Sunday Update

Happy Valentine's Day!

It is very cold and snowy here in Texas.

I ended up watching a lot of the last two days of impeachment. I was glued to the TV some of the time...which, for me, translates to-when is this going to get less riveting?  Because I really have to pee. 

My wish came true. More than six Republican Senators voted guilty.  These brave men and women are GOP rather than GQP.  They are deserving of the elephant mascot. 

I know some people are unhappy that witnesses weren't called. I'm not one of those people.  I think enough evidence and persuasion was presented. And all of that was hardly even needed since the members of the jury were actually VICTIMS of the event.  

No matter how many witnesses were brought forth, no matter how much evidence...even if Donald Trump got on the stand and said Yes! I wanted them to kill Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi! I lied about the election, so I could stay in power. If you acquit, I'm going to run again, and the first thing I will do as President is start a nuclear war,  the Republicans would still vote not guilty.  

So anyway...some other random thoughts about the impeachment:

1. I loved Joe Neguse's speech. He tried so hard to appeal to the Republican Senators' better natures. Even though I had very strong doubts that there'd be more than a small handful of brave Republican Senators, I hoped to be wrong, and a teeny tiny part of me believed that I might be. Neguse failed to reach the Republicans' better nature, but he did succeed somewhat in reaching mine. He made me let go of some of my pessimism about whether bad people can change and become one of the good guys.  

2. I loved Raskin's speeches. Though Tim and I joked about his overuse of the fire analogy.  

3. Tim and I also joked that Bruce Castor and Michael van de Veen are the same person.  Tim confused the two, and I corrected him. But I admitted  that the only reason I knew van de Veen was a different lawyer is that I noticed his name posted on CNN.  And when I had seen van de Veen instead of Castor, I had been really confused. I kind of thought CNN had made a mistake and put the wrong name up. 

Our theory is that it's one guy playing two parts.  When he's in a friendly, dopey mood he puts on the Castor costume. When he's in an angry, manipulative mood he puts on the van de Veen costume.

4. I liked Chuck Schumer's speech at the end. I forgot what he said, exactly. It was along the lines of that although Trump was not convicted, he will be convicted by the American people. He will be convicted throughout history.   

Yep. 

Trump will be convicted in elementary school social studies books.

He will be convicted in future Broadway musicals.

He will be convicted in movies.

He will be convicted in Emmy nominated miniseries  

He will be convicted in novels and autobiographies.

He will be convicted in college history courses....around the world.

And the same goes for some of the prominent GQP Senators that voted Not Guilty.  

5. The Mitch McConnell speech was incredibly bizarre. I kept waiting for the punchline and wondering...did he say the wrong words when it was time to vote and then not realize he had messed it up?   

And yeah. The punchline came eventually. McConnell had felt compelled to vote not guilty.  Because in order for him to vote guilty, the impeachment trial would have had to begin before January 20.  And who refused to bring the Senate back to do that?  

 

I really hope that Biden and the Democratic Senators and Representatives stop trying to compromise and have unity with people like McConnell.  I hope they fight hard against him.  

It's hard, though. I get that. 

I want to stand strong against selfish, manipulative people who make me jump through hoops. But instead I usually end up going out of my way to try to please them.   

Anyway....

Onto Coronation Street...

 So, Abi (Sally Carman) and Ray (Mark Frost) meet for a secret meeting behind the Rovers.  

Credit goes to Abi for refusing to meet in an even more secluded location.  

At the Rovers, Ray acts like he's open to giving into Abi's blackmail demands. They argue over whether Abi should delete the incriminating video first or if Ray should turn himself into the police first.  Then Abi starts getting woozy. Oh no! 

So Abi was smart enough to not meet in a super secluded location but not smart enough to be weary of her drink.  

The episode ends with her collapsing while struggling to do something with her phone.

Not only did it seem like Abi's noble plan was foiled but also since Abi is a former junkie, it would be assumed she's gone back to the drugs again.  

But then....

In the next episode, it turns out that Abi managed to to send out the incriminating video to ALL of her contacts.  

The feelings I got from that development is like the opposite to the feeling you get when the car stopped for Chunk in The Goonies.   

I have Goonies on my mind, because last night Tim watched the trailer for Finding Ohana. I looked at IMDb and saw Ke Huy Quan is one of the stars. And...the movie is a reimagining of Goonies. We're going to watch that tonight.

We're done with Broadchurch. I'm a little sad to be saying goodbye...wish there'd be more seasons. But on the other hand, I'm kind of glad to be getting out of that town.  Murder. Rape. And that scary suicide cliff.....

I finally finished listening to the Imagineering Podcast about family memories and have just begun listening to his podcast about The Carousel of Progress. I'm excited...and excited to listen to others. Though with the rate I'm going, it might take decades for me to go through with them all.

Back to Abi and her miracle.  How does one manage to send something to everyone in their contacts. I think I've seen that before in TV shows. Actually...the first example that came to my mind was Coronation Street. At a teen party, a sexting video was quickly sent to everyone at the party.  Is there a button on UK phones that allows you to send to everyone at a party?

Well...now that I think of it, there is that drop file thing. 

But that wasn't the case with Abi. She sent it to people who weren't in her vicinity.  

Is there an option on phones where you can send a video or photo to everyone on your contacts with a quick push of one button?

Last night I started editing my fourth TV pilot screenplay...the one about dreams. I was feeling really happy and excited about it.  It might have just been my mood. Who knows if I'll like it today.

Anyway, I started thinking maybe I should, for now on, send only that one out to contests.

What I told myself before is that I'm going to stand strong and not give up on screenwriting if I don't place anywhere in the contests. But I planned on giving up (at least temporarily) on those specific pilot screenplays.  What I wonder, though is if I'll end up questioning things....I might imagine well, maybe I sent out all the wrong pilots to the wrong contests.

I'm not sure if I'm explaining things right.

I'm just wondering if it's best to put most of my eggs in one screenwriting basket. Then if that one fails all the contests, I can still have my other pilots for next year's contests.  

On the other hand, what if I'm totally wrong, and it's the other pilots that are more likely to win?

What I've done with most of the contests I've entered so far is use Random.org to decide which screenplay to enter.   

I'm thinking of alternating...definitely enter the dream pilot in the next contest; then with the contest after that, use Random.org.  Random.org might choose the dream screenplay again...or not.  

And then...repeat.

I'm not sure how many contests I will enter.

I'm kind of plunging in this year.  Investing and gambling on myself.

If I lose, lose, lose, lose, lose, lose, etc....But I still have the courage to get back up again, if I do more contests, I'll probably be a lot more conservative regarding how many contests I enter.  

One thing for sure is I have to get better at keeping notes about what and where I've entered. 

I wanted to be really careful about keeping track of things.  Yet in the center of my notes is The Dead are Online Version A...and there is no contest attached.  I don't know if I wrote that accidentally or if I entered a mystery contest.  

Well, it wasn't a mystery when I entered (if I entered),

But now it is.  

I have this idea in my head...because I'm disturbed in some ways... that if it's in my destiny to win any contests, it will be as a dead person.  Like it will be my luck to finally have a major writing success, but I will have died from Covid. 

I'm very morbid.

I have more to say about Broadchurch. Regarding the certain character who was stalking another character. He had been secretly in love with her for years, and thousands of photos of her were found on his phone.  Yes, that's disturbing, but I also thought it was nice. If someone doesn't demand anything in return and doesn't seek to cause harm, is that type of stalking really that awful?

Or maybe it doesn't have to be labeled stalking. Maybe we can just call it extreme unrequited love.  

I don't know, though.  Benign extreme unrequited love might be rare. Maybe in most cases, the obsession turns to demands and dangerous actions.   

It would also depend on the nature of the photographs. If you're out in public with the person and happen to get more photos than they're noticing...that's one thing. But if you're hiding behind bushes or spying on them from the windows, that's creepy and invasive.  

Read my novel: The Dead are Online 

Friday Update

I haven't been good about watching the impeachment live.  I watch bits here and there; then later I go on Twitter and watch clips, read quotes, and see the comments.

I've felt guilty about that, because people on Twitter say it's our American duty to watch. (uh...Even more so for those elected by and paid by the American people)

Now I feel no more guilt thanks to The Washington Post. They have provided all the video evidence given by the impeachment managers. I'm working my way through all of them.  I finished day 2 and am about halfway through day 1.

They also have provided all the document evidence. I plan to probably look at that as well.

The video part that made me cry, strangely, is the security footage of the staff members rushing into the room to hide. I'm not sure why, because there's much worse footage. 

I don't know. Maybe I'm haunted by a past life memory.

The most traumatic, horrible video scene I've seen so far is the police officer being crushed and crying out for help.

Another bad scene for me is the huge mess...papers everywhere. 

All the videos of Trump, through the years, doing his brainwashing and violent rhetoric. That makes me so angry—angry at him and angry at the people who think what he did was okay.

I know there are people who point out the Trump used the word peaceful a couple of times.

But it's like if there's an abusive parent who tells their child she's stupid, ugly, and worthless. Does that get erased, because once in a blue moon they call her "Cutie Pie"?

Yeah.

I think it's depressing and terrifying that we had a president like Trump.

I think it's depressing and terrifying that so many people voted for him again.

I think it's depressing and terrifying that so many people participated in the invasion of the capitol.

I think it's depressing and terrifying that so many people still stand by Trump even after what happened on January 6.

I don't think there's any good person that can watch the impeachment evidence videos and still support Trump. 

I have strong doubts that Trump will get enough votes against him for a conviction. But I hope more than six Republicans vote against him. 

I wish the Republican Senators would look ahead and imagine all the movies, TV shows, and plays that will be made about the Trump/Covid era. They will be characters in these stories. Do they want to be the characters that were too scared of Trump, QAnon, and MAGA to vote for a conviction? 

I heard on Twitter that there were fifteen Senators who were absent for all or part of the impeachment. What came to my mind is that it was done with the hope of being disqualified from voting. They don't support Trump, but they're too scared to vote against him. Then I saw on Twitter that there were other people thinking the same thing.

Another plot idea I had was that Trump's lawyers just give up, because they're so personally horrified by the evidence against Trump. So either in a subtle or direct way, they tell the Senators to vote against Trump.  And then, it would be declared a mistrial, and Trump would get off that way.  

In other news.....

Jack and I watched the latest episode of WandaVision this morning. I really like the show.  I'm starting to like the outside-of-Westview scenes. Last week, I was kind of disheartened by the cracks in the matrix...or whatever you want to call it.  I wanted it to just be happy, fun sitcoms from different decades.

My hand is still swollen and the red spots are still there. Today's my last day of the steroid cream. I put it on this morning; then about five minutes later I looked at my hand and the spots were gone. I was thinking, wow. It finally worked!  Then I realized I was looking at the wrong hand. And what's worse is I was mistaking my normal, skinny left pinkie finger with my swollen right index finger. 

So my fingers don't seem to be getting better and my mind is getting worse.  I think the latter is due to lack of sleep from the prednisone.  

Sometimes it looks like the red spots have faded. But I think what's happening is that on top of the non-blanching red spots, my skin is blanching red from irritation. So the red blends into the red. But when I press down, I can see the not-disappeared red.

Last night I watched Coronation Street where Abi (Sally Carman) lets Ray (Mark Frost) know that she has secretly recorded him bribing city officials. She's blackmailing him not for selfish reasons but so he will admit to the attempted rape of Faye (Ellie Leach). Abi doesn't want Faye to have to endure the trauma of a trial.

Anyway, the scene drove me nuts. Because when are fictional characters going to learn that you shouldn't confront dangerous people when you're alone with them? She's like holding the phone with the recording...taunting him. 

This happened on Corrie a few years ago with Tina (Michelle Keegan). She was on a balcony with Rob (Marc Baylis). They were fighting about something...I forgot what. But she was taunting him in some way. He got mad and pushed her off the balcony. 

I say if you have incriminating evidence against someone, take a friend with for the confrontation.  OR...skip the blackmail and simply upload the evidence to Twitter.  

In my recent re-watching Schitt's Creek adventures, David (Dan Levy) and Patrick (Noah Reid) have an especially tender, tear-jerking moment together in their shop.  Then for some comic relief, Patrick points out that David forgot to get him the tea he had requested. David starts off to remedy his mistake. Patrick tells him he doesn't need to. David insists.  He walks out.

I'm thinking...if this was an Australian TV show, David would step out onto the curb and a bus would speed by and kill him.  So...I'm very thankful that Schitt's Creek is a Canadian show.  

Maybe that will be my wish for people in the world...that their lives be more like Canadian comedies and less like Australian dramas and/or dramedies. 

 

How would our world change if we knew for sure there was life after death, and it was easy for our dearly-beloved to talk to us via the Internet?   

The Dead are Online, a novel by Dina Roberts 

Wednesday Update

We're now halfway through season 3 of Broadchurch. I like it MUCH more than season 2. 

There was one episode of season 2 where I started to believe I was liking season 2, but that soon fizzled.

I liked season 3 from the start.

I vaguely recognized Sarah Parish who plays the best friend of Trish (Julie Hesmondhalgh). I IMDB'd her last night and was reminded that she's from Blackpool!

I was kind of obsessed with Blackpool a few years ago.  And it's kind of what brought me to Doctor Who.

From what I can remember, this is what happened. My interest in Doctor Who was first sparked a bit by a commenter on my blog. He was a fan, and I have a love for people who are passionate about a specific things. I guess, in a way, I'm a fangirl of fanboys/fangirls. 

And when it comes to popular culture, I think I often have this desire to at least try to join the fandom. 

I found two Doctor Who books at a used book thing...maybe at a New York flea market?

I read them and wasn't really impressed. Well...it didn't seem like the type of thing I could love. 

Sometime later, I was into The Walking Dead. David Morrissey led me to watching Blackpool videos on YouTube. In the comments, there was a lot of enthusiasm for David Tennant, and I think that intrigued me. Plus...maybe around the same time, Jack began talking about watching it? 

Last night I rewatched one of my favorite Blackpool videos. 

One of my favorite actors on Blackpool was Georgina Taylor from Coronation Street.

Later I'd end up watching Coronation Street. Georgina Taylor was no longer on the show but eventually she came back, and she plays one of my favorite characters.  

Speaking of Coronation Street and Doctor Who. In an episode of Coronation Street that I watched recently, two the current villains mentioned the Doctor and the TARDIS. That was fun.

Onto other things....

I'm rewarming up to The Fosters.  So much so that...when it was my self-designated time to take a break from the show and watch an episode of Lucifer, I was less excited about Lucifer than I had anticipated. I was eager to get back to The Fosters.  

The Fosters does have a lot of angst, though. And that's fine. But I think it could use a bit more comic relief.  

It's like the characters on Coronation Street have a TON of problems. I mean that street is full of disaster. But they still manage to have a lot of comedy on the show...and the same for Shameless.

I think the character that brings the most lightness The Fosters is Mariana (Cierra Ramirez). She doesn't have less problems than the other kids. But she has more of a spark. Most of the other characters seem pretty melancholy and/or angry most of the time.  

In my book news, I'm reading Leah Remini's Troublemaker: Surviving Hollywood and Scientology.  I'm liking that a lot and feeling that I've not hated enough on Scientology.

I've always been anti-Scientology...enough so that I become somewhat repulsed by actors when I find out they're Scientologists.  

I understood that Scientology is a manipulative cult that drives people away from their money, common sense, family, and friends.

And I heard of stories of abuse. But I often took the stance of....Well, all religions have abusers in their ranks. 

With what Remini describes, though....It's like the child abuse she experienced is baked into the actual Scientology program...rather than just being an outlier kind of thing. 

As a young teen, her family moves to a Scientology hotel or motel in Florida. Remini is made to do housekeeping work for very low wages. That's bad. But worse is that there's a daycare for the babies of overworked parents. And the babies are pretty much neglected. Remini describes babies soaked in their own urine.

Then again...maybe other Scientology centers/churches are less abusive?  Maybe I'm wrong to assume that each Scientology teen's experience matches Remini's. Maybe it would be like assuming that since a lot of kids are molested by priests, ALL Catholic kids are molested by priests.

I've been following the Impeachment trial to some extent. We were actually all watching Avengers: Endgame yesterday afternoon instead of the impeachment.  Though I found the movie enjoyable and interesting, my heart wasn't into it enough to not-multitask. So I was on Twitter and seeing very entertaining Tweets about Trump's lawyers.  I made a comment to Tim and Jack about how we should be watching the Impeachment.  Jack decided he wanted to take a break from the movie anyway.  I turned on the trial...and still stayed on Twitter, because Twitter was more entertaining than the actual trial.

I don't think I've seen such a stream of funny Tweets since the finale of True Blood.

Eventually, I gave up watching and just watched Impeachment comments and clips from Aaron Rupar

Rupar is very good at providing video highlights of various political events.

This morning I read articles and editorials  about the impeachment via The Washington Post.  Later I decided I should at least put some time into watching the actual live event. As luck had it, I tuned in right as Eric Swalwell began his speech. I watched the whole thing, because I like Swalwell.  I'm very glad he talked about how it's not just about a few random Trump Tweets encouraging people to fight and be wild. It's about months and months and Tweets upon Tweets of Trump pushing his supporters to believe the election was stolen from them.

Trump pushed the idea of the election being stolen from him before the election even began.

In other news....

I did a virtual doctor's (well Physician assistant) visit. It felt futuristic in a Horizon's kind of way.

It was also frustrating. They couldn't do it on the laptop.  I had to use my phone which hurt my vanity. I'm very ugly in phone images.

On top of that major problem, it was hard for me to show the PA what I needed her to see. Especially when she asked me to press down on my fingers. I don't think she realized I was holding my phone with my other hand.  

I did manage to prop up my phone...with some mild struggling. The nearest thing for propping was a metal fruit basket and it didn't provide the best propping.  

So what has happened is that my very dried and chapped hands evolved into swollen fingers. I had that for a few weeks. A few times, I considered making a doctor's appointment and then I'd unconsider it.

Then.... I realized the red spots appearing on my fingers didn't blanch. I've always heard that this could be a sign of major disaster, so I decided I should probably get that checked out.

The PA didn't seem too concerned about the lack of blanching. And she compared it to my past major rash which DID blanch.  I'm not sure if she didn't hear me about the not-blanching...or didn't understand.

She prescribed me antibiotics, Prednisone, and steroid cream.

I did lots of Googling and saw somewhere that this could be a valid treatment for non-blanching rash bits.  So maybe she did understand me.

I'm weary of being on the Prednisone during a pandemic. Despite the statistics in my favor, I've been believing that if Covid finds it's way into me, I'm going to die or spends months in the hospital.  Since Prednisone decreases immunity, the situation seems even more dire.  Plus, I read about how even short term Prednisone increases your chance of getting Sepsis, fractures, and DVT's.  

I think maybe I could have done without the Prednisone.  

But I am glad for the antibiotics, because I'm a little scared that I was on the path to blood poisoning.  

I'm big on the whole thing of not over-prescribing antibiotics. But in this case, I'm glad to be taking them.

The combo prescription of antibiotics and steroids kind of reminds me of that episode of House MD where the doctors were struggling to diagnose and treat a woman. They didn't know if her symptoms were caused by autoimmune or infection.  There was a worry that if they gave her steroids then she wouldn't be able to fight the infection if it was an infection issue.  Or something like that. 

I also read how steroids like Prednisone can maybe SAVE people from dying of Covid....if their body overreacts to the virus.  

It's all very confusing.

Anyway...I've decided that after the pandemic, I'm going to take the plunge and start on the path of getting diagnosed with an auto-immune problem OR ruling out an auto-immune problem. For years, I've suspected I have an auto-immune disease. I'm tired of not knowing.   

In blog reading news, I finished reading about the McGinley trip to Peru and now am reading about their 2011 trip to Denver.  I'm running low on McGinley trip reports. I need the pandemic to end, so they can start traveling again.  

In podcast news, I'm very slowly listening to the Imagineer Podcast about his family's memories of Disney. It's great. They talk about the Disney stuff at the World's Fair, favorite parks, favorite rides, memories of Belgian waffles, etc.

One of my favorite parts was where they talk about bringing the Podcaster to Disney for the first time when he was four months old. They took him on It's a Small World and he was so enthralled by the whole thing. His eyes wide and all that. I imagine most babies would be scared, bored, or asleep.  But he was so into it.  I feel like he was born to be a Disney fan.

Or maybe I'm wrong and this is a typical reaction of infants to Disney rides.

I love hearing about families who have an intergenerational love for Disney.  

I plan to listen to more of the podcasts. 

I guess I might be becoming a podcast person.

In my screenwriting news...I'm now working on revising/proofreading The Dead are Online Version C. I made a decision last night while dealing with Prednisone induced insomnia. I had planned to write a The Dead are Online version D which would be a mix of version A, B, and C.  I decided I'm going to skip that...and end my loyalty to my novel.  

After I end up my contest-entering spree, I'm going to start slowly working on stuff for versions A, B, C...maybe work on further episodes and begin doing show Bibles. Then if I see any of the versions getting traction in the contests, I'll put extra speed and effort into that particular version.

 I feel good about this decision. And it's not like I necessarily will lose characters, because I have crossover characters.  One character is in all three versions and at least three characters are in two versions.  And that's just in the pilot episode. With version A and B, there will be a lot of crossover in later episodes...if I go by what's in the novel.  Version C is much more standalone.  But I can always bring in A and B characters somehow...somewhere. For some reason.  

I also have my pilot screenplay about dreams that I'm excited about.

And I shall have to eventually take a look at my Covid-therapy screenplays I wrote.

I sometimes get ideas for new screenplays but they never take off.

I had one about a dystopian that really wasn't a dystopian. It was a dystopia in the eyes of white supremacists.  It was going to be about how us left wing people got our way, and we're living our happy left-winged fantasy life while white supremacists live together in three star hotels teaching the children about how bad things are outside.

There's one half Black woman living in the hotel who's been brainwashed to believe that she shouldn't leave the community; the message told to her being that out there they despise and discriminate against anyone with white blood.

And the reason why I haven't gone far with the screenplay is that this woman is really the only character in which I have a real storyline for.   

It was too much of me wanting to world build a left wing paradise...and not enough story or character development. But maybe someday that will change.  

I had another idea that was a supernatural parenting kind of thing, but it might be too similar to Travelers.  Or that's my excuse for not try writing it, because I'm lazy and would rather have more time for Twitter.  

My idea is a mother slowly realizes her child is possessed and has been possessed for a long time.  The catch is that it's not an evil entity that has possessed her child but an innocent lost soul; I think a ghost of a child they encounter at a touristy haunted cafe.  

The possession happens gradually. The spirit takes awhile to completely take over.  But then the mother realizes that the child she knew and loved is gone and locked away in some spirit holding room.  She wants that child back, of course but also has grown to love the other child within her child.

I think I was also influenced by some certain horror movies that I won't name, because it would be too much of a spoiler. But it's the whole thing of a child being replaced but the replacement not being evil.  Although in that movie, it's not a matter of possession.  

I had another screenplay idea yesterday...more slow Indie type. It was based on my own personal experiences and things I've witnessed. A young girl with low self-esteem gets a boost when a teen cousin showers her with adoration and attention at a summer family reunion event. But then when she returns the next summer having lost some of her youthful cuteness, she's discarded and replaced with a younger, cuter cousin.  

I sort of like the idea.  The problem is I couldn't figure out how would it work. Do you cast two actresses to play the girl...so you can get the age difference. Or do you film part of the film when the actress is young and then wait until she goes through puberty to do the rest?  What if it ends up she has delayed puberty and you're waiting for years?

Then again, she doesn't necessarily have to go through puberty. She can just lose some of her youthful cuteness.  

I think the screenplay would also explore where do you draw the line between healthy, safe relationships between children and teens/adults and psychologically abusive/exploitive ones.  

I saw a social media post recently that declared grooming should not be seen as something that LEADS to abuse but something that in itself is abusive.  That stuck in my head.  

There definitely should be room in this world for healthy good relationships between children and older people...teens, adults, elderly folks, etc.  But we should also be aware of how easy it can be to fall into toxic behaviors...either out of ignorance or because of our own psychological issues.  And these toxic behaviors can be especially damaging to children.  Then again, toxic shit can happen between kids of the same age, so.....

I really don't know. But maybe one day I'll write that screenplay and know more. Or...more likely, I'll end up even more lost and confused about the matter.  

Read my novel: The Dead are Online 

  

Friday Update

Yesterday I watched WandaVision with Jack.  We watched all the four available episodes together. That was special for me, because we very rarely watch things together anymore.

If the show didn't look interesting enough to me or Jack had already started watching episodes upstairs, the show might have been added to my certain category of shows...a category I haven't named yet.  Sometimes I think of calling it watch-by-proxy.  But I'm not sure the name would fit what I'm about to describe.

What it is are shows that Tim (and very occasionally Jack) watch in the kitchen/den. I hear and see the show in the background as I do other things. Every so often, something will catch my attention.

Some of the shows seem appealing enough to me that I'll add it to my watchlist, OR I already have it on my watchlist.

The one show that got my attention enough to put it in a request that Tim stop using it as a solo show and change it to a together-show was Cobra Kai. 

I think I watched a little bit here and there but then with the final episode of season 1, I sat down and watched it for real. Then I asked Tim if we could watch season 2 together.

Anyway, back to WandaVision.....

The 1950's style of the first episode immediately got my attention. When Jack told me that each episode was going to take place in a different decade, I was immediately sold.

The nostalgic feelings I got from watching fake-1950's, 1960's, and 1970's shows make me wonder if I should add more old shows to my to-watch list. But then again, maybe I prefer the setting of those time periods with the mindsets and values of the 21st century.

I don't know.

I did enjoy watching old The Twilight Zone episodes recently.

The most recent episode of WandaVision takes place in modern times....or future times?  I was less interested in that episode and did some of my computer stuff while watching. I was surprised that this episode had the highest IMDb rating. I later asked Tim and Jack which episodes they prefer, and they agreed with me. We all like the TV show episodes better.

Wait. Back up a bit.

So before I joined in watching with Jack, he suggested that I first watch the last Avengers movie, so I could understand what's going on. Originally, my plan was to not watch with Jack as he watched and instead watch with Tim.  I think this was because I wrongly assumed Jack had already started the show, and I wanted to start at the beginning. 

But Jack was starting at the beginning, AND...later I learned that Tim had already watched the first four episodes...I'm guessing in his Man Cave. Although there is the slight possibility that he watched it in the kitchen/den, and I wasn't around or so absorbed in whatever I was doing that I didn't notice.

A few weeks ago, my sister promoted the show Ted Lasso to the family. I planned on watching it with Tim. Then when I mentioned it to him, he told me he already watched it and told me I had been in the room while watching it.  After he said that, I had vague memories of seeing it on the TV.  

Oops. I'm totally off on a tangent here.

So...anyway....I wasn't too excited about watching The Avengers. I loved the first movie but didn't like the second. Then I missed the third and fourth.

I wondered if I really needed the backstory of WandaVision. Could I not just enjoy the show on a more surface level?

Also, even if there is some valuable backstory, I managed to enjoy The Black Panther and the new Spiderman movies without having the full Avengers story downloaded in my brain.

What I ended up doing is watching the beginning of the first episode of WandaVision while reading a background article about the whole thing. 

I'm trying to find the article I read. I think this is it. I kind of skipped over all the comic history and just read the movie stuff. 

It was helpful. 

I'm sure I could have enjoyed some of the jokes and definitely the settings and costumes of WandaVision without knowing the backstory. But having the backstory, I think, made me feel much more emotionally involved.

It's very sad and romantic.

Today the fifth episode is coming out.

Jack told me he's probably going to watch the rest of the series upstairs. I asked Tim if we could watch the rest of the show together. We have one last episode of season 2 of Broadchurch, so we'll probably watch episode 5 of WandaVision tomorrow. Then we'll start on season 3 of Broadchurch.

Other stuff....

I'm not liking The Fosters too much. It's getting on my nerves. But...that happens to me sometimes when I first start watching a show or getting back to a show.  I can be cold towards it; then slowly warm up.

Right now with The Fosters, it's just a bit too woke. 

And I consider myself a woke person. I'm pretty far-left. 

There's nothing on the show that goes against my political or ideological beliefs. 

It's just a bit too heavy-handed.

Then again, Coronation Street can get heavy-handed, and I love that show.

Maybe it's not about being woke or heavy-handed. Maybe it's just....

Who knows?

The writing? Directing? Acting?

There's a lot of whining on The Fosters. That might be part of the issue. 

Anyway...while I was writing this post, Jack came down. And I guess he changed his mind about watching the next episode of WandaVision upstairs. We watched episode 5 together. That was very nice.

This episode was much darker...less silly and happy.

In other news....

The Congress voting tracker website has been heavily updated. The last time I checked, I think they were on vote 20 of the Senate. Now they're up to vote 50!  And they also have the House vote that kicked Marjorie Taylor Greene off of the committees. 

I did know that the Senate was very busy yesterday...and through the night. (Thanks to...The Washington Post). I guess I just didn't expect the voting tracking website to update so quickly. Oh and also...I guess I didn't expect there to be THAT many votes. Though the article did mention that a lot of stuff was voted on.  So...sometimes things surprise me when they really shouldn't.

I'm seeing that my Representative, Kay Granger, voted in support of a woman who goes around telling victims of school shootings that their tragedies never happened. 

Wait. I had it wrong. It was House vote 20 that I left off on.

Yeah. Okay. The Senate Bill had been only at 13.I think?  

There's a lot of stuff here.

I'm going to go pee, and then I'll be back to try to make sense of it.  

All right. I'm back.

So...what I'm starting to realize is that the House and Senate don't just vote on motions, bills, etc. They vote on whether to vote. I think?

Yesterday, at 2:23, they voted on whether to vote on whether Marjorie Taylor Greene should be kicked off committees. All Democrats voted yes and all Republicans voted no. 

At 3:22, there was yet another vote about all of this. All Democrats voted yes. All Republicans voted no. I'm not sure what the difference is between the 2:23 vote and 3:22 one. 

At 6:48, they did the voting on the actual issue. Although no Republicans wanted to have a vote on the issue, once the vote on the issue actually happened, 11 Republicans voted Yea.  

So, we can say the scorning of Marjorie Taylor Greene was bipartisan. But the act of deciding whether or not to scorn was partisan.

Meanwhile in the Senate....

Their first vote yesterday happened at 2:35 and the last vote was at 4:23 this morning.  Or at least the last vote recorded on the website.

People who say Congress doesn't work hard should pay attention to this website sometimes.

Congress might not do the work we want them to do, but I think that's more about differing opinions...and some people having the hearts and minds of comic book villains. I do NOT think it is about laziness.  

Then again, these all-nighters might be rare.

Now I'm trying to understand all these Senate votes. I'm struggling. The website is good for understanding who voted for what but less helpful in terms of what the hell the vote was about.

I know it has something to do with the budget and the Covid relief stuff. But I'm not sure which bill means what. I mean for all I know, some might be votes about whether or not they should order in some pizza.  

I can see that some votes were very bipartisan and others that were partisan. 

12 votes were totally partisan.

12 votes were slightly bipartisan.

12  were very bipartisan with a few of those being unanimous.

Did they make it perfectly even like that on purpose?

Maybe I miscounted.

Well...it the numbers could have changed if I classified things differently between very and slightly bipartisan. I put any difference higher than 40/60 as being very bipartisan.  

For example, at 3:42 am, 50 Republicans and 20 Democrats voted yes on something. I would count that as being very Bipartisan.  I wish I understood what so many of them said yes to. 

Well...I mean I wish up to the point that I wish the website gave me an easy answer. My wish isn't strong enough to seek out the answer elsewhere.  

Read my novel: The Dead are Online 

 

Wednesday Update

I finished my Turkish adventure in Duolingo and have now moved onto Latin. Latin is fantastic, because the voice actors sound like they are in some sort of angry, evil trance.  Since I associate Latin mostly with religious horror movies, it's all so perfect. 

Last night, I finished watching season 1 of Shameless. I used Random.org to pick a new show and ended up with Lucifer. I'm very excited about that. I love Lucifer.

I'm on season 3 with that. I won't get to it for awhile, though. I'll be concentrating on my other show which is The Fosters.  I have a whole system for how I balance my two solo-shows/movies. But it's hard to explain, and I'm not going to try.

It's funny, though because in my last post I brought up old posts related to The Fosters and Lucifer. And now those are both my current shows. 

I'm seeing that the website I've been using to keep up with Congress votes has finally updated.  They're a bit slow, unfortunately. They stopped at Senate vote 10 which was on January 28, and it wasn't until today that they posted Senate vote 11-13 and House votes 19-20.  It's all kind of old news for me, because The Washington Post and Twitter were all more timely. 

But still...now I can see things in more detail.  

Both Republican Senators from Indiana voted Yea for Pete Buttigieg.  That's cool...since he was the Mayor there.

Thirteen Republican Senators said Nay to Pete Buttigieg.  The same Senators keep giving Democrats a lot of no's, including Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, and Marsha Blackburn. I wonder if they'll say yea to anything.

Alejandro Mayorkas as Homeland Security Secretary is more controversial than Mayor Pete.  He received only six yea's from Republicans.  

Shelley Capito, from West Virginia, is one of the GOP Senators who said yea. West Virginia has had my attention lately, because they've been doing so well with vaccine distribution. 

And here's some more bipartisanship.  Three Democrat Representatives voted with Republicans to say Nay to a bill regarding apprenticeships. 

On Coronation Street, they're doing a storyline about liver transplants. It made me think of the liver transplant storyline on Offspring. 

Daniel (Rob Mallard) is offering up his liver to his brother Peter (Chris Gascoyne). I don't agree with Daniel's actions, because he has a young baby, and the mother of the baby is deceased.

The storyline on Offspring was somewhat similar. Nina (Asher Keddie) was faced with the decision of offering up her liver, and she too was the single parent of a baby. With that situation, I was a bit more torn, because the person needing the liver was a very young child. 

Peter is an adult, and his only dependent is a young adult. The death of a parent is always sad, but I'd rather a young adult lose their parent than a baby. 

When it comes to deciding between parents losing their young child vs a baby being orphaned...that's much harder to me.

 It's not like liver transplants are 100% fatal for the donors. In fact, there's a pretty good chance the donor will survive.  The death rate is 4 out of 1000. But the chance of dreadful complications is 1.1%.  That's pretty scary.

I don't think Daniel should take the risk. But in other situations, the risk might be worth it.  

I'm still listening to Trump harass Raffensperger  I lost my place, so now I might end up missing something or re-listening a part.  I know I was somewhere around 48-50 minutes.

I'll be glad when I'm done with that.

I'm still reading Untamed Shore by Silvia Morena-Garcia, and I'm still liking it. 

Tim and I are still watching Broadchurch. Season 2 is split between two murder storylines—one that was the focus of season 1 and the other which was alluded and flashbacked to during season 1.  I'm wondering now what season 3 will be about. One of the lawyers has a son in prison. I'm wondering if season 3 will focus on his case. Or...will there be a new murder?

I think Tim suggested that the murderer of season 1 will win the court case; go free; someone will take justice into their own hands. And then season 3 will be a who-done-it in terms of the vigilante justice.  

I'm back to reading the 2014 Peru adventures in Dog Food for Chairs. I may be at the end, because the title mentions airlines. Or maybe they end up flying within Peru? Or maybe they're having pre-travel airline issues.

The answers to my questions might have been given in the previous post, and I wasn't paying enough attention. I might have been distracted by the mention of Rainbow Looms.

Right now I'm listening to the final season soundtrack of Lost. I think it's one of the best musical scores. 

Last night I dreamed about Lost...mixed with X-Files, because I was trying to get help from Scully. And also, I slit people's throats with a razor. Okay but before you judge me...it was totally in self defense. It was their razor, and they had plans to use it on me. Or...at least I think they did.  

One other thing...on the subject of Lucifer.  I was thinking of Tom Ellis the other day...not in terms of Lucifer but from when he was on the show Miranda. There's an episode where Miranda (Miranda Hart) tells her friends she's on a vacation but in reality she's just in a local hotel.  I thought of that episode because on Coronation Street, Leanne (Jane Danson) tells her family and friends that she's gone to France to visit her mother and sister, but she's secretly actually at home.

The Coronation Street storyline is much darker than the Miranda one, because Leanne is grieving the loss of her three-year-old son and is very depressed. She faked the trip to Paris to keep concerned family and friends off her back.

Read my novel: The Dead are Online 

Monday Update

I'm really liking Shameless...so much so that I kind of regret my practice of watching one season at a time; then waiting for Random.org to pick it again for me.

On the other hand, I'm excited to see what my next show will be.

My favorite episode of Shameless so far has been "It's Time to Kill the Turtle".

In this episode, Frank (William H Macy) the alcoholic, narcissistic, father is told he will get $3000 if he stops drinking for three weeks.

He's a struggling, grumpy mess in the first hour or so of the experiment. But once he discovers the powers of sugar via his daughter's (Emma Kenney's) juice box, his mood picks up, and he becomes sober-super dad. 

He entertains and impresses his kids with his piano talent. He makes pancakes. He takes the kids bowling....

Most importantly, for the first time in the show, he shows interest in being with his children.

The tragedy in the episode is the children knowing that none of it will last.

One thing I wondered while watching the episode is if Frank's narcissism is dependent on his drinking. Without a drinking problem, would he be NOT-a-narcissist?

OR was he still a narcissist while sober but in a less noticeable way?  

The episode reminded me of two of my old blog posts.

Lucifer had inspired me to write God Narcissists and Demon Narcissists, and The Fosters inspired me to write this post. The former was my way of dividing narcissists into those who are adored by many and those who are scorned. The latter was about a character in a similar situation as Frank. She seemed to be a narcissistic heroin addict. Then she gave up the drugs and also seemed to give up the narcissism. 

Oh! I just saw that the post talked about another thing I've been wondering about. (Past me and Present me sometimes REALLY think alike)

Anyway, what I was and am wondering is if narcissism could influence the behavior of the drug addict and/or alcoholic.  

Do alcoholics without narcissism put in more effort to be sober/clean? And even when drunk/high, do they treat their kids better than a narcissistic drug user?  

What I asked in the old The Fosters post is this: I'm also wondering, are all addicts that desperately manipulative?  Are there some addicts who manage to have standards?  Like, I'll steal to get high. But NOT from my own children! If some addicts have lower standards and are more manipulative, could these manipulative traits be there before the addiction began and after they've become sober?  Could it simply take a more subtle and different form? 

As for the god and demon narcissist thing. I would definitely put Frank in the demon category. He's not seen in good light, maybe partly because of the narcissism but more so because of the heavy drinking and irresponsibility with money.  

Did Frank's narcissism disappear when he stopped drinking? And would it permanently go away if he stayed permanently sober? OR would he just become a God narcissist—someone who is self-absorbed, dishonest, and manipulative but hides it behind things like physical attractiveness, wealth, charm, talent, philanthropy, etc.  

Moving on....

I'm starting to like season 2 of Broadchurch. I wasn't too into it with the first two episodes. But with the third episode, I started warming up to the whole thing. And I was even dismayed when the episode ended...longing for more.  

I usually try to not play on my phone while watching shows. I'm bad at multitasking. But I started doing that while we were watching the second episode. I was looking for Broadchurch actors older than me so I could feel less old.  Yeah. I do that sometimes.

I found a few.

But I also found out that Jodie Whittaker and Arthur Darvill (who are dreadfully younger than me) have the exact same birthday. I was so excited about this. I blurted it out to Tim and actually asked him to pause the show, so he could fully hear the news.

Tim listened and then asked if they were born the same year.

I was like...hello? Why else would I see this as being newsworthy?  I mean it would be mildly cool for actors on the same show to have the same birthday. I probably wouldn't have interrupted the show for that, though. I might have just said it quietly to myself not caring if Tim heard or not.

I feel it's kind of a big deal to know someone who was born on the same day as you.

I don't think I ever met anyone who was born the same day as me.

BUT....one of the few things I remember from my late 1970's St. Louis life is that there was a girl in preschool. Her name was Allison, and her birthday was close to mine. I don't think we had the same  exact birthday. But it was a big enough deal to me just to have a friend with a close birthday.  I mean a big enough deal that I still think about it 43 years later.  

I wonder if we were the same age. Were we born days apart? It's possible that she was a 1973 birthday instead of my 1972.  

In screenwriting news, I'm feeling somewhat good about The Dead are Online version B. I had decided to NOT submit that one to contests.  I was unhappy with one of the characters...Anna.  My plan was to save the scenes in version B and use them when/if I wrote a miniseries version.  

I felt somewhat okay with her character in a full length project but felt things about her personality and storyline would be a deterrent to a contest judge liking my screenplay.  

SO I ended up deleting a couple of scenes that might have fixed the problem.

Well...to be less vague. Anna and her fiancee Eugene have a bad relationship. They are awful to each other; maybe more her to him than vice-versa. Then, in the end, they start mending their relationship. But I started to think that maybe Anna was too toxic, and the mending of the relationship wouldn't be seen as a positive thing.  So I took out her more toxic bits.  

I've not been a podcast person, but I was suddenly in the mood to hear the Horizons theme song and ended up finding the Imagineer Podcast, and they have a whole episode about the ride. I listened to it in bits...just like I've been listening to Trump bully Raffensperger in bits. But with the Horizons thing, I listened in larger bits, and I'm already done listening to it.    

I might listen to more episodes. Well...actually I started this one while doing some chores. So I'll probably continue with it.  

One last thing (hopefully).

Eastern Europe is the section of the world I've usually been the least interested in and attracted to. But I watched this video from the Frank James channel, and my interest was sparked when he said Latvia is the best country for introverts.

So this morning, I watched the Latvia episode of Geography Now! and learned about the Singing Revolution. That got my attention. My days of being disinterested in Eastern Europe are probably over (which is good because my great grandparents come from the Soviet Ukraine).

 

 Read my novel: The Dead are Online