Blakes7 May 2001

blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se

84 participants
897 discussions

ttfn
by Una McCormack 11 May '01

11 May '01

I'm going no mail in preparation for my jolly to the US, so I'll be chat to you all at the end of the month. Play nicely and have fun! Una --------- Sooty. He is the hollow bear, he is the stuffed bear. Headpiece filled with straw, alas!

1 0

New Guests at Eclectic 21
by sue wadsworth-ladkin 11 May '01

11 May '01

Hi Chaps Just thought you might like to know there are a further two confirmed guests at Eclectic 21; Sylvia Anderson, co-creator of Stingray, Thunderbirds, UFO and Space 1999 and also Andrew Sewell, one of the producer's of the forthcoming Blakes 7 movie. There are still some places left, so if you want to get your registrations in download a form from the website www.eclectic21.co.uk or telephone 01422 376031. Sue Wadsworth-Ladkin _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] We can't all be Geniuses
by Sally Manton 11 May '01

11 May '01

Harriet wrote: <A minute earlier, Avon tells Blake he can't get control of the systems. After Gan tears a couple of sections out, Avon has it sorted in no time. Gan cut the Gordian knot for him.> <gurgle> proof positive that one Golden Rule survives (more or less) into the future - if any mechanical device won't work, try kicking it. _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] Re: McVeigh
by Sally Manton 11 May '01

11 May '01

Harriet wrote: <I can understand if no one feels like having the Blake-at-Star-One thing just now, but it did make me pause to think about why McVeigh feels wrong and Blake mostly right.> Probably a whole raft of reasons, but I'll try. All opinions my own, as usual. Is it about the innocents being killed? Noooo ... not entirely. I've seen pictures of children killed by Allied bombing in the war (please note, I am talking about those raids aimed at military targets here, not terror bombing) and though I might find it hard to call *it* 'right', I don't think of it as horrendously 'wrong' in the same way as I do the Oklahoma bombing. My instinctive reaction is that if they were aiming at legitimate military targets, in a 'just' war (those words 'if' and 'just' is both important and extremely personal, something everyone needs to sort out for themselves) then I can say they were 'right' in spite of the unplanned (though not unforseen) consequences. Possibly the particular action, in hindsight, was wrong, but they were right to fight and that does count for something. I can understand and empathise with what they were trying to achieve; I simply have no way to do that with McVeigh. Which brings it back, I suppose, to the cause in question. Maybe it's (at least partly) because many fans *can* understand and empathise with Blake's central motive of destroying a tyranny, (even if disagreeing loudly the means he uses) that he is in that different moral basket. And I've also no doubt part of it *is* because they're all fictional. After all - to take the process one step further - look at Servalan, who destroyed a whole race (no doubt including infant Auranar who would have looked just as pathetic in photographs) for selfish reasons. Yet many fans still admire her and even cheer in those episodes where she wins. Even *she* doesn't feel 'wrong' in the same, visceral way, because it's removed by the fiction and the fantasy. _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

We can't all be Geniuses
by Helen Krummenacker 11 May '01

11 May '01

> He's not stupid. He doesn't act stupid. It's just the company he > keeps. > > Jenny said (of Gan): Oh, he does act stupid. There's a lot of Gan's actions which are put > down by > a lot of people (including the crew) to his being stupid-- not > checking to > see if Jenna was behind him on Cephlon, or tearing out the computer > banks in > "Breakdown." But if he's doing these things, and he's not stupid, why > is he > doing them? > Breakdown-- he has very strange things going on in his brain because his limiter is malfunctioning. Maybe the pretty sparkling lights irritated him. Maybe he was getting revenge on the computers for all the times he didn't know what button to press. I cannot see that as typical behavior for him. On Cephlon, I believe everyone was on board ship before anyone noticed Jenna missing? Does that mean Vila and Avon are also stupid? Or that when one is on a very hostile planet one doesn't always look around to see if everyone else is okay, especially if the other person is believed to be comptetent in a dangerous situation.

2 1

Re: [B7L] Re: Blakes7 digest, Vol 1 #406 - 15 msgs
by Jenny Kaye 11 May '01

11 May '01

Helen Krummenacker wrote:> > > Suppose he'd said, 'a trooper killed Bobby. She meant everything to > > > me. We > > > were to be married. When she died, a part of me died as well.' But he > > > doesn't say that, or anything like it. And the reason he doesn't is > > > because > > > the author is trying to tell us something. > > > > > > > > >Yes, the author is saying, "I'm much better at plotting and writing > >clever, snappy dialogue than deeply emotional stuff." But that isn't true. Nation in the past has written some very good "deep emotional stuff." Have you ever watched Survivors? Also the series was script edited by Chris Boucher, another good writer, who can do the "deep emotional stuff" when required (or haven't you seen Rumours of Death?). Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

We can't *all* be geniuses ... (was: moloch/limiters)
by Sally Manton 11 May '01

11 May '01

Julia writes: <As for common sense, the other men all occasionally manage to give the impression that they shouldn't be allowed out without a keeper. (Me being an A-B junkie, I find it highly amusing that the worst of them (IMO) in this respect should appoint himself as keeper to one of the others.)> <chortle> ain't it the truth ... _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: SFX card game
by Helen Krummenacker 11 May '01

11 May '01

> Why would women fancy *him*?") > > Outwith the ranks of B7 fandom, I've observed that women seem much > less > inclined to drool over Avon. Stephen Grief, now, that's another story. > Doesn't prove anything. Would a woman who wasn't a fan of Buffy or Angel consider Angel a 10 in snoggability? I like the shows and *I* don't see the appeal-- he's all right for a friend, but (unloike Avon, who a girl could hope just has had bad luck when it comes to relationships), if Angel ever really loved you, it wouldn't be safe to be together for SURE. Not to mention, he gets a real ugly face sometimes, drinks pig's blood which must make his breath smell, mopes frequently... just to name a few problems. Stephen Greif may appeal to non-fans, but does Travis? We are talking about characters, not actors, on the cards. Likewise, Paul Darrow would of neccessity have a much lowered snoggability rating in comparision to the character, even at the same age; he's a smoker, and non-smokers generally consider it a turnoff to kiss a smoker. Now I'm wondering if the drinking capacity rating was based on the actor rather than the character.

2 1

language in the Federation
by Alison Page 11 May '01

11 May '01

Sally talking about Federation language >>It *is* harsher than what we're used to a lot of the time, more reticent and much less effusive. In other words, more 'British' :-) I read an interview with Robert Altman a couple of days ago. He is using exclusively British actors in his next film (admittedly set in England) and he explained it thus (I paraphrase) that British people are all 'actors' because the society puts a premium on disguising emotion, or revealing it only obliquely. He could have said 'You are all insincere and devious', but he was talking to a British reporter so perhaps he was being tactful. Alison ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com **********************************************************************

1 0

Re: Blake and McVeigh
by Alison Page 11 May '01

11 May '01

Sondra said - >If Blake had thrown a bomb into a building full of innocents (children or not), I wouldn't be defending him. I must say this is a good answer. And it would be possible for Blake, or any of the characters, to have committed acts which were on different sides of that line, in different episodes Alison ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com **********************************************************************

1 0

← Newer
1
...
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
...
90
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

Blakes7 May 2001