Hooray!  The Powers That Be may have denied us our David Tennant fix by not taking "Rex Is Not Your Lawyer" to series, but we now have a clip!

Verdict: American accent is OK, but distracting.  Why couldn't they let him use his natural accent?  David Tennant using his Scottish accent is at least 1000 times sexier than David Tennant with any other accent.  This has been proven by science.

Comment (1)

Apparently there was some kind of convention in San Diego recently.  Does anyone know anything about this?

No, just kidding.  I and 125,999 of my closest friends hit the ol' Sandy Eggo for some fun far away from the sun.

Comment (1) Read More...

If you don't get the reference in the title of this article, I confess, I pity you just a little. But never fear! It is never too late to get your geek on with the fabulousness that  is Futurama, an animated geekgasm of a show from the creator of The Simpsons. 

Not only are Futurama fans geeky, but also devout enough to support the show after its cancellation by FOX, buy the DVD sets, and later, the movie DVDs.

Some of us even kept the flame of fannishness burning by constructing elaborate and freakishly detailed Bender costumes. (The photo to the left is an almost complete costume my own dear clan constructed -- we did eventually complete the tri-fingered hand cups, and provide better attachment  of the bend-y limbs. In fact, this costume was a crowd favorite at Halloween costume contests. And although we never bothered to haul it out to Cons (It is unwieldy to transport and somewhat uncomfortable to wear. Yes, I've done it), Bender, being the party bot that he is, was recognized everywhere we took him. And frequently offered free beers.

After all that, the show is about to be resurrected on Comedy Central in an hour-long event tonight. Here's a sneak peek at the first minute and a half :

Comment (0) Read More...

I guess you might think that all I talk about is stuff that has to do with David Tennant. I promise that this is not the case. Mostly. He just happens to be closely connected with things I dearly love. Like the U.K. Science Fiction. Shakespeare. Hotness. I have the same problem with Patrick Stewart for all the same reasons. I'm sure you all know where this is going.

Oh yes, it's Hamlet! As most of you know, the Royal Shakespeare Company sent SciFi/Shakespeare/U.K./Hotness fans into a tizzy a few years ago when they announced that their 2008 production of Hamlet would star David and Patrick in leading roles (Hamlet and Claudius, respectively).  The thought was stunning: The Doctor and Jean Luc Picard together on stage in Shakespeare's home town!  I vividly remember the day I decided that I would see that show and I remember the day that tickets went on sale.  I bought a few of them and 1o months later I took the trip across the pond just so I could witness what promised to be a momentous event in pop culture and live theater history.  I was delighted by the fact that so many folks took the very same trip from all over the world.

Nightsky wrote a great review of the stage production a little while back, so I won't talk much about that.  But I will say that the live performance was astonishing.  I've seen this play performed many times and this particular production was so fresh and lively. The choices made by the director, the actors, and even the set designers were all pivotal and so effective. The whole company worked together so seamlessly under Gregory Doran's brilliant direction that it was easy to forget about the two world-famous actors and just watch as the story unfolded. (However, when David uttered the immortal line, "The time is out of joint: O cursed spite / That ever I was born to set it right!" I had to hold in my gleeful laughter. But I did let out an audible snort when Patrick waved his hand and said imperially, "See that it is so." I couldn't help it!)

You can imagine my joy when the RSC announced that they would film this production for DVD release. Same cast. Same set. Same mood and feel and atmosphere. But this time, everyone would be able to see it. You'd think that I would be most excited about having a copy to watch over and over again (which I will). Actually, much to my surprise, I'm MOST excited that everyone else can finally see the amazing production that I saw. Starting May 4th (that's today!) when the Region 1 DVD is released here in the U.S., I can finally show everyone what I've been talking about for almost two years.

Actually, I can show you now! PBS put the entire production up on their website after they broadcast it in its entirety last Wednesday night as part of the Great Performances series. I stayed up and watched the whole thing, riveted. It was so much fun to see the way they chose to adapt it to film.  Film is so much more intimate than live theater. You can see the actors' faces, when they clench their jaws or make a slight shift of the eyes. I found myself even more engrossed this time through than when I was when seeing it live.

Some things about the film version were jarring at first such as the instances during the soliloquies when the actors clobber the fourth wall by looking directly into the camera. I actually jumped the first time it happened, but I soon got used to it. It's easy to see the attraction of this type of acting on film. Watch David perform the 'To be, or not to be' soliloquy here.  You can see how effective eye contact is in the moments he chooses to use it.

 

There were moments throughout the play when it seemed as if the characters gazed into the camera, through my TV, and right into my soul. I ended up really loving this new facet of the production. I felt included in the story, as if the characters purposefully wanted me to be privy to all of their secretive plans and thoughts -- as if they wanted me to understand (or even condone) their actions.  I for one was delighted to be involved!

Another great choice made in the film production was the use of second-hand visuals like mirrors, security cameras and Hamlet's little hand-held camera. Our point of view shifts often from 'live' to the view through one of the cameras and back again. There were moments that actually made the audience feel like we were spying on the unfolding drama. It was really effective and created a more sinister feeling overall that pervaded the whole production, which I loved. (I also love how we get a snippet of the famous 'Hamlet Video Diaries' a la the Doctor Who DVDs as Tennant performs a soliloquy into his hand-held camera. My fangirl self giggled with glee at the visual parallel.)

However, with these differences taken into account, the filmed production is still almost identical to what I saw on the live stage. The sets are on location, but they look the same. The furniture, the costumes, the blocking...it's all the same. If you didn't get to see the live performance, rest assured that this film version is closer to it than I ever thought possible. 

Along with all of these thoughts about the technical aspects of this version of Hamlet, I can't resist putting down some of my thoughts about the actual performances you'll see in this wonderful production.  They were quite inspiring. 

Comment (4) Read More...

I have to admit that even though I cried when David Tennant held out his hand and said "I don't want to go" on New Year's Day, I've been really looking forward to my first glimpse of "New New Who".   I've missed Doctor Who and it's a great feeling to have a full season ahead of us complete with monsters and catch-phrase-y story arcs.

Part of me feels disloyal for being so excited.  You all know how much I adore David.   He loved being the Doctor so much and I always appreciate how hot he is sweet he is to his fans.  I traveled across the ocean to see him play Hamlet in 2008.  He signed my postcard at the stage door and I squeed with joy.  I'm just a wee bit of a fan girl where he is concerned.

And yet...and yet, I was ready for his turn as the Doctor to end.  Ten's story took two years to wind down.  For me, it was a rather torturous resolution because we went with him on that journey and it was hard to watch him suffer through it.   I was sad when he finally regenerated, but I was also a little relieved.  I knew I would miss David and his brilliance in that role, but it was definitely time for the FUN to come back.

I saw the first episode of Series 5 after it aired in the U.K. last Saturday night and I can say that the fun is definitely back.   Woohoo!

As most of you know, the credits for this season are crammed with new names including those of the actors, the writers, the production team, and Stephen Moffat, who is the head writer and executive producer.  He's written episodes (and won awards for) the show before, but this is the first time he stands at the helm.  I've enjoyed a lot of Moffat's twisty and terrifying episodes over the past 5 years and I can only imagine what he will do with an entire season arc.  I'm actually kind of giddy with anticipation. 

I was also a bit nervous.  The news over the past few months made it seem like Moffat changed everything.  The TARDIS.  The logo.  The theme music.

Well, after seeing his first episode, it's clear that he did change everything.  And I loved it, despite the mild pangs of disloyalty.   It's great to be reminded that Doctor Who has always been a great show in its own right.  This first episode made me feel lucky that such a spunky, funny show even exists!

As the episode starts and we see the familiar view of Earth from space, Matt Smith is literally flung from the crashing TARDIS into his very first crazy fast-paced and funny adventure as Doctor Number Eleven.  But it's when we cut to the title theme and intro that it's clear we're not in Kansas anymore.  Aside from being so good, this episode is special because we get to know a new Doctor, and we get to know him within the setting of what almost seems like a brand new show. 

I think this is why my brain is so willing to embrace all the new stuff from the very beginning.   It's like this is 'New Who Version Two', or a really awesome sequel to a great movie I love.  I'm not mad at it for not being the same.  I'm just so excited that it is still going strong.

BBC America will run all new episodes of Doctor Who two weeks after they air in the U.K.  Catch The Eleventh Hour and see what all the fuss is about on April 17th at 8/7c.

What what? you say, No review of the actual Doctor?  Is he a good Doctor?  Is he crazy?  Too normal?  Is the bow tie thing really going to work?  Did he say 'Geronimo' enough to make you want to throw up?  Is he as awesome as Ten?  All good questions.  My first reactions are very enthusiastic, but I'm withholding my full analysis until I can get to know him a little better.  However, I'd love to hear your opinion.  Speak up in the comments and let me know what you thought of the first episode!

Comment (4)

So the Tubes have been buzzing with, of all things, an interview with some Eighties Doctor Who figures who have copped to sticking political allegories in the storylines during Sylvester McCoy's era.  Particular attention is paid to one serial called "The Happiness Patrol"*, which is now revealed to be an attack on Margaret Thatcher's politics.  (Except for the giant candy monster, which is just there to be hilariously bad.)

A couple of problems here.  One: as a revelation, this is about as revelatory as "Gene Roddenberry was a secular humanist!".  If it shocks you, well... hi, welcome to Earth, hope you enjoy your stay.  "The Happiness Patrol" as anti-Thatcher allegory was picked up on at the time--it's not a difficult interpretation.

Vote Labour or THE KANDYMAN EATS YOU. 

Two: in fact--Sylvester McCoy's claims notwithstanding--as an allegory, it's as subtle as a pink elephant. "The Happiness Patrol" serves just as well as an example of why Doctor Who shouldn't do allegories: they're terrible at them.  See also "The Sunmakers" (anti-tax), "The Green Death" (environmentalism), "The Two Doctors" (vegetarianism), and, from the new series, "Aliens of London / World War Three" (anti-Iraq war).**  It's notable that none of these are universal fan favorites today; consensus is pretty strong on the merits of most stories, and the best-liked stories ("Genesis of the Daleks", "The Caves of Androzani","The Curse of Fenric", "The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances", and whatever favorite of yours that I haven't listed here because otherwise this would be a really long list) tend to not have obvious takeaway Aesops.

Three, what do the pearl-clutchers allege that Doctor Who was trying to accomplish?  Mass riots in the streets?  Britain's prepubescents marching on Whitehall?  Because that didn't happen.  Okay, so they were trying to inculcate a dislike of Thatcher and her policies, so that Britain's children would grow up to vote Labour... because these children would, somehow, be raised in a pro-Tory vacuum otherwise?  "The Happiness Patrol" was broadcast in 1988,  public mood had turned against Thatcher by the Nineties, and IMHO the changing of the public's opinion of her government is best explained by the failures of said government.

Four, I have a serious problem with the unspoken assumption under all the handwringing, which is that Doctor Who should have been impartial.  What the hell does this mean?  Should they not have done stories that... I don't know, commented on the world in any way?  This is fiction's job.  All stories are about the world in which they're made, and science fiction is always at least as much about the present as it is about the future.  The BBC should only ever make TV that everyone will agree with?

Which, finally, is impossible anyway. Showrunners have no control over what interpretation people give to the stories.  If Russell T. Davies says that the episode "Bad Wolf" was intended as an homage to reality TV, and bazillions of fans think it's a satirical critique of reality TV, who's right and who's wrong?

* IMHO, you're not missing much if you sit this serial out.  It's one of those Eighties serials where the world sucks and the special effects are terrible and the soundtrack is synth-tastic.

**And, of course, lots of others.  Trust me, you'll be able to tell which.

(Kandyman image yoinked from the Doctor Who Image Archive.)

Comment (2)

 There's been a bit of a brouhaha regarding Some of the Super Bowl commercials, it seems. Well, since I live in New Orleans, the commercials have hardly been at the top of my list of things to think about. The Saints are our superheroes these days, and no one within a hundred miles of where I sit would be at all surprised to look up and see pigs flying or someone selling box seats to watch hell freeze over.

Seriously, we let school out early and closed businesses at 2pm to make sure everyone had a chance to get downtown in time for the Saints' parade at 5pm this past Tuesday. It's been off the hook.

I have never been capable of true feminist rage for anything less than profoundly stupid and horrific so-called honor killings, or the ridiculous ways in which governments punish women for being raped.  So, yeah. A stupid commercial that depicts men as helpless children who have little capacity to feel alive unless they are speeding around in an ugly car trying to wrap themselves around bridge abutments? Barely gets an eyeroll from me.

Still, I get it. As far as women still have to go to be accepted as of equal value to men even in the most developed nations of the world, these little things can wrankle.  The blogosphere has already weighed in and my personal favorite came from the Queen of Shake-Shake, in whose article the original advert is available, if you haven't seen it. Then - and we all knew this would happen - the video parodies began. Here's a good one:

The real problem with advertisements of this sort isn't that they are insulting to women, though. The Dodge Charger ad was horribly insulting to men. Men are powerless and oppressed by having to get up and go to work, to clean up after themselves and listen to the voices of people they supposedly love. Men really just want to shirk the responsibilities that every grown-up has to bear, and play with their toys in the most dangerous way possible. That ad basically says that men are overgrown, spoiled children, and THAT infuriates me on behalf of all the really awesome, competent and caring men I know. I hope my sons grow up to emulate those men, the real ones, not these pathetic, selfish and powerless fictions.

Real men are strong, but do not have to abuse their strength to feel powerful. Real men, real people, can seethe beauty in the world around them, in the faces of those they love and those who love them.  When we can get past real or imagined slights and love each other anyway, that's when life begins, and the joy of it can sustain us. That is something nobody gets from a car or some expensive face cream or what the heck ever.

So, to advertisers I say, GROW UP. Grow up and drink deep of the fact that many, many women watch the Super Bowl, and buy cars. They're probably not going to buy yours.

Comment (0)

Here at GC, we're never happier than when our readers engage us in conversation. No, really. I have always enjoyed being challenged. If no one bothers to question our assumptions, how can we grow? When I went through the "Why is the sky blue?" phase, my family actively encouraged me to ask more questions.  (I'm a parent now, and I've got to tell you, I have more respect for my folks every day.) So, I find it actively enjoyable to discuss points of interest in the articles I write. (This is a different thing entirely from trollishness, which amounts to "[insert noun/pronoun] sucks" or the YouTube version,  "shut up and show your boobies." Those, while amusing in their own way (Ha, HA! Inarticulate boy is inarticulate!) are not really engaging.)

So it was with great delight that I sorted through the mailbag to find the following letter from Mark Warren, a Whedon fan and writer of fanfiction, who had a few bones to pick with my recent article, Dollhouse: Did I Fall Asleep?  Mr. Warren was kind enough to let me share his letter with GeekaChicas readers. It is presented here with some serious formatting issues I could not fix, though I tried. (Our site software has some issues with the text, though it looks fine when we go in to our WYSIWYG editor.) 

There are more spoilers than in my original article beyond this point.

Comment (0) Read More...

Space shuttles are for sale, people.  And as sad as I am that the shuttle program is ending, I'm also curious to see where NASA is going to go with their next program.

Unfortunately, I'm a little short of the $28.8 million price tag as far as my personal funds are concerned.  Wanna split one?

We can keep it in the field behind my house, and the engines are free!  All we need is a few mechanical engineers, and we can start our very own commercial spaceflight business.  Let's give Richard Branson a run for his money. 

Even better, let's actually go through with the plans I gave my university for my degree:  let's equip it with phasers and torpedoes and go build a base on the moon.  

From there, who knows?  I think the grand majority of Cool Space Stuff is going to come from the market at this point instead of from NASA. 

Vulcan, here we come! 

Comment (10)

US Life On Mars wasn't enough.  US Little Britain, of all the weirdly self-contradictory ideas, wasn't enough.   US Being Human still wasn't enough.  Now, against all logic, we will soon have US Torchwood!

Now, I hear the low keen of despair rise from you all, and I am tempted to join in*, except that they've got not only Russell T Davies BUT ALSO Julie Gardner AND Jane Tranter aboard.

Besides, it's on Fox, so it'll be canceled pretty quickly whether or not it sucks.

* For the LAST TIME, Hollywood: what we like about British shows IS THEIR BRITISHNESS.

Comment (6)

I feel I should give a bit of back story to this particular review, considering how very strongly hooked I now am on streaming movies and TV shows.

I've had a Netflix account for quite a while. Very convenient, very fast, and no movie rental store leaving me angry voicemails about how they're going to charge me $60 for that copy of Serenity that my ex-boyfriend borrowed  and never brought back.

Unfortunately, after hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, I had no mailing address.  Another university had agreed to let me attend for that semester and live in the dorms, and they'd worked out a deal with my school so that my scholarship would still be honored.  So  I wasn't exactly going to look a gift horse in the mouth.

Of course, that meant that I couldn't use Netflix by mail.

Enter the "Watch Instantly" on  demand streaming function.  I loved it.  Sure, I had to watch things on my computer, but considering I don't do well with roommates anyway, I was perfectly fine with shoving headphones in my ears and having an excuse for not responding to anything any of my three roommates said.

Eventually, Netflix  announced it was going to make streaming available directly through televisions.  Currently, this can be accomplished through any of several gaming consoles or by buying a Roku box. I was intrigued by the Roku box, but I didn't want to spend a hundred bucks for it until I'd heard something good or bad.  Unfortunately, no one that I know has bought one since they came out.

So when I opened one of my Geekmas gifts and found a Roku player, I was excited.  Very excited.

I've had time to play around with it, and I have to say that I'm impressed.  I wanted to see how the manufacturer had managed to address some obvious issues (set-up, connection, selecting titles, etc.).

Comment (3) Read More...

I'm quite new to the twitterverse, which is why you should forgive me if you've thought of/read all of what I'm about to say.  I always read people's tweets on Facebook and I saw evidence of Twitter's rise to social networking dominance all over the internet.  It wasn't until I got a shiny new phone with internet access that I finally decided that the rest of the world needed to receive up to the minute notifications about what song I'm listening to at any given moment. 

And then I discovered something:  for an entertainment news junky like me, it's much more fun to be a follower on Twitter.  It's like standing at a crowded party full of all the people you want to hear from.  You hear snatches of the conversation, pass along anecdotes of your own, and come away with plenty of gossip for later.  If you can't stand what someone is saying - *Click* - they're out of the party!  I love that it's instant, I love that it's banal, and I love that the URLs are tiny. 

The coolest thing about Twitter though has to be that, as geeks, we positively own the place.  Geeks were the first to start using it (except for latecomers like me, obviously) and geeks are the ones who cry foul when Twitter tries to 'improve' the service (i.e. that irritating retweet function that doesn't allow the user to add comments).  If we add # to the front and 'fail' to the end, you'd best hope that your name/product/show/company is not hanging out in between.   The power that the internet gave us in the 90s seems to have increased exponentially, and Twitter is a huge part of that.

But I love being a geek because, for the most part, we use the power for good and for fun.  We're a breed that likes to share information and support something that we think is valuable and wonderful.  We hang on to things, even if they haven't become popular quite yet.   And, we laugh like crazy when afterelton.com pits Captain Jack Harkness against the delicious Dr. Horrible for Gay Man of the Decade in an online poll.  The ensuing and completely delightful Big Gay Battle was one example of how the word 'viral' has taken on a brand new meaning since the advent of Twitter.   Movements and news spread so fast, and I love that. 

Of course, everyone wants a piece of what all this free advertising can do.  The little band of Community fans to which I belong is currently using Twitter to show support for the show and spread the word around in hopes we can keep it on the air amidst the huge NBCfail.  (@community_tv if you're interested!)  I know similar movements are always occurring and that many of them have actually succeeded.   Entrepreneurs are able to generate exposure and buzz in a completely free and painless way.  'Free' makes everything better in my opinion.

If you're getting started on Twitter, or you want to increase your geek exposure,  Wired just posted their list of 150 Geeky Media People You Should Be Following on Twitter.  This list is a veritable gold mine of geek royalty.  It was exciting to see that I was already following some of them but, needless to say, I found plenty of new folks to add to my pool.  Grant Imahara?  I am so there.   Simon Pegg?  How did I not think of that before?

But I think what makes me the proudest, the most secure in my own geekiness, is the fact that I saw this list tweeted by someone I was already following: Al Yankovic.  He's definitely at the top of my geek list.  Who's at the top of yours?

You can put US at the top of your Geeky Twitter List if you feel so inclined.  Follow us at @GeekaChicas.

Comment (1)

For those of you who have followed this space for any amount of time, it will come as no surprise that many of us here at GC are Joss Whedon fans. I'm no exception. I am, quite possibly, genetically predisposed to love anything Joss Whedon writes.

Last spring I was looking forward to Dollhouse, even though the premise (a group of programmable people sent out on assignments with different personalities and memories each week - most of the assignments naturally being sexual/romantic in nature)  sounded strangely misogynistic and dark. Joss Whedon gets a lot of leeway with me, because he's Joss. I set my DVR with hope in my heart.

It was not love at first sight, let me tell you. That series opener was so narratively jumbled that I had a hard time watching the whole episode. I had a hard time watching it to the end, and I can lose an hour on YouTube watching videos of cats eating broccoli.

So why was this first episode of the new show helmed by my favorite television writer less compelling than, say, gonads and strife? I'll tell you.

Comment (20) Read More...

When you’re a fan of several different franchises as I am, you have to realize that in doing so, there is a certain amount of risk involved.  A danger of your fandom not living up to your expectations and/or coming to the point that causes you to ponder “Why in the world did I ever start watching/reading/playing this?” is always present, even if it is only the danger of the story ending.

I first came to grips with this painful fact at the tender age of eleven, when my family and I sat in our living room with our eyes glued to the television, and we watched the last flight of the Enterprise 1701 D into an artful background of sun and nebulae on the small screen. Star Trek: The Next Generation is still my favorite show, but there is no one more depressed than I am about the fact that there will be no more of it.

Other examples include: Heroes, which turned to crap after the mesmerizing first season. Doctor Who, it will never be the same – no, really, it won’t. 

That’s why the main requirement of being a fan is unfailing, sometimes obsessive love.  But even after all of that, it’s hard not to wallow in despair at times. 

Sometimes we as fans just need a more solid ground to stand on.  There is one thing in this entire universe that I know will never fail me.  It’s a person actually, and his name is Bear Grylls.  Perhaps you’ve heard of him?

Comment (5) Read More...

Comment (3)

Aside from the Rifftrax guys' ubiquitous Christmas carol version of "Pokerface," there is an entire album you must purchase for great lulz this holiday season.

Have Yourself a Meaty Little Christmas

My rating?

Okay, I love Aqua Teen Hunger Force, but even if you don't (and there are plenty of people who don't), there's a good chance you'll find this album hilarious.  Especially those who've had just a little too much stress to handle.  They have some pretty fantastic, if not family-friendly lyrics.

The tracks and my favorite lines are as follows (be warned that by clicking "Read more," you will likely be amused, scandalized, and/or insulted):

Comment (0) Read More...

I am not native to fandom.  Other than the science fiction/ fantasy I devoured, my exposure to geekery when growing up was limited to my dad having Star Trek TNG on in the background while he puttered around the house. 

This is, as it happens, my parents' preferred method of TV viewing: something to watch while knitting (Mom) or clipping coupons (Dad).  And yet TV viewing was (and still is, when I'm home for a visit) very much a communal activity, something for the whole family to watch after dinner.

As I sank further and further into fandom, my tastes became ever more esoteric.  I furtively taped MST3K and Space Ghost: Coast To Coast* for private screenings when the 'rents weren't around, because I knew what the reaction would be:

Parent: (friendly, interested) Hey, what are you watching?

Me:  Um...  A show about robots who make fun of bad movies / A pretend talk show hosted by a cartoon superhero.

Parent: *blank stare*

And they, being loving and supportive parents, would give whatever weird thing I was interested in a try, and end up saying things like "I wish those robots hadn't talked over the movie."

To sum up: my parents are not fen. 

And yet they--being, as previously mentioned, loving and supportive--invite me to pick the after-dinner movie, try to like what I like, and--with the sixth sense I developed as a teenager--I just know that TV shows with disappearing police boxes, or space cowboys, or bakers who can raise the dead, or extradimensional superheroes named after chemical compounds... these are not going to be big hits.

So over the years, I've developed a strategy for uniting the worlds of fandom and non-fandom: not geeky works, but geek-related works.

My hypothesis is as follows: actors who appear in geeky works are, ipso facto, attracted to geeky projects, and stand a good chance of being smart.  Smart and geeky people like smart projects, not all of which are necessarily geeky.  So, if I begin with one of my latest interests, Classic era Doctor Who, ("What do you want to watch, Nightsky?" "Low-budget British TV weirdness from the 70s and 80s!"), I look at what else the actors have done.  In the penumbra of geekiness, if you will.  And lo! here's The Last Detective (starring ex-Doctor Peter Davison), a gently funny police procedural that I like; good characterization; smart dialogue... and it's 100% weirdness-free, and I know my parents like whodunits, because they loved Murder, She Wrote.  Perfect!

Similarly:

• Blackadder too dark and too earthy?  Try Kingdom--funny, accessible, beautifully-shot show about a country lawyer, starring Stephen "Melchett" Fry.  If they like period pieces, he and Hugh Laurie (now, of course, better known as House) deliver the goods in Jeeves & Wooster.
• Life on Mars too damn surreal?  Maybe they'll like the more down-to-earth intrigue of State of Play, starring John Simm and Philip Glenister.
• Firefly too hard to get into? Castle, starring Nathan Fillion, awaits!

This is not to say that nothing geeky can work.  Knowing of my sister's interest in the paranormal, I put on Dead Like Me when she visited, and it went over so well that the weekend turned into a DLM marathon.  And the whole family liked Spirited Away--they've often said so, even though at the time their reactions seemed kinda meh.  Even my former roommate, one of the universe's least geeky people, fell hard for Howl's Moving Castle.

Remember, try to keep it light.  What non-geeks dislike about geeky works is the amount of continuity you have to absorb and remember: to them, it looks an awful lot like work.  Any work best understood by arguing about it with other fans online is right out.

* I actually didn't much like SG:C2C, despite its They Might Be Giants theme song.

Comment (1)

In case you've been living on Mars for a few years (in which case, I hope I can rent out your place), Monk is that TV series often presented with the tagline "Obsessive.  Compulsive.  Detective."  It's about a police officer with severe obsessive-compulsive disorder which was aggravated when his wife was murdered.  It's won many awards and has a decent fan base.

One might think that a series bringing obsessive-compulsive disorder to light would be seen as a step forward as far as mental health is concerned.  In this case, the opinions are mixed.  Monk's OCD is compounded by a large number of severe phobias.  But often, the thought process associated with obsessive-compulsive disorder is what allows him to succeed where others have failed!  That's good!  Right?  .....right?

Maybe not.

Comment (2) Read More...

Water overcomes the stone;
Without substance it requires no opening;
This is the benefit of taking no action.
~Tao Te Ching

Water always wins.
~The Doctor

Slightly spoilery: discussion of themes but not plot points.

Comment (5) Read More...

We at GeekaChicas are very proud to have the lovely miss_s_b  guest blogging here about a subject near and dear to many a Geek Femme. Check out her award-winning blog here.

My daughter is a geek. This is no real surprise, given that she's my daughter, but at six years old, she is a fully-fledged, space crazy, sci-fi geek. Aside from Original Trek and Voyager, she loves Andromeda, SGA, old and new Doctor Who, Ben 10, Batman of all flavours, Thundercats, and Duck Dodgers in the 24th and a halfth CENTURY! By far her favourite, though, is the BAFTA-nominated The Sarah-Jane Adventures.

As most of you will know, Sarah-Jane started as a companion in regular Doctor Who in the seventies, in which she was an intelligent and fearless investigative journalist; almost had a spin-off show in the eighties; and came back in the episode School Reunion a couple of years ago with Tennant!Doctor. She's a character with a long and convoluted history in the parent show, and when the idea was mooted of another attempt at a spin-off, I was sceptical, to say the least. Then I watched the pilot (Invasion of the Bane) with my daughter and had to somewhat mentally change gear. This was a show that took all the problems I had with recent seasons of Doctor Who and stamped on them joyfully and comprehensively. But surely they couldn't keep it up for a whole series? I almost didn't dare to hope...

We're over half-way through the third series now,  and my daughter is so addicted that she watches each episode several times on the iPlayer, and has insisted on having her hair cut to be "just like Sarah-Jane's!". And they have kept it up. They have SO kept it up. Sarah-Jane has the moral centre which the modern Doctor seems to lack. She abhors guns, and does her best to keep the military in general, and UNIT in particular, out of things (apart from the Brigadier, obviously).Her general greeting to a new alien is to reassure it that she doesn't want to hurt it, and that she'll help if she can.

She has more than one person in the "companion" role, and even though one of these is her adopted son, she doesn't play favourites. Maria and Clyde  and Rani get just as much of her love, time and attention as Luke does. Sure, she makes mistakes, but she owns up to them and faces up to them. She's not afraid to admit that she has been wrong to her companions, and tell them to learn from her mistakes as well as their own.

In terms of geekery, too, SJA is wonderful. My daughter watches it because she loves the characters and finds the stories exciting. I watch it for these reasons too, but I am kept watching by my geeky need to spot the references. And there have been many. Not just to within-Whoniverse stuff, but to everything from The Wicker Man to The Stone Tape. The writers clearly know their audience.

But the best thing of all, the very best thing, is that The Sarah-Jane Adventures is a science fiction show in which the lead character is a strong, capable, yet emotionally centred woman, and in which every single episode passes the Bechdel test.

When I was a kid, I had almost exclusively male role models. My dad, the Doctor, Brian May, Doctor McCoy, Patrick Moore, David Attenborough... As I got a bit older I picked up some female ones - Durham Red, Captain Janeway, Skin from Skunk Anansie, Judge Hershey,  Animated!Batman Poison Ivy - but the boys were still in the majority. I can't tell you how happy it makes me that my little girl can watch a gender-balanced science fiction show, and not only that, but a gender and RACE balanced science fiction show, and not only that, but one in which the female characters are NOT cyphers and stereotypes, but real, fleshed-out characters.

One recent episode centred around a misguided (but not evil) female alien,  who was redeemed by and released by Rani (who has become my daughter's favourite character in the show), and ended up rescuing Rani in return. When was the last time you saw a non-evil alien in regular Doctor Who? When was the last time you saw a TV show of ANY genre (other than a RomCom or soap) whose main premise was the journey of two female characters, with everyone else as incidental?

My only real beef with SJA is that it is setting my daughter up for a massive fall. No other series is even going to come close to matching it until she's old enough to watch  new!BSG. I am glad, then, that series 4 is already in the planning stages. And hope that it will contiue for a while after that. After all, my daughter is her mother's child, and she absolutely would arrange a protest march on television centre if the BBC had the temerity to cancel her favourite show, six years old or not.

--------------------------------------

If you have enjoyed this post and want to find out more about SJA, watch the Livejournal Sarah-Jane newsgathering community Sonic Lipstick, and/or the blogspot blog Sarah-Jane.tv.

Comment (9)