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

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.

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!)

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.

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.

I saw no point in torturing her any longer with this. I usually worry and warn that I will not give away a plot to a movie so as to inform and tell you what I thought without ruining the storyline for those that wish to see it. However, in the case of Bee Movie, I couldn’t give you the complete storyline if I wanted to. Why? Because I am not sure there was one.

The movie appears at times to be anti-corporate establishment (not wanting to work until you die doing the same job for the rest of your life), at another point it appears to be a warning about the environment, and yet at others seems to pull on the “allow me to be different” (such as in Happy Feet). But none of these seem to pan out to be the theme of the film. It doesn’t seem to have one at all.

The first 15 minutes is the most engaging stretch in the film. Like many in the genre, you get a view of the inner workings of a Bee’s life, from the perspective of the Bee, which casts a new light or at least allows the viewer to see common events in a new perspective. You get a lot of Bee (and “B”) humor, which culminates with Barry B. Benson (Jerry Seinfeld) flying out of the hive with the “Pollen Jocks” and getting to see the world outside of the hive. From there, it is a string of sight gags and Bee jokes loosely strung together with the aforementioned seemingly multi-themed (or non-themed) storyline that utterly fails to pull it all together.

It is quite a shame. They pulled together an all-star cast, and most put out exceptional performances (which the one glaringly bad John Goodman doing a seemingly cartoonish play on a cartoon of a character as the human defense attorney, although I am not entirely sure if the blame here goes to Goodman or to the director that wanted that type of performance out of him). The cast, which includes Renée Zellweger, Patrick Warburton, Matthew Broderick as well as Seinfeld are good enough that they will keep you watching this longer than you would without their talents, still ultimately fail to cover the fact that the script just isn’t a complete work.

Bee Movie had potential, but ultimately does not deliver.  It will go down with other animated disasters like Robots as the “B” movies of the genre.  Might be worth a rainy afternoon DVD or On Demand viewing, but that would be about all.  Definitely not something destined for most people’s (hey every film has its fans) video cabinet.

As is my usual, I will not give away the full story line, though you could probably guess your way through most of it, and wind up surprised by very little. This is about fairy tales, and princesses, not something you need to sit and decipher. So, if you want “Citizen Cane” then this film is not for you. But whether or not you are “into” princesses per se is not a requirement to see this film.

For those that remember back 5 years ago, when Lilo and Stitch was first being promoted, Disney did so with a series of commercials that were scenes Disney Classic films, in which Stitch entered in one way or another to become the twist on the story. Take that general idea, embolden it into a full length film where Disney is not afraid to poke a little fun at its own franchise of Princesses, and you have Enchanted.

But the film is more than that, which is what most took me by surprise. Sure there was the clearly overt sight gags and jokes about the cartoon world v. real world, but the humor and subtext actually is much deeper than it would initially appear. Because it is not only the animated world characters that learn something. It is people in the real world, learning a little something about love and happiness from the enchanted visitors as well.

You can’t help but find you own cynicism almost melting away as you watch the film. As Princess Giselle (Amy Adams) talks of True loves kiss. How she disarms people with her childlike qualities. Those same qualities, that we admire in kids, but somehow often “outgrow” or merely forget. This is why I say it is a film for everyone. Even the most jaded. “I hate princesses because they are not good role models” type of people can enjoy this film, and maybe even remember why princesses are things that many little girls dream about being. And even laugh about it along the way.

The film was splendidly cast, which helps pull off the spoofing of the classic films as well. Amy Adams does such a fabulous job with Giselle, she manages to capture perfectly what you would imagine a princess that was suddenly thrust into real world New York would be like. Susan Sarandon comes across splendidly as the combination of the Evil Queen and Maleficent, and while James Marsden may at first blush seem to be a bit over the top as the Prince, you realize that it really is more about the Prince and how he would react in this circumstances (with a bit of tongue in cheek thrown in) and realize just what a great job Marsden did.

I somehow doubt that this will join the ranks of Cinderella, Snow White and the rest of the classic Disney princesses. It is not something that you will see re-released every 10 years or so, on Special Edition DVD’s (or Blu Ray, or whatever comes after that), but I would not be surprised at all to see Giselle when we return to Disney World in 2009. As fluffy and sweet as Cotton Candy, this just may be the most brilliant combination of animation and live action film since Who Framed Roger Rabbit. What can I say, grab the kids and go.

Now, the 80’s were known for their cheesy, campy summer movies, and this one is no exception. I like Andrew McCarthy, if for no other reason than he is predictable. He (it would seem) has a very limited range as an actor, either that or he was simply typecast into the same role repeatedly, but either way, you know your going to get a silly character, that Andrew managed to pull of time and again with precision that the two dimensional character he plays does not really give most people the time to appreciate, because he plays these roles so well.

The story follows Jonathan Switcher (McCarthy), a constantly out of work artist that is going nowhere fast.  One of his failed endeavors was working in a mannequin factory, where he “creates a masterpiece of a mannequin”  Of course this takes him entirely too long, and he is fired from this job, just like every other he has attempted.

The mannequin, ends up in the display window of ‘Prince & Co,’ a Macy’s like,  ailing department store. When Jonathan saves the life of the
owner (Estelle Getty), he is repaid with a job as a stock clerk.

When he sneaks to go look at his former creation, the  mannequin comes to life.  “Emmy” (Cattral) who we are introduced to with a short scene at the beginning of the movie,  is from ancient  Egyptian, and was granted by the gods to be whisked away from that time period in search of one more suitable for her.

Jonathan is the only one that can see her alive, which of course leads to some hilarious situations as well as suspicion and rumors from other employees of the store.  With Emmy as his inspiration, and with her assistance together they create the most stunning store display windows around.  Fellow designer ‘Hollywood’ Montrose (Meshach Taylor), being a fellow “artiste” begs Jonathan to help mold him.  (For the record, this movie is worth watching for the outstanding and uproariously funny job that Taylor does in this supporting role alone).  Meanwhile they must avoid dealing with Felix (G.W. BAILEY), an overzealous security guard and his dog ‘Rambo’  who is tasked by a mole in Price and Co (played by James Spader) to find out the secret of Switchers success.

The success of the window displays puts a cramp into the plans of the company that was planning on buying out Prince & Co, and the  owner of the other store B.J Wert with the help of his mole and the inept Felix attempt to bribe and/or blackmail Switcher away.  In a last ditch effort to get him away they decide to steal him mannequin (but since Felix cannot actually identify the “one”, they must take them all).
Can Jonathan get her  back before she is destroyed along with the other mannequins?  Can Prince  & Co. be saved? Well for that you will just have to watch.

I found the show to be, shall we say less than stellar. Matter of fact, I had to go splash some water in my face to keep from falling asleep. I was however in the minority in this opinion. TheWife thought the show was “fantastic,” and LatteGirl rates the show “just too awesome.”

The biggest thrill for the kids seemed to be the new 3-D movie of “Santa’s sleigh ride to New York” and I saw LatteGirl duck out of the way of “flying packages” on several ocassions during the brief film.

This year celebrates the 75th anniversary of Christmas Spectacular.  And for all those years, they have maintained certain dance numbers which everybody has come to expect, including   the Rockettes own version of “The Nutcracker” and “The Parade of the Wooden Soldiers.”  For me personally, my favorite number was “New York at Christmas” where the dance number took place on a touring style Double Decker bus that appeared to be whisking the Rockettes around to he various landmark sites of New York City.

Also in tribute to the 75th anniversary, the had what they called their Christmas Memories Card, a nice video tribute to the show, that takes you back and tells you about significant dates and information, from the very beginning when the Rockettes were originally called the Roxyettes, the Rockettes going on tour with the USO to help entertain the soldiers during WW II, and the near closing of Radio City Music Hall in the late 70’s.  I found it a nice piece of trivia, and enjoyed watching it, but many around me (especially the little ones) got a bit antsy during this part.  I would have expected this to be something on a screen in the lobby, playing over and over for people as they entered the theater, rather than being part of the show.

This was my first return to Radio City Music Hall since it was refurbished in the late 90’s, and it looks as fabulous as ever.  There were enough stations that it made it fairly simple considering the large crowd to still get your souvenirs and beverages, although the stiff prices charged made for plenty of kids that walked away with nothing.  Personally, I got a popcorn and Diet Coke for TheWife, a Strawberry Daquiri (yes, non-alcoholic) and Pretzel for LatteGirl, and a coffee for me, for the low price of $35 dollars.  Normally, LatteGirl collects the programs for these events, but for another $35, we opted to pass on it this time.

Yes, I do know and fully expected it to be expensive.  Going to a show in New York always is.  But, at the same time, the shows are usually worth the money, and overall I would have to say that this years version of the Christmas Spectacular didn’t disappoint.

Update:  My apologies for the somehow, prematurely published version that I goofed earlier)

But I happened across a blog post (I unfortunately forgot where), telling about how cute this movie was.  So, I decided to give it a spin on DVD.  Me, LatteGirl, and a tub of popcorn.  Now I will not kid you and say that this is another Disney Classic.  It isn’t.  It certainly doesn’t hold a candle to anything that has come out of Pixar in terms of storyline or graphics quality.

But what this movie is good for is fun.  (And some people will be happy since it doesn’t use the word “hell”) It carries the moral of the story along without being so blatantly obvious.  The characters are whimsical and likable, the gags are simple enough for kids to get, and solid enough for adults to appreciate.  IN short, I was sort of sad that I didn’t have an opportunity to see it in the theaters… and so was LatteGirl by the time it was over.  Does it NEED the big screen?  No, but some things like the time machine and the dinosaur probably would have been a lot more entertaining in that format.

So what is it about?  Lewis an orphan wants to see what his mother looked like. So he invents a machine that looks through your brain so you can see your memories. But this weird kid says he’s from the future and warns him about a guy in a bowler hat. The bowler hat guy messes with his invention and it fails. He decides that he’s a failure and no one wants him. But the kid that warned him about the guy is here on a mission to find the bowler hat guy that wants to destroy Lewis. To prove he’s from the future he takes lewis to the future. But the time machine breaks and he’s stuck in the future until he fixes it. In the meantime he spends quality time with the family. But the bowler hat guy is about to alter time and it’s up to Lewis to save the future.

Now, I don’t know if it was because of the “holiday” week of July 4th, but we were simply amazed by the lack of people in the park.  Throughout our day there, we had to wait on line for a grand total of 2 rides, well actually I had to wait on line for 2, as the girls did not go on the Batman Roller Coaster, so the only real line we had to wait for was the Log Flume.

While planning this excursion I was pleased to see they had implemented a “FlashPass” program (similar to FastPass for those familiar with Disney World and Disneyland).  What was disappointing, was to find out that their FlashPass was not included with your theme park admission, and actually cost $36 (for the first person) and up.  Fortunately, I opted against this additional cost, and since the lines were short to very short for most of the rides we were interested in, this really would have been a waste of money.  I guess if you want to spend your day on the big roller coasters (Great Adventure may very well be one of the best Roller Coaster Parks I have been to, with Rides like Kingda Ka (World’s Tallest and Fastest Roller Coaster), the now somewhat dated Great American Scream Machine, and many others.) If you intend to spend the day with rides such as those, then perhaps the extra money may be worth it on a crowded day, as the lines can wind up being an hour or more each, but if you are not a thrill seeker, or are going with children in tow where you will be spending more time on smaller rides, the additional expense may not (and most likely won’t in my opinion) be worth it.

There is far less advertising around the park than there was when I last went.  That is not to say there isn’t any, but years ago, you couldn’t look in any direction before without seeing a sponsored by sign, or advertisement.  However, the concessions now are all “brand named.”  Where you had the ice cream palor and Pizza Stand, you now see a Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream, a Papa John’s Pizza, and so on.  This is not necessarily a bad thing as some of the food was actually better than the junk I remember, but the blatant advertising of it is something of a distraction (to me at least).

It is obvious that they are taking some cues from Disney, and renaming section (or worlds or whatever you want to call them), in a very similar fashion.  It now sports a “Movietown Section”  (think Disney-MGM studios), a couple of Looney Tunes section (think Magic Kingdom Fantasyland and toontown), the only things original is the new Wiggles World section.

Speaking of Wiggles World, my daughter was greatly disappointed with this.  Now she has for the most part outgrown the Wiggles, and the stated age range for the area is like 2 – 6 years old, but at 7 I thought she would find some interesting things here.  One ride.  That was it.  Everything else was clearly for the closer to 3 or 4 year old.

The park was clean, although some parts looked a bit old and tattered and a bit dated.  Though they like to bill themselves (or they did in ads some years back), “Bigger than Disneyland and a whole lot closer,”  they don’t hold a candle to Disneyland (and are a world away from Disney World).

Our favorite rides of the day were Congo River (formerly Roaring Rapids) which is a large “boat” of 8 people riding down the “rapids.”  They use blocks to help shorten the ride a bit, and took away some of the “scenery” around the ride, but since this ride is about going down the rapids, and getting wet, it is still a fun ride.

Movietown Water Scene (Formerly SplashwaterFalls) is similar to any “Flume” ride, except the boat holds far more people than most, there is only one drop to the ride, but that one drop will get you soaked.  The exit of the ride, also gives you a second opportunity to get soaked as it goes directly over the “splashdown” point of the ride.

The Log Flume, yes another water ride (seeing a trend).  This old favorite has been around since almost the beginning of Great Adventure 45 years ago, and it shows.  It is tattered, and worn looking.  But it still gets you wet, and is still a fun ride for people of all ages.

The Runaway Train was the largest roller coaster that LatteGirl could go on (at 44″ she is either 4″ or 6″ shy of the remainder of the big coasters).  It was larger and faster than anything she has ridden thus far.  She absolutely loved it.  Like the log flume, the exterior of this ride looks a bit weather worn, but since it is supposed to be part of an “old mine” it actually doesn’t look as “odd” to be dull and worn as the Log Flume.

Some tattered appearance around the edges aside, tt is still a great amusement park in its own rights, and while I wouldn’t tell anybody not to go to the park, I wouldn’t base a vacation around it either.  For a daytrip (or two with their “bounceback passes”, which give you a second day in the park for $15), it is certainly worth it.  If you are a roller coaster enthusiast, you will LOVE it, but for everybody else, it is a good place if you like an amusement park.

7-up Gold - it was considered a “spice soda.”  7-Up without the “clear” as it was lightly colored.  I actually liked this as it wasn’t as boring as Lemon-Lime Soda, and far more refreshing a taste than a cola.  But in a world dominated by Coke and Pepsi, it never stood a chance.  Plus, of the people I know that tried it, I was apparently the only one that liked it.

dnL – “upside down” 7 up.  7 up with Caffeine and coloring.  Since most people drink seven up to get away from those factors, it doesn’t surprise me that it did not sell well.

 Mello Yellow – this is supposedly still in production, but I haven’t seen it in years.  The original commercials for it was a “quick draw” contest showing two gunslingers trying to guzzle soda a quickly as they could.  Since Mello Yellow was only “lightly” carbonated, it was easy to chug down.  Of course the downside is that many people thought they just got flat soda.

Pepsi-Lite – Pepsi was the first to introduce a soda with a lemon taste to it.  I actually thought (at least at the time) that it was pretty good, as opposed to today’s Pepsi-Twist, which tastes more like a soda that has been sprayed with Lemon Pledge.

Crystal Pepsi – Does anybody else remember the “clear craze” that went on for a while in the 80’s where everybody was rushing out clear products?  This wasn’t the worst idea in the world in that, there is nothing wrong with taking the caramel coloring away, but Pepsi also tinkered with the flavor formula to differentiate Crystal Pepsi, and much like “New Coke” it was soundly rejected by consumers.

Pepsi-Free – immortalized in the movie Back to the Future, Pepsi-Free was Pepsi’s first attempt at caffeine free soda.  It’s popularity though lasted only about as long as the movies run though, as this was the mid-80’s and the world wasn’t ready for caffeine free yet.

Pepsi Blue – about 5 years ago, the soda companies try to “extend” themselves with new flavors and concepts in soda flavorings.  They were in a word.  Hideous.  Of course I wasn’t then (and even less now) their demographic, which was supposed to be “young and hip” that should go for these electric colored flavored beverages.   Other products that came (and went) of this awful age of variety included, Dr. Pepper’s Red Fusion, Mountain Dew Live Wire, Mountain Dew Code Red.

 New Coke (a.k.a. Coke II) - known as one of the biggest marketing blunders in the world (and possiby of all time), when Coke got tired of getting beaten by Pepsi in the “Blind Taste Tests,” despite being Number 1 in the market, they decided to reformulate and taste closer to Number 2 Pepsi.  The backlash was monumental.  And “Classic” Coke was reintroducted, as Coke II was slowly phased out and disappeared.

An interesting piece of trivia I found out during the release of Coke Zero, is that the formula for for Diet Coke is actually the sugar free version of New Coke formula, whereas Coke Zero is the sugar free version of the Classic Coke formula.

Pepsi Edge / Coke C2 – It may seem odd to lump them together, but if you remember (or were unfortunate enough to try) either of these products you were probably on the Atkins Diet at the time.  Half Sugar, Half Sucralose, Half the Calories… and the most god awful taste ever produced.  The products were thankfully put on the scrap pile when the Carb Craze died.  They were the same bad idea, that both companies tried and failed with.

Of course I would be remiss if I didn’t throw in a few alcoholic beverages as well -

Zima – yes it is still around… sort of.  It was acquired by Coors (or at least the name was).  This was the product that started the Malt Beverage craze that is still quite popular, though Zima itself was tagged a Yuppie drink, and like many things that become too popular too quickly, a backlash against the product sent it into obscurity.

Miller Clear Beer – brought out around the same time as Crystal Pepsi, this was a product aimed squarely at the Clear = Pure craze of the late 80’s/early 90’s.  Turns out nobody wants to drink a beer with no color.  Plus the fact that they had to filter it so extensively to get it to be clear, they pretty much filtered out the taste as well.

Doc Otis – I miss this product.  Produced by the Anheuser Buch people, it was a “lemonade” malt beverage that to me was the best one on the market.  It unfortunately suffered from poor marketing, and when AB licensed “Barcardi” for a new line of Malt Beverages, Doc Otis got tossed.

Bud Dry – This is another product that is supposedly not actually discontinued, but I haven’t seen it (at least not in the NY/NJ metro area) in many years.  It is the only version of “Bud” I actually liked.   Meant to take the dry beer category once owned by Rheingold (before my drinking time). I am not much of a mass produced beer drinker to begin with, but this had a clean crisp taste I could enjoy. Was a big hit initially, but seemed to die off.

So, what did I miss? Any long lost favorites of yours?  Anything that was simply so awful that you can’t figure out what they were thinking when they started marketing it?  What do you miss?  Or what are you only too glad has been relegated to the chronicles of history?

But that has never stopped me before, particularly when I like something. And I have to say that we all loved Ratatouille.  It is proof positive to me that Disney made the right decision with the acquisition of Pixar.  It can be tiring and seem almost contrite after a while to constantly keep saying that Pixar, yet again raises the bar of animated films, and yet they seem to continue to do so.

The characters  are as well developed (if not more so) than in just about any recent “live” film.  The imagery of Paris almost makes me want to visit there someday (almost), and while you never leave the animated world, you can almost at times forget that you are watching an animated film.

The storyline is complex enough to keep the adults entertained, and simple enough to keep the children fixated for the entire time (though I am sure there are some things they do not quite get, much like we didn’t see all the double meaning in the cartoons we used to watch as kids, it was not so confusing as to distract kids or make them ask a lot of questions).

It is not often that I feel that a film is a must see in theaters, but with some of the scenery and action sequences in the film, I believe you would be missing out if you simply waited for the DVD.

Load up the family and take ‘em out for a serving of Ratatouille.

Though carefully worded to avoid “false” claims, the advertisement was clearly misleading, as way the high flying picture that was shown.

But LatteGirl persisted.  She wanted them.  And to top it off she wanted to use the money that she had saved as part of her allowance that we allow her to spend “any way she wants” to do it.

I tried talking her out of it, I even tried explaining (though I suspect she wasn’t listening at this point) that not everything you see in an ad is exactly true.  But she continued on with the whole “I am supposed to be able to buy what I want if I save this money.”  So, rather than “forbidding” her from buying them, I opted to teach her a lesson in advertising and allowed her to make her own decision and purchase the shoes.

Fast forward a couple of weeks later the shoes arrive.  Huge Plastic Shoe Box sized “boots” with elastic bands that connect to a shoe that you strap to your feet.  She excitedly waited as I put them together, put them on her feet, and allowed her to jump.

Clunk… Clunk… Clunk.

She sounded like an elephant bounding around the deck.  Struggling to get any height out of this heavy plastic boots, and then having to strain to keep her balance as the bands wobbled back to a standstill.  They were (no surprise here) a great disappointment to her, and for me, even worse than I had imagined.  Your child binds themselves to these shoes with hard nylon velcro that is fairly secure.  Possibly too secure.  I could see if a fall happened the wrong way an ankle being broken in them.

She queried me as to why they “weren’t working” since the ad said she would get “50% more height in her jumps” and I pointed out that her jumps probably were 50% higher since she was starting about 5″ higher off the ground (the height of the shoe).  She said that wasn’t “fair” and that she felt like she was “lied to.”  Naturally, at that point I once again tried to explain to her that advertising is designed to sell a product, and that you have to really think about what they are saying.

So now I have a couple of plastic shoes sitting in my shed, which who knows if they will ever see the bottom of her feet again (I am doubting it), she is out $24 that she worked hard to save, and of course she is quite disappointed.

When I allowed her to buy them, I though it was a good lesson to teach her.  Now I just feel like an awful dad for not protecting her from the evils of marketing.  (But I guess, I will just have to hope that the lesson “took”)

About all Apple got right in this first release was the sleek looking box, and that is only if you are comparing it to the ancient WebTV.  The product is obviously rushed, and the combination of abilities along with requirements are to say the least puzzling.  It appears that Apple decided, in an effort to avoid being compared Microsoft for being late and constantly pushing back deadlines, shoved this out the door sort of as page marker.

At $300,  it comes across more as an oversized iPod.  With a 40 GB hard drive, it would not be hard for many folks to pack it with just their music downloaded from iTunes alone.  Of course, that is all you may really want to use it for.  It only handles videos from iTunes as well, and the lossy video format does not make the jump well from the small iPod screen up to a Wide Screen TV.  Yes, it MUST be a Widescreen HDTV which is unfortunate to say the least since it only supports 640 by 480 video, so it requires HDTV to give less than standard video quality.

The dumbed down remote which looks like it explains what Apple did with all the old cases from the first generation Shuffles, is beyond “simplified” to “too basic.”  Finally the last nail in the coffin of this DOA arrival is that in order to buy iTunes content for your Apple TV, you must buy it on your PC (yes or MAC for you 5 percenters), and transfer it over.   You would think that they would at least allow you to buy and download directly from the iTunes store, but that is simply not the case.

Sort and simple, if you want a “converging” device such as this, wait until the next generation.  I don’t think you will have to wait too long, since this one is destined to die out as soon as the initial hype wears off.

(Side Note:  Why is it that if a male teacher “sleeps with” a female student, the headlines use words like rape, molested, took advantage of, etc.?  Which they should by the way.  But when it in involves a female teacher they say she “slept with”, “had a relationship with”, and so on.  In either case, it is statuatory rape of a minor, and should be judged just as harshly.)

In the latest case, which is way too close to me (in terms of driving distance),  Newark School Teacher Tracy Booth is accused of having sex with a 13 year old student.  13 years old.  Now I don’t think I need to go into the obvious and primary reason this is wrong.  But let me extend it even further.  How many times have you heard (or do you know) women that prefer older men because even at 18 or 20 years old, that men are just clumsy testoserone machines, and have not really grown up yet sexually.  Just what does a 31 year old woman get out of a 13 year old boy?  (Never mind, I don’t think I really want that answered.  Sick freakin’ people.)

Worse than even I thought

If you have the stomach for it.  Just try what I did, and see what comes up.  I went to Google News and just typed in “Teacher Charged” (without the quotes).  You can see the results for yourself here.

Originally, I thought I was going to list some of the more recent cases, but do you see how many came up in that news search?  I didn’t make it out of April 2007 before I realized how in over my head I would be to even try!

I don’t know what should be done, or could be done… but it seems obvious to me that something… SOMETHING has to be done to stem this tide.  Because this is just clearly out of control.

I mean she once she got over her initial fear of reading (which was more about fear of not reading “perfectly”) she has enjoyed reading, even things that are a bit tough for her. But she would tire with a story easily. She is just eating this up, and I have to force her to put it down to go to sleep.

These are great little “chapter books” that have far more story and detail than the basic children’s books we have had up until now, but not so hard or complicated as to confuse or cause a loss of interest.  I see a lot more Junie B in our future.

So, why the big secret?  I’m sure some of you have run across these books before, right?  If not, what is (or did) you child read once they started to get beyond the single chapter books?

1.  The Adventures of Ford Fairlane (1990) – a semi-comedic vehicle for the then popular Andrew Dice Clay.   It was a box office bomb, and was widely panned.  But I am not sure what most critics were expecting of this movie.  Was it dumb?  Of course.  So is the persona of “Dice”  overall it is a fun little respite.

2.  Romy and Michelle’s High School Reunion (1997)-  maybe it is because I like 80’s music, and this movie has an awsome soundtrack, maybe because I have liked Lisa Kudrow since Mad About You (Yes, I used to watch Mad About You.  Shut Up!), or maybe because I could identify with the not fitting in thing, but I thought the film was fun.  Again, you are not going to mistake this for an Academy Award, but the characters were well thought out, and yes funny.  No, film doesn’t make you think (although a few jokes could go over your head if you don’t understand that being naked or semi-naked in a dream is a common thing).  But it will make you laugh.

3.  Ace Vetura Pet Detective (1994) -  I don’t care what people want to say now, this film is funny.  And enough people went to see it to justify a sequel (that was admittedly… REALLY bad).  It seems to be in style now to hate Jim Carry, and I am not going to defend him saying he is a fantastic multi-talented actor.  He may very well be a one trick pony.  But he does that trick well.

4.  From the Hip (1987) – this would be the one that most people have not even heard of before.  By 1987 I think America was starting to tire of The Brat Pack,  and a quick scan of Wikipedia doesn’t even acknowledge this film as being made by a member of the Brat Pack (Judd Nelson).  It is about a young attorney, that makes a name for himself by being outlandish in court, and then winds up defending a man who is apparantly guilty of murder because of it.  Sounds a bit grim, and perhaps that grim premise made people expect it not to be funny, or it was too much of a comedy for such a dark premise.  But it is a easy watch, with an excellent cast.

5.  Oscar (1991) – Sylvester Stallone as a Mobster leaving the life of crime as promised to his father on his death bed.  Lots of Schtick.  Lots of Cliche.  Lots of laughs and lots of fun, and an excellent cast.  Just the silliness of a young Marisa Tomei as “Snaps” Provolone’s daughter makes this film worth one sit down to watch it.

6. Elvira: Mistress of the Dark (1988) – Nope not a horror film, basically a Coors Lite Halloween Comercial that runs 96 minutes long.  Silly Campy, just like about any other summer movie in the 80’s.

7.  Bulworth (1998) – A politician that loses his mind and starts telling…. the truth.  Ah if only it were true in real life as well.

I could go on, but I want you to come back, so I won’t.  Beside,  now I want to know, what films to you secretly (or not so secretly) like, against what “most people” think?

(Picture Perfect Thursday will return next week)

First LatteGirl, who gave this quick synopsis to TheWife who did not see it. “Funny, scary and some really, really sad parts. I loved it!” And, I will admit that I saw all those emotions coming from her as the movie unfolded. She laughed out loud a few times, cried a couple of times, and hid her head under the blankets at least once. For the duration she was completely and totally engrossed in the film. So, from the perspective of a six year old, the movie was totally engrossing. For somebody that rarely sits still, she did not budge or lose her focus for the duration.

Now from a more adult perspective, this movie is NOT Cinderalla, or even close. They did a good job of including some of the characters from the original, and even one or two characters from Cinderalla II, but there were character’s missing. For example the only mice here were Jaq and Gus. The others, none of whom were important per se , were still noticably absent. Other character’s just weren’t what you remember. The King wasn’t quite as crazy as he was in the first two films, the Duke wasn’t quite as stuffy, and the step-sister’s went from mean to outright bufoons.

The music in the movie seemed almost forced. With the one exception of a song by Jaq and Gus, it almost seemed like the music was stuck in as an afterthought, like somebody forget and then said, “Oh yeah, this is suppoed to be a musical. We will just have this one say this to music, and that one say that line to music and we are done.”

In the end, you got much better than some of the really poor offerings that marked the end of the Eisner era at Disney (i.e. Little Mermaid II, Pocohontos II), but certainly nothing on par with true first run Disney productions.

Well, being the oddball that I am, besides the standard Classics, of The Grinch, Merry Christmas Charlie Brown, and others, every year I have a selection of less that Classic…uh… Classics that I like to sit down and watch. Some you may know… most probably, but may not be the ones you think about pulling out of the Video Cabinet, or have just long forgotten about. So I thought I would share this set with you… if only to go down memory lane.

An American Christmas Carol (1979) – this is my favorite alternative variation of the true classic. It was a made for TV movie back in 1979, and only once have I seen it on Television again, so I was thrilled when it finally came to VHS (and now of course DVD). Thanks to its placement in the Depression Era, it is as timeless as the original, and I think it never really fared all that well because back in 1979, everybody was still viewing Henry Winkler as Fonzie and had trouble seeing him as the lead character. It is a truely inspired and well written variation that I enjoy as much now as I did when I first saw it.

The Ref (1994) – Going to the other end of the spectrum, when I need a bit of levity, there are two movies I watch. This is one of them. To be honest, I am not crazy about Denis Leary as a stand up comic, so originally I had my reservations about this film. But between him, Kevin Spacey and an excellent ensemble cast, this movie is funny from beginning to end.

Christmas Vacation ( 1989) – This one I am sure the most people will know, remember, or even potentially still watch this one out of my list. It is stupid, sometime quite predictable, brainless and downright hysterical. Beside all the standard Chevy Chase slapstick, in virtually each and every character, you can almost certainly recognize a particular family member or at least friend that you can associate them with. My wife to this day, when I go to put the Christmas lights outside the house says something along the lines of, “There he goes with his 25,000 imported Italian twinkle lights.”

Home for the Holidays (1995) – Technically, I guess this is also a Comedy, albeit more of a Dark Comedy, especially when compared with my previous selections. But that doesn’t mean it is any less of a funny movie, just that this one makes you think a bit more, and has some more serious moments in it. Again, you can almost always find a member of your own family that fits each of the characters in the movie, and I admit that probably is what really makes it fun for me. Oh yeah, there is Uncle So and So, and she is just like Aunt AbsentMinded. This is actually a Thanksgiving movie and not technically a Christmas movie, and before I started to host Thanksgiving Dinner at my house, I used to watch it religiously on Thanksgiving night. Now it has to wait… but it is still certainly one of my holiday favorites.

Miracle on 34th Street (1994) – Now I know what you are thinking. Why is this on the list? This certainly qualifies as a classic. But… BUT, look at the year. I am one of the very few (sometimes I feel like the only one), people that like THIS version of the film, with Dylan McDermott, Elizabeth Perkins, Richard Attenbourough and Mara Wilson much better than the original. I am not one that usually likes a remake, but I really enjoy this classic updated and in color. Mara Wilson is just fun to watch as Susan Walker as she comes to believe in Santa.

I will also give an honorable Mention to Jingle All the Way (1996), and The Family Man (2000) but then I am flirting with more mainstream popular movies.

So do you have any out of the ordinary movie you like to watch or offbeat traditions for to get you through the holidays?

For kids, the action and eye candy is enough to keep them entertained. Martin Short as Jack Frost was soft enough a villian that the kids could dislike him, but not so much so that they feared him to the detriment of the film (much like the aliens were a bit too scary for a lot of smaller kids in Chicken Little). The 1-1/2 hour time frame might be a bit long for them, but should be just enough to keep their attention throughout.

Now from an adult viewpoint (and for the record my wife disagrees… so as she puts it, “from my highly critical and unforgiving” point of view). They did some awful things to this movie. First of all, you immediately miss Bernard. The “Number 2″ elf from the last movie becomes “Number 1″ and he can’t carry it. Charlie is nothing but an afterthought and side role in this film. The jokes… what few there are, seem either forced… or just plain unfunny. They obviously ran out of sweater and psychologist gags for Rheinhold’s character and make him even more strange, but sadly less funny than previously. Tim Allen is as good as in this one as he has been in any of the films, but it is not enough to save this.

The last 20 minutes of the film has all the action, and the first hour and ten minutes feels like an eternity. Too much setup for too little.

Is it truly terrible? No. But I would really suggest waiting until DVD. There is nothing in this that you will miss in the conversion to the small screen.

Now, I am not one to often go and buy a book soon after it comes out. Why? Honestly, I don’t know. But I suspect it has to do with me being cheap and waiting for it to go on sale, or to pick up a copy on eBay’s Half.com.

However, this one I think I need to go and get now. I will review it when I am done, and see if it lives up to my anticipations (the “Lies” part). The Lunacy part is just obvious. I mean if you just go over to Joe’s Blog and read her quotes, it becomes quickly clear how far “out there” she is. (In case you don’t feel like clicking over, I will share my “favorite”)

“I think [women] should be armed but should not [be allowed to] vote.”
– Ann Coulter on Politically Incorrect, 2/26/01

Of course if you had followed my suggestions in the past and stopped over at Sweet Jesus I Hate Bill O’Reilly, you are now thinking, as I am, that the second book in the series, “Brainless: The Lies and Lunacy of Bill O’Reilly” practically writes itself. Oh wait, I forgot… that would probably be considered plaguirism, since Bill put his own lunacy in print with his pathetic “Culture Warrior.”

What I thought: Finding a gem like this is why I am always willing to try new things. This is far and away the best Boca Java blend I have tried. I knew this was going to be good from the momment I opened the bag. You could just smell the richness of the blend as the aroma wafted from the bag, and it took great restraint on my part to wait for the full pot to complete brewing before grabbing a cup. The flavors are rich and pleasant, but not harsh or intense. Again, sticking to their goals, Boca Java has created a rich dark blend that has literally no bitterness to it at all. It is almost the perfect combination, rich and strong enough to for my picky taste, yet balanced enough and smooth enough that I would not hesitate to serve it to dinner guests who may not desire an over-the-top blend.

Who would like this coffee: Virtually anybody that drinks coffee, with the exception of those that prefer a watered down taste (think Starbuck’s LiteNote Blend, Boca Java’s New Media Maverick Blend) will emjoy this blend. The taste is rich but not smokey like some over-roasted coffees are.

Overall: I rated this a 4 stars (out of 5) . This is a coffee blend I feel comfortable recommending to anyone, and consider keeping around on a regular basis (that is far more of a compliment that it sounds, very few coffees rank as a “usually have around”).

What I thought – This may be the most difficult to describe, yet easiest coffee to define I have ever tasted. To define it, I only need two words oddly eclectic. You can taste what I can only assume is Columbian coffee quite distinctly in this blend. That is what is good about this coffee, and yet at the same time, what is off in this blend. Not as strong as “Blogs of Bravery”, but considerbly more so than the “New Media Mavericks,” but that assesment is based soley on the odd punch the flavor has. It is not as smooth as the other blends, it has a definite “bite” to it, but not actually bitter. I went beyond my promise of trying this coffee two times and added a third, but can still not honestly say whether or not I like it. I certainly didn’t hate it, and would drink it if offered, but I am not sure whether or not I would buy it again.

Who would like this coffee – If you are a HUGE fan of Columbian coffee (I am not, I do not mind it added to blends, but 100% Columbian is not among my favorites), than you will probably like this blend.

Overall Rating – 3 out of 5 stars. The coffee is definitely drinkable, and not bitter. Juan Valdez fans may rate this higher, but its lack of complexity and overpowering Columbian taste left me on the fence with this blend.

For more information on this or other Boca Java blends, visit their website at http://www.bocajava.com/, or http://www.bloggersfuel.com/.

What I thought – I admit that I tried this blend with much trepidation. It is a blend of dark and medium roasts. That sounds good, but they went directly to “well balanced smooth” in the description not bothering with words like “rich” or “robust” anywhere, and considering how the New Media Maverick was lacking in body and was described as “robust”, I was not expecting a much from this blend. Well, I am glad to say how wrong I was. It is not harsh, or overpoweringly strong. But it is a rich flavor. Again, a remarkably smooth taste (which seems to be the trademark they are going after and to that end they are doing an amazingly good job), but unlike the New Media Maverick Blend, this was a taste that could be enjoyed. It is a blend that can work any time of day from a breakfast eye opener, to a perfect compliment with dessert in the evening.

Who would like this coffee – If you like rich taste, would like Starbuck’s House Blend, or perhaps their Gold Coast Blend, without the bitter aftertaste, then this is a coffee you can sit back and enjoy. Even people who generally trend towards milder coffee may enjoy this as it does not have the smokey undertones or residual bitterness often associated with stronger blends. The truly meek LiteNote types of drinkers may however still find this a bit too much for their tastebuds, but otherwise this is coffee like it is supposed to be enjoyed.

Overall rating – I give this one 4 out of 5 stars. Definitely a cut above the ordinary. This is why people like micro-batch roasted coffee. Roasted for taste not strength, it provides all the taste you want without the bitter side-effect of mass over roasting.

For more information on this or other blends, visit their website at http://www.bocajava.com, or http://www.bloggersfuel.com.

What I thought – I decided to go with this one next, so as to alternate the flavored blends and the real coffee. I decided the weekend was also the best time to try and enjoy this coffee, this way if it was awful, I still had time to make something else without having to worry about running late.

Fortunately, I did not need the extra time as this coffee was extremely drinkable, and coming from me, who does not particulary care for flavored coffees that is a compliment. I would be remiss if I did not note that in particular I find the somewhat bizarre taste that is supposed to be caramel is highly pronounced in this blend. If you like that taste, then you will like this coffee. It is the same taste that I have noticed in every coffee (and some syrups) that allege to have the taste of caramel, so this one is no worse than any other, but no better either.

The hints of dark cocoa chocolate taste were there, but suprisingly not overbearing, and if it wasn’t for the caramel twinge I may have actually thought this was GOOD. But unfortunately I had to seek out the chocolate taste from under the chemical taste of the caramel.

Who would like this coffee – If you are a person that likes artifically flavored coffee, and do not find the chemical taste that most caramels give coffee, then this is for you. It supasses most flavored coffees in its drinkability. There is no aftertaste or bitterness, and the beans used here are obviously not a grade below, as is the case with many (if not most) flavored blends.

Overall Rating – 3 Stars (out of five). I am giving this higher marks than I normally would to a flavored coffee because even though it was not my particular taste, it is clearly superior to virtually any flavored coffee I have every tasted. If you are one that does not typically drink flavored coffees this will not change your mind. If you like flavored coffee from places like The Coffee Beanery, then this Boca Java Blend will absolutely blow you away because it is that much better.

Following on the heels of Valiant, and Chicken Little (which I reviewed here), The Wild proved once again why it was so critically important for Disney to acquire Pixar. While not as spectacularly aweful as those previous movies (except at the box office where last week it did an abysmal $9 million, and I can only expect it to do worse this week), The Wild should have been a straight to video release.

When I read some reviews that noted how much like The Lion King this movie was, I for the most part ignored it, since I like, The Lion King, I did not see the comparison as necessarily a bad thing. Well as it turns out, it was. It both took such obscene amounts of material you can not help but make the comparison, and it is not one that The Wild stands up to well.

There is some humor in the movie for both kids and adults, but not nearly enough. The graphics, like many of today’s films was good, but not as good as most others. There was enough action that the movie should have seems to fly by, but instead I kept wondering when it would be over. The heartwarming conclusion is one of those things that should have an audience cheering, instead what you got was a collective sigh, enthusiatic that the end was finally near.

If this does make it another week in the theaters, stay away. When it first appears on video, do not buy it. Rent it, or better yet, like Chicken Little wait until it shows up on eBay or Half.com. This was not worth the price of a movie ticket, nor is it worth the (estimated) $19.99 – $24.99 it will first appear at.

I think I may have to wait until “Cars” comes out before I venture out to the theaters again. Fortunately that is an early summer release, so my wait isn’t that long, which is good

The simple fact is, that despite what it appeared to me on the outside, a simplistic vacation where we could see it all and do everything we wanted to in a couple of days, was simply not a correct assessment on my part. There was far more to do and see than we could fit in a weekend.

Hershey Park – this is bigger and better than I anticipated it being. It may not be the same size as a Six Flags Park (at least not Six Flags Great Adventure here in New Jersey) or Disneyland (yes Disneyland, as in the California one, not Disney World in Florida which would be a total mismatch), but is certainly entertaining enough and big enough to keep everyone happy. Unlike some parks, the number of rides for the little ones competes almost one for one with the rides for older kids/adults. You can very easily spend a day (or two) here and keep everyone entertained between rides and shows. My only gripe here is the concessions. Now I understand that you have a captive market in a theme park, but this was nothing short of sad, with a hamburger costing $9.55 (plus tax). Save your money and pack a lunch, or heck you can walk across to the Hershey Factory Works and eat in their cafe, get better food and pay less.

Hershey Chocolate World – it is sad (probably only to me, but anyway), that you no longer can tour the actual factory and see the chocolate in production. Milton Hershey was proud of his factory and chocolate making process and allowed the world to see it being done. It may not be as glitzy as the new demonstrations are, but it was real and that was what people came to see. That being said, I realize that this is the 21st century and times change. Hershey Chocolate World still provides a glimpse into the world of Hershey Chocolate and how it is made on they “World Chocolate Tour”, give kids a change to become “workers” at the “Chocolate Works” were they get to work on a “production line” filling a container with Chocolate Kisses. There is a 3D theater which we didn’t even consider trying to attend in our short time there, a Trolley Ride that gives you a tour of the city of Hershey PA, and of course a food court and a (huge) shop to buy as much chocolate (and souveneirs) as you could possibly want. You can easily a half a day (without shopping) to a whole day (you would probably need to do some shopping to fill a full day) here all by itself.

Hershey Lodge – this was my most underestimated part of the vacation. A hotel is a hotel is a hotel. I have gotten myself hyped up about exceptional hotels before only to be disappointed. Well, this time I got to be pleasantly surprised. The rooms are nice, clean, well maintained and comfortable. The staff was incredibly (and I mean INCREDIBLY) cheerful, helpful and quick to assist you making me wonder exactly how much sugar they pump into these people everyday. There are three pools, since it is early spring the outdoor pools were closed making the indoor pool and whirpool a bit crowded, but not horribly so. A miniture golf course is right on the premises, as well as tennis and basketball courts. They had activities for young and old alike throughout the day, so basically you could spend your vacation here and never need to leave the hotel. There are three restaurants The Forebay (the “sit down” dining that required reservations, that we did not attempt), LEBBIE LEBKICHER’S which was a buffet style restaurant that had some good food, and plenty of it, The Bears Den which is a sport themed restaurant, if you have a sports fan in the family this is the place to have lunch (or dinner – but more of a lunch/snack place to me) . There is also the Hershey Grill, but that was closed for remodeling at the time we were there. There is even a Coffee Beanery right on the premises serving Coffee, Cappucino as well as pre-made sandwiches and salads plus some delectable (and quite fattening) chocolate desserts. If you put a gun to my head and said I needed to find something wrong with this hotel, the only complaint I could come up with is that everything shut down a little early for my “New Yorker” taste. Now this may have been because it is still early spring, but except to grab a bite in either the coffee house or Bears Den, or grab a drink at the bar, everything else came to a grinding halt around 9PM (now during the summer I know Hershey Park is open later, so perhaps things at the hotel match those hours.)

We planned on and never got to actually see, The Zoo, The Hershey Museum, Take the Trolley Ride, or visit Hershey Gardens. So much to see and do, Hershey lived up to and actually surpasses my cynical view of how much there is to do and see.

If you have the means and opportunity, I rate Hershey a Must See, Must Do.

Now, I can probably justfy rushing to opening weekend, because if I don’t, once I read the reviews, my desire to see them tends to wane. I should know better, because a film such as this is are generally not going to get great reviews from the likes of Roger Ebert.

The benefit of waiting is of course not wasting good money on going to see the simply awful films like Robots which I fortunately did hold off on and Chicken Little, which with great regret I did rush off to see opening weekend.

But now that I have gone completely off the subject, let us try to get back and talk about this weekends family film, Ice Age: The Meltdown.

To get right to the point for those that don’t want an explaination, I will answer the question of, do I think this film is worth spending your money on to go so in the theater. And the short answer to that question is a resounding YES.

Sure there are some negatives to this film which I will readily admit. The storyline is to not put too sharp a point on it weak. It suffers from many of the flaws that you will find in many sequels, such as using running gags from that are popular in the first film far too much in the second film (The squirrel and the acorn).

What it doesn’t do however, is try to pretend it is something it is not. This is a comedy, with plenty of sight gags, and jokes with enough double entendres to keep both parents and the little ones laughing throughout. ANd I mean, Laugh Out Loud. It aims for laughs and it delivers. To try and draw some comparisons, if you consider Cinderella a classic story on line with say a Casablanca, then this by quality comparison would be akin to Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me, funny entertaining, but never in a million years would be mistaken for Academy Award winning material.

It looks like it may be a banner year for family films this year with things such as The Shaggy Dog already out, and some additional good films on their way, such as The Wild and Cars so I can understand people wanting to try and pick and choose carefully where to spend their hard earned money on the now rather expensive trek of going to the theater (That is a whole new rant I will save for another time), but if you are only going to see one film in theaters this year, well then that movie should probably be Cars. But if you are going to see at least two, then I cannot see a reason to not bring the family out to see Ice Age The Meltdown.

Wow, did this movie s**k!

Unfortunately based on the Box Office, Disney may think they have a hit, and decide that they can go it alone in the Animated Movie Genre. I am here to tell you nothing is further from the truth. If I were an Executive at the House of Mouse, I would be desperately renewing talks to get Pixar Animations back into the fold.

My suggestion, wait for video… no wait longer. Wait until the video comes out + about 1 week, then start scanning eBay, Half.com or Amazon for used copies around the $1.99 range.

The movie is too scary for the under 6 crown, not entertaining enough for say 10 and above. Best audience that will enjoy the humor of this movie is the 7-9 crowd, where things like farting cause uncontrolable laughter.

And Gary Marshall. My goodness, he almost single handedly destroys whatever fun was in this movie, with a simply awful performance. Gary should stay BEHIND the camera where he belongs, and if he MUST get in front of a camera (or microphone, as in this case), keep it to small cameos like in A League of Their Own. Zach Braff and Joan Cusak are good, very good, and their comedic timing is excellent together, but it is not enough to keep Chicken Little from laying an egg.

Don’t say you weren’t warned.