Let’s review:
- After doing “the hover” over the toilet, please be sure to wipe up any stray dribbles when you’re done. (Yeah, thanks.) Oh, and while you’re at it, if your hair (pubic or other) finds its way onto the seat, wipe that out of my way too, wouldya please? Especially the reeeeaaaaaally long hair. It’s almost worse than the pubes. Seriously.
- When I’m having a sugar craving in the late afternoon, I would appreciate it if you would leave me a snack in your desk drawer so that, when I rummage through your desk while you’re out, I find a suitable treat.
- Yes, I do did have grapes in the fridge. No, they did not do the trick.
- I have not missed being in a high school cafeteria. It had been 21 years since I stepped into one, until today. The smell is exactly the same, in case you were wondering. The students, however, are much younger and wear a lot less clothing.
- If you are the cute new guy in one of the other offices in my building, please do feel free to introduce yourself the next time I step over you on my way to the coffee maker.
- When I write back to you after you “wink” at me or show "interest" on one of those little online dating sites, please write something substantial in your response, as I did. “Thanx for writing. You sound cool. Let’s talk.” is not a substantial message. I have nothing more to go on than I did when I got the “wink” in the first place. I am now convinced that you’re just another one of those guys.
- Now I understand why some guy’s online alias is “Squidw@rd.” Thank you, SpongeBob. That’s been bothering me for more than two years.
- My friend Patty e-mailed me to confirm our plans to see Closer this weekend. She wrote: “I do know that it is rated R for sequences of graphic sexual dialogue, nudity/sexuality and language. Bonus.” Exactly my thought. Patty rocks.
Have a great weekend, all. Spambots, don’t even think of dropping anchor around here. There’s tinkle and pubes all over the place, I swear.
i'm DYING to see "closer." it's adapted from a stage play, and was originally set in london. i heard a lot about it when i was in college. super-racy. have fun, shelleybean.
Posted by: luva on December 3, 2004 05:40 PMA lesson in how to "hover" for those who require it.
Posted by: Brian on December 3, 2004 08:43 PMMy ass and I thank you, Brian, for that important public service.
Posted by: shelley on December 4, 2004 07:02 AMShelley, Shelley, Shelley. Surely you know by now that grapes ≠ chocolate. Sugar isn't as transmutable as it might be.
Posted by: house9 on December 4, 2004 09:31 AMSaw Closer this weekend. I'm not sure why people keep saying it's racy. I mean, people TALK about sex a lot, but there ain't a lot of sex going on. Then again, maybe I'm confusing 'sex' with 'sexy.' It's about the former, but is hardly what I'd label the latter. Your mileage may vary.
Oh, and people who pee on the seat need to be bitchslapped senseless.
Posted by: Jen on December 5, 2004 06:46 PMI'd be curious to hear what some men think of the movie. Like Jen, I saw it to be about sex but not at all sexy (and certainly not romantic), although it would interest me to know whether men think it was sexy. I'm not sure if I can pinpoint why I think this, but I'm going to guess that most men will find it to be a much sexier and/or sexual film than most women will. It reminded me a lot, in tone, of the Neil LaBute movies (In the Company of Men, Your Friends and Neighbors) with its painfully honest and even cruel take on what motivates people, and particularly men, in relationships. It was a provocative film, not in the sexy sense of the word but in the way it provokes thought and discussion.
Posted by: shelley on December 5, 2004 11:08 PMI hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I'm pretty sure it's been proven that spambots thrive on pubes and tinkle.
Posted by: Jamie on December 6, 2004 01:19 AMWho needs romance?
Also, I will leave snacks for you on my desk, but they will be covered in pubes.
Posted by: Polerand on December 6, 2004 06:05 PMStrange that you should mention Your Friends and Neighbors; that was exactly the movie that I thought of after seeing Closer.
A friend & I went to see Closer this weekend. Leaving it, I was taken back to the day (1998?) that I saw Your Friends and Neighbors. Both movies left me feeling utterly drained, almost hollow.
I remember just sitting and feeling so alone (in 1998, after seeing YF&N), trying to wrap my brain around why it had elicted such a visceral response. (I suspect that it was some of what follows, but more the very ugly an prosaic lives led by the characters.) I had no sympathy for any of the characters (in either movie), but I had to sit through the entirety (like the fabled train-wreck).
The scene transitions in Closer threw me at first, heightening the sense of alienation. Taken out of the context of their daily lives (caused by such abrupt transitions), it was impossible to discern what any of their motivations were. It felt like I was witnessing the worst events of some acquaintances' love lives.
Natalie Portman's character sums it up in a scene at the gallery. When asked (by Clive Owen) what she thinks of her portrait (one of her in tears, enlarged to a mural and gorgeous), she replies that it's all fake, that audience will find it all beautiful, but it's not: it's just sad.
Posted by: Robyn on December 7, 2004 11:01 PMOh, also: while the none of the characters were well-developed, the females were especially flat. Jude Law was such a prick, but he could have been like anybody one knows; it's hard to say with such disjointed vignettes to go on.
Posted by: Robyn on December 7, 2004 11:05 PM