#judge mainwaring

[quanatural]

……so,,,I drew another poster.I just made the three of them pose like this（P3） ...The breaking ice is a complicated love movie, and its poster has become a meme.

[gnome-adjacent-vagabond]

I appreciate that filmmakers repeatedly find ways to attach Peter Lorre's characters very closely to characters that are noticably taller and/or ganglier than he is. Whether they have romantic tension or just seem like they're great friends/colleagues, there's a sort of bonded pair [or trio] vibe they give off that I live for.

[quanatural]

I fucking love this. I fucking love everything you wrote. I fucking love this series.And I have to watch The Boogie Man Will Get You because of this article.

This is so much fun! Ah, I like it when Gogol and Professor Karl are talked about looks alike....Although they have the biggest difference in body shape. Gogol is stout, while Professor Karl is ... petite.

Besides, I like Professor Karl's background story so much!Ha, he is definitely the kind of bad student who will copy other people's answers to be lazy.And Herman is the poor guy who was copied!But I feel that if Professor Karl studies harder, maybe he can solve everything by himself soon.

Maybe a silly question, but do you have any specific headcanons for how the medical malpractice gang are related or came to know eachother?

Not a silly question at all! And sorry I only just now got to answering you!

I've toyed with different headcanons with these four idiots. One of my favourites is that they're related but they have no idea that they are. To me that's the funniest one! As to how they met...

Gogol and Fenninger definitely met in Paris. Fenninger trying to run whatever criminal enterprise he has on his mind together with his accomplices/cronies/friends/lovers and Gogol, because, well, he lives there. I imagine they came across each other in a café and first pointedly ignored each other until doctor Wong or Prince Saliano loudly started commenting on their appearances and how they look like each other.

Arthur and Herman definitely met each other in the good ol' US of A, with Herman and Jonathan on the run and ending up in that podunk village run by Arthur. Hell, they might even be staying over at Nathaniel's old inn with Nathaniel trying to recruit the two for one of his experiments, Jonathan plotting to kill the old professor, Herman trying to stop Jonathan, and Arthur barging in with a 'what's all this, then?' Also I imagine Jonathan trying many attempts on Arthur's life simply because he's a sheriff. Also Arthur is completely clueless to Jonathan's criminal status.

Fenninger met Herman in Heisenberg, Germany because they went to the same medical school and Fenninger dropped out to live a life of crime, and because I think that would be funny. I just like the idea of Fenninger being sent there as a young lad by his rich parents to make something of himself (and because he refused to join the military like any good Viennese of higher standing should) and meeting Herman as a nervous student doing his goddamn best to make it through.

As to how they all met the others? Fenninger and his gang are on the run after the whole Kay Kyser incident and decide to lay low in the countryside, coincidentally where Arthur and Nathaniel live. There they come across Jonathan and Herman who recognises Fenninger as that cool rich kid who was always copying his answers in class. And Gogol...? He was at a conference in New York when his taxi got hijacked by this gang of idiots (Herman, Jonathan, Fenninger, Saliano, Mainwaring) on the run and gets recognised by Fenninger!

By that point I simply imagine them just constantly bumping into each other in the most unlikely places and in the end just resigning themselves that they are somehow cursed by fate to constantly see each other and making the best of it.

[faustiandevil]

Happy ‘ween!! I am a day late, because I had to work yesterday and only now I could finish this.

When I showed You’ll Find Out to my friends I kept describing it as what if Scooby Doo was a big band instead of a group of teens. I mean that’s basically the movie. You got a spooky mystery, there’s a dog, and a couple a villains. It’s an early Scooby movie.

[angelamontoo]

Alternatively

[pluralzalpha]

Thanks to the TARDIS wiki, we have hi-res scans of Clive's Doctor photos from Robert Hack's illustrated edition of RTD's novelisation of "Rose." We can see that there are more incarnations illustrated than there included in the text. As well as the first thirteen (numbered) Doctors, the wiki lists the Fourteenth and Fugitive Doctors, but I can't see them there (there's the hair of one who could be either Ten or Fourteen, but it's not clear).

Clearly visible, though, are the Fifteenth Doctor, and the two Doctors RTD invented for the novelisation - a black woman with a flaming sword and a child in a wheelchair with K9. At the time the book originally came out it was generally assumed these were future incarnations, but they could be past lives before the First Doctor.

Most excitingly, though, are the two Morbius Doctors included. On the first selection, there's a sideways-sitting picture of the George Gallaccio Doctor (aka Doctor Crocus) and an upside-down picture of the Douglas Camfield Doctor.

I'm also intrigued by the picture beneath the snaps of the Third Doctor and the Whomobile and the Eighth Doctor. It's probably supposed to be the Third Doctor and the Brigadier, judging by the filly cuffs and 'tache respectively. It doesn't really look like either of them, though. (The soldier looks more like Captain Mainwaring from "Dad's Army!")

[angelamontoo]

beautyandterrordance:

Peter Lorre, Bela Lugosi & Boris Karloff, in You’ll Find Out (1940).

[bethanydelleman]

Lady Susan Readthrough: Letter 41 and Conclusion

Summary: Catherine cannot bring Frederica to visit as Lady Susan had come and taken her to London. Catherine did what she could to prevent it and assured Frederica that she could write in distress. A+ on Aunting. Lady Susan did not reveal what happened with Reginald while at Churchill.

Suspecting that Lady Susan is monitoring their correspondence, Catherine determines to visit Frederica in town and try to bring her back to Churchill. Lady Susan asks if Frederica is looking well and suggests town may not be good for her daughter's health. Catherine urges her over several days to let them take her daughter back to the country and succeeds at last.

It is clear afterwards that Lady Susan wanted Frederica gone, as she marries Sir James herself three days later! Catherine maintains tacit custody of Frederica until she marries Reginald.

-+-

Catherine is a bit wary that Reginald has actually left Lady Susan for good:

Pray heaven, Reginald may not be in town again by that time!

Catherine's husband continues to not be very bright:

Her manner, to be sure, was very kind and proper, and Mr. Vernon believes that Frederica will now be treated with affection. I wish I could think so too. 

To say that the end of the letters was a blow to the finances of the government is hilarious!

Mr. Vernon, who, as it must already have appeared, lived only to do whatever he was desired

I think this means Mr. Vernon is a malewife? Catherine really does seem to direct this relationship and hold most of the brains.

was met with such an easy and cheerful affection, as made her almost turn from her with horror. No remembrance of Reginald, no consciousness of guilt, gave one look of embarrassment; she was in excellent spirits, and seemed eager to show at once by every possible attention to her brother and sister her sense of their kindness, and her pleasure in their society.

Lady Susan has no remorse, maybe only regret, but she is able to show whatever emotion she pleases. Catherine is totally disgusted by her.

The first hope of anything better was derived from Lady Susan’s asking her whether she thought Frederica looked quite as well as she had done at Churchhill, as she must confess herself to have sometimes an anxious doubt of London’s perfectly agreeing with her.

For whatever reason, Lady Susan wants to be rid of her daughter, so she opens the door to Catherine taking her to Churchill, but of course she makes Catherine work for it!

Lady Susan’s maternal fears were then too much awakened for her to think of anything but Frederica’s removal from the risk of infection; above all disorders in the world she most dreaded the influenza for her daughter’s constitution!

LOL! I doubt it!

Lady Susan was managing three men, Reginald, Mainwaring, and Sir James. She loses Reginald, Mainwaring is unavailable, and she settles for Sir James. Without Alicia paying her way, it's unclear how Lady Susan is supposed to live, so I guess it's not surprising. By the end of the book, she is unwelcome everywhere.

Frederica was therefore fixed in the family of her uncle and aunt till such time as Reginald De Courcy could be talked, flattered, and finessed into an affection for her which, allowing leisure for the conquest of his attachment to her mother, for his abjuring all future attachments, and detesting the sex, might be reasonably looked for in the course of a twelvemonth.

Still so strange that they set Reginald up with the daughter of the woman he was engaged to! Then again, with how Lady Susan is I guess Frederica probably knew she would end up with her mother's sloppy seconds.

Whether Lady Susan was or was not happy in her second choice, I do not see how it can ever be ascertained; for who would take her assurance of it on either side of the question? The world must judge from probabilities; she had nothing against her but her husband, and her conscience.

You can only imagine that when Sir James has a freak horseback riding accident, she'll be back and the whole affair will start again?

Sir James may seem to have drawn a harder lot than mere folly merited; I leave him, therefore, to all the pity that anybody can give him.

This is VERY similar to Austen's final word on Rushworth:

She had despised him, and loved another; and he had been very much aware that it was so. The indignities of stupidity, and the disappointments of selfish passion, can excite little pity. His punishment followed his conduct, as did a deeper punishment the deeper guilt of his wife.

But this is a wonderfully hilarious note to end on:

For myself, I confess that I can pity only Miss Mainwaring; who, coming to town, and putting herself to an expense in clothes which impoverished her for two years, on purpose to secure him, was defrauded of her due by a woman ten years older than herself.

I kind of wish we ended with letters, but maybe Austen just wanted to wrap up at this point. She does often have very rapid wrap-ups after the two main characters get engaged.

Here is the masterpost.

Anyway, I love this little novella and I hope you enjoyed reading along with me!

There will be character analysis next.

[gaykingslayer]

ranger's apprentice characters as (dumb) shit i've done in my life

halt: brining up the existence of ireland to a person who didn't know what ireland was almost everytime i see them

crowley: being a loyal eurovision watcher

horace: putting my finger in a blender

will: shoot at two guys who were making fun of me and my friend for fucking around with our shitty bow at a play ground

cassandra: push a guy so hard he fell to the ground and started crying after he insulted me during musical rehearsal infront of atleast 15 people

alyss: bullshit my way through a debate and then get the highest grade of the class

gilan: ask someone i liked to dance and proceed to get rejected because i was 'too tall'

george: writing letters to a friend every few weeks for a year when i moved away and never getting a reply

[fandomsofadistractedwriteblr]

[Image ID: a strip of crossstitch fabric with two embroidery designs on it: a green oakleaf with the word “ranger” stitched over it in an uneven script and a small sunflower. The other pictures are closeups of the two designs. End Image ID.]

some stress sewing to keep me from getting distracted over finals week. I started the oak leaf a while ago and decided to finish it which is why it looks kind of lopsided. It’s my first time trying embroidery but I could tell I improved a lot just between the two designs so I’ll keep practicing this summer (and maybe try to turn these into patches?)

the oakleaf is inspired by the necklaces the characters wear in the Rangers Apprentice series. I headcanon that Alyss learned how to embroider from Pauline along with the diplomacy education (since historically, a lot of discussion happened around a sewing circle between women as they worked together and so it would be important to know). And she knew how important the identity of their jobs were to her friends because choosing day defined their entire lives, so she made little patches like this for all of them as graduation gifts when they finished their apprenticeships. I want to do the rest of them at some point. Jenny would put hers (a ladle) on the pocket of her apron. She made a matching oakleaf for Horace’s battle frock after the adventures in Gallica. George got a quill, and he put it on the flap of his satchel, so he can see it every time he goes to take out notebooks. The sunflower is just because I think sunflowers are pretty.

I also want to embroider the flag that Eilonwy makes for Taran in The High King - Henwen on a blue background (with the wrong colored eyes). Idk I just think the idea of fantasy girls both swinging swords and making pretty decorations for their SOs is a Neat idea

[angelamontoo]

(via fyeahpeterlorre, jamiskoli)

[partywithponies]

People who might judge me for this are asleep, time to post my Dad's Army hot takes

Discounting the last few series, in which characters got exaggerated way beyond what they originally were, Hodges really did nothing majorly wrong, or at least nothing worse than the Home Guard also did. Like, he's treated like the antagonist of the show, but in a lot of episodes he's just minding his own business trying to do his goddamn job when the entire platoon decides to bully him for no good reason, and if he actively starts being petty and relishing in their misfortune, can you blame him? They do the same to him. This is a Hodges apologist account.

Furthermore, the spinoff It Sticks Out Half A Mile does Hodges and Pike so well. Okay so YES, Pike being actively antagonistic towards Hodges and Hodges barely acknowledging he exists like in the main show might make way more logical sense, but the two of them genuinely being friends like in It Sticks Out Half A Mile is way, way, funnier.

Like, too many sitcoms think the only relationship dynamics that can be funny are characters being dicks to each other all the time and being forced to work together despite barely liking each other, but I think the It Sticks Out Half A Mile dynamic of "two idiots with very different experiences and viewpoints who are both kind of assholes actually genuinely like each other and when the entire rest of the world is yelling 'WHAT THE FUCK YOU CAN'T DO THAT' every time one of them has a terrible idea, the other is like 'fantastic idea, let's do it'" is an equally funny dynamic that should be used in sitcoms way more.

FURTHERMORE, It Sticks Out Half A Mile giving us Hodges actually listening to and going along with Pike's absolutely batshit insane sounding ideas, them actually working somehow, and Hodges calling Pike "clever lad" all provides such a beautiful parallel to Pike and Mainwaring in the main show, and I love it.

Like, whatever other criticisms you could make about It Sticks Out Half A Mile, the Pike and Hodges friendship dynamic is great and I love hearing them support and encourage each other while blackmailing and inconveniencing everyone else.

(Also It Sticks Out Half A Mile made Pike and Hodges both canonically not homophobic and I stan that.)

My other Dad's Army hot take is that the show lost something that couldn't be fixed without Walker, and the show should not have gone on without him for as long as it did.

[gnome-adjacent-vagabond]

Just watched You'll Find Out (1940). It's not helping the Peter Lorre brainrot; I'm fixated on the evil maybe-polycule now.

Look at them. Lorre clearly in charge, Karloff looking like he JUST woke up (to be fair he did, right after getting knocked out by Kay Kyser of all people), and Lugosi hurgling angrily behind them. They're arranged like nesting dolls. They're wild. They're in love. They're at a sleepover. Peter Lorre is CLEARLY in charge.

This movie was wild from start to finish. Not the best, of course, but pretty fun and very corny. The second half is just a sleepover. A seance is held, college girls go wild over some rather strange band performances; two of them are very into Peter Lorre. Peter Lorre smokes like twenty cigars over the course of the movie.

There are a couple VERY questionable moments because the movie does unfortunately take place in a house full of stolen African art, so that's something to be wary of.

My main note is that it would have been better if the evil trio had a bit more screentime and Kay Kyser's musical numbers were cut just a bit, but I get why it was done.

[riotactquotes]

Great Britain, History of the Proceedings and Debates of the House of Commons, 1796

Page 114: That the magistrate should be empowered to apprehend any persons whose conduct should seem calculated for those purposes, and that any resistance to the authority of a magistrate so acting, should be deemed felony in every person concerned in it. — That, on perceiving the proceedings of such meeting to be tumultuous and leading to the bad consequences he had already mentioned, the magistrate should have power similar to that which he had already by the Riot act, to disperse the assembly; and that, after reading the Riot act, and ordering them to disperse, any number of persons remaining should, as by the Riot act, incur the penalty of the law, that of felony. This power to be given to the magistrate was, in his view of the subject, absolutely necessary; but it appeared to him still to leave the free exercise of the right of petitioning [At these words there was a cry of hear! hear!] This power, h would repeat, it was absolutely necessary to delegate to the magistrate in order to guard against the abuse of the right of petitioning, and to preserve the public peace and tranquility.

Page 138: In order to quality those Magistrates for the task which the worthy Baronet has assigned them, it will first be necessary to give them integrity; secondly, independence; and lastly, ability to detect misrepresentation, and refute unfounded arguments, the consequence of all which must be, to take from them the only thing which thy now possess, their salaries. But the Magistrates, it seems, are to attend, accompanied by their constables. In this case fair argument had but little chance. If a Speaker, when interrupted by the Magistrate, said, “You have not heard me out, allow me to explain myself,” and the Magistrate did not choose that he should proceed, immediately the Riot Act was read, the constables interfered, and the meeting was forcibly dissolved. And this was what gentlemen called, “setting a man to rights,” that is to say, “knocking him down.” Upon my word, such nonsense can scarcely be made a subject of serious argument. As it is the nature of man always to resist oppression, how many Magistrates all be wanted, in order to carry into effect this new system? Will it be necessary, as, to the disgrace of the service, it was with respect to surgeons’ mates for the army, to advertise, “Wanted a number of Magistrates,” etc.

Page 168: The honourable gentleman said, that their demeanor was peaceable and orderly; but the honourable gentleman’s appearance for the moment might have sufficient weight to suspend the operation of wickedness. While gentlemen of fortune and talents attended their meetings, they might be willing to conceal the blackness of their designs; and to declare, for the purpose of deceiving, that their aim was honest and constitutional. He wished to ask the House, was not the general notoriety enough to justify them in the measure? Was not this ground in the Riot act? “Look,” said he, “to the precedents of the House, you will find that the general notoriety was all on which the bill in that instance was founded; and yet the measure was agreed to in that House nem. con. What were we to think of the conduct of our ancestors in the gunpowder plot? Did they go into evidence about that plot? Had they done so, the House of Commons ought to have been gunpowder proof. Such was the case before the House: the notoriety was such, that going into proof would be ridiculous — for, were not the Parliament of Copenhagen House, Westminster, and elsewhere, suppressed, the freedom of debate in that House would be soon over — the British Parliament, as consisting of King, Lords, and Commons, would be crushed forever.

Page 189: He then took notice of the Riot act. That act was passed without any inquiry, upon the notoriety of the case, that mischief might arise which required the adoption of such provisions, as were specified in the clauses of that act. What was the situation of the country at that time? There were some persons who were inimical to the King upon the throne. They wish to remove the King, and to put another upon the throne in his place. The danger apprehended at that time was nothing to that which was now to be dreaded. Had the family of Stuart been placed upon the throne, the whole of the Constitution would not have been destroyed; the property of every individual would not have been wrested from him; personal distinction would not have been sacrificed; and some security would have remained for the form of our Government continuing.

Page 196: He would observe also, that the meetings which the bill was framed to discourage were those where vast crowds were assembled. Even this practice was prohibited by existing laws, by which tumultuous petitions were prohibited. If meetings were held in defiance of the enactment of the present bill, the assembly would be unlawful, and might be dispersed by the magistrate, in the same manner as he is now entitled to disperse a mob under the Riot act. To prevent destructive views from being prosecuted under specious pretexts, the magistrate was empowered to exercise a certain discretion in judging of the tendency of the proceedings, and authorized to put an end to the meeting. The public peace required such a measure to be adopted, in consequence of the extravagant attempts these meetings had encouraged, and the flagrant abuses of them which had been committed. 

Page 208: Mr. MILBANKE said he should oppose the second reading of this bill, because the Riot act already authorized magistrate, mayor, or sheriff, to disperse any meeting composed of twelve persons or more, suspected of assembling for tumultuous purposes, and if those persons did not immediately disperse, when so command, they were guilty of felony. He was afraid that the bill might be made use of for bad and pernicious purposes, and to sanction the introduction of many abuses into the state; and upon the principles, convinced that there was already a strong and satisfactory ready to every probable evil, of the nature advert to in the bill, to be found in the law as it now stands, he would not detain the House any longer, but give his decided negative to the question.

Page 227: He granted that the bill was enacted with particular circumstances of solemnity, and that from it the present family derived their right to the throne, but still it was a bill originating from the wisdom of Parliament, and subject to their discretion, and liable to be revised or altered as circumstances might require. He remarked particular occasions in which circumstances of convenience had induced a deviation from the principle of this bill. Some of the clauses of the Riot act were inconsistent with its provisions, and in 1745, the loyal Highland clans were disarmed, as well as the others, in order to guard against the danger of the throne, from the spirit of rebellion lurking in that quarter.

Page 438: Mr. Sheridan said, he meant not to propose any clause; he, on the contrary said, he should oppose the whole of the bill; what h said was to show its absurdity, and also to give notice of the ground on which he should oppose the bill in its future stages. On the clause which subjects the company to the penalties of the Riot act, if they continue for one hour after proclamation made for their dispersion, the Solicitor General proposed to fill up the blank with stating the offense to be felony without benefit of clergy, and that the persons so remaining shall consequently suffer death.

Mr. Stanley contended, that the punishment of death was too severe, and suggested the milder punishment of simple felony, or misdemeanor.

Mr. Mainwaring did not approve of the clause. He took occasion to allude to the Riot act, which, he said, had never produced much good effect.

Page 528: General Smith expressed his regret at having drawn upon him such a censure, and wished that the word “pertinaciously” had not been made use of. He then proceeded in his remarks upon the bill. If it should be found, he said, that the advocates for the measure had, in the strongest manner, at a former period, confirmed the right of the people to petition, it would be a matter of infinite regret to everyone that such a bill as the present should have been adopted. With respect to the corrections that had been made in the bill, he did not receive them as boons from the Ministers, for h was sure they would not have ben made if the voice of the pool had not rendered them necessary. Upon the full view of the bill, he saw sufficient ground to be alarmed for the happiness, tranquility, and freedom of the country. Persons would be liable to penalties without knowing that they had committed any crime. — The bill had been compared to the Riot act, and merit had been assumed because it was said that the bill was not worse than that act. — He denied the assumption. — In the Riot act it was provided, that the magistrate should come as near as possible to any meeting.

Page 529: Why had not the same provision been introduced into this bill? Instead of such a provision, the magistrate might go into a neighboring field or highway, and read the Riot act, and nineteen out of twenty persons, if the meeting were numerous, might not know that the Riot act had been read. The bill ought, he contended, to have been divided into two bills. There might be many persons who might think that part of the bill should be adopted, but who could not accede to all the provisions introduced into it. It ought, therefore, to have been dividd into two bills.

Page 546: But the honorable gentleman state, that the Justice came to the meeting merely to watch the proceedings, that he was to wait till he heard the name of the person who had expressed himself seditiously, and then what harm was there if he should arrest the person? Gentlemen seemed to think that they had gained a great point, by having inserted in the bill the words, willfully and advisedly. They did not recollect that this might afterwards b a fit question for the consideration of a Jury; it was precisely the circumstance of which the Magistrate could not judge on the spur of the moment. Was it nothing new that every debate of Englishmen should be watched and controlled by a Magistrate! In the Riot Act, the expressions which gave to the Magistrate his authority were “authorized, empowered and required.” In the present bill Ministers dared not insert the word required. They were well aware that no person of independent character, or of right feelings, would choose to put himself in the situation of relating the proceedings of a public meeting; and in what a situation must the person be who is obliged in the course of speaking to examine the countenance of a Magistrate, to observe his nods and looks, in order to discover to what degree he meets his approbation, or how far he may proceed with safety to himself! Another question was, what was to be done with the man after he was seized? Mr. Sheridan referred to the Riot Act, the principles of which had, in his opinion, been mistaken when it was referred to or quoted as applicable to the present case. — According to the Riot Act, the person who was guilty of a treasonable tumult was found not only in the meditation, but in the very commission of the criminal act. It was necessary to arrest his hands, and to prevent him from the power of doing farther mischief. But was there that exigency, that pressure in the present as, which required a similar principle to be adopted? By this bill the magistrates were empowered to seize men whose sentiments they should disapprove, and if they resisted, to command that they should separate, under the penalty of military execution. But Mr. Sheridan put the case, that they might refuse to separate, not tumultuously and riotously, but quietly and peaceably.

Page 547: On what pretext would the Magistrate then be able to enforce the law? He need not observe, that the Riot Act was brought in during the time of a rebellion, when danger was apprehended, not from loose societies, but from a considerable body of gentlemen, whose numbers were supposed to amount to one-third, if not a larger proportion of the country, disaffected to the existing government, and disposed to bring in a family, whose existence on the throne had been found to be incompatible with the rights and liberties of Englishmen. Under these circumstances, it was impossible to view the provisions of the Riot Act, and not to admire the merciful temper which then prevailed, in comparison with the bloody spirit which had dictated the clauses of the present bill.

Page 574: It now appeared that they could vote thanks to Dukes and Earls, and illustrious characters, whom they had hitherto treated with the grossest abuse. If, however, these societies had really given up their detested systems, and would even join the Whig Club, the present acts would be waste paper, they would never be carried into execution. Until, however, he had some strong grounds for believing this sudden change had taken place, he could not consent to lay down his arms, more particularly at a moment when he had every reason to believe that they are sparing no labour to make proselytes to their cause. What he had hitherto said, related to the preamble of the bill; he would now observe upon some attacks which had been made upon the bill. It had been said, that no Justice would act under this bill, and that therefore Ministers had purposely omitted the word “required,” which is in the Riot Act; in answer to which he would only say, that in case of a riot, the magistrate is called upon to act immediately, and from the pressing nature of the danger; but under this act the immediate urgency was not so great, and therefore, the word “required” was not necessary.

[faustiandevil]

POV: You are Kay Kyser + band and the evil gays are making out right before gunning you down. What you do?

Original meme image under the cut.

[angelamontoo]

Yknow what I always found super weird about the ending of You'll find out?

Why is Saliano the only one wearing what seems to be just normal clothes when everyone else is wearing Pajamas?

It would be one thing if it was the outfit he was wearing earlier in the film, but its not. He was wearing a tux and then his sorcerer robe. Why did he change into a normal shirt, slacks and suspenders and why didn't Fenninger and Mainwaring aswell???