Torchwood: Ghost Machine (S1,E3)

"Since when did we care about courts?"

Ghost Machine (Season One, Episode Three) ("An alien shows visions of the past to the Torchwood team, bringing a long-buried crime to the surface.")

What I Liked

* After the rest of Torchwood busies themselves looking for someone by a variety of hi-tech means, Owen finds him in about ten seconds by looking at the phonebook.

* Gwen and Rhys' flashbacks--clearly a couple very much in love.

* Jack bitching the team out when they get lazy and stop looking for Bernie Harris.

* The scenes with young Ed Morgan--a very effective and scary portrayal of a rapist/murderer.

What I'm Not Sure About

* When Jack and Gwen are at the shooting range, they don custom-embossed Torchwood ear protection. Does Torchwood really set aside part of the budget for corporate branding? Do they have their own ballpoint pens and coffee mugs? And aren't they supposed to be a "secret" organization anyway?

What I Didn't Like

* Near the end, when old Ed Morgan is about to impale himself on Gwen's knife, Jack gets a really cheesy slow-motion "Nooooooo!"

Commentary

By: Burn Gorman (actor), Helen Raynor (writer), Colin Teague (director)

Tone: Amiable, though Colin Teague talks way too much and leaves little room for Helen Raynor and Burn Gorman to get a word in.

Interesting Tidbits:

* Burn Gorman joking that Eve Myles is difficult to work with--that she does yoga on set and takes two hours to get into character.

* The Bernie Harris character was based on an old boyfriend of the episode's writer.

Deleted Scenes

* A slightly longer intro to the beginning chase scene--Tosh temporarily loses the signal, leading Jack to suggest they go see a Charlotte Church concert.

* A boardroom scene in which Jack figures out the purpose of the alien device--it's a sort of "G.P.S." for "transdimensional beings" so they can orient themselves through space and time. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but that's okay.

Torchwood Declassified: "Living History"

* Interviews with the cast and crew about Owen's character--variously labelled, in very British fashion, as "boozy", a "geezer", "cocksure", and a "Jack the Lad"

* Discussion of the virtues of Cardiff as a site for filming and a little backstory on the big Owen/Bernie garden chase scene.

Un dossier perdu

Next up in my random stack of French novels was a 1974 "aventure--policier" novel, Colette Renard's Un dossier perdu. It was one in a series of the publisher's "lire et savoir" ("read and know") series, which was apparently intended either for crazy foreigners like myself or for elementary school children--the book makes a point of noting it requires a vocabulary of 3,500 words and includes a handy glossary in the back (the definitions are also in French, and the list of defined words includes an odd mix of stuff I would assume people would pick up very quickly like "sol" or "message" and much harder stuff I've never encountered before, like French historical figures and Paris street names). It also contains maps of Paris and photographs of mundane things like cafes and automobiles--not really necessary to following the story, but I always appreciate publishers who put a little something extra in novels.

It starts off in a very intriguing way--a man is found beaten in the middle of the sidewalk, barely conscious and repeatedly mumbling a strange name. When brought to safety, he's very mysterious but constantly fears that someone is looking for him. It turns out (and yes, I'm going to spoil this for the thousands of you who were just about to bombard E-Bay looking for this book) that the man is a scientist working on creating a synthetic substance that is much stronger than steel and cheapter to make. Because his plans will revolutionize the world, some folks from Big Steel (I assume) are out to get him. There follows a bit of running around and one mild fist-fight, but most of the excitement is gone as soon as we know what this guy is running from (I thought for the longest time we would get a "surprise twist" and realize that this guy is the bad guy and the people looking for him are the good guys, but no such luck). Anyway, the poor bastard's scientific files (the "lost dossier" of the title) end up destroyed through sabotage and, in despair, he crashes his car into a tree. Fin.

Night Terrors

FROM THE ARCHIVES (Buffy book reviews)

NIGHT TERRORS

Alice Henderson (2005)

RATING: 4/5 Stakes

SETTING: Season Two

CAST APPEARANCES: Buffy, Willow, Cordelia, Xander, Angel, Joyce, Giles, Principal Snyder, Oz, Ethan Rayne

MAJOR ORIGINAL CHARACTERS: The Night Terror (demon)

BACK-OF-THE-BOOK SUMMARY: “Banished to the realm of dreams, the Night Terror stalks its victims as they sleep. By replacing another’s soul with its own, the demon can assume anyone’s body and wreak havoc in the real world. But the effect is short-lived. Human bodies soon break down under the tremendous stress of the transfer, and the Night Terror is forced to find a new body to inhabit. That is, until it discovers Buffy’s secret and imagines the Slayer would make an ideal—and permanent—host. . . .”

REVIEW

Night Terrors will always hold a special place in my heart because it’s the first Buffy Choose-Your-Own-Adventure (“Stake Your Destiny”) book I’ve successfully completed on my first try. Indeed, one of the aspects that sets this book apart from most others in the series is the wide range of possible endings, ranging from complete success to mediocre survival to outright death.The core plot of the book is an attempt by a demon, the Night Terror, to take over the bodies of residents of Sunnydale by entering into their dreams. This leads to some really interesting and fun dream sequences with Buffy, and shows us examples of how White Hats like Giles, Joyce, and Angel would be like if evil (of course, this last one we know all too well).The writing is smooth and the dialogue is appropriately quirky. In addition, crisp action scenes and a well-researched bad guy help keep the plot moving. Definitely one of the better Stake Your Destiny books.

NU Plays Catch-22 With Benefits

FROM THE ARCHIVES (Daily Nebraskan columns)

NU plays Catch-22 with benefits

Jeremy Patrick (jhaeman@hotmail.com)

April 02, 2001

"Bureaucracy, the rule of no one, has become the modern form of despotism."
-- Mary McCarthy, The New Yorker magazine

We are angry, we are frustrated, and we are tired. But we are not going to be quiet until NU stops spouting "equality" and starts delivering it. The history of domestic partner benefits at NU is like something out of Joseph Heller's "Catch-22."
The University-Wide Fringe Benefits Committee says it is not itself "a decision-making body" and tables the issue of domestic partner benefits. Higher-level administrators say that the issue must be decided by the regents or by the Legislature.
The Board of Regents avoids addressing the issue because the benefits committee is supposed to decide it but asserts that the "public policy" of Nebraska is against it. Legislators, who decide the state's "public policy," point to the Nebraska Constitution, which leaves responsibility for deciding issues like faculty benefits to the Board of Regents and the committees it creates.
Everybody has excuses; nobody has answers. And the result is that gifted faculty members who have spent their entire careers at NU are denied the benefits any heterosexual teacher acquires: funeral leave, sick leave, family medical leave of absence and the institution's crisis leave sharing policy. Additionally, faculty members with same-sex partners are denied equal access to NU's health plan, forcing them to spend thousands of dollars more on private health insurance. The net effect is that heterosexual teachers and staff earn several thousand dollars more than gay or bisexual faculty members. Although UNL's Academic Senate and ASUN have repeatedly called for domestic partner benefits and two-thirds of NU's "peer institutions" offer them, no visible progress has been made.
It all began in 1992, when the Annual Report of UNL's Homophobia Awareness Committee called for domestic partner benefits. After a meeting, then-Chancellor Graham Spanier stated that he "supported a revision in the proposed family leave policy to accommodate gay and lesbian couples."
No real action was taken until the University-Wide Fringe Benefits Committee considered the issue in 1996. The committee permanently tabled the idea on a 6-3 vote and "agreed not to reconsider the matter until legal, financial and other matters are resolved." (Omaha World-Herald, 8/16/96) Unclear as to what the "legal, financial and other" questions were, the Committee on Lesbian and Gay Concerns offered to provide more information. John Russell, an administrator at NU, wrote back and stated that the committee didn't need any additional information and wouldn't reconsider the question until "such issues ... are resolved by the appropriate jurisdictions (judicial, legislative, etc.)."
And thus, the dissembling begins. One should ask exactly which "judicial" and "legislative" issues the committee was waiting on. The benefits committee is not made up of lawyers, it did not ask for legal advice, and if it really did do its research, it would have seen that dozens of "Tier 1" universities implemented domestic partner benefits without difficulty. The benefits committee could have addressed the issue and simply chose not to.
Their decision making is controlled by two factors. First, is offering benefits in the best interest of the faculty and staff? Second, is it economically feasible? Of course, the answers to both questions are a resounding yes. By permanently tabling the issue, the committee was cowardly able to avoid justifying its actions by placing the burden on vague "legislative" and "judicial" shoulders.
Fast-forward to 2000. The issue is still tabled in the benefits committee. In August of 2000, UNL's student health plan goes into effect, which allows students to claim their domestic partners for health insurance. Now, not only are GLBT faculty members denied benefits that straight faculty members receive, they are denied health benefits that both undergraduate and graduate students receive.
Questioned about the effect of Initiative 416 in the Daily Nebraskan, University General Counsel Dick Wood states that it would not prevent the university's offering domestic-partner benefits. This makes sense, especially considering that the amendment is of dubious constitutionality and that resolving the legal dispute is likely to take years.
The most recent blow came on February 5, when NU President Dennis Smith sent an e-mail to all faculty and staff about the new tuition credit for faculty family members. He began the letter by saying, "I want to share a development with you that, if approved, will positively impact all full-time university employees." (emphasis added)
It quickly became apparent that the tuition-credit plan would only benefit some faculty members: GLBT teachers and staff would suffer an additional inequality in benefits.
All of this, then, comes in the face of NU's written policy that it makes "all decisions regarding recruitment, hiring, promotion, and all other terms and conditions of employment without discrimination on the basis of ... individual characteristics other than qualifications for employment, quality of performance ... and conduct related to employment." (emphasis added) Further on in the policy, NU vows to administer all of its "employment programs" without discrimination on the basis of "sexual orientation" and "marital status."
The university simply cannot have it both ways. Retaining such a policy under current conditions is dishonest and deceptive to both current employees and those considering employment here. The university must either offer equal benefits to all persons based solely on merit or stop claiming that it doesn't discriminate.
In this case, sincere malice would be preferable to blatant hypocrisy.

(c) 2001 Daily Nebraska Online (www.dailyneb.com)

Drusilla's Back!

I have to quickly note the return of one of my favorite characters to the world of Buffy: Drusilla! Even more, it's written by Juliet Landau--one never knows whether actors can write, but this was a really good (and gory!) story. I'm definitely looking forward to the second half, and consider this the best IDW's Angel series has done since it started.

Colony

FROM THE ARCHIVES (Buffy book reviews)

COLONY

Laura J. Burns & Melinda Metz (2005)

RATING: 4/5 Stakes

SETTING: Season Two

CAST APPEARANCES: Buffy, Xander, Principal Snyder, Cordelia, Willow, Giles, Oz, Angel, Joyce, Harmony, Amy, Jenny Calendar

MAJOR ORIGINAL CHARACTERS: Victoria Belakane (villain)

BACK-OF-THE-BOOK SUMMARY: “Because of the high incidences of death and violence, the Mayor of Sunnydale has invited a woman called Belakane to speak at Sunnydale High School. Her program, ‘Be the Ultimate You!’ builds self-esteem in teenagers. But Belakane is a demon antlike queen, whose test—and subsequent nurturing of the skills she discovers—is simply part of her plot to enlist workers to build her colony, and to find mates to help her populate it. Soon Sunnydale High is full of kids with only one trait each: aggressive Slayer, brainy Willow, helpful Oz . . .and Belakane has only just begun. . . ."

REVIEW

Colony is a strong entry in the line of “Stake Your Destiny” choose-your-own-adventure Buffy novels. The main plot thread enlists the reader in stopping inspirational-speaker Victoria Belakane from turning Sunnydale High into a giant ant farm, while the subplot pits the Slayer against a Sleaniman demon, a dimension-hopping brute with a surprising vulnerability. Much like its predecessors, Colony is a hard book to win—I died three times before deciding it was review-writing time.

In addition to an original and well thought-out plot, Colony boasts accurate characterization and fun, inventive dialogue. Xander’s transformation into an enormously obese figure of rippling fat is a classic combination of disgusting and hilarious, and the portrayal of high school assemblies is spot-on. Fans of the “Stake Your Destiny” line should try this one out.

The Bible Tells Me So

FROM THE ARCHIVES (Daily Nebraskan columns)

The Bible Tells Me So

Religion adopts secular values to stay alive

Jeremy Patrick (jhaeman@hotmail.com)

March 20, 2000 "Both sides read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes his aid against the other..."
--Abraham Lincoln, Second Inaugural Address on the Civil War (1865)

A century ago, religion appeared to be on its last legs, an archaic remnant of a superstitious past. Darwin's proof of evolution had stormed on to the stage, Hume and others had shown that the philosophical arguments for God's existence were fallacious and Freud argued that belief in God was an infantile delusion.
Marx hoped to wean society from the "opiate of the people," and Nietzsche declared "God is Dead."
But God didn't die. Instead, religious belief remains as strong as ever. Even in today's "secular" world of "moral degradation," 98% of Americans say they believe in God. (Stark, 1994)
Part of the reason religious belief remains so strong is because most people have a need to feel that some divine presence is watching out for them. But while belief in God remains constant, the social effects of this belief have changed dramatically in the past century.
A little over a century ago, many cities and states had laws forbidding people from working or shopping on Sundays in order to observe the Sabbath.
These "Blue Laws" had ample Biblical support (Exodus 20:8-10, Nehemiah 10:31) and were tied to severe punishments. In colonial times, for example, violators could be fined, whipped or sentenced to spend time in the stocks. Repeat violators could be executed.
As commerce became more important, enforcement became lax. This raised the ire of many of the era's religious leaders.
One reverend in 1890 said "We see this desecration of the Sabbath increasing every year, giving up a little here and giving up a little there...I want to say to the working man, if you give up the Sabbath, you give up the best friend you've got . . ." (Hill & Cheadle, 1996)
Now of course, these laws are largely forgotten and present-day religious leaders don't seem to mind.
In the late 1800s, religious leaders were also appalled at the "loose morals" and increasing "godlessness" of the nation. Today we blame this on movies and the Internet; back then, it was blamed on alcohol.
Citing scripture (Proverbs 20:1, Isaiah 28:7), the Women's Christian Temperance Union formed the "Anti-Saloon League of America." Over 60,000 churches joined the movement. Thirteen years after it went into effect, Prohibition ended due to difficult enforcement and the Depression.
Today, advocates of Prohibition and the supporting scriptures are routinely ignored.
Of course, the Bible was used to justify much more heinous practices than just banning liquor or work on Sundays. For most of its history, Christianity was united in supporting racism and slavery.
They had ample Biblical support (Leviticus 25:44-46, Exodus 21:20-21) and some used it to resist the abolition movement of the 19th century.
A typical example was said by a Baptist minister in 1856: ". . . Jesus Christ recognized [slavery] as one that was lawful among men . . . Jesus Christ has not abolished slavery by a prohibitory command; and . . . he has introduced no new moral principle which can work its destruction..." (Hill & Cheadle, 1996)
As Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "The greatest blasphemy of the whole ugly process was that the white man ended up making God his partner in the exploitation of the Negro."
Christianity slowly adopted the secular values of ending slavery and segregation and allowing people to choose when to work and when to drink.
Another example of a change in Christanity is the extreme changes in attitude by mainstream religious organizations toward once adamantly opposed practices like divorce (Mark 10:6-9) and contraception (Genesis 38:7-10).
Being divorced is no longer a stigma in politics, and fundamentalists cannot be found blocking access to a pharmacy that dispenses birth control pills. Yet at one time divorcing and using birth control were seen as severe violations of God's Word.
These dramatic shifts in view demonstrate how malleable the Bible really is. As Shakespeare said, "Even the devil can cite scripture for his purpose."
Anyone who reads the Bible, literally or not, brings his or her own biases, prejudices and expectations into the act. They all highlight some passages and ignore others, while explaining away contradictory passages to their favor.
This practice is dangerous; racism, the subjugation of women and hatred and discrimination toward homosexuals have all been justified at one time by quoting scripture.
Last week the Pope apologized for, among other things, the brutal slayings of thousands of heretics at the hands of the Crusaders. The Crusaders' battle-cry? "God wills it!"
In the end, the Bible is just an empty tome full of empty words. It's time to close the book, open your eyes and think for yourself.

© 2001 Daily Nebraskan Online (www.dailyneb.com)