I finally caved and bought one of those days-of-the-week pill containers. That's right, kids. I have so many pills that my purse rattled when I walked. I had to do something better.
*sigh*
Has anyone seen my Metamucil?
Monday, July 20, 2009
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Movie Review: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
Note: This review assumes you've either read the book or seen the movie; contains spoilers.
Harry Potter is all grown up and the girls like him for it. Half-Blood Prince, the sixth movie/book of the series, focuses on a more mature Harry and friends Ron (who looks like he's been lifting weights) and Hermione (charmingly attractive). The petulant teenager from Order of the Phoenix is gone, and a more goal-oriented Harry is in his place, listening to his mentor Albus Dumbledore with increasing clarity.
The book focuses thoroughly on the sixth year of school - potions classes, Quidditch matches, and most importantly, hormones. Teenagers are goopily in love throughout the entire book, and the movie has seen fit to milk this for all its worth. Hermione fends off the arrogant Cormac MacLeggen and moons at Ron with far more ardor than is ever displayed in the book; Ron snogs Lavender Brown with just as much enthusiasm as in the pages. Also clear to us is Harry's crush on Ginny, Ron's kid sister, again touted much more heavily in the film than the book, sometimes to awkward effect. This probably pleases the teen audience, but when they finally do kiss it lacks the surprise and emotion of the printed moment, as well as Ron's reaction, which I was looking forward to.
The movie does make significant changes from the book in ways that didn't make a lot of sense. I get that it doesn't work to have Harry running around under the invisibility cloak much in the film - because obviously you can't see him - but his inaction in the final action sequence (you know the one) comes across as much more cowardly than had he been frozen with the Petrificus Totalus spell under his cloak, unseen to anyone and unable to move.
Voldemort is a menacing background presence but it's the Death Eaters who are front and center - Severus Snape, Bellatrix LeStrange, Fenrir Greyback, who is never fully introduced in the movie. You have to know who he is to understand his role. We are also denied the final battle at the base of the astronomy tower. Bill and LeFleur don't make any appearances, but we are treated to a scene or two not in the book, including at the Burrow - a move I'm not quite sure I understand the need for. We don't get the funeral, which I was also looking forward to, nor Harry's speech to Ginny at the end, which I think is an important one. It shows where Harry has chosen to go in the seventh book and why he's chosen the path that aims to spare her and the other people he loves from harm. I would have included that speech, however heartbreaking, because of its impact. He gives a small snippet of something similar to Hermione.
One thing the movie does is make sure the same students come back to play familiar roles. I was pleased to see Neville, Seamus, Crabbe and Goyle among the familiar faces, Neville especially having grown exceedingly tall and looking quite grown up. It's too bad they couldn't give these guys more lines but it's nice to see them all the same. Nice, too, to see in limited roles Tonks and Lupin; however, some of Tonks' scenes are given to Luna Lovegood (ditzy as usual) which made very little sense. Even though I rather like that dipsy Luna and her spectrespecs, I would have preferred sticking to the book.
That's not to say this is a bad movie, only that I made what could be considered a mistake for reading the book just before seeing the movie. In fact, many lines, especially early on, come straight from the book, which is refreshingly fun. I also think that not having read the books leaves you at a bit of a disadvantage. You're missing the supporting characters (for example, you don't know what a full prat Cormac is, you only get a hint of it) and some of the subtext (Ron threatening to kill for snogging his sister, unaware his best friend wants to do exactly that but would choose his best mate anyday). You miss the real struggle Harry underwent to get the memory from Slughorn or how he continued to excel at potions thanks to his potions book. Still, they can't do everything. Even at 2 1/2 hours or so the movie moves quickly and there's barely a still moment, especially if you know what's coming up. And as usual the visuals are stunning - a ring of fire has never looked so incredibly grand and powerful and awe-inspiring. And I still nurse a strong crush on Hogwarts itself - its Gothic arches, its dark passageways, and the touches of magic that make it so alive and unique.
Jim Broadbent does an admirable job at Horace Slughorn, who I had pictured as fatter and with a large blonde mustache - but the crystallized pineapple, which sounds delicious, does make an appearance. Then again, when does Jim Broadbent give a bad performance? Alan Rickman continues to bite off the ends of his words with a crisp relish, and Tom Felton as Malfoy (again, all grown up) gets a lot to do in this film. Knowing how his arc turns out enriches this movie, I think and his performance in it. I hope after this he gets to do some roles where he smiles instead of sneers. He'll have the girls falling all over him too, not just Pansy Parkinson.
Animals: A small bird dies.
Overall: I freely admit I need to see this one again, not immediately after having read the book. I was waiting for what I knew was coming, not settling down to enjoy it as it ran. I give it an initial 3/12 roses out of five for what it cut from the book. A second viewing will likely improve that rating.
Harry Potter is all grown up and the girls like him for it. Half-Blood Prince, the sixth movie/book of the series, focuses on a more mature Harry and friends Ron (who looks like he's been lifting weights) and Hermione (charmingly attractive). The petulant teenager from Order of the Phoenix is gone, and a more goal-oriented Harry is in his place, listening to his mentor Albus Dumbledore with increasing clarity.
The book focuses thoroughly on the sixth year of school - potions classes, Quidditch matches, and most importantly, hormones. Teenagers are goopily in love throughout the entire book, and the movie has seen fit to milk this for all its worth. Hermione fends off the arrogant Cormac MacLeggen and moons at Ron with far more ardor than is ever displayed in the book; Ron snogs Lavender Brown with just as much enthusiasm as in the pages. Also clear to us is Harry's crush on Ginny, Ron's kid sister, again touted much more heavily in the film than the book, sometimes to awkward effect. This probably pleases the teen audience, but when they finally do kiss it lacks the surprise and emotion of the printed moment, as well as Ron's reaction, which I was looking forward to.
The movie does make significant changes from the book in ways that didn't make a lot of sense. I get that it doesn't work to have Harry running around under the invisibility cloak much in the film - because obviously you can't see him - but his inaction in the final action sequence (you know the one) comes across as much more cowardly than had he been frozen with the Petrificus Totalus spell under his cloak, unseen to anyone and unable to move.
Voldemort is a menacing background presence but it's the Death Eaters who are front and center - Severus Snape, Bellatrix LeStrange, Fenrir Greyback, who is never fully introduced in the movie. You have to know who he is to understand his role. We are also denied the final battle at the base of the astronomy tower. Bill and LeFleur don't make any appearances, but we are treated to a scene or two not in the book, including at the Burrow - a move I'm not quite sure I understand the need for. We don't get the funeral, which I was also looking forward to, nor Harry's speech to Ginny at the end, which I think is an important one. It shows where Harry has chosen to go in the seventh book and why he's chosen the path that aims to spare her and the other people he loves from harm. I would have included that speech, however heartbreaking, because of its impact. He gives a small snippet of something similar to Hermione.
One thing the movie does is make sure the same students come back to play familiar roles. I was pleased to see Neville, Seamus, Crabbe and Goyle among the familiar faces, Neville especially having grown exceedingly tall and looking quite grown up. It's too bad they couldn't give these guys more lines but it's nice to see them all the same. Nice, too, to see in limited roles Tonks and Lupin; however, some of Tonks' scenes are given to Luna Lovegood (ditzy as usual) which made very little sense. Even though I rather like that dipsy Luna and her spectrespecs, I would have preferred sticking to the book.
That's not to say this is a bad movie, only that I made what could be considered a mistake for reading the book just before seeing the movie. In fact, many lines, especially early on, come straight from the book, which is refreshingly fun. I also think that not having read the books leaves you at a bit of a disadvantage. You're missing the supporting characters (for example, you don't know what a full prat Cormac is, you only get a hint of it) and some of the subtext (Ron threatening to kill for snogging his sister, unaware his best friend wants to do exactly that but would choose his best mate anyday). You miss the real struggle Harry underwent to get the memory from Slughorn or how he continued to excel at potions thanks to his potions book. Still, they can't do everything. Even at 2 1/2 hours or so the movie moves quickly and there's barely a still moment, especially if you know what's coming up. And as usual the visuals are stunning - a ring of fire has never looked so incredibly grand and powerful and awe-inspiring. And I still nurse a strong crush on Hogwarts itself - its Gothic arches, its dark passageways, and the touches of magic that make it so alive and unique.
Jim Broadbent does an admirable job at Horace Slughorn, who I had pictured as fatter and with a large blonde mustache - but the crystallized pineapple, which sounds delicious, does make an appearance. Then again, when does Jim Broadbent give a bad performance? Alan Rickman continues to bite off the ends of his words with a crisp relish, and Tom Felton as Malfoy (again, all grown up) gets a lot to do in this film. Knowing how his arc turns out enriches this movie, I think and his performance in it. I hope after this he gets to do some roles where he smiles instead of sneers. He'll have the girls falling all over him too, not just Pansy Parkinson.
Animals: A small bird dies.
Overall: I freely admit I need to see this one again, not immediately after having read the book. I was waiting for what I knew was coming, not settling down to enjoy it as it ran. I give it an initial 3/12 roses out of five for what it cut from the book. A second viewing will likely improve that rating.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Ding
Would you people PLEASE stop hitting my CAR with your CAR DOORS????
The side of my shiny new car is COVERED with paint dings. White, gray and green are the predominant colors. Is it THAT difficult to get into and out of your car in the parking lot when I've parked properly between the lines? Or are you just too freaking lazy to be considerate of anybody else's vehicle? Work is the main place I get hit, but the worst dings I got were in shopping center parking lots. At least one person I think hit me with his front door AND the back door. Two in one go! Nicely done. *eye roll*
One nice lady left a note, and hers was the smallest ding on the door. I called and told her thank you for leaving a note but don't worry about it. Now I'm probably going to have to see if insurance covers touchups.
*sigh*
The side of my shiny new car is COVERED with paint dings. White, gray and green are the predominant colors. Is it THAT difficult to get into and out of your car in the parking lot when I've parked properly between the lines? Or are you just too freaking lazy to be considerate of anybody else's vehicle? Work is the main place I get hit, but the worst dings I got were in shopping center parking lots. At least one person I think hit me with his front door AND the back door. Two in one go! Nicely done. *eye roll*
One nice lady left a note, and hers was the smallest ding on the door. I called and told her thank you for leaving a note but don't worry about it. Now I'm probably going to have to see if insurance covers touchups.
*sigh*
Too Old Too Young
TLC keeps showing an ad for 'Toddlers and Tiaras' and it gives me the CREEPS. This is a show about little kids in pageants, and they act like teenagers or older with the moves they're supposed to do and the makeup and clothes they're wearing. It's disturbing. Aren't these supposed to be little kids, running around in pigtails, getting dirty?
Why are they wearing more lipstick than me?
Creepy.
Why are they wearing more lipstick than me?
Creepy.
Monday, July 13, 2009
The Podcast Primer
As you might know, I listen to a lot of podcasts, usually while walking on my lunch hour. I prefer podcasts that deal with favorite sports and television programs from a variety of hosts. With that in mind, I have a few suggestions for making your podcast stand out among the many on I-Tunes.
1. Production Value - Get yourself some introductory theme music that puts people in the right frame of mind. Break up your segments with a sound clip, and have regular segments so people tune in to hear the news, or the episode review, or whatever uniqueness you bring to the podcast universe. There are, I understand, websites where you can get free podcast music. Why not use it and jazz up your show? Or better yet, write your own. And use a system or program that gives radio quality sound. I don't want to feel like I'm listening in on a long-distance phone call. Great example of fun production value: The Lost Podcast with Jay and Jack.
2. Think Fan, not Fangirl - I'm with you ladies, okay? Jensen Ackles is hot. David Boreanaz is smoking. Jamie Bamber sans towel is enough to make you fall off the sofa. Or conversely, yes, Spiderman IS the coolest superhero, if it makes you feel better (actually, in my world, that's Batman, but whatever). I love fans. Drooling fangirls and fanboys can be a little annoying, especially if there's never anything wrong with the show in question and they keep repeating how HOT the lead actor is. Every show has ups and downs and the lead actor can occasionally be dorky (Apollo's lawyer haircut, anybody?). Be sure to share them all - the goods and the bads. If I wanted cheerleaders, I'd watch Heroes. Great example of perfect fan-ism: Supernatural Podcast.
3. I Am Not the Jonas Brothers - No giggling. Please? I know this is aimed unfairly at women, but I cannot take the girly tee-hee, which usually goes with excessive fangirlism. I opted out of a podcast because the two young women who hosted it kept giggling, saying "Woo-hoo" repeatedly and trying to sound knowledgeable about things they were not knowledgeable about. Sweetie, you don't say his name Luc Robi-tally, okay? Watch some hockey then get back to me. Great example of no giggling but lots of fun: The Answer Bitch Show
4. Keep It Short - I like my podcasts under an hour - 20 minutes tops if they're teaching me something. Feature films don't even go two hours all the time, why should you? That's two lunch hours to me, and if you're just chatting, it's just boring. Great example of podcast length: Stuff You Missed in History Class
5. Be Prepared - Come into your podcast with all your notes, know what you're going to say, and say it concisely. If you're partnered up with somebody, make sure you all know what you're going to say ahead of time. Don't babble or leave dead air while you wait for somebody to chime in who isn't going to or who doesn't know what the next point made is going to be (remember outlines back in speech class?). Chatting is fine if it fits the point and serves a purpose, but rambling on is worthless if you sound awkward doing it. Know what episodes you're referring to, character names, and for heaven's sake, know your actors. A really good internet connection next to you doesn't hurt in case you hit a blank. And charisma among hosts is a must. Great examples of preparedness and charisma: Galactic Watercooler; The Fringe Podcast.
Podcasting is 21st-century radio, after all. The least you can do is make it sound like it.
1. Production Value - Get yourself some introductory theme music that puts people in the right frame of mind. Break up your segments with a sound clip, and have regular segments so people tune in to hear the news, or the episode review, or whatever uniqueness you bring to the podcast universe. There are, I understand, websites where you can get free podcast music. Why not use it and jazz up your show? Or better yet, write your own. And use a system or program that gives radio quality sound. I don't want to feel like I'm listening in on a long-distance phone call. Great example of fun production value: The Lost Podcast with Jay and Jack.
2. Think Fan, not Fangirl - I'm with you ladies, okay? Jensen Ackles is hot. David Boreanaz is smoking. Jamie Bamber sans towel is enough to make you fall off the sofa. Or conversely, yes, Spiderman IS the coolest superhero, if it makes you feel better (actually, in my world, that's Batman, but whatever). I love fans. Drooling fangirls and fanboys can be a little annoying, especially if there's never anything wrong with the show in question and they keep repeating how HOT the lead actor is. Every show has ups and downs and the lead actor can occasionally be dorky (Apollo's lawyer haircut, anybody?). Be sure to share them all - the goods and the bads. If I wanted cheerleaders, I'd watch Heroes. Great example of perfect fan-ism: Supernatural Podcast.
3. I Am Not the Jonas Brothers - No giggling. Please? I know this is aimed unfairly at women, but I cannot take the girly tee-hee, which usually goes with excessive fangirlism. I opted out of a podcast because the two young women who hosted it kept giggling, saying "Woo-hoo" repeatedly and trying to sound knowledgeable about things they were not knowledgeable about. Sweetie, you don't say his name Luc Robi-tally, okay? Watch some hockey then get back to me. Great example of no giggling but lots of fun: The Answer Bitch Show
4. Keep It Short - I like my podcasts under an hour - 20 minutes tops if they're teaching me something. Feature films don't even go two hours all the time, why should you? That's two lunch hours to me, and if you're just chatting, it's just boring. Great example of podcast length: Stuff You Missed in History Class
5. Be Prepared - Come into your podcast with all your notes, know what you're going to say, and say it concisely. If you're partnered up with somebody, make sure you all know what you're going to say ahead of time. Don't babble or leave dead air while you wait for somebody to chime in who isn't going to or who doesn't know what the next point made is going to be (remember outlines back in speech class?). Chatting is fine if it fits the point and serves a purpose, but rambling on is worthless if you sound awkward doing it. Know what episodes you're referring to, character names, and for heaven's sake, know your actors. A really good internet connection next to you doesn't hurt in case you hit a blank. And charisma among hosts is a must. Great examples of preparedness and charisma: Galactic Watercooler; The Fringe Podcast.
Podcasting is 21st-century radio, after all. The least you can do is make it sound like it.
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Rebranding - or This Ain't Your Papa's Cable
I tuned in last night to watch 'Warehouse 13' on Sci Fi channel, which is now SyFy. (Raise your hand if you want to pronounce that 'Siffy.' Me too.) Apparently the channel wants to branch out beyond science fiction to 'imagine more' or whatever the new tagline is.
And it's also showing wrestling.
So why do niche networks suddenly drop the niche that made them household names and go broad? I assume it's because they see what networks like USA and TNT are doing - creating original TV that doesn't fit into a narrow box and get success. (FX is another one I forgot to mention, and AMC.)
What are we getting instead? Not just 13 channels of generic TV, hundreds and hundreds of them!
Look, I like the idea of niche TV. If I was into golf, I would turn to the Golf Channel because I know, shocker, it's all about golf! I turn to HGTV because I want to watch home and garden-related television shows. And I turn to Sci Fi to watch SCIENCE FICTION and maybe fantasy, which I consider kissing cousins. I consider that a pretty broad genre that can show a lot of really great television and movies (and some not-so-great, like that sand worm movie they're advertising). I don't want to watch wrestling.
Nobody wants to be niche anymore because they want to attract a broad scope of viewers. I used to watch A&E to catch old episodes of Masterpiece Mystery, like Poirot or Midsomer Murders. Nowadays I couldn't even tell you what's on that station because I never watch it. I think it's a bunch of reality television. But apparently its ratings are up.
TLC, the learning channel, has stopped focusing on teaching you anything and is now focused on reality - and so has its pal Discovery. What should I wear? What should I blow up? That's about it, and I LIKE some of those shows. (At least Mythbusters includes some actual SCIENCE.) But I miss the idea that Arts and Entertainment was full of shows that might air on PBS or BBC America, and that TLC and Discovery were aimed at teaching me something.
I'm waiting for Animal Planet to drop shows about animals in exchange for another incarnation of The Real Housewives of New Jersey or wherever they're from these days. I can hear the executives now. "Well, they behave like animals, so it fits."
Somebody hand me the remote. I'm going to go read a book.
And it's also showing wrestling.
So why do niche networks suddenly drop the niche that made them household names and go broad? I assume it's because they see what networks like USA and TNT are doing - creating original TV that doesn't fit into a narrow box and get success. (FX is another one I forgot to mention, and AMC.)
What are we getting instead? Not just 13 channels of generic TV, hundreds and hundreds of them!
Look, I like the idea of niche TV. If I was into golf, I would turn to the Golf Channel because I know, shocker, it's all about golf! I turn to HGTV because I want to watch home and garden-related television shows. And I turn to Sci Fi to watch SCIENCE FICTION and maybe fantasy, which I consider kissing cousins. I consider that a pretty broad genre that can show a lot of really great television and movies (and some not-so-great, like that sand worm movie they're advertising). I don't want to watch wrestling.
Nobody wants to be niche anymore because they want to attract a broad scope of viewers. I used to watch A&E to catch old episodes of Masterpiece Mystery, like Poirot or Midsomer Murders. Nowadays I couldn't even tell you what's on that station because I never watch it. I think it's a bunch of reality television. But apparently its ratings are up.
TLC, the learning channel, has stopped focusing on teaching you anything and is now focused on reality - and so has its pal Discovery. What should I wear? What should I blow up? That's about it, and I LIKE some of those shows. (At least Mythbusters includes some actual SCIENCE.) But I miss the idea that Arts and Entertainment was full of shows that might air on PBS or BBC America, and that TLC and Discovery were aimed at teaching me something.
I'm waiting for Animal Planet to drop shows about animals in exchange for another incarnation of The Real Housewives of New Jersey or wherever they're from these days. I can hear the executives now. "Well, they behave like animals, so it fits."
Somebody hand me the remote. I'm going to go read a book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
