Wednesday, November 26, 2008

We haven't lost Santaville yet!

Mr. Awesome seems like a pretty normal guy, and in most ways he is. But he has one weakness: terrible, made-for-television holiday movies starring D-list actors. He loves them. LOVES. And now I am a complete convert.

For instance? A few years ago our favorite was this fine film, starring Tori Spelling, William Shatner and Gary Coleman--PLUS the added bonus of Jack #2 (or was it #3?) from Days of Our Lives. Tori Spelling is Scrooge, see, and she should have realized that Jack #2 was about to propose to her a long time ago before she became such a big star, only she didn't and now she is too big for her britches. Now, only Angel Gary Coleman can set things right!

That movie has been the gold standard of the genre. Until now. Because now, my friends, we anxiously anticipate Moonlight and Mistletoe, starring Tom Arnold and Candace Cameron Bure.

A quote from the preview: "We haven't lost Santaville yet!!" How can it not be awesome? Come on. You know you'll watch it.

Happy Thanksgiving, peops.


p.s. I'm off to the woods for a few days. It's clear I have been a hopeless failure at NaBloPoMo, but I guess I have decided that this blog deserves to live--barely.

7 comments:

Jennie said...

Gobble gobble.

Am v. pleased you're keeping your blog alive. As blogs go, I'm adamantly pro-life. Fetuses on the other hand...

Librarian Girl said...

As a person who is totally down with the made-for-tv holiday movie, let me say that you are going to be SO HAPPY with Moonlight Mistletoe.

I think my love of all things holiday-made-for-tv started with A Very Brady Christmas. It's like the gateway drug.

Jennifer said...

A.) I thought I was the only one with this problem. I saw a commercial for the "25 days of Christmas Movies" or whatever they call it and actually SMILED.

B.) He was Peter. I know this because Jack #2 was a major favorite of mine. I guess that doesn't fully explain/excuse having that knowledge but let's pretend it does.

C.) Yay for keeping the blog alive!

D.) From your previous post, I quite like "bloody hell" and "bugger" and use them frequently. I think the possibility of being thought a complete tosser for using them outweighs the inappropriateness of some of my other favorite choices. Plus, they come naturally to me and make me happy. I'm also a big fan of "feck" thanks to "Father Ted."

arajane said...

I know I have no one to blame but myself for actually watching Moonlight and Mistletoe, but I would like to transfer a small portion of that blame to you. Seriously, that was a real tour de force of acting on the part of Tom Arnold. He went from drunk to high to retarded, all in one scene! And those "nutcrackers"... is the Hallmark channel really too cheap to even shell out for actual working nutcrackers?! Oh dear god, I can't even continue to list all the horribleness that was this movie. However, it did bring some joy into my life, as Chris and I laughed through most of the movie. So, I say to you both "Why, dear lord, why?!?" and "Thank you"!

librarianista said...

Hey Jennifer--thanks for helping me out with that Jack/Peter thing! They dated the same lady, right? It's been a while since my Days days.

Arajane, a friend of mine gave me a breakdown of the plot of M&M, and I have to say that while I still plan on watching it, you and Chris might deserve a medal.

Britt said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Stella'sMom said...

I totally agree about the so-called Nutcrackers in "Moonlight." Why would anyone pay $500 for an only roughly-finished, childishly-painted piece of wood that any amateur wood-worker could turn out -- and why would this piece of painted wood be called a nutcracker? Are you supposed to put the nut on a table and hit it with the hunk of painted wood? People who make real nutcrackers - especially those lovely German and Swiss versions - are surely shuddering to think someone might believe the "Moonlight" hunk of painted wood to be the real thing.