Reign Clip (by CWtelevision)
Hm. This is obviously not shooting for historical accuracy, which wouldn’t normally bother me, but if you AREN’T trying to be 100% accurate, why not cast some actors of color?
Reign, the reason Scotland votes for Independance! Why the hell does she sound English. A Scottish girl who lived in France for 13 years! Francis should be French!
I was so hopeful for this as well :(
See that everyone. Saturn Girl is on the box! She was the first female leader of a super-hero team. Yet, everyone seems to forget that some of the greatest DC women are Legionnnaires.
Support Legion of Super-Heroes!
River Song is supposed to be back in “the name of the doctor”, and I have a feeling that your ship is about to end…sorry
To the Doctor/River shippers.
Rose is back in the 50th.
… and what, I’m supposed to be flipping out over this? He can love more than one person, even at the same time.
You are meant to stop being an arsehole to other people and realise that while you sit there and crow about getting one over them, there is always a bigger fish.
Some times, I can’t help but wonder if maybe they’re going to kill off Jane Foster in the movie (no offense to her fans). I don’t know it’s just a feeling.
Also, for all those complaining about the Thor, Sif and Jane love triangle saying that it’s “silly” and will ruin Sif’s character, are you…
Sif is ruined by her love for Thor in the comics too. So at least it will be accurate. Not all of us are ignorant. Sif’s best stories are sans Thor.
“Wait a second. During Asgard’s reincarnation Loki’s soul went into Sif’s body, thus creating Lady Loki, and Sif’s soul went into an old woman’s body. Wouldn’t that mean the old lady’s soul went into Loki’s body?”
If I remember correctly, Sif was sharing the body with the older woman’s soul.
Yes. I think we are meant to believe Loki left her to die in that old woman’s body right in front of Jane who Sif has always been jealous of. Its torture on many levels.
If you are a female author, you are much more likely to get a package that suggests the book is of a lower perceived quality. We’re the high fructose corn syrup of literature, even when our products are the same.
This article made me go back and look at all the books we read in my college honors English class. First semester: zero women writers. Second semester: one. Out of the seventeen books we read, only Jane Austen’s Persuasion made the list.
And granted, we also read Hannah Arendt’s essay “What is Authority?” at the end of the spring semester. But still. That’s a BIG gap.
One novel and one essay? Hmm.
Yikes. Was it English lit and not combined with American lit?
We had a lot of option modules so we could choose our own books but we had a whole unit in year 2 on Austen and the Brontes. In fact we were encouraged to analyse all books from a context of gender. We had Aphra Behn, Hannah Cullwick, Christina Rossetti, various Victorian women’s short stories etc. What was disproportionate was the critical and cultural theory modules, apparently women only ever talk about gender.
This is what we were thought in school, yet somehow I feel like the only Norwegian who keeps the “u”s… it’s all a very sad story about the people who learnt British English but ended up with a bizarre mixture of Scandinavian and American …
Why would anyone learn American English and not English English? It is after all, English.
Also, the U is needed for the -uh sound. So Labe-uh, fave-uh-rite etc.. Taking it out you get this strange -ar if that is the best way to put it. Labe-ar, fave-ar-rite etc
English should be fine for Scandinavians, its basically got the same germanic roots.
hey there seems to be a bit of confusion and blatant condescension towards people who criticise jane foster as a character so let me clear this up at least from my point of view
a list of reasons which i have never and will never use for disliking jane:
- she’s not sif
- she’s not a fighter
1) Her character is not one dimensional. Jane has been working on this theory for her whole career. She is on the fringes of Physics and her ideas are so outlandish they could be just thrown out before they even get looked at. Therefore she works 1000%. But this is also something she enjoys, she will throw herself into her work literally putting herself in danger to get answers. Flaws? Well, she’s shy and awkward. She works so hard she has no social life, she is stuck in a trailer in the middle of the desert with only Darcy, someone she employs for company. Where are her friends that weren’t friends with her dad or paid to be there?
2) Romance wasn’t the focus of the first film. That was intentional. The first film is a beginning not the be all and end all of their relationship. They like each other, they want to see each other again. Thor is grateful to her for kicking life into perspective for him.
3) Why shouldn’t there be a character for young girls to look up to? Surely the heroes are there for little boys to look up to and play in the playground? You are chatting bubbles here.
4) As is your opinion. Tastes differ and its not an objective failing.
5) LOL! Thor was better than some of Tarantino’s crap.