Oh no. Once you have the gist, you have it. Too bad he doesn't opine as tersely as he writes.

It was pretty turgid and lacking in point. He should have used his usual language:

People suck. We are all seriously fucked up. Those fuckers who wrote the Constitution actually, can you believe it, really knew what the fuck they were doing. It's all turned out pretty fucking well. I think. What the fuck was I saying?

I can't open the link but assume it's Mamet? I've thought he was a major ass since he visited a college class of mine and told us that film school was a waste of time. We were a class of film majors. Such a condescending assy asshole.

Ginger wins the summarizing Mamet contest!

or, possibly, the Deadwood version.

I started skimming halfway down the page, and then realized there were five pages! Where was Ginger when I needed her?!?

I can't open the link but assume it's Mamet? I've thought he was a major ass since he visited a college class of mine and told us that film school was a waste of time. We were a class of film majors. Such a condescending assy asshole.

This reminds me of an NYU class called "Cinema and Literature" that I took my first year of grad school. It was with nouveau roman guru Robbe-Grillet and he came in the first day and started reading the opening paragraph of Proust ("Longtemps je me suis couché de bonne heure..."), got to the end and declared (I'm translating and paraphrasing here) "How do you adapt that?!? You can't. I don't believe in the concept of "cinema and literature"! He then proceeded to teach one of the worst courses I've ever taken. And, in the end, the final paper was "Choose a scene from a novel and write how you would adapt it."

A new installment of my favorite popcorn read paranormal series was released! Kim Harrison's The Outlaw Demon Wails. I devoured it last night, and I've got to say I'm impressed. Just as high a HSQ as the last book, but in different ways.

My library holds list got out of control again. I really must stop requesting anything and everything that sounds even mildly interesting. On my weekly library run this evening I will be picking up:

DAUGHTER OF YORK, by Anne Easter Smith
THE FIRST DAY OF THE BLITZ, SEPTEMBER 7, 1940, by Peter Stansky
GENGHIS: BIRTH OF AN EMPIRE, by Conn Iggulden
THE KING'S COAT, by Dewey Lambdin
NUNS: A HISTORY OF CONVENT LIFE 1450-1700, by Silvia Evangelisti
SUPERCAPITALISM, by Robert Reich
VAGABOND, by Bernard Cornwell
THE YEAR OF LIVING BIBLICALLY, by A.J. Jacobs

And that's assuming that AFTER THE ICE: A GLOBAL HUMAN HISTORY 20,000-5000 B.C., which is listed as in transit, doesn't show up today. There's no way I'll have time to read them all within three weeks, especially since I still have four books from last week I haven't started yet. So I really hope some of them turn out boring. And I could probably renew the Cornwell and the Lambdin if I had to, since neither are new releases. But my eyes are always so much bigger than my stomach when it comes to books.

This reminds me of an NYU class called "Cinema and Literature" that I took my first year of grad school..."How do you adapt that?!? You can't. I don't believe in the concept of "cinema and literature"!

Oh! grrrrrr!!!

I had a class in film school...I can't remember which one...where the teacher told us that there are no great film adaptations of great books. There are only great films adapted from mediocre books and mediocre films adapted from great books.

Discuss!

I think some of the Jane Austen books and movies would disprove that right out.