recreational vicodin
So, my two biggest crushes at the moment both sleep in the nude. Huh. *grins* And, Hugh, honey, you are sexy. No, not in the typical way. Perhaps there's no rhyme or reason for it. But it's there. Scruffy and self-deprecating and hilarious and sexeh. House is sexy, too, but in a different way. Possibly because he's so scarred and definitely because he's so snarky.
To whomever could possibly be in charge of such things: please make Dom wear hats more often.
People's sexiest blahblahblah is arbitrary and idiotic as all lists are. But DDK, Naveen, Viggo and Hugh work for me, yes indeedy. There might be others I like on the list, but I can't be arsed to look it up.
iTunes has celebrity playlists by Daniel Radcliffe and Rupert Grint. Rather good too. I love how Dan wrote these detailed, eloquent passages for each song. Meanwhile, Rupert basically described each of his selections with, "Cool track." *snerk*
And finally, "Steve Jones' Diary" skit on TV's Craig! Big burly punk-rocker with pink fuzzy slippers. Price-friggin-less! If I did a "sexiest men" list, Ferguson would be there. *whipcrack* ;)
Goodwin said they took the "good" people. But did we actually see any of the so-dubbed "good" folks? Did we get any true insight into their characters? This makes it even more curious as there is no litmus test for the Others' criteria regarding goodness. We can certainly assume the children are good, or at least young enough to be re-moulded, impressionable and relatively plastic (unless you go by Freud's theory that our personalities are basically formed by age six, but whatever). Then, what of the other "taken" survivors? We can deduce, guesstimating why the castaways we know aren't "good." However, there's so much gray area there that my head aches just attempting to consider thinking about it. Oi.
Also, how could the Others determine goodness of character in less than 24 hours?? The first batch was taken right away. Hmm.
If this leads into the theory (which seemed--and still kinda sorta does seem--sketchy at best) that the plane was brought down not by a fluke, but intentionally, then... well... oh, my brain is twitching again.
Personally, I don't think anyone is absolutely good, children (of a certain age perhaps) included. That is my RL theory, not just pertaining to the series. This creates complications in reality, but great drama in fictionland. What makes most if not all of the castaways so compelling to me is their flaws, from the tiny, annoying quirks to the more serious violations.
Wait, I get it! Good people = boring. It's a dramatic device. And the Others are really the writers and producers yanking people off-screen with a big old vaudevillian cane. Ha.
Eko rocks. But I was hoping we'd learn more about him with an entire episode dedicated to his small group of survivors. What we learned appears to be that a.) he's a spiritual if not religious man (the bible-gazing didn't confirm anything, really, did it?), b.) he's compassionate (which I think we already knew) and c.) he's an efficient mute. Referring back to the "good" issue, if Eko is not a good person by helping survivors and pulling bodies from the water to bury them respectfully, then... what the hell?
I still don't know what makes Ana Lucia tick. Guess we'll need her flashback to gain further insight there. Dammit, she made me cry though. Crying's contagious. Can't help but wonder if the Ana-haters will change their minds after this episode. I suspect a few of them are determined to hate her regardless of any character development that conceivably thwarts such negative opinion. More power to 'em. I find it impossible to hate any of the characters, though I am bored by a couple.
That said: Ana-girl, careful with Sayid, babe. *wags finger*
The quasi-neurotic babbling of Libby combined with the terse, precise manner in which she twisted and set that man's leg scares me. She's a live wire, that girl.
Cindy. That's the Aussie flight attendant's name, right? I liked her. Why'd they have to snatch into the abyss of Otherness?
Bernard's sniveling almost made me like him less. He just needs his Rose is all. *pets*
Nice sleight of hand with Nathan and Goodwin. Although, as with most sleights of hand, you could catch the turnabout well before it happened, they did a sufficient job of setting up Nathan as the tailies' Ethan, right down to the name, place of origin and rather void expression. Should've known it was Goodwin from the moment he mentioned he was in the Peace Corps. Do you think that's how he got on the island? Or was it just a lie?
Did anyone else find that, at certain angles, Goodwin looked somewhat Bean-ish?
Not only was the repetition at the end of the episode gratuitous, but it was shot in that syrupy slightly-slower-than-real-time way that is typically reserved for promotional adverts and, well, commercials in general. I won't deny that the average American is rather thick, but I like to think the average Lost is a tiny bit more clever and thus... we do not need to see this stuff again. Seriously, I love well-used repetition. It's essential to music for a reason and, when done economically and properly-timed, it can prove terrifically potent in tv and film. But the repetition in this season's Lost has begun to feel like filler.
Next week looks intense. And, whee, I'm so thrilled next week will actually have new Lost and House! I know it's sweeps, but don't they usually revert to repeats during Thanksgiving week? So yay! :)
To whomever could possibly be in charge of such things: please make Dom wear hats more often.
People's sexiest blahblahblah is arbitrary and idiotic as all lists are. But DDK, Naveen, Viggo and Hugh work for me, yes indeedy. There might be others I like on the list, but I can't be arsed to look it up.
iTunes has celebrity playlists by Daniel Radcliffe and Rupert Grint. Rather good too. I love how Dan wrote these detailed, eloquent passages for each song. Meanwhile, Rupert basically described each of his selections with, "Cool track." *snerk*
And finally, "Steve Jones' Diary" skit on TV's Craig! Big burly punk-rocker with pink fuzzy slippers. Price-friggin-less! If I did a "sexiest men" list, Ferguson would be there. *whipcrack* ;)
Goodwin said they took the "good" people. But did we actually see any of the so-dubbed "good" folks? Did we get any true insight into their characters? This makes it even more curious as there is no litmus test for the Others' criteria regarding goodness. We can certainly assume the children are good, or at least young enough to be re-moulded, impressionable and relatively plastic (unless you go by Freud's theory that our personalities are basically formed by age six, but whatever). Then, what of the other "taken" survivors? We can deduce, guesstimating why the castaways we know aren't "good." However, there's so much gray area there that my head aches just attempting to consider thinking about it. Oi.
Also, how could the Others determine goodness of character in less than 24 hours?? The first batch was taken right away. Hmm.
If this leads into the theory (which seemed--and still kinda sorta does seem--sketchy at best) that the plane was brought down not by a fluke, but intentionally, then... well... oh, my brain is twitching again.
Personally, I don't think anyone is absolutely good, children (of a certain age perhaps) included. That is my RL theory, not just pertaining to the series. This creates complications in reality, but great drama in fictionland. What makes most if not all of the castaways so compelling to me is their flaws, from the tiny, annoying quirks to the more serious violations.
Wait, I get it! Good people = boring. It's a dramatic device. And the Others are really the writers and producers yanking people off-screen with a big old vaudevillian cane. Ha.
Eko rocks. But I was hoping we'd learn more about him with an entire episode dedicated to his small group of survivors. What we learned appears to be that a.) he's a spiritual if not religious man (the bible-gazing didn't confirm anything, really, did it?), b.) he's compassionate (which I think we already knew) and c.) he's an efficient mute. Referring back to the "good" issue, if Eko is not a good person by helping survivors and pulling bodies from the water to bury them respectfully, then... what the hell?
I still don't know what makes Ana Lucia tick. Guess we'll need her flashback to gain further insight there. Dammit, she made me cry though. Crying's contagious. Can't help but wonder if the Ana-haters will change their minds after this episode. I suspect a few of them are determined to hate her regardless of any character development that conceivably thwarts such negative opinion. More power to 'em. I find it impossible to hate any of the characters, though I am bored by a couple.
That said: Ana-girl, careful with Sayid, babe. *wags finger*
The quasi-neurotic babbling of Libby combined with the terse, precise manner in which she twisted and set that man's leg scares me. She's a live wire, that girl.
Cindy. That's the Aussie flight attendant's name, right? I liked her. Why'd they have to snatch into the abyss of Otherness?
Bernard's sniveling almost made me like him less. He just needs his Rose is all. *pets*
Nice sleight of hand with Nathan and Goodwin. Although, as with most sleights of hand, you could catch the turnabout well before it happened, they did a sufficient job of setting up Nathan as the tailies' Ethan, right down to the name, place of origin and rather void expression. Should've known it was Goodwin from the moment he mentioned he was in the Peace Corps. Do you think that's how he got on the island? Or was it just a lie?
Did anyone else find that, at certain angles, Goodwin looked somewhat Bean-ish?
Not only was the repetition at the end of the episode gratuitous, but it was shot in that syrupy slightly-slower-than-real-time way that is typically reserved for promotional adverts and, well, commercials in general. I won't deny that the average American is rather thick, but I like to think the average Lost is a tiny bit more clever and thus... we do not need to see this stuff again. Seriously, I love well-used repetition. It's essential to music for a reason and, when done economically and properly-timed, it can prove terrifically potent in tv and film. But the repetition in this season's Lost has begun to feel like filler.
Next week looks intense. And, whee, I'm so thrilled next week will actually have new Lost and House! I know it's sweeps, but don't they usually revert to repeats during Thanksgiving week? So yay! :)