• "Shakespeare in love?" NO it was, "Mummy sucking eggs!"

Oh well, another piece of hard work (and fun to make) gets slashed by the reviewers and caned by the public. Being ordinary has never been so .. um .. depressing. That's what you want me to say?

I think that film-making is becoming more and more American orientated. Stick Johny Depp or Nicole Kidman in with the potato men and suddenly it would have been a well judged piece of social commentary, with just the right amount of action.

OK so it shocked you. It did me too. It managed to make group sex look boring, which is quite an achievement. If it was unusual and clever, that was solely in it's ability to infuriate the British middle classes, who are famous for never getting laid, but would NEVER talk about it.

If the only successful films we are allowed to make in the UK are romantic comedies with Hugh Grant or gothic monsterpieces, then fine. But this film was made with local money and talent (ok get cross now) and was solely about local insanities, little triumphs, little disasters. It makes a lot of people's reaction to this film seem purple faced. Which is mildly interesting.

If it was bad, then how do you explain the screen dross you spend the rest of your life waiting around for?

[from someone who liked Trainspotting]