In personal news, what in tarnation is wrong with my back? The lower part (right below the waist) is glitched and spasming. *groans* Yes, the weather's cold and miserable, but it's not raining and I don't want to have to bike in the garage today for fear of having my back go out miles from home. :(
I've been writing less these past few weeks, not just from RL but also from 1) having my thyroid meds lowered a bit and 2) fighting off a cold (I lost). I've been sleepy a lot lately during the evening periods when I normally write. However, I've got a short SPN thing I'm working on and I finished a PB ficlet last night. Other than the fact that the PB thing would not porn, that is—must retry challenge! This time with porn!
Watched the Scrubs premieres, and... something's off. Funny how you can have the same actors, writers, and presumably the same directors, but you move a show to another network and it does have an effect. The comic timing wasn't quite the same—a little forced and flat in places. Maybe changing networks means a lower budget and fewer retakes (or lousy coffee), which could affect the final result.
More on Australia: my opinion of the movie hasn't changed, but I needed to mention that Hugh Jackman's pants deserve their own accolade. They're extremely form-fitting, hugging his legs and butt in a way that demonstrates his fine physique. :0 I remember the 70s, when pants were so tight you could count the change in mens' pockets. Now it's all this saggy/baggy stuff, and why hasn't that trend died already (after years of enduring it)? I thought about this yesterday, observing a pair of 20-something guys with sag (2) and bag(1). In both cases, it makes their legs look really short, which is never flattering. Much like board-shorts (mens' baggy capri pants) which reduce everyone's legs to either A) pencils or B) blimpage. Bleh!
ETA: Not only is my back still killing me, I'm moving like an old lady in a bad sitcom. I'm afraid of bending over in case I can't get back up again. :0
