Jump to content

nothing i do is magic

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by nothing i do is magic

  1. There's a town in Michigan called Hell too. I have a friend from there. It's very, very small. IIRC, they don't actualy have a post office, but take the mail to a general store (or somewhere) where it's later collected - but first stampted in red ink with the words "this letter's been through Hell" (or something like that) - nothing
  2. ...sorry to be nitpicky, but Cro Magnons were Homo sapiens. :boody: - strippers, plural. I was wondering when this icon'd get any use :grin: -nothing
  3. not sure what you mean by more succesful[ly] than MillenniuM, but it only ran one year longer because the main actress left after the third season. My dad and I had a nickname for her - BadActress, all one word. It was odd that two shows with chacters with however you want to call the ability to see into the killer's mind began in the same year, and both were partially inspired by a movie called Fear (the 1990 movie, not the 1996 one). There were suspisions of espionage on someone's part, but I know CC didn't pull MillenniuM out of nowhere, and haven't really cared to investigate the impetus for Pofiler. Profiler beat MM to DVD, but that's about all it beat it in. The atmosphere of MM was much better, as some have said, as were the characters; and the stories weren't drawn from the repetitive 'cop show' scripts. The main 'evil' in Profiler was a crazy man obsessed (against all odds) with the main character (a woman, I can't remember what kind of title the job carried, like det. or not). And it really got old quickly - not just that character, the whole thing. How many Profiler fans do you suspect are still discussing their show on the interweb right about now? (And if they are, I'm not sure I'd like it brought to my attention.) - nothing (coincidentally, Profiler and The Others ran back to back for a brief moment on NBC)
  4. I was so scared, irrationally I must say, when I first heard about the outbreaks in Angola. The phrase "Ebola-like" was enough to do me in. I must preface this and say it was mainly because of Millennium that I had this reaction - more like the power of people controlling a virus rather than the pathogen itself. I was the only person in my AP Biology class in high school to know what Marburg was, and I did a presentation on it. I know little about the policies surrounding the outbreak in Angola, and can only hope it's controlled and no longer a threat. If you don't have a weak stomach and have the time I'd reccommend reading Richard Preston's The Hot Zone. I read most of it on a plane ride. It's sort of the 'true story' about the filoviruses - the Ebola strains and Marburg, and while it wanders a little bit once the virus reaches the US, it's very informative and easy to read. Preventing the spread of the virus is obviously fundamental to controlling it; the methods gravity well posted below are employed whenever possible, but they're not always available. It was almost painful reading about the first man to become infected, and how little precautions were taken because they had no idea what they were dealing with. However, once a patient is infected with a filovirus, they're pretty much treated symptomatically, and obviously, kept clean and whatnot. One thing that really interested me is that if you're kept hydrated you'll probably survive, because most people died of dehydration. So there you go. (I also learned that Nairobi has the best hospital in Eastern Africa, but my mother still wouldn't let me travel abroad to Kenya...) On that note, I had a lot of questions about Marburg after reading the book, because what was shown on MM was not Marburg (exactly). I understand the writers/make up people needing to clean it up in order for it to be shown under "network standards and practices", but... All I can say is the Group had some scientists working overtime on modifying the virus. (Reminded me a bit of the only other Richard Preston book I've read (so far), The Cobra Event, his first work of fiction about an engineered virus. Scary, but very interesting.) Anybody else want to discuss that aspect, post away! I'm certainly no virologist (nor am I sure how to spell it!). -nothing
  5. Oh good, I'd hoped I wasn't too hard on Catherine; apparently not. (Though I have been before... not here) Good point- it's been far too long since I've sat down and watched them in order (one more month!). But even solely in regards to the PM, I personally find it understandable that she'd need time after having been through her ordeal. Don't get me wrong - I get angry with her every time I watch that scene where they're sort of packing and avoiding the talking they desperately need to do, and I do think she/the writers could've handled it better, but I probably would've been more worried/annoyed if the writers written very little/no reaction to it. I mean, everything else aside, her husband just killed a man in front of her. It's raw and it's shocking to watch, and it's what makes MM great television. I'm glad they're unlike so many TV dramas that bring up something huge about a character and the next week it's barely mentioned if at all. (...That's a roundabout way of saying they're good with continuity.) I don't know if I'd call her a warrior, fourhorsemen, but I would agree that she's fighting something/for something, just something outside the main 'battle' of the show (on which it'd've been nice to get her take on, IMHO). But I'm all up for a discussion of (not sure how much I'd have to say, but I'm sure something would strike me). As for the article I read, arcanamundi, the first bit was what I remember her saying in it, the line that beings 'Not only that' was my continuation of the idea. But of course. I know I have opinions/questions about Lara (more thought out than my Catherine thoughts, which I just came up with sitting here); hope nobody minds. Ok, I have to admit it took me a second to get that. (It's also 2 in the morning.) It works, though I usually 'go by' (read: sign stuff) nothing. Either way. And wait, who is the forensic psychologist among us? I have a feeling this may be tiwwa trivia I should but don't know because of spastic visiting patterns... - nothing, who should really get to bed, and who is sorry about the crazy italics last post. they should be better now. p.s. i love the gehenna pics. i think this guy is really neat:
  6. I've largely not been a Catherine fan, but I do believe she has great qualities and adds a lot to the show (I know no one is arguing this, I'm just saying...) Her character changes with good reason over her two seasons, but it is also changed with less good reason, IMHO. I agree that Catherine's reaction to 'being saved' from the Polaroid Man was extreme, but so were the circumstances around her needing to be rescued from PM. Yes, Frank's reaction was also extreme, as a member of the law force, and as someone, as pointed out earlier, Catherine couldn't imagine committing murder. Yes, he's been a gun-carrying law enforcement official for damn near as long as she's been alive (go find the MM timeline), and probably shot at/shot at a body or two in his career (I seem to remember him shooting in the Thin White Line flashbacks, but I could easily be mistaken). But she wasn't present at the other occasions, and Frank was acting as a cop. In TBATE, his intentions were different (obviously). He was trying to kill someone with his bare hands - not just subdue the PM or render him unconscious. It's very shocking even to watch; I can't even imagine what it'd be like, to be abducted, to think your daughter dead, and be tormented by a man who'd stalked you for years and about whom you'd never known – then have your husband, whom you’d probably been silently invoking the whole time, break in and kill the man three feet from you. There may be a bit of the whole wanting someone dead but not wanting kill the person thing going on. I think Frank sort of failed Catherine's expectations of him – not that I can say what she wanted, but that she didn’t like what she got. But regardless of what happened to the PM, I'd find it very difficult for anyone to question Catherine's wanting "some time" after having just been through the ordeal I'm too lazy to type again. Granted, it'd probably have been "some time" with Frank if he hadn't been the one to kill PM, but he was. She needed time not only to process this event, however. We know little of Catherine's beliefs on the nature of the universe except she's a Catholic of some sort and doesn't like Frank trying/pretending to protect her and Jordan from 'the real world'. But Frank's 'real world' barging into their houses, hanging an old friend on a peg in the basement and leaving a 'sorry for barging in' kidney in their fridge is something I'm sure she's still dealing with at this point in the series. I think she was underdeveloped in season 1. While we get glimpses of her as a professional and a person, she's mainly a mother and a wife who serves as a grounding point and touchstone. There's nothing wrong with those roles, or following only those roles. But the majority of her scenes are those supporting Frank, or at least interacting with him. We know she’s a real person; he certainly knows it. But most of the definitions we have for her are in relation to Frank . This assessment is, of course, in light of her development in s2. It was the disentanglement from Frank that allowed the writers to explore her more, but also broadened Frank and Jordan. (I’m thinking of Monster, Luminary, Siren, O/R…) We don’t always like what we get, and apparently, they didn’t always like what they wrote. But the two seasons’ Catherines really stand at odds, if not in episodic moments, than especially in overall season-long action. I think her actions in Luminary are at the same time encouraging and discouraging. She's finally making a grand effort to understand just what the hell Frank is talking about (and granted, I probably would be rather puzzled and maybe a bit annoyed). She's got all the books laid out on the floor, comparing names and dates and whatnot, but as a viewer, I can't help but think that while she's going about it as best she knows, she's going about it the wrong way. This is further pointed out when Jordan takes one look at the pictures and can identify in a moment, "That's daddy." It's made even more ironic because Catherine is the one who sent Frank to Alaska in the first place. Unfortunately, I don't think Catherine could've ever understood 'the gift' entirely - Frank's or Jordan's. It's an ability, maybe somewhat genetic, and Catherine doesn't have it. That doesn't mean she can't be supportive; indeed, she'd maybe be better at being supportive of someone like Frank than someone like Lara would (more on that later). But that's also one of the reasons Catherine reacts so offhandedly to Frank in season 2. I don't remember the earliest manifestations of Jordan's vision/s (besides the dreams) but I do remember one of the earliest is in the Dove/TBATE arc, when Jordan saw angels in the corner, "but now they're gone." Catherine has to come to the understanding they're inevitable. As far as we know, she's (and indeed maybe even Frank, besides his mother) had never met another person with the 'gift' - so her only reference point for the phenomenon is that her husband sees things unlike normal people, and he had a mental breakdown as a direct result of it. No parent wants anything like that for their child. And because it was during her abduction that Jordan saw angels, who were gone when Catherine returned, I could completely see someone even as normally composed and rational as Catherine (largely) is – I could see her blame herself. I'm not all that well versed in the whole battle over when the visions started and who was the impetus (i.e. were they s1 recent or s2 life-long), but bringing Lara in as an alternative to Frank was an interesting idea. Frank, and I can't remember where, says he manipulated his vision to see evil; Lara sees something as an indication of evil. So it's not all that cheery, but it's a better 'option' for Jordan. However, we get very little Catherine and Lara interaction, and what we do have is awkward and in passing, up until Anamnesis (sp), by which point Catherine's already formed an opinion of Lara. (And not a great one.) (I always find it very telling Frank doesn’t introduce Lara to Catherine – which is understandable, but that the camera follows her and leaves the Blacks.) I remember reading in an interview or an article that at the very beginning of season 2 someone had thrown out the idea of, if not an actual affair, a mutual Frank/Lara attraction. But they decided against it; I remember Kristen quoted as saying something like the viewers wouldn’t want it, and something like there were so many affairs on TV they wanted to be different in that they weren’t doing one. Not only that but it would fly in the face of the home and (nuclear) family as a place of sanctity, for Frank if for few others on the show (even though it happened to be breaking down at the time). I came onto this show in reruns and it was a little while before I discovered the extensive web community it has, so I’d have to admit that I’d thought about a Frank and Lara relationship. I don’t know how much I thought about it, b/c I seem to remember seeing the eps out of order. But having seen them all several times again, and thinking about it, a Frank and Lara affair doesn’t seem very viable for several reasons I won’t go into because this is about Catherine. In short (har har) I do realize her character changed over the course of s2 in her reasoning and reactions to Frank, Jordan, family, the gift, etc. I find her criticism of Frank unnecessarily harsh (in MOCT, “I know that things are changing for us. Time's running out. Frank, I want you to be happy. But Jordan is my first priority: her safety and her well-being. And I won't let anything jeopardize that.”) as though somewhere along the line she realized/decided it may come down to a choice between the two… And while I enjoy her character development (if not necessarily her character) it definitely seems to me that M&W (&whomever) sacrificed a consistent Catherine for Frank/story/plot development whenever they wanted to. I believe a lot of her can be figured out, but it may not be easy, because she’s not the focus of the show, and it may not be pretty, because she can seem, and sometimes is, an impediment to Frank. (I don’t recall her exact reasoning, but I do remember Megan Gallagher gave her full support to the death of Catherine.) -nothing, hoping this makes a bit of sense, and who happens to think the parent/offspring relationships are some of the most intriguing on the show.
  7. ...According to csifiles.com, (which I only check for episode titles - I promise) Dean Winters has signed on for the CSI: Miami finale. I'm not going spoil who he's playing, but I was surprised. There's a blurb on the front page of the posted website, news from April 22nd, and a link to more info. Dean was, of course, Mr. Crocell in Curse, and, strangely enough, young Michael Lanyard in Matryoshka. He's a detective in most of the first season of Law and Order: Special Victims Unit, which I've seen, and was on Oz for at least one season (not yet seen that). I caught him in his first of three Homicide: Life on the Street episodes (as the same character) this past winter break - it was kind of funny to see him even younger than he was in SVU, my Dean reference point, and younger than in MM. I don't know why, but I cannot stand him in SVU - anywhere else I enjoy him and his performances just fine. But not as Cassidy... - nothing amended: so i just did a google image search of the keyword 'crocell' and was wondering why this image kept coming up: <-click on it; the little pic doesn't work for some reason but the big one does So in a fit of curiosity I actually clicked some of the links, here's what I came up with (apologies if this has come up before or is the wrong place to post this):"CROCELL.--The Forty-ninth Spirit is Crocell, or Crokel. He appeareth in the Form of an Angel. He is a Duke Great and Strong, speaking something Mystically of Hidden Things. He teacheth the Art of Geometry and the Liberal Sciences. He, at the Command of the Exorcist, will produce Great Noises like the Rushings of many Waters, although there be none. He warmeth Waters, and discovereth Baths. He was of the Order of Potestates, or Powers, before his fall, as he declared unto the King Solomon. He governeth 48 Legions of Spirits. His Seal is this, the which wear thou as aforesaid." https://www.sacred-texts.com/grim/lks/lks05.htm "Crocell is the Forty-ninth Spirit listed in the Goetia, who governs 48 Legions. He appears as an angel & knows of mystical & hidden things. He teaches geometry & liberal sciences, & can produce noises like rushing waters. He is known for warming waters & discovering baths." - https://www.deeptrancenow.com/solomonspirits.htm ...granted I don't actually know what a lot of this means, or exactly what the Goetia is... ...so i looked it up: "Goetia (Latin, "howling") is a word used to describe a class of magick which emphasizes the summoning or calling forth of lesser spirits and demons to visible appearance, with the intention of binding the spirits to perform the magician's will." https://heru-ra-ha.tripod.com/topics/goetia.html ...that didn't really clear things up too much. But it's an interesting revelation that Mr. Crocell's name was not just pulled out of thin air. I know Chris Carter often imbues much menaing into the names of his characters, especially the main characters, but I hadn't heard anything on this one yet. -nothing again, hoping she's not bored you to tears. and to get back on-topic:
  8. ...such a late reply... Yeah, they were genetically engineered soldiers, called In-Vitros, or, derroragorily, tanks, because they spend matured till age 18 in a liquid-filled tank. He didn't so much keep it a secret (it's kind of hard to with a military hair cut and 'belly button' on the back of your neck) as didn't let it define him so much. Rodney Roland played another In-Vitro, Cooper, who was more hot-headed about it and in general. Aah, T.C. McQueen.... Also, Tucker Smallwood, who played Stephen Kiley in Goodbye Charlie was in S:AAB as Commodore (?) Ross, aka Boss Ross. James Morrison loves Morgan and Wong, I recall reading in an interview. I hope something great comes his way soon ... i mean... -nothing
  9. Do the R2 disk sleeves have similar art as the R1s? I mean, Frank in a slightly different pose/facial expression? Don't get me wrong; I love Frank, but even my brother (whom I'm working on indoctrinating into MM!) noted the repetitiveness after handling maybe 3 disks... I get that he's the main character/emphasis, etc, but most other TV shows I know/own have pics of the supporting characters as well, even those, unlike MM, that have a character as part of the title of the show. And as for the s2 covers - yeah, ASBOG is a strange pic considering very few people liked it. I do like the overall color scheme, the episode had a lot less to do with the MM arc than Owls did, on the British cover. I do like that the upper half of the covers have the same 'theme' going on -the ouroborous, with the expanding bridge thingy behind it, in a larger and fainter ouro, with some symbols visible, like the three triangles and other angled shapes without names (am very inarticulate today), but the scale seems slightly different, especially for the 'background'. The font for 'MillenniuM' is a little different, with the US looking a bit more 'destroyed' than the UK; and the rest of the US font is a bit more atypical than the UK font. Coincidentally, they're both on sale at amazon.com and amazon.com/uk; 25 and 18 % off, respectively (I don't know how to put pics in the text... :( ) (edited: apparently I do) - nothing
  10. mountain.bmp Good question. It may not be named; however I am of little help. I googled images for 'art by hitler', 'hitler mountain' 'hitler watercolor' and a few others, but no luck. However, I did find Hitler's Art: Lanscapes. Additionally, there's Original Hitler Artwork for Sale if you're interested. I wonder why Clear had that particular painting and had it on display in her office, of all places. It wasn't particurarly good either, it seems some (see links) were better (some worse). Too bad we can't find the site where Frank found it in the first place... (though I don't remember seeing a title there either) - nothing, who needs to get off the computer and do something to validate her existence
  11. Great cover! I love whatever you did to make the House sketchy/watercolery. (Forgive the lack of techincal terms; my one semester of Modern Technology was... four years ago... or something). I know it's been asked, but... any plans for S2 and 3? On a side note: why do the British and US (only ones I've seen) covers differ so drastically? I know the people who created the show have little to no say in the design, but it seems strange, since the artists/ad people, whomever, are selling the same product to the same fans, unless I missed something. I guess I'm just envious because I think the British covers are cooler than ours (Harsh Realm especially!) Also jealous because they have 3 and the threefer out already... - nothing, reminding herself 'patience is a virtue, and you haven't even watched all of 1&2 yet' (blasphemy, she knows).
  12. I would love it. Of course, they'd probably have to have hired an extra barber or something. You wouldn't want such power going to its... er... his... er... head. It's so strange whenever I see him in movies/TV from before or after MM, and he's either got a full mop of hair, or no hair/no mustache, or some non-Peter combination of the two extremes.... good times. -nothing
  13. Wow. Thanks for the help. And that's an amazing site! I think I've heard of it, but never been before. https://www.chrisnu.com/millennium/ Now... to figure out how to work it into the story. -nothing
  14. On which hand is Frank's scar? I did a quick picture search but I can't seem to find it. I know this is a strange question (and that I've been gone forever and a day) but it's for a strange crossover fic I've almost got done. I recently watched the episode too, but forgot, and don't have my DVDs with me for being without DVDs!
  15. I am apparently very slow; it took me several watchings to realize someone was supposed to be *dead*. I was younger and hadn't seen all the eps, nor in order. I didn't seen the pool of blood for the longest time; what I though had happened is that James Hollis had gone to sleep/passed out/fainted on the floor after immersing himself in his life, so to speak. (Though why he still had his shoes on puzzled me a bit.) I have of course rewatched it and now know that indeed, there is someone lying in *Peter*'s house (it struck me at the time as very un-Emma's apartment), unmoving, with a pool of blood. The rest of the office is a mess. Also, we know that Peter is in danger because of the previously-discussed transfer of documents. I haven't seen my GTAT tape in unfotunately quite some time - we never saw what those documents were, or not all of them, right? (I have a story idea floating aroudn in my brain about this.) So somebody's dead in Peter's study. I'd honestly not considered the possiblity of a Legion incarnaton, or a MG-sent 'assassin' until reading it here or on another message board, and I'd have to agree with earlier posters that suicide doesn't seem like an action Peter would undertake. Granted, we don't know a lot about him, but it doesn't fall in line with my idea of Peter. I know a lot of people here are good with things like shooting details and other behind-the-scenes information, so I propose a question: Who was the actor lying on the floor, whose leg appeared on screen? I'm pretty sure it would just have been an extra, or in this case a 'leg model' like are used for close-up hand shots, etc, but CC is often finicky with details. Also, because my tapes are regretably 1700 miles (but only about 3.5 weeks this time!) away, I was also wondering if anyone had screen caps of the shot of the leg and desk? Also, what did Peter's pants (and shoes? if seen) look like in his last living scene? Wow. If only I devoted this much thought to my real homework and analyses, etc... - nothing i do is magic
  16. Hey all. I remember seeing MM sheet music for sale more than just a little while ago. I saw it on MM websites and I'm pretty sure the big retailers such as amazon.com and barnesandnoble.com. IIRC, it was black with the orange ouro and most likely the same 'men searching woods' picture as on the bus stops, early promos, etc, but darker. Thing is, I had little use for it (outside pure collection value - grr, why didn't I buy it?). I've only recently taken up music. But now when I search for it by keywords on amazon and barnesandnoble, I can't seem to get anything close. I remember seeing it on a German website as well; and possibly on the Millennial Abyss store/products for sale [elsewhere] page, but I can't find that either. MDUK is also a strike-out. Is this another MM project that lamentedly almost made it to publishing, or is it just veeeeeeeeeeery hard to find? Anyone have it, have heard of it, can tell me about it? Thanks in advance, -nothing i do is magic
  17. wow. my mom can't/won't stomach it. (this is odd given her new favorite show is 6 feet under, and we don't even have HBO.) thought the ep she's seen the most of, iirc, is bardol tholdol, and she kept missing bits of it, which renders it even more confusing. my dad's kind of a fan. but then again he'll generally watch whatever i have on. hmm... (...::begins plans for mm-conversion compaign of my father :::... ) - nothing i do is magic.
  18. i’m sorry. you are absolutely correct. (hmm, about that philo class i took...) it is just my observation that debates about religion, which are often touchy subjects in their own rights, often turn into debates between religions. debate to me implys arguments over discussion, though i may be completely in the wrong. the results are often a quick summary, a 'my daddy can beat up your daddy' type of judgment of a religion rather than knowledge about it, resulting from dialogues and careful study. i think single-source beliefs on a religion are incomplete; what my Islamic roommate from last year believes is not the exact same thing as what my Islamic Arabic teacher believes; my friend’s Buddhist beliefs are different from many others because he was brought up and still is a Christian; my own beliefs and questions are not those of my friends and acquaintances who are atheist/agnostic. i personally enjoy learning about other religions and discussing them, though that sounds a little more goal-oriented than what i have in mind. i do think discussions can help illuminate those many factors many religions share, and can be really enlightning and enjoyable. debates about whose religion is better; more applicable, fair, or just; and especially more correct, i think have little purpose. - nothing i do is magic who needs to get ready for dinner.
  19. i think this is a bit of a misunderstanding. theories aren't batted about labs across the world as if they were pingpong balls. a conclusion becomes theory after many, many tests or observations, by many, many individuals. that's one tenant of an experiment; it must be repeatable. each time, the conclusion was found to work, or else the hypothesis was revisited and the conclusion reworked. cell theory and the theory of evoultion, i have been taught and told countless times, are misnomers. they have reached and tested so many times they should be called principles (one step up the level of knowledge, under law. gravity is a law, Fg = (Gm1+m2)/r^2.) here you've peaked my curiosity. do you have any examples? ... i am not sure what theories have to do with religion. the religions that have come down to us today are undenyably and inextricably tied to beliefs that began thousands of years before man created writing systems. sure, many of these 'events' as you say are passed down to us orally and/or were later written down, but all these too must be seen through the veil of history ("written records"). the amount of time man as a species has been able to write is miniscule compared to the amount of time man has had a fully modern brain, capable of conceiving of such things as religion and reason. i did not say man created god. or the gods. or spirits. or the devil. or angels. or the masters in the universe, despite my believing so. almost everyone i knows believes thusly, and it is not my place to attack them. i said man created religion, the systems and methods and beliefs about how to interact with his god/s: whether to fear them; how to pay reverence to them; how similar or different the gods were to man himself; how the gods affected man's environment; what the gods thought that man should be doing and how he should be treating others. and most importantly, how attentive and caring was a god; how powerful. what happened after a man died? again, i personally believe we created all of religion, but understand many don't. in that case, in any case, the search for the origins of religion is a psuedoscience at best: we can come up with ideas and general time spans of when the human brain became capible of producing and understanding religious thought. but just because it's there doesn't mean we used it for thousands of years. indications point to between 70 and 35 thousand years ago. this is very, very, very late in our evolution. some people have to believe spirituality devoped much earlier. but until we invent a time machine, a device for detecting 'spiritual thought', and some way to perform the tests without planting religious ideas (and scaring the hell out of our australopithicene, H. habalis, H. erectus, and H. sapien subjects), the beginnings of religion and spirituality, it's all a psuedoscience. it's untestable. now this is tricky. i never understood descartes' "how do i know this reality is real, thus an evil demon is tricking me" which restulted in "i question (the part most people leave out) therefore i think therefore i am." uh, rene, you just presupposed your own existence to be doing the questioning in the first place. this is just one example. i am not well-versed in philosophy, nor do i think we learn as much from debating third parties' views on religion, reality, etc as we do from debating/discussion our own. i happen to think this is real - to me. the world i observe, the information i take in and process, the people i meet, the stars a hundred thousand light years away. science, mostly, which restults in an ever changing reality, at which point emotion is introduced. i agree with the second point. if i were to walk up to someone and say, "you can quit spending so much time and energy trying to understand you reality; you're actually living in my reality, and here's what you need to know:..." they'd probably just walk away. reality is bound with personal experience. no one's ever had the exact same exeperience as any other person on the planet. could you at least accept that someone's reality is "total athiesm", however, even if it is a strange concept? (not sure mine is, but for the sake of discussion...) and, in conclusion, it's my turn to say: ; -nothing i do is magic
  20. "...and there's gotta be something we can do about all your, um, grey showing through..." as much as i had to laugh at that, i'd take frank in orison over signs and wonders any day. and all souls is a great suggestion. (so long as it's not all things, we're good. - did i just say that?) - nothing i do is magic
  21. just fyi, as of august 2004, jordan's 13... (at least, i seem to recall 7&1 taking place in august - am i hallucinating?) in any case, she was born in 1991. quit looking at me like that. - nothing i do is magic
  22. he was on JAG a few years ago - i mean a lot of few years ago. not sure if it was pre/post MM, but i think he's a recurring character. i don't watch the show, but did (as an mm fan, of course) catch 2 eps with him, actually. - nothing i do is magic
  23. ... that happens a lot in human interaction. especially on religion... however, getting back to the show, i kind of always thought lucy, pepper, the demon in frank's house, etc, were one form of demon; they were 'legion', people who had become infested by a higher power. it was mentioned in pptd that pepper had been clinically dead a month before, and if lucy butler/annie martin (or whatever her other name was) has been alive since 1911, i want a bottle of her face product and name of her plastic surgeon. in my mythology of the show, legion can inhabit many people at once. i grouped danielle barbakow (sp?) in this group too, not entirely on her actions, while they were heinous, but also becasue of frank's (and lara's, to a lesser extent) reaction to her. frank has felt evil. evil seeks him out as well, mainly in the form of lucy. and, in my mind, it does so for the same reason dean winters' character (sorry, awful with names -guy with cigarette, killed himself, scared the sh*t outta five year old frank on halloween) gave to frank in his attic. it took me a long time thinking and processing the show (and i must admit, being 1700 miles from my tapes does not help) to believe that evil isn't that concerned with the addition of frank to its side; it's the subtraction from the opposing side that evil wishes to obtain. (and i hesitate to say 'good'; i kind of think of it more as the default or status quo. that it's not always such a battle between the two, but a slight deviation from one can have major consequences.) frank doesn't have to join legion to hinder the group's and his own process, he just has to "sit back and do nothing." and given what legion knows about frank, the second option is much more a possability than the first. here i've used evil as a being, in opposition to the skow (serial killers of the week). yes, i think the polaroid stalker is evil (as an adjective). the frenchman and the judge and ed cuffle and anyone who takes a life for any reason other than extreme self protection, in my impression of the show, is 'evil' (adjective). they are not, however, driven to these crimes by an outside force. whatever the reasons are: past abuse, mental problems, and a whole host of others and divisions of others and subgroups of these, they commit the crimes for themselves. or, possibly, for a partner, but the motives are present and more or less apparent. (yes, i realize i'm horribly generalizing about sks and the like. but on the whole they're the second category.) legion's actions are orchistrated, and don't just involve murder. pepper makes intimate contact with frank's family and repeatedly offers him a job. (funny thing, siren allows him a glimpse of life without the MG - i'm not all that sure what she is/was, but given the state of the demon in the MGless world [ie, present], i lean vaguely to the slightly-helpful-but-mostly-not-destructive force side, like samiel (sam-iel/-ael, or something) from pptd. love his lines about being pained to be 'here' and how pepper's death didn't help/solve much of anything.) if you've made it this far, i admire your persistance. now comes the time that i explain that i seem to approach mm like a schitzophrenic (and not just in my obsession). millennium is by far my favorite show ever. i am amazed by the ability of all those who worked on it to produce something so rich. i see in mm good and evil, and i approach the show with these ideas because they are what i have taken from the show to be reality. (sounds circular, but i don't think it is.) it is how the universe exists for frank and everyone else there, and so my personal ideas have to be checked at the door in order to understand what the patterns and influences on the characters are. i want to stress that it is not a universe based on frank's beliefs, however, for that would be some power of projection. it is the universe he inhabits, one with powers, one which he is able to see more clearly than many others. but i don't believe he has it all figured out. good, evil, angels, demons, god, devil, heaven, hell, torment, punishment, reward - these are themes that resonate in many (but not all) spiritual systems. so while the show is based on christian belief and myth (and certian denominations, etc, at that), i personally believe it is useless to debate the traits of angels on a text by text basis. religion is a creation of man kind. i don't know what the impulse was, if, like in the recent time article, we have a 'drive' and/or a something in our brain that wants us to be spiritual, to seek God or god or a higher power or harmony with others or preservation of the earth, or whatever. NO ONE DOES. it's one of the mysteries of human evolution. i can speculate till i'm blue in the face. scientists, anthropologists, sociologists, linguists, archaeologists, astronomers, astrologers, religious researchers (you can't say historians, becuase religion predates written records) can perform million and millions of tests and studies, and write millions of papers, hold millions of confrences, and we most likely still won't know. not only that, i personally don't believe in any of it. i'm an athiest, and don't mind saying so. a lot of people think it's odd that i like mm b/c i'm an athiest, and a lot of people think it's odd i'm an athiest b/c i like mm. but that's the way it works. i still haven't gotten the whole spirituality thing worked out yet. i believe people can act with goodly intentions towards one another, or they can act with evil intensions. many factors influence this. we alone among animals have the power of reason, it makes us "almost wholly without instinct" (from a book i just read - pm me for details). this is not to say our actions towards one another are based completely on reason, but it plays a large factor. i believe mm is and can be a wonderful conduit for sparking religious discussion. i don't really see much point in religious 'debates', because that's basically what the crusades were, with spears. sorry, not to be crass, but anyone who is the first to stand up in support of a religion is probably not going to be the easiest for the other side to win over, which, it seems to me, is a main point of a debate. religions are like children - we created them and each person believes his to be best. (wow, i'm pithy at 2:15 am.) i'd even venture to say that part of mm's intent was to *be* a stimulant for religious discussion. i find a lot of things wrong with particular religions, and with religion as a whole. none of that, however, matters here. becaues what i find worse is religious ignorance and intolerance. shouting matches about whose god is bettter, people dying and killing themselves for religious beliefs, defacings of religious places and imagery, hate crimes and discrimination against those who appear or are obviously a follower of a certain religion - none of this makes the least bit of sense to me. if religion's purpose is to help man - help him understand, to grow, to face the world, to accept its cycles, to help him form a path of 'right action' or 'morals' or 'acceptable behavors, none of this advances the point. it doesn't help the participants to discover the similarities of their beliefs, or marvel in the differences that the human mind is able to conceive and hold at the same time. and probably don't help the soul either. i don't want to sound as though i'm lecturing anyone. i'd hate that, actually. but why fight over the properties of an angel; if one appeared to mary, or mohammed, don't you think the experience would be more than mere words could capture? add in the many subsequent revisions and translations through which the Bible, in this case, has gone, and one come up with a text that has about as much history about it as in it. the people who made millennium had an idea of what they wanted mm to say, and how they were going to say it. this was refined over the years. every viewer comes to the show with his preconceived notions, his ideas of what is rational, what is right, the nature of evil. when wound together and discusses with others, fans and nonfans alike, my approach to, understanding of, and appreciation for our wonderful show has grown immensely. because i know no fans in real life, (and can no longer subject my best friend - separate states- and family - freaks them out - to mm eps), this message board is pretty much my last respite. i agree this is not necessarily the place for out of context religious debate or even discussion, but such places are hard to come by. but i, for one, wouldn't mind hearing others' views on religion in MillenniuM. because of my personal approach, i know my mm approach lacks something. so if i've stepped out of bounds, tell me; if i've bored you to tears, i apologize; if you'd like to comment, discuss, argue, point out an error, please do here or pm; if you've made it this far i'm really impressed; and if you're like me - in the US, might you join me in some eager anticipation of season 2? nothing i do is magic p.s. i'm totally blanking on frank's religious denomination, if one was given. i know catherine and jordan were catholic. and i wonder, did frank keep his parents' out of habit? who is still working on the 'afterlife', especially in context to the demons in curse; and who just wrote a short story that, after typing all this out, i've come to realize puts the MG in the role of evil via its creation of lucas barr. which adds to it nicely.
  24. I think you're thinking of the X-Files episode Grotesque. (spoilers) I haven't seen it in a while, but Mulder went a little off the deep end (if that's possible) during a case in which a killer who hid at least one body in clay. The killer, then Mulder, were obsessed with gargoyles. If I remember correctly Mulder's mentor is involved in the case. It was one of the 'Chris Carter has demons' (as I call them) that served as a spark for MM itself.
  25. The Millennium Calendar and Desk Diary are available on e-bay right now; it ends in 6 days, has no bids and an original start price of 9.99 (cheaper than the prices of mine combined, I can tell you that). Ships worldwide (sounds like I'm the seller but I'm not; I have both these items and can tell you they're beautiful as and to a Millennium fan [they do happen to scare my sister, but...]) go to ebay.com and search for item # 3286359152 ~ orfan
  • Create New...