Thanksgiving has rolled around once again, and since it happens to fall on Doctor Who Day this year, I know one of the things I’m thankful for.
In all seriousness, though, with all the crazy and sometimes unpleasant stuff that happened to me this year…right now I’m just thankful I survived it all. Mustering up some energy, I realize I’m also thankful that I was able to build a new computer with my dad’s help. It’s much faster than the laptop I was using, and it’s so much easier to get work done now.
So, yeah, there’s always something to be thankful for even if you have to dig in your head for a bit.
Last week the BBC released a picture of what Jodie Whittaker’s Thirteenth Doctor would wear, and I made a mental note to myself to do a post about it. Then I sort of forgot because real life has been attacking me in various ways lately, but then I remembered again! And before I forget again, here’s a picture of her new look.
Jodie Whittaker debuts the Thirteenth Doctor’s new look.
Here’s my take on it–I’m okay with the shirt, suspenders, and trenchcoat; those have very Doctor-y feels to them (although I admit the brighter color scheme is uncomfortably reminiscent of the Sixth Doctor and his amazing technicolor dream coat). But what in the name of jelly babies is up with those pants!? Pants like that never look good on anyone. If you want Whittaker to succeed as the Doctor, don’t make her wear pants that look too small!
I am starting to be very skeptical of this new Doctor, y’all. I want to be excited, but then they dress her in that. Granted, fashion has never been the Doctor’s strong point, but still…how hard would it have been to find normal pants for her?
At least we’ll still get Capaldi looking awesome in the Christmas special.
You know how people complain about how much they hate cats and how cats are so mean and unfriendly? I think I figured out part of the problem. A lot of people expect a cat to behave like a dog. When it behaves like a cat instead, they get upset and disappointed and try to force it to behave like a dog, but that doesn’t accomplish anything except making the cat mad.
You have to understand that a cat is not going to behave like a dog. It doesn’t have the same social needs a dog does; that’s why they can seem so aloof and act so annoyed if you try to chase after them. A cat needs time to decide it likes you; you’ll need to give it space while it makes its decision. If you respect the cat, the cat will respect you.
Funny the thoughts that come into your head when you’re doing laundry.
And don’t forget tomorrow is All Saints’ Day, a Holy Day of Obligation, so get to Mass! In the meantime, enjoy this fascinating video about some of the Catholic imagery and symbolism in Bram Stoker’s Dracula.
What could be better for Halloween than classic silent horror films? I’ve mentioned some of these before, but I always like to trot them out again around this time of year.
- Nosferatu (1922): It’s the classic copyright-infringing adaptation of Dracula that was almost lost forever when Bram Stoker’s widow Florence sued the studio for not acquiring the rights to film her late husband’s story. It’s not only a great example of silent films, it’s also a great vampire story.
- The Phantom of the Opera (1925): If you’re surprised to see me mention this gem…you clearly must be new.
- The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1919/1920, I keep finding conflicting dates for this): I don’t think I’ve mentioned this one before, but I discovered it last year and absolutely fell in love with it. It’s the story of a man who believes a traveling magician and his somnambulist exhibit are responsible for a series of bizarre deaths, including the murder of his best friend.
I’m not talking about characters like Wolverine who have sometimes been morally murky. Nor am I talking about characters like Darth Vader who fell and still found redemption. I’m talking about characters we’ve seen turned into distorted parodies of themselves like Superman in Man of Steel or Batman in Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice. It was shocking to learn of Snow and Charming’s decision to exile Maleficent’s child in Once Upon a Time (although we later learned that their actions were solely being controlled by the Author at that point). And now with the rumors that Luke will be turning to the Dark Side in The Last Jedi, I’m forced to ask…why? Why are heroes being corrupted? Do the authors think it makes for a better story? But what is to be gained? Why kill the hope that these characters represented? With the way the world currently is, I would think we could all do with a little hope.
A lot of times movies are just movies, and I really shouldn’t be dissecting every tiny detail when something doesn’t make sense. BUT I CAN’T HELP IT!
A few days ago I was watching Dracula’s Daughter, and Van Helsing made a few remarks about dates that got me wondering about how exactly Countess Zaleska can be Dracula’s actual daughter. According to Van Helsing, Dracula died and was turned into a vampire 500 years ago. His daughter Marya died and was converted 100 years ago. This means that Dracula was already a vampire when Marya was born. Does this mean that the vampirism was something she inherited? And who was her mother–one of Dracula’s vampire wives or some random woman who wasn’t a vampire? If her mother was still human, does that mean she had a normal human childhood and was converted once she reached adulthood?
These are questions that will probably never be answered, much to my disappointed. Still, it had been a long time since I’d seen Dracula’s Daughter, and while I’m not one of the people who thinks it surpasses the original Dracula, it’s undeniably a good movie.