Kit·blog — Comments on “Charlie's Angels”

Kit·blog Comments — s on “Charlie's Angels”

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 10:45:55 +0200

Reply no.: 1. On 24 Aug 2007, 10:45 AM, s wrote: ]]>

Ohh, my God… I’ve spotted Bond, James Bond in the crowd behind. I guess you were on the verge of discovering an amazing ‘constipated’ conspiracy. ;) Well, as they say… the right man in the right place.

Any thoughts? Reply to this comment.
Too narrow? Subscribe to global comments feed.

Kit·blog Comments — Kit on “Charlie's Angels”

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 12:46:01 +0200

Reply no.: 2. On 24 Aug 2007, 12:46 PM, Kit wrote: ]]>

No, no, I think it’s a misunderstanding: it was Brown, James Brown!

Any thoughts? Reply to this comment.
Too narrow? Subscribe to global comments feed.

Kit·blog Comments — s on “Charlie's Angels”

Sat, 25 Aug 2007 10:12:27 +0200

Reply no.: 3. On 25 Aug 2007, 10:12 AM, s wrote: ]]>

Wrong, wrong – might have been Bond disguised himself… Browne, Bourne… In fact, are you sure you were not attending an espionage well designed conference?

Any thoughts? Reply to this comment.
Too narrow? Subscribe to global comments feed.

Kit·blog Comments — RR on “Charlie's Angels”

Fri, 31 Aug 2007 00:50:21 +0200

Reply no.: 4. On 31 Aug 2007, 12:50 AM, RR wrote: ]]>

That’s so strange, I know those girls!!!

Any thoughts? Reply to this comment.
Too narrow? Subscribe to global comments feed.

Kit·blog Comments — Kit on “Charlie's Angels”

Fri, 21 Sep 2007 19:47:19 +0200

Reply no.: 5. On 21 Sep 2007, 7:47 PM, Kit wrote: ]]>

Richard, you live in Hollywood and go to the same gym as one of the real “angels”!

Any thoughts? Reply to this comment.
Too narrow? Subscribe to global comments feed.