Jeanie Bottle 415
Jan24
on January 24, 2017
at 12:00 am
and modified on November 27, 2022. at 1:26 am
Chapter: Story 10: I Dream of Verisimilitude
Why am I not surprised that Rodge screwed up…?
Welcome to
Normally Updates Weekly
Usually Tuesday or Thursday
Why am I not surprised that Rodge screwed up…?
What a surprise! Jean(ie) actually has integrity–at least about his writing. To be fair, I think Jean would have probably gotten fired anyway if he’d turned down his boss’s request. But now she has someone else to blame.
Stripper poles for two?
I don’t know, but if Jean(ie) doesn’t think of something fast, his/her career is KAPUT!
The same thought went through my head as I read this strip.
Hey Robert:
Panel 4: “THAT’S” and “IT’S” both need apostrophes. And “EVER” -> “every”.
Also, Panel 3: should “TILL”, be ” ’till “…? (Prefixed with apostrophe) Because it’s really a contraction of “until”… ? Same with “CAUSE” in Panel 4 – short for “because”. Your call.
It should be “’til” then, not “’till”. Also, “till” is a correct word.
P.S. Editing messages is awful, don’t press any arrow key or else!
“There’s” and “it’s” both have apostrophes already… Admittedly, the low resolution of the image does make that kind of hard to see.
You’re right about “ever”, though.
I’d say that “till” and “cause” don’t really need apostrophes because they’re spoken slang. I feel like it would read haltingly if I added them.
According to Merriam Webster Dictionary, “till” without an apostrophe is an acceptable spelling for the casual meaning you want.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/till
You are supposed to put an apostrophe on ’cause though.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/'cause
On the other hand, if you are making a creative choice because you feel the sentence flows better without an apostrophe, I can respect that. “That’s ’cause it’s…” is an awful lot apostrophes in close proximity.
Well, to be fair, this is one that Rodge really couldn’t have foreseen.
Gee, maybe he could have if he’d actually paid attention to all the briefing Jean gave him on the flight up from Florida. Now this is a decided contrast to the rapt attention Rodge gave to Natalie when she was tutoring him to keep his job (and hers/his), but to be fair, Natalie was talking about engineering, something that Rodge actually has some interest in, rather than writing, literature, and publishing, which I suspect he neither understands nor wants to understand.
However, judging by how well Rodge is hitting it off with Jean’s boss so far, maybe he should change careers. He obviously isn’t nearly as good an engineer as Neil/Natalie, and I suspect he doesn’t have to be a great writer to work for Jean’s editor.
In fact, it occurs to me now that one of Jean’s possible “solutions” will be to have Rodge break up with her and get back with Debbie, the chief editor’s daughter. Hey, she’s hot, and Debbie and Rodge share an interest: drinking too much.
What briefing? I don’t remember seeing it. I have no idea how well Jeanie briefed Rodge, or that she verified that he got the important points. Her editor seems to have grabbed Rodge in an off-the-cuff manner that Jeanie likely didn’t anticipate. Do you suppose that she had Rodge go through a selection of her reviews to get a sense of her style?
What reward has she promised Rodge for pulling this off, other than not getting turned into a frog or stripper? Or stripper frog?
Think of that in terms of Jeanie’s tendency stolid, logical, minutely detailed plans for every aspect of her life. I.E. not one damn bit.
This is Jeanie’s fault up one side and down the other.
@50srefugee: On the plane, Jean tried to tell Rodge what to do and say, and what to watch out for. But apparently Rodge was asleep, drunk, or busy ogling the stewardesses, or something. See: https://jeaniebottle.com/?comic=jeanie-bottle-408 (Panel 4.)
*Poof*
And the Academy Award for best picture goes to A. J. Clayton
Anybody else think A.J. Clayton is standing in for Michael Bay?
Yea, That is what I was thinking, or J.J. Abrams.
Wow… this chapter has really fleshed Jean’s character out in some interesting ways. It’s kind of funny seeing Male Jean’s thought process from a female perspective. It’s even more hilarious when you realize Jean has 0 control over the situation he/she is in right now.
One comment and one question I have for the creator:
I’m really enjoying this chapter so far. I was an IDOJ fan as a kid (I’m in my 20’s so… take that for what it is). This is actually the most IDOJ-like strip show so far. Only with Jean(nie) unable to control the situation, and Rodge (Nelson/Healey) causing trouble for Jean(nie).
And, if possible, my question is this: There’s been a common assumption that Jean(nie) is slowly, but surely, adopting a female mentality and attitude over the course of the series. The chapter, so far, kind of debunks that theory. Is this something that will continue throughout the series with Jean remaining Jean (personally I hope it does)?
Actually I think the character in this comic who is most like Jeannie in IDOJ is Araceli: She’s the one who’s scheming to marry Neil, she finds many puzzling things about the modern world, and she’s usually trying to help. The only dark side she’s shown is in her competition with Jean over Neil. But Jeannie’s evil twin in IDOJ basically wanted Tony to get one up on her sister; she was a villain whereas Araceli is a rival.
I’d say Araceli has shown some very strong villiainess tendencies trying to get the new, inexperienced, genie who freed her from being stuck at the bottom of an ocean sealed away for all eternity just because she wants her master.
@Senko
Hear, hear! I still cannot fathom how anyone could consider Araceli less than evil after she made it so clear that she is more than willing to condemn Jeanie to a fate worse than death over a man.
@Robert: Tsk, tsk, Robert; you’re not looking at it from the right viewpoint. Sure, spending years locked in a bottle seems bad from a human’s point of view, but remember that Araceli just finished a several-century stretch on the bottom of the Aegean, and yet is none the worse for wear. Clearly, to a creature that lives for thousands of years, a couple of centuries in a bottle is barely the equivalent of being cooped up for a long weekend. So Araceli doesn’t think of it as a “fate worse than death”; to her, it’s just a slightly-dull-but-expected part of life. Whereas Jeannie has only been a genie for a few months; she hasn’t yet adjusted to the idea that she’s got millennia ahead of her.
And it’s not just “over a man”. It’s an opportunity to have someone to love, who actually treats you with care, consideration, and respect. Hell, Neil didn’t even ask for a wish! He’s probably the nicest, most wonderful guy Araceli’s ever met. (Not that she has many opportunities.)
And Jeannie has been pretty snotty to Araceli, as well. Jean has a short fuse anyway, and was nasty to Araceli right off the bat. So Araceli can hardly be blamed for not liking Jean. Despite which, she DID help her, anyway, by explaining what to do to get rid of the magic sneezing. (Heck, she could have said nothing, and gone right ahead and let Jean sneeze herself to death.) So she’s kind, even when it would be to her advantage not to be. I can’t see Jean going out of HER way to help someone she didn’t like.
I think that, at worst, Araceli is no worse than Jean, and she at least has the excuse that she’s been alone a long time, and been treated very poorly by Jean, who she in turn sees as not appreciating Neil at all. [Which, God knows, is certainly true.] And while she’s naive and can certainly get angry, I’d say she has some pretty good reasons for it. And she’s definitely NOT either self-centered or egotistical. But she has a good heart… whereas the jury’s still out on Jean.
And remember, Jean has screwed up at least 4 other people’s lives (Red, Agent Anderson, the Greek captain and the crewman) without so much as a second thought. Jean may not be out-and-out evil, but she’s sure as hell uncaring. Which, in the end, is just about as bad.
I’m sorry, but you seem to have forgotten the wording of Araceli’s threat. She said, and I quote:
“When you screw up big enough… (which you will)… he’s going to bottle you up permanently.”
How is sentencing an immortal to an eternity of solitary confinement NOT the most evil act ever referenced in this comic? And no, the Holocaust was never actually mentioned, so you don’t get that as an out.
Has Jean ever threatened anyone with anything worse than mild inconvenience and embarrassment? Sure, she’s thoughtlessly done several things that messed up peoples lives, but two of those were accidents (Red and the Greek crewman), one was to save Neil from possibly being detained in Guantanamo, and while the last was on purpose (the Greek captain), she did it in response to him threatening to take away her freedom and make her his breeding slave. That seems like an entirely reasonable spur-of-the-moment reaction to me.
None of those things seem like acts that she couldn’t be persuaded to reverse, if given the opportunity. While Araceli has made it clear that she wants to imprison Jeannie for eternity with no hope of escape!
And as for Araceli’s motivation for being so evil, I’d cast aspersions on it being about love at all. Araceli followed up her threat to Jeannie with “And when you’re finally gone, Lord Guano will reward me… with your master.”
I don’t get the feeling that this has anything to do with “loving” Neil. She seems to consider him a prize in this non-existent competition she thinks she’s having with Jeannie, to “win” her master.
I like that Jeanie certainly is becoming more female, yet still hangs on to certain male traits at times. Interesting fictional characters often have some kind of inner conflict. It keeps them interesting to the reader because they can believably react to situations in multiple ways.
It keeps us on our toes. If Jeanie has stayed completely male in her actions, she would be predictable. If Jeanie became completely female, that would also be predictable. An added level of comedy comes from the fact that Jeanie isn’t a particularly self-aware person, so s/he doesn’t even know how she will act.
Jeanie came to the party in disguise as “Jean’s” date, having girlied herself up for the occasion. Yet as soon as she was surrounded by a bunch of ex-girlfriends who were unknowingly criticizing her, her male ego needed to assert itself in defense. Her sudden swing to male behavior makes total sense.
That’s not to say the comic would start sucking if Jeanie ever did become entirely female. CD is a good storyteller, and he would simply draw on other conflicts to keep things interesting.
Jean will have her moments each way. Sometimes she’ll be more on the girl/guy side of the fence, depending on the situation and Jean’s own motives
I’m sorry for the late response mate. That said, it’s awesome to see so many chiming in and weighing there opinions on the matter. Personally as a slight (emphasis on slight) film buff I’d rather watch Whiplash or Nightcrawler than an A.J. Clayton movie (haha).
Also you do bring up a good point about Jean’s own motives and mood going either way (depending on her mood). All-in-all this chapter has been written extremely well. And provides an interesting insight into Jeans thought process. Plus I am kind of anticipating Jean/Jeannie’s downfall &/or embarrassment at the end of this chapter. Assuming that does happen.
On a side note: Still kind of hoping for a full-blown “Dharling!” moment with Jean/Jeannie. I was always a big fan of Jeannie’s sister/Jeannie 2 from the original series. I loved the contrast to her sisters personality. Really hope to see that, even as a cameo, once in this series (and not Neil as Natalie).
I don’t agree — not completely — about Jeannie acting totally male in this chapter. Her sensibilities about that movie, that there’s no plot just explosions is a very feminine one.
It’s not like men can’t recognize plotless, explosion-fest garbage like Michael Bay’s, oops, I mean A.J. Clayton’s movies.
I think it mostly says something about Rodge that a movie that’s all action and no plot appeals to him.
@Robert: David Denby, film critic for The New Yorker, is quoted referring to Michael Bay as, “stunningly, almost viciously, untalented”.
Come on, Denby, no need to sugar-coat it like that; tell us what you really think. 😉
Up to this point I don’t see it either as Male of feminine, it just an opinion that could fit into either category. Now if Jeanie were to elaborate a little more like there love interest or anything, thin I would say it definitely feminine, but, if she talking about political entree and she talking along those like, thin I would think that she thinking more male than female.
This is really a remarkable insight into Jeannie – up until now, I would have guessed that an all-action movie with no plot would have been right up Jean’s alley. Apparently there IS a tiny bit of depth to her. At least as far as films go.
This is good, CD – Jean’s becoming more interesting. Shallow people are boring.
(Of course, it’s also possible that she’s just griping because it’s going to be hard to find anything in the movie to be complimentary about.)
I enjoy making characters people love, and later hate, and later love. Araceli is the perfect example. People loved her when she first showed up. Then hate her for plotting against Jean…etc…
An excellent technique. Characters aren’t worth anything if they do not evoke emotional responses to them.
Take into account that before the transformation Jean was writing book and movie reviews for a living. You don’t read a lot and watch movies without appreciating a good plot. Some of the best movies are the ones where you don’t have much going on as far as car chases and explosions go.
I wonder if this development is going to put a damper on Jean’s plans to prove all men are scum.
How would it do that? Jean’s boss is a poster boy for scum.
Ever noticed that the bosses of IDOJB seem to be bald?
@Theo: Not a huge surprise there. Baldness tends to come along with being older, and CEOs tend to be older.
She’s going to be struggling with the review rather than proving her point.
Kattgirl actually baldness starts showing up at a young age and most older men are not bald.
@Theo: Go to a high school sometime and see how many balding teenagers you find. SOME guys do start thinning early, but that’s very much the exception. If hair loss does occur (and some do escape it) it tends to happen when older.
Of course, shaved heads, as a style choice, make the whole question moot.
Theo is right. I have known a few guys who started losing their hair early. Some as early as high school. They are the ones who tend to go bald. It isn’t just age. Though everyone’s hairline recedes with age. Not at the same rate though.
So I would not say being bald comes with being older. That would indicate that most older people are bald. Which isn’t true. They might have less hair than they did way back when though.
And it also depends on your view of being old. Which of course changes as you get older yourself!
I didn’t say that most older people are bald. Rather, the reverse; that most totally bald people ARE older.
Yes, SOME people (a few) do start losing hair early on. But it’s very rare to find anyone who’s naturally completely bald at a young age. Whereas, if you look in retirement homes, it frequently looks like a cue ball convention.
The point being that it probably isn’t a coincidence that the bosses tend to be bald; they’re mature men. If they were all 20-somethings, then it would be odd. [Except that then I would assume that they were shaving their heads as a fashion statement.]
Boss hair has a lot to do with fashion.
Once upon a time you needed good hair to be in charge of anything, then Patrick Stewart came along and was incredibly sexy as bald space dad in Star Trek and then baldness for bosses became cool. Then just as it looked like good hair was going to make a come back, Patrick Stewart animated his baldness for OTT parody bad boss in American Dad and baldness became cool again due to Patrick Stewart’s voice still being incredibly sexy. What I’m saying is… uh… Patrick Stewart is sexy and something something something bald guys.
Kattgirl: I did go to high school and not many of my teachers were bald. I do not know if I ever had a bald boss. Only about twenty% of in America suffer from baldness. That would about twenty %% of the bosses.
Ah man, it’s really just 20%? Now I feel extra unlucky for inheriting my uncle’s baldness. I started to lose my hair at 30. 🙁
Did Jennie really think she could write for a magazine AND keep her journalistic integrity? Everyone knows mainstream journalists are professional liars. If she had wanted integrity she should be working on her own blog
I can remember the days when journalism was an honorable profession in search of truth.
Oh, wait – no I can’t.
Well maybe you can’t, but I can. I think the search for truth in journalism died with Walter Cronkite’s retirement. Not that it was a long and honored tradition. Look at newspapers and the like prior to WW2. They all had a slant and were proud of it. It was just in the ’50s and ’60s and maybe a little into the ’70s that journalists seemed to take pride in being unbiased. Journalistic integrity was just a minor blip in the long and lurid traditions of publishing . . .
Ranck–
Telling the truth and being unbiased are hardly one and the same. To maintain a stance of “I am neither for nor against any viewpoint”, one would have to express a lack of disapproval for the commission of crimes, for example, or to be unsympathetic in the face of tragedies, since being anti-crime or having sympathy for victims is an opinion. It’s impractical to eliminate all traces of having an opinion short of simply quoting sources verbatim with no additions. What we do need for integrity is for journalists/publishers to be honest about their opinions, as in not claiming balance where there isn’t, and not claiming to support/oppose something while the reporting indicates the opposite.
Yes I talked about integrity and about honesty, not about being unbiased. It is impossible to be unbiased. What we should do is to make our biases known from the beginning, so readers knows where we stand. And we need to be able to separate opinion from fact.
In Jennies example, she needs to write a review which is almost only opinion, but it shows a lack of integrity to say that something is ones opinion when it is not.
Really? I actually find most professional Journalists are reasonably truthful. There are a huge amount of problems with modern journalism and it has gone down hill. It is more of an intertainment mediun and reporting that is done is greatly moved by raiting and headline grabber but the information they do publish id generally truthful. Can you tell me a more truthful source, the internet perhaps? Also could you document all these lies the press is telling us?
It is impossible to come with anything close to a complete list, but basically everything regarding the US election. Trump have been the victem of intense slander from the start while all of Hillary’s actual crimes have been hushed by the mainstream media that are owned by only five corporations that are all in bed with the government in a true fascist order.
The only reason why any of it is known, the only reason why he won, was because we still have an independent media in the form of the alternative media. Zerohedge is one of the sites that I trust the most, but there are other truthtellers out there, just stay away from sites such as
Counterfeit News Network: CNN or
Nothing but Crap: NBC
they couldn’t tell a truth even if their lives dependent on it, I wont even trust them on reporting the weather anymore.
Clearly the people that are surprised by Jean’s journalistice integerty failed to notice Jean’s ego making him want to be the best at what ever he does. He’s a girl so he is going to be a cute girl. Neil better at sex not on his watch you get the picture.
Jeanie is really rocking that dress it looks like a silver age of Hollywood dress. Jean has some great taste and so do you CD.
I thought it would work out well.
I liked the dress as well.
Shouldn’t be too hard…just say “From the first explosion I knew I’d love this movie.”
Yes. A good writer would be able to pull off a seemingly positive review that any follower of that reviewer would recognize as sarcastic.
Another route would be the “so bad it is good” review. You could insult the movie all you wanted, but by saying it is worth seeing just to laugh at it, the studio that paid for the ad would be satisfied as well. They don’t care why people buy the tickets.
It would still be compromising her ethics, but at least some honesty could get through.
@Ephemerer “So bad it’s good.” Ah, I like that. Good point about asses in seats.
For a historical perspective you can reference the famous Siskal and Ebert “Star Wars” “re-evaluation revue”. (They both panned it, then when it appeared to be setting new box office records their editors “suggested” they take another look at it.)
Ebert loved Star Wars from the get-go (he was always a big SF fan).
Perhaps you’re thinking of Harlan Ellison? HE thought Star Wars was plotless tripe at first, but after it was a hit he re-evaluated it.
Get Rodge to write a review then edit it to her style maybe?
I’m not sure Rodge knows how to write. Anything. For all we know, he signs his name with his paw print. 😉
LOL! I could see that!
I was wondering what Jean did for a living.
I am going with the ones that think that Jeanie would have got herself canned if Rodge were not acting in her place. If the editor want something he usually get it. If the sponsor or advertiser of the magazine say jump, the editor will ask high do they want him to jump and how long do they want him to jump and he will straightway start doing it. And if your working for that editor, you will be expected to do like wise too or you will be fired. When the sponsor speaks everybody else lesson or they won’t continue working at that magazine or radio or TV station, the sponsor pays the bills and they get what they want or your out of business.
It kind of depends on whether the writer is salaried or free-lance. Free-lance employees have a great deal more discretion to turn down work if they don’t like it or don’t want to do it.
Jean, what have you got against explosions?
I’m thinking that the editor must want this review for an online magazine as by the time it made print the movie would be out of the theatres.
The only nationally-available magazine which could effect box office these days is the New Yorker, and it’s a weekly. I don’t think Jean’s magazine is anything like the New Yorker; it’s more like the old Playboy or maybe Maxim. Or is Maxim still around? Hustler? I’ve pretty much given up looking at magazines, and I live across the street from a Barnes & Noble now.
Unless Jean’s family is rich, he/she couldn’t support his lifestyle on what online magazines pay–if they pay at all! Jean would have to be working on a magazine like Playboy in its golden age. Writers loved to write for it because it paid more than any other magazine.
Of course, this is a fantasy comic which follows norms from the days when there were only three networks to compete for ratings and the ad revenues they brought, and people actually paid to read reviews in newspapers and magazines. As I pointed out before, Jean doesn’t really need a regular job now. She doesn’t need money at all, with magic. IN fact, given that genies can stay in their bottles for decades, centuries, etc, she doesn’t really need to eat, drink, or go to the bathroom. Remember how sparsely furnished Araceli’s bottle was?
Tom, I always assumed that Jean wrote for multiple clients. It would be pretty hard to live on what a single journal pays, I agree.
Although I do think there are a few other places that would also have significant influence though reviews. Variety and Rolling Stone come to mind.
I was thinking more that the magazine has both a print and online side, that way they can address different types of articles like the in-depth interviews and hot topic items.
How many words? Because I am fairly certain that, even with the movie being fictional, I can knock out a thousand word positive review in a couple of hours. Praise the effects, claim the protagonist and antagonist are a mirror of each other’s journey, throw in something headline grabbing about an ‘ism (pro or against, it doesn’t matter for headline grabbing and letting other sites and twitter fans go on their own rampages over whatever you said) and then liberally garnish with posterbait blurb lines. Is there really a job where a person can make a living doing that? If there is, how do I apply?
Random22, I’m sure that maybe a really good writer like Pratchett could have. (And then lost a week perfecting it. :p) But 1000 words in an hour for a professional piece…? I know I’d be stretched.
You mean, apart from the fact that as the writer, you already knew? xD
I have this feeling that a Cleton is being pariodied here, but can’t place it…
Well, it’s bothering me, so I’ll ask. CD, who’s the parody in this one? (And is it an affectionate parody…?)
Not all storylines are parodies of other shows. But Aj Clayton is pretty clearly a Michael Bay parody.
Action movies with lots of explosions are good if that is what you like. Giving a positive review yet still warning the reader about its lack of plot is entirely feasible. No lies and no disappointments.
But if that represents a significant change in Jean’s reporting, it will disappoint many of his readers.
It’s Monday now can we see Jeanie do something to Rodge now?