i got fat for my brother's wedding today.
you know, fat, as in the past tense of fit.
sit : sat :: fit : fat
well, it should be the past tense for fit, then the word would have a much less negative connotation.
but alas, fat is not the past tense of fit, it's more the future tense! oh snap, zing! ahahaha.
.....man, i'm such a literary dork sometimes. i do have a degree in writing, so i guess it's not completely unexpected.
in other news, i watched atonement last night.
i wasn't that impressed.
*spoiler alert*
i think my favorite part was that they made you believe he came back and that they lived happily ever after, then the old lady was like, nope, that part was bullshit, he actually died before he ever got back to england. haha. take that unexplained and unrealistically instantaneous movie love!
i suppose that's rather macabre of me, but first, all i ask for is a realistic romantic movie, is that too much to ask? does one exist? if anyone knows, please tell me! (i nominate love actually, high fidelity, before sunrise/sunset, and eternal sunshine, what ya think?) but second i don't really think it's too macabre, just realistic. i've always enjoyed a good tragedy rather than a happy ending. in all my creative endeavors, whether that be a song, a painting, a story, whatever, i have yet to find a way to make something happy without it being ridiculously cheesy. being playful and goofy is one thing, but artistically legit while happy and positive and maintaining creative ingenuity, i find it difficult to be creative in that way. maybe it's just me.
i digress, what i was saying, i wasn't impressed with atonement, especially since it was nominated for 7 academy awards. i don't recall it winning any of them though, ha. maybe an unimpressive one like costume design or something like that. it reminded me of the english patient in that way. in the fact that the academy throws all these accolades on some boring yawn of a movie claiming some snobby reasons that normal movie watches go along with just to pretend we know what the hell they're talking about. at least it didn't win best picture. no country for old men was much more deserving of that title.
*spoiler alert*
but that movie bugged the hell out of me that they killed off Llewelyn, Joss Brilon's character, in the middle of it. maybe i was taught old fashioned story telling ways or something, but the whole movie i was wondering who the protagonist, the main character, was. from the title i realized who they intended it to be about, but i thought the execution of the plot and story telling devices was poor. Tommy Lee Jones had the voice over narration at the beginning, but we were with Brilon for the first 10 or 20 minutes or so, and both brilon and javier bardem (who was awesome and very deserving of best supporting actor he got for it) had more major parts than jones. i realize that they intended it to be a story revolving around jones' character, but it didn't. the plot and all the action revolved around brilon and bardem. brilon found some money, bardem and a host of others tried to track him down and get it back from him. that's the movie, that's the plot in a nutshell. tommy lee jones was the old guy trying to catch up with brilon to warn, help, and save him. who cares? that's a boring protagonist. so for me that made the end very anticlimactic, cuz tommy lee didn't get enough screen time, so in the end i didn't give a shit about him and his retirement. to keep it with tommy lee as the protagonist it would have been a much more boring and psychological movie between jones and the changing of times, as evidenced in brilon and bardem which would have been got much less screen time. so i think the movie should have switched focus and forgot about jones and his retirement and had it be a true suspense, thriller, about the money and the chase. but what do i know, it won best picture. perhaps i'm out voted. i did think all the actors did amazing. i loved woody harrelson's character, haha. very well acted and a fun movie.
wow, i didn't intend for that to turn into movie critique hour by yours truly, but then again i don't even know the point of anything i said in this post, so i'm gonna shut up now and go get drunk off 50 cent lone stars! the best part about mondays! for those outside texas that may not know the joys of lonestar, the best cheap beer known to man, i am sad for you. perhaps i will drink a miller in your honor tonight. ha. laters!
you know, fat, as in the past tense of fit.
sit : sat :: fit : fat
well, it should be the past tense for fit, then the word would have a much less negative connotation.
but alas, fat is not the past tense of fit, it's more the future tense! oh snap, zing! ahahaha.
.....man, i'm such a literary dork sometimes. i do have a degree in writing, so i guess it's not completely unexpected.
in other news, i watched atonement last night.
i wasn't that impressed.
*spoiler alert*
i think my favorite part was that they made you believe he came back and that they lived happily ever after, then the old lady was like, nope, that part was bullshit, he actually died before he ever got back to england. haha. take that unexplained and unrealistically instantaneous movie love!
i suppose that's rather macabre of me, but first, all i ask for is a realistic romantic movie, is that too much to ask? does one exist? if anyone knows, please tell me! (i nominate love actually, high fidelity, before sunrise/sunset, and eternal sunshine, what ya think?) but second i don't really think it's too macabre, just realistic. i've always enjoyed a good tragedy rather than a happy ending. in all my creative endeavors, whether that be a song, a painting, a story, whatever, i have yet to find a way to make something happy without it being ridiculously cheesy. being playful and goofy is one thing, but artistically legit while happy and positive and maintaining creative ingenuity, i find it difficult to be creative in that way. maybe it's just me.
i digress, what i was saying, i wasn't impressed with atonement, especially since it was nominated for 7 academy awards. i don't recall it winning any of them though, ha. maybe an unimpressive one like costume design or something like that. it reminded me of the english patient in that way. in the fact that the academy throws all these accolades on some boring yawn of a movie claiming some snobby reasons that normal movie watches go along with just to pretend we know what the hell they're talking about. at least it didn't win best picture. no country for old men was much more deserving of that title.
*spoiler alert*
but that movie bugged the hell out of me that they killed off Llewelyn, Joss Brilon's character, in the middle of it. maybe i was taught old fashioned story telling ways or something, but the whole movie i was wondering who the protagonist, the main character, was. from the title i realized who they intended it to be about, but i thought the execution of the plot and story telling devices was poor. Tommy Lee Jones had the voice over narration at the beginning, but we were with Brilon for the first 10 or 20 minutes or so, and both brilon and javier bardem (who was awesome and very deserving of best supporting actor he got for it) had more major parts than jones. i realize that they intended it to be a story revolving around jones' character, but it didn't. the plot and all the action revolved around brilon and bardem. brilon found some money, bardem and a host of others tried to track him down and get it back from him. that's the movie, that's the plot in a nutshell. tommy lee jones was the old guy trying to catch up with brilon to warn, help, and save him. who cares? that's a boring protagonist. so for me that made the end very anticlimactic, cuz tommy lee didn't get enough screen time, so in the end i didn't give a shit about him and his retirement. to keep it with tommy lee as the protagonist it would have been a much more boring and psychological movie between jones and the changing of times, as evidenced in brilon and bardem which would have been got much less screen time. so i think the movie should have switched focus and forgot about jones and his retirement and had it be a true suspense, thriller, about the money and the chase. but what do i know, it won best picture. perhaps i'm out voted. i did think all the actors did amazing. i loved woody harrelson's character, haha. very well acted and a fun movie.
wow, i didn't intend for that to turn into movie critique hour by yours truly, but then again i don't even know the point of anything i said in this post, so i'm gonna shut up now and go get drunk off 50 cent lone stars! the best part about mondays! for those outside texas that may not know the joys of lonestar, the best cheap beer known to man, i am sad for you. perhaps i will drink a miller in your honor tonight. ha. laters!
VIEW 6 of 6 COMMENTS
squee:
Thanks for the add hun! 
andren:
GRACIAS!