Misson

Gene Kelly! (He's great.) Brigadoon. One of my sister's favorite movies. And, just to close the loop, I think the errant quote is from Unforgiven unless I've got my Eastwood westerns mixed up. (Possibly I've got my Westwood easterns mixed up as well.) Hum. A quote. I have one in mind, but I've got to make sure I've got it right. Hah! Can't find it on-line! Back to the source material when I get a chance. (You guys are in for some fun!) Slight pause whilst I adjust my accoutrements. (Means I'll post my quote tomorrow. Sorry for the delay.)

BTW, had a fabulous time SF. Much better than the first time. It is a city much worth walking about and observing. Spent the fore with Jack and Jill ( Sorry...had to...) the mid going on walkabout - even found a pirate shoppe of sorts - and the aft with Autodesk. I met the most fabulous woman this morn' at breakfast. She was in town to fulfill her duty as a board member of the American Funds. But her history included many years of work at a Think Tank. I believe in my heart of hearts I would love to be on the staff of a TT. Like me, she started out as a starry-eyed idealistic communist (the pure sort) and wound up through thought and consideration as a more pragmatic, but still (somewhat) open-minded libertarian (note small "l"). I suspect we would've spent hours and dinners together speaking on great and many things had she not to go to work (as a board member - she lived in VT and had commuted for the semi-annual whatsit) and I not to catch my flight. I have a whole new view of SF. I should very much like to visit Jill & Co. again and ride aboard that beautifully restored tall ship they mentioned in passing. Yep, good times.

Ah, but the green argument is, at it's core, essentially selfish. We must preserve the planet...for us. Some folks paint this absurdist picture of an ideal planet where we have no impact and how the earth "would be" as it would be if we weren't here. Do go on with your little self... I mean, who writes this stuff? The earth has seen the most violent upheavals and landscape adjustments that you can probably imagine. Take the amount of oxygen in the environment. Oxygen is a corrosive, poisonous element to many things. Look at it's effect on metals. Yet we need it to live, so we are in favor of it (inhale) and biased against CO2 (exhale). We are basically preserving a poisonous environment to many species which are now dead and gone as a result of the oxygen in the atmos. (See the documentary War of the Worlds (the good one...pre-Cruise) for proof.) I say that's pretty damned selfish of us. ( Perception...you know I love it.)

Connery's chest hair is one of the satiric targets of Myers' Austin Powers. "You have to remember, in Britain, in the '60s, you could be a sex symbol and have bad teeth."

I suggest you keep on missing it... Connery is dependable as always, but the script...and the costumes... "Oh my" sums it up nicely.

They are still in my phone. I tried sending it to my brother in law so I could get them into jpg format and post them and it failed utterly. *Sigh* I have to figure out how to do this. My phone is holding my pictures for ransom.

Hear, hear! (Connery is the consummate actor - whatever movie he appears in, you can almost assuredly depend on him. (Although Zardoz...well, it takes a certain fortitude on behalf of the viewer to view.))

Despite my conviction that the majority of the GW publicity is little more than a political ploy, I engage in environmental practices as I've detailed elsewhere on the board. As Jill mentioned, we should do it if only to preserve the environment for ourselves. (It's really quite selfish when you look at it - the planet will survive either way.) As for fluorescent bulbs...bah. I've tried 'em in several fixtures and the things give off less light. I couldn't read without my cheaters when I put them in my bedroom and I love to read at night, so I gave most of them the heave ho and am currently using a 200 watt fluorescent. (Still can't read the footnotes when I get too far away from the light. This may be a failing of mine rather than the bulb. ) I have a few scattered about where the level of lighting doesn't matter to me as much, but for the most part, I'm not convinced. As I have mentioned, I'm also scouting solar energy. It's still too expensive, but eventually it will become pragmatic. I guess that's what it really comes down to for me - is each practice also pragmatic as well as being green? Being green for green's sake just don't send me.

It came from Los Angeles?

You're upset with a fictional character because he's too capricious...and thus realistic?

Perhaps what we think of or call "true love" is just a rounding out of our own lacking personality traits? Dunno....I married someone nearly my opposite and found myself on that fool's errand of trying to make them "more like me." So now it seems (purely logically speaking) that someone "more like me" might be a better choice. Or am I just trading one set of problems in for another? (Forgive me, I've had a snootful and it is in these rare occasions that what I perceive as emotions tend to bustle to the fore. Rare...rare... Perhaps I'll edit this on the morrow... ) "Love is an emotional thing, and whatever is emotional is opposed to that true cold reason which I place above all things. I should never marry myself, lest I bias my judgment." -Sherlock Holmes

The modern notion of "love" is mostly mental. I think people "fall out of love" when they change what they focus upon. We are all combinations of traits, some perceived as good and some not to our partner (said perceptions frequently being different than other people's perceptions of our traits...or even our own.) When you change your focus from the things you liked to the things you don't, you "fall out of love." In fact, the things I've seen (and experienced) indicate to me that it's often just a perceptive shift, often on the part of one of the two partners. This reminded me of a concept put forth when I was reading on the topic of relationships about what attracts us to another person. The author suggested that it is often how another person complements our traits that makes them initially appealing. Strangely enough, when the relationship becomes more secure and committed, those same traits often irritate us. So we try to mold our partner to make them "more like us." If we succeed at modifying their behavior, we essentially remove all the traits that attracted us in the first place. Thus, our perception of them shifts and we find we have "fallen out of love." I thought it was an interesting idea, if not always true from my observations.

Brazil? (No, wait, that's just what the movie is about, not a line from it...)

Right now mine's a collection of classical music (primarily containing Bizet, Gershwin and Strauss - I just stumbled across Gershwin's Cuban Overture. It's wonderful.) I am also lately enamored of selections from the Buddha Bar albums, which are a sort of world music. The movie music playlists (usually my staple musical diet) are on the outs for some reason.

Indeed. (I need a smilie that has one raised eyebrow. The kind of smilie that would lift its pinkie finger when drinking tea.) Any post that says hello and how great the forum is and so forth appears to be spam. I don't see what their purpose is, but these are people with name structures like all the other spammers and the happy emoticon in the title. They never return. As I was weeding out (yet another) Paris Hilton post, I happened to notice that one of the reams of sentences that they put in there as search terms was, "Paris hilton grage sex tape." I thought maybe someone had invented a new style or word association or some such but...nope. What could they have meant? Grape? The mind boggles.

I was going to guess Pollyanna, but that's a good guess too.

Whoa! Another ancient post that someone resurrected rather than posting to the currently running post! (We ought to combine these. Rumba, I can send the "What are your reading?" post from Beyond here if you want to do so.)

Have you seen the Sharpe's movies? Sean Bean does a really good job in those.

I was watching this again last night. It's one of those rare movies that makes me wish I was there. Most movies are watchable, but a few make you wish life was like the movie. Goldfinger is another one.

I just deleted one where the first line was, "Will suffice to torture itself searches of the true decision. It is found!" I suspect that when you speak these words in the light of the full moon and draw the magic quadragraph in the pure sand, all will be revealed.

A-hah! So that's why barnes & noble looked like a halloween bash. I actually ordered it from Amazon. Had I known there was going to be a Halloween-style bash...I probably still would have ordered it from Amazon. (Somehow my primary Haunted House character, Mute, the mailman, doesn't seem to fit HP. Stupid owls...) I am just finishing Never Check E-Mail In the Morning by Julie Morgenstern (which is excellent for the topic) and preparing to start The Case of the Missing Neutrinos: And Other Curious Phenomena of the Universe by John Gribbin

Funny is funny. (Even if it tasks me awhile to attune myself.)

Yes, I think it was the one about Paris Hilton doing something unspeakable with three turnips and a garter snake.

I need one of Rumba's zany emoticons for that one!

You are the third person whose opinion I trust on these sorts of things to say that. I'm off to put it in the rental queue! Exactly. I didn't notice this one until it was too late to see it in the theatres.