sundries

[rm]

I had meant to do a full, actual thing on the State of the Union and then my stomach flipped out. I don't think it was gluten. I think I've either become seriously unable to consume dairy or caesin or that one of the new gluten-free products (I've found lots of new stuff suddenly) disagrees with me for some other reason (possibly related to brown rice, which has never been my friend). Anyway, it wiped out the rest of my night, including writing. I think I may need to go to an allergist, despite, thus far, having been more competent than my doctors.

Watched part of The Princess Bride the other night. If you know me at all, yuo know I maintain the movie does nothing for me. It's the sort of silly, broad comedy that has never moved me and I went on a totally lame first date to it, with a boy I wasn't into because one was supposed to eagerly accept such offers and so on and so forth. The whole thing is a trauma of lameness for me.

But anyway, I watched that swordfight that's all, "I have something to tell you, I'm not left handed!" "I'm not left handed either!" and it made me smile, rather perversely. That's all.

Comments

[askeladden.livejournal.com]

silly, broad comedy

It's really not. Try watching the rest of it again; you might change your mind.

[blucrowlaughing.livejournal.com]

Or try the book very good satire, when I read it as a kid I speant a semester looking for the 'original'

[roadnotes.livejournal.com]

The book is better, and if you read the book first, then go to the movie, you can smile at how much it actually managed to maintain.

[askeladden.livejournal.com]

See, I think the book was more slapstick and absurdist than the movie. The movie only has two really broadly silly bits (when the albino gets clunked and the "mutton, lettuce, and tomato sandwich" speech). The book is more about the bizarre anachronisms for the sake of the yuks (e.g., "mutton, lettuce, and tomato sandwich" is replaced with "cough drops"). Not that I mind that sort of book, but I think the movie was more successful in making it a coherent, consistent story within its fairy-tale setting; it didn't wink so much.

[blucrowlaughing.livejournal.com]

what 'dweem wif in a dweem' wasnt funny? that got to be in the silly bits list

[askeladden.livejournal.com]

There are plenty of bits that are damn funny, but the two I mentioned are the only ones that could really be considered slapstick or farce, which is what I figured RM meant when she said "silly, broad comedy". I don't think that phrase characterizes the movie at all, because most of the humor is subtler, better integrated into the whole, and is used in service of the plot rather than for its own sake. A bishop with a speech impediment is hilarious, but he's not incompatible with the milieu (just to get extra wanky here) of the setting, the way "mutton, lettuce, and tomato sandwich" is. I guess, arguably, the "anybody want a peanut?" line probably falls under the same category as "mutton, lettuce, and tomato sandwich", but damnit, it's just classic, so nyah. All I mean is that the movie doesn't break its story's rules anywhere near as much as a farce (e.g., Men in Tights) would, even if it's not 100% straight-faced in the way it mixes romance, adventure, and wit.