Friends S9-09 - moving on
Tennant Stuart
It's the way the changing patterns of light fall across them.
British/Anzac/Euro SPOILER SPACE for 909...
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E
S
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E
S
909 "TOW Rachel's Phone Number"
Joey phones Chandler in Tulsa, to announce he has courtside tickets
for a Knicks game, but it's on the only night that Monica can get off
from the restaurant. Chandler can't think how to put Joey off, so he
lies instead that he must stay at the office.
However, this means that once Chandler gets home, Joey assumes that
Monica has a lover there. Monica tries to fob Joey off, but he's not
fooled by her lame excuses, her sexy nightie, the man's voice he has
heard, the locked door, or the two glasses of wine on the table.
Joey loyally phones Chandler, who takes it on his mobile - so as
Chandler yells down the phone at Joey to forestall him, Joey again
hears the man's voice coming from Monica's apartment. Chandler's
brilliant plan is to sneak down the fire escape into the December
night, without putting his coat on, then go up the stairs to where
his door is being grimly guarded by Joey, armed with a baseball bat.
Joey is surprised that Chandler arrives so fast, since it's a 3 hour
flight from Tulsa, but he trustingly lets Chandler fob him off with
an excuse about the time difference. Monica lamely pretends to be
outraged, demanding an apology from Joey, but he espies Chandler's
luggage, which Monica had foolishly forgotten to hide.
Chandler has no recourse but to apologise & confess to Joey, who is
very annoyed that the Bings think he is too dumb to understand that
a husband needs to be with his wife. Monica kindly allows Chandler
to go to the game with Joey, but it turns out that he'd got the
date wrong anyway, it's actually on the next night!
---o0o---
Ross is minding the baby while Rachel gets ready to spend the evening
with Phoebe, but his eyes are on stalks when she appears in a slutty
dress supported by a push-up bra, making a cleavage so deep that light
can't penetrate to the bottom - or as Phoebe puts it, Girls Night Out!
At a wine bar, Rachel informs Phoebe that Ross had liked the way she
looked, and then he had made eye contact - disguising the truth that
he had been gawping at her breasts until she had ordered him to stop
looking at her like that, so he turned to her face instead.
When two guys named Bill & Kevin send some drinks over, Rachel has to
remind an amused Phoebe that she has a boyfriend - whilst she herself
has 'a baby & a Ross'. Meanwhile, Ross is hanging out with Mike, but
they have nothing to do or talk about, so they quickly grow bored.
Rachel is delighted to hear that Bill lives in the same building as
her grandmother, so while Phoebe turns Kevin down, Rachel tells Bill
that she does not have a boyfriend, and gives him her phone number.
Phoebe does not approve, but Rachel reveals that she & Ross have not
been communicating, and maybe she should move on with her life.
But when Phoebe asks Rachel to consider Ross's feelings, should Bill
move in with them & Emma, Rachel tells Mike on his mobile to intercept
any calls to Ross's phone - preventing the poor guy from escaping the
extreme boredom, and causing him to leap across Ross when Judy rings.
When the girls come home, the guys are so bored out of their brains
that they hug them with joy. Yet while Rachel covertly checks with
Mike that everything is okay, Bill calls and Ross takes the message.
After Rachel describes how she had so much fun, and it felt so good
to be out, Ross quietly puts Bill's note away in his pocket...
---o0o---
This is the first time I've ever wanted to Fast Forward during a new
episode. I'd thought that the perpetuation of bad jokes had gone far
enough with Chandler grimacing at that photographer or Ross on roller
blades, but there were SEVEN boring scenes of two men being bored!
Meanwhile, I would sound very shallow by admitting what the four best
things in this episode were, so instead I shall simply point out that
this was because the two main stories were quite interesting, and even
occasionally amusing, but there was no great entertainment to be had.
---o0o---
Since Chandler is a cat person, and *very* lucky to have Monica,
shouldn't he be more charitable towards his assistant Jo Lynn?
But what is a cat condo?
And since Chandler is away 4 days out of 7, how come Monica has to
work on 2 of the 3 days that her husband is in NYC?
Since Joey's suspicions stemmed from hearing a man's voice in the
apartment while Monica's husband was away, why did Chandler start
talking while he was right by the front door, only seconds afterit had been shut?
How come it's only now that the top US comedy has found the 'man on
the other side of the door is the man talking to you on his mobile
phone' gag? In Britain, this situation was first used in the classic
BBC sitcom "Joking Apart" - a forerunner of "Coupling" - way back in
1991. Is this because America is technologically backward? Ross was
still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years later.
In fact, when did we first see a mobile phone in "Friends"?
Anyway, if Chandler is so clever, why didn't he go into his bedroom
and shut the door, to take the call where Joey can't hear him?
Since the previous episode was set at Thanksgiving, it must now be
early December, and it's night. So how come only Phoebe is wearing a
proper overcoat? Mike wears a small jacket, Rachel picks up a flimsy
wrap, and Chandler goes out in in a short-sleeved shirt!
Note that Joey wore a warm coat to keep guard in the hallway.
Chandler going out to the fire escape reminds me - how long has it
been since we had a scene actually set on Monica's balcony?
Scary pigeon?
Why did the writers have to spoil a potentially good story with that
time difference joke? It was going so well: the way that the Bings
kept underestimating their suspicious friend, while it was they who
acted stupidly all the way through; that it's a shame that such a
cheap laugh was allowed to wreck the dynamic they'd established.
But once again we saw Joey's superior sense of smell being used to
root out deception - the last time was when a naughty Phoebe stole
his chocolate in 701 "TOW Monica's Thunder".
Which do you think was better - Monica's impression of Chandler,
or Rachel's impression of Ross?
Phoebe staring hard at that chasm of a cleavage, and making saucy
remarks about it, only serves to reinforce her lesbian tendencies;
most recently noted in 905 "TOW Phoebe's Birthday Dinner" when she
eyeballed Monica's ripe bosoms, and called them a treat...
And how come Rachel objected to Ross staring at her cleavage, when
she once realised that Chandler was not gay after he had spent the
whole of Phoebe's birthday party talking to her breasts?
Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
Does a story about bored people have to be boring?
Phoebe, Joey & Rachel weren't boring, as they missed the Blowfish
concert in 205 "TOW Five Steaks and an Eggplant"; the whole gang
weren't boring, as Ross talked shop in 307 "TOW the Race Car Bed";
Ross & Rachel weren't boring, at the fabrics lecture in 314 TOW
Phoebe's Ex-Partner; the whole gang weren't boring, on a rainy day
in 325 "TOA the Beach"; Joey & Ross weren't boring, since they were
unemployed in 510 TOW the Inappropriate Sister; and most especially
Rachel & Ben weren't boring in 716 "TOW the Truth About London".
Hey, we got the name of Rachel's gran, Leonard's mum, Ida Green!
So, what happens next?
Will Bill pass up a prize like Rachel Green simply because she
didn't return his first call?
Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so angry
that there's a huge bust-up?
Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so touched
that she falls into his arms?
Will Ross & Rachel start acting like mature adults, and actually
sit down and talk to each other?
Or will the writers just forget about the whole damn thing?
---o0o---
Are the actors who played Bill & Kevin credited the right way round?
Bill was the white guy who fancied Rachel, and if we are to see more
of him, it's surprising to see that his actor Chris Payne Gilbert was
placed at the end of the credits, coming after Chandler's assistant;
while Alan F. Smith (he was Kevin the black guy who fancied Phoebe),
received second billing after recurring cast member Paul Rudd.
Their parts were virtually the same size...
BILL: "Spuds" is your grandmother? So, she has a boyfriend. What is
your situation? Then, can I have your number? Okay. Okay,
thanks. I'll give you a call later tonight. Bye.
KEVIN: So, we're on our way to a couple of parties. Um... maybe we
can get your numbers and give you guys a call if we find
something fun. Alright. It's no big deal.
So, should we conclude that Bill is never going to be seen again, and
what actually counts is what happens when Rachel finds that message?
Or was AFS ranked higher because he was a cast member of that other
BKC production "Veronica's Closet", while CPG is a relative unknown?
No spoilers PLEASE from anyone who has seen episode 910.
Tennant Stuart
--
____ ____ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ ____
(_ _)( ___)( \( )( \( ) /__\ ( \( )(_ _) Greetings to family
)( )__) ) ( ) ( /(__)\ ) ( )( friends & neighbours
(__) (____)(_)\_)(_)\_)(__)(__)(_)\_) (__) @argonet.co.uk & MCR
Christoph Paeper
Nice for those who used to pick on the issue that we always see the
Friends together.
> Rachel informs Phoebe that Ross had liked the way she
> looked, and then he had made eye contact - disguising the truth
I think she didn't mean Ross's staring with "eye contact", but didn't
know how to call the *very* little "thing" they had.
> he had been gawping at her breasts until she had ordered him to stop
> looking at her like that,
IMO it would have been cute, but perhaps inappropriate, for him to
respond like this:
Rachel: "... last time that happened, that (points at Emma) happened!"
Ross: "Actually that (points at Emma) is the [second] best thing ever
happened to me."
> so he turned to her face instead.
Well, after he noticed the low neck-line, he looked at her face first,
then got lost by the breasts ("A lot of people are thankful for
/those/."), then face again.
> she herself has 'a baby & a Ross'.
'a b--aby and a Ross'. Yes I know, they'll continue to torture us
remaining R&R fans like that at least till the end of February sweeps if
not longer.
> Meanwhile, Ross is hanging out with Mike, but
> they have nothing to do or talk about, so they quickly grow bored.
And were boring to watch, too.
> After Rachel describes how she had so much fun, and it felt so good
> to be out, Ross quietly puts Bill's note away in his pocket...
Still don't know how to feel about this.
> And since Chandler is away 4 days out of 7, how come Monica has to
> work on 2 of the 3 days that her husband is in NYC?
I guess Chandler's three days always include the weekend and sometimes
it's Monica's turn to work on Saturday and Sunday, so there you go.
Are there specific days of the week that the Knicks use to play? (It's
basketball, right?)
> Ross was still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years later.
> In fact, when did we first see a mobile phone in "Friends"?
I think mobiles / cellulars aren't as (long time) common in the US as in
Europe, but that I'm not really sure about.
> Since the previous episode was set at Thanksgiving, it must now be
> early December, and it's night. So how come only Phoebe is wearing a
> proper overcoat?
Try to explain snow or negative degrees to a Californian.
> Why did the writers have to spoil a potentially good story with that
> time difference joke?
Oh, c'mon! You should already have noticed, that Joey is -er- easy to
persuade, even though you don't like it. Maybe excuse it with: he doesn't
want to look dumb, because he knows, he is at least a little bit, thus he
sometimes seems dumber than he actually is.
> Which do you think was better - Monica's impression of Chandler,
> or Rachel's impression of Ross?
Phoebe's impression of Rachel. :-þ From the two choices given I'd pick the
latter although the former was closer to the original.
> Phoebe staring hard at that chasm of a cleavage, and making saucy
> remarks about it, only serves to reinforce her lesbian tendencies;
Yeah, once she realizes it for herself, there'll be no chance left for
your Ross&Phoebe dream. ;)
> And how come Rachel objected to Ross staring at her cleavage,
IMHO she didn't. She did object to Ross seeing her differently than -er-
usual. And later complains about them not getting closer.
> Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
And why did Rachel think that would make them come over? Weird American
rituals maybe?
> Does a story about bored people have to be boring?
No, but this one was most of the time. I only liked the scene where Ross
wants to start to talk, but quickly turns his head away.
> Will Bill pass up a prize like Rachel Green simply because she
> didn't return his first call?
Yes. Less because most men did, more because I don't see the actor to
reappear. (That's no spoiler, just guessed.)
> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so angry
> that there's a huge bust-up?
Maybe, but the writers will probably just ignore that bit in the future.
> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so touched
> that she falls into his arms?
Definitely no. What I could see is Ross telling her about it, but then
again see above.
> Will Ross & Rachel start acting like mature adults, and actually
> sit down and talk to each other?
Are you kidding? That be way too easy. In several other US series they
would have started to see a couple therapist (or what it's called) long
ago.
> So, should we conclude that Bill is never going to be seen again, and
Yes.
> what actually counts is what happens when Rachel finds that message?
I think the writers will find different things to get some drama into
their relationship before they reunite. What I'm still sure they'll do.
> Or was AFS ranked higher because he was a cast member of that other
> BKC production "Veronica's Closet", while CPG is a relative unknown?
Was he the neighbour / gay boyfriend of <insert-name>? I never liked that
show that much anyway.
Christoph
--
New episode: 910 - TOW Christmas in Tulsa; 2002-12-12
Friends FAQ: <http://www.friends-tv.org> [FAQ, Episode Guide, Music]
Download eps: <http://www.kazaalite.tk>, <irc:#downloadfriends>
Transcripts: <http://www.eigo-i.com/>
iphigenia
> apartment while Monica's husband was away, why did Chandler start
> talking while he was right by the front door, only seconds afterit
> had been shut?
You'd think Chandler would be bright enough to move into the living room at
least.
>
> How come it's only now that the top US comedy has found the 'man on
> the other side of the door is the man talking to you on his mobile
> phone' gag? In Britain, this situation was first used in the classic
> BBC sitcom "Joking Apart" - a forerunner of "Coupling" - way back in
> 1991. Is this because America is technologically backward? Ross was
> still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years later.
USAian perspective: I dont remember cell phones being all that ubiquitous in
1995, and I do remember a lot of people having beepers then.
I don't think I'd ever seen a cell phone in 1991 (granted I was only 16, but
still).
>
> Which do you think was better - Monica's impression of Chandler,
> or Rachel's impression of Ross?
Definitely Rachel's impression of Ross. Chandler's tendency to emphasize the
word "be" is an old joke, and I don't see him actually *saying* "could I BE
more turned on?" Whereas I could definitely see Ross saying the lines Rachel
made up for him.
>
>
> Phoebe staring hard at that chasm of a cleavage, and making saucy
> remarks about it, only serves to reinforce her lesbian tendencies;
I think with Phoebe it's not so much of a straight/gay dichotomy. Seems like
she might be willing to get together with anyone who caught her eye
regardless of gender.
>
> Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
I don't drink and have never been to a bar, so my actual experience isn't
all that helpful. But I think the idea is, the guys sent the girls a drink
to indicate their interest, and if the girls were interested back, they'd
return the favor, at which point the guys could come over and start chatting
the girls up.
When Rachel said maybe they should send something back, it was pretty clear
that she meant something alcoholic, but Phoebe, with her traditional
disregard for, well, tradition, took "something" to refer to a much broader
spectrum of items and thought that mashed potatoes would be interesting, or
at least that was the first thing she thought of.
There's my interpretation. : )
>
> Does a story about bored people have to be boring?
>
I think the examples you gave proved that it doesn't have to be, but the
Mike/Ross one certainly was. Geesh. They couldn't turn on the TV? Go rent a
video? Play darts (does Ross still have his dartboard?)?
>
> Will Bill pass up a prize like Rachel Green simply because she
> didn't return his first call?
Probably. She was reluctant to give him her number, he'll probably assume
that she had second thoughts.
>
> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so angry
> that there's a huge bust-up?
This sounds fairly likely.
>
> Will Ross & Rachel start acting like mature adults, and actually
> sit down and talk to each other?
I don't think there's a really strong precedent for that, unfortunately.
--
iphigenia
www.tristyn.net
Belphoebe
"Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:na.f7ae534ba3...@argonet.co.uk...
Not just her gran, but her "bubbe"! This is the Yiddish word for grandma,
and definitely establishes Leonard and Ida as Jewish. (Just thought you'd
like to add that tidbit to your files, Tennant! ;) )
> No spoilers PLEASE from anyone who has seen episode 910.
Belphoebe
Tennant Stuart
Christoph Paeper <cri...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Tennant Stuart wrote:
Oh, that seems like a long time ago.
>> Rachel informs Phoebe that Ross had liked the way she
>> looked, and then he had made eye contact - disguising the truth
> I think she didn't mean Ross's staring with "eye contact", but didn't
> know how to call the *very* little "thing" they had.
Whatever, she was making it sound like more than it was.
>> he had been gawping at her breasts until she had ordered him to stop
>> looking at her like that,
> IMO it would have been cute, but perhaps inappropriate, for him to
> respond like this:
> Rachel: "... last time that happened, that (points at Emma) happened!"
> Ross: "Actually that (points at Emma) is the [second] best thing ever
> happened to me."
I guess that's the male perspective though, giving birth is much
better us since the woman has to do the tricky bit.
>> so he turned to her face instead.
> Well, after he noticed the low neck-line, he looked at her face first,
> then got lost by the breasts ("A lot of people are thankful for
> /those/."), then face again.
Notice that when Mike arrived, he only looked at her face.
>> she herself has 'a baby & a Ross'.
> 'a b--aby and a Ross'. Yes I know, they'll continue to torture us
> remaining R&R fans like that at least till the end of February sweeps if
> not longer.
I've been reading the posts on Angel's Friends, where one fan wrote that
Rachel said "You have a boyfriend, I have a bo-baby", and then all the
others picked it up; but Rachel says no such thing. One expects that she
will continue with "I have a boyfriend" because of the context, and thus
some people imagined she said that, or even half of that, but not so.
>> Meanwhile, Ross is hanging out with Mike, but
>> they have nothing to do or talk about, so they quickly grow bored.
> And were boring to watch, too.
I know,it was hideous. :(
>> After Rachel describes how she had so much fun, and it felt so good
>> to be out, Ross quietly puts Bill's note away in his pocket...
> Still don't know how to feel about this.
It's a classic piece of "Friends" ambiguity, where it could be that Ross
was jealous (wanting her for himself), or possibly he just resented any
outsider (as Phoebe warned her against), then again he could be envious
(disliking her moving on before he did), or he simply being protective.
Experience of the past eight seasons should have taught us to be wary
of *any* of the above extrapolations, for most likely it is simply yet
another stunt that will be thrown away in the next episode.
>> And since Chandler is away 4 days out of 7, how come Monica has to
>> work on 2 of the 3 days that her husband is in NYC?
> I guess Chandler's three days always include the weekend
They do, he goes away Monday mornings and returns Thursday evenings.
> and sometimes it's Monica's turn to work on Saturday and Sunday, so
> there you go.
Well, she's organised that very badly then, hasn't she?
She is the head chef, she's in charge.
> Are there specific days of the week that the Knicks use to play?
Dunno. Hopefully, someone will write in.
> (It's basketball, right?)
Errr... <hang on, I'll check> ..yes, that's right, in 413 "TOW Rachel's
Crush", Rachel tries to get off with Joshua Bergin by giving him tickets
for a basketball game, and that was the Knicks.
>> Ross was still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years later.
>> In fact, when did we first see a mobile phone in "Friends"?
> I think mobiles / cellulars aren't as (long time) common in the US as in
> Europe, but that I'm not really sure about.
Well, we have such a big head start over them.
>> Since the previous episode was set at Thanksgiving, it must now be
>> early December, and it's night. So how come only Phoebe is wearing a
>> proper overcoat?
> Try to explain snow or negative degrees to a Californian.
Absolutely, the irony is that many Americans on the east coast missed part
of this episode (where Rachel talks about her grandmother, gives her phone
number to Bill, does an impression of Ross, then realises the possibility
of Ross getting the call) due to heavy snow interrupting the feed.
>> Why did the writers have to spoil a potentially good story with that
>> time difference joke?
> Oh, c'mon! You should already have noticed, that Joey is -er- easy to
> persuade, even though you don't like it. Maybe excuse it with: he doesn't
> want to look dumb, because he knows, he is at least a little bit, thus he
> sometimes seems dumber than he actually is.
It isn't that, it's that the joke had no reality. Joey was talking to
Chandler (as he believed) in Tulsa, and five minutes later there he is
in New York City. Nobody would swallow that ridiculous lie.
>> Which do you think was better - Monica's impression of Chandler,
>> or Rachel's impression of Ross?
> Phoebe's impression of Rachel. :-ş
LOL, you're right - so how come I forgot all about that?
> From the two choices given I'd pick the latter although the former was
> closer to the original.
How come?
>> Phoebe staring hard at that chasm of a cleavage, and making saucy
>> remarks about it, only serves to reinforce her lesbian tendencies;
> Yeah, once she realizes it for herself, there'll be no chance left for
> your Ross&Phoebe dream. ;)
C'est la vie. :)
>> And how come Rachel objected to Ross staring at her cleavage,
> IMHO she didn't. She did object to Ross seeing her differently than -er-
> usual. And later complains about them not getting closer.
Yes she did. He was staring at her breasts, and she said "Okay, stop. Stop
looking at me like that."
>> Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
> And why did Rachel think that would make them come over? Weird American
> rituals maybe?
I don't know, but I doubt that mashed potatoes were intended to make
the guys come over, they would be some sort of symbol of rejection.
>> Does a story about bored people have to be boring?
> No, but this one was most of the time. I only liked the scene where Ross
> wants to start to talk, but quickly turns his head away.
I don't even recall that, it was all so mind-numbingly awful.
>> Will Bill pass up a prize like Rachel Green simply because she
>> didn't return his first call?
> Yes. Less because most men did, more because I don't see the actor to
> reappear. (That's no spoiler, just guessed.)
Yeah, I agree.
>> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so angry
>> that there's a huge bust-up?
> Maybe, but the writers will probably just ignore that bit in the future.
That wouldn't be surprising.
>> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so touched
>> that she falls into his arms?
> Definitely no. What I could see is Ross telling her about it, but then
> again see above.
Yeah.
>> Will Ross & Rachel start acting like mature adults, and actually
>> sit down and talk to each other?
> Are you kidding?
Yes. :)
> That be way too easy. In several other US series they would have started
> to see a couple therapist (or what it's called) long ago.
Absolutely. The strange thing is that Ross used to be a lot more mature
than he is now, while the series has followed Rachel's maturation.
>> So, should we conclude that Bill is never going to be seen again, and
> Yes.
Okies.
>> what actually counts is what happens when Rachel finds that message?
> I think the writers will find different things to get some drama into
> their relationship before they reunite. What I'm still sure they'll do.
Wait & see.
>> Or was AFS ranked higher because he was a cast member of that other
>> BKC production "Veronica's Closet", while CPG is a relative unknown?
> Was he the neighbour / gay boyfriend of <insert-name>?
I don't know. According to epguides.com, AFS joined the show in its
third season as Bryan, a straight guy with a girlfriend. Weirdly, the
writers then respelled his name as Brian; and at a bachelor party for
Veronica's sexually ambivalent assistant Josh, the two guys were found
kissing. Later on, Brian's girlfriend turned out to be a fake, he came
out of the closet, and at the very end Brian & Josh moved in together.
> I never liked that show that much anyway.
Me neither. And people complain about the continuity in "Friends"...
Tennant
Christoph Paeper
>> Ross: "Actually that (points at Emma) is the [second] best thing ever
>> happened to me."
>
> I guess that's the male perspective though, giving birth is much
> better us since the woman has to do the tricky bit.
That's not what I meant. I think /that/ would have been a "thing".
> Notice that when Mike arrived, he only looked at her face.
Well, he has a girlfriend and not a Rachel.
>> 'a b--aby and a Ross'.
>
> I've been reading the posts on Angel's Friends,
I'm not reading there. Usenet is faster and more comfortable than web
forums. Plus in most cases the standard is higher, especially in de.ALL.
> where one fan wrote that Rachel said "You have a boyfriend,
> I have a bo-baby", and then all the others picked it up;
> but Rachel says no such thing.
No "o-b", but a notable pause after the b, which I indicated with the
dashes. You can't deny to hear that if you even notice where Mike looks.
>> and sometimes it's Monica's turn to work on Saturday and Sunday, so
>> there you go.
>
> Well, she's organised that very badly then, hasn't she?
> She is the head chef, she's in charge.
She'd be a bad boss if she never took the weekend shift.
Btw.: Why does "chef" mean "cook" in English, but "boss" in German,
although it's not a German word? For now I guess it has a French origin
and double meaning there.
>> (It's basketball, right?)
>
> Errr... <hang on, I'll check> ..yes, that's right, in 413 "TOW
:-D Most people would just check with Google or knicks.com or the brother
who is more into sports.
>> I think mobiles / cellulars aren't as (long time) common in the US as in
>> Europe, but that I'm not really sure about.
>
> Well, we have such a big head start over them.
OTOH beepers were never as popular here. Also note that most of the big
mobile phone manufactors don't originate from the US (e.g. Nokia,
Ericsson & Sony).
> Joey was talking to Chandler (as he believed) in Tulsa,
> and five minutes later there he is in New York City.
Just because it takes five minutes in the episode it doesn't mean it
really was five minutes. Although Chandler would be an even worse friend
if he let Joey wait in the hall longer then necessary.
>>> Which do you think was better - Monica's impression of Chandler,
>>> or Rachel's impression of Ross?
>
>> I'd pick the latter although the former was closer to the original.
>
> How come?
I think it's JA's voice that's way too different from DS's. The throat
clearings didn't help much, although they fit in.
>>> And how come Rachel objected to Ross staring at her cleavage,
>
>> IMHO she didn't. She did object to Ross seeing her differently than -er-
>> usual. And later complains about them not getting closer.
>
> Yes she did. He was staring at her breasts, and she said "Okay, stop. Stop
> looking at me like that."
Yeah, "like that". Seems as if we have very different interpretations of
that "that", IMO it didn't relate to her breasts in particular. Let's
agree to disagree.
> The strange thing is that Ross used to be a lot more mature
> than he is now, while the series has followed Rachel's maturation.
He had to lose some of his maturity to mature Rachel. Maybe. Still leaves
a great amount that he most have lost elsewhere.
>> before they reunite. What I'm still sure they'll do.
>
> Wait & see.
Am I glad to know, that you don't read future spoilers.
>>> Or was AFS ranked higher because he was a cast member of that other
>>> BKC production "Veronica's Closet", while CPG is a relative unknown?
>
>> Was he the neighbour / gay boyfriend of <insert-name>?
>
> I don't know.
Yes, Josh and Br[iy]an it was.
> And people complain about the continuity in "Friends"...
Yeah, there's at least not one new friend (company owner respectively)
each season. AFAIR the gay plot in VC had alright continuity, though:
both characters had always been very feminine and were close friends--it
was quite obvious that they'd get each other throughout that season,
although Josh was preparing to get married to a masculine woman he
avoided having sex with. That show had the 00:30 time slot a while ago
with two or three consecutive repeats of all season; I should go to bed
earlier weekdays.
Christoph
--
New episode: 911 - TOW Rachel Goes Back to Work; 2003-01-09
Friends FAQ: <http://www.friends-tv.org> [FAQ, Episode Guide, Music]
Download: <http://www.kazaalite.tk>, <irc:#downloadfriends>
Transcripts: <http://www.eigo-i.com/>
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.f7ae534ba3...@argonet.co.uk...
British/Anzac/Euro SPOILER SPACE for 909...
Absolutely, thanks Belphoebe!
Are there any signs that Sandra is Jewish also?
And don't you have anything else to say about my review?
Tennant
Tennant Stuart
"iphigenia" <preter...@hotmail.comeon> wrote:
> Tennant Stuart wrote:
Absolutely!
>> How come it's only now that the top US comedy has found the 'man on
>> the other side of the door is the man talking to you on his mobile
>> phone' gag? In Britain, this situation was first used in the classic
>> BBC sitcom "Joking Apart" - a forerunner of "Coupling" - way back in
>> 1991. Is this because America is technologically backward? Ross was
>> still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years later.
> USAian perspective: I dont remember cell phones being all that
> ubiquitous in 1995, and I do remember a lot of people having beepers
> then. I don't think I'd ever seen a cell phone in 1991 (granted I was
> only 16, but still).
Well, we had cell phones before 1991, when "Joking Apart" was on; it's
just that Stephen Moffat (the series' author, who now writes "Coupling")
was the first person to see its comic potential.
>> Which do you think was better - Monica's impression of Chandler,
>> or Rachel's impression of Ross?
> Definitely Rachel's impression of Ross. Chandler's tendency to emphasize
> the word "be" is an old joke, and I don't see him actually *saying*
> "could I BE more turned on?" Whereas I could definitely see Ross saying
> the lines Rachel made up for him.
Fair enough, although Chandler did emphasise "be" once or twice.
>> Phoebe staring hard at that chasm of a cleavage, and making saucy
>> remarks about it, only serves to reinforce her lesbian tendencies;
> I think with Phoebe it's not so much of a straight/gay dichotomy. Seems
> like she might be willing to get together with anyone who caught her eye
> regardless of gender.
So you're saying that she's not straight or gay, she's straight and gay?
>> Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
> I don't drink and have never been to a bar, so my actual experience
> isn't all that helpful. But I think the idea is, the guys sent the girls
> a drink to indicate their interest, and if the girls were interested
> back, they'd return the favor, at which point the guys could come over
> and start chatting the girls up.
That's right, although they usually just send back a smile...
> When Rachel said maybe they should send something back, it was pretty
> clear that she meant something alcoholic, but Phoebe, with her
> traditional disregard for, well, tradition, took "something" to refer to
> a much broader spectrum of items and thought that mashed potatoes would
> be interesting, or at least that was the first thing she thought of.
I didn't see that mashed potatoes were intended to be an invitation,
they seemed to me to be some sort of symbol of rejection.
> There's my interpretation. : )
Okay, but why mashed potatoes?
>> Does a story about bored people have to be boring?
> I think the examples you gave proved that it doesn't have to be, but the
> Mike/Ross one certainly was. Geesh. They couldn't turn on the TV? Go rent
> a video? Play darts (does Ross still have his dartboard?)?
Well, yes they should have. (And I suppose Ross has kept his dartboard).
Why didn't Ross invite Joey round?
>> Will Bill pass up a prize like Rachel Green simply because she
>> didn't return his first call?
> Probably. She was reluctant to give him her number, he'll probably assume
> that she had second thoughts.
That's got nothing to do with it, she was looking very hot.
>> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so angry
>> that there's a huge bust-up?
> This sounds fairly likely.
Interesting...
>> Will Ross & Rachel start acting like mature adults, and actually
>> sit down and talk to each other?
> I don't think there's a really strong precedent for that, unfortunately.
Yeah. Me neither.
Tennant
Christoph Paeper
>
> So you're saying that she's not straight or gay, she's straight and gay?
What's wrong with or new about bisexuals? Most men's dream girlfriends
are, although few would confess.
iphigenia
> gay?
>
Could be. I just have to wonder if a person who takes as nontraditional an
approach to things as Phoebe does would view sexuality as being so
exclusive, i.e., you have to be one or the other.
>
>> There's my interpretation. : )
>
> Okay, but why mashed potatoes?
Maybe she had them for dinner? Why she would think a bar would *serve* them
is beyong me, though.
>
> Why didn't Ross invite Joey round?
>
Good point. Joey was busy guarding the door, but Ross didn't know that.
>
> That's got nothing to do with it, she was looking very hot.
Oh, OK, well, this is where a man's perspective comes in handy. If I were in
the situation and found out that he had called and Ross hidden the message
from me, I'd think, "oh great, now he's going to think I didn't want to talk
to him after all and he's never going to call again..."
--
iphigenia
www.tristyn.net
Belphoebe
YW
> Are there any signs that Sandra is Jewish also?
I can't think of anything definitive, but maybe something will come up
later. . . .
> And don't you have anything else to say about my review?
Eek, just coming up for breath from my grading bonanza. I've got another
day's worth to go. . . .
Belphoebe
David Buehrle
Well, actually, there was a moment where they each catch the other's glance
for just a moment. I don't think anyone was disguising the truth, but
certainly Rachel was stretching the incident out of proportion.
> >> he had been gawping at her breasts until she had ordered him to stop
> >> looking at her like that,
>
> > IMO it would have been cute, but perhaps inappropriate, for him to
> > respond like this:
>
> > Rachel: "... last time that happened, that (points at Emma) happened!"
> > Ross: "Actually that (points at Emma) is the [second] best thing ever
> > happened to me."
>
> I guess that's the male perspective though, giving birth is much
> better us since the woman has to do the tricky bit.
>
>
> >> so he turned to her face instead.
>
> > Well, after he noticed the low neck-line, he looked at her face first,
> > then got lost by the breasts ("A lot of people are thankful for
> > /those/."), then face again.
>
> Notice that when Mike arrived, he only looked at her face.
He's very well behaved.
> >> she herself has 'a baby & a Ross'.
>
> > 'a b--aby and a Ross'. Yes I know, they'll continue to torture us
> > remaining R&R fans like that at least till the end of February sweeps if
> > not longer.
>
> I've been reading the posts on Angel's Friends, where one fan wrote that
> Rachel said "You have a boyfriend, I have a bo-baby", and then all the
> others picked it up; but Rachel says no such thing. One expects that she
> will continue with "I have a boyfriend" because of the context, and thus
> some people imagined she said that, or even half of that, but not so.
She is obviously starting the b, but of course, baby starts with b too. We
can only assume she was probably going to say boyfriend.
> >> Meanwhile, Ross is hanging out with Mike, but
> >> they have nothing to do or talk about, so they quickly grow bored.
>
> > And were boring to watch, too.
>
> I know,it was hideous. :(
OMG! They could have cut 30 seconds from those scenes without losing a
thing. Five seconds here, ten there. It would have made all the
difference.
> >> After Rachel describes how she had so much fun, and it felt so good
> >> to be out, Ross quietly puts Bill's note away in his pocket...
>
> > Still don't know how to feel about this.
>
> It's a classic piece of "Friends" ambiguity, where it could be that Ross
> was jealous (wanting her for himself), or possibly he just resented any
> outsider (as Phoebe warned her against), then again he could be envious
> (disliking her moving on before he did), or he simply being protective.
>
> Experience of the past eight seasons should have taught us to be wary
> of *any* of the above extrapolations, for most likely it is simply yet
> another stunt that will be thrown away in the next episode.
It's fun to extrapolate, but we must be mindful of the scope into which we
let our imaginations run.
> >> And since Chandler is away 4 days out of 7, how come Monica has to
> >> work on 2 of the 3 days that her husband is in NYC?
>
> > I guess Chandler's three days always include the weekend
>
> They do, he goes away Monday mornings and returns Thursday evenings.
Yes, each week (official holidays excluded, I assume).
> > and sometimes it's Monica's turn to work on Saturday and Sunday, so
> > there you go.
>
> Well, she's organised that very badly then, hasn't she?
>
> She is the head chef, she's in charge.
As head chef, she would also be aware that a restaurant's primary business
would occur on Friday and Saturday nights. A head chef needs to be there on
the big nights. So, I would guess that they only get one night together
during most three-day weekends.
> > Are there specific days of the week that the Knicks use to play?
>
> Dunno. Hopefully, someone will write in.
It could be any night during the week. On weekends it would be more likely
that the game would be played during the day, but not always true.
> > (It's basketball, right?)
>
> Errr... <hang on, I'll check> ..yes, that's right, in 413 "TOW Rachel's
> Crush", Rachel tries to get off with Joshua Bergin by giving him tickets
> for a basketball game, and that was the Knicks.
That's correct. The New York Knickerbockers are a professional basketball
team.
> >> Ross was still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years later.
> >> In fact, when did we first see a mobile phone in "Friends"?
>
> > I think mobiles / cellulars aren't as (long time) common in the US as in
> > Europe, but that I'm not really sure about.
>
> Well, we have such a big head start over them.
I was thinking about this very issue as I watched the episode over and over
(typing the transcript). All of a sudden "everybody" has a cell phone. Too
bad Rachel doesn't have one. She could have avoided the whole telephone
conflict by giving Bill her cell number.
> >> Since the previous episode was set at Thanksgiving, it must now be
> >> early December, and it's night. So how come only Phoebe is wearing a
> >> proper overcoat?
> >>
> > Try to explain snow or negative degrees to a Californian.
> >
> Absolutely, the irony is that many Americans on the east coast missed part
> of this episode (where Rachel talks about her grandmother, gives her phone
> number to Bill, does an impression of Ross, then realises the possibility
> of Ross getting the call) due to heavy snow interrupting the feed.
Oh, we lost 45 seconds of it here in Minnesota too, and oddly, we have no
snow yet. I understand that other locales lost different amounts of that
bar scene. Too bad too, because it was really the most important part of
the episode. After all, that's where they got the title.
> >> Why did the writers have to spoil a potentially good story with that
> >> time difference joke?
>
> > Oh, c'mon! You should already have noticed, that Joey is -er- easy to
> > persuade, even though you don't like it. Maybe excuse it with: he
doesn't
> > want to look dumb, because he knows, he is at least a little bit, thus
he
> > sometimes seems dumber than he actually is.
>
> It isn't that, it's that the joke had no reality. Joey was talking to
> Chandler (as he believed) in Tulsa, and five minutes later there he is
> in New York City. Nobody would swallow that ridiculous lie.
They portray Joey inconsistently, but generally he isn't a quick wit, but he
is highly intuitive. The time zone thing really throws some people off. I
think Joey would rather trust a good friend than figure out the time
situation.
> >> Which do you think was better - Monica's impression of Chandler,
> >> or Rachel's impression of Ross?
>
> > Phoebe's impression of Rachel. :-þ
>
> LOL, you're right - so how come I forgot all about that?
"Dead on" is right.
> > From the two choices given I'd pick the latter although the former was
> > closer to the original.
>
> How come?
Ross doesn't clear his throat repeatedly. Could Chandler BE any more turned
on?
> >> Phoebe staring hard at that chasm of a cleavage, and making saucy
> >> remarks about it, only serves to reinforce her lesbian tendencies;
> >
> > Yeah, once she realizes it for herself, there'll be no chance left for
> > your Ross&Phoebe dream. ;)
>
> C'est la vie. :)
LOL I think Phoebe is just free to speak what other women would never say.
> >> And how come Rachel objected to Ross staring at her cleavage,
>
> > IMHO she didn't. She did object to Ross seeing her differently than -er-
> > usual. And later complains about them not getting closer.
>
> Yes she did. He was staring at her breasts, and she said "Okay, stop. Stop
> looking at me like that."
Yes, she did say that, but there was quite a bit of lilt in her voice. I
think she really loved it.
> >> Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
> >>
> > And why did Rachel think that would make them come over? Weird American
> > rituals maybe?
>
> I don't know, but I doubt that mashed potatoes were intended to make
> the guys come over, they would be some sort of symbol of rejection.
Well, Rachel says, "Should we send them something back?" I think Phoebe
picks up on the word "something" and mashed potatoes pops into her head.
Who knows where her ideas come from?
If someone sent me mashed potatoes, I'd have to go talk to her to find out
what the he** it means. So, that's probably why Rachel was concerned.
> >> Does a story about bored people have to be boring?
>
> > No, but this one was most of the time. I only liked the scene where Ross
> > wants to start to talk, but quickly turns his head away.
>
> I don't even recall that, it was all so mind-numbingly awful.
OMG it got drawn out didn't it. Hmmm. Yeah. Uh-huh. (Sigh)
> >> Will Bill pass up a prize like Rachel Green simply because she
> >> didn't return his first call?
>
> > Yes. Less because most men did, more because I don't see the actor to
> > reappear. (That's no spoiler, just guessed.)
>
> Yeah, I agree.
I don't what will happen with Bill, but I wonder it the incident might be an
indicator for Ross that it's time to start dating again. Do we have time
for the two of them to start dating before the big wedding in 924?
> >> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so angry
> >> that there's a huge bust-up?
>
> > Maybe, but the writers will probably just ignore that bit in the future.
>
> That wouldn't be surprising.
It's too bad if they ignore it, because they could develop some plot that
would throw Rachel into a cheater-on-a-break role, for which Ross could fly
off the handle--a nice balancing plot IMO.
> >> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so touched
> >> that she falls into his arms?
> >>
> > Definitely no. What I could see is Ross telling her about it, but then
> > again see above.
>
> Yeah.
She would find a way to turn it against Ross.
> >> Will Ross & Rachel start acting like mature adults, and actually
> >> sit down and talk to each other?
> >>
> > Are you kidding?
>
> Yes. :)
I've been waiting eight years for them to act like mature adults. I'm just
hoping we see it by 923-24.
> > That be way too easy. In several other US series they would have started
> > to see a couple therapist (or what it's called) long ago.
>
> Absolutely. The strange thing is that Ross used to be a lot more mature
> than he is now, while the series has followed Rachel's maturation.
Really? I think they both bounce in and out of it quite a lot. They just
never seem to bounce into it at same time, with the exception of brief
moments--then, poof, they're children again.
> >> So, should we conclude that Bill is never going to be seen again, and
>
> > Yes.
>
> Okies.
LOL They call people from Oklahoma, Okies. I'm sure that was not what you
intended, but it threw me off for just a second there. I thought, "Where
did THAT comment come from?" Btw, "Okie" has a slightly negative
connotation.
> >> what actually counts is what happens when Rachel finds that message?
>
> > I think the writers will find different things to get some drama into
> > their relationship before they reunite. What I'm still sure they'll do.
>
> Wait & see.
I think it's gone forever, but then, as Fats Waller said, "One never knows,
do one?"
> >> Or was AFS ranked higher because he was a cast member of that other
> >> BKC production "Veronica's Closet", while CPG is a relative unknown?
That bothered me because we are never told in the dialogue that Bill's
friend is actually Kevin. So, when I was checking the credits it was not
where I expected to find it. It made me think that Kevin might have been a
different character, but there was no other character.
David Buehrle
My Yiddish isn't too good, but isn't Bubbe short for Bubbola? It's not
significant in any way. I was just wondering if I had my facts straight.
> Are there any signs that Sandra is Jewish also?
Have we established that Rachel is Jewish? It would seem odd to me for a
woman to be Christian when her parents are both Jewish, but not impossible.
We know Rachel celebrates Christmas . . ., but Rachel is a common Jewish
name, and Phoebe tried to rhyme Rachel with Draidel. (Of course, we all
know Phoebe pulls things out of the air. I mean, why mashed potatoes for
heaven's sake?) Was Barry Jewish?
Hey! If Rachel and Ross EVER get married, do they have a church wedding, or
a Jewish wedding?
Tennant Stuart
Christoph Paeper <cri...@gmx.net> wrote:
> *Tennant Stuart* <ten...@argonet.co.uk>:
Err... how do you mean?
>> Notice that when Mike arrived, he only looked at her face.
> Well, he has a girlfriend and not a Rachel.
Lol, yes.
>>> 'a b--aby and a Ross'.
>> I've been reading the posts on Angel's Friends,
> I'm not reading there. Usenet is faster and more comfortable than web
> forums. Plus in most cases the standard is higher, especially in de.ALL.
I have a soft spot for AF, since I began there.
>> where one fan wrote that Rachel said "You have a boyfriend,
>> I have a bo-baby", and then all the others picked it up;
>> but Rachel says no such thing.
> No "o-b", but a notable pause after the b, which I indicated with the
> dashes. You can't deny to hear that if you even notice where Mike looks.
I looked & listened very carefully, and there's no sound at all.
>>> and sometimes it's Monica's turn to work on Saturday and Sunday, so
>>> there you go.
>> Well, she's organised that very badly then, hasn't she?
>> She is the head chef, she's in charge.
> She'd be a bad boss if she never took the weekend shift.
Ordinarily, maybe. But Monica has special circumstances.
> Btw.: Why does "chef" mean "cook" in English, but "boss" in German,
> although it's not a German word? For now I guess it has a French origin
> and double meaning there.
Well, "chef" does not mean "cook" in English, it means "head cook",
being short for the phrase "chef de cuisine". Think of "chief".
>>> (It's basketball, right?)
>> Errr... <hang on, I'll check> ..yes, that's right, in 413 "TOW
> :-D Most people would just check with Google or knicks.com or the brother
> who is more into sports.
Grin. I'm not most people. :)
>>> I think mobiles / cellulars aren't as (long time) common in the US as
>>> in Europe, but that I'm not really sure about.
>> Well, we have such a big head start over them.
> OTOH beepers were never as popular here.
Well, they're crap compared with mobile phones.
> Also note that most of the big mobile phone manufactors don't originate
> from the US (e.g. Nokia, Ericsson & Sony).
Absolutely.
>> Joey was talking to Chandler (as he believed) in Tulsa,
>> and five minutes later there he is in New York City.
> Just because it takes five minutes in the episode it doesn't mean it
> really was five minutes.
Fair point, but how long did he wait? It wasn't three hours.
> Although Chandler would be an even worse friend if he let Joey wait in
> the hall longer then necessary.
Chandler would be a better friend if he trusted Joey's judgement.
>>>> Which do you think was better - Monica's impression of Chandler,
>>>> or Rachel's impression of Ross?
>>> I'd pick the latter although the former was closer to the original.
>> How come?
> I think it's JA's voice that's way too different from DS's. The throat
> clearings didn't help much, although they fit in.
So why would you pick the latter?
>>>> And how come Rachel objected to Ross staring at her cleavage,
>>> IMHO she didn't. She did object to Ross seeing her differently than
>>> -er- usual. And later complains about them not getting closer.
>> Yes she did. He was staring at her breasts, and she said "Okay, stop.
>> Stop looking at me like that."
> Yeah, "like that". Seems as if we have very different interpretations of
> that "that", IMO it didn't relate to her breasts in particular. Let's
> agree to disagree.
Okay.
>> The strange thing is that Ross used to be a lot more mature
>> than he is now, while the series has followed Rachel's maturation.
> He had to lose some of his maturity to mature Rachel. Maybe. Still
> leaves a great amount that he most have lost elsewhere.
Indeed.
>>> before they reunite. What I'm still sure they'll do.
>> Wait & see.
> Am I glad to know, that you don't read future spoilers.
I'm glad too. I'm convinced it enhances my enjoyment.
>>>> Or was AFS ranked higher because he was a cast member of that other
>>>> BKC production "Veronica's Closet", while CPG is a relative unknown?
>>> Was he the neighbour / gay boyfriend of <insert-name>?
>> I don't know.
> Yes, Josh and Br[iy]an it was.
Right.
>> And people complain about the continuity in "Friends"...
> Yeah, there's at least not one new friend (company owner respectively)
> each season. AFAIR the gay plot in VC had alright continuity, though:
> both characters had always been very feminine and were close friends--it
> was quite obvious that they'd get each other throughout that season,
> although Josh was preparing to get married to a masculine woman he
> avoided having sex with. That show had the 00:30 time slot a while ago
> with two or three consecutive repeats of all season; I should go to bed
> earlier weekdays.
Well, the thing was that most of those episodes weren't aired on US
network television. NBC cancelled the show when Br[iy]an's girlfriend
broke up with him, and after that was only seen on cable.
Tennant Stuart
"David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>>> Tennant Stuart wrote:
>>>> Rachel informs Phoebe that Ross had liked the way she
>>>> looked, and then he had made eye contact - disguising the truth
>>> I think she didn't mean Ross's staring with "eye contact", but didn't
>>> know how to call the *very* little "thing" they had.
>> Whatever, she was making it sound like more than it was.
> Well, actually, there was a moment where they each catch the other's
> glance for just a moment. I don't think anyone was disguising the truth,
> but certainly Rachel was stretching the incident out of proportion.
Indeed.
>>> Well, after he noticed the low neck-line, he looked at her face first,
>>> then got lost by the breasts ("A lot of people are thankful for
>>> /those/."), then face again.
>> Notice that when Mike arrived, he only looked at her face.
> He's very well behaved.
He probably went to the male US equivalent of a Swiss finishing school.
>> I've been reading the posts on Angel's Friends, where one fan wrote
>> that Rachel said "You have a boyfriend, I have a bo-baby", and then all
>> the others picked it up; but Rachel says no such thing. One expects
>> that she will continue with "I have a boyfriend" because of the
>> context, and thus some people imagined she said that, or even half of
>> that, but not so.
> She is obviously starting the b, but of course, baby starts with b too.
> We can only assume she was probably going to say boyfriend.
Given the context, she probably was, but that means she was merely
bouncing off what she had just said about Phoebe. In any case, some
people have imagined that she actually did say it, and she didn't.
>>>> Meanwhile, Ross is hanging out with Mike, but
>>>> they have nothing to do or talk about, so they quickly grow bored.
>>> And were boring to watch, too.
>> I know,it was hideous. :(
> OMG! They could have cut 30 seconds from those scenes without losing a
> thing. Five seconds here, ten there. It would have made all the
> difference.
More than that, they could have cut at least three whole scenes,
there were seven altogether.
>> It's a classic piece of "Friends" ambiguity, where it could be that Ross
>> was jealous (wanting her for himself), or possibly he just resented any
>> outsider (as Phoebe warned her against), then again he could be envious
>> (disliking her moving on before he did), or he simply being protective.
>> Experience of the past eight seasons should have taught us to be wary
>> of *any* of the above extrapolations, for most likely it is simply yet
>> another stunt that will be thrown away in the next episode.
> It's fun to extrapolate, but we must be mindful of the scope into which we
> let our imaginations run.
Exactly.
>>>> And since Chandler is away 4 days out of 7, how come Monica has to
>>>> work on 2 of the 3 days that her husband is in NYC?
>>> I guess Chandler's three days always include the weekend
>> They do, he goes away Monday mornings and returns Thursday evenings.
> Yes, each week (official holidays excluded, I assume).
Yep.
>>> and sometimes it's Monica's turn to work on Saturday and Sunday, so
>>> there you go.
>> Well, she's organised that very badly then, hasn't she?
>> She is the head chef, she's in charge.
> As head chef, she would also be aware that a restaurant's primary
> business would occur on Friday and Saturday nights. A head chef needs to
> be there on the big nights. So, I would guess that they only get one
> night together during most three-day weekends.
I would agree with that for normal circumstances; but Monica does not
enjoy the luxury of normal circumstances. She should explain to the
owner and then her staff that she can only see her darling husband at
the weekends, so they just won't have her services. If the owner does
not like it, he can look elsewhere for a head chef, which he will not
want to do since he was so desperate to get her. If the staff does
not like it, she can make sure to find a bloody good sous chef who
can run the whole show on his/her own at the weekends.
>>> Are there specific days of the week that the Knicks use to play?
>> Dunno. Hopefully, someone will write in.
> It could be any night during the week. On weekends it would be more
> likely that the game would be played during the day, but not always true.
Thanks. Well, this would be a Thursday, so the game would be at night.
>>> (It's basketball, right?)
>> Errr... <hang on, I'll check> ..yes, that's right, in 413 "TOW Rachel's
>> Crush", Rachel tries to get off with Joshua Bergin by giving him tickets
>> for a basketball game, and that was the Knicks.
> That's correct. The New York Knickerbockers are a professional
> basketball team.
Knickerbockers!?!?!
LOL, 8 years of watching "Friends" and this is the first I've heard that!
>>>> Ross was still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years
>>>> later. In fact, when did we first see a mobile phone in "Friends"?
>>> I think mobiles / cellulars aren't as (long time) common in the US as
>>> in Europe, but that I'm not really sure about.
>> Well, we have such a big head start over them.
> I was thinking about this very issue as I watched the episode over and
> over (typing the transcript). All of a sudden "everybody" has a cell
> phone. Too bad Rachel doesn't have one.
Rachel does have one, doesn't she? I seem to recall her having one.
> She could have avoided the whole telephone conflict by giving Bill her
> cell number.
Yes, mobile phones have ruined a lot of standby plots, since people
can find each other more easily, explain about missing appointments,
and get rescued from awkward situations.
There's a lovely moment in the movie "Three Kings" where a GI is
captured by Iraqis in the aftermath of the Gulf War, and shut in
a storeroom full of loot, including mobile phones - so he uses one
to call his wife in America, then she has to get through to the
Pentagon to arrange a rescue for him.
>>>> Since the previous episode was set at Thanksgiving, it must now be
>>>> early December, and it's night. So how come only Phoebe is wearing a
>>>> proper overcoat?
>>> Try to explain snow or negative degrees to a Californian.
>> Absolutely, the irony is that many Americans on the east coast missed
>> part of this episode (where Rachel talks about her grandmother, gives
>> her phone number to Bill, does an impression of Ross, then realises the
>> possibility of Ross getting the call) due to heavy snow interrupting
>> the feed.
> Oh, we lost 45 seconds of it here in Minnesota too, and oddly, we have no
> snow yet. I understand that other locales lost different amounts of that
> bar scene. Too bad too, because it was really the most important part of
> the episode. After all, that's where they got the title.
Absolutely. From what I've read, only the west coast was immune, which made
up for being three hours behind with the show. There's nothing odd about
you not having any snow, it was the fault of the weather at the uplink.
>>>> Why did the writers have to spoil a potentially good story with that
>>>> time difference joke?
>>> Oh, c'mon! You should already have noticed, that Joey is -er- easy to
>>> persuade, even though you don't like it. Maybe excuse it with: he
>>> doesn't want to look dumb, because he knows, he is at least a little
>>> bit, thus he sometimes seems dumber than he actually is.
>> It isn't that, it's that the joke had no reality. Joey was talking to
>> Chandler (as he believed) in Tulsa, and five minutes later there he is
>> in New York City. Nobody would swallow that ridiculous lie.
> They portray Joey inconsistently, but generally he isn't a quick wit,
> but he is highly intuitive. The time zone thing really throws some
> people off. I think Joey would rather trust a good friend than figure
> out the time situation.
Yes, that's how I saw it. :)
>>>> Which do you think was better - Monica's impression of Chandler,
>>>> or Rachel's impression of Ross?
>>> Phoebe's impression of Rachel. :-ş
>> LOL, you're right - so how come I forgot all about that?
> "Dead on" is right.
Yep.
>>> From the two choices given I'd pick the latter although the former was
>>> closer to the original.
>> How come?
> Ross doesn't clear his throat repeatedly. Could Chandler BE any more
> turned on?
That's right, but what puzzled me is why Christoph picked the choice
that was further from the original.
>> C'est la vie. :)
> LOL I think Phoebe is just free to speak what other women would never
> say.
Hah!
>>>> And how come Rachel objected to Ross staring at her cleavage,
>>> IMHO she didn't. She did object to Ross seeing her differently than
>>> -er- usual. And later complains about them not getting closer.
>> Yes she did. He was staring at her breasts, and she said "Okay, stop.
>> Stop looking at me like that."
> Yes, she did say that, but there was quite a bit of lilt in her voice.
> I think she really loved it.
Oh sure, of course she did - but what I'm objecting to is that she
boasted to her friend that there was eye contact, whereas in fact it
was eye-breast contact until she told him to stop looking there.
>>>> Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
>>> And why did Rachel think that would make them come over? Weird
>>> American rituals maybe?
>> I don't know, but I doubt that mashed potatoes were intended to make
>> the guys come over, they would be some sort of symbol of rejection.
> Well, Rachel says, "Should we send them something back?" I think Phoebe
> picks up on the word "something" and mashed potatoes pops into her head.
> Who knows where her ideas come from?
Lol yes, except they did show us in 623 "TOW the Ring"...
PHOEBE: So how are things going with Paul?
RACHEL: Good. Although y'know, he-he's a private guy. Y'know, I wish
I could get him to open up a little bit, share some feelings.
PHOEBE: That's easy! You just have to think of him as as a jar of
pickles that won't open.
RACHEL: So what are you saying; I should run him under hot water and
bang his head against a table?
PHOEBE: No, that's what you do when you want to get the truth out of
someone.
(Later on)
ROSS: Well, if Joey is angry, he really shouldn't just cover it
up. I wish he would just tell me the truth.
PHOEBE: Oh, if that's what you want, then you really should run his
head under hot water and bang his head against a table.
..Ross was very puzzled by that remark, but just for once we weren't.
> If someone sent me mashed potatoes, I'd have to go talk to her to find out
> what the he** it means. So, that's probably why Rachel was concerned.
Yeah, but I'm still hoping for a more metaphorical explanation.
>>>> Does a story about bored people have to be boring?
>>> No, but this one was most of the time. I only liked the scene where
>>> Ross wants to start to talk, but quickly turns his head away.
>> I don't even recall that, it was all so mind-numbingly awful.
> OMG it got drawn out didn't it. Hmmm. Yeah. Uh-huh. (Sigh)
Exactly. But recall Ross in 210 "TOW Russ"...
ROSS: See what? I don't know what she sees in... innn that goober.
And it takes him, what? Like... like... I don't know, uhh...
uhhh, hello... a... week, to get out a sentence.
CHANDLER: Yeah, it's annoying, isn't it?
..it *was* annoying, but DS still made it most entertaining.
>>>> Will Bill pass up a prize like Rachel Green simply because she
>>>> didn't return his first call?
>>> Yes. Less because most men did, more because I don't see the actor to
>>> reappear. (That's no spoiler, just guessed.)
>> Yeah, I agree.
> I don't what will happen with Bill, but I wonder it the incident might
> be an indicator for Ross that it's time to start dating again. Do we
> have time for the two of them to start dating before the big wedding in
> 924?
I think the jury ought to be out on that one.
>>>> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so angry
>>>> that there's a huge bust-up?
>>> Maybe, but the writers will probably just ignore that bit in the future.
>> That wouldn't be surprising.
> It's too bad if they ignore it, because they could develop some plot
> that would throw Rachel into a cheater-on-a-break role, for which Ross
> could fly off the handle--a nice balancing plot IMO.
Oh absolutely - but in the end she should come crawling apologetically
back to Ross, only to have him finally reject her, for all the grief that
she has caused him over the years. The series could end with Ross dreaming
of how he's known Rachel, and how much he loves her - and in the closing
moments of the show he wakes up, determined to stay away from her forever.
Well, I guess Claire would like that, and justice would be served...
>>>> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so touched
>>>> that she falls into his arms?
>>> Definitely no. What I could see is Ross telling her about it, but then
>>> again see above.
>> Yeah.
> She would find a way to turn it against Ross.
Of course, she always does.
>>>> Will Ross & Rachel start acting like mature adults, and actually
>>>> sit down and talk to each other?
>>> Are you kidding?
>> Yes. :)
> I've been waiting eight years for them to act like mature adults. I'm
> just hoping we see it by 923-24.
Hah, seeing them act like mature adults is why I'm hoping for Season 16.
>>> That be way too easy. In several other US series they would have
>>> started to see a couple therapist (or what it's called) long ago.
>> Absolutely. The strange thing is that Ross used to be a lot more mature
>> than he is now, while the series has followed Rachel's maturation.
> Really? I think they both bounce in and out of it quite a lot. They just
> never seem to bounce into it at same time, with the exception of brief
> moments--then, poof, they're children again.
Yes David, you've just put it much better than I did. :)
>>>> So, should we conclude that Bill is never going to be seen again, and
>>> Yes.
>> Okies.
> LOL They call people from Oklahoma, Okies. I'm sure that was not what
> you intended, but it threw me off for just a second there. I thought,
> "Where did THAT comment come from?" Btw, "Okie" has a slightly negative
> connotation.
Oops!
>>>> what actually counts is what happens when Rachel finds that message?
>>> I think the writers will find different things to get some drama into
>>> their relationship before they reunite. What I'm still sure they'll do.
>> Wait & see.
> I think it's gone forever, but then, as Fats Waller said, "One never
> knows, do one?"
Exactly.
Fans with expectations must bear in mind that *anything* can happen.
>>>> Or was AFS ranked higher because he was a cast member of that other
>>>> BKC production "Veronica's Closet", while CPG is a relative unknown?
> That bothered me because we are never told in the dialogue that Bill's
> friend is actually Kevin. So, when I was checking the credits it was not
> where I expected to find it. It made me think that Kevin might have been
> a different character, but there was no other character.
I knowwww!!! If this series has one thing it's crap at doing, it's naming
its characters. Fortunately, Phoebe made that remark about Rachel, Bill,
Ross, and Emma being so happy together, else you guys would have had to
but up with me going crazy to find out which guy was which - and it would
have been even worse if their actors hadn't been so easy to tell apart.
Tennant Stuart
"David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>> Absolutely, thanks Belphoebe!
I dunno. The main thing is that it's "Bubbe", not "Bubba", yes?
>> Are there any signs that Sandra is Jewish also?
> Have we established that Rachel is Jewish? It would seem odd to me for a
> woman to be Christian when her parents are both Jewish, but not
> impossible.
Wearing the Star of David was a pretty good sign.
> We know Rachel celebrates Christmas
That means nothing. Most people do, it's not really a Christian festival,
it's pagan, and anyway it's just part of Western culture.
> but Rachel is a common Jewish name, and Phoebe tried to rhyme Rachel
> with Draidel. (Of course, we all know Phoebe pulls things out of the
> air. I mean, why mashed potatoes for heaven's sake?)
Exactly.
> Was Barry Jewish?
I think so.
> Hey! If Rachel and Ross EVER get married, do they have a church wedding,
> or a Jewish wedding?
Well, Rachel and Ross ALREADY HAVE gotten married...
Tennant Stuart
"iphigenia" <preter...@hotmail.comeon> wrote:
> Tennant Stuart wrote:
I think that's a very good point, Iphigenia.
>>> There's my interpretation. : )
>> Okay, but why mashed potatoes?
> Maybe she had them for dinner? Why she would think a bar would *serve*
> them is beyong me, though.
I knowwwwww!!!!
>> Why didn't Ross invite Joey round?
> Good point. Joey was busy guarding the door, but Ross didn't know that.
Exactly.
And if Ross had phoned Joey, and heard what was happening, he & Mike
would've come round to help out - they wouldn't be bored any more!
>> That's got nothing to do with it, she was looking very hot.
> Oh, OK, well, this is where a man's perspective comes in handy.
Yep. You have to think about where the blood goes when it leaves
a man's brain... ;)
> If I were in the situation and found out that he had called and Ross
> hidden the message from me, I'd think, "oh great, now he's going to
> think I didn't want to talk to him after all and he's never going to
> call again..."
Grin. You need to watch 304 "TOW the Metaphorical Tunnel" again...
CHANDLER: I've actually ruined this haven't I? It's time for
the good ice cream now, right?
RACHEL: Yeah, it is.
(The phone rings, and Chandler answers it.)
CHANDLER: Hello. Hi, Janice! Can you hold on for a second?
Okay. (to Monica & Rachel) Okay, what do I do?
RACHEL: Shhh... I don't know what to do, this is totally unprecedented.
MONICA: If-if-if we ever did what you did a man would never call.
CHANDLER: (on phone) Hello, Janice. Hi, I'm so glad that you called, I
know I've been acting a really weird lately. And, it's just
because I'm crazy about you, and I just got... stupid, and,
and scared, and... stupid a couple of more times. I'm sorry.
(listens) Really?! (listens) Really?!
RACHEL: He's soo lucky, if Janice were a guy, she'd be sleeping with
somebody else by now.
CHANDLER: (on phone) I love you too.
MONICA: Aw, it's so unfair.
(The girls both start digging into the good ice cream.)
..I know that's the other way round, but the scene demonstrates how
the 'rules' are different for men & women. :)
Tennant Stuart
Christoph Paeper <cri...@gmx.net> wrote:
> *Tennant Stuart* <ten...@argonet.co.uk>:
>> So you're saying that she's not straight or gay, she's straight and gay?
> What's wrong with or new about bisexuals?
According to Phoebe's song in 212 "TOA the Superbowl (part 1)"...
# Sometimes men love women,
Sometimes men love men.
And then there are bisexuals,
Though some just say they're
Kidding themselves. #
> Most men's dream girlfriends are, although few would confess.
Wait till you see the lesbian porn episode of "Coupling"...
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.6c7ca64ba4...@argonet.co.uk...
>> Are there any signs that Sandra is Jewish also?
> I can't think of anything definitive, but maybe something will come up
> later. . . .
Okay.
>> And don't you have anything else to say about my review?
> Eek, just coming up for breath from my grading bonanza. I've got another
> day's worth to go. . . .
Oops, sorry! Lots of luck with that, and I'll look forward to seeing you
again when you're done. :)
Belphoebe
"David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote in message
news:9RBK9.6197$_b.1...@twister.kc.rr.com...
Nope, bubbe is a separate word. Here's a quote from a "Yiddish word of the
week" site <http://www.zipple.com/weeklyzipple/weeklyyiddish.shtml>:
bubbe (buh-bee) Grandmother
zayde (zay-dee) Grandfather
Hurry! Put on your sweater! Your Bubbe and Zayde are coming for dinner and
will think I'm a terrible mother to let you catch cold!
"Bubelah" is according to another site, darling, sweetheart - especially a
child (lit. "little grandma").
Bubbe and zayde can also be pronounced "bubbeh" and "zaydeh."
But this is probably more than you really wanted to know. . . .
> Have we established that Rachel is Jewish?
She has worn a star of David necklace, but she's never really said anything,
one way or another. "My bubbe" seems the best evidence we have yet.
Belphoebe
Belphoebe
>
> > Eek, just coming up for breath from my grading bonanza. I've got
another
> > day's worth to go. . . .
>
> Oops, sorry! Lots of luck with that, and I'll look forward to seeing you
> again when you're done. :)
Finished today--yea! I'm a little fried, but I'll try to think of some
things to say soon. :)
Belphoebe
David Buehrle
Is there any such thing here? Oh yeah, maybe out east.
> >> I've been reading the posts on Angel's Friends, where one fan wrote
> >> that Rachel said "You have a boyfriend, I have a bo-baby", and then all
> >> the others picked it up; but Rachel says no such thing. One expects
> >> that she will continue with "I have a boyfriend" because of the
> >> context, and thus some people imagined she said that, or even half of
> >> that, but not so.
>
> > She is obviously starting the b, but of course, baby starts with b too.
> > We can only assume she was probably going to say boyfriend.
>
> Given the context, she probably was, but that means she was merely
> bouncing off what she had just said about Phoebe. In any case, some
> people have imagined that she actually did say it, and she didn't.
I had another listen, and you are right--there's no sound, although her lips
are in the form of a b. I would have sworn the b sound was there too. It's
a funny thing the way the mind fills in the blanks for you, and then recalls
it from memory that way.
> >>>> Meanwhile, Ross is hanging out with Mike, but
> >>>> they have nothing to do or talk about, so they quickly grow bored.
>
> >>> And were boring to watch, too.
>
> >> I know,it was hideous. :(
>
> > OMG! They could have cut 30 seconds from those scenes without losing a
> > thing. Five seconds here, ten there. It would have made all the
> > difference.
>
> More than that, they could have cut at least three whole scenes,
> there were seven altogether.
The bottom line is that I didn't buy it--although I had this date last week
. . well, that's OT, never mind. ;-)
As I thought about this later I realized that a person can't really be
expected to work EVERY weekend. Even stage actors get a break every now and
then.
> >>> Are there specific days of the week that the Knicks use to play?
>
> >> Dunno. Hopefully, someone will write in.
>
> > It could be any night during the week. On weekends it would be more
> > likely that the game would be played during the day, but not always
true.
>
> Thanks. Well, this would be a Thursday, so the game would be at night.
>
> >>> (It's basketball, right?)
>
> >> Errr... <hang on, I'll check> ..yes, that's right, in 413 "TOW Rachel's
> >> Crush", Rachel tries to get off with Joshua Bergin by giving him
tickets
> >> for a basketball game, and that was the Knicks.
>
> > That's correct. The New York Knickerbockers are a professional
> > basketball team.
>
> Knickerbockers!?!?!
I'll bet they haven't been called that since the '50s. There are some other
sports teams here that have shortened their team name. In baseball:
Cincinnati Reds were the Redlegs (very old change), and the A's were the
Athletics ( a recent change).
> LOL, 8 years of watching "Friends" and this is the first I've heard that!
>
>
> >>>> Ross was still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years
> >>>> later. In fact, when did we first see a mobile phone in "Friends"?
>
> >>> I think mobiles / cellulars aren't as (long time) common in the US as
> >>> in Europe, but that I'm not really sure about.
>
> >> Well, we have such a big head start over them.
>
> > I was thinking about this very issue as I watched the episode over and
> > over (typing the transcript). All of a sudden "everybody" has a cell
> > phone. Too bad Rachel doesn't have one.
>
> Rachel does have one, doesn't she? I seem to recall her having one.
I did a scan of transcripts without finding a reference. It's tough though
because the stage direction might have said phone instead of cell phone or
cell.
> > She could have avoided the whole telephone conflict by giving Bill her
> > cell number.
>
> Yes, mobile phones have ruined a lot of standby plots, since people
> can find each other more easily, explain about missing appointments,
> and get rescued from awkward situations.
>
> There's a lovely moment in the movie "Three Kings" where a GI is
> captured by Iraqis in the aftermath of the Gulf War, and shut in
> a storeroom full of loot, including mobile phones - so he uses one
> to call his wife in America, then she has to get through to the
> Pentagon to arrange a rescue for him.
I seem to recall wondering why those phones worked. The accounts were still
active I guess?
> >>>> Since the previous episode was set at Thanksgiving, it must now be
> >>>> early December, and it's night. So how come only Phoebe is wearing a
> >>>> proper overcoat?
>
> >>> Try to explain snow or negative degrees to a Californian.
>
> >> Absolutely, the irony is that many Americans on the east coast missed
> >> part of this episode (where Rachel talks about her grandmother, gives
> >> her phone number to Bill, does an impression of Ross, then realises the
> >> possibility of Ross getting the call) due to heavy snow interrupting
> >> the feed.
>
> > Oh, we lost 45 seconds of it here in Minnesota too, and oddly, we have
no
> > snow yet. I understand that other locales lost different amounts of
that
> > bar scene. Too bad too, because it was really the most important part
of
> > the episode. After all, that's where they got the title.
>
> Absolutely. From what I've read, only the west coast was immune, which
made
> up for being three hours behind with the show. There's nothing odd about
> you not having any snow, it was the fault of the weather at the uplink.
I can see why the uplink would be an issue, but why would different places
be out for different times. I guess I don't understand the dynamics of the
process. Does the west coast of the US still get a different feed like they
used to, or do they simply pick up the eastern feed and replay it later? I
seem to recall reading something about network affiliates taping the early
feed in case there were problems, but this was more than a decade ago.
> >>>> Why did the writers have to spoil a potentially good story with that
> >>>> time difference joke?
>
> >>> Oh, c'mon! You should already have noticed, that Joey is -er- easy to
> >>> persuade, even though you don't like it. Maybe excuse it with: he
> >>> doesn't want to look dumb, because he knows, he is at least a little
> >>> bit, thus he sometimes seems dumber than he actually is.
>
> >> It isn't that, it's that the joke had no reality. Joey was talking to
> >> Chandler (as he believed) in Tulsa, and five minutes later there he is
> >> in New York City. Nobody would swallow that ridiculous lie.
>
> > They portray Joey inconsistently, but generally he isn't a quick wit,
> > but he is highly intuitive. The time zone thing really throws some
> > people off. I think Joey would rather trust a good friend than figure
> > out the time situation.
>
> Yes, that's how I saw it. :)
It doesn't explain the heavy leather jacket though. Is the hall cooler than
the apartments? That's the case in my duplex, but I've never noticed it
being an issue with anyone on the show.
Maybe she targeted the eye-contact because they were on the verge of
expressing something honest to each other. (Oh God forbid!) Of course, they
narrowly escaped THAT dilema.
> >>>> Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
>
> >>> And why did Rachel think that would make them come over? Weird
> >>> American rituals maybe?
>
> >> I don't know, but I doubt that mashed potatoes were intended to make
> >> the guys come over, they would be some sort of symbol of rejection.
>
> > Well, Rachel says, "Should we send them something back?" I think Phoebe
> > picks up on the word "something" and mashed potatoes pops into her head.
> > Who knows where her ideas come from?
>
> Lol yes, except they did show us in 623 "TOW the Ring"...
>
> PHOEBE: So how are things going with Paul?
>
> RACHEL: Good. Although y'know, he-he's a private guy. Y'know, I wish
> I could get him to open up a little bit, share some feelings.
>
> PHOEBE: That's easy! You just have to think of him as as a jar of
> pickles that won't open.
>
> RACHEL: So what are you saying; I should run him under hot water and
> bang his head against a table?
>
> PHOEBE: No, that's what you do when you want to get the truth out of
> someone.
>
> (Later on)
>
> ROSS: Well, if Joey is angry, he really shouldn't just cover it
> up. I wish he would just tell me the truth.
>
> PHOEBE: Oh, if that's what you want, then you really should run his
> head under hot water and bang his head against a table.
>
> ..Ross was very puzzled by that remark, but just for once we weren't.
Oh my, I must be Joey. I didn't get it until reading this. I've even seen
it a number of times. I never connected the dots. It's like Ross's
sweater--beat, beat, reaction.
> > If someone sent me mashed potatoes, I'd have to go talk to her to find
out
> > what the he** it means. So, that's probably why Rachel was concerned.
>
> Yeah, but I'm still hoping for a more metaphorical explanation.
Good luck. ;-)
> >>>> Does a story about bored people have to be boring?
>
> >>> No, but this one was most of the time. I only liked the scene where
> >>> Ross wants to start to talk, but quickly turns his head away.
>
> >> I don't even recall that, it was all so mind-numbingly awful.
>
> > OMG it got drawn out didn't it. Hmmm. Yeah. Uh-huh. (Sigh)
>
> Exactly. But recall Ross in 210 "TOW Russ"...
>
> ROSS: See what? I don't know what she sees in... innn that goober.
> And it takes him, what? Like... like... I don't know, uhh...
> uhhh, hello... a... week, to get out a sentence.
>
> CHANDLER: Yeah, it's annoying, isn't it?
>
> ..it *was* annoying, but DS still made it most entertaining.
Parts of it, yes, but I'm not quite so generous over that/those bit(s).
> >>>> Will Bill pass up a prize like Rachel Green simply because she
> >>>> didn't return his first call?
>
> >>> Yes. Less because most men did, more because I don't see the actor to
> >>> reappear. (That's no spoiler, just guessed.)
>
> >> Yeah, I agree.
>
> > I don't what will happen with Bill, but I wonder it the incident might
> > be an indicator for Ross that it's time to start dating again. Do we
> > have time for the two of them to start dating before the big wedding in
> > 924?
>
> I think the jury ought to be out on that one.
I think it *is* still out. (Another case of projecting into the abyss.)
> >>>> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so angry
> >>>> that there's a huge bust-up?
>
> >>> Maybe, but the writers will probably just ignore that bit in the
future.
>
> >> That wouldn't be surprising.
>
> > It's too bad if they ignore it, because they could develop some plot
> > that would throw Rachel into a cheater-on-a-break role, for which Ross
> > could fly off the handle--a nice balancing plot IMO.
>
> Oh absolutely - but in the end she should come crawling apologetically
> back to Ross, only to have him finally reject her, for all the grief that
> she has caused him over the years. The series could end with Ross dreaming
> of how he's known Rachel, and how much he loves her - and in the closing
> moments of the show he wakes up, determined to stay away from her forever.
>
> Well, I guess Claire would like that, and justice would be served...
I don't know about justice, but at least satisfaction, possibly bragging
rights.
> >>>> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so touched
> >>>> that she falls into his arms?
>
> >>> Definitely no. What I could see is Ross telling her about it, but then
> >>> again see above.
>
> >> Yeah.
>
> > She would find a way to turn it against Ross.
>
> Of course, she always does.
>
> >>>> Will Ross & Rachel start acting like mature adults, and actually
> >>>> sit down and talk to each other?
>
> >>> Are you kidding?
>
> >> Yes. :)
>
> > I've been waiting eight years for them to act like mature adults. I'm
> > just hoping we see it by 923-24.
>
> Hah, seeing them act like mature adults is why I'm hoping for Season 16.
>
> >>> That be way too easy. In several other US series they would have
> >>> started to see a couple therapist (or what it's called) long ago.
>
> >> Absolutely. The strange thing is that Ross used to be a lot more mature
> >> than he is now, while the series has followed Rachel's maturation.
>
> > Really? I think they both bounce in and out of it quite a lot. They
just
> > never seem to bounce into it at same time, with the exception of brief
> > moments--then, poof, they're children again.
>
> Yes David, you've just put it much better than I did. :)
Ta
> >>>> So, should we conclude that Bill is never going to be seen again, and
>
> >>> Yes.
>
> >> Okies.
>
> > LOL They call people from Oklahoma, Okies. I'm sure that was not what
> > you intended, but it threw me off for just a second there. I thought,
> > "Where did THAT comment come from?" Btw, "Okie" has a slightly negative
> > connotation.
>
> Oops!
I'm thinking Chandler even makes a comment about Okies. I might have to
look back through recent transcripts to see if my memory serves.
> >>>> what actually counts is what happens when Rachel finds that message?
>
> >>> I think the writers will find different things to get some drama into
> >>> their relationship before they reunite. What I'm still sure they'll
do.
>
> >> Wait & see.
>
> > I think it's gone forever, but then, as Fats Waller said, "One never
> > knows, do one?"
>
> Exactly.
>
> Fans with expectations must bear in mind that *anything* can happen.
That's true. Who would have thought an alien would come to Milwaukee and
freeze Fonzie? Certainly not I.
> >>>> Or was AFS ranked higher because he was a cast member of that other
> >>>> BKC production "Veronica's Closet", while CPG is a relative unknown?
>
> > That bothered me because we are never told in the dialogue that Bill's
> > friend is actually Kevin. So, when I was checking the credits it was not
> > where I expected to find it. It made me think that Kevin might have been
> > a different character, but there was no other character.
>
> I knowwww!!! If this series has one thing it's crap at doing, it's naming
> its characters. Fortunately, Phoebe made that remark about Rachel, Bill,
> Ross, and Emma being so happy together, else you guys would have had to
> but up with me going crazy to find out which guy was which - and it would
> have been even worse if their actors hadn't been so easy to tell apart.
>
99-plus percent of the public never pays attention to the credits. So, I'm
sure the producers aren't going to push the issue.
I'm just glad that I'm a credits-watcher. It was such a treat at the end of
the credits of "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" to see Ferris pop into the hall
and say, "You're still here? It's over. Go home."
David Buehrle
Just realizing THAT it leaves a man's brain is a good start.
David Buehrle
The captioning says, "bubby", but of course it's a translation of another
language. So, I suppose it doesn't really warrant so much of my brain
activity or time.
> >> Are there any signs that Sandra is Jewish also?
>
> > Have we established that Rachel is Jewish? It would seem odd to me for
a
> > woman to be Christian when her parents are both Jewish, but not
> > impossible.
>
> Wearing the Star of David was a pretty good sign.
When was that?
> > We know Rachel celebrates Christmas
>
> That means nothing. Most people do, it's not really a Christian festival,
> it's pagan, and anyway it's just part of Western culture.
When I was a kid we had friends that had a Christmas tree that they termed a
"Chanukah bush." Whatever floats your boat I guess.
> > but Rachel is a common Jewish name, and Phoebe tried to rhyme Rachel
> > with Draidel. (Of course, we all know Phoebe pulls things out of the
> > air. I mean, why mashed potatoes for heaven's sake?)
>
> Exactly.
>
>
> > Was Barry Jewish?
>
> I think so.
>
>
> > Hey! If Rachel and Ross EVER get married, do they have a church
wedding,
> > or a Jewish wedding?
>
> Well, Rachel and Ross ALREADY HAVE gotten married...
And we all know how well that stuck.
David Buehrle
news:l4SK9.14155$4W1....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
No, this is great for me. I could listen to a megileh about it. Of course,
the rest of the ng is about to vetsh, and personally I hope to avoid the
tzures. (OMG I'm becoming Niles Crane--wrong ng for that.)
Lauren
Well, I know she hater her mother, but to serve ham at her funeral ???
Lauren
Belphoebe
>
> No, this is great for me. I could listen to a megileh about it. Of
course,
> the rest of the ng is about to vetsh, and personally I hope to avoid the
> tzures. (OMG I'm becoming Niles Crane--wrong ng for that.)
Oh, good--just so long as I didn't bore you. :)
Belphoebe
Tennant Stuart
"David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.a9d6c94ba4...@argonet.co.uk...
>>>> Notice that when Mike arrived, he only looked at her face.
>>> He's very well behaved.
>> He probably went to the male US equivalent of a Swiss finishing school.
> Is there any such thing here? Oh yeah, maybe out east.
Exactly.
>>>> I've been reading the posts on Angel's Friends, where one fan wrote
>>>> that Rachel said "You have a boyfriend, I have a bo-baby", and then
>>>> all the others picked it up; but Rachel says no such thing. One
>>>> expects that she will continue with "I have a boyfriend" because of
>>>> the context, and thus some people imagined she said that, or even
>>>> half of that, but not so.
>>> She is obviously starting the b, but of course, baby starts with b
>>> too. We can only assume she was probably going to say boyfriend.
>> Given the context, she probably was, but that means she was merely
>> bouncing off what she had just said about Phoebe. In any case, some
>> people have imagined that she actually did say it, and she didn't.
> I had another listen, and you are right--there's no sound, although her
> lips are in the form of a b. I would have sworn the b sound was there
> too. It's a funny thing the way the mind fills in the blanks for you,
> and then recalls it from memory that way.
Absolutely, thanks for being honest about it. :)
>> More than that, they could have cut at least three whole scenes,
>> there were seven altogether.
> The bottom line is that I didn't buy it--although I had this date last
> week... well, that's OT, never mind. ;-)
Grin. The date was very boring, hence disaster?
Or you guys didn't talk much, just did stuff, hence success?
>>> As head chef, she would also be aware that a restaurant's primary
>>> business would occur on Friday and Saturday nights. A head chef needs
>>> to be there on the big nights. So, I would guess that they only get
>>> one night together during most three-day weekends.
>> I would agree with that for normal circumstances; but Monica does not
>> enjoy the luxury of normal circumstances. She should explain to the
>> owner and then her staff that she can only see her darling husband at
>> the weekends, so they just won't have her services. If the owner does
>> not like it, he can look elsewhere for a head chef, which he will not
>> want to do since he was so desperate to get her. If the staff does
>> not like it, she can make sure to find a bloody good sous chef who
>> can run the whole show on his/her own at the weekends.
> As I thought about this later I realized that a person can't really be
> expected to work EVERY weekend. Even stage actors get a break every now
> and then.
Yep. Monica is a valuable commodity, she can impose terms.
>>> The New York Knickerbockers are a professional basketball team.
>> Knickerbockers!?!?!
> I'll bet they haven't been called that since the '50s. There are some
> other sports teams here that have shortened their team name. In
> baseball: Cincinnati Reds were the Redlegs (very old change), and the
> A's were the Athletics ( a recent change).
What about the Mets?
Metropolitans? Meteorologists? Metal Workers? Methyl Alcoholics?
>> Rachel does have one, doesn't she? I seem to recall her having one.
> I did a scan of transcripts without finding a reference. It's tough
> though because the stage direction might have said phone instead of cell
> phone or cell.
That's right.
But an early sighting would be the mobile she borrowed in 207.
>> In the movie "Three Kings" a GI is captured by Iraqis in the aftermath
>> of the Gulf War, and shut in a storeroom full of loot, including mobile
>> phones - so he uses one to call his wife in America, then she has to
>> get through to the Pentagon to arrange a rescue for him.
> I seem to recall wondering why those phones worked. The accounts were
> still active I guess?
Probably, assuming the owners and/or the Kuwaiti authorities were murdered.
>> From what I've read, only the west coast was immune, which made up for
>> being three hours behind with the show. There's nothing odd about you
>> not having any snow, it was the fault of the weather at the uplink.
> I can see why the uplink would be an issue, but why would different
> places be out for different times. I guess I don't understand the
> dynamics of the process. Does the west coast of the US still get a
> different feed like they used to, or do they simply pick up the eastern
> feed and replay it later? I seem to recall reading something about
> network affiliates taping the early feed in case there were problems,
> but this was more than a decade ago.
If I was organising it, I would tape the first transmission to broadcast
it in the western evening, but if that went wrong, order a second uplink
at the appropriate time. But then, if I was organising it, I would take
out a later show from the eastern schedule, and show "Friends" again.
> It doesn't explain the heavy leather jacket though. Is the hall cooler
> than the apartments? That's the case in my duplex, but I've never
> noticed it being an issue with anyone on the show.
We know that the apartments have their own heating from when it has gone
wrong - see 119 "TOW the Monkey Gets Away" and 209 "TOW Phoebe's Dad" - so
it makes economic sense for the hallways to be heated to a lesser degree.
This means that the weird thing isn't Joey's heavy leather jacket, it's
Chandler's short-sleeved shirt, especially since he was outdoors. Could
this have been a subtlish signal about which of them is the dumbass?
>> What I'm objecting to is that she boasted to her friend that there was
>> eye contact, whereas in fact it was eye-breast contact until she told
>> him to stop looking there.
> Maybe she targeted the eye-contact because they were on the verge of
> expressing something honest to each other. (Oh God forbid!) Of course,
> they narrowly escaped THAT dilema.
Nah, he just gawped at her tits, then got told off.
RACHEL: Did you not get a good enough look? (113)
>>> Who knows where Phoebe's ideas come from?
>> Lol yes, except they did show us in 623 "TOW the Ring"...
>> PHOEBE: So how are things going with Paul?
>> RACHEL: Good. Although y'know, he-he's a private guy. Y'know, I wish
>> I could get him to open up a little bit, share some feelings.
>> PHOEBE: That's easy! You just have to think of him as as a jar of
>> pickles that won't open.
>> RACHEL: So what are you saying; I should run him under hot water and
>> bang his head against a table?
>> PHOEBE: No, that's what you do when you want to get the truth out of
>> someone.
>> (Later on)
>> ROSS: Well, if Joey is angry, he really shouldn't just cover it
>> up. I wish he would just tell me the truth.
>> PHOEBE: Oh, if that's what you want, then you really should run his
>> head under hot water and bang his head against a table.
>> ..Ross was very puzzled by that remark, but just for once we weren't.
> Oh my, I must be Joey. I didn't get it until reading this. I've even
> seen it a number of times. I never connected the dots. It's like Ross's
> sweater--beat, beat, reaction.
Grin. You're very welcome, David. Need anything else explaining?
The useful little sink in 120 "TOW the Evil Orthodontist", perhaps? :)
>>> If someone sent me mashed potatoes, I'd have to go talk to her to find
>>> out what the he** it means. So, that's probably why Rachel was
>>> concerned.
>> Yeah, but I'm still hoping for a more metaphorical explanation.
> Good luck. ;-)
Lol, I heard that as though Julie Graff was saying it...
>> But recall Ross in 210 "TOW Russ"...
>> ROSS: See what? I don't know what she sees in... innn that goober.
>> And it takes him, what? Like... like... I don't know, uhh...
>> uhhh, hello... a... week, to get out a sentence.
>> CHANDLER: Yeah, it's annoying, isn't it?
>> ..it *was* annoying, but DS still made it most entertaining.
> Parts of it, yes, but I'm not quite so generous over that/those bit(s).
Oh okay, but I thought Schwimmer was great in 210.
>>> I don't what will happen with Bill, but I wonder it the incident might
>>> be an indicator for Ross that it's time to start dating again. Do we
>>> have time for the two of them to start dating before the big wedding
>>> in 924?
>> I think the jury ought to be out on that one.
> I think it *is* still out. (Another case of projecting into the abyss.)
Yah.
>>> It's too bad if they ignore it, because they could develop some plot
>>> that would throw Rachel into a cheater-on-a-break role, for which Ross
>>> could fly off the handle--a nice balancing plot IMO.
>> Oh absolutely - but in the end she should come crawling apologetically
>> back to Ross, only to have him finally reject her, for all the grief
>> that she has caused him over the years. The series could end with Ross
>> dreaming of how he's known Rachel, and how much he loves her - and in
>> the closing moments of the show he wakes up, determined to stay away
>> from her forever.
>> Well, I guess Claire would like that, and justice would be served...
> I don't know about justice, but at least satisfaction, possibly bragging
> rights.
Claire would see it as justice, and I'd tend to agree, except for Karen.
>> Fans with expectations must bear in mind that *anything* can happen.
> That's true. Who would have thought an alien would come to Milwaukee and
> freeze Fonzie? Certainly not I.
There you go, and out of that came a spin-off which launched a major star.
>> If this series has one thing it's crap at doing, it's naming its
>> characters. Fortunately, Phoebe made that remark about Rachel, Bill,
>> Ross, and Emma being so happy together, else you guys would have had to
>> but up with me going crazy to find out which guy was which - and it
>> would have been even worse if their actors hadn't been so easy to tell
>> apart.
> 99-plus percent of the public never pays attention to the credits. So,
> I'm sure the producers aren't going to push the issue.
Yeah.
> I'm just glad that I'm a credits-watcher. It was such a treat at the end
> of the credits of "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" to see Ferris pop into the
> hall and say, "You're still here? It's over. Go home."
Absolutely, and there's an extra scene after the credits of the new Harry
Potter movie, "Chamber of Secrets".
Tennant Stuart
"David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>>> Tennant Stuart wrote:
>>>> That's got nothing to do with it, she was looking very hot.
>>> Oh, OK, well, this is where a man's perspective comes in handy.
>> Yep. You have to think about where the blood goes when it leaves
>> a man's brain... ;)
> Just realizing THAT it leaves a man's brain is a good start.
Grin.
Tennant Stuart
"Lauren" <richard.the...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
>> Absolutely, thanks Belphoebe!
Sorry Lauren, that's Judy Geller you're thinking of, not Sandra Green. :)
Tennant Stuart
"David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>>>> Absolutely, thanks Belphoebe!
Yeah, I'll go by what a Yiddish speaker says.
>>>> Are there any signs that Sandra is Jewish also?
>>> Have we established that Rachel is Jewish? It would seem odd to me
>>> for a woman to be Christian when her parents are both Jewish, but
>>> not impossible.
>> Wearing the Star of David was a pretty good sign.
> When was that?
It's on a nice little pendant that Rachel wears for the first third of
313 "TOW Monica and Richard Are Just Friends". Monica wears one quite
like it in 624 "TOW the Proposal (part 1)", just before the Mr.Bowmont
arrives outside Central Perk.
>>> We know Rachel celebrates Christmas
>> That means nothing. Most people do, it's not really a Christian
>> festival, it's pagan, and anyway it's just part of Western culture.
> When I was a kid we had friends that had a Christmas tree that they
> termed a "Chanukah bush." Whatever floats your boat I guess.
Absolutely.
710 "TOW the Holiday Armadillo" illustrated the power of the mainstream,
backed by commercial interest, to sweep aside minority culture.
>>> Hey! If Rachel and Ross EVER get married, do they have a church
>>> wedding, or a Jewish wedding?
>> Well, Rachel and Ross ALREADY HAVE gotten married...
> And we all know how well that stuck.
Yeah. I was a bit surprised that Rachel didn't tell Ross to hang onto
the signed divorce papers - then since she was moving in with Phoebe,
that would have given him time to recover from all his stress.
Then they could just take it easy, see how it goes for a year, and after
that either get divorced for the last time, or stand up in front of their
friends, and do the wedding properly.
It seems to me that would have made a viable story arc for Season 6. What
is more, after I published this in my review of 605 "TOW Joey's Porsche",
we received unconfirmed insider info that the first few episodes of the
season were made with the idea of some sort of continuing relationship,
but then the creators changed their minds, and aborted the storyline.
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.86d8f24ba4...@argonet.co.uk...
>>>> And don't you have anything else to say about my review?
>>> Eek, just coming up for breath from my grading bonanza. I've
>>> got another day's worth to go. . . .
>> Oops, sorry! Lots of luck with that, and I'll look forward to
>> seeing you again when you're done. :)
> Finished today--yea! I'm a little fried, but I'll try to think
> of some things to say soon. :)
Okay! :)
Errr... fried?
David Buehrle
LOL Well, what else could I do. It's documented on thousands of video
cassettes across North America.
> >> More than that, they could have cut at least three whole scenes,
> >> there were seven altogether.
>
> > The bottom line is that I didn't buy it--although I had this date last
> > week... well, that's OT, never mind. ;-)
>
> Grin. The date was very boring, hence disaster?
>
> Or you guys didn't talk much, just did stuff, hence success?
I don't expect to go out with her again. You can draw your own conclusions.
> >>> As head chef, she would also be aware that a restaurant's primary
> >>> business would occur on Friday and Saturday nights. A head chef needs
> >>> to be there on the big nights. So, I would guess that they only get
> >>> one night together during most three-day weekends.
>
> >> I would agree with that for normal circumstances; but Monica does not
> >> enjoy the luxury of normal circumstances. She should explain to the
> >> owner and then her staff that she can only see her darling husband at
> >> the weekends, so they just won't have her services. If the owner does
> >> not like it, he can look elsewhere for a head chef, which he will not
> >> want to do since he was so desperate to get her. If the staff does
> >> not like it, she can make sure to find a bloody good sous chef who
> >> can run the whole show on his/her own at the weekends.
>
> > As I thought about this later I realized that a person can't really be
> > expected to work EVERY weekend. Even stage actors get a break every now
> > and then.
>
> Yep. Monica is a valuable commodity, she can impose terms.
In more than one way. Attractive people often get away with more. When you
are attractive AND tallented in your field, you are quite powerful indeed.
> >>> The New York Knickerbockers are a professional basketball team.
>
> >> Knickerbockers!?!?!
>
> > I'll bet they haven't been called that since the '50s. There are some
> > other sports teams here that have shortened their team name. In
> > baseball: Cincinnati Reds were the Redlegs (very old change), and the
> > A's were the Athletics ( a recent change).
>
> What about the Mets?
>
> Metropolitans? Meteorologists? Metal Workers? Methyl Alcoholics?
Good one. Metropolitans. Although, I don't think they were ever actually
called that by the general public.
> >> Rachel does have one, doesn't she? I seem to recall her having one.
>
> > I did a scan of transcripts without finding a reference. It's tough
> > though because the stage direction might have said phone instead of cell
> > phone or cell.
>
> That's right.
>
> But an early sighting would be the mobile she borrowed in 207.
I just love seeing not-so-old scenes from television or films where the
technology has changed. Chandlers clunky lap-top is a case in point.
> >> In the movie "Three Kings" a GI is captured by Iraqis in the aftermath
> >> of the Gulf War, and shut in a storeroom full of loot, including mobile
> >> phones - so he uses one to call his wife in America, then she has to
> >> get through to the Pentagon to arrange a rescue for him.
>
> > I seem to recall wondering why those phones worked. The accounts were
> > still active I guess?
>
> Probably, assuming the owners and/or the Kuwaiti authorities were
murdered.
And recently enough that the accounts were not canceled. I guess I can buy
that.
> >> From what I've read, only the west coast was immune, which made up for
> >> being three hours behind with the show. There's nothing odd about you
> >> not having any snow, it was the fault of the weather at the uplink.
>
> > I can see why the uplink would be an issue, but why would different
> > places be out for different times. I guess I don't understand the
> > dynamics of the process. Does the west coast of the US still get a
> > different feed like they used to, or do they simply pick up the eastern
> > feed and replay it later? I seem to recall reading something about
> > network affiliates taping the early feed in case there were problems,
> > but this was more than a decade ago.
>
> If I was organising it, I would tape the first transmission to broadcast
> it in the western evening, but if that went wrong, order a second uplink
> at the appropriate time. But then, if I was organising it, I would take
> out a later show from the eastern schedule, and show "Friends" again.
I'd repeat the entire evening lineup after "Late Night with Conan O'Brien."
> > It doesn't explain the heavy leather jacket though. Is the hall cooler
> > than the apartments? That's the case in my duplex, but I've never
> > noticed it being an issue with anyone on the show.
>
> We know that the apartments have their own heating from when it has gone
> wrong - see 119 "TOW the Monkey Gets Away" and 209 "TOW Phoebe's Dad" - so
> it makes economic sense for the hallways to be heated to a lesser degree.
>
> This means that the weird thing isn't Joey's heavy leather jacket, it's
> Chandler's short-sleeved shirt, especially since he was outdoors. Could
> this have been a subtlish signal about which of them is the dumbass?
Oh yes, and how convient to blame Monica for not hiding his suitcase (and
jacket) when there was no discussion about who was supposed to deal with it.
Were his hands and legs tied together while he waited for the pigeon to
leave?
> >> What I'm objecting to is that she boasted to her friend that there was
> >> eye contact, whereas in fact it was eye-breast contact until she told
> >> him to stop looking there.
>
> > Maybe she targeted the eye-contact because they were on the verge of
> > expressing something honest to each other. (Oh God forbid!) Of course,
> > they narrowly escaped THAT dilema.
>
> Nah, he just gawped at her tits, then got told off.
>
> RACHEL: Did you not get a good enough look? (113)
I could never get a good enough look.
> >>> Who knows where Phoebe's ideas come from?
>
> >> Lol yes, except they did show us in 623 "TOW the Ring"...
>
> >> PHOEBE: So how are things going with Paul?
>
> >> RACHEL: Good. Although y'know, he-he's a private guy. Y'know, I wish
> >> I could get him to open up a little bit, share some feelings.
>
> >> PHOEBE: That's easy! You just have to think of him as as a jar of
> >> pickles that won't open.
>
> >> RACHEL: So what are you saying; I should run him under hot water and
> >> bang his head against a table?
>
> >> PHOEBE: No, that's what you do when you want to get the truth out of
> >> someone.
>
> >> (Later on)
>
> >> ROSS: Well, if Joey is angry, he really shouldn't just cover it
> >> up. I wish he would just tell me the truth.
>
> >> PHOEBE: Oh, if that's what you want, then you really should run his
> >> head under hot water and bang his head against a table.
>
> >> ..Ross was very puzzled by that remark, but just for once we weren't.
>
> > Oh my, I must be Joey. I didn't get it until reading this. I've even
> > seen it a number of times. I never connected the dots. It's like Ross's
> > sweater--beat, beat, reaction.
>
> Grin. You're very welcome, David. Need anything else explaining?
Are we back on that date I had last week?
> The useful little sink in 120 "TOW the Evil Orthodontist", perhaps? :)
LOL You've explained that one to me already. Thank you btw. My
syndication watching experience is so much more full thanks to you and this
ng.
> >>> If someone sent me mashed potatoes, I'd have to go talk to her to find
> >>> out what the he** it means. So, that's probably why Rachel was
> >>> concerned.
>
> >> Yeah, but I'm still hoping for a more metaphorical explanation.
>
> > Good luck. ;-)
>
> Lol, I heard that as though Julie Graff was saying it...
I'm not familiar with Ms. Graff.
> >> But recall Ross in 210 "TOW Russ"...
>
> >> ROSS: See what? I don't know what she sees in... innn that goober.
> >> And it takes him, what? Like... like... I don't know, uhh...
> >> uhhh, hello... a... week, to get out a sentence.
>
> >> CHANDLER: Yeah, it's annoying, isn't it?
>
> >> ..it *was* annoying, but DS still made it most entertaining.
>
> > Parts of it, yes, but I'm not quite so generous over that/those bit(s).
>
> Oh okay, but I thought Schwimmer was great in 210.
Oh yes, I agree that he was good in 210. However, I don't think 909
compared well to 210 on that issue.
> >>> I don't what will happen with Bill, but I wonder it the incident might
> >>> be an indicator for Ross that it's time to start dating again. Do we
> >>> have time for the two of them to start dating before the big wedding
> >>> in 924?
>
> >> I think the jury ought to be out on that one.
>
> > I think it *is* still out. (Another case of projecting into the abyss.)
>
> Yah.
>
>
> >>> It's too bad if they ignore it, because they could develop some plot
> >>> that would throw Rachel into a cheater-on-a-break role, for which Ross
> >>> could fly off the handle--a nice balancing plot IMO.
>
> >> Oh absolutely - but in the end she should come crawling apologetically
> >> back to Ross, only to have him finally reject her, for all the grief
> >> that she has caused him over the years. The series could end with Ross
> >> dreaming of how he's known Rachel, and how much he loves her - and in
> >> the closing moments of the show he wakes up, determined to stay away
> >> from her forever.
>
> >> Well, I guess Claire would like that, and justice would be served...
>
> > I don't know about justice, but at least satisfaction, possibly bragging
> > rights.
>
> Claire would see it as justice, and I'd tend to agree, except for Karen.
I understand the point of view. :-)
> >> Fans with expectations must bear in mind that *anything* can happen.
>
> > That's true. Who would have thought an alien would come to Milwaukee
and
> > freeze Fonzie? Certainly not I.
>
> There you go, and out of that came a spin-off which launched a major star.
>
>
> >> If this series has one thing it's crap at doing, it's naming its
> >> characters. Fortunately, Phoebe made that remark about Rachel, Bill,
> >> Ross, and Emma being so happy together, else you guys would have had to
> >> but up with me going crazy to find out which guy was which - and it
> >> would have been even worse if their actors hadn't been so easy to tell
> >> apart.
>
> > 99-plus percent of the public never pays attention to the credits. So,
> > I'm sure the producers aren't going to push the issue.
>
> Yeah.
>
>
> > I'm just glad that I'm a credits-watcher. It was such a treat at the end
> > of the credits of "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" to see Ferris pop into the
> > hall and say, "You're still here? It's over. Go home."
>
> Absolutely, and there's an extra scene after the credits of the new Harry
> Potter movie, "Chamber of Secrets".
>
Thanks for the heads-up.
David Buehrle
> In article <E5SK9.7271$_S2....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
> "Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:na.86d8f24ba4...@argonet.co.uk...
>
> >>>> And don't you have anything else to say about my review?
>
> >>> Eek, just coming up for breath from my grading bonanza. I've
> >>> got another day's worth to go. . . .
>
> >> Oops, sorry! Lots of luck with that, and I'll look forward to
> >> seeing you again when you're done. :)
>
> > Finished today--yea! I'm a little fried, but I'll try to think
> > of some things to say soon. :)
>
> Okay! :)
>
> Errr... fried?
>
final exams. (Same egg frying in the pan.)
David Buehrle
half of Ross and Monica.
Christoph Paeper
>
> Err... how do you mean?
If Ross indicated that /that/ (Emma) wasn't that bad and he didn't regret
that /that/ (him looking at her like that about a year ago) happened,
that would have been a "thing", or "Ross and Rachel moment".
>>>> 'a b--aby and a Ross'.
>
>>> where one fan wrote that Rachel said "You have a boyfriend,
>>> I have a bo-baby", and then all the others picked it up;
>>> but Rachel says no such thing.
>
>> No "o-b", but a notable pause after the b, which I indicated with the
>> dashes. You can't deny to hear that if you even notice where Mike looks.
>
> I looked & listened very carefully, and there's no sound at all.
Exactly, there's a pause after she pronounced the first letter.
>> She'd be a bad boss if she never took the weekend shift.
>
> Ordinarily, maybe. But Monica has special circumstances.
Tell that to the cooks who have to work every weekend, just because their
boss wants to have sex with her husband. After all she doesn't work 24
hours a day.
Christoph
--
New episode: 911 - TOW Rachel Goes Back to Work; 2003-01-09
Friends FAQ: <http://www.friends-tv.org> [FAQ, Episode Guide, Music]
Download: <http://www.kazaalite.tk>, <irc:#downloadfriends>
Transcripts: <http://www.eigo-i.com/>
Christoph Paeper
>
> Wait till you see the lesbian porn episode of "Coupling"...
Well, I remember the threesome episode. It actually seems as if they're
gonna show the third season right now suceeding the first two, starting
tomorrow.
Christoph Paeper
People wear all kind of stuff they consider pretty regardless of meaning.
> When was that?
Germany Nov. 1939 / Sept. 1941 till May 1945, but I doubt Tennant and you
meant that.
Belphoebe
Heh heh. Yup, that's about right. The end-of-semester grading crunch can
be (usually is) exhuasting. And I'm going to have to try to avoid having
papers due during finals week--that wasn't such a hot idea!
Belphoebe
Tennant Stuart
"David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.bb6a834ba5...@argonet.co.uk...
>>> I had another listen, and you are right--there's no sound, although
>>> her lips are in the form of a b. I would have sworn the b sound was
>>> there too. It's a funny thing the way the mind fills in the blanks for
>>> you, and then recalls it from memory that way.
>> Absolutely, thanks for being honest about it. :)
> LOL Well, what else could I do. It's documented on thousands of video
> cassettes across North America.
Tell that to all the fans who insist she said "I have a bo- baby".
>> The date was very boring, hence disaster?
>> Or you guys didn't talk much, just did stuff, hence success?
> I don't expect to go out with her again. You can draw your own
> conclusions.
Sorry.
>> Monica is a valuable commodity, she can impose terms.
> In more than one way. Attractive people often get away with more. When
> you are attractive AND tallented in your field, you are quite powerful
> indeed.
Oh, absolutely.
>> What about the Mets?
>> Metropolitans? Meteorologists? Metal Workers? Methyl Alcoholics?
> Good one. Metropolitans. Although, I don't think they were ever actually
> called that by the general public.
Ah. Thanks.
>> An early sighting would be the mobile she borrowed in 207.
> I just love seeing not-so-old scenes from television or films where the
> technology has changed. Chandlers clunky lap-top is a case in point.
Yes, David Crane remarks on that in his commentary.
>>> I seem to recall wondering why those phones worked. The accounts were
>>> still active I guess?
>> Probably, assuming the owners and/or the Kuwaiti authorities were
> murdered.
> And recently enough that the accounts were not canceled. I guess I can
> buy that.
It wasn't just a question of being recent - the people who would have
carried out the cancellation were dead, or wandering the rubble.
>> If I was organising it, I would tape the first transmission to broadcast
>> it in the western evening, but if that went wrong, order a second uplink
>> at the appropriate time. But then, if I was organising it, I would take
>> out a later show from the eastern schedule, and show "Friends" again.
> I'd repeat the entire evening lineup after "Late Night with Conan O'Brien."
Cable & satellite channels used to do that here (after midnight not LNWCO).
> How convient to blame Monica for not hiding his suitcase (and jacket)
> when there was no discussion about who was supposed to deal with it.
> Were his hands and legs tied together while he waited for the pigeon to
> leave?
Good point, though it does show how he dominates her.
>> RACHEL: Did you not get a good enough look?
> I could never get a good enough look.
Oh, I could. Give her tits just a token look, then go for the girl.
>> Need anything else explaining? The useful little sink in 120 "TOW the
>> Evil Orthodontist", perhaps? :)
> LOL You've explained that one to me already. Thank you btw. My
> syndication watching experience is so much more full thanks to you and
> this ng.
YW
>>> Good luck. ;-)
>> Lol, I heard that as though Julie Graff was saying it...
> I'm not familiar with Ms. Graff.
She was Chandler's camp girlfriend who got really fa-aa-aw-ow before
their third summer together.
>> Ross in 210 was annoying, but DS still made it most entertaining.
> Oh yes, I agree that he was good in 210. However, I don't think 909
> compared well to 210 on that issue.
Fair enough.
>> Claire would see it as justice, and I'd tend to agree, except for Karen.
> I understand the point of view. :-)
Okay.
>> There's an extra scene after the credits of the new
>> Harry Potter movie, "Chamber of Secrets".
> Thanks for the heads-up.
YW - it's a top movie too, bit darker than the first one, good story.
Tennant Stuart
"David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.ce76b94ba5...@argonet.co.uk...
>> In article <E5SK9.7271$_S2....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
>> "Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
>>> I'm a little fried, but I'll try to think of some things to say soon. :)
>> Errr... fried?
> This is your brain. (a fine, large, grade-A egg.) This is your brain on
> final exams. (Same egg frying in the pan.)
Oh, I'm afraid that my brain reacts to the stress of exams by suddenly
being able to recall everything I've learnt, once I've turned over the
first sheet. Very useful, and so much easier than having to study. :)
Tennant Stuart
"David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.54785c4ba5...@argonet.co.uk...
>> In article <3dfc5c13$0$237$cc9e...@news.dial.pipex.com>,
>> "Lauren" <richard.the...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
>>> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:na.6c7ca64ba4...@argonet.co.uk...
>>>> Are there any signs that Sandra is Jewish?
>>> Well, I know she hater her mother, but to serve ham at her funeral ???
>> Sorry Lauren, that's Judy Geller you're thinking of, not Sandra Green. :)
> But it IS good support for the fact that Jack Geller represents the Jewish
> half of Ross and Monica.
Absolutely.
But we have no doubt about them, since Ross rapped at Monica's bat mitzvah.
David Buehrle
I can only suggest that if they are that into the show (as am I) they should
probably record it for review later (as do I).
> >> The date was very boring, hence disaster?
>
> >> Or you guys didn't talk much, just did stuff, hence success?
>
> > I don't expect to go out with her again. You can draw your own
> > conclusions.
>
> Sorry.
No worries. There are plenty of birds in the sky.
> >> An early sighting would be the mobile she borrowed in 207.
>
> > I just love seeing not-so-old scenes from television or films where the
> > technology has changed. Chandlers clunky lap-top is a case in point.
>
> Yes, David Crane remarks on that in his commentary.
Oh yes, I remember that. It's been a while. I think I would enjoy
listening to that commentary. It's really the best part about owning the
DVD from season 2 IMO. Those little extras mean so much whatever they are.
> >>> I seem to recall wondering why those phones worked. The accounts were
> >>> still active I guess?
>
> >> Probably, assuming the owners and/or the Kuwaiti authorities were
> > murdered.
>
> > And recently enough that the accounts were not canceled. I guess I can
> > buy that.
>
> It wasn't just a question of being recent - the people who would have
> carried out the cancellation were dead, or wandering the rubble.
That's true, but the company with which I have my account will suspend all
calls after 10 days or so if a payment is late.
> >> If I was organising it, I would tape the first transmission to
broadcast
> >> it in the western evening, but if that went wrong, order a second
uplink
> >> at the appropriate time. But then, if I was organising it, I would take
> >> out a later show from the eastern schedule, and show "Friends" again.
>
> > I'd repeat the entire evening lineup after "Late Night with Conan
O'Brien."
>
> Cable & satellite channels used to do that here (after midnight not
LNWCO).
It wouldn't happen here anymore though. They get too much revenue from the
infomercials.
> > How convenient to blame Monica for not hiding his suitcase (and jacket)
> > when there was no discussion about who was supposed to deal with it.
> > Were his hands and legs tied together while he waited for the pigeon to
> > leave?
>
> Good point, though it does show how he dominates her.
Hmmm, I never looked at it that way. He, so often, looks like a hen-pecked
man.
> >> RACHEL: Did you not get a good enough look?
>
> > I could never get a good enough look.
>
> Oh, I could. Give her tits just a token look, then go for the girl.
Oh yeah, like either of us would have a shot. ;-)
> >>> Good luck. ;-)
>
> >> Lol, I heard that as though Julie Graff was saying it...
>
> > I'm not familiar with Ms. Graff.
>
> She was Chandler's camp girlfriend who got really fa-aa-aw-ow before
> their third summer together.
Was her name in the dialogue, or did you have to pick it off of the credits?
I ask because I didn't pick it up on my scans. (And I know how they are
about that sort of thing.)
> >> There's an extra scene after the credits of the new
> >> Harry Potter movie, "Chamber of Secrets".
>
> > Thanks for the heads-up.
>
> YW - it's a top movie too, bit darker than the first one, good story.
>
I haven't seen the first yet. I almost rented it on "On Demand." I love
that "On Demand." All the benefits of renting, what with rewind, pause,
etc., but you don't have to go out when it's raining or when there's a foot
of snow.
David Buehrle
> In article <XcbL9.97362$ry.12...@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>,
> "David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:na.ce76b94ba5...@argonet.co.uk...
>
> >> In article <E5SK9.7271$_S2....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
> >> "Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> I'm a little fried, but I'll try to think of some things to say soon.
:)
>
> >> Errr... fried?
>
> > This is your brain. (a fine, large, grade-A egg.) This is your brain on
> > final exams. (Same egg frying in the pan.)
>
> Oh, I'm afraid that my brain reacts to the stress of exams by suddenly
> being able to recall everything I've learnt, once I've turned over the
> first sheet. Very useful, and so much easier than having to study. :)
>
opportunity to demonstrate that I understood the topic. I have to admit
though, that I'm not as quick as I once was. I'm too young to be noticing
such things, but there it is. I really think the West Nile Virus that I had
last July might have had something to do with that.
Belphoebe
> In article <XcbL9.97362$ry.12...@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>,
> "David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:na.ce76b94ba5...@argonet.co.uk...
>
> >> In article <E5SK9.7271$_S2....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
> >> "Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> I'm a little fried, but I'll try to think of some things to say soon.
:)
>
> >> Errr... fried?
>
> > This is your brain. (a fine, large, grade-A egg.) This is your brain on
> > final exams. (Same egg frying in the pan.)
>
> Oh, I'm afraid that my brain reacts to the stress of exams by suddenly
> being able to recall everything I've learnt, once I've turned over the
> first sheet. Very useful, and so much easier than having to study. :)
I'm fried from the other end of final exams--grading them! Each student has
to write one, and then I have to grade 'em all! :)
Belphoebe
Cookie Dude
cracker and said:
>>> Rachel does have one, doesn't she? I seem to recall her having one.
>
>> I did a scan of transcripts without finding a reference. It's tough
>> though because the stage direction might have said phone instead of
>> cell phone or cell.
>
> That's right.
>
> But an early sighting would be the mobile she borrowed in 207.
Fear not my friends, I'm here to save you :-)
We saw Rachel with her own mobile in errr... 715 wasn't it? The one where
she and Phoebe argue over that other guy's phone, just watched it last night
(the new boxset *with* the fourth disc arrived, yay me!)
André
--
Watch, learn - and don't eat my cookie
Cookie Dude
cracker and said:
[mobiles/cells]
>> It wasn't just a question of being recent - the people who would have
>> carried out the cancellation were dead, or wandering the rubble.
>
> That's true, but the company with which I have my account will
> suspend all calls after 10 days or so if a payment is late.
*shameless plug*
Are you with T-Mobile (USA)? If not, you should, because that's the company
I work for ;-)
And are they really running that many ads over there? A guy I work with just
got back from NY recently and said there were T-Mobile ads, banners and
flyers everywhere
Cookie Dude
cracker and said:
> 909 "TOW Rachel's Phone Number"
>
> Joey phones Chandler in Tulsa, to announce he has courtside tickets
> for a Knicks game, but it's on the only night that Monica can get off
> from the restaurant. Chandler can't think how to put Joey off, so he
> lies instead that he must stay at the office.
I really object to the "can't you just realize it yourself?" line
> However, this means that once Chandler gets home, Joey assumes that
> Monica has a lover there. Monica tries to fob Joey off, but he's not
> fooled by her lame excuses, her sexy nightie, the man's voice he has
> heard, the locked door, or the two glasses of wine on the table.
Sherlock Tribianni....? :-)
> Joey loyally phones Chandler, who takes it on his mobile - so as
> Chandler yells down the phone at Joey to forestall him, Joey again
> hears the man's voice coming from Monica's apartment. Chandler's
> brilliant plan is to sneak down the fire escape into the December
> night, without putting his coat on, then go up the stairs to where
> his door is being grimly guarded by Joey, armed with a baseball bat.
A prime example of why this show is called Friends and the theme song is
called "I'll be there for you", isn't it? Too bad they seem to have
forgotten about that motto ages ago (they are the writers in this case)
> Joey is surprised that Chandler arrives so fast, since it's a 3 hour
> flight from Tulsa, but he trustingly lets Chandler fob him off with
> an excuse about the time difference. Monica lamely pretends to be
> outraged, demanding an apology from Joey,
And of course doesn't miss out the opportunity to slap Chandler. Poor guy
first has to lie to his best friend and then his wife, who got him into the
trouble in the first place, hits him in the face
> but he espies Chandler's
> luggage, which Monica had foolishly forgotten to hide.
....or is it Joey Holmes?
> Chandler has no recourse but to apologise & confess to Joey, who is
> very annoyed that the Bings think he is too dumb to understand that
> a husband needs to be with his wife.
Very funny scene when he hits himself with the baseball bat IMHO
> At a wine bar, Rachel informs Phoebe that Ross had liked the way she
> looked, and then he had made eye contact - disguising the truth that
> he had been gawping at her breasts
Can you blame him though? Even if you'd wanted to you could not not look at
them. Besides, IIRC at first he tried not to look and seemed really
embarrassed when he couldn't help it in the end. I definitely agree on the
eye contact thing though, they hardly looked at each other, that was less
than a second. For most of the time, they were looking right past one
another - which reminded of early teens on their first date
> Rachel is delighted to hear that Bill lives in the same building as
> her grandmother, so while Phoebe turns Kevin down, Rachel tells Bill
> that she does not have a boyfriend, and gives him her phone number.
> Phoebe does not approve, but Rachel reveals that she & Ross have not
> been communicating, and maybe she should move on with her life.
>
> But when Phoebe asks Rachel to consider Ross's feelings, should Bill
> move in with them & Emma, Rachel tells Mike on his mobile to intercept
> any calls to Ross's phone
woah, aren't you a little bit fast here?
Rachel didn't sound too convinced when she said those things, as was
indicated by the little word "maybe" in the sentence "maybe I should just
stop waiting around for moments with Ross". And a few seconds later, when
Phoebe makes her see that it will seem to Ross as if she's already moved on
if that guy calls, she and Phoebe phone up Mike. Anyway, the real question
here is, why would Ross think Rachel still needs to move on? If I remember
the first two eps correctly, Rachel "would have said yes to anybody" and
Ross doesn't want to be "just anybody". He doesn't know of any deeper
running feelings of hers and from what we've seen, there have been no
incidents that could be interpreted this way. Sure they acted a lot more
mature around each other recently, but that's all.
And as for their communication problems, are we supposed to believe that
there have been conversations between Ross and Rachel where she brought up
the issue of their feelings for one another? Really?? Or is that monologue
merely how Rachel imagines such a conversation would go?
I got really annoyed with this episode after a while. I thought it had
answered some of the questions I had about what's going on with R+R, but
while it did partly answer some of them, it brought up like five times as
many new questions
> When the girls come home, the guys are so bored out of their brains
> that they hug them with joy.
And Rachel's face really lightens up, but I don't think the people
responsible for the show would pay attention to such minute details... The
writing this year is more "lumberjack style"
> This is the first time I've ever wanted to Fast Forward during a new
> episode. I'd thought that the perpetuation of bad jokes had gone far
> enough with Chandler grimacing at that photographer or Ross on roller
> blades, but there were SEVEN boring scenes of two men being bored!
Yeah... When the subject got to "beer", I thought that finally they would
have something to talk about, but no... Then they look up the difference
beer and lager in a dictionary... WTF??? You don't use a book to look
something up these days, you spend ages looking it up on the internet. And
even more, if there's two bored guys and internet access, there's lots of
other sites they could look at. At least, it wasn't all Ross' fault
> Meanwhile, I would sound very shallow
Everybody knows you are anyway :P
> Anyway, if Chandler is so clever, why didn't he go into his bedroom
> and shut the door, to take the call where Joey can't hear him?
Because then we wouldn't have had the really funny scene with Joey! "Dude, I
just heard him again"
> Since the previous episode was set at Thanksgiving, it must now be
> early December, and it's night. So how come only Phoebe is wearing a
> proper overcoat?
And why does Phoebe look like a little schoolgirl who chose what to wear for
the first time, when Rachel looks like a mantrap?
> Why did the writers have to spoil a potentially good story with that
> time difference joke? It was going so well: the way that the Bings
> kept underestimating their suspicious friend, while it was they who
> acted stupidly all the way through; that it's a shame that such a
> cheap laugh was allowed to wreck the dynamic they'd established.
Yeah, the time difference joke really didn't fit in here. Maybe Joey's just
too gullible. But I liked when Chandler said "Don't you think it's better
for him to think that you're cheating on me, than for him to think that I'm
cheating on him?" (since you didn't mention it, I thought I'd do it anyway)
> Which do you think was better - Monica's impression of Chandler,
> or Rachel's impression of Ross?
Don't know about better, but Rachel was funnier. I want Chandler to
emphasize a word like that again.. We haven't had that for ages
> Phoebe staring hard at that chasm of a cleavage, and making saucy
> remarks about it, only serves to reinforce her lesbian tendencies;
> most recently noted in 905 "TOW Phoebe's Birthday Dinner" when she
> eyeballed Monica's ripe bosoms, and called them a treat...
Stop it with the ripe bosoms already, you're not a female erotica writer...
Phoebe and her remarks about the other women seem to become a running gag,
huh?
> And how come Rachel objected to Ross staring at her cleavage
she was very happy about his compliments though
> So, what happens next?
>
> Will Bill pass up a prize like Rachel Green simply because she
> didn't return his first call?
>
> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so angry
> that there's a huge bust-up?
>
> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so touched
> that she falls into his arms?
>
> Will Ross & Rachel start acting like mature adults, and actually
> sit down and talk to each other?
>
> Or will the writers just forget about the whole damn thing?
I'm going with the last option, if I had my we would get the second to last
option though
Tennant Stuart
Christoph Paeper <cri...@gmx.net> wrote:
> *Tennant Stuart* <ten...@argonet.co.uk>:
>>>>> Rachel: "... last time that happened, that (points at Emma)
>>>>> happened!" Ross: "Actually that (points at Emma) is the [second]
>>>>> best thing ever happened to me."
>>> I think /that/ would have been a "thing".
>> Err... how do you mean?
> If Ross indicated that /that/ (Emma) wasn't that bad and he didn't regret
> that /that/ (him looking at her like that about a year ago) happened,
> that would have been a "thing", or "Ross and Rachel moment".
Oh well, people who have even acrimonious & bitter divorces still
regard their children as the best thing that happened to them.
>> I looked & listened very carefully, and there's no sound at all.
> Exactly, there's a pause after she pronounced the first letter.
Well not quite, she did not even pronounce any first letter.
>>> She'd be a bad boss if she never took the weekend shift.
>> Ordinarily, maybe. But Monica has special circumstances.
> Tell that to the cooks who have to work every weekend, just because their
> boss wants to have sex with her husband. After all she doesn't work 24
> hours a day.
Doesn't matter, Christoph. Monica is a top chef, much in demand. She can
dictate her working conditions, and the ordinary cooks of her kitchen will
just have to buckle under. And in any case, it's a great opportunity for
the cook whom she appoints as sous chef, for he/she would be in command at
every weekend, an excellent way to prove themselves.
Tennant Stuart
Christoph Paeper <cri...@gmx.net> wrote:
> *Tennant Stuart* <ten...@argonet.co.uk>:
>> Christoph Paeper <cri...@gmx.net> wrote:
>>> What's wrong with or new about bisexuals?
>>> Most men's dream girlfriends are, although few would confess.
>> Wait till you see the lesbian porn episode of "Coupling"...
> Well, I remember the threesome episode.
Ah yes, that was very clever.
> It actually seems as if they're gonna show the third season right now
> suceeding the first two, starting tomorrow.
Oh yay, well have fun, I know you will!
How well does the dubbing handle the translation into German of those
weird terms that Jeff Murdoch comes up with?
Christoph Paeper
>>>>>> best thing ever happened to me."
>
>> that /that/ (him looking at her like that about a year ago) happened,
>> that would have been a "thing", or "Ross and Rachel moment".
>
> Oh well, people who have even acrimonious & bitter divorces still
> regard their children as the best thing that happened to them.
I was unsure about the "second", that's why I put it in brackets. You
convinced me--without wanting to--that "[Emma] is the second best thing
ever happened to me." is better.
>>> I looked & listened very carefully, and there's no sound at all.
>
>> Exactly, there's a pause after she pronounced the first letter.
>
> Well not quite, she did not even pronounce any first letter.
It's a B. It's almost silent if nothing follows directly.
I just checked it again (5+ times): I clearly hear a sound, but the more
often I listened to it it sounded more like a *very* dense "hup-ump". But
after all it's very clear the writers / director wanted us to think she
was going to say "boyfriend".
> Monica is a top chef, much in demand. She can dictate her working
> conditions, and the ordinary cooks of her kitchen will just have to buckle
> under.
She wouldn't keep that job very long with such an attitude. Either a sous
chef takes his chance or her pissed off underlings have a talk with the
restaurant owner. OTOH when she got that job, she knew she'd be separated
from her husband much of the time and would have told that the owner or
whoever hired her.
Christoph Paeper
> Christoph Paeper <cri...@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>> Well, I remember the threesome episode.
>
> Ah yes, that was very clever.
Actually that was the most forseeable Coupling episode I've seen so far.
Not unfunny though.
> How well does the dubbing handle the translation into German of those
> weird terms that Jeff Murdoch comes up with?
"Breasts"? I've not yet watched an original episode, but e.g. "giggle
loop" was translated quite properly to "Kicherschleife" IIRC. After all
the dubbing is far superior to that of Friends.
Belphoebe
>
> It's the way the changing patterns of light fall across them.
> shouldn't he be more charitable towards his assistant Jo Lynn?
Yup.
> But what is a cat condo?
<http://www.cdpets.com/images/condos.jpg>
> Since Joey's suspicions stemmed from hearing a man's voice in the
> apartment while Monica's husband was away, why did Chandler start
> talking while he was right by the front door, only seconds afterit had
been shut?
He didn't think it through, it seems.
> How come it's only now that the top US comedy has found the 'man on
> the other side of the door is the man talking to you on his mobile
> phone' gag? In Britain, this situation was first used in the classic
> BBC sitcom "Joking Apart" - a forerunner of "Coupling" - way back in
> 1991. Is this because America is technologically backward? Ross was
> still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years later.
I have no idea, but it hadn't occurred to me that we're technologically
bakcward.
> In fact, when did we first see a mobile phone in "Friends"?
TOW the Blackout, perhaps? "in the ATM 'estibule, 'ith 'ill 'oodacre."
> Anyway, if Chandler is so clever, why didn't he go into his bedroom
> and shut the door, to take the call where Joey can't hear him?
The answer that springs to mind is the one you don't like--that if he'd done
that, the story would not have happened. You no doubt want a
character-driven explanation. Besides "Chandler isn't so clever after all,"
I don't suppose there's a good one.
> Why did the writers have to spoil a potentially good story with that
> time difference joke? It was going so well: the way that the Bings
> kept underestimating their suspicious friend, while it was they who
> acted stupidly all the way through; that it's a shame that such a
> cheap laugh was allowed to wreck the dynamic they'd established.
The writers give with one hand and take with the other. Another example is
after Joey chastises Chandler for assuming he's too stupid to understand his
need to be with Monica--when he mixes up the date of the game.
> But once again we saw Joey's superior sense of smell being used to
> root out deception - the last time was when a naughty Phoebe stole
> his chocolate in 701 "TOW Monica's Thunder".
>
> Which do you think was better - Monica's impression of Chandler,
> or Rachel's impression of Ross?
>
>
> Phoebe staring hard at that chasm of a cleavage, and making saucy
> remarks about it, only serves to reinforce her lesbian tendencies;
> most recently noted in 905 "TOW Phoebe's Birthday Dinner" when she
> eyeballed Monica's ripe bosoms, and called them a treat...
>
> And how come Rachel objected to Ross staring at her cleavage, when
> she once realised that Chandler was not gay after he had spent the
> whole of Phoebe's birthday party talking to her breasts?
>
> Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
>
> Does a story about bored people have to be boring?
>
> Phoebe, Joey & Rachel weren't boring, as they missed the Blowfish
> concert in 205 "TOW Five Steaks and an Eggplant"; the whole gang
> weren't boring, as Ross talked shop in 307 "TOW the Race Car Bed";
> Ross & Rachel weren't boring, at the fabrics lecture in 314 TOW
> Phoebe's Ex-Partner; the whole gang weren't boring, on a rainy day
> in 325 "TOA the Beach"; Joey & Ross weren't boring, since they were
> unemployed in 510 TOW the Inappropriate Sister; and most especially
> Rachel & Ben weren't boring in 716 "TOW the Truth About London".
>
> Hey, we got the name of Rachel's gran, Leonard's mum, Ida Green!
>
> So, what happens next?
>
> Will Bill pass up a prize like Rachel Green simply because she
> didn't return his first call?
>
> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so angry
> that there's a huge bust-up?
>
> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so touched
> that she falls into his arms?
>
> Will Ross & Rachel start acting like mature adults, and actually
> sit down and talk to each other?
>
> Or will the writers just forget about the whole damn thing?
>
> ---o0o---
>
> Are the actors who played Bill & Kevin credited the right way round?
>
> Bill was the white guy who fancied Rachel, and if we are to see more
> of him, it's surprising to see that his actor Chris Payne Gilbert was
> placed at the end of the credits, coming after Chandler's assistant;
> while Alan F. Smith (he was Kevin the black guy who fancied Phoebe),
> received second billing after recurring cast member Paul Rudd.
>
>
> Their parts were virtually the same size...
>
> BILL: "Spuds" is your grandmother? So, she has a boyfriend. What is
> your situation? Then, can I have your number? Okay. Okay,
> thanks. I'll give you a call later tonight. Bye.
>
> KEVIN: So, we're on our way to a couple of parties. Um... maybe we
> can get your numbers and give you guys a call if we find
> something fun. Alright. It's no big deal.
>
>
> So, should we conclude that Bill is never going to be seen again, and
> what actually counts is what happens when Rachel finds that message?
>
> Or was AFS ranked higher because he was a cast member of that other
> BKC production "Veronica's Closet", while CPG is a relative unknown?
>
>
> No spoilers PLEASE from anyone who has seen episode 910.
>
> Tennant Stuart
Belphoebe
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:hJRL9.38543$4W1....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> > And how come Rachel objected to Ross staring at her cleavage, when
> > she once realised that Chandler was not gay after he had spent the
> > whole of Phoebe's birthday party talking to her breasts?
She didn't really seem to object, ISTM. Her telling him not to look seemed
more like a playful admonition.
> > Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
It seemed to be Phoebe being Phoebe--nothing "metaphorical"; sorry.
> > Does a story about bored people have to be boring?
[snipping]
Nope, clearly not. But also, I don't see why the story had to be about Ross
and Mike boring one another. The writers could have done so much more with
the two of them *not* being bored--having lots to talk about. We could have
learned more about Mike (besides his willingness to thwart social
boundaries).
> > No spoilers PLEASE from anyone who has seen episode 910.
Belphoebe
Tennant Stuart
Christoph Paeper <cri...@gmx.net> wrote:
> *Tennant Stuart* <ten...@argonet.co.uk>:
>>> Well, I remember the threesome episode.
>> Ah yes, that was very clever.
> Actually that was the most forseeable Coupling episode I've seen so far.
Ah.
> Not unfunny though.
Indeed.
>> How well does the dubbing handle the translation into German of those
>> weird terms that Jeff Murdoch comes up with?
> "Breasts"?
Lol, you mean shadiam? (sp?)
> I've not yet watched an original episode, but e.g. "giggle loop" was
> translated quite properly to "Kicherschleife" IIRC.
Good.
> After all the dubbing is far superior to that of Friends.
Really? Why is that, Christoph?
Are there credits to say who dubs the sitcoms?
Tennant Stuart
<andre...@HarDcorE.de> wrote:
> Now that everyone's overdosed on Teletubbies, Tennant Stuart had a
> cracker and said:
>>>> Rachel does have one, doesn't she? I seem to recall her having one.
>>> I did a scan of transcripts without finding a reference. It's tough
>>> though because the stage direction might have said phone instead of
>>> cell phone or cell.
>> That's right.
>> But an early sighting would be the mobile she borrowed in 207.
> Fear not my friends, I'm here to save you :-)
Yay!
> We saw Rachel with her own mobile in errr... 715 wasn't it? The one where
> she and Phoebe argue over that other guy's phone, just watched it last
> night (the new boxset *with* the fourth disc arrived, yay me!)
Ah, *as*well*as* the stolen phone?
<checks>
Oh yes, Phoebe challenged Rachel's claim that she had Barney's the
store on her speed dial, so she pulled out her own phone to prove it.
Well done André, but does that mean that not a single one of the gang
owned a mobile phone until 2001?
Tennant Stuart
Christoph Paeper <cri...@gmx.net> wrote:
> *Tennant Stuart* <ten...@argonet.co.uk>:
If you like.
>>>> I looked & listened very carefully, and there's no sound at all.
>>> Exactly, there's a pause after she pronounced the first letter.
>> Well not quite, she did not even pronounce any first letter.
> It's a B. It's almost silent if nothing follows directly.
> I just checked it again (5+ times): I clearly hear a sound, but the more
> often I listened to it it sounded more like a *very* dense "hup-ump". But
> after all it's very clear the writers / director wanted us to think she
> was going to say "boyfriend".
Since it's completely silent (I haven't a clue what a hup-ump is, dense or
otherwise) then it's not at all clear that anyone intended anything.
>> Monica is a top chef, much in demand. She can dictate her working
>> conditions, and the ordinary cooks of her kitchen will just have to
>> buckle under.
> She wouldn't keep that job very long with such an attitude. Either a sous
> chef takes his chance or her pissed off underlings have a talk with the
> restaurant owner. OTOH when she got that job, she knew she'd be separated
> from her husband much of the time and would have told that the owner or
> whoever hired her.
You're overlooking the fact that Monica is the one in demand.
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.a5e9464ba5...@argonet.co.uk...
>> Oh, I'm afraid that my brain reacts to the stress of exams by suddenly
>> being able to recall everything I've learnt, once I've turned over the
>> first sheet. Very useful, and so much easier than having to study. :)
> I'm fried from the other end of final exams--grading them! Each student
> has to write one, and then I have to grade 'em all! :)
Even so, marking has gotta be easier than sitting.
Tennant Stuart
"David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.a5e9464ba5...@argonet.co.uk...
>> Oh, I'm afraid that my brain reacts to the stress of exams by suddenly
>> being able to recall everything I've learnt, once I've turned over the
>> first sheet. Very useful, and so much easier than having to study. :)
> I have so many friends that "clam up" for exams.
Me too, so they're not too pleased that I "clam down".
> I always enjoyed the opportunity to demonstrate that I understood the
> topic. I have to admit though, that I'm not as quick as I once was. I'm
> too young to be noticing such things, but there it is.
Use It Or Lose It is your motto.
> I really think the West Nile Virus that I had last July might have had
> something to do with that.
Geez, where have you been?
Tennant Stuart
"David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.42e9444ba5...@argonet.co.uk...
>> Tell that to all the fans who insist she said "I have a bo- baby".
> I can only suggest that if they are that into the show (as am I) they
> should probably record it for review later (as do I).
So they should, but it amazes me that Americans talk about missing the
show because they were watching "Survivor", don't they have VCRs?
> No worries. There are plenty of birds in the sky.
LOL
>> David Crane remarks on that in his commentary.
> Oh yes, I remember that. It's been a while. I think I would enjoy
> listening to that commentary. It's really the best part about owning the
> DVD from season 2 IMO. Those little extras mean so much whatever they are.
Yep, it would be nice if someone transcribed them.
>> It wasn't just a question of being recent - the people who would have
>> carried out the cancellation were dead, or wandering the rubble.
> That's true, but the company with which I have my account will suspend all
> calls after 10 days or so if a payment is late.
Really? In Britain, you buy calls over the phone, then spend them. I was
given a mobile phone for my birthday a few years ago, and I've never paid
a penny for using it. Hang on... <dials 453> ..there's still £36.56 on it.
> It wouldn't happen here anymore though. They get too much revenue from
> the infomercials.
Oh, we have hundreds of channels that show those, but many more hundreds
do not. None of the good ones do, and the best have no commercials at all.
>>> How convenient to blame Monica for not hiding his suitcase (and
>>> jacket) when there was no discussion about who was supposed to deal
>>> with it. Were his hands and legs tied together while he waited for the
>>> pigeon to leave?
>> Good point, though it does show how he dominates her.
> Hmmm, I never looked at it that way. He, so often, looks like a
> hen-pecked man.
People say that, but if you work out the score, Chandler is miles ahead.
For me, the most convincing evidence is that he took her side of the bed.
>>>> RACHEL: Did you not get a good enough look?
>>> I could never get a good enough look.
>> Oh, I could. Give her tits just a token look, then go for the girl.
> Oh yeah, like either of us would have a shot. ;-)
Lol, but we'd try harder than that Bill guy.
>>>> I heard that as though Julie Graff was saying it...
>>> I'm not familiar with Ms. Graff.
>> She was Chandler's camp girlfriend who got really fa-aa-aw-ow before
>> their third summer together.
> Was her name in the dialogue, or did you have to pick it off of the
> credits? I ask because I didn't pick it up on my scans. (And I know how
> they are about that sort of thing.)
The "Julie" was in the credits, but the "Graff" came from the dialogue.
We had some discussion at the time, and that name was the consensus.
>>>> There's an extra scene after the credits of the new
>>>> Harry Potter movie, "Chamber of Secrets".
>>> Thanks for the heads-up.
>> YW - it's a top movie too, bit darker than the first one, good story.
> I haven't seen the first yet.
You should.
> I almost rented it on "On Demand." I love that "On Demand." All the
> benefits of renting, what with rewind, pause, etc., but you don't have
> to go out when it's raining or when there's a foot of snow.
Oh, for sure, except we don't get the snow either.
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.f7ae534ba3...@argonet.co.uk...
British/Anzac/Euro SPOILER SPACE for 909...
> Yup.
Okay.
>> But what is a cat condo?
> <http://www.cdpets.com/images/condos.jpg>
What the hell is a cat supposed to do with those?
They remind me of alt-Joey's weird chair.
>> Since Joey's suspicions stemmed from hearing a man's voice in the
>> apartment while Monica's husband was away, why did Chandler start
>> talking while he was right by the front door, only seconds after
>> it had been shut?
> He didn't think it through, it seems.
No, he didn't, did he?
>> How come it's only now that the top US comedy has found the 'man on
>> the other side of the door is the man talking to you on his mobile
>> phone' gag? In Britain, this situation was first used in the classic
>> BBC sitcom "Joking Apart" - a forerunner of "Coupling" - way back in
>> 1991. Is this because America is technologically backward? Ross was
>> still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years later.
> I have no idea, but it hadn't occurred to me that we're technologically
> bakcward.
That's because of the propaganda.
>> In fact, when did we first see a mobile phone in "Friends"?
> TOW the Blackout, perhaps? "in the ATM 'estibule, 'ith 'ill 'oodacre."
Ooh, good call!
As early as that?
That's only three years after "Joking Apart".
So, how come the six friends took so long to get one?
>> Anyway, if Chandler is so clever, why didn't he go into his bedroom
>> and shut the door, to take the call where Joey can't hear him?
> The answer that springs to mind is the one you don't like--that if he'd
> done that, the story would not have happened. You no doubt want a
> character-driven explanation. Besides "Chandler isn't so clever after
> all," I don't suppose there's a good one.
Well, when this happened on "Joking Apart", a wife was having sex with
her husband's best friend when said husband arrived home unexpectedly,
(the plot was not as clichéd as that sounds) and so it was quite natural
for the best friend to hide in the en suite bathroom with his wife (who
was in there for entirely different reasons, told you it wasn't clichéd)
and so the poor guy couldn't move any distance from the door.
>> Why did the writers have to spoil a potentially good story with that
>> time difference joke? It was going so well: the way that the Bings
>> kept underestimating their suspicious friend, while it was they who
>> acted stupidly all the way through; that it's a shame that such a
>> cheap laugh was allowed to wreck the dynamic they'd established.
> The writers give with one hand and take with the other.
Yeah. :(
> Another example is after Joey chastises Chandler for assuming he's too
> stupid to understand his need to be with Monica--when he mixes up the
> date of the game.
Oh well, we all do that.
>> But once again we saw Joey's superior sense of smell being used to
>> root out deception <SNIP REST OF THE REVIEW>
What happened? Did you press a button too early?
Tennant
Belphoebe
> In article <HzGL9.35233$4W1....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>,
> "Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:na.a5e9464ba5...@argonet.co.uk...
>
> >> Oh, I'm afraid that my brain reacts to the stress of exams by suddenly
> >> being able to recall everything I've learnt, once I've turned over the
> >> first sheet. Very useful, and so much easier than having to study. :)
>
> > I'm fried from the other end of final exams--grading them! Each student
> > has to write one, and then I have to grade 'em all! :)
>
> Even so, marking has gotta be easier than sitting.
Easier, maybe--but more time consuming!
Belphoebe
Belphoebe
> >> But what is a cat condo?
>
> > <http://www.cdpets.com/images/condos.jpg>
>
> What the hell is a cat supposed to do with those?
Climb and scratch, scratch and climg. . .
> >> Since Joey's suspicions stemmed from hearing a man's voice in the
> >> apartment while Monica's husband was away, why did Chandler start
> >> talking while he was right by the front door, only seconds after
> >> it had been shut?
>
> > He didn't think it through, it seems.
>
> No, he didn't, did he?
No--maybe it's a problem with thinking on his fee.
>>> Is this because America is technologically backward? Ross was
> >> still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years later.
>
> > I have no idea, but it hadn't occurred to me that we're technologically
> > bakcward.
Eek--I don't help my case by reversing the "C" and the "K."
> That's because of the propaganda.
Yours or ours? ;)
> >> In fact, when did we first see a mobile phone in "Friends"?
>
> > TOW the Blackout, perhaps? "in the ATM 'estibule, 'ith 'ill 'oodacre."
>
> Ooh, good call!
Thanks! :)
> As early as that?
>
> That's only three years after "Joking Apart".
>
> So, how come the six friends took so long to get one?
Well, it's hard to say. Maybe characters have had phones longer, but the
writers haven't come up with reasons to work them into the scripts. They're
so ubiquitous now, IRL, that a "Shut up--no one cares about your
conversation!" script might be my choice!
> Well, when this happened on "Joking Apart", a wife was having sex with
> her husband's best friend when said husband arrived home unexpectedly,
> (the plot was not as clichéd as that sounds) and so it was quite natural
> for the best friend to hide in the en suite bathroom with his wife (who
> was in there for entirely different reasons, told you it wasn't clichéd)
> and so the poor guy couldn't move any distance from the door.
So there should have been a reason Chandler couldn't go into another room. .
. .
> > Another example is after Joey chastises Chandler for assuming he's too
> > stupid to understand his need to be with Monica--when he mixes up the
> > date of the game.
>
> Oh well, we all do that.
I know, but it seemed to me that was put in there to undercut Joey's
I'm-not-that-stupid speech.
> >> But once again we saw Joey's superior sense of smell being used to
> >> root out deception <SNIP REST OF THE REVIEW>
>
> What happened? Did you press a button too early?
Yes, that's exactly what happened. I'd intended to save the post as I was
working on it. I clicked "send" by accident, and had one of those
Rachel/Monica "Nooooooooo!" moments. See my followup to my own post, sent
seven minutes later. . . .
Belphoebe
Christoph Paeper
>
> Lol, you mean shadiam? (sp?)
I don't know this word or one that sounds like it in any language, sorry.
>> After all the dubbing is far superior to that of Friends.
>
> Really? Why is that, Christoph?
Friends in German lacks atmosphere as well as fun. Many gags are hard to
translate but they often don't even try to. The speakers seem to be random
people, but not actors who could resemble the original actors' acted
feelings. The only reason you would want to watch it, is to follow the
story.
> Are there credits to say who dubs the sitcoms?
After most shows the company and sometimes the director and/or writer
(translator) is credited. I don't remember if it is in Friends.
The dialogs are by Janina Richter who also directs. If you dare, these
are the speakers:
Rachel Nadja Reichhardt
Monica Andrea Aust
Phoebe Maja Dürr
Joey Roland Frey
Chandler Michael Iwannek
Ross Gerald Schaale
<http://www.seriensynchron.de/Serien/Friends.htm> lists also many
reappearing characters.
I wish the IMDb had this kind of information for every title. I once
suggested it, but never got a response.
Tennant Stuart
Cookie Dude <andre...@arcor.de> wrote:
She put it a *little* more kindly than that...
>> However, this means that once Chandler gets home, Joey assumes that
>> Monica has a lover there. Monica tries to fob Joey off, but he's not
>> fooled by her lame excuses, her sexy nightie, the man's voice he has
>> heard, the locked door, or the two glasses of wine on the table.
> Sherlock Tribianni....? :-)
Hehe.
>> Joey loyally phones Chandler, who takes it on his mobile - so as
>> Chandler yells down the phone at Joey to forestall him, Joey again
>> hears the man's voice coming from Monica's apartment. Chandler's
>> brilliant plan is to sneak down the fire escape into the December
>> night, without putting his coat on, then go up the stairs to where
>> his door is being grimly guarded by Joey, armed with a baseball bat.
> A prime example of why this show is called Friends and the theme song is
> called "I'll be there for you", isn't it? Too bad they seem to have
> forgotten about that motto ages ago (they are the writers in this case)
Yep, good point. At least Joey is still there for them.
>> Joey is surprised that Chandler arrives so fast, since it's a 3 hour
>> flight from Tulsa, but he trustingly lets Chandler fob him off with
>> an excuse about the time difference. Monica lamely pretends to be
>> outraged, demanding an apology from Joey,
> And of course doesn't miss out the opportunity to slap Chandler. Poor
> guy first has to lie to his best friend and then his wife, who got him
> into the trouble in the first place, hits him in the face
Awww, think of Joey getting all that water in his face... ;)
>> but he espies Chandler's
>> luggage, which Monica had foolishly forgotten to hide.
> ....or is it Joey Holmes?
Indeedy.
>> Chandler has no recourse but to apologise & confess to Joey, who is
>> very annoyed that the Bings think he is too dumb to understand that
>> a husband needs to be with his wife.
> Very funny scene when he hits himself with the baseball bat IMHO
Yeah. MLB acted as though he was dazed, but was it an act for Joey?
>> At a wine bar, Rachel informs Phoebe that Ross had liked the way she
>> looked, and then he had made eye contact - disguising the truth that
>> he had been gawping at her breasts
> Can you blame him though? Even if you'd wanted to you could not not look
> at them. Besides, IIRC at first he tried not to look and seemed really
> embarrassed when he couldn't help it in the end. I definitely agree on
> the eye contact thing though, they hardly looked at each other, that was
> less than a second. For most of the time, they were looking right past
> one another - which reminded of early teens on their first date
Well, this is it, they're not. They're a divorced couple, pushing 40,
staying together for the sake of a child. ISTM it's time they grew up.
>> Rachel is delighted to hear that Bill lives in the same building as
>> her grandmother, so while Phoebe turns Kevin down, Rachel tells Bill
>> that she does not have a boyfriend, and gives him her phone number.
>> Phoebe does not approve, but Rachel reveals that she & Ross have not
>> been communicating, and maybe she should move on with her life.
>> But when Phoebe asks Rachel to consider Ross's feelings, should Bill
>> move in with them & Emma, Rachel tells Mike on his mobile to intercept
>> any calls to Ross's phone
> woah, aren't you a little bit fast here?
Am I?
> Rachel didn't sound too convinced when she said those things, as was
> indicated by the little word "maybe" in the sentence "maybe I should
> just stop waiting around for moments with Ross". And a few seconds
> later, when Phoebe makes her see that it will seem to Ross as if she's
> already moved on if that guy calls, she and Phoebe phone up Mike.
Well, I have to condense the story, I can't keep every nuance, but I
still stand by my description. "Phoebe asks Rachel to consider Ross's
feelings, should Bill move in with them & Emma" is based on...
PHOEBE: Wow. So, that's great. You, Bill, Ross, and Emma are going to
be so happy together. What were you thinking?
..while "Rachel tells Mike on his mobile to intercept any calls to
Ross's phone" was greatly shortened from...
PHOEBE: I'm so sorry honey, but, okay, Rachel gave this guy her number
and, um, she doesn't want Ross to answer the phone. So, you have
to intercept all his calls.
MIKE: I can't do that!
PHOEBE: (to Rachel) He says he can't do that.
RACHEL: Oh give me... (Phoebe gives Rachel the phone.) Hi, Mike? Hi.
Listen. I know this is a lot to ask, but you know what? If you do
this I ... Phoebe will ... do anything you want. Seriously, I'm
talking dirty stuff.
> Anyway, the real question here is, why would Ross think Rachel still
> needs to move on? If I remember the first two eps correctly, Rachel
> "would have said yes to anybody" and Ross doesn't want to be "just
> anybody". He doesn't know of any deeper running feelings of hers and
> from what we've seen, there have been no incidents that could be
> interpreted this way. Sure they acted a lot more mature around each
> other recently, but that's all.
She's an intelligent beautiful well-paid woman, why shouldn't she be
wanting to move on? In earlier seasons it puzzled me what Rachel was
doing at home in the evenings. And in any case, Ross probably recalls
the conversation he had with Rachel in the hallway, the night that
Chandler & Monica got engaged...
RACHEL: Hey, do you believe this? Do you believe they are actually
getting married?
ROSS: Well sure. But I get married all the time so-
RACHEL: Ohh-
ROSS: You okay?
RACHEL: Yeah, I guess. I-I- I mean, do-do you think we're ever
gonna have that?
ROSS: You mean, we- you & me?
RACHEL: Oh no-no-no-no-no, no, no! We, you with someone and me
with someone.
ROSS: Oh good, you scared me for a minute.
RACHEL: Shake it off.
> And as for their communication problems, are we supposed to believe that
> there have been conversations between Ross and Rachel where she brought up
> the issue of their feelings for one another? Really?? Or is that monologue
> merely how Rachel imagines such a conversation would go?
It's how she imagines it.
> I got really annoyed with this episode after a while. I thought it had
> answered some of the questions I had about what's going on with R+R, but
> while it did partly answer some of them, it brought up like five times as
> many new questions
Life's like that. :)
>> When the girls come home, the guys are so bored out of their brains
>> that they hug them with joy.
> And Rachel's face really lightens up, but I don't think the people
> responsible for the show would pay attention to such minute details...
Yeah.
> The writing this year is more "lumberjack style"
What, they wear women's clothing and press wild flowers? :-)
>> This is the first time I've ever wanted to Fast Forward during a new
>> episode. I'd thought that the perpetuation of bad jokes had gone far
>> enough with Chandler grimacing at that photographer or Ross on roller
>> blades, but there were SEVEN boring scenes of two men being bored!
> Yeah... When the subject got to "beer", I thought that finally they would
> have something to talk about, but no... Then they look up the difference
> beer and lager in a dictionary... WTF??? You don't use a book to look
> something up these days, you spend ages looking it up on the internet.
Ross isn't a computer person, he's a book person.
> And even more, if there's two bored guys and internet access, there's
> lots of other sites they could look at. At least, it wasn't all Ross'
> fault
There's so much they could have done, but that wasn't the point. They
were meant to be bored (it probably symbolises something) which is okay
by me, there just shouldn't have been so much of them being bored.
>> Anyway, if Chandler is so clever, why didn't he go into his bedroom
>> and shut the door, to take the call where Joey can't hear him?
> Because then we wouldn't have had the really funny scene with Joey!
> "Dude, I just heard him again"
It should have been written better, for example Chandler in the bathroom.
>> Since the previous episode was set at Thanksgiving, it must now be
>> early December, and it's night. So how come only Phoebe is wearing a
>> proper overcoat?
> And why does Phoebe look like a little schoolgirl who chose what to wear
> for the first time, when Rachel looks like a mantrap?
I knowwwww!!!!
This is *exactly* what I was complaining about in my S9-07 review.
>> Why did the writers have to spoil a potentially good story with that
>> time difference joke? It was going so well: the way that the Bings
>> kept underestimating their suspicious friend, while it was they who
>> acted stupidly all the way through; that it's a shame that such a
>> cheap laugh was allowed to wreck the dynamic they'd established.
> Yeah, the time difference joke really didn't fit in here.
Absolutely.
> Maybe Joey's just too gullible.
Or too trusting.
> But I liked when Chandler said "Don't you think it's better for him to
> think that you're cheating on me, than for him to think that I'm
> cheating on him?" (since you didn't mention it, I thought I'd do it
> anyway)
Neat line, but like so much of this episode, it didn't make me laugh.
>> Which do you think was better - Monica's impression of Chandler,
>> or Rachel's impression of Ross?
> Don't know about better, but Rachel was funnier. I want Chandler to
> emphasize a word like that again.. We haven't had that for ages
I don't think he's ever done it unthinkingly.
>> Phoebe staring hard at that chasm of a cleavage, and making saucy
>> remarks about it, only serves to reinforce her lesbian tendencies;
>> most recently noted in 905 "TOW Phoebe's Birthday Dinner" when she
>> eyeballed Monica's ripe bosoms, and called them a treat...
> Stop it with the ripe bosoms already, you're not a female erotica
> writer... Phoebe and her remarks about the other women seem to become a
> running gag, huh?
Hah!!! If I were a female erotica writer, I'd have started with half a
dozen European cities, and thrown in 30 euphemisms for male genitalia.
>> And how come Rachel objected to Ross staring at her cleavage
> she was very happy about his compliments though
Oh, they're all like that.
>> So, what happens next?
>> Will Bill pass up a prize like Rachel Green simply because she
>> didn't return his first call?
>> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so angry
>> that there's a huge bust-up?
>> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so touched
>> that she falls into his arms?
>> Will Ross & Rachel start acting like mature adults, and actually
>> sit down and talk to each other?
>> Or will the writers just forget about the whole damn thing?
> I'm going with the last option, if I had my
Way?
> we would get the second to last option though
Me2. :)
Belphoebe
> Well, this is it, they're not. They're a divorced couple, pushing 40,
> staying together for the sake of a child. ISTM it's time they grew up.
!!!
"Pushing 40"?!?!?
Ross is around 34/35 years old, and Rachel, according to her revised age
from TOW They All Turn 30, is only 31 (she'd otherwise be 33-ish).
You'd better take this back, because I'm 35 (and NOT pushing 40 yet)!
Belphoebe
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> Gah! I hit "send" before I was done!!!!
I was wondering that!
> "Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote in message
> news:hJRL9.38543$4W1....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
>> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:na.f7ae534ba3...@argonet.co.uk...
British/Anzac/Euro SPOILER SPACE for 909...
Oh, those are the best sort of admonitions. :)
>>> Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
> It seemed to be Phoebe being Phoebe--nothing "metaphorical"; sorry.
S'okay, I was prepared for that <sob>
>>> Does a story about bored people have to be boring?
> [snipping]
> Nope, clearly not. But also, I don't see why the story had to be about
> Ross and Mike boring one another. The writers could have done so much
> more with the two of them *not* being bored--having lots to talk about.
> We could have learned more about Mike
Absolutely.
> (besides his willingness to thwart social boundaries).
Ooh! How would that go, then?
>>> No spoilers PLEASE from anyone who has seen episode 910.
> Belphoebe
Tennant
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.e561654ba6...@argonet.co.uk...
>> Even so, marking has gotta be easier than sitting.
> Easier, maybe--but more time consuming!
Lol, that's what you need - marking against the clock... ;)
Tennant Stuart
bakk...@plu.edu (Marita Bakken) wrote:
> If I hear about T-Mobile one more time, I'll.... :)
> Seriously, the ads are all over the place here in the States.
> Catherine Zeta Jones is talking about the miracle that is T-Mobile
> whenever I turn on the TV or listen to the radio. You cannot go
> through one single day without seeing/hearing those ads at least ten
> times.
Lol, does the "T" stand for "Ten years ago in Europe"?
Tennant Stuart
bakk...@plu.edu (Marita Bakken) wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 22:43:46 GMT, Tennant Stuart
> <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>>> We saw Rachel with her own mobile in errr... 715 wasn't it? The one
>>> where she and Phoebe argue over that other guy's phone, just watched
>>> it last night (the new boxset *with* the fourth disc arrived, yay me!)
>> Ah, *as*well*as* the stolen phone?
>> <checks>
>> Oh yes, Phoebe challenged Rachel's claim that she had Barney's the
>> store on her speed dial, so she pulled out her own phone to prove it.
>> Well done André, but does that mean that not a single one of the gang
>> owned a mobile phone until 2001?
> Nope, some of them had cell phones way earlier than that.
> Ross showed up with one in e.g. 504, 506, 511 and 604, Joey had one in
> 621 and 724, Chandler had one in 903 and 909, Monica used hers in 803
> and 904, Phoebe had one in (615), 715 and 807, while Rachel got her
> own in 715.
You know sweetie, sometimes I think you won't amaze me, and then you do.
How the hell do you manage to do this stuff? You're incredible. :)
Anyway, alt-Phoebe doesn't count, nor does post-715, so that gives us...
Ross showed up with one in 504, 506, 511 and 604, Joey had one in 621.
And the winner is Ross talking loud on his phone during a movie.
So, not a single one of the gang owned a mobile phone until 1998?
And Ross might have bought that in London... ;)
Cookie Dude
cracker and said:
> In article <3e011aa...@News.CIS.DFN.DE>,
> bakk...@plu.edu (Marita Bakken) wrote:
>
>> If I hear about T-Mobile one more time, I'll.... :)
>> Seriously, the ads are all over the place here in the States.
>> Catherine Zeta Jones is talking about the miracle that is T-Mobile
>> whenever I turn on the TV or listen to the radio. You cannot go
>> through one single day without seeing/hearing those ads at least ten
>> times.
>
> Lol, does the "T" stand for "Ten years ago in Europe"?
nah, it's from the "mother company" (is that a valid expression?) - Deutsche
_T_elekom. There's also T-Com (landline), T-Online (does that one need
explaining?) and T-Systems (network and IT system service solutions)
Belphoebe
> In article <zd7M9.46847$4W1....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>,
> "Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:na.e561654ba6...@argonet.co.uk...
>
> >> Even so, marking has gotta be easier than sitting.
>
> > Easier, maybe--but more time consuming!
>
> Lol, that's what you need - marking against the clock... ;)
A new game show, coming to a fledgling cable network near you. . . . ;)
Belphoebe
Belphoebe
> In article <ZPRL9.38586$4W1....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>,
> "Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > Gah! I hit "send" before I was done!!!!
>
> I was wondering that!
Mmm hmmm. I hate when I do something like that!
Yes, they're the ones that overturn the whole notion of admonitions. . . .
;)
> >>> Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
>
> > It seemed to be Phoebe being Phoebe--nothing "metaphorical"; sorry.
>
> S'okay, I was prepared for that <sob>
Aw, but I've always felt silliness can be its own reward. It certainly
makes things more fun.
> > Nope, clearly not. But also, I don't see why the story had to be about
> > Ross and Mike boring one another. The writers could have done so much
> > more with the two of them *not* being bored--having lots to talk about.
> > We could have learned more about Mike
>
> Absolutely.
>
>
> > (besides his willingness to thwart social boundaries).
>
> Ooh! How would that go, then?
Does your "that" refer to the "willingness to thwart social boundaries" or
the "besides"?
The latter was,of course, Mike lunging across Ross to answer his
phone--something Ross characterizes this way:
ROSS: Oh, you know . . . we just drank some beer and Mike played with the
boundaries of normal social conduct.
As for the "besides," I have no idea, since the writers denied us the
opportunity to find out.
David Buehrle
> In article <NsxL9.81807$Xr6.1...@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>,
> "David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:na.a5e9464ba5...@argonet.co.uk...
>
> >> Oh, I'm afraid that my brain reacts to the stress of exams by suddenly
> >> being able to recall everything I've learnt, once I've turned over the
> >> first sheet. Very useful, and so much easier than having to study. :)
>
> > I have so many friends that "clam up" for exams.
>
> Me too, so they're not too pleased that I "clam down".
>
>
> > I always enjoyed the opportunity to demonstrate that I understood the
> > topic. I have to admit though, that I'm not as quick as I once was. I'm
> > too young to be noticing such things, but there it is.
>
> Use It Or Lose It is your motto.
>
>
> > I really think the West Nile Virus that I had last July might have had
> > something to do with that.
>
> Geez, where have you been?
>
river through infected birds and mosquitoes. It reached Minnesota just this
summer.
Cookie Dude
Doesn't change the meaning though. He can be with his wife a lot more often
than he gets the chance to go to a Knicks game courtside
>>> Joey loyally phones Chandler, who takes it on his mobile - so as
>>> Chandler yells down the phone at Joey to forestall him, Joey again
>>> hears the man's voice coming from Monica's apartment. Chandler's
>>> brilliant plan is to sneak down the fire escape into the December
>>> night, without putting his coat on, then go up the stairs to where
>>> his door is being grimly guarded by Joey, armed with a baseball bat.
>
>> A prime example of why this show is called Friends and the theme
>> song is called "I'll be there for you", isn't it? Too bad they seem
>> to have forgotten about that motto ages ago (they are the writers in
>> this case)
>
> Yep, good point. At least Joey is still there for them.
He's always been the most caring friend.
>>> Chandler has no recourse but to apologise & confess to Joey, who is
>>> very annoyed that the Bings think he is too dumb to understand that
>>> a husband needs to be with his wife.
>
>> Very funny scene when he hits himself with the baseball bat IMHO
>
> Yeah. MLB acted as though he was dazed, but was it an act for Joey?
What do you mean?
>>> At a wine bar, Rachel informs Phoebe that Ross had liked the way she
>>> looked, and then he had made eye contact - disguising the truth that
>>> he had been gawping at her breasts
>
>> Can you blame him though? Even if you'd wanted to you could not not
>> look at them. Besides, IIRC at first he tried not to look and seemed
>> really embarrassed when he couldn't help it in the end. I definitely
>> agree on the eye contact thing though, they hardly looked at each
>> other, that was less than a second. For most of the time, they were
>> looking right past one another - which reminded of early teens on
>> their first date
>
> Well, this is it, they're not. They're a divorced couple, pushing 40,
> staying together for the sake of a child. ISTM it's time they grew up.
And growing up can only be achieved if Rachel morphes into Karen, starts
dating Joey and Ross starts going out with Phoebe? btw. Rachel is just about
32, so Ross shouldn't be older than 34 if my understanding of the American
school system is correct. Calling that pushing 40 is really cheeky, not even
I would do that
>>> Rachel is delighted to hear that Bill lives in the same building as
>>> her grandmother, so while Phoebe turns Kevin down, Rachel tells Bill
>>> that she does not have a boyfriend, and gives him her phone number.
>>> Phoebe does not approve, but Rachel reveals that she & Ross have not
>>> been communicating, and maybe she should move on with her life.
>
>>> But when Phoebe asks Rachel to consider Ross's feelings, should Bill
>>> move in with them & Emma, Rachel tells Mike on his mobile to
>>> intercept any calls to Ross's phone
>
>> woah, aren't you a little bit fast here?
>
> Am I?
You make it sound as though Rachel had already ultimately decided to move on
with her life - which she didn't - and Phoebe talked her into making Mike
stay at Ross'. All Phoebe did was to make Rachel see that she doesn't know
what she's doing. She's avoiding talking to Ross, because she thinks she
knows how that's gonna go and that nothing will come out of it, but
apparently dating other men is not what she wants either
>> Rachel didn't sound too convinced when she said those things, as was
>> indicated by the little word "maybe" in the sentence "maybe I should
>> just stop waiting around for moments with Ross". And a few seconds
>> later, when Phoebe makes her see that it will seem to Ross as if
>> she's already moved on if that guy calls, she and Phoebe phone up
>> Mike.
>
> Well, I have to condense the story, I can't keep every nuance,
Sure you can't keep every nuance, but again, your way of describing it makes
it seem as if Phoebe talked Rachel into making sure Ross doesn't find out
about that guy, which she didn't.
>> Anyway, the real question here is, why would Ross think Rachel still
>> needs to move on? If I remember the first two eps correctly, Rachel
>> "would have said yes to anybody" and Ross doesn't want to be "just
>> anybody". He doesn't know of any deeper running feelings of hers and
>> from what we've seen, there have been no incidents that could be
>> interpreted this way. Sure they acted a lot more mature around each
>> other recently, but that's all.
>
> She's an intelligent beautiful well-paid woman, why shouldn't she be
> wanting to move on?
Because he's the father of her daughter, they were in a loving relationship
a few years back, a glimmer of these feelings still seems to be there on
both sides (after this episode I would say they just don't know what to do
with/about it) and they're backups anyway? Besides, remember an episode from
the 2nd season when Ross also answered the phone for Rachel and told someone
he'd pass on the number?
> In earlier seasons it puzzled me what Rachel was
> doing at home in the evenings. And in any case, Ross probably recalls
> the conversation he had with Rachel in the hallway, the night that
> Chandler & Monica got engaged...
a lot has happened since then though. Like Emma for example
>>> When the girls come home, the guys are so bored out of their brains
>>> that they hug them with joy.
>
>> And Rachel's face really lightens up, but I don't think the people
>> responsible for the show would pay attention to such minute
>> details...
>
> Yeah.
anymore at least. In earlier seasons I would have taken that as a hint, but
not anymore
>> The writing this year is more "lumberjack style"
>
> What, they wear women's clothing and press wild flowers? :-)
What is it with that saying? Is it from the Monty Python lumberjack sketch?
>>> This is the first time I've ever wanted to Fast Forward during a new
>>> episode. I'd thought that the perpetuation of bad jokes had gone far
>>> enough with Chandler grimacing at that photographer or Ross on
>>> roller blades, but there were SEVEN boring scenes of two men being
>>> bored!
>
>> Yeah... When the subject got to "beer", I thought that finally they
>> would have something to talk about, but no... Then they look up the
>> difference beer and lager in a dictionary... WTF??? You don't use a
>> book to look something up these days, you spend ages looking it up
>> on the internet.
>
> Ross isn't a computer person, he's a book person.
The Ross I got to know isn't someone who:
- freaks out over a sandwich
- gets stuck in leatherpants
- goes around attacking women in the streets
- drives a Porsche in 2nd gear all the time and tries to flirt with a
(male!) police officer
- gives the keys to his apartments to his girlfriend and then has the locks
changed
- (...)
so for the sake of the story they could have made him a computer person.
It's not like that would have destroyed the character
> There's so much they could have done, but that wasn't the point. They
> were meant to be bored (it probably symbolises something) which is
> okay by me,
I know
> there just shouldn't have been so much of them being
> bored.
Exactly
>>> Anyway, if Chandler is so clever, why didn't he go into his bedroom
>>> and shut the door, to take the call where Joey can't hear him?
>
>> Because then we wouldn't have had the really funny scene with Joey!
>> "Dude, I just heard him again"
>
> It should have been written better, for example Chandler in the
> bathroom.
I liked it as it was, Chandler really seemed like good old Chandler - watch
his hands and facial expressions
>> And why does Phoebe look like a little schoolgirl who chose what to
>> wear for the first time, when Rachel looks like a mantrap?
>
> I knowwwww!!!!
>
> This is *exactly* what I was complaining about in my S9-07 review.
But there she was appropriately dressed for the occasion, here she didn't
fit in at all. Which guy would chat up a woman dressed like that in a bar?
>> Maybe Joey's just too gullible.
>
> Or too trusting.
Or both
>> But I liked when Chandler said "Don't you think it's better for him
>> to think that you're cheating on me, than for him to think that I'm
>> cheating on him?" (since you didn't mention it, I thought I'd do it
>> anyway)
>
> Neat line, but like so much of this episode, it didn't make me laugh.
I liked the idea behind it. Chandler is more worried about his friendship
with Joey than he's about Monica. Yay! Now all we need is for him to move
back into his old room...
>> Don't know about better, but Rachel was funnier. I want Chandler to
>> emphasize a word like that again.. We haven't had that for ages
>
> I don't think he's ever done it unthinkingly.
Could be, but my point is he hasn't done it at all for ages
>>> Phoebe staring hard at that chasm of a cleavage, and making saucy
>>> remarks about it, only serves to reinforce her lesbian tendencies;
>>> most recently noted in 905 "TOW Phoebe's Birthday Dinner" when she
>>> eyeballed Monica's ripe bosoms, and called them a treat...
>
>> Stop it with the ripe bosoms already, you're not a female erotica
>> writer... Phoebe and her remarks about the other women seem to
>> become a running gag, huh?
>
> Hah!!! If I were a female erotica writer, I'd have started with half a
> dozen European cities, and thrown in 30 euphemisms for male genitalia.
You don't even know that many European cities :P
>>> So, what happens next?
>
>>> Will Bill pass up a prize like Rachel Green simply because she
>>> didn't return his first call?
>
>>> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so angry
>>> that there's a huge bust-up?
>
>>> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so touched
>>> that she falls into his arms?
>
>>> Will Ross & Rachel start acting like mature adults, and actually
>>> sit down and talk to each other?
>
>>> Or will the writers just forget about the whole damn thing?
>
>> I'm going with the last option, if I had my
>
> Way?
yupp :-)
>> we would get the second to last option though
>
> Me2. :)
Well, they managed to really surprise in an earlier episode, though I can't
remember which one, and they really stressed how Joey is not as dumb as they
wrote him earlier on in this episode. So every now and then they throw in
something surprising... We'll see
Belphoebe
"Cookie Dude" <andre...@HarDcorE.de> wrote in message
news:au4b7u$acd$1...@newsread1.arcor-online.net...
> > staying together for the sake of a child. ISTM it's time they grew up.
> [. . . ] btw. Rachel is just about
> 32, so Ross shouldn't be older than 34 if my understanding of the American
> school system is correct. Calling that pushing 40 is really cheeky, not
even
> I would do that
Thank you, André! I'm 35, and I was offended. :(
> >> The writing this year is more "lumberjack style"
> >
> > What, they wear women's clothing and press wild flowers? :-)
>
> What is it with that saying? Is it from the Monty Python lumberjack
sketch?
Yup, it's a reference to the lumberjack song in the sketch.
Belphoebe
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> !!!
> "Pushing 40"?!?!?
Just for you sweetie, I'll take that back; but don't you feel the
dreaded 40 arriving with ever-gathering speed? 30 was bad enough.
Tennant Stuart
"Cookie Dude" <andre...@HarDcorE.de> wrote:
> Now that everyone's overdosed on Teletubbies, Tennant Stuart had a
> cracker and said:
>> In article <3e011aa...@News.CIS.DFN.DE>,
>> bakk...@plu.edu (Marita Bakken) wrote:
>>> If I hear about T-Mobile one more time, I'll.... :)
>>> Seriously, the ads are all over the place here in the States.
>>> Catherine Zeta Jones is talking about the miracle that is T-Mobile
>>> whenever I turn on the TV or listen to the radio. You cannot go
>>> through one single day without seeing/hearing those ads at least ten
>>> times.
>> Lol, does the "T" stand for "Ten years ago in Europe"?
> nah, it's from the "mother company" (is that a valid expression?)
Not really, say "parent company".
> Deutsche _T_elekom. There's also T-Com (landline), T-Online (does that
> one need explaining?) and T-Systems (network and IT system service
> solutions)
Ah, thanks André.
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.1691b94ba7...@argonet.co.uk...
>>> Gah! I hit "send" before I was done!!!!
>> I was wondering that!
> Mmm hmmm. I hate when I do something like that!
At least you didn't post a very private email to the world. :)
Lol
>>>>> Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
>>> It seemed to be Phoebe being Phoebe--nothing "metaphorical"; sorry.
>> S'okay, I was prepared for that <sob>
> Aw, but I've always felt silliness can be its own reward. It certainly
> makes things more fun.
Fair enough, but it might have had literary connotations, one never knows.
Dr.Seuss perhaps?
>>> Nope, clearly not. But also, I don't see why the story had to be about
>>> Ross and Mike boring one another. The writers could have done so much
>>> more with the two of them *not* being bored--having lots to talk
>>> about. We could have learned more about Mike (besides his willingness
>>> to thwart social boundaries).
>> Ooh! How would that go, then?
> Does your "that" refer to the "willingness to thwart social boundaries" or
> the "besides"?
Oh, I've always been a sucker for a good thwarting.
> The latter was,of course, Mike lunging across Ross to answer his
> phone--something Ross characterizes this way:
> ROSS: Oh, you know . . . we just drank some beer and Mike played with the
> boundaries of normal social conduct.
Indeedy.
> As for the "besides," I have no idea, since the writers denied us the
> opportunity to find out.
Ah, that's what I was hoping you'd imaginate (GWB) for me.
>>>>> No spoilers PLEASE from anyone who has seen episode 910.
Tennant
Tennant Stuart
"David Buehrle" <dbue...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.2561604ba6...@argonet.co.uk...
>>> I really think the West Nile Virus that I had last July might have had
>>> something to do with that.
>> Geez, where have you been?
> I have a cottage along the Mississippi. I believe the virus tracked up
> the river through infected birds and mosquitoes. It reached Minnesota
> just this summer.
Wow, you don't think of things like that as happening in America.
Well, not North, anyway.
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.1b91ec4ba7...@argonet.co.uk...
>>>> Even so, marking has gotta be easier than sitting.
>>> Easier, maybe--but more time consuming!
>> Lol, that's what you need - marking against the clock... ;)
> A new game show, coming to a fledgling cable network near you. . . . ;)
Absolutely, with Joseph Tribbiani as the host...
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.cdc9a54ba6...@argonet.co.uk...
>>> <http://www.cdpets.com/images/condos.jpg>
Oh, is it bigger than I thought, then?
>>>> Since Joey's suspicions stemmed from hearing a man's voice in the
>>>> apartment while Monica's husband was away, why did Chandler start
>>>> talking while he was right by the front door, only seconds after
>>>> it had been shut?
>>> He didn't think it through, it seems.
>> No, he didn't, did he?
> No--maybe it's a problem with thinking on his fee.
Errr... is that a very clever joke, or a typo?
>>>> Is this because America is technologically backward? Ross was
>>>> still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years later.
>>> I have no idea, but it hadn't occurred to me that we're
>>> technologically bakcward.
> Eek--I don't help my case by reversing the "C" and the "K."
You'll appreciate the fact that I didn't point this out. :)
>> That's because of the propaganda.
> Yours or ours? ;)
Yours.
>>>> In fact, when did we first see a mobile phone in "Friends"?
>>> TOW the Blackout, perhaps? "in the ATM 'estibule, 'ith 'ill
> 'oodacre."
>> Ooh, good call!
> Thanks! :)
YW
>> As early as that?
>> That's only three years after "Joking Apart".
>> So, how come the six friends took so long to get one?
> Well, it's hard to say. Maybe characters have had phones longer, but the
> writers haven't come up with reasons to work them into the scripts.
> They're so ubiquitous now, IRL, that a "Shut up--no one cares about your
> conversation!" script might be my choice!
Indeedy, but Ross was using a beeper in 1995, and later that year Rachel
had to borrow a mobile from another patron at a restaurant, so neither of
those people had them at the time.
>> Well, when this happened on "Joking Apart", a wife was having sex with
>> her husband's best friend when said husband arrived home unexpectedly,
>> (the plot was not as clichéd as that sounds) and so it was quite natural
>> for the best friend to hide in the en suite bathroom with his wife (who
>> was in there for entirely different reasons, told you it wasn't clichéd)
>> and so the poor guy couldn't move any distance from the door.
> So there should have been a reason Chandler couldn't go into another room.
Yep. The simplest staging is for him to be in the bathroom.
>>> Another example is after Joey chastises Chandler for assuming he's too
>>> stupid to understand his need to be with Monica--when he mixes up the
>>> date of the game.
>> Oh well, we all do that.
> I know, but it seemed to me that was put in there to undercut Joey's
> I'm-not-that-stupid speech.
It could well be, but even so we all do that.
>>>> But once again we saw Joey's superior sense of smell being used to
>>>> root out deception <SNIP REST OF THE REVIEW>
>> What happened? Did you press a button too early?
> Yes, that's exactly what happened. I'd intended to save the post as I
> was working on it. I clicked "send" by accident, and had one of those
> Rachel/Monica "Nooooooooo!" moments. See my followup to my own post,
> sent seven minutes later. . . .
Which for me was later, since I must have downloaded in your 7 minutes.
Belphoebe
> In article <yMFM9.57190$_S2.3...@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
> "Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:na.1b91ec4ba7...@argonet.co.uk...
>
> >>>> Even so, marking has gotta be easier than sitting.
>
> >>> Easier, maybe--but more time consuming!
>
> >> Lol, that's what you need - marking against the clock... ;)
>
> > A new game show, coming to a fledgling cable network near you. . . .
;)
>
> Absolutely, with Joseph Tribbiani as the host...
Heh. Definitely. It would have to have some very complicated rules. :)
Belphoebe
Belphoebe
> In article <IYFM9.57218$_S2.3...@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
> "Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:na.1691b94ba7...@argonet.co.uk...
>
> >>> Gah! I hit "send" before I was done!!!!
>
> >> I was wondering that!
>
> > Mmm hmmm. I hate when I do something like that!
>
> At least you didn't post a very private email to the world. :)
No, fortunately I've managed to avoid that. I've done the opposite
though--sending via e-mail a response I meant to post to the world. Not as
bad, but still somewhat embarrassing. :)
> >>>>> Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
>
> >>> It seemed to be Phoebe being Phoebe--nothing "metaphorical"; sorry.
>
> >> S'okay, I was prepared for that <sob>
>
> > Aw, but I've always felt silliness can be its own reward. It certainly
> > makes things more fun.
>
> Fair enough, but it might have had literary connotations, one never knows.
>
> Dr.Seuss perhaps?
Ah, that little-known Suess story about the Who's in Whoville ordering
mashed potatoes at the Whobar. ;)
> > As for the "besides," I have no idea, since the writers denied us the
> > opportunity to find out.
>
> Ah, that's what I was hoping you'd imaginate (GWB) for me.
Ah, I see. . . .
Maybe he'd reveal his deep feelings about Phoebe? In an entertaining way,
of course. :)
> >>>>> No spoilers PLEASE from anyone who has seen episode 910.
Belphoebe
Belphoebe
Belphoebe
>
> Oh, is it bigger than I thought, then?
Not having access to your thoughts, I'd have to say. . . probably. Imagine
a cat sprawled on each of those upper platforms.
> >>> He didn't think it through, it seems.
>
> >> No, he didn't, did he?
>
> > No--maybe it's a problem with thinking on his fee.
>
> Errr... is that a very clever joke, or a typo?
Sigh. Sadly, it's a typo. (Pay attention, Belphoebe!)
> >>>> Is this because America is technologically backward? Ross was
> >>>> still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years later.
>
> >>> I have no idea, but it hadn't occurred to me that we're
> >>> technologically bakcward.
>
> > Eek--I don't help my case by reversing the "C" and the "K."
>
> You'll appreciate the fact that I didn't point this out. :)
Yes, I do! :)
> >> That's because of the propaganda.
>
> > Yours or ours? ;)
>
> Yours.
Perhaps you are not immune to yours?
> >> So, how come the six friends took so long to get [a mobile phone]?
> > Well, it's hard to say. Maybe characters have had phones longer, but the
> > writers haven't come up with reasons to work them into the scripts.
> > They're so ubiquitous now, IRL, that a "Shut up--no one cares about your
> > conversation!" script might be my choice!
>
> Indeedy, but Ross was using a beeper in 1995, and later that year Rachel
> had to borrow a mobile from another patron at a restaurant, so neither of
> those people had them at the time.
Maybe 1996 was their big year for buying cell phones? I had one in 1993, in
case you're curious.
> > So there should have been a reason Chandler couldn't go into another
room.
>
> Yep. The simplest staging is for him to be in the bathroom.
True, but then the writers would have had to come up with a complication
other than Joey hearing Chandler through the door.
> >>>> But once again we saw Joey's superior sense of smell being used to
> >>>> root out deception <SNIP REST OF THE REVIEW>
>
> >> What happened? Did you press a button too early?
>
> > Yes, that's exactly what happened. I'd intended to save the post as I
> > was working on it. I clicked "send" by accident, and had one of those
> > Rachel/Monica "Nooooooooo!" moments. See my followup to my own post,
> > sent seven minutes later. . . .
>
> Which for me was later, since I must have downloaded in your 7 minutes.
Ah, that explains it. :)
Belphoebe
Belphoebe
Thank you! :)
but don't you feel the
> dreaded 40 arriving with ever-gathering speed? 30 was bad enough.
Nope--I won't think that until I'm 38! :)
(So if you want to say that CCA and LK are "pushing forty," that's allowed!)
Belphoebe, holding 35. . . .
Cookie Dude
cracker and said:
>>> Lol, does the "T" stand for "Ten years ago in Europe"?
>
>> nah, it's from the "mother company" (is that a valid expression?)
>
> Not really, say "parent company".
duh.... So close
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.df14fd4ba9...@argonet.co.uk...
>>>>>> Even so, marking has gotta be easier than sitting.
>>>>> Easier, maybe--but more time consuming!
>>>> Lol, that's what you need - marking against the clock... ;)
>>> A new game show, coming to a fledgling cable network near you. . . .
> ;)
>> Absolutely, with Joseph Tribbiani as the host...
> Heh. Definitely. It would have to have some very complicated rules. :)
And topless Eng.Lit professors? ;)
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.9114b34ba9...@argonet.co.uk...
>>>>> Gah! I hit "send" before I was done!!!!
>>>> I was wondering that!
>>> Mmm hmmm. I hate when I do something like that!
>> At least you didn't post a very private email to the world. :)
> No, fortunately I've managed to avoid that. I've done the opposite
> though--sending via e-mail a response I meant to post to the world.
> Not as bad, but still somewhat embarrassing. :)
I hope that wasn't a reply to one of my reviews!
>> Dr.Seuss perhaps?
That's exactly the one!
>>> As for the "besides," I have no idea, since the writers denied us the
>>> opportunity to find out.
>> Ah, that's what I was hoping you'd imaginate (GWB) for me.
> Ah, I see. . . .
Yep.
> Maybe he'd reveal his deep feelings about Phoebe? In an entertaining
> way, of course. :)
Lol, if I thought that some guy was going to try the Kivin method on me,
I'd be running a mile, or revealing my deep feelings with a fist! :)
>>>>>>> No spoilers PLEASE from anyone who has seen episode 910.
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.0c15dd4ba9...@argonet.co.uk...
>>>> What the hell is a cat supposed to do with those?
>>> Climb and scratch, scratch and clim[b]. . .
>> Oh, is it bigger than I thought, then?
> Not having access to your thoughts, I'd have to say. . . probably.
> Imagine a cat sprawled on each of those upper platforms.
Oh, I imagined one cat sprawled on its back across the whole thing.
That photo gave no notion of scale.
Why didn't they put a couple of contented cats on it?
>>>>> He didn't think it through, it seems.
>>>> No, he didn't, did he?
>>> No--maybe it's a problem with thinking on his fee.
>> Errr... is that a very clever joke, or a typo?
> Sigh. Sadly, it's a typo. (Pay attention, Belphoebe!)
Oh. Sozza.
>>>>>> Is this because America is technologically backward? Ross was
>>>>>> still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years later.
>>>>> I have no idea, but it hadn't occurred to me that we're
>>>>> technologically bakcward.
>>> Eek--I don't help my case by reversing the "C" and the "K."
>> You'll appreciate the fact that I didn't point this out. :)
> Yes, I do! :)
:)
>>>> That's because of the propaganda.
>>> Yours or ours? ;)
>> Yours.
> Perhaps you are not immune to yours?
I dunno, but I've seen yours, and it's horrific.
Texas is the worst.
Especially if one speaks German.
>>>> So, how come the six friends took so long to get [a mobile phone]?
>>> Well, it's hard to say. Maybe characters have had phones longer, but
>>> the writers haven't come up with reasons to work them into the
>>> scripts. They're so ubiquitous now, IRL, that a "Shut up--no one cares
>>> about your conversation!" script might be my choice!
>> Indeedy, but Ross was using a beeper in 1995, and later that year
>> Rachel had to borrow a mobile from another patron at a restaurant, so
>> neither of those people had them at the time.
> Maybe 1996 was their big year for buying cell phones? I had one in 1993,
> in case you're curious.
Oh, good for you, only two years after we had sitcoms about them. :)
>>> So there should have been a reason Chandler couldn't go into another
> room.
>> Yep. The simplest staging is for him to be in the bathroom.
> True, but then the writers would have had to come up with a complication
> other than Joey hearing Chandler through the door.
Joey starts banging on the door, Chandler gets scared so hides in the
bathroom, Monica lets Joey in before he breaks down the door, Chandler
phones Joey while Monica tries to haul him off. Simple.
>>>>>> But once again we saw Joey's superior sense of smell being used to
>>>>>> root out deception <SNIP REST OF THE REVIEW>
>>>> What happened? Did you press a button too early?
>>> Yes, that's exactly what happened. I'd intended to save the post as I
>>> was working on it. I clicked "send" by accident, and had one of those
>>> Rachel/Monica "Nooooooooo!" moments. See my followup to my own post,
>>> sent seven minutes later. . . .
>> Which for me was later, since I must have downloaded in your 7 minutes.
> Ah, that explains it. :)
Good. :)
Tennant Stuart
"Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
> "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:na.eb13e84ba9...@argonet.co.uk...
>>> Ross is around 34/35 years old, and Rachel, according to her revised
>>> age from TOW They All Turn 30, is only 31 (she'd otherwise be 33-ish).
>>> You'd better take this back, because I'm 35 (and NOT pushing 40 yet)!
>> Just for you sweetie, I'll take that back;
> Thank you! :)
YW
>> but don't you feel the dreaded 40 arriving with ever-gathering speed?
>> 30 was bad enough.
> Nope--I won't think that until I'm 38! :)
Awww...
> (So if you want to say that CCA and LK are "pushing forty," that's
> allowed!)
IIRC, LK turns 40 next July, and CC (not CCA any more) 11 months later.
> Belphoebe, holding 35. . . .
Lol, my big sister, who's 10 years older than me, is holding 29...
Cookie Dude
cracker and said:
> At least you didn't post a very private email to the world. :)
oi! silly me did it the other way around. I just noticed that instead of
posting it here, I emailed you my reply to the 906 thread. So whenever you
find it, could you post your reply back here?
Thanks :-)
André
Belphoebe
> In article <wpHN9.72910$_S2.7...@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
> "Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:na.df14fd4ba9...@argonet.co.uk...
>
> >>>>>> Even so, marking has gotta be easier than sitting.
>
> >>>>> Easier, maybe--but more time consuming!
>
> >>>> Lol, that's what you need - marking against the clock... ;)
>
> >>> A new game show, coming to a fledgling cable network near you. . . .
> > ;)
>
> >> Absolutely, with Joseph Tribbiani as the host...
>
> > Heh. Definitely. It would have to have some very complicated rules.
:)
>
> And topless Eng.Lit professors? ;)
Naughty! Did Joey tell you to ask that? ;)
Belphoebe
Belphoebe
> In article <AzHN9.73004$_S2.5...@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
> "Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:na.9114b34ba9...@argonet.co.uk...
>
> >>>>> Gah! I hit "send" before I was done!!!!
>
> >>>> I was wondering that!
>
> >>> Mmm hmmm. I hate when I do something like that!
>
> >> At least you didn't post a very private email to the world. :)
>
> > No, fortunately I've managed to avoid that. I've done the opposite
> > though--sending via e-mail a response I meant to post to the world.
> > Not as bad, but still somewhat embarrassing. :)
>
> I hope that wasn't a reply to one of my reviews!
Nope, I don't think so!
> >> Fair enough, but it might have had literary connotations, one never
> > knows.
>
> >> Dr.Seuss perhaps?
>
> > Ah, that little-known Suess story about the Who's in Whoville ordering
> > mashed potatoes at the Whobar. ;)
>
> That's exactly the one!
:)
> > Maybe he'd reveal his deep feelings about Phoebe? In an entertaining
> > way, of course. :)
>
> Lol, if I thought that some guy was going to try the Kivin method on me,
> I'd be running a mile, or revealing my deep feelings with a fist! :)
<Doing a Google search on "Kivin method">
Eek, I wasn't thinking anything like *that*!
> >>>>>>> No spoilers PLEASE from anyone who has seen episode 910.
Belphoebe
Belphoebe
> In article <dMHN9.73102$_S2.3...@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
> "Belphoebe" <n...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > "Tennant Stuart" <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:na.eb13e84ba9...@argonet.co.uk...
>
> >>> Ross is around 34/35 years old, and Rachel, according to her revised
> >>> age from TOW They All Turn 30, is only 31 (she'd otherwise be 33-ish).
>
> >> but don't you feel the dreaded 40 arriving with ever-gathering speed?
> >> 30 was bad enough.
>
> > Nope--I won't think that until I'm 38! :)
>
> Awww...
:)
> > (So if you want to say that CCA and LK are "pushing forty," that's
> > allowed!)
>
> IIRC, LK turns 40 next July, and CC (not CCA any more) 11 months later.
Yup, that's what I mean!
> > Belphoebe, holding 35. . . .
>
> Lol, my big sister, who's 10 years older than me, is holding 29...
Oh, I'm not that bad! I actually do admit to aging a year whenever I have a
birthday. The way I see it, I'd rather have people thinking I look good at
35 than "29? She looks terrible for 29!".
I used to participate in a BBS run by a married couple. The female half of
the pair would go into the BBS software just before her birthday every year
and add one year to her date of birth, so that when the BBS listed her
birthday in its announcements, it would always wish her a happy 29th. She
was considerably older than I, and I was somewhat annoyed when my 30th
birthday rolled around!
Belphoebe
Belphoebe
I don't know. They should have.
> >>>>>> Is this because America is technologically backward? Ross was
> >>>>>> still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years later.
>
> >>>>> I have no idea, but it hadn't occurred to me that we're
> >>>>> technologically ba[ck]ward.
[ . . . ]
> >>>> That's because of the propaganda.
>
> >>> Yours or ours? ;)
>
> >> Yours.
>
> > Perhaps you are not immune to yours?
>
> I dunno, but I've seen yours, and it's horrific.
I take it you're not limiting yourself to technology? I agree it can be
horrific, especially when it passes for "news."
> Texas is the worst.
I hate Texas, too, but what specifically did you have in mind?
> Especially if one speaks German.
?
> > Maybe 1996 was their big year for buying cell phones? I had one in
1993,
> > in case you're curious.
>
> Oh, good for you, only two years after we had sitcoms about them. :)
Yes. But I surely wasn't the first adopter of the technology. In the
short-lived _That Eighties Show_, there was an episode featuring someone
using an early, clunky cell phone.
> >>> So there should have been a reason Chandler couldn't go into another
> > room.
>
> >> Yep. The simplest staging is for him to be in the bathroom.
>
> > True, but then the writers would have had to come up with a complication
> > other than Joey hearing Chandler through the door.
>
> Joey starts banging on the door, Chandler gets scared so hides in the
> bathroom, Monica lets Joey in before he breaks down the door, Chandler
> phones Joey while Monica tries to haul him off. Simple.
I guess the hitch there would have been cutting between Chandler in the
bathroom and Joey with Monica in the main part of the apartment. The way
the sets are arranged might have prohibited doing so.
Belphoebe
David Buehrle
> >>> something to do with that.
>
> >> Geez, where have you been?
>
> > I have a cottage along the Mississippi. I believe the virus tracked up
> > the river through infected birds and mosquitoes. It reached Minnesota
> > just this summer.
>
> Wow, you don't think of things like that as happening in America.
>
> Well, not North, anyway.
>
unless they have been vaccinated. Unfortunately, there's no effective
vaccine for humans.
It is said that most humans that get exposed show no symptoms. I think the
numbers were something like one in 150 show symptoms. And of the people
that show symptoms, one in 200 die from it. So, it could have been much
worse for me.
David Buehrle
news:RY9O9.19664$eB.2...@twister.kc.rr.com...
One *shows* symptoms. One *dies* from it. This is really basic stuff. I
should really have known better--but I assume everyone reading still got the
point.
Tennant Stuart
wen...@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote:
> In article <na.f7ae534ba3...@argonet.co.uk>,
> ten...@argonet.co.uk (Tennant Stuart) wrote:
> Haven't been able to watch this ep until now. In general, I'm not
> thrilled with sitcoms built around a lie. But I didn't think Mike and
> Ross were so bad, but it was pretty dumb that it didn't occur to either
> of them to just turn on the TV or some music or read something.
That's right. Or maybe Ross should have called Joey, to ask him over.
>> And since Chandler is away 4 days out of 7, how come Monica has to
>> work on 2 of the 3 days that her husband is in NYC?
> Big nights at restuarants = Friday and Saturday.
She's in great demand, so she can dictate terms.
>> Since Joey's suspicions stemmed from hearing a man's voice in the
>> apartment while Monica's husband was away, why did Chandler start
>> talking while he was right by the front door, only seconds after
>> it had been shut?
> You'd think he'd have had the sense to run into the bedroom with the
> phone, wouldn't you?
Absolutely. This whole episode is full of people not doing the obvious
thing to solve their problems. And it's simply not sufficient to say how
there'd be no story otherwise, that's merely an excuse for weak writing.
>> How come it's only now that the top US comedy has found the 'man on
>> the other side of the door is the man talking to you on his mobile
>> phone' gag? In Britain, this situation was first used in the classic
>> BBC sitcom "Joking Apart" - a forerunner of "Coupling" - way back in
>> 1991. Is this because America is technologically backward? Ross was
>> still using an old-fashioned beeper in 1995, four years later.
> Mobile phones weren't as widespread in the US until recently -- for one
> thing, you pay for inbound calls as well as outbound, so until prices
> started dropping it was *much* more economical to have a beeper and call
> back either from a mobile phone you kept switched off or from a pay phone.
It was like that here at first, too. The problem was the USA simply
didn't have the infrastructure to implement the technology properly,
forcing companies to use less efficient frequencies which made the
phones huge, at least by comparison with phones in Europe & Japan.
>> In fact, when did we first see a mobile phone in "Friends"?
> I don't really remember one before the ep where Rachel and Phoebe competed
> for the guy who left his mobile phone behind. S7, was it?
Yeah, that was 715 "TOW Joey's New Brain", where we first saw Rachel
owning a mobile phone. Marita Bakken tells me that the earliest friend
to have one was Ross, in 504 "TOW Phoebe Hates PBS" - maybe he bought
it in London. An early character to own a mobile phone was the man in
the restaurant in 207 "TOW Ross Finds Out" (the phone ended up in an
ice bucket), but first was Jill Goodacre in 107 "TOW the Blackout".
>> Anyway, if Chandler is so clever, why didn't he go into his bedroom
>> and shut the door, to take the call where Joey can't hear him?
> Because subconsciously he wanted to tell JOey the truth?
Ooh, interesting...
Please expand.
>> Since the previous episode was set at Thanksgiving, it must now be
>> early December, and it's night. So how come only Phoebe is wearing a
>> proper overcoat? Mike wears a small jacket, Rachel picks up a flimsy
>> wrap, and Chandler goes out in in a short-sleeved shirt!
> Well, Chandler we could excuse on the grounds that he was coming from
> Tulsa -- it's not as cold there, and anyway, he'd have been in a taxi, on
> a plane, in a taxi, and home. I loathe traveling with a coat, and even
> when it's cold with a setup like that I wouldn't bother -- you're just
> whisking from one heated environment to another.
No, I wasn't talking about Chandler coming from Tulsa, I was talking
about Chandler going down the fire escape.
> We'll assume Mike drove.
Yeah.
> Rachel's just NUTS.
Girls do this though, I'm sure you do Wendy.
IME they're either completely immune to the cold, or they demand to
wear my jacket, and then *I'm* cold (like Monica in the S6 finale).
>> Note that Joey wore a warm coat to keep guard in the hallway.
> Colder when you're sitting still for a while. But of course the hall
> would be heated in most NYC buildings.
Sure, but with the thermostat set lower.
>> Chandler going out to the fire escape reminds me - how long has it
>> been since we had a scene actually set on Monica's balcony?
>> Scary pigeon?
> Note that Chandler also left the window open when he came back from
> finding the pigeon. We must assume that 1) it was not that cold that day,
Maybe, though the irony is that the broadcast was affected by snow.
> and 2) the pigeon doesn't know how to climb or fly through open windows.
Lol, it wasn't like the pigeon which scared Rachel, then! :)
>> Why did the writers have to spoil a potentially good story with that
>> time difference joke? It was going so well: the way that the Bings
>> kept underestimating their suspicious friend, while it was they who
>> acted stupidly all the way through; that it's a shame that such a
>> cheap laugh was allowed to wreck the dynamic they'd established.
> Oh, well.
Yeah. Sigh.
>> But once again we saw Joey's superior sense of smell being used to
>> root out deception - the last time was when a naughty Phoebe stole
>> his chocolate in 701 "TOW Monica's Thunder".
>> Which do you think was better - Monica's impression of Chandler,
>> or Rachel's impression of Ross?
> I didn't think either was all that good. But Monica's was better,
> if we have to pick.
Oh, okay then. :)
>> Phoebe staring hard at that chasm of a cleavage, and making saucy
>> remarks about it, only serves to reinforce her lesbian tendencies;
>> most recently noted in 905 "TOW Phoebe's Birthday Dinner" when she
>> eyeballed Monica's ripe bosoms, and called them a treat...
> bah. I don't believe Phoebe has lesbian tendencies. Just a lot of
> tolerance and not a lot of editing between brain and mouth.
Hah! Could be, Wendy! :)
>> And how come Rachel objected to Ross staring at her cleavage, when
>> she once realised that Chandler was not gay after he had spent the
>> whole of Phoebe's birthday party talking to her breasts?
> They're both pretty cautious around each other. But if she didn't want
> men staring at her breasts, why wear them like that?
Because she wanted the men she would meet at the club to do the staring?
>> Why exactly did Pheebs want to send the guys some mashed potatoes?
> Because Phoebe is weird?
Yes, but why potatoes, and not carrots for example?
>> Does a story about bored people have to be boring?
> Very, very difficult to make it otherwise.
Well, what about the following examples...
>> Phoebe, Joey & Rachel weren't boring, as they missed the Blowfish
>> concert in 205 "TOW Five Steaks and an Eggplant"; the whole gang
>> weren't boring, as Ross talked shop in 307 "TOW the Race Car Bed";
>> Ross & Rachel weren't boring, at the fabrics lecture in 314 TOW
>> Phoebe's Ex-Partner; the whole gang weren't boring, on a rainy day
>> in 325 "TOA the Beach"; Joey & Ross weren't boring, since they were
>> unemployed in 510 TOW the Inappropriate Sister; and most especially
>> Rachel & Ben weren't boring in 716 "TOW the Truth About London".
>> So, what happens next?
>> Will Bill pass up a prize like Rachel Green simply because she
>> didn't return his first call?
> Bill = merely a vehicle to make a point about R&R
Maybe, but the guy must be an idiot.
Or else he's in the closet, and even best friend Kevin doesn't know.
>> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so angry
>> that there's a huge bust-up?
> Only if there's a reconciliation afterwards.
Their history doesn't support that.
>> Will Rachel discover the note in Ross's pocket, and be so touched
>> that she falls into his arms?
> More likely to be mad, so they can spin the whole thing out several eps.
We'll see.
>> Will Ross & Rachel start acting like mature adults, and actually
>> sit down and talk to each other?
> ??>?!!!! What program are you watching?
Grin - I know, but I had to include all the possibilities.
>> Or will the writers just forget about the whole damn thing?
> No. But if there's going to be S10 it will be a long, drawn-out thing.
Ah - well now we know that there is going to be an S10.
>> ---o0o---
>> Are the actors who played Bill & Kevin credited the right way round?
>> Bill was the white guy who fancied Rachel, and if we are to see more
>> of him, it's surprising to see that his actor Chris Payne Gilbert was
>> placed at the end of the credits, coming after Chandler's assistant;
>> while Alan F. Smith (he was Kevin the black guy who fancied Phoebe),
>> received second billing after recurring cast member Paul Rudd.
>> Their parts were virtually the same size...
> Agents fight.
Lol, good point, Wendy!
So AFS had a much better agent than CPG did?
Tennant Stuart
"Cookie Dude" <andre...@HarDcorE.de> wrote:
> Now that everyone's overdosed on Teletubbies, Tennant Stuart had a
> cracker and said:
>> At least you didn't post a very private email to the world. :)
> oi! silly me did it the other way around. I just noticed that instead of
> posting it here, I emailed you my reply to the 906 thread.
Eek, that's like posting to the Black Hole of Calcutta... :(
> So whenever you find it, could you post your reply back here? Thanks :-)
Sure!