Blakes7 May 2001

blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se

84 participants
897 discussions

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

11 May '01

Harriet Monkhouse wrote: > >Jenny wrote: > >>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." > > > >The latter is proof that Gan was a computer genius. More a happy accident. 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. You're right, I never noticed that before. Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] Dayna's family
by Jenny Kaye 11 May '01

11 May '01

Tavia wrote: > > > >Harriet, quoting Dana responding to Jenny: > > >>> It might be a good idea if you went back into the archive and reread > >the emails between Tavia, Dana, Harriet, Fiona and myself on the subject > >of Hal Mellanby ... but basically what we came up with is that he's a > >hypocrite and a > > >>> liar. > >I feel my name being taken in vain here. As I recall, I entered the fray > >merely to suggest that Terry Nation's scripts might be most simply > >interpreted just as hack writing, rather than the ingenious, enjoyable but > >in the end rather implausible interpretations put forward predominantly by > >Fiona. Then why didn't you say they were implausible at the time and to her face? And why were you conceding at the end of the thread that there might be more to Nation than just a hack? > >I don't usually assign moral values to fictional constructs. Perhaps you should start? Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] Re: Gan's woman
by Jenny Kaye 11 May '01

11 May '01

This woman came back and said: > > > >That the other woman wrote: > >: Some woman said:-): > > > >: > >That some other woman said: > >: > > > >: That another woman wrote: > > > >You know, there's a reason for attribution lines. But-- but-- but-- when *Gan* calls people "my woman" it means he's being intimate and tender! Of course it does! So if I call somebody "woman," that means I like them, even love them! Doesn't it? And other reasons not > >to edit quoted material. I did attribute the thread in my post, and if > >my username doesn't appeal to you my signature is quite straightforward. What makes you think you were being singled out? > >This woman wrote: > >: Some woman said:-): > >Me, in fact. > > > >: > >That some other woman said: > > > >Thanks, that's very helpful. Sally, perhaps? Who knows? > >: That another woman wrote: > > > >And here I have no idea what you mean. Yourself? No idea at all. > >This is why one shouldn't edit out attributions. I think it's all the more reason why we should. > >: > >: <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.'> > >: > > > >: > >: If he'd said that, I'd have checked the tape for what show I'd got > >on > >: > >'cause it sure wouldn't be Blake's 7 :-) > > > >: The point I was making was that if the author wanted to be explicit about > >: Gan's connections to this "woman" then he could have easily done so. That > >: fact that he didn't is the point. > > > >And the point some other woman was making is that any other way of saying > >it would have carried different connotations less appropriate to the > >setting. Yes, but I don't agree. > >: > >: What Gan says - 'my woman' - is IMO perfectly in tune with the > >general > >: > >tone > >: > >: of the language used in the series, especially by people within the > >: > >: federation itself > > > >: Is that so? Give me some examples then. > > > >You weren't asking me, but here: > > > >SHRINKER: I never saw your woman. > > > >If you think Shrinker was going to be insulting to Avon about Anna at > >that point, you think he's far braver than I do. I have already answered this point in another email some days ago, but here we go again. Shrinker is a torturer. You are using the words of a torturer to justify Gan's use of the same words. Which is, if anything, *more* extreme than what I was saying. > >But since the comment was about tone, it's all in the ear of the listener, > >and not exactly susceptible to evidence. So if Gan had said, "Jenna, I am going to stand back and allow the Guardians to terrorise you throughout this episode" but had said it in a nice way you would then discount it? > >: You don't spill your emotions to > >: > >: people when you've spent your life not knowing who you can trust. > > > >: But in Time Squad Gan is saying that he has to stay with the crew of the > >: Liberator because he needs people he can "rely" on. That means he trusts > >: them. Please watch the episode. > > > >Please be a little less condescending. So, asking you to actually watch an episode before commenting on it is condescending? > >Trusting someone on a mission is very different than trusting someone with > >your emotional core. > > > >: Sorry, but as there is not one shred of evidence in the series to support > >: this speculation, I have to reject it. > > > >Well. So much for speculation, period. Good. Does that mean you are going to stop speculating now? > >: > >I think that one of the themes of the series is that nobody is > >squeaky- > >: > >clean. I interpret this as being because the Federation, the world > >: they're > >: > >in, doesn't allow them to be so clean. > > > >: I think it's more to do with them being members of the human race. > > > >If you like. Not much, no. > >: > >Back to Gan... to me, the *least* morally dubious statement he can > >make > >: > >is the one he does. Any elaboration would only give one reason to > >: > >dissect the statement for emotional falsity or lack of moral > >soundness. > >: > >What he says is straightforward and comprehensible, and not, to my > >ear, > >: > >sexist. > > > >: Then listen to it again:-) > > > >I hear it quite vividly in my recollection without having to play the > >tape again, I assure you. You can "assure" all you like but I still don't believe you, and until you do watch the episode, instead of relying on your "recollection" we aren't going to get anywhere. > > I don't see where you get off biting into me with a vicious ad hominem > > attack and then having the gall to sweeten it with a smiley face. It adds to the bite :-) It's called irony. > > You stink! :) Yet you're the one defending a murderer! And your logic is flawed! ;^) My logic is impeccable. And, you have absolutely no > > reason to attack me, Oh, I don't know, I can think of loads :-) > > except that apparently you're a big flaming > >asshole. Arsehole is better, less American. That Woman _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] Re: Gan's woman
by Jenny Kaye 11 May '01

11 May '01

"Hang the":-) DDJ wrote: Jenny Kaye wrote: > > > > > > > >My wife is not the same as "my woman". > > > > > > >Which might be because she's not his wife -- for any of a number of reasons > >(prohibitions against marriage in their grade; one of them in a situation > >where s/he's not free to marry because of family obligations or > >pre-existing marriage or financial inability to support a spouse). It "might be" that she is a rotting corpse and it's illegal to marry rotting corpses in the Federation. It "might be" that she is an android or really a man in disguise. Or an inflatable sea bird, or a kangaroo, or a plate of Spam. She "might be" a handgliding penguin from the planet Calufrax, who didn't have an entry visa. She "might be" a large stripy snake called Hector, or a shop window dummy, or she "might be" Sally Manton, or me, or she "might be" a cut out picture from a magazine. When > >I hear "my woman," it connotes a degree of intimacy/closeness beyond "my > >girlfriend" Does it now? So Jarvik, then, was really a kind and sensitive guy who just wanted to be intimate and close with Servalan, and all his ordering her about was just him being loving. -- the kind of closeness he'd have with a woman he wanted to > >marry but hadn't; However you want to paint it, though, that possessive is still there. Why is she "his" woman? What makes her "his" and not, oh, say, her own? at the same time, the term doesn't foreground the > >physical relationship the way "my lover" would. Or "my victim..." And not elaborating on the > >details seems in keeping both with Gan and the scene: That's true! it's not a > >confess-all-the-details situation, but a brief explanation. That's true! > >But one of Lennon's greatest love songs is titled "Woman" and conveys the > >opposite attitude : > > > >"Woman I know you understand > >The little child inside the man, > >Please remember my life is in your hands, > >And woman hold me close to your heart, > >However, distant don't keep us apart," Yes, but he doesn't use the possessive, does he? "My Woman I know you understand. The little child inside the man, Please remember your life is in my hands. And my woman, hold me close to your heart, However, distant don't keep us apart, Do that, and I will have to tear you apart." Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] Re: Gan's woman
by Jenny Kaye 11 May '01

11 May '01

Dana Shilling wrote: > > > >Jenny Kaye said: > > > From what what we have seen of Dana's previous "Pythonesque" humour, I'd > >say she was just joking here. Were you Dana? Please God say you were. > >It seems like a perfectly reasonable hypothesis to me, but we don't > >have the evidence either to prove or disprove it. Then it isn't a "reasonable hypothesis" then is it? PROSECUTING LAWYER: After shooting President Kennedy, the accused subjected himself to cryogenic freezing for 17 years, then, cunningly disguising himself as Mark Chapman, shot John Lennon. JUDGE: What's this got to do with the accused stealing a bicycle pump? PROSECUTING LAWYER: Nothing! But it seems like a perfectly reasonable hypothesis to me. JUDGE: Is that right? Case dismissed. Oh, and arrest that Prosecuting lawyer for contempt of court. > > > . The woman was > > > > >married to the trooper, but was "Gan's woman" by her own heart. > > > > >Here's an eerie idea for a fanfic-- what if Gan's woman (wife, lover, > >as > > > > >you will) was only injured, and transformed into a mutoid after the > > > > >incident? > > > > > > Or perhaps her intestines were ripped out by a herd of wildebeest! > >I'd be more inclined to read the former story than the latter Why? By the criteria you're using they are both equally valid :-). Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

new guests for Eclectic 21
by Judith Proctor 11 May '01

11 May '01

-- http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 - Fanzines for Blake's 7, B7 Filk songs, pictures, news, Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth Thomas, etc. (also non-Blake's 7 zines at http://www.knightwriter.org ) Redemption '03 21-23 Feb 2003 http://www.smof.com/redemption/

1 0

SFX card game
by Steve Rogerson 11 May '01

11 May '01

In the SFX special edition out in the shops in the UK, there is a card game. Each card contains the name and picture of an SF TV character plus rating on various attributes - I won't go into details of how to play it. I don't know if every issue has exactly the same set of cards, but as my set had some duplicates, I doubt it. However, contained in my set was the card for Kerr Avon. Here are his ratings (all out of 10): Kick ass ability: 7 Intellect: 9 Snogability: 6 Fashion sense: 5 Use of weapons: 9 Drinking capacity: 8 Real world alter ego: Peter Mandelson nine is pretty good, the only tens i could find were Robocop for use of weapons, Batman for kick ass and use of weapons, The Doctor for intellect, Buffy for snogability, Max (Dark Angel) for intellect and drinking capacity, Wolverine for kick ass ability, Buzz Lightyear for kick ass ability, Angel for snogability and Brains for intellect. Most of the cards didn't have a ten at all. In total, I've got 37 different cards plus four duplicates (Hans Solo, The Doctor, Vincent and Jim Phelps) if anyone has any swaps. -- cheers Steve Rogerson http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/steve.rogerson Redemption 03, 21-23 February 2003, Ashford, Kent Celebrating 25 years of Blake's 7 and 10 years of Babylon 5 http://www.smof.com/redemption

3 6

Re: [B7L] Re: Gan's woman
by Sally Manton 11 May '01

11 May '01

Dana wrote: <To seek revenge can lead to hell...but everyone does it, and seldom as well.> <g> Isn't that one of Travis's favourite tunes? (Apart from "We'll All Go Together When we Go", of course. _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

2 1

Re: [B7L] We can't *all* be geniuses ... (long)
by Jenny Kaye 11 May '01

11 May '01

"Sally Manton" wrote: > >This is getting unpleasant again, unfortunately I'm going to have to bail > >out and will *not* be addressing any reply, but in the interests of > >clarity: And I for one do not much like holding online discussions with people who effectively burst out crying as soon as you contradict their points. But in the interests of clarity: > >Me: > ><The second instance is an invalid example, IMO,> > >Jenny: > ><Is that right?> > > > >I'm sorry? As I said IMO, yes, it's right that it's IMO. It's very interesting how the IMO is used on this Lyst. Basically it is used to stifle any opinion different to your own. Here's a hypothetical example: PERSON ONE: IMO, Gan was always kind to animals. PERSON TWO: Where is the evidence? PERSON ONE: You never see him kill any and IMO that means he meant them well. PERSON TWO: But you never see him with animals at all. PERSON ONE: Look I said IMO okay, and I think you should say IMO as well, because it is just your opinion after all. PERSON TWO: Eh? There is no evidence to support your statement that "Gan is kind to animals". To say "That's my opinion" is not enough. PERSON ONE: But IMO there is no evidence to disprove it either. And again please qualify everything you say with "IMO". PERSON TWO: You have to base things on evidence, you can't just conjure things out of the air and say, it's valid because, "it's my opinion". PERSON ONE: Yes I can. IMO all interpretations are equally valid. PERSON TWO: No they aren't. PERSON ONE: IMO, they are. PERSON TWO: Based on what? PERSON ONE: Based on my opinion, IMO. PERSON TWO: That is totally mad. PERSON ONE: IMO it isn't. PERSON TWO: So if I were to say, "Soolin was an android" then that would be valid, as there is no evidence to prove that she was not an android. PERSON ONE: If you put IMO in front of it, yes. PERSON TWO: But IMO that isn't far. PERSON TWO: In your opinion why? PERSON ONE: Because it means that anything I say is immediately qualified, and although you are doing the same, there are more people on this sight that share your opinion than will, by definition, share my "new" take on a particular scene or character. Therefore, the dominant opinion will always triumph. PERSON TWO: So what? PERSON ONE: So what? It means that all debate is stifled. It means that "IMO" is being used as a control device. PERSON TWO: That's *your interpretation* IMO. PERSON ONE: ARRRRRGH!!! > ><Yes, but I don't think it's meant to show stupidity, just Gan's true > >nature.> > > > >That is *your interpretation*. Other people do not see the evidence the > >same way. See above. > > I think it shows that it moments of stress he acts like any other > >average human being. Is it accepted that other people do not have to agree > >with our interpretation, or is it not? ARRRRRGH!!! It is accepted that if people are going to put forward an "interpretation," they have to justify it with something more substantial than just "IM bloody O" > ><Hostage is a dog's dinner of an episode, I'll grant you that. Quite why > >it's such a mess, I don't know. Time maybe, or perhaps it was a last minute > >replacement script. Nation was going to write the last two episodes of > >series two but then didn't. That must have put a huge last minute strain on > >everyone.> > > > >What has that got to do with it? It means what it says. If the production staff is under stress, more mistakes are going to be made. If Gan's actions 'show his true nature', > >Avon's show moments of stupidity. You can't have it both ways. Please read my whole email before replying. Thank you. > ><If Avon sent a message to Space Command Headquarters (anonymously > >remember), it would be logical for Servalan/her staff to send the nearest > >pursuit ship to Exbar, which would have rotten there in a very short > >period > >of time; Travis would have been dealt with by the time Blake got into in > >his > >shiny suit. Unfortunately Servalan herself got interested and decided to > >come along, which meant a long delay,> > > > >To quote you on other threads, the business about who was sent and how long > >they might have been delayed is not in the script. No, because the author is relying on the audience to have the intelligence to work it out. A smart writer doesn't give his audience everything on a plate. This is why Terry Nation gets mentioned at academic conferences, and none of the hacks working on Farscape do. Avon was taking a huge > >and totally unjustified risk with Blake's life Blake wants to willingly walk into a trap set by Travis, therefore the risk Avon takes isn't unjustified. - the fact that he then gets > >upset about it shows he didn't think. No. It shows that his plan has backfired. > ><He didn't know Sara was armed.> > > > >You don't know that. Yes I do. Watch the episode. The only thing he *does* know is that she's murdered > >two people, not something that a cautious man should treat lightly. The > >rest is *your interpretation*. ARRRRRRRGH!!!!! (This is beginning to sound awfully familiar). Yes it is, isn't it? How very strange. I wonder what could be happening? > ><Where does it say that the gun was in another room? He could have simply > >fallen asleep in the bath. After all, after the events on Terminal they all > >must have been both physically and emotionally exhausted.> > > > >Exhaustion or not, falling asleep in the bath would have been even > >stupider. You don't fall asleep in the bath on purpose. You could drown. > ><Why was Norl's story "incredibly silly"?> > > > >Oh come on. Norl insisted on Vila going down alone - unarmed - with no way > >to call for help - and it's made clear that he made damn sure Tarrant > >didn't get to see or hear anything while he was there. The whole set-up *screams* > >set-up. Vila does not want to go down and has to be bullied by Tarrant. Tarrant, for his part, is also suspicious but says that he has no choice: they need the crystals and the only way they can get them is by accepting their terms, even if that means sacrificing Vila. CALLY: What's wrong with Vila? TARRANT: I scared him a little. CALLY: That must have been difficult. TARRANT: I had no choice, Cally. We've got to have those crystals for the weaponry system. CALLY: So we do a swap, they give us the crystals, we give them Vila. TARRANT: They only want his help. CALLY: Then why are they insisting that he goes down alone? TARRANT: I don't know, maybe outsiders make them nervous. CALLY: Did you? [Avon enters] TARRANT: Me? Who could be nervous of me? CALLY: Only Vila, it seems. TARRANT: We've no reason to think they'll harm him. AVON: And less reason to care? > ><Because Gan was not acting like a raging monster and was now calm. She > >didn't know that he was a psychopathic killer with a hatred of women.> > > > >Neither do we, so that doesn't count. Yes we do. Watch the bloody episode again! What we do know is that she knows he > >tried to kill two members of the crew when the limiter was malfunctioning > >and it hasn't been fixed. See above. She can't know if it's going to malfunction > >again. She believes that the restraints are "barbaric" Gan speaks to her kindly. Cally says to him "When the pain became to much for you, you became violent" Gan is not in pain now. He says he's uncomfortable, "I would like to sit up. Please." Cally's heart melts and she releases the restraints goes over the the medical kit and starts to preparing him a power. Seconds later Gan has turned her round and is slowly strangling her. He is smiling as he does it. Cally's *interpretation* is wrong. Gan was not acting violently because he was in pain. I am in pain though, having to point out the blatantly obvious to you. > ><Because Servalan--who operated the teleport in Terminal--would therefore > >be > >able to tell if she was operating the wrong controls and would have ordered > >Shad to shoot her if she did anything dodgy.> > > > >What? Sorry, but what has Terminal got to do with it? This is the first > >time Servalan's been on the ship. And the last time, before Terminal. So she has to have learned about the teleport controls sometime before Terminal. Therefore, in Harvest. And - to quote one of your own arguments - > >since she isn't shown to have learned about the controls beforehand, it > >didn't happen. It did happen because she operated them in Terminal. > ><Anyway the two times people are teleported into space are in S1 and S2, > >before Dayna joined the crew-- we don't know that she knows how or even > >that it's possible.> > > > >No one taught the earlier people either. Avon and Jenna discuss it in Cygnus Alpha: JENNA: (REFERRING TO THE TELEPORT CONTROLS) Is there maximum range on this? AVON: Of course. I don't know what it is though. JENNA: What would happen if you teleported someone beyond the maximum range? AVON: I imagine that they would appear momentarily in space and then that their atoms would be scattered to the solar winds. Hey, if you go and watch the episode yourself, you'll see the same scene too. > > It's sheer common sense. Not to Jenna; she had to ask Avon. > ><Why in MoD he left the unsealed box with an incredibly valuable neutrotope > >lying around where at the first bump it would fall?> > ><It was in a sealed padded box in the middle of a table with Gan sat in > >front of it. It's Gan that lets it drop. Gan again, see?> > > > >If it's sealed, why does it fall open, please? When reviewing this scene on frame by frame it does appear to open fractionally. The reason? It's a crap prop. There are many things in B7 (in fact in many productions, remember the stormstrooper cracking his head on the door in Star Wars. Or the guard wearing a wristwatch in Ben Hur) that happen but have nothing to do with the script. This is one of them. In the next scene Blake is seen taping the green lock thingy. Confirming that in the script the thing was supposed to have been locked. > ><Because she wanted insurance. And Zeeona being on Xenon Base is the best > >insurance you can possibly have. Notice also that Soolin dislikes Zukan > >(which turns out to be a much smarter action than Avon's)-- "spite" is a > >decent motivation.> > > > >I'm afraid that doesn't even make sense to me. No. I didn't think it would. The alliance is barely > >hanging together because of mutual distrust and suspicion, and Soolin > >thinks a good insurance is to incur the hatred of the figurehead/supplier of the > >antidote? You can do things to spite people, and them not find out about it. > > This is a *long-term* plan, remember; But it's a short term betrayal. If a traitor is going to show their hand it's going to be sooner rather than later. or do they intend to keep > >Zeeona there for years and hope Zukan comes round before he finds a way to > >get even? Zukan wouldn't have know anything if he hadn't betrayed them in the first place. He takes a lot of convincing when they do tell him. Perhaps this is another episode you should watch. > ><As Vila had no idea that Blake is under control at that point, and Blake > >is > >the leader, it makes perfect sense.> > > > >Yes he *does* know, they've all been talking about it non-stop since the > >episode started!!! But Blake convinces him that it is all a conspiracy, and he believes Blake. > > > ><They argue with Blake. Blake tells them that Ven Glynd has a plan and a > >way of ousting Servalan without bloodshed, but that he won't tell them until > >they get back on the Liberator. He is rational and lucid (remember that > >they > >don't have any actual proof at this point that his mind is being > >controlled);> > > > >No, of course, the tone and all those all those 'renounce renounce' bits at > >the start were an illusion. Sorry, that *was* sarcasm, Well, I did wonder. That was also sarcasm, by the way. but they know damn > >well that he's having mind problems, and they know the tone that caused the > >problems was heard just before he re-routed them to the asteroid to pick up > >the mummy, so it wouldn't take three seconds to work out they're linked. They know that he's having mind problems, and they know the tone is connected to it, and they apparently suspect that it has something to do with the asteroid-- but they have no proof. Throughout they talk in terms of "ifs" and "maybes"; Cally says that "if" they are using a transmitter, there must be someone there to operate it. Suggesting that they are, wisely, giving the scenario the benefit of the doubt; they are wary, but as they have no conclusive proof as to what is going on, they are playing along with it until somebody shows his hand. > >Yes, they do as he says. Avon almost *always* does what Blake wants him to, > >even when it's stupid. That doesn't make it not stupid. Really? So Avon breaks out of the rest room earlier in the episode and orders Vila to disobey Blake's instructions because it's what Blake wants him to do? Avon has a heightened sense of self-preservation. > ><(Jenna doesn't have *many* 'where-in-the-world-have-I-put-my-brain' > >moments, but she does seem to persistently be several steps behind Avon and > >Blake (the dreaded 'what's going on, Blake?' bits) so that they have to > >explain things to her - Redemption is especially bad on this point).> > ><So? Reading that episode back, she doesn't seem to ask any more questions > >than Vila or Gan.> > > > >One expects better from Jenna and yes, IMO she does ask 'what's going on' > >more than they do here. "In your opinion," not that you've actually checked it at all. >YMMV. What does this mean? I suspect it's some kind of more virulent form of IMO. > > > >I'm not even going to touch your view of SLD, because we're clearly > >watching > >completely different versions of the episode. In other words it contradicts your fanon. A pity. > ><Or that Jenna *saw* their discarded handcuffs in Bounty and said > >nothing???> > ><BECAUSE SHE WAS ONLY **PRETENDING** TO BE ON TARVIN'S SIDE. Next time > >watch > >the episode.> > > > ><Deep sigh> *I* have watched it. Well done. A change is as good as a rest I suppose. > > I know she was only pretending. Now you do. *They* > >don't know that - and from the dialogue after she leaves, they ****still > >don't work it out****, even though she noticed the handcuffs rather > >pointedly. 1/ She notices the handcuffs and so do the audience in a damned great close-up *****but that doesn't necessary mean that the rest of the crew noticed that she noticed them*****. 2/ We hear her kick the handcuffs during that damned great close-up, and we hear it ***** but is doesn't necessary mean that the rest of the crew heard it, nor that the noise meant to them that she had kicked the handcuffs*****. If you think the handcuffs were in too obvious a position for Jenna not to notice then that's the fault of the director not the script. Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

2 1

Re: [B7L] Re: Gan's woman
by Jenny Kaye 11 May '01

11 May '01

Dana Shilling wrote: > > > >Jenny Kaye said: > > > 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. > >Maybe the author put all that into the script, and the actors flat-out > >refused to play the scene that way. Quite the opposite. In a recent offline discussion, I was told that during filming David Jackson wanted Gan to cry during the recording of that scene, and even did the first take that way. But it was vetoed by the Gallery. > >PS--I can just hear Gan singing "Bess, you is my woman now...." I doubt it. Murderers generally don't like assigning names to their victims. Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

← Newer
1
...
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
...
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