WHO: Lucienne Diver
WHAT: CHATTING LIVE!
WHEN: 12pm EDT, Wednesday, June 25th, 2008
WHERE: TKA CHAT ROOM
TO CHAT: Follow this link TKA CHAT ROOM, enter a screen name and simply select "log in."
Monday, June 23, 2008
Monday, June 16, 2008
Reversing expectations on the Bachelorette
So, I SWORE I wasn't going to get sucked into the Bachelorette. I didn't particularly like DeAnna when she was on the Bachelor--thought she came off cold, like a robot, and really I do not need any more reality TV in my life.
But, somehow I got sucked in.
I think part of it is DeAnna's pragmatic approach -- the demeanor/approach that pissed me off when she was on the other side of the coin. It totally works when she's making the decisions and she's showing more vulnerability too. And definitely part of me getting hooked was the guys. HATED a few of them, but most of them are cute and bright and all around yummy. And again, except for that aggressive hair-cutting dude, whose name I've blocked from memory (good riddance) the guys get along, and that's fun to watch. And for the most part, I've agreed with who she's turfed off. I've been nodding my head at the end of each night. Sure, I would've kept Paul longer than Sean or haircutting jerk, but whatever.
Then, tonight was a fabulous example of a great reversal of expectations in storytelling. The producers or editors or whoever makes these decisions REALLY had us thinking she'd pick Sean. I mean, they showed pictures of his house and his mom, when the next date is to visit each guys' home. Plus, she said on their date that if she'd been giving out roses on dates that week he'd have gotten one.
Now, Sean's one of the guys I don't like. Never liked him from the first night. Found him icky. Slightly less icky since the other big jerk in the house (since turfed) gave him a much needed haircut, but seriously, this dude is way too into himself and his possessions. Compensating much???
BUT she picked adorable, underdog Jesse instead. I'm smiling. No way will she end up with Jesse, (I don't think... maybe my expectations will reverse, yet again) but way more fun to think of a home date with him than Sean who'd have spent the entire time bragging and posing and kicking blocks of wood to impress her.
But, somehow I got sucked in.
I think part of it is DeAnna's pragmatic approach -- the demeanor/approach that pissed me off when she was on the other side of the coin. It totally works when she's making the decisions and she's showing more vulnerability too. And definitely part of me getting hooked was the guys. HATED a few of them, but most of them are cute and bright and all around yummy. And again, except for that aggressive hair-cutting dude, whose name I've blocked from memory (good riddance) the guys get along, and that's fun to watch. And for the most part, I've agreed with who she's turfed off. I've been nodding my head at the end of each night. Sure, I would've kept Paul longer than Sean or haircutting jerk, but whatever.
Then, tonight was a fabulous example of a great reversal of expectations in storytelling. The producers or editors or whoever makes these decisions REALLY had us thinking she'd pick Sean. I mean, they showed pictures of his house and his mom, when the next date is to visit each guys' home. Plus, she said on their date that if she'd been giving out roses on dates that week he'd have gotten one.
Now, Sean's one of the guys I don't like. Never liked him from the first night. Found him icky. Slightly less icky since the other big jerk in the house (since turfed) gave him a much needed haircut, but seriously, this dude is way too into himself and his possessions. Compensating much???
BUT she picked adorable, underdog Jesse instead. I'm smiling. No way will she end up with Jesse, (I don't think... maybe my expectations will reverse, yet again) but way more fun to think of a home date with him than Sean who'd have spent the entire time bragging and posing and kicking blocks of wood to impress her.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Sex and the City
I wasn't sure whether I'd like this film. The hype around it was so crazy, not to mention all the faux scandal about the cast fighting. And when the trailers and promo bits for a film, seem to be more about the clothes than the plot... Well, let's just say I worried.
Then my local paper's movie reviewer HATED it. It's the first time I've seen a review in that paper with zero stars. I assume normally movies they hate that much, simply don't get reviews. ZERO STARS.
So, I went in with some trepidation. And I really liked it.
Sure, I can see how a reviewer who wasn't a fan of the show and expected more of a traditional movie structure might have been put off. Instead of having a film-like structure, it was more like watching an entire season (a short season) of episodes back to back... But I think that's why it worked. I mean, to come up with a single storyline big enough for a movie, that involved all four of those characters, would have been super contrived. As it was, each of them got their own little story and they were woven together nicely. Sure, Carrie and Big was the main story, but that in itself wouldn't have been enough. And that story line ended where you thought it would, but took a very circuitous route to get there. All good.
But the main reason I have to give this film my thumbs up is it made me cry. A few times. Okay, maybe five or six. They did a really good job of "the moments". Even some of the smaller ones, like Samantha spoon-feeding Carrie yogurt. Yes. Made me cry. I guess it's because if you watched the TV show you know so much about those characters so some of the small gestures have a lot of deep meaning.
The success of this film (for me, anyway), got me thinking about something my friend Molly always says about the "big scenes", that the readers (audience) are expecting them so you have to deliver and deliver them well.
And this film did that in spades. I don't want to post any spoilers, but if you've seen the film... the scene with the town car and the limo passing on the street and the bouquet of flowers and Big and Charlotte and Carrie!!! WOW. You knew something was coming. You kind of thought it might possibly be one thing... but it wasn't. And they totally delivered on the emotion. I didn't think Kristen Davies had that kind of raw emotion in her. SJP was good, too. And the end of the Miranda/Steve story was well done, too. Could've been so corny. Wasn't. Not for me.
Anyway... This film gets my thumbs up. I love those characters, and their menfolk, and found it a perfectly entertaining evening.
Oh, and a tiny fun thing for writers... There's a scene... not much happening. Carrie's on the phone with someone... can't even remember whom... But she's in a book store and while she's talking, she's taking other books off a front table display and replacing them with her own. :-) Talk about your great accurate details for a character who's an author. LOL
Then my local paper's movie reviewer HATED it. It's the first time I've seen a review in that paper with zero stars. I assume normally movies they hate that much, simply don't get reviews. ZERO STARS.
So, I went in with some trepidation. And I really liked it.
Sure, I can see how a reviewer who wasn't a fan of the show and expected more of a traditional movie structure might have been put off. Instead of having a film-like structure, it was more like watching an entire season (a short season) of episodes back to back... But I think that's why it worked. I mean, to come up with a single storyline big enough for a movie, that involved all four of those characters, would have been super contrived. As it was, each of them got their own little story and they were woven together nicely. Sure, Carrie and Big was the main story, but that in itself wouldn't have been enough. And that story line ended where you thought it would, but took a very circuitous route to get there. All good.
But the main reason I have to give this film my thumbs up is it made me cry. A few times. Okay, maybe five or six. They did a really good job of "the moments". Even some of the smaller ones, like Samantha spoon-feeding Carrie yogurt. Yes. Made me cry. I guess it's because if you watched the TV show you know so much about those characters so some of the small gestures have a lot of deep meaning.
The success of this film (for me, anyway), got me thinking about something my friend Molly always says about the "big scenes", that the readers (audience) are expecting them so you have to deliver and deliver them well.
And this film did that in spades. I don't want to post any spoilers, but if you've seen the film... the scene with the town car and the limo passing on the street and the bouquet of flowers and Big and Charlotte and Carrie!!! WOW. You knew something was coming. You kind of thought it might possibly be one thing... but it wasn't. And they totally delivered on the emotion. I didn't think Kristen Davies had that kind of raw emotion in her. SJP was good, too. And the end of the Miranda/Steve story was well done, too. Could've been so corny. Wasn't. Not for me.
Anyway... This film gets my thumbs up. I love those characters, and their menfolk, and found it a perfectly entertaining evening.
Oh, and a tiny fun thing for writers... There's a scene... not much happening. Carrie's on the phone with someone... can't even remember whom... But she's in a book store and while she's talking, she's taking other books off a front table display and replacing them with her own. :-) Talk about your great accurate details for a character who's an author. LOL
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Update
For those of you deeply concerned about the weather in Toronto and how much I'm sweating... It's cooled off. LOL
For those of you who like a good rant. I blogged on DWT today.
For those of you who like a good rant. I blogged on DWT today.
Friday, June 06, 2008
Feelin' Hot Hot Hot
Well, it's June and I think I'm about to turn on my air conditioner. (She types while wiping sweat from her nose.)
I just realized this is the first May since I've lived in my house that I haven't turned it on for at least a few days in May.
It's been cool in Toronto this spring and I've kind of liked it. A lot to be said for leaves on trees and flowers in the garden (well, weeds in the case of my garden) but no excessive heat.
I've been sleeping with the window open and enjoying the chilly night air for at least 2 months... But no more. Today it's hot. Really hot.
Summer's here. Damn. Personally? I'd take year round spring.
I just realized this is the first May since I've lived in my house that I haven't turned it on for at least a few days in May.
It's been cool in Toronto this spring and I've kind of liked it. A lot to be said for leaves on trees and flowers in the garden (well, weeds in the case of my garden) but no excessive heat.
I've been sleeping with the window open and enjoying the chilly night air for at least 2 months... But no more. Today it's hot. Really hot.
Summer's here. Damn. Personally? I'd take year round spring.
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
Committed
I was going to title this post "over commitment" and then realized, right now, I should really be committed.
Many of you know I'm coordinating my local RWA chapter's writing contest this year, and so far, we've received 152 entries, and I'm expecting more to roll in over the week as they had to be postmarked by last Saturday.
Each of these need to be judged by 3 judges, so allocating over 450 score sheets to judges is, shall we say, a nightmare. (If anyone out there reading this is willing to help judge, let me know. :-) I have almost enough judges... but a few are having to take on more entries than I'd like.)
And what arrives in my e-mail today? (after 6 arrived in my postal mailbox) A contest entry. Ah, I think. Disqualified. The e-mail entries had to be in by midnight on Saturday.
BUT NO!!! I freaking volunteered to be the coordinator for one of the categories for the Golden Pen contest, too, and they're starting to roll in. AND, I'm the coordinator for one category for the Stiletto contest, too.
WHEN WILL I EVER FINISH MY MANUSCRIPT????
(Send the men with the straight jacket now, please.)
Many of you know I'm coordinating my local RWA chapter's writing contest this year, and so far, we've received 152 entries, and I'm expecting more to roll in over the week as they had to be postmarked by last Saturday.
Each of these need to be judged by 3 judges, so allocating over 450 score sheets to judges is, shall we say, a nightmare. (If anyone out there reading this is willing to help judge, let me know. :-) I have almost enough judges... but a few are having to take on more entries than I'd like.)
And what arrives in my e-mail today? (after 6 arrived in my postal mailbox) A contest entry. Ah, I think. Disqualified. The e-mail entries had to be in by midnight on Saturday.
BUT NO!!! I freaking volunteered to be the coordinator for one of the categories for the Golden Pen contest, too, and they're starting to roll in. AND, I'm the coordinator for one category for the Stiletto contest, too.
WHEN WILL I EVER FINISH MY MANUSCRIPT????
(Send the men with the straight jacket now, please.)
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Indiana Jones and the Aliens
Okay, so it's been out a week, so I figure it's safe to post a blog about this film. BUT, if you haven't seen it and still want to STOP READING.
I wasn't sure of my reaction to this new Indiana Jones movie, because I'd had plans to meet up with some friends before hand and our wires got crossed, so I wasn't in a great mood going in. But after a week of thinking about it, this film didn't work for me.
Many things felt really indulgent. Like the filmmakers were including unnecessary elements--like the greaser vs the preppy kids fight in the diner--just because they're nostalgic for the 50's. And I'm sorry. Putting animatronic gophers into the scene, doesn't make an atomic bomb blast funny.
And while it's not a storytelling problem, per se, I think the over the top stunts in this film made my eyes roll just a little too often and a little to wildly. Thinking back to the first Indiana Jones film--it's been a while since I saw it--sure, the stunts were over-the-top. But while they would have taken super-strength or super-speed and timing and luck, you could understand what he'd done in each of the stunts and almost believe it was possible.
Starting with the second film and that absurd being-tossed-out-of-an-airplane-and-getting-into-an-inflatable-raft
-mid-air stunt... This franchise started to lose me a bit. And there were so many stunts like that in this film. My favorite (least favorite) was the refrigerator in the atomic bomb test thing. Even if you believe he'd survive the heat and radiation because of the "lead lining" they made sure you'd notice, ridiculous in itself, even if you believe the blast blew the fridge miles away, while no other debris seemed to have gone that far, tell me every bone in his body wouldn't have broken when that fridge hit down.
But on a storytelling level, I think the problem with this film is that we never ever understood what the heck he was trying to prevent the evil Russian chick from getting her hands on, or what she hoped to do with it if she got it. I mean... Once they did have it, no one got any great power from it. I do get that the stories around it were "just a legend", but I don't think you can build a compelling story around preventing something that's really not that dangerous or terrible to begin with. In the end, it was just ET wanting to go home. And how come ET only took the bad people with him into the portal or spaceship or whatever it was, and let all the good people be?
I wanted to love this film, I really did. But in the end, I'm not sure I even liked it.
Am I just a big Indy Grinch?
I wasn't sure of my reaction to this new Indiana Jones movie, because I'd had plans to meet up with some friends before hand and our wires got crossed, so I wasn't in a great mood going in. But after a week of thinking about it, this film didn't work for me.
Many things felt really indulgent. Like the filmmakers were including unnecessary elements--like the greaser vs the preppy kids fight in the diner--just because they're nostalgic for the 50's. And I'm sorry. Putting animatronic gophers into the scene, doesn't make an atomic bomb blast funny.
And while it's not a storytelling problem, per se, I think the over the top stunts in this film made my eyes roll just a little too often and a little to wildly. Thinking back to the first Indiana Jones film--it's been a while since I saw it--sure, the stunts were over-the-top. But while they would have taken super-strength or super-speed and timing and luck, you could understand what he'd done in each of the stunts and almost believe it was possible.
Starting with the second film and that absurd being-tossed-out-of-an-airplane-and-getting-into-an-inflatable-raft
-mid-air stunt... This franchise started to lose me a bit. And there were so many stunts like that in this film. My favorite (least favorite) was the refrigerator in the atomic bomb test thing. Even if you believe he'd survive the heat and radiation because of the "lead lining" they made sure you'd notice, ridiculous in itself, even if you believe the blast blew the fridge miles away, while no other debris seemed to have gone that far, tell me every bone in his body wouldn't have broken when that fridge hit down.
But on a storytelling level, I think the problem with this film is that we never ever understood what the heck he was trying to prevent the evil Russian chick from getting her hands on, or what she hoped to do with it if she got it. I mean... Once they did have it, no one got any great power from it. I do get that the stories around it were "just a legend", but I don't think you can build a compelling story around preventing something that's really not that dangerous or terrible to begin with. In the end, it was just ET wanting to go home. And how come ET only took the bad people with him into the portal or spaceship or whatever it was, and let all the good people be?
I wanted to love this film, I really did. But in the end, I'm not sure I even liked it.
Am I just a big Indy Grinch?
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
They got it right. Wow
So half-watching Idol tonight and half-working on the judges training for my local RWA chapter's contest, I was struck by just how much freaking better David Cook was than the little hobbit boy he was up against.
It's not just a matter of taste (or sexual attraction on my part) he's just better. When they sang together, C overpowered A so much it was crazy. And when they sang with the bands, it was so clear that David Cook belonged up on a stage with professional musicians and wasn't intimidated, while David A was barely visible singing with his group.
But I was convinced after the final performance show that David Archeletta was going to win. The judges clearly wanted him to win. David C was great but not goose-bump worthy for me, so I was sure David A. would win.
But the right guy won. Yea.
Funny story. I was watched the results on my DVR and it cut off the recording just as Ryan was about to announce the winner. I couldn't stop laughing. Thank goodness for the web or I'd have had to watch the Vancouver version to find out who won--and it just started.
It's not just a matter of taste (or sexual attraction on my part) he's just better. When they sang together, C overpowered A so much it was crazy. And when they sang with the bands, it was so clear that David Cook belonged up on a stage with professional musicians and wasn't intimidated, while David A was barely visible singing with his group.
But I was convinced after the final performance show that David Archeletta was going to win. The judges clearly wanted him to win. David C was great but not goose-bump worthy for me, so I was sure David A. would win.
But the right guy won. Yea.
Funny story. I was watched the results on my DVR and it cut off the recording just as Ryan was about to announce the winner. I couldn't stop laughing. Thank goodness for the web or I'd have had to watch the Vancouver version to find out who won--and it just started.
Monday, May 19, 2008
Sunday, May 18, 2008
May Two-Four
It's a long weekend up here in Canada and it's raining. I'd feel worse for the people camping or opening their cottages if I weren't sitting in a coffee shop determined to finish the first draft of my latest WIP today, (and instead blogging).
The muscles in my lower back seized up on the drive home from Boston nearly two weeks ago and they won't let go. The pain has erased my ability to put coherent sentences together. Certainly the ability to figure out the last three or four scenes of my book.
Got close to nothing done the last two days. Sigh.
But I have gone to some movies this week. They don't need much brain power and I can stretch my back while I sit.
I will try to blog more about these films, but enjoyed them all for different reasons...
Iron Man. Robert Downey Jr. Too funny. Too cute for his own good. Ten thousand names in the credits.
Someone told me to stay for the credits and here's my tip. Unless you're seriously into comics. Don't bother. The little post credits easter egg was not worth sitting through ten thousand names going by. (I'm not exaggerating. Might have been closer to a hundred thousand people who worked on this movie. But the result was highly entertaining.)
My Blueberry Nights. Nora Jones' acting debut, surrounded by many stellar established actors: Jude Law, Natalie Portman, Rachel Weisz, David Strathairn. This film's not for everyone. In spite of the overall story being a romance it's really an "art film", certainly doesn't have the pacing or clear storytelling arc of a commercial film. But I really enjoyed it. She was kind of the weak link. A bit blank. But the others made up for it. And it's a story I keep thinking about... Someone go see it so we can tawk.
Son of Rambow I'd recommend this one to just about anyone. Really well done. It was "one that got away" for me at the TIFF last fall. Didn't see it then, but glad it got released so I could see it now. Very sweet kid as the protagonist. Very sweet story. Very funny. That cute guy who plays Chuck on Gossip Girls in a minor role. Set in the 1980's. What more could you want? Oh, and this one had a tiny easter egg after the much shorter credits. The one kid telling the other:
"You spelled it wrong."
"Really?"
"There's not supposed to be a "w" at the end."
"Oh, sorry." (or something to that effect.)
Ooops. I was going to just list the films and then blog about the long weekend and why Canada still celebrates Queen Victoria's birthday even though she's been dead for, what, 107 years? But you got movies instead. :-) (See what I mean about my brain not being able to hold onto thoughts????)
The muscles in my lower back seized up on the drive home from Boston nearly two weeks ago and they won't let go. The pain has erased my ability to put coherent sentences together. Certainly the ability to figure out the last three or four scenes of my book.
Got close to nothing done the last two days. Sigh.
But I have gone to some movies this week. They don't need much brain power and I can stretch my back while I sit.
I will try to blog more about these films, but enjoyed them all for different reasons...
Iron Man. Robert Downey Jr. Too funny. Too cute for his own good. Ten thousand names in the credits.
Someone told me to stay for the credits and here's my tip. Unless you're seriously into comics. Don't bother. The little post credits easter egg was not worth sitting through ten thousand names going by. (I'm not exaggerating. Might have been closer to a hundred thousand people who worked on this movie. But the result was highly entertaining.)
My Blueberry Nights. Nora Jones' acting debut, surrounded by many stellar established actors: Jude Law, Natalie Portman, Rachel Weisz, David Strathairn. This film's not for everyone. In spite of the overall story being a romance it's really an "art film", certainly doesn't have the pacing or clear storytelling arc of a commercial film. But I really enjoyed it. She was kind of the weak link. A bit blank. But the others made up for it. And it's a story I keep thinking about... Someone go see it so we can tawk.
Son of Rambow I'd recommend this one to just about anyone. Really well done. It was "one that got away" for me at the TIFF last fall. Didn't see it then, but glad it got released so I could see it now. Very sweet kid as the protagonist. Very sweet story. Very funny. That cute guy who plays Chuck on Gossip Girls in a minor role. Set in the 1980's. What more could you want? Oh, and this one had a tiny easter egg after the much shorter credits. The one kid telling the other:
"You spelled it wrong."
"Really?"
"There's not supposed to be a "w" at the end."
"Oh, sorry." (or something to that effect.)
Ooops. I was going to just list the films and then blog about the long weekend and why Canada still celebrates Queen Victoria's birthday even though she's been dead for, what, 107 years? But you got movies instead. :-) (See what I mean about my brain not being able to hold onto thoughts????)
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Death by Bikini
Fellow TKA client and Backspacer, Linda Gerber, is having a party to celebrate the release of her new book, DEATH BY BIKINI.
Stop on by and join the fun. (Even if you can't stay to party, stop by just to check out her cover. Tres cool.)
Stop on by and join the fun. (Even if you can't stay to party, stop by just to check out her cover. Tres cool.)
Monday, May 12, 2008
Tag Week part Uno
Okay, so I've been a bad blogger AND I've had at least 3 tags in the past ten days (that I know about).
Time to get down to business. My apologies to my taggers.
I decided to tackle the most recent one first, because it doesn't require much (any) thought. :-)
The wonderful Sara Hantz (author of THE SECOND VIRGINITY OF SUZY GREEN) passed me this tag. Here are the rules:
1. Pick up the nearest book.
2. Open to page 123
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the next three sentences.
5. Tag five people and post a comment to the person who tagged you once you’ve posted your three sentences.
Okay, so I guess the instructions imply fiction, but I'm in my office and the closest books on hand are writing books, so I randomly grabbed THE WRITER'S JOURNEY, by Christopher Vogler. The three sentence block straddles a mid-chapter subtitle (the perils of choosing non-fiction for this tag) so I'm not counting the subtitle as a sentence. :-) Such a rebel I am.
Wow. Riveting stuff, eh? ;-)
Okay, so now I have to think of some people to tag, and I guess it would be pretty rude to tag anyone who's tagged me recently where I have yet to take up the tag... (This week, Kwana and Bev. I promise.)
I tag:
Mel Francis
Christine D'Abo
Bonnie Staring
Marilyn Brandt
Elizabeth Kerri Mahon
Time to get down to business. My apologies to my taggers.
I decided to tackle the most recent one first, because it doesn't require much (any) thought. :-)
The wonderful Sara Hantz (author of THE SECOND VIRGINITY OF SUZY GREEN) passed me this tag. Here are the rules:
1. Pick up the nearest book.
2. Open to page 123
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the next three sentences.
5. Tag five people and post a comment to the person who tagged you once you’ve posted your three sentences.
Okay, so I guess the instructions imply fiction, but I'm in my office and the closest books on hand are writing books, so I randomly grabbed THE WRITER'S JOURNEY, by Christopher Vogler. The three sentence block straddles a mid-chapter subtitle (the perils of choosing non-fiction for this tag) so I'm not counting the subtitle as a sentence. :-) Such a rebel I am.
The young man's learning is so complete that when the movie ends, he is ready to take Barbarossa's place as a larger-than-life folk hero.
MENTOR AS EVOLVED HERO
Mentors can be regarded as heroes who have become experienced enough to teach others. They have been down the Road of Heroes one or more times, and they have acquired knowledge and skill which can be passed on.
Wow. Riveting stuff, eh? ;-)
Okay, so now I have to think of some people to tag, and I guess it would be pretty rude to tag anyone who's tagged me recently where I have yet to take up the tag... (This week, Kwana and Bev. I promise.)
I tag:
Mel Francis
Christine D'Abo
Bonnie Staring
Marilyn Brandt
Elizabeth Kerri Mahon
Thursday, May 08, 2008
Best Season Ever
Okay, so I should be responding to a couple of recent tags from Kwana Minatee-Jackson and Bev Katz Rosenbaum, or even tidying my house because my sister and her family will be arriving at any moment and it's a total disaster. But I can't resist blogging about the episode of Survivor I just watched. (Nor could I resist watching it as soon as I got home, even though it was safely saved on my DVR.)
Wow. This is my favourite season ever. It's been such a lesson in manipulation and gullibility and how young men will believe just about anything a pretty woman tells them.
The women this season are proving to be masters of this game. I'm not even sure who I want to win anymore. I think I'd be happy with any of the four who are left (although Cirie is my fav).
I haven't been a big fan of the skeleton with silicone bags hanging off her chest, but I realize that's prejudiced. I shouldn't be a hater, just 'cause she's a skeleton with silicone bags hanging off her chest, but really, Nathalie is a warning for young girls everywhere. Skeleton-skinny chicks do not have boobs. Not big ones like that. If you're that skinny, fake boobs will look like silicone bags hanging off your chest. Don't do it!
But putting my fake-boob-prejudice aside, now I'm even rooting for the silicone bag toting skeleton. Any of the four can win in my mind. Wow. I can't believe what they pulled off tonight. Masterful. Men everywhere are quaking in their boots. (Or they should be.) Like Cirie said at the end, her mama always told her you can't always beat them with these (she points to her biceps) but you can always beat them with these (points to her head).
Brilliant.
Wow. This is my favourite season ever. It's been such a lesson in manipulation and gullibility and how young men will believe just about anything a pretty woman tells them.
The women this season are proving to be masters of this game. I'm not even sure who I want to win anymore. I think I'd be happy with any of the four who are left (although Cirie is my fav).
I haven't been a big fan of the skeleton with silicone bags hanging off her chest, but I realize that's prejudiced. I shouldn't be a hater, just 'cause she's a skeleton with silicone bags hanging off her chest, but really, Nathalie is a warning for young girls everywhere. Skeleton-skinny chicks do not have boobs. Not big ones like that. If you're that skinny, fake boobs will look like silicone bags hanging off your chest. Don't do it!
But putting my fake-boob-prejudice aside, now I'm even rooting for the silicone bag toting skeleton. Any of the four can win in my mind. Wow. I can't believe what they pulled off tonight. Masterful. Men everywhere are quaking in their boots. (Or they should be.) Like Cirie said at the end, her mama always told her you can't always beat them with these (she points to her biceps) but you can always beat them with these (points to her head).
Brilliant.
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Marley Gibson's Book Release Day!
Not only is it May Day, it's the day my good friend Marley Gibson's first two novels are being released under the pen name Kate Harmon.
The books are aimed at teens and are called: SORORITY 101: ZETA OR OMEGA? and SORORITY 101: THE NEW SISTERS
Cute covers, eh?
Huge congratulations to Marley!!! (I'm actually about to get in my car (after having a late breakfast/early lunch with Molly, and then heading to Boston for her release party tomorrow night! Can't wait.)
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/bookbitesforkids
She'll be on at 3 p.m. ET and people can call in. Cool!
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Smart and Stupid
I did a movie night this week and saw two very different films: Smart People and Harold and Kumar: Escape from Guantanamo Bay. I liked both films, but for very different reasons.
First, H&K. Well, what can I say about a film that includes some seriously base toilet humor even before the opening credits, but then goes on to have tons of smart political satire. I suppose the clearest thing I can say is: I laughed embarrassingly loudly a few times. Hard to argue with that. I feel like I can't say much about this film without spoilers... but just wait until George Bush comes onto the scene. Killed me. And Neil Patrick Harris on the unicorn. Too funny.
Smart People I liked, too, but didn't work quite as well, even though it's probably the "better" film. It's a story of a decidedly dysfunctional family and a woman who comes into their lives, and in spite of some occasional dark humor, it was so not a comedy. Not at all. Once again, I think the ads and trailers for this film have been misleading. They were hoping, I'll bet, to get some of the audience from Juno to come out, just because Ellen Page is in it.
And Ellen Page was fabulous. And in a character very different from Juno, but just as believable. Thomas Hayden Church was great, too, and well cast. And I think the film was well written. There were four distinct character arcs and an overall storyline linking them (the lead character's arc), and it fit well, together. My problem was in the casting of the two other main characters. And I'd be willing to guess the filmmaker had pressure to cast "names" in these parts whether or not they were right for the parts. (Anyone watch Project Greenlight?)
Sarah Jessica Parker was fine, but too old for her part. Something didn't make sense about that and it kept bugging me. She was supposed to be 10 years past her undergrad days... no, ten years past being a freshman. And sorry, Jessica, it's more like 20.
But the bigger problem for me was Dennis Quaid. And I LOVE Dennis Quaid. But I just couldn't believe him playing an intellectual.
Some actors can pull off portraying characters who regularly use words the actor doesn't know the meaning of... but Dennis isn't one of them. He was supposed to be pompous and highly intelligent. And he flipped between sloppy and lethargic, to channeling his performance as Jerry Lee Lewis in Great Balls of Fire. Maybe that's the only pompous he can do. Talented pompous. He sure didn't pull off academic pompous.
This would have been an entirely different film if Jeff Daniels had been cast in that role. At least he's the first actor who popped into my mind, probably because of his role in The Squid and the Whale, which you should see if you haven't. Rent it. Or perhaps even if the two males were reversed. Yes, sure, Hayden Church does an amazing slacker. We know that. And he was good in this film. But I expect he could have played the professor, too, and lord knows Quaid would have done a good slacker. But the professor part was the "lead" so they cast Quaid and I think that's what made this film less than stellar. Oh, now that I wrote that, I am CONVINCED that reversing the male casting would have made a better film. I don't want to post a huge spoiler... warning... but the Ellen Page character hits on her uncle (played by Hayden Church) and this, too, would've been even more believable if it had been Quaid playing the part. What girl (even a seventeen year old) could resist his devilish (even in his fifties) grin.
Plus, as I said... Sarah Jessica Parker was supposed to be way too young for Quaid and, yes, she's at least 10 years younger than him in real life, but I expect the screenwriter wrote a film intending there to be more like 20 years between those two characters. Casting just didn't work.
At least not for me. Your mileage may vary. But I sound like I didn't enjoy it. I did, mostly.
First, H&K. Well, what can I say about a film that includes some seriously base toilet humor even before the opening credits, but then goes on to have tons of smart political satire. I suppose the clearest thing I can say is: I laughed embarrassingly loudly a few times. Hard to argue with that. I feel like I can't say much about this film without spoilers... but just wait until George Bush comes onto the scene. Killed me. And Neil Patrick Harris on the unicorn. Too funny.
Smart People I liked, too, but didn't work quite as well, even though it's probably the "better" film. It's a story of a decidedly dysfunctional family and a woman who comes into their lives, and in spite of some occasional dark humor, it was so not a comedy. Not at all. Once again, I think the ads and trailers for this film have been misleading. They were hoping, I'll bet, to get some of the audience from Juno to come out, just because Ellen Page is in it.
And Ellen Page was fabulous. And in a character very different from Juno, but just as believable. Thomas Hayden Church was great, too, and well cast. And I think the film was well written. There were four distinct character arcs and an overall storyline linking them (the lead character's arc), and it fit well, together. My problem was in the casting of the two other main characters. And I'd be willing to guess the filmmaker had pressure to cast "names" in these parts whether or not they were right for the parts. (Anyone watch Project Greenlight?)
Sarah Jessica Parker was fine, but too old for her part. Something didn't make sense about that and it kept bugging me. She was supposed to be 10 years past her undergrad days... no, ten years past being a freshman. And sorry, Jessica, it's more like 20.
But the bigger problem for me was Dennis Quaid. And I LOVE Dennis Quaid. But I just couldn't believe him playing an intellectual.
Some actors can pull off portraying characters who regularly use words the actor doesn't know the meaning of... but Dennis isn't one of them. He was supposed to be pompous and highly intelligent. And he flipped between sloppy and lethargic, to channeling his performance as Jerry Lee Lewis in Great Balls of Fire. Maybe that's the only pompous he can do. Talented pompous. He sure didn't pull off academic pompous.
This would have been an entirely different film if Jeff Daniels had been cast in that role. At least he's the first actor who popped into my mind, probably because of his role in The Squid and the Whale, which you should see if you haven't. Rent it. Or perhaps even if the two males were reversed. Yes, sure, Hayden Church does an amazing slacker. We know that. And he was good in this film. But I expect he could have played the professor, too, and lord knows Quaid would have done a good slacker. But the professor part was the "lead" so they cast Quaid and I think that's what made this film less than stellar. Oh, now that I wrote that, I am CONVINCED that reversing the male casting would have made a better film. I don't want to post a huge spoiler... warning... but the Ellen Page character hits on her uncle (played by Hayden Church) and this, too, would've been even more believable if it had been Quaid playing the part. What girl (even a seventeen year old) could resist his devilish (even in his fifties) grin.
Plus, as I said... Sarah Jessica Parker was supposed to be way too young for Quaid and, yes, she's at least 10 years younger than him in real life, but I expect the screenwriter wrote a film intending there to be more like 20 years between those two characters. Casting just didn't work.
At least not for me. Your mileage may vary. But I sound like I didn't enjoy it. I did, mostly.
Friday, April 25, 2008
Card counting and eyelashes
Well, I went to see the film 21 tonight. I actually wanted to see SMART PEOPLE, but got drawn in by the promise of looking at Jim Sturgess' eyelashes for 90 minutes. The eyelashes did not disappoint. 
The film, on the other hand, did.
I feel like I've seen this exact story before, I'd even guess the film I'm thinking of was based on the same book, but I can't seem to remember the name of the film. It might have been a made for TV thing just shown in Canada. Ah, I finally found it on IMDB. The Last Casino. It did have virtually the same plot. And was a made for TV Canadian movie.
But my point... is the overall plot didn't fascinate me. And I had trouble with the motivation for the Kevin Spacey character, and perhaps the Larry Fishburne one, too, and the so-called romantic sub-plot was extremely poorly developed. Why even freaking bother?
The other thing was I just couldn't stop thinking about the entire card-counting phenomenon and this idea that people who do it get beaten up. Okay, I am fully aware that I am completely ignorant of how things work in Vegas, and I am not completely ignorant of the fact that organized crime is or at least has been involved in Vegas... But I also know that the gaming commission or whatever they are called are fairly strict... And not all the cops in Vegas can be corrupt. So that's where I take issue with these stories. Card counting isn't against the law. It isn't even cheating. It's just playing the game of blackjack extremely well, at a level most of us could never hope to. (And at a level where the player has an advantage over the casino.) So... if someone gets beaten for counting cards... wouldn't they just go to the cops? They didn't do anything wrong. The people who assaulted them did. It just doesn't make sense to me.
And even Jim Sturgess' eyelashes couldn't distract me from this.
Speaking of eyelashes... I'm in the middle of watching tonight's episode of LOST (have the DVR on pause) and looking at the actor who plays Ben, I am so glad I'm a girl. Why you ask? Because I can wear mascara and eyeliner to help disguise the fact I have transparent eyelashes. He can't. Too bad. He might look less freaky with eyelashes, and stronger eyebrows, too. But I guess while playing this Ben character, freaky is kind of the point.
The film, on the other hand, did.
I feel like I've seen this exact story before, I'd even guess the film I'm thinking of was based on the same book, but I can't seem to remember the name of the film. It might have been a made for TV thing just shown in Canada. Ah, I finally found it on IMDB. The Last Casino. It did have virtually the same plot. And was a made for TV Canadian movie.
But my point... is the overall plot didn't fascinate me. And I had trouble with the motivation for the Kevin Spacey character, and perhaps the Larry Fishburne one, too, and the so-called romantic sub-plot was extremely poorly developed. Why even freaking bother?
The other thing was I just couldn't stop thinking about the entire card-counting phenomenon and this idea that people who do it get beaten up. Okay, I am fully aware that I am completely ignorant of how things work in Vegas, and I am not completely ignorant of the fact that organized crime is or at least has been involved in Vegas... But I also know that the gaming commission or whatever they are called are fairly strict... And not all the cops in Vegas can be corrupt. So that's where I take issue with these stories. Card counting isn't against the law. It isn't even cheating. It's just playing the game of blackjack extremely well, at a level most of us could never hope to. (And at a level where the player has an advantage over the casino.) So... if someone gets beaten for counting cards... wouldn't they just go to the cops? They didn't do anything wrong. The people who assaulted them did. It just doesn't make sense to me.
And even Jim Sturgess' eyelashes couldn't distract me from this.
Speaking of eyelashes... I'm in the middle of watching tonight's episode of LOST (have the DVR on pause) and looking at the actor who plays Ben, I am so glad I'm a girl. Why you ask? Because I can wear mascara and eyeliner to help disguise the fact I have transparent eyelashes. He can't. Too bad. He might look less freaky with eyelashes, and stronger eyebrows, too. But I guess while playing this Ben character, freaky is kind of the point.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
An Engineer's Guide to Cats
Okay, I'm so not a cat person, but I must be an engineer geek person because this really cracked me up. It's kind a long.. But very funny.
I think I'm a bit in love with the one named Paul. Do you think he's single? Of course he's single. **Maureen slaps head** He's an engineer who owns 3 cats. Paul, if you can lose the cats, call me.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Stop-Loss and In the Valley of Elah
I saw Stop-Loss last week and what it really got me thinking about (in addition to the obvious political questions) was why In the Valley of Elah didn't 100% work.
I am a huge fan of Paul Haggis, was so excited to see this film in the program book for the TIFF last year, and was thrilled to get a ticket to the premiere.
But the film didn't thrill me like I'd hoped it would. It's not that I didn't like it. It's not like the performances weren't excellent. It's not like it didn't have a powerful message, and it's not like the film didn't make me think afterwards...
But, something just didn't gel for me, like it had with Crash, a film of Haggis's that I love, love, loved.
And watching Stop-Loss that has a different but similar topic, I think I might have figured it out. The main characters in Stop-Loss are soldiers. The ones things are happening to. The ones who have served proudly, are ready to get out, and are dragged back in via a back-door draft. The ones who come home from Iraq violent and addicted to drugs or alcohol and generally messed up. War does that.
In In the Valley of Elah, the film was seen through the eyes of Tommy Lee Jones' character and secondarily through the Charlize Theron's. Tommy Lee Jones plays the father of a returned vet killed after returning home, and Theron a cop who helps him investigate the crime when the army ignores him and writes it off as a drug deal gone bad (which, of course, it so wasn't). Looking at the story through the eyes of a parent was an interesting way to take a look at the syndrome of young men turning into monsters when they return from war. (Certainly nothing new to this particular war.) But while it was an interesting way to do it, I'm not sure it was the most compelling way, the best storytelling choice.
Stop-Loss, on the other hand, is told from the soldiers' points of view. In the Valley of Elah was based on a true story and I think Haggis might have done better to pick one of the soldiers involved, (or even create a fictional character to add to the group if none of the actual boys were sympathetic enough), and to tell the story through those eyes.
Not that the heartbreak of a father learning what his son has done and seen and gone through isn't heart wrenching... But I think it was more emotionally engaging to actually put ourselves in the soldiers' shoes.
Don't know... One way or another, both films are worth seeing. But I think Stop-Loss was the stronger of the two. Good performances. A subject all Americans, for sure, should know about. And it's not unpatriotic or even anti-war... It simply comes out against forcing people to do something -- particularly something dangerous and traumatic -- against their wills.
I am a huge fan of Paul Haggis, was so excited to see this film in the program book for the TIFF last year, and was thrilled to get a ticket to the premiere.
But the film didn't thrill me like I'd hoped it would. It's not that I didn't like it. It's not like the performances weren't excellent. It's not like it didn't have a powerful message, and it's not like the film didn't make me think afterwards...
But, something just didn't gel for me, like it had with Crash, a film of Haggis's that I love, love, loved.
And watching Stop-Loss that has a different but similar topic, I think I might have figured it out. The main characters in Stop-Loss are soldiers. The ones things are happening to. The ones who have served proudly, are ready to get out, and are dragged back in via a back-door draft. The ones who come home from Iraq violent and addicted to drugs or alcohol and generally messed up. War does that.
In In the Valley of Elah, the film was seen through the eyes of Tommy Lee Jones' character and secondarily through the Charlize Theron's. Tommy Lee Jones plays the father of a returned vet killed after returning home, and Theron a cop who helps him investigate the crime when the army ignores him and writes it off as a drug deal gone bad (which, of course, it so wasn't). Looking at the story through the eyes of a parent was an interesting way to take a look at the syndrome of young men turning into monsters when they return from war. (Certainly nothing new to this particular war.) But while it was an interesting way to do it, I'm not sure it was the most compelling way, the best storytelling choice.
Stop-Loss, on the other hand, is told from the soldiers' points of view. In the Valley of Elah was based on a true story and I think Haggis might have done better to pick one of the soldiers involved, (or even create a fictional character to add to the group if none of the actual boys were sympathetic enough), and to tell the story through those eyes.
Not that the heartbreak of a father learning what his son has done and seen and gone through isn't heart wrenching... But I think it was more emotionally engaging to actually put ourselves in the soldiers' shoes.
Don't know... One way or another, both films are worth seeing. But I think Stop-Loss was the stronger of the two. Good performances. A subject all Americans, for sure, should know about. And it's not unpatriotic or even anti-war... It simply comes out against forcing people to do something -- particularly something dangerous and traumatic -- against their wills.
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
Fallen out of love
Okay, so my David Cook infatuation may have come to an end. I'm fickle that way. One bad performance -- he's out.
I hated his performance. The beginning was way too low for his voice... And I hated what he was wearing... Simon said he looked pretentious. I just thought he looked femme. And not in a good way. Yuck.
I also don't understand what the judges see in David Archuleta. Except maybe for the last fifteen seconds of the song... he sounded like what he is -- a little kid trying to do a Robbie Williams impression and sounding like a total amateur.
Why the hell do the judges want him to win? (which they so seem to) Do they really think people will buy the records he makes? I don't get it. Not at all. Then again, I'm not a 12-year-old girl... Perhaps his target audience. But even 12-year-old girls like their music to be more poppy and less schmaltzy, don't they? Maybe his target audience is actually eighty-year-old women. I'm not one of those, either.
Anyone a fan of his? What am I not getting? (And why am I watching American Idol anyway...)
I hated his performance. The beginning was way too low for his voice... And I hated what he was wearing... Simon said he looked pretentious. I just thought he looked femme. And not in a good way. Yuck.
I also don't understand what the judges see in David Archuleta. Except maybe for the last fifteen seconds of the song... he sounded like what he is -- a little kid trying to do a Robbie Williams impression and sounding like a total amateur.
Why the hell do the judges want him to win? (which they so seem to) Do they really think people will buy the records he makes? I don't get it. Not at all. Then again, I'm not a 12-year-old girl... Perhaps his target audience. But even 12-year-old girls like their music to be more poppy and less schmaltzy, don't they? Maybe his target audience is actually eighty-year-old women. I'm not one of those, either.
Anyone a fan of his? What am I not getting? (And why am I watching American Idol anyway...)
Monday, April 07, 2008
Spring has sprung
Critique partner and very good buddy Molly O'Keefe guest blogged about Spring Fever over on The Debutante Ball yesterday, well, today... but it's late in the day, now. But it wasn't only her funny blog post that got me thinking about spring. It was the weather. :-)
It's been in the double digits (Celsius) since Friday or Saturday in Toronto and boy is it welcome this year. What a crappy winter. While we had very few super-cold days, we had so, so, so much snow... I didn't hear in the end if we broke the previous record held by the infamous winter of 1938-39 (everyone remember that one? LOL), but we came close.
So temps in the teens were very, very welcome. And I took advantage. In addition to raking the 4 inches of oak leaves off my garden over the weekend, tonight I started an outdoor exercise class. A week or so ago, when I realized my bootcamp started in April I figured they'd have to cancel or move it inside, because, well, outside was still buried in snow. How quickly things change.
Today was a warm day... I was walking around in short sleeves midafternoon, but once the sun started to get low in the sky, the clouds came in, and it got really chilly. And yes, that was just in time for my "bootcamp" class to start at 7:00 pm. (An aside: very surreal to be doing crunches at the base of the CN Tower... I wonder what our doggie leg-lifts looked like from the observation decks in the tower?)
But I survived. I just hope it doesn't get really nasty again. Not sure I'm up for bootcamp in temps closer to freezing... (Fingers crossed.)
Here's hoping it's spring where you are -- which, unless you live in the southern hemisphere and it's fall -- or maybe in parts of the northern US midwest or in Northern Canada, or Alaska, or Siberia... I'm sure it is.
Happy spring, everyone!
It's been in the double digits (Celsius) since Friday or Saturday in Toronto and boy is it welcome this year. What a crappy winter. While we had very few super-cold days, we had so, so, so much snow... I didn't hear in the end if we broke the previous record held by the infamous winter of 1938-39 (everyone remember that one? LOL), but we came close.
So temps in the teens were very, very welcome. And I took advantage. In addition to raking the 4 inches of oak leaves off my garden over the weekend, tonight I started an outdoor exercise class. A week or so ago, when I realized my bootcamp started in April I figured they'd have to cancel or move it inside, because, well, outside was still buried in snow. How quickly things change.
Today was a warm day... I was walking around in short sleeves midafternoon, but once the sun started to get low in the sky, the clouds came in, and it got really chilly. And yes, that was just in time for my "bootcamp" class to start at 7:00 pm. (An aside: very surreal to be doing crunches at the base of the CN Tower... I wonder what our doggie leg-lifts looked like from the observation decks in the tower?)
But I survived. I just hope it doesn't get really nasty again. Not sure I'm up for bootcamp in temps closer to freezing... (Fingers crossed.)
Here's hoping it's spring where you are -- which, unless you live in the southern hemisphere and it's fall -- or maybe in parts of the northern US midwest or in Northern Canada, or Alaska, or Siberia... I'm sure it is.
Happy spring, everyone!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
