More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
25 April
At any rate, the hedline (sic) talks of a doube-decker.
Knowing that a deck denotes part of the equipment of the likes of DJ Skunk, I dare not assume that this is a merror (a portmanteau word*, comprising 'error' and 'mere'), but guess that doube might denote :
* That 'whole dub thing'
* A Routemaster smeared with melted cheese and barbeque sauce
* A bi-plane flown by a dove**
* A love-track sung by Kelly, which went straight to this former partner's heart
Yes, I am too lazy to read 'the actual' story, or rather, me and my doube, we're havin' too much craic... !
Postscript : 26 April
And to-day AOL® excels itself :
Woman defiant against bag theif [sic]
End-notes
* Thank you, Lewis Carroll !
** German Taub.
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Showing posts with label Kelly Brook. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kelly Brook. Show all posts
Thursday, 25 April 2013
Friday, 8 February 2013
'She's a heffer': Katie Price slams Kelly (according to Yahoo!®)
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
8 February (updated 21 February)
Interesting that :
Kelly is just Kelly, but there may be other Katies
Simon Heffer is a writer, and Heffer's a bookshop
If one can accurately use a word that, according to Wikipedia®, may mean A young cow before she has had her first calf, one cannot then spell it
What does one judge of Ms Kelly Ann Parsons (now that Jordan / Price insists on us looking at her) ?
And what about the story... ? How many weeks were their agents and they in negotiation :
1. To find, in principle, the person to agree to slight Kelly B. ?
2. To fix a price for full participation, i.e. putting one's name to anything ?
3. To determine where the story would be placed, and what the opening gambit and subsequent developments of the story would be ?
I don't know why, but I find these details much more interesting than the initial slam !
Yesterday, although with a bit of a delay, Huffington Post reported that Kelly replied by calling Katie 'rude' and 'sad', so there's probably more to come...
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
8 February (updated 21 February)
Interesting that :
Kelly is just Kelly, but there may be other Katies
Simon Heffer is a writer, and Heffer's a bookshop
If one can accurately use a word that, according to Wikipedia®, may mean A young cow before she has had her first calf, one cannot then spell it
What does one judge of Ms Kelly Ann Parsons (now that Jordan / Price insists on us looking at her) ?
And what about the story... ? How many weeks were their agents and they in negotiation :
1. To find, in principle, the person to agree to slight Kelly B. ?
2. To fix a price for full participation, i.e. putting one's name to anything ?
3. To determine where the story would be placed, and what the opening gambit and subsequent developments of the story would be ?
I don't know why, but I find these details much more interesting than the initial slam !
Yesterday, although with a bit of a delay, Huffington Post reported that Kelly replied by calling Katie 'rude' and 'sad', so there's probably more to come...
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Saturday, 21 January 2012
Supposedly, Holden makes 'brainless' dig at Brook
More views of - or after - Cambridge Film Festival 2011
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
22 January
Nothing nicer than a link so entitled under a picture of the two ladies, smiling nicely enough together - shark-fins, the phantom menace beneath the unruffled surface...
I blogged yesterday (Allegedly, Katy Perry unfollows Russell) tangentially to a so-called story about so-called celebrities. What now has to be asked is:
If Amanda Holden actually had to make some public pronouncement that damns Kelly Brook (rather than, more easily, just allowing it to be put about that she did), who actually believes that said Kelly did not license her to do so, because it is part of some agreed way of trying to boost what they are now calling BGT (and / or their own presence* and careers)?
It would, at the very least, invite AOL users, about to sign in to get e-mail (which is where I saw it, and actually, for a change, knew who both people were), to take a look at what it's all about, and so show Huffington Post attracting readers into the bargain...
And 'BGT'? Doesn't that sound like a reworking of Roald Dahl and his BFG - or a beverage made out of three men who sang (probably still do) with high-pitched voices?
Or maybe the modern attention-span is so short that, just as British Oxygen Corporation thought plain BOC more sexy back in the 1980s (and, after all, they did capture and, under pressure, liquidize many other gases - still do), Britain's Got Talent had too many potential viewers glazing over.
Personally, I don't think it's that at all: all along, the programme has been open to misinterpretation between couples shouting out its name to each other as to what's on, but only now has research revealed the crucial and damaging mishearing, leading to the hostile response:
Oh, I know well enough this country's got that bastard - that's why I'd emigrate, if I could, to get away from his bloody millionaire suspense!'
* Why is it always 'media presence', when doesn't 'presence' say it all, when it is self evident that these people are present - or invisible - to the public?
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
22 January
Nothing nicer than a link so entitled under a picture of the two ladies, smiling nicely enough together - shark-fins, the phantom menace beneath the unruffled surface...
I blogged yesterday (Allegedly, Katy Perry unfollows Russell) tangentially to a so-called story about so-called celebrities. What now has to be asked is:
If Amanda Holden actually had to make some public pronouncement that damns Kelly Brook (rather than, more easily, just allowing it to be put about that she did), who actually believes that said Kelly did not license her to do so, because it is part of some agreed way of trying to boost what they are now calling BGT (and / or their own presence* and careers)?
It would, at the very least, invite AOL users, about to sign in to get e-mail (which is where I saw it, and actually, for a change, knew who both people were), to take a look at what it's all about, and so show Huffington Post attracting readers into the bargain...
And 'BGT'? Doesn't that sound like a reworking of Roald Dahl and his BFG - or a beverage made out of three men who sang (probably still do) with high-pitched voices?
Or maybe the modern attention-span is so short that, just as British Oxygen Corporation thought plain BOC more sexy back in the 1980s (and, after all, they did capture and, under pressure, liquidize many other gases - still do), Britain's Got Talent had too many potential viewers glazing over.
Personally, I don't think it's that at all: all along, the programme has been open to misinterpretation between couples shouting out its name to each other as to what's on, but only now has research revealed the crucial and damaging mishearing, leading to the hostile response:
Oh, I know well enough this country's got that bastard - that's why I'd emigrate, if I could, to get away from his bloody millionaire suspense!'
* Why is it always 'media presence', when doesn't 'presence' say it all, when it is self evident that these people are present - or invisible - to the public?
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)