Do You Want to Build a Snowman?

It's been a long time since I guest authored here but, as the father of two daughters and a recruiter for a tech company, there's an important message I want to evangelize.  Now that most of the mass hysteria surrounding Disney's latest princess film has run it's course it's time to take a step back and address the social engineering baked into Frozen.

For the non-parents out there, let's quickly review the tidal wave from Arendelle that swept over the parents of the world in the last 12-15 months. I was planning to see Frozen when it hit the cheap theaters but didn't. Because it never got to the cheap theaters.  It stayed in the full price theaters morphing from regular showings into special sing along showings right through the DVD release ($1.2B global box office). In June, the Billboard Dance Club Songs list was topped by a Disney song (Let it Go), and for the better part of a year parents had to sell heirlooms to buy Frozen birthday party decor off eBay. A year after it released, we went to Disneyland where Kate expected to meet Elsa and Anna.  We got lucky. We had 3-day passes, so we got into the park an hour early one day.  That day, G speedwalked from the entrance to the "Meet Elsa and Anna" fastpass line (yes, Elsa and Anna have their own fast pass line), waited in line for 45 minutes to get fastpasses, and managed to get passes for 2:20 in the afternoon.  They ran out of passes before the park opened for general admission.  When we returned at 2:20 we waited in line again for over an hour to actually meet Elsa and Anna.  Apparently, before they implemented the fast pass system parents were waiting in line for over 5 hours to meet the princesses.  A YEAR after the movie released.

The fanatical devotion that surrounds this film left quite a few people scratching their heads about what caused such an uproar.  Certainly Tangled (Rapunzel), and the Frog Princess (Tianna) didn't produce anything like this. Why this one?  I thought it over for a while and ran some ideas past G.  It turned out we had independently come to basically the same conclusion. The way our kids put it was, "She's a princess, but with powers," which is a major departure from previous Disney princesses.

Not so sure?  Let's review some other Disney princesses:

• Snow White - Beautiful, kind, sickeningly optimistic and helpless before a simple disguise.  She ends up waiting, half dead, for her prince to save her.
• Aurora - Beautiful, loved by everyone, so trusting she dances with strange men who show up in the forest, but ultimately helpless before spinning needles.  She ends up stuck in an enchanted death sleep, waiting for her prince to save her.

Of course these are really old examples.  Maybe a more modern one will be better:

• Ariel - Beautiful, but rebellious, and honestly not so bright.  Helpless before a witch with a lousy sales pitch.  She loses the guy, and gets transformed back into a mermaid after getting her father turned into a worm.  She's stuck waiting for her prince to knock off the witch and then STILL needs her dad to save her from the disappointment of losing her first infatuation love. (Assuming that being transformed into an alien creature and separated from your family forever counts as being saved.)

Now let's talk about Elsa.  She makes awesome stuff with her mind and a gesture, and runs a kingdom (without a guy even!).  Halfway through the movie she "loses" her princess status and becomes Queen Elsa of Arrendelle. Most importantly, she does all this despite feeling unsure of herself.  When she can't keep her fears in check anymore, she gives up the act, exiles herself for everyone's safety, and finally gets to revel in her own power.  "Let it Go" captured the hearts of millions of girls.  They will have to grow up a little before they really understand why its working title was "Elsa's Bad*** Song".

Disney is sending girls a big message here.  You don't have to feel perfect. Hiding your abilities won't help in the long run.  You can make awesome things.  You can be powerful.  This movie is about getting girls into STEM. (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math)

No, I'm not really kidding. Elsa describes her own soul as a spiral of frozen fractals. She likes to be alone, and her skin looks like she's never seen the sun.  She can make her own dress, bridge, castle, and probably whatever else she wants to.  And she's been doing it since she was little with no training.  She can't stop changing the world around her even when she tries.  Can you say "power geek" louder than this?

Someone at Disney really gets it.  They understand what's keeping girls out of STEM. That's not really a surprise since I'm pretty sure "they" is John Lasseter (current Chief Creative Officer at Disney and former Pixar exec) and his Pixar cronies.  Sound crazy?  Lets review the "Pixar princesses":  Merida (Brave), Ellie (Up), EVE (WALL-E), Sally (Cars), Mrs. Incredible.  This group and the old Disney princesses have never met and it's not hard for me to see where Elsa belongs (or Anna for that matter).  Since Elsa's real heritage is a computer animation studio it's not hard to convince me that the subliminal message coming from her is a whispered "grow up and work for us".

Admittedly what I'm about to say could be biased, because I have a small sample set to work with but here goes.  I haven't seen girls treated with discrimination in the engineering workplace since I started working full-time a decade ago.  At least not in the traditional "you wouldn't understand, why don't you go get us some coffee" way.  I can't imagine a team where people wouldn't listen to a woman's technical input just because she was female.   I'm sure it still happens in some places, but I really don't think fear of being treated like a secretary is the issue.

The issue is at the social level.  In a STEM workplace some girls will end up uncomfortable.  A girl who shows up with a Luis Vuitton handbag and a perpetual manicure because that's how she rolls will likely get professional respect for good work, but she won't be one of the gang unless she's willing to keep her Paladin Blood Elf leveled up to the max or brew her own beer or something equally off the beaten path.  But that's just work, not life.

The bigger problem is outside of work.  The social scene is pretty harsh on girls who get serious about technical stuff.  If a girl wants to go into biology that's OK. That's on the softer end of science. But as soon as a girl says words like "astrophysics" or "focused ion beam", the guys who were going to ask for her number disappear faster than doughnuts at a hack-a-thon.  Not only that, but the girls who were going to invite her along to the next Neiman Marcus shopping trip forget to call her and all her relatives stop buying her gift certificates to Ulta and start buying her pink screwdrivers.  Halfway through college G started telling people at parties she was an "EE" major because a lot of them would just assume that meant Elementary Education and then treat her like a regular girl.

In the long haul, treating girls like they changed just because they are going into a new professional area needs to change, but for now girls need Frozen.  They need Let it Go to sink in deep so they won't freak or feel guilty when someone is intimidated by them.  They need to know that even if you do technical things, and do them well, you can still be a normal person with normal relationships because their abilities don't define them. It will be a tough process but the more girls go into STEM, the more people will realize that being smart and competent in math and science doesn't magically transform a girl into an evil step-sister or a witch. Or a boy.

I really think that ~15 years from now we'll see a small uptick in girls entering the STEM workforce, just from this movie.  But to be honest, I have to find people to hire from now until then, and I don't care if they are male or female.  If you have a daughter, or sister, or friend who hides what she can really do, and isn't heading down the STEM road just because of social pressure, do me a favor: open a door, climb a mountain, build a snowman.  Only love can thaw a frozen heart.

Should I Have Seen This Coming?

We've learned over the years that parenthood is in large part having some new thing you never worried about before come around a blind corner and bite you in the face.

Sometimes it's literal. Kids get teeth eventually and you feel like an idiot for not thinking through the consequences of the "trick your kid into biting the end of your nose when they were trying to give you a kiss" game.

Sometimes it's more figurative. Like when your child learns to crawl and you forget you can't just plop them down somewhere and walk off only to find them a few minutes later banging glass baby food jars on the tile floor. (If you've never tried this, it does make a cool, unique, dink dink sound and after your child ventures into the pantry one or two times you will recognize it instantly.)

Sometimes you really should have seen it coming. Like when your four year old decides that as far as he is concerned, dinosaurs STILL rule the earth. And when he gets a toy tyrannosaurus figurine for his birthday he carts it around everywhere for over a month. And reminds you that T Rex needs to watch TV (when you have decided your son can't), needs to go to bed or take naps, and really really likes melted cheese on top of his hot dog. You'd think you would expect Rex to be around but occasionally he'll just show up somewhere and take you by surprise (you see, figuratively biting you in the face). Like this.



But then sometimes you really just had no reason to predict what would come your way next. You've read the parenting books. You spend time with your kids. In retrospect it seems obvious but you just weren't prepared for...













Xenosaurus Rex - Space Faring Meat Eating Parent Rule Evading Dinosaur Who Takes Off His Helmet When He Is On Mars (and really likes melted cheese)

See, didn't see that coming, did you?

And The Winner Is...

M!

Winner of what you'd probably like to know. Good Question. It turns out that unbeknown to the rest of the world a quiet stand off has been taking place between G and I for some time now. Think on the level of U.S. and Iran but not quite to the North Korea/South Korea level.

The crux of the issue lies here:






This is the diaper bag we used with Claire. It has a few pros: made of nylon instead of pleather, more than one pocket, not fluorescent, etc. It has some cons: looks "sporty" (not good in our case), made of nylon instead of something nicer, is a diaper bag, etc.

I considered this bag Totally Adequate (TM). This bag was so much better than the contractor style garbage bag we would have carried around if I had been in charge of this sort of thing I was content indefinitely. Then, when G was pregnant with Scott, insanity gripped her brain and she decided she needed a "better" diaper bag so we acquired a new diaper bag (below) with a different set of pros: not made of fake fur, not obviously a diaper bag, large.






It also has its cons: a little floppy, is a purse, not as many pockets as I'd like.

We kept meaning to pack multiple bags so I didn't have to look like a transvestite but there were inevitably "special" things that couldn't easily be replicated (original birth certificate, camera, noise canceling headphones, etc). They had to go back and forth anytime we went anywhere and we were lazy and usually running late so that never happened. Also, at the time, no one knew where our old diaper bag or our pile of ~37 free diaper bags had gone. So we stayed at an impasse through Scott's early childhood that mostly involved me trying to play dumb to the fact that ~90% of the time, my wife was carrying the bag with the poop wads wrapped in whatever plastic bag was available when the kid needed a diaper change.

Finally I put my foot down and declared to G that I really would like to not have to carry around a purse while caring for our child. Also, it sure would make it easier for me to take Kate somewhere if I had a less intimidating care package to take along with us (nudge nudge, wink wink).

That has finally resulted in this

[angelic choirs]



[/angelic choirs]

Come on, you gotta admit that's one awesome diaper bag.

On the run from the car seat installation zealots? Just find a bush, cradle the kid in your lap and pull this bad boy over your head.

Got a diaper loaded with standard issue #2 baby excrement and no trash can? Switch over to the (not quite) custom made diaper duck pocket and seal that puppy up with all the hermetical-ness a flimsy plastic bag can provide.

Yes, thanks to my incessant whining and a good father's day we have finally reached disarmament in our now larger family

Thanks G.

Who's your best friend?

A little while back I got the best compliment I've ever received.

Or so I thought.

A few months ago or so, Scott announces, "Dad, you're my best friend!". As you may have picked up, in our house, Scott tends to be the sweet emotional kid. He wears his heart on his sleeve so this wasn't jaw dropping but I still felt like a million bucks. I mean really, how many dad's top the list of people their son would like to be around? Especially one that reminds him EVERY SINGLE NIGHT he has to eat BOTH tablespoons of dinner Mom made BEFORE he can have ice cream? I was feeling pretty good about myself

Fast forward a bit. Scott is missing Grandma and Grandpa who visited recently so we decide to give them a call. Scott's not the biggest phone talker but he does manage to eek out "Grandpa, you're my best friend EVER."
Suddenly, I'm feeling more like 100K. That's ok. So there is someone out there who is Scott's favorite person regardless of which social circle we are talking about. This is Grampa we're talking about after all. He's not the one forcing a spoonful of unpalatable spaghetti on the kid.

Fast forward a bit more. We are at church. Scott sees one of his friends from nursery. "Look, it's my BROTHER Anden!

Well, at least I'm on the guest list. I suppose that's the best a dad at this age can ask for. But if Scott thinks he's getting out of eating that half a hot dog he's got another thing coming.

What's with this Sir Topham Hatt dude?

Recently the kids have been watching a lot of Thomas and Friends of which I more or less approve. In all of it though, Sir Topham Hatt just seems a little off.

For starters, he always rolls around in a suit and tie. And not just a suit and tie. He's got the full on vest and pocket watch thing going. Who wears a suit and tie around these days? Especially for a job where you drive around all day and visit train stations. Weird. Then when he does show up he always has two guys with him who are also dressed in suits minus the vest/pocketwatch combo. They just stand around staring at people. Are they mute? What do they do? I assume one of them is the driver. What does the other one do? Cigar lighter? Shoe shine lacky? Door opener?

And have you noticed that apparently if you want to get around the Island of Sodor you ride on Sir Topham Hatt's railroad or you don't ride at all? There don't appear to be any other modes of transport running around. Except for maybe the helicopter. Oh wait, apparently Sir Topham Hatt owns that too. So if you want your coal to get from the mine to the market, I guess you better be in the good graces of Monsieur Hatt.

On the upside, working with Topham apparently means that no matter what you are shipping, it can be picked up on short notice at any time, day or night. Seriously, engines are perpetually being sent off in the middle of the night to pick up a giant Chinese dragon on a couple hours notice or whatever. I'm sure for the right price he can make sure a small shipment of "stuff" gets picked up on 30 minutes notice wherever works for you and delievered in the next few hours.

Perhaps pulling all those all night trasfers is why Sir Topham Hatt is always getting ready to receive some really important peeps. Are we seriously supposed to believe that the queen mother cares enough to visit the Island of Sodor? I mean the island can't be more than 10 miles wide and apparently it's biggest feature is that most of it is covered in train tracks. Why is the Duke coming? Why is some weird Chinese envoy coming? Why is the railroad guy setting up the big meetings? Shouldn't the mayor or governor do that sort of thing? Wait, does Sodor have any kind of organized goverment?

Throw all that in with the way he talks to his trains like they are not quite equals but not just employees either and you have to admit the whole thing just seems a little shady. He's always talking to them in a not quite fatherly tone, maybe more godfatherly. And he always makes it sound like he's offering them their next assignment in stead of just telling them what to do. You know sort of like an offer you can't refuse.

All I know is something shady's going down somewhere on Sodor and I'm keeping my nose out of it.

Sanity -- Not Dispensed Here Anymore

I know you all just can't get enough of M's posts, especially his insightful book and movie reviews. Unfortunately for you, M has decided on a change of venue for the majority of his work. Check out his latest movie review (with more pontifications in the works) at:

http://the-last-sane-man.blogspot.com/

"But what else is at the bottom of the mine?"

As a dad I really do try to answers my kids questions.

You know, where you sit down and explain that air pushes up on the bottom of the airplane, and electricity flows through your toaster to make it get hot, and we aren't having any more candy just because dad thinks more candy will make you cranky.

Unfortunately I frequently get sucked into believing that somehow if I'm smart enough and patient enough we'll get to the bottom of the question well. That is false in case you are wondering.

It turns out that kids aren't very good at identifying what I call "fundamental truths". A "hypothetical" example:

"Daddy what does the word mind mean?"

"It's what you think with, your brain."

"no, mind!"

"yes, mind, what you think with"

"no, I heard it on Thomas, he fell into a mind"

"Oh, a mine, that's a hole they dig looking for metal."

"Oh... why did Thomas fall in it?"

"Well, if he tried to be on top of the mine he would fall in. You always fall down holes if you try to be on top of them."

"And that's why you need to stay away from them?"

"Yes, because you could fall into them and get hurt. You should stay away from them."

"How could you get hurt?"

"You could break some bones"

"Oh... Why would you break your bones?"

"Because mines are deep and you would fall faster and faster until you hit the bottom"

"Oh... and then you could break your bones?"

"yes"

"What is at the bottom of the mine?"

"Dirt and rocks."

"Oh... what else is at the bottom of the mine?"

"Nothing, just dirt and rocks."

"Oh... why is nothing else at the bottom of the mine?"


Thats where I lose it. Why aren't other things at the bottom of the mine? The question could have a million stupid answers right?

"Because every time the robber puts the gold there the gypsies use their divining rods to find it and get it back. "

Or

"Because Scotty figured out how to boost the tachyon emitters to locate captain Kirks communicator signal and beam him out of there."

Or

"Because there is a special force field that only lets miners and little kids and claymation trains past the opening"

But at that point I've already lost. My fatherly wisdom has run out and the only way out is the way I probably should have taken at the beginning of this conversaion.

"I doesn't matter... go to sleep"

M Takes Over

G has foolishly left town for a week with me still listed as a contributing author and no oversight!

Look forward to a week of lusting after rear wheel drive cars and complaints about how the passat factory manual won't tell me where the connector is to recharge our AC system. No, really I'll try to stick to stuff that may be of remote interest to the regular readers of the blog :)

Todays nugget of joy:

If you have a child who rarely eats anything but pancakes it may be a little cruel to suddenly pull a pork chop dinner on them. Scott had a bit of a fit yesterday when he realized the slab of meat on my plate was not in any way related to a light quick bread. Such is life. At least he eats pancakes right?

Movie Review: The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe

So you may have noticed that I only review books and movies long after they have been released. I would love for you to believe that I do so only because I care so much about writing quality reviews that I need to see/read it multiple times, or think about it for a while before I write about it.

But those things wouldn't be true, would they? The truth is G and I haven't seen anything that resembles a new release in years. I suppose we saw Enchanted while it was on the tail end of its run at the dollar theater. We have such a backlog of books and movies to consume we probably won't see anything "new" for a few more years yet (unless the screen writers guild gets upitty again).

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (6 out of 7 stars)

Lets get The Bad out of the way first.

The special effects. I'm usually blind to bad special effects but the green screens in this movie just grated on me. After the second time G and I had to stop and stare at a few stills to figure out what made it so patently obvious the actors were not in fact standing in front of the background. We tried to think through color, focus, depth of field, film grain, and lighting (can you tell G likes cameras?). We both think the most obvious problem was the lighting. The act(or/resse)s all looked like they had a spotlight about 2 feet from their faces and the trees behind them looked like they were filmed in the haze immediately following Mount Saint Helens. The lion looked cool though

The witch was just creepy. Not in an evil witch way. More like in the "What are you trying to pretend you're an evil witch or something?" way. G kept wondering whether she was a football player or a Rastafarian or what? No seriously, we both suspect that the actress just couldn't muster the "presence" the role demanded so they tried to patch it up with weird hairdos, odd dresses, and bizarre makeup.

Now on to the Good Stuff.

The story. I mean come on. If you thought I was on to something with the convenient platform for a story about good and evil in my post on Harry Potter you'll probably pee you pants when you think about this one. It's got it all, good and evil, talking lions, ice witches, traitors, long prophisied kings and queens, royal destiny of humans, epic battles, sacrifice, loyalty you name it. There's even some plucky comic relief from the Beavers.

Great character development, mostly about Edmund

The first scene during the bombing Edmund is running off to grab a picture of his dad, forcing Peter to risk himself to come save him. He is always making other people take risks for him, that' just how he rolls. Of course in the next scene, Peter and Susan are playing "I pick a word out of the dictionary and you guess what it means!". Pretty awesome game huh? Edmund thought so too but that's just how Peter and Susan roll.

When Lucy gets up in the middle of the night to try and go back to Narnia, there is a great shot of her putting on her shoes. We see a pair of feet sliding out of bed next to slippers and boots. Then into the boots. Thats because Lucy really believes she will be wandering in snow as soon as she gets down the hall. That's just how she rolls.

When Edmund meets the witch I thought it was telling how casually Edmund treats her. He's British. He should know not to just beg the nearest royalty for candy, but that's just how he rolls.

When Edmund runs off from the beaver's house to find the witch he leaves his coat and freezes all the way there. I suppose because it's a girls coat and Peter suggested he wear it. When he gets there he amuses himself drawing stupid faces on the "statues" because he likes to have control over other people even if they are made of rocks. That's just how he rolls.

If he's British enough to know not to go begging local royalty for candy Edmund should really know not to sit down on other people's thrones, but he likes to feel powerful so he does anyway. When Tumnus points out he's Lucy's sister he responds in perfect Edumund fashion by saying he is Edmund instead of confirming that he is in fact Lucy's brother because being his own man is just how he rolls.

When Susan and Lucy are up in the tree hiding from the wolves, Peter comes to save them and kills the wolf. Aslan knights him, clearly preparatory to the coming battle. Immediately we cut to the witch's camp where they are making all kinds of crazy weapons. It's a really cool parallel. Aslan is preparing people, the witch is preparing things. That's just how the two of them roll.

Other little touches I thought were cool.

When Lucy finds the room with the wardrobe in it there is a dying fly in one of the windowsills. I suppose it's reminiscent of the fact that you can't always get out of this room easily.

When Edmund is eating on the witches sleigh the cup he hands back to the dwarf turns back to ice as he throws it at a tree. Neat visual touch emphasizing the transient nature of what the witch can give. Also, it's really cool the way the witch talks about how she could see Edmund becoming a prince of Narnia since that is exactly what she is thinking, just in a different way from what Edmund is thinking.

When the four of them find Tumnus's house burnt out Edmund steps on the same picture of Tumnus's father Lucy was looking at when she was there. Now it is clawed and broken. I think it means Tumnus has gone to war like his father did. G thinks it reminds the viewer of the fact that Tumnus was suffering the effects of war and he has now brought them on himself and others. Or maybe it's just to drive home to the viewer that Edmund has really messed stuff up. I don't know but it's a cool touch somehow.

It's in the book but the fact that Edmund doesn't get anything from Father Christmas is cool. It's nice to see someone walk that "you can come back but you might have missed something while you were gone" line. Along the same line I like that one of the tigers at the coronation still has the mustache Edmund drew on him when he was a statue. It's nice to see that your actions can also have lasting effects on others.

There were a bunch of other ones too but I'm too tired to put those all here. All in all, cool movie.

Books Review: Harry Potter (I-VII)

Warning: Here There Be Spoilers!


So I managed to get myself to avoid reading the last Harry Potter book until about a month ago. That was important because, like G, I get a little obsessive about books I'm reading. Since I couldn't afford to blow a week perpetually distracted from work because I wasn't reading at that exact moment, I decided to hold off until the hype settled down. I also told myself I would read no more than one chapter a day. That worked. Sorta. A little. OK, I was really good except for the day I had jury duty and when I realized it was Friday night and I only had six chapters left.

Anyway I liked the series and since you missed G and I's (G tells me this is grammatically incorrect but I think it sounds right anyway, and she thinks this comment should come after the word discussions but she's not writing this post is she?) discussions of books 1-6 I'll throw those in here as well.

So lets start with the good stuff. Kids actually read these books. I figure in a day where pokemon passes as good television, as long as it isn't hate crime propaganda who cares what it is as long as kids read it. But this series goes beyond that. It really is about good and evil and it hits pretty close to home most of the time. It's about family and friends and love and hate and hits those nails right on the head.

It's well written and engaging. JK (cause we're on a first initial basis) manages (mostly) to avoid letting the Harry Potter universe become the story. The magic isn't the story, it's just there because you need it to tell the story. She also manages to make a story about a boy thrown into a magical world where there's a lunatic monster that keeps un-dying funny most of the time. The characters and places are endearing.

JK also had the guts to do what had to be done. In a story like this somebody has to die. Actually lots of people have to die. And they do. I liked most of them but you can't have a scary group of bad guys who just run around saying "Boo" a lot (like Scott does).

Of course JK forgot to consult with me on several of the books so there are some things that could have been done better. For example Books 4,5 and 7 should have been 1/2 to 2/3 the length they were. Book 6 could have lost a little weight too. I suspect she could have done better with more time. Writing very concisely takes time (which I clearly haven't put into this post).

I have to admit, I've read more fantasy that is probably healthy for me along the way and Voldemort is one creepy dude. I mean really, splitting your soul up to live forever? Besides wouldn't all your soul pieces die of old age eventually anyway? Whatever. Weird.

Also, the last book didn't really make a whole lot of sense to me. I still don't know what the deathly hallows had to do with anything. I was under the impression Harry could come back from the brink of death because his mother died for him and Voldemort used his blood to come back to life. What does the stupid invisibility cloak have to do with anything?

My biggest complaint revolves around Severus Snape. For all the time JK spent propping up the "Snape is a mean guy" straw man she just didn't spend enough time tearing it down. I was looking for him to be a good guy for at least a third of book 7. I also think he died a little too ignominiously for someone with his skill as a wizard. This guy was inventing magic while he was at school. The only other characters that did that are Dumbledore and Riddle. When Dumbledore runs afoul of Voldemort's protections on the Perevel ring who does he go to? Who's the best potions man we've ever seen? Severus. But somehow this guy dies from a snake bite to the neck? From a snake large enough it has to be a constrictor and therefore wouldn't bite people to kill them anyway? Sorry, I'm not buying it JK.

A book by book synopsis, M style:

Book 1: Harry's a wizard. He goes to a school for freaks wizards where he meets his two new best friends. They play games on brooms where people get hurt. Harry is good with a broom just like his dad. He looks like his dad but he has his mother's eyes. Voldemort is back and has a bit of a chip on his shoulder. This Dumbledore guy seems to have things pretty well under control. No one believes Harry.

Book 2: People are dying and no one knows why. Harry hears voices. Harry can talk to snakes. Harry finds a weird diary that talks back to you. It turns out there's a weird room under Hogwarts. Voldemort made the diary to control people and he's really the one killing people. No one believes Harry.

Book 3: There are weird ghosty things that make you sad and steal you soul. Harry has a godfather who betrayed his parents is an awesome guy. Ron's rat is really an old guy who was a great guy betrayed Harry's parents. You can travel through time. No one believes Harry.

Book 4: There is a weird cup that shoots fire and student names out like some kind of twisted roman candle. Harry's name comes out which means he has to do a lot of dangerous stuff. Harry can see into Voldemort's head sometimes (weird). Voldemort uses Harry to come back to life (weird). No one believes Harry.

Book 5: Some weird old lady prophesied that Harry and Voldemort would never be at peace while they were both alive. Severus Snape was responsible for Voldemort finding out about Harry. Dumbeldore says Severus felt bad when Harry's parents died (this is actually important).

Book 6: Voldemort has split his soul up and captured pieces of it in objects so he won't really die till they find and destroy them (extra creepy). Severus Snape is not a greasy haired two bit hack, he is a greasy haired ridiculously talented wizard. Severus kills Dumbledore in a way that makes it ambiguous whether that is good or not.

Book 7: Harry et al camp in the woods a lot. No really, a lot. There's a rock, a wand, and an invisibility cloak and if you have all three you are master over death or something like that. These appear to be nearly irrelevant to the actual story. Harry finds out about Severus's past, that he was in love w/ Harry's mom, and Dumbledore told Severus to kill him. Harry lets Voldemort kill him, has a nice chat with dead Dumbeldore, and for reasons still not clear to me comes back to life. Voldemort dies dueling Harry and there is much rejoicing.

Bonus Material: M's alternate ending:
Severus is devastated by the loss of Lily. He doesn't need convincing from Dumbledore to join the fight against Voldemort because he has seen the bitterness that comes from being like Voldemort. He agrees to work on the inside to bring down Voldemort knowing that Harry is the only one who can do so. In book seven he shows up, kidnaps Harry and takes him back to spinners end. Harry of course is not powerful enough to do anything about it at first. Severus begins to teach his deep defense against the dark arts knowledge to Harry. Legellimancy (You might be thinking this is misspelled. And you may be right. Why don't you go look it up... freak) and Occlumency are part of the training and eventually Harry manages to get inside Severus's head enough to see what is really going on. Harry is forced to reconcile his bad feelings towards Severus. As reluctant partners they search out and destroy the remaining horcruxes. At the pivotal confrontation Severus dies protecting Harry which gives him the protection he needs to finish Voldemort off. This is artistically paralleled to Lilly's death and accentuates the fact that Severus is finishing the job Lilly started. Man, I should be an author.

Movie Review: Pride and Predjudice

You know how there were a few classes in college you just loved? The ones that had nothing to do with your major but you couldn't help but get an A in because you couldn't stop working on them? Well one of mine was Intro to Film. I am a special sucker for good cinematography and editing. You'll see what I mean. Here we go.


Pride and Prejudice (2005) (i.e. the good one) - 12/13 stars

This movie has it's faults of course. Kiera Knightly is too pretty to play Lizzie but the makers couldn't find any other big name actresses that had the spunk and moxie to play the part. Darcy probably doesn't quite come across as proud enough. G swears that Collins and Mrs. Bennett were better in the Super-sized version.

This version however is fabulous. There are lots of good things but like I said I'm a sucker for cinematography and editing and that is where this movie shines. I cannot believe the director and cinematographer have done effectively nothing else.

This movie has wonderful long takes. A long take is a shot that goes uncut for significantly longer than normal. Long takes require the actors to get the whole thing right in one go, so they aren't used much. There are two long takes that jump out at you. One at the beginning tracking Lizzie through the field then through the house and another following Lizzie through the ballroom. If you watch closely you'll notice there are probably hidden cuts where Lizzie walks behind things (sheet in the opening and pillar in the ball scene) but nevertheless they are well done and let the audience take in a great deal about the family without much dialog (necessary when cutting a 5 1/2 hour movie down to 2). The same technique is used (although I believe serious use of green screen was involved) when panning through the windows the night after Mr. Bingley proposes.

This movie also makes great use of abrupt zooms. I am not a cameraman but I assume these are fairly difficult but they do it well. For example, when Mr. Collins proposes to Lizzie and she abruptly stands up the camera cuts to Lizzie and quickly zooms in on her face creating a very disorienting feeling, which is how Lizzie feels at the moment. You see it again when Darcy bursts in on Lizzy at Mr. Collins' house.

The scene where Darcy is riding away on horseback after delivering his letter to Lizzie is no more than 20 seconds long but incredible. Somehow they found a section of forest with a road next to it they could drive a camera truck down AND that had a parallel path a few yards in straight enough for a horse to gallop on. Then they managed to light and frame the shot so that even outside of the context of the film it is patently obvious that the rider is running away from something rather than towards it by making it appear as if the left edge of the frame is constantly about to catch the rider.

When Lizzie is touring Pemberley she stops to look at the statues. She stands for a while in front of "A Veiled Vestal Virgin" whose true face can't be seen and/or who can't see clearly, and then turns to gaze upon Achilles. Could there be a more poignant visual representation of Lizzie realizing where she and Darcy stand? Possibly, and if so I would really like to see it.

Lizzie spinning on the swing watching the seasons go by is another fabulous way to portray the boring slow passage of time without actually boring the audience with the slow passage of time.

I could go on forever but that would be boring and rather disappointing when reading a review of a movie that manages to avoid that at all costs. Suffice it to say this is one of the better movies I have watched in years. If you haven't seen it, you should. If you have, you should see it again.

7 things about G

So G got tagged to blog about 7 things you wouldn't normally know about her but she didn't know what to write.... M to the rescue


7 Things you wouldn't usually know about G:

1) She got stuck teaching an aerobics class in Provo when the original teacher got too pregnant to do it everyday.

2) She is a post-stressor. That means the world can fall apart on her daughters wedding day and she will be calm and in control... until the world gets put back together. Then she falls apart. No really, falls apart, just later.

3) She has a ridiculous collection of socks. Christmas socks, Valentine's day socks, Halloween socks, Polkadot day socks, you name it.

4) She prefers semi-automatic shotguns because they don't kick as bad and she's tool lazy too pump in the next round for the second clay. Specifically this one.

5) Her favorite painter is Rothko. Bonus points if you already knew who Rothko is. I didn't.

6) Her EE degree isn't in Elementary Education and she can't stand SWE.

7) She can't eat ice cream cones without getting ice cream all over her face. You wouldn't know this because she wisely doesn't eat ice cream cones in public.

Daddy... how do they make computers?

Claire asked me this the other day.

How does one answer a question like that? I know what you're thinking, "Ask your [insert other spouses title here]" followed by "I don't know" right?

Neither G nor I have such luxury. I most unfortunately know pretty much everything that goes into making a computer. I suppose at the ore refining/crystal growth level I'm a bit spotty but from that point on my geek to the max education and relentless pursuit of completely irrelevant knowledge pretty much take care of the rest.

Even if the question is not about my particular specialty I probably know more on the subject than my three year old bargained on. "How do cars work?", "Why is the sky blue?", "Why do my hands have germs on them?". I could go on for days about any of these questions if I needed to but I don't really want to and Claire certainly doesn't want to hear anything longer than a Sesame Street skit.

I really do think it's important to give your kids fairly straight and informative answers. I also think it's good to explain how the world around them really works. I also think it's good for your kids not to get beat up every day of second grade because they are a know it all dork.

So what do I do? Give watered down answers? Teach my kid all this cool stuff and then teach them to act stupider than they are around their friends? Just let them get their lunch money stolen at school every day?

I guess at the moment I dont really know. Melty sand it is for now. We'll see when they get a little older.

HD-DVD vs Blu-ray... Round 1... Fight

OK,

G has taken the risk of letting me post on this blog. This is good for me because I don't have nearly the quantity or quality of material necessary to sustain my own blog and this gives me a chance to leach off of someone else.

Down to business.

Many of you are probably unaware that a technological war is going on right now. The war is about what kind of discs will be used to display high definition movies. In case you are unaware DVD's just don't have what it takes to produce a "sharp" picture on today's Hi-Def TVs. I assure you that soon, you will realize that your current television and DVD player don't really cut it and will go out and buy one of these new high tech thingies.

There are two main contenders in this fight. Blu-ray (pronounced Blue-Ray) and HD-DVD. They are fairly similar. Blu-ray stores a little more data, HD-DVD is cheaper to make, blah blah blah.

I'm hoping Blu-ray wins for one simple reason.

I don't really want to say HD-DVD. It is five difficult to pronounce syllables and makes me think of a medical disorder more than a cool new toy. Blu-ray rolls of your tongue and sounds like some kind of super weapon or piece of medical equipment. I feel like I should be able to diagnose someone with HD-DVD using a Blu-ray scanner.

Seriously though, when coming up with a trade mark did they not notice that every other acronym longer than your standard TLA (three letter acronym) is pronounceable? Like DARPA or CORBA or COBOL? Why not just add vowels until you can pronounce it like HIDEDIVID (HIgh DEfinition DIgital VIdeo Disk)? Oh wait, I think I know.

So if for some reason Sony or Toshiba calls you in for a focus group, remember, why use five syllables when two would do?