Re: Explanation of women required...

[Jennifer Lowe <jenni@xxxxxxx>]

--- Richard Challis <richard@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
> That's what I mean - you had the system and she
> wants to watch the idiot box
> version instead!
>
> (and they probably badly censored parts of the film
> as well - Any one for a Melonfarmer?!)

I have sat back and watched this thread unravel
without comment so far, but now I feel I have to
step in.
I have no idea why anyone would want to watch a film
off the TV when they own it on DVD - quality, adverts
etc etc etc. And why not use the whole fabby sound and
vision available to them.
<RANT>
BUT this is Clear and Present Danger we are talking
about - a complete abomination of a film! It should
not be viewed at anything better than 10" Black &
White
mono!!!! I wouldnt normally go off on such a rant, but
I had soooo looked forward to the film, because the
book was great, and then what a disappointment!
Killing off main characters that a pivotal to the plot
in further sequels, and what they did to the John
Kelly/Clark character was just pitiful!
</RANT>
*deep breath, count to ten*

Sorry for the rant, it just (even now) makes my blood
boil to think how they abused the story!

> Mindyou - it is a pain trying to receive parcels
> without a better half, so it isn't all bad. (Even if

> they do want to know what it is)

I may be thick, but I dont quite follow what this
means. The only thing I can think of is because a
SWMBO is in the house all day, and not, in actual
fact, working.... which I am pretty sure is not what
you meant....


Jenni

____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie