The ongoing Sarah Jessica Parker problem
Discussion
I try to forget that this awful woman exists, and I'm really don't have any objection to her contining existence, as long as she does it well away from me, but now I've got her god-awful excuse for a face peering at me from a poster in a very eye-catching posiiton as I drive home from the supermarket.
Not only that, but apparently this poster is advertising a film! That people are expected to pay to see! I just don't get it. I thought film stars were supposed to be attractive, or at least not visually offensive, but this woman doesn't fit either of those categories.
She must have paid for the film to be made herself.
Not only that, but apparently this poster is advertising a film! That people are expected to pay to see! I just don't get it. I thought film stars were supposed to be attractive, or at least not visually offensive, but this woman doesn't fit either of those categories.
She must have paid for the film to be made herself.
singlecoil said:
I try to forget that this awful woman exists, and I'm really don't have any objection to her contining existence, as long as she does it well away from me, but now I've got her god-awful excuse for a face peering at me from a poster in a very eye-catching posiiton as I drive home from the supermarket.
Not only that, but apparently this poster is advertising a film! That people are expected to pay to see! I just don't get it. I thought film stars were supposed to be attractive, or at least not visually offensive, but this woman doesn't fit either of those categories.
She must have paid for the film to be made herself.
Don't like her then.......Not only that, but apparently this poster is advertising a film! That people are expected to pay to see! I just don't get it. I thought film stars were supposed to be attractive, or at least not visually offensive, but this woman doesn't fit either of those categories.
She must have paid for the film to be made herself.
That film you mention is the same film that t
t face Hugh "typecast" Grant is in?
The sickingly same old tripe film that tossbag (no, not you PH tossbag) churns out every couple of years.
How can the marketing people think this will be of interest to anyone! I dont get it! Make it stop!
Yes, that SJP is one fucgly beeatch.
t face Hugh "typecast" Grant is in?The sickingly same old tripe film that tossbag (no, not you PH tossbag) churns out every couple of years.
How can the marketing people think this will be of interest to anyone! I dont get it! Make it stop!
Yes, that SJP is one fucgly beeatch.
Eric Mc said:
Life obviously hasn't happened to the OP yet.
Surely there are more serious issues you could be getting all worked up about?
Who said I was all worked up? Not me. Surely there are more serious issues you could be getting all worked up about?
I've never understood this type of post, someone complains about something and someone else comes along and says there are more important things to be concerned about. Talk about the bleeding obvious!
It's just a conversation. I expect I'll choose another subject next time.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff