Bay 12 Games Forum

• A argument in the House, involving staffers and representatives and occurring over House Democrat's Procedural attempts to bring a clean CR to the floor, broke out into acrimony, possibly involving someone laying a hand on someone.
  

(emboldment mine) Are you saying CSPAN might soon become as entertaining as British Parliament?

In all seriousness, it's good to hear some progress is happening. And I'm not too surprised said progress is coming from the upper house, whilst the lower house gets chaotic.

And of course, I still support the discharge petition. You go, House Dems!

Apparently Jesus Christ Superstar got a theatrical updoot in 2000. :O

Comparison time!
1973 Judas | 2000 Judas
This is a toss up. Old Judas' performance was angry, embittered, and powerful. Given the era it was filmed in, I read a few more layers of meaning and emotion into it too. The new one was a more concerned, desperate, broken character, though... and I kind of like seeing him in that light. I think I liked how it was framed in the original, with Judas at a distance and stalking off, rather than the song being cast as Judas' internal monologue and/or some kind of montage happening over time. I did like that they changed "I am frightened by the crowd / for we are getting much to loud." to "...and our conquerors object / to another noisy sect." The rhyme is sharper, and just fits better.

1973 Jesus | 2000 Jesus
It's really hard to top the original performance here... that voice and performance and scenery combined was just incredible. And though the new one was a great vocalist too, he... sounded a bit too whiny, I guess? And I don't like how strictly he followed the meter of the song, which costs the song a lot of potential emotion. It felt less like soul-searching, and more like giving up.

1973 Caiaphas et al | 2000 Caiaphas et al
I really love the set design in the modern one, and the singers are a good bit stronger too. Maybe a bit more flat and villainous in their presentation, though, which makes it harder to see how they were trying to save the Jews from Jesus, and the risk his sweeping fandom posed to them all. I do kinda miss the image of shirtless beardy men in gigantic swirly hats, singing and clinging to a gigantic wooden scaffold, though. Both have their merits.

Herod 1973 | Herod 2000
I... am pretty much unavailable for comment. Both of these are too amazing.

I grew up listening to the original 1970 album and watching the 2000 direct-to-DVD version. I've only seen clips of the 1973 movie in recent years, but I wouldn't object to watching it. (1973 certainly seems sillier than 2000.) I actually haven't listened to the 1970 album in quite a while, but that's because my mind tends to default to those versions, when I much prefer the 2000 versions (I just like the way they're performed better.) And without a doubt the 2000 movie contains none of the cheese 1973 movie does (well, except for Herod, but that's required by law).

Yes, the whole thing is very much depicted as the story of Judas. The special features for the DVD say as much, from what I recall.

I don't think I've seen the 1973 version of Gethsemane, so I'm of course partial to 2000. Different from the '70 album at least is how quiet he gets at "then, I was inspired". That, I think, is my favorite part.

I love the 2000 version of "This Jesus Must Die" by far. It's a more upbeat version of the song, and I think it fits much better.

Fun fact: The 1973 "King Herod's Song" features a Weird Al lookalike on piano (watch at the beginning, with the shots of everybody turning to camera and gasping. Lookalike is one of them.)
Fun fact: The 2000 Herod was to be the poltergeist in the first Harry Potter film, but those scenes were cut.

And to close off this bit of geeking-out, you'd be remiss to not watch Damned for All Time, every Pilate song, and... you know what, just spend a couple hours and watch the whole 2000 movie.

(One thing the 1973 movie undoubtedly does have over the 2000 movie is Then We Are Decided. If only...)

EDIT: And also, leaving Jesus on the cross as they pack up and go. The 1973 movie has that too

Quote from: greatorder on October 12, 2013, 12:00:34 pm

Quote from: Haspen on October 12, 2013, 10:17:54 am

Have some deadly humour.

It really made me giggle.

Those are terrible. Why do I find them funny?

They're dad jokes. So lame you can't help but giggle.

Makes me think of Pictures for Sad Children, and comics that tend to be like that.

Now if only more of those funny comics would show up, perhaps to-marrow...

You can trick the companion to disturb the mummy and the that poor guy will get the curse.

Mummies are really one of the scariest thing in DF right now. I can swear they break all the laws of physic. They... they are already everywhere I try to go.

I was sneaking with my two companions. I found a tomb and wnet inside. My companions were butchered by the mummy (I was sneaking nearby and the mummy didn't saw me). I took my turn to leave, and when I exited the room, the mummy stood in front of me.

I went back to the mummy's chamber and found a stairs. I saw how the mummy kept appearing in my small field of vision - I didn't had been spotted yet, even the zombies just stood silently. I managed to climb some stairs upwards, and there it was. The mummy was already there. I tried some other ways, but the mummy kept coming after me. I didn't ever saw it actually moving, just appearing into my field of vision when I moved. It could have moved very fast outside my field of vision and get always there before me, so it seemed like teleportin, but I doubt it. Mummies aren't that fast.

At this point I had completely forgotten all the sweet loot I could get, and just tried to get out of that hellhole alive. I get caught in a weapon trap, which sent me down into ground. I crawled forwards and noticed once again a dead end. When I turned back, the mummy finally spotted me and killed me.

Damn scary. I've encountered similar behavior with catacombs mummies, too.

Wow, that's terrifying. I've only dived into a tomb once, and that was as a member of the non-living. It was weird seeing the mummy hurl battle cries and then do nothing against me, but that's peanuts compared to your story.

Let's see, after that video and some quick playing around with a synthesizer just now, my range appears to be E2 - G4.

I can't even hit D#2/Eb2. There's a clear divide between that and the next semitone, E2. Hopefully as I get older I'll eventually hit C#2 (I do gain a few semitones down if I'm lucky when I first wake up, but that's rare.)

Upwards G4 is the last I can hit with confidence. I can try for A4, but that works much better in falsetto. (Funny enough, on my Fluidsynth at least, the A4 note of the grand piano somehow sounds like a falsetto note. As in, it's more falsetto-y than G4. Weird.)

And no, I don't know the range of my falsetto. At least, not yet.

I guess that means I'm a bass-baritone. Which is awesome, because I've already guessed this was me for a while now, and because it's a really flexible voice type (all the benefits of middle-of-the-road baritone with a stronger bass than just baritone. Add in a falsetto and you've got high notes covered too!)

Why are Republicans GOP?
You guys don't have a house of representatives do you? I thought your lower house was just a lower house without special name... Do you get to vote on it? How does a bill become a law?!?!?!?

Or is there some other reason why 'reps' was taken?

GOP = Grand Old Party. I don't know why either. (Oh wait, here it is!)

And yes, our lower house is in fact call the House of Representatives, although its nickname is "the House", not "the Reps". However, "reps" is more reminiscent of the House or the people elected to it than Republicans.

And yes, we elect everyone in Congress. (Although popular vote of Senators wasn't enacted until Amendment 17)

Article 1 Section 7 outlines the process in 18th Century legalese. To summarize:

• One house (hereafter house #1) of Congress goes through their various procedures to introduce a bill to the floor for a vote. If it passes by simple majority it goes on to house #2. If it fails that vote, You have failed bill! TRY AGAIN.
• House #2 votes on it as well. If it passes by simple majority it goes to the President. If it fails that vote, You have failed bill! TRY AGAIN.
• If the President signs the bill into law, You have law! STOP HERE. If the President vetoes the bill, it goes back to house #1 (along with whatever the Prez says he objected to). If the President neither signs nor vetoes the bill for ten days (Sundays excepted), see this sublist:
  
  • If Congress is in session after the ten day period, You have law! STOP HERE.
  • If Congress is not in session after the ten day period, then this is a pocket veto. For what happens now, see this sublist:
    
    • If "agents" have been set up to receive communication for Congress, then the pocket veto is treated as a normal veto, delivered complete with the written objections to the "agents". The next step in the main list occurs once Congress reconvenes.
    • If there are no agents for the President to return the bill to, You have failed bill! TRY AGAIN.
• House #1 mulls it over a bit, taking the President's objections into consideration, and vote again. If the vote passes by 2/3 majority, it goes to house #2, along with Prez's objections. If this vote fails, You have failed bill! TRY AGAIN.
• House #2 mulls it over a bit as well, and takes a vote. If the vote passes by 2/3 majority, You have law! STOP HERE. If the vote fails, You have failed bill! TRY AGAIN.

That's basically it. I hope this colorful guide helps you. (Note: The reason why I say House #1 and House #2 is because who starts the process depends on what type of bill it is; the House is supposed to start budgetary bills, for instance. (see the Article 1, Section 7, Clause 1))

Quote from: Max White on October 12, 2013, 12:09:08 am

How does a bill become a law?!?!?!?

So absolutely obligatory.

I believe every American thinks of this video whenever someone asks how a bill becomes law .

Quote from: GlyphGryph on October 12, 2013, 12:11:47 am

We have a Senate and a House of Representatives, yes. Bicameral legislature.

Fun fact: To most people in the rest of you world you have a President who personally writes all legislation with a quill on parchment and has a time turner as it is the only way one man could ever produce that much paperwork.

It makes perfect sense when you think about it, why else do all your presidents age about fifteen years a term?

Don't sweat it, plenty of Americans think it's all on the President too (they know of Congress, of course, but they tend to act like the President has puppetmaster levels of control over it at times).

EDIT: Whoops, completely forgot the pocket veto. It gets a little wonky though, so don't twist yourself into knots over it (hell, nobody's quite sure how a pocket veto ever becomes undeliverable to Congress, but that's a separate legal matter...)

well it's been fun everyone but the clock has strucken twelve midnight in Washington so NO MORE SEX FOR ANYBODY

but you can console yourself knowing it's what Santorum would have wanted

Darn, it's just kinky now .