Bibliogryphon

Cheeky blighter! The joke compelled me to post that.

Can't we just ship him out to a godforsaken island on the other side of the world?

The advantage of this remake is that it will provide us with another pool of elderly actors to list in the future. I think Bill Nighy and Toby Jones will be unlikely to deliver (especially considering his fathers longevity) but Tom Courtney and Michael Gambon must already be on many lists. I did think that Michael Gambon was inspired casting as Godfrey, if you don't belive me watch the recent BBC adaptation of Emma where he plays Mr Woodhouse, normally the character is treated as a joke but his performance is really moving they all understand how the character thinks.

The first victim of the Mummy in Saturday's Doctor Who episode was an old lady played by Janet Henfrey (b.1935) but when I checked out where I recognised her from it was from the 1989 DW episode The Curse of Fenric where she played - an old lady so she should join the ranks of Peter Sallis, Warren Mitchell and Stephanie Cole in being nominated for the Clive Dunn eternal pensioner award.

Doctor Who on Saturday demonstrated its Deathlisting credentials with a monologue from Peter Capaldi that went something like this: "There are any number of reasons why that old lady died, old ladies are always dying. Its what they do. Its almost part of the job description".

Sounds like he might actually be alive.

The logical choice would be Nimoy.

Source: http://www.startrek....lks-first-movie Meanwhile, Trekkies aren't exactly known for taking things lightly, so the reaction to the news on a few Trek noticeboards has been interesting. Mods have basically been shutting down the discussions on the allegations fairly quickly and some Trekkies are swearing they will never watch The Motion Picture again. I'm a massive Trek fan and I'll never watch The Motion Picture again because: A - it's overly long and B - when I went into a Parisian cinema in 1980 to watch it, it was in English with French subtitles. I went to see it with my married sister when it first came out and we went to the pub for a quick drink before going home. Together with her husband, they owned a shop and a known gossipy customer came in the following day to inform my brother-in-law that she had seen his wife in the pub with a man. He replied along the lines of - they're brother and sister and I don't think their relationship is incestuous. She left without saying another word. It is definitely "the poor man's 2001" but I prefer it to the "militaristic Star Fleet" in the Meyer films. I think it is a film you can immerse yourself - don't worry about the plot, just enjoy the special effects and the orchestral score. The Enterprise, for one thing, has never seemed more real. I don't think I have ever seen better model work, even on the original Star Wars films. You feel as if it really is a giant spaceship capable of traveling between the stars. I don't get point B. Did you just want to watch it in English without the distraction of the subtitles or would you prefer it to be overdubbed in French? FWIW, I watch French films with English subtitles all the time, since I am monolinguistic but love French cinema. One interesting reading of the film I came across is that it is all a metaphor for sex and birth. The gleaming white Enterprise shoots out from the phallic dry dock, enters the ova-like V'Ger cloud and, at the end, a new life is born... I find The (slow) Motion Picture almost unwatchable even though it is directed by Robert Wise who brought us The Sound of Music and The Day The Earth Stood Still. It would probably be a good attempt at being a 'realistic' science fiction movie but it is a million miles away from the 'camp' feel of the original series. Meyer's films are closer to the original and are excellent sf adventure movies. Worse than the Motion Picture is ST:V. Yes, i prefer the realistic over the camp myself most of the time (1960s Batman being the big exception.) I am not a fan of the original 1960s Trek television series at all. The "office politics" between Kirk and Decker can be a bit depressing and too-real-life after a while though, although I imagine that is the kind of person Kirk would be like if he were real. I will have to part company with you on Meyer though. Aside from the overt militarism in Wrath of Khan and Undiscovered Country, I thought the latter's murder mystery was very poorly done. The analogies to the collapse of the Soviet Union are that film's only saving grace. Yes, objectively Star Trek 5 was terrible but... I like aspects of it, at least until it all falls apart at the end when they reach the "God Planet." I think Shatner did have a good eye for cinematography, such as the opening scene where Spock's brother comes riding in on horseback to the bloke digging holes. Had he been trained as a director from a young age, he might have made something of that career path. (Obviously, the much commented bad editing in the elevator scene is a mess though but, hell, there are lots of editing mistakes in the original Star Wars, too, such as the way R5-D4 moves back and forth.) The opening scene of Kirk trying to climb the mountain (and failing) is nicely symbolic of the search for God that is the theme of the story. The campfire scenes also help develop the characters of Spock, McCoy and Kirk more than nearly any other scene in any of the previous films (not that that is saying much.) Overall, though, the film can't overcome that awful "Why does God need a starship?" line and the twee ending. If you want a science fiction film that deals with spiritual subjects, you are better off watching Tarkovsky's Solaris, 2001 or, yes, even Star Trek: The Motion Picture.... P.S. - FWIW, I also think that Wise's Day th Earth Stood Still is one of the truly great SF films to come out of the United States. The like in the above post was purely for the last line. Like our Genesis conversation it seems we both have a lot to say on this topic but from different perspectives. ST:TOS is part of my childhood and I have always enjoyed it but I understand its limitations. I tried to watch TNG when it came along but it was so far up its own arse that I rapidly gave up. DS9 was a poor man's Babylon 5 and Voyager did not deliver its promise. There I kept it brief so as to avoid enraging our fellow posters who give not a toss about this subject. What about the animated series? Passed me by.

Leaves hospital.

This picture of Trevor Baxter (Professor Litefoot) was taken last year (b.1932) I do not suggest him for the main list but he would be a worthy addition to any Who based or Character actor team for 2015

For obvious reasons the names of hostages are not bandied about in the media until IS draw attention to them in the trailers at the end of thier videos this normally only allows a period of about a month or so where the name is known and thereby would be possible eligible as a pick. So unless someone has inside track in IS or the Intelligence community then this should not have a massive impact on the final results. They would probably accelerate the Deathrace results though.

The fact that he seems to be making these statements seems to me to be an encouraging sign.

I think the two who will go will be Sam Simon - 07th November Peter Sallis - 26th December And if we are lucky Billy Graham but that will be a bonus.

You are so convined by Tony Bennett you put him on the list twice?

Source: http://www.startrek....lks-first-movie Meanwhile, Trekkies aren't exactly known for taking things lightly, so the reaction to the news on a few Trek noticeboards has been interesting. Mods have basically been shutting down the discussions on the allegations fairly quickly and some Trekkies are swearing they will never watch The Motion Picture again. I'm a massive Trek fan and I'll never watch The Motion Picture again because: A - it's overly long and B - when I went into a Parisian cinema in 1980 to watch it, it was in English with French subtitles. I went to see it with my married sister when it first came out and we went to the pub for a quick drink before going home. Together with her husband, they owned a shop and a known gossipy customer came in the following day to inform my brother-in-law that she had seen his wife in the pub with a man. He replied along the lines of - they're brother and sister and I don't think their relationship is incestuous. She left without saying another word. It is definitely "the poor man's 2001" but I prefer it to the "militaristic Star Fleet" in the Meyer films. I think it is a film you can immerse yourself - don't worry about the plot, just enjoy the special effects and the orchestral score. The Enterprise, for one thing, has never seemed more real. I don't think I have ever seen better model work, even on the original Star Wars films. You feel as if it really is a giant spaceship capable of traveling between the stars. I don't get point B. Did you just want to watch it in English without the distraction of the subtitles or would you prefer it to be overdubbed in French? FWIW, I watch French films with English subtitles all the time, since I am monolinguistic but love French cinema. One interesting reading of the film I came across is that it is all a metaphor for sex and birth. The gleaming white Enterprise shoots out from the phallic dry dock, enters the ova-like V'Ger cloud and, at the end, a new life is born... I find The (slow) Motion Picture almost unwatchable even though it is directed by Robert Wise who brought us The Sound of Music and The Day The Earth Stood Still. It would probably be a good attempt at being a 'realistic' science fiction movie but it is a million miles away from the 'camp' feel of the original series. Meyer's films are closer to the original and are excellent sf adventure movies. Worse than the Motion Picture is ST:V. Yes, i prefer the realistic over the camp myself most of the time (1960s Batman being the big exception.) I am not a fan of the original 1960s Trek television series at all. The "office politics" between Kirk and Decker can be a bit depressing and too-real-life after a while though, although I imagine that is the kind of person Kirk would be like if he were real. I will have to part company with you on Meyer though. Aside from the overt militarism in Wrath of Khan and Undiscovered Country, I thought the latter's murder mystery was very poorly done. The analogies to the collapse of the Soviet Union are that film's only saving grace. Yes, objectively Star Trek 5 was terrible but... I like aspects of it, at least until it all falls apart at the end when they reach the "God Planet." I think Shatner did have a good eye for cinematography, such as the opening scene where Spock's brother comes riding in on horseback to the bloke digging holes. Had he been trained as a director from a young age, he might have made something of that career path. (Obviously, the much commented bad editing in the elevator scene is a mess though but, hell, there are lots of editing mistakes in the original Star Wars, too, such as the way R5-D4 moves back and forth.) The opening scene of Kirk trying to climb the mountain (and failing) is nicely symbolic of the search for God that is the theme of the story. The campfire scenes also help develop the characters of Spock, McCoy and Kirk more than nearly any other scene in any of the previous films (not that that is saying much.) Overall, though, the film can't overcome that awful "Why does God need a starship?" line and the twee ending. If you want a science fiction film that deals with spiritual subjects, you are better off watching Tarkovsky's Solaris, 2001 or, yes, even Star Trek: The Motion Picture.... P.S. - FWIW, I also think that Wise's Day th Earth Stood Still is one of the truly great SF films to come out of the United States. The like in the above post was purely for the last line. Like our Genesis conversation it seems we both have a lot to say on this topic but from different perspectives. ST:TOS is part of my childhood and I have always enjoyed it but I understand its limitations. I tried to watch TNG when it came along but it was so far up its own arse that I rapidly gave up. DS9 was a poor man's Babylon 5 and Voyager did not deliver its promise. There I kept it brief so as to avoid enraging our fellow posters who give not a toss about this subject.

It has gone quiet again. We are now over 2/3 through the year and on a pro rata basis we are down to 9 for the year. Unless we end up with a December like last year.

She was on The Last Leg a few weeks back - physically she appears fine, but she's clearly as mad as a box of frogs. That last picture makes her look very thin.

Source: http://www.startrek....lks-first-movie Meanwhile, Trekkies aren't exactly known for taking things lightly, so the reaction to the news on a few Trek noticeboards has been interesting. Mods have basically been shutting down the discussions on the allegations fairly quickly and some Trekkies are swearing they will never watch The Motion Picture again. I'm a massive Trek fan and I'll never watch The Motion Picture again because: A - it's overly long and B - when I went into a Parisian cinema in 1980 to watch it, it was in English with French subtitles. I went to see it with my married sister when it first came out and we went to the pub for a quick drink before going home. Together with her husband, they owned a shop and a known gossipy customer came in the following day to inform my brother-in-law that she had seen his wife in the pub with a man. He replied along the lines of - they're brother and sister and I don't think their relationship is incestuous. She left without saying another word. It is definitely "the poor man's 2001" but I prefer it to the "militaristic Star Fleet" in the Meyer films. I think it is a film you can immerse yourself - don't worry about the plot, just enjoy the special effects and the orchestral score. The Enterprise, for one thing, has never seemed more real. I don't think I have ever seen better model work, even on the original Star Wars films. You feel as if it really is a giant spaceship capable of traveling between the stars. I don't get point B. Did you just want to watch it in English without the distraction of the subtitles or would you prefer it to be overdubbed in French? FWIW, I watch French films with English subtitles all the time, since I am monolinguistic but love French cinema. One interesting reading of the film I came across is that it is all a metaphor for sex and birth. The gleaming white Enterprise shoots out from the phallic dry dock, enters the ova-like V'Ger cloud and, at the end, a new life is born... I find The (slow) Motion Picture almost unwatchable even though it is directed by Robert Wise who brought us The Sound of Music and The Day The Earth Stood Still. It would probably be a good attempt at being a 'realistic' science fiction movie but it is a million miles away from the 'camp' feel of the original series. Meyer's films are closer to the original and are excellent sf adventure movies. Worse than the Motion Picture is ST:V.

Carlos the Jackel is to face a new trial for murders committed in 1974 but if you look at the picture he now looks like Jim Broadbent

Lynsey de Paul's funeral offers the usual opportunity of seeing celebrities with their guard down. Look out for Henry Kelly though.

You don't have anything to worry about Holland came second last year by entering an original and not half bad song. (Interesting strategy)

I am sorry to hear that. It is always sad to lose a loyal friend.

One of my colleagues is going to see Steve Hackett in a couple of weeks. Looking at the pictures of the group from the recent documentry I thought he had not aged as well as Peter, Tony & Mike.

Blackpool airport is no more.

BBC are inviting video entries in an effort to find a winning song. So can the Deathlist boast any song writing, musical or singing talent when we can dominate Europe with our storming anthem I Choose You (to go on the Deathlist).