Go ahead, play Siskel and Ebert. Just a bit. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Looks lovely. Too bad they're butchering one of my all-time favorite stories, or I'd go see it.
(Of course, that is based almost entirely on the fact that they are completely ignoring traditional Jewish views of Esther's story. I find The Ten Commandments laughable and The Prince of Egypt annoying (when it's not simply silly). YMMV.)
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
I'd tried my best to ignore the butchering part - from the Christian perspective of the Old T - they certainly changed quite a bit to get the story to fit screenplay . . . but okay for an afternoon matinee and free small popcorn. *grin*
Posted by andi330 (Member # 8572) on :
It's actually based on the Christian fiction book Hadassah, not taken directly from the book of Esther. Although, the book is taken from (my understanding) both the biblical story of Esther, and research that the author did with religious scholars, about what would have been happening at the time.
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
I saw the book a few years ago in the Christian lit section of Borders or B&N, and it looked interesting, so I took it out from the library.
It's appallingly poor writing. I mean, for people who are accustomed to the literary skills of LaHaye, it may be okay, but it was pretty awful. I didn't even finish it.
It'll be interesting to see the movie, though it's been done often enough before. I have this one at home.
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Looks lovely. Too bad they're butchering one of my all-time favorite stories, or I'd go see it.
(Of course, that is based almost entirely on the fact that they are completely ignoring traditional Jewish views of Esther's story. I find The Ten Commandments laughable and The Prince of Egypt annoying (when it's not simply silly). YMMV.)
Did you want her green? Anyway, I kind of like this one. There's an excerpt here.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: I have this one at home.
I believe I saw that one on late-late-night TV. It was . . . not entirely horrible.
No, they needn't make Esther look like an Orion slave girl. But the whole romance angle doesn't work for me.
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: I believe I saw that one on late-late-night TV. It was . . . not entirely horrible.
We have the DVD set with that, and Jeremiah (also surprisingly not bad -- it was also the first time I'd ever seen Patrick Dempsey) and Solomon and one other that escapes me at the moment.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Yup, they had those the following nights, I think. Was the other one about David?
Hooray for late-late-night Christian television? Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
I heard James Callis is in it, but I can't be sure.
--j_k
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Yup, they had those the following nights, I think. Was the other one about David?
I don't think so, but I'm drawing a blank.
This is their website. Maybe it was David... I'll look when I get home. If it was, I haven't watched it yet.
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Hooray for late-late-night Christian television?
So long as they don't mess with things, they aren't that bad. Sometimes we watch the Jeremiah one on Tisha B'Av afternoon. It kind of brings the tragedy to life.
Posted by Jonathan Howard (Member # 6934) on :
Yes, well... Jeremiah...
God as the little girl struck me as very unauthentic to the way *I* learned Jeremiah at school.
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
So long as she doesn't do a God wave, I'm okay with it.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
There is a version with a green Esther... it's kinda fun. Along the way, Mordecai saves the king from a plot to drop a piano on his head.
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: (Of course, that is based almost entirely on the fact that they are completely ignoring traditional Jewish views of Esther's story.
I'm curious, what traditional Jewish views are being ignored? I know the Old Testament story, but am not familiar with this movie, nor am I familiar with any other scholarship/commentary on Esther.
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shmuel: There is a version with a green Esther... it's kinda fun. Along the way, Mordecai saves the king from a plot to drop a piano on his head.
The Christian stuff in Veggie Tales is too intrusive. We took our daughter to see Jonah, and in the middle, there's this big gospel routine with a backdrop of very obviously cross shaped masts of boats. I imagine Tova didn't pick up on it, but it made us more than a little uncomfortable.
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Uprooted:
quote:Originally posted by rivka: (Of course, that is based almost entirely on the fact that they are completely ignoring traditional Jewish views of Esther's story.
I'm curious, what traditional Jewish views are being ignored? I know the Old Testament story, but am not familiar with this movie, nor am I familiar with any other scholarship/commentary on Esther.
There are a lot of midrashim that deal with the story of Esther. Some are considered to be literally true, while others aren't necessarily so. Some even contradict others, but since they aren't all to be taken literally, that's not a problem.
For example:
Esther, while beautiful, was hardly young. Some sources put her at 90. Others say her skin was green. These are clearly trying to downplay her physical beauty in order to emphasize that it was her spiritual beauty that got her chosen.
The golden vessels Ahasuerus used at his celebration were those taken from the Temple in Jerusalem. He'd calculated the 70 years of exile incorrectly, and was celebrating the fact that the prophecy of the Jews returning to Israel hadn't come true.
When Ahasuerus tells Esther she can have anything "up to half the kingdom", what he means is "anything but the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem".
Memuchan in the first chapter, who advised the king to exile/kill Vashti, was Haman.
Ahasuerus may have been a fool, but he was a vicious, Jew-hating fool, and was more than aware of and on board with Haman's genocidal plan.
Vashti was the daughter of Belshazzar, the last king of Babylon, and didn't come when she was called because she was a snob, and thought it was only his marriage to her that gave Ahasuerus any legitimacy.
When Mordechai was being led around on the king's horse by Haman, Haman's daughter saw them from a balcony, and, thinking that it was her father on the horse and Mordechai leading him around, poured a chamber pot on her father's head. When she found out what she'd done, she was so filled with remorse that she committed suicide.
Esther was Mordechai's wife. The rabbis discuss how Esther was able to sleep with Ahasuerus without dying instead, and there's a midrash which says that God sent an angel to take Esther's place. There's another midrash that says that Darius, king of Persia, was the son of Esther and Ahasuerus (and no, we don't think Ahasuerus was Xerxes son of Darius I).
Another reason Vashti didn't come when Ahasuerus called her was that she miraculously developed pimples or blemishes all over her body.
Vashti was also a terrible anti-semite, and specifically assigned her Jewish maidservants to work on Shabbat.
Hatach, who did all of the shuttling between Esther and Mordechai, was Daniel.
The reason Mordechai didn't bow down to Haman was that Haman wore an idol around his neck, for the purpose of making the Jews who bowed down to him de facto idolaters.
Haman and Mordechai had been soldiers together years earlier, and Haman had actually sold himself to Mordechai as a slave after losing a lot of money to Mordechai gambling (I think). This was one of the reasons he hated Mordechai so much, even aside from the whole being an Amalekite thing.
Darius the Mede and his son-in-law Cyrus the Persian conquered Babylon together. When Darius died, Cyrus became emperor, though Darius left the throne of Media to his son Ahasuerus. Three years later, Ahasuerus killed Cyrus and took the joint throne of Persia and Media. That's why it says "The third year of his reign" and "when king Ahasuerus sat on his throne in Susa the capitol".
There's more, but that gives you some idea.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: The Christian stuff in Veggie Tales is too intrusive. We took our daughter to see Jonah, and in the middle, there's this big gospel routine with a backdrop of very obviously cross shaped masts of boats.
Well, Veggie Tales definitely is specifically Christian. No question about that; that's its mission. And I have some issues with their take on Jonah as well... it wasn't their best work, aside from the animation.
Funny thing about that scene; the producer, Phil Vischer, noted in the commentary (IIRC) that the crosses in the big gospel numbers (both by the masts, and by the addition of shoulder pads to stalky vegetables) were pointed out to him afterward, but that he hadn't noticed them during production and it wasn't intended. On the one hand, I accept this as true; on the other, I find this mind-blowing, because the crosses are blatant to my eye. Just goes to show that perceptions differ depending on what you bring to the table...
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by starLisa:
Esther was Mordechai's wife.
This is the main one I was talking about. It has quite a few ramifications. It means Esther gave up her husband to save her people. It means that when she went to Achashverosh she gave up ANY possibility of ever going back to Mordechai (until that point all relations with the king were compelled (simply because if she had refused or resisted she almost certainly would have been put to death), but by going to him voluntarily, she became forbidden to Mordechai, no matter what). The whole conversation she has with Mordechai about not wanting to go to Achashverosh? That's what that was really about.
So I happen to think it's a very romantic story. They just had the WRONG romance! Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
Wow, that is all very interesting, and all new to me -- thanks!
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shmuel: Funny thing about that scene; the producer, Phil Vischer, noted in the commentary (IIRC) that the crosses in the big gospel numbers (both by the masts, and by the addition of shoulder pads to stalky vegetables) were pointed out to him afterward, but that he hadn't noticed them during production and it wasn't intended. On the one hand, I accept this as true; on the other, I find this mind-blowing, because the crosses are blatant to my eye. Just goes to show that perceptions differ depending on what you bring to the table...
I don't believe it was unintentional. I believe, if he says so, that he didn't intend it and didn't notice it, but the artist clearly intended it.
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: The Christian stuff in Veggie Tales is too intrusive.
That's like saying the Objectivist stuff is too intrusive in Atlas Shrugged.
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
No, it really isn't. The Book of Jonah doesn't, even by Christian standards, need to have blatant crosses as a backdrop during an animated musical number.
Posted by airmanfour (Member # 6111) on :
Yes it does. By evangelical Christian standards anyway. They see crosses EVERYWHERE.
Edited to be longer
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Why, exactly?
Posted by airmanfour (Member # 6111) on :
Sorry for the edit. I blame your confusion on a too-quick response.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Yup.
All your fault. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
(Please tell me I'm not the only one channeling the Chi-Lites every time they see this thread's title!)
Posted by Slim Shady (Member # 3372) on :
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: No, it really isn't. The Book of Jonah doesn't, even by Christian standards, need to have blatant crosses as a backdrop during an animated musical number.
*makes a note to design round or triangular masts for the Pirates Who Don't Do Anything movie*
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
quote: No, it really isn't. The Book of Jonah doesn't, even by Christian standards, need to have blatant crosses as a backdrop during an animated musical number.
So what if it does?
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
Okay, here's my thing with the Veggie Tales version of Jonah. (Well, apart from the fundamental problem that it was too short a story to sustain a feature-length film.)
The makers of the film made the following three decisions along the way. All three were just fine in and of themselves, but, when combined, led to a theme that I don't believe they actually intended.
1) Jonah is portrayed as being Jewish.
This was not a given; indeed, it hasn't been done in their other retellings of Old Testament stories, Esther included.
This is not at all objectionable as-is. Frankly, I wouldn't have minded if they'd made Esther explictly Jewish too.
2) The big "our God is a God of second chances" number uses specifically Christian symbolism.
Between the gospel song (not used elsewhere in the film) and the cross imagery, there's not much way around this one. And it's worth noting that, in this version, Jonah isn't left alone until he decides to do things God's way; the message comes from his cute sidekick and a large choir.
This is also not a problem in itself. Veggie Tales is a Christian production designed to inculcate Christian values into Christian children, not to provide entertainment for the masses. To ask that it be purged of Christian elements would be totally missing the point.
3) Jonah is portrayed as not having learned his lesson at the end.
Also not a given. The text doesn't resolve this either way, though if you take Jonah as being a real historical personage (as I do), it's not hard to suppose that he learned his lesson in the end; otherwise, nobody would ever have heard the epilogue, which was between him and God.
Still, it's a defensible reading (especially if you take the story as being allegorical), and not inherently a bad one.
The problem comes when you combine all three of the above, leading to this:
Theme: The Jews believed in a God of strict justice, while Christians believe that God is forgiving.
If this were intentional -- and, again, I honestly don't think it was -- it would be... ironic, to say the least, given that the theme of God's forgiveness shown here comes from a Jewish book in the Old Testament.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shmuel: Theme: The Jews believed in a God of strict justice, while Christians believe that God is forgiving.
If this were intentional -- and, again, I honestly don't think it was
Either you are less of a cynic than I, or maybe it's because I watched entirely too much late-late-night Christian television during the year I had insomnia (and no DVD player). Because, despite never having watched more than about five minutes of any Veggie Tales, I find it hard to believe that the theme you mention was NOT deliberate.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Either you are less of a cynic than I, or I just watched entirely too much late-late-night Christian television during the year I had insomnia (and no DVD player). Because, despite never having watched more than about five minutes of any Veggie Tales, I find it hard to believe that the theme you mention was NOT deliberate.
I've watched too many other Veggie Tales productions and heard too much from Phil Vischer (including his concerns about not doing anything inadvertently offensive to Jews in the market scene setting up Jonah's place in society) to suppose this was intentional.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I will defer to your greater experience. Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Thanks for the reply, Shmuel.
I'm genuinely not trying to be offensive, but just to make sure I understand, some of why the Jews in this thread are disliking the Veggie Tales version of Jonah is because it screws up the way it's told in your version and gives a false impression of what Jews believe?
This still doesn't really answer, for me, why having crosses in a blatantly Christian production is offensive to Lisa. Or is it not just offensive to her? And if so, why?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Storm Saxon: I'm genuinely not trying to be offensive, but just to make sure I understand, some of why the Jews in this thread are disliking the Veggie Tales version of Jonah is because it screws up the way it's told in your version and gives a false impression of what Jews believe?
This still doesn't really answer, for me, why having crosses in a blatantly Christian production is offensive to Lisa. Or is it not just offensive to her? And if so, why?
I'm not offended by Veggie Tales; I simply refuse to watch 'em. Yes, I think they play fast and loose with the meaning, but my disinterest is mostly because of the Christian messages. And I actually prefer the blatant ones -- they're easier to dismiss.
I literally cannot imagine encouraging a pre-teen Jewish child to see any of their videos or movies. (Not meant to be a judgement; I just cannot fathom it. But my kids almost never go to movies in any case, nor do they feel deprived on that account.)
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
quote:Originally posted by Storm Saxon: I'm genuinely not trying to be offensive, but just to make sure I understand, some of why the Jews in this thread are disliking the Veggie Tales version of Jonah is because it screws up the way it's told in your version and gives a false impression of what Jews believe?
Speaking strictly for myself, I don't actually dislike it -- I own the DVD, have watched it several times, and can sing "The Song That Goes Under the Credits" at the drop of a hat -- but, as I said above, I think it gives a false impression of what Jews believe insofar as it implies that we don't believe that God is (or should be) merciful. The cross imagery is not a problem in itself, but only in that it helps create an apparent dichotomy between the Christian "God of second chances" and the Jewish prophet "who really never got it." The claim that the Jewish conception of God isn't merciful is a canard, and one that can get tiring.
quote:Originally posted by rivka: I literally cannot imagine encouraging a pre-teen Jewish child to see any of their videos or movies.
I'm with you there.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shmuel: The claim that the Jewish conception of God isn't merciful is a canard, and one that can get tiring.
True story.
Posted by TheTick (Member # 2883) on :
I like the word canard.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:Veggie Tales is a Christian production designed to inculcate Christian values into Christian children, not to provide entertainment for the masses.
My problem with the VeggieTales is that while all this is true, VeggieTales were, at the height of their popularity, pushed on kids as if they were entertainment for the masses instead of Christian material. My kids have received Veggie Tales materials in kids' meals from restaurants and they've been shown Veggie Tales programming in private (non-Christian) preschools and in public elementary school. The private entities showing or disseminating VeggieTales I can accept, though I personally wish they wouldn't and find it distasteful--and this has affected my fast food choices when I'm eating with my kids. The public school showing VeggieTales is completely out of line, IMO.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Thanks for your replies, Shmuel and Rivka. I think I understand now.
I think part of my confusion was that Lisa was offended that there was a cross in a veggie tales play, and I thought it was fairly standard knowledge that Veggie tales were a Christian thing, so I was kind of confused what the big deal of the cross in the production was.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
I'm guessing the restaurants in question are Chick-Fil-A? They're also upfront about their Christian convictions being a guiding force behind their company...
You'll get no argument from me regarding the public school showings.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Yes. Chik-Fil-A is within their rights, but I find it distasteful, because I feel like I'm being preached at when all I wanted was a damn chicken sandwich.
(I wouldn't find it distasteful merely for their Christian convictions to guide their corporate practices, but when they hand out materials with bible verses and quotes on them I find that to be at odds with what I want from my fast food establishments. It is their right, but I don't have to like it.)
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shmuel: You'll get no argument from me regarding the public school showings.
Or from me. I would've screamed bloody murder. Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Storm Saxon:
quote: No, it really isn't. The Book of Jonah doesn't, even by Christian standards, need to have blatant crosses as a backdrop during an animated musical number.
So what if it does?
So what if it does? I was replying to the false analogy that showing ships masts as crosses in the movie Jonah is similar to having Objectivism in Atlas Shrugged. One is inherent to the story. One is not.
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Storm Saxon: This still doesn't really answer, for me, why having crosses in a blatantly Christian production is offensive to Lisa. Or is it not just offensive to her? And if so, why?
It's not that I was offended by the crosses. Only that having seen the crosses, I'll now know never to take my daughter to a Veggie Tales movie again. When I said the Christian stuff was too intrusive, all I meant was that it was too intrusive for me.
I guess I'd had some hope that the producers just be "biblical", in which case Jonah would be equally suitable for Christians and Jews. I'm not upset that this turned out not to be the case; I just pointed out that I learned something.
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheTick: I like the word canard.
It's a duck? Why a duck?
Posted by TheTick (Member # 2883) on :
A canard is also a false or misleading story.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
I'm betting that was humor. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by starLisa:
quote:Originally posted by TheTick: I like the word canard.
It's a duck? Why a duck?
I like ducks in orange sauce. Or plum sauce.
*mouth waters*
Posted by TheTick (Member # 2883) on :
Ick, I thought about using the third definition of canard to reply but it would've been pushing the funny (what little there was).
Top o' the page to ya.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by starLisa:
quote:Originally posted by TheTick: I like the word canard.
It's a duck? Why a duck?
I like ducks in orange sauce. Or plum sauce.
*mouth waters*
I don't like duck at all. Too fatty.
-o-
Tick, can I be your new sidekick, Deadpan Man?
Posted by TheTick (Member # 2883) on :
Are you willing to wear a frying pan on your head?
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Is that supposed to be funny? I don't get it.
((See? I'm doing my part already!))
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: I don't like duck at all. Too fatty.
Philistine. I almost never have it (both because of the fat and the price), but to dislike it? Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
Duck is yummy. Peking duck is to die for (and given the fat, probably to die from as well).
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Philistine?! I've never even been to the Middle East!
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: Duck is yummy. Peking duck is to die for (and given the fat, probably to die from as well).
But what a way to go!
Posted by TheTick (Member # 2883) on :
You're hired.
You have to hang out in the Sidekick's lounge when we go to the Comet Club, hope you don't mind.
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
Uh....this is the first opportunity I've had to reply to this thread, though I skimmed it yesterday and wanted to reply and now it's moved on to ducks and straightmen.
Onward...
I haven't been to the movies in ages, but we went to go see One Night With The King last weekend. Hubby loved it. My son had problems with the inconsistencies from the Book of Esther, but I can't complain because it spurred him to go back and re-read it to make sure he was right to be indignant. I thought it was visually lovely, but from an entertainment standpoint, too friggin' slow to start and too brief at the end to make much sense at all. Half the time I was confused and unsure what was going on, and most of that time I was irritated that I felt stupid for not having any idea what in the world the characters were talking about.
In other words, I'm not sorry I saw it, simply because I'm a costume junky and the costumes were very pretty. But other than that, it was about as good as the Left Behind movies.
(The VeggieTales version is more entertaining, though I admit it's not one of my favorites of theirs. My favorite is A Snoodle's Tale. Followed closely by Lord of the Beans, generally because I love the sporks.)
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I discussed the movie yesterday with two friends who went to see it together. One is Jewish, but father to the left than I: she said it was absolutely awful. The other, who is an extremely devout Catholic, gave it a 2 on a scale from 1-5. But she agreed with jeniwren that the costumes were great.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
Your hubby loved it, jeni? Wow. Why? Ask him, would you? My son's father took my recommendation that he really could wait - a long time - to see it. Unless he wanted to use my free popcorn coupon *grin*
I would have classed it in the B- grade of chick flicks and did tell my mom who has been working lots of OT to go see it just for kicks and giggles.
I did order the book it was based on from the local library. Maybe it'll give me some ideas for NaNo.
You know, the story of Esther -- in my St. James Bible -- was always my favorite, but now I am really curious about the "rest of the story."
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
The actress who plays Esther had a major role in the Mormon drama film The Work and the Glory. I didn't care for her in that, so I'm pretty skeptical about the likelihood of my liking her as Esther.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
You won't. It was a pretty unrealistic mix of "smarts" and "flighty" . . . but hey -- for an afternoon matinee, to make the work blues go away, and gorge on popcorn, and get great Halloween costume ideas . . .
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
Shan, I think he loved it because it was subject matter he found entertaining. He's not as critical as I am about that sort of thing...for me, it has to be done well to be entertaining. For him, the story itself, Biblically based -- loosely anyway, is enough.
In one sense, I agree with him. We got to go to a movie that was not a children's film, that nonetheless treated romance in a way that did not offend my sensibilities or values. That's a big plus when going to spend $20+.
I haven't yet decided if I liked the over the top set design. It was too Lord of the Rings-esque for me. So much so it distracted from the story. I spent time wondering if the architecture was remotely historically accurate. But I think the theory behind the set design was to bring in a distinct flavor of Elizabeth Taylor's Cleopatra and that genre of film. To attract just the audience it might have, had the story been better told.
My real disappointment was the discovery that I have a terrible crush on Gaius Baltar (who would have been better as Haman than the actor who plays both characters). And that he's a walking rug. Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
They really did a lot of shots reminiscent of "LOTR"ish style -- it was a bit distracting. Peter Jackson has certainly made his mark, no?
Well, if it's the subject matter that kept your husband interested, then I probably ought to tell my ex to go see it -- he must own every last biblically-based movie there is to own. *grin*
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)