Caught About a Boy last night (thus missing Game 1, which is just as well), and while it was quite good for its genre (and Hugh Grant was surprisingly palatable), I do have some problems with its underlying premises. Mild spoilers to follow for those who haven’t seen it or read the book. Anyway, why was Grant’s character a “nobody” because he didn’t work for a living? Since when is one’s identity primarily formed by holding down a job you hate? A man should be more than the sum of his consumer choices, to be sure, but it seems to me he’s more of an individual for having decently informed opinions about books, music, and television than he would be for joining the rat race. (I guess that puts me in the High Fidelity camp.) Of course this wasn’t the only component of his ultimately invalidated “island” philosophy, but it still bugged me. I don’t remember the protagonist of Hornby‘s book being nearly so shattered by his presumed nothingness. I dunno…perhaps it’s where I’m at right now, but I think there’s much more to be said for striking out on one’s own. The kid was good, though. And Rachel Weisz is always easy on the eyes.