It often implies a more extreme discipline (harshness or austerity), as in government measures or punishments, but you can say manquer de rigueur for something that lacks discipline or precision. So, in an academic setting, someone's research might "manquer de rigueur."

Thanks! That's perfect for the context of this sentence. (Basically, that the American remake is kind of all over the place whereas the original was a tightly plotted farce.)

As to your second point, he agrees.

I'm pretty sure I didn't know traffic signs had words on them.

Individual leaves on trees--I knew they were there, of course, I'd seen leaves up close, held detatched ones in my hands. But I had no idea you could (or should) actually see individual ones on a tree across the street. Revelation, age 10!

stuff-oriented

I think this gets worse when young kids lose a parent, lose the family they've known, lose the home they're familiar with. They get clutchy with physical objects under their control, demanding about acquiring more. It's attempting to fill a gap they can't even articulate, sometimes, and almost certainly can't correlate for themselves. A's been dealing with it for five of his ten years, and is only now beginning to get a tiny bit of a handle on it. It may be something he struggles with into and all through his adulthood. But he's at least aware of the causes of it. Maybe talking with M about why he feels the need to amass "stuff" might help.

Individual leaves on trees--I knew they were there, of course, I'd seen leaves up close, held detatched ones in my hands. But I had no idea you could (or should) actually see individual ones on a tree across the street.

Oh, this was my exact revelation! I remember staring at trees all amazed and going oh that's what it's supposed to look like! I was five.

I totally agree with you, Bev. I just don't want him to correlate things with affection. He gets lots and lots and lots of affection, but I can see how he is starting to get the "gotta have it" bug.

I think quite a bit of it is societal, and he does a great job of using his imagination when playing -- he spent a whole bunch of...ooops, they're back! Gotta go get the glasses lowdown!

Finish thought later.

Seriously? I only just heard that he got married. (Orlando Bloom, that is.)

I think that just happened a few weeks ago. Hussy.

I don't remember the first time I wore glasses, but I do still have my first pair (tiny little granny glasses from 1971). I probably should see what the prescription was in them and see how bad my eyes actually were!

I'm just amazed that I was able to teach myself how to read before I got my glasses. Thank goodness for big print in children's picture books.

I got my glasses sophmore year of college. And that's when I realized that Impressionism was more than just a popular art style of the day, but rather how I was living my life.

I got my glasses around 4th or 5th grade. I'd needed them long before that, but due to my hearing problems the teachers had always seated me in the front of the classroom. So the usual cues—not being able to read the board, etc.—weren't there. I suspect this played into a fair bit of my social problems in elementary school. If you can't see the other students and half the time you can't hear them it's kind of hard to interact with them. Especially if you don't know there's a problem.

Yikes! Power out at our house.

I got my first glasses in 7th grade and totally had that OH that's how the world really looks! moment.