![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
icepixieSo over the past few days, I've watched parts three and four of the Key to Time story, "The Stones of Blood" and "The Androids of Tara."
Oh, such FUN! New Who is perhaps better at sticking themes and symbols and emotional oomph into an episode, but it can't beat the old stuff for sheer glee. Particularly these old ones. And there are a surprising amount of character moments, for all that Old Who is generally criticized for not having much of that kind of thing--I was particularly impressed with Lamia in "Tara," and of course Romana gets lovely moments all the time: the shoes and the very put-out, "Yeah, I got pushed off a cliff and I'm hanging by my fingernails--little help here?" attitude when she, uh, gets pushed off a cliff in "Stones"; the very smug way in which she lands the TARDIS perfectly at the beginning of "Tara," etc.
"Stones" has fantastic trappings with the Celtic mythology, the henge, the dotty old lady professor, etc. And the justice machines! Hah! I loved those little blinking lights. So fun.
And of course "Tara" was just a big ol' ball of silliness, and everyone knew it. HOW funny was K-9's "Master? Maaaster?" closing the episode when he was stuck in the boat? And Mary Tamm gets some fantastic disdainful expressions in when she's captured. Hee. I love how they're all sort of like, "Fourth segment of the Key? Eh, whatever. Logical reason for this society to have electric cattle prods mated with swords, crossbows that shoot laser bolts, and freaking androids, yet apparently still exist in the Middle Ages in every other way? Who cares!" Although at the same time, what we saw of their society was actually really intriguing: Only "peasants" have the knowledge to control the androids, and yet they're an underclass. Hmmm. I smell a revolution, myself...
I've never even heard of The Prisoner of Zenda, but I think I might need to read the book.
If I weren't already hatching a plan to dress up as Charley to![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
elflore's Eighth Doctor and go to a con sometime, somewhere, I'd make myself a copy of that lovely purple outfit Romana wears in this episode and wear it to a con. (I really, really want that hat. Really, really, really. I don't think I can articulate how much I want that hat, actually.)
Also, I thought I recognized the location they were shooting at--particularly the moat, and bridges over it. It was confirmed in the commentary that it was Leeds Castle, and I HAVE TOTALLY BEEN THERE. AWESOME. And heh, commentary. Funny. Lord, I could listen to Mary Tamm read the phone book for hours. She has such a gorgeous voice. Has she been in any of the Big Finish audios, I wonder?
I'm a bit sad that I only have two more Romana I stories left. :( I love Lalla Ward in the role as well, but Romana's first incarnation is just so cool. Smart and prickly and snarky and with a bit of naivete for spice. (Not to mention unusually good fashion sense for the 1970s.) Great character.
*
In random news, I found a pair of jeans that fit with a minimum of looking around. Not only do they fit at the top, but they are ALSO in "short" length, which I don't think I've seen for at least three years. Hooray! I don't have to take this pair up by the nearly two inches that "average" length requires!
(Yeah, so I'm about an eighth of an inch under 5'5". I am also not unnaturally sticklike and able to fit in, like, a size 2 or whatever would usually have the inseam of under 30" that I need. This means that the "petite" sizes some stores do, for people 5'4" and under, are just a bit too short, both in the legs and the waist, but EVERYTHING ELSE is too long. I love "short" lengths of things in my size.
And yes, I realize the tall people reading this are rolling their eyes and saying, "At least you have the option of altering them! We have to live with pants that are too short!" Yeah, well, anything that helps me continue to be lazy is nothing but good. ;))
*
Question: Am I a very strange person for eating cinnamon raisin bagels with butter and a generous helping of brown sugar sprinkled on top? My mother says that no bagel is meant to be sweet, while I think that any bread product which has a spice like cinnamon and little fruit bits in it damn well better be sweet, or what's the point, really?
Oh, such FUN! New Who is perhaps better at sticking themes and symbols and emotional oomph into an episode, but it can't beat the old stuff for sheer glee. Particularly these old ones. And there are a surprising amount of character moments, for all that Old Who is generally criticized for not having much of that kind of thing--I was particularly impressed with Lamia in "Tara," and of course Romana gets lovely moments all the time: the shoes and the very put-out, "Yeah, I got pushed off a cliff and I'm hanging by my fingernails--little help here?" attitude when she, uh, gets pushed off a cliff in "Stones"; the very smug way in which she lands the TARDIS perfectly at the beginning of "Tara," etc.
"Stones" has fantastic trappings with the Celtic mythology, the henge, the dotty old lady professor, etc. And the justice machines! Hah! I loved those little blinking lights. So fun.
And of course "Tara" was just a big ol' ball of silliness, and everyone knew it. HOW funny was K-9's "Master? Maaaster?" closing the episode when he was stuck in the boat? And Mary Tamm gets some fantastic disdainful expressions in when she's captured. Hee. I love how they're all sort of like, "Fourth segment of the Key? Eh, whatever. Logical reason for this society to have electric cattle prods mated with swords, crossbows that shoot laser bolts, and freaking androids, yet apparently still exist in the Middle Ages in every other way? Who cares!" Although at the same time, what we saw of their society was actually really intriguing: Only "peasants" have the knowledge to control the androids, and yet they're an underclass. Hmmm. I smell a revolution, myself...
I've never even heard of The Prisoner of Zenda, but I think I might need to read the book.
If I weren't already hatching a plan to dress up as Charley to
elflore's Eighth Doctor and go to a con sometime, somewhere, I'd make myself a copy of that lovely purple outfit Romana wears in this episode and wear it to a con. (I really, really want that hat. Really, really, really. I don't think I can articulate how much I want that hat, actually.)Also, I thought I recognized the location they were shooting at--particularly the moat, and bridges over it. It was confirmed in the commentary that it was Leeds Castle, and I HAVE TOTALLY BEEN THERE. AWESOME. And heh, commentary. Funny. Lord, I could listen to Mary Tamm read the phone book for hours. She has such a gorgeous voice. Has she been in any of the Big Finish audios, I wonder?
I'm a bit sad that I only have two more Romana I stories left. :( I love Lalla Ward in the role as well, but Romana's first incarnation is just so cool. Smart and prickly and snarky and with a bit of naivete for spice. (Not to mention unusually good fashion sense for the 1970s.) Great character.
*
In random news, I found a pair of jeans that fit with a minimum of looking around. Not only do they fit at the top, but they are ALSO in "short" length, which I don't think I've seen for at least three years. Hooray! I don't have to take this pair up by the nearly two inches that "average" length requires!
(Yeah, so I'm about an eighth of an inch under 5'5". I am also not unnaturally sticklike and able to fit in, like, a size 2 or whatever would usually have the inseam of under 30" that I need. This means that the "petite" sizes some stores do, for people 5'4" and under, are just a bit too short, both in the legs and the waist, but EVERYTHING ELSE is too long. I love "short" lengths of things in my size.
And yes, I realize the tall people reading this are rolling their eyes and saying, "At least you have the option of altering them! We have to live with pants that are too short!" Yeah, well, anything that helps me continue to be lazy is nothing but good. ;))
*
Question: Am I a very strange person for eating cinnamon raisin bagels with butter and a generous helping of brown sugar sprinkled on top? My mother says that no bagel is meant to be sweet, while I think that any bread product which has a spice like cinnamon and little fruit bits in it damn well better be sweet, or what's the point, really?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Random observations (mostly clothing-related)
Date: 2006-08-08 02:10 pm (UTC)In my experience, the "standard" inseam for women's jeans is 32, regardless of size. Short is 30, long or tall is 34. The latter being my holy grail, which I've been ecstatic to find in plain old regular Levis and Lees at Meijer and Wal-Mart the last couple of years. Victoria's Secret also does most of their jeans in all three inseams, but tend not to be cut well for hourglass proportions -- it's that "either snug hips or gappy waistband" problem.
Levi's stretch bootcuts make me all kinds of happy. Actually, ANYTHING that doesn't stop three inches above my ankle makes me all kinds of happy. People can mock 80s slouchy boots and legwarmers all they want, but they were the only thing between me and displaying my high-waters to the world throughout high school!
while I think that any bread product which has a spice like cinnamon and little fruit bits in it damn well better be sweet, or what's the point, really?
I agree with this, except for the part where I kinda think such a thing is already sweet and doesn't need additional sugar. But I'm pretty much always about the option that isn't presented. *g* Cinnamon raisin with just butter, however, sounds divine.
Re: Random observations (mostly clothing-related)
Date: 2006-08-08 04:33 pm (UTC)I, on the other hand, have no such excuse. *g* I just really like purple.
In my experience, the "standard" inseam for women's jeans is 32, regardless of size.
Really? To me, when, say, a size 14 and a size 4 are hanging beside each other on a rack, the 4 looks noticibly shorter. Is there something else that accounts for this, or am I just shopping at weird places? :)
The latter being my holy grail, which I've been ecstatic to find in plain old regular Levis and Lees at Meijer and Wal-Mart the last couple of years.
I noticed that stores like that have kept the long/tall lengths, as well as the average, but had completely ditched the short lengths. I figured it had something to do with the fashion for wearing one's jeans two or three inches too long.
Victoria's Secret also does most of their jeans in all three inseams, but tend not to be cut well for hourglass proportions -- it's that "either snug hips or gappy waistband" problem.
*makes note to stay far away from them* *g*
Actually, ANYTHING that doesn't stop three inches above my ankle makes me all kinds of happy.
Hee!
I agree with this, except for the part where I kinda think such a thing is already sweet and doesn't need additional sugar.
But it's so...bready. Like it got lost on the way to becoming a cake and dived too far into the yeast. (Possibly my expectations are a bit different from what "bagel" says to most people...)
But I'm pretty much always about the option that isn't presented. *g*
Heh heh heh.
Re: Random observations (mostly clothing-related)
Date: 2006-08-08 04:55 pm (UTC)It's mostly the top part -- the amount of fabric comes up to the same level on a 3-dimensional person looks longer when it's flat. The outseam tends to be longer for the same reason.
I noticed that stores like that have kept the long/tall lengths, as well as the average, but had completely ditched the short lengths.
We should switch places. The ones around here generally have way more short lengths, at least when I happen to be looking.
My guess is they're misjudging their local markets, and we're both getting there behind the feeding frenzy. ;-)
I figured it had something to do with the fashion for wearing one's jeans two or three inches too long.
For a while there, I was figuring I was completely screwed when that finally goes out, because when it came in was the first time in my life I was finding pants long enough. And they have this weird chain reaction where, because the hem (which is at the normal place on me) is meant to be covering most of a 4-inch platform shoe, the place where the knees should be is about three inches above my actual knees. I have one pair with pseudo-military style details, including dinky little knee tucks, of which the bottom ones hit just above my knee. Fortunately, they're not very noticeable -- if they were like real BDU knee tucks, they'd look very silly!
Crossing my fingers that the brands actually bothering to do lengths for women's pants will continue to do so after the "drag your hems on the ground in heels" phase finally passes. Even five years ago, it was practically impossible to find.
Re: Random observations (mostly clothing-related)
Date: 2006-08-08 05:53 pm (UTC)Ah, I see. That makes sense.
We should switch places. The ones around here generally have way more short lengths, at least when I happen to be looking.
Huh. How strange. Literally the last time I saw any pair of pants in a short length was when I was in high school. And that's in two different markets, since I would occasionally look for jeans up at school. (And there was England, of course, but I realized quickly that I was never going to find a pair of pants to fit me over there. NEVER. And even if I did, it'd be three times as expensive.)
My guess is they're misjudging their local markets, and we're both getting there behind the feeding frenzy. ;-)
Hey, definitely possible.
For a while there, I was figuring I was completely screwed when that finally goes out, because when it came in was the first time in my life I was finding pants long enough.
Oh, my. I suppose it does suck more to have too-short pants than too-long ones.
Crossing my fingers that the brands actually bothering to do lengths for women's pants will continue to do so after the "drag your hems on the ground in heels" phase finally passes.
Yes!