Australia (Movie not continent)

Angie and I got to go see this movie free as a work function. The best word for this movie is ambitious. It actually was a lot of fun and we both enjoyed ourselves, but you couldn't help leaving with the feeling that that was a movie that was not nearly as good as it was trying to be. I suppose that a movie shouldn't be knocked for shooting high and only managing to be fun and entertaining, but it's hard not to notice when a film is trying to position itself as a great romantic epic in the tradition of "Gone With the Wind" and really only manages to be "Man from Snowy River." Still, I like "Man from Snowy River", and I liked "Australia." In the end, I give it a B. I also give it some extra points for ambition.

The River Walk in Zion National Park

How have I been to Zion National Park more times than I can count in the past thirty-one years and not walked this trail before? Weird. Anyway, I love the short trail by the tunnel (Zion Canyon Overlook?), but the River Walk may have passed it and become my favorite hike in Zion. For me, the River Walk is the perfect hike. It's not painful. It's a pleasant walk, but you can get some exercise on it. It's great for children---not too hard, great places to play by the river. Lastly, it's utterly beautiful.

Firefly and Serenity

Jennie and Jonathan got Dan and I into this series and movie created by Joss Whedon, and we were hooked. "Firefly" is a series Joss Whedon started that was tragically canceled after its first season. Serenity is the movie he made after the cancellation, I guess to take the story where it had been headed in the series. The genre is Sci-fi Western, which is fun. The major conflict is man vs. THE MAN, which is always relevant. What makes the show/movie great though is what generally makes a work of fiction great in my book, character and dialogue. I fell in love with the characters easily and quickly. The casting is fantastic. The dialogue is witty, and I often laugh out loud, but at the same time, the drama is also intense. The series is better than the movie, but I'm glad Whedon was able to make the movie, so that we could get an idea of the full vision. After finishing the series, I was seriously bummed that there was only one season made, but then, my experience with Whedon's "Buffy" and "Angel" has been that a Whedon series goes down hill after a couple of seasons, so maybe it's good that "Firefly" never got to go down hill. (Actually I had some issues with the two episodes before the last one, which was great, so maybe signs of the downward turn were already there---I'll console myself with that thought).

Breaking Dawn by Stephenie Meyer

If you haven't read Breaking Dawn, be aware that this review contains spoilers.

I've never been a big fan of this series, but this book topped it off for me. Stephenie Meyer's characters have never been anything special (where are the little details/great lines that give characters life?), but in this book the characters become inconsistent as well. (By the way, why are Edward and Bella in love?---as far as I can tell, it's because he's exceptionally good looking, and she smells good---which smell she should lose when she becomes a vampire, but Meyer isn't about following her own rules.) Edward goes from control freak to doormat (but he still seems to retain that one window to his soul---the fact that he likes expensive cars, so Bella gets to continue to whine about driving a Mercedes), but as Jacob's been my favorite character, I think what happens to him is worse. Until the second half of Breaking Dawn, he's the character with the most personality, at least. In fact, though I think it's kinda cheap of Meyer to conveniently go shifting to his viewpoint when it's always been Bella's before, I like getting his point of view because finally her writing shows a little voice. Then Jacob imprints on---I know people say it's non-sexual, but since imprinting's really all about reproduction, I can't help but think "pedophilia" here---Bella's baby, and he's done. His personality is totally lost, and he becomes some kind of odd nanny. I guess Meyer is too attached to her characters (flat, though they are) to kill any of them, but having him die for Bella or something would've killed him less than what she does to him in this book. So now we're supposed to believe that the whole thing pulling Bella and Jacob together was Bella's unborn child? I guess before the child was conceived, the egg must've been doing it. Speaking of the rapidly aging child (again, convenient---that speeds the plot along) with the unfortunate name, why not just change all the rules Meyer had set for vampires and have vampire babies with some lame scientific excuse about how men can have babies even when they're old, so that's why male vampires can do it---what? On to Bella---wow, I thought she was annoying as a human, but I could hardly stomach perfect vampire Bella with her cottage, and she loses her one, trite personality trait (other than whiny selfishness)---clumsiness ---when she goes vampire.

That brings me to my next point: weak major conflict. I would say the major conflict of this series has been, should Bella become a vampire? Even when I read Twilight, I thought this was flimsy because I didn't see that Meyer had given becoming a vampire enough drawbacks---the sun doesn't shrivel them, they don't lose their souls, and *bonus* they're total lookers. Now that Bella has become a vampire, and it's like she's been resurrected and is in heaven, we can see that, yes, that conflict has always been hollow. Shoot, Bella doesn't even have to give up Charlie (who accepted all the weirdness so easily and didn't even want to ask questions---yeah, right) or having children.

People have told me this book has some great surprises. Maybe. But that's because, in fact, Meyer didn't set things up properly. Think of, say, The Sixth Sense, that's good story crafting! Most people didn't see the end coming, but once we got there, we could see that it had been building to that point all along. Or consider Harry Potter, books that I think, unlike the Twilight books, deserve the hype. When we learn all of Snape's history and what he's really been doing all along, we see that it's been there since Book 1. Meyer just kind of forgets how she's set things up, makes vampires into superheroes, and throws this thing at us.

Somehow Meyer marketed these books as "vampire books for people who don't like vampire books" as though that's something new---what? There are tons of teeny-bopper-vampire-romances and adult-vampire-romances out there. The adult ones are generally really heavy on the sex, but Meyer goes about as far as she can without mentioning a---you know I have to say it---"throbbing manhood" in Breaking Dawn anyway. I will say the one thing Meyer does well is sexual tension, and now that the deed's been done, I'm not sure the whole nymphomania thing she has going in Breaking Dawn is as good. Look, if you find you like this genre, go check out DVDs of the first couple seasons of Buffy. Joss Whedon pulls off great drama AND great humor (something Meyer almost completely lacks). Or check out some L.J. Smith---her Night World series isn't anything special, but at least she doesn't take herself so seriously, and her work isn't pretentious. Come on, it's teeny-bopper-vampire-romance!

I've ranted more than I meant to here, and I can't deny that Breaking Dawn kept me turning the pages. My sister-in-law, Karene, wrote a better review. I think it's like the #1 review on Goodreads; it's witty and perceptive. She tells me it's my fault she's become critical, so I feel good about that. I like to think I had some hand in her current celebrity status. I'd say her review makes for much better reading than Breaking Dawn. Check it out, and check out the comment from Lisa---comment 70 or something. Lisa makes some great points about what these books seem to be trying to teach teenage girls concerning love, sex, dealing with parents, and having babies.

Ginger Cookies

My mother-in-law bought these awesome ginger cookies at Costco. They are yummy.

Indiana Jones and The Kingdom of The Crystal Skull

Bennett as Indi
Alright, in the first scene when Indiana Jones appears, the sequence goes like this: There are some very bad Soviets (their badness was established earlier). They open the trunk of a car and pull one guy out and toss him to the side. They then reach in and pull out a fedora and toss it on the ground. A second guy is pulled from the car. We don't see the second guy. We only see his feet in a long shot with the fedora in the foreground. The feet stagger a little, straighten up, walk to the hat. A hand reaches down and picks up the fedora The camera follows the fedora up the body where Indiana Jones places it on his head, cue theme music, spell is cast, my childlike Indiana Jones fanboy-dom is in full force. Considering this and that the movie brought back Marion Ravenwood, how on earth did it manage to be so bad?

Laraine as Indi

Don't get me wrong. The opening sequence of "Raiders" with thousands of year old booby traps still working perfectly and Indi managing to avoid them all is one of the greatest bits in all of film. I don't go to Indiana Jones for realism. I like escapist fantasy, but this went too far. One of the best descriptions of the movie I heard was that Indiana Jones used to be a clever, talented man who cheated death; this movie turned him into an invincible superhero. I'll put it still a hair above Temple of Doom, solely on the strength of the return of Marion, but this movie definitely detracts from the legacy of Indiana Jones. I think I'll just show my kids Raiders and try to keep them from the knowledge that the others were ever made as long as possible.

Jim Henson's The Frog Prince

Good, clean entertainment for children and adults, this is one of my favorite productions from Jim Henson. It is hilarious. You've gotta love the dim-witted, but well meaning King, who delivers my favorite line, "I don't understand any of this, but it seems to be ending well." This film also introduces the wonderful character with whom you may be familiar from other muppet movies, Sweetums. You will also be treated to many fun songs, one of which has the truly great lyrics, "Sweetums, lay your ugly head down upon your wretched bed...Sweetums is so sweet and cute, go to bed, you stupid brute." And there is also the added bonus of Prince Robin's awesome hair. If you haven't seen this, you need to be enlightened. You can find a copy used on amazon.com.

Cook vs. Archuleta

First, let me apologize for subscribing to this rather horrible phenomenon of the American public allowing the media to shove whatever they want at us and then getting us to vote more avidly for our favorite manufactured pop star than we do for our president. It is sad (but, hey, I guess it may be true that we actually do have more say as to what pop star we choose than we do with the candidates the parties shove at us). However, I have the small point of pride in that I've never actually voted for any manufactured pop star, and I have voted in all presidential elections since I turned 18. (Oh, how embarrassed I am to admit to having voted for Bush in 2000.) Okay, having made my disclaimer, I will now indulge in this rather horrific example of American priorities. Wow, how biased was Simon (isn't it weird how the voters kinda do what Simon tells them---it's almost, but not quite, as bad as how the parties dictate our candidates, at least I often agree with Simon)? I will say it was one of Archuleta's best nights and not Cook's best night. Still, I found Cook far more interesting, as always---I think mediocre Cook is better than Archuleta at his best. I thought Cook did well with "I Still Haven't Found what I'm Looking For"---Bono's tough competition though. "Don't Let the Sun Go Down on Me" is, in my opinion, a far inferior song, but I thought it was one of Archuleta's better performances. As for the lame Idol songs on the second round, I can't understand the praise for Archuleta over Cook on that one---they were both kinda lame songs, but I thought Cook did better with his and was more entertaining at least. Last songs, Archuleta reuses "Imagine" and does well, though I don't care for how he pops everything up so much. Cook's song was not as amazing as some he's done in the past, but I liked him trying something new, and I found his performance at least as good as Archuleta's. Maybe Cook had already set the bar so much higher than Archuleta, he had more trouble living up to past performances. Anyway, clearly Idol (Simon at least) was stacking the deck in Archuleta's favor, plus he's got all those prepubescent girls voting for him, so I guess he'll likely win, but I think Cook will end up with the better career either way. Cook is the first Idol for whom I've actually been tempted to take the trouble of voting because I enjoy his performances so much. He's the first Idol I'm interested in following beyond the show. All that being said, Archuleta seems like a sweet kid with a lovely voice, though his dorkiness is sometimes extreme, but hey, I like dorks.

Salad Dressing

If you love Bleu Cheese dressing, Kroger all the way. It is the standard to which I hold all other Bleu Cheese dressing, and I haven't found better, which is great because it's cheap.
If it's Caesar you want...Brianna's is the way to go. Unfortunately, it's not as cheap, but it's excellent dressing.

American Idol Top 3

Syesha--Hey, she picked it up with her Andrew Lloyd Webber performance, and yeah, she can sing, but generally, I'm bored. I was bored last night, even with "Fever." I have been liking her hair lately though.
David A.---So cute, such a pretty voice...B O R I N G... No offense, Archulta fans, I've just never actually wanted to listen to anything he's done twice. Last night...same old, same old... I'm even a Billy Joel fan, but Paula should've given him "Uptown Girl" or something that might have made David A. a little less boring. Of course, he probably would've ruined it by getting all croony and putting a bunch of vocal modulation in, but the Billy Joel song was certainly the best of the three.
David C.---Last night wasn't his best (for me that would be between "Hello" and "Eleanor Rigby") but as usual...not boring. I really liked his "First Time Ever I Saw Your Face"---Simon was right to give him something out of his general realm---it's always cool to see what he'll do with songs like that (that's why I actually hope to see him sing one of those awful songs written for American Idol). David's own song choice...okay, but nothing special. The Aerosmith song...I thought he sang it very well (and yes, Kelly, the violins were cool), but I guess I missed a thing, because I never caught the vision with that song, and I even like Aerosmith---come on, you gotta love "Love in an Elevator"and "Dude Look Like a Lady"---but seriously, I'm a big fan of "Cryin'" and "Angel," but I guess I do wanna miss a thing. Anyway, you get the idea....I think David Cook was far better than the other two.

Twilight

Everywhere I go, someone's talking about how much they love these Twilight books, so I'll go ahead and post a review of Twilight by Stephenie Meyer that I wrote for a family website a couple of years ago:

I really enjoyed reading Twilight, and it was a page turner. I'd say it was a better than average teeny bopper-vampire-romance novel. The back cover compares Twilight to Anne Rice's stuff, and that comparison is way out in left field. We do not have Anne Rice's signature elevation of evil, or maybe you would say disregard for morality (which has driven me to go on the wagon where Anne Rice is concerned---yeah, I heard, she converted to Christianity and has written a novel about Jesus---scary thought--not the conversion, the novel), nor do we have her beautiful mastery of using language to involve the senses (which I did enjoy). Even the vampires are vastly dissimilar. I will try not to give plot stuff away here. I think Twilight was better than L.J. Smith, but not as good as "Buffy" at its best (unfortunately, as I believe most of you would agree, "Buffy" and "Angel" weren't as good after their first few seasons). Twilight lacks that wonderful, poking fun at teeny-bopper/vampire melodrama humor that "Buffy" has. Don't get me wrong, I did enjoy the book a great deal, but there were some annoyances for me. I prefer it when staples of vampire lore are observed. I don't mind messing with a few things, but it really bugs me when sunlight doesn't hurt the vampire. (Often teeny-bopper-vampire romance novels need to fudge this so that the centuries-old vampires can attend high school---yes, cheesy. But at least in Twilight the sun is problematic for them.) I like the wooden stake thing, but I'm not horribly offended if it's taken out (the wooden stake is not mentioned in Twilight). I think allowing the vampire to be in sunlight makes it far too easy for the vampire. Humans would have no chance if not for that. Also, since in Twilight vampires don't lose their souls, can go out in sunlight, and are virtually indestructible, everyone would want to be one. That always bothers me too. I like it when being a vampire is somehow undesirable. In this novel our dark, dashing hero thinks he shouldn't turn his ingenue into a vampire, and we wonder why. I prefer something "Buffy"-like here. Vampire is tortured. In Angel's case, cursed with a soul he will lose should he become truly happy. Spike, though a fun character (we loved him watching "Passions" with Buffy's mom), I thought was handled poorly. They lost Angel and wanted another vampire for Buffy (well, Riley sure didn't work), but Spike developing his own morality didn't really fit in the "Buffy" universe. Sorry. Back to Twilight. Back to the ingenue. As is typical in romance novels (the better to make her everywoman), the heroine is rather dull. Her token character flaw is clumsiness that is somewhat unbelievable and gets annoying. Also, she sometimes seems kinda dumb, and we do wonder what Mr. Vampire finds so fascinating. For that matter (don't stone me, ladies), he's not really very original either, but he makes up for it by being a dashing, moody vampire, so who can resist him anyway? Despite the fact that I've spent a lot of time ripping, the book was a lot of fun.

Some Quick, Somewhat Random Reviews

Gone With the Wind (book) - Excellent Gone With the Wind (movie) - Excellent A Tale of Two Cities -Excellent Hop on Pop - Good for target audience, redundant for reader, but full of good rhymes Dr. Seuss's ABC - Wonderful intro to literature The Sneetches - Enjoyable to target audience with benefit of good social commentary Guernica - overrated The Exploration of the Colorado River - Dull, but Dan likes it Hamlet - Excellent All's Well that Ends Well - Not Will's best work Huckleberry Finn - Excellent Tom Sawyer- Pretty Good Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure - Excellent Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey - Bogus, but for one redeeming moment involving the Grim Reaper and Battleship Starry Night - Excellent Father and Son (Cat Stevens) - Excellent Dog is Doughnut (Cat Stevens) - Not Cat's finest Our Town - Waste of Time Cyrano - Excellent Cyrano, the musical on the old record - Excellent The Ballad of Davy Crocket - Excellent The Swamp Fox - Excellent Harry Potter and The Prisoner of Azkaban - Excellent Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets - Okay Where the Red Fern Grows -Excellent Return of the Native - Poopy Wuthering Heights - Excellent Dracula - Disappointing The Brothers Karamozov - Excellent The Phantom Menace - A Travesty Hellboy -Surprisingly Enjoyable The Day After Tomorrow - You get what you expect The Raven -Excellent One Hundred Years of Solitude - A strange experience Jesu, Joy of Man's Desire - Excellent Barney's Sand Castle - So-so The Pop-up Book of Phobias - Excellent The Green Mile (book, not movie) - Excellent It - Don't Waste Your Time Raising Arizona - Excellent Dr. Strangelove - Excellent First Knight - Oh. That was horrible. Sommersby (sp?) - Speaking of Richard Gere, that was awful too The Original Large Painting of a Rainy City I got at the D.I. -Excellent Prelude to the Afternoon of a Faun - You will be reborn. Obviously, this list neglects many important works, good and bad. It is just a sampling.

The Scarlet Pimpernel

WARNING: This may give something away. Begad, this book rocks! I don't think I'd read it since high school, and it was like falling in love again for the first time. Come on, he kissed every spot on the stairs her foot had touched! Odds fish, m'dear! That's demmed good melodrama. I took a long time reading it because I had to reread everything Percy said about six times for the pure joy of it. Lud, I have such a crush on Sir Percy. I admit it. I don't think Dan minds. I suspect he's got a man crush too. If you haven't read it, you are in for a smashing good time. Maybe I should embark upon the sequels.