What did you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Primum non nocere
Pages
About Me
Fun Reads
Popular Posts
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(314)
-
▼
August
(33)
- Newsweek's Award Winning Reporters Still Swilling ...
- 'Swingers' Open Thread
- Religion of Peace Caught Again Looking For Another...
- Query
- Obama, Bloomberg Discuss Economy Over Game Of Golf
- AP Checks The Facts For Us, Can't Figure Out Nuthin!
- 'Imagine Me And You' Open Thread
- John F. Kerry: Statesman?
- Sports Writer Weenies Wait With Delight For Tebow ...
- Kathleen Parker Ignores Islamists
- 'Local Hero' Open Thread
- Obama Approval Reaches Rock Bottom 42%
- Maxine Waters Blames ... President Bush?!
- What Are Little Girls Made Of?
- Obama Takes On 'Local Issue', Throws Hat In With I...
- Obama Comes Clean, Gets Rid Of Pretense of Transpa...
- Gay 'Rights' Protesters Willing Pawns For MoveOn
- Regal Obamas Show Little Regard For Cares Of The N...
- Get A Grip
- David Warren Views Middle East
- JetBlu Flight Attendant Bails Out On Tarmac
- Democrats Look To Split Conservative Vote
- The Cordoba Conundrum
- - 'Lawrence of Arabia' Open Thread
- Milwaukie Teachers Fight For Their Rights...
- Justice Stevens Replacement Confirmed
- Barack Bowls A Gutter Ball
- Tommy Spells It Out
- Canadian David Warren Hears The Tea Pot Whistle
- New Home Found
- Palin Let's It Rip
- 'My Favorite Year' Open Thread
- Conrad Black Freed
-
▼
August
(33)
Stat Counter
OK, guys, no spoilers, now. I just realized I left Laurence of Arabia at my Dad's, so will not get next movie for a couple of days. Sorry!
ReplyDelete(I do hope to get caught up a bit on Hulu-ing, however, between visiting with The Sister and getting The Niece moved into her dorm!!!)
Now this is an unexpected pick! Brilliant!
ReplyDeleteAs you have me completely gobsmacked, I shall await Cathy's return before I presume to continue formulating my thoughts. . .
Given the absolute juvenile and caddish behavior of Cooper, Rob, Gordon and even... Ned, it is little wonder that Luce would find little of value in the male gender. If I had been her, I'd tell them all to bugger off as well. But the whole notion of the superiority of love at first sight is just off. If Luce had been exactly the same person, but without the striking cheek bones, or say fifty pounds heavier, would she still have been able to pull off the extended longing gaze with Rachel as she is walked down the isle to marry her life long love? If the gaze denoted the recognition of her soul mate, than the answer should be yes. But we all know that yes is not the answer, and that poor Rachel has actually mistaken a moment of interest or attraction for love. Unfortunate, but nothing to be alarmed about. Young people do that all the time. But the issue of marriage is one of making a commitment to love. It is committing yourself to another person, not committing yourself to a feeling.
ReplyDeleteFor her part, Luce shows a real knack for saying and doing inappropriate things. The florist at a wedding should deliver and set up the flowers, get paid and leave. She doesn't need to hang around the wedding. She is not there to provide whatever aid the bride may require. Stay out of the brides way, take the check and hit the door.
While there, she completely allows herself the liberty to insert herself into family discussions, undermining the bride's mother and the groom by offering an opinion that is of no real value. The same at the dinner she finds herself invited to, and when she challenges the brides more solid description of loving relationships and undermines the bride's notion of happiness in her marriage, she views herself as the put upon individual and inappropriately accepts the brides later apology. This, despite the fact that it was Luce's unsolicited opinion that disrupted the dinner and caused the two men to feel ill at ease at the table. In short, Luce is an inconsiderate house guest.
Is this really the stuff of true love?
What happened to waiting for Cathy? Oh well, Cathy don't read this post until you have seen the movie.
ReplyDeleteNicholas, Nicholas. . . You have to accept the central premise of any movie. Luce fell in love with Rachel at first sight. Rachel fell in love with Luce when their eyes first met. Deeply, madly, truly--souls connecting---got it? So forget thinking that Superman just has a mild concussion and that he is really just a regular farm boy from Smallville, USA. He is Kal-El from the planet Krypton. Rachel and Luce fell in love at first sight. In that moment of clarity, she instantly knows that Hector is just her best friend and that she is probably making one heck of a mistake. But the food is already on the table and the hall is booked 'til 2 AM. . .
Care to try again? Relax. Open your heart. Listen when Luce is invited to attend the wedding. . . ;-)
Rachel was all about marrying Heck, who truly loves her. She looks over her shoulder, and suddenly she is filled with a certain unease. Turns out, she's in love with the girl that just delivered the flowers. Their souls connected and it was a done deal. Well, if I hadn't been through a couple of those I would find it more credible. I find I am expected to accept a premise that is without merit. "For the sake of the crew."
ReplyDelete"For the sake of the crew."
Hmm.
Okay.
Well, if I hadn't been through a couple of those I would find it more credible.
ReplyDeleteWell, you see, if it happens more than once in a lifetime, it's not the same thing. This is the love that gives the mighty light of ten thousand suns challenging infinity a good run. Clark doesn't have a tumor on his adrenal gland, nor is the steel substandard--he does have superpowers on Earth. Accept the premise. . .You don't want the real thing to slip away and regret it the rest of your years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNpRLziQyPg
But what the heck is Heck doing for a living? There seems to be stock quotations on the monitor screens, but they are giving customers variable price quotes. And Heck doesn't even seem to do that. Rob gets the customers and Heck just tells them it's a good price. Do they even understand business in the UK? Those Office folks don't seem to have a clue either.
I've never heard of this movie.
ReplyDeleteThere is no such thing as "love at first sight" ... and who in his right mind would want there to be?
ReplyDeleteOh. That's right, girls (and boys who think like girls) ... who have been raised to believe in such foolishness as "soul mates."
Rather, love is a decision and a commitment. It assuredly is not a feeling, much less is it some uncontrollable force that happens to you, will you nil you. That the decision and commitment may have grown around a kernel of sexual attraction doesn’t change what love is. And what it is not.
Ilion, love is like a concussion grenade that someone tosses into your room. If you can't clear out the cobwebs and get back on your feet before she comes crashing through the door ... you're done for.
ReplyDeleteThe smoke. The confusion. The utter disorientation.
ReplyDeleteYou're gonna have to watch the movie.
That's infatuation ... or lust.
ReplyDeleteBut it's not love.
Do you remember David Picasso?
ReplyDelete"Hyacinth, am I going to have to search every gym in San Diego to find you. You are an inspiration and I’d love to meet you."
That's what we're talking about.
L O V E ... Love!
Of course, then Dave heard tell that April thought her rear was too large, and the bloom was off the rose.
"Large ass? Oh no! I don't like a large ass on a woman." or something close.
Darrell suggested he take a shot-gun to David's rear, see if that might make him feel better. Turned out April didn't need much help. I think her response was:
"And I care, why?"
Anyway, that's love.
I suggested that Mr HG and April had a selection of shotguns at the ready to greet unwanted "guests" in the appropriate manner. He did say he was local and made reference to the gym she teaches at. I'd be glad to do it but he'd have to take a little side trip to where I live first.
ReplyDeleteIlion, I didn't say I believe in Superman, either, and the source of his powers. But I can accept the premise in order to enjoy the story. And isn't love an electro-chemical thing? I've seen some of the clinical research for 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, when it was in that realm rather than "Ecstasy" in the clubs. You should see what it does to long-married couples who quite literally were ready to strangle each other. Decision and a commitment is an intellectual process that makes it all work in the long run. Yet those wouldn't happen if our bodies didn't make us dance first like puppets on a string. If we're lucky.
And yes, I do reserve a space for Divine intervention as well. I just never try and presume to know what that is. . .or isn't.
"I can accept the premise in order to enjoy the story."
ReplyDeleteAs can we all.
Now see if you can rent it - a Blockbuster non-new release offering - should be a couple of bucks. Then tell us what you think!
I've seen it, James. Watched it again just the other day. But you had to know that, right? Can't say it was just as enjoyable as when I saw it the first time, years ago. Funny how moods and situations affect how we view things. This time all the flaws stood out. I swear there were a few missing scenes this time around, too. Minor things, but this added to the flaws. Luce was invited to the reception by Rachel's mum because of the connection she made with H. There was more discussion of business between Heck and Rob that showed neither had a clue about the real world--nor the writer.
ReplyDeleteWhy is this lovely young florist making such a point to say hello to Heck and inform him that it was she that delivered the flowers for him. If it was me, I would be like..
ReplyDeleteThe flowers..?
Anyway, she gets a courtesy invite to the wedding. What, she has absolutely nothing else to do? She is looking for some cheap food and good wine? If someone gives you an 'oh by the way' courtesy invite to a wedding.. do you take them up on it? You don't know the groom or any of his friends. You don't know the bride or any of her friends. To be frank, you don't know anybody at the wedding, except perhaps for the groom and his mother, both of whom you have just embarrassed in front of the young .. what .. niece? No wonder Coop thought he had a vibe. Who else could she possibly have been there for. From Cooper's perspective...it was on! It was so incredibly on!!
I did love the fact that Coop kept asking Heck if he felt there was something going on for him... that focus and attention to self is about right in a young man and was funny. I definitely enjoyed that and bits and pieces like it. Anyway, the friendship between Luce and the lovely newly wed Rachel ... flourishes!
I can't get around how totally jerked over Heck is. Sure, he loves Rachel and wants her to be happy. But should not she have wanted the same? It reminds me a tad of Jerry Seinfeld at the Reebok Sports Club meeting Jessica Nederlander just as she returned from her three week honeymoon in Italy. Next thing you know... batta-bing, botta-boom - she divorces Nederlander after four months of marriage.
I don't know.
But back to the movie....
It's her job to deal with the wedding party--particularly the bride and groom--to make sure that everything is exactly as they wanted. A small business owner always makes the customer happy, and that includes making changes on the fly if that's what it takes. She would pin the boutineer on the groom as well, and the introduction would come then. She would hand flowers to the ushers to distribute to members of the family and such as they arrive. As for a person in the "wedding" business accepting an invitation to attend--it happens all the time. It's a great place to hand out business cards and do a little schmoozing. Lots of future clients, and in-laws of future clients, to be found there. You need to do what it takes if you are going to stay in business. And if you saw where Luce's flower shop was in London--one of the most expensive cities in the world--she would have to go an extra twenty miles just to make the monthly rent. I've known people in the wedding planning business, and one in London that did a posh wedding for a TV anchor and her sportstar husband and the planners were there until the final cleanup. Just before the last call they had a giant release of balloons and she was on a second floor balcony shimmying on a guy wire trying to get the net full of balloons to release. She had her computer printers there because the couple was making last second changes on the wedding packets changing formal names to nicknames for the groom's old schoolchums. As he insisted.
ReplyDeleteWatching this time, I got the sense that Heck hadn't given much thought to marriage and commitment with Rachel. I didn't even get the sense that he loved her--more like she was his friend and he decided that it was time to marry.
They imply that there wasn't much of a sex life even before Luce was a consideration, nor was that a particular concern of his. Could Heck have missed (or dismissed) some very important clues? Before you answer that, remember that they are British. I've known some pretty oblivious Brits in my life.
And sometimes, people learn lots of things about their mates on a honeymoon that they never saw when they were dating. Some people are just that dishonest--the person they made themselves out to be before is a complete lie. Afterward there is no reason to continue the charade. I made the mistake of asking a woman at work that I was close with "How was the honeymoon?" She closed my door, burst out crying and said it was the worst two weeks of her life! And no, I didn't take advantage of the situation. Thirty years later I can say that I should have: She was my dream woman.
“Ilion, I didn't say I believe in Superman, either, and the source of his powers. But I can accept the premise in order to enjoy the story.”
ReplyDeleteThat’s a very differ rent thing. Superman is very improbable, but not logically impossible. A “willing suspension of disbelief” regarding Superman does not gnaw at the roots of morality and the continuing viability of society.
To watch and enjoy Superman does not require that one engage a “willing suspension of disbelief” with respect to a moral lie.
“And isn't love an electro-chemical thing?”
No! No more than humans are “hydro-carbon things.” That human beings are comprised mostly of water and carbon tells you what we’re made of; it doesn’t tell you what we are. That infatuation (which isn’t love, in any event) is mediated by an electro-chemical means still doesn’t tell you a thing about what it is.
“I've seen some of the clinical research for 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, when it was in that realm rather than "Ecstasy" in the clubs. You should see what it does to long-married couples who quite literally were ready to strangle each other. Decision and a commitment is an intellectual process that makes it all work in the long run. Yet those wouldn't happen if our bodies didn't make us dance first like puppets on a string. If we're lucky.”
And when my blood-sugar drops suddenly when I’m in a crowd, I wouldn’t mind murdering the crowd if that would get them to shut up their mooing and cud-chewing and foot-shuffling (even in the best of moods, crowds remind me of cattle headed back to the barn).
By all means, let's keep emotion out of love.
ReplyDeleteI'll pass your sentiments along to Hallmark, Mr. Spock.
I really don't think your feelings that come from a blood sugar drop are at all related. No evolutionary imperative with that, unless taking them all with you helps the species. Don't most people experience weakness, shakiness, instead?
And for the record, Luce and Rachel only shared a kiss, an urgent hug (and a kiss), and a rousing game of Dance-Dance Fever in an arcade. Rachel was going to stop seeing Luce even casually and Luce was about to leave town. Heck didn't even think about asking Luce to move in. Talk about requiring me to engage in a willing suspension of disbelief. It's Sarah Connor, Man! Are you daft?
"By all means, let's keep emotion out of love."
ReplyDeleteNow you're being dishonest ... and it's no cuter when you do it than when some "liberal" does it.
"I'll pass your sentiments along to Hallmark, Mr. Spock."
As if Hallmark ... or schlocky sentimentality ... has anything to do with love.
Well, golly. This is one of the loveliest movies I've seen in some time, and better crafted than most. The music is wonderful, the sets and the lighting, not to mention the principals' physical beauty, make this a delight to watch. The little sister, H, is wonderful, as well as being an effective device for some key plot elements. (Apparently, Luce is "invited" to the wedding so that she can keep H contained.) The characters are sympathetic, particularly Rachel and Luce -- each of them trying not to act on the desires she feels, each feeling so bad for the others who would be hurt, each trying to "get over it" by distancing herself. And then we see the happy endings for everybody -- the supporting characters, Luce and Rachel, even Heck, who gets to work on his travel book after all AND meet his own "at first sight" girl.
ReplyDeleteA few problems, though. I usually skip movies that promote things I believe are wrong, and even setting aside the homosexuality (for the moment), I take issue with the notion that it's alright to "follow your heart" when that means abandoning your spouse. Ideally, before getting married, one considers the likelihood of meeting someone to whom one will be attracted after getting married. There are a hell of a lot of attractive people out there, whether you're drawn to them physically or intellectually, the time to decide whether or not you're willing to put yourself in a position to have your feelings for another person intensify is before you pledge your life and your love -- before you promise to behave lovingly to another regardless of how loving you feel day to day -- before the wedding.
Ironically, although not at all uncommonly, Rachel and Heck did everything else before the wedding. They used up their honeymooners' enthusiasm when they moved in together (or perhaps even before then); they were already a long -settled couple before they married. So settled, they don't even take a honeymoon. If it hadn't been for meeting "that flower girl," the wedding would have been nothing more than a fancy party over the weekend. We see them -- especially Rachel -- already somewhat dismissive of each others thoughts and feelings; the filmmakers' "before" picture of marriage, with Rachel's parents' bitterness and contempt for each other their "after" picture.
(Continued)
(Continued)
ReplyDeleteBut Rachel does put herself in the way of having her feelings become complicated. She tells herself at first she just thinks she and Luce are destined to be great friends. But when she does decide that it's not right for her attraction to Luce to pull her away from Heck, she goes to see her to "end it." Yes, that always works out well. Almost as well as telling someone who loves you that you love somebody else, but you're going to stick around anyway. When a mid-life crisis husband springs this on the mother of his children, you can make a case for staying in the marriage. But how the hell is a young newlywed supposed to go on as if nothing has changed? If you've made a mistake -- especially as brief and limited as Rachel's -- you can re-commit yourself to the relationship you're choosing without breaking the heart of the person who loves you.
So the plot devices that make Rachel "free" are so very poignant and convenient, and the feelings the young women seem to have for each other look so lovely, and the idea that you can meet someone and immediately know that you are perfectly suited for each other is such a wishfully-held romantic notion, that the filmmakers have removed every obstacle from True Love's Path.
Except, if you had been happily partnered, and decide to marry, someone of the opposite sex, and out of the blue find yourself sexually attracted to someone you've just met, of the same sex, wouldn't it seem a good idea to explore this a bit with someone objective and qualified, before making major life decisions? Rather than lying in bed next to your sleeping spouse and frowning into the distance? Because we all know what excellent counsel is to be found in the lack of sleep.
Very well said, Cathy.
ReplyDeleteI must admit I have been a bit of a goof ball about this movie, perhaps not as willing to embrace it as one might hope. Darrell quite capably countered most of my objections to the mechanisms of the story's development, and we are left with the story itself. I did think the score was lovely, and that it was a beautifully photographed movie.
That being said what I am keen to know is what Darrell thought of the movie. I'm gonna give it another whirl - tonight I think. What might one appreciate on closer inspection?
Imagine me and you I do
ReplyDeleteI think about you day and night
It's only right
To think about the girl you love
And hold her tight
So happy together
If I should call you up invest a dime
And you say you belong to me
And ease my mind
Imagine how the world could be
So very fine
So happy together
I can see me lovin' nobody but you
For all my life
When you're with me baby the skies'll be blue
For all my life
Me and you and you and me
No matter how they toss the dice
It had to be
The only one for me is you
And you for me
So happy together
I can see me lovin' nobody but you
For all my life
When you're with me baby the skies'll be blue
For all my life
Me and you and you and me
No matter how they toss the dice
It had to be
The only one for me is you
And you for me
So happy together
Me and you and you and me
No matter how they toss the dice
It had to be
The only one for me is you
And you for me
So happy together
So happy together
How is the weather
So happy together
We're happy together
So happy together
Happy together
So happy together
So happy together
The Turtles (originally "The Tyrtles" ala "The Byrds or The Beatles" 1966
I admit it--I've been brainwashed! I believe every word. This is from the soundtrack of the formative years of my life and I don't just believe it, I expect it. Put away your flowcharts and balance sheets, all I need is LOVE.
Ideally, before getting married, one considers the likelihood of meeting someone to whom one will be attracted after getting married. There are a hell of a lot of attractive people out there, whether you're drawn to them physically or intellectually, the time to decide whether or not you're willing to put yourself in a position to have your feelings for another person intensify is before you pledge your life and your love -- before you promise to behave lovingly to another regardless of how loving you feel day to day -- before the wedding.
ReplyDeleteIn a perfect world. If you really believe it will be "until death do us part"--which few people really do, these days. We didn't get to see the proposal but it was probably something like "Do you want to get married? Ans. "Why not?"
As far as I know, the only place they really counsel enagaged couple before marriage is in the Catholic Church with the Pre-Cana counseling.
There couples are at least confronted with notions of lifetime committment and God, children, budgeting, goals, sex and interpersonal relationships--everyday stuff. You would think that discussion of those issue would come naturally given that a lot of couples have lived together, but you'd be surprised. The notion that either party can end it rather quickly today plays a big part in people avoiding the big picture. And you have to remember that this is Great Britain--which has traveled even further down the road of squishy socialism than we have. Although there is that "hanging on in lonely desperation is the English way" business. When marriages are (were) put together for social status and position, lots of things take a back seat. Like personal happiness.
Yeah, I loved your comments on Rob and Heck's business approach. And I'm sure you're in the right of it in terms of the rather non-committal commitment the two newly weds likely made. Heck, Heck was at an utter loss for words when asked to stand up and give a toast. It is your send off, and every groom should be willing to state that he is the luckiest man alive. Come on, you managed to find a girl willing to commit herself to be married ... to you! That's quite an achievement in itself, and worthy of being underscored. No matter who people consider to be 'the lucky one', by my lights its always the groom, and any groom worth his salt should have the wherewithal to publicly say so.
ReplyDeleteHeck was a lucky guy, and if he couldn't say that, well then that's bad luck for them both.
If you are going to watch again, notice how Luce is presented as a woman who interacts naturally and believably with men and women. She has a normal life and a loving relationship with her mother. That would not be notable, except that it is rarely seen in a Hollywood movie. No "community" caricatures surrounding her. Only one awkward scene in the grocery store.
ReplyDeleteOh...and listen for Rachel to say (to Heck) "You were my best friend. It was enough before. It will be again."
ReplyDeleteNicholas: "... No matter who people consider to be 'the lucky one', by my lights its always the groom, and any groom worth his salt should have the wherewithal to publicly say so."
ReplyDeleteIt is customary to say to the prospective groom, "Congratulations!," and to the prospective bride, "Good Luck!" -- which is to say, "You don't deserve her; you lucked out!" and "You could have done better than him; you'll certainly need a lot of luck to get him into shape!," respectively.
This was doubtless a custom invented by women of the Victorian era; and it expresses perfectly "your lights."
And, therein, in miniature, is the root of the contemporary problem between the sexes.
Since it has traditionally been up to the man to offer marriage to the woman, who was limited to accepting or refusing those offers she was fortunate enough to receive, it was incorrect to congratulate the bride on her good fortune of finding a man who would marry her -- she was offered "Best wishes" -- but the groom was congratulated on his implied good fortune that the lady accepted his proposal.
ReplyDeleteIt's all about being gracious to those of inferior rank or social standing.
"It's all about being gracious to those of inferior rank or social standing."
ReplyDeleteNow, develop this though a bit more.
Okay... I think I'm going out on a limb here. Vince Vaughn, Jon Favreau in a crazy, guys trying to make it in LA while still having a little fun kind of story .. just to be a little out there.. I think you will all enjoy Swingers.
ReplyDelete"It's all about being gracious to those of inferior rank or social standing."
ReplyDeleteWell, until quite recently, a woman who outlived her father had no property, no power, and no way of providing for herself unless she married someone who could support her. Since her fate rested entirely upon her being attractive, accomplished, fine-familied, or hard-working enough to secure a legitimate proposal of marriage, in effect being rescued from penury by a man who would now basically own her, it was considered less than gracious to call attention to this dependency by offering her congratulations (attributing her future security to good luck, or commending her on her successfully securing her future). Rather, the bride was best-wished health, happiness, etc, while the fact of the bride's having accepted the groom's proposal was treated as if her acceptance secured all that was essential to his future well-being, and he was congratulated. A pretty little fiction for most, and a kernel of truth for the very fortunate.
I had hoped that a bit of googling would turn up something to indicate when the rule about what to say to whom was formalized, but no luck so far. I presume it predates the Victorians, although it may not have been written down anywhere before that.
The distinction is mentioned as if well-known in the 1922 Emily Post Etiquette in Society, in Business, in Politics and at Home: "But remember it is a breach of good manners to congratulate a bride on having secured a husband." (Bartleby.com) It appears as a rule, again, no explanation offered, in my 1952 Amy Vanderbilt's Complete Book of Etiquette.
Miss Manners (Judith Martin) is far more entertaining, of course. Although in the 1982 edition of Miss Manners' Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior she answers the question of "Why is that?" with a brief "Because of inequality in the marriage laws," her response in the 2005 edition (under the chapter "Marriage (For Beginners)" is somewhat expanded:
"... Even though the rule is still in effect, most people break it, yet modern brides are highly unlikely to be insulted by being congratulated.
This is not because the courtship patterns have changed. Even if the lady proposes to the gentleman on bended knee, Miss Manners and other polite people should figure he is lucky to get her. Nor is it entirely because those who offer congratulations mean well but don't know the rule and it would be churlish to quibble.
It is because today's brides hear far worse. Those who are repeatedly told 'It's about time!' and asked 'Are you pregnant?' are only too happy to accept kind thoughts, however they are phrased."
Swingers?!
ReplyDeleteDoes this mean I get to pick Notting Hill after all?
;)
Yes, indeed!
ReplyDelete: )
Swingers is about a guy who has left home and whose girlfriend broke up with him just at the time he was leaving. He can't make it in LA as a comedian, and he can't get over the girl he has left behind. He is an absolute train-wreck. Into the mix is his best friend, the irrepressible, Vince Vaughn, who sees opportunity everywhere, and whose easy manner makes him friends wherever he goes. It's a guy's movie I suppose, about moving on and getting over the fear of asking someone on a date ... but it's good fun.
ReplyDeleteHey Cathy, "I'm think I'm picking up a vibe about this one. Oh yeah...definitely. It's on! It's so incredibly on!!"
: )
Nut! ;)
ReplyDeleteI've seen Notting Hill, and I just started a one month free trial on Netflix and they have that title available for streaming. Swingers is not available instantly. Do you know that they have hundreds of movies on Hulu, some even watchable? You might want to root around there for some ideas before you select something for your club.
ReplyDeleteCathy? I think you will like Mrs. Dalloway (1997). It's a Virginia Woolf story set in London before and after WWI. Vanessa Redgrave is the principal star, along with Natascha McElhone and Lena Headey. It's a film of moods and manners, and if you can tolerate Julia Roberts, you can handle Vanessa.
Question, Jim. How old are you if I may ask? A range is fine if you don't want to reveal too much. The reason I ask is Vince Vaughn and Jon Favreau.
ReplyDeleteI graduated high school in '77.
ReplyDeleteSwingers is available on Netflix, if you can't find it at the local video store. Two days and you're golden. But you've got to wait two days. Two days is the industry standard. Two days and you're money. You're so money, and you don't even know it!
What don't you understand about instant gratification? Two days? What is this, the early Naughties? Times were simpler then.
ReplyDeleteMike: So how long do I wait to call?
ReplyDeleteTrent: A day.
Mike: Tomorrow.
Sue: Tomorrow, then a day.
Trent: Yeah.
Mike: So two days?
Trent: Yeah, I guess you could call it that, two days.
Sue(a boy named Sue): Definitely, two days is like industry standard.
Trent: You know I used to wait two days to call anybody, but now it's like everyone in town waits two days. So I think three days is kind of money. What do you think?
Sue: Yeah, but two's enough not to look anxious.
Trent: Yeah, two's enough not to look anxious. But I think three days is kind of money. You know because you...
Mike: Yeah, but you know what, mabey I'll wait 3 weeks. How's that?
Darrell, you are so money!
Just reading back through this, or at least those comments that actually pertained to Imagine Me and You, I have to say that Cathy is really good at this.
ReplyDeleteI tip my hat to the master.
: )