--- Now I can buy Monica Lewinsky's protestations of ignorance about
how the media works. Hers, however? I think not.

Regarding her silence until now, Polier said, ``Because these
stories were false, I assumed the media would ignore them. It seems
that efforts to peddle these lies continue, so I feel compelled to
address them.''
Let me see if I've got this straight. You have a master's degree in
journalism from Columbia University and you just assumed there was no
need to reply to these allegations; that everyone would just take your word for it because the story is so patently false?
Ummm, honey, either Columbia is really into grade inflating these days,
or you're covering. Even I know you have to get out in front of a
story---it's not like the press wasn't following you around already.
You can't claim that being in Nairobi is like being on the moon where
the media is concerned. Everyone's got an African bureau these days,
and many of them are in Nairobi. Hell, you knew where to find the AP
office when you needed to. Could it be that, AHEM, you used to work for them? Oh, but that doesn't count right? You're just an innocent in the ways of the media---you just thought it was going to go away because everyone who knows you would know just how ridiculous a claim it was..
Has Monica taught you nothing? Don't let that poor girl's sacrifice go
to waste. Learn the lessons she never did. Either she's really dumb,
which I doubt. Or something fishy is going on here. I'm not buying the
"it'll go away" business for a second. I still haven't decided whether
or not I'll care about the whole deal. But it's fascinating to watch
just how the media is covering this thing. --- Yeah, but you still need a pitching staff, George.

Bats are the last thing you need right now, buddy.

--- Went and saw this on Friday night.

And it's good. It's really good. But, once again, it could have been better.

I just spent about a half hour looking through the seventeen
clips they have listed as trailers on the IMDB site---some of which
were actually trailers---but most were clips from the film, with a few
interviews with the cast and the director thrown in for spice, I guess.
And watching them reinforced the brilliance of this film for me. Now,
it's not Casablanca brilliant. Nothing will ever be that good
again, but to handle the overall topic of "age" as classily as they did
speaks volumes. But I can't help but thinking they got the short-shrift
from the editing and marketing departments. If this film is exactly how
the director wanted it to be, well, I guess I don't know much about
storytelling. Hmmm. How to put it without blowing the plot for those
who haven't seen it? Hmmm. Let's just say there was a whole lot of
brilliant buildup regarding Jack Nicholson's Harry and Diane Keaton's
Erica---but the ending was contrived. It left you unsatisfied. It was
too simple and I have this horrible feeling there was a huge scene
between Diane and Keanu that got the boot in the editing process.
Grrrrrr. Now, it's kind of hard to describe but the "age" theme was
completely apparent without them having to hit you over the head with
it. Yes, they did talk about it directly, but it wasn't omnipresent and
heavy. I think the phrase that best describes the writer/director's
handling of the subject would be "a deft touch." But the ending, well,
it brought that damn cast iron frying pan out and pretty much implied
that the main reason Erica wound up with Harry was that it was too
awkward for her to be with a younger man. Yeah, Erica was in love with
Harry, no doubts about it, but why
did she dump Keanu's Julian for him, particularly when he had treated
her pretty poorly? Makes no sense. It's very funny, and who the hell
knew that Jack "I could be your grandfather" Nicholson could
be---reasonably---sexy? Huh. Threw me for a loop. On the whole: well
worth the eight bucks. Prediction: there are doing to be shedloads of
"deleted scenes" on the DVD.

Posted by: Kathy at 02:17 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 721 words, total size 4 kb.