julifolo

azalaisdep @ 10:15am: It's official...
... DT has just apologised live on Radio 2 to the nation for his ubiquity.  Well, at least he's noticed.

(And actually, he and Catherine Tate are very good, so far. Not that I am stalking the guy through the ether or anything, honest...)

azalaisdep @ 12:14am: Sigh.
Oh, RTD, you are so bloody frustrating...

( spoilery rant within )

folo1 @ 5:31pm: Sherlock Holmes!
Just got back. Despite a few reservations--I don't think Holmes would ever go about unshaven--I thought it was magnificent. Ritchie returned to the canon so many times--and deviated in a couple inconsequential details--and gives a much more physical and cerebral Holmes than so many lazy portrayals have given us. Downey, as always, was a delight, and Judah Law gave a nice Watson that was more in keeping with the original and much much less with the Nigel Bruce travesty of the 40s. Although a pipe appears several time, it isn't the pipe associated with Holmes by William Gilette, and the damned deerstalker never appears.

Ritchie goes into the personal life of the pair a bit more than I remember from the stories, but nothing is incredibly wrong or contradictory. He does not use drugs at all in the film--a concession to Downey perhaps?--and the scenery was remarkable, almost making me wonder whether it as real or CGI. Even the end credits had remarkable artwork that kept Julie glued to the seat while they went on, and Hans Zimmer's score was incredible.

The plot was fairly routine, dealing with secret societies and conspiracies, but Ritchie doesn't succumb to the current trend toward presenting supernatural actions as facts, providing a logical cause for what seems like a supernatural action. The villain is new, but Irene Adler has a pretty large part, and the Professor is brought to Holmes's attention, hopefully portending a sequel. Ritchie's innovative movie-making even details the way that Holmes's brain works and how things occur in a much more satisfactory way than any of the earlier adaptations.

Ritchie is one of two outstanding modern directors--my love of "Inglourious Bastards" should hint at the other--and this exciting and amusing film reenfoces the reputation!

celandineb @ 12:33pm: Happy Christmas
( You are about to view content that may not be appropriate for minors. )

firefly67 @ 7:02am: Apprentice Cordwainer?
The Hungarian master shoemaker w/whom I studied last August in NYC is having a little competition now. He's going to choose two students, from among all the members in the HCC online (Honorable Company of Cordwainers, Crispin Colloquy) who will have a chance to study for free for 2 weeks in his Budapest workshop (such apprenticeship periods normally cost a LOT). I assume one would still have to get oneself there, and probably pay for room & board, but it's very likely a LOT less expensive than doing same thing in NYC!! I sent in my application & he wrote back..."Finally...I think you weren't going to apply!" (One must remember that English is nowhere near being Marcell's first language, but he does very well in it just the same.)

It might be too costly for me to go, even if I were chosen, but what a lovely gift to offer. I hope he chooses students who will be supremely able to make the best use of such a possibility.

celandineb @ 8:02pm: So I'm terrible at estimating snow depth...
( You are about to view content that may not be appropriate for minors. )

folo1 @ 6:33pm: Happy Holidaze
Some people like holidays, winter and snow. I like old silent movies. Kino's year-end gift this year is a silent film segment from "A Christmas Past, so even the rest of you might enjoy watching it: http://www.kino.com/trailers/

celandineb @ 6:25pm: Almost done...
( You are about to view content that may not be appropriate for minors. )

celandineb @ 2:21pm: *sadface*
( You are about to view content that may not be appropriate for minors. )

azalaisdep @ 8:00pm: The Night Before Christmas
... blimey. I can't remember the last time the Small People went to bed early voluntarily.  Stockings placed, glass of wine and mince pie left out for Mother sorry Father Christmas, carrots for reindeer; we all cuddled up to read 'Twas the Night Before Christmas...

... next thing I knew they were loudly "SSSHHH"ing each other as I tiptoed down the stairs.  Why can't it be December 24th more often?

Merry Christmas to All; and to all, a Good Night!

celandineb @ 9:55am: No walk for Juno today
( You are about to view content that may not be appropriate for minors. )

mrowe @ 7:04am: HEY! Mind where you're going, will you... *sigh*

celandineb @ 11:09pm: Still working...
( You are about to view content that may not be appropriate for minors. )

folo1 @ 5:18pm: Holiday research
Well, not research on holidays (unless you really love to celebrate Slaughtering Month). I'm taking advantage of the down time to research Viking Age farming methods so that folc can knowledgeably converse with MoPs on the ropeline who see our new ag tools and have questions!

It was originally going to be a one-sheet. It's developed into something a wee bit more...

seamstrix @ 4:51pm: Merry MidWinter To All My Friends
( You are about to view content that may not be appropriate for minors. )

azalaisdep @ 3:33pm: OK, that's spooky
Last Friday, Christmas shopping in town, I picked up in Waterstones a copy of a Rumpole of the Bailey Christmas story anthology for my Dad, who is notoriously difficult to buy for and, being a lawyer, was always a big Rumpole fan.

Just went to look something entirely unrelated up on Amazon and top of "Recommended for You" were two Rumpole books.

Now I swear to God that I hadn't looked anything Rumpole-related up on Amazon, or indeed anywhere online, for months or years - that purchase for Dad was entirely impulse-related.

Are Waterstones feeding credit-card-identified purchasing information through to Amazon now????!!???

(Or is it just, perhaps more likely, that for some Christmas in the past I bought a Rumpole book on Amazon and it has remembered and served more up as potential seasonal fare?...)

azalaisdep @ 3:20pm: Because I seem to be having a DT kinda day...
(... well, the man is all over the British media at the moment, he's kinda inescapable...)

here's a link courtesy of davidtennant.com to a very funny and sweet feature article on DT from this week's Observer newspaper. (Warning; minor End of Time spoiler about half way down)

azalaisdep @ 2:11pm: Three days to go...
... and the RSC's Twitter feed linked to this really exciting review on BBC Radio 4's arts programme, Front Row, of Hamlet:

exciting not only because they loved it (DT's performance is described by one critic as "stupendous... the best line-readings of any Shakespeare I've ever heard...  I'm happy to say the performance is at least as good as the hype") but because it sounds as though the film captures many of the best things about the theatrical production. Just in the same way that many of us who were lucky enough to see it noted the clarity and naturalistic feel of the dialogue, the film is described as "for anyone who's ever wondered what all the fuss is about with Shakespeare".  The claustrophobic, surveillance-society feel of the production is apparently captured using, among other things, CCTV to portray some scenes.

Deemed a hit, a very palpable hit.  All this and Who on Christmas Day - can the human frame support this much anticipation?

mrowe @ 1:48pm: Minor peeve, resulting from the "best/worst of the decade" lists I'm seeing in places: the decade doesn't end until the end of NEXT year, mmmkay?

celandineb @ 8:03pm: Another holiday prep day
( You are about to view content that may not be appropriate for minors. )

telperion1 @ 8:48pm: oh, good grief!
Seems there are posts at metafandom about what kind of posts properly belong at metafandom - whether posting language is Russophobic or anything along those lines is properly meta. Basically it's asking whether posts that aren't what the poster calls "oldschool meta" properly belong on the metafandom.

And to that, the only truly appropriate response seems to be Charlie Brown: Oh, good grief.

I am not against meta and in better times quite enjoyed it (RL has turned me a bit sour to fandom at the moment, which I'm hoping will change as time goes on, so past reactions is a fairer judgment than present ones). As a philosopher I arguably am professionally interested in meta of all kinds - meta-ethics, metatheology, metaphysics, etc. - and so I really can't complain about people wondering why straight women write sexually-explicit slash. But this seems to be carrying it way too far. I mean, seriously... there's so much out there worth writing about. Real people hurting, or problems that need solved for whatever reason. Or, you know, fic to write.

And now I'm commenting on meta-metafandom. *rolls eyes*

firefly67 @ 7:34am: new laptop!
I finally did it, went and got a nice SHINY new MacBook Pro. Tried to firewire transfer stuff from G5, don't think all my files made it--or else that is not what 'migration assistant' actually does. It copied Firefox & the like, but not my photo files, etc. Guess I'll try putting those on my external hard drive & then manually moving them.

It is such a bore being a non-geek in an increasingly geeky world...!

Back to packing boxes for the Move...

celandineb @ 10:18pm: Ack.
( You are about to view content that may not be appropriate for minors. )

celandineb @ 10:01pm: And so...
( You are about to view content that may not be appropriate for minors. )

seamstrix @ 9:09pm: Cool Victorian Style Boots
( You are about to view content that may not be appropriate for minors. )