Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:A couple waking up together, talking, kissing, and having sex.
The morning breath, ughhh.
I love morning sex. You just don’t do it facing each other.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:1. I live outside DC and yup, take shoes off at my front door.
2. Women who take 10 bites to eat a cracker or actually anything they're holding in their hand--am I supposed to eat like that? Because I'm hoovering pretzel chips when I'm hungry.
So do I, but I still understand that it’s not unrealistic to have people wear shoes in a house on TV.
All the debates on DCUM about shoes on/shoes off should tell people that there is a big divide on the issue and it's realistic to have a TV family do either one. Shoot, there was an episode of Sex and the City about the perils of visiting a shoes-off house unprepared.
But while households can be either shoes-on or shoes-optional, I don't know anyone who is OK with shoes on furniture, and yet TV shows that all the time. Get your shoes off the furniture, you clod!
I have a HUGE thing about shoes on the bed. And when I see that on tv shows, I CANNOT pay attention to anything else.
As for the shoe thing, I assume that in real life most households are 50/50 on house wearing or not. But 100% of the Asians I know, even if the adult kids are part another race, always take their shoes off. And I stop watching any shoe where an Asian does not take their shoes off when entering their home.
I have a shoes-off household and a shoes-on husband.
Anonymous wrote:Super hot girl with unattractive guy, even though he isn't rich...
- Knocked Up
- She's out of my league (yeah, I know its part of the premise, but it is completely unbelievable as a TSA worker. Maybe if he was a doctor, or IT worker)
There are lots more... but not so many the other way (hot dude with not-hot chick)... maybe Big Fat Greek Wedding??
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
My pet peeve with anything set before the mid-20th-century is when someone is shown writing fluidly with their left hand and nobody smacks the back of that hand and .says "RIGHT hand only!"
OK, not that extreme, though my late grandmother got swatted a lot for that reason.
But before the later 20th century, children (at least in the US and UK) were always taught to write right-handed even if they were naturally left-handed. Some teachers and parents would tie a kid's left hand behind the kid's back or use other methods to force right-handedness. Especially when I see some historical setting where someone's blithely scribbling away left-handed, it takes me out of the reality of the setting. I'm sure there were adults who, later in their lives, wrote left-handed as they pleased, but overall it's just not true to many periods and places to see it on screen.
Have you noticed how many actors are left-handed? It's amazing. [/quo
Yeah, I've noticed that. And it's pretty poor acting 101 to use your left hand to write (and sew etc.) in a period piece when the character would have been taught to write right-handed no matter what (and would have been punished in school for trying to write left-handed!). They usually arent' writing or sewing etc. for very long; the natural left-handed actors could do it right-handed for those scenes if anyone bothered about this tiny but very real detail and took a little time to practice for the scene...
Anonymous wrote:I’ve always found the most unrealistic part of Gilmore Girls to be that no one is repeatedly punching them both in the face
Anonymous wrote:
My pet peeve with anything set before the mid-20th-century is when someone is shown writing fluidly with their left hand and nobody smacks the back of that hand and .says "RIGHT hand only!"
OK, not that extreme, though my late grandmother got swatted a lot for that reason.
But before the later 20th century, children (at least in the US and UK) were always taught to write right-handed even if they were naturally left-handed. Some teachers and parents would tie a kid's left hand behind the kid's back or use other methods to force right-handedness. Especially when I see some historical setting where someone's blithely scribbling away left-handed, it takes me out of the reality of the setting. I'm sure there were adults who, later in their lives, wrote left-handed as they pleased, but overall it's just not true to many periods and places to see it on screen.
Anonymous wrote:Having gone to a private school, the way they are always portrayed, esp. the uniforms. No school makes the kids wear sweater vests or ties for girls. And, it’s always portrayed as stodgier than they really are.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:1. I live outside DC and yup, take shoes off at my front door.
2. Women who take 10 bites to eat a cracker or actually anything they're holding in their hand--am I supposed to eat like that? Because I'm hoovering pretzel chips when I'm hungry.
So do I, but I still understand that it’s not unrealistic to have people wear shoes in a house on TV.
All the debates on DCUM about shoes on/shoes off should tell people that there is a big divide on the issue and it's realistic to have a TV family do either one. Shoot, there was an episode of Sex and the City about the perils of visiting a shoes-off house unprepared.
But while households can be either shoes-on or shoes-optional, I don't know anyone who is OK with shoes on furniture, and yet TV shows that all the time. Get your shoes off the furniture, you clod!
I have a HUGE thing about shoes on the bed. And when I see that on tv shows, I CANNOT pay attention to anything else.
As for the shoe thing, I assume that in real life most households are 50/50 on house wearing or not. But 100% of the Asians I know, even if the adult kids are part another race, always take their shoes off. And I stop watching any shoe where an Asian does not take their shoes off when entering their home.
Anonymous wrote:The weird Indian accent in Hollywood on Indian characters. NO ONE talks like that IRL. The weird mix of south Indian and North Indian accent which passes for an Indian accent. There is nothing called an Indian accent. You have only regional accent - Punjabi, Bengali, Tamil, Kannada, Marathi etc. Also, how is that they do not have any knowledgable Indians on set who can give proper names to Indian characters instead of Parminder Khan and Ramarao Singh. Uff!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:1. I live outside DC and yup, take shoes off at my front door.
2. Women who take 10 bites to eat a cracker or actually anything they're holding in their hand--am I supposed to eat like that? Because I'm hoovering pretzel chips when I'm hungry.
So do I, but I still understand that it’s not unrealistic to have people wear shoes in a house on TV.
All the debates on DCUM about shoes on/shoes off should tell people that there is a big divide on the issue and it's realistic to have a TV family do either one. Shoot, there was an episode of Sex and the City about the perils of visiting a shoes-off house unprepared.
But while households can be either shoes-on or shoes-optional, I don't know anyone who is OK with shoes on furniture, and yet TV shows that all the time. Get your shoes off the furniture, you clod!
I have a HUGE thing about shoes on the bed. And when I see that on tv shows, I CANNOT pay attention to anything else.
As for the shoe thing, I assume that in real life most households are 50/50 on house wearing or not. But 100% of the Asians I know, even if the adult kids are part another race, always take their shoes off. And I stop watching any shoe where an Asian does not take their shoes off when entering their home.
I am the OP of the kdrama The Glory
Even when the poor girl is practically homeless and living in what looks like a shipping container, she takes her shoes off. (Her bullies tormented her about that too)