AFBH 5: 1st Compilation Episode
.Episode 5. First compilation episode.
Future Man Chuck, and I do my best to correct the various misconceptions from the first four action sequences.
http://fantasybedtimehour.com/episodes/EP5.php
###Pages
As this is a compilation episode, it doesn’t cover pages per se.
###Expert
Tadhg O’Higgins
###Overview
This episode has a “false intro”, starting at 01:55, where Heatherly and Julie begin to introduce pages 51-55. They are interrupted by the sound of bubble wrap popping (first pop at 02:09), which popping signifies the arrival of Future Man Chuck (onscreen at 02:12). Future Man Chuck says he has been sent by by their future selves to warn them that they must not read pages 51 through 55, and to make sweet love to them. When they ask why, Future Man Chuck says “Because…” (02:28) and dialogue from Terminator 2 follows:
Future Man Chuck/The Terminator:
> [T]he Skynet funding bill is passed. The system goes on-line August 4th, 1997. Human decisions are removed from strategic defense. Skynet begins to learn, at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. eastern time, August 29th. In a panic, they try to pull the plug.
Heatherly/Sarah:
> And Skynet fights back.
Future Man Chuck/The Terminator:
> Yes. It launches its ICBMs against their targets in Russia.
Julie/Sarah:
> Why attack Russia?
There is some divergence in the next line:
Future Man Chuck/The Terminator
> Because Skynet knows the Russian counter-strike will eliminate their enemies here./Because Skynet knows the Russian counter-strike will remove its enemies here.
Heatherly & Julie/Sarah:
>Jesus. (02:59)
At that point they decide to postpone pages 51-55 and do a compilation episode instead (03:12), then get it on with Future Man Chuck, who leaves them with a slightly plaintive “Call me!” at 03:40. They then bring me onto the show to review the first four episodes.
###Key Misunderstandings
Because this is a compilation episode, there are no major new misunderstandings.
###Analysis of Pages
There is no reading or analysis of specific pages in this episode.
###Expert
Tahdg O’Higgins. The expert scene begins a 03:40, and I appear at 03:50. I’m not wearing any eye makeup this time. I am wearing the expert jacket. They ask me if I’ve read the book again, I say I’ve skimmed it. They ask me if I understood it this time, and I say “Yes. Again.” (04:16)
###Action Sequence 1
The Episode 1 Action Sequence runs from 04:58 to 07:31. See AFBH 1 for notes.
###Expert
The Action Sequence is followed by a discussion about whether or not Covenent will be any more likable later in the book, and whether he remains pissed off all the time. I try to make the point that he does have some cause to be aggrieved, what with the leprosy, divorce, etc.
My attitude in this episode is significantly more combative in this episode than the first. I correct Julie’s claim that “VSE stands for leprosy” and am pointedly unimpressed by Heatherly’s enthusiasm in adopting the letter L as “standing for Leprosy” (08:58).
###Action Sequence 2
The Episode 2 Action Sequence runs from 09:07 to 12:01. See AFBH 2 for notes.
###Expert
Heatherly and Julie comment on how much more exciting the second action sequence is than the first, focusing on the “hot chick from Pacific Bell”, at which point I insist that it’s the Bell Telephone Company, and proceed with a very short explanation of the history of the “Baby Bells” (12:32).
They ask me why Covenant is so lecherous and I state he isn’t like that in the text. We go through the penis/no penis discussion again, and I insist that he has one, still (13:10). Then I attempt to correct their misconception that Covenent fell from his precipice into a dungeon.
###Action Sequence 3
The Episode 3 Action Sequence runs from 13:51 to 17:08. See AFBH 3 for notes.
###Expert
After the third action sequence, we are arguing once again over penis/no penis. Cameraman Steve informs us at 17:13 that we’re rolling.
They then (17:28) ask me to retract my definition of dotard from Episode 3, at which point I crack up and get rather embarrassed. From 17:42 to 18:21 they roll the relevant clip from Episode 3. I defend myself by pointing out that I initially defined it correctly, that I was then confused by Heatherly’s misquotation, and that they edited out my later affirmation that my initial definition had been correct.
We go over that until 19:03, at which point we start to discuss the idea that Kevin lost the Staff of Law ten times. I first insist that he did not at 19:32.
###Action Sequence 4
The Episode 4 Action Sequence runs from 19:45 to 24:40. See AFBH 4 for notes.
###Expert
We resume the discussion about the number of times Kevin lost the Staff of Law. I insist that I’m certain it was once (24:45), and Hetherly gleefully starts reading the ‘proof’ that I am wrong at 25:00. I correct her at 25:10, and at 25:21 they realize that “ten times a hundred years ago” in this context means “a thousand years ago”.
The outro begins focusing (literally) on Heatherly’s breasts (25:40).
Heatherly asks me for my favorite part of the action sequences (25:50) and I reply that it was Lord Foul. Heatherly says that her favorite part was the “archive footage” from Episode 4. Julie asks me for another favorite part, starting with pages 1-4 but continuing to other pages. I answer the “pages 1-4″ part by saying that it was still the encounter with the man in the ocher robe.
Heatherly speaks highly of the scene from Episode 3 where Covenant had the spear in his head, and I point out that it was a metaphorical spear.
Julie then asks Cameraman Steve to get a close-up of Heatherly’s breasts again, which he does, saying, “Nice, nice.” (27:25)
###End Credits
The end credits are different this time, featuring Future Man Chuck stripping out of his bubble wrap outfit (27:47).
###Words Defined
None, although we do argue about dotard again.
###Firsts
First compilation episode
First appearance of Future Man Chuck, 02:12
First repeat expert, 03:50
First flashback to an earlier episode of the show, 17:42
First “non-plain” end credits, 27:47
13 Oct 2006 at 11:35
This is awesome! Your linking to ep 4 though…
13 Oct 2006 at 12:15
Thanks, I corrected that!