6 November 2003

Submitted by eve on Sun, 11/09/2003 - 12:21am. Beautiful

"They're great. She's great. In fact, if there were a spotlight on just her, and the rest of the theatre was dark, I would be madly in love with that lady."
--A guy at the Parkway Theatre, commenting on Project Pimento's lead singer.

» add new comment

Well...

Posted by hypoxic on Tue, 11/11/2003 - 9:10am.

The coconuts go with the cricket eating swallows of course...

» reply to this comment

Durn big crickets!

Posted by ChristyMC on Tue, 11/11/2003 - 11:33am.

Wait, do you mean cricket-eating swallows, as in swallows that consume crickets, or do you mean the cricket that consumes swallows? Because there would DEFINITELY be something left of a cricket that could eat a swallow, even after a few rounds from a .22.
And of course the real question is, is the giant cricket eating African or European swallows?

::grin::

» reply to this comment

So confused!

Posted by marinerd on Tue, 11/11/2003 - 9:37am.

The llamas were in a different thread, but I always think of Monty Python when someone mentions llamas. (The ones that swim, of course!)

» reply to this comment

Posted by Matt on Tue, 11/11/2003 - 9:18pm.

A moose once bit my sister. No, really! She was carving her intitials on the moose when it reached back and...

Never mind. I'm giving up trying to be novel.

» reply to this comment

Yes.

Posted by Apple on Wed, 11/12/2003 - 6:06am.

"Never mind. I'm giving up trying to be novel."
Trying to be novel only gets you a paper cut.
*grin*

» reply to this comment

What

Posted by hypoxic on Mon, 11/10/2003 - 9:29am.

if they're jerusalem crickets. Those are pretty big. You might be able to have something left after a hit from a .22

» reply to this comment

Posted by brian28306 on Tue, 11/11/2003 - 7:30am.

I see the beginning of a Monty Python skit here.

Oh, right! Sure if they were Jerusalem crickets, then you could hit the ball, but not your common cricket, those would be much too small.

» reply to this comment

Yes, but..

Posted by Apple on Tue, 11/11/2003 - 8:43am.

where would you fit the coconuts into the conversation??

*grin*

» reply to this comment

Disturbingly...

Posted by gareth on Sun, 11/09/2003 - 7:14pm.

In the one picture I looked at from the band site, the lead singer looks unsettlingly reminiscent of Cherie Blair. No doubt I'm doing the poor woman a deep injustice by such a comparison, though, and in fact this may be completely attributable to getting out of bed and attempting to function without caffeine based help.

G

PS - I tried to find the picture of our PM's missus so beloved of Have I Got News For You (the bad hair day picture) but came up blank. Sorry, world. It was a deeply amusing picture.

» reply to this comment

I can relate to this.

Posted by Paul on Sun, 11/09/2003 - 1:16pm.

Oddly enough, this topic came up in conversation not long ago...

For some people (including myself), one of the sexiest and most seductive traits a woman can posess is a good voice. I can think of numerous singers with whom I've fallen in love just from listening to them through headphones. Is there anything more seductive than having someone softly singing into your ear?

The down side to this is that almost invariably the women whose voices I fall for like that turn out to be gay. Not that this changes how I feel about their voices, but still- it's just plain weird.

» reply to this comment

Yah

Posted by Cebu on Sun, 11/09/2003 - 3:52pm.

That is one of the reasons I love Depeche Mode so much. The lead's voice, Dave, has such a sexy voice. It's great to listen to with headphones so you can *really* hear it. Excellent baritone. :)

» reply to this comment

Posted by Matt on Sun, 11/09/2003 - 12:43am.

Decent stuff, that band, but the "lounge core" scene was done to death by the time Squirrel Nut Zippers hit it big in the mid-90s.

Give me Portishead any day.

Hey Eve, what's up with the anglophile spelling?

» reply to this comment

Anglophilia

Posted by eve on Sun, 11/09/2003 - 9:49pm.

Remember all those business trips lately? They're warping my brain. Or my spelling at least. :-)

» reply to this comment

Just be glad folks...

Posted by ParU on Mon, 11/10/2003 - 12:00pm.

that she doesn't start talking with an accent...

» reply to this comment

Unless she starts typing with

Posted by dave on Mon, 11/10/2003 - 1:24pm.

Unless she starts typing with an accent, its not going to be a problem for the rest of us ParU.

And to some of us, theatre looked exactly correct!

» reply to this comment

Well...

Posted by ParU on Mon, 11/10/2003 - 8:19pm.

Her French accent is sooo good...
How good is it? (with a nod to Johnny Carson).
It's so good that she got mistaken for being French while she was in France in high school. Which, if any of you know anything about the French, is very hard to do.

» reply to this comment

Yes, but who really wants to

Posted by dave on Mon, 11/10/2003 - 10:34pm.

Yes, but who really wants to pass themselves off as French. Other than the French themselves of course.

» reply to this comment

How true..

Posted by ParU on Mon, 11/10/2003 - 11:29pm.

dave. How true. But she was sure proud of it.

» reply to this comment

Posted by Matt on Mon, 11/10/2003 - 11:20pm.

The Quebecois, apparently.

» reply to this comment

Thank God

Posted by umrguy on Tue, 11/11/2003 - 1:21am.

You called them Quebecois... back in high school, we used to get this program during homeroom called Channel 1, and when they were covering events in Quebec (a vote on something, I think, secession maybe?), they kept calling them "Quebeckers"... I just wanted to bitch-slap every single one of them for that.

-There's someone in my head, but it's not me.-

» reply to this comment

Quebecker/Quebecois same thing...almost

Posted by Catri on Tue, 11/11/2003 - 3:35am.

Quebecker is the correct English word. Generally, Quebecois means the francophone population, Quebeckers means the whole lot (assuming you're an anglophone). At least they didn't call them Quebeckians, because if you want to annoy a Quebecker, or a Quebecois, I think that would probably do it.

» reply to this comment

Yes, but...

Posted by umrguy on Tue, 11/11/2003 - 10:04am.

"Quebecker" just sounds... stupid, honestly.

-There's someone in my head, but it's not me.-

» reply to this comment

I will not comment

Posted by Jon on Wed, 11/12/2003 - 6:09am.

I will not make a comment about this... do we have a Canadian politics thread yet? ;-)

» reply to this comment

Canada

Posted by ParU on Wed, 11/12/2003 - 10:27am.

has politics????

» reply to this comment

On the other hand...

Posted by Paul on Tue, 11/11/2003 - 2:19pm.

...it's better than "Schenectedoids".

» reply to this comment

Or...

Posted by ParU on Tue, 11/11/2003 - 9:52pm.

Los Angelenos

» reply to this comment

Posted by Saint on Sun, 11/09/2003 - 8:04am.

Maybe "Theatre" is how they spell it on the marquee, and Eve is just going along with it.

» reply to this comment

Good thought

Posted by Matt on Sun, 11/09/2003 - 10:16am.

Saint, but no.

Hey, here's a random thought for your Sunday morning. Some of us around here have spent countless kilobytes worth of text discussing baseball, but here with football in Week 10, nary a peep. Is it that a) football fans around here are more closeted for some reason, or b) something about the kind of person who frequents IP tends not to be a fan of the oblong spheroid?

I'm Linda Richman. Discuss.

» reply to this comment

But ... but ...

Posted by dave on Sun, 11/09/2003 - 1:58pm.

Its cricket season! And its odd enough having the Rugby World Cup intermingled with my cricket without introducing more lunacy.

» reply to this comment

Cricket Season

Posted by Joe Napalm on Sun, 11/09/2003 - 6:26pm.

And, I'll tell ya, you gotta be one HECK of a shot to hunt crickets.

Danger danger danger.

-Jn-
Efreeti Sophist

» reply to this comment

Gotta give...

Posted by ParU on Mon, 11/10/2003 - 12:01pm.

a cool pt to Joe. Great one! Made me smile.

» reply to this comment

Well when you consider that y

Posted by dave on Sun, 11/09/2003 - 10:15pm.

well when you consider that you actually have to hit the cricket ball...

» reply to this comment

Ouch.

Posted by Paul on Sun, 11/09/2003 - 10:56pm.

I imagine that would require a very tiny bat.

» reply to this comment

Why isn't

Posted by Jon on Mon, 11/10/2003 - 6:46am.

Why isn't PETA all over these cricket players, I wonder. Cricket is murder! Cricket is murder! Makes as much sense as vandalizing a McDonald's...
;)

» reply to this comment

I like football.

Posted by Kris the Girl on Sun, 11/09/2003 - 12:27pm.

But I feel no compulsion to discuss it at length.
Plus I mostly watch college ball, not NFL, and I don't actually follow a team or players, I just like watching football. I am of little help in this conversation.

» reply to this comment

There are basically 2 football teams

Posted by Sewicked on Tue, 11/18/2003 - 1:32pm.

that I even like & I just don't watch that much football. BTW the 2 teams? Carolina Panthers & the Scottish Claymores.

» reply to this comment

Football.

Posted by ParU on Mon, 11/10/2003 - 12:03pm.

I think that because there's a preponderance of Bay Area people on IP (along with a few stray Midwesterners and the odd Virginian (hi Paul!)) and both the Bay Area NFL teams are soooo bad this year that we just want to forget the whole thing and wait for the Giants and A's.

» reply to this comment

Mad Martz strikes?

Posted by umrguy on Mon, 11/10/2003 - 7:56pm.

Rams fan here personally, but I'm trying not to get too involved - I get too worked up about games. Plus, yesterday's game, although a victory, wasn't a lot for our offense to write home about...

-There's someone in my head, but it's not me.-

» reply to this comment

Re: Football

Posted by Apple on Mon, 11/10/2003 - 3:19pm.

Um, I'm rooting for the Indy Colts, and they're actually not doing too bad. I mean, they don't have a Kansas City-type record, but at least they've won more games than lost. I just know how to handle my enthusiasm. *grin*

» reply to this comment

...

Posted by Joe Napalm on Sun, 11/09/2003 - 12:32am.

Shouldn't that be the other way around?

I mean, if he were madly in love with that lady, the rest of the theatre would be dark and there would just be a spotlight on her...

I find the spotlight's causality confusing, I guess.

-Jn-
Efreeti Sophist

» reply to this comment