I'm watching my way through a show called 'Forever' at the minute. Immortal Medical Examiner currently working in New York. It's enjoyable so far, actually. I'm only on episode 6, "The Frustrating Thing About Psychopaths".

This episode itself, however ... Okay. A cop has a human heart delivered in a package to his desk. They determine it's the heart of a very healthy 25-30 yr old woman killed in the last 3-5 days, and look up missing people for that time and criteria. They find a call girl/prostitute operating under the pseudonym 'Mary Kelly' (which, by the way, whole other kind of tempting fate, right there). None of them twig. None, except the 200 year old ME.

How? Seriously? How does a whole room full of cops be presented with a human organ delivered to a cop from the murder of a prostitute named Mary Kelly, and not come to ONE CONCLUSION?!? Like, even if it's the wrong one, how do you not come to it?

It's the right one, by the way. It is a copycat. Not really a spoiler. And to top this all off, when said ME is explaining that the original Mary Kelly murder was the last and most brutal of the original killings, one of the cops asks him why, was the killer was caught after that? The name has been named, by this stage. They know who the guy's copying. (Though all the other cops have actually started remembering shit by now, so maybe that one was just a little dim).

Honestly, though. Hasn't every crime show ever done some kind of Jack copycat? How do they not twig when Mary Kelly comes up? I'd have thought a large portion of joes off the street would have started suspecting at that stage, let alone a room full of cops.

*flaps hand* But. Nevermind. The episode is pretty good, that bit just broke my suspension of disbelief a little bit. My apologies for the random rant.
icarus_chained: lurid original bookcover for fantomas, cropped (Aurin)
( Feb. 25th, 2014 07:39 pm)
Okay. Work. I need people to bear with me, I had a small psychotic break today.

icarus_chained: lurid original bookcover for fantomas, cropped (Icarus)
( Jan. 10th, 2014 05:51 pm)
Okay. After about four years of thinking and about six months of actually trying, I wrote the thing, I posted the thing, and now I'm going to go have a simultaneous panic-attack and existential break-down, yes? *flaps hands in the air* Hate this, hate this, why can't I not have emotions about this stuff?

Sorry. I'm emotional and a stupid-head right now.
icarus_chained: lurid original bookcover for fantomas, cropped (Nick)
( Oct. 19th, 2013 05:08 pm)
I think my dog is having an honest-to-gods adrenalin crash right now. I didn't know that actually happened to dogs. *blinks*

There's two terriers down our way which tend to zoom out and bark and snarl at things that pass them. Today, they actually came in together to attack me and the pup while we were walking home. Usually if I crouch and snarl back, it dissuades them, but there was the two of them together today, so I guess they had a pack thing going on and thought it would work.

You can't run, especially not from terriers, and especially not when your dog is on a lead and can't protect himself properly. So it ended with me crouched defensively over my dog, with him snapping at them and me turning slightly to keep an arm between them and him at all times.

We were rescued, more or less, when the terriers' owners finally came out and tried to gather them up, and when our neighbours came out to help stand between us and them while I got my pup in the door.

It wasn't that bad, really. Not a scratch on either me or the pup, because it never actually came to a fight fight despite the little bastards' cockiness. But my dog has actually just collapsed on the couch inside like the energy has just been cut out from under him, almost dead to the world, and it looks for all the world like an adrenalin crash. *blinks* I guess he was a lot more scared than I thought.

*shakes head* I didn't know that could happen to dogs. But I'm giving thought to bringing a stick with me next time, just for the home stretch. I can leave it in a bush for the walk proper and collect it on the way back. I mean, I was planning on punching if either of them came close enough to actually hurt us today, but a stick might dissuade them before it comes to that? It'll also give me longer reach to keep them back, so hopefully it doesn't come down to anyone getting hurt.

Oi. Honestly. What a day.
icarus_chained: lurid original bookcover for fantomas, cropped (Icarus)
( Oct. 7th, 2013 01:30 pm)

Work RANT )
icarus_chained: lurid original bookcover for fantomas, cropped (Nebula)
( May. 10th, 2013 05:24 pm)
Okay. I haven't actually seen the movie, but I accidentally ran into some spoilers for the new Star Trek: Into Darkness. And okay, I'm not that hot on the reboot universe anyway, but this ...

... I apologise for more Holmes meta. After the previous two I realise I've been, ah, somewhat obsessed recently. It's just rereading the canon again, with specific things to look for and examine, has put me in the frame of mind.

I also apologise to fans of the BBC Sherlock adaptation, I realise I'm spending a lot of these pointing out my problems with that specific adaptation. Um. I just ... sort of have a lot of them, when I'm watching it with the ACD canon in mind (and some just watching it in general). So. My apologies.

This isn't really an essay (no, okay, it totally is), as such, it was just something I noticed while reading back through the canon for Holmes' views on morality, society and people, and with the BBC Sherlock version of Scandal in Bohemia in mind (and the Downey films' treatment of Irene too). The original canon, for something written in the 19th century by a male inhabitant of a very patriarchal and stratified society, has some surprising moments of grace regarding gender and race relations (mostly focused on gender, I'll admit in advance, just one tiny mention regarding race).

Continued from Part I. I promise, I'm going to get this part off my chest, and I'll be done. *grins sheepishly* It's only because the relationship between Holmes and Watson is one of the parts most subject to interpretation in adaptations, and I've had several people say the original Holmes would do such-and-such a thing to Watson based on their dynamics in various adaptations (BBC Sherlock, I'm really sorry, you just tend to do this a lot?). And, um. Not so much?

Okay. So. The second part of my 'slightly annoyed about Holmes' essay (yes, I'm going to be slightly stubborn about this). This one is on ACD Holmes' interpersonal relations in the original stories.

I feel I should clarify, before I continue, that I'm not necessarily annoyed by the adaptations themselves, though I prefer some over others. It's the fact that people seem to be saying the original was such-and-such a thing in light of the adaptations, when in fact he wasn't. Much as you generally can't really judge canon characters sight-unseen based on fanfic characterisations of them, so too you can't judge the original versions sight-unseen based on the versions seen in adaptations. If you want to tell me the original Holmes was such-and-such, please provide the original stories that prove so, yes?

And in that cause ...

[Again, links to online versions of the stories used, the ones I could find, are provided at the end. Most of them are hosted at Wikisource]

Right. So. This is middling-to-majorly nerdy of me, but howandever. It's been bugging me slightly since discussing the various Holmes adaptations with people, in particular the BBC Sherlock version and the Downey film version. Just a small exploration of the original, Arthur Conan Doyle Holmes, mostly concerned with his views on crime/morality/law. Only my interpretation, but one I'm ... ah, rather vehemently attached to. *smiles sheepishly*

[I've scrounged up links to online version of most of the stories I'm using in the discussion, they're down at the end. All of them are hosted either on Gutenberg or Wikisource. SPOILERS for all stories involved, obviously.]

icarus_chained: lurid original bookcover for fantomas, cropped (Nick)
( Nov. 29th, 2012 10:45 pm)
Right. So I'm going to risk my Fury rant, because it's been bugging me lately.

This is basically in response to the whole 'Nick Fury is an evil manipulative bastard who will betray the Avengers' thing which I've seen in some places. Which ... confuses me mightily, in that I'm not sure what people are using as the basis for it. Um. At all. So. Just a quick run through of my impression of Fury (and SHIELD) in the MCU? (Spoilers for all movies so far. And I tell a lie, not quick at all. In fact, somewhat long -_-;)

icarus_chained: lurid original bookcover for fantomas, cropped (Icarus)
( Nov. 29th, 2012 07:14 pm)
Um. Okay. First, thank you to everyone who commented on my last entry. I, um, am having some problems responding individually (no spoons?), but I thank you all for it. *dips head*

Second, the situation at home is developing ... precariously, and somehow I've ended up the sane one (or at least the ruthlessly pragmatic one), so apparently I'm on damage control. Also, lying to people because other people need me to. I am ... not happy, really. But. We will work with this.

Third ... Okay. This is a fandom thing, intersecting with the me-stuff. Apparently, in times of stress, what I most want to do fannishly is write out a couple of really argumentative meta posts wherein I rant at people (I've got two so far, one Once Upon A Time on Regina vs Rumple and why that is possibly a stupid question to start with, and one on the MCU and why Nick Fury is not actually a villain, thanks). Because I sort of want to rant at somebody, on some slightly safer or at least less personal topic that does, in fact, genuinely annoy me.

And then I can't post them, because a) it's not fair to randomly rant at people, b) I haven't the spoons right now to actually back the rants up in discussion, and c) cathartic as they may be, they feel like picking fights and that's never wise. Even if I do, in fact, actually think that Regina vs Rumple on moral grounds is a stupid distinction, and that Nick Fury is emphatically not a villain and I'm more than a little annoyed at fics that make him out to be. *grumps faintly*

So. Is catharsis worth the rant when you haven't the strength to back it up right now? *shakes head* Oi.

Anyway. On previous topic. Thank you to all. Heh. *nods gratefully*
icarus_chained: lurid original bookcover for fantomas, cropped (Default)
( Nov. 16th, 2012 09:28 pm)
I like reading cracked.com articles. They're often funny and interesting. Sometimes, though, I really, really have to wonder if the writers research much of anything before writing?

Six Insane Superstitions That Are Still Shockingly Influential.

Apparently, here in Ireland, we can't build roads on fairy land because the NRA believes in fairies. *blinks rapidly* Now, what they're probably talking about is that roads are (sometimes) diverted to build around ringforts, which are called fairy forts, because ringforts are early medieval archaeological monuments and some people would like it if you didn't bulldoze those (not that that protects them in the long run, see things like the Hill of Tara, but anyway). There is a belief traditionally attached to them regarding fairies (the raths are traditionally the surface entrances to the Otherworld, where the Tuatha de Danann went when they left Eire), but I highly doubt that belief makes no nevermind to the National Roads Authority, given that scientific and/or historical preservation reasons tend to do bugger all either if there's money on the line.

(And, to be fair, there's also a lot of ringforts in Ireland - they were essentially an early medieval type of farmstead, so anywhere there was farming, there's ringforts - the country is fairly lousy with them and we've got to build roads somewhere. Usually only the particularly large or important ones are spared).

Just ... what now? Really? There are any number of religious and superstitious beliefs worldwide and in Ireland that affect the everyday running of things (the concept of the weekend, for example), but thinking that fairy folklore will save a ringfort or divert a road in Ireland is ... somewhat optimistic, darling.

Just. Oi. Really?
icarus_chained: lurid original bookcover for fantomas, cropped (Loki)
( Oct. 5th, 2012 07:55 pm)
Just something that has been bugging me, lately. Where did the idea of Methos the invincible, godlike ancient badass come from?

... Moving a (floor-to-ceiling, bolted-to-wall) shelving unit in order to clear access to the recess in the wall which holds the heating pump that hasn't been accessed in 16 years. With a deadline of three hours, which is when the plumber arrives (well, no, he actually hasn't yet, but there were three hours until the time he said he'd arrive).

We realise that because of my father's wiring tendencies, the stereo system is actually plugged through a hole cut into the back of the unit (to one side), with the permanent connection to the stereo on one end, and a plug buried somewhere behind three more bolted-to-the-wall shelving units on the other. So we cannot remove the shelving unit without either a) partially disassembling the stereo, which none of us know how to do, or b) removing every bolted-to-wall unit along that wall. Neither of which we have time to do.

My mother, now edging into full-blown panic: We'll disassemble the whole thing! Fetch the screwdrivers!

Me: ... Or we could just turn the unit sideways, like a door? Because the hole with the wires is only on one side, and we could bascially just consider it like a hinge?

My mother: ... Or we could do that. Yes.

So we turned the unit sideways, like a door. And lo, there is access to the panel, and neither the shelf nor the stereo had to be disassembled (though my father, when he gets home, might not be so lucky -_-;).

... Yay pragmatism? Also, common sense. And I dropped a heavy thing on my toe, and if someone panics in my general vicinity once more today I will kill them, and for the love of gods, people, no plumber worth his salt has ever shown up early, we've got time to figure out a sane solution! *snarls*

Also, ow. My toe. Yeah. I hate everyone.
Well, okay, one rant, and one observation.

The rant follows thusly:

The observation follows thusly:

icarus_chained: lurid original bookcover for fantomas, cropped (Default)
( Jun. 19th, 2012 05:26 pm)
This may sound strange, but normally, I have only two pairs of shoes. Three, if you count the pair of black flats for interviews and stuff. I have a pair of hiking boots for winter, and a pair of hiking sandals for summer. That's ... about it.

I finally wore through my pair of hiking sandals two days ago. There is apparently no shop in town that stocks hiking sandals. It's all flip-flops or dress sandals. So I've spent the past few days trying various pairs of my mother's dressy sandals (she's the same size) while I look for a goddamn shop that sells hiking sandals. (My feet are the first things to overheat, for me, so the 'sandal' part of the equation is kind of a must).

My feet are in bits. I do three mile walks a day, with the dog. Dress sandals and flip-flops do not work, when you're doing that. I'm going barefoot more than I'm wearing the damn things. It is less painful.

For the love of Someone, why does no-one design and/or sell summer sandals that you can actually walk in???


icarus_chained: lurid original bookcover for fantomas, cropped (Default)


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags