Last weekend was the Pinewood Derby. I was quite nervous because a number of the tracks I had lined up ended up falling through. Fortunately (thanks to Lynette's good find), I had reserved a backup track...but it was down in Provo.
So, the morning of the Derby (while Lynette was away at Trek training), I loaded the kids up and drove ~55 minutes to pick up the track. It was packed a little bigger than expected and we barely fit all 3 kids and myself back in the van for the drive home. We got home just in time for the kids to head to a primary activity (they had tons of watery fun with sprinklers, water toys, water balloons, etc.). Meanwhile, I got together all of the various Award Certificates, Activity Packets, Decorations and tools so after lunch we were set to hit the church to setup the track and get ready.
The Derby Pack Meeting was slated to begin at 3. At about 2:40, we finally had the track set up and the decorations and chairs ready (thanks again to Lynette and the kids for all their help). I rushed home to get into my uniform and was back just in time to help postpone the Derby while we waited for missing Cubs to arrive and for arriving Cubs to fix their cars that had trouble (one car fell and the back of it broke off...thanks to a great dad in the pit crew between each race, it managed to survive until the end).
Since the Bears and Wolves had been to Cub Camp just a couple of weeks previously, we had a lot of awards to hand out, which was good because it helped cars get ready and helped stall while we waited for our line judges.
At about 3:30, our first race was off. Over the next hour, we ran almost 20 heats between the 11 cars. There were some awesome cars in the running and the kids had a ton of fun. We finished up with some tasty refreshments, awarding of certificates and medals to all racers and then dismantled the track and ran it back to Provo.
All in all, it was a great Derby. There were a few lessons learned (allow more time for setup, make sure you have a microphone, have the heats/structure set up beforehand) but mostly it was just a lot of fun.
As most of you (hopefully) know, this last weekend was Father's Day. As a dad, that means I get to be doted on by my kids and wife a little bit...which makes me feel a little strange, but is still fun overall.
First of all, even though my dad won't likely see/read this, I want to shout out a huge THANKS to my dad for being a great dad. We didn't get over to see him over the weekend but will be seeing him tonight. In fact, he'll be playing dad/grandpa tonight by working with Jason and I on his saws to shape Jason's Pinewood Derby car for the pack meeting this weekend.
Thanks dad for being a great example and for always being there.
As for my kids, they made me a ton of cute little cards...some with smaller notes tucked inside, some with cute pictures colored on, and others with family photos cut-and-pasted into fun arrangements with fun "we love our family" phrases.
Andrew made me breakfast in bed (my standard bagel & orange juice breakfast) and Julia massaged my back.
There were also gifts given...very unnecessary, but still fun.
Lynette took an old nightshirt (yes, I have nightshirts that I sleep in sometimes) that I had ~15 years ago and absolutely loved (it's got Scar & the Hyenas from The Lion King and includes Scar's phrase "I'm Surrounded by Idiots"). Anyway, the nightshirt was tattered and falling apart from many years of wear & wash. It hasn't been wearable for many years and has just been tucked in a drawer nostalgically. Lynette sewed a new nightshirt and then scanned the images and painted the lettering and made me a brand new nightshirt. It's a trip to wear my old nightshirt again...just like new.
Lynette also found and imported a board game I have been curious about for some time called En Garde. The game is a "fencing" game where each player plays cards to move up and down a fencing track and attempt to score a "hit" against the opponent. It's been re-released with a more simplistic set of components, but the one I was after was the early version which included a board that gets built into a 3-dimensional bridge-like track and includes pewter swordsmen as the playing pieces. Since it was imported, I had to find and download the English rules, but once that was done and after ~10 minutes of figuring out how to set up the 3-d board, we had some fun family time taking turns crossing swords.
Jason, knowing my penchant for board games, decided to make me a game. He cut a shoe box open to lay it flat and then drew a game board on it based on the Monopoly layout. He called it "Adventure Game" and themed it around Indiana Jones and other adventures. It used monopoly style gameplay to navigate your pieces (which could be a jet, a hat, a villain, or a couple of different heroes), around the board to collect or lose money (by finding treasure or getting shot or bit by snakes), buy helpful items (such as a boat, a whip, or a gun) or encounter villains. It was very cute. Hopefully I can keep all the bits together and we can play it from time to time and bring it out again for him when he gets older. I'll have to get a picture of it to post later. :)
Julia wrapped up a couple of her story books for me. They've since made their way back to her bookshelf, but we'll read them together I'm sure. :)
My family truly spoiled me for Father's Day. I try to be a good dad, but it's definitely not easy. I am very blessed by my family and love them very much. They truly are my biggest joy in life. Thanks guys for putting up with me. :)
There's a new author in the blogospher, J.G. Sexton. He's the author of what he calls the "Jason Horde Mysteries." I don't know much about his writing or his stories, but I'm always up for trying out new authors. His first blog post (only one right now) is a basic introduction of himself as well as a Contest.
So if you want to get the inside scoop on a new author on his way up, head on over and subscribe to his blog. You can also enter into the contest (be sure and tell him that I sent you over...that gets me an extra entry *grin*).
Microsoft still has a minimal presence in Utah but they've just announced a new office in Utah County poised to employ 100 developers.
When Microsoft sold the studio I was working for ~5 years ago, it wasn't the end of the world. I don't deny that Microsoft was a good employer in terms of pay and benefits. But the work-life balance wasn't great. And the distance from Microsoft headquarters contributed to a sometimes conflicted work bureaucratic.
Still, it's exciting to see big tech names continuing to come to Utah. Perhaps it will boost confidence in the tech environment here and help push us out of the recession mindset that seems to be dragging us all down.
OK, so this isn't so much a review as a commentary. While watching the performance tonight, I was VERY disoriented. As I mentioned, Lynette and I went to see this show ~10 years ago. I also have the Broadway Cast Recording and listen to it frequently. However, as I watched tonight, I was literally watching a show entirely different from the one I knew.
Reading the Wikipedia page on the musical, I see where the difference lies.
It seems the show debuted in London in 1986 and met with mixed success. When it came over to America in 1988, "the creative team decided that the show had to be reimagined from the top down."
That reimagined version is the one I'm familiar with and the original London version is the one portrayed in tonight's concert. Having "seen" both of them now, I must say I much prefer the Broadway version. It's sometimes said that familiarity breeds contempt, but in this case I have more approval for the version I'm familiar with. Part of that affection may be due to the familiarity, but I think that a large part of it has to do with the fact that the Broadway/reimagined version of the show just felt more believable and more engaging.
The London version shown in tonight's concert gives us Act I with a chess tournament between an American (Freddie) and a Russian (Anatoly) chess master. Freddie is the reigning champion defending his title. At the end of Act I, he loses his title, loses his trainer/partner (Florence) and retires from chess altogether to go be a chess commentator for 'global television' (?). Act II gives us Anatoly (now defected to England and with Florence as his trainer/partner and now lover) preparing for a chess tournament against Russia's new champion. Freddie is there in a background role as the commentator but also trying to win back Florence and get back at Anatoly. While there is some tension throughout and some redemption near the end, I really missed the tension created in the Broadway version of the show (which I'll outline in a moment). The London version gives us a nice love triangle (becomes a love square once Anatoly's wife shows up), but the Broadway version had that as well. The London version amplifies the East-West relations after Anatoly defects, but the Broadway version does that as well. Basically, the Broadway version maintained the main conflict points of the plot, but changed them to make them more realistic and also added a bit of tension that keeps the audience engaged.
The Broadway version encompasses a single chess tournament...one between Anatoly and Freddie. By the end of Act I, Florence has left Freddie for Anatoly and Anatoly has defected. But Freddie and Anatoly still have unfinished business because the tournament is not over. They still have very real reasons to be at each others' throats both over Florence and in the world of Chess. The London version loses a lot of tension by removing Freddie as the opponent and instead introducing Russia's follow-up challenger...a character we never get close to and never really care about.
By keeping Freddie in the game, the audience is VERY engaged in the final scenes of the play. We've gotten to know both Freddie and Anatoly and have deep sympathies for each of them. Freddie is brash and arrogant, so it's likely a part of us will want to side with Anatoly instead. And yet, many political motivations are given for the audience to hope Anatoly loses (the same motivations are provided in the London version, but in that version, we really don't care about Anatoly's opponent, so it's a different choice...perhaps it's a harder choice...we don't want Viigand to win because we don't know him...and yet, Anatoly's reason for winning hardly seems like a trade off when dealing with the wife of his family and of Florence's father).
Overall, I felt like the performances tonight were good. Idina, Adam, Josh, and Kerri all did a great job. It's hard to judge them on acting and passion when it was just a concert rather than an actual performance of the play, but it felt a little lacking and what acting they did try felt a bit out of place.
It was an enjoyable show with some great music...but the lyrics and flow was changed from what I expected and so it wasn't nearly as powerful or enjoyable as I had hoped. I hope that if the show does tour the U.S., that it tours using the American rather than London book. This London version is just too convoluted, lacks a clear direction, and is filled with lyrics that feel contrived and tacked on rather than natural and engaging.
If you're a die-hard fan of the Broadway Chess, I'd say steer clear. If you are a huge musical fan, check it out, but don't expect greatness. I can only half-heatedly recommend this, and even then, only under pressure.
Tonight on PBS (check your local listings for tonight's time and rebroadcast times), Great Performances will be presenting Chess in Concert.
For those unfamiliar with Chess, it's a mid-80s rock musical from Benny Andersson and Björn Ulvaeus (of ABBA fame) with lyrics by Tim Rice. Many non-musical fans may at least be familiar with one song, One Night in Bangkok, which was released as a single by Murray Head and I still hear on the radio from time to time today. The show is centered around a chess championship focused on American and Russian rivalry in the match. The American's manager falls in love with the Russian player, creating an odd sort of love triangle. There are also some cold-war style elements as government agencies are involved in the American-Russian relations.
As far as I've seen, the show doesn't get played much (at least locally)...Lynette and I drove ~80 minutes to see it when it was playing at a small community theatre up in Northern Utah many years ago.
While I'd much rather see them broadcast the actual show, I'm sure the concert will be wonderful. The general plotline is moderately week at points. There are a few scenes which are great to see acted out (the endgame scene is a lot of fun), but honestly a lot of the show felt like filler for the music. Which is why the concert should be great. There are some wonderfully powerful songs in the mix and Great Performances has gathered a great cast.
I'm really looking forward to seeing Josh Groban belt out Pity the Child or Where I Want to Be and I am sure Idina Menzel will be awesome for Nobody's Side or Someone Else's Story. I could take or leave a few of the songs, but most of them are filled with great emotion and I am stoked for this show.
For those in the Salt Lake area, the show will be on KUED tonight (June 17) at 7PM and will rebroadcast at 1AM on the 22nd.
Apparently over the weekend, somebody spent too much time watching Snatch or Ocean's 11 or Thomas Crown Affair or any other number of movies with well thought out plans for stealing a big score. Unfortunately for him, this would-be-thief failed to pay attention to the part in the movies where the crooks come up with a well thought out plan that includes properly identifying the target.
The thief wandered into Black Diamond Equipment during the weekend night shift wielding an ice pick and demanding precious metal and money. He didn't bother to take the time to learn that Black Diamond Equipment doesn't actually deal in jewelry, but rather in outdoor recreation equipment.
He did apparently make off with some computers and climbing gear, but I don't think he'll be retiring on his score.
After reading Hale's graphic novel Rapunzel's Revenge, I decided to try and get to one of her novels sooner rather than later. After a little coin flipping, Austenland made its way to my nightstand.
Austenland is an intriguing concept that is carried of rather well. From a high level, it involves a thirty-something single woman named Jane off for 3 weeks of "Live Action Role Play" (LARP) in a Regency House populated with servants, gentlemen and other women searching for Victorian style romance. I expected plenty of sappy moments and coming away with a sugar headache. Instead, I found a thoughtful and fun (albeit cheesy at times) romance that tries to get to the heart of romance while exploring unrealistic expectations and the joys and pains of obsessions.
Starting out the novel, I was worried that Jane would quickly become a stereotypical archetype...the 'unlucky in love' woman who obsesses over Pride & Prejudice (and other similar books), spurns men as vile and unromantic, and sets herself expectations that can never be achieved. By the end of the book, many of those traits were in fact proven out. However, Jane did progress through the novel and explored her own psychology to determine which of those characteristics were realistic and which should be abandoned.
Her path to discovery was humorous at times, frustrating at others, but in the end felt believable. I really found myself getting to understand and sympathize with Jane while at the same time wanting to shout at her that she was an idiot.
I absolutely loved the prefaces to many of the chapters in the book...many of the chapters began with a short description of each of Jane's "boyfriends" (of which I think she had 15). Most were a few paragraphs...one was just a sentence. Each was very insightful into her character and each was rather humorous...the kind of humor that is funny because you can see the reality behind the pathetic occurrence. As an example, one of these "boyfriend" descriptions tells about how she first saw the boy in class and they shared a glance and then, because he was too shy, she asked him out...to which he responded, "sure...and what was your name"....which promptly ended their "relationship".
As for the other characters, I felt that they were well portrayed, but I had some trouble (as did Jane) trying to sort out the behavior of the actors versus those of the person behind the character. I really felt Hale did a good job of keeping the true person at a distance while exposing glimpses of reality. The gardener was an interesting character who felt a little flat and, while I was surprised what happened with him, I was glad the way his story ended. I thought Mr. Nobley and the other gentlemen on the estate were well portrayed as proper 19th century gentlemen, but I would have liked to have seen more "behind-the-scenes" moments with them. We get one VERY brief scene where one of the characters is smoking behind a bush and talks about "getting back to work." I would like to have seen moments like that elaborated on a bit more.
The writing and the plot flowed along very nicely and it was a very fun read. Even though I am a heterosexual male, I did enjoy the book and can recommend it. However, I can't recommend it to everyone. For example, most of my friends (both male and female) would likely laugh at the suggestion and never make it beyond the first chapter. Others would certainly eat it up. I think that in order to enjoy this, the reader must first have an appreciation, if not a love, of Victorian literature and particularly Victorian romances. Having at least a perception of the obsession around Pride and Prejudice may also help.
So, two scores.
To those who don't like Victorian romances - 1 star
To those who enjoy Victorian lit, romances, or "girlie" books - 3.5 stars
Great video from The Daily Show. Thanks to Banzai for sharing.
I still read print newspapers every once in a while, but I mostly get my news online. In the past 6 months, I think I bought three newspapers and I picked up a free "newspapers" for the crossword puzzle.
I felt bad for the folks at the Times a few times during the interview, but it was still hilarious, and fairly accurate as well. Although the Times employee did have a point that the online news 'zines don't have the money/clout to get direct access to some things and so they just riff off big sources like the NYT, CNN and others. But even that's changing.
Well, last week was E3. For many, that means nothing. For big fans of video games, it means a week full of great new announcements, exciting new trailers and websites, and confirmation of long whispered rumors.
I've only been to the E3 once and it was a lot of fun...but generally, I just follow the news via the web. Being busy with family, work and school, my time in the gaming trenches is less than it has been in previous years. Still, there were some things that really excited me from this year's expo.
After much hype and waiting, I devoured AC1 and loved it. The combat mechanic was a little repetitive over time (as is the case of many Ubisoft titles), but I was willing to overlook that thanks to a very intriguing story line, stellar graphics, and a wonderfully immersive world. I'm very stoked for the sequel...set in Renaissance Italy, one of my favorite eras & locales. Plus...he swims! ;)
I've always been a fan of the Adventure genre in games and I love the humor and fun of the Monkey Island series, so I'm very excited to see Monkey Island resurrected, even if only as a small PC or Xbox Arcade download. This should be a lot of nostalgic fun. I'd love to see it breathe some new life into the mostly-dead adventure world.
While Secret is just a remastering of the original...LucasArts is also planning a brand new Monkey Island adventure, Tales of Monkey Island. Huzzah!
This particular game has already garnered plenty of hype and is on my pre-order list (saving for the special edition that includes cool bonus items like a real batarang *grin*). But at E3, they unveiled the trailer above that shows the playable Joker character. Very excited for this title!
This is another one I've been hearing about for a while. It looks like it will be fun...perhaps a little too similar to Silent Hill or Resident Evil, but still looks fun. At the very least, it looks like it's got an intriguing story line, good graphics and a nice combat system. I'll try the demo first, but my curiosity is definitely peeked.
In addition to putting out a second Lego Indiana Jones game, Travelers Tales is also bringing their Lego goodness to the Harry Potter world. If you haven't played any of these Lego games yet, you're really missing out. They are lightweight yet truly tons of fun. My kids have loved all of them so far. I'm thinking this will be a Christmas gift for them...I'll try to not let them even know the game exists, so it will be an even bigger surprise. :)
In other news, Blizzard hinted that the goal is to get Starcraft II released by the end of the year...though they always add the caveat that they will only ship "when the game is done." I both love and hate them for this. It means they make sure the game is solid before release, but it makes the wait longer.
Halo is getting a Bungie created update, which should be good. Though honestly, I haven't yet played through the entire campaign of any of the other 3 Halo games, nor do I play a ton of multiplayer with the game. Halo is definitely the best multiplayer shooter, so it's what I prefer to play if it's shooter time. However, I'm truly fine with Halo 2. I might grab the new Halo at a discount just so I have the new version to play on Live.
Microsoft also showed off "their answer to the Wii", a motion sensor camera that let's you play games (and do other stuff), without any controller at all. The concept advertisement showed a little innovation and the stage demos showed that they may be able to achieve at least some of what they hope. Still, as with other Microsoft ventures, I suspect it will be at least the second version before Project Natal really starts gaining any traction. By then, they'll nail many of the bugs and might have third party devs truly breaking through the technology and doing something cool with it. Still, I could have sworn something like this was tried in years past...oh yeah, how could I possibly have forgotten the EyeToy for Playstation. While cool in concept, the implementation was pretty poor...you had to have the lighting just right, and move just perfectly, and make sure there wasn't anything else to interfere with the camera's vision of you. Project Natal looked a little more robust than the EyeToy, but I'm definitely not going to rush out and thank Microsoft until their project has survived at least a year or two.
Dante's Inferno sounds interesting from a literary standpoint, but the game itself didn't look that exciting or noteworthy to me.
The new Metal Gear looks astounding!
A new Mario vs. Donkey Kong: March of the Minis game was announced and should be fun. They also announced a follow up in the Professor Layton series which is cool.
Overall, it looks to be a good year of gaming. There were plenty of other titles that lots of folks got very excited about (God of War, Metroid, a couple of Mario games, and more), but my main hype is with the titles above.
With my schedule the way it is, I don't by as many games on release day any more, so it will probably be mid-2010 before I play most of these. I'll probably grab Arkham Asylum and Lego Harry Potter and might get Assassin's Creed as well if it has any fun pre-order swag.
To all the other gamers out there. What are you excited for this year?
Each year about this time, a jury of board gamers in Germany votes on the Spiel des Jahres (translated = Game of the Year). This German Game of the Year award has been going on for ~30 years now and is a major accolade in the board gaming world. Having the Spiel des Jahres logo on a game box can immediately perk up interest among some avid gamers (myself included).
This year's nominees were announced about 3 weeks ago and include 5 games. I hadn't heard of two of the games (Fauna and Finca). I'd heard a little about Fits but wasn't terribly interested. The two titles I've heard a lot about are Pandemic and Dominion. While I haven't played any of the nominees, I've been extremely interested in both Pandemic and Dominion from the hype and the good reviews both games have been getting.
Here's my feel about the titles on the list and my prediction for the winner:
Dominion Looking more into Dominion over the past few months, I think this game could be fun, but it's not really my style of game. I never really got into the collectible card game world and while Dominion isn't officially a CCG, it shares some elements. The gameplay is simple enough as you upgrade your cards to collect money, victory points, or action cards. The artwork and production value looks good. I'll have to give it a try (possibly at the Utah Boardgamer's Convention next month) before I make a final call. It could be fun, but it seems to me that after a while it will be fairly repetitive and might feel like the game is playing me rather than vice-versa.
Pandemic As for Pandemic, this title seems more along the line of the type of game I like to play and try to get out when we game. The most experience I have with the co-operative game genre is with Scotland Yard. I think I've played one or two other co-op games years ago, but the experience wasn't that memorable. Pandemic sounds like a very immersive game full of varied and deep strategy as well as slightly chaotic elements that add to the challenge. I think the variety and the changing difficulty should make for a lot of fun. I love the idea of working together as a team to stop global outbreaks of disease...sounds like a great theme with great execution. My main worry would be that the co-op style may have trouble in some game groups. I'm not sure how it would play out with those I usually play with, but I want to try it.
Fits As I mentioned above, I've heard of Fits and even looked briefly at it. While it's intriguing from a high level, it's one of those things that I think would wear thin rather quickly. Basically, it's a board game version of Tetris with a few strategic twists. It would be a fun puzzle game to have and pull out once in a while, but I'm not sure I'd classify it Game of the Year material.
Fauna Fauna sounds like an interesting game...but that's about it. It basically seems like an animal themed Trivial Pursuit with some new scoring mechanics. It's interesting, quirky and educational, but it seems like the audience and staying power is limited.
Finca Finca sounds like an alright worker/resource game that could be fun. I'd like to try it out and see how it plays. The hazard here is that there are so many worker placement / resource gathering titles out there that it's hard to have a new title that's distinct and worthwhile. So even though it has potential, I'm guessing this one doesn't earn the title.
There is also the Kinderspiel des Jahres which is the Kids Game of the Year. Reading the list, there are some interesting title, but they are even more obscure to me. I've only heard of one (which sounds kind of fun, but kitchy...an 'invisible' maze you have to navigate using magnets). I'll keep an eye on the Kinderspiel, but I already have a lot of kids games I want to get the kids, so I'm not scrutinizing the list.
My Prediction I will be truly surprised if either Fits or Fauna wins the title. Finca might pull it off, but unless it's more distinct than it seems, I don't think it will.
My feel is that it's going to come down to either Pandemic or Dominion. I'm trying to set aside my personal opinion, but even then, I feel like Pandemic has the greater versatility and interest while Dominion seems like it would appeal to a smaller crowd. Still, the co-op elements of Pandemic may shrink its audience as well.
I wouldn't be surprised to see either one pick up the title, but my personal hope and prediction is that Pandemic picks up the award.
To any gamers reading my blog, what are your thoughts on the Spiel des Jahres?
While the logo on a box catches my interest, it's not the final selling point. Interestingly though, as I look at the winner's lists from the past 10 years, I own 5 of the 10 games (Thurn & Taxis, Ticket to Ride, Alhambra, Carcassone, and Tikal). Though going all the way back to '79, there are only 3 more on the list that I own (Settlers of Catan, Scotland Yard, and Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective). So while it influences my browsing, I wouldn't say it affects my purchasing. Although there are a number on the winner's list that I still need to try out and see if I want to buy them. That's actually the key for me. There are a few games I've purchased without playing, but most of the time, I want to play a game before buying...to see if those I game with would play it and more importantly to see if I enjoy it.
What about you? What games do you like? What helps dictate what you buy/play?
Talk about a crazy concept! As reported in the New York Times this week, a school in New York will be opening this fall with an experimental program where they actually pay teachers based on the value they provide...and the school actually looks at the value of teachers as a GREAT asset.
The school is called the Equity Project and will be paying its grade school teachers 6-figure incomes. The teachers will also be elibible for bonuses up to $25k. As a comparison, last I checked, the average starting salary for a teacher here in Utah is $28k...so in other words, their potential bonus is as much as my starting salary. As another interesting note...the administration in the school makes less than the teachers (something unheard of in the current system...which is part of the problem...far too many of the good teachers advance their way into administration so they can actually make ends meet).
The school is starting small with 8 teachers and 120 students, but plans to grow to 480 teachers and 28 teachers in coming years. The article describes the application/interview process as sort of like American Idol for teachers. They hired a dream team of teachers who are truly passionate about their subjects, about teaching, and about the kids.
What was very interesting (and sad) to me was a comment from one of the teachers about the interview process. He said "It's so refreshing that somebody comes to a teacher and says 'Show me what you know'...This is the first time in 30 years of teaching that anybody has been really interested in what I do.". To me, that statement is a HUGE reflection on what is truly wrong with our education system. Administration, government, and even parents to some extent, are far too concerned with test scores and attendance rates and other less important factors than being certain the person teaching the class actually knows and is passionate about what he/she is teaching and uses effective methods to ENGAGE students in the learning process.
I truly hope this idea pans out and shows promise. I know not every district can afford this kind of program currently, but if it has success, it could turn government officials on their ears and make them pay attention and finally see where the problem is. Who knows, in 5-10 years, the U.S. might have an education worth bragging about rather than hanging our heads in shame and foolishly asking ourselves why it is that we're seeing such an increase in crime, unemployment, bankruptcies, etc. I personally see the decline of our society as being able to be tracked to two main things...the disintegration of good family environments and a lack of effective and worthwhile education.
To those not keeping up on the theatre scene, you were probably unaware that the Tonys were awarded last night. There were a few years where I watched the awards show and enjoyed them. The last few years have been kind of blah in my opinion, so I haven't really watched the awards. It sounds like last night's show was great though. Apparently Neil Patrick Harris breathed some new life into the show as the new host.
For me, since I haven't usually seen most of the shows nominated, my favorite part of the award show is the highlights from the nominees. They generally show live scenes/numbers from each of the nominees for best play and best musical.
Lately, I haven't been as excited about the shows coming out. In my opinion, we have far too many pop-culture movies turned stage shows. Wedding Singer, Legally Blonde, 9 to 5, Shrek, etc...come on. What's happened to the creativity. Granted, I haven't seen any of these shows, but truly, I don't have any desire to. The movies were decent and had some funny writing and performances, but I don't see them becoming stellar plays.
Granted, there are a lot of great, original plays and musicals that come through, and the Tony awards help highlight that. So while I wasn't familiar with most of the shows on the list, I had a ton of fun watching clips of each of the shows nominated and some of the key performances.
I submitted my ballot of predicted winners...and I WON a local contest. Huzzah! I was actually pretty surprised, but it's still fun to win. My prize? A broadway sampler CD of some sort. Should be fun.
Regardless of what mediocre plays and musicals make it to the stage, there are TONS of great shows produced every year and I take any opportunity I can to support local theatre both community/semi-pro and professional/touring. Salt Lake may not be the hippest, most-happening scene on Broadway's radar, but we get some excellent shows and we have great local talent.
Support your local theatre...go see a stage show this summer!
A year or so ago I read Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West, and found it pretty enjoyable and thought provoking. Enough so that I picked up the follow-up book, Son of a Witch. It took a while to finally getting around to reading the second book...and by now I've seen the musical and forgotten elements of the first book (which are definitely radically changed for the musical).
My overall feeling is that Son of a Witch has way too much going on and isn't terribly focused. While Wicked had a moderately clear message it was trying to convey, I often felt lost as to the direction Son of Witch was going. Perhaps it was done intentionally by Maguire to help us feel just as uneasy and confused as Liir. If so, I think it went a little overboard. It also felt like many aspects of the text were there for shock value rather than substance since many of the actions and themes were just dropped in the reader's lap without any further discussion or contemplation by the narrative.
The narrative style was a bit confusing at first, transitioning between current action and dream/coma flashbacks. I got used to that style fairly quickly, but then the coma ended...apparently before Maguire was done with the backstory, because the next many chapters continued the flashback tale even though Liir was no longer in his coma. It wasn't awful, just a little unsettling and felt like bad planning from the author. Once the backstory has finalized, Liir just seems to wander idly around Oz, picking up quest after quest, but not really focusing whole heartedly on any one task. He constantly behaves like a victim of circumstance, all the while bemoaning his fate and his lack of action.
The main storyline, once extracted from all the extraneous threads in the book, was actually fairly interesting. Over the course of Liir's young life, Oz is transitioning between one political faction after another. While the changes of power are relatively free of violence, each new ruler brings new trials, disasters, repressions and violence. The flashback history while Liir's in a coma takes us through a couple of puppet governments (one almost literally with the Scarecrow...though "not Dorothy's Scarecrow") and finally leaving us with the Emperor. Liir becomes aware of the vile machinations of the Emperor and disagrees with the actions of the government. He helps uncover a mystery plaguing many travelers around Oz (a violent and tragic "face scraping" of travelers...which threatens to throw rival groups into war, or at least keep them from any form of peace). Liir even leads a small rebellion against the Emperor, but he really isn't motivated in this and just sort of wanders off.
Generally, this book felt like it was trying to make a number of political and social statements but in the end it just felt like a statement about inaction, complacency and finding your own purpose. Any statement was muddled amid too many distractions. There were many great paragraphs and "sound bites" that would make for cool one-off quotes, but the ideas weren't lasting enough to help pull the book off.
All of that said, I am still interested enough in the vivid and intriguing Oz that Maguire has crafted, such that I will likely seek out the third book (A Lion Among Men) to see what happens next. But sadly, my expectations have fallen a bit.
I picked Prince of Persia up as a fan of the games and of the general adventure genre of the Arabian Nights style.
The story was intriguing and thoughtful. It's presented as two stories set ~400 years apart with the first story creating and influencing the legend/action of the second story. The stories are presented side-by-side allowing the plot points to expose themselves gradually which leads to a feeling of mystery and intrigue. The female characters felt stronger to me than the male characters both in terms of their strength of mind and their initiative and drive to get things done.
The art was clean and simple while still detailed enough to really draw me in. The tone created by the art changed based on plot points but was generally fairly light (after having recently read Watchmen, the art here felt almost airy). Some of the depictions of violence were fairly graphic...it wasn't spewing blood, but the violent imagery was pushing PG-13 at times.
The art and the plot were fast paced and kept me scanning from panel to panel and page to page quickly. I think I flew through the book in about 40 minutes. Which was my main complaint. I wanted more. The depth there was good and the story flowed well. I just felt like it was over too quickly. There was a little deus ex machina that sped things up a little bit, but the story itself flowed well. I think mostly I would have loved to have seen the book double in size, stretch a few segments out, and add more scenes before ending.
The book also came with a very cool afterward by the developer/designer responsible for the first Prince of Persia game and involved in creation of the subsequent titles. Having worked in video games, I was really interested by his description of the creation of the initial games and of how the process changed for the later titles. I also really liked his insight into the adventure stories and histories that helped inspire the games and the book. I'd been looking to read Arabian Nights and he recommends the translation I'll likely use.
Over Memorial Day weekend, we took the kids to see the new Night at the Museum movie. We all really enjoyed the first movie. We have the original picture book on which the movie was (loosely) based, and the kids have fun with that as well. So we went into this film with fairly high expectations.
...And it didn't disappoint.
Plot
I wasn't quite sure how the plot would play out. From the trailers and the title, I knew we were headed to the Smithsonian to meet some new characters and have some cheesy new jokes at their expense.
The plot itself was a lot of fun and worked very well. The action was well paced. Plot elements were well organized and played out nicely as things went from bad to worse to worser. The story arc increased nicely, came to a nice climactic peak and then wound down to a good ol' fashion fairy tale style ending.
Characters
Stiller's character was believable as the loyal do-gooder with a lot of heart and plenty of courage especially considering the situation. I thought he did great.
I was actually kind of glad to see Robin Williams' character not getting a ton of screen time. While Williams can be funny, he often plays himself as larger than life and ends up distracting from the show and the character he's representing. His appearance in the Smithsonian had a few good jokes without going overboard and was a good balance for the show.
To me, the two core new characters really stole the show.
Amy Adams was great as Amelia Earhart. I really enjoyed her acting style and her character in general. Just a lot of fun with lots of spunk.
Hank Azaria was wonderful as the ancient Egyptian pharaoh. I loved the snarky sarcasm of his character and the obnoxiously laughable way he pushed his way through the tight situation everybody was in. He was great.
Setting, effects, etc
The setting was great. I went to D.C. in High School and wandered around some of the monuments and spent some time in the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum. It was cool to see the movie bounding around the nation's capitol and its amazing museum.
The effects were fabulous and the kids absolutely loved them. They loved the ~final line(s) of the movie in which a kid is critiquing the "obviously fake animatronics" on Rexie (the T-Rex skeleton brought to life during the movie). To the kids, everything that came to life...was really alive. And truly, the effects looked great such that everything really did look alive.
Overall
Overall this was a great flick. It's naturally not for everybody. It was whimsical and silly and just plain zany, which won't appeal to some movie goers. But to anybody in the mood for a fun filled cheesy comedy, especially if you're a kid or a kid at heart, you should have fun with this.
I've never been a Trekkie or a Trekker or any other type of mega-fan of Star Trek. I've seen many episodes of each of the TV Series (except the new Enterprise series...for some reason I never saw that one). I think I've seen all of the movies...original and Next Generation. So it was only natural that I go see this movie...especially after all the hype it's been getting.
Even though I wasn't a huge follower of Star Trek, I knew enough to be a little disconcerted early on that the director/writer were screwing up Kirk's and the original show's history. I hadn't heard any major complaints from die hard fans, so I thought perhaps I'd gotten the history wrong. About a third of the way through the film (when other things felt off), I figured out what was going on and was intrigued to see how it'd work.
The action sequences in this show really put earlier Trek movies to shame...even recent films. The special effects were fabulous. The action was intense. There was really a good sense of peril and adventure throughout the entire movie.
To me, the characters really made this movie.
In general order of appearance:
I was actually kind of hoping that Kirk would mimic some of the mannerisms and acting styles of Shatner. Now that I've seen it, I'm glad he didn't. Kirk was played perfectly as the hothead, womanizing, devil-may-care flyboy ready to take on the universe.
Spock seemed a little too emotional to me based on previous experiences, but I still truly felt that he did a wonderful job pulling off the character and making the role completely believable.
"Bones" Macoy was also exquisite in his performance. He really picked up on the mannerisms and dialogue of the original Bones. Of all of them, I think Bones was the one that seemed to me the most true "predecessor" of his "future" iteration in the TV Series and beyond.
Uhura, Chekov and Sulu had relatively minor roles compared to the others, but their personalities still shone through and worked well. Uhura was especially interesting as compared to the "original" series/movie.
Scotty was astounding as the brilliant engineer always being asked to do more than is humanly possible and then pulling it off. He was hilarious.
The plot itself was engaging, even if it felt somewhat overdone. I'm not suggesting this exact plot has been done before...just that so many of the elements felt like something I'd seen before. Fortunately, where I saw them before would have been in the Star Trek universe. Even though the vengeful, planet/race destroying plot felt familiar, it was still interesting and exciting.
This was a great movie. Definitely recommended and well worth seeing. I'm sure I'll see it again, hopefully on the big screen again. I'm also hopeful that this is the beginning of a series of a new Star Trek franchise. It will be exciting to bring some new blood to the saga.
Barnes & Noble has a cool summer reading program for elementary aged kids. It's a pretty cool program that allows kids to get a free book from B&N just for reading over the summer.
The gist is this:
It's only available to kids in grades 1-6 (kind of a bummer for my Kindergartener, but there's always next year
Sometime between now and the end of the summer (actually, Sept. 7), the kids need to read any 8 books they choose
The kids fill out a little form with the titles of the 8 books and something they enjoyed about them
The kids (and their parents/teachers) take the form to a local Barnes & Nobel and pick up a FREE BOOK (naturally there are a handful of specific books to choose from, but it's still fun)
The form also acts as an entry form for the kids to possibly win an autographed copy of the newest/final Percy Jackson adventure (I just started this series and it is pretty fun)
The reading journal also has a few activity pages to help the kids think about what books they like and why as well as to brainstorm a story of their own
Overall, it's a pretty fun little program and a nice way to encourage kids to read even when school's out.
Ah, the X men. Wolverine was never my favorite mutant, but he was still fun and I have enjoyed Hugh Jackman's performances in the previous X men movies. So I was fairly excited to see the new X men film.
I'm not an X men purist by any means. I've read a few of the comics...watched a few of the cartoons back in the day...and even had some mutant discussions with friends a time or two over the years. So I wasn't going into this "Origins" movie with any specific expectations to be shattered.
I felt that the origin story of Wolverine was presented very effectively. The opening scene between him and his father was intense and thought-provoking. I really liked the way the director then followed Wolvie's life through the next ~150 years.
(minor spoiler ahead)
My first mild disappointment was after Logan split from Stryker after the incident in Africa and then found out that his ex-partners were being systematically killed off. My reason for being upset wasn't plot related, but rather due to something that I keep seeing in these comic movies...key or otherwise cool characters are killed off after barely being showcased. As I mentioned, I'm not a comic purist by any means...but even I know that these comic characters don't just "die"...they're sent away somewhere/somehow to re-emerge in a later story. I'm disappointed every time a comic movie manages to kill off a very cool character....or in this case, multiple very cool characters.
(/end spoiler)
Speaking of characters, I (like many others) was excited to learn Gambit would finally show up. I'm glad he at least didn't die, but I was hopeful that he'd have more prominence. Even without much screen time, I felt Gambit shows potential and I'm hopeful that he'll appear in a future X men film.
I enjoyed the movie and had fun with the action sequences and the backstory this movie lends to the previous films. I'm curious if there will be remastered copies of the previous movies to include the updated footage from this one (particularly Wolverine's escape after being bonded with Adamantium)...we've gone back and watched the first two, and some of the scenes are distinctly different (but could be chalked up to Logan's imperfect memory).
The action in the movie was exciting and the pacing was good. The ending worked with the storyline, but was a bit heavier and sad than I would have liked. Where most of the comic character movies have a sort of "happily ever after...for now" ending, this ending was actually somewhat depressive and actually resulted in a semi-melancholy state of things.
While successful in filling in many of the gaps constantly alluded to in the other movies, this movie wasn't quite as enjoyable or fulfilling as the others. Still, it was certainly entertaining and well produced and works as an adequate companion to the X men series.
To prep for the movie, I read Angels & Demons a few weeks ago. I guess I'm a glutton for punishment since, in many/most cases, the book is generally better than the movie. Still, I went into the movie hopeful that it would be a better attempt than The DaVinci Code (mainly because I found Angels to be a more engaging story than DaVinci).
Differences were immediately apparent in just the first few opening minutes. The primary difference early on was the status of CERN (the research facility) in the story and the relationship between Vittoria and the scientist killed at CERN. The changes weren't awful and helped with the believability to some degree (when reading, I was curious how an isolated pair of two scientists without any backup team could have done what they were supposed to have done...so the addition of a team, was a good touch). I was a little disappointed that the Kohler character was notably absent and was curious who would take his place later in the story. His replacement was adequate, and probably more realistic in terms of Vatican security, but I think I still would have rather had Kohler be in the film. I also preferred the assassin character from the book much more than from the movie. He felt much more watered down in the film.
Taking away the differences between book and film and looking at the movie on its own merits, it was an entertaining ride. There were a few more in-depth items that got glossed over in the film and may have been slightly confusing to those who hadn't just read the book, but I still felt that the coherence was there and the action played out nicely.
The setting and general environment were gorgeous. I have no idea how accurate some of the elements were (such as the archives and some of the portions of the buildings that were likely sets rather than 'on location' shots). The visual imagery was beautiful and makes me want to get to Italy sooner rather than later.
The casting was adequate. I really like Ewan McGregor. He felt a little youthful for the role he was portraying, but at the same time that helped add to the tension between him and the church leaders. His character fell a little flat for me at the end of the movie, but generally, he did well. The Richter and Olivetti characters were pretty strong and believable. Richter felt a little stereotypical at times, but his intensity and presence was good.
I sadly wasn't terribly impressed with the Vittoria character. Her desire for vengeance didn't seem real. Her curiosity with the hunt felt a little muted. Her intensity with regards to the canister she was there to recover/repair also felt a little subdued considering the severity of the situation. Instead of feeling like an asset who had a real purpose to be running around the city, she felt like a bit of tacked on eye candy without any good purpose other than swapping the battery at the path.
But my biggest character complaint was with Mr. Tom Hanks. For some reason, Hanks always seemed to have this arrogant air of superiority that felt out of place. In the novel, it was evident that Langdon was bright...but he never struck me as being quite as patronizing and uppity.
The plot and pacing of the film were fun. I really enjoyed the action and intrigue of the chase around the city. It didn't really feel like the intensity grew over the course of the film. Rather, it seemed to peak near the beginning of the film and maintain a plateau until the final resolution. Unfortunately, this made the final confrontation feel less climactic and delightful.
Still, it was a fun movie and I would recommend it over DaVinci Code any day. It's not necessarily something I'd watch again and again and wouldn't recommend it over other thrillers, but it's not something you need to avoid.
Last weekend was the Pinewood Derby. I was quite nervous because a number of the tracks I had lined up ended up falling through. Fortunately (thanks to Lynette's good find), I had reserved a backup track...but it was down in Provo.
The Derby Pack Meeting was slated to begin at 3. At about 2:40, we finally had the track set up and the decorations and chairs ready (thanks again to Lynette and the kids for all their help). I rushed home to get into my uniform and was back just in time to help postpone the Derby while we waited for missing Cubs to arrive and for arriving Cubs to fix their cars that had trouble (one car fell and the back of it broke off...thanks to a great dad in the pit crew between each race, it managed to survive until the end).
At about 3:30, our first race was off. Over the next hour, we ran almost 20 heats between the 11 cars. There were some awesome cars in the running and the kids had a ton of fun. We finished up with some tasty refreshments, awarding of certificates and medals to all racers and then dismantled the track and ran it back to Provo.
, and found it pretty enjoyable and thought provoking. Enough so that I picked up the follow-up book, 
. It took a while to finally getting around to reading the second book...and by now I've seen the musical and forgotten elements of the first book (which are definitely radically changed for the musical). 
up as a fan of the games and of the general adventure genre of the Arabian Nights style. 
