Imitation Feline

[sorry] It's been a little while.

2004-03-15T20:05:00.000Z

Wow, it has been quite a while since I've had the time to write anything in this blog for which I'm sorry. Currently I'm directing a short film, making a new webcomic and quite possibly dating again (don't you hate it when you're not even sure if you are or not?). Which is why I haven't had the time to do almost anything.

The short film is an animated comedy called "Deadline", I'm filming it from the 25th to 27th of march and we're currently hard at work in preproduction.

The webcomic will be caled "The more things change" and will be on the keenspace webcomic service. It's already been confirmed but I'll need to wait over a week for the account to be finalised. When it is though the comic will be at http://thingschange.keenspace.com/.

[Internet] - Something Positive

2004-03-12T04:05:00.000Z

I love webcomics, I've been haunting the sluggy freelance site for over a year but only being able to read one comic each day leaves me waiting around anxiously for the next one. So finding a fantastic webcomic with several years of archives for me to read all in one lump is like christmas come early.

www.somethingpositive.net is one of the best webcomics I've ever read. The target audience of this blog will probably appreciate the (slightly twisted) humour it has in spades.

[Software review] - Lord of the rings: Return of the king.

2004-03-09T10:11:00.000Z

I've been playing this game for most of the afternoon and found it fairly addictive.

The interface makes use of the mouse and keyboard together to control the character. I don't like mouse and keyboard games as a general rule but LOTR makes it work reasonably well. The default keys though are "W" for up, "A" for left, "S" for down and the tab, shift and control keys for some special functions. It works okay but if your fingers slip off the keys you can expect to take some serious damage in the time it takes to find them again. The game feels like it's designed to be played on a console and would probably be easier to play on an X-box or PS2 controller.

There are several storylines to the game, as in the movies and books. You can choose which storylines to follow and what order to play them in as well as being able to complete each level with each character. The characters advance both individually and as a group, you can spend your experience on either that one character or for a higher cost purchase bonuses for the entire fellowship. All of this makes the game fairly large. From my experiences this afternoon I'd guess it would take about two weeks to play out the entire game.

When it comes to combat this game is mostly button-mashing, a combination between Diablo II's click as fast as you can and Mortal Kombat's combo attacks. I hope you enjoy the combat system because that's virtually all there is to the game, the levels are a simple path system where you start at A and follow a single curvy line to B. There is no decision making or heavy thought to playing this.

Will you like LOTR: Return of the king? Ask yourself this, do you love the movies? If so then you will probably like the game. (though you, like me, may wonder where all the combat that wasn't in the movies came from) Otherwise you'll probably find the frequent cut-scenes from the movie (that you can't skip) frustrating and the rewards you get for completing quests (interviews with the cast) uninteresting. Just like the Matrix game, this is 100% movie tie-in.

As a fan of the movies I'm enjoying playing the game and it will probably keep me interested until I finish it, which makes it a good and satisfying game by my standards. It is not however a great innovation that I could play for the next year or obsess over. I give it 3.5 stars and if you don't like the movies it's probably a 2 star game at best.

[Test] - What famous world leader am I?

2004-03-06T13:36:00.000Z

I found this test on God's ex-boyfriend. A great blog which I've been spending a lot of my time visiting lately.

What Famous Leader Are You?.

[Internet] - Microsoft, a comedy of error messages.

2004-03-05T19:22:00.000Z

Even though you may not want to work in a microsoft environment, sometimes circumstances such as your career may force you to. People handle this stress in different ways, one computer programmer collects screenshots of error messages. He even attempts to deliberately provoke rare and unusual ones just to complete his collection.

You can see these screenshots in his gallery. The fact that websites like this exist has disturbing implications to the quality of microsoft's products.

[New software] - Mozilla Firefox

2004-03-05T16:36:00.000Z

It is my eventual goal to remove all microsoft products from my life for various complicated reasons, partly for the same reasons someone else has listed at "What's so bad about microsoft". I was already using netscape 7 but while netscape is preferable to microsoft it is none the less a corporation based on owning code which grates against my political beliefs. (today is apparently my rant about corporations day).

Then while looking at open source browsers I saw a really cute logo with a picture of a fox on it, I immediately went to investigate (what did you expect from someone represented on the internet by a stuffed animal?). I clicked on a button a little like this:

Now after a 6mb download, I'm running Mozilla Firefox. The interface seems like the bastard lovechild of netscape 7, internet explorer and opera with a few extra features all joined together very well. What's more it appears to be fully customizable with skins and optional settings. I haven't touched the documentation yet (I don't believe in manuals) and I haven't had any trouble figuring out how to operate it. The interface is entirely intuitive to anyone familiar with modern browsers.

I've only been using it for about five minutes and though I might write a more detailed review when I'm more intimately familiar with the browser for now I think I can safely recommend having a look at Firefox.

[Rant] What happened to public services?

2004-03-05T15:50:00.000Z

Children in many American schools are forced to watch around 8 minutes of advertising a day thanks to channel one. Then if they go to use the school computers they are forced to watch the ZapMe ads (though ZapMe is now phasing out its program due to community action) in exchange for having the computers. The worst example I didn't even believe when I first heard about it. Apparently in some cities the police cars have corporate advertising on it.

Aside from advertising, what common theme runs through all these things. They are public services, things which we should expect the government to provide for the people. However the government is continually shutting down public funding. So corporations end up providing these things instead and in exchange we have their advertising forced upon us.

What about those things that microsoft won't exchange for yet another place to put their logo? With the decline of public healthcare I can't go to hospital and get a motorolla cast for a broken arm (hmmm, this is actually a pretty good idea though, maybe I should patent it before some PR company thinks of it).

Why can't we afford public services anymore?

Firstly corporations. These large companies and their owners get out of paying most (if not all) of their taxes, then many of them receive government subsidies. Not only are they not contributing to the public wealth but they are actively draining it. And people actually expect us to be grateful that corporations are providing through advertising services that should be public?

Secondly privitisation of public assets. When a government sells a profitable national asset it exchanges its future income for a brief influx of money. The government that sold it can then spend this money to make itself popular in the short term.

Thirdly, governmental spending on ridiculous things. Like, for example, invading Iraq. America's economy absolutely destroyed so that Bush's corporate friends can make a few billion.

These problems are not hard to fix but still they continue while the solution lies in plain site. Do you know why they're not fixed. Don't blame the government because it's your fault. In order to compete in an election a party needs voters, which it gets by advertising itself, which costs money. If the community were active in politics and actually gave a damn it just might be possible for a party which hasn't sold its soul to a corporation to get into government. That's not going to happen though until you make it happen.

I'm doing what I can, but without a widespread community of politically active voters no democratic country will survive the growth of corporate globalisation. If you don't like how things are then you have to fix it. If the entire population gave a damn we could fix about half of these problems in the next half hour, instead they are getting worse.

The point of democracy is that the running of the country is up to you. Do something.

[Debate] Debating an ex atheist.

2004-03-03T09:53:00.000Z

The site www.ex-atheist.com is a fairly well known evangelical christian site run by (as you may have guessed from the name) an ex atheist. Since this is practically the first time I've seen a christian site that lists reasons and discusses things logically I thought the author would make a good debate partner.

I've emailed the site's owner (A.S.A. Jones) and along with a bit of a chat emailed him (or is it her?) a list of counter-arguments to those on his page. You can read the counter-arguments now and in a few days Jones has promised to publish a response on his page. When he does I'll add a link to it here.

Subject = "Re: Some comments about ex-atheist"

I'll answer this on my site, since you posted it publicly. It may take a few days before I get around to it. If more than a week goes by, please e-mail me again; sometimes challenges get lost in the piles of mail and I forget about them.

In His Grace,
A.S.A. Jones

I don't know about you, but I'm looking forward to seeing what he writes.

[Internet] - Wow, a genuine rabid feminist.

2004-03-02T10:30:00.000Z

From a site named "The Goddess" I suppose I shouldn't be surprised to find an article written by a genuine rabid feminist. Still, this is the kind of brainwash feminist fluff that makes me wonder whether I should laugh or back away slowly avoiding eye contact. I'm emailing a reply to her and thought I'd publish the article and reply on here. Her article is in a fetching shade of purple with my commentary interspersed in my usual black font.

we have brains:Warrior Womyn

OK, I'm taking on two topics here - Fairy Tales and Womyn Warriors.

First, yes, I'll watch some of the shows listed, even though I'll be biting my lip the whole time because of historical inaccuracies. For example, Jean D'arc was called the Maid of Orlean for a reason - Maid is the title of Priestess, just as The HPs in modern covens is still sometimes called the "Maid Marion".( Yep, Robin and the Merry Men were a coven.) She WAS a witch and she WAS NOT BURNED. The woman who was executed as Jean D'arc was veiled so no one could see her face. The real Jean lived to a ripe old age. None of the history books tell you that that was one of the last great Pagan/Christian wars. They tell you she was a little girl who heard voices and had delusions of grandeur.

Morgaine... What are you doing? You just fell victim to the patriachy's linguistic domination of our culture by using the word woman. You were doing so well at the beginning of the conversation sticking to calling them wymen. Oh, just so you know, wymen is not pronounced women. The E lengthens the preceding Y just like it does in Byte (or hymen I suppose), making wymen pronounced "Why men". Perhaps a clever pun, but I doubt it's an intentional one.

Linguistics aside, what source are you drawing your versions of history from? The idea of France being a pagan country in the 15th century is kind of cool and I'd like to learn more about that. Plus if you have some method of determining history more accurate than using sources from the time period I'm sure the archaeological community would be fascinated to hear about it.

We have to remember that the books have been written by men. Whenever the oppressor writes history- and they always do- it denigrates the oppressed. If you haven't read the works of Elizabeth Gould Davis, Barbara G. Walker, Merlin Stone, and a handful of other feminist writers, you have no idea of the depths the Patriarchy dove to in trying to hide our Herstory.

Interestingly enough the word history (from the greek historia for record) predates the use of the word his as a gender based possessive determinator (from old english). Consider those authors on my reading list, I'll get back to you on that one.

On the subject of Fairy Tales, The Brothers Grimm never intended their work for children. They were doing a study on the development of language. By following the stories through different cultures, they were able to catalogue the evolution of language as it moved throughout Europe and Asia. By the way, that's "Fairy" as in Faery as in the Picts and Celts which is another word for Wise/Wicce/Witch.

Really, I thought it was the generic word for a supernatural being rather similar to the norse idea of Dwarves or Elves.

Cinderella originated in Asia and is actually about foot binding. In the European versions, the ugly step sisters cut off their toes and heels to fit the shoe. Other Grimm classics include incest, cannibalism, and various forms of mutilation. They are not intended for kids, and they are not good for kids.

Evil QUEEN, not king? Wicked Step-Mother, not Father. The hand of the patriarchy is seen throughout our culture's mythology. The Dragon is turned from an ancient symbol of Woman's power to a demon from which she must be saved by a valiant knight or savior. Slaying a Dragon is symbolic of slaying the Goddess. God tells you in his first commandment that he's jealous.

Dragons are a female symbol? A bull horned giant snake doesn't sound the least bit phalic or masculine to you? As for the whole jealous God bit you're right, isn't christianity a silly religion?

Disney has not improved on these tales. They still have the same horrid misogynist symbolism, only it's in a pretty package so it seems innocuous. It isn't. It's poison in the minds of our children. The girl with the smallest feet gets the prince. Your life is in danger if you are prettier than your Step-Mother, or she'll work you too hard and make you serve her own daughters as a slave. Don't miss the Herd ethic either - that if you are patient and good in the face of oppression, you'll be rewarded in the end by the Prince. (Sounds like...Heaven?) Even Pocahantas was Disneyfied - Show me a Native American chick with that Bay Watch body and I'll show you a white chick who takes after her Cherokee grandmother. I'm sure there are exceptions, but I've never met one. Native women aren't built that way, and we don't have European features.

I'm not familiar with the Brother Grimm tale, but in the modern version didn't Cinderella rebel, run away and consort with supernatural forces in order to get her way and reward? Hardly being patient and good in the face of oppression. Also isn't Cinderella the heroine of the tale, assisted by her fairy godmother. In fact every character in the story except for prince charming is female and this guy is so whipped that he goes from house to house to find the particular girl he saw at the ball. Hardly mysoginistic.

You think pocahontas had a baywatch body, be grateful you haven't seen "The road to El Dorado", the woman in that is ridiculous.

Disney will stay on my shit-list until they create some positive female role models. In the mean time, my little cousin gets Tomb Raider toys for Yuletide. Some neighborhood boys who were playing soccer recently told her she could be their Cheerleader. Her reply? "I'm not a Cheerleader, I'm a GOALIE!." My girl kicks ass, on and off the field.

Disney doesn't have many positive female role models. Still I've always thought Mary Poppins was pretty cool, though I suppose that you'd say her looking after the children is a patriachal depiction of gender roles. Tomb raider is fantastic, I'm sure your cousin will love the toys.

That reminds me though, some neighborhood boys who were playing soccer recently told my brother he could be their Goalie. His reply? "I'm not a Goalie, I'm a cheerleader". The story is fake, but on a serious note who do you think would receive the worst response from deviating from assigned sexual roles in today's society?

So do I. Drop a house on MY sister, and I'll get you and your little dog, too. Frankly, I don't think that's a bad thing, nor is my olive skin. Steal her ruby shoes- my inheritance, as it were- and we'll have a fight on our hands. It's all a matter of perspective and until now, it's been skewed deliberately against us. I've said it before and I'll say it again - Equality, Hell! After centuries of oppression and slavery that goes on today in most of the world, after 200+ years of Gender Apartheid in America, I don't want equality, I want JUSTICE.

Gender Apartheid? Well I suppose men and women do have different public bathrooms. Why don't you go share your comparison between Apartheid in South Africa and American female history with Nelson Mandela? I think he could use a laugh after all the suffering he's endured in his lifetime from discrimination. And justice is a wonderful word isn't it? Often used as respectable clothing for the word revenge.

-----

Morgaine is a fairly classic example of the feminist conspiracy theorist who imagines shadowy men sitting in smokefilled boardrooms deciding to rewrite history and oppress women. She sees all the differences between men and women in today's society but views any advantages men have as oppression and any female advantages as signs of the natural feminine superiority. She's blind to any gender discrimination men receive but absolutely incensed about what she believes is discrimination against females.

As she says she doesn't want equality or to take a clear look at the world. She wants "justice", to get what she feels she deserves. In fact she's willing to justify her desires or anger based on oppression in the past or in other countries, even to invent (or rather claim the inventions of certain popular feminists) history to justify even more "justice".

The world needs clear headed people to examine it and see how they can make it a better place, for men and women alike. It doesn't need more people rushing off angrily looking to claim what's theirs, but perhaps I shouldn't expect too much from her, her view is pushed onto her by our modern female centered society.

[Review, sort of] - Two weeks notice

2004-03-02T09:36:00.000Z

I'd hoped to review a good movie next, to establish that there are some movies I like. My review of love actually was rather negative and it would have been nice to alternate away from that. Unfortunately as chance would have it, the next film I saw was "Two weeks notice" another Hugh Grant romantic comedy. I stopped watching this film about halfway through and only kept myself watching it even that long with the thought of a review I could write about it.

Firstly, the music was terrible, both incidentals and sound tracks. The rare occassion that there was an actually good song it wouldn't fit in with the visual action. Mixing the quiz show "thinking music" into the incidentals when Hugh Grant asks Sandra Bullock to name a man she's loved was clever but didn't work.

The cinematography was reasonable but nothing to write home about. The direction was pretty poor. When it came to acting, Hugh Grant can act but didn't. Sandra Bullock can't act, didn't act and they managed to make her look fairly ugly for this film, removing her one useful trait.

And finally the script... I can not believe that this script got used for a feature film, it has so many major problems. Firstly the timeline for this movie is absolutely wrong, use of a blackscreen "2 months later" is the worst and least imaginative way of demonstrating the passage of time... however if you have to do it, do it once or if you have to do it multiple times don't make them radically different units.

After sitting through "six months later", "two weeks later", "one month later", "four months later" and "another six months later" I was struggling to add up just how much time had passed in the last two minutes of the movie. They should have written it to focus around the central most important time and forgot about the time passing... however if they had to show her being hired and skip to a year later then they should do it in one jump.

There were so many other problems with the script, but that one just started the parade of misery. The "looking for romance amongst people of her political beliefs but ends up finding it with the exact opposite" was a good idea in theory, but that's about the only thing in the script they wrote that was worth keeping. The witty one liners weren't. The heartfelt monologues were passionless. The personality for the characters got cut at some point...

I just can't go on. This movie was terrible, I'll try to find a better one for next time.

[Internet] - Music Randomness

2004-03-02T03:42:00.000Z

Inspired by The Fence (which was in turn inspired by Neil Gaiman's site) I've decided to list ten random songs from my play list so you can know what I'm listening to.

I've hit the shuffle button and here goes...

1) Animal Instinct by The cranberries
2) Wide eyes by Diffuser
3) The theme from Xena: Warrior princess (by Ray Bunch?)
4) Heaven by DJ Sammy
5) There she goes by Sixpence none the richer
6) Soulmates by Placebo
7) The lie by Bad Religion
8) Unwell by Matchbox 20
9) Blame it on the weatherman by B*witched
10) Hanging by a moment by Lighthouse

There you are, ten almost randomly selected songs from my playlist. (I redid number 8 since another bad religion song came up). Maybe that'll give you some idea of my musical tastes, maybe it won't.

[Rant] - This is getting embarrassing.

2004-03-02T03:14:00.000Z

Mankind now has the power to feed the world's population (yet it chooses not to), the power to cure almost all diseases (again it chooses not to) and even the power to destroy all life on Earth (in progress). We can travel throughout our solar system (though we don't) and draw on the power of the sun, wind and wave (again we don't). We can create human life on demand (now illegal) and suppress our natural creation of human life (in progress on being made illegal).

The parentheses are embarrassing enough along with all the other stupid things we do, but that's not the embarrassment to which I refer. It is embarrassing that in this day and age people continue to believe that an invisible creature like us sits up in the sky running the universe whilst remaining intimately concerned with my penis.

When I encounter one of these people who believe in talking snakes and animal loaded boats I blush at the thought of our genetic similarity. The flaw with evolution is not that I share a common ancestor with apes (ever an amiable species) but rather that I could possibly share an even closer ancestor with half of my own species.

The children around me believe that a fat man in a red suit brings them presents on flying reindeer. They also believe that a rabbit brings them (and possibly lays) chocolate eggs. These beliefs are kind of silly but they are forgivable from children.

Yet when the adults around me believe in a bearded man in the sky whose son committed suicide to rescue me from an abstract noun that he invented I feel like I’m in a mental asylum. And now they are looking at me like I’m the crazy one because I think donkeys and snakes just might lack the necessary vocal and cerebral components to speak in old Hebrew languages.

What’s worse though are the people smart enough to understand how crazy these beliefs are yet act like it’s okay for people to believe in this crap. Some of these people even attack me for pointing out the stupidity of these beliefs and say that I must “respect their beliefs”. I’d like to see them go into a mental ward and apply the same philosophy, they can salute the three guys who think they’re Napoleon Bonaparte.

It gets worse, can you believe that there are people out there having trouble deciding whether these stories are true or not? Remove the fancy Greek name and these people are basically wondering whether or not some bronze-age sheepherders’ myths about old cloud-beard could be true. Is anyone ever agnostic about Santa Clause?

So I’m just going to sit here blushing and hoping that no intelligent space aliens see how stupid my species is. Then again they’d probably kill us all for not believing in FleXfl’ap god of tentacle farts.

[Internet] - Remind me not to buy this girl a gift.

2004-02-28T13:18:00.000Z

I've found a rather amusing Blog out there called NeVeR tHe SaME aGaiN by a girl called Belimwen. She's a very devout christian who can't seem to make a single blog post without mentioning God. At times she strikes me as being a few brain-cells short of a cerebellum but I find myself anxiously awaiting her next post to see if it gets any worse. Like watching a trainwreck, I'm horrified but I can't look away.

"thank God and friends Thursday 02.26.04 [6:16 pm]

i'm gotten be another year older but 2b honest, i dun feel it at all. i still look the same and feel the same as i did when i was 20 years! dun u dare guess my age.

i got my 1st birthday gift from God thru my friends. i know it was from Him. no doubts. been wanting to get a personal laptop all along so i dun take up vio's chance to use the computer.

the desire to get my want (laptop was a want, not a need) was so strong especially for this month but then i told God tat i will not buy it cos' i wanna clear my school loan fast so tat i am free to go where He wanna me to go.

was totally shocked when my friends gave me the laptop and it was only 1.7kg! can u believe it!?! who knows my heart desire? it was clear to me tat the laptop was a gift from God. gotten use my laptop to do His ministry. God really knows how to pamper me. thank you, God!

posted by: belimwen"

Mentions of God: 6 Mentions of Friends: 3
A troubling trend.

[Rant] Imagine this

2004-02-28T12:36:00.000Z

You're on a date, or meeting someone new with a certain amount of dating potential. As you chat and get to know one another they slip out the question, "What starsign are you?". It seems like just another question, albeit a little unusual, so you tell them, "I'm a capricorn". They look at you with a serious expression and say...

"Oh great, I'm a sagitarius. That means we'll get along really well."

I can't help but wonder what they'd do if you'd said you were an incompatible sign, shout "Oh fuck, you're a water sign?! I'm sorry, I forgot I've got an urgent appointment to get to. I'll call you." while you sit there wondering how they'll ring without having your number.

These people just seem a little bit behind the times. All those labtechnicians in white coats have discovered this fantastic new chemical that's spread throughout your entire body which is responsible for how your body builds itself. It's called DNA, which stands for a long complicated name that you don't really need to know. But forget DNA, these people have reliable information from Nostradamus that people are formed based on the relative position of stellar objects

Then they buy these little magazines to predict the future, which even if they were true would have to be so general as to apply to five hundred million other people in the world. There are even books out there based on your astrologies to determine your dating advice, economic decisions and even what medicines to take.

Astrologists are even more backwards than creationists for fuck's sake. At least most creationists don't still think the Earth's flat, but the astrologists still ascribe to a "science" based entirely around the notion that everything orbits the earth itself.

And what about the bigotry of it all? Based on a factor over which you have no control they stick you in one of twelve categories and begin to asign you various personality traits and abilities. They say things like "As an Aries you have a very negative personality". How would it sound if they said "As a Black woman you must have a very negative personality"? Bigoted perhaps?

Maybe I could put up with all this, except that these people are such idiots that they can't even get astrology right. Half of the astrology zealots would give you a blank look if you asked them what their "ascendant" is or how to calculate their 5th house or mercury sign. Most of the rest of them would say things like "oh I don't believe in that other stuff, it's all just superstition. I only believe in starsigns".

I don't even know what to say to these people, I just hope they leave me alone.

[Review] - Love actually.

2004-02-28T08:59:00.000Z

Love is actually all around us. This film is trying to actually show many different examples of this love. Such as how Emma Thompson is actually still in love with Alan Rickman even though he's actually having an affair with some actress that I don't actually know.

By this point you're probably contemplating how many ways there are to skin a cat but at least you know how I felt sitting in the cinema listening to the scriptwriters shove the word "actually" into the script as many times as they can without most people actu... really noticing. Perhaps I'm the only one this annoyed, in fact I don't think most people even noticed it, but for me this was already one point against the movie.

This was not the only point against it however. As a whole this film didn't have a storyline or plot, it was a collection of around a dozen stories united only by a common theme of love and some very shaky common relationships between the characters. The point of the film wasn't anything to do with the individual stories
but simply an attempt to capture the emotion love and project it onto a screen for a painful 129 minutes.

The movie had way too many stories going on, at least 9. Each story had so little time to develop itself that it was almost a preview for another film. The plots were shallow, poorly realised and couldn't have worked as an individual story without major reworking. The bridging between these stories wasn't any better, don't expect the interweaving storylines of Quentin Tarantino or Lock Stock and 2 Smoking barrels from this film. It would be possible, with a good script and editor, that such a composite storyline could be greater than the sum of its parts however in this case it didn't work out.

To show just how many stories were going on I've described and critiqued each one below. Reading this list will probably give you as much detail as watching the film, it was actually that shallow (sorry, couldn't resist one more).

Story 1 is about Kris Marshall, a sad and desperate man convinced that he could find sex if only he were in America. He saves up his money, flies to America and his fantasy comes true. I should mention that this is not me simplifying it, it is literally that speed and level of detail in the movie. In short, this subplot was a throwaway joke which had nothing to do with the actual aim of the movie.

Story 2 is about Emma Thompson, a long-suffering housewife whose husband Alan Rickman is having an affair with the office slut. At the begining of the film she really knows he's having an affair but won't admit it to herself. Over the course of the film she finds out for sure that he is sleeping with his secretary and... does pretty much nothing. Maybe, just maybe, this idea could work as a psychological drama if it were played seriously but it really doesn't fit into the romantic comedy genre the rest of the film is stuck in. This segment was one of the main subplots as well with a good deal of screentime and used to bridge a lot of the other segments.

Story 3 is about Bill Nighy, an old has been rock star who releases a crappy christmas record. By admitting on radio that it's crap, stirring up public controversy and a range of publicity stunts he gets the record to number one. This story has absolutely nothing to do with love except for some hasty and unrelated decleration of affection for his manager which he squeezes into the last minute of the movie. This subplot contributed nothing to the plot side of the movie but managed to bridge a few scenes and gave them a theme song to work with.

Story 4 is about Liam Neeson whose wife has just died, before her death he promised his wife that he would date the real Claudia Schiffer. He meets Carol (played by Claudia Schiffer) a month after his wife's death and is seriously dating her a month after that, guess he moves on quickly.

Story 5 is about Liam Neeson's stepson, Thomas Sangster, a 14 year old in love with the coolest girl in school. He unsuccessfully tries to win her affection by learning to play the drums. He breaches airport security to tell her that he loves her just as she's getting on the plane. She apparently likes him too and gives him a kiss. I suppose who wouldn't like someone who can learn to play drums to a proffessional level in under a month? (the song they perform at the very end could only be the product of a skilled band in an audio studio, not a high-school christmas concert).

In story 6, Colin Firth moves to France after his wife has an affair with his brother. He meets a Portugese housekeeper and we are treated the rest of the movie with seeing her subtitles being "humourous" mirror images of his dialogue. He gets back to America and learns Portugese so he can go back and propose
to her.

Story 7 shows us Hugh Grant as a very unlikely prime minister of Britain who bases his foreign policy decisions on his love for his assistant then reassigns her to another office so he can think clearly. When he gets a romantic christmas card from her he then goes to every door on her street looking for her since he can't remember the address (and apparently never thought to look her up on the office rolls or ask his police escort to check). As chance would have it his secretary lives next door to the office slut having an affair with Hugh Grant's sister's husband. This coincidence has nothing to do with the story and isn't used in anyway other than to get out of hiring an extra and as an attempt to give the movie some semblance of coherency.

Story 8 is about an office girl, Laura Linney, who's (not so) secretly in love with her coworker Rodrigo Santoro. She gives up the hot hunk to look after her insane brother and ends up spending christmas with him in the mental ward.

Story 9 wants us to think that Andrew Lincoln is gay and in love with his friend Chiwetel Ejiofor, however he's really in love with Chiwetel's wife.

Which brings up a damn good point.

Do only straight people fall in love?

Most films I couldn't care less about having token black, female, gay or jewish characters. If your story doesn't need to have that character in there then don't include it and I'll be fine. This film irked me though only because it attempts to present itself as a fairly definitive and extensive view of love and then doesn't include anything about gay couples in love. With all those disjointed plots which barely came together anyway weren't they able to squeeze in a single gay couple anywhere?

Okay, perhaps they didn't fit into the plot, I'll grant the film makers that much. But what about the montage at the very end of the movie? Shots of hundreds of couples embracing at the airport, going by so quickly that you'd be challenged to spot any single picture. Scanning through them I didn't see even a single shot of a gay couple, and that bugs me in a movie trying to demonstrate love for the audience.

Having Liam Neeson saying "she/he" about his son's unidentified love-interest and misleading the audience into thinking that Andrew Lincoln is gay just doesn't cut it. In any other movie this cursory nod would be more than enough, but in a movie attempting to cast as wide a scope as this movie did the ommission of homosexuality was inexusible.

but...

If you don't care about a movie making sense, having a plot or exploring characters then this movie might be for you. It was well made, had great actors and some cute dialogue. If you switch your brain off at the door you'll probably come out with a warm buzzing feeling. Definately a movie to take a date along to, at least that way you'll have a distraction from the inane film and maybe get something out of the $10 you wasted on seeing it.