| Author |
Message |
|
| marantzo |
 Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:46 am |
 |
|
|
Guest
|
billyweeds wrote: marantzo wrote: I don't not like Aniston because I think she is a bad actress. She's competent as far as I'm concerned. I just watch her and find her unlikable, just like Joan Crawford, ever since I was very young, and she did turn out to be a very unlikable person.
And the inside skinny (always to be taken with a grain of salt) is that Aniston and Angelina are in real life the absolute opposites of their widely accepted images. In other words, "siren" Jolie is in actuality a very appealing, warm, accessible woman, whereas "girl next door" Aniston is sort of a bee-yotch. Gary may be on to something here.
I've got to start reading those gossip rags.  Now Angelina; I have never liked her acting in the least. Maybe there was a performance I liked but I can't think of one. But....post Billy Bob Thornton I've always thought of her as simple but a very nice person. I think Brad Pitt and her are a nice couple. Now watch, they will soon break up and ruin my reputation as a reader of personalities. Not that I have that reputation outside of my own mind. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| carrobin |
| Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:15 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 7795
Location: NYC
|
Another thing about "Robin Hood." You have to see it in the theater. Battle scenes and expansive medieval views will knock you out. I was stunned by the scene showing the Tower of London, with St. Paul's in the gray background; the Tower was the royal domicile then (1199), with its walls right down to the river. Incredible artwork there.
I'll try to see "A Solitary Man" soon but might end up back at "Robin Hood" again. |
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
| lshap |
| Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 7:29 pm |
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 4248
Location: Montreal
|
| Carol - I also liked Robin Hood. It was better than some of the critics led me to believe. |
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
| carrobin |
| Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:53 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 7795
Location: NYC
|
| I'd probably have skipped "Robin Hood" if I hadn't been influenced by a friend--the reviews made it sound like a grim violent movie. As so often happens, I wondered whether the critics saw the same film I did. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 1:00 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
| My problem is I'm just not interested in the character. I used to look up some of the old ballads and I like the way the Errol Flynn version used the legend for a perfect distillation of storybook daring-do. But in general--meh. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 4:17 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Joe Vitus wrote: My problem is I'm just not interested in the character. I used to look up some of the old ballads and I like the way the Errol Flynn version used the legend for a perfect distillation of storybook daring-do. But in general--meh.
Joe--It's derring-do. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| carrobin |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 10:12 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 7795
Location: NYC
|
| This "Robin Hood" is about Robin before the Hood--a soldier in King Richard's army who agrees to return a sword to a dying knight's father and ends up battling King John and making himself an outlaw at the end of the film. I happen to enjoy the Robin Hood legend and its variations (like vampires, Robin Hood can be done many different ways as long as one sticks with a few basics, in his case the Merry Men and Maid Marian), but this is the first film in which he isn't Robin Hood at all until the very end and "the legend begins." Basically it's just a great swords-and-boots adventure/romance. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 1:11 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
billyweeds wrote: Joe Vitus wrote: My problem is I'm just not interested in the character. I used to look up some of the old ballads and I like the way the Errol Flynn version used the legend for a perfect distillation of storybook daring-do. But in general--meh.
Joe--It's derring-do.
You're right, but why isn't it "daring"? |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 3:46 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Joe Vitus wrote: billyweeds wrote: Joe Vitus wrote: My problem is I'm just not interested in the character. I used to look up some of the old ballads and I like the way the Errol Flynn version used the legend for a perfect distillation of storybook daring-do. But in general--meh.
Joe--It's derring-do.
You're right, but why isn't it "daring"?
Interesting question and worth researching, which I will do right now.
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/daringdo.html
After reading this I looked it up in the O.E.D. and it is explained, though not very convincingly. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 4:28 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
| Derring do, used to mean taking part in a gun fight. Derring was just a short form of derringer. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:08 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
marantzo wrote: Derring do, used to mean taking part in a gun fight. Derring was just a short form of derringer.
That's not the story from the OED. According to them, "derring" was another spelling of "daring." But who knows? There are probably a million different excuses. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:13 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
| Thanks both of you. I guess it's one of those things like trying to find the "true" orgin of the word "okay." |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Syd |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 6:16 pm |
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 12940
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
|
billyweeds wrote: marantzo wrote: Derring do, used to mean taking part in a gun fight. Derring was just a short form of derringer.
That's not the story from the OED. According to them, "derring" was another spelling of "daring." But who knows? There are probably a million different excuses.
I've read derring-do was a mondegreen for meaning "daring to do," was picked up by Spenser, and popularized by Sir Walter Scott, who somehow managed to read The Faerie Queen. |
_________________
Rocky Laocoon foretold of Troy's doom, only to find snaky water. They pulled him in and Rocky can't swim. Now Rocky wishes he were an otter! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 6:17 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
| I just made it up, but it's a good explanation anyway. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| bartist |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 6:42 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 27 Apr 2010
Posts: 6965
Location: Black Hills
|
| I sensed that the derring-derringer thing might be concocted. The derringer, BTW, was invented by Rick Derringer's great-grandfather, Horace P. Derringer who was afflicted with tiny hands and felt that every man whose hands were too small for throwing a good punch needed some kind of weapon that was easy to operate. He also was a co-inventor of the throw pillow, which was originally meant to serve as a weapon, and contained lead shot -- making a sort of large "sap" which could be swung with both hands. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
