Fandom Bouquet

2012-01-24T13:20:00.000-08:00

It's been a rough couple of years for me (as my last few posts will attest) and I'm hesitant to make definitive statements about when my can expect updates regularly, but there is some news and I thought it was about time I gave folks some word about the future of the blog. I got some great music over the holidays, and I have plans to make some music recs. I'm still behind on anything I had been watching (including Leverage) or I'm just plain disatisfied and don't want to turn the blog into a weekly trash session, so I've been holding off. I don't have access to my DVD collection right now either, which makes it kind of hard to come up with content for a fandom blog. >.< Hopefully this situation will improve within a few months, but like I said, there are no guarantees.

RIP Anne McCaffrey

2011-11-23T12:12:00.000-08:00

I clearly remember the day I first picked up an old, beat up copy of Dragonflight. I can see the now familiar green cover, slightly curling in the bottom left cover and the image of Lessa and beautiful gold Ramoth that has since remained my emblem for both Pern and its author. I remember turning the paperback over, reading the description and thinking "Well, I'm bored. Might as well try it out." There were two other books in the series right there, and that meant at least a week or so of reading material if they turned out to be good.

I didn't know what a gift the world of Pern would become to me, and I didn't know how much of a formative influence its creator was about to be on my own work. I didn't know that I would eventually own every scrap that Anne McCaffrey chose to publish.

I'm grateful for those gifts, and I'm very sorry for her family and friends who are grieving this holiday season. You have my deepest respect and sympathy.

Anne McCaffrey has died at age 85.

Quick Update and Rec

2011-11-11T19:41:00.000-08:00

My personal life and original fiction work have gotten in the way of this poor neglected blog in a big way. I'm not sure when I'll be able to go back to regular upkeep of the garden, but I am still alive, and once I've gotten back on track with my fandom stuff, I do plan to pick it up again. Until then, I have something for those visitors who love wolves as much as I do. I don't know if there can be such a thing as a "fandom" for a species of real life beings, but if there can, I am definitely a fan of wolves.

I came across this site while doing research about Wolves this week, and I really found the stories about this pack to be interesting and compelling.

http://www.livingwithwolves.org/Stories_Full/AW_Stories.interactive.html

2011-08-18T15:14:00.000-07:00

Fandombouquet has been on hiatus because I've been having problems with my health and semi-related problems with my writing. I'd prefer not to write about the specifics. I haven't been keeping up with any of my fandom activities or watching much of anything, so writing a fandom blog is a little out of the credibility range right now. I am still here, and the blog has not been abandoned. Neither have any of my writing projects. I'm shooting for "after the holidays" as a spot where I can pick up Fandombouquet again. Thanks, everyone, for your patience.

Unplanned Hiatus...

2011-02-21T15:09:00.000-08:00

I've been on antibiotics that have been kicking my butt and not really doing much for my symptoms. Fandombouquet is going to have to go back on hiatus until I get a diagnosis. Sorry, everybody.

More Music Recs For January

2011-01-23T13:17:00.000-08:00

I'm a bad geek. I'm behind in all the episodes of my currently airing fandoms and I haven't watched any of my Christmas/birthday presents yet. The reason for that is I'm still plugging away at my Nano novel. (So much for "finish the draft in January.") The good (or bad) news for visitors to the Fandom Garden is that this means I'm offering another music rec this week.

Subject: Abandoned Toys
Title/Season: The Witch's Garden

Tracklist:

01. Within a Lilac Clutch
02. The Witch's Garden (Prelude)
03. Vermillion Reflections
04. Where Red Shadows Slumber
05. Flickering Embrace
06. The Great Dreaming Swan
07. Spiraling Into the Sun
08. Flowering Ashes
09. The Witch's Garden

Genre:Contemporary Classical, Progressive
Similar Artists:Ophelia's Dream, Dark Sanctuary

This is the only album I have by this band, but I like it a lot. The genre may sound off-putting, but Abandoned Toys is for Nightwish fans as well as classical music lovers. It's atmospheric, edgy, spooky, and beautiful all at once. My favorite tracks are Flickering Embrace and The Great Dreaming Swan

13 Things You Should Watch (But Probably Haven't) Part 3

2011-01-16T04:51:00.000-08:00

Well, here we are again. The 13 Things list I started back in September. I bet everyone thought I forgot. This is turning into an epic affair. It keeps getting sidelined, and it sure is dragging on. I seem to have contracted what a friend of mine calls run-on-at-the-mouth-itis, so I'm only going to cover one item.

Reviewing my last post in this series I realized that I got the list out of it's alphabetical order. So much for my attempt at organization. But-- I shall not be deterred! I'm simply going to talk about a few of my favorite franchises ever, and to heck with the alphabet. I never liked it anyway.

Highlander: The Raven

The Highlander franchise period is one of my biggest fandoms. I truly mourn for it, because I don't know many others with such devoted fans, awesome characters, fun stories, engaging concepts, and ridiculously poor continuity and development.

My love affair with the world of the Immortals began in the early 90s with Highlander: The Series. Somehow I missed the Highlander movies and didn't watch the first one until I had already started to enjoy the TV series. When I did see the first film, I was thrilled and found that it gave me a lot of insight into the world, the Immortal mythos (as opposed to the Immortal Methos), and the atmospheric elements conveyed by the series. Then I had the misfortune to view the sequel movie, Highlander II: The Quickening. It would take me an entire blog series to list all the things I don't like about that film. For the purposes of this post, I will say only that "continuity" is not a four letter word. Resolving to put The Quickening out of my mind and pretend it didn't exist, I went happily back to Highlander: The Series and stayed there until the show ended in 1999.

Unfortunately, no matter how hard I tried to forget The Quickening, it had scarred me. So, when I came across Highlander: The Raven in 2005, I was leery. Then I heard fans talking about licencing issues that essentially prevented the spin-off show from mentioning either of the MacLeods, and my response was: "How can you have a show called Highlander: Anything when it doesn't have a MacLeod?"

I will admit that did have a small, niggling curiosity about the show, simply because my favorite Immortal had always been Amanda, but that curiosity wasn't enough to compel me to buy the DVDs. I finally saw the show only because I got it as part of a birthday present which also included all six seasons of Highlander: The Series and the first Highlander movie. (Why yes, I do have awesome friends. Thank you very much.)

I'm sure there are fans of The Raven out there, but I have yet to converse with anyone who told me that the they really like it. I pride myself on my ability to keep an open mind, but I have to say that I did not have high hopes for The Raven. One of the biggest complaints I heard was that it felt more like a cop show than like a show about Highlander style immortals. I don't like cop shows in general, and I did not think Paul Johannsen was a good fit for the Highlander universe, especially in the role of a police officer who was supposed to be playing counterpoint to Amanda. I really hated knowing that Duncan wasn't even going to be mentioned, and to top it all off, I hated Amanda's haircut when I first saw it. I also knew that if I didn't take the time to watch it, I would forever be haunted by the possibility that Amanda had done something awesome in the short, thirteen episode run and I would never know.

Well, let me deal with the small issues first and work my way up to the ones that matter. Amanda's haircut grew on me. (No pun intended.) It does make her look edgier, but Elizabeth Gracen invests the character with such an enjoyable mix charm, mischief, class, and simple joie de vevre--even when she's dealing with for her past or with issues relating to the down-side of living forever--that an audience would have to be asleep not to be won over by her. Of course, I may be prejudiced. As I've stated, Amanda is my favorite Immortal.

Does The Raven feel like a cop show? Yes, at times it does. Is that a bad thing? Not really. Here's why. The entire premise of the show was that after centuries of living as an irresponsible thief, Amanda was going to have to face some of the consequences for her behavior. A series where she became a complete do-gooder and ran around helping people the way Duncan usually did would have been laughable. No one changes that much over night, and all the character's inherent charm would have dissipated very quickly into a heavy, annoying moral struggle.

Paul Johannssen surprised me a lot in the role of Nick Wolfe. The character is a fish out of water when dealing with the Immortals, and he's kind of a "by-the-book" police detective, two things I really tend to find irritating. Paul put a lot of work into making Nick a compelling and likeable person, and the character works great as a counterpoint to Amanda. I completely retract my opinion that he doesn't fit with the Highlander universe.

The only thing that I don't like about the show is that there is no Highlander. I miss Duncan--and I even miss Connor, though I'm less attached to him. The absence of a MacLeod just reinforces my belief that this franchise suffers badly from lack of continuity. Jim Byrne reprises his role as Joe Dawson, and that does help, but if they're going to call the show Highlander: Anything, there needs to be a MacLeod somewhere. I'm not saying that Duncan should have been in every episode. If he had been, The Raven would have been little more than a sequel to Highlander: The Series. A couple of episodes or at least mention of him was really necessary in order to make this show feel like part of an established franchise.

That aside, though, The Raven is a good show with a fantastic heroine. The emphasis on a female character who is not a cliche is a definite plus in my book. Most of the so-called "strong female protagonists" on television today are just jerks or bullies who can shoot and have big boobs. Clearly, Amanda is capable of holding her own against any and all comers, but she is not a jerk. She's a complex, multifaceted and fascinating person who deserved a lot more than a thirteen-episode run.

The Cheapskate's Lament, or: Marketing Is For Vultures

2011-01-09T15:00:00.000-08:00

In 1992, I found myself accidentally caught up in a show called Renegade. I happened to catch it one night after watching what was then my favorite show, Highlander: The Series. I was intrigued by the character of Bobby Sixkiller, a bounty hunter who struck me as part Lando Calrissian and part Leo Getz. I tuned in for a few more weeks and decided I thoroughly enjoyed Cheyenne Philips, Bobby's half-sister. Eventually, I warmed up to the show's protagonist, Reno Raines, and I admitted that I was becoming invested in his quest to clear his name and put his wife's killers behind bars.

Renegade is cheesy in the best possibly ways. My cheese-o-meter is set kind of high, though, so take that statement with a grain of salt. Whether or not it was "high caliber entertainment," it had all the elements that usually hook me. There's an underdog struggling against seemingly impossible odds. He's one of a group of disparate individuals who come together to form a family under very odd circumstances. All the lead characters are endearing and humorous--with the exception of Dutch, the recurring villain, who I'd cheerfully skewer and roast over an open pit, but I still enjoy every minute of him. The adventures are over-the-top adventures and the plotlines that walk the line between being engaging in their human-ness and requiring at least a reasonable ability to suspend one's disbelief.

I followed Reno's quest for three years. Then my own life took an unexpected trip to "the badlands" and I was never able to find out what had happened. I despaired to learn that only the first three seasons of the show had been released on DVD. Seasons 4 & 5, it seemed, were doomed to be lost in the netherworld of incomplete TV series collections, where profit-vultures would pick their bones for eternity because the first three seasons hadn't raked in enough money.

Well, now Renegade fans can rejoice--sort of. Seasons 4&5 have indeed made it to DVD, but only part of the Renegade: The Complete Series boxed set. Now, I am certainly glad to have them available. In fact, my inner fangirl is already squeeing with delight and planning a post-holiday season immersion in the badlands. The cynical pragmatist who rules about 80% of my brain is already already sneering.

Of course they're only going to release them in a boxed set. Why would they want to show any appreciation toward the fans who've already shelled out for seasons 1-3? Why would they want to risk their profit margins on the gamble that fans who feel respected and appreciated might actually spend money more readily?

The answer is, of course, very simple. Fans will pay the money anyway. And we do. Stupidly. Loyally. We do. Because we are that awesome. As of this writing, the boxed set is being sold at Amazon for $29.99. I have no idea how long that will last, but to all the Renegade fans who'll be purchasing duplicates of seasons 1-3 either now or later, I salute you. And I'll see you in the badlands!

January Music Rec Post

2011-01-02T14:28:00.000-08:00

Hello, everyone, and happy New Year. Welcome back to the Fandom Garden. Life seems to have eaten my writing time in December, so I am still plugging away at my 2010 Nanowrimo project. So much for my "finish the draft" goal. At this point, I'm setting my sights on having it finished by June.

Anyway. In honor of the New Year, I'm going to be a sheep and discuss my favorite (and least favorite) CDs of 2010. I advise readers not to hold their breaths for this to become a yearly event. It probably won't, simply because I don't run out and buy every album right when it comes out, so half the time, I hear an album 2 or 3 years after it's released. That wasn't the case this year.

Two CDs came out this year that I was compelled to listen to right away. The first was Eric Clapton's 19th studio release, entitled simply Clapton. I was looking forward to that one. The second one I bought bought more out of curiosity than enthusiasm. That was Born Again, the 14th release by the Christian pop-rock group Newsboys.

Now, I am a Clapton fan. I have been one for about as long as I've been cognizant of who Eric Clapton was. I don't have anything against contemporary Christian music. I enjoy some of it, but I find a large portion of it to be annoying, overly simplified, and preachy. This seems like a done deal, doesn't it? Well, read on. You may be surprised.

Clapton is not a bad CD. It's just not a very good CD, either. It gets my "least favorite" of the year vote because of how woefully and ridiculously disappointing it was. The music is solid, relaxed, and pretty much the music of an artist who has paid his dues and now goes into the studio to record exactly what he wants to play. My hat is off to the man for that, seriously. However, just once more in my life, I would like to be blown away by a Clapton album.

The album is about half originals and half blues standards. All are decent, but I found myself lulled almost to the point of falling asleep while listening to them. Now, that would be fine if I was listening to, say, Enya, or Luther Vandross. One is not supposed to be put to sleep by an Eric Clapton album. The only two songs on the CD that made me sit up and pay attention were Autumn Leaves--a standard which Clapton makes his own in true style with top notch guitar work--and Diamonds Made From Rain, a lovely new ballad with Sheryl Crow on background vocals. Unfortunately, those two songs don't make the CD worth listening to for me. I'll happily import them into my music library and never bother with the rest again.

Born Again is Newsboys' first outing with Michael Tait as lead vocalist. I was curious but not quite sure what to expect, so I waited until I could get the MP3 download for rock bottom as a deal of the day. I rarely pay full price for anything, but I can tell you, if I'd heard this CD first, I would have happily shelled out for it. The title track sets a fabulous rock tone as the album opener, which is closely followed by One Shot. Both of these songs are fantastic, with smart lyrics and catchy, driving music. Track three, Way Beyond Myself, has more of a dance feel to it. I'm not a dance music fan at all, but the song won me over anyway. Again, terrific lyrics, and the music is upbeat enough to be fun without being annoying. The next song, Impossible, is probably the weakest in terms of the lyrics. It's been done before, but I guess there's a reason for that. People need encouragement sometimes. Not a bad song at all, simply not remarkable. Track five, When The Boys Light Up, is the song that will get stuck in your head for days. You're either going to love it or hate it. I love it. Build Us Back is a ballad, positioned nicely at the half point of the CD. It's my favorite song on the album, with lovely music and lyrics that are pretty and metaphorical while also being inspiring. It feels like it could have been an old time gospel song or a hymn back when worship music was more than simple choruses that engage on an emotional level and ask us to leave our intellects at the door. (Before anybody sends me hate mail, yes I know that worship choruses have their place and I even like to sing them. Just not all the time.) Escape, track seven, picks the energy back up a few notches, and Tait really shines here. Anyone who likes where Newsboys is going musically will probably love it. The people in the "we want Peter" camp probably won't. The next track, Miracles, builds on the rocking momentum established in Escape with an up-tempo drive and some nice guitar work. The CD slides smoothly from there to a slower song for track nine. Running To You is my second favorite song on the album. I could listen to it on repeat for hours. In fact, I think I did that one time when I was trying to get When The Boys Light Up out of my head. And then everything comes to a slow, grinding halt with track ten. It's a ballad called On Your Knees, which I tried very hard to like because it tells what should be an engaging and interesting story. It falls a bit short though. The lyrics are kind of muddled and while it isn't preachy, I just kind of rolled my eyes and sighed through the second verse because it was too predictable. The CD had been so good up to that point. I wish they'd chosen to leave the clunker off. Track eleven brought me back around, though. It's a fabulous cover of a Hillsong tune called Mighty to Save and I was so happy listening to it that I completely forgot to be irritated about the previous song. (See? I do like worship choruses!) The CD ends with another cover, this time of the classic dc Talk song Jesus Freak. It was a risky move for the band. Any time an established group switches singers, the first release is basically make or break time. Tait is well known as the frontman of dc Talk, and doing a cover of their most recognizable song now could have damaged the album's credibility. I am more than pleased to say, though, that they pulled the song of beautifully. I might even like their version better than the original--which is really saying something, because Jesus Freak gets a lot of play around here.

Bottom line? Buy this CD. Listen to it. Love it. Then come back next month for more music recs.

December Music Rec Post

2010-12-05T02:02:00.000-08:00

I wasn't sure I was going to start posting here at Fandombouquet until the New Year. In fact, this may be my only post in December. I can happily say that I completed this year's NaNoWrimo successfully. (I stopped counting words at around 55k, but there are more than that. Significantly more.) However, I am currently stuck in the exact middle of the novel, and I've determined that the only way to solve this problem is to keep going and make December's goal "finish the damn draft." So, that's what I'm going to do, and I'll warn readers now, I get testy and distracted when I'm this focused on the finish line. That's especially true when there's a deadline involved, even if it's a self-imposed deadline.

I had to post this week, though, because I discovered an absolutely gorgeous new Christmas album, and it would have been criminal to keep it to myself.

Artist: Sean Smith
Title: Christmas
Tracklist:

01. The First Noel
02. Good King Winceslas
03. Little Drummer Boy
04. Joy To The World
05. Silent Night, Holy Night
06. We Three Kings
07. Hark ! The Herald Angels Sing
08. Christmas Morning (Improvisation I)
09. Christmas Morning (Improvisation II)
10. Christmas Time Is Here, A Meditation
11. O Tannenbaum
12. O Come All Ye Faithful
13. Deck The Halls
14. It Came Upon A Midnight Clear
15. Twelve Days Of Christmas
16. Auld Lang Syne

Genre: Instrumental; Acoustic Guitar (is that a genre?)
Similar Artists: Technically, I could list any number of guitar players here, but none of them are actually similar. Just buy the album.

There is a lot of really boring instrumental Christmas music out there. A large portion of it is acoustic guitar, and for some reason no one in the recording industry cares that by it's by turns syrupy and sleep-inducing. That's probably because they figure that enough people will buy the boring music that it's worth making the albums anyway. Sean Smith proves that there is still magic in "traditional" Christmas music.

I discovered the album after downloading Deck The Halls, which was (probably still is) available free right now on Amazon. Deck The Halls is one of my least favorite Christmas songs, but I was blown away by Mr. Smith's version. I don't think I can describe the tracks adequately to give readers a breakdown. There is true beauty here. I sat with my open during most of it on my first listen. My reaction was, "This is what Christmas was when I was six. And this is acoustic guitar as it was meant to be played." Granted, I was weird six-year-old. I liked presents as much as every other kid I knew, but for me Christmas was a time of deep and powerful magic. It was mystical in ways that were only vaguely related to lights and presents and Santa Claus. Those things were merely the outgrowth of something bigger. It's still like that, when I let it be, but I'm a grown-up now, and most of the time it's cluttered with grown-up things. The magic gets pushed into the corners and I don't pay attention to it until something like this stops me in my tracks. When I listened to this album, I had mental images of Smith's fingers drawing music out of the guitar the way a magical virtuoso in a fantasy novel might coax magic from a place that no one else could reach.

How Not To Succeed At NaNoWriMo

2010-11-08T11:37:00.000-08:00

Just thought I would come by and clean up the garden a bit. It's late fall now and there are a lot of dead leaves blowing around. While I'm here, I might as well provide a little insight into what has sapped so much of my attention lately. (Or not).

How Not To Succeed at NaNoWriMo.

1. Get a migraine.

2. Spend the next 3-4 days poking at your novel veeeeeeeeeeery slowly and making a mess.

3. Oversleep the day the migraine leaves because migraines make you tired.

4. Proceed to spend two hours looking up mythology and folklore references because you can't remember some obscure thing you knew 12 years ago that NO ONE ELSE CARES ABOUT anyway but is going to be used in the novel in some minor way that could easily be left out at the moment and by the time you find it you've gone down ten or twelve other tangential internet search paths because you are a geek.

5. Watch an equally obscure indie film on Netflix Instant. (Gee, glad I didn't decide to put my membership on hold this month. The movie is called Strangers In Good Company for anyone who likes indie films. I enjoyed it.)

6. Find a random song you like from a band in a genre you generally don't get into. Spend the next thirty minutes or so looking for more songs by said band to see if it's a fluke. (It isn't a fluke. The band is called Ill Niño-- Latin Hardcore/Metal band whose name might raise a blip on the radar of anyone into horror movies. They did "How Can I Live?" on the Freddy vs. Jason soundtrack in the early 2000's.)

7. Decide you absolutely HAVE to find another random song by a completely different, unrelated artist (Christian folk-pop singer Brooke Fraser) and hunt through all your music to figure out if you have it or if you need to listen to it on YouTube.

8. Eat lunch. (Yummy, beef stew and corn on the cob.)

9. Look at your current chapter and go "Yuck, this is a mess."

10. Decide you don't want to deal with it yet, justify your procrastination by saying, "Well, I'm way ahead anyway. I haven't done anything but write the stupid book for a week," then hop off to post lists on your blog.

Brief Update

2010-10-22T07:04:00.000-07:00

The Fandom Garden is looking a little neglected, so I wanted to let readers know that I'm still here. October has gotten away from me in the process of preparing a new project for Nanowrimo. In November, most of my time will go to that project, and unless I suffer a catastrophic meltdown of brain tissue, December will be spent on (hopefully) finishing the first draft and then cleaning it up.

I haven't seen much of interest in the new crop of shows this TV season. I will say, however, that I'm quite impressed with Castle's third season--although less impressed with Beckett's new hair. There's a new season of Sanctuary starting and I'm excited about that, but reserving judgment for the time being. The only new fandom I can say we'll be seeing in the garden is Hawaii 5-0. It's passed my "three episode" rule with flying colors and I can't wait to catch up on the season once Nano is over!

Expect to see regular updates again in January, starting with Music recs for the new year. Until then, I wish everyone happy fandom pursuits.

Five-O or No?

2010-09-23T05:46:00.000-07:00

I've been off the radar for a few weeks, and I apologize to readers. I can't even blame my internet connection this time. I've been distracted with preparations for NanoWriMo, watching Blade Runner, (I received the 5-Disc Ultimate Collectors Edition box set as an early birthday present and I came up with this great idea to do a blog post comparing all five movies) and trying to catch up on the summer TV shows I had been watching before the fall season started. All of this (except Nano) was motivated by Fandombouquet, and yet I managed to forget to post here.

I've got a half finished post in the Thirteen Things series, but I have a burning need to interrupt my nicely ordered schedule. Why, you ask? No, actually you're probably not asking that. You've read the title of the post. So. As you can probably guess, I watched the pilot episode of CBS' re-imagined Hawaii 5-0 this week.

The first thing I want to explain is that the original series is right up there beside The Bionic Woman and MASH as an integral part of my growing-up experience. (Thank you, WNDS Derry for airing the show a gazillion times a week and being one of probably four channels we could consistently get without cable in my parents' home.) I won't say that I remember every episode, but I can say that if I happen to catch a re-run on TV now, it's rare for me not to remember it within a few minutes. Wo Fat is one of my favorite TV villains ever.

Now, let me also say that my experiences with "re-imagined" television shows have not been good. I liked Battlestar Galactica in its early seasons but I quit watching in season 3 and have very little to say other than "good riddance." There were a couple of others that I tried to like and couldn't. The one that I really did enjoy got cancelled after eight episodes.

Usually, it takes me three episodes to decide I like a television show. I have a firm rule. Pilot episodes do not always (ever?) reflect what the show is really like. They're meant to pique viewer interest and set up a series. Second episodes give me a little more of an accurate view, but I typically do not have a good picture of things yet. So by the third episode, I can decide with a fair amount of confidence whether I really like a show or not.

Given how often a new show will get cancelled, my current practice has been to wait until a second season is confirmed before even bothering to get invested in a series. In this case I made an exception--partially out of loyalty to the franchise; partially out of curiosity; and mostly because I wanted to have an opinion before people started asking me whether I'd seen it or not, since there's been a lot of buzz.

I wasn't absolutely convinced that I wouldn't like the show, but I have to admit that I wanted to dislike it. I like Grace Park a lot, but re-casting Kono Kalakaua (a cheerful sort of comic relief character whom I liked very much) as a hot girl with martial arts skills struck me as cheap. I frankly do not like LOST or Moonlight, so I was immediately irritated by the choice of actors for McGarrett and Chin Ho, too.

All that said, I hadn't gotten halfway through the episode before I was telling my friend, "Dammit. I like this show. I like these people." I won't comment on specifics because I don't know enough yet to do character analysis a la my Leverage series, and I don't know if I will continue to like them next week.

The episode had flaws. The set up was transparent and too obvious. Plot elements required a higher level of suspension of disbelief than I would have liked in a show that seemed to be going for a "edgy and realistic" atmosphere. The progression of the characters from strangers to colleagues and then to "unit" was a trifle fast for my taste. However, as I said earlier, pilot episodes rarely reflect the nature of the series.

So, the jury is still out. I'm not ready to jump in with both feet, but my toes are in the water here. Five-O looks like a yes from where I stand.

And for the record: I am still a Danny girl. The rest of you can have McGarrett.

September Music Rec Post

2010-09-05T10:15:00.000-07:00

My internet problems appear to be solved. Thank you, Brian from the phone company! Anyway. On with the show. I'm about halfway done the "Thirteen Things" theme I started in late August, but I'm going to take a break this week because I've decided to start doing a monthly music rec on the first Sunday of the month.

I've been slowly but surely updating my list of music, and if you take a look on the music page, you can see that my life is a testimony to eclectic taste and adoration of music across genre. (And as of this post, I haven't even finished updating the C's!)

The more I work on the music page, the more I realize how much wonderful music I've been exposed to, both from growing up around people of different age groups and backgrounds and, in the past ten years or so, making friends through the internet who have even more varied tastes than myself. I feel privileged to live in a time and culture where we have such a marvelous variety of styles and genres.

I hemmed and hawed about what to start with for a while and then I just said, "the heck with it" and started with the first album on the list.

Artist: Aaron Lines
Title: Moments That Matter

Tracklist:

1. Cheaper to Keep Her
2. Moments That Matter
3. Somebody's Son
4. Let's Get Drunk and Fight
5. When We Make Love
6. It Broke Off
7. Everyday Heroes
8. Just Drunk Enough
9. Sometimes It's Summertime
10. Nothing Like You

Genre: Country
Similar Artists: Blake Shelton, Tim McGraw, Luke Bryan

Buy: Amazon.com

Aaron Lines is a Canadian country artist who's been recording since the early 2000's, but I only discovered him about five months ago during my last country music jag. He stands out to me for several reasons, the first being that he can actually sing. His voice is pleasant and melodic, but the twang may not be for everyone. I enjoy this album enough that I don't mind. The songs are a great mix of fun, upbeat tunes and serious/thoughtful ballads.

Moments That Matter and Somebody's Son are now among my all time favorite songs in any genre. Just Drunk Enough and It Broke Off are hilarious, the latter being a song I can relate to so well it's scary. When We Make Love and Nothing Like You are standard love songs from a lyrical perspective, but Lines' voice makes them noticibly pretty. (It is permissible to call a male singer's voice "pretty," right?) Cheaper To Keep Her, which is apparently Lines' biggest hit to date, is palatable in small doses but very irritating if left on repeat by accident.

Announcement

2010-08-28T13:02:00.000-07:00

The Fandom Garden's going to be quiet for a few weeks. My internet access is really sketchy. Hopefully I'll be able to pick up the current series again in early September.

13 Things You Should Watch (But Probably Haven't) Part 1

2010-08-15T09:30:00.000-07:00

I was going to do this in one post. Then I remembered how wordy I am and how much I don't like it when bloggers go on and on in their posts. So I decided that if I'm going to do lists of any description, I need to break them up. So, for the next few weeks, you lucky people get to hear me ramble at length about obscure and underrated TV and movies!

I have a terrible time ranking things if I have to make more than three choices. So, I'm going to list these alphabetically. It's not so much a ranking as just a list with a little description. Not all of them are genre-related, but most are.

These movies and shows are not without flaws. They're simply not well known; underrated; unfairly maligned; or ignored in favor of inferior works that are similar in theme; etc. Do they qualify as masterpieces or "the best ever" in their categories? Not necessarily. Watch them anyway.

Aeon Flux (The movie)

Yes, that's right. I'm going to jump right in with the sharks. You remember Aeon Flux? I'm sure you do if you were a teenager in the early 90s like I was. Fans of the original cartoon largely panned the film, and animator Peter Chung denounced it. I can understand why. The film pretty much ignored what continuity there was in the six-part animated serial. The story, visual style, and tone of the film are very different as well.

Do I have a problem with that? In theory, yes. This is the kind of thing that drives me crazy about certain other "re-imaginings" out there.

So, why am I recommending that my readers watch Aeon Flux? Because it's visually stunning. It's one of maybe four post-apocalyptic anything that I've enjoyed. The concepts it explores are a lot more thought-provoking and interesting than anything I remember from the MTV cartoon. (Although I will admit, I haven't seen the episodes in the last ten years.) Finally, it was the first time I was ever impressed with Charlize Theron.

Watching Aeon Flux as anything other than a stand along story is not going to work. It can't be viewed as a remake or even a derivative story of the cartoon. However, it is worthy of more attention than it's ever likely to get.

Brotherhood of The Wolf

I was first introduced to this movie back in 2006 by my friend and collaborator, Natacha Guyot. I've lost track of how many times I've watched it since then. It's a French film, directed by Christophe Gans and starring Sameul Le Bihan as Grégoire de Fronsac, a royal taxidermist sent to investigate a series of animal attacks in the province of Gévaudan. Folklore and history geeks will no doubt pick up on the reference. The film is based loosely around the legendary "Beast of Gévaudan." I enjoy it too much to spoil the plot, but let me say that it's one of the most inventive genre films I've seen in a long time. It incorporates elements from all kinds of things--from fantasy and horror to political thriller to romance and erotica (though not a distasteful or graphic manner.) With this many ingredients, the movie was a recipe for disaster, but it holds together nicely and has so many luminous moments that I probably should have saved it for its own post. Unlike some of the other movies and shows I'm writing about, this one pretty well well-received in the US, where it was released by Universal Pictures. I'm usually surprised when people tell me that they haven't heard of it. Then I remember it's French and I had never heard of it until Natacha recommended it. It's fantastic escapist entertainment that is far more creative and visually appealing than the current slew of generic (or just plain bad) fantasy/horror stuff saturating both the film and television markets.

City of Ember

This is a late edition to the list. It reached the top of my Netflix queue last weekend, and I watched it about the time that I was formulating ideas for the blog. It's based on a series of young adult novels by Jeanne DuPrau. I'm not sure how I missed it when it came out in 2008, but I was intrigued enough by it to buy the books. (Yes, that does mean I'll be doing a comparison post one of these days.) The premise is that in the aftermath of some unspecified apocalyptic events, a group of scientists and engineers create an underground city intended to be a refuge for humanity. Two-hundred years later, the city (aptly called Ember) is falling apart, and two young adventurers must find a way to save their people despite the resistance of their mostly complacent elders. The movie stars Harry Treadaway and Saoirse Ronan, whose performances are far better than the script deserves. I kept thinking what a great movie itshould have been, especially with Bill Murray and Tim Robbins in supporting roles. Overall, it felt like a piece of toffee stretched too thin on one end. By the time things got going in the first half of the film, there simply wasn't enough movie left to provide a satisfactory ending. The last half hour or so tumbles over itself to get the two kids where they need to be, and the action scenes, while exciting, fairly screamed "I'm here for a video game tie-in!" All right. So then whyon Earth am I telling readers to watch the movie? One: I foresee great things for Saoirse Ronan. Two: the sets and effects are amazing. Three: Bill Murray is brilliantly despicable as the Mayor. I hate him so much I want to strangle him, in all the best possible ways.

13 Things You Should Watch (But Probably Haven't) Part 2

2010-08-15T09:29:00.000-07:00

This is going to be a short post. I had a migraine this week, and my plan to cover more of these entries was derailed. Still, these are interesting movies and I recommend that readers take a look. More next week.

Crusade: A March Through Time

Another movie I discovered through a friend. It's based on the novel Kruistocht In Spijkerbroek (Translation: Crusade In Jeans) by Thea Beckman. The premise seems weak and hokey: A teenage soccer player attempts to travel back in time after losing an important game and accidentally ends up in the middle of the Children's Crusade. Surprisingly, the movie pulls it off well. If Disney had done this, it would have been over sentimentalized and silly. (I say this as an avowed Disney fan.) This movie avoids the "family movie" trap very nicely and still manages to be entertaining for kids and adults alike. I'm told that the internationally released version has a much longer ending, which would be a good thing, because the one glaring weakness I can see in the American release is the abrupt and badly thought out ending. Overall, I have to say that the "science" in this science fiction film is...well...not. But view it as a fantasy and just have fun. Emily Watson has a supporting role as the mother, who is also the head researcher on the time machine project that sends our protagonist to the middle ages. I'm not a particular fan of hers, but I enjoyed this role anyway. Joe Flynn is flat-out terrific as Dolph Vega. I'd really love to see more from this young actor. Hm. Maybe a role opposite Saoirse Ronan from my last post? One can hope.

Dragonslayer

Dragonslayer is a cult classic from the early 80s. It came in the wake of Star Wars, and the studio was very obviously trying to milk the Skywalker cash cow. There are so many parallels between this movie and what is now called A New Hope that I won't even try to list them. It's pretty comical in that sense, but ultimately I don't think it's a deal-breaker, because the movie has enough of its own merits to stand up. The protagonist is written very much in the vein of Luke Skywalker, which means I don't like him all that much. (I think Luke is annoying as hell in ANH; aggravatingly cocky in ESB; and finally grows up to be respectable in RotJ just in time for the series to end.) What I really like about the story is the cool and unexpected angle on the love interest. For those who might see the movie sometime, I won't spoil, but this point of originality easily makes up for the Star Wars feel. Visually, the movie goes for a gritty, realistic look--insomuch as the word "realistic" can be applied to a medieval fantasy about dragons--which is a sharp counterpoint to Legend or Labyrinth. The effects are certainly not cutting edge, but given the era in which the film was made, I find them pretty remarkable. The dragon is terrifying, and the battle scene at the end is still one of the coolest things I've ever seen. If for nothing else, fantasy enthusiasts will want to see the movie for that.

Little Manhattan

I can't remember how I came across this gem of a movie, but I'm glad I did. I read something online (probably an Amazon review) that said the movie was written entirely from the perspective of its pre-teen protagonist, a fifth-grader experiencing all the terrible and wonderful stuff that comes with first love. I was intrigued. I watched the movie expecting something cute and enjoyable, but not particularly memorable.

The protagonist, Gabe, is played by Josh Hutcherson, who later achieved notice in the role of Jess Aarons in Bridge To Terabithia. His co-star is a very believable and compelling actress named Charlie Ray, who unfortunately hasn't done much else. Both actors did a great job in their roles, giving life and personality to characters who could easily have been cardboard cut-outs. The characters are at a transitional point in their lives, neither entirely children nor ready to grow up. Their confusion and awkwardness comes across when it's supposed to, but is never distracting. The dialogue and interraction between them is rich and believable. When they're supposed to be comfortable with each other, the viewer is comfortable. When they're not, the viewer winces sympathetically, but the scenes are never over-done.

The ending is bittersweet but not overly dramatic. The supporting cast is interesting, the problems that the kids face are realistic and dealt with in a dignified way by the writer and director. There are inevitably going to be comparisons to My Girl, simply because the characters are roughly the same age as Veda and Thomas J, but whether you like My Girl or you hate it, try to put those expectations aside and look at Little Manhattan for itself.

Want to Affiliate?

2010-08-08T01:41:00.000-07:00

Comment here if you would like to affiliate with Fandombouquet. Please provide the following information in your comment.

Name of Your Website or Blog:

URL (Web address) of the site/blog:

Short Description of Your Content:

The Name You Are Known By Online:*
How Did You Find Fandombouquet:*

You can use either the link button provided on my links page or a plain text link to: http://fandombouquet.blogspot.com

Index Post: The Five Faces of Robin Hood

2010-08-07T22:55:00.000-07:00

This week I ended my first blog series, entitled The Five Faces of Robin Hood. It's been both a challenge and a fun experience for me. I'd like to thank everyone who read and commented on the series while I was writing it.

Below is a list of links to all the posts for easier navigation.

The Five Faces of Robin Hood: Eliot Spencer

2010-08-07T17:19:00.000-07:00

Eliot Spencer is larger than life. He's a tank of a guy who can get on a boat full of gun wielding thugs, count them up while he's being escorted around and then count them all down again while beating the crap out of them to save his teammates. He can also cook, sing, play baseball, charm the ladies, and outrun mobs of screaming fangirls--uphill!--all while delivering witty one-liners and engaging in witty repartee with Alec Hardison.

He is a blast to watch. The writer in me experiences "character envy" just about any time Eliot does something. He's the kind of character who can say more with a facial expression or a raised eyebrow than most people say in their dissertations. Yet at the same time, I can't think of an instance when he didn't speak his mind if it was necessary. Although he doesn't like to show it, he also has a remarkable capacity for compassion. In short, Eliot is really, really awesome. He's the most overtly Robinesque of our six Robin Hoods: the former soldier turned outlaw turned vigilante who rushes in to save the day and sends the Sheriff's men running for their lives. Okay. Maybe he's a little more of Little John than Robin when you consider that he's also huge and prefers to use his fists where Robin preferred a bow. Either way, he's still the one who most closely fits the analogy that this series has been making. So, today Eliot is Robin. But is he relatable? Can he be someone's personal Robin Hood the way that Hardison and Tara are mine?

I had trouble answering that question at first because I couldn't think of anyone who reminds me of him. With the other characters, I could think of all kind of instances when I said, "I know exactly how he/she feels," and I could come up with a whole list of people who reminded me of them. In this case, I could think of several people who probably wished they were more like Eliot, but that's not the same thing, and I had to think a while before I remembered the times I was able to really empathize with him.

As the crew's hitter, Eliot's role is largely defined by violence. He's the one that the rest of the team look for when things get rough and trouble comes in the form of scary guys with lots of guns. Yet, there's much more to his job (and his character) than the ability to impersonate the Hulk or play a high-powered Energizer Bunny.

He's referred to early in the show's history as a retrieval specialist. Somewhere along the way, he acquired the tag of "hitter"--probably because it's punchy (no pun intended) and rolls off the tongue a lot more easily than retrieval specialist. I envision the powers that be on Leverage sitting around one day thinking up the clever tags, and it goes something like this:

"The mastermind, the thief, the grifter, the retrieval specialist...no, no, that sounds clunky. Hmmm.... the brains, the thief, the grifter, the hitter, the hacker! Much better."

Whatever name he's given, Eliot is a professional. Early on, he worked pretty hard to keep his relationships with the rest of the crew strictly at that level, and although he has grown to care about the others, there are times that he seems uncomfortable with that reality. He's extremely self-controlled and precise in everything he does, and he's as capable of acting a part as any other member of the team. When he hurts someone, he inflicts exactly the kind of damage he means to inflict, and I have the feeling that accidentally harming someone would seriously rattle his self-image.

We know that he ex-military, and from the kind of things we've seen him do, it's reasonable to infer that he's had the kind of high-level training that governments would prefer the public not to know about. He seems to have a particularly intense dislike of anyone who mistreats children, and in The Scheherezade Jobe he mentioned having fought in third world countries where child labor practices were pretty despicable. We also know that he has a price on his head in three countries, although it isn't clear whether either of these things have to do with his military service or if they're related his current profession.

Whatever the case, Eliot has a lot more hidden under his muscles than more muscles. At this point in the show, I think that his teammates are aware of that, but clients rarely seem to take notice unless he's cracking skulls on their behalf, and the season 2 episode The Zanzibar Marketplace Job illustrated that the phenomenon off underestimating him extends to recurring villains like James Sterling. We also learn in this episode that Eliot either cultivates or uses the image of "the brainless hitter" to his advantage.

That may be so, but I for one was glad to see him shine and put Sterling in his place in Zanzibar Marketplace. (I won't go into specifics because I recently learned that one of Fandombouquet's readers hasn't seen the second season. If you have, then you know what I'm talking about, and if not then I'll happily leave you curious.)

I mentioned previously that most of my offline friends only know me in a context limited to the specific interests we share. I think that's true of a lot of people, and I think most of us have been underestimated or felt boxed in by the assumptions of others from time to time. It's nice to see Eliot find a way to use that to his advantage, and I can't speak for anyone else on this point, but the fact that he is so overwhelmingly awesome about it makes me, at least, feel like I've vicariously stuck out my tongue at the Sterlings in my life.

Eliot intrigues me. I'm really hoping that the writers will stop dancing around his background at some point this season and give us some meat to chew on besides his ill-fated romance with Aimee Martin. And of course, I hope he gets to take one James Sterling down a few more pegs. Would it be too much to ask that he gives Sterling a little taste of what Hardison calls Eliot-Fu?

The Five Faces of Robin Hood: Tara Cole

2010-07-29T09:10:00.000-07:00

I have the same affinity for outsiders that I do for underdogs. I'm trying to decide whether one is an extension of the other or if I just identify with outsiders and therefore gravitate to them. Either way, I'm going to issue the warning that this post may not be the most balanced look at Tara. I like her too much.

Bringing a new or "replacement" character into an ensemble cast is rarely successful. Why should it be? Fans become invested in the interpersonal dynamics on a show as much as they do the lives of the individuals or the development of story arcs. It's impossible to introduce someone else without changing those dynamics to some degree.

So, "the new guy"--or in this case "the new girl"-- faces an uphill climb. I have a lot of fandoms. Check them out my updated list here and find out just how many there are. I also keep tabs on other shows' characters, plots, and the fan reactions to them. There are a fair number of characters who were meant to appear in a single episode but became popular enough to be brought in on a recurring basis. Most of the time, those characters aren't part of the core group. MASH replaced several principle characters during its 11 year run, and while there is some debate as to which characters are the best (Do you like Henry or Col. Potter? Frank or Charles?) the replacements generally seem to have earned their place with fans. MASH is the exception that makes the rule. If I started listing all the examples of replacements who met hostility from fans, this post would be ridiculously long, so here are a few of the most pointed examples: Jonas Quinn who was a failed attempt to replace Daniel Jackson during Stargate SG-1's sixth season; Katherine Pulaski who acted as ship's doctor during the second season of Star Trek: TNG; Ezri Dax, the reluctant replacement for Jadzia Dax during Star Trek: DS9's final season.

When Tara first came on the scene in Leverage, I was worried--but probably not for the same reasons that the majority of fans were. She didn't seem to be universally despised (Ezri), but I heard her called "the blonde," "the new girl," "that new girl," "Sophie's stand-in," and "Jeri Ryan's character," etc. One person did remember her name but referred to her as "that Tara person." I thought, "Great. Here we go. Even though we know that Sophie is coming back, nobody is going to give her a chance."

As a fan, I understood the reluctance to accept and trust Tara. Certainly, I wasn't jumping for joy at the prospect of Sophie being away and another grifter working with the crew. That said, I thought Tara did a fantastic job on her "audition" in The Lost Heir Job, and I wanted to either accept or reject her on her own merit. I was glad to find that most of the fans I know warmed up to her, much like the other characters did.

Like the crew, we realized that there had to be a grifter. Without one, the characters would have to completely change the way they worked their cons. Tara was obviously capable, and she was there at Sophie's request. Yet she was a stranger, and the crew even less inclined to accept a stranger than most fans.

Tara had reservations about Sophie's crew as well. She's skeptical of the Robin Hood crusade, and she doesn't understand its appeal. She's a professional who expects to be well paid for her work. Although she acknowledges that the others are good, she seems to think they're overconfident.

It quickly becomes apparent that her methods are very different from Sophie's. Where Sophie usually adopts a cool and aloof persona or charms a mark with subtle compliments and gestures, Tara tends to be more direct. Her flirting is more physical--or at least more obvious, as in The Maltese Falcon Job. Her aliases are usually more confrontational than Sophie's, and she doesn't automatically trust or go along with Nate's plans.

Her style is off-putting to the others at first, but ultimately it works in her favor. Once they--and by extension, viewers--realize that she has no intention of trying to "be" Sophie, they are able to adjust and accept her. For her part, Tara tries to maintain an air of professional distance, and she genuinely seems willing to live with the possibility that she will always be the outsider, but small gestures and comments indicate that she would like to be accepted.

After kicking bad guy butt in The Runway Job, for example, she says to Eliot, "Admit it, you kinda like me now." Her tone is light, but it's easy to see that she means it--especially in view of similar comments she makes throughout the season. My favorite example is in The Three Strikes Job when she remarks to Parker, "See, trusting me's not so bad."

Next to Hardison, Tara is the character that I have the most in common with. I'm the only geekand the only writer in my immediate family. The majority of my offline friends and acquaintances only share one or two specific interests with me, which usually don't run to any of my geeky books and shows. I can't remember a single instance of being part of an "in crowd" in my life. I don't aspire to belong to one; I only make the statement to illustrate a point of commonality between myself and Tara. I'm even something of an anomaly among my online (read: fandom) friends. Even though I have a ridiculously long list of fandoms, readers will notice that most of the currently hot ones are absent. I also don't like going to fan conventions or watching actor interviews, since they spoil my happy illusions and force me to stop suspending my disbelief. Granted, none of that makes my friends wonder whether they should accept me or not, but it does contribute somewhat to the kinship I feel with Tara who, while she has things in common with the rest of the crew, is still markedly different from them.

So, is that why I decided to include Tara in the Robin Hood series? Maybe a little, but I don't think I'm alone in being able to identify with her. I've never met anyone who hasn't felt like an outsider from time to time. A poised and confident outsider like Tara, who has obviously led an exciting life, allows us to have the vicarious experience of becoming part of the crew as she gains their trust.

I was very happy to see Sophie return at the end of the season, but I was still sad to see Tara go. Of course, the crew can't have two grifters, but I still think it would be nice to see Tara as a recurring character in some capacity. Hopefully, we'll see her again in the future, if only to answer the oft-asked question of what exactly she owed Sophie.

Previous posts in this series: Week 1: Intro | Week 2: Nate Ford| Week 3: Alec Hardison| Week 4: Parker|Week 5: Sophie Devereaux

The Big Valley

2010-07-25T02:26:00.000-07:00

Another show that I was first exposed to as a kid. Having seen the first season on DVD a couple of years ago, I was most impressed by the beauty of the landscapes and the visual elements of the show. Given that it ran in the 1960s, it's understandable that The Big Valley comes off as a bit contrived and predictable to modern viewers.

Still, I am a sucker for family dynamics, and the close-knit nature of the Barkleys still appeals to me as an adult. It's an enjoyable show, and even if the episodes do tend to follow a formulaic pattern, I continue to find myself drawn into the lives of this wonderful family.

My favorite characters were Victoria and Heath. Victoria appealed to me for her strength and charisma, and--predictably enough--because she was a woman who maintained her own authority and ran a large business empire in a time period when most women didn't do such things. Heath was compelling as the outsider who had to earn the respect of the Barkleys' employees and other people in the community. This aspect seemed to be played down in later seasons, but it was a prominent part of the s1 plot.

Beauty and the Beast (Fandom Listing)

2010-07-25T01:23:00.000-07:00

I will never forget when I first discovered this show, some time late in the original run of Season 1. It's because of Beauty and The Beast that I first became interested in fandom activities as a cultural phenomenon.

Like Babylon 5, this was a show that I couldn't watch regularly when it was on television. That said, Vincent and Catherine's story was a compelling one that I took every opportunity to catch up on.

My favorite characters were Catherine and Father, so like most fans, I was unhappy with the show's final season. However, I did think that the character of Diana Bennett had a lot of potential. It was unfortunate that she had to be introduced the way she was.

I picked up the DVDs a few years ago, but I'm still waiting for an opportune time to watch the series from start to finish.

Ships

Vincent/Catherine

Bewitched (Fandom Listing)

2010-07-25T01:15:00.000-07:00

What can I say? Who doesn't love Bewitched?

I have to admit that I don't generally enjoy sitcoms, but this was a show my family watched when I was growing up. Sam appealed to me because she wanted to do things her own way, regardless of what her mother or even--at times--Darren thought about it. Yet, she was consistently loyal to and protective of her husband. I probably also enjoyed the way that Darren was typically in need of rescue by his wife instead of being the show's hero and saving the damsel in distress.

Roddenberry's Andromeda (Fandom Listing)

2010-07-25T01:02:00.000-07:00

I am a Roddenberry fangirl, and I won't apologize for it. So, I suppose it was inevitable that I would come to enjoy Andromeda. That said, I was a bit reticent about the show when I started watching it.

As with Star Trek, I enjoyed the ideas that the series often explored. However, I had a hard time seeing Kevin Sorbo as a starship captain. For the majority of season 1, I kept seeing and hearing Hercules when Dylan spoke. The rest of the characters were what drew me in to the show, which I ended up watching in its entirety while it was running on what is now Syfy along with my favorite show, Stargate SG-1.

My favorite characters were Beka and Rhade, but one way or another I found myself drawn into everyone's lives and the evolution of interpersonal dynamics on the show.

Ships

Dylan/Rommie
Andromeda/Balance of Judgement
Beka/Rhade

All Creatures Great and Small (Fandom Listing)

2010-07-25T00:25:00.000-07:00

One of the few British shows I enjoy, this show is based on the novels of Alf White, who wrote under the pen name of James Herriot. The episodes can be a bit slow paced, but the characters are enjoyable and warm. At this point, I've only watched the original three seasons, which ran from 1978-1980.

The show and the novels that they were based on were based on Herriot's experience as a veterinary surgeon in a small country practice prior to the Second World War. Herriot begins as an assistant in the family practice operated by Sigfried Farnon. As the show progresses, he works his way up to being a full partner.

The show may be a bit dated since it was produced in the late 70s-early 80s. Animal lovers and anyone who appreciates character driven storylines will appreciate it.

The Five Faces of Robin Hood: Sophie Devereaux

2010-07-22T09:41:00.000-07:00

I kept wondering what title I should use for this entry. After all, Leverage fans learned a while back that the name Sophie Devereaux is really just one of an undetermined number of aliases used by the crew's main grifter. Her real name remains a mystery to viewers, although most of the team learned it at the beginning of season 3. I toyed with calling the post The Five Faces of Robin Hood: The Grifter Formerly Known as Sophie, but that sounded awkward. Then I thought about calling it The Five Faces of Robin Hood: Grifter #1, but that didn't feel right since the whole point of the Five Faces series is why viewers are able to identify with the characters on a personal level. Finally, I decided that I was spending too much time trying to come up with a clever title and just followed the formula I'd established in previous posts.

By the time I made that decision, I'd started asking myself another question: how important is Sophie's real name? In one sense, there is logic in Shakespeare's idea that "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." In another sense, names are how we identify ourselves. There are some cultures in which names are so significant that people are given new ones at various stages of their lives: a "temporary" name for early childhood, which is usually connected to high infant mortality rates; a more "permanent" name once a child has reached a certain age or developmental marker; and sometimes a new name is part of the rite of passage from childhood to adult life.

To put Shakespeare's words in contemporary terms: what difference does it make what you call something? Whatever name you give it, it has the same properties. So, in this case, whatever name Sophie chooses to go by, she is still the same woman. Isn't she? That seems to be part of what Sophie herself is trying to figure out.

She's spent so much time grifting--assuming false identities--that she no longer knows who she is. She spent most of Season 2 traveling in an attempt to "find herself," and although finally did come back, it's not quite clear whether those issues have been resolved in her mind or if she simply chose to put her own uncertainties on the back burner again because her crew was in trouble. She did choose to reveal her real name to three of her four teammates, which indicates to me that she has made some peace with herself. I still doubt that a problem which has been building in her psyche for such a long time could be completely resolved in a few months of aimless travel, but that's another post altogether.

I'd certainly like to know that Sophie found the answers she needed when she decided to leave, if only because I care about her as a character. I'm as curious as anyone else about what her real name will turn out to be. However, I've decided that we don't really need to know Sophie's name in order to identify with her, and knowing how the multiple lives she leads have affected her view of herself make her more sympathetic and accessible to the audience.

Sophie's character is built on ambiguity. She is worldly; sophisticated; poised and glamorous. When working a con, she can take on any role or persona that she has to. Yet she consistently makes a fool of herself any time she tries to act on stage, and she seems to have no idea how bad of a stage actress she is. She's charming and very capable of reading people while she's on the job. Her relationships with the other members of the team--especially Parker and Nate--make it clear that she cares very deeply for other people, yet she seems to have difficulty relating to anyone unless there is some barrier in place (like a false name) that keeps the level of intimacy within her control. She can think herself out of--or into--almost any situation. She's very rarely caught without a back up plan, but that in itself can be viewed as an ambiguity. A back up plan can often be very easily turned into an escape route. The need for an avenue of escape seems to imply a lack of trust in her teammates, but she has clearly grown to trust and rely on them throughout the show.

What we know about Sophie comes largely from her relationships with the other characters. I think they--and by association, the audience--know Sophie a lot better than she seems to know herself. She has a long and complicated history with Nate. Both have acknowledged romantic interest in the other, but neither one is going to pursue that kind of relationship, at least until Nate gets his act together. I suspect however, that even if Nate was sober, Sophie would have difficulty being involved long-term. The warmth and realism of her friendship with Parker is one of the most gratifying elements of the show, and it gives further evidence of Sophie's caring nature. One of the most telling glimpses we have of her life comes in the mystery that surrounds her connection to fellow grifter, Tara Cole.

Tara "auditioned" and was subsequently accepted by the crew as a grifter while Sophie was away during season 2. We learned that she took the job as a personal favor to Sophie--or not so much a favor but as to pay back a previous debt. The audience is never given specifics, but it must have been a pretty big deal in order for Tara to go to the lengths she did to win acceptance with this tightly-knit and emotionally closed group of people. The fact that the details are never discussed makes perfect sense in the context of Sophie's established relationship patterns, but the way she is willing to trust Tara with her closest friends for an undetermined length of time indicates that the two women have more than just professional respect for one another. Sophie does not make friends easily, so either she has known Tara for an extremely long time or their previous history was pretty intense.

All that said, another question comes to mind. If Sophie is this hard to pin down, who on earth is going to identify with her, and how does she fit the Robin Hood analogy? To answer that one, I'm going to take a page from Socrates and ask another. Who really knows him or herself? Sophie's experience may be more extreme than the norm, but isn't it the nature of human life to learn about and re-invent ourselves? Of course, it doesn't hurt that Sophie is elegant and downright fun to watch. So while most of us move through the more ordinary process of redefining ourselves as we find our footing in new jobs, new schools, new personal and business relationships, we can watch Sophie do the same thing on a much more exciting scale from week to week.

As I said earlier, I would love to know what Sophie's given name is. I really hope that she's more at peace with herself now than she was in Season 2. Even if she isn't, I feel confident that I know who she is. She's the one who didn't leave her friends high and dry just because she was messed up, and she's the one who came to bail them out when they were in trouble. Do I want to know more about her? Absolutely. Do I need to know her name? Not really.

Previous posts in this series: Week 1: Intro | Week 2: Nate Ford| Week 3: Alec Hardison| Week 4: Parker

The Five Faces of Robin Hood: Parker

2010-07-17T11:37:00.000-07:00

Remember the "crazy kid" in school? The one who sat in the back of the room and either didn't talk or didn't make sense? The one everybody said was an alien or maybe the one who told everybody that he or she was from Neptune? Remember the sexy cat burglar in the movies? The one who wore a catsuit so tight it was a miracle she could move let alone scale buildings or do backflips over laser beams in the bank vault? The one who steal anything, any time, and was rarely in any danger of being caught? That's Parker. Seem incongruous? That's the point.

Once again, I have to congratulate the creative team behind Leverage for being able to breathe so much life into a character who was a recipe for a tired and predictable cliche. On a show about a team of criminals, a thief is as necessary as a hacker--which, in some weird way, may explain why Parker and Hardison make such a great couple. The problem was: how could they give the show a credible thief--one who could believably do all the things that Parker has to do from week to week--without making her a boring repetition of all the characters like her that viewers have been watching for the last 30 or 40 years?

The answer they came up with was one as rich and deliciously complex as the charming gentleman hacker and unabashed geek I wrote about in last week's entry. We don't know very much about Parker's past. In fact, we don't even know for sure whether "Parker" is her first name or her last. The little we've seen from brief flashbacks and the handful of episodes that have touched on or dealt directly with her history indicate a lot of trauma. We know that she had a brother who died tragically as a kid and that she blames herself for it. We also know that she was in foster care at some point. We discovered recently that she learned her craft from a master thief named Archie who, even while he took her under his wing and taught her everything he knew, recognized that she was "too damaged" to have ever fit in with his biological family. Even without those hints, most viewers wouldn't have trouble figuring out that Parker's had a rough life.

Fortunately, Parker doesn't seem to think that this gives her the right to indulge in an angst-fest week after week, and although she's a thief, she sure doesn't think that anyone owes her a living. She is smart, competent, funny, usually upbeat, and although she does not trust people easily or often, when she shows her vulnerable side, she does so with strength and dignity.

Unlike most female cat burglar types who trade heavily on their sex appeal, Parker walks a deft line between innocence and experience. She keeps a fluffy bunny in the middle of her bed--which is in a warehouse surrounded by a really creepy array of tools and...um...equipment. She can crack just about any safe, no matter how technologically advanced, but she had to ask Eliot what sexting was. Eliot's response?

"I am not having this conversation with you, Parker!"

Having said that, no one can dispute that Parker is attractive. In fact, she's quite beautiful when she wants to be. She simply doesn't regard sex as a standard tool of her profession. While there may be some male viewers who find this a little disappointing, it makes me respect Parker all the more.

There is some debate about just how crazy she really is. There's no question that she's...well...not quite right. Some of the things that go through her head are just strange. Other times, we don't know what is going on in there, but her behavior or expression is enough to indicate that we probably don't want to. The question remains, how much of Parker's nuttiness is real and how much is an affectation she's developed to keep people at arm's length?

One way or another, the weirdness might make her seem like the least accessible or familiar member of the crew. I'm sure that she would be happy to have us think so. It's my contention that Parker isn't hard to relate to at all.

Who hasn't felt alone in a crowd? Who hasn't--at least once--been standing in the middle of a group of friends and felt that none of them really knew us? Who hasn't been through something that had such a profound affect on us that, for a while anyway, we just wanted to hide? Parker is just a little more concrete about it. The difference between her and the majority of people is a difference of degree--or maybe she's just more confident in herself than the rest of us. Most people keep their inner weirdo safely tucked away where nobody can find it and laugh. Parker doesn't bother.

With an ensemble cast, it's sometimes hard to go deeply into every character's history. The writers can't spend every episode dropping backstory information and bringing in people like Archie or Nate's ex-wife Maggie. Also, some of Parker's charm is in the mystery of not knowing what makes her tick. Yet the more I learn about her as the series progresses, the more fascinated I become. I have no doubt that Parker will keep me guessing no matter how much the new season reveals about her. Other fans I've spoken to feel the same way.

The weird kid in school isn't exactly someone that people want to be friends with. Otherwise, he or she wouldn't be sitting at the back of the room. So, why do Leverage fans seem to care so much about Parker? Well, maybe a few of us were that kid in school, so we understand what might make Parker feel and act the way she does. More of us probably have "Parker moments," but in either case, when we see how capable and assured that Parker is, how comfortable she is in her own skin, we smile because we recognize ourselves in her and we think if she can be okay, maybe I am too.

Previous posts in this series: Week 1: Intro | Week 2: Nate Ford| Week 3: Alec Hardison

The Five Faces of Robin Hood: Alec Hardison

2010-07-10T08:05:00.000-07:00

Alec Hardison is without a doubt the Leverage character with whom I feel the strongest sense of identification. So much so, in fact, that I had a difficult time figuring out what to write about in this post. After all, I reasoned, who wouldn't feel that way about him. Then I remembered that not everyone would understand why hiring a bunch of girls to dress up in gold bikinis and fight with lightsabers is not only hilarious but awesome. Not everyone pumped a fist in the air and yelled, "Yes!" when Hardison gave what is becoming the battle cry of geeks worldwide:

"Age of the geek, baby! We run the world!"

It goes without saying that I am a geek. Hello? I'm writing a fandom blog. I won't claim to understand all of Hardison's technobabble. I know a fair share about computers, but I'm really more of a book and movie lover. That said, I still understand Hardison. I am the person whose friends and acquaintances are constantly staring at her as if she has grown a third head. (Most of my friends are two headed aliens from the planet Weird.) I have a talent for collecting bizarre and useless information, and when asked to explain something, I frequently take the scenic route, going off on tangents and making references that my audience has no context for whatsoever.

Like Nate, the average guy who becomes a tragic hero, Hardison's character type is not new. There is usually a geek or a nerd somewhere in an ensemble cast. On action-oriented shows, it tends to be a computer geek simply by virtue of the fact that the team needs a "tech person." What makes Hardison stand out is his humanity.

There's no question that he provides comic relief. His banter with Eliot, quips, and running monologues over the team's comsets are hilarious. Viewers with less nerd-like tendencies will probably find his references to Star Wars, Dr. Who, comic books, etc, to be funny for reasons completely different than mine.

However, he could very easily have been a caricature or a cardboard cut-out geek who filled the slot nicely, did all the predictable things that the tech guy is supposed to do on these shows, and occasionally got an episode in the vein of "Hardison gets to do something non-nerdy for a change." I'm sure it would have worked fine, but I'm very glad that the creative team on Leverage didn't take that road with him.

Hardison is funny, charming, self-assured, and he can be something of a bad-ass when he has to be. He doesn't like public speaking, but when called upon to impersonate a lawyer in Season 1, he came through beautifully. He has a love-interest who isn't a geek, and although he can be sweetly shy around her, he doesn't fumble. (Well. Unless they're pretending to kiss or she's naked.) Bottom line? He's a real person.

As a card-carrying geek, I'm happy to see a character who is so much like me on a television show. (Okay. Maybe Hardison is more charming than I am. A little.) I love watching Hardison impersonate an FBI agent or verbally spar with Eliot. I love that he's smooth and sophisticated when he wants to be, and yet he never ceases to be a geek. It gives me hope that the old cliche may, in fact, be destined for retirement. Even if not, as long as we have Hardison, the geeks of the world can vicariously stick out our tongues at everybody who gives us those strange looks.

I'm excited about where season three is taking him so far. I can't wait to see how things develop, and I'm especially glad about the pacing and development between him and Parker. There are a few things about the season that are making me nervous, but I have no doubt that Hardison will help bring the crew out on top--because yes, baby, geeks do run the world.

Previous posts in this series: Week 1: Intro | Week 2: Nate Ford

The Five Faces of Robin Hood: Nate Ford

2010-07-03T13:28:00.000-07:00

There is something about an underdog that draws me in even if I know that rooting for him is going to be painful. Sometimes it's all right, because there's a formula in place that dictates who's going to come out on top. That isn't the case with Nate Ford, but I'm in his corner anyway.

Nate is an average guy all the way around. He isn't especially good looking or athletic, nor is he really ugly or out of shape. He can't do a triple axle, but he won't win Clutz of the Year either. Unlike the other members of his crew, Nate is not a professional thief, or at least he wasn't until circumstances led him to a sudden change in careers.

Before that, he was an insurance investigator. He had a wife, a son, and although we never see it, the implication is that there was a house in the suburbs with a white picket fence and a swing set in the backyard. His one claim to fame was his ability to get inside the minds of the criminals he was supposed to catch. Even that came from years of experience rather than from some bizarre superpower or magical gift.

He had a reputation for two things: being very good at what he did, and being incorruptibly honest. Leverage Season 1 spends a lot of time giving the viewer subtle--or sometimes not so subtle--glimpses of a man who had earned the respect of his adversaries. The first two seasons also show us that Nate isn't entirely comfortable with his new role as the mastermind of a criminal crew. He takes pains to point out that he is not a thief--not like the others, even though he's now using his skills to steal things instead of trying to find them again.

Nate appeals to most viewers because he is like them. The majority of us are not thieves. We're not glamorous. If six guys jumped us in an alley, we'd probably be on the way to an intensive care unit within the next ten minutes. (It would take about 8 minutes for an ambulance to arrive.) We can't scale a building; crack a safe; or hack the White House e-mail system.

Like us, Nate held down a job, paid the bills, and generally obeyed the law. He was a good guy who worked hard and tried to do the right thing. Then his son got sick, and suddenly he saw that being a good guy didn't mean as much as he thought it did. The insurance company he worked for refused to pay for so-called experimental treatments. Nate lost his son, started drinking, and within a few years, everything else in his life fell apart.

It's not an especially original backstory, but it's compelling because most of us can empathize. We may not have lost a child, but we have all felt powerless over something in our lives. Many of us know what it's like to have our insurance companies dictate which treatments we can have or which medications we can take. A lot of us are down on our luck and out work right now; maybe we've also had to take a job we didn't want to take because it was the only one we could find. On a more philosophical level, almost everyone has had his or her view of the world shaken up by some unexpected trial at one point or another.

So, we feel for Nate because we understand him. When he takes a case, we know he's doing it because he identifies with the client as much as we do. We cheer when his plans work because he lets us vicariously stick it to the insurance company and the boss.

Of course, all is not happiness and sunshine in Sherwood Forrest. Nate's struggle with the bottle takes its toll on the team, and because we care about them, it takes its toll on us. When he's fighting the Sheriff, we expect Nate to win, but things are not that cut and dry when he's wrestling with himself.

I don't know where Season 3 will take him, and as much as I can empathize with him, as of this writing, I would still like to strangle him. It would be easier if Eliot could forcibly throw him back on the wagon and tie him there, but it doesn't work that way. Maybe that's why I keep watching, even when I have to peek through my fingers because I really don't want to look. If I knew for sure that everything was going to work out, he wouldn't really be an underdog, now would he?

Previous posts in this series: Week 1: Intro

Next Week: Hardison!

Leverage: The Five Faces of Robin Hood

2010-06-26T13:10:00.000-07:00

It's a simple premise. Take five people who don't trust each other, give them a common foe, and force them to work together. It's been done a hundred times on ensemble shows. Why does it need to be done again? And why has Leverage struck such a chord with its audience?

It needs to be done again because it says something. Too many shows today have weak, disjointed plots or no plots at all. They're full of characters who revel in their own dysfunction instead of seeing it as something to struggle against. Interpersonal dynamics are seldom allowed to develop past the stage of "alliance based on need." No one really trusts anyone else, no one wants to be where they are, and there is an ever-present sense that the fragile accord of the moment is about to be shattered under the stress of impending doom. We're told that this is gritty and realistic. My phrase for it is self indulgent and lazy.

In the age of reality TV, we've gotten used to shows that don't really say anything--or if they do, they say we should hold popularity contests for cash; parade the minutiae of our daily lives in front of a camera to excite the voyeuristic trend in post-modern culture; or engage a series of bizarre trials to see whose behavior can be the most extreme. There are exceptions of course. On rare occasions, I've seen reality shows rise above the level of old time carnival promoting to provide content that is thought provoking or at least well thought out. There have been a handful of contestants on talent shows whose music made me glad they had the opportunity to be heard. One or two even inspired me. (Take a wild guess.) Overall though, reality shows remind me in a very painful way of gladiator tournaments in the last days of the Roman Empire.

We need shows that speak to the best of human nature instead of the worst. We need accessible characters who can be selfless even when they don't want to be; who find that they are better and stronger when they work together; who maybe--just maybe--might like how it feels to help others. Leverage speaks to its audience because it does those things with wit and style.

Last week, I compared the show to Robin Hood. I made the observation that, with five characters in the role of Robin, most people would find one who looked like them. So, who are these wonderful characters I keep talking about? Over the next six weeks, I'll be answering that question in a blog series called The Five Faces of Robin Hood. Please check back next week for--

Holy crap, I can hear the clamor starting already!

"Six weeks? I thought you said five? I'm confused! And hey, what about..."

Okay. Okay. First let me say that the title of this post isn't entirely accurate. As I'm sure most fans know, when Gina Bellman (who plays Sophie Devereaux) went on maternity leave last season, Jeri Ryan joined the cast as Tara Cole, which brings the number of Robin Hoods up to six. The premise of the show, however, called for a five person team, and The Five Faces of Robin Hood is just a better sounding title.

I'm not dismissing Tara. In fact, she's my (second) favorite team member. I also love Sophie, and I'm really glad she'll be back for Season 3. So, I'll be blogging about both of the lovely grifters in turn.

For the moment, this is what the series look like:

July 3: Nate Ford
July 10: Alec Hardison
July 17: Parker

July 24: Sophie Devereaux

July 30: Tara Cole

August 5: Eliot Spencer

Brooklyn South (Fandom Listing)

2010-06-24T00:03:00.000-07:00

Brooklyn South

One of only a handful of modern police dramas I have enjoyed, this series was produced by Steven Bochco, who is more well known for his work on a similar show in the 80s: Hill Street Blues. Unfortunately however, CBS was unable to find a niche for this one. The characters were wonderfully drawn, and the show was well written, but it suffered from poor ratings and was cancelled after a single season.

I only discovered it after having watched another show with Yancy Butler, who plays Officer Anne-Marie Kersey. I had the good fortune of being able to pick up the series very cheap (about $10) and I'm glad I did!

Back To Fandoms Page

Castle (Fandom Listing)

2010-06-23T21:33:00.000-07:00

Castle

I checked this show out in 2009 because I was curious about the protagonist being a writer. Although the first season has some twitchy moments, I have to congratulate the creative team, because I've lost count of the times I found myself echoing Castle in his "writer" mode. There were even times I said his lines before he did. The most compelling character for me, though, is Kate Beckett, and she's the real reason I decided to tune in for season 2. I wanted to know what happened to her and if she found her mother's killer. I'm not sure at this point that we'll ever have the answer to that question, but I'm definitely glad I stuck around. Season 2 was top notch, and I'm eagerly waiting to see where things will go in Season 3.

Ships

Castle/Beckett (What else?)

Back To Fandoms Page

DCAU (Fandom Listing)

2010-06-23T17:39:00.000-07:00

DCAU (DC Animated Universe)

I'm including all the DCAU shows that I watch in a single post because they have the same continuity, so I consider them to be a metaseries.

I will say upfront, I'm not really into comics. I gave up reading them when I was a kid because I didn't like having to wait so long between issues and when I realized that different writers have handled the same comic at various points in history, I felt like I never knew what the "real" story was.

Weird? Maybe. But that's how I felt at the time.

Out of curiosity, I have used the internet to trace the stories around particular superheroes or hero teams that I like, and usually enjoy a good superhero movie, but I can't speak to how well something does or doesn't stick to the comic plots/characterizations.

DCAU Shows I watch:

Batman: TAS/The New Batman Adventures

BTAS is my favorite. I stuck out The New Batman Adventures just to see what happened, but I wasn't thrilled.

Superman: TAS/The New Batman/Superman Adventures

This series didn't quite live up to BTAS, and I think it's gotten a worse reputation than it deserves for that reason. It was still a good show in its own right, and I enjoyed it.

Batman: Beyond

I wasn't sure how I felt about this concept when the show started, but Terry McGinnis won me over despite himself.

Static Shock

One of those shows I wish would have lasted a LOT longer.

Justice League (JLA/JLU)

Given the choice, I prefer JLA, but again, I stuck with the story and I enjoyed it.

Back To Fandoms Page

Battlestar Galactica 2003 (Fandom Listing)

2010-06-23T16:45:00.000-07:00

Battlestar Galactica 2003 (BSG)

I'm including this show because my completest nature won't let me leave it out. Despite the widespread acclaim the series has received, including having been named among Time Magazine's Top 100 TV Shows of All Time, it has the dubious distinction of being one of only four shows I ever quit watching after I had watched two full seasons and become invested in the lives of the characters. This is even more remarkable because Edward James Olmos and Mary McDonnell are two of my favorite actors.

So, if you are a BSG fan, you can start sending me hate mail now, because if I ever post about this one, you will not like what I have to say.

Ships

(Yes, I did have some before I quit the show, and in my happy place, they still exist.)

Roslin/Adama

Kara/Lee

Saul/Ellen

Six/Gaius

Dee/Billy

Back To Fandoms Page

Battlestar Galactica-Original (Fandom Listing)

2010-06-23T16:15:00.000-07:00

Battlestar Galactica

Another show that is a fondly remembered part of my childhood. My favorite character was Adama. Between this show and Bonanza, Lorne Greene became permanently embedded in my subconscious as the model for father figures. The other big draw for me was the brother dynamic between Apollo and Starbuck.

It's on the list of shows I'd like to watch again, but until I do, I'm not going to be able to offer much commentary.

Back to Fandoms Page

Bionic Woman-Original (Fandom Listing)

2010-06-23T14:58:00.000-07:00

The Bionic Woman-(Original) (2)

This was my very first fandom. As most of my readers will probably know, it was a spin-off of The Six Million Dollar Man. Jaime Sommers appeared as a love interest for Steve Austin and was so well received that she was given her own series, which ran for three seasons. My affection for the show is based on a child's perspective and admiration for Jaime Sommers, so I can't offer a very balanced commentary. Hopefully, I'll get to watch the show again as an adult.

Ships

Jaime/Steve
Jaime/Chris

Back To Fandoms Page

Bionic Woman 2007 (Fandom Listing)

2010-06-23T14:13:00.000-07:00

Bionic Woman 2007 (3)

This show was one of the most unfortunate casualties of the WGA strike in 2007-2008. Although it was highly anticipated, the show struggled to find an audience and was ultimately cancelled after only 8 episodes. The premise and characters deviated quite a bit from the original, which I suspect was off-putting to some fans, but it far less different in spirit an tone than the reinvisioned Battlestar Galactica is from its source material.

I fell in love with it from the outset, and I believe that if the strike hadn't blown the entire 07-08 TV season off course, it would have found its footing. The characters were rich and complex, the relationships believable, and while the plot seemed too convoluted at times, this could have been remedied if time and care had been taken.

Ships

Jaime/Antonio*

Sarah/Jae

Ruth/Jonas

Back to Fandoms Page

Babylon 5 (Fandom Listing)

2010-06-23T13:47:00.000-07:00

Babylon 5 (1)

I discovered this show during its initial broadcast run on TNT. I was in my teens at the time, and since no one in my family liked it, I could only catch episodes here and there. Despite this, the show stayed with me and has become a strong influence on my science fiction. In 2010 I finally had the pleasure of seeing B5 in its entirety from start to finish. It is a remarkable experience and one that I recommend to anyone who enjoys the unfolding of a story. Season 5 has some weak spots in comparison to the other four, but from listening to the DVD commentaries, I gather that JMS was told to wrap up his storylines in s4 and subsequently got the greenlight for a final season. With that information in mind, it's pretty clear that the problem with season 5 is the loss of momentum from the previous year.

Ships

Sheridan/Delenn *

Susan/Marcus

Back to Fandoms Page

Leverage: The Awesomeness of Us.

2010-06-20T09:27:00.000-07:00

There is a strange and marvelous phenomenon sweeping the fandom garden. It's called Leverage, and if you haven't heard of it yet, you will. Actually, if you haven't heard of it yet, all I have to say is, you must live in an alternate reality.

Leverage runs on TNT, and I am about to explode with anticipation of tonight's season 3 premier. I love this show, folks. I love it in a way that is scary because I swore to myself that, after SG-1's cancellation, I would never allow myself to get this invested in a fandom again. Well, so much for that. Good job, Rose--or maybe, good job Leverage writers...

I discovered Leverage last year, and I have since devoured all 28 episodes. Twice. Soon after I found it, I began telling everyone I know, "This show is incredible. You must watch it." Then I found myself having to explain that, no, it isn't science fiction. It isn't fantasy. It's not a period drama. I love it anyway, and so do a lot of my friends who usually stick to genre shows.

Why? There are a lot of ways I can answer that. It's probably a little different for each person. That said, I can point to a lot of commonalities that I've observed between Leverage and my favorite science fiction shows.

Leverage is an ensemble show in which a team of professional thieves run elaborate con jobs on wealthy individuals or powerful corporations. Rather than just looking for a big score though, the team chooses their marks at the behest of their clientele: ordinary people that the targets have wronged. The characters are flawed but endearing misfits, and the storylines deal as much with their personal struggles as with the professional challenge of the week. Although the team is very good at what they do, things rarely go smoothly for them, which provides a satisfying mix of humor and tension. Plots are nice and twisty, even managing to surprise me a good part of the time--not an easy feat, as anyone who knows me will attest! All in all, it adds up to a compelling experience with enough humanity to keep viewers tuning in and enough escapism to offer a little break from our real problems.

Most of the science fiction I enjoy is not actually about spaceships, aliens, time travel, or high-tech gadgetry. Those things provide a backdrop that tickles the imagination of the viewer and allows the show/movie to deal with themes and ideas that are more difficult to approach in a contemporary setting. They usually feature a disparate but tightly knit group of characters who must routinely pool their skills and resources to defeat (or at least hold the line against) a larger and more powerful force. Star Wars makes it the most obvious: Rebel Alliance vs. Galactic Empire. Star Trek tends to be more metaphorical about it: explorers vs. the vast unknown. Other shows run the gamut in between.

Leverage pits the same kind of group against the most universal enemy concept that I know of: wealth and privilege. It's a show about finding a way for the average joe to come out on top after being victimized and dismissed. The lives of the main characters excite our imaginations the same way that aliens and ray-guns do. These guys put on new identities every week; they impersonate public officials; they pretend to be air marshals and FBI agents; they walk in the circles of the rich and powerful and nobody knows they don't belong. When they're done, they walk away with bags of money and rarely get caught. If by some fluke they are discovered, they escape. In short, they live out our fantasies. They are awesome. Rooting for them is rooting for ourselves.

There's a reason that robin hood stories are so common across time and culture. Robin Hood resonates. Especially in rough economic times, we want a hero whose allegiance is to ordinary people and who can ride in at the eleventh hour with a big bag of gold. The fact that the gold comes from the rich villain on the hill only makes us love our Robin Hood more. Leverage gives Robin Hood five faces. Most people will find one who looks like them. The individual cases make the premise more immediate and personal. Robin Hood isn't just trying to save England anymore. He (or she) is saving us.

I could go on. There's a lot more I could say, especially if I wanted to start analyzing the five faces of Robin Hood or something. Actually, that sounds like a good idea for a blog series. For now, I'll let the new episode speak for itself.

Whoooooooooo are you?

2010-06-18T16:54:00.000-07:00

That's the question of the hour, isn't it? The short answer is that I am a long-time fan of speculative fiction, movies and television. The longer answer is that I am a picky person who chooses her fandoms and fan-related activities carefully. I won't jump on every bandwagon that comes along, but when I do decide I like something, I will devour it until I know (almost) all there is to know.

And I have opinions. Lots of opinions. So many opinions that I decided I should find a place to write them all down. Hopefully, in the process I'll find a few people with similar ones to share with me.

I'm generally open minded, and I welcome intelligent discussion, whether or not you agree with what I have to say. Remember, though. I said intelligent. That means, if you have nothing to say except , "Ur rong! U suk!", you should find an adult education center and learn to speak in complete sentences, then find something else to do with your time.

Enjoy your stay!

(Oh, and anyone who can tell me who said, "Whoooooo are you?" gets today's secret prize.)