Bastet

Oops. Seeing this quoted just now reminded me I never answered you. Indeed I do; can't stand him.

Hmm. I disliked Little Women when I read it, because Jo couldn't have the life she wanted, then as an adult learned about the sexist shenanigans where Alcott was forced to marry Jo off and thus came up with the deliberately weird pairings of Jo and the professor and Laurie and Amy, rather than going down the tired Jo/Laurie path some of her readers were inexplicably calling for. That didn't save the book for me, but I appreciated it more knowing the context of what Alcott wanted to say and what she had to say. I've only seen the Katharine Hepburn version among film adaptations (and only saw it because of Hepburn), but discussion of this one and comparisons to others (so much more widely available than when the 1994 version came out) has made me think I may want to see it - and finally watch the 1994 film, which I just never got around to out of curiosity. So I appreciate the links to various analyses as I just perused the thread. This, in particular, from the Vox article, sounds most interesting: I might finally like this thing. When it's available to rent on Blu-Ray, I'll find out.

Thirding the praise for Kerr's performance in Edward, My Son. While lying on the couch with a cold several years ago, absolutely nothing good was on and I didn't feel like getting up to select a DVD. The film was just starting on TCM, and didn't sound particularly appealing, but the cast meant I'd give it a go in the absence of anything else striking my fancy. It turned out to be quite an interesting way to pass a couple of hours; it's realistically restrained in a way that wasn't the norm then. But I agree with @Rinaldo that Spencer Tracy is miscast (not the first time I've thought this; as much as I adore Libeled Lady, it would be even better with Clark Gable in the Haggerty role as originally planned, because as Tracy plays him it makes no sense Gladys wants to be with him). He doesn't ruin it, though; the film still works and is worth a viewer's time. As for Kerr, playing a sad/angry alcoholic is much harder than playing a fun drunk, and something something some mighty fine actors (including my beloved Myrna Loy in Lonelyhearts) have failed to pull off quite right, but she nails it. Had the internet existed then, some website would have had a "Best Drunk" category in its deliberately quirky year-end review of films, and Kerr would have won.

Hey, I get that it's your team, but the committee didn't decide LSU was number one and Ohio State was number two after championship weekend because they like LSU's team colors better; it was based on that weekend's respective performances. If Ohio State were robbed, and deserved to be one instead of two, they should have beat the third-ranked team. They didn't, so they're not one of the two best teams in the country this season. At least it was a far more respectable loss than the last time Clemson beat them in a playoff bowl game, and it's certainly not a fluke for them to be in contention; they'll be back, to your enjoyment and my annoyance. But they didn't get it done this year and thus deserve to be watching the championship on TV like almost everyone else.

Ohio State couldn't win big enough in its conference championship over an inferior team, as compared to how LSU dominated in its championship game against a closer-ranked team, in order to hang onto the number one slot, and then couldn't play well enough at number two to beat number three in the playoffs. So, by definition, not one of the two best teams this season.

Leftover Christmas ham is on the menu tonight here, too - pasta shells stuffed with spinach, ham, ricotta and parm are ready to go, and I just need to make the alfredo sauce and get everything in the oven (I know it's traditionally made with marinara, but I have to be in the right mood for a tomato-based sauce and I'm not). No vegetable side tonight, but I'm munching away on my salad (mixed greens, avocado, and green goddess dressing).

Holy shit, what a disappointing end to the Seahawks-49ers game. That was a terrific second half comeback, but that delay of game penalty to move first and goal from the one to second and goal from the six was one of the stupidest mistakes I've seen in a while. What were they even thinking? Well, clearly not thinking, but someone among the many people whose job it is to think about such things should have been on the ball. That was a bullshit non call for pass interference on 3rd down, though. If not for that, and Seattle subsequently waiting for a booth review that didn't come, what might have happened? We'll never know. But what might have happened if not for that stupid-ass delay of game is the bigger question, and that's all on the Seahawks. What a dramatic change from one season to the next for San Francisco.

There's no way I'm going to root for the Eagles against my guys, even to get rid of the Cowboys a week early (if Dallas does limp into the playoffs, they'll be one and done as nature intended). In other news, I'm still laughing about the Patriots losing to the Dolphins. I just saw one projection that had given New England a 26 percent chance of winning the AFC coming into today's game dropped in half to 13 percent, while Kansas City's chance went from 16 to 30 percent. I'd rather the Chiefs than the Ravens, but as long as it's not the Patriots!

I guess Team Brad just because the other two bug me. But, then again, the other two only bug me after prolonged exposure. So I'm really just rooting for good games, which I'm sure these will be. James comes in with the age and recency advantage, Brad with the "my only loss was to a computer" confidence ... Ken's longevity streak isn't really a factor in a limited run like this. So we'll see. I'm not as excited by this as the show wants me to be.

I can easily imagine that being true (I like the show, but I'm also quite sure I wouldn't work for him), but I can also see it being a matter of wanting not to be on call and/or doing so much large animal work anymore, so I'm curious to see what she says on air when the show addresses her departure. He's a good example of not judging a book by its cover, because until you learn more about him, he comes across like a guy who lives in his parents' basement playing video games until he's dragged out to help with the family business. Still, a little of him goes a long way for me. Same with Beth, who is way too perky (I hate perky like Lou Grant hates spunk). I like the other vets in the practice more than I like Dr. Pol, so I would happily watch this show if it kept going after he retired, but a) I don't see him retiring until he absolutely has to and b) I think the show would come to an end then.

This was asked in another thread, and I checked the release dates of the last several years worth of TCM Remembers in response - yes, at least in recent history, this was a typical release date. And TCM Remembers always includes non-specific footage interspersed throughout that can be and is replaced with shots of those who die between the release date and the end of the year, without screwing with the total running time/syncing to the music. This year's offering is one of TCM's best in a while, but also a bit more difficult to edit; they can pull it off, though.

Thank you, Clemson. Every bowl game in which I was rooting for a team went to shit, but at least the one in which I wanted the obnoxious Ohio State sent packing worked out in the end. I have no personal interest in the national championship now, since it's SEC vs ACC, but at least I won't puke at either winner. Because of Ed Orgeron, I'm pulling for LSU, but don't particularly care beyond hoping for a good game.

I was quite torn between football and "Before and After" tonight -- I absolutely love season one, but it's a playoff game, although not between any of "my" teams. So I watched football, and checked out the episode during breaks in play -- but was also consistently slow to turn back. I watched the entire opening credits segment, because I laugh a lot in that short period of time: Provenza calling the victim "Hanging Chad" to start, and then there's Rusty's "Somebody married you?!" and Provenza's reaction to the entire overheard conversation, capped off with Sharon's wonderfully saccharine, "I'm sorry, Lieutenant, are you suddenly in over your head?" when he wants to know if she'll be gracing them with her presence at the crime scene. Add in Andy's "Because we're west of the 405 [meaning in a rich area of L.A.]?" when Andrea asks what makes this a major crime and his reminding the grumbling Provenza he hasn't been in charge for eight years, so why is it suddenly a problem. I also made sure to tune back in for my favorite part of the episode, which is one of my favorite scenes of the series, the conversation between Sharon and Taylor in his office. First she - who is not protected by a federal mandate like when she ran FID and snotted off to Pope - snarks right to her new boss's face "Except, apparently, to Assistant Chief" when he blames reneging on her promised promotion on a department-wide freeze. Then it gets even better when she recaps his "The job is the promotion" speech with, "So considering how many people would like to replace me and how old I am, I should just take this job and be grateful, is that what you're saying?" If every woman who relates to that simultaneously cheered, it would be deafening worldwide. I also love the Sharon and Provenza scene at the end (and am disproportionately amused by the mental image of him and the parakeets), and her inviting him to stay on just until he finds someplace completely fair to work is great, and a wonderful transition to her getting fed up with Rusty and shoving all his junk into his bag and ordering him to sleep in the bedroom, not her living room. From jump, she has a touch for understanding and showing some patience with things that are based on his shitty history, while not abiding the things that are just bratty teenage asshole. Her response to his "you're not my mother" fit is both: "You're right, I'm not your mother, and how do we know that? Because I am here. [pause to make sympathetic eye contact] I'm here, and your mother is not. And you're going to have to try and make the best of it." The case is a good one, with all the rape victims' heartbreakingly familiar stories - lured into trusting him via an inherently intimate relationship, one wondering if she'd given him mixed signals, Amanda's disgust that he got her into "doable" shape, etc. I love Sharon countering the defense attorney's threat to parade Chad's victims before the jury with, "And I'll show the jury your client erasing those women as if they never existed". And the squad brainstorms well together, in just their second case with Sharon, to figure out it has to be the wife. I like Sharon hugging her as part of setting her up, and Julio's grin into the tablet's camera when they catch her. (He does that across both series every time he's on a hidden camera that has just paid off, and it's a nice character touch.) I liked Hobbs a lot from her several appearances on The Closer, so I was ridiculously giddy the first time I watched this to see her and Sharon tag team the wife into taking the deal. And I enjoy Morales's consternation when no one enjoys his joke about looking for someone with a good burn in their forearms. "The first hit, we give her - they were married. The second and third, that was intent" from Julio is also amusing. "Medical Causes" is another good one, although I missed a lot of it this time around to prep dinner. Rusty turning from surly to giddy and thankful when his mom is coming for him is quite reminiscent of his introduction on The Closer, when we saw the kid desperate to get his mom - whom he's in a good deal of denial about - back that lies underneath all the tough street kid bluster. As is Andy first seeing him as the brittle abandoned child of an addict, not just "the little psycho," and the guilt he feels when Rusty runs off. And Provenza starting to really feel for Rusty, and appreciate the good care Sharon is taking of him. It's a good foundation for a number of relationships to come. "Rusty is home" is a lovely ending, and caps off a wonderful scene between Sharon and Rusty -- The unspoken shared aversion to crying in front of people (I love Sharon making her way out of the Murder Room as she tears up) and the shared understanding of this: "I thought she loved me. And letting go of that is what's hard." "But holding onto someone when they're gone is even harder." is something that plays out beautifully across the series, along with him handing her the filled-out forms to the school he'd protested there was no point in him going to. The hard work both of them put in over the series to go from "people like me don't go to college, and we both know it" to him on the brink of applying to law school is rewarding to see. The case is a good one, too, and the actor playing the woman drugged by her stage five clinger boyfriend does a great job when she blows apart his crazy plan to bring them back together by ruining her career via a failed drug test - what were they going to live off of, his golf money? - and especially when she cries, "Four people are dead because of you!" and can't quite finish "You made me kill four people!" without breaking down. Dr. Nolan does a great job luring the boyfriend into a taped confession under horrible emotional circumstances, and I like the combination of Amy taking him out and comforting her. My favorite funny moment is Sharon on the phone, yelling at the hospital that no, she won't wait for a call back on the tox screen results, she's the police, relenting, "Fine, I'll hold," and then shoving the phone at Provenza to wait. I also like: "Evidently you don't know how a hospital works. Look, whoever called me down here could have asked these questions over the phone." "Evidently you don't know how a police station works." I greatly enjoy Sharon's dismissal of Amy when Sykes brings in the info on sexual harassment claims against the attending and tries to once again stick around and over-explain in front of a suspect. It's funny to go back and look at Buzz so desperate to be free of babysitting Rusty that he's throwing in all his cash and begging others to do the same, given the close relationship they wound up having. Something random I noticed in hindsight about this episode that never struck me in a previous rewatch: There are two printers in addition to the one Provenza replaces with his own in season two used during this case. So do they simultaneously die along with the one he replaces (printer suicide pact)?

I'm pretty much of the do what makes you comfortable while you're a guest in my home persuasion - e.g. I don't wear shoes in the house, because I like things neat but am lazy, so like to go as long as possible between floor cleanings, but I'm not going to ask someone to remove theirs - but some things are just rude. I don't understand not at least asking: "Do I need a coaster?" (my bar is specifically polyurethaned not to need one, but my coffee, end, and dining tables, yep, you do).

Establish your value to the company over time and make arrangements for your absence. I doubt it's very common, for a variety of reasons on both employer and employee side, but it happens.

Yes, that's what I was going to say; I think that's the biggest potential problem (especially with a woman who is just a few years into adulthood and a man who is 10+ years older than her), with the second being a greater likelihood of lacking similar experiences and interests. Or, fundamentally, if the fact the woman is young is why the older man is interested in her and it's his dating MO (or the reverse, but let's be real here), rather than this particular woman who caught his interest for the usual reasons also happens to be young. Basically, if it's not sleazy or predatory, and the couple have common interests and a similar life status, an age gap isn't an issue.

Failure to Launch.

"Type" momentarily tripped me up, too, making me wonder if I should be thinking about techniques/mediums rather than movements/styles.

Another archive night, as I was watching football. The free lunch and ten TS surprised me. So did dribble glass, tennis, and garbage in, garbage out to a lesser extent. The wrong answers in the category where you had to figure out the element just from its consonants amused me, especially "oxygen" for RGN.

This was a special kind of challenge: With another drink or two than usual under my belt tonight since it's vacation, I - not home the previous two nights and late to night's game - just read the archive for the previous three games. It was a bit of a strange run from that perspective: tonight's episode seemed to have more clues left on the board than average, and the previous two more TS/missed DD, but none of them came across "on paper" as particularly bad games. Varnish and vanish was a little surprising as a TS tonight, given the category (and that it was the third clue uncovered in that category, so they weren't ignorant as to what it sought), and Euripides, roll bar, and parboil were also clues I'd have predicted at least one would know. Cobblestone taking three guesses only true surprise of the game, though. The "tongue thrust" portion of the "lisp" clue led me to the answer, but the part about wanting a second story in order to sleep had me utterly confused and second-guessing myself; I don't know what I'd have done under game conditions. Toby Keith being a TS made me happy, though, I know that. In the earlier games, I'm a little surprised house was a TS in the astrological terms category -- no one immediately got the "when the moon is in the seventh house ..." lyric in their head and took it from there? TWA was my "huh, really, no one?" surprise (I accounted for it being my long-time favorite airline, but still think at least one should have come up with it based on the AA takeover date) and Carmel took me aback before I remembered all the contestants were from the midwest/East coast and was only mildly surprised. So, again, no real doozys, which means good games.

You keep saying that, and similar things about not subjecting yourself to the inevitable. Nothing will change until you actually do it. She's in the wrong, but you can't fix her. All that's left is how you respond; she's going to keep doing the same things, but you don't have to. Stopping is a lot harder in reality than on paper, but at least try! You'll have support here when you do, and from what you've said it seems your friends will also be there to remind you in difficult moments that you're doing the right thing. I'm glad she has hospice care; this suffering with only one inevitable end has largely already ended for her, and I hope the relief comes soon for you as well. You've done right by both her and yourself in all this, and as it comes to an end I wish you peace -- and a reprieve from the presence of your useless brother-in-law.

If you pull the text you want to quote from a subsequent reply that also quoted it, rather than the original post, it gets attributed to the one who replied: If Poster A says "This sucks," Poster B quotes that and replies, "Yeah it does," and you copy "This sucks" from the quote box in B's reply instead of from A's original post, the attribution doesn't come out the way you wanted.

I have several terrific pizza places near me, so luckily I never have to rely on Domino's or the like. If there's something wrong with my order, I call, and they bring me the correct thing. None of this filing a claim and getting a credit for future use jazz; if they mess it up, they fix it that night so I can eat what I ordered. So the commercial is odd to me -- Domino's shows up with with some sort of apology pizza on a different day, and the customers are all surprised and excited by it?

I've watched parts of episodes here and there during the marathon, and it has been a good "oh boy, I have to gear up for this" reminder. Some of these farmers', owners', and vets' actions ... I do a good bit more communicating through my TV than I do with Dr. Jeff or The Vet Life, yet I keep tuning in, because at least most have their hearts in the right place.

It would be a lot better with Emilio instead; I can do without the abusive piece of shit that is Charlie Sheen on my TV. I understand they went with Charlie because he's the most recognizable of the four kids (and the other two would only be recognized by a relative handful of viewers), but he's also for years been more recognizable for his bad behavior than his work. So, bleh. His presence detracts from the wonderful "I didn't want to interrupt; it felt like a West Wing moment."