Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Comments on Numb3rs (TV show, 2005)
I think I agree with just about everything said in the first two comments of this thread:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0433309/board/thread/189667747
Including that I think Liz is attractive (though I'm a straight female) and Robin seems a little dull as a character. If they'd given her more time on the show, she/her relationship with Don might have been better.
I don't mind that they stretch some of the math until it breaks. :-p I recognize that a lot of this is only possible in TV-world, but I generally like the characters and I think David Krumholtz does a good job of really sounding like he BELIEVES what he's saying and he makes me believe that his character is really that passionate about math.
I sympathize with the people who are annoyed by the relationships and just want to hear the math parts (however bogus--or maybe not-bogus, I'm no math expert--it is, they usually make it sound interesting and plausible); but since I like most of the characters, I don't mind a little relationship drama. Sometimes it's annoying, sometimes it's good. Larry can be really funny, really annoying, or just weird. The cast went through some changes (and people randomly disappear for an episode or two all the time. They usually throw in 1 or 2 lines to explain their absence, which I appreciate, but it always feels a little odd when somebody is suddenly just gone.).
I miss Megan; she was a good character. What happened to her actress? I liked her relationship with Larry, after she left, his character changed (which is fine, and I guess somewhat realistic...actually he changed after his trip into space, which I suppose would also probably change a person significantly!) Diane Farr doesn't seem like the most attractive woman in the world to me, and her voice is a little more nasal than is usual...but I really liked her; and her leaving the series seemed sort of abrupt, which makes me wonder if there was something else going on (her leaving for another show, a contract or salary dispute...?)
I also wish Millie (Mildred, played by Kathy Najimy) was in more episodes...I think she was only in 6, but even in those, she actually had an arc. I started out hating her in her first episode, and loving her by her last episode. I can understand why some people might not like her, but I loved her! She is a little bitchy at first...and she points out a problem with Amita/Amita's sort of putting Charlie first...but a little unfair...
The constantly rotating cast is both a strength and a weakness of the show.
I kinda feel that the math starts to REALLY take a backseat around Season 5...they start having lots of fun with special effects and it was more about creating pretty visuals. I liked the little throwback to Season 1 (first episode?) with David explaining the sprinkler analogy in Season 5 Episode 21, "Disturbed".
After awhile, it seemed like the "explanations" were just token speeches to showcase their fun new effects and sometimes were unclear. After the first season or two they just stop arguing with him about how or why or whether or not it will work, and instead they just listen to him talk, nod, and turn him loose. Though they tried to show that the agents actually understood what he's doing by having Liz occasionally throw in comments that show she remembers something he said before, or in another episode.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0433309/board/thread/189667747
Including that I think Liz is attractive (though I'm a straight female) and Robin seems a little dull as a character. If they'd given her more time on the show, she/her relationship with Don might have been better.
I don't mind that they stretch some of the math until it breaks. :-p I recognize that a lot of this is only possible in TV-world, but I generally like the characters and I think David Krumholtz does a good job of really sounding like he BELIEVES what he's saying and he makes me believe that his character is really that passionate about math.
I sympathize with the people who are annoyed by the relationships and just want to hear the math parts (however bogus--or maybe not-bogus, I'm no math expert--it is, they usually make it sound interesting and plausible); but since I like most of the characters, I don't mind a little relationship drama. Sometimes it's annoying, sometimes it's good. Larry can be really funny, really annoying, or just weird. The cast went through some changes (and people randomly disappear for an episode or two all the time. They usually throw in 1 or 2 lines to explain their absence, which I appreciate, but it always feels a little odd when somebody is suddenly just gone.).
I miss Megan; she was a good character. What happened to her actress? I liked her relationship with Larry, after she left, his character changed (which is fine, and I guess somewhat realistic...actually he changed after his trip into space, which I suppose would also probably change a person significantly!) Diane Farr doesn't seem like the most attractive woman in the world to me, and her voice is a little more nasal than is usual...but I really liked her; and her leaving the series seemed sort of abrupt, which makes me wonder if there was something else going on (her leaving for another show, a contract or salary dispute...?)
I also wish Millie (Mildred, played by Kathy Najimy) was in more episodes...I think she was only in 6, but even in those, she actually had an arc. I started out hating her in her first episode, and loving her by her last episode. I can understand why some people might not like her, but I loved her! She is a little bitchy at first...and she points out a problem with Amita/Amita's sort of putting Charlie first...but a little unfair...
The constantly rotating cast is both a strength and a weakness of the show.
I kinda feel that the math starts to REALLY take a backseat around Season 5...they start having lots of fun with special effects and it was more about creating pretty visuals. I liked the little throwback to Season 1 (first episode?) with David explaining the sprinkler analogy in Season 5 Episode 21, "Disturbed".
After awhile, it seemed like the "explanations" were just token speeches to showcase their fun new effects and sometimes were unclear. After the first season or two they just stop arguing with him about how or why or whether or not it will work, and instead they just listen to him talk, nod, and turn him loose. Though they tried to show that the agents actually understood what he's doing by having Liz occasionally throw in comments that show she remembers something he said before, or in another episode.
Nunb3rs – warm & cool lighting
References to Ridley Scott? J/ Bladerunner – Season 3
Episode 8 Hardball (about 14 minutes in)
Ongoing “storyline”…a little disjointed; Characters in
and out
Megan is good but disappears; she and Larry are good but
Megan leaves show
Liz ok, Amita ok, first woman ok, Nikki? (African-American woman?)
ok Don’s lawyer girlfriend disappears
and reappears all the time
Problem – Liz & Don?
Recurring characters
--LAPD Drug/gang guy?
--lawyer?
--psychiatrist
--psychic
--Bill Nye
--Medical Examiner (lady who is in Dexter)
--Charlie’s rival
--baseball genius kid
--Lou Diamond Philips sniper (Edgerton)
--The Fonz Henry Winkler?
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Skincare Myths and Gimmicks
I really, REALLY hate the myth that your skin can "get used to" a product. I do believe that you may gradually build up a tolerance to certain ingredients (over years) but I don't think it's going to just stop working after a few months. So maybe in a few years, you may want to find a product with a higher concentration of ingredients that work well for you.
What I really think is that somebody in marketing made this up to increase sales. Or lots of people at the counters made it up to "explain" why a product "stopped" working, to make more sales. It's just a selling ploy.
I don't believe a "BB cream" is really anything more than a new name for a tinted moisturizer (usually with SPF)? All of the ones I’ve seen claim to brighten, hydrate, protect, prime, etc…all of which is what a tinted moisturizer does as well. It isn't that I want companies to stop producing them, or creating new products or TMs (especially since the ones I've seen have been generally pretty good) it just generally bothers me that they felt the need to call them “BB creams” instead of tinted moisturizer, to capitalize on the craze. It feels like another marketing gimmick. I suppose as long as it's a good product, I shouldn't care.
This is a comment I made on John Su's blog, The Triple Helix Liasion, as LadyIsla. Sidenote, John's blog is incredible! (edit: he's stopped posting...):
Calling these products “BB Creams” is just creating another needless category of products, like Eye creams, Neck creams, etc. Some Western companies are bringing out their own versions of BB Creams now, and if they manage to make another good tinted moisturizer, that’s great; but I am pretty much fed up with the endless marketing ploys, just slapping new names on a slightly different product. I do admit, it is nice that the items that are named “BB Creams” do tend to include an SPF and moisturizer, but it’s still annoying to me.
Link: http://thetriplehelixliaison.wordpress.com/2012/05/20/do-you-think-asian-brands-or-products-marketed-toward-the-asian-community-are-better-than-their-western-counterparts-v-0-10/
What I really think is that somebody in marketing made this up to increase sales. Or lots of people at the counters made it up to "explain" why a product "stopped" working, to make more sales. It's just a selling ploy.
I don't believe a "BB cream" is really anything more than a new name for a tinted moisturizer (usually with SPF)? All of the ones I’ve seen claim to brighten, hydrate, protect, prime, etc…all of which is what a tinted moisturizer does as well. It isn't that I want companies to stop producing them, or creating new products or TMs (especially since the ones I've seen have been generally pretty good) it just generally bothers me that they felt the need to call them “BB creams” instead of tinted moisturizer, to capitalize on the craze. It feels like another marketing gimmick. I suppose as long as it's a good product, I shouldn't care.
This is a comment I made on John Su's blog, The Triple Helix Liasion, as LadyIsla. Sidenote, John's blog is incredible! (edit: he's stopped posting...):
Calling these products “BB Creams” is just creating another needless category of products, like Eye creams, Neck creams, etc. Some Western companies are bringing out their own versions of BB Creams now, and if they manage to make another good tinted moisturizer, that’s great; but I am pretty much fed up with the endless marketing ploys, just slapping new names on a slightly different product. I do admit, it is nice that the items that are named “BB Creams” do tend to include an SPF and moisturizer, but it’s still annoying to me.
Link: http://thetriplehelixliaison.wordpress.com/2012/05/20/do-you-think-asian-brands-or-products-marketed-toward-the-asian-community-are-better-than-their-western-counterparts-v-0-10/
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Urban Decay Naked & Naked 2 (For my own reference)
For my reference mostly!
Naked Palette shades:
-Buck:
-Creep:
-Darkhorse:
-Gunmetal:
-Half-Baked:
-Hustle:
-Naked:
-Sidecar:
-Sin:
-Smog:
-Toasted:
-Virgin:
Exclusive to palette now: Sidecar, Hustle, Creep
All others available in new formula as singles
Naked 2 Palette shades:
-Blackout:
-Booty Call:
-Busted:
-Chopper:
-Foxy:
-Half-Baked:
-Pistol:
-Snake Bite / Snakebite:
-Suspect:
-Tease:
-Verve:
-YDK:
Still exclusive to Naked 2 Palette:
only Booty Call
all others now available in new formula as singles
Naked Palette shades:
-Buck:
-Creep:
-Darkhorse:
-Gunmetal:
-Half-Baked:
-Hustle:
-Naked:
-Sidecar:
-Sin:
-Smog:
-Toasted:
-Virgin:
Exclusive to palette now: Sidecar, Hustle, Creep
All others available in new formula as singles
Naked 2 Palette shades:
-Blackout:
-Booty Call:
-Busted:
-Chopper:
-Foxy:
-Half-Baked:
-Pistol:
-Snake Bite / Snakebite:
-Suspect:
-Tease:
-Verve:
-YDK:
Still exclusive to Naked 2 Palette:
only Booty Call
all others now available in new formula as singles
Saturday, May 12, 2012
Fun Entries
Mini DS Ring (2nd from bottom): http://www.funnyfacebeauty.com/2012/04/love-them-or-leave-them-crazy-rings.html#comment-form
Monday, April 9, 2012
Joseph & the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat (Part 2: 90s Versions!) : still in progress
For my general opinion of this show (I Love It!) and quick overview of the songs, go here:
Also at that link is the first version I'm reviewing/upon which I am commenting, the Original Broadway Cast (OBC) from 1982
This note, again: I am reviewing these based on the recording only; I can't say too much about what the original live production would have been like (I wasn't even alive when the first one was on Broadway); but these are my impressions of the production based on the recording, and any pictures I've found in the CD booklet or online.
Next, we have:
1991 Original London Cast:
Linzi Hateley as the Narrator--I like her quite a lot. Some pronunciations sound odd to me, but I'm guessing it's just British-English vs American-English phonetics. Oh, yes, and it's "Jozeph" (with a [z] sound instead of an [s]). Her phrasing is a unique and not too distracting.
Jason Donovan as Joseph:
B&B This is another reason why I think this show is pretty amazing--I believe this was the 3rd live performance of this that I'd seen, and up until this point, I had always counted "Those Canaan Days" as my least favorite song and probably the lowest point of the show for me (the other low-ish point being "Close Every Door"). I really disliked "Those Canaan Days." However, I don't know exactly HOW they did it, but the brothers in this version were GREAT. They were so good, that I found myself really LIKING "Those Canaan Days". And somehow...that memory carries me through that song to this day; in all the recordings I have. I think I used to skip that track fairly often whenever I listened to the show, now I don't bother, I listen straight through. Weird?
Live: Civic
Unfortunately most of what I remember is being very disappointed in the Song of the King, because the guy who was Pharoah seemed a little dull and not very funny.
Now...I may be misremembering this; so anyone who knows the production I'm talking about can feel free to correct me! But I seem to recall that when the local newspaper featured it, they interviewed the guy playing Pharoah; and when interviewed, I believe he said something to the effect of, "I'm not hamming it up in this role as much because most people interpret Pharoah as Elvis, and I'm trying to give a more realistic portrayal of Elvis." (I'm sorry if this is wrong; but this is what I remember; but hey, it's possible my brain just made it up...) This is a ridiculous thing to do though, because nobody comes to Joseph to see a "realistic" Elvis impersonation, we come to see a funny Elvis caricature as Pharoah. I suppose if you're a huge Elvis fan, you may be offended by silly caricatures of him (I shudder to think what a huge Elvis fan would say about Rum Tum Tugger...) but, well, it's supposed to be fun and funny. I appreciate all the good Pharoahs a lot more after seeing the Civic production.
Also at that link is the first version I'm reviewing/upon which I am commenting, the Original Broadway Cast (OBC) from 1982
This note, again: I am reviewing these based on the recording only; I can't say too much about what the original live production would have been like (I wasn't even alive when the first one was on Broadway); but these are my impressions of the production based on the recording, and any pictures I've found in the CD booklet or online.
Next, we have:
1991 Original London Cast:
Linzi Hateley as the Narrator--I like her quite a lot. Some pronunciations sound odd to me, but I'm guessing it's just British-English vs American-English phonetics. Oh, yes, and it's "Jozeph" (with a [z] sound instead of an [s]). Her phrasing is a unique and not too distracting.
Jason Donovan as Joseph:
B&B This is another reason why I think this show is pretty amazing--I believe this was the 3rd live performance of this that I'd seen, and up until this point, I had always counted "Those Canaan Days" as my least favorite song and probably the lowest point of the show for me (the other low-ish point being "Close Every Door"). I really disliked "Those Canaan Days." However, I don't know exactly HOW they did it, but the brothers in this version were GREAT. They were so good, that I found myself really LIKING "Those Canaan Days". And somehow...that memory carries me through that song to this day; in all the recordings I have. I think I used to skip that track fairly often whenever I listened to the show, now I don't bother, I listen straight through. Weird?
Live: Civic
Unfortunately most of what I remember is being very disappointed in the Song of the King, because the guy who was Pharoah seemed a little dull and not very funny.
Now...I may be misremembering this; so anyone who knows the production I'm talking about can feel free to correct me! But I seem to recall that when the local newspaper featured it, they interviewed the guy playing Pharoah; and when interviewed, I believe he said something to the effect of, "I'm not hamming it up in this role as much because most people interpret Pharoah as Elvis, and I'm trying to give a more realistic portrayal of Elvis." (I'm sorry if this is wrong; but this is what I remember; but hey, it's possible my brain just made it up...) This is a ridiculous thing to do though, because nobody comes to Joseph to see a "realistic" Elvis impersonation, we come to see a funny Elvis caricature as Pharoah. I suppose if you're a huge Elvis fan, you may be offended by silly caricatures of him (I shudder to think what a huge Elvis fan would say about Rum Tum Tugger...) but, well, it's supposed to be fun and funny. I appreciate all the good Pharoahs a lot more after seeing the Civic production.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)