marina to

Because it was to commemorate the BBC 100th anniversary. In that context, covering all the various eras of the Doctor made a lot of sense. And to truly do that, bringing back the companions was the right thing to do.

Here's the counterpoint. How much are those teams making? A hell of a lot when you look at tv revenue, merchandise, betting, concessions and parking (I'm assuming the stadiums charge for parking). Shouldn't the athletes, who are the reason for all of this, get a large cut of this? Look back at the 70s and how little professional athletes were being paid in relation to the teams' revenue. This is just rebalancing. The average career of an NFL athlete is only a few years, after training for it for a decade. (It's a little longer for other sports but not by much.) Why shouldn't they maximize their revenue in that time?

One thing that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere was how Jordan's segment in the beginning mirrored Colbert's on Stewart's last show. The standing behind, the "did you forget someone?" I had been watching that segment a few weeks ago and it immediately jumped out at me. I liked that Trevor gave each of them one last chance to shine and poke fun at him In the end, Trevor ended up mirroring Jon a lot - supporting the correspondents in their careers, wanting to have thoughtful discourse. They took different directions but Trevor kept the core of what the Daily Show is. Congrats and best wishes wherever the winds take Trevor next.

Seems to be a Chris Judge week. He hosted a panel for The Companion called Elevating Black Voices in Sci-Fi . Not sure when it will be public.

I've been wondering that myself.

I have been really impressed with the correspondents' work lately. Usually they bore me to tears but since the Atlanta trip they've been fire. The interview with Obama was incredibly insightful. I would totally love to see the "Half and Half" tour.

This is an excellent point that I hadn't considered, thank you. Both those communities have great reason to hate the British crown, although more so the Indigenous community, since the Brits reneged on their promises made in exchange for their assistance during the War of 1812, which led to the displacement of the various nations in the decades afterwards. The French overall fared better because they did get to keep their institutions, just under British leadership, before Confederation. I live in Toronto, so I see all the immigrants from all over the world and most of them have no ties, so it makes no sense for them too. After this show, I picked up Penny Junior's Charles: Villian or Victim, which is a book written in 1998 based on interviews with people who had worked for him or were friends with him. The book portrays a very complex man, who chose to keep silent in the wake of Diana's interviews because he didn't want to distress his sons by airing dirty laundry. It also portrays a Diana who isn't the saint that she's been portrayed as but rather a person who yes, didn't get guidance as to what her role would be and whose husband did become jealous of her popularity but also carried scars from her parents' divorce and a teenager's idea of what a relationship was and as a result had a hard team dealing with being with a man who had so many demands on his time. It also paints a different timeline of the Charles/Camilla relationship, insisting he wanted to make the marriage work and it was only when it became obvious that it couldn't that Camilla came into the picture. All of which to say that a lot of how we view him comes from the lens of one person. And now when I read what people are saying about this season of The Crown, it feels incredibly unfair. She may end up destroying the monarchy from the grave if The Crown has turned people against Charles. Which was what she wanted, I guess.

I have a big problem with the main piece. As the monarchy was stripped of all political power, their role of state means they speak for the government. So tell me, what could Elizabeth then, or Charles even now, do? Formal apologies and reparations have to be approved by the government. The reigning monarch saying anything would set off a political firestorm. Look at what happened when Charles stated his own opinions about things while he was Prince of Wales. There was a lot of telling him to shut up. What has happened in the name of crown is horrific and quite frankly, Charles strikes me as someone who is very well aware of that. All these years of going around the world visiting the various citizens of the commonwealth has been the best education someone in his role can get. The question is, what can he do? If stories are to be believed, he is restricted from even making suggestions as monarch. This is something he is going to wrestle with and there aren't easy answers. John is also remiss in not mentioning that there were rumours going around before the queen died that Charles is very aware of public perception of the monarchy and wants to institute some major changes that will reduce or eliminate the reliance of public money. This too, is going to require some political maneuvering both in The Firm and in the government. He'll need some time to do this. Been kind of hard since the current British government has had to focus on some other urgent priorities. I get John hates the monarchy. As a Canadian citizen, I feel the monarchy does a valuable role to play in statecraft. I am so grateful our political leader is not our head of state. The monarch's representative in Canada has been for a long time now a Canadian citizen appointed by the Queen and it's served us well. (Looking at you, Stephen Harper!) I like the Commonwealth. I don't mind my tax dollars paying for royal visits because they are a wonderful theatrical pageant, and I'm a fan of those. And I like Charles. He's not perfect but from what I can see, he learned from his mistakes. He's had to live his whole life in a public fishbowl. His devoted love to Camilla, even when he was asked to sacrifice her for, let's be honest, bullshit, I find admirable. Note that there was no pushback for his sons marrying commoners - they learned. He's not afraid to look silly while trying to understand others' perspectives, which is what I see when I watch that clip with the DJ that John used to mock. He's been a small farm/organic farm advocate for decades and tested a lot of now accepted practices on his own land. He's thought about the world (check out his book Harmony, it really impressed me). Also, the guy just lost his mom and is having to make this system he just inherited his own. That takes time. I'm willing to give that to him.

I certainly hope you're right. I love 8, but his movie is what I'm afraid can happen.

Disney also has creative say.

My bad! I saw AG and a state that started with A and the vid was trending so I just assumed it was the correct one. Lesson - read carefully!

There's a 3 minute clip.

I live in Canada and this deal upsets me. CBC was the first International partnership BBC did with this show back in the 70s. It currently airs on CTV's science-fiction channel. So it's easy accessible to anybody who has cable. Putting on Disney+ is actually going to make it less available in Canada, not more. I guess they are gambling that people will continue to move towards streaming options like Disney +. But it feels like a slap in the face for those of us here who supported the show for decades.

I hadn't thought of this but it makes a great deal of sense. I couldn't remember how long ago this was shot.

Both of these had to do with RTD's 60th. Chibnall doesn't know what RTD had planned so he stayed away from New Who so as to not mess with anything he's doing. I'm assuming the change to Tennant was planned between the two, since immediately after the airing there was this: https://www.doctorwho.tv/news-and-features/david-tennant-is-the-fourteenth-doctor Chibnall said he was asked but was unavailable. This is probably why.

I was so happy to see this!

In an interview Chibnall said that he didn't know what RTD had planned for the 60th so he purposely stayed away from any new Who characters so not to mess up anything that RTD would do. As far as I'm concerned, everyone we saw last night should have been in the 50th so he righted a great wrong. That alone endears me to this episode.

Not sure how much book talk will be here considering that she's barely mentioned in the books. Although I guess there may be some discussion about Violet Bridgerton because there is a prequel series that she's writing now.

Last season they used to get the panel discussions in full up on YouTube. Now we're just getting two minute clips. So a lot harder for me to be able to discuss the episodes now since I'm only seeing a small sliver of it. Really wish the show was not on Apple TV+

She's been really busy. You can see her in Ruby and the Well and Five Days at Memorial. Flo continues on in animated form in Mary and Flo on the Go. She's currently shooting a webseries that she also wrote, Hello Charlie. Here's the trailer.

I've said for ages that when George isn't in an episode, Higgins becomes competent. Because someone has to be.

I'm so tired of putting our cast in peril, creating angst for them, and bringing back former enemies from the dead.

This ended up being tons of fun. I like that our people are getting larger recognition. And it was great seeing Leah Brahms again.

What a strong episode! Loved the variation in the different ships and clearing up the Pakled mystery. The back half of this season has been amazing.

This episode was great! I loved how we got to see someone other than Mariner be the hero and I loved watching Rutherford and Boimer working together, and a more assertive Tendi. Great character growth.