Posts by Craig Ranapia
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Up Front: Say When, in reply to Isabel Hitchings,
Much as I adore Helen Mirren I have a bit of an issue with her being used as the example in this discussion. HM is slim, conventionally attractive and doesn’t particularly look her age, of course she gets a “pass” for wearing skimpier clothes than the average 60 year old.
I’d recommend watching the last series of Prime Suspect, where she looks every bit like a barely functional alcoholic at the end of her last tether, ticking off the handful of days to her retirement. Also rather interesting that her highest profile role in The Queen wasn’t exactly the Frocky Horror Picture Show. (Though, if I wanted to be a tad bitchy they could have slapped some padding on Mirren if they were going for verisimilitude.)
-
Muse: TV Review: Good Gods Almighty!, in reply to Lucy Stewart,
Oh, come on, though. “It’s too hard not to be racist so we’ll just tell stories about white people”? Like there’s no-one who could dare Maori or Pasifika mythology, let alone stuff from further afield? Not good enough.
Of course it isn't, but I still think Rich has a fair enough point - at the risk of "political correctness gone boink" I can understand why Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom went down like the proverbial bucket of cold sick in India .
-
Hard News: Book review: 'Wikileaks:…, in reply to Don Christie,
The “rape apologist” label applied to Gordon Campbell was appalling, IMO .
I don’t need to retail my position, but “appalling” and “rape apologist” was my reaction to this condescending head pat from Gordon. (“Privilege douche bingo” also comes to mind.)
Personally, I do find it depressing that so much energy has been spent on Assange’s actions in bed and so relatively little on the morality exposed in the Wikileaks cables, which continues to validate the persecution, torture and death of hundreds of thousands of people. That doesn’t mean that one lacks compassion for the two complainants, or that anyone is giving Assange license to be a sexual predator. It means that there are revelations in Wikileaks than matter as much – or more – as what we’ve heard so far in the course of the soap opera swirling around Assange. Still, if some people prefer to focus on the Assange soap opera – because it rings a bell about injustices elsewhere – then that’s their prerogative. {emphasis not in original}
Gee, thanks for the permission to give a shit about rape and rape culture Gordo. Of course, it might be possible us trivial, man-hating, panty-sniffing, don’t give a shit about torture and illegal wars types can think about two things at once.
Personally, I’m more depressed by an otherwise intelligent man who needs to get his head out of his arse before the tan line becomes permanent.
BTW, Gordon, one “morality exposed in the Wikileaks cables” I followed fairly closely was the details of how the Irish government was forced to grant Vatican officials immunity from co-operating with the Murphy Commission of Investigation.
-
Muse: TV Review: Good Gods Almighty!, in reply to Steve Parks,
Yes. Though this question should surely have been answered by James or Simon!…
*cough* First line of the post: "The Almighty Johnsons (Three, Mondays, 9.30; repeated Sundays, 10.30pm)"
-
Muse: TV Review: Good Gods Almighty!, in reply to Russell Brown,
Give her a break! It’s her first TV review.
Fair enough – I’ve got a brownish clipping of my first sally upon the field of criticism. Rather embarrasing, as it was promptly followed by a correction and apology for giving the leads unwanted gender reassignments. Spoiling a somewhat important plot twist was merely bad form. Provincial am-dram is a harsh mistress.
-
Hard News: Book review: 'Wikileaks:…, in reply to Russell Brown,
I think what’s really out of order is the bald-faced lies Assange’s lawyers have told about the case, and the implicit encouragement to vilify the women.
Um, yes, and it's rather disturbing to see a very smart and respected man like Geoffrey Robinson accusing the prosecutor of "anti-male bias" on grounds that could most generously be described as weak.
In caustic evidence on the first day of the two-day hearing, Brita Sundberg-Weitman, a former appeal court judge, told Belmarsh magistrates court that Sweden's chief prosecutor, Marianne Ny, who is seeking the WikiLeaks founder's extradition, "has a rather biased view against men". "I can't understand her attitude here. It looks malicious," she said.
Geoffrey Robertson QC, acting for Assange, asked if it was her view that Ny wanted "to get [Assange] into her clutches and then arrest him no matter what?"
"Yes" said Sundberg-Weitman. "It might be her attitude to have the man arrested and maybe let him suffer for a few weeks to have him softer [for interrogation]."
Such was the hostility towards Assange in Sweden that "most people take it for granted that he's raped two women", she said. The country is seeking Assange's extradition in relation to allegations of rape, sexual assault and sexual molestation made by two women in August.
He denies all the allegations and has not been charged.
Under cross-examination by Clare Montgomery QC, for the Swedish government, however, Sundberg-Weitman admitted she had no personal knowledge of the conduct of the prosecutor in the case, basing her views instead on what she had been told.
She also acknowledged that while she believed the warrant to have been disproportionate, a Swedish district court and the appeal court, considering evidence from Assange's Swedish lawyer Björn Hurtig, had judged it both proportionate and legal. "I must say I am very concerned about the state of the rule of law in Sweden," she said in response. "It has been decaying since the mid-1970s."
I guess by that standard, Robertson is everything from a degenerate pornographer to an apologist for terrorism given the people he's represented over the last forty odd years, 'cause, you know, that's what I've been told.
-
Muse: TV Review: Good Gods Almighty!, in reply to Russell Brown,
Fair enough, but hell -- sometimes a sword is just a sword not a cock. A distinction that comes clear when you get poked in the eye. :)
-
Muse: TV Review: Good Gods Almighty!, in reply to Simon Bennett,
Bloody hell, Simon. I'm sorry to tell Ms. Martin this, but I'm fairly sure Go Girls had more..., well (implied) johnsons on display than Almighty. The promos were certainly cock-teasing like crazy. And since both shows drew well north of 300K viewers, I guess male objectification works.
-
Speaker: Medical Journal, Chapter V, in reply to Danielle,
I now have a perverse desire for you all to gather in a circle in the bush somewhere and beat each other meaningfully with small handfuls of aromatic twigs.
By “small handfuls of aromatic twigs”, I assume you mean “ rusty nail-studded cricket bat”? :)
-
Muse: TV Review: Good Gods Almighty!, in reply to nzlemming,
Quite.
Honestly, I can see the criticism of RTD's 'everything and the kitchen sink' approach to Doctor Who -- sometimes it doesn't work. Even Steven Moffat - the new show runner who wrote some of the best episodes of Who 2.1 - has his off days. The much anticipated return of The Weeping Angels in series five was good, but inevitably suffered by comparison with the outright classic 'Blink'.
But it's easy to forget the howls of outrage when it was announced that that Queer as Folks guy would be bringing Doctor Who back to television after eighteen years. And with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, it's easy to forget that there was enormous scepticism that DW would be relevant to an audience that, in large part, wasn't alive when it limped off air in 1988. Davies and Julie Gardner pulled off an enormously difficult balancing act - preventing the die hard fanboys from starting a lynch mob, while at the same time being open to everyone else.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 352 353 354 355 356 … 1235 Older→ First