Happy Face

I heard yesterday how on arriving at Rangers he told Bernard that no matter how well he performed he wouldn't get out of the reserves. Still bitter about when he left Lyon for us apparently. Right out of the Souness school of petty grievences.

Have you seen "The Last Detail" ? In my opinion another great performance, and nominated for best actor Oscar, a very under rated film. It was on TV the other week, but I missed the start so didn't bother. I'll have to get hold of the DVD, I've just got hold of Five Easy Peieces too which was excellent. EDIT: And I haven't seen The Passenger either which is meant to be superb.

Slow start on here today. Hard Candy The scene to induce leg crossing from male viewers wasn't as bad as I expected. It's all implied where I was led to believe it was quite graphic. I was really impressed by the lass when she was acting the innocent, but couldn't abide her angry, vengeful personality which seemed very forced to me. Still a canny film. All About Eve George Sanders is my new hero. He's the coolest bastard who ever lived. I've only seen him in Rebecca before this, but in this he's the daddy. I only recently watched Sunset Boulevard which is very similar, and as much as I liked that, I think I prefer this far less cynical view of dwindling fame. Chinatown Not seen it in a while, and never commented when Alex brought it up recently, but rewatched it on Saturday and it is a fantastic film. On a par with Cuckoo's nest for best Jack performance.

Before you chuck him out, who are you going to get in?

Celebrite? Jesuits wept.

I've not seen much of the last 7 or 8 series of the Simpsons but I was pissing myself at a season 13 episode last night where Homer had his jaw wired shut. "So, the substitute teacher comes in and says her name is Mrs. Doody, and everyone's looking at me like, "Take it, Bart! Run with it!" And it hits me, I've become a clown ... a class clown. And it sickens me." Family Guy would never write something that genius, they'd stop at "Doody".

Can't believe he's still going tbh.

http://www.franksworld.co.uk/

Oh yes!

Frank Sidebottom - Freedownload

It is, but fantastically so.

For every review that says the implication is made, I can show you one that says such a suggestion is nonsense, Sight and Sound for example, this month point out that the bloke who goes to Iraq is played as a barnpot throughout. Anyone fully sympathising with him and going along with his quest for revenge would be odd, he’s creepy in a Travis Bickle kind of way. Although Travis Bickle does a good thing his core beliefs are out of whack. I never suggested you didn’t fully understand. You suggested Stone makes these films with wild unsubstantiated claims and no consideration whatsoever for the result. I refuted this by pointing out how much shit he gets for making the films he wants to and how much he cares. So much so, that he later has to go over every point in the screenplay to explain the point being made, it’s source and why he felt it warranted inclusion. He doesn’t take this stuff lightly. I’ve not read it so I can’t say how successful he is at defending himself, but he’s not being irresponsible and is not reticent about continually discussing his work and it’s interpretations. Your last statement "Result?...", is that a result of Stone's film or is JFK a result of what many Americans already believed? He might perpetuate the myth, but the majority of people believe something rotten went on and as long as the government keep files confidential for the sake of "National Security" it's good that people like Stone remind us that whatever the facts, we have a right to see that information sooner or later.

No need to ring in sick if you're only doing half days anyway

Patrokles, you heard of Larrikin Love? Any good?

Yep, we went through this while you were away. Oh and HF, he does make the link, you didn't deny it before. Except for that post where I did... http://www.toontastic.net/forum/index.php?...st&p=209570 No, you don't deny it, you just say it wasn't explicit, which is a matter of opinion anyway. Implicit or explicit though, he made the link, which given the current political climate in the States is irresponsible imo. He makes no link whatsoever between the attack of 9/11 and the government of Iraq. He shows a character who helped save these blokes and states that after that he served two tours in Iraq which is a fact. Some extremely stupid and ignorant individual could think to themselves "ah, so it was Iraq that crashed planes into the building, I was waiting for the film to tell me who the bad guys were because I was lost without that information" A simpleton might think "yes, I've read something or other about this so called 'war on terror' If George Bush later sent his soldiers to Iraq, then by golly they must've been involved." Someone of average American intelligence might have thought "What led to this man being sent to Iraq? I wonder why the film didn't explore that some more? Perhaps out of respect for the subject matter" Are you saying filmmakers should avoid making the film they want in case it's misconstrued by dafties?

Yep, we went through this while you were away. Oh and HF, he does make the link, you didn't deny it before. Except for that post where I did... http://www.toontastic.net/forum/index.php?...st&p=209570

Nah.

Come on Rentboy, you were commenting on the film, not the fact that you didn't want to see it. At least it's my watery piss though eh? I was commenting on reviews of the film, I never claimed to have seen it. And shut it Alex! Right! So these quoptes aren't yours? "implicit" and "clearly" aren't the words to use in your postion, "alleged" and "apparently" I could live with.

Come on Rentboy, you were commenting on the film, not the fact that you didn't want to see it. At least it's my watery piss though eh?

Why am I not surprised that you can't differentiate between attacking someone's point of view and having a discussion? I've had plenty of decent chats with you about movies, but no-one is seemingly allowed to have a different opinion about you to this movie, I just thought it was ironic given the subject matter, lighten up! I'm lightened, don't worry. Given that the 2 pages or so of 'discussion' I've previously had about it was with people who hadn't seen it, I was just trying to glean more than one word from someone who had and disagreed with me. Alreetlike is the only one allowed to have a different opinion at the moment though

Gol is right, I keep deviating from unwritten rule of a one word review and I apologise... Kandahar - lush Heart of Glass - Strange

He's the best thing in the ladykillers and when you're better than a Coen brothers script your not doing too bad. He should stick to the comedy though. Dragnet was quality too.

Worth it for the plate spinner alone.

I said I thought it was no fun, but I still thought it was very good. What were you expecting? Did you want one of them to be more like Bruce Willis, protect the building and sort the terrorists? Next person who dares criticise is getting called un-American and hauled of the Gitmo! Woe betide anyone discussing a film in the film thread.

I wonder if Spielberg agrees with this because everyone else on the planet does. Should have been a 25 minute short. Shame these big Hollywood directors/studios frown on that sort of thing.