Review: Asus EeePC 904HA Netbook
Really this should have been a TechParent Tuesday post, but… well… I couldn’t wait for next week, and I had already done my prognostications, so here we are.
When I first started reading about the Netbook “craze” I was quite skeptical. At first there was the little machines with a 7 in screen and 2 GB of “storage.” Ok, the screen was a bit bigger, but I had as much processing power and storage on my Motorola Q9m phone. And while I am not adverse to using Linux, I didn’t care for those little, customized, “fitted” versions.
Quickly they started to grow, both in size and in price. Then I couldn’t figure out why anybody would buy one, when a full powered notebook was a similar price. But as the prices, sizes and “craze” settled down a bit towards the end of the year (and prices dropped as economic turmoil hit everybody), some more… what I will call sensible models fit in the middle between the little 7″ 2GB models, and the 10″ might as well be a laptop size.
To be honest, I battled back and forth between several models, the finalists being the Acer AspireOne and the Asus EeePC because on the spec sheet, they were virtually identical. 1 GB of RAM, 160 GB of storage, 8.9″ screen, and a 92% keyboard, and powered by the relatively new power sipping Intel Atom processor. Both even boasted battery life (with the larger 6 cell battery that I opted to go with) of around 5 hours. I opted to go with Windows XP, but both are also available with Ubuntu (or you can install it yourself). Units of this type and size run inn the area of $349. (Except for Dell which gives a stripped down model with less memory for that same price, a machine equal to this from Dell costs considerably more)
Ultimately, I opted for the 904HA from Asus because of the fact that it is fully upgradable. If you want to boost this up to 2GB of memory, you just open a door and change the memory. The Acer however required you to disassemble the netbook. While I am handly and built my own desktop PCs in the past, with the tiny parts of a netbook, this is not something I would want to do, so that was a deal breaker. Also, the Acer also appeared to have some firmware issues. While Acer was by all accounts trying to deal with them and issuing patches, I thought I might as well start with one that had less issues from the start.
So, what do I think after working with it for two weeks? It is a neat little addition. I would not recommend it for somebody as their everyday computer, the smaller keyboard, the lack of an optical drive and small screen is not something I would want to always use. However, if you travel a lot, spend time at places like Starbucks or other free (or semi-free) Wi-fi location to do you writing, it is much more pleasant to carry around than a full notebook. The 5 hour battery life (assuming it is charged when you leave the house) is more than enough for most that you can get done what you need to do without having to hope to find a seat near an outlet.
The Intel Atom processor so far is more than powerful enough for tasks that you would be doing on a netbook (document editing, web surfing, etc). No, you are not going to be doing any hardcore gaming on a system like this, but who would want to do that on an 8.9″ screen anyway?
Like anything that is built on compromise, there are some things that get some taking used to. The keyboard is 92% of full size, meaning some keys are not where you would expect them to be. Also the touchpad buttons require some real force to click.
Though I did mention this as a secondary computer for most people, this would also serve as a great “first” computer for a younger one that you may want to have a computer (or to keep them off of yours).
If you are an aspiring writer or somebody that likes to write “everywhere” and wants something light (less than 3 pounds) that you can keep with you at all times, then I fully throw my support now behind the Netbook in general, and the Asus Eee PC 904HA, It may be the best tech purchase I have made in several years.
P.S. For the record, this post was written using my netbook.
Asus Eee PC 904 HA specs:
General
- Built-in Devices Stereo speakers , Wireless LAN antenna
- Width 10.5 in
- Depth 7.5 in
- Height 1.5 in
- Weight 3.1 lbs
- Color Fine ebony
- Notebook type Netbook, Budget
- Screen type Wide-screen
- Wireless capabilities 802.11b, 802.11g
Processor
- Processor Intel Atom N270 / 1.6 GHz
Cache Memory
- Type L2 cache
- Cache size 512 KB
RAM
- Installed Size 1 GB
- Technology DDR2 SDRAM
- RAM form factor SO DIMM 200-pin
Storage
- Floppy Drive None
- Hard Drive 160 GB
- Storage Removable None
- Hard drive type Portable
Optical Storage
- Type None
Optical Storage (2nd)
- 2nd optical storage type None
Card Reader
- Card reader type Card reader
- Supported flash memory cards MultiMediaCard , SD Memory Card , SDHC Memory Card
Display
- Display Type 8.9 in TFT active matrix
- Max Resolution 1024 x 600 ( WSVGA )
- Widescreen Display Yes
- Features LED-backlit , Zero Bright Dot
Video
- Graphics Processor / Vendor Shared video memory (UMA)
Audio
- Audio output type Sound card
- Audio Input Stereo microphone
Notebook Camera
- Camera Type Integrated
- Notebook Camera / Sensor Resolution 1.3 Megapixel
Multimedia Functionality
- TV Tuner Type None
Input Device(s)
- Input device type Keyboard , Touchpad
Telecom
- Modem None
Networking
- Networking Network adapter
- Networking / Wireless LAN Supported Yes
- Data link protocol Ethernet , IEEE 802.11b , IEEE 802.11g , Fast Ethernet
- Networking standards IEEE 802.11b , IEEE 802.11g
Expansion / Connectivity
- Expansion Slots Total (Free) Memory – SO DIMM 200-pin
- Interfaces 1 x Display / video – VGA – 15 pin HD D-Sub (HD-15) , 3 x Hi-Speed USB – 4 pin USB Type A , 1 x Headphones – Output – Mini-phone 3.5 mm , 1 x Microphone – Input – Mini-phone 3.5 mm , 1 x Network – Ethernet 10Base-T/100Base-TX – RJ-45
Power
- Power device form factor External
Battery
- Technology 4-cell Lithium polymer
- Installed Qty 1
- Battery capacity 5600 mAh
- Mfr estimated battery life 5.9 hour(s)
Operating System / Software
- OS Provided Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
Manufacturer Warranty
- Service & Support 1 year warranty
- Service & Support Details Limited warranty – 1 year , Limited warranty – Battery – 6 months
Review: Wall-E
Well, I can not hide the fact (especially since I mentioned it last week) that I was really looking forward to seeing the latest Pixar Studio creation, Wall-E. This is of course, a double edge sword. On the one hand (and I have no problem admitting it), I am a Pixar fan. They have completely redone animation, and made it not about creating a cartoon, but about using the animated medium to tell real stories, with solid plotlines (much to the chagrin of some that can’t seem to get past the fact that the story is animated and I guess would prefer a mindless slapstick piece instead.)
On the other hand with high expectations, comes the potential for a monumental disappointment. I mean, Pixar hasn’t thrown a clunker (in my opinion) since A Bug’s Life.
So, this weekend I piled the family into the car and we headed off to see the latest installment. The one thing that concerned me, and I did not fill in TheWife and LatteGirl in on ahead of time, was that the first 1/2 hour or so of the film has absolutely no dialog, and I wasn’t sure how this would play out. We also had the issue that LatteGirl was uncertain about going to see this movie. Her friends had already tagged this a “boys film” because it deals with space and robots. So, she was leery to begin with, and was the complete opposite of my “highly anticipated” vantage point, and I thought would or could pose an interesting alternate views of the movie.
I won’t hold out any longer to let you know.. I loved this movie. Pixar once again showed, that not only are they masters at animation, they are excellent story tellers. But what did the skeptical 8 year old think? She loved it even more than I did. How much? Well, before we actually got home from the theater, she asked if we could go see it again next week, and even offered to use her birthday money to pay for everyone to go again.
It really didn’t take long for me to get past my original complaint about how Wall-E looked like Johnny 5 from Short Circuit. I completely forgot about it very quickly and just saw the new character. The graphics in this film looked a bit more… I don’t know… “cartoony” than some other Pixar films, but that was probably a conscience decision as it really fit the scenery and futuristic theme and feel of the movie quite well.
There were some message’s in this film that people who are so dead set against having a clean planet that any message along those lines is a battle cry of “subversive,” “anti-consumer,” “anti-corporation” and other such non-sense. It is true, there is certainly a stance being shown, how we need to care for our planet and care for ourselves. But, only if you are so hell bent on being “anti-human” does it really affect your movie experience. (I could go on about this for some time, but this is about the movie, so I will stop here on this particular matter… for now)
I am not going to try and break this film down. One, I never do “spoilers” and two, there is just no way (without the spoilers) I could do this any justice, other than to say this. For those with “boys” (I put that in quotes, because I am sure there are some girls that enjoy this stuff as well) there is space and robots and slap-stick comedy. For the “girls,” there is the pre-adolescent sort of “chick flick” love story angle. For everybody, there is a good time to be had. Load up the family and take ‘em all to see Wall-E.
Game Decisions made Easier
OK, so your kid wants a new game for their PS3 (Xbox360, Wii, PS2, GameCube, etc). Check out WhatTheyPlay.com. Sure there are plenty of sites out there that give you information about games, what is good, what is hot and what is not. But that is not what this site is about.
WhatTheyPlay tells you in plain English what the ESRB categories are (for those that don’t already know), and some of the explainations that go along with it, so that you can get enough unbiased information to make your own decision, because honestly, while the ESRB ratings are generally a good guideline, there are some areas that are a bit murky, such as some of the warnings about things like “Alcohol References.”
What exactly does “Alcohol References” mean? After all, you may not want you kids playing a game that glorifies drinking, right? And based solely on the box, with other point of reference, even though the rating may be right, that “Alcohol Reference” may give you pause, because there is no way of knowing. And this is where WhatTheyPlay comes in. Now a couple of examples from the site that I have seen include the games, DiRT a rally game, and Cooking Mama: Cook Off. Both of these games have “Alcohol Reference” listed on the box. But according to the site, DiRT’s only alcohol reference is your passenger mentioning “cracking open the champagne” when you win, and Cooking Mama mentions cooking with wine. Obviously not what most people thing of as “Alcohol References” in a game.
There is also an “Ask GamerDad” column, where you ca read questions and answers from other parents, or you can ask GamerDad a question of your own. The Site not only covers the PS3, Xbox360 and Wii, it also covers the PS2, Gamecube, PC and Macintosh as well as the handheld games like GameBoy Advanced, Nintendo DS, and the Playstation Portable. If you want to find out “What is hot and what is not” go to someplace like 1up.com. But for information to make your own decision on titles you may or may not wish your children to play. Don’t depend on gossip around the water cooler about who got there kids what game, and whether or not it was appropriate, check out WhatTheyPlay.com and get the facts you need to decide for yourself.
While, this came off more like an advertisement than I intended, this is not some PayPerPost type promotion. Matter of fact, there is no advertising here at all from WhatTheyPlay at all. I was just that impressed with the whole idea, it is an excellent tool for parents.
I can make no guaratees as time (as previously mentioned) has been at a premium, but it has been my long standing (and hopefully now coming to fruition) idea to start a Tech Tuesday for Parents. Next Tuesday, I am currently looking at posting some information and doing some research on Blu Ray now that the format war is over. If you have any questions you would like answered, or information on a particular Blu Ray product, drop me a note over at JayMonster and that is at Google’s Gmail with a dot com ending (just let me see a screen scraper try to harvest that!)
Overexposure: A Parent’s Guide to buying a Digital Camera
I purchases a camera today (for the record it is a Canon Powershot S3 IS, but I will review that another time). So what is the big deal about that right? I mean hundreds if not thousands of people buy a new digital camera every day, so why should anybody care? Well, I am glad you asked that. Pull up a chair and let me tell you what it took for me to lay out the money for a camera this time.
Now I am an admitted gadget freak, mostly computers, but if it is an electronic gadget, I am interested. One area that I have had a bit of a hard time in this area is with digital photography. When it comes to computers, PDAs, phones, I have always been quick to lay down good money to be on the front edge of technology, though admittedly that has slowed a bit since LatteGirl was born, and now I try to be a bit more economical, and try to choose what will give me the most bang for my buck. In other words, be good enough to satisfy me in the short term, but also be good enough at least in the mid-term that I am not already itching to replace it quickly.
I have done well in this department with laptops, building my own desktop computers, and fortunately rarely have ever had to live with a phone for more than two years, so even a mistake was relatively short lived. But with cameras, I seemed to fail in this respect. Sure, I would love to go out and buy a Canon Rebel XTi or Nikon D2x. But first of all, I don’t have the kind of time or attention span necessary to learn how to use on of these cameras well enough to justify the expense. But on the other hand, I have been quite dissatisfied with my past couple of purchases (Kodak Z series), so I knew I had some work to do. I started to do my research, and by the time I finally settled on the camera I wanted, a year had passed. That’s right a full year. 12 months, 52 weeks. To pick out a camera. Some call that kind of research and time to make a decision insane (That would be TheWife), but I call it smart. But fortunately, much of what I learned can be boiled down and some shortcuts taken to finding what is right for you without having to spend so much time.
Again, much of this is intended with certain factors in mind, so if you don’t fit into this criteria, it may affect your choices. The criteria I have set forth here. 1. This is geared for parents. I say this because as a parent (whether you know it or not yet), you are going to have some difficult shots that you are going to try and take. Xmas pageants, recitals, sporting events, etc. Many times, no matter how early you think you are for an event, you will find there are other parents that have gotten there even earlier, thus leaving you a good distance away from your child that you want to photograph. Throw in some lousy auditorium or gymnasium lighting, and you now know what I mean by challenging. 2. You are at least somewhat budget conscience. If you wouldn’t think anything of dropping $600 or more on the latest and greatest. More power to you. I don’t, and I know many other parents that don’t have, or wouldn’t consider that kind of outlay for a camera. This is for those people, not the person that buys the model right off the floor of the CES Floor in Vegas (Consumer Electronics Show).
Megapixels. Back in the day, when digital camera were sporting resolutions like, VGA, 1.3 Mega Pixels or 2 Mega Pixels, the amount of pixels really mattered. You could find a 1.3 MP camera that would take a nice picture, but if you wanted a print that was bigger than 4×6 or you took pictures with the intention of zooming in and cropping a lot, you were simply out of luck. Today you can find cameras at the consumer level as high as 12 MP. Unless you plan on making a Warhol like mural of your child, the size of your living room wall you really do not need a 12 MP camera. Especially if you are going to forgo other important features for it.
Zoom. When you were out on the town with your friends and wanted a little camera you could slip into your blazer, leather jacket or purse and not be obtrusive, then those super slim camera were perfectly adequate for mediocre pictures taken at the bar, nightclub, etc. After all, many times, you were probably had one or two too many drinks by the time the camera came out to take a decent picture anyway. This won’t cut it when you are trying to capture those once in a lifetime moments. The biggest problem with these small cameras is the fact that if you have one when you find yourself on the wrong side or too far back in a poorly lit auditorium or gymnasium, you will be cursing that puny little 3x optical zoom. Quick note for those that don’t already know this… forget about the “digital zoom” that you camera brags about having. It is a worthless measure. In short digital zoom works by enlarging a certain part of a picture to simulate optical zoom, to the detriment of clarity).
The answer, is the class of cameras that are known as “Super Zoom Cameras.” These cameras generally sport Zooms of 8, 10 or 12 times optical zoom. The side benefit of this is also that because of the need for clarity, camera makers generally put better glass (lenses) in their Super Zooms than they do in their regular consumer cameras. This will enable you to get a nice shot of your child, and not just a shot of 1/2 the class in a picture where you have to point out to people, “see, right there… no over to the right, that is little Suzy over there.” When in doubt, sacrifice pixels for zoom.
Other Factors: These qualify as things that are important to me, but are more subjective and a matter of personal taste. Zoom camera are more prone to “noise” (wavy lines) when zoomed out than a normal picture. Most camera have some sort of image stabilization to compensate for this. They generally break down into two types, Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) and Digital Image Stabilization(DIS). OIS is far superior and worth it for better pictures… for me. Fuji sells a line of super zooms with NO Image Stabilization at all, going rather with its “face detection” technology, and they sell very well. So some people obviously don’t find this as important as I do, but most experts will tell you to go with OIS whenever possible. The other thing is Scene Modes. Do you know a lot about Aperature Priority, Shutter Priority, etc? No? Me neither. That is why I depend on a camera that has a lot of presets for various settings. The basic “general” setting is excellent for mediocre or basic pictures, but when I want to capture a shot at a soccer game, or some other specific event, I want to be able to turn to a setting that gives me the best chance of getting the shot I want, and without having to know how to configure the camera. Scene Modes save you from having to know how to set up a camera for action, landscapes, night shots, etc. The more scene modes, the more specific setting you are ready to shoot. Again not a deal breaker if the camera doesn’t have many scene modes (or any) but it certainly will help.
Some things you can probably ignore: Certainly Digital or “total” Zoom should be ignored, as I already pointed out, they are useless measures. However, there are some other “important” measures according to many reviewers, that really aren’t a big deal to the average user. The ability to shoot in RAW mode. Most consumer camera do not shoot in raw mode, but for some reason reviewers are fixated on this feature that is usually held out for professionals. In order to use RAW format, you generally need to use a program such as Photoshop CS. If you have $700 to lay out on Photoshop however, you are probably not reading this looking for a camera. The other feature is an articulating LCD (the LCD panel swivels around so you can see it at various angles). This is certainly a nice thing to have if the camera happens to have one (my new Canon does), but lets be honest, how often do you need this feature? To take a picture of yourself? To take a picture by holding the camera over your head in a crowd? Do you really think you will do that often enough to make this a “must have” on your camera.
Finding your camera. Ok, so now you know what you like and don’t like. You have an idea of what kind of camera you want. How do you go about finding the best value for your dollar? Well, for me, the answer came in the way of a year old copy of PC Magazine that I had laying around. A year ago, the camera I ultimately selected had just come out. The only knock against the camera (and the primary reason, I would not have bought it a year ago) was the price. With a retail tag around $500 it was a lot more than I really cared to spend. Fast forward a year, the S3 has been replaced with the S5. 6 Megapixels have given way to 8 – 12 MP camera. That top of the line camera was now forgotten. In the meantime, plenty of new Super Zooms have come out at lower prices (for this example I will uses Canons new SX100). At first glance the new low priced super zooms seemed like a great deal. The SX100 was retailing at $249, the same price I was able find the S3 selling at. It also had more mega pixels. But in a quick comparison, it quickly became obvious that in order to get the price down there with the higher pixel count, that lots of features had to be removed. In this case, last years “winner” didn’t change, and more than met my needs, but at a far more friendly price. Sometimes last years model, if you are careful is still better than this years new model. Now granted, you may not have a year old copy of a magazine laying around (certainly if TheWife had her way, I wouldn’t), but thanks to the Internet, most of these reviews are still around to be perused. Just bypass the latest editions for those 6 or 12 months ago, and you can find a camera that “back then” would probably be too much money, but now fits inside your budget.
One word of caution using this method though. There is a point of diminishing returns for the camera manufacturers, that when the camera crosses over from profitable to no longer worth their time. At that point, the price will not drop any lower, and instead the camera will just disappear. In other words, no matter how long you wait, you will not find a new Canon Rebel XTi for $100. No matter how long you wait.
And of course, one final note. I have given a lot of credit and used the name Canon here quite a bit. But that is predominantly because that is the camera that I recently purchased. This is in no way meant to imply that I recommend Canon over any other particular camera. Olympus, Nikon, Panasonic, Fuji and others all certainly have their benefits and highlights, and if the timing was different, I may have gone a different route. The only way I was almost certain I wasn’t going again, was back to Kodak, which has disappointed me twice in a row.
Review: The Little Mermaid on Broadway
I refused to look at any of the reviews of The Little Mermaid from the previous shows so as to not taint my experience going in, and personally I had high expectations going into this show. When Disney first came to Broadway, it was with sort of sneer from the general public and theater buffs whether the House of Mouse could put on a “real” Broadway production. Following the sucesses of The Lion King and the recently closed (after a fantastic run) Beauty and the Beast, those questions began to fade. However, after the disaster that was the production of Tarzan, and the less than stellar reviews for Mary Poppins, those questions have again begun to creep back. So, with expectations on one side and questions about Disney’s ability to put forth a quality production on the other, The Little Mermaid has a lot to answer for in the minds of critics and patrons alike. Can The Little Mermaid turn things back around and prove that Disney is capable of a great theater experience, or are they looking to turn a quick buck with a second rate, theme park like quality production?
Unfortunately, if you had preconceived notions on this going in, there was very little in this production to change your opinion. For those with kids, and the touristy (is too a word) types, the show was enjoyed. Of course, for those people, they were satisfied hearing the numbers that you expected to hear going in, such as Part of Your World, Poor Unfortunate Souls and Under the Sea. For the most part the cast was admirable, Sierra Boggess proved quite good as Ariel, and simiarly other members were at the very least acceptable in their roles with a few glaring exceptions, but even in those cases, I am not sure whether I can blame the actors in the roles, or the “vision” of director.
In short (what do you mean “too late”), I was disappointed with The Little Mermaid. It wasn’t “Quick Close” awful (like the recent Broadway bombs Lestat or Lennon), as the main numbers are already known hits, and tourists will help keep it afloat (pun somewhat intended) for some time, but the show is missing it’s magic. You do not get completely wrapped up into the show or its characters, and the ability to “lose yourself” in it is noticeably absent. In short, if this was a regional production or small local show, I would say “well done” but instead looking at this as a full scale stage production, I am only left scratching my head asking, “What were they thinking?”
So, where did it go so wrong? At first blush, I thought to myself that something did not quite add up when looking at the show. It was as if the whole did not add up to the sum of its parts. If I was happy with the cast, and I thought the singing was good, then why did it seem so off? Then I realized, it had little to do with the people on the stage, and more about those that weren’t.
Choreography. Not the worst part of the show, but the numbers were clearly lacking. Perhaps because of the costumes and adjustments that had to be made for actors that had to spend the show on “Wheelies” (more on that in a minute), but the choreography was lacking. I am not quite sure what the choreographer was going for, but it came off with some sort of tribal feeling that seemed more at home in The Lion King than it did here, and seemed overall uninspired. Under the Sea, which should have been the livliest and most fun number in the show comes off as a chaotic mess more reminiscent of Three Ring Circus.
Sets. What sets? It seemed like the show was pushed into the realm of “interpretive” where the audience was expected to accept an awful lot of abstract pieces and make the set in their minds. It fails miserably. The ship appears to be hanging in mid air rather than floating in the “water” of the set. There was little to no backdrops to anything. The one standard piece at the back of the stage flipped and turned into, (theoretically) the moon, the sun, and what is that a spaceship? Oh, no I guess it is supposed to be chandelier in the dining room and the ball room. Overall, it wound up looking more like something I would hang up in my windows for Christmas. Other large, unidentifiable pieces pop on and off at times, providing to fill the stage, though you never quite really have any clue what they actually are supposed to be or represent.
Directing. The characters I was least satisfied with in the play were Sebastian (Tituss Burgess), Ursula (Sherie Rene Scott) and her sidekicks Flotsam (Tyler Maynard) and Jetsam (Derrick Baskin). Initially I was going to lay at the feet of the actors themselves, but as the show went on, and the things I found wrong mounted, I can only assume these “interpretations” of the characters that I was so disappointed in, was the work of the director. In the case of Sebastian, as the show went along, Burgess’ presence seemed to get stronger and was not nearly as dragging on the show as he was in the first act. Now I should point out in fairness that TheWife did not share my disdain for Ursula and her cronies, she thought they were fine. I on the other hand was so annoyed by their style, their presence on the stage immediately jerked me out of the moment, and instead of making me feel like I was watching the show, I was instead watching some sort of cartoonish Saturday Night Live version. Picture Ursula played by Phyliss Diller, cackly laugh and all, and you have this version of Ursula. Flotsam, if you can imagine him played by Martin Short with the silly faces and all, you have Maynard’s character down, and Jetsam was similar. If that is what the director had in mind building these characters, then the actors did a superb job of building that vision, it just wasn’t The Little Mermaid.
Script and Music. OK, so you need to alter the show because obviously you can not pull off on stage things that you can in an animated movie, and for a musical Broadway production you need a bit more than the original show had, so you need to add some numbers. I understand and appreciate that. But both were poor. If you didn’t know the show or story before going in, this did not stand up on its own. The story was too fractured to have a clean an understandable time line, or even to say the full plot was completely conveyed. This may have been partly due to the fact that in their effort to stuff the music in they simply didn’t leave enough time for the rest of the writing. I don’t know. I just know it didn’t work. And while we are on the music, I would love to know who’s decision it was to give so much time to Scuttle. Way too much. Scuttle is a funny character in his bit appearances, but not to give multiple numbers in the show. He is supposed to be a funny bit part (like the chef), but they gave him way too much time, without the benefit of advancing the story. The opening number of Fathoms Below, expanded from its short form in the Movie to a full blown number on the ship (opening the show) was a real yawner both musically and visually. I was ready after Beauty and The Beast to buy the Soundtrack to this show as soon as I got in the door. Fortunately (for me), this being only the 8th performance (due to the stagehand strike in New York), they have not actually made the CD yet, and were only taking pre-orders for it, which I opted against getting. And needless to say, by the time the show was done, I was happy, I hadn’t plunked down the money for this.
In the end, I all I can say it, if you have lots of money and time to waste, and a child to bring with you (that can appreciate the fact that it is The Little Mermaid, and not care about things such as an actual storyline, and will cheer accordingly) then by all means go. If you are expecting a worthwhile theater experience however, then The Little Mermaid will most likely leave you disappointed.
-
Sponsors
