Okay. There are only two possibilities that I can deduce from this. Either you are just kidding, which you must be, or you are completely lost when it comes to what was happening in this film.
You honestly think that it would have worked out better for Beverly if Claire had been played by someone you believe to be more attractive? Are you kidding me? How Claire looked had absolutely nothing to do with the outcome of their lives. I can't even begin to fathom how someone could think this, other than, again, you being completely ignorant when it comes to what was happening between the three characters.
And by the way, what is wrong with Genevieve Bujold? Just because she wasn't some plastic, photocopy, typical Hollywood "babe" doesn't mean she isn't attractive. Uniqueness is attractive in itself. Also, she wasn't the kinky one, the brothers were. At least with Bev you saw firsthand, but I imagine that Elliot was also, judging by his personality.
The plural of mouse is mice. The plural of goose is geese. Why is the plural of moose not meese?
reply
share
denham
10 years ago
There is a third possibility, or rather fact.
it would have worked better if Claire had been rather more attractive
it would have worked out better for Beverly if Claire had been... more attractive
Perhaps after reflection you will be able to see the difference. Your response was to a proposition not put forward by me. But thank you for your courtesy.
I beseech ye in the bowels of Christ, think that ye may be mistaken.
reply
share
Gabe1972
10 years ago
Are we supposed to think it's her sexual kinkiness that does it for Beverly? It didn't seem to me he was particularly into that.
It seems to me you were referring to her in reference to how it would have worked better for Beverly. If not, then who would it have worked better for? Who is it you are referring to? The viewer? Claire, herself?
The plural of mouse is mice. The plural of goose is geese. Why is the plural of moose not meese?
reply
share