SUPERNATURAL where Sam and Dean Winchester are two blue collar animal control workers who have been fighting evil for 14 years and whose villain for their 15th and final season is God Almighty himself, a being of boundless power who can erase Sam and Dean from reality on a whim and the boys defeat him by clever use of osmosis to siphon God's power into his kindhearted grandson.

Another clever loophole was in RISE OF SKYWALKER where Rey is told that if she kills the Emperor, his consciousness will transfer into her body and so when the Emperor attacks her with Force Lightning, Rey reflects the lightning back at him and he kills himself, sparing Rey from being used as a host -- which for some reason, IMDB seems to consider a plothole.

SLIDERS REBORN has a loophole at the end. The central conceit is that in REBORN, the multiverse is broken: the only branching point for parallel Earths now is the day of the first slide and there are no subsequent splits before or after that single date. Smarter-Quinn wants to destroy this damaged multiverse so a new one will replace it and Quinn has to stop him; at the end, Quinn and Smarter Quinn have the chance to choose a new branching point and they choose the very moment in which they are choosing a branching point, which repairs the multiverse to have infinite branching points and preserves the existing realities. Transmodiar said that this would have simply wiped out the existing multiverse and Slider_Quinn21 says it's extremely clever, and sometimes, if I've had a bad day, I re-read Slider_Quinn21's email saying it's clever and I feel better.

2,302

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I was watching Rob Benedict talk about playing CHUCK and he says that, as is obvious from a rewatch, he was not informed that his Chuck character was actually God or that his Chuck character would be revealed as evil at the end of Season 14 and be the villain of Season 15. Therefore, his acting in one episode could never hint at any revelations in future episodes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRd35H7Eu9w

But it's so interesting: Benedict says that he viewed Chuck as a character perpetually discovering himself: thinking he was a troubled writer, realizing he was a prophet, then realizing he was God, then realizing he was a villain. Benedict explained that a lot of that was because he wasn't told anything about his character beyond each individual script for each individual episode. But the result: Benedict played Chuck as 'God' having brainwashed himself into genuinely thinking himself a human named Chuck with 'God' as a sleeper personality that gradually reasserted itself, first with an aloof divinity at the end of Season 5, then as a blend of Chuck's assumed human identity but with God's power in "Don't Call Me Shurley," but finally with God's true personality at the end of "Moriah" as a cruel voyeur who torments his children for amusement.

It's as good an interpretation as we can get and I commend Mr. Benedict for his rationale and finding a way to believe in what he was performing as an actor who would perform a script with no idea what his character would be doing in the next one.

Andrew Dabb wrote:

I think we’ve done a lot over many seasons to differentiate our God from any one that anyone out there in the actual world worships, if that makes sense. He’s a character on a show, he’s not meant to be a representation of any deity that anyone is in any church praying to.

I think that when you’re writing a writer -- there’s a real danger to making it too authorial. Chuck’s a character. He’s not meant to be me or anyone else on this staff. He’s meant to be a character we’ve created over a number of years.

And the type of writer he is -- I don’t think that’s a very good type of writer.

A good writer will tell you that if you write good characters, they’ll go their own way and talk to you themselves. Chuck is the kind of writer who just wants his characters to do what he wants them to do and he gets frustrated when they -- because they have a little bit of agency -- kind of refuse.

I don’t think he’s a particularly good writer. https://www.themarysue.com/interview-su … drew-dabb/

2,303

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Conversation with the niece!

ME: "You'll recall that after that time with that thing and the dogs, you agreed that you would watch JUSTICE LEAGUE with me and comment on it while we ate a pizza."

LAUREN: "Yeah. You just never called it in. And now you can't because we're socially distancing! Ha! Although I guess someday you could when we're not."

ME: "Are you aware that JUSTICE LEAGUE will now be four hours long? And with the theatrical cut, you'll likely have to watch this movie for six hours while providing commentary for the entire time while eating a pizza."

LAUREN: "Oh God."

2,304

(756 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

And now for Tech Talk, with Quinn Mallory:

For the longest time, my niece was understandably furious with me for buying what were essentially netbooks: little $200 tablet-laptops with 10.1 or 11.6 inch touchscreens that could detach from the keyboard and Atom or Celeron processors that could only be used for light office work and web browsing. I used them for word processing and messaging and spreadsheets and website maintenance when I didn't want to be at by (very powerful) desktop computer and wanted to work at the library or the living room or at a friend's house.

My niece would be mad because these machines always failed within a year: they would stop powering on. The charging ports would break. They would inexplicably get the display stuck upside down. Wifi wouldn't work when Bluetooth was on. The keyboard would start inputting random characters. The touchpads would fail. "Stop buying these pieces of junk and get a good laptop!" she'd shriek at me.

I'd protest, "I don't need a good laptop. I have a great desktop with an i7 processor and 32GB of RAM and two solid state drives -- " (really a laptop permanently plugged into a monitor and keyboard and mouse that's too heavy to move around much). "I just need a small laptop for work on the go."

"BUT YOU HAVE TO BUY ONE EVERY YEAR!" she howled at me. There was a long period where, after the last netbook failed, I simply got a keyboard for my iPad. And this past year, with all the work from home, I've come to depend on a Chromebook to tether me to work when wandering away from my desktop.

The Chromebook, a Samsung Chromebook 3 with a matte IPS screen (that I had to install myself) was great -- but with the shift to working from home, I realized that all the (limited) Chrome apps and (slow) Remote Desktop access didn't replace my need for a Windows 10 laptop that could run LibreOffice and Adobe Photoshop and InDesign. Despite working from home, I often had to go to different rooms for Reasons and I needed a small laptop to keep work with me. I didn't need anything fancy, just something light in hand and on the wallet -- preferably one that fell within the stipend that my job had granted me to buy some hardware for working from home. But how would I avoid all the previous pitfalls?

QUINN: "You know what your problem's been?"

ME: "Being a cheapskate when it comes to buying a secondary laptop? Being a weirdo who needs a secondary laptop?"

QUINN: "I'm not going to confirm or contradict that -- except to say you've bought laptops that were trying to be tablets and tablets that were trying to be laptops and it isn't working. I mean, look at the Egyptian timer: instead of just trying to be a tracker-trigger for the next window to open a gateway, it became a reverse homing beacon, a coordinate repository, a sacred object in a funeral ritual, an express train to Los Angeles -- and it kept glitching and seizing because the hardware got overstretched. Just choose one specific use-case. You need a laptop within a price point. So get a laptop within the price point. Don't try to get a laptop that's also a tablet."

I was reviewing all the laptop options at an electronics chain called Canada Computers where I'd bought all my previous one year wonder tablet-laptops (this was when they were still offering in-store purchasing amidst social distancing). I went over to their small and light laptops and noticed that, as always, there was a stack of 'open box' / 'refurbished' laptop boxes stacked under the display counter, as there had been every year that I'd bought a cheap laptop from them that lasted a year.

QUINN: "You know what this means?"

ME: "Discount prices from buying a refurbished item? Yes!"

QUINN: "No, you moron. There have to be like TWENTY of these open box laptops. That means people bought them, hated them and returned them. Pretty much every laptop in this store has at least four open box laptops; that means this shop is selling garbage that people just bring back. Did you buy all your old laptops here?"

ME: "Yeah."

QUINN: "This store is your problem. You need to go somewhere else."

ME: "But the refurbished discount! So entrancing!"

QUINN: "Stop! Back away from that pricetag! I swear to God, if you buy a computer from this disaster fire of a retailer, I will have to hate you. I will hate you on a physical level if you do this."

A Best Buy had opened up the road, so to review my options and went there, and noticed that the majority of the laptops were much more expensive than the ones at Canada Computers and where Canada Computers had 5 - 6 cheap little laptops (and numerous returns piled up on the floor), Best Buy had exactly ONE cheap little laptop for sale.

QUINN: "Now, Best Buy's not the be-all, end-all of computer hardware. If you want RAM or flash memory or solid state drives or enclosures or cases or fans, that's clearly Canada Computers' bread and butter. But Best Buy -- they sell consumer gear, not hobbyist hardware. Best Buy sells preassembled units and they're not going to stock lemons that they have to take back; they only have worthwhile merchandise because showroom space is valuable."

I bought the cheap little 11.6 laptop from Best Buy and it's been precisely what it needs to be. It's slow, but I've disabled all non-essential Windows services to keep it from freezing and but a secondary machine doesn't need to be a speed demon so long as it's capable of opening any and all Windows 10 applications. The battery lasts 10 hours. The wifi and bluetooth haven't glitched, the keyboard hasn't gone haywire, the touchpad works. I was getting bad laptops before because I was going to a bad store for laptops whereas Best Buy, having survived the Amazon apocalypse on retail through price matching and raising the scale of the Geek Squad and being hyperselective in what they show in their show room, has somehow survived and also thrived.

2,305

(3,573 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

A fair and sensible assessment.

Thank you.

2,306

(3,573 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Trump has crashed the COVID relief package.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/2 … ost-450343

On one level, Trump is calling for something good: larger cheques to people whose need is desperate. On a more realistic level, Trump is agitating for more attention because the nation is slowly but surely turning its eyes towards President-elect Biden and Biden's shockingly conventional and status-quo upholding cabinet picks which are everything Transmodiar warned against but may or may not be a political reality of contending with a GOP Senate.

Trump doesn't care about helping anyone. He just wants to be in the news, life is just a reality show to him. But it may lead to a government shutdown as the Trump-stalled stimulus is tied to the spending bill that would keep government in operation.

I think it's important to highlight what a massive endeavour any virtual season of fanfic is for everyone involved. There's a lot of time, talent and work put into these passion projects and nobody gets paid. You do it at a loss. And there is a lot of love and fondness and obsession with the series and its characters to make this happen. My therapist referred to SLIDERS fan fiction on this level as the equivalent of a master's thesis.

I haven't been following any STAR WARS stuff since RISE, but if Slider_Quinn21 and Grizzlor are happy, I am also happy. :-)

2,309

(724 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

What did SliderQuinn21 think of the final season of HOUSE OF CARDS?

2,310

(3 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Thank you for finding, editing and sharing this. It's wonderful to see John and Cleavant in their prime and at the height of their powers. Even though I don't like the Season 3 costuming and hairstyling and makeup, it's incredibly flattering towards all the actors. There's a wonderful sense of ease and friendship between all the actors.

The strength of their chemistry convinces you that these untrained civilians have repeatedly beaten the odds and survived anything and everything and will continue to do so with their onscreen fates often seeming like a temporary situation rather than a permanent conclusion. I think this is why fans kept battling for more seasons of the show and had faith that the status quo would somehow miraculously be restored.

"Season's Greedings" is a pretty solid episode. Aspects that irk me like Quinn on a date with Kelly Welles when Wade is having a breakdown are more due Jerry's absurdly flirtatious performance than the script. There are two aspects that seem a bit too toned down from a modern perspective: the issue of consumer spending and debt is due to people purchasing items they don't need and can't afford. But from a 2020 perspective, people are generally in debt because their wages don't cover the cost of living. It's ridiculous that McDonalds and Walmart earn billions while having their frontline employees paid so low that they live on food stamps. "Season's Greedings" suggests debt is a matter of willpower and brainwashing and that's simply not the case.

"Season's Greedings" also has the sliders toppling the slavery of debt by destroying all the records which is charming but naive; what computer couldn't have its files restored? What corporation wouldn't have extensive backups of its debts? But people didn't really understand computers as commonly in 1996 as they do in 2020 and "Season's Greedings" would only have needed a mild rewrite here and there to address the issues of debt for survival and computer records. It's fine.

It's a pretty decent episode. It's interesting how Torme held it up as a symbol of everything that had gone wrong with SLIDERS, talking to me about how he hated how the episode ended with everything wrapped up in a bow and happy without any twists or turns or points of thought and how the sliders step into an offscreen vortex at the end to save money, but because of what came later in Season 3 and 4 and 5, "Season's Greedings" looks pretty good now.

Also, I've come to realize from talking to my film student niece: it's hard to make anything. If you make a bad TV show or film, you're probably average. If you make something okay, you're probably good. If you make something good, you're probably brilliant. And if you make something great, you may be a genius.

2,311

(954 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

There are rumours (but I can't find full confirmation yet) that Tobey Maguire will reprise his role as Peter Parker in DR. STRANGE II: MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS which will lead into AMAZING SPIDER-MAN III featuring Maguire as Spider-Man as well as Emma Stone as Gwen Stacey -- so it's possible that the massive number of cameos and multiple versions of the same characters in AMAZING III will have all the groundwork laid out in the DR. STRANGE sequel first.

2,312

(8 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I don't recommend VIP. It is not a good television series. However, I recommend the first season of SHE SPIES, which is strangely a very similar show to VIP -- a comedy action series featuring three beautiful women fighting crime every week -- but where VIP was crippled in many ways by budget and casting and limped along despite its difficulties, SHE SPIES leaps boldly and succeeds.

SHE SPIES is about three ex-cons sprung from jail to work as secret federal agents in exchange for pardons. All three are beautiful women and reformed conwomen. Cassie (Natasha Henstridge) is an espionage-oriented spy, Shane (Natashia Williams)  is a fighter and Deedee (Kristen Miller) is a hacker and their handler is Jack (Carlos Jacott). SHE SPIES is a silly action show with absurd plots and the actresses perpetually in ludicrous outfits -- but SHE SPIES is good, clever, brilliant and fun.

The first is the budget: SHE SPIES is a low budget cable show and cannot pull off crazy action, so SHE SPIES smartly declares upfront: Cassie, Shane and Deedee, as ex-cons, are not permitted to carry firearms, effectively eliminating gunfights from the show. Spared the need for squibs, the show has more resources to commit to locations and hand to hand combat.

Second: the characters break the fourth wall. They have inconsistent levels of awareness that they are in a TV show, at one point complaining about the credits, often declaring that they can sense the presence of the audience watching them, regularly complaining about the male gaze and their contrived spy operations and their ridiculous disguises.

"You think this just happens!?" their handler Jack protests at one point, saying the women do not appreciate the amount of effort it takes to make "three beautiful ex-cons" the perfect agents for espionage situations and describing the aggravation of constantly securing the costumes and disguises. In another episode, Cassie (Natasha Henstridge) tells some young bystanders to leave a dangerous scene by saying, "SPECIES is on cable tonight," the movie in which Henstridge was the star.

And third: SHE SPIES has real actresses and isn't handicapped by its lead performer being someone with no performance ability outside of still images. In addition to all three being amazing actresses, all three do a great job of selling the action sequences and high kicks and hard punches and that's even with the necessity of stunt doubling.

SHE SPIES is a terrific criticism of the male-gaze oriented action comedy while still mildly getting away with being one -- or at least it was for its first 20 episodes.

Quite inexplicably, the second season abruptly did away with all the fourth wall jokes, the hyperawareness of the characters existing in a silly spy show, the rapid fire quips and played SHE SPIES absolutely straight. Without a sense of comedy to acknowledge the absurdity, SHE SPIES became a blander version of itself -- still well-acted and well-performed, but pitifully generic. Without laughter, the fight scenes became rote and dull; the plot twists became formulaic and obvious; the characterization became shallow and empty -- except it had always been but now, the show had silenced its ability to point it out. The production was still a professional product and certainly watchable, but it wasn't worth watching.

The whole show is on YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwL4I4F … YMyj-lAnUj

It'd be nice to get a CHARLIE'S ANGELS reboot in this vein someday.

2,313

(3,573 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Do Americans really want to do this every time someone doesn't like losing an election... ?

2,314

(2 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

"You the man, coach! When I grow up, I want to be just like you! A single, childless adult who parties with kids." - A teenager to the now grown up jock Slater at a high school party.

I just watched the entire SAVED BY THE BELL revival. I've only seen maybe 9 - 10 episodes of the original show, probably when I had chicken pox and had to stay home for a month as a child and was watching a lot of TV. I was impressed by how the 2020 incarnation of SAVED BY THE BELL updated the series to a modern format, recreated some of the original energy of the series but updated it to 2020 with an ironic, self-aware angle, how it embraced social justice issues of education and racism and inequality with charm and wit -- and how it picked up on all the characters over two decades after they were last seen on TV, showing their families, jobs, ambitions, and overall situations.

Mischiefmaker Zack Morris has become the inept governor of California; Kelly peddles self-help books; Jessie has become a psychiatrist and published author and high school counsellor and former big man on campus Slater remains stuck in high school as the gym teacher and become an arrested adolescent.

The best part of the show's scenes with the original cast (who are all parents and teachers to the new students) is the deadpan references to all the absurd episodes of the original show.

It really goes to show how, for a show to have a proper revival with the original cast, it is important that the original cast when we last saw them were not shot and blown up after getting their brains sucked out. Or sent to a rape camp off camera before being turned into a computer that exploded. Or merged with another character and then lost forever. Or sent into an unstable vortex, fate unknown.

Slater to Jessie, high school social justice warrior turned adult school guidance counsellor
I think I owe you an apology. I feel bad about how I treated you back in high school. You were always standing up for things for things that you believed in and I kept telling you to calm down.

But you were right to be angry.

We all made fun of you, but you were the only one who really knew what was going on. Styrofoam is bad. Drilling for oil on a football field is bad. A school sponsored bikini contest is bad. I shouldn't have been telling you to calm down. I should have been yelling right there with you.

2,315

(3,573 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Game over for the Texas lawsuit.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/1 … ory-444638

2,316

(8 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I've been watching the first season of V.I.P., a wonderfully ridiculous (in)action comedy from 1998 (when Season 4 of SLIDERS was airing) featuring Pamela Anderson as a hot dog stand worker who blunders ass-backwards into:

(a) a date with a leading man celebrity actor to a Hollywood movie premiere
(b) accidentally rescuing the cowardly actor from a murderous gunman on live TV
(c) playing along with said actor telling TV reporters that she is his bodyguard to explain why he hid behind her and used her as a human shield when threatened
(d) joining an actual team of bodyguards who hire her as a figurehead while they do all the actual work and pretend that she's a martial artist/markswoman/combat strategist when her skills extend to counting cash and grilling hot dogs

V.I.P. is not 'good' by any conventional standard of quality, but it stands out to me because it is clearly being made on the same production model as Season 4 - 5 of SLIDERS: filmed in Los Angeles on a barrel-bottom scraping budget. Enclosed sets with windowless room after windowless room. 'Action' that consists of interchangeable shots of actors firing weapons off camera. A female lead hired for her surgically augmented chest and presented in an action show.

Yet, V.I.P. somehow manages to be better than the worst (meaning it's better than Season 5 of SLIDERS) despite many of the same limitations. V.I.P., while often bound to interior sets, battles the beige dullness of SLIDERS in Season 5. Walls are painted purple and blue with lights and bizarre 60s pop art livening up the sets. Clothes are vivid pink or shiny silver and other rich tones. V.I.P. is colourful, at times garishly so, but the creators are aware of the budget shortfall and putting up a mighty fight, insisting that every shot of their show decline succumbing to bland grayness of SLIDERS episodes like "Please Press One."

V.I.P. also attempts to work past its difficulties with action. It is budgetarily restricted to the lead actors and various guest henchmen firing weapons vaguely off camera and no one getting hit until the plot calls for an end to the fight, much like inaction non-masterpieces like "The Dying Fields" and "Heavy Metal. But there is some effort at strategy with the heroes often coming up with feints to draw their enemies into traps or waste all their ammo on decoys or distract with flash grenades and smoke bombs. There's an actual attempt to create an arc in the action instead of just having the actors shoot guns and stall to commercial.

The characters of V.I.P. are broadly scripted and badly defined, much like SLIDERS on the Sci-Fi Channel giving very generic roles to Quinn, Colin, Rembrandt, Maggie, Diana and Mallory. Yet, the show has cast surprisingly well outside of Pamela Anderson, hiring actors who are actually very good to play the 'real' bodyguards around Pamela Anderson's 'fake' bodyguard. The tall and regal Molly Culver gives her Tasha Dexter character a crisp professionalism and a strategic sense of movement and decisiveness and comes off as an ex-spy. The short-haired and muscled Natalie Raitano plays Nikki as a bruiser with a boxer's swagger and a mischievous aggression. And the token male of the group, Shaun Baker, gives his Quick Williams bodyguard character a charmingly unthreatening male glamour and playfulness who loves impersonations and pretending to be a hapless civillian when he's not.

The primary deficiency of V.I.P. is, oddly but unsurprisingly, lead actress Pamela Anderson. She's the co-creator and producer of the show. It wouldn't exist without her. And yet, a few episodes into Season 1, it is painfully clear that Ms. Anderson is simply not an actress and her skills are so weak that she makes Kari Wuhrer look good.

Kari Wuhrer may not be the master thespian, and she had deeply embarassing moments in Season 3 like "Dinoslide" where she couldn't hold a rifle convincingly (which is more on the weapons trainer than on Wuhrer). However, Kari Wuhrer has the basic skills: she can deliver dialogue and hit the points of emotion and exposition. She can perform the character's onscreen actions within frame, she can react and build rapport with other performers and she can carry a scene.

Pamela Anderson can't seem to do these things. I never thought I would see an actor fail to walk down a hallway unconvincingly, but Anderson can't do it; she is visibly struggling to stay within the center of the frame and each step is guardedly hesitant as she's afraid to throw off the shot. She can't decide whether or not to swing her arms and holds them at an awkward middle-height. She has absolutely no thought or technique in how she delivers lines, at one point saying, "Okaabuhhahhhwannarsss" which I had to listen to four times before I realized she was saying, "Okay. But I want a raise." There is no thought to emphasis and her enunciation is shockingly poor.

Anderson is also pitifully incapable of carrying a scene; she can't bounce off her other actors because she doesn't seem to react to them, suggesting she's somehow been composited into the shot in post. She doesn't generate a friendly chemistry or rapport with guest stars with whom she's called to create a bond; she is a vacuum of anti-screen presence. Kari Wuhrer would never be so inept.

Anderson is good on camera when she's in slow motion, walking silently towards the audience, presenting a steely scowl as her supposed bodyguard character only to collapse into laughter as she gets close to the lens. She can do a music video. But once she's given any actual dialogue or any point of narrative or emotion to convey, she becomes a mess.

Kari Wuhrer was, for all her issues, an actress capable of acting. Pamela Anderson, however, is on camera because she has been surgically redesigned for the male gaze. This is another problem that Kari didn't have, or at least not to the same degree. While Kari Wuhrer had C-cup breast implants, Seasons 4 - 5 generally costumed her in blouses and jackets that didn't show off her cleavage except in specific occasions and even the sports bra of "Slidecage" was quite tame. Kari Wuhrer could still be presented as a woman who wasn't a Hollywood actress.

Anderson in V.I.P., however, has DD-cup breasts. Even in normal clothes, she looks like a surgical experiment. Her implants don't sit naturally on her body as any sort of plausible formation of fatty chest tissue; they don't rest against her form. They protrude and burst as a separate addition to her figure. It seems unlikely that her minimum wage hot dog stand worker character could afford the $15,000 for cosmetic surgery in addition to the lifetime of medical maintenance and upkeep. Kari Wuhrer, with C-cups that could be de-emphasized, played a lot of centerfold pinup girls, but she could also play a soldier, a hairdresser, a journalist, a police officer or a doctor or a hot dog vendor.

The unfortunate truth is that Kari Wuhrer and Pamela Anderson have bodies that were designed by men, for men and for the male gaze and for the camera to show them in full with their chests to be the most prominent part of their figure in a full body shot. Despite the popularity of these images, I'm not sure that most women would want to look like either one of them, to be the center of unwanted male attention and harassment, to be unbalanced on top, to have back issues and difficulties with posture. And despite Wuhrer and Anderson having made a lot of money, I'm not sure that many actresses would want to limit themselves to only playing characters meant to appeal to the male gaze. And outside of that, their bodies aren't really all that impressive; neither had much musculature. Neither were actually that fit. Outside of the augmentations, they simply acquired a lean skinniness through what looks to me like deprivation and liquid diets at the time. Women and girls should not look to them as role models of health or athleticism.

But amusingly, V.I.P. seems to understand this problem entirely and addresses it by having a worthy female role model onscreen. V.I.P. repeatedly compares Molly Culver's actual bodyguard character with Pamela Anderson's fake-figurehead bodyguard role -- and contrasts them accordingly. Molly Culver's Tasha Dexter wears suits -- fitted by 90s standards, a bit loose and big by modern standards, but she dresses like a professional, moves like an Olympic athlete, and fights like Bruce Lee. In contrast, Pamela Anderson's Val dresses like a teenaged cheerleader, is all hands in the air and uncoordinated in her gait, and can't actually fight at all. Tasha speaks with a measured, cool, dry delivery; Val babbles in an at times unintelligible mess. Val's onscreen beauty is presented through dresses and tops that wrap around her chest and emphasize strained straps and the full roundedness of her breasts. Tasha wears clothes that drape and flow in smooth, clean lines with Tasha being a picture of active and calculated athleticism.

Molly Culver is a really good actress in all the ways Anderson isn't and the highlight of her scenes is her exasperated frustration where the public at large lauds Val as the world's greatest bodyguard when Tasha is the one who is everything Val only pretends to be. Pamela Anderson may be the lead, but Molly Culver is the star.

(For all I know, Culver has as much silicon or saline in her as Anderson, but the show puts her in power suits, so I can't tell.)

What's also interesting to me is that on some level, Pamela Anderson herself must know this and encourage the show -- her show -- to do this. As the executive producer, Anderson would have had full control over who to cast. And she deliberately surrounded herself with extremely talented actors who are skillful in all the areas where Anderson is not. V.I.P. presents Anderson's character as a fake, an impostor, a phony supported by the real talent of her supporting cast, another choice that would have been Anderson's to make. In terms of the V.I.P. television series, Pamela Anderson backed other women and supported their talents.

In contrast, Kari Wuhrer during her time on SLIDERS did not support other women, actively harassing and bullying her female co-star into quitting and making catty remarks about her in the press.

Anyway. Season 5 of SLIDERS could have used V.I.P.'s set dresser and action choreographer. And I assume that Pamela Anderson as Maggie Beckett would have been even more bizarre than Kari Wuhrer, but given that Anderson was content to play an inept goofball to let real actresses take the lead on her own show, it's safe to think that Anderson wouldn't have driven Sabrina Lloyd off the show.

Don't watch V.I.P. It's only interesting in terms of 90s TV and subverting the genre and production conventions of the era. An era that has passed (thank God), because today, if men want to see surgically altered women, they have the internet; they wouldn't go to V.I.P. or SLIDERS for that kind of content and it'd be a waste of time, effort and resources to court that kind of audience. Television now presents action heroines in terms of physical proficiency and athletic ability from Megan Boone on THE BLACKLIST to Jaimie Alexander on BLINDSPOT and it's a shame Maggie Beckett wasn't rendered this way.

2,317

(9 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

It occurs to me that we could write a script called PARALLELED or we could still get UNPARALLELED. But we'd all better do it fast because there are only two of these titles left to us!

2,318

(3,573 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

"The justices are not going to have the slightest interest in entertaining a sprawling lawsuit brought by an unaffected third-party state — one that, if Texas got its way, would forevermore thrust the Supreme Court into the thick of electoral politics."
https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/10/politics … index.html

2,319

(9 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Well, you know what this means. It means that Temporal Flux, Slider_Quinn21 and I should combine our talents and write and sell a screenplay called PARALLELED before someone else gets it because with PARALLELS as a TV movie and PARALLEL as a feature film, the title PARALLELED is all that remains. We should all join in together and snap that up before someone else get it. Temporal Flux will apply his satirical sense of inverted, skewed without skewering comedy. Slider_Quinn21 will bring his sense of emotional momentum and his crisp exposition. And ireactions will buy the Fade In screenwriting software license to type it all up and export it to PDF.

2,320

(3,573 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Well, then that's 18 states supporting an absurd and incoherent lawsuit, the basis of which is that voter fraud was somehow widespread in 2020 because there was no evidence of voter fraud and therefore no evidence that there wasn't voter fraud. As Transmodiar might say, "You can't prove a negative" -- which isn't true, but the underlying point still stands -- the absence of evidence is not evidence. Biden doesn't need to prove his votes weren't fraudulent he's not the one alleging fraud.

And, to my surprise, Trump's judges are not falling in line for their benefactor. Across the board, Trump-nominated judges are striking down his ridiculous lawsuits.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ … ump-444023

Why is the Texas attorney general doing this? He's under investigation for corruption and he's hoping this hopeless lawsuit will win him a presidential pardon.

2,321

(954 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

https://www.cbr.com/spider-man-3-andrew … ten-dunst/

The third MCU SPIDER-MAN film will apparently feature Tom Holland as Peter Parker, Zendaya Stoermer Coleman as MJ, Alfred Molina as Dr. Octopus (reprising the role from Sam Raimi's SPIDER-MAN II), Jamie Foxx as Electro (reprising his role from THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN II) and Andrew Garfield (!) also as Peter Parker and Kirsten Dunst (!) as Mary Jane Watson (!?!!).

CRISIS ON INFINITE EARTHS on the CW seems to have emboldened a certain devil may care craziness. It's ridiculous. As ridiculous as, I dunno, a SLIDERS story where Quinn, Wade, Rembrandt and Arturo have a rematch against the Season 3 monsters. But here we are.

2,322

(3,573 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

It's a ridiculous case. Texas has no chance of getting this case forward because their case is dependent on claiming there were tens of thousands of fraudulent signatures -- and there is absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever. (Absence of evidence to the contrary isn't evidence.) They can't establish evidence of injury or just cause for this lawsuit to go anywhere. (Not liking the results of a vote is not injury or just cause.)

2,323

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I think, although the CW wouldn't permit Chuck's death in Season 11, they couldn't force the issue in Season 15. What could the CW do to SUPERNATURAL? Cancel it?

God is a difficult character to write. One of the best renditions of the character, JOAN OF ARCADIA, was cancelled in Season 2 and that's always been a shame.

In terms of SUPERNATURAL, I think the show has largely done a decent job, but due to the show being extended to three times its original lifespan, Chuck's characterization and reveals and overall arc are not entirely airtight.

If the intention from Season 4's "The Monster at the End of this Book" had been for Chuck to be eventually revealed as God, certain scenes in "Monster" would not have been present. Chuck is shown alone and experiencing psychic visions of future episodes and seeks to warn Sam and Dean only to be intimidated by the angel Zachariah who informs the agonized Chuck that even if he killed himself, the angels would simply resurrect him.

This doesn't actually track with later episodes where Chuck is decidedly not omniscient with regards to future events. He predicted and planned for Dean to execute Jack with the Equalizer gun and was taken by surprise. And his supposed omniscience didn't allow him to predict Jack siphoning his power; in fact, Jack is a massive blindspot even in his omniscience for present and past events. SUPERNATURAL's prophets are also less precognitive than their title would suggest; they predict inevitable events but not outcomes, much in the same way a mechanic predicts that you'll need an oil change eventually.

Had Chuck been planned all along to be revealed as God, "The Monster at the End of this Book" would have left it vague how Chuck receives his 'visions' (because he doesn't receive any) and rather than have Zachariah frighten Chuck, perhaps Chuck would have fallen asleep and Zachariah would read his next manuscript malevolently. Alternatively, a future Chuck appearance could have revealed that Chuck suppressed his true identity as a 'sleeper' personality not to be reawakened until after "Swan Song."

And had it really been planned all along that Chuck is a sadistic voyeur, I think "Swan Song" would have altered Chuck's monologue slightly, saying that "endings are hard," but then intoning that some endings aren't endings at all, just one door closing while another one opens as we go from Dean eating dinner with Ben and Lisa to Sam somehow restored and watching at a distance -- hinting that Chuck is determined to maneuver events to keep Sam and Dean hunting monsters for even longer.

"Don't Call Me Shurley" would also have needed a slight adjustment: rather than have Chuck indifferent to humanity's impending doom at Amara's hands but ultimately return as a loving father who took a step back, the episode would have needed to present Chuck as a viewer. With "Moriah"'s revelation coming in the future, "Don't Call Me Shurley" could have had Chuck declare that he didn't want his favourite show to end, but it looked like it was ending and he was simply going to keep his distance, survive Amara's onslaught, and then start a new TV show/reality and try again. Metatron would chastise Chuck for his indifference and then declare that if Chuck truly believed in his story and creations, he would get involved in the story even if it might mean Chuck might not exist afterwards to tell a new story should Amara win.

Chuck would respond to Dean saying Chuck abandoned humanity by saying, "I know you think I'm some all powerful deity to be worshipped, but I'm not. I'm just a dad who had to take a beat and let my boys make their own choices, find their own way and fight their own fights -- but I'm here for you now with this fight."

Dean might have protested, "A father's there for his kids! He inspires them! He helps light their way even if he can't carry them, but you just left us in the dark!" And perhaps Chuck would say he'd try to make that right and then at the end of Season 11, he'd declare, "You're right, Dean. I did leave you alone. A parent shouldn't do that. Amara and I want to fix that now," and that would have Mary Winchester return.

But then "Moriah" could reveal that Chuck is actually not the passive viewer he claimed to be. He is the showrunner. And anyone who inflicts this much grief on his children so that he can have more episodes of his "favourite show" is the villain.

There is a degree of wiggle room in that what we see onscreen as Chuck is a facade; the face and charisma and warmth of Rob Benedict is a shell inhabited by a much more complex personality who wields Benedict's affability and emotional accessibility for his own purposes and with Season 15's Chuck using the Benedict skin as a subtly toxic and indirectly cruel blade against those who trusted in Rob's gentle screen presence.

And the writers certainly mined past decisions well and did their best to earn it and play fair with it and did their best not to blatantly contradict the past except in areas that were always open to suspicion of onscreen events. But Seasons 1 - 12 were certainly not building to a grand showdown against Chuck; Rob Benedict was not playing Chuck as God pretending to be normal in Season 4 - 5, nor did he later play Chuck in Season 11 as Chuck as a sadist masquerading as an exasperated father who came back to save his kids.

Ultimately, Chuck's turn to villainy is a retcon, albeit an inevitable (if unexpected) retcon.

2,324

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Something interesting about Chuck.

In Season 11's "Don't Call Me Shurley," Chuck expressed irritation with humanity and a desire to give up and let Amara destroy it all. Chuck pointed out that the angels, despite being given their freedom, had chosen to continue pursuing the Apocalypse. Castiel had become a mutated angel of his own accord. Dean had pushed for Death to restore Sam's soul; Sam had insisted on restoring Dean from a demonic existence that ultimately led to Amara being unlocked.

Chuck declared he was done watching his children fail and that he was done -- until Metatron, an unlikely advocate for humanity, demanded that Chuck stop seeing himself as an awkward human being and as God Almighty and respect humanity's perseverance, creativity and indomitable spirit at which point Chuck decided to get involved. Chuck resurrected the dead, approached the Winchesters, brought Kevin's ghost to the bunker and sent him to heaven and won the Winchester's (hesitant) trust. Metatron would later sacrifice himself pleading for humanity to be spared.

Informant watched these episodes and declared that Chuck hadn't really been depressed and hadn't given up on humanity and was just pretending to be an indifferent God to inspire Metatron to get back on track. In terms of the actual onscreen events, this was Informant's usual attitude to God; that only Informant's view of a Christian God is permitted to be considered, worshipped or depicted in fiction -- to the point of declaring with no onscreen evidence whatsoever that Chuck was play acting in his exasperated frustration with Sam, Dean and Castiel.

Except... as of "Moriah" in Season 14, it turned out that Informant was absolutely right about one thing -- Chuck was indeed playacting in Season 11. "Moriah" asserts that Chuck has been deliberately forcing Sam and Dean to the center of every apocalyptic crisis because SUPERNATURAL is his "favourite show" -- and given that Chuck would not have wanted his favourite show to end with Amara destroying all reality in Season 11 (or end at all), that means Chuck's indifference to Sam and Dean in Season 11 was indeed feigned.

However, Season 15 asserts that Amara really was a threat to the world and Chuck and exists independently of him. Season 15 also has Chuck, when left to his own devices, utterly sincere in his view of himself as a writer, seeking out former fangirl Becky for inspiration and encouragement in his writing. So how much of Chuck's behaviour in Season 11 was sincere, how much was counterfeit, and why did Chuck lie or pretend to be uncaring that his favourite show could end with Season 11?

This is a question that may or may not have an answer. After Season 5, SUPERNATURAL was generally written one season at a time. In addition, Chuck being the final villain of the series was not intended; in fact, Chuck's true identity was an area where even Eric Kripke himself was decidedly noncommital. He didn't tell Rob Benedict until late into Season 5 that Chuck was God, meaning Benedict played Chuck's terror of angels and awkwardness at fan conventions as absolutely genuine. Chuck's absence from Seasons 6- 11 outside a brief cameo in Season 10's "Fan Fiction" maintained the vague uncertainty.

And in Season 11, Chuck was unquestionably intended to be a force for good by the writers under showrunner Andrew Dabb; the original plan was for Chuck to be killed off after "Don't Call Me Shurley," upping the stakes even more with the boys losing their most powerful ally -- except the CW intervened on Chuck's behalf, declaring that killing off the character of God was courting entirely too much religious and metaphysical controversy for their taste.

The decision to make Chuck a villain tracks with various characters questioning God's motives from Seasons 1 - 13 -- except that having Chuck potentially malevolent was never a serious plan. It was simply an obvious and worthwhile avenue of drama when writing for a largely offscreen character who wasn't around to defend or justify his actions. It's only with Season 13 that SUPERNATURAL began actively laying the groundwork for presenting Chuck as a villain, first by showing a parallel world where he'd abandoned humanity to an angelic apocalypse, and then in Season 14's tenth episode, "Nihilism."

Michael said:
Me and my brother -- my Lucifer -- when we fought in my world, we thought that God would come back. Give us answers: why he'd gone, what we'd done. But instead, do you know what happened?

Nothing. No God. Nothing. And now, now that I'm in here -- now I know why.

God -- 'Chuck' -- is a writer. And like all writers, he churns out draft after draft. My world? This world? Nothing but failed drafts. And when he realizes that they're flawed, he moves on and tries again. Because he doesn't care.

There is a thematic inevitability to God being the final enemy for the Winchester brothers. But retroactively, what was Chuck doing in Season 11? Humanity was genuinely under threat as was Chuck himself; did he decide that, if he had to insert himself into the story, he would wait until the most dramatic moment and risk his favourite show being obliterated? Was that why he pretended to be disenchanted with SUPERNATURAL? Declaring Seasons 6 - 11 to be "all reruns" when the truth was he'd been fervently watching every episode the entire time?

And in his gentleness with the Winchesters -- was that sincere? Or was he playing the role he thought would work best for his story? The role of a cautiously distant but loving father who had, for better or worse, felt he had to stop being a "helicopter parent"?

It's also most interesting: Chuck wins the Winchester's trust by sending Kevin's spirit to heaven. But Season 15 reveals that Chuck sent Kevin to hell. Why? From a behind the scenes standpoint, Season 15 wanted a familiar face to explain the situation and Osiric Chau was available to reprise his role. But from an in-universe perspective, why did Chuck say he was going to give Kevin an "upgrade" to heaven but instead send him to hell?

It's possible that there simply isn't an answer outside of the writers having written Chuck season by season and having had one intention in Season 11 but chosen to alter their plans after that and that's the only explanation we'll ever have.

2,325

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

*sigh* So busy lately...

I was very satisfied with the SUPERNATURAL ending. The only thing that I would have changed would have been for the CW to announce that they would have WAYWARD SISTERS next year after all.

That said, I was surprised when my niece, a big SUPERNATURAL fan, told me that she was deeply disappointed with it.

Historically, she has strongly disliked Eugenie Ross-Leming and Brad Buckner scripts for being filled with forced, plot-driven occurences with characters making nonsensical choices to serve the plot, and she felt that "Inherit the Earth" had Ross-Leming and Buckner's worst tendencies from a contrived and rushed means of defeating Chuck to a random and unearned betrayal from Michael and a ridiculously haphazard deceit from the Winchesters.

She was also dismayed by Jack being a God who would do absolutely nothing as though inaction and indifference were somehow to be admired. "You can tell that SUPERNATURAL was started by a Jewish writer and finished by two Christian writers," she said, and she was also unimpressed by Jack's claims that he would be present in all aspects of life but absent in any practical sense.

She thought it was a waste of dramatic potential for Dean to have no further development on Castiel's apparent death. She was also disappointed by "Carry On," noting that the episode seemed to be struggling to fill its timeslot with two musical montages and she disliked the idea that the point of life was to die and reach the afterlife.

I talked a bit about how Charlie and Kevin's deaths were to show how hunters lead dangerous lives and that Dean, once no longer having his life written by Chuck, suffered the same fate as so many other hunters and that it made sense. I said I felt that Jack might not write events for drama as Chuck did, but to me, the definitive Jack-scene is "The Bad Place" where Jack attends a Narcotics Anonymous group and regards the attendees with interest, enthusiasm, respect and without any judgement, pleased to be present, requesting assistance but not forcing it -- and that I imagined Jack using his omniscience to be there for people in a conversational sense but never a dictatorial one -- although I confess that this is not in the show, based in my fondness for the TV show JOAN OF ARCADIA where God makes requests and offers advice but does not coerce, threaten or offer anything in return. ("I don't bargain; that would be cruel.")

My niece replied that while my responses were very logical, she was more concerned with the themes of the series and she felt that the finale didn't fulfill them, although she said that it was more about the 15 year journey than the finale at the end of it.

I just really wish, for her, that WAYWARD SISTERS had been picked up. She loves SUPERNATURAL conventions and travels around the continent to attend them, but she doesn't go for Jared and Jensen. She goes for Kim Rhodes, Briana Buckmaster, Ruth Connell, Rob Benedict, Richard Speight Jr. and it's a shame that Rhodes and Buckmaster never got their show.

2,326

(3,573 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

My hope is that Trump will be in jail by 2024.

2,327

(3,573 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

TemporalFlux wrote:

What happened here?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/En17g4rVoAEF9Lc?format=jpg&name=small

Looks like they moved in the kids’ table from Thanksgiving

pilight wrote:

It's a bill signing desk, normally used when they need extra space for guests

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/En1Q99DW4AASV6z.jpg

And it's a desk sized so the person sitting behind it can share the spotlight with others. But when that person sits behind that desk alone, you see how small and weak that person is.

Joe Biden is not the candidate I wanted, but he has been becoming more of the candidate I wanted. It's interesting to look at his outburst with a plant worker who accused him of being part of a conspiracy to shutter second amendment rights. "You're full of shit!" Biden shrieked at him, ranting about how he owned guns himself for hunting and howling, "I don't work for you!" When a student asked him why Democrats should support him during his weak primary performance, Biden snapped that democracy is a caucus and a discussion (as opposed to a competition) and asked her if she'd ever even been to a caucus. When she hesitantly (and untruthfully) said she had, Biden shrieked at her that she was "a lying, dog-faced pony soldier" (?!?).

The back chatter is that when Obama formally began coaching him, the advice was to stop losing his cool like this. "You're not running for Senate, but for President," Biden's former boss allegedly told him. "Don't be senatorial. Be presidential." What does that mean?

In practice, it means that later, when a black kid asked Biden what he could do for black people and mocked Biden for saying that any Trump voters weren't really black -- Biden responded with a full and polite answer about giving black-owned businesses startup funds to encourage other investors to chip in, childcare that would allow black families to work and build wealth -- and no anger at the jibe or resentment at the mockery which he so richly deserved. It means that when a college student asked Biden why young people should support him, Biden responded by telling him that this current generation of youth is the generation that is the most educated informed and also the least prejudiced and ignorant, and that Biden would try to serve as a transitional president to their leadership.

I watched Biden saying after he won that Democrats should find ways to unite with Trumpists.

Joe Biden wrote:

For all those of you who voted for President Trump, I understand the disappointment tonight. I've lost a couple of times myself. But now let's give each other a chance. It's time to put away the harsh rhetoric, lower the temperature, see each other again, listen to each other again. To make progress, we have to stop treating our opponents as our enemies. They are not our enemies. They're Americans. They're Americans.

This is a silly fantasy. This is saying that we should be kind to the arsonist burning down our house, that we should have a listening ear to the racist shrieking that Chinese people are making good Christian Americans sick, that we should treat Men's Rights Activist terrorists as having a legitimate point of view in declaring that women are required to provide sex to any man who wants it. That we should be concerned with the well-being of the person who refuses to wear a mask during a pandemic.

But this is also the job: a president sets the tone he wants people to find. A president's job is to treat you like the absolute best version of yourself, the most honourable and self-sacrificing and empathetic incarnation of your being -- even if you aren't there yet, even if you may never get there at all. A president speaks to you as though you have conquered your failings and weaknesses so as to remind you that can choose to do so. And a real president sits at that tiny desk and allows himself to look smaller to make space for the other people around him. A real president does not sit there alone.

2,328

(1,684 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I hope it goes well. I love STARGIRL.

**

I don't think TITANS is a bad show. It's compellingly acted, drivenly filmed, intensely scripted and even absurdities like Dick Grayson being tried, convicted and sentenced in a few days work for a dark superhero reality. It's probably fine. It's probably just not for me. There's definitely an audience for more nihilistic superheroes with WATCHMEN, THE BOYS and now TITANS. As Transmodiar once said, I'm not the final arbiter of taste.

2,329

(3,573 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Turnout was estimated to be high due to a highly partisan election year and few undecided voters. 23 million shouldn't be a surprise.

https://www.vox.com/2020/11/4/21549010/ … ction-2020

2,330

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Billie in 11x02, "Form and Void":
You and Dean dying and coming back again and again -- the old Death thought it was funny, but now there is one hard fast rule in this universe: what lives, dies. So the next time you or your brother bite it, well, you're not going to heaven or hell. One of us -- and Lord, I hope it's me -- we're going to make a 'mistake' and toss you out into the Empty. And nothing comes back from that.

I don't recall Billy giving a number of deaths.

As for "The Heroes' Journey," I genuinely don't think the authorial intent was to say that Sam and Dean were talentless and inept and only ever propped up by Chuck. It's simply that they were given the means to bypass things that Kevin, Charlie, Bobby, Rufus, John and Mary had to deal with.

Sam and Dean's sudden inability to pick a lock is often cited as an example of the brothers being incompetent without Chuck stacking the deck in their favour. But, in my view, it's actually a subtle DOCTOR WHO reference to how after many seasons of the Doctor being stalled and delayed by locked doors, the writers introduced the sonic screwdriver and spared the audience the tedium. (Any show that names a character "Amy Pond" has some WHO fans on staff.)

Chuck clearly didn't find it entertaining to watch Sam and Dean delayed by locks, so he gave them a sonic screwdriver -- lockpicking -- but once he lost interest in them, it became something they had to deal with.

Also, "Heroes Journey" has Chuck deciding that anything that can possibly go wrong for Sam and Dean will finally go wrong. No one would miraculously manifest cavities within weeks, so Chuck was now stacking the deck against them -- and any lockpick artist will be defeated by a lock at some point.

It's also a bit comforting, in some ways.

Dean in "The Real Ghostbusters":
I think that the Dean and Sam story sucks. It is not fun. It is not entertaining. It is a river of crap that would send most people howling to the nut house. So you listen to me. Their pain is not for your amusement. I mean do you think they enjoy being treated like... like circus freaks?

While Dean's life has been horrific, he has also enjoyed a life without worrying about bills, cavities, colds or car trouble except for a brief two week period. He may have been cursed by God, but he was also blessed in many ways.

2,331

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I assume that even a retired Sam would train new hunters, give advice, set up waystations and teams, collate new data on monsters, maintain a weekly email newsletter, let people know about exciting sales of wolfsbane and dead man's blood, etc..

**

I can understand the irritation that after 15 seasons of battling werewolves, vampires, poltergeists, serial killers, Satan, archangels, Leviathans, mutated angels, Robert Singer, the King of Hell, the Men of Letters, God's disgruntled sister, the FBI, God himself and dental cavities, it's frustrating for Dean to be taken out by a vampire and a nail. But to me, that just captures how death sucks whether it's some self-sacrificing explosion or a small scuffle. Death is never happy in real life, and SUPERNATURAL was quite true to life in that respect.

In addition, Dean has died 112 times: 106 freak accidents in "Mystery Spot," a car accident, dragged to hell, shot to death, becoming Death and self-induced death to talk to Death (twice). The only death that the show hadn't done at this point was something small and low-key. As for whether or not Dean had to die -- I think that it was a dramatic necessity because the show had repeatedly resurrected Dean (and Sam). But this was to be the series finale, and rather than leave fans wondering how Sam and Dean would come back for some hypothetical Season 16, they showed Dean die and in the afterlife to make it clear that this was the end.

There's also the fact that SUPERNATURAL has had a decidedly unromantic view of death, often at its own cost and to the outrage of fans, specifically with Kevin Tran and Charlie -- but I'm not sure SUPERNATURAL was wrong to kill those characters the way it did. There was a strange sense of consequence to Kevin's death. He was only ever expected to be a guest star, but Osric Chau won over the fans and the cast and crew, so they kept him on -- but the character was in a difficult position. His mother was kidnapped. His girlfriend was murdered. He couldn't protect them.

Kevin was not a fighter, and while the show could have had him training with Sam and Dean and present him as combat capable, there came a point of no return where Kevin had spent so long as a non-combatant that it was too late to overturn it. Kevin was a scholarly student hiding in the bunker, incapable of defending himself against monsters like Sam and Dean -- so his eventual death at the hands of any threat that could gain access to the bunker was inevitable.

The show refused to excuse itself or Kevin from this painful but inescapable path of cause and effect, only giving Kevin the slight comfort that in death, he could bid farewell to his mother before Chuck sent him to heaven -- except it turned out Chuck sent him to hell to keep him in circulation for future episodes of his favourite show. (Presumably, Jack sent Kevin to the rebuilt heaven afterwards.)

And with Charlie, we had a somewhat inverted version of Kevin that came to the same unfortunate conclusion. Charlie rose to the challenges of becoming a hunter: she became combat ready, she drew upon her past skills to defend herself in her new life, she proved able to disguise herself, she was fit for life as a wanderer and researcher and fighter. But the life of a hunter is constant, endless, repeated exposure to deadly situations with enemies who are stronger than any human. Hunters survive based on knowledge of monster's weaknesses, partnerships, teams, preparations -- but those can fail and in the end, Charlie was trapped in a room with a monster too strong for her to beat and she died.

This was incredibly offensive to many fans. Felicia Day was offended. The cast were offended; when Season 10 showrunner Jeremy Carver was asked to explain this at a convention, the cast and crew around Carver took a step back from the microphones; they would not defend him or side with him. Carver said that it was where the story took him and ultimately, Charlie's death was upsetting and hurtful because death is upsetting and hurtful and most hunters die horribly.

The fan protest is that Sam and Dean have repeatedly been spared death and that surely a beloved character played by a beloved actress had earned the same privileges as the straight white men who lead the show; that surely a lesbian and a female hunter and a beloved role model to young girls and LGBTQ viewers should be excused from the likely outcome of a dangerous life, and that refusing to give some of Sam and Dean's privilege to Charlie and Felicia Day proved ghastly and horrific.

And I can see that -- except the show seems to have addressed that with Season 14 - 15, noting that Sam and Dean were spared because Chuck spared them. Because they were his "favourite show." Season 15 in "The Heroes Journey" further notes that Sam and Dean have been granted many special exemptions by being the leads of Chuck's favourite show that other characters like Bobby, Garth, Kevin and Charlie don't receive. Sam and Dean have exemptions from death, credit limits, parking tickets, the common cold, car battery failures, dental decay, indigestion and food allergies.

It's also fair for fans to feel sad that many guest-stars and recurring characters never got an on camera resolution. This was an unfortunate effect of the pandemic making it impossible to bring back many guest stars for the finale. I am sad that we never saw Jack face off against Harper Sayles the necromancer again. But -- the unfortunate truth is that any show that makes it five years (never mind 15) is going to have unresolved arcs because TV is perpetually hit by actor unavailability or sudden changes in the rush to crank out 20 - 25 episodes a year. No series escapes this.

From a creative standpoint, SUPERNATURAL absolutely grasped that it needed to give its guest-stars more screentime and development, especially its female characters. Over several seasons, the show built a cast of recurring female guest stars in Jody Mills, Donna Hanscum, Alex and Claire and then built momentum to launch a spinoff in WAYWARD SISTERS, a place where they could finally offer their female players the same advantages as Sam and Dean. The spinoff wasn't picked up due to (a) Kathryn Newton's success in BLOCKERS and DETECTIVE PIKACHU making her more expensive and (b) the CW having a lot of other shows that year that wouldn't come with the Kathryn Newton pricetag. The SUPERNATURAL creators had absolutely no control over that; they saw their own flaws with women, they attempted to balance it out, but their measure was rejected by the network.

Also, SUPERNATURAL addressed the Charlie issue by bringing in an alternate universe version of Charlie which proved satisfactory. This would suggest to me that the issue was not killing off Charlie, but rather killing off Felicia Day, and since Felicia Day returned to the show, SUPERNATURAL's point with Charlie's death has a clearer validity: hunters lead dangerous lives and will likely die during a hunt, their deaths will be violent, and death is always upsetting. And ultimately, once Chuck was no longer forcing Sam and Dean to be the star of his favourite show, Dean was treated in the same way as Charlie: he lived a life of constant kill or be killed situations and he was killed. His number came up.

Could Jack have saved Dean? Of course. But Jack freed Dean (and Sam), liberating them from the endless cycle of death and resurrection and being at the center of Chuck's favourite show. To resurrect Dean again would have been to steal his freedom instead of granting him peace.

I think it's fine to dislike it. But it was a perfectly valid writing choice and there weren't that many options that hadn't been explored after 326 episodes.

2,332

(3,573 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Michigan's results are certified.

Do Americans really want to go through this every time they have an election? Where after the results are in, they have to argue whether or not the results are to be accepted because the losing party doesn't like losing?

2,333

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

According to an interview with Andrew Dabb and Jensen Ackles, the finale's story was largely the same -- but anything involving large numbers of extras or returning guest stars was cut. There was an intended montage of guest-stars, so I assume that we would have seen Charlie, Donna, the alternate Bobby and others restored to reality in 15x19 and that we would have seen Eileen and Sam raising their son in 15x20.

I did read that Ackles wasn't happy with the ending, but he didn't specify what he wasn't happy with and he also said that Kripke assured him that Dabb's ending was the right one and he accepted it.

I remarked to my niece that to see Felicia Day die once is tragic; to see her die in the same show twice suggests that Chuck's rather sadistic. It's a shame production didn't film everyone being reinstated to reality at the same time as they filmed the erasures.

I also think that Castiel was supposed to be present. He's mentioned as working with Jack, but he's not onscreen and I have no idea why; I read that Misha Collins was quarantining in Vancouver, but that could have been a mistaken report. It's possible that with all the risks, production elected to not bring back an actor for whom they'd filmed a death scene before the shutdown.

From a storytelling stance, though, the finale was supposed to show Sam and Dean without Chuck's ongoing interference and from that perspective, it makes sense to show the brothers without Jack, without angels, and without anything other than Eric Kripke's original intention of SUPERNATURAL as a series about two brothers hunting American urban legends and the result that would come if Chuck hadn't been artificially extending the series for 10 seasons after the Lucifer/Michael battle was concluded.

The implication of the montage is that Sam continued to hunt as he responded to a call for help. It's the last image we have of Sam engaged with his career as a hunter. There is no later image to suggest that he walked away from the profession. At the same time, if any fans prefer to think that Sam retired, there is an open space for fans to think that.

It's the same logic by which I'd say that the woman standing at a distance behind Sam is Eileen; the last explicit update we ever got on Sam's romantic life had him dating Eileen, so any woman Sam subsequently marries is likely Eileen -- although if fans want to slot in any love interests that Sam met over the last 15 seasons who weren't killed off, there is again space to do that.

A lot of fans are upset that the finale was not explicit that Eileen was Sam's wife, something that could have been achieved through Sam engaging in sign language to the woman in the background or showing the actress in photographs. But... I really, really did not like it when the show tried to summon the presence of Kathryn Newton as Claire by having Claire text Jody from offscreen or having Jody say that Claire was in Yosemite. It was clumsy and artless. They might as well have had Kim Rhodes turn to the camera and say, "We couldn't get Kathryn because she's busy filming THE SOCIETY and also, ever since DETECTIVE PIKACHU and BLOCKERS, she's gotten really expensive."

I concede that I don't have an alternative to that. The show needed to address Kaia's fate and Claire's situation even if Claire wouldn't appear on camera. But I appreciated how the finale did not try to hammer Eileen into the episode without having Shoshannah Stern to swing the hammer. As Informant would say, you have to know when to hold them and when to fold them, and the finale accepted that it didn't have Stern and didn't have Eileen -- but it made some space so that if you wanted it to be Eileen, then it was Eileen, and if you wanted it to be Dr. Cara Roberts / Lana / Lori / Sparrow Jennings / Velma from SCOOBY DOO or someone else, it could be.

2,334

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I watched episodes 19 and 20 last night and I thought both were really good. Episode 19 was an effective season finale. Sam, Dean and Jack wandering through an empty world was an eerie and pandemic possible-method of finishing filming on the season and Rob Benedict's depiction of a villainous 'God' has never been better with Benedict's warmth, charm and sincerity revealed as a falsely-affable shell on top of a demented, indifferent and sadistically amused entity. The sheer pettiness of Chuck disappearing a dog simply to needle Dean was painful. And the repeated shots of Chuck striking down Sam and Dean only for them to keep getting back up was powerful. And Chuck's fate to live out a normal human life was highly effective and fitting.

The only part that didn't work for me -- the boys' somehow expecting Michael's betrayal was odd, as was Michael's betrayal in general. The alternate universe version had proven vengeful and determined to kill Chuck; this Michael being loyal to Chuck regardless of Chuck's betrayals was peculiar. There was also something arbitrary about it to me; Michael could have just as easily warned Chuck of the false spell knowingly to lure him out. But it went by so fast that it didn't seem to matter.

It was a very interesting choice to wrap up all of the Season 15 plots in Episode 19 as much as possible and leave the slate clear for one last episode. There were some unfortunate setbacks that couldn't be resolved: despite a presumed offscreen restoration, we will never see Donna or Charlie or Eileen reinstated to reality onscreen. It sounds like the intention to bring those performers back was there, but once the pandemic hit, it became impossible to afford the cost of flying everyone to fly to Vancouver and housing them in quarantine for two weeks if they'd only be on set for a day to film their shots.

Episode 20 was an interesting depiction of what Sam and Dean's lives would be if Chuck were not constantly engineering apocalyptic situations every year that put them at the center of everything. They would fight monsters of the week. They would have pie. They would save people. They would age. And they would die either in one of their monster hunts or from old age.

The episode is somewhat marred by showing Sam's marriage but not whom he married; on a second viewing and on pause, the woman standing out of focus at a distance looks like Jared Padalecki's wife Genevieve. In the fictional reality of the show, the woman is clearly meant to be a restored Eileen, but it looks like it was simply impossible to afford the cost of having Shoshannah Stern flown in, put up in a hotel for 14 days and then on set for that shot. But it seems unlikely that Sam's wife is anybody else after this past season where the show resurrected Eileen from the dead, had Sam go out on a date with her offscreen, and had him texting her urgently two weeks previous. It looks like, because they couldn't get the actress, they didn't want to insist that it was her and draw attention to her absence, so there's no photograph of Stern to be seen; they decided to film it ambiguously rather than try to summon the presence of a performer who couldn't be there and let the audience summon her instead.

The pandemic also seemed to force a number of unfortunate but unavoidable concessions; there is decidedly less physical contact between the brothers, Jack and Bobby than one would expect. No hugs. A very minimal amount of touching, some of it engineered through clever editing and what may or may not be frame manipulation. These disappointments will be immortalized. SUPERNATURAL survived for 15 years on the same economics as SMALLVILLE and those god-awful horror movies that Rewatch Podcast is perpetually reviewing; it didn't make big money, but it also didn't cost big money, so it was also earning reliably. It's unlikely the resources will be there to film a few shots of Shoshannah Stern or Briana Buckmaster or Felicia Day to integrate into 19 and 20 for a future release. This is what it is.

I assume that if there were a Season 16, the child versions of Sam and Dean would appear in the present day, age into the present day Jared and Jensen through some magical MacGuffin. And I do expect a SUPERNATURAL Season 16 comic book at some point. But I think this is the end as a TV show: the spinoffs never came together, the lead actors are very, very tired and they have been working on the show a decade after they thought it would end. Season 5 would have been a great ending, but Season 15 was a good ending.

2,335

(1,684 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Finished STARGIRL. It was good, but the lavish fight choreography and extensive computer generated effects and single-shot action moments are so very, very expensive for a show that's moving to the CW. I can only think that they'll cut costs by (a) limiting the use of the STRIPE robot (b) moving to a slightly diminished level of action with shorter CG shots and (c) losing all the expensive licensed music.

I liked how the Injustice Society didn't see themselves as villains; in Icicle's mind, they face injustices and view mass murder as an acceptable means of correcting society's disregard for environmental catastrophe, prejudice and inequality, but his grief over his wife has warped his noble intentions into a vendetta of hatred and total disregard for the lives he thinks he's saving.

There's an odd emphasis on how killing is 'wrong' with Hourman chastised for planning to kill Solomon Grundy by Wildcat who then kills Brainwave while conceding it was a moral failure. In reality, superheroes refuse to kill villains because superheroes are published over multiple decades and killing off recurring supervillains means cutting off avenues of storytelling that might be needed again at some point.

There is nothing wrong with killing a wild, homicidal monster like Solomon Grundy who has murdered multiple innocent parties. There was also no real alternative to stopping a telepathic and telekinetic supervillain like Brainwave other than killing him and his twistedly impersonating the son he killed shows him to be an unrepentant murderer. It's ironic that his sadistic wish to toy with Yolanda by mimicking his dead son is what allowed Yolanda to get close enough to slash his throat. As Professor Arturo would say, Brainwave is a genocidal maniac, not a social worker.

Stargirl telling Pat that she is his daughter was quite beautiful.

I worried about Stargirl destroying the satellite which might have fallen on innocent people.

The closing scene of Stargirl and Pat flying through the sky is lovely and joyful and everything I want out of a superhero show and I was also happy to watch it on a giant IMAX sized screen (sort of) via the magic of an Oculus Go virtual reality headset.

2,336

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I'm looking forward to watching it tomorrow.

2,337

(1,684 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I don't understand TITANS. I understand the kind of story it's trying to tell, I just can't figure out what it's trying to say or why it would say it with these characters. TITANS is a brutalist portrayal of superheroes as troubled warriors. But I don't understand why these characters are put to that purpose -- although a lot of the confusion is also in the original source material.

There is no real reason why street level crimefighters like Robin and Hawk and Dove are in the same show as an alien princess like Starfire, a child of supernatural horror like Raven, an X-Men type character like Beast Boy and a Wonder Woman supporting character like Donna Troy, and TITANS doesn't make a particularly clear case for this odd mashup. The original comic book didn't make a particularly clear case for this either; it was simply a place to gather some underused copyrights (Robin, Kid Flash, Wonder Girl) with some additions (Beast Boy, Cyborg, Starfire) and see if readers would go for it (and they did, for a time).

It's also unclear why a show about a teen superhero team features the characters long after the team disbanded with none of the characters being teens and nobody being particularly heroic. Jason Todd is simply interested in beating people up. Dick Grayson abandons Raven. Hawk and Dove are 'heroes' looking to acquire money to retire and not be heroes anymore. All the Titans are keen to abandon Rose to Deathstroke. The majority of the characters are not teens, many aren't super, and none are heroes.

Setting that side, TITANS is about the psychological and physical wear and tear and toll of this difficult profession, and on that level, it succeeds -- I just don't understand what this show is trying to say about it. But it is moody, compelling, atmospheric and grimly ridiculous from the characters being ridiculously calm about bodyswapping and aliens and primordial forces of evil and Dick Grayson running around town after breaking out of jail like his being a convicted felon and fugitive is about as serious a charge as an overdue library book. TITANS is a successful show, although I couldn't tell you what it's successfully accomplished.

I think that the success of the Lego really speaks to how social media functions. As much as I love novellas like Nigel Mitchell's X-FILES crossover with SLIDERS and scripts like SLIDERS DECLASSIFIED, the internet operates best in a visual medium and Lego is so immediate, versatile and instantly appreciable. The graphics are so memorable and charming, the intricate and painstaking effort is clear and it has clearly struck a note with the actors as well as the fans. Congratulations!

2,339

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I'm distantly interested in JUSTICE LEAGUE: THE SNYDER CUT. I love watching different versions of the same story and seeing how the editing can present different things differently. I'm happy that the DCEU will get a four hour finale. I'm pleased that someone I care about will get something that he wanted badly and that is harmless in its existence. I'm moderately intrigued by Zack Snyder's horror-driven version of superheroes and would like to see it concluded. And I'm glad that he's getting to do it.

I'm more invested in STARGIRL and THE FLASH and LEGENDS and SUPERGIRL, of course. And I need to get into BLACK LIGHTNING. I'm not really a very big fan of horror. Despite all I've written about THE X-FILES, I don't really like it; I just learn from it. And that's how I feel about Zack Snyder movies. I'm sure there's an audience for it.

2,340

(3,573 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

My God, not only does this nightmare seem to never end, it keeps starting sooner than we ever noticed.

An essay on how Trump voters feel ignored by Democrats. Pretty much what TF said but much more long-winded.
https://www.salon.com/2020/11/15/unders … -it-right/