Die a Hero, or Become the Villain

So I had a conversation recently.

Like any conversation, it was filled with contradictions and absolutes and WHY do I bother stating a  case? At this point, either there are going to be so many exceptions to my stance that it barely counts; or I will completely change my stance to the opposite after stating something absolutely. (For reference: see everything I say I won't or can't do and now do.... It's annoying. "Yes, you're going to be a liar no matter what - you're welcome.")

Anyway, I was discussing villains.

The original point was: could the villain in a story be the best character?

As in: could the character that everyone else fights against (perhaps 'antagonist is better suited but...Villain portrays my point better.) be actually the best person? Never murders, doesn't break the law, is kind to kittens and all manner of cute creations, is generous chivalrous, etcetra, etcetra, ad nauseum, ad aeternum.... Yet this perfect person is the villain?

In my opinion: yes.

Why? Because essentially:  the villain is just the one that the majority of the people oppose. Simplistic? Yes. But in its essence...

Of course, the Villain is also the one that lies, steals, kills, betrays, and does whatever necessary to achieve his end goal. Generally, the end goal he wishes to achieve is the reason he is termed the villain - the reason most stand against him - as it is something that stands against the morals of the majority of sane people. However, there are occasions where the end goal is not the one that rouses opposition, but rather the methods enacted to accomplish it.

I find that in the moment, while I can find many villains - antagonists - that fit in the role of the latter, I know few off the top of my head that fit the role of the former.... Off the top of my head, three for the former would be: James Moriarty, DC's Joker, and...Red John. Three that have laudable goals but went about them in wrong ways would be Agent Smith, Loki (in the first Thor at least, and then it depends how much you want to read into the character.), and obviously Ras al Guhl. I would have said the Doctor (long, long story....But I always liked the darker renditions and my first and one favourite is the First who tried to murder someone so....there would be that. Also: he kidnapped them to protect himself - if I hadn't researched the show? I'd say he's DEFINITELY the villain.), but then I realised that he doesn't technically count because while the Dalek's might see him as the villain - the majority of people don't. (That we know - there's the whole warrior thing but...)


Agent Smith is just doing his job and HONESTLY who would choose a life outside the Matrix?? It's a mess! Loki was either pointing out that his brother wasn't ready to rule (in which he was completely right or that society is going nowhere fast. Er. It's already going nowhere - they have space travel but dress like Shakespeare in the park??








It annoys me - but....still better than Stargate's Asgardians. Now, THERE'S a villain with a good motive that went about it in a rubbish way. But I haven't actually finished that series yet.....

Although, I'd take Stargate over Marvel even..... Sadly, they canceled the last series about a year or so before I found out about it and that IRKS me.

Anyway! Back on point. What was my point...

Oh! Villains.

So I'm accused of being psychopathic, sociopathic (whatever), manipulative (that I plead guilty to at least.), sick, and cruel.

I maintain that I merely prefer intelligence. And realism. Some degree of suspension of disbelief is acceptable and expected: but if you don't want me to talk through the film or story or entertainment? Please give me either complex characters or complex plots to distract myself with. Else? Deal with it.

Soooo.....then we get down to the actual topic: I don't like most heroes.

Now, I say 'most' because off the top of my head I can think of none.

Most heroes (or protagonists - but that includes the anti-heroes which I prefer, so we're just going to call them the heroes) are incredibly predictable. They're usually some version of aesthetically pleasing, strong, morally good and principled, have a girlfriend (or get one in the process of the film), have lost a loved one in a manner that relates to the antagonist, is betrayed sometime in the story, gets caught in the most obvious of traps, and somehow manages to triumph every time.

I'm sorry.

What?

I get it. Good always wins. I agree mostly whole-heartedly (I'm also rather pragmatic or fatalistic or cynical....)! But does that automatically mean that Good has to be dumb?

I. Think. Not.

(Again, I have WAY too much fun finding pictures....)

But please: prove to me that the majority of heroes don't follow that basic storyline give or take a few things? Then you may cherish the look of surprise on my face.

And I will be surprised. Because while I've not seen the MOST stories, I've seen an awful lot.

Usually, however, the predictable story is tempered by differences. Honestly, my problem generally comes more from poor plot than poor characters - but because the characters were tied into the plot, they suffer and I end up complaining.

The most obvious example I can think of off the top of my head of an utterly predictably hero-arc is that of Nick Burkhardt.

"Most heroes (or protagonists - but that includes the anti-heroes which I prefer, so we're just going to call them the heroes) are incredibly predictable. They're usually some version of aesthetically pleasing, strong, morally good and principled, have a girlfriend (or get one in the process of the film), have lost a loved one in a manner that relates to the antagonist, is betrayed sometime in the story, gets caught in the most obvious of traps, and somehow manages to triumph every time."

"Nick is incredibly predictable. He's to some apparently aesthetically pleasing, strong, morally good and principled, has a girlfriend, loses a loved one at the hand of the creatures he's supposed to hunt and oppose, is betrayed by at least his girlfriend, gets caught in the most obvious of traps set by his greatest opponents, and somehow manages to triumph every time."

....See my point?

Now, this isn't saying that there aren't any good heroes - au contraire, I CAN come up with a few if given the chance and time.

(This list also does not include anti-heroes or too twisted individuals just to prove that I CAN like good people. It's just harder.)

Off the top of my head? The first hero would be Ian Chatter-CHESTERton. But that might just be because I was watching the....Not Empty Child - that's the Ninth's....Whatever the pilot serial for the First was called. Or William Murdoch. (If you want someone good? He is good. But still so very, very interesting now why can't they make heroes like THAT??? Hmm??  AND intelligent enough to keep up with the villain (and yes, there is one...) without almost a case of Deus ex Machina...

There's also Steve Rogers. And Aram Mojtabai. And Alexis Castle. And Theresa Lisbon. And Grace Van Pelt. And Wayne Rigsby. And Abby Scuito. And Donald Mallard. And Tony Donozzo. And Tim McGee. And Angela Perry. And Chuck Taggert. And  Sarah Forbes. And Edwin Jarvis. And Cisco Ramon. And Jim Gordon. And Alfred Pennyworth. And Donald Ressler. And Angie Martinelli. And Jack O'Neill. And Daniel Jackson. And Sam Carter. And Rodney McKay. And Carson Becket!!!! And Evan Lorne. And Spock. And Leonard McCoy. And Donna Noble. And Amy Pond. And Rory Williams. And Romana I. And Sarah Jane. And Iolaus. And John Watson. And Jo Martinez. And Henry Morgan. And Lucas Whal. And Herman Gottlieb. And Cadfael. And Hugh Beringer. And Fisher's Jack Robinson. And Alex O'Conner. And Aragorn. And Elrond. And Faramir. And Bilbo. And Clyde Easter. And the Baudelaire Orphans. And even Peter Pevensie. And as much as I'd LOVE to say Martin Hausman, that would be cheating on two levels: that series hasn't technically aired yet, and he plays anti-heroes at best and charming, relateable villains at worst and always dies or leaves too soon.

And I could find more - but I left the majority of my notes elsewhere and sadly Mrs. Hudson refuses to pick them up for me....

Rubbish.

I'll do my own writing then, ja?

Now, what do those characters have in common? Why do I like say...Rory Williams and not Barry Allen? Why do I like Steve Rogers but not Clark Kent? Why do I like 'insert character' and not 'insert character'?

I have NO idea.

I generally tend to be a contradiction - it's easier to sum it up that way. Whatever I say about myself, there will be another part of me that directly opposes that and WHY is it that way.... It just complicates matters...

But the main correlation betwixt those characters? They have a dry sense of humour and a sharp wit. Most dress well, but I honestly don't notice appearance until after I get to know someone - until then they're just...faces. Nothing. Whether or not I like their personality determines whether or not I think them aesthetically pleasing and good GRIEF is that hard to explain.... And apparently also generally discounted. Thanks. Figures.

Reasons I still watched Doctor Who even when they RUINSES the Master: Missy is the embodiment of my interactions with the majority of entertainment.

Yeah. Well. So is life.

Although, I do wonder if perhaps the best thing about the heroes I like is the way they interact with the anti-hero.....

Except, no. Because Clyde had absolutely no support (AKA I didn't watch the rest of the episode...) and Murdoch has no anti-hero. And Murdoch is also MAJORLY predictable, honestly; yet.....

While Nick Burkhardt is the existing embodiment of everything I hate in heroes? Murdoch is a case where the same things that infuriate me about heroes somehow....don't matter?

Maybe it's the loyalty? Maybe it's the ability to stand by what they believe or their friends regardless of what comes against them. Maybe it's the ability to bed the rules to protect those they've consciously or subconsciously promised themselves to. Maybe it's the constant weight in their actions that thinks how their choice will affect those around them.

Because the villains? All of the characters I like? More than just being relateably flawed and having a intelligent and smart humour, they're loyal. This loyalty transcends everything else - whatever may be to. But this loyalty is also rarely to themselves. It's a loyalty to someone else: and this also humanises them further. Because everyone has a loyalty to something outside of themselves. It may be shallow - but it still exists.

So in the end? If they're intelligent, have a dry humour, and are incredibly loyal and principled (whichever way...), then I will likely enjoy them. If they are complex characters with ulterior motives, then I will enjoy them. If they have opportunity for growth, are relateable, make mistakes, fail, but are able to THINK....

And I think that's about as wrapped up as you're going to get on this subject.

At least I have an answer for myself now....

Wish We Could Turn Back Time....

Definition of 'seeing too much of a show': 'recognising the show from the back of someone's head in the first five seconds of a promo'.

See, I hate hospitals. Fear them, despise them, don't want anything to do with them as long as there are live people walking around.

And I really, REALLY hate waiting rooms.

Why is it so....sterile? Cold? Creepy? 'Going to smuggle you away to a dark fate and no trace of you will ever be found' like?

Maybe it's just me....

And the telly is ALWAYS on and NEVER playing anything good! Just...why.

So, there were three random trailers. And I knew all three of them - just the other two it took me a while to get (one was until I  saw the faces of the characters, and the other was until I saw the series name) but then there was the third one. First five seconds, back of the head.

For my sanity and the river not quite in Egypt, no names will be mentioned.

Speaking of shows, there are several I DEARLY need to catch up on.

Blacklist although at this point I'll probably just wait until the series is over again so I don't have too much cliffhangers at least. Doctor Who as well, although for whatever reason, I'm just not in the mood - probably something having to do with the girl who is impossible to get rid of..... Agent Carter but.... Well. I just want to have her dress!

Can you blame me??  Black and red and vintage and long and what is there NOT to like???  Well, besides the low neckline - but THAT is easily fixed.

I also would like to know WHY she is dancing with Jarvis but.... I'm sure we'll find out. And I refuse to spoil myself more.

.....if there was any doubt that she's a Widow though, I think her current clothes choices are either dead giveaways or blatant foreshadowing depending on the point of view......


And it's April now! Which - for one - I have a decidely evil and macabre sense of humour that is dying to be let out today, but unfortunately I don't know anyone that WOULDN'T kill me or give me the fifth degree if I loosed it so.....  That's a lost cause.

However.... April is National Poetry Month.

So, I've a challenge for anyone that writes any sort of poetry or verse: write one poem every single day for the rest of the month.

It's fun.

Especially if you can link them all.

Bon chance!

I'm going to post this and see if I can every finish the companion to Pippen's dress.....

I'm Fine

You get up in the morning.

You get out of bed and get dressed. You do your hair, brush your teeth, do your makeup if you want. You eat your breakfast and open the door and you go out to face the world.

You do a day's worth of work, and you get by. You could do better, but you could do worse. You could fight harder, but you could give up.

You're fine. You laugh and cry and play and fight - you're just like everyone else. Sure, there are happier people. Sure, there are people that have more. But there are also people with less. Much less.

So then why do you want to stay in bed?

Why do you hide beneath the duvet? Why do you stumble into the bathroom and stare at the mirror for hours, wondering why you're even bothering? Why do you pull on a shirt and trousers, and wonder if anyone would notice if you wore the same thing twice?

Why do you choke down your food, or tell yourself you'll eat later? Why do you laugh and wish you were screaming? Why do you lie and wish you were telling the truth?

Do you even know what truth is anymore?

Is what you see what everyone else sees?

There are voices in your head. That sounds wrong - but there are. They whisper and clamour, and they shriek and cut and you're holding them all in - wondering when your mind became the prison for them. You lay down to sleep at night, but they won't shut up. They follow you outside, and you scream at them - and then look up to realise that everyone hears you, but can't hear the voices.

So you push yourself to exhaustion. You keep going and going and going - because you don't care any more. And you don't care that you don't care. and this terrifies you - but you still just can. Not. Care. And you don't know why.

You have too much to do. You're slacking. You're lying in bed when there are things to do. You didn't do well on that last project - you need to work harder, make up for it. You're better than this - you know it!

You can sleep when you're dead.

You'll live with it. You always have. The voices say something's wrong - but it's all on you. If you were better, this wouldn't be happening. If you were better, you wouldn't be failing. If you were better, you wouldn't be so weak.

This is all you know. This is all you are. You don't remember another life. This is the way everyone lives.

So you get up in the morning, and you smile. You dress up, and you eat breakfast, and you work. Because there are others so very much worse off than you. They're more tired. Their cuts are deeper. They stand on the side of a bridge and look down.

You only stand on the window ledge.

You're fine.

All Around Me Are Familiar Faces....

In which I thought for certain that Person of Interest was airing its fifth series in January.

My mistake.

I think it's coming out in May.

DID ANYONE ELSE SEE THE END OF THAT EPISODE THAT IS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL - alright, not too much.....We've had worse cliffhangers - there is that memorable one where the main character was exiled but then had to be called back on the plane to address a certain problem that arose on home soil that none but he could solve.... - PUNISHMENT!!!!

"The Final Problem" wasn't really that bad. I mean, you knew he was alive, and you knew he'd be coming back - it would have been a WHOLE lot worse if they'd ended that episode about the point where Richard Brook is discovered because that? That would have been cruel. (I think the first series ended on a cliffhanger too? I can't recall where in the Pool Scene it ended...... So, actually, Reichenbach was the kindest finale. Isn't that sad.

Thank you, Moffat, for taking pity on the people that just had everything crushed and minced into tiny pieces and not making them wait on a real cliffhanger. Now that I'm crying, I'll watch something to cheer me up....  I loved the Weeping Angels - let's watch "Angels Take Manhattan".)

If you didn't sense the irony and sarcasm in that sentence, you have not seen the episode.

Don't watch the episodes like that.

And I basically did just that too. So then I went to watch Murdoch as it had been reccomended to me and good. grief. 

The Hobbit was a double-edged sword.

Come on - the Hobbit finally being adapted??  What was there NOT to like?  The countless references and throwbacks and treats and - I have no words for how much I was looking forward to it. (There were two times I literally screamed with joy: Coulson was alive, and opening a box to find the first film of the trilogy in it) And I had to wait a year until it came out in theatres and I could. not. wait.

It was also really, really, really fun.

Then The second and the third came out and it went from 'forgivable mistakes' to 'this is torture but still barely worth it' to 'I'm never watching this again'.

I honestly don't want to watch it. Maybe fastforward to the best parts (DRAGON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) but on the whole.....   I can still rewatch LOTR again and again, and have only seen The Hobbit once and....why. Just...why.

However, for all its faults, the trilogy stars Martin Freeman and features Benedict Cumberbatch. Who looked very, very, very familiar.

They played in a short series that I had said I wouldn't watch because WHO MOVES HOLMES FORWARD IN TIME WHAT ARE YOU IDIOTS RUINING THE STORY yeah I really need to stop saying that......

I watched that series a year before the Third aired. That was nice. Compared to this one. But  still. So, I was introduced to fanfiction. Thank you or sorry depending on which day it is.

Of course, this was when I figured out how to watch episodes online and.....well, it went downhill from there.

So then. Fanfiction. And fanvideos - those things have the horrid habit of spoiling things.....

Reading fanfiction and my atrociously annoying sense of humour eventually led to writing prose for it - poetry doesn't count unless a name is used and I don't do that. Now, have I ever been good at.....moderation in writing? I. Think. Not.

So if I hadn't ever seen The Hobbit, I wouldn't have ninety percent of the problems concerning writing and reality and...headspace that I have now.

.....I also wouldn't have some of the best story ideas in my collection, nor would I have met.....well, any of my friends that I still have.

So. Double-edged sword.

And I found the rest of the cars - I knew there were more....  There is a total of seven cars. Not counting just plain old cars.

......no, people experimenting with recreating Iron man's suit will NOT be working in the garage. I'll manage your house for you dear, but you're NOT ruining things.

It's a joke. I know someone that would love to have and get a mansion with extensive grounds (I'm going to call him Luke). He also doesn't want to run it. So? He declared that he'll get it, and I'll run it. (Yes, thank you - I always aspired to be a housekeeper......) Honestly, I'd love it - a MANSION what is there not to like?? Besides, we like a lot of the major things so....decorations and collections would mesh.

However, he's really, really good at science, math and engineering and one of the things he aspires to do is build a functional Iron Man suit.

He could do it.

But he's not reaching greatness in the garage or near any valuables I might have or protect.

Nor in the general vicinity of the house or grounds - as much as he's likely to suceed, he's also very likely to forget everything else.

Fun!

Have you ever been asked what you would like as a gift?

Invariably, there are three outcomes. Either, you have absolutely nothing you want, you want nothing that anyone else could get you, or you remember what you wanted AFTER they leave and it falls into the second category anyway.

It's annoying.

And what is the plural of 'hiatus'? It just...doesn't look right at all any way it's spelt....

Ménage à...Douze? Vingt? Trente? Cent?

So I like languages. And Literal translations. The title simply translates to 'household of....twelve? Twenty? Thirty? One Hundred?' Ask not my reasons...... Well, it's simply for the fandoms I'm a part of - just how many ARE there.....

I had forgotten how I ever started watching Merlin. It was one of those series I had heard about, but it wasn't reccommended to me and since I read legends, I knew generally what would happen.

Thankfully, the series did manage to leave out the worst things and the closest it came to it was done by a ghost and not real, so.....  Anyway.

But I was first introduced to the series proper through that music video - but never wanted to watch it.

How then did I go from never wanting to watch it to finishing the series?

I was watching bloopers of another series and absently weighing the pros and cons of starting that series - the cons must always come out. That's just principle - and remembered that I had done this before and I finally remembered how I started watching Merlin.

It goes right up there with ever, ever, ever say that I 'won't' or I 'can't'.

You'd think that since it invariably contradicts itself later that if I said that I would never be happy or that I can't be happy or good - you'd think THAT would contradict itself too. No. Of course not. THAT remains true as spoken, of course.

Probably Résmar's.....

Is anything predictable?

and then people say that I complicate things - that life has a lot of black and white. EVERYTHING HAS AN EXCEPTION!! There is basically almost no such thing as absolutes.

Even THAT has - I just completely paradoxed my head........  Alright. So there's absolutely no absolutes except that one and God. So almost no absolutes but God? That sounds better. I think.

I don't know - I got really, really twisted up in that. I'll leave it alone.

I just sort of realised that my house is First, going to be large; and Second, going to be incredibly dangerous.

Do you know how many weapons and traps and poisons there are from films and series??  Do you know how much I would really, really, really like?

And let's not get started on my own weapons. Basically every family line has a blade design to match their heralds - and then there's the stone angels!!  Every single angel has a sword. Very, very sharp, delicate, deadly sword.

I love fantasy worlds. And deleting earth - it makes it easier to make everything work seamlessly.

I'd also have to have so many trinkets and replicas and...I think there's only two vehicles. The other one was dull.

ah, but that's what dreams are for, right? So you can hope for the impossible.

"Moriarty, if evil for evil's sake were a pathological condition, that would be your diagnosis."

So the Russian Moriarty is probably the absolute best in comparison to canon. He literally looks as if he walked off Paget's illustrations. Next would be Andrew Scott hands down through and through if just because - while he's completely inaccurate - he is so. much. fun. Jared's turn in Game of Shadows was on par with Scott's. The only complaint with him is that he's not true to the books and isn't as good as Scott. But then again, most of those films aren't......

Elementary's Moriarty is the only reason I'd watch the series but I can think of another series I won't watch that I'd watch before Elementary. The things WRONG with that series!!!  Just...why. No. Please. That being said - their handling of Moriarty is...unique and brilliant and I would have enjoyed seeing it if it weren't for the other MAJOR faults with that series that make it rather unwatchable.

Let me see......Rathebone's was....dull. Rather. I found most of those dull, actually - but it was probably a good thing I saw them before I read all of the cases.

Who else have I seen...... I've seen a few representations in other series - but most of those tend to be of Holmes rather than Moriarty (predominatly, Murdoch Mysteries - which has the best side story for the ressurection of Holmes EVER and good grief you should at least just go watch that episode. (and then the whole series....) It is.....brilliant. Given the time and how famous Holmes was. Brilliant, parfait.

Made by Angelique

(so, example of my horrid learning of languages. There's 'parfait', 'magnifique', 'fantastique', 'superbe'....These are all easy to figure out when I forget them. And then there's 'formidable'. No, it doesn't mean 'formidable'. It means something similar to the preceding words - but I can't recall the exact translation!!  So I use it and know what it means, but I couldn't translate it......  This is why I can't teach languages....)

There was Roché's portrayal of Moriarty (or of a man playing Moriarty) and that....was the best part of the episode. Honestly, that was another well-handled episode. **SPOILERS FOR CSI 4X11 OR SOMETHING** Given Holmes was the one shot and that the suspects were Irene Adler, Watson, and Moriarty - or the people portraying them which shall henceforth be understood as such - the obvious choices for the murderer would have been Moriarty or Watson. Moriarty because he's Holmes' nemesis, and Watson because he was his friend - it would have been a twist. Instead, it was Adler - the one that.....didn't come to mind for an obvious option. So, bravo! It was worth watching albeit the subtext was confusing.

It reminded me of when I started watching The Mentalist - I started with "Pretty Red Balloon" and "Red Bricks and Ivy", and the later was in the fourth series and the former in the first; and I watched them in that order. So I had NO idea what was going on, who anyone was......  (You can watch Red Balloon on it's own and I do reccommend it if you like precedurals. Jane is.....an infuriating pleasure to watch. Not the best, but he was certainly worth the series.)

That series is also the only one I've caught up to and then finished as it aired. I've got a bad habit of catching up and then letting the series finish before catching up again. Murdoch especially - although I've not caught up to that yet. Castle  on the other hand.....No. That is.....I'm almost willing to quit the thing except Castle and Beckett are so much fun when they're not infuriating.

(For anyone considering that series - you will be tortured with more torture than anyone has been tortured before unless maybe they watched the

Hobbit expecting it to be like the book. The series does make the wait completely worth it - but then they turned around and ruined it and almost made me quit. So.......you'll hate it, but it's worth it.

Do not go to me for reccommendations for I will say both 'no' and 'yes'. Unless i know you and your personality VERY well, at which point I can give you a more...narrowed answer.)

But I had forgotten how much Grace hated Jane at the beginning...... And I always thought Roché looked familiar because he looks quite similar to Jonathan Harris' Dr. Smith - but he was actually in The Mentalist. That at least is more plausible.  (So I was rewatching some of Jane's best episodes. And then realised that as long as Red John wasn't in them or one of his murders wasn't, they were all good....  So there was that. I was going to watch the one with the blind car driving - but I got very distracted. what's new!)

By Grabthar's Hammer....

Alright. So he'd happily toss me out of an airlock.

He was the main reason I ever enjoyed the film enough to notice the parodical nature of the film and the homage it pays, and by that point I'd memorised nearly the entire film and enjoyed it on it's complete merits.

It is sort of like House of Long Shadows  - and this may be a spoiler in and of itself, but I think I'm the only one in this corner that watches the old films of that sort, so.... - in that it is a film that only works as a parody, as it was made. If - as the aforementioned film was in Britain - it was marketed as a serious contribution to the genre, it would likely....what's the English word for it....bomb? No, that's good....  Oh, forget it - the film would recieve low ratings in theatre and would not be remembered well. However, if it was marketed as a comedy, then-!  It's humourous on it's own merits, but standing upon the history of all it parodies! It adds to it.

But that was a side note that I just realised.

No, I was thinking about Galaxy Quest. There have only been.....four or five series of Star Trek? Not including the old spin-off films? Six if you count the reboot series, even though it's in film and not television format. But nonetheless, there have been a LOT. And that's ignoring the countless books.

So I had been musing on how a reboot of that film would work - sort of a reunion. (I work in corssovers.....) Obviously, it wouldn't happen - like so many other things, any continuation would bring the entire house of cards tumbling down. But.....  I mean, perhaps to answer the Reboot films? Now THAT would be an interesting scene to parody - and then I remembered.

It's completely impossible.

Well, in any way that would interest me at least. My humour is best dry, and.....

I always enjoyed watching Spock and McCoy. Kirk was my first favourite when I was young, but he was too brash and plain - too.....innocent, in a way. Always escaping punishment. As he said, he never likes to lose. I've never really cared for that type of character. Better the man - or woman - that has lost and paid a dear cost and yet struggled up again than the person that has escaped all consequences. McCoy and Spock? Both have lost and both got up again.

That they have the MUCH more intruiging interaction attracted my attention long before my characterising skills were discovered though - my brother and I were always wont to repeat their lines forever....  I could never manage Spock's perfectly straight face although I aft agreed with his sentiments - or lack thereof - so I took McCoy's side. He had the more....lengthy speeches anyway, and the more opportunity....creative lines.

I suppose that if you combined the language of Spock and McCoy and took away their bravery then you would have Dr. Zachary Smith from a show that ran alongside Star Trek, Lost in Space. The bravery, the heartlessness, the humanity, the flawed nature, the ability to seem above it all - to be above it all, the ability to care so much and yet to seem like he doesn't care at all....

Hm..... Interesting.

Alright. So Smith is stereotyped as an eternally dumb coward who sells his 'family'  - for lack of a better term - out to the highest bidder and then runs back to them for help when everything invariably goes wrong, but......

***SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!***

He is a spy. A spy in a place where to be caught would be treason and so would end in death. And he is a doctor - the last man checking the pioneers out. He is also trusted to sabotoge the complex ship in such a way that it would not be detected until too late. He is also intelligent enough to hide himself once he realises that he is trapped with the people he tried to murder.

He is not dumb. He is a doctor - the highest doctor in the facility. so he has to be the best of the best of the best - this was a space journey. He also understand the ship and so has some knowledge of mechanics. And he DESIGNED the Robot. If not

actually built it, then the theory and the programming behind it.

He's not a coward. All men are cowards at heart, and he simply uses it as a cover, knowing the Robinsons will protect one that they believe is weaker than them; but he took the job as a spy. I do not see anyone forcing him to do something he did not wish to do.

He also has a high ranking in the military and many medals that he earned, although I can't recall those at the moment - but he is not a weak or cowardly man.

So if you combined Spock and McCoy? You would have Dr. Smith.

.........if you bear in mind that they ran at the same time and Jonathan Harris gradually changed the character so as to keep him from being the useless villain to be killed off - Smith really is the only reason to watch the series, and did end up stealing the show in the later series aired. However, one must get through the first few episodes........ - so my line of thinking may not be ENTIRELY implausible.

Only mostly.

Have I mentioned that I can find plausible ways to link all of the shows that I watch together?

Anyway.....

There are some things that irk me immensely. Granted, this list is probably longer than I remember given it fades and shifts as my interest waxes and wanes - but for the most part, there are a few constants.

Have you ever found out about a terrific character? Great story arc, great lines, terrific humour, good morals (or the like), terrific personality, good style, etcetra, etcetra, etcetra.....  The only problem being that the character is in something that you could never ever watch or read because the rest of it is rubbish?
Quite annoying. Frustrating rather. Right on par with that is the terrific character who is there for all of two minutes in two hours. Lovely....

Or what about actors? Usually, I shy away from all having to do with them. There tends to be too much drama and hypocrisy, but since I've noticed some actors tend to play the same sort of character - such as, if I like one portrayal, there is a chance I'll like the others - I watch more things they're in. The drawback to this? I usually like the characters that appear for two seconds or I can't see, and generally, the rest of the roles are the same. Great, certainly - but I can never see it. Or, even better than this, they tend to play in genres that I can't or won't watch at all!

You don't.

Welcome to my ramblings!

No Wealth, No Ruin, No Silver, No Gold....

So about a year ago, I created a character.

He's very dark, sarcastic, aloof...

Originally, he was only supposed to be a passing character, written to interact with  better characters - written to fix plotholes and to...play around a little bit. He was never supposed to really become anything.

But I suppose I should have known that that would not go as planned either.

He sort of started a book.

It's quite an interesting book, on a rather....abstract level. It's about a Quadrumvirate of siblings, each ruling a part of....the world. The Brothers are greater, unchanging. They will always be there. Their two sisters are more...fluid. They always exist as well, but they're a bit more...tempermental? They change.

While setting this world up, I stumbled across yet another interesting Supernatural character: Death.

And he looked incredibly, annoyingly familiar.

I hadn't seen anything else he was in, and figured it was just because of his similarity (loose thereof) to Richard E. Grant. Which, there is that too - but it wasn't right. Earlier today, I was trying to find some pictures to make a wallpaper, and I found a different picture. Now, I happen to know that Death does not die in Supernatural being run over by a carriage. Nor does he basically ever wear brown. And I highly doubt that he would become a corpse - he disintegrates.



A Nero Wolfe Mystery. I can't recall his name here and don't remember much of his part save that he was reading some sort of rubbish and Archie hated it. And had to sit through it - it was quite amusing. The episode was "Death of a Doxy", and is good. Well, all of those episodes are - Hutton is a good actor, and the whole thing is set in the...Thirties I believe. The hair's not right for the Twenties, and the show is supposed to be pretty accurate. The acting at least is terrific.

And no, that picture isn't from the episode of which I speak - but he was in several, as every other actor on the series, as different pictures. I just couldn't find pictures of the one I spoke of.

For the longest time, that was the only thing I ever saw of that series, given it was incredibly hard to find. They are finally all on Youtube now - too late for me, but still.

Phillip Uxbridge (who HAS  surname like that??). From Murdoch Mysteries. An excellent episode concerning mummies and ancient Egypt and, of course, murder. Of an apparently supernatural kind, and thus the shenanigans that ensue every time that comes up. (Now, I find the placing rather ironic...  Nonetheless)

He's also in Kingdom Hospital but I've never actually watched that series yet, and can't even remember who or why it was recommended......  Nevertheless.

Nope, not in the slightest - whyever would you think that??

I've known about and have watched Murdoch Mysteries for a while - quite before I learnt anything about SPN. Thus? Death looked familiar because I had seen Richings before.

I love it when I can solve mysteries like that....

Which, speaking of Murdoch Mysteries, it reminds me of two things: it really is a toss-up whether Castle or Murdoch Mysteries made me more willing to forgo watching anything ever - never was decided. I don't think either have calmed down yet....

Grant says it perfectly.

So, Juliette and Adalind and Nick might be infuriating - but they've not yet reached THAT level of 'why am I still watching this and WHY do I keep coming back' that the other two did.

Not saying they weren't worth watching, I'd reccommend them to anyone in a heartbeat, but that they were more annoying that usual.

Why do they have to be so mean to the characters I like??

Not nice, Precious - not nice at all.....

But Murdoch really is an interesting series. Of course, there's the Historical aspect, and the police procedural aspect that never fails to attract me - and the costumes! And the science! And the characters! Except Julie. But even her I liked..... Regardless of plot - the plot I abhorred....

See, there are instances like this where I've no trouble differentiating between character and plot. And then there are the other times....

Besides. Julia and Grace have almost the best job possible!!

And they are such fun to watch together..... Honestly, brains, blood, poisons...  all in their gowns and corsets.

Have I mentioned the costumes? The costumes are gorgeous. I couldn't vouch for accuracy, but they certainly don't look inaccurate at least. And they are wearing corsets! Whyyyy.....

Irrelevant.

Interestingly enough, the costumes do repeat. Often enough. Which is sensible although I'm probably confusing it with the Medieval time in that regard. But even then, clothes would be expected to repeat.

So.

Anyway.

I have run out of drafts. Imagine that!