In figures: Brexit and its most famous ad viz the European Union.

This was initially writen as a reply in a forum.

Damage report

If and when the UK officially leaves, its farmers and other fields will be bereft of all the EU subsidies, though the UK government has promised to continue (some of) those into 2020, though Brexit, if not stopped, might come into force in 2019.

Paint no evil

Every political ad is implicitly a promise.

The "£350-million-a-week" payments into the EU, an infamous and false claim that was painted on the "battle bus" of the Brexit supporters' "Leave" campaign, calculates to £18.2 billion for an entire year, and this is not the kind of money that the UK has ever annually paid into the EU budget.

Figure it out

The very generous estimate of a £50 billion divorce bill is more than five times greater than the UK's £9.4 bn net payment into the EU in 2016, despite the £18.9 bn gross contribution. (Source: UK Office for National Statistics, 31 October 2017)

The gross divorce bill could be as high as £89bn, which is 9.4 times greater than the net payment. (The Guardian, 29 Nov 2017)

While the UK budget presented on 11/2017 is £769 billion + £40 bn deficit (the deficit is 1.9% of the UK GDP).

The 2016 net payment of £9.4B into the EU is only 0.44% of the £2.131 trillion UK GDP in that same year. (The UK GDP calculated from the dollar amount of U.S. $2.629 trillion at the rate of U.S. $1.23321 for one pound sterling on 31 December 2016.)

All this means, that the UK practically gets half its money back — into projects, subsidies, and investments that Britain itself really hasn't had the thought to finance.

A New Hope

What I hope for, is a turn-around to cancel Brexit through a possible second referendum, which was alluded to by European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and European Council President Donald Tusk on 16 January 2018.

The Next Best Thing (or least worst)

The next-best option would be a soft Brexit, which would give the UK the same status as Norway: stay in the European Economic Area (EEA), and follow those same EU rules anyway — without the benefit of having any say in the decision-making on EU policy and external relations, and on those "pesky" regulations, current and future.

If the UK wants to sell (export) any stuff to the EU, then that stuff would still have to be designed according to EU standards, and there's no escaping that.

Dune the movie and series

I like the Dune movie for its very baroque and steampunk feel, but it seems that the plot was rushed, and that there was not enough world-building. The space-based special effects and the Toto soundtrack in the movie are timeless; compare with Darren Aronofsky's The Fountain.

Whereas the series is much better in terms of worldbuilding, character development, actor work, storytelling, and planetside visual effects. And that unforgettable music by Brian Tyler, which was used in the Star Trek 2009 trailer.

Space-based VFX in the series were very drab, though, and remain so to this day. Ultimately, if a Blu-ray version is ever made of the series, then the space-based effects should be redone entirely, and if Lynch and the movie studio are ever okay, then the space-based effects (especially the heighliners) should be fashioned after those in the movie.

That way, it would be an ideal combination with Lynch's baroque/steampunk elements, and good storytelling.

Unlike Star Trek/Star Wars and other science fiction, a lot of the Dune story happens planetside, and worldbuilt space tech is more like an afterthought.

Family, and character development on Star Trek: The Next Generation

Data did not develop much throughout the series. It was in Generations where he did. Wesley developed in the beginning, and we see plenty of that, but then he was "put on a shuttle".

Riker's development was just the beard (because he was getting visibly older at one point), and that over time, his midsection got softer and softer.

Troi did develop, albeit slowly, and we get to see her in different settings; her role as "Major Rakal" in "Face of the Enemy" stands out. Oh, Deanna's fab mom Lwaxana, a dead father and a dead sister she didn't know about.

Throughout TNG's run, Worf got the most development of all people, as we see him promoted once or twice, find a mate, have a child later on, and we get to see his brother Kurn, and his (Worf's) adopted parents.

Data had just as much: a grandfather in Dr. Ira Graves, a father in Dr. Soong, a mother in Juliana Soong Tainer, his late daughter Lal, an evil brother, and B4, presumably a half-brother.

Compared that, we only saw Picard's brother and maybe nephew; Riker had an estranged father, a dead mother, and a clone brother; Dr. Crusher was the widow of a dead husband.

Tasha had a sister whom we saw only after Tasha's death, and her alternative-universe self got into the prime universe, and had Sela.

Let's not forget Ensign Ro. Her life seemed in some ways to reflect that of Tasha. Ro eventually left Starfleet and joined the Maquis.

O'Brien married, and he and Keiko had a daughter.

In the end, I could posit, that TNG had character development, but it was slow for all characters, and there were few who had more than even the primary characters.

Character development on Deep Space Nine

I can't claim, as if Garak's development was not phenomenal — it's all simply in the details. In the beginning, we learn from here and there, that Garak had to have been quite a ruthless operator, and was looking out for himself only. And Cardassia, if it benefited him. As time went on, he gradually began to look out and care for others. And Cardassia.

The show's characters all catered to different demographics. Like, Nog was there for the kids and aspiring youth, and Garak for a more discerning viewer. Think also about how Kira's relationship with her past evolves.

Interestingly, the most flawless characters were somewhat the most boring. There wasn't anything flawed about Dax, but I enjoyed seeing her romance with Worf. Or that Worf had a really romantic streak, and that he could give excellent advice on love (I should thank the writers). Ezri had the best Dax episode (meant to be 'special' for just her).

The stories revolving around Nog and Damar were a very modern take on the rags-to-riches theme. For some, it was like accelerated development. Some even had Cinderella themes (Rom).

Whereas with Kira, it was reconciling her past; with Quark, it was about being less greedy; and Bashir, well, he became less blue-eyed.

DS9 was overall about how each character developed as time went on, and it was really dynamic. In TNG, we don't see that kind of drastic character development, which hovered on being static. And now I'm not sure, which of those takes is more realistic.

Lethe, and Lorca's motivations.

Reply in this G+ thread.

Lorca has probably realised, that his command might be on somewhat wobbly feet, and so that seeming wobbliness has little to do with his ship, its crew, or the Klingons. There are many indications as to why. So, danger to his command manifests from outside the ship, not from within, and not because Lorca has his own issues.

On one hand, he likes Burnham, and her continued presence has given him a very good track record, especially with regard to getting the ship to jump multiple times, and making several missions successful. Essentially, winning. Burnham is like a good omen, or an amulet or talisman.

On the other hand, anyone he doesn't like, or which may potentially harm him, his command, or his ship, is put on a shuttle. Losses are inevitable during wartime.

On TNG, DS9, and Voyager, people usually survive a Starfleet shuttle trip. Sometimes, by only a hair's breadth, but still. But Discovery's track record of putting people on shuttles places the putting of Dr. Moriarty on a shuttle in TNG into what now is a very different context from back then.

Another problem is, that this young Starfleet apparently only accepts flawless people. The picture is different by TNG (Lt. Barclay).

I've noticed, that these apparently flawless people (Landry) do die on Star Trek: Discovery. Other Star Trek shows usually never show Starfleet officers of relative or low importance die, even if it's talked about. Granted, the the dead person is shown or talked about only after the death has occurred. And then an investigation happens. The difference is, that in Discovery, people are now shown on-screen, some of the viewers already root for even the minor characters, and then they die. Or maybe we have seen the comeback of redshirts in a different form.

I wouldn't see "Lethe" or every episode through the prism of trauma and other such afflictions.

Burnham's decisionmaking wrt the Klingons has, though, been informed by her trauma from her early childhood and the Klingon attack, but also the Vulcan drive to suppress her human emotions, which she's been unable to process properly for much of her life, especially when in a critical situation. The lack of war, and her posting on U.S.S. Shenzhou has shielded her from critical situations. The Battle of the Binary Stars was the first such occasion.

Whereas Lorca's conduct is not based on trauma, but survival instinct. Admiral Cornwell is also much too nosy, thinking the rescue mission to save Sarek as trivial. Strange that. For Lorca, Sarek is an important puzzle piece that keeps Burnham in order.

Blanche in the Eurovision Song Contest 2017, and comparable past acts

This is a comment reply in a YouTube video comments thread to Blanche's song "City Lights" (BE).

Blanche's advantage is, that her song in its nature is rather subdued, and so differs from the usual Eurovision fare of bawdy ballads, rappy rap, rocky rock, and flimsy folk.

In 2015, for example, my favourite was Boggie (Czemer Boglarka) from Hungary, but her beautiful and also comparably subdued "Wars for Nothing" was bogged down (if you forgive the pun) by the high-register voice of a background singer, and so the song did not quite make it as well as it should have — reaching No. 20 out of 26 entries in the final. I recall, that the other contenders in the 2015 ESC final were much stronger that year.

In 2009 (Moscow), "Is it True?" by Yohanna was superb and executed to perfection: Despite the high notes in important places (I think one of these is called the bridge), it was mostly moderate in terms of power, not too slow and not too fast. Alas, Yohanna lost out to Belarus-born Alexander Rybak from Norway.

In 2005, the Latvian duo Valters & Kaža charmed me with their poignant "The War is not Over", eventually reaching No. 5 in the final of that year. The duo even "sang" in sign language, which was a lovely stunt. The composition was written by Mārtiņš Freimanis, who died in early 2011...

ESC 2017
Several—if not most—songs are rehashes of previous motifs. With many, it's par for the course, but this time, the Italians are so unconfident about their own song this year, that they had to bring a "gorilla". I pity the poor bloke who has to perform in the animal costume, because these are always really hot inside.

Most others' live performances were weaker; either their song was weak, or was the presentation, and only a few performances are up to any standard.

For example, Switzerland's singstress was very, very professional, but didn't make it to the finals. Lithuania was great, but too eclectic for the peevy televoters and juries. And so it usually boils down to regional voting blocs.

Estonia
The 2011 local "Eesti Laul" competition had this beautiful and innovative "Valss" by Orelipoiss, which most unfortnately lost out to the garish "Rockefeller Street" sung by Getter Jaani. Ugh.

The 2015 "Eesti Laul" had a strong contender in Maia Vahtramäe with "Üle vesihalli taeva". She lost to Elina Born and Stig Rästa, who deservedly got to 6th place at the ESC final.

In 2016, Mick Pedaja and his quiet and serene "Seis" should have won the local "Eesti Laul" competition, but lost out to Jüri Pootsmann, and I was happy with glee, when Pootsmann thereafter got about the very last position at the Eurovision.

In 2017, Daniel Levi should also have won the local competition with "All I Need", but lost to local charmeur and chanceuse couple of Koit Toome and Laura. Much to my chagrin, Daniel Levi's live-action video was poor, too.

I mean, there's such a trove of great music that regretfully never made it to the ESC.

Science fiction television and use of colours

For a moment there, I thought, that a lot of it had to do with the quality of actual film that was used.

The VFX and makeup in TOS must have looked like the high end at the time, but they also did a lot of work with choosing the right colours to make interiours look futuristic and maybe even unobtrusive. Colour on television was still something very new, and the respective personnel probably did their best to accentuate the magic of colour. TOS stands out in clean and straight lines, primary colours, and many pastel colours everywhere.

TNG interiors have a lot of light and Enterprise beige, which at the time looked quite futuristic. Non-Federation ships often had different colours to accentuate their otherness. Exterior-wise, Enterprise-D itself withstands the test of time admirably.

DS9 the station is dark and artfully stylish. Compare also TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise. Personally, DS9 stands out to me as having struck the best balance. Interestingly enough, Season 2 of TNG had also struck the right tones. maybe it had something to do with Diana Muldaur.

Voyager had tech-y sets, but mostly failed to be dark and gritty. Ronald D. Moore fixed that with BSG.

Farscape thrived with colours, and shined in ways unimaginable.
Stargate Universe channelled the coloration of Blade Runner.

It may seem like a minor detail, but the kind of coloration, how much and what kinds of colours one uses, and then the amount of makeup on actors determines a lot in the character of a television show. JJ-verse 'Trek often feels plastic.

Religion in Estonia and in Nordic countries

A reply in an IMDb forum to a post about religion (wrt "Ida").

There are differences between eliminating religion, not following organised religion, and being spiritual instead.

Most research and surveys fail to be precise enough to record the latter two notions, and thus their methodologies are all similar and very nearly always skewed to present black/white results that inadvertently (or by intent) support a black/white worldview.

For people in Nordic countries, religion is something very personal. I'd say it's the same in Northern Europe.

For example, Estonia is about the least-religious country in the world, because surveys don't take into account spirituality. It's that among Estonians, organised religion is not followed much, if at all. I have a feeling, that Nordic countries are similar in that regard.

There is, of course, a possibility, that people in Estonia might see religion as something so personal, that they might as well not indicate their affiliation.

The Die Is Cast: Why Sisko chose to disobey orders, and why Odo chose to stay on DS9

There be spoilers for those, who haven't watched these episodes.

I read a review of "The Die is Cast", an episode of "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine", and the comments that accompanied the said review.

Two very widespread issues for many people who watched the episode, are Sisko disobeying orders to not go into the Gamma Quadrant to retrieve Odo, and Odo choosing to return to the station and not join the Great Link and return to his people -- something that he'd wanted to do for a long time.

Text in this post is licensed under Creative Commons-Attribution / CC-BY.

re Sisko not returning --

Commenter DLPB wrote, that one of the most serious crimes that a captain can commit, is neglect of comrades.

Furthermore, Odo is a Changeling, the nature of which makes him a very valuable asset; his presence on the station is essentially Bajor's life insurance policy, and Sisko knows that very well. So does Odo, [spoiler—] especially when he chooses to stay on DS9 after the Dominion and Cardassians much later overran the station's defenses, and Sisko was forced to leave.

Lovok's reveal is the reason Odo finally chose instead to return to DS9, because he understood the danger that the Dominion posed to Bajor and the entire Alpha Quadrant. We should not forget, that Odo is an officer of Bajor.

Were he to join the Great Link right then and there, his adoptive home would have been left completely defenseless, and the other shapeshifters would have then been free to work their magic on DS9.

Because Odo's presence on Deep Space Nine meant, that the Dominion really could not use the station and Bajor as a springboard into the Alpha Quadrant (they could not attack either for fear of hitting Odo by accident), and therefore had to go past these places to use Dukat and the Cardassians to expand their galactic domination. This essentially bought some time for everyone. And the Alpha Quadrant.

Of course, Fake Lovok didn't like it, and that's why he chose to use the narrower definition of 'no Changeling has harmed another', in that he decided not to notify the Jem'Hadar to not shoot at (or even provide cover to) the runabout carrying Odo and Garak, who were attempting to escape the mêlée of a very intense space battle.

There's a high probability, that Odo has by then realised Fake Lovok's hypocrisy about the 'no harm' adage, because the runabout was repeatedly shot at, and lost its shields.
----
Many episodes later, we can actually see how palpable Odo's importance is during Dukat's occupation of Terek Nor, as Odo's presence alone causes Weyoun to defer to Odo (because like any other changeling, he's like a god to the Vorta) — much to the chagrin of Dukat and the annoyance of the Female Shapeshifter, who finally arrives in "Sacrifice of Angels" to neutralise Odo, and by proxy, the resistance movement on the station.
----
Edit: This post was initially published on 02.09.2016 03:33 UTC +0300 (01.09.2016 19:33 UTC -5). A minute or so later, I posted much of this text in a comment here.

Voyager: I really would have kept Kes

This is a comment to a poll post on Google+.

AFAIK, the powers that be introduced Seven, but then were short on money, so they had to remove either Kim or Kes, but Kim's actor was named one of "50 most beautiful people", and so it was Kes who had to leave.

Instead, I would have definitely kept Kes, but given the actress some time to recover from the stress of work during the show's hiatus.

And as one of "50 most beautiful people" that season, the actor who played Kim would have been easily lapped up by another show.

So, I would have certainly kept Kes as part of the primary cast, because Kes was the soul of the show. Imagine the friendship between Seven and Kes :-)

I would either have removed Kim, Neelix, and Chakotay (and maybe Tom) from the show, or at least from the primary cast, and given them recurring roles instead.

The PR spin would have been about keeping the show within budget.

And in-universe, there would have been a realistic story depicting discord within the crew about having a former Borg onboard, while at the same time they met USS Equinox or another old Starfleet ship.

Preferably, I really would have given the pink slip to Kim, but the episode "Nightingale" showed another potential future path for Kim et al.

ID4. Aftermath.

Reply to thread post at "Independence Day: Resurgence" IMDb board. The post was interested about how reconstruction worked, and what could have been the changes in society.

My reply:

The POW thing is interesting, because I wouldn't be surprised, if a huge can of worms was not opened.

And also something to deal with how that alien society works. In 20 years, the surviving aliens must have had children, who never experienced living in space.

Omitted:

Sure, war stories must have been aplenty, but then how do you explain your children, that you lost a conflict? One option is, that they never told their offspring. But being all-telepathic, it's hard to imagine, that the kids wouldn't learn in time. Unless the surviving aliens completely isolated their children, or that the amount of offspring was too small to worry too much about what they would think.

OTOH, there's the nowadays' North Korea, where people truly believe, almost as a matter of religion, that they had an upper hand. Or that they're still the best thing ever. Dictatorships often rely on propagandistic belief systems that support such a rule.

The trailers suggest, that the first-wave aliens knew their stay was temporary, so I imagine the offspring might have been taught, that "oh, it's just temporary, we're leaving soon."

How we remember a movie

In reply to this post on IMDb

I've never seen the original Jurassic Park film at the cinema, so I think I finally saw it on tv once. But then seeing that film turned out to be such a non-event, that I probably forgot that I ever saw it whole, and so mostly remember getting to see it in parts in my old home. It's as if seeing the original did not make any impression on me. Except "It's a UNIX system! I know this!".

I kinda think that this may be related to how one watches films, and whether it's alone or with someone, and then also where and in which setting. When I see a particular film or documentary at home, then I take the time to watch it, and invest the necessary mental resources to think along.

Another interesting point is whether I've consumed any similar [visual] content on the same day: Of the two movies I might have seen in a day, which one of these will I remember seeing? Will I remember one or the other, or the one I saw later?

Independence Day and the gays

This is in reply to a forum post on IMDb.

There was Capt. Jimmy Wilder (Harry Connick, Jr.), a fighter pilot and best buddy of Hiller (Will Smith). Wilder is used as this "fun sidekick", but is never directly said to be gay, despite sometimes unintentionally creating or getting into gay situations, including his on-screen mannerisms that suggested gayness. Because of the ambiguity around Wilder's sexuality, the gays can take it that Wilder was gay, and straight people can argue that he wasn't, and that he was just comic relief.

Yet the characterization of Wilder showed him as gay to the best of my mind, then two years into Don't Ask Don't Tell (at which time I didn't know anything about), so he was the non-offensive gay character to me, despite all the ambiguity.

The end result is that I remember that for a very long time this was the only big sci-fi blockbuster that featured gays in a positive light in the military, or anywhere at all in the movie space of the genre. Wilder was then killed, and Smith was outraged. And that was that.

In conclusion, the scene between Wilder and Hiller of the proposal that wasn't was one of the cutest in the movie.

Independence Day 2. What might have happened in-between

This was in reply to a similar post in IMDb, a post which speculated on what might have happened in the 15-odd years on Earth since the events set in "Independence Day" (1996). Because IMDb forums for a movie or personality are cleaned up from time to time, I've decided to simultaneously publish this here along with the reply on IMDb.

Disclaimer: This blogpost does not contain spoilers to the movie, because I am not aware of its actual content.

My favourite ideas revolve around relations between humans and surviving aliens from the first war.

Of the surviving party (parties), there would be at least two or three 'factions', put this way:
* Those that want to destroy humanity and much of Earth and reconnect with whatever future mothership comes. These would be fighters and their ilk (the alien hard-liners);
* Those who somehow automagically decide that humans are worth something, too, and the Earth preserving.
* And maybe those that kinda-sorta like Earth, but not humans, only that they can't do much about it. The undecided (?).

It's possible that maybe one of the city-ships somehow survived to the point that it's established a state-like territory on its own, but that the ship itself is unable to become airborne. Maybe there are more than one and each has formed a different faction and attitude towards Earth and humanity.

Then the structure of the alien society: What was it like before, during, and after the invasion?

Then the very serious problems around whether and how to integrate surviving aliens into society (à la "Alien Nation", but it wouldn't work out like that anyway) — Because if we're better than them, then we can't just kill them all off. I'm aware it's very pacifist and stuff.

And then about how humans treat or mistreat the surviving aliens — look at Guantánamo; and would there even be trials? Does the whole species need to be convicted, or just the ones who set the agenda? How do you find out the surviving alien leaders (given that they all seem to look alike), and whether there are any, if the social structure and ways of communication are so different?

It's likely that humans and (former) invaders would mostly feel mutually repelled by one another and keep up some form of segregation ("District 9"). Would be interesting to know if that's in the new movie.

Then all the issues wrt biocontamination. Organic as they all are, there must be observable changes in Earth's nature. Did the first strikes also hit nuclear plants and was there any fallout and thus any possibility of a nuclear winter? Then I'd imagine the use of cars with internal combustion engines has perhaps lessened alot first due to destruction of major population centres and because of new technology.

The idea of a third and fourth species is also very intersting, given that a large explosion in space can be noticed by a civilization with at least similar advancement.

Oh, the "Pocahontas" scenario of two kindred spirits meeting one another would never work. No, no. But I wouldn't rule out several accidental hybrids. There's a possibility that if some alien surviors managed to form a workable faction within the confines of their previous social structure, then they might have made several experiments with human survivors until releasing one or more, or even a group of human-alien hybrids. And I suppose those in turn would have very dangerous properties. Maybe alien-human infiltrators.

Then what has happened to different human societies on Earth. Suppose some states rebuild and develop military technology, but at the cost of freedom. Some countries decide to keep individual freedoms, but maybe or maybe not risk being less secure. Or countries who decide not to adopt alien technologies and develop native technologies (Not Invented Here syndrome), or countries that don't want to sacrifice freedoms and develop slower and on their own pace compared to those that might sacrifice freedoms and might want to adopt all the latest alien tech.

Vertigo. Review. Analysis.

Reaction and reply to this IMDb post
Agree about the time capsule effect; pity they didn't show the trolleybuses.

I just saw the movie a few hours ago and thought it this way:

Judy Barton somehow decides to start dating Scottie, afraid that Scottie — having recognized Barton — has already put all the pieces of the puzzle together, while in fact he has yet not. This probably hints to the less sophisticated background of both, despite Scottie being a detective and Judy being part of an elaborate plan.

Were the actor playing Scottie different than John Ferguson, who was 49 at the time, the interpretation of the film could have been different, too. — Such that if the actor were much younger and more handsome, it would have been much more plausible to believe Judy's claims of loving Scottie in the final scenes of the movie. This also applies to the relationship between Midge and Scottie, where in some scenes Midge plays the mother figure.

Hitchcock was therefore correct to complain about mis/casting an older guy, despite 'early retirement' at 49 (going on 50) still sounding about right in 1958.

Midge is clearly smarter than Scottie and knows what Scottie is looking for in a woman (a mother-like figure, that is). Scottie hasn't so far taken the bait from Midge, and it is likely that he innately knows that she knows what he wants and so would feel uncomfortable to progress from friendship to something else, as Midge's play would feel unauthentic just because she knows and that Scottie knows that she knows.

The other reason could be that Midge is far too independent; Scottie wants to dominate, but knows that Midge wouldn't let him. Scottie is also old-fashioned, as he doesn't know much about women's wear.

This is when Scottie, after meeting "Madeleine", sees in her exactly what he wants to see: a young and pretty woman with the look and mannerisms of a lady, reasonably independent, but apparently subservient on an interpersonal level. Here we see how Scottie exercises his right to dominate by saving "Madeleine" from drowning, by taking care of her, and so on.

Scottie has become completely obsessed with Judy/"Madeleine".

As Judy and Scottie keep on dating, Judy realizes that Scottie doesn't know about the ruse and lets her guard loose. She chooses to be with Scottie with designs for a better life with him (We see from Judy's family photos that she seems to be from modest surroundings in the state she grew up in).

Maybe she'd thought that Scottie, almost 50 and still not married yet, might be gay and is perhaps looking for a beard. This is alluded to in "Madeleine"'s question about why he hasn't been married yet.

At the time of the ruse, Judy as "Madeleine" was willing to appear subservient, as she was instructed to be like that by Elster. Scottie falls for it.

I remember Elster at the beginning of the movie had no intention to go and wanted to stay with his enterprise. In the scene where Judy has walked up the stairs of the church tower and Elster throws his real wife down, Judy screams and Elster realizes that this could give away the charade, which causes him (uncharacteristically) to part ways with the city and his company as soon as possible. Scottie only attributes this to Elster's grief.

Once Judy has fulfilled her role as "Madeleine", she doesn't need to appear subservient and we get to see a decidedly more independent Judy than Scottie ever thought. It's hinted about when she decides to leave Scottie's home on her own, instead of letting Scottie bring her to Elster.

The masks start falling when Scottie demands Judy to be more like Madeleine and Judy thinks that Scotty is on to something; and while she plays along out of fear of discovery, she is also pushing back, because Scottie 'doth protest too much.'

The masks fall futher after the detective in Scottie has realized that Judy was in on the charade and when Scottie takes Judy to the murder site.

Several scenes follow where Scottie is overly dominant with Judy, short of being violent. It shows why Scottie is unable to have steady relationships with women, and how this is the real reason for his being unmarried.

Scottie forcibly takes Judy up the tower while overcoming his fear of heights, tells all to Judy and forces her to confess. Judy, trying to save herself both from the situation and to tame the much too overbearing Scottie, expresses the words of love to him, but is startled by the nun, who I think was there all along, who heard everything and only used the excuse of having heard voices to appear as if she just arrived.

Whether Judy was startled or felt no other way than to fall to her death is a matter of debate.

The reason why I think the nun heard everything was because after Judy fell to her death, the nun started pulling the bell ropes and so ringing the bell right away. — A person who just woke up usually takes some time to wholly wake up, so I understood that the nun was completely alert by the time Judy's confession escaped her lips.

The ending is left a bit open, because Scottie could be implicated in Judy's death. His saving grace is the nun, who apparently heard everything... but chose not to reveal this.

Or, if the nun really heard "some sounds," and only witnessed Judy fall down, then Scottie would be in a difficult position. Scottie would think that the nun would tell and would want for the nun to be silent. The old and wise nun probably knows this, too (by way of having observed Scottie's mannerisms with Judy), and rings the bells as soon as possible to make sure Scottie doesn't get any chance to impove his position on account of another person's life.

---

In a later post, I added this:
I remember the "gay old bohemian days" phrase was uttered by Midge's librarian friend.

If we allow ourselves to assume that Scottie might be gay, then the librarian friend somehow recognizes this in Scottie, but Scottie dismisses it, because he doesn't know it yet himself. We might see it when Judy (perhaps still as "Madeleine") and Scottie stroll in a park full of young people being together and cuddling. I then saw a cut to Scottie and Judy, where Judy seems to wistfully look at the young people with want, but Scottie appears conflicted — almost wanting to be there, too, but restraining himself.

Then what I forgot to add to my original writeup is this point:

While Judy is actually more independent and despite that still willing to be with Scottie for various reasons, then by very the end of the film she sees her decision backfire, as Scottie becomes more dominant. By the time Judy actually realizes this and starts pushing back, it's too late to break free, as Scottie is almost violent and takes Judy out of the car to the church tower.

Scottie's demands on Judy to be like "Madeleine" is an exercize of a series of warning signs, which Judy doesn't recognize.

So, if the actor playing Scottie were younger, I'd more readily believe Judy's love for Scottie, while with the current version of her "love" might more than anything be for reasons of fear.

Tallinn ja uued trammid?

Tallinna auto- ja trammiteede praegune seis on selline, et uhiuute trammide kasutamine ei ole lihtsalt mõeldav. Ning veel "tasuta transpordiga" lisanduvad tegelinskid, kelle õõvastav odöör omale iseloomulike heitgaasidega hõljub mitme sülla kaugusele. Et milleks uued trammid, kui need lõpuks ka "ära märgistatakse"?

Peale selle kestavad trammid hea hooldusega väga pikka aega ja seetõttu võib trammipark nii tehnoloogiliselt kui ka stilistiliselt aeglaselt vahetuda.

Kui oleks alles jäetud ja renoveeritud need Tatra T4 sõiduvahendid, siis nostalgiahõng kestaks isegi kauem :-)

Trammiromantikast...

Nagu kindla stiiliga musta värvi taksod Londonis, määrab ühistransport päris selgelt ka Tallinna näo ja seega paneb ka siinne veerem oma märgi maha. See ei pruugigi paha olla, sest selle järgi tunneb nii piltidelt kui filmit ära tuttava linna.

KT4 tramme saaks võtta kui omamoodi klassikat, kaasaega ja modernsust eelmise sajandi lõpuveerandist — mis kokku võttes ühendab üleminekuvahendina peamiselt puidust Kopli ja Kalamaja ennesõjaaegse stiili, XX sajandi modernsuse ja ilmetuse vaheldumise (Lasnamäe jt 1980ndate hooned), ning XXI sajandi postindustrialismi (Kesklinna City), avaldudes esimesele ja viimasele kontrastsena ja sulandudes ühte keskmisega.

Võrreldes mistahes tulevikutrammidega, mis viivad minevikust tulevikku ja tagasi, mõjuvad KT4 trammid oleviku eri faaside vahel laveerijatena.

Seda stiili muutumatust võib nimetada omamoodi paigalseisuks (v.k. застой).

Ma mõistan, kui inimestel on soovi, et Tallinn näeks läbi trammide modernsem välja, kuid kas praegune poliitiline seis (sest edasiminekuks seda nimetada ei saa) uute trammide asja lõpuni viia jõuab, on kaheldav.

P.S.
Trammiostu CAFilt ma ei toeta, sest nende trammid on mõnede sildade-estakaadide jaoks liiga rasked, st. ei vastanud tegelikele tehnilistele tingimustele. Lisaks pole veeremit Tallinna trammiteedel üldse testitud.

Määrdunud korvid poodides ja mida peale hakata

Nagu teada,
on poodides plastmasskorvid ja kärud kole mustad.

Tehke nii:

1. Võtke üks kilekott rullist, mis on tavaliselt puu- ja köögiviljaletis. (Need kilekotid on enam-vähem tasuta, kui neid eesmärgipäraselt kasutada. Tervet rulli ära võtta muidugi ei maksa.)
2. Pange sinna kilekotti oma kaup.
3. Kui kott saab täis, võtke uus.

(Kergelt määriv kaup, nagu näiteks hallitusjuust, tulekski jätta kilekotti.)

4. Kassas: Laduge kaup kilekotist lindile.
...
5. Siis võtke kilekott, pöörake tagurpidi ja pange jopetasku.
6. Saadud kilekotti saab kasutada koera jalutamiseks.
Profit...

7. Koera jalutamisel võtke kilekott, pöörake see käe peale tagurpidi nii, et varem korvis määrdunud kilekotipool jääks välja (kui see mingi kauba poolt enne ära määritud polnud).
8. Korjake koerakaka üles, siduge kilekott kinni ja visake koerakaka vastavaks otstarbeks mõeldud ühe partei värvidega äravõõbatud kasti.

Stargate Universe, Star Trek: The Motion Picture, and 2001: The Space Odyssey—A Perspective

This was published first to make sure that the post lasts longer than in IMDb forums.
I've reminisced a bit since first replying in this [IMDb] thread, so got some new ideas in support for TMP.

"Star Trek: The Motion Picture" (TMP) was released ten years after "2001: A Space Odyssey" (2001), so it's historically placed within the timeframe of a generation that also had first-hand experience of 2001, which there is a huge fanbase of, and which extensively features elements of observation and contemplation. And, so, this is what the creators of TMP probably leaned on, most likely to offer an intelligent and ethereal view of space, in order, perhaps, to unintentionally counteract the "pew-pew-pew" effect of Star Wars.

So, when I think of Stargate Universe (SGU) and TMP having similarities, then a fair amount of all of that was borne out of 2001. Now that I'd thought of it, 2001 must have provided the people over at SGU quite a bit of influence in how SGU was presented.

When 2001 was initially released, it was lambasted by critics and a rather incredulous public, while only later was the film accepted as a classic. I hope for the same trend to happen with SGU, and, to a certain extent, to have happened already with TMP.

What went wrong with Star Trek: Nemesis

This is in reply to a post on IMDb's Stuart Baird forum thread regarding what his input was to "Star Trek: Nemesis". The advantage to this post here is that threads on IMDb get sometimes deleted as a matter of cleanup, and I can also edit this one here for further comment.

It is soon almost ten years since the film was released, well past the 2009 "Star Trek" movie directed by J.J. Abrams, and I am making my review only now.

The post herein lists some of the things I thought went wrong with making Star Trek: Nemesis and contains an opinion about the stuff that I would have made.

Indeed, it is yet another and one of many posts that list the things that were and went wrong with Nemesis. Many people, of course, do vouch to be the expert storymaker and director after a flop, yet hindsight also gives us the opportunity not to repeat the mistakes and do things better.

So, for starters, I noted a poster there was actally correct in terms of who actually ran the show, and I made a conclusion:

All in all, it was a confluence of bad calls and decisions:

* John Logan is an awesome team writer. With him doing a solo job on Nemesis, the studio should have assigned someone to take a critical look at the script before it was put into production.

The Reman storyline was ok, though fairly one-sided, as it is. I would have never allowed such a terrible name as "Shinzon". Pieces of "B4" on another planet was also a great idea, but I would have certainly scrapped the car chase for better VFX, and perhaps given the non-space-faring planet a greater role in the dispute over Scimitar the ship and weapon of mass destruction.

* Tom Hardy is a really nice actor and played his bit with vengeance. I can't really see how the appearance of his face is in any way similar to that of Patrick Stewart. Hardy also has really luscious lips :-9

* Stuart Baird is an accomplished film editor, but his directorial effort is something right out of "An Alan Smithee Film: Burn Hollywood Burn".

The more I thought of it, the more I realized that the Nemesis directing situation was almost exactly out of Burn Hollywood, where an editor by trade becomes the director (I admit I haven't seen Burn Hollywood properly, but I'm sure the situation described has happened aplenty in this industry) and is hostage to the whims of the producer, in addition getting into conflict with the actors and everyone else involved. btw, Burn, Hollywood has Whoopi Goldberg in it <:

And one more thing: "Skyfall" has John Logan as one of the writers and Stuart Baird as the editor. Skyfall has raked in a gross of almost $800 million dollars worldwide.

I believe the TNG cast still deserves another movie, one that has a polished script for starters, and preferably with Denise Crosby in it as the wily Sela. But the clock is ticking.

A.I. Artificial Intelligence. The need to be loved.

This was in reply to a comment on IMDb. I posted it here first, because forums on IMDb sometimes tend to be cleaned up from threads.

I'd assume the makers of androids managed to gather and digitize some amount of brainwaves from humans, which data were then either constricted, or made free within certain baseline contexts (such as love, as in the case of David, or only a simulation of it, as it was with Gigolo Joe).

What you might be asking for is either the level of self-awareness of androids, or the extent to which their programming was free enough to be unpredictable in their actions to explore that self-awareness.

The movie offers what I see to be a dichotomy between the unique David's apparently self-serving and self-aware purpose of [wanting to be] "a real boy, so Mother can love me", that of needing to be loved; and the other less self-aware androids' selfless purpose of service to others. And how all this correlates with the human condition, which can vacillate around variations of these options: Most (well, nearly all) of us want to be loved, but what is the extent of service we are willing to give to others?

The story reveals that several androids became increasingly self-aware and were through various misshaps (intentional or otherwise) forced to become "free agents", but the hardware and programming of the less fortunate ones was limited; imagine people from the autistic spectrum, where their social skills are to some extent or other known to be less adaptive.

Here, Gigolo Joe was one of the few lucky ones to be not just self-aware but also reasonably adaptive. While David was all those things more by an order of magnitude, then the differentiator between David and Joe were experience, skills (both social and practical), heritage, and purpose. What held Joe back were heritage and somewhat constricted social skills which gave him so easily away; while David was aided by the 'more human' fortune of being in these respects a clean slate, and importantly, having an existential and non-materialistic purpose towards the person he related to.

David's primary uniqueness stood in having a (self-aware) purpose, wherein he was not aware of the fact that his being was there to satisfy a very similar (if not exactly the same) human desire — out of which happiness could ultimately be derived. Whereas Gigolo Joe knew precisely what women wanted, and even what would happen to humanity in the longer term.

The juxtaposition of the two shows the differences in how they sought to derive happiness from others. Incidentally, the happiness that either were wired to seek was also different.

While thinking more of it, the future androids in their evolution seemed to have found that very fine balance of satisfying the needs of one (David) and the many, without putting said needs into conflict with one another. This would follow how the early androids' relation to others, despite their being hardwired for service to others, was more, well, binary.

What was lacking in androids, both past and future, was consciousness, or how we humans understand it. Suppose the evolved androids finally managed to reach a level of primary consciousness, but not the subconsciousness, as some cosmological lore has it that in humans this is connected to upper densities of existence. (Not that real-life academics would take seriously or even corroborate, so you can consider it as crackpot science. I might as well add that religion often falls into that same place.)

That is why human consciousness was envied by future androids, so they needed David.