rf_ucsd

RD is the shiz-nitz. You and I keep agreeing on things and you might not be without a boyfriend for long. At least, you won't be without (how you say?) a "gentleman caller." Mo-West ... Montreal?

Well, Laura, it's true. Between 16 and 25 Ih had three separate relationship each lasting >2 years. They werea ll very good realtionships, but I lost a lot of time that I should have used finding myself. It's not a maturity thing. It's a history thing. Just take it easy.

I went and saw "Lost in Translation" and "Intolerable Cruelty" since the last time I was posting. i'm gong to post my pretentious thoughts on thsoe movies when I get back. I'm leaving shortly to go see "Life Without Me". That will be the fourth movie I've seen today! Oh, it's bee so fun!

We definitely agree: Everybody is going to be invited. I think, right now, we're riding so high that we're not worrying about dates or times or places. We're not worrying about anything.

yeah ... it's only scary the first time you see it, and it's SO MUCH sacrier on a big screen.

** digesting ** Mmmmmmmmm. That was good. Did you like other Tarantino films?

Laura! Not you too! Be 19! You don't need a boyfriend! Boyfriends at thtat age are nothing but baggage!

uh oh. thanks, amanda! btw, amanda: my name is Richard, in case I haven't intodruced myself before. have you seen the blair witch project?

i wish i was a little but taller i wish i was a baller i wish i had a girl that looked good i would call her i wish i had a rabbit in a hat with a bat a 6-4 impala the subject at hand: we all wish we had boy/girlfriends every once in a while. but doesn't it tell you something about these thougths that they come at the point when we are at our most emotionally vulnerable or feeling a little down? any other thought that happened in a state where you are not your normal self, whether you're feeling too up or too down, you'd almost disregard. at the very least you would set aside that thought and reevaluate at another time. this is not to say that i am against relationships. but people who are single bemowning the fact that they don't have a boy/girlfriend is just a waste of time. first, it trivializes the beauty of a realtionship of people who truly match each other. sitting around wanting a "relationship" rather than "the right person" is just silly. i'm willing to wait as long as it takes for a match (which will be a long time, hence the value of "hooking up"). second, and probably more importantly, waiting around for a boy/girlfriend runs the risk of wasting a good portion of your life that can be used to better yourself. if you spent as much time building yourself emotionally as you do tearing yourself apart about being single you'd probably be strong enough and confident enough to attact anybody you'd want. and finally, it breeds unhappiness, and if history tells us anything about our species it is that we're at our best when we're happy and at our worst when we're sad. power to yourself, brotha!

Almost everybody I knwo that saw this loved it. I've seen three movies this week which I liked more: Mysic River, Kill Bill and Lost in Translation. Am I missing something? Seriously.

Re: What's the name of the song chris wrote for Gwyneth Palt I think it's called "Holy Shit! Look What I've God"

agreed. that pickle up the ass maxim truly is something to live by.

time and place for everything, but like anything moderation is key.

np dude. take it easy.

OK you two. Break it up. Just don't respond to each others' posts of a while.

Noni: Do you have a favorite Turin Brakes song?

"Nobody puts [Noni] in the corner."

I just saw runaway jury. Before I type my typically pretentious thoughts, can we just get two things out of the way: 1) I AM prententious, and 2) Rachel Weisz is all that an a bag of donuts. So let's move on. I'll try to type with the prespective viewer and those who have already seen it in mind. I thought the movie was good ... like on a scale of 1 to 9 (I use 1 to 9 so 5 will be an accurate median and I don't have to use two digits; drawback: I need to explain it each time) I would give it a 6. If this movie comes on television I'll probably put it on in the background as I do other things. But the movie had some issues. First, it's a typical Holloywood premise movie. What's a premise movie? If you can sum up most of a movie plot with a derivation of the following formulaic statement then the movie is a "premise movie": "This movie asks the questions 'What happens when [X interesting twist] happens to [Y otherwise mundane situation]'?" Runaway Jury is taking the recent escalation in jury consultants' use and effect and seeing what happens when those people move from being "jury consultants" to "jury managers." The guise this scenario in a trial where the widow of a man murdered in a workplace shooting sues firearms manufacturers for neglegence. That's about as far as I'll go with the plot aside from saying, as in any premise movie, this film tries to cram as many small, interesting facets of this scenario into the film. What you get can be looked at as a collection of tightly wound 2 minute vignettes. This comes as the expense of real character development. It's just part of the formula, and it's probably why a premise move can never be a truly great movie. So there are four major players in this movie: Gene Hackman as the defense's overzealous jury consultant; Dustin Hoffman as the attorney for the plaintiff; Rachel Weisz as Gene Hackman's counterpart in jury manipulation; John Cusack as the jury pulling the strings on the panel. Cusack is good, and a good deal of the action revolves around him. With John Cusack you know what you are not and are going to get. You are not going to get an Oscar caliber performance, but you are going to get a compotent performance that isn't lacking in any aspect. The same is true here. In fact, given a small range within which his performance will fall, this performance is toward the high end of the range. Gene Hackman is good, but he's Gene Hackman. He plays a "veteran of the game" who while "always one step ahead of his competition" is "in for a surprise" as he relies too much on his experience. I don't blame him because the director didn't want to deviate from this mold. Dustin Hoffman, shockingly, takes a more understated role. He is really a complimentary player in the process. There is one particular scene where he has to turn it up a knotch and "go Hoffman" on Weisz, but it doesn't steal or distract. Thinking back on it, it was a real refreshing way to see a Hoffman performance. It would be interesting to know if this was the intended role or if scenes more centered around his character ended up on the cutting room floor. Finally, Weisz. She be hot. I'm sorry: It must be said. Beyond that 70% of her performance involves her and a cell phone without sharing the frame with any other actors. It's hard to say what she contributed or took away fromt he film. She was good, though. Yay eye candy. OK, that's enough. I hope other people post their thoughts (if the movie is there yet).

8675

2663

I saw 2 minutes of an interview with Gwyneth this morning and I have to admit that, the more I think about it, the more convinced I become that ... She was meant for me And I was meant for her

Awesome Laura! You should wear a crown!

Hey Laura: I'll give you $50 to go over and eat an egg roll off that table. $50U.S.!

Santo Domingo was correct Puerto Rico is San Juan How about Estonia?

They released (at least) one album after Natalie Merchant left, though the band has not has the succes she has had in her solo efforts. They released a remake of "More Than This" that was a radio hit.