Caraccioli

That was my thought. I almost combined this with the MQ Game, but it's basically different, so... "Don't call me a mindless philosopher, you overweight glob of grease." -C3PO

Hello Kitty! What a marketing bonanza. For the Kitty! fan who has everything: Not officially licensed. Officially licensed. (You can see more of the Mira's officially licensed Hello Kitty! car here. Blackjohn and Duchess - you guys need one of these.) A few years back, I read the story of Sanrio which focused on founder, Shintaro Tsuji called Hello Kitty: The Remarkable Story of Sanrio and the Billion Dollar Feline Phenomenon by Ken Belson & Brian Bremner. It's quite interesting. I highly recommend it for anyone who wants to see how a pop marketing phenomenon like this can survive in multiple countries (Japan, China, Europe, US etc.) for over 40 years without substantially changing the message of the product. (Hint: it involves very shrewd marketing.)

To be honest, I think it's only a handful. They each post 5-15 links and then disappear. (Of course, I mainly see what's going on in this forum, but we try to report them to each other as well.)

I still see row upon row upon row of corn every once in awhile when I close my eyes. I have never in my life tipped a cow though, I will have you know! Y'know... Mission does indeed forget. We were talking about tassling corn, weren't we? There's a big difference. (Isn't there?)

You should really do something to remedy that.

It isn't possible to over-think anything in Beyond Pyracy. So it is written, so it shall be done. (Here's proof.)(Here's more proof. There's even more, but I'll stop now. )

There are probably (at least) four things at work here. 1. It is something to remove, which is apparently of interest to many people. (I believe Patrick called it "unwrapping the gifts...") 2. It has been strongly associated in our minds with sex and has become a sexual indicator in and of itself. (This is sometimes called "anchoring" in psychology. As in, you anchor an object to an emotion or feeling.) 3. It is an article of clothing that does not obscure anything. So it could be said to invoke a sort of "hiding but revealing" aspect. (Implying seductive naughtiness on the part of the wearer if you stretch it (so to speak). That calls to perceived "naughty deviant behavior" as well as a sex/guilt thing some people love to indulge in. (More on that below.)) 4. It hearkens to a more Victorian Age when talking about sex was taboo which appears to be a big turn-on for some people. I suppose this assumes that you want to be caught doing something naughty. (Another example of the whole silly guilt/sex thing that has spawned a lucrative S&M market, among other things.) That reminds me of a scientist I was reading about who has compiled a sort of manual of facial expressions and their meanings. Apparently, we are unable to completely control our facial expressions and there are some psychologists who even believe that facial expressions are directly tied to the emotions felt in the brain. According to his studies, we can control our face most of the time, but when something first strongly impacts us, our faces quickly reflect our mind's feeling about it without our even being aware of it. This whole process can happen in a few seconds. Anyhow, this scientist has been studying and cataloging facial expressions for decades and he has developed a pretty good ability to read people's often used facial expressions and assess their meaning. He was explaining that Bill Clinton had some facial tic or some such that he often used that projected the idea that he wanted to get caught doing something naughty (although, I confess, I don't recall what the expression or tic was - if anyone is interested, LMK and I'll go back and look it up.) He explained this to someone on Clinton's staff early in C's career and offered to help teach the then-president how to lessen the use of this expression. They turned him down because they were afraid hiring such a consultant might make the prez look bad. (Whew! They narrowly dodged that bullet!)

Yes, do! I was hoping you would. jess, here are some ideas for an avatar. (Well, these are ideas I might use...) Or this one... Or (saving the best for last) this: (I bet you thought I forgot all those discussions we had about shucking corn. (Or maybe you just wish I had.) Ha ha!~~ Mission never forgets! )

Actually, I did notice that several of the vehicles have been quite well done. The reaver ship, their ship, that space station thing where the evil guy was at and the train. (Which was probably CGI, but what can I say? I like trains.) They even had some custom ground transportation that was kind of interesting.

Funny you should mention MBTI - this is exactly what I noticed about the characters in McLeod's Daughters...they do behave fairly close to type. (And at least 3 and maybe all 4 of the basic types are represented among the main characters.) In fact, I find that in many shows I like because it keeps the characters more realistic and consistent (for me). Don't get me wrong, guys. It's not the worst thing I've ever seen, I am just commenting on what I noticed. I had sort of forgotten that Whedon did Buffy until I noticed that one of the things I didn't enjoy much about the characters so far was the same undefinable thing that I didn't enjoy much about the characters on Buffy. (I wish I could pin that down better.) I think my biggest problem isn't that it's cliche, it's more than I don't identify with anyone and there are several things that stick out rather rudely and spoil some of the escapism for me. Maybe if one of the characters could stick a bunch of disks in his chest...

So, I got the first Disc from Netflix and I watched the first two episodes... (This is all just my first thoughts, fresh from viewing last night. Unfortunately, this has to compete with recent viewings of the first season of McLeod's Daughters which I find to be exceptionally well acted and written. They are two completely different sorts of shows, but that does impact my first impressions.) First off, let me briefly explain my experience with Whedon's previous series Buffy the Vamp, which I watched for almost a season. I never really identified with any of the characters on that show and only watched the season I did (season 4, I think) because friend insisted that I do so. I took half a liking to the main villain there, a sort of Frankenstein thing that could apparently pop a whole case of disks directly into the drive on his chest. (How cool is that?) My problem with Buffy was that none of the characters seemed "right" to me. They weren't...something. Whole? Consistent? Very believable? This show already appears to me to have the same problem. I haven't identified with any of the regulars. They seem off in the same way Buffy's little cadre did. I suspect this is a Whedon thing. Most of them are stock "Western" caricatures of a sort. We have the surly, embittered leader who appears all gruff and mean, but actually is very concerned about his group. (Which, so far, seems to borrow a lot personality-wise from the character of Han Solo. "Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid." Except he doesn't have enough of the fun cockiness Solo had. He's got that teenager-oriented "brooding" thing going on instead.) We have the rash and impulsive hot shot who is apparently only concerned about money. (Which reminds me of one of the characters in the western Yellow Sky, but I don't remember his name.) We have the reluctant and intelligent "Doc." If he were also a drunk, he would be a complete Western stereotype. We have the hooker with a heart of gold (I'm assuming she will eventually be shone to have a heart of gold. So far, not so much, but there are indications.) And we have the preacher. There is often a good preacher in earlier Westerns for some reason. If a preacher appears in later Westerns, he is pretty cynically drawn. This character appears to be pretty good, so he appears to be a throwback to the older Westerns. Then we have these other characters that seem like they don't quite belong in this show at all. There's the quiet female hotshot. (Is she a hotshot? I'm assuming so.) So far, her character is as interesting as cardboard, so I hope that changes. We have her husband who, for the life of me, I can't figure out how he wound up in this ensemble cast. His character doesn't fit at all IMO. I guess he's the sort of hotshot pilot/mob wheelman, but he doesn't even seem to be that. We have the cheerful mechanic chick who reminds me for all the world of Number 3 on the cartoon Kids Next Door. (Does she have any rainbow monkeys? I saw teddy bears...) Then there's River who is a sort of standard X-Files/The Pretender type character who is brilliant but damaged. (She's still the most interesting thing going in the show for me. Somehow she doesn't suffer quite so badly from that whole Whedon "not quite right" character thing. Probably because she hasn't said much. Well, and she is inherently "not quite right.") And what the heck is up with those accents? The funny words - fine. Even cool. The obvious dropping of gs in things ending in "ing"? Weird...it sounds completely unnatural the way several of the actors do it. It struck a jarring chord with me from the outset. That may only be the first episode, though. I didn't notice it quite as much in the second show. I also notice they like to drop the nouns in sentences. A bit of this - again, it's cool. But doing it consistently makes it sound sort of forced to me. A point made by the director of a previous series I watched was that the first few shows of any given series are not written with the actor in mind. As the actors grow into their characters, the writer takes this into account and the character improves as the actor becomes more comfortable. Still, even season 4 of Buffy retained that sort of out-of-place, alienated character facet, so who knows? The two stories I saw were pretty standard modern-western/sci-fi fare. (The train in the second episode was sort of neat, but why would they use trains and not transports? But I am carping about foolish things.) So far it hasn't hooked me. I ordered the second one right on the tails of the first one thinking that this was going to be pretty compelling. I'll watch them both and see if things improve. The key to these sorts of series' is to hook you into what they call "the mythology" of the story - the back-stories and on-going stories involving the regular characters. It sort of borrows from Cowboy Bebop too. Does an "Ed" character show up? How about Ein? Then I'd be hooked...

Thanks again, everyone. I even got the Iron Bess seal of approval. (It's almost like having Disney wink at you. )

Brilliant! I don't generally like to copy, but this one is too good. I'm copying you on that one. I salute you, sir. (Is Ed still using Tigger with the paper pirate hat? We could be the Three Amigos. )

"I had the sword extended. But that was all," he said. What a thing to say in an article about a porn video.

I was looking for the name of the McGuffin in that movie, which I found at Wikipedia. I was just closing everything up here, getting ready to go home when I decided to see what Wiki had to say about my least favorite movie from the series (Moonraker is a very, very close second for worst place. Pigeons doing double takes - bah. For a pretty funny review of Moonraker, check out the agony booth. Start on page 4.) Anyhow, Wiki talks quite a bit about that island and the one next to it where the movie was filmed, so I thought I'd share: "The scenes featuring the island hideout of Scaramanga were filmed in Phang Nga Province in Thailand, northeast of Phuket now named James Bond island. One of the islands seen in the film is known as the "Nail" island (or Ko Khao Tapoo)—in the film, this island houses the solar panels. Scaramanga's hideout is actually Ko Kow-Phing-Khan—both islands are now tourists attractions. The "nail" island seen in the film is known by locals as James Bond Island in all tourist literature. The site was extremely hard hit by a tsunami following the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake." Source

Well, I was going to build the whole room around the Jack the Undead Monkey prop that I built, but then I remembered that I might have to sell the house some day. ("Why did you decide to put a giant hole in the plaster walls?") Isn't the ceiling fan so cool?

Not if you're a dentist.

I've been rambling on and off about my pirate themed living room and I am now finished enough to put it up on my webpage and focus on something else (like the kitchen). The only part not completed is POTC model diorama using the old 70s MPC models. No rush on that one, though. You can see (reams and reams and reams) of material on it here.

A true master... might see happy/sad as judgment calls based on some human bias... some level of expectations... Or...a true master doesn't care because he/she isn't attached to the outcome. It is the thinking of the other three types that say the outcome is important. (Now I have to go start a new thread so I can show off my work. Athlete.)

Beg to disagree here, and maybe you hang with a different circle of people so you don't see it, but, and in line with the definition given, I know enough "Masters" that are successfully mentoring others... have they truly mastered the skill/gift that they pass on... most likely not since no one is perfect, but now we're discussing jot and tittle stuff, but do they successfully pass on their experiences to help others and help them to grow Ah, but how many people do you know who don't do that? People to whom it never even occurs to pass on the knowledge and skill that they have (provided they even recognize that they have it). Now here's something interesting. I know several teachers who I would say are more at the athlete level than the master level. They enjoy the attention and the opportunity to preen and preach at their charges, but they don't really share anything substantive. Then there's another group who secretly (and sometimes not so secretly) despise their students and do the job only for the paycheck. (Seriously, I know two such teachers.) Being a teacher does not necessarily a master make. Seek and ye shall find. When the student is ready, the teacher will appear. Etc. Opportunity is always around and abounding. It just takes a perceptive and ready student to want to learn. What you say about fear is true. "You gain strength, courage, and confidence by every experience in which you really stop to look fear in the face. You must do the thing which you think you cannot do." –Eleanor Roosevelt

No, I meant in Twill. I know he's still over at piratesinfo. He, jess and I were all mods there. I expect he would be everything I expect him to be as well. Our birthdays are something like a day apart, so I suggested we meet in his home country to celebrate some year. Trouble is...I've never done anything about it.

Is Ed Foxe still hanging out there? I knew him on another forum. (I notice jessie from piratesinfo is spending more time here too. )

Well...yeah and no. I think you have to at least initially move through each level. It also depends on how loosely you define the concepts. Some people never seem to me to get beyond the Athlete stage where they're primarily fascinated with how they look and how everything appears to the neighbors and so forth. Others like to beat everyone else at everything else and seem (to me) to be stuck at the Warrior level. (Some very successful people, actually.) As our educational system improves and more people move into it or into business for themselves, I think the opportunity to progress up the scale increases. It depends on whether people choose the opportunities that are accessible to them. (I dunno, maybe you're right and I'm just thinking like an elitist. Talking about this sort of stuff usually interests me more than some quiz on the internet that answers some odd, obscure and ultimately useless question like "What color shade are you on the 256 pallet?")

I have a pretty good idea of who will nibble on these kinds of threads... damn, wish we were all together someplace discussing this over beer. Yeah... *sigh* Kinda' makes me long for college. (Sorry, Duchess )

Fantastic! I love pics like that. (I want to build a geodesic dome smack in the middle of just such a place...sans through road, natch'.)