UKRM Film Club

Mean Girls: Was expecting an above-average teen-flick, actually got an
extended SNL routine wrapped up in an above-average teen-flick. Well
worth
a watch.

Stepford Wives (the remake): Not as good as I was hoping it'd be, but a
passable way to spend a couple of hours. I think the mrs preferred it to
Mean Girls. A reasonably good twist (not the main one) at the end which
I'd all but worked out by the time it happened.

Human Traffic Remixed: Ahhh, nostalgia!

Shameless Desire: Good five-way girl-on-girl scene. Far better than
Jenna Loves Kobe.

Next up: The Terminal, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, and I Robot,
just as soon as I get some more blank CDs.

 

Ah, that reminds me of another film I'm looking forward to.
The Life Aquatic. Don't think it's got Stiller in, but Tenebaums
did and that was almost as good as Rushmore.

 

oh great, now I've got "Tarzan boy" stuck in my head - thanks.

 

I was strangely disappointed by the Tenenbaums thing.

 

I thought it was shite.

 

Fucking hell Des, you're just not trying very hard today. You'll be saying
that we go on and on about the weather next.

 

that's what I meant - I expected to really like it, and strangely,
despite the promise of the cast, it was shite, and therefore I was
disappointed.

 

Amusing coincidence though, isn't it? Having said that, what was your point
about the "****, this title-less URL shit is fun "

 

I assumed he was just projecting his own inadequacies onto the rest of his
compatriots.

 

I thought he was Scottish?

 

hilarious.

 

Why? Oh! I see! You were lying again!

 

I think his persecution complex knows no borders.

 

Hmm. It was more odd than shite, and that's odd in a way I liked,
much as I liked Rushmore. I've not seen Bottle Rocket yet (it was
meant to be on a few months ago and I taped it, but they changed
the schedules so all I got was 2 hours of **** knows what instead)

Being part of a quasi-series, part of the enjoyment comes from
seeing the same people pop up again in different roles, I guess
in the same way as the Kevin Smith films. It's an auteur thing.

 

With what? How can it possibly be better or even easier to post an
unintelligible URL than simply write the name of the film?

 

I didn't mean to. I had planned to produce a wicked dissection of the
film, pointing out all the manifold weaknesses. Of course, I also
planned to include the title. However, I was so incensed with fury as
I began to post that I rushed to hit send, to avoid giving myself a
hernia.

Apologies.

 

I quite understand. You can finish the critique later, when you've calmed
down.

Think nothing of it.

 

"Big Fish." Jolly good if you like quirky films. Has the usual Tim Burton
unsual look about it.

 

My god Rosencrantz and Guildenstern is a tedious pile of shite.
Great idea, crap delivery. Probably great in 1967 though.

 

It's true that Stoppard wrote some potboilers but R&G isn't one of them.
(Could you keep your mind on the job if you were living
with Felicity Kendal?)