Magnum Mania!

The Tokyo firebombing on the night of March 9/10 is often overlooked in these kinds of discussions. The number of people killed and the area destroyed is considered the largest of any single air raid of World War II. That includes the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, when each event is considered singularly. There was at the time, and has since been, very little discussion of the moral aspect of that event compared to the atomic bombings. I think the very unique and devastating nature of atomic technology quite naturally leads to discussions about its impact and meaning, and its morality, but the end result was tragically little different.

I would also add that the idea that warfare, past or present, is between only soldiers is simply not accurate. Whether it’s tribal warfare among traditional societies involving raiding parties and kidnapping of rival tribe members, or imperial conflicts from centuries ago with armies plundering communities of their food and other resources on their marches to the battlefield, to modern strategic bombing campaigns aimed specifically at industrial centers, non-soldiers have directly suffered the consequences of conflict. Perhaps they suffered even more so than the soldiers, as has been suggested. I’m making no moral argument defending such actions, but rather commenting that they have been a part of warfare for much of human existence. The fact that modern warfare attempts to place limits at least at some level on civilian suffering is quite a recent concept.

Good evening to all,

This is a very slippery subject. I will bring my little stone to it from a legal point of view, as always.

Some of you mention the bombings -deliberate- on Dresden, Hamburg or Tokyo.

I would simply answer that the pilots who took part in them could not be considered war criminals at the time because the Geneva Convention, which prohibits and represses this type of behavior according to the laws of war, was adopted after 1949.

https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/war-and-law ... ntions.htm

"The 1998 Rome Statute, another important international treaty on armed conflict, is also a useful guide to the acts generally considered to be serious violations of international law. Its definition of war crimes includes:

- Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities.

- Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of civilian life or injury.

- Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, undefended towns, villages, dwellings or buildings."

Back to the watch party?

NEXT:



March 25th, 1982

[CBS 8:00] Magnum, P.I.
The Elmo Ziller Story
Season 2, episode 20

With Glenn Cannon (Dr. Ibold), Robin Dearden (Lexie Ziller), John Dennis Johnston (Gary), Med Flory (Bud), Barbara Rhoades (Marcella Ziller), Gillian Dobb (Sylvia), Ben Jaus (Police Officer), Henry Kapono (Dan), Carolyn Shofner (Cowgirl).

Magnum is certain that Higgins is pulling some kind of prank when he meets Higgins' supposed half-brother Elmo Ziller, a guitar-plucking, 10-gallon-hat wearing Texan rodeo owner.

T.Q. wrote: ↑Wed Mar 23, 2022 1:44 pm Back to the watch party?

NEXT:



March 25th, 1982

[CBS 8:00] Magnum, P.I.
The Elmo Ziller Story
Season 2, episode 20

With Glenn Cannon (Dr. Ibold), Robin Dearden (Lexie Ziller), John Dennis Johnston (Gary), Med Flory (Bud), Barbara Rhoades (Marcella Ziller), Gillian Dobb (Sylvia), Ben Jaus (Police Officer), Henry Kapono (Dan), Carolyn Shofner (Cowgirl).

Magnum is certain that Higgins is pulling some kind of prank when he meets Higgins' supposed half-brother Elmo Ziller, a guitar-plucking, 10-gallon-hat wearing Texan rodeo owner.

Amusingly before I knew much about the show/cast I thought that John Hillerman''s attempt at sounding like a cowboy was a bit clumsy even for an Englishman. Of course when I found out he was a native Texan - mind blown !

Silly me -- I watched one episode early! Do I get extra credit for completing the assignment early, or doing it twice? I mean, maybe I'll watch it again because of Robin Dearden.

eagle wrote: ↑Wed Mar 23, 2022 2:33 pm Silly me --…. maybe I'll watch it again because of Robin Dearden.

That sounds like a perfect reason to watch it again

In my mind, before watching this episode again, I had it bunched in with the "silly" Magnum episodes, but I really enjoyed it this time. Especially the scene in the resort where Higgins explains to TM how Elmo Ziller came to be his half brother. The "flower of British manhood" indeed! The tart! (Incidentally, the timeline of that story would make Higgins 62ish at the time of the episode. He's pretty spry for 62. Hillerman was only 48 or 49 at the time the episode was filmed. )

Interestingly enough, the DVD says this aired on March 18th, not the 25th:

ENSHealy wrote: ↑Sat Mar 26, 2022 8:53 pm In my mind, before watching this episode again, I had it bunched in with the "silly" Magnum episodes, but I really enjoyed it this time. Especially the scene in the resort where Higgins explains to TM how Elmo Ziller came to be his half brother. The "flower of British manhood" indeed! The tart! (Incidentally, the timeline of that story would make Higgins 62ish at the time of the episode. He's pretty spry for 62. Hillerman was only 48 or 49 at the time the episode was filmed. )

Interestingly enough, the DVD says this aired on March 18th, not the 25th:

You raise an interesting point about imagery used in the dialog--flower and manhood. It also intrigues me how people--we--can only take so much information at a time. This imagery completely went past me when I first watched it! So curiously, I decided to take a look at the dialogue and lo and behold, there's a story here.

I mean, flower and manhood is a strange association, is it not? Well maybe not so strange as "flower of manhood" yields about 100,000 google hits but "flower of womanhood" brings 5x the hits! So comparatively women are associated with flowers more than men. What saves the scriptwriters here is that the imagery is connected to a woman's caretaking, Elmo's mother: "she had the flower of British manhood in her care." Interestingly that flower is not Elmo but Higgins's father. Being pretentious, Higgins undercuts himself by his misused imagery for his father, making him a humorous or curious character. So here again the scriptwriters save themselves.

But they cannot save themselves in view of the illogical story Higgins weaves about himself and Elmo. The father presumably was in France upon meeting the nurse with whom he had a fling, producing his offspring Elmo. At the time the father was presumably in a hospital with the nurse where they had their fling. So how could Elmo and Higgins have been born about "the same time" when Higgins had to have been nearly a year older than Elmo? The father was at the Versailles Peace Conference, lasting six months, and likely separated even longer from his wife. Higgins explains that afterwards his father confessed, so she never touched him again. So Higgins had to have been born or conceived before Versailles. Just saying.

charybdis1966 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 23, 2022 8:25 pm

eagle wrote: ↑Wed Mar 23, 2022 2:33 pm Silly me --…. maybe I'll watch it again because of Robin Dearden.

That sounds like a perfect reason to watch it again

And I enjoyed it just as much this time.

April 1st, 1982

[CBS 8:00] Magnum, P.I.
Three Minus Two
Season 2, episode 21

With Jill St. John (Jan Kona), Beverly Garland (Florence Russell), Dick Jensen (Sgt. Kaio), Teri Ann Linn (Wendy Clane), Wayne Ward (Wayne Lochman), Don Lamond (Alan Russell), Robert Harker (Bart Lindsey), Denny Miller (Ox), Gibo Romero (Kimo), Julia Nickson (Lani).

A beautiful leading fashion designer hires Magnum to protect her when one of her two partners in their designer clothing company is murdered, and she suspects that the other partner may have been behind it.

--- END SEASON 2 ---

Thanks for tuning in to the 40th Anniversary Watch Party.

See you in the Fall with Did You See the Sunrise? (September 30th 1982).

T.Q. wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 4:38 pm

April 1st, 1982

[CBS 8:00] Magnum, P.I.
Three Minus Two
Season 2, episode 21

With Jill St. John (Jan Kona), Beverly Garland (Florence Russell), Dick Jensen (Sgt. Kaio), Teri Ann Linn (Wendy Clane), Wayne Ward (Wayne Lochman), Don Lamond (Alan Russell), Robert Harker (Bart Lindsey), Denny Miller (Ox), Gibo Romero (Kimo), Julia Nickson (Lani).

A beautiful leading fashion designer hires Magnum to protect her when one of her two partners in their designer clothing company is murdered, and she suspects that the other partner may have been behind it.

--- END SEASON 2 ---

Thanks for tuning in to the 40th Anniversary Watch Party.

See you in the Fall with Did You See the Sunrise? (September 30th 1982).

A story that's very much of it's time as a lot of the fashion show scenes wouldn't be PC today. Always a delight to have Jill St John on the screen a 70's/80's glamour icon.
Enjoyed TC hamming it up as the photographer and TM's reluctant fist fight with Ox.

Thank you for the updates T.Q. - it's going to be long time till autumn and the start of season three, IMHO one of the top three seasons of the whole lot.

charybdis1966 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 01, 2022 3:24 pm
A story that's very much of it's time as a lot of the fashion show scenes wouldn't be PC today.

Are you talking about wearing the bathing suits? Is that not a thing anymore in fashion shows?

ZelenskyTheValiant (Ivan) wrote: ↑Fri Apr 01, 2022 5:04 pm

charybdis1966 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 01, 2022 3:24 pm
A story that's very much of it's time as a lot of the fashion show scenes wouldn't be PC today.

Are you talking about wearing the bathing suits? Is that not a thing anymore in fashion shows?

No, it’s the commentary from the compère that would probably get some triggered nowadays.

charybdis1966 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 01, 2022 7:20 pm

ZelenskyTheValiant (Ivan) wrote: ↑Fri Apr 01, 2022 5:04 pm

charybdis1966 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 01, 2022 3:24 pm
A story that's very much of it's time as a lot of the fashion show scenes wouldn't be PC today.

Are you talking about wearing the bathing suits? Is that not a thing anymore in fashion shows?

No, it’s the commentary from the compère that would probably get some triggered nowadays.

What was the commentary? I don't remember anything offensive.

ZelenskyTheValiant (Ivan) wrote: ↑Sat Apr 02, 2022 4:14 am

charybdis1966 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 01, 2022 7:20 pm

ZelenskyTheValiant (Ivan) wrote: ↑Fri Apr 01, 2022 5:04 pm

charybdis1966 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 01, 2022 3:24 pm
A story that's very much of it's time as a lot of the fashion show scenes wouldn't be PC today.

Are you talking about wearing the bathing suits? Is that not a thing anymore in fashion shows?

No, it’s the commentary from the compère that would probably get some triggered nowadays.

What was the commentary? I don't remember anything offensive.

Not offensive per se just a bit cringy and likely to have dungaree-clad feminists screaming "demeaning to women", for example when the compere says stuff like: "..and more than a touch of sexiness in this daringly-cut two-piece"

Actually you're right Ivan, having rewatched that scene I think I remembered it as being worse than it actually was.
I blame that on me becoming an old git !