I recently was raging at the injustice of the world, wherein Terminator is denied a Season 3, while Smallville, which should have ended 3 years ago, is getting a season NINE. But eventually I decided to go ahead and watch the finale (I only watched a few episodes this season before deciding to just glance at the cliff notes from time to time) to see how they could possibly justify this thing continuing.
I was actually impressed. It's not great television, but it's way better than Smallville had been in recent times. From what I gather Season 8 had a lot of the same things that have been ruining smallville (way too much soap opera-ness, way too much Lana, random stupid filler episodes with ridiculous plots). But despite this, the episodes that ARE good are finally moving forward in a good way. It's not Smallville anymore, it's early superman (he doesn't wear the cape yet and doesn't let anyone see his face but has begun to form the Superman identity).
The finale in particular had little-to-no soap opera-ness (what stuff is there serves a purpose), had action that really drove the characters forward and finally started addressing some apparent continuity issues.
-
SPOILERS
-
-
Things I liked:
Jimmy Olsen being 10 years older than he should be is addressed by him actually being Howard James Olsen, apparently the older brother or cousin or something of the actual Jimmy Olsen. I'm not sure who would name two children Jimmy in the same timeframe. It's a little silly, but a neat surprise.
Clark's realization of "Oh, humans can be mean." I know they'll eventually reverse this back to his usual optimistic self but it's an appropriate character arc.
Chloe is Watchtower. All along I've been expecting Chloe to die tragically. Instead it looks like they're creating a role for her in the actual DC universe that somehow manages not to contradict anything (at least not unreasonably). My understanding is that previously, Watchtower wasn't an actual character, just a place. Making her the person who originally ran that place and formed the Justice League is pretty cool. Chloe's always been my favorite character, even when she started getting shoehorned into lame subplots and given ridiculous lines that didn't make sense. I'm glad she finally got to do something really cool and appropriate for the character.
Things I didn't like: Doomsday looked dumb, but I can't really fault them for that.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Smallville can surprise you.
Chloe has always been my favorite character, too. Clark Kent is a fool not to choose her over Lana or Lois. Over and over she has proven herself to be a true friend, unswerving and unselfish in her love, absolutely faithful in keeping his secrets. I think Allison Mack is a better actress, too.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
I've been watching it from the beginning. There was one point where I stopped watching for half a season (though I went back and picked those up eventually) because of the stupid teen angst sex stuff.
I think it's interesting to see how they're doing things. The chemistry between Clark and Chloe is so much better and believable than that between him and Lana or him and Lois, and there was a time when I thought Chloe was going to turn out to be Lois, but I'm okay with the way things are going now. Even Lois is getting a little more tolerable, and the little Lana that we had this season was actually okay, I thought. So long as she didn't stay around.
So the big giant guy who came out of the crystal is Zod? Haven't they overdone Zod a bit? And when exactly did Lois go with the Legion ring? Forward? Backward? I can't imagine them ever doing anything set 1000 years in the future, just because it'd be too expensive.
What I'd like is for the show to move away from just Clark and move more towards a nascent Justice League. Oliver is really filling the niche that would be filled by Batman if WB would have allowed it. Canary and Impulse are good, and Cyborg too, if they ever bring him back. Clark is seriously my least favorite person on the show (even worse than Lana, in my opinion). I would have killed him off and given his powers to Chloe a long time ago had it been up to me.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: I can't imagine them ever doing anything set 1000 years in the future, just because it'd be too expensive.
Oh, please. All they need is to add a lot of chrome to the set, have everyone in jumpsuits, and mention "By the way, this is the 31st Century" a lot, and we're there. Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:I'm not sure who would name two children Jimmy in the same timeframe.
*plans to name her first son James despite the only current boy cousin of her children already being named James*
*though they call theirs James and we'll call ours Jimmy*
*just to point out it happens*
Posted by Lissande (Member # 350) on :
My husband's cousin has a son and daughter named two of our favorite names for our own children. We might name a son the boy's name anyway, but it would probably be too much to then name a future daughter the girl's name. I guess we see them too often for that not to be a little weird. Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
I didn't watch the last few episodes because CW's website sucks and watching old episodes there just doesn't seem to work. I can't watch the show live because it's at 7:00 and that's when I'm putting my kids to bed. So, after trying and failing to find a way to watch them on the web, I just read the wiki summary of them. Actually, I think it was better than watching a live episode. I don't have to deal with the acting.
Besides, I don't really enjoy watching the show anymore. I'm really just curious enough about how they're going to end this thing that I peak in every once in a while to see what's going on.
I actually thought the Jimmy thing was ridiculous. Oh no, that's not Jimmy, that's Jimmy's brother, Jimmy. Sigh...
There is no chemistry between Clark and Lois at this point. They've tried, in a few forced ways, to indicate the two are interested in each other but I'm unconvinced, even if I pretend that Lana didn't show up again this season and cement herself as the tragically lost love of Clark's life. I'm hoping that whatever hapens to Lois in the future will help this situation.
Of course, I was also hoping that 8 would be it. I'm really, really, really convinced that 9 had better be it.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Christine: I actually thought the Jimmy thing was ridiculous. Oh no, that's not Jimmy, that's Jimmy's brother, Jimmy. Sigh...
Maybe they're related to Mr. Noodle's brother Mr. Noodle. Or Xathras' brother Xathras.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Wasn't the Jimmy we always thought was Jimmy in Smallville actually Harold James Olsen? Apparently the Jimmy Olsen who was Superman's buddy is James Bartholomew Olsen. But if they're going to call Harold Jimmy, then they should call James Bart. The parents were very confused.
Just be thankful they didn't name them both Darryl.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
Sources are reporting that Smallville got bumped to Friday. Vampire Diaries is taking its usual spot.
Posted by manji (Member # 11600) on :
SPOILERS
So, the finale finale was a week ago.
I couldn't help but laugh at the hilarity of the very last scene.
It's because they tried to do as many callbacks and cues to the Superman movies. But Tom Welling is no Christopher Reeve.
I don't know why they bothered getting the suit from Superman Returns. All of Clark's scenes in the suit looked like they were CGed. There was never one good shot with just Superman standing in the suit.
Posted by aeolusdallas (Member # 11455) on :
Personally I think Smallville's strongest seasons were 8,9 and 10. No the show is not perfect but It always had heart and ambition and it was almost always fun. I really liked the finale.
Posted by Jeorge (Member # 11524) on :
So is Smallville finally over? I stopped watching it when they killed off Lionel. Well, I guess I tried watching a few episodes after that, but my heart just wasn't in it anymore.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
It does seem weird that Smallville has been pretty lousy for about six or seven years and was renewed forever. Supernatural is now going the same way - it should have ended a couple of years ago, and is now a lurching zombie of its former self. It seems to be the CW way.
I'm looking forward to the new Superman movie, though.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
*** SPOILERS ***
Jeorge, they may have killed off Lionel, but they kept bringing him back--like from an alternate universe. They even brought back Lex Luthor, via cloning and reassembling the most viable parts from the various clones. Even General Zod has a charmed life, returning from the dead (or Phantom Zone) in various improbable ways.
At least they ended the series with Clark wearing the suit and flying. (It was about time!) He does this after he has apparently attained "righteousness," so he can be a true superhero. I think it would be OK to call Superman a "saver," but it is inappropriate to call him a "savior." That last has religious connotations that go beyond any superhero.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
"Saver" makes me think of someone who's good at using coupons.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
quote:Originally posted by PSI Teleport: "Saver" makes me think of someone who's good at using coupons.
Wow. I think that means that my grandmother had the most boring superpower ever.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lissande: My husband's cousin has a son and daughter named two of our favorite names for our own children. We might name a son the boy's name anyway, but it would probably be too much to then name a future daughter the girl's name. I guess we see them too often for that not to be a little weird.
That's so weird that you should say that. My friend did the same thing. He named his daugher Lana after this show.
[SPOILERS]
Anyway, after watching this for 10 years I was really sad to see it end, and a bit dissapointed in the ending. For starters, the first hour was just about a wedding that didn't even happen. I mean, what a waste of time, mostly due to the fact that the previous episode started the whole Lois doubting if she should marry Clark, despite the fact that she has already struggled with it in past episodes (it really felt out of place). Everyone knew they were going to get back together, so why even waste our time with that when it's the second to last episode, which further wasted time in the very last episode.
I also expected to see a doomsday fight, but all i got was a zombie-Lionel fight that lasted all of 10 seconds. I guess I should have expected this, because after all it is smallville, but a man can dream.
The superman costume was a major disapointment too. Welling never even appeared in the suit except in CG, which was retarded. I liked seeing him swoosh around and save the day, but all they needed to do was give us a hero shot of him standing still in the suit, but we never got to see it because Welling refused to actually wear it. How are you going to be in a show about superman and never wear the suit? I just don't get it.
I also thought Green Arrow's scenes were retarded. He takes down all three of the bad guys in a single shot, and it is never explained how or why that happens. To make it worse, he uses his outfit and weird voice thing when they already know who he is...
I'd also like to know where the rest of the Justice League is. I understand funding and whatnot, but they really should have had them all there, at least in the church scene. Martian Manhunter and friends wer sorely missed this season as a group, so I was hoping to see them all together in the last episode, but it never happened. Oh well.
Finally, seeing Cloe read a comic book called Smallville was equally stupid, and quite possibly the dumbest thing in the episode. I have so many questions about how that is even possible and why that comic book even exists that I don't know quite what to say. I mean, doesn't it give away his identity?
The pros, for me at least, were:
-Seeing Lex, who stole the show, hands down. Some of the best dialogue in the entire show was from him in this episode -Watching Tess die -Watching Superman zip around and save the plane -Seeing Lois become the world famous reporter she eventually is supposed to be. She does this by interviewing the President, which i don't think a lot of people knew how significant that was. Lois is supposed to be a pulitzer prize winner and a world famous reporter, so it's good to see her start to get there. -Johnathan Kent's return in corporeal was interesting and fitting since he was the biggest part of clark's life. I was glad to have him back, even if he was just a ghost or whatever.
I would have enjoyed another season of Clark being the man of steel, even without the suit. This last season was one of the best because it showed him beings superman, but without the suit. It was a lot of fun.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: but it is inappropriate to call him a "savior." That last has religious connotations that go beyond any superhero.
Just wanted to touch on this. "Savior" just means someone who saves people. It has religious connotations only because our society has associated them with this word. Furthermore, Superman has been regarded in comics and other media as the comic book superhero version of Christ because he is so altruistic and has, on more than one ocassion, given his life to save mankind. It's a powerful image and has been done many times in films and books (Re: The Matrix).
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
I'd have thought that, even if you were religious, there's a difference between 'a savior' and 'the savior'. 'A' would be one of many. 'The' would be yours personally.
Anyone who is not of your religion can say whatever they like.
Anything else would be like McDonald's trying to trademark the word 'hamburger', because theirs are the most famous.
Posted by aeolusdallas (Member # 11455) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bella Bee: It does seem weird that Smallville has been pretty lousy for about six or seven years and was renewed forever. Supernatural is now going the same way - it should have ended a couple of years ago, and is now a lurching zombie of its former self. It seems to be the CW way.
I'm looking forward to the new Superman movie, though.
Except is hasn't been lousy for the last six or 7 years. It got bad around season 5 then got good again around season 8 and it's ratings show that more than enough people agreed with that to keep it on the air.
Supernatural has always had good enough ratings for the CW and in fact it's ratings have been improving.
Posted by aeolusdallas (Member # 11455) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: *** SPOILERS ***
Jeorge, they may have killed off Lionel, but they kept bringing him back--like from an alternate universe. They even brought back Lex Luthor, via cloning and reassembling the most viable parts from the various clones. Even General Zod has a charmed life, returning from the dead (or Phantom Zone) in various improbable ways.
At least they ended the series with Clark wearing the suit and flying. (It was about time!) He does this after he has apparently attained "righteousness," so he can be a true superhero. I think it would be OK to call Superman a "saver," but it is inappropriate to call him a "savior." That last has religious connotations that go beyond any superhero.
Why wouldn't people call him a savior? He is essentially a god. Sure not an Omnipotent god like the Christians believe in but he's certainly up there with the various pagan gods. Besides he does go around saving people.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Sure. A savior as opposed to THE Savior. But it is interesting that he had to become sufficiently confirmed in his righteousness before he could finally don the suit and fly and be the greatest superhero of them all. It is one thing to present someone as evoking a sort of Christ figure. But Smallville may have gone just a little over the top with it. True, in the last episode, Superboy/man saves the entire earth from the approaching planetoid (which he diverted too easily). That's a pretty significant savior. But not in the sense of being a Redeemer. That brings in much more cosmic issues.
Jeff, I thought Cloe reading the Smallville comic book was cute. It was sort of a paying tribute.
I remember many years ago (decades ago) reading some fan comments in a syfy (in those days just sf) comic book where one fan asked why the villains didn't just pick up a Superman comic book to find out Superman's secret identity. Sort of the same thing. It's begging the limits of the suspension of disbelief.
Somewhat similar was the episode of Bones where Temperance Brennan says she is writing a fiction novel about a forensic anthropologist named Kathy Reichs (who is actually the author on whose novels Bones is based). I thought that was really amusing and clever. Kathy Reichs is a real forensic anthropologist, and she's pretty, too. Sometimes she is on the set helping with the show in some capacity.
Maybe it is a bit self-indulgent when the screenwriters of a series do this kind of thing. It's like reminding everyone of how mythic their story is. But it still just strikes me as fun. After all, it's really not true. We're all playing here, with our storyteller.
[ May 21, 2011, 08:10 PM: Message edited by: Ron Lambert ]
Posted by Jeorge (Member # 11524) on :
Was there anything to indicate that the "Smallville" comic was about Clark? Or could it have been about the meteor freaks? In which case it makes more sense.
Posted by Jeorge (Member # 11524) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: *** SPOILERS ***
Jeorge, they may have killed off Lionel, but they kept bringing him back--like from an alternate universe.
Was he a good guy, a bad guy, or some of both?
I loved the way Lionel was so unpredictable in his actions.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I stopped watching in the middle of season five in the episode where Clark reveals everything to Lana, she dies, then he goes back in time, and his dad ends up dying, and his secret is unrevealed.
That just totally turned me off to the show, and I was never able to recover.
Did it get better after that?
Posted by aeolusdallas (Member # 11455) on :
Yes seasons 8, 9 and 10 were very good. It's 5, 6 and 7 that are the weakest. Although the various pre justice league characters that are introduced in those seasons are fun to watch as is the formation of the Justice League episode in season 7
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
The last three seasons rocked. I'm actually glad I didn't give up on the show when they were doing all the soft core teen pr0n.
It's interesting that the show really picked up when the original showrunners went away.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Jeorge, yes, Lionel changed alot. At one point he had virtually a religious conversion, and became a dedicated do-gooder. But then he became embittered again. The alternate universe Lionel was uniformly bad.
Lisa, I am not sure who you mean by "original showrunners." I will admit I was glad when Lana finally went away. She was cute, but Lois was knock-out gorgeous, so I did not miss Lana. Besides, like Lyrhawn said, her plot line was getting ridiculous.
Clark's adoptive parents were mostly gone after one died and the other went away to serve in the legislature, but I never minded their part in the show's story line, and I was glad to see them show up again for short bits in the last show.
Thank goodness they held on to Cloe, even though she did vanish for a while a couple of times in the series. She is my favorite character. Bless you, Allison Mack, for making her such a delightful character.
You know, sometimes in a series like this, they have to write out certain characters because it costs too much to keep paying all the actors/actresses. This was admitted by the producers in their commentary on DVD for the last season of Charmed. They had to have Leo Wyatt (played by Brian Krause) locked away and frozen for several episodes, because of budget constraints. At least they returned him for the final episode. I think it is unfortunate when financial considerations affect the story.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
I wish we could get a superhero show on the same level of quality as Battlestar Galactica. Imagine a superman show with the writing, acting, and special effects of BSG. It would be rediculous!
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
Birds of Prey made a half-hearted Ally McBeal attempt at a darker superhero show, but in contrast to Dark Angel which was still relevent at the time it was sloppy even by non-comic book fans and dissapeared quite quickly. Maybe Nightwing could be a sturdier character to follow, but certainly not the Dark Knight himself as that show would not meet the standard set by Nolan lately.
Who from the DC universe would make for a suitable show? Green Arrow? The Question? Solomon Grundy? Honestly Im surprised that they could play with Clark Kent this long, but less surprised that they have broken all but the one promise to never have him in suit.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
They were talking about doing a show with Raven. That seemed a little unlikely to me.
I thought Birds of Prey rocked. I was bummed that it got cancelled. They could actually do something with Booster Gold, the way he is now. Not the jerk he used to be and was still on Smallville, but the guy who with Rip Hunter is responsible for keeping time in order. That's a show that I think could really work. It could almost be Doctor Who-ish (as it originally was), going to various periods in history.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
If only Doctor Who had super powers. All he's got is a souped-up screwdriver and a hokey time machine/space ship. But I do love time travel stories. Especially the ones with the stone angels. They're a more serious threat than those Daleks that look and act and even speak like renegade Robbie the Robots. Plus the doctor only seems to frequent England, never shows up in America. He can't stand for "Truth, Justice, and the American Way" if he confines himself to the socialist states of Europe. Of course, I know, the British invented him. But that just means he can't be a Superman substitute.
What is needed is a real Superman show featuring the grown up Superman. Something better than Lois and Clark was. Which wasn't bad, it just could have been better. It needs to be more mythic than romance--a show that explores how the world would really be with Superman in it.
Posted by Drifter (Member # 11958) on :
quote: I'm not sure who would name two children Jimmy in the same timeframe.
I know a family of seven girls, six of whom are called Ann. Sue-Ann, Toni-Ann etc. It's the seventh girl, Emma, who gets the strange looks from strangers You have to wonder why they changed the theme then??
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
quote:Plus the doctor only seems to frequent England, never shows up in America.
Do you even watch this show? Have you watched it recently? Because there've only been a couple of seasons in the past few years where the doctor hasn't visited America. Admittedly, most of the time the fake US accents sucked, but still. Outside of Britain (which is not just England by the way - look it up) America is where he visits more often than anywhere else.
quote: He can't stand for "Truth, Justice, and the American Way" if he confines himself to the socialist states of Europe. Of course, I know, the British invented him.
There's just no... I can't even... Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Something better than Lois and Clark was. Which wasn't bad, it just could have been better.
HERETIC! Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
I felt that Birds of Prey went out of the way to show stereotypical feminism. Oracle was disabled and had all these responsibilities but she was also a high-school teacher and had a boyfriend, just to make sure that she was well rounded and not a shut-in with no life. And dont get me started on that horrible rendition of Harley Quinn, or the very idea that Huntress could regularly go to a therapist who is secretly a notorious criminal and Oracle not know about it.
All the overt tactics to make the show about strong women but they always needed men at the same time, like a poorly written Gilmore Girls with pleather on everything.
[ May 23, 2011, 10:35 AM: Message edited by: AchillesHeel ]
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Bella, when did Doctor Who ever visit America? Please name even one episode. I haven't seen every episode, especially since my cable service currently does not include BBC America. But all the episodes I have seen where the doctor visits earth, it is always England. Not Great Britain, not Scotland, not Wales--just England. Usually in London. Sometimes the English countryside.
If the producers/writers are making an effort to break out of their long-standing provencialism, then fine. But I haven't seen it.
Rivka, to me, Lois and Clark was the episodic equivalent of a chick flick. Maybe you like that. Fine. There was enough of the mythic Superman element to keep me interested, but frankly I could hardly care less about the relationship between Superman and Lois Lane. That was just something I had to endure through to get to the good stuff, where Superman flies around and does heroic stuff.
Oops. Thunderstorm is coming up. Have to sign off. I never leave my computer on when there's a thunderstorm. I don't trust surge protectors that much.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
The Impossible Astronaut.
Posted by Ace of Spades (Member # 2256) on :
[Edit - Ah, that's what I get for getting busy at work and taking a long time between writing a post and actually submitting it.]
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: But all the episodes I have seen where the doctor visits earth, it is always England. Not Great Britain, not Scotland, not Wales--just England. Usually in London. Sometimes the English countryside.
Leave it out. Do you know how much it would cost to go all the way out to Wales? Too much just to film an episode of The Dr. Who.
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: But all the episodes I have seen where the doctor visits earth, it is always England. Not Great Britain, not Scotland, not Wales--just England. Usually in London. Sometimes the English countryside.
The vast majority of episodes set on Earth do take place on the British Isles (not just England, and I'd guess that more take place in the country than in London, really), but there have been episodes ever since the first season, back in the 60s, that took place elsewhere on Earth. The Aztecs is probably the first of them. There have been a number of episodes set in France, I know, and the best episode of the Tom Baker years, City of Death, was filmed on location in Paris.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
Ron, the first two episodes of this season were not only set but actually filmed in the US.
Apart from the two NY based Dalek episodes, there was also an episode in the middle of season 1 set in Utah (though you never really saw any scenery, for budgetary reasons).
So that's five episodes set in the US, which is more than France (two episodes) or Italy (two episodes).
As for the rest of the UK, there have been some episodes set in Cardiff (thanks for that laugh, Dobbie) - because that's where the show is filmed.
Also a number of episodes set in Scotland. And if you don't remember the difference between Scotland and England, Amy Pond will seek you out and bite you.
(But seriously, it just bugs me when people use 'England' when they mean 'Britain', because there are three different countries in GB, not one. And if you really did mean England, you need to watch the show more often.)
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
To me, there's essentially no difference between England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales. It's like the difference between New York and New Jersey.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
England and Ireland are essentially the same, in the way that the US and Canada are essentially the same - in that they're completely different countries.
But you can be as unaware of the differences between the countries in Britain, or in the UK (neither of which include the Rep. of Ireland), as you like, just as long as you don't call them all 'England'. Because then you're just wrong.
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bella Bee: And if you don't remember the difference between Scotland and England, Amy Pond will seek you out and bite you.
I don't remember the difference between Scotland and England.
Hear that, Amy? I DO NOT REMEMBER THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SCOTLAND AND ENGLAND! Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bella Bee: Ron, the first two episodes of this season were not only set but actually filmed in the US.
True, but if you want Ron to understand that, you'll have to use Google translate or something to convert your statement into Neanderthal.
quote:Originally posted by Bella Bee: As for the rest of the UK, there have been some episodes set in Cardiff (thanks for that laugh, Dobbie) - because that's where the show is filmed.
Because Ron is unlikely to understand the reference, let me point out that Cardiff is in Wales.
quote:Originally posted by Bella Bee: (But seriously, it just bugs me when people use 'England' when they mean 'Britain', because there are three different countries in GB, not one. And if you really did mean England, you need to watch the show more often.)
What about Northern Ireland? That's part of Great Britain, but it isn't English or Welsh or Scottish.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
This is why I feel perfectly justified in not getting it right -- even the people who jump up and down when I get it wrong get it wrong. Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: I felt that Birds of Prey went out of the way to show stereotypical feminism. Oracle was disabled and had all these responsibilities but she was also a high-school teacher and had a boyfriend, just to make sure that she was well rounded and not a shut-in with no life. And dont get me started on that horrible rendition of Harley Quinn, or the very idea that Huntress could regularly go to a therapist who is secretly a notorious criminal and Oracle not know about it.
True... it's about as likely as a pair of glasses hiding Clark Kent.
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: All the overt tactics to make the show about strong women but they always needed men at the same time, like a poorly written Gilmore Girls with pleather on everything.
I totally agree. I can count the number of TV shows (particularly superhero shows) that have had so much as a single episode that would pass the Bechdel Rule on the fingers of one foot. Right now, that seems to be the price the networks exact.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Bella Bee: (But seriously, it just bugs me when people use 'England' when they mean 'Britain', because there are three different countries in GB, not one. And if you really did mean England, you need to watch the show more often.)
What about Northern Ireland? That's part of Great Britain, but it isn't English or Welsh or Scottish.
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: This is why I feel perfectly justified in not getting it right -- even the people who jump up and down when I get it wrong get it wrong.
Northern Ireland is in the United Kingdom. It is not part of Great Britain. GB is only the large island containing England, Scotland and Wales, and their respective islands.
I was being quite specific, as I don't remember there having been an episode of Doctor Who since 2005 set in Northern Ireland.
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
Bella, I happen to be very good at geography. I said England because I meant England. Since, as I said, I have not seen every episode in the past five years or however long its been running, I might have missed one that was set in the USA. But all the episodes I have seen where Doctor Who visited earth were set in England proper--meaning London or the countryside around it. Not Wales, not Scotland. If I had meant Great Britain I would have said Great Britain.
That is one of the reasons why the show has for so long seemed so provincial. I mean, really, how can this time-traveling alien visit all over the galaxy, but when he comes to earth, the whole world for him seems to be England.
I did happen to see one episode last year, where Doctor Who was visiting Venice, Italy.
If Doctor Who has visited the USA this season, then I have not seen it, since as I said I don't currently get BBC-A.
Lisa, why the gratuitous insult, saying I need to have things translated into "Neanderthal" so I can understand them? My IQ has been tested at 150. Can you match that? Do you really think it is civilized discussion to say to someone you may disagree with about some things, "You're stupid"? That's all you're doing. Not very intelligent or witty conversation. You would get a big zero in a formal debate.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
quote: But all the episodes I have seen where Doctor Who visited earth were set in England proper--meaning London or the countryside around it. Not Wales, not Scotland. If I had meant Great Britain I would have said Great Britain.
The Doctor stops by Cardiff in numerous episodes (every time he's recharging at the rift). That's in Wales. The queen/werewolf episode is in Scotland. The Madame de Pompadour episode has him go to France. For the episode Dalek he's underneath the US. You'd have to have missed a significant proportion of the recent episodes to not have seen an area outside England.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:"People who boast about their IQ's are losers".
-- Stephen Hawking
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote: [Heaven] is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark.
-- Stephen Hawking
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
Ron, my PBS shows all but the most recent season on Saturdays at like 9pm.
Posted by Ace of Spades (Member # 2256) on :
Having your IQ tested twice and getting 75 both times is not the same as having an IQ of 150.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
While boasting about your IQ is in pretty poor taste, attacking others for (supposedly) having a low IQ is much worse.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
IQ is one of the most idiotic measurements I know of. There was a guy who worked where I do now... when we were considering him, the developers, myself among them, were given his resume to look over. My boss is smart enough to know that he isn't competent to vet someone when it comes to programming. The resume, honest to God, listed his Mensa membership. We hired him anyway, but he never heard the end of it.
Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
I'm confused by this thread. I think I read it too quickly. But I think if Smallville ended with Clark not visiting America enough because of his low IQ, I can see why some people were less than thrilled with it.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
If I remember right, Mensa only requires an IQ of 140 to get in. But I also read from some critic that Mensa mainly meets in bars--which seems like a dumb place for smart people to have their meetings, since alcohol kills brain cells.
Cute, docmagik. But that brings up a complaint I had begining with the first Superman movie. Here he was supposedly endowed with vast learning during his long trip to earth, all the most advanced scientific topics. But not in any of the movies, nor in any of the TV series, did Superman exhibit any signs of above-average intelligence. I began rooting for Lex Luthor, because at least he seemed really intelligent. If it weren't for being sociopaths, the mad scientists of the comic books and fantasy TV would make great superheroes--since they invent their own powers.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:If it weren't for being sociopaths, the mad scientists of the comic books and fantasy TV would make great superheroes
If they weren't such terrible people, they'd be wonderful people!
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Non sequitur, m_p_h.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: My IQ has been tested at 150. Can you match that?
hahahahahahahahahahaha
fiddy bucks says this was a self-administered online test or sommat
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
Mensa also lets you join if you are a national merit scholar without taking a IQ test. National merit requires an PSAT score in the top half of the top 1% and mensa says that is good enough.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Scholar or semifinalist? All semifinalists meet that top 0.5% cutoff, and to get from semifinalist to finalist to actual NM scholar requires several things, but none are scored tests of any type, as I recall.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote: Lisa, why the gratuitous insult, saying I need to have things translated into "Neanderthal" so I can understand them? My IQ has been tested at 150. Can you match that? Do you really think it is civilized discussion to say to someone you may disagree with about some things, "You're stupid"? That's all you're doing. Not very intelligent or witty conversation. You would get a big zero in a formal debate.
I'm no expert, but I don't remember, "I am this smart!" being a classic rhetorical ploy used in formal debate. One thing I am pretty sure about, though, is that in formal debates, when people challenge you directly to demonstrate a point, you have to actually show evidence rather than just drop the topic for a few weeks and then come back bragging about how super-smart you are.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I am absolutely flabbergasted that people are getting on his case for claiming to be pretty smart but have nothing to say about the claim that he's really dumb, which is what prompted his claim in the first place.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
As for me, it's not the claim that he's really smart, it's the claim that he's really smart along with the, "You wouldn't go very far in formal debate!" Right after smugly citing one's IQ score in a setting in which it cannot be substantiated in any way. Basically it's the constant suggestion/claim of very high standards that he is living up to while detractors are failing to do so that's drawing my mockery, at least.
Well, that and the whole cutting and running thing too.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
But the thing is, he's right. Lisa's comment is just about the lowest form of ad hominem. It's beneath every single person on this board. Lisa deserves to be called on it.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Well yes, he is right-that Lisa's remark was a low-class insult and Lisa should be called on it. That's fair.
I guess I just get a kick out of Ron's obvious hypocrisy, too. Perhaps if it were an isolated thing-like, if he weren't normally like this, and Lisa's insult had just stung him and he responded that way, it'd be one thing. But it's not. *shrug*
I also disagree it's beneath every single person on this board. It should be, but it's not-Ron and Lisa being two such people, with not a little regularity, actually. Which is why I had my little fun pointing out the contradiction.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
rivka- you're right. Being a semifinalist is the part based on test scores. Though I seem to recall having to send them my SAT scores though there was no rule on what you had to get- just part of the packet. I just remember mensa saying that as a national merit scholar, I could join without doing an IQ test. My response was, why would I want to join? It seemed to me like a bunch of people congratulating themselves on something they had very little role in doing. They were born smart. Big whoop.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
So, we've got Lisa displaying genuinely bad behavior, and we've got Ron, failing to live up to exemplary behavior (and kinda making himself look like a child), and he's the one you call on it?
I suspect it has more to do with Ron's comments making him such an easy target. Which is a pretty poor reason to take shots at him.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I suspect it has more to do with it just not being worth the effort to try to rein in Lisa.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
In comparison to Ron?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:I suspect it has more to do with Ron's comments making him such an easy target. Which is a pretty poor reason to take shots at him.
If by 'Ron's comments' you mean 'Ron's routine attitude towards others in disagreements on discussions of current events, politics, and religion', then yes, absolutely. As for why Ron and not Lisa so much for me personally, well, Lisa hasn't insisted to me directly, repeatedly, that I'm a lazy, stupid, dishonest American-something that can't be said of Ron. She also hasn't, when challenged on all of that, failed to offer substantive response. In other words, my experience with her lately is different, that's all.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
So excited about more Torchwood!
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:I suspect it has more to do with Ron's comments making him such an easy target. Which is a pretty poor reason to take shots at him.
Ding ding ding.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Bella Bee: Ron, the first two episodes of this season were not only set but actually filmed in the US.
True, but if you want Ron to understand that, you'll have to use Google translate or something to convert your statement into Neanderthal.
I was referring to Ron's calling Lois and Clark the equivalent of a "chick flick". I guess anything that isn't a brawl constitutes a chick flick to him.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: rivka- you're right. Being a semifinalist is the part based on test scores. Though I seem to recall having to send them my SAT scores though there was no rule on what you had to get- just part of the packet.
I recall the packet, but not most of what went in it, except I think there was an essay. And letters of recommendation from teachers, maybe?
Or do I have that mixed up with college applications?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
That sounds right. I was a semi-finalist but never got around to doing the essay. Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: My IQ has been tested at 150. Can you match that?
hahahahahahahahahahaha
fiddy bucks says this was a self-administered online test or sommat
When I was a kid, I used to take those tests in Readers' Digest.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: That sounds right. I was a semi-finalist but never got around to doing the essay.
Man, my HS principal would have skinned me alive if I had pulled that. I was a finalist -- even though I knew that as someone not going straight to college I was going to end up ineligible for the scholarships.
But it was something to put on applications, and for my (very small) HS to brag about.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:I was referring to Ron's calling Lois and Clark the equivalent of a "chick flick". I guess anything that isn't a brawl constitutes a chick flick to him.
As far as superhero shows go, I have to say that Lois and Clark was pretty chick-flick-y. (It's not just about the ratio of brawls to romance. There's a certain quality to the romance that feels quintessentially chick-flickish to me.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: That sounds right. I was a semi-finalist but never got around to doing the essay.
Man, my HS principal would have skinned me alive if I had pulled that. I was a finalist -- even though I knew that as someone not going straight to college I was going to end up ineligible for the scholarships.
But it was something to put on applications, and for my (very small) HS to brag about.
Yeah. I kinda had a crappy adviser.
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: I just remember mensa saying that as a national merit scholar, I could join without doing an IQ test. My response was, why would I want to join? It seemed to me like a bunch of people congratulating themselves on something they had very little role in doing. They were born smart. Big whoop.
I have a friend who, despite being very bright, grew up under the impression that she was of below average intelligence (having been told that repeatedly by her parents, who should never have been allowed to raise kids) and having had that idea reinforced by some of her less perceptive teachers. For her, being able to get into MENSA in college was a huge deal. Her membership card gave her a physical object that acted almost as a totem, reminding her the negative messages of her childhood were wrong. It was hugely important for her. So while I generally don't see a lot of point to the organiztion, it can in very specific instances be a valuable thing.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: rivka- you're right. Being a semifinalist is the part based on test scores. Though I seem to recall having to send them my SAT scores though there was no rule on what you had to get- just part of the packet.
I recall the packet, but not most of what went in it, except I think there was an essay. And letters of recommendation from teachers, maybe?
Or do I have that mixed up with college applications?
It has been a long time but that sounds right. I wrote the essay but the rest of the stuff the counselors took care of (including the letters of rec).
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: But the thing is, he's right. Lisa's comment is just about the lowest form of ad hominem. It's beneath every single person on this board. Lisa deserves to be called on it.
Then keep reporting her posts. She's already shown how inclined she is to maturity or personal reform (not at all) so there's nothing left to do but goad moderation where and when she acts out.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
The value of IQ is something that is rather heavily contested. Sixty years ago, IQ was given far more credence than it is today and IQ testing was much more routine in the schools. It was once believed that IQ was a constant that would only change due to traumatic injury. If at the age of 6 you performed at a 9 year old level, you had an IQ of 150 and it was presumed you would smarter than 999/1000 for your full life. We now know that isn't true. Children mature at different rates and child prodigies rarely perform extraordinarily as adults. Genius kids rarely grow up to be genius adults.
IQ is at most an indicator of potential and when you are a child (or even a young adult), potential is something to boast about. By the time you are Ron's age, you have to boast about your achievements not your potential. I think that's what Hawking was getting at when he said people who boast about their IQs are losers.
I have no idea whether Ron's accomplished anything worth boasting about. I hope he has. I understand his frustration at being called an idiot. He has a blind spot a mile wide, but he is not an idiot and did not deserve Lisa's insult.
I didn't call Lisa on it because we have a history I did not wish to repeat.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
I was not "bragging" about my IQ. Why is it questionable for me to mention my IQ in response to Lisa's uncivil, gratuitous insult, where she implied that I was a Neaderthal?
I might also mention that when I went back to college to change careers (I had been an assistant editor of two national trade magazines that served the construction industry, but then that industry suffered a severe recession and I lost my job in the ensuing staff cuts, so I decided to become a computer programmer) and received my associate degree in Computer Information Systems, I completed a two-year course in exactly one year--at one point taking 25 credit hours in core curriculum classes--and graduated cum laude. My faculty advisor told me that no one at Oakland Community College in Michigan had ever done that before. Could a Neanderthal, as Lisa implied I was, do this? Could you do this, Lisa? You are the one who have exposed yourself to ridicule. Would it cost you too terribly much to apologize, and admit you had no call to insult my intelligence?
The favorite recourse of people who find they cannot overthrow my position is to pretend that I am ignorant, or have a vast "blind spot" or something. They appear not to be able to stand the thought that I truly know everything they do, every fact, every evidence they cite (and usually have longer than they have been alive), and I still disagree with them based on the evidence. The only way they can avoid really dealing with my arguments is to dismiss me as ignorant. But that is only what they pretend.
kmboots, since you made your snarky remarks, let me inform you that I was administered the IQ test by the counseling and testing services of Andrews University. It was the Slausson Intelligence test, administered orally. I only missed two questions on the whole test. (One of them I still kick myself over--it was "Why would an anthropophagite welcome a visit from an anthropologist?" Perhaps it was the way the tester pronounced the words, but I failed to realize the first term involved Greek words I knew--I had taken Biblical Greek, and knew that anthropos was the koiné Greek word for man, and phagao was the Greek word for "I eat." So an anthropophagite obviously would would be a man-eater, a cannibal. Sigh. No matter how many times I recount that, I can't seem to change what happened.)
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote: The favorite recourse of people who find they cannot overthrow my position is to pretend that I am ignorant, or have a vast "blind spot" or something. They appear not to be able to stand the thought that I truly know everything they do, every fact, every evidence they cite (and usually have longer than they have been alive), and I still disagree with them based on the evidence. The only way they can avoid really dealing with my arguments is to dismiss me as ignorant. But that is only what they pretend.
Well, no. You'll note that I, for example, have never disagreed with you about editing, computer programming, or the construction industry. I suspect but am not sure (I mean that as no slight, but only because I have no personal experience with you) that you actually do have the experience you cite, and are informed and knowledgeable in those area.
But-just as another for-example-when it comes to, say, politics. When we look over at the various discussions of President Obama's birth and what his grandmother did and didn't say, anyone can see many people repeatedly challenging you to substantiate your claims with something other than, "It's obvious. It's right there, you guys are just ignorant." I'm absolutely certain that if you used that kind of standard in your editing experience, you wouldn't have lasted long at all.
When you said, "She says this, it's in the video," and people said, "No...actually she does not, in fact, say that. We challenge you to show us where, exactly, she says that," you failed to do so. In fact you ended up dropping the discussion entirely. That's what happened, and it's right there in black and white for anyone to look at. Your claims of righteousness, your invocation of security with God's judgment, wont' change what happened.
You can change what happened, though. That discussion is still right there. If you're so right, if you're so thoroughly triumphant and your position so unassailable...well, that's a discussion where it cannot be any simpler to prove. Go prove it.
If not, though-if you don't do that-then it serves as an example of your standard of discussion when it comes to politics, and that's the kind of thing you get mocked for a lot around here.
Posted by manji (Member # 11600) on :
Aren't there other topics you guys could hijack?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Fair `nuff.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Would it cost you too terribly much to apologize, and admit you had no call to insult my intelligence?
You've shown that you have reading comprehension difficulties and poor self-esteem.
No one has any idea how intelligent Neanderthals were compared to us. Nor is "Neanderthal" generally used as a term for a person of low intelligence. What it is commonly used for is someone with primitive ideas, particularly sexist ones.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
I say we hold a battle royale with the center stage showcasing a one on one battle of the sexes. Lisa vs Ron! FIGHT!
Lisa takes a swing but just barely misses Ron's chin. He backs up, unsure of his next move. The crowd is cheering, but for whom? The contestants are evenly matched, it seems, but they each have a trick or two to spare. Ron steps forward, this time with determination, and Lisa backs away, watching her move. He goes for the blow, hitting Lisa in the eye. She staggers, clearly disorientated, but manages to catch herself. The two make eye contact for a brief moment, and then lunge at one another, catching each other in the air and falling to the ground. Full of hysteria, they start clawing at each other, frantically doing whatever they can. Lisa loses a wad of her hair, Ron loses an eye. Lisa pulls out a gun and shoots Ron in the foot, but then he takes the gun (somehow) and shoots Lisa in the arm! It's anyone's game now, folks!
Jeff and the other Hatrackers look on from the sidelines, looks of confusion spreading over their faces like waves of fat over an obese child with onset diabetes. No one had a clue what was going on, but it didn't matter. "Rip his freaking head off!" shouted Rakeesh.
"Stop the fighting!" protested Manji, but no one was listening to him.
Then, suddenly, the windows shattered. Figures dressed in black lept through the glass and grapled down the walls toward the crowds. "It's the Russians!" screamed Rivka, and everyone knew it was true. The Russians went to killing people fast, throwing grenades and using guns that should have been replaced decades ago.
Jeff managed to kill one of them, and then took the gun from the body. But before he could do anything, he was quickly surrounded (oh noes!). "Dasvedanya suki!" he declared in one of the worst fake Russian accents anyone had ever heard. They shot quickly, and he was dead, happy to be rid of the whole mess.
Suddenly there was a loud whistle sound coming from everywhere. It started out small, then grew exponentially. Everyone stopped to listen, and then they all looked up.
The bomb destroyed everything, including the puppies. And everyone died. All that was left was a crater, and for the rest of day, people remembered.
The end.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
russians murder all of hatrack. every one of us.
humanity wins
Posted by Ace of Spades (Member # 2256) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Nor is "Neanderthal" generally used as a term for a person of low intelligence.
Ne·an·der·thal/niˈændɚˌtɑ:l/noun
1: a type of early human being that existed very long ago in Europe —called also Neanderthal man
2informal + disapproving: a man who is stupid and rude ▪ I can't believe I was married to that Neanderthal for three years. b: a person who has very old-fashioned ideas and who does not like change ▪ Some Neanderthals continue to resist the education reform bill.
Posted by JanitorBlade (Member # 12343) on :
The label neanderthal at least for me, when applied to other human beings has always had a feeling of primitive or less than average intelligence when used.
Lisa is claiming that for her it just means somebody who is in possession of a primitive mindset, or particularly a sexist one. I don't really see how Ron disliking Lois and Clark because it was more focused on their relationship instead of the heroics of Superman means he hates sophistication or is sexist, so I find label neanderthal insulting nonetheless.
Look I'm not you guys' parent, I'm not going to say, "Now apologize to Ron, and tell him you are sorry for calling him a neanderthal". But I am going to say that it seems pretty obvious to me that somebody insulted another poster, or at least offense was taken. I find that when I wasn't intending to hurt somebody's feelings that it's very easy to apologize for their feeling hurt, when I actually want them to feel hurt I come up with reasons for why I shouldn't have to make amends.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I don't actually know what Ron thinks of Neanderthals at all, as he's a Young Earther.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Get your facts straight, Ron. I wasn't snarky to you in this thread. I was vaguely nostalgic for my childhood obsession with Readers' Digest. I neither know, nor speculated, nor care where you took your IQ test.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
You do know - he has stated he finds it an insulting term, which makes sense, since it is an insulting term.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
This thread is a monument to crappy behavior all the way around.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Yes, he finds it an insulting term. But that's not the detail I cared about. (I imagine that's probably relevant to Lisa, since she's the one who insulted him.) But for my part, I'm mainly curious whether he feels like he was just called a yeti or something.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: This thread is a monument to crappy behavior all the way around.
Hey, I take exception to that! My story about how we all die was pretty awesome. Now take it back or I'll start calling you names and then we can argue about how smart we each think we are.
DO IT!!!
Posted by manji (Member # 11600) on :
I don't know why this thread doesn't just die. It's clearly no longer about Smallville.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
First of all, it did die, and then get resurrected. Second, it's only actually degraded that badly in the last two days. It's not like it's been sitting here festering for weeks on end.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Jeff, your story about how we all die was amusing, in a Wagnerian sort of way. (His Ring Trilogy operas had the most ridiculous plots. For one thing he gets clear into the middle of the third opera before Siegfried ever meets a woman who isn't his aunt.) It reminds me of what someone said once, "Life is a terminal illness."
I used that quote once to "cheer up" a girlfriend who had fallen into a real depressed mood, and challenged me to say something to cheer her up. The quote apparently took her by surpise, and she laughed in spite of herself.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Tom, I do not challenge the former existence of Neanderthals. Variation of the human species could easily have been that great. I just challenge WHEN they were supposed to have existed. I challenge WHEN homo sapiens sapiens (us) was supposed to have begun.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Thanks, Ron. I was wondering how that worked for you.
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
As for the hissy fit some of you threw over Obama's grandmother saying he was born in her village, I did provide you with a link to a video of her saying that.
I also have stressed repeatedly (at least six times now), that my point is there WAS A CREDIBLE REASON TO QUESTION the validity of claims about where Obama was born, AT THE TIME OF THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN. It was never intellectually honest to dismiss this with ridicule. Why does this not penetrate?
I do not care that much where Obama was actually born--what I care about is his nonchalant disregard for the importance of satisfying responsible questions about whether he fulfills the U.S. Constitutional requirements that he must be a natural born citizen.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Why not pick that discussion back up in its own thread? It's still there.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: No one has any idea how intelligent Neanderthals were compared to us. Nor is "Neanderthal" generally used as a term for a person of low intelligence. What it is commonly used for is someone with primitive ideas, particularly sexist ones.
So, how sexist were Neanderthals compared to us?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:As for the hissy fit some of you threw over Obama's grandmother saying he was born in her village, I did provide you with a link to a video of her saying that.
If you're going to call it a hissy fit, I'm going to point out that this is in fact a lie: you claim you provided a link to a video of her saying that. What you in fact provided was a video where it appeared that she said that. We went over this in depth in the thread in question, a discussion you abandoned after repeated requests that you show us exactly where we can see Obama's grandmother say-with her own mouth, with the words syncing up in her voice simultanous to her lips moving-that he was born in a village in Kenya.
You didn't do that. When people told you that that's what the video showed, more than once, you ignored it. So you told a lie just now.
Given the fact that your 'credible reason' to question the validity of his claims about his birthplace rests on foundations such as these, at the time of the election, yes, it was intellectually honest to dismiss them with ridicule because the claims that he was born in Kenya were never anything but dishonest at worst or poorly pursued at best.
quote:what I care about is his nonchalant disregard for the importance of satisfying responsible questions about whether he fulfills the U.S. Constitutional requirements that he must be a natural born citizen.
Yes, because the best, most reasonable measure of what is responsible is what the far base of your opposition considers damning, yes?
You're being dishonest. Yes, I 'dare' to point it out. Please, be upset about that-channel that energy into proving me wrong. Go to that video yourself, view it, and tell us the minute and second that it says the things you claim it says-not just says, but actually shows. Posted by Destineer (Member # 821) on :
quote:As for the hissy fit some of you threw over Obama's grandmother saying he was born in her village, I did provide you with a link to a video of her saying that.
Just to be clear, Ron, your contention at that time was that in this video you see Sarah Obama on the screen speaking at the same time you hear the sound clip "Barack nate dhalani."
Do you stand by that? Can you point out how many minutes and seconds into the video you see that happen?
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Okay, as original creator of the thread, I have no problem with thread drift, BUT when there is a perfectly good recent thread addressing a particular topic, please put that discussion there.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
I dont really understand why they used Solomon Grundy. Dont get me wrong, along side The Phantom Stranger Grundy is one of my absolute favorite non main DC characters, but he doesnt belong in live action pieces. The overall appearance and characterization is lost with a real human being, Im still not really sure what Grundy is but he is most definatly larger than any person and I dont believe anyone can pull off that voice while giving a believable performance. So why use Solomon Grundy? Black Manta and the eskimo are a bit out there but they still make better sense if they are alluding to future works involving the villians.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
The 10th season to me just seemed to lack something. It seemed like the they just rehashed the same things over and over, then went out with a bang.
It seemed like every episode was : "Oh no Darkseid took over someone else, will Oliver fall to the dark side? Oliver overcame the darkness! Yay!"
Rinse/ Repeat
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Destineer: Yes. Did you not view the video for yourself?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Where exactly in the video does it say what you say it says, then?
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
After giving up somewhere around season 5, I did watch the Smallville finale. And it served as a perfect wrapup to everything I loved and hated about the series, so well done, everyone.
On the hate side: - It had Clark being an oblivious idiot. - It had bad CGI. - It had scenes that could have been eliminated with the use of that miraculous device, the cellphone (remember when it was apparently easier to drive out to Lex's place several times an episode and tell him stuff instead of, you know, calling him?) - It had overblown metaphors that went just past the metaphor stage to become look-heres. "Look! The ghost of Pa Kent is handing him the suit! This is meaningful!" - It had wildly inconsistent use of powers and strengths. Why is that sometimes Clark can be hit by a speeding bus with no ill effects but a suped-up Ollie can smack him down? If he can think fast enough to safely run around with superspeed why do so many people take him by surprise? Hey writers? A superspeeding Clark rushing in fast enough to not be seen would also bring in tornado-strong winds right behind him,. Just saying. - Everything major happens offscreen. The big Clark/Bad Guy fight the whole season has been leading to? Clark flies through him, we're done here. A fiery planet is threatening? Let's have Clark fly toward it and then it goes away. - Deus ex machina solutions. The whole series I was wondering how Superman would face Lex when Lex already knows him. "Clark, what's with the cape?" Now I know, and it's as stupid as I expected. He lost his memory! Sure! Actually, as often as he and Lana have been knocked unconscious in this show it's a wonder he has any higher brain functions at all. - Build-up expectations, massive disappointment. We wanted to see Welling in the suit. For 10 years, we knew it wouldn't happen till the last episode, but it was assumed we'd get it then. We did not, and I'm not at all surprised.
And yet I still watched all the way through. Something about the show works, on some level. Absurd, silly, and maddening as it is, there's always been some good stuff in Smallville.
They desperately need a good script doctor, though. Want to know what fans wanted to see?
EXT. METROPOLIS - DAY.
Apokolips is approaching earth, a fiery ball of hate. Citizens of Metropolis GATHER to look up at their doom. Some are crying. Many of them have glowy OMEGA symbols on their foreheads. OLIVER rushes out into the street. People are packed in the windows, watching. The end is very clearly near.
CUT TO:
A terrified WOMAN HOLDING A BABY leans too close to her window and gets jostled; the baby slips, FALLS. The woman screams, the crowd reacts.
And something blurs past the woman. Something red and blue.
CLARK lands gently in the Metropolis street, in full costumed view, holding the baby, moving with calm assurance. The crowd marvels.
MAN IN CROWD It's the Blur!
People gasp and murmur. Clark HANDS THE BABY to Oliver. Then cue the Superman theme song as he SMILES THE SUPERMAN SMILE for the first time ever, and TAKES OFF into the sky.
OLIVER (holding the baby) Good luck, Clark.
As we cut back and forth between his grim determination and the people we see signs of long-denied hope in the populace. Here and there the Omega symbol blinks out, overwhelmed by emotion. The people of Metropolis CHEER HIM ON.
Clark vanishes into the planet's corona. And Apokolips STARTS TO MOVE AWAY.
Same scene as before. No fancy special effects the crew hasn't already done a zillion times before, I'm not even suggesting we show him pushing the planet. But we get two things we were denied: Clark, in the suit, being Superman, in full view. And we get the added benefit of Metropolis realizing their hometown hero is a lot more heroic and inspirational than they imagined.
How hard would that have been?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: I dont really understand why they used Solomon Grundy. Dont get me wrong, along side The Phantom Stranger Grundy is one of my absolute favorite non main DC characters, but he doesnt belong in live action pieces. The overall appearance and characterization is lost with a real human being, Im still not really sure what Grundy is but he is most definatly larger than any person and I dont believe anyone can pull off that voice while giving a believable performance. So why use Solomon Grundy? Black Manta and the eskimo are a bit out there but they still make better sense if they are alluding to future works involving the villians.
Huh?
Posted by Destineer (Member # 821) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Destineer: Yes. Did you not view the video for yourself?
Yes, Ron. I did.
Since you seem game to discuss this again, out of respect for Raymond's quite reasonable wishes, I'll resurrect the old thread. See you there?
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
Solomon Grundy was at the table of villians at the end. Depending on which itteration you want to go with Grundy is either a zombie with the deteriorated minds of several people or some kind of swamp-plant monster. Either way his strength is usually on par with Superman while his stature resembles The Hulk and The Thing and he is always connected with this rhyme.
Solomon Grundy, Born on a Monday, Christened on Tuesday, Married on Wednesday, Took ill on Thursday, Grew worse on Friday, Died on Saturday, Buried on Sunday. This is the end Of Solomon Grundy
He even recites it while fighting and says little else. And I have no idea why they would alude to having a live-action Solomon Grundy in the future, it would be worse than the Eric Bana Hulk movie.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)