There are many phrases that are used to politely (indirectly?) draw someone's attention to a potentially embarrassing aspect of their dress.
Some ask "Cat's died?" when they notice that the bottoms of your trouser legs don't seem hang down as far they are normally expected to be worn.
There are several possible explanations for the origin of this expression:
By saying 'Cat's died?' they are implying that you are deliberately wearing your trousers ...
1.... at 'half-mast', like a flag1 (because your cats have died!), whereas, in reality, they are actually calling indirect attention to the fact that your trousers seem unusually short and that you may wish to correct this 'dress malfunction' sometime!
2.... with their hems further up from the ground because ... your your cat used to catch all the mice, but now your cat is dead, the mice abound and could run up your trouser leg, given the chance.
There are many phrases that are used to politely (indirectly?) draw someone's attention to a potentially embarrassing aspect of their dress.
Some ask "Cat's died?" when they notice that the bottoms of your trouser legs don't seem hang down as far they are normally expected to be worn.
There are several possible explanations for the origin of this expression:
By saying 'Cat's died?' they are implying that you are deliberately wearing your trousers ...
1.... at 'half-mast', like a flag1 (because your cats have died!), whereas, in reality, they are actually calling indirect attention to the fact that your trousers seem unusually short and that you may wish to correct this 'dress malfunction' sometime!
2.... with their hems further up from the ground because ... your your cat used to catch all the mice, but now your cat is dead, the mice abound and could run up your trouser leg, given the chance.
Some ask "Cat's died?" when they notice that the bottoms of your trouser legs don't seem hang down as far they are normally expected to be worn.
Used to hear that term regularly at school - not so much when you get to the age that everyone around you has stopped growing out of their trousers, but it's a term definitely used in the west coast of Scotland.
Me too, but maybe it is not common in the US where I am?
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
Growing up in my part of the US, abnormally short pant legs were called out with references to "floods" or "flooding." Then the Eighties came around and it was sometimes considered fashionable, e.g., Michael Jackson, the Thompson Twins, etc. On a related note, like news anchors who wear anything comfortable below the waistline, I vaguely remember seeing a photo of Connery wearing shorts with a fully suited torso.
P.S. I enjoy occasionally learning UK jargon on this board, like the dog's danglies, lol.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
Mr MartiniThat nice house in the sky.Posts: 2,707MI6 Agent
Growing up in my part of the US, abnormally short pant legs were called out with references to "floods" or "flooding." Then the Eighties came around and it was sometimes considered fashionable, e.g., Michael Jackson, the Thompson Twins, etc. On a related note, like news anchors who wear anything comfortable below the waistline, I vaguely remember seeing a photo of Connery wearing shorts with a fully suited torso.
P.S. I enjoy occasionally learning UK jargon on this board, like the dog's danglies, lol.
Funny you should mention that Supes. There's a Sports reporter around here who is known for wearing shorts behind the reporting desk. If you tune in for the first time, you wouldn't know it. But if you've watched him for years, he's actually stood up and made jokes about how the viewing audience can't see what's he's wearing below the waistline.
Some people would complain even if you hang them with a new rope
if the production is using Jaguar and Land Rovers - that means Ford are no longer involved (as with the previous 2 films), which could also mean no more Aston Martin and probably does.
Could we see Bond now taking control of a Jaguar? Maybe the new Jaguar C-X16 or XK at least?
if the production is using Jaguar and Land Rovers - that means Ford are no longer involved (as with the previous 2 films), which could also mean no more Aston Martin and probably does.
Could we see Bond now taking control of a Jaguar? Maybe the new Jaguar C-X16 or XK at least?
I don't think they have to be exclusive; the last film had prominent position given to a load of Alfa Romeos, after all. I wouldn't be surprised if an Aston does pop up; although I also wouldn't be surprised if Bond doesn't have a car at all.
Doubt he'll get the C-X16, gorgeous though it is. I don't think it's far enough down the line for that just yet, unless it's a fleeting appearance. They've got to think up a nicer name, yet!
if the production is using Jaguar and Land Rovers - that means Ford are no longer involved (as with the previous 2 films), which could also mean no more Aston Martin and probably does.
Could we see Bond now taking control of a Jaguar? Maybe the new Jaguar C-X16 or XK at least?
The deal doesn't rely on Ford. It has happened with and without Ford. Aston Martin is very likely to be back given how big the brand association has gotten.
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
Growing up in my part of the US, abnormally short pant legs were called out with references to "floods" or "flooding." Then the Eighties came around and it was sometimes considered fashionable, e.g., Michael Jackson, the Thompson Twins, etc. On a related note, like news anchors who wear anything comfortable below the waistline, I vaguely remember seeing a photo of Connery wearing shorts with a fully suited torso.
P.S. I enjoy occasionally learning UK jargon on this board, like the dog's danglies, lol.
Funny you should mention that Supes. There's a Sports reporter around here who is known for wearing shorts behind the reporting desk. If you tune in for the first time, you wouldn't know it. But if you've watched him for years, he's actually stood up and made jokes about how the viewing audience can't see what's he's wearing below the waistline.
I think I saw that segment myself...Gary Radnich?
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
Mr MartiniThat nice house in the sky.Posts: 2,707MI6 Agent
Growing up in my part of the US, abnormally short pant legs were called out with references to "floods" or "flooding." Then the Eighties came around and it was sometimes considered fashionable, e.g., Michael Jackson, the Thompson Twins, etc. On a related note, like news anchors who wear anything comfortable below the waistline, I vaguely remember seeing a photo of Connery wearing shorts with a fully suited torso.
P.S. I enjoy occasionally learning UK jargon on this board, like the dog's danglies, lol.
Funny you should mention that Supes. There's a Sports reporter around here who is known for wearing shorts behind the reporting desk. If you tune in for the first time, you wouldn't know it. But if you've watched him for years, he's actually stood up and made jokes about how the viewing audience can't see what's he's wearing below the waistline.
I think I saw that segment myself...Gary Radnich?
Yes sir!!!! it is Gary Radnich.
Some people would complain even if you hang them with a new rope
There's a nice clip of Michael Buerk reading the BBC news on Children in Need night a few years back; he had to finish the news and then go to do the traditional newsreaders' dance for charity but because there was so little time he had to do the news in his outfit for the dance. On top all was fine: suit, tie, all of that- the bottom half under the desk (as revealed when he stood up after the news was finished) he was wearing fishnets and suspenders. Nice.
I enjoyed this conjectures on the photos. Here's one I'm throwing out there that may explain Craig's appearance as well - he may have been kidnapped and been held for a short time (hence the scruffy beard), and he may have pinched the clothes from the place he was held or from one of his captors, which would explain them not fitting. Also, if his escape had been a frantic one, it would explain why he is minus socks. He then contacts HQ and from there we could have three storylines - either he tells them M is about to be attacked en route on the street (kidnapping? assasination attempt?) and he jumps into the chase to intercept her, or they pick him up on the street after his escape where he is going to rendevous with M, or perhaps M is actually with the security detail that picks him up on the way to some crisis that has to do with his initial kidnapping.
At least with the tux he had several to choose from in the locker room I think. The jacket had more luck involved. Both guys could've been his stunt doubles though.
The beard is so he can use tons of grooming product placement products for some clean up shots in his hotel upon returning to London. And the bad clothes are so he can walk down a street and let us see a bunch of store brand names for more product placement so that he can fix his wardrobe. That must be it.
I enjoyed this conjectures on the photos. Here's one I'm throwing out there that may explain Craig's appearance as well - he may have been kidnapped and been held for a short time (hence the scruffy beard), and he may have pinched the clothes from the place he was held or from one of his captors, which would explain them not fitting. Also, if his escape had been a frantic one, it would explain why he is minus socks. He then contacts HQ and from there we could have three storylines - either he tells them M is about to be attacked en route on the street (kidnapping? assasination attempt?) and he jumps into the chase to intercept her, or they pick him up on the street after his escape where he is going to rendevous with M, or perhaps M is actually with the security detail that picks him up on the way to some crisis that has to do with his initial kidnapping.
I can't help feeling that the major points are being missed. Yes the beard can be explained, but does it have to be grey? A number of comments have been along the lines of ' a shave and a suit and he'll be fine '...the hair is more difficult, even more severe and less flattering than in CR and now with an older DC. The hair cannot be changed overnight so as a minimum Bond will have to spend a good portion of the film looking like a thug, and an ageing one at that. Not what I was hoping for, but I hope that I'm wrong.
Comments
Some ask "Cat's died?" when they notice that the bottoms of your trouser legs don't seem hang down as far they are normally expected to be worn.
There are several possible explanations for the origin of this expression:
By saying 'Cat's died?' they are implying that you are deliberately wearing your trousers ...
1.... at 'half-mast', like a flag1 (because your cats have died!), whereas, in reality, they are actually calling indirect attention to the fact that your trousers seem unusually short and that you may wish to correct this 'dress malfunction' sometime!
2.... with their hems further up from the ground because ... your your cat used to catch all the mice, but now your cat is dead, the mice abound and could run up your trouser leg, given the chance.
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_do_people_say_your_cats_have_died_when_your_trousers_are_short_at_the_hem#ixzz1d9Lg5mZr
Can't say I've EVER heard of that expression. Must have lived a sheltered life
But thanks.... I think....
Me too, but maybe it is not common in the US where I am?
P.S. I enjoy occasionally learning UK jargon on this board, like the dog's danglies, lol.
Funny you should mention that Supes. There's a Sports reporter around here who is known for wearing shorts behind the reporting desk. If you tune in for the first time, you wouldn't know it. But if you've watched him for years, he's actually stood up and made jokes about how the viewing audience can't see what's he's wearing below the waistline.
if the production is using Jaguar and Land Rovers - that means Ford are no longer involved (as with the previous 2 films), which could also mean no more Aston Martin and probably does.
Could we see Bond now taking control of a Jaguar? Maybe the new Jaguar C-X16 or XK at least?
I'm in the UK and I've never heard it!
I don't think they have to be exclusive; the last film had prominent position given to a load of Alfa Romeos, after all. I wouldn't be surprised if an Aston does pop up; although I also wouldn't be surprised if Bond doesn't have a car at all.
Doubt he'll get the C-X16, gorgeous though it is. I don't think it's far enough down the line for that just yet, unless it's a fleeting appearance. They've got to think up a nicer name, yet!
The deal doesn't rely on Ford. It has happened with and without Ford. Aston Martin is very likely to be back given how big the brand association has gotten.
I think I saw that segment myself...Gary Radnich?
Yes sir!!!! it is Gary Radnich.
LOL!! yeah, i chuckled at that scene a tad too loud when i first saw it.
any other examples? there have to be some out there!
The jacket fit when he stole it in Port Au Prince
"You work on commission right, big mistake, Huge!"
Maybe the beard is beacuse Bond is doing his bit for Movember?
I can't help feeling that the major points are being missed. Yes the beard can be explained, but does it have to be grey? A number of comments have been along the lines of ' a shave and a suit and he'll be fine '...the hair is more difficult, even more severe and less flattering than in CR and now with an older DC. The hair cannot be changed overnight so as a minimum Bond will have to spend a good portion of the film looking like a thug, and an ageing one at that. Not what I was hoping for, but I hope that I'm wrong.