Re: Buffy tapes

[Bruce Richardson]

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 10:02:57PM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
> 
> The BBC have an archaic storage recovery department.

You mean they're equipped to transfer information from papyrus to
vellum?

-- 
Bruce

Explota!: miles de lemmings no pueden estar equivocados.

Re: Buffy tapes

[Dave Hodgkinson]

On 22 Jun 2011, at 18:50, Raphael Mankin wrote:

> On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 17:47 +0100, Christopher Jones wrote:
>> On 22 Jun 2011, at 17:02, Raphael Mankin wrote:
>> 
>>> I have a collection of about 40 Buffy video tapes to dispose of. If any
>>> one would like them please contact me offlist. Collect from NW4
>>> (Hendon).
>> 
>> What's a 'video tape'?
> 
> Now you now why I am disposing of them.
> 

The BBC have an archaic storage recovery department.

Re: Buffy tapes

[Raphael Mankin]

On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 17:47 +0100, Christopher Jones wrote:
> On 22 Jun 2011, at 17:02, Raphael Mankin wrote:
> 
> > I have a collection of about 40 Buffy video tapes to dispose of. If any
> > one would like them please contact me offlist. Collect from NW4
> > (Hendon).
> 
> What's a 'video tape'?

Now you now why I am disposing of them.

Re: Buffy tapes

[Andrew Beattie]

 On 22/06/2011 17:47, Christopher Jones wrote:

What's a 'video tape'?

The technology that triumphed over Laserdisc.

Andrew

Re: Buffy tapes

[Christopher Jones]

On 22 Jun 2011, at 17:02, Raphael Mankin wrote:

> I have a collection of about 40 Buffy video tapes to dispose of. If any
> one would like them please contact me offlist. Collect from NW4
> (Hendon).

What's a 'video tape'?


Chris

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Piers Cawley]

"David H. Adler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 07:14:15PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
>> "David H. Adler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 
>> > On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 05:02:29PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
>> >> "David H. Adler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> 
>> >> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 06:23:23AM -0800, Dave Cross wrote:
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> "Normal Again" which is by far the best episode of Buffy ever
>> >> >> made.
>> >> >
>> >> > Hm.  Interesting choice.  My gut choice there would be The Body,
>> >> > actually.
>> >> 
>> >> Indeed. In fact I'd go so far as to say it's probably in the top ten
>> >> best episodes of any TV show ever.
>> >
>> > I might agree.  Ironically, the one thing about the episode that puts me
>> > off is the fact that they felt required to put a vampire in it.
>> 
>> I dunno. I'm in two minds about it. Pointed up the fact that, frankly,
>> monsters are nothing compared to the shock of loss.
>
> Hm.  I felt that it took away from the fact that this was the first time
> any of them had to deal with a natural death.  It's not like yet another
> vamp is anything different for them.
>
> But that's me.  *shrug*

Okay, I've just done the mental equivalent of sticking my thumb over
the bit with the vamp in it and taking a look at the picture again,
and you're right. Still, perfection isn't everything it's cracked up to be.

-- 
Piers

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[David H. Adler]

On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 07:14:15PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
> "David H. Adler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 05:02:29PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
> >> "David H. Adler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> 
> >> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 06:23:23AM -0800, Dave Cross wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> "Normal Again" which is by far the best episode of Buffy ever
> >> >> made.
> >> >
> >> > Hm.  Interesting choice.  My gut choice there would be The Body,
> >> > actually.
> >> 
> >> Indeed. In fact I'd go so far as to say it's probably in the top ten
> >> best episodes of any TV show ever.
> >
> > I might agree.  Ironically, the one thing about the episode that puts me
> > off is the fact that they felt required to put a vampire in it.
> 
> I dunno. I'm in two minds about it. Pointed up the fact that, frankly,
> monsters are nothing compared to the shock of loss.

Hm.  I felt that it took away from the fact that this was the first time
any of them had to deal with a natural death.  It's not like yet another
vamp is anything different for them.

But that's me.  *shrug*

dha
-- 
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
"A Marine that says 'gee whiz'?  What's he gonna do, storm the
Cunningham house?" - mst3k

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Piers Cawley]

"David H. Adler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 05:02:29PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
>> "David H. Adler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 
>> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 06:23:23AM -0800, Dave Cross wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> "Normal Again" which is by far the best episode of Buffy ever
>> >> made.
>> >
>> > Hm.  Interesting choice.  My gut choice there would be The Body,
>> > actually.
>> 
>> Indeed. In fact I'd go so far as to say it's probably in the top ten
>> best episodes of any TV show ever.
>
> I might agree.  Ironically, the one thing about the episode that puts me
> off is the fact that they felt required to put a vampire in it.

I dunno. I'm in two minds about it. Pointed up the fact that, frankly,
monsters are nothing compared to the shock of loss.

-- 
Piers

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[David H. Adler]

On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 05:02:29PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
> "David H. Adler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 06:23:23AM -0800, Dave Cross wrote:
> >> 
> >> "Normal Again" which is by far the best episode of Buffy ever
> >> made.
> >
> > Hm.  Interesting choice.  My gut choice there would be The Body,
> > actually.
> 
> Indeed. In fact I'd go so far as to say it's probably in the top ten
> best episodes of any TV show ever.

I might agree.  Ironically, the one thing about the episode that puts me
off is the fact that they felt required to put a vampire in it.

dha
-- 
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
Had deep and meaningfuls with kitty_goth, about BDSM, scarring, love,
and compiler theory, which was good.  - Alex Page

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Piers Cawley]

"David H. Adler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 06:23:23AM -0800, Dave Cross wrote:
>> 
>> "Normal Again" which is by far the best episode of Buffy ever
>> made.
>
> Hm.  Interesting choice.  My gut choice there would be The Body,
> actually.

Indeed. In fact I'd go so far as to say it's probably in the top ten
best episodes of any TV show ever.

-- 
Piers

Re: [buffy] spoiler policy reminder

[David H. Adler]

On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 02:48:51PM +, Mark Fowler wrote:
> Just as a reminder, the spoiler policy of this list is that no-one should
> mention anything that happens in Buffy or Angel until the episode has
> aired on the BBC.

So buffy may have changed her hair again in season 7.  Or maybe not.

But I won't tell you.  BWAHAHAHAHA.




lord, I need sleep

dha
-- 
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
Packard Bell doesn't make computers, they make elaborate paperweights.
- Mark Rogaski

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[David H. Adler]

On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 06:23:23AM -0800, Dave Cross wrote:
> 
> "Normal Again" which is by far the best episode of Buffy ever
> made.

Hm.  Interesting choice.  My gut choice there would be The Body,
actually.

> Season 7, on the other hand, is seeming distinctly average right
> now - tho' I hear it gets much better.

If you don't even want to hear the most vague and general comments on S7
possible, don't read any further.






IMO, it's been uneven.  Starting to pick up speed, though.

dha
-- 
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
A London.pm thread topic is like a non-alchoholic ingredient in a
cocktail, its only there so you can pretend not to be an inebriated
addict.   - Greg McCarroll

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Dominic Mitchell]

James Powell wrote:

On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 01:52:29PM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:

Sod it, I don't care.  I just want more farscape.


That's just muppets in space!


Exactly.  That's why I like it.  Far more entertaining.  I was waiting 
for the Kermit cameo, too...

-Dom

--
| Semantico: creators of major online resources  |
|   URL: http://www.semantico.com/   |
|   Tel: +44 (1273) 72   |
|   Address: 33 Bond St., Brighton, Sussex, BN1 1RD, UK. |

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Paul Mison]

On 13/02/2003 at 14:14 +, Andrew Wilson wrote:


Let's face it, season six was complete shite. This season (seven) is
vastly improved and they've only broadcast four episodes so far.


Season six was great. Already the BBC viewers have seen the beginning 
of one of the great dysfunctional relationships in TV history (Buffy 
and Spike) and there's better to come. (Spoilers are still in effect, 
remember, kids. Otherwise I'd go into more detail.)

Mind you, I'm a black-clad grumpy old bugger, so evidently I'm going 
to like it.

The two and a half out of the first four of season seven that I've 
seen so far are distinctly lacklustre in comparison.

While we're on the subject of Buffy, although you'll need to be a 
little careful, boils and burning torment is a great site. Here's 
their review of the infamous 'Willow gets hooked on magic' episode 
(on BBC2 a fortnight or so ago):

http://www.boilsandblindingtorment.com/Wrecked.htm

Also, because it's now out of spoiler territory, here's london.pm's 
archived discussion of it from when it was on Sky.

http://london.pm.org/pipermail/london.pm/Week-of-Mon-20020304/010464.html
http://dir.salon.com/sex/feature/2001/11/28/buffy/index.html # mentioned

--
:: paul
:: we're like crystal

Re: [buffy] spoiler policy reminder

[Jason Clifford]

On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Mark Fowler wrote:

> Just as a reminder, the spoiler policy of this list is that no-one should
> mention anything that happens in Buffy or Angel until the episode has
> aired on the BBC.
>
> Now, I'm not saying anyone has broken this, but several people are
> skirting close (which is okay) so I thought I'd point it out.

I guess I prompted that.

I have tried to avoid mentioning anything that would be a spoiler and I 
shall continue to be careful.

Jason
-- 
UKFSN.ORG   Finance Free Software while you surf the 'net
http://www.ukfsn.org/   Sign Up Now

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Jason Clifford]

On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Greg McCarroll wrote:

> Change the central cast dynamics yes, but there is a lot of mileage
> there ...
> 
>   Xander + Faith = lets just remember the hotel incidents
>   Willow + Faith = Willows maternal concern about Xander
>   Anya + Faith   = jealousy etc.
>   Giles + Faith  = giles hanging around to sort out this
>wet behind the ears slayers

They've all been done before though.

>   Spike + Faith  = love/hate relationship

I wish I could comment.

> it will also darken BtVS a lot more, and Angel which darker is doing
> a lot better this season

S6 was dark Buffy and a lot of fans hated it.

Jason Clifford
-- 
UKFSN.ORG   Finance Free Software while you surf the 'net
http://www.ukfsn.org/   Sign Up Now

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Greg McCarroll]

* Jason Clifford ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, James Powell wrote:
> 
> > to be replaced by the much fitter Eliza Dushku
> > 
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/2756657.stm
> 
> I am not convinced. 
> 
> I don't think 3 episodes would be enough to set this up and Faith taking 
> over the main slayer role would be too great a change to the central cast 
> dynamics.
> 

Change the central cast dynamics yes, but there is a lot of mileage
there ...

Xander + Faith = lets just remember the hotel incidents
Willow + Faith = Willows maternal concern about Xander
Anya + Faith   = jealousy etc.
Giles + Faith  = giles hanging around to sort out this
 wet behind the ears slayers
Spike + Faith  = love/hate relationship
Dawn + Faith   = bah who knows, maybe they will drop Dawn

it will also darken BtVS a lot more, and Angel which darker is doing
a lot better this season

imho, ymmv

-- 
*** ***
***   Email address has changed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Please   ***
***   update your email address book.   ***
*** ***
Greg McCarroll http://www.mccarroll.org.uk/~gem/
   jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Dave Cross]

From: Andrew Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 2/13/03 2:14:53 PM

[ about BtVS]

> Let's face it, season six was complete shite. This season 
> (seven) is vastly improved and they've only broadcast four
> episodes so far.

Beg to differ. I'm currently watching season 6 for the second
time on the BBC and I'm really enjoying it. Don't forget it contains
"Normal Again" which is by far the best episode of Buffy ever
made.

Season 7, on the other hand, is seeming distinctly average right
now - tho' I hear it gets much better.

>> Maybe it's dying off.
>
> Rumours of the show's demise are greatly exaggerated.

Well, let's just wait and see. I suspect that if SMG does leave
at the end of season 7 then they should just let it die a natural
death.

Dave...

-- 


"Let me see you make decisions, without your television"
   - Depeche Mode (Stripped)

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Dave Cross]

From: "Dave Cross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 2/13/03 2:01:20 PM

>From: James Powell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2/13/03 1:13:33 PM
>
>> to be replaced by the much fitter Eliza Dushku
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/2756657.stm
>>
>> maybe I will start watching this now instead of leaving my
>> girlfriend on a thursday night and escaping down the pub.
>
> This is the BBC reporting on a story from the Express - so
> I don't know how much credence you want to give it.

Actually, it seems to be the BBC reporting on the Express reporting
on this:

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/art-tv.html?2003-02/07/12.00.tv

which only says that this option is being _considered_

Dave...

-- 


"Let me see you make decisions, without your television"
   - Depeche Mode (Stripped)

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Jason Clifford]

On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, James Powell wrote:

> > I am not convinced. 
> > 
> > I don't think 3 episodes would be enough to set this up and Faith taking 
> > over the main slayer role would be too great a change to the central cast 
> > dynamics.
> 
> Latest series hasn't gone down too well in the US anyway has it?
> 
> Maybe it's dying off.

I don't know about the US. I've been watching the same episodes they have 
(up to S7 14 now) and it does feel like it's being drawn to a final 
conclusion.

After S7 I don't see where they can go for a big bad.

I guess they may launch another spin off series based upon Faith but I'm 
not sure there's a lot of fresh story line for Slayer II.

Jason Clifford
-- 
UKFSN.ORG   Finance Free Software while you surf the 'net
http://www.ukfsn.org/   Sign Up Now

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Andrew Wilson]

On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 01:54:33PM +, James Powell wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 01:37:42PM +, Jason Clifford wrote:
>> I am not convinced.
>>
>> I don't think 3 episodes would be enough to set this up and Faith
>> taking over the main slayer role would be too great a change to the
>> central cast dynamics.
> 
> Latest series hasn't gone down too well in the US anyway has it?

Let's face it, season six was complete shite. This season (seven) is
vastly improved and they've only broadcast four episodes so far.

> Maybe it's dying off.

Rumours of the show's demise are greatly exaggerated.

andrew
-- 
Taurus: (April. 20 - May 20)
You thought you'd heard of all the kinky fetishes, but that was before
next week's launch of a 24-hour doll-collecting channel.



msg11129/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Dave Cross]

From: James Powell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 2/13/03 1:13:33 PM

> to be replaced by the much fitter Eliza Dushku
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/2756657.stm
>
> maybe I will start watching this now instead of leaving my
> girlfriend on a thursday night and escaping down the pub.

This is the BBC reporting on a story from the Express - so I
don't know how much credence you want to give it. It's certainly
one possibility that I've heard mentioned before but there's
doesn't seem to be any official word from Mutant Enemy yet. I've
posted the link to Whedonesque so let's see what the reaction
there is.

Oh, and that BBC story contains spoilers for the last three episodes
of season 7.

Dave...

-- 


"Let me see you make decisions, without your television"
   - Depeche Mode (Stripped)

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[James Powell]

On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 01:52:29PM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
> James Powell wrote:
> >to be replaced by the much fitter Eliza Dushku
> >
> >http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/2756657.stm
> 
> Hmmm, linked in by the fact that both have been in a mental asylum[1]?
> 
> Sod it, I don't care.  I just want more farscape.

That's just muppets in space!

> 
> -Dom
> 
> [1] Or whatever the PC term is these days...
> 
> -- 
> | Semantico: creators of major online resources  |
> |   URL: http://www.semantico.com/   |
> |   Tel: +44 (1273) 72   |
> |   Address: 33 Bond St., Brighton, Sussex, BN1 1RD, UK. |
> 

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[James Powell]

On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 01:37:42PM +, Jason Clifford wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, James Powell wrote:
> 
> > to be replaced by the much fitter Eliza Dushku
> > 
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/2756657.stm
> 
> I am not convinced. 
> 
> I don't think 3 episodes would be enough to set this up and Faith taking 
> over the main slayer role would be too great a change to the central cast 
> dynamics.

Latest series hasn't gone down too well in the US anyway has it?

Maybe it's dying off.

> 
> Jason
> -- 
> UKFSN.ORG Finance Free Software while you surf the 'net
> http://www.ukfsn.org/ Sign Up Now
> 
> 

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Dominic Mitchell]

James Powell wrote:

to be replaced by the much fitter Eliza Dushku

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/2756657.stm


Hmmm, linked in by the fact that both have been in a mental asylum[1]?

Sod it, I don't care.  I just want more farscape.

-Dom

[1] Or whatever the PC term is these days...

--
| Semantico: creators of major online resources  |
|   URL: http://www.semantico.com/   |
|   Tel: +44 (1273) 72   |
|   Address: 33 Bond St., Brighton, Sussex, BN1 1RD, UK. |

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Chris Carline]

On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 01:37:42PM +, Jason Clifford wrote:
> > to be replaced by the much fitter Eliza Dushku
> > 
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/2756657.stm
> 
> I am not convinced. 
> 
> I don't think 3 episodes would be enough to set this up and Faith taking 
> over the main slayer role would be too great a change to the central cast 
> dynamics.

It's three episodes of Angel, five episodes of Buffy according to this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/news/buffy/2003/01/20/1669.shtml

Chris
-- 
Chris Carline <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://chris.carline.org/
GnuPG: 1024D/57B5CB20 | 5E85 207A 89D8 E097 0C0F FD4C 871A CE15 57B5 CB20

Re: [buffy] is leaving?

[Jason Clifford]

On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, James Powell wrote:

> to be replaced by the much fitter Eliza Dushku
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/2756657.stm

I am not convinced. 

I don't think 3 episodes would be enough to set this up and Faith taking 
over the main slayer role would be too great a change to the central cast 
dynamics.

Jason
-- 
UKFSN.ORG   Finance Free Software while you surf the 'net
http://www.ukfsn.org/   Sign Up Now

Re: Overloading: was (Re: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers))

[Robin Berjon]

Dave Cross wrote:

From: Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

And can you mess with it?


I don't think so. Wanting to do that would make you a very sick
person.


It would indeed. That sounds like a task for B::Generate...

--
Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Research Engineer, Expwayhttp://expway.fr/
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE  8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488

Re: Overloading: was (Re: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers))

[Piers Cawley]

Shevek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Have you solved the equality problem for straight line programs without 
> evaluating? *Grin*

The what?

Re: Overloading: was (Re: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers))

[Piers Cawley]

Shevek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Fri, 24 Jan 2003, Piers Cawley wrote:
>
>> "Dave Cross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 
>> > From: Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > Date: 1/24/03 11:45:52 AM
>> >
>> >> Oh! I've just remembered my overloading question from last
>> >> night. Does precedence stay the same when you overload?  
>> >
>> > Yes.
>> >
>> >> And can you mess with it?
>> >
>> > I don't think so. Wanting to do that would make you a very sick
>> > person.
>> 
>> It depends how you do it. If you have, for instance multiplication and
>> division returning a 'Result' object and only doing the actual
>> calculation at num/stringification time then your stringified 'Result'
>> object would hold enough information to rebuild what the calculation
>> looked like which would allow you to change the order of application
>> independently. The catch is that the 'Result' tree wouldn't capture
>> any brackets around operations that would, by default, be calculated
>> in that order whether there were brackets or not.
>
> Have you solved the equality problem for straight line programs without 
> evaluating? *Grin*
>
> S.

Re: Overloading: was (Re: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers))

[Shevek]

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003, Piers Cawley wrote:

> "Dave Cross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > From: Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: 1/24/03 11:45:52 AM
> >
> >> Oh! I've just remembered my overloading question from last
> >> night. Does precedence stay the same when you overload?  
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> >> And can you mess with it?
> >
> > I don't think so. Wanting to do that would make you a very sick
> > person.
> 
> It depends how you do it. If you have, for instance multiplication and
> division returning a 'Result' object and only doing the actual
> calculation at num/stringification time then your stringified 'Result'
> object would hold enough information to rebuild what the calculation
> looked like which would allow you to change the order of application
> independently. The catch is that the 'Result' tree wouldn't capture
> any brackets around operations that would, by default, be calculated
> in that order whether there were brackets or not.

Have you solved the equality problem for straight line programs without 
evaluating? *Grin*

S.

-- 
Shevek
I am the Borg.

sub AUTOLOAD{my$i=$AUTOLOAD;my$x=shift;$i=~s/^.*://;print"$x\n";eval
qq{*$AUTOLOAD=sub{my\$x=shift;return unless \$x%$i;&{$x}(\$x);};};}

foreach my $i (3..65535) { &{'2'}($i); }

Re: Overloading: was (Re: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers))

[Piers Cawley]

"Dave Cross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> From: Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 1/24/03 11:45:52 AM
>
>> Oh! I've just remembered my overloading question from last
>> night. Does precedence stay the same when you overload?  
>
> Yes.
>
>> And can you mess with it?
>
> I don't think so. Wanting to do that would make you a very sick
> person.

It depends how you do it. If you have, for instance multiplication and
division returning a 'Result' object and only doing the actual
calculation at num/stringification time then your stringified 'Result'
object would hold enough information to rebuild what the calculation
looked like which would allow you to change the order of application
independently. The catch is that the 'Result' tree wouldn't capture
any brackets around operations that would, by default, be calculated
in that order whether there were brackets or not.

Re: Overloading: was (Re: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers))

[Dave Cross]

From: Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 1/24/03 11:45:52 AM

> Oh! I've just remembered my overloading question from last
> night. Does precedence stay the same when you overload?  

Yes.

> And can you mess with it?

I don't think so. Wanting to do that would make you a very sick
person.

> I did write Acme::Number::Klingon at some point 
> (stringifies to klingon words)

The prosecution rests m'lud :)

Dave...

-- 


"Let me see you make decisions, without your television"
   - Depeche Mode (Stripped)

Overloading: was (Re: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers))

[Mark Fowler]

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003, Mark Fowler wrote:

> got last weeks Buffy on tape that for some unknown reason we lost?

got last week's Buffy on tape (that for some unknown reason we lost)?

Damn precedence.

Oh! I've just remembered my overloading question from last night.  Does
precedence stay the same when you overload?  And can you mess with it?

I've only really been overloading q{""} and q{+0} recently.  I did write
Acme::Number::Klingon at some point (stringifies to klingon words) but
I've lost that a long time ago and forgotten all about how I did things...

Mark.

-- 
#!/usr/bin/perl -T
use strict;
use warnings;
print q{Mark Fowler, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://twoshortplanks.com/};

Re: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers)

[Tim Sweetman]

Dave Cross wrote:
> I thought the point of a Tivo was that you didn't have to set
> it. Doesn't it Just Know?

That's a bit subtle, expecting it to realise that a london.pmer who
regularly watches Buffy watches Buffy, and that it should tape Buffy.
Heuristics are always fallible when making a tricky decision like this
(:


Ti'

Re: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers)

[Mark Fowler]

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003, Dave Cross wrote:

> I thought the point of a Tivo was that you didn't have to set
> it. Doesn't it Just Know?

No, I've never bothered to teach mine.  It occassionally records the
Simpsons but more often than not records crud off the commedy channel.
Sigh.

Richard assured me that the Tivo recorded both Buffy and Angel last night,
so I'll investigate dumping these to tape for you.  Don't supose you've
got last weeks Buffy on tape that for some unknown reason we lost?

Let me know off list how you'd like us to get those to you.

Mark.

-- 
#!/usr/bin/perl -T
use strict;
use warnings;
print q{Mark Fowler, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://twoshortplanks.com/};

Re: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers)

[Dave Cross]

From: Simon Wistow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 1/24/03 11:05:13 AM

>On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 07:19:46AM +, Dave Cross said:
>> I really shouldn't go out on a Thursday night :-/
>> 
>> My video and my cable box conspired to record both Buffy 
>> and Angel last night without sound. If anyone has them on
>> VHS or SVCD and would be willing to let me borrow or copy
>> them I would be most grateful.
>
> I also forgot to set the Tivo but I've set it for Saturday
> and I can always dump it to tape then or something.

I thought the point of a Tivo was that you didn't have to set
it. Doesn't it Just Know?

Saturday's Buffy is on at 5pm so will almost certainly be cut.
I didn't realise that Angel was repeated on Saturday (11pm on
Sky One according to Digiguide). That's good news.

Dave...

-- 


"Let me see you make decisions, without your television"
   - Depeche Mode (Stripped)

Re: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers)

[Simon Wistow]

On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 07:19:46AM +, Dave Cross said:
> I really shouldn't go out on a Thursday night :-/
> 
> My video and my cable box conspired to record both Buffy and Angel last
> night without sound. If anyone has them on VHS or SVCD and would be willing
> to let me borrow or copy them I would be most grateful.

I also forgot to set the Tivo but I've set it for Saturday and I can
always dump it to tape then or something.

Simon

RE: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers)

[Gareth Kirwan]

> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Cross
> Angel Season 3 isn't out on DVD until the start of March. I'd
> guess you'll have at least another six months to wait after that.
>
> Dave...

Don't know what's wrong with me today - I meant VHS ( I've got all 1-3 on
VHS )

Re: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers)

[Dave Cross]

From: "Gareth Kirwan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 1/24/03 10:41:17 AM

[Angel season 4]

> Anyone know how long it will be until the release of dvds ?

Angel Season 3 isn't out on DVD until the start of March. I'd
guess you'll have at least another six months to wait after that.

Dave...

-- 


"Let me see you make decisions, without your television"
   - Depeche Mode (Stripped)

RE: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers)

[Gareth Kirwan]

> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Cross

> Yeah. It was the first episode of season 4. So it's a pretty
> crucial episode by all accounts :)
> 
> Dave...

I don't even want a *hint* of what happens :p
Anyone know how long it will be until the release of dvds ?

Re: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers)

[Dave Cross]

From: "Gareth Kirwan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 1/24/03 9:13:54 AM

> Is that the next series of Angel ? ( 4 )

Yeah. It was the first episode of season 4. So it's a pretty
crucial episode by all accounts :)

Dave...

-- 


"Let me see you make decisions, without your television"
   - Depeche Mode (Stripped)

RE: Buffy/Angel (No Spoilers)

[Gareth Kirwan]

Is that the next series of Angel ? ( 4 )
I've been waiting for it to start coz I won't get to see it until it's out
on dvd

> -Original Message-

> I really shouldn't go out on a Thursday night :-/
>
> My video and my cable box conspired to record both Buffy and
> Angel last
> night without sound. If anyone has them on VHS or SVCD and
> would be willing
> to let me borrow or copy them I would be most grateful.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dave...
>
> --
>   "Don't you boys know any _nice_ songs?"
>

Re: buffy

[David H. Adler]

On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 06:07:29PM +, Paul Mison wrote:
> 
> Anyway, *we* don't have huge threads about rubbish movies that you 
> wouldn't want to sit through. (Admittedly, that thread's been much 
> more entertaining than I expect I'd find many of the movies...)
> 
> (You do have archives so the rest of the list can figure out what I'm 
> on about, don't you?)

What?  And leave EVIDENCE lying around?  Fat chance. :-)

dha
-- 
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
It's amazing what giant mutant ants that are the result of Man's
dabbling with the power of atomic energy can accomplish when they set
themselves to the task.- Mark Rogaski

Re: buffy

[Paul Mison]

On 05/12/2002 at 12:40 -0500, David H. Adler wrote:

On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 03:02:53PM +, Lusercop wrote:


 Hey, it's buffy-related, it must be on-topic, right?


I was under the impression that the only thing that ran the risk of
being off-topic was perl...


Oh, shush. We've got a lot better recently, although whether that's 
because Perl's better or Buffy's worse I'm not sure.

Anyway, *we* don't have huge threads about rubbish movies that you 
wouldn't want to sit through. (Admittedly, that thread's been much 
more entertaining than I expect I'd find many of the movies...)

(You do have archives so the rest of the list can figure out what I'm 
on about, don't you?)

:-)


I'll see that and raise it a couple of :)

--
:: paul
:: we're like crystal

Re: buffy

[David H. Adler]

On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 03:02:53PM +, Lusercop wrote:
> 
> Hey, it's buffy-related, it must be on-topic, right?

I was under the impression that the only thing that ran the risk of
being off-topic was perl...

:-)
-- 
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
He was from the planet Blobnar.
- Jon Orwant

Re: Buffy S6E21-22

[David H. Adler]

On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 04:06:01PM +0200, Merijn Broeren wrote:
> Quoting Greg McCarroll ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > 
> > bah, we are all missing the obvious guess appearance - Alf!
> > 
> You're showing your age.

I mentioned David Hemmings and *Greg*'s showing his age?? :-)

-- 
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
"...who could save journalists a lot of trouble by adopting "not related"
as his middle name..."
   - A. O. Scott, on Kiyoshi Kurosawa, in the NY Times

Re: Buffy S6E21-22

[Merijn Broeren]

Quoting Greg McCarroll ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > 
> > > Or mulder and scully (or just scully) come to town to investigate the
> > > mysterious goings on.
> > 
> > Or Agent Cooper
> > 
> bah, we are all missing the obvious guess appearance - Alf!
> 
You're showing your age. To keep up with the current TV audience for
Buffy and audience buying power that adverts are targetted at, I predict
the next Buffy guest appearance to be Tinky Winky.

But it was a close run thing with Thomas the TE and the Dread Purple one

And I must say that reading the X files timeline at least put my mind at
ease that there was some thought behind it all. Garbled and silly, but
thought anyhow. After the first few episodes I thought they would just 
recast all of snopes.com on automatic pilot. Never watched it since.

Cheers,
-- 
Merijn Broeren | 'I want to understand everything. I want to know every-
Software Geek  |  thing and put it all together to see what it means.'
   | 'Excellent project, it will look very good on your resume.'

Re: Buffy S6E21-22

[pdcawley-london . 0dd185]

the hatter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Wed, 22 May 2002, David H. Adler wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 07:02:24AM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>> > * David H. Adler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> > > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:06:11PM -0400, Mike Jarvis wrote:
>> > > > When do you guys get it? I won't spoil, I'll just say I have real hope
>> > > > for next season.  It could be really good.
>> > >
>> > > Or not.  Lots of potential, but it really depends on where they go with
>> > > it.  It could still be fairly mediocre without too much trouble.
>> > >
>> >
>> > I predict guest appearances, say Bradd Pitt, Tarantino and John
>> > Cleese. Oh and Jeff Goldblum stretching his acting range that bit
>> > further and playing a mad professor ;-)
>>
>> I suppose David Hemmings as a Hippie Gestapo Officer would be too much
>> to hope for... :-)
>
> Or mulder and scully (or just scully) come to town to investigate the
> mysterious goings on.

I have the horrible feeling I've seen some slash fiction along those
lines. 

-- 
Piers

   "It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in
possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite."
 -- Jane Austen?

Re: Buffy S6E21-22

[Dave Cross]

On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 07:22:26AM -0400, Mike Jarvis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 11:27:15AM +0100, Simon Batistoni wrote:
>  
> > Well, according to my "media headlines roundup", provided by the kind
> > folks at the Guardian, the Daily Star is today reporting that Britney
> > Spears might be drafted in to play a vampire.
> 
> I'd heard that had already fallen through.  Britney was too busy.  It
> was first discussed in the fall of '00.  I suppose they could try
> again next season though.
> 
> Maybe there's a Britney-bot somewhere out there.

The original plan was for Britney to play the bot in "I Was Made To Love
you".

Dave...

-- 
  .sig missing...

Re: Buffy S6E21-22

[Mike Jarvis]

On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 11:27:15AM +0100, Simon Batistoni wrote:
 
> Well, according to my "media headlines roundup", provided by the kind
> folks at the Guardian, the Daily Star is today reporting that Britney
> Spears might be drafted in to play a vampire.

I'd heard that had already fallen through.  Britney was too busy.  It
was first discussed in the fall of '00.  I suppose they could try
again next season though.

Maybe there's a Britney-bot somewhere out there.

-- 
mike
A whole lotta hoot and just a little bit of nanny

Re: Buffy S6E21-22

[Greg McCarroll]

* Stray Toaster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 09:42:11AM +, the hatter wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 May 2002, David H. Adler wrote:
> > 
> > Or mulder and scully (or just scully) come to town to investigate the
> > mysterious goings on.
> 
> Or Agent Cooper
> 

bah, we are all missing the obvious guess appearance - Alf!


-- 
Greg McCarroll http://www.mccarroll.org.uk/~gem/
   jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Buffy S6E21-22

[Simon Batistoni]

On 22/05/02 07:02 +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> * David H. Adler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:06:11PM -0400, Mike Jarvis wrote:
> > > When do you guys get it? I won't spoil, I'll just say I have real hope
> > > for next season.  It could be really good.
> > 
> > Or not.  Lots of potential, but it really depends on where they go with
> > it.  It could still be fairly mediocre without too much trouble.
> > 
> 
> I predict guest appearances, say Bradd Pitt, Tarantino and John
> Cleese. Oh and Jeff Goldblum stretching his acting range that bit
> further and playing a mad professor ;-)

Well, according to my "media headlines roundup", provided by the kind
folks at the Guardian, the Daily Star is today reporting that Britney
Spears might be drafted in to play a vampire.

Of course, this is a tabloid newspaper, so anything bearing
resemblence to actual fact between its pages is probably a happy
accident of nature. Nevertheless...

Re: Buffy S6E21-22

[Stray Toaster]

On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 09:42:11AM +, the hatter wrote:
> On Wed, 22 May 2002, David H. Adler wrote:
> 
> Or mulder and scully (or just scully) come to town to investigate the
> mysterious goings on.

Or Agent Cooper

m.

-- 
I don't want the world, I just want your half
--
Family ties : http://www.thefamilykerr.co.uk
Playtime: http://www.stray-toaster.co.uk

Re: Buffy S6E21-22

[the hatter]

On Wed, 22 May 2002, David H. Adler wrote:

> On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 07:02:24AM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> > * David H. Adler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:06:11PM -0400, Mike Jarvis wrote:
> > > > When do you guys get it? I won't spoil, I'll just say I have real hope
> > > > for next season.  It could be really good.
> > >
> > > Or not.  Lots of potential, but it really depends on where they go with
> > > it.  It could still be fairly mediocre without too much trouble.
> > >
> >
> > I predict guest appearances, say Bradd Pitt, Tarantino and John
> > Cleese. Oh and Jeff Goldblum stretching his acting range that bit
> > further and playing a mad professor ;-)
>
> I suppose David Hemmings as a Hippie Gestapo Officer would be too much
> to hope for... :-)

Or mulder and scully (or just scully) come to town to investigate the
mysterious goings on.


the hatter

Re: Buffy S6E21-22

[Mike Jarvis]

On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 01:11:46AM -0400, David H. Adler wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:06:11PM -0400, Mike Jarvis wrote:
> > When do you guys get it? I won't spoil, I'll just say I have real hope
> > for next season.  It could be really good.
> 
> Or not.  Lots of potential, but it really depends on where they go with
> it.  It could still be fairly mediocre without too much trouble.

Potential is all I need for hope.  It could be worse than mediocre, it
could be downright awful.  I can think of two plot developments that
could come that would be painful to think about.  

[1]
Anyway, they have many ways they could go. And since Buffy gave birth
to full grown demon children, think of the madcap hilarity that awaits
us next year! 


[1] No, nothing like what I described happened on the show.  It was a 
joke, but somebody bitched at me last year for the giving away the
ending with the same joke, so I felt obliged to repeat it.

-- 
mike
A whole lotta hoot and just a little bit of nanny

Re: Buffy S6E21-22

[David H. Adler]

On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 07:02:24AM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> * David H. Adler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:06:11PM -0400, Mike Jarvis wrote:
> > > When do you guys get it? I won't spoil, I'll just say I have real hope
> > > for next season.  It could be really good.
> > 
> > Or not.  Lots of potential, but it really depends on where they go with
> > it.  It could still be fairly mediocre without too much trouble.
> > 
> 
> I predict guest appearances, say Bradd Pitt, Tarantino and John
> Cleese. Oh and Jeff Goldblum stretching his acting range that bit
> further and playing a mad professor ;-)

I suppose David Hemmings as a Hippie Gestapo Officer would be too much
to hope for... :-)

dha
-- 
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
Learned?  You must be crazy.  Do you think I could play as badly as
this if I had had lessons?  - Patrick Troughton

Re: Buffy S6E21-22

[Greg McCarroll]

* David H. Adler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:06:11PM -0400, Mike Jarvis wrote:
> > When do you guys get it? I won't spoil, I'll just say I have real hope
> > for next season.  It could be really good.
> 
> Or not.  Lots of potential, but it really depends on where they go with
> it.  It could still be fairly mediocre without too much trouble.
> 

I predict guest appearances, say Bradd Pitt, Tarantino and John
Cleese. Oh and Jeff Goldblum stretching his acting range that bit
further and playing a mad professor ;-)

Greg

-- 
Greg McCarroll http://www.mccarroll.org.uk/~gem/
   jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Buffy S6E21-22

[Dave Cross]

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:06:11PM -0400, Mike Jarvis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> When do you guys get it? I won't spoil, I'll just say I have real hope
> for next season.  It could be really good.
> 
> Details gladly discussed soon, I hope.

Those of us watching on Sky get 6x21 tomorrow (23rd May) and 6x22 the 
following week (30th May). The BBC hasn't even started showing season 6
yet.

Dave...

-- 
  Shoot some of those missiles, think of us as fatherless scum
  It won't be forgotten 'cause we'll never say anything nice again
  Will we?

Re: Buffy S6E21-22

[David H. Adler]

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 10:06:11PM -0400, Mike Jarvis wrote:
> When do you guys get it? I won't spoil, I'll just say I have real hope
> for next season.  It could be really good.

Or not.  Lots of potential, but it really depends on where they go with
it.  It could still be fairly mediocre without too much trouble.

> Details gladly discussed soon, I hope.

Yeah, all the vaguery is making me kind of blurry... :-)

dha
-- 
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
"Life is so hard, you know that sometimes it seems the good guys only
win, when the bad guys leave." - The Jim Basnight Thing

Re: Buffy - Sky 1, last night...

[Simon Wistow]

On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 11:25:04AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > Spoilers follow. Don't read on unless you had to hear about stuff that's
> > going in in series 6 of Buffy on Sky One.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> Exactly... I found it beyond condecending.  Without wishing to start a debate
> on "drugs are just bad m\'kay" I found it completely offensive.

Out of interest ... what's offensive about this rather than say the
episode where the Jock came out as gay (some pretty unsubtle metaphors
there as well), the one were Xander becomes a hyena ("he's in a pack. a
pack of wild dog possesed teenagers. Almost like roving packs^W cliques
of teenagers. Quelle Symbolism"), the one were the teacher is devouring
th students, the robot girlfriend, Ted the robot boyfriend, the demon
who Willow meets on the internet etc etc ad nauseam, ad infinitum. 

I'm just wondering. All those episodes lay The Message [tm] on pretty
thick. What's the difference? Enlighten me.
 
> I'm guessing the "In memory of ..." in the final credits demonstrated the
> real motivation behind this pathetic episode.

I didn't notice the 'In Memory' of at the end to be honest but say that
is true and somebody (one of the writers, Joss Whedon, whoever) was
traumatised enough to do an episode like this as either a way of
exorcising some personal demons and/or attempting to spare someone else
going through the same thing they might have gone through then this, and
I'm out on a limb here, isn't *necessarily* a bad thing. Of course,
there are probably people who say that personal experience or emotion 
has no place in literature, film or any other creative media but then
they probably think that The Gap is the height of individualism and are
well catered for with Pop Idol and reruns of Catchphrase.

 


-- 
: fast, cheap and out of control

Re: Buffy - Sky 1, last night...

[Rob Partington]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Spoilers follow. Don't read on unless you had to hear about stuff that's
> > going in in series 6 of Buffy on Sky One.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> > If you mean the "hey kids! look, here's a thinly disguised metahpor for how
> > drugs can really mess up your life" message, then I have to say that I 
> > completely agree with you.
> Exactly... I found it beyond condecending.  Without wishing to start a debate
> on "drugs are just bad m\'kay" I found it completely offensive.

Perhaps I'm missing the point here by treating it as a TV show that's
entertaining for an hour a week and not some kind of message carrier?
-- 
rob partington % [EMAIL PROTECTED] % http://lynx.browser.org/

Re: Buffy - Sky 1, last night...

[mass]

> Spoilers follow. Don't read on unless you had to hear about stuff that's
> going in in series 6 of Buffy on Sky One.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> If you mean the "hey kids! look, here's a thinly disguised metahpor for how
> drugs can really mess up your life" message, then I have to say that I 
> completely agree with you.

Exactly... I found it beyond condecending.  Without wishing to start a debate
on "drugs are just bad m\'kay" I found it completely offensive.

I'm guessing the "In memory of ..." in the final credits demonstrated the
real motivation behind this pathetic episode.

Re: Buffy - Sky 1, last night...

[Simon Wistow]

On Sat, Mar 09, 2002 at 02:28:15PM -0500, mike said:
> > > Spoilers follow. Don't read on unless you had to hear about stuff that's
> > > going in in series 6 of Buffy on Sky One.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> 
> I didn't know if they meant Smashed (which has willow abusing magic
> and Buffy abusing Spike) or Wrecked, which I think is the episode you
> mean. 
> 
> I liked the Buffy bits of Smashed, and I understand her relationship
> with Spike.  As for wrecked, let me momentarily become the Comic Book
> Guy from the Simpsons: "Worst.  Espisode.  Ever"


I watched this last night ... yes I took the piss out of the rather
unsubtle metaphor but it was still interesting.

Buffy has *always* been about unsubtle metaphors - Monsters are an
unsubtle metaphor for the trials and tribulations of being a high school
student, Angel was always a metaphor for the boy-you-shouldn't-date, you
all watch it, you know what I mean.

Addiction is a difficult subject to broach. It's a nastier subject to
deal with in real life. I was quite surprised by the way it was handled
by that episode ... [following paragraph removed because I couldn't make
it sound right] ... basically there were a couple of touches in there
that made me wonder if the writer had some first hand knowledge. 

Dealing with drugs on a show like Buffy is an odd move - the primary
demographics are impressionable teenagers (if anybody says I should give
teenagers more credit, I'll bitch slap them) and rather more cynical
twenty (and thirty :) somethings. 

I don't know where I'm going with this really so I'll shut up but I'll
reiterate by saying that yes, it was one of those "god, who are they
trying to fool" episodes but then ask yerself how many other times
they've done that - I'd actually say that the message wasn't "drugs are
bad, mmmkay" rather "addiction is fucking horrible, is uncontrollable
without a lot of help, makes you do stuff which you wouldn't normally do
and not only that but you'll actually be ashamed of them *whilst* you're
doing them so don't do it, ok".

Just my 0.02 mgs.





-- 
: fast, cheap and out of control

Re: Buffy - Sky 1, last night...

[mike]

On Sat, Mar 09, 2002 at 02:25:40AM -0500, David H. Adler wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 05:08:52PM +, Dave Cross wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 04:42:33PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > My post won't be spoilered but replies may be.  This isn't so much a post
> > > about the content but about the purpose of the episode.
> > > 
> > > It's destroyed quite a lot of respect I had for the series...
> > > 
> > > Anyone got any opinions?
> > 
> > Spoilers follow. Don't read on unless you had to hear about stuff that's
> > going in in series 6 of Buffy on Sky One.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Still with me?
> > 
> > If you mean the "hey kids! look, here's a thinly disguised metahpor for how
> > drugs can really mess up your life" message, then I have to say that I 
> > completely agree with you.
> 
> Oh. You just got the Willow is a drug^Wmagic addict episode.
> 

I didn't know if they meant Smashed (which has willow abusing magic
and Buffy abusing Spike) or Wrecked, which I think is the episode you
mean. 

I liked the Buffy bits of Smashed, and I understand her relationship
with Spike.  As for wrecked, let me momentarily become the Comic Book
Guy from the Simpsons: "Worst.  Espisode.  Ever"

> Yeah, I was very disappointed that it was *just* like a... well, I don't
> know what the UK equivalent of an afterschool special would be...
> drugs-are-bad-for-you show - with the *only* difference being that, when
> someone thinks they're stuck to the ceiling, it's actually happening.

I read somewhere once they tried to get some of the money the
government was giving out to show TV shows that did an anti drug
theme. When they showed up with "Beer Bad" they were told to take a
hike. (Just the name is silly.  Everyone knows beer foamy. Beer Good.)

This may have been an another attempt

> For what it's worth, I will give no details about how it's handled from
> there out, but they seem to do a better job with the theme when it's not
> the focus of an episode.

It's only handled better because there's not as much of it. It's still
pretty bad. 

-- 
mike
"Two of my favorite things are sitting on my front porch
smoking a pipe of sweet hemp, and playing my Hohner harmonica."
Abraham Lincoln, 1855

Re: Buffy - Sky 1, last night...

[David H. Adler]

On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 05:08:52PM +, Dave Cross wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 04:42:33PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > My post won't be spoilered but replies may be.  This isn't so much a post
> > about the content but about the purpose of the episode.
> > 
> > It's destroyed quite a lot of respect I had for the series...
> > 
> > Anyone got any opinions?
> 
> Spoilers follow. Don't read on unless you had to hear about stuff that's
> going in in series 6 of Buffy on Sky One.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still with me?
> 
> If you mean the "hey kids! look, here's a thinly disguised metahpor for how
> drugs can really mess up your life" message, then I have to say that I 
> completely agree with you.

Oh. You just got the Willow is a drug^Wmagic addict episode.

Yeah, I was very disappointed that it was *just* like a... well, I don't
know what the UK equivalent of an afterschool special would be...
drugs-are-bad-for-you show - with the *only* difference being that, when
someone thinks they're stuck to the ceiling, it's actually happening.

For what it's worth, I will give no details about how it's handled from
there out, but they seem to do a better job with the theme when it's not
the focus of an episode.

dha

-- 
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
I'll treasure the implied compliment.
- Simon Templar

Re: Buffy - Sky 1, last night...

[jonah]

on 8/3/02 5:08 pm, Dave Cross at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

[a spoiler]

Heh, I thought that and all I saw was the trailer!

-- 
matt

Howard Cope (the simian) smells of George Orwell and lycra.

Re: Buffy - Sky 1, last night...

[Paul Mison]

Spoiler space added.
































































On 08/03/2002 at 16:49 +, Rob Partington wrote:

>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> My post won't be spoilered but replies may be.  This isn't so much a
>>post
>> about the content but about the purpose of the episode.
>> It's destroyed quite a lot of respect I had for the series...
>> Anyone got any opinions?
>
>I liked it, but then I wasn't looking for deeper meanings or anything.
>
>Salon did too:
>http://www.salon.com/sex/feature/2001/11/28/buffy/index.html

I was going to post this, but of course I didn't see the episode
yesterday, so I was going to wait until the Saturday repeat to read it.
(I found the article last week and it looked like I'd be berrter off
waiting to read it.)

In case you didn't know (and if it's not too late), yes, that article
contains spoilers *except* for people who watched yesterday's episode
on Sky. Please put spoiler space in if you reply to this. (fwiw, I
would have put in spoiler space even before the link. Ah well.)

--
:: paul
:: macintosh!

Re: Buffy - Sky 1, last night...

[Dave Cross]

On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 04:42:33PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 
wrote:
> My post won't be spoilered but replies may be.  This isn't so much a post
> about the content but about the purpose of the episode.
> 
> It's destroyed quite a lot of respect I had for the series...
> 
> Anyone got any opinions?

Spoilers follow. Don't read on unless you had to hear about stuff that's
going in in series 6 of Buffy on Sky One.
























Still with me?

If you mean the "hey kids! look, here's a thinly disguised metahpor for how
drugs can really mess up your life" message, then I have to say that I 
completely agree with you.

Dave...

-- 

  .sig missing...

Re: Buffy - Sky 1, last night...

[Natalie Ford]

On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 04:42:33PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> My post won't be spoilered but replies may be.  This isn't so much a post
> about the content but about the purpose of the episode.
> It's destroyed quite a lot of respect I had for the series...
> Anyone got any opinions?

Here's one: I think I am useless for forgetting to set the video.  :/

-- 
Natalie Ford .. [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Buffy - Sky 1, last night...

[hipps]

Pulled from [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s mail (Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 04:42:33PM +):
> My post won't be spoilered but replies may be.  This isn't so much a post
> about the content but about the purpose of the episode.
> 
> It's destroyed quite a lot of respect I had for the series...
> 
> Anyone got any opinions?

Aaargh! Just don't reply, OK? I don't have the willpower to resist the
temptation to peek...

Maybe we should instantiate an X-Buffy-Spoiler header. But, then, I'd
probably just accidentally-on-purpose spell it wrong in .procmailrc.

Hey ho.
-- 
Alex Hooper
plank

Re: Buffy - Sky 1, last night...

[Rob Partington]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> My post won't be spoilered but replies may be.  This isn't so much a post
> about the content but about the purpose of the episode.
> It's destroyed quite a lot of respect I had for the series...
> Anyone got any opinions?

I liked it, but then I wasn't looking for deeper meanings or anything.

Salon did too:
http://www.salon.com/sex/feature/2001/11/28/buffy/index.html
-- 
rob partington % [EMAIL PROTECTED] % http://lynx.browser.org/

Re: Buffy... Wow

[Dave Cross]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 08:42:19AM +, Leo Lapworth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Sky Buffy... don't scroll if you didn't see
> it last night.

A small tip for people about setting the video recorder.

If you're going away for a few days[1] and need to record something
important[2], always make sure that you've changed the date of the 
recording to the correct date[3] and haven't left it at the date that you
were setting the video[4].

Did anyone record Thursday's Buffy and Angel? And can I borrow it please?
I have two episodes of the Simpsons and the first hour of "The Fugitive".

Dave...

[1] For example, to the German Perl Workshop
[2] For example, Buffy and Angel
[3] For example, Thursday 14th Feb
[4] For example, Tuesday 12th Feb

-- 

  Drugs are just bad m'kay

Re: Buffy... Wow

[Lucy McWilliam]

On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Paul Mison wrote:

> > > Sky Buffy... don't scroll if you didn't see
> > > it last night.
> > >
> > >
> > > spoiler...
> > >
>
> preserving...
>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> It reminded me of some of the episodes in Babylon 5 where JMS suddenly
> said 'actually, you thought there was this and this. Actually, it's
> *this* and *these four other things*. The fact that this episode
> managed something like that- but in song- is what's really surprising.

A.  Babylon 5.  I wrote this yesterday:

"This evening, for the first time in ages, I watched some Babylon 5...and
was bowled over by nostalgia.  When I was an undergraduate in Manchester,
B5 was a Big Thing.  The Buffy of the mid 90s.  My social circle consisted
of geeks, but we didn't talk software licenses and kernel hacking all the
time...or maybe they did I wasn't geeky enought to notice.  We talked
about technology, possibilites, the future and beer.  I met lots of cool
people this way, including the (ex) love of my life.

When I get a job I'm gonna buy a big TV and the whole series."


L.
"I stand between the candle and the bar."

Re: Buffy... Wow

[Mike Jarvis]

On Fri, 2002-02-15 at 06:52, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> * Simon Wistow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 09:47:47AM +, Paul Mison said:
> > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 09:20:18AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> > > > * Leo Lapworth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > > > Sky Buffy... don't scroll if you didn't see
> > > > > it last night.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > spoiler...
> > > > > 
> > > 
> > preserving...
> > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > Oh, I have a theory about this. But it's not original. All I'll point
> > > out is that we've seen the three nerds (oh, Simon Wistow posted about
> > > these somewhere- IRC, maybe- and I can see his point about them
> > > completely, but he should probably reiterate it if he cares) 
> > 
> > a load of stereotype nerdlings straight from an 80's movie. Christ, I'm
> > suprised he doesn't make them wear thick black glasses, pocket
> > protectors and propellor beanies.
> > 
> > He better have a fucking good reason for this.
> 
> to distract people from the real seasion big baddy ... Willow
> 
> and no, i don't know this for sure yet

I don't think it's Willow either.  Amy is much more likely, but I won't
say more here, since I can't keep up with what you do and don't already
know.

But Amy is also just a guess.  This isn't the first time they've waited
so long to tell us.  Series 3 and 4 both waited until more than halfway
through to let you know.  


-- 
mike
Asked why the right wing despises him so, the former president answered
simply, "Because I won."

Re: Buffy... Wow

[Greg McCarroll]

* Simon Wistow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 09:47:47AM +, Paul Mison said:
> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 09:20:18AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> > > * Leo Lapworth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > > Sky Buffy... don't scroll if you didn't see
> > > > it last night.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > spoiler...
> > > > 
> > 
> preserving...
> > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 
> > Oh, I have a theory about this. But it's not original. All I'll point
> > out is that we've seen the three nerds (oh, Simon Wistow posted about
> > these somewhere- IRC, maybe- and I can see his point about them
> > completely, but he should probably reiterate it if he cares) 
> 
> a load of stereotype nerdlings straight from an 80's movie. Christ, I'm
> suprised he doesn't make them wear thick black glasses, pocket
> protectors and propellor beanies.
> 
> He better have a fucking good reason for this.

to distract people from the real seasion big baddy ... Willow

and no, i don't know this for sure yet

-- 
Greg McCarroll http://217.34.97.146/~gem/

Re: Buffy... Wow

[Simon Wistow]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 09:47:47AM +, Paul Mison said:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 09:20:18AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> > * Leo Lapworth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > Sky Buffy... don't scroll if you didn't see
> > > it last night.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > spoiler...
> > > 
> 
preserving...
> 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> Oh, I have a theory about this. But it's not original. All I'll point
> out is that we've seen the three nerds (oh, Simon Wistow posted about
> these somewhere- IRC, maybe- and I can see his point about them
> completely, but he should probably reiterate it if he cares) 

Which I will do, because, well, I'm sad.

The nerds really piss me off. They're so flat and stereotypical.
Compared to other 8uffy characters they're barely developed at all. That
alone is enough to piss me off.

What pisses me off even more is that 8uffy was *supposed* to be about
the nerds and the geeks and the outcasts.

8uffy her self, an ex-cheerleader and prom queen, was teased as being a
freak and hung out with Xander, a loser goof ball and Willow, a computer
geek. They hung around in the library and on their own in the school
yard. They were the antipothesis of the 'kids' in Beverly Hills 90210
(also shot at the same school) and in Saved By The Bell (who were good
at *everything*).

The whole series was one long frickin metaphor about school being tough.

The Xander / Cordelia thing was _genius_. The gay jock was funny.

Ok, so 8uffy was always stylish (well, msotly) but still.

Now, Xanders got a cute girlfriend and a flat to die for and appears to
be a foreman after only one year being a builder and Willow dyed her
hair and went shopping with a stylist and Mr Whedon has seen fit to slap
a load of stereotype nerdlings straight from an 80's movie. Christ, I'm
suprised he doesn't make them wear thick black glasses, pocket
protectors and propellor beanies.

He better have a fucking good reason for this.





-- 
: as seen on tv

Re: Buffy... Wow

[the hatter]

On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Rafiq Ismail (ADMIN) wrote:

> That is SO cruel.  I moved out to Amsterdam on Tuesday and I don't have
> sky - or currently a tv.  Leo if you're going to give a spoiler make it a
> substative one, or make it as a 'teaser'

I hear that, in some dark, seedy corners of the internet, you can actually
download all of the current series, and have been able to for many weeks.
There are even some versions which don't have network idents in the
corner.


the hatter

Re: Buffy... Wow

[Rafiq Ismail (ADMIN)]

That is SO cruel.  I moved out to Amsterdam on Tuesday and I don't have
sky - or currently a tv.  Leo if you're going to give a spoiler make it a
substative one, or make it as a 'teaser'

Now's I'm just all curious about things which are twisted.

Oh, how I need cable!

fiq














On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Leo Lapworth wrote:

> Sky Buffy... don't scroll if you didn't see
> it last night.
>
>
> spoiler...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Wow, cool, and amazing, I didn't think it would work.
>
> I actually think it was one of the best episodes I've
> seen in a long time, not saying that the singing was
> great or that they are usually bad or anything, but it
> just seemed to work for me.
>
> And Spike! - that's just twisted...
>
> Well, just had to express my enjoyment of it.
>
> Laters
>
> Leo
>
>

Re: Buffy... Wow

[Paul Mison]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 09:20:18AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> * Leo Lapworth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Sky Buffy... don't scroll if you didn't see
> > it last night.
> > 
> > 
> > spoiler...
> > 

preserving...

> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> so what do you think your favourite tune was? (the mp3's were on
> gnutella the next morning)

I really liked the last song; 'Where do we go from here'? Although the
song and dance of Xander and Anya was probably the most amusing. And was
it me, or did Sky cut Tara's song off just at the end?

> > I actually think it was one of the best episodes I've
> > seen in a long time,
> 
> get ready to become an Angel fan, BtVS goes down hill after this.
> although that might just be because we haven't seen the big baddy for
> the series yet.

Oh, I have a theory about this. But it's not original. All I'll point
out is that we've seen the three nerds (oh, Simon Wistow posted about
these somewhere- IRC, maybe- and I can see his point about them
completely, but he should probably reiterate it if he cares) and we've
seen somebody who obviously has a lot of power who is beginning to
misuse it...

> > not saying that the singing was
> > great or that they are usually bad or anything, but it
> > just seemed to work for me.
> 
> Giles can sing quite well, he's got the accent and he knows where to
> point it. Tara can sing as well. Buffy wasn't bad, but Willow and
> Xander seemed to keep a little quiet ;-)

Willow evidently can't sing, or, indeed, dance. I think one of the best
things about the episode was that anyone who was really bad at doing the
musical stuff got nicely hidden away.

It reminded me of some of the episodes in Babylon 5 where JMS suddenly
said 'actually, you thought there was this and this. Actually, it's
*this* and *these four other things*. The fact that this episode
managed something like that- but in song- is what's really surprising.

-- 
:: paul
:: the future has been and gone

Re: Buffy... Wow

[Natalie Ford]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 09:20:18AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> * Leo Lapworth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Sky Buffy... don't scroll if you didn't see
> > it last night.
> > 
> > 
> > spoiler...
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Wow, cool, and amazing, I didn't think it would work.
> > 
> 
> so what do you think your favourite tune was? (the mp3's were on
> gnutella the next morning)
> 
> I must admit i liked "I've got a theory", but mainly due to the Bunny
> insanity.
> 
> > I actually think it was one of the best episodes I've
> > seen in a long time,
> 
> get ready to become an Angel fan, BtVS goes down hill after this.
> although that might just be because we haven't seen the big baddy for
> the series yet.
> 
> > not saying that the singing was
> > great or that they are usually bad or anything, but it
> > just seemed to work for me.
> 
> Giles can sing quite well, he's got the accent and he knows where to
> point it. Tara can sing as well. Buffy wasn't bad, but Willow and
> Xander seemed to keep a little quiet ;-)

Although Willow *did* have the line that made me laugh the most
in the song on the way to the demon at the end:

"I think this line's mostly filler"

I laughed out loud!  :)

-- 
Natalie Ford .. [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Buffy... Wow

[Greg McCarroll]

* Leo Lapworth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Sky Buffy... don't scroll if you didn't see
> it last night.
> 
> 
> spoiler...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, cool, and amazing, I didn't think it would work.
> 

so what do you think your favourite tune was? (the mp3's were on
gnutella the next morning)

I must admit i liked "I've got a theory", but mainly due to the Bunny
insanity.

> I actually think it was one of the best episodes I've
> seen in a long time,

get ready to become an Angel fan, BtVS goes down hill after this.
although that might just be because we haven't seen the big baddy for
the series yet.

> not saying that the singing was
> great or that they are usually bad or anything, but it
> just seemed to work for me.

Giles can sing quite well, he's got the accent and he knows where to
point it. Tara can sing as well. Buffy wasn't bad, but Willow and
Xander seemed to keep a little quiet ;-)

Greg

-- 
Greg McCarroll http://217.34.97.146/~gem/

Re: Buffy riding a Pony

[Andrew . Savige]

#!/usr/bin/perl

  ''=~('('.'?'
   .'{'.('['^"\+").(
 '['^')').('`'|')').(
'`'   | '.'
   ).((  '['
  )^+ (   '/'
 )).  (   '"'
).(  ( '!'
   )^+  '+').(  '`'
   ^((  ')')  ) ).(
  '{'   ^'['   ) .+(
  '[' ^+( '/'
  )).(   ('`'
  )|+   ( '!')).(
 '`'|  ( (  (
 (   '+') .(  ('`')| (  (
 (  (  (((  (
 (  (  ( (( ( ( (( ( (   (
 (  (   '%')     )   )
 )   )))))
 )))) )  )
 ))  )   )   .( ((
 '{'  ))  ^'['
  ).(('[')^   ('/')).(
  '`'|'(').('`'|')') .(('[')^
  '(').('{'^ '['). ( '{'^'+')
  .('`'|'%').((  ('['))^
  ')').('`'|','  )   .("\{"^
  '[').('`'^'!' )  . (('[')^
  '(').('`'|'#' ).('`'| (
  ')')).("\`"|  "\)").(   (
  '{')^"\[").(  '`'^'!' )
   .('['^')'). ('['^'/' ).('{'^
   '[').("\["^ "\(").(  (  ('`'))|
 '%'). ('['^')').( ('`')|   ( (
(  "\)".( ((   '`'))|  (
   (   ('/'.(   (   ( '[')) ^  (
   ( '.'))).('['   ^ '(')   .  (
   ('`')|',').(((   (
   ( '['^  ((   (
   ( ( '"') )   )
   ) )  )   .
   ( (  (   (
   ( (  (  ( (
   ( (  (  ( (
   ( (  ( (  (
   ( (  ( (  (
   ( '.').('{'^'[').((   (
   ('`')))^'.').('`'|'/').','.('{'^'[').('['^')').
   ('`'|'%').('`'|'!').('`'|',').('`'|',').(('[')^   (
   (   '"'))).('{'^'[').('`'^')').('{'^'[').('`'|'$').(  (
   (   '`'))|'/').'.'.('!'^'+').('`'^'!').('`'|'.').('`' |



  '$').("\{"^  '[').(   ('[')^
',')   .('`'  |((  ')' )))  .+(
'`'|'.').('`' |'.'
).+("\`"|')') .''.
('`'   |'.')   .('`'|  "'").   ('{'^'['  ).('`'|  '!').(  "\{"^
'[')  .('['  ^'('   ).+( '['^ '+') .''. (
'`'|'%').('`'   |'#' ).+( '`'|  ')').
('`'  |'!')  .''.   ('`' |',' ).+(   '{'^  (
'[')   ).''. ('`'   |'!' ).+( '['^',') .
('`'|'!').''.   ('[' ^')' ).+( '`'|
'$')   .('{'^'[')   .''. ('`' |'&'  ).(
'`'|  '/').  ('['^')').( '{'^ '[')  .(
  '['^"\/").( '`'|  '(').   ("\`"|   '%').( (
((  (
   '{' )
)))


   ^
  ((
'[')
 )).( "\["^ ',').  ('`'|'%' ).('`'   |')'
   ).(  '['^')')  .''.  ('`' |'$' ).
  ((('`'   ))|+   '%')  .''.  ('['^
 '(').''.  ('['   ^'/'  ).+(  '{'^(
 '[')).+(  '['^   '+')  .''.   ('`'  |
 '/').''.  ('['   ^'('  ).+("\["^
  '/').(   '{'^   '[')  .''.('`'|
   '/'  ).('`'|   '&')  .''. (   '!'
 ^'+' ).('[' ^'/').  ('`' |



  ((
((   '('))
  ))).(  ('`')|
  "\%").('{'^'[')
   .('['  ^"\,").(   '`'|'%').(
'`'|'%').('`' |'+').('{'^'[').("\`"|
  "\-").(   ('`')|'!').(('`')| '$').('`'|'%'
 ).('{'^'[').("\`"|   '-').('`'|'%').('{'^"\[").(
 '`'|'&').('`'|'%').  ('`'|'%').('`'|',').('{'^'['
  ).('`'|'!').("\`"| ',').('`'|',').('{'^'[').("\["^
   ',').('`'|'!' ).('['^')').('`'|'-').('{'^'[').(
'`'|'!').

Re: Buffy series 6 first episode video

[Mark Fowler]

On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Chris Carline wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 12:51:53PM +, Mark Fowler wrote:
> > [2] Tivo doesn't work with cable
> Works with my cable (NTL). What cable do you have?

Telewest digital.

Oh, then I have to get round to watching the episodes before my Tivo fills 
up too.  (Yes, I have been known to be as disorganised as that)

Later.

Mark.

-- 
s''  Mark Fowler London.pm   Bath.pm
 http://www.twoshortplanks.com/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
';use Term'Cap;$t=Tgetent Term'Cap{};print$t->Tputs(cl);for$w(split/  +/
){for(0..30){$|=print$t->Tgoto(cm,$_,$y)." $w";select$k,$k,$k,.03}$y+=2}

Re: Buffy series 6 first episode video

[Jasper McCrea]

Chris Carline wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 12:51:53PM +, Mark Fowler wrote:
> >
> > [2] Tivo doesn't work with cable
> >
> 
> Works with my cable (NTL). What cable do you have?

Have you digital or analogue? I have digital, and the only reason I have
to not go tivo is the non-compatibility with NTL digital. I think.

Jasper
-- 
Kirk: Spock, the women on your planet are logical. 
  No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim.

Re: Buffy series 6 first episode video

[Chris Carline]

On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 12:51:53PM +, Mark Fowler wrote:
> 
> [2] Tivo doesn't work with cable
> 

Works with my cable (NTL). What cable do you have?

Chris

-- 
Chris Carline <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://chris.carline.org/
GnuPG: 1024D/57B5CB20 | 5E85 207A 89D8 E097 0C0F FD4C 871A CE15 57B5 CB20



msg04410/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Buffy series 6 first episode video

[Mark Fowler]

On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Dave Cross wrote:

> Apparently I was wrong. Saturday's version _was_ even more cut :(
> 
> Dave...

When it comes down to it, I think I'm going to wait until they release
them on VHS.  No cut footage.  I can watch it when I want, etc. etc.  No
flatmates trying to order Chinese food during the really critical fifteen
minutes from the end of the program that you've been waiting six months to
watch.

And before someone suggests recording it off the TV I'll point out that
I'm incapable of setting the video recorder anyhow[1][2]

Later.

Mark.

[1] this isn't to say that I don't understand how to operate the system,
it's more that I'm not up to the task of ensuring that I have a blank tape
handy, negotiating the political landscape of ensuring people don't
accidental mess with the cable box unbenownst I'm trying to video 
something, and remembering that Buffy is on and I need to set the video 
before going to the pub, trying to sort my life out, etc, etc.

[2] Tivo doesn't work with cable

-- 
s''  Mark Fowler London.pm   Bath.pm
 http://www.twoshortplanks.com/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
';use Term'Cap;$t=Tgetent Term'Cap{};print$t->Tputs(cl);for$w(split/  +/
){for(0..30){$|=print$t->Tgoto(cm,$_,$y)." $w";select$k,$k,$k,.03}$y+=2}

Re: Buffy series 6 first episode video

[Piers Cawley]

Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 01:09:35PM +, Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:48:02PM +, Steve Norman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2002, Mark Fowler wrote:
>> > 
>> > > As I was unable to watch Buffy properly last night, does anyone have it on
>> > > tape I could borrow.
>> > >
>> > > (That's VHS, none of this dodgy computer based media)
>> > 
>> > Sky are repeating it on Saturday at 5pm if you can video then.
>> 
>> And given the cuts that were in it last nigh, I strongly suspect they won't
>> cut any more off for the earlier showing.
>
> Apparently I was wrong. Saturday's version _was_ even more cut :(

I thought it was a tad incoherent in places...

-- 
Piers

   "It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in
possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite."
 -- Jane Austen?

Re: Buffy series 6 first episode video

[Dave Cross]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 01:09:35PM +, Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:48:02PM +, Steve Norman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2002, Mark Fowler wrote:
> > 
> > > As I was unable to watch Buffy properly last night, does anyone have it on
> > > tape I could borrow.
> > >
> > > (That's VHS, none of this dodgy computer based media)
> > 
> > Sky are repeating it on Saturday at 5pm if you can video then.
> 
> And given the cuts that were in it last nigh, I strongly suspect they won't
> cut any more off for the earlier showing.

Apparently I was wrong. Saturday's version _was_ even more cut :(

Dave...

-- 

  "Don't you boys know any _nice_ songs?"

Re: Buffy series 6 first episode video

[Lucy McWilliam]

On 11 Jan 2002, Mike Jarvis wrote:

> This ep is important in buffydom because it's the first time that
> anybody cared about somebody dying in 5 years of carnage.  There was a
> lot about this one that was great (Buffy seeing/hearing things, Santa
> isn't a myth, Anya doesn't get it).

Hmm.  I'm not quite sure about this episode.  I was originally planning on
avoiding it.  Maybe it's impact on me was lessened because I've been
through similar events in real life.  Then again, I did miss the first
five minutes which, from the script, looked to be the most traumatic.

Ah, well.  It's Friday evening and I'm going to the pub.
L.

Re: Buffy series 6 first episode video

[Mike Jarvis]

On Fri, 2002-01-11 at 08:51, Robert Shiels wrote:

Season 5 spoilers below:








> Is this just a soap opera now, there was one undead guy near the end that
> Buffy killed with a medical hacksaw, but apart from that it was all long
> meaningful silences and people crying. Bored now!

This ep is important in buffydom because it's the first time that
anybody cared about somebody dying in 5 years of carnage.  There was a
lot about this one that was great (Buffy seeing/hearing things, Santa
isn't a myth, Anya doesn't get it).

I really do like this episode, but I also understand why some people
won't.  For the most part I prefer the first two or three seasons.  They
were much sillier, and the skirts were shorter.  But of course season
2/3 is more soap opera-ey than anything since.  All that crap about
Buffy falling for a vampire that acts more like a art student. Bleh. 


-- 
mike

Re: Buffy series 6 first episode video

[Robert Shiels]

From: "Paul Mison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Buffy's mother had just died, and she went to the school to tell her
sister.
> >
> > Is this just a soap opera now, there was one undead guy near the end
that
> > Buffy killed with a medical hacksaw, but apart from that it was all long
> > meaningful silences and people crying. Bored now!
>
> So, you don't like TV doing 'reality', and you'd rather it stuck to just
> doing fictional stuff like killing vampires? I'd argue that Buffy's good
> because it does do stuff like this, and actually makes it work; plenty
> of people seemed to really find this episode very moving.

No, I don't like Buffy doing 'reality' - it's called 'Buffy the Vampire
Slayer', the clue is in the title:-)

Some people think soap operas are very moving, with their storylines on
issues like sex & drugs, but I think they are a pile of boring,
manipulative, repetitive rubbish that suck gullible people in who then think
they are being entertained. Yes - I hate all soaps, which I'll define as
neverending stories with no climax and therefore no point.

If Buffy is now a soap, I'll pass. If I want to be moved, I'll get "Terms Of
Endearment" out of Blockbuster again.

This rant has been brought to you by someone now looking for work, and
disliking the process very much.

..and relax.

/Robert

Re: Buffy series 6 first episode video

[Jonathan Peterson]

> So, you don't like TV doing 'reality', and you'd rather it stuck to just

Umm, guys, none of it is real you know. I think you mean realism, not
'reality' :)

> doing fictional stuff like killing vampires? I'd argue that Buffy's good
> because it does do stuff like this, and actually makes it work; plenty
> of people seemed to really find this episode very moving.

Interesting. And do those people consider themselves more or less geeky
than people who write erotic fiction about Furs living in Sunnydale?

:-)


 
> ObURL: http://www.salon.com/ent/col/mill/2001/03/12/buffy_mom/index.html

U, I _used_ to quite like Buffy before reading that article. |-P

Jon



-- 
Jonathan Peterson
Technical Manager, Unified Ltd, +44 (0)20 7383 6092
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Buffy series 6 first episode video

[Paul Mison]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 01:51:03PM -, Robert Shiels wrote:
> > > On Fri, 11 Jan 2002, Mark Fowler wrote:
> > >
> > > > As I was unable to watch Buffy properly last night, does anyone have
> it on
> > > > tape I could borrow.
> > > >
> Watched Buffy on BBC2 last night, no idea what series, so I'll put spoiler
> space in to describe it

Since spoilers are only required *until* terrestrial TV shows episodes
(on the fairly sane basis that if you don't have terrestrial TV, you're
not going to be watching it at all), no spoiler space is required.

For what it's worth, it's series 5, episode... 16?

Of course, discussing the rest of season five, or season 6 (which, as
Marm mentioned, has just started on Sky), is not welcome without, at the
least, spoiler space and warnings...

> Buffy's mother had just died, and she went to the school to tell her sister.
> 
> Is this just a soap opera now, there was one undead guy near the end that
> Buffy killed with a medical hacksaw, but apart from that it was all long
> meaningful silences and people crying. Bored now!

So, you don't like TV doing 'reality', and you'd rather it stuck to just
doing fictional stuff like killing vampires? I'd argue that Buffy's good
because it does do stuff like this, and actually makes it work; plenty
of people seemed to really find this episode very moving.

ObURL: http://www.salon.com/ent/col/mill/2001/03/12/buffy_mom/index.html

-- 
:: paul
:: husk 

Re: Buffy series 6 first episode video

[Robert Shiels]

> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2002, Mark Fowler wrote:
> >
> > > As I was unable to watch Buffy properly last night, does anyone have
it on
> > > tape I could borrow.
> > >
Watched Buffy on BBC2 last night, no idea what series, so I'll put spoiler
space in to describe it
































Buffy's mother had just died, and she went to the school to tell her sister.

Is this just a soap opera now, there was one undead guy near the end that
Buffy killed with a medical hacksaw, but apart from that it was all long
meaningful silences and people crying. Bored now!

/Robert

Re: Buffy series 6 first episode video

[Dave Cross]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:48:02PM +, Steve Norman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2002, Mark Fowler wrote:
> 
> > As I was unable to watch Buffy properly last night, does anyone have it on
> > tape I could borrow.
> >
> > (That's VHS, none of this dodgy computer based media)
> 
> Sky are repeating it on Saturday at 5pm if you can video then.

And given the cuts that were in it last nigh, I strongly suspect they won't
cut any more off for the earlier showing.

Dave...

-- 

  Drugs are just bad m'kay

Re: Buffy series 6 first episode video

[Steve Norman]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2002, Mark Fowler wrote:

> As I was unable to watch Buffy properly last night, does anyone have it on
> tape I could borrow.
>
> (That's VHS, none of this dodgy computer based media)

Sky are repeating it on Saturday at 5pm if you can video then.

Steve

Re: Buffy, the musical

[David H. Adler]

On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 02:54:43PM +, Redvers Davies wrote:
> 
> Warning, it is NOT really a stand-alone episode - and does contain
> spoilers for end of last season and beginning of new.  It also has
> references to the episode before (which may also be on tape), but
> you wouldn't pick up on those unless you saw it.

I would concur.  This episode ties up a lot of loose ends that have been
flying around for the early episodes of the season, and funnels them
directly into what's left of the season which, not to give away any
specifics, looks wildly disturbed.

Some of the numbers are catchy, though.

dha
-- 
David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
for (('to you', 'dear '.shift)[0,0,1,0]) { print "Happy birthday $_" }
- perl code for wishing someone a happy birthday
Courtesy of purl

Re: Buffy, the musical

[nik butler]

> I may, or may not have aquired a copy of said episode and the episode
Hmm is this like one of those cat in the box questions. 
is the cat
a. dead
b. alive
c. bloody furious ?

> Should the tape really exist and london.pm'ers want to get together
Hmm a possible quantum event of london pm ers gathering. If this is truly the case 
then the result of the meeting will be that either.
a. people watched the episodes but were not really there 
b. People did not watch the episode but meant to be there
c. Someone stood on a cat.

> Warning, it is NOT really a stand-alone episode - and does contain
Hmmm so theres a base version of buffy we need to have preinstalled in order to review 
the musical. im fetching my blindfold 

Re: Buffy, The Musical.

[Dave Cross]

On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 10:16:18AM +, Peter Haworth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 
wrote:
> 
> On a slight tangent, anyone know when series 2 of Angel is next showing in
> the UK (terrestrial or otherwise)? I'm sure C4 trailed it before BBC2
> started BtVS series 5, so I was kind of expecting them to run concurrently,
> but this doesn't seem to have worked.

But that assumes co-operation between the BBC an C4 on a level not seen
since Cennis Potter died :)

Last I heard, C4 had bought the rights to Angel series 2, but haven't 
said when thay're going to show it. If their treatment of series 1 is
any kind of guide they'll either try to "edit"[1] it to show it at 6pm
or bury it at 2am.

Dave...

[1] Where "edit" means turn a 60 min show into a 35 min one.

-- 

  "Don't you boys know any _nice_ songs?"