TimeChaser

I definitely label myself as a geek,considering my knowledge/obsession with things like anime, Doctor Who, and music. My personal definition of "dork" is more along the lines of someone with a pretty low understanding of something. I tend to use it as a softer term for "idiot" or "moron". [quote name='chibi-master']Geek...well, the stereotypical movie versions. Like the example mentioned earlier! Also, geek=nerd.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't say that necessarily. A geek is someone who is totally obsessed with something (remember the old Beat the Geeks game show on Comedy Central?) I think of a nerd as someone who is obsessed, but who's obsession translates as knowledge of things that are actually useful, like computers, and not trivial geek fare. But maybe that's just me. :animesmil

[quote name='DeLarge'][SIZE=1]With my vast and untouchable knowledge/memory of film and TV, I am fortunate enough to say I've seen Matt Smith act in a couple of different things on TV, and he was really rather good. The two roles he played were so totally different, and yet he inhabited the characters equally well, so I can see the potential for a good Doctor in there (he should be able to handle the multi-faceted nature of the character's personality). It seems shallow, but I'm looking forward to seeing what he chooses to wear. Th clothes are such a memorable and vital part of the character that it seems really important to me. I mean, when Tennant's Doctor first came on TV in the pinstripe suit and Converse, that was all I wanted to wear for weeks. Matt Smith's lack of eyebrows does creep me out ever so slightly, though... [/SIZE][/QUOTE] I should see if I can find something he's been in so I can get a feel for his acting. I feel more confident now from your appraisal of his past work (plus I knew Moffat and the team would never pick someone who wasn't good enough for the part). Yeah, the clothes are always important, they help define the character as much as the performance. I'm not sure if I heard it in an official source, but one reason each Doctor picks his particular outfit/style is to help stabilize his new persona, to differentiate the new him from all his other selves. I'm hoping we get another bunch of press photos when they start filming so we can see him in his actual Doctor clothes. Heh, yeah the lack of eyebrows is a bit disconcerting, but as someone who's eyebrows are barely there, I can get over it. :animesmil

[quote name='Vicky'][size=1]Haha but that kind of thing would appeal to the kiddy winks. Unfortunately emo fangirls irritate me because they think watching the TV movie makes them an old time fan. I do agree he should get a hair cut but you know, it's quite popular these days. It's almost like Tennant wearing the converse, except they looked good.[/size][/QUOTE] I don't really mind his hair, I'm just afraid of him getting unfair and inaccurate labels. I guess I shouldn't sweat it too much. :animeswea Heh, and it worked in my case. I bought a pair because of Tennant. :rolleyes:

[quote name='Nerdsy'][color=deeppink]My judgements of him are currently only about his face. I'm waiting for some screen time before I say anything else. ; ) Although I've seen more than one picture. And there was even one were he didn't look like a Jay Leno/Crispen Glover vampire lovechild![/color][/QUOTE] Fair enough. :animesmil Heh, yeah... I'm hoping he gets a little bit of a haircut at least for the role. I have fears of him being labeled the "Emo Doctor" or something similar just because of the way his hair is right now. :animesigh

[B]Cats[/B]. Never anything else. Beautiful, mysterious, exotic. We had a cat for sixteen years (he died in the summer) and we all loved him. Plus they are quiet. Dogs bark too much, especially around here. I don't like that noise. Cat's are also better at their own grooming.

Exactly! Hartnell, Troughton, Pertwee, Tom Baker, Colin Baker, McCoy, Eccleston... none of them were "attractive". About the only ones you can say that about are Davison, McGann, and Tennant. While I absolutely love Tennant for his energy and performance, I think a bothersome side-effect of this new age of Doctor Who is this new air of sexuality (however minor) that's crept in. It is reflective of modern times, but it was something they never dared touch in the classic series.

[quote name='Nerdsy'][color=deeppink]I didn't, though. I've always enjoyed Tennant's face.[/color][/QUOTE] Me too. My point was though, that I think looks aren't really that important, it's how well an actor can play the part. I also thought Matt Smith looked odd when I first saw him, but I'm getting more used to it. I'm just... nevermind me. :animesmil I'm just tired of seeing so many early judgments of him based on one interview and one picture. I think my natural defense mechanisms kick in because I've been a fan of the show my whole life. I don't mean to be rude about your opinion.

[quote name='Nerdsy'][color=deeppink]I don't like his face. It's weird. [/color][/QUOTE] People said the exact same thing about David Tennant. ;)

Do they not realize that there already exists such a thing named a [B]catfish[/B] that many people, including myself, find quite tasty? :p

[B]Black Lagoon[/B] is without a doubt in my Top 10 anime. It's just perfect on so many levels: the characters, the action, the animation. And the dub is truly among the best out there. It's just an engrossing show that pulls you in as long as you have no qualms about over-the-top language and extreme graphic violence. Oddly enough, I would never watch anything live-action like this, but in animation form it seems just right. I was beyond happy when I finally got the Second Season late last year and recently watched it. As good as Season 1 was, Season 2 topped it, especially the 6-episode closing story arc. I'm eager to see where they take things in Season 3.

Been on a Tool kick lately, particularly the album Lateralus and the song [U][URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiR1hmpk-x4"]The Grudge[/URL][/U].

Currently listening to [U][URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTolmLPYHV0"]Porcupine Tree - Slave Called Shiver[/URL][/U].

[quote name='SunfallE'][COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"] Also, sister site of [U]God hates Retards[/U], [U]God hates Women[/U] and [U][B]God hates Harry Potter[/B][/U]? [I]*falls over laughing*[/I][/QUOTE] Because Harry Potter turns kids to witchcraft and Satan! :worried: Now pardon me while I go sacrifice a chicken. ;)

An interesting new development in the story... [url]http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2009/01/08/watchdog-to-probe-atheist-advertising-claim-91466-22649549/[/url] From the article: [I]Stephen Green, national director of Christian Voice, complained to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) yesterday, saying the adverts break the ASA?s codes on substantiation and truthfulness. ?It is given as a statement of fact and that means it must be capable of substantiation if it is not to break the rules. ?There is plenty of evidence for God, from people?s personal experience, to the complexity, interdependence, beauty and design of the natural world. ?But there is scant evidence on the other side, so I think the advertisers are really going to struggle to show their claim is not an exaggeration or inaccurate, as the ASA code puts it,? said Mr Green. The adverts contain the slogan: ?There?s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life,? whilst the ASA code states that ?marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove all claims, whether direct or implied, that are capable of objective substantiation?.[/I] I've heard that this Stephen Green also tried to bring a charge of blasphemy against [I]Jerry Spring - The Opera[/I]. :rolleyes:

[quote name='Darren'][SIZE="1"]Well I'll disagree with you on point 1. I'm atheist; I [B]believe[/B] that God doesn't exist. Furthermore, if atheism isn't a belief, then why would they bother to advertise. They shouldn't care. Point 2: I slightly agree. I don't think it's necessarily shoving beliefs on others... But my whole point is that atheists shouldn't have to advertise. They shouldn't care because they're not a religion... By advertising on the buses, they're defeating the whole idea behind atheism.[/SIZE][/QUOTE] I'd rather say "I don't believe in God" than "I believe God does not exist." And they're not advertising atheism like they're trying to market it, they just want people to think critically, and the point is there isn't a lot of critical thinking and self-examination going within religion. If you actually read religious texts with a critical eye and without predetermined beliefs, it doesn't take long to notice inconsistencies, contradictions, and a lot of abject and horrible crimes committed either in the name of God or by his order. There's also the need to critically think about how much of a book like the Bible is true history and how much is just fable. [QUOTE=Tophel]No I've seen his documentaries and interviews. He seems a little obssessed with convincing everyone that he is right. An overabundance of ego combined with a lack of empathy. ... Well actually I would have to disagree. He doesn't really want to engage in any sort of debate/discussion. He would rather lecture. Like priests lecture us about sin, Hell and fire and brimstone, only he lectures about evolution and the evils of religion. Same pulpit, same tone, just a different message. I consider him a secular fundamentalist.[/QUOTE] He's not an egotist at all and neither does he lack empathy. He's just trying to point out the inconsistencies and contradictions in religion which people who have been indoctrinated since childhood are either unable or unwilling to investigate. You can't equate him at all to a preacher, I'm sorry. There is a difference between offering people to take a look at the evidence and telling them "Believe in this because it says so in this book." No atheists, including Dawkins, are fundamentalist. There is no doctrine or dogma for us to be fundamentalist about. We don't go around blowing up people to get to heaven or shooting doctors at abortion clinics.

Currently reading [I]A Devil's Chaplain[/I] by Richard Dawkins, a collection of his essays on various subjects, including a eulogy to his friend Douglas Adams (yep, THAT Douglas Adams).

[quote name='Tophel']By the way, is it just me or does Richard Dawkins have some massive chip on his shoulder about religions? He comes across to me as a smug mean and grumpy guy. I love the South Park episodes. Heheh.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't take a full personality profile of Richard on just a South park episode; they send up EVERYONE. I have been reading his books, and he's a very intelligent and thoughtful person and makes a lot of good arguments. Plus, he isn't just some hack, he's an evolutionary biologist and most of his books are about evolution. [I]The God Delusion[/I] is only his most recent book, but he has been an atheist for most of his life. The issue is this: religion has somehow achieved this charmed status where people are allowed to get very offended if someone is at all critical of it. Richard and his contemporaries want to put religion on the table of rational criticism, and allow us to discuss it open and freely in the same we we debate politics and music and any other intellectual subjects. There are very good reasons people give up their religions or never believe in the first place, and we'd like to discuss those reasons rationally.

I think it's a harmless exercise of our freedoms. :) I too am atheist, and I don't see anything wrong with this, nor do I see it as "pushing belief" on anyone, because 1) Atheism is not a belief, it's a lack of belief in god/gods and the supernatural, and 2) Placing some ads on a bus is hardly getting in someone's face about it, unlike people going door-to-door preaching at you. All this is is opening up room for discussion.

[quote name='Tophel']Not sure I'm a fan of the new Doc. I hope they're not going for the teen crowd. He seems a little too young for my liking. Oh well, Moffatt is in charge and he did well with his scripts, hopefully he knows what he is doing.[/QUOTE] I don't think they cast him to reach a certain demographic. I trust what they said in the Confidential, talking about how hard a role the Doctor is to play, and that they chose Matt because he real nailed it in their eyes. Alas, we must wait several more torturous months to find out. :animesigh I'm looking forward to two things: 1) Once they cast the companion, the next press photos of Matt and (insert name here later) in costume/character. 2) Our first glimpse of Matt actually acting, likely a brief minute right after the regeneration and then the trailer for Season 5.

[quote name='Rachmaninoff']Well that's interesting. o_O And I'm sorry to say it, but my first impression with him being so skinny and pale... was to think [SIZE="1"]Twilight[/SIZE]. >_> Sorry but that was my first impression. I am curious to see how he works out though.[/QUOTE] But just remember, blame Twilight for that and not anybody on the DW production team. ;) I've never seen Matt Smith before, so I can't make any judgments yet on his acting. I can see certain sparks in him in the Doctor Who Confidential interview that give me hope that he'll work out, and I put my trust in Steven Moffat (brillianyt writer) and the rest of the team who understand that this is a hard role to cast and play. My only reservation is his age, I mean he's a year younger than me. :animestun I just wonder, in the context of the stories, how will older characters act toward this man who appears much younger than them?

Not much, but at least one very special gift. - $70 cash (probably use it to help pay for a new mp3 player). - $20 Barnes & Noble gift card. - Starbucks card (I've never been to a Starbucks before, but I guess there's a first time for everything). - A copy of the Cinematic Titanic release of "Santa Claus Conquers the Martians", signed by the whole CT crew (gives major glomps to Katana).

I wasn't aware of any of that. :animestun Makes you wonder if Obama was even aware of all those things. You'd think he would be. He really should have picked someone else. :animesigh

Yeah, they didn't explain the Cybershades (those animal things) too well, but I really liked them, they were a nice touch. Russel is co-writing the next couple of specials and then I think writing the last one on his own. Wiki removed some information, but unless it changes there will be a special at Easter, one at Christmas 2009, and one early in 2010 that will be a 2-parter presumably leading into Season 5 and the Eleventh Doctor. I think Tennant is serious about leaving. He says he was tempted to stay on one more season to work with Moffat as the new head writer, but he'd always intended to leave at the same time as Russel.

I can understand Obama's desire for inclusion, but I really think he should have picked someone else, especially after the recent defeat of rights in several states during the election. He could have picked someone less controversial.

Heh, and my scepticism proves to be true. :p I watched the special last night, and really enjoyed it. Most of the past Christmas specials have had elements that eventually led me to dislike them, things that kind of ruined the story and made it feel silly (I am aware of the British tradition of panto at Christmastime). I think this one was better because it was scaled down from trying to be more epic than the rest. Plus I liked the storyline of the man who thought he was the Doctor. Morrisey seemed like he'd be annoying from the opening sequence, but then you get to like him when the story starts to unfold. There was real heart and emotion to this episode. I just wish they'd have come up with a better name for the next special, because [I]Planet of the Dead[/I] is too similar to [I]Forest of the Dead[/I]. Lazy titles... :animeangr